So anyone coming over to the dark side on realignment yet?

[billsin01]

I'm on the record as hating expansion and not being thrilled in any way with the move to the ACC outside of the influx of cash -- which is admittedly a necessary evil.

But I'll lay out my platform again and see if I can get any takers.

1) Realignment is shortsighted and pointless
I've said this before but the only conferences people care about are almost exclusively regional in nature. SEC football, Big 10 football, ACC hoops, BE hoops. On a far lower level maybe Big 12 football, but that's a conference that's always changing. Anyway, what do those four have in common -- regional programs playing at a high level with strong bonds and rivalries between teams making for a conference that's greater than simply the sum of it's parts. Yes, the BE expanded with USF and others, but the core of that conference is still regional (g'town/nova/cuse/st. john's/uconn/provi/seton hall/ru/pitt). Did you care about all those games? No, probably not, but there was a lot of familiarity there that made winning the big east something people actually care about. Now we move to the ACC and while we play bigger name schools in football and retain at least a strong hoops reputation, we start all over again ... which would be fine if not for point no. 2 ...

2) When teams are tied by only money, there will never be continuity
UMD leaving the ACC is funny b/c there's not a single fan that really wants anything to do with Big 10 ... except for the money. But the real impact is that we no longer have a presence in MD/DC/Northern VA and now will start adding teams. And then more teams will leave and. And then more will be added and on and on and on ... I'm not a sentimental fan crying for the "good ole days" but I would at least like to be in a conference where there was some semblance of regional opponents, continuity and intrigue. I fear those days are gone.

3) All moves are short-sighted
So UMD moves to the Big 10 and this makes financial sense long-term for a program with a good but not great fan base and a solid but not spectacular athletic program? No, it's just a state uni that needs some cash ... badly. So the Big 10 expands for TV reasons and grabs two athletic programs no one in teh world cares about who stand a chance of being also-rans annually? B/c all of NY and NJ will be tuning in to see RU/Michigan State every saturday? (and I'm not an RU basher, I'd be saying the same if they added Syracuse). Bizarre and I agree with whoever posted that this TV money is absurd and likely a bubble that will burst sooner than later. What advertiser is going to be thrilled with huge ad rates and pretty bland ratings/demographics?

So who's with me on just being an old man who's kinda pissed that we can't just get some visionary who realizes that putting teams together based on their geographic location is actually a pretty good idea?!?!?!?!?!

 

[MaxwellCuse]

I'm an older guy who never liked the hybrid conference, viewing it only as a stop-gap necessary evil back in the 80s. My preference has always been for an all sports conference to I'm pretty happy with the ACC move, even if we end up without malcontents such as FSU and (supposedly) Clemson. I would have preferred an ACC with Maryland and PSU but that's not to be I guess.

Anyway, ditching the Providence Mafia and the basketball-onlies brought great satisfaction a year ago and continues to today.

 

[OttoinGrotto]

So who's with me on just being an old man who's kinda pissed that we can't just get some visionary who realizes that putting teams together based on their geographic location is actually a pretty good idea?!?!?!?!?!

I'd like to tell Penn St. to get the Hell off my lawn.

 

[kingottoiii]

I want every conference to be 9 or 10 schools. That is the way things should be. Gives a true round robin in both FB and BBall. All these moves have been about money. So instead of expanding why not sell TV rights together? Couldn't the P12 and B1G sell Tier 1 rights in a package and make more money than expanding with schools they do not want? Wouldn't a BTN make more money with LA, SD, SF, Seattle, Denver, Phoenix, Salt Lake City than it would with Baltimore and NYC? Wouldn't combining TV assets be more valuable and still keep your conference from being too big by adding schools you have no history with?

 

[billsin01]

I'd like to tell Penn St. to get the Hell off my lawn.

I believe you meant Ped St. -- I'd like to keep that joke going for 30-40 more years.

 

[OttoinGrotto]

I believe you meant Ped St. -- I'd like to keep that joke going for 30-40 more years.

My game is slipping.

 

[billsin01]

I'm an older guy who never liked the hybrid conference, viewing it only as a stop-gap necessary evil back in the 80s. My preference has always been for an all sports conference to I'm pretty happy with the ACC move, even if we end up without malcontents such as FSU and (supposedly) Clemson. I would have preferred an ACC with Maryland and PSU but that's not to be I guess.

Anyway, ditching the Providence Mafia and the basketball-onlies brought great satisfaction a year ago and continues to today.

I never minded the hybrid. I still don't get what's so bad about it. I'd take G'town to the ACC in a heartbeat. I like going to those games, making fun of the g'town fan base, and playing a game that matters. I don't really care that they don't have an FBS football team. I also guess I just feel, generally, that from a marketing perspective leaving something that is an absolutely proven entity -- even if it wasn't the "same" as it was in the late 80s -- is a really risky proposition. Therefore, another point I forgot to make was that our identity was really forged, at least in a modern sense, with hoops and big east hoops in particular. Seems strange to just leave that behind.

 

[rrlbees]

I want every conference to be 9 or 10 schools. That is the way things should be. Gives a true round robin in both FB and BBall. All these moves have been about money. So instead of expanding why not sell TV rights together? Couldn't the P12 and B1G sell Tier 1 rights in a package and make more money than expanding with schools they do not want? Wouldn't a BTN make more money with LA, SD, SF, Seattle, Denver, Phoenix, Salt Lake City than it would with Baltimore and NYC? Wouldn't combining TV assets be more valuable and still keep your conference from being too big by adding schools you have no history with?

Completely agree. Just isn't the way it should be. As an old guy, I still have visions of an all eastern conference.

SU
BC
UConn
rutgirls
Pitt
Ped St (putting aside my disdain for the institution for a minute)
Temple (someone has to suck)
WVU
MD

 

[MikeSU02]

Completely agree. Just isn't the way it should be. As an old guy, I still have visions of an all eastern conference.

SU
BC
UConn
rutgirls
Pitt
Ped St (putting aside my disdain for the institution for a minute)
Temple (someone has to suck)
WVU
MD

I would kill for that conference. It is anchored by one elite football school in PSU and two elite bball schools in SU and UConn.

 

[Crusty]

Unintended consequences. We do not yet know what they will be - only that they always show up sooner or later.

I think that conference realignment will change football programs in a significant ways. At the end of the day, there are only so many good players and coaches and if they get spread out over more financially sound programs the result seems to be obvious - greater parity. We do not yet know how that will play out at OSU, Michigan etc.

Mizzou, WVA and TAM gives us an example of what happens when c program steps out of its comfort zone. Unless you have a once-in-a-lifetime player like Johnny Football, life as you know it will change. If WVA cannot climb to the top the conference (it can't) how will that affect their recruiting? Their alum support? Same thing for Mizzou. I have faith that the Aggies will fall to the bottom of the conference fairly quickly.

Clemson and FSU could wind up as middle of the road programs. I am sure they are both paying as much attention to these teams as they are to MD and Rutgers.

ND is the wildcard. They can now stay independent as long as the eye can see. They will negotiate another TV contract that is going to knock our eyes out. How that helps the ACC long term is yet to be fully understood. Clemson and FSU know they will not be left out, regardless of the conference realignment, and I doubt they feel any need to be in a hurry. They can afford to see how this plays out. Neither gives a damn who else joins the league other than ND.

So, I think this is way too premature to forecast what happens to the ACC or Big 12 or anybody else. Developments we cannot forecast will come in to play over the next couple of years so it is impossible to forecast.

 

[Chip]

I want every conference to be 9 or 10 schools. That is the way things should be. Gives a true round robin in both FB and BBall. All these moves have been about money. So instead of expanding why not sell TV rights together? Couldn't the P12 and B1G sell Tier 1 rights in a package and make more money than expanding with schools they do not want? Wouldn't a BTN make more money with LA, SD, SF, Seattle, Denver, Phoenix, Salt Lake City than it would with Baltimore and NYC? Wouldn't combining TV assets be more valuable and still keep your conference from being too big by adding schools you have no history with?

9 teams would be perfect. But these power hungry math majors that run conferences would freak out. Their lives would be failures.

Maryland and Rutgers won't be investing in the improvements of their programs. This just pays off their debts. Everything else stays the same (football probably gets worse with better competition).

I wish the B1G would pick the USA next for expansion. It's a bigger version of Rutgers and Maryland.

 

[OrangeXtreme]

I want every conference to be 9 or 10 schools. That is the way things should be. Gives a true round robin in both FB and BBall.

Pac 10
Big 10
SEC
SWC
Big 8
ACC (plus South Carolina)
Original BE (plus Penn State and UConn)
CUSA
MWC
WAC

 

[kingottoiii]

Completely agree. Just isn't the way it should be. As an old guy, I still have visions of an all eastern conference.

SU
BC
UConn
rutgirls
Pitt
Ped St (putting aside my disdain for the institution for a minute)
Temple (someone has to suck)
WVU
MD

Funny thing is even then we would be TG rival less

RU-Temple
BC-UConn
WV-MD
PSU-Pitt
SU-???

And if we are having a sucky Philly team I rather it be Nova. Or maybe Army/Navy instead of either Philly school. But that would suck for BBall. And how can we forget ND as #10?

 

[N.Y. Orangeman]

I want every conference to be 9 or 10 schools. That is the way things should be. Gives a true round robin in both FB and BBall. All these moves have been about money. So instead of expanding why not sell TV rights together? Couldn't the P12 and B1G sell Tier 1 rights in a package and make more money than expanding with schools they do not want? Wouldn't a BTN make more money with LA, SD, SF, Seattle, Denver, Phoenix, Salt Lake City than it would with Baltimore and NYC? Wouldn't combining TV assets be more valuable and still keep your conference from being too big by adding schools you have no history with?

In the next three to five years, aren't we really looking at what we formerly referred to as conferences as divisions in a larger organization? It seems like we may be moving down a path of 9-10 teams in each division, with one or two crossover games and a title game at the end. In some respects, this organizational structure during the season would mirror what you are talking about.

The irony is that the larger these conferences get, the closer we will come to the old 10 team formats IMHO.

 

[billsin01]

Completely agree. Just isn't the way it should be. As an old guy, I still have visions of an all eastern conference.

SU
BC
UConn
rutgirls
Pitt
Ped St (putting aside my disdain for the institution for a minute)
Temple (someone has to suck)
WVU
MD

I'll take this a step further and say I've never understood why this doesn't happen. I'd have to imagine it's marketable in a TV sense, it makes for a ton of destinations easy to travel to. I don't know, it just makes sense. I'd even go for a group of hoops onlies, but I know people hate that idea. Regardless I do think, at the end of the day, schools will end up back in smaller, more regional conferences. The travel costs make no sense.

 

[billsin01]

Funny thing is even then we would be TG rival less

RU-Temple
BC-UConn
WV-MD
PSU-Pitt
SU-???

And if we are having a sucky Philly team I rather it be Nova. Or maybe Army/Navy instead of either Philly school. But that would suck for BBall. And how can we forget ND as #10?

I wonder about ND being in a position to basically fashion it's own conference. I mean, once all these conferences are torn up and redrawn and there's no particular loyalties, isn't it setting the stage for ND to kind of pick and choose who it wants to associate with?

As for SU and rivalries in that scenario, I'd argue it would be a conference full of rivalries. I mean, as long as you're relevant those WVU, PEd St., RU, BC, MD games would really function as defacto rivalry games.

 

[baggerbob]

Completely agree. Just isn't the way it should be. As an old guy, I still have visions of an all eastern conference.

SU
BC
UConn
rutgirls
Pitt
Ped St (putting aside my disdain for the institution for a minute)
Temple (someone has to suck)
WVU
MD

That conference could have happened, only if Jake and Joe had the imagination of a Dave Gavitt.

 

[Scooch]

9 teams would be perfect. But these power hungry math majors that run conferences would freak out. Their lives would be failures.

Maryland and Rutgers won't be investing in the improvements of their programs. This just pays off their debts. Everything else stays the same (football probably gets worse with better competition).

I wish the B1G would pick the USA next for expansion. It's a bigger version of Rutgers and Maryland.

Who would have thought years ago that ultimately it would be the major professional sports leagues that would build saner, more sustainable business models and sensical geographic alignments?

As money-hungry and power-mad guys like Steinbrenner (father and sons), Jerry Jones, Mark Cuban, et. al. are, they recognize that their success is dependent upon the overall health of their respective sport. Yet no college President, AD or college commissioner seems to give a rip about that. And of course the NCAA decided years ago that they would be best served enforcing rules about coaches talking to recruits in July rather than actually maintaing some semblance of true order in collegiate athletics.

Sadly, there has never been (and I suspect never will be) a Pete Rozelle-type figure in college sports. Someone who could get the 75 or so major athletics programs together and convince them how working together would be far more lucrative, and less stressful, than trying to croak each other.

 

[baggerbob]

Eventually Congress is going to force the cable companies, to make available packages based upon desire. They almost did during the last session, and when they do the Big 10 network is in a lot of trouble. No-one outside of the Midwest, is going to pay for boring football or basketball, and there goes the money train.

 

[OttoinGrotto]

Eventually Congress is going to force the cable companies, to make available packages based upon desire. They almost did during the last session, and when they do the Big 10 network is in a lot of trouble. No-one outside of the Midwest, is going to pay for boring football or basketball, and there goes the money train.

That's an interesting thought.

 

[rrlbees]

Eventually Congress is going to force the cable companies, to make available packages based upon desire. They almost did during the last session, and when they do the Big 10 network is in a lot of trouble. No-one outside of the Midwest, is going to pay for boring football or basketball, and there goes the money train.

That would be a good thing. Lets hope none of these conferences with all the $$$ have politicians in their back pockets.

 

[SmilinBob]

That would be a good thing. Lets hope none of these conferences with all the $$$ have politicians in their back pockets.

Plus cable companies which basically means the lobbyist will kick john q public's ass yet once again unless it's worded in the cable/$ conferences favor.

 

[HtownOrange]

That conference could have happened, only if Jake and Joe had the imagination of a Dave Gavitt.

They did. Joe just let his ego get in the way. It's peculiar how a little ego can harm so many others. Joe's (and Ped State's) ego regarding his reputation harmed all those kids. Joe's ego about not sharing football revenues but demanding to share all other revenues killed an all eastern conference (we could have had Louisville, FSU and Miami on board, and I think that is you have PSU, FSU and Miami in a conference, PSU never looks at the B1g).

 

[HtownOrange]

Eventually Congress is going to force the cable companies, to make available packages based upon desire. They almost did during the last session, and when they do the Big 10 network is in a lot of trouble. No-one outside of the Midwest, is going to pay for boring football or basketball, and there goes the money train.

Alternatively, Congress, or the courts, could mandate the cable companies operate like the phone (and in some areas power) companies, which is to say the companies pay line charges but consumers have the choice of their provider. Competition really does work.

 

[longtimefan]

Who would have thought years ago that ultimately it would be the major professional sports leagues that would build saner, more sustainable business models and sensical geographic alignments?

As money-hungry and power-mad guys like Steinbrenner (father and sons), Jerry Jones, Mark Cuban, et. al. are, they recognize that their success is dependent upon the overall health of their respective sport. Yet no college President, AD or college commissioner seems to give a rip about that. And of course the NCAA decided years ago that they would be best served enforcing rules about coaches talking to recruits in July rather than actually maintaing some semblance of true order in collegiate athletics.

Sadly, there has never been (and I suspect never will be) a Pete Rozelle-type figure in college sports. Someone who could get the 75 or so major athletics programs together and convince them how working together would be far more lucrative, and less stressful, than trying to croak each other.

The NFL model was Pete Rozelle sitting down with Wellington Mara, and getting the owner of the most lucrative franchise to agree to revenue sharing. I don't think anyone would be able to get the presidents of Ohio St, Mich, ND, USC, not to mention half of the SEC, to make similar concessions.