Texas A&M too SEC ?

gtphd said:
Why would the SEC add 4 more teams? Their TV contract isn't up for like 15 years, so that's the same money to more teams. I wonder if there's a clause in the contract that requires it to be renegotiated if one or more teams leave / join.
Click to expand...

There is, it's been discussed during the TAMU speculation in a couple places. Most journalists seem to consider it a non-factor to expansion.
 
Given FSU and Clemson, I'm really wondering why not GA Tech. We sew up the heart of the SEC (ATL) for them, we bring a quality program up and down, and some academic reputation for a conference virtually devoid of such. Also, by inviting GA Tech, the SEC shuts the door on Big Integer incursion into their heartland. All in all, this smells of something foul.
Click to expand...
GT would be a second Vandy to them: small stadium, weaker fan base than other SEC teams, not located in a college town, academics too strong to recruit top talent. Plus they don't really need GT to capture the Atlanta market; they've already got it.

The only way GT makes sense is if they think a Big 10 GT would suddenly become a powerhouse that could challenge their dominance in the market, or if they think Penn State / Ohio State / Michigan / etc would draw fans away from Athens. I don't see either of those really being an issue.
 
SEC is going to 16 because they can get "first pick" of what's out there. PAC 12 has already stated they were going to 16 eventually so why not call dibs
 
SEC and Big 10 are so huge, it is not that important for SEC to carry out a bad expansion (GT) just to 'keep out' Big 10 from a market. That is just gold-colored glasses' talk. Expansion will be dominated by what a team brings to the conference in terms of markets and national popularity, not what it prevents another conference from.
 
gtphd said:
GT would be a second Vandy to them: small stadium, weaker fan base than other SEC teams, not located in a college town, academics too strong to recruit top talent. Plus they don't really need GT to capture the Atlanta market; they've already got it.

The only way GT makes sense is if they think a Big 10 GT would suddenly become a powerhouse that could challenge their dominance in the market, or if they think Penn State / Ohio State / Michigan / etc would draw fans away from Athens. I don't see either of those really being an issue.
Click to expand...

Only GA Tech is not Vandy. Since 2000 we've beaten Vandy 4x, Auburn 2x, MSU 2x, and UGAg 2x (ouch, really?). In the same time frame, we've also beaten F$U 2x, VPI 2x, Miami 4x, and Clemson 7x. Our won-loss record is 87-55 (.613) over that span, better than Clemson, Missouri and Texas A&M, and only .020 behind F$U.
 
cyptomcat said:
SEC and Big 10 are so huge, it is not that important for SEC to carry out a bad expansion (GT) just to 'keep out' Big 10 from a market. That is just gold-colored glasses' talk. Expansion will be dominated by what a team brings to the conference in terms of markets and national popularity, not what it prevents another conference from.
Click to expand...

In market-driven business, when you have the opportunity to virtually exclude a major competitor from your market, you take it. You're foolish not to.

In addition, it can be demonstrated (above) that ours is a more successful program than three of the four apparently chosen. I also don't believe that Clemson, Missouri and Texas A&M possess any more national popularity than GA Tech.

Furthermore, though Missouri and Texas A&M do open new markets to the SEC, Clemson absolutely does not. It's a smaller school in the country in a lower population state and would be similar to another Mississippi State. Clemson draws whatever power it gets from being equidistant between Atlanta and Charlotte. Two major cities in two different states, neither one of which cares a bit about Clemson.

Honestly, it's the Clemson inclusion that has me scratching my head.
 
stinger78 said:
In market-driven business, when you have the opportunity to virtually exclude a major competitor from your market, you take it. You're foolish not to.

In addition, it can be demonstrated (above) that ours is a more successful program than three of the four apparently chosen. I also don't believe that Clemson, Missouri and Texas A&M possess any more national popularity than GA Tech.
Click to expand...
Yes, but we are talking about SEC and Big 10 having only 4 more chances to expand, unless you want to argue that a 20-team-conference is the next goal. It's not a true market where you can keep on expanding across the US.

So, what I am saying is, when you have 4 more chances to add, your decision depends a lot more on what that team adds to the table, not what that team subtracts from another table.

Yes, I do agree that Clemson doesn't make sense like how GT only makes slightly more sense than Clemson. TAMU and other teams from new states/markets make the most sense.
 
cyptomcat said:
Yes, but we are talking about SEC and Big 10 having only 4 more chances to expand, unless you want to argue that a 20-team-conference is the next goal. It's not a true market where you can keep on expanding across the US.

So, what I am saying is, when you have 4 more chances to add, your decision depends a lot more on what that team adds to the table, not what that team subtracts from another table.
Click to expand...

See above.

GA Tech makes more sense as a program than Clemson, and far more sense from a market perspective. This is an SEC brain fart.
 
Clemson locks up the state of South Carolina, which is way closer to a 50/50 split than the state of Georgia. Ergo, Clemson?
 
ThisIsAtlanta said:
Clemson locks up the state of South Carolina, which is way closer to a 50/50 split than the state of Georgia. Ergo, Clemson?
Click to expand...

South Carolina has a total population of ~ 4 million. The Atlanta metro area alone has a population of ~ 6 million. Yes, Clemson is more popular in SC than GA Tech is in GA as a whole, but it's really not that different when you're talking millions of people in a statistical area and not simply a stadium on Saturdays. I think the real difference is a drop in the bucket.

The SEC has a chance to make a move than can advance their product and close out their biggest competitor. It appears to me they are blowing it.
 
ncjacket said:
As stinger says, why would they care about locking up SC?
Click to expand...

I think you have to factor brand preservation into this as well. Part of the SEC's brand is sellouts and strong, passionate fanbases. Unfortunately we don't fit that mold. SEC had #s 4 (Bama), 6 (UT), 7 (uga), 8 (LSU), 9 (Fla), 10 (Auburn), 17 (USCe), 22 (Arkansas), 25 (Kentucky), 35 (Miss), and 37 (MSU) in terms of total attendance (not counting Vandy). Those respective capacities (and don't ask me how they get over 100%, I don't know) are 110%, 97%, 100%, 100%, 102%, 98%, 96%, 96%, 98%, 92%, 100%.

Look at their "candidates" compared to us
A&M - #13 attendance, 99%
Climpson - #18 attendance, 94%
FSU - #20 attendance, 87%
Mizzou - #26 attendance, 90%
GT - #50 attendance, 84%

That's the difference. We may have a relatively recognizable brand across the country, but those other teams do too. More importantly, they have fanbases who turn out in droves both at home and away and drive the gameday atmosphere the sec is all about. I hate to say it, but we don't have that same passion in our fanbase. We have a smaller stadium than all of those other schools, yet we don't have a higher capacity than FSU or Mizzou.

In terms of TV money I'd say we are prob about even with Clemson. Yeah, we are in a much much bigger TV market, but the SEC already has a pretty big share of that market and adding us probably won't do much to change that. Not that adding Clemson would do much either, so its kindof a wash there.
 
You misunderstand. I'm not saying Tech over Clemson. I'm simply saying Clemson adds nothing the SEC needs.
 
You guys just keep leaving out the open door to the Big Whatever that GA Tech appears to be.

There are tons of Big Whatever fans down here in Atlanta. There are also tons of recruits down here. There are tons of TV's connected to cables in Atlanta, too.

GA Tech in the SEC automatically sells out every game, and with the increased revenue, we expand BDS again to get to about 70K by renovating Edge and redoing the upper east. That factor is a null factor, IMO, if you can see past the end of your nose.

Leaving Atlanta (through GA Tech) out there in the open for the Big Whatever, when you now have to feed 16 schools on the recruits that primarily come from GA and FL is even more shortsighted than the above, and it involves a sizeable marketing risk.

All in my humble opinion.
 
I agree with this stinger and ATL is our best card in all of this. Whether people believe we will deliver the TV market or not, if non SEC power schools are suddenly showing up in ATL every couple of years it opens lots of recruiting doors that threatens the status quo. GA could decide we're safer in the SEC with them where they can "control" us than seeing us tied in with outside powers. I mean how would they feel about Texas playing in ATL every other year? Or Ohio State?
 
ncjacket said:
I agree with this stinger and ATL is our best card in all of this. Whether people believe we will deliver the TV market or not, if non SEC power schools are suddenly showing up in ATL every couple of years it opens lots of recruiting doors that threatens the status quo. GA could decide we're safer in the SEC with them where they can "control" us than seeing us tied in with outside powers. I mean how would they feel about Texas playing in ATL every other year? Or Ohio State?
Click to expand...

Bingo.

If Rad is as smart as I think he is, he'll be approaching the Big Whatever right about now to discuss some home-homes in the next 2-3 years to warm those folks up to playing in 70 degree weather in early November.
 
ncjacket said:
You misunderstand. I'm not saying Tech over Clemson. I'm simply saying Clemson adds nothing the SEC needs.
Click to expand...

If SEC expands to 16 it will need a 16th team.

A&M appears to be the best candidate, but then what?

I'd go after Texas/Oklahoma/Ok State first if I were the SEC.

Not them, Clemson and FSU have the most fans of the remaining teams. Otherwise you've got VT, Missou, UNC, NC St., WVU, Miami, Louisville, ECU, and us to round out attendance in the top 50 (yes, our attendance is worse than ECUs). A few other teams in the SE aren't far behind - UVA at 53, TCU at 56, USF at 58, Baylor at 61, UCF at 63, Cincy at 69.

If you are the SEC and have to pick three teams in that last paragraph to get to 16 teams, who would you grab? In terms of the teams that fit the SEC brand best you'd have FSU, Clemson, VT, Missou, and WVU at the top of the list. If you want to add 2 teams to each side (i.e. 2 east and 2 west), you probably have to push up a western team like TCU.

If you take out teams that may not leave due to political reasons (i.e. UNC, VT, and NCSt), there aren't too many remaining choices.
 
Legal Jacket said:
If SEC expands to 16 it will need a 16th team.

A&M appears to be the best candidate, but then what?

I'd go after Texas/Oklahoma/Ok State first if I were the SEC.

Not them, Clemson and FSU have the most fans of the remaining teams. Otherwise you've got VT, Missou, UNC, NC St., WVU, Miami, Louisville, ECU, and us to round out attendance in the top 50 (yes, our attendance is worse than ECUs). A few other teams in the SE aren't far behind - UVA at 53, TCU at 56, USF at 58, Baylor at 61, UCF at 63, Cincy at 69.

If you are the SEC and have to pick three teams in that last paragraph to get to 16 teams, who would you grab? In terms of the teams that fit the SEC brand best you'd have FSU, Clemson, VT, Missou, and WVU at the top of the list. If you want to add 2 teams to each side (i.e. 2 east and 2 west), you probably have to push up a few a western team like TCU.

If you take out teams that may not leave due to political reasons (i.e. UNC, VT, and NCSt), there aren't too many remaining choices.
Click to expand...

Once again you miss the TV and recruiting issues.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top