BreakawayZou83

Ole Miss 7-1 (.875)
Arkansas 13-4 (.76)
Vanderbilt 12-5-1 (.71)
Mississippi State 4-2 (.667)
South Carolina 10-6 (.625)
Florida 7-6 (.538)

Tennessee 6-6 (.500)
Auburn 3-3 (.500)
LSU 2-2 (.500)

Texas A&M 7-11 (.389)
Kentucky 5-9 (.357)
Texas 9-18-1 (.339)
Oklahoma 25-68-5 (.281)
Alabama 2-7 (.222)
Georgia 1-12 (.077)

Shameless spinoff thread. I was curious what this looks like without heavy weight on tv ratings, and and attempt to factor in "fit".

I created seven categories, each with a weight assigned:

1. Distance from geographic center of SEC (Houston, MS): 15%
2. Number of games played all-time against current SEC members: 15%
3. 2025 athletic revenue: 20%
4. 2025 attendance: 10%
5. 2025 stadium capacity percentage: 10%
6. Top 25 AP poll finishes, 2000- present: 15%
7. Weeks all-time in the Top 25 AP poll: 15%

Here are the results:

quote:

---

There's just not much dead weight other than Vandy. Even MSU ranks well ahead of four BIG 10 programs.

In hindsight, adding Clemson back in 1992 rather than South Carolina would have been a better call, but what's done is done. Florida State would have been great too but they passed on the opportunity.

---

There's not and the other thing to keep in mind is that the current SEC TV deal actually kind of throttles the lower half of the conference in this metric that very heavily weights tv ratings.

Take this comparison: Notre Dame, even when they're bad, get a free giant rating because every single game is on NBC. It's basically impossible, even if the two worst FBS programs are going at each other, to have a lower rating on NBC than two great teams playing on SEC Network or even say ESPN 2.

So a really fun slugfest between say 5-3 Ole Miss and 4-4 South Carolina is relegated to the SEC Network or ESPN 2 at 11am. If that game had the opportunity to be on ABC in primetime, it would do great ratings.

But the SEC only has a handful of primetime network slots each week:

ABC: 1-3 games (big ratings guaranteed)

ESPN / ESPN2 / ESPNU: 3-6 games (can still see big ratings on ESPN, basically impossible on ESPN2 / ESPNU)

SEC Network / digital only: 1-3 games (guaranteed shite ratings to tank your average)

So a genuinely competitive, fun, middle of the pack SEC team is going to get weighed down in ratings because it rarely gets on a national network. Since the SEC is the deepest conference, but has no more national tv slots than the B1G or the ACC or the Big 12, its sinks its own middle class and lower class teams.

To put that in perspective, Mizzou appeared on national television twice last season. Texas appeared on national television seven times. Notre Dame appeared 10 times (with one game on Peacock and one on ESPN).

Of course Mizzou's tv ratings look like dog shite in comparison. They were relegated to SECN / ESPN2 / ESPNU / digital only broadcasts seven times.

If the SEC had a better tv deal and scheduled better, it would pump ratings even higher.

This is a much more thoughtful way to analyze the candidates than 99% of internet slop arguing about the "best" candidates. That said, some suggested tweaks:

1. Television viewership is not an impartial metric so I think giving it 50% in the formula skews some of your results. I think this should account for 10-15% of the formula, at most.

Call it a chicken or egg situation, but blue bloods/historic winners that are already well-represented by your All-time AP poll points tend to get the best network and time slots. Of course Notre Dame, for example, is going to come up smelling like roses here - it has its own tv deal and has all its games on a giant network, while schools like North Carolina or Virginia Tech will perform poorly as they are rarely playing in primetime on a major network. That does not necessarily indicate that North Carolina would be a worse network draw than any of your #4-10 ranked candidates if it were an SEC member.

2. I think you need a "fit" metric. I realize that's adding a somewhat subjective rather than quantifiable data point to the formula, but it could be done. Expansion candidates, in my mind, are basically a simple formula of big brand + fit + economics.

Colorado may rank better overall in your formula, but there is no way it's a better fit in the SEC than North Carolina or Georgia Tech or Virginia Tech. I propose calculating the geographic center of the SEC, and then distance (miles) to the expansion candidate's campus. Combine this with number of games played against current SEC schools, and you've got something.

Clemson and Florida State are obvious candidates not just because they are good football brands, but because they are effectively SEC programs wearing ACC badges. Clemson instantly gives you incredible match-ups that would be ratings bangers: South Carolina, Georgia, Alabama, Auburn, Tennessee, etc. They sit in the midst of the existing footprint. This ain't about cable boxes and footprint anymore, and you rightfully left those factors out of your formula.

For me? No. I still absolutely love it. For hauling family there and back? Quite a pain. I do it for the sake of my kids having the same experience that I did over 30 years ago at Faurot Field with my dad and grandfather.

quote:

---

That’s bc a White dude isn’t the face of the league.

---

Idk about the "face" of the league - I'd argue the NBA doesn't really have just one right now. But Joker and Luka are insanely popular players (Luks was #2 for jersey sales last year), you don't really see any of this nonsense aimed at them. NBA players just don't really seem to have this problem. Closest thing I can even recall is the Morris brothers picking a fight with the Jokic brothers. The Morris brothers did not want that smoke, in the end. And that fight started because of a dirty foul by Joker on Morris, so not even the same problem that we're seeing in the WNBA.

For Mizzou fans, this question simply becomes "name your best player since 1970".

quote:

---

That bill is DOA in the courts if it passes so why worry about it?

---

DOA in the courts? Doubtful. Maybe portions of it, at best. Or after years of fighting. It's a big bill that is trying to cover a whole hell of a lot of ground.

I think it's becoming more doubtful that it passes at all. It's too broad. Would've made far more sense to produce a series of focused/targeted bills to address the key issues instead of bundling into one big clusterfrick so its gets pushback from a million angles.

quote:

---

This would have to be a law specifically for FSU to join. I just don’t see Miami being invited.

---

UNC? Clemson?

quote:

---

“Per the amendment, obtained by @YahooSports, if a power league school wants to move to another power conference, the school can avoid the 5-year probationary period if it withdraws from its league within 180 days of the bill’s enactment.”

---

I don't understand how this would help though - ACC members missed their deadline to leave this year. It would be more than 180 days from enactment before they could depart. The language may specify 180 days to announce intent to depart from their current conference. As quoted though, doesn't seem to change anything. Which would completely make sense that even the amendment bungles the issue.

quote:

---

A bunch of nerdy politicians creating feaux championships for votes. What a world.

---

That's probably the oldest college football tradition.