They and the B1G need to drop their old grudges....that is where UND belongs.
Oklahoma and texas want in the SEC.
- Thread starter jeff2001
- Start date
I always thought so, for the same geographic reason I always thought FSU should have joined the SEC. Their decision to go to the ACC - in the long run - was a pig-headed blunder.
That may very well be the way it is. Personally tho, I would not give one team member more clout or a bigger voice than any other no matter how long they have been in the conference. But annexing a team when we already have a team from that state is a different animal. The existing member from that state should have the first and last say. And quite frankly, every team should support their wishes imo.
This could be a 50-100 year decision. It has to be made from a comprehensive perspective.
This may be a completely moot point. Oklahoma cant go anywhere without OSU per state legislature.
They’ve won three NCs since joining the ACC
Just add another team to the conference to make it an 18 team conference. It could be Texas, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State and the fourth team could be Iowa State or Texas Tech or Houston.
Back then Bobby Bowden didn’t want anything to do with the SEC, he wanted the easier path in the ACC.
And for several years, he had it. No one at the time could’ve forecasted FSU, Miami, and VT inexplicably doing a nosedive.
That's what I'm saying for a while they wont be good, like they are now in the acc. Give them a few year and they might learn to play with us week in and week out. Leave them in the ACC they will be a dweller in football but still be "Good".
A few things here.
1. Like Harvard pointed out, the Sooners ain't going in anywhere without the Fightin' T. Boones.
2. Under the current SEC conference schedule, this would just be two more teams that we would only play once a decade outside of the SECCG. We would need to go to a 10 or even 12 game conference slate to make it even feel like a true conference.
3. What does Texas bring to the table besides trouble? We've already tapped into the Lone Star state's TV market by virtue of adding aTm. I guess the addition of the OK City and Tulsa markets might sweeten the pot a little?
4. Speaking of trouble with Texas, would they be willing to share conference revenue evenly, unlike their current setup with Big XII, which it is responsible for pretty much obliterating?
Also, would they be willing to give up the Longhorn Network? Would the SEC be OK with letting them have it alongside the SEC Network? I suspect the answers to both questions would be an emphatic NO.
Food for thought.
1. Like Harvard pointed out, the Sooners ain't going in anywhere without the Fightin' T. Boones.
2. Under the current SEC conference schedule, this would just be two more teams that we would only play once a decade outside of the SECCG. We would need to go to a 10 or even 12 game conference slate to make it even feel like a true conference.
3. What does Texas bring to the table besides trouble? We've already tapped into the Lone Star state's TV market by virtue of adding aTm. I guess the addition of the OK City and Tulsa markets might sweeten the pot a little?
4. Speaking of trouble with Texas, would they be willing to share conference revenue evenly, unlike their current setup with Big XII, which it is responsible for pretty much obliterating?
Also, would they be willing to give up the Longhorn Network? Would the SEC be OK with letting them have it alongside the SEC Network? I suspect the answers to both questions would be an emphatic NO.
Food for thought.
This was intentionally leaked to scare the Big 10 into making them a bigger offer to join that conference.
I believe it was purposely leaked also, however I am not totally sure of the motive. Anyway, If Texas does end up leaving the Big 12 for some other conference, I doubt Oklahoma will stay in the Big 12.
The pig-headedness has been confirmed in the crucible of time.
I thought (just off memory) that florida blocked them?
And FSU was in the ACC for like a decade before Miami and VT joined, right? Or maybe I misread your second part.
The first two were carry-over before the collapse of the Bowden era. The third is now several years ago and even that regime was slipping when the coach escaped for Texas. Now they are flat on their backs, not even a factor in the ACC. They were situated in the middle of the SEC footprint and they would have brought a great team into the league. Also, they would have benefitted from the affiliation in their recruiting. They robbed their constituency of decades enjoying the best kind of college football. It was pigheaded, and now it has blown up.
I don't recall Florida blocking them. I do recall their being miffed because Kramer talked to some other schools first - not us.
I don’t recall UF attempting to block them.
Bowden was very open admitting he’d rather be in the ACC instead of duking it out in the SEC. He admitted the ACC gave them an easier road than the SEC.
Miami and VT, two (at the time) successful teams, did join the ACC later. For whatever reason, both programs started slipping once they joined the ACC. They’re both shells of what they used to be.
I know that won't happen but I would love for it to. We need to be playing against the UNCs, Ga Techs, and Wake Forests of the world. We share much more history with those guys.
If Okie and Texas join the SEC, payout to each conference team probably goes up at least 25%, maybe more. Every school loves the money, and I could see this happening for that reason. If this expansion happens we probably go to a nine game conference schedule. The real loser of this expansion will be the fans of mediocre football programs, USC, Kent, Miss St, Ole Miss, Arky, Mizou, and even Tenn. The fans of the average programs will not get any enjoyment from the extra money. The only thing fans like us will get is more butt whippings. It will be impossible for any of these average football teams to win a conference football championship. The conference champs and the best bowls will always go to Bama, LSU, UGA, A&M, OU, Tex, and maybe occasionally Aub, and Fla.
As a long time fan I am sick, and tired of the butt whippings. We are in over our heads as it is in the SEC. Bringing in Oklahoma and Texas kills any hope of us ever winning anything substantial in football. I would rather move back to the ACC where we have a chance of an occasional outstanding season. If the ACC isn't interested in letting us join, I would rather go join the Big 12 conference, along with Mizou, Arky and one other team. I admit I would be shocked if that actually happened. If it did happen we could compete for a football championship, and a legit chance of eight or nine wins a season, maybe even more sometimes. That would be a lot better than five wins a season in the SEC Super Conference. Even a trip to the Outback Bowl is probably out of our reach in the expanded conference.
As a long time fan I am sick, and tired of the butt whippings. We are in over our heads as it is in the SEC. Bringing in Oklahoma and Texas kills any hope of us ever winning anything substantial in football. I would rather move back to the ACC where we have a chance of an occasional outstanding season. If the ACC isn't interested in letting us join, I would rather go join the Big 12 conference, along with Mizou, Arky and one other team. I admit I would be shocked if that actually happened. If it did happen we could compete for a football championship, and a legit chance of eight or nine wins a season, maybe even more sometimes. That would be a lot better than five wins a season in the SEC Super Conference. Even a trip to the Outback Bowl is probably out of our reach in the expanded conference.
Market wise, we already have a Texas team - Oklahoma is smaller than SC. This needs to be a sound fiscal and football decision - add NC State and VT. You add two very good teams (not great - you can actually have too many great teams), and you add the 10th and 13th largest states to the conference TV footprint. It's a no-brainer.
Actually Texas invited A&M for a one and one and it was the Aggies who said "No".
IIRC the ACC made it almost impossible for teams to pull out of the conference....the exit fees they have are draconian.
So what do you think regarding the votes? Missouri and A&M are obvious "no" votes. All it takes is two more to block. How would SC vote, assuming payouts would go up as much as expected.
I doubt this happens. On the SEC side, there are too many no votes. On the Texas side, the faculty has always been against this, even if the athletic dept wants it. There is complicated reasoning for that, they want to be seen as a Western school like Stanford or Cal-Berkeley, not a Deep South school, even if Vanderbilt and others are good academics. As for Oklahoma, it wants to, but the Ok Governor is an Okie State alum, the Lt Gov is chair of the Okie State board and other powerful forces in the Ok legislature are Okie State alums. So I doubt their legislature allows Oklahoma to leave Oklahoma State in the lurch.
I doubt this happens. On the SEC side, there are too many no votes. On the Texas side, the faculty has always been against this, even if the athletic dept wants it. There is complicated reasoning for that, they want to be seen as a Western school like Stanford or Cal-Berkeley, not a Deep South school, even if Vanderbilt and others are good academics. As for Oklahoma, it wants to, but the Ok Governor is an Okie State alum, the Lt Gov is chair of the Okie State board and other powerful forces in the Ok legislature are Okie State alums. So I doubt their legislature allows Oklahoma to leave Oklahoma State in the lurch.
Last edited:
Don't forget N.C. State. I still hate 'em. Four of the five schools I hate the worst are in the ACC. And they hated us right back. It wouldn't be hard to bring the hatred back. No one in the SEC cares about us one way or the other.
I don't think it will be about votes. I think it will be about opportunity. Other schools will be making moves to other conferences as well. The other big conferences will expand, and Missouri could end up in the B1G, for example. It's where they wanted to go to begin with.
If Texas prefers to rub shoulders with Cal Berkeley, and Stanford instead of Alabama, and Georgia, then they should go knock on PAC 12's door.
pepsicock
Well-Known Member
^^This. We would be better served in another confrence. I get it the $ is too good to leave. But what has that money really done for our programs over the years. ACC schools like UNC and VT have better facilities than we do and they started behind us.
More picturesque environment perhaps, but not better football facilities.
I say let the Big 10 have Texas. Can you imagine the battle of egos between Ohio State and Texas? It would suck up all the oxygen in the room every time.
I've been living in the metro Atlanta area now for over 20 years, of course UGA is the local flavor, with that said there is always conversations about UF, Auburn, Bama, and UT, but SC rarely if ever gets mentioned.
So even though SC borders Georgia one would think there would be some kind of passing interest in our fortunes.
That is not the case. We are a complete afterthought, Particularly after the last two HC hires, which around here was considered comical.
The takeaway is what King just alluded to, we are not taken seriously.
Makes zero sense. They really have it made right now. They have a chance at major bowls and a playoff chance in the Big 12. Join the SEC and thats gone.
which one? All three? I see clemson in the west and they would be us in the west.
You seem to think FSU is going to stay down. I don’t
