Megaconferences on the horizon...

by ragekage on Sep 4, 2011 2:36 AM EDT

Well, that didn't take long. Mere days after the administration at Texas A&M confirmed that they're going to jump conferences to the SEC, word comes that FOUR schools- OU, Texas, OSU, and Texas Tech- are looking seriously at making the PAC-12 become the PAC-16.

Pac-12 commissioner Larry Scott said Saturday the conference isn't seeking expansion partners, but acknowledged that "schools have reached out to us." "We are not doing anything proactively," Scott said to reporters before Saturday's Oregon-LSU game. "We've not initiated anything. But schools have called us. And we are certainly going to listen. We always are going to evaluate."

Comissioner Scott denied his conference was being "predatory". Yeah, and by the way, I've got this awesome bridge to sell ya.

What more can I say? How long before the Big Ten and SEC get aggressive in turn? The SEC is almost certain- they'll want a school to compliment Texas A&M. So the big questions are:

A) What school is that going to be, and

B) What should the ACC do about it?

As for who the SEC will go after, I'm not sure. Mizzou, Virginia Tech, WVU, Florida State, amongst others have been floated as possibilities. FSU and VT obviously are big deals for us, but are they likely? Would Florida want FSU cutting in on their racket? Would state politics and the downsides to joining the SEC keep Virginia Tech in the ACC?

Now, as for what the ACC should do about it- well, no two ways about it. We should get just as aggressive. I say we make a bid- NOW- for WVU, UConn, ahh, maybe Syracuse, Pitt, ECU, and USF (heh, they were good enough to beat ND). Plus someone else. Hmm. Put us up to 16-18. Gosh, that seems like such a ridiculous number, but I don't think we have much of a choice. If we don't do it, someone else will. I can't even the fathom the implications this will have on scheduling. I mean, teams are unlikely to be able to even play all the teams in our own division. If we went up to 16-18 schools, it'd take seven or eight games a season just to play everyone in the Atlantic division, say. So, what- two games for the opposing division, and two for other schools at large.

I dunno. I like to see variety. I enjoy getting to see Virginia play WAC and MAC schools, or Virginia Tech go up against Boise State- no insult there, fellas, I just enjoy good games against two good teams- and it seems to me this would seriously jeopardize this. For instance, one of the arguments that makes me foam-at-the-mouth angry, especially from SEC folks, is "DERP, Virginia Tech only plays ACC losers, they don't play anyone serious or they lose!" This would only make that worse.

I guess the biggest question is going to be a simple one, though- where's the money at? Because inevitably, that's the direction we'll end up going.

Thoughts?

FanPosts are user-generated content not necessarily endorsed by Gobbler Country.

Tweet Comment 8 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

16

Lets b real about this, if we’re gonna b proactive (and i believe we should b), 16 is the way to go, as it means there are 7 teams to play n the division, and 2 cross-division games equals a 9 game in-conference slate (allowing us to preserve the ooc for push-overs and rivalries, while still getting the full division and cross division games n). I like ECU and have to qualms with USF, BUT if we’re raiding the bigeast (really no choice, lol USCe is really going to leave the $EC), then WVU, PITT, UCONN, and Syracuse are the teams. Three have respectable football teams and one is trying to get back to being respectable. All have good basketball, and would fit nicely within our geographic footprint (all the way to BC remember?). They provide access to quality TV markets, and all but one already good enough academics to meet the ACC’s standards (hey, even we, VT had to pick our academics up a bit when we joined), so the one (one guess which one it is) would just have to pick it up. I’ll be honest, I really-really don’t want to have WVU come to the ACC, but they’re one of the “four-best fits.”
As to why ECU and USF won’t b involved, USF is south florida (hello we already got Miami, and lets b real we r not gonna loose them or FSU to the $EC, UF just won’t allow it.) so we don’t need them and they add virtually nothing to the conference but another name. ECU, i love ECU, but they’re always gonna b too small to be able to vibe well with the ACC, they have good football, the other sports…not so much (no insult to ECU fans obviously). And they really are not gonna bring alot of academic credibility to the ACC.
So to me, its WVU, PITT, ’Cuse, and UCONN……talk about a dominant basketball conference, excellent football conference, and a academic powerhouse of a conference more than capable of challenging the BIG10 for their unofficial “Academic Kings” title.

by redneckwes387 on Sep 4, 2011 9:18 AM EDT reply actions

Good points

Can’t say I disagree with any of ’em in particular.

by ragekage on Sep 4, 2011 1:06 PM EDT up reply actions

VT to SEC

Would be great IMO. Would probably be rough at first, but we would start getting more big name recruits by being in the SEC and we already play great ball with what we get.

by wstrahan on Sep 4, 2011 2:00 PM EDT reply actions

Would it?

I think it’d allow the SEC to raid Virginia of recruits, to get people from the 757, but what would it gain Virginia Tech in return? This is the same argument I gave against UVA joining the Big Ten or anything like that. It would raid Virginia, but what good would it do us? Do you think VT would be more liable to get recruits from Alabama, or Texas I guess now?

Besides, like I’ve said before, Virginia Tech hasn’t committed nearly enough ethical violations to fit in the SEC.

by ragekage on Sep 4, 2011 4:18 PM EDT up reply actions

Really?

The SEC has already made a presence in Virginia. Percy Harvin, Phil Sims, come to mind. If Curtis Grant (VA’s top recruit last year) didn’t go to OSU, he would have gone to the SEC. Joel Caleb (top VA recruit this year) is deciding between VT and the SEC. VT joining the SEC will probably actually enhance the ability for VT to get the top in state talent. And yes, I think VT would get more recruits from the state of Florida, Georgia, South Carolina and Tenessee, where many HS athletes do not even consider a non-SEC team.

Oh, good point on the ethical violations. The ACC would never have a team in the midst of an ethical violation, let alone three with one being the greatest violation since the SMU scandal.

by Chazz Micheal Michealzz on Sep 6, 2011 2:13 AM EDT up reply actions

People of Tech...

…join me in my dream of a West Virginia and Virginia Tech, along with Missouri and Texas A&M union with the SEC!

…Really, I just want to play you guys again, but I don’t think our culture fits the ACC at all.

by MountaineerAirman on Sep 7, 2011 5:58 PM EDT reply actions

VT to SEC

VT is a perfect fit for the SEC.
First, the academic culture is more familiar/similar with SEC schools like Auburn and Tennessee than with Duke or UVA.
Second, the brand of football is closer to SEC football than ACC.
Third, football schools with great traditions should not be wasting away in basketball conferences.
Fourth, it offers a market and area to SEC fans and vice versa SEC football to the DC area.
Fifth, and probably the coolest, with the addition of Texas A&M in the west VT offers a
senior military college in the east which could be a cool rivalry in itself (of course they would have to make an exception that allows these two schools to get together each year). Can you imagine! Watching the cadets file in…

by ishok on Sep 8, 2011 11:12 AM EDT reply actions