SEC Expansion Candidates

Matt Hinton has provided a more comprehensive treatment of expansion candidates here.

Dan Wetzel's advocacy for TCU stands alongside his irrational hatred of the BCS as knocks against him as a sports writer. I get that writers benefit from taking forceful controversial positions in public, but I would wager that TCU is so far from being on the table as an expansion candidate that they are effectively irrelevant.

Even ignoring that reality, do they make sense in a vacuum? They are a borderline candidate at best. They are a small private school that happens to have had a good run in football. They don't fit the profile of an SEC school. Their stadium has only 50,000 seats after a significant expansion. Only Vanderbilt has a smaller football stadium in the SEC. Every SEC school has a larger student body than TCU, and most of them are more than twice as large. Most of their football success is recent. Between 1960 and 1998 they only went to 3 bowl games.

West Virginia, on the other hand, is a public flagship university with great tradition in football and basketball, but they may already be out of the picture. If that's the case, and if no ACC schools are willing to leave their conference, the SEC has limited choices for its 14th member and the chances of an interim era with 13 members increases.

As the article suggests, Missouri is still out there, but their departure might prevent a deal to save the Big 12. Would they pull the trigger on that? They certainly appear to covet SEC membership as a golden ticket to future relevance, and as an opportunity that they may not ever see again, but if they leave the Big 12 and all hell breaks loose, they will take some of the blame.

It's Official: Texas A&M will join the SEC

The search is now on for the 14th member. If reports of the remaining 9 Big 12 members handcuffing themselves together are true, Missouri is off the table and armageddon might be averted. It's looking increasingly like Florida State would be the only ACC team to consider an invitation to the SEC. That takes Virginia Tech, NC State, and even Maryland off the table. Add Clemson and WVU to FSU and you have a list of 3 solid candidates that could be plugged into the SEC-E to create two seven team divisions.

Keep in mind that the Big 10 played with 11 teams for several years, so it is not too much of a stretch to suggest that the SEC would go with 13 teams for a year or more rather than take a sub-optimal expansion candidate.

West Virginia Makes a Lot of Sense for the SEC

Spencer Hall makes the argument more colorfully than I can, but the culture argument for adding WVU to the SEC resonates with me. They are a good basketball school, are almost certainly available, and would be a good fit with the SEC. The have that same chip on their shoulder as a small state that many SEC schools share. Despite not being a marquee academic name they are still the flagship school in their state and that counts for something. They fit the profile.

Missouri, on the other hand, is a midwestern school in a pro sports state. They are not the biggest thing in any media market except perhaps for their immediate vicinity. Academically they bring a lot to the table, and are a large flagship school. Not a bad addition, but the Big 10 passed on them for a reason, and they passed on them for a more football crazed school from a smaller state. The SEC should do the same.

More on "Inevitable Superconferences" - The Pac 12 stands pat

SI is reporting today that the Pac 12 has decided not to expand in the current round. I like the idea of giving the current twelve team structure some time to jell. It takes a lot of time for new additions to really feel like a part of the conference and for meaningful rivalries to develop. I am an Arkansas fan and there are still people in the fan base who long for the Southwest Conference days. Actual paid sports writers have speculated that Arkansas might leave the SEC to join the Big 12. Arkansas, it should be noted, has been in the SEC for a mere twenty years.

I'm not sure how much of this is driven by the Pac 12's voting structure. At least when it had 10 members, expansion required a unanimous vote. This argument was used against the inclusion of BYU, a very conservative religious school likely to raise objections from Stanford and Berkeley. I assume they still have a unanimous voting requirement and it is quite likely that at least one member objected to expanding beyond 12 teams.

Notably this also works against reports that have identified Missouri as the SEC's next expansion target. If the Big 12 can hold onto its current 9 members and quickly add a 10th, it could very well survive and Missouri would have no need to move. Call this Scenario 1.

Scenario 2 sees Oklahoma as still desiring to leave the conference, and with the Pac 12 off the table the SEC is a strong option. The Big 12 implodes, current members find homes where they can, and the remnants probably merge with the Big East.

Thoughts on LSU vs. Mississippi State

LSU's defense is the big story from this game. MSU has a pretty good offense, and it was absolutely stumped.

The tone was set with the first or one of the first plays of the game, when MSU ran a simple option play which was quickly snuffed out. Having only seen the play once, my guess is that they were in a cover zero or cover 1 look and had a man assigned to both the QB and the pitch man. I didn't see MSU run another conventional pitch option play during the game.

It really felt like watching an NFL defense. They were able to consistently make Relf wrong on zone read plays. Again, this is based on a single viewing, so I cannot say whether it was a matter of a superior athlete at end or tackle playing both Relf and the RB, or whether it was a schematic thing where the defense assigned a player to both runners. In theory the zone read always works when the QB makes the correct read, but the play was so unsuccessful against MSU that I wondered why they continued running it. Like an NFL defense, the LSU Tigers did not (usually) allow MSU to get away with slow developing running plays or sweeps to the outside.

And through all of this, MSU had some lucky moments on third downs. It could have been even worse. Even after three games it is difficult to accurately describe MSU's quality. They played perhaps the worst D1 team in Memphis in the first week and gave up 14 points and over 300 yards of total offense, not all in garbage time. Then they go on the road and lose to the defending national champs, and follow that up with a loss at home to an apparently legitimate top 5 team after a short week. I'd like to see them play a lower tier SEC team right now just to see if they struggle or not.

The ugly part of the game was MSU's blatant surrender at the end of the game. They were never more than two scored behind. Victory was unlikely, but you don't just quit when you have 3 timeouts and are only down 10. Auburn would never do that. LSU would never do that. There are many reasons why MSU is a perennial cellar dweller in the SEC West, and this sort of attitude is one of them. I expect Mullen to move on to greener pastures sooner rather than later, but if he can't be bothered to fight to the final whistle while coaching a ranked SEC team, why would any other school bother to hire him away? Is that the kind of coach you want on your sideline? Don't get me wrong, Mullen has done a lot of good things there and is a terrific coach, but this is to me a significant black mark.

The Shame of College Sports

The Atlantic has posted a voluminous article about the NCAA and college athletics. Though long, it is required reading on the topic. If it looks too long, read half of it. Read a quarter of it if you must, but do read some of it.

Suffice it to say, many of the present problems with college athletics predate the modern era of huge television contracts.

I have long been opposed to paying players, and this article tests that belief. Perhaps it would be more accurate to say that I think it is impossible to pay the players while keeping a college sports world that resembles the current one. There are major legal and institutional issues that make paying players within the current framework extremely complicated. The article highlights some of those issues that even I had not considered when it comes to athletes collectively negotiating with their schools to determine which players get what salary.

One solution would be to regress and embrace true amateurism: get rid of athletic scholarships, get the big money out of college athletics, and turn college football into glorified intramurals. Another solution would be to convert the college football programs into bona fide for profit businesses, either completely independent or under the organizational umbrella of their university.

Finally, I want to point out another elephant in the room: tax exempt status. For athletic departments, losing their tax exemption is a huge obstacle to major reform. If the athletic departments morph from their current state into true, for-profit club teams then they are likely to lose their tax exemption.

Changing the NBA Draft to Favor Weak Teams

Zach Lowe at the excellent Point Forward blog has some discussion of proposals to alter the NBA draft to give an even greater advantage to weaker teams. I don't like most of the proposals. Each of the 30 teams should get one of the first 30 picks. It's only fair, and as he notes few players outside even the first 10 or 15 picks become superstars. The first 5-10 picks are by far the most important part of the draft, and the draft lottery already allocates those picks to teams that missed the playoffs.

"Inevitable" Superconferences

I might end up looking foolish for going against the conventional wisdom here, but I am getting a little tired of hearing so many smart commentators suggest that 16 team superconferences are inevitable.

Simply put, the people actually making the decisions about conference expansion are not trying to create any particular arrangement of conferences. Each conference is out for its own selfish interests. They will not expand because it will make a playoff easier to create. They will not expand simply to get to an arbitrary number like 16, and they will not expand simply because other conferences do so.

Consider the SEC's behavior. Some weeks ago Mike Slive remarks off hand that “I could get to 16 (teams) in 15 minutes." But he hasn't so far, and all indications are that choosing a 14th team is not going to be easy. In fact, the SEC might choose to endure the irregularities of a 13 team schedule for a year rather than add a team in a hurry. Things can always change, but even the addition of A&M has hit a snag with threats of litigation from the Big 12 rank and file. I personally believe that A&M will ultimately join the SEC despite these hurdles, but for now it certainly looks like there is at least a chance that A&M could end up in limbo for a year, and they are certainly in limbo now, having left the Big 12 but lacking an invitation to another conference.

This is certainly a far cry from 16 teams in 15 minutes.

The SEC also presents evidence for another argument about conference realignment. The conferences are not expanding just to expand. They are trying to pry the marquee football programs out of the Big 12. The B1G has already taken Nebraska, and now the Pac 12 and SEC are fighting over the likes of Texas A&M, Oklahoma, and Texas. For conferences, expansion is about adding value.

Keep in mind that when expanding to 12 teams it is not as critical to add especially valuable teams, as the extra revenue from a conference championship game offsets the costs associated with adding members. This explains why the Pac 12 expanded despite not adding any marquee football names. Colorado and Utah are fine schools in their own right, but neither is on the same level (in football) as Nebraska, OU, or UT.

Compare expansion to 12 with expansion to 16. When expanding to 16, there is no added benefit like a conference championship game to offset the division of revenue into smaller pieces. Each addition will have to pull its own weight. As far as the SEC is concerned, A&M fits the bill. They are a wealthy institution that is a significant ratings draw in Texas. Although their recent football history is not great, they are a classic sleeping giant that the conference can confidently add. This is why the SEC wants Texas A&M: it adds value, plain and simple. The trick will be to find an appropriate 14th school. Two names jump out to me immediately: Virginia Tech and Florida State. Other names that have been batted around add considerably less value. Such schools include WVU, Missouri, and Clemson.

Consider that given the uncertainty surrounding the 14th member adding two additional members to go to 16 teams is even trickier. The real story here is not the emergence of superconferences, but a feeding frenzy caused by the destruction of the Big 12. The major conferences are essentially trying to pick up the cream of the Big 12 crop without getting too much chaff in the deal. If the SEC could get them, they would pick up Oklahoma and Texas in a heartbeat. So would the Pac 12. If they could do it without taking Texas Tech or Baylor in the deal so much the better.

Finally, an important consequence of this line of thinking is that there are no life rafts for good but not great schools that get lost in the shuffle. The B1G won't bail out Kansas or Iowa State if those schools are left out, just to be nice. They will stay at 12 teams before they add programs that are going to take money away from existing members without generating value in return, and the same goes for the SEC.

Big 12 Implosion Scenarios

Here are some possible endgames for the Big 12 as it currently stands:

1. Armageddon Averted:

The rank and file Big 12 members succeed through a combination of legal threats and exit fees to prevent Texas A&M from leaving. The Oklahoma schools decide to stay as well. The SEC, failing to agree on a 14th team, decides that expansion isn't worth it. The Big 12 continues with 10 members and possibly adds two more to go back to 12 in the next few years.

Almost certain not to happen. I honestly don't know if Texas A&M is too far along in the process to go back.

2. The Storm Blows Over

Texas A&M ultimately pays whatever exit fees and buyouts are required, the legal issues sort themselves out through a settlement or otherwise, and Texas A&M becomes the SEC's 14th member. Then, the SEC decides to add another member from the Big East or ACC. Probably West Virginia, but potentially Virginia Tech or Florida State. The Big 12 acts quickly and adds BYU as its 10th member, the Oklahoma schools agree to stay, and the conference is able to obtain similar television money.

This is the most likely scenario under which the Big 12 survives in something close to its current form.

3. The Texas and Scrubs Show #1

Texas A&M joins the SEC. The SEC does not add Missouri. Oklahoma and Oklahoma State join the Pac 12, bringing it to 14 teams, but the other schools stay to form a new age Southwest Conference with some combination of BYU, SMU, Houston, UTEP, and/or New Mexico.

4. The Texas and Scrubs Show #2

Texas A&M joins the SEC. The SEC does not add Missouri. Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, and two other schools join the Pac 12 to form the Pac 16, creating the first "inevitable" superconference. Texas decides to create a new age Southwest Conference by adding some combination of BYU, SMU, Houston, UTEP, and/or New Mexico. The old Big 12 north schools decide to hang around because they do not have a good alternative. The Big East stands pat.

5. The Texas and Scrubs Show #3

Texas A&M joins the SEC. The SEC does not add Missouri. Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, and two other schools join the Pac 12 to form the Pac 16, creating the first (inevitable) superconference. Three other schools join the Big East football schools in creating a new 12 member football conference as described in my previous post. Texas, rather than going independent, decides to lord over a new age Southwest Conference, adding some combination of BYU, SMU, Houston, UTEP, New Mexico, New Mexico State, Tulsa, and/or North Texas.

In this scenario, Texas could also go independent in football. Perhaps BYU could join this conference for its non-revenue sports as an independent in football as well.

6. Big 12 Explodes

Texas A&M joins the SEC. Four more schools break off and join the Pac 12. If it doesn't go along to the Pac 12, Texas goes independent and joins, say, the MWC in non-revenue sports. Three or five more schools join the Big East football schools. Perhaps Missouri ends up in the SEC. Some of these schools get left out in the cold: Iowa State, Kansas, Kansas State, Missouri, or Baylor. The cold means joining the MWC, WAC, Sunbelt, or CUSA.

Note that in this scenario we still do not have the "inevitable" superconferences. The B1G is likely to stand pat unless Notre Dame wants to join, and the SEC might only go to 14. The new Football Big East would have 12 members, and the ACC would also stick with 12. The other conferences would watch and wait to see how the 14 and 16 team models play out at the highest levels of college football.

Splitting the Big East

The Big East is a hybrid conference in which only about half of the members participate in football. You can see from the chart the the football members are generally larger institutions. There will be 9 such members once TCU formally joins the conference for the 2012 season, and there are 8 basketball members, including Notre Dame.

The marriage of these two groups of schools has created arguably the preeminent basketball conference in America, and certainly the weakest BCS AQ conference in football. Last season UConn earned the Big East's automatic BCS bid despite winning only 8 games and barely cracking the top 25. Given the title of this post, this leads to the obvious question: why split up the greatest basketball conference in America in order to create what will certainly not be a top tier football conference?

Why? Because several Big 12 schools might suddenly become available (see below). The 9 football schools could break away and add some combination of Kansas, Kansas State, Missouri, Iowa State, Baylor, and possibly Texas Tech. Adding Kansas to a lineup that already includes Pitt, UConn, Syracuse, and Louisville will create a terrific basketball conference. The 8/9 current members have already earned an automatic BCS bid, so it stands to reason that such quality additions as the schools listed would be able to continue with that benefit.

Why break away at all? To create a proper, relatively homogeneous 12-14 member football conference that plays a championship game and generally operates much like the other major conferences. Such a conference could potentially earn a lucrative new media deal, which would depend on the particulars of the current Big East agreement. I do not know how television revenue from the football side is split, but presumably the basketball only members do not receive these funds, and presumably the media contract specifies what happens when and if the football members leave as a group, and what happens when new members join the conference. Either way, the conference is nearing the end of its current television contract, so the pending implosion of the Big 12 could not have come at a better time.

I will briefly go over the possible scenarios for Big 12 armageddon in my next post.

Introduction

This is to be a blog primarily about sports and secondarily about other topics that I find interesting. I do not have great plans or ambitions for this blog at the present time. It is mostly a place for me to organize my thoughts that is not a message board or comment thread.