SEC not taking A&M yet

[The Fake Lonnie Finch]

http://www.ledger-enquirer.com/2011/08/14/1693816/sec-statement-on-expansion-texas.html

Realignment talk postponed to the end of the season.

[UNTflyer]

Just got a text alert that says SEC "declined to offer" A&M a spot in the SEC.

[UNTcrazy727]

I bet it had something to do with not finding another school to join with A&M

[Rudy]

IF the SEC decides not to take ATM, I wonder how many bridges have been burned?

[golfingomez]

I bet it had something to do with not finding another school to join with A&M

not quite... it's apparently an extremely complicated situation that A&M and the SEC have to tread lightly with

http://outkickthecoverage.com/how-espn-is-complicating-am-to-sec-deal.php

[The Fake Lonnie Finch]

The statement:

“The SEC Presidents and Chancellors met today and reaffirmed our satisfaction with the present 12 institutional alignment. We recognize, however, that future conditions may make it advantageous to expand the number of institutions in the league. We discussed criteria and process associated with expansion. No action was taken with respect to any institution including Texas A&M.”

It's lawyer speak:

1. “The SEC Presidents and Chancellors met today and reaffirmed our satisfaction with the present 12 institutional alignment.

Translation: We we opened the meeting, we had 12; at the close of the meeting, we'll have 12.

2. We recognize, however, that future conditions may make it advantageous to expand the number of institutions in the league.

Translation: We've given A&M the opportunity to join, and now they want to join.

3. We discussed criteria and process associated with expansion.

Translation: We haven't had time to find the 14th, and possibly 15th and 16th school yet to make adding Texas A&M balance out.

4. No action was taken with respect to any institution including Texas A&M.

Translation: We didn't tell them yes, we didn't tell them no. We told them we need time for find school #14, and possibly #15 and #16 as well to join with them.

[The Fake Lonnie Finch]

not quite... it's apparently an extremely complicated situation that A&M and the SEC have to tread lightly with

http://outkickthecoverage.com/how-espn-is-complicating-am-to-sec-deal.php

That's as good a read as you'll find on the technicality of the ESPN deals with the Big 12, SEC, and Longhorn Network. It shows why the Big 12 was having to scramble to get back to ten members.

But, once A&M's Regents give the president permission to deal, and a 14th member is found to join the SEC with them, A&M will be gone.

As Howard Schnellenberger would say, "The only variable now is time."

And, speaking of Howard, wouldn't it be something for Louisville, the second program he built up, ended up in the SEC. That would make, for Howard's career:

(1) Saving the Miami program that was about to be disbanded,

(2) Saving the Louisville program, getting funding for a new stadium,

(3) Creating the FAU program and getting it to back-to-back bowl games within a decade.

Say what you will about Captain Kangaroo, but the guy knows how to build a program. His only blip was in the "rebuilding" of Oklahoma in 1995. Seems the OU administration didn't feel it needed to be built from the ground up and never would give him full reign of the program.

Louisville in the SEC would certainly add to their basketball rivalry - instead of playing once a year, it'd be twice, and possibly three in a conference tourney. That'd be something.

I don't think North Carolina leaves the ACC because they are a basketball program that plays a little football on the side. They'd never leave the Duke basketball series behind for the sake of football.

I think team 14, then, will be Clemson (although, South Carolina will fight it), Florida State (although Florida will balk), Missouri (after getting time to think about it - although they have no natural rival in the SEC, they border Arkansas. It still see that as Big Ten material), or one of the dark horses mentioned - Maryland, North Carolina State, or Oklahoma. Although OU seems to have an Oklahoma State problem to solve.

Edited August 14, 2011 by The Fake Lonnie Finch

[El Paso Eagle]

The statement:

The SEC Presidents and Chancellors met today and reaffirmed our satisfaction with the present 12 institutional alignment. We recognize, however, that future conditions may make it advantageous to expand the number of institutions in the league. We discussed criteria and process associated with expansion. No action was taken with respect to any institution including Texas A&M.

It's lawyer speak:

1. The SEC Presidents and Chancellors met today and reaffirmed our satisfaction with the present 12 institutional alignment.

Translation: We we opened the meeting, we had 12; at the close of the meeting, we'll have 12.

2. We recognize, however, that future conditions may make it advantageous to expand the number of institutions in the league.

Translation: We've given A&M the opportunity to join, and now they want to join.

3. We discussed criteria and process associated with expansion.

Translation: We haven't had time to find the 14th, and possibly 15th and 16th school yet to make adding Texas A&M balance out.

4. No action was taken with respect to any institution including Texas A&M.

Translation: We didn't tell them yes, we didn't tell them no. We told them we need time for find school #14, and possibly #15 and #16 as well to join with them.

I think they also want to see what happens with the legislative hearings that are being talked about

Edited August 15, 2011 by El Paso Eagle

[Rudy]

Everyday that the superconferences get postponed is a good day for NT.

[The Fake Lonnie Finch]

Everyday that the superconferences get postponed is a good day for NT.

Agreed!

If the A&M move to the SEC can be stalled until the 2013 season, we've got time to get a couple of winning seasons under our belt in football and get the attendance up. That Houston and SMU are being talked about as Big 12 replacements with their attendance figures as low as they are, we should have some hope.

A couple more winning seasons in basketball, and at least the announcement of a baseball program being begun would probably help as well. But, SMU has no baseball program and that doesn't seem to have kept them out of better conferences than have taken us.

A&M's move is going to give us an opportunity. Unlike many situations in life, this is one where we can play an active role - get involved. Be there. Give. Be there. Give. Be there. Give. And, the teams have got to win and keep winning.

The door has been cracked up - let's slip through it!

[Rudy]

Not to mention that we are going to be playing both SMUt and Houston. If we can start beating them, that would help our cause.

[The Fake Lonnie Finch]

Not to mention that we are going to be playing both SMUt and Houston. If we can start beating them, that would help our cause.

Hadn't thought of that! Good point as well. I'm hoping McCarney and Bowen turn this thing into a defensive terror!

[untjim1995]

To me, for UNT, the pros and cons on all of this are just glaring at us all.

PROS--PROMISE and LOCATION!! Now that we finally have a legitimate stadium, other strong facilities, and solid coaches/athletic director in the two main sports, we should have conferences very interested in having us come aboard. We are located in a huge media market, have a huge enrollment, and lots of alums who would come running out of the woodwork if we ever started playing and beating names of schools that people know. The MWC would be a great fit for a Texas school to play in right now.

CONS--HISTORY, APATHY, and LOCATION!! No history of winning and lots of apathy among the fans and media, due to poor leadership and community support over the decades. The other Texas FBS schools, private or public, have shoen little-to-no interest in being aligned in a conference with us EVER. We got this beautiful stadium (finally) and started supporting athletics (finally) but, realistically, it may very well be too late. As a matter of fact, the price tag on this new stadium seems to be a bargain for the jewel that it is, but it will look very expensive if we are "downgraded" back to a 1-AA type level within the next 5-10 years. If this happens, and we are basically back to playing Southland-type schools, the administrators at UNT will get barbequed by the "old nestors" and the anti-athletic types. You think funding was bad before...

I will tell you that my best hope is that we end up in the MWC, but I fear that the number of applicants for that conference just soared. I truly believe Texas Tech, Baylor, and possibly, Kansas and K-State, are bound for that conference real soon. If the MWC wanted to wait until they saw who would be a good fit for expansion to 12, they are about to get some good possibilites. Tech's academics will not play with the Pac-12 schools at all, only if it means they get Texas with them. Either way, Baylor will go there, just to smite the old SWC schools in CUSA. The Kansas schools would be a huge get for the MWC, but I suspect it will be the Big East that will get them.

I fear this, though. All of this conference shuffling occurs and CUSA see some teams leave and there are openings. But CUSA decides to fill UCF's shoes with Florida Atlantic, ECU shoes with Middle Tennessee, and there are no Texas or private schools that leave, thus we get stuck in the SBC with Arkansas State, ULL, ULM, Troy, USA, WKU, and FIU. If this occurs, it will continue to be a tough sell here for the foreseeable future.

[TIgreen01]

To me, for UNT, the pros and cons on all of this are just glaring at us all.

PROS--PROMISE and LOCATION!! Now that we finally have a legitimate stadium, other strong facilities, and solid coaches/athletic director in the two main sports, we should have conferences very interested in having us come aboard. We are located in a huge media market, have a huge enrollment, and lots of alums who would come running out of the woodwork if we ever started playing and beating names of schools that people know. The MWC would be a great fit for a Texas school to play in right now.

CONS--HISTORY, APATHY, and LOCATION!! No history of winning and lots of apathy among the fans and media, due to poor leadership and community support over the decades. The other Texas FBS schools, private or public, have shoen little-to-no interest in being aligned in a conference with us EVER. We got this beautiful stadium (finally) and started supporting athletics (finally) but, realistically, it may very well be too late. As a matter of fact, the price tag on this new stadium seems to be a bargain for the jewel that it is, but it will look very expensive if we are "downgraded" back to a 1-AA type level within the next 5-10 years. If this happens, and we are basically back to playing Southland-type schools, the administrators at UNT will get barbequed by the "old nestors" and the anti-athletic types. You think funding was bad before...

I will tell you that my best hope is that we end up in the MWC, but I fear that the number of applicants for that conference just soared. I truly believe Texas Tech, Baylor, and possibly, Kansas and K-State, are bound for that conference real soon. If the MWC wanted to wait until they saw who would be a good fit for expansion to 12, they are about to get some good possibilites. Tech's academics will not play with the Pac-12 schools at all, only if it means they get Texas with them. Either way, Baylor will go there, just to smite the old SWC schools in CUSA. The Kansas schools would be a huge get for the MWC, but I suspect it will be the Big East that will get them.

I fear this, though. All of this conference shuffling occurs and CUSA see some teams leave and there are openings. But CUSA decides to fill UCF's shoes with Florida Atlantic, ECU shoes with Middle Tennessee, and there are no Texas or private schools that leave, thus we get stuck in the SBC with Arkansas State, ULL, ULM, Troy, USA, WKU, and FIU. If this occurs, it will continue to be a tough sell here for the foreseeable future.

This scares the crap out of me, too. But what gives me hope is thinking of what our leadership looks like now. For years and years we had leadership with little to no political ties. This is where Lee Jackson, Lane Rawlins and Bill Lively come in (not to mention our BOR). I think that UNT is better positioned, leadership-wise, than at any other time in our history. So while some are hoping that realignment stalls a year or two so we can win a few football games, I think the time is NOW!! You never know what our leadership will look like in a year or two.

Edited August 15, 2011 by TIgreen01

[houstonmeangreen]

This scares the crap out of me, too. But what gives me hope is thinking of what our leadership looks like now. For years and years we had leadership with little to no political ties. This is where Lee Jackson, Lane Rawlins and Bill Lively come in (not to mention our BOR). I think that UNT is better positioned, leadership-wise, than at any other time in our history. So while some are hoping that realignment stalls a year or two so we can win a few football games, I think the time is NOW!! You never know what our leadership will look like in a year or two.

While our recent hx of football is not good, this is the first time in history we have had...new and well paid top notch coaching along with a new stadium, along with an athletic fee, along with a very pro athletic admin with athletic ties and a student body who seems to want to support a football team...I was amazed at the turnout to some of the games at the dump Fouts...and I am amazed at the response to the new stadium and football program we have rec'd from supporters...all of the suites sold out...maybe 75% of the club seats sold....season tickets ups 80%...million dollar donations...20 million commitment from Apogee and a university growing by leaps and bounds. It all looks good to me and if Rawlins, RV and Dan can get in front of the right people...upper levels...we have a lot to sell at good old UNT.