The best thing that could happen to the new C7 conference is UNC goes to to the B1G. Then Miami, Virginia, Fla State, Clemson etc all jump to the SEC and B12.
Should this happen, it opens the door to ND and possibly BC joining us (if BC can find a football home).
How realistic is this?
While were at it, maybe duke will abandon football and join also.
I don't want any schools with football. If we care about the ACC blowing up it should be BC they are a better BBall conference than we will be.
If that happens, we would then have 4 super conferences go 16 schools. Would the break away from NCAA. Rest of us would be on our own I'll take a pass.
Honestly, I don't care anymore. Let them do whatever they want, I feel secure in our future, which was the main concern all along.
Quote from: brewcity77 on December 16, 2012, 01:36:29 PM
Honestly, I don't care anymore. Let them do whatever they want, I feel secure in our future, which was the main concern all along.
This. Now that we're on the path to stability I no longer have a rooting interest.
No. I want the realignment madness to end. It's only made college athletics less palatable.
There will be more stability without football playing members.
Quote from: 4everwarriors on December 16, 2012, 01:52:57 PM
There will be more stability without football playing members.
Absolutely. Why get ourselves in a position where we have to worry about this crap in another 10 years?
Quote from: AnotherMU84 on December 16, 2012, 01:23:18 PM
The best thing that could happen to the new C7 conference is UNC goes to to the B1G. Then Miami, Virginia, Fla State, Clemson etc all jump to the SEC and B12.
Should this happen, it opens the door to ND and possibly BC joining us (if BC can find a football home).
How realistic is this?
Please explain why you think this is a good thing, let alone one we should root for.
My mother told me never to wish ill on anyone.
Quote from: ChicosBailBonds on December 16, 2012, 02:23:32 PM
Please explain why you think this is a good thing, let alone one we should root for.
Because we could pick up a high profile school in ND. (They are essentially a non-football school)
Quote from: AnotherMU84 on December 16, 2012, 03:37:05 PM
Because we could pick up a high profile school in ND. (They are essentially a non-football school)
Wait, what?
There may not be a school in the country - at least outside the state of Alabama - that is less non-football than Notre Dame.
Quote from: Pakuni on December 16, 2012, 03:42:50 PM
Wait, what?
There may not be a school in the country - at least outside the state of Alabama - that is less non-football than Notre Dame.
ND is independent in football. They will always be independent in football. They are NOT a football member of the ACC. They were not a football member of the Big East. Their conference affiliation is made without consideration of football.
Pakuni, you knew all this, why did I have to explain it to you?
Quote from: AnotherMU84 on December 16, 2012, 03:46:14 PM
ND is independent in football. They will always be independent in football. They are NOT a football member of the ACC. They were not a football member of the Big East. Their conference affiliation is made without consideration of football.
Pakuni, you knew all this, why did I have to explain it to you?
As long as Notre Dame football exists, so does the possibility that they'll eventually wind up in a conference. there may come a time where joining the Big ? is better for ND, competitively and financially, than remaining independent. Never say never.
It's arguably worth taking the chance to bring them into this new conference, but let's not pretend it's not always a looming possibility. Football will drive all future athletics decisions made by ND.
Quote from: Anottopic=34920.msg428984#msg428984 date=1355693825
Because we could pick up a high profile school in ND. (They are essentially a non-football school)
The ACC is currently making decisions to appease FSU and Clemson. If they leave, what makes you think the ACC is going to continue to make decisions about membership based on football? If schools like Duke and Syracuse are in that conference (and as long as they have 12 football members), dont you think they could potentially make a run at Georgetown? And maybe SJU? Never say never. So, it would be preferable if the ACC sticks together and option doesnt get consideration.
Also, BC has the largest athletic department in the ACC. They simply couldnt fit it in the new conference. Even Notre Dame's athletic department is much larger than any of the other schools. I dont ever see them leaving football schools.
Quote from: honkytonk on December 16, 2012, 04:07:03 PM
The ACC is currently making decisions to appease FSU and Clemson. If they leave, what makes you think the ACC is going to continue to make decisions about membership based on football?
Football drives the bus. Football makes the money.
If FSU and Clemson leave and the ACC decides to make decision based on Basketball ... Miami, UNC, Virginia, BC and a lot of the others schools will look to jump. Basketball does not makes enough money to be a deciding factor.
No...we need stability "above" us.
Quote from: AnotherMU84 on December 16, 2012, 04:12:04 PM
Football drives the bus. Football makes the money.
If FSU and Clemson leave and the ACC decides to make decision based on Basketball ... Miami, UNC, Virginia, BC and a lot of the others schools will look to jump. Basketball does not makes enough money to be a deciding factor.
In your OP, you made the assumption that these schools were gone anyways.... The BE died because too much garbage was added. With Duke and Wake and Cuse and BC and UL and UConn in charge, I could definitely see at least Georgetown getting added.
Quote from: The Sultan of South Wayne on December 16, 2012, 04:14:59 PM
No...we need stability "above" us.
Wrong, we need as big a TV deal as possible. That will ensure the maximum possible TV coverage which dominates recruiting. ND helps increase the TV deal.
If the ACC starts coming apart, FSU, Clemson, Miami leave, they are leaving because the SEC and the B12 have larger TV contracts and they get more money. It is that simple.
If these schools leave, the ACC will most likely replace them with UConn, Cincy and USF. With the ACC already having 'Cuse Pitt and Louisville, it is the football schools of the Big East all over again. This conference will not get as good a TV deal that the current configuration gets. The ACC is watering itself down and ND, as a non-football school, might reconsider.
Quote from: honkytonk on December 16, 2012, 04:22:17 PM
In your OP, you made the assumption that these schools were gone anyways.... The BE died because too much garbage was added. With Duke and Wake and Cuse and BC and UL and UConn in charge, I could definitely see at least Georgetown getting added.
How does GU improve their football TV deal? Answer, they do not and Virginia will not stand for it.
Quote from: AnotherMU84 on December 16, 2012, 04:24:25 PM
How does GU improve their football TV deal? Answer, they do not and Virginia will not stand for it.
Again, if you actually read your original post, you made the assumption that Virginia (and all the other major fball schools currently in the ACC) were ALREADY gone. Jesus.
Quote from: AnotherMU84 on December 16, 2012, 04:22:51 PM
Wrong, we need as big a TV deal as possible. That will ensure the maximum possible TV coverage which dominates recruiting. ND helps increase the TV deal.
If the ACC starts coming apart, FSU, Clemson, Miami leave, they are leaving because the SEC and the B12 have larger TV contracts and they get more money. It is that simple.
If these schools leave, the ACC will most likely replace them with UConn, Cincy and USF. With the ACC already having 'Cuse Pitt and Louisville, it is the football schools of the Big East all over again. This conference will not get as good a TV deal that the current configuration gets. The ACC is watering itself down and ND, as a non-football school, might reconsider.
Or it could go in a direction you don't want it to go. Stability means no one poaches the new conference for whatever reason.
Quote from: The Sultan of South Wayne on December 16, 2012, 04:30:08 PM
Or it could go in a direction you don't want it to go. Stability means no one poaches the new conference for whatever reason.
You're fooling yourself if their will ever be stability. Stability only applies to the B1G because they make more money then anyone else (thanks to the Big Ten Network or BTN). Have you noticed no one leaves teh B1Ga nd everyone wants in. That is because of one reason, the money they make with the BTN.
You get stability by getting more money. To get more money, you have to take risks. That means ND if you can get them to reconsider. If not, the new conference is on a road to mid-major.
Quote from: honkytonk on December 16, 2012, 04:28:57 PM
Again, if you actually read your original post, you made the assumption that Virginia (and all the other major fball schools currently in the ACC) were ALREADY gone. Jesus.
You seriously think if Virginia jumps to the B1G they would consider GU? The ACC is not that stupid.
Conference realignment is made on three criteria ... football, football and ... football. If you do not have football (GU ... and their glorified club team does not count), you're not part of the decision. The ACC took Louisville over GU! What does that say? Academics, geography, and basketball are irrelevant to the decision making process. It is about new TV markets (Virginia already has the DC market) and how good your football team is. GU loses on both counts.
The ACC will take USF, Cincy and/or UConn over GU. If they thought GU made sense, they would have already taken them ... and done it years ago. Why not? Because GU does not mean more money for the ACC. Stop that is the answer.
Quote from: AnotherMU84 on December 16, 2012, 04:42:27 PM
You seriously think if Virginia jumps to the B1G they would consider GU? The ACC is not that stupid.
I didnt suggest that Georgetown would replace a football school.
The ACC would obviously shore up their football membership and make sure they have 12, first and foremost. So...twelve football schools....plus ND....plus .....Georgetown, maybe? Not an impossibility...at all.
Quote from: AnotherMU84 on December 16, 2012, 04:35:10 PM
You're fooling yourself if their will ever be stability. Stability only applies to the B1G because they make more money then anyone else (thanks to the Big Ten Network or BTN). Have you noticed no one leaves teh B1Ga nd everyone wants in. That is because of one reason, the money they make with the BTN.
You get stability by getting more money. To get more money, you have to take risks. That means ND if you can get them to reconsider. If not, the new conference is on a road to mid-major.
This is cute.
It also doesn't really matter because the ACC isnt going to blow up.
Quote from: The Sultan of South Wayne on December 16, 2012, 04:50:27 PM
This is cute.
It also doesn't really matter because the ACC isnt going to blow up.
Don't be so sure. The ACC football schools make less money that the SEC, B1G and B12. Because of this they are vulnerable, and will always be vulnerable.
They just lost Maryland.
Quote from: AnotherMU84 on December 16, 2012, 04:53:03 PM
Don't be so sure. The ACC football schools make less money that the SEC, B1G and B12. Because of this they are vulnerable, and will always be vulnerable.
They just lost Maryland.
Maryland was desperate. I don't think other schools are necessarily interested at this point.
Quote from: The Sultan of South Wayne on December 16, 2012, 04:55:43 PM
Maryland was desperate. I don't think other schools are necessarily interested at this point.
Not interested in making more money? Your comment is 180 degrees off from all the comments/stories about the ACC. That is most schools want out to the B1G (Virginia, UNC) or the SEC/B12 (Clemson, G-Tech, Miami and FSU). The hold up is some of these conferences are not sure they want them or state legislatures are putting rules on them (UNC has to take NC State and Virginia has to take Virginia Tech).
They are definitely interested as they are the next lowest grossing football major football conference now that the Big East is gone.
Quote from: AnotherMU84 on December 16, 2012, 05:01:33 PM
Not interested in making more money? Your comment is 180 degrees off from all the comments/stories about the ACC. That is most schools want out to the B1G (Virginia, UNC) or the SEC/B12 (Clemson, G-Tech, Miami and FSU). The hold up is some of these conferences are not sure they want them or state legislatures are putting rules on them (UNC has to take NC State and Virginia has to take Virginia Tech).
Find me a single report that points to this as a fact and not mere speculation. Just one.
Quote from: The Sultan of South Wayne on December 16, 2012, 05:08:24 PM
Find me a single report that points to this as a fact and not mere speculation. Just one.
So your made up speculation that you invented tonight for this thread is better than the multiple stories that say half the ACC is ready to jump.
So yes all the stories are speculation but they are much more informed than your "
Maryland was desperate. I don't think other schools are necessarily interested at this point." Their is not basis in truth in this statement.
Maryland was not desperate, they represented the DC TV market for the BTN, just like Rutgers represented the NYC TV market for the BTN. The rest want to jump because they would make more money on the B1G, SEC and/or B12.
Simple Economics
Quote from: AnotherMU84 on December 16, 2012, 06:30:13 PM
So your made up speculation that you invented tonight for this thread is better than the multiple stories that say half the ACC is ready to jump.
Could you link a credible news story reporting that half the ACC is ready to jump?
Quote from: Pakuni on December 16, 2012, 06:34:56 PM
Could you link a credible news story reporting that half the ACC is ready to jump?
I will but you will dismiss them as not credible. But they are more credible that Sultan's invented opinons.
http://espn.go.com/college-football/story/_/id/8718339/16-team-big-ten-michigan-state-spartans-ad-mark-hollis-sees-advantages
http://bleacherreport.com/articles/1418981-seven-steps-the-acc-could-take-to-prevent-being-carved-up-by-the-sec
http://augustafreepress.com/2012/11/26/chris-graham-what-uva-unc-to-big-ten-would-mean/
The reason they are credible is the economics say they are credible. ACC schools that leave will make more money in the B1G and SEC.
Quote from: AnotherMU84 on December 16, 2012, 06:30:13 PM
So yes all the stories are speculation but they are much more informed than your "Maryland was desperate. I don't think other schools are necessarily interested at this point." Their is not basis in truth in this statement.
Maryland was not desperate
:D
In the Big Ten, as in most conferences, each school receives an equal share of the league's annual revenue. But Nebraska, which entered the Big Ten for competition in 2011, won't receive the full share of revenue for several years, according to reports. Loh didn't know it, but the Big Ten also was negotiating a deal to bring in Rutgers that would phase the Scarlet Knights into the conference over time. ...
The Big Ten's desire was to have new members earn a gradually larger piece of the revenue over a six-year period. But Maryland felt its stability in the ACC offered more bargaining leverage than Rutgers had in the crumbling Big East.
"There is no reason for us to leave," Loh said. "So if we are going to consider, seriously, leaving, it has got to be worth our while."
Perhaps, if the Big Ten really wanted Maryland, the two sides could figure out a way the Terrapins could receive a larger share of the Big Ten's pie earlier. The potential solution was to get creative, according to two people with direct knowledge of the deal. By front-loading the deal — moving some money from years well into the future to the Terrapins' first six years in the conference — Maryland was able to secure the cash it will need to address some of its immediate financial problems.
http://espn.go.com/blog/bigten/post/_/id/67782/maryland-to-get-front-loaded-deal-from-b1g
So the only people that leave their job for a higher paying job are "desperate?"
Maryland, like just about every other school is in desperate financial trouble. What else is new? And, as Michigan's AD said on 60 minutes a few weeks ago, only 22 FBS schools make money. The rest lose money. It is a safe bet that virtually all the ACC schools are in the lose money camp.
The better question is why was the B1G do desperate to get Maryland? Why not hold out for Virginia?
Quote from: AnotherMU84 on December 16, 2012, 03:37:05 PM
Because we could pick up a high profile school in ND. (They are essentially a non-football school)
Well, I think you have it wrong in your thinking. I don't think you are close, actually. The more the music keeps playing, the more instability there is, the closer we get to a potential of a day where you have 4 or 5 super conferences and then the world won't even be recognizable for our little school.
Quote from: AnotherMU84 on December 16, 2012, 06:30:13 PM
So your made up speculation that you invented tonight for this thread is better than the multiple stories that say half the ACC is ready to jump.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/sports/colleges/an-analysis-of-marylands-potential-move-to-the-big-ten/2012/11/18/e382308a-31d3-11e2-9cfa-e41bac906cc9_story.html
"With its athletic department facing a nearly $5 million annual deficit that is rapidly compounding and stands to top $17 million by 2017, Maryland this summer cut seven of its 27 varsity sports — a move projected to pare roughly 7 percent from the $57.7 million annual budget. But unless the Terps figure out how to boost the revenue side of their ledger, even more draconian measures are likely in store."
No apologies are necessary.
Quote from: The Sultan of South Wayne on December 16, 2012, 07:28:57 PM
http://www.washingtonpost.com/sports/colleges/an-analysis-of-marylands-potential-move-to-the-big-ten/2012/11/18/e382308a-31d3-11e2-9cfa-e41bac906cc9_story.html
"With its athletic department facing a nearly $5 million annual deficit that is rapidly compounding and stands to top $17 million by 2017, Maryland this summer cut seven of its 27 varsity sports — a move projected to pare roughly 7 percent from the $57.7 million annual budget. But unless the Terps figure out how to boost the revenue side of their ledger, even more draconian measures are likely in store."
This passage describes most schools across the country. As I noted above only 22 of 125 FBS schools make money the rest lose money, just like Maryland (and most of the other ACC schools). This is hardly unique.
You want me to believe that Maryland, and any other school in the ACC, could always leave for more money but where never interested until now and only because Maryland is "desperate" because of their financial situation. Otherwise, the prospects of jumping did not interest them? You have a strange view of economics and why we have college sports and how ADs measure their success.
Here is how the world works, all AD and Presidents want to jump to conferences that make them more money at any time. Maryland made a better case than everyone else (like Rutgers) that they can get the BTN in their market. The B1G agreed and added them. No desperation here at all, smart business.
Wrong on this, wrong on Mayo in the other thread. They night is young Sultan, want to go for the trifecta?
Quote from: ChicosBailBonds on December 16, 2012, 07:08:55 PM
Well, I think you have it wrong in your thinking. I don't think you are close, actually. The more the music keeps playing, the more instability there is, the closer we get to a potential of a day where you have 4 or 5 super conferences and then the world won't even be recognizable for our little school.
That day already arrived yeas ago. Remember football drives the bus and we now have 4 or 5 super conferences. Too much money to grab for for the music to stop anytime soon.
We are a basketball school so we have different issues. But what you said is totally correct for the little football schools like Uconn, three NC in basketball in the last 12 years and no one wants them because they worth is measured by their football team.
Quote from: AnotherMU84 on December 16, 2012, 07:57:34 PM
That day already arrived yeas ago. Remember football drives the bus and we now have 4 or 5 super conferences. Too much money to grab for for the music to stop anytime soon.
We are a basketball school so we have different issues. But what you said is totally correct for the little football schools like Uconn, three NC in basketball in the last 12 years and no one wants them because they worth is measured by their football team.
Not there yet. You still have the Big 12, you still have other buffers...we're closer, but we're not there yet. When I say THERE, I mean 4 super conferences and no more NCAA Division I. No more MU playing Wisconsin, no more MU playing ND, no more MU playing Ohio State because they will be governed elsewhere by their own governing body.
This is why you don't want the ACC to break up. Why you don't want the Big 12 to break up.
Quote from: ChicosBailBonds on December 16, 2012, 08:19:19 PM
This is why you don't want the ACC to break up. Why you don't want the Big 12 to break up.
I get it but wishing the ACC doesn't break up does not mean it will stop it. What the ACC needs is better football that gets them TV revenue on-par with the SEC, B1G etc.
Until then they are next to go after the Big East died yesterday. That reality must be considered and when the ACC goes (not if) their will be schools up for grabs. Maybe we can get ND as they are independent in FB.
Quote from: AnotherMU84 on December 16, 2012, 08:29:13 PM
I get it but wishing the ACC doesn't break up does not mean it will stop it. What the ACC needs is better football that gets them TV revenue on-par with the SEC, B1G etc.
Until then they are next to go after the Big East died yesterday. That reality must be considered and when the ACC goes (not if) their will be schools up for grabs. Maybe we can get ND as they are independent in FB.
ND plays 23 Div 1 sports. How many sports do you really think the new conference is going to sponsor? What would they do with their baseball program, for example?
They can stay in a depleted ACC which would still likely sponsor more sports or they can join the new conference for a couple of sports, move another sport to some other conference....another sport will have to go somewhere else. Before long, moving from the ACC to the new conference will result in ND being a member of about 6 different conferences. Not happening.
Quote from: honkytonk on December 16, 2012, 09:09:14 PM
ND plays 23 Div 1 sports. How many sports do you really think the new conference is going to sponsor? What would they do with their baseball program, for example?
They can stay in a depleted ACC which would still likely sponsor more sports or they can join the new conference for a couple of sports, move another sport to some other conference....another sport will have to go somewhere else. Before long, moving from the ACC to the new conference will result in ND being a member of about 6 different conferences. Not happening.
OF ND's 23 sports, only two make money ... football and basketball. The other 21 lose money. Whatever sports are not covered by our new conference, or the ACC, will go into special conference for that sport, like Hockey (the ACC does not have Hockey).
Money losing sports are irrelevant to the decision of what conference to join.
Quote from: AnotherMU84 on December 16, 2012, 09:20:08 PM
OF ND's 23 sports, only two make money ... football and basketball. The other 21 lose money. Whatever sports are not covered by our new conference, or the ACC, will go into special conference for that sport, like Hockey (the ACC does not have Hockey).
Money losing sports are irrelevant to the decision of what conference to join.
Right. So ND will just dictate which conferences will accept ND's non-revenue generating sports. And Im sure the ACC will gladly accept most of them. ?-(
Quote from: honkytonk on December 16, 2012, 09:24:41 PM
Right. So ND will just dictate which conferences will accept ND's non-revenue generating sports. And Im sure the ACC will gladly accept most of them. ?-(
None of this had anything to do with them accepting the ACC invitation. Women's field hockey played no role in the decision.
Quote from: AnotherMU84 on December 16, 2012, 07:47:59 PM
This passage describes most schools across the country. As I noted above only 22 of 125 FBS schools make money the rest lose money, just like Maryland (and most of the other ACC schools). This is hardly unique.
You want me to believe that Maryland, and any other school in the ACC, could always leave for more money but where never interested until now and only because Maryland is "desperate" because of their financial situation. Otherwise, the prospects of jumping did not interest them? You have a strange view of economics and why we have college sports and how ADs measure their success.
Here is how the world works, all AD and Presidents want to jump to conferences that make them more money at any time. Maryland made a better case than everyone else (like Rutgers) that they can get the BTN in their market. The B1G agreed and added them. No desperation here at all, smart business.
Wrong on this, wrong on Mayo in the other thread. They night is young Sultan, want to go for the trifecta?
Whatever dude.
I provided evidence to back my assertion that Maryland was desperate - they dropped multiple sports and were facing huge budget deficits. You provide no evidence that suggests that any other ACC school is looking to leave, much less a handful of schools like you originally asserted.
So sorry that I do not take your opinions as facts.
Quote from: AnotherMU84 on December 16, 2012, 09:29:05 PM
None of this had anything to do with them accepting the ACC invitation. Women's field hockey played no role in the decision.
If UConn, SU, Pitt, BC, Duke and Wake all remained in the ACC, why would ND move to a worse bball conference....that will definitely make less money...and sponsor less sports forcing ND to find homes for whichever sports the new conference doesnt sponsor???? That move would make no fucking sense at all.
A depleted ACC will still make more bball money than the new conference.
A depleted ACC will provide a home for many more of ND's sports.
Quote from: honkytonk on December 16, 2012, 09:46:51 PM
If UConn, SU, Pitt, BC, Duke and Wake all remained in the ACC, why would ND move to a worse bball conference....that will definitely make less money...and sponsor less sports forcing ND to find homes for whichever sports the new conference doesnt sponsor???? That move would make no fracking sense at all.
A depleted ACC will still make more bball money than the new conference.
A depleted ACC will provide a home for many more of ND's sports.
If another school leaves the ACC, it's dead. It will not survive. Just like we knew the Big East was gone when Pitt and 'Cuse left.
If another school leaves the ACC, it will slowly bleed to death, like the BE.
Again, Uconn has won 3 Bball National Championships in the last 12 years. They also arguably have the best women Bball program ever. Yet, as of this writing, no one wants them. That is because Football is all that matters. Uconn is nothing because their football is nothing. The rest does not matter. So, what you argue above are not the things these decisions are made on.
ND agreed to play 5 ACC football games a year (but not join as a FB member). This year they played four ... BC, Wake, Miami and Pitt. ND is not going to water down their FB schedule with 5 games against lousy FB programs like Uconn, Wake, Duke, Pitt, Louisville and 'Cuse. They could have stayed in the BE and done this.
If another school leaves the ACC, they will die and ND will leave. The only question is do they hook up with us or does the B1G relent and take them as a non-football member?
Quote from: AnotherMU84 on December 16, 2012, 06:42:22 PM
I will but you will dismiss them as not credible. But they are more credible that Sultan's invented opinons.
http://espn.go.com/college-football/story/_/id/8718339/16-team-big-ten-michigan-state-spartans-ad-mark-hollis-sees-advantages
http://bleacherreport.com/articles/1418981-seven-steps-the-acc-could-take-to-prevent-being-carved-up-by-the-sec
http://augustafreepress.com/2012/11/26/chris-graham-what-uva-unc-to-big-ten-would-mean/
The reason they are credible is the economics say they are credible. ACC schools that leave will make more money in the B1G and SEC.
Not one of those links suggest what you claim they do.
What makes you think that if one school leaves the ACC that the ACC will "die?" Where will the other ACC schools go? Will they drop down to Division 2? Drop sports entirely? Cease to exist?
No. They will respond by adding another school. Or perhaps they will stay at whatever number they decide.
Will this cause ND to leave? Perhaps... But I think it takes more than one school for that to happen.
Quote from: Pakuni on December 17, 2012, 09:39:50 AM
Not one of those links suggest what you claim they do.
DING!! DING!! DING!!!
Quote from: The Sultan of South Wayne on December 16, 2012, 04:55:43 PM
Maryland was desperate. I don't think other schools are necessarily interested at this point.
I think that's being a bit optimistic. Someone's getting to 16. And it's right when everyone thinks it's settled down that it starts back up again. ACC is vulnerable because the Big XII is not.
Quote from: The Sultan of South Wayne on December 17, 2012, 09:40:57 AM
What makes you think that if one school leaves the ACC that the ACC will "die?" Where will the other ACC schools go? Will they drop down to Division 2? Drop sports entirely? Cease to exist?
No. They will respond by adding another school. Or perhaps they will stay at whatever number they decide.
Will this cause ND to leave? Perhaps... But I think it takes more than one school for that to happen.
Exactly.
If one ACC schools leaves, they're immediately replaced by UConn and the league carries on. Unless that one team is UNC (not likely) or Duke (impossible), the conference gets even better from a basketball standpoint. And unless that one team is FSU or Clemson, they drop off very little from a football standpoint.
Quote from: The Sultan of South Wayne on December 17, 2012, 09:40:57 AM
What makes you think that if one school leaves the ACC that the ACC will "die?" Where will the other ACC schools go? Will they drop down to Division 2? Drop sports entirely? Cease to exist?
No. They will respond by adding another school. Or perhaps they will stay at whatever number they decide.
Will this cause ND to leave? Perhaps... But I think it takes more than one school for that to happen.
If by the ACC blowing up you mean all the schools will leave - then no - it will still exist in some fashion. I think under most any circumstance, Louisville, Syracuse, Pitt, Wake Forest, and Boston College will still be there. So that will leave UConn, Cincy, Memphis (ACC ain't gonna be picky with only 5 teams), USF, and UCF to get to 10 teams.
Though, I think it's decently likely that if the ACC does go haywire 1 of Cuse, BC and UConn are gone to the B1G. So Add Temple or UMass and it's back to 10.
Point is, there will be plenty of ways for the ACC to survive as an above-average conference.
Quote from: Aughnanure on December 17, 2012, 09:50:24 AM
If by the ACC blowing up you mean all the schools will leave - then no - it will still exist in some fashion. I think under most any circumstance, Louisville, Syracuse, Pitt, Wake Forest, and Boston College will still be there. So that will leave UConn, Cincy, Memphis (ACC ain't gonna be picky with only 5 teams), USF, and UCF to get to 10 teams.
Though, I think it's decently likely that if the ACC does go haywire 1 of Cuse, BC and UConn are in it. So Add Temple or UMass and it's back to 10.
Point is, there will be plenty of ways for the ACC to survive as an above-average conference.
Correct...but Another says "they will be dead." No...they won't be.
And this only after one school has left and no evidence to suggest that other schools are considering leaving.
Quote from: Pakuni on December 17, 2012, 09:44:24 AM
Exactly.
If one ACC schools leaves, they're immediately replaced by UConn and the league carries on. Unless that one team is UNC (not likely) or Duke (impossible), the conference gets even better from a basketball standpoint. And unless that one team is FSU or Clemson, they drop off very little from a football standpoint.
Impossible is a bit harsh. I could definitely see the SEC taking UNC and Duke to get UNC. Could be the #1 basketball and #1 football conference.
Quote from: The Sultan of South Wayne on December 17, 2012, 09:52:16 AM
Correct...but Another says "they will be dead." No...they won't be.
And this only after one school has left and no evidence to suggest that other schools are considering leaving.
I'm not sure I believe the Big East can die.
Quote from: Aughnanure on December 17, 2012, 09:52:44 AM
Impossible is a bit harsh. I could definitely see the SEC taking UNC and Duke to get UNC. Could be the #1 basketball and #1 football conference.
Why would they have to take Duke to get UNC? If anything, they might have to take NC State to get UNC because the two are tied politically. But I don't see the SEC being particularly interested in adding UNC. FSU maybe, if UF will stand for it. Clemson, if South Carolina allows it, perhaps. Outside of Kentucky, basketball is an afterthought in SEC land (including Florida, where they ranked 37th in attendance last year and couldn't consistently fill up an 11,000-seat arena). I suppose it could happen, but I don't see a ton of upside in the SEC dividing their football revenue pie to add a couple of bad football programs.
Quote from: The Sultan of South Wayne on December 17, 2012, 09:40:57 AM
What makes you think that if one school leaves the ACC that the ACC will "die?" Where will the other ACC schools go? Will they drop down to Division 2? Drop sports entirely? Cease to exist?
No. They will respond by adding another school. Or perhaps they will stay at whatever number they decide.
Will this cause ND to leave? Perhaps... But I think it takes more than one school for that to happen.
This is the question I keep asking. If one school leaves the ACC, why is it going to die? I find Another's argument there...lacking.
Quote from: The Sultan of South Wayne on December 17, 2012, 09:40:57 AMWhat makes you think that if one school leaves the ACC that the ACC will "die?" Where will the other ACC schools go? Will they drop down to Division 2? Drop sports entirely? Cease to exist?
No. They will respond by adding another school. Or perhaps they will stay at whatever number they decide.
Will this cause ND to leave? Perhaps... But I think it takes more than one school for that to happen.
At the very least, the ACC can still add UConn and Cincy. Neither would result in a huge drop-off athletically for either football or basketball. Beyond that, USF, UCF, and Memphis could all be in play. Not necessarily the sexiest names, but decent enough that the conference would survive. I'd guess that they probably could absorb 4 losses and still survive, although not in as strong a position as they are in now. If it became more than 6 I think they'd really be in trouble. But they're still a long way from losing Virginia, Virginia Tech, North Carolina, North Carolina State, Clemson, Florida State, AND another school.
Hearsay alert .... Speculation alert ....
I've been told from someone I know from the ND AD department that ND has language in their agreement about the 5 FB games a year with the ACC. They have certain schools they want to play (read UNC, Clemson, Miami, Fla State, BC, etc.) and if too many of these "top tier" schools leave, they can void their deal.
ND does not want to be "trapped" in a watered down ACC playing Virginia, Duke, Cuse, NC State, etc. every year. That would hurt their FB product too much. They will play one or two of them but need/want Miami, BC, Pitt, UNC, Clemson, Fla State as part of the ACC.
Ok, sorry I cannot produce a notarized copy of their ACC agreement so you can chose to not believe this. But, it does make sense.
And yes, the ACC dies if more leave, like the BE died. Yes the name BE name very live on but it died. The name ACC may leave if defections occur but it will die.
Quote from: Pakuni on December 17, 2012, 10:15:51 AM
Why would they have to take Duke to get UNC? If anything, they might have to take NC State to get UNC because the two are tied politically. But I don't see the SEC being particularly interested in adding UNC. FSU maybe, if UF will stand for it. Clemson, if South Carolina allows it, perhaps. Outside of Kentucky, basketball is an afterthought in SEC land (including Florida, where they ranked 37th in attendance last year and couldn't consistently fill up an 11,000-seat arena). I suppose it could happen, but I don't see a ton of upside in the SEC dividing their football revenue pie to add a couple of bad football programs.
If they're starting a TV network, then they'll want more markets for subscriber fees. I can't see the SEC expanding to where they already are. So that leaves North Carolina and Virginia as the 2 best contiguous states to get. The football is strong enough that they don't need powerhouses - and there is value in those basketball programs. Say what you want about basketball's role in realignment, but it isn't nothing.
And by the way, can we stop judging realignment based on how good currently your football team is. Has that really helped predict much change at all?
Quote from: Aughnanure on December 17, 2012, 01:13:11 PM
If they're starting a TV network, then they'll want more markets for subscriber fees. I can't see the SEC expanding to where they already are. So that leaves North Carolina and Virginia as the 2 best contiguous states to get. The football is strong enough that they don't need powerhouses - and there is value in those basketball programs. Say what you want about basketball's role in realignment, but it isn't nothing.
And by the way, can we stop judging realignment based on how good currently your football team is. Has that really helped predict much change at all?
But if they want the NC and Virginia markets, why would they add
Duke to UNC? Seems Va. Tech would do more for them if that's their goal. And, again, it might be hard to get UNC without NC State.
As for your second question, it's not simply a matter of how good your program is, but how much of an audience it's going to bring to your television package. Nobody cares about Duke football, and not many more care about UNC football. Those are among the handful of FBS programs in the country where football plays second fiddle. Adding those programs isn't likely to draw the additional revenue to the TV package that it would cost to divvy up the pie by two more members. Nate Silver essentially made this same argument for why he believes the Big ? additions of Maryland and Rutgers ultimately won't bring in additional revenue for the conferences existing members.
The hell with ND - let's set our sights higher. Indiana, Kentucky, Duke and Kansas allegedly play football, but not so you'd notice. In that respect, they're a wart on the ass of progress to the BIG, SEC, ACC and the Big 12. When they get ready to drop their horrendus money losing football programs they can join us in what can be the greatest BB conference of all time.
Again, here the deals that ND had in place PRIOR to joining the ACC:
Pitt - 2013, 14, 15, 16
BC - 2015, 16, 18, 19
SU - 2014, 15, 16, 17
ND has played Pitt 65 times in its history. BC? 22 times. GTech? 34 times. Miami? 25 times. Syracuse? 6 times (with 4 more scheduled). UNC? 18 times
Let's look at the rest of the ACC teams.
FSU - 7 times
Clemson - twice (last game in 1979)
NCSU - Once
Wake - twice
Duke - 4 times
UVA - Once
VPI - Never
ND likes to schedule teams it has a history with. Im not sure the best football teams in the ACC are that important to them anyways (VPI, FSU and Clemson). If they were, Im sure ND would have found a way to join the ACC when BC joined. They played those programs a combined 9 times in history...
Btw, Swofford said that every ACC team will play ND on a revolving basis such that everyone will play ND once before any school plays them twice. And I dont think it takes a friend in ND's athletic department that does account receivables to know that contracts can be opened up and renegotiated. Isnt it possible that if the ACC lost a school or two that ND could negotiate to only play 4 ACC teams per year instead of 5? Or maybe even 3?
Quote from: honkytonk on December 17, 2012, 01:43:49 PM
And I dont think it takes a friend in ND's athletic department that does account receivables to know that contracts can be opened up and renegotiated. Isnt it possible that if the ACC lost a school or two that ND could negotiate to only play 4 ACC teams per year instead of 5? Or maybe even 3?
Yes, and that renegotiation
potentially means the ACC loses a "non-conference game" or two against ND they can include as part of their conference TV deal.
Quote from: AnotherMU84 on December 17, 2012, 02:14:32 PM
Yes, and that renegotiation potentially means the ACC loses a "non-conference game" or two against ND they can include as part of their conference TV deal.
OMG!! That's it...there it is. If the ACC loses a home game against ND, it's all over. Curtains! Everyone will scramble for the ACC exits. ND will join the new conference because they will be devastated that they couldnt maintain their
incredibly strong history with FSU, Clemson and VPI.
Quote from: AnotherMU84 on December 16, 2012, 10:34:55 PM
If another school leaves the ACC, it's dead. It will not survive. Just like we knew the Big East was gone when Pitt and 'Cuse left. If another school leaves the ACC, it will slowly bleed to death, like the BE.
Again, Uconn has won 3 Bball National Championships in the last 12 years. They also arguably have the best women Bball program ever. Yet, as of this writing, no one wants them. That is because Football is all that matters. Uconn is nothing because their football is nothing. The rest does not matter. So, what you argue above are not the things these decisions are made on.
ND agreed to play 5 ACC football games a year (but not join as a FB member). This year they played four ... BC, Wake, Miami and Pitt. ND is not going to water down their FB schedule with 5 games against lousy FB programs like Uconn, Wake, Duke, Pitt, Louisville and 'Cuse. They could have stayed in the BE and done this.
If another school leaves the ACC, they will die and ND will leave. The only question is do they hook up with us or does the B1G relent and take them as a non-football member?
Several schools left the Big 12 and they survived.
Quote from: Pakuni on December 17, 2012, 01:35:59 PM
But if they want the NC and Virginia markets, why would they add Duke to UNC? Seems Va. Tech would do more for them if that's their goal. And, again, it might be hard to get UNC without NC State.
As for your second question, it's not simply a matter of how good your program is, but how much of an audience it's going to bring to your television package. Nobody cares about Duke football, and not many more care about UNC football. Those are among the handful of FBS programs in the country where football plays second fiddle. Adding those programs isn't likely to draw the additional revenue to the TV package that it would cost to divvy up the pie by two more members. Nate Silver essentially made this same argument for why he believes the Big ? additions of Maryland and Rutgers ultimately won't bring in additional revenue for the conferences existing members.
I'm not saying they
HAVE to, but it may make it easier to - plus adding that big of a rivalry game is valuable. To me it's a fight between the B1G and SEC for UNC and UVA. And when that shakes out, it'll be easier to see where everyone goes.
Oh, and yes the revenues for Maryland and Rutgers will go up. It's a network. So Rutgers and MD open up a new area for subscriber fees (and more from them) on cable packages. You have more games to sell, more inventory to market, more commercials to see. So Rutgers and Maryland aren't technically watering it down, rather than expanding. Ohio St and Nebraska aren't playing less games to make room for them. RU/MD don't have to raise the revenue for the same # of games. It's first off more games! The B1G Network as 3 freaking channels, they need content.
I never get this argument. Maryland is not East Carolina. People in Maryland watch Maryland. They're a large state school with a large alumni base in highly-populated areas. So they're not good right now at football, so therefore they won't ultimately bring money to the conference? Losing teams earn money too. If the revenue goes down its because the sports bubble burst, not because of Rutgers of Maryland.
Nate Silver is right if he was talking about the Big 12, or the Catholic 7 or the ACC that are dependent on ESPN and other networks to carry/buy their games (i.e., matchups over markets). But when you have your own network, you care more about getting subscriber fees. B1G ain't stupid.
Quote from: Aughnanure on December 17, 2012, 04:14:10 PM
I'm not saying they HAVE to, but it may make it easier to - plus adding that big of a rivalry game is valuable. To me it's a fight between the B1G and SEC for UNC and UVA. And when that shakes out, it'll be easier to see where everyone goes.
A big basketball rivalry game is not that valuable.
Let's put basketball in perspective here:
Indiana-Butler - an in-state rivalry game featuring the #1 team in the nation on a broadcast network (CBS) Saturday afternoon - pulled a 1.5 rating.
The New Mexico Bowl - a wholly meaningless game on ESPN featuring two middling programs - pulled a 1.9.
Quote
Oh, and yes the revenues for Maryland and Rutgers will go up. It's a network. So Rutgers and MD open up a new area for subscriber fees (and more from them) on cable packages. You have more games to sell, more inventory to market, more commercials to see. So Rutgers and Maryland aren't technically watering it down, rather than expanding. Ohio St and Nebraska aren't playing less games to make room for them. RU/MD don't have to raise the revenue for the same # of games. It's first off more games! The B1G Network as 3 freaking channels, they need content.
I never get this argument. Maryland is not East Carolina. People in Maryland watch Maryland. They're a large state school with a large alumni base in highly-populated areas. So they're not good right now at football, so therefore they won't ultimately bring money to the conference? Losing teams earn money too. If the revenue goes down its because the sports bubble burst, not because of Rutgers of Maryland.
Nate Silver is right if he was talking about the Big 12, or the Catholic 7 or the ACC that are dependent on ESPN and other networks to carry/buy their games (i.e., matchups over markets). But when you have your own network, you care more about getting subscriber fees. B1G ain't stupid.
Well, take it up with Nate, I guess. Hate to play the old "appeal to authority," but he's looking at the same information the Big ? is and saying it could be a loser for them.
The Big ? is assuming viewers in New York, New Jersey and DC - not exactly hotbeds for college football - are willing to pressure their cable/satellite to meet the network's fee demands to the same extent that viewers in Wisconsin, Nebraska and Ohio are. That's far from a sure thing. The vast majority of New Yorkers don't give a flip about Rutgers, and certainly won't be eager to pay Cablevision more money for the chance to see Minnesota take on Iowa in softball.
Nobody is suggesting that there isn't money to be made by the Big ? by expanding into those markets. The question is, will it be enough to outweigh dividing all revenues by 14 instead of 12.
Quote from: Pakuni on December 17, 2012, 04:30:23 PM
A big basketball rivalry game is not that valuable.
Let's put basketball in perspective here:
Indiana-Butler - an in-state rivalry game featuring the #1 team in the nation on a broadcast network (CBS) Saturday afternoon - pulled a 1.5 rating.
The New Mexico Bowl - a wholly meaningless game on ESPN featuring two middling programs - pulled a 1.9.
And there's 3X as many basketball games.
Quote from: AnotherMU84 on December 17, 2012, 01:05:38 PM
Hearsay alert .... Speculation alert ....
I've been told from someone I know from the ND AD department that ND has language in their agreement about the 5 FB games a year with the ACC. They have certain schools they want to play (read UNC, Clemson, Miami, Fla State, BC, etc.) and if too many of these "top tier" schools leave, they can void their deal.
ND does not want to be "trapped" in a watered down ACC playing Virginia, Duke, Cuse, NC State, etc. every year. That would hurt their FB product too much. They will play one or two of them but need/want Miami, BC, Pitt, UNC, Clemson, Fla State as part of the ACC.
Ok, sorry I cannot produce a notarized copy of their ACC agreement so you can chose to not believe this. But, it does make sense.
And yes, the ACC dies if more leave, like the BE died. Yes the name BE name very live on but it died. The name ACC may leave if defections occur but it will die.
WHAT???
The ACC name may leave the conference, but it will die? How does a conference name leave the conference behind? And where does a conference name go to die?
Quote from: LittleMurs on December 17, 2012, 10:57:55 PM
WHAT???
The ACC name may leave the conference, but it will die? How does a conference name leave the conference behind? And where does a conference name go to die?
You can call it the BE but it is not the BE, it is something else.
Likewise if the ACC gets mass defections and cheapen itself with Uconn and USF, it will still be called the ACC but it is no the ACC.
You know what I mean so let's not get involved in yet another pointless semantics exercise.