The Conference Realignment Vigil- Update: Terps to Big10?

[tommy]

PSU football won nat titles with easy scheduling just like FSU and Miami

You mean like in 2001, when undefeated Miami beat the following teams by the following scores:

Penn State, on the road, 33-7
Pitt, on the road, 43-21
14th ranked Florida State, on the road, 49-27
West Virginia, 45-3
14th ranked Syracuse, 59-0
12th ranked Washington, 65-7
14th ranked Virginia Tech, on the road, 26-24
4th ranked Nebraska, in the Rose Bowl, 37-14


Pretty easy scheduling, huh?

Maybe the fact that this one college team had on its roster Clinton Portis, Willis McGahee, Frank Gore, Jeremy Shockey, Andre Johnson, Bryant McKinnie, Ken Dorsey, Jerome McDougle, William Joseph, Vince Wilfork, Jonathan Vilma, D.J. Williams, Ed Reed, Phillip Buchanon, Kellen Winslow II, Sean Taylor, Antrel Rolle, and Vernon Carey miiiiiight have had something to do with their success, even against a schedule full of dangerous games like they faced? Seventeen, count em, seventeen (!!) players from that Hurricanes squad were drafted in the first-round of the NFL Draft. That ain't beating up on a weak schedule. That was one of the top handful of teams in the history of college football, no questions asked.

[Scorp4me]

Here is the link. The site offers to sell it to you, but I had no trouble downloading it for free.

I refuse to read it in detail because of the mind-numbing complexity to give representation to every element of every school -- except, of course, the players.

sagegrouse

Thanks for the link...I actually clicked on that page. Saw the offer to buy it...missed the free download at the bottom

[Newton_14]

No link yet, but local WTVD Channel 11 news just reported on the 11pm news that the ACC is in discussions this weekend with Syracuse and Pitt about joining the ACC. I assume all of the local news stations here will pick the story up and provide details on their websites. I will link something as soon as they start hitting their sites.

Looks like the ACC is definitely going to be pro-active in this deal rather than reactive.

Stay tuned, as the plot thickens!

Edit: The New York Times is the source of the story. Here is the link.
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/09/17/sp...-with-acc.html

[-bdbd]

My understanding is that the ACC is open to the LHN while some other conferences are not. If that is true, and remains true, there is more substance to this than I originally thought.

From a buddy who lives in Dallas and is a UT grad, and avid booster:
(quoting UT Booster sources)

Rumors here are that Texas has a plan to go independent with ESPN guaranteeing Texas coverage between the LHN and ESPN. Non football programs align with The ACC. Texas football would play a rotation of ACC teams.

So, it sounds like maybe a step further than the ND deal with the Big East, with their football team playing SOME ACC games every year, but no full FB membership initially.

[AtlBluRew]

No link yet, but local WTVD Channel 11 news just reported on the 11pm news that the ACC is in discussions this weekend with Syracuse and Pitt about joining the ACC. I assume all of the local news stations here will pick the story up and provide details on their websites. I will link something as soon as they start hitting their sites.

Looks like the ACC is definitely going to be pro-active in this deal rather than reactive.

Stay tuned, as the plot thickens!

Edit: The New York Times is the source of the story. Here is the link.
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/09/17/sp...-with-acc.html

I'm just not excited about having either of those two schools in the conference, and I don't like that, again, the ACC could be expanding by raiding the Big East ... and I grew up following Pitt in football. I'd much rather see Texas and Kansas. Those programs interest me an inspire a sense of rivalry that Syracuse and Pitt never will.

[throatybeard]

As long as we're playing the big boys' rotten game,

I like Syracuse and I like Pitt, and in a vacuum, I'd be honored to have them, but admitting them would just be digging us deeper into the hole we're already in. It has to do with demographics. And not 2010 lists of city limits populations (apologies Sumner, you know I respect the the most of anyone on the board).

Pitt's the better choice, I think, slightly, because it's a bit bigger school and a state U, and we need a lot more of those in the ACC. Even then, Pitt is in a shrinking metro--not just city, metro. This last expansion, we admitted one big state school, arguably a really good TV draw in DC, and a sure-fire sellout in their own stadium. VT is in a class with FSU and Clemson alone in FB in the ACC. And they've won more than both recently, and they have better access to big TV markets than Clemson. VT really strengthens us on TV in all of VA and DC and Hampton Roads, and wasn't totally redundant with UVA and Maryland for that reason. (UVA sucks at FB when George Welsh isn't around). But BC and Miami are just making the problem worse, unless Miami reverts to the 1980s Miami in FB. (Without all the cheating). Two private schools with small alumni bases that don't really deliver their own metro areas. We already had a Duke and a Wake. We don't need two more.

Presently the ACC has four private schools and another one that sort of acts like one in terms of size and demographics (GT). We don't need another Syracuse. We need a big state, state behemoth that is the butt-kicker in its state. That's why the Big Ten and others are kicking our butts. Everyone whines about the sore travails of the Big 4. Well, UNC alone could deliver the 9M+ people in NC. Duke does have a national brand in the sport that counts less, so there's that. But if we had stayed the ACC8 we'd have died on the vine like the SWC. Instead of whining about the alleged travesty of FSU being in the conference, we should be thanking them for towing us from 1991 to 2003.

Rutgers does not deliver NYC TV. BC does not deliver Boston TV. Pitt is better, but does not deliver PA TV, really, because of PSU. I'm willing to listen about SU, but I'm skeptical. NYC peeps, you go in a bar in the City on a Saturday, how many have an SU game on?

In the very unlikely event PSU is interested in us, that's target #1, #2, and #3. We also need to hold onto FSU like grim death.

Our problem is that the conferences in a position to add someone, or who have just added someone, that someone was the power broker in their state, CU, NU, UU, those aren't even from bigger states (CO is medium sized) but they are the big state school in their area. For TV, the ACC could really use an A&M, but the SEC is in a position to sit around and think about it because of their amazing national brand. The SEC has a brand. It's FOOTBALL in your face, and er, as an afterthought, UK and UF BB. Our brand is "We really do think we're jolly just as good as the Big East in the second sport. Oh look, Carolina and a tiny school everyone hates have nice BB. Let's all congratulate ourselves about the USNews magazine--even though we're not the Ivy league, we can bring the snot. Nyah nyah, [spitting tongue]" The first brand kills, just kills the second when it comes to sports.

I'm not trying to be a person who randomly assembles schools in a map and then asserts an Atlantic league over and over. But if the domino apocalypse starts, I think we need to be very aggressive in getting two or four more schools, state schools, with big huge alumni bases. If Texas to the ACC isn't the dumbest idea ever, then go after OU too. That's no less silly than UT. MU, KU, maybe UConn, maybe even WVU. By being in this game, we're already whores; the question is just the price. No more private schools like the ones we already have. Wake Forest never won anyone a new TV contract, and Duke may not even on the BB side if on Michael Krzyzewski falls out or burns out or if time's fell hand crushes him, which it will at some point. God knows this spoiled fan base will turn on his successor tout suite.

If you want to sit around and rub the USNews copy on yourself, and sing hymns to Dear Old Duke being #10 in a stupid news magazine, fine, but then it's time to get out of the filthy business of big time college sports altogether. We don't need any more Syracuses. Their Krzyzewski (Boeheim) is old too, and the FB is a mess. Pitt maybe I could see, just. If you want the ACC to play big dirty sports, Syracuse and Pitt aren't the answer. Pitt maybe. Pitt or WVU.

[duke09hms]

Wow, at the previous post. Why so bitter?

Anyway, I agree with the general idea. If we're going to play the game, go big or go home. Go for Texas, Oklahoma and get to 14. Maybe even 2 of PSU, Pitt, WVU, or Syracuse and be the first to 16. It's always better to be proactive and aggressive then wait to pick up the pieces - if we don't, the ACC will gradually matter less and less. We definitely should prefer the big state schools as opposed to small private schools - more fans, more TVs, more money is all that matters. This is about survival as a major conference and not as an afterthought.

[ForkFondler]

The latest rumor regarding Texas:


*************************
The ACC deal thats on the table right now is..
-Texas goes Independent
-ACC for all other sports
-Play 4 ACC opponents every year in football
-Espn is guaranteeing 8 home games, 4 road games on natl tv (espn, abc, lhn)

*************************

Now, that only makes sense for the ACC if another independent is added for football as well. Notre Dame, perhaps?

Syracuse+Pitt would make 14 for football, 16 for basketball, and a really awesome 6 for lacrosse.

[RoyalBlue08]

The latest rumor regarding Texas:


*************************
The ACC deal thats on the table right now is..
-Texas goes Independent
-ACC for all other sports
-Play 4 ACC opponents every year in football
-Espn is guaranteeing 8 home games, 4 road games on natl tv (espn, abc, lhn)

*************************

Now, that only makes sense for the ACC if another independent is added for football as well. Notre Dame, perhaps?

Syracuse+Pitt would make 14 for football, 16 for basketball, and a really awesome 6 for lacrosse.

I have a hard time figuring what the ACC gets out of this deal. Having to send all your non-revenue sports teams to Texas is less than ideal. If you don't get the Texas football program in return, why is it worth it? (I can see why this works for Texas.)

[ForkFondler]

I have a hard time figuring what the ACC gets out of this deal. Having to send all your non-revenue sports teams to Texas is less than ideal. If you don't get the Texas football program in return, why is it worth it? (I can see why this works for Texas.)

The short answer is "ESPN contract".

The longer answer is that many of the "non-revenue" sports are becoming "revenue" sports. Baseball and lacrosse are already on ESPNU in spades. What's next? Myself, I look forward to seeing more women's VB.

[devildeac]

Yesterday's musings from one of our local curmudgeons:

http://www.newsobserver.com/2011/09/...-good-fit.html

[Duvall]

Formal letters of application from Pitt, Syracuse.

[devildeac]

Formal letters of application from Pitt, Syracuse.

Wonder what the cost would be for Pitt and Syracuse to leave the BE?

Or, what do they lose if/when the BE falls apart?

[davekay1971]

So here's the questions...if Syracuse and Pitt join, do we still go after Texas (which, from a revenue standpoint, is the holy grail in all this)?

I'd say yes. As someone else above mentioned, if you're going to do this, do it all the way. Texas makes the least sense geographically, but the most sense financially. And, from my point of view, I can't think of much things that would be funnier than having Mack Brown bring his Texas behemoth into Keenan Stadium and beat down the Tar Heels in front of the Blue Zone crowd.

So, if the ACC gets Texas, Syracuse, and Pitt to go to 15 teams, who is team 16? WVU leaps to mind as a natural fit geographically, and they certainly have competitive football and basketball programs. They're also a natural rival for Maryland, Va Tech, and Pitt. Obviously a lot of other teams would be considered.

It'll be very interesting to see how this pans out. One thing is clear, however. Unless the ACC goes to basketball-only or football-only memberships, ACC basketball will even less recognizable to an old-school Big-4 centric curmudgeon like me.

[Son of Jarhead]

Formal letters of application from Pitt, Syracuse.

I'm wondering who are the "at least 10 schools" that have approached the ACC about membership??? We know (it seems) who two are, Syracuse & Pitt, and we can guess at Texas being one, but who else do you think? Any that are real possibilities? Any (like ECU) that are dreaming big impossible dreams? Just wondering.

And why do I feel like I'm watching a train wreck in slow motion?

[PumpkinFunk]

So here's the questions...if Syracuse and Pitt join, do we still go after Texas (which, from a revenue standpoint, is the holy grail in all this)?

I'd say yes. As someone else above mentioned, if you're going to do this, do it all the way. Texas makes the least sense geographically, but the most sense financially. And, from my point of view, I can't think of much things that would be funnier than having Mack Brown bring his Texas behemoth into Keenan Stadium and beat down the Tar Heels in front of the Blue Zone crowd.

So, if the ACC gets Texas, Syracuse, and Pitt to go to 15 teams, who is team 16? WVU leaps to mind as a natural fit geographically, and they certainly have competitive football and basketball programs. They're also a natural rival for Maryland, Va Tech, and Pitt. Obviously a lot of other teams would be considered.

It'll be very interesting to see how this pans out. One thing is clear, however. Unless the ACC goes to basketball-only or football-only memberships, ACC basketball will even less recognizable to an old-school Big-4 centric curmudgeon like me.

It's tough to say for sure. I think the ACC won't be happy just adding Cuse and Pitt, because it adds little to football even though it certainly adds to basketball. I think the Texas-to-ACC rumors are gonna stay alive. I can envision a situation in which the ACC decides something a little radical, though: Add Villanova and Texas both as non-football members, with the requirement that Texas still play a certain number of games yearly with ACC teams. It's a possibility, for sure. Adds in the Philadelphia market, at the least. I could also see Georgetown and Villanova both being added as non-football members if the Big East falls apart and we don't get Texas, since I think they are by far the most lucrative teams to add of the remnants of the Big East.

Still, though... I have to wonder if the ACC will say yes to this. Swofford is on the record of saying that he likes 12 teams and that he sees major scheduling difficulties along with loss of traditions/rivalries becoming a problem when you go to 14 or 16 teams. The $20m buyout makes it hard for any team to want to leave the ACC (and indicates that the membership is happy with what we have) and so perhaps the conference decides to stand pat. Certainly would be the more bold move given the current climate, would it not?

[ForkFondler]

Texas and Notre Dame to the ACC?

[loran16]

Cuse and Pitt would be perfect fits for the ACC - both have great bball programs and at least have mediocre to respectable Football teams every year. From a BBall standpoint, that's a no brainer.

[kinsman_bob]

I just heard a bit of a clip on ESPN980 in DC that the ACC had accepted Pitt and Syracuse. They also said that several other BE schools are under consideration including Rutgers, UConn and WVA. I just caught the end of the clip.

[blazindw]

If Texas and Notre Dame really join the ACC along with Syracuse and Pitt, the ACC would be the definitive winners of this expansion game. I'm still not sold on Notre Dame joining a conference other than the B1G if they have to, but that would be unbelievable if Notre Dame joined.

I think the Texas-to-the-ACC reports may have more legs than they're letting on. That's just my gut telling me that though.