Before posting expansion scenarios, please review...FYI

[DoctorBombay]

The established hierarchy, based on $$$$$, is:
(1) B1G/SEC
(2) PAC-12(?)
(3) Big 12
(4) ACC
(5) BigEast & everyone else.

Therefore, it makes no sense to suggest expansion scenarios where a team w/ a higher status would be "taken" by a lower conference, ie:
"The ACC should take Kentucky for their hoops", or,
"The Big 12 should snatch up Tennessee", etc etc
Moreover, no team will leave a league making more $ for a league making less $.

Also, the real visionary here has been Delaney & the B1G. They were the first w/ the BTN, and their expansion aims are far-reaching, hence the taking of RU & MD.
He has ALWAYS coveted ND, and if it takes breaking up the ACC to do so, no biggie. The SEC may now end up playing a huge role because the defection of MD has proven that the ACC is vulnerable. Collusion...maybe. But'll never be proven in court.
OTOH- ND no longer has a reason to get into a conference what w/ their access via the ACC, & wads of cash from NBC.
So, don't expect them to "save" the ACC, just like they didn't "save" the BE. They're selfish a**holes...but they're consistent.

An ACC Network already exists...its called Raycom.
What Swofford did was to secure the facilities of Raycom & have them integrated into the ACC. Thats different than the BTN which started from scratch, and can establish its own rights fees, etc. and pocket all proceeds.
The ACC only pockets 50%, with other 50% split between Raycom & ESPN.
Swofford figured he'd save money by avoiding set-up/start-up costs of a new ACC Network, so he basically signed away all rights to do so.
Its the equivalent of the ACC being a refurbished Corvette, & the BTN being a 2012 Ferrari w/ all the works. Still valuable, but not in the same ballpark.

Finally, the ACC is likely to survive in some form or fashion, and SU still ends up in a better position than before. However, we have to be resigned to play in a league that's a coupla notches below the big boys, especially if the $$ numbers for the SEC Network come true.
That means that the MD's, RU's, and whoever else defects from the ACC or BE will immediately make more $, which will leave us/ACC even further behind.
We'll still be relevant in the ACC after all this is over, just not sittin' at the big boy table. Is it a "BE-2.0" situation....not exactly, but close.
Discuss. :blah:

 

[Alsacs]

The established hierarchy, based on $$$$$, is:
(1) B1G/SEC
(2) PAC-12(?)
(3) Big 12
(4) ACC
(5) BigEast & everyone else.

Therefore, it makes no sense to suggest expansion scenarios where a team w/ a higher status would be "taken" by a lower conference, ie:
"The ACC should take Kentucky for their hoops", or,
"The Big 12 should snatch up Tennessee", etc etc
Moreover, no team will leave a league making more $ for a league making less $.

Also, the real visionary here has been Delaney & the B1G. They were the first w/ the BTN, and their expansion aims are far-reaching, hence the taking of RU & MD.
He has ALWAYS coveted ND, and if it takes breaking up the ACC to do so, no biggie. The SEC may now end up playing a huge role because the defection of MD has proven that the ACC is vulnerable. Collusion...maybe. But'll never be proven in court.
OTOH- ND no longer has a reason to get into a conference what w/ their access via the ACC, & wads of cash from NBC.
So, don't expect them to "save" the ACC, just like they didn't "save" the BE. They're selfish a**holes...but they're consistent.

An ACC Network already exists...its called Raycom.
What Swofford did was to secure the facilities of Raycom & have them integrated into the ACC. Thats different than the BTN which started from scratch, and can establish its own rights fees, etc. and pocket all proceeds.
The ACC only pockets 50%, with other 50% split between Raycom & ESPN.
Swofford figured he'd save money by avoiding set-up/start-up costs of a new ACC Network, so he basically signed away all rights to do so.
Its the equivalent of the ACC being a refurbished Corvette, & the BTN being a 2012 Ferrari... w/ all the works. Still valuable, but not in the same ballpark.

Finally, the ACC is likely to survive in some form or fashion, and SU still ends up in a better position than before. However, we have to be resigned to play in a league that's a coupla notches below the big boys, especially if the $$ numbers for the SEC Network come true.
That means that the MD's, RU's, and whoever else defects from the ACC or BE will immediately make more $, which will leave us/ACC even further behind.
We'll still be relevant in the ACC after all this is over, just not sittin' at the big boy table. Is it a "BE-2.0" situation....not exactly, but close.
Discuss. :blah:

 

[RICuse44]

Thanks for the summary but one question. Why is the big 12 considered superior to the acc? I never really understood this. Sure there is Texas and Oklahoma. But after that (football wise which seems to be running the ship almost exclusively) your best football teams are k state, wvu, ok st, and tcu. Good teams but not upper echelon. Is it their GOR? Maybe I can understand that. But they are a ten team league that is already geographically fragmented. Plus it seems like Texas is their nd. A bunch of a@@holes concerned about only themselves who think they are better than they are.

 

[OrangeCrush22]

Thanks for the summary but one question. Why is the big 12 considered superior to the acc? I never really understood this. Sure there is Texas and Oklahoma. But after that (football wise which seems to be running the ship almost exclusively) your best football teams are k state, wvu, ok st, and tcu. Good teams but not upper echelon. Is it their GOR? Maybe I can understand that. But they are a ten team league that is already geographically fragmented. Plus it seems like Texas is their nd. A bunch of a@@holes concerned about only themselves who think they are better than they are.

Two reasons. A few million more per year, and the BIG one, tie-in vs. the SEC. It's true, though, that Texas can decide they're done and call the PAC at any moment.

 

[TexanMark]

Hearing rumors of Cuse to B1G crazy

 

[dasher]

why don't we let this play out a bit before making broad statements. We don't know what is going on behind the scenes, if anything.

 

[44PRIDE]

Hearing rumors of Cuse to B1G crazy

Any more crazy than Maryland and Rutgers to the B1G? Who would've thought that 3 weeks ago?

 

[TexanMark]

Dasher: If you wanna go crazy read this couchburn
http://csnbbs.com/showthread.php?tid=601617

 

[Alsacs]

Dasher: If you wanna go crazy read this couchburn
http://csnbbs.com/showthread.php?tid=601617

So what I get from that the ACC is going to go to 16 teams and kicking Notre Dame out. My reaction to that .....Right. If ND gets kicked out of the ACC then they will join the B1G no doubt in my mind unless the Big XII gives them the ACC agreement.

 

[TexanMark]

So what I get from that the ACC is going to go to 16 teams and kicking Notre Dame out. My reaction to that .....Right. If ND gets kicked out of the ACC then they will join the B1G no doubt in my mind unless the Big XII gives them the ACC agreement.

It was hard to follow...several tangents. My take is it is BS and the ACC will stay intact. ACC going past 16 teams to me would be an alarm bell but arbigetals sp? alluded that we might go over 16.

 

[Alsacs]

It was hard to follow...several tangents. My take is it is BS and the ACC will stay intact. ACC going past 16 teams to me would be an alarm bell but arbigetals sp? alluded that we might go over 16.

If the ACC goes beyond 16 I am done with caring about college football. I have had enough of Frankenstein conferences and will honestly lose a lot of interest in college football. If Swofford is this dumb I need to get into college athletics administrating because this s#it is a joke. I would rather be in a 10 team league with Duke, Boston College, Wake, Pittsburgh, Miami, Georgia Tech, Clemson, Florida State, and Louisville and let NC State, N. Carolina, Virginia, and Virginia Tech go than add all these BE teams.

 

[obliterata]

There's too many members from the state of North Carolina in the ACC, if I were the football schools I'd pressure the conference to dump Wake Forest at the very least with Duke being next up if they booted two.

I realize this isn't going to happen but it would help more than some of the scenarios that are being mentioned.

 

[SmilinBob]

A friend of mine calls it his Hurricane theory. The 3 Florida's are in separate conferences and all have their own identity BE, ACC and SEC. The Hurricanes leave the big east for "greener" pastures but have reduced themselves to another Florida team and FSU and Miami struggle for years while Florida finally wins its first championship. In other words, by having something the other guy doesn't have it gives kids choices but once Miami joined the ACC it killed them. Now look at A&M, they leave the Big 12 and they have the SEC and also their own schtick. Texas always had the advantage and they were the selectors but now it isn't head to head with the same choices, you have the SEC vs the Big 12.

Now you get an idea of what kind of debacle the ACC is in...WAY TOO MANY NC schools. NCS has to jump to the SEC and the AC gets new eyes for its conference ND, Louisville or whatever. This killed the SWC and it will kill the ACC unless something is done.

 

[ImperialOrange]

I don't think that heirarchy is correct dollar wise. Currently it is B1G, pac12, SEC, big 12, acc dollarwise. An sec network would probably change that quite a bit. Once the new acc deal is in effect the acc and big12 will be paying teams the same BUT the acc contract has a higher ceiling and allows teams their own teams 3rd tier media rights. So an acc team leaving for the big 12 makes no sense since they would immediately be making the same money, have lower potential growth, and have to pay a $50 milIion exit fee for their troubles. What are any of these other confence buyout fees at currently?

In summary, worry about the B1G and sec but not the bevo. Nobody wants the longhorn network as witnessed currently. The bevo is much more unstable depending all on texas and their teams are cheaper to buyout as well.

 

[chakka3421]

Doctor @ Alsacs - while I can understand your positions, you guys are just preaching 1 side of the story as gospel. What your not taking into consideration is a couple of things which still need to play out.

1. Swofford & ESPN - they were blindsided so a new reality will sit in where market access becomes more important than team performance - we need to wait for their response
2. NC schools are all governed by BOT - no school goes anywhere unless the BOT decides
3. UVA & VT may be joined at the hip like Okla & Okie st - easier to pick off Marland, Rutgers, Missou, Colorado, Utah - no state government issues

So finally ImperialOramge makes the better argument - B12 offers no advantage and really is the most unstable. The only way the Pac12 can expand is east - B12 territory - they need to poach 4 schools (maybe just 3 with BYU). If the B10 expands I believe Kansas is the most attractive school right now. Finally the SEC is the only wild card here - if the B12 becomes unstable, then it's easy pickings and the B12 implodes.

My view - Pac12 makes the next move by taking 2 from B12.

A better discussion would be an analysis of who would be the PAC12 best candidates to form a "eastern division" to reduce travel costs for those universities further south & east. But I also think B10 swoops in and takes Kansas & one other (to me UConn makes a lot of sense for B1G to lock up the Boston-NYC corridor along with Kansas out West).

 

[RICuse44]

Doctor @ Alsacs - while I can understand your positions, you guys are just preaching 1 side of the story as gospel. What your not taking into consideration is a couple of things which still need to play out.

1. Swofford & ESPN - they were blindsided so a new reality will sit in where market access becomes more important than team performance - we need to wait for their response
2. NC schools are all governed by BOT - no school goes anywhere unless the BOT decides
3. UVA & VT may be joined at the hip like Okla & Okie st - easier to pick off Marland, Rutgers, Missou, Colorado, Utah - no state government issues

So finally ImperialOramge makes the better argument - B12 offers no advantage and really is the most unstable. The only way the Pac12 can expand is east - B12 territory - they need to poach 4 schools (maybe just 3 with BYU). If the B10 expands I believe Kansas is the most attractive school right now. Finally the SEC is the only wild card here - if the B12 becomes unstable, then it's easy pickings and the B12 implodes.

My view - Pac12 makes the next move by taking 2 from B12.

A better discussion would be an analysis of who would be the PAC12 best candidates to form a "eastern division" to reduce travel costs for those universities further south & east. But I also think B10 swoops in and takes Kansas & one other (to me UConn makes a lot of sense for B1G to lock up the Boston-NYC corridor along with Kansas out West).

What about big 12 GOR? Media rights for 13 years. What does that look like in cash?

 

[chakka3421]

Well that's just it - revenues generated from having no B12 network to revenues generated by PAC12 network. Don't you think Kansas would jump ship if B10 came calling?

We need to wait upon new ACC/ESPN deal - the B10 raid may have been the best thing to happen to the ACC - may provide far more bargaining power to redo the contracts & implement a GOR.

LMAO - way too funny if Maryland & B1G pays for it too with $50 M price tag! Lots of money here to get things right!

 

[007]

What about big 12 GOR? Media rights for 13 years. What does that look like in cash?

There are many who believe that the media rights penalty is highly punitive and therefore will not stand up court. TexanMark posted a great article about liquidating damages and breaches of contracts. Bottom line, the Big12 GOR penalty will likely be no more of a deterrent than the $50 million exit fee was for the ACC.

 

[Alsacs]

Doctor @ Alsacs - while I can understand your positions, you guys are just preaching 1 side of the story as gospel. What your not taking into consideration is a couple of things which still need to play out.

1. Swofford & ESPN - they were blindsided so a new reality will sit in where market access becomes more important than team performance - we need to wait for their response
2. NC schools are all governed by BOT - no school goes anywhere unless the BOT decides
3. UVA & VT may be joined at the hip like Okla & Okie st - easier to pick off Marland, Rutgers, Missou, Colorado, Utah - no state government issues



My view - Pac12 makes the next move by taking 2 from B12.

A better discussion would be an analysis of who would be the PAC12 best candidates to form a "eastern division" to reduce travel costs for those universities further south & east. But I also think B10 swoops in and takes Kansas & one other (to me UConn makes a lot of sense for B1G to lock up the Boston-NYC corridor along with Kansas out West).

So a 13 year GOR makes the Big XII easier to pick off? How about NO. The only way the Big XII breaks up is if Texas decides too do it. Texas isn't going to the Pac-12. The LHN network is tied with ESPN.The Pac-12 Network is tied with News Corp/FOX. That was the holdup during the last round of expansion. ESPN after investing a lot of capital into the LHN Network wasn't going to let it become the reginal Pac-12 channel for Texas without maintaining there interest. Commissioner Scott of the Pac-12 wouldn't allow that so Texas never joined. That is the short and sweet of that issue. UVA and VPI will move and the VA legislature won't give a crap if one goes to the B1G and the other the SEC. The UNC system doesn't care about Wake Forest or Duke and if UNC gets an invite to the SEC or B1G and the other goes to NC State that will be okay as well. The UNC system just won't allow NC State to make the first move without UNC CH being taken care of first. The ACC will be picked off before the Big XII there is no question in that.

 

[chakka3421]

We will just have to wait an see Alsacs. You can be so sure about things all you want but yoursounding more like a clanging bell that nobody wants to listen to anymore.

I am always more interested in people who offer alternative views and various options than people who are so adamant about things that think the are prophets from God. You may be right in the end well good for you. Nothing personal really but your just being a "bully" on this forum based upon all the posts I have read from you.

 

[Alsacs]

We will just have to wait an see Alsacs. You can be so sure about things all you want but yoursounding more like a clanging bell that nobody wants to listen to anymore.

I am always more interested in people who offer alternative views and various options than people who are so adamant about things that think the are prophets from God. You may be right in the end well good for you. Nothing personal really but your just being a "bully" on this forum based upon all the posts I have read from you.

Do you think I like saying stuff that hurts SU, my goodness I am one of the few who sees the writing on the wall. I am analyzing the situation in a non-SU bias manner and won't spew positive stuff that isn't true. How is what I said wrong? You make a statement the Big XII is more vulnerable when in fact they aren't. The Big XII is TEXAS, and until Texas doesn't want to be king anymore that conference will survive. There is no Texas in the ACC, Florida State is a national brand in football and North Carolina is a king in basketball, but football is driving the bus. If the Pac-12 expands it will when Texas/ESPN decide the LHN network can't work and they have 19 years left on the contract. All you said to counter my points let's what and see and I don't want to hear it, well guess what unless Dr. Gross sells the B1G on us adding more money to the conference portfolio or Texas decides to head west for some unforeseen circumstance the ACC will decay more and become the Big East 2.0

 

[orange79]

Dasher: If you wanna go crazy read this couchburn
http://csnbbs.com/showthread.php?tid=601617

Yikes, Mark. 18 pages! Got a brief synopsis? Thx.

 

[chakka3421]

Alsacs - I think we all understand your position - nothing personal but you keep taking over threads anything to do with conference expansion. To me that's the definition of an Internet bully.

 

[DoctorBombay]

We will just have to wait an see Alsacs. You can be so sure about things all you want but yoursounding more like a clanging bell that nobody wants to listen to anymore.

I am always more interested in people who offer alternative views and various options than people who are so adamant about things that think the are prophets from God. You may be right in the end well good for you. Nothing personal really but your just being a "bully" on this forum based upon all the posts I have read from you.

Chakka, I hear what you're saying and not to speak for Alsacs and his POV, but I literally spent the last 2 months having the same kinda arguments on the WVU Expansion board.
I read posters painting the scenario that started playing itself out last week, especially regarding the ACC.
I argued and vigorously defended the ACC's position and unfortunately, it appears I was wrong.
The 4 X 16 conference set-up is coming, and the SEC will likely strike next and the carnage will commence.
Its not easy for me to admit that, and maybe a curve-ball gets thrown into the mix, but overall thats the likely outcome.
The determinant factor in all of this is the money...period.
Forget loyalties, forget traditions, forget fanbases. Think location, footprints, and rights fees...that's the new language being spoken.
Bottomline- the B1G, the SEC (especially after their Network), the Pac 12, AND the Big 12 (as long as Texas & OU are there), rule the roost because the money differential is, or will become, extremely large.
Unless the ACC figures out a way to make substantially more money, on par with the other leagues, they won't be able to keep up...and THAT's why the FSU's, Clemson's, VT's, and even UNC's of the world will probably take off.

 

[Alsacs]

Alsacs - I think we all understand your position - nothing personal but you keep taking over threads anything to do with conference expansion. To me that's the definition of an Internet bully.

If analyzing the facts objectively and not allowing people to get false and unwarranted hope is the definition of an internet bully then I guess I am. I am pointing out misstatements and interjecting my opinions based on inferences that can be made based on the facts. I agree with everything DoctorBombay just said.