re: Texas A&M to SEC talks heating up?

Or TCU to the big east

12 is a perfect number imo. Don't wanna see it change.

quote:

---

I think 18 would be the perfect number. That way you could play the other 8 division foes and four OOC games to give you 12 games. That would determine a "True" divisional champ. The Divisional champs would then go on to the conference championship game.

---

If you do that though why not just have two separate conferences that agree to play a playoff game. I would hate never playing teams from the other division unless its in a championship game - pointless to even be in the same conference.

At some point you don't get equal value for adding teams and get diminishing returns from a monetary standpoint. Universities would never agree to that.

At what point does conference expansion begin to hurt the average fan? I think a lot of us can agree that the SEC fans are some of the most passionate and follow their teams virtually anywhere., but what happens when you greatly increase the geographic footprint of the conference?

From Baton Rouge to Columbia, Missouri is almost as far as it is from Gainesville, FL to Fayetteville, AR. Mileage wise, Oxford, MS is closer to Columbia, SC (541 miles) than it is to Stillwater, OK (555 miles).

At some point are you going to have fans, especially if the SEC expands to the west like everyone wants/expects them to, get tired of driving 8 - 10 hours just to go to a game against an opponent in the same division?

quote:

---

I think 18 would be the perfect number. That way you could play the other 8 division foes and four OOC games to give you 12 games. That would determine a "True" divisional champ. The Divisional champs would then go on to the NATIONAL CHAMPIONSHIP GAME

---

FIFY.

Why does't the SEC do this then say this game is the NC. PERIOD.

Take it FWIW, but what you aren't seeing are the discussions on the Scout, TexAgs and Rivals premium boards.

I have 3 unrelated sources that do not know each other (One is a direct tie to an A&M regent, one is a Sooner/Tiger(LSU kind) and one is a Horn). For the first time since conference realignment heated up, they are all agreeing on the story.

From what I have been told, A&M to the SEC is a done deal. What the hold up is, is whether OU comes along, and if OU comes along (all seem to think it is likely) then OU will broker OSU and Mizzou into the SEC as well. Frankly, I'd rather it just be us.... but if someone else has to come along, I'm alright with OU. I'm not a big fan of OSU and Mizzou coming along too, but I guess if OU/OSU is really a package, then that would have to happen.

Let's just get one myth out of the way before some rebuts my post. A&M and Texas have never been a package and never will be a package. Legislative reasons for keeping them together are far less important in 2011 than in May 2010 (especially since the ESiPN contract was signed). A&M is in very good standing with the State Legislature right now, and I have perused the 100 or so pages for their funding presentation to the legislature, and it all looks great. Yes, politics helped to stem the tide in 2010, but I can promise you Perry and other lawmakers, not named Aggie or Horn, have not had any influence, nor will have any influence on this 2011 decision.

Now, for the timetable.... I have been told for a while that we would announce in June that we would go to the SEC. I have been told, as of yesterday, that it is much much sooner.

18 as the perfect number? good god dude.

quote:

---

Take it FWIW, but what you aren't seeing are the discussions on the Scout, TexAgs and Rivals premium boards.

I have 3 unrelated sources that do not know each other (One is a direct tie to an A&M regent, one is a Sooner/Tiger(LSU kind) and one is a Horn). For the first time since conference realignment heated up, they are all agreeing on the story.

From what I have been told, A&M to the SEC is a done deal. What the hold up is, is whether OU comes along, and if OU comes along (all seem to think it is likely) then OU will broker OSU and Mizzou into the SEC as well. Frankly, I'd rather it just be us.... but if someone else has to come along, I'm alright with OU. I'm not a big fan of OSU and Mizzou coming along too, but I guess if OU/OSU is really a package, then that would have to happen.

Let's just get one myth out of the way before some rebuts my post. A&M and Texas have never been a package and never will be a package. Legislative reasons for keeping them together are far less important in 2011 than in May 2010 (especially since the ESiPN contract was signed). A&M is in very good standing with the State Legislature right now, and I have perused the 100 or so pages for their funding presentation to the legislature, and it all looks great. Yes, politics helped to stem the tide in 2010, but I can promise you Perry and other lawmakers, not named Aggie or Horn, have not had any influence, nor will have any influence on this 2011 decision.

Now, for the timetable.... I have been told for a while that we would announce in June that we would go to the SEC. I have been told, as of yesterday, that it is much much sooner.

---

well aint that some shite...

i just think 14 sill allows you to have some cross division continuity..

going to 16 really makes it feel like two completely separate divisions.. eventually, one will be stronger or a bigger draw, and will want its own more lucrative deal.. similar to the WAC breakup that produced the MWC..