A couple of weeks ago, Orlando Sentinel sports writer Mike Bianchi wrote that the SEC should replace dead weight like Mississippi State and Ole Miss with teams such as South and Central Florida universities.
Bianchi's argument is that MSU and Ole Miss bring nothing to the SEC, and the USF and UCF would be great additions because they are in Florida and in or near major TV markets. He also wonders why USF and UCF are condemned for not being in the right place at the right time like Ole Miss and MSU were 100 years ago.
Speaking just about TV markets and the ability to add more money to television contracts, Bianchi has a point. But speaking of playing in the toughest conference in America, USF and UCF would be even bigger dead weight.
UCF did win a BCS game as part of the newly formed but weak American Athletic Conference in the wake of the break-up of the Big East. In recent history, UCF beat the Georgia Bulldogs 10-6 in the Liberty Bowl in 2010, but the team lost 3-10 to MSU in 2007's Liberty Bowl.
As a member of AAC, UCF was a solid team and did beat Louisville, who will join the ACC next season.
Over the last three seasons, South Florida football has been a dumpster fire. The Bulls couldn't even win a championship in the weak Big East with their best finish being tied for third in 2005 and 2007. Last season, USF finished 2-10 in the last place of the AAC and would have no chance of even competing on the field in the SEC.
USF has gone 10-26 in weaker conferences the last three seasons, while MSU went 22-17 and Ole Miss went 17-21 over the same period.
It's unknown if USF or UCF could do the same in the basketball-weak SEC. UCF never even won a tournament game and USF never made it past the round of 32. UCF didn't make the tournament after leaving the Atlantic Sun and joining Conference USA.
Adding UCF and USF would give the SEC more attention from major television markets and a bigger foothold in recruiting hotbed of Florida, but the Knights and Bulls would be as big or bigger dead weight on the field of play.