Texas A&M and Expansion: SEC to Take No Action on Conference Expansion for Now
by Gamecock Man on Aug 14, 2011 5:54 PM EDT
in South Carolina Gamecocks Football
Email
PrintMy apologies for the lack of posting over the past few, action-filled days. I'm currently on a vacation with my family, from which I will return tomorrow evening. This post, too, will be short for that reason.
That said, I'd be remiss in my duties to fail to comment at all on this story. As you all know, Texas A&M is seeking admission to the SEC. The media has represented expansion as a done deal, with outlets like espn.com reporting headlines more or less stating that A&M is joining the SEC, with schools such as FSU, Clemson, and Mizzou soon to follow.
Through all of the noise over this story over the past two days, I've continuously noticed that almost all of the confirmed interest is coming from College Station. Although one would have to assume that A&M has reason to believe that the SEC is interested, there was conspicuously no indication that an invite was a done deal. The question remained as to whether the SEC is truly serious about bringing in Texas A&M at this time.
It appears that my doubt was not unwarranted: the SEC presidents met today and decided not to accept A&M's overtures. Why did the SEC reject A&M? Well, that remains open for speculation. It must first be said that this is not an unequivocal rejejction. Florida prez Bernie Machen says that
"We recognize, however, that future conditions may make it advantageous to expand the number of institutions in the league," Machen said. "We discussed criteria and process associated with expansion. No action was taken with respect to any institution including Texas A&M."
It certainly sounds like A&M-to-the-SEC isn't out of the question and that this will be a developing issue. My opinion is that the question of finding a suitable 14th team was a sticking point for some SEC presidents. A 14th has not been chosen and confirmed, and Machen, Harrison Pastides, and Michael Adams may be against the logical choices that reside within their states. This being the case, the SEC may be reluctant to make a move on A&M without the certainty that it will find a quality counterpart for the Aggies. That's just speculation, of course.
Whatever the case may be, the events that have occurred over the past two days should tell you that there's tons of misinformation about this issue. I would suggest that fans proceed with interested caution.
12 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
only a matter of time...
agree with you that the reason ‘no’ at this time was due to no No. 14 currently. If they can find a suitable No. 14 in a non-SEC current state (VT?) then this domino will finally fall.
So not a matter of IF but WHEN for expansion in the SEC.
USC Gamecocks Sports Analysis and Insight
www.leftoverhotdog.com
Agreed. Based on some other articles I read this evening...
It sounds like the other issue, in addition to the 14th team issue, is that the SEC wants A&M to formally divorce the Big 12 before it gets too involved in the fracas. The SEC may be afraid of being viewed as tampering with A&M’s current contract with the Big 12.
That’s all to say that although things are moving more slowly than originally anticipated, A&M will be in the SEC eventually.
Garnet and Black Attack: A Blog By and For Gamecocks Fans.
by Gamecock Man on Aug 14, 2011 9:21 PM EDT up reply actions
Adding A&M and VaTech would be HUGE for the conference.
Busting into television markets in TX and VA/DC would be tremendously advantageous to the SEC. Not to mention the addition of two well respected programs. I truly believe we’re only 5 or 6 years out from four 16-team “superconferences.”
by Skulls and Spurs on Aug 15, 2011 8:48 AM EDT up reply actions
Yeah, I think the end result of all this will be superconferences.
Garnet and Black Attack: A Blog By and For Gamecocks Fans.
by Gamecock Man on Aug 15, 2011 9:51 AM EDT up reply actions
I'm happy
Ive posted over at TKS on this subject, and I just don’t see how expansion can work and keep any semblance of a unified league. A 14 team SEC would require a 9 game slate in order to ensure each division team plays each other once and keep the “1-2” system of one permanent and two rotating cross-division games. If you stick with 8 games, that means that that some division teams wouldnt play each other every year – or, worse- some division teams would be permanent and some floating – undercutting the entire rationale for divisions.
Setting aside the self-inflicted competive disadvantage of playing 9 league games, or sacrificing any sort of seasonal integrity by sticking to 8 games when its impossible to play all your divisons foes plus 3 cross-division opponents, it appears that divisions are a necessity for a NCAA-sanctioned championship game. That means if you scrap the division format, you lose the SECCG. And that was the whole reason why the league expanded from 10 to 12 in 1992.
Either way, at the end of the day, a 14 team SEC sets itself at a competitive disadvantage vis-a-vis the other 12 member conferences since it will be that much harder (under either an 8 or 9 game scenario) for a team to go undefeated and compete for the NC and BCS berths..
Super-conferences like a PAC 16 or a B1G 16 may be the wave of the future, but I doubt they will hold together. Frankly, I think its a slim chance either can pull it off, since the PAC 12 would have to raid the old Big XII South (including Texas which now has its own network) and the B1G would have to raid the Big East and/or the Big XII North and/or absorb Notre Dame. And so what if they do? What will they have? A mish-mash.
The same would hold true for a 16 team SEC. It wouldnt really a conference anymore – its a mish-mash association that lacks the integrity of a real conference. As I argued at TSK, the integrity is essential to the product. The rush to enhanced TV revenue will undermine the integrity, and ultimately undermine the product. Is the NHL better off with expansion? How about the NBA. Or MLB. Contraction is probably the best case scenario for those three pro leagues. Is that a future we want?
I think we’ll look back on this day and think it was a good thing.
Here's a health, Carolina, forever to thee! UNIVERSITAS CAROLIN MERID. 1801 Emollit mores nec sinit esse feros (Ovid)
You seem to be assuming that A&M won't join eventually. That seems unlikely to me. Now, as you say, whether the larger league works or not remains to be seen. Personally, I'm a traditionalist and like things the way they are. I also see the potential...
logistical problems you’re referring to, although presumably part of the idea behind expansion is the eventual creation of superconferences that will feed a playoff system, in which case the arguments about needing to go undefeated to play for the national title will be moot.
Garnet and Black Attack: A Blog By and For Gamecocks Fans.
by Gamecock Man on Aug 14, 2011 11:46 PM EDT up reply actions
The notion of the SEC being the conference which might
lead the way to a FBS playoff system is rich with irony (well, maybe not irony, but you know what I mean).
Somewhere Roy Kramer is having a heartburn attack. If it comes to pass, GM, then the traditonalist in you can be satisfied that at least we can go back to calling major CFB by the name “Division 1” and drop the FBS/FCS silliness! Hah.
Here's a health, Carolina, forever to thee! UNIVERSITAS CAROLIN MERID. 1801 Emollit mores nec sinit esse feros (Ovid)
Today's announcement was all about posturing
The conference is trying to avoid exposing itself to legal liability. Texas A&M will have to exit the Big 12 first so the SEC cannot be accused by the Big 12 of damaging the value of their existing TV deals and conference. A&M’s short-lived independence will then be a condition that “make(s) it advantageous” to expand.
"Lattimore, as the kids can say, can ball, and sometimes does it to the extent one might say [he] is out of control in his balling." - Spencer Hall
by GwinnettGamecock on Aug 15, 2011 12:36 AM EDT reply actions
If you're correct (and on reflection you very well may be)
then will the same hold true for “Team 14” if it comes from the ACC. Will that team have to resign before a formal invitation is extended?
I’m still not totally sold on the necessity for strict resign-first, invitation second. Both the Pac-12 and the B1G poached Colorado and Nebraska, respectively, from the Big XII without that sort of folderol. Both the Pac and the B1G consider themselves the ultimate paragons of virtue in CFB, yet no lawsuits erupted and both the Buffs and Huskers already had their invitations in their pockets.
If, I’m wrong, however – and major multi-tens-of-millions lawsuits are a concern with the A&M expansion – shouldn’t we be equally scared of an ACC lawsuit? After all, the Big XII already lost its championship game when Colorado and Nebraska bolted, and neither was the top team in the conference (though the Huskers were admittedly in the top 3). If we poach FSU – whether through kabuki-theater machinations or straight-up – then the ACC loses its top revenue team and its CG, That would be an even bigger blow. The only way to mitigate its damages would be (most likely) to steal a Big East team like WVU or Syracuse. What a mess would ensue then.
One thing missing from all this discussion is that we’re not seeing and not being told exactly how much projected, additional revenue each member school will receive, at least in the short run, from a 14 member league.
If we’re still planning on “selling out” (though keeping our virtue intact at least for today , I’d at least like some idea what the pay-out will be.
Here's a health, Carolina, forever to thee! UNIVERSITAS CAROLIN MERID. 1801 Emollit mores nec sinit esse feros (Ovid)
You make some good points about the B10 and the Pac-12. Perhaps there's something to what you say.
Regardless, I would think we observe similar proprieties with the ACC, unless there’s some particular contractual issue with A&M that we’re aware of and are afraid of tampering with, an issue that doesn’t exist with the ACC.
BTW, one thing I’ve read in a couple of places is that there’s a gentleman’s agreement among SEC presidents not to invite Clemson, FSU, or GT out of respect to USC, UF, and UGA’s wishes.
Also, the payout would probably be pretty good. Expansion would warrant restructuring our ESPN TV contract.
Garnet and Black Attack: A Blog By and For Gamecocks Fans.
by Gamecock Man on Aug 15, 2011 9:55 AM EDT up reply actions
Wasn't Georgia Tech in the SEC originally before trying to go independent?
That school is not quite what they were. Reading about some of the rivalry stuff with
Georgia Tech reminds me of a different era. One with more pranks and the kinda hate that would really boil your blood. What I mean to say is UGA calls GT the nerds or the techies, fun banter between the schools, but Tech seems to have held its own when it came to rivalries and pranks. Throwing bottles or other objects at Notre Dame fans, the Auburn fans greasing the train tracks so that GA Tech’s train couldn’t stop and the players having to run 5 miles or something back to town.
Really off topic, but I forget that Tech has some good rivalries with Auburn and even Tennessee, I think.
- FOW
by skandrewj62j on Aug 15, 2011 10:48 AM EDT up reply actions
Two different answers
First, I understand that the Big 12 enacted stricted punishments after the last defections. They also negotiated hundreds of millions in media contracts based on their existing membership. A defection by their 2nd or 3rd most valuable name would damge that and likely give their media partners the right to renegotiate the deals, though they may not exercise that right.
As for the SEC value, our initial contract was groundbreaking, but it has been eclipsed by subsequent deals. Sports programming has become extremely valuable in the DVR age. I will set my DVR to record Walking Dead or Surivivor so I can watch it at my convenience without commercials. I will not wait for a Carolina game, and I will sit through the commercials while I fret over the next play after the break. The only way to escape and negotiate a better deal in the new market is to add teams.
"Lattimore, as the kids can say, can ball, and sometimes does it to the extent one might say [he] is out of control in his balling." - Spencer Hall
by GwinnettGamecock on Aug 15, 2011 10:59 AM EDT up reply actions
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on Garnet And Black Attack
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
