As expected, the Big Ten has officially added Rutgers as its newest member. (See the start of the Rutgers-Big Ten relationship above.) When looking back at the last 3 years of conference realignment, Rutgers is vying with Utah and TCU for the title of being the biggest beneficiary of the constant earthquakes, which I’m sure is particularly sweet for Scarlet Knight fans that were on the precipice of being the largest loser in the process after Syracuse, Pitt, West Virginia and Notre Dame left the Big East. Prior to today, the only schools that were members of the six original BCS AQ conferences (Big Ten, Big 12, the old Pac-10, ACC, SEC and Big East) when the current postseason system began in 1998 and hadn’t moved to one of the five “new” contract bowl conferences (Big Ten, Big 12, Pac-12, ACC and SEC) were Rutgers and Temple… and Temple had such a horrible football program that it was kicked out of the Big East even after Miami, Boston College and Boston College defected to the ACC in 2003. (The Owls rejoined the Big East as a full member this season.) In a way, conference realignment hasn’t necessarily been about expansion for individual leagues, but rather consolidation of all of the power schools from six “chosen” leagues into five. Rutgers moving to the Big Ten completes that consolidation process.
I’ve already spent some time in yesterday’s post addressing what the additions of Rutgers and Maryland mean to the Big Ten along with the possible reactions from the ACC and Big 12. So, let’s address some of the latest news and rumors flying around the country:
(1) Louisville might be the target for the ACC instead of UConn – Andy Katz of ESPN has indicated that “Louisville is a serious player to bump out UConn” for the 14th spot in the ACC. My bet would still be on UConn taking that last spot because of the academic, geographic and cultural fits with the ACC, but you never know if there might be a radical change in the mindset of that conference in the wake of a defection. Louisville has certainly done everything right as an athletic department over the past few years, yet let’s not forget that UConn isn’t exactly a competitive slouch, either. Both the Connecticut men’s and women’s basketball programs are at the elite level and the football program (as down in the dumps as it might be today) won the Big East and was in a BCS bowl only 2 years ago. As a result, I believe that there’s a bit of an overstatement in what seems to be a widespread belief that Louisville is far ahead of UConn athletically (as that’s colored by the “What have you done for me lately?” thinking of how well Louisville is doing today in football specifically compared to UConn). To be sure, the addition of Rutgers to the Big Ten certainly demonstrates how much TV markets matter. If the athletic departments at Louisville or Connecticut were able to swap locations with Rutgers, they would have been picked up by power conferences long ago and we wouldn’t be having this discussion.
(2) Big 12 Observations – Barry Tramel of The Oklahoman has been looking at Big Ten expansion from the Big 12 angle, where he states that Louisville’s chances of getting into that league have improved. I agree with his assessment that the ACC’s loss of Maryland doesn’t mean that Florida State and Clemson (or other ACC schools) would end up bolting to the Big 12 and how he sees Louisville as the main realistic option. Now, I doubt that the Big 12 would add solely Louisville as school number 11 as he suggested (as the Big Ten staying at 11 schools with Penn State for so long was mainly based on the belief that Notre Dame was destined to be team number 12), so BYU and Cincinnati should get ready to polish off their resumes.
(3) BYU, Boise State and San Diego State Speaking with the Mountain West? – Last night, Brett McMurphy of ESPN reported that BYU, Boise State and San Diego State were having conversations with the Mountain West about re-joining (or in the cases of Boise State and San Diego State, not leaving) the conference. My knee-jerk reaction is that this makes no sense at all. Even if the Big East ends up losing Rutgers, UConn and Louisville, the remnants of that league would still likely cobble together enough to make substnatially more TV money than the current CBS payout of $800,000 per year per MWC school. BYU is even farther ahead with its independent TV deal with ESPN.
There was one plausible rumor out there that at least made a tiny bit of sense as to why this could happen. Essentially, BYU could be speaking with the Mountain West about joining as a non-football member with a Notre Dame/ACC-type deal where the school would remain independent with a partial MWC football scheduling arrangement (to aid BYU with late season scheduling). That could be enough to (a) spur Boise State and San Diego State to ditch its Big East obligations and stay in the MWC and (b) open the MWC TV contract back up for negotiation where that league could end up with revenue on par (or maybe better) than the remnants of the Big East.
I don’t quite buy that rumor (as I still don’t believe the TV dollars add up), but once again, you just never know with conference realignment these days.
(4) What does the Big East do? – Well, this could get somewhat ugly. At the very least, the Big East is going to have to replace 2 members (Rutgers and 1 of Louisville or UConn) out of the current 13 football schools in or about to be in the conference, might have to replace 3 members, or could even lose 5 of them (if Boise State and San Diego State get an MWC deal as described above). The good news is that even the worst case scenario, the Big East would survive as a conference with 8 members. There won’t be a case of schadenfreude in favor of, say, Conference USA where they will start picking off Big East schools. The bad news is that the already slim pickings for the Big East get reduced even further, as BYU (who I never believed would end up in the Big East even before the latest realignment news occurred) is completely off the table and, if the Mountain West becomes relatively strong again, there isn’t too much value to found in expansion candidates from Conference USA or the MAC. East Carolina is perpetually brought up as a Big East candidate since they have a solid fan base, but they’re a small market victim of the TV market-driven economics of conference expansion. Beyond ECU, there are schools such as Tulane (great academics and market, but needs a lot of help athletically), Rice (ditto and overlaps with Houston’s market), UMass (excellent geographic fit and a rare Northeast flagship school, yet only moved up to the FBS level last year), Marshall (will always be the #2 team in an already small West Virginia market)… I think that you get the idea.
The Big East’s main hope is that they only lose Rutgers and one other school. If either Louisville or UConn is still in the conference, that will make a world of difference in terms of the Big East trying to sell itself to the TV networks.
Of course, just when so much of the talk on Monday revolved around how much money was being made in college sports, Division II Chaminade went out and convincingly defeated Texas, the most powerful and richest athletic department in the country that can single-handedly control conference realignment, in basketball. (I did not witness this monumental upset since I was watching the NFL Division II level offense of the Bears get pummeled by the 49ers. Let’s hope my Illini don’t suffer a fate similar to Texas against Chaminade later tonight.) It’s a reminder that money will only take you so far – schools still have to prove it on the field or court of play.
(Follow Frank the Tank’s Slant on Twitter @frankthetank111 and Facebook)
(Image from ESPN)
Love ya Frank!!!
LikeLike
RTR and destroy the barn on Saturday!!!
LikeLike
GEAUX LSU Fightin’ Tigers!
War Damn Eagle!
Fight on USC!
Go ‘noles!
Go Beavers!
LikeLike
How many TV’s do you have? 🙂
LikeLike
ccrider55 – since all the talking heads brought up 2007 ( a very good year in Tigerland) after all the upsets last weekend, I decided to expand my rooting interests beyond LSU, TCU, and Tulane.
If Auburn could somehow beat Bama, the Aggies beat Mizzou, and my Tigers beat the Hogs, LSU wins a 3-way tie in the SEC West and punches a ticket to the SEC CG.
USC beating the Irish knocks out the BCS #1 for the third week in a row.
Florida State beating Florida assures LSU of at least a Sugar Bowl berth.
Oregon State beating Oregon ruins any chances of the Ducks getting back in the BCS race.
If all those results happen and LSU beats the Dawgs in Atlanta, my Tigers are most likely back in the BCS NCG.
A guy can dream . . .
LikeLike
I like all of that but add a Hog win over the Tigers and it will be perfect! Gig’em.
LikeLike
Add.
LikeLike
Late to the party.
LikeLike
Louisville v. UConn is important on so many levels here.
This is the proxy tug of war between FSU/Clemson and Tobacco Road.
Not sure it means FSU/Clemson bolt if Louisville doesn’t join, but I think it’s obvious that they want a good football school in there, and Louisville is the best on the board in that respect.
LikeLike
Don’t really get that argument. Louisville might be better right this second, but it’s not like they’ve dominated UConn since UConn joined Big East football. The programs are remarkably similar in overall record. Louisville just happens to have the better record right now and used to have Bobby Petrino. But that’s no indicator of anything going forward.
LikeLike
UL has shown a willingness to spend the money necessary to stay competitive over an extended period of time. They don’t spend money like the “kings” do, but I they spend more money on athletics than most schools in their position.
LikeLike
And Uconn doesn’t? They’ve only been in Division 1 a short period, but already have a BCS birth. Their short football history is impressive considering the circumstances (little money and a new team) and their basketball is even better than Louisville. Those are the only revenue sports.
LikeLike
Amazing as it may seem, UConn’s basketball revenues are a small fraction of Louisville’s basketball revenues. Calhoun is a miracle worker, but he’s gone now.
LikeLike
Sparty on!
I’d be shocked if Louisville beat out UConn, assuming there is only one ACC spot left.
LikeLike
add
LikeLike
Hook ’em
LikeLike
Go Green! Welcome, Rutgers!
LikeLike
Already time for a new post Frank? Virginia Tech AD “potentially” interested in joining SEC ….
http://www.sbnation.com/college-football/2012/11/20/3673798/virginia-tech-sec-conference-realignment
LikeLike
Welp, everyone better buckle up for moves to 16.
LikeLike
“I’d like to defer my comment for right now, but there may potentially be some interest.” – Jim Weaver on “Tech Talk Live”
That statement is a far cry from Weaver’s statements back when the SEC was looking for a 14th member. I believe Weaver used to the word “poppycock” when describing the potential of VT moving to the SEC at that time. And he made this last statement live on air. That is a pretty interesting choice of words by Weaver this time.
LikeLike
Translation: Va Tech is in play.
LikeLike
David Teel, ACC reporter for Daily Press reporting that Virginia Tech AD has denied those comments… AD Jim Weaver quote, “I just can’t believe people are misrepresenting what I said. There’s nothing happening in regard to Virginia Tech going anywhere. I don’t know how to say it any clearer than that.”
So, now there’s that… Smoke, Fire, or False Alarm?
LikeLike
He said his original comments on the air, and a lot of the VT people heard him say it over the air (just go read their message boards right now). But now he has to do fire control because those comments are blowing up on twitter and on the VT message boards.
They probably are no where near jumping to the SEC just yet, but I’m guessing that the lines of communication have been reopened now.
LikeLike
@bama: If I’m the B1G I’d be calling UVa and VT today. Hell, I would’ve called them yesterday as I was leaving the Rutgers presser.
LikeLike
As a Rutgers Football alum (’79), today is extremely emotionally gratifying. @40 years ago HC Frank Burns sat in my living room and paited the picture and vision for Rutgers Football going “Big Time”. As part of the undefeated and #17 ranked 1976 team and Rutgers’ first Bowl game in 1979, we, as the early believers, really felt the foundation was laid. Many years of starts and stops later, TODAY a dream was fulfilled for us early believers. Fight on you Loyal Sons of Rutgers. Welcome to the Big Time…er….B1G. Thank you to all the B1G supporters who have welcomed us on our fanblogs and websites, we truely appreciate it and you will NOT be disappointed. Buckle up.
LikeLike
We MidWesterners are a patient group. I, for one, am happy about the expansion. Welcome, and I am glad you are here. That said, if it takes some time to get up and running…then it is what it is.
Keep in mind that if you do not fill your football stadium on game day, it is highly likely that the Big Ten team will. Fair warning.
LikeLike
I think some folks will be surprised. The talent level at Rutgers, as measured by % of the roster with 4 and 5 Star talent (Scout.com) is equal to that of MSU, Wisconsin, Iowa, and Illinois. They play very tough defense that forces turnovers and scores, a Pro-Style Coryell Hybrid offense, and Special Team scoring is strong. Their turnover ratio excellent every year. This program can compete sooner than later, I promise you. You will not be able to take them lightly. They will be your trap game and sneak up on some teams. Not a bottom feeder. This is a tough program with tough kids.
LikeLike
I’m among those that think Rutgers will surprise immediately.
They already look like they’ve gotten more talent the past couple years than most of the bottom half of the Big Ten.
They’d be at worst the 3rd or 4th best team in the East if they had been in the league the past year and possibly 2nd behind Ohio State given that Wisconsin took a step back.
LikeLike
Zeek, I think you are right, this program is getting stronger every year. There is now depth and high quality skill players. They built their defense on aggressive speed and blitzing. This is a very fast and strong team. The O-Line is being built on the Wisconsin model and they are committed to a balanced run/pass strategy. These kids can play.
LikeLike
I hope you are right…as an IU fan, I hope all your energy goes into football!!!
LikeLike
Congrats Rick. It is a great feeling when these long held hopes come to fruition.
LikeLike
ok…but what did Hawkeye and Trapper John have to say………
LikeLike
PSU fan here. I’m not a “pro Rutgers” guy or anything…but I’ve been calling for Rutgers to the Big Ten for the past three years. You guys fit what the Big Ten is all about. Your football might not have the legacy…but in every other way, you are a Big Ten school. Glad it’s finally “officially” so.
LikeLike
From Chip Brown (so take it with a grain of salt)
Before Notre Dame decided to cozy up to the ACC, I was told by key Big 12 sources Florida State and Georgia Tech were probably the most attractive targets the Big 12 would consider adding.
…
With Maryland bolting the ACC for the Big Ten in 2014 and the ACC seemingly on the verge of destabilization, the question is if the Big 12 can afford to sit back and let things play out or take an aggressive stance?
Keep your ears open for rumblings out of the SEC about a push that could include Alabama with support from Texas A&M and Missouri to get Florida and Georgia to relent on their opposition to adding Florida State and Georgia Tech.
http://texas.rivals.com/content.asp?CID=1439491
LikeLike
I’m not sure why the SEC would add Georgia Tech though.
They have to be focused on Virginia Tech + a North Carolina school.
LikeLike
Maybe FSU + Va Tech if they can’t dislodge a North Carolina school.
LikeLike
My guess would be to keep the Big XII from getting a foothold in SEC territory.
LikeLike
That’s interesting, but they wouldn’t mind the Big Ten taking Georgia Tech?
LikeLike
@zeek: Yeah, I don’t get it. GT is in the unfortunate position of being just good enough to be relevant, but not good enough for people to concern themselves. They’re the SEC version of Pitt — it makes sense for everyone not thinking about factors beyond the court/field.
LikeLike
I doubt that Bama or the SEC cares about the Big 12 getting a foothold in GA or FL. The ACC already has a foothold there, and most of their teams try and recuit out of their (a lot more than what the other Big 12 teams would try and recruit). And those two states will always be SEC states, regardless of what league GT & FSU are in, so it won’t hurt their ability to get cable subscribers for their upcoming SECN. The next time Brown is right about a conference realignment issue, may be the first time. His record isn’t all that good considering his info is propaganda straight for the UT AD.
LikeLike
Actually that is a misperception. He may have UT athletic department sources, but it is not DeLoss Dodds. He definitely gets people sending a message through him. BTW, as I recall, he did call TCU.
LikeLike
@bullet
He was also the first person to call the 2010 PAC talks collapsing, and more impressively, the massive value of the LHN months before anything was officially released by the school.
People in the AD’s office use him for propaganda, he has real connections.
LikeLike
Come on. Chip has about a 10% hit rate. He was completely wrong multiple times on A&M to the SEC. Let’s not attempt to alter history here.
LikeLike
Continuity? Travel?
I’d think Florida State and Virginia Tech are the big tickets here.
LikeLike
I’m getting dizzy…
LikeLike
I definitely would take that with a grain of salt. Maybe what I was told was not true, or maybe Bama has softened up on their stance on FSU. But I still find it very hard to believe that Bama would go out of its way to stick its neck out for two schools that are in the two states outside of Alabama that they rely most on in recruiting. I guess I could see Slive talking the PTB at Bama to go along with their inclusion, but for Bama to go out of their way to try and force it? That doesn’t make a whole lot of sense to me.
LikeLike
Bama
The reports out of Bham have been for some time that FSU will never ever EVER be on the SEC. Even prior to aggy joining the SEC had its eye on UNC. No doubt UNC has its pick between the two ans suddenly geogrhy is not such a big issue for them joining either. They would however lose rule of their little fiefdom.
LikeLike
Georgia Tech adds nothing to the SEC. The only thing they add to the Big 12 would be FSU alumni in Atlanta, i.e. makes the Big 12 more Seminole friendly.
So would the Big 12 exes try to sabotage Big 12 expansion? Sounds like bowtie. But again, this is Chip, so someone could be suggesting an angle.
As for Louisville, Big 12 fans would throw a fit if we expanded to 11 for Louisville. So would Fox which requires 45 league games. 11X9 is not possible. 11 X 8 is only 44. Maybe you could do something creative like 10X9+ Louisville X8 and let them count UK as #9.
I’m sure FSU is running the numbers and evaluating all their options. And trying to figure out what VT, UVA and UNC will do. I don’t expect them to do anything before summer. I’d put the odds at 60/40 they move. I can’t believe the SEC would say no if that’s what FSU wanted. The only real reason to say no would be because they don’t really need more powers. But I think the Big 12 is most likely for FSU.
LikeLike
bullet – I posted on the previous blog thread that I think the Big 12’s end game should be FSU, Clemson, Miami, GT, Pitt, and one more eastern school (one of Syracuse, BC, UL, or a NC school). That way would could split the divisions like this:
WEST – UT, OU, OSU, TT, TCU, Baylor, KU, KSU
EAST – FSU, Clemson, Miami, GT, WVU, Pitt, UL (or whoever they choose here), and ISU (I know they are getting somewhat of a raw deal here, but they are lucky they are even in a top 4 conference).
Or you could go with these pods:
Texas: UT, TT, TCU, Baylor
Plains: OU, OSU, KU, KSU
Southeast: FSU, Miami, Clemson, GT
North: WVU, Pitt, UL (or whoever they get), ISU
What is your feelings on this as and end game for the Big 12, and would the majority of Big 12 fans be ok with it?
LikeLike
It’s logical, but it all depends on what the SEC wants and can get.
If the SEC can only get Va Tech in the Mid-Atlantic, then the SEC is going to want FSU for themselves.
(SEC may not be able to separate that mess of schools in Tobacco Road; UNC and NC State may decide to just stick it out regardless of the future).
LikeLike
I think that scenario of UNC & NCST deciding come hell or high water that they are going to stick with the remain ACC teams, is the only one where the SEC take FSU. If the NC schools are completely off of the table, then the SEC may not have any other viable options than to go with FSU.
LikeLike
It is logical. Personally, I think its a mistake to go beyond 12. There’s a lot of sentiment among league officials to stop at 12 (if they even go beyond 10). Take FSU and somebody else. Doesn’t matter if its Tulane or Rice or Louisville, although Clemson or Georgia Tech would probably be the best.
I see a lot of talk of 14 although divisions would be difficult. General consensus seems to be that the league thinks Miami is tainted and may not be willing to risk embarrassment again to become a power. They may be satisfied to be a Northwestern. So FSU, Clemson, GT and Louisville. A number of people do believe in 4X16 and talk of those 4 + 2 of NCSU/Pitt/Miami (assumes UVA to B1G, VT to SEC and UNC to SEC or B1G). Everyone seems to believe Louisville is in with a 16 team scenario and most believe they are in with 14 (not that everyone is happy with that, but UL has some strong supporters in the league).
It would be a long term mistake to sit at 10 while the other powers have 14-16 and lots bigger populations. Media exposure would hurt you, especially if OU and UT have down periods at the same time (see 1990-95). But the Big 12 doesn’t need to rush out and take the 1st two schools that are available. They need the right two.
LikeLike
I agree with everything you’re saying here.
The other thing to consider though is recruiting/alumni populations and the like.
It seems to me that there’s a tightknit group against expansion (Texas + Northern schools).
I can see why OU/OSU/WVU want to expand.
But I have a much harder time seeing why Kansas, Kansas State, Iowa State would want to expand. They’re in a rush to get thrown with WVU and FSU into a different division where they’ll play significantly less in the state of Texas where their alumni and recruiting are?
Texas + those 3 should all be deadset against expansion. It just doesn’t seem equitable to those 3 schools to toss them into a division that spreads from the Plains to Florida.
LikeLike
KU and KSU fans seem adamant about there not being a Texoma division. The reality is divisions don’t matter much if you have 12 and a 9 game schedule with no fixed rivalries (which you could do with a Texoma). You play 4 out of 6 from the other division every year. So you put the Texas and Oklahoma schools together and the other 6 together and play 9.
LikeLike
Wouldn’t FSU and cCemson expect to play UT and OU yearly?
LikeLike
@bamatab
(Copy paste from my response to this question in the previous thread)
I actually had thought of that exact alignment and think it might actually be easier to get the votes necessary to move to 16 than to 12. Nobody outside of WVU seems willing to give up games in Texas to accommodate expansion, but if they went to 16 no one else besides ISU would have to.
Maybe the other schools buy off ISU by offering them an extra few 100K a year and call it a “travel stipend” to offset the added travel costs they would endure. Or they just tell them that they should consider themselves lucky that they are in a power conference at all.
LikeLike
frug – I think they just tell ISU to be thankful they aren’t in the MWC at this point. I actually think that group of schools would pull a very nice tv contract and could have a pretty successful conference network (if they could figure out how to include UT into the network).
LikeLike
Bama
Sine the summer we referred to these as the SWC pod, Big 8 pod, ACC pod and BIG pod. With travel concerns it seems the only way to get FSU is to let them bring some neighbors. That gets you to 14 which is not a great number to go to with all due respect to the SEC and BIG so adding two more arou d WVU seems to make sense. Plus adding GTech and Pitt might appeal to one conference destabilizing school that shall not be named. Just in case they are looking.
LikeLike
Sorry since the summer
LikeLike
Bullet – “So would the Big 12 exes try to sabotage Big 12 expansion? Sounds like bowtie. But again, this is Chip, so someone could be suggesting an angle.”
@bullet – when has R. Bowen Loftin ever attempted to sabotage B12 expansion? If you mean that he halted Powers/Dodds plan to drag A&M (by informing A&M of their “grand” plan at the 11th hour) to the Pac16, then yes, that is true. Otherwise, I doubt he cares who the B12 adds going forward. Just like the vast majority of Ags.
LikeLike
I think bullet’s point is there would now be a pac16 (wonder how the LHN thing would have been resolved, but I digress) but for aTm. Could a school (or group) scuttle a current, almost done deal?
LikeLike
A&M didn’t sabotage the Pac16. Once Loftin was informed of the plan by Powers he declined. Powers assumed he could dictate and found out he was wrong. A&M couldn’t care less about B12 future plans and the only sabotage would be in the minds of the paranoid.
LikeLike
FranktheAg:
I’m not assign motive or blame. Just wondering/suggesting that a similar circumstance might be possible now, as in a school (or schools) may act in their best interest may scuttle a move promoted or arranged by others. aTm is not mentioned by me in any way other than as an example of how one school may have the power to derail the plans of others, and happened in the same conference being discussed.
LikeLike
No, I wasn’t referring to the Pac 16.
I was referring to later in those e-mails from OU that got disclosed and he sent an e-mail to Boren trying to undermine the conference after A&M had already left.
LikeLike
First bullet you are misrepresenting those letters by calling it sabotage. Boren and Loftin had multiple conversations about moving together to the SEC a year earlier. Of course they continued to have conversations about OU going to the PAC. They value each others input. Just like Powers had conversations with tOSU.
Second the conversation had nothing to do about B12 expansion. It was about OU leaving.
LikeLike
Chip doesn’t have sources at Texas A&M. Everything he states is pure propaganda for Texas/Dodds.
LikeLike
Go Huskers!
LikeLike
Hawks.
LikeLike
I’m curious about whether the PAC 12 will expand? Texas and OU are the two targets that are of any interest to them but would they take OU and OSU to get to UT? so far they have said no, but the realignment game is changing faster than anyone thought it would even 2 years ago.
LikeLike
They’ll take any group of 3 under the sun if Texas is coming.
Texas is the prize of all prizes. You could add SMU, Houston, and UTEP, and Texas would pay for all 4…
Texas has to sign on first for the Pac-12 to expand at this point.
LikeLike
turnip truck hit a bump and you landed on your head?
LikeLike
The consensus from the news reports seems to be that Georgia Tech is the preference for #15.
If Tech is #15, who is the 16th school? UVA? UNC? Kansas?
I’ll throw out a darkhorse — Florida State. They make no sense in a vacuum. However, if GT is #15, then Florida State would be a home run as the final school. First, their fanbase, based on the message boards, seems to be the most receptive to joining the B1G. Tellingly, the majority of their fans view the Big 12 as inherently unstable and are circumspect about leaving one shaky situation for another.
Unlike UNC and UVA, FSU is not a founding member of the conference. Their top athletic priority is not to maintain any ACC rivalris, but to ensure their football program is on equal footing in terms of revenue and exposure with UF. FSU fans look at the revenue generated by the Big 10, and see an opportunity to gain a permanent seat at a stable, cash generating conference. Further, it would be an easy academic sell to move from the ACC to the B1G — more difficult to persuade the faculty to leave the ACC for the Big 12.
In exchange, FSU would offer the Big 10 access to the top state in the country for high school players — Florida. FSU would bring one of the few national brands in college football. You think network TV would pay for FSU-PSU? FSU-Nebraska?
Its not a perfect fit by any means. The geography is a stretch (but then again FSU is already playing games in Boston and Syracuse in the ACC). FSU would be testing the Big 10 presidents’ limits on academics (ranked #102 in US NEWS). However, if the Big 10 adds GT to Maryland and Rutgers, they may be more inclined to accept a non-AAU school — with the intention of helping FSU eventually obtain AAU status.
A darkhorse pick? Sure, but if I’m Jim Delaney, and expansion is about (1) markets, (2) football and (3) new recruiting territories, why would I destabilize the ACC and allow the crown football jewel — FSU — to fall in the Big 12’s lap?
If the Big 10 is keen on Georgia Tech as the 15th member, I wouldn’t be surprised if there are internal discussions about Florida State as the final addition.
LikeLike
UVa has to be included to get to the other side of D.C. in my opinion. It’s just hard to see the Big Ten moving forward without UVa unless they’re not interested at all in moving.
LikeLike
UVa and UNC are last movers in this game and if they do get forced to move, it would more than likely be to the SEC. I doubt much of anything happens next other than the ACC adds one school to replace Maryland (i’m guessing Louisville).
Nothing so far will push UNC/UVa to jump, so what else could happen? I guess if the B1G wants to move they could pull GaTech and FSU but that would close out their available seats. Is Delany willing to end the game with Rutgers, Maryland, GaTech and FSU?
Clemson and GaTech have made it clear they are not going to the B12 and FSU won’t go alone. So I don’t see anything forcing UVa and UNC at this time.
LikeLike
I considered FSU a long time ago. If they are willing, I think the B10 has to take a long hard look. Them or Miami (who are closer to AAU status).
LikeLike
@MiamiWolv – If I were running the Big Ten, I’d be willing to consider a school such as Florida State or Oklahoma that’s a football power that’s right outside the cusp of meeting the conference’s academic standards. I don’t think the powers that be are thinking that way, though. For a Florida presence, I’ve long thrown Miami out there as the most viable option for the Big Ten (obviously assuming that Florida would never ever leave the SEC). Culturally, Miami is really a Northeastern school as opposed to a Southern school and, while it’s not an AAU member, it has high undergrad academic rankings. Sure, they might be getting sanctions soon (perfect for the Leaders Division) and the private school fan base is as fairweather as they come, but when it comes down to drawing TV viewers (both local and national), Miami is still near the top. I don’t think that’s a likely move for the Big Ten, but the Canes would be more likely compared to the Noles (IMHO).
LikeLike
Frank, I’m pretty sure OU isn’t on the cusp of AAU status. NCSU is actually on the cusp. Miami is close. FSU is a little farther away, and OU is farther away than that. They’re not WVU, but also so far away that I don’t think meeting B10 standards in several decades is realistic.
LikeLike
Guys,
Here’s the rankings from NE’s AAU presentation based on AAU criteria (2005-7 ave):
59. Miami – That puts Miami just below the 25th percentile. #31 GT only recently got approved, and is above the 50th percentile. There are 10 eligible schools between GT and Miami although I have to assume some of them have been passed over for other reasons (Dartmouth, for example).
91t. VT
91t. NCSU
91t. OU
94. FSU
The lowest AAU members at the time were #109 NE, #105 (Syracuse?), #94, #87, #83 and #81.
AWRU 2012 US rankings:
54-67. GT
68-85. NE, NCSU, Miami, VT
86-109. FSU, Syracuse
110-137. OU
Other B10 schools:
17. WI
18. MI
19. IL
21. MN
22. NW
29. MD
35. PSU
38. PU
40. RU
41. OSU
48. IN
52. MSU
54-67. IA
LikeLike
OK, so Miami’s close. B10 may not even mind if they get the death penalty. Still plenty of recruits and alums there, and not being a threat to the B10 powers may be a plus. I say they come in with ND.
LikeLike
The thing with Miami is that there is a serious question if they can ever be good again without being so dirty as to get shut down. That school has apparently never won clean, and in a “dirtier than the SEC” type of not-clean as opposed to the free shoes or no-show work that pops up every so often elsewhere. Miami itself believes the Shapiro stuff is true and involves flagrant institutional violations. They’ve self-imposed a two-year bowl ban now without even a formal notice of allegations. They’re clearly expecting the death penalty.
It’s a totally different kettle of fish from other dormant programs or a once-and-future king like FSU.
LikeLike
Oh and THIS is what’s going to happen to Miami. Willful violator clause & all:
http://miamiherald.typepad.com/sports-buzz/2012/11/ncaa-gives-ultimatum-to-players-in-um-investigation-canes-dolphins-marlins-heat-chatter.html
Death penalty.
LikeLike
Is pretty heavy handed. Like Tennessee got punished worse because Willie Mack Garza who followed Kiffin to USC lied about Tennessee violations while employed by USC. Pretty ridiculous.
And they still ignore UNC’s academic fraud.
LikeLike
The whole southeast coast is in play.
Potential Big10 targets: UNC, UVa, Duke, Miami, GTech (and ND)
Potential SEC targets: UNC, VTech, UVa, NCSU, FSU
Potential B12 targets: All of the above + Clemson (and maybe Pitt and ‘Cuse)
It’s like HS recruiting except with bribery being legal.
LikeLike
Good thing that the SEC has plenty of experience in that area then. 😉
LikeLike
Good luck against UGA. I am at law school at Emory…surrounded by Dawg Fans…please silence them for me in a few weeks. After taking care of the Barners of course.
Nicest friends I have met here are Bama guys…
LikeLike
Thanks Nick. Bama fans get a bad rap because of our lunatic fringe (which admittedly can be pretty darn nuts), but the vast majority of Bama fans are good, friendly folks who are usually pretty knowledgeable about college football.
I’m guessing by your handle you are a ND guy? If so I hope they take care of USC, and then we take care of the barn and dawgs. A Bama vs ND BCSCG would be pretty darn epic IMO.
LikeLike
I am actually the only person in South Bend who is neutral on the Irish. Not my team, but do not hate them. They employ part of my family, and are generally good people. The football team is a bit nauseating much of the time, but I don’t hate them. I am an Indiana fan…we are moving in the right direction in football, and I am glad basketball season is here.
I am most interested in an ND vs. Bama match up for the title. They have both eraned it the most in my opinion.
LikeLike
I don’t think ND has earned it….I think they’ve been lucky as hell……and the refs freaking gave them the Pitt game with the phony PI call.
LikeLike
I don’t care what anyone says about fit or “Southern Culture”….If Delany captures UVA through all of this…that is a hell of a get.
LikeLike
At this point UVa is probably the #1 school on the Big Ten’s list if you ignore ND and Texas.
LikeLike
The Big Ten would definitely love UVA. I still think the old guard there that thinks of it as a Southern school will push back on that prospect unless they’re convinced that the ACC is going to collapse.
LikeLike
Definitely true. It’s hard to see UVa considering a move early in the process. You might have to wait for the Big 12 and SEC to expand, and even then it’d be a lift.
But the Big Ten is at 14 now, so it’s not like there’s a lot of spots left to fill. Only really 2 left aboard this wagon.
LikeLike
Nah. Only 6 spots left on the wagon.
LikeLike
Re: Divisions
When Nebraska was added three years ago, there was much effort made on the part of the Big Ten to ensure competitive balance with the formation of the Leaders and Legends divisions. I didn’t like it at the time, specifically splitting Ohio State and Michigan, but I understood it. However, now that the league has expanded into Maryland and New Jersey, with the goal of generating enough local interest in the Big Ten to eventually capture these TV markets and make it Big Ten territory, isn’t in the B1G’s and thus every school’s interest to feature Michigan, Ohio State, and Penn State, in DC/Baltimore and New York/New Jersey as often as possible? Does this mean that Michigan and Ohio State are reunited with the new realignment?
Obviously, Penn State is going to be grouped with Rutgers and Maryland. Similarly, because of proximity, Ohio State will be as well. But don’t you have to put Michigan with them as well? Michigan’s largest alumni bases are in Detroit and Chicago, but the next two are in New York and DC, second to only Penn State among league alumni bases in these two cities (if not first). This is what will spur local interest in Maryland and New Jersey/New York, seeing Maryland and Rutgers take on the kings of the league as often as possible. If you simply move Illinois west, and keep the divisions the same, you are limiting how often Michigan comes to town, in what is sure to be one of the biggest if not biggest draws locally for both Maryland and Rutgers.
So why wouldn’t these divisions work?
LEADERS
Ohio State
Michigan
Penn State
Rutgers
Maryland
Purdue
Indiana
LEGENDS
Nebraska
Wisconsin
Michigan State
Iowa
Northwestern
Illinois
Minnesota
Are these divisions that unbalanced? The East is more top heavy, but the West is more balanced, and probably the more difficult to win on a year in and year out basis. Lock Michigan and Michigan State, and the rest however the league sees fit.
LikeLike
We’re going to 16 before 2014 I think.
For now, if we stick it out with this group, they’ll just shift Illinois to the West.
Before long though, they’ll get to 16 and blow up the divisions model.
4 pods headlined by Nebraska, Michigan, Ohio State, Penn State (West, North, South, East respectively).
LikeLike
Having grown up in the NY Metro area (now living in Atlanta where I was born), the NY media is going to go crazy over the B1G coming to town. NY is a humungous sports town, not just Pro sports. They love seeing the biggest and best, College or Pro. It does not matter. Big Time is Big Time and that is what is coming to town now. NY loves Big Time.
In my opinion, the divisions posed above will totally deliver the NY media/cable dollars. Michigan is the key, outside of ND alum, Michigan is NY all the way. Tons of Wolverine fans. Michigan in the eastern division is a must to accelerate the BTN penetration into higher cable fees.
LikeLike
I really agree with this sentiment. Similar statement about DC – the Michigan fanbase here is incredible.
LikeLike
I want to see what happens when an elite IN comes to MSG to play a solid RU in hoops. NYC has always been a great hoops town and they must be excited to see IN more often.
LikeLike
These are pretty much exactly the same divisions I proposed a few threads ago. As long as UM vs MSU is protected, it would work well. It might also make sense to also split the Illinois and Indiana schools and give them protected crossover games with their in-state rivals. That way the visiting teams get a little more variety by going to both states instead of just one.
LikeLike
Tom,
“However, now that the league has expanded into Maryland and New Jersey, with the goal of generating enough local interest in the Big Ten to eventually capture these TV markets and make it Big Ten territory, isn’t in the B1G’s and thus every school’s interest to feature Michigan, Ohio State, and Penn State, in DC/Baltimore and New York/New Jersey as often as possible? Does this mean that Michigan and Ohio State are reunited with the new realignment?”
No and no. I’ll explain below.
“Michigan’s largest alumni bases are in Detroit and Chicago, but the next two are in New York and DC, second to only Penn State among league alumni bases in these two cities (if not first).”
OSU’s largest alumni concentrations outside of OH are DC/NoVA, NYC and Chicago in that order.
“If you simply move Illinois west, and keep the divisions the same, you are limiting how often Michigan comes to town, in what is sure to be one of the biggest if not biggest draws locally for both Maryland and Rutgers.”
Assuming 9 games, 7 team divisions and 1 locked crossover (6-1-2 schedule), MI would come once every 6 years while in the other division. So would NE. And that’s on top of either OSU or PSU every year, so 8 king games in 6 years.
“So why wouldn’t these divisions work?
LEADERS
Ohio State
Michigan
Penn State
Rutgers
Maryland
Purdue
Indiana
LEGENDS
Nebraska
Wisconsin
Michigan State
Iowa
Northwestern
Illinois
Minnesota”
The east has:
1. 3 of the 4 kings
2. OSU and MI, the 2 premier B10 programs in terms of fans and media coverage
3. the 3 largest stadiums
4. most of the major metro areas
5. about 2/3 of the B10’s population
6. the media capital of the world
7. proximity to ESPN
8. all the top recruiting grounds
9. most of the year’s king/king games in division
The western teams would be lucky to get any non-local media coverage with your setup. The MSU fans would explode with the injustice of it all. That was why they split the kings equally and particularly OSU and MI in the first place.
As to wanting to maximize the number of king games for the new guys, you have to be careful. They need to win enough games to keep fans excited. Giving them the NE schedule will just turn off the fans.
If on the field was all that mattered, they’d still be bad though.
“Are these divisions that unbalanced?”
Yes. The east is top and bottom heavy, the west is mostly middle.
If you don’t like the IL swap, try pods:
S – OSU, PU, IN, IL
E – PSU, MD, RU
W – NE, WI, IA, MN
N – MI, MSU, NW
2014-5
Woody Division = S + E
Bo Division = N + W
EX. OSU
division – PU, IL, IN, PSU, MD, RU
locked – MI
rotating – NE, MN
EX. PSU
division – MD, RU, OSU, PU, IL, IN
locked – NE
rotating – MI, MSU
2016-7
Woody = S + N
Bo = E + W
EX. OSU
division – PU, IL, IN, MI, MSU, NW
locked – PSU
rotating – WI, IA
EX. PSU
division – MD, RU, NE, WI, IA, MN
locked – OSU
rotating – MSU, NW
LikeLike
#3
What if they pulled another Mountain West and formed a new conference? Then they aren’t tied down by the existing TV contract (of course they are partly stuck with what they negotiated back in 1998) Could they get a good TV contract? Would anyone other than CBSSports be interested? Does Fox have enough of the west already with the Pac and Big 12? ESPN is pretty saturated with the Big 5.
Hawaii, Fresno, UNLV, Nevada, CSU, UNM, Air Force + BYU, SDSU, Boise, Houston and SMU or UTEP. I really don’t see how the old CUSA (now known as the new Big East) with Boise and SDSU is significantly more valuable for football. Boise, SDSU, UH, SMU, Memphis, UCF, USF, Louisville, Cincinnati, Temple, Navy is must see TV? The 1st group has 6 schools who threatened to be BCS busters. The 2nd group has 2 of those 6 + two schools who won the Big East + Navy and a bunch of schools with no history of football success. Maybe it is worth much more. But I don’t understand it.
LikeLike
They probably don’t want to give up their tournament credits by dissolving. That was what killed the MWC-CUSA merger.
LikeLike
Welcome Scarlet Knights! Go B1G Red
LikeLike
Dear Notre Dame,
Remember how you left the Big East for the ACC in order to protect basketball and your Olympics sports’ future? You felt like a Big East that had been transformed into something radically different from what you joined in 1995 was not where you wanted your future. You left the Big East, even though they made no demands that you play them a minimum number of times in football, allowing you full independence as you desired. You left them for the ACC, a league that, according to your own administrators, fit your school academically and culturally, not to mention that it meets your large east coast alumno/fan base. With Pitt, Syracuse, Boston College, Georgia Tech, Miami, and Florida State, it even includes several very familiar opponents in football (not including USC, Navy, or the three Big Ten September rivals, one of which you just dumped). For you, Notre Dame, this is your ideal league.
But you really on joined this league when your former one, the Big East, suffered defection after defection after defection. You saw the writing on the wall that you needed something stable.
As we have learned from conference realignment, stability can only be assured by a grant-of-rights. (Well, in the case of the SEC, stability can also be assured by a complete absence if exit fees or granting of media rights. Instead, the SEC relies on the ultimate confidence that says, “Why in the hell would anyone ever leave the badass SEC?”) Exit fees assure only crossed fingers in hopes that no one will leave the league. They assure anything but stability–just look at the Big 12 prior to their granting of rights, or your decimated, soon-to-be former league, the Big East. Unfortunately, the ACC also has mere exit fees, which, as you and all ACC members have been made soberingly aware, do nothing to deter members from leaving. Not even a founding, 60-year member of the conference. They do not lead to stability, the exact thing you sought in leaving the Big East.
On the other hand, the ACC cannot gain a grant-of-rights, which guarantees true stability in membership, if its members cannot gain a sense of assurance that the league’s financial future can be competitive with the four higher revenue leagues. Replacing Maryland with Louisville or UConn can’t make that happen. Most, if not all, members feel will still feel vulnerable and would jump away to the Big Ten, SEC, or maybe even the Big 12 if given the opportunity, just as all those ex-Big East schools jumped to our league. No one wants to be left on a sinking ship, which we are vulnerable to become without a grant-of-rights. Again, a grant-of-rights is not going to happen with the addition of a Louisville or UConn.
What you want is true stability in a league you truly want go be in. You dont want non-stability in aleague that you lost interest in, as with the Big East, sven if ghey gave you full football independence. You dont want stability for stability’s sake in a league you dont actually want to join at all, i.e., the Big Ten. You obviously dont want to settle for a relationship with a league where you have very few institutional or demographic commanalities, i.e., the Big 12. (ND alumni dont exactly flock to the Great Plains.) Nor do you want to be a member if an ACC that gets a grant-of-rights only after losing 2, 3, 4, who knows how many members, and the league starts looking exactly like the conference you just left. You want to be a member of a league where you know everyone is guaranteed to be staying, is happy to stay, and is paix competitively to stay. But in this day of conference mistrust, that can only happen by adding something that would be a total game changer. Your ACC, the one that you needed so badly that you were willing to commit five games/year to our league, needs you to go all the way with us if you want to be a member if the same league you joined a few years from now. Oh, we wouldnt vote you out. We’d just not really be yhe same league. Do you rsally want to go through all that again. Do you really want to more charter members to leave, or other later joining members like Va. Tech or FSU to leave? Or do you want this to be your home, where Notre Dame football completely turns this league around and where, by the way, you can make the Orange Bowl much more than two times in 12 years, which is the case with your current independent status. (Just imagine what it would be like for an 11-1 or 10-2 Irish team to miss the contact/playoff bowls altogether, because of a 10-2 Michigan team that’s ranked ahead if you.) Your football would spike our already considerably under market TV value (we’re paid much less than the Big 12 or Pac-12 despite having better TV ratings) through the roof, even if we’re only renegotiating with ESPN rather than going to open market. You’d change everything for this league, and you’d be getting what you want.
Give it some time, but don’t wait too long. Jim Delaney could be phoning Virginia or UNC as we speak, and who knows whether Bowls by has heard from Florida State or Clemson yet.
Sincerely,
The ACC
LikeLike
Does it seem presumptuous to anybody else that just by adding Rutgers and Maryland the BTN will be able to force the cable companies to pass these high carriage fees on to their subscribers in New Jersey, Maryland, and New York? Its not quite like adding Nebraska where everybody in the state demanded the BTN. Do enough people in these markets actually care enough for the cable companies to justify raising everybody’s prices? The cable companies already go to war when the carriage fees go up for channels that most of their customers actually watch.
LikeLike
SIAP, but it answers this question.
http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/columnist/hiestand-tv/2012/11/20/michael-hiestand-big-10-fox-expansion-/1718311/
LikeLike
There are several sources of money with the cable:
1. Automatic footprint hikes. This is a big one on its own because it is contractual. There are different rates paid per subscriber for states that have a B1G school and states that don’t. Maryland & New Jersey now do. The difference here is quite large, as much as from $.10/month to $.80/month. This is contractual and pretty much all cable operators have this in place.
2. Advertising. Ratings dependent, but live sports tends to command serious advertising money. The second side of advertising is market – markets with high disposable incomes are much more valuable. New Jersey & Maryland are affluent states. This is something I think people overlook way too much when they talk about the glories of Missouri. That state is poor outside of STL & KC, and B1G already has major penetration in both.
3. Basic cable carriage. This is a step above the better rates paid on the footprint for sports channels and the Holy Grail. Getting this in the NYC media market is the super ultra mega Holy Grail. It looks like FOX, the partner with the BTN, is going to try to strong arm that with the YES (Yankees & Nets) network they just acquired and which commands obscene subscriber rates.
Quality of football product is only related to ratings & advertising, and only then a piece of the puzzle.
LikeLike
One of the things I enjoy about the BTN are all the seed corn, herbicide, and pesticide ads. Are those network wide, or just local?
LikeLike
I don’t think the BTN can do local ads.
If you want to reach Midwestern farmers, you have few better alternatives than the BTN, however.
LikeLike
Good luck begging ND to “give one up for the Gipper”…………..BE tried that for 10 years
LikeLike
The ACC must save itself, but as a basketball conference I’m not sure it can. The reason the B1G, UT&friends, and PAC, and the SEC is because they have big glamorous programs with decades of success and legions of fans. Where is that in the ACC?
FSU was all-female for forty years until after WWII. They chose the ACC because their coach believed the ACC would be the easiest league to go undefeated. He was right, since the ‘Noles didn’t lose an ACC game for over 3 years. Heck, in their first 9 years in the ACC they only lost 2 league games. Regardless, their most famous players are Burt Reynolds, Neon Deon, and Lee Corso. One of their Heisman trophy winners had a decent NBA career.
FSU, even with all that, is the ACC team that would be a king.
The only other ACC school with a stadium that holds more than 80K is Clemson. Clemson has only won even a share of the league 14 times in 59 years despite being the only football first school in the league for most of its history. They have won only 1 MNC. I checked wikipedia, and I didn’t recognize a single former player. I am almost certain no one outside of SC cares about them.
Georgia Tech’s heyday was long before the ACC was formed. They did manage to win half a title in 1990, making them the only other team ACC remaining with the conference to win an MNC as a member of the league. Even with that they are the #2 college team in their own city.
Virginia Tech is a great story, but they have no history prior to Beamer, and that only goes back about 20 years.
The remainder of the league are either former Big East members who’ve been down for about a decade, basketball first teams in the Carolinas, and Virginia who doesn’t move the needle.
The money will flow to the football blue-bloods, and the ACC has none really.
LikeLike
Dear ACC,
Conversation is good. A few notes that might push the conversation forward, if not we understand:
1. GOR might not be a deal-breaker depending on how an agreement is written. If you agree with us that the current business model of forcing old ladies to pay for ESPN has a short shelf life, then we need to position for the day when institutional brands will increase significantly in
value and collective brands will matter only if they will matter — a fan must know which
colleges are members of each division and in which conference, there must be a
compelling reason why the conference matters and why winning a conference title means something.
2. Discussion about GOR is just talking about money — and a tiny amount of money at that. What is far more important are values and specifically a unified approach towards academics,
athletics and student development.
A. You need to commit to higher standards of self-policing. For example, the Big 10
shamed itself by “leading from behind” in both the OSU and PSU scandals. What new
information do you need before you act on UNC’s ever-expanding academic scandal?
What new information do you need to learn about Miami? Mistakes happen. It is how
you respond when you know that a mistake has happened that is the
issue. Is the first response “this is not who we are”? or is it “what does the network
say”? If you don’t have the will to self-police, then this will be a problem.
B. Similarly, APR matters. In this part of country, schools play a shell game. University
administrators will routinely note that graduation rates for different athletic teams are
slightly better or only slightly worse than for the general undergraduate population — but
won’t say that 55 – 65% graduation rates for the general student population is a fraud.
Credits to nowhere, paid with student loans and subsidized by the taxpayers is a
cynical ploy used to balance the books of our land-grant brethren in the midwest. If a
conference demands high graduation rates in bb and fb and internally holds members
to reach these standards — regardless of the “impossibility of competing effectively
unless standards are lowered,” then effective and dedicated programs will find a way to
accomplish athletic and academic success. It is the lazy way out to say that you can’t.
Who knows how our fb or bb programs will do this year — but we have already won —
we are #1 in graduation rate this year– and Stanford, BC and Northwestern show that
it can be done as well. Will you self-police on outcomes that truly matter? And don’t
play games with majors — you know who you are recreation, tourism, hospitality,
kinesiology and “general studies” majors.
3. We will hold up our end of the deal on academics. In the next few years we promise to invest a billion or two to “merge” with a medical and health system. This will balance out our graduate research portfolio and instantly increase our national academic rankings (by some estimates to #12). You must hold your end. Undergraduates must continue to matter. They are not transients, they do not transfer in from junior colleges under statewide “articulation” agreements. How can enrolling in Freshman Seminar at Ivy Tech be a substitute for the same course at Duke? You commit to only admitting those students who will flourish while enrolled for four years at your school and if they can’t afford it, you provide full financial support. You are not trying to make a profit on every undergraduate credit. Instead, you provide them with an experience that is so positive that they voluntarily agree as alums to donate to your mission. Small financial endowments and large alumni bases are a very bad signal.
4. So you see, it is not a conference that we are against, it is that we have not found the right partners. Is the ACC a full-partner? We were heartened to see MD leave. If they were willing to forsake 50 years of heritage for 15+ million, what will they do in five years when they realize that it was their bad decision making and dysfunctional processes that led them to their problems in 2010 — and that after receiving a BTN windfall they are still broke? Let the Big 14 deal with it. FSU does not seem to be a good fit. I hear they might want to leave. Let them — and VT. Let Pitt and Syracuse go to the B20. Clemson is actually trying to become something academically. If they are worried about money, can’t we “carry them” for a while? Duke, UNC (tell us it was an temporary insanity), UVA, Wake Forest and GT are a really good start. We will even agree to join a conference with Fredo (BC) — that will make their century. If we can carry Clemson for a while, we make 8. Eight is good. We don’t need 20. NCSTU? ACC9? Scheduling, conference championships, Tier 1 — matter less than finding the right partners. Find the right partners, have a mission that “differentiates” from the crowd — this is what matters — and we can still make money. Trust us, you can. It might be a different path — but it still can work. The rest is just details for staff. If you agree, let’s continue to talk. Have a wonderful Thanksgiving.
LikeLike
“A. You need to commit to higher standards of self-policing. For example, the Big 10
shamed itself by “leading from behind” in both the OSU and PSU scandals.”
I’m not really sure what more you were expecting OSU to do with its recent issues. The only thing the NCAA really hit them with that wasn’t self-imposed was the bowl ban, and OSU was under the impression its transgressions weren’t egregious enough to warrant it based on past NCAA precedent. Emmert felt differently.
LikeLike
“You need to commit to higher standards of self-policing.”
You know, like the Catholic Church has done.
“For example, the Big 10 shamed itself by “leading from behind”…”
That joke would be too easy, except it’s not at all funny. But thanks for the lesson on how those immoral secular state schools should behave.
.
LikeLike
I don’t think it’s fair to ridicule ND for the actions of the Catholic Church. That’s why I didn’t bring that up. My retort was going to be a little less polarizing, such as I hope ND has granted Brian Kelly the ability to teach an undergrad meteorology class in the near future.
If you’ve won a NC in the last 50 years, likely you have some skeletons in the closet. You just don’t usually get your hands slapped as hard as others:
LikeLike
If you’re a member of an institution whose very identity is defined by a religion involved with a systemic scandal of abuse and cover-up, and if you’re assuming a position of supposed moral authority, lecturing others on having “higher standards” and how to police oneself, that is hypocrisy on a grand scale. Further, to suggest ND would withhold its grand football team from the ACC because of APR or because the ACC hasn’t dealt with that great big UNC scandal–even while parking every other sport in that very conference–is the same sort of convoluted logic.
LikeLike
“Further, to suggest ND would withhold its grand football team from the ACC because of APR or because the ACC hasn’t dealt with that great big UNC scandal–even while parking every other sport in that very conference–is the same sort of convoluted logic.”
Not sure we’ll agree on the first part, but I love this comment for sure.
LikeLike
As long as Notre Dame continues to whitewash rapes at the hands of Irish football players and deaths due to the negligence of it’s coaching staff Notre Dame really shouldn’t open their damn mouths about ‘higher standards of self-policing’.
LikeLike
Notre Dame left their non-football affiliation with Big East for a similar arrangement with ACC and agreed to play 5 ACC football teams each year. Who knew they could end up playing 5 former Big East teams? BC, Syracuse, Pitt, Connecticut, Louisville?
LikeLike
So they didn’t really leave the Big East. They just followed it.
LikeLike
Basically, ND’s endgame here has always been to ensure that there was an extra leftover conference that would keep the system from going to 4×16.
That’s how they’re playing their hand.
They don’t mind the ACC becoming Big East v2 as long as it stays with the other 4 conferences (even way behind…).
LikeLike
They don’t mind it, but some of the ACC schools do. The partial membership was apparently a big issue with Maryland’s leadership.
LikeLike
It’s probably an issue with other schools now that Maryland has bolted as well.
All the “we’re all for one, one for all” bullcrap means nothing if you just gave a sweetheart deal to ND to house their non-revenue sports and fill 5 late season slots on their schedule.
LikeLike
They can say that, but they really did just need the money. I think the timing with the YES acquisition and the ability for FOX to play hardball for the BTN is why this happened when it did. It seems that FOX is now in charge, not Delaney. He who pays the piper picks the tune.
LikeLike
7. You forgot Miami and V-Tech.
(And yes the new ACC will have more former Big East members than original ACC members)
LikeLike
Whoops, slightly misinterpreted what you wrote, but what I said remains true!
LikeLike
Frank mentions the Temple Owls. There are 4 schools that have been left behind who were big time in the last 20 years (assuming you count Temple). Two others will be back in the club for one year, 2013, before the BE loses its AQ. That’s SMU and Houston. The other two are both Owls-Temple and Rice. Guess TPTB don’t want that academic sounding team name making people think of the comprises they make in trying to win..
LikeLike
Yeah, for all the talk of the Northeast being left behind as the conferences expanded; it seems like there wasn’t that much worry about the future of college football up there. Almost the entire Big East is accounted for now…
Utah and TCU being the extra two on board the future Big 5 now.
LikeLike
It will not be long before SMU, Houston, and Rice will have been out for more than 20 years and will be more like Tulane (SEC member 45+ years ago). TCU will be the only exiled SWC member back in the big time. Besides Utah, VT program has been upgraded in the last 20 years. If UCONN gets the ACC bid it will have gone from FCS to AQ, but without it is likely to sink with the rest of CUSA II (the new BE).
LikeLike
Go Chaminade!
LikeLike
#lolhatweek
LikeLike
i would love to see them win that thing once.
LikeLike
Consolidation is a good description…
~1990 after the last major independents joined a conference, 7 major conferences (Big 8, Big Ten, Pac-10, SEC, ACC, Big East, SWC)
~2000, 6 major conferences (Big Ten, Pac-10, SEC, ACC, Big East, Big 12)
~2010, 5 major conferences (Big Ten, Pac-12, SEC, ACC, Big 12)
net results:
Added Utah
Dropped Rice, SMU, and Houston
The more things change, the more things stay the same.
LikeLike
Georgetown is fighting Indiana here hard. Wow.
LikeLike
Free throw disparity is huge.
LikeLike
Completely different topic. Who moves to LA?
http://tracking.si.com/2012/11/21/rose-bowl-preps-for-nfl-team/?sct=hp_t2_a7&eref=sihp
LikeLike
Rams probably, though I wouldn’t be surprised if it was Jacksonville. Heck, could be both.
LikeLike
“They’re the model that everybody in the country looks to,” said Larry Hincker, associate vice president for university relations at Virginia Tech, an ACC school. In terms of academic and institutional collaboration, Hincker said, “I don’t think there’s any conference in the country that has what the Big Ten’s got.”
http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/education/big-ten-institutional-cooperation-cited-as-a-plus-for-u-md/2012/11/20/31d41364-333e-11e2-9cfa-e41bac906cc9_story.html?hpid=z2
LikeLike
Just thought it was interesting that they got a quote from a Va Tech official.
LikeLike
The CIC love is way overblown, imo, but the BIG has certainly used it well for propoganda purposes…….for that we can thank former IU President Herman Wells, who came up with the idea……….
LikeLike
I always love how football fans mock something as “overblown” or “propaganda” that the administrations and faculty senates are willing to kill over.
LikeLike
I’ve enjoyed this site for almost three years and recognize that it is a Big Ten first blog, but I gotta say this whole thing sucks realllllllllllly bad as an ACC fan. Predictably, guys on the local radio are saying things like Maryland hasn’t contributed anything positive to the conference in years. Conveniently left out is that they son the effing national championship in basketball just 10 years ago and that, oh yeah, losing a charter member of the league is a damning indictment on the league.
I just hate everything about this. Yes, I recognize that the ACC has also raided other conferences and may be getting a taste of year own medicine, but why is that a good thing? And if it is a good thing, why is there no clamoring for the Big Ten to get poached so it can get a taste of what it’s done to other leagues?
Anyway, there are some obvious differences between the loss of a Maryland by the ACC and a loss of any former team by the Big East. Yes, they’re both driven by greed. But the raid on the Big East wasn’t exactly shaking up long-term traditions or threatening the identity of a conference and the region it represents. Miami, VT, and BC were in the Big East for less than 15 years in football. They entered the league for businesses reasons; they left for business reasons. The acquisition of Pitt and Syracuse were a little later and did break up two long-term series (Pitt-WVU and Syracuse-WVU), but honestly, Big East football never really developed any traditions that me members could be proud of. And honestly, the Big East has always seemed more like a conglomeration with no real sense of belonging in football.
The ACC was different. Yeah yeah yeah the footballs never been great but it has had 60;years of history. The longest running rivalry in the South is in this league (UNC-UVA, which has been played a year or two longer than UGA-Auburn). And especially, being a North Carolina guy (not a UNC guy, just NC in general), this conference has been a conference that this part of the country can have all to its own. The ACC, both in basketball as well as football, is just part if what living her is all about. That is being threatened, and I just don’t see it as a good thing.
As for the Big Ten expanding from 11 fairly rightly knit teams where on two teams/year are missed on the schedule to 14-16 teams, resulting in the sacrificing of decades-old rivalries so that Purdue can play Maryland or Wisconsin can play Rutgers… I just don’t see what all the celebration us for. The Big Ten was going to get a mammoth, earth shattering ESPN deal that blows everyone, SEC and Pac-12 included, out of the water anyway. It’s not like this was needed for the Big Ten’s financial security. And it was not done with fans’ interests in mind. (While the same could be said of the ACC with the frequent expansions, those moves WERE for security, as the ACC was merely trying to catch up with the big Ten/SEC.)
So why so much fanfare without any recognition that maybe, just maybe, this was not necessary?
LikeLike
It’s obviously tough being an ACC fan when the conference is under attack like this (my group of family/friends are mostly hardcore Miami fans).
As for the Big Ten, there’s no real fanfare here except congratulations to the Rutgers fanbase.
This was a business transaction by the Big Ten.
LikeLike
Probably not necessary.
Maybe Delany is still trying to figure out how to get his white whale, Notre Dame, into the fold by adding DC/NYC markets and striking a blow against the ACC that might eventually lead to its unraveling if FSU bolts for Big 12.
LikeLike
I honestly think we would have only gone to 14 with ND/Rutgers if ND had come. That’s why we were waiting so long for ND.
ND has made it clear they just want football independence; the membership of the ACC doesn’t really matter in that respect; the ACC should have 10+ schools regardless of what happens in this round of expansion.
LikeLike
As a fan of a team that is lucky to be in the Big Ten (Indiana) I can empathize, as it is no stretch to imagine my school in the same position as Wake Forest or Kansas. That said…no one other than Maryland has left yet, so it remains to be seen.
I do think it was a sign of things to come when the ACC procured a large monetary buyout, rather than a grant of rights provision.
LikeLike
Outside of the SEC (and maybe the Big ten and Pac-12, which use grant of rights for establishing and collaborating their respective networks more so than for “handcuffs”), the only way to achieve a GOR is by getting a satisfying, secure TV deal. And the only way the ACC can get a GOR and the absolute stability that comes with it is to have Notre Dame football join. That ESPN contract would get reopened and immediately increase well beyond Big 12 levels and be competitive with the PAC, B1G, and SEC.
John Swofford and company better be working hard on getting ND football on board because, short of their addition, the ACC is indeed vulnerable.
You’re right, increasing the exit fee was no deterrent at all.
LikeLike
The Big Ten though has had a GOR since like the 80s.
LikeLike
If Illinois shifts west, I seriously will have a hard time thinking of any rivalry that was sacrificed besides Wisconsin-Iowa. The Illibuck? I don’t think anyone cares (probably because that series hasn’t mattered since the ’30’s).
LikeLike
Illinois fans care… but we also know that Ohio St. doesn’t.
And speaking as an Illinois fan I would much rather beaten by Ohio St every year than Michigan (though we usual give tOSU problems even when they did beat us)
LikeLike
frug,
Buckeyes care a little about Illibuck, but it gets swamped by our caring about MI.
LikeLike
More Ohio State fans care than people think. It wasn’t that long ago that the
Illini gave the Buckeyes everything they could handle year in and year our.
Damn you John Cooper *shakes fist*
LikeLike
Shift Illinois west makes the most sense & preserves rivalries. It will be interesting to see how the locked cross rivalry matchups work out in 2014.
LikeLike
Fanfare is probably the wrong word. There was fanfare when Nebraska and Penn State joined. I believe what’s being missed by the national sports-centric media and blog population is that for many of us, The B1G is not primarily or solely about sports in the way some other conferences may seem to be (especially easy for me to say historically as a Northwestern grad). I am as interested in the academic, financial and research endeavors of my school and conference as I am in NU’s awesome woman’s lacrosse teams. I actively solicit funds, mentor students and otherwise work to further the mission of my alma mater. I care about endowments and financial stability for my schoool. I care about the growth of the CIC and the proliferation of AAU membership within The B1G. It warmed my heart yesterday to hear the head of UMCP speak so convincingly on reinvesting some of their newfound largess back into education for students who are in need.
When we maintain relationships with the U of Chicago and affiliate with UMCP and Rutgers (who just acquired its state’s Medical and Dental schools with about $500M in annual research), this is furthering our collective mission. For many of us, this is at least as much of a passion as sports (and yes, I played baseball in college on a Top 25 team; I’m not just an egghead). I never appreciated that as an undergraduate, but after getting a Masters at Harvard (where their main source of pride was the number of Nobel Laureates walking around), I was able to reexamine that premise when I went to medical school at U of Illinois and my wife did her doctoral work at Purdue. This is who we are across the landscape.
Knowing that a conference worth $7 billion in annual research is healthy, growing and flourishing financially gives me confidence in this country’s future; if our best universities aren’t leading the way internationally and against the anti-science types in this country, who will? Our mission is inclusive of, but on a higher order than, CFB National Championships. I couldn’t be happier than to welcome Rutgers and UMCP (and as a byproduct MD, DC, NJ and maybe NY). For what it’s worth, they both add a hellova lot more colors to the conference!
LikeLike
Nicely said. (Though regarding colors, both additions are really just bringing in more red and white, and the B1G has enough of that already.)
LikeLike
I can’t say it’s greed. This money’s going back towards the students and athletic programs, or in the case of Maryland and Rutgers, returning their athletic department to solvency.
I understand your sorrow, Hell, I down right empathize, but you can’t blame the Big Ten for “poaching” the ACC. Schools left because they couldn’t survive, which is an indictment against the league’s financing and management. You guys have serious issues down there that need to be addressed, and merely blaming the other conferences for offering your disgruntled members a way out won’t solve your problems.
You shouldn’t have invited Notre Dame for that partial membership. There’s a reason why we never did.
LikeLike
Welcome to the world of the southwest and Great Plains where 100 year old rivalries were broken up. 150 years in the case of Missouri-Kansas.
LikeLike
One thing we’ve confirmed from the Sandusky scandel and all the reallignment goings on is that college administrators are no more loyal or honorable than the smuck next door, and twice as greedy.
LikeLike
Getting to 4 super conferences would potentially provide national quarterfinals (via conference championship games) followed by semi-finals (Rose and Sugar Bowls) and National Champion$hip at rotating site. Obviously, the 4 Supers would be the SEC, the B1G, the PAC and the B12.
If you make the assumption that each of these 4 Super Conferences are going to at least 16 teams, here’s one view of that new world order which would realistically give only 64 teams a real shot at the title … BTW, is it just coincidence that Nick Saban recently said that’s about how many teams should be contending for it?
B1G takes either Notre Dame (doubtful) and 1 ACC (guess is UVA) or 2 ACC (guess is UVA and UNC) = keeps conference within new contiguous states
SEC takes 2 ACC (guess is NC State and Va Tech) = keeps conference within new contiguous states
B12 takes 6 ACC (guess is FSU, Miami, GTech, Clemson, Duke, Pittsburgh). The conference would be far flung, but that was already set in stone once WVU joined. Recruiting area would be vast.
PAC would still need 4 teams to get to 16 and might not make it. Could actually be most appealing home to Notre Dame but it is really tough trying to figure out who PAC might take from the remainder ….
BYU, Boise State, BC, Syracuse, Louisville, Wake Forest, Connecticut, Cincinnati, Houston, Nevada, Utah State, New Mexico, Hawaii, San Diego State, Central Florida, Temple, Air Force, Army, Navy, Fresno State, Southern Miss, Louisiana Tech, UTEP, Tulane, Tulsa, Rice, East Carolina, Memphis, San Jose State, New Mexico State, Wyoming, Colorado State
LikeLike
They wouldn’t. No one can force the PAC to take any of those teams, and the league certainly isn’t interested in any of them. Basically, as long as both the Big 12 and Pac-12 exist, it’s almost impossible to get anything close to a 4×16 setup, and both leagues have seemed to secure their near-term futures w/ GOR’s and large TV deals.
LikeLike
If its a given no one else is available, I could imagine Rice (academics, helps P12N, has played OOC games recently). The Academies (Army/Navy game, P12N)? Outside the box, and outside the borders, an academic elite from BC (preparing for global warming grabbing the future citrus capital 🙂 )?
LikeLike
So let me get this straight:
ACC raiding BE for 5 (and soon to probably be 6) of its teams is okay because the Big East (in terms of Football) had only been around for 15 years.
Anyone raiding ACC: OMG THIS IS TERRIBLE THINK OF THE TRADITION SOMEONE PLEASE HELP UNBUNCH MY PANTIES
The ACC feasted on a weaker conference to make themselves stronger.
Now other, stronger conferences are starting to feast on the ACC.
I believe in English we call it “Karma” or “What goes around comes around”
The Germans call it “schadenfreude”
Being a WVU grad married to a Duke grad I call it “Delicious”.
LikeLike
I don’t think I consider it ‘just desserts’, but when half your league is from another league not 10 years ago, you’ve already kind of given up some of your tradition. It seems only natural that one or more of the original crew might look around and not feel like the new place is where they still want to be. That’s what happened to Nebraska.
That said, it should also be a history lesson to the B1G about growing without consideration for everyone involved.
LikeLike
Michael,
It wasn’t necessary, but it was needed. The B10 needed access to a growing part of the country for the future of the league. That meant going east or south, and the south is blocked by the SEC. As it turns out, MD got way over their head in financial trouble so the B10 offered them a way out. This wouldn’t have happened if MD had their fiscal house in order, and I doubt Delany would have even tried it in that case. Don’t blame the B10 for MD’s fiscal mismanagement and the ACC’s inability to draw a bigger TV deal.
This was a win-win deal for MD and the B10, but the ACC lost big in the transaction. I feel for you, but not enough that I want the B10 to sacrifice its future to protect the ACC. I much preferred the 80s with smaller regional conferences and less focus on money, but times have changed. The strong survive and the weak do their best.
Perhaps what you should hope for is the true superconference. Have the B10 absorb the ACC and make it one division with the old B10 in the other. It wouldn’t be quite the same, but it’d be close.
LikeLike
I’m posted this to a few Big Ten boards in the hope many people will write and figured I’d leave it here too.
I hope we can all agree that playing much of the conference only twice in 12 years is completely unacceptable. With the Big Ten going to 14 and 9 conference games looking iffy at best, that’s very probable though (the SEC is already going with that format).
In order to avoid that outcome, we need a divisional alignment that will allow for no locked crossovers. Obviously there is no perfect alignment or it would have been in place already. I do think we can do better than simply keeping the current alignment though and I purpose that the 4 western teams are put with the 3 eastern teams and that the 3 Ohio/Michigan teams are put with the 4 Indiana/Illinois teams. It’s not perfect, but it would allow the conference to avoid crossovers and the schedule could be done so that in a 4 year period, every school plays every other school at least once home or away.
If you think this is better than what we are more likely to get (or if you have other ideas), then please e-mail a letter like this to your schools president/AD and Delany and possibly to others. E-mail address are below the sample letter.
Sample Letter:
I know that in the past, conference leaders have expressed a desire to “play each other more.” With that in mind, I would like to encourage the Big Ten to consider divisional alignments that will maximize the number of games between schools. Namely, I would encourage the conference to embrace an alignment that does not require locked cross divisional games.
I understand that divisional alignment is a delicate subject and there is no solution without a cost. However, I do believe the following set-up minimizes the pain. The 4 western most Big Ten schools could be paired with the 3 eastern most in one division. The 3 Ohio/Michigan schools could be combined with the 4 Illinois/Indiana schools in the other. I understand that this would result in The Little Brown Jug and Ohio State/Penn State ceasing to be annual events. It would however allow for locked crossovers to end and thus allow for every Big Ten school to face every other Big Ten school at least once home or away during a 4 year period of time.
In the interest of preserving Big Ten’s historic connections, I strongly encourage the presidents/chancellors to consider this proposal or any plans which will allow us to “play each other more.” Thank you for your time.
E-mail Addresses:
Jim Delany: jdelany@bigten.org
Illinois: President: PresidentEaster@uillinois.edu AD: Mike Thomas: FightingIlliniAD@illinois.edu
Indiana: President McRobbie: iupres@iu.edu AD: Fred Glass athldir@indiana.edu
Iowa: President Sally Mason: president@uiowa.edu AD Gary Barta: gary-barta@uiowa.edu
Michigan: President Mary Sue Coleman: presoff@umich.edu AD: Can fill out suggestions here: http://www.mgoblue.com/feedback/mich-feedback.html
Michigan State: President: presmail@msu.edu AD Mark Hollis: AD@ath.msu.edu
Minnesota: President Kaler: upres@umn.edu AD: Norwood Teague: icaadmin@umn.edu
Nebraska: President James B. Milliken: president@nebraska.edu AD Tom Osborne: ahackbart@huskers.com
Northwestern: President Morton Schapiro: nu-president@northwestern.edu AD assistant: annemarie.adams@northwestern.edu
Ohio State: President Gee: gee.2@osu.edu AD Smith: athletic_director@osu.edu,
Penn State: President Erickson: president@psu.edu Athletic Director Tim Curley: tmc3@psu.edu
Purdue: Acting President Tim Sands: president@purdue.edu AD Burke: mjb@purdue.edu
Wisconsin: President Kevin P. Reilly: kreilly@uwsa.edu Assistant to Athletic Director Cerniglia, Michael: mgc@athletics.wisc.edu
Maryland: President Wallace D. Loh: president@umd.edu
LikeLike
We’re going to 16 soon though.
Each team will have 1 crossover opponent in each other division (locked in).
They will then play their 3 other teams as well as 3 other teams in one of the 3 other divisions.
That’s a total of 9 games:
3 division opponents
3 locked crossover opponents (1 from each other division)
3 opponents from matched division that will combine for purposes of Big Ten CCG
There’s really no reason to shake the boat up at this point. We’re biding time for 16 now. 14 isn’t really long-term stability for the Big Ten.
LikeLike
Eric,
I sympathize with your position, but your aim is unrealistic. The B10 will keep locked rivals no matter what. With your divisions, they’d want to lock these games:
OSU/PSU, MI/NE, MSU/WI + 4 others (IL/IA, IN/MN, PU/MD, NW/RU perhaps)
They want those king/king games for TV purposes.
I’d suggest you focus your efforts on getting the 9th game. This is an easy sell to fans and Delany, I think. It’s the ADs and coaches that are avoiding it.
Pods help you play everyone more, but I don’t think the B10 is ready for them. It would mean OSU and MI aren’t always separated, too.
LikeLike
So let’s say the worst case happens for the ACC, and they lose UVA and GT to B1G, VaTech and UNC to SEC, FSU and Clemson to Big XII, Miami to probation, and replace all of that with Louisville, Cincy, UCONN, and maybe USF. What happens with the Orange Bowl deal?
LikeLike
Miami getting an outright death penalty is quite likely. The NCAA is clearly treating this as a willful violator case, as well as a repeat violator.
LikeLike
I think they avoid the Death Penalty, but get hit hard (though they will get credit for the bowl bans).
LikeLike
Don’t see how you could hit them with anything else. This is many times worse and more extensive than USC and USC’s penalties were about as harsh as you can get without a DP. Penn State’s situation is obviously unique & their punishment is arguably worse than the death penalty, although not the FOUR YEAR one much of the NCAA wanted to drop on them.
Granted, Miami has cooperated NOW, but they’re going to be charged as both a repeat violator and a willful violator, that’s very clear.
LikeLike
Orange Bowl would definately try and cut its payout (and maybe dump the ACC altogether).
That said, the worst case for the ACC would probably be something like FSU, Miami, Clemson, G-Tech, Pitt and Louisville to the Big XII, NC State and V-Tech to the ACC and UVA and UNC to the Big Ten.
That would leave them with BC, ‘Cuse, Duke and WF to try and cobble together something with the Big East leftovers.
LikeLike
They would also have ND’s non-football sports which would be worth absolutely nothing in this situation.
LikeLike
Depends his the contract was written. If the ACC had to have had a certain percentage if the 2013 (first year of Pitt/Syracuse) membership roster, then the OB deal would be in jeapordy. If it says ACC champion without specifying that a certain grouping if teams be available, then OB could have to accept an ACC champion from a league whose foster looks nothing like today’s.
That’s the least of concerns right now, though. The ACC is secure as the No. 5 league, with or without the Orange Bowl (although having a contracy bowl does help). the news of the No. 6 league losing Rutgers and possibly UConn/Louisville AND possibly failing to have Boise and SDSU further exacerbates the distancebetween the ACC and Big East.
But of greatee concern is the growth in revenue gap between themselves and the other power conferences. It just lost a member. Thats nit someghing a secure, stabke, historic league does. That something shotgun marriages like the Big 12 and Big East do. Sure, the ACC had lost a member befire, but that was over 40 years ago for enfirely different reasons. Even the SEC and Big Ten had lost a member ic you go back far enough. But the ACC was upposed to be in the same class with thise leagues, alongside the Pac-12. But now that’s changed.
Bet John Swofford wishes he could’ve negotiated that ESPN deal in 2012 instead of 2010, huh? Larry Scott, in 2011, was able to secure a far, far superior TV deal for the Pac-12 than the ACC despite hia league having lower ratings. (As Frank said, Larry Scott can sell ice cubes to Eskimos.) If the ACC’s deak had been made post-Pac-12, Maryland would probably still be in the ACC, a gtant if rights might have been in place (or may not have been necessary due to inherent, SEC-like sense of stability), and this crisis could have been altogether averted.
Mistakes were likely made at the conference level, but my sense is that the ACC is suffering dearly from brutal, brutal timing for its deal signed with ESPN in 2010.
LikeLike
It wasn’t just bad timing. The ACC’s instance that whomever they signed with include Raycom Media as a broadcast partner (something explainable only by the fact that Swofford’s son worked there) caused Fox to pull out of the negotiations and kept Swofford from pitting the companies against each other to secure the best deal possible.
He then exacerbated the problem by giving ESPN all the conference’s TV rights instead of keeping some for themselves or insisting on a equity deal (an ACC Network) which left the league no leverage in the event of future market shifts.
LikeLike
ESPN probably told them that they didn’t have much of a great shot at a conference network.
Where would they get coverage: North Carolina, Virginia, Maryland (assuming they stayed). Those 3 states for sure full coverage.
South Carolina? Probably yes even though that’d be an interesting discussion. Regardless, that’s not a valuable TV market.
Atlanta? Maybe, but I doubt it. Yes, Ga Tech is there as well as many ACC alumni, but their numbers are dwarfed by SEC fans.
Florida? Maybe Miami, but I doubt it. Tallahassee, yes (which is a really tiny market). Florida State’s location doesn’t help the network talks. You really need UF to get carriage.
The Northern states? Pittsburgh/Upstate NY, Boston. Maybe just Pittsburgh and some parts of upstate New York but I’m not sure.
Sum all of that up and what are you looking at. A Mid-Atlantic network with barely any presence outside those states except for smaller markets like South Carolina, Pittsburgh, and Tallahassee.
LikeLike
All that said, the ACC still got better ratings than the PAC and the PAC managed to set up their own network (and with 100% equity to boot).
Plus, that still doesn’t excuse the Raycom requirement which reduced competition or giving up their Tier III rights (something the SEC did not do) so they would have leverage if the market shifted.
LikeLike
@frug – There’s something to be said for monopolies.
LikeLike
@frug
You make a good point about ratings.
But the Big Ten and SEC and Texas show that it’s all about monetizable ratings.
For all the faults of the Pac-12’s fanbases, they have a captive enough audience of states that they can force the Pac-12 Network on with which to fully monetize those people.
Even though the ACC has several schools that bring in great to decent ratings, the problem is monetizing them.
LikeLike
Timing is always the killer in these conference expansion talks.
Go back to all the stuff we talked about with respect to Nebraska in the Big 12.
Ask bullet about that; if the Big 12 had renegotiated its deals earlier, it might not have been poachable.
Instead they were on a really outdated deal that paid members under $10 million per year, while the Big Ten was already going up to $18 million per year and gaining fast.
LikeLike
For all the talk about the Big 12 being short term, remember that Missouri and Nebraska had been with the B12 North schools for over 100 years in the Missouri Valley and later the Big 6, 7, 8 and 12. A&M had been with Texas and Baylor since 1914 and Tech since 1957. CU had been with the B12N schools for about 60 years. Now Colorado changed and I think everyone agreed they needed to go west. Weed is now legal in 2 Pac 12 states and Maine. Change wasn’t the case for the other 3. They didn’t leave for a better cultural fit.
LikeLike
Add.
LikeLike
ANYONE CAN SAY ANYTHING!
Under that heading, I’ll relay what some radio host is claiming to have heard for ‘inside sources’.
That UNC and UVA have B1G invites in hand, which has led to a butterfly effect of sorts with:
1) Coach K (having been whispered this forbidden knowledge) now bemoaning the stability of the ACC and pleading for stiff upper lips.
2) The VT AD’s Clintonian response “There’s nothing happening with VT going anywhere.” after first claiming there was indeed interest, is technically correct……if the interest he was referring to is the secret knowledge that the B1G is targeting UVA. -BWA-HAHAHA!
Probably all crap.
LikeLike
Let’s be honest here. Brutally honest:
I would say that there are 4 schools that *know* they can call Delany, and he’ll lay out a red carpet and the Big Ten presidents will fall over themselves to invite into the league:
1) Texas
2) ND
3) UNC
4) UVa
These guys would all fall over themselves if any of the 4 wanted to come. They really don’t need Big Ten invites. The Big Ten invites are basically implied. They all know that if they ever want to come, they’re in, no questions asked.
LikeLike
Yes, but you just identified 4 teams for 2 spots. Are they gonna be too cute by half? The train is leaving the station. Those offers likely have a 2014 expiration date.
LikeLike
And that’s a part of why being at 14 is almost as deadly as being at 11.
If you think that way, the implication of 14->16 becomes almost as strong as 11->12. There aren’t many chairs left now.
LikeLike
I thought UT made themselves unwelcome when they explored B1G potential 2 years ago. Same demands the Pac rejected, and rather “Texan” in their aproach. They, as with ND, need to accept becoming a member. UT wants to be the controler, ND left to their own devices in FB. Aside from apearently irreconcilable differences, sure, welcome aboard…
LikeLike
Well, I meant, if Dodds decided he wanted to be in the Big Ten and called Delany tomorrow to say so, then all would be forgiven.
Same goes for ND.
These are 100 year decisions. Friction over expansion the past couple years is water under the bridge.
LikeLike
So your suggesting that a tiger can change its stripes, or in this case a longhorn remove those horns? I don’t buy it.
LikeLike
Interesting dilemma. On the one hand, if they’re crazy enough to give up their GOR, we’d take it. On the other, someone had better do a whole lot of due diligence before you invite all that crazy into your happy home.
LikeLike
Yeah, this was in jest. Texas isn’t coming at all so the fact that they’d have an open door to walk through is meaningless.
LikeLike
Yes, but like the chicken and the egg, there still has to be an official invite at some point in the process. With that said, it feels almost untoward giving credence to what appears, on its face, to be expansion fan fiction.
LikeLike
It’s not really fan fiction when you really dig into it and think about it.
The odds that UVa is in the Big Ten at some point in the next 15 years is probably around 50%.
LikeLike
15 years? But the tectonic plates are warm now…
LikeLike
That timeline is because the plates are likely to heat up again in 15 years when the disparity between the Big Ten/SEC payouts and ACC payouts is so wide as to be undeniable and the ACC is coming upon another contract negotiation.
So even if the plates cool for now, there’s two bites at this apple.
LikeLike
I see your point, but can you imagine the buy in 15 years from now? Everyone knows where this is going. Better to get it done now if it can be sold to their constituency.
LikeLike
UNC really seems to be between a rock and a hard place. They’ve had a nice fiefdom in the ACC, and can’t be thrilled about freezing their asses off in the BIG or associating with Arkansas or Miss State in the SEC.
I could really see the SEC making a strong play for UNC and VA, for several reasons. First, they don’t really need any more powerhouse football programs. Second, markets. Third, they class things up considerably.UNC, VA, Florida, Vandy, Georgia wouldn’t be a terrible academic line-up.
LikeLike
A combo fo Virginia/UNC/Vandy/Florida/Missouri/Texas A&M/Georgia would put the SEC as solidly the third best conference academically, and not too far off from #2 (Pac 12).
LikeLike
Leave MO out of that, and you’ve got a point….hehe, just messin with you Andy
LikeLike
Only issue there is going to be that Va Tech is likely to be the first school that the SEC contacts.
LikeLike
Unless they aren’t…….I would expect them to at least contact NC and UVA first to gage interest. I think a lot of BIG 10ers underestimate the boring football and weather dynamics…………
LikeLike
@mush: Not sure I’d categorize VT’s brand of football as thrilling exactly.
LikeLike
Really, why does UNC have to go anywhere? They’re not a football school and they never will be.
If Texas taught us anything, it’s better to rule in Hell than serve in Heaven.
LikeLike
Well…..they’re still going to HAVE a football team, and I doubt they will like the idea of sucking in the Olympic sports…..making $10-15M less than teams in the BIG/SEC wouldn’t seem to cut it….thus the dilemma….
Could ND’s hatred of the BIG finally cause it to get off the pot and give a league-saving commitment to the ACC?
LikeLike
Took a look at VA’s #s—21000 enrollment, #24 US News ranking, $5B endowment, 21 NCs, all in the Olympic sports….VA is essentially Stanford….or a public Northwestern.
I’m sure VA is serious about football…..kinda. They want to do well (like they do well in soccer, and lacrosse and those other rich white boy sports) but won’t lose any sleep over it if they’re down for a few years here and there. On the other hand, the folks at VA Tech are very ambitious about their football…..they want the SEC not the BIG.
One huge and underrated issue I see about UNC and VA and the BIG-weather. I just don’t think many will be excited about the prospect of games in E. Lansing or New Jersey or Minnesota in November…..
LikeLike
You mean like playing Boston College or Pitt? They already have agreements to play north.
LikeLike
and Miami and FSU and Wake and Duke and GT and NC State and VA and VA Tech, all in the South
LikeLike
Isn’t the weather factor overblown? High temperatures in Big Ten cities and Chapel Hill this past Saturday (11/17):
Lincoln 64
Bloomington 57
Columbus 57
Iowa City 57
Champaign 56
College Park 55
Minneapolis 55
New Brunswick 55
Madison 54
West Lafayette 54
East Lansing 53
Ann Arbor 52
University Park 50
Average Big Ten 55
Chapel Hill 55
Hmm, look at that…
LikeLike
Ha, I read someone at Nebraska saying that they went from the Canada of the Big 12 to the San Diego of the Big Ten. Just need that Pacific Ocean coast now…
LikeLike
Probably, but I guarantee that if you read the UNC forum about all this the’re going to be talking about playing in the south v. the north, and the BIG’s boring football style….now I know the fans don’t make the decision, but…….
LikeLike
I think they’d get a boner over Duke, too.
LikeLike
@Frank
Thanks for NOT linking the video of the week. Taylor’s ok but not in that song.
LikeLike
Since my post didn’t go through:
Why is there such a massive disconnect between the views of Michigan fans and Ohio State fans over Maryland/Rutgers.
The BuckeyePlanet folks virtually all seem to be in favor of this plan as a “rational extension” of the Big Ten into the Mid-Atlantic whereas the mgoblog folks have spent days ranting about it.
Yeah, it’s rivalry week, but to have this kind of disconnect about expansion?
It’s just bizarre.
LikeLike
Michigan folks are generally cranky. My Dad is an alum and he would vote, literally, against anyone. You name em…ND, Stanford, Vanderbilt, Texas, Missouri. Heck, he would rather contract back down to 8 or so if he could. It is just a genetic thing with a lot of Wolverines I guess.
LikeLike
Brian is being really whiney about it and poisoning the well at MGoBlog. It’s ruining Ohio State week for me.
LikeLike
Wait wait wait…. is Brian #1 here Brian from MGoBlog?
LikeLike
Me? No.
LikeLike
Cultural differences?
Ohio is Midlands in the north (except for the NE corner, which was part of the Western Reserve, which is part of Yankeedom) & Greater Appalachia in the south. Michigan is wholely part of Yankeedom.
Midlands & Greater Appalachia are egalitarian. Yankees are elitist.
LikeLike
It’s pop not soda.
LikeLike
http://popvssoda.com:2998/
Coke in the South, soda in the Northeast and Cali,& pop in the Midwest & on west.
Except for greater St. Louis and eastern Wisconsin. Somehow, we ended up being soda territory.
LikeLike
I live in Columbus and call it soda. Of course, I think I picked up the habit while living on the west coast, so there you go.
LikeLike
@Richard
I live slightly west of center PA, I’m not sure if that is what you would consider Northeast or Midwest. It is considered part of The Midlands according to the 11 Regional Cultures I believe. Anyway, we call it pop. We use the term “yinz” for you plural (even though we are a couple of hours east of Pittsburgh), we call small bodies or running water “cricks”, we “red” up a room when it is messy and we say that the “keller” of Penn State’s uniforms is blue and white.
LikeLike
We’re not elitist, we just like things the way they are. Don’t lump Michigan in with them.
LikeLike
As an OSU fan, I certainly like to think of Michigan as elitist. It’s why you get along with ND so well. 😉
LikeLike
@zeek: It could be that Maryland and Rutgers, in the current alignment, dilutes Michigan’s ability to face PSU and Wisconsin. OSU has a reduction in Nebraska (which is new anyway) and… Michigan State? I mean, Dantonio is a good coach, but I don’t think most OSU fans are all that concerned about it. OSU fans care about one game — dilute/ruin that and Delany would need to go into protective hiding.
LikeLike
That’s one way of looking at it.
Conversely, Ohio State is adding two schools that it’s never played before in its history permanently to its schedule in lieu of Nebraska/Michigan State/Iowa/etc. games.
I mean, if there’s damage to “tradition” here, it’s all on Ohio State’s side.
Michigan gets its regular slate + Illinois annually and slightly less of Penn State/Wisconsin.
Ohio State’s the one who’s schedules are being changed dramatically if anything.
LikeLike
That’s true. Although I’m unsure how concerned most OSU fans are with it. Michigan has trophy games with, what, ND, MSU, Minnesota, Wisconsin, Northwestern, Denny’s, and the VFW local chapter? OSU has Michigan, the Illibuck which is amusing but little else, and a couple teams they don’t like which are sticking around (Wisconsin, PSU).
Then again, if it were just traditional rivalries, as you said Michigan isn’t really losing in this. So who knows. MGoBlog is weird.
LikeLike
If you go back in the main expansion threaa on BP you’ll see that I’ve complained
about that exact thing in the past. I’ve long been against Ohio State getting shuffled
off into an eastern division that is little more than the eastern conference full of patsies
(yes yes I know Rutgers fans random bowl games and star chasing on Rivals means you’re
actually going to lay the smack down on the B1G from day one *snort*) that SOB Paterno longed for.
It would have been a better long term move for the conference and not just Ohio State
if TSUN & Sparty had gone east while Ohio State & Wisconsin had gone west. TSUN
is the strongest current B1G team (outside of PSU) on the east coast and that
should have been leveraged to it’s fullest.
LikeLike
(cont)
It’s also why I proposed pods for the upcoming 14 team lineup so that every team in
the conference will face ever other team at least four out of every six years (providing
they go a 9 game conference schedule).
I think the main reason you haven’t seen much outrage yet is because people are mostly
in wait and see mode to see how things shake out. But yes if a few years down the line
Delaney announced a division consisting of: Ohio State, Indiana, Purdue, Penn State,
Maryland, Rutgers, Virginia & North Carolina; then people are going to be rightly pissed.
I just don’t think many have looked that far ahead yet.
LikeLike
I think your second post is on the right track for fixing the issues in the first post.
The story of all of this is that TPTB never viewed the Big Ten as being in its long-term equilibrium with 12 teams. They’ve always been looking at either a future where ND joined to 14 (and thus changed the setup) or a future of 4 divisional pods in a move to 16 teams.
In that sense the 2-division 12 team setup has always been just a holdover to something else.
Whatever 2-division 14 team setup they come up with for Maryland/Rutgers is also going to be a holdover for something else.
At this point, you’re right that everyone is just in a holding pattern for 4 pods with 16 teams likely with each headlined by one of Michigan/Ohio State/Penn State/Nebraska (and 1 or 2 protected crossovers for each pod when their two pods aren’t combined to form a division as the rotation goes…).
LikeLike
Scarlet_Lutefisk,
“If you go back in the main expansion threaa on BP you’ll see that I’ve complained
about that exact thing in the past. I’ve long been against Ohio State getting shuffled
off into an eastern division that is little more than the eastern conference full of patsies
(yes yes I know Rutgers fans random bowl games and star chasing on Rivals means you’re
actually going to lay the smack down on the B1G from day one *snort*) that SOB Paterno longed for.”
I haven’t complained much about it here, but yes, OSU is usually the school getting the short end of that stick. The bright side is all the extra access to even more great recruiting grounds. If the B10 wants to help Meyer recruit, more power to them.
“It would have been a better long term move for the conference and not just Ohio State
if TSUN & Sparty had gone east while Ohio State & Wisconsin had gone west. TSUN
is the strongest current B1G team (outside of PSU) on the east coast and that
should have been leveraged to it’s fullest.”
It would have been wrong before for several reasons, but you can do it now. OSU, WI and IL move west, MI and MSU move east to join the newbies.
E – MI, PSU, MSU, PU, IN, MD, RU
W – OSU, NE, WI, IA, MN, IL, NW
LikeLike
The IL & IN schools are not going to be split up now for the same reason they couldn’t be before, too many schools don’t want to give up a regular game near Chicago.
LikeLike
It is not like the IN & IL schools are driving the B1G bus. If they stay together it is just because it worked out that way. Not much value will be lost if 2 or 3 of those schools quit the B1G and they know it. They are not as far down as Wake, Baylor, MS St, or WA St. at the bottom of the other 4 power conferences, but they could be replaced with schools that added more value to the B1G if any of them is willing to call it quits because the new members created scheduling changes.
LikeLike
Scarlet_Lutefisk,
“The IL & IN schools are not going to be split up now for the same reason they couldn’t be before, too many schools don’t want to give up a regular game near Chicago.”
???
NW is already apart from IN and PU. With 2 crossovers, they’d play the IL schools 1/3 of the time each. In addition, they’d get games in the recruiting grounds of DC and NJ. Not everybody can play in Chicago all the time.
LikeLike
I enjoy reading Mgoblog (visit it every day) and Brian (not FTT Brian, by the way where has he been recently?) is obviously a very smart guy and great writer. I think he and in turn most of his readers are against expansion because he tends to romanticize Wisconsin, Iowa, Northwestern, etc., treating these games as rivalries that are going to be diminished by adding Rutgers and Maryland, in his view lesser programs. While these B1G programs have become more competitive over the past 20 years, the reality is that they are far from being Michigan’s rivals as evidenced by the all time series records.
As I’ve said before, as a Michigan fan, I care about Michigan State, Ohio State, and Notre Dame. Those are the three rivalry games I grew up with, and are the ones that I want to see continued. Penn State is another game that I look forward to, but honestly that’s about it. I like the tradition of the Big Ten, and I like playing Big Ten schools, but as a fan I don’t need to see Michigan play Wisconsin or Michigan play Illinois every single year. Cycling through works for me. And while Michigan will no longer play ND, I think this presents an opportunity for Michigan to play in different parts of the country now against a variety of teams.
I guess my view is different from MgoBlog in that I see the opportunity the B1G has to take hold of DC/Baltimore and New York/New Jersey. Rutgers and Maryland are both undervalued programs that for the most part have been in inferior leagues with inferior resources for the majority of their histories. They are both blessed with instate talent better than Wisconsin and Iowa, and with the right coach I see no reason why they can’t eventually become part of that 2nd tier in the B1G.
LikeLike
Tom,
Busy few days at exactly the wrong time.
LikeLike
Yeah, that’s a good explanation of the dichotomy of views on this subject.
I respect the old-tradition based view, it’s just that this isn’t that world anymore.
I mean, look at where these schools get their students from; there are a ton more coast-based students going to the Big Ten and then leaving the footprint upon graduation. It’s just a different world now.
As a Northwestern fan, I just care that we see enough of Michigan and Ohio State on the schedule (although not too much, I’d like chances at 9 or 10 win seasons too).
LikeLike
zeek,
“Why is there such a massive disconnect between the views of Michigan fans and Ohio State fans over Maryland/Rutgers.”
Because MI are elitists?
LikeLike
Take a look at the comments on Eleven Warriors & The OZone. There is plenty
of complaining going on in Buckeyedom.
That being said BuckeyePlanet is a bunch of weirdos.
LikeLike
I have no idea if Miami is getting the Death Penalty, but if it occurs, that is something that would create even more upheaval than before. The first thing would be South Florida leaving the Big East for the ACC to replace them. Obviously losing your biggest Conference Rival (Coupled with more changes and Big East Teams), would increase the odds that Florida State and some quite likely some combination of Clemson & Georgia Tech would go as well. It becomes obvious as well that either Connecticut or Louisville (Whichever is NOT selected to replace Maryland in the ACC) is gone from the Big East (The Huskies to the ACC or the Cardinals to the ACC or Big XII). That creates the nightmare scenario where the Virginia & North Carolina Schools look to move as well (I would NOT want to be Wake Forest and believe it or not Duke (If anyone thinks North Carolina would not leave them, ask Texas (A&M went to the SEC), or Pitt (West Virginia to the Big XII) about it), and San Diego State & Boise State finally realize that the Mountain West (Even at a lower payout) is a better option than the WAC oops Big East Conference. The next six months will be very interesting.
LikeLike
There is no way the ACC would take USF. None.
LikeLike
Yep. I’m beginning to think that the ACC would eventually just be satisfied with 10 members if it loses a few more.
They’re not going to warp themselves out of shape like the Big East did because there’s still going to be a backbone of East Coast schools.
LikeLike
Agree Zeek.
If the ACC was left with North Carolina, NCST, Duke, Wake, Virginia, Georgia Tech, Pittsburgh, Boston College, Syracuse, and Miami (basically losing Florida State, V-Tech and Clemson to the SEC/Big 12), I could see them doing nothing. Perception would be bad initially and the disparity in money would really hurt their competitiveness in football. But I’m not sure that any of the North Carolina schools or Virginia would care enough to leave the ACC if they could be assured that those ten would still be there.
And if Georgia Tech left, they could be replaced with UConn easily enough.
LikeLike
I thoroughly disagree with the opinion that 10 teams would be enough for the ACC. Without Florida State and (or) Miami (Death Penalty?) they need some presence in Florida. Without it, the ACC will have reached DEFCON Level 3 (The Big East is at 2 and the WAC 1). There is no way in the world I can see that happening, which is why I see USF as a viable alternative. Throw in the fact, that the ACC would be left with Virginia Tech and Northwestern-Level (At best) football programs. Does anyone expect the Hokies to live under those conditions, if the SEC or Big XII became open?
LikeLike
In the long run, I’m not sure if this would work out. This is the Big East merged with the ACC. While it is all east coast schools, it is also southern schools with northern schools. And while the founding ACC schools may wish to stick it out together, none of the other schools will feel the same loyalty. VA and tobacco row will find it increasingly more difficult to maintain the conference. Perhaps it is time for VA to break free from tobacco row. For NC, it is probably best in the long run that they split up as well. Texas has had a very similiar problem, and A&M was smart to get away. This probably helps Texas too in the long run. Why should NC and Duke carry Wake and NC State.
LikeLike
Further, I think it is a foregone conclusion that NCState and VTech are going to the SEC (unless they are able to get NC instead). l just see no way that Clemson ends up in the SEC.
LikeLike
@Arch
That is where I sit on this as well although I think there are 4 more schools in addition to Georgia Tech that are question marks on your list.
NCState
Pittsburgh
BC
Syracuse
My rationale on this is the following.
The ACC schools have to ask themselves if they are willing to do what it takes to compete for Football championships or are would they prefer to perform well in the Director’s Cup standings.
Duke, UNC, UVA haven’t been to a BCS bowl nor an ACC Championship game but at the same time each,is routinely in the Top10 for the Director’s Cup Standings. Wake has no options anyway. I think these 4 will decide that its not worth moving conferences as long as they can get assurances from Notre Dame that the Irish are ‘in’ to use Coach K’s term.
Everyone else has questions.
NCState hasn’t been to a BCS Bowl or ACC Championship game but they don’t do particularly well with the Director’s Cup either. They might be inclined to take inspiration from South Carolina and Maryland and look for a home in a Football conference and they’ll definitely have options.
Pitt has some football history but has only been to one BCS game as a mamber of the BigEast? Can they compete? Would they be offered a home? Could be attractive to Big12 and/or SEC in the right circumstances.
BC has played for the ACC championship a couple of times but never made a BCS game. They could be attractive to both the Big12 and B1G. Fox owns NESN which could make 3rd tier rights valuable and/or help BTN gain carriage in New England. Keep your eyes on BC.
Syracuse has some football history but geography and TV really raise questions on how attractive they are to other conferences. They might be #12 or #14 or #16 somewhere.
Georgia Tech has had a fair amount of football success and they haven’t really done much for Director’s Cup, so I have to believe they’ll be looking for options. They will be hugely attractive to B1G and Big12 and they might even work as SEC #16.
I think the ACC may just do a managed split here, forming two lines:
Football First:
FSU
VT
Miami
Clemson
Willing to live on in ACC with access to Orange Bowl and ND partnership:
UNC
Duke
UVA
Wake
These are the schools where questions exist on which line they’ll choose in order of likelihood that they decide to pursue football riches elsewhere:
GT
NCState
BC
Pitt
Syacuse
There are two more factors, Maryland’s exit fee and ACC #14.
If I’m right about Duke/UNC/UVA/Wake then they won’t want to invite Louisville to the party while there is the risk of a minimal exit for Maryland. The idea of bringing Louisville into their party and then seeing the Football First schools leave anyway would be worst case scenario, UCONN would be a much better fit for those core 4 schools.
And that is really the dilemma that the ACC is in right now.
LikeLike
I think the problem with that “managed split” idea is there’s zero guarantee ND would still want to hang around. If FSU, Miami, Clemson etc. all bail, that deal becomes a LOT less favorable for the Irish.
LikeLike
@Matthew Smith
No guarantee but the possible Notre Dame/UNC/Duke/UVA partnership would have a lot more power than the ND/BE partnership ever did, particularly with the not insignificant support ESPN would provide.
It would be a pretty sturdy platform for ND to maintain its independence and as long as Duke/UNC/ESPN are involved you know you are going to have an elite basketball conference. The timing of this is particularly interesting with the academic turmoil UNC is dealing with.
LikeLike
If the ACC was down to 10 teams as described above and the NC-Virginia faction was content with that, I don’t see Notre Dame going any place else. You could probably count on Notre Dame only playing 3 football games against the ACC though (some years 4). But for the teams left, that would still be about the same frequency. And, really, where else would ND go if they wanted to keep their football independence? ACC would still be the best of the conferences that would allow them non-football membership.
LikeLike
If FSU left, there is definitely some chance they would want to keep those 3 letters in a different arrangement.
LikeLike
You seem to be assuming that somehow it’d be a permanent death penalty. If that even happens (and given that Penn St escaped it for what is obviously much worse decisions, except perhaps in NCAA la-la land), it’d presumably just be for a year or two. That’s not enough to all by itself force UM out and USF in of the ACC.
LikeLike
Pitt got the ACC invite before WV got the XII invite. Pitt decided that ACC would be a better home than theXII and managed to get an invite while both were in discussions with XII. Staying in the Big East was not an option for either. A&M wanted to go to the SEC (with TX) when the SWC fell apart, so A&M left TX but is now in the conference it wanted to be in for 20years.
The reason the ACC does not have a GOR is the same reason that the XII could not get one before all the schools that wanted to leave left. Missouri (wanted B1G) and Colorodo (wanted PAC) would not agree to a GOR (NE might have if TX, OK, A&M were on board, but got a better offer). In the ACC MD and FSU keep voting against increased exit fees, so I doubt they will go for a GOR. So if the ACC gets rid of FSU Tobacco road may be able to stabilize the ACC with a GOR.
LikeLike
I find it very investing that SI Thamel published the prospective payouts the BIG was offering Maryland. Usually that stuff is kept quiet. Publishing that Maryland stands to make $100 million more by 2020 in the BIG versus the ACC sounds to me like an attempt of convince some other ACC members to jump.
LikeLike
Agreed. I really think that was an effort to let Big12 and ACC fans know that they are a long, long way from keeping up on revenues.
LikeLike
Possible. If so, I think I am in agreement with Zeek, this is aimed clearly at UVA. UVA has been battling with the state legislature for years with respect to funding. Plus, last year’s issue with the president means that UVA would not proceed the same as MD did. They would have to get some public support for the move. This could help. Also the UVA president does have Michigan ties. I’m not sure how strong her influence really is though. She was dismissed after two years, but rallied the public to save her job. So who knows.
LikeLike
The fact that the exact numbers and details and years were “leaked” to a reporter as prominent as Thamel is telling.
The fact that Delany himself then gave a full interview with details to SI is also telling.
All of this is deliberate. No one in the Big Ten (or Maryland officials) would give details that explicit out unless it was publicly directed at #15 and #16 (and those schools know who they are).
LikeLike
Could be Maryland letting it go. Missouri was leaking all over with the SEC projections.
LikeLike
I believe before going the TCU-West Virginia expansion route, Big 12 was trying to get a West Virginia-Pittsburgh combo for travel partner purposes.
Question: If Big 12 could snake Pitt now, before they officially jumped to the ACC, would Pitt still be obligated to the $50MM ACC exit fee?
LikeLike
TCU did end up paying some form of an exit fee to the Big East without having played a game there, but I believe it was the previous lower one; they never paid the upgraded fee.
So maybe Pitt would be able to get out for the old fee of $20 million.
Probably no way out of it free.
LikeLike
Another question is would Pittsburgh want to leave the ACC for the Big 12?
When they were in the Big East, it would have been a no-brainer.
But, let’s say that the ACC plugs in UConn and appears to stabilize. If no other ACC schools appear to be conference shopping, would Pittsburgh make the first move? The money might be a little better in the Big 12, and West Virginia is there, but I don’t see it happening at this point.
If Pittsburgh were to go to the Big 12, it would likely be with Louisville. I’m guessing they would end up in a division with UL, WV, Iowa State, Kansas, and Kansas State. As I’m typing that out, it occurs to me that it would be a pretty stout little division for basketball. But still, I’m not sure that Pittsburgh is making that move.
LikeLike
Pitt was 1st on the Big 12 list when WVU joined. They contacted the ACC and got accepted. So Pitt much prefers the ACC if it will still be there for them. And they probably dropped lower on the Big 12’s list with their ACC choice.
LikeLike
That info is from internet chatter, not any media sources as I recall, but it seems to be generally accepted and it makes sense.
LikeLike
Pitt and ‘cuse were announced as ACC adds weeks before WVU went to the BigXII. Their poaching, along with TCU to BigXII is what caused WVU to start knocking on every other power conferences’ door. The BigXII may have went to Pitt after and said “do you want to change your mind?” but Pitt to the ACC predated WVU to BigXII.
LikeLike
I think we are all on the same timeline. Big XII’s first target (after TCU anyway) was Pittsburgh. Pittsburgh went to the ACC instead of Big XII. Big XII and West Virginia then became mutually enamored. After a brief attempt by Louisville to butt in, West Virginia was officially announced to be joining the Big XII.
So it seems that Pittsburgh preferred the ACC to the Big XII. The question is, with the Maryland defection and rumors of move schools looking around, would Pittsburgh now entertain the thought of moving to the Big XII?
Clearly, there is a level of ACC destruction that would send Pitt to the Big XII but have we reached that point now, or would several other schools have to leave first. I’m thinking at least two more schools would have to leave before Pittsburgh would re-think their loyalty to the ACC.
LikeLike
The issue for the B10 will be to keep the money flowing to overcome the cultural differences between its schools and the regions they represent. This will be true no matter who the 15/16 teams are. The SEC will be able to do this better because there is much better cultural cohesiveness. The best coalitions for long-term stability are the ones that are built around a common culture. It definitely helps to be financially successful as well. There is a reason why the SEC, B10 and P10 have had long-term stability. They all shared a culture, and when they expanded, they expanded with schools that shared a similar culture in regions that had similiar cultures and they did it slowly allowing those schools to assimilate. The two big conferences that have struggled are the ones that expanded in big numbers and merged cultures that didn’t work together – the ACC and B12. The ACC used to share a common culture, and they brought along FSU and GTEch, schools in similar regions and allowed those schools to assimilate. The B8 merged with Texas basically. Texas (the state and the school), as most would agree, is a culture unto itself. There was a reason that it basically had its own conference for so many years.
In this regard, the SEC appears to be in the best shape going forward. All their schools still share a basic southern culture – with a few slight outliers. Even if they expand to 16, they will likely do it with schools and states that fit the profile.
The B10 is not doing that. While they are arguably and likely the most powerful and influential conference, certainly the most valuable (today), they are taking a big risk here. And while Rutgers and MD may make PSU happy, there is a big difference between MD and NJ and the midwest. Culture binds people together better than anything else. Ultimately, it trumps money. And if you bring in a Texas, VA, NC, or GT, you are adding an additional culture to the mix. It doesn’t mean it can’t work. But in the long run, it may be difficult to maintain the cohesiveness. The SEC won’t have those problems.
Demographics may have forced the B10 to make this move. And it may pay off for them and look like a huge success in the first 10-15 years. But eventually, the cultural differences will start to strain the relationships. It always does. What’s true in politics and geopolitical events is just as true in conference affiliation. The past 20 years of conference alignment has offered some proof.
The B10 is now making a move similar to what the ACC and B8/SWC did. It doesn’t appear that it has worked out well (in terms of long-term stability) for the latter two. The B10 is more savy, and the money is so much better, it may overcome everything else. But I wouldn’t bet on it – in the long run.
All that being said, as a UVA alum and B10 fan, I am hoping that VA does ultimately join. There is a huge risk, but for UVA, I’d rather take the risk in the top conference now than stay in a conference that appears to be losing members and losing influence.
LikeLike
Agree that a lot of folks here underestimate the value of common “culture”, but you may be overstating it a bit.. Texas, MO, and Ark are stretching things a bit geographically and culturally.
As a BIG 10er, I’m not worried at all about Rutgers….but MD does scare me some. When 50% of the fan base are looking for reasons to hate a conference, they generally find them. Are MD fans going to be sulking and moaning for 20 years going forward…?
LikeLike
I just think in the long run it overtakes things. I don’t think it will come into play anytime soon. But the history of the world shows that affiliations that do not share a common culture eventually break apart. I don’t see why it should be any difference with respect to sports and conferences.
LikeLike
Could happen
LikeLike
I think the ‘PSU factor’ is what will eventually win them over completely. PSU hates the B1G. Maryland will (again) hate PSU. I don’t think PSU will be able to wrangle the newcomers into a voting block. The enemy of my enemy and all that.
LikeLike
@Scarlet_Lutefisk,
PSU doesn’t hate the B1G. A small percentage do, and some are upset right now having to do with the Sandusky affair and the consequences but I think the vast majority of the PSU fanbase is happy enough with the B1G and will only be happier with the Eastern/Mid-Atlantic expansion. Over what issues do you see PSU wanting to form a voting block to disrupt the party anyway? Money distribution is an accepted standard and with expansion PSU is surely happier than anyone.
LikeLike
While my comment was mostly TIC the disgruntled faction of PSU fan is larger than you are giving credit to. A content (sane) alumni base does not elect a nut like Lubrano to it’s BOT.
LikeLike
@Scarlet_Lutefisk
Your average t-shirt fan though isn’t going to feel that way.
LikeLike
The difference between Rutgers and Maryland is that the former has little, if any, big-time conference tradition — remember, RU was playing a handful of Ivy League schools as late as the early 1980s — whereas Maryland was an ACC member from day one (1953) and had built up a big-time football program in the late 1940s under Jim Tatum. In addition, the Maryland fan base is largely basketball-oriented and has never thought much of Big Ten hoops (stylistically or otherwise), and is probably resentful that this decision basically was made with football in mind (as Willie Sutton might have said, that’s where the money is). In contrast, Rutgers men’s basketball has been an afterthought for close to two decades.
Once Maryland fans understand the benefits of Big Ten membership — financial and athletic — and realize that Big Ten basketball has its own charms, I think the College Park community will be delighted to be part of this conference.
LikeLike
Sorry, I just don’t see this huge cultural difference between NJ & MD and the Midwest that you speak of. At least, it is no bigger than the cultural differences between Texas & Missouri and Florida & SCarolina.
Now if the B10 takes big chunks of the south, they you would have a point (though taking just VA is probably safe, culturally, as VA is rapidly Midlandizing, just like MD did before).
LikeLike
I agree Richard. Maryland and New JErsey are not that culturally different from the other areas of the Big Ten. And institutionally, as large state flagship research insitutions, they are very similar. Bringing in Mizzou and Texas to the SEC is as much of a culture class as this, if not worse.
LikeLike
@SH – I think there’s still a major cultural gap between the Big Ten and schools such as UVA and UNC, but it’s a bit overstated with respect to Rutgers and Maryland. I’d say that the range from the Upper Midwest to the Northeast (all Northern ties) is more akin to the range between Southern California and the Pacific Northwest (very distinct but still the West Coast). North/South seems to be a larger cultural difference to me (which plagued the Big 12 and now the ACC) than Midwest/East Coast.
LikeLike
That may be true. Though I think the difference between the Midwest and the Northeast is a little more pronounced than you stated. Yes, they are the “north” but they are still different. My point was that whoever is the 15/16 team added, it appears that now you are adding a third culture. Let’s say it is UVA and UNC. Well Rutgers and MD may naturally affiliate more with the east schools (one of which has a long history with the other two), and they may be able to pull PSU into their sphere of influence. You run the risk of having old school B10 v. 5 east coast schools. This could strain the relationship. I think in the long run, it will present some interesting issues for the B10.
LikeLike
“Yes, they are the “north” but they are still different.”
OK, but are they as different as SCarolina & Missouri or Florida & Texas?
LikeLike
For that matter, are they as different as Texas and Missouri?
LikeLike
I grew up in Michigan and live in DC. I don’t really know what you’re talking about. There are so many Big Ten alums here anyway that adding a contiguous state like Maryland isn’t going to be a problem.
Maryland fans seem pretty pumped about it after they realized the actual details of the situation, outside of a vocal minority…
LikeLike
I go back to the Civil War, and see the same dynamics…..
The troops from the East and the “Old Northwest” eyed each other with some suspicion, but were ultimately on the same side….read about the Iron Brigade fighting in the Army of the P. or the rebels v. the raiders in Andersonville…..
When you add VA and UNC you’re now really talking about 3 seperate regions….tougher
LikeLike
Exactly, and two coalitions that appear to have nothing in common, may align just to act as a buffer against the much biggers and stronger coalition. Creates very interesting dynamics.
LikeLike
Frank – I’m a clash of the civilizations believer. So I find it interesting to apply the same thinking to conference alignment. Without the bloodshed and such.
LikeLike
I’m not. The Hutu’s massacred the Tutsis in Rwanda, and no outsider (including Africans) can tell them apart. If a Croatian, Bosnian, and Serb were holding a conversation, no outsider could tell who was which.
Most fights occur because of economics and politics (or more baldly, money and power), not because of cultural differences.
LikeLike
Didn’t that little fight called WW1 start because of cultural differences?
LikeLike
Well the difference between Croatians, Bosnians and Serbs is that Croatians are southern Slavs who turned Catholic under Austrian rule and use the Roman alphabet, Bosnians are southern Slavs who turned Muslim under Turkish rule and Serbs are southern Slavs who stayed Orthodox under Turkish rule and kept the Cyrillic alphabet. So its all religion and reading and writing.
LikeLike
Cultural differences become shorthand for your group or tribe. People tend to stick together for superordinate goals and fight amongst themselves when there are none.
LikeLike
mushroomgod:
I thought it started with an assasination and stupid alliances/treaties that pulled countries that had little reason to be at war to fight one another. Culturally, the French were closer to the Germans than the Russians, yet the Russians allied with France and their old enemy GB.
LikeLike
@Mushroomgod: No, World War 1 started due to the depression created by overzealous reparations demanded by the Prussian side of the Franco-Prussian War. World War 2 started because of the same exact penalties imposed by the Western Powers. Culture clash doesn’t mean shit when you don’t have food to eat or heat in your home.
There is a reason the 1947 Paris Peace treaties didn’t impose crippling economic sanctions for the Germans and the Marshall Plan wasn’t purely to fight communism.
LikeLike
I don’t think culture is a big deal at all. Academia is a culture on to itself. Professors and administrators hop school to school and often intermingle in multiple institutions across the country. Graduate students and research personal also hop between conferences and areas of the country so they wouldn’t have any real cultural differences. So then you are left with t-shirt fans. There is a drastic difference between t-shirt fans in different regions but essentially they don’t matter. From personal experience, individual schools have different types of fans regardless of region. Nebraska and Ohio State fans are completely different yet are both from the Midwest. Same with Michigan. T-shirt fans bitch and moan all the time, as many fellow PSU fans do about the Midwest bias or OSU/Mich favoritism or we should go to the ACC, but all of that is meaningless. Administrators at Penn State love the big ten and that’s all that matters.
As far as the conferences that died from expanding: they died from all parties not being equal. Regionality has nothing to do with it. That is not the case in the BIG or SEC, the two most stable conferences.
LikeLike
And they died because the economics didn’t make sense.
Was there really a need for a Southern superconference 80 years ago?
Or the need of a super WAC?
If the economics make sense, a set of institutions can grow as large as feasible.
LikeLike
All of this is true, but I’m not so sure that the Big Ten will automatically have cultural fissures depending on what it does and largely because this all depends on what demographics look like.
In particular, the past 20-30 years were the beginning of a dramatic ideological/cultural/political self-sorting of the US population based on the choices that people are making of where to move and where to live (and even where to send their kids to college).
Due to this, it’s very easily conceivable that Virginia will follow a similar trajectory to Colorado as a state. Colorado was more or less indistinguishable from the other Big 8 states just a few decades ago. Now it’s almost identical to Washington in terms of cultural leanings and the like.
Virginia’s future to me is something akin to Illinois. A state with a largely rural population dominated politically and culturally by the growth of D.C. and its sprawl, or something like Pennsylvania (imagine Pennsylvania minus Pittsburgh and you have a similar dynamic). It’s going to be amazing how different of a state Virginia is in 20 or 30 years. It will be unrecognizable from what it is today, just as it is now unrecognizable from what it was 20 or 30 years ago.
North Carolina’s future to me is something similar to Florida. Florida has patches of “the North” plastered throughout, certain counties in the center of Florida along with the Southeast which may as well be transplanted from the Northeast. But then many other counties are virtually indistinguishable from southern Georgia or Alabama in the panhandle and north of the I-4 corridor. North Carolina is going to look like a patchwork like that. Florida’s culturally a mix of states, and I think that’s what North Carolina’s future is going to look like. You’re going to have the Fayetteville and Raleigh areas, and they’ll have different leanings from other parts of the state. It’s hard to tell what the dominant force will be, just like a state like Florida is incredibly complex to determine the the culture of; it’s more of a patchwork than anything else.
Now, what does this mean for the Big Ten.
The Big Ten is going to look at the fact that they’re attaching parts of the Mid-Atlantic to the Midwest.
That means we’re talking about a group of 5 Mid-Atlantic/East Coast schools being attached to the Midwest. Penn State and Rutgers are the most easily assimilated.
After that, Maryland and then Virginia and then North Carolina are going to be a bit more culturally different on a sliding scale where NC is the most different.
To me, Virginia won’t be where the issues will be. It’ll be North Carolina because that state is going to be like Florida where it doesn’t have a more unified identity. Illinois has a unified identity in a sense, and I think Virginia’s will end up similar.
The question is how long does it take for institutions that are typically staid to catch up to the leanings of their state. Some of these places are so insular (particularly a college like UVa which isn’t a giant land-grant) that it will take longer. In time though, it’ll work itself out, so I’m not particularly worried about that.
The only thing that worries me is if we go for a Big 18 with 7 East Coast schools and then group those schools mostly together in a division. I really don’t think that would be good for integration, but that’s a bridge to worry about after we get to where this is going.
LikeLike
All good points. And of course cultures change as demographics change. I agree that VA would assimilate more quickly and easily, for many reasons. NOVA is much closer to the north than the south, but the research triangle is basically surrounded by the south. Further, NC is somewhat like a Texas, in that they have always had this outsized influence over a conference, which they would no longer have. I also think UVA has a much larger non-state enrollment, which certainly affects the school culture.
But with respect to CO, while they are much more culturally aligned with the P10 than the old B8 (as a state), even in the P10, there could be interesting dynamics. The more schools that get added, the less influence the CA schools have. Before, the AZ schools basically fell in line. But now they will find new schools to align with to create a voting block to check the CA schools.
But let’s be honest, we aren’t talking about life and death decisions here.
LikeLike
Yeah and besides, when all these schools are earning $50M+ per year in the 2020s, no one’s going to care about demographics and culture. Money overrides everything.
LikeLike
Actually Florida is pretty simple. The further south you go, the further north you get. Jacksonville and Pensacola are very deep south. Outside of Texas, I’ve never seen more pickups than Jacksonville. I hear more NY accents in Miami than in NY City.
Virginia is different than Illinois. Norfolk and Richmond are pretty big metro areas with 1.7 million and 1.3 million people. Fairfax County is 1.0 million. The military is a very big influence in Virginia. Carbondale doesn’t compete with Chicago for influence in Illinois. And Carbondale and rural Illinois politically are as red as rural Tennessee. Illinois is not Massachusetts.
LikeLike
On personal experience, there is not that much cultural difference between the Midwest and NJ, MD. These are suburban-type states and you could swap in a Chicago/MSP/Detroit/Columbus suburb and barely notice the difference. Nothing like North/South.
LikeLike
The biggest cultural split is urban/rural, but that has little to do with Midwest/Mid-Atlantic as far as the schools themselves are concerned. Many of the B1G universities are surrounded by rural flyover territory but have zero in common culturally with it. Most of their in-state students are also from the well-off urban & suburban areas in the states.
And besides, one of the reasons the B1G is expanding the way it is, is that there’s not a whole lot of future in rural American demographically. Country’s changing, becoming much faster, more diverse, and a lot more urban.
LikeLike
Exactly. I don’t know see how a bunch of suburban kids from DC and Baltimore are that much different from suburban kids from Pittsburgh, Philly, Cleveland, Detroit, Chicago, Minneapolis, etc.
LikeLike
You’re overstating cultural differences, which is fine. As a trained anthropologist, we in the field are use to it. Western B1G folks are not so different with Mid Atlantic folks from the East, not much different at all – no B1G campuses are really rural & all of them are either close to urban centers similar to Va, or urban in general – Iowa and UN are the semi-oddballs because they are of course situated in smaller states. Mason-Dixon aside, Md has been more Yankee than Southern for decades. Md & NJ have even less cultural differences, generally speaking, with the eastern Midwest & in more ways are similar because PSU is an eastern, slightly Rust Belt state already. Bmore is merely a typical Great Lakes city but near the ocean – a whole lot of blue collar, working class inner city with large pockets of professional, old money creative types. When I watch the Wire I also think Bmore’s socio-economic and political machinery is much like a Chicago, Cleveland, Milwaukee, Philly, Newark, or Detroit.
Look at Md’s professional sports team. The Ravens, esp, share a division with Pitt & the Ohio NFL teams – so the idea of Md associated with Pa and Ohio has already been cultivated. In MLB, the Orioles share a division with mostly eastern markets: TB is the odd ball, Toronto is merely a Canadian Great Lakes region city, much like those found in the US, BIG footprint. Back to the Mason-Dixon, this imaginary line keeps lowering in large part because of Northern Virginia’s growth which attracts a lot of non-southern folks & people form all over the world. The upper eastern influence has undoubtedly been settling in Raleigh-Durham-Chapel Hill for years as well – throw in Charleston, SC, though less noticeable. NJ, n esp NYC metro, which touches quite near New Brunswick = global region – folks from all over. There will be hairline cultural differences between Md, NJ, Pa & Oh.
As for Va, you’re in what I call the in between of Va – southern and Yankee. But your alum, esp, are pluralistic and of course highly educated. I think it’s fair to say Va Cavalier faithful have a world view that transcends staunch cultural lines.
Va would be a fine addition to the B1G and they’d have 4 road trips w/in 7 hours drive of campus: tOSU, Rut, Md & PSU.
Va’s ccademic compatibility with the B1G, esp from top to bottom: undergraduate, graduate & research, would be stronger than existing ties in the ACC. The academic angle drives this expansion far more than people realize – there are mucho dollar signs on this end as well.
LikeLike
I just don’tt think the SEC, though popular with the fan base, is going to be the preferred destination for the powers that be at UNC or particularly UVA. From what I’ve read, Delany’s ties to UNC are not superficial (though Slive’s probably aren’t either).
UNC and VT are sure to be the top two targets of Slive. UVA and UNC most likely the B1G. The maneuvering already taking place behind the scenes would be fascinating to watch.
LikeLike
I would agree. I know more about UVA as an alum, but NC and UVA are fairly similar. I suspect the powers that be feel closer to Mich, NW, and Wisc than any SEC school (with the exception of Vandy). UVA’s president has strong B10 ties (and ties to U Chicago). She was dismissed last year, but rallied the public. One reasons for her dismissal was that she was perceived at being not progressive enough to the changing college landscape. Could this be the kind of bold move that may make her stronger?
I think UVA will be easier for the B10 to get than UNC. If UVA goes to B10, VT goes to SEC, both sides are happy. UNC has a Texas problem in that they have the baggage that is NCState, Duke and Wake. NCSt would probably like to jump to SEC, so ok there. They probably have no qualms with leaving Wake behind. So you are left with Duke.
As a basketball school, Duke probably would do best with the Big East basketball schools. You could always maintain the Duke/NC rivalry game.
LikeLike
I don’t doubt your opinion about the administration, but what about the board and major alumni?
LikeLike
Exactly right. Good post.
LikeLike
See SH’s post above…..adding UNC and VA would be risky in that it really creates an alterior power base/voting block in the East/SE, while adding NC St and VA Tech is a much easier fit. On the other hand, adding VA and UNC would create such a powerhouse conference academically that a university president would be hard pressed to want out.
LikeLike
If you really want to take the long view (100 years) as Zeek likes to point out, will football even be around?
I think an argument can be made that football will eventually die as a sport, from the ground up, as fewer parents will allow their sons to play for health reasons and high schools get rid of the sprot for liability and cost reasons.
But I don’t think anyone is making a 100 year decision. They are making a decision for the present and the next 20-25 years. After that, we really have no clue what condition the sports world will be in.
If UVA and UNC try to stay together as a conference for Director’s Cup purposes, this may prove to be very smart in the long-term.
LikeLike
Very good point SH……..PSU and NEB were 100 year additions…….MD, Rutgers, UNC, VA (if that happens) are 25 year decisions
LikeLike
As far as 100 year decisions go, you can’t worry about the long-run that far.
I mean, we’re all dead in the long run. Other people will get to worry about whether any of these conference moves make sense that far along the lines.
As far as we can see though (the timescale of the BTN to 2032 is fair), these things are what they are.
LikeLike
I agree. The college landscape will face some huge changes in the next 20 years that will have an affect on all this. The cost of college just cannot continue with the same trajectory. This could lead to many schools abandoning their football programs and scaling back their athletic departments. My belief is that football is at the zenith of its popularity. Partly because nothing stays on top forever, but mainly because the concussion issue is going to force changes from the ground up, changes that ultimately lead to less football. You could argue that this may make it more popular because it will become more scarce. But I think you will also see the better athletes move to play other, safer sports. My other belief is that public dollars for sports will become less available. Obviously, this is a big thing driving the current train as colleges are looking for more and more funding. But it will have an impact on schools that are not part of the power conferences.
LikeLike
I gave you a response above to your demographics post.
LikeLike
SH: Football dying actually would be an argument for the Big20 as it would be the preeminent basketball conference & the CIC would be one of the top collections of major research universities in the world.
LikeLike
@SH
I thought there would be a lot of colleges dropping it because of financial reasons. 15 years ago, I would have bet most of the MAC would have dropped football or be FCS and half of FCS would be gone.
Instead, schools are adding football. There’s nothing that keeps alumni connected better and its getting harder and harder to do that.
The concussion issues are serious. But everything else promotes its growth.
LikeLike
bullet makes a good point.
Football is the sport that brings out alumni “patriotism” the most. That means money; boosters, the rest.
LikeLike
It’s more than that, though, for the lower end of 1-A (the programs you’d think ought to consider dropping football). These programs are HEAVILY subsidized by the wealthier programs. When a MACrifice victim pockets $1M per blowout loss (and takes, say, 2 per year), that’s a big impact on the bottom line.
Let’s say it costs about $20k per player per year for tuition, housing etc. Take 85 players on scholarship and that gets you $1.7 million. So 2 bodybag games pays for most of your player expenses. Then you just have to raise enough money elsewhere to pay for your coaching staff, travel expenses, etc.
And just so we’re all clear: a MACrifice victim isn’t contributing $1 million of value when they take that check. That check is an inflated number mainly due to current NCAA rules about bowl eligibility requirements; there’s really nothing fundamentally more entertaining/interesting about beating up Eastern Michigan instead of Western Illinois, but the paychecks EMU gets are MUCH higher.
Also worth noting: as TV money becomes more important, the number of bodybag games teams play will go down. As that goes down, bodybag programs will get fewer paychecks AND will get smaller checks per beating (supply/demand: cut demand and both volume and price decreate).
So don’t be surprised if some of those programs do end up cutting football in the not terribly distant future, once the subsidies going their way decline (and if the big programs ever walk from the NCAA entirely, then the end becomes VERY near for many of those programs).
LikeLike
@Richard: Except the death of football removes the only reason to go to a conference that unwieldly huge to begin with.
LikeLike
Boxing has declined, but is still alive and we have MMA in addition (I used to follow boxing before its management turned into WWE, but MMA is just brutal).
Football has issues, but its not going away.
LikeLike
@Frank –
Wanted to throw out my divisions for a National Basketball Conference. I’m assuming Georgetown goes to the ACC to throw Notre Dame a bone in DC now that Maryland is out.
20 teams
West
Gonzaga
St. Mary’s
UNLV
Pepperdine
San Diego State
Central
New Mexico
BYU
Creighton
Wichita State
St. Louis
North
DePaul
Marquette
Butler
Xavier
VCU
East
UMass
St. John’s
Providence
Seton Hall
Villanova
With basketball automatic qualifier rules it would probably be better to make an Eastern Conference and a Western Conference of 12 teams each. Eastern would take the Big East bid and Western would take the WAC bid. You could fill it with some of these:
Charlotte
Richmond
Belmont
Dayton
Davidson
Old Dominion
Oral Roberts
Texas-Arlington
LikeLike
@Read The D – I think I’ll put up a full post on this after the immediate realignment news calms down since the prospect of a national basketball league fascinates me. That looks like a good league. Now, I personally think the FBS schools (other than independents like BYU) will need to be in all sports leagues, but who knows.
This is what I was thinking if there was a single 20-team league with a private school emphasis:
DIVISION A
Georgetown
Villanova
St. John’s
Providence
Seton Hall
DIVISION B
DePaul
Marquette
Xavier
St. Louis
Butler
DIVISION C
Creighton
BYU
Gonzaga
Air Force* or Denver
Portland
DIVISION D
St. Mary’s
Santa Clara or San Francisco
Loyola Marymount
Pepperdine
San Diego
* Air Force in the event that it takes a football-only membership to the Big East or elsewhere.
Dayton deserves to be in this league with its rabid fan base, but being so close to Xavier might do them in if the TV people have a say in it. Division C is also very spread out, but there aren’t as many options in that area between St. Louis and the West Coast. Finally, Division D features multiple teams in both the LA and Bay Area markets, but those metro areas can support 2 schools. California coverage would be critical if this league were to be pulled off.
LikeLike
By the way, for people that don’t know what I’m talking about, Pete Thamel of Sports Illustrated mentioned the possibility of a nationwide basketball conference if the Big East Catholic schools split off in a column yesterday:
http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2012/writers/pete_thamel/11/20/Big-East-realignment/index.html
LikeLike
There’s probably a decent TV market for that too. There’s loads of new sports channels whether regional or national that have come online recently or are coming online. Plenty of those teams will pop in and out of the rankings as hoops powers.
LikeLike
@Frank – It’s a fascinating idea, but I think it’s too ambitious. IMHO, an all Catholic league mostly within the Big Ten foot print (Creighton to Providence) would be more likely. The Catholic school presidents have to be looking for some stability and will try to focus on schools with common purpose and cause.
LikeLike
You can easily get Boston, New York, DC, Philly, Detroit and Chicago along with a bunch of other top 50 metros. That’s the biggest metro areas not in California or Texas. There’s marginal gain going beyond the NE and MW.
LikeLike
SCENARIO B: If you want to make this more of an Eastern tilt:
DIVISION A
Georgetown
Villanova
St. John’s
Providence
Seton Hall
DIVISION B
Xavier
Dayton
Duquense
Richmond
Davidson
DIVISION C
DePaul
Marquette
Butler
St. Louis
Creighton
DIVISION D
BYU
Gonzaga
St. Mary’s, Santa Clara or San Francisco
Pepperdine or Loyola Marymount
San Diego
LikeLike
My B Scenario: 3 Divisions of 6 teams each. Play round robin in your division. Play 2 home and 2 away from the other divisions. Gives each team a total of 18 conference games, plus only 2 cross country trips. I’d also try to have 3 pairs of travel partners in each division.
East
Georgetown
VCU
Seton Hall
St. John’s
Villanova
Providence
Central
Marquette
DePaul
Butler
Xavier
St. Louis
Creighton
West
Gonzaga
St. Mary’s
Pepperdine
San Diego
BYU
Air Force
LikeLike
Seems clear to me that the B10 is prioritizing large public institutions, aside from ND have we even heard a rumor of them targeting a small private school?
I just don’t see us adding BC (14.5k students), Duke (14.5k), or GTech (20k). UNL is now our smallest school not named Northwestern at 25k.
If we can’t pry out UVA and UNC then I’d rather hold my nose on the academics and contiguous state angle and add FSU. If it’s about demographics, I think Florida is probably the best state we could realistically get a major player in.
Academics and road trips aside I see no advantages to adding the U over FSU.
LikeLike
Nothing for nothing, but if you add UVA, they will become the smallest school not named Northwestern. That being said, as a state flagship school, with their top academics and public influence in DC, they bring quite a bit to the table, despite having a small enrollment (for state school standards).
LikeLike
Enrollment isn’t everything after all.
I mean, UVa probably has a bigger fanbase than Maryland even though it has considerably fewer students.
T-shirt fans and the like matter too.
LikeLike
You were doing so good until you got to the FSU line…….
But good point…….size matters to the BIG…..can’t really see them taking both GT(25000) and VA(21000) as some rumors suggest as you add both cultural and institutional fit issues……..
LikeLike
UNC and UVA also bring campus beauty. If I was a B10 alum, I would love to travel to Charlottesville/Chappel Hill for a fall football game. Can’t think of a better destination. So they have that going for them.
LikeLike
No doubt…..and reading up on UVA….quite an amazing institutional history…….no doubt the academic bluebloods in the BIG would have a big boner over UVA……..
LikeLike
Any conference would love to have UVA from an academic perspective. Arguably the top public institution in the country. At least when I was there, we had a competitive football team and basketball team. Not sure what has happened.
LikeLike
@mushroomgod……Yeah I think I’m in the minority here on Florida State. Overall, my line of reasoning is that if we add two more schools who are meh in football and I consider UNC meh then we have seriously diluted our inventory of marquee games in going from 12 to 16 (this all assumes we stop at 16). FSU is the only realistic marquee FB program that is attainable to the B10.
I really think at some point product matters, and if all of the other 15 members are in contiguous states then I think taking a flier out on FSU is worth it.
Let me ask you this if you could have FSU or OU (without Okie State) which of the two would you take?
LikeLike
Brindelin:
I agree, and I would take FSU in a heartbeat. They are closer to AAU status than OU (still not that close) & are in a much bigger state.
Don’t think we should stop at 20, though, if ND is available.
LikeLike
Lets just go to 64 and hold all D1 championships in house..
LikeLike
Stop at 16, I meant. 20 shoud be the end goal.
LikeLike
I’ve been a proponent of adding Florida State and Georgia Tech for awhile.
I agree with your thought process as well.
LikeLike
Interesting story on the Rutgers Rivals site about their wrestling coach’s reaction to RU joining the BIG…..says that every blue-chip recruit he’s lost at RU he lost to a BIG school….says it will huge for his recruiting……
LikeLike
There is really no solid reason, other than the “basketball school” issue, why UNC isn’t playing at teast at he Michigan State or Iowa level of CF…..those teams are watchable. UNC shouldn’t have the demographic issues of a Kansas, UK, or IU. As for VA, I see it as a Stanford-type situation–when they have a really solid coach they’ll be capable of 8-4 or 9-3….in their down periods they’d be a 3-9, 4-8 type program. As a comparison, I would certainly expect VA to outdue Northestern over the span of the next 30 yrears or so……so I don’t see that we’d be adding more IUs(ouch) or Minnesotas or Purdont’s.
LikeLike
This should have gone above……..
LikeLike
UNC should really be a dominant football program. They have a huge and rapidly growing (i.e. young people i.e. high schools) state with a year-round climate to draw from. The state is bigger than Tennessee with a much larger African-American population. It’s every advantage an Iowa doesn’t have.
LikeLike
They were pretty darn good during the Mack Brown years, but could never top FSU.
With the right coach, and enough $ to keep him, they could be very good.
LikeLike
@mushroomgod – his job just got easier.
LikeLike
Except for the competing for conference championships part.
LikeLike
What can Maryland and Rutgers wrestlers do to match the Hawkeyes?
http://espn.go.com/college-sports/story/_/id/8659823/iowa-hawkeyes-wrestlers-banned-campus-rabbit-hunt
LikeLike
Yeah, he could recruit a better team and have a worse record every year…
LikeLike
Wrestling is one of those sports where that isn’t as important because ultimately all that matters matters is the NCAA tournamenta and nothing will do a better job of preparing Rutgers (& Maryland) wrestlers for that than surviving the brutal B1G schedule.
LikeLike
Just to throw out some added benefits of UVA/UNC. They bring lacrosse inventory to the B10 network. I believe Lacrosse is the sport that is growing the most across the country. With MD and Rutgers, UVA and UNC you have some good lacrosse schools. Not to mention the soccer inventory.
LikeLike
It wouldn’t surprise me if we see a BTN2 pop up at some point in the future.
LikeLike
I could see lacrosse taking over the “rich white boy” segment of the HS athletic scene of the East, Midwest, and West…….I’ve got some relatives who have played soccer at high levels, I’ve watched IU soccer frequently over the years and, I’m sorry, that is a boring ass sport…..and I don’t care what 80 million Brazilions think………..the field is too big and the scores are too few for American tastes.
LikeLike
The problem with soccer is that it has to be played at really high levels to be watchable. HS football and basketball are still pretty exciting, but if soccer players can’t control the ball with their feet, it’s tough to sit through. Champions League is pretty scintillating.
LikeLike
Agreed. At the highest levels it’s great. But everywhere else it’s worse than June baseball.
LikeLike
I think the CIC should also approach Johns Hopkins about an association (sort of an East Coast version of the U of Chicago – and the #1 school in terms of research expenditures thanks to JPL) and also invite JHU to the B1G LaCrosse league
LikeLike
Well, the Big Ten will absolutely start sponsoring women’s lacrosse as a conference sport, since they will have 6 teams in that sport. They will be at 5 for men’s and I wouldn’t be surprised to see someone add that at some point in the future… it’s a relatively affordable sport.
LikeLike
It would be cruel since I don’t think they would consider either, but if the Big 10 has any plans to go to 16, they probably have planted the seed in UConn and Louisville’s heads that they are still looking for 15/16, that would make it harder for the ACC to backfill quickly.
If Louisville for whatever reason goes to the ACC over UConn where does that leave the Big 12 with future expansion if FSU and the rest of the ACC are not interested? I always thought BYU/Louisville were the only good options. If Louisville were off the table who would you pair with BYU? The West doesn’t have good options, Boise State I don’t think will ever get an invite, no matter how good they are. No good options in CUSA, Big East… Central or South Florida? … that’s far from ideal.
LikeLike
I don’t think it’s any secret to anyone that the Big Ten and SEC are looking to go to 16.
16 is a way easier organization than 14.
4 pods of 4 teams (with 1 or 2 crossovers) means that you essentially get to play everyone in the conference every 2 or 3 years.
Not so for a 14 team conference with 2 divisions where you might miss certain teams for several years longer.
It takes a bit of time to accept, but 16 is a much more natural configuration than 14; it’s like the inert gases on the periodic table.
LikeLike
zeek,
“I don’t think it’s any secret to anyone that the Big Ten and SEC are looking to go to 16.
16 is a way easier organization than 14.
4 pods of 4 teams (with 1 or 2 crossovers) means that you essentially get to play everyone in the conference every 2 or 3 years.
Not so for a 14 team conference with 2 divisions where you might miss certain teams for several years longer.
It takes a bit of time to accept, but 16 is a much more natural configuration than 14; it’s like the inert gases on the periodic table.”
You’re making the huge assumption that the B10 is willing to do pods. If not, 14 trumps 16 every time. Also, you can do pods with 14 just fine (2 pods of 3, 2 pods of 4). People like 16 for the symmetry, but it isn’t really better.
LikeLike
Two problems with U Conn, from a BIG perspective…..a little small enrollment wise, and non-AAU status….
LikeLike
All of you saying that the SEC would prefer VT over UVA are way off. Everything I’ve heard is that the SEC would only take VT if they can’t get UVA. The SEC and B1G are in direct competition for UVA if future expansion happens. There are reasons for UVA to consider both conferences.
UVA fans prefer the SEC. Culturally/regionally, Virginia is a southern state.
But the Big Ten is stronger academically.
So the question for UVA is can they be satisfied with the academic block of
Virginia/North Carolina/Vanderbilt/Florida/Missouri/Texas A&M/Georgia
And I think it’s likely that the SEC would get UNC if they can get UVA. That’s 7 pretty good schools. Is that good enough?
Or do they need:
Northwestern/Michigan/Wisconsin/Penn State/Illinois/Minnesota/Rutgers/Maryland/Ohio State/Indiana/Purdue/Michigan State/Iowa
That will be their decision, if they choose to leave the ACC.
LikeLike
@Andy – Well, I’ll agree with you on that one. UVA is a big-time prize for both the SEC and Big Ten.
LikeLike
I agree that the SEC could end up with UNC and VA….that would put the BIG in a real bind, as VA Tech is a little too hokie for BIG 10 tastes, and is non-AAU…also, NC State doesn’t fit–everyone sees them and Va Tech as SEC……in that event would the BIG make (another) run at ND and/or MO and/or U Conn?
LikeLike
If UVA and UNC went to the SEC, then presumably FSU and Clemson leave, and ND is in play. At this point I wonder if the B1G just sits and waits to see if the ACC is unstable enough to smoke out ND. If not, they can still work on a few ACC schools that would not cause the league to collapse.
LikeLike
NCSU is actually very close to AAU status, and VTech isn’t far behind. The _perception_ of those 2 schools trails their actual academic standing, however.
One thing to keep in mind is that the B10 has been adding mostly large (UMD) & gigantic (PSU & Rutgers) public schools (the other one was a king in football). This keeps with the strategy of growing its own fanbase, so that even if B10 football is down in the doldrums, they would still have lots of loyal viewers and fans.
Now that UMD is taken, FSU is significantly bigger than anyone else in the ACC. NCSU & VTech are next in size, and while UNC is close in size to NCSU, UVa isn’t (& neither are GTech and Miami).
LikeLike
I’ll second that Andy.
– Wahoowa!
LikeLike
If it was my call. I’d prefer to assuage the concerns of the Alumni/Fans vs. the faculty.
UVA probably would only consider Vanderbilt a peer in the SEC, in the B1G it would include Northwestern, Michigan, Wisconsin, and Illinois.
Going B1G at least gets you a narrative that academics still count with the CIC and University of Chicago association. With the SEC, there is no plausible narrative, its just a money grab.
LikeLike
yes, but I agree with your first sentence…..the really big donors will decide where the schools go……but we have to remember that there are academic donors as well as sports donors………
LikeLike
As I’ve stated on this board, as a UVA alum, I much prefer the B10 to SEC. But I’m biased as I come from a B10 family. You can make arguments for both conferences. UVA is more similar to the Wisc, Mich, and NW in terms of academics. But as an institution with alums, UVa may affiliate closer with southern schools. That being said, after VA, UVa’s top out-of-state enrolles are from NY and NJ. Further, NOVA doesn’t really fit with the south any more and that is where most of UVA’s students come from.
If it was me, I’d lean more towards the academics. Plus I think we would be able to compete better in football in the B10. Though in bball, we might be able to compete better in SEC.
Further, I think B10 offers the most money, at least for now. Its possible in the long run, it is even or behind.
At the end, I think most people, including alums, would identify UVA as one of the top public schools in the conference (the public ivies). That points you to the B10, not the SEC.
LikeLike
So NOVA doesn’t fit with metro Dallas, Atlanta, Houston, Miami, Nashville, St. Louis and Orlando – where much of the SEC students come from? I think you guys overestimate this aspect and want to view the SEC as the deep south and overlook the large cities in the SEC, which are very similar to NOVA and Charlotte. More so than Chicago, Detroit or Newark/NY.
LikeLike
What? I’m calling BS on this.
DC/Nova is more like SEC cities than Big Ten cities? You realize DC is made up of considerable amount of midwest and east coast (north of DC) transplants as well as southerners…The difference in culture from Nova to the Virginia-NC border is considerable.
I’m sitting in Arlington right now and the two biggest crowds at bars are Hokies and Nittany Lions. After that, Virginia, then huge spots of Michigan and Ohio State fans
Also, I’m not even sure how you’re classifying these cities. Did you just annex St. Louis as ‘southern’ because Missourah has been in the SEC for a year? Did you conveniently forget the entire states of South Carolina, Alabama, and Mississippi when comparing culture? And Miami is now southern?…Miami/FTL is essentially New York’s sixth borough.
LikeLike
Ted – Mizzou IS in the SEC now so St. Louis is an SEC city. Not sure what is confusing about that. My point is the SEC has large metro areas included in its footprint and the populations that reside in those cities do not differ greatly from NOVA.
LikeLike
StL is closer to Chicago than any southern city, just like NoVa is closer to Philly or Baltimore than any city in the SEC south of Missouri.
LikeLike
So NoVa would be an outlier in the SEC, just like StL is now.
LikeLike
You’re focusing on location vs. the culture of the people who reside in those cities. The difference between residents of ATL and NOVA is minor.
LikeLike
Uh, no, I’m focusing on the culture. The difference in culture between DC/NoVa & Baltimore is miniscule compared to the difference in culture betwee DC/NoVa & Atlanta, just as the difference in culture between StL & Chicago is miniscule compared to the difference in culture between StL & Memphis.
LikeLike
Of course Baltimore since it is the same metroplex. What about compared to Detroit or Chicago?
LikeLike
NoVa? When I visited & stayed in Arlington, it didn’t seem much different from the inner suburbs of Chicago or St. Louis.
NoVa’s quite ethnically mixed now, with a decent amount of Catholics & German ancestry evidently being most prevalent there: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_Virginia
Politically, it’s quite progressive.
LikeLike
The UVA message boards are one that I haven’t been keeping track of, so I don’t know exactly what their fan preference is in regards to conferences. But I would think that they would be a lot more accepting of the B1G than would the UNC fans (whose website I have been monitoring).
The UNC fans seem to be pretty heavily in favor of the SEC than the B1G for a number of different reasons which have been stated previously (one that hasn’t been mentioned much though is their fear that NCST could surpass them in athletics (especially football) if they went to the SEC instead).
I’m sure that the SEC would prefer UVA over VT, but I think settling on VT won’t be near as hard as having to settle on NCST over UNC. I think the SEC would jump for joy if they ended up with UNC & VT. But settling on VT & NCST would truely be just that in their eyes (although they’ll still take them).
LikeLike
I don’t ever look at UVA message boards. But I doubt there would be an overwhelming consensus either way. I can see a strong contingent wanting the SEC, a strong contingent wanting the B10 and the remainder favoring the status quo, with no contingent outpacing the others.
For UNC, I would think the B10 contingent would be much smaller.
While UNC considers itself and is a very good public school, its in-state/out-state student ratio is much higher than UVAs (I think). That likley plays a key role, along with all the other reasons why it may be a better fit with the SEC than B10.
Frankly, I think UNC could make either conference work.
But I would be dissapointed if UVA ended up in the SEC. I just think it makes too much sense for UVA to go to B10 and VT to go to SEC. Both schools are happy, and both conferences are happy, and state of VA is happy.
I don’t want UVA to end up being a Vandy doormat in the SEC. I’ll take the $ and the B10.
LikeLike
You get the $ either way.
LikeLike
Perception is important as well. Even though there is are great acedemic institutions in the SEC, there is the perception of it being a football only conference. The BIG has a much better acedemic image. All of times perception trumps reality in people’s decisions, especially powerful ones.
LikeLike
The SEC would need to sell UVA and UNC on the idea that they are building a new conference that is serious about academics. They would be adding 4 AAU schools (Missouri, A&M, UVA, and UNC) to the two that the SEC already had (Florida and Vandy), with Georgia currently appying for AAU membership with a pretty good chance at getting it in the near future. They also just set up the SEC Academic Consortium, which long run could become a CIC of the south.
When the SEC recruited Missouri, if you remember it took months for Missouri to accept. This was how the SEC sold Missouri: with the promise of a conference that was going to be serious abut academics moving forward.
They’ve also instituted stricter academic standards on athletics, which will probably end up hurting them long term on the field, but it’s where they’re trying to move to in the future.
The SEC has been copying the Big Ten a lot lately. Soon they’ll have their own network too.
I’m sure a major goal is to get some academic powerhouses to give the league some of the academic oomph that the Big Ten has.
LikeLike
The conferences have been copying each other when you really think about the past 20 years. It’s been a game of risk where they eye one another and shift pieces here and there.
LikeLike
It’s been tough for me to accept, but now that the Big 10 is at 14, it is looking way to hard to manager. 16 would be easier… a lot easier. I guess it is up to the SEC and Big 10 to push the ACC over the edge and then the Big 12 can maybe grab the scraps. They actually may end up with some nice scraps, but I agree with Frank, the Big 12 TV package is not enticing enough for teams to leave the ACC, but the SEC and Big 10’s may.
LikeLike
When the Big12 is ready to play ball I believe it will have a willing partner in Fox to help it justify expansion.
LikeLike
Lets say the Big 10 and SEC go to 16 by grabbing ACC teams, and the Big 12 sweeps in to grab others to go to 16. Who gets left to go back to the Big East or start a new ACC? SEC, Big 10, and Big 12 only need 10, that would leave 3, and I could see Louisville being grabbed by the Big 12, so that could leave 4 sad teams. Who would they be?
LikeLike
Duke – they are a basketball school.
Miami – lousy alumni support, a once strong brand built on past accomplishments through shady payments.
BC – private school in an area that just doesn’t draw a lot of college support
LikeLike
Oh and Wake too.
LikeLike
I said it before – I’ll say it again…..the Pac really screwed up not taking the OK schools when they had the chance to start last year. Most upsetting thing is that Scott wanted it, but the presidents shot him down after they got the new TV contract done.
They needed to continue to put their trust in Scott as he led them successfully through expansion and the new TV deal vs reverting back the Tom Hansen mindset of thinking.
If conf realignment armageddon continues…..everyone will be sitting at 16 and the Pac will remain at 12 (and have them have the look again as the weakest of the Big 5) because at the end of the day, it still only makes sense to expand if you can include Texas and/or OK. Without them – nobody is worth while geographically.
LikeLike
I agree that the OK twins would have been a great ad to the PAC. However, the flip side is, that OK needs Texas, not the other way around. What is to say that, once OK left the conference that Texas was sure to follow at some point? I am not sure that is necessarily true.
The reverse would certainly be true. If Texas went to the PAC, OK would certainly follow. Don’t misunderstand though, I think they should have done it, but more for adding one of the few remaining Kings out there, the Sooners.
LikeLike
I agree – you take OU on king status alone – scheduling be damned. Plus you may get UT eventually in the process…albeit maybe down the road. Now they will be the west coast conference stuck at 12 while there are 2/3 other super conferences at 16.
LikeLike
Why in the world does OU need UT? They managed just fine without them for a century.
LikeLike
While they weren’t in the same conference they WERE playing every season. TX is critical
to Oklahoma recruiting. I’m not saying that Oklahoma would shrivel up and die if the musical chairs stopped with them in another conference just pointing out why the relationship is important to OK.
LikeLike
They could have just continued the RRR OOC as it was for 8 decades. Texas’ AD had already said that had Oklahoma left Texas would have pressed the Sooners to continue the playing in Dallas every year (he specifically noted that the OU game was a priority but that A&M was not).
The RRR is literally the most valuable regular season game in all of college football (Forbes actually did a study a couple years ago), and neither side would want to give that up.
Plus, its not like some kid in north Texas is going to suddenly forget that there is an elite FB program in Norman just because OU is not in the same conference as Texas…
LikeLike
Both sides have benefitted from being in the same conference.
That said, Michigan/Ohio St. is more likely to go away than Texas/OU. That game is critical for season ticket sales and donations as well as all its other benefits. For a long time you could get better tickets on the street cheaper than through the school (as a whole-individual games might cost more), but you couldn’t get OU tickets. It was a big incentive to get season tickets.
LikeLike
Eh – I don’t really care, but I’m not sure why any school would want to be part of the P10. Talk about a non-cultulral fit. I’m sure the money would have been good, but I think the timezone would have been problematic. But not an alum, not a resident, so I just don’t know.
LikeLike
It wasn’t Scott’s fault that dissolved.
Blame that more on Oklahoma. Oklahoma ran a gambit on Texas and lost. Texas bet that Oklahoma wouldn’t be willing to go through with it and that it was a bluff.
It ended up being a bluff.
LikeLike
I don’t think it was Scott’s fault either, but I always assumed it was the PAC presidents who over ruled Scott. Oklahoma was ready to go but Colorado, Utah, Staford, Cal and the Arizona schools weren’t willing to give up an annual game in LA unless they also got Texas (Colorado’s president indicated CU might have voted no even if they got Texas as part of the deal).
When Boren found out the deal fell through he put together a rushed press conference so he could get his demands public before everyone found out what happened and he lost all his leverage.
LikeLike
I agree with you. Boren’s comments sounded like face saving. That’s why I think San Diego St. actually has a shot if the Pac 12 ever does expand. It gives those not with USC and UCLA southern California access and help get votes for #s13-15.
LikeLike
Yeah, and I will add that the fact virtually the exact same scenario played out 12 months later (when Scott told Jim Delany for months that he had votes to institute the PAC-B1G Alliance only to come up short when it mattered) is further evidence that Scott got overruled. (Also that no one should ever trust Larry Scott)
LikeLike
Frug:
Is the presidents failure to see (or a couple of them reneging on) Delaneys and Scott’s vision really a reason to not trust Scott?
Do you know for sure how the OU deal actually ended?
LikeLike
Bullet:
Big12 going to add UCF so both divisions get Fla access? Far more likely than a 5th CA school in the PAC.
LikeLike
@ccrider55
No, I don’t know for sure what happened in the PAC-OU deal, but based on the evidence available evidence it looks more like Scott got overruled than Oklahoma walked away. I always assumed that Scott made his late night announcement because he wanted to try and get ahead of David Boren so people wouldn’t think he got played for the second year in row (Texas used the threat of going west to get their TV deal).
That said, I could certainly could be wrong.
As for not trusting Larry Scott, keep in mind two things:
1. You shouldn’t rely on someone who has proven he can’t deliver votes.
2. He has admitted lying in the past. Originally he stated that the 2010 PAC raid blew up because Texas politicians were forcing the PAC to take Baylor (which did not happen) and had nothing to do with Texas’ desire to have their own TV network. (Presumbly he didn’t want people to think he had been played).
Months later he gave and interview admitting that it was Texas desire to have their own TV that killed the deal.
Now, Larry Scott is hardly the only person who lies in realignment scenarios (pretty much everyone does) he just tends to be more blatant about it.
LikeLike
FWIW the Cali 4 would definitely try & block the inclusion of another in-state school, especially it is a ‘State’ instead of a ‘Cal’. Now if my alma mater (UCSD) can just get the ultimate frisbee team up to Div 1 standards….
LikeLike
I don’t think the presidents overruling Scott would necessitate an after 11:30pm ET by Scott to announce it. It did give UT a extra days notice before the B12 meetings as to their standing regarding bargaining with OU. To me this makes the most reasonable explanation.
LikeLike
For what it’s worth, Jon Wilner is talking about this topic on Twitter and he says it was the PAC CEO’s who killed the deal
Now he could be wrong, but I tend to agree with him
LikeLike
And this too
LikeLike
Wilner was sure OU was in until the sudden, night time announcement. He reported changing sentiment long before B1G/PAC deal collapsed. Quite different.
I’ve begun to think of Wilner along the lines of Chip, only not nearly as good at it. He may have been used for a while, but not so much now. I think he is now guessing, like the rest of us.
LikeLike
Boren and Oklahoma acted pretty sure they were in until all of the sudden they weren’t as well. I have little doubt in my mind that Scott wanted OU/OSU and the Pac-12 Presidents shot it down based largely on OSU.
LikeLike
Nos:
So when the BOR gives Boren authority why is his first move to secretly meet with UT prior to B12 meetings, rather than begin the process to exit, as those who actually left did? Once more, for old times sake? What motivations would the presidents have to allow this to continue, and then end it suddenly in the night? Sounds like someone discovered they were being used and attempted to reverse the effect of that use as quickly as possible. UT, you’re welcome.
LikeLike
I’m with ccrider55 on this one.
To me, Oklahoma ran a power play on Texas and when their bluff was exposed to the Pac-12, the Pac-12 tried to save face publicly by rushing out in front and “voting” against expansion.
That episode about OU/OSU going to the Pac-12 was all an Oklahoma bluff that the Pac-12 realized when Oklahoma started to get egg on their face.
LikeLike
I would imagine that Swofford is asking schools for a GOR about now….does anyone have any opinion on whether or not her gets it?
I would imagine he tried before, and they ended up with the huge buyout instead.
LikeLike
He’s definitely going to ask, but the only way he gets it is if it’s rammed down the throats of some of the schools like FSU and Clemson.
If he does that, they may panic and try to leave immediately.
LikeLike
No mechanism to ram this down the throat of anyone. It’s a question of property rights. FSU & Clemson have to willingly sign them over. Totally different deal than voting through an exit fee over two dissenters.
Florida State is not signing their media over to anyone. Will not happen.
LikeLike
Not going to get it from FSU, which would make the whole exercise futile.
LikeLike
WVU board claiming he is working on it.
LikeLike
If FSU wasn’t willing to vote for upping the exit fees I can’t possibly imagine they would sign a GOR.
LikeLike
In the end, I think all schools will end up in a power conference, but I’m not sure it will be 4 or 5 power conferences. Here is how I look at the schools who are not already in the B10, SEC, or P12. There isn’t enough space for 4 16 conferences (this would mean there are 18 spots available). So there will either need to be a 5th “major” conference or another conference will need to have more than 16 tream.
Schools that are safe because they move the needle: Texas, FSU, ND, OK
Schools that are safe because of geographic location and prestige: UVA, UNC
Schools that are safe because of geographic location and football: VT, GT
Schools that are safe because they must ultimately be taken care of from a political perspective: Kansas, WV
Schools that are safe simply because they are attached to schools that matter in this environment: Ok St, Nc St, TT, KSt
Schools that have the most to lose, but are probably safe because they have political clout and other intangibles to be saved: Iowa State, Clemson, Pitt
I think all the schools above will either be saved or will be independent. BYU will probably be on that list to as an independent. The schools below have the most to lose and will likely end up in a conference other than the power 5.
Schools that have most to lose Miami, Boston College, Wake Forest, Louisville, TCU, Baylor, UConn, Duke
In the end politics will save the big state schools (other than UConn, though perhaps them too). The private schools have the most to lose. Miami, BC and Duke are the ones who could be on the outside looking in.
LikeLike
The way this is going I could see a 37 team Big 10 and a 41 team SEC with about 24 teams in both conferences.