• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

SEC expansion: Texas A&M gone?

norm said:
Ultimately I think you are correct that the league won't get them, though i am less convinced they don't want them. The ACC wanted ND during the last expansion, my guess would be the sentiment has not changed since.

UT has a habit of their conferences deteriorating, so I can understand folks being leary of them. And no conference other than the Big XII is going to allow them an unequal revenue sharing model. So if the Longhorns insist on maintaining the network and its revenue all of this won't matter anyway.
Click to expand...

If Texas joins the Big 10, it will be on the Big 10's terms.
 
Interesting comment on the radio just now. ESPN may be liable in this whole thing since they are conflicted with their contracts with the Pac 12, SEC and Big 12. Basically, they have set it up to where they have incentivized members of the Big 12 to leave because they are paying other conferences more.
 
Bubble Boy said:
I'm pretty sure that the reason Wellman/Wake were so supportive of ACC expansion a few years ago, is because they felt that college sports were going down this path of super-conferences, and they knew that Wake could be left out in the cold, if the ACC was not one of the pro-active conferences.
Click to expand...

I'm talking about the scenario where four super conferences or one 64 team super conference elect to break from the NCAA. I don't believe Wake will take part in such a break if it occurs. I tried yesterday to find the article I was referring to - it's probably almost a month old at this point - I'll try to find it again.
 
I just found another article describing this scenario, though it's not the same one.

http://aol.sportingnews.com/ncaa-football/feed/2011-08/um-violations/story/miami-allegations-bring-game-closer-to-wild-wild-west-nevin-shapiro-yahoo

I have little doubt that if the superconferences broke from the NCAA, started paying athletes and having no eligibility requirements or any inclination to graduate players, that Wake Forest would elect to not take part. I probably wouldn't want it to take part. Would you?
 
wfumike02 said:
I just found another article describing this scenario, though it's not the same one.

http://aol.sportingnews.com/ncaa-football/feed/2011-08/um-violations/story/miami-allegations-bring-game-closer-to-wild-wild-west-nevin-shapiro-yahoo

I have little doubt that if the superconferences broke from the NCAA, started paying athletes and having no eligibility requirements or any inclination to graduate players, that Wake Forest would elect to not take part. I probably wouldn't want it to take part. Would you?
Click to expand...

I don't care if stipends are increased, as long as it isn't unreasonable (or performance based), but should what little incentive there is to recruit and mold student athletes cease to exist Wake should not be involved. Having 85 athletes on campus who don't give a damn about academics or Wake Forest beyond the pay check it can provide would damage the school's reputation and academic experience.

I am sure Duke, Emory, Davidson, Vanderbilt, and many other southeast private schools would join us.
 
Last edited:
My predictions:

ACC
Wake
FSU
Clemson
BC
GT
UNC
Duke
UVa
Miami
first wave gain: Uconn, Syracuse, Rutgers, WVU
first wave loss: VT, Maryland
second wave gain: Notre Dame, Villanova, Pitt, ECU
second wave loss: NC State

SEC
Vandy
Tenn
Florida
Kentucky
Georgia
Miss St.
Arkansas
Alabama
Auburn
LSU
Miss
SC
first wave gain: Texas A&M, VT
second wave gain: Cincy, NC State

PAC16
Wash St.
UW
Oregon
Oregon St.
Cal
Stanford
Asu
Arizona
USC
UCLA
Colorado
Utah
first wave gain: OU, U$U
second wave gain: Boise St., SMU

Big14
Wiscy
OSU
Penn St.
Illnois
Purde
Indian
Nebraska
Iowa
Mich
Mich St.
Northwestern
Minnesota
first wave gain: Mizzou, Maryland

GreatPlains
Texas
Texas Tech
Kansas
KState
Baylor
Iowa St.
BYU
TCU
Memphis
Louisville
SFlorida
Air Force
Tulsa
 
Last edited:
Notre Dame, Villanova, ECU, and Pitt? Two of those don't belong.
 
TBR said:
I don't care if stipends are increased, as long as it isn't unreasonable (or performance based), but should what little incentive there is to recruit and mold student athletes cease to exist Wake should not be involved. Having 85 athletes on campus who don't give a damn about academics or Wake Forest beyond the pay check it can provide would damage the school's reputation and academic experience.

I am sure Duke, Emory, Davidson, Vanderbilt, and many other southeast private schools would join us.
Click to expand...

Wake already ruled in favor of big time athletics in the 50s. I think we'd make the same decision now.
 
Missouri is not joining the Big Ten. It isn't going to happen. Missouri certainly wants to be in the Big Ten, but the Big Ten doesn't want Missouri. Missouri has been floating this idea that they're going to join the Big Ten "any year now" since the Big Ten added Penn State and the Big XII was formed, but it simply isn't going to happen.

The Big Ten's sights are set on one city and one city only, New York. And before everyone gets all in a huff about how "New York is a pro sports town," the Big Ten doesn't care. Adding schools like Rutgers (8.8m in NJ), Syracuse (19.4m in NY), UConn (3.6m in Conn), and ND would allow the Big Ten to force every cable provider in those three states carry the Big Ten Network in their basic package -- that's 31.8m new subscribers paying premium dollars for the network each and every month.

If the Big Ten were to get Kansas, Missouri, Maryland, and Virginia, that adds only 23.3m new subscribers - so they'd be leaving roughly 8m on the table. That's clearly the next best thing for the Big Ten, but the Big Ten has wanted NYC money since they added Penn State, so I don't see them forgoing those dollars just yet. And there isn't going to be a situation like Nebraska, because the only school mentioned who has a national following on par with Nebraska is ND (and ND will always have the first right of refusal for the final spot in any Big Ten expansion).

Of course, all of this assumes that the Big Ten isn't going to go after Texas (I don't see this happening, since Texas wants to keep the Longhorn Network and there's simply no way that the Big Ten would let them do that unless they forced every cable provider in Texas who carried to LHN to also carry the BTN and then didn't let Texas get any of the money from the BTN while keeping the LHN money).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top