Texas, Oklahoma reach out to the SEC

[Jeepers]

We should be playing the B10 more. That should have been happening this whole time we’ve been in the ACC. When Notre Dame is ready to join the B10, tell them we’ll play all of our home games with them in NYC for X amount of years, if they bring us with them.

 

[NJCuse97]

I want Notre Dame and Vandy in the ACC for all sports with uneven payments based on performance: top 5 teams 100% SEC money, 6-11 75% SEC, 12-16 60% SEC.

ESPN owns both conferences so they could make this happen if they wanted to.

ESPN has little to no sway over ND and while I understand the rationale, a model like this likely separates the top five too much, making it a microcosm of the current P5. ND, FSU, Clemson, and two of Pitt, VT, Miami, UNC.

 

[Scooch]

I want Notre Dame and Vandy in the ACC for all sports with uneven payments based on performance: top 5 teams 100% SEC money, 6-11 75% SEC, 12-16 60% SEC.

ESPN owns both conferences so they could make this happen if they wanted to.

This is a plan the schools would never, ever, ever, ever entertain.

And no, they can't. The fever dreams some folks have about who controls conference changes are ludicrous.

 

[HRE Otto IV]

How? There are no plays.

Yeah they aren't many moves left. I think the ACC dropped the ball not taking Rutgers and UCF when they landed Notre Dame. That would have been a big move. We knew no one was stopping at 14 so why not get out in front. Maryland would have still left but Rutgers if they just joined the ACC couldn't have afforded the buyout. So maybe Maryland is still here in the ACC. The B1G wouldn't go to 13 just for Maryland.

So who is left now? UConn? Temple? Neither are increasing TV rights. Would Cincy or UCF have to pay an exit fee if they leave before they join in July? And why would they? I suppose you can convince WV to leave before the new GOR takes effect. But who is your 16th? Or do you just have 15 in FB and 16 in BBall. There are bye weeks in FB and the ND games to help fill some of the gaps. Plus the end of year SEC games. So maybe it could work. But again does WV help the TV contract?

 

[Scooch]

Yeah they aren't many moves left. I think the ACC dropped the ball not taking Rutgers and UCF when they landed Notre Dame. That would have been a big move. We knew no one was stopping at 14 so why not get out in front. Maryland would have still left but Rutgers if they just joined the ACC couldn't have afforded the buyout. So maybe Maryland is still here in the ACC. The B1G wouldn't go to 13 just for Maryland.

So who is left now? UConn? Temple? Neither are increasing TV rights. Would Cincy or UCF have to pay an exit fee if they leave before they join in July? And why would they? I suppose you can convince WV to leave before the new GOR takes effect. But who is your 16th? Or do you just have 15 in FB and 16 in BBall. There are bye weeks in FB and the ND games to help fill some of the gaps. Plus the end of year SEC games. So maybe it could work. But again does WV help the TV contract?

The conferences have long suffered a failure of imagination. I'll argue that there has only been three truly BIG IDEAS throughout the past 25+ years of realignment:

(1) Pac-10's original plan to add Texas, Texas A&M, Oklahoma and OK State.
(2) SEC adding Texas and Oklahoma
(3) B1G adding USC and UCLA

Everything else has been nibbling around the edges. SEC adding A&M and Mizzou, Pac-12 adding Colorado and Utah, ACC adding SU and Pitt, B1G adding Nebraska, then Maryland and Rutgers... yawn. Incremental moves to achieve incremental gains.

By the late 2000s the ACC should have made a bold move to become THE conference on the east coast. Should never have stopped at SU and Pitt. Should have added Rutgers, UConn, Villanova (and upgraded to FBS), and sold their soul to get Penn State to join.

But they didn't have the leadership who could sell a vision like that.

 

[elimunelson]

Geography will reign supreme again in my lifetime for conferences. That's my hot take.

I had beers with a local HS coach who's big player went to a Big 10 school 3 years ago and is now transferring to a local/big time program. The reason: homesickness.

I think ultimately schools will reallign regionally again. Not sure what the impetus would be (if it ultimately is just conferences becoming sub conferences within themselves) but i see it being the only path forward for the north east conf reforming once again. my guess it happens when the SEC/BIG go for their kill shots when the ACC becomes available

 

[HRE Otto IV]

The conferences have long suffered a failure of imagination. I'll argue that there has only been three truly BIG IDEAS throughout the past 25+ years of realignment:

(1) Pac-10's original plan to add Texas, Texas A&M, Oklahoma and OK State.
(2) SEC adding Texas and Oklahoma
(3) B1G adding USC and UCLA

Everything else has been nibbling around the edges. SEC adding A&M and Mizzou, Pac-12 adding Colorado and Utah, ACC adding SU and Pitt, B1G adding Nebraska, then Maryland and Rutgers... yawn. Incremental moves to achieve incremental gains.

By the late 2000s the ACC should have made a bold move to become THE conference on the east coast. Should never have stopped at SU and Pitt. Should have added Rutgers, UConn, Villanova (and upgraded to FBS), and sold their soul to get Penn State to join.

But they didn't have the leadership who could sell a vision like that.

I also think Duke and UNC would have been an issue. Heck they were for the first round of expansion. So at least for step 1 it needed to be small enough to pass but not too large to scare off a school to a No vote. I also think SU was a problem. I don't think we wanted out of the Big East until it was clear that we had to leave.

It would have been so easy to go to 16 in 1992 and rotate divisions, solidifying the conference. But that means going from 9 to 16 schools. The ACC likely has MD still instead of Louisville, and adds Miami, SU, BC, RU, Pitt, WV and then offers Penn State. Do they come? If they say no #16 is Temple I suppose, who was still a good BBall school. VA Tech wasn't any good at that time. Louisville is outside the footprint. Nova wasn't the Nova they have become. UConn wasn't UConn BBall and were FCS in FB.

So the ACC could have had Maryland, West Virginia, Rutgers, and Temple (or maybe Penn State) instead of Louisville and VA Tech.

 

[HRE Otto IV]

Geography will reign supreme again in my lifetime for conferences. That's my hot take.

I had beers with a local HS coach who's big player went to a Big 10 school 3 years ago and is now transferring to a local/big time program. The reason: homesickness.

I think ultimately schools will reallign regionally again. Not sure what the impetus would be (if it ultimately is just conferences becoming sub conferences within themselves) but i see it being the only path forward for the north east conf reforming once again. my guess it happens when the SEC/BIG go for their kill shots when the ACC becomes available

The more teams the conferences add, the smaller they become. For instance if the B1G went to 30 teams, they could have 6 (or 5) divisions of 5 (or 6) teams. It would limit travel for all sports. The conference would be national but the divisions would be regional. That means adding 3-4 more Western teams, 5-6 Southeastern teams, and 2-3 more Northeastern teams. Then fill in any gaps.

If somehow we get left behind (the ACC gets raided and there are only scraps left), I want SU to be part of a new conference. I want nothing to do with trying to keep the ACC together. Get us with UConn, Temple, BC, WV plus any other Northeastern left overs (Pitt, VA Tech). Maybe Army/St Johns and Navy/Georgetown. Maybe a Florida school (Miami, UCF, USF). I will take that over Duke or Wake. I rather have ECU than either of those 2.

 

[baggerbob]

The conferences have long suffered a failure of imagination. I'll argue that there has only been three truly BIG IDEAS throughout the past 25+ years of realignment:

(1) Pac-10's original plan to add Texas, Texas A&M, Oklahoma and OK State.
(2) SEC adding Texas and Oklahoma
(3) B1G adding USC and UCLA

Everything else has been nibbling around the edges. SEC adding A&M and Mizzou, Pac-12 adding Colorado and Utah, ACC adding SU and Pitt, B1G adding Nebraska, then Maryland and Rutgers... yawn. Incremental moves to achieve incremental gains.

By the late 2000s the ACC should have made a bold move to become THE conference on the east coast. Should never have stopped at SU and Pitt. Should have added Rutgers, UConn, Villanova (and upgraded to FBS), and sold their soul to get Penn State to join.

But they didn't have the leadership who could sell a vision like that.

The ACC's biggest problem has always been they are pro North Carolina in everything. Those 4 schools have been at the center of everything. They always were more concerned with basketball, then football.
Duke and North Carolina were the problem, and Swofford, from North Carolina added to it.
By the time the conference realized football drove the bus it was to late.
Had North Carolina and Duke not gotten in the way the conference could have taken Pitt, Syracuse, Boston College, West Virginia, Rutgers, and Connecticut along with Notre Dame in 2003.
That would have added good football, and great basketball to the league.

 

[Scooch]

I also think Duke and UNC would have been an issue.

For sure. I don't think my lame brain idea was really possible. I'm just noting that I'm fairly certain that it never entered the minds of anyone in conference leadership or influential ADs.

There's never been a long-term, over-arching strategy employed by anyone when it comes to conference expansion. It's been a series of largely reactive, incremental moves for three decades.

I think the B1G adding USC and UCLA is absurd, but I do respect their ambition.

 

[HRE Otto IV]

The ACC's biggest problem has always been they are pro North Carolina in everything. Those 4 schools have been at the center of everything. They always were more concerned with basketball, then football.
Duke and North Carolina were the problem, and Swofford, from North Carolina added to it.
By the time the conference realized football drove the bus it was to late.
Had North Carolina and Duke not gotten in the way the conference could have taken Pitt, Syracuse, Boston College, West Virginia, Rutgers, and Connecticut along with Notre Dame in 2003.
That would have added good football, and great basketball to the league.

That would have been 17 teams then. Probably have to leave UConn out.

 

[HRE Otto IV]

For sure. I don't think my lame brain idea was really possible. I'm just noting that I'm fairly certain that it never entered the minds of anyone in conference leadership or influential ADs.

There's never been a long-term, over-arching strategy employed by anyone when it comes to conference expansion. It's been a series of largely reactive, incremental moves for three decades.

I think the B1G adding USC and UCLA is absurd, but I do respect their ambition.

The USC and UCLA thing only makes sense if they add 3-4 more P12 teams. But if that is the end game why in the heck are we slowly moving toward that?

 

[Capt. Tuttle]

The Olympic sports would stay as they are now because they don't make money like football and basketball do. There's really no incentive to change them, plus the SEC and B1G don't care as much about them as they do football and basketball.

Ending scholarships would move everyone to the D-3/Ivy model of giving only need-based aid. I really don't know one way or the other if they would also want to do that.

W/O FB and BB, there would be no money for the scholarships for the other sports.

 

[qdawgg]

Yeah they aren't many moves left. I think the ACC dropped the ball not taking Rutgers and UCF when they landed Notre Dame. That would have been a big move. We knew no one was stopping at 14 so why not get out in front. Maryland would have still left but Rutgers if they just joined the ACC couldn't have afforded the buyout. So maybe Maryland is still here in the ACC. The B1G wouldn't go to 13 just for Maryland.

So who is left now? UConn? Temple? Neither are increasing TV rights. Would Cincy or UCF have to pay an exit fee if they leave before they join in July? And why would they? I suppose you can convince WV to leave before the new GOR takes effect. But who is your 16th? Or do you just have 15 in FB and 16 in BBall. There are bye weeks in FB and the ND games to help fill some of the gaps. Plus the end of year SEC games. So maybe it could work. But again does WV help the TV contract?

Adding anyone at this point is diluting the product. In the same way B10 adding Rutgers and Maryland, diluted their product to some degree but that conference can handle that. The ACC would look like they’re just grasping at straws adding anyone at this point. I like WV from a historical playing perspective and they have fans. But they do absolutely nothing for what counts today: eyeballs at home watching.

 

[Hoo's That]

W/O FB and BB, there would be no money for the scholarships for the other sports.

Most schools' scholarship money comes from boosters. The TV money from football usually pays the rest of the bills for the other sports, like travel expenses and coaches' salaries. The schools that go into the no class attendance required" league will still get TV money for the 3 sports of interest to the SEC, with football money's being the biggest component.

 

[Scooch]

The USC and UCLA thing only makes sense if they add 3-4 more P12 teams. But if that is the end game why in the heck are we slowly moving toward that?

Why? They don't need geographical balance, they just want a couple marquee schools to boost their TV money. No one else out west is going to add to the per-school cut. At this point its better to leave some arrows in the quiver for future negotiations. If they need to entice a FOX, or Amazon, or Apple, in a few years, then they can think about more additions.

 

[baggerbob]

That would have been 17 teams then. Probably have to leave UConn out.

Louisville could have been 18

 

[Best1]

ACC needs to act

The ACC could try to add Oregon, Washington, and possibly Stanford and Cal from the West Coast.

 

[Best1]

Adding anyone at this point is diluting the product. In the same way B10 adding Rutgers and Maryland, diluted their product to some degree but that conference can handle that. The ACC would look like they’re just grasping at straws adding anyone at this point. I like WV from a historical playing perspective and they have fans. But they do absolutely nothing for what counts today: eyeballs at home watching.

Nobody thinks that WVU is a bad competitive add. They probably wouldn’t even be a bad financial add, despite the lack of subscribers WV would bring to the ACC Network.

The problems with WVU are their academics and to a lesser extent their fan behavior.