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

[blust2i3d4]

But wouldn't not being a member of the AAU be a problem? [Thanks Nancy]

Not being in AAU will be a big problem to be admitted to B1G. Can we find a way to SEC? Like SEC is going to 24, maybe Pittsburgh and SU would be a good pair to have when there is only two national conferences?

 

[Archbold44]

Big 10 compensation article

63 million cept RU and Maryland. Hate that league.

Not being in AAU will be a big problem to be admitted to B1G. Can we find a way to SEC? Like SEC is going to 24, maybe Pittsburgh and SU would be a good pair to have when there is only two national conferences?

The reality is that the ACC is the only conference left that has desirable teams for the SEC or B1G. And I am skeptical that he B1G or SEC want/need Syracuse. Just no real point to it. If Texas, Ohio State, and others start leaving these conferences to do the Notre Dame thing... then maybe the remaining schools could start adding.

One question is whether the ACC should be proactive to try to raid the B12 now while it is the arguable #3 and risk forcing teams out... or wait until teams are poached and the ACC drops down to the B12's level or below to #4. I don't know the answer. For example, if the ACC added Houston, Arizona State, Arizona, and West Virginia to get to 22 teams/21 football... that would not really make the ACC any more valuable now, but protect against what happens if the best teams bolt to the SEC/B1G. But what good if it forces the best teams to bolt to the SEC/B1G. But what is the likelihood that they are not leaving anyway. And so on.

For a conference that cannot even schedule logically (see recent 18 team schedule), I cannot image them deciding this difficult issue correctly. Frankly, it makes me wonder if Syracuse should not be proactive in trying to join the B12 for stability purposes. I don't like the idea of Pitt/Louisville/SMU being more desirable for the B12 if the ACC is gutted. Is it worth sticking with BC, Wake Forest, and other other private schools in the ACC while it fizzles away? For example, if Syracuse, Pitt, Boston College, and UConn joined the B12... there would be some pretty interesting divisions for football and basketball, while giving the B12 a NE presence (hello, ESPN!):

East: Syracuse, Pitt, BC, UConn, West Virginia
TX: Houston, Baylor, Texas Tech, TCU, Oklahoma State.
MW: UCF, Kansas, Kansas St, Iowa State, Cincinnati
West:

Or bring Louisville, SMU, Va Tech, and USF with us:

East: Syracuse, Pitt, BC, UConn, WVU, Va Tech
Mideast: UCF, USF, Louisville, Cincinnati, Kansas, Kansas State
TX: Houston, Baylor, Texas Tech, TCU, Oklahoma State, SMU
West: Arizona, Arizona State, Utah, BYU, Colorado, Iowa State

A 4-team playoff to get an actual football playoff spot would be cool. At least we would have a chance when the ACC is done being raided. Meanwhile... a basketball conference with Syracuse, UConn, Louisville, Kansas, Houston, and Arizona is not too shabby. And BYU is ready to invest.

Is it perfect? No.

 

[SURules]

Is it just me as I am getting so sick of hearing Clemson, FSU, and a few others diss Syracuse along with BC and some others. The “Brands” in one division vs the “Non-Brands” being relegated to another division. How did the SU brand get so bad that we are / will be relegated out of relevancy by Clemson, FSU, etc.. This whole new ACC revenue model is the end of the ACC.

 

[Orangefizz]

Is it just me as I am getting so sick of hearing Clemson, FSU, and a few others diss Syracuse along with BC and some others. The “Brands” in one division vs the “Non-Brands” being relegated to another division. How did the SU brand get so bad that we are / will be relegated out of relevancy by Clemson, FSU, etc.. This whole new ACC revenue model is the end of the ACC.

These are all temporary Band-Aids for the next few years. By the end of this decade the top brands will move on to the big two conference and we will either merge with the big 12 or reconstitute the ACC

 

[SURules]

These are all temporary Band-Aids for the next few years. By the end of this decade the top brands will move on to the big two conference and we will either merge with the big 12 or reconstitute the ACC

Maybe I am older but I remember when we were as big or bigger than many of those considered “Brands” now.

Edit: when has UNC done anything in football? Clemson after their next coaching change could very well be back to their normal Tommy West days. I could go on.

 

[Archbold44]

Maybe I am older but I remember when we were as big or bigger than many of those considered “Brands” now.

Edit: when has UNC done anything in football? Clemson after their next coaching change could very well be back to their normal Tommy West days. I could go on.

The reality is that public schools have an inherent advantage over private schools. When you are graduating 2-3X the students, you have 2-3X the alumni base. Simple math is that, over 50 years, you end up with a lot more "fans." Meanwhile, all schools have "locals" to support them. When Clemson is on TV, they need a lower percentage of their casual fans to watch to get big ratings. Clemson has more alumni to compete for and buy tickets... meaning higher prices. If Clemson goes back to the West days, those advantages will remain. Florida State at 2-10 last year outdrew 10-3 Syracuse at the gate AND on TV.

Once upon a time, we were a basketball brand. Somehow, we allowed that to get weaker and weaker. Our football brand was really good in the decades surrounding each 1960 (Brown/Davis/Little) and surrounding 1990 (McPherson/Graves/McNabb). But who was President when we won our one football title? A guy (Eisenhower) born in 1890. Even our 2003 hoops title is starting to age. 22 years ago and counting. Final fours are nice... Houston has 7, we have 6. Nobody considers Houston a brand or blue blood.

If the Big 10 was expanding in 1996, maybe we would have been a candidate as we were a top 20 team in both major sports for 10 years straight. But it was not the case. We fit the Big East nicely back then anyway.

 

[texascpa]

The reality is that public schools have an inherent advantage over private schools. When you are graduating 2-3X the students, you have 2-3X the alumni base. Simple math is that, over 50 years, you end up with a lot more "fans." Meanwhile, all schools have "locals" to support them. When Clemson is on TV, they need a lower percentage of their casual fans to watch to get big ratings. Clemson has more alumni to compete for and buy tickets... meaning higher prices. If Clemson goes back to the West days, those advantages will remain. Florida State at 2-10 last year outdrew 10-3 Syracuse at the gate AND on TV.

Once upon a time, we were a basketball brand. Somehow, we allowed that to get weaker and weaker. Our football brand was really good in the decades surrounding each 1960 (Brown/Davis/Little) and surrounding 1990 (McPherson/Graves/McNabb). But who was President when we won our one football title? A guy (Eisenhower) born in 1890. Even our 2003 hoops title is starting to age. 22 years ago and counting. Final fours are nice... Houston has 7, we have 6. Nobody considers Houston a brand or blue blood.

If the Big 10 was expanding in 1996, maybe we would have been a candidate as we were a top 20 team in both major sports for 10 years straight. But it was not the case. We fit the Big East nicely back then anyway.

I get what you are saying, but Clemson is a bad example. Clemson has about 28K students vs SU's 23K (according to MS CoPilot) . That's about 1K more a year that graduate before taking in consideration drop-out rates. That's not a large difference and certainly not 2-3x.

 

[oldpinepoint]

Bottom line is we sucked during the exponential growth of football in the last 20 years. That hurt our brand immensely.

 

[supp]

The reality is that public schools have an inherent advantage over private schools. When you are graduating 2-3X the students, you have 2-3X the alumni base. Simple math is that, over 50 years, you end up with a lot more "fans." Meanwhile, all schools have "locals" to support them. When Clemson is on TV, they need a lower percentage of their casual fans to watch to get big ratings. Clemson has more alumni to compete for and buy tickets... meaning higher prices. If Clemson goes back to the West days, those advantages will remain. Florida State at 2-10 last year outdrew 10-3 Syracuse at the gate AND on TV.

Once upon a time, we were a basketball brand. Somehow, we allowed that to get weaker and weaker. Our football brand was really good in the decades surrounding each 1960 (Brown/Davis/Little) and surrounding 1990 (McPherson/Graves/McNabb). But who was President when we won our one football title? A guy (Eisenhower) born in 1890. Even our 2003 hoops title is starting to age. 22 years ago and counting. Final fours are nice... Houston has 7, we have 6. Nobody considers Houston a brand or blue blood.

If the Big 10 was expanding in 1996, maybe we would have been a candidate as we were a top 20 team in both major sports for 10 years straight. But it was not the case. We fit the Big East nicely back then anyway.

This is a conversation that's been had on these boards for a long time but it bears repeating that major college fan bases generally rely on non-alums to fill stadiums and provide eyeballs for tv. This is often equally the case for public schools. Maybe more so for publics if the college team is the surrogate pro team and source of local pride for many in a state, like Alabama for example.

Syracuse may be a private school but it has a huge advantage compared to other privates in that there is no public school that can challenge it for fan loyalty in the state. Even taking the NY metro area out of the equation where there is little in the way of state pride or sustained college sports fandom, the upstate population is greater than that of a number of SEC and southern ACC states. This, I believe, is why SU has always been on the radar for major conference leaders during the various realignments going back to 1989. I don't see that changing in the future.

SU has a lot of non-alum fans, myself included. The stadium is small but SU does well on tv. The school has had sustained periods of national prominence in both major sports in recent history. Not many private schools can make that claim, Notre Dame included. In a national superconference scenario, I think the marketing experts will ensure that we are very much in the conversation.

 

[Orangefizz]

Maybe I am older but I remember when we were as big or bigger than many of those considered “Brands” now.

Edit: when has UNC done anything in football? Clemson after their next coaching change could very well be back to their normal Tommy West days. I could go on.

Unfortunately perception is reality.

North Carolina is one of the most valuable brands and will be in great demand by both the SEC and Big 10, even though their football has been bad and basketball is on a current downtrend (compared to Duke)

 

[HtownOrange]

There is another perspective. Concentrating all the "brands" to two conferences means several "brands" will fall to mediocre or bottom feeder status. If it happens quickly (withing sixish years) we may see things go back to the regional conferences. I think it will need a few more years but the real big dogs will not be happy as mediocre nor will their fans. The pretenders will not be happy becoming bottom feeders nor will their fans.

Even the NFL, as well as all pro leagues, is broken down into smaller divisions so that winning their respective division is important, at some level. Unless the NCAA allows multi-game playoffs within the conferences, the only teams with true bragging rights is the conference champs and the national champ.

If the NCAA allows multi-game playoffs within the conferences then expansion to some degree makes sense

Regardless, more teams are needed as fodder for the big dogs to rack up wins. Games within the conferences are zero sum game. The present SEC and B1G are top heavy with big dogs, some will lose. They need more fodder to rack up wins.

 

[SouthernCuse]

Regardless, more teams are needed as fodder for the big dogs to rack up wins. Games within the conferences are zero sum game. The present SEC and B1G are top heavy with big dogs, some will lose. They need more fodder to rack up wins.

Are Oklahoma fans going to settle for going 6-7. I guess so, there will be some fun popcorn grumbling to watch, but they will settle. Nebraska has settled for even less. Arkansas used to be a national power in the Big 8, now they are an also ran, except in track and CC, there they run pretty fast. They are in the SEC, there is lots of $$$ to count, and there is always hope for next year.

I don't want a 2 super league world, but they rarely ask me.

 

[NJCuse97]

The reality is that public schools have an inherent advantage over private schools. When you are graduating 2-3X the students, you have 2-3X the alumni base. Simple math is that, over 50 years, you end up with a lot more "fans." Meanwhile, all schools have "locals" to support them. When Clemson is on TV, they need a lower percentage of their casual fans to watch to get big ratings. Clemson has more alumni to compete for and buy tickets... meaning higher prices. If Clemson goes back to the West days, those advantages will remain. Florida State at 2-10 last year outdrew 10-3 Syracuse at the gate AND on TV.

FSU's gate has to do with them having a more than 30,000 seat capacity. Their potential capacity is almost 2x ours. Little to no money is made on gate anyway (see the Lally vs AW thread, where the Lallys say as much themselves). That said, a full stadium looks better on TV, so filling it up matters for that.

Clemson is a public/private school not unlike Cornell. It has land grant status and state funding for research. It is not much bigger than SU and they are founded 20 years after us. There is no real disparity there, as we are both R1 research institutes, but SU needs to up it's STEM research commitments and establish a medical college. For football, it all comes down to wins and a recency bias. As others have said, Clemson's football prestige and success is more recent (the last ten years) than most care to believe. They have 50 more wins historically (thanks to the last 20 years) and we have a better bowl win percentage (they have 50 bowls to our 39 - again, thanks to the last 20 years).

 

[Toga]

There is another perspective. Concentrating all the "brands" to two conferences means several "brands" will fall to mediocre or bottom feeder status. If it happens quickly (withing sixish years) we may see things go back to the regional conferences. I think it will need a few more years but the real big dogs will not be happy as mediocre nor will their fans. The pretenders will not be happy becoming bottom feeders nor will their fans.

Even the NFL, as well as all pro leagues, is broken down into smaller divisions so that winning their respective division is important, at some level. Unless the NCAA allows multi-game playoffs within the conferences, the only teams with true bragging rights is the conference champs and the national champ.

If the NCAA allows multi-game playoffs within the conferences then expansion to some degree makes sense

Regardless, more teams are needed as fodder for the big dogs to rack up wins. Games within the conferences are zero sum game. The present SEC and B1G are top heavy with big dogs, some will lose. They need more fodder to rack up wins.

Hello Modder. Hello Fodder.

 

[LAorange44]

Bottom line is we sucked during the exponential growth of football in the last 20 years. That hurt our brand immensely.

Bingo. Our brand sucks. Fran has a lot of work to do to undo that brand but he is doing an admirable job so far.

 

[oldpinepoint]

Bingo. Our brand sucks. Fran has a lot of work to do to undo that brand but he is doing an admirable job so far.

Our brand doesn’t suck our brand is inconsistent, we need to be consistently good to occasionally a great team. That would help change the narrative

 

[HtownOrange]

Are Oklahoma fans going to settle for going 6-7. I guess so, there will be some fun popcorn grumbling to watch, but they will settle. Nebraska has settled for even less. Arkansas used to be a national power in the Big 8, now they are an also ran, except in track and CC, there they run pretty fast. They are in the SEC, there is lots of $$$ to count, and there is always hope for next year.

I don't want a 2 super league world, but they rarely ask me.

Arkansas was in the Southwest Conference for 75+ years. They won 14 conference titles and one national title in the SWC. They have not won the SEC title, though they have some division titles. They were not really a top dog, like Texas, Alabama, etc. They have accepted the money but will the fans be happy when they lose more games?

Both Nebraska and Oklahoma ruled the Big 8, to be sure. However, Nebraska essentially became a non-entity towards the end of their tenure in the Big 12, jumping to the B1G as a better payday and an excuse to leave the Texas influence. They are accepting a payday but their fans are not happy. More teams in the B1G and a multi-team playoff in the conference would benefit Nebraska, maybe.

As for Oklahoma, the fans are very displeased with their performance last season in the SEC and are already complaining. The school may not be as willing to leave the SEC but the fans are not likely to support a mediocre or losing team for a long time. Fans are already calling for Venables job (he's been mediocre to date, though he walked into a rough situation when Lincoln Riley took half the offense to USC). An expanded SEC with multi-team conference playoffs or regional conferences would benefit OU.

I agree that money will be a big issue but then, that is why we are in this current set-up.

 

[WoadBlue]

The reality is that the ACC is the only conference left that has desirable teams for the SEC or B1G. And I am skeptical that he B1G or SEC want/need Syracuse. Just no real point to it. If Texas, Ohio State, and others start leaving these conferences to do the Notre Dame thing... then maybe the remaining schools could start adding.

One question is whether the ACC should be proactive to try to raid the B12 now while it is the arguable #3 and risk forcing teams out... or wait until teams are poached and the ACC drops down to the B12's level or below to #4. I don't know the answer. For example, if the ACC added Houston, Arizona State, Arizona, and West Virginia to get to 22 teams/21 football... that would not really make the ACC any more valuable now, but protect against what happens if the best teams bolt to the SEC/B1G. But what good if it forces the best teams to bolt to the SEC/B1G. But what is the likelihood that they are not leaving anyway. And so on.

For a conference that cannot even schedule logically (see recent 18 team schedule), I cannot image them deciding this difficult issue correctly. Frankly, it makes me wonder if Syracuse should not be proactive in trying to join the B12 for stability purposes. I don't like the idea of Pitt/Louisville/SMU being more desirable for the B12 if the ACC is gutted. Is it worth sticking with BC, Wake Forest, and other other private schools in the ACC while it fizzles away? For example, if Syracuse, Pitt, Boston College, and UConn joined the B12... there would be some pretty interesting divisions for football and basketball, while giving the B12 a NE presence (hello, ESPN!):

East: Syracuse, Pitt, BC, UConn, West Virginia
TX: Houston, Baylor, Texas Tech, TCU, Oklahoma State.
MW: UCF, Kansas, Kansas St, Iowa State, Cincinnati
West:

Or bring Louisville, SMU, Va Tech, and USF with us:

East: Syracuse, Pitt, BC, UConn, WVU, Va Tech
Mideast: UCF, USF, Louisville, Cincinnati, Kansas, Kansas State
TX: Houston, Baylor, Texas Tech, TCU, Oklahoma State, SMU
West: Arizona, Arizona State, Utah, BYU, Colorado, Iowa State

A 4-team playoff to get an actual football playoff spot would be cool. At least we would have a chance when the ACC is done being raided. Meanwhile... a basketball conference with Syracuse, UConn, Louisville, Kansas, Houston, and Arizona is not too shabby. And BYU is ready to invest.

Is it perfect? No.

I am always interested when I see someone assert some school as a value to the ACC that I think of no value. In your case, that school is Houston. TTU averages about 20K more fans per football game than Houston. TTU also has about 3 times the booster power that Houston can muster. For that, see first the co-Chair with Nick Saban of the Presidential commission on CFB Cody Campbell. Houston has never had a booster remotely close to his power in college athletics or to his proven ability and desire to donate to his school.

Houston was the last school to join the SWC in the 1970s and so never had any real rivalry with SMU, or any SWC school except for maybe hometown Rice.

On the other hand, If the Big 12 wants Syracuse, Yormark will pitch pairing Syracuse with UConn. He has always wanted UConn in the Big 12, and that makes 0 sense unless he can get Syracuse too. And he might then also want BC, because even before the BE was founded, UConn relied on playing BC in many sports. I would assume that he would find The BackYard Brawl appealing, but I don't think he would covet Pitt.

 

[Cheriehoop]

I am always interested when I see someone assert some school as a value to the ACC that I think of no value. In your case, that school is Houston. TTU averages about 20K more fans per football game than Houston. TTU also has about 3 times the booster power that Houston can muster. For that, see first the co-Chair with Nick Saban of the Presidential commission on CFB Cody Campbell. Houston has never had a booster remotely close to his power in college athletics or to his proven ability and desire to donate to his school.

Houston was the last school to join the SWC in the 1970s and so never had any real rivalry with SMU, or any SWC school except for maybe hometown Rice.

On the other hand, If the Big 12 wants Syracuse, Yormark will pitch pairing Syracuse with UConn. He has always wanted UConn in the Big 12, and that makes 0 sense unless he can get Syracuse too. And he might then also want BC, because even before the BE was founded, UConn relied on playing BC in many sports. I would assume that he would find The BackYard Brawl appealing, but I don't think he would covet Pitt.

I bet UConn fans had enough of Houston when they were in the AAC together right before UConn bolted back to the Big East.

 

[kcsu]

Lets assume the next 5 years will determine the long term future of college sports. Trump listened to Saben and I believe that there is going to legislation approved within the next year no more than two that is going to level the playing field.
Lets also assume Syracuse is on a major upswing. These two things happening at the same time are very good for our future.
Fran is as Hot a coach as there is. A rising star. We are going to have incredible exposure this season based on our schedule. If we can be competitive and hold our own this year I believe that 26 could be a year that we make some real noise . If so and if legislation is on the horizon at the same time we might just catch a wave. Timing as they say is everything.

 

[NJneer12]

Lets assume the next 5 years will determine the long term future of college sports. Trump listened to Saben and I believe that there is going to legislation approved within the next year no more than two that is going to level the playing field.
Lets also assume Syracuse is on a major upswing. These two things happening at the same time are very good for our future.
Fran is as Hot a coach as there is. A rising star. We are going to have incredible exposure this season based on our schedule. If we can be competitive and hold our own this year I believe that 26 could be a year that we make some real noise . If so and if legislation is on the horizon at the same time we might just catch a wave. Timing as they say is everything.

Agreed. Cuse was coming off Marrone, The Express was a few years old, those few FF runs, and B2B lax titles with their ACC invite.

I'd say we're building up again with Fran, Kiyan, and lax again. Lfgo

 

[Toga]

Lets assume the next 5 years will determine the long term future of college sports. Trump listened to Saben and I believe that there is going to legislation approved within the next year no more than two that is going to level the playing field.
Lets also assume Syracuse is on a major upswing. These two things happening at the same time are very good for our future.
Fran is as Hot a coach as there is. A rising star. We are going to have incredible exposure this season based on our schedule. If we can be competitive and hold our own this year I believe that 26 could be a year that we make some real noise . If so and if legislation is on the horizon at the same time we might just catch a wave. Timing as they say is everything.

I like the cut of your jib.

 

[WoadBlue]

Are Oklahoma fans going to settle for going 6-7. I guess so, there will be some fun popcorn grumbling to watch, but they will settle. Nebraska has settled for even less. Arkansas used to be a national power in the Big 8, now they are an also ran, except in track and CC, there they run pretty fast. They are in the SEC, there is lots of $$$ to count, and there is always hope for next year.

I don't want a 2 super league world, but they rarely ask me.

Arkansas was in the SWC not the Big 8. Arkansas hated being under the Longhorn thumb.

I think before long many OU fans will realize that they traded winning for more money, and that more money cannot replace winning in their hearts. But it will be too late.

A Top Tier of college sports (because such a football division also will create a basketball division to its liking) will be terrible in many ways.

 

[WoadBlue]

I bet UConn fans had enough of Houston when they were in the AAC together right before UConn bolted back to the Big East.

UConn clearly saw being in the AAC as not worth the time. UConn football gained nothing and separated totally from the old BE schools, its basketball took a pretty big hit. So I would bet that UConn would not join the Big 12 unless at least Syracuse also were joining - so it could keep a major basketball foe from the old BE.

 

[SURules]

Lets assume the next 5 years will determine the long term future of college sports. Trump listened to Saben and I believe that there is going to legislation approved within the next year no more than two that is going to level the playing field.
Lets also assume Syracuse is on a major upswing. These two things happening at the same time are very good for our future.
Fran is as Hot a coach as there is. A rising star. We are going to have incredible exposure this season based on our schedule. If we can be competitive and hold our own this year I believe that 26 could be a year that we make some real noise . If so and if legislation is on the horizon at the same time we might just catch a wave. Timing as they say is everything.

I’ve said for a long time now that in the end, Government was going to get involved. Just to many teams in prominent states will be left out which will push it. I’m not a fan of government involvement usually but this time it is inevitable.