Well, if my choices are Temple and UMass, I go with the Owls.No one wants Temple.
Well, if my choices are Temple and UMass, I go with the Owls.No one wants Temple.
No one wants Temple.
WVU is in the right geography as you put it. So is Cincy. And you are not thinking about how if the AXCC is thinking about becoming truly National, it may have eyes on a couple of TX schools. That state, even without UT and A&M, is worth a good deal.You need to even things out geographically and they are the only acceptable team from the availables.
UConn would make a lot more sense than Temple.You need to even things out geographically and they are the only acceptable team from the availables.
WVU is in the right geography as you put it. So is Cincy. And you are not thinking about how if the AXCC is thinking about becoming truly National, it may have eyes on a couple of TX schools. That state, even without UT and A&M, is worth a good deal.
UConn would make a lot more sense than Temple.
Yeah that makes zero sense, they bring nothing, and being in Philly means nothing because no one in Philly cares about themNo one wants Temple.
Neither makes sense, but U Conn makes more sense between the twoIMO Temple offers more. They play in a major media market. It is easy to get there for the other teams and their fans. They have local recruits which helps other ACC teams. The stadium is way better.
In BBall they also help in recruiting.
How does UConn being good at BBall help any other ACC team become better or richer?
IMO Temple offers more. They play in a major media market. It is easy to get there for the other teams and their fans. They have local recruits which helps other ACC teams. The stadium is way better.
In BBall they also help in recruiting.
How does UConn being good at BBall help any other ACC team become better or richer?
UConn is the entire state of Connecticut. No one in Philly cares about Temple.
How does Temple add money? they have no fans. They have no national interest. No one goes to their games except the one time in 100 years they're decent and get Penn State at home.
The ACC isn't adding a school no one cares about because of basketball recruiting.
If Stanford, California, Oregon, Oregon St, Washington, and Washington St are left behind.All incoming schools to the ACC would have to sign the existing GOR.
It would not affect the GOR regarding the existing ACC schools.
Exactly. If the GOR could have been broken, the GOR would have been broken by now. When the GOR is short and finances allow a school to buy their way out, sure, the school may go the way of OU and UT. The ACC GOR is simply too large at this time to buy out and provides stability for a decade or more.
So you’re saying Cal is still in this?I think in terms of Value to the ACC it would be…
1. Washington
2. Oregon
3. Arizona State
4. Stanford
5. Utah
6. Arizona
7. Cal
8. Washington State
9. Oregon State
I don’t think you can split Stanford and Cal. The ACC could take the first 4 and Cal, plus Temple. That gives the ACC 20 schools which is easy to schedule.
I think a lot of those schools would prefer the Big 12 over the ACC(assuming the Big 10 isn’t interested first) and as aggressive as Yormark is, I would not be shocked if they take enough Pac teams to get to 20 teams. Having a deal through 2036 is not as good as having a deal through 2031 like the Big 12 has, that is stable too and it is better to have the option to do a new deal way before the ACC can again. Live sports is always going to be of huge value.If Stanford, California, Oregon, Oregon St, Washington, and Washington St are left behind.
Getting to join the ACC should be a no brainer, it would be a life raft through 2036.
It would also bolster the ACC, Stanford could be an annual Notre Dame game counting for Stanford in the standings.
No. Accretive value is whats needed.You need to even things out geographically and they are the only acceptable team from the avaavailables
You may be confusing the GOR and the current media deals. Adding schools can reopen negotiations on the ESPN deal, but I believe as quoted above, GOR explicitly states any new members will be bound by the current agreement.
Everyone else meaning Washington and Oregon? There is little to no chance they choose the ACC over the Big 12, and there is no chance the Big 12 won’t offer themI suppose you could take Utah instead of an Eastern team. Then the ACC teams can all keep their 3 perm rivals. But that adds an extra cross country trip. Also instead of playing 4 teams yearly and everyone else 4x in 15 years, you are at only 3 teams yearly and 5x in 16 years.
So Oregon State/Washington State to the MWC, Arizona to the B12, everyone else to the ACC. Temple and UConn left out.
Why so?Everyone else meaning Washington and Oregon? There is little to no chance they choose the ACC over the Big 12, and there is no chance the Big 12 won’t offer them
Everyone else meaning Washington and Oregon? There is little to no chance they choose the ACC over the Big 12, and there is no chance the Big 12 won’t offer them
They can’t get that in the ACC either unless Stanford and Cal come to the ACC and I don’t see that either, I think the B12 will want them too and they may prefer the B12 tooWhy so?
Edit
You don’t think playing in Cali is very important to both? They can’t get that in the B12.
I hope so, the ACC has a deal through 2036 so if Oregon and Washington don’t get B10 or B12 invites we can get them through 2036 or close to it, they can’t come to the ACC and then bail as soon as the B10 eventually may come calling, the GOR will prevent thatI'm telling ya, Big12 ain't going after UW and Oregon. It's a short-term investment. The league has basically said so by going after Colorado, and now, apparently, Arizona.