NCAA Conference Realignment & Expansion Message Boards
NCAA Map

Discussions by Conference:
  It is currently Tue Sep 23, 2014 9:25 am

Help support CollegeSportsInfo.com by shopping

All times are UTC - 5 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 1034 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 56, 57, 58, 59, 60, 61, 62 ... 69  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Thu Dec 05, 2013 2:37 pm 
Offline
Senior
Senior

Joined: Sun Jun 11, 2006 9:04 pm
Posts: 396
Agree. Cannot see why would the B1G, ACC and/or the SEC would cooperate to deliver the B12's most desirable schools to the PAC12.
The B1G, allegedly, implied by the former Ohio St. President, was frustrated with the SEC in not cooperating last year so the B1G could extract it's most preferred schools from the ACC.

The B12 created their GoR before the ACC did theirs'. If most of these B12 schools foresaw going elsewhere, then why sign-on to it and then a few years later go through the expense, lawsuits, and hassles in an attempt to escape from it? They all look stuck together whether they want to or not. Texas or anyone else in the B12 is not going to jump somewhere, even with others, and relinquish their broadcasting and related earnings for the duration of the GoR agreement. If there is a flaw/loophole in the GoR agreement, then maybe somebody shall take the chance to leave. Even that would be subject to costly litigation. Also with GoRs', the networks that deliver a departed schools' games, can be sued to collect the revenue. So it would not be just the school, or the new conference, subject to litigation, but the broadcasting source as well.

Presumably, the ACC is counting on a future full commitment from Notre Dame then they would go to 16, pending nobody of their own exited. That deal with ND was a mistake because ND got all they wanted from it, and the ACC is left hoping. It cost them Maryland, but hey, Louisville benefited.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Dec 05, 2013 9:31 pm 
Offline
All-Star
All-Star
User avatar

Joined: Fri Sep 10, 2010 11:40 pm
Posts: 1446
Wolfman wrote:
So the ACC agrees to take mid-tier West Virginia so the PAC can take all the top tier teams? Even if WV and the ACC got over their feud there is zero incentive for the ACC to do this.

louisvillecard01 wrote:
Agree. Cannot see why would the B1G, ACC and/or the SEC would cooperate to deliver the B12's most desirable schools to the PAC12.


Wolf/Lville - The B1G/SEC wouldn't, but the ACC would. First off the ACC doesn't want any of those TX/OK/KA programs. They want programs in or near their footprint. The best programs left are those 3. Also, there is safety in number. The ACC know the SEC and B1G wants most likely 4 of their programs (if not more) and wants to have enough programs to maintain their place at the table. But the biggest reason is to secure their schools in a top bowl game and playoffs. The Big 12 is a threat to most ACC programs not named FSU/Clemson. They already took the Sugar Bowl 1v1 matchup with the SEC, that leaves the ACC the only conference w/o that type of major game and they instead had to settle for sloppy seconds and make a deal with the devil that is ND in order to get it. The ACC and Big 12 are both competing for 4th place in the realignment game, so if the PAC/Texhoma approach with this deal they'd be crazy to turn it down. They could take over the Big 12's spot in the Sugar AND keep their game in the Orange (since they'll have 18 teams) AND have a better chance to land their champ in the playoffs in most years. And as a bonus they make a great ally with the PAC and may be powerful enough to fend off any upcoming poaching from the SEC/B1G respectively.

louisvillecard01 - I pointed out that the Big 12 can be dissolved (and thus dissolving the GOR) with a 75% vote which was the point of the post. Its a fact, check the Big 12 board for the link to the GOR and the conference bi-laws. The entire reason the GOR was signed was for stability and basically to stop the bleeding. Now the Texhoma 4 are regretting it. If the conference is dissolved the conference cannot sue. And I'd love to see the lawyers of UT, Tech, OU, OSU, KU, KSU, WVU, Cincy, and UConn go up against the lawyers of TCU, Baylor, and Iowa State (Baylor's law school is good, but UT's is much MUCH better). http://law-school.findthebest.com/d/d/Texas" 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;

Basically, it makes sense but it may just be too complex to pull off, and I also assume that 18 is most likely an awkward number, which is why I was hoping that they'd grab another school or two and just go ahead and go to 20 (both PAC and ACC).

_________________
Fan of the Big 12 Conference, the Mountain West Conference and...
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Jan 05, 2014 7:32 pm 
Offline
Freshman
Freshman
User avatar

Joined: Tue Oct 01, 2013 8:08 pm
Posts: 10
I disagree. The strategy of "help the PAC get the top teams from the B12 so the B1G or SEC doesn't get them" is not a good strategy for the ACC.

The ACC has had several opportunities to add WVU and didn't. WVU has some good programs but they don't add any value to the ACC.

The ACC is clearly willing to add schools outside its footprint (see Notre Dame).

The ACC would do the same thing the PAC is considering - form a pod of the top B12 schools. Even if multiple (more than 2) divisions doesn't get passed, you realign the divisions every year or two, effectively rotating the pods.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jan 07, 2014 11:00 am 
Offline
All-Star
All-Star
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jun 21, 2005 11:14 pm
Posts: 1016
Location: Ciales-Manatí-Bayamón, Puerto Rico
Wolfman wrote:
The ACC would do the same thing the PAC is considering - form a pod of the top B12 schools. Even if multiple (more than 2) divisions doesn't get passed, you realign the divisions every year or two, effectively rotating the pods.


When you mentioned "realigning the divisions and rotating pods", it's like the old '96 WAC Effect.

_________________
Florida State Seminoles fan for life (mostly on football, basketball and baseball)! 2013 ACC football Atlantic Division champions; 2013 ACC football regular season champions; 2013 ACC football conference bowl tournament champions; 2014 NCAA D-I FBS BCS national champions!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jan 07, 2014 12:52 pm 
Offline
All-Star
All-Star

Joined: Mon May 05, 2003 10:30 am
Posts: 1370
Location: Baltimore, MD
ncaanopaawaa2000 wrote:
Wolfman wrote:
The ACC would do the same thing the PAC is considering - form a pod of the top B12 schools. Even if multiple (more than 2) divisions doesn't get passed, you realign the divisions every year or two, effectively rotating the pods.


When you mentioned "realigning the divisions and rotating pods", it's like the old '96 WAC Effect.


And that proved to be a disaster.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jan 07, 2014 1:27 pm 
Offline
All-Star
All-Star
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jun 21, 2005 11:14 pm
Posts: 1016
Location: Ciales-Manatí-Bayamón, Puerto Rico
westwolf wrote:
ncaanopaawaa2000 wrote:
Wolfman wrote:
The ACC would do the same thing the PAC is considering - form a pod of the top B12 schools. Even if multiple (more than 2) divisions doesn't get passed, you realign the divisions every year or two, effectively rotating the pods.


When you mentioned "realigning the divisions and rotating pods", it's like the old '96 WAC Effect.


And that proved to be a disaster.


It's obviously logical. Imagine the Power-5 FBS conferences about to experience the same fate as the WAC had. So much for the TV and money markets and all that stuff.

_________________
Florida State Seminoles fan for life (mostly on football, basketball and baseball)! 2013 ACC football Atlantic Division champions; 2013 ACC football regular season champions; 2013 ACC football conference bowl tournament champions; 2014 NCAA D-I FBS BCS national champions!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jan 08, 2014 2:53 pm 
Offline
All-Star
All-Star

Joined: Mon Apr 16, 2012 11:41 am
Posts: 1093
The WAC-16 was done horribly wrong. Networks wanted it until the content didn't really produce, and you had that core who wound up splitting to form the MWC who insisted they play each other all the time...because they took too many schools they didn't want to make the thing work.

I think the ACC lost the malcontent of its group when Maryland left. I don't think the WAC-16 would happen there unless it really impacted one of the "Big 3" (UNC, Duke, and UVA).

Wolfman wrote:
The ACC has had several opportunities to add WVU and didn't. WVU has some good programs but they don't add any value to the ACC.


I think it's more a historical grievance than it was value programs. You don't take WVU over Pitt because Pitt's the better academic institution. You don't take WVU over Pitt because Pitt doesn't need to recruit religiously from the South and FL (in other words: Pitt can actually recruit from its own region) in order to run at a competitive level. But on face-value of what each school adds to an athletic conference? I don't know how you ever take Pitt over WVU.

Politics, old grudges, and parochial snobbery...


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jan 08, 2014 4:13 pm 
Offline
All-Star
All-Star

Joined: Sat May 20, 2006 2:09 pm
Posts: 1552
The Bishin Cutter wrote:
The WAC-16 was done horribly wrong. Networks wanted it until the content didn't really produce, and you had that core who wound up splitting to form the MWC who insisted they play each other all the time...because they took too many schools they didn't want to make the thing work.

I think the ACC lost the malcontent of its group when Maryland left. I don't think the WAC-16 would happen there unless it really impacted one of the "Big 3" (UNC, Duke, and UVA).

Wolfman wrote:
The ACC has had several opportunities to add WVU and didn't. WVU has some good programs but they don't add any value to the ACC.


I think it's more a historical grievance than it was value programs. You don't take WVU over Pitt because Pitt's the better academic institution. You don't take WVU over Pitt because Pitt doesn't need to recruit religiously from the South and FL (in other words: Pitt can actually recruit from its own region) in order to run at a competitive level. But on face-value of what each school adds to an athletic conference? I don't know how you ever take Pitt over WVU.

Politics, old grudges, and parochial snobbery...


I would concur that WVU has been on the receiving end of biased attitudes and actions for a long time. Also agree, in terms of athletics, specifically, WVU has generally done a fine job in positioning themselves in recent decades. With regard to the other factors mentioned, WVU just has not made themselves appealing enough, whereby the ACC is forced to realistically decide 'we need them, they would make our conference better, and let's get them'. Notre Dame without full conference fb gets in; Louisville got in; and WVU has gotten repeatedly rejected though they have tried to be a candidate longer and harder for many years. Bad timing was also involved. Outside of athletics, indeed politics and attitudes have much hindered WVU efforts to be attractive to the ACC.

The ACC taking Notre Dame without in-conference fb shows the ACC's mindset tactics in sustaining themselves. At least the old BE had a better excuse, being a real hybrid. Wait till that ND deal starts having repercussions when it impacts bowl placements and certain ACC schools get upended in tournaments and such.

Some of WVU's fan base on the Internet and elsewhere pride themselves on projecting an image of being uncouth and rebellious. That part doesn't help.

The malcontent thing, the ACC has had a history of that. Some had complained much louder than Maryland over the years. I believe Maryland leaving for the B1G was fundamentally about enhancing revenue as opposed to scheduling.

FSU, one that certainly has not been always happy with the ACC, is back in the fb driver's seat. They know and proved the ACC is their route to frequent conference championships and national championship games. Clobber Clemson early, beat over-rated Miami, nail upstart Duke in a CCG, and best a very good but profoundly lucky Auburn team in the final BCS championship game. That said, FSU had the best team and certainly deserved and earned the BCS title. The point, the ACC is their perfect path to get there.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Jan 12, 2014 3:14 pm 
Offline
Senior
Senior

Joined: Sun Jun 11, 2006 9:04 pm
Posts: 396
As to the Card's fb coach hiring:

With an AD who has had an impressive record of good decisions, why gamble with old baggage when you're in a position not to have to taint?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jan 13, 2014 1:57 pm 
Offline
All-Star
All-Star

Joined: Fri Jun 23, 2006 4:25 pm
Posts: 1708
We'll see.

The guy has been successful, up until he bailed on the Cards, and then quickly bailed on the Atlanta Falcons.
Then some less-than-skillful motorcycle riding....

He has succeeded in the past, by knowing how to successfully recruit, and assemble a staff.
Will he have credibility with recruits, based on his more recent transgressions ? Not sure...

I heard that WKU had a clause in his contract that wherever Bobby landed (via early-termination contract buy-out)
would be obligated to schedule WKU for 2 games in the near future...


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jan 14, 2014 12:36 pm 
Offline
All-Star
All-Star

Joined: Sat May 20, 2006 2:09 pm
Posts: 1552
Information on the Maryland counter suit.

Allegations that Wake Forest and Pitt tried to lure B1G schools to the ACC. Penn State allegedly one. Claim ESPN was involved.

Interesting stuff.

http://collegefootballtalk.nbcsports.co ... umor-mill/


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jan 14, 2014 12:49 pm 
Offline
All-Star
All-Star

Joined: Sat May 20, 2006 2:09 pm
Posts: 1552
USA Today confirms the above:

http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/co ... n/4471441/


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jan 14, 2014 7:09 pm 
Offline
All-Star
All-Star

Joined: Sat May 20, 2006 2:09 pm
Posts: 1552
Penn State would be the obvious one. The other? My guess, Northwestern maybe? (WFU AD was once baseball HC at NW).
Wake's President is a former Provost at Notre Dame. But what clout would Wake have to recruit any B1G school?
The ACC guided by ESPN may have had a plan that if 2 B1G schools got lured, Notre Dame would become onboard with fb also.

Adding Rutgers and Maryland may have been more than a new market issue, and could have also been intended to have Penn State more secure in the conference.

The B1G has so much more revenue than the ACC, and the B1G has more prestige. Wonder what ESPN was willing to pony up? The attempt was probably made knowing that the odds for such happening were near unrealistic.

ESPN commentators often act dismayed about expansion while their executives and marketing experts are manipulating much of it.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jan 14, 2014 7:42 pm 
Offline
All-Star
All-Star

Joined: Mon Apr 16, 2012 11:41 am
Posts: 1093
I think PSU is definitely one of them. I think it's kind of weasel-like to toss that in there given the circumstances (not just what might have happened to PSU after the scandal, but because of UMD blocking PSU back in the day), but I'm not very high on how the ACC handled their business, either.

I think the other could have been Northwestern, especially if it helped anything with Notre Dame. Having an Indiana school that claims to be a Chicago darling, but needing an actual Illinois school to "deliver the market" is kind of hilarious.

The way the whole Johns Hopkins thing went down, I wouldn't have put it past both sides to have done some chatting after the announcement. Granted, JHU is not officially a member of the Big Ten yet. No word on CIC yet, either (which RU and UMD are members of).


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jan 14, 2014 9:14 pm 
Offline
Senior
Senior

Joined: Thu Feb 07, 2013 10:45 am
Posts: 209
Penn St is an obvious one.

As far as the other? I, too, believe it to have been Northwestern. The only other option in my mind would be Purdue, but I doubt the ACC wanted 2 Indiana programs.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 1034 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 56, 57, 58, 59, 60, 61, 62 ... 69  Next

All times are UTC - 5 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
 

 

cron




Looking for College Sports apparel? Support our partner:








Support Our Partners: Search Engine Marketing - Search Engine Optimization - Search Engine Training - Online Marketing for Restuarants

Subway Map Shirts - Food and Travel

Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group