OLD VandyMania.com (ARCHIVE)

Multiple stories up about Clemson and FSU inquiring about SEC membership. Supposedly the big SEC concern is that they won’t actually increase the monetary benefit for other SEC schools. Personally, I’d rather have Clemson and FSU than Texas and OU, but since that’s already done I’m unsure if I’m a fan of this potential change.

Would you take Louisville and Virginia Tech?

NO!

I'd take Rice & Tulane

Versus75 wrote: ↑Mon Aug 02, 2021 3:46 pm Would you take Louisville and Virginia Tech?

One of the "reports" out there about Clemson/FSU also mentioned that the only team left for the SEC to possibly poach that would actually increase it's profile is Notre Dame... not FSU and/or Clemson.

Clemson and UGa are 70 miles apart. You think A&M was pissed about Texas joining? People have said as long as I can recall that UGa would have a total meltdown if Clemson joined.

How about Georgia Tech and Sewanee?

Versus75 wrote: ↑Mon Aug 02, 2021 7:11 pm How about Georgia Tech and Sewanee?

Hell, why not. Frankly, I'm starting to approach the point where I just don't give a ....

MrMemorial wrote: ↑Mon Aug 02, 2021 7:08 pm Clemson and UGa are 70 miles apart. You think A&M was pissed about Texas joining? People have said as long as I can recall that UGa would have a total meltdown if Clemson joined.

SC would have a greater fit. Right now being in the SEC is the only advantage SC has over Clemson. And the really don't like each other.

The ones to add would be NC, Duke, VA, and West VA. Those are all new markets that would bring in more revenue to divide. Clemson, Fl St bring in no new markets which means no more money.

What happens when you bring in a powerhouse which isn't from a major market and they cease to be a powerhouse when playing an increasingly on steroids SEC schedule? That team ceases to be a monetary asset to the SEC. Nebraska's move to the Big 10 seems instructive.

GoVU wrote: ↑Mon Aug 02, 2021 9:17 pm The ones to add would be NC, Duke, VA, and West VA. Those are all new markets that would bring in more revenue to divide. Clemson, Fl St bring in no new markets which means no more money.

The SEC and BigTen already rejected WVA last time they added on. And the ACC didn't seem interested either.

Johnmn555 wrote: ↑Mon Aug 02, 2021 11:08 pm What happens when you bring in a powerhouse which isn't from a major market and they cease to be a powerhouse when playing an increasingly on steroids SEC schedule? That team ceases to be a monetary asset to the SEC. Nebraska's move to the Big 10 seems instructive.

I've been doing a lot of reading on this topic and listening to a lot of opinions. One opinion I've seen is that when teams move conferences in major shifts, they often remain what they were. If they were mediocre before, they continue at the same pace. A&M is pretty much the same team they always were in the Big 12, same for Mizzou, same for Nebraska (sustained excellence under Osbourne, but nothing substantial in 20 years before joining the Big 10). My guess is that this is what we will see from Texas. They won a title in 2006, played for one in 2009 and they haven't been right since they ran Mack Brown off. They'll probably be much the same. 7, 8, 9 wins.

Now for the money, whether a team is good or not, they're going to bring new markets if they're in a new state which means more money. The way the deals with ESPN work, a piece of money eventually filters to the conference for every cable subscriber in a given state where there is a team. So Texas won't add new money, but Oklahoma will. So Nebraska isn't costing the Big 10 anything in revenue unless someone drops their cable subscription because the football team is not as good.

As discussed in another thread, I think eventually the TV revenue could change and make things different, but right now it is king.