Originally Posted by BuckeyeRed27
I'm sure Missouri wants to join the Big 10, but I don't believe that feeling is mutual. I don't think Missouri is the SECs preferred choice, but is probably the path of least resistence.
Are Army and Navy real possiblities? I would think they are behind several other schools, but I could be wrong.
The thought process is strengthen the government influence card. You add those schools for football in hopes that you can prevent the loss of the bid and pr that these young guys are good enough to serve for the military but you're saying they aren't good enough to play for a championship?
Looking back the Big East really needed to do a couple things IMO.
1 Let the ACC take who they wanted to begin with. Outside of the mythical tv set stupidity what has/did Syracuse or BC add? Virginia Tech has been the ONLY thing keeping ACC relevant in football the last 5 years or so.
2 Everyone talks about adding tv sets but what has been SEC's motis operendi? Quality programs and quality on field teams.
The Big East should have gone to at least 10 teams immediately after the raid. You were going to be dealing (tv wise) from a spot of weakness regardless so take some programs who put quality teams on the field and have pretty good upside in hopes they can add value to the next tv deal.
Still add Louisville, USF, and Cincy (which got them back to 8) but also add at least 2 of TCU, Houston, ECU, or UCF. Each of those schools while not adding a lot to the immediate value of the Big East could have developed into something more with time and the recruiting resources of the aq.