PDA

View Full Version : Boise St disses Big East, stays Mt West



SCMatt33
11-19-2012, 10:42 AM
Not on the website yet, so no link, but ESPN just scrolled on the bottom line that Maryland has approved the move. I'm sure there is much, much, much more to come.

CameronBornAndBred
11-19-2012, 10:46 AM
Not on the website yet, so no link, but ESPN just scrolled on the bottom line that Maryland has approved the move. I'm sure there is much, much, much more to come.
Unanimous approval.
Ahhhh Seeeya!!

http://espn.go.com/blog/bigten/post/_/id/65679/maryland-regents-approve-big-ten-move

OldPhiKap
11-19-2012, 10:49 AM
"Flee the Turtle"

Kdogg
11-19-2012, 10:51 AM
Also I don't think the ACC can, with a straight face, get all indignant with the Big 10 and refuse to do the challenge anymore, while poaching teams from the Big East right and left. I wouldn't expect many ACC schools to schedule UMd voluntarily for the near future, but I don't see much point in going scorched earth.

Well the Big East did cancel the ACC/Big East challenge from back in the day so it's payback. :D

I hope MD realizes that by almost all measures they will be the low man on the pole in the Big Ten.

As for membership into CIC, that body took a hit when Nebraska was let in even after it was dropped by AAU.

dukedrummer
11-19-2012, 10:58 AM
Don't let the door hit you in the shell on the way out!

Duke Drummer

howardlander
11-19-2012, 11:05 AM
Don't let the door hit you in the shell on the way out!

Duke Drummer

LOL! WE should have a greatest Maryland moments thread. I'll start with the time Boozer's mom (I think it was Boozer's Mom) got hit with a water bottle and got a concussion. Special bonus, wasn't she a Maryland grad?

As I said before, the Big 10 is welcome to them...

Howard

94duke
11-19-2012, 11:11 AM
espn has it on their web page now:
http://espn.go.com/college-sports/story/_/id/8651934/maryland-terrapins-accept-invitation-join-big-ten-sources-say

Class of '94
11-19-2012, 11:11 AM
Not on the website yet, so no link, but ESPN just scrolled on the bottom line that Maryland has approved the move. I'm sure there is much, much, much more to come.

Don't have any further information; but I just heard on one of the sports talk radio stations here in Detroit that after the announcement of MD approving move the the BIG 10, the ACC is now looking at ND as a full member in football. Don't know how true this is or realistic with ND poised to be the BCS championship game; but ND would be an excellent replacement and upgrade to MD in all sports.

Duvall
11-19-2012, 11:13 AM
Don't have any further information; but I just heard on one of the sports talk radio stations here in Detroit that after the announcement of MD approving move the the BIG 10, the ACC is now looking at ND as a full member in football. Don't know how true this is or realistic with ND poised to be the BCS championship game; but ND would be an excellent replacement and upgrade to MD in all sports.

Yeah, I wouldn't count on that. Why would ND be *more* likely to say yes now?

WakeDevil
11-19-2012, 11:13 AM
Their fans on one of their boards think the B10 is going to fill Byrd Stadium.

Let's hope the ACC insists on the full exit amount.

mdj
11-19-2012, 11:15 AM
LOL! WE should have a greatest Maryland moments thread. I'll start with the time Boozer's mom (I think it was Boozer's Mom) got hit with a water bottle and got a concussion. Special bonus, wasn't she a Maryland grad?

As I said before, the Big 10 is welcome to them...

Howard

My personal favorite was scalping tickets to the final in Minneapolis in '01 after we beat them in the semis. upper level were going for around $20 well below face and a Maryland fan started screaming at me and acting as if he wanted to fight me when i wouldn't pay him face for his tickets. I don't think i've ever enjoyed being insulted so much in my life.

mdj
11-19-2012, 11:22 AM
Their fans on one of their boards think the B10 is going to fill Byrd Stadium.

Let's hope the ACC insists on the full exit amount.

agree. in a perfect world ACC's stance would be i don't care when you leave but whenever you leave you owe us $50 million.

DukeSean
11-19-2012, 11:26 AM
Over/under on exit fee settlement amount? I'll put it at $35M

Dev11
11-19-2012, 11:27 AM
As a Maryland native and lifelong Duke fan, good riddance. I wish them nothing but empty seats and ACC-B?G challenge losses.

A-Tex Devil
11-19-2012, 11:27 AM
Don't have any further information; but I just heard on one of the sports talk radio stations here in Detroit that after the announcement of MD approving move the the BIG 10, the ACC is now looking at ND as a full member in football. Don't know how true this is or realistic with ND poised to be the BCS championship game; but ND would be an excellent replacement and upgrade to MD in all sports.

If ND makes the BCS title game this year, I don't know why on earth they'd move football to any conference any time soon. In fact, regardless of that, I don't know why they would. The new playoff format starting in 2014 positions them to be able to stay independent for a long, long time if they can continue to keep the NBC style TV contract they currently have -- and a BCS title game will just up the ante there.

There were certain playoff scenarios last summer that might actually freeze ND out, and they'd have to join a conference to ensure access for an undefeated/one-loss team. The way it played out, they aren't going to get frozen out of the top 4 if they deserve to be there (like, say, a mid-major or (gulp) an ACC team might).

Here is a likely potential nightmare scenario for the ACC (simply because no-one looks at the past and future, just the "right now"): If FSU beats Florida and Notre Dame loses to USC, and then FSU (along with probably K-State) loses the one-loss team sweepstakes to two of ND, K-State and the Georgia/Bama winner, then rightly or wrongly, FSU is going to view that as an indictment of the ACC. ESPECIALLY if K-State gets in ahead of them. And if a one loss Clemson doesn't get into a BCS bowl when several 2 loss teams do? Yikes!

Chicago 1995
11-19-2012, 11:29 AM
Don't have any further information; but I just heard on one of the sports talk radio stations here in Detroit that after the announcement of MD approving move the the BIG 10, the ACC is now looking at ND as a full member in football. Don't know how true this is or realistic with ND poised to be the BCS championship game; but ND would be an excellent replacement and upgrade to MD in all sports.

But the ACC has NO leverage with ND right now, so what incentive would ND have to join the ACC as a full member? How sweet a deal would they be able to cut? Cut ND a better deal than FSU or Clemson? Those two bolt to the SEC. It's the same problem that lead to TAMU leaving the Big XII.

Right now, it seems likely if the Big Ten and SEC move to 16 team conferences, the ACC will lose at least two more to the Big Ten, and depending on how the SEC feels about adding schools within its footprint compared with expanding its footpring, could lose two to the SEC.

Losing four teams to those conferences leaves an ACC that's not going to give its schools the revenue to really compete with the Big Ten, SEC and Pac 10, who might join the fray in heading to 16 teams as well.

The best, I think the ACC can hope for at this point, if we end up in 4 16 team conferences, is seeing the SEC expand Westward with OU and OSU joining the SEC. Then the most the ACC loses to the Big Ten is two schools. The Pac 12 probably poaches four schools from the Big XII to get to 16.

That leaves the ACC with 13/14 members counting ND, with the four schools left from the Big XII (probably Baylor, TCU, Iowa State, WVa) and the remaining "jewels" of the Big East (UConn, Cincy, Louisville) to fill the two/three spots the ACC has.

If the SEC does decide to go after Clemson and FSU, it's less likely the Big XII falls apart, I think, and thus, it's more likely that the ACC and the Big East football schools simply merge. And that's a bad outcome for those ACC schools that didn't get a seat at the Big Ten table.

Jderf
11-19-2012, 11:30 AM
Like a lot of people, I'm getting very mixed feelings about this. It's a shame to lose a charter member, obviously, and I have to admit that Maryland used to be one of my favorite teams to pull for out-of-conference. Their fans, on the other hand, I will not miss. Although I suppoose, as a corollary, I will miss the bi-annual beatdown we would hand them, ensuing riot and all. Really confounding decision, but I guess we'll have to wait and see how it works out for them (and us).

roywhite
11-19-2012, 11:30 AM
Their fans on one of their boards think the B10 is going to fill Byrd Stadium.

Let's hope the ACC insists on the full exit amount.

Probably fill it vs Penn State; maybe fill it vs Ohio State.
Michigan and Nebraska on a lesser basis may be well represented.
Other than that?.....no, don't see regular sell-outs or huge boost in FB attendance.

75Crazie
11-19-2012, 11:40 AM
BTW, Gary Williams coached at OSU prior to MD, so I'm not shocked to hear him support such a move. But I think you'll hear other prominent Terps arguing against it, beyond just the Len Elmore types.
Just curious, what is a "Len Elmore type"? I've always liked Elmore as a commentator. And speaking of commentators, in last night's Duke game, it was clear that Adrian Branch was horrified at the possibility of a switch. He was trying to laugh it off, but his words were clear, he is definitely an ACC guy.

hudlow
11-19-2012, 11:44 AM
Yeah, I wouldn't count on that. Why would ND be *more* likely to say yes now?


Because the Punk level in the ACC just went down about 99%....?

Jderf
11-19-2012, 11:47 AM
An additional thought: For a school that constantly whined and complained about just about everything in the ACC, how typical is it that when they finally make a move to leave, the vast majority of their fans hate it? Even on their way out the door, they can't help but moan about the unfairness of it all.

pamtelp
11-19-2012, 11:53 AM
Like a lot of people, I'm getting very mixed feelings about this. It's a shame to lose a charter member, obviously, and I have to admit that Maryland used to be one of my favorite teams to pull for out-of-conference. Their fans, on the other hand, I will not miss. Although I suppoose, as a corollary, I will miss the bi-annual beatdown we would hand them, ensuing riot and all. Really confounding decision, but I guess we'll have to wait and see how it works out for them (and us).

Sorry, but I don't get this sentiment. You may or may not be a fan of Maryland or its fan base (I certainly am not), but this is undoubtedly a very bad development for those of you that love Duke. By losing a charter member, regardless of the school or program, this move demonstrates just how tenuous a position the ACC is in. I fear that this move is the beginning and soon schools like Florida State and Georgia Tech could be on the move (the seal has been broken). If that should happen, we are not in that much better long-term position than the Big East. The financial implications for Duke's athletic department, setting aside the short-term impacts on the field, over the long run could be profound.

Make no mistake about it. This is a bad day for Duke.

As a conference, it is tough for us to take the moral high ground after pilfering the Big East, but I, for one, hope that the ACC gives Maryland the cold shoulder and refuses to schedule them for any sports. And I won't be buying any more UnderArmour gear for my kids any time soon ;)

Pamtelp "Maryland has been a force in a few olympic sports, Men's Soccer, Lacrosse, Field Hockey, etc, and will be missed"

ForkFondler
11-19-2012, 11:59 AM
Yeah, I wouldn't count on that. Why would ND be *more* likely to say yes now?

Well, maybe the ACC would be more amenable to taking Navy, or a Navy/Georgetown football-basketball hybrid, to fill the Washington area void.

TexHawk
11-19-2012, 12:05 PM
Either way, the Big 12 is in more danger and a Baylor is in more danger than a Duke. Would the SEC really want FSU/Clemson over a Texas or an Oklahoma. Heck, even KSU, KU, or ISU would fit better for the B1G than G. Tech. I guess the Pac12 could go after OSU, OU, UT, and TT and then the SEC would poach FSU and Clemson. But that would still leave KU and KSU along with WVU up for grabs to replace MD and whoever left for the B1G.

This has been stated in this thread previously, but the grant-of-rights that all Big12 schools signed solidifies that conference for at least a decade. Texas/OU are actively holding back expansion by refusing to sign onto a CCG.

Dev11
11-19-2012, 12:10 PM
Because the Punk level in the ACC just went down about 99%....?

You're not giving Deron Washington enough credit.

Mike Corey
11-19-2012, 12:16 PM
This is a sad day in that we're losing a charter member, but the conference is not in peril.

This has been a loooong time coming, and the ACC--as I understand it--has long been prepared for this move, and the next few moves to follow.

The Big East is about to lose Rutgers to the Big Whatever.

I suspect a few other Big East teams are ripe for picking, too.

SCMatt33
11-19-2012, 12:20 PM
Sorry, but I don't get this sentiment. You may or may not be a fan of Maryland or its fan base (I certainly am not), but this is undoubtedly a very bad development for those of you that love Duke. By losing a charter member, regardless of the school or program, this move demonstrates just how tenuous a position the ACC is in. I fear that this move is the beginning and soon schools like Florida State and Georgia Tech could be on the move (the seal has been broken). If that should happen, we are not in that much better long-term position than the Big East. The financial implications for Duke's athletic department, setting aside the short-term impacts on the field, over the long run could be profound.

Make no mistake about it. This is a bad day for Duke.

As a conference, it is tough for us to take the moral high ground after pilfering the Big East, but I, for one, hope that the ACC gives Maryland the cold shoulder and refuses to schedule them for any sports. And I won't be buying any more UnderArmour gear for my kids any time soon ;)

Pamtelp "Maryland has been a force in a few olympic sports, Men's Soccer, Lacrosse, Field Hockey, etc, and will be missed"

I don't think the ACC will be in as bad of a position as the Big East any time soon. The football landscape for the foreseeable future was set before this move was made. The ACC has already gotten its seat at the big boy table, regardless of who stays or leaves. With that in mind, I don't this this move changes FSU's or GTechs mindset at all. It would be naive to think that FSU wasn't already thinking about leaving, as evidenced by their vote against the $50 million. The truth is that they are too far away for any conference other than the SEC and Florida doesn't want them. The SEC already has the whole sunshine state within it's footprint thanks to the Gators, so FSU doesn't bring a new TV market. The SEC already has the best match-ups in the game without FSU, so they don't bring that much to the table from that standpoint. If the SEC really wanted the 'noles, do you think they would have taken Mizzou ahead of them?

I think that in this case, Maryland's movement was not a zero sum game. The Big Ten gained a lot more than the ACC lost. The ACC lost something for sure. The regional cable games right now appear on MASN in the DC/Baltimore area. Those games will now be Big Ten and not ACC. The Big Ten, however, has a different equation than everyone else. With a profitable cable network, they only need to get their foot in the door of a market. They don't need a team that owns the market like everyone else. That's why Rutgers can be a viable addition for the Big Ten, but they wouldn't have been worth much to the ACC. If Rutgers is enough to get Cablevision and other NY area TV carriers to put the B1G network on a standard digital tier, as opposed to the premium tier or the sports tier, that will be huge as to what they can command for rights fees, not only in that market, but nationally as well.

From the Maryland perspective, even if they wanted to stay in the ACC out of a sense of tradition (which I don't think they did), their financial situation dictated otherwise. They're athletic department has been in a big hole, forcing them to cut several Olympic sports, much to the chagrin of their fanbase. I'm sure the Big Ten has promised to help out with the 50 mil, and Maryland might be able to revive a few of those lost teams.

The ACC is clearly 5th out of 5 in the big conference pecking order, but they are still on the good side of that line and today doesn't change that.

On a personal note, I hope that Duke and the rest of the ACC refuses to send the Devils to College Park for the challenge, much as the Big 12 is planning on keeping Kansas out of Columbia for their new challenge slate. BTW, Maryland will save a few thousand dollars a year now that they don't have a guaranteed riot on their hands from playing Duke every year (win or lose).

killerleft
11-19-2012, 12:23 PM
Sorry, but I don't get this sentiment. You may or may not be a fan of Maryland or its fan base (I certainly am not), but this is undoubtedly a very bad development for those of you that love Duke. By losing a charter member, regardless of the school or program, this move demonstrates just how tenuous a position the ACC is in. I fear that this move is the beginning and soon schools like Florida State and Georgia Tech could be on the move (the seal has been broken). If that should happen, we are not in that much better long-term position than the Big East. The financial implications for Duke's athletic department, setting aside the short-term impacts on the field, over the long run could be profound.

Make no mistake about it. This is a bad day for Duke.

As a conference, it is tough for us to take the moral high ground after pilfering the Big East, but I, for one, hope that the ACC gives Maryland the cold shoulder and refuses to schedule them for any sports. And I won't be buying any more UnderArmour gear for my kids any time soon ;)

Pamtelp "Maryland has been a force in a few olympic sports, Men's Soccer, Lacrosse, Field Hockey, etc, and will be missed"

I don't agree with all you say, but this is definitely NOT in any way good news for the ACC or Duke. The ACC is not in a strong position right now unless they can in turn pry loose a team or two from the SEC or Big Ten, and the chances of that happening are very small. Only Notre Dame playing the full ACC schedule in football would negate the loss of Maryland, I think.

OldPhiKap
11-19-2012, 12:26 PM
Over/under on exit fee settlement amount? I'll put it at $35M

Yeah, I'd pay $35M to have them gone.

wilko
11-19-2012, 12:29 PM
Serendipitous bonus..
It seems that Len Elmore may soon be calling B1G games instead of ACC games.
I wont miss his digs at Duke. The next nice thing Len says about Duke should count 2x... his 1st and his Last.


All jokes aside I feel sad. Not at the loss of UMd exactly, but as a change that is delivered by Fate.

Makes me wonder if Cunningham and White are talking with Slive this week to secure a golden parachute. I think there is more brand equity in the SEC picking up UNC and Duke as a pair.

If we are to be nibbled to death by fish, lets just cut to the end game so we don't have to sweat this anymore.

TexHawk
11-19-2012, 12:30 PM
On a personal note, I hope that Duke and the rest of the ACC refuses to send the Devils to College Park for the challenge, much as the Big 12 is planning on keeping Kansas out of Columbia for their new challenge slate. BTW, Maryland will save a few thousand dollars a year now that they don't have a guaranteed riot on their hands from playing Duke every year (win or lose).
Several folks on here ripped KU and Bill Self for their stance on not playing Missouri. The situations are very similar.

Billy Dat
11-19-2012, 12:31 PM
This is a sad day in that we're losing a charter member, but the conference is not in peril.

I'm really surprised more people aren't upset about this. The Maryland rivalry is fantastic (you can say its not a rivalry but that is wrong). The bombastic nature of the Maryland home games in the series, at Cole and the new gym, was really intense and got me going. The fact that their fans are barbarians was a huge part of it. I will miss those games, big time, and the tradition of the conference takes a big hit - but I guess that ship sailed long ago.

Duvall
11-19-2012, 12:34 PM
Several folks on here ripped KU and Bill Self for their stance on not playing Missouri. The situations are very similar.

The difference is that many Duke fans didn't like playing Maryland while Maryland was still *in* the conference.

SCMatt33
11-19-2012, 12:36 PM
Several folks on here ripped KU and Bill Self for their stance on not playing Missouri. The situations are very similar.

I think there are some differences. The first one is that KU-Mizzou was the oldest and most heralded rivalry from that conference, and one that had just entered a renaissance with Mizzou's recent resurgence. That is not the case with Duke and Maryland. It is a very recent rivalry that is already past it's heyday of the early 2000's. With the Maryland Fans' behavior both during and after games, I see this as having as much in common with WVU-Pitt as with KU-Mizzou. People lamented that loss at first, but quickly realized that things sometimes got out of hand, and it wasn't the worst thing in the world to lose it. It's one thing to say that college basketball should have more on campus games vs. neutral site games, but give me 5 minutes with anyone who blames Coach K for not subjecting his team to the Comcast Center anymore.

TKG
11-19-2012, 12:38 PM
If football (and assoicated $$$) is THE reason for schools changing conferences and the ACC has already taken BC, Miami, VT, Pitt and Syracuse from the Big East (ostensibly for football), why would the ACC consider adding UConn or Villanova? What does the football program at either school bring to the ACC?

Duvall
11-19-2012, 12:39 PM
If football (and assoicated $$$) is THE reason for schools changing conferences and the ACC has already taken BC, Miami, VT, Pitt and Syracuse from the Big East (ostensibly for football), why would the ACC consider adding UConn or Villanova? What does the football program at either school bring to the ACC?

A fourteenth member for scheduling purposes. That's about it.

killerleft
11-19-2012, 12:41 PM
I'm not surprised that ex-Maryland players, especially basketball-wise, are not happy about the deal at all. The very good ones (such as McMillen, Elmore, King, etc.) are legends in the ACC. The Big Ten fans won't care about them at all, and they'll be unwelcome at ACC tournament-time when they were VIPs. I know lots of us would find solace in the fact that Len Elmore has been set adrift in no-fans-land, but I find it kinda sad.

Ima Facultiwyfe
11-19-2012, 12:43 PM
Must say that as ugly as the Maryland fans are, the net gain in conference classiness by their leaving will be offset by the acquisition of the UConnvicts.
Love, Ima

Chicago 1995
11-19-2012, 12:44 PM
A fourteenth member for scheduling purposes. That's about it.

They'd also bring presence in large media markets, making the conference more marketable in future TV deals. That's the only think that matters in all of this.

Dev11
11-19-2012, 12:50 PM
Over/under on exit fee settlement amount? I'll put it at $35M

That's over $2M that the Maryland Board of Regents will be giving to the WW improvements. How generous of them!

Duvall
11-19-2012, 12:52 PM
They'd also bring presence in large media markets, making the conference more marketable in future TV deals. That's the only think that matters in all of this.

For UConn and Villanova? That's optimistic.

Chicago 1995
11-19-2012, 12:52 PM
This is a sad day in that we're losing a charter member, but the conference is not in peril.

This has been a loooong time coming, and the ACC--as I understand it--has long been prepared for this move, and the next few moves to follow.

The Big East is about to lose Rutgers to the Big Whatever.

I suspect a few other Big East teams are ripe for picking, too.

Not in peril? Is adding UConn, Cincy and Louisville really going to be enough to placate FSU and Clemson? Those three aren't going to hold the line when Delaney decides its time to make the B1G a 16 team conference and Georgia Tech's ability to change the subscription fee dynamic in the Atlanta market is there for the taking. Adding teams from what's left of the Big East, which is seemingly our only move, isn't going to be enough to stabilize the league at this point.

The conference is very much in peril. Best case, the ACC loses one full member. Worst case, we lose four more. If it's the worst case, as unlikely as it is, Duke's in a better place to be one of the four leaving the ACC than one of those left behind to try to cobble a competative conference together with the dregs of the Big East and CUSA. Maybe Swofford's got some masterstroke that isn't readily apparent or even seemingly possible -- like actually adding ND and poaching from the Big XII -- but right now, if our plan involves UConn, and some basketball only schools, that's not a plan.

-bdbd
11-19-2012, 12:53 PM
I don't think the ACC will be in as bad of a position as the Big East any time soon. The football landscape for the foreseeable future was set before this move was made. The ACC has already gotten its seat at the big boy table, regardless of who stays or leaves. With that in mind, I don't this this move changes FSU's or GTechs mindset at all. It would be naive to think that FSU wasn't already thinking about leaving, as evidenced by their vote against the $50 million. The truth is that they are too far away for any conference other than the SEC and Florida doesn't want them. The SEC already has the whole sunshine state within it's footprint thanks to the Gators, so FSU doesn't bring a new TV market. The SEC already has the best match-ups in the game without FSU, so they don't bring that much to the table from that standpoint. If the SEC really wanted the 'noles, do you think they would have taken Mizzou ahead of them?

I think that in this case, Maryland's movement was not a zero sum game. The Big Ten gained a lot more than the ACC lost. The ACC lost something for sure. The regional cable games right now appear on MASN in the DC/Baltimore area. Those games will now be Big Ten and not ACC. The Big Ten, however, has a different equation than everyone else. With a profitable cable network, they only need to get their foot in the door of a market. They don't need a team that owns the market like everyone else. That's why Rutgers can be a viable addition for the Big Ten, but they wouldn't have been worth much to the ACC. If Rutgers is enough to get Cablevision and other NY area TV carriers to put the B1G network on a standard digital tier, as opposed to the premium tier or the sports tier, that will be huge as to what they can command for rights fees, not only in that market, but nationally as well.

From the Maryland perspective, even if they wanted to stay in the ACC out of a sense of tradition (which I don't think they did), their financial situation dictated otherwise. They're athletic department has been in a big hole, forcing them to cut several Olympic sports, much to the chagrin of their fanbase. I'm sure the Big Ten has promised to help out with the 50 mil, and Maryland might be able to revive a few of those lost teams.

The ACC is clearly 5th out of 5 in the big conference pecking order, but they are still on the good side of that line and today doesn't change that.

On a personal note, I hope that Duke and the rest of the ACC refuses to send the Devils to College Park for the challenge, much as the Big 12 is planning on keeping Kansas out of Columbia for their new challenge slate. BTW, Maryland will save a few thousand dollars a year now that they don't have a guaranteed riot on their hands from playing Duke every year (win or lose).

This is a sad day, no doubt. Lots of mixed emotions here in the DC area from MD grads and plain ole fans. Apparently even their Regents were divided. A shame that their mismanagement of their Athletic Budget has led to the loss of such great tration. I think that this will really HARM their fanbase over time, being out on the extreme perimeter of such a huge conference, which will be Headquartered 700 miles away in Chicago (and you think they had a chip on their shoulder over North Carolina-based ACC leadership in the ACC??!). Other than PSU, it is unlikely that the normal fan will be able to travel to any games -- "Weekend roadtrip to Nebraska/Minn/Iowa/Wisc./Northwestern everyone! Jump in the car! Wahoo!!!"

One thing I disagree with above is the implication that the ACC will "lose" the DC market. DC still has a lot of ACC fans, and this is the biggest metro area for Va Tech and UVA grads too. I don't see a Navy/Georgetown combo as a terrible way to retrieve any lost ground there. But it sure looks like UCONN's position just grew stronger vis-a-vis the ACC, as we'll want to strengthen our eastern seaboard "bullwork" and try to attract the NYC TV market. Aside, I don't think Louisville is as out of the question as it once was, though PSU remains the ACC's "dream school" addition.

Still, a sad day.

DBFAN
11-19-2012, 12:54 PM
Don't know if anyone has said this but I wonder who Marylands first opponent in the ACC/Big Ten Challange will be-sarcasm intended

Chicago 1995
11-19-2012, 12:55 PM
For UConn and Villanova? That's optimistic.

I don't think either is the focus in their respective markets, but both are more visible than Rutgers, who was just able to turn its simple location into a massive windfall in terms of its sports revenue.

I don't think Villanova is realistic. We all love basketball, but basketball is second fiddle here by a wide margin. I don't see how the teams that don't have football programs fit into the Big Football conferneces at all all.

That means that the ACC is looking at schools like UConn, Louisville, Cincy, USF, Memphis, etc. to fill this hole and other holes if this move causes others to bolt for the SEC or B1G.

formerdukeathlete
11-19-2012, 12:57 PM
A fourteenth member for scheduling purposes. That's about it.

While UConn might be the logical choice, with their smallish enrollment for a state school with limited media markets, one would think another choice would be better in terms of Conference payouts. Or, could it be that it would be better to stay at 13, with two 6 team divisions for Football with one floater per year? Based on a formula, the floating team could best the lower performing divisional champion in making it to the ACC CG.

Perhaps it is time to think a bit outside of the box re who might next join the ACC. Louisville, UCF, USF? I suppose Miami would be against UCF and USF and BC may be against UConn.

Chicago 1995
11-19-2012, 01:01 PM
Aside, I don't think Louisville is as out of the question as it once was, though PSU remains the ACC's "dream school" addition.

Still, a sad day.

That Maryland's able to financially justify this move even in the face of having to pay a $50M exit fee (potentially) should tell you all you need to know about how likely it is that PSU is going to leave the B1G. Nevermind that PSU is a better cultural fit in the B1G. It can't afford to leave the Big Ten and forego its TV money to join the ACC. The pool of teams that the ACC can land does not include a Big Ten, SEC or Pac 12 school. It's probably not all of the Big XII either, but I suppose that's possible.

bjornolf
11-19-2012, 01:01 PM
I, for one, will miss MD. However, if we add UConn and maybe even Villanova, would the ACC be the undisputed #1 basketball conference in the NCAA, at least over the last, say, 30 years (with Syracuse, 14 of the last 30 titles would be in the ACC)? Taking away one title for Maryland but adding, what, four for UConn and Villanova? Not to mention how many women's titles?

TexHawk
11-19-2012, 01:01 PM
I think there are some differences. The first one is that KU-Mizzou was the oldest and most heralded rivalry from that conference, and one that had just entered a renaissance with Mizzou's recent resurgence. That is not the case with Duke and Maryland. It is a very recent rivalry that is already past it's heyday of the early 2000's. With the Maryland Fans' behavior both during and after games, I see this as having as much in common with WVU-Pitt as with KU-Mizzou. People lamented that loss at first, but quickly realized that things sometimes got out of hand, and it wasn't the worst thing in the world to lose it. It's one thing to say that college basketball should have more on campus games vs. neutral site games, but give me 5 minutes with anyone who blames Coach K for not subjecting his team to the Comcast Center anymore.

WHOA! Missouri had their renaissance** season last year after agreeing to the SEC move, and all questions about playing in the future had already been asked and answered. Before that, Missouri was the pinnacle of mediocrity in basketball in the Big12. They've made more NITs than NCAAs in the last 10 years, finishing 5-6-8-11-6-10-3-5-5-2 in the conference. They are still the program with the most NCAA tournament appearances w/o a single Final Four appearance. Mizzou would trade for Maryland's basketball history in one second.

** That "renaissance" ended in the biggest upset in NCAA tournament history (per Kenpom).

Also, I know this is a particularly hilarious and impossible thing to debate, but I would take a game @Maryland as a visitor 10 times a day over a visit to Columbia. Take your personal stories, Duke player and family stories and multiple them by 100 and you have Missouri Tiger fans.

Matches
11-19-2012, 01:03 PM
I don't think either is the focus in their respective markets, but both are more visible than Rutgers, who was just able to turn its simple location into a massive windfall in terms of its sports revenue.



Rutgers was attractive to the Big 10 *only* because the B1G already has a cable network. The ACC is not similarly situated, which is why we had basically no interest in Rutgers when they were making overtures to us some months ago.

I'm with Duvall on this - not really excited about any of the most likely candidates. None of them have particularly strong football programs. Having a team in a particular market doesn't really = presence in that market, as we've learned with Boston College.

mapei
11-19-2012, 01:05 PM
As a Maryland native and lifelong Duke fan, good riddance. I wish them nothing but empty seats and ACC-B?G challenge losses.

As a DC resident about 2 miles from the border, my sentiments exactly.

Chicago 1995
11-19-2012, 01:11 PM
Rutgers was attractive to the Big 10 *only* because the B1G already has a cable network. The ACC is not similarly situated, which is why we had basically no interest in Rutgers when they were making overtures to us some months ago.

I'm with Duvall on this - not really excited about any of the most likely candidates. None of them have particularly strong football programs. Having a team in a particular market doesn't really = presence in that market, as we've learned with Boston College.

Delaney's deal as to the BTN and how the subscriber fees work is what made Rutgers attractive. Still, the conference footprint and relevant markets do matter in media negotiations. UConn is a presence in a big market, and they aren't exactly similarly situated in terms of fan interest and profile to BC, who hasn't survived the move well at all. I'd posit that while Rutgers wouldn't have been worth as much to the ACC as it was to the Big Ten, it had value. I suspect the ACC was aiming higher, but that may have been too optimistic, and now we've suffered a serious blow.

I'm not excited about the other candidates, but we need to be realistic about them. We're going to take one of them -- I think Louisville's a better call than UConn myself, even with consideration of the TV markets involved -- and we might be in a position where we need to take four of them.

hurleyfor3
11-19-2012, 01:12 PM
LOL! WE should have a greatest Maryland moments thread.

#1: Moving to the Big Ten.

The ACC survived South Carolina leaving; we can survive without Maryland.

kdavis
11-19-2012, 01:13 PM
That Maryland's able to financially justify this move even in the face of having to pay a $50M exit fee (potentially) should tell you all you need to know about how likely it is that PSU is going to leave the B1G. Nevermind that PSU is a better cultural fit in the B1G. It can't afford to leave the Big Ten and forego its TV money to join the ACC. The pool of teams that the ACC can land does not include a Big Ten, SEC or Pac 12 school. It's probably not all of the Big XII either, but I suppose that's possible.

I don't believe that Maryland can justify leaving on economic terms. This craziness with TV money, conference realignment, etc. has been going on for years (see VPI, BC, Miami, etc.), but college finances are as bad as they have every been. Non revenue sports continue to be cut (yes, Md, I mean you) and tuition continues to skyrocket.

Where does all this magic TV money go? Usually the revenue producing sports that favor the move in the first place. From an institutional governance standpoint (and that is what these Boards of Trustees, et al are supposed to pay attention to, is it not), how are any of these moves benefiting the fundamental mission of the school? Colleges and Universities are first and foremost institutions of learning, are they not?

Son of Jarhead
11-19-2012, 01:19 PM
http://www.theacc.com/genrel/111912aac.html

That it is only 4 sentences long says an awful lot, don't ya' think?

pamtelp
11-19-2012, 01:19 PM
I, for one, will miss MD. However, if we add UConn and maybe even Villanova, would the ACC be the undisputed #1 basketball conference in the NCAA, at least over the last, say, 30 years (with Syracuse, 14 of the last 30 titles would be in the ACC)? Taking away one title for Maryland but adding, what, four for UConn and Villanova? Not to mention how many women's titles?

Great! We can be the new Big East..oh, wait. Hmmm...

MChambers
11-19-2012, 01:21 PM
As a DC resident about 2 miles from the border, my sentiments exactly.
Yup. It will be safer to wear my Duke gear now (and I'm less than a half mile from the border).

My son (who is a freshman at Michigan State) and I are wondering if the Terp fans will riot if their team beats MSU.

Duvall
11-19-2012, 01:22 PM
The ACC survived South Carolina leaving; we can survive without Maryland.

Assuming, of course, that it's just Maryland that leaves.

uh_no
11-19-2012, 01:24 PM
Great! We can be the new Big East..oh, wait. Hmmm...

pitt syracuse VT miami BC ND, now with the possibility of connecticut and maybe even louisville

vs

duke unc NCSU wake clemson virginia fsu and GT

maybe they should just cut to the chase and call it the big east coast conference?

uh_no
11-19-2012, 01:33 PM
some guy named jon wilner (apparently a blogger from SF) is claiming to have sources saying Uconn->ACC could happen as soon as tomorrow

https://twitter.com/wilnerhotline

seeing as I can't find any actual information on this guy, i'd hold off any weight on this until we hear it from somewhere more reputable

Matches
11-19-2012, 01:36 PM
I'm only in favor of UConn joining the league if we can call them "Maryland" and refer to their coach as "Sweaty". Can that be worked into the contracts please?

gumbomoop
11-19-2012, 01:37 PM
Perhaps it is time to think a bit outside of the box re who might next join the ACC.

How about UL and UK?

Seems simple enough.......

Duvall
11-19-2012, 01:40 PM
Proposed rule: Anyone that suggests filling an ACC vacancy with a member in good standing of the Big Ten, SEC or Pac-12 should get a 24-hour ban. It's time to get serious.

rhymeswithdreidel
11-19-2012, 01:40 PM
Enjoy.

http://www.memecreator.org/meme/rejects-increasing-exit-fee-leaves-acc-for-b1g-111912-on-philosophical-grounds-9/

A-Tex Devil
11-19-2012, 01:42 PM
This has been stated in this thread previously, but the grant-of-rights that all Big12 schools signed solidifies that conference for at least a decade. Texas/OU are actively holding back expansion by refusing to sign onto a CCG.

This is true to an extent -- Texas and OU (Texas, especially) is holding back expansion until the "right" 2 teams come along. I think the FSU to Big XII talk died last summer when Clemson made it abundantly clear it wasn't going anywhere and there wasn't a better 12th option than Louisville. 12 teams + championship game > 10 teams > 11 teams in most people's mind.

I'll be curious as to how Louisville is courted now. McConnell and OU's pres David Boren are best buddies from Congress, and Boren has actively pined for Louisville (even over WVU ). It may behoove the ACC to grab them now before the Big XII does. With Calhoun gone, I feel UCONN is about to fall a rung below Rutgers, and TV markets aside (and ignoring geography, since we can now), Louisville is the better all around fit for the ACC imho, even if it is a bit of a commuter school.

Jderf
11-19-2012, 01:47 PM
Where does all this magic TV money go?

Salaries.

CameronBornAndBred
11-19-2012, 01:48 PM
2951

I've been thinking of Dr. Seuss all day.

A-Tex Devil
11-19-2012, 01:50 PM
Proposed rule: Anyone that suggests filling an ACC vacancy with a member in good standing of the Big Ten, SEC or Pac-12 should get a 24-hour ban. It's time to get serious.

I can get behind that. PSU, Kentucky, Florida, etc. etc. etc. are never coming to the ACC.

One fun little discussion to be had, though: Is this a demographics move for the Big Ten, or is this a retaliatory strike against ND (and the ACC) for ND moving its olympic sports and ~40% of its football schedule to the ACC? A little of both? Especially in light of ND at least temporarily killing off Michigan rivalry and potentially Michigan St. and Purdue shortly thereafter.

All heads turn to Tallahassee, I guess.

uh_no
11-19-2012, 01:54 PM
I can get behind that. PSU, Kentucky, Florida, etc. etc. etc. are never coming to the ACC.

One fun little discussion to be had, though: Is this a demographics move for the Big Ten, or is this a retaliatory strike against ND (and the ACC) for ND moving its olympic sports and ~40% of its football schedule to the ACC? A little of both? Especially in light of ND at least temporarily killing off Michigan rivalry and potentially Michigan St. and Purdue shortly thereafter.

All heads turn to Tallahassee, I guess.

its a preemptive move to ensure that PSU doesn't hop on board with ND if they joined the ACC in football.

the ACC had PSU surrounded if ND came, and PS has never really been at "home" in the big 10...and were ND to be a full member, the ACC would be very attractive for PSU

so the big 10 did the same thing, and dove into the ACC territory to ensure that PSU wasn't hanging off the end of the conference like they have been

those of you who played civilization (the computer game) might know what its like when your border cities would leave for other countries if they were surrounded....that's what the big 10 didn't want to happen to penn state

ChillinDuke
11-19-2012, 01:54 PM
Proposed rule: Anyone that suggests filling an ACC vacancy with a member in good standing of the Big Ten, SEC or Pac-12 should get a 24-hour ban. It's time to get serious.

Agreed. Add Georgetown and Villanova to your rule as well.

Maryland's gone. I was upset for a second, now I'm over it. This realignment thing has been happening for years now, and I've grown accustomed to sometimes unpalatable changes in conferences.

Frankly, I don't see many good options for the ACC to get to 16 or even back to 14. Best two options in terms of strength of conference would be (IMO):

1) ND as full member (unlikely)
2) Double-down on NY Metro market with UConn. I get that there isn't a huge college following in NYC (heck, I live here. I get it). But does anyone see a better option in terms of buffering the conference? Gotta hope UConn + Pitt + Syr + ND + BC + Duke is enough to pull NYC viewers to the extent NYC viewers can be pulled.

- Chillin

Matches
11-19-2012, 01:57 PM
One fun little discussion to be had, though: Is this a demographics move for the Big Ten, or is this a retaliatory strike against ND (and the ACC) for ND moving its olympic sports and ~40% of its football schedule to the ACC? A little of both? Especially in light of ND at least temporarily killing off Michigan rivalry and potentially Michigan St. and Purdue shortly thereafter.


More like "Plan B", I suspect. I'm sure the B1G would rather have had ND, but with that ship having sailed, they moved on to UMd and Rutgers.

And yea, agreed there's no point in even speculating about the ACC prying away B12, SEC or Big 10 members. There's no reason for any of those schools to leave for the ACC. Expansion will have to come by further plundering the Big East and/or getting really creative geographically.

hurleyfor3
11-19-2012, 02:00 PM
I still think it would be fun to snag UNLV. We'd still have everyone east of the Big East's westernmost member... last time I checked. I will now assign myself 4 points.

TruBlu
11-19-2012, 02:13 PM
. . . but ND would be an excellent replacement and upgrade to MD in all sports.

And in the civility of the fans.

A-Tex Devil
11-19-2012, 02:15 PM
The more and more I think about it, if the ACC is going to immediately add a team, it has to be Louisville over UConn, right?

The ACC preemptively swipes the best non-ACC target of the Big XII. This makes it harder for the Big XII to pick up a quality 12th team without taking an ACC member that voted *FOR* $50MM exit fees.

Also, Louisville has a much better Q rating than UConn right now, and UConn could have a Iowa St/Washington St.-esque Q rating in a couple of years if the basketball program doesn't maintain its stature -- despite where it is located. UConn would just be added to fill a number and hope for the best in my mind. Louisville can come in and get butts in seats and eyeballs on the TV right away.

Unfortunately, I'm afraid the ACC will go the easy route. Hopefully the ACC will be deliberate in its decision making and not make the panic decision.

Chicago 1995
11-19-2012, 02:20 PM
The more and more I think about it, if the ACC is going to immediately add a team, it has to be Louisville over UConn, right?

The ACC preemptively swipes the best non-ACC target of the Big XII. This makes it harder for the Big XII to pick up a quality 12th team without taking an ACC member that voted *FOR* $50MM exit fees.

Also, Louisville has a much better Q rating than UConn right now, and UConn could have a Iowa St/Washington St.-esque Q rating in a couple of years if the basketball program doesn't maintain its stature -- despite where it is located. UConn would just be added to fill a number and hope for the best in my mind. Louisville can come in and get butts in seats and eyeballs on the TV right away.

Unfortunately, I'm afraid the ACC will go the easy route. Hopefully the ACC will be deliberate in its decision making and not make the panic decision.

Louisville, I think, is an easy choice, even with the differences in TV markets.

Cincy's probably third behind UConn, right?

A-Tex Devil
11-19-2012, 02:26 PM
its a preemptive move to ensure that PSU doesn't hop on board with ND if they joined the ACC in football.

the ACC had PSU surrounded if ND came, and PS has never really been at "home" in the big 10...and were ND to be a full member, the ACC would be very attractive for PSU

so the big 10 did the same thing, and dove into the ACC territory to ensure that PSU wasn't hanging off the end of the conference like they have been

those of you who played civilization (the computer game) might know what its like when your border cities would leave for other countries if they were surrounded....that's what the big 10 didn't want to happen to penn state

I guess I just can't get on board with the idea that PSU would choose to move to the ACC, even with the unlikely prospect of ND joining the ACC anytime soon. The Big Ten was actively talking expulsion earlier this year. Maybe that was just sword rattling, but success on the field/court or not, the Big Ten has the best total package financially (both athletically and academically) for its member schools, and it's not close. Geography is out the window. Not sure why PSU from a financial point of view would ever consider the ACC.

loran16
11-19-2012, 02:28 PM
Except louisville's acAdemics suck. Not good enough

TruBlu
11-19-2012, 02:29 PM
Does Central Prison over in Raleigh have an athletics program? They would have fan support comparable to MD, it fits in geographically, and probably has the same academic integrity as UNC.

Matches
11-19-2012, 02:31 PM
Louisville, I think, is an easy choice, even with the differences in TV markets.

Cincy's probably third behind UConn, right?

Probably. Can't imagine FSU or Miami would be thrilled with USF - at least Cincinnati is in a new (for the ACC) market.

The academics really are a sticking point with some of these schools though. I know that's far down the list of things to consider - but it's still on the list.

Nugget
11-19-2012, 02:33 PM
Not in peril? Is adding UConn, Cincy and Louisville really going to be enough to placate FSU and Clemson? Those three aren't going to hold the line when Delaney decides its time to make the B1G a 16 team conference and Georgia Tech's ability to change the subscription fee dynamic in the Atlanta market is there for the taking. Adding teams from what's left of the Big East, which is seemingly our only move, isn't going to be enough to stabilize the league at this point.

The conference is very much in peril. Best case, the ACC loses one full member. Worst case, we lose four more. If it's the worst case, as unlikely as it is, Duke's in a better place to be one of the four leaving the ACC than one of those left behind to try to cobble a competative conference together with the dregs of the Big East and CUSA. Maybe Swofford's got some masterstroke that isn't readily apparent or even seemingly possible -- like actually adding ND and poaching from the Big XII -- but right now, if our plan involves UConn, and some basketball only schools, that's not a plan.

This isn't great for the ACC, but I also don't quite see the gloom and doom rationale you espouse. Obviously, the Big 10 saw the move into DC and NY cable markets for the Big 10 channel as sufficiently lucrative to justify splitting its pie 14 ways rather than 12.

But, how would the SEC adding any of FSU, Tech or Clemson be sufficiently valuable to justify splitting their pie 16 ways? They already make a jillion dollars off of football and get their money from CBS and ESPN rather than their own network. They already are the lead dog in the markets that would be brought in by FSU, G. Tech and Clemson. They already got what they wanted with the new playoff system not having limits on the number of teams from a single conference or requiring conference champions. So, other than spite or a desire to put the ACC out of business (which seems unlikely given that we aren't a real rival for the SEC in football) I don't see why the SEC would do that.

To be honest, I'd be much more worried that the SEC might go after UNC than any of the others. That would in my view bring more value to the SEC than anyone else in the ACC.

HaveFunExpectToWin
11-19-2012, 02:41 PM
Because the Punk level in the ACC just went down about 99%....?

Don't worry, we still have Va Tech.

Duvall
11-19-2012, 02:43 PM
Don't worry, we still have Va Tech.

Hey now. We have to give the new Virginia Tech coach time to show whether he will continue the traditions of the Goonberg years.

kingboozer
11-19-2012, 02:44 PM
To be honest, I'd be much more worried that the SEC might go after UNC than any of the others. That would in my view bring more value to the SEC than anyone else in the ACC.

I can't see UNC jumping without Duke or vice versa, our destinies are intertwined. The rivalry is a different beast than any other in the country (with respect to Ohio St/Michigan) and I can't see one going without the other, or a conference wanting one without the other.

Duvall
11-19-2012, 02:46 PM
I can't see UNC jumping without Duke or vice versa, our destinies are intertwined.

The only schools whose destinies are intertwined are the ones whose appropriations come out of the same legislature. And even then, it's iffy.

kingboozer
11-19-2012, 02:46 PM
Probably. Can't imagine FSU or Miami would be thrilled with USF - at least Cincinnati is in a new (for the ACC) market.

The academics really are a sticking point with some of these schools though. I know that's far down the list of things to consider - but it's still on the list.

USF is in Tampa, and that's a big media market with Orlando an hourish away. If TV money is the driving force they are the no brainer.

devildeac
11-19-2012, 02:48 PM
"Flee the Turtle"

But if the acc gets whole $50M enchilada when they leave, can we change it to "Fleece the Turtle?";):rolleyes:

wilko
11-19-2012, 02:55 PM
I can't see UNC jumping without Duke or vice versa, our destinies are intertwined. The rivalry is a different beast than any other in the country (with respect to Ohio St/Michigan) and I can't see one going without the other, or a conference wanting one without the other.


BAM!
I feel the exact same way.
I would mourn the passing of the ACC when this came to pass...

But it this is a destiny we cant escape then lets cut to the endgame and not be nibbled to death by fish.
I'm tired of having to hear about this and sweat it out every time there's a rumor..

A-Tex Devil
11-19-2012, 02:56 PM
The only schools whose destinies are intertwined are the ones whose appropriations come out of the same legislature. And even then, it's iffy.

Yeah, this is important to keep in mind. For instance, Va Tech owes a debt of gratitude to the Virginia legislature to get into the ACC. Hindsight 20/20, their hypothetical path to the SEC may have been clearer if they'd stayed in the Big East, but that ship has sailed. Va Tech will not be allowed to move unless it's clear UVa has a soft landing spot. The SEC has been pretty clear it only wants to expand demographics, and not take schools in the same state. So a Va Tech move to SEC likely wouldn't include UVa (hypothetically), when the SEC has refused to look at FlaSt, Clemson and Ga Tech in the past.

I am hoping that the ACC adds Louisville (holding its nose a bit) and makes it harder for the Big XII to pry Florida St. away. Then we re-address things when unicorns are discovered and ND wants to join up in football too.

It may be worth the legal fight to make MD come out of pocket for that whole $50MM (or as close as possible) just to set a precedent. Then the conference should meet again and approve a grant of rights through the end of the current TV deal.

uh_no
11-19-2012, 02:56 PM
I guess I just can't get on board with the idea that PSU would choose to move to the ACC, even with the unlikely prospect of ND joining the ACC anytime soon. The Big Ten was actively talking expulsion earlier this year. Maybe that was just sword rattling, but success on the field/court or not, the Big Ten has the best total package financially (both athletically and academically) for its member schools, and it's not close. Geography is out the window. Not sure why PSU from a financial point of view would ever consider the ACC.

I tend to agree. I think the move was based off the potential of ND moving football to the ACC. If that happened, the fear would be that PSU+ND+FSU might be able to drive a market value similar to that of the Big 10, and PSU might be more attracted to that than remaining in the big 10

certainly they wouldn't leave straight up in the current situation, but I think the Big10 is future proofing

weezie
11-19-2012, 02:57 PM
The sad thing is that there will no longer be those twerp fans ready to unload their tickets on the second day of the ACC tournament. I always looked forward to that feast day.

devildeac
11-19-2012, 03:00 PM
Yeah, I'd pay $35M to have them gone.

Ante up. Olympic Fan has already contributed $10 so you are next in line. I'm reaching for my check book now. I'd be reaaallly curious what plans the acc has made figuring that Mike Corey is correct and that we have made such plan/s based on the conference re-alignments over the last couple years.

hurleyfor3
11-19-2012, 03:02 PM
The sad thing is that there will no longer be those twerp fans ready to unload their tickets on the second day of the ACC tournament. I always looked forward to that feast day.

You like hearing about my ticket scores that much? :) I thought your modus operandi was simply to move from your upper-deck Iron Duke seats to open ones that terp or unc fans don't even bother to sell.

Although that book I snagged behind Erin Andrews was in the Clemson section.

Duvall
11-19-2012, 03:05 PM
The sad thing is that there will no longer be those twerp fans ready to unload their tickets on the second day of the ACC tournament. I always looked forward to that feast day.

It's just as well - with the 15-team double bye Maryland fans would be long gone by the time Duke even got to the tournament site.

burnspbesq
11-19-2012, 03:56 PM
With Georgetown off the table because it doesn't play FBS football, UConn is by far the best fit for non-revenue sports.

If it's going to be UConn, though, part of the deal should be a commitment to add men's lax no later than 2015.

ForkFondler
11-19-2012, 04:24 PM
With Georgetown off the table because it doesn't play FBS football, UConn is by far the best fit for non-revenue sports.

If it's going to be UConn, though, part of the deal should be a commitment to add men's lax no later than 2015.

The Navy/Georgetown hybrid would be good for one football team, one basketball team, and two men's lax teams. Just saying.

uh_no
11-19-2012, 04:55 PM
The Navy/Georgetown hybrid would be good for one football team, one basketball team, and two men's lax teams. Just saying.

the Big east fell apart partly because of its hybrid nature. I don't think this is the way to go for the acc.

rocketeli
11-19-2012, 05:02 PM
I guess I just can't get on board with the idea that PSU would choose to move to the ACC, even with the unlikely prospect of ND joining the ACC anytime soon. The Big Ten was actively talking expulsion earlier this year. Maybe that was just sword rattling, but success on the field/court or not, the Big Ten has the best total package financially (both athletically and academically) for its member schools, and it's not close. Geography is out the window. Not sure why PSU from a financial point of view would ever consider the ACC.

Oh, I don't know (cough) UNC (cough)

ForkFondler
11-19-2012, 05:18 PM
the Big east fell apart partly because of its hybrid nature. I don't think this is the way to go for the acc.

This could be somewhat simpler. Navy and Georgetown would get one vote and one share of the revenue between them. They also might combine to fill a patriot or colonial league spot with the rest of their sports.

uh_no
11-19-2012, 05:30 PM
This could be somewhat simpler. Navy and Georgetown would get one vote and one share of the revenue between them. They also might combine to fill a patriot or colonial league spot with the rest of their sports.

I'm sure they would both be thrilled with that arrangement. :)

Mike Corey
11-19-2012, 05:38 PM
After a little reading and asking around, I retract everything positive I wrote earlier about the ACC.

Coach K says he's concerned (http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2012/writers/pete_thamel/11/19/Coach-Krzyzewski-Maryland/index.html#ixzz2Chw9BMds)about the future of the league.


"I think the ACC is vulnerable right now, I'm concerned about our conference," Krzyzewski said on Monday afternoon, taping a segment for his Basketball and Beyond show on Sirius XM Radio. The show will air on Wednesday night.

When a guest asked Krzyzewski if he'd prefer Louisville or Connecticut to replace Maryland, which announced its departure for the Big Ten on Monday, Krzyzewski said before he could answer that he'd wanted to get everyone in a room and "close ranks and see who's still here."

Krzyzewski added: "I think there could still be some movement in our conference."

OldSchool
11-19-2012, 05:44 PM
...and I think we can definitively say that Maryland students and fans have given the move a thumb's-down.

Otherwise, they would have celebrated by rioting in the streets, trashing some local businesses, overturning a few cars and brawling with the police.

But so far, not even a broken shop window.

kingboozer
11-19-2012, 05:47 PM
After a little reading and asking around, I retract everything positive I wrote earlier about the ACC.

Coach K says he's concerned (http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2012/writers/pete_thamel/11/19/Coach-Krzyzewski-Maryland/index.html#ixzz2Chw9BMds)about the future of the league.

I think if we got an offer to leave at this point we'd entertain it too, I don't think we'd go without UNC but I've been wrong before. Thank God for our basketball program because our football program doesn't add much for us, that obviously could change if we continue the way we are and with the stadium expansion.

blazindw
11-19-2012, 05:48 PM
After a little reading and asking around, I retract everything positive I wrote earlier about the ACC.

Coach K says he's concerned (http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2012/writers/pete_thamel/11/19/Coach-Krzyzewski-Maryland/index.html#ixzz2Chw9BMds)about the future of the league.

Wow, those are telling statements...sounds like Coach is legitimately worried and, like me, isn't too excited about a UConn or Louisville joining our ranks.

devildeac
11-19-2012, 05:52 PM
Might have to change the cheer when/if they visit here during hoops season to:

Not our conference-clap, clap, clap/clap/clap:o.

MattC09
11-19-2012, 05:53 PM
After a little reading and asking around, I retract everything positive I wrote earlier about the ACC.

Coach K says he's concerned (http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2012/writers/pete_thamel/11/19/Coach-Krzyzewski-Maryland/index.html#ixzz2Chw9BMds)about the future of the league.

I think he's right to be. We have Florida State, who still may want out. If they go, Clemson would likely follow and that would be it for the ACC. The ACC is incredibly vulnerable because there are few, if any, alternatives to Maryland that are of the same caliber and offer something financially and athletically. If the exit fee doesn't stick, the ACC might well be open season. FSU could get out and go to the Big 12 where it's "more appreciated."

UConn is not ideal. It offers very little in terms of market. It's football team is nothing to write home about. Academically it fits roughly, but it doesn't have anything that would secure the ACC's future existence.

Louisville might be the best school left at the moment. They have a improving football program and a solid basketball program with tradition. It would spread the ACC into Kentucky, which is a basketball-centric state, and improve the quality of the revenue sports. However, academically it doesn't fit.

Cincinnati and USF would reek of desperation, in my opinion, as two filler schools that bring little to the table.

The only sure-fire way to ensure the survival of the ACC into the future would be Notre Dame as a football member, but why would they do that when they are poised, should they beat USC, to make the BCS title game? There is little to no incentive for them to join as a football school when their contract is running down just as they are rising to prominence again, unless the ACC/ESPN could blow NBC out of the water.

It's all doom and gloom, but it's worrying that the ACC was caught with its pants down losing a charter member.

Olympic Fan
11-19-2012, 06:35 PM
I want to get back to the buyout.

I know the Maryland people say they will negotiate down that $50 million figure. And I've seen the posts here noting that teams often negotiate lower buyouts.

Obviously, you can modify a contract if both sides agree to it.

But my question is, what would the ACC have to gain from reducing Maryland's buyout? Why wouldn't the league insist on the full payment -- mostly to send a message to FSU or anybody else who wants to leave that it's going to be expensive?

What leverage does Maryland have to force a lower buyout? On what grounds would they challenge it in court? I know they didn't vote for the buyout, but as a charter member of the ACC, they've always agreed to the rule that organizational changes (such as an increased buyout) could be made with a 3/4ths vote of the membership. The $50 million buyout was approved by 10 of 12 members ... by the rules of organization(which they subscribe to), Maryland is bound by that.

I'm not a lawyer, but I know a very good one and he doesn't see what legal grounds Maryland would have to contest the buyout (although he said, "Sure they can sue ... you can sue anybody for anything. That doesn't mean you can win.")

Again, I ask what leverage does Maryland have to negotiate a lower buyout? And why would the ACC send the message that their buyout is a paper dragon?

duke09hms
11-19-2012, 06:35 PM
Best move for Duke now would be to see if the SEC would welcome us and UNC as their 15th and 16th members. They'd make new inroads into North Carolina and would boost the basketball and academic credentials of their league.

The SEC would be known as the best conference in both football and basketball (Kentucky, Duke, UNC, Florida).

Hope the Duke and UNC ADs are being creative now. It would be a disaster if Duke is left in a conference with no football powers.

CameronBornAndBred
11-19-2012, 06:42 PM
Geez..we've gone from saying goodbye to the Terps to wondering where we should go? Obviously this in not directed at everyone, or even anyone in particular...but how about taking a step back and breathing for a minute. The ACC is one of the stongest conferences in America and things will work out. At the end of the day (decade?) we'll still be here, in one form or fashion and Duke will still be predominant in sports.

However, if I were a fan of a Big East team, I'd be freaking out.

hurleyfor3
11-19-2012, 06:51 PM
Again, I ask what leverage does Maryland have to negotiate a lower buyout?

Most obviously, other teams that would entertain offers to leave. Who and how many of them there are is a separate matter.

A-Tex Devil
11-19-2012, 06:51 PM
I want to get back to the buyout.

I know the Maryland people say they will negotiate down that $50 million figure. And I've seen the posts here noting that teams often negotiate lower buyouts.

Obviously, you can modify a contract if both sides agree to it.

But my question is, what would the ACC have to gain from reducing Maryland's buyout? Why wouldn't the league insist on the full payment -- mostly to send a message to FSU or anybody else who wants to leave that it's going to be expensive?

What leverage does Maryland have to force a lower buyout? On what grounds would they challenge it in court? I know they didn't vote for the buyout, but as a charter member of the ACC, they've always agreed to the rule that organizational changes (such as an increased buyout) could be made with a 3/4ths vote of the membership. The $50 million buyout was approved by 10 of 12 members ... by the rules of organization(which they subscribe to), Maryland is bound by that.

I'm not a lawyer, but I know a very good one and he doesn't see what legal grounds Maryland would have to contest the buyout (although he said, "Sure they can sue ... you can sue anybody for anything. That doesn't mean you can win.")

Again, I ask what leverage does Maryland have to negotiate a lower buyout? And why would the ACC send the message that their buyout is a paper dragon?

Maryland is going to say the $50MM is unenforceable as liquidated damages, and instead a contractually unenforceable penalty, and they'll have a little bit more leverage than, say, Clemson, because they voted against it. The argument will be that the ACC can't seek an amount excessively more than the actual harm Maryland's exit will cause the ACC. It's the same tactic Nebraska and Colorado used against the Big XII (although there were some other legal arguments at play there as well).

But you are right, the ACC needs to prepare to fight this tooth and nail, and run up Maryland's attorney fee. Every dollar below $50MM that Maryland pays to the ACC is a dollar Florida St. (as the other member voting against the exit fee) wouldn't have to pay.

It also potentially sets a precedent for the folks that voted *for* the penalty if the ACC hasn't enforced it to fullest extent in prior cases.

Maryland probably has a few other legitimate legal arguments, but the liquidated damages/penalty distinction is probably its most solid ground. And it's probably something the lawyers drafting the arrangement at the time were well aware of as being legally precarious.

uh_no
11-19-2012, 06:53 PM
What leverage does Maryland have to force a lower buyout?

Lawsuits are really expensive....the thread of the league having to A) spend money on the lawsuit and B) have the possibility of losing out even more depending on how the ruling goes is plenty of reason to work on an out of court settlement with a somewhat lower payment....yeah the payment is lower, but the league just saved the cost of a court case and probably still got more money back than they would have had they lost in court.

The big east wanted to stick to its guns to until west virginia filed a ridiculous lawsuit, then the big east countersued, then they said "why don't we work this out before we have to go to court"

the same will happen in the ACC.

wilson
11-19-2012, 06:58 PM
The ACC is one of the stongest conferences in America and things will work out. At the end of the day (decade?) we'll still be here, in one form or fashion and Duke will still be predominant in sports.

However, if I were a fan of a Big East team, I'd be freaking out.Unfortunately, this isn't necessarily true. Prevailing wisdom in many circles is that this could be the B1G's way of weakening the ACC through the back door after Notre Dame spurned them (again) in favor of the ACC.
Maryland's negotiated buyout is a huge key here. If they're able to negotiate it down to a certain level, then FSU and Clemson will assuredly start to look elsewhere, probably the Big 12, which has higher TV revenues than the ACC and would assuredly take them whereas Flarduh and South Carolina may balk at adding them to the SEC.
Subtract those two teams, and there's basically no way Notre Dame has any interest in sticking around. Carolina would start to get winsome glances from the Big 12 and B1G at that point too.
There are many dominoes to fall into place, but the prevailing currents seem to favor the eventual formation of four superconferences, and the ACC may well not be one of them. Of course any four superconferences that do emerge will likely look nothing like any of the conferences that have become familiar since the last major round of movement/expansion in the mid-90s.
Duke basketball will always be ok, even if we were to end up in an Atlantic 10-like conference (and in a basketball sense, I don't mean that as an insult...they're going to get more tournament bids than the ACC this year). The endowment is large enough and our wealthy donors numerous enough to ensure that basketball will always have the resources it needs to remain nationally relevant. However, I really don't think its a given that we'll have a seat at the table with all the other "BCS" (in quotations because that term is about to become obsolete, which is also going to bear upon this situation) football programs. Whether we want to or not is a question for another space, but there is very legitimate cause for concern with regard to the future of the ACC. Coach K wouldn't throw such phrases around lightly, and frankly, I think a lot of people here are whistling past the graveyard.

brevity
11-19-2012, 07:08 PM
http://www.theacc.com/genrel/111912aac.html

That it is only 4 sentences long says an awful lot, don't ya' think?

It's really telling that only 2 of those sentences were about Maryland. Swofford spends the next 2 sentences talking about moving on.

wilson
11-19-2012, 07:15 PM
It's really telling that only 2 of those sentences were about Maryland. Swofford spends the next 2 sentences talking about moving on.Personally, I think he should have gone bigger. Full-page ad in the Charlotte Observer addressed (in Comic Sans) to all ACC fans, guaranteeing them that every ACC team in every sport will win a national championship before Maryland does.

http://www.nba.com/cavaliers/news/gilbert_letter_100708.html (http://http://www.nba.com/cavaliers/news/gilbert_letter_100708.html)

-bdbd
11-19-2012, 07:27 PM
Unfortunately, this isn't necessarily true. Prevailing wisdom in many circles is that this could be the B1G's way of weakening the ACC through the back door after Notre Dame spurned them (again) in favor of the ACC.
Maryland's negotiated buyout is a huge key here. If they're able to negotiate it down to a certain level, then FSU and Clemson will assuredly start to look elsewhere, probably the Big 12, which has higher TV revenues than the ACC and would assuredly take them whereas Flarduh and South Carolina may balk at adding them to the SEC.
Subtract those two teams, and there's basically no way Notre Dame has any interest in sticking around. Carolina would start to get winsome glances from the Big 12 and B1G at that point too.
There are many dominoes to fall into place, but the prevailing currents seem to favor the eventual formation of four superconferences, and the ACC may well not be one of them. Of course any four superconferences that do emerge will likely look nothing like any of the conferences that have become familiar since the last major round of movement/expansion in the mid-90s....

I truly agree re. the door that get's cracked open for FSU and Clemson departures if the ACC allows the $50M to be significantly negotiated down. What I haven't seen from anybody is WHY IN THE HE11 WOULD THE ACC EVER NEGOTIATE IT DOWN?? There is absolutely no incentive for the ACC to do this. In fact, per the aforementioned argument, the incentives are for them to hold fast to $50.0000M and a July 2014 departure timeline.

BlueDevilBrowns
11-19-2012, 07:37 PM
Geez..we've gone from saying goodbye to the Terps to wondering where we should go? Obviously this in not directed at everyone, or even anyone in particular...but how about taking a step back and breathing for a minute. The ACC is one of the stongest conferences in America and things will work out. At the end of the day (decade?) we'll still be here, in one form or fashion and Duke will still be predominant in sports.

However, if I were a fan of a Big East team, I'd be freaking out.

If you've ever played "musical chairs", taking a step back and breathing for a minute is not an effective strategy.

Unfortunately, "musical chairs" is exactly the game Duke finds itself in at the moment. To find a chair, they have to be proactive, not reactive. As was mentioned by someone else, the winds are blowing toward a 4-conference landscape for major athletics, soon to be followed by the extinction of the NCAA as a major player. It's Duke's mission to make sure they have a chair when the dance is finished, be it in the ACC, B1G, or SEC.

Further, it looks like the Pac12, B1G, and SEC are firmly entrenched as 3/4ths of the Super-conferences of the future. It will be interesting to see who the 4th conference will be - Big12 or ACC?

duke09hms
11-19-2012, 07:55 PM
If you've ever played "musical chairs", taking a step back and breathing for a minute is not an effective strategy.

Unfortunately, "musical chairs" is exactly the game Duke finds itself in at the moment. To find a chair, they have to be proactive, not reactive.

Further, it looks like the Pac12, B1G, and SEC are firmly entrenched as 3/4ths of the Super-conferences of the future. It will be interesting to see who the 4th conference will be - Big12 or ACC?

Amen bro, got to be proactive not reactive.

I'd say pretty confidently, if it comes down to the Big 12 vs the ACC, it's going to be the Big 12 based on massive fan following, football tradition and recent relevance, and the presence of Texas.
4 lucky universities will get invites to join the SEC/Big 10. Most likely, the Big 10 and SEC will take the 4 schools they want, and then the Big 12 will take the remaining relevant schools.
Duke AD Kevin White's job is to make sure we're in a relevant conference when all is said and done.

Future prognostications of the 4 superconferences:
SEC - UNC, Duke
Big 10 - UVA, VT
Big 12 - Miami, FSU, Clemson, NC State, GT, Louisville

Conference of irrelevants left in the cold - Wake, BC, Syracuse, Pitt, and the remnants of the Big East.

Duke needs to avoid being left out. Don't be in the cold.

tieguy
11-19-2012, 07:56 PM
It's Duke's mission to make sure they have a chair when the dance is finished, be it in the ACC, B1G, or SEC.

Why? Our peer schools (with the exception of Stanford, and in the next tier down, with the exception of NWU and Vandy) do just fine as schools without being in one of the power conferences. (Hopkins, with the D-I grandfathering for lacrosse, is actually probably the best example.)

Deslok
11-19-2012, 08:00 PM
Its just the latest in a series of many things... but I think this, for me personally, is where I stop being a huge fan of college sports. I love Duke and will continue to do so. But aside from that I've tended toward watching fewer and fewer other college sports events, and I doubt I'll make any effort to watch from here out. To see things reduced to just naked money grabs with no concern whatsoever about the university itself when it comes to conference affiliation, recruiting, no show classes, etc. I've just reached my fill. Its not just Maryland, it not just UNC's academic support, its not just Kentucky recruiting, but taken all together its hard to find much worthwhile in college athletics these days. Maybe I was just harboring too much idealism thinking there was more than that, but at this point I'm much more in favor of just having sports have minor professional leagues and having college athletics being a small sideshow that perhaps 3000 people want to see any particular event.

Maybe the University of Chicago was just way ahead of the game when it got out of the game 70 or so years ago.

NSDukeFan
11-19-2012, 08:07 PM
I truly agree re. the door that get's cracked open for FSU and Clemson departures if the ACC allows the $50M to be significantly negotiated down. What I haven't seen from anybody is WHY IN THE HE11 WOULD THE ACC EVER NEGOTIATE IT DOWN?? There is absolutely no incentive for the ACC to do this. In fact, per the aforementioned argument, the incentives are for them to hold fast to $50.0000M and a July 2014 departure timeline.

Or should they hold fast to the 50 million and a November 2012 departure? (;

Atlanta Duke
11-19-2012, 08:08 PM
I don't agree with all you say, but this is definitely NOT in any way good news for the ACC or Duke. The ACC is not in a strong position right now unless they can in turn pry loose a team or two from the SEC or Big Ten, and the chances of that happening are very small. Only Notre Dame playing the full ACC schedule in football would negate the loss of Maryland, I think.

Agreed - if the end game is 16 school conferences I do not see how the arithmetic works for the ACC.

Notre Dame can play by its own rules for football and if it decides its ACC arrangement is not working out will walk.

Getting the Charlotte and Raleigh-Durham TV markets would be attractive to the SEC or Big Ten. Given what we know has gone on with compromising academics for the greater good of the athletic program at Chapel Hill, do not count on UNC staying with the ACC for old times sake if the price is right.

roywhite
11-19-2012, 08:10 PM
Its just the latest in a series of many things... but I think this, for me personally, is where I stop being a huge fan of college sports. I love Duke and will continue to do so. But aside from that I've tended toward watching fewer and fewer other college sports events, and I doubt I'll make any effort to watch from here out. To see things reduced to just naked money grabs with no concern whatsoever about the university itself when it comes to conference affiliation, recruiting, no show classes, etc. I've just reached my fill. Its not just Maryland, it not just UNC's academic support, its not just Kentucky recruiting, but taken all together its hard to find much worthwhile in college athletics these days. Maybe I was just harboring too much idealism thinking there was more than that, but at this point I'm much more in favor of just having sports have minor professional leagues and having college athletics being a small sideshow that perhaps 3000 people want to see any particular event.

Maybe the University of Chicago was just way ahead of the game when it got out of the game 70 or so years ago.

Perfectly reasonable point of view. Not there myself yet, but I get your point, and certainly see the direction things are going.

kingboozer
11-19-2012, 08:10 PM
Buddy of mine and I were talking and wondered if money weren't as much of a factor, Vanderbilt would be a perfect fit for the ACC geographically, athletically, and academically. It's a shame it's all about the benjamin's these days.

SCMatt33
11-19-2012, 08:15 PM
I don't see the super conference scenario happening right now. The landscape is so much different than it was in 2010. First, the Big XII is very stable right now. After losing Mizzou and A&M, schools gave up their rights fees to the conference, meaning that for anyone to leave, the conference has to break up. For the conference to break up, we have to go back to the old well of Texas, OU, OkSt, and TTech/Baylor going to the Pac-12. That's much less likely to happen than it was 30 months ago. Since then, the Big XII has a new contract with the Sugar Bowl, Texas has its network and a share of a shiny new rights deal. With Texas A&M, Mizzou, Colorado and Nebraska gone, much of the disgruntled part of the conference has already left, and the schools I haven't mentioned are happy to have a seat at the table. With that, the Big XII isn't really going anywhere. The Pac-12 won't be successfully raiding the Big Ten or SEC any time soon, so I don't see a viable scenario under which the Pac-12 expands right now. That right there shuts the door on any 4x16 talk.

But Florida State still wants out, you say. It's pretty well know that UF doesn't want FSU in the conference and the SEC in general doesn't want new teams that don't expand its current footprint. So that eliminates FSU, GTech, Clemson, Miami, and Louisville from SEC consideration. With the Big XII grant of rights, they aren't poaching WVU either. The Big Ten is the only conference that makes more money so they aren't poaching any teams from there. That pretty much leave North Carolina and Virginia as the only realistic places to expand. If there hand was forced, I can see them offering one team each from North Carolina and Virginia, but I don't really see it. Now we get to the meat of the matter. Will FSU go to the Big XII and drag a few teams with them. I guess it's possible, but I don't see why the Big XII would feel the need to split its conference around the SEC unless it absolutely has to. I'm also not sure that Florida State, GTech, and Clemson are that excited about playing half of their games west of the Mississippi. I think this one ends up being a ripple overall and not a wave of movement.

duke09hms
11-19-2012, 08:18 PM
Why? Our peer schools (with the exception of Stanford, and in the next tier down, with the exception of NWU and Vandy) do just fine as schools without being in one of the power conferences. (Hopkins, with the D-I grandfathering for lacrosse, is actually probably the best example.)

I think you're proving his point by listing Stanford, Northwestern, and Vanderbilt as exceptions. All the other top academic schools don't excel in athletics. A major Duke/Stanford selling point is excellence in both academics and athletics (true for Northwestern/Vanderbilt but slightly lower tier).

Which schools excel in athletics without being in a major conference?

ForkFondler
11-19-2012, 08:37 PM
Agreed - if the end game is 16 school conferences I do not see how the arithmetic works for the ACC.

Add in some spatial analysis: What four teams will the PAC 12 add to get to 16?

g-money
11-19-2012, 08:44 PM
Amen bro, got to be proactive not reactive.

I'd say pretty confidently, if it comes down to the Big 12 vs the ACC, it's going to be the Big 12 based on massive fan following, football tradition and recent relevance, and the presence of Texas.
4 lucky universities will get invites to join the SEC/Big 10. Most likely, the Big 10 and SEC will take the 4 schools they want, and then the Big 12 will take the remaining relevant schools.
Duke AD Kevin White's job is to make sure we're in a relevant conference when all is said and done.

Future prognostications of the 4 superconferences:
SEC - UNC, Duke
Big 10 - UVA, VT
Big 12 - Miami, FSU, Clemson, NC State, GT, Louisville

Conference of irrelevants left in the cold - Wake, BC, Syracuse, Pitt, and the remnants of the Big East.

Duke needs to avoid being left out. Don't be in the cold.

Interesting post. But you may be overlooking ND. I think they would need to affiliate their football program with a conference if the endgame is an 'each superconference gets one bid to a four team football playoff' system.

And in the bigger picture, what a bummer this would be for ACC fans. Think of all the other college sports (lacrosse, soccer, baseball, and obviously basketball) whose traditional rivalries would be eliminated in the name of football and the almighty dollar it brings. I guess Big East fans can relate.

Parting shot: All these athletic directors will look like idiots in 20 years when brain injuries make football obsolete.

wilko
11-19-2012, 08:46 PM
Duke AD Kevin White's job is to make sure we're in a relevant conference when all is said and done.

Future prognostications of the 4 superconferences:
SEC - UNC, Duke
Big 10 - UVA, VT
Big 12 - Miami, FSU, Clemson, NC State, GT, Louisville

Duke needs to avoid being left out. Don't be in the cold.

I would have to imagine that UNC and Duke are a package deal. Either w/o the other is not nearly as attractive both of them together.
You kind of have to think the calls have been made and these thoughts already thunk by the shot-callers.

If that deal could be made tomorrow, you do it.
No point waiting, then I can put it out of mind and tune out the noise of conference realignment.

Sides - then Kentucky has NO excuse not to come to Cameron at least 1x a yr...

Bluedog
11-19-2012, 08:47 PM
Which schools excel in athletics without being in a major conference?

According to the NACDA's Director Cup, the most successful non-BCS athletic program last year was....Princeton, at #39. Second place goes to New Mexico. But, hey, both are better than Northwestern's standing. ;) Or Clemson and Miami for that matter. Clearly, it's not really total athletic success that matters, though, but rather football success and then, to a lesser degree, men's basketball. Certainly, it's very challenging to have a strong overall athletic program (and football program) not being part of a major conference.

One thing that seems to not be talked about much, but would be a concern for me if I was considering being an athlete at a school is the ridiculous travel times and schedules. As a serious student and volleyball player (not me, just a hypothetical situation), for example, having to travel 800 miles frequently during college doesn't sound like that much fun. But obviously, nobody cares about the well-being of volleyball players and it's simply driven by money unfortunately.

kingboozer
11-19-2012, 08:49 PM
Add in some spatial analysis: What four teams will the PAC 12 add to get to 16?

Boise State, Colorado State, BYU, New Mexico I'd guess

77devil
11-19-2012, 08:51 PM
The sad thing is that there will no longer be those twerp fans ready to unload their tickets on the second day of the ACC tournament. I always looked forward to that feast day.

What's the over/under on how long before Twerps start whining that the Big 10 tournament is always in the Midwest?

kingboozer
11-19-2012, 08:53 PM
I would have to imagine that UNC and Duke are a package deal. Either w/o the other is not nearly as attractive both of them together.
You kind of have to think the calls have been made and these thoughts already thunk by the shot-callers.

If that deal could be made tomorrow, you do it.
No point waiting, then I can put it out of mind and tune out the noise of conference realignment.

Sides - then Kentucky has NO excuse not to come to Cameron at least 1x a yr...

When a conference looks at UNC or Duke, they'll be buying the rivalry as much as the individual schools. I think we'd both be best served in the Big 10 but wouldn't mind UK being a conference foe!

g-money
11-19-2012, 08:54 PM
Add in some spatial analysis: What four teams will the PAC 12 add to get to 16?

If they follow the Big East's logic, it will be Texas Tech, Syracuse, Minnesota, and Miami. Call it the four corners approach.

throatybeard
11-19-2012, 08:57 PM
I would have to imagine that UNC and Duke are a package deal.

We better hope to hell, 'cause we ain't on top of that relationship. We're one of the schools like Mississippi State or Iowa State that's lucky to be in on of the big conferences because of the accidents of history.

Me, I'm divided as to whether to celebrate Maryland, doors, and butts, or whether it's time to crack each other's heads open and fest on the goo inside:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5l3oUUUzOxE

I'm also really sick of US News being used as a metric for total institutional quality, as opposed to a celebration of a privileged undergraduate base. But no one listens when I talk about that.

Louisville is probably the best firewall at this point.

I'm not a fan of Connecticut, but something I haven't seen mentioned is ESPN's understandable obsession with them. That should figure into the calculus, and it's worth something.

Newton_14
11-19-2012, 09:10 PM
I will absolutely link to the video if WRAL puts it up, but K was funny as hell on the WRAL news. The reporter asked K to comment on Maryland leaving the ACC. This isn't 100% verbatim, but it is close, He said "Well, every time I have ever walked into that building up there, I have heard the same two words with an exclamation point on the end directed at me, and every single time I left that building, I heard those same two words. So I imagine if I were to comment on this situation, I would hear those same two words with the exclamation point from them, so I guess it's best I don't comment"

Hilarious.

Atlanta Duke
11-19-2012, 09:24 PM
When a conference looks at UNC or Duke, they'll be buying the rivalry as much as the individual schools.

Unfortunately it appears we have reached the stage the conferences are buying TV markets for football

This from The Wall Street Journal

That is because conferences' TV properties and markets are in some ways more important than the on-field product. The evolution is reflected in how fans who once talked about national rankings and conference standings are now talking media-market rankings and conference-network footprints. As Delany said of Maryland: "They're in a great population area."

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887323353204578129430974702190.html?m od=WSJ_hpp_MIDDLE_Video_Top

If a main purpose of Maryland and Rutgers joining the Big Ten is to assist Fox in being able to purchase a controlling interest in the YES network (Yankees telecasts) and to then bundle YES and the Big Ten Network with other channels, getting UNC into the fold to gain the North Carolina TV market might not be regarded as also requiring Duke to tag along

kdavis
11-19-2012, 09:37 PM
All these athletic directors will look like idiots in 20 years when brain injuries make football obsolete.

Ah, but then we will be talking about the craziness of Balkanized Conferences as everyone looks to find a home as part of an 8-team conference close to home to minimize travel expense...

ns7
11-19-2012, 09:51 PM
We better hope to hell, 'cause we ain't on top of that relationship. We're one of the schools like Mississippi State or Iowa State that's lucky to be in on of the big conferences because of the accidents of history.



With UNC's latest academic scandal, the school may be more willing to strengthen ties with Duke. I've read opinion pieces before stating that the SEC would like to go to 16 by adding Duke and UNC, to add the North Carolina market and to strengthen the academic reputation of the conference. Suddenly with UNC, Duke, Vandy, Florida, Texas A&M, and Missouri, the conference isn't a joke academically. We'd have to hope that UNC would want to take us along. The big challenge is that the NC legislature would tie UNC and NCSU together (a la UVA and VT).

Let me also state that I'm very upset with how the ACC has been handled over the last 10 years. I hated the addition of BC and Virginia Tech. I would have preferred just Miami to get to 10 to strengthen football. VT and BC really haven't added much TV money--yes, BC theoretically adds the Boston market, but Swofford has done nothing to get this value for the ACC. Additionally, his recent blunder with the TV contract is what is driving Maryland to leave--eventually money talks and overrules loyalty.

The other big issue is that the ACC football schools have 1) underperformed or 2) been uncommitted (FSU). If Miami, FSU, Clemson and UNC hadn't screwed around the last 10 years at football, we'd never be having this discussion.

wilson
11-19-2012, 09:54 PM
BC theoretically adds the Boston market...Mmmm...Boston Market...
2952

hurleyfor3
11-19-2012, 09:55 PM
The other big issue is that the ACC football schools have 1) underperformed or 2) been uncommitted (FSU). If Miami, FSU, Clemson and UNC hadn't screwed around the last 10 years at football, we'd never be having this discussion.

Not a good idea for Duke people to cast stones here.

opossum
11-19-2012, 10:19 PM
Buddy of mine and I were talking and wondered if money weren't as much of a factor, Vanderbilt would be a perfect fit for the ACC geographically, athletically, and academically. It's a shame it's all about the benjamin's these days.

If we really want to be proactive, let's start from scratch and revive the Magnolia League concept. Start a new conference with UVA, UNC, Wake and GA Tech. Invite Rice and Tulane. Maybe Miami, maybe Clemson, maybe SMU. Raise money to get William & Mary and Davidson promoted to FBS. Persuade Emory to start a football team after all these years. Implement high academic standards for student athletes (UNC would start out on probation). Would Vanderbilt take the money and second-tier academic status in the SEC or would they join up? It was their idea after all.

A guy can dream.

CameronBlue
11-19-2012, 11:03 PM
Additionally, his recent blunder with the TV contract is what is driving Maryland to leave--eventually money talks and overrules loyalty.



Money talks, okay, got it and ditto....which is why I don't see the Duke/UNC rivalry being all that marketable. To fans in Athens, Tuscaloosa, Auburn, Knoxville etc the Duke/UNC rivalry has little marquee value, not enough to matter anyway. The poachers won't come shopping for Duke or UNC and I don't think they give a rat's patooty about academic credibility, not in this era. This is about revenue and the culture of football and there are only two high value targets in the ACC, FSU and Clemson. As TB intimated Duke in the realignment sweepstakes is extremely vulnerable. For Duke's sake the ACC must survive largely intact.

But the firewall strategy is something like playing not to lose IMO. It concedes the advantage to the aggressor. Use FSU and Miami as leverage against Florida, it's the only SEC school of importance that doesn't naturally fit into the SEC's Deep South/Appalachain state cultural identity. Go after the Gators, hard. Sell the Florida rivalries and Notre Dame's partial conference schedule and re-pitch the conference as a football power. Guarantee Florida an annual matchup with ND if neceesary. I give Swofford credit because I have to believe he saw this coming. It would explain in part why he accepted ND as a non-traditional member. About a week or so ago I imagine there probably was a lot of backslapping and high-fiving at the ACC offices in Greensboro. What a difference a week makes.

Atlanta Duke
11-19-2012, 11:24 PM
I will absolutely link to the video if WRAL puts it up, but K was funny as hell on the WRAL news. The reporter asked K to comment on Maryland leaving the ACC. This isn't 100% verbatim, but it is close, He said "Well, every time I have ever walked into that building up there, I have heard the same two words with an exclamation point on the end directed at me, and every single time I left that building, I heard those same two words. So I imagine if I were to comment on this situation, I would hear those same two words with the exclamation point from them, so I guess it's best I don't comment"

Hilarious.

K seemed less amused on Sirius

Duke Coach Mike Krzyzewski is worried about the future of the Atlantic Coast Conference in the wake of Maryland's departure.

"I think the ACC is vulnerable right now, I'm concerned about our conference," Krzyzewski said on Monday afternoon, taping a segment for his Basketball and Beyond show on Sirius XM Radio. The show will air on Wednesday night.

When a guest asked Krzyzewski if he'd prefer Louisville or Connecticut to replace Maryland, which announced its departure for the Big Ten on Monday, Krzyzewski said before he could answer that he'd wanted to get everyone in a room and "close ranks and see who's still here."

Krzyzewski added: "I think there could still be some movement in our conference."


http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2012/writers/pete_thamel/11/19/Coach-Krzyzewski-Maryland/index.html?sct=hp_t2_a4&eref=sihp

burnspbesq
11-19-2012, 11:30 PM
If we really want to be proactive, let's start from scratch and revive the Magnolia League concept. Start a new conference with UVA, UNC, Wake and GA Tech. Invite Rice and Tulane. Maybe Miami, maybe Clemson, maybe SMU. Raise money to get William & Mary and Davidson promoted to FBS. Persuade Emory to start a football team after all these years. Implement high academic standards for student athletes (UNC would start out on probation). Would Vanderbilt take the money and second-tier academic status in the SEC or would they join up? It was their idea after all.

A guy can dream.

How about a slightly different dream: Duke, Georgetown, Army, and Navy to the Ivy League, and the Ivies drop the prohibition on playing in the FCS playoffs?

sporthenry
11-19-2012, 11:41 PM
Money talks, okay, got it and ditto....which is why I don't see the Duke/UNC rivalry being all that marketable. To fans in Athens, Tuscaloosa, Auburn, Knoxville etc the Duke/UNC rivalry has little marquee value, not enough to matter anyway. The poachers won't come shopping for Duke or UNC and I don't think they give a rat's patooty about academic credibility, not in this era. This is about revenue and the culture of football and there are only two high value targets in the ACC, FSU and Clemson. As TB intimated Duke in the realignment sweepstakes is extremely vulnerable. For Duke's sake the ACC must survive largely intact.

But the firewall strategy is something like playing not to lose IMO. It concedes the advantage to the aggressor. Use FSU and Miami as leverage against Florida, it's the only SEC school of importance that doesn't naturally fit into the SEC's Deep South/Appalachain state cultural identity. Go after the Gators, hard. Sell the Florida rivalries and Notre Dame's partial conference schedule and re-pitch the conference as a football power. Guarantee Florida an annual matchup with ND if neceesary. I give Swofford credit because I have to believe he saw this coming. It would explain in part why he accepted ND as a non-traditional member. About a week or so ago I imagine there probably was a lot of backslapping and high-fiving at the ACC offices in Greensboro. What a difference a week makes.

UF isn't going to leave. They make more money in the SEC and by holding Miami/FSU down, they can dominate SEC recruiting in Florida. The ACC offers little else.

But I do agree about the UNC/Duke not bringing much to the table. Mentioned this in the other thread and someone can correct me but I'm pretty sure the big money comes from the marquee match ups not just opening up a TV market. The B1G is in a different situation b/c of their own TV channel, the fact they charge more for TV's in their market (so adding a market instantly increases the money they bring in), and their possible move on YES or another channel.

But I don't think the SEC is in a similar situation so opening up markets for the sake of a market won't get them anywhere. Like bowl games, I'm sure the CBS broadcasts and prime time broadcasts of the SEC truly drive the big bucks. I don't see UNC getting a prime time match up with 'Bama and I don't think they have enough people in the area to counteract the amount of people who tune in to a top 10 match up just to watch. Adding better teams would give the SEC more chances to put top 10, top 25 match ups on TV. I remember the first few weeks of this year was utterly boring in college football but having teams like FSU playing a UGA will drive ratings.

SoCalDukeFan
11-19-2012, 11:43 PM
is the TV money.

With the 68 team or whatever it is NCAA basketball tournament the regular season and conference championships are not that big a deal and the NCAA hands out the Tournament money.

The conferences control football.

SoCal

opossum
11-19-2012, 11:45 PM
How about a slightly different dream: Duke, Georgetown, Army, and Navy to the Ivy League, and the Ivies drop the prohibition on playing in the FCS playoffs?

Not ideal, but if UVA, UNC, GA Tech and Wake don't bite on plan A, that could be plan B. Since we're already dipping into FCS by including the Ivy League, can we bring along Davidson and William & Mary?

A-Tex Devil
11-19-2012, 11:47 PM
But the firewall strategy is something like playing not to lose IMO. It concedes the advantage to the aggressor. Use FSU and Miami as leverage against Florida, it's the only SEC school of importance that doesn't naturally fit into the SEC's Deep South/Appalachain state cultural identity. Go after the Gators, hard. Sell the Florida rivalries and Notre Dame's partial conference schedule and re-pitch the conference as a football power. Guarantee Florida an annual matchup with ND if neceesary. I give Swofford credit because I have to believe he saw this coming. It would explain in part why he accepted ND as a non-traditional member. About a week or so ago I imagine there probably was a lot of backslapping and high-fiving at the ACC offices in Greensboro. What a difference a week makes.

How do you use Miami and FSU as leverage against Florida? Why would Florida want to join the ACC with Florida St. when they don't even want Florida St. in the SEC? We gotta be realistic here. As Duvall said up thread, no one is leaving the 4 conferences with big-boy TV deals for the ACC.

Swofford has been on the front lines of realignment, but he completely botched the TV contract. I think there is a chance to get FSU to stay, but that's with Louisville on board. Louisville isn't just a firewall, it's taking a piece away from the Big XII.

hurleyfor3
11-19-2012, 11:50 PM
How about a slightly different dream: Duke, Georgetown, Army, and Navy to the Ivy League, and the Ivies drop the prohibition on playing in the FCS playoffs?

The Ivy League is the opposite of everyone else. They're not about letting people in, they're about keeping people out.

kingboozer
11-19-2012, 11:52 PM
The Ivy League is the opposite of everyone else. They're not about letting people in, they're about keeping people out.

The last pure conference in college sports.

opossum
11-19-2012, 11:59 PM
The last pure conference in college sports.

If we play our cards right, we could be part of something like that too. Just saying.

TexHawk
11-20-2012, 12:00 AM
UF isn't going to leave. They make more money in the SEC and by holding Miami/FSU down, they can dominate SEC recruiting in Florida. The ACC offers little else.

But I do agree about the UNC/Duke not bringing much to the table. Mentioned this in the other thread and someone can correct me but I'm pretty sure the big money comes from the marquee match ups not just opening up a TV market. The B1G is in a different situation b/c of their own TV channel, the fact they charge more for TV's in their market (so adding a market instantly increases the money they bring in), and their possible move on YES or another channel.

But I don't think the SEC is in a similar situation so opening up markets for the sake of a market won't get them anywhere. Like bowl games, I'm sure the CBS broadcasts and prime time broadcasts of the SEC truly drive the big bucks. I don't see UNC getting a prime time match up with 'Bama and I don't think they have enough people in the area to counteract the amount of people who tune in to a top 10 match up just to watch. Adding better teams would give the SEC more chances to put top 10, top 25 match ups on TV. I remember the first few weeks of this year was utterly boring in college football but having teams like FSU playing a UGA will drive ratings.

Expect to see an SEC network in the next few years, so geographic footprint WILL become an issue in their expansion. Also, take a look at the Top 10 in this week's BCS rankings, the SEC has no need for more national title contenders in football. Up until a rash of upsets last weekend, their "strength" had seemingly knocked them out of a title game appearance. This is partly why the SEC took Mizzou last time around. A so-so team that brings a market (St Louis), with very little chance of them becoming a football power. Every conference needs doormats too.

Everything you say does (sorta) apply to the Big12 though. They seem to be comfortable with their Tier 3 strategy, so that likely means no Big12 network anytime soon. So they need to maximize their premier games, OU v FSU, for example.

TexHawk
11-20-2012, 12:08 AM
Louisville isn't just a firewall, it's taking a piece away from the Big XII.

Taking a piece from the Big12? Serious question... When has the Big12 shown any kind of interest in Louisville? I'm honestly curious if there has been anything mentioned in public. The attention (from my view) seems to be entirely one-way.

They would have been members 12+ months ago if the Big12 thought anything of them.

A-Tex Devil
11-20-2012, 12:21 AM
Taking a piece from the Big12? Serious question... When has the Big12 shown any kind of interest in Louisville? I'm honestly curious if there has been anything mentioned in public. The attention (from my view) seems to be entirely one-way.

They would have been members 12+ months ago if the Big12 thought anything of them.

David Boren openly pined for Louisville over WVU, and has kept them on a leash every since. Louisville is to the Big XII what UConn is to the ACC. I believe that when the Big XII couldn't pull another ACC team with Florida St. earlier this year, they backed off because they didn't want to settle for Louisville. But now, with the exit fee in the ACC perhaps a sticking point for a Clemson or a Ga Tech leaving, what the ACC does with Maryland will be telling in how FSU and the Big XII react. And maybe there's nothing to it and FSU has no plans to leave anymore. Great.

If the Big XII thinks they can pull another ACC team, then, no, they won't bother with Louisville. But if hot on the heels of Maryland's exit, the Big XII thinks now is the prime time to get FSU, I could see the conference settling for Louisville in the same way the SEC settled for Missouri.

So having Louisville out there gives the Big XII someone to pair with FSU to get to 12 teams. The Big XII has said over and over it wouldn't make sense to just go to 11. Obviously, it would prefer another ACC school to Louisville, but if that's not possible, Louisville is there (for now) in a pinch. If the ACC gets Louisville first and the $50MM exit fee is as preventative on the teams that actually agreed to it as we hope it might be, then that puts a bit of a damper on any FSU to the Big XII plans -- unless the Big XII wants a South Florida or a Cincy as its 12th team -- both hugely inferior to Louisville.

-bdbd
11-20-2012, 12:32 AM
How about a slightly different dream: Duke, Georgetown, Army, and Navy to the Ivy League, and the Ivies drop the prohibition on playing in the FCS playoffs?

Feinstein, is that you??! :confused:

kingboozer
11-20-2012, 12:33 AM
Feinstein, is that you??! :confused:

You know, pre-Cutcliffe I wouldn't have thought dropping to FCS would have been the worst idea. Now, I think we're better than that.

Class of '94
11-20-2012, 07:29 AM
David Boren openly pined for Louisville over WVU, and has kept them on a leash every since. Louisville is to the Big XII what UConn is to the ACC. I believe that when the Big XII couldn't pull another ACC team with Florida St. earlier this year, they backed off because they didn't want to settle for Louisville. But now, with the exit fee in the ACC perhaps a sticking point for a Clemson or a Ga Tech leaving, what the ACC does with Maryland will be telling in how FSU and the Big XII react. And maybe there's nothing to it and FSU has no plans to leave anymore. Great.

If the Big XII thinks they can pull another ACC team, then, no, they won't bother with Louisville. But if hot on the heels of Maryland's exit, the Big XII thinks now is the prime time to get FSU, I could see the conference settling for Louisville in the same way the SEC settled for Missouri.

So having Louisville out there gives the Big XII someone to pair with FSU to get to 12 teams. The Big XII has said over and over it wouldn't make sense to just go to 11. Obviously, it would prefer another ACC school to Louisville, but if that's not possible, Louisville is there (for now) in a pinch. If the ACC gets Louisville first and the $50MM exit fee is as preventative on the teams that actually agreed to it as we hope it might be, then that puts a bit of a damper on any FSU to the Big XII plans -- unless the Big XII wants a South Florida or a Cincy as its 12th team -- both hugely inferior to Louisville.

I think your reasoning is spot on. That's why I wanted ACC to take ND, even as a partial member, to take them away from the Big 12 and the Big 10. Apparently, it may have ruffled the feathers of Delaney and the BIG 10 by doing so; and some people are speculating the MD and Rutgers grab is payback. In fact, the Big 10 is planning to open up an east coast office somewhere with the purpose increasing exposure of that conference on the east coast. Good luck with that in NYC; but I can see it being comforting to MD and Rutgers, especially since some MD people feel like the ACC didn't care about them. That sound, an east coast office of the BIG 10 could be a staging ground for further encroachment into the eastern seaboard and the ACC. So the ACC has to be very strategic at this point and find a way to keep everyone on board in the wake of these moves by the BIG 10 imo.

K in that interview said in hindsight, maybe the ACC should have also taken a Rutgers and a UConn or Louisville as well. I agree because it would've taken a very important piece off the table for the BIG 10 because they've had their eyes on MD and Rutgers for a few years now; and if Rutgers was taken off the table prior to MD, that along with taking ND might have halted the BIG since no one else in the NE that was prime for picking fit the academic requirements of the BIG 10. That said, I get whey the ACC didn't do it because they in a way they had to make sure financially they could justify it. But at this point, I think they have to make proactive moves to keep people in the ACC; and taking Louisville off the board would strengthen the ACC's football profile and take a potential piece off for the BIG 12 to match with FSU off the table. I'm wondering if Swofford now goes directly to 16 teams plus ND in football to bolster the league

On an aside, I read the AD of MD was concerned that he and Swofford would no longer be friends. Well, I guess if you say one thing and go behind his back and do another, that would create some problems. I remember a poster saying earlier that because the MD AD came from Army, he would have a good understanding of how important tradition and history was; after this, I'm questioning if he has a good understanding of what honor and integrity is all about. MD has every right to leave the ACC if they want to; but why not be honest and upfront about it as opposed to being sneaky and dishonest about it.

BlueDevilBrowns
11-20-2012, 07:48 AM
Not to change the subject but I ran across this quote from Ole Sweaty B*****d this morning:

Williams said he doesn't see Duke or Carolina scheduling Maryland in the future.

"Just like Nebraska doesn't schedule Texas or Oklahoma in football now," he said. "You're talking about 2012, not 2000. There has been a cultural change in college sports. We were never Carolina's or Duke's rival. They had each other. I'm sure there will be great games with teams in the future in the Big Ten -- starting with Indiana."

Enough said.

P.S. - Indiana, bet you didn't know you were already bitter rivals with MD, did ya? You've been warned...

http://espn.go.com/mens-college-basketball/story/_/id/8653208/mark-turgeon-gary-williams-jump-board-maryland-terrapins-big-ten-move-%13-college-basketball

Class of '94
11-20-2012, 08:06 AM
Not to change the subject but I ran across this quote from Ole Sweaty B*****d this morning:

Williams said he doesn't see Duke or Carolina scheduling Maryland in the future.

"Just like Nebraska doesn't schedule Texas or Oklahoma in football now," he said. "You're talking about 2012, not 2000. There has been a cultural change in college sports. We were never Carolina's or Duke's rival. They had each other. I'm sure there will be great games with teams in the future in the Big Ten -- starting with Indiana."

Enough said.

P.S. - Indiana, bet you didn't know you were already bitter rivals with MD, did ya? You've been warned...

http://espn.go.com/mens-college-basketball/story/_/id/8653208/mark-turgeon-gary-williams-jump-board-maryland-terrapins-big-ten-move-%13-college-basketball

I love it how he's spinning as if Nebraska had a choice of scheduling Texas and Oklahoma, those teams dumped Nebraska from their scheduling and not the other way around. And I agree that Indiana is not going to suddenly count MD as their rival. Similarly, I don't see Duke or Carolina choosing to schedule MD as part of their non-conference unless forced to by the Big 10/ACC challenge. The thing that really bothers me is that Williams comes across as a "sell-out" and a media-propaganda machine for MD. Oh well, good luck going to Iowa, Nebraska, Minnesota, Wisconsin, etc. in the winter months.

hq2
11-20-2012, 08:16 AM
From a basketball standpoint, a lot of this feels like when South Carolina left the conference in the early 70s.
It was the same kind of chippy nastiness, hate-the-big-four can't get a break attitude ("The tournament is
always in Greensboro.....blah blah blah"). Frank McGuire was a big time jerk who was responsible for it; here,
it's mostly the pursuit of $$$$$$ for other reasons. You have to give the Twerps credit; they won their share
against Duke the last 10 years, more than almost anyone than Carolina, and some of the Duke-Maryland games
(say J-will 10 points in one minute) were classics. Still, like South Carolina, their fans were jerks too, and no one
cried when they left. We won't this time either.

johnb
11-20-2012, 08:19 AM
Regarding the stupidity of the sorts of guys who run the NCAA and athletic departments... the NYT has an article about the NCAA investigation of Shabazz Muhammad. From the sounds of it, he and the family did nothing wrong, and not just because it involved Duke. http://www.nytimes.com/2012/11/20/opinion/nocera-race-and-the-ncaa.html?nl=todaysheadlines&emc=edit_th_20121120

I lump together the NCAA and athletic depts because the same guys make the decisions: middle-aged white former athletes whose intellectual creativity does not match their influence.

All this footprint jumbo jumbo sounds like something cooked up over a third scotch in an airport hotel. You're talking about an entire university's identity, and you sell it over a weekend without public involvement for a few million dollars per year? and the board of trustees accepts a decision making process of a 9 am mtg in secret without time to think? what a bunch of leaders.

of course, I didn't mind our poaching teams from the Big East as much, but that seemed to make sense for them and us. and the big east is made up of the same sorts of idiots who run the ncaa--not a good recent decision that i can think of. adding Colorado and Utah to the PAC 12, otoh, did make sense in retrospect. they are western schools, and, not unimportantly, don't make it harder for one of the core PAC 12 teams to win natl championships.

anyway, 10 years, who knows, maybe every game in the country will be televised into every household for pennies.

Matches
11-20-2012, 08:19 AM
The other big issue is that the ACC football schools have 1) underperformed or 2) been uncommitted (FSU). If Miami, FSU, Clemson and UNC hadn't screwed around the last 10 years at football, we'd never be having this discussion.

This really is the crux of the matter. The ACC is a basketball conference in a football world. Every attempt we've made to improve our football, going as far back as adding FSU, has fallen flat. So we command fewer TV dollars, which means our member schools are vulnerable to being plucked away by other conferences.

Being totally honest - the quality of play in mens' college bball has been dropping for years. One of the big things that's kept me watching is the tradition and the history with the various schools. I've sat through some darn-near unwatchable games against State or Wake or whoever because it's State or it's Wake. Take that away through radical realignment, and I doubt I'm "in" in the same way as before.

wilko
11-20-2012, 09:12 AM
Perhaps I'm crazy... or merely just thick, but I'm not getting how this works in a sustainable fashion.

So what if I have the B1G network on my cable provider. I never watch it.
They get zippo ROI for having it on my tube as their advertisers never reach me.

I think that if Netflix (or something like it) were to stream live sports and adult content they would put cable/dish out of business as content providers and turn them into service providers for connectivity. I think we are headed that way.

Apple and Google TV offerings are going to try and put their spins on it.. This is a changing market-space and I think its only a matter of time till the model is busted and we are OUR OWN content program directors as consumers.

So to look at what the cable companies are paying for content I don't want, and base projections off of that... Well it just strikes me as folly.

Jderf
11-20-2012, 09:31 AM
Perhaps I'm crazy... or merely just thick, but I'm not getting how this works in a sustainable fashion.

So what if I have the B1G network on my cable provider. I never watch it.
They get zippo ROI for having it on my tube as their advertisers never reach me.

I think that if Netflix (or something like it) were to stream live sports and adult content they would put cable/dish out of business as content providers and turn them into service providers for connectivity. I think we are headed that way.

Apple and Google TV offerings are going to try and put their spins on it.. This is a changing market-space and I think its only a matter of time till the model is busted and we are OUR OWN content program directors as consumers.

So to look at what the cable companies are paying for content I don't want, and base projections off of that... Well it just strikes me as folly.

Wait just a minute here. Are you telling me that all of these conference expansion maneuvers are really nothing more than short-sighted money grabs, based on potentially flawed assumptions about the current trajectory of American content distribution and entertainment, disregarding both the past and future tradition of our beloved institutions for the sake TV contracts -- contracts which themselves are worth mere pennies when compared to the yearly operating budget of the actual universities?

Seriously though, you make a good point. It makes me think about radio conglomerates spending decades consolidating power at the start of the 20th century, only to find that by the time they had solidified their position, television showed up and completely changed the rules of the game. Let's hope those salary bumps are worth it.

wilko
11-20-2012, 10:20 AM
Wait just a minute here. Are you telling me that all of these conference expansion maneuvers are really nothing more than short-sighted money grabs, based on potentially flawed assumptions about the current trajectory of American content distribution and entertainment, disregarding both the past and future tradition of our beloved institutions for the sake TV contracts -- contracts which themselves are worth mere pennies when compared to the yearly operating budget of the actual universities?

I didn't say that. I can see how you would say I said it. :cool: I kinda wish I had said it - but I was genuinely inviting someone to hit me with some knowledge on why this makes long term sense in a way that I can understand it.


Seriously though, you make a good point. It makes me think about radio conglomerates spending decades consolidating power at the start of the 20th century, only to find that by the time they had solidified their position, television showed up and completely changed the rules of the game. Let's hope those salary bumps are worth it.

The trends I see (and I'm no insider or expert) are somewhat at odds with Maryland's reasons for doing this.. I understand a short term fix. But they seem to be leveraging quite a lot on the status quo being maintained for quite some time. They've got maybe 3 to 5 years to break even before the dynamic is turned on its ear by somone.

A better fix is for Swoff and the ACC to figure a way to get on Netflix to offer ACC centric sports and features. Or find another distribution path along these lines. It could be the beginning of getting ESPN to buy Netflix so their delivery isnt fractured and splintered into a number of mini-networks equal to the number of conferences. Either way the advertisers are now reaching their target market and they have better metrics around their viewers/subscribers. Thats a transfer of real dollars I can see and understand.

Jderf
11-20-2012, 10:51 AM
I didn't say that. I can see how you would say I said it. :cool: I kinda wish I had said it - but I was genuinely inviting someone to hit me with some knowledge on why this makes long term sense in a way that I can understand it.

I actually wasn't trying to put words in your mouth at all. I was mostly just trying to push my own agenda wherever possible. Sorry about that.

Back to my agenda though :). In the most recent numbers I can find (2009), UM's annual operating budget was $1.531 billion. On the other hand, the difference in TV revenue per school between the ACC and the Big Ten is $7 million. Think about that for a second. We're talking completely different orders of magnitude here. So it isn't like we can pretend that this $7 million makes all that much of a difference in terms of revenue for the university itself. BUT, if you're Maryland Athletic Director Kevin Anderson, and you receive a base salary of about $400,000, then an influx of $7,000,000 to your athletic department could be seen as a huge windfall, perhaps enough to double your salary. Similarly if you are the founder of Under Armour, getting more eyes on your product/brand could be very significant.

My only point is that when we make vague statements like "Football money rules the day," we should be clear about who exactly is making these decisions and what their interests are, because they are certainly very distinct from the actual universities.

And, oh yeah, let's makes sure that we're absolutely and unequivocally ruthless when enforcing NCAA bylaws against scumbags like Shabazz Muhammad. That kid and his $1,600 visit to North Carolina are seriously jeopardizing the integrity of college athletics.

Monmouth77
11-20-2012, 11:36 AM
I actually wasn't trying to put words in your mouth at all. I was mostly just trying to push my own agenda wherever possible. Sorry about that.

Back to my agenda though :). In the most recent numbers I can find (2009), UM's annual operating budget was $1.531 billion. On the other hand, the difference in TV revenue per school between the ACC and the Big Ten is $7 million. Think about that for a second. We're talking completely different orders of magnitude here. So it isn't like we can pretend that this $7 million makes all that much of a difference in terms of revenue for the university itself. BUT, if you're Maryland Athletic Director Kevin Anderson, and you receive a base salary of about $400,000, then an influx of $7,000,000 to your athletic department could be seen as a huge windfall, perhaps enough to double your salary. Similarly if you are the founder of Under Armour, getting more eyes on your product/brand could be very significant.

My only point is that when we make vague statements like "Football money rules the day," we should be clear about who exactly is making these decisions and what their interests are, because they are certainly very distinct from the actual universities.

And, oh yeah, let's makes sure that we're absolutely and unequivocally ruthless when enforcing NCAA bylaws against scumbags like Shabazz Muhammad. That kid and his $1,600 visit to North Carolina are seriously jeopardizing the integrity of college athletics.

There is a lot of insight in this post, and following the actual streams of revenue here would be a pretty revealing exercise. I am sure Maryland's AD's public salary is published and it would be interesting to find out how, if at all, it changes as a result of the Big Ten move.

But an AD cannot drive this process entirely on his/her own, and I do put some stock in the Maryland President's partial explanation that Maryland is seizing a chance to affiliate with other large State Universities which, among other things, share a large research budget.

From the Big Ten's perspective, Maryland is no great licks academically, as others have pointed out up thread, and the deal can be understood primarily as adding the DC TV market for the Big Ten channel, while staying a move ahead in the lurch towards the superconference era.

But from a University President's perspective, I think there is an argument that this move could improve perceptions about Maryland as a public research institution and aspiring upper tier state University. My impression as a Duke grad living in the DC area has been that Maryland alums have a huge chip on their shoulder about how they are perceived, and it doesn't help having UNC, UVA, Wake, Duke, etc., looking down on them as a lower tier school.

In some ways, joining the Big Ten is a way for the school to re-invent its identity as a quality big state institution. They'll never be perceived as a "public ivy," and Michigan and Northwestern might as well be UVA and Duke. But they might benefit from being thought of in the same orbit as Minnesota, Ohio State, Indiana, etc.

Perception and image as much as money sometimes drives decisionmaking.

Bluedog
11-20-2012, 11:47 AM
Perhaps I'm crazy... or merely just thick, but I'm not getting how this works in a sustainable fashion.

So what if I have the B1G network on my cable provider. I never watch it.
They get zippo ROI for having it on my tube as their advertisers never reach me.


I think you're missing a key point of how the B1G network delivers revenue to its members. I have the network with my cable provider as part of my standard Comcast cable package, and Comcast pays the B1G something like $1.50/subscriber REGARDLESS of if they're watching it or not. So, I am indirectly paying Comcast for the ability to watch the B1G network as they set my rate, which is based on the various rates they pay. However, of course, if Comcast determines that nobody in my area ever watches the network, they could conceivably drop it from their coverage (or make it a higher tier than basic) and then save $1.50/subscriber, so it's in the B1G's best interest to get viewers so that cable companies pick them up in their most widespread packages. But it's the subscriber fees they bring in that give them a large portion of the revenue; the advertisers on the network are only a piece of that. And I'm a "subscriber" whether I want to be or not since I want basic cable. If Maryland and Rutgers can bring them 20 million new potential subscribers, that's a lot of money if they can negotiate having the network as part of the cable packages.

wilko
11-20-2012, 11:50 AM
I actually wasn't trying to put words in your mouth at all. I was mostly just trying to push my own agenda wherever possible. Sorry about that.

No worries. If I was that emotionally fragile I wouldn't have posted. :D



My only point is that when we make vague statements like "Football money rules the day," we should be clear about who exactly is making these decisions and what their interests are, because they are certainly very distinct from the actual universities.
I never doubted Plank wanted to his Turtles to pretend like they were the Ducks...
Trouble is the product not the market. Now hes gonna be blinding 200million people instead of 75million with those awful designs...... Good for him.



And, oh yeah, let's makes sure that we're absolutely and unequivocally ruthless when enforcing NCAA bylaws against scumbags like Shabazz Muhammad. That kid and his $1,600 visit to North Carolina are seriously jeopardizing the integrity of college athletics.
Calling Bazz names doesn't solve anything. I was hoping we would get him. Maybe if we HAD this dies a quiet death and he doesn't miss a game... The NCCA is so arbitrary... its eroded most of its credibility and goodwill. Thats a whole different kettle of fish. I mean for UNC to skate with what they have done, and for UK & FSU to get away with what they are allegedly doing - oh and lets not for UCLA's hijinx. I think integrity is dead and buried. We have to decide how much its worth it to us to remain invested in playing the game this way.

wilko
11-20-2012, 12:04 PM
I think you're missing a key point of how the B1G network delivers revenue to its members. I have the network with my cable provider as part of my standard Comcast cable package, and Comcast pays the B1G something like $1.50/subscriber REGARDLESS of if they're watching it or not. So, I am indirectly paying Comcast for the ability to watch the B1G network as they set my rate, which is based on the various rates they pay. However, of course, if Comcast determines that nobody in my area ever watches the network, they could conceivably drop it from their coverage (or make it a higher tier than basic) and then save $1.50/subscriber, so it's in the B1G's best interest to get viewers so that cable companies pick them up in their most widespread packages. But it's the subscriber fees they bring in that give them a large portion of the revenue; the advertisers on the network are only a piece of that. And I'm a "subscriber" whether I want to be or not since I want basic cable. If Maryland and Rutgers can bring them 20 million new potential subscribers, that's a lot of money if they can negotiate having the network as part of the cable packages.

Thanks for the comment. And you are right thats the CURRENT dynamic. In much the same fashion Album Oriented Rock was supplanted by iTunes "buy the song you want". I think TV viewing is about to change. Everything you see bundled you will be able to pick a'la carte for the things you want. I think UMd is hoping that stays staus quo, but I see it as volatile and subject to change. I think its more risky than has been stated.

Mike Corey
11-20-2012, 12:40 PM
So much of this is being driven by research dollars.

In the '50s, the Big Ten (plus its former member, UChicago) created a research consortium. In total, it's funding around $7 billion per year in research--more than the Ivy League.

Here's a sampling of the '11 "top american research universities" list:

Here's a sample from the "top american research universities" rankings from '11:

(6) Duke
(7) M*chigan
(14) Wisconsin
(15) Minnesota
(16) North C*rolina
(17) Texas
(18) Northwestern
(21) U. of Chicago
(22) Ohio State
(26) Illinois
(30) Penn State
(33) Notre Dame
(38) Purdue
(39) Georgia Tech
(40) Michigan State
(41) Virginia
(43) Maryland

g-money
11-20-2012, 12:45 PM
Back to my agenda though :). In the most recent numbers I can find (2009), UM's annual operating budget was $1.531 billion. On the other hand, the difference in TV revenue per school between the ACC and the Big Ten is $7 million. Think about that for a second. We're talking completely different orders of magnitude here. So it isn't like we can pretend that this $7 million makes all that much of a difference in terms of revenue for the university itself. BUT, if you're Maryland Athletic Director Kevin Anderson, and you receive a base salary of about $400,000, then an influx of $7,000,000 to your athletic department could be seen as a huge windfall, perhaps enough to double your salary. Similarly if you are the founder of Under Armour, getting more eyes on your product/brand could be very significant.

What would be funny is if MD's annual alumni donations swing negative by over $7M/yr as a result of the move. The law of unintended consequences.

-bdbd
11-20-2012, 12:51 PM
Sigh....

FWIW, the Washington Post today has a TON of coverage of the MD move to the Big10. Including the front page of the whole paper. I'd say about 75% of it is negatively toned. The front of the Sports section has two "commentary" articles, one referring to it as "an act of (financial) desperation." The other focuses on how it is more a financial and football decision than an earnest, well-thought-out strategy in the best interest of the student-athletes and fans. The main article on it focuses on the significantly increased travel requirements. They also have a page in the back quoting many of yesterday's tweets from graduated student athletes, such as Grievous Vasquez, Elmore, the WR now playing for the Ravens, a couple of former weomen's BB players, etc. All but one or two of the tweets are decidedly negative, or downright angry.

Local News Radio played a quote from Gary Williams, who is still employed by the University as a Special Assistant to the AD, saying that the move was "good for the university long-term." But then, interestingly, the reporter shared that she'd later asked Williams (ioff camewra/microphone) and his response was, in her words, "telling" : He paused for a few seconds, thinking, then said, "Don't blame us for doing what the rest of college soports is doing now too."

Kinda a sad day.

CameronBornAndBred
11-20-2012, 01:02 PM
Heather Dinich talks about how Randy Edsall is looking forward to the move. (He's expected to say he isn't?)
Funny start to her writeup, and painfully true for Terps fans.

Maryland won’t go bowling for a second straight season, it has never won the ACC's Atlantic Division, and it holds an overall record of 4-44-1 against the Big Ten
Have fun, guys, enjoy the cellar.

http://espn.go.com/blog/acc/post/_/id/48518/randy-edsall-looking-forward-to-big-ten

(Pay attention to her last line.)

Mike Corey
11-20-2012, 01:06 PM
There's some formula for the above rankings. In terms of strict research expenditures:

(2) M*chigan
(3) Wisconsin
(7) Duke
(9) Minnesota
(12) Ohio State
(13) Stanford (just as a measuring stick)
(15) Penn State
(17) UNC
(20) Pittsburgh
(25) Illinois
(26) Georgia Tech
(28) Northwestern
(30) Texas
(33) Purdue
(39) Maryland
(41) Virginia Tech
(44) N.C. State
(47) Michigan State
(57) Iowa
(59) Rutgers
(72) Virginia
(76) Miami
(78) Nebraska
(91) Wake Forest
(93) Florida State
(99) Clemson
(104) Indiana
(111) Louisville
(118) UConn
(134) Temple
(139) Notre Dame
(197) Boston College
(198) Syracuse

Mike Corey
11-20-2012, 01:27 PM
News is getting less encouraging.

I'm reading elsewhere that UNC and Texas are responding positively to overtures from the Big 10. There are obvious issues to overcome, but that's not a good sign.

juise
11-20-2012, 01:46 PM
Here's an interesting opinion piece (http://www.grantland.com/story/_/id/8654190/on-urban-meyer-ohio-state-wisconsin-big-ten-expanding-include-maryland-rutgers) (entitled "The Big, Dumb, Greedy Ten" - written by a B1G alum) on the state of football in the B1G. It is sad that we can say that these moves are about football, but it's only about football money and not about football accomplishment.

Matches
11-20-2012, 02:05 PM
News is getting less encouraging.

I'm reading elsewhere that UNC and Texas are responding positively to overtures from the Big 10. There are obvious issues to overcome, but that's not a good sign.

The war in the NC legislature if UNC decides to move somewhere, and State has no landing spot, could be epic.

freedevil
11-20-2012, 02:24 PM
The war in the NC legislature if UNC decides to move somewhere, and State has no landing spot, could be epic.

Get your popcorn.

A-Tex Devil
11-20-2012, 02:25 PM
News is getting less encouraging.

I'm reading elsewhere that UNC and Texas are responding positively to overtures from the Big 10. There are obvious issues to overcome, but that's not a good sign.

Don't buy it. Texas and the Big Ten are a non-starter from the get go due to the LHN. Say what you want about access to the network, but it's getting an average of $12MM to Texas over the 10 year lifespan of the contract with half going to academics. Texas isn't going to give that up, and the Big Ten isn't going to give Texas special treatment.

As for UNC, I can't imagine they'll be a first mover at all. In a lot of ways, they are like Texas and will land on their feet, so they can wait around and then choose where they want to go when/if the time comes.

Setting aside Big East teams getting picked off, all eyeballs should be on Tallahassee in the coming weeks. If there is a next move among the five relevant conferences, and I'm not convinced there will be, it will be from our Seminole friends, I think.

senkiri
11-20-2012, 02:44 PM
News is getting less encouraging.

I'm reading elsewhere that UNC and Texas are responding positively to overtures from the Big 10. There are obvious issues to overcome, but that's not a good sign.


Source? Where is that being discussed?

Matches
11-20-2012, 02:45 PM
As for UNC, I can't imagine they'll be a first mover at all. In a lot of ways, they are like Texas and will land on their feet, so they can wait around and then choose where they want to go when/if the time comes.



I would agree except that I would have said the same about Maryland until the last few days. FSU has always seemed like the unstable link, the first domino if you will. But if it starts to look likely that domino will fall, I could see a UNC, a UVa, an NCSU, even a VT trying to make a pre-emptive move.

Mike Corey
11-20-2012, 03:08 PM
Don't buy it. Texas and the Big Ten are a non-starter from the get go due to the LHN. Say what you want about access to the network, but it's getting an average of $12MM to Texas over the 10 year lifespan of the contract with half going to academics. Texas isn't going to give that up, and the Big Ten isn't going to give Texas special treatment.

As for UNC, I can't imagine they'll be a first mover at all. In a lot of ways, they are like Texas and will land on their feet, so they can wait around and then choose where they want to go when/if the time comes.

Setting aside Big East teams getting picked off, all eyeballs should be on Tallahassee in the coming weeks. If there is a next move among the five relevant conferences, and I'm not convinced there will be, it will be from our Seminole friends, I think.

I hope you are correct.

A-Tex Devil
11-20-2012, 03:16 PM
I would agree except that I would have said the same about Maryland until the last few days. FSU has always seemed like the unstable link, the first domino if you will. But if it starts to look likely that domino will fall, I could see a UNC, a UVa, an NCSU, even a VT trying to make a pre-emptive move.

I was reading some old stuff from a Maryland blog and apparently there were some "rumors" of Maryland to the Big 10 during the initial 2010 realignment (specifically involving Texas to the Big 10 as well before the "We've got a Tech Problem" email).

Whether or not that was the throw it against the wall and see what sticks type of rumor, or the very beginnings of what happened Monday, I'm not sure. Has anyone at MD or Big Ten come out and said how long these discussions had been going on?

A-Tex Devil
11-20-2012, 03:26 PM
I hope you are correct.

Mike -- I hope I am too. I didn't mean to be so emphatic, but it just doesn't make sense (feet on the ground here in Austin and with a modicum of UT connections). I see that the Northwestern message board "source" PurpleBookCat is talking again and is espousing much the same type of scenario you laid out re: UT and UNC. WVU's gaggle of message board rumor-mongers are spouting off as well.

It's important to remember, though, that other than WVU's initial hit last spring re: FSU and "talks", these guys have generally been wrong - way wrong. Especially PurpleBookCat. Most of the real news (ACC grabbing Pitt and Syr, Big Ten's MD move) has come relatively out of nowhere.

Olympic Fan
11-20-2012, 03:34 PM
All I can add to the discussion is the perception among the Texas coaches that the LHN is a major disappointment, both in terms of finances and exposure. Mack Brown has been especially critical (he also thinks that televising practices puts the Longhorns at a competitive disadvantage).

I haven't seen the $12 million a year figure for the next 10 years confirmed, but even if that's true, it's very likely that a switch from the Big 12 to the Big 10 would be worth more than $12 million annually to Texas (nothing has been more mis-reported on the internet and by un-informed reporrters who base their "sources" on the internet than the size of the annual Big 12 payout. I guarantee you that despite what you read, the ACC payout is still significantly higher than the Big 12).

Maryland is claiming that switching from the ACC to the Big 10 will ultimately be worth an extra $20 million annually ... since Texasw is getting less from the Big 12 than Maryland is getting from the ACC, I think it's safe to say that the $12 million from the LHN is not going to prevent Texas from jumping if the Big 10 comes calling.

Two years ago, the prospect of the Long Horn Network kept Texas from jumping either to the Pac 12 or the SEC. I'm not as sure that it's as big a hurdle today as it was thern.

A-Tex Devil
11-20-2012, 03:44 PM
Just poking around on a massive BS laden filled thread on Texas' version of Inside Carolina, Shaggy Bevo. It's been a good hopping off point for realignment news, but also high entertainment for ridiculous speculation that would make the "Florida to the ACC" and similar stuff on this thread seem viable.

New "lead" -- and I don't post this as "rumor mongering," I post this as an example of some of the insanity this week coming from the "Realignment Gnomes" (this time WVU's now infamous MHVer3) -- Duke has called the Big XII.

Now, I don't believe that for a second -- or if there was a phone call, it was merely for advice, not a solicitation -- but man, oh man would this place blow a gasket (as would I).

It's pretty clear now that a lot of the guys that may have gotten some cache by leaking one or two correct facts in the last few years are just having fun with everyone through a massive and unfortunately successful trolling effort. The buildups and meltdowns are pretty amusing.

Class of '94
11-20-2012, 03:47 PM
News is getting less encouraging.

I'm reading elsewhere that UNC and Texas are responding positively to overtures from the Big 10. There are obvious issues to overcome, but that's not a good sign.

Would UNC being willing to ditch en epic rivalry with Duke (assuming Duke isn't invited) to play in the BIG? I know tradition and rivalries are being ignored and Delaney would love to expand his BTN further into the South and Texas; but I just can't see UNC leaving Duke and the rivalry. Of course, anything can happen nowadays......

senkiri
11-20-2012, 03:48 PM
I was reading some old stuff from a Maryland blog and apparently there were some "rumors" of Maryland to the Big 10 during the initial 2010 realignment (specifically involving Texas to the Big 10 as well before the "We've got a Tech Problem" email).

Whether or not that was the throw it against the wall and see what sticks type of rumor, or the very beginnings of what happened Monday, I'm not sure. Has anyone at MD or Big Ten come out and said how long these discussions had been going on?

MD Regent Tom McMillen (apparently the lone dissenting vote on the move) was quoted in one of the Washington Post articles today as saying the BigTen wanted them 2 years ago and would again in 2 years, so what's the rush? So these may in fact have been long standing discussions or discussions that picked up again after Maryland got a new president and AD in place. Unfortunately, I doubt either MD or the Big10 will provide any clarity here with the potential for lawsuits involved...

ATexDevil, or others with knowledge of the media rights deals, is the BigTen's arrangement also a grant of rights type of deal like the PAC-12 and Big12, where (loss of money issues aside) you would essentially never be able to leave because you would be worthless to any new conference?

Matches
11-20-2012, 03:50 PM
Would UNC being willing to ditch en epic rivalry with Duke (assuming Duke isn't invited) to play in the BIG? I know tradition and rivalries are being ignored and Delaney would love to expand his BTN further into the South and Texas; but I just can't see UNC leaving Duke and the rivalry. Of course, anything can happen nowadays......

Clemson and USC still play every year, and they still frickin' HATE each other after 40+ years in separate conferences.

A-Tex Devil
11-20-2012, 04:00 PM
All I can add to the discussion is the perception among the Texas coaches that the LHN is a major disappointment, both in terms of finances and exposure. Mack Brown has been especially critical (he also thinks that televising practices puts the Longhorns at a competitive disadvantage).

I haven't seen the $12 million a year figure for the next 10 years confirmed, but even if that's true, it's very likely that a switch from the Big 12 to the Big 10 would be worth more than $12 million annually to Texas (nothing has been more mis-reported on the internet and by un-informed reporrters who base their "sources" on the internet than the size of the annual Big 12 payout. I guarantee you that despite what you read, the ACC payout is still significantly higher than the Big 12).

Maryland is claiming that switching from the ACC to the Big 10 will ultimately be worth an extra $20 million annually ... since Texasw is getting less from the Big 12 than Maryland is getting from the ACC, I think it's safe to say that the $12 million from the LHN is not going to prevent Texas from jumping if the Big 10 comes calling.

Two years ago, the prospect of the Long Horn Network kept Texas from jumping either to the Pac 12 or the SEC. I'm not as sure that it's as big a hurdle today as it was thern.

OF,

Love your posts, but you are wrong on the Big XII/ACC contracts. ACC gave up rights to *ALL* football and basketball games to ESPN for an average of $17.1MM per team per school (http://www.newsobserver.com/2012/05/10/2054760/acc-espn-agree-on-36-billion-tv.html) on average over the course of the contract(well, OK somewhere north of that now that MD has left, assuming ACC doesn't add a team).

The Big XII deal is worth $20.3MM per year on average over the course of the contract for Tier 1 and Tier 2 (http://www.cbssports.com/collegefootball/blog/dennis-dodd/20090469/big-12-espn-fox-finally-get-deal-done) rights for a limited number of games. Any games not picked up by Fox and ESPN can be marketed by the home team's school. Which is where the extra money, on top of the $20.3MM comes in for the LHN ($11MM annually and rising, after payout to IMG (http://www.cbssports.com/mcc/blogs/entry/24156338/31192274)), and for other schools like Oklahoma (http://muskogeephoenix.com/sports/x1023279743/Sooners-launch-their-own-Longhorn-Network), Oklahoma St. (http://www.foxsportssouthwest.com/11/20/12/FOX-Sports-Learfield-Sports-multimedia-r/landing_big12.html?blockID=823113&feedID=3742) and Kansas State (http://1350kman.com/k-state-fox-sports-learfield-announce-third-tier-rights-deal/). Not to mention KU's huge basketball related TV revenues outside the ESPN/Fox deals.

As for the LHN, it has growing pains. Mack's complaints were a red herring for his poor coaching and recruiting job during the last 4 years, and were generally met with scorn, not sympathy. The LHN is a concept in its infancy. I believe it will be something great and will pave the way for schools, even Duke, to control, market and publicize their own brand in all sports -- even beyond football and basketball. I may be wrong in the end, but it's too early for a decision to be made at this point. The ACC gave that right completely away to ESPN with respect to TV, and that was a mistake, especially for the price the ACC received.

Class of '94
11-20-2012, 04:02 PM
Clemson and USC still play every year, and they still frickin' HATE each other after 40+ years in separate conferences.

In football.....But do they play each other in all other sports. And even they do, I personally wouldn't want to sse them only play once a year in basketball, Again, if Carolina is all about "the Carolina way", I can't see them leaving the ACC (and it's unique relationship with Duke) at this point unless the conference was about to immediately dissolve. That would be like Michigan leaving OSU.....

Likewise, I believe Duke wouldn't leave w/out UNC. Despite the negative feelings I have for UNC, these two schools are too good together to allow money to break them apart imo.

CameronBornAndBred
11-20-2012, 04:03 PM
Duke has called the Big XII.

I'm enjoying thinking of all the prank calls that Dr. White may be making. A-la Bart Simpson to Moe's Tavern.

Matches
11-20-2012, 04:07 PM
In football.....But do they play each other in all other sports. And even they do, I personally wouldn't want to sse them only play once a year in basketball,

Clemson plays USC in basketball every year. They used to play twice a year but it appears they've cut back to once. Not sure if that's related to the expanded ACC schedule.

I'd expect ESPN would still want as many Duke-UNC games per year as it could get, regardless of conference affiliation. That might change if Duke were to decline in a gutted ACC or lesser conference, though.

edit: Plus I'm sure we could count on the selection committee to "coincidentally" put us in the same bracket every March...

COYS
11-20-2012, 04:16 PM
Clemson and USC still play every year, and they still frickin' HATE each other after 40+ years in separate conferences.

So do UGA and GaTech, but there's no doubt that the rivalries would mean just that much more if they were in the same conference.

I'm not THAT old, but all this conference realignment stuff has me feeling like I'm that old guy on the street who yells at the kids to slow down and reminisces about the "good ole' days" when conferences were small enough for round robin regular season schedules against teams that were more or less in the same region. I miss the days when the announcers could go back 40-50 years (or even more, in some cases) to talk about epic games between two opponents.

The very fact that we can talk about Duke and UNC playing in separate conferences even as a remote possibility is just proof that nothing is mightier than the dollar and, in this case, football is the only sport commanding enough dollars to direct traffic.

What's even worse about this whole thing is that it's really bad timing for the ACC in terms of football. Take us back 12-17 years and we would have had perennial national championship contenders in Miami and FSU. VaTech made a title game in January of 2000, too (losing to FSU). The entire perception of the league would have been different if Miami and FSU had won their championships more recently. I really do think things go in cycles and that the ACC has had an unsustainably bad run of luck when it comes to its "elite" teams stacking up against the other top teams. It is just lame that the conference realignment storm has hit while the ACC is in a downswing when it comes to football. It gives us so much less leverage than I would have guessed even 5 years ago when I figured that FSU and Miami would right the ship with regard to their football programs sooner rather than later and that Beamer and VaTech would be able to make a splash on the national stage, too. I really never thought the realignment storm would hit the heart of the ACC, but it is looking more and more likely that it will.

Chicago 1995
11-20-2012, 05:07 PM
In football.....But do they play each other in all other sports. And even they do, I personally wouldn't want to sse them only play once a year in basketball, Again, if Carolina is all about "the Carolina way", I can't see them leaving the ACC (and it's unique relationship with Duke) at this point unless the conference was about to immediately dissolve. That would be like Michigan leaving OSU.....

Likewise, I believe Duke wouldn't leave w/out UNC. Despite the negative feelings I have for UNC, these two schools are too good together to allow money to break them apart imo.

I don't have that same faith in UNC. I hope Duke is being active here and isn't counting on the solidarity of the ACC and the strategy of John Swofford to protect it. I hope Kevin White has been talking to the Big XII and Lord Valdemort, er, Jim Delaney to see if we have a soft landing spot or if we're going to end up, eventually, like Georgetown.

NSDukeFan
11-20-2012, 05:10 PM
In football.....But do they play each other in all other sports. And even they do, I personally wouldn't want to sse them only play once a year in basketball, Again, if Carolina is all about "the Carolina way", I can't see them leaving the ACC (and it's unique relationship with Duke) at this point unless the conference was about to immediately dissolve. That would be like Michigan leaving OSU.....

Likewise, I believe Duke wouldn't leave w/out UNC. Despite the negative feelings I have for UNC, these two schools are too good together to allow money to break them apart imo.

I wonder if this would be the best time to count on loyal, ethical behavior from UNC?

SCMatt33
11-20-2012, 05:32 PM
On the sentiment of rivalries, several posts have mentioned rivalries that have continued after 1 team left a conference, namely SC/Clemson and UGA/GTech. The landscape is certainly different than it was 40 years ago, however. Back then, teams still needed to fill out the schedule without travelling too far, and the rivalries provided a convenient way to generate buzz, sell tickets, and get a good game on the schedule without leaving the state. With more money for travel, every game on TV, and expanded conferences lowering demand for non-conference home and homes (in both football and basketball), most of the factors keeping non conference rivalries together don't exist anymore.

In addition to that, the expanded conferences are blowing up rivalries even without teams leaving. There hasn't been as much buzz about Duke-Maryland as there was Texas/Texas A&M or Kansas/Missouri, but there has been some. Let's not forget that just 6 weeks ago, the ACC took the first shot at the rivalry by placing Duke with Wake in the new partnerships and leaving Maryland to play UVA and Pitt twice a year. I'm not a Maryland fan, and don't know many Maryland fans, but I can't imagine that taking away the yearly home game with Duke sat well with them. This happens all over the place, too. It was much harder to lament losing Syracuse-Gtown when they stopped playing twice a year 6 years ago.

That being said, Duke/UNC is different. Not only is it the biggest rivalry in the sport, the two schools share a lot of common ground both in the community and academically. Most of these rivalries are between schools that are a couple of hundred miles apart, not 8 miles. It makes it much harder to "break up" with each other. Anyone who is an alumni/student or lives in the area knows that Duke and UNC students share all manner of stores and restaurants along 15/501. The Robertson Scholar program provides a direct link for its scholars to study at both schools and easy transportation for any student to travel between campuses. I haven't even mentioned the shared charitable endeavors, like the student basketball marathon.

The environment of conference movement is very bitter right now. Most schools that remain in the old conference feel stabbed in the back and often want nothing to do with the school that left. It would be very tough for one to cut off the non-sports ties with the other, but continuing to have them would lead to a very awkward relationship. I wouldn't want to see what that relationship is like. That makes me think that one would not actively look to leave the other, but if behind closed doors, the ACC is seen as a sinking ship, I would expect one (likely UNC) to take a lifeboat to another conference if offered.

Mike Corey
11-20-2012, 05:49 PM
Mike -- I hope I am too. I didn't mean to be so emphatic, but it just doesn't make sense (feet on the ground here in Austin and with a modicum of UT connections). I see that the Northwestern message board "source" PurpleBookCat is talking again and is espousing much the same type of scenario you laid out re: UT and UNC. WVU's gaggle of message board rumor-mongers are spouting off as well.

It's important to remember, though, that other than WVU's initial hit last spring re: FSU and "talks", these guys have generally been wrong - way wrong. Especially PurpleBookCat. Most of the real news (ACC grabbing Pitt and Syr, Big Ten's MD move) has come relatively out of nowhere.

You've no need to apologize. I reacted emphatically when I read what I shared here, as well. Or as someone here writes, I yelled out "heavens to Betsy"--or its Midwestern synonym, which is not appropriate here. ha

The person that permitted me to share the information here is not a source. He is someone who works independently and has proven time and again to be ahead of this stuff. For example, he was talking about Maryland's move to the Big Ten a few years ago. If I did not trust him and the information he gathers, I would not share it here or elsewhere.

That said, he could absolutely be wrong, and from what I understand, the legalese binding Texas to the Big 12 is ironclad...at least for a while.

Here's hoping this is all hogwash and we can get back to focusing on the game, the players and the coaches rather than how a few want to best manipulate the dollars they might generate.

sporthenry
11-20-2012, 05:52 PM
On the sentiment of rivalries, several posts have mentioned rivalries that have continued after 1 team left a conference, namely SC/Clemson and UGA/GTech. The landscape is certainly different than it was 40 years ago, however. Back then, teams still needed to fill out the schedule without travelling too far, and the rivalries provided a convenient way to generate buzz, sell tickets, and get a good game on the schedule without leaving the state. With more money for travel, every game on TV, and expanded conferences lowering demand for non-conference home and homes (in both football and basketball), most of the factors keeping non conference rivalries together don't exist anymore...

I would agree with all of this. I'm not versed in how things went down 40 years ago or if any rivalries even stopped for anytime but leaving the conferences back then doesn't seem to have as much significance as it does now. But using those examples seem to be wrong when all recent examples like Texas/A&M, Backyard Brawl, and pretty much all rivalries including Colorado, Mizzou, A&M, or Nebraska in the B12 were lost.

Olympic Fan
11-20-2012, 06:08 PM
OF,

Love your posts, but you are wrong on the Big XII/ACC contracts. ACC gave up rights to *ALL* football and basketball games to ESPN for an average of $17.1MM per team per school (http://www.newsobserver.com/2012/05/10/2054760/acc-espn-agree-on-36-billion-tv.html) on average over the course of the contract(well, OK somewhere north of that now that MD has left, assuming ACC doesn't add a team).

The Big XII deal is worth $20.3MM per year on average over the course of the contract for Tier 1 and Tier 2 (http://www.cbssports.com/collegefootball/blog/dennis-dodd/20090469/big-12-espn-fox-finally-get-deal-done) rights for a limited number of games. Any games not picked up by Fox and ESPN can be marketed by the home team's school. Which is where the extra money, on top of the $20.3MM comes in for the LHN ($11MM annually and rising, after payout to IMG (http://www.cbssports.com/mcc/blogs/entry/24156338/31192274)), and for other schools like Oklahoma (http://muskogeephoenix.com/sports/x1023279743/Sooners-launch-their-own-Longhorn-Network), Oklahoma St. (http://www.foxsportssouthwest.com/11/20/12/FOX-Sports-Learfield-Sports-multimedia-r/landing_big12.html?blockID=823113&feedID=3742) and Kansas State (http://1350kman.com/k-state-fox-sports-learfield-announce-third-tier-rights-deal/). Not to mention KU's huge basketball related TV revenues outside the ESPN/Fox deals.

As for the LHN, it has growing pains. Mack's complaints were a red herring for his poor coaching and recruiting job during the last 4 years, and were generally met with scorn, not sympathy. The LHN is a concept in its infancy. I believe it will be something great and will pave the way for schools, even Duke, to control, market and publicize their own brand in all sports -- even beyond football and basketball. I may be wrong in the end, but it's too early for a decision to be made at this point. The ACC gave that right completely away to ESPN with respect to TV, and that was a mistake, especially for the price the ACC received.

Sigh,

I guess when the big lie is repeated enough, it's impossible to overcome it. I repeat -- the breakdown of ACC and Big 12 finances that have been widely reported are WRONG. Wildly wrong.

That kind of reporting led to an FSU trustee going off half-cocked last summer when it was reported how much more the Big 12 was getting than the ACC. He rased a 24-hour tempest until FSU officials took him aside and showed him the correct numbers. He publically backtracked and admitted that FSU was better off in the ACC.

Look, I'm just an internet poster so you can believe or disbelieve as you want, but I'm telling you that the only Big 12 school that takes in more revenue than the ACC is Texas (because of the LHN). The ACC payout is significantly more than the Big 12 -- although less than the Big Ten, SEC and Pac 12 (in that order). the ACC is fourth. The Big 12 is fifth and the Big East in a distant sixth.

Despite the summer firestorm, there never was ANY real contact between gthe Big 12 and Florida State or Clemson. No ACC team is leaving for the Big 12 ... now if the SEC comes calling, that's a different story.

TexHawk
11-20-2012, 06:37 PM
Look, I'm just an internet poster so you can believe or disbelieve as you want, but I'm telling you that the only Big 12 school that takes in more revenue than the ACC is Texas (because of the LHN). The ACC payout is significantly more than the Big 12 -- although less than the Big Ten, SEC and Pac 12 (in that order). the ACC is fourth. The Big 12 is fifth and the Big East in a distant sixth.


KU made more money in 3rd tier revenue than UT in the first year of the LHN, due to the Jayhawk network. (I haven't heard what the latest numbers are.) UT is looking at $12+ million per, going forward, and KU usually pulls about $8-10 million.

As to rest of it, is there, you know, a link or something?

A-Tex Devil
11-20-2012, 06:46 PM
Sigh,

I guess when the big lie is repeated enough, it's impossible to overcome it. I repeat -- the breakdown of ACC and Big 12 finances that have been widely reported are WRONG. Wildly wrong.

That kind of reporting led to an FSU trustee going off half-cocked last summer when it was reported how much more the Big 12 was getting than the ACC. He rased a 24-hour tempest until FSU officials took him aside and showed him the correct numbers. He publically backtracked and admitted that FSU was better off in the ACC.

Look, I'm just an internet poster so you can believe or disbelieve as you want, but I'm telling you that the only Big 12 school that takes in more revenue than the ACC is Texas (because of the LHN). The ACC payout is significantly more than the Big 12 -- although less than the Big Ten, SEC and Pac 12 (in that order). the ACC is fourth. The Big 12 is fifth and the Big East in a distant sixth.

Despite the summer firestorm, there never was ANY real contact between gthe Big 12 and Florida State or Clemson. No ACC team is leaving for the Big 12 ... now if the SEC comes calling, that's a different story.

Yes, I remember very clearly how badly the FSU trustee misinterpreted the reports on the ACC deal, then ran with, and created a firestorm, over that false information. You are right on that account. But the initial reporting wasn't wrong, the initial interpretation of the deal by bloggers, message boards, radio stations, etc. was often wrong, and that's what set the FSU trustee off. But the FSU trustee went off - specifically - because he thought that Duke and Carolina got to keep some men's basketball rights, fortifying the power held by Tobacco Road over the conference -- it wasn't true. Duke and Carolina handed over 100% of the television rights to men's basketball and football games just like every other ACC member did. Everyone was treated the same.

The Big 12 is getting >$20MM per school per year over the life of the contract, and the ACC is getting <$20MM per school on average per the life of the contract. I can go find the ESPN articles (where they should know exactly what the contracts look like) and quote them if you want rather than CBS and the N&O. Plus Big XII schools have the ability to rake in a little (or a lot) more for the rights they didn't hand over to Fox and ESPN. I'm not quoting blogs here, and I haven't seen a single media source, mainstream or otherwise, say the ACC deal is better. You may have access to the contracts or sources, I don't know. Notre Dame could possibly change the equation -- that's certain. But the reports I linked aren't tarnished by message boards or filtered through blogs. The misinformation you speak of came after that.

Atlanta Duke
11-20-2012, 09:48 PM
Jonathan Chait of New York Magazine (and Michigan alum) questions whether the Big Ten's quest for cable TV glory makes long term financial sense

The more people who live in the Big Ten’s footprint, the more households will be paying their cable operators an extra dollar a month or so to carry the Big Ten network. Hence the logic of adding Rutgers and Maryland. While the athletic traditions of both schools are, respectively, mediocre and terrible, they geographically encompass large, populous regions whose cable television subscribers will, for the most part involuntarily, be paying the Big Ten conference a chunk of their cable television bills.

In other words, as a profit-making mechanism, this is essentially a scam..

Is there any possible outcome here for the Big Ten other than brand dilution?

http://nymag.com/daily/sports/2012/11/madness-of-big-ten-expansion.html

sporthenry
11-20-2012, 10:18 PM
Jonathan Chait of New York Magazine (and Michigan alum) questions whether the Big Ten's quest for cable TV glory makes long term financial sense

The more people who live in the Big Ten’s footprint, the more households will be paying their cable operators an extra dollar a month or so to carry the Big Ten network. Hence the logic of adding Rutgers and Maryland. While the athletic traditions of both schools are, respectively, mediocre and terrible, they geographically encompass large, populous regions whose cable television subscribers will, for the most part involuntarily, be paying the Big Ten conference a chunk of their cable television bills.

In other words, as a profit-making mechanism, this is essentially a scam..

Is there any possible outcome here for the Big Ten other than brand dilution?

http://nymag.com/daily/sports/2012/11/madness-of-big-ten-expansion.html

I wonder if the TV stations realize this won't bring those markets. I doubt they get the $.70 they currently get in all other markets and once these contracts eventually run out, they'll see what Nate Silver pointed out in the other thread, Northeast and Mid-Atlantic teams just don't have the following.

NSDukeFan
11-21-2012, 10:12 AM
I was always against Jay Bilas' ideas about paying players in the biggest revenue sports (mainly football and basketball.) I think I may be changing my tune and was probably too naive. If university competition is not at all about playing sports against similar schools in close proximity to help school spirit and is only about how much money the football programs can get from cable television rights without regard to university student-athletes, other students, alumni, local fans, etc. so that the athletic department can have more money than I would have to agree that the players should be getting some of this money.
Was Jay right all along? I don't know if I am convinced yet, but I am getting there.

Indoor66
11-21-2012, 11:50 AM
I was always against Jay Bilas' ideas about paying players in the biggest revenue sports (mainly football and basketball.) I think I may be changing my tune and was probably too naive. If university competition is not at all about playing sports against similar schools in close proximity to help school spirit and is only about how much money the football programs can get from cable television rights without regard to university student-athletes, other students, alumni, local fans, etc. so that the athletic department can have more money than I would have to agree that the players should be getting some of this money.
Was Jay right all along? I don't know if I am convinced yet, but I am getting there.

I understnd your point. That said, I am personally not ready or able to relinquish all of my ideals about sports to the worship of the almighty dollar. It is a tragedy that all amateur sports (not just college) has been reduced to a dollar chase. I guess it is inevitable in this dollar driven secular world. (sigh) :mad:

chaosmage
11-21-2012, 01:08 PM
Andrew Jones on IC has a post regarding his radio show and "UNC's options from here." Not linking or clicking it because ew, but is there anything NOT rumor-based that points to UNC considering options for leaving? I know in some threads (possibly this one) the hypothetical UNC and/or Duke and NCSU? Curious regarding any local coverage that has a basis in fact. Thanks!

-bdbd
11-21-2012, 01:38 PM
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/campus-overload/post/details-emerge-about-university-system-of-maryland-regents-private-meetings/2012/11/21/4c7be7f4-33df-11e2-bb9b-288a310849ee_blog.html?wprss=rss_education

Article in the Washington Post about how the MD Board of Regents violated laws via their secretive, private meetings re. the Big10 move...

Doubt that it comes to much, but Trustee McMillan, who dissented, is raising good questions re. "Why the rush?" and "Why the secrecy?" Interesting.

alteran
11-21-2012, 02:08 PM
When a conference looks at UNC or Duke, they'll be buying the rivalry as much as the individual schools. I think we'd both be best served in the Big 10 but wouldn't mind UK being a conference foe!

Folks, I hate to say this, but when the Big 1x comes knocking, they won't be buying the rivalry. They'll be extending existing contracts to cable providers to pay 70 cents per subscriber to carry the Big1x network in new states. Cable companies already carrying B1G NW in other areas will be BOUND to add it in NC, and at existing rates. Big bucks there. They need one school per state to do that.

They'll snag Carolina for the bigger fan base, and entry into the NC market. Done. If Carolina balks, the B1G will tell them, "fine with us, NCSU is just a cab ride away."

Both teams have more fans than us. Adding Duke simply does not add a dime.

Duke, and pretty much any private college, is going to get cut out. There's a reason the Big East is/was filled with so many private schools. The money conferences want the large state schools and bigger local fan bases.

Mal
11-21-2012, 02:39 PM
Jonathan Chait of New York Magazine (and Michigan alum) questions whether the Big Ten's quest for cable TV glory makes long term financial sense

The more people who live in the Big Ten’s footprint, the more households will be paying their cable operators an extra dollar a month or so to carry the Big Ten network. Hence the logic of adding Rutgers and Maryland. While the athletic traditions of both schools are, respectively, mediocre and terrible, they geographically encompass large, populous regions whose cable television subscribers will, for the most part involuntarily, be paying the Big Ten conference a chunk of their cable television bills.

In other words, as a profit-making mechanism, this is essentially a scam..

Is there any possible outcome here for the Big Ten other than brand dilution?

http://nymag.com/daily/sports/2012/11/madness-of-big-ten-expansion.html

I agree with Chait and Nate Silver. I also think the B1G is shortsighted in assuming the delivery model of their product won't change three times over in the next 25 years, rendering the geographic footprint of the conference irrelevant. And in the short run, they're vastly underestimating how much people in their new TV markets generally don't care about college sports. The brand is instantly terribly diluted and Maryland and Rutgers will, I predict, be seen a generation from now as horrible mistakes and Exhibit A in the craziness of the 2009-2014 period of everyone playing musical chairs in a race for the 4x16 format.

The one place I disagree with Chait, though, is that his descriptors of the athletic traditions at Rutgers and Maryland are backwards. The Terps have a national title in one of the two relevant money sports in the last century, and an up and down football program. That's at least respectable. Rutgers has a mirage of football success, having beaten exactly zero out of conference ranked teams ever, and basically played 1-AA for the first 125 years of its program's existence. And the basketball program's nothing. Both these football teams will be in the bottom third of the Big Ten every year, and Rutgers will compete with Penn State for the basketball cellar. They bring nothing to the table for the conference in terms of football, one basketball program that's waned considerably from its high water mark a decade ago, no hockey, no baseball presence, and a couple decent soccer and lax programs. Rutgers was 111th in the Directors' Cup standings last year. One hundred eleventh. That's just ahead of Montana State and a few spots below Brown. Brown!!! Iowa was next worst in the B1G, at 48th.

sagegrouse
11-21-2012, 02:51 PM
The Terps have a national title in one of the two relevant money sports in the last century, and an up and down football program.

Tweet! Tweet! The history police have arrived! In addition to the 2002 hoops title, Maryland football was #1 in the final AP and UPI polls of 1953, the only team with a perfect record in the regular season. The Terps, however, lost to Oklahoma 7-0 in the Orange Bowl.

The year 1953 is the answer to two trivia questions: When was the last time a coach with an defeated record got fired? And when was the last time a coach of a Heisman Trophy winner got fired. Notre Dame was 8-0-1 (no bowl game). Johnny Lattner of the Irish won the Heisman. Then Coach Frank Leahy was told by the padres in charge that he had coached his last season at ND.

sagegrouse

Mtn.Devil.91.92.01.10.15
11-21-2012, 03:51 PM
Tweet! Tweet! The history police have arrived! In addition to the 2002 hoops title, Maryland football was #1 in the final AP and UPI polls of 1953, the only team with a perfect record in the regular season. The Terps, however, lost to Oklahoma 7-0 in the Orange Bowl.

Is it possible they meant "since the turn of the century?" Granted, it's a difference of 88 years...

devildeac
11-25-2012, 01:24 PM
Interesting article and quote from the always colorful Jim Boeheim:


http://www.wralsportsfan.com/jim-boeheim-goes-off-on-conference-realignment/11803025/

"Like I said, if these guys (the conference commissioners) were running the United States in colonial times, Brazil and Argentina would be states because they have something we need. It's a great country."

Sarcasm aside, you might be on to something, Jim. They have some pretty good hoopsters down there and their futbol is consistently excellent, too;).

brevity
12-31-2012, 05:18 PM
Score one for geographical sanity. Boise State had second thoughts and is sticking with the Mountain West. The sound you hear is the sighs of relief from Broncos fans, stadium staff, and local businesses who either aren't made of money or would like to make some when Colorado State comes into town instead of Connecticut.
http://espn.go.com/college-sports/story/_/id/8796807/boise-state-broncos-staying-mountain-west-conference-all

Not sure where else to post this. The Conference Realignment Vigil thread has been closed ever since the moderators decided that Maryland was more important than the rest of the nation.

-jk
12-31-2012, 06:00 PM
Since pretty much any realignment thread runs amok, we tend to leave just one open at a time. Duly renamed.

-jk

A-Tex Devil
02-20-2013, 04:18 PM
Since pretty much any realignment thread runs amok, we tend to leave just one open at a time. Duly renamed.

-jk

Move to new thread if it makes more sense, but..... Big Ten has reportedly offered UNC (http://aol.sportingnews.com/ncaa-football/story/2013-02-20/big-ten-expansion-north-carolina-virginia-georgia-tech-acc).

I've followed the rumor mill in the last few months since the Maryland move, but nothing ever made a major publication, so in my view, wasn't worth mentioning here. A lot of it was pretty humorous. It's interesting that the Sporting News decided to pick this up now, though, and I think it's because Jeff Ermann was out in front of the MD --> Big Ten thing last fall.

This is one of 3 things:

1. True.
2. Absolute horse-hockey -- and there is a ton of merit to that since the fashion forward approach to realignment is not asking someone to dance until you know they'll say yes.
3. This is a backchannel move by Big Ten to put pressure on schools that might be (relatively) more likely to leave (Ga Tech or Virginia) than UNC.

From a common sense perspective, I still think the first shoe to drop, if any, won't happen until after the MD/ACC suit plays out. MD made some really compelling arguments with respect to the exit fee and the ACC bylaws that are, on their face, a bit damning. But I don't have all of the facts, and that was a MD-leaning pleading, obviously. Will be interested to see how the ACC responds (and they may have already).