Texas A&M is not the SEC's first choice

[miamicane]

yo gus are gonna have fun with that option of gt,miami crushed that thing last year,but two years ago..it was a headache

 

[vol66]

After reading the OU scout (free) forum, honestly, for the OU fans, all it would take is a threat from Texas. "You Come With Us or Blah" they'd jump to the SEC they don't like what Texas is pulling on A&M.

 

[Velo Vol]

I wonder how the dollars compare in the SEC/PAC10 sales pitches to A&M?

 

[Rasputin_Vol]

I wonder how the dollars compare in the SEC/PAC10 sales pitches to A&M?

Well, considering the SEC already has a deal in hand and the PAC-10 doesn't... you know what they say about birds in the bush and all.

And in these hard economic times, who else is left to create a lucrative television deal with? NBC??? A PAC-10 Network?

 

[rbroyles]

]Doubt it, I'd bet either Missouri, Baylor, or Kansas.[/B]

I'd rather have KU but it's not up to me, they're a great basketball school. We'll see if Baylor tries to hitch a ride with A&M. Missouri gives you the St. Louis and Kansas City markets.

Wow! Baylor, that bastian of sports excellence? Might as well raid C-USA, I'd take Southern Ms over Baylor.

 

[BubbaDoc]

As far as new markets and money are concerned, A&M is a better option than FSU.
Posted via VolNation Mobile

Ya. I just get excited about the sports part and forget that that doesn't have anything to do with expansion.
:sad:

 

[VolsSportsFan]

I still say A&M and OU are headed to the Pac-10 with Texas.

And I've always heard Okie St. is a packaged deal with OU.
Posted via VolNation Mobile

 

[vol66]

Well, considering the SEC already has a deal in hand and the PAC-10 doesn't... you know what they say about birds in the bush and all.

And in these hard economic times, who else is left to create a lucrative television deal with? NBC??? A PAC-10 Network?

I agree with you on the first part. The PAC is hoping FOX will be a partner to the extent anyone knows what's true, they are telling the big 12 it would be ready to go by '12. However, if OU bolts for the SEC, who knows?

 

[vol66]

I still say A&M and OU are headed to the Pac-10 with Texas.

And I've always heard Okie St. is a packaged deal with OU.
Posted via VolNation Mobile

You may end up being right, but I've learned a lesson today about Texas. Nebraska hates them. Texas A&M hates them. And a certain portion of OU fans would love to "stick it to them". I know some of it has to do with the way revenue is split. Some of it is just good 'ol fashion rivalry, I don't pretend to know the details. If you go to an A&M board the fans are overwhelmingly for going to the SEC. On the Sooners board it's closer to 50/50 and of course Nebraska went there own way. I guess it could be sour grapes about wins and losses, but I really don't think so.

 

[JoeKyleVol]

Wow! Baylor, that bastian of sports excellence? Might as well raid C-USA, I'd take Southern Ms over Baylor.

I guess that Men's Elite 8 basketball team and Women's basketball National Championship (AFTER beating our Lady Vols!) just means absolutely nothing....

 

[VolAlumNGatrland]

He'll no. Memphis would just leech off of UT. And despite its relatively large size as a city, Memphis is not a large tv market nor does it have a large fanbase.
Posted via VolNation Mobile

Memphis has a larger market share than Knoxville.

 

[Pappy]

Memphis has a larger market share than Knoxville.

a larger market share of what? certainly not college sports...IMHO

 

[ZombVol]

I still say A&M and OU are headed to the Pac-10 with Texas.

And I've always heard Okie St. is a packaged deal with OU.
Posted via VolNation Mobile

OSU already stated that there going with Texas only.

 

[VolsSportsFan]

I guess that Men's Elite 8 basketball team and Women's basketball National Championship (AFTER beating our Lady Vols!) just means absolutely nothing....

It doesn't mean nearly as much as some are making it out to be, epecially when their football program would add another Vandy to the conference.
Posted via VolNation Mobile

 

[VolAlumNGatrland]

I seriously wonder if people read the info out there before posting on here.

For example:
"We've got to be diligent in evaluating this," another SEC athletic director told ESPN.com's Schlabach. "We can't just add teams who are going to split the pie without adding anything substantial to the pie."

meaning they are looking for schools that will bring MONEY to the table. So before you suggest adding school X you need to ask yourself what does it bring to the table in terms of MONEY - not academics or athletics, those are secondary concerns.

Texas brings boatloads of money - but I seriously doubt they come east.

Texas A&M brings money, expands the SEC brand into Texas, brings in the Houston (#10) and a share of the Dallas markets (#5), and is a regional fit. It brings a strong tradition in football and basketball. This makes sense from all aspects for the SEC.

Looking beyond the Big 12 for expansion, specifically to the ACC for schools such as Georgia Tech, Clemson, Florida State or Miami, Mike Slive said these schools are not in the SEC's plans.

So about 50% or more of the posts have said the SEC needs to add one or more or all of these schools. At this point, its just not going to happen. Move on. The ACC is hard to raid for a number of reasons - Academics being the biggest reason. UNC, Duke, UVA, GA Tech, Wake,etc are all top research schools and aside from Vandy the SEC has only one other school in the top 50 and 3 more ranked between 75-100...meanwhile the entire ACC makes the top 75.

Of the schools that may even make sense from a MONEY standpoint is Miami which would bring all of south FL market (#16) - I think UF is putting pressure on Slive not to bring in any other Florida schools. Right now they compete with UM and FSU for recruits as it is, one of their selling points is they play in the SEC - the best conference. Add UM of FSU and that recruiting advantage goes away.

I also view the SEC as "Top Heavy" conference - Bama, UF, UGA, LSU, Auburn, etc. Then you have the "Also Rans" - Vandy, Miss St, etc.

I don't think the SEC wants to add 3-4 more power teams to its ranks. What actually makes most sense from a competitive standpoint is to add a few middle of the pack teams that won't threaten the power structure of the conference, but would add more balance and make sure the schools you add are money makers.

So who do you add?

Texas A&M, maybe a Louisville, Maryland (bringing the DC market #9) NC State if they'll break away from UNC, and if you want to add another school to the west think Missouri (bringing KC #31 and STL #21 markets and is a great fit in football and basketball) or add ONE power school and make a run at Oklahoma.

From a financial and athletic standpoint these schools make the most sense - especially give what has been made public by Slive and other SEC AD's.

 

[VolAlumNGatrland]

a larger market share of what? certainly not college sports...IMHO

go google market shares by city....i've done the research so I didn't offer an opinion but facts a based on date i found. that isn't intended to be crass. if you can find data to back your opinion i will humbly listen

 

[rbroyles]

I guess that Men's Elite 8 basketball team and Women's basketball National Championship (AFTER beating our Lady Vols!) just means absolutely nothing....

I'm looking at the past ten years of history, and as much as I hate to say it, our Lady Vols were far from their normal level.

 

[rbroyles]

I seriously wonder if people read the info out there before posting on here.


Looking beyond the Big 12 for expansion, specifically to the ACC for schools such as Georgia Tech, Clemson, Florida State or Miami, Mike Slive said these schools are not in the SEC's plans.

So about 50% or more of the posts have said the SEC needs to add one or more or all of these schools. At this point, its just not going to happen. Move on. The ACC is hard to raid for a number of reasons - Academics being the biggest reason. UNC, Duke, UVA, GA Tech, Wake,etc are all top research schools and aside from Vandy the SEC has only one other school in the top 50 and 3 more ranked between 75-100...meanwhile the entire ACC makes the top 75.



So who do you add?

Texas A&M, maybe a Louisville, Maryland (bringing the DC market #9) NC State if they'll break away from UNC, and if you want to add another school to the west think Missouri (bringing KC #31 and STL #21 markets and is a great fit in football and basketball) or add ONE power school and make a run at Oklahoma.

From a financial and athletic standpoint these schools make the most sense - especially give what has been made public by Slive and other SEC AD's.

A fairly well thought out post until you didn't read what you wrote.

 

[VolAlumNGatrland]

A fairly well thought out post until you didn't read what you wrote.

No I realized that I dipped back into the ACC for NC State and Maryland.

I guess I just should have prefaced that by saying - IF the SEC tried to grab an ACC school or two, then NC State and UMD are the best chances given my previous argument. - UMD being most viable and I still think its a reach at best

But, You are correct that post did seem a bit incongruous.

thanks for making me clarify that

 

[GoBigOrangeVols]

I seriously wonder if people read the info out there before posting on here.

For example:
"We've got to be diligent in evaluating this," another SEC athletic director told ESPN.com's Schlabach. "We can't just add teams who are going to split the pie without adding anything substantial to the pie."

meaning they are looking for schools that will bring MONEY to the table. So before you suggest adding school X you need to ask yourself what does it bring to the table in terms of MONEY - not academics or athletics, those are secondary concerns.

Texas brings boatloads of money - but I seriously doubt they come east.

Texas A&M brings money, expands the SEC brand into Texas, brings in the Houston (#10) and a share of the Dallas markets (#5), and is a regional fit. It brings a strong tradition in football and basketball. This makes sense from all aspects for the SEC.

Looking beyond the Big 12 for expansion, specifically to the ACC for schools such as Georgia Tech, Clemson, Florida State or Miami, Mike Slive said these schools are not in the SEC's plans.

So about 50% or more of the posts have said the SEC needs to add one or more or all of these schools. At this point, its just not going to happen. Move on. The ACC is hard to raid for a number of reasons - Academics being the biggest reason. UNC, Duke, UVA, GA Tech, Wake,etc are all top research schools and aside from Vandy the SEC has only one other school in the top 50 and 3 more ranked between 75-100...meanwhile the entire ACC makes the top 75.

Of the schools that may even make sense from a MONEY standpoint is Miami which would bring all of south FL market (#16) - I think UF is putting pressure on Slive not to bring in any other Florida schools. Right now they compete with UM and FSU for recruits as it is, one of their selling points is they play in the SEC - the best conference. Add UM of FSU and that recruiting advantage goes away.

I also view the SEC as "Top Heavy" conference - Bama, UF, UGA, LSU, Auburn, etc. Then you have the "Also Rans" - Vandy, Miss St, etc.

I don't think the SEC wants to add 3-4 more power teams to its ranks. What actually makes most sense from a competitive standpoint is to add a few middle of the pack teams that won't threaten the power structure of the conference, but would add more balance and make sure the schools you add are money makers.

So who do you add?

Texas A&M, maybe a Louisville, Maryland (bringing the DC market #9) NC State if they'll break away from UNC, and if you want to add another school to the west think Missouri (bringing KC #31 and STL #21 markets and is a great fit in football and basketball) or add ONE power school and make a run at Oklahoma.

From a financial and athletic standpoint these schools make the most sense - especially give what has been made public by Slive and other SEC AD's.

man, everything was making sense until you went and said this.

adding NC State would not be wise. NC State is the third school in that market and maybe 4th or 5th most popular in the state (UNC, Duke, Wake, and a lot of Charlotte are Clemson people).

Missou doesn't really bring anything to the table other than a geographical rival for Arkansas. St. Louis is still a midwestern city with Chicago envy. They don't care anything about coming down south.

Maryland would be an okay choice if they weren't separated from the entire league by at least one state. I think it is much more likely that they would go to the BigTen if they decided to leave the SEC.

I agree that Miami would be a good choice, behind them... Va Tech could be a good addition. But the real prize if we can't get Texas is to get Texas A&M. I'd be happy with A&M and Miami and call it a day.

 

[VOLnMiami]

If we raid the ACC we will take either Miami, Florida State, or Virginia Tech.

I see you didn't read the article where it said the SEC had no plans to invite any of those teams lmao lol:

 

[TheVolunteer]

I see you didn't read the article where it said the SEC had no plans to invite any of those teams lmao lol:

No, I did, but honestly, if everything falls apart with OU, Texas, etc. Then I dont know where else you would turn other than those schools, the plan is to bring in schools that will bring in a lot of revenue and be a solid competitor in the SEC as well. So if OU or Texas doesn't join, then you tell me who else we should bring in?

 

[Rasputin_Vol]

go google market shares by city....i've done the research so I didn't offer an opinion but facts a based on date i found. that isn't intended to be crass. if you can find data to back your opinion i will humbly listen

Sorry to disagree, but the right strategy would be to increase the quality of the programming and content. That means the conference offering better games a better product week in and week out. By sacrificing content just for the sake of adding in a large market is a mistake. Okie, TX, Clemson, FSU, Miami, and maybe UNC if you want to improve basketball.

 

[Velo Vol]

I seriously wonder if people read the info out there before posting on here.

Read? That's hard work.

meaning they are looking for schools that will bring MONEY to the table. So before you suggest adding school X you need to ask yourself what does it bring to the table in terms of MONEY

Revenue? Or TV households? I was surprised to see that--according to one list--Kansas brings in almost as much revenue as Texas A&M. Of course the latter has better TV markets.

The ACC is hard to raid for a number of reasons - Academics being the biggest reason.

You just said it was all about money.

What actually makes most sense from a competitive standpoint is to add a few middle of the pack teams that won't threaten the power structure of the conference, but would add more balance and make sure the schools you add are money makers.

See Texas A&M.

Maryland (bringing the DC market #9) NC State if they'll break away from UNC, and if you want to add another school to the west think Missouri (bringing KC #31 and STL #21 markets and is a great fit in football and basketball) or add ONE power school and make a run at Oklahoma.

I agree with those and wouldn't mind seeing any or all of them; I have no idea how likely they are, though.

 

[TrueOrange]

Sorry to disagree, but the right strategy would be to increase the quality of the programming and content. That means the conference offering better games a better product week in and week out. By sacrificing content just for the sake of adding in a large market is a mistake. Okie, TX, Clemson, FSU, Miami, and maybe UNC if you want to improve basketball.

you need to tell the conference commishes this, because they're all doing it about money first