College Football 2011: The Year the (Vacated) Won It All!

[Vade]

Tech to SEC? More like A&M :D SEC ! SEC !

[noblemountain]

Ha...yeah I meant A&M.

too many damn Texas teams.

[Plow]

I highly doubt the credibility of these rumors, but how weird is it that there's all this talk of the teams that came from the soutwest conference moving through the big 12 and into the southeast conference

[Akiyama]

Why..why would A&M move to the SEC when they basically get crushed, outside of a couple years lately, in the Big XII? I mean.. Sure I guess we can have another team to beat up on down here, but srsly.

[Plow]

Why..why would A&M move to the SEC when they basically get crushed, outside of a couple years lately, in the Big XII? I mean.. Sure I guess we can have another team to beat up on down here, but srsly.

A&M was solid its first few years in the Big 12 but then fell off. Literally every year since the last time A&M won (98... fucking...don't get me started... anyway) it's been Texas or OU. At least in the SEC the big teams have down years, and sometimes those down years even coincide.

Pretty much anyone other than OU and Texas that's in the Big 12 south would have a better chance at winning the SEC west than they do where they are.

That could change if Bama and LSU could get really consistent, but who knows how long Saban will stick around, and Leonard Miles is always going to find ways to fuck things up.

Anyway, yeah, the Big 12 is pretty much Texas's conference, and not just in terms of money. Not even just in terms of football, really.

[Byrd]

Why..why would A&M move to the SEC when they basically get crushed, outside of a couple years lately, in the Big XII? I mean.. Sure I guess we can have another team to beat up on down here, but srsly.

$$$$$, that's the most important answer. If they feel they can make more $$$ in the SEC than the Big 12, they most likely will. I'm sure there are other political and pride-related considerations, but $$$ is #1 and always will be.

[Akiyama]

Don't get me wrong, Plow. Your reasoning of OU/Texas rocking face every year really does make sense, but.. didn't Texas suck last year and A&M beat OU? I could be thinking something else.. but going from the Big XII, which outside of the last few years with Mizzou, the year that Kansas was randomly good, and the Oklahoma State lately.. it was Texas/OU as the only big teams that were 'big bads' which should mean if A&M could play worth shit.. they should be able to finish with 3-4 losses at worse. Then if they move to the SEC (not sure where they'd be, probably West), they'd have to play Alabama, LSU (who wrecked them with Jordan Jefferson, lulz), Arkansas (who beat 'em last year), and an improving Mississippi State. Auburn.. well, this year, I'd be happy with 6-6, but yeah. That schedule seems slightly tougher than what they face normally.

I dunno. Byrd's reasoning makes more sense to me. Seems like it's just about all that money.

[Plow]

Oh money is always the driving factor, I wouldn't debate that for a second, I'm talking purely chances of success, not necessarily as reasoning for repositioning.

You seem to have forgotten that OSU has been consistently top 25 and occasionally top 10 for at least half the decade, Tech only slightly behind them, and the fact that Baylor, while they've been extraordinarily unlucky, have moved out of the laughingstock status the last couple years.

None of the teams aside from A&M and Baylor have spent considerable time outside the top 25 pretty much since Leach got to Tech right up until he left. They did beat OU and Texas, but in the end, and this is a real shocker, OU got the title with the same record and a head to head loss thanks to being higher in the BCS. A&M lost to OSU and Mizzou btw.

It's also still so weird for me to hear people talking about Mizzou like they're a serious program lol. I remember the year they were finally supposed to have a defense and actually be a quality team, K-State ended up facing them with the winner taking the north.

We gave Sproles the ball over and over and over again, and a kid that's 5 foot nothing and ~180 ran for over 300 yards without a run over 20 yards. iirc he had 43 carries.

[Vade]

A&M BOR To vote on the move to the SEC on Monday...exciting!

[Byrd]

A&M BOR To vote on the move to the SEC on Monday...exciting!

I think if this happens, it really may end up causing a much more seismic shift to the conference landscape than last year. The SEC will presumably invite a 14th team (at least) to balance it out, likely from the ACC, and then the ACC will need to invite another team to keep a conference championship game. This may result in an arms race of sorts, forcing the big 4-5 conferences to invite anyone they might want to conceivably invite to make sure they don't miss out on someone they might eventually want.

I can't help but wonder if we're on the path to four 16-team super-conferences. And then, ten years from now, everything shifts again and we end up with eight eight team conferences because 16 is just too ungainly. Ugh.

[Plow]

I don't believe A&M is going anywhere without Texas honestly, so the fact that A&M is actually legitimately considering the move seems to imply the Big 12 is pretty fucked, really.

I thought the same about 4 16 team conferences, but who's going to be the 4th if the SEC and Pac10 expand by taking out the big 12?

[Bregor]

I think if this happens, it really may end up causing a much more seismic shift to the conference landscape than last year. The SEC will presumably invite a 14th team (at least) to balance it out, likely from the ACC, and then the ACC will need to invite another team to keep a conference championship game. This may result in an arms race of sorts, forcing the big 4-5 conferences to invite anyone they might want to conceivably invite to make sure they don't miss out on someone they might eventually want.

I can't help but wonder if we're on the path to four 16-team super-conferences. And then, ten years from now, everything shifts again and we end up with eight eight team conferences because 16 is just too ungainly. Ugh.

I would hate 14 or 16 teams in the SEC. Considering Alabama would have to play all the SEC West teams and Tennessee (can't do anway with the Third Saturday in October) they would be really limited in how many other SEC East teams they could play. And I want to beat Will Muschamp every year until he's fired.

[Plow]

It's almost too bad there's so many of those type of games, even though they are amazing.

4 16 team leagues playing 15 game seasons where they all play each other and the top 2 from each league go to an 8 team playoff... Shit would be so cash.

[Byrd]

I don't believe A&M is going anywhere without Texas honestly, so the fact that A&M is actually legitimately considering the move seems to imply the Big 12 is pretty fucked, really.

I thought the same about 4 16 team conferences, but who's going to be the 4th if the SEC and Pac10 expand by taking out the big 12?

I would imagine the ACC would probably pick a few teams out of the Big East and maybe even the remaining Big 12 teams; I think their TV deal is relatively healthy compared to the Big East. Kansas and Missouri in particular would be likely to find new homes, I would think. Iowa State, Baylor and, to a lesser extent, Kansas State and Texas Tech, might have a tougher go of it.

4 16 team leagues playing 15 game seasons where they all play each other and the top 2 from each league go to an 8 team playoff... Shit would be so cash.

It would be pretty awesome, I just doubt it will happen. Playing nine conference games seems to be getting more and more common, and I think that would make sense with 7 divisional and 2 cross divisional opponents every year in conferences with 16 teams.

If there do end up being four 16 team super-conferences, while a 4 team playoff seems logical, that would completely exclude teams like Boise State, Notre Dame, BYU, and even Texas, if they go independent, leading to more potential anti-trust issues, so I'm not sure it would change a damn thing. It might make it tougher for those teams to find non-conference opponents to fill out their schedule in the long run, though, particularly if more conferences start requiring most if not all non-conference games to be finished by the end of September, like the Pac-12 has done.

[Plow]

I would imagine the ACC would probably pick a few teams out of the Big East and maybe even the remaining Big 12 teams; I think their TV deal is relatively healthy compared to the Big East. Kansas and Missouri in particular would be likely to find new homes, I would think. Iowa State, Baylor and, to a lesser extent, Kansas State and Texas Tech, might have a tougher go of it.

I dunno, I would have expected the SEC to ravage the ACC before going after the Texas schools, and the Texas schools to head west in the first place, but who knows wtf now. The ACC is weak as fuck once you get past the 1-2 teams that are decent each year.

KU is not an attractive school btw. Their basketball has a name, but it's not like NC or 80's Georgetown/90's Michigan where everyplace in the country has a rack of their stuff next to the rack of the local school.

[Akiyama]

I dunno, I would have expected the SEC to ravage the ACC before going after the Texas schools, and the Texas schools to head west in the first place, but who knows wtf now. The ACC is weak as fuck once you get past the 1-2 teams that are decent each year.

KU is not an attractive school btw. Their basketball has a name, but it's not like NC or 80's Georgetown/90's Michigan where everyplace in the country has a rack of their stuff next to the rack of the local school.

Why would the SEC ravage the ACC? They suck worse than the Big XII. They want quality first IMO. Gotta balance out the Kentucky and Vandy's you know. I know they went after Texas first off (that'd been epic), but A&M.. I mean okay.

As far as the whole Texas Tech/OkState being in the Top 25.. yeah, I know they've been in the Top 25 more often in the past five or so years, but not really BCS title contenders, which is all that matters. Honestly.. OkState, Tech, et all.. they have some awesome, fun offenses, like OU did that year, but throw them against a semi-good defense (or beastly like Florida that year) and what happens? Yeah.

That's neither here nor there, though as it's in the past and we're looking at A&M's possible move to the SEC.. I still disagree with the move. The money in this deal must be fucking huge.

Editing here. When I said 'suck worse than the Big XII', that wasn't a shot at the Big XII. :< Don't want to confuse it. I still think they're probably second best, or third.. but the ACC and Big East are so meh.

[Ryany]

Van Pelt was really pushing the whole FSU as the 14th team (probably based off speculation), which honestly would make perfect sense.

[Akiyama]

Van Pelt was really pushing the whole FSU as the 14th team (probably based off speculation), which honestly would make perfect sense.

Yeah it would, and it'd keep the Florida/Florida State rivalry alive easily, and even let Florida add a different OOC opponent.. plus I'd love to see FSU play in the SEC. Would be fun stuff. A shame Bobby Bowden's not there

But if I had to pick an ACC team.. I'd want FSU over Miami, and VT wouldn't make too much sense, though.. meh.

[Plow]

Why would the SEC ravage the ACC? They suck worse than the Big XII. They want quality first IMO. Gotta balance out the Kentucky and Vandy's you know. I know they went after Texas first off (that'd been epic), but A&M.. I mean okay.

I'm not sure what you think I meant by ravage considering 12 to 16 is only 4 teams, but if you snag FSU, Miami, VT, and whoever out of the other decent schools, probably NCU just cuz they sell hats in china, and the ACC is thoroughly fucked.

As far as the whole Texas Tech/OkState being in the Top 25.. yeah, I know they've been in the Top 25 more often in the past five or so years, but not really BCS title contenders, which is all that matters. Honestly.. OkState, Tech, et all.. they have some awesome, fun offenses, like OU did that year, but throw them against a semi-good defense (or beastly like Florida that year) and what happens? Yeah.

They're playing those ridiculous offenses when they're in full stride with a week to prepare. Would you rather be faced with figuring out how to score against Bama and LSU a couple times a year, and potentially winning the division with a loss, or how to figure out how to stop Tech, OU, OSU, Texas, and whoever comes out of the north in the home stretch of the season, potentially in consecutive weeks? Knowing full well if you lose a game OU or Texas is going to get voted into the championship game...

It's not necessarily about quality at that point even, all those teams are just plain unpredictable, it's not like facing Bama, LSU, etc. where if you can find a way to put up 24+ points or so you're probably going to win.

[Plow]

It's a lot like how even if the east was weaker during Urban's time, you still didn't want to be over there because you might put up 35 points in your biggest game of the year and get blown out.