Article out of Raleigh(previously posted in another thread)comparing ACC revenue to other conferences at http://www.newsobserver.com/sports/coll ... 06052.html
" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
The situation for the ACC revenue is much worse than trying to spin the dollars with how much the league generates in revenue. The bottom line is how much each school gets in revenue is the true measuring stick of the success of a power league.
I understand why the ACC over expanded with taking Pitt and Syracuse when the Pac 16 was concerned the SEC was coming after Florida State and Clemson.
The ACC would look at lot better if say the league remained with 12 schools and say finally replace Maryland with Syracuse for 12 schools. If you hade those type of revenue with 12 schools, then the ACC would be in much stronger position and not at the bottom of the power five group.
This type of issue is most likely why the Big 12 is very cautious on expansion just for the sake of expansion and will most likely stop with 12 schools to maximize revenue.
The Big 12 is making 30 million dollars per schools with ten schools compared to this projections of the ACC with a CCG and one time revenue from Maryland exit.
Factor in the ACC has a leach in the name of Notre Dame that was also required to ensure the Orange Bowl remained an access bowl.
At the end of the day, the ACC is at the bottom of the power group of five schools and the situation does not appear to have options to improve over the next decade.
Things sure seem different from a distance or from the region of a different conference, ....or what does region have to do with a conference when you're talkin' 'bout the Big 12?
Well, if you read the comments coming out of KS, IA, or even OK and especially TX, it's the Big 12 at the bottom of the P5 w/no option to improve.
Maybe I should give more credit the Big 12 Powers That Be, but I didn't think reluctance to expand was a matter of caution but rather one of hesitance and getting left behind. We would love to have Syracuse and Pitt, let alone Louisville who wanted to join in '11 when the Big 12 was happy to have survived 4 departures and get back to 10 (the target # per a TV contract that saved the conference the year before). I think the Cards feel it was blessing in disguise, and that they are better off than WVa with shorter travel distances to larger media markets.
There are schools available in the same region as WVa. In fact, I just looked at this thread to see if there was any interest in Temple as a "bridge" between VA and the 3 northern members of the ACC (before the Big 12 notices the rebuilt football program to go along w/a solid athletic and academic history in the largest market outside of the P5)! I'm not sure if WVa wants them, Cincy, or UConn cutting into their recruiting in OH, PA or the Northeast.
While those schools may be too close for comfort, more fertile expansion in the west is being hampered because the schools are too far, especially from WVa. The delay here may also be indecision, or lack of interest, on the part of BYU. The Big 12 needs to move on like (a) Bronco, and proactively seek programs in the region who are currently on the same level and would be stronger in the P5.
Back to the ACC.: I don't know what Maryland was thinking but it wasn't about Nebraska as opposed to Miami, when they played right into the BIG hands. That conference has done more of the filed in the off-season, to compensate for what they couldn't do on the filed in seasons before and during this decade of realignment madness.
This comment was not meant to imply the Big 12 is making better decisions compared to ACC with expansion. The fact does remain that the Big 12 is making 30 million dollars a year per school not counting tier 3 revenue compared to this article that suggest the ACC is in third place making more money per schools which is just not true. Maybe it an attempt for the ACC to spin the situation to calm fears of the top ACC schools the league is falling further behind the SEC and Big Ten.
Regardless the ACC with over expansion and the Big 12 with under expansion have both done harm to their respective leagues with decisions on expansion and the lack of pushing for a conference network when that trend was popular and networks were willing to pour investment funding into these type of ventures are more indications of bad decisions by both of those leagues.
The Big Ten expanded with Maryland and Rutgers after the BTN was up a running successful whereas the ACC expanded with Pitt and Syracuse due to other issues that were occurring at the time with realignment. The Big Ten had the investment projections to support 14 schools whereas the ACC were in survival mode and wanting to kill its closest rival the old Big East before the Big East could do the same damage.
The point I was trying to make is once you have schools added to your league, you better have the revenue potential to feed to the extra mouths.
The Big 12 is a better position compared to the ACC to try and make up some ground in the every revenue chasing power group of five leagues because they just have not expanded. Maybe it was luck on the Big 12 part or just pure survival for a league that lost four schools in the major 2010 realignment process to remain with just 10 schools.
The ACC can not extract schools where the Big 12 can or will be adding a CCG and potentially two new schools the consultancy firm suggested to improve the standing of the perception of the league.
The final point of this post is you can not discuss one of the five power leagues without comparing all five because they are all in the same boat and all five must keep the revenue gap within binocular views(Big 12 comments) of the revenue of the top leagues if they want to survive the next major alignment process that will begin with GOR expire in the next decade.
I am not sure either of the ACC or Big 12 can do anything to catch the Big Ten or SEC in revenue. The Big 12 does have more options on the table to improve that gap. The ACC has long shown their cards and Maryland is proof the school made the correct decision by jumping the Big Ten when the opportunity presented itself.
Time will tell if the Big 12 can make decisions either through expansion or other means to keep in reach of the top power leagues.
I better understand now your well made points and hope they are an indication of a bright future for the Big XII as a power conference. I see the ACC as a good model with universities that have prestigious academics, competitive athletics in large media markets and fertile recruiting areas, mostly in warm weather climates. In order for the Big XII to be comparable , they would have to expand on a large scale, probably coast to coast, and probably beyond 16 teams. I may like such a multi-regional arrangement in quads/pods if all the above mentioned bases are covered, but there is little/no chance that the current members could agree on one step to take in any direction.