ACC, PAC-12, and BIG alliance / conference realignment

[atom58]

That's hilarious. oooooooo the bridge was burned lol.

and they basically can't get out for 12 years. How many of the decision makers at those schools will still be around in 12 years?

None of them.

 

[HRE Otto IV]

It would have been nice if there was an 18th team that could be added and go 1 + 8/8.

You could have a nice balanced schedule/travel by adding Tulane.

SU-BC
Pitt-Louisville
UVA-VA Tech
UNC-NC State
Duke-Wake
Clemson-GA Tech
FSU-Miami
Stanford-Cal
SMU-Tulane

 

[CousCuse]

It would have been nice if there was an 18th team that could be added and go 1 + 8/8.

You could have a nice balanced schedule/travel by adding Tulane.

SU-BC
Pitt-Louisville
UVA-VA Tech
UNC-NC State
Duke-Wake
Clemson-GA Tech
FSU-Miami
Stanford-Cal
SMU-Tulane

In a previous post, you said Tulane has to wait 10 years?

 

[sutomcat]

It would have been nice if there was an 18th team that could be added and go 1 + 8/8.

You could have a nice balanced schedule/travel by adding Tulane.

SU-BC
Pitt-Louisville
UVA-VA Tech
UNC-NC State
Duke-Wake
Clemson-GA Tech
FSU-Miami
Stanford-Cal
SMU-Tulane

I am surprised the ACC didn't look more seriously at this when they added 3.

Would not be shocked if some school sees what SMU did and offers the same deal to the ACC the Mustangs did.

If the school makes sense and is willing to give up TV revenue dollars short term, I could see the ACC doing this.

Or they might just wait for just before the new B12 contract expires and go after a couple of those schools.

I believe that one ends in 2030-31.

 

[EnviroSciGuy]

I am surprised the ACC didn't look more seriously at this when they added 3.

Would not be shocked if some school sees what SMU did and offers the same deal to the ACC the Mustangs did.

If the school makes sense and is willing to give up TV revenue dollars short term, I could see the ACC doing this.

Or they might just wait for just before the new B12 contract expires and go after a couple of those schools.

I believe that one ends in 2030-31.

Rice maybe, if their admin is willing to step up? Would make a nice partner for SMU and another middleground for the rest of the conference. Ditto Tulane. Obviously Texas>>>>Louisiana for markets, although I think as streaming becomes more predominant, BRANDS are what will be dictating market share and leverage in realignment.

As for recent expansion, I assume 3 was all that was possible to get approved at the time. And even then just barely so.

 

[HRE Otto IV]

In a previous post, you said Tulane has to wait 10 years?

They aren't worthy of an ACC invite right now. I am saying for a nice balanced schedule it would have (not should have) been nice to have a team to pair with SMU. Of the available choices you are left with Rice or Tulane. In both cases it would be short sighted to grab either. You don't expand just because 18 is easier than 17. You also don't make it harder to potentially raid the B12 down the road.

I like Tulane and wouldn't mind them eventually if we need another team to fill in. If we were to add an 18th from the G5s they make sense. But we should be looking to add a P4 first. Until that door is closed, you can't add Tulane.

 

[sutomcat]

Rice maybe, if their admin is willing to step up? Would make a nice partner for SMU and another middleground for the rest of the conference. Ditto Tulane. Obviously Texas>>>>Louisiana for markets, although I think as streaming becomes more predominant, BRANDS are what will be dictating market share and leverage in realignment.

As for recent expansion, I assume 3 was all that was possible to get approved at the time. And even then just barely so.

I believe I have read Washington State and Oregon State wanted in and tried hard to stay with Stanford and Cal, but there was not enough support for them.

Not sure any others from the AACKK! tried to join with SMU.

Honestly, when the whole ACC expansion story broke, I expected to read that UConn saw what SMU was doing and tried to do the same thing. And perhaps they tried and the ACC told them no thank you very quietly.

Or maybe they just couldn't do it right now.

No question SMU has is better positioned to throw a lot more money at a conference to buy a membership.

I don't think UConn has the money or the big money donors to make a similar play. At least not on short notice. Maybe they will do some back door negotiations with donors who agree to back this kind of a move sometime down the road.

But we know FSU and Clemson were 100% against UConn before. They might have enough support to block this. SU and BC might also be against it for territorial reasons. Not sure on that.

I will say this: if Clemson, FSU and probably UNC ever leave the ACC, I would think it becomes a lot easier for UConn to get the votes to get added to the ACC.

It will be interesting to see what happens down the road.

 

[atom58]

This is where my head went as well. If this becomes an all out brawl for #3 in a few years this gives the ACC some geographic benefits to poach the top of the B12

Right you are about the benefits of this geographic expansion + the ACC has a TV network and the Big12 does not so that is a 2nd advantage, a very big one IMO.

Also, I remember years ago some talk here about those conference payouts not being directly comparable. The Big10 included gate receipts from their large stadiums in the amounts quoted and the ACC does not. Apple versus oranges. This seems fraudulent to me but it's CFB so color me not surprised.

 

[HRE Otto IV]

I believe I have read Washington State and Oregon State wanted in and tried hard to stay with Stanford and Cal, but there was not enough support for them.

Not sure any others from the AACKK! tried to join with SMU.

Honestly, when the whole ACC expansion story broke, I expected to read that UConn saw what SMU was doing and tried to do the same thing. And perhaps they tried and the ACC told them no thank you very quietly.

Or maybe they just couldn't do it right now.

No question SMU has is better positioned to throw a lot more money at a conference to buy a membership.

I don't think UConn has the money or the big money donors to make a similar play. At least not on short notice. Maybe they will do some back door negotiations with donors who agree to back this kind of a move sometime down the road.

But we know FSU and Clemson were 100% against UConn before. They might have enough support to block this. SU and BC might also be against it for territorial reasons. Not sure on that.

I will say this: if Clemson, FSU and probably UNC ever leave the ACC, I would think it becomes a lot easier for UConn to get the votes to get added to the ACC.

It will be interesting to see what happens down the road.

I think travel partners / similar programs is the way to go. Which doesn't bode well for UConn.

It would be nice to add Cincinnati to pair with Louisville. West Virginia with Pitt. A Texas school with SMU. If you lose a current ACC school then you fill with what fits geographically.

That causes a problem for UConn. Sure you can add them with BC but then who do you put with SU? Villanova or Temple? It would make more sense to leave UConn out.

If you want a balanced schedule geographically and competitively, UConn doesn't seem to fit.

 

[sutomcat]

I think travel partners / similar programs is the way to go. Which doesn't bode well for UConn.

It would be nice to add Cincinnati to pair with Louisville. West Virginia with Pitt. A Texas school with SMU. If you lose a current ACC school then you fill with what fits geographically.

That causes a problem for UConn. Sure you can add them with BC but then who do you put with SU? Villanova or Temple? It would make more sense to leave UConn out.

If you want a balanced schedule geographically and competitively, UConn doesn't seem to fit.

Travel partners are important and a consideration but there are a lot of other variables too.

If say the ACC is convinced FSU is leaving, they are surely going to make a play for UCF to replace the Seminoles circa 2030. The conference needs a couple teams in Florida and UCF would be a good replacement.

Maybe get TCU to pair with SMU and add WVU and UC and you have a nice group to replace defectors.

I am interested to see how proactive the ACC is to backfill and if they make deals with the defectors where the defectors get out early with some concessions on exit fees/GOR money in exchange for voting for replacement programs.

One thing the ACC can't do is let the best B12 schools sign another GOT for 5 or 10 years in 2031 and not have any of them available if/when ACC schools shortly after that.

Back to UConn. Their best bet to get into the ACC might be if the B12 is able to get a new GOR signed before the ACC defections occur. In that case, schools like UConn, USF and Tulane might end up in the ACC.

 

[atom58]

More, yes. But not enough. It's never enough.

Naked greed. "The love of money is the root of all evil" a rather famous book says. Do you recall what the Parthians did to the Roman general Crassus after their victory in the Battle of Carrhae? (He was the richest man in Rome you know.) They had some molten gold on hand and ...

Like the lyric from an old Warren Zevon song "I don't want to talk about it ..." or think about it either.

Yeah, I believe in karma.

 

[atom58]

I'm not that upset I don't think this changes much. My real beef is that the Big Ten is no longer the bad guy we just let them off the hook for their expansion. Imagine the Pac 12 was a bank. Big Ten got everything in the vault and the hundreds...Big 12 got all the smaller bills...ACC came in and scooped up the coins. We have no moral high ground in this nonsense anymore if we stood pat we would have.

We did not actively participate in the destruction of the Pac12. The B10 and B12 did. We actually tried to save the Pac12. When all Hell broke loose we scooped up the two best academic schools in the Pac12 (and just about anywhere else for that matter - oh, "University" (sic) presidents don't care about that?), and the "mobile" has now been perturbed by these three editions. It will be an exciting time for them, they do have some athletes, and I do think that all three of them will become competitive in FB again. BB may be another matter - just my opinion anyway. Women's BB and the non-revenue sports at Stanford will be a big edition already.

 

[TexanMark]

It would have been nice if there was an 18th team that could be added and go 1 + 8/8.

You could have a nice balanced schedule/travel by adding Tulane.

SU-BC
Pitt-Louisville
UVA-VA Tech
UNC-NC State
Duke-Wake
Clemson-GA Tech
FSU-Miami
Stanford-Cal
SMU-Tulane

Another option

Treat 5 ND and 3 UConn FB games as the 18th (ghost) team to create better schedules. Likely have to go to 9 conference games...UConn could play 4 games.

 

[HRE Otto IV]

Another option

Treat 5 ND and 3 UConn FB games as the 18th (ghost) team to create better schedules. Likely have to go to 9 conference games...UConn could play 4 games.

That works out great but why pick UConn as the additional team? Wouldn't Army fit better? That way you don't disrupt BBall (stay at 20).

So year 1 a team would get:
SU, Pitt, UVA, UNC, Duke, Clemson, FSU, Stanford, SMU

Year 2 they would get:
BC, Louisville, VA Tech, NC State, Wake, Miami, GA Tech, Cal, X


Where X is Notre Dame or Army. Notre Dame keeps the 5 games vs the 17 full member ACC teams. SMU will play Army when they don't have Notre Dame (12 times over 17 years). For Army they will get 4 ACC games a year, Navy, Air Force. Which leaves them 6 games to schedule. Not ideal but better than the 10 they need to schedule now.

 

[TexanMark]

I figured UConn as a tryout. You don't necessarily have to invite UConn's Olympic Sports since the Big East doesn't offer D1 FB.

 

[FRANKIEFAN]

We did not actively participate in the destruction of the Pac12. The B10 and B12 did. We actually tried to save the Pac12. When all Hell broke loose we scooped up the two best academic schools in the Pac12 (and just about anywhere else for that matter - oh, "University" (sic) presidents don't care about that?), and the "mobile" has now been perturbed by these three editions. It will be an exciting time for them, they do have some athetes, and I do think that all three of them will become competitive in FB again. BB may be another matter - just my opinion anyway. Women's BB and the non-revenue sports at Stanford will be a big edition already.

West coast ivys in a market that doesn’t care about college sports didn’t need saving.

We voted against UNC and Clemson and then saw the worst calls imaginable go against us vs both. Syracuse had an opportunity to stop the stupidity and chose to send non revenue programs to the west coast.

Just say no. They just fixed the ridiculous ACC scheduling that had us play Putt Clemson and FSU annually that alone was enough reason to try and block changes. Watch us get those 3 every year again.

It’s not the end of the world at least it’s not a small regional airport when need to shlep our field hockey team to 3000 miles away.

 

[kcsu]

SMU will play for the ACC Championship within 4 years.

 

[Hoo's That]

I am surprised the ACC didn't look more seriously at this when they added 3.

Would not be shocked if some school sees what SMU did and offers the same deal to the ACC the Mustangs did.

If the school makes sense and is willing to give up TV revenue dollars short term, I could see the ACC doing this.

Or they might just wait for just before the new B12 contract expires and go after a couple of those schools.

I believe that one ends in 2030-31.

There aren't many schools with a booster list that will "Pony" up the bucks like SMU's boosters will. One booster's foundation put up $50M for the end zone structure that will house meeting rooms, athlete cafeteria, etc.

 

[Hoo's That]

We did not actively participate in the destruction of the Pac12. The B10 and B12 did. We actually tried to save the Pac12. When all Hell broke loose we scooped up the two best academic schools in the Pac12 (and just about anywhere else for that matter - oh, "University" (sic) presidents don't care about that?), and the "mobile" has now been perturbed by these three editions. It will be an exciting time for them, they do have some athetes, and I do think that all three of them will become competitive in FB again. BB may be another matter - just my opinion anyway. Women's BB and the non-revenue sports at Stanford will be a big edition already.

Most definitely. Rowing - UVa was the top ACC finisher at #10. Stanford won the championship, Cal was #8 and SMU was #9. SMU MSoccer currently #4.

 

[SU68]

I believe I have read Washington State and Oregon State wanted in and tried hard to stay with Stanford and Cal, but there was not enough support for them.

Not sure any others from the AACKK! tried to join with SMU.

Honestly, when the whole ACC expansion story broke, I expected to read that UConn saw what SMU was doing and tried to do the same thing. And perhaps they tried and the ACC told them no thank you very quietly.

Or maybe they just couldn't do it right now.

No question SMU has is better positioned to throw a lot more money at a conference to buy a membership.

I don't think UConn has the money or the big money donors to make a similar play. At least not on short notice. Maybe they will do some back door negotiations with donors who agree to back this kind of a move sometime down the road.

But we know FSU and Clemson were 100% against UConn before. They might have enough support to block this. SU and BC might also be against it for territorial reasons. Not sure on that.

I will say this: if Clemson, FSU and probably UNC ever leave the ACC, I would think it becomes a lot easier for UConn to get the votes to get added to the ACC.

It will be interesting to see what happens down the road.

But UCan't is already in the best all-time conference in the universe

 

[atom58]

West coast ivys in a market that doesn’t care about college sports didn’t need saving.

We voted against UNC and Clemson and then saw the worst calls imaginable go against us vs both. Syracuse had an opportunity to stop the stupidity and chose to send non revenue programs to the west coast.

Just say no. They just fixed the ridiculous ACC scheduling that had us play Putt Clemson and FSU annually that alone was enough reason to try and block changes. Watch us get those 3 every year again.

It’s not the end of the world at least it’s not a small regional airport when need to shlep our field hockey team to 3000 miles away.

They nearly got lost in the shuffle of musical chairs so maybe they care about it now. I have read they both did stadium renovations (Stanford in 2005 and Cal even more major ones in 2010) so there must have been some interest. (SMU spent $250 million on athletics even in the AAC. "Build it and they will come.") They wanted to join a conference together so they could keep playing. As Wildhack said in that interview that was posted here, Stanford has had some success with Jim Harbaugh and during most of the David Shaw era. They won the Pac10 (he said) and won the Rose Bowl. I know this CFP business has messed up the traditional bowl system but if you guys won the ACC and then the Orange Bowl, this board would be ecstatic. If a team is not a doormat there will be greater attendance. Frankly, even then some local fans would prefer to watch games on TV - no traffic jams and no deafening noise.

 

[TexanMark]

College Sports Fan Sentiments on the Conference Shuffle

We asked 3,000 college sports fans their thoughts on the Pac-12's dissolution, preferred team movements, and the rise of super-conferences.

oddspedia.com

Interesting findings. ACC fans would most want to add UF for Football and UK for Hoops.

Interesting that nationally Syracuse didn't make Top 8 most desired Hoops Team to ad. Likely due to our underperformance lately. I'd imagine we would be Top 12.

 

[OrangeXtreme]

 

[CousCuse]

I think this means Army is going to bail on the remaining games with SU. Would probably have to replace them with another team from Army's future opponents who are also canceled.

 

[OrangeXtreme]

I think this means Army is going to bail on the remaining games with SU. Would probably have to replace them with another team from Army's future opponents who are also canceled.

Maybe.

8 conference games plus Navy still leaves three non-con openings a year.

Maybe we still get one game at West Point.