PAC-10 To Issue Invites - Is this the beginning of Conference Expansion?

[Doc]

Also, I don't see the BigEast leadership offering anyone any spots because of the non-football schools' ownership of the league name.  We'd have to lose someone first.  Otherwise, it would be our schools asking to join THEM.

[Doc]

Smazza: that's exactly my point.  Don't merge into the ACC unless it's a matter of survival.  Even if we lose only Rutgers and the ACC gets all its top teams picked apart, maybe we extend an offer for a desperate BC to join us and stay at 8 for football and 16 for hoops.

[cmhatter]

Smazza: that's exactly my point.  Don't merge into the ACC unless it's a matter of survival.  Even if we lose only Rutgers and the ACC gets all its top teams picked apart, maybe we extend an offer for a desperate BC to join us and stay at 8 for football and 16 for hoops.

there would be no point in staying at 8 if conferences expand...

[usf97]

I still think the SEC and ACC sit tight for a while....even if the Pac-10, Big 10 and MWC/Big 12 form mega conferences. I tend to agree with Joe on this one.

I keep hearing the SEC will expand to "keep up with the Jones" argument and I'm not buying it. Since they don't own their own Network as the Big 10 do and the Pac 10 may do, I don't see any financial benefit. I could see ESPN/ABC come offering a renegotiated deal maybe to expand but why would they? They already have the ACC and SEC locked up so why offer to water down one league to strengthen another league to pay it more?

In reality, if this Pac-10 induced Armageddon happens, I could see the SEC look at the financial outcomes for several seasons before they do anything. I don't see how creating two 8 team divisions helps the SEC. People want to see UF-LSU, UF-Auburn, UGA-Auburn, Alabama-UT every year. You potentially lose those East-West rivalries if you add 4 teams.

The ACC isn't going to add teams unless the SEC raids them 1st. They also just signed a new TV deal.

This leads me to believe, you could have 3 mega conferences , the SEC as is, the ACC as is (or less Maryland) and then the Big East short 2 or 3 teams that they replace with Memphis, UCF and possibly ECU.

I don't think that would be good for the big east per se, we would then become the weakest of 7 BCS conferences. Thoughts??

[BullsFanInTX]

I still think the SEC and ACC sit tight for a while....even if the Pac-10, Big 10 and MWC/Big 12 form mega conferences. I tend to agree with Joe on this one.

I keep hearing the SEC will expand to "keep up with the Jones" argument and I'm not buying it. Since they don't own their own Network as the Big 10 do and the Pac 10 may do, I don't see any financial benefit. I could see ESPN/ABC come offering a renegotiated deal maybe to expand but why would they? They already have the ACC and SEC locked up so why offer to water down one league to strengthen another league to pay it more?

In reality, if this Pac-10 induced Armageddon happens, I could see the SEC look at the financial outcomes for several seasons before they do anything. I don't see how creating two 8 team divisions helps the SEC. People want to see UF-LSU, UF-Auburn, UGA-Auburn, Alabama-UT every year. You potentially lose those East-West rivalries if you add 4 teams.

The ACC isn't going to add teams unless the SEC raids them 1st. They also just signed a new TV deal.

This leads me to believe, you could have 3 mega conferences , the SEC as is, the ACC as is (or less Maryland) and then the Big East short 2 or 3 teams that they replace with Memphis, UCF and possibly ECU.

I don't think that would be good for the big east per se, we would then become the weakest of 7 BCS conferences. Thoughts??

Where to start.  First, as I posted earlier in this thread. the MWC is NOT currently on track to obtain a BCS bid, because they are not meeting all 3 criteria.  There have been numerous articles on this, even with Boise.  They may get one but they will have to improve overall.  This is due to the bottom of that conference being about as good as the Sun Belt conf.  It is terrible, bringing the rest of it down, and causing them not to meet the 3rd criteria.  Secondly, no i do not believe we would be the weakest of 7.  We are not the weakest of 6 now, in perception yes, but in reality no - not according to every stat I have seen comparing the BCS conferences.

[usf97]

I still think the SEC and ACC sit tight for a while....even if the Pac-10, Big 10 and MWC/Big 12 form mega conferences. I tend to agree with Joe on this one.

I keep hearing the SEC will expand to "keep up with the Jones" argument and I'm not buying it. Since they don't own their own Network as the Big 10 do and the Pac 10 may do, I don't see any financial benefit. I could see ESPN/ABC come offering a renegotiated deal maybe to expand but why would they? They already have the ACC and SEC locked up so why offer to water down one league to strengthen another league to pay it more?

In reality, if this Pac-10 induced Armageddon happens, I could see the SEC look at the financial outcomes for several seasons before they do anything. I don't see how creating two 8 team divisions helps the SEC. People want to see UF-LSU, UF-Auburn, UGA-Auburn, Alabama-UT every year. You potentially lose those East-West rivalries if you add 4 teams.

The ACC isn't going to add teams unless the SEC raids them 1st. They also just signed a new TV deal.

This leads me to believe, you could have 3 mega conferences , the SEC as is, the ACC as is (or less Maryland) and then the Big East short 2 or 3 teams that they replace with Memphis, UCF and possibly ECU.

I don't think that would be good for the big east per se, we would then become the weakest of 7 BCS conferences. Thoughts??

Where to start.  First, as I posted earlier in this thread. the MWC is NOT currently on track to obtain a BCS bid, because they are not meeting all 3 criteria.  There have been numerous articles on this, even with Boise.  They may get one but they will have to improve overall.  This is due to the bottom of that conference being about as good as the Sun Belt conf.  It is terrible, bringing the rest of it down, and causing them not to meet the 3rd criteria.  Secondly, no i do not believe we would be the weakest of 7.  We are not the weakest of 6 now, in perception yes, but in reality no - not according to every stat I have seen comparing the BCS conferences.

Well we spoke of this earlier in the post. Jim mentioned (whether this is true I don't know) the remaining 4 Big 12 schools (i.e. KU, KSU, ISU & Baylor) could just keep the Big 12 name and expand essentially by 12. You start to cherry pick MWC, WAC & CUSA teams and you suddenly have a very SOLID 16 team conference. So I did do the math wrong, in this scenario the MWC ceases in existance so you would only still have 6 BCS conferences.

A 16 team Pac-16

A 16 team Big Ten (add Mizzou, Nebraska, Rutgers, Syracuse, &UConn/Maryland)

A 16 team Big 12 (MWC, BSU, Houston, SMU +4 holdovers (KU, KSU, ISU, BU))

An as is SEC (12 teams)

An as is ACC (or if Big Ten takes Maryland they take one from Big East, let's say UConn)

A depleted Big East with 3 new teams ( ie. Lost Rutgers, Syracuse, UConn. Add UCF, Memphis, ECU  :puke)

I don't like it...my point however, is unless the SEC expands we are still in a pretty bad situation and right now I don't see the SEC expanding for the sake of expanding. Down the line it may happen but I think until it did, we could be in a bad conference.

[Guest]

I still think the SEC and ACC sit tight for a while....even if the Pac-10, Big 10 and MWC/Big 12 form mega conferences. I tend to agree with Joe on this one.

I keep hearing the SEC will expand to "keep up with the Jones" argument and I'm not buying it. Since they don't own their own Network as the Big 10 do and the Pac 10 may do, I don't see any financial benefit. I could see ESPN/ABC come offering a renegotiated deal maybe to expand but why would they? They already have the ACC and SEC locked up so why offer to water down one league to strengthen another league to pay it more?

In reality, if this Pac-10 induced Armageddon happens, I could see the SEC look at the financial outcomes for several seasons before they do anything. I don't see how creating two 8 team divisions helps the SEC. People want to see UF-LSU, UF-Auburn, UGA-Auburn, Alabama-UT every year. You potentially lose those East-West rivalries if you add 4 teams.

The ACC isn't going to add teams unless the SEC raids them 1st. They also just signed a new TV deal.

This leads me to believe, you could have 3 mega conferences , the SEC as is, the ACC as is (or less Maryland) and then the Big East short 2 or 3 teams that they replace with Memphis, UCF and possibly ECU.

I don't think that would be good for the big east per se, we would then become the weakest of 7 BCS conferences. Thoughts??

The SEC won't expand for financial reasons as much as they will for reputation and ego.

The Pac 16 would certainly take the SEC's place as the best football conferences... and a Big 16 might even move ahead of the 12-team SEC depending on which teams get the invite.

The SEC won't stand for that.  They will talk with ESPN about their contract and explore adding teams.  The SEC will never have their own cable network, because the members schools like the independence they have (you could see something like the Florida Gator Network offered across Florida, the LSU network in Louisiana, the Crimson Tide network in Alabama, etc...)  And growing to 16 would allow each school to add more potential eyeballs for things like ONLINE and other revenue streams.

My guess is the money would be effectively a "wash" - with each school getting the same $$ from the conference, but each school having the ability to increase their non-conference revenue.

So, the SEC expands - makes enough $$ so each school gets the same cash - and becomes the number one conference again.

[usf97]

The SEC won't expand for financial reasons as much as they will for reputation and ego.

The Pac 16 would certainly take the SEC's place as the best football conferences... and a Big 16 might even move ahead of the 12-team SEC depending on which teams get the invite.

That's the part I have a hard time digesting. Really? They are going to expand for ego and reputation? Even staying at the 12, I think the SEC is better than those conferences would be at 16. Compare the top schools from a football perspective: SEC v New Big 16 v Pac 16

Florida=Ohio State=USC

Alabama=Michigan=Texas

LSU=Wisconsin=Oklahoma

Georgia=Nebraska=Texas A&M??

Auburn=Penn State=Oregon??

Tennessee=Mizzou??=Cal??

Ole Miss=Michigan State??=Oregon State??

Arkansas=????=????

South Carolina=????=????

Maybe if the Big Ten were to get Notre Dame I could buy the ego theory. However, the SEC is stacked and has a way more rabid fan base and an atmosphere at almost any game that can only barely be matched at a Michigan Ohio State or Texas Oklahoma game.

I don't see how adding FSU, Clemson, Miami and Georgia Tech add to what the SEC already has. I mean adding those four schools to the SEC sounds like they are adding more of Arkansas, South Carolina and Ole Miss, in the SEC they will be dominated by the top. I could see the SEC interested in adding Texas and Oklahoma but short of that, what more could you add to the product. You are going to help out FSU, Clemson, GT & Miami for ego? You don't think UF, Georgia and South Carolina aren't going to have a problem with that? I would think those 3 votes could just about kill expansion.

Maybe I'm wrong. I hope I am in this situation because it would greatly help USF. However, the SEC seems to be one of the last existing vestiges of the Old South. Right or wrong, I just have a hard time seeing them invite schools like Miami and GT.

[usf97]

Good article from Friday about SEC expansion. Basically doesn't really say anything other than SEC is trying to figure out if this paradigm shift can benefit them somehow.

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2010/football/ncaa/06/03/sec.discussions/index.html

Couple of quotes from article:

SEC presidents will discuss expansion at their scheduled meeting Friday, but they don't intend to go on the offensive.

"We would be reactive, not proactive," University of Florida president Bernie Machen said Thursday. "There's not a plan that we will take out of here. We would be reactive to a paradigm shift."

SEC commissioner Mike Slive plans to continue to use former Supreme Court justice Potter Stewart's philosophy to determine whether a potential shift is great enough to force the SEC to act: He'll know it when he sees it. Until then, he said, the league will prepare for various scenarios. "We pay attention to what's happening all around," Slive said. "We think about what's happening, and we think about what's in our long-term best interests."

At issue for the SEC is whether it should expand at all. It just wrapped the first year of deals with ESPN and CBS that will pay the conference $3 billion over 15 years. "The numbers are extraordinary. ... That's a cause of celebration," Slive said. " Obviously, the finances give our schools a sense of long-term security."

The SEC probably would not have the same priorities as the Big Ten, which would expand by seeking out new markets for its eponymous cable network. The SEC is distributed on television by CBS and ESPN, and each school is allowed to sell its own local multimedia package. Florida, for example, makes an additional $10 million a year from its local package. "We don't need to get larger for purposes of distribution. ... Everyone has to look at their own elements," Slive said. "But that's not an element that would have to cause us to expand."

If the SEC did choose to expand, there are windows built into its contracts with CBS and ESPN that would allow the league to renegotiate those deals, a source said. But, the question remains as to what scenario would allow the SEC to benefit from expansion. That's precisely what presidents will discuss Friday.

"We're sitting in a pretty good position right now," Machen said.

[tampabull]

Big 10 would take virginia over uconn.  Virginia would add just as many new subscribers if not more, plus it is a highly respected academic institution(aau also).  Syracuse will not be invited to the big 10.  Big 10 will add missou, nebraska, maryland, ND(will cave), Rutgers.  Then the acc will take 1 institution from the big east to make up for maryland.  Big east maybe screwed unless they get proactive and go after kansas, kstate, iowa state.