Texas and Oklahoma to the SEC

[Volbound1700]

Not to be a Debbie downer, but your problems are more fundamental than Bama being good. You have had shit administrators for more than a decade who have killed you. I mean historically horrible. You have made horrendous coaching decisions. Most importantly, your state is not very strong with in-state prospects, and you have UNC, UGA, and everyone else picking you apart in TN. When you were at the top, you recruited well in Ga. You don't any more and won't as long as CKS is around. And, you've been down too long ... there isn't a prospect alive who remembers how good UT was in the 90s. That's a big problem to overcome - just ask Nebraska, Michigan, Miami and the like. FSU better get it turned around before that applies to them. You are in the SEC, in the south, and you have rich alumni. But, playing UA, AU, UF and Bama every year, with TAMU, OU, LSU and Tx thrown in each year is going to make it tough to come back.

We are not having any problems recruiting, we are having problems developing talent and maintaining stability in coaching. I agree though that our Admins and Boosters have destroyed the UT program. That is pretty common knowledge. However, UT (just like schools such as Arkansas, South Carolina, etc.) are never as far off as you think they are. Look at our 2015/2016 seasons for example. Both seasons, we should have won the division and were only a few plays away from winning several games that might have got us into playoffs. This was in spite of having a weak coaching staff.

Unlike Nebraska and Michigan, we have access to prime recruiting grounds and are in the premier league. Unlike Miami, we still have a large fanbase that fills a 100k stadium despite how bad the program has been over the past 15 years.

 

[Red_Alert]

Do you truly believe if a 40 year old Tom Osborne clone walked though the door and said "I want to be the head coach at Nebraska" it would solve your problems? I think a better coach would definitely help but I'm leery if it would completely fix what's ailing the Huskers. I wish I was more optimistic that Nebraska can ever get back to the elite level they used to enjoy. Recruiting has changed and academic qualifications have changed. And, unfortunately, the Old School way of doing things at Nebraska (spend two years in the weight room getting stronger than a mofo before you go earn All-American status, for example) has given away to instant gratification and player expectations that are waaaay different than what Devaney and Osborne had to work with.

There are only so many 'elite' coaches in a generation. 3 or maybe even 4 at best. Unless your a Meyer/Saban type hiring a head coach is a complete crap shoot. Dabo was sheer luck for Clemson.
If it were as easy as you imply then RichRod, Hoke, and Harbaugh would still be playing for titles at Michigan.
If it were as easy as you imply then Strong and Herman would still be playing for titles at Texas.
If it were as easy as you say then Lane Kiffin, and Sarkisian would still be playing for titles at Southern Cal. Helton has been there 7 years and how many playoff entries? I'll wait.....
If it were as easy as you imply then Florida would still be playing for titles...... etc, etc, etc.

Again, landing a head coach that can put ALL the pieces together to play NC caliber football is a crap shoot at best.
The dust bin of O and D coordinators or G5 coaches that made the jump to P5 head coaching jobs is a mile high.

BTW.... Bob Stoops was NOT an 'Elite' coach. Top 10 or so, yes. However, he benefitted by playing in a Big 12 that was down. His lone NC was 2000 with Blake recruits.

To get back to your original question on Nebraska ever returning to NC caliber... The chances are just as slim as anyone else. It would take an ass ton of luck.
Getting back to Iowa, Wisconsin, Northwestern, Penn St, Michigan level is certainly obtainable.

 

[Volbound1700]

We are not having any problems recruiting, we are having problems developing talent and maintaining stability in coaching. I agree though that our Admins and Boosters have destroyed the UT program. That is pretty common knowledge. However, UT (just like schools such as Arkansas, South Carolina, etc.) are never as far off as you think they are. Look at our 2015/2016 seasons for example. Both seasons, we should have won the division and were only a few plays away from winning several games that might have got us into playoffs. This was in spite of having a weak coaching staff.

Unlike Nebraska and Michigan, we have access to prime recruiting grounds and are in the premier league. Unlike Miami, we still have a large fanbase that fills a 100k stadium despite how bad the program has been over the past 15 years.

Kind of also to add to my post, I don't mean to down Michigan, Miami, or Nebraska. I think all three will see prominence once again. Michigan and Miami are almost back, they just need some luck. (Michigan just needs to beat Ohio State to truly feel like they are back and it will eventually happen).

Alabama's current run is unprecedented and in a way so is Clemson although it has been overshadowed by Alabama. Look at both teams prior to 2007. They were after thoughts and would be in the same category as Michigan, Miami, Nebraska, and Tennessee right now.

 

[Blackshirts BLVD]

So what happens if the SEC comes out and shocks the world and says no? Lol, do OU and Texas immediately turn to the PAC to save them?

 

[Red_Alert]

What does AAU even mean? UGA ranks ahead of a lot of AAU member schools academically, but they’re not AAU.

But if say Bama and UGA wanted to join the B1G, they’d waive that AAU requirement in a heartbeat

AAU is MASSIVE research WEALTH. AAU schools get #billions of federal govt research dollars every year.
You don't have to be AAU to share in those grants. You simply have to be in a conference with an AAU member.
In the Big 10's case Nebraska (no longer AAU) still gets the research share of the other 13 schools that are AAU.
Same with the Big 12 having Texas, Iowa St, and Kansas as AAU. The other 7 all shared in the research monies of those 3 schools. The conference has the power to determine who gets what size piece of pie, but everybody gets some of the pie.

$54 million/year for Big 10 athletics payouts pales in comparison to the $billions they get from AAU.

The Big 10 would certainly waive the AAU requirement for Notre Dame and likely an Alabama. But for Georgia? Not likely.
Bama and ND are Top 10 all-time bluebloods.
Georgia is...... Well they're Georgia.

 

[Illustrious Potentate]

AAU is research WEALTH. AAU schools get #billions of federal govt research dollars every year.
You don't have to be AAU to share in those grants. You simply have to be in a conference with an AAU member.
In the Big 10's case Nebraska (no longer AAU) still gets the research share of the other 13 schools that are AAU.
Same with the Big 12 having Texas, Iowa St, and Kansas as AAU. The other 7 all shared in the research monies of those 3 schools. The conference has the power to determine who gets what size piece of pie, but everybody gats some.

$54 million/year for Big 10 athletics payouts pales in comparison to the $billions they get from AAU.

The Big 10 would certainly waive the AAU requirement for Notre Dame and likely an Alabama. But for Georgia? Not likely.

Georgia is the 6th most valuable team in the country. They’d take Georgia.

 

[occupant]

 

[Red_Alert]

Georgia is the 6th most valuable team in the country. They’d take Georgia.

Highly unlikely.

They'd take Ga Tech before Georgia.

It's not ALL about football for The Big 10. They certainly want football and basketball to pay the athletic dept bills.

Georgia would bring in a few $million towards that mission. However, Ga Tech would bring hundreds of $$$ millions on the research side of the conference.

"I didn't come here to play school".

 

[Illustrious Potentate]

Highly unlikely.

They'd take Ga Tech before Georgia.

It's not ALL about football for The Big 10. They certainly want football and basketball to pay the athletic dept bills.

Georgia would bring in a few $million towards that mission. However, Ga Tech would bring hundreds of $$$ millions on the research side of the conference.

"I didn't come here to play school".

One of the biggest money colleges in the country. They’d take em and be happy to have em. We ain’t goin nowhere though

 

[Volbound1700]

Highly unlikely.

They'd take Ga Tech before Georgia.

It's not ALL about football for The Big 10. They certainly want football and basketball to pay the athletic dept bills.

Georgia would bring in a few $million towards that mission. However, Ga Tech would bring hundreds of $$$ millions on the research side of the conference.

"I didn't come here to play school".

You have never been to the state of Georgia. UGA is far bigger than Ga Tech. Ga Tech is equivalent to what Creighton is to Nebraska with regard to fan bases. UGA is bigger than the Atlanta Falcons as well. Only the Braves competes with them.

 

[Red_Alert]

The Big 10 is quite comfortable with 4 of the Top 10 bluebloods anchoring the conference towards media rights contracts.

Georgia does not tip the scale in value like a Notre Dame, Texas (AAU), or Bama. Even OU would not likely get a Big 10 offer.

The Big 10 implied the other day that they're only interested in Texas, Iowa St, or Kansas from the Big 12.
Conference Expansion: Big Ten Only Interested in AAU Schools

Sorry Dawg.

 

[Wild Turkey]

Highly unlikely.

They'd take Ga Tech before Georgia.

It's not ALL about football for The Big 10. They certainly want football and basketball to pay the athletic dept bills.

Georgia would bring in a few $million towards that mission. However, Ga Tech would bring hundreds of $$$ millions on the research side of the conference.

"I didn't come here to play school".

You are speaking out of turn and have no clue about the research dollars brought in by SEC schools. Most members are land, sea, air and space grant universities.

The combined SEC R&D investments total over 5 billion and have an outward economic impact of 65 billion.

Acting like AAU owns this space is ridiculous.

 

[Volbound1700]

BTW, listed to 6:30 off this video.

Apparently Texas is owed $ 160m by ESPN for LHN so ESPN may pay the bailout to get OU and Texas into the SEC since ESPN wants it too.

LMFAO.

 

[Red_Alert]

One of the biggest money colleges in the country. They’d take em and be happy to have em. We ain’t goin nowhere though

Which makes Georgia a potential to the Big 10 an absolutely stupid conversation. But not for reasons you think.

 

[Wild Turkey]

The Big 10 is quite comfortable with 4 of the Top 10 bluebloods anchoring the conference towards media rights contracts.

Georgia does not tip the scale in value like a Notre Dame, Texas (AAU), or Bama. Even OU would not likely get a Big 10 offer.

The Big 10 implied the other day that they're only interested in Texas, Iowa St, or Kansas from the Big 12.
Conference Expansion: Big Ten Only Interested in AAU Schools

Sorry Dawg.

The only reason the B1G schools receive more in R&D is because your enrollments are massive and your state populations are so much higher. From a per capita student basis every SEC school matches up well.

 

[Blackshirts BLVD]

BTW, listed to 6:30 off this video.

Apparently Texas is owed $ 160m by ESPN for LHN so ESPN may pay the bailout to get OU and Texas into the SEC since ESPN wants it too.

LMFAO.

Which brings me to my next point...

Fuck ESPN.

 

[Volbound1700]

The Big 10 is quite comfortable with 4 of the Top 10 bluebloods anchoring the conference towards media rights contracts.

Georgia does not tip the scale in value like a Notre Dame, Texas (AAU), or Bama. Even OU would not likely get a Big 10 offer.

The Big 10 implied the other day that they're only interested in Texas, Iowa St, or Kansas from the Big 12.
Conference Expansion: Big Ten Only Interested in AAU Schools

Sorry Dawg.

3 of the top 10 Bluebloods are in MAJOR decline though. Tennessee is ahead of Georgia, Florida, LSU, Auburn, etc. in all-time rankings but do you really feel like Tennessee is a more valuable product than any of these four?

When was the last time any of those 3 Blue Bloods sniffed a National Title? Wisconsin has been more of a factor in the B1G than any of those 3 Bluebloods. Right now, Florida, Georgia, and LSU are far bigger and more profitable products than those 3 Blue Bloods.

 

[Fredmccallyrtr]

I disagree:

- At the end of the day, we have to go through Bama. Whether that is during the year, or the SECCCG, we have to beat Bama. It's just when we play them ... regular season or CG.

- There is a post somewhere here where the "Gentlemen's agreement" was laid out as not being as solid as some may have thought. If, at the end of the day the SEC feels we can make an extra 15 million per year brining in GaTech, FSU, Clemson, or Louisville, so be it. I hope that doesn't happen but only because I don't understand the advantage of a 24 team super conference.

As to the first point, it is way less important due to the 12 team CFP. We can lose to Bama every year and win all our other game and we will get a second shot.

FYI, there are a lot of Dawg fans that are looking forward to Bama every year. We already want it in Atlanta ... glad to have home and away.

BTW, your schedule just got harder, too. You lose LSU and pick up UF and UGA, and still have little brother you have to play every year.

Yep. Our schedule did get tougher, that's a negative for us too. But, the millions of dollars extra should make up for it in the long run. Your viewpoint is a positive one and I dig that. Worst case scenario for yall is probably trading a consistent spot in the SECCG for a consistent spot in the 12 team playoff. I'd assume that's why UGA will vote for it.

Depending on the teams, the advantage of a 24 team conference would be $$$. Let's say we're at 16 now, 8 more teams that could increase our negotiating power and make geographical sense would be Clemson, NC, NC State, Miami, FSU, Vtech (noticing a trend?) and possibly Oklahoma State. Virginia is uppity so let's send them to the B1G.

 

[Red_Alert]

You have never been to the state of Georgia. UGA is far bigger than Ga Tech. Ga Tech is equivalent to what Creighton is to Nebraska with regard to fan bases. UGA is bigger than the Atlanta Falcons as well. Only the Braves competes with them.

Again... Ga Tech brings $10's of milllions per year to the Big 10 institutions. Ga Tech also adds the Georgia footprint regardless of how bad they suck at football.

U of Georgia brings maybe $4 million/yr 'at best' in the next round of media rights negotiations based on Georgia footprint.
Georgia brings no research value to speak of.

The Big 10 is fine with 4 out of the 10 blueblood anchors.
Same # as the SEC once TX/OU arrive.

 

[WhosYourDawggy]

Yep. Our schedule did get tougher, that's a negative for us too. But, the millions of dollars extra should make up for it in the long run. Your viewpoint is a positive one and I dig that. Worst case scenario for yall is probably trading a consistent spot in the SECCG for a consistent spot in the 12 team playoff. I'd assume that's why UGA will vote for it.

Depending on the teams, the advantage of a 24 team conference would be $$$. Let's say we're at 16 now, 8 more teams that could increase our negotiating power and make geographical sense would be Clemson, NC, NC State, Miami, FSU, Vtech (noticing a trend?) and possibly Oklahoma State. Virginia is uppity so let's send them to the B1G.

The 12 team CFP makes this possible from a competitive advantage. Without that, I would hate it. I have a son at Bama, so we get to trash talk more, that's good.

My problem with 24 teams is a "pigs get fat, hogs get slaughtered" problem. If we gut the ACC and the B12, have we really helped CFB, or made it worse. I would say made it worse. So we own a bigger piece of a less valuable pie. I hope it stops where we are.