ACC, PAC-12, and BIG alliance / conference realignment | Page 386 | Syracusefan.com

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

WoadBlue said:
The BT and SEC are both waltzing around one another trying to figure how to finalize this crap to their ultimate advantage. Meanwhile, there are people actively trying to save the ACC, though ESPN seems unconcerned to make an effort on its part.

The way I see it is that the BT MUST get into the South to ever have a real chance to equal SEC football quality top to bottom. The SEC will be hurt badly over time if the BT expands big in the South meaning a half dozen schools kind of expansion.

Then we have all the networks. More than just ESPN and Fox would love to show a bunch of Major conference football and basketball. So if there are only 2 Major conferences left, all those other networks get cut out. If just one of those other networks would become very aggressive about wanting to back the ACC, then we could see some real explosions.

Other than, I think that the BT and SEC together backed by ESPN and Fox will squeeze the ACC toward death. They intend to apply major pressure until they can make several schools jump just to avoid having to cut sports. A passive ACC will either end up as the next SWC (DEAD) or as the next Pac (permanently reduced in status). And when either happens to the ACC, the BT and SEC together will have total control. They would then be unlikely to even want to allow the Big 12 to have a slot in their playoffs.
Expand...
Assume the B1G gets UNC/UVa to get into the South. Assume the SEC takes FSU, Clemson, Ga Tech, and Louisville to pull all rivalries in house. Then they can go to 9 conference games too. 20 teams = 10 team divisions. 9 conference games. Rotating divisional membership to keep schedules fresh.

I do not see either conference pushing past 20. The B1G would do it to get several brands... but I do not think EsecPN would let that happen. So 20/20 seems more likely.

That leaves the ACC with Miami, Va Tech, Pitt, Syracuse, BC, NC State, Duke, Wake Forest, SMU, Stanford, and Cal. Add UConn and we are at 12 teams. If we kept one AQ, we would be no better or worse off than during the Big East era. You could divide the conference into: Northeast: Miami, Va Tech, Pitt, Syracuse, BC, UConn and Southwest: SMU, NC State, Stanford, Cal, Duke, Wake Forest. Or, if we could snag West Virginia from the B12, with Memphis taking its place... that would be a doable swap for all... and then add UConn to the N and USF to the S to get to 14. I could live with that. All we ever want is an AQ in case it all comes together...

We would be a clear Tier 2. But we are kind of now anyway.
 
Archbold44 said:
Assume the B1G gets UNC/UVa to get into the South. Assume the SEC takes FSU, Clemson, Ga Tech, and Louisville to pull all rivalries in house. Then they can go to 9 conference games too. 20 teams = 10 team divisions. 9 conference games. Rotating divisional membership to keep schedules fresh.

I do not see either conference pushing past 20. The B1G would do it to get several brands... but I do not think EsecPN would let that happen. So 20/20 seems more likely.

That leaves the ACC with Miami, Va Tech, Pitt, Syracuse, BC, NC State, Duke, Wake Forest, SMU, Stanford, and Cal. Add UConn and we are at 12 teams. If we kept one AQ, we would be no better or worse off than during the Big East era. You could divide the conference into: Northeast: Miami, Va Tech, Pitt, Syracuse, BC, UConn and Southwest: SMU, NC State, Stanford, Cal, Duke, Wake Forest. Or, if we could snag West Virginia from the B12, with Memphis taking its place... that would be a doable swap for all... and then add UConn to the N and USF to the S to get to 14. I could live with that. All we ever want is an AQ in case it all comes together...

We would be a clear Tier 2. But we are kind of now anyway.
Expand...
Without or limiting the “No’s”, let’s add WVU
 
jr4750 said:
UNC looking a greener pastures:

www.footballscoop.com

North Carolina reportedly among schools with sights set on SEC

Inside Carolina shared today that North Carolina is among a group of schools "seeking a potential departure from the ACC" when the next round of conference realignment co
www.footballscoop.com www.footballscoop.com
Expand...
This is hilarious.

Sure, go from being conference royalty to the new kid in the conference.

That's gonna go great.
 
Basically every program is looking to go somewhere with more security/money. I'm sure Cuse prefers B1G, but would be happy to so unspeakable things if the SEC made them an offer.
 
OttoinGrotto said:
Counterpoint -

mo money mo problems
Expand...
It is funny that schools like UNC love to crow about the success of their athletics programs. Yet literally the only thing that matters to them is keeping up with the Jones's, athletic performance be damned.

FSU will take endless seasons of 6-6 football if they can make SEC money.
 
This 10,000 post thread seems awfully political in nature. Conferences and states playing geo-political games over where colleges end up in the pecking order. Perhaps this thread is the definition of “politics”?

Yet it remains unlocked.

Can someone please enlighten me on what I may post again, without fear of locking a thread?

Thanks.
 
Forgive me if this is a dumb question, I’ve read into this but not enough to know as much as others because it’s a complicated mess but… is throwing the kitchen sink at ND to lock them in as a full time member, to create stability to the conference so far out of the question?

Edit: like fox and ESPN are the big players, but is there a way to rope NBC in with the ACC and ND?
 
Scooch said:
It is funny that schools like UNC love to crow about the success of their athletics programs. Yet literally the only thing that matters to them is keeping up with the Jones's, athletic performance be damned.

FSU will take endless seasons of 6-6 football if they can make SEC money.
Expand...
Well, they think the money will fix the problems...but the real issue is unrealistic booster expectations on winning and hiring the wrong coaches. Being a head coach at some of these schools is insanely difficult given expectations and the booster culture. Yes, you will get 10m a year for five years, but you're likely bought out after three and thrown to the curb for the next guy who has to win immediately.

I never thought UNC had those folks on the football side but who knows.
 
Never mind I asked Googles Gemini and got a great answer… I don’t need you losers (Jking I love u)

The ACC is indeed facing significant challenges to its long-term stability, particularly as its current media rights contract with ESPN extends to 2036, putting it at a substantial financial disadvantage compared to the SEC and Big Ten. Recent legal settlements with Clemson and Florida State have made it easier for schools to potentially leave the conference in the future by reducing exit fees, which further highlights the instability.

Here are the best options to elevate and secure the ACC's future:

1. Maximize Revenue through Innovative Distribution and Performance Incentives

Unequal Revenue Sharing: This is arguably the most crucial step. The ACC has already begun to implement a new revenue distribution model that provides a "brand" fund and rewards schools based on viewership numbers and competitive success in football and men's and women's basketball. This addresses the concerns of top programs like Clemson and Florida State, who generate the most revenue for the conference but felt undervalued under the previous equal distribution model. Continuing to refine and expand this model is essential to incentivize high performance and retain top brands.

Explore New Revenue Streams: The ACC needs to be aggressive in finding additional ways to generate income beyond its current ESPN deal. This could include:

Strategic Partnerships: Seeking out additional corporate sponsors for various conference events and initiatives.

Direct-to-Consumer (DTC) Offerings: While challenging for a single conference, exploring niche content or exclusive access through a DTC platform could be a long-term goal.

International Reach: Leveraging the global appeal of some of its brands (e.g., North Carolina basketball, Florida State football) to attract international viewership and sponsorships.

Negotiate a Stronger Media Deal (when possible): While the current deal runs until 2036, any opportunities to revisit or renegotiate aspects of the contract that could increase payouts should be pursued aggressively. The current deal is significantly below market value compared to the Big Ten and SEC.

2. Leverage the Notre Dame Relationship More Effectively

Notre Dame's unique independent status in football, coupled with its full ACC membership in other sports, presents both a challenge and an opportunity for the ACC.

Increased Football Integration (the "mortgage" aspect):

More Marquee Matchups: The ACC is already looking to ensure its top football brands (Clemson, Florida State, Miami, North Carolina) play Notre Dame more often. This creates more valuable television inventory and boosts the ACC's overall football perception.

Incentivize Full Membership: While difficult, the ACC should continue to explore ways to incentivize Notre Dame to become a full football member. This would bring their significant media value and national brand fully under the ACC umbrella. This could involve offering Notre Dame a highly favorable revenue share, or even a structure that allows them to maintain a degree of scheduling flexibility. The current landscape, with the expanded College Football Playoff, might make full conference membership more appealing to Notre Dame in the long run to guarantee a path to the playoffs without relying on at-large bids that could be impacted by a weaker strength of schedule as an independent.

Bowl Game Tie-ins: Ensure that Notre Dame's continued relationship strengthens the ACC's overall bowl tie-ins and playoff access, potentially by linking their performance to the conference's automatic bids or higher-tier bowl slots.

Amplify Non-Football Sports: While football drives the most revenue, Notre Dame's presence in ACC basketball and other Olympic sports adds significant value to the ACC Network and the conference's overall athletic prestige. Promoting these matchups and highlighting their competitive success can add value.

3. Strengthen the Conference's Brand and Competitive Standing

Consistent On-Field Success: Ultimately, winning drives revenue and prestige. The ACC needs its top football and basketball programs to consistently compete for national championships. This means investing in coaching, facilities, and NIL opportunities to attract and retain elite talent.

Strategic Expansion (if necessary and beneficial): While the ACC recently added Cal, Stanford, and SMU, any future expansion should be strategic, focusing on schools that bring significant media value, new geographic markets, or strong academic profiles that align with the ACC's identity. However, with the current contract through 2036, significant expansion may not be the immediate solution for revenue issues.

Maintain Academic & Cultural Identity: The ACC has historically prided itself on a balance of strong academics and competitive athletics. Maintaining this identity can be a differentiator from other conferences and appeal to certain institutions and fan bases.

4. Advocate for National College Athletics Reform

Federal Legislation for NIL: Commissioner Jim Phillips has emphasized the need for federal legislation to create a uniform and stable framework for Name, Image, and Likeness (NIL) across the country. This would level the playing field and reduce state-by-state discrepancies that can put conferences at a disadvantage.

NCAA Governance Reform: The ACC, alongside other conferences, needs to be actively involved in discussions about the future of NCAA governance, ensuring that any new models support broad-based programming and the student-athlete experience while addressing the financial realities of modern college sports.

The ACC is in a challenging position, but by focusing on maximizing its existing assets, innovating its revenue model, strategically leveraging its relationship with Notre Dame, and advocating for broader systemic change in college athletics, it can work towards a more secure and competitive future. The recent settlement with Clemson and Florida State, while highlighting instability, also provides a pathway for the ACC to adapt its revenue distribution to better align with performance and viewership. The period leading up to 2036 will be critical for the ACC to demonstrate its value and position itself for a more lucrative future media deal.
 
Nahson said:
Forgive me if this is a dumb question, I’ve read into this but not enough to know as much as others because it’s a complicated mess but… is throwing the kitchen sink at ND to lock them in as a full time member, to create stability to the conference so far out of the question?

Edit: like fox and ESPN are the big players, but is there a way to rope NBC in with the ACC and ND?
Expand...
The most important thing to ND is a path to the championship. As long as there are at-large bids ND will stay independent. Under the current structure (which Sankey set up to assure more than one SEC team in the playoff), they top out as the #5 seed (with a home game) which is perfectly fine with them. Unless there is a drastic change which ends at-large bids there's no need for them to join a conference.
 
just for funsies i'd like to see the BIG12 and ACC combine, take smaller teams, create divisions, and let chaos reign

Do 4 divisions split with the map in mind. 8 conf games + a regional championship (1 vs 4, 3 vs 2) then maybe a total conference champ

idk - gotta do something, can't just sit there!
 
richmondcuse03 said:
Well, they think the money will fix the problems...but the real issue is unrealistic booster expectations on winning and hiring the wrong coaches. Being a head coach at some of these schools is insanely difficult given expectations and the booster culture. Yes, you will get 10m a year for five years, but you're likely bought out after three and thrown to the curb for the next guy who has to win immediately.

I never thought UNC had those folks on the football side but who knows.
Expand...
Agree. That’s an huge issue as college sports becomes pro sports. Pro sports are designed to facilitate parity and even the greatest dynasties have a shelf life. The power players in college sports expect to reign over the competition like they did in the 1970s. They don’t want parity, but NIL, player payments, conference expansion, and the like are actually creating it in a non-linear way.
 
Archbold44 said:
Assume the B1G gets UNC/UVa to get into the South. Assume the SEC takes FSU, Clemson, Ga Tech, and Louisville to pull all rivalries in house. Then they can go to 9 conference games too. 20 teams = 10 team divisions. 9 conference games. Rotating divisional membership to keep schedules fresh.

I do not see either conference pushing past 20. The B1G would do it to get several brands... but I do not think EsecPN would let that happen. So 20/20 seems more likely.

That leaves the ACC with Miami, Va Tech, Pitt, Syracuse, BC, NC State, Duke, Wake Forest, SMU, Stanford, and Cal. Add UConn and we are at 12 teams. If we kept one AQ, we would be no better or worse off than during the Big East era. You could divide the conference into: Northeast: Miami, Va Tech, Pitt, Syracuse, BC, UConn and Southwest: SMU, NC State, Stanford, Cal, Duke, Wake Forest. Or, if we could snag West Virginia from the B12, with Memphis taking its place... that would be a doable swap for all... and then add UConn to the N and USF to the S to get to 14. I could live with that. All we ever want is an AQ in case it all comes together...

We would be a clear Tier 2. But we are kind of now anyway.
Expand...
Why do you not see either BT or SEC pushing beyond 20. For a very long time the Overton's Window on this was 12 would be the max. Then it widened to 16. Then 18, Now you say the max must be 20. WHY?

The SEC and BT are in a shootout to prove who can secure top dollar pay outs forever and then go win almost all the championships in the 2 revenue sports. They only thing that will stop them from adding until they are gorged is lack of fiscal backing from networks to do so. The BT arranged to make that easy with its Fox deals with both NBC and CBS. Fox could use that to be able to show a coast to coast league of even 30 members and make big bucks.

And if the BT goes to 30 or even just 24, it will secure ND and at least 5 ACC schools. The SEC then would expand to at least 24, adding at least 7 ACC teams and perhaps KU.

Air that point those tow leagues will be between them so large that they will feel the next logical, maybe even necessary move is for them to set up as the 2 leagues in the new Top Tier of CFB.

You assume the the BT and SEC are always going to be willing to allow even 1 league that has not bettered itself from where it is now to be granted an AQ in the football playoff they will own totally. I think both BT and SE. are far too greedy for that. When they can get away with closing the playoffs they control to just their two leagues, they will do so. They will take 16 of 16 slots in the playoffs.

Insatiable greed is insatiable greed.

And then you will see them use ACC history to argue why they should also have their own closed 2 league basketball tournament. The ACC long sponsored the Dixie Classic, all 8 ACC teams and 8 non-ACC, and then also the all 8 ACC tournament championship. Both tournaments were huge in ticket sales and TV audience.
 
Last edited:
Once the ACC settled with Clemson and FSU, the monetary penalties to leave the ACC with your media rights were defined. In other words, the GORs are basically over. Thus, it is only a matter of time until schools try to leave with 2030/2031 being the target year to leave as the exit fee drops to $75 million. I say try because you have to have to have a better spot lined up which isn't a given. Also, look at when the conference media deals end:

Big 10: 2029/2030
Big 12: 2030/2031
SEC: 2033/2034
ACC: 2035/2036

Officially, ACC schools must give 13 months notice to leave by June 1st of the previous year. Thus no ACC school in leaving during 2025/2026.

If a school is planning to leave the ACC for the Big 10, I would think they would announce it by June 1, 2027 or 2028 to help with the media negotiation. If a school is leaving for the SEC, I would expect them to announce it by June 1, 2029, but it will become obvious they are leaving before then.

One other point. It isn't a given that we end up with a P2 as a third conference could arise by a combination of the best of the Big 12 and ACC to create a P3. How could this happen? Well, it is kind of what happened when the Big 12 was formed in 1994 with the Big 8 combining with 4 schools from the SWC. And, private equity could help fund the new conference. Remember, there was an ACC "Magnificent Seven" of UNC, FSU, Clemson, Miami, NC State, Virginia, and Virginia Tech that supposedly met to figure out a way to break the GORs.
 
IMO the best solution would be to...

1. For the good of college sports we need FB TV contracts, M/W BBall TV contracts, and every other sport TV contracts. IMO there will eventually be challenges to player compensation and the only way to keep the money where it belongs is to separate into 3 contracts. Networks slightly lose out as they no longer bundle everything together.

2. With everything separate we can have different conferences for FB and everything else. That solves a lot of problems with these mega conferences: no regionality, lost rivalries, too much travel.

3. The B18 and SEC merge for FB, add 26 more teams (60 total now), and create their own division for FB. Everything is now under one giant FB TV contract.

4. The NCAA passes a 10 team conference max. Since the 60 team new division is a division and not a conference, that does not apply. FBS, FCS, and so on have to go down to 10 if those conferences are over.

5. The 60 FB teams are separated into 12 five team divisions based on historical conferences. So an SEC East, SEC West, Big 8, SWC, Metro, ACC, B1G East, B1G West, PAC North, PAC South, A10, Big East. That takes care of the parity issue as you can now have 12 kings at the same time.

6. The 60 FB teams are separated into 6 ten team conferences for all other sports. The SEC East/West, Big 8/SWC, Metro/ACC, B1G East/West, PAC North/South, A10/Big East.
 
HRE Otto IV said:
IMO the best solution would be to...

1. For the good of college sports we need FB TV contracts, M/W BBall TV contracts, and every other sport TV contracts. IMO there will eventually be challenges to player compensation and the only way to keep the money where it belongs is to separate into 3 contracts. Networks slightly lose out as they no longer bundle everything together.

2. With everything separate we can have different conferences for FB and everything else. That solves a lot of problems with these mega conferences: no regionality, lost rivalries, too much travel.

3. The B18 and SEC merge for FB, add 26 more teams (60 total now), and create their own division for FB. Everything is now under one giant FB TV contract.

4. The NCAA passes a 10 team conference max. Since the 60 team new division is a division and not a conference, that does not apply. FBS, FCS, and so on have to go down to 10 if those conferences are over.

5. The 60 FB teams are separated into 12 five team divisions based on historical conferences. So an SEC East, SEC West, Big 8, SWC, Metro, ACC, B1G East, B1G West, PAC North, PAC South, A10, Big East. That takes care of the parity issue as you can now have 12 kings at the same time.

6. The 60 FB teams are separated into 6 ten team conferences for all other sports. The SEC East/West, Big 8/SWC, Metro/ACC, B1G East/West, PAC North/South, A10/Big East.
Expand...

So for FB...

SEC East- Tenn, UGA, Fla, UK, Vandy
SEC West- Bama, LSU, Auburn, Ole Miss, Miss State
Big 8- Nebraska, OU, Mizzou, Colorado, KU
SWC- A&M, Texas, Arkansas, Baylor, Houston
Metro- South Carolina, FSU, VA Tech, Louisville, GA Tech
ACC- Clemson, NC State, UNC, UVA, Duke
B1G East- Michigan, Ohio State, Purdue, Indiana, Northwestern
B1G West- Wisconsin, Michigan State, Iowa, Minnesota, Illinois
PAC North- Washington, Oregon, Utah, Cal, Stanford
PAC South- USC, BYU, ASU, UCLA, Zona
A10- Penn State, West Virginia, Pitt, Rutgers, Maryland
Big East- Notre Dame, Miami, SU, BC, UConn

Notes
Big 8 left outs- Iowa State, Okie State, K State
SWC left outs- Texas Tech, TCU, SMU, Rice
Metro left outs- Memphis, Tulane, Southern Miss
ACC left outs- Wake
PAC left outs- Oregon State, Washington State (not counting the newbies)
A10 left outs- UMass
Big East left outs- Temple, USF, Cincy
Big 12 left outs- UCF

*I stuck MD in the A10 group because I felt that they fit better in that division. I suppose I could have put VA Tech there, MD in the ACC, and stuck NC State with the Metro.


For BBall...

SEC- has all 10 OGs

Big 8/SWC- has Houston and Arkansas plus 8 of the OG B12 (Nebraska, OU, Mizzou, Colorado, KU, A&M, Texas, Baylor)

Metro/ACC- has a former ACC member (South Carolina), two new ACCs (VA Tech, Louisville), and 7 of 9 OG ACC (FSU, GA Tech, Clemson, NC State, UNC, UVA, Duke). If you move Maryland here (and remove VA Tech) then you get 8 of 9 OG.

B1G- has all 10 OGs

PAC- has BYU, newer PAC (Utah), and 8 of 10 OGs (Washington, Oregon, Cal, Stanford, USC, ASU, UCLA, Zona). I know that Cal/Stanford didn't want to be in a conference with BYU when they were in the PAC, but this time aroudn they have no voice. Otherwise they get left behind.

A10/Big East- has Penn State, Maryland, and 8 former Big East members (WV, Pitt, RU, ND, Miami, SU, BC, UConn). If VA Tech is here instead then it is 9 former Big Easts.


The above makes so much more sense historical and geographically.
 
richmondcuse03 said:
Well, they think the money will fix the problems...but the real issue is unrealistic booster expectations on winning and hiring the wrong coaches. Being a head coach at some of these schools is insanely difficult given expectations and the booster culture. Yes, you will get 10m a year for five years, but you're likely bought out after three and thrown to the curb for the next guy who has to win immediately.

I never thought UNC had those folks on the football side but who knows.
Expand...
Getting bought out after 3 is a perk.
 
WoadBlue said:
Why do you not see either BT or SEC pushing beyond 20. For a very long time the Overton's Window on this was 12 would be the max. Then it widened to 16. Then 18, Now you say the max must be 20. WHY?

The SEC and BT are in a shootout to prove who can secure top dollar pay outs forever and then go win almost all the championships in the 2 revenue sports. They only thing that will stop them from adding until they are gorged is lack of fiscal backing from networks to do so. The BT arranged to make that easy with its Fox deals with both NBC and CBS. Fox could use that to be able to show a coast to coast league of even 30 members and make big bucks.

And if the BT goes to 30 or even just 24, it will secure ND and at least 5 ACC schools. The SEC then would expand to at least 24, adding at least 7 ACC teams and perhaps KU.

Air that point those tow leagues will be between them so large that they will feel the next logical, maybe even necessary move is for them to set up as the 2 leagues in the new Top Tier of CFB.

You assume the the BT and SEC are always going to be willing to allow even 1 league that has not bettered itself from where it is now to be granted an AQ in the football playoff they will own totally. I think both BT and SE. are far too greedy for that. When they can get away with closing the playoffs they control to just their two leagues, they will do so. They will take 16 of 16 slots in the playoffs.

Insatiable greed is insatiable greed.

And then you will see them use ACC history to argue why they should also have their own closed 2 league basketball tournament. The ACC long sponsored the Dixie Classic, all 8 ACC teams and 8 non-ACC, and then also the all 8 ACC tournament championship. Both tournaments were huge in ticket sales and TV audience.
Expand...
I didn't mean ever. I just meant that these things tend to go 2 at a time. The idea that the B1G is going to go from 18 to 24 overnight is more forum fodder than reality/history. How would that make more money for the B1G or strengthen any aspect of the conference?

ND will wait to the bitter end. The B1G and SEC would probably go to odd number of teams to take them, so that is the rush?

This whole thing about money is interesting, but money isn't helping Rutgers satisfy its budget or be a better team than they were in the Big East.
 
JimBoston said:
Once the ACC settled with Clemson and FSU, the monetary penalties to leave the ACC with your media rights were defined. In other words, the GORs are basically over. Thus, it is only a matter of time until schools try to leave with 2030/2031 being the target year to leave as the exit fee drops to $75 million. I say try because you have to have to have a better spot lined up which isn't a given. Also, look at when the conference media deals end:

Big 10: 2029/2030
Big 12: 2030/2031
SEC: 2033/2034
ACC: 2035/2036

Officially, ACC schools must give 13 months notice to leave by June 1st of the previous year. Thus no ACC school in leaving during 2025/2026.

If a school is planning to leave the ACC for the Big 10, I would think they would announce it by June 1, 2027 or 2028 to help with the media negotiation. If a school is leaving for the SEC, I would expect them to announce it by June 1, 2029, but it will become obvious they are leaving before then.

One other point. It isn't a given that we end up with a P2 as a third conference could arise by a combination of the best of the Big 12 and ACC to create a P3. How could this happen? Well, it is kind of what happened when the Big 12 was formed in 1994 with the Big 8 combining with 4 schools from the SWC. And, private equity could help fund the new conference. Remember, there was an ACC "Magnificent Seven" of UNC, FSU, Clemson, Miami, NC State, Virginia, and Virginia Tech that supposedly met to figure out a way to break the GORs.
Expand...
I agree that 2030/31 will be the annus horribilus. At that point, all the most highly valued ACC schools will be able to pay their way out of the ACC. Spot how are they going to be kept? What cant the ACC do to make it worth their while to remain out of SEC or BT?

I think that we must make it certain that top producers i. the ACC for both TV numbers and post-season Ws get paid more than those who produced less.

And I think we must that ACC pie get larger by shedding dead weight in terms of TV audience and replacing it with schools with much more upside.

Can we then equal Sec and BT?No even with ND on board fully but we ca get much closer. If we can get the numbers close enough then nobody will leave bedcasu they will get the Lion's hare of the bugger ACC pie.

Overtime that ACC can grow its fan base so that its pie gets very close to the Sec and BT pies.

But 2 conferences cannot do that - only 1 can because there is not enough value in both ACC and Big 12, nor enough elsewhere to add to those 2 leagues, to make up ground vis a vis BT and SEC.

When a man tells you what he intends to do, believe him and act accordingly. Hardcore SEC and BT people across the internet have been preaching for nearly a couple decades that those two leagues were planning to totally take over Major Conference football for themselves and use that basis to then also take over the top level of college hoops.
 

Similar threads

ScriptCuse
    • Like
    • Wow
Big People Beat Up Little People
Replies
20
Views
2K
sufandu
sufandu

Forum statistics

Threads
174,144
Messages
5,137,318
Members
6,106
Latest member
CavaCuse

Share this page

Online statistics

Members online
28
Guests online
1,374
Total visitors
1,402
Totals may include hidden visitors.


...
Top Bottom