re: More SEC $ with Texas and OU?

quote:

---

I hope the rest of y’all are getting a good taste of the arrogance that comes with them.

Just facts. I actually dont disagree with some of the people saying not to underestimate our influence. Longterm it will shake up the SEC without question, so i dont really blame people who want to keep the conference as is.

---

In a conference of the size, import and power of an expanded SEC, with the teams already in, you won't have the influence you're used to. The conference will not be dependent on TX at all. You'll certainly will be listened to, but you won't be able to demand and get anything you want. TX won't even get in unless you agree to the rules in the first place.

quote:

---

That's exactly what they'll do. The SEC is already perfect with LSU, Bama, Auburn, Florida, Georgia, Tennessee, A&M.. all of them. We could take lower tiered schools from the Big 12 or ACC and make them stars before I'd want to take on a humongous school who historically bullies their conference.

The state of Texas is like it's own country. A&M is all we need.

---

Yeah I'd much rather we add UNC and UVA. Two new markets, smaller schools with great academics and good at basketball and baseball. Football could turn around in the SEC if they make the right coaching moves.

quote:

---

hopefully that someone is LSU. sending Auburn and Bama over to the East to leave us stuck with ole miss and state and a bunch of Big 8 teams is a terrible tradeoff for LSU.

---

Not have scheduled annual games against auburn, Alabama, and Florida would suck (if permanent annual with florida would also go away with expansion).

I want more games against traditional SEC members not less. Before 2 long LSU will be part of the new SWC.

quote:

---

The only issue is weather Texas will stand down and accept that they aren’t going to treat the SEC like they did the SWC and Big12.

---

Why would Texas change now?


It’s been a while but how binding is agreement between SEC schools including future television rights/money? I thought it was looser contractually and more bound by the respect and money the league as a whole brings in and it’s tradition. SEC has teams and fans that usually feel we are better together - SEC, SEC, SEC, …

I don’t see Texas ever cheering anything but Texas with sports. Based on current students SEC would fall behind SJW chants. Students will be more concerned will pushing boycotts of team travel to states they disagree with than showing pride and unity with SEC.

Unless Texas comes hat in hand and willing to prove it’s commitment in a legally binding way outside the norm of other member teams for a certain time frame I can easily see problems in the near future. More teams will also just make is easier to cause problems and division. I am more ok with Oklahoma than Texas.

quote:

---

I would like two good athletic programs added in the SEC

---

i mean, we already have like 10 of them

send OU and Texas to the Big Ten or Pac 12 where they need good programs

quote:

---

The SEC is trying to own college sports. Their value grows exponentially by adding two brands like Texas and OU. It’s really not a tough call.

---

you think 11 out of 14 are on board with that????

I hope more schools than A&M object. When A&M and Mizzou tell the other schools what it's like to deal with Texas, they'd be fools not to listen. If 1 or 2 schools are adamant against a new member, the other schools should respect them. Texas is NOT a team player, and they never will be.

Marry someone who's been divorced four times at your own peril (Colorado, Nebraska, A&M, Mizzou).