What's new
AllBuffs | Unofficial fan site for the University of Colorado at Boulder Athletics programs

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • Prime Time. Prime Time. Its a new era for Colorado football. Consider signing up for a club membership! For $20/year, you can get access to all the special features at Allbuffs, including club member only forums, dark mode, avatars and best of all no ads ! But seriously, please sign up so that we can pay the bills. No one earns money here, and we can use your $20 to keep this hellhole running. You can sign up for a club membership by navigating to your account in the upper right and clicking on "Account Upgrades". Make it happen!

News From The SEC Office

i've been wondering why ou has been so quiet. they have the stick to have a say in how things shake out. the sec is way better fit for them than the pac.

it is going to be an interesting few days.
 
OU will be the key in determining whether the SEC expands to 14 or 16. If it's just A&M on the west side, then most likely Virginia Tech will get an offer on the east side. But if Slive lands OU, then the Slive will try to land Duke and North Carolina together on the east side.

While the A&M, OU, UT, etc news is easy to get behind, the SEC seriously going after V-Tech, Duke, and UNC is just laughable.

And I thought OU-Okie State were tied at the hip too?
 
hmmmm. As long as Scott's offer to OSU is conditional on OU, I could care less... Would really piss me off if OSU came in without OU.
 
hmmmm. As long as Scott's offer to OSU is conditional on OU, I could care less... Would really piss me off if OSU came in without OU.

Agreed. It would be like adding Oregon State without Oregon. What is the point?

I wonder if the Big 12 South Sweepstakes go to the SEC, will the Pac turn their attention on Missouri-Kansas, then add Utah as our rival?
 
Agreed. It would be like adding Oregon State without Oregon. What is the point?

I wonder if the Big 12 South Sweepstakes go to the SEC, will the Pac turn their attention on Missouri-Kansas, then add Utah as our rival?

If that were to happen, the PAC would first go to 12 by adding Utah.

I believe that Tech is still on the table since they get the conference a presence in Texas, which is very important with this expansion. Could they come in with New Mexico? That's not a bad regional partner at all.

Just looking at a map, this is what would make the most geographic sense. Then, finish up by bringing in UNLV and TCU.

I really want the PAC to remain a western conference.
 
If that were to happen, the PAC would first go to 12 by adding Utah.

I believe that Tech is still on the table since they get the conference a presence in Texas, which is very important with this expansion. Could they come in with New Mexico? That's not a bad regional partner at all.

Just looking at a map, this is what would make the most geographic sense. Then, finish up by bringing in UNLV and TCU.

I really want the PAC to remain a western conference.

TCU = private religious school. Nonstarter... UNLV.... well that is forward thinking, but still, would cost the pac schools money in the short run.
 
If that were to happen, the PAC would first go to 12 by adding Utah.

I believe that Tech is still on the table since they get the conference a presence in Texas, which is very important with this expansion. Could they come in with New Mexico? That's not a bad regional partner at all.

Just looking at a map, this is what would make the most geographic sense. Then, finish up by bringing in UNLV and TCU.

I really want the PAC to remain a western conference.

Was thinking the same thing, but didn't want to get too far ahead.

UNLV-TCU wouldn't be needed as they would be 17/18 teams.

CU is 11
Utah 12
KU-MO 13/14
TT-UNM 15/16

Probably a much smaller payday from the TV contracts, but still "ACCish" I would think. Basketball would be pretty damn good, and football would be decent but not have any additional "power" teams especially in the "eastern" division. It would be respectable with ASU, Utah, CU, and Missouri carrying the load and Tech would benefit as the only TX school in recruiting.

The regional play with CU, Utah, AZ, ASU, UNM, Tech, KU, and MO would be pretty cool, but it would mean missing out on CA and NW road trips more often (just as the other Pac-16 scenario would).

Long-term that conference would own all the growing markets in the Western US aside from Texas.
 
UNC and Duke to the SEC doesn't make much sense to me because this would be a total basketball-related move, and football TV draw has completely driven all these conference moves.
 
UNC and Duke to the SEC doesn't make much sense to me because this would be a total basketball-related move, and football TV draw has completely driven all these conference moves.

The SEC doesn't need any more football exposure. The SEC is king of the hill in football, and probably will continue to be, regardless of what the rest of the country does. BUT - they're most definitely NOT king of the hill in basketball. Adding Duke and UNC to their conference, while having Kentucky and Florida already there makes them a formidable basketball conference. Now that the B12 is gone, it makes them the best basketball conference, hands down. Smart move, if you ask me.
 
The SEC doesn't need any more football exposure. The SEC is king of the hill in football, and probably will continue to be, regardless of what the rest of the country does. BUT - they're most definitely NOT king of the hill in basketball. Adding Duke and UNC to their conference, while having Kentucky and Florida already there makes them a formidable basketball conference. Now that the B12 is gone, it makes them the best basketball conference, hands down. Smart move, if you ask me.

Well, you're right about the SEC and their contrast in football and basketball prominence, but I'm yet to see any of these moves to have a hint of a basketball slant to them. With all the conference shuffling likely to happen and the subsequent domino effect, I suppose that could change though and there's still some big basketball schools out there that are candidates to move to other conferences.
 
Well, you're right about the SEC and their contrast in football and basketball prominence, but I'm yet to see any of these moves to have a hint of a basketball slant to them. With all the conference shuffling likely to happen and the subsequent domino effect, I suppose that could change though and there's still some big basketball schools out there that are candidates to move to other conferences.

These moves don't have a basketball hint to them because the rest of these conferences are trying to catch the SEC in football. The SEC doesn't need to catch anybody in football. There's a lot of money to be made in college basketball, though, and UNC and Duke are the two big dogs of college basketball. The SEC doesn't need to strengthen it's football offering, so why should it try? Nobody it adds will do anything for them, football wise. So naturally, they're trying to increase their prominence in basketball. Genius, if you ask me. I wouldn't be surprised if Kansas is on their radar, too.
 
That is something to think about - if the SEC added UNC, Duke, and KU, they'd have arguably the top 4 basketball programs in the country, all factors considered.
 
That is something to think about - if the SEC added UNC, Duke, and KU, they'd have arguably the top 4 basketball programs in the country, all factors considered.

IMO, Duke and UNC have 0% chance of going to the SEC.

Missouri, Kansas, Texas A&M, and either: TCU, Kansas State, Louisville, West Virginia, or Florida State are the more likely candidates.

Maybe Texas politics can get Baylor tagged along with A&M, but doubtful. That is another Texas school, with good basketball and baseball, both of which the SEC would favor.

The SEC probably wouldn't mind bringing in a "middle of the road" program in football and national prestige as they wouldn't be a threat to upset the balance of power.

The SEC also has a fixed-contract Television deal, not a conference owned network, so their main concern is not "adding markets" but gaining national exposure and ratings. They already have enough national teams that Baylor wouldn't be required to pull their new viewers in football.

Still a small chance, but something to consider.
 
Back
Top