Reply to thread

Message

[QUOTE="HtownOrange, post: 5088146, member: 622"]
In the live sports arena, 12 years is a long time.  ESPN has likely placed its marker down by advising against the addition of Utah as it has a smallish market and only recent success.

No Big 12 team offers sufficient revenue to warrant addition to the ACC, except for any that may be in secret discussions.

Iowa St., OK St., BYU  are second fiddles in smallish states.

Baylor, TCU, TTU, Houston are repeat markets and place at best third and likely lower.  UT and TAMU are a massive chasm from the others. (This includes SMU)

WVU is a smallish state.

AZ State and UofA duplicate a small to mid size state.  Colorado is another really to mid size state.  Kansas and K State are a duplicates ina small state, though Kansas possesses hoops chops.

UCF is at best fourth in FL, plus the ACC has UM and FSU.  Not even close.

Cincy offers a larger state but lacks the academic chops and the substantive athletic history and draw (Yes, tOSU is likely to blame for this but it will not change soon, the State makes sure of it).

If any of these teams is viable for the ACC, ESPN would provide the data...and may have.  Any ACC team moving to the Big 12 would be a gain.  Even WF and BC, both solid markets and some history.

Recall that any new additions must add value to the ACC and to ESPN, who actually writes the checks.

Time will tell, but in this moment, ESPN is not jumping to approve a marginal or worse team moving to the ACC.  Marginal being defined as a offering close to value of the ACC teams.

Besides, once the FSU BOT starts paying legal bills regularly with no success and no end in site, the case will be resolved amicably and FSU stays home until the end.  The ACC has no need to compromise and ESPN has no incentive to compromise.
[/QUOTE]

Verification

What is a Syracuse fan's favorite color?