SEC vs Big 12

[JimR]

I'm fairly content to stay in the Big XII and compete for a spot in the playoff every year. If we do decide to leave - I guess we'd go to the Pac-12 and create a super conference. I assume OU would come with us, and they'd have to bring OkSt with them.

UT's coaches were against going to the PAC 12 unanimously.

 

[SFlonghorngirl]

UT and OU mutually agreed to "prop up the Big 12" by signing a Grant of Rights that doesn't expire until 2023. Nobody can leave the Big 12 without forfeiting their TV rights and proceeds. Rumor is the current conference alignments may go the way of the dodo if/when schools from the Top 5 leagues break away from the NCAA. If that happens, this new 64-team conglomerate may negotiate TV deals as one power-wielding block and encourage regional scheduling and divisions. You could see a 16-team division with UT, aggy, LSU, Arky, etc.
Who knows what the future holds?

ETA breakway > or < 5 years? Would this hold true for basketball and other sports?

 

[Hiphopopotamos]

UT's coaches were against going to the PAC 12 unanimously.

I'd be interested in what the new coaching staff thinks - especially with the AD having a connection to that conference.

But, as JB posted, these conferences might soon be obsolete anyways.

 

[J.B. TexasEx]

ETA breakway > or < 5 years? Would this hold true for basketball and other sports?

Good question.

It's just a rumor that's football motivated. I honestly don't know how a breakaway will effect hoops and baseball. I'd hate to see the current playoff structures change. I love cheering for the mid-major underdogs during March Madness. Schools like Butler obviously aren't a Top 64 program.

 

[coolhorn]

UT's coaches were against going to the PAC 12 unanimously.

That's because several of those coaches thought UT would spend the bulk of their time in the PAC out on the coast, and playing 11 P-M games. That's just not true. UT, OU, OSU, and Tech would be part of a new PAC East Division that would also include the Arizona schools, Colorado, and Utah. UT would probably play, at most, two games on the coast, and I suspect neither would be the 11 P-M game. A move to a PAC East is the closest thing UT can get to a regional alignment IF the Horns remain adamant about not going to the SEC. Strictly from a personal viewpoint, I'd have no problem with the SEC. Instead of ONE rivalry game, UT would get back agricultural and Arkeysaw, start a good rivalry with LSU, and 'Bama, and add Auburn to the schedule too, unless Auburn and 'Bama were moved to the SEC East. I enjoyed UT playing 'Ole Miss, that last score notwithstanding...and wouldn't mind seeing the two play every year. Like I said, I'm not opposed to a move to the SEC, but then, I don't make any decisions for UT.

 

[SFlonghorngirl]

I love realignment talk. Sports business is one of my favorite topics.

Big 5 breakaway would include: Big 12, Big Ten, Pac 12, SEC, and ACC. I will try to breakdown what a potential 64 team division would look like later.

 

[aowells]

I'm fairly content to stay in the Big XII and compete for a spot in the playoff every year. If we do decide to leave - I guess we'd go to the Pac-12 and create a super conference. I assume OU would come with us, and they'd have to bring OkSt with them.

B12 provides a good path to the playoffs. But if we're the cream of a conference that can't attract top recruits, we could struggle mightily to convert those playoff opportunities into championships.

 

[Hiphopopotamos]

B12 provides a good path to the playoffs. But if we're the cream of a conference that can't attract top recruits, we could struggle mightily to convert those playoff opportunities into championships.

Agreed - it all comes down to whether or not we can still attract top recruiting classes. If we can't - well then we are screwed and so is the B12.

 

[BBQ time]

Agreed - it all comes down to whether or not we can still attract top recruiting classes. If we can't - well then we are screwed and so is the B12.

I see zero evidence that recruiting will not improve. Mack could not evaluate talent and recruited off star rankings, often ignoring positional needs. In the end he was a flashy, but mediocre recruiter.

 

[Hiphopopotamos]

I see zero evidence that recruiting will not improve. Mack could not evaluate talent and recruited off star rankings, often ignoring positional needs. In the end he was a flashy, but mediocre recruiter.

We don't have a whole lot of evidence to make a determination either way. Mack had some exceptional recruiting classes according to the rankings, how much of that was due to Mack and how much was because of the Univ of Texas?

We know Strong has a history of being a very good recruiter going back to his Florida days - but how much of that was an Urban Meyer byproduct? Can Strong recruit Texas like he did Florida? Will he be able to compete against Coach Cool and his gadget bag for recruits? Will he get the access from Texas high school coaches that Mack had?

These are all questions that we will see get answered over the next couple of years.

 

[doc longhorn]

Thanks for the youngster reference, since I won't see 65 again. I don't entirely disagree with you, but I do think the conference affiliation landscape has changed significantly enough for UT to be looking at its' best option for being in a conference.
I don't think the Big XII is the answer. The conference was good to go when it still included Nebraska, Mizzou, agricultural, and Colorado. If ONLY Colorado had left, they could have been adequately replaced. Losing the other three fatally-wounded the Big XII, and TCU and WVU are NOT adequate replacements for them. It's true that IF UT and OU are good, and choose to remain in the Big XII, it will stay on life support, but I just don't see either school being willing to prop up the conference.

I wouldn't have a problem with UT moving to the SEC, but I just don't see it happening, except as a last gasp move. I really think both UT and OU would prefer a move west to the PAC, and are willing to bring OSU and Tech with them. I also think OU will move to the SEC if offered, and if they don't think UT is willing to move west. If that happens, UT HAS to consider the SEC. UT does NOT want BOTH OU and agricultural in the SEC and recruiting Texas, not to mention the damage LSU is doing now while UT is down.

Bottom line...things are changed from a few years ago, and permanently. There are some conference moves yet to be made, and I think the Big XII is gonna get picked apart like roadkill. UT is in serious danger of getting left behind, or at least having its' choices cut in half, if Patterson doesn't get proactive at looking at the conference landscape and UT's place in it.

A couple of final thoughts..."Winning cures everything" is NOT a long term answer to UT's conference affiliation questions. In the kingdom of the blind, the man with one eye rules. UT would be considered the king of a watered down Big XII if OU leaves. I don't think the ACC is the answer either. UT would be on the same kind of island they'd be on if they went to the B1G, being a member of a fly-over conference, where they'd have to fly over a good part of the SEC to get to their nearest ACC competition. Last...being an independent is NOT the answer for UT. Notre Dame may have an in to the playoffs, but with their ACC deal, the Irish are no longer a true independent. It's just not a route UT wants to go, for various reasons.

LOL! Cool, you continue to surprise me - I had no idea you were that ancient. You are in my realm now.

Yeah, you and I have discussed this before. I still maintain the best option for UT is to stay put and find $ome way to lure a couple of attractive teams to the Big 12. I say this because I believe nothing is impossible. Eight years ago would you have believed that Colorado, Nebraska, Missouri and A&M would have bolted? Or San Diego State or U of H would be part of the Big East?

Beyond this, would a coalition of independents like ND, BYU, UT and OU form the core of a whole new conference that might include FSU, Miami, Clemson and UNC?

And I loved this - "In the kingdom of the blind, the man with one eye rules."

 

[doc longhorn]

I see zero evidence that recruiting will not improve. Mack could not evaluate talent and recruited off star rankings, often ignoring positional needs. In the end he was a flashy, but mediocre recruiter.

I disagree. Mack was many things, but a mediocre recruiter wasn't one of them. He was the best in the nation, IMO.

If he was the recruiting coordinator for UT, would you say the same about him?

I firmly believe, because Mack wasn't an X's and O's coach, that Mack allowed his assistants to guide him in his recruiting. And the two primary influence on him were Akina and Davis - and they mostly recruited towards their specialty. As a result there was no process and no continuity towards set offensive and defensive schemes. In other words, the inmates were running the asylum because the head master had no firm input.

 

[castlebravo1]

The instant the big 12 gets shut out of the 4 team playoff by a second place SEC team, the Big12 will die. And it will happen, barring a major realignment.

 

[Hiphopopotamos]

The instant the big 12 gets shut out of the 4 team playoff by a second place SEC team, the Big12 will die. And it will happen, barring a major realignment.

I expect it will happen each year to at least one of the Big10, Pac12, and the Big12. Are each of the other conferences going to die as well? There are 5 'major' conferences fighting for 4 spots.

 

[coolhorn]

LOL! Cool, you continue to surprise me - I had no idea you were that ancient. You are in my realm now.
Yeah, you and I have discussed this before. I still maintain the best option for UT is to stay put and find $ome way to lure a couple of attractive teams to the Big 12. I say this because I believe nothing is impossible. Eight years ago would you have believed that Colorado, Nebraska, Missouri and A&M would have bolted? Or San Diego State or U of H would be part of the Big East?

Beyond this, would a coalition of independents like ND, BYU, UT and OU form the core of a whole new conference that might include FSU, Miami, Clemson and UNC?

And I loved this - "In the kingdom of the blind, the man with one eye rules."

I'm NOT so ancient that I don't enjoy the occasional Jimmy Buffett concert, and I'm no candidate for a trip to Branson anytime soon. That being said, I have been around long enough to recognize that it's not gonna be too long before UT has to cook or get out of the kitchen where realignment is concerned.

I think that there are still some folks around Bellmont Hall who suffer from the idea that UT is the "prettiest belle at the ball" and can go anywhere they want, at the twist of a finger. That's only partly true, and it will change the longer UT waits. UT is in real danger of being left behind in realignment if the athletic department is content to be a big fish in an increasingly smaller pond.

I agree with you Doc to the extent that IF there were a couple of suitable teams to bring into the Big XII, that would be the best answer. The problem, as I see it, is this. There is UCF, which at least has the potential to develop into an interesting addition. There is NO number twelve. Cincy? Only if the Big XII is willing to settle for sloppy seconds in Ohio. They do NOT have the potential of a Louisville, as some claim. BYU? No thanks to that bunch of divas. They're also located in the wrong part of the country for the Big XII, and they don't really bring a sizable tv market with them. (Sorry Salt Lake City.) Arkansas is NOT walking through the door. Neither is LSU, and the Big XII, which apparently sat on its' hands when it could have acted, can forget about FSU and Clemson. Like I said Doc, there's a not-ready-for-prime-time Central Florida, and nobody else.

That leaves two options. The SEC? I really don't have a problem if UT wanted to go that route. I stated earlier in this thread that if UT and OU went SEC, something by the way Mike Slive would move heaven and earth to have happen, UT would annually be playing rivalry games against Arkeysaw, agricultural, Okie, and LSU. I figure 'Bama and Auburn would be moved to the SEC East, but UT would play them on a regular basis too, as well as Ole Miss, Georgia, South Carolina, and Florida. The built in advantage agricultural gets from being in the SEC would be gone, UT would NOT have to cheat to get players, and if, as some claim, Texas is becoming increasingly an SEC-dominated state, then UT could and should take advantage of that. By the way, as a UT fan, I do NOT want UT having to compete against both an agricultural and an OU that are in the SEC while UT languishes in whatever's left of the Big XII. Talk about sloppy seconds...

The other answer is the PAC. I'm no insider to OU thinking, but I believe that IF OU and UT can make the jump west, that would be the preference of both schools right now. Take Tech and OSU with us, and put the four of us in a PAC East with the Arizona schools, Colorado, and Utah, and you've got the closest thing to a regional alignment UT is gonna find when the Big XII blows up.

My prediction for the Big XII? When all is said and done, I think it gets picked over like a turkey at thanksgiving. I think that there are still some nice options out there for UT, but I don't think that those options are gonna be there forever. I've ruled out the B1G and ACC for distance considerations, and I've never thought going independent is a viable option for UT, so as I see it, there are the three options I've mentioned, with staying and propping up the Big XII being the most risky option, and one I seriously hope UT doesn't choose. Sometimes, you have to move to a new and better neighborhood, even if you have to leave some old friends behind.

 

[J.B. TexasEx]

The instant the big 12 gets shut out of the 4 team playoff by a second place SEC team, the Big12 will die. And it will happen, barring a major realignment.

IF this were to happen, the first correction you'll see is the Big 12 adding 2 teams (UCF & Cincinnati?). As you may already know, the NCAA mandates 12 members to hold a Conference Championship Game. Said CCG will hopefully improve the Big 12's strength of schedule to overcome any SEC bias and preserve our slot in the 4-team playoff.

Right now, the Big 12 is reluctant to expand because available options won't grow our existing Tier 1 & 2 TV contracts with ESPN and FOX. Hell, CBS refused to renegotiate the SEC's Tier 1 contract after they added A&M and Mizzou. The Big 12's available options aren't "names" that will move the dial on a national scale.

Hypothetically, the Big 12 expands - splitting the TV pie into 12 pieces - with hopes of making up this lost revenue on the back end with a playoff spot. Ugh... Why add teams if you don't have to?

 

[aowells]

The instant the big 12 gets shut out of the 4 team playoff by a second place SEC team, the Big12 will die. And it will happen, barring a major realignment.

If an UNDEFEATED B12 team were shutout of the playoffs by the loser of the SEC finals, or a 1 loss B12 team lost their playoff spot to a 2 loss SEC team then yes, something would be seriously wrong, panic would ensue and something major would happen with the B12.

But if the season played out like this year where Baylor won the B12 at 11-1 with a squeaker win against TCU and were embarassed by OSU, I don't think anything would explode when FSU, Auburn, Alabama and Michigan State go to the playoffs.

It's also a fairly unique situation where you've got two undefeated teams in the SEC playoff on the verge of OT, a 2 loss team winning the PAC12 and a one loss B12 champ that doesn't look as good as their record. Something similar will happen eventually, but not often enough to light a powderkeg. More than likely if we're sitting on the sidelines, it'll be the winners of the other 4 major conferences playing.

 

[J.B. TexasEx]

I'm NOT so ancient that I don't enjoy the occasional Jimmy Buffett concert, and I'm no candidate for a trip to Branson anytime soon. That being said, I have been around long enough to recognize that it's not gonna be too long before UT has to cook or get out of the kitchen where realignment is concerned.
I think that there are still some folks around Bellmont Hall who suffer from the idea that UT is the "prettiest belle at the ball" and can go anywhere they want, at the twist of a finger. That's only partly true, and it will change the longer UT waits. UT is in real danger of being left behind in realignment if the athletic department is content to be a big fish in an increasingly smaller pond.

I agree with you Doc to the extent that IF there were a couple of suitable teams to bring into the Big XII, that would be the best answer. The problem, as I see it, is this. There is UCF, which at least has the potential to develop into an interesting addition. There is NO number twelve. Cincy? Only if the Big XII is willing to settle for sloppy seconds in Ohio. They do NOT have the potential of a Louisville, as some claim. BYU? No thanks to that bunch of divas. They're also located in the wrong part of the country for the Big XII, and they don't really bring a sizable tv market with them. (Sorry Salt Lake City.) Arkansas is NOT walking through the door. Neither is LSU, and the Big XII, which apparently sat on its' hands when it could have acted, can forget about FSU and Clemson. Like I said Doc, there's a not-ready-for-prime-time Central Florida, and nobody else.

That leaves two options. The SEC? I really don't have a problem if UT wanted to go that route. I stated earlier in this thread that if UT and OU went SEC, something by the way Mike Slive would move heaven and earth to have happen, UT would annually be playing rivalry games against Arkeysaw, agricultural, Okie, and LSU. I figure 'Bama and Auburn would be moved to the SEC East, but UT would play them on a regular basis too, as well as Ole Miss, Georgia, South Carolina, and Florida. The built in advantage agricultural gets from being in the SEC would be gone, UT would NOT have to cheat to get players, and if, as some claim, Texas is becoming increasingly an SEC-dominated state, then UT could and should take advantage of that. By the way, as a UT fan, I do NOT want UT having to compete against both an agricultural and an OU that are in the SEC while UT languishes in whatever's left of the Big XII. Talk about sloppy seconds...

The other answer is the PAC. I'm no insider to OU thinking, but I believe that IF OU and UT can make the jump west, that would be the preference of both schools right now. Take Tech and OSU with us, and put the four of us in a PAC East with the Arizona schools, Colorado, and Utah, and you've got the closest thing to a regional alignment UT is gonna find when the Big XII blows up.

My prediction for the Big XII? When all is said and done, I think it gets picked over like a turkey at thanksgiving. I think that there are still some nice options out there for UT, but I don't think that those options are gonna be there forever. I've ruled out the B1G and ACC for distance considerations, and I've never thought going independent is a viable option for UT, so as I see it, there are the three options I've mentioned, with staying and propping up the Big XII being the most risky option, and one I seriously hope UT doesn't choose. Sometimes, you have to move to a new and better neighborhood, even if you have to leave some old friends behind.

Good points and I can't say that I necessarily disagree, but I'm not sure the ACC isn't ripe for the pickings after the UMD lawsuit is settled. http://aberdeen.patch.com/groups/sports/p/report-umd-files-157-million-counterclaim-alleging-acc-recruited-big-ten-schools_62cf74a7

Let's say the courts rule that the ACC's $52M exit fee was punitive and this case is settled in UMD's favor for a much smaller amount. What's to stop the schools that were shopping themselves before from re-opening their "recruitment"? Why wouldn't the Big 12 be a much more attractive home for the other dissatisfied members; FSU, Clemson, GT, NCST, VT, & Miami? With these prime additions, the Big 12 will have the leverage to reopen their TV contract negotiations.

The dissatisfied members were poking around because the ACC commissioner, John Swofford, sold all of their TV rights to ESPN in a cut-rate deal. A proposed "ACC Network" hasn't come to fruition yet because ESPN has put all of their eggs in the SEC Network basket (and LHN to a much lesser degree). Swofford made promises he hasn't kept and there is a perception by the disgruntled members that the ACC is a "basketball league" with the power in NC.

Look at the ACC's most recent additions - Syracuse, Pitt, & Louisville. Basketball? Great! Football? Yuck - only UL has any BcS cred. Frankly, I think the Big 12 screwed the pooch when we didn't invite them as our 11th member. (Hell, maybe they'd be a better addition than TCU)

My point is don't count the Big 12 out on expansion yet. UT is still the prettiest girl at the ball, we just need to be smart about our next move. There's a lot of moving pieces; "Division 4" CFB breakaway from the NCAA, ala carte programming, technology advances, etc.

Keep the faith and Hook 'Em! \m/

 

[coolhorn]

Good points and I can't say that I necessarily disagree, but I'm not sure the ACC isn't ripe for the pickings after the UMD lawsuit is settled. http://aberdeen.patch.com/groups/sports/p/report-umd-files-157-million-counterclaim-alleging-acc-recruited-big-ten-schools_62cf74a7
Let's say the courts rule that the ACC's $52M exit fee was punitive and this case is settled in UMD's favor for a much smaller amount. What's to stop the schools that were shopping themselves before from re-opening their "recruitment"? Why wouldn't the Big 12 be a much more attractive home for the other dissatisfied members; FSU, Clemson, GT, NCST, VT, & Miami? With these prime additions, the Big 12 will have the leverage to reopen their TV contract negotiations.

The dissatisfied members were poking around because the ACC commissioner, John Swofford, sold all of their TV rights to ESPN in a cut-rate deal. A proposed "ACC Network" hasn't come to fruition yet because ESPN has put all of their eggs in the SEC Network basket (and LHN to a much lesser degree). Swofford made promises he hasn't kept and there is a perception by the disgruntled members that the ACC is a "basketball league" with the power in NC.

Look at the ACC's most recent additions - Syracuse, Pitt, & Louisville. Basketball? Great! Football? Yuck - only UL has any BcS cred. Frankly, I think the Big 12 screwed the pooch when we didn't invite them as our 11th member. (Hell, maybe they'd be a better addition than TCU)

My point is don't count the Big 12 out on expansion yet. UT is still the prettiest girl at the ball, we just need to be smart about our next move. There's a lot of moving pieces; "Division 4" CFB breakaway from the NCAA, ala carte programming, technology advances, etc.

Keep the faith and Hook 'Em! \m/

Admittedly, the ACC is not one big happy family. There is and always will be the divide between the football-first schools and the basketball bluebloods in North Carolina. It's true that the ridiculous amount that conference placed on leaving isn't likely to pass the smell test in court. There are still teams in the ACC that whet the appetite of the B1G and SEC, if the SEC can't get UT and OU.

The only ways I can see the Big XII surviving and doing a reasonable expansion involving the ACC are realignment, or formation of a whole new conference. First, a new conference...there was talk for a while of some kind of scheduling alliance between the two conferences. That's a step, but not enough of one. If you could combine the top eight teams from each conference into a sixteen team two division league, that would work, despite the conference being a "fly over" conference. (West teams having to fly over SEC territory to play east teams, and vice versa). That is the least likely to happen, for one big reason. What is done with the teams that don't make the cut from both conferences? Almost certainly, there would be numerous lawsuits tieing up the foundation of a new conference.

If it develops that the Big XII has a chance to expand with ACC teams (Something I seriously doubt will happen.), then the XII must be willing to add six teams to get to a sixteen team league. No two schools from the ACC want to be put on an island by being in the Big XII. The XII would have to be willing to add Clemson, Miami, FSU, Georgia Tech, maybe Louisville, and one other team, maybe Pitt. That's an awful big bite to swallow for a conference that so far has sat on its' hands since adding TCU and WVU.

These are the reasons I didn't include any scenario involving the ACC in my previous posts. Anything is possible, but I just don't see things breaking this way.

 

[castlebravo1]

I expect it will happen each year to at least one of the Big10, Pac12, and the Big12. Are each of the other conferences going to die as well? There are 5 'major' conferences fighting for 4 spots.

It has to happen to at least one conference every year since there are 5 conferences, but four seeds. The insult comes if the SEC gets 2 and there are 2 other conferences frozen out. What I hope eventually happens is that when the big money schools split off into their own division that the schools land in 4 different conferences. I'm guessing that the SEC survives, adding a couple of schools, then the PAC12, Big10, Big 12, and ACC collapse into 3 conferences. Each conference has a CCG and those champions go on to the 4 team playoff. That seems the most interesting to me.