Could be the end of this conference. Seems SEC could go to 20 team conference.
Btw what schools in the ACC do u consider a blue blood?
Printable View
Could be the end of this conference. Seems SEC could go to 20 team conference.
Btw what schools in the ACC do u consider a blue blood?
Carolina and Duke are blue bloods in basketball. That's it.
They have no baseball blue bloods and despite Clemson thinking they are one in football, they're not. They bottled a really good run together for about 7 years but outside of that they are Auburn. And we don't consider Auburn a blue blood. And no I do not consider FSU one either.
I agree also, I can see any 4 teams joining from ACC to sec, we can compete against pretty good.
Snagging a team in NC seems to make sense since the SEC has a big presence in Charlotte. Maybe NC and FSU. I don't think it would be necessary to mess with Virginia teams. They would stick out like a sore thumb kinda like Missouri does.
Sounds like the SEC is on its way to becoming the first super conference.
If they add 4, and that's a HUGE IF, I think it'll be UNC, Clemson, UVA, and FSU. I personally don't see that happening and tend to think they'll just add two, which would be UNC and UVA. Florida DOES NOT want Florida St in the SEC and South Carolina DOES NOT want Clemson. Now I know the SEC kind of threw A&M's opinion to the side with Texas but that was a bit different. It was Texas. Clemson nor FSU are even in the same atmosphere as Texas.Quote:
Originally Posted by BravesDoggy
I read online a couple years ago that Florida has lowered its opposition to adding Florida State.Quote:
Originally Posted by StarkVegasSteve
I predict Florida State, Clemson, North Carolina and NC State as the 4 to come to the SEC, with Virginia choosing the Big 10 over an SEC offer.
I can see the ACC breaking up and Sec going to 20. Big -0 will add 4 teams as well. Look at PAC 12 , they aren't the same nor is Big 12. Sec and Big 10 will dominate with expansions and hopefully one day break away from the NCAA.
JMO
Those past days of not adding another school from an existing state are gone after Texas joined over TAMU's quiet objection. It will be UNC and FSU or Clemson initially. FSU and Clemson will race each other to be the next one after UNC. The next move will cause the collapse of the ACC with the Big Ten adding Virginia and Duke then there will be a rush by NCSU, Miami, VT, BC, etc. to join Big Ten or SEC.
NC State is not an attractive option.Quote:
Originally Posted by Quaoarsking
UNC and UVA would be the big adds. Followed by FSU and Clemson. Those would be the 20.
And you can bet no matter the four they take, the two toughest in football will immediately hit our schedule the first year replacing two "weaker" foes. If the league goes to 9 SEC games we will get the toughest of the four.Quote:
Originally Posted by HoopsDawg
"They're going to boot us for NCState!"
- some negative nancy (probably) soon
I agree that UVA is more desirable to us than NC State, but I also think UVA will ultimately choose the Big 10 over us. I'm not 100% sure of that, probably 70:30.Quote:
Originally Posted by HoopsDawg
NC State is a large public university - it would be in the top half of the conference in enrollment and academics and would be a good backup plan for the conference. It has the feel of an "SEC school."
FSU will definitely be one. There is no doubt.Quote:
Originally Posted by StarkVegasSteve
Seems for sure the fight between big 10 and SEC is UNC and UVA.
Academically they seem more Big 10.
But UNC would do well if in the SEC footprint.
Does Disney and the BIG money even care what Florida or South Carolina feel about Florida State or Clemson? The power base for conference expansion has shifted profoundly over the past few years. The power base would tell Florida and South Carolina to shut up and understand the real food chain of the SEC?Quote:
Originally Posted by StarkVegasSteve
this is still 4 or 5 years away, but if the SEC can add one team, UNC would be it. FSU would be number two, then UVA? Who would be the fourth, Clempson? UVA only for a new market, not for sports pedigree. Duke for the Bball?
Why would UVA be a big add? Don’t they suck at everything not baseball?
Clemson has been relevant for quite a while going back to the 70's and 80's. And FSU even longer. Agreed on Auburn.Quote:
Originally Posted by StarkVegasSteve
This. I think Va would be in down the line and more in line with the Big Ten. NC/Fla St/Miami/Clemson would be the obvious top 4 teamsQuote:
Originally Posted by Brobi-wan
They had a run at baseball like Clemson did at football. It's over nowQuote:
Originally Posted by Brobi-wan
UVA was great in basketball, but I think that is over too.
Maybe not blue blood status but they?re a top 15-20 program in the major 3Quote:
Originally Posted by StarkVegasSteve
The reverse slam ...
13 SEC teams leave to join the XLT Conference ... leaving Vandy and MSU and Mizzou as the only members of the "SEC".
We then have to merge with the runts of the Pillaged ACC and snag the Eastern half of the Big 12.
MSU, Mizzou, and Vandy
+
UVA, NCSU, Wake, Georgia Tech, Louisville
+
Ok State, Kansas, TCU, Kansas State
There are 6 teams left needing a home. FSU, Clemson, Miami, UNC, UVA and Va Tech. 4 will come to the SEC and 2 to the Big 10. Not sure who goes where but that will most likely be the final straw for the 2 super conferences and expansion. The question is which 4 go SEC and which 2 go Big 10. That will put each conference at 20 teams
By no means do I want that to happen -Quote:
Originally Posted by The Federalist Engineer
But, setting aside the $ impact, MSU football would be very competitive in that league.
It wouldn’t shock me if it happened.Quote:
Originally Posted by BrunswickDawg
put the crack pipe up good lordQuote:
Originally Posted by The Federalist Engineer
I would be beyond shocked.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dawgface
Why do we have so many self loathing, low T fans? We have way too many fans who deep down inside want this to happen, else they wouldn't obsess about it. The SEC and Big 10 and their current teams, aren't going anywhere.Quote:
Originally Posted by The Federalist Engineer
Id only be ok with it if we got a Spirits of St. Louis type deal in the lawsuit that will follow. Give us a slice of broadcasting (TV and streaming) rights in perpetuity that would fund us as a top dog for years to come.Quote:
Originally Posted by viverlibre
OM will also be left behind in any eventual contraction. And likely if it goes to one team in the state, we have more sway than most seem to think. The chopping block is actually OM at 16. State at 15. Kentucky at 14. Vandy at 13.
I think he was just pointing out another POV. Just for conversation. That's how I read it anyway.Quote:
Originally Posted by viverlibre
Quote:
Originally Posted by StarkVegasSteve
Uhhh, Miami & Florida State are absolutely baseball blue bloods and UNC & Clemson are at least debatable.
Florida State has won exactly ZERO national championships. ZERO. I might give you Miami, although they've been up and down since the early 00s. Bluebloods aren't up and down.Quote:
Originally Posted by MStateDawg
North Carolina has ZERO national championships. ZERO.
Clemson has ZERO national championships. ZERO
Also, no conference is taking a team because of a non revenue sport. Basketball and Football will be the only reason teams make it.
Florida State has 24 trips to Omaha and 3 Runner Ups. They are absolutely a blue blood.Quote:
Originally Posted by StarkVegasSteve
There are examples of blue bloods in every sport that have down periods. It happens.Quote:
Originally Posted by StarkVegasSteve
Who said otherwise?Quote:
Originally Posted by StarkVegasSteve
To further emphasize your point. We aren't blue bloods and neither is LSU. Both are New bloods.Quote:
Originally Posted by StarkVegasSteve
Texsa, USC, Arizona State, Arizona, Miami and Fullerton. LSU is probably another 10 before we say sure as most people alive will only remember them as good rather than newcomers. Their first CWS appearance was 40 years ago. Okie and Stanford are debatable as well. FSU needs a title for consideration.
But no national championships. Blue Bloods win the big one. They are a solid program, but they're not a blue blood. Honestly, there's one blue blood in college baseball, Louisiana State University. That's it. They've been up for almost 50 years. They've missed the tournament 4 times since 1986 and have now won 8 national championships, along with 20 trips to Omaha since 1986(that's a 40% hit rate. We have an 8% hit rate). That's the blue blood. That's the standard. Everyone else is just playing catch up.Quote:
Originally Posted by MStateDawg
FSU been to Omaha more than anyone. They are a blueblood.Quote:
Originally Posted by StarkVegasSteve
Bluebloods are up and down. Bama ain't always been on top, they had some bad years in several stretches in my life.
There is no real definition for blue blood but when you go to championship round more than anyone, that has to count. Ark been to Omaha 12 times but never won, I'd count them as one. There stadium, fans, investment, they care and they produce.
If you can't admit that Texas is a blue blood, then there's no point in me continuing debating this subject with you.Quote:
Originally Posted by StarkVegasSteve
Texas has 38 trips to the College World Series along with 6 titles and 6 Runner-ups.
To put that 38 number in perspective: LSU has only made the tournament 37 times. YES, Texas has been to Omaha more times than LSU has made the tournament. Texas is 1,000,000% a baseball blue blood along with several other schools.
They're not. Again, there's one blue blood. LSU. They were great in later part of the 80s, they were incredible in the 90s, they were great in the 00s, they were great in 10s, and now they're back on one of those incredible streaks in 20s. Again, hit rate of 40% of winning it when they get to Omaha. That's unheard of. Texas is 16%. I think you're confusing my take. I'm not saying that Texas or Florida St or Miami or [insert program] isn't a great program or even elite. But those teams had runs with great coaches, just like Dedeaux at USC. And honestly, like I think we can be under O'Conner.Quote:
Originally Posted by MStateDawg
Texas was really good under Gustafson and really good under Garido. They won two national championships a piece. But they haven't won it since 05 and haven't made the championship series since 09. We've made it twice since then and we're not a blue blood.
Florida St was incredibly consistent under Mike Martin, but he didn't win the big one. Same reason Arkansas isn't a blue blood.
Miami was really good Ron Fraser and were really good Jim Morris. They probably underachieved a bit tbh. But they haven't really been there since. They tailed off at the end of Morris and Gino wasn't very good. This new guy may get them back.
Then there's LSU. It took Skip two years to get it rolling and it hasn't stopped since. Skip won it more times between 91 and 00 than most programs have won it. EVER. Texas, who you say is a blue blood has only won it 6 times total. Skip won it 5 in 10 years. Hell Smoke Laval was fired and went to a regional, a super, and two CWS trips in 5 years. Manieri won one and went to Omaha 4 more times. And now there's Jay who's won 2 in 4 years. There's everyone else and then there's LSU. They are the standard. I mean LSU has crap coaches get to Omaha and bad coaches that win it. When they get a good coach, it's over. In other words, the coaches don't really matter because they're going to get there. But if they have a good one it's over. You can't say that about other schools.