CLEAR OF LEGAL IMPEDIMENTS, FULL WALLETS, EVERYBODY LOSES: I don't normally write much about sports, but the news that Texas A&M is apparently finally going to consummate its flirtation with the SEC saddens me. As anyone who's watched half an episode of Friday Night Lights can attest, Texas and football have a deep primal connection with one another, and there are a bunch of great rivalries--some one-sided (as JFK observed), and some far more competitive--with arguably the greatest of those being the Texas/Texas A&M showdown--tied for the third longest running one (by games played) in college football, and for years, played on the Friday or Saturday after Thanksgiving, and often a major game with implications for which team would go on to play in the Big XII championship.
Grantland has (as usual) an interesting piece on the SEC's culture, arguing that A&M isn't a cultural fit as it is more Texan than Southern, but fails to note that "SECede" t-shirts and slogans have apparently been quite popular amongst Aggie fans in recent years, who are convinced that going to a bigger pond with a bunch of really big fish is a better solution to what ails them than staying in a smaller pond with one other really big and hungry fish.
The most interesting possible outcome here seems to me an 8 school "Texas Conference," which could be UTEP, SMU, Rice, Houston, TCU, Texas, Texas Tech, and Baylor, and which might actually get an automatic BCS berth for its champion.
ETA: Rice's Marching Owl Band provided its comment during halftime of last weekend's Rice-UT game. Still not as bold as when they marched in the shape of a fire hydrant and played "Oh Where Oh Where Has My Little Dog Gone" at A&M in tribute to its mascot.
Nothing problematic about secession! Oh, wait.
ReplyDeleteThe full M.O.B. script from Saturday's game is even nastier, not just because of the notation that with the departure of A&M "both conferences improve their average IQ," but because of much mockery at the expense of a well-known A&M alum. (The MOB archive is a decent way to kill time.)
ReplyDeleteIf I were the SEC, my goal would be then to blow up the Big 9 entirely, making it harder for Texas and Oklahoma to win titles by forcing them to go through USC and Oregon. The way to do this is to expand to 14 by admitting the University of Houston, the next logical replacement for A&M. This lets Mizzou (currently chair of the Big 9) leave for the SEC, where it is kind of a fit, and then the SEC takes Kansas St. as well. Texas, Texas Tech, OU, and OSU join the Pac-12. Kansas and Iowa St. join Nebraska in the Big 10, which also adds Pitt and Cincinnati. The Big East, now denuded, loses Rutgers, West Virginia, and Louisville to the ACC, which then adds Temple or some other eastern conference filler. (I can't see Syracuse and UConn splitting up for basketball.) We now have 4 super conferences, each with a title game, paving the way for a playoff. There are enough schools left over to make up a fairly weak Big East conference, as well -- Syracuse, Uconn, maybe add the academies, Umass and Villanova make the jump, ECU, UCF, USF. TCU and Baylor can join SMU and Rice in C-USA.
ReplyDeleteWhy would the SEC want Kansas State? Wouldn't West Virginia, Virginia Tech, Clemson, Georgia Tech or Miami be a lot more attractive? And why would the Big Ten want Iowa State, who is terrible at everything? I feel like the PAC12, Big Ten and SEC get to be choosy here, there's no reason for them to go after secondary state schools.
ReplyDeleteIf the Oklahoma schools, Tech and Texas go west, the Big East has apparently already made overtures to Kansas and Missouri. They've already got TCU coming in next year, so "East" is already a very relative term.
<span>Why would the SEC want Kansas State? Wouldn't West Virginia, Virginia Tech, Clemson, Georgia Tech or Miami be a lot more attractive?</span>
ReplyDeleteSouth Carolina, Georgia and Florida would vote down any attempt to invite Clemson, Georgia Tech or Florida State to the SEC. But yes, there's no reason for any league to invite Kansas State as anything other than part of a package deal with Kansas.
I threw in some conference filler. I can't see Kansas going anywhere else but the big 10, which was the jumping off point for a lot of the discussions. K-State and Iowa State are too big to be in a minor conference, and I began with the premise that the SEC is expanding westward and ACC schools don't want to join a tougher conference. If you want KU, KSU, and ISU in the big 10, I can't really argue, but I'm not sure who then joins the SEC as the 16th school in that scenario? WV is the likeliest candidate, but I thought it was a better fit for the ACC as part of the Upper South. I thought Pitt would be a good fit with the big 10, academically and with a good rivalry with Penn St. If the big east gets torn apart, as it should be as the weakest automatic qualifer conference, TCU has no reason to join.
ReplyDeleteBig Ten is much more likely to look east than west; that's where they'll find plenty of lucrative TV sets on which to put the Big Ten Network at premium cable rates. They will be looking at schools like Syracuse, Rutgers and Maryland.
ReplyDeleteNot sure what the SEC will do, but Missouri, West Virginia and Virginia Tech seem like strong possibilities. WVU is a better fit with the SEC than the ACC, but it will be up to the SEC to decide whether they want to invite them.
KSU and ISU may be big, but they may also be screwed. Neither has a national brand or offers an untapped market worth pursuing.
Big Ten is much more likely to look east than west; that's where they'll find plenty of lucrative TV sets on which to put the Big Ten Network at premium cable rates. They will be looking at schools like Syracuse, Rutgers and Maryland.
ReplyDeleteNot sure what the SEC will do, but Missouri, West Virginia and Virginia Tech seem like strong possibilities. WVU is a better fit with the SEC than the ACC, but it will be up to the SEC to decide whether they want to invite them.
KSU and ISU may be big, but they may also be screwed. Neither has a national brand or offers an untapped market worth pursuing.
USC is already suffering from its probation; Oregon will be shortly. Unless somebody else steps up, the Pac-10 looks pretty weak in the near term.
ReplyDeleteOh, and Syracuse had its bags packed for the ACC before Mark Warner intervened on behalf of Virginia Tech. They would have no problem leaving UConn behind.
ReplyDeleteThe basketball implications in all of this is mind boggling.
ReplyDeleteI think the NCAA should step in and set up four ragions for football like some state high schools AA's do. That way the entire season is essentially a playoff.
An opening round robin with the five schools closest to you. And then start whittling the field down with cross sectional games.
My initial reaction was, "If you thought going from Knoxville to Fayetteville was a drag..."
ReplyDeleteClearly, there's room to tinker around the edges, but the point is that A&M's defection could set in motion a move to four 16-team superconferences, though as you note it's not really possible without some dilution in brand.
ReplyDeleteI just don't see any of the schools where the Big 10 might move eastward being good fits. You could throw Missouri into the big 10, with the SEC taking WVU and the ACC getting maybe both Syracuse and UConn? WVU could have good rivalries in the ACC, though with VT, Uva, and MD.
I don't see my scenario as inevitable or even likely -- for one, the SEC isn't trying to break up the Big 9, though if they did it would be better for all involved as it would probably set up a playoff. I think the SEC taking Houston to pair with A&M is distinctly unlikely but also awesomely Machiavellian. Unless the four schools i mentioned going to the Pac-12 defect, the Big 9 could get back up to 12 and having a championship game by adding SMU, Houston, and maybe Air Force. There would clearly be some musical chairs going on, though, as the SEC is almost certain to add a 14th school, which would either be Missouri or someone from the Big East or ACC. I don't know who it would be -- they won't take someone from a state that already has an SEC team the rumor goes, and WV doesn't give them a market worth having. If they take Missouri and Texas/OU stay, the Big 12 has to add a 4th team, though it's too bad TCU made the ridiculous decision to join the Big East. SDSU? (Part of my agenda is making it so the half assed teams comprising the big east don't get BCS auto bids anymore.) I assume Boise St. has no interest in joining a big conference but they'd be a decent choice.
Boise State's problem is that despite a strong football program, they don't have much else to offer, either in the way of other sports or a lucrative local media market. The big prize from a prestige and money standpoint seems likely to be Notre Dame, but they're not going anywhere until their NBC contract is up. BYU is another potential prize, but the cultural conflict is going to be a problem for them joining a PAC-XX in particular.
ReplyDeleteWhat I've read is that the Longhorns Network is struggling to find advertising. UT's right to have its own network is what kept it in the Big 12 and out of the Pac-10. If it pulls the plug on that, UT/OU/Tech/OSU to the Pac-10/12/16 makes a lot of sense. The schools are a great match academically, in the sense that they are large schools that thrive on research grants (which is important to the Pac-12 Presidents -- one gets the sense that the Pac-12 cares about that stuff and the Big-10 does too, but that SEC/ACC/Big East etc. would rather have a church-state separation between athletics and academics. The TV contracts work, it increases the profile and recruiting footprint of the original Pac-10 schools, it makes for a killer championship game in football and tournament in basketball. Win-win-win.
ReplyDeleteIt's apparently a vicious cycle for the Longhorn Network, in that they're having trouble getting carriage, which creates problems with advertising, which creates problems with carriage (since why is someone going to carry a network that can't get advertising). Add to that that their other marquee attraction (aggressive Texas high school coverage) got deep sixed by the NCAA, and they're in deep deep trouble.
ReplyDeleteThe schools are a great match academically, in the sense that they are large schools that thrive on research grants
ReplyDeleteIt's hard to imagine how any one school can be an academic match for both UC-Berkeley and Arizona State.
The Longhorn Network is DEFINITELY struggling to find advertising. We have it (because we have Verizon FIOS) and watched the Texas game on Saturday, and I'd say the advertising was about 75% Longhorn Network advertising for itself and 25% very regional, Texas advertising (Taco Cabana, HEB, both of which just made me miss home). With only one other football game lined up for the season (Kansas), I'm not sure ESPN has the leverage to push for carriage, particularly with the high per-sub cost they are (reportedly) demanding.
ReplyDeleteI'd rather see the Big XII stay the Big XII than see UT/TT/OU/OSU decamp to the Pac-XX, but I'd rather Texas play in the Pac-XX than try to go independent.
As for super-conferences, they are definitely going to happen, one way or the other. I just thought we had more time.
Gotta separate the school from the students.
ReplyDeleteAs a native Chicagoan and true blue Jayhawk, it saddens me to think we might end up part of the Big 10. I've made it part of my sportsfan identity to be as obnoxious as possible about how much I can't stand the Big 10 and their fans. But it does seem to make the most sense. At this point, I'm just crossing my fingers that the K-State and Mizzou basketball games still happen every year. They're bigger than Christmas in my house.
ReplyDeleteWe have a theory that Big Ten Network is just a bad money laundeirng scheme for the universities. When you watch it, most of the ads are schools for the Big Ten schools. So the Big Ten schools all put in money to advertise on the network, then they get big payouts from the network they get to tout to the media to make their network and conference sound like a money-printing operation.
ReplyDelete