The Conference Realignment Vigil- Update: Terps to Big10?

[Jderf]

If nothing else, Duke should see a priority in becoming competitive enough in football to bolster itself in the changing landscape. As much as the NCAA tournament makes, football keeps D1 athletics as a whole viable, and we can't afford to be left out. For that alone, every Duke basketball fan should at least be rooting for a little football success.

But why not? I feel like the endowment will do fine without a top-tier football program, so it seems like we can afford a lot of things. What exactly is this worst-case-scenario that all this hand-wringing is about? The impending football-apocalypse is nigh, but for the life of me I can't seem to figure out what is so scary about it.

Besides, I'm more worried by the fact that we are talking about "keeping D1 athletics as a whole viable" in the first place. Isn't that the problem that needs to be addressed?

[Faison1]

I wouldn't be at all surprised. Clemson is a football minded school and their fans and boosters measure themselves almost exclusively against South Carolina and vice-versa. They've gotten the short end over the last 3-years and they aren't happy at all. On top of tha,t the latest rumors have USC fans crowing loud about how Clemson will be left out in the cold in the ACC. They really couldn't stand being left out in football and I would not be at all surprised to see them panic in this situation.

I just can't see how anyone in South Carolina could possibly be excited about traveling to Texas and Oklahoma for away games.

I hope it's not true...it will be a sad day if a founding member leaves for Texas.

[lotusland]

In regards to the ACC, I'm surprised no one on this thread is talking about Clemson and FSU. I was just told by a Clemson fan that the Clamson A.D. is holding a press conference today at 1:30. I'm assuming it has to do with yesterday's rumors that Clemson is bolting for the BigXII.

Has anyone been following this, or are we not allowed to discuss rumors/subjects such as these?

My Clemson buds are not aware of a presser scheduled for this afternoon so I think may not be correct. Big 12 rumors have been flying lately though but it may be only wishful thinking. Most of the IPTAY folk would go to the Pac whatever if it meant not losing prestige in comparison with South Carolina.

[Dev11]

But why not? I feel like the endowment will do fine without a top-tier football program, so it seems like we can afford a lot of things. What exactly is this worst-case-scenario that all this hand-wringing is about? The impending football-apocalypse is nigh, but for the life of me I can't seem to figure out what is so scary about it.

Besides, I'm more worried by the fact that we are talking about "keeping D1 athletics as a whole viable" in the first place. Isn't that the problem that needs to be addressed?

It comes back to wanting to remain on top of the basketball world. We can't be the kings of college basketball if we're not in a top conference, and if a sport is dominated by teams not in the 'power conferences,' it is downgraded in the general eyes of the public. This is my opinion, obviously, but I think it's a factor in considering how we operate going forward. If NCAA basketball isn't as prominent in the future because it's ruled by non-power conference teams, Duke Athletics makes less money, and the whole athletic program is negatively affected. Unlike some, I'm not at all interested in Duke going the way of U Chicago, so we must keep football at least respectable.

Interesting debate, for sure with all the unknowns out there.

[CameronBornAndBred]

It comes back to wanting to remain on top of the basketball world. We can't be the kings of college basketball if we're not in a top conference, and if a sport is dominated by teams not in the 'power conferences,' it is downgraded in the general eyes of the public. This is my opinion, obviously, but I think it's a factor in considering how we operate going forward. If NCAA basketball isn't as prominent in the future because it's ruled by non-power conference teams, Duke Athletics makes less money, and the whole athletic program is negatively affected. Unlike some, I'm not at all interested in Duke going the way of U Chicago, so we must keep football at least respectable.

Interesting debate, for sure with all the unknowns out there.

Great reasoning there. There is also a bunch of great reasoning in this article from FSCarolinas, along with a look at why luring the Irish would be a much needed move.

With a four-team playoff coming to college football in 2014, this new deal between the SEC and Big 12 solidifies the Big 12, which has lost four teams to other power conferences in the last 12 months. It remained quite poachable, but the increased payout for its teams and relationship with the SEC guaranteeing the league a place at the playoff table reduces that possibility significantly. Instead of losing teams, look for the Big 12 to add a few, with FSU and Clemson, and perhaps more ACC teams..

http://www.foxsportscarolinas.com/05...04&feedID=7628

Gotta wonder what Syracuse and Pitt are thinking now. They may have just jumped from one sinking ship to find their new boat is also a bit leaky.

[-bdbd]

I love watching a game at WW, there's not a bad seat in the house and even our Carolina friends seem to enjoy watching the games there. That is the problem right there. I find it silly that we're concerned with building a bigger stadium when we can't fill...can't come close to filling the ones we have.

As for the track, it seems to be the splinter under everyone nail, but I've never really minded it.

I agree with the previous poster, if only 4 conferences are going to be included then something else will materialize and I'd be completely happy being in the other.

Unfortunately the "enjoyable experience" for the Kerlina fans has been all-too-often enhanced by the results on the field in recent years.

I too love to watch games at WW, BUT it really is not a first-rate FB venue. Forget SIZE, where the WW capacity is pretty smallish (apx 33K) compared to our ACC bretherin - BTW it used to be configured for many more seats, and has held 50K+ - and instead look at he sight-lines, surrounding amenities (bathrooms, etc), concessions and even parking. To my understanding the focus has not been on making a bigger venue, but rather making a better venue. For example, taking out the track and lowering the field gets fans closer to the action and improves everyone's sight-lines. I'd recommend taking in a game at someplace like Ga Tech, NC or even an NFL stadium. You'll see quickly how much more you feel "on top of the action" when looking more down onto the field or over a thirty yard "buffer" between stadium/seats and playing field. But the bottom line is that, by enhancing the experience - sight lines, closeness to the action, facillities, parking, product on the field, traditions, etc - you will inherently attract more people to the event.

As others have pointed out, there is a real danger in the ACC losing top-flight FB status, being left out of the big-4; as Duke, like the rest of the ACC, benefits greatly from all of the revenue (TV and otherwise) and status that the league brings in with FB, serving to subsidize many other (non-rev) programs here. While Duke may not be quite as vulnerable as some ACC FB-centric schools, we still would be greatly adversely affected by any drop in conference FB stature and/or revenue.

[johnb]

While Florida State seems to be run by dunderheads, they can do the math: $20 million exit fee to make a POSSIBLE 2 or 3 million extra a year while putting themselves in a much less likely position to be in the national championship game BUT putting themselves and their nonrevenue sports >1000 miles and a time zone away from the powers that be. It seems silly. If Florida State, Miami, NC State, Clemson, Georgia Tech, and Virginia Tech were all to go away, however, and form the eastern bloc of the SEC and/or Big 12, then we'd have a few problems.

And that's because most of those places have big, passionate fan bases who would likely follow them online and to bowl games. Of course, most of the teams wouldn't be going to bowl games if they had to play in the SEC or Big 12, but they don't really believe that--they might just see the money and the recruiting and think they could beat OU/Texas or Alabama/LSU often enough to make it a reasonable gamble.

As for Duke, I haven't been to a game for years, but the track does make us seem kinda bush league. Surely some rich alum could toss over $25 million, get naming rights to the field, and make it look cool. And possibly get the tv cameras to aim at the populated side of the field (or, better yet, get both sides filled). As everyone has said, football rules, and big state schools rule football, but there are enough Notre Dames, Stanfords, and Dukes that indicate that there should be a continued presence for these schools in the top 64-96.

I'd guess that the real shake-out won't be related to the national championship caliber games or even conference alignment (thought it's related) but simply to finances. If many of these programs are losing money, then their schools and alums will just have to decide whether they can afford to play at the top level.

[ForkFondler]

To my understanding the focus has not been on making a bigger venue, but rather making a better venue. For example, taking out the track and lowering the field gets fans closer to the action and improves everyone's sight-lines. I'd recommend taking in a game at someplace like Ga Tech, NC or even an NFL stadium. You'll see quickly how much more you feel "on top of the action" when looking more down onto the field or over a thirty yard "buffer" between stadium/seats and playing field. But the bottom line is that, by enhancing the experience - sight lines, closeness to the action, facillities, parking, product on the field, traditions, etc - you will inherently attract more people to the event.

Even if attendance weren't increased, better seats would command higher ticket prices. Duke can't give the end zone seats away for most games, but if they had 10,000 seats where the track is now, they could easily get $50+ for them.

[lotusland]

Even if attendance weren't increased, better seats would command higher ticket prices. Duke can't give the end zone seats away for most games, but if they had 10,000 seats where the track is now, they could easily get $50+ for them.

Maybe but I don't think that makes any difference as to whether the ACC falls apart and, if so, whether Duke gets picked up by another big 4 football conference. I don't think Duke fits in the big 4 football conference model period. But if everyone else is out then obviously they aren't in which means their fans are no longer as invested in that product. So it seems to me that product being offered by the big 4 is thereby diminished. That's why I don't think a Big 4 conference model that completely excludes everyone else will happen. Even so the football depended schools like Clemson, FSU, Miami, VT, Pitt and maybe even NCSU may not wait around to find out what is left when the dust settles. I don't see where Duke has any play to make though. Right now with K I think they maintain a high profile basketball program regardless of the conference affiliation.

Right now Duke could be the Notre Dame of basketball with no conference and probably still have almost every game televised. That status will be tested when K retires though.

[Jderf]

Well, here is one of my fears (or maybe hopes) that I haven't really seen adequately addressed:

As many, many people are suggesting, the four currently-aligned "power conferences" may very well end up making some gigantic, unprecedented move away from the NCAA to form their own sports super-conference/mega-league/ultra-fun-group. In doing so, they would almost certainly be leaving everybody else out in the cold.

But, when the NCAA money starts to dry up, I wouldn't predict that all of those schools will simply sit back and say, "Aw shucks. Nice play. Alright then, you can have your superconference." No. Instead, seeing as we live in a civilized and modernized world, I'd expect the response to involve a heavy dose of everyone suing the pants off each other. Over a thousand different colleges, many with impressive law schools, would be instantly furious. A teeming horde of university presidents would descend upon Washington. It would be a Wild West of rapid-fire, spray-n-pray litigation.

In that situation, all bets are off. NCAA, BCS, "student-athletes," tax-exempt status, impermissible benefits, standards of eligibility, pay-the-players, scholarships, financial aid -- all the rules would be up for negotiation. It would be chaos.

Or maybe not.

Thoughts?

[Indoor66]

What is the goal? Do you want Duke to build a football program to compete with Texas, Florida, Alabama and Ohio State? Not going to happen. What was the last small private school to win a national championship in football?

In response to your question:

Auburn, 2010

U of Miami, 2001, 1991, 1989

Notre Dame, 1988

U of Miami, 1987

Brigham Young University, 1984

U of Miami, 1983

Notre Dame, 1977

It does happen with some regularity.

[Duvall]

In response to your question:

Auburn, 2010

U of Miami, 2001, 1991, 1989

Notre Dame, 1988

U of Miami, 1987

Brigham Young University, 1984

U of Miami, 1983

Notre Dame, 1977

It does happen with some regularity.

Auburn is a public school.

[Indoor66]

Auburn is a public school.

I stand corrected. I misread the Wiki article. Shows what happens to old eyes late in the day, durn it.

[A-Tex Devil]

Well, here is one of my fears (or maybe hopes) that I haven't really seen adequately addressed:

As many, many people are suggesting, the four currently-aligned "power conferences" may very well end up making some gigantic, unprecedented move away from the NCAA to form their own sports super-conference/mega-league/ultra-fun-group. In doing so, they would almost certainly be leaving everybody else out in the cold.

But, when the NCAA money starts to dry up, I wouldn't predict that all of those schools will simply sit back and say, "Aw shucks. Nice play. Alright then, you can have your superconference." No. Instead, seeing as we live in a civilized and modernized world, I'd expect the response to involve a heavy dose of everyone suing the pants off each other. Over a thousand different colleges, many with impressive law schools, would be instantly furious. A teeming horde of university presidents would descend upon Washington. It would be a Wild West of rapid-fire, spray-n-pray litigation.

In that situation, all bets are off. NCAA, BCS, "student-athletes," tax-exempt status, impermissible benefits, standards of eligibility, pay-the-players, scholarships, financial aid -- all the rules would be up for negotiation. It would be chaos.

Or maybe not.

Thoughts?

Why do the "Big Four" have to agree to allow others into their club? I am not asking that flippantly, I am really curious if anti-trust laws can reach that far. I get why the BCS might be seen as an antitrust violation, but the NCAA is not.

If the "Big Four" start a new football division that's as different from the NCAA as the NCAA is from NAIA, why do they have to allow entry? Now there may be state legislatures upset with this that could play around with funding or the NCAA could threaten non-revenue sports of the exiting schools (but would they?), but is there a lawsuit there outside breaches of various contracts? Boggles the mind.

[A-Tex Devil]

While Florida State seems to be run by dunderheads, they can do the math: $20 million exit fee to make a POSSIBLE 2 or 3 million extra a year while putting themselves in a much less likely position to be in the national championship game BUT putting themselves and their nonrevenue sports >1000 miles and a time zone away from the powers that be. It seems silly. If Florida State, Miami, NC State, Clemson, Georgia Tech, and Virginia Tech were all to go away, however, and form the eastern bloc of the SEC and/or Big 12, then we'd have a few problems.

Florida St.'s math is as follows: They won't see $17MM per year under the ACC contract until 2021. Under the Big XII contract, the schools are going to be $20MM per year as soon as 2015. Additionally, under the Big XII, Florida St. can try to sell their third tier rights, perhaps back to ESPN at a higher price. UT got $15MM. Let's say Florida St. is worth a third of that. That's another $5MM. I'm not saying that is what they'll get, I'm saying that is what they envision.

But here is why Florida St. is really jumpy. Consider any variation of the new playoff system -- either top 4 based on a system, or top 4 conference champs out of top 6, plus a wild card. Now check out this chart:

9sapp1.jpg

Where do you see the ACC getting to take part in the playoff since FSU fell apart? 2007 with a 2 loss VaTech team. The ACC has missed the top 10 altogether 4 times in the BCS era. This is what the ACC football schools are focusing on. Is it short sided, lacking in a full understanding of circumstances, lacking in a good look in the mirror and ignoring the cyclical nature of things? Absolutely. But you can also look at this chart as an indictment on whether the ACC should be included in the "Big 4," and that's what FSU is afraid of more than anything else --- being left out.

[roywhite]

Where do you see the ACC getting to take part in the playoff since FSU fell apart? 2007 with a 2 loss VaTech team. The ACC has missed the top 10 altogether 4 times in the BCS era. This is what the ACC football schools are focusing on. Is it short sided, lacking in a full understanding of circumstances, lacking in a good look in the mirror and ignoring the cyclical nature of things? Absolutely. But you can also look at this chart as an indictment on whether the ACC should be included in the "Big 4," and that's what FSU is afraid of more than anything else --- being left out.

Well, you follow this stuff pretty closely, A-Tex...are we about to say goodbye to the Seminoles?

Can you sift through the rumors and identify another ACC school close to jumping?

[Duvall]

Florida St.'s math is as follows: They won't see $17MM per year under the ACC contract until 2021. Under the Big XII contract, the schools are going to be $20MM per year as soon as 2015. Additionally, under the Big XII, Florida St. can try to sell their third tier rights, perhaps back to ESPN at a higher price. UT got $15MM. Let's say Florida St. is worth a third of that. That's another $5MM. I'm not saying that is what they'll get, I'm saying that is what they envision.

FSU can envision what they like, but it's not yet clear that *Texas* is worth a third of the money that they are getting from LHN. Just because ESPN made one bad deal doesn't mean someone else will make another one.

[-jk]

In response to your question:

Auburn, 2010

U of Miami, 2001, 1991, 1989

Notre Dame, 1988

U of Miami, 1987

Brigham Young University, 1984

U of Miami, 1983

Notre Dame, 1977

It does happen with some regularity.

What I read from that data (with the Auburn correction) is one small private school champ in the ESPN/hyper-money last 20 years.

-jk

[pfrduke]

What I read from that data (with the Auburn correction) is one small private school champ in the ESPN/hyper-money last 20 years.

-jk

And that one being a school that had won multiple times previously, not a school trying to build a program from the ground up.

[A-Tex Devil]

Well, you follow this stuff pretty closely, A-Tex...are we about to say goodbye to the Seminoles?

Can you sift through the rumors and identify another ACC school close to jumping?

It looks like FSU is gone. I made a bet over a bottle of Bulleit Rye that by the time we kick off in the fall, FSU will have announced they will be playing in the Big XII in 2014. I am pretty confident I'll be enjoying sazeracs and manhattans all fall, or at least the first weekend. As for the second (or third or fourth) schools, I don't know. OU wants Louisville. The rest of the conference prefers Clemson or maybe Ga Tech, both of whom are playing things much closer to the vest (if they are playing at all). The ND non-football to the Big XII rumors have heated it up today, so there is that. One thing I am pretty sure of, DeLoss and UT do NOT want to fill up the conference too much (beyond 12) until it is crystal clear what Notre Dame is going to do. I still don't buy ND to Big XII in football, but the guys playing the long game in the Big XII clearly want to keep that option open.

But I think FSU is gone. They've gone Aggie, if you will, and burnt some bridges that I'm not sure the rest of the conference cares to work hard to rebuild. I understood from reports that the ACC meetings were AWK-WARD, and that Swofford may have even been futilely asked to resign. But I have hope for the ACC. UNC can lead NC State (by law) and Duke and Wake (by circumstance) around by the nose to create a pretty good core along with Virginia, Va Tech, MD so that the worst damage to the ACC is *maybe* losing 2 schools then gaining Big East schools. I think VaTech is the linchpin, somewhat surprisingly. They provide some credibility in football and the face of the program wants to stay in the ACC. But if they go, then I'll start to worry.

FSU can envision what they like, but it's not yet clear that *Texas* is worth a third of the money that they are getting from LHN. Just because ESPN made one bad deal doesn't mean someone else will make another one.

The LHN is a 15 year contract. Even if it's a loss leader for ESPN, it is a good deal because they have one of the top 2 college football brands locked up, allowing it more leverage in everything from the Big XII contract to realignment as a whole. You can call it a bad deal now. Let's talk in 3 1/2 years when we are 5 years into it and another 3 1/2 years into the internet streaming revolution. Patience.