Do we now root for the ACC to blow up?

[GGGG]

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.

[GGGG]

Not one of those links suggest what you claim they do.

DING!! DING!!  DING!!!

[Aughnanure]

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.

[Pakuni]

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.

[Aughnanure]

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.  

[GGGG]

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.

[Aughnanure]

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.

[Aughnanure]

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.

[Pakuni]

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.

[ChicosBailBonds]

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.

[brewcity77]

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.

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.

[Tugg Speedman]

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.

[Aughnanure]

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?

[Pakuni]

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.

[Lennys Tap]

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.

[honkytonk]

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?

[Tugg Speedman]

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.

[honkytonk]

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.

[bilsu]

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.

[Aughnanure]

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.

[Pakuni]

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.

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.

[Aughnanure]

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.

[Dawson Rental]

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?

[Tugg Speedman]

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.