Unconquered

i wont happen, it would get vetoed. some SEC schools have an agreement with each other to all veto any of those teams rivals if there is a chance they might join the SEC. basically florida, georgia, USC would join together and veto FSU, GT and clemson from joining. i also remember hearing that bama and auburn would also veto it.

BS.

UF sponsored us for years to get into the SEC. We actually made them look bad with our back door bid with the ACC.

Both school's admin don't hate eachother the same as a typical fan.

This is all about the financials. See the other post about the FSU and the budget. We have to have the finances to keep up.

I won't buy the Big 12 talk until an FSU source starts reporting it. I'd love to leave with Miami, Clemson, and Georgia Tech, though. Without Miami, I don't want to leave the ACC unless we go to the SEC. I don't want to lose the Miami or UF match ups.

It would be idiotic If FSU was presented the opportunity to go to the Big 12 without Miami and didn't. Miami is a sinking ship. Their athletic department continues to dwindle and if they aren't already, they will be irrelevant soon. Florida means much more to FSU than Miami. I understand there is tradition, but tradition can be sacrificed if it meant a huge increase in revenue, which FSU absolutely needs. Not only can FSU survive without Miami, but they can thrive without them if put in the right situation.

I agree BUT did anyone hear about Pitt or Cuse?

My gut tells me that in the future it will be more quiet then BOOM compared to the SEC's poorly handled sagas

TAMU, Nebraska, Colorado, and Missouri couldn't wait to get away. Why is that? What has changed where FSU wouldn't hate it as much as those teams? I was under the impression their reasons were much more than money

Bingo. It was all about "Texas" (University of). Still is.

The ONLY chance FSU has to avoid those demons is to get equality in the conference set in stone with contracts, etc.

The SEC has equality. The ACC has equality. So do the PAC and BIG10. But the Big12 blew up because of the lack of it.

By Equality, I mean voting power, money distribuion, etc. Sure, just like in any "club" there are influences... but at the end of the day, everyone should get same dollars (revenue) and same voting power, etc etc.

Texas isn't about equality, never has been. Texas is about Texas. So far, they've gotten away with it... until Texas A&M called their bluff and bolted. Sure, the Big12 has "rebounded" in sorts.... but Texas is still Texas.

I'll take the $30 million, even if its a percentage of Texas' tv revenue.

I agree with your point.... but....

... the SEC didn't handle that situation poorly at all.

That whole thing with Texas A&M was about Texas A&M verus Texas, and the power struggle in the conference, about Texas breaking conference rules, then NCAA rules (high school on Longhorn Network) and about revenue sharing, etc. Nebraska got "fed up" with it, and totally pissed off and just walked. They got out quiet because they're a non-Texas school, didn't have a "sister/brother" school....and the conference wasn't in jeopardy at all. Colorado left because they ALWAYS preferred the PAC, and got their chance... but they agreed with Nebraska's reasons too.

Texas A&M? Now that's a fight. Texas A&M leaving caused the conference to go into guaranteed chaos - and that it did. Texas used it's b|tch in Baylor (who sits just a few miles off Austin) to fight Texas A&M over it, after Texas A&M called Texas's bluff... then boom, a monster fight happened.

Did Texas threaten to never play TAMU again? Yup and that one, they actually followed through (for now).
Did Texas threaten to overpower TAMU in the state legislature and take away some of their share of the land grant money? Sure did. (failed)

Texas went hog-wild over it, and played every mean trick in the book.

What did Texas A&M do? Nothing, they just left. Before leaving, they even got a guarantee (in the SEC contract) that they could always play Texas if they wanted to AND it could be on Thanksgiving.

So why did the SEC handle this poorly? They didn't. Actually, they shocked me and handled it pretty damn professionally. They didn't come to TAMU, TAMU came to them... and they "refused" to "poach". The ACC poached the Big East, but you don't hear about that because nobody cared/cares about those schools..... but breaking up a conference that basically consists of the whole state of Texas? Now that's a fight. And it was. And still is.

I have no inside info.. but I can't see a situation where Miami doesn't replace VT in your dream scenario.

ALSO, while it's fun on message boards to dream up "the perfect conference".... keep in mind that even the SEC didn't want to bring in too many power teams to go with Texas A&M when they had Texas A&M coming. Another reason why Missouri was perfect fit in that slot.

In a dream scenario, you want a perfect balance of having a crop of great schools that rotate the power to go along with a group of competative ones with a couple of weak academic ones to feed on. That keeps you from having all of your teams beat themselves up too bad cause everyone to have 3 losses due to parity. It allows your SOS (schedule strength) to remain high thanks to those middle teams... and it allows you a few "off weeks" by having a few creampuffs in your conference.

When Texas A&M was "in" the SEC, the SEC looked hard at OU... but OU was getting a lot of internal resistance by some SEC teams due to the simple fact of adding another powerhouse to an already strong conference.

Truth.

The only REAL rivals we have in the ACC are Clemson and Miami. If we can take them with us then the hell with the freaking ACC, what's the point?? And if GT is the 4th, wow, what a bonus that would be. Baseball with Texas, OU, Clemson, Miami and FSU would have to be the best in the nation as well..