Let's add A&M, Oklahoma, Duke, and UNC to the SEC

#1
Aavoxx

Aavoxx

Got my own theme music...
Joined
Jan 31, 2010
Messages
20,862
Likes
763
#1
Oklahoma and A&M everyone understands. Why Duke and UNC you might ask? It greatly increases our chances of being the best conference in all three major sports every year.

The only problem I see with this is TV markets. Would the extra revenue generated from increased basketball interest in the SEC make up for losing a market like St. Louis that a Missouri would bring?

What say you?
 
#2
#2
Aavoxx said:
Oklahoma and A&M everyone understands. Why Duke and UNC you might ask? It greatly increases our chances of being the best conference in all three major sports every year.

The only problem I see with this is TV markets. Would the extra revenue generated from increased basketball interest in the SEC make up for losing a market like St. Louis that a Missouri would bring?

What say you?
Click to expand...

Great idea. But UNC. and Duke will not leave for the SEC. Will not. And while I'm on it, Peyton Manning is not coming to UT to coach, ever.
 
#3
#3
Aavoxx said:
Oklahoma and A&M everyone understands. Why Duke and UNC you might ask? It greatly increases our chances of being the best conference in all three major sports every year.

The only problem I see with this is TV markets. Would the extra revenue generated from increased basketball interest in the SEC make up for losing a market like St. Louis that a Missouri would bring?

What say you?
Click to expand...
We probably would only play our biggest rival about once every 10 years, so I'd have a big problem with that.
 
#4
#4
Aavoxx said:
Oklahoma and A&M everyone understands. Why Duke and UNC you might ask? It greatly increases our chances of being the best conference in all three major sports every year.

The only problem I see with this is TV markets. Would the extra revenue generated from increased basketball interest in the SEC make up for losing a market like St. Louis that a Missouri would bring?

What say you?
Click to expand...

no unfortunately, it would not do such
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#5
#5
Aavoxx said:
Oklahoma and A&M everyone understands. Why Duke and UNC you might ask? It greatly increases our chances of being the best conference in all three major sports every year.

The only problem I see with this is TV markets. Would the extra revenue generated from increased basketball interest in the SEC make up for losing a market like St. Louis that a Missouri would bring?

What say you?
Click to expand...
Program content trumps TV markets because if you have good programs/games, it will have vastly more national appeal than a regional game between Mizzou and Arky, for example.
 
#6
#6
Duke AND UNC? No.

I'd say pull a school like NC State and add Va Tech if we're bringing in two easterly teams. That way you get Charlotte and DC/Nova.
 
#7
#7
tvolsfan said:
We probably would only play our biggest rival about once every 10 years, so I'd have a big problem with that.
Click to expand...

Maybe, maybe not. Regardless of who we add, and I'm almost certain it will be TV market driven, the SEC will go to 16 teams. I think it's inevitable. So the question then becomes how do we do the divisions? If we add Duke and UNC for basketball purposes, and A&M and OU for football purposes, we could do split the two divisions into "mini-divisions" for the lack of a better word for schedule purposes. For example:

SEC East

Florida
Duke
North Carolina
South Carolina
Tennessee
Kentucky
Vanderbilt
Georgia

SEC West

LSU
Arkansas
Texas A&M
Oklahoma
Auburn
Alabama
Ole Miss
Mississippi State

In this setup, Tennessee would play Kentucky, Vanderbilt, and Georgia every year. That's three conference games. We'd play an anchor from the other East teams every year, that could be Florida in this case. That's four conference games. We could play an anchor from the West every year, which for us would be Alabama. That's five conference games. We could rotate one of the other East teams for 6 games, and then rotate 2 of the west teams for 8 games.

We'd still have two divisions to setup for a conference championship game. We could take this a step further and actually break down into four divisions, seed the winner, and have a round of semis before the conference game but then we've moved closer to a playoff system and pushed the number of games we're allowed to play in a season.
 
#9
#9
The SEC is perfect the way it is. Don't do a thing to it.
 
#10
#10
Aavoxx said:
Maybe, maybe not. Regardless of who we add, and I'm almost certain it will be TV market driven, the SEC will go to 16 teams. I think it's inevitable. So the question then becomes how do we do the divisions? If we add Duke and UNC for basketball purposes, and A&M and OU for football purposes, we could do split the two divisions into "mini-divisions" for the lack of a better word for schedule purposes. For example:

SEC East

Florida
Duke
North Carolina
South Carolina
Tennessee
Kentucky
Vanderbilt
Georgia

SEC West

LSU
Arkansas
Texas A&M
Oklahoma
Auburn
Alabama
Ole Miss
Mississippi State

In this setup, Tennessee would play Kentucky, Vanderbilt, and Georgia every year. That's three conference games. We'd play an anchor from the other East teams every year, that could be Florida in this case. That's four conference games. We could play an anchor from the West every year, which for us would be Alabama. That's five conference games. We could rotate one of the other East teams for 6 games, and then rotate 2 of the west teams for 8 games.

We'd still have two divisions to setup for a conference championship game. We could take this a step further and actually break down into four divisions, seed the winner, and have a round of semis before the conference game but then we've moved closer to a playoff system and pushed the number of games we're allowed to play in a season.
Click to expand...

Oh and it'd work where we play 9 conference games. We Play the 7 other East teams every year, Bama, and the 1 west team switches every other year. Pretty lame
 
#11
#11
UTK said:
Oh and it'd work where we play 9 conference games. We Play the 7 other East teams every year, Bama, and the 1 west team switches every other year. Pretty lame
Click to expand...

It would take forever to play all of the teams in the West that way. 12 years if we do home and homes.
 
#12
#12
Duke and NC, no thanks. If the teams came from the ACC, there are better choices.

Basketball is worth much less to a conference compared to football. Just look at how many conferences were fighting over Kansas when the Big12 was imploding a few months ago.
 
#13
#13
Aavoxx said:
Maybe, maybe not. Regardless of who we add, and I'm almost certain it will be TV market driven, the SEC will go to 16 teams. I think it's inevitable. So the question then becomes how do we do the divisions? If we add Duke and UNC for basketball purposes, and A&M and OU for football purposes, we could do split the two divisions into "mini-divisions" for the lack of a better word for schedule purposes. For example:

SEC East

Florida
Duke
North Carolina
South Carolina
Tennessee
Kentucky
Vanderbilt
Georgia

SEC West

LSU
Arkansas
Texas A&M
Oklahoma
Auburn
Alabama
Ole Miss
Mississippi State

In this setup, Tennessee would play Kentucky, Vanderbilt, and Georgia every year. That's three conference games. We'd play an anchor from the other East teams every year, that could be Florida in this case. That's four conference games. We could play an anchor from the West every year, which for us would be Alabama. That's five conference games. We could rotate one of the other East teams for 6 games, and then rotate 2 of the west teams for 8 games.

We'd still have two divisions to setup for a conference championship game. We could take this a step further and actually break down into four divisions, seed the winner, and have a round of semis before the conference game but then we've moved closer to a playoff system and pushed the number of games we're allowed to play in a season.
Click to expand...

That would never work because Florida would whine and cry about having to play a tough schedule every year :yes:
 
#14
#14
Dr.Vol said:
Duke and NC, no thanks. If the teams came from the ACC, there are better choices.

Basketball is worth much less to a conference compared to football. Just look at how many conferences were
fighting over Kansas when the Big12 was imploding a few months ago.
Click to expand...

Exactly, very good comparison
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#15
#15
I like the SEC the way it is. While the Pac-12 and Big 10 are worried about adding teams to their conferences, we'll just keep winning championships.
 
#16
#16
I admit I'm not in favor of expansion.

But if we let A&M in, I want them to admit they're moving because they're inferior to Texas and can't keep up.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top