The ACC championship game has been a flop, not bringing in the revenues that were anticipated. So, where does that leave that conference now that they have more mouths to feed?

IMO, it makes them more likely to expand. Since the championship game hasn't worked, the only way to regard the additional teams as assets is via TV markets. With BC sitting to the north all by itself & with no natural rivals, the full potential of expansion to the north isn't being realized.

With incentives to act sooner both because of the Big Ten move & because of the penalty free option in the Big East contract, I wouldn't be at all surprised to see the ACC add 4 teams to the north to establish a true eastern seaboard conference. Even if the Big Ten adds one eastern school, that still leaves 4 from the group of UConn, Rutgers, Syracuse, Pitt, & West Virginia.

Adding those markets could be a bonanza to ACC TV revenue.

If the Big Ten expands to 16 would the ACC expand to 16

ACC North: Syracuse, Rutgers, UConn, Boston College, Pitt, Maryland, Va Tech, Virginia

ACC South: North Carolina, Duke, NC State, Wake Forest, Clemson, Georgia Tech, Miami, Florida State

Friar, so right about the ACC championship game. But it seems that the whole "expand so we can have a championship game" is secondary to the primary reason for all conferences: expand to add new markets for TV revenue.

Lash, I actually think that the ACC is in an interesting spot right now. From a business perspective, their biggest rival seems to be the Big East. And a proactive move from 12 to 14 could be a dagger in the Big East. A move like adding (2) schools from Uconn, Syracuse and Rutgers would be a big boost to their next TV package. It would be sad to see that happen to Big East football, since it could lose 3 members (1 to B10) in that scenario. But at the same time, it would reunite Boston College with 2 regional members like Cuse, Rutgers or Uconn. It's the lone positive spin on fans of football in the region, but at the expense of the BE football schools.

If that were to happen, and the BE lose 3 of it's 8 members, I wonder if the basketball schools would pull rank and say "if you want 3 new members for football, they are football only".

Meanwhile, the ACC would be in a good spot at 14...but only if they can justify the move by increasing their TV contract from 67 million to 79 million to break even. Something tells me though that adding Syracuse and Uconn would bump that TV deal up to over $90 million based on those markets being added (and the expected bump in the ACC contract as is).

_________________


@ncaasports csi.com/facebook


Like the new CSI Userbar? Feel free to use it here and any other forums.
You can save and host it yourself or link from here.

Note those comments were made regarding rumors of a move to the Big East, reports that make no sense at all given the conferences' respective stability and financial wealth. The Big Ten does not come up in Yow's discussion, and it's an entirely different animal.

It should also be noted that the U. of Maryland is now looking for a new president after C.D. Mote, who's 73, announced he would retire as of Aug. 31. Depending upon who becomes his successor, it's hard to say how things might transpire in College Park.

VP, many of us like myself would love to see a group of northeast schools all together at the highest level. I'd love to see a Big-16 with Maryland, Rutgers, Syracuse, Uconn and BC. Maybe a new MD president agrees that a move out of the southern based ACC conference the school founded 67 years ago is in their best interest. But thus far the fanbase and admins have not been in agreement.

_________________


@ncaasports csi.com/facebook


Like the new CSI Userbar? Feel free to use it here and any other forums.
You can save and host it yourself or link from here.

Fellows,

Again, Maryland is not leaving the ACC to join northern schools. No one wants or is discussing that.

I'm not discussing that because Maryland aint leaving. Just like I'm not discussing Boise St. to the PAC10

_________________

WRANGLERS 153-55-1 CVFL CHAMPS '04 '05 '09 '12

NFL CHAMPS '29 '30 '31 '36 '39 '44 '61 '62 '65 '66 '67 '96 '10

BW/WAC/MWC CHAMPS '77 '82 '85 '88 '89 '91 '92 '93 '99 '12
['08 NCAA BASEBALL CHAMPS]

Oh my, Westwolf, don't you want Maryland to be midwestern & play Iowa & Minnesota & new member Texas?

Old enough to well remember the PSU-Md series, as one sided as it was. Nevertheless, both have moved on.

Agree, Maryland shall stay put. Maryland in not going to entangle themselves in less secure situation (BE), and there is no evidence BC is going back to it.

If the ACC ever went to 14, then whose available among types such as UCONN, 'Cuse, Pitt, & Rutgers perhaps would be included. Again, nothing out there that the ACC is even considering it.

I sense if the Big Ten went to 16 teams, politics would force it to go in two directions, which means Missouri and Nebraska would take the place of Boston College and Connecticut.

I think your right about politics. Going to 12 is one thing. But 16 teams could really hurt the Big 12. I find it hard to believe that Iowa would be permitted to vote in a given way and not have Iowa St. in the mix as 1 of the 5 schools. I wonder if Penn St. could face pressure like that too. Where all of a sudden, if you expand to 5, you really only have 3 spots (with Iowa St. and Pitt forced to be included). Now it's 3 from Rutgers, Syracuse, missouri, Nebraska, etc).

_________________


@ncaasports csi.com/facebook


Like the new CSI Userbar? Feel free to use it here and any other forums.
You can save and host it yourself or link from here.

Article out of Carolina with comments from ACC Commish who indicates that the league is not currently interested in expansion.Link at http://www.postandcourier.com/news/2010 ... fford_1on1

Article(previously posted in another thread) out of Carolina with comments from ACC Commish regarding ACC membership and conference tv deal situation.He says the ACC is currently set at 12 schools.Link at http://www.newsobserver.com/2010/03/14/ ... r-acc.html

I know Swofford said the ACC is standing pat and the ACC had A LOT of trouble with the last expansion but if I'm him, I at least give a courtesy call to ND to see what it takes for them to come to the ACC.

If the Big 10 gets ND + Syracuse (and with PSU already in), the ACC will forever be below the Big 10 and SEC in terms of revenue.

I'm not sure how it would work with 14 to maximize revenue, but I *might* think about 16:

ACC North:
BC
UConn
SY
RU or Pitt
ND
Maryland
Miami
VT

ACC South:
Pre expansion ACC minus Maryland

Agree to whatever it takes to get ND on board. This means that ND plays 8 conference FB games - all of the ACC north schools + rotate one school from the south. This would then allow ND to still schedule USC and Navy while also having two more games to play with.

Miami is in the north because of the former BE schools and Miami wants northern schools for their alumni. While they do sacrifice their FSU rivalry, it is made up with a game every year against ND. This setup also gives ND a game in Florida every other year while also hitting the major NE/Midatlantic markets (Boston, NY, DC). While this essentially creates two mini-conferences, it does allow the old ACC conference foes to play all of their old opponents every year in FB.

As for BB, you would play 18 games - 15 games against everyone and 3 games home and home (like the BE)

the 4 'pods' - teams you would play twice are:

Pod 1: UNC, NCSt, Wake, Duke
Pod 2: UVa, Clemson, GT, FSU
Pod 3: SU, BC, UConn, ND
Pod 4: Pitt/Ru, VT, Maryland, Miami

I know this is crazy but the ACC should at least think of doing something to get closer to the Big 10 and SEC in terms of revenue, otherwise they are stuck in that second tier.

The post from the PSU fan on FranktheTanks website about a 16 team conference scheduling (http://frankthetank.wordpress.com/ also reposted in the Big 10 realignment and expansion thread - page 44) got me to think of a better system for FB scheduling in a 16 team ACC.

I think that I would go with this one (assuming Pitt over Rutgers):

Pod 1: UNC, NCSt, Wake, Duke
Pod 2: UVa, Clemson, GT, FSU
Pod 3: SU, VT, Maryland, UConn
Pod 4: Pitt, BC, ND, Miami

Pod 1 is obvious. Pod 2 groups the three 'southern' pre-expansion ACC schools with UVa.
I think ND would want to be paired with Pitt and BC. I also added Miami as a concession to ND for Florida exposure so they are grouped together. SU and VT were former BE partners. SU-Maryland also has history. I'm sure someone can come up with something better though.

PSU fan's system: It would be a 9 game conference schedule.

Each team plays their pod every year. You play one other pod for 2 consecutive years and that pod is on your side of the confernece for the championship game. You also play 2 other teams from another POD for 2 years. This creates a balanced schedule over a 12 year period where you play your POD 12 times (6H/6A) and you play every other team 6 times (3H/3A). The conference alignment would change every 2 years for the conference championship game.

Years 1-2
East/West vs. North/South
Years 3-4
East/South vs. North/West
Years5-6
East/North vs. South/West
Years 7-8
East/West vs. North/South
Years 9-10
East/South vs. North/West
Years 11-12
East/North vs South/West

I've always liked some of the 4 division ideas...especially if it means having a mini-playoff the last week of the year between 2 "pod" winners on the higher seed campuys with the winners playing in the conference championship.

My pods are a bit more straight forward:

Pod 1: Syracuse, UConn, BC, ND
Pod 2: Pitt (or Rutgers), Maryland, VTech, UVA
Pod 3: UNC, NCSt, Wake, Duke
Pod 4: Clemson, GT, Miami, FSU

_________________


@ncaasports csi.com/facebook


Like the new CSI Userbar? Feel free to use it here and any other forums.
You can save and host it yourself or link from here.