The alliance scheduling agreement already looks dead in football

[Chip]

The timing couldn't be better because 2026 is our year.

 

[OrangeXtreme]

The timing couldn't be better because 2026 is our year.

Tucker will be an 8th year Junior by then.

 

[HRE Otto IV]

I want ND to have to join the Big Ten.
I know it hurts the ACC but it would be poetic justice for the ND fanbase.

School would get paid but ask Penn State what they think of Big Ten leadership.
Notre Dame would be an outlier and wouldn’t have the influence anymore.

It would get its money but would lose influence.
The Big Ten will always be Ohio State and Michigan with the power:

Notre Dame with 12 landgrant univerisites, Rutgers and Northwestern would be great.

That is why the ACC not using ESPN to get the SEC to do its dirty work is stupid.

The ACC could back an expanded playoff while ESPN still has exclusivity and make the network more money and ESPN could get the SEC to propose you must be in a conference to be eligible.

Watch what ND would do.

You can't get conferences to agree on anything with the playoffs but you think out of spite every conference will vote yes against ND?

Even if that did happen, ND would rather make a little less money in an 8+2 ACC than go to the 9+1 B1G. Being in the ACC would allow ND to keep Navy, USC, and Stanford OOC. Plus they have access to the entire East vs being in a Midwest conference.

And if ND did end up in the B1G then so what? How is that so bad for them? With a 3+6/6 they would have access to the B1G CG and the CFB Playoffs. You act like going to the B1G would kill their program.

 

[GreekFreak]

The timing couldn't be better because 2026 is our year.

Ahhh...he's on the WF Sam Hartman plan.

 

[HRE Otto IV]

Michigan IMO has been hurt more by divisions than Penn State has been hurt by joining the B1G. The 11 seasons from 1997-2007 Michigan finished 3rd once, tied for 3rd once, and the other 9 times either 1st or 2nd. Since going to divisions 2011-2021 Michigan has finished 1st or 2nd in division only 4 times, and 7 times 3rd of worse in division. They went from the best program in the entire conference to the 4th best program in division when counting Top 2 division finishes.

 

[Alsacs]

That decision to remain with 4 thru 2025 is the Big Ten getting what it wants and ACC got played.

ACC screwed up even though I don’t like the Big Ten.

 

[TheCusian]

That decision to remain with 4 thru 2025 is the Big Ten getting what it wants and ACC got played.

ACC screwed up even though I don’t like the Big Ten.

Why?

 

[NJneer12]

If the B1G stays with 9 conference games, it can still work. It would be more of an ACC/P12 Alliance than anything.

Thanks to HRE Otto IV for his in-depth replies in the other schedule builder thread, giving me some ideas.

ACC
4 vs B1G
14 vs P12
5 vs ND
1 vs B12
4 vs SEC

B1G
4 vs ACC
4 vs P12
2 vs ND
2 vs B12
2 vs SEC

P12
14 vs ACC (2 teams are each playing 2 ACC teams a year, home and away preferably)
4 vs B1G
2 vs ND
2 vs B12
2 vs SEC

ND gets 5 ACC, 2 B1G, 2 P12, 1 SEC.

B12
1 vs ACC
2 vs B1G
2 vs P12
7 vs SEC

SEC
4 vs ACC
2 vs B1G
2 vs P12
1 vs ND
7 vs B12

 

[TerryD]

You do not understand what I am saying. The BT no more would want to downgrade ND football than the ACC wanted to see Miami football become what we have seen.

What I am saying is that a conference is run as a corporation. There always is Power in a conference; there always is a small group more powerful than the rest of the members. The most obvious example of what I mean is Texas, which was the sole Power in the SWC, and which very quickly displaced every old Big 8 team from any power in the Big XII. Even OU has been just a sidekick to Texas in the Big XII - not in terms of who wins league titles in football, but in who controls the league.

The BT is defined by gigantic Flagship and/or Land Grant universities. Each of them (save Rutgers, for historical reasons having to do with the northeast) have very old power in state, and regional, politics. BT Power is not limited to scheduling games, not even close. It is true major political and economic power. No small private school can enter into that club and become a power broker within it. If ND also had Duke's basketball history and Miami's baseball history and Syracuse's lacrosse history, it still could not get into the center of BT Power.

In the BT, ND always would remain an outlier in terms of conference power brokers. ND football finally could win another National Championship, and ND still would not be able to more than sniff the power that Michigan and Ohio St have. Both those schools and other gigantic BT members would be more than happy for ND to win football games, and remain no more powerful in league leadership than Northwestern is now.

If ND surrendered independence in football to fully join the ACC, it might be a bigger fish for a while but in a smaller (ultimately non-P2), rapidly drying up pond.

It would have more influence in the ACC, but at the cost of around $40-50 million a year until the day the P2 poaches the still far behind ACC.

I think that even if ND football joins the ACC, the latter is not going to survive long term, not as a P5 type conference.

Even if it did, that move would lock ND out of the P2 and cost ND hundreds of millions of dollars, and still require ND to surrender football independence.

So, what business sense does that make for ND to surrender football independence to the lowest bidder for a number of years just to quite possibly end up in the Big Ten anyway (or be locked into a long term disadvantage) ?

I guess someone needs to spell out to me how this is ND's smartest possible move in realignment.

It seems the better course of action for ND would be to renew the NBC deal (hopefully for lots more money--especially if NBC snags a Big Ten deal and cross markets as announced) and try to stay independent unless/until the day it has to surrender football independence.

 

[Alsacs]

You can't get conferences to agree on anything with the playoffs but you think out of spite every conference will vote yes against ND?

Even if that did happen, ND would rather make a little less money in an 8+2 ACC than go to the 9+1 B1G. Being in the ACC would allow ND to keep Navy, USC, and Stanford OOC. Plus they have access to the entire East vs being in a Midwest conference.

And if ND did end up in the B1G then so what? How is that so bad for them? With a 3+6/6 they would have access to the B1G CG and the CFB Playoffs. You act like going to the B1G would kill their program.

The conferences can’t agree because its the SEC vs. 3 conferences in voting.

The Big Ten wants expansion of the CFB but they want limits and other stuff to limit the SEC.

The ACC was against it because they got played by the Big Ten.

If ND surrendered independence in football to fully join the ACC, it might be a bigger fish for a while but in a smaller (ultimately non-P2), rapidly drying up pond.

It would have more influence in the ACC, but at the cost of around $40-50 million a year until the day the P2 poaches the still far behind ACC.

I think that even if ND football joins the ACC, the latter is not going to survive long term, not as a P5 type conference.

Even if it did, that move would lock ND out of the P2 and cost ND hundreds of millions of dollars, and still require ND to surrender football independence.

So, what business sense does that make for ND to surrender football independence to the lowest bidder for a number of years just to quite possibly end up in the Big Ten anyway (or be locked into a long term disadvantage) ?

I guess someone needs to spell out to me how this is ND's smartest possible move in realignment.

It seems the better course of action for ND would be to renew the NBC deal (hopefully for lots more money--especially if NBC snags a Big Ten deal and cross markets as announced) and try to stay independent unless/until the day it has to surrender football independence.

i honestly don’t want ND in the ACC.

Because of the influence it would get.
However if they joined full time the TV contract wouldn’t be SEC or Big Ten level but it would be really close and the money difference wouldn’t be thet large. The ACC was doing well plugging the gap with NCAAT credits.
The conference has struggled in basketball which can fill that hole.

In the Big Ten ND has zero influence.
In the ACC they would likely share power with UNC.

That is why i want no part of ND even though that is what the ACC wants and should be doing.

 

[Alsacs]

Why?

If you want an answer and aren’t doing the routine you do sometimes I will explain.

Big Ten is in bed with Fox.
Fox wants into the CFB playoffs.

ESPN wanted expansion now because they control the rights exclusively and have exclusive window to negotiate.

ESPN and SEC are aligned.

Fox wants in and the Big Ten wants to help them.

The ACC took the position against ESPN and has been played by the Big Ten.
The ACC needs to realize this and while they can’t be happy with the SEC what its doing has to realize the SEC isn’t their enemy as much as the Big Ten.

The SEC doesn’t want to poach the ACC the Big Ten’s end game would want that.

 

[CousCuse]

The ACC needs to hire a commissioner with an SEC background and connections and then go to the SEC and tell them we're your huckleberry.

 

[TheCusian]

If ND surrendered independence in football to fully join the ACC, it might be a bigger fish for a while but in a smaller (ultimately non-P2), rapidly drying up pond.

It would have more influence in the ACC, but at the cost of around $40-50 million a year until the day the P2 poaches the still far behind ACC.

I think that even if ND football joins the ACC, the latter is not going to survive long term, not as a P5 type conference.

Even if it did, that move would lock ND out of the P2 and cost ND hundreds of millions of dollars, and still require ND to surrender football independence.

So, what business sense does that make for ND to surrender football independence to the lowest bidder for a number of years just to quite possibly end up in the Big Ten anyway (or be locked into a long term disadvantage) ?

I guess someone needs to spell out to me how this is ND's smartest possible move in realignment.

It seems the better course of action for ND would be to renew the NBC deal (hopefully for lots more money--especially if NBC snags a Big Ten deal and cross markets as announced) and try to stay independent unless/until the day it has to surrender football independence.

Whoa! Lots of presumptuous blathering here.

1. The ACC is non P2 now. Sometimes I think we wrongly equate money with wins. The SEC isn’t a power because of money alone. It’s recruiting areas and money. ND just lost their HC for this reason, I think?

2. What if the big teams bug out and decide to just start paying players? ND cool with that?

3. We’ve gone around and around on the value of independence. It makes little sense to me outside of the positioning and clout the P5 allows you to have as a “free agent.” It’s cute, but if it comes down to it, the P5 or just a couple of conferences could cut off the playoff to you.

4. I think ND would strengthen the ACC. I think the ACC would be a good partner and keep a relatively easy path to the playoff while getting more money. Alsacs is right in that the B1G would happily gobble you up and you’d be worse off power-wise, but richer. If the donations to the school dry up completely, that is more of an indictment of the people donating and ND’s commitment to it’s actual values than anything else. I’d call that bluff if I were ND.

5. I think it’s convenient that you use “business sense” when it’s convenient and “mission” when it’s not. Someone said you can’t love two masters… is ND doing what’s best for itself financially or what’s best for it’s mission? Joining the ACC doesn’t help or hurt the mission per se, but it does help stabilize a sport against the greed that is driving it. Maybe over a cliff (regional sport, paying players, etc). I could make an argument that ND is uniquely positioned to do something good for the sport if it got out of its own way. But I guess it’s moot vs $$$.

 

[Alsacs]

A stronger ACC doesn’t impact the SEC one bit.
A stronger ACC does impact the Big Ten long term.

That is why Phillips has to realize this.

 

[HRE Otto IV]

If ND surrendered independence in football to fully join the ACC, it might be a bigger fish for a while but in a smaller (ultimately non-P2), rapidly drying up pond.

It would have more influence in the ACC, but at the cost of around $40-50 million a year until the day the P2 poaches the still far behind ACC.

I think that even if ND football joins the ACC, the latter is not going to survive long term, not as a P5 type conference.

Even if it did, that move would lock ND out of the P2 and cost ND hundreds of millions of dollars, and still require ND to surrender football independence.

So, what business sense does that make for ND to surrender football independence to the lowest bidder for a number of years just to quite possibly end up in the Big Ten anyway (or be locked into a long term disadvantage) ?

I guess someone needs to spell out to me how this is ND's smartest possible move in realignment.

It seems the better course of action for ND would be to renew the NBC deal (hopefully for lots more money--especially if NBC snags a Big Ten deal and cross markets as announced) and try to stay independent unless/until the day it has to surrender football independence.

Where are you getting this $40-$50M a year from?

If the ACC with Notre Dame can get $0.75 to the B1G's $1.00, wouldn't ND pick the ACC? Yes, they are giving up $ but isn't that the case now as well? That isn't making ND join the B1G and give up Independence.

The ACC has like minded schools.

The ACC locations are better for population growth and recruiting. ND would have access to the Northeast, Mid-Atlantic, South, and Florida. Plus plenty of games surrounding Ohio's rich recruiting (assuming Cincy isn't #16 which would put a school in the state).

Being in the ACC would give ND greater access to the CCG, playoffs, and high tiered Bowls. It is easier to stay relevant (10-2 type seasons) in the ACC. In the B1G say hello to 8-4 type seasons.

The B1G would come with 9 conference games. ND can leverage the ACC into keeping 8 games for the length of the TV contract as a condition for joining. Having only 8 games allows ND to have USC and then one rotating P5 OOC game. That variety and control of schedule cannot happen in the B1G.

ND can also use leverage to get Navy in as #16 for football. Which keeps another OOC spot open. Additionally ND can get Navy to play one year in San Diego and the next in Houston. This would keep yearly California games for ND (replacing Stanford), and add a game every other year in Texas. Both would help with exposure and recruiting.

ND can then pay 2 G5 cupcakes to fill out the schedule. This would give them 7 home games every other year.

Too big of a gap in $ between the B1G and ACC with Notre Dame as a full member, will make all of the above pointless. But if the gap is manageable, it makes more sense for ND to join the ACC.

 

[Chip]

This thread is wild.

 

[TheCusian]

If you want an answer and aren’t doing the routine you do sometimes I will explain.

Big Ten is in bed with Fox.
Fox wants into the CFB playoffs.

ESPN wanted expansion now because they control the rights exclusively and have exclusive window to negotiate.

ESPN and SEC are aligned.

Fox wants in and the Big Ten wants to help them.

The ACC took the position against ESPN and has been played by the Big Ten.
The ACC needs to realize this and while they can’t be happy with the SEC what its doing has to realize the SEC isn’t their enemy as much as the Big Ten.

The SEC doesn’t want to poach the ACC the Big Ten’s end game would want that.

Not a bit (I don’t really do that - I’m pretty sincere most of the time).

Was honestly curious.

I think the ACC looked at what the SEC/ESPN (and a little ND) was doing behind their backs as a bigger threat than Fox wanting in on the playoffs. The PAC12 is in similar shoes.

Not a lot of cards to play. Holding off the playoff expansion is def the big one. Let’s see if the leverage yields anything.

 

[CousCuse]

A stronger ACC doesn’t impact the SEC one bit.
A stronger access does impact the Big Ten long term.

That is why Phillips has to realize this.

He was the AD at Northwestern for 12 years.

 

[Alsacs]

This thread is wild.

I tend to use logic even if people disagree with me.
But I understand the process.

 

[Hoo's That]

Eliminating the division requirement would give all of the P5 great flexibility in determining their champions.It's hard to understand why they've stuck with the division system this long.

Because the B1G and SEC were hoping against hope that not having 3-5-5 would make the ACC implode and they would get to pick over the remnants for what they want.

 

[Alsacs]

Because the B1G and SEC were hoping against hope that not having 3-5-5 would make the ACC implode and they would get to pick over the remnants for what they want.

SEC doesn’t care to add more mouths just to do do. Would they take UNC sure? But they aren’t pursuing them.

They added Texas and Oklahoma because they are football schools and it was cheaper for ESPN to throw another 100 million per season to the SEC than have to pay the Big XII 400 million a season.

ESPN was smart. They got the value out of the Big XII into a conference it owns for 10 years and now the Big XII will be a lot cheaper.

The ACC has ESPN protection from the Big Ten but not SEC.

The Big Ten wants UNC but they dont want to leave:
If the Big Ten went after Florida State or Miami we would see what the loyalty level really is.

 

[TerryD]

Whoa! Lots of presumptuous blathering here.

1. The ACC is non P2 now. Sometimes I think we wrongly equate money with wins. The SEC isn’t a power because of money alone. It’s recruiting areas and money. ND just lost their HC for this reason, I think?

2. What if the big teams bug out and decide to just start paying players? ND cool with that?

3. We’ve gone around and around on the value of independence. It makes little sense to me outside of the positioning and clout the P5 allows you to have as a “free agent.” It’s cute, but if it comes down to it, the P5 or just a couple of conferences could cut off the playoff to you.

4. I think ND would strengthen the ACC. I think the ACC would be a good partner and keep a relatively easy path to the playoff while getting more money. Alsacs is right in that the B1G would happily gobble you up and you’d be worse off power-wise, but richer. If the donations to the school dry up completely, that is more of an indictment of the people donating and ND’s commitment to it’s actual values than anything else. I’d call that bluff if I were ND.

5. I think it’s convenient that you use “business sense” when it’s convenient and “mission” when it’s not. Someone said you can’t love two masters… is ND doing what’s best for itself financially or what’s best for it’s mission? Joining the ACC doesn’t help or hurt the mission per se, but it does help stabilize a sport against the greed that is driving it. Maybe over a cliff (regional sport, paying players, etc). I could make an argument that ND is uniquely positioned to do something good for the sport if it got out of its own way. But I guess it’s moot vs $$$.

"Presumptuous blathering" ?? Well, I was a lawyer for 32 years so I made a career out of it. Sorry.

College sports is a big business.

I don't think that I mentioned the word "mission" once when talking about conference realignment, but maybe I am wrong about that (I will stop if I ever did).

There is no "mission" here. Just business.

Why should ND do something "for the sport" that is against its best interests ? What school would?

When has any other school who switched or joined conferences done so "for the sport" at a cost to its own best interests ?

I must have missed all of the schools who joined conferences for less money instead of more money.

 

[orangecuse]

"Presumptuous blathering" ?? Well, I was a lawyer for 32 years so I made a career out of it. Sorry.

College sports is a big business.

I don't think that I mentioned the word "mission" once when talking about conference realignment, but maybe I am wrong about that (I will stop if I ever did).

There is no "mission" here. Just business.

Why should ND do something "for the sport" that is against its best interests ? What school would?

When has any other school who switched or joined conferences done so "for the sport" at a cost to its own best interests ?

I must have missed all of the schools who joined conferences for less money instead of more money.

Perhaps you'll answer. Again, what makes the alleged "independence" so sacred for only football while the remaining of the institution's sports teams are not? What separates football in that regard from being any different?

I find it interesting you mention it's "just business" yet you also allege it's not "about the money" or along those lines out your other end. Well, if it's "just business" then you realize one is in business to make money.

And, no. You didn't miss all of the schools who joined conferences take less money instead of more. However, they aren't the ones alleging it's not about the money, etc. in their sermons.

 

[TexanMark]

The timing couldn't be better because 2026 is our year.

Didn't you say that in 2005, 2011, 2019, 2020? ;-)

 

[TheCusian]

"Presumptuous blathering" ?? Well, I was a lawyer for 32 years so I made a career out of it. Sorry.

College sports is a big business.

I don't think that I mentioned the word "mission" once when talking about conference realignment, but maybe I am wrong about that (I will stop if I ever did).

There is no "mission" here. Just business.

Why should ND do something "for the sport" that is against its best interests ? What school would?

When has any other school who switched or joined conferences done so "for the sport" at a cost to its own best interests ?

I must have missed all of the schools who joined conferences for less money instead of more money.

Short memory? You used to talk it up all the time. Maybe you evolved your position in the face of “business”? That’s cool - I’m assuming that it mirrors ND’s own priorities.

You equate “joining a conference” with being against their best interests which is most definitely a matter of opinion and not all that clear. In fact it’s likely that it absolutely is in their best business interests to join one financially. If they choose the ACC it’s the best of both worlds (relative power sharing and money vs B1G/SEC where it’s more money at the cost of power and clout).

Your interests align better with the ACC than anywhere else. The benefits out weigh nostalgia.