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

[HRE Otto IV]

That's 5 weeks of playoffs on top of a regular season of at least 10 games and a conference championship game for some. Tough fit if they want to show any recognition of the student part of student athlete. And on the other end, non-playoff teams get an additional revenue hit by a shortened regular season.

12 teams is established as doable, so staying with that: guarantee 4 teams: a G5 team and the next top 3 conference champs. Add 8 at-large, seed them, and give the top 4 a bye.

A case could be made to consider whatever is left of the B12 and/or ACC as a G5 at some point.

FCS is able to figure out how to have a 24 team playoff. The FBS should be able to as well.

Assuming the PAC does not survive, the G5 has 5 of the 10 votes for the playoff format. They are set to get 2 auto bids now, when before they were getting only one. There is no way they would agree to go under 5 auto bids, let alone approve zero auto bids. And to get down to 5 auto bids, they are going to need to get more guaranteed money to give up that 6th auto bid.

The B18 and SEC will have only 2 of the 10 votes. Although Notre Dame would also vote for no auto bids to increase the chances they make the playoff. Before the B18 and SEC could align with the ACC, B12, and PAC against the G5. Now is it really smart for the ACC or B12 to align with the two conferences who want you gone?

 

[OrangeXtreme]

 

[qdawgg]

Again you aren’t answering the question. What does it matter who is number 3 if the B18 and SEC break away?

If the B18 and SEC do not break away they have no control over shutting out others from the playoff as they are in the minority. They have to share unless they break away. So again #3 does not matter.

SEC and B-whatever aren't breaking away solely by themselves/together. If they try, you would definitely see politicians start getting involved. #3 will matter for awhile at least. The only way it doesn't is if we end up with 2 mega conferences and I don't think the SEC wants that but B-whatever might force their hand since they suck as a conference and the only way to pretend to be big is to get big.

 

[qdawgg]

Go re-read my posts, I'm not going to keep typing the same thing out in detail for you to skip it and ask the same question. The short answer is the quality of the #3 league will make a difference in whether or not the #3 league can prevent a full breakaway. I've typed out the long answer for you already.

Yes you will and he'll also keep asking the same questions or moving the goal posts ever so slightly forcing you to reply. This is about as sure a thing as it gets on this board

 

[HRE Otto IV]

Yes you will and he'll also keep asking the same questions or moving the goal posts ever so slightly forcing you to reply. This is about as sure a thing as it gets on this board

If the questions aren’t answered and the conversation is changed, how exactly is that moving the goalposts on my part?

Another brilliant post! The Cali imposter makes more sense than you.

 

[qdawgg]

If the questions aren’t answered and the conversation is changed, how exactly is that moving the goalposts on my part?

Another brilliant post! The Cali imposter makes more sense than you.

None of this makes sense... which makes sense.

 

[baggerbob]

The great probelm with the often very silly and almost always childish FSU fans is that they assume that when the lose to a Wake Forest, which has about as many total students as FSU has freshman girls, is that losing to 'inferiors' in the ACC proves that FSU football is far too big and powerful to be stuck in the lowly ACC. Sop if SMU were to beta FSU in football in back to balk years, that would further persuade FSU fans that FSU is triply too big and powerful to be in the ACC.

In many FSU fans are worse sports and more unrealistic than Texas fans. They just have maybe 1/10th the money and 1/15th the political power. So they have about a dozen chips on each shoulder.

As I said before had FSU and Miami been the teams of Bowden, and the bad boys who dominated football at the beginning of this century the ACC would be number 1.

 

[WoadBlue]

As I said before had FSU and Miami been the teams of Bowden, and the bad boys who dominated football at the beginning of this century the ACC would be number 1.

And that makes my point about those totally loyal and always passionate CFB fans. They never go away, so you keep the TV numbers even when they are not near their National Champ levels. If the ACC had had Florida and Georgia instead, our TV numbers always wood have better than we've had.

 

[WoadBlue]

FCS is able to figure out how to have a 24 team playoff. The FBS should be able to as well.

Assuming the PAC does not survive, the G5 has 5 of the 10 votes for the playoff format. They are set to get 2 auto bids now, when before they were getting only one. There is no way they would agree to go under 5 auto bids, let alone approve zero auto bids. And to get down to 5 auto bids, they are going to need to get more guaranteed money to give up that 6th auto bid.

The B18 and SEC will have only 2 of the 10 votes. Although Notre Dame would also vote for no auto bids to increase the chances they make the playoff. Before the B18 and SEC could align with the ACC, B12, and PAC against the G5. Now is it really smart for the ACC or B12 to align with the two conferences who want you gone?

If the Pac survives, it will be lesser than the MWC, unless it can take major MWC powers.

 

[FloridaCuse]

Mike Silver, columnist with the SF Chronicle, tweeted tonight that "Cal/Stanford/SMU to the ACC is happening."

 

[HtownOrange]

Mike Silver, columnist with the SF Chronicle, tweeted tonight that "Cal/Stanford/SMU to the ACC is happening."


So much for Swain's intel...

 

[OrangeXtreme]

Mike Silver, columnist with the SF Chronicle, tweeted at exactly 4:44 PM.

It can only mean SU to the BigTen.

 

[FloridaCuse]

Mike Silver, columnist with the SF Chronicle, tweeted at 4:44 PM.

It can only mean SU to the BigTen.

We wish!

 

[wvlax]

Silver seems like a fairly legit source. Worked 13 years at Sport Illustrated, covered 12 Super Bowls for SI and now works for the second biggest newspaper on the West Coast. Also, worked for the NFL Network.

 

[sutomcat]

Silver seems like a fairly legit source. Worked 13 years at Sport Illustrated, covered 12 Super Bowls for SI and now works for the second biggest newspaper on the West Coast. Also, worked for the NFL Network.

I think he and Wilner are journalists to watch out West. Mike is also a Cal grad and is tapped in there.

 

[Ozcuse]

Does this vote of taking on more schools open up the entire GoR contract or allow the conference to add more years to the whole thing?

Just a little concerned that the schools that have showed doubt in the ACC may use their needed votes as leverage to chip away at the strength of the GoR.

 

[kcsu]

Does this vote of taking on more schools open up the entire GoR contract or allow the conference to add more years to the whole thing?

Just a little concerned that the schools that have showed doubt in the ACC may use their needed votes as leverage to chip away at the strength of the GoR.

no they would become party to the GOR

 

[Ozcuse]

no they would become party to the GOR

I’m talking about FSU, Miami, and Clemson. If their votes are needed to expand they should be looking to introduce ways to make this less challenging if and when they do decide to leave.

My own take- I don’t think expansion is smart with this group of schools. We lose our geographical identity and I feel no interest in playing California schools in conference and have very little incentive to attend a road game there. This does not feel like a sustainable decision.

 

[Stern]

Sounds like this is gonna happen


More from Pete: "That amount is expected to be between $50 and $60 million annually. Some of that will be distributed to all members, and the rest would be put into a pool for success initiatives."

 

[OrangeXtreme]

 

[Acesn8s]

I think this is a no win situation, all of this is football and $$ motivated, eventually these schools will get full shares, and they don’t bring in enough $$$ to justify it. Now maybe something in the works to stream or add TV revenue and this will be more understandable, but as of now I think it’s just a bandaid. Further more no other conference has an off number of teams? Notre Dame ain’t joining you would think there has to be another west coast or Mountain west area school they should add to help with travel.

 

[Offthedome]

Does anyone care who wins the FCS? Is there ever a question if North Dakota State is the true D1 champ instead of the FBS champ? The same thing would apply to a new sub division of B18 and SEC teams. Their playoff will determine their champ. Even if the AP poll chose the FBS champ as #1, the P2 champ would say isn't that cute and not care. They got their NCAA trophy and got paid.

Does most of the talent (including coaching talent) end up in FBS or FCS? So if the B18 and SEC broke away into their own sub division, they would have all the talent (even worse than now). What kid or coach would want to be in the lower division (like with FCS vs FBS)?

Most likely they would go to 10 game conference schedules and 1-2 OOC vs the other conference. Then instead of an FCS game like they have now, they have one FBS cupcake game.

The left behind FBS teams would have no marquee Ws. Clemson can go undefeated but if their biggest Ws are FSU and BYU why would anyone think they are better than the P2 sub division champ. Same as with North Dakota State winning the FCS.

As to Part II
The B18 and SEC cannot dictate how the FBS playoff goes. The ACC, B12, and G5 need to agree to the system. It is why the G5 was thrown a bone in the new system. The B18 and SEC have all the power and will absolutely get a favorable outcome, but they cannot close out the rest of the FBS. The PAC going away isn't going to change the playoff from 6 conference champs to 2.

I think they could push for more playoff teams and/or no auto Top 4 as conference champs. Maybe something like...

Top 3 conference champs make the Quarterfinals.
Next 3 conference champs and 3 best at larges make the 2nd Round.
Bottom 3 conference champs and 5 next best at larges are in the 1st Round.

That gives every conference champ a shot. There would be 8 at larges (only 6 currently) which will be mostly B18 and SEC teams.

For example...

QFs: UGA, Michigan, Clemson
2nd Round: K State, Tulane, Troy, TCU, Ohio State, Bama
1st Round: UTSA, Fresno State, Toledo, Tennessee, Utah, USC, Penn State, Washington

That would have yielded:
5 B18
3 SEC
3 B12
1 AAC, ACC, CUSA, MAC, MWC, Sun Belt

1st Round
10. Tennesse vs 17. Toledo
11. USC vs 16. Fresno State
12. Utah vs 15. UTSA
13. Penn State vs 14. Washington

2nd Round
4. TCU vs 13. Penn State
5. Ohio State vs 12. Utah
6. Bama vs 11. USC
7. K State vs 10. Tennessee
8. Tulane vs 9. Troy

QF
1. UGA vs 8. Tulane
2. Michigan vs 7. K State
3. Clemson vs 6. Bama
4. TCU vs 5. Ohio State

SF
1. UGA vs 5. Ohio State
2. Michigan vs 6. Bama

CG
1. UGA vs 6. Bama

All the CG game money goes to the SEC. All the SF money is split between the SEC and B18.

I like it, but all that work just to end up with the same 4 teams, more of less, that we get every year. The occasional upset this would give fans would be marvelous, however.

 

[kcsu]

I think this is a no win situation, all of this is football and $$ motivated, eventually these schools will get full shares, and they don’t bring in enough $$$ to justify it. Now maybe something in the works to stream or add TV revenue and this will be more understandable, but as of now I think it’s just a bandaid. Further more no other conference has an off number of teams? Notre Dame ain’t joining you would think there has to be another west coast or Mountain west area school they should add to help with travel.

They actually do bring in enough to justify it. Between the cable adds and the additional base ESPN pay they more than pay for themselves. This is an accretive deal.

 

[jr4750]

They actually do bring in enough to justify it. Between the cable adds and the additional base ESPN pay they more than pay for themselves. This is an accretive deal.

Does this additional money include added ACCN subscriptions? I haven't seen that directly noted.

 

[Acesn8s]

They actually do bring in enough to justify it. Between the cable adds and the additional base ESPN pay they more than pay for them

They actually do bring in enough to justify it. Between the cable adds and the additional base ESPN pay they more than pay for themselves. This is an accretive deal.

The most I have seen any projections is an extra 3 million a year per school per year, once you factor in travel and how it hurts Olympic sports not sure it it make financial sense. This does nothing to appease FSU or Clemson, the gap in still way to much. Now if it was an extra 10 million per school then so be it.