Online Now 3251

The Blue Board

We aren't just committed to college football; we're early enrolling in it.

On this Board 2142
Record: 7394 (2/14/2012)

Online now 3182
Record: 18710 (2/25/2012)

Boards ▾

The Blue Board

We aren't just committed to college football; we're early enrolling in it.

247Rumors

College football scuttlebutt and scoop- powered by Football Rumor Mill

The Green Board

Where the madness isn't just in March.

Big Ten Board (Beta)

Reply

SEC / Big 12 Sugar Bowl agreement

  • thejumper5 said...

    I've read that the conferences will open up the process of searching for a site for this game. They will seek to control the process and take away control from the bowl commissioners. Andy Staples suggested on Twitter that they will be open minded about location and named San Antonio, Dallas, St. Louis, Atlanta, Miami, Houston, and Kansas City as possibilities. Obviously those cities aren't all on equal footing, but if the conferences are willing to look away from current major bowl sites, I would think that Dallas, New Orleans, Atlanta and Houston have the best shot at the game. It has also been suggested that the game will rotate from site to site.

    Knowing how Slive moves he already has the agreement in place with Big 12 to bid the site out to the highest bidder like the Super Bowl.

    This post was edited by AtlGator19 on 5/18/2012 at 12:54 PM

    signature image signature image signature image

    AtlGator19

  • SEC could have checkmate if they invited VA tech and FSU. Destroy the acc and destroy the big 12s expansion plans.

    signature image signature image

    Status

  • Status said...

    SEC could have checkmate if they invited VA tech and FSU. Destroy the acc and destroy the big 12s expansion plans.

    that wouldn't destroy anything. The big10 and big12 would divide up the rest of the ACC they wanted and everyone is happy..except schools like Wake and BC who get left out

    Coastal Eer

  • Coastal Eer said...

    that wouldn't destroy anything. The big10 and big12 would divide up the rest of the ACC they wanted and everyone is happy..except schools like Wake and BC who get left out

    I don't think the big 12 would want any of those acc schools without FSU.

    Clemson? Gt? Maryland? That's just adding schools for the sake of expanding. Not necessary.

    signature image signature image

    Status

  • Here's the games this agreement would have produced going back to '96...

    ■1996: Texas (Big 12 Champion) vs. Alabama (runner-up, Florida to national title game)
    ■1997: Texas A&M (runner-up, Nebraska to national title game) vs. Tennessee (SEC Champion)
    ■1998: Texas A&M (Big 12 Champion) vs. Mississippi State (runner-up, Tennessee to national title game)
    ■1999: Nebraska (Big 12 Champion) vs. Alabama (SEC Champion)
    ■2000: Kansas State (runner-up, Oklahoma to national title game) vs. Florida (SEC Champion)
    ■2001: Colorado (Big 12 Champion) vs. LSU (SEC Champion)
    ■2002: Oklahoma (Big 12 Champion) vs. Georgia (SEC Champion)
    ■2003: Kansas State* (Big 12 Champion) vs. Georgia (runner-up, LSU to national title game)
    ■2004: Colorado (runner-up, Oklahoma to national title game) vs. Auburn (SEC Champion)
    ■2005: Colorado (runner-up, Texas to national title game) vs. Georgia (SEC Champion)
    ■2006: Oklahoma (Big 12 Champion) vs. Arkansas (runner-up, Florida to national title game)
    ■2007: Oklahoma (Big 12 Champion) vs. Tennessee (runner-up, LSU to national title game)
    ■2008: Missouri (runner-up, Oklahoma to national title game) vs. Alabama (runner-up, Florida to national title game)
    ■2009: Nebraska (runner-up, Texas to national title game) vs. Florida (runner-up, Alabama to national title game)
    ■2010: Oklahoma (Big 12 Champion) vs. South Carolina (runner-up, Auburn to national title game)
    ■2011: Oklahoma State (Big 12 Champion) vs. Georgia (second runner-up at 7-1, LSU and Alabama to national title game)

    SEC / Big 12 Bowl Alliance: Here's The Games The Agreement Would Have Produced - Around the Loop - SB Nation Houston

    News, analysis and opinion from the fan perspective.

    houston.sbnation.com
    signature image

    devidee

  • Status said...

    I don't think the big 12 would want any of those acc schools without FSU.

    Clemson? Gt? Maryland? That's just adding schools for the sake of expanding. Not necessary.

    From a market perspective, the BIG XII would be interested in FSU, UNC, MIAMI, VT....probably in that order.

    signature image signature image signature image

    MrBlonde

  • His dream to 16 teams would be VT and Okie but with this new deal and playoff coming I think the SEC stays pat. Clem and FSU would be logical from geographical footprint but Slive wants markets not just brands/schools. Maybe ND jumping to the Big 12 would force his had at another round of expansion.

    signature image signature image signature image

    AtlGator19

  • devidee said...

    2007: Oklahoma (Big 12 Champion) vs. Tennessee (runner-up, LSU to national title game) 2011: Oklahoma State (Big 12 Champion) vs. Georgia (second runner-up at 7-1, LSU and Alabama to national title game)

    The game would run into problems if they don't iron out some other guidelines besides (east vs west winner) bc not sure you could pass over UGA in 2007 even without playing in SEC championship game.

    And last year would have been a complete miss.

    signature image signature image signature image

    AtlGator19

  • Probably a tactical error on Slives part, if he did not want a conference champ only playoff. This really opens the door for the PAC-12 and Big-10, to say fuck all ur playoff plans and just have the winner of the Rose Bowl play the winner of this new Sugar/Cotton Bowl. The way allah intended. The meeting in June will be very interesting.

    Unbowed, Unbent, Unbroken

    MJRuffalo

  • MJRuffalo said...

    Probably a tactical error on Slives part, if he did not want a conference champ only playoff. This really opens the door for the PAC-12 and Big-10, to say fuck all ur playoff plans and just have the winner of the Rose Bowl play the winner of this new Sugar/Cotton Bowl. The way allah intended. The meeting in June will be very interesting.

    Would be like a 1 vs 2 and 3 vs 4 semifinal. Makes no sense.

    signature image signature image

    Status

  • MJRuffalo said...

    Probably a tactical error on Slives part, if he did not want a conference champ only playoff. This really opens the door for the PAC-12 and Big-10, to say fuck all ur playoff plans and just have the winner of the Rose Bowl play the winner of this new Sugar/Cotton Bowl. The way allah intended. The meeting in June will be very interesting.

    Both Big 12 and SEC want best 4 not conference playoffs. I see this agreement as more of a treaty to have each others backs.

    Big East and ACC would side with the SEC and Big 12 just because they know they could get left in the cold.

    Don't see this move as an error at all. Quite the opposite actually

    signature image

    Ichabod ●

  • Status said...

    Would be like a 1 vs 2 and 3 vs 4 semifinal. Makes no sense.

    It would change yearly. Though for the past couple of years, when the +1 has been debated, many wanted an unseeded format, then one more game. This fits in perfectly. The polls are not really accurate enough to be relied on anyway. Settle it on the field of play.

    Unbowed, Unbent, Unbroken

    MJRuffalo

  • Status, just sit back and shut up. FSU and Clemson are locked in to the Big XII now. The ball is now in Notre Dame's court. GaTech, VT, and others are on standby. You being threatened by the Big XII expansion is cute though. So forget what I said. Keep posting your inane delusional drivel.

    Black Shipley

  • Black Shipley said...

    Status, just sit back and shut up. FSU and Clemson are locked in to the Big XII now. The ball is now in Notre Dame's court. GaTech, VT, and others are on standby. You being threatened by the Big XII expansion is cute though. So forget what I said. Keep posting your inane delusional drivel.

    Every thread you post in turns to shit. All you do is post crap like this. With no due respect, you shut up.

    signature image signature image

    Status

  • Ichabod said...

    Both Big 12 and SEC want best 4 not conference playoffs. I see this agreement as more of a treaty to have each others backs.

    Big East and ACC would side with the SEC and Big 12 just because they know they could get left in the cold.

    Don't see this move as an error at all. Quite the opposite actually

    This agreement pretty much signed the death warrant for the Big East and ACC, they will have nobody's backs, and if they did, nobody would care as they are no longer relevant to the discussion.

    I predict that after the June meeting, the BCS is dead. The winner of the Rose Bowl will play the winner of this bowl, at some rotating site. ACC teams will scramble to find a home in the other conferences. These new 4 conferences, will then have a 5-10K a year stipend for football players, and they may simply choose to break away from the NCAA, though I do not think that will happen at the upcoming meeting.

    Unbowed, Unbent, Unbroken

    MJRuffalo

  • MJRuffalo said...

    This agreement pretty much signed the death warrant for the Big East and ACC, they will have nobody's backs, and if they did, nobody would care as they are no longer relevant to the discussion.

    I predict that after the June meeting, the BCS is dead. The winner of the Rose Bowl will play the winner of this bowl, at some rotating site. ACC teams will scramble to find a home in the other conferences. These new 4 conferences, will then have a 5-10K a year stipend for football players, and they may simply choose to break away from the NCAA, though I do not think that will happen at the upcoming meeting.

    The BCS as we know it is done when the contract is up but it will still be the driving force behind the playoff.

    signature image signature image signature image

    AtlGator19

  • Status

    If I wanted my own comeback, I wouldve wiped it off your mother's chin.

    Black Shipley

  • MJRuffalo said...

    This agreement pretty much signed the death warrant for the Big East and ACC, they will have nobody's backs, and if they did, nobody would care as they are no longer relevant to the discussion.

    I predict that after the June meeting, the BCS is dead. The winner of the Rose Bowl will play the winner of this bowl, at some rotating site. ACC teams will scramble to find a home in the other conferences. These new 4 conferences, will then have a 5-10K a year stipend for football players, and they may simply choose to break away from the NCAA, though I do not think that will happen at the upcoming meeting.

    I would agree with this except that the Big East and ACC still have votes when it comes down to it.

    You could argue that they would vote either way but I agree this is just another step to superconferences

    signature image

    Ichabod ●

  • Black Shipley said...

    Status

    If I wanted my own comeback, I wouldve wiped it off your mother's chin.

    Can you 2 just PM your petty insults to each other while we discuss the ish that went down

    signature image

    Ichabod ●

  • AtlGator19 said...

    The BCS as we know it is done when the contract is up but it will still be the driving force behind the playoff.

    The BCS will cease to exist in 2014 IMO. This is really good news for football fans though, as this will end the Poll era. No need for polls anymore as we can simply have the champions of these 2 major Bowls play each other for the national championship. Much better to be decided on the field of play, than to be decided by people who do not even watch the games.

    Unbowed, Unbent, Unbroken

    MJRuffalo

  • Ichabod said...

    I would agree with this except that the Big East and ACC still have votes when it comes down to it.

    You could argue that they would vote either way but I agree this is just another step to superconferences

    Votes for what exactly? They can't force the hand of the PAC-12, or Big-10, or any other conference for that matter. As I said, I believe the BCS will cease to exist and thus ending the relationship between the 6 conferences that comprised it. The Big East and ACC are relegated to Conf USA status. The member schools of the ACC will want out asap, so they are certainly not going to attempt to rock the boat of any conference that they want to go to.

    Unbowed, Unbent, Unbroken

    MJRuffalo

  • MJRuffalo said...

    The BCS will cease to exist in 2014 IMO. This is really good news for football fans though, as this will end the Poll era. No need for polls anymore as we can simply have the champions of these 2 major Bowls play each other for the national championship. Much better to be decided on the field of play, than to be decided by people who do not even watch the games.

    At the same time it sucks for the smaller schools in CFB. You'd have to think they come up with a scenario where they get a chance to play.

    Or better yet this might open the +1 scenario where they play the bowl games and BCS games as normal then vote afterwards on a national championship game

    signature image

    Ichabod ●

  • Ichabod said...

    Can you 2 just PM your petty insults to each other while we discuss the ish that went down

    I was trying to do that before that child interjected himself in here.

    Funny enough I saw on twitter the big east would be open to an acc deal like this one. They are panicking.

    signature image signature image

    Status

  • Ichabod said...

    At the same time it sucks for the smaller schools in CFB. You'd have to think they come up with a scenario where they get a chance to play.

    Or better yet this might open the +1 scenario where they play the bowl games and BCS games as normal then vote afterwards on a national championship game

    It does suck for the smaller schools, but they were never realistically going to have a chance at a national title anyway.

    120 schools is too many for the same division, and as we know they were in the same division in name only. Buffalo and Idaho are never going to be able to compete with USC and Alabama. Why not simply streamline it on paper as it is in reality?

    Unbowed, Unbent, Unbroken

    MJRuffalo

  • MJRuffalo said...

    It does suck for the smaller schools, but they were never realistically going to have a chance at a national title anyway.

    120 schools is too many for the same division, and as we know they were in the same division in name only. Buffalo and Idaho are never going to be able to compete with USC and Alabama. Why not simply streamline it on paper as it is in reality?

    Because unfortunately we live in a society where everything has to be fair in sports. The BCS may not be fair but it leaves the option for a smaller school to get in

    signature image

    Ichabod ●

Football Recruiting
Basketball Recruiting
Features
Resources
Connect

247Sports In partnership with CBS Sports