ACC-B1G-PAC Allliance "Expected Soon"

[hallcity]

There are reports this morning that an alliance between the ACC, B1G and PAC is "expected soon." It will involve scheduling and "other factors."

I don't understand this. Yes, the SEC is a threat but we know quite well that the B1G is no friend of the ACC and the PAC is a long, long way from here. If it wants to create the most valuable content to show on TV, the ACC should be scheduling with the SEC. I fear this is happening because the ACC wants to schedule more games against P5 teams but the ACC coaches and ADs are scared of losing to SEC teams.

[-jk]

There are reports this morning that an alliance between the ACC, B1G and PAC is "expected soon." It will involve scheduling and "other factors."

I don't understand this. Yes, the SEC is a threat but we know quite well that the B1G is no friend of the ACC and the PAC is a long, long way from here. If it wants to create the most valuable content to show on TV, the ACC should be scheduling with the SEC. I fear this is happening because the ACC wants to schedule more games against P5 teams but the ACC coaches and ADs are scared of losing to SEC teams.

When this got tossed out a couple weeks ago, I figured the SEC didn't really need or want an alliance with anyone else.

-jk

[budwom]

I think it's a really good move. For one thing, I suspect they might agree to not poach each other's teams...certainly preferable to all the sky is falling scenarios of a month ago when we were going to be relegate to a conference with Charleston Southern.

[75Crazie]

When this got tossed out a couple weeks ago, I figured the SEC didn't really need or want an alliance with anyone else.

-jk

I think they're more into acquisition (read "conquest") than mergers.

[Kdogg]

I think it's a really good move. For one thing, I suspect they might agree to not poach each other's teams.

Ding, Ding, Ding.

For better or worse, it makes the SEC the only raider in the country.

[tommy]

I think it's a really good move. For one thing, I suspect they might agree to not poach each other's teams...certainly preferable to all the sky is falling scenarios of a month ago when we were going to be relegate to a conference with Charleston Southern.

That won't be worth the paper it's not written on . . .

[budwom]

Ding, Ding, Ding.

For better or worse, it makes the SEC the only raider in the country.

The SEC probably has all the plums they need. They've got the biggest contract with TV and few other teams could help them. Those that conceivably could wouldn't be interested, e.g. Notre Dame, tOSU, etc.

[uh_no]

The SEC probably has all the plums they need. They've got the biggest contract with TV and few other teams could help them. Those that conceivably could wouldn't be interested, e.g. Notre Dame, tOSU, etc.

clemson...

[hallcity]

The SEC probably has all the plums they need. They've got the biggest contract with TV and few other teams could help them. Those that conceivably could wouldn't be interested, e.g. Notre Dame, tOSU, etc.

I think you're right. It's unlikely the SEC expands further for the reasons you suggest plus the fact that there is a point beyond which a conference becomes unwieldy and the SEC is probably at that point.

As I think about it, these three conferences may be of a very different mind than the SEC about NIL. I suspect that SEC members are eager to use NIL as a thinly disguised means of schools and their boosters paying players. They're not worried about becoming minor league pro sports as long as they excel at football. The members of the other three conferences may want to avoid that as much as possible. They've got academic reputations to worry about and they fear that their alums won't be happy with college sports becoming minor league pro sports. I can imagine a dividing line developing that could permanently split college sports.

[uh_no]

I think you're right. It's unlikely the SEC expands further for the reasons you suggest plus the fact that there is a point beyond which a conference becomes unwieldy and the SEC is probably at that point.

As I think about it, these three conferences may be of a very different mind than the SEC about NIL. I suspect that SEC members are eager to use NIL as a thinly disguised means of schools and their boosters paying players. They're not worried about becoming minor league pro sports as long as they excel at football. The members of the other three conferences may want to avoid that as much as possible. They've got academic reputations to worry about and they fear that their alums won't be happy with college sports becoming minor league pro sports. I can imagine a dividing line developing that could permanently split college sports.

Methinks you are selling the B10 boosters short here...

[brevity]

Not sure about the details here, but a general alliance with the Big Ten and Pac-12 sounds like a good idea for the ACC. There's going to be a post-NCAA world, and whatever form it takes, we don't want the SEC to create it.

[MarkD83]

In many of these threads about the Big12 imploding, NIL, the incompetence of the NCAA we discuss short term effects or the effects on specific teams. What is missing is what would be the "ideal" outcome of all of the changes.

We are not going back to an 8 team ACC and amateurism as it existed decades ago. We are also realize that football is driving most of the moves. NIL is a general trend on compensation for all athletes. So what would be the "ideal" college landscape in the future. Let me throw out a general scheme for comment and restrict my comments to the revenue sports.

College basketball overall is in good shape as long as you are not worried about the chances of any specific team. Their is March Madness where all 300+ teams can try to fulfill a dream of playing in the tournament. No matter how man losses there are in the regular season teams do have their conference tournaments as a way to make the NCAA tournament. This also means that conference regular seasons do make a difference because they set the seeding for the tournament. Now conference realignment may be driven by football and NIL may redistribute basketball talent but the NCAA tournament will still draw fans and dollars.

For college football let's start by looking at the Football Championship Subdivision. There are ~130 schools that play in various conferences and, in general conference champions make it to a 24 team playoff that is very popular for fans of FCS schools. Nothing wrong with the FCS except that they may want to play more games against FBS schools, but these non-conference games are not necessary to have a good structure for the FCS. NIL may change the distribution of talent but the FCS will still have a competitive regular season and playoffs.

For the Football Bowl Subdivision there are also ~130 schools and the playoffs are in flux (2 grew to 4 and is growing to 12). So why not end up with a 16 to 24 team playoff system like the FCS. The biggest issue is how do you deal with that many extra games and how do you handle the 41 bowl games. Take the 10 conferences that exist today an create 8 conferences. You can have 4 super conferences (made up of Power 5 teams and a few additional top no Power 5 teams). Each super conference would have two divisions with 8 teams each. For a 12 team playoff take the winner of the 8 super conference divisions. They could still have conference championships for seeding in the tournament. The other 4 conferences would have the other ~64 teams and only the conference winner would make the playoffs. So the entire FBS season would be just like conference basketball tournaments with the sole purpose of making the playoffs.

What about the bowl games. The 12 team playoff needs 11 games, so the current New Years bowl games could be quarters and semi-finals and then a separate championship. Take 4 other bowl games and make them the paly-in games to the quarter. All other bowl games would be like the NIT for basketball. There is nothing new about this since teams with only 0.500 records can make bowl games.

[budwom]

That won't be worth the paper it's not written on . . .

well, it probably won't be written. The PAC 12 is happy with whom they have, so is the Big 10...the notion that conferences (other than the Big 12) need to be blown up to fend off the SEC isn't logical.

[tommy]

So what does it seem like this proposed "alliance" will actually provide? What benefits? I saw that scheduling was mentioned, but right now what is stopping any of the schools from scheduling each other even in the absence of some sort of formal "alliance?"

[uh_no]

So what does it seem like this proposed "alliance" will actually provide? What benefits? I saw that scheduling was mentioned, but right now what is stopping any of the schools from scheduling each other even in the absence of some sort of formal "alliance?"

I imagine like ACC/B10 challenge for football. just more organization of scheduling so they can milk money out of the OOC scheduling.

Or cynically, to create a super league with divisions that are paid commensurate with their ratings/viewership.

Or super cynically, allows the big 10 to keep an eye on oregon and clemson in case they need to expand to keep on par with the SEC.

But any fuzzy notion of "support and collaboration" is worth about as much as the peace medal sent by japan in the early 40s.

[budwom]

So what does it seem like this proposed "alliance" will actually provide? What benefits? I saw that scheduling was mentioned, but right now what is stopping any of the schools from scheduling each other even in the absence of some sort of formal "alliance?"

I guess we'll have to wait and see, but I would imagine an agreement not to poach would be likely. Not everyone want to behave like the SEC...with the BIgt 12 being toast, the remaining three large leagues still have a lot of academic integrity.

[Phredd3]

I guess we'll have to wait and see, but I would imagine an agreement not to poach would be likely. Not everyone want to behave like the SEC...with the BIgt 12 being toast, the remaining three large leagues still have a lot of academic integrity.

With NIL in place and given the recent SCOTUS ruling, would an anti-poaching agreement be a monopolistic restraint on trade? An agreement like that among conferences might become problematic.

[Dedgummit]

I guess we'll have to wait and see, but I would imagine an agreement not to poach would be likely. Not everyone want to behave like the SEC...with the BIgt 12 being toast, the remaining three large leagues still have a lot of academic integrity.

I'm not sure how you're figuring-- the ACC is one of the worst offenders in this area-- having "poached" Florida State, Boston College, Virginia Tech, Miami. Syracuse, Pittsburgh, and Louisville-- half the league; and the "academic integrity" of a league featuring Clemson, Miami, Louisville, and North Carolina will always be subject to reproach.

[Dedgummit]

This whole (alleged) effort by the ACC, Big Ten, and Pac-12 feels like a "re-arranging deck chairs on the Titanic" effort to me-- it's not going to matter. NIL is an ill wind sweeping through the old legacy forests of college sports-- and it is going clear out a lot of dead wood--these conferences would appear to be among the detritus.

[camion]

I'm not sure how you're figuring-- the ACC is one of the worst offenders in this area-- having "poached" Florida State, Boston College, Virginia Tech, Miami. Syracuse, Pittsburgh, and Louisville-- half the league; and the "academic integrity" of a league featuring Clemson, Miami, Louisville, and North Carolina will always be subject to reproach.

Hey, what do you have against Clemson?

They're the N.C. State of South Carolina. Except they're good at football.

So, I guess that's it.


Note: I'm an NC native who currently lives about half an hour from Clemson. They're super annoying until I mention basketball.