The Conference Realignment Vigil- Update: Terps to Big10?

[Cavlaw]

Mr. SEC has been providing good analysis of the SEC perspective on expansion, similar to how Frank the Tank's Slant has covered the Big Ten perspective. In a recent posting on "best targets" for SEC expansion, Mr. SEC was hot on how much value Penn State would bring to that league, despite calling the odds of that happening "Nil". Of interest was this nugget in his analysis:

"When Joe Paterno recently brought up in a press conference the idea of Penn State possibly leaving the Big Ten for something back East, our ears perked up. Not because Penn State would ever leave the academically-revered Big Ten — a former PSU athletic department official recently told us that academics and research funding topped athletics as the main reasons State joined that league in 1991 — but because this would be the exact kind of move other conferences would try to pull off."

[Duvall]

I'm sure that the SEC is going to come calling for this Florida State team any minute now.

[ACCBBallFan]

Mr. SEC has been providing good analysis of the SEC perspective on expansion, similar to how Frank the Tank's Slant has covered the Big Ten perspective. In a recent posting on "best targets" for SEC expansion, Mr. SEC was hot on how much value Penn State would bring to that league, despite calling the odds of that happening "Nil". Of interest was this nugget in his analysis:

I would agree that Mr. SEC's analysis is good.

A few things I would amend in his conclusions. Chances of UNC or Duke to SEC from Very Slim to nil.

Pair UVA and VA Tech and pair Oklahoma and Okie St who are package deals. I assume KU and K-St are too but each have a nil chance anyway.

Whether Mr. SEC made all the Texas teams except A&M nil due to the Florida, Georgia, So Carolina, Kentucky alliance, which is the opposite of these state politics package deals, to not add another team in an SEC state, or for some other reasons Mr SEC eliminated all of them, I do not know.

The amended results:

TxA&M 8.0 Done SEC-13

Missouri 87.0 Good chance of being SEC-14, assumes B12 does not sign the 6 year grant of rights, or at least Mizzou does not

FSU 89.5 Slim, for now (assumes SEC allliance of Florida, GA, KY and So Carolina agree)
West VA 133.5 Very Slim, for now

VA Tech 82.5 Slim
UVA 52.0 Very Slim

Oklahoma 69.5 Very Slim (assumes B12 does not sign the 6 year grant of rights)
Okie St 118.5 nil (assumes B12 does not sign the 6 year grant of rights)

Maryland 91.0 Very Slim
NC St 104.5 Very Slim

Cincy 120.5 Very Slim
Clemson 125.0 Very Slim (assumes SEC allliance of Florida, GA, KY and So Carolina agree)

Louisville 163.0 Very Very Slim (assumes SEC allliance of Florida, GA, KY and So Carolina agree)
GA Tech 174.5 Very Very Slim (assumes SEC allliance of Florida, GA, KY and So Carolina agree)

Then to account for all the ones Mr. SEC included with nil chance of happening

UNC 28.5 Very Slim (IMO, nil)
Penn St 38.0 nil
Texas 40.0 nil

Duke 77.5 Very Slim (IMO, nil)
Pitt 84.0 nil
Notre Dame 96.5 nil

Rutgers 104.0 nil
UCONN 113.0 nil
Baylor 115.5 nil
Kansas 115.5 nil
TX Tech 115.5 nil

TCU 124.5 nil
ECU 146.5 nil
Wake 152.5 nil

Iowa St 155.0 nil
Syr 156.5 nil
BC 164.5 nil
Miami 168.5 nil (assumes SEC allliance of Florida, GA, KY and So Carolina agree)

K-State 175.5 nil
Navy 184.5 nil
USF 211.0 nil (assumes SEC allliance of Florida, GA, KY and So Carolina agree)


I did a scoring similar to Mr. SEC's. Ignoring the nil's from above and assuming SEC alliance to not add a team from state SEC is already in, the results were pretty similar:

TxA&M 87 Done SEC-13

Missouri 192 In Process SEC-14

UVA 142 Package deal #1 for SEC 15-16
VA Tech 159

Oklahoma 155 Package deal #2 for SEC 15-16, though personally I would make it #1 due to football
Okie St 232

Maryland 201 next duo if two package deals fall through
West VA 220

NC St 244 only others not eliminated by SEC alliance or nil chance
Cincy 256

[Cavlaw]

Whether Mr. SEC made all the Texas teams except A&M nil due to the Florida, Georgia, So Carolina, Kentucky alliance, which is the opposite of these state politics package deals, to not add another team in an SEC state, or for some other reasons Mr SEC eliminated all of them, I do not know.

Interestingly, according to other Mr. SEC posts, multiple sources within the conference and the schools in question have said that the long-rumored and oft-cited "gentleman's agreement" on this issue has, in fact, never actually existed.

[Duvall]

USAFA to the Big East?

Pretty clear that the Big East is planning on relying on the last refuge of a scoundrel to hold on their BCS berth.

[ACCBBallFan]

USAFA to the Big East?

Pretty clear that the Big East is planning on relying on the last refuge of a scoundrel to hold on their BCS berth.

Well, that would rival the six biggest geographic misfits that arose from expansions, but at least it would only be for football.

Penn St and Nebraska are geographic misfits for B1G, compounded when they play one another.

A&M to SEC continues the trend as would Missouri to SEC. Missouri's best fit is in B12 and second best fit is in B1G, not the SEC.

USF is a geographic misfit for BE, but decent team with nowhere to go since UF wants Florida to itself and ACC has FSU and Miami already.

BC was a goegraphic misfit for ACC and is somewhat mitigated now by adding Syracuse and Pitt.

With Nebraska no longer an AAU member maybe one day they go to P12 which needs every team west of Kansas to get to 16 decent in football, by also adding Boise St, BYU, and maybe Air Force or San Diego St, but in no rush to do that.

If Missouri does not continue the geography nightmares, SEC could get to 16 with West VA, Cincy and USF or Louisville, is best case for ACC.

Perhaps if Notre Dame eventually joins B1G and PSU eventually moves to ACC some of that could be righted.

Then B1G could get to 16 by replacing PSU with ND and adding Missouri, Iowa State, KU and very relucatantly K-State as part of a package deal.

The other way for B1G to get there is to retain PSU by adding Notre Dame, Rutgers Navy, and Army, but in no rush to do either quartet until ND has no other options.

ACC could get to 16 by adding PSU and Rutgers, or PSU and UCONN, or in a perfect storm PSU and ND to relieve one geography problem but compound another.

If B12 loses Missouri to SEC or eventually loses MO to B1G, the best B12 approach would be to hope SEC stops at 14 by grabbing one West VA, Lousiville and Cincy. Then B12 grabs the other 2 before SEC does, along with Houston, So. Miss and SMU and try to lock those 14 in with a granting of rights deal, before they also lose Iowa State or KU to B1G.

Any way one looks at it, it's only a matter of time before BE is first of the 6 majors to fall, with or without super conferences.

Sounds like AFA has at least decided to use BE as its way to getting into more major football landscape rather than being the cellar dweller in B12.

I read somewhere that Army may not think it is ready to even compete in BE football, and that Navy is just waiting to see what is left in BE before deciding.

BE may be able to find some other desperado's like Temple, ECU, UCF, upgrade Florida International or Richmond who seem to be auditioning vs. Duke, or Nova. They might also try to beat B12 to the punch with Houston, Southern Miss and SMU.

Memphis is so bad in football that even BE would not take them to re-establsih its Bball.

With respect the the 8 BE non football schools, there are a ton of Catholic Univerisites they could pair up with.

BE-BB 32Villanova -9
BE-BB 18Marquette -9
BE-BB Georgetown -6
BE-BB 36Notre Dame -2
BE-BB 39St. John's -4
BE-BB Providence - 14
BE-BB Seton Hall -12
BE-BB DePaul -16

By conference, A10 has 8, MAAC has 8, WCC has 7 but too far away, NE has 4 not very good, Horizon has Detroit Mercy and Loyola-IL , ACC has BC, MVC has Creighton and Patriot has LaSalle, plus Seattle is Independent.

A10 14Xavier -1
A10 St. Bonav -7
A10 Duquesne -4
A10 Dayton -7
A10 Fordham -14
A10 St. Joseph's -12
A10 SLU -10
A10 LaSalle -10

MAAC 55-Iona -2
MAAC Fairfield -1
MAAC St. Peter's -4
MAAC Siena -7
MAAC Loyola-MD -5
MAAC Manhattan -9
MAAC Niagara -8
MAAC Marist -9

NE MtStMary's -6
NE St. Franc NY -5
NE Sacred Heart -10
NE St. Franc PA -8

Two of the non-Catholic A10 schools ironically could be candidates for BE football. Temple is already MAC in football and Richmond though 1-AA has some potential to beat football teams like Duke anyway. The others would have to scramble for homes in conferences like the Am East, NE, CAA, Big South etc

A10 38Temple -2
A10 Richmond -3
A10 U.R.I. -5
A10 GWU -5
A10 UMASS -7
A10 Charlotte -13

The other approach would be for the 8 to pair up with the 8 team Patriot Conference, but their Bball is quite a bit weaker than A10's and top of MAAC's Catholic schools are. It does include some teams Notre Dame competes with in football obviously OOC:

Patr 56-Bucknell -1
Patr Lehigh -4
Patr American -2
Patr Holy Cross -3
Patr Lafayette -4
Patr Army -8
Patr Navy -4
Patr Colgate -7

Best case for BE and everybody's sanity, Missouri stays put in B12 @10 for time being, and SEC stops at 14, but that action likely causes a reaction somewhere.

[Duvall]

Boise, Air Force and Navy to be targeted by Big East?

Really?

[OldPhiKap]

I am starting the OldPhiKap conference. Everyone who doesn't want to be where they are, please PM me. I'll pick the best 16 teams and off we go.

Oh yeah, and any company that wants to sponsor my conference ("The Coca-Cola League" or "The Facebook Friends Group") can PM me as well.

[rthomas]

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/10/10/sp...-nytimessports

"The most stunning comment in the article was DeFilippo’s public admission that ESPN guided the A.C.C.’s decision to add Syracuse and Pittsburgh last month. “We always keep our television partners close to us,” DeFilippo told The Globe. “You don’t get extra money for basketball. It’s 85 percent football money. TV — ESPN — is the one who told us what to do. This was football; it had nothing to do with basketball.”

http://www.bostonglobe.com/sports/20...FxGM/story.xml

[towerview road]

Someone mentioned upthread Vandy. I've long thought they'd be a great addition to the ACC but I think they have some old boosters/alumni supporters who would be very upset so I don't think they're willing to move.

My father has long maintained that he wished there could be an "academic/athletic" conference. He'd put Duke, UNC-CH, UVA, Rice, Vanderbilt, Northwestern, Notre Dame, Boston College, Stanford, Navy, Army, and Air Force in a conference, if it were up to him. Of course I'm not actually proposing this conference, just my dad's wishful thinking.

[ACCBBallFan]

Boise, Air Force and Navy to be targeted by Big East?

Really?

Here's another link that corroborates yours. Desperate times call for desperate measures by both parties, the BE and the teams being wooed.

[url=http://espn.go.com/college-sports/story/_/id/7082348/air-force-falcons-exploring-options-other-sports-football-joins-big-east[/url]

So you can see the theme starting to emerge. Over time, the Big “East” overly concentrated on Basketball to detriment of Football and Academics with first round of CUSA teams.

As super conferences emerge, BE loses some of its better Football teams that also happen to be some of its better Basketball and Academic schools, first Cuse and Pitt and only a matter of time before either West VA or Louisville, for its football and better Bball, not its academics, is next.

Here's the UCONN sour grapes perspective link:

http://www.businessinsider.com/scand...erence-2011-10

To survive, Big East has to again do a Horace Greeley and Go West this time with football only offers to minor or mid-major being more politically correct conferences like MWC and CUSA whose football teams are not ready for major conference play in P12 or B12, but their Bball and in some cases academics are dilutive.

This temporarily keeps BE football alive, mortgages the “East” brand by going further central/West and dilutes basketball to prop up football until some day the Boise State and AFA go into the P12 super conference and the Houston and SMU’s, or likely Cincy and other of UL or West VA first and then these two, go into B12 or SEC, since very few temporarily annexed into BE meet the academic standards of ACC or B1G.

It makes some sense from Boise St and AFA perspective, both strong academically BTW, to only have to add 4 longer football flights, actually 3 and one not as long as Hawaii when they join MWC from WAC in 2012 or Seattle also joining MWC in 2012.

They each get an easier shot at BCS bid without Boise St. having to get crushed back to reality in one of the stronger football schedules every weekend.

Also makes sense for WAC rather than the more stable MVC to use them in a mutually beneficial non-football arragement to replace Hawaii to help AFA and Boise St keep their non-football travel costs down.

One of the comments in your link made some sense from football perspective, not as much from geography to also add Houston bad in Academics and Bball, SMU bad in Bball but good academically before B12 does, and instead of, or rather before, the other two rumored in both links ECU bad in both and Temple, better in Bball than academics:

"MustangMike October 09, 2011 at 7:03PM

East: West Virginia, Navy, UCONN, Rutgers, USF, UCF

West: AFA, Boise State, Louisville, Cincinnati, SMU, Houston

Add 3 Top 25 programs next week, assuming SMU and Houston both win."

Whether Missouri stays in B12 to level that off at 10 and someone else from BE joins SEC to get to 14, or whether MO is SEC 14 and B12 adds someone in BE to get back to at least 10, BE may still lose at least one more, West VA or UL, and have to have one more team besides those above (Temple or ECU or upgraded Nova) to keep 5 and add 7 for 12 in football.

And that's the best case for BE of B12 staying at 10 not yet going to 12 or SEC staying at 13-14, not yet going to 16. It only gets worse over time.

So BE responds/reacts/panics by adding at least 2-4 as football only and 3-4 in all sports gets BE up to a watered down 16-18 in Bball.

Boise St and Houston instead of Syracuse and Pitt is not a bad football trade, but leaves a lot to be desired in Bball as do UCF, SMU, Houston, ECU, any of these except Temple, still a bad trade in both sports for WV or UL but have to survive first, then worry about dilution in Bball.

At the same time, the 8 non-BE football schools already have Depaul, Seton Hall and Providence diluting Nova, G-town, Notre Dame, Marquette and St. Johns; in Bball.

For time being they still have UCONN, Cincy and one or both of WV and UL to offset the Bball dilution of USF and Rutgers. It’s a slow bleed as more Bball powers more attractive in football and academics depart BE to be replaced by schools such as Temple, UCF, ECU, SMU, and Houston.

Eventually at least for the top 5 of the 8 non-football BE schools, it makes more sense to stop the continual dilution and to merge with some of these Catholic school Bball teams:

WCC 26Gonzaga -1
A10 14Xavier -1
A10 St. Bonaventure -7
HOR Detroit -5
MVC 53-Creighton -4
WCC St. Mary's -1
MAAC 55-Iona -2
A10 Duquesne -4
MAAC Fairfield -1
WCC Santa Clara -4
A10 Dayton -7
WCC Portland -5

One day even leaving DePaul, Seton Hall and Providence in competition with some of these for who is least dilutive in a Bball only conference

[rthomas]

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/10/10/sp...-nytimessports

"The most stunning comment in the article was DeFilippo’s public admission that ESPN guided the A.C.C.’s decision to add Syracuse and Pittsburgh last month. “We always keep our television partners close to us,” DeFilippo told The Globe. “You don’t get extra money for basketball. It’s 85 percent football money. TV — ESPN — is the one who told us what to do. This was football; it had nothing to do with basketball.”

http://www.bostonglobe.com/sports/20...FxGM/story.xml

I wonder why the mods wanted to bury this. It's even on the front page.

[Duvall]

I wonder why the mods wanted to bury this. It's even on the front page.

I think we just have some merge-happy mods that will dump anything realignment-related into the omnibus thread. As you said, it's all over the front page.

I'm not sure about the collusion outrage, though. I would be surprised if every league did not have detailed information from its television partners about how much every potential addition would be worth. I assumed that's how these things were done.

[ForkFondler]

I wonder why the mods wanted to bury this. It's even on the front page.

My only problem with that post is that it's not "collusion" or a "scandal". It's what has obviously been happening. I'd call it "cooperation". If the BE finds that to be sufficiently nefarious, they can take their BB contract elsewhere next time. But I can see why the folks in Storrs would be particular upset by what the folks in Bristol did to them.

[DueBlevil]

My only problem with that post is that it's not "collusion". It's what is obviously happening. I'd call it "cooperation". If the BE finds that to be sufficiently nefarious, they can take their BB contract elsewhere next time.

Yeah, I agree. I think the wording DeFillipo used, that ESPN "told" the ACC what to do, has been problematic for some, but we shouldn't take those words too literally. Probably the ACC consulted ESPN before the offers to Pitt/Cuse and asked how it would affect the TV deal, ESPN told them how much more they would make, and they decided it would be reasonable to add Pitt and Syracuse. That's ESPN facilitating a move, encouraging it even, but not demanding it or arranging it.

[ForkFondler]

Well, that would rival the six biggest geographic misfits that arose from expansions, but at least it would only be for football.

Penn St and Nebraska are geographic misfits for B1G, compounded when they play one another.

A&M to SEC continues the trend as would Missouri to SEC. Missouri's best fit is in B12 and second best fit is in B1G, not the SEC.

USF is a geographic misfit for BE, but decent team with nowhere to go since UF wants Florida to itself and ACC has FSU and Miami already.

BC was a geographic misfit for ACC and is somewhat mitigated now by adding Syracuse and Pitt.

I don't think Nebraska belongs on that list. Iowa City is about the same distance from Lincoln as Ames. The two Kansas schools make the B12 a better geographic fit than the B1G, but only slightly. I also don't think that A&M and maybe Mizzou in the SEC is nearly as bas as USF or TCU in the BE, BC in the (current) ACC, or PSU in the B1G. Colorado in the PAC12 is worse.

The grandaddy of geographic misfits was Miami in the BE.

[Class of '94]

Yeah, I agree. I think the wording DeFillipo used, that ESPN "told" the ACC what to do, has been problematic for some, but we shouldn't take those words too literally. Probably the ACC consulted ESPN before the offers to Pitt/Cuse and asked how it would affect the TV deal, ESPN told them how much more they would make, and they decided it would be reasonable to add Pitt and Syracuse. That's ESPN facilitating a move, encouraging it even, but not demanding it or arranging it.

Here is a link about TCU and the expectations that they formally accept the Big 12 invitation as early as today: http://espn.go.com/dallas/story/_/id...-invite-monday.

In this article, it mentions from a Big 12 source that the conference received "expert information on the fit/value/enhancement to [their] league" that was clearly in reference to TCU. IMO, the expert information came from television partners; and they were and have been consulted on what moves would maximize the value of their TV contracts. I'm just suprised DeFillipo would come out and specifically mention ESPN or any television partner instead of being vague and taking generalitiees like the source did in the article above about TCU's impending move to the Big 12.

[Class of '94]

Sorry for the back to back posts, but after reading the front page articles on DBR,it left me wondering if Syracuse and Uconn would have been a better combination of schools to expand with than the Syracuse and Pitt. Based on the fact that UConn and not Pitt was the ACC's preference (first choice), I would think the league thought Syracuse and Uconn was the most favorable combination. I know there are many posters who do not like Uconn; but Uconn is in the NY market, has a decent football team and has powerhouse men and women basketball programs; and Uconn is a good school academically (although some may dispute this). I can't believe BC blocked this because I think BC and Uconn would have made a great rivalry and with the natural dislike for one another, would potentially have had fans tune in to watch their games. Saying that, Pitt is a very good choice to add to the ACC as well; and I'm not disappointed with their addition. But I think the notion that the ACC doesn't or didn't want Uconn has been dispelled by DeFillipio's revelations; and that there is plenty of support IMO for UConn; and that it may be a matter of time before Uconn is added (pure conjecture on my part).

[-bdbd]

Sorry for the back to back posts, but after reading the front page articles on DBR,it left me wondering if Syracuse and Uconn would have been a better combination of schools to expand with than the Syracuse and Pitt. Based on the fact that UConn and not Pitt was the ACC's preference (first choice), I would think the league thought Syracuse and Uconn was the most favorable combination. I know there are many posters who do not like Uconn; but Uconn is in the NY market, has a decent football team and has powerhouse men and women basketball programs; and U-con is a good school academically (although some may dispute this). I can't believe BC blocked this because I think BC and Uconn would have made a great rivalry and with the natural dislike for one another, would potentially have had fans tune in to watch their games. Saying that, Pitt is a very good choice to add to the ACC as well; and I'm not disappointed with their addition. But I think the notion that the ACC doesn't or didn't want Uconn has been dispelled by DeFillipio's revelations; and that there is plenty of support IMO for UConn; and that it may be a matter of time before Uconn is added (pure conjecture on my part).

A couple of thoughts, Class, as this is a theme I've been pondering as well. First, just setting aside TV and markets, I suspect that the ACC leadership views Pitt as a better fit than U-Con. That comes generally from a cultural and academic perspective. (Yes, I'm not in the "U-Con is an excellent academics/rankings school" camp -- and certainly Pitt comes with a higher perceived academic rating than U-Con.) I think the ACC leadership weighs that stuff - academics and culture - maybe more heavily than the casual fans. Second, there is the BC factor. I am told by close friends who are BC grads and involved in their alumni orgs that there was never any love lost between BC and U-Con in the Big East, and the fact that U-Con was largely behind the lawsuit (and lots of nasty press) directed at BC in the wake of their departure to the ACC has left a hugely sour taste in the mouth of the BC athletic department. I think I recall reading that soon after the lawsuit was filed the BC AD laid out a directive that BC would NOT play U-Con in any sports for a long time (or as little as possible). Don't underestimate that bitternessor BC's activism in opposing U-Con's admission. Third, don't forget that FOOTBALL is driving this expansion parade and I suspect that Pitt football is generally perceived as stronger than the new D1 entry that is U-Con football. (Yes, U-con has had some decent early FB success, but just lost their head coach to MD and I think are viewed as being on a bit of a downward swing for the next few years - not so for Pitt. More importantly, Pitt has more FB tradition and certainly opens up the talent-rich fields of PA H.S. football more to ACC recruiting.) Lastly, according to the data posted a month back in this string, U-Con doesn't have as much impact on the NYC TV market as you might think. IIRC they were about 4th or 5th in school rooting loyalty in that TV market, with around 7%, well behind Notre Dame - another ACC target - Rutgers (easily the top TV draw in the NY market), and PSU (yet another ACC target).

If I were a betting person I'd say that, yes, U-Con will eventually be wearing ACC colors. But there are some other targets that must be attempted first. If there is a strong pull to 16 teams, and ND and PSU fail to happen - long shots anyway - then Rutgers and U-Con seem to be obvious strong candidates. But in the short term the ACC "got it right" in getting the best two-school fit, geographic expansion into an important new market, cultural fits, academic fits, in what I perceive was a defensive move to hedge against SEC and Big10 hegemony. I don't think U-Con really helped themselves with the ACC leadership in their recent loud campaign pressing for an invitation to the ACC (whether or not the addition makes sense, I think that is just not how the ACC leaderhip prefers to do business), and they might have seen the effort as brash.

[jafarr1]

One thing that grabbing Pitt now has going for it is that it might take both Pitt and UConn off the Big Ten's radar. I think UConn really wants to end up in the ACC for basketball reasons, and from what I can tell, still would strongly prefer the ACC over the Big Ten. Pitt might not have had quite so strong an opinion, so this gives the ACC more options down the road.

Another thing: if UConn still holds out hope on joining the ACC, that really limits the options for the Big Ten to expand east, and since PSU has long wanted the Big Ten to expand that direction, limiting that option improves the opportunity for the ACC to sell PSU on better TV markets and a more desirable geography. (PSU is still a long shot, but who knows. TV money is driving all this craziness, so it might be enough to get PSU to jump.)

Still, it sounds like these weren't considerations this time around.