Texas A&M possibly to sec....vt/wvu

[RichlandsAlum 678]

Sounds like 2003...

Perhaps their state legislatures won't yank them by their choke collars like some states did...

 

Do you really think that's what happened with Tech and UVa??

 

I know that Mark Warner gets as much political mileage out of the outcome as possible, but it's not like the General Assembly has funded public colleges in Virginia at anything resembling a reasonable level for over 20 years now. And the ability to appoint Board members doesn't represent anything like real power over outcomes, either. What kind of threat do you really think the Commonwealth could have made -- or enforced, for that matter?

 

Which isn't to say that the Commonwealth didn't have a vested interest in what happened to Tech. Huge bucks were poured into road construction projects in Montgomery County, and this was justified in large part by the traffic demands generated by Tech athletic events.

 

What was consistent from the very beginning of the ACC expansion saga was that John Casteen was a staunch personal supporter of Virginia Tech. Zealots from both Blacksburg and Charlottesville don't care to admit that, but it seems to be obvious from all accounts. And that's the kind of political power that had real value, IMO.

[Deleted Account 5,203]

I understand the St. Louis/Kansas city thing. But I think Nationally FSU has alot more respect than Missouri. I mean there is benefit. Someone in California or New York is going to watch FSU vs. Bama before they would watch Missouri vs. Bama. I mean there is value with FSU nationally. They have a national brand. Can't be said about alot of other teams being brought up. Especially Missouri..... Big 10 didn't want them. I don't want them. Just doesn't fit with the rest of the conference.

 

Of course FSU has respect, but conferences don't bring people in on "respect". Conferences are concerned with dollars, and that's where adding Missouri will outpace FSU for the short and long term.

 

Speaking of someone in New York, they're going to watch whatever major market game's placed on the TV, considering there is no football powerhouse from New York. They'll choose a Big-10/11/12 game, an SEC game, or an ACC game. It'll most likely be SEC, given the conference's prestige.

 

Missouri isn't any more a geographical outlier than Kentucky is, and nowhere close to as much of one as WVU would be...

[RichlandsAlum 678]

I understand the St. Louis/Kansas city thing. But I think Nationally FSU has alot more respect than Missouri. I mean there is benefit. Someone in California or New York is going to watch FSU vs. Bama before they would watch Missouri vs. Bama. I mean there is value with FSU nationally. They have a national brand.

 

Didn't see this before I posted elsewhere, but I think VOL is 100% correct. Expansion and realignment decisions are likely to be driven by $$$ on a national scale -- and very little else -- from now on.

 

Unless, of course, I missed some major news event and Colorado is actually adjacent to the Pacific now.

[Deleted Account 5,203]

What was consistent from the very beginning of the ACC expansion saga was that John Casteen was a staunch personal supporter of Virginia Tech. Zealots from both Blacksburg and Charlottesville don't care to admit that, but it seems to be obvious from all accounts. And that's the kind of political power that had real value, IMO.

 

Oh no, he wasn't. He was firmly, consistently against it, until the General Assembly made a not-so-veiled threat to financially neuter UVA. Of course, we backed down when faced with the prospect of having that 6.7% support removed.

 

Obvious from all accounts? Take it from someone who went there. Let's just say, I had some drinks with the right people once...

Edited August 12, 2011 by UVAObserver

[Deleted Account 5,203]

Didn't see this before I posted elsewhere, but I think VOL is 100% correct. Expansion and realignment decisions are likely to be driven by $$$ on a national scale -- and very little else -- from now on.

 

Unless, of course, I missed some major news event and Colorado is actually adjacent to the Pacific now.

 

Huh? This was exactly my point...that FSU doesn't add a new market and $$$...

[RichlandsAlum 678]

Huh? This was exactly my point...that FSU doesn't add a new market and $$$...

 

The biggest money isn't in the "markets" as we have traditionally been trained to think about them. The most attractive programs are those who have the broadest individual NATIONAL appeal.

 

And conference expansion itself is old news with regard to the emerging business model for college athletics. The new standard is Texas, which is following (and widening) the earlier trail blazed by Notre Dame.

 

Completely my opinion, but I'm convinced that this is close to the dynamic of what's going on.

[RichlandsAlum 678]

Oh no, he wasn't. He was firmly, consistently against it, until the General Assembly made a not-so-veiled threat to financially neuter UVA. Of course, we backed down when faced with the prospect of having that 6.7% support removed.

 

Obvious from all accounts? Take it from someone who went there. Let's just say, I had some drinks with the right people once...

 

I know plenty of "people" myself. But if this is the account that helps you sleep better at night, I'm not going to upset your apple cart.

[VOL61 14]

Straight up, I'd say that we're both residing in glass houses when it comes to non-conference schedule. The difference is that I'm not flinging stones.

 

I suppose on the field results would be the best way to compare Tech and Tennessee. And to that end, I would submit the following:

 

1. Please ask your athletic administrators to seriously consider adding us to your schedule. (And be sure to advise me of the results of that conversation.)

 

2. Let us know when Tennessee beats an ACC team. (And yes, we'd even consider Duke for the purposes of the discussion.)

 

3. December 31, 2009. 37-14. (Ring a bell?)

 

If you'd like to continue this fascinating discussion, please advise.

 

First off we schedule as tough as anyone out of conferece. We played Oregon last year for christ sakes. We have Oklahoma, Nebraska, ohio st. already on future schedules. I am talking about the entire schedule. That does include our conference. We play UF, Bama, UGA, LSU, Ark, USCjr, all this year in conference. I mean do we need to go schedule the Oklahoma's, Oregon's, Ohio st's?

 

1. I don't get to decide who we play. If I did I can promise you the chokies would be on there every year. That is why I would love to see them in the SEC. For no other reason.

 

2. I will get back to you on Sept. 2 2012. Or sooner. We did beat UNC in the Music City bowl except for the rip off job we got.

 

3. Yes, I remember. I hear about it daily. I think they are going to put a sign that says welcome to VA we won the 2009 chickfila bowl. But hey, if beating one of the worst TN teams in the last 40 years makes you feel better fine. If I where 2 and twenty somthing vs. the top 5. I would probably crow to. You have to take what you can get.

[VOL61 14]

Personally from a VT fans point of view, I'd rather FSU leave, we keep Miami and pick up either WVU or PITT or maybe even PITT,WVU and Someone else on the east coast.

 

I miss the games between WVU and Tech

 

If Tech was to join the SEC we'd get murdered for at least 5 or 6 years until we had the talent recruited and we get rid of stiney as OC. That's just my 2 cents on this.

 

Wouldn't you rather go to games against UT, FL, Bama, Auburn, LSU, Miss. st., Ark, USC than the crap you have this year to attend?

 

Don't be scared. They may make you better.... In the words of Rick Flair "to be the best you got to beat the best" and to beat the best you have to play the best. Not once a year either. Over and over.

Edited August 12, 2011 by VOL61

[RichlandsAlum 678]

First off we schedule as tough as anyone out of conferece. We played Oregon last year for christ sakes. We have Oklahoma, Nebraska, ohio st. already on future schedules. I am talking about the entire schedule. That does include our conference. We play UF, Bama, UGA, LSU, Ark, USCjr, all this year in conference. I mean do we need to go schedule the Oklahoma's, Oregon's, Ohio st's?

 

1. I don't get to decide who we play. If I did I can promise you the chokies would be on there every year. That is why I would love to see them in the SEC. For no other reason.

 

2. I will get back to you on Sept. 2 2012. Or sooner. We did beat UNC in the Music City bowl except for the rip off job we got.

 

3. Yes, I remember. I hear about it daily. I think they are going to put a sign that says welcome to VA we won the 2009 chickfila bowl. But hey, if beating one of the worst TN teams in the last 40 years makes you feel better fine. If I where 2 and twenty somthing vs. the top 5. I would probably crow to. You have to take what you can get.

 

I have two confessions to make. This isn't the first time I've had a Tennessee fan engage me in this debate. And I really enjoy it, because you guys are so utterly predictable in the way you argue it. Is there some kind of manual that is read aloud in Knoxville?

 

You played Oregon. That's wonderful. You also had your nether parts handed to you by the national runner-up, so I'm not really sure what your point might be.

 

Earlier in this thread, I noted that I believe the SEC truly is the best athletic conference in the country. So you don't need to preach too much about your conference schedule. Hand in hand with your "2 and twenty somthing [sic]" argument (which I will concede is a very valid point) is the fact that Tennessee generally loses against Bama, UF, LSU, et. al. Beat someone other than Vanderbilt and Kentucky on a regular basis, and I promise that I'll be impressed.

 

I'm know I'm being obstinate here, and I do apologize. Truth is that I have several dear friends who are alumni of that particular institution in Knoxville, and generally speaking I bear no ill will toward UT whatsoever.

 

I can only assume that your hatred of my alma mater (which you felt obligated to interject out of the blue into another post of mine) might be the result of your frequent interactions with a certain segment of our fan base. As you, I, and the Lord are certain, we do have our share of idiots. But life's way too short to take any of this kind of stuff too seriously. And not every paint job requires a broad brush.

 

(I want to put this tangent to bed, because I think you've got good insight into the whole national market thing elsewhere.)

[VOL61 14]

This is from Palm beach Post today....

 

http://www.palmbeachpost.com/sports/seminoles/florida-state-seminoles-flirting-with-joining-the-sec-1732416.html

[Deleted Account 5,203]

The biggest money isn't in the "markets" as we have traditionally been trained to think about them. The most attractive programs are those who have the broadest individual NATIONAL appeal.

 

And conference expansion itself is old news with regard to the emerging business model for college athletics. The new standard is Texas, which is following (and widening) the earlier trail blazed by Notre Dame.

 

Completely my opinion, but I'm convinced that this is close to the dynamic of what's going on.

 

You're equating "most attractive" with "historically significant", and then using that to argue "financially lucrative", which does not follow. There's a correlation, but not causation. That's our crux of dispute.

 

I know plenty of "people" myself. But if this is the account that helps you sleep better at night, I'm not going to upset your apple cart.

 

One of the accounts was from a couple who, up until 2005, was the biggest donor in university history. The other was from John Casteen's right-hand man. I don't know what the Hell else to tell you. My version is THE correct version, not the polished "Hokie-Hoo love" version that the VT-biased Virginia media projects.

 

When the issue first came up, everyone in power at UVA wanted Syracuse: a better academic fit, the better fit for the ACC athletically. UVA's power brokers scuttled around and secured the 4 NC schools in a pact to block the move (remember, only 9 ACC schools at the time). The General Assembly caught wind of it and sent word to Virginia's BOV that it could "enjoy becoming a private school". Casteen and Co. got the picture, cowardly flipped, and left the Carolina schools hanging when the vote came up.

 

Not only did we neuter ourselves to get VT into the conference, we pretty much made sure none of the NC schools would support one of our propositions again. Lose-lose.

 

You can believe what you want to believe. I place a lot of stock and certainty in those with whom I've spoken, and that account is not what you're saying here. I've said my piece.

Edited August 12, 2011 by UVAObserver

[gcdevils47 10]

Mark Gottfried from ESPN says he hears it's going to be A&M and FSU....

 

Sucks. I mean I like the fact we would get to play FSU every year but I really wanted Tech. That would have been a huge game around here. I don't understand how any tech fan wouldn't want to join the SEC. Doesn't make sense to me. I mean if you want to keep paying your hard earned money for the home schedule you have. I guess that is fine. But I would at least like to see a couple decent games a year. Grow a pair. Come play with the big boys. Seems like every tech fan I have spoken to doesn't want it...... Come on you bunch of Hokies......

 

Afraid of going negative every year. They wouldn't be regarded as one of the best anymore. They would be like the Kentucky's and the Ole Miss's and the Mississippi States. And yes hokie fans before you say it, UNC wouldn't win more than 3 games. I realize this :)

[RichlandsAlum 678]

You're equating "most attractive" with "historically significant", and then using that to argue "financially lucrative", which does not follow. There's a correlation, but not causation. That's our crux of dispute.

 

The way it was explained to me boils down to TV ratings indexed to individual teams, and that measure is more objective than "attractive" or "significant" -- although there is probably a measurable correlation that can be derived from those factors as well. The data show that certain programs have played in certain games (particularly national title games and non-BCS bowls) that have attracted historic high ratings in terms of viewer market share. Schools attract nationwide viewers at a certain measurable level. The schools that rate highly on this type of scale are the ones that are therefore "most desirable."

 

I'm doing a poor job of explaining it, and it's not precisely due to the rationale expressed by VOL (so my "100%" reference is fallacious). But at least from an anecdotal perspective, that seems to be the driving force in college athletics right now (e.g., Texas).

 

One of the accounts was from a couple who, up until 2005, was the biggest donor in university history. The other was from John Casteen's right-hand man. I don't know what the Hell else to tell you. My version is THE correct version, not the polished "Hokie-Hoo love" version that the VT-biased Virginia media projects.

 

When the issue first came up, everyone in power at UVA wanted Syracuse: a better academic fit, the better fit for the ACC athletically. UVA's power brokers scuttled around and secured the 4 NC schools in a pact to block the move (remember, only 9 ACC schools at the time). The General Assembly caught wind of it and sent word to Virginia's BOV that it could "enjoy becoming a private school". Casteen and Co. got the picture, cowardly flipped, and left the Carolina schools hanging when the vote came up.

 

Not only did we neuter ourselves to get VT into the conference, we pretty much made sure none of the NC schools would support one of our propositions again. Lose-lose.

 

You can believe what you want to believe. I place a lot of stock and certainty in those with whom I've spoken, and that account is not what you're saying here. I've said my piece.

 

We're going to have to agree to disagree. My sources are also highly placed and credible, and they are not saying the same thing as yours. There are any number of explanations for this, including (but not limited to) the fact that mine could be wrong. Ultimately, neither of us are in complete possession of all the facts involved, as the process we're discussing was the epitome of "back room."

 

My strongest opinion is that it's not worth getting torqued about at this point (because what's done is done). Consequently, I'm not taking it personally.

[bhs7695 185]

I thought it would only be a matter of time before something started cooking up from the SEC.

 

I agree with an article on a VT website I read. The SEC is the best athletics conference in the country, but I don't want to see VT join it. The SEC also has more programs that have been under investigation in the last 40 years than any other conference. It's a dirty conference and I don't want to see VT turn into that.

[RichlandsAlum 678]

ESPN is reporting A&M is done deal. FSU, Clemson, and Missouri and the others. Tech was offerred but chickened out. I guess we know what a Hokie is now. Unbelievable. I just hope they don't screw with the third saturday in October. The bama game is bigger than money to everyone at both those schools.

 

I can't believe you Tech people. You might as well join the Wac. I guess you will still get your 10 wins. But what a chicken $hit move.....

 

If this all shakes out and we learn that Tech was truly offered (and I'm still skeptical about that to begin with), I would imagine that the decision to decline had very little to do with athletics at all.

 

But I'd still be surprised to learn that Virginia Tech was really that high up on the SEC's list of targets. Perhaps I'm just warped by years of rejection by the ACC.

[GMan 3,569]

Wouldn't be surprised to see FSU tuck tail and run from the ACC...considering all the ACC titles they won prior to VT entering the conference and how many they've won since 2004...they no longer control the ACC football scene...

 

1991 Clemson Florida State joined the ACC, but did not compete for the football championship until the following season.

1992 Florida State

1993 Florida State

1994 Florida State

1995 Florida State/Virginia Florida State received the Bowl Alliance bid awarded to the 1995 ACC football champion.

1996 Florida State

1997 Florida State

1998 Florida State/Georgia Tech Florida State received the Bowl Championship Series bid awarded to the 1998 ACC football champion.

1999 Florida State

2000 Florida State

2001 Maryland

2002 Florida State

2003 Florida State

2004 Virginia Tech Virginia Tech and Miami joined the ACC, which then had 11 teams.

2005 Florida State This was the first year of the ACC Championship Game. Florida State defeated Coastal Division champion Virginia Tech.Boston College joined the ACC, bringing it to its current total of 12 teams.

2006 Wake Forest Wake Forest defeated Coastal Division champion Georgia Tech.

2007 Virginia Tech Virginia Tech defeated Atlantic Division champion Boston College.

2008 Virginia Tech Virginia Tech defeated Atlantic Division champion Boston College.

2009 No Champion Georgia Tech defeated Atlantic Division champion Clemson, but Georgia Tech was forced to vacate this win by the NCAA.

2010 Virginia Tech Virginia Tech defeated Atlantic Division champion Florida State

[bhs7695 185]

Give me a break. FSU is running from Tech. Come on they just went through firing a coach who had won almost 400 games. I mean they were not the same anyone who has watched FSU the last 5 years knows that.

 

I think your Hokies are the ones running. You can keep winning football titles in a basketball conference and feel good about yourself. But you had a chance to play with the big boys and chickened out.....

 

Slive wanted Tech. He let them know as much last year when all the A&M stuff almost broke. Tech didn't want any part of it. Now you get to play in a conference without FSU and Clemson if that happens. What a joke......

 

Slice it anyway you want it was a chicken $hit move..... You are a barn school who beats up on the rich kids. You don't belong in the ACC. You belong in the SEC with the rest of us AG schools. We don't give a crap about basketball either.

 

This really sucks..... I can't believe Tech fans aren't screaming from the rafters. What a bunch of Chicken $hits.....

 

Glad to know that your quick reaction ego knows what goes on at the VT office with regards to academics and athletics. I can't believe you aren't being called by every school in the country since you know what is the best move for everyone. Shouldn't you be more concerned about your Volunteer school that has THREE programs being investigated/put on probation??? There is a chicken$^%# move cheating to win in three sports.

 

Are you kin to Nostradamus since you know everything????

[bhs7695 185]

Is a Hokie kin to a Chicken at least? ........ They can't be that far apart......

 

Do the Vols cheat to win?? It can't be that far fetched if THREE of Tennessee's programs are being looked at......

[HurricaneWarning 212]

http://www.orangeandwhite.com/news/2011/aug/12/would-clemson-be-good-fit-sec/

 

This article states that AD Jim Weaver would "politley deline" if VT was invited to the SEC.

[GMan 3,569]

http://www.orangeandwhite.com/news/2011/aug/12/would-clemson-be-good-fit-sec/

 

This article states that AD Jim Weaver would "politley deline" if VT was invited to the SEC.

 

And, of course, that is an article from the Clemson website...and in all honesty, I don't think Jim Weaver would be the "end all, be all" in the decision making process as to whether VT would leave the ACC for the SEC...

 

Let's all just sit back and watch, let things fall as they may...nothing is set in stone as of yet for any school...

 

And just a reminder from everything that took place when VT joined the ACC...Jim Weaver said VT wouldn't leave the Big East either...just sayin'....

[bhs7695 185]

What about this article???

 

http://outkickthecoverage.com/fsu-and-clemson-have-no-shot-at-the-sec.php

 

This morrning ESPN's Doug Gottlieb reported that Texas A&M to the SEC was official and that Florida State, Clemson, and Missouri were likely to be three additional members of the conference. I believe Texas A&M has the votes to join the conference. But I maintain my position from yesterday --I'm told the SEC will not expand in any markets where there are already teams present. That would mean that Florida State and Clemson will not be added to the SEC. Why? Multiple sources have told me that Florida, Georgia, and South Carolina have a Survivor-style pact that all three will oppose the addition of any teams within their own state. The reason? All three schools, presently holding exclusive rights to their entire states -- believe that their competitive position would be weakened by the addition of second teams in their state.

 

I've also been told that Mike Slive, who always governs with near unanimity from his conference presidents, will not ram through an expansion vote if more than one school opposes the addition. So I do not believe ESPN's report that Clemson and FSU are likely to join the SEC. At least not so long as this Survivor-style pact remains extant. And I've heard nothing to suggest these schools are wavering in this regard.

 

If anything, I think the floating of Clemson and FSU might well be a trial balloon intentionally sent up to distract attention from another SEC target. But, and this is key, I'm not sure that the SEC has done the requisite due diligence on other schools to know for certain what the contracts for ACC schools say. To reiterate what I said Friday, I believe that the SEC would look to expand to Virginia and North Carolina if it is going to extend offers to ACC schools. Like I've said all along, I believe the SEC wants into Texas bad enough that it would be willing to sit at 13 and wait for the college football landscape to change around it rather than moving too quickly and making decisions that are not in the best interests of the conference long term.

 

As I told y'all Friday, Texas A&M reached out to the SEC this time around, not the SEC reaching out to A&M. So I'm not sure how much due diligence the SEC has been able to do for outside schools. Let's dive in numbers-wise again and look at where we are.

 

1. Texas A&M has the votes.

 

The only thing that could derail A&M to the SEC is -- and this is why I question Gottlieb's report -- fear from the SEC schools that adding A&M would mean that a second school could be added to Florida, Georgia, or South Carolina.

 

Could this be a leak designed to make the SEC presidents of those schools think twice about voting for A&M? Definitely. In fact, I think that's exactly what this story is, a deliberate plant designed to make it less likely that the SEC votes to add anyone.

 

2. Remember you can't trust anyone.

 

I told y'all Friday to think about conference expansion like the NFL Draft, everyone has an agenda. Could I be wrong? Of course. Could every single writer talking to sources anywhere be wrong? Of course. The reality is this: There are so many vested interests at stake right now that everyone is trying to use the media to advance its interests.

 

Remember the Pac 16 story ESPN "broke"? How'd that end up turning out?

 

Texas played the media like a fiddle and ended up getting wealthy beyond measure. Could Texas and the Big 12 be behind the rumor that FSU and Clemson are going to join the SEC? It wouldn't surprise me at all.

 

3. What happens to A&M if the SEC voted not to accept its application to join the league?

 

It would be the greatest embarrassment in Aggie history, right? How does A&M return to the Big 12 after attempting to join another conference? How much ridicule would it face? Worst of all, what other options would A&M have for the foreseeable future to join another conference?

 

A&M would become the most humiliated team in conference expansion history, the perpetual cautionary tale of realignment for all time.

 

That's why I think these rumors about FSU and Clemson are being cleverly leaked by someone to undercut A&M's bid for SEC membership. A&M has the votes right now. But could that change if SEC presidents start worrying about the additional teams that might follow A&M?

 

Yep.

 

4. The SEC is worried about being sued for tortious interference.

 

That's why it's significant that A&M came to the SEC first. The league isn't liable for any Big 12 lawsuit if A&M comes to it first. Now, A&M will probably be sued over its exit fee, but the SEC isn't buying a lawsuit assuming it operated in an above board fashion.

 

In reviewing A&M's contract the SEC would have become privy to all the details of the Big 12's newest contract arrangements. So, and this is purely speculation on my part, if the SEC really wanted to add a 14th member right now, it would know exactly what the pricetag of that 14th member would be if that team came from the Big 12.

 

That's why I've always thought the SEC would add more than one team from the Big 12 or stick at 13 right now.

 

Missouri says it isn't talking to the SEC. Again, just because Missouri says that publicly doesn't mean it is being honest. But I'll go back to what I've previously told y'all, Oklahoma and Oklahoma State are out as a package deal. That means the only truly viable teams in the Big 12 are Texas Tech and Missouri.

 

Texas Tech has been pretty damn quiet throughout this whole process hasn't it?

 

5. What do the ACC contracts say?

 

Again, the ACC schools would have had to approach the SEC about membership. I believe such approaches happen fairly regularly. That is, I believe the SEC has been approached multiple times by ACC schools on an informal basis to discuss conference affiliation. I also believe the SEC has had mock votes to assess where different teams stand in the event conference expansion took place. So Slive has a working knowledge of what the votes look like and how teams rank on the pecking order.

 

But have those talks ever progressed to the point where review of ACC contracts has taken place? I have no idea.

 

I know the SEC would want to do its due diligence before extending offers. Are they far enough along in this process to invite a team from Virginia or a team from North Carolina this weekend? I doubt it, but who knows?

 

6. Could the SEC's leverage with the ACC teams in North Carolina and Virginia improve by waiting?

 

Let me just say this -- and I'll expand upon it next week -- the ACC is not as stable as some of y'all think.

 

And it may not be the SEC that's causing all the instability.

 

7. SEC Commissioner Mike Slive likes to govern via unanimity

 

I'm told that if more than one school votes against expansion, it's unlikely that Slive will push through the vote. If three schools -- the Florida, South Carolina, and Georgia voting bloc -- stay true to one another then there is no way a team is being admitted with that many votes allied against it. So FSU and Clemson are dead. (Georgia Tech as well in case y'all care).

 

Having said that, here's one caveat, if South Carolina and Georgia turned on Florida and voted for FSU's inclusion, could the SEC bring in FSU with an 11-1 vote in favor? Perhaps, but it would create a hell of a mess.

 

I believe the bloc will stay together and there remains no way that a team from the existing SEC footprint gets an invite to the league.

 

So bringing it all back to the top, I believe that the suggestion that Clemson and FSU are in line to receive SEC invites is an attempt to derail A&M to the SEC. Based on what I'm told FSU and Clemson are not in play for the SEC.

[Ditto 10]

Being an Alabama fan first and a Tech fan second. I don't believe that Tech could/would compete within the SEC like they would want to, as far as football goes I believe the SEC is the best conference in the country, but anyone that can look at Techs schedule for this year and try to tell me it would hold up to anything the SEC has is living in a different sort of world than I am.I am by no means a "Tech Hater" but that schedule is one of the biggest jokes I have ever saw from someone that tries to bill themselves as a "Football Program". I would like the addition of A&M to the SEC for whatever reason it just seems right to me, and I would sort of like to see Tech being in there, but I just don't see it happening anytime in the near future.

[GMan 3,569]

Being an Alabama fan first and a Tech fan second. I don't believe that Tech could/would compete within the SEC like they would want to, as far as football goes I believe the SEC is the best conference in the country, but anyone that can look at Techs schedule for this year and try to tell me it would hold up to anything the SEC has is living in a different sort of world than I am.I am by no means a "Tech Hater" but that schedule is one of the biggest jokes I have ever saw from someone that tries to bill themselves as a "Football Program". I would like the addition of A&M to the SEC for whatever reason it just seems right to me, and I would sort of like to see Tech being in there, but I just don't see it happening anytime in the near future.

 

First off, there is nothing that can be done about the ACC schedule...it is what it is. So, for comparison, you must only use the OOC schedule. I admit, this year's VT OOC is fairly weak but that hasn't been the case over the last several seasons.

 

Anyway, for a fair comparison, let's look at the OOC's of the SEC schools...

 

VT - Appy St. East Carolina, Arkansas St., Marshall

 

Alabama - Kent St., Penn St., North Texas, Georgia Southern

Arkansas - Missouri St., New Mexico, Troy, Texas A&M

Auburn - Utah St., Clemson, Florida Atlantic, Samford

Florida - Florida Atlantic, UAB, Furman, Florida St.

Georgia - Boise St., Coastal Carolina, New Mexico St., Georgia Tech

Kentucky - Western Kentucky, Central Michigan, Louisville, Jacksonville St.

LSU - Oregon, Northwestern St., WVU, Western Kentucky

Mississippi St. - Memphis, Louisiana Tech, UAB, Tennessee-Martin

Ole Miss - BYU, Southern Illinois, Fresno St., Louisiana Tech

South Carolina - East Carolina, Navy, Citadel, Clemson

Tennessee - Montana, Cincinnati, Buffalo, Middle Tennessee

Vanderbilt - Elon, UConn, Army, Wake Forest

 

With the exception of a few games, I don't see any difference...

[blueinbama 259]

First off, there is nothing that can be done about the ACC schedule...it is what it is. So, for comparison, you must only use the OOC schedule. I admit, this year's VT OOC is fairly weak but that hasn't been the case over the last several seasons.

 

Anyway, for a fair comparison, let's look at the OOC's of the SEC schools...

 

VT - Appy St. East Carolina, Arkansas St., Marshall

 

Alabama - Kent St., Penn St., North Texas, Georgia Southern

Arkansas - Missouri St., New Mexico, Troy, Texas A&M

Auburn - Utah St., Clemson, Florida Atlantic, Samford

Florida - Florida Atlantic, UAB, Furman, Florida St.

Georgia - Boise St., Coastal Carolina, New Mexico St., Georgia Tech

Kentucky - Western Kentucky, Central Michigan, Louisville, Jacksonville St.

LSU - Oregon, Northwestern St., WVU, Western Kentucky

Mississippi St. - Memphis, Louisiana Tech, UAB, Tennessee-Martin

Ole Miss - BYU, Southern Illinois, Fresno St., Louisiana Tech

South Carolina - East Carolina, Navy, Citadel, Clemson

Tennessee - Montana, Cincinnati, Buffalo, Middle Tennessee

Vanderbilt - Elon, UConn, Army, Wake Forest

 

With the exception of a few games, I don't see any difference...

 

I am one of the biggest Alabama fans you will find anywhere, and I agree, the OOC schedules of Va. Tech and any of the SEC teams is comparable. Most SEC teams try and schedule a few cupcakes. I believe that is because of the intense in conference schedule. The biggest difference between Tech's schedule and any other SEC team's schedule is in conference games. Almost any team that joins the SEC should benefit, and get better because of the added exposure to recruits, and the step up in competition week in and week out. There may be some exceptions, especially if you look at Vanderbilt being the perennial seller dweller, but for the most part teams would benefit. So, in my humble opinion, Va. Tech could compete with the best teams in the SEC. There most likely would be an adjustment period, but that would be true with any team that joins the SEC.

 

Look at the last game played between Va. Tech and Alabama. The game could have gone either way, and wasn't decided until the 4th quarter. No Alabama fan I knew came away from that game with anything less than total respect for the Hokie football program.