Page 8 of 101 FirstFirst ... 6789101858 ... LastLast
Results 141 to 160 of 2016
  1. #141
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    20 Minutes From The Heaven That Is Cameron Indoor
    Quote Originally Posted by JasonEvans View Post
    I didn't want to quote all of SCMatt's post, but in response to some of the questions he raised let me throw this out...

    Among the things that will happen --
    • In football, they will form a 4 or 8 or maybe even 16-team college football playoff that will bring in hundreds of millions. They will have 20 or 30 other teams playing in bowls.
    • They will form their own basketball tournament. Sure, they won't have a few schools like Gonzaga, Butler, Xavier, and Temple in their tourney, but it won't take long for all the high quality recruits to stop going to those schools and start only attending schools with a chance to win the real national title among the super teams.
    • They will probably throw out the entire NCAA rule book and set up their own. My bet is that it will be a lot simpler.
    • They may decide the best way to curb cheating is to just break down and start paying players, at least a little bit. Heck, they may even decide to pay the players a lot as an inducement to keep them in school and produce better quality of play along with more established stars which should lead to higher TV ratings.
    • As for the other sports... like women's hoops, LAX, track, swimming, golf, and so on... I suspect the new super conferences would just stage their own national titles and tournaments in those sports too. Who knows, maybe by only involving the big institutions, there might be a bit more fan interest in those sports and they might come closer to breaking even.


    I could be wrong about this, I fully admit that. But, if maximum revenues are the goal, then this has to happen, right? Where is the logic in operating under old rules and old revenue sharing systems when you can break off and form your own rules and revenues? Can anyone make a monetary case for the power conferences remaining hitched to the old NCAA?

    -Jason "I am not wishing for this, but I am not sure it is such a bad thing either" Evans
    Unfortunately, I agree with you Jason. It would be great for Football, but terrible for March Madness. For purist anyway. People tune in hoping to see Northern Iowa take out Kansas in the early rounds, but it will not be nearly as exciting to watch Miss St "upset" Kansas on the first day of the tourney. That will be a sad day if/when it happens.

    Great for the gridiron, bad for hoops. Basketball plays 2nd fiddle again...

  2. #142
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Delaware
    Quote Originally Posted by JasonEvans View Post
    • In football, they will form a 4 or 8 or maybe even 16-team college football playoff that will bring in hundreds of millions. They will have 20 or 30 other teams playing in bowls.
    • They will form their own basketball tournament. Sure, they won't have a few schools like Gonzaga, Butler, Xavier, and Temple in their tourney, but it won't take long for all the high quality recruits to stop going to those schools and start only attending schools with a chance to win the real national title among the super teams.
    • They will probably throw out the entire NCAA rule book and set up their own. My bet is that it will be a lot simpler.
    • They may decide the best way to curb cheating is to just break down and start paying players, at least a little bit. Heck, they may even decide to pay the players a lot as an inducement to keep them in school and produce better quality of play along with more established stars which should lead to higher TV ratings.
    • As for the other sports... like women's hoops, LAX, track, swimming, golf, and so on... I suspect the new super conferences would just stage their own national titles and tournaments in those sports too. Who knows, maybe by only involving the big institutions, there might be a bit more fan interest in those sports and they might come closer to breaking even.


    I could be wrong about this, I fully admit that. But, if maximum revenues are the goal, then this has to happen, right? Where is the logic in operating under old rules and old revenue sharing systems when you can break off and form your own rules and revenues? Can anyone make a monetary case for the power conferences remaining hitched to the old NCAA?

    -Jason "I am not wishing for this, but I am not sure it is such a bad thing either" Evans
    I'm not sure that a new umbrella organization, similar to the NCAA in terms of revenue sharing, oversight, and operating multiple championships, but only for 64-70 schools, would be feasible. The big problem with this is that it would be hard to get those schools within 4-5 conferences to agree on basic rules. Without precedent, whose to stop the SEC from insisting that there are no minimum academic requirements for athletes. John Infante of the Bylaw Blog wrote a great article on the subject about a month ago. For instance, why would a new organization pay so much money to fund championships in money losing sports when there's nothing compelling them to do it. This is after all, about making money, and the other sports do nothing but drain money for marginal benefits. I think that many schools are aware that the time, efforts, and costs in forming a new organization are great, and it may not happen for several years, if not decades. In the meantime, with the new contract that the Pac-12 just got and the emergence of the Longhorn Network, I don't the Pac-12 trying to jump to 14 or 16 right now, and even if they did, I don't see Texas jumping on the change if they have to fold in the Longhorn Network to the new Pac-12 regional networks.

    For the immediate future, I see the SEC taking A&M plus one more from the Big 12 or ACC. BYU will replace A&M, and the other school will be replaced by poaching one team from the Big East.

  3. #143
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    North Carolina

    ACC should get Proactive

    First time poster but long time reader so please be gentle.

    First I agree with Jason. I have thought all along that the NCAA's days are numbered if this consolidation of conferences happens. The four superconferneces will have their own playoff in football and have their own 64 team "March Madness" and ESPN et. al. will pay big money to carry it. College athletics will change forever (not sure if this is for the good or bad)

    If the consensus is that at the end of all this madness that we will be left with 4 (or maybe 5) superconferences then IMHO the ACC should get proactive and expand to 16 teams now. In this way they have a better chance of holding on to current membership (Miami excluded if they get the Death Penalty), get a better selection of the teams from the Big East or Big IX, and not get left with the leftovers of SEC and BigX expansion. If they choose wisely they may even be able to renegotiate the ESPN deal. My fear is that if the ACC takes it usual conservative approach the SEC/BigX will poach a few of our teams and the ACC as we know it will be scrambling just to survive.

    There are rumors all over several of the BigX boards that the BigX would love to have UNC and Duke. It increases TV viewership for the BigX network and adds quite a bit to BBall. I don't think this will ever happen unless the ACC falls apart due to inaction. If that happens who knows?

    I say if Armageddon is coming I would personally like to see the ACC come out fighting and have some control of its own destiny rather than let that destiny be dictated by the SEC and BigX.

    bbq-devil

  4. #144
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Roxboro, NC
    I haven't followed this nearly as much as you guys, but isn't it possible that the landscape really doesn't change that much? Say A&M does go to the SEC, then the SEC grabs one more to keep it even like UCF. Then the Big 12 grabs teams like Nevada, BYU, Boise St, or TCU to get them back to 12. That would leave the BCS conferences intact. Even if the SEC takes USF from the BE or an ACC team, they could be replaced by a Villanova or ECU.

    My point is that I don't think the whole thing will just be blown up. There apparently will continue to be some movement as A&M has indicated, but (IMHO) I don't see the super conferences happening anytime soon.

  5. #145
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Austin, TX
    Quote Originally Posted by nocilla View Post
    I haven't followed this nearly as much as you guys, but isn't it possible that the landscape really doesn't change that much? Say A&M does go to the SEC, then the SEC grabs one more to keep it even like UCF. Then the Big 12 grabs teams like Nevada, BYU, Boise St, or TCU to get them back to 12. That would leave the BCS conferences intact. Even if the SEC takes USF from the BE or an ACC team, they could be replaced by a Villanova or ECU.

    My point is that I don't think the whole thing will just be blown up. There apparently will continue to be some movement as A&M has indicated, but (IMHO) I don't see the super conferences happening anytime soon.
    I think your first paragraph is extremely likely (although it won't be UCF --- it would be Missouri or an ACC school). The problem is that if it's Mizzou, the Big XII (i.e. Texas and Oklahoma) can either add BYU and Pitt, or move to the Pac 12.

    The problem with teams like Villanova (already rejected by the Big East as a football school), Boise St. (a generation removed from a junior college and a one trick pony) and TCU (a new power player in football with a small alumni base), is that they don't bring anything to the table for Newscorp/Fox, Disney/ESPN, Viacom/CBS and NBC/COMCAST. As SCMatt mentioned, it's not about wins and losses as much as it is TV sets and media markets.

    I was shocked the Big East took on TCU. It's a great move for TCU, but the Big East bought high here in my view.

    And if the Big XII can't pull BYU or Pitt in to replace A&M, I think Texas and OU will begin making some noise. If the Pac 12 won't let Texas have some semblance of the LHN, Texas may very well go independent, if only temporarily. They can then reneogtiate with the networks for Tier 1 and Tier 2 rights (the LHN has the Tier 3 rights) with ESPN/LHN having the right to match. If the LHN payout is any indication, that will get bid up pretty high.

    I think it's more likely the Pac 12 would work with the LHN, but we'll see.

  6. #146
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Hot'Lanta... home of the Falcons!
    Quote Originally Posted by nocilla View Post
    I haven't followed this nearly as much as you guys, but isn't it possible that the landscape really doesn't change that much? Say A&M does go to the SEC, then the SEC grabs one more to keep it even like UCF. Then the Big 12 grabs teams like Nevada, BYU, Boise St, or TCU to get them back to 12. That would leave the BCS conferences intact. Even if the SEC takes USF from the BE or an ACC team, they could be replaced by a Villanova or ECU.

    My point is that I don't think the whole thing will just be blown up. There apparently will continue to be some movement as A&M has indicated, but (IMHO) I don't see the super conferences happening anytime soon.
    ECU? USF? Ain't no way the SEC takes one of those teams. The SEC and Big X are the bosses of the bosses (with the Pac whatever and the ACC just behind and the Big 12/Big East scrambling to figure out how to survive). When they expand, it will be by taking in prime-time teams that build the stature and revenue-base of the league. ECU and USF aren't even in the conversation. FSU, Clemson, Missouri, Louisville, Cincy -- those are the schools actually in the conversation here.

    -Jason "you are right that we may not see a titanic shift right away -- but I suspect the big conferences today and the big conferences in 5 years will be very different" Evans
    Why are you wasting time here when you could be wasting it by listening to the latest episode of the DBR Podcast?

  7. #147
    Quote Originally Posted by Newton_14 View Post
    Unfortunately, I agree with you Jason. It would be great for Football, but terrible for March Madness. For purist anyway. People tune in hoping to see Northern Iowa take out Kansas in the early rounds, but it will not be nearly as exciting to watch Miss St "upset" Kansas on the first day of the tourney. That will be a sad day if/when it happens.

    Great for the gridiron, bad for hoops. Basketball plays 2nd fiddle again...
    While I agree with Jason's other predictions, I'm not so sure about the implosion of March Madness. If it's all about the money, then I don't think anyone would be all that thrilled to just scrap the championship format that currently nets them close to a billion dollars a year in TV broadcast fees alone. The number of people who would cut out of the office on the afternoons of the first Thursday and Friday would plummet if Hampton, VCU and Utah State were replaced with Rutgers, Iowa and Arizona State. There would be no possibility of a cinderella, by definition, so nothing to gain casual viewers' interest and generate buzz and media attention for the second weekend. And it would mean a harder path to the Final Four for the big boys, since they would get a major conference, battle-tested (if bad) team in the first round instead of a completely overmatched team that's just happy to be there and has no chance. The bottom team in the Big Ten has a not-negligible chance at beating Kansas on any given night - Swofford doesn't.

    I just don't know that they'd kill that golden goose. Even if the NCAA as we know it were blown up as a governing body, some limited alternative body would spring up to run a basketball tournament.

  8. #148
    It's a pretty big assumption that we (KU) actually make it into a super conference, and therefore any "new" NCAA tournament featuring KU upset losses may not even be possible.

    As a fan, I think it's pretty remote, but nobody is sleeping easy.

  9. #149
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Roxboro, NC
    Quote Originally Posted by JasonEvans View Post
    ECU? USF? Ain't no way the SEC takes one of those teams. The SEC and Big X are the bosses of the bosses (with the Pac whatever and the ACC just behind and the Big 12/Big East scrambling to figure out how to survive). When they expand, it will be by taking in prime-time teams that build the stature and revenue-base of the league. ECU and USF aren't even in the conversation. FSU, Clemson, Missouri, Louisville, Cincy -- those are the schools actually in the conversation here.

    -Jason "you are right that we may not see a titanic shift right away -- but I suspect the big conferences today and the big conferences in 5 years will be very different" Evans
    Just to be clear, I didn't say the SEC would take ECU. I said the ACC may take ECU if the SEC poaches an ACC team like FSU/Clemson. A team like ECU or UCF could move into the ACC or Big East if needed. However, I don't think any ACC teams are leaving. The biggest moves I see possibly happening would be the Big 12 taking some quality Mountain West teams, getting them back to 10 or 12, in an attempt to keep the conference relevant. Then again, I could be wrong.

  10. #150
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    lives near a number of big white buildings
    Lots of speculation in this topic discussion, and sometimes it is fun to speculate about possibilities...also considering future options is often a good planning exercise.

    But almost all of the schools who have been mentioned as potential targets for being absorbed into the ACC-- whether in going from 12 to 16 or replacing defecting ACC members--give me the "you've got to be kidding" creeps.

    Some for ethical reasons pertaining to their schools, programs, and/or coaches.
    Some because they are academically primitive.
    Some because they just aren't regarded publicly as institutions held in high regard for one reason or another.

  11. #151
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Quote Originally Posted by SmartDevil View Post
    Lots of speculation in this topic discussion, and sometimes it is fun to speculate about possibilities...also considering future options is often a good planning exercise.

    But almost all of the schools who have been mentioned as potential targets for being absorbed into the ACC-- whether in going from 12 to 16 or replacing defecting ACC members--give me the "you've got to be kidding" creeps.

    Some for ethical reasons pertaining to their schools, programs, and/or coaches.
    Some because they are academically primitive.
    Some because they just aren't regarded publicly as institutions held in high regard for one reason or another.
    Academically primitive? Huh?

    The schools most often talked about as ACC additions are Pitt and Syracuse, both fine schools.

  12. #152
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Undisclosed
    Quote Originally Posted by SmartDevil View Post
    Some for ethical reasons pertaining to their schools, programs, and/or coaches.{cough}Miami{cough}
    Some because they are academically primitive.{cough}{VTech}{cough}
    Some because they just aren't regarded publicly as institutions held in high regard for one reason or another.{gag}{VTech}{gag}
    Fixed it for you. Because, yes, we've already seen that movie.

  13. #153
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Undisclosed
    Quote Originally Posted by Duvall View Post
    Academically primitive? Huh?

    The schools most often talked about as ACC additions are Pitt and Syracuse, both fine schools.
    I can't imagine snagging one or both of those, but they would be good additions to any conference.

  14. #154
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    lives near a number of big white buildings
    Quote Originally Posted by Duvall View Post
    Academically primitive? Huh?

    The schools most often talked about as ACC additions are Pitt and Syracuse, both fine schools.
    Agreed....and those happen to be two schools discussed who I think would be good fits with the conference.

  15. #155
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    lives near a number of big white buildings
    Quote Originally Posted by OldPhiKap View Post
    Fixed it for you. Because, yes, we've already seen that movie.
    Agreed...Va Tech and Miami were both questionable choices to be invited in the first place.

  16. #156
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Raleigh, NC
    Quote Originally Posted by Duvall View Post
    Academically primitive? Huh?

    The schools most often talked about as ACC additions are Pitt and Syracuse, both fine schools.
    Pitt and Syracuse? Yea. Two thumbs up.

    Louisville. Memphis. West Virginia? Not so much.

  17. #157
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Tampa
    Quote Originally Posted by SmartDevil View Post
    Agreed...Va Tech and Miami were both questionable choices to be invited in the first place.
    and F$U...
    ___________________
    Mike Stein
    Trinity '97, Tent #1 '97
    Tampa

  18. #158
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Hot'Lanta... home of the Falcons!
    So, Oklahoma is now publically saying that it is exploring options. All the talk is that the Sooners think the Big 12 (currently 9) is on borrowed time and they want to get while the getting is good. Supposedly, they are most interested in the Pac xx. The Pac xx would loooove to get Oklahoma and Texas but Texas' $300 million Longhorn Network deal would not fit into the Pac xx's rules regarding team-specific networks. Apparently, the most likely scenario now is that Okie and Okie St would go to the Pac xx. Of course, the moment Okie flees, Texas will know that the Big 12 is dead and will go in search of a new league... unless Texas wants to go indy, which is a possibility I suppose.

    In any event, the noise would make it seem that the Big 12 is doomed... at least as a major conference. I'd guess that we will see 3-5 Big 12 teams flee for new homes by 2012, 2013 at the latest.

    The ACC should really think about being proactive here, though I am not sure what action the league should take. Absorbing a Big 12 team makes no sense geographically.

    --Jason "IT is going down... we just need to see what IT is" Evans
    Why are you wasting time here when you could be wasting it by listening to the latest episode of the DBR Podcast?

  19. #159
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Austin, TX
    Quote Originally Posted by JasonEvans View Post
    So, Oklahoma is now publically saying that it is exploring options. All the talk is that the Sooners think the Big 12 (currently 9) is on borrowed time and they want to get while the getting is good. Supposedly, they are most interested in the Pac xx. The Pac xx would loooove to get Oklahoma and Texas but Texas' $300 million Longhorn Network deal would not fit into the Pac xx's rules regarding team-specific networks. Apparently, the most likely scenario now is that Okie and Okie St would go to the Pac xx. Of course, the moment Okie flees, Texas will know that the Big 12 is dead and will go in search of a new league... unless Texas wants to go indy, which is a possibility I suppose.

    In any event, the noise would make it seem that the Big 12 is doomed... at least as a major conference. I'd guess that we will see 3-5 Big 12 teams flee for new homes by 2012, 2013 at the latest.

    The ACC should really think about being proactive here, though I am not sure what action the league should take. Absorbing a Big 12 team makes no sense geographically.

    --Jason "IT is going down... we just need to see what IT is" Evans
    How about this - ACC invites Texas, KU, Mizzou, and Texas Tech. Let's Texas have it's own network and we are done. That is proactive. Unlikely. But proactive.

  20. #160
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    20 Minutes From The Heaven That Is Cameron Indoor
    Quote Originally Posted by JasonEvans View Post
    So, Oklahoma is now publically saying that it is exploring options. All the talk is that the Sooners think the Big 12 (currently 9) is on borrowed time and they want to get while the getting is good. Supposedly, they are most interested in the Pac xx. The Pac xx would loooove to get Oklahoma and Texas but Texas' $300 million Longhorn Network deal would not fit into the Pac xx's rules regarding team-specific networks. Apparently, the most likely scenario now is that Okie and Okie St would go to the Pac xx. Of course, the moment Okie flees, Texas will know that the Big 12 is dead and will go in search of a new league... unless Texas wants to go indy, which is a possibility I suppose.

    In any event, the noise would make it seem that the Big 12 is doomed... at least as a major conference. I'd guess that we will see 3-5 Big 12 teams flee for new homes by 2012, 2013 at the latest.

    The ACC should really think about being proactive here, though I am not sure what action the league should take. Absorbing a Big 12 team makes no sense geographically.

    --Jason "IT is going down... we just need to see what IT is" Evans
    Quote Originally Posted by A-Tex Devil View Post
    How about this - ACC invites Texas, KU, Mizzou, and Texas Tech. Let's Texas have it's own network and we are done. That is proactive. Unlikely. But proactive.
    Well, after listening to Kevin White on the Inside Duke Football Radio show today, I am convinced more than ever that this race to 16 Team Leagues is going to happen and happen soon. He never directly mentioned the ACC exploring their options, but he gave me the impression, that is exactly what is going on. He also made an interesting comment, suggesting schools would have to look at their situation, and see if it would be beneficial to move to another conference. I took it to mean Duke is exploring all options.

    I think the ACC needs to be proactive to protect itself, and try to go to 16 as soon as possible. As much as I hate hate freaking hate to see these mega-conferences, I am afraid if the ACC is not proactive, they could go the way of the Big 12 (which is doomed imo), and fall apart with many of our teams heading to the SEC and Big 10.

    I am sold on Syracuse, and Pitt, and I would ask Notre Dame as well. I know some folks don't like them, but West Virginia might be the best option for that 16th team, especially logistics wise.

    If Notre Dame says no, and logistics gets tossed to the wind, I would take 2 of the 4 ATD has in his list above and invite Texas and Kanas. Both would be great fits Basketball wise.

    The Clock is ticking Mr Swofford, so please do not bungle this...

Similar Threads

  1. Baseball Realignment
    By SoCalDukeFan in forum Off Topic
    Replies: 33
    Last Post: 07-06-2011, 11:36 PM
  2. Big East Realignment
    By johnb in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 21
    Last Post: 04-23-2011, 09:29 PM
  3. The Kyrie Irving Toe Vigil
    By diveonthefloor in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 1507
    Last Post: 02-05-2011, 06:25 PM
  4. NCAA Conference Realignment
    By A-Tex Devil in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 78
    Last Post: 03-04-2010, 05:16 PM
  5. Sentinel: 5 Years After Realignment: Are Schools Better Off?
    By gotham devil in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 07-04-2008, 11:28 PM

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

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