The problem is, the ACC might benefit by just taking what they want FROM the Big East. And by "want" I mean Uconn and Rutgers. Louisville would be nice too, but not exactly the market draw that UConn and Rutgers are, but certainly deserving. After that, if you're the ACC, do you want SMU, USF, Houston, etc? And Boise St. and SDSU? Not so sure. There's so much overlap in markets already for the two conferences.

The Big Ten and Pac-12 arrangement is one that was formed because they have a historical tie with each other. This didn't happen overnight, this has it's roots in almost a century of similarities in academics, the Rose Bowl tie in (remember, it was so strong that initially, the game was not part of the BCS). The bonus is of course that they are polar opposite markets: one is midwest, one is the pacific. Colorado and Utah added the Mountain, Nebraska pushed the B10 limits west so now there is a nice bridge.

_________________


@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.

What I listed was just preliminary thoughts. The B1G/PAC arrangement is pretty genius considering they have a small pool of schools to expand with (Notre Dame, Rutgers, UConn, Texas). My thoughts were how other schools may take the same thought for their own good. Sure, the ACC could add UConn and Rutgers, maybe Notre Dame, but would an alliance with maybe the SEC help both conference's 3rd tier programming similar to the B1G/PAC arrangement. The ACC and SEC already play rivalry games against each other (Florida-FSU, Clemson-South Carolina, Georgia-Georgia Tech), so the conferences are familiar with each other. SEC football could help with the ACC's 3rd tier programming and ACC basketball could help the SEC's 3rd tier programming (Kentucky-North Carolina). Also, the SEC would get exposure in the northeast while the ACC gets more exposure to Texas and the southeast. Together, the conferences would have almost all collegiate programming east of the Mississippi River with the exception of Michigan, Ohio and Pennsylvania. The conferences may decide it dilutes their football (SEC) and basketball (ACC) products to much.

The SEC is clearly in a position of power and has more options than the ACC. They could make an arrangement with the BIG XII (that would be fun) where Texas-Texas A&M could revive their rivalry. Oklahoma and Oklahoma State could play LSU or Alabama. The SEC also could expand to get the programming they want (FSU, Clemson maybe take Oklahoma with Oklahoma State) so they can split the pie in less pieces (2 or 4 instead of 10 or 14).

MAYBE, it could be beneficial to the SEC and ACC (or BIG XII) even if it's not as great as a package the B1G and PAC just put together. It will take others much smarter than I to figure that out. Like I said, it's just my initial thoughts.

One thing is for sure, the B1G/PAC arrangement was ingenoius for those 2 conferences. My hat is off to them.

The ACC has had a bb challenge with the Big1G; the SEC has had one with the BE.

In state-cross conference rivalry games such as FSU-UF, SC-Clemson, UGA-GT, and UK-L'ville (BE), are natural and intense. And, a school such as Tenn. could play regularly a school such as nearby VPI or even UNC, and Wake vs. Vandy has been very appropriate, or even Auburn vs. Miami; however, it gets less enthusiastic when those more western SEC schools would be matched with remaining ACC schools: Mississippi State vs. UCONN, Arkansas vs. BC? LSU vs. Pitt? It's sort of like selling a house--- location! location! location!

The advantage the Big1G and PAC12 have with a top to bottom rivalry series is the tradition founded with the Rose Bowl, and there is no over-lapping.

As to the SEC not promoting bb, and the ACC not promoting fb; that's on the stereotyping side, and does not reflect the expenditures, facilities, promotions, and sometimes rankings, that each render respectively per the given sports.

There are advantages and disadvantages to conference alliances. I can see advantages with scheduling and 3rd tier rights but not necessarily with tier 1 and 2 rights. I think it works great for the B1G/PAC because they have their own conference networks but not so sure about the advantages for a SEC/ACC or a SEC/Big XII alliance, for example, because they do not have their own networks. If the SEC or ACC decided to have their own network, an alliance may help with programming. Without a network,the SEC and ACC may be better off by staying as they are. Expansion may be a better fit for the ACC than the SEC. Like I said, it will take smarter people than me to figure that out.

As far as SEC basketball and ACC football, it's not stereotyping if it's true. Money is great but results are better.

QUESTIONS?

Will the B1G-ACC challenge still exist after the B1G/PAC arrangement starts?

How attractive is the Big East to the SEC after Syracuse, Pitt and West Virginia leaves and possibly UConn or Louisville?

Why is the current SEC-Big East arrangement attractive to the SEC West schools but a potential ACC arrangement not be attractive?

LSU-WVU is good but LSU-Pitt is bad?

Mississippi State-UConn in the Big East is good but a possibly Mississippi State-UConn in the ACC is bad?

Location, location, location. I guess a house in Syracuse in the Big East neighborhood is worth more than a house in Syracuse on the ACC side of town.

Not sure the same thing is being referenced. If it is a top to bottom fb challenge, I could see both conferences scheduling such with fewer complications as opposed to some other conferences. First, the respective conferences need that equivance in numbers, or some teams sit out or rotate in subsequent years. PAC12/BIG could avoid that issue.
As to freedom of scheduling, few have in-state or MUST OOC commitments: Colorado-CSU, Iowa-ISU, USC-ND, Iowa-BYU and maybe USU.

Mississppi State is bb ranked. Playing UCONN (who just lost to SHU) may not be a predetermined-outcome matchup. As to football, the implication is NOT that western SEC schools matched with certain ACC would make for uncompetitive games, necessarily; rather, the incentive to embrace it by certain members of either faction would/could be less enthusiastic compared to others more closer or have traditional rivalries with a member(s) of the other conference. With the SEC and ACC both at 14 and have not yet fully incorporated new members (ACC), and both are highly divisional focused; any top to bottom, ACC-SEC arrangement would be no time soon. Also, any further talk of the SEC adding any ACC schools does not lend much peer cooperation at the by-conference scheduling level.

The PAC12/B1G are building from the Rose Bowl foundation, and have the current, positive circumstances for it to be all clean, void of certain suspect motives.

http://www.fromtherumbleseat.com/2012/3 ... t-see-this

Kind of a strange article suggesting that the Big 10 may try to add Notre Dame, Rutgers, Maryland, and...Georgia Tech? Seems strange, but if we assume that the Big 10 will only add AAU schools outside of current states then their only realistic options are:

Duke, Georgia Tech, Rutgers, Kansas, Maryland, North Carolina, Pittsburgh, Virginia

UNC and Duke are a package and they won't take both so they're out. That would leave:

Georgia Tech, Rutgers, Kansas, Maryland, Pittsburgh, Virginia

I hope Georgia Tech is out based on geography. Virginia or Kansas would fit much better in the Big 10.

If the B1g wanted to go to 16, not sure why they sat idly by this past year.
Everything was fluid, and they could have grabbed some choice schools before they were tied up wiht some hefty exit fees.
The ACC schools all agreed to $20 million, the Big XII has something like a poison-pill, where the school's TV rights belong to the Big XII for the next 5-6 years or so....

The logical 4 schools for B1G expansion would seem to be: Kansas, Missouri, Notre Dame, and Rutgers.
Missouri has been lobbying to join the B1G for years. I think they will now find happiness in the SEC.
KU has contractual and KSU entanglements to leaving the Big XII.

Everyone in the BE is in play. I think any one of them would jump to one of the "Big 5" conferences.
The remaining schools that would be somewhat desirable to B1G / ACC / Big XII are Notre Dame, UConn, Rutgers, and Louisville.
Perhaps the reason that the B1G waited, is that Notre Dame is the center-piece of all their expansion plans,
and the Big Ten did not want to move until they sensed that Notre Dame was feeling vulnerable.
The FB side of the BE hybrid has morphed into a collection of second-tier urban (not flagship) schools.
One senses that this groups is not who Notre Dame originally signed on to associate with.

If the B1g does decide to ponder expansion again, looking at near past practice, the process may take as long as the total time Romney has been running for President, and the theatrics shall exceed the time Neil Armstrong took his first step on the moon.

Landing Notre Dame may not be in the cards anytime soon. If any kind of fb playoff, the system will accommodate a comfortable and special avenue for Notre Dame. The B1g will continue to give ND the games they want.

As to the fb side of the BE, ND has had a hand in the pickings', and it is easy for them to continue to project superiority to the fb group, yet not play them with any substance while the conference reeps whatever benefits come from fb.

ND has multiple choices and can just sit with no BE split and a stable bb home that appears sustained for the immediate future.

I think you should look at a map. Eight of the twelve Big Ten schools are closer to Georgia Tech than to Rutgers. Only Penn State, Ohio State, Michigan, and Michigan State are closer to Rutgers. GTech brings the Atlanta metro area, and would be a great addition to the Big Ten.

Rutgers brings the NY metro area, and Maryland brings the Baltimore/DC metro areas. Both would be great additions as well.

But I'm not buying Notre Dame in the Big Ten - ever. ESPN might want it, but neither Notre Dame nor the Big Ten does. They've been down that road at least twice, and couldn't get it done, so there is no real point in pursuing it further. The athletics directors want Notre Dame in the Big Ten because it would be a great fit athletically and geographically, but the university presidents know that Notre Dame would be a terrible fit academically. All Big Ten schools are research heavyweights, while Notre Dame is primarily a teaching school - an outstanding one, but still. Notre Dame's focus is on undergraduate and professional (e.g., business, law) education; their doctoral program and research facilities are very limited, I believe.

Notre Dame wants to maintain their football independence and freedom. It's a point of pride for their alumni. They especially don't want to join the Big Ten. If forced to join a football conference, I believe they would choose the ACC or Big 12 instead of the Big Ten, because they would be able to retain more freedom - though probably not their television contract. Joining the Big Ten is like the Borg - you will be assimilated. Just ask Nebraska. In exchange for enormous amounts of both athletics money and research money, they must submit to some strong guidance from the Big Ten on governance, academics, and athletics. For example: raise your crappy men's basketball program up to Big Ten standards, hire a new coach, recruit better players, build a new arena - and make it a dual purpose arena because the Big Ten will begin sponsoring ice hockey in a couple years, etc. Now, Nebraska isn't complaining, because the rewards of Big Ten membership are far greater than any other conference has to offer, but . . . you WILL BE ASSIMILATED.

I have no idea who would be the 16th Big Ten school in this scenario, but I know that both Vanderbilt and Florida are AAU members. I've heard that UConn and NC State are close to being qualified for AAU membership, but I don't know whether it's true. I'll let others take it from there.

This would have been my first post, but it looked too much like whimsy and got rejected.

That being said, if anything fuels B1G expansion at this point, it's to get a broader market share to elevate the worth of the potential B1G-PAC agreement. So, it's no wonder that Rutgers, UMD, ND, and GT are still getting play; all bolster newer or broader market visibility. However, even though there's room for the B1G to expand to further saturate "untouched" markets, there's only tumbleweeds for the PAC. It's tapped, spare for Texas, OU, and Kansas, though those acquisitions come with hefty unwanted baggage (Tech, KSU, OSU), and some are just as much targets for the B1G and SEC.

For the B1G, all of this talk about RU and others is very much "cart leading horse." Yes, Rutgers wants a spot at the B1G table. The NYC-proximity is a selling point by itself. Well, Missouri also wanted in. And Pitt. And there's more history with those last two. And Nebraska had about a century of history with the Big Ten before that finally happened. The Big Ten is happy with the twelve they have, and even if Notre Dame is still in play (they always are, although now it's on THEM to approach the B1G and not the other way around), hypothetical spot 14 is more likely to be one to appease the Irish. That's more likely a Service Academy, Boston College, or Texas than it is a Scarlet Knight or Terrapin.

I doubt very seriously that it would be a service academy. I do think that Boston College would be a wild card in B1G expansion. They fit the criteria, would fit nicely alongside Notre Dame, and offer the Boston market (not the sandwich shop) which would be huge for the B1G Network. I see Rutgers as option 3 behind ND & BC solely because of the market. Virginia Tech is a sneaky 4 due to their athletic prowess and national prominence. I just don't see Maryland jumping from the ACC. The Terrapins hold strongly onto their supposed rivalries with Duke and UNC for some reason.

Either way, if, a B1G IF, the conference expands again to 14 I think it will be with 2 of the 3 above. Although it could very well be Virginia Tech and ND.

I think the wildcard is Kansas not Virginia Tech. Kansas is a AAU member, are the #1 school in their state, and they bring a brand.

My top 5 B1G expansion candidates if Notre Dame joins.

1. No One (just Notre Dame)
2. Rutgers
3. Kansas
4. UConn
5. Maryland

BC doesn't have deep penetration in the Boston market. It's a pro town. Lots of Catholics and cable subscribers in Jersey. Rutgers has much more potential than BC.

The last two B1G expansions over a long period was first Penn State, then Nebraska. The first to the immediate east, the later to the contiguous west. Both are major flag-ship type schools with sustained fb success, each having fb polling championships. Outside of Notre Dame which is a within footprint private institution whom the B1G has tried to lure due to their lofty fb tradition and following; it's unclear whom the B1G would seek beyond that. Maybe Kansas or Rutgers would be a choice to even out the membership number, but they don't fit the prior pattern. Maryland and Virginia don't fit it either.
Texas and Oklahoma would, but a lot of complications with that.
The B1G may be in the mindset as many believe.....wait and see what ND does. I just don't see the B1G adding two unless ND is one of them. With the B1G intending to enhance its cooperation with the PAC12, expanding at this time appears to be a back burner matter on very low heat.
Delany (B1G) and Slive (SEC) with their lead/role in the proposed playoff arrangements, may also be defining with this the direction certain expansion may take. Major conferences will not be able to force ND's hand, but could tighten certain screws to make fb conference membership for ND a bit more plausible at some point.

Certainly based on the trends, the Big Ten looks like it will remain the way it is. Face it, we've seen Penn St. and Nebraska added: has any conference in the, what, past 30 years...maybe ever...added two better schools as expansion candidates? We're talking former recent national champs.

There were the talks of schools like Syracuse, Rutgers, etc over the past years, but ultimately, it was ONLY Nebraska added.

so the caliber of school the Big Ten would be looking at, based on the trends, would be a SMALL pool. Notre Dame tops the list, we know that. After that, we're talking Texas caliber programs. Sure, if Syracuse were approached, they'd likely jump from the ACC due to the revenue boost, and might make sense to Rutgers being the 14th. But at this point, I'm not thinking the Big Ten does a thing for a long time.

_________________


@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.

Yup - I just don't see either the Pac 12 or Big 10 going to 14 or 16 unless something monumental happens - the pool of schools they they would draw from is very small.

Both would add Texas/OK
Big 10 would add ND
Big 10 might go for a Duke/UNC pair if the ACC fell apart.