Monday morning update

Well, so much for an easygoing mid-June in these parts. South Carolina’s baseball team is headed to Omaha, and the SEC could be on the verge of adding a new member.

Here’s the latest we know about potential expansion:

- Texas A&M remains on the front burner, according to all reports. The Houston Chronicle has a report saying the College Station, Tex., school has become “starry-eyed” for the SEC, and sees itself as a better fit for that league than the Pac-10.

The board of regents at Texas A&M could meet as soon as Thursday to take a vote on the matter. (The school has to provide three days’ public notice, and hadn’t done so as of the end of the weekend.)

- Meanwhile, reports are mixed on whether Texas A&M turned down a Pac-10 invite over the weekend. Pac-10 commissioner Larry Scott was traveling all over the Big 12 dispensing in-person invites, and presumably met with each of the five schools his league will get one: Texas, Texas Tech, Texas A&M, Oklahoma and Oklahoma State.

[...]

Texas A&M

It sure seems, based on various reports, that Texas A&M would like to join the SEC, and the feeling is reciprocated by the league. The question is whether the Aggies will ultimately pull the trigger, or feel the pull of Texas and go with their main rival to the Pac-10.

We shall see. But with the SEC potentially close to adding a new member, here are the bare facts about Texas A&M:

Distance from College Station to Columbia: 1,073 miles (16 hours, 48 minutes, according to Mapquest.)

Distance from College Station to Fayetteville, Ark.: 518 miles (8 hours, 22 minutes)

Enrollment: Approximately 48,000 (seventh-largest in U.S.)

National academic rank in U.S. News: 61 (which would be fourth in SEC behind Vanderbilt, Florida and Georgia).

Recent football bowl appearances: 2009 Independence Bowl (lost to Georgia), 2007 Alamao Bowl (lost to Penn State), 2006 Holiday Bowl (lost to California), 2005 Cotton Bowl (lost to Tennessee).

Last top 25 football finish: 1999 (23 in AP, 20 in coaches)

Best men’s basketball NCAA tournament performance: Sweet 16, three times.

Last year in men’s basketball: 24-10, earned No. 5 seed in NCAA tournament, lost in second round to Purdue.

Last baseball College World Series appearance: 1999 (four total)

Recent baseball performance: Four straight NCAA tournament appearances, two Super Regionals (2007 and 2008)

Sears Cup (all-sports) ranking: 13^th, as of June 3.

Expansion errors in thinking

Ten misconceptions about expansion, as we sit here on Thursday of what has been and will continue to be a busy time:

1. The Texas schools HAVE to stay together. They don’t. They WANT to. But there’s nothing legally preventing them from splintering.
2. The Virginia schools have to stay together. They also don’t. A few years ago Virginia Tech wiggled into the ACC because then-Gov. Mark Warner stepped in, but only because he was worried the Big East was on the verge of getting dissolved and didn’t want Virginia Tech left out. If, say, Va. Tech were interested in the SEC, it wouldn’t have to bring Virginia with it – unless it looked like the ACC was going to implode, and the current governor stepped in again.
3. The ACC is going to implode. Too many historical and other ties to each other. The Tobacco Road schools are closely tied together, minimizing any chance North Carolina could be swayed to go to the SEC.
4. There’s a secret cabal in the SEC that will gang together and veto in-state rivals. Georgia, South Carolina, Florida and Kentucky will not all agree to veto the admittance of Georgia Tech, Clemson, Miami, Florida State and Louisville.
5. Every report has validity. Remember the Kansas City radio report last month that the Big Ten was about to invite five schools, and which led Sportscenter? Now we have a Kansas City TV report that Texas and Texas A&M are headed to the Big Ten. (What is it about Kansas City?) There was also an Indianapolis radio report that Rutgers and Maryland were headed to the Big Ten.
6. The SEC is sitting back and waiting. Mike Slive and his people are not publicly saying anything, which is wise, but trust me, behind the scenes they MUST be gauging the interest of various schools. That doesn’t mean the league will expand, it just means Slive and company are doing their due diligence.
7. This is much ado about nothing. If you still believe this, well, climb out of your cave. Colorado already proved that, and Nebraska will in a bit. There’s still a chance the Big Ten and Pac-10 will end up staying at 12, the Big 12 will stay intact by adding TCU and SMU, and the other three big leagues will stay as is. But don’t count on it.
8. If the SEC expands, market size will be paramount. Look, the league isn’t making money hand over fist based on the Nielsen shares in Tuscaloosa, Starkville, Oxford, Fayetteville, etc. If anything, the league would love to expand its footprint westward, hence the interest in the Texas schools. Otherwise, any attraction to Georgia Tech, for instance, would be based on its strength as a program, and not the Atlanta market. There are more Georgia Bulldog fans in Atlanta anyway.
9. USC will definitely oppose Clemson’s entry. So far there’s no evidence it will. (And read more from Joe Person on this in Friday’s paper.)
10. The SEC will definitely come calling at Clemson, which will definitely be interested. Again, we don’t know.

Nebraska and Clemson

Will Nebraska decide later this week to leave the Big 12, possibly setting in motion some major dominoes that could result in Clemson becoming a candidate to join the SEC?

It’s possible, though not likely, as I wrote in today’s paper.

(And allow me to clear up something: It’s NOT clear what USC’s feelings on the matter of Clemson’s entry would be. I did not originally write that, though that’s how it appeared in the paper, but it’s been fixed in the online version I just linked.)

According to the Omaha World-Journal, Nebraska could decide by Friday to join the Big Ten. Interestingly, that’s actually coming from another Big 12 chancellor, although Nebraska athletics director Tom Osbourne also said in a Tuesday radio interview that “before too long” this issue will be “put to bed.”

Of course, there were also reports Tuesday that Colorado’s board would decide that night to join the Pac 10, but it only discussed its options. All that’s clear is that events are unfolding quickly, and it’s a very fluid situation. Stay tuned.

Bombs from Finebaum

As new expansion talk swirls, the eminent Paul Finebaum writes in the Mobile Register that the SEC’s most recent adds haven’t added anything. Basically, South Carolina and Arkansas have been “a drag” both on and off the field.

He writes:

What does this prove? Well, it clearly shows the SEC lost badly when Texas and Florida State slipped away 20 years ago. Especially when you consider their population footprint — Texas ranks No.2 and Florida is No. 4.

As for Arkansas and South Carolina, have they brought anything to the table? Not much, unless you considering taking up space a major accomplishment.

I’ll let the rest of you send your friendly cards and letters of disagreement to Mr. Finebaum disagreeing. I’ll just add one brief point.

At a minimum, what USC and Arkansas have brought to the SEC is their simple presence, which allowed the league to get to 12 and hold a football championship game. That event has helped boost the national profile of the league, even if USC has been in it and Arkansas was shellacked in its three appearances.

Of course Texas and Florida State would have been bigger, more high-profile schools. But they said no. Absent that, what was the SEC going to do, invite East Carolina and South Florida? (Apologies to all alums of those two fine institutions.)

So to say Arkansas and USC have been a total waste for the SEC? Seems a bit much.

Texas off the table?

Amid all the potential seismic activity in conference realignment, this nugget has emerged:

Texas is not an option for the SEC, according to several reports.

There’s this almost throwaway line from Kevin Sherrington of the Dallas Morning News:

Texas has what it wants most: leverage. The Big Ten wants Texas. The Pac-10 wants Texas. The SEC would love Texas, too, but that’s not happening.

And Stewart Mendel of SI.com offered this explainer in his column on Friday:

Texas isn’t necessarily looking to flock West — but it almost certainly would if Nebraska bolts to the Big Ten. (Texas reportedly has little interest in the SEC, mainly for academic reasons.)

Meanwhile, if you need a good evaluation of what’s going on with the Pac 10-Big 12 stuff, here’s a good one from The Oklahoman. As Mendel mentioned, Nebraska is the key. Missouri is as good as gone to the Big Ten, it seems, and whether Nebraska follows suit will be watched closely by Texas, Oklahoma and company. Writes Berry Tramel:

This is about Nebraska. Everybody cares about Nebraska. Nebraska helps make the league go. Without Nebraska, Texas’ and Oklahoma’s  enthusiasm for the Big 12 wanes.

Which is why I believe Beebe gave Nebraska chancellor Harvey Perlman a deadline Friday. Stake your claim. Are you with the Big 12 or not? Are you staying or are you waffling?

Now all this doesn’t mean Texas couldn’t change its mind and join the SEC. The cash cow in Austin can name its league, and maybe after all this deliberating it decides the SEC and its ability to print money is a good fit, academics or not.

But at the moment, it doesn’t look likely.

Pac-10 and Clemson

Everyone assumed the first big domino to fall in conference expansion, if any fell at all, would come from the Big Ten. And who knows, that still may be the case.

But if reports Thursday night are correct, it appears the first salvo is being fired from the West Coast. According to the Texas Rivals.com site, the Pac-10 was preparing this weekend to invite six Big 12 teams – Texas, Texas A&M, Texas Tech, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State and Colorado. This was backed up a few hours later by Colorado athletics director Mike Bohn telling the Boulder Daily Camera that those six schools did indeed expect an invitation.

So … wow.

If this happens – and it remains a big if – it could very well have repercussions for the SEC and South Carolina’s arch-rival. It’s not hard to predict:

- The Pac-10 expands to 14 or 16, depending on which of those six schools accept. The Big Ten then reacts, and gets Nebraska and Missouri (even more eager to leave a disintegrating Big 12) along with some Big East schools.

- So now two other super-conferences have been created. The SEC can stand pat, or answer – but the main target, Texas, would likely be off the table. So what does it do to get to 14 or 16? It looks to those oft-mentioned southern-most ACC teams: Florida State, Miami, Georgia Tech and … drum roll … Clemson.

Not saying this will happen. We still need to watch the Pac-1o situation, which is interesting because if the initial report is true Texas A&M and others may not accept. Which means the Pac-10 has broken the first rule of expansion, which is not let it get out that it’s inviting schools without knowing they will accept.

The Pac-10 is meeting this weekend. Watch to see what happens. If the reports are true, we will be in for a very eventful set of falling dominoes.

Nope

Regarding the previous post … Not yet, and maybe not ever.

As Joe Person reports today, the SEC met and decided not to change the seeding procedures for the men’s basketball tournament. They had considered not giving byes based on division finish, which as we know last season forced two Eastern teams that had better overall records and swept the West to still have to play an extra game.

But tournament re-seeding may still be on the table for the future. It just wasn’t done in Destin.

It appears the league didn’t even consider eradicating divisional play. That’s not surprising. While it would probably help a team like South Carolina from a competitive standpoint, it makes scheduling easier, and helps build up rivalries.

Even a league like the ACC, the richest in tradition and probably overall quality (five of the past 10 national champions) has found problems with a 12-team, non-division schedule. Other than the two teams you play every season, no one can quite keep track of the rotation and who they play in what season. The SEC men’s hoops arrangements makes for a clean setup, for whatever that’s worth.

Divisional play changes?

In the four seasons I’ve covered South Carolina men’s basketball, I’ve always noted that the Gamecocks would be better off if they played in the SEC West, or at least didn’t have to play the brutal East division teams twice every year.

Could there be relief on the way?

One of the items on the agenda at this week’s SEC meetings is divisional play in basketball. The great Tony Barnhart of the AJC doesn’t expect the SEC to go the way of the ACC – which has no divisions in basketball – but there could be a change in SEC tournament seeding.

Last season, as Barnhart points out, the top four teams in the East went undefeated against the West, yet the top two teams in the West got byes into the tournament quarterfinals. That seems a bit unfair, no?

An option on the table is to seed the tournament by best league record regardless of division. That would at least be more fair to teams like Tennessee and Florida, which last year had to play an extra game despite dominating the West.

South Carolina, on the other hand, would probably welcome just blowing up the division format. While the Gamecocks have just one winning league record in the past 12 years – going 10-6 in Darrin Horn’s first year – they have done much better against the West.

[...]

Great expansion explainer

Technically I’m on vacation right now, but the ongoing conference expansion issue is so fascinating, it doesn’t interrupt the break to read and blog about it.

A big question among SEC faithful has been a central one: Why does the SEC need to act if the Big Ten goes to 14 or 16 teams? Tony Barnhart at the Atlanta Journal-Constitution has a good blog up Monday morning that gets to the core of it.

Barnhart lists a lot of the reasons expansion could as much as double the income of Big Ten schools. Then he adds:

What if every Big Ten school is suddenly making $35 million a year and the SEC is still at $17 million?  Over ten years that’s $180 million more per school that is invested. Would that not make a competitive difference over a decade?

That is why the SEC can’t ignore what the Big Ten may do.

Basically, Big Ten schools could gain a huge competitive advantage if they can afford to pay their coaches and administrators much more money than the SEC, build huge facilities and do all the other important off-field stuff. Eventually, off-field money = on-field results. Just ask Nick Saban and Alabama.

Hence the need for the SEC to keep up.

But that’s why SEC expansion would almost certainly just bring in big-name schools (Texas, Texas A&M, perhaps the four southern ACC schools). And if commissioner Mike Slive does decide to invite schools, it will likely only happen after the Big Ten makes its moves, or it’s clear what the Big Ten will do.