The principal sticking point for Notre Dame in the ACC is keeping tradition rivalries (Michigan State, Michigan, Purdue, Southern Cal and Navy) on the schedule. Thus, it would be impossible for the ACC to have more than a 7-game conference schedule -- and that might not be enough to please ND.

In the midst of the 2003 expansion furor, the New York Post reported (inaccurately, as it turned out) that the ACC would go whole hog and become a 14-team league, with Syracuse and Notre Dame added to the current group of 12. If that's what the membership was like, you could put Notre Dame in one division, Syracuse in the other, switching them in two-year spans. Teams would play 7-game conference schedules -- the six teams within division plus a permanent cross-division rival (for ND, it would be Syracuse in this instance).

Would that be enough to placate ND? Probably not, but you never know.

No way would any conf. have you play the same cross over every year and never play the other 6. you'd have the 6 others in your div. and same cross over. It would be like the other 6 are in a different conference.

_________________

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]

If the B10 somehow would expand to 14 or an immense 16, expecting the ACC to follow suit and pick up West Virginia, Cincy, Louisville, and USF is quite an assumption. Of those, West Virginia seems the most probable.
Miami and FSU, probably others, would not want USF as the third ACC school in Florida. Louisville and Cincy would receive a lot of scrutiny, much of it negative from various angles. What the BE much needed in 2003, is not what the ACC wants for the near future.
If one or more of Syracuse, Pitt, Rutgers, or UCONN are not selected, then the ACC logically could take one of them (if one available) with West Virginia, or two of them (if more than one available).
The ACC may not just take their cue from the B10, but also from what the SEC does. Any unexpected SEC expansion could force the ACC to act again.
If the BE does fall apart with a mega B10 expansion, certainly any left and prime northeast types would be attractive to the ACC if the conference wants to strengthen its northward appearance and improve it's bridge to BC.

Well said sec03. I'm not sure why the columnists are plugging a 16 team ACC with the leftovers from a 16 team Big 10 expansion. I can certainly see a Pitt or UConn in there - perhaps even WVu (if they can get by the academics angle) but I'm not so sure about Cincy, UL, and USF. Also, any ACC expansion won't occur until sometime close to the end of their NEXT TV contract. It's unfortunate because all of these schools have invested heavily into their athletics. We'll see.....

Why would the ACC go to 16, expanding largely with Big East left-overs ?

Well, we all speculate a lot, and none of us are tight with those making the ultimate decisions, HOWEVER.....
There seems to be some "writing on the wall" here....

All of the conferences are looking around the landscape, and a big WHAT IF... seems to be screaming out at everybody...

WHAT IF - the Big Ten expands to 16 with 3-4 Big East football schools and Notre Dame in the mix ?
Then following that, what if the ACC devours the rest of the Big East, and the SEC and PAC cherry-pick the Big XII ?
What would it mean to have 4 16-team superconferences ?
Woud it be advantageous for the ACC (and SEC and PAC) to head down that path, following the Big Ten's lead ?

I would submit to you, the answer is YES.

Those 4 conferences would dominate the college sports landscape, and call the shots on TV deals, being that 2 competing entities have vanished from the national scene.
At this point, the format of the BCS could NEATLY revert to the NCAA-approved model.
8 teams - 4 automatic bids (guess who ?), and 4 at-large berths (50% of berths mandated to be "at-large") to avoid accusations of exclusion and anti-trust.... (see the FCS playoff structure). The Big Four could hand the BCS over to NCAA adminstration, and still get exacttly what it wants... 4/8 of the total money guaranteed, and in a typical year where the Big Four get 3 of the at-larges, they recive 7/8 of the proceeds. The format is deemed "fair", Orrin Hatch and the legal issues go away. Everyone currently in the Big Ten, ACC, SEC, PAC is happy. The money from this football playoff is huge, and the Big Four get the lion's share.

Will the PER SCHOOL revenue be as high as with the current 12-team ACC, 12-team SEC, 10-team PAC ?
One could make an argument that a network wouldn't feel compelled to up the money in mid-contract if a league expanded to 16. That's the short-sided view. Once the TV contracts re-up with the ACC offering UConn, WVU, Louisville (and I suppose Cincy, NOT USF), they can expect more. An SEC with Texas is easily 33% more desirable from the poiont of TV rights. A PAC with interest spanning the Rockies into the Plains with 6 more flagship schools could draw viewship during afternoon and prime-time hours. They would be much more 'national' and a lot less 'regional'. In short, the money will EVENTUALLY be there.

All the players are looking at that right now, and not commenting, but waiting to see what move the Big Ten will lead with.

tute,

If the big IF were to happen, and say IF the Big Ten went to 16 with Rutgers, Syracuse, Missouri, Pitt and ND...i think there COULD be a benefit for the ACC to try to get crafty with their reaction.

I think they look at Uconn and WVU for 14. But it's the 15 and 16 that could be interesting. The ACC could try to bridge some of it's members and get some traction in new markets by getting crafty. They could TRY to bring in Army and Navy for football only. And they could also bring in Villanova and Georgetown for the non-football sports. It's a big difference than the Big East 8-8 split...this would be a 14-2 split.

_________________


@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.

freaked posted this link in the B10 thread...

http://www.boston.com/sports/colleges/f ... _things_up


Interesting take on the SEC. Writer seems to think that the SEC would follow the Big Ten to 16 with ACC schools. As we know, the SEC does not have it's own network, so expanding to 16 is less than ideal at this time.

But it's worth taking a look at this scenario the writer brings up:

what IF the ACC lost the schools he mentioned (Clemson, GA Tech, Miami & Florida St) to the SEC?

The end result might be a big plus for the Big East schools.

Think about it...what if the Big Ten did expand to 16 but it was with Notre Dame, Missouri, Nebraska, Pitt and Syracuse.
And then the ACC lost 4 schools to the SEC.

All of a sudden, you've got a perfect home for some of the remaining Big East teams.

ACC:
BC, *Uconn, *Rutgers, *WVU, *Louisville, Maryland, VA Tech, UVA, Duke, UNC, Wake Forest, NC State

_________________


@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.

Quinn, do you think they would want those schools since they are in those markets. Wouldn't Oklahoma, Oklahoma St., Texas, Texas A&M be better. I've heard Texas is too good for the SEC academically so if they went to the Pac 10 and TAMU went to the SEC (as long as they still play every year) then W.Virginia could be the 16th.

what do you think?

_________________

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]

Indeed, I agree. The scenario the writer proposed was that the SEc would raid the ACC, not the Big 12. But I think those 4 Big 12 schools would be great.

Although, I could also see Texas, A&M, Florida St. and Miami being the best 4 options.

But for the case of the argument, I just stuck to the Boston.com article speculation with the ACc losing 4 to the SEC.

_________________


@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.

ACC blog article discussing possibility of future league realignment at http://www.accsports.com/blogs/david-gl ... ansion.php

BTW,the ACC spring meetings are next week.It should be interesting to find out if the ACC expansion position has changed.

This was previously posted in the BE thread and should fit here also;blog article and BE MB thread regarding possibility that current problems between UCONN and other ACC schools like BC could keep it from getting as much future ACC expansion consideration.
Links at http://www.bcinterruption.com/2010/5/1/ ... uits-could

and at http://ncaabbs.com/showthread.php?tid=433488

Tony Barnhart weighing in on conference realignment as one of the topics for this week's ACC spring meetings.Link at http://blogs.ajc.com/barnhart-college-f ... e_football

So the question for the ACC is:

Will the SEC look to expand westward into Texas and Oklahoma, or pick off the southern flank of the ACC (Miami, FSU, Ga. Tech, and Clemson) ?

This dictates the urgency with which the ACC needs to formulate it's plan.... wait and react to the Big Ten expansion by picking over the carcass of BE football OR pro-actively invite 4 BE football schools NOW, and sign all 16 ACC members to a loyalty pact with BIG financial penalties for leaving ?

The latter approach could pre-empt the Big Ten's plan and protect the southern flank from the SEC.

I tend to think the SEC would prefer to expand westward into Texas and Oklahoma, for the same reason the Big Ten is looking a the Northeast - NEW TV MARKETS ! (the SEC already owns the flagship school in Fla, Ga, and SC). The SEC may have recently signed new TV deals, but long term they will have the clout to get the big contract that offers Texas, A&M, OU, and OSU the best deal... (but I am just speculating).

Regardless of the SEC's intentions, the ACC could perhaps pull off a brilliant coup by offering an invitation to Pitt, WVU, Syracuse, and UConn right now ! Those schools are all on pins and needles, and somewhat dreading this protracted game of musical chairs. If the ACC said: "we'd love you, but we need a YES from all 4 and you have 10 days to decide", that would really get things moving.

If they agreed and signed a deal with a huge penalty for leaving, the Big Ten would be forced to redirect their focus to Rutgers, Notre Dame, Missouri, Nebraska and Kansas (maybe Louisville if Notre Dame refused). The Big East and Big XII are gutted, and the PAC expands with some rocky mountain and plains schools (left-overs from the MWC, Big XII, and perhaps the WAC).

But back to the ACC - if they like the idea of this pre-emptive move, there is incentive to act soon... namely to lock up the expansion, so they can sell the expanded package in the braodcast negotiations that are taking place right now....

Orlando Sentinel article with comments from ACC Commish regarding possible future league expansion planning at http://www.orlandosentinel.com/sports/c ... 5457.story

I am curious if the SEC will make any moves in the future and go after any ACC teams. I still think the Big 12 and texas would be the top target. But who knows...maybe the ACC makes a move north again.

_________________


@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.