🏈 SEC keeping expansion options open

[shipley00]

http://www.foxnews.com/sports/2010/04/26/slive-sec-exploring-expansion-just-case/

Really? Other than Money, what possible reason could the SEC have to even consider this? How much money do we need as a conference? It can only hurt the conference in the current (and short term future) BCS. We already had the two top teams in the country (sorry Texas) and it will only make it harder to get a NC for the SEC. Let other leagues lower the caliber of their leagues by adding a semi big name along with a low teir. It will also reduce the number of OOC games. Great for getting rid of patsies, but the last thing the SEC needs is to have even more teams to beat up upon each other.

 

[psychojoe]

I agree the SEC doesn't need to do anything at present. The question is should the SEC act if the Big 10 went the 16 team route and added Pitt, Rutgers, Missouri, UConn and Syracuse. They'd be big time into the NYC market, and would upgrade their competition level in basketball at the very least. That would destroy the Big east annd shake up the Big 12. If the Pac 10 decided to upgrade as well the SEC would want to preserve it's realstive position at the top, especially if such plums as Texas were interested in a new alliance. If the Big 10 chose that route I think our best action would be to ignore it, but it doesn't hurt to have a plan.

 

[XXL TideFan]

It is a matter of when not if. The Big Tenleven and PAC are going to get tired of being relegated to 2nd tier status in CFB. In their minds they are royalty and as such are getting tired of the SEC getting all of the attention. This will wind up creating a half dozen or so super conferences and then we will have a playoff. Your overall win loss record will not matter as much if you are on the top of your conference heap at years end. Conference champs play off for all of the marbles.
With a bit of luck the NZAA will exist only for the smaller wannabes.

 

[shipley00]

It is a matter of when not if. The Big Tenleven and PAC are going to get tired of being relegated to 2nd tier status in CFB. In their minds they are royalty and as such are getting tired of the SEC getting all of the attention. This will wind up creating a half dozen or so super conferences and then we will have a playoff. Your overall win loss record will not matter as much if you are on the top of your conference heap at years end. Conference champs play off for all of the marbles.
With a bit of luck the NZAA will exist only for the smaller wannabes.

The only problem with this scenario is that the PAC 10 and Big 11 don't want a playoff. They'll lose their prescious Rose Bowl if they do, and along with it, their sweetheart deal. Besides, I don't think anyone will be happy if we finally get a playoff then pull from the Conference championships to get it. The SEC and Big 12 would meltdown if either has a 12-1 or 11-2 and don't get into the playoff where as an 8-5 FSU makes it in for winning the ACC.

 

[bamascw]

I know this is in the realm of "what if" but.......

we already play 8 SEC games out of a 12 game season, with a 16 team conference would we then add two more SEC games? Keeping with playing each team in your division, you would have to play 7 games just to play everyone in your division. Do we cut the out of conference games back or play less games in the other division? Of course they could always add a game to the schedule but it's a bit crowded now unless you start school early to play an extra game. Lots of what ifs and buts.......

 

[252BAMA]

I know this is in the realm of "what if" but.......

we already play 8 SEC games out of a 12 game season, with a 16 team conference would we then add two more SEC games? Keeping with playing each team in your division, you would have to play 7 games just to play everyone in your division. Do we cut the out of conference games back or play less games in the other division? Of course they could always add a game to the schedule but it's a bit crowded now unless you start school early to play an extra game. Lots of what ifs and buts.......

I would not expect them to play more than 9 conference games, and that with a 7-2 format. Which would be the 7 common division opponents and 2 rotating teams from the other division as done now. Each school would play the schools in the other division twice in an 8 year period. Thusly: 8-1, 1-2, 2-3, 3-4, 4-5, 5-6, 6-7, 7-8.

But they might just leave it at 8 games with each school having one common opponent from the other division. The only time you would ever play one of the other 7 would be in the SECCG.

 

[bamascw]

Yeah, with out of conference games being such a big part of the BCS, you would think they couldn't drop too many of them. I guess realignment would be possible as well. Who knows, getting waaaaay too far ahead of the game here.