ESPN says Texas A&M, Mizzou, Clemson, FSU to join SEC

#176
#176
MemphisVol1485 said:
I want it to happen just for the Hot Girls of FSU thread.
Click to expand...



Ok so scratch my suggestion of VT or Clemson. This is reason enough to pick FSU.

68758553_03363467d0_1.jpg


Chick on the far right takes the prize.
 
#177
#177
Voldemonium said:
I understand the arguments for ATM but I'm not for Missouri under any circumstances. They aren't even a southern university. They don't fit the SEC profile. Even the B10 didn't want'em. Hell, why not just invite tOSU. Columbus Ohio is closer to more SEC schools than Columbia MO. If most SEC fans won't bother to make the trip to Fayettville what makes anyone think they'd want to drive to Columbia? Since Slive is apparently willing to nuke the conference he might as well go big by adding ATM, UNC, Duke, and either FSU/VT/Clemson and institute 4 N/S/E/W divisions.

ATM - I think enough people have made the case for their inclusion

UNC & Duke - Adds another state and are national names. I'd wager Duke sells more merchandise than MSU, OleMiss, and Vandy combined. In combination with UK they could make the SEC the new Big East in b-ball.

FSU - National brand that's been down a few years but is on the rise. Fits the SEC profile.

Clemson - wouldn't rock the boat or make the conference prohibitively difficult but would be solid mid-level addition. Clemson is an obvious fit culturally.

VT - See Clemson. Adds another state to the conf.
Click to expand...

I agree with your argument against Mizzou joining. They bring nothing to the table, except maybe giving the other SEC schools a better chance of gaining those MO basketball recruits.

I say add aTm and Houston. Houston solely for tv markets and the more money for an ESPN contract. And then add Duke and UNC for the 2 added East spots. The SECe would be dominant in basketball: UK, UNC, Duke...arguably three of the top 5 college basketball programs in history.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#180
#180
i really dont think the SEC should expand at all but if they are gonna expand i would prefer that clemson or FSU come in rather than Texas A&M. I think if the SEC expands the conference would be too big and i think thats a plan for trouble
 
#183
#183
Is think that there's too many threads saying this same thing already.... mergebait.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#184
#184
IMO it really sucks. I guess it's going to bring in a lot more money to for the conference as a whole, and will bring some interesting new opponents onto UT's schedule, but it's almost certainly going to kill the yearly UT v. Bama series. With two 8 team divisions that means that you'll play the 7 other teams in your division and the ones in the other division will probably rotate, which means we would likely play a home and home with Bama, and then it would be 14 years until they rotate back onto the schedule. I know Bama has owned us of late, but the thought of this rivalry all but disappearing makes me sick.
 
#186
#186
Orangesmokey said:
i really dont think the SEC should expand at all but if they are gonna expand i would prefer that clemson or FSU come in rather than Texas A&M. I think if the SEC expands the conference would be too big and i think thats a plan for trouble
Click to expand...

^ Yah, this. :bad:
 
#187
#187
Somebody may have already said this, but just let the entire NCAA into the SEC ... and then have a national championship playoff. :crazy:
 
#188
#188
Does Missouri still have a football team?:D I would be okay with Clemson and FSU but that's enough. I think it diminishes the exclusiveness of being in the SEC if you add too many teams.
 
#189
#189
Voldemonium said:
I understand the arguments for ATM but I'm not for Missouri under any circumstances. They aren't even a southern university. They don't fit the SEC profile. Even the B10 didn't want'em. Hell, why not just invite tOSU. Columbus Ohio is closer to more SEC schools than Columbia MO. If most SEC fans won't bother to make the trip to Fayettville what makes anyone think they'd want to drive to Columbia? Since Slive is apparently willing to nuke the conference he might as well go big by adding ATM, UNC, Duke, and either FSU/VT/Clemson and institute 4 N/S/E/W divisions.

ATM - I think enough people have made the case for their inclusion

UNC & Duke - Adds another state and are national names. I'd wager Duke sells more merchandise than MSU, OleMiss, and Vandy combined. In combination with UK they could make the SEC the new Big East in b-ball.

FSU - National brand that's been down a few years but is on the rise. Fits the SEC profile.

Clemson - wouldn't rock the boat or make the conference prohibitively difficult but would be solid mid-level addition. Clemson is an obvious fit culturally.

VT - See Clemson. Adds another state to the conf.
Click to expand...

You don't understand today's world then...its all about TV money is why Mizzou would be added
 
#192
#192
SEC officials are denying there is any interest in anyone other than A&M at this time.

11 of 12 presidents are meeting tomorrow to discuss A&M admission.
 
#194
#194
Va Tech makes more sense from a marketing money stand point. Clemson brings nothing because the Gamecocks have that market share of the Carolinas. FSU brings a tradition, but marketing of Florida has the Gators well entrenched. Georgia Tech being in the ATL is nice, but the SEC has the Bulldogs to cover that market. Va Tech would do well in the SEC. Just remember it's about money and nothing else.
 
#197
#197
SlyStone said:
Va Tech makes more sense from a marketing money stand point. Clemson brings nothing because the Gamecocks have that market share of the Carolinas. FSU brings a tradition, but marketing of Florida has the Gators well entrenched. Georgia Tech being in the ATL is nice, but the SEC has the Bulldogs to cover that market. Va Tech would do well in the SEC. Just remember it's about money and nothing else.
Click to expand...

In that case Maryland makes a lot more sense.
 
#198
#198
I think going to 16 is too many. It means that almost all your conference games are going to be played against the 7 teams in your division and then have one rotating opponent from the other. I think it'll suck playing a team like Auburn or LSU for a couple years and then knowing it's going to be almost 15 years before we play them again. Also, going to 16 teams legitimately brings the possibilty of losing the yearly UT/Bama rivalry into play. Geographically we won't fall into the same division with them, and in either scenario (2 or 4) divisions, and with 16 teams, it's likely that the protected rivals getting to keep a yearly series will have to come to an end. (UT/Bama, UGA/Barn, LSU/UF).
 
#200
#200
Good by me. One step closer to a true playoff system and earned NC.

Four 16 team conferences producing 4 true champions that could then play a two round playoff for the NC.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top