It looks like it would probably be OU, Ark, and Mizzou - maybe as a concession to A&M to keep them happy? No way we could pod with LSU without including A&M.
Not sure why they’d make any concessions to A&M at this point. They were purposely kept out of the dark and tried to blow it all up the second they caught wind. UT/A&M every 4 years would be a missed opportunity for the conference and tv partners just to appease them.
Unlike the Big12, most of the other conferences try to keep their members as happy as they can. It was one of the big stories when the B12 was blowing up last time about how the B12 is run through bullying while the other conferences aim for unanimous consent even when they don't need it (often talked about in money, where the Ohio States, Michigans, Alabamas, USC's, etc don't try to demand more revenue even though they could). While the SEC *can* piss off a member (and the B12 would have no problem doing so), they generally try not to. I think they'd like to get a yes vote from A&M if they can and this is a carrot they could use. But beyond not annoying A&M, having a pod with OU, LSU, A&M, and UT would be fantastic, but it also means creating a horrible pod of Ole Miss, MissSt, Ark, and Mizzou. I'd think from a marketing standpoint, they want to split those up anyway and put two popular teams in each pod.
True but don't think they'd structure the conference a certain way just to get a yes vote from A&M, especially if they know they have the votes (which isn't certain until its done I guess). The SEC certainly keeps their teams in check and it seems that most of the schools are willing to go along with what is best for the conference. So can't see A&M trying to blow up a move that would seemingly benefit the conference sitting all that well with Sankey and the rest of the schools on board. An old SWC or Big 12 pod makes the most sense but guessing it'll come down to whether the SEC wants A&M/LSU or A&M/UT every year.
No question about it... TAMU will play UT every year. And if this thing grows into the beast I think it might, I imagine you'll have a division of playing partners that will include UT, OU, TAMU, ARK. Really, this is such an exciting move. But annoying as a TAMU fan (for now). And bittersweet as a fan of college football as a whole. UT is doing what's best for them, as they always have, but they really ****ed a lot of programs over along the way.
Just like the SEC is, as they have, always. I don't have a time machine, so I can't go back and fix what already f'ed things up and got the Big12 and CFB in general to this point...and I do feel badly for the other Big12 schools. Even Texas Tech. Now get the SEC to grab some more (4? 6?) proper schools and just set up their own football league. We'll pay the NCAA (or whatever the NCAA morphs into) to be part of it in all the other sports....there should be money available.
Playing OU, ATM, and Ark every year would be awesome. Like the old SWC years again. Add LSU, and there are tons of great games to watch.
Pretty much how I feel exactly. It's annoying that it seems like right when we are gaining our footing in the conference and nationally, UT has to come steal our thunder. But I'd be lying if I didn't say I was excited to see those mofos again every year. I do think UT is going to have to make some concessions they aren't used to making in the B12, and there may be a bit of a culture shift, but overall a move like this was inevitable for college football. The SEC is just making sure they're the ones to act first.
You think ARK will be OK getting put with all the new blood and giving up their rivarlies to Ole Miss and LSU ? I think it's gonna be UT, OU, TAMU, and Mizzou.
Shout out everyone who heeded CDC's calls to "lock in season tickets this year" because those are about to be a lot harder to get. I didn't have the guts to go to this year's home slate and now I'm out in the cold. Oh well!
Hmm... adding 2 western-er teams. Mizzou is already in the east. Not saying it cant happen, just didn't consider it because of the geography.
Plus Arkansas can restart their rivalry with Texas. I don't know enough about the history of Missouri-OU rivalry to say if it's comparable.
Sure but people would still pay to watch them play. It's one of the oldest rivalries around. Nebraska F'ed up leaving the Big 12. I know they wanted out of Texas's economic shadow, but they just stepped into Ohio's shadow and they lost their most important rival in the process.
I'm guessing it's going to be left up to Arkansas to decide for themselves whether they want to maintain their rivalry with LSU & Ole Miss or swap. A rivalry that has been dormant for 30~ years probably won't take precedence over a live one that has been going for 50+, but hey, maybe they want more exposure to Texas recruits.
They want more money. Texas is the Connor McGregor of college football. Even when they aren't good, people will pay to watch them lose. Texas also has the best travelling alumnus around and they spend tons of money. I remember reading an article about every hotel being booked up in Oxford Mississippi when Texas came into town.
That seems silly that the chamber of commerce would drive these choices but if it's in Arkansas' hands exclusively who knows.
