PDA

View Full Version : Notre Dame to join ACC in all sports but football



blazindw
09-12-2012, 08:49 AM
http://espn.go.com/college-sports/story/_/id/8369070/sources-notre-dame-football-acc

Would be full member except for football, in which they would play 5 games annually vs. ACC opponents.

rthomas
09-12-2012, 08:51 AM
http://espn.go.com/college-sports/story/_/id/8369070/sources-notre-dame-football-acc

Would be full member except for football, in which they would play 5 games annually vs. ACC opponents.

You would think the ACC would have learned how bad this is for the conference from the Big East. Bad move if football isn't in.

OldPhiKap
09-12-2012, 08:52 AM
http://espn.go.com/college-sports/story/_/id/8369070/sources-notre-dame-football-acc

Would be full member except for football, in which they would play 5 games annually vs. ACC opponents.

Wow, big news if it pans out.

Duke09
09-12-2012, 08:52 AM
I fail to see how this helps the ACC if they don't bring football. Someone explain this to me?

allenmurray
09-12-2012, 08:52 AM
http://espn.go.com/college-sports/story/_/id/8369070/sources-notre-dame-football-acc

Would be full member except for football, in which they would play 5 games annually vs. ACC opponents.

They need to get over themselves with their desire to remain independant in football. Their football program hasn't been relevant in a long time.

Jderf
09-12-2012, 08:58 AM
Both extremely promising and extremely worrying at the same time. Here's to hoping that being half-in for football eventually becomes a stepping stone to all-in.

senkiri
09-12-2012, 09:03 AM
Also noteworthy, from the official ACC press release:

"In addition to extending an invitation to Notre Dame, the Council of Presidents voted to increase the conference exit fees to three times the annual operating budget. Currently this would equate to an exit fee of over $50 million."

That certainly does more to stabilize the ACC and prevent any possible defections to other conferences...

Mods, maybe this should be merged with the conference realignment vigil thread?

Class of '94
09-12-2012, 09:04 AM
You would think the ACC would have learned how bad this is for the conference from the Big East. Bad move if football isn't in.

I have to admit that I've been in favor of this for a while now although I would prefer ND to be "all in" and include football; and while I agree that it didn't work out for the BE, I believe their stability problem was that they had issues more to do with schools that didn't play football vs schools that did. The ACC doesn't have that problem. I also have to think that a lot of thought went into this; and schools like FSU and Clemson are in favor of this. After all, I think it's going to be a long time before ND joins a conference in football; and it's better they're in the ACC than the Big 12 (since this cnference has been recruiting them hard) as a partial member. I would also like to think that ACC officials did the financial research on this and discovered that even a partial member ND in the ACC ,makes the conference more valuable in all sports including football from a tv network perspective than not at all.

Now the quesiions start in regards to whether or not there are plans behind the scene for ND to transition into the ACC as a full football member down the road (which I think is highly possible); and does the conference decide to add any other members at this point like a UConn or someone else to go with ND?

ChillinDuke
09-12-2012, 09:08 AM
IMO, this is huge. No ifs, ands, or buts.

I'll take 5 games in football annually. That is substantially in.

To compare this to the Big East is not fair at all, as we have a full conference of quality football-playing schools.

The ACC (again IMO) has become the weakest of the five (?) major conferences remaining (PAC, B1G, 12, SEC, ACC; East is gone). With ND in the fold, even for 5 games in football, swings a huge amount of sway to the ACC re football. More importantly, it takes some wind out of the B1G sails which has been positioned solidly and with momentum for some time now. The 12 also seems to have stabilized and solidified its footing as a conference. The East has most certainly been all but obliterated by expansion.

The ACCs proactive move to add Syracuse and Pitt is not looking so good from a football-driving standpoint. Both of those teams look pretty bad right now. With a 5-game ND, the ACC would have a core of excellent football teams and very likely be able to fend off any conference vultures in the future.

I would love to hear A-Tex's take on this.

Stoked,
- Chillin

blazindw
09-12-2012, 09:08 AM
Mods, maybe this should be merged with the conference realignment vigil thread?

This is big news and pertains to the ACC, so I moved to have it stand alone. There's sure to be a great deal of discussion on this news, so I want to keep it separate from the catch-all conference realignment thread. All talk of what teams would also fit in the ACC or what teams you could fit elsewhere should be placed there (http://www.dukebasketballreport.com/forums/showthread.php?25922-The-Conference-Realignment-Vigil).

AtlBluRew
09-12-2012, 09:10 AM
They need to get over themselves with their desire to remain independant in football. Their football program hasn't been relevant in a long time.

They may not have been relevant in the BCS calculations, but the five losses they tag onto ACC members each year will certainly be relevant in the bowl hopes of other ACC teams in coming years.

JasonEvans
09-12-2012, 09:16 AM
They may not have been relevant in the BCS calculations, but the five losses they tag onto ACC members each year will certainly be relevant in the bowl hopes of other ACC teams in coming years.

Have you seen ND football lately? They ain't putting automatic losses onto top-tier ACC teams.

I have not thought about this move a lot but I think I like it at first blush. Getting 5 football games is clearly a move to ease ND into the league in football. They fit nicely with the league is many other sports too. They are a major college sports franchise and bringing them in is a huge deal -- even if it is not the "all-in" that many were advocating.

The ACC has now ensured that it will be a player in the future of college sports. That much is clear and, as Duke fans, we should be quite glad for that. Most importantly, I would imagine that the ACC would seek to include at least some, and perhaps all, of the 5 ND games as part of our TV package, which makes our football TV rights much more attractive.

-Jason "the $50 mil exit fee ensures we won't get poached by anyone else either" Evans

Dev11
09-12-2012, 09:17 AM
They need to get over themselves with their desire to remain independant in football. Their football program hasn't been relevant in a long time.

As Mike Golic ranted a couple weeks ago, regardless of your feelings towards the quality of the on-field product, you cannot deny that they have the eyeballs and cash necessary to keep the charade up. I, too, wish they would join as full members, but it's just not in their best intere$ts.

MaxAMillion
09-12-2012, 09:21 AM
The best part of this is the exit fee being raised. The conference should be stable going forward. I wish they would join in football as well, but you can't ignore the fact that ND does still get attention for football. Having ND play 5 games a year means 5 national TV audiences (which is a good thing). ND plays Miami in Chicago this year. That game will be on NBC and that is a plus for Miami.

blazindw
09-12-2012, 09:27 AM
Official statement from the ACC: http://www.theacc.com/genrel/091212aaa.html

Mabdul Doobakus
09-12-2012, 09:32 AM
I don't really see much of a downside here. Of course we'd all like to see full participation in football, but this seems like a pretty significant compromise by a school that has long remained committed to their independence. It could very well be a stepping stone to full commitment, but even if not, with 5 games per year against ACC teams, Notre Dame will begin to be viewed as kind of belonging to the ACC in football. Their basketball program should add a little more depth, and they fit pretty well with the conference academically. What's not to like...

MulletMan
09-12-2012, 09:34 AM
I would think that 5 games will eventually lead to 9 and full membership. ND is probably positioning itself to be a part of the national college football playoff while trying to maintain independence for a bit. My guess is that the admins at ND see the writing on the wall, and they know that in the next 5 years, if they don't return to normal 10 and 11 win seasons, they're going to be on the outside looking in of football playoffs. However, alumni donations run that school, and as we can see in our own backyard (see: feelings regarding ACC expansion from 8 to more than 8), people are averse to change.

So... ND cuts a deal to join the ACC, where they will be a "top tier" team with FSU, Clemson and VT, as opposed to the BigTweleventeen, but can still tell their older alums, "Hey, we are still independent."

With 5 ACC games, ND can still schedule Stanford, USC and Navy. Now we're at 8 games. They've got 4 left. So let's say Michigan, Michigan State and Purdue plus a floating game. They're playing a brutal schedule this year, IIRC.

My guess is that right now, the 5 ACC games won't be rotating. So they will probably lay BC, which is actually a rivalry game that has an exchangeable trophy (so the old Catholics like my family eats up that game). They will probably get FSU or VT if they want, and then throw in 3 teams on the East coast in various areas each season to give them a presence where a lot of alums are.

Eventually, my guess is that ND sees that this is not a relevant way forward if they want to get into the playoff. Sorry, but if there are only going to be 4 teams, then those teams are going to need 12-0, 11-1, or 10-2 records. ND just can't get there without some games against lesser foes, like conference bottom feeders. So, I bet that in 5-7 years, ND is a full football member, and is free to schedule OOC rivals like USC and Navy to go along with an ACC slate. Then they can finish 11-1 (with a loss at USC) and look at the "selection committee" and say, "Yeah... we may have played some crappy teams, but we have to play our conference schedule."

DukeSean
09-12-2012, 09:35 AM
Even without ND football in as a full member, does this open the door for TV contract re-negotiations?

The only reason ND would add football would be if their independent status makes them less money than if they shared in ACC revenue. I have no idea what those numbers are and that threshold, but as we all know, it's all (well, mostly) about the money.

Class of '94
09-12-2012, 09:39 AM
I would think that 5 games will eventually lead to 9 and full membership. ND is probably positioning itself to be a part of the national college football playoff while trying to maintain independence for a bit. My guess is that the admins at ND see the writing on the wall, and they know that in the next 5 years, if they don't return to normal 10 and 11 win seasons, they're going to be on the outside looking in of football playoffs. However, alumni donations run that school, and as we can see in our own backyard (see: feelings regarding ACC expansion from 8 to more than 8), people are averse to change.

So... ND cuts a deal to join the ACC, where they will be a "top tier" team with FSU, Clemson and VT, as opposed to the BigTweleventeen, but can still tell their older alums, "Hey, we are still independent."

With 5 ACC games, ND can still schedule Stanford, USC and Navy. Now we're at 8 games. They've got 4 left. So let's say Michigan, Michigan State and Purdue plus a floating game. They're playing a brutal schedule this year, IIRC.

My guess is that right now, the 5 ACC games won't be rotating. So they will probably lay BC, which is actually a rivalry game that has an exchangeable trophy (so the old Catholics like my family eats up that game). They will probably get FSU or VT if they want, and then throw in 3 teams on the East coast in various areas each season to give them a presence where a lot of alums are.

Eventually, my guess is that ND sees that this is not a relevant way forward if they want to get into the playoff. Sorry, but if there are only going to be 4 teams, then those teams are going to need 12-0, 11-1, or 10-2 records. ND just can't get there without some games against lesser foes, like conference bottom feeders. So, I bet that in 5-7 years, ND is a full football member, and is free to schedule OOC rivals like USC and Navy to go along with an ACC slate. Then they can finish 11-1 (with a loss at USC) and look at the "selection committee" and say, "Yeah... we may have played some crappy teams, but we have to play our conference schedule."

Hopefully, in 5-7 years, the ACC as a whole (including Duke) will be much stronger in football than what it is now. :D

Chicago 1995
09-12-2012, 09:41 AM
As Mike Golic ranted a couple weeks ago, regardless of your feelings towards the quality of the on-field product, you cannot deny that they have the eyeballs and cash necessary to keep the charade up. I, too, wish they would join as full members, but it's just not in their best intere$ts.

I tend to think this is just priming the pump, and that by the end of the decade, they'll be a full member. I suspect some of that's going to be driven by ND's continued fade on the field and some of it by access to the FB playoff whether I'm right about the on the field product. There are enough fans still tied irrationally to independence that ND's administration couldn't do this in a single step. Five games is the midpoint to ease the transition.

The real question is whether (1) the ACC sticks at 15 for hoops (3 five team pods for scheduling?; or (2) we look for a 16th.

If we look for a 16th, we can't add a FB program because that puts us at 15 for FB, which I don't think the conference would want. At the same time, I suspect the conference wants to be able to absorb ND fully, and move to 16 for football when the time comes.

That would mean, I think, a school with a FCS football program. Villanova?

mdj
09-12-2012, 09:42 AM
As Mike Golic ranted a couple weeks ago, regardless of your feelings towards the quality of the on-field product, you cannot deny that they have the eyeballs and cash necessary to keep the charade up. I, too, wish they would join as full members, but it's just not in their best intere$ts.

yeah its not a matter of getting over themselves. financially they would be giving money away to give up the NBC contract. they have bills to pay like everyone else so why would the do that. i think this is a definite plus for ACC and it's not close. The ACC was probably competing with Big 12 for Clemson and possibly FSU as well. If Clemson left and ND did this type of deal with Big 12 the ACC at least from a football standpoint starts looking really shakey and I would think there's a good possibility that FSU and maybe others would look to leave. This pretty much shuts that path down and when the NBC contract is up next if Notre Dame goes to a conference it'll certainly be ACC. In the meantime 5 ACC schools get to schedule marque home and homes with ND. Seems like a win/win.

AtlBluRew
09-12-2012, 09:45 AM
If we look for a 16th, we can't add a FB program because that puts us at 15 for FB, which I don't think the conference would want. At the same time, I suspect the conference wants to be able to absorb ND fully, and move to 16 for football when the time comes.

That would mean, I think, a school with a FCS football program. Villanova?

This begs the question of whether a game against Notre Dame would count as a game for purposes of ACC standings. If they're not playing a full ACC schedule, I'd vote that ND shouldn't count as a conference game. Rather, it should count as a non-conference game. A school that plays ND would play a full ACC schedule plus ND.

hudlow
09-12-2012, 09:46 AM
The ACC has turned into a homeless shelter.

ChillinDuke
09-12-2012, 09:47 AM
This begs the question of whether a game against Notre Dame would count as a game for purposes of ACC standings. If they're not playing a full ACC schedule, I'd vote that ND shouldn't count as a conference game. Rather, it should count as a non-conference game. A school that plays ND would play a full ACC schedule plus ND.

ND would not be in the ACC in football. So, playing ND would not be a conference game.

It would still be a marquee game with big monetary impacts for any team that plays them. And that's what the ACC needs.

- Chillin

mdj
09-12-2012, 10:00 AM
Had Coach K walked out of Tropicana Field that April night in 1999 and devised a plan to marginalize UConn basketball by tearing down their conference piece by piece over the next decade plus I'm not sure he could have planned it any better. Now they just need to roll the ACC tournament through MSG every 5 years or so to make the humiliation complete.

throatybeard
09-12-2012, 10:16 AM
I think this development is gut-bustingly hilarious simply because of the number of people on this board who swore, as if from some position of authority, that the ACC would never ever do it.

How they're going to schedule this is a mystery to me, but I sort of think they've already figured that out if they've made Notre Dame sign a contract specifying exactly five games.

What I hope does NOT happen is that we proceed to blindly reach into the Northeast for a sixteenth member. I've no use for UConn, and I suspect that Rutgers wouldn't deliver the NYC market to the extent that folks say it would. Rutgers seems to me only marginally more attractive than Buffalo or Temple, frankly. The scheduling is already going to be a grease fire, so let's sit pretty at fifteen and see who is interested in that last spot on the life raft.

The Indiana section of the Atlantic Coast is beautiful.

Man, I wish we had let Penn State in a couple decades ago. I mean, except for that whole worst-scandal-in-NCAA-history thing. Even now though, I haven't heard anyone pinning that on the Big Ten.

Hey, RThomas, are WVU and Pittsburgh going to continue playing each other in a non-conference game?

hurleyfor3
09-12-2012, 10:24 AM
Merge like a champion today.

loran16
09-12-2012, 10:27 AM
This is terrific for the ACC. Of note, this won't help the football contract because the ND games will still be televised by NBC under ND's own contract. But it's still huge:
A. It helps the other sports, not just basketball - (Can you think of ACC Lacrosse now? Syracuse, Duke, UVA, MD, UNC, and Notre Dame?! Heck Lacrosse can be an official conference and get an auto-bid now.)
B. 5 games is really not that far from 7-8, the amount of a full conference team. In a few years, it'll only be a small step for ND to join the conference fully.

Now the question is: Who's team #16?

throatybeard
09-12-2012, 10:34 AM
Loran is right. We're now the SEC of Lacrosse.


B. 5 games is really not that far from 7-8, the amount of a full conference team. In a few years, it'll only be a small step for ND to join the conference fully.

It's a bigger step from five to eight games if you consider that Notre Dame plays Stanford, USC, Michigan, Michigan State, Purdue, and Navy every year, and there are only twelve slots in the schedule. I'm just guessing here, but I bet they're going to be as recalcitrant about full membership for as long as they can get away with it. And maybe, even if they eventually agree to play eight in football, they're going to finagle some way to hang onto that NBC contract as a side pot off the ACC's main pot.

Duvall
09-12-2012, 10:39 AM
This is terrific for the ACC. Of note, this won't help the football contract because the ND games will still be televised by NBC under ND's own contract.

The games played at ACC sites will be part of the ACC football contract.


B. 5 games is really not that far from 7-8, the amount of a full conference team. In a few years, it'll only be a small step for ND to join the conference fully.

The number is 9, not 7-8. And that's not a small step, it's the difference between having 7 games for rivalries in the Midwest and West and having 3 each year.


Now the question is: Who's team #16?

There won't be a 16th team until the ACC has a 15th member in football.

loran16
09-12-2012, 10:40 AM
Loran is right. We're now the SEC of Lacrosse.



It's a bigger step from five to eight games if you consider that Notre Dame plays Stanford, USC, Michigan, Michigan State, Purdue, and Navy every year, and there are only twelve slots in the schedule. I'm just guessing here, but I bet they're going to be as recalcitrant about full membership for as long as they can get away with it. And maybe, even if they eventually agree to play eight in football, they're going to finagle some way to hang onto that NBC contract as a side pot off the ACC's main pot.

Well ND's contract with NBC ends in 2015. I'd suspect that's the year the ACC grabs a bigger tv contract and grabs ND as a full member.

Also re: Michigan scheduling: The Chicago Tribune reported on June 27, 2012 that "[t]he fierce rivals will take a 'hiatus' from each other in 2018 and 2019. And the other teams - MSU isn't a must keep and will probably go by the wayside - so will Purdue despite hte local rivalry. I expect ND keeps USC (a profitable game for all sides which is a nice modern tradition) and Michigan and probably Navy and that's it. With 8 conference games that gives ND one game they can schedule against an opponent of their choosing every year.

So ND's schedule would be:
USC
Navy
Michigan
<1 other>
8 ACC Teams

This would also allow them to play a 1-aa or money game as their 12th game. Or if they want Purdue.

SCMatt33
09-12-2012, 10:46 AM
I think the predictions of team 16 are premature. ACC basketball had no desire to go to divisions ad that is really the only reason to have an even number of teams. The Big Ten did just fine with 11 teams for over 15 years. The big issue with trying to add a 16th team is that an FBS team would throw off divisions in football and a non-FBS team would make it awkward if ND did ever join in full down the line. The other factor is that the ACC has gone to great lengths to keep rivalry games in tact. That would be very difficult to pull off with only 3 home and home games on the schedule. It's a bit easier with 4. My guess is that the ACC will stick with 15 unless ND joins for football. I am definitely exited though at the prospect of some ND games falling under the ACC TV deal. They might not regularly compete for tiles anymore, but they sure do have a lot of eyeballs on them.

Duvall
09-12-2012, 10:47 AM
Well ND's contract with NBC ends in 2015. I'd suspect that's the year the ACC grabs a bigger tv contract and grabs ND as a full member.

Also re: Michigan scheduling: The Chicago Tribune reported on June 27, 2012 that "[t]he fierce rivals will take a 'hiatus' from each other in 2018 and 2019. And the other teams - MSU isn't a must keep and will probably go by the wayside - so will Purdue despite hte local rivalry. I expect ND keeps USC (a profitable game for all sides which is a nice modern tradition) and Michigan and probably Navy and that's it. With 8 conference games that gives ND one game they can schedule against an opponent of their choosing every year.

So ND's schedule would be:
USC
Navy
Michigan
<1 other>
8 ACC Teams

This would also allow them to play a 1-aa or money game as their 12th game. Or if they want Purdue.

Notre Dame *could* do that. But why would they? What incentive do they have to join the ACC as a full-time member?

Also, the ACC now has a nine-game football schedule.

blazindw
09-12-2012, 10:53 AM
Well ND's contract with NBC ends in 2015. I'd suspect that's the year the ACC grabs a bigger tv contract and grabs ND as a full member.

Also re: Michigan scheduling: The Chicago Tribune reported on June 27, 2012 that "[t]he fierce rivals will take a 'hiatus' from each other in 2018 and 2019. And the other teams - MSU isn't a must keep and will probably go by the wayside - so will Purdue despite hte local rivalry. I expect ND keeps USC (a profitable game for all sides which is a nice modern tradition) and Michigan and probably Navy and that's it. With 8 conference games that gives ND one game they can schedule against an opponent of their choosing every year.

So ND's schedule would be:
USC
Navy
Michigan
<1 other>
8 ACC Teams

This would also allow them to play a 1-aa or money game as their 12th game. Or if they want Purdue.

There is huge talk among Michigan fans and alumni to scrap the ND game. With this move, that talk will only get louder, and I wouldn't be surprised if the three Big Ten schools that play ND decided to end their series with them.

SCMatt33
09-12-2012, 10:53 AM
Notre Dame *could* do that. But why would they? What incentive do they have to join the ACC as a full-time member?

Also, the ACC now has a nine-game football schedule.

Right now, none, but if NBC lowballs them in negotiations, or if the new playoff system gives an incentive to conference titles without also giving ND a sweetheart deal like the BCS, they will have major incentive to join. My one big question is as a non football member, is ND subject to the full exit fee. It would be a huge blow for ND to be forced to join a conference, and hen bolt to the Big Ten or Big 12.

loran16
09-12-2012, 10:58 AM
Notre Dame *could* do that. But why would they? What incentive do they have to join the ACC as a full-time member?

Also, the ACC now has a nine-game football schedule.

Err, no they don't? Duke plays 8 ACC teams this year, and 4 non-conference (NCCU, Stanford, Memphis, FIU). And otherwise what Matt said.

@Matt, the speculation and talk has all been that ND would have to pay the full exit fee. Of course, I'm not sure if that would apply if ND kept in all its other sports and just breached the 5 game/year part of the contract for football, since that wouldn't be "leaving the conference." I'd bet it wouldn't.

Duvall
09-12-2012, 11:00 AM
Right now, none, but if NBC lowballs them in negotiations, or if the new playoff system gives an incentive to conference titles without also giving ND a sweetheart deal like the BCS, they will have major incentive to join. My one big question is as a non football member, is ND subject to the full exit fee. It would be a huge blow for ND to be forced to join a conference, and hen bolt to the Big Ten or Big 12.

I don't see how Notre Dame would be deterred by any exit fee. Or, for that matter, any scenario in which Notre Dame joins the Big XII. It's independence, full ACC membership or full Big Ten membership at this point.

Duvall
09-12-2012, 11:02 AM
Err, no they don't? Duke plays 8 ACC teams this year, and 4 non-conference (NCCU, Stanford, Memphis, FIU). And otherwise what Matt said.

The nine-game schedule starts next season when Syracuse and Pittsburgh arrive and continues for the foreseeable future. This year's eight game schedule is as relevant to Notre Dame as the ACC's six-game schedule in 1978.

Class of '94
09-12-2012, 11:04 AM
Right now, none, but if NBC lowballs them in negotiations, or if the new playoff system gives an incentive to conference titles without also giving ND a sweetheart deal like the BCS, they will have major incentive to join. My one big question is as a non football member, is ND subject to the full exit fee. It would be a huge blow for ND to be forced to join a conference, and hen bolt to the Big Ten or Big 12.

But I don't think ND would bolt to either the Big 10 or Big 12 because neither conferences are good fits culturally and academically with ND. And ND wants the access to the New England and the Southeast. Also, unless something changes drastically with the ACC's seat at the "Big boys table", ND would have just as good an opportunity (if not better) to make it to the championship game being a member in the ACC as compared to being a member of another conference with the possible exception of the SEC (which is not a good fit culturally and academically with ND). And I think cultural and academics is more important imo to ND than athletics.

throatybeard
09-12-2012, 11:08 AM
You know what? Damn the torpedoes. Let's add Brigham Young. We need some Mormons up in here. They're great at foreign languages.

hurleyfor3
09-12-2012, 11:11 AM
You know what? Damn the torpedoes. Let's add Brigham Young. We need some Mormons up in here. They're great at foreign languages.

Looking at the list Sage posted to the other thread, which lists the highest revenue minor-conference schools, I was thinking adding unlv. That would be hilarious. Or we can take both of them for full comedic effect.

Duvall
09-12-2012, 11:27 AM
You would think the ACC would have learned how bad this is for the conference from the Big East. Bad move if football isn't in.

Looking historically, it's a much safer move than signing on to be one of Texas' peons.

blazindw
09-12-2012, 11:28 AM
But I don't think ND would bolt to either the Big 10 or Big 12 because neither conferences are good fits culturally and academically with ND.

The B1G is absolutely a great fit culturally, academically and geographically. Which is why ND has flirted with joining them several times in the past.

pamtar
09-12-2012, 11:30 AM
The real question here is what's the conference logo gonna look like?

fuse
09-12-2012, 11:31 AM
This is terrific for the ACC. Of note, this won't help the football contract because the ND games will still be televised by NBC under ND's own contract. But it's still huge:
A. It helps the other sports, not just basketball - (Can you think of ACC Lacrosse now? Syracuse, Duke, UVA, MD, UNC, and Notre Dame?! Heck Lacrosse can be an official conference and get an auto-bid now.)
B. 5 games is really not that far from 7-8, the amount of a full conference team. In a few years, it'll only be a small step for ND to join the conference fully.

Now the question is: Who's team #16?

You got to it before I did, Notre Dame joining is an exciting lacrosse development for sure.

hurleyfor3
09-12-2012, 11:47 AM
The real question here is what's the conference logo gonna look like?

As the logo is, Syracuse and Pitt will fit just fine. All they need to do is move the map over a little to right to add a dot for ND. Although as long as ND is only a partial member the "dot" should be an asterisk.

http://www.sportslogos.net/logo.php?id=2rhd2xyhyyagfs7q08rgewb5r

throatybeard
09-12-2012, 11:52 AM
The real question here is what's the conference logo gonna look like?

The same, but with a psychedelic, fluorescent shamrock splattered all over the map.

Newton_14
09-12-2012, 11:54 AM
I think this development is gut-bustingly hilarious simply because of the number of people on this board who swore, as if from some position of authority, that the ACC would never ever do it.
How they're going to schedule this is a mystery to me, but I sort of think they've already figured that out if they've made Notre Dame sign a contract specifying exactly five games.

What I hope does NOT happen is that we proceed to blindly reach into the Northeast for a sixteenth member. I've no use for UConn, and I suspect that Rutgers wouldn't deliver the NYC market to the extent that folks say it would. Rutgers seems to me only marginally more attractive than Buffalo or Temple, frankly. The scheduling is already going to be a grease fire, so let's sit pretty at fifteen and see who is interested in that last spot on the life raft.

The Indiana section of the Atlantic Coast is beautiful.

Man, I wish we had let Penn State in a couple decades ago. I mean, except for that whole worst-scandal-in-NCAA-history thing. Even now though, I haven't heard anyone pinning that on the Big Ten.

Hey, RThomas, are WVU and Pittsburgh going to continue playing each other in a non-conference game?

I will take my crow medium-well with lots of ketchup please. Thanks

rthomas
09-12-2012, 12:07 PM
I think this development is gut-bustingly hilarious simply because of the number of people on this board who swore, as if from some position of authority, that the ACC would never ever do it.

How they're going to schedule this is a mystery to me, but I sort of think they've already figured that out if they've made Notre Dame sign a contract specifying exactly five games.

What I hope does NOT happen is that we proceed to blindly reach into the Northeast for a sixteenth member. I've no use for UConn, and I suspect that Rutgers wouldn't deliver the NYC market to the extent that folks say it would. Rutgers seems to me only marginally more attractive than Buffalo or Temple, frankly. The scheduling is already going to be a grease fire, so let's sit pretty at fifteen and see who is interested in that last spot on the life raft.

The Indiana section of the Atlantic Coast is beautiful.

Man, I wish we had let Penn State in a couple decades ago. I mean, except for that whole worst-scandal-in-NCAA-history thing. Even now though, I haven't heard anyone pinning that on the Big Ten.

Hey, RThomas, are WVU and Pittsburgh going to continue playing each other in a non-conference game?

The answer is probably "no", but "maybe". And what about Kansas and Missou? or Nebraska and OK?

All about the Benjamins.

Stwray
09-12-2012, 12:22 PM
This would mean looking at schools like Villanova, Georgetown, DePaul and Marquette. All would make for a 16th school for basketball and not add a 15th conference member for Football. I like Nova as it is a strong academic program and brings the Philly market (which isn't covered by ACC now). Plus Duke will play in Philly more often!

Longtime lurker, thinks this is a great move...

STWray

loran16
09-12-2012, 12:33 PM
The B1G is absolutely a great fit culturally, academically and geographically. Which is why ND has flirted with joining them several times in the past.

FWIW, this was never as true as people made it sound. The Big 10 is all big state schools, while Notre Dame is a small private catholic university, more akin to Duke, Wake, or BC than say Michigan. That's the culture. And academically, the ACC is just as good, if not better than the B10, FSU/NCST not withstanding.

The big thing the Big 10 had over the ACC was geography. And that's less of a big deal these days, especially for ND who plays annual games against Navy (Annapolis), Stanford, and USC.

luvdahops
09-12-2012, 12:52 PM
FWIW, this was never as true as people made it sound. The Big 10 is all big state schools, while Notre Dame is a small private catholic university, more akin to Duke, Wake, or BC than say Michigan. That's the culture. And academically, the ACC is just as good, if not better than the B10, FSU/NCST not withstanding.

The big thing the Big 10 had over the ACC was geography. And that's less of a big deal these days, especially for ND who plays annual games against Navy (Annapolis), Stanford, and USC.

And the geography argument was always a lot weaker than it seems at face. ND considers itself to be very much of a national university, both for football and for the student body as a whole. Outside of Chicago, its largest concentrations of alumni are in New York, Boston and DC. Mike Brey has talked openly about wanting to stay in an East Coast focused basketball conference. The Irish do have longstanding FB rivalries with Michigan, Michigan State and Purdue. They play Indiana in hoops every year. Otherwise, their historical ties to Big Ten schools have not really been that deep.

SmartDevil
09-12-2012, 12:56 PM
As the logo is, Syracuse and Pitt will fit just fine. All they need to do is move the map over a little to right to add a dot for ND. Although as long as ND is only a partial member the "dot" should be an asterisk.

http://www.sportslogos.net/logo.php?id=2rhd2xyhyyagfs7q08rgewb5r

Move the map a tiny bit west, add a dot (not a shamrock) to mark Notre Dame, but in the "ACC" on the logo add a hybrid shamrock-ASTERISK.

MulletMan
09-12-2012, 01:06 PM
FWIW, this was never as true as people made it sound. The Big 10 is all big state schools, while Notre Dame is a small private catholic university, more akin to Duke, Wake, or BC than say Michigan. That's the culture. And academically, the ACC is just as good, if not better than the B10, FSU/NCST not withstanding.

The big thing the Big 10 had over the ACC was geography. And that's less of a big deal these days, especially for ND who plays annual games against Navy (Annapolis), Stanford, and USC.


*cough* Northwestern *cough*


This would mean looking at schools like Villanova, Georgetown, DePaul and Marquette. All would make for a 16th school for basketball and not add a 15th conference member for Football. I like Nova as it is a strong academic program and brings the Philly market (which isn't covered by ACC now). Plus Duke will play in Philly more often!

Longtime lurker, thinks this is a great move...

STWray

Stwray, I'm not picking on you, as you're not the only poster to bring this issue up... just the most recent one. Please continue to do more than lurk and jump in on these discussions.

But really, the 'Nova, Georgetown, basketball program with no football program stuff is not gonna happen. The whole goal here, I think, is to eventually have ND as a football member. Until that happens, there is no point in just gobbling up another team to get the 15/16. The divisions in football are even now, and if/when ND joins the conference in football, you're not going to want a school to have to build a D-1 football program from a D-1AA program or less. Hell, just the sheer stadium construction costs would deter anyone like Nova from signing on to that type of agreement.

The ACC is going to sit back and let some other chips fall before grabbing a school. As long as the Big East continues to serve as a stepping stone to the ACC, Swofford can afford to wait. Right now people are talking Rutgers or UConn. OK... well why not wait 3 or 4 years to see if a school like Temple really gets its football program up and running at a big time level?

You just don't know what schools will be relevant if/when ND joins in football. So why add someone now? Or even in the next year?

Mtn.Devil.91.92.01.10.15
09-12-2012, 01:13 PM
... The ACC is going to sit back and let some other chips fall before grabbing a school. As long as the Big East continues to serve as a stepping stone to the ACC, Swofford can afford to wait.

This is true. I have many times lamented the loss of the eight team ACC, but I have to admit that the ACC has pretty much played their hand perfectly. They've been proactive at the right times, and stood pat at the right times. They haven't panicked, and haven't "reached" for schools just to get to a certain number.

I still yearn for my pre-FSU ACC, but the fact is, they had to grow to survive, and their execution has been flawless.

I wonder how much of their moves went according to plan? I'd love to know if back a few years ago when we first raided the Big East, there was any sense of "if we play our cards right, maybe we can get Notre Dame..."

We will likely never know.

blazindw
09-12-2012, 01:17 PM
FWIW, this was never as true as people made it sound. The Big 10 is all big state schools, while Notre Dame is a small private catholic university, more akin to Duke, Wake, or BC than say Michigan. That's the culture. And academically, the ACC is just as good, if not better than the B10, FSU/NCST not withstanding.

The big thing the Big 10 had over the ACC was geography. And that's less of a big deal these days, especially for ND who plays annual games against Navy (Annapolis), Stanford, and USC.


And the geography argument was always a lot weaker than it seems at face. ND considers itself to be very much of a national university, both for football and for the student body as a whole. Outside of Chicago, its largest concentrations of alumni are in New York, Boston and DC. Mike Brey has talked openly about wanting to stay in an East Coast focused basketball conference. The Irish do have longstanding FB rivalries with Michigan, Michigan State and Purdue. They play Indiana in hoops every year. Otherwise, their historical ties to Big Ten schools have not really been that deep.

I grew up outside Ann Arbor/Detroit and can tell you that ND has been mentioned as a Big Ten addition as long as I've been alive...particularly when Penn State was added to bring them to 11, but even back in the 60s and 70s. My dad and uncle would wax poetic on several occasions about the days of Woody and Bo and the fact that even preceding their big rivalry, ND was basically viewed as a Big Ten school by all in the region. Just because they view themselves as a national university (and I agree that they still are) doesn't mean that everyone else does. We're a national university too, but that doesn't stop us from being the pride and one of the rocks of the ACC.

Duvall
09-12-2012, 01:20 PM
*cough* Northwestern *cough*

Okay, where are the others?

MulletMan
09-12-2012, 01:25 PM
Okay, where are the others?

What others? My man, Loran said "all". I don't need others... one Big 10 school isn't large or state run, that makes "all" incorrect. And it also suggests that ND was a viable option for the Big 10. Look, Blazindw is right... people in the region (Ohio, Michigan, Indiana) have always thought that ND to the Big 10 was inevitable. Delany just wasn't willing to bend on the football issue. So Swofford wins. Thing is, it was more important for the ACC to get ND than it was for the Big 10.

phaedrus
09-12-2012, 01:36 PM
This would mean looking at schools like Villanova, Georgetown, DePaul and Marquette. All would make for a 16th school for basketball and not add a 15th conference member for Football. I like Nova as it is a strong academic program and brings the Philly market (which isn't covered by ACC now). Plus Duke will play in Philly more often!

STWray

Adding Marquette to the ACC would be ludicrous and in most, if not all, respects a terrible idea.

As a Milwaukeean, I deeply hope that it happens.

throatybeard
09-12-2012, 01:43 PM
Adding Marquette to the ACC would be ludicrous and in most, if not all, respects a terrible idea.

As a Milwaukeean, I deeply hope that it happens.

I like this line of thinking, and I'm just going to start saying schools now.

Washington University!

SLU!

Fontbonne?

loran16
09-12-2012, 01:45 PM
What others? My man, Loran said "all". I don't need others... one Big 10 school isn't large or state run, that makes "all" incorrect. And it also suggests that ND was a viable option for the Big 10. Look, Blazindw is right... people in the region (Ohio, Michigan, Indiana) have always thought that ND to the Big 10 was inevitable. Delany just wasn't willing to bend on the football issue. So Swofford wins. Thing is, it was more important for the ACC to get ND than it was for the Big 10.

Good call, I missed Northwestern. But it's the outlier in the Big Ten - not like the ACC.

I mean you're right, ND was certainly a viable option for the Big Ten. But no more than the ACC is. (And both are far better fits than the Big 12)

luvdahops
09-12-2012, 01:47 PM
I grew up outside Ann Arbor/Detroit and can tell you that ND has been mentioned as a Big Ten addition as long as I've been alive...particularly when Penn State was added to bring them to 11, but even back in the 60s and 70s. My dad and uncle would wax poetic on several occasions about the days of Woody and Bo and the fact that even preceding their big rivalry, ND was basically viewed as a Big Ten school by all in the region. Just because they view themselves as a national university (and I agree that they still are) doesn't mean that everyone else does. We're a national university too, but that doesn't stop us from being the pride and one of the rocks of the ACC.

No doubt that (ie ND would be a great and logical fit for the Big 10) has been the view of other schools in the region. And for a long time, I think it was the view of many associated with Notre Dame as well. There were serious discussions about ND joining at least twice that I can recall - in the late 90s and the again around the end of the Willingham era when the NBC contract was coming up for renewal. But I think Notre Dame's perspective around conference fit has evolved considerably since then, especially as realignment has accelerated and a CFB playoff has become a reality. I also understand that many Big 10 bigwigs effectively wrote off ND after that last serious flirtation (I don't think Notre Dame was ever really part of the discussion when the decision was made to add Nebraska). Not that the Big 10 would have rejected overtures from the Irish; they were just resolved to not chase them anymore.

ChillinDuke
09-12-2012, 01:51 PM
*cough* Northwestern *cough*



Stwray, I'm not picking on you, as you're not the only poster to bring this issue up... just the most recent one. Please continue to do more than lurk and jump in on these discussions.

But really, the 'Nova, Georgetown, basketball program with no football program stuff is not gonna happen. The whole goal here, I think, is to eventually have ND as a football member. Until that happens, there is no point in just gobbling up another team to get the 15/16. The divisions in football are even now, and if/when ND joins the conference in football, you're not going to want a school to have to build a D-1 football program from a D-1AA program or less. Hell, just the sheer stadium construction costs would deter anyone like Nova from signing on to that type of agreement.

The ACC is going to sit back and let some other chips fall before grabbing a school. As long as the Big East continues to serve as a stepping stone to the ACC, Swofford can afford to wait. Right now people are talking Rutgers or UConn. OK... well why not wait 3 or 4 years to see if a school like Temple really gets its football program up and running at a big time level?

You just don't know what schools will be relevant if/when ND joins in football. So why add someone now? Or even in the next year?

Hey Mullet, why Temple?

I only ask because this is not the first time it's been brought up, and I'm curious as to why Temple is more appealing than a UConn/Rutgers.

Personally, I don't see any other schools that I would want to add. But if we had to add one more school, I'm still leaning towards UConn.

So why is there some board buzz around Temple?

- Chillin

loran16
09-12-2012, 01:56 PM
Hey Mullet, why Temple?

I only ask because this is not the first time it's been brought up, and I'm curious as to why Temple is more appealing than a UConn/Rutgers.

Personally, I don't see any other schools that I would want to add. But if we had to add one more school, I'm still leaning towards UConn.

So why is there some board buzz around Temple?

- Chillin

In theory, Temple would be a good school. It'd be a market the ACC doesn't have (Philly), bridging the gap to our NE schools and it's a school with good basketball history and a good current program (Fran Dunphy is terrific).

Of course, the problems are that A. It'd be our worst academic school - not as bad as louisville, but not good- and B. It's football program is very marginal at best.

Brian913
09-12-2012, 01:57 PM
Hey Mullet, why Temple?

I only ask because this is not the first time it's been brought up, and I'm curious as to why Temple is more appealing than a UConn/Rutgers.

Personally, I don't see any other schools that I would want to add. But if we had to add one more school, I'm still leaning towards UConn.

So why is there some board buzz around Temple?

- Chillin

There are three available programs with football and basketball in the East: Uconn, Rutgers and Temple. UCONN brings nothing to the table at all, and would likely be opposed by BC. I doubt Rutgers would come up with the money to leave the Big East. I don't know the deal with an exit fee for Temple, but it at least brings in a major media market which UCONN does not.

blazindw
09-12-2012, 01:57 PM
No doubt that (ie ND would be a great and logical fit for the Big 10) has been the view of other schools in the region. And for a long time, I think it was the view of many associated with Notre Dame as well. There were serious discussions about ND joining at least twice that I can recall - in the late 90s and the again around the end of the Willingham era when the NBC contract was coming up for renewal. But I think Notre Dame's perspective around conference fit has evolved considerably since then, especially as realignment has accelerated and a CFB playoff has become a reality. I also understand that many Big 10 bigwigs effectively wrote off ND after that last serious flirtation (I don't think Notre Dame was ever really part of the discussion when the decision was made to add Nebraska). Not that the Big 10 would have rejected overtures from the Irish; they were just resolved to not chase them anymore.

That's the key point. The Big 10 eventually decided it wasn't going to try and wine & dine them. They basically said, "you have our number...when you're ready, call us."

BD80
09-12-2012, 02:02 PM
Since the "Big East" has seemingly seen the light - and the fact that San Diego is the west coast - and will change its name ...

The ACC could then have a "Big East" divison!

ChillinDuke
09-12-2012, 02:18 PM
In theory, Temple would be a good school. It'd be a market the ACC doesn't have (Philly), bridging the gap to our NE schools and it's a school with good basketball history and a good current program (Fran Dunphy is terrific).

Of course, the problems are that A. It'd be our worst academic school - not as bad as louisville, but not good- and B. It's football program is very marginal at best.


There are three available programs with football and basketball in the East: Uconn, Rutgers and Temple. UCONN brings nothing to the table at all, and would likely be opposed by BC. I doubt Rutgers would come up with the money to leave the Big East. I don't know the deal with an exit fee for Temple, but it at least brings in a major media market which UCONN does not.

Thanks for the explanation.

Although I would prod you both on evidence that Temple brings a "new market". Duke is a powerhouse basketball program that polarizes people, thereby making TVs turn on. UNC delivers the lion's share of the NC media market in both football and basketball. FSU is a huge football school with an enormous fanbase in a highly populated state. These are reasons that I can easily understand for "bringing in a major media market."

Which of these (or others) does Temple do to deliver Philly? I guess my point is that a school being in or near a city doesn't mean that city will turn on its TVs (to the extent that an ACC Network would be broadcast in that city - that's the ultimate point, right?). So is Philly a "Temple town"???

Again, just curious.

- Chillin

Blue in the Face
09-12-2012, 02:18 PM
Since the "Big East" has seemingly seen the light - and the fact that San Diego is the west coast - and will change its name ...

I thought the Big East reiterated in just the past few days that it isn't changing its name.

Chicago 1995
09-12-2012, 02:25 PM
What others? My man, Loran said "all". I don't need others... one Big 10 school isn't large or state run, that makes "all" incorrect. And it also suggests that ND was a viable option for the Big 10. Look, Blazindw is right... people in the region (Ohio, Michigan, Indiana) have always thought that ND to the Big 10 was inevitable. Delany just wasn't willing to bend on the football issue. So Swofford wins. Thing is, it was more important for the ACC to get ND than it was for the Big 10.

There's a not small portion of the ND alumni base who, if given the choice, would join ANY conference before joining the Big 10. Delaney wasn't offering, but ND wasn't asking either.

loran16
09-12-2012, 02:28 PM
Thanks for the explanation.

Although I would prod you both on evidence that Temple brings a "new market". Duke is a powerhouse basketball program that polarizes people, thereby making TVs turn on. UNC delivers the lion's share of the NC media market in both football and basketball. FSU is a huge football school with an enormous fanbase in a highly populated state. These are reasons that I can easily understand for "bringing in a major media market."

Which of these (or others) does Temple do to deliver Philly? I guess my point is that a school being in or near a city doesn't mean that city will turn on its TVs (to the extent that an ACC Network would be broadcast in that city - that's the ultimate point, right?). So is Philly a "Temple town"???

Again, just curious.

- Chillin

Philly Basketball is historically dominated by the Big Five: Villanova, Temple, Penn, St. Joes, and La Salle (the 6th Philly School, Drexel, is not Big 5). For obvious reasons, Penn's bball prominence in the city has dropped off, though the Palaestra is still held in high regard. La Salle is kind of marginal (though they're underrated), leaving the bball territory of Philly to three schools: Temple, Nova, and St. Joes, and Temple has a greater fan base than St. Joes and is close to Nova (Temple is in fact the only one of these three to really be INSIDE Philly itself).

So no, Philly isn't a "Temple town", but Temple is a major power and good draw in Philly for basketball.

Jarhead
09-12-2012, 02:34 PM
This is a good thing for the ACC, and for Notre Dame. They can hold on to their treasured independence, but the ACC has cracked the shield. ND is independent, but committed to play 5 games a year in the ACC. That is only a partial independence.

Chicago 1995
09-12-2012, 02:35 PM
Notre Dame *could* do that. But why would they? What incentive do they have to join the ACC as a full-time member?

Also, the ACC now has a nine-game football schedule.

The incentive will come, I think, out of access to the impending playoff structure and the revenue that playoff generates. ND's relevance on the field and its comparative decline leave it with limited options and leverage. The deal they'd cut with the BCS years ago giving a full share for a guaranteed yearly outlay (that cost them millions) and the trouble ND has had in the latest round of bowl negotiations in finding a spot for themselves show that (1) they aren't the commodity they once were; and (2) conferences generally are taking a harder bargaining line with them. Heck, getting 5 guaranteed games from them is more proof.

If ND wants full access and a full share of the playoff money, join the ACC. If they want independence, then they pay for it. ND can't forego revenue as it once did. Indiana made more last year -- Indiana -- thanks to the Big 10 Network. In that aspect of the arms race, ND literally is going to have trouble affording being independent much longer.

As for the schedule and that being an impediment to ND going to full conference membership. First, something has to give. Second, I think ND would be fine with keeping the USC game, the Navy game and the MSU game, likely rotating the last two occassionally to get other teams on the schedule. Third, in the vein of something has to give, it may be that the ACC moves back to a eight game schedule.

Class of '94
09-12-2012, 02:44 PM
The B1G is absolutely a great fit culturally, academically and geographically. Which is why ND has flirted with joining them several times in the past.

ND is a good fit geographically and academically; but not a good fit culturally. ND is a smaller private school with a much smaller undergrad student body. The Big 10 is primarily composed of large public universities (with only 1 private school in Northwestern i believe) with a student bodies at each school i nthe 10s of thousands. Moreover, the ACC is a better fit academically and geogpraphically when you consider the number of schools in the ACC ranked in the top 60 in the US News and World Report and access to growing population areas in the country. The midwest is simply not thriving in terms of population growth compared to the SE.

burnspbesq
09-12-2012, 02:46 PM
It's all good from my perspective.

ACC lax becomes the definition of "power conference." This is probably going to force the NCAA to expand the field for the men's tournament. I'm getting all giddy thinking about a five-day ACC men's lax tournament (first-round doubleheader on Wednesday, semifinal doubleheader on Friday, championship game on Sunday) at a centrally-located neutral site like PPL Park or RFK.

ND substantially strengthens an already dominant conference in women's basketball and men's and women's soccer.

Heck, Duke finally gets a conference rival in fencing. :cool:

If ND stays independent in football, it opens the door for Georgetown, which in my view is a perfect fit.

rasputin
09-12-2012, 02:55 PM
I like this line of thinking, and I'm just going to start saying schools now.

Washington University!

SLU!

Fontbonne?

Throaty, I'll toss in my undergraduate alma mater, Southeast Missouri State.

BigWayne
09-12-2012, 03:02 PM
I don't remember where I saw it, but you can probably find it on the internet if you look......

I believe that there was a point in time, many years ago, probably pre MNF, pre ND/NBC contract era,
that ND wanted into the B10 and was rebuffed. I believe this is the reason they have never joined
since when the B10 has come calling.

DukeSean
09-12-2012, 03:07 PM
Heck, Duke finally gets a conference rival in fencing. :cool:


Ha! I like that. But ND has always been just a step ahead of us when it comes to fencing. A big part of that is that ND offers scholarships for fencing, whereas until recently Duke has not been able to do that.

But, I do like how non-football sports get a mutual boost by having ND in the conference

hq2
09-12-2012, 03:17 PM
As the logo is, Syracuse and Pitt will fit just fine. All they need to do is move the map over a little to right to add a dot for ND. Although as long as ND is only a partial member the "dot" should be an asterisk.

The "Atlantic Coast" Conference in Indiana? Hey guys, let's get Boise State to join too! That'll be great for football! Now, how would we get that on the map?:cool:

MulletMan
09-12-2012, 03:20 PM
Hey Mullet, why Temple?

I only ask because this is not the first time it's been brought up, and I'm curious as to why Temple is more appealing than a UConn/Rutgers.

Personally, I don't see any other schools that I would want to add. But if we had to add one more school, I'm still leaning towards UConn.

So why is there some board buzz around Temple?

- Chillin

So the reason I am thinking it might be Temple is the fact that the football program is actually on the way up, unlike UConn who seems to be nose-diving since Edsall bolted for Maryland. All Golden brought them out of the crapper:
2006 1-11
2007 4-8
2008 5-7
2009 9-4 (Bowl loss)
2010 8-4

Then he left and they got a big hire in Steve Adazio, former OC at Florida and a hot name on the coaching carousel. He picked up where Golden left off:

2011 9-4 (Bowl win)
2012 Move to the Big East

This year they beat Nova 41-10 and lost to Maryland 36-27 after sleep walking through the first half. I see them as a program that is on the rise, and since the will have a few years to get it together in full, I just feel like they might be the team to bring in.

The ACC has had a pile of trouble with the NCAA recently... do they really want to bring UConn into that fold? Many are suggesting that UConn is the logical add for basketball, but is there any guarantee that UConn will continue to be a basketball power? Calhoun has yet to commit to coaching this season, they're banned from the post-season this year, and who knows what might happen in future years as the APR goes up. What, exactly, is UConn bringing to the table?

I think if Temple does well in the next few years in the Big East they just might be a logical add. We'll see. This is all just conjecture, but I'm trying to look at it like a commissioner might. Not what's right now, but what will be right in 5 years.

Rutgers is the easy add, because I think they would obviously jump at the chance, but I don't think they are delivering any TV market... at least nothing that Cuse isn't bringing in.

Mtn.Devil.91.92.01.10.15
09-12-2012, 03:31 PM
Throaty, I'll toss in my undergraduate alma mater, Southeast Missouri State.

I'll throw out mine... even less likely... Warren Wilson College!

-bdbd
09-12-2012, 03:41 PM
Gotta say that I was in shock when I first heard this news on the radio this morning. Just WOW! I for one had no idea that any negotiations with ND had progressed this far, and was thinking that ND was a "nice to have" dream addition, but that the ACC would eventually "settle" on two other steals from the Big East, probably U-Con and Rutgers. Give credit to the conference office for, once again, keeping things very quiet until the very end -- something hard to do in this day and age...


There are three available programs with football and basketball in the East: Uconn, Rutgers and Temple. UCONN brings nothing to the table at all, and would likely be opposed by BC. I doubt Rutgers would come up with the money to leave the Big East. I don't know the deal with an exit fee for Temple, but it at least brings in a major media market which UCONN does not.

I agree to a certain "inevitability" that the ACC eventually moves to 16 teams. Not stating MY preferences, but predicting maybe what is the order of targets on Swofford's shopping list, I'd say:
1. Penn State (would the Big10 possibly let them go post-scandal, or would PSU ever leave the Big10 now that the biggest original pro-Big10 proponent is now gone - JoePa? ) For the ACC the attraction is obvious, adding an important market, huge and strong alumni base, and FB tradition - though that will suffer for the next 5 or so years.
2. U-Con (U-Con and even the CT Governor were campaigning for ACC admission less than a year ago) I agree with the poster who questioned the cultural fit with the ACC, but disagree about whether they bring any value. They are one of the top 4 teams in the humongous NYC metro area TV market - BTW Notre Dame and Rutgers are ahead of them in the NYC market. Also, I don't think their academics are as strong as THEY think they are, or would enhance the ACC's image in that regard. Though I think they may be a strong possibility, they are huirt by the recent run-ins with the NCAA as well as the eminent departure of both BB coaches.
3. Rutgers (I'm sure they would RUN to the ACC if given the opportunity) The ACC gets the biggest NYC TV Market player, and a large alumni base in the NYC market. Not sure if a NC-centric Conference could stomach having "The State University of NJ" as a member, image or cultural-wise.
4. Temple - I see them as a distant 4th, as they don't guarantee or even dominate the Philly market and, frankly, given their A10 history, might be seen by many ACC members and fans as "small time" (whether warranted or not). Also, they have absolutely NO FB tradition and the BB program isn't exactly on a high post-Chaney.
5. TBD - another school might appear on the horizon, either as a steal or defection from another conference, such as Navy, ECU, Vandy, KY. I think the WV ship has sailed though.



Thanks for the explanation.

Although I would prod you both on evidence that Temple brings a "new market". Duke is a powerhouse basketball program that polarizes people, thereby making TVs turn on. UNC delivers the lion's share of the NC media market in both football and basketball. FSU is a huge football school with an enormous fanbase in a highly populated state. These are reasons that I can easily understand for "bringing in a major media market."

Which of these (or others) does Temple do to deliver Philly? I guess my point is that a school being in or near a city doesn't mean that city will turn on its TVs (to the extent that an ACC Network would be broadcast in that city - that's the ultimate point, right?). So is Philly a "Temple town"???

Again, just curious.

- Chillin


ND is a good fit geographically and academically; but not a good fit culturally. ND is a smaller private school with a much smaller undergrad student body. The Big 10 is primarily composed of large public universities (with only 1 private school in Northwestern i believe) with a student bodies at each school i nthe 10s of thousands. Moreover, the ACC is a better fit academically and geogpraphically when you consider the number of schools in the ACC ranked in the top 60 in the US News and World Report and access to growing population areas in the country. The midwest is simply not thriving in terms of population growth compared to the SE.

ND draws heavily from the Northeast for its students and fan base - think NE Prep Schools - and is probably one of the few best national draws in college FB. It is more FB-centric than most ACC schools, but not more so than FSU, Clemson, Miami or VPI maybe. And, most importantly, their strong-academics was a HUGE draw/match between the leaderships of both the ACC and ND. I did a bunch of research several years ago, and the average SAT figures and admissions percentages for the ACC are demonstrably better than the Big10, BigEast or PacTen. Not saying that any of those are poor academically, but ACC has always prided itself on keeping an academic element/focus within the conference's culture/priorities. Think, does the Big10 or Pac12 have 7 schools that can match up academically with Duke, Wake, Notre Dame, UVA, BC, UNC, and Ga Tech?? Pitt and Miami and Syr aren't slouches either. At the presser today the ACC Commish, I think, cited the recent US News rankings saying that the ACC will have 11 schools (out of 15!) in the top-60 or so. As he said, nobody else can say that. That is important to the league, and to Notre Dame.

SCMatt33
09-12-2012, 03:59 PM
Philly Basketball is historically dominated by the Big Five: Villanova, Temple, Penn, St. Joes, and La Salle (the 6th Philly School, Drexel, is not Big 5). For obvious reasons, Penn's bball prominence in the city has dropped off, though the Palaestra is still held in high regard. La Salle is kind of marginal (though they're underrated), leaving the bball territory of Philly to three schools: Temple, Nova, and St. Joes, and Temple has a greater fan base than St. Joes and is close to Nova (Temple is in fact the only one of these three to really be INSIDE Philly itself).

So no, Philly isn't a "Temple town", but Temple is a major power and good draw in Philly for basketball.

I'd say that Philly Basketball is dominated by the Sixers. I would mostly agree that Philly college basketball is dominated by Temple and Nova first, with St. Joe's as a solid third. The real issue is that except for alumni and a select few other die hard fans, no one cares about college basketball in the city except for the NCAA tourney or a team is in the top tn and the Eagles are done playing. In revenue terms, the only thing that a Philly team would have over another team in terms of revenue is potential rights fees that a local station would pay for ACC network programming.

On another note, I think people in general jumped on the "is in a big market" bandwagon when the Big Ten first expanded and Rutgers was involved in rumors. For a conference with a stand alone cable network, rights fees alone, regardless of ratings, is a big deal (though still overstated, since I don't think anyone is knocking on Ritgers door). Foot a conference without it, you just want the best and most popular teams for a rights deal.

luvdahops
09-12-2012, 04:00 PM
That's the key point. The Big 10 eventually decided it wasn't going to try and wine & dine them. They basically said, "you have our number...when you're ready, call us."

That's one key point. The other is a much more thorough vetting of options by ND over the past 10 years or so. Jack Swarbrick has probably spent more time evaluating conference affiliations, pros and cons, etc. Than all of his predecessors combined.

Lar77
09-12-2012, 04:07 PM
3. Rutgers (I'm sure they would RUN to the ACC if given the opportunity) The ACC gets the biggest NYC TV Market player, and a large alumni base in the NYC market. Not sure if a NC-centric Conference could stomach having "The State University of NJ" as a member, image or cultural-wise.



Just funnin'

throatybeard
09-12-2012, 04:08 PM
Throaty, I'll toss in my undergraduate alma mater, Southeast Missouri State.

That's on the the Mississippi River Coast.

kexman
09-12-2012, 04:27 PM
ND draws heavily from the Northeast for its students and fan base - think NE Prep Schools - and is probably one of the few best national draws in college FB. It is more FB-centric than most ACC schools, but not more so than FSU, Clemson, Miami or VPI maybe. And, most importantly, their strong-academics was a HUGE draw/match between the leaderships of both the ACC and ND. I did a bunch of research several years ago, and the average SAT figures and admissions percentages for the ACC are demonstrably better than the Big10, BigEast or PacTen. Not saying that any of those are poor academically, but ACC has always prided itself on keeping an academic element/focus within the conference's culture/priorities. Think, does the Big10 or Pac12 have 7 schools that can match up academically with Duke, Wake, Notre Dame, UVA, BC, UNC, and Ga Tech?? Pitt and Miami and Syr aren't slouches either. At the presser today the ACC Commish, I think, cited the recent US News rankings saying that the ACC will have 11 schools (out of 15!) in the top-60 or so. As he said, nobody else can say that. That is important to the league, and to Notre Dame.

The Big10 boasts 10 schools in the top 72 of US News so it is no slouch. Also if you focus on the entire university (ie. graduate/professional schools and the research output) the Big 10 schools look even better than the undergrad rankings.

Stwray
09-12-2012, 04:41 PM
*cough* Northwestern *cough*

But really, the 'Nova, Georgetown, basketball program with no football program stuff is not gonna happen. The whole goal here, I think, is to eventually have ND as a football member. Until that happens, there is no point in just gobbling up another team to get the 15/16. The divisions in football are even now, and if/when ND joins the conference in football, you're not going to want a school to have to build a D-1 football program from a D-1AA program or less. Hell, just the sheer stadium construction costs would deter anyone like Nova from signing on to that type of agreement.

The ACC is going to sit back and let some other chips fall before grabbing a school. As long as the Big East continues to serve as a stepping stone to the ACC, Swofford can afford to wait. Right now people are talking Rutgers or UConn. OK... well why not wait 3 or 4 years to see if a school like Temple really gets its football program up and running at a big time level?

You just don't know what schools will be relevant if/when ND joins in football. So why add someone now? Or even in the next year?

I don't disagree with waiting -- I think that is smart and makes a lot of sense. But the Nova case for football (I think it is a no brainer for basketball -- 2 eight team divisions , could even put together the old "ACC" -- Big Four, Clemson, Maryland, Tech and Virginia-- as one division with the Big east refugees in the other) is stronger than you might think. They were very close to moving up in Football for Big East this year, and seem to want to move up to D-1 in Football for a lot of reasons. Their Big East proposal had them using an expanded PPL Park, which is the soccer stadium for the Philadelphia Union (already have played a game there in past). Currently 20k seats, with plans for expansion to between 30 and 35K. You bring in the Philly market, which is the 4th or 5th largest TV market in the US and one the ACC doesn't have right now. Academically, they are a fit, and they also have natural rivalries with the other ACC/Big East Schools, particularly Pitt, Syracuse and Notre Dame. They play D-1 in other sports as well.

Temple is another potential strong fit as well, and a stronger academic match than many would think.

This will be interesting to see play out.

loran16
09-12-2012, 05:34 PM
I'd say that Philly Basketball is dominated by the Sixers. I would mostly agree that Philly college basketball is dominated by Temple and Nova first, with St. Joe's as a solid third. The real issue is that except for alumni and a select few other die hard fans, no one cares about college basketball in the city except for the NCAA tourney or a team is in the top tn and the Eagles are done playing. In revenue terms, the only thing that a Philly team would have over another team in terms of revenue is potential rights fees that a local station would pay for ACC network programming.

On another note, I think people in general jumped on the "is in a big market" bandwagon when the Big Ten first expanded and Rutgers was involved in rumors. For a conference with a stand alone cable network, rights fees alone, regardless of ratings, is a big deal (though still overstated, since I don't think anyone is knocking on Ritgers door). Foot a conference without it, you just want the best and most popular teams for a rights deal.

True enough - you'd know better than me about Philly.

New York is weird - people keep claiming various schools will bring in the NY Market (Cuse, St. John's, Rutgers, UConn), but really the city has no real team that captures most of the city. The newspapers focus most on St. John's and Rutgers (with Cuse behind them) during the regular season, but care more about the BIG EAST than any particular New York team. And the City has alums of every school all over the place (ND helps here incidentally).

Honestly, the only way the ACC is going to capture the "New York City" market is for the big east to probably die.

Blue in the Face
09-12-2012, 05:38 PM
Calhoun has yet to commit to coaching this season,
In fact, he will reportedly retire tomorrow (http://www.courant.com/sports/uconn-men/hc-hoops-calhoun-0913-20120912,0,3835501.story).

Bluedog
09-12-2012, 05:47 PM
Does this mean Chicago will now be part of the ACC region? If so, I'm all for it! They never show the Raycom ACC network games. Plus, can maybe make a game in South Bend but I'm sure it will be the hottest ticket of the year when Duke comes to town.

ForkFondler
09-12-2012, 05:57 PM
The Indiana section of the Atlantic Coast is beautiful.

Indeed

2791

ForkFondler
09-12-2012, 06:11 PM
Throaty, I'll toss in my undergraduate alma mater, Southeast Missouri State.

[cough] Tami Hanstravel [cough]

BigWayne
09-12-2012, 06:16 PM
(Can you think of ACC Lacrosse now? Syracuse, Duke, UVA, MD, UNC, and Notre Dame?! Heck Lacrosse can be an official conference and get an auto-bid now.)


The incidental to this is that the Big East will most likely drop down to 5 D1 lacrosse schools and will lose their auto bid.

dball
09-12-2012, 06:21 PM
As the logo is, Syracuse and Pitt will fit just fine. All they need to do is move the map over a little to right to add a dot for ND. Although as long as ND is only a partial member the "dot" should be an asterisk.

http://www.sportslogos.net/logo.php?id=2rhd2xyhyyagfs7q08rgewb5r

Well it is closer to the Atlantic than the Pacific at least.

SCMatt33
09-12-2012, 06:50 PM
The incidental to this is that the Big East will most likely drop down to 5 D1 lacrosse schools and will lose their auto bid.

They will still have 6. Marquette is starting a team this year.

dball
09-12-2012, 06:54 PM
Laughing at myself. Was glancing at enrollment figures for ACC schools after reading this topic. So, I rather quickly got 11 schools then remembered the new arrivals Pitt and Syracuse but for life of me couldn't place the 14th (wasn't counting ND yet). I had enrollment size in order with gaps for major differences (couple of thousand at least).

FSU

MD
NC State
Virginia Tech

Pitt

Clemson
UVA
Ga Tech
Syracuse

Miami
BC

Duke
Wake

I kid you not, it was a minute before I remembered UNCCH...heh, heh. They're just above Pitt in list above. ND is pretty close to BC BTW. Oh well, guess UNC holds place it deserves in my memory.

Acymetric
09-12-2012, 07:27 PM
Have you seen ND football lately? They ain't putting automatic losses onto top-tier ACC teams.

I have not thought about this move a lot but I think I like it at first blush. Getting 5 football games is clearly a move to ease ND into the league in football. They fit nicely with the league is many other sports too. They are a major college sports franchise and bringing them in is a huge deal -- even if it is not the "all-in" that many were advocating.

The ACC has now ensured that it will be a player in the future of college sports. That much is clear and, as Duke fans, we should be quite glad for that. Most importantly, I would imagine that the ACC would seek to include at least some, and perhaps all, of the 5 ND games as part of our TV package, which makes our football TV rights much more attractive.

-Jason "the $50 mil exit fee ensures we won't get poached by anyone else either" Evans

According to the press conference, games ND plays at an ACC site will be ours (as is the case with any team that plays at an ACC school) while any games ACC teams play at ND will be part of Notre Dame's tv deal with NBC. This makes pretty good sense, and my only question which I never heard asked or answered is how many of the 5 games are home and away each year for Notre Dame.


My guess is that right now, the 5 ACC games won't be rotating. So they will probably lay BC, which is actually a rivalry game that has an exchangeable trophy (so the old Catholics like my family eats up that game). They will probably get FSU or VT if they want, and then throw in 3 teams on the East coast in various areas each season to give them a presence where a lot of alums are.

I would be shocked if the 5 games aren't rotating for two reasons:

A: Those 5 teams would be limited to only 2 voluntary out of conference games, which sounds extremely unappealing. Plus those teams will have to drop already scheduled games to make room. If it rotates a school can say "We don't have room to play you in 2014 but that slot opens back up in 2017, can we play you then?" With no rotation it becomes increasingly likely that the team would simply have to say "Sorry, we don't have room on our schedule anymore" and cut a check.

B: One of other benefits of playing Notre Dame is increased exposure, as ESPN is going to jump all over a chance to air Notre Dame. Duke-Notre Dame may not be on ESPN primetime, but would probably avoid the ESPN3 curse. If schedules don't rotate, you also don't spread this exposure around to all ACC schools and end up with sort of 3 different classes in the ACC: Notre Dame, Teams Who Play Notre Dame, and Everyone Else.

Granted I have no inside info and could be totally off base here, but I really think that rotation is essential to this being a successful move that benefits the league.

Edit: Also wanted to add that it is plain stupid that Notre Dame can get in line for the ACC's bowl tie ins with this deal. As long as they are within one win (or better) of the next ACC team in line for a tie-in bowl that bowl can choose Notre Dame instead. So a 6-6 Notre Dame is going bowling ahead of a 7-5 Boston College in one of the ACC's bowls without being an ACC member. Sounds reasonable to me. This does not include the Orange Bowl, although ND is supposed to have a tie in there as a potential opponent (to a team they most likely played earlier in the year as part of their semi-membership).

cspan37421
09-12-2012, 08:49 PM
Please forgive me if I missed this in this thread, but wasn't it the case that if you were in the ACC you had to join with football, basketball, and so forth? I recall during some of our recent highly unsuccessful football seasons there were threads questioning whether Duke should drop to D1-FCS for football (or something) and the answer was, no, no, if you are part of the ACC you can't fail to field a football team. You're in with all the major sports or you're not in at all.

Perhaps this isn't a perfect analogy with ND, but it seems to me that something in the ACC constitution had to have changed to allow ND to halfway join for football, or whatever it is they're doing - and to make plausible the discussions here of finding a 16th team to add, also not fully in football, like 'Nova.

sagegrouse
09-12-2012, 08:54 PM
Please forgive me if I missed this in this thread, but wasn't it the case that if you were in the ACC you had to join with football, basketball, and so forth? I recall during some of our recent highly unsuccessful football seasons there were threads questioning whether Duke should drop to D1-FCS for football (or something) and the answer was, no, no, if you are part of the ACC you can't fail to field a football team. You're in with all the major sports or you're not in at all.

Perhaps this isn't a perfect analogy with ND, but it seems to me that something in the ACC constitution had to have changed to allow ND to halfway join for football, or whatever it is they're doing - and to make plausible the discussions here of finding a 16th team to add, also not fully in football, like 'Nova.

There is no question the ACC changed its rules or practices to accommodate Notre Dame. But, after all, it is Notre Dame.

John Feinstein argues that Duke should drop out of ACC football and form a conference with the service academies, Rice, Tulane, etc. etc. that could be called the "SAT Conference." His rejoinder to the question about the requirement that all schools in the ACC play football: "The ACC IS NOT going to toss Duke out of the conference!!!!"

sagegrouse

devildeac
09-12-2012, 08:55 PM
You know what? Damn the torpedoes. Let's add Brigham Young. We need some Mormons up in here. They're great at foreign languages.

At least it's on a "coast."

2792

Well, what the heck. South Bend is almost coastal, too.

2793

devildeac
09-12-2012, 09:01 PM
The real question here is what's the conference logo gonna look like?

How about this:

2794

Duvall
09-12-2012, 09:05 PM
I think this development is gut-bustingly hilarious simply because of the number of people on this board who swore, as if from some position of authority, that the ACC would never ever do it.


There's a pretty big difference between saying the ACC should not do a thing, and saying that the ACC would not do a thing.

burnspbesq
09-12-2012, 09:17 PM
The incidental to this is that the Big East will most likely drop down to 5 D1 lacrosse schools and will lose their auto bid.

Nope. Marquette is starting D1 men's lax in 2013 (women's in 2014), and is scheduled to play a full Big Least schedule beginning in 2014.

burnspbesq
09-12-2012, 09:23 PM
As long as we're destroying conferences, let's invite BU, North Dakota, Air Force, and Colgate as hockey-only members.

Duvall
09-12-2012, 09:29 PM
As long as we're destroying conferences, let's invite BU, North Dakota, Air Force, and Colgate as hockey-only members.

Why not just invite four more teams from Hockey East? We already have two.

Not UConn, of course. Never UConn.

throatybeard
09-12-2012, 10:45 PM
There's a pretty big difference between saying the ACC should not do a thing, and saying that the ACC would not do a thing.

I've seen/heard plenty of folks say it would not happen, period.

TKG
09-13-2012, 07:14 AM
If someone else posted on this subject, I apologize. I was too lazy to read through the six pages of the thread. Ever onward. With the addtion of ND, ACC lacrosse is comprised of:

Duke
Maryland
North Carolina
Notre Dame
Syracuse
UVA

That is pretty impressive.

CameronBornAndBred
09-13-2012, 07:27 AM
If someone else posted on this subject, I apologize. I was too lazy to read through the six pages of the thread. Ever onward. With the addtion of ND, ACC lacrosse is comprised of:

Duke
Maryland
North Carolina
Notre Dame
Syracuse
UVA

That is pretty impressive.

Almost starting to look like a full conference tourney.

blazindw
09-13-2012, 07:41 AM
Almost starting to look like a full conference tourney.

We should basically make this the national championship tournament every year! ;)

Faison1
09-13-2012, 09:36 AM
I haven't looked through the entire thread, but is anyone else concerned that we're becoming the Big East?

Kedsy
09-13-2012, 10:58 AM
If someone else posted on this subject, I apologize. I was too lazy to read through the six pages of the thread. Ever onward. With the addtion of ND, ACC lacrosse is comprised of:

Duke
Maryland
North Carolina
Notre Dame
Syracuse
UVA

That is pretty impressive.

I'm pretty sure Pitt has a Division 1 lacrosse team, as well.

tommy
09-13-2012, 11:09 AM
Sorry if this was already discussed and I missed it, but I heard Brian Kelly on the radio this morning say that the ACC deal will help Notre Dame with bowl tie-ins.

How? They're only playing 5 ACC games, not eligible for the ACC Championship game, so how can they be placed in the conference pecking order for bowl tie-ins? How would it be determined if they're ACC #3 or ACC #4 or whatever it is, when they haven't played a full conference schedule? Seems to me they'd be available as an at-large selection, same as they were as an independent. What am I missing?

crimsonandblue
09-13-2012, 11:23 AM
Sorry if this was already discussed and I missed it, but I heard Brian Kelly on the radio this morning say that the ACC deal will help Notre Dame with bowl tie-ins.

How? They're only playing 5 ACC games, not eligible for the ACC Championship game, so how can they be placed in the conference pecking order for bowl tie-ins? How would it be determined if they're ACC #3 or ACC #4 or whatever it is, when they haven't played a full conference schedule? Seems to me they'd be available as an at-large selection, same as they were as an independent. What am I missing?

I think you're missing the agreement by the ACC that slots ND into the ACC pecking order based on overall record and even allows bowls to select ND over an ACC team with a better record to the extent ND is within one game (by overall record) of that ACC team. At least that's what I've seen tossed around.

sagegrouse
09-13-2012, 11:26 AM
Sorry if this was already discussed and I missed it, but I heard Brian Kelly on the radio this morning say that the ACC deal will help Notre Dame with bowl tie-ins.

How? They're only playing 5 ACC games, not eligible for the ACC Championship game, so how can they be placed in the conference pecking order for bowl tie-ins? How would it be determined if they're ACC #3 or ACC #4 or whatever it is, when they haven't played a full conference schedule? Seems to me they'd be available as an at-large selection, same as they were as an independent. What am I missing?

Yes, Notre Dame does get to be in the mix for the secondary bowl games. I can't find the story, but it was clear and unmistakable IIRC (and there is always a first time). The secondary bowls (not the Orange Bowl) get to pick ND so long as its overall record is no worse than one game below the next ACC team in line. Is this fair? Well, I dunno, but it was the outcome of a lengthy negotiation, so it can't be looked at by itself. And truthfully, ND is a heck of a draw for bowl game.

sagegrouse

TKG
09-13-2012, 12:22 PM
I'm pretty sure Pitt has a Division 1 lacrosse team, as well.

Pitt does have a lacrosse team but it plays in the MCLA (club team). Perhaps they are moving to D-1? Michigan won an MCLA title before becoming a D-1 program last year.

greybeard
09-13-2012, 12:22 PM
The ACC? The traditional ACC, dead! ACC basketball rivalries, dead! Academics and basketball, dead! Playing meaningful out of league games at home, dead! What we have now is naked greed, naked disregard for any normalcy in college life for big time athletes. Playing regional rivals, once the bedrock of league” games, is gossamer. Get on the private jets guys, travel large, not to worry, global warming is just a myth, and, you’ll get to be a regular student soon son, you know you’ll have a good time soon. Just students who happen to be athletes, athletes who bring in billions. Remember now, you all are just like other students. Really? “The cat’s in the cradle in a silver spoon, little boy blue and the man in the moon.” Conferences and their members are merging and shuffling like players in high tech industries, doing it for the money, big time money, and these young men are not pros. Why, because a conspiracy in restraint of trade says so, the NCAA says so, its member conferences and universities say so, refuse to let them get paid. How much longer does that get to last. These free-for-alls for the money, for millions and millions of it, lay bear what is left of the charade. In the process, tradition be damned, Duke verses UNC, who cares and for how much longer. Certainly not these college presidents who can think of nothing else but the dollars.

Has anyone ever looked at BC as being a genuine member of the ACC. How long will it be before BC, and these newer acquisitions be thought of in such terms. Ever. And, should “ever” ever come, what will being an ACC team mean. What does it mean now.

the cat's in the cradle and the silver spoon
Little boy blue and the man on the moon
When you comin' home son?
I don't know when, but we'll get together then
You know we'll have a good time then.

K seemed to have been onto something that might have held back the flood that’s coming: he proposed that players be given a small stipend to have a little spending money. That ship has sailed, and these mergers and acquisitions show that the owners, oops, the conference and university big wigs, know it. Players will soon be paid, and one-and-doners will be no more unless they are, big time. It has to happen now. The case for treating players as something other than pros has evaporated--the morale ground for it, never very high in the last 20 years, has been washed away. So too has the legal underpinnings for the rule that has made the one-year-and-done stars that make the college game such a seller.

This one-and-done rule has created a vacuum that high school stars will no longer tolerate and they will soon not have to go overseas to have an option. These mergers and acquisitions we now see in big time college sports is a gear up for the creation of professional league alternatives that, because of their continued connection to universities with huge and loyal fan bases, might just be able to keep alternative leagues like the ABA and the AFL at bay. Unless big time college sports go pro, such alternatives are on the horizon, only this time they will not have to play and fly on the cheap. Stern proudly pronounces that the NBA has gone global. We’ll see global, all right, right here in the good old USA. But, ownership, like American industries and jobs of yesterday and tomorrow, will be off-shored. You think that the owner of the Nets or whatever they are now to be called is the only foreigner with the dough and interest to have a sports toy in the US of A, think again. The last bastion of what is truly American is going out the door, unless something it done to forestall it. I think those who run and make barrelfuls of money from big time college sports might well be gearing up to do just that.

The price will be dear and it a big down payment has already been paid. Winning the ACC, Duke verses UNC, “where have you gone Joe DiMaggio.” Sad.

crimsonandblue
09-13-2012, 01:06 PM
I would think that getting to sixteen and shifting to two eight-team divisions would be attractive to the core of the old ACC. If you get large enough, conferences really become administrative, marketing, television and scheduling affiliations only. Wouldn't a North Carolina-centric South Division with double round robin in basketball and some ties to the other division be attractive? Even the 15-team, 3 5-team pod concepts could make something like that possible, although it's cleaner to get to 16 and have two mini-conferences affiliated only through TV, scheduling and a conference tournament/championship game.

If anything, I would think the northern teams might balk at what would seem to be an inevitable shunting off into a reconstituted Big East as the north division of the ACC.

SCMatt33
09-13-2012, 01:09 PM
Yes, Notre Dame does get to be in the mix for the secondary bowl games. I can't find the story, but it was clear and unmistakable IIRC (and there is always a first time). The secondary bowls (not the Orange Bowl) get to pick ND so long as its overall record is no worse than one game below the next ACC team in line. Is this fair? Well, I dunno, but it was the outcome of a lengthy negotiation, so it can't be looked at by itself. And truthfully, ND is a heck of a draw for bowl game.

sagegrouse

I think the one game rule is fair. It's the same standard applied to a regular ACC team, just based on overall instead of conference record. Plus, ND plays virtually no cupcake games against FCS teams so building up a soft record isn't that likely.

-jk
09-13-2012, 01:18 PM
Any idea how ND will share bowl money with the rest of the ACC, and vice-versa?

-jk

JasonEvans
09-13-2012, 02:36 PM
my only question which I never heard asked or answered is how many of the 5 games are home and away each year for Notre Dame.

I believe they said that Notre Dame would alternate year to year playing 3 road games, 2 home games the first year and 2 road, 3 home the next.

I agree with Acymetric's excellent post that having a couple/few ND games on the ACC TV schedule makes our TV package more attractive. Even without them as a full member, we reap some football benefits from having them around.

-Jason "welcome, Irish!" Evans

ChillinDuke
09-13-2012, 02:51 PM
The ACC? The traditional ACC, dead! ACC basketball rivalries, dead! Academics and basketball, dead! Playing meaningful out of league games at home, dead! What we have now is naked greed, naked disregard for any normalcy in college life for big time athletes. Playing regional rivals, once the bedrock of league” games, is gossamer. Get on the private jets guys, travel large, not to worry, global warming is just a myth, and, you’ll get to be a regular student soon son, you know you’ll have a good time soon. Just students who happen to be athletes, athletes who bring in billions. Remember now, you all are just like other students. Really? “The cat’s in the cradle in a silver spoon, little boy blue and the man in the moon.” Conferences and their members are merging and shuffling like players in high tech industries, doing it for the money, big time money, and these young men are not pros. Why, because a conspiracy in restraint of trade says so, the NCAA says so, its member conferences and universities say so, refuse to let them get paid. How much longer does that get to last. These free-for-alls for the money, for millions and millions of it, lay bear what is left of the charade. In the process, tradition be damned, Duke verses UNC, who cares and for how much longer. Certainly not these college presidents who can think of nothing else but the dollars.

Has anyone ever looked at BC as being a genuine member of the ACC. How long will it be before BC, and these newer acquisitions be thought of in such terms. Ever. And, should “ever” ever come, what will being an ACC team mean. What does it mean now.

the cat's in the cradle and the silver spoon
Little boy blue and the man on the moon
When you comin' home son?
I don't know when, but we'll get together then
You know we'll have a good time then.

K seemed to have been onto something that might have held back the flood that’s coming: he proposed that players be given a small stipend to have a little spending money. That ship has sailed, and these mergers and acquisitions show that the owners, oops, the conference and university big wigs, know it. Players will soon be paid, and one-and-doners will be no more unless they are, big time. It has to happen now. The case for treating players as something other than pros has evaporated--the morale ground for it, never very high in the last 20 years, has been washed away. So too has the legal underpinnings for the rule that has made the one-year-and-done stars that make the college game such a seller.

This one-and-done rule has created a vacuum that high school stars will no longer tolerate and they will soon not have to go overseas to have an option. These mergers and acquisitions we now see in big time college sports is a gear up for the creation of professional league alternatives that, because of their continued connection to universities with huge and loyal fan bases, might just be able to keep alternative leagues like the ABA and the AFL at bay. Unless big time college sports go pro, such alternatives are on the horizon, only this time they will not have to play and fly on the cheap. Stern proudly pronounces that the NBA has gone global. We’ll see global, all right, right here in the good old USA. But, ownership, like American industries and jobs of yesterday and tomorrow, will be off-shored. You think that the owner of the Nets or whatever they are now to be called is the only foreigner with the dough and interest to have a sports toy in the US of A, think again. The last bastion of what is truly American is going out the door, unless something it done to forestall it. I think those who run and make barrelfuls of money from big time college sports might well be gearing up to do just that.

The price will be dear and it a big down payment has already been paid. Winning the ACC, Duke verses UNC, “where have you gone Joe DiMaggio.” Sad.

I look at BC as a genuine member of the ACC. So "ever" has come for me.

I completely understand those who look fondly on the old days of the 8-team ACC and the rivalries and fandom and nostalgia and everything else that came with it. But we're in 2012. It's been over 8 years since Miami and VT joined. Over 7 since BC joined. Thousands of Duke University students have matriculated, studied, and graduated having never known a different ACC in their time on campus.

There are reasons for the new ACC landscape, and we can be upset about them, discuss them still to this day, hash out plausible rectifying action, and even reach out to your local politician about it. All perfectly acceptable responses. I, for one, choose to accept the ACC as it stands. BC is a fine school and, to my knowledge, an excellent representative of the Atlantic Coast Conference. As I'm sure Notre Dame will be. If this were not the case, different story.

I choose to embrace the changes and move forward.

- Chillin

JasonEvans
09-13-2012, 03:34 PM
Well said, Chillin.

So, seeing as you did such a good job, allow me to further pile on and make a fool of myself ;)

Greybeard, I know you are not alone in lamenting the demise of the "good old days" in the ACC. If it was possible to maintain a conference with the traditional ACC members and play a full home-and-home schedule in basketball as well as play everyone else 1 time in football, I would be oh so happy at that turn of events.

But I think all of us need to understand that is simply not possible in the modern college sports climate. Football commands the dollars and having a larger, more prominent football footprint means more dollars. In this world of athletic budgets being squeezed, dollars matter. If we were still an 8 team league, there is little question that the most attractive football members of the conference would have fled for greener (green=money) pastures. The Duke-UNC rivalry would be dead. So would Duke-Maryland, I suspect. I cannot see how UNC, Virginia, NCSU, Maryland, Ga Tech, FSU, or Clemson would stick around in a conference that did not try to generate large football TV revenues. Duke and Wake might be ok with it (as neither of us are seen as valuable football commodities), but the rest of the conference would have fled to someplace else.

I can certainly sympathize with Grey's rant over the loss of so much tradition, even if I could barely understand what he was talking about at times, but that ship has sailed and it ain't coming back any time in the foreseeable future. Being upset about it is about as productive as lamenting the good old days when you only had to choose among 3 channels for your prime time viewing choices.

-Jason "at least the ACC played the expansion game smartly and came out strong and with schools that seem to make sense. Thank you, John Swofford!" Evans

rasputin
09-13-2012, 03:46 PM
I can certainly sympathize with Grey's rant over the loss of so much tradition, even if I could barely understand what he was talking about at times, but that ship has sailed and it ain't coming back any time in the foreseeable future. Being upset about it is about as productive as lamenting the good old days when you only had to choose among 3 channels for your prime time viewing choices.

-Jason "at least the ACC played the expansion game smartly and came out strong and with schools that seem to make sense. Thank you, John Swofford!" Evans

I miss the good old days too. But the ship has sailed. With the Pilot!

TKG
09-13-2012, 04:10 PM
I miss the good old days too. But the ship has sailed. With the Pilot!

Along with Jim Thacker and Billy Packer........

throatybeard
09-13-2012, 04:16 PM
It's been nearly a decade. It's time to come to terms with expansion.

What's interesting to me is the pace at which different schools come to feel like naturalized citizens. I'm sure this varies for everyone.

Virginia Tech feels to me like they've always been in the ACC. Even though I didn't like Miami entering the league, they feel to me more or less like an ACC school too. But Boston College--and I have no particular enthusiasm or disdain for Boston College--they feel like a space alien on the schedule to me. Like seriously, to the point where I forget momentarily that it's a league game. I'm all like, why are we playing a nonconference...oh, yeah. And Florida State. When I was a kid, I don't remember anyone complaining that FSU didn't seem like an ACC team. People just moaned about their football team killing all of us every year. I'm skeptical about Syracuse and Pittsburgh, mainly Syracuse. There sure are a lot of Yankees in this conference now.

I'm glad West Virginia had a life raft out of the Big East, but I wish they were in the SEC or ACC. I can't imagine any scenario where, in twenty years, I'm all fired up for WVU-Iowa State. If that league even exists after the next time Texas tries something cute.

The SEC additions are particularly interesting, and I think the divisions are important. Mizzou being in the midwest but placed in the East (to protect the Bama-Tennessee rivalry, I believe) will slow the degree to which they seem like a natural SEC team. But A&M in the SEC West, reunited with their old foe Arkansas, and presented with a new natural rival in LSU. I look forward to the "Snow Bowl" teams of A&M and MSU playing each other regularly. Hell, Texas A&M already feels more natural in the SEC to me than Boston College does in the ACC. I am very glad Mizzou is in the SEC though, because it puts me in an SEC market.

Nebraska feels right in the B1G. I can't make up my mind about Colorado and Utah in the PAC-12.

I welcome Notre Dame with open arms, and I think we will eventually get them in as a football member. It will just take some time.

Once you have a sixteenth team, a 16-team basketball schedule would work OK with 18 games if you had two dedicated opponents home&home, and played everyone else once. Of course, the stupid league would give us Maryland instead of State.

I have no idea how they're going to schedule 15 teams.

I guess it would never happen, because we can't pay what out what the B1G does, but I wish we would make an overture to Penn State. We could pitch it as a break from the past and a new start after the scandal. Convince them they're really an east coast team. Pie-in-the sky, I know.

Bob Green
09-13-2012, 04:28 PM
It's been nearly a decade. It's time to come to terms with expansion.

I'm still pissed South Carolina left. Georgia Tech was a very welcome addition from my perspective. But I get your point, it is all about survival and I will take this bastardized edition of the ACC over no ACC everyday of the week.

throatybeard
09-13-2012, 04:43 PM
I'm still pissed South Carolina left. Georgia Tech was a very welcome addition from my perspective. But I get your point, it is all about survival and I will take this bastardized edition of the ACC over no ACC everyday of the week.

Well, if they hadn't, we'd be full now at sixteen. So the question is, would you want South Carolina, or some other school as your sixteenth.

I think South Carolina and Arkansas feel plenty naturalized in the SEC, especially after twenty years.

I wrote an extensive post about this a while back, but the degree to which everyone kept playing South Carolina after they left is really striking. It was only when they joined the SEC that the North Carolina schools lost them on the schedule. It was like they were only halfway out of the conference for two decades. I'm too lazy to find this post.

hudlow
09-13-2012, 05:02 PM
If Duke left the ACC....would anyone care about the ACC then?

burnspbesq
09-13-2012, 05:15 PM
And possibly the best tweet in the history of tweeting.

2799

Bob Green
09-13-2012, 05:37 PM
Well, if they hadn't, we'd be full now at sixteen. So the question is, would you want South Carolina, or some other school as your sixteenth.

I'd take South Carolina back in a heartbeat, but I suspect I'm in the minority.

Tappan Zee Devil
09-13-2012, 06:18 PM
I'd take South Carolina back in a heartbeat, but I suspect I'm in the minority.


No! Never!

I remember Roche et al. They were thugs and I have not forgotten or forgiven.

Jim

JasonEvans
09-13-2012, 07:32 PM
NOTE: the below post was written after my bad eyes thought they saw Bob lamenting the inclusion of Ga Tech. I totally mis-read his post. So sorry.


I'm still pissed South Carolina left. Georgia Tech was a very welcome addition from my perspective. But I get your point, it is all about survival and I will take this bastardized edition of the ACC over no ACC everyday of the week.

Georgia Tech gives the ACC the Georgia and, more importantly, the Atlanta market. Atlanta is the largest city in the Southeast. Georgia is extremely fertile recruiting ground for basketball players. What's more Tech has been a top ACC team in both basketball and football quite a bit over the years.

Their basketball program is easily in the top 5 in the ACC over the past 30 years since they joined, perhaps as high as 3rd (Duke, UNC, and then either Maryland, NC State, or Tech). Their football program is also one of the better ones in the conference (FSU, Va Tech, and then either GaT or Clemson). They have done all this while generally posting strong graduation rates, staying out of NCAA trouble, and without employing questionable ethics of out of control fans (hello to Maryland!). Heck, I think Tech is one of the model schools in the ACC in terms of success across the 2 revenue sports without too much scandal.

-Jason "being in Atlanta is good because it allows me to see all ACC games!" Evans

hurleyfor3
09-13-2012, 07:57 PM
I guess it would never happen, because we can't pay what out what the B1G does, but I wish we would make an overture to Penn State. We could pitch it as a break from the past and a new start after the scandal. Convince them they're really an east coast team. Pie-in-the sky, I know.

I really like the Penn State idea myself. Another benefit is PSU would get back their dormant but natural (and still heated in the Pittsburgh area) rivalry with Pitt.

Newton_14
09-13-2012, 08:38 PM
It's been nearly a decade. It's time to come to terms with expansion.

What's interesting to me is the pace at which different schools come to feel like naturalized citizens. I'm sure this varies for everyone.

Virginia Tech feels to me like they've always been in the ACC. Even though I didn't like Miami entering the league, they feel to me more or less like an ACC school too. But Boston College--and I have no particular enthusiasm or disdain for Boston College--they feel like a space alien on the schedule to me. Like seriously, to the point where I forget momentarily that it's a league game. I'm all like, why are we playing a nonconference...oh, yeah. And Florida State. When I was a kid, I don't remember anyone complaining that FSU didn't seem like an ACC team. People just moaned about their football team killing all of us every year. I'm skeptical about Syracuse and Pittsburgh, mainly Syracuse. There sure are a lot of Yankees in this conference now.

I'm glad West Virginia had a life raft out of the Big East, but I wish they were in the SEC or ACC. I can't imagine any scenario where, in twenty years, I'm all fired up for WVU-Iowa State. If that league even exists after the next time Texas tries something cute.

The SEC additions are particularly interesting, and I think the divisions are important. Mizzou being in the midwest but placed in the East (to protect the Bama-Tennessee rivalry, I believe) will slow the degree to which they seem like a natural SEC team. But A&M in the SEC West, reunited with their old foe Arkansas, and presented with a new natural rival in LSU. I look forward to the "Snow Bowl" teams of A&M and MSU playing each other regularly. Hell, Texas A&M already feels more natural in the SEC to me than Boston College does in the ACC. I am very glad Mizzou is in the SEC though, because it puts me in an SEC market.

Nebraska feels right in the B1G. I can't make up my mind about Colorado and Utah in the PAC-12.

I welcome Notre Dame with open arms, and I think we will eventually get them in as a football member. It will just take some time.

Once you have a sixteenth team, a 16-team basketball schedule would work OK with 18 games if you had two dedicated opponents home&home, and played everyone else once. Of course, the stupid league would give us Maryland instead of State.

I have no idea how they're going to schedule 15 teams.

I guess it would never happen, because we can't pay what out what the B1G does, but I wish we would make an overture to Penn State. We could pitch it as a break from the past and a new start after the scandal. Convince them they're really an east coast team. Pie-in-the sky, I know.


I actually view BC as a long timer now. I am weird (not earth shattering news) in that I loved the ACC I grew up with in the 70's and 80's, but I have no problem adapting to the changing landscape. I did not like the expansion to 12 at first, but that was due to me not understanding at the time that the landscape was changing more drastically than what I anticipated. I fully embrace Pitt and Syracuse, and love the addition of ND, even though I was convinced the ACC would not cave on the "All in or not in" stance. Debbie Yow did state on the radio yesterday, that in the meetings it was stated that the only exception to that rule on planet earth was Notre Dame, and no other school would have or will in the future get the exception. Still, I was wrong there. (Apologies to ClassOf94 the poster)

For the 16th, my choice was always Penn St prior to the scandal, and once that passes, I still think they are the best available choice for the ACC. Wes Durham predicted today it would be Louisville, and he predicted ND back in the Spring. I could live with that choice. I too, would have loved West By God Virginia to have joined the ACC as well. Academics, aside, they would have been a good fit with natural rivals galore.

FWIW, Yow also stated adding ND "saved the NCSU/UNC rivalry". I assume that means 3 pods of 5 with UNC, Duke, NCSU all being in the same pod and annual Home and Home games.

With regards to Football and the Duke/ND games, it was mentioned on radio today those games would possibly be sold and played in the New York area. I see the logic, but would much rather see those games at Wally Wade and South Bend.

So Welcome Notre Dame. Here's to them becoming All In in 4 to 5 years or so...

ForkFondler
09-13-2012, 08:43 PM
II'm glad West Virginia had a life raft out of the Big East, but I wish they were in the SEC or ACC.


I am completely on board with replacing UNC-Corrupt with the Mountaineers.

-bdbd
09-14-2012, 02:17 AM
If anyone is interested, the Washington Post asked the U of MD Predident about why he/they voted against raising the ACC exit fee from $20M to $50M. As you can see at this link, below, he claims that it wasn't at all political, or having anything to do with MD's relationship with the ACC. He is a Yale Law grad, and former Dean of the U of Washington Law School, and objected to it on philisophical/legal grounds. He argues that it is less "fee" and more "punative," and he thinks it could deter other potential new members from joining. But, he rightly points out that the focus this week should be on the very good news about Notre Dame joining the ACC, and not on the penalty issue...


http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/terrapins-insider/post/maryland-president-wallace-d-loh-voted-against-accs-50-million-exit-fee-says-its-not-a-good-idea/2012/09/13/683ff014-fe12-11e1-8adc-499661afe377_blog.html

BlueDevilBrowns
09-14-2012, 06:50 AM
For the 16th, my choice was always Penn St prior to the scandal, and once that passes, I still think they are the best available choice for the ACC. Wes Durham predicted today it would be Louisville, and he predicted ND back in the Spring. I could live with that choice.

So Welcome Notre Dame. Here's to them becoming All In in 4 to 5 years or so...

My opinion is if the ACC announces within the next 12 months they are adding a 16th school, it's probably Louisville. However, if they wait longer, PSU may be in a stronger position in a couple of years post-scandal to make a move to the ACC; starting ACC play around the same time perhaps ND's TV contract ends and The Irish decide to go "all-in", making a true 16 team conference.

As long as ND isn't in with football, there's no rush on the ACC's part to add a 15th member on the football side, so why settle for Louisville when you could potentially grab a bigger fish in PSU?

ForkFondler
09-14-2012, 07:15 AM
My opinion is if the ACC announces within the next 12 months they are adding a 16th school, it's probably Louisville. However, if they wait longer, PSU may be in a stronger position in a couple of years post-scandal to make a move to the ACC; starting ACC play around the same time perhaps ND's TV contract ends and The Irish decide to go "all-in", making a true 16 team conference.

As long as ND isn't in with football, there's no rush on the ACC's part to add a 15th member on the football side, so why settle for Louisville when you could potentially grab a bigger fish in PSU?

If anything happens in the next year or so, I think the Navy for FB with Georgetown for BB is more likely:

http://www.southernpigskin.com/acc/view/the-acc-plus-notre-dame-plus-navy

Bob Green
09-14-2012, 08:59 AM
No! Never!

I remember Roche et al. They were thugs and I have not forgotten or forgiven.

Jim

I was only 11 and 12 years old in '70 and '71 when John Roche and South Carolina were so good so I didn't pick up on the thuggery. I also didn't pick up on the racism involved in John Roche being named ACC POY over Charlie Scott. One of the many football games my Dad took me to in my youth was against South Carolina in 1967. Duke fumbled the opening kick-off and South Carolina fell on it in the endzone for a touchdown (right in front of us in the closed end of the horseshoe) and a 7-0 lead. Duke played a good game the rest of the way but fell 21-17. The early lesson that a football game is a full 60 minutes was hardearned that day. Duke was the better team for 59 minutes and 50 seconds. Those first 10 seconds were costly.

Anyway, I'm being longwinded in reiterating I'd like to see the Gamecocks back in the league, but they will never voluntarily leave the SEC.

Indoor66
09-14-2012, 09:31 AM
No! Never!

I remember Roche et al. They were thugs and I have not forgotten or forgiven.

Jim

I am with you on No! Never! to the gcocks. Their history is hateful and their fans second only to unc for arrogance. Who needs another one?

sagegrouse
09-14-2012, 10:19 AM
I am with you on No! Never! to the gcocks. Their history is hateful and their fans second only to unc for arrogance. Who needs another one?

As a proper son of the Lowcountry, I have a different memory of Gamecock fans. My Dad, in business for 50 years, had customers who were Gamecock diehards. He would wait until they won a significant game before calling them, so he would have something pleasant to discuss. Only problem was -- it was a long time between sales calls, and he had to think up other subjects to bring up.

Besides, they fill up their stadium every game. I would be happy to have South Carolina back in the fold.

sagegrouse
'Much better now with Spurrier in the saddle, but as le General said, "Apres moi, le deluge"'

ChillinDuke
09-14-2012, 10:35 AM
My opinion is if the ACC announces within the next 12 months they are adding a 16th school, it's probably Louisville. However, if they wait longer, PSU may be in a stronger position in a couple of years post-scandal to make a move to the ACC; starting ACC play around the same time perhaps ND's TV contract ends and The Irish decide to go "all-in", making a true 16 team conference.

As long as ND isn't in with football, there's no rush on the ACC's part to add a 15th member on the football side, so why settle for Louisville when you could potentially grab a bigger fish in PSU?

Correct me if I'm wrong, but haven't we been through this?

Maybe you didn't partake in the Conference Realignment thread over the last few years, but the consensus opinion seems to be: No one is leaving the Big Ten to come to the ACC.

It's a $ issue. Big Ten $ > ACC $. Pretty much that simple.

I doubt the scandal changes this logic.

- Chillin

PS - Ughhh, Louisville. I guess there really aren't many options.

Duvall
09-14-2012, 10:41 AM
My opinion is if the ACC announces within the next 12 months they are adding a 16th school, it's probably Louisville.

I don't understand why the ACC would pass on West Virginia in 2011 and then take Louisville in 2013.

phaedrus
09-14-2012, 10:52 AM
If anyone is interested, the Washington Post asked the U of MD Predident about why he/they voted against raising the ACC exit fee from $20M to $50M. As you can see at this link, below, he claims that it wasn't at all political, or having anything to do with MD's relationship with the ACC. He is a Yale Law grad, and former Dean of the U of Washington Law School, and objected to it on philisophical/legal grounds. He argues that it is less "fee" and more "punative," and he thinks it could deter other potential new members from joining. But, he rightly points out that the focus this week should be on the very good news about Notre Dame joining the ACC, and not on the penalty issue...


http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/terrapins-insider/post/maryland-president-wallace-d-loh-voted-against-accs-50-million-exit-fee-says-its-not-a-good-idea/2012/09/13/683ff014-fe12-11e1-8adc-499661afe377_blog.html

And which, just as significantly, means it is likely unenforceable.

Jderf
09-14-2012, 10:57 AM
And which, just as significantly, means it is likely unenforceable.

Yeah, it is almost impossible to imagine a plausible scenario where a school would ever end up actually paying the entire $50 million. I see it more as a symbolic vote of confidence/solidarity from the member institutions.

Olympic Fan
09-14-2012, 11:02 AM
I don't undetrstand this sentiment that because the ACC went to 15 with Notre Dame, it must now go to 16.

In the first place, the ACC is still at 14 for football -- adding a 16th team would unbalance the divisions (and while it would make scheduling simpler, it would actually make out-of-division scheduling even more infrequent). Adding 16 for basketball just adds more teams to play. It doesn't really make anything easier. Yeah, you can't play eight first-round games in the tournament, then you are down to eight for the quarterfinals -- no byes whatsoever. But with 15, you give the regular season champion a bye (a fair reward for winning the regular season) into the quarterfinals and led the other 14 teams play a first round-game ... and that gives you seven winners to join the regular season champs for the quarterfinals ... simple.

There is no compelling reason to add a 16th team -- it will just split the financial pie another way without significantly raising revenue. Now, that could change --everything changes ... as recently as three years ago, the ACC was adamant that it wouldn't take Notre Dame as a partial member. The sentiment that the ACC doesn't need a 16th member could change too. Maybe when (and IF -- it's still not certain) Notre Dame joins as a fulltime football member, then the ACC would go looking.

And it would help if there is a viable candidate. It ain't going to be Penn State (for reasons explained many times before, they ain't leaving the Big 10). It ain't going to be South Carolina (not just because of bad feelings with the ACC ... why would they leave the SEC? Folks, nobody is leaving the SEC or Big 10 in the current environment). And it ain't going to be an embarrassing academic school such as Louisville or West Virginia -- the fans might not care about such things, but the Presidents -- who are the people who make such decisions (at least in the ACC) do. There is nobopdy who makes sense at the moment. Keep an eye on UConn to see if they clean up the academic and ethical mess that surrounds their basketball program now that Calhoun is gone. Since the ACC ain't doing anything in the near future, they have time to fix their problems before conditions force the ACC to start looking again.

But, I repeat, the ACC is NOT going to 16 teams anytime soon. If you hear that a firm plan is in place to bring Notre Dame in as a full football member, THEN you can start thinking about it. It won't be a lock even then, but at least it would become thinkable.

Jarhead
09-14-2012, 11:17 AM
A couple of days ago I almost mentioned South Carolina in a post, but thinking of the potential for mass objection, I closed my browser to avoid accidentally posting it. I've done that before. Now there seems to be a wave, not very high, of some approval of the idea. I wouldn't mind seeing the Gamecocks back in the league, but I doubt they would consider it. They left in a way that seemed weird to me, and I thought much of it was engineered by Paul Dietzel. As I recall he had moved around the country with his Chinese bandits defense, and decided it would be easier to change conferences than to move his family again. That's how I looked at it. Most conversations I've had about it put more blame on Frank Maguire. With their subsequent entry into the SEC, I don't see it as a possibility for the ACC now, or at any time in the future. It would be nice having Spurrier back in the league, though.

My choice for a 16th school? Well, certainly not Georgetown. As a contributor to the construction costs of Navy–Marine Corps Memorial Stadium in Annapolis, my choice would be Navy. I always have held that institution in the highest regard, and I have many old friends who who attended the Naval Academy. They would would be a top fit for the ACC, except for their levels in football and basketball. Never a patsy, they would always give their all, and be a tough competitor in every contest. They'd win their share.

Realistically I'd give both Penn State and Rutgers consideration. Plenty of time to make that decision. By the way, football independence is not total if ND has to play 5 games in the ACC. I'd rate only partial independence. The next step will come about when a 16th school is selected, and new TV contracts are negotiated.

sagegrouse
09-14-2012, 11:17 AM
I don't undetrstand this sentiment that because the ACC went to 15 with Notre Dame, it must now go to 16.
................................

But, I repeat, the ACC is NOT going to 16 teams anytime soon. If you hear that a firm plan is in place to bring Notre Dame in as a full football member, THEN you can start thinking about it. It won't be a lock even then, but at least it would become thinkable.

I agree that the ACC has no intention of adding a 16th team, although until that story came out, I thought it probably would add another school.

In basketball it just means that conference byes occur twice a week that must be filled by out-of-conference opponents. Although, for other reasons, I support interconference play in Jan, Feb and March, that seems like a lot of trouble for the member schools. And I thought the ACC would move to simplify it. But, I agree with Olympic Fan, apparently not.

sagegrouse
'Now, there is a scheme to avoid byes by having a third game for two teams each week. That won't be very popular with the teams, coaches, or academic leadership -- basketball players already miss a whole bunch of classes'

Duvall
09-14-2012, 11:26 AM
Look at it this way - the last six teams added by the ACC were Big East teams currently rated in the top 75 in the crappy US News rankings. Why would we expect the seventh to be different?

Lar77
09-14-2012, 11:29 AM
Instead of the current system, could you have a 3 division format of 5 teams each (I know, everyone will want Duke and UNC in their division) with more home and home opportunities - it works to 18 games in conference.

Duvall
09-14-2012, 11:35 AM
Instead of the current system, could you have a 3 division format of 5 teams each (I know, everyone will want Duke and UNC in their division) with more home and home opportunities - it works to 18 games in conference.

That's possible, but I'm not sure that would be more popular than the 2-2-10 model (two rivals with home-and-home series every year, two other teams played home-and-home, and ten teams played once). You would lock ten of your teams from ever getting home-and-home with a team outside their division. Plus, how would the divisions work?

ACC Big Four: Duke, UNC, NCSU, WF
ACC South: Clemson, GT, FSU, Miami
ACC Mid-Atlantic: UVa, VT, Maryland, Pitt

...and then just allocate ND, BC and Syracuse randomly?

Lar77
09-14-2012, 11:42 AM
That's possible, but I'm not sure that would be more popular than the 2-2-10 model (two rivals with home-and-home series every year, two other teams played home-and-home, and ten teams played once). You would lock ten of your teams from ever getting home-and-home with a team outside their division. Plus, how would the divisions work?

ACC Big Four: Duke, UNC, NCSU, WF
ACC South: Clemson, GT, FSU, Miami
ACC Mid-Atlantic: UVa, VT, Maryland, Pitt

...and then just allocate ND, BC and Syracuse randomly?

Put Syracuse in the Big Four division and play the NC games at Greensboro (only while Boeheim is still the coach) and the NY games at MSG or the Meadowlands (aka Cameron North).

Bob Green
09-14-2012, 11:52 AM
I vote we add a 16th team and break the conference into two divisions:

Real ACC: Clemson, Duke, Georgia Tech, Maryland, North Carolina, N.C. State, Virginia, Wake Forest

Pseudo ACC: Boston College, Florida State, Miami, Notre Dame, Pittsburgh, Syracuse, Virginia Tech, 16th team

:rolleyes:

I know, I know, expansion is reality and I need to get over it. Sometimes, I just can't help myself.

MarkD83
09-14-2012, 11:52 AM
That's possible, but I'm not sure that would be more popular than the 2-2-10 model (two rivals with home-and-home series every year, two other teams played home-and-home, and ten teams played once). You would lock ten of your teams from ever getting home-and-home with a team outside their division. Plus, how would the divisions work?

ACC Big Four: Duke, UNC, NCSU, WF
ACC South: Clemson, GT, FSU, Miami
ACC Mid-Atlantic: UVa, VT, Maryland, Pitt

...and then just allocate ND, BC and Syracuse randomly?

Would it make more sense to have a North Mid and South ACC:

North: ND, BC, Syracuse, Pitt, MD
Mid: VT, UVA, UNC, Duke, NCSU
South: WF; Clemson, GT, FSU, Miami

Bob Green
09-14-2012, 12:00 PM
Would it make more sense to have a North Mid and South ACC:

North: ND, BC, Syracuse, Pitt, MD
Mid: VT, UVA, UNC, Duke, NCSU
South: WF; Clemson, GT, FSU, Miami

Why is Wake Forest in the South? A quick look at Latitudes reveals:

Winston-Salem: 36.09 N
Raleigh: 35.77 N
Durham: 35.99 N
Chapel Hill: 35.91 N

Wake Forest is located North of the three Triangle schools. N.C. State should be sent to the South (which would fuel the Wolfies inferiority complex).

Lar77
09-14-2012, 12:10 PM
Why is Wake Forest in the South? A quick look at Latitudes reveals:

Winston-Salem: 36.09 N
Raleigh: 35.77 N
Durham: 35.99 N
Chapel Hill: 35.91 N

Wake Forest is located North of the three Triangle schools. N.C. State should be sent to the South (which would fuel the Wolfies inferiority complex).

Either way, somebody's inferiority complex is fueled (after all, Wake and State are both charter members of the ABC and ABCD clubs). My guess is State would demand to be in the same division as Duke and UNC or threaten to have the N&O reveal more embarassing stories with wolfish persistence.

BD80
09-14-2012, 01:49 PM
That's possible, but I'm not sure that would be more popular than the 2-2-10 model (two rivals with home-and-home series every year, two other teams played home-and-home, and ten teams played once). You would lock ten of your teams from ever getting home-and-home with a team outside their division. Plus, how would the divisions work?
ACC Big Four: Duke, UNC, NCSU, WF
ACC South: Clemson, GT, FSU, Miami
ACC Mid-Atlantic: UVa, VT, Maryland, Pitt
...and then just allocate ND, BC and Syracuse randomly?


Pigskinners: Clemson, GT, FSU, Miami, VT

Sheepskinners: Duke, ND, UVA, BC, WF

Hasbeens: unc, Md, Syr, Pitt, NCSU

BlueDevilBrowns
09-14-2012, 02:03 PM
Correct me if I'm wrong, but haven't we been through this?

Maybe you didn't partake in the Conference Realignment thread over the last few years, but the consensus opinion seems to be: No one is leaving the Big Ten to come to the ACC.

It's a $ issue. Big Ten $ > ACC $. Pretty much that simple.

I doubt the scandal changes this logic.

- Chillin

PS - Ughhh, Louisville. I guess there really aren't many options.


I don't understand why the ACC would pass on West Virginia in 2011 and then take Louisville in 2013.





There is no compelling reason to add a 16th team -- it will just split the financial pie another way without significantly raising revenue. Now, that could change --everything changes ... as recently as three years ago, the ACC was adamant that it wouldn't take Notre Dame as a partial member. The sentiment that the ACC doesn't need a 16th member could change too. Maybe when (and IF -- it's still not certain) Notre Dame joins as a fulltime football member, then the ACC would go looking.

And it would help if there is a viable candidate. It ain't going to be Penn State (for reasons explained many times before, they ain't leaving the Big 10). It ain't going to be South Carolina (not just because of bad feelings with the ACC ... why would they leave the SEC? Folks, nobody is leaving the SEC or Big 10 in the current environment). And it ain't going to be an embarrassing academic school such as Louisville or West Virginia -- the fans might not care about such things, but the Presidents -- who are the people who make such decisions (at least in the ACC) do. There is nobopdy who makes sense at the moment. Keep an eye on UConn to see if they clean up the academic and ethical mess that surrounds their basketball program now that Calhoun is gone. Since the ACC ain't doing anything in the near future, they have time to fix their problems before conditions force the ACC to start looking again.

But, I repeat, the ACC is NOT going to 16 teams anytime soon. If you hear that a firm plan is in place to bring Notre Dame in as a full football member, THEN you can start thinking about it. It won't be a lock even then, but at least it would become thinkable.

My thinking regarding PSU, Louisville, and the whole "adding a 16th member" thing is that if they move NOW to add another team, likely it would be Louisville (I understand the academic side but, hey, FSU and VT aren't exactly Harvard and Yale). If the ACC waited a couple of years, I DO BELIEVE that PSU could be interested in moving IF ND was committed by then to becoming a full member. The B1G didn't exactly go out of their way to help PSU during the scandal (not saying they should have but the facts are they didn't) and, to your point Olympic Fan, WHO KNOWS what the financial picture will be like for the B1G and ACC in 2014/15. So I do think it's in the best interest of the ACC to wait and see how adding ND could possibly open up bringing in someone better than L'ville, or UConn, or Rutgers.

Mal
09-14-2012, 06:03 PM
their fans second only to unc for arrogance.

Ha! We'll see if you can still say that with a straight face after you've witnessed Notre Dame up close and personal for five years. ;)

Not that it matters at this late stage in the thread, or in 2012 now that the megaconference era has begun in earnest, but can I just say "Booooooo!" in a meta sense to expansion run wild generally, and to adding a school in freaking Indiana to the Atlantic Coast Conference, a school which refuses to join a conference for football, as a more specific matter?

Thanks. Booooooooooo.

msdukie
09-14-2012, 10:27 PM
Again, based on the ACC/ND press conference and subsequent interviews, there is NO 16th team coming unless ND becomes an ACC Football member. Because of this and based on Swofford's comments suggesting everyone will get two permanent partners again, the 2-2-10 model Duvall referenced is the likely outcome of a 15 team ACC.

Duke would play UNC (and presumably Maryland) twice each year, two other teams twice and the remaining 10 once. Instead of a 3 year rotation, there would now be a SIX year rotation. Of the 10 non-permanent partners, we would play them home OR road each year and home AND road only ONCE during that 6 year period. That's what happens when you get this big.


BTW, do you realize that Duke will likely play ND more often than State in football now?!, especially if ACC Football goes back to 8 games....

ForkFondler
09-15-2012, 07:54 AM
Again, based on the ACC/ND press conference and subsequent interviews, there is NO 16th team coming unless ND becomes an ACC Football member.

Which is why Navy is more likely at this point (however likely that is) than most of the other possibilities. Gotta weigh those contingencies into your probability calculations.

ForkFondler
09-17-2012, 10:05 PM
ND to ACC for Football is Inevitable (http://www.southernpigskin.com/ACC/view/nd-to-acc-for-football-is-inevitable)


The final demand Swarbrick should make is to play Duke as annual cross-divisional rival with Duke agreeing to play all its home games versus ND at neutral sites. That would mean that ND would have one league game each year played in cities across the country, usually outside the ACC geographic footprint. That would guarantee that ND playing an ACC slate of nine games would play a truly national schedule every year. ND could play, for example, Navy in San Diego one year, followed by playing Duke in St Louis, Navy in New Orleans, Duke in Philadelphia, Navy in Houston, Duke in Cincinnati, Navy in San Francisco, Duke in Dallas, Navy in Seattle, and Duke in Denver.

Gotta play in WW at least once every six years, I think.

blazindw
09-17-2012, 10:11 PM
ND to ACC for Football is Inevitable (http://www.southernpigskin.com/ACC/view/nd-to-acc-for-football-is-inevitable)



Gotta play in WW at least once every six years, I think.

As long as Cut is coach, that home matchup will be in Wally Wade every time.

ForkFondler
09-17-2012, 10:32 PM
As long as Cut is coach, that home matchup will be in Wally Wade every time.

I think he'll have to win a few more games in order to have enough pull to influence that decision. A few more fans in the seats would go a long way too.

Duvall
09-17-2012, 10:36 PM
I think he'll have to win a few more games in order to have enough pull to influence that decision. A few more fans in the seats would go a long way too.

Why? That's a Duke athletic department decision.

ForkFondler
09-17-2012, 10:51 PM
Why? That's a Duke athletic department decision.

Doesn't the conference schedule conference games?

throatybeard
09-17-2012, 11:06 PM
Duke in Saint Louis

Well hai-yill, y'all!

Duvall
09-17-2012, 11:09 PM
Doesn't the conference schedule conference games?

They can assign Duke a home game; I don't think they can require Duke to sell the game without the school's consent.

blazindw
09-17-2012, 11:10 PM
I think he'll have to win a few more games in order to have enough pull to influence that decision. A few more fans in the seats would go a long way too.

One of the first things he did as coach was declare that he wanted the Alabama game to be played in the friendly confines of Wallace Wade instead of at a neutral site in Atlanta (which Alabama, at the time, was pressuring Joe Alleva to do). That game, as we all know, was indeed a true home game. When we have home dates against big time opponents, it's clear that Coach Cutcliffe wants those games to be true home games.

The conference schedules the matchups. They have no say in where the home team decides to play the game.

throatybeard
09-25-2012, 01:40 PM
Notre Dame dumps Michigan:

http://espn.go.com/college-football/story/_/id/8423552/notre-dame-fighting-irish-opts-series-michigan-wolverines

Class of '94
09-28-2012, 03:41 PM
I wondering ND could be joining the ACC in non-football sports by next season (2013-2014). I say this after reading an article on the DBR front page that links to an espn article announcing that a highly rated class of 2013 PG recruit committed to ND yesterday. In that link, the recruit mentions that he's looking forward to learning from the current PG at ND who will be a senior PG by the time recruit plays as a freshman at ND (which would be next year). The recruit also goes to say that the "senior" PG would have another year (this year) in the Big East and would play in the ACC. The only way that the current PG at ND could play in the ACC with the recruit as a freshman would be next year.

Granted, this could all be hope and desire on the committed ND recruit's part because apparently he's a big fan of the ACC; and it appears that ND's announced move to the ACC may have helped to sway this recruit to ND. That said, it still makes me wonder if someone associated with ND told him that the move could be for next season.

Anyone has any thoughts on this?

ForkFondler
09-30-2012, 05:35 PM
Given the performance of the midshipmen so far this year, the Navy scenario has slid from dubious to preposterous. Taking them as a football only participant, even without regular league membership, could only happen if they are competitive with the bottom half of the league. Right now, they aren't -- and that's pretty bad. Cincinnati is my new dark horse.