Page 2 of 26 FirstFirst 123412 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 40 of 506
  1. #21
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Austin, TX
    Quote Originally Posted by hurleyfor3 View Post
    How do you keep BYU and Utah out of this discussion? I think you need to cover the SLC area (more than you need, for example, Northwestern) and it's hard to take one and not the other. UNLV too; Vegas is a pretty big metro area now.
    I think there is a chance that the Pac Ten grabs Utah and/or BYU. The problem with BYU is that they won't play on Sundays. The problem with both is they are plan C to getting CU, Texas, etc. and the status quo, regardless.

    Would you pick Utah and BYU over, say, Nebraksa? That's a tough one. Sure SLC is bigger than the whole state of Nebraska, but there's a reason Nebraska is one of the wealthiest athletic departments in the country. It's not all TV sets. That's a part of it. It's also institutional fit, athletic department budget, and competition in other sports.

    If anyone new comes to the party, it will be Utah or BYU, but they certainly won't be anyone's first choice.

  2. #22
    Quote Originally Posted by A-Tex Devil View Post
    Would you pick Utah and BYU over, say, Nebraksa? That's a tough one. Sure SLC is bigger than the whole state of Nebraska, but there's a reason Nebraska is one of the wealthiest athletic departments in the country. It's not all TV sets. That's a part of it. It's also institutional fit, athletic department budget, and competition in other sports.
    This whole setup strikes me as a collective move by large state schools and a very small handful of private schools. Think NW, Vandy and Wake are on the outside looking in. And the next cut would be us -- after all, this is mostly about football. And Wake's recent past in football is a lot better than ours.

    Anyway, it's quite possible to squeeze BYU and Utah in if you kick a couple of the smaller private schools out, maybe leave out Baylor too or someone like that. I could see Byu not wanting to go along in the first place, but that would make it more important to add Utah, not less.

  3. #23
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Delaware
    I don't think that this will blow up as much as people seem to think. I see a multitude of scenario's where we end up with 5 conferences ranging from 12-16 rather than just four super conferences. I have seen no indication that the Pac-10 is willing to go east of the Rockies and create a three time-zone league. The Pac-10 is in a very stable postion. They are the only game in town out west right now, and their TV situation is pretty stable because of the east coast bias. Texas is the only team out there that would give a big boost to Per Team revenue. Even if they were willing to go that far east, I don't think that they would take the entire state of Texas plus a team or two to the north, its just to cumbersome geographically, and the Presidents would have too many academic concerns about that much travel to allow it to happen. Without the Pac-10 taking on six extra current BCS teams, the four conference scenario doesn't work.

    I think that it is more likely that the Big East is raided and forced to dissolve with not enough football schools remaining. The Big XII will lose a few teams, maybe Missouri and/or Nebraska to the Big 10 and CU to the Pac-10. This will force the hand of Texas, who could either try and help save the Big XII, or bolt somewhere else (it could be anyone out of the Pac-10, Big 10, or SEC depending on how stuff goes in front of them). The remaining BXII teams will join up with one of the other four if they can, but there will be room for not too many at this point. The rest will end up splitting up. One half will go west and form a football conference with the top Mountain West and WAC schools that are left, and the rest will go east and form a basketball focused league with the big east remnants. This will create a scenario with 5 major conferences, though two different ones for B-ball and football.

    At the end of the day, though, the Pac-10, not necessarily the Big XII will be key, because I don't think that they want to take six teams from the current Big XII.

  4. #24
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Durham
    My two cents:

    If they ACC wants to get ahead of the expansion, they should look for three things in new schools,

    1. Solid academic institutions
    2. New markets
    3. Good football and basketball teams.

    For this reason, I like reaching out to Pitt, ND, and Syracuse. (I realize Syracuse doesn't bring in a good football program, but the NY market is very important).

  5. #25
    Quote Originally Posted by OldPhiKap View Post
    Why don't we just pick up four PAC-10 teams, and change our name to the "Both Coasts Conference?"

    Great for football, bad for basketball. Just like the last time.
    If all of this is about the geographic footprint of a television network, how about an alliance between the ACC and the Pac-10 rather than expansion if the Big Ten decides to expand? A network shared between the two conferences would have a huge geographic footprint with very attractive demographics and neither conference would have to reinvent itself.

    Not only would the demographics be good, but the three hour time difference between the two coasts would be a bonus. It would allow wall to wall coverage with everybody playing at their normal times. For basketball, each region’s weekday games could be broadcast in primetime with early/late games available from the other. For football, the Saturday game times could be handled just as the NFL does, early start times on the East Coast and later start times on the West Coast.

    With the ACC and the Pac-10 there would be a real synergy because the weakness of each in its revenue sports (football versus basketball) is the strength of the other.

    I think that economies of scale favor a two conference network rather than a single conference one. Even with 16 teams, a single conference would struggle to fill out the schedule of an entire network. With 22 teams, an ACC/Pac-10 network would be more valuable because it had more content as well as viewers.

    Mutual interest between fans of the respective conferences could be further heighted by replacing the ACC/Big Ten challenge with an ACC/Pac-10 Challenge and . . . wait for it . . . an ACC/Pac-10 Rose Bowl! The consequences for the Big Ten could not be more appropriate: “He that troubleth his own house shall inherit the wind.”

    In anticipation of such an alliance, please join me as a fully bi-coastal college sports fan in derisively referring to The Big Ten Network as “the flyover network.”

  6. #26
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Fairfax County, Virginia
    Quote Originally Posted by wva_iron_duke View Post
    Georgetown doesn't fit due to no football. Try WVU.
    Well, actually, I believe Georgetown plays intercollegiate football, although not Division I. I doubt if on-campus space at Georgetown could accommodate an even Wade-sized stadium (plus parking, etc.), however, RFK (easy student access via Metro) and/or FedEx Field (high-revenue sky boxes and all the latest accouterments) have adequate seating .
    Last edited by 4decadedukie; 04-22-2010 at 07:24 PM.

  7. #27
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Lincoln Ne

    Love this conversation

    I am from Nebraska and I can tell you that the Tom Osborne is trying to be proactive not wanting to be left in a watered down big 12. On a different note everyone has watched the emergence of the moutain west as a legit conference they had a good basketball year and even a better football year. I am a little surprised that the pac-10 would not want some of them instead of say Colorado that sucks at everything these days. Except that Colorado has a large TV market and probably a larger alumni base. I still cannot see why the old golden domes don't want to join the big 10.

  8. #28
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Raleigh, NC
    Would Thurber's invention be called the "Bi-Coastal Leagues?"

    For those of you who wish the ACC to go after academically compatible schools, Army and Navy beckon. Of course, their basketball programs are beyond woeful. But the SATs are off the charts.

    If we could just get the University of Chicago to reinstate big-time football.

  9. #29
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Undisclosed
    Quote Originally Posted by Thurber Whyte View Post
    If all of this is about the geographic footprint of a television network, how about an alliance between the ACC and the Pac-10 rather than expansion if the Big Ten decides to expand? A network shared between the two conferences would have a huge geographic footprint with very attractive demographics and neither conference would have to reinvent itself.

    Not only would the demographics be good, but the three hour time difference between the two coasts would be a bonus. It would allow wall to wall coverage with everybody playing at their normal times. For basketball, each region’s weekday games could be broadcast in primetime with early/late games available from the other. For football, the Saturday game times could be handled just as the NFL does, early start times on the East Coast and later start times on the West Coast.

    With the ACC and the Pac-10 there would be a real synergy because the weakness of each in its revenue sports (football versus basketball) is the strength of the other.

    I think that economies of scale favor a two conference network rather than a single conference one. Even with 16 teams, a single conference would struggle to fill out the schedule of an entire network. With 22 teams, an ACC/Pac-10 network would be more valuable because it had more content as well as viewers.

    Mutual interest between fans of the respective conferences could be further heighted by replacing the ACC/Big Ten challenge with an ACC/Pac-10 Challenge and . . . wait for it . . . an ACC/Pac-10 Rose Bowl! The consequences for the Big Ten could not be more appropriate: “He that troubleth his own house shall inherit the wind.”

    In anticipation of such an alliance, please join me as a fully bi-coastal college sports fan in derisively referring to The Big Ten Network as “the flyover network.”
    "The sun never sets on the ACC empire."

  10. #30
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Fairfax County, Virginia
    Is anyone else troubled by additional ACC expansion, especially with more "thuggish" Big East schools? I see very significant cultural and academic differences between universities like Pitt, UConn, WVU, and so on -- or even with Miami, FSU, Virginia Tech -- and with Duke, UNC, UVa, Wake, etc.

    Many believe the ACC's recent expansion (Miami, Virginia Tech and then BC) and its next-to-last expansion (FSU) were mistakes that have not even achieved alleged financial promises -- and please consider, the most-reputable ACC universities (Duke, UNC and UVa) opposed the more-recent change (with UVa eventually strong-armed to accede by Virginia politicians, who wanted to have VPI added to the ACC). We should remember that expansions/consolidations of this sort will include ALL intercollegiate athletics, not just the traditional, major revenue sports (men's football and basketball).

    If one wants Duke to have excellent competition and cultural/academic compatibility for all sports, why not consider a sixteen-team Atlantic conference (no longer the ACC) that melds the best of the Ivy League -- currently unmentioned in all the uber-expansion chatter -- the ACC, and a few others, such as:
    Duke
    UNC
    UVa
    BC
    Wake
    Syracuse
    Notre Dame (a long-shot, but this whole proposal is mighty theoretical)
    Army
    Navy
    Cornell
    Dartmouth
    Yale
    Harvard
    Penn
    Princeton
    Brown

    Or one could have great academic and cultural similarity, if geographic parameters (and travel costs) were increased, with Atlantic and Pacific Divisions (such as):
    Duke
    UNC
    UVa
    BC
    Wake
    Syracuse
    Army
    Navy

    Stanford
    Northwestern
    Air Force
    Rice
    Tulane
    TCU
    Vanderbilt
    Notre Dame
    Last edited by 4decadedukie; 04-22-2010 at 08:30 PM.

  11. #31
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Raleigh, NC
    There's a reason why nobody is talking about the Ivies. They gave up big-time football two generations ago and I can't imagine they're interested in coming back.

    This whole thing is driven by football and money, an unholy alliance all too often. I don't think Option Two has enough football power to make it work. Like it or not, large state universities control college football and a conference without a fair number of those likely will be driven into something approaching irrelevance.

  12. #32
    Quote Originally Posted by 4decadedukie View Post
    Is anyone else troubled by additional ACC expansion, especially with more "thuggish" Big East schools? I see very significant cultural and academic differences between universities like Pitt, UConn, WVU, and so on -- or even with Miami, FSU, Virginia Tech -- and with Duke, UNC, UVa, Wake, etc.

    Many believe the ACC's recent expansion (Miami, Virginia Tech and then BC) and its next-to-last expansion (FSU) were mistakes that have not even achieved alleged financial promises -- and please consider, the most-reputable ACC universities (Duke, UNC and UVa) opposed the more-recent change (with UVa eventually strong-armed to accede by Virginia politicians, who wanted to have VPI added to the ACC). We should remember that expansions/consolidations of this sort will include ALL intercollegiate athletics, not just the traditional, major revenue sports (men's football and basketball).

    If one wants Duke to have excellent competition and cultural/academic compatibility for all sports, why not consider a sixteen-team Atlantic conference (no longer the ACC) that melds the best of the Ivy League -- currently unmentioned in all the uber-expansion chatter -- the ACC, and a few others, such as:
    Duke
    UNC
    UVa
    BC
    Wake
    Syracuse
    Notre Dame (a long-shot, but this whole proposal is mighty theoretical)
    Army
    Navy
    Cornell
    Dartmouth
    Yale
    Harvard
    Penn
    Princeton
    Brown

    Or one could have great academic and cultural similarity, if geographic parameters (and travel costs) were increased, with Atlantic and Pacific Divisions (such as):
    Duke
    UNC
    UVa
    BC
    Wake
    Syracuse
    Army
    Navy

    Stanford
    Northwestern
    Air Force
    Rice
    Tulane
    TCU
    Vanderbilt
    Notre Dame
    Nice thought but the cost of travel for all teams, especially non-revenue sports would be prohibitive.

  13. #33
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Northern VA
    Quote Originally Posted by 4decadedukie View Post
    Is anyone else troubled by additional ACC expansion, especially with more "thuggish" Big East schools? I see very significant cultural and academic differences between universities like Pitt, UConn, WVU, and so on -- or even with Miami, FSU, Virginia Tech -- and with Duke, UNC, UVa, Wake, etc...We should remember that expansions/consolidations of this sort will include ALL intercollegiate athletics, not just the traditional, major revenue sports (men's football and basketball).

    If one wants Duke to have excellent competition and cultural/academic compatibility for all sports, why not consider a sixteen-team Atlantic conference (no longer the ACC) that melds the best of the Ivy League -- currently unmentioned in all the uber-expansion chatter -- the ACC, and a few others, such as:
    Duke
    UNC
    UVa
    BC
    Wake
    Syracuse
    Notre Dame (a long-shot, but this whole proposal is mighty theoretical)
    Army
    Navy
    Cornell
    Dartmouth
    Yale
    Harvard
    Penn
    Princeton
    Brown
    First, I don't see the more tradition-bound ACC as being all that eager to expand again - 'could be wrong, but am only seeing that happen in a "strike first," defensive mode. But I think the most obvious three schools for the ACC to add if we were moving towards a 16-team conference would be the three NYC general area colleges -- Rutgers, Syracuse and UCONN, who provide TV market heft and fall within the currently defined ACC geography. It would also fit the "strike first" mode that I mentioned above, since they are also being eyed by the Big10/11. Then, think in terms of north-south ACC Divisions. And it truly is THE Atlantic Coast Conference.

    The 16th school could be any of WVU (geography appropriate), Pitt (another market and expansion into PA recruiting areas), ECU (they'd KILL to get in) or any of a few (long-shot) SEC schools - FL, USC, another FL school, etc.

    I'm more concerned that MD gets approached again by the Big 10/11.

    Interesting Times...


    BDBD
    "If I'm the Big East I'm sleeping with a gun under my pillow these days..."

  14. #34
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Fairfax County, Virginia
    Quote Originally Posted by jimsumner View Post
    There's a reason why nobody is talking about the Ivies. They gave up big-time football two generations ago and I can't imagine they're interested in coming back.

    This whole thing is driven by football and money, an unholy alliance all too often. I don't think Option Two has enough football power to make it work. Like it or not, large state universities control college football and a conference without a fair number of those likely will be driven into something approaching irrelevance.
    Much as I would like to, I simply cannot disagree.

    I would note, however, that until a couple years ago, quite a few substantial Dukies would have agreed that your statement re the Ivy League ("There's a reason why nobody is talking about the Ivies. They gave up big-time football two generations ago and I can't imagine they're interested in coming back.") also applied to Duke. We all now know our program -- under Coach Cut's great leadership and with significant support from every relevant Duke community and governing entity -- is making superb progress. Further, I am not trying to suggest that the anything similar is at all likely with the Ivy League. But it is interesting that the "marginal football" that characterizes the Ancient Eight also applied in Durham for, perhaps, three decades.

  15. #35
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Fairfax County, Virginia
    Quote Originally Posted by -bdbd View Post
    First, I don't see the more tradition-bound ACC as being all that eager to expand again - 'could be wrong, but am only seeing that happen in a "strike first," defensive mode.
    I agree; however, I suspect the we all fear that a nation-wide, football and financially driven uber-expansion will force the ACC to act (possibly proactively, or be left attempting to cobble together a viable, sixteen-team conference with unattractive leftovers). Now I hate this -- I really do -- and what I despise most about it is the likely loss of the ACC's traditional character, which (IMO) has already been seriously compromised by the inclusion of universities such as FSU, Miami, and Virginia Tech. Therefore, my dream (please see post #30) concerning a broader -- at least the whole northern/middle seaboard -- conference. With all its deficiencies and its lack of compelling broadcasting revenue, such a conference would represent the academic and cultural values that have characterized the ACC since inception. Dreams are funny things; last November, I dreamed about a Fourth National Championship for our Blue Devils, never believing (at that time) it was possible . . .

  16. #36
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Fairfax County, Virginia
    Quote Originally Posted by -bdbd View Post
    I'm more concerned that MD gets approached again by the Big 10/11.
    In my opinion, one of the few potentially positive results of a possible nation-wide collegiate athletics uber-expansion would be shedding Maryland. I realize UMd is a founding ACC member and I recognize their athletic program extends far beyond men's hoops, but -- as has been commented upon so frequently, so fervently, and so recently in various DBR posts -- their culture and values have become incompatible with those that traditionally characterize the ACC, and neither their Administration nor their Trustees appear to be remotely interested in correcting this long-growing malignancy.

  17. #37
    I've not heard of UMD having academic problems in other sports, only Men's basketball.

    Expansion is all about TV markets and how many households your conference has access to (not how many would actually watch, otherwise nobody would want BC).
    This is all about getting your piece of the pie. The SEC TV deal is driving this, the Big 10 wants to surpass it. Here is something thats interesting. Outside of the Atlanta/Athens and Central Florida markets, the SEC is not in a large TV market at all. Its desired for America's love of football and the competition it brings. The Big 10 would do just as well to bring in teams that create intriguing match-ups for ad revenue, not necessarily what state has theoretically the most TV sets. With that in mind, the Big 10 should pick

    Pitt
    WVU
    ND

    If they need two more I guess Missouri and I'd pick KU.

    The SEC and ACC WOULD pick up other schools to keep pace.

    If the ACC is lucky, the SEC would take FSU and Miami, Unlucky, they'll take Clemson and GT. The ACC should go north for UConn (I can't imagine The U or FSU is much better for academics) Rutgers, UL, Syracuse. All of them have a solid football history, all but Rutgers have a great basketball history, but you have to hope Rutgers would be motivated to improve.

  18. #38
    Quote Originally Posted by G man View Post
    I am a little surprised that the pac-10 would not want some of them instead of say Colorado that sucks at everything these days. Except that Colorado has a large TV market and probably a larger alumni base.
    CU has value to someone. They're really the only game in town in a quite sizeable catchment area. They have a nice little football rivalry with Colorado State, but the funny thing about the state of Colorado is no other school really has D-IA athletic aspirations, so who else do you take? For a number of reasons, I don't think it matters that much that CU's revenue sports suck. (One is that for many fans, CU football is little more than a diversion between hiking and skiing seasons. Man, this team sucks, but hey, Arapahoe Basin opens next week!) Academically and philosophically they're a great fit in the Pac-10.


    I still cannot see why the old golden domes don't want to join the big 10.
    Because they have their own teevee network and are their own conference for bcs purposes, that's why. Heck, I would wonder whether we could pull that off in basketball, except that we don't fill an 80,000-seat stadium for basketball games. We already have our own network anyway, it's called espn.

    BTW, what's with all this talk about Pitt? They're a decent school with decent sports programs (and Dad is Pitt '59) but all you're adding is western Pennsylvania, which has pretty lousy demographics (declining, aging population, not a lot of disposable income etc). Pitt is no better than the #3 cared-about football program in its area. Pitt has value, and I've argued for including them in a "mid-Atlantic ACC" in the past, but not a lot of value on their own.

  19. #39
    Quote Originally Posted by RelativeWays View Post
    I've not heard of UMD having academic problems in other sports, only Men's basketball.

    Expansion is all about TV markets and how many households your conference has access to (not how many would actually watch, otherwise nobody would want BC).
    This is all about getting your piece of the pie. The SEC TV deal is driving this, the Big 10 wants to surpass it. Here is something thats interesting. Outside of the Atlanta/Athens and Central Florida markets, the SEC is not in a large TV market at all. Its desired for America's love of football and the competition it brings. The Big 10 would do just as well to bring in teams that create intriguing match-ups for ad revenue, not necessarily what state has theoretically the most TV sets.
    The Big 10 only cares about TV sets, because right now, the Big 10 gets 60-70 cents per TV set in their home markets for the Big 10 Network, but only 10 cents in out of market areas. That's a huge amount of cash, which is why Rutgers and Missouri are in the mix. The only team that they don't care about market size is ND due to its national appeal.

    I'll also go ahead and point out that the biggest losers in expansion are going to be Cincinnati, Louisville, and WVU. Funny how lack of academics is going to kill any chance of those schools to join the new conference order. None of those schools have any shot at joining the ACC or the Big 10. I'd shed a tear, but meh.

  20. #40
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Durham
    Quote Originally Posted by hurleyfor3 View Post
    BTW, what's with all this talk about Pitt? They're a decent school with decent sports programs (and Dad is Pitt '59) but all you're adding is western Pennsylvania, which has pretty lousy demographics (declining, aging population, not a lot of disposable income etc). Pitt is no better than the #3 cared-about football program in its area. Pitt has value, and I've argued for including them in a "mid-Atlantic ACC" in the past, but not a lot of value on their own.
    Pitt has alot more value to the ACC than to the Big 10. The Big 10 already owns their market (Western PA), and would like to take over the whole NE (lots of people live in the NE, and they all have TVs). If the ACC wants to stay to continue to compete in the TV revenue game, they need to get into the NE too and not just cede it to the Big 10. Pitt offers something as it isn't as much of a joke school as say UConn or WVU. I say get Pitt and Syracuse now while you can, and with BC you have three NE schools to get your games on in the NE markets.

Similar Threads

  1. Can we fight the tournament expansion?
    By left_hook_lacey in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 18
    Last Post: 04-15-2010, 04:48 PM
  2. Tourney Expansion Looking Likely
    By grossbus in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 02-04-2010, 11:48 AM
  3. Expansion Criticism...
    By shoutingncu in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 02-24-2009, 04:50 PM
  4. ACC Schedule expansion possibility
    By CameronBornAndBred in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 16
    Last Post: 05-01-2008, 03:07 PM
  5. For ACC expansion haters
    By Olympic Fan in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 11-18-2007, 03:49 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •