EarthX, here is the link about TTU's political power:
http://ncaasports.proboards10.com/index.cgi?action=display&board=general&thread=1040063124&start=30

Look for Zebbie's post starting out about not forgetting BU & TTU near the top of page 2.

Why is Miami thinking of leaving the BE?Not for anything but money.The nature of the BE leadership is not the main reason they are thinking of leaving.If the BE produces more money or at least as good a package then the idea that Miami will for the ACC is pure junk.The basis of the deal is that the worth of the 12 th football game.That is to keep the amount per team at a level equal to 9.7 million.This is an assumption that is not based on fact but on a weak forecast.Also they are hoping that their new TV package will be much greater.For the most part this is another weak forecast.What does the BE have to offer in reply
1.8-10 shares for bb not 12 shares
2.8-12 shares for for football with a superior tv market
3.a special BE garden based tournament in december in NYC
4.what great games does Miami gain in football they do not have NONEl

The whole thing is a defensive play to keep per team revenues in the ACC where they are now. The ACC risks losing Clemson, Ga.Tech and FSU to a Big East football spin off and needs Miami to prevent it. However, moving to 12 teams a) dilutes the per team revenue without a conference championship game and/or a second BCS spot, b) holds them about even with either a conference championship game or a second BCS spot or c) increases them slightly with both a conference championship game and a second BCS spot. With the proposed division lineup of the NC schools plus Md and UVa in one division, though, the conference championship game will NOT generate the amount of money they are hoping for AND may REDUCE the likelihood of getting a second BCS spot because the other division will be a bloodbath. Finally, I don't have exact numbers, but my understanding is that expanding conferences have not seen their NCAA tournament bids grow proportionately with conference size. Rather, the number of bids has stayed about even. In other words, there may be not even be any incremental revenue from hoops to spread around the larger conference. The ACC would probably be smarter to add Va.Tech and call it good.

Where is Ga.Tech going? Only place is the BE.Will it be better to go there for them ?NO
Where is Clemson going?Only place is the BE.will it be better to go there for them?NO
Where is Fla St going?Possibly to the SEC if Arkansas leaves.Or they could go to the BE.will it be better for them ?NO
The idea that the ACC is going to break up over this is slight.There is a lot of HOT AIR about this.

If this isn't an indication of the efficacy of KingCal's argument, I don't know what is!!! ;D

Obviously, somebody has pointed out to Mr. K what is at risk for Duke relative to NOT expanding. What good is your basketball league when it is going to be left holding the bag looking for potential "2nd tier" teams (their view not mine ;)) to fill the void after the defection of the south football ACC-3.

The North Carolina-4 are going to be caught between the rock and the hard place on this one.

The reasonable answer to the league setup is to use split divisions for football, and use a 12 team for basketball, and decide who plays a home and home and who doesn't, and DOES NOT have to line-up by the football conference.

Example...Football is regional and competitive

North ACC
Syracuse
BC/Va Tech (whoever comes)
UVA
Maryland
Wake
NC ST

South ACC
UNC
Duke
GA Tech
Clemson
Miami
FSU

Better football balance than current proposals...
Then in basketball you allow the 4 NC schools, Md, and UVA to play home and homes with each other and singles with everybody else and vice versa, but run the standings like the Big XII does as all one conference. This satisfies competitive football and the desire to maintain traditional basketball home and homes. 8-)

This model actually makes good sense if VATech comes instead of BC.

I'll give the people in the know the benefit of the doubt about how they'll make the money work. Local radio has reminded us that once all is said and done there may actually be a loss in the amount paid per school, but that it may still prove to be the best available option compared to losing schools, status and money if expansion doesn't work out.

And while I don't think that the three four-team division idea will even be touched, I have heard some GT folks suggest that the divisions will be based on geography with the exception of basketball, which will keep the original ACC 6 in the same pool. Otherwise they expect the divisions for FB and all else to look like this:

North
Maryland
Virginia
Duke
UNC
Expansion #1
Expansion #2

South
Wake Forest
NCS
Clemson
Ga Tech
FSU
Miami

Suggestion from radio show caller - What are the odds the ACC would announce their expansion invitation to 1-3 BE schools while the BE meetings are in progress?!! Brash, perhaps, but an interesting ploy to further deflate the prospects of the BE from focusing on a credible counter offer.

I was here during the Big 12 formation too. and most of his comments just don't follow what I've witnessed.

The Pac-10 wanted TX, but no TX alumnus was in favor of that one. A&M (& TX for that matter) have never had any interest in not being in TX's conference. The two schools would have been interested in an SEC invitation, but their alumni are ecstatic that they were able to join up with OK & OK ST given how most of their FB teams are made up of fellow Texans.

TX and A&M, with OK were the biggest players in the Big 12 formation. In truth, it was not a Big 8 expansion, but offically a brand-new conference with SWC adminstrators all over the their infrastucture. Why do you think the headquarters "moved" to Dallas? Most of the guys making those decisions already lived within 4 hours of there!

http://big12sports.ocsn.com/aboutbig12/big12-aboutbig12.html

The UT-Tech rivalry in WBB is true after Swoopes left UT for Tech amid a supposed "straight-bashing" scandal & her helping make Tech the state's dominant force in WBB.

In MBB, though, it is still UT vs. Bobby, not UT vs. Tech.
That may chance if the program succeeds after Knight retires. Oklahoma has been the Longhorn's biggest BB rival since the Big 12 formed and that hasn't changed.

Every Texas school in represented in state government, but the pressure put on competing schools & conferences is minimal. Prominent Tech & Baylor alumni did kiss up to the Big 12 to get their teams in (Tech maybe didn't need to since they were mentioned immediately in the initial rumors as in for sure), but there was no true political power play on anyone.
Nothing like if the VA legislature required UVA to vote a certain way on the ACC deal.

Maybe its all just a different perception of events...

tigersharktwo,

I don't think there's any immediate danger of Ga Tech, FSU, and Clemson leaving, it's more a matter of where the ACC would be in 3 or 4 years. By then the Big 11 wil have 12 members, the SEC may have reshuffled and added some bigger draws, there's a slight chance the Pac 10 might go to 12 if the right teams were available, and the BE by then will probably have become a very stable conference with at least 9 all-sports memebrs (splitting with bball only schools). At that point, if the NC 4 voting block has continually opposed expansion, FSU, Ga Tech, and Clemson will be downright pissed, and the BE by then would be a more attractive option than it is right now. Particularly if they managed to get ND on board by then. But the main point is, if in several years the ACC continues to tell these schools "nope, no more expansion, ever, we're never going to 12 even though everyone else is," then FSU and especially Tech and Clemson would probably approach the BE. Fortunately it hasn't come to that, but I do think that's one major reason why the ACC is willing to be flexible now. They know we won't bail immediately, but over time a rift would widen and the BE would only get stronger. They're heading that off with this move. Plus they're hoping to make more money. They will, IF they handle realignment properly. If not, the football end really could blow up in their face. The ACC better pray Maryland, NC State, and UVA are up to the task of a conference title game soon, or the alignment most commonly proposed is gonna flop and no on will watch the conference title blow-outs. It's amazing the SEC title games get the ratings they do, since we've already had too many Miss St. and Arkansas appearances. No offense to either school, they earned their shot, but that conference was set up to hand deliver a conference title game appearance to Auburn and Alabama every year, and both teams have fallen short recently (though Auburn may be back at last). The Big 12 is much more balanced, and as a result their title games, even the blowouts, have been much more entertaining.

If the SEC responds to this, assuming they can make any room at all under the by-laws, the ought to go all out and approach Texas, T A&M, and Oklahoma. If they could bump out Vandy, Miss St., and South Carolina, they could reorganize and have an SEC West conf with:

Arkansas
LSU
Oklahoma
Ole Miss
Texas
Texas A&M

The move would be bad for college sports probably, because it would put teams like Texas Tech and Ok St. in a free fall, but it would succeed in putting SEC athletics light years ahead of every other conference. The money would be obscene. Gee, I wonder if anyone would watch an SEC title game between Texas and Florida? How about Oklahoma and Alabama? Not to mention the regular season ratings when the East division will now have a round robin between:

East

Alabama
Auburn
Florida
Georgia
Tennessee
Kentucky

The conference would also be tip top in basketball. Not terribly likely, but if it really is all about money, why can't this happen? The ACC isn't worried about the leftover BE teams, so why should any other conference be any different?

Opinions for and against expansion from one of the current ACC 'football schools.'

http://www.andersonsc.com/and/sp_clemson_univ/article/0,1886,AND_8209_1960025,00.html

They're right, it's a big risk, but there've been some other scenarios proposed that would practically hand a division to Clemson. Their concern is understandable though, it's not like they've had much luck in scheduling in the ACC so far. But even if they get stuck with Miami AND FSU, those two games could help out their recruiting. And every school should consider that the wrecking of the former BE will help free up some recrutiing territory, or at least provide a window to move in on territory held by schools like Va Tech.

Re: the article about Clemson football better off in the ACC as is -

A few flaws with this argument.
a) Miami will always be good, but not always unbeatable. No one ever is.
b) If Clemson is to make any progress towards winning a national title game, it will have to play the likes of Miami and VT. Schedules full of La. Tech don't produce champions.
c) While Duke and Wake are producing better athletes and facilities, they won't travel to games as well as VT. Plus, the more highly touted match-ups you have, the more likely you'll be on national TV. And big wins move you up the rankings.
d) If Clemson is truly a football school, surely they'd want to be part of a FB conference more like the SEC. This means having more than 1-2 good schools.

No matter who's in the ACC, they must do better in out of conference match-ups in order for the league to achieve greater respect, TV time, bowl games and revenue. Clemson, GT and the rest must upgrade their schedules and then win those games - otherwise we'll always be dependent on FSU and the dream of Miami.

I am inclined to agree with most of the article. I am against the inclusion of BC in the mix. A new TV market means nothing to me if the game is not exciting. I would much rather see VT in the mix as the crowds would be better, the schools closer to the others, and not in the middle of a professional sports mecca. Cuse gets in b/c it brings basketball and an average football team. Miami gets in b/c it is Miami.

With regards to OCC scheduling. The rest of the ACC should take a lesson from FSU. Get rid of the 1-AA games and schedule some decent oppontents out of conference.

To suggest that the SEC was set up for Alabama or Auburn is silly. Look at the geography. It was the correct division. Also, if only Alabama or Auburn were the selections, why have a structure in the first place. LSU, Mississippi State, Ole Miss, and Arkansas do draw fans and interest. The SEC West has had more balance over the years, and that is great! If only one or two teams dominated, that is not good. If you are such an Auburn fan, Nole, why don't you focus on the War Eagles backing out of the games with FSU? Buy Turbeville dinner or something!