The Conference Realignment Vigil- Update: Terps to Big10?

[MarkD83]

I'm curious to see how long the biggest scandals become history. UConn goes to a couple of Final Fours with a new coach, and I'd guess they're fine. Give Penn State 5 years of cleanliness, and I'd guess they're fine. Even Carolina will be seen on DBR to be exemplary in, oh, about the half life of plutonium.

Is that for Plutonium - 244 (800 million yrs) or Plutonium - 238 (88 years) or Plutonium -239 (24,000 years)

[Duvall]

Luke Winn: After realignment, there's little doubt that the strongest hoops conference, top-to-bottom, is the ACC.

[hurleyfor3]

I'm curious to see how long the biggest scandals become history. UConn goes to a couple of Final Fours with a new coach, and I'd guess they're fine. Give Penn State 5 years of cleanliness, and I'd guess they're fine. Even Carolina will be seen on DBR to be exemplary in, oh, about the half life of plutonium.

We'll be arguing about whether the ACC adding Stanford in all sports except blernsball is good for the conference, and whom else it needs to add to bring the conference to a nice round 128 members.

[ForkFondler]

As I always have been, I'm completely intrigued by this conference realignment stuff. I'm very interested to see the differing viewpoints on a 16th team.

Based on Sage's table above and others' postings in this and other threads, I have compiled the following list of possible 16th teams.

In no particular order:

Louisville
UConn
Rutgers
Temple
Navy (football only) / Georgetown (e.g.; all sports)
Villanova (if committed to D-1 football)
Eastern Carolina
Cincinnati
Wildcard: Penn State (I believe this is highly unlikely, no matter how badly we may - or may not - want it)
Others?


I see three foundational questions:

1) Would the ACC go for another football-only member?
2) To what degree does the ACC want to stay within its "traditional" geographic footprint: the Atlantic Coast? (please no digs at VT, Miami, BC, etc.)
3) What is the ACC's viewpoint regarding long-standing football programs versus relative newcomer programs? In other words, do they invest in the future or go with tradition?


I will reserve my views at this point, as I'd love to hear what others think on these and other possible questions.

- Chillin

The only reason to bring in Navy would be to get ND as a full member. The ACC could still stick with 15 for basketball, or bring in GT or Villanova as Navy's other half -- there you get into academics (GT) vs new market (Nova)

[msdukie]

If you watch the ACC/ND press conference and subsequent interviews, it is quite clear that the ACC is staying at 15 and is NOT adding a 16th team, unless ND becomes an ACC Football member. Any other speculation re: a 16th team appears to be a waste of time.

[johnb]

Is that for Plutonium - 244 (800 million yrs) or Plutonium - 238 (88 years) or Plutonium -239 (24,000 years)

reasonable people can disagree, though few would seriously argue that Carolina could rehabilitate itself in 88 years.

We'll be arguing about whether the ACC adding Stanford in all sports except blernsball is good for the conference, and whom else it needs to add to bring the conference to a nice round 128 members.

one can hardly expect Stanford to join for blernsball given that, by then, it will own the patents for the forced in utero transplantation technology of blernsball's interactive intracranial mirror neuron gaming modules, and most of the ancillary, optional, high-end holographic and tasty snack/beer technology.

[rthomas]

Luke Winn: After realignment, there's little doubt that the strongest hoops conference, top-to-bottom, is the ACC.

If a conference poaches 6 teams from what is generally considered to be the best basketball conference, it should become the best basketball conference.

The number of Big East teams in the ACC is greater than the number of original ACC teams currently in the ACC.

[SCMatt33]

If a conference poaches 6 teams from what is generally considered to be the best basketball conference, it should become the best basketball conference.

The number of Big East teams in the ACC is greater than the number of original ACC teams currently in the ACC.

I thought it was 7 original teams, to 6 Big East teams now, with Ga Tech, and FSU not being part of either category.

On another note, even though they lost, Louisinana-Monroe almost beat their second straight SEC team. I think the Big East just offered them membership in football.

[jimsumner]

If a conference poaches 6 teams from what is generally considered to be the best basketball conference, it should become the best basketball conference.

The number of Big East teams in the ACC is greater than the number of original ACC teams currently in the ACC.

Not a math major, I gather.

[rthomas]

Not a math major, I gather.

haha..I meant to type "greater than or equal to".

[opossum]

one can hardly expect Stanford to join for blernsball given that, by then, it will own the patents for the forced in utero transplantation technology of blernsball's interactive intracranial mirror neuron gaming modules, and most of the ancillary, optional, high-end holographic and tasty snack/beer technology.

I couldn't disagree more -- the new 7-blern and neuro-optical squirrel interface requirements going into effect in the 26018 season pretty much force their hands. Besides what other conference would they join? The Andes Federation? The LAC? Stanford will be an all-sports member of the ACC by 26020. Done deal.

As for the 128th team, my vote is for the Munson Institute. Great academics, and gives us market and recruiting access to the Kuyper Belt. Or maybe Rutgers.

[Class of '94]

I completely understand and agree with the ACC waiting to pickup a 16th member until if and when ND becomes a full member in football. That said, my concern is by that time it possibly happens, there won't be much left to pcik from. IMO, Louisville, Cincinatti, Rutgers and UConn are the best schools left (assuming Nova doesn't upgrad football to Div 1). Rutgers and Uconn have been mentioned in the past as possible targets for the Big 10 in order to get into the NY market. Louisville and Cincinatti (assuming BYU doesn't come back into play) would be viable candidates for the Big 12 to move back to 12 schools. I know all of this would be driven by TV and market share; but if it was found later that it made financial sense for the Big 10 and Big 12 to make these moves before the ACC was ready to choose a 16th member, it would be very slim pickings at that point.

[Duvall]

I completely understand and agree with the ACC waiting to pickup a 16th member until if and when ND becomes a full member in football. That said, my concern is by that time it possibly happens, there won't be much left to pcik from. IMO, Louisville, Cincinatti, Rutgers and UConn are the best schools left (assuming Nova doesn't upgrad football to Div 1). Rutgers and Uconn have been mentioned in the past as possible targets for the Big 10 in order to get into the NY market. Louisville and Cincinatti (assuming BYU doesn't come back into play) would be viable candidates for the Big 12 to move back to 12 schools. I know all of this would be driven by TV and market share; but if it was found later that it made financial sense for the Big 10 and Big 12 to make these moves before the ACC was ready to choose a 16th member, it would be very slim pickings at that point.

If the Big Ten or Big XII had much interest in those schools they would have already added them. Meanwhile, adding a 15th football team would make divisional play impossible to schedule.

[Kedsy]

I thought it was 7 original teams, to 6 Big East teams now, with Ga Tech, and FSU not being part of either category.

Technically, Virginia was not an "original" ACC team. They joined the conference after the first ACC football season.

[Kedsy]

Or maybe Rutgers.

I laughed out loud at this.

[jimsumner]

Technically, Virginia was not an "original" ACC team. They joined the conference after the first ACC football season.

True. But technically, Syracuse, Pitt and Notre Dame aren't actually members of the ACC.

If the Mayans are right, they'll never play a single ACC game.

Even if we take out UVA and add the three newbies, the count would be 6 v. 6, so the BE teams would not outnumber the original ACC teams.

[Kedsy]

True. But technically, Syracuse, Pitt and Notre Dame aren't actually members of the ACC.

If the Mayans are right, they'll never play a single ACC game.

Even if we take out UVA and add the three newbies, the count would be 6 v. 6, so the BE teams would not outnumber the original ACC teams.

If you look at the Mayans' Pythagorean win shares, you wouldn't put too much faith in their predictions.

I know it's 6 to 6 (and I wasn't the poster who said Big East teams would outnumber original ACC teams), but 6 former Big East teams (even against 7 traditional ACC teams) does have the potential to change the league's dynamics.

[MarkD83]

The 16th team has to be from the original Big East. The ACC can then reorganize into two eight team divisions:

Duke, UNC, NCSU, Wake, Md, UVA, Clemson and GT.

BC, ND, Pitt, Syracuse, Miami, VT, FSU, ex-Big East team.

[NSDukeFan]

The 16th team has to be from the original Big East. The ACC can then reorganize into two eight team divisions:

Duke, UNC, NCSU, Wake, Md, UVA, Clemson and GT.

BC, ND, Pitt, Syracuse, Miami, VT, FSU, ex-Big East team.

Boise State? near the coast of the Boise River.

[Olympic Fan]

If a conference poaches 6 teams from what is generally considered to be the best basketball conference, it should become the best basketball conference.

The number of Big East teams in the ACC is greater than the number of original ACC teams currently in the ACC.

Let's see -- six of the seven original ACC members are still around: Duke, UNC, Clemson, N.C. State, Wake Forest and Maryland. We lost South Carolina 40 years ago.

There are now six former Big East teams in the league -- at least there will be when Notre Dame, Pitt and Syracuse join Boston College, Miami and Virginia Tech.

So there will be an equal number of original ACC teams and former Big East teams.

That leaves Virginia (the first outsider to join the ACC), Georgia Tech and Florida State in neither category.

As for the ACC poaching to become the best basketball conference ... that doesn't quite fit the facts. Before the ACC's three-team Big East expansion of 2004-5 (Miami and VPI, then BC), the ACC was clearly the best basketball conference in the modern era. Before that expansion, the ACC was better than the Big East and it wasn't even debatable.

But the ACC's 2004-5 expansion was made to bolster football and the ACC brought in three mediocre basketball programs, weakening its product. The Big East responded by expanding -- adding teams like Louisville, Cincinnati and Marquette which enhanced their basketball prestige.

My point is that the ACC's poaching in 2004/5 is what made the Big East the best basketball conference ... its latest round of poaching is merely restoring the natural order of things.