*** Official Super Conference Thread ***

[SUPERCOACH]

I think there might be 3 or 4 but some of them may have dropped down the page.  Should we merge them?  What say ye?

Am I making you exasperated?  The woman says I sometimes do that.

No, not at all.  I'm just busy trying to keep up with all of this.  I think I will go ahead and do the merge.

[SUPERCOACH]

I think there might be 3 or 4 but some of them may have dropped down the page.  Should we merge them?  What say ye?

I vote merge.

Agreed. I only started the other thread because at the time it was breaking news and I wanted everyone to see it. It s/b merged.

what other thread?

The other "main" one is titled "is this the beginning".  I think there have been a few over the last several days as the story has developed.

[SUPERCOACH]

OK, I think I have merged all the recent ones now.

[2Stater]

A&M would probably bring in significant money in their own right, whoever else comes with them may not, in which case there may not be a substantial increase in the economic pie such that expansion would be worthwhile.

The other issue here is finding a specific additional team, outside of Texas A&M, because adding A&M would necessitate the addition of a fourteenth team to maintain a balanced divisional format. The fourteenth team becomes an even bigger issue than A&M because the fourteenth team would (1) bring in less revenue and (2) step on the toes of existing members. Either the SEC would have to add someone from the East and thereby generate intense opposition from existing members and arguably violate the tacit agreement between SEC presidents not to do such a thing.

This guy is making me look like a genius.

IMO, bigger isn't necessarily better. Having said that, I think the conference will go to 16 teams as well, because the perception of "bigger is better" prevails in the mindset of some AD's and most league officials. I really don't think a conference needs more than 12 teams. With 12, the team schedules are balanced and gives everyone room for good OOC scheduling.

There is too much emphasis on money. I think that revenue may actually be spread thin by adding more teams, if the interest in those teams is not what is to be expected. If Texas is carrying the Big 12 in it's back, as it appears to be, the same thing can happen with the SEC. The Alabamas, LSUs and Floridas of the SEC may need to stock up on Doan's pills.

I like the 12 team conference, but there is little doubt in my mind that it's going to 16, but at what cost?

Good point on the possibility of spreading the revenue thin.  But, you have to remember we don't need to bring in heavyweights like Texas to keep it at the current level.  We only need to bring in schools that can match the league average for things to stay basically the same.  We have Alabama, LSU, Florida, etc. but we also have Vanderbilt, Kentucky, Ole Miss, Miss St, etc.  As long as these teams are better than the league average (whatever that is), it will be a net win for the other schools.  I think FSU is probably better than the league average.  A&M probably is too.  Clemson is probably about average, maybe slightly lower (have no idea).  I'm guessing OU is above average.

So it probably would mean more money.  I am certain that they will examine that closely since this whole deal really is about the money.

And you would think that it would at least be the league average. One thing that pops into my mind is how far fans will have to travel to road games and how it will affect attendance with games such as Vanderbilt/TAMU or Missouri/Clemson. Just things that make you go hmmm.......

[Old Tider]

A&M would probably bring in significant money in their own right, whoever else comes with them may not, in which case there may not be a substantial increase in the economic pie such that expansion would be worthwhile.

The other issue here is finding a specific additional team, outside of Texas A&M, because adding A&M would necessitate the addition of a fourteenth team to maintain a balanced divisional format. The fourteenth team becomes an even bigger issue than A&M because the fourteenth team would (1) bring in less revenue and (2) step on the toes of existing members. Either the SEC would have to add someone from the East and thereby generate intense opposition from existing members and arguably violate the tacit agreement between SEC presidents not to do such a thing.

This guy is making me look like a genius.

IMO, bigger isn't necessarily better. Having said that, I think the conference will go to 16 teams as well, because the perception of "bigger is better" prevails in the mindset of some AD's and most league officials. I really don't think a conference needs more than 12 teams. With 12, the team schedules are balanced and gives everyone room for good OOC scheduling.

There is too much emphasis on money. I think that revenue may actually be spread thin by adding more teams, if the interest in those teams is not what is to be expected. If Texas is carrying the Big 12 in it's back, as it appears to be, the same thing can happen with the SEC. The Alabamas, LSUs and Floridas of the SEC may need to stock up on Doan's pills.

I like the 12 team conference, but there is little doubt in my mind that it's going to 16, but at what cost?

Good thoughts, 2Stater. I vote to keep the club exclusive.

[SUPERCOACH]

A&M would probably bring in significant money in their own right, whoever else comes with them may not, in which case there may not be a substantial increase in the economic pie such that expansion would be worthwhile.

The other issue here is finding a specific additional team, outside of Texas A&M, because adding A&M would necessitate the addition of a fourteenth team to maintain a balanced divisional format. The fourteenth team becomes an even bigger issue than A&M because the fourteenth team would (1) bring in less revenue and (2) step on the toes of existing members. Either the SEC would have to add someone from the East and thereby generate intense opposition from existing members and arguably violate the tacit agreement between SEC presidents not to do such a thing.

This guy is making me look like a genius.

IMO, bigger isn't necessarily better. Having said that, I think the conference will go to 16 teams as well, because the perception of "bigger is better" prevails in the mindset of some AD's and most league officials. I really don't think a conference needs more than 12 teams. With 12, the team schedules are balanced and gives everyone room for good OOC scheduling.

There is too much emphasis on money. I think that revenue may actually be spread thin by adding more teams, if the interest in those teams is not what is to be expected. If Texas is carrying the Big 12 in it's back, as it appears to be, the same thing can happen with the SEC. The Alabamas, LSUs and Floridas of the SEC may need to stock up on Doan's pills.

I like the 12 team conference, but there is little doubt in my mind that it's going to 16, but at what cost?

Good point on the possibility of spreading the revenue thin.  But, you have to remember we don't need to bring in heavyweights like Texas to keep it at the current level.  We only need to bring in schools that can match the league average for things to stay basically the same.  We have Alabama, LSU, Florida, etc. but we also have Vanderbilt, Kentucky, Ole Miss, Miss St, etc.  As long as these teams are better than the league average (whatever that is), it will be a net win for the other schools.  I think FSU is probably better than the league average.  A&M probably is too.  Clemson is probably about average, maybe slightly lower (have no idea).  I'm guessing OU is above average.

So it probably would mean more money.  I am certain that they will examine that closely since this whole deal really is about the money.

And you would think that it would at least be the league average. One thing that pops into my mind is how far fans will have to travel to road games and how it will affect attendance with games such as Vanderbilt/TAMU or Missouri/Clemson. Just things that make you go hmmm.......

Those road games will be tough for sure.  It seems like it would make it almost impossible for the SEC champ to be undefeated by the end of the season.

[SUPERCOACH]

A&M would probably bring in significant money in their own right, whoever else comes with them may not, in which case there may not be a substantial increase in the economic pie such that expansion would be worthwhile.

The other issue here is finding a specific additional team, outside of Texas A&M, because adding A&M would necessitate the addition of a fourteenth team to maintain a balanced divisional format. The fourteenth team becomes an even bigger issue than A&M because the fourteenth team would (1) bring in less revenue and (2) step on the toes of existing members. Either the SEC would have to add someone from the East and thereby generate intense opposition from existing members and arguably violate the tacit agreement between SEC presidents not to do such a thing.

This guy is making me look like a genius.

IMO, bigger isn't necessarily better. Having said that, I think the conference will go to 16 teams as well, because the perception of "bigger is better" prevails in the mindset of some AD's and most league officials. I really don't think a conference needs more than 12 teams. With 12, the team schedules are balanced and gives everyone room for good OOC scheduling.

There is too much emphasis on money. I think that revenue may actually be spread thin by adding more teams, if the interest in those teams is not what is to be expected. If Texas is carrying the Big 12 in it's back, as it appears to be, the same thing can happen with the SEC. The Alabamas, LSUs and Floridas of the SEC may need to stock up on Doan's pills.

I like the 12 team conference, but there is little doubt in my mind that it's going to 16, but at what cost?

Good thoughts, 2Stater. I vote to keep the club exclusive.

Even if the PAC12 and Big10 each added 4 teams?  There would be 8 fewer teams to pick from if the SEC decided to play catch up down the road.

[BAMAWV]

I think there might be 3 or 4 but some of them may have dropped down the page.  Should we merge them?  What say ye?

Am I making you exasperated?  The woman says I sometimes do that.

No, not at all.  I'm just busy trying to keep up with all of this.  I think I will go ahead and do the merge.

Can the ones that don't go along with the group start a new one?

[SUPERCOACH]

I think there might be 3 or 4 but some of them may have dropped down the page.  Should we merge them?  What say ye?

Am I making you exasperated?  The woman says I sometimes do that.

No, not at all.  I'm just busy trying to keep up with all of this.  I think I will go ahead and do the merge.

Can the ones that don't go along with the group start a new one?

Make all the threads you want.  Just keep the political ones in the President's Mansion. 

[2Stater]

A&M would probably bring in significant money in their own right, whoever else comes with them may not, in which case there may not be a substantial increase in the economic pie such that expansion would be worthwhile.

The other issue here is finding a specific additional team, outside of Texas A&M, because adding A&M would necessitate the addition of a fourteenth team to maintain a balanced divisional format. The fourteenth team becomes an even bigger issue than A&M because the fourteenth team would (1) bring in less revenue and (2) step on the toes of existing members. Either the SEC would have to add someone from the East and thereby generate intense opposition from existing members and arguably violate the tacit agreement between SEC presidents not to do such a thing.

This guy is making me look like a genius.

IMO, bigger isn't necessarily better. Having said that, I think the conference will go to 16 teams as well, because the perception of "bigger is better" prevails in the mindset of some AD's and most league officials. I really don't think a conference needs more than 12 teams. With 12, the team schedules are balanced and gives everyone room for good OOC scheduling.

There is too much emphasis on money. I think that revenue may actually be spread thin by adding more teams, if the interest in those teams is not what is to be expected. If Texas is carrying the Big 12 in it's back, as it appears to be, the same thing can happen with the SEC. The Alabamas, LSUs and Floridas of the SEC may need to stock up on Doan's pills.

I like the 12 team conference, but there is little doubt in my mind that it's going to 16, but at what cost?

Good thoughts, 2Stater. I vote to keep the club exclusive.

Even if the PAC12 and Big10 each added 4 teams?  There would be 8 fewer teams to pick from if the SEC decided to play catch up down the road.

I'm sure Ball State, Akron, Idaho and William & Mary would still be available.  

[Old Tider]

A&M would probably bring in significant money in their own right, whoever else comes with them may not, in which case there may not be a substantial increase in the economic pie such that expansion would be worthwhile.

The other issue here is finding a specific additional team, outside of Texas A&M, because adding A&M would necessitate the addition of a fourteenth team to maintain a balanced divisional format. The fourteenth team becomes an even bigger issue than A&M because the fourteenth team would (1) bring in less revenue and (2) step on the toes of existing members. Either the SEC would have to add someone from the East and thereby generate intense opposition from existing members and arguably violate the tacit agreement between SEC presidents not to do such a thing.

This guy is making me look like a genius.

IMO, bigger isn't necessarily better. Having said that, I think the conference will go to 16 teams as well, because the perception of "bigger is better" prevails in the mindset of some AD's and most league officials. I really don't think a conference needs more than 12 teams. With 12, the team schedules are balanced and gives everyone room for good OOC scheduling.

There is too much emphasis on money. I think that revenue may actually be spread thin by adding more teams, if the interest in those teams is not what is to be expected. If Texas is carrying the Big 12 in it's back, as it appears to be, the same thing can happen with the SEC. The Alabamas, LSUs and Floridas of the SEC may need to stock up on Doan's pills.

I like the 12 team conference, but there is little doubt in my mind that it's going to 16, but at what cost?

Good thoughts, 2Stater. I vote to keep the club exclusive.

Even if the PAC12 and Big10 each added 4 teams?  There would be 8 fewer teams to pick from if the SEC decided to play catch up down the road.

Maybe we can steal Georgia Tech back.

[SUPERCOACH]

A&M would probably bring in significant money in their own right, whoever else comes with them may not, in which case there may not be a substantial increase in the economic pie such that expansion would be worthwhile.

The other issue here is finding a specific additional team, outside of Texas A&M, because adding A&M would necessitate the addition of a fourteenth team to maintain a balanced divisional format. The fourteenth team becomes an even bigger issue than A&M because the fourteenth team would (1) bring in less revenue and (2) step on the toes of existing members. Either the SEC would have to add someone from the East and thereby generate intense opposition from existing members and arguably violate the tacit agreement between SEC presidents not to do such a thing.

This guy is making me look like a genius.

IMO, bigger isn't necessarily better. Having said that, I think the conference will go to 16 teams as well, because the perception of "bigger is better" prevails in the mindset of some AD's and most league officials. I really don't think a conference needs more than 12 teams. With 12, the team schedules are balanced and gives everyone room for good OOC scheduling.

There is too much emphasis on money. I think that revenue may actually be spread thin by adding more teams, if the interest in those teams is not what is to be expected. If Texas is carrying the Big 12 in it's back, as it appears to be, the same thing can happen with the SEC. The Alabamas, LSUs and Floridas of the SEC may need to stock up on Doan's pills.

I like the 12 team conference, but there is little doubt in my mind that it's going to 16, but at what cost?

Good thoughts, 2Stater. I vote to keep the club exclusive.

Even if the PAC12 and Big10 each added 4 teams?  There would be 8 fewer teams to pick from if the SEC decided to play catch up down the road.

I'm sure Ball State, Akron, Idaho and William & Mary would still be available. 

             



I think David Letterman went to Ball State.  There is no way we can let those big libs in here.  HTH.

[SUPERCOACH]

A&M would probably bring in significant money in their own right, whoever else comes with them may not, in which case there may not be a substantial increase in the economic pie such that expansion would be worthwhile.

The other issue here is finding a specific additional team, outside of Texas A&M, because adding A&M would necessitate the addition of a fourteenth team to maintain a balanced divisional format. The fourteenth team becomes an even bigger issue than A&M because the fourteenth team would (1) bring in less revenue and (2) step on the toes of existing members. Either the SEC would have to add someone from the East and thereby generate intense opposition from existing members and arguably violate the tacit agreement between SEC presidents not to do such a thing.

This guy is making me look like a genius.

IMO, bigger isn't necessarily better. Having said that, I think the conference will go to 16 teams as well, because the perception of "bigger is better" prevails in the mindset of some AD's and most league officials. I really don't think a conference needs more than 12 teams. With 12, the team schedules are balanced and gives everyone room for good OOC scheduling.

There is too much emphasis on money. I think that revenue may actually be spread thin by adding more teams, if the interest in those teams is not what is to be expected. If Texas is carrying the Big 12 in it's back, as it appears to be, the same thing can happen with the SEC. The Alabamas, LSUs and Floridas of the SEC may need to stock up on Doan's pills.

I like the 12 team conference, but there is little doubt in my mind that it's going to 16, but at what cost?

Good thoughts, 2Stater. I vote to keep the club exclusive.

Even if the PAC12 and Big10 each added 4 teams?  There would be 8 fewer teams to pick from if the SEC decided to play catch up down the road.

Maybe we can steal Georgia Tech back.

Too late, we already sent them to a watery grave.

[Old Tider]

A&M would probably bring in significant money in their own right, whoever else comes with them may not, in which case there may not be a substantial increase in the economic pie such that expansion would be worthwhile.

The other issue here is finding a specific additional team, outside of Texas A&M, because adding A&M would necessitate the addition of a fourteenth team to maintain a balanced divisional format. The fourteenth team becomes an even bigger issue than A&M because the fourteenth team would (1) bring in less revenue and (2) step on the toes of existing members. Either the SEC would have to add someone from the East and thereby generate intense opposition from existing members and arguably violate the tacit agreement between SEC presidents not to do such a thing.

This guy is making me look like a genius.

IMO, bigger isn't necessarily better. Having said that, I think the conference will go to 16 teams as well, because the perception of "bigger is better" prevails in the mindset of some AD's and most league officials. I really don't think a conference needs more than 12 teams. With 12, the team schedules are balanced and gives everyone room for good OOC scheduling.

There is too much emphasis on money. I think that revenue may actually be spread thin by adding more teams, if the interest in those teams is not what is to be expected. If Texas is carrying the Big 12 in it's back, as it appears to be, the same thing can happen with the SEC. The Alabamas, LSUs and Floridas of the SEC may need to stock up on Doan's pills.

I like the 12 team conference, but there is little doubt in my mind that it's going to 16, but at what cost?

Good thoughts, 2Stater. I vote to keep the club exclusive.

Even if the PAC12 and Big10 each added 4 teams?  There would be 8 fewer teams to pick from if the SEC decided to play catch up down the road.

Maybe we can steal Georgia Tech back.

Too late, we already sent them to a watery grave.

The lyrics say "send them." Somebody should tip off the Million Dollar Band.

[2Stater]

A&M would probably bring in significant money in their own right, whoever else comes with them may not, in which case there may not be a substantial increase in the economic pie such that expansion would be worthwhile.

The other issue here is finding a specific additional team, outside of Texas A&M, because adding A&M would necessitate the addition of a fourteenth team to maintain a balanced divisional format. The fourteenth team becomes an even bigger issue than A&M because the fourteenth team would (1) bring in less revenue and (2) step on the toes of existing members. Either the SEC would have to add someone from the East and thereby generate intense opposition from existing members and arguably violate the tacit agreement between SEC presidents not to do such a thing.

This guy is making me look like a genius.

IMO, bigger isn't necessarily better. Having said that, I think the conference will go to 16 teams as well, because the perception of "bigger is better" prevails in the mindset of some AD's and most league officials. I really don't think a conference needs more than 12 teams. With 12, the team schedules are balanced and gives everyone room for good OOC scheduling.

There is too much emphasis on money. I think that revenue may actually be spread thin by adding more teams, if the interest in those teams is not what is to be expected. If Texas is carrying the Big 12 in it's back, as it appears to be, the same thing can happen with the SEC. The Alabamas, LSUs and Floridas of the SEC may need to stock up on Doan's pills.

I like the 12 team conference, but there is little doubt in my mind that it's going to 16, but at what cost?

Good thoughts, 2Stater. I vote to keep the club exclusive.

Even if the PAC12 and Big10 each added 4 teams?  There would be 8 fewer teams to pick from if the SEC decided to play catch up down the road.

Maybe we can steal Georgia Tech back.

Not bad. They would prolly do a better job of stealing Georgia and Auburn's recruits if they were in the SEC. Let's send 'em an invite.

[Guest]

Username:
Password:
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

There aren't any users online.

Loading Tweet...