Official realignment thread - SEC formally invites OU and Texas to join the conference in 2025

[PAHIBuff]

We'd be in the west. ****braska sucks. Minnesota we'll learn a lot about in 2 months. Illinois we can beat. Northwestern's a lot like we are program wise. They've won the west the last two years but followed that up with a couple losing seasons. All the respect in the world for Pat Fitzgerald as a football coach but they have a ceiling. Iowa and Wisconsin are damn good but we'd compete in that division.

At first we’d be the Washington State of the B1G West. Generally faster overall than most of the competition, but lighter. We’d be solidly in the middle of that group, initially. I’ve long been an advocate of it and honestly would look forward to CU football seasons more than I’ve ever done being in the PAC12. A case could be made that it would throw our recruiting off kilter, but compared to what? The recruiting now?

 

[PAC MAN]

 

[The Alabaster Yak]

B1G gonna take the gloves off and go into attack mode now.

Latest conference realignment rumor states SEC in ‘serious contact’ with UM, OSU

Could you picture a Big Ten that doesn't include Michigan and Ohio State? That is apparently a possibility if you believe this latest rumor on conference realignment.

sports.yahoo.com

IF this happened, it would almost assuredly mean a BIG leftovers/Pac 12 merger of some kind.

 

[skibum]

B1G gonna take the gloves off and go into attack mode now.

Latest conference realignment rumor states SEC in ‘serious contact’ with UM, OSU

Could you picture a Big Ten that doesn't include Michigan and Ohio State? That is apparently a possibility if you believe this latest rumor on conference realignment.

sports.yahoo.com

The gauntlet has certainly been thrown down. Beat 'em or join 'em are the only realistic options left on the table for the big boys in the B1G.

The long term relationship with the Pac means that they have some allies if they decide to fight.

But we (the schools in the Pac outside of USC and *maybe* one or two others) are facing a slightly different gauntlet: join 'em or take our ball and go home.

 

[Jens1893]

The gauntlet has certainly been thrown down. Beat 'em or join 'em are the only realistic options left on the table for the big boys in the B1G.

The long term relationship with the Pac means that they have some allies if they decide to fight.

But we (the schools in the Pac outside of USC and *maybe* one or two others) are facing a slightly different gauntlet: join 'em or take our ball and go home.

I’d say hope they allow us to join.

 

[241Volcanos]

IF this happened, it would almost assuredly mean a BIG leftovers/Pac 12 merger of some kind.

Does B10 attack mode suggest they go after some of Pac?

 

[The Alabaster Yak]

Is there any way West Cost programs like Oregon, UW, USC and UCLA would get invited to SEC or are the geographical and time zone issues too much?

 

[Buffnik]

The stupid thing to me about the SEC trying to be the only super conference is that the SEC does not currently represent only elite programs for a football super conference.

Alabama, Auburn, Florida and LSU have the hardware to be there. Tennessee, Georgia and probably Texas A&M belong at that table due to market and resources. Now add Oklahoma and Texas.

That's 9/16. But what the hell do Ole Miss, Miss State, South Carolina, Vanderbilt, Kentucky, Arkansas or Missouri have that make them part of this other than current membership driving revenue for them?

If ESPN is driving this, then the SEC also has some dead weight to be cut.

 

[Jens1893]

Is there any way West Cost programs like Oregon, UW, USC and UCLA would get invited to SEC or are the geographical and time zone issues too much?

I think nothing is off the table but I do think those four might be SOL due to the obvious geographical factors.

 

[Buffnik]

Does B10 attack mode suggest they go after some of Pac?

Almost certainly.

And if you can put USC, Stanford, Michigan, Michigan State and Purdue in the same conference, you have a ton of ammo for getting Notre Dame. Maybe you also grab Boston College to make that happen so you secure all their traditional rivals other than Navy.

 

[Jens1893]

The stupid thing to me about the SEC trying to be the only super conference is that the SEC does not currently represent only elite programs for a football super conference.

Alabama, Auburn, Florida and LSU have the hardware to be there. Tennessee, Georgia and probably Texas A&M belong at that table due to market and resources. Now add Oklahoma and Texas.

That's 9/16. But what the hell do Ole Miss, Miss State, South Carolina, Vanderbilt, Kentucky, Arkansas or Missouri have that make them part of this other than current membership driving revenue for them?

If ESPN is driving this, then the SEC also has some dead weight to be cut.

Except for Vandy they were all top 30 in average attendance over the five year period between 2014 and 2019 and filled 95%+ of capacity. That to me shows the fan support is there.

 

[Leon Sandcastle]

The stupid thing to me about the SEC trying to be the only super conference is that the SEC does not currently represent only elite programs for a football super conference.

Alabama, Auburn, Florida and LSU have the hardware to be there. Tennessee, Georgia and probably Texas A&M belong at that table due to market and resources. Now add Oklahoma and Texas.

That's 9/16. But what the hell do Ole Miss, Miss State, South Carolina, Vanderbilt, Kentucky, Arkansas or Missouri have that make them part of this other than current membership driving revenue for them?

If ESPN is driving this, then the SEC also has some dead weight to be cut.

Yeah. Any “big time” program looking to join the SEC, will likely be relegated to mediocrity for quite some time. I don’t understand why any PAC or B1G school would want to join a conference that will just beat the hell out of each other rather than stay put and have a known/clear path to success.

 

[The Alabaster Yak]

Also, how does this affect the new CFP? OU and UT good with being 3rd, 4th or 5th in their own conference most years and maybe squeaking into the new playoff as an at large?

 

[Jens1893]

Yeah. Any “big time” program looking to join the SEC, will likely be relegated to mediocrity for quite some time. I don’t understand why any PAC or B1G school would want to join a conference that will just beat the hell out of each other rather than stay put and have a known/clear path to success.

Money and because they’re thinking ahead as they figure people will want to see high profile matchups on a way more regular basis. Plus it might well be the only path to success at some point.

It’s essentially the European super league argument again. College football, due to the lack of regulations, is very comparable to European football in some regards.

 

[Buffnik]

Except for Vandy they were all top 30 in average attendance over the five year period between 2014 and 2019 and filled 95%+ of capacity. That to me shows the fan support is there.

Big part of that is regionality and tradition. Expansion erodes this. As I saw by a Wisconsin writer, those silly traditions and history matter in college football - there's no emotional tie to Maryland visiting Madison in late October.

Every expansion that's gone too far and lost regional, cultural and historical cohesiveness has ultimately failed.

Frankly, I think the actual shift will be a lot less than all these initial reactions would indicate.

 

[Leon Sandcastle]

Money and because they’re thinking ahead as they figure people will want to see high profile matchups on a way more regular basis. Plus it might well be the only path to success at some point.

It’s essentially the European super league argument again. College football, due to the lack of regulations, is very comparable to European football in some regards.

I get all that. Here’s the counter: the power teams currently in the SEC would likely continue to dominate. Are they still high profile match ups when UT, OU, USC, Washington, OR, and Mich end up having 3++ losses in conference every year? I’d even say that we could expect to see tOSU have a hard time competing for a conference championship initially. How does that affect recruiting?

You could likely be 100% right, but I see the risk/reward for many of these teams as not very favorable except for the $$

 

[Buffnik]

Money and because they’re thinking ahead as they figure people will want to see high profile matchups on a way more regular basis. Plus it might well be the only path to success at some point.

It’s essentially the European super league argument again. College football, due to the lack of regulations, is very comparable to European football in some regards.

A lot of similarities, but also some fundamental differences. One of the biggest differences between college athletics fandom and pro leagues is that colleges have alumni bases and state government ties. You're never going to have more people in CO talking about a South Carolina vs Texas game, no matter their ranks, than a CU-CSU game. Fundamentally, it's a local & regional sport with very few national brands.

Case in point - in Albuquerque for pro sports you see a ton of Cowboys and Broncos with the Suns for NBA. For college, it's UNM #1 and NMSU #2 with a huge drop off that's not UT, TTU, CU, ASU and UA having a leg up. Other college fandom is mostly about if you went to a school or moved here from a place. That won't change. Minnesota folks, if the Gophers are left out, won't be adopting the Sooners like they might choose Man U as their team.

 

[Jens1893]

Big part of that is regionality and tradition. Expansion erodes this. As I saw by a Wisconsin writer, those silly traditions and history matter in college football - there's no emotional tie to Maryland visiting Madison in late October.

Every expansion that's gone too far and lost regional, cultural and historical cohesiveness has ultimately failed.

Frankly, I think the actual shift will be a lot less than all these initial reactions would indicate.

One thing we haven’t touched on: How future proof is the sport? How popular is it with younger generations? Do they have the attention span required to watch a four hour game with quite a bit of downtime? What do they want?

Because I think consumer behaviour is changing and the competition isn’t just other sports but Netflix, Twitch, YouTube and Tiktok. It’s about the entertainment budgets, not only financially but also time wise, of the future generations. And I think regular matchups between schools like Ohio State and Alabama are an easier sell than Ohio State v Alabama State or Ohio v Alabama.

 

[Jens1893]

A lot of similarities, but also some fundamental differences. One of the biggest differences between college athletics fandom and pro leagues is that colleges have alumni bases and state government ties. You're never going to have more people in CO talking about a South Carolina vs Texas game, no matter their ranks, than a CU-CSU game. Fundamentally, it's a local & regional sport with very few national brands.

I think you seriously underestimate the regionality of European football and the fans. Pro sports here isn’t like pro sports in the States.

 

[Buffnik]

One thing we haven’t touched on: How future proof is the sport? How popular is it with younger generations? Do they have the attention span required to watch a four hour game with quite a bit of downtime? What do they want?

Because I think consumer behaviour is changing and the competition isn’t just other sports but Netflix, Twitch, YouTube and Tiktok. It’s about the entertainment budgets, not only financially but also time wise, of the future generations. And I think regular matchups between schools like Ohio State and Alabama are an easier sell than Ohio State v Alabama State or Ohio v Alabama.

I think that's a major issue for football and baseball that benefits basketball and soccer into the future. Also, the latter sports are much easier to follow without having to learn a ton of rules.

Edit: to your larger point, I agree that the main thing that's broken with college viewership and attendance is that at least 1/4-1/3 of everyone's schedule has been filled with games that aren't compelling. CU hosting Nortern Colorado holds no interest to me outside of getting together with friends and family for a nice day at Folsom. That's not a business model when broadcast media is driving revenue.

 

[Jens1893]

I get all that. Here’s the counter: the power teams currently in the SEC would likely continue to dominate. Are they still high profile match ups when UT, OU, USC, Washington, OR, and Mich end up having 3++ losses in conference every year? I’d even say that we could expect to see tOSU have a hard time competing for a conference championship initially. How does that affect recruiting?

You could likely be 100% right, but I see the risk/reward for many of these teams as not very favorable except for the $$

I think so because I think we could see a ridiculous concentration of talent more so than we already do. Also toss in NIL.

I realise it’s a bleak picture I’m painting.

 

[The Alabaster Yak]

I get all that. Here’s the counter: the power teams currently in the SEC would likely continue to dominate. Are they still high profile match ups when UT, OU, USC, Washington, OR, and Mich end up having 3++ losses in conference every year? I’d even say that we could expect to see tOSU have a hard time competing for a conference championship initially. How does that affect recruiting?

You could likely be 100% right, but I see the risk/reward for many of these teams as not very favorable except for the $$

The unintended consequences will be interesting to see unfold. As you mention, tOSU, OU, etc recruit so well because they are the top dogs and winning their conference every year. What happens when they are finishing in the middle of this new SEC with 3-4 losses every year and aren’t even winning their division on a consistent basis.

It’s why I think the BIG and P12 would be very smart to merge in some capacity and rival the new SEC (which they would).

 

[Jens1893]

I think that's a major issue for football and baseball that benefits basketball and soccer into the future. Also, the latter sports are much easier to follow without having to learn a ton of rules.

Even soccer games could be too long as there is a lot of downtime where seemingly nothing happens compared to say a video game.

This is Andrea Agnelli’s line of argumentation, btw.

 

[Leon Sandcastle]

I think so because I think we could see a ridiculous concentration of talent more so than we already do. Also toss in NIL.

I realise it’s a bleak picture I’m painting.

At least you’re admitting it

 

[The Alabaster Yak]

Football would have to go away altogether for basketball* and soccer to overtake it in the States

*I will say the NBA is trending in the right direction with teams like Milwaukee, Denver and Phoenix competing for championships

 

[Buffnik]

Football would have to go away altogether for basketball* and soccer to overtake it in the States

*I will say the NBA is trending in the right direction with teams like Milwaukee, Denver and Phoenix competing for championships

On a long enough timeline, it can change in dramatic ways. My grandparents lived in an America well into adulthood where baseball and boxing dominated the sports landscape.

 

[The Alabaster Yak]

On a long enough timeline, it can change in dramatic ways. My grandparents lived in an America well into adulthood where baseball and boxing dominated the sports landscape.

That was mostly before football was really a thing, though, and WAY before sports was big business. Soccer has been around forever and hasn’t even overtaken baseball or hockey in the states.

 

[Buffnik]

That was mostly before football was really a thing, though, and WAY before sports was big business. Soccer has been around forever and hasn’t even overtaken baseball or hockey in the states.

I'd argue that MLS has done a lot more in its first 27 years than the NFL accomplished from 1920 through the 1940s.

 

[PAC MAN]

One thing we haven’t touched on: How future proof is the sport? How popular is it with younger generations? Do they have the attention span required to watch a four hour game with quite a bit of downtime? What do they want?

Because I think consumer behaviour is changing and the competition isn’t just other sports but Netflix, Twitch, YouTube and Tiktok. It’s about the entertainment budgets, not only financially but also time wise, of the future generations. And I think regular matchups between schools like Ohio State and Alabama are an easier sell than Ohio State v Alabama State or Ohio v Alabama.

With the CTE issue with football in general, it's understandable to see football's future in a negative light. With the new NIL laws that not only benefit college athletes but even high school athletes, there is a chance that football survives for a little longer. With more money, NASCAR drivers are also having shorter careers compared to the past so those future football players will have shorter careers if the price is right. And ever since that expensive Messi contract was leaked, perhaps a few more people will be more interested in soccer as a potential career.

Yes consumer behavior is changing and I have noticed that myself. It's no accident that I'm poking around on the association football thread because I know that soccer games can last about two hours and my interest in sports that is limited by a running clock is going up. I already gave baseball the heave-ho myself (Rockies aren't helping those matters either) and hockey looks like it could be the next up. I am becoming more conscious of my time after passing the All-Buffs traditional age of 35.

ESPN+ is just $7 per month as opposed to $70 for Youtube TV. Big difference there and I imagine there is a sizable number of people who think the same way. I watched the big matchups in FCS last spring and really enjoyed it so I am going to apply it to FBS football this coming fall and any other sport. I have no plans to subscribe to traditional cable plans including YouTube TV this coming year.

 

[Jens1893]

With the CTE issue with football in general, it's understandable to see football's future in a negative light. With the new NIL laws that not only benefit college athletes but even high school athletes, there is a chance that football survives for a little longer. With more money, NASCAR drivers are also having shorter careers compared to the past so those future football players will have shorter careers if the price is right. And ever since that expensive Messi contract was leaked, perhaps a few more people will be more interested in soccer as a potential career.

Yes consumer behavior is changing and I have noticed that myself. It's no accident that I'm poking around on the association football thread because I know that soccer games can last about two hours and my interest in sports that is limited by a running clock is going up. I already gave baseball the heave-ho myself (Rockies aren't helping those matters either) and hockey looks like it could be the next up. I am becoming more conscious of my time after passing the All-Buffs traditional age of 35.

ESPN+ is just $7 per month as opposed to $70 for Youtube TV. Big difference there and I imagine there is a sizable number of people who think the same way. I watched the big matchups in FCS last spring and really enjoyed it so I am going to apply it to FBS football this coming fall and any other sport.

That Messi contract is a massive outlier and has been more or less public for years.