The Conference Realignment Vigil- Update: Terps to Big10?

[A-Tex Devil]

The Big Ten has a bucketload of alumni in NY/NJ. The ACC doesn't other than Duke.

The Big Ten has schools of massive size with massive alumni bases. The ACC has big schools but generally aren't near the size of tOSU, Penn St, Wiscy, and Michigan to name some. And generally the ACC doesn't travel as well (see any ACC championship game).

Games at Rutgers means weekend trips to New York, it means more donations from their NY/NJ alumni. It might boost TV some but not much. But it's a value add to the Big Ten in ways it wouldn't be for the ACC. Now would the Big Ten invite them? Doubtful, but Rutgers has its merits.

[Jderf]

Again there's that quote..."and making plans to get to 16"...layed out there as if it's a fact (though I concede you included you suspect). Maybe it will be, but everyone seems to be resisting it pretty darn hard. I suspect they are making plans just like the ACC did 18 months ago, I just suspect they are hoping they don't have to use them and have the restraint to not.

The ACC formed a committe to act if other conferences made moves to get to 16. They claim 10 offers, but I doubt the options were plentiful. We're not talking from Kentucky and Kansas here. The Big 12 had problems, but that ended up being all. If we hadn't raided the Big East then the only move would have been A&M (still pending of course). We flinched first thinking we'd be the last to move...and instead it seems we're the only one who did. That was the panic I referenced.

Again, no one can explain the inevitability of the 16 team conference. If we move to 16 it wouldn't surprise me for the other conferences to sit back and wait it out. Let us be their guinea pig in the mega conference experiment. And it wouldn't surprise me for the conference to split (not fall apart) in the coming years.

The whole situation is starting to get the feel of a mexican standoff. Nobody wants to start shooting in the first place, but it would be even worse to be the last person pulling the trigger. The more people talk about the inevitability of 16, the more inevitable it becomes.

[Duvall]

That pretty much sums up everyone here when you get comments such as "rutgers and uconn are about the same academically" from Duvall.

Well, aren't they? The unreliable USNews rankings have both schools in about the same place - UConn at #58, Rutgers at #68. Rutgers is an AAU institution, while UConn isn't, but I have no idea who pays attention to that other than the Big Ten. In any case, it wasn't meant to be an insult. Both UConn and Rutgers are excellent schools whose programs and missions are comparable to those of the other schools in the ACC. I don't think anyone here has a problem with UConn's academic programs, and I doubt the ACC presidents would either.

[Scorp4me]

The whole situation is starting to get the feel of a mexican standoff. Nobody wants to start shooting in the first place, but it would be even worse to be the last person pulling the trigger. The more people talk about the inevitability of 16, the more inevitable it becomes.

I can agree with that analogy Jderf. To me it just feels like we shot first and everyone else said...dang, what'd you shoot Big East for? Then everyone put their guns back in their holsters and mumbled maybe this was a bad idea. May not have unloaded them, but put them away.

As for the more they talk the more it becomes. The Big East and Big 12 are fighting for their survival. The Pac 12 has said thanks but no thanks. And the Big 10 hasn't said much of anything. The SEC accepted A&M (provisionally)...so I'm sure they'd like to get to an even number (personally I think they'd be just as happy at 12 as 14, but that's just me). So who exactly will inevitably end up at 16, besides the ACC?

These are honest questions. I've admitted I don't like the mega conference idea and feel it is doomed to fail in the future, but in the short term I had accepted it and wanted the best for our conference. Say we accept Rutgers and UConn, will the other conferences rush to get to 16...or do they just sit back and watch the beast collapse?

I feel like 16 was inevitable...for someone. I'm just not sure it's a positive thing for that one someone unless the rest come along. Which right now no one is doing.

[-jk]

So, as expected, Beebe's out as Big 12 commish.

More interesting is that the Big 12 is looking at collecting all the TV revenue from ABC/ESPN and Fox for the next six years, and would get a team's share of the money even if the team left the conference. It looks like those revenues ("tier 1" and "tier 2") would be shared out equally among conference members.

If I'm reading the reports correctly, though, it sounds more draconian than it is. Presumably a team leaving would then make money with its new conference, and would no longer play games (and generate revenue) under the ABC/ESPN and Fox contracts. I'm not seeing a big stick here unless I'm missing something.

-jk

[Kedsy]

I feel like 16 was inevitable...for someone. I'm just not sure it's a positive thing for that one someone unless the rest come along. Which right now no one is doing.

What's the downside of 16? The Big East was doomed because half the teams don't play football, but that's not applicable to the new ACC. You can't play everyone in your conference every year in football and you can't play everyone twice in basketball? Well if these teams weren't in the conference you wouldn't play them at all, or at least not very often. (Although to play everyone in your division twice and everyone in the other division once, I suppose it would take a 22 game league schedule, and so far the ACC would be unwilling to do that, so there might be complaints on that front.) The conference basketball tournament is too unwieldy? There are ways around that, and the Big East tourney has been pretty exciting the past few years despite its unwieldiness.

If the divisions are done right, you can even look at it as if it's two 8 team conferences that like to schedule against one another and combine for a few exciting events (football championship game, ACC tournament). Again, what's the downside? I'm not making an argument or being sarcastic. I'm really not sure.

[Bluedog]

Well, if you bring Chicago into the discussion, another way to help football with one and academics with two would be Notre Dame and Northwestern.

Losing ND would devastate B1G false hopes, but losing NW would not upset the B1G much as they could add Rutgers for that NY/NJ maket that Cuse and Pitt already partially satisfied for ACC.

Not that the ACC is considering Northwestern anyways, but coming from somebody who lives in Chicago, nobody here watches Northwestern or cares about them. In my four block radius there are probably 30 bars and nearly all of them are associated with a Big Ten school (there are a few outliers like an Alabama bar). There is only ONE bar that I know of that was supposedly a Northwestern bar, but that wasn't attracting the masses, so they just changed to Michigan State! (Even though there are two other MSU bars within two blocks.) It's sad really - I wish Northwestern got more local support.

[Scorp4me]

Again, what's the downside? I'm not making an argument or being sarcastic. I'm really not sure.

I didn't think you were being sarcastic, it sounds like you're asking as much a question about "why not" as I was "why". In fact I even made the comment in a previous post that everyone rushes to 16 and the first thing they do is split the conference in half. So perhaps I would like it better. Of course that begs the question why not just have eight conferences of 8 if that is the case (NCAA requirement of 12 for a championship game not withstanding).

But, let me clarify. If it's coming I want the ACC to be in a good position, if for no other reason than so it will be in a good position should they fail. It just doesn't feel like right now it's going to happen...except maybe with the ACC as all others sit back to see how it goes. I'm not asking "why" it's a good thing. I may not like it, but I can accept it and can even see the good and the bad (in varying degrees).

But with the Pac-12 saying no, with the SEC being reluctant, with the Big 12 and Big East just trying to survive...I'm asking why is it inevitable? I mean if we had waited til today to do something, til we saw the Big 12 wasn't dying and no one else was moving...do we still accept new members? I'm not sure you have the opportunity cause I don't think they ask to be accepted.

[uh_no]

Well, aren't they? The unreliable USNews rankings have both schools in about the same place - UConn at #58, Rutgers at #68. Rutgers is an AAU institution, while UConn isn't, but I have no idea who pays attention to that other than the Big Ten. In any case, it wasn't meant to be an insult. Both UConn and Rutgers are excellent schools whose programs and missions are comparable to those of the other schools in the ACC. I don't think anyone here has a problem with UConn's academic programs, and I doubt the ACC presidents would either.

You're right, sorry, I was looking at Rutgers Newark campus. I underestimated Rutgers acadmic standing and hope I didn't offend anyone in the process.

I think what bothers me is that while rutgers and Uconn appear to bring about the same amount to the table in terms of football, people pooh pooh the considerable differences in other sports. While Football drives this thing (we all no that) I don't think people are dumb enough to ignore the fact that Uconn's basketball team is far superior to rutgers, and their women's basketball team is probably one of a handful in the country that can sell out buildings wherever they go (take a look at the ticket sales every year when they play DUke and UNC) and while no, its not football, its a little bit extra on the side that sweetens the deal, and really some pretty big differentiation from Rutgers.

You also have to notice there are more Uconn fans around here than there are Rutgers fans. Again, I'll point to when the women come down to play: you see the stadium filled with almost 50/50 uconn/home team fans. These are butts in seats when uconn comes to play.

With football and academics considered even, I'm not sure how Uconn can be worse than just as good as rutgers for the ACC.

[Scorp4me]

While Football drives this thing (we all no that)

Can someone explain why it's football that is driving this? I mean from a television stand point there are more basketball games on television each year than football games simply from a scheduling stand point. So why are the television deals based on football? Maybe I'm missing something right in front of my face, but I've never really heard an explanation.

[A-Tex Devil]

Can someone explain why it's football that is driving this? I mean from a television stand point there are more basketball games on television each year than football games simply from a scheduling stand point. So why are the television deals based on football? Maybe I'm missing something right in front of my face, but I've never really heard an explanation.

Ratings and advertising dollars are much (much) more lucrative than basketball, other than the NCAA tourney whose rights are owned by the NCAA, not the conferences and schools.

[Scorp4me]

Ratings and advertising dollars are much (much) more lucrative than basketball, other than the NCAA tourney whose rights are owned by the NCAA, not the conferences and schools.

I know it is, but do you know why? I mean there are more basketball games than football games to be aired during a season so what is the reason. Do football games have a higher number of viewers times number of games than basketball games times number of games?

[Duvall]

I know it is, but do you know why? I mean there are more basketball games than football games to be aired during a season so what is the reason. Do football games have a higher number of viewers times number of games than basketball games times number of games?

Yes. It's just more popular.

[OldSchool]

If the divisions are done right, you can even look at it as if it's two 8 team conferences that like to schedule against one another and combine for a few exciting events (football championship game, ACC tournament). Again, what's the downside?

To my mind, that is the big question. If the divisions are done right, it could work out well. If not, it could further dilute what was at one time a very good thing.

One could look at a 22-team schedule as merely forcing the teams to schedule tougher opponents than they otherwise would have with their out-of-conference scheduling. On the other hand, while home-and-home series with St. Johns or Georgetown are attractive to us in order to play in MSG or the Verizon center, the same with Pitt or Syracuse is not something that would have otherwise appealed to us.

If Duke and UNC are in one division, I can imagine the teams in the other division pushing for a 22-game schedule in order to make sure they get to have home games against Duke and UNC at least once every other year. Duke and UNC rolling into town are big-time events for schools like Pitt, Syracuse and BC. But that would mean giving up some patsies in the OOC schedule.

[uh_no]

To my mind, that is the big question. If the divisions are done right, it could work out well. If not, it could further dilute what was at one time a very good thing.

One could look at a 22-team schedule as merely forcing the teams to schedule tougher opponents than they otherwise would have with their out-of-conference scheduling. On the other hand, while home-and-home series with St. Johns or Georgetown are attractive to us in order to play in MSG or the Verizon center, the same with Pitt or Syracuse is not something that would have otherwise appealed to us.

If Duke and UNC are in one division, I can imagine the teams in the other division pushing for a 22-game schedule in order to make sure they get to have home games against Duke and UNC at least once every other year. Duke and UNC rolling into town are big-time events for schools like Pitt, Syracuse and BC. But that would mean giving up some patsies in the OOC schedule.

I would highly doubt the league schedule would go over 18 games. MAYBE 19 in a pinch, the coaches don't want it (or at least K doesn't, and I doubt roy does...and in this league, that's pretty much all that matters) I can't imagine the other coaches would want to wind up playing conference games in early december...it would interfere with the ACC B10 challenge...18 already forces you to start at the end of december...another 4 games is 2 weeks, likely more since you start running into exams. It's not logistically possible, the coaches wouldn't want it, its not happening.

[Scorp4me]

I would highly doubt the league schedule would go over 18 games. MAYBE 19 in a pinch, the coaches don't want it (or at least K doesn't, and I doubt roy does...and in this league, that's pretty much all that matters) I can't imagine the other coaches would want to wind up playing conference games in early december...it would interfere with the ACC B10 challenge...18 already forces you to start at the end of december...another 4 games is 2 weeks, likely more since you start running into exams. It's not logistically possible, the coaches wouldn't want it, its not happening.

Can we not just play a 15 game conference schedule playing each team once and rotating home and away every other year. Half your games away, half at home with a more balanced schedule than we've had the past few years. Plus I don't see the use of having such a large and diverse conference if you're not going to taken advantage of it.

Edit: Ooops I was thinking we were at 16 already. I guess a 13 game conference schedule would be a bit small. But just wait til we get to 16 then everything will work out

[Kedsy]

Can we not just play a 15 game conference schedule playing each team once and rotating home and away every other year. Half your games away, half at home with a more balanced schedule than we've had the past few years. Plus I don't see the use of having such a large and diverse conference if you're not going to taken advantage of it.

Edit: Ooops I was thinking we were at 16 already. I guess a 13 game conference schedule would be a bit small. But just wait til we get to 16 then everything will work out

I don't think anybody would want Duke/UNC to only happen once a year, which means you'd have to have some sort of rivalry provision. And once you're there it's a slippery slope. From a scheduling standpoint, the pod thing might work (2 games vs. the three teams in your four-team pod and one game against everyone else -- 18 games total in a 16 team league). In a 14 team league you could split into two divisions and have a 19 game schedule (playing everyone in your division twice and the other division once).

But there's a whole 'nother thread on 16-team logistics, right?

[Scorp4me]

I don't think anybody would want Duke/UNC to only happen once a year, which means you'd have to have some sort of rivalry provision. And once you're there it's a slippery slope. From a scheduling standpoint, the pod thing might work (2 games vs. the three teams in your four-team pod and one game against everyone else -- 18 games total in a 16 team league). In a 14 team league you could split into two divisions and have a 19 game schedule (playing everyone in your division twice and the other division once).

But there's a whole 'nother thread on 16-team logistics, right?

I don't think anyone wants just one game a year either, but I've learned to accept you have to give up some things in the quest for the all mighty dollar. Apparently even good basketball isn't enough to overcome football money. But you are right, there is another thread for this, I was just responding to a comment. It all begins to intermingle and it'd be hard to keep it straight even if it wasn't crazy to begin with.

[devildeac]

Interesting tidbit here:

http://www.sbnation.com/ncaa-footbal...c-fsu-maryland

[uh_no]

Interesting tidbit here:

http://www.sbnation.com/ncaa-footbal...c-fsu-maryland

I had read that a day or two ago, and while certainly interesting, I don't think it is necessarily indicative of anyone intending to leave. I think it has more to do with a fear that if the ACC were to begin to implode, then those schools would be stuck.