Next round of expansion

[Las Panteras]

I

What do I think the Big Ten does?

1. Declares war on the SEC by adding Florida State, Miami, GT, and Clemson to give it access to recruiting and TV markets in prime SEC territory

2. SEC counters by taking UNC, NCSU, UVa, and VT

- With both leagues at 18 teams, the Big Ten and SEC turn to the Big 12 and ND.

- Oklahoma and little bro choose the SEC.

- Notre Dame finally chooses a conference, going with the Big 10 which now has markets in the NE, MW, mid-atlantic, SE, and Texas.

I think they may stop at 20 teams or 21 with ND but just for fun, lets go a bit further.

- The Big Ten keeps going crazy and adds new markets, Syracuse, BC, and Duke to get to 24

- The SEC has to decide between Pitt, WVU, Wake, Duke, Kansas, KST, Baylor, TCU, Houston

- SEC takes Pitt, WVU, TCU, and Kansas

- Pac 12 takes Baylor, Houston, SMU to gain access to Texas markets plus KST, Iowa State, and UNLV to add new markets

SMF....

You have a few flaws in your new organization. The BIG ten would view Kansas (and by extension, KSU) as far more valuable than BC. IF the Big10 was to go after BC they might as well go after Pitt....neither of which offers much

The SEC would take Baylor...easily

and I would not be surprised if Missouri bolted the SEC to join a far more suitable Big ten

 

[raleighpanther]

I just don't see the Big Ten stopping at 14 teams. Delaney wants world domination. He wants to be the premier college football conference, better than the SEC and I think the very short, 6 year TV contract which coincides roughly with ACC and Big 12 GOR deals coming to an end is an indicator that we are in for some very nervy times ahead.

What do I think the Big Ten does?

1. Declares war on the SEC by adding Florida State, Miami, GT, and Clemson to give it access to recruiting and TV markets in prime SEC territory

2. SEC counters by taking UNC, NCSU, UVa, and VT

- With both leagues at 18 teams, the Big Ten and SEC turn to the Big 12 and ND.

- With LHN's fate sealed by this time, Texas and little bro (TT) pick the Big Ten in part due to its academic reputation but also in part because they don't want to be affiliated with Texas A&M. Also, Texas will feel it will be a big dog in the Big Ten, but just another also-ran in the SEC.

- Oklahoma and little bro choose the SEC.

- Notre Dame finally chooses a conference, going with the Big 10 which now has markets in the NE, MW, mid-atlantic, SE, and Texas.

I think they may stop at 20 teams or 21 with ND but just for fun, lets go a bit further.

- The Big Ten keeps going crazy and adds new markets, Syracuse, BC, and Duke to get to 24

- The SEC has to decide between Pitt, WVU, Wake, Duke, Kansas, KST, Baylor, TCU, Houston

- SEC takes Pitt, WVU, TCU, and Kansas

- Pac 12 takes Baylor, Houston, SMU to gain access to Texas markets plus KST, Iowa State, and UNLV to add new markets

SEC North
Pitt
WVU
Virginia
VT
UNC
NCSU

SEC East
Florida
Georgia
South Carolina
Tennessee
Vanderbilt
Kentucky

SEC South
Alabama
Auburn
Miss
Miss St
LSU
Ark

SEC West
Missouri
Kansas
Oklahoma
Oklahoma State
Texas A&M
TCU

Big Ten North
BC
Syracuse
RU
PSU
Maryland
Notre Dame

Big Ten South
Duke
Clemson
GT
FSU
Miami
Indiana

Big Ten Central
OSU
MSU
Mich
Purdue
Illinois
Northwestern

Big Ten West
Texas
TT
Nebraska
Iowa
Wisconsin
Minnesota

- I know most will act as if this can never happen but it is basically a foregone conclusion that the Big Ten and SEC will expand again. The only question is how far they need to expand to include Pitt in the plans.

Complete and utter nonsense.

 

[Dr. von Yinzer]

http://www.cbssports.com/collegefoo...rove-big-12s-playoff-chances-by-10-15-percent

Actually, the 4-5 percent was if they just added a championship game, it goes up to 10-15 percent if they add two teams and go to an 8 game conference schedule.

I personally think IF they do expand, it will be all east. Cincy and UConn would be my guess, but like you said, who the hell knows.

I think you're right. It makes more sense to go East for the better start times. UConn and Cincy make a hell of a lot of sense.

 

[pittdan77]

 

[Sean Miller Fan]

SMF....

You have a few flaws in your new organization. The BIG ten would view Kansas (and by extension, KSU) as far more valuable than BC. IF the Big10 was to go after BC they might as well go after Pitt....neither of which offers much

The SEC would take Baylor...easily

and I would not be surprised if Missouri bolted the SEC to join a far more suitable Big ten

Delaney thought RU delivered NYC so I would expect he thinks BC delivers Boston since that makes more sense. Boston greater than Kansas City.

Not so sure SEC would take Baylor. Private school, smallish fanbase, bad TV market. How long will they be this good?

 

[CaptainSidneyReilly]

UCincy won't be allow, OSU will prevent it, Ohio is Big Ten anyway. I see BC as way to capture Notre Dame that will trouble turning down the Money? I can see KU but not both KSU, nor VT & UVA. Or OU but Not OKSU why need both? Same with Texas Schools. One state per team is enough to expand now, no longer need two?

The Best Scheduling for 12 Games Year is having 9 Teams per divisions. This allows 8 or 9 Division games, and 3 or 4 other games with 1 or 2 Inter-Conference or 1 or 2 OCC. It makes it easy to schedule in any event.

This is why some Sports Lawyers feel the Power Conferences will go to 18 teams, 2 Divisions Each, and why Pac-12, Big-12 and ACC can't fall too far behind, but may be scooped up by those with Highly Profitable Networks having the edge.

This is why I could not understand how the ACC Presidents & Swofford having sign up with ESPN on All Rights missed that opportunity? Others can differ, but that time has passed.

 

[Sean Miller Fan]

I don't think that is the goal.

Well it better be. The only way, and I mean the ONLY way the ACC survives the next round is with an ND/Texas agreement to come in, and by extension, TT, OU, OKST.

Frank the Tank, who is a semi-well respected expansionista is of the opinion that if Texas had to choose, they would choose the ACC over the B10 and would NEVER choose the SEC and not just becaue of A&M. But more importantly, Texas wants to be associated with ND.

So yea, Texas and ND can hold the ACC together, otherwise the SEC and Big Ten will eat it.

 

[ThePanthers]

Well it better be. The only way, and I mean the ONLY way the ACC survives the next round is with an ND/Texas agreement to come in, and by extension, TT, OU, OKST.

Frank the Tank, who is a semi-well respected expansionista is of the opinion that if Texas had to choose, they would choose the ACC over the B10 and would NEVER choose the SEC and not just becaue of A&M. But more importantly, Texas wants to be associated with ND.

So yea, Texas and ND can hold the ACC together, otherwise the SEC and Big Ten will eat it.

OK.

 

[pittdan77]

UCincy won't be allow, OSU will prevent it, Ohio is Big Ten anyway. I see BC as way to capture Notre Dame that will trouble turning down the Money? I can see KU but not both KSU, nor VT & UVA. Or OU but Not OKSU why need both? Same with Texas Schools. One state per team is enough to expand now, no longer need two?

The Best Scheduling for 12 Games Year is having 9 Teams per divisions. This allows 8 or 9 Division games, and 3 or 4 other games with 1 or 2 Inter-Conference or 1 or 2 OCC. It makes it easy to schedule in any event.

This is why some Sports Lawyers feel the Power Conferences will go to 18 teams, 2 Divisions Each, and why Pac-12, Big-12 and ACC can't fall too far behind, but may be scooped up by those with Highly Profitable Networks having the edge.

This is why I could not understand how the ACC Presidents & Swofford having sign up with ESPN on All Rights missed that opportunity? Others can differ, but that time has passed.

My only argument against all of the B1G and SEC expansion rumors is that there will be way less room for the cupcakes on the schedule. These schools thrive on the easy money, easy three or four wins that they get every year (for the most part). The people that watch the TV could care less as long as they get to see what they want. Wins or losses they can complain about. That's good TV in their eyes. You start making these people watch something where you need at least ten wins to be nationally relevant, they'll quit watching and the TV money will dry up.

Means you need to get schools to the table to play the stooge and take their beatings for the money. FCS cupcakes do that. Other five schools do that. Conference opponents won't. Not for long. Ole Miss is a great example of why that doesn't work. Who thought they would be a contender ten years ago? All of this new money has the back of the pack in these two conferences throwing money around to build their programs (legally and otherwise) like it's Christmas every day.

 

[joeydavid]

Seriously, if you think SMF is an expert at this shit you must have missed his predictions, assumptions and thoughts on expansion a few years ago.

Here's the cliff notes version- he was 100% incorrect in every thought to point you would have to assume he was trying to be wrong because it's tough to be so wrong on one type but I reality it was just the same fringe lunatic dribble as his post above.

SMF has a very wild imagination regarding conference expansion.. I truly enjoy his posts, dude is expert on the network/cable stuff and usually pretty good with expansion, he just seems to take the "highly unlikely" scenarious and move them into the "probable" category and add a touch of pitt-doomsday sprinkled on top..

 

[pittdan77]

Really missing the WVU folks telling us how they hit it out of the park by going to the Big 12 and how Pitt will be a cast-off to the FCS when it all works itself out. Expansion threads really feel empty without them.

Anyone ever check to see if The Dude is okay?

 

[deepelemblues]

is there some reason every conference expansion scenario has to include pitt being put in a terrible situation until the SEC or Big 10 reluctantly takes them in?

 

[Sean Miller Fan]

Seriously, if you think SMF is an expert at this shit you must have missed his predictions, assumptions and thoughts on expansion a few years ago.

Here's the cliff notes version- he was 100% incorrect in every thought to point you would have to assume he was trying to be wrong because it's tough to be so wrong on one type but I reality it was just the same fringe lunatic dribble as his post above.

I said ND to the ACC before anyone else, even saying there'd be an agreement to play a partial ACC schedule though I said 6 games, not 5.

Said RU would be candidate for B10 years ago when everyone was laughing at them.

If it helps, if I had to bet money right now on a "big move," I say Swofford lands ND and Texas to keep the ACC afloat.

 

[pfffiiit]

...
Think about it does Memphis, Cincinnati, UConn add any value as a football partner and the answer is no and nobody is beating down BYU door.

The value of the UConn women's basketball program alone would be a huge add for any power conference - the Women's team at UConn had their own million-dollar-plus tv deal with SNY before the AAC for them. Out of the NYC market. I think that makes them a much bigger deal than Cincy or Memphis.

 

[Dr. von Yinzer]

You forgot the purple font.

 

[paulbl99]

I said ND to the ACC before anyone else, even saying there'd be an agreement to play a partial ACC schedule though I said 6 games, not 5.

Said RU would be candidate for B10 years ago when everyone was laughing at them.

If it helps, if I had to bet money right now on a "big move," I say Swofford lands ND and Texas to keep the ACC afloat.

You said hundreds of things about expansion and movement

All of which were somewhere on blogs shytes all over the Net too

 

[aged_wolverine]

I just don't see the Big Ten stopping at 14 teams. Delaney wants world domination. He wants to be the premier college football conference, better than the SEC and I think the very short, 6 year TV contract which coincides roughly with ACC and Big 12 GOR deals coming to an end is an indicator that we are in for some very nervy times ahead.

What do I think the Big Ten does?

1. Declares war on the SEC by adding Florida State, Miami, GT, and Clemson to give it access to recruiting and TV markets in prime SEC territory

2. SEC counters by taking UNC, NCSU, UVa, and VT

- With both leagues at 18 teams, the Big Ten and SEC turn to the Big 12 and ND.

- With LHN's fate sealed by this time, Texas and little bro (TT) pick the Big Ten in part due to its academic reputation but also in part because they don't want to be affiliated with Texas A&M. Also, Texas will feel it will be a big dog in the Big Ten, but just another also-ran in the SEC.

- Oklahoma and little bro choose the SEC.

- Notre Dame finally chooses a conference, going with the Big 10 which now has markets in the NE, MW, mid-atlantic, SE, and Texas.

I think they may stop at 20 teams or 21 with ND but just for fun, lets go a bit further.

- The Big Ten keeps going crazy and adds new markets, Syracuse, BC, and Duke to get to 24

- The SEC has to decide between Pitt, WVU, Wake, Duke, Kansas, KST, Baylor, TCU, Houston

- SEC takes Pitt, WVU, TCU, and Kansas

- Pac 12 takes Baylor, Houston, SMU to gain access to Texas markets plus KST, Iowa State, and UNLV to add new markets

SEC North
Pitt
WVU
Virginia
VT
UNC
NCSU

SEC East
Florida
Georgia
South Carolina
Tennessee
Vanderbilt
Kentucky

SEC South
Alabama
Auburn
Miss
Miss St
LSU
Ark

SEC West
Missouri
Kansas
Oklahoma
Oklahoma State
Texas A&M
TCU

Big Ten North
BC
Syracuse
RU
PSU
Maryland
Notre Dame

Big Ten South
Duke
Clemson
GT
FSU
Miami
Indiana

Big Ten Central
OSU
MSU
Mich
Purdue
Illinois
Northwestern

Big Ten West
Texas
TT
Nebraska
Iowa
Wisconsin
Minnesota

- I know most will act as if this can never happen but it is basically a foregone conclusion that the Big Ten and SEC will expand again. The only question is how far they need to expand to include Pitt in the plans.

If it were up to me, I would swap Pitt for PSU, then try to make a rivalry between you guys and NW.


I would look to add VA, either Duke or UNC, GT, and FSU provided they push for AAU. For 20 schools, I would also give ND their final shot, and perhaps Texas if they understand they have one vote, and other than that, they need to STFU, and draw their pay check. If ND doesn't jump, look for a big university to add, preferably with a good combination of FB/BB/hockey/LAX.


Whether or not the current PSU allegations are true, they have been enough of a black eye to the conference. That, and I cant stand the idiots on BWI, but any who.

 

[QuitCallingMeWanny]

I said ND to the ACC before anyone else, even saying there'd be an agreement to play a partial ACC schedule though I said 6 games, not 5.

Said RU would be candidate for B10 years ago when everyone was laughing at them.

If it helps, if I had to bet money right now on a "big move," I say Swofford lands ND and Texas to keep the ACC afloat.

You say "If Swofford land ND and Texas to keep the ACC afloat" ......... Jesus if Swofford landed both the ACC wouldn't be just afloat, it would be a 500,000 ton aircraft carrier

 

[Las Panteras]

If it were up to me, I would swap Pitt for PSU, then try to make a rivalry between you guys and NW.


I would look to add VA, either Duke or UNC, GT, and FSU provided they push for AAU. For 20 schools, I would also give ND their final shot, and perhaps Texas if they understand they have one vote, and other than that, they need to STFU, and draw their pay check. If ND doesn't jump, look for a big university to add, preferably with a good combination of FB/BB/hockey/LAX.


Whether or not the current PSU allegations are true, they have been enough of a black eye to the conference. That, and I cant stand the idiots on BWI, but any who.

In one post......you managed to achieve not one....but two of the dumbest, stupidest, most ridiculous ideas ever espoused on this board. And given the level of competence from most here....that is quite an accomplishment.

I know you Harbaugh sheep think you are head and shoulders above the rest of the NCAA....ergo a smug and completely stupid commentary. I remind you, genius.....

Notre Dame >Michigan

Texas> Michigan

If thats not enough........your comment about the idiots on BWI.....while true.....in no way dismisses this gem of a post that reeks of ......well.....it reeks of idiocy.

Dont post here again.

 

[topdecktiger]

UCincy won't be allow, OSU will prevent it, Ohio is Big Ten anyway. I see BC as way to capture Notre Dame that will trouble turning down the Money? I can see KU but not both KSU, nor VT & UVA. Or OU but Not OKSU why need both? Same with Texas Schools. One state per team is enough to expand now, no longer need two?

The Best Scheduling for 12 Games Year is having 9 Teams per divisions. This allows 8 or 9 Division games, and 3 or 4 other games with 1 or 2 Inter-Conference or 1 or 2 OCC. It makes it easy to schedule in any event.

This is why some Sports Lawyers feel the Power Conferences will go to 18 teams, 2 Divisions Each, and why Pac-12, Big-12 and ACC can't fall too far behind, but may be scooped up by those with Highly Profitable Networks having the edge.

This is why I could not understand how the ACC Presidents & Swofford having sign up with ESPN on All Rights missed that opportunity? Others can differ, but that time has passed.

Signing up all the rights with ESPN is not that big of a deal. Having a conference is going to require a partner anyway, which means the rights have to be sold to that partner. This is what both the SEC & Big Ten have done. The Pac 12 started a network without a partner, and you see the results. They make little profit from it, because they have to pay for all the expenses of the network themselves.

I said ND to the ACC before anyone else, even saying there'd be an agreement to play a partial ACC schedule though I said 6 games, not 5.

Said RU would be candidate for B10 years ago when everyone was laughing at them.

If it helps, if I had to bet money right now on a "big move," I say Swofford lands ND and Texas to keep the ACC afloat.

You also said in another thread that Fox didn't bid on the ACC rights because of Raycom. That was proven false, but you just ignored it.

 

[aged_wolverine]

In one post......you managed to achieve not one....but two of the dumbest, stupidest, most ridiculous ideas ever espoused on this board. And given the level of competence from most here....that is quite an accomplishment.

I know you Harbaugh sheep think you are head and shoulders above the rest of the NCAA....ergo a smug and completely stupid commentary. I remind you, genius.....

Notre Dame >Michigan

Texas> Michigan

If thats not enough........your comment about the idiots on BWI.....while true.....in no way dismisses this gem of a post that reeks of ......well.....it reeks of idiocy.

Dont post here again.

I will post where I like, and you will sit there like the lemming that you are, and like it. We have equality in the B1G. I guess that is something your over inflated ego cant grasp. Now piss off.

 

[pittmeister]

I listen to Mark Packer on the Sirius College Football station yesterday and expansion was discussed. He and his guest host both agreed that the ACC was safe and that the Big 12 was very vulnerable. He believes that ten years from now both Texas and Oklahoma would be playing in the PAC 12.

This whole thread is nonsense....

 

[Gary77]

I listen to Mark Packer on the Sirius College Football station yesterday and expansion was discussed. He and his guest host both agreed that the ACC was safe and that the Big 12 was very vulnerable. He believes that ten years from now both Texas and Oklahoma would be playing in the PAC 12.

This whole thread is nonsense....

That's been my prediction for the past few years. Bad news for the hoopies, imo.

 

[Black Panther]

I think you're right. It makes more sense to go East for the better start times. UConn and Cincy make a hell of a lot of sense.

I agree on the start time idea.But to$u wouldn't want to play cincy every year so that wont happen.They might have to play a real road game against them God forbid.The ACC would be smart to look at UConn.But BC wouldn't like that...Oh well...

 

[bubba31]

I will post where I like, and you will sit there like the lemming that you are, and like it. We have equality in the B1G. I guess that is something your over inflated ego cant grasp. Now piss off.

Equality in the B1G

thats funny........

 

[ricflair4LIFE]

I just don't see the Big Ten stopping at 14 teams. Delaney wants world domination. He wants to be the premier college football conference, better than the SEC and I think the very short, 6 year TV contract which coincides roughly with ACC and Big 12 GOR deals coming to an end is an indicator that we are in for some very nervy times ahead.

What do I think the Big Ten does?

1. Declares war on the SEC by adding Florida State, Miami, GT, and Clemson to give it access to recruiting and TV markets in prime SEC territory

2. SEC counters by taking UNC, NCSU, UVa, and VT

- With both leagues at 18 teams, the Big Ten and SEC turn to the Big 12 and ND.

- With LHN's fate sealed by this time, Texas and little bro (TT) pick the Big Ten in part due to its academic reputation but also in part because they don't want to be affiliated with Texas A&M. Also, Texas will feel it will be a big dog in the Big Ten, but just another also-ran in the SEC.

- Oklahoma and little bro choose the SEC.

- Notre Dame finally chooses a conference, going with the Big 10 which now has markets in the NE, MW, mid-atlantic, SE, and Texas.

I think they may stop at 20 teams or 21 with ND but just for fun, lets go a bit further.

- The Big Ten keeps going crazy and adds new markets, Syracuse, BC, and Duke to get to 24

- The SEC has to decide between Pitt, WVU, Wake, Duke, Kansas, KST, Baylor, TCU, Houston

- SEC takes Pitt, WVU, TCU, and Kansas

- Pac 12 takes Baylor, Houston, SMU to gain access to Texas markets plus KST, Iowa State, and UNLV to add new markets

SEC North
Pitt
WVU
Virginia
VT
UNC
NCSU

SEC East
Florida
Georgia
South Carolina
Tennessee
Vanderbilt
Kentucky

SEC South
Alabama
Auburn
Miss
Miss St
LSU
Ark

SEC West
Missouri
Kansas
Oklahoma
Oklahoma State
Texas A&M
TCU

Big Ten North
BC
Syracuse
RU
PSU
Maryland
Notre Dame

Big Ten South
Duke
Clemson
GT
FSU
Miami
Indiana

Big Ten Central
OSU
MSU
Mich
Purdue
Illinois
Northwestern

Big Ten West
Texas
TT
Nebraska
Iowa
Wisconsin
Minnesota

- I know most will act as if this can never happen but it is basically a foregone conclusion that the Big Ten and SEC will expand again. The only question is how far they need to expand to include Pitt in the plans.

Why wouldn't the Big 1011121314151617181920 take Pitt?

 

[Steve91562]

In the next round of expansion the ACC can have Penn State. No one in the Big would cry if they left.

 

[aged_wolverine]

Equality in the B1G

thats funny........

The schools each get one vote a piece.
The schools get an equal share from the proceeds of the BTN. The only schools that are not at equal value are having their checks prorated for the equity buy into the network that the other schools already paid.





You got a better plan simp?

 

[aged_wolverine]

In the next round of expansion the ACC can have Penn State. No one in the Big would cry if they left.

Aye, the people that have been bitching about the new additions have gone back to being annoyed that PSU is bringing bad press again.

 

[Sean Miller Fan]

I listen to Mark Packer on the Sirius College Football station yesterday and expansion was discussed. He and his guest host both agreed that the ACC was safe and that the Big 12 was very vulnerable. He believes that ten years from now both Texas and Oklahoma would be playing in the PAC 12.

This whole thread is nonsense....

People who think Texas will wind up in the Pac 12 have no idea what they are talking about an instantly lose all credibility. Texas prefers East Coast markets where more of the population is and more if their alums live on the East Coast, not West Coast. And its only 1 time zone away, not 2.

Oklahoma could possibly wind up in the Pac 12 but Texas's choices are:

1. Whoever lets them keep LHN and its revenue

2. Wherever Notre Dame is as a full member

If it were me, I'd invite Texas, TT, OK, OKSY, and ND, and 1 more to get to 20 and allow Texas and ND to keep their LHN and NBC deals with the understanding that they dont share ANY ACC Network revenue. Seems like a compromise. So, lets say Pitt plays AT Texas. That game is on LHN but since ESPN owns it, outside of LHN markets, the game is on ESPNews. When Texas plays at Pitt, its on the usual ESPN channels or the new ACCN.

 

[Steve91562]

With all your experience with ND, dating back into the BE, do you think they will ever join a conference? That's more delusional then thinking Texas will go to the Pac, which at least almost happened.

Schools generally change conferences for either stability or they need the money (or both). ND doesn't need the cash, nor will they ever. No one will restrict ND's access to the playoffs. Too much of a media draw, and anyway there's a good chance the playoffs increase to eventually include 8 teams. And as far as stability, the ACC bent over for ND.

No, ND will never join a conference. Pitt fans should know that.

 

[Sean Miller Fan]

With all your experience with ND, dating back into the BE, do you think they will ever join a conference? That's more delusional then thinking Texas will go to the Pac, which at least almost happened.

Schools generally change conferences for either stability or they need the money (or both). ND doesn't need the cash, nor will they ever. No one will restrict ND's access to the playoffs. Too much of a media draw, and anyway there's a good chance the playoffs increase to eventually include 8 teams. And as far as stability, the ACC bent over for ND.

No, ND will never join a conference. Pitt fans should know that.

Actually, yes, I think ND is going to be forced to. I think eventually , there will be 3 superconferences (B10, SEC, P12) in a new division of D1 football so no money has to be shared with the mid-majors. ND will have to join a league or be an Independent in a lower division with CUSA teams, Mountain West teams, etc.

The only way the ACC survives this is if Texas and ND prefer the ACC to the Big Ten. That saves the ACC and there would be 4 superconferences with what amounts to a 16 team tournament

Conference semifinals are Round of 16
Conference finals are Quarterfinals
4 Conference champs advance to Final 4

ACC North
ND
BC
Syr
Pitt
Lou

ACC Central
UVa
VT
UNC
NCSU
Duke

ACC South
Wake
Clemson
GT
FSU
Miami

ACC West
Texas
TT
OU
OKST
Kansas

 

[Steve91562]

Actually, yes, I think ND is going to be forced to. I think eventually , there will be 3 superconferences (B10, SEC, P12) in a new division of D1 football so no money has to be shared with the mid-majors. ND will have to join a league or be an Independent in a lower division with CUSA teams, Mountain West teams, etc.

The only way the ACC survives this is if Texas and ND prefer the ACC to the Big Ten. That saves the ACC and there would be 4 superconferences with what amounts to a 16 team tournament

Conference semifinals are Round of 16
Conference finals are Quarterfinals
4 Conference champs advance to Final 4

ACC North
ND
BC
Syr
Pitt
Lou

ACC Central
UVa
VT
UNC
NCSU
Duke

ACC South
Wake
Clemson
GT
FSU
Miami

ACC West
Texas
TT
OU
OKST
Kansas

I don't know; that seems too logical. Expansion hasn't always has been so reasonable.

I agree that further expansion will likely cut the sheer number of teams out of the power groups, as opposed to just shuffling their composition. As of today, the B12 seems the most vulnerable. They lack the historical stickiness of the other conferences, and Texas is the only linch pin that keeps them together.

I think the window of vulnerability for the ACC has largely passed, though they may lose a team to the SEC someday.

Who knows what the college football world will look like in 5-6 years, or whenever the expansion roulette wheels spins again. We're probably in a period of calm, similar to that period after the ACC first raided the BE. My best guess though, as the world stands today, is that the SEC is just as likely to start the next phase of expansion.

 

[BoogieKnight]

Personally I think the 4 super conferences will form but I think it's the Big 12, not the ACC, that will collapse. It will essentially set up an East (ACC) West (Pac 12) North (B1G) South (SEC) format. Even if it were the ACC that got broken up I'm confident Pitt would land in the Big 12 as WVU's travel partner. Pitt will be fine. Syracuse and BC on the other hand...

 

[Piranha]

I listen to Mark Packer on the Sirius College Football station yesterday and expansion was discussed. He and his guest host both agreed that the ACC was safe and that the Big 12 was very vulnerable. He believes that ten years from now both Texas and Oklahoma would be playing in the PAC 12.

This whole thread is nonsense....

Agreed - Oklahoma will be in the SEC or Pac12, and UT will be in the Big10, Pac12, or ACC

 

[CaptainSidneyReilly]

My only argument against all of the B1G and SEC expansion rumors is that there will be way less room for the cupcakes on the schedule. These schools thrive on the easy money, easy three or four wins that they get every year (for the most part). The people that watch the TV could care less as long as they get to see what they want. Wins or losses they can complain about. That's good TV in their eyes. You start making these people watch something where you need at least ten wins to be nationally relevant, they'll quit watching and the TV money will dry up.

Means you need to get schools to the table to play the stooge and take their beatings for the money. FCS cupcakes do that. Other five schools do that. Conference opponents won't. Not for long. Ole Miss is a great example of why that doesn't work. Who thought they would be a contender ten years ago? All of this new money has the back of the pack in these two conferences throwing money around to build their programs (legally and otherwise) like it's Christmas every day.

Agree with most of your remarks, but I now see a larger problem no longer on the horizon but it no longer just expansion.

It now about the Money Gap of B1G & SEC with 18 Programs having over $100 Million out just 10 Programs in ACC, PAC-12, and B-12?

Money is the Milk that makes Big Programs win National Championships and more lose money due to higher costs out doing Revenues and the disorganization of CFB Non-Profit Power Conferences.

 

[CaptainSidneyReilly]

Signing up all the rights with ESPN is not that big of a deal. Having a conference is going to require a partner anyway, which means the rights have to be sold to that partner. This is what both the SEC & Big Ten have done. The Pac 12 started a network without a partner, and you see the results. They make little profit from it, because they have to pay for all the expenses of the network themselves.

You also said in another thread that Fox didn't bid on the ACC rights because of Raycom. That was proven false, but you just ignored it.

Nope, it is not false, I accept you saying it was the ACC Presidents that decided Expansion 1 & 2 and but they also had ESPN signed with the ACC. I also accepted and complimented your facts that all Conferences including B1G and SEC did it.

SEC also signed with ESPN and took three years to regain All Rights to form a SEC-ESPN NETWORK, 3 years after ACC signed with ESPN!

What you still cannot explain or answer to me is why SEC dumped Raycom and moved on to form a SEC-ESPN while ACC saved Raycom and does not have an ACC-ESPN Network?

I am aruguing that the SEC Commissioners & Presidents were right to dump Raycom and worked with ESPN to acquire all it Rights to distribute without Raycom and doing just great today!

The SEC Commissioner son does not work at SEC-ESPN does he?

The SEC Presidents chose a better way to do it with ESPN?

 

[topdecktiger]

Nope, it is not false, I accept you saying it was the ACC Presidents that decided Expansion 1 & 2 and but they also had ESPN signed with the ACC. I also accepted and complimented your facts that all Conferences including B1G and SEC did it.

SEC also signed with ESPN and took three years to regain All Rights to form a SEC-ESPN NETWORK, 3 years after ACC signed with ESPN!

What you still cannot explain or answer to me is why SEC dumped Raycom and moved on to form a SEC-ESPN while ACC saved Raycom and does not have an ACC-ESPN Network?

I am aruguing that the SEC Commissioners & Presidents were right to dump Raycom and worked with ESPN to acquire all it Rights to distribute without Raycom and doing just great today!

The SEC Commissioner son does not work at SEC-ESPN does he?

The SEC Presidents chose a better way to do it with ESPN?

That's not what I was talking about. You mentioned that you didn't understand why the ACC signed up all its rights with ESPN. What I was pointing out is that to have a conference network, you are going to have to sign over all of your rights anyway. Both the Big Ten and SEC had to sign over all their rights to form a conference network. (The Pac 12 didn't because they self-funded their network. You see how well that worked out.) What I'm saying is that the ACC would have had to sign all of its rights (i.e. Tier 3) to ESPN anyway if the wanted to form a network. The ACC just got that part out of the way early, so now all they have to do is repurchase the syndication package.

To get to your other point about why the SEC dumped Raycom, they didn't. What happened was, back in 2008, the SEC did something sort of similar to the Big 12. They kept all the Tier 3 rights for the individual schools, and signed the Tier 2 rights over to ESPN. The SEC didn't make a conscious decision to dump Raycom. What happened was, they just didn't request that ESPN use a specific syndicator, so ESPN chose to use Comcast and Fox instead of Raycom. So in other words, the SEC just let ESPN decide which syndicator to use, whereas the ACC specifically requested Raycom.

The thing that you keep confusing is that you have this idea that the Raycom syndication package is somehow different from Comcast or Fox. It's not. It's the same thing. It would be like choosing between Coke, Pepsi, or Dr. Pepper. They are all soft drinks. It's just a different brand. The ACC said, "We want Pepsi," whereas the SEC said, "We don't care what kind. We just want a drink."

 

[Old School1]

Teams not on or near the West coast don't want to move West due to limited national exposure.
Just think of how many PAC12 conference games you watch compared to BIG10, SEC or ACC. I watch a lot of college football and unless you're an insomniac and stay up until 3 am you don't see many west coast games.

Even the BIG12 is on the outskirts of prime time sports watching.

If the ACC plays its cards right it should be able to bulk up and be one of the big dogs in the college football game.

 

[CaptainSidneyReilly]

Part I & Due To 1,000 Limit:
"topdecktiger, post: 1279950, member: 3806"]That's not what I was talking about. You mentioned that you didn't understand why the ACC signed up all its rights with ESPN. What I was pointing out is that to have a conference network, you are going to have to sign over all of your rights anyway.
I agreed and complimented you pointing it out! Still you do not explain how SEC dumped Raycom and ACC saved them?

Both the Big Ten and SEC had to sign over all their rights to form a conference network. (The Pac 12 didn't because they self-funded their network. You see how well that worked out.)
I agreed again and I posted the LINK how the PAC-12 is working on that mistake, but still has a Network unlike the ACC? Again, I posted Info for all to see, read judge and thanked you.

What I'm saying is that the ACC would have had to sign all of its rights (i.e. Tier 3) to ESPN anyway if the wanted to form a network. The ACC just got that part out of the way early, so now all they have to do is repurchase the syndication package.
Ok, I accept that too, but SEC so no value in Raycom and ACC insisted on it and one has a SEC-Network and the others doesn't?

To get to your other point about why the SEC dumped Raycom, they didn't.
Hmmmnnnnn, even Raycom CEO Haines said once SEC dumped them the ACC saved Raycom? Deal with it not me this contradicts your assumptions even with what i accepted and thanked you!
Excerpt Article:
"The survival of Raycom Sports hinged on its 31-year relationship with the ACC.".........
The problem was that Raycom couldn’t compete financially with bigger national TV networks, like ESPN and Fox, who also wanted the ACC’s rights. So Raycom decided to rely on the deep, personal relationships it developed over its three-decade relationship with the conference.................Underneath the swaying pine trees, ESPN Skipper asked Swofford what ESPN could do to secure a deal. “It would be our preference,” Swofford told Skipper, “if ESPN could construct something that would keep us in business with Raycom.” “So we did,” Skipper said.
STAYING IN BUSINESS:
Raycom executives concede that the company’s existence depended on staying in the game with the ACC...........Without the ACC, Raycom’s future would be bleak. CEO Ken Haines felt the pressure, as did his 50 employees, most of whom described it as a tense two years that led up to the ACC talks. What emerged, though, was a 12-year, $1.86 billion contract between the ACC and ESPN that was finalized over the summer and goes into effect for 2011-12. Raycom signed a sublicensing arrangement with ESPN for $50 million a year, providing the company with more marketing and media rights than it had before, including syndication, ACC Properties and all digital rights. Everyone involved with the negotiations cited Raycom’s 31-year history as the main reason it was able to strike a deal. “It tugged at me,” Swofford said. “We wanted to keep Raycom as a partner, but we had to do what was in the ACC’s best interests. That we got the deal we got and kept Raycom involved was icing on the cake.”
LINK:
http://www.sportsbusinessdaily.com/...story-With-ACC-Secures-Future-For-Raycom.aspx

Raycom loses Southeastern Conference:
A new 15-year deal between the Southeastern Conference and ESPN puts a gaping hole in the portfolio of Charlotte-based Raycom Sports. Raycom, which includes the sports syndication companies formerly known as Jefferson Pilot and Lincoln Financial, has been the 12-school SEC’s TV syndication partner since 1986.....ESPN and its various offshoots will gobble up all SEC games not controlled by flagship network CBS beginning next year. ESPN is paying an average of $150 million a year for 15 years, according to SportsBusiness Journal....."We’re very disappointed,” says Ken Haines, Raycom Sports chief executive. “After more than 20 years together, it’s a significant loss for us. We were hoping for a different outcome.” Raycom Sports counts the SEC and the Atlantic Coast Conference as its two biggest revenue sources. The company’s contract with the ACC runs three more years......Through its recently extended $55 million-a-year deal with CBS and the new ESPN pact, the SEC will triple its TV revenue starting in 2009-10. Industry experts say Disney-owned ESPN’s deep pockets trumped longstanding relationships between the SEC and Raycom Sports. The SEC won’t have games syndicated by Raycom beyond the current school year, but Charlotte will still play a large role in the conference’s TV operations. That’s because ESPN’s syndication arm, ESPN Regional Television, calls Ballantyne home. Former ESPN executive Chuck Gerber served as one of the SEC’s key consultants on the newly negotiated TV deals. Gerber’s ESPN tenure included an executive role at ESPN Regional Television during the late-1990s. ESPN’s Charlotte syndication arm ranks as the largest in the industry, producing more than 900 events annually.
LINK:
http://www.bizjournals.com/charlotte/stories/2008/08/25/daily4.html

PART II Below Continued: