For clarity's sake, I'll say the following:
I don't think that the SEC's existence or relevance would be in jeopardy were you to merge every remaining major conference together, add the AFC North & NFC South, throw in the Lakers and Yankees, have Billy Graham as the Conference Chaplain, name Warren Buffet as the Commissioner, and with Led Zeppelin opening every game with a free concert while topless women served free beer and gave out Snuggies to the first 5,000 fans. The SEC is simply too strong, from any conceivable standpoint (i.e. fanbase, money, prestige, history, winning, footprint, etc.), to fail to be one of the premier conferences in this country. Hooker said it best when he said that while the NFL was the "King of Sports", the SEC was the "Crowned Prince", and no compilation of calamitous events is going to change that, at least for the forseeable future.
The landing of Texas and Oklahoma (with or without the hanger-on schools coming with them) is critical because their addition / loss represents equally dramatic help and harm. Were the SEC to land them, where does the Pac-10 then go? Who do they then add that comes close to increasing their stature, as the landing of Texas / Oklahoma, et al, would provide? The shortest answer: Nowhere significant, as no one else would afford them this potential leap, were those two off of the table.
Should the SEC land them, it would likely make the already cavernous distance between themselves and other conferences nearly insurmountable - and across all critical criterion of revevue, TV footprint, competitive balance, etc. If you are like me, and think that winning either the Big 10 or Pac 10 championship is essentially meaningless now, wait until you do it without having to beat TX, FL, BAMA, TN, OK, GA, or any other SEC schools. Should the Pac-10 sign Texas and Oklahoma (again, with or without the hanger-on schools) all of these previously stated factors would work to greatly - GREATLY - close the gap between the Pac-10 and the SEC. How could it not? In fact, should the Pac-10 sign Texas and OK, I think that the Big 10 would then become a distant third - even if a miracle occurred and they somehow add Notre Dame. So, to me, that's really what's at stake here.....the SEC has a chance to place themselves in a nearly-unchallengeable position of current and future dominance, and the Pac-10 has this, a single chance to place themselves if not on-par with the SEC, then at least in the same conversation. In any regard, their size and footprint alone would ensure that they were never reduced to a point of irrelevance, or of being outside of the conversations.
The SEC would love to add them, but the Pac-10 MUST land them, IMO. More importantly, I believe that the Pac-10 is going to go after them, accordingly, with this mind set. Be prepared to see the Pac-10, "break the bank" so to speak, and make every effort to land both Texas and Oklahoma and the rest of the Big 12 defectors. I could see the Pac-10 being willing to add all four Texas teams, offering Texas and Oklahoma more revenue-shared money (as the Big 12 now does), having the Pac-10 championship game in Dallas, etc., etc. For well or ill, I think it is highly unlikely that the SEC will be similiarly able - or more likely, willing - to make the same concessions. I'm not even asserting that the SEC should or that it would be sensible to do any of these things, even for the long-term future of the Pac-10, but I think that they'll be far more willing and likely to do so, than the SEC.
I don't oppose Miami or FSU's entrees into the SEC because of their current football status (both "down" right now), but for more pragmatic reasons, namely, because they don't add any appreciable value to the conference (by the major categories, previously cited: TV footprint, revenue, etc.) beyond what the SEC now fully enjoys, namely, the fact that we already own the State of Florida with the Gators (who play both Miami and FSU each season, anyway). You cannot say that an appreciably larger group of Floridians would watch more SEC games, nor that more recruits would elect SEC schools than now do so. I just don't see these schools - either together, or respectively as individual institutions - raising the stature of or otherwise significantly adding to the SEC, whatsoever. I respect the opinions of those who may know more about these schools than I, or who believe differently about their prospects for contributing to the SEC, but from my detached standpoint (I neither like nor dislike either school), it seems certain to the point of being self-evident that they are a notch below Texas and Oklahoma in regards to the attractiveness of adding them to the SEC, and significantly so. Proponents of their entrance are, at best, simply expressing some feelings of loyalty to those schools or wishful thinking that they may gain admission into the SEC, and at worst, delusionally believe that Miami and FSU are not far closer to the Georgia Tech's and West Virginia's of the world, than they are to Texas and Oklahoma. The SEC might be forced to settle for one or both of them, but it won't be their first (or maybe even second or third option) so long as Texas and Oklahoma remain possibilities. Texas and Oklahoma are like Charlize Theron and Cameron Diaz. Miami and FSU are like Tina Fey and Fergie....not wholly unattractive, do-able, but not your first options. But it's not like they are the worst choices, either, because in my opinion, adding Georgia Tech is like taking your sister to prom....and the after-party, West Virginia is like adding Larry the Cable Guy, and Virginia Tech is like adding Andy Dick.
Some other tidbits to add to the conversation that I've heard or elsewhere read:
There's a lot of talk about how these schools will, "culturally fit" with one another, so I wonder how Baylor's religious affiliations are going to fit into the notably secular institutions of the Pac-10? Conversely, Austin, Texas prides itself on its Bohemian sub/counter-culture, and a move to the Pac-10 might be just the opportunity to go, "full-hippie". Of course, as Dallas, TX is home to one of the largest and most integrated homosexual populations in America (both the Dallas Sheriff and its District Judge are openly gay), perhaps Texas would be a closer cultural fit to the Pac-10 than the SEC. Of course this is not to say that the SEC-based cities doesn't also have their own fluorishing and widely-integrated homosexual communities (and whom which we are thankful to have, if only for their many and diverse contributions to our cities and towns), as well, but I wouldn't think them to be comparable to those others which are located in predominantly Pac-10 areas of the country. Simply, any notion that Texans are somehow more culturally akin to Southerners, or irreparably different from those in the Pac-10, may be in error. Or not. Just something to think about.
The $17M (or whatever it is) is only that which the SEC gets from its TV package with CBS / ESPN.....and does not include additional revenues which the individual teams may negotiate with other outlets, and which they would retain for themselves, without sharing with anyone. So, if Texas wanted to start its own network, it could do so as a member of the SEC....but not the Pac-10, as it would be an, "all-rights in" (meaning, all rights would be shares amongst all, in one package) deal. Sounds like a way for Texas to get what it wants, after all.
If we're at the point that there is concern that Texas can't leave without Baylor.....how is it possible that they could leave without A&M? Well, its not, really. And who's the one AD who has both stated that the SEC would be an option (implicitly confirming that some discussions have been held) if the Big 12 went away, and who has been most vocal in criticizing the prospect of Big 12 teams travelling long distances to Pac-10 sites.....that would be the A&M AD. While everyone's looking at Texas (who seems to be revelling in being so heavily courted by everyone), the SEC might have attempted or has actually ensured that they won't be able to just do anything they want, at least without warning, knowing that A&M would want to go to the SEC. A step further, suppose that the Pac-10 sends out their invites to all six schools, and immediately thereafter, the SEC invites A&M.....and they accept their invitation, becoming members of the SEC. Would the Pac-10 have the stomach to fight the TX legislature (and the current TX Governor, who is an A&M grad) to gain their allowance for Texas to come to the Pac-10 without A&M? How long would that take? What would happen to the rest of their invites, in the meantime? Does anyone believe that OK and the others leave for the Pac-10.....not knowing what TX may be forced / allowed to do. What would the other conferences be doing during this time? After seeing the Pac-10's hyper-aggressive manuevering suddenly becoming bogged down over Texas, they wouldn't be sitting idly by while awaiting other events to unfold, you can be certain of that. The Big 10 likely leaps to go slightly further South, and extends invites to OK & OK State, as would the SEC. Knowing that its most likely TX will have to follow A&M, and most preferring the SEC themselves (as is widely rumored), the Oklahoma pair accept the SEC's invitation, following A&M. Now, TX might be allowed to go to the Pac-10 eventually, but if they want to keep the rivalry with both the Aggies and the Red River rivalry with OK....they'll need to come to the SEC for that. The TX legislature, now seeing the inconceivability of the SEC taking all four TX schools (they've already taken 3 at this point - OK, OK ST & AM), might then be open to protecting and keeping the main Texas school rivalries intact - and that's TX and A&M.......and that's the SEC.
Much to the Longhorn's chagrin, the road to mega-conference expansion might not go through Austin, after all, but College Station, instead.
My hope - and that's all it is, really - is that such a scenario is what Slive means when he said that the SEC would be "thoughtful and strategic"......and is not waiting to scramble to find a dance partner once he hears the opening notes of some Bel Biv Devoe slow-jam.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
My opinion is that it would be crazy for them to go to the Pac 10. That's a lot of miles to just play sports, and if education is high on their priority list then that means a lot of time away from the classrooms and a lot of tired student athletes from travelling. JMHO
