SEC Conference Expansion

[Noah.Dreams]

Is it just me or does anyone else wonder why the SEC isn't expanding the conference? The logic choices to me would be Texas, Oklahoma, Nebraska, Texas A&M, or Louisville.

[JBryant12]

noppe your the only one....12 teams is fine

[dudeman0501]

noppe your the only one....12 teams is fine

Sorry, you're wrong. :)

I've been wondering why we haven't expanded lately. I'm happy with 12 teams, but I would support adding another (as long as it's a good school).

Also, it would be "12 teams are fine", since team is plural. :D ;)

Now watch an English major tell me I'm wrong...

[BigSpur]

Sorry, you're wrong. :)

I've been wondering why we haven't expanded lately. I'm happy with 12 teams, but I would support adding another (as long as it's a good school).

Also, it would be "12 teams are fine", since team is plural. :D ;)

Now watch an English major tell me I'm wrong...

Why would the SEC want more teams? The SEC is the biggest Major Conference there is right now along with the BIg 12 and the soon to be Acc. Who else would come to the SEC without watering down the conference. You can forget about the BIg 12 teams(which even if they wanted to come are not even geographically located in our area), No ACC team is going to leave. Who do you want? Tulane? Southern Miss? Troy? The later 2 are not that bad in football but the only way I would take one of them is to get rid of Vandy, and honestly I would rather have Vandy. Not to mention it would make it harder to make it to a title game, harder to make it to a bowl,it would mess up football scheduling,(you would have to drop a Non conference team) and you wouldn't play at least 3 teams every year in baseball. You would have to change Tournament formats. If you ask me it would be a real pain in the ass for almost no compensation in return.

[autiger1126]

thats what i was thinking

[bleedsgarnet]

Big Spur, i would like to say that the sec had 10 teams for decades and when they decided to add two more, i really dont think USC was exactly what all the sec followers envisioned as a 12th team..We were putrid..Of course, we have gained our share of respectablility since we joined. When you take in all sports, not just football, we are in the middle of the pack..The reason i mention this is this..i don't know if we can really state a strong opinion on this subject.. we just dont have history on our side. Vandy deserves to stay because of the history. Vandy may be lowly in the sec, but they were here years before we were..

[jneesy]

west virginia...

any fans that drag home furniture into the front yard and set it afire on a big win is alright with me, and their in a sucky conference to boot.

[JBryant12]

Louisville isnt bad....

[BigSpur]

Big Spur, i would like to say that the sec had 10 teams for decades and when they decided to add two more, i really dont think USC was exactly what all the sec followers envisioned as a 12th team..We were putrid..Of course, we have gained our share of respectablility since we joined. When you take in all sports, not just football, we are in the middle of the pack..The reason i mention this is this..i don't know if we can really state a strong opinion on this subject.. we just dont have history on our side. Vandy deserves to stay because of the history. Vandy may be lowly in the sec, but they were here years before we were..

First of all the main reason the sec expanded was to have 12 teams for football to create divisions and a championship game. Second of all Getting 2 state schools such as USC and Arkansas was a very good option, the only one better in the region I could think of is Fsu and Miami who were both available at the time. What are you talking about we can't have a strong opinion on the matter, it's not a matter of history but of common sense. And if you'll read in my post I said I didnt want to get rid of Vandy. I think Vandy is better than any other available team in the south, for Academics if nothing else.

[uscballer101]

JB, Louisville is going to Big East...

[JerryBeeds]

I like it the way it is. I'd take another team if we booted Vandy but I don't want more than 12 teams.

[Jay_Lupo]

I think you're friggin nutts if you want to add more teams to this already brutal conference. The teams we have now are plenty enough for me. IMO, the SEC is the toughest conference from top to bottom in all sports. There are down years, such as the 2005 basketball season, but on a pretty regular basis our conference is just downright brutal in the big three sports. We don't need anyone else. I don't want anyone else. And I hope to hell the people who're in charge of the conference feel the way I do.

[JerryBeeds]

I think you're friggin nutts if you want to add more teams to this already brutal conference. The teams we have now are plenty enough for me. IMO, the SEC is the toughest conference from top to bottom in all sports. There are down years, such as the 2005 basketball season, but on a pretty regular basis our conference is just downright brutal in the big three sports. We don't need anyone else. I don't want anyone else. And I hope to hell the people who're in charge of the conference feel the way I do.
Preach it! That's exactly how I feel.

[Cockrocker]

Dealing with 12 teams is a big enough scheduling headache. Why in the world would you consider compounding the problem?

[CockyTatGuy]

for once me and jneesy agree, I would love to see WVA come to the SEC. West Virginia is the only "powerhouse" left in the Big East and it is only going to hurt them if they stay.

[BigSpur]

UUghh not West Virginia, if you brought them you would have to bring another team as well, If as you say they are a "powerhouse"(kind of makes me laugh when I say WVU and powerhouse in the same sentence) why would we bring them into the conference do you want another team in the conference that you would have to beat to get to a championship. And if staying in the Big East is bad for WVU, then I say good, since when do we want to throw a pity party for the Mountaineers.

[GatorNation]

I think you're friggin nutts if you want to add more teams to this already brutal conference. The teams we have now are plenty enough for me. IMO, the SEC is the toughest conference from top to bottom in all sports. There are down years, such as the 2005 basketball season, but on a pretty regular basis our conference is just downright brutal in the big three sports. We don't need anyone else. I don't want anyone else. And I hope to hell the people who're in charge of the conference feel the way I do.

Totally.....I think we all have our hands full with the current set up.

[Neo]

Totally.....I think we all have our hands full with the current set up.


I second that....

[fernandomike]

We would be shooting ourselves in the foot. It is already nearly impossible to get throught the SEC unscathed. Schools from other conferences play much easier schedules and then punch their ticket to the national championship game. Schools near the media centers in this country already have a distinct advantage in the polls. We shouldn't further stack the deck against our conference.

[supergenius]

Should never have expanded in '92.

[GAMECOCK_FAN]

Should never have expanded in '92.
Tired of losing to the Gamecocks and Razorbacks the last few times, huh? ;)

[bleedsgarnet]

this goes back to big spur..i realize good and well why they expanded. It was for the money and power..i was just stating that the question may be better served with the fans of teams who have been here for decades. I also was not arguing the point with you about vandy..i was making a statement.. i was agreeing with you..12 is plenty..I am glad we got in back in 92..I am not so sure we were looked at any differently than a troy or tulane by opposing teams..that was one point i was making

[JerryBeeds]

This is a least the 5th thread we've had on this topic. The SEC isn't going to expand nor should it.

[BeeDee]

How about we bring Clemson into the SEC? (I'll run and cover my head before the chairs start flying)

[Neo]

How about we bring Clemson into the SEC? (I'll run and cover my head before the chairs start flying)

Actually that would be a good idea. They naturally should be in the SEC as opposed to the ACC.

If and this is a big if....

The SEC were to expand, adding West Virginia and Clemson would take the cake.

Personally, I'm against another expansion right now though. Our conference is tough enough as it is, why make it worse? :cool:

[BeeDee]

Gotta keep it round, so Clemson and Southern Miss or maybe Texas. As an Ole Miss fan, I'd hate to bring Southern Miss into the SEC because it'd just mean more recruiting headaches for us, but I do feel that they're worthy and that they could compete.

[GatorNation]

Gotta keep it round, so Clemson and Southern Miss or maybe Texas. As an Ole Miss fan, I'd hate to bring Southern Miss into the SEC because it'd just mean more recruiting headaches for us, but I do feel that they're worthy and that they could compete.

Well, if we add one, we'd have to add two in order to keep the SECCG, no? Or can you have a conference champ-game with 13 teams? If not, there's no way the SEC is going to give up that $$$ for an invite.

[Neo]

Gotta keep it round, so Clemson and Southern Miss or maybe Texas. As an Ole Miss fan, I'd hate to bring Southern Miss into the SEC because it'd just mean more recruiting headaches for us, but I do feel that they're worthy and that they could compete.


Here's a map of the US. The RED dots represent current SEC member institutions. The BLACK dots represent (Clemson) and (West Virginia).

If you notice, according to the map, by adding those two (2) teams, we would still be geographically correct. :cool:

http://www.wrrx.com/thumbs/DarthMaul/usmap.jpg (http://www.wrrx.com/images/DarthMaul/usmap.gif)

[JerryBeeds]

That map should be red. :D

[uscballer101]

I dont want clemson...they dont deserve to be in the SEC

[JBryant12]

yeah but it would be fun to watch them get killed week in and week out....they wouldnt be able to claim that they could play against the SEC anymore

[BigSpur]

Actually that would be a good idea. They naturally should be in the SEC as opposed to the ACC.

If and this is a big if....

The SEC were to expand, adding West Virginia and Clemson would take the cake.

Personally, I'm against another expansion right now though. Our conference is tough enough as it is, why make it worse? :cool:

good post, Strenght wise the best duo would be Miami/FSU, but that would be brutal.

[jbuzbee]

If......IF...we added two schools like Clemson and West Virginia then we would have to make Tennessee and Vandy part of the West division....I would enjoy playing them every year....

[jbuzbee]

We need to bring in two patsies....It would help everybody. My vote is for Middle Tennessee State and Southwest Missouri State....

[1000x]

Expansion is a bad idea. First, if you take from another conference, it'll cause a chain reaction with the other conferences. We saw it when the Big Ten admitted Penn State and again when the ACC took in Miami, Virginia Tech and Boston College.

Second, what is the gain for the SEC? More teams would mean the SEC would have to divide the money pie more ways while the pie stays the same size. Expansion won't put extra people in seats at the SEC football championship and would squeeze football teams out of bowls. It will also cause turmoil for fans of all the other sports, as fans will have to split tickets to SEC championship tournaments with more schools. Expansion would be bad for every sport.

Third, no conference has been successful with more than 12 schools that fielded football teams. Remember, the WAC had 16 teams before and that experiment failed miserably.

Fourth, who would come into the SEC? Clemson seems to be a good fit, but not necessarily a good choice (in other words, the SEC may be good for Clemson, but Clemson might not be good for the SEC). The SEC is already in the state of South Carolina with USC and will gain no more markets in that state. West Virginia is not really in the southeast, because anything north of Virginia does not fit the bill geographically. LSU and Arkansas are really in the southwest, so moving west from there would not fit geographically, either.

If the SEC were to expand, it would have to be with a school or schools in the state of North Carolina. It'd be a new market and the geography would make sense. However, I think the major athletic schools there are pretty happy where they are.

So, SEC expansion should not take place. Overall, the SEC would not benefit and it would only create a big mess. Nothing's wrong with the SEC right now, anyway.

P.S. "12 teams is fine" is grammatically correct. I don't think the poster was talking about the individual schools, but a single concept of having 12 teams in the SEC.

[cocky4ever]

Expansion is a bad idea. First, if you take from another conference, it'll cause a chain reaction with the other conferences. We saw it when the Big Ten admitted Penn State and again when the ACC took in Miami, Virginia Tech and Boston College.

Second, what is the gain for the SEC? More teams would mean the SEC would have to divide the money pie more ways while the pie stays the same size. Expansion won't put extra people in seats at the SEC football championship and would squeeze football teams out of bowls. It will also cause turmoil for fans of all the other sports, as fans will have to split tickets to SEC championship tournaments with more schools. Expansion would be bad for every sport.

Third, no conference has been successful with more than 12 schools that fielded football teams. Remember, the WAC had 16 teams before and that experiment failed miserably.

Fourth, who would come into the SEC? Clemson seems to be a good fit, but not necessarily a good choice (in other words, the SEC may be good for Clemson, but Clemson might not be good for the SEC). The SEC is already in the state of South Carolina with USC and will gain no more markets in that state. West Virginia is not really in the southeast, because anything north of Virginia does not fit the bill geographically. LSU and Arkansas are really in the southwest, so moving west from there would not fit geographically, either.

If the SEC were to expand, it would have to be with a school or schools in the state of North Carolina. It'd be a new market and the geography would make sense. However, I think the major athletic schools there are pretty happy where they are.

So, SEC expansion should not take place. Overall, the SEC would not benefit and it would only create a big mess. Nothing's wrong with the SEC right now, anyway.

P.S. "12 teams is fine" is grammatically correct. I don't think the poster was talking about the individual schools, but a single concept of having 12 teams in the SEC.
Good points.

[gmcock22]

Should never have expanded in '92.
what? this comment makes your screen name sound and look like a bunch of BS! :D :D

[BeeDee]

Expansion is a bad idea. First, if you take from another conference, it'll cause a chain reaction with the other conferences. We saw it when the Big Ten admitted Penn State and again when the ACC took in Miami, Virginia Tech and Boston College.

Second, what is the gain for the SEC? More teams would mean the SEC would have to divide the money pie more ways while the pie stays the same size. Expansion won't put extra people in seats at the SEC football championship and would squeeze football teams out of bowls. It will also cause turmoil for fans of all the other sports, as fans will have to split tickets to SEC championship tournaments with more schools. Expansion would be bad for every sport.

Third, no conference has been successful with more than 12 schools that fielded football teams. Remember, the WAC had 16 teams before and that experiment failed miserably.

Fourth, who would come into the SEC? Clemson seems to be a good fit, but not necessarily a good choice (in other words, the SEC may be good for Clemson, but Clemson might not be good for the SEC). The SEC is already in the state of South Carolina with USC and will gain no more markets in that state. West Virginia is not really in the southeast, because anything north of Virginia does not fit the bill geographically. LSU and Arkansas are really in the southwest, so moving west from there would not fit geographically, either.

If the SEC were to expand, it would have to be with a school or schools in the state of North Carolina. It'd be a new market and the geography would make sense. However, I think the major athletic schools there are pretty happy where they are.

So, SEC expansion should not take place. Overall, the SEC would not benefit and it would only create a big mess. Nothing's wrong with the SEC right now, anyway.

P.S. "12 teams is fine" is grammatically correct. I don't think the poster was talking about the individual schools, but a single concept of having 12 teams in the SEC.


I'm fine with sticking with twelve teams, but I'm a bit puzzled by part of your logic. How do you figure that "the pie stays the same size"? You've got more teams playing more games (overall) and more chances to have teams in bowls, on TV and winning titles. The money wouldn't stay the same.

[Noah.Dreams]

Given the strength of the SEC football teams, I would like to see the SEC expansion target schools with outstanding basketball programs, such as Louisville, Oklahoma and Texas. These teams already have existing rivalries within the SEC, so we need to capitalize on them.

[Rebeldrummer]

Gotta keep it round, so Clemson and Southern Miss or maybe Texas. As an Ole Miss fan, I'd hate to bring Southern Miss into the SEC because it'd just mean more recruiting headaches for us, but I do feel that they're worthy and that they could compete.

No three state school in the same conference ...thats bad logistics for the sate .. we would be putting ourselves out of bowlgames ..

this year wasn't a good example but lets take '97 we all three went to bowl games all fans were happy all school smade money .. those years won't happen if we are all inteh same conference .. I can't thinks of a state with three schools in the same conference .. cept for texas?

[JBryant12]

California with the Pac 10....

[JBryant12]

i stand corrected they have 4 teams in the Pac 10 - USC Cal UCLA and Stanford....

[cocky4ever]

i stand corrected they have 4 teams in the Pac 10 - USC Cal UCLA and Stanford....
They should just call it the Cal 4 and Some Other Teams Conference.

[GeauxTo]

They should just call it the Cal 4 and Some Other Teams Conference.
ha-ha-ha
That's funny, Cocky!
;)

[Noah.Dreams]

No three state school in the same conference ...thats bad logistics for the sate .. we would be putting ourselves out of bowlgames ..

this year wasn't a good example but lets take '97 we all three went to bowl games all fans were happy all school smade money .. those years won't happen if we are all inteh same conference .. I can't thinks of a state with three schools in the same conference .. cept for texas?

North Carolina, North Carolina State, Duke, Wake Forest are in the same state.

[cocky4ever]

North Carolina, North Carolina State, Duke, Wake Forest are in the same state.
Yeah, I dont know any team in the country that would wanna have to go through tobacco road every year in basketball.

[Sic'em Dawgs]

Or Georgia Tech, this would give my teams rivalry even more heat. Also, GA T has been pretty good for the last couple of years, they would deffininetly beat Vandy.

[Noah.Dreams]

SEC needs to recruit quality basketball programs. Can you imagine Louisville and Kentucky in the SEC tourament? Or how about Oklahoma or Texas playing Arkansas?