Should the SEC expand to 16 teams??????

[ArkansasI]

I know we discuss this every year, but I believe that Arkansas enjoys some minor benefit being on the western edge of the SEC.  I don't fancy helping OU or OSU by moving either to the SEC.  It seems to be an advantage we would have over OSU in Texas.  So long as Texas treats OU with utmost respect, Arkansas will never enjoy an advantage over OU in Texas.

This focus on Big 12 teams is understandable because of the perceived weakness of that conference.  If we were to dive west, OU and KU would be the most intelligent gets - assuming Texas is not on the table.

The problem seems to be that OU will not abandon OSU.  And I doubt that Kansas politics are any different that would allow KU to drop K-State into the abyss of an imploding Big 12.  Of course, we always thought Texas and A&M were joined at the hip, too...  Anyway, adding two teams from the west would allow Mizzou to come west, and Alabama and Auburn to roll east.

That stated, I think that the best financial opportunities for the SEC are east.  West Virginia is a reasonable target, but they add mostly geographical sense.  Arkansas is lucky that we received the invitation when we did...

Besides WVU, Virginia Tech and North Carolina State (ideally, Virginia and UNC, but that seems unlikely) are attractive targets.  These states bring quite a bit to the table, and NC State might see the same benefit to joining the SEC as did Texas A&M.  This, too, would allow Mizzou to come west and the two newcomers would be added to the east. 

[hobhog]

I know we discuss this every year, but I believe that Arkansas enjoys some minor benefit being on the western edge of the SEC.  I don't fancy helping OU or OSU by moving either to the SEC.  It seems to be an advantage we would have over OSU in Texas.  So long as Texas treats OU with utmost respect, Arkansas will never enjoy an advantage over OU in Texas.

This focus on Big 12 teams is understandable because of the perceived weakness of that conference.  If we were to dive west, OU and KU would be the most intelligent gets - assuming Texas is not on the table.

The problem seems to be that OU will not abandon OSU.  And I doubt that Kansas politics are any different that would allow KU to drop K-State into the abyss of an imploding Big 12.  Of course, we always thought Texas and A&M were joined at the hip, too...  Anyway, adding two teams from the west would allow Mizzou to come west, and Alabama and Auburn to roll east.

That stated, I think that the best financial opportunities for the SEC are east.  West Virginia is a reasonable target, but they add mostly geographical sense.  Arkansas is lucky that we received the invitation when we did...

Besides WVU, Virginia Tech and North Carolina State (ideally, Virginia and UNC, but that seems unlikely) are attractive targets.  These states bring quite a bit to the table, and NC State might see the same benefit to joining the SEC as did Texas A&M.  This, too, would allow Mizzou to come west and the two newcomers would be added to the east.

Thank you for agreeing why OU and OSU would be a bad fit for us in the SEC. And I think the size of the conference is fine as it is. I actually miss playing everyone each year like the old days....

[GuvHog]

I know we discuss this every year, but I believe that Arkansas enjoys some minor benefit being on the western edge of the SEC.  I don't fancy helping OU or OSU by moving either to the SEC.  It seems to be an advantage we would have over OSU in Texas.  So long as Texas treats OU with utmost respect, Arkansas will never enjoy an advantage over OU in Texas.

This focus on Big 12 teams is understandable because of the perceived weakness of that conference.  If we were to dive west, OU and KU would be the most intelligent gets - assuming Texas is not on the table.

The problem seems to be that OU will not abandon OSU.  And I doubt that Kansas politics are any different that would allow KU to drop K-State into the abyss of an imploding Big 12.  Of course, we always thought Texas and A&M were joined at the hip, too...  Anyway, adding two teams from the west would allow Mizzou to come west, and Alabama and Auburn to roll east.

That stated, I think that the best financial opportunities for the SEC are east.  West Virginia is a reasonable target, but they add mostly geographical sense.  Arkansas is lucky that we received the invitation when we did...

Besides WVU, Virginia Tech and North Carolina State (ideally, Virginia and UNC, but that seems unlikely) are attractive targets.  These states bring quite a bit to the table, and NC State might see the same benefit to joining the SEC as did Texas A&M.  This, too, would allow Mizzou to come west and the two newcomers would be added to the east. 

Since the ACC just strengthened their Grant of Rights agreement, the SEC won't be getting any of those schools and there aren't any other notable schools in the east that the SEC could get to go with WV. That's why going west is by far the better option.

I don't see Kansas as an option for the reason you mentioned and also because the SEC is a football first conference, not a basketball conference and let's be honest, Kansas is beyond HORRIBLE in football. Texas has made it clear that they want no part of joining the SEC so that isn't happening. These reasons are why I see OU and OSU as being the SEC's best options for expansion. This would allow Alabama and Auburn to move to the east while allowing Missouri to move to the West where they really would prefer to be.

[ArkansasI]

Since the ACC just strengthened their Grant of Rights agreement, the SEC won't be getting any of those schools and there aren't any other notable schools in the east that the SEC could get to go with WV. That's why going west is by far the better option.

I don't see Kansas as an option for the reason you mentioned and also because the SEC is a football first conference, not a basketball conference and let's be honest, Kansas is beyond HORRIBLE in football. Texas has made it clear that they want no part of joining the SEC so that isn't happening. These reasons are why I see OU and OSU as being the SEC's best options for expansion. This would allow Alabama and Auburn to move to the east while allowing Missouri to move to the West where they really would prefer to be.

Thanks for the reply.  I appreciate your comments.

OU and OSU represent one state - that isn't highly populated.  Bringing in two for one modest state of revenue/viewers seems risky.

KU, while not a great football program, would add another revenue state - albeit small population - and be a great balance to UK (and Vandy for that matter) in a new west division.  KU could also renew whatever they have with Mizzou - a win for both programs in the conference.

I think if the Big 12 ever starts falling apart, KU and OU will be Big 10 targets.  OSU and KSU never will be - so why wouldn't the SEC be interested in beating the B10 to the punch?  These are good, tradition rich institutions.  The SEC should be proud to have them.

[East TN HAWG]

The SEC should not expand.  Each team received a layout of 31m last year.   So if the SEC wanted to expand by two teams, then the new teams would have to increase revenue by at least 62m to even remain the same. 

Comcast pays the SEC around 1.25 per subscription for states within the SEC footprint, and .25 for subscriptions outside the footprint.  The entire state of Oklahoma has 4m people.  If none of the state had a current subscription, then to add OU would bring about 5m dollars to the bottom line for the SEC network. 

That leaves CBS and ESPN that would still have to make up about 56m dollars.  There is no way that they would pay that much more for extra inventory of OU and whatever other team.   They have enough inventory to fill their stations and time slots.  Seeing OU play AM is not significantly better then LSU playing Ole Miss.  The quality of inventory would not improve enough on a weekly bases for the big networks to want to pay that kind of cash for the additional inventory.

Bringing more teams into the conference will only dilute the payouts.

[bphi11ips]

Good point by Ark1 and EastTn

[East TN HAWG]

My math is wrong.  It's per month not annual.  So OU would bring 60M, so bring them on.  That said leave OSU because they would not add a penny

[Murr]

I think the SEC will expand similar to how we expanded a couple of years ago:  expand with a school worth expanding for, then round out with the best available school if possible. Oklahoma,  Texas, North Carolina, Virginia, and Virginia Tech are worth expanding for.  Kansas, Oklahoma State, West Virginia, Florida State and Clemson are worth rounding out with.

[passinghog]

NO

[Piggfoot]

The SEC should not expand.  Each team received a layout of 31m last year.   So if the SEC wanted to expand by two teams, then the new teams would have to increase revenue by at least 62m to even remain the same. 

Comcast pays the SEC around 1.25 per subscription for states within the SEC footprint, and .25 for subscriptions outside the footprint.  The entire state of Oklahoma has 4m people.  If none of the state had a current subscription, then to add OU would bring about 5m dollars to the bottom line for the SEC network. 

That leaves CBS and ESPN that would still have to make up about 56m dollars.  There is no way that they would pay that much more for extra inventory of OU and whatever other team.   They have enough inventory to fill their stations and time slots.  Seeing OU play AM is basenot significantly better then LSU playing Ole Miss.  The quality of inventory would not improve enough on a weekly bases for the big networks to want to pay that kind of cash for the additional inventory.

Bringing more teams into the conference will only dilute the payouts.

thinking is badly flawed. While states population may be important, it is more important to determine how popular the proposed expanding teams may be. If population was the only figure, Indiana's 6.5 million may not make Notre Dame attractive.
A teams fan base is not restricted to the state in which the school is located. This is true for all sports.
From a fan standpoint It would be logical to choose teams in geographical proximity.
I think Oklahoma is an excellent choice but I suspect Ok St would have to tag along.
Texas is a popular school but they would have to give up their network.  Florida state would be good but Florida would have to get of its high horse.

[East TN HAWG]

thinking is badly flawed. While states population may be important, it is more important to determine how popular the proposed expanding teams may be. If population was the only figure, Indiana's 6.5 million may not make Not re Dame attractive.
A teams fan base is not restricted to the state in which the school is located. This is true for all sports.
From a fan standpoint It would be logical to choose teams in geographical proximity.
I think Oklahoma is an excellent choice but I suspect Ok St would have to tag along.

Nope.  For ND, it may be different.  I understand what you are saying, but that is not what has happened in past negotiations.

The SEC deal with Comcast is based upon subscriptions within the footprint and outside.  If you don't believe me, Google it.  Expansion is all about footprint and subscription.

Edit: This is for SEC Network only.  The major networks would pay more for a national team such as NBC and ND. 

[Iwastherein1969]

Not until the next wave of Conference re-alignment begins...some may think the SEC should be proactive so we could get the best programs when conference growth occurs but the SEC's brand would make the very best college programs wait to see if they got an invite from the SEC...sorta like the best looking guy in high school waiting to choose his prom date, while he is available all the women-folk would be turning the average guys down left and right hoping to get the top dog...same thing applies to the SEC and expansion

[ArkansasI]

Nope.  For ND, it may be different.  I understand what you are saying, but that is not what has happened in past negotiations.

The SEC deal with Comcast is based upon subscriptions within the footprint and outside.  If you don't believe me, Google it.  Expansion is all about footprint and subscriptions.

Yessir.  This is why the addition of new schools will require expansion into new states, with the lone exception being the University of Texas.

Smart comments from murr.

[Pork Twain]

Damn fine post bphi11ips

[NaturalStateReb]

I think we should expand with Oklahoma State and West Virginia, then break the east and west into two pods for scheduling purposes:

West 1
Arkansas
Missouri
Oklahoma State
Texas A&M

West 2
LSU
Miss. State
Ole Miss
Vanderbilt

East 1
Alabama
Auburn
Kentucky
Tennessee

East 2
Florida
Georgia
South Carolina
West Virginia

You play the other teams in your pod every year, then 4 from the other pods, plus 1 permanent rival for 8 conference games.  A typical Arkansas schedule might look like:

Missouri
Oklahoma State
Texas A&M
Ole Miss
Tennessee
Auburn
West Virginia
LSU

That's pretty good, I think.

[RME]

I think we should expand with Oklahoma State and West Virginia, then break the east and west into two pods for scheduling purposes:

West 1
Arkansas
Missouri
Oklahoma State
Texas A&M

You had me at this. Say no more and sign me up.

This is indefinitely better than the yayhoos who want to bring Oklahoma and Texas into the SEC.

[PorkSoda]

You play the other teams in your pod every year, then 4 from the other pods, plus 1 permanent rival for 8 conference games.  A typical Arkansas schedule might look like:

Missouri
Oklahoma State
Texas A&M
Ole Miss
Tennessee
Auburn
West Virginia
LSU

That's pretty good, I think.

I like it, but if we expanded to 9 conference games that would allow teams to play 2 teams from each pod + thier own pod. 

I assume LSU would be our permanent rival.

[GuvHog]

I seriously doubt the pod system will ever be used in college football. Most likely if the SEC expands to 16 schools, we'll see the same two East and West 8 school divisions 9 conference games every year with 2 against the other division on a rotating basis.

[PorkSoda]

I seriously doubt the pod system will ever be used in college football. Most likely if the SEC expands to 16 schools, we'll see the same two East and West 8 school divisions 9 conference games every year with 2 against the other division on a rotating basis.

what is the point of a conference if you don't play the other teams in your conference.  with 16 teams and 8 conference games it would take 8 years to play every team in the conference.  playing another team in your conference once a decade doesn't seem right.

with the pod system you play every team every 2-3 years.  which is what it was before the last expansion. 

[ArkansasI]

If the conference ever climbs to 16 members, then I hope it is divided into 4 divisions for all purposes.  In football, each school should play 11 conference games comprised of 3 permanent divisional opponents plus 8 games against 2 of the other 3 Divisions.  One opposite division would role off the schedule annually and be replaced with the division not previously scheduled.

Non-conference games are over-rated.  If a school wants to schedule a non-conference game, then it may schedule it the way we schedule 12th games now.  Maybe you schedule a non-conference game in those years that you need a 6th home game.

Healthy rivalries will develop within divisions, and every 4 years players and fans will enjoy games against every school in the conference.  Within a 4 year span, 13 conference opponents will travel to Arkansas.  The other 2 would make it to Arkansas in the 5th year.

It's also fair.  All Intra-Divisional school would compete against nearly identical schedules.  Fans will get more of what they pay for.  Players won't have to find ways to compete against Toledo.

I honestly don't understand why fans discuss this as being a bad idea or too hard.  5-6 home games against conference opponents is better than 4 conference home games + 2-3 non-conference home games.  It also allows for better alternating weekends.

Things get pretty bland during football season when you've paid $$$ to watch UTEP in Fayetteville the weekend after a conference home game.

[Piggfoot]

Nope.  For ND, it may be different.  I understand what you are saying, but that is not what has happened in past negotiations.

The SEC deal with Comcast is based upon subscriptions within the footprint and outside.  If you don't believe me, Google it.  Expansion is all about footprint and subscription.

Edit: This is for SEC Network only.  The major networks would pay more for a national team such as NBC and ND.

Again, your thinking is flawed. I underdtand in order for Comcast or other tv providers to pick up a network like the SEC the number of subscribers is important. It may well be in the future if not already in some areas the SEC network could become a premium pay channel. The contract with the SEC is with ESPN and not cable or sat companies.
ESPN will be looking for teams with a nationwide following. If you look up the most popular nationwide teams you will find Oklahoma, Texas and Florida state on that list. The big boys in the SEC are Alabama, Auburn, Florida, Tennessee, Georgia ,LSU and Texas A&M. Thats Seven marquee teams playing whoever. They have to have other teams to play. Now in Basketball it may be other marquee teams but for a while Arkansas has unfortunately not been a draw.

[chaz]

Yes. I'd like to see Okie State and TCU added to the west. Move Auburn and Bama to the east.

[bphi11ips]

Does this mean the Titans play in the AFC South Pod?

[Murr]

I seriously doubt the pod system will ever be used in college football. Most likely if the SEC expands to 16 schools, we'll see the same two East and West 8 school divisions 9 conference games every year with 2 against the other division on a rotating basis.

Pods could work perfectly at 16 members and 8 conference games.  Combine two pods to form a division for that year; division winners meet in Atlanta just like we already do now.  Rotate pods every year and now we will play every school within 3 years.  With two four team pods, you'll have 7 accounted for games freeing everyone to have a permanent rival. 

Historic rivalries can be preserved. Having two permanent 8 team divisions creates two conferences under one brand.

[ArkansasI]

Pods could work perfectly at 16 members and 8 conference games.  Combine two pods to form a division for that year; division winners meet in Atlanta just like we already do now.  Rotate pods every year and now we will play every school within 3 years.  With two four team pods, you'll have 7 accounted for games freeing everyone to have a permanent rival. 

Historic rivalries can be preserved. Having two permanent 8 team divisions creates two conferences under one brand.

I don't see how equivalent schedules are played with teams having different opponents - preserving specific games.

Also, decreasing the number of conference games really devalues fan investment.   But this issue frustrates me today in our 14 team conference.

Always fun to discuss...  GO HOGS!!

[Inhogswetrust]

Does this mean the Titans play in the AFC South Pod?

If so are you gonna give up your Titans season tickets?

[bphi11ips]

If so are you gonna give up your Titans season tickets?

Do you like turtles?

[GuvHog]

what is the point of a conference if you don't play the other teams in your conference.  with 16 teams and 8 conference games it would take 8 years to play every team in the conference.  playing another team in your conference once a decade doesn't seem right.

with the pod system you play every team every 2-3 years.  which is what it was before the last expansion. 

I believe playing 2 games per year against the other division is enough because I don't like the fact that one division can help decide who the other division's champion will be. The point to having two divisions is so each can decide their own champion and the 2 play each other for the overall SEC title.

By the way, with 16 teams the SEC would likely go to a 9 game conference schedule to allow for 2 rotating games against the other division.

[Cinco de Hogo]

I suggest that if the SEC were going to add two powerhouse teams it would have already done so.  The SEC has not played from behind in this game so far and I don't believe it is now.  I suggest that the interest is in preserving the B12 because of its history and that percludes raiding it for UT and OU.  I suggest that the news we are hearing of late backs up these suggestions. 

If the B12 survives the PAC12 actually has the tougher route to add quality teams.  If the B12 survives all P5 conferences will dilute their SOS a little.  What that means is that everything remains par and the SEC would still be the tougher conference.  Other than the B12 and PAC12 it matters not what the others add because almost all the canidates left to choose from without raiding another P5 conference are just about the same. 

Within the footprint or bordering footprint of the SEC, BIG and ACC there are teams that would add good football along with expanded viewership, meaning money.  ESPN will pay for a Cincinnati vs Florida game because it will add viewers that typically wouldn't watch an SEC game.  In other words it make no difference who a SEC team plays fan interest spikes.  The same is true of most teams in all the P5 conferences.  I bet ESPN wants 5 conferences too.  Remember, if money is the driving issue and that money comes from ESPN and the Networks they need a lot of games.   

[Cinco de Hogo]

As for the OP's question, I don't think it's a question of should, it when will it happen.  And my answer to that is just as soon as the B12 solidifies itself with the four best teams left to choose from right now.

[bphi11ips]

As for the OP's question, I don't think it's a question of should, it when will it happen.  And my answer to that is just as soon as the B12 solidifies itself with the four best teams left to choose from right now.

You may be on to something with your more-the-merrier theory, but are you suggesting we will wind up with 5 P5 conferences with 16 teams each? 

The logical "best 4" for the Big 12 might be Houston, Memphis, Cincinnati and BYU.  If it goes that way, who is left in the "SEC footprint" to choose from without raiding the other conferences?

On the other side of the more-the-merrier coin is the under-my-thumb strategy.  This is the one Arkansas has taken with Arkansas State at least since John Barnhill was the UA AD.  Do the 64 or so power schools want to share enough to drag another 15 or so up to their level?

Who is running things - ESPN or college presidents?

[oldhawg]

You may be on to something with your more-the-merrier theory, but are you suggesting we will wind up with 5 P5 conferences with 16 teams each? 

The logical "best 4" for the Big 12 might be Houston, Memphis, Cincinnati and BYU.  If it goes that way, who is left in the "SEC footprint" to choose from without raiding the other conferences?

On the other side of the more-the-merrier coin is the under-my-thumb strategy.  This is the one Arkansas has taken with Arkansas State at least since John Barnhill was the UA AD.  Do the 64 or so power schools want to share enough to drag another 15 or so up to their level?

Who is running things - ESPN or college presidents?

Five P-5 conferences would work nicely with an eight game championship bracket, consisting of the five conference champions and three at-large teams.

[bphi11ips]

Five P-5 conferences would work nicely with an eight game championship bracket, consisting of the five conference champions and three at-large teams.

That may be what happens.  I'd prefer a true playoff where no one can whine.

[Cinco de Hogo]

You may be on to something with your more-the-merrier theory, but are you suggesting we will wind up with 5 P5 conferences with 16 teams each? 

The logical "best 4" for the Big 12 might be Houston, Memphis, Cincinnati and BYU.  If it goes that way, who is left in the "SEC footprint" to choose from without raiding the other conferences?

On the other side of the more-the-merrier coin is the under-my-thumb strategy.  This is the one Arkansas has taken with Arkansas State at least since John Barnhill was the UA AD.  Do the 64 or so power schools want to share enough to drag another 15 or so up to their level?

Who is running things - ESPN or college presidents?

I don't think it will be a rule that all have to have 16 teams and the two western conferences might not have.  Or it might end at 14, does it really matter? 

Everyone says it's about the money so I guess ESPN is running things.  Or even more to the point, Disney. LOL

Do you remember how many teacups are on that ride?

[bphi11ips]

I don't think it will be a rule that all have to have 16 teams and the two western conferences might not have.  Or it might end at 14, does it really matter? 

Everyone says it's about the money so I guess ESPN is running things.  Or even more to the point, Disney. LOL

Do you remember how many teacups are on that ride?

Rule?  No.  Plan?  Maybe.  Sort of like the NFL has an organized plan.  The NCAA has evolved.  Maybe it's time to come up with a plan.

[PonderinHog]

Rule?  No.  Plan?  Maybe.  Sort of like the NFL has an organized plan.  The NCAA has evolved.  Maybe it's time to come up with a plan.

I'd take four "virtual" 24 team super conferences, call 'em the Big North, Big South, Big East, and Big West, select four teams from each conference, establish a 16 team playoff, and let them tee it up and see who's best where it counts - on the field.  Arkansas could make that cut, every three to five years.

The downside would probably be a shorter regular season, but it would be a helluva show.

[Cinco de Hogo]

That may be what happens.  I'd prefer a true playoff where no one can whine.

Someone will always whine, that's one of natures laws.

[bphi11ips]

Someone will always whine, that's one of natures laws.

There's no whining in the NFL, NBA, NHL or major league baseball.  No whining in high school football.  Playoffs should be playoffs.  Either you get in or you don't.  Otherwise, it's a tournament. 

[Inhogswetrust]

There's no whining in the NFL, NBA, NHL or major league baseball.  No whining in high school football.  Playoffs should be playoffs.  Either you get in or you don't.  Otherwise, it's a tournament. 

There is whining in all sports and life. That doesn't mean any particular specific whine is valid though. 99.999% are not.

[Hawghiggs]

what is the point of a conference if you don't play the other teams in your conference.  with 16 teams and 8 conference games it would take 8 years to play every team in the conference.  playing another team in your conference once a decade doesn't seem right.

with the pod system you play every team every 2-3 years.  which is what it was before the last expansion. 

Conferences should have never been allowed to grow beyond 10 members. If you can't play everyone in your conference each year. Then its not an actual conference.

[jbcarol]

are any schools out there that previously jumped conferences and now regret it? [sic]

You'd be hard-pressed to find a school that "regrets" having moved conferences over the last 15 years because all of them made more money than they would have in their old conference, and many of them really had no choice. For example, while many at Syracuse (most notably Jim Boeheim) would have preferred not to have to leave the Big East for the ACC, the end was already near for that conference. You can't really regret jumping off a sinking ship.

Meanwhile, some have suggested Colorado regrets going to the Pac-12 and/or Missouri to the SEC, but both are in much more stable places long-term than they would have had they remained in the Big 12.

But one interesting case study would be the very school that touched off the modern realignment wave – Miami.

[jbcarol]

https://twitter.com/Carvell_AJC/status/765673410571612161

Last year, commissioner Greg Sankey offered a very interesting quote on the subject:

"Acknowledge (expansion) is not a front burner issue," Sankey said. "We added two great universities in Texas A&M and Missouri, both members of the American Association of Universities. Great athletics traditions. Contiguous states. There's probably some information in there that's useful."

Here are seven schools that could fit the bill:

Texas
Texas is the goose that laid the rotten egg — that being the disastrous Longhorn Network.

Oklahoma
This the school you might hear about most. Oklahoma is another heavyweight in a conference that's pursuing the likes of Cincinnati, BYU and Memphis.

Oklahoma State
For the Cowboys, this would be a no-brainer. Jump off the sinking Texas/Big 12 ship and land in the cozy confines of the SEC. And for the SEC, Oklahoma State is good enough to boost its resume.

North Carolina
As of 2013, the SEC was reportedly courting UNC, and athletic director Bubba Cunningham expressed legitimate concern over whether the ACC could financially compete with the SEC... The sure-to-be-lucrative ACC Network will launch in August 2019.

West Virginia

Virginia Tech

Houston: Probably the longest shot on this list...