- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
Wetzel: SEC should add TCU as 14th team
Posted on 8/30/11 at 2:03 pm
Posted on 8/30/11 at 2:03 pm
quote:
Unlikely? Sure. Am I the only one who sees it? Probably. Is TCU a perfect choice? Of course it’s not, but unless Oklahoma changes its mind, who is perfect?
If you’re going to go with less than perfect, then why not do it in the Dallas-Fort Worth Metroplex, an area of recruiting perfection in which your schools are already desperately trying to establish a foothold?
LINK
Yay or nay to TCU as #14?
14
Posted on 8/30/11 at 2:05 pm to Augustus
nay
Posted on 8/30/11 at 2:07 pm to Augustus
quote:
Am I the only one who sees it?
No.
It would be an investment, meaning that they would unlikely justify their payout in the near term, but long term you could build something really good. It would be a big time advantage to the SEC to have two teams in the state--like it would be a big time advantage to have two teams in FL.
Posted on 8/30/11 at 2:11 pm to Augustus
me likey
Posted on 8/30/11 at 2:17 pm to Indiana Tiger
quote:
It would be an investment, meaning that they would unlikely justify their payout in the near term, but long term you could build something really good.
You mean like a few years back when Fresno State was the talk of college football? The "we'll play anyone, anywhere" lovable underdog? Where have they been lately?
Or Boise State, with their oddball Smurf Turf and trick plays to knock off one of college football's elite programs?
TCU has had some good years but mid-major powers come and go. The only reason they will do well in the Big East (if they in fact do well) is because outside of West Virginia and Pitt, the conference doesn't give a rat's hiney about football (a big chunk of its members don't even play the sport or at least not at D-1).
Posted on 8/30/11 at 2:18 pm to Augustus
Good article and he makes good points. TCU would be an easier sell.
Posted on 8/30/11 at 2:19 pm to Quidam65
quote:
Quidam65
Who's your team?
Posted on 8/30/11 at 2:20 pm to AUCE05
Nope
Posted on 8/30/11 at 2:23 pm to Gunner
I said that just the other day
Posted on 8/30/11 at 2:28 pm to Quidam65
quote:
You mean like a few years back when Fresno State was the talk of college football? The "we'll play anyone, anywhere" lovable underdog? Where have they been lately?
The reason why these teams can't sustain is that they don't have access to the same resources as the big boys. You give them the money to invest in facilities, etc, then they will be able to compete for better talent, which will lead to better results. As I said, it would be an investment.
Now I can see why A&M wouldn't want a second SEC team in TX, but it would benefit the rest of the SEC. With two teams, the rest of the west could play a game in state every year with an alternating emphasis between DFW and Houston.
Posted on 8/30/11 at 2:32 pm to Augustus
Nay.
TCU has been jumping conferences somewhat regularly about every 4 years.
I don't want to bring in a school to the SEC then worry about replacing them in a few years because they think they have a better offer from the Pac 12 or Texas' mythical super-conference they want to put together with ND and BYU.
TCU has been jumping conferences somewhat regularly about every 4 years.
I don't want to bring in a school to the SEC then worry about replacing them in a few years because they think they have a better offer from the Pac 12 or Texas' mythical super-conference they want to put together with ND and BYU.
Posted on 8/30/11 at 2:34 pm to teke184
quote:
I don't want to bring in a school to the SEC then worry about replacing them in a few years because they think they have a better offer from the Pac 12 or Texas' mythical super-conference they want to put together with ND and BYU.
Like, say, Mizzou?
Posted on 8/30/11 at 2:35 pm to teke184
quote:
TCU has been jumping conferences somewhat regularly about every 4 years.
I don't want to bring in a school to the SEC then worry about replacing them in a few years because they think they have a better offer from the Pac 12 or Texas' mythical super-conference they want to put together with ND and BYU.
Are you serious?
Posted on 8/30/11 at 2:38 pm to Indiana Tiger
quote:
quote:
TCU has been jumping conferences somewhat regularly about every 4 years.
I don't want to bring in a school to the SEC then worry about replacing them in a few years because they think they have a better offer from the Pac 12 or Texas' mythical super-conference they want to put together with ND and BYU.
Are you serious?
Half-serious.
The SEC is the top conference in the land right now, but I wouldn't put it past TCU to go for the Bigger Better Deal if the landscape changes in a few years.
Posted on 8/30/11 at 2:40 pm to Augustus
TCU= hot arse women imho
add them!
add them!
This post was edited on 8/30/11 at 2:41 pm
Posted on 8/30/11 at 2:41 pm to teke184
You can understand though why TCU jumped from the WAC to C-USA and then to MWC. Especially leaving the WAC AND jumping on the chance to be in a AQ conference. It's not even the same as joining the SEC and deciding there's something more appealing out there.
Posted on 8/30/11 at 2:44 pm to hoginthesw
quote:
You can understand though why TCU jumped from the WAC to C-USA and then to MWC. Especially leaving the WAC AND jumping on the chance to be in a AQ conference. It's not even the same as joining the SEC and deciding there's something more appealing out there.
MWC to Big East is an easy one to approve of since it is an AQ conference.
WAC to C-USA to MWC doesn't sit as well with me, in part because, IIRC, C-USA was better than the MWC at the time they jumped.
Granted, I'm prejudiced in that I was at USM at the time TCU was in C-USA and they talked a LOT of shite for a program that didn't win a single league title the whole time they were there.
Posted on 8/30/11 at 2:44 pm to Indiana Tiger
quote:
The reason why these teams can't sustain is that they don't have access to the same resources as the big boys.
And TCU -- a small private school -- does? If that were the key to success, Vandy would be competing for the SEC title every year. Or at least Baylor would be better than 18-102 in its Big 12-2-1 tenure.
Fresno State's time has come and gone. Boise State's is soon passing. TCU's will pass as well, and we'll all be talking about the next surprising mid-major.
Posted on 8/30/11 at 2:50 pm to teke184
WAC to C-USA makes sense due to the region they are in.
C-USA to MWC.....I can see your point
C-USA to MWC.....I can see your point
Posted on 8/30/11 at 2:52 pm to Quidam65
quote:
And TCU -- a small private school -- does? If that were the key to success, Vandy would be competing for the SEC title every year. Or at least Baylor would be better than 18-102 in its Big 12-2-1 tenure.
Fresno State's time has come and gone. Boise State's is soon passing. TCU's will pass as well, and we'll all be talking about the next surprising mid-major.
Their only disadvantage is size. If they are committed to academics as Vandy, then that would be a problem. Baylor...well I have enough of them pissed off at me already. The key is the staff and the support that they have and I'm convinced that Gary P will be there a long time. I don't think that they would winning championships, but they could and would be competitive.
Page 1 of 4
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News