Conference Realignment 2022-23

[Eternal Outlaw]

And I would add this -- if the SEC and Big Ten break away and turn dozens of previously high-powered programs into afterthoughts, how excited are fans of those programs going to be about watching the games played by the folks who just ruined their college sports relevance? If you are a die-hard Va Tech or NC State or Miami fan and your team is left on the outside looking in, are you really going to make those big games between those hated Big Ten and SEC clubs appointment viewing? There is an potential unintended consequence here that could really impact the TV rating bottom lines where dozens of fan bases decide to boycott the schools/conferences that ruined what had been a reasonably stable college sports system.

I would add one more thing -- if I wanted to watch the absolutely best basketball competition outside of the NBA, I would not watch college basketball or March Madness, I would watch the G-League (don't kid yourself, even a bad G-League team would wax the floor with Duke or Gonzaga). I watch the NCAA because all these teams are related in some way to a program about which I have a deep connection. If the SEC or Big Ten were to break away, I'm fairly sure I would not watch much, if any, of their basketball. I might watch a little bit of the football because I am a bit of a UGA fan due to a lifetime of geographic proximity. I am sure I am not alone in feeling this way.

You know who could be the big loser in all this? ESPN, CBS, ABC, and so on when they sign a 10-year contract at $1 bil per year (or something like that) to broadcast what they expect to be huge ratings-grabbing games that turn out to be merely "ok" when it comes to garnering TV ratings because many college sports fans don't care about those games at all.

G League has better players but they are all playing to make the NBA while college players are trying to win Championships with a small percentage of them with true NBA dreams. I think that's why no matter how much better G league teams are than college, college will still be considered the better watch. I've tried watching some Duke guys in the G League and it is brutal viewing. Given a free ticket to a random G League game or random conference like Big Sky game, I'd check out the college game easy.

[Steven43]

Listened to the Giglio show on radio in Triangle driving home. He had a national commentator voicing this very Duke topic. He contends the Duke b-ball success may not continue under Scheyer and B1G may not take a risk with Duke and the new b-ball coach.

Many apologies if this has already been asked (and answered), but what in the heck is the Giglio Show??

[Mountain Devil]

Go back and read all 8 steps in his plan. Steps #7 and #8 take care of that nicely.

I'd like to amend #8 to read "The worst 2 champions would play in the Relegation Bowl with the loser getting demoted". That would be a lot of fun and people might actually watch that bowl. Plus, UNC and NCSU playing every couple of years to shame one another would be a laugh.

[arnie]

Many apologies if this has already been asked (and answered), but what in the heck is the Giglio Show??

Joe Giglio on 99.9 in Triangle. He’s a huge State homer and I only listened to hear State perspective on realignment. Didn’t listen long enough for that and the show is basically worthless.

[Nugget]

I count some ND alums among my best friends

The ACC offers a better fit academically and philosophically, and the chance to be one of top 2 football programs in the conference year in and year out. They might have an outside shot at that in the Big Ten but not in the SEC. And winning matters a great deal to ND.

Believe it or not, beyond the financial upside, the Big 10 really does not excite most ND fans, even with the addition of Southern Cal. And there is still a segment of the fanbase (and the administration) that will never get over ND being rejected by the Big 10 in the earlier part of the 20th century, allegedly due to anti-Catholic bigotry.

Notre Dame in the SEC would be the ultimate in strange bedfellows. Doesn't mean it couldn't happen. But it would be all about money and leave many hardcore Irish fans (and high donor alums) holding their noses in perpetuity.

The scope of realignment moving forward really does all seem to hinge at this point on:

(1) what Notre Dame wants to do (stay Independent in football with the semi ACC schedule vs. join Big 10; can't ever see Notre Dame in the SEC for the reasons you note); and

(2) what the SEC's goal is -- to blow up the current college sports system entirely, or just preserve/lock in it's current advantaged position as First Among Equals and get expansion of the college football playoff agreed to on terms favorable to the SEC (e.g., an increase to 12 teams in a way that would enable the SEC to get 4-5 of those spots every year.

Saw a couple of articles (don't recall exactly where now or have links) that hit on what seemed to me to be critical points. First, that the SEC's expansion to add Texas and Oklahoma had been keyed off its negotiation of a provision in its tv contract with ESPN to automatically increase the per-team payout on a pro-rata basis if the SEC expanded to add a "Tier 1" (or maybe "Tier A") school, with that tier being tied to any school equal to or better than Oklahoma. Obviously, Oklahoma and Texas met that standard, so the expansion to add them was smooth. But, it's not clear that anyone other than Notre Dame and USC would meet that standard. For anyone else, the SEC would need to consider whether the value of adding school X is accretive, on an individual per school basis to the value of the tv contract. Does Clemson add enough value to the SEC that splitting the pie 17 ways makes the current members as much or more than splitting it 16 ways? Maybe, though I kind of doubt it. Does adding UNC? Again, maybe, but I doubt it. For sure, Florida St. and Miami don't.

Now, I suppose the SEC could, even if they don't bring additional value, still expand and take those four (or, maybe dump Miami and take Virginia), or maybe just take Clemson and UNC -- since the SEC already dominates recruiting in Florida and I think sufficiently dominates the tv markets there that it probably doesn't need to add Florida St. and Miami, and those programs would further wither if Clemson and UNC left the ACC -- simply to drive a stake in the ACC. But, that seems somewhat far-fetched.

Second, one of the articles noted that since Notre Dame is the only team left really worth expanding for, the SEC is probably not inclined to take positions -- like destroying the ACC by taking the steps noted above -- that would, essentially, force Notre Dame to join the Big 10.

So, it really goes back to what does Notre Dame want. Stay where it is now and pressure the ACC to agree to the SEC's proposal to increase the size of the playoffs, with the understanding that the 12 teams will likely end up every year being something like 4 SEC, 3 Big 10, Notre Dame, 1 ACC, 1 Big 12, 1 Pac 10, 1 Group of 5, and stabilize things roughly where they are now -- with the SEC and Big 10 dominant, the others teetering and Notre Dame still independent but with a clear shot to the playoffs each year?

Or, bite the bullet on giving up independence, and the resentment of being excluded from the Big 10, and agree to join the Big 10 conditioned on getting a partner of its choosing (Stanford? UNC?), plus other scheduling concessions (like retaining USC as a permanent rival), and maybe holding out for a more favorable revenue split for giving up its unique NBC contract.

[JosephReidBooks]

Could be left coast wishcasting, but there's a lot of buzz on Twitter tonight about a possible link-up between the ACC and remaining Pac-12/10 to make a bicoastal league that would offset the SEC/Big 10. The two conferences could continue to operate relatively independently as "divisions" and then just meet up at the end.

I gotta admit, it's an interesting countermove that causes almost no disruption, but curious what others think.

[sagegrouse]

IMHO (where the H disappeared years ago), the ACC schools are not in play, but everyone else is. 2036 is a long ways away, and the ACC has locked its members up until then.

So anyone speculating about Clemson, UNC or UVa should deal with the 2036 reality first. Fair enough?

[Acymetric]

Could be left coast wishcasting, but there's a lot of buzz on Twitter tonight about a possible link-up between the ACC and remaining Pac-12/10 to make a bicoastal league that would offset the SEC/Big 10. The two conferences could continue to operate relatively independently as "divisions" and then just meet up at the end.

I gotta admit, it's an interesting countermove that causes almost no disruption, but curious what others think.

Relative to the other options, I love it. Honestly I might have liked this idea even before all the latest realignment hoopla.

[-jk]

IMHO (where the H disappeared years ago), the ACC schools are not in play, but everyone else is. 2036 is a long ways away, and the ACC has locked its members up until then.

So anyone speculating about Clemson, UNC or UVa should deal with the 2036 reality first. Fair enough?

Unless the ACC moves as a whole, I guess.

-jk

[Acymetric]

Could be left coast wishcasting, but there's a lot of buzz on Twitter tonight about a possible link-up between the ACC and remaining Pac-12/10 to make a bicoastal league that would offset the SEC/Big 10. The two conferences could continue to operate relatively independently as "divisions" and then just meet up at the end.

I gotta admit, it's an interesting countermove that causes almost no disruption, but curious what others think.

Relative to the other options, I love it. Honestly I might have liked this idea even before all the latest realignment hoopla.

Here is an article discussing the rumor:

https://trojanswire.usatoday.com/202...o-the-big-ten/

I really do like the idea, except that the article mentions holding the championship game in Vegas which would be a fantastic business move but I would hate personally. Also seems like the Pac-12 would need to expand beyond 10 teams where the article seems to assume they stay at 10.

[Thurber Whyte]

I like it. I always thought that, given the three hour time zone difference, we should have partnered with them for a single TV network and had live football and basketball games running all day. Our games would be their early show and their games would be our late night programing. Our westernmost member is Louisville. To help even out the numbers, they would have to play in the PAC 10(11?). Our new name for the BIG 10/SEC duopoly: the Flyover Alliance. The two conferences should indeed meet up at the end: in the Rose Bowl! Indeed, the Rose Bowl should split its time between Pasadena and its other traditional home: Wallace Wade.

[JosephReidBooks]

Also seems like the Pac-12 would need to expand beyond 10 teams where the article seems to assume they stay at 10.

I’m guessing that if the alternative was being left out, the current PAC-10 could find an SDSU here and a BYU there to come closer to our numbers.

The more I think about this the more I love the simplicity of it and how it basically let’s us keep what we already have.

[tommy]

I’m guessing that if the alternative was being left out, the current PAC-10 could find an SDSU here and a BYU there to come closer to our numbers.

The more I think about this the more I love the simplicity of it and how it basically let’s us keep what we already have.

And as an added bonus, we'd get to travel 2700 miles to play football in the freezing rain in Pullman, Washington! Not great for the carbon footprint, but builds character, I'm sure.

[tommy]

The more of this I read, the sicker I become of everybody kowtowing to Notre Dame, waiting on Notre Dame, hoping for Notre Dame, etc. Frankly, I think they're way overrated, on the football field and off. I don't know what the ratings are like on NBC as they play Navy and Purdue and Stanford and all the Who cares? ACC teams, but if my decidedly unscientific polling -- meaning, knowing all my sports-minded friends' viewing habits -- Notre Dame football is not appointment television for anybody. I mean, sure, there are some out there clinging to past glory, but really. Are there really any more die-hard, must-watch adherents of Notre Dame football than there are of Michigan, Ohio State, Penn State, Oklahoma, Clemson, and a lot of the SEC teams, and a lot I haven't even named? They have been extremely fortunate to have this NBC contract, and this easy road to the playoff (which more often than not they're not even good enough to take advantage of) but to continue to treat them as so special in whatever world we're headed to next seems crazy to me. They haven't earned it.

Not that I want any of these changes to be happening, but if they're going to happen, it would be great to me if the Big 10 stopped here or maybe while Notre Dame dithered and hemmed and hawed and played hard-to-get, the new conference added either Oregon/Washington or Duke/UNC, or if they wanted to go to 20 also add Cal and Stanford, get their giant new TV contract, and leave ND out in the cold, preserving their dear, dear independence as they slip into utter irrelevance. Good luck in the big Air Force game.

[Acymetric]

And as an added bonus, we'd get to travel 2700 miles to play football in the freezing rain in Pullman, Washington! Not great for the carbon footprint, but builds character, I'm sure.

There wouldn't be any change to the conference schedule, that would stay separate under this proposal/rumor. They do mention the potential for 2 cross-conference matchups for the non-conference schedule, but assuming one home and one road that would just be one big road trip per year. We might schedule that on our own some years anyway, and it isn't hard to imagine some benefits to playing one left coast game per year. I wouldn't want that to become a regular thing in conference play but that kind of thing is what the non-conference schedule is for.

I’m guessing that if the alternative was being left out, the current PAC-10 could find an SDSU here and a BYU there to come closer to our numbers.

The more I think about this the more I love the simplicity of it and how it basically let’s us keep what we already have.

I've been pretty surprised by the overwhelmingly negative reaction to this (from what I've seen elsewhere) to be honest.

The more of this I read, the sicker I become of everybody kowtowing to Notre Dame, waiting on Notre Dame, hoping for Notre Dame, etc. Frankly, I think they're way overrated, on the football field and off. I don't know what the ratings are like on NBC as they play Navy and Purdue and Stanford and all the Who cares? ACC teams, but if my decidedly unscientific polling -- meaning, knowing all my sports-minded friends' viewing habits -- Notre Dame football is not appointment television for anybody. I mean, sure, there are some out there clinging to past glory, but really. Are there really any more die-hard, must-watch adherents of Notre Dame football than there are of Michigan, Ohio State, Penn State, Oklahoma, Clemson, and a lot of the SEC teams, and a lot I haven't even named? They have been extremely fortunate to have this NBC contract, and this easy road to the playoff (which more often than not they're not even good enough to take advantage of) but to continue to treat them as so special in whatever world we're headed to next seems crazy to me. They haven't earned it.

Not that I want any of these changes to be happening, but if they're going to happen, it would be great to me if the Big 10 stopped here or maybe while Notre Dame dithered and hemmed and hawed and played hard-to-get, the new conference added either Oregon/Washington or Duke/UNC, or if they wanted to go to 20 also add Cal and Stanford, get their giant new TV contract, and leave ND out in the cold, preserving their dear, dear independence as they slip into utter irrelevance. Good luck in the big Air Force game.

I completely share your disdain for Notre Dame (I was not happy they made the ACC title game in the COVID year, either). Unfortunately even though I agree with you they will maintain their outsized influence.

[uh_no]

The more of this I read, the sicker I become of everybody kowtowing to Notre Dame, waiting on Notre Dame, hoping for Notre Dame, etc. Frankly, I think they're way overrated, on the football field and off. I don't know what the ratings are like on NBC as they play Navy and Purdue and Stanford and all the Who cares?

the networks paying the bills, unfortunately.

ACC teams, but if my decidedly unscientific polling -- meaning, knowing all my sports-minded friends' viewing habits -- Notre Dame football is not appointment television for anybody.

I suspect the networks and leagues have somewhat more accurate numbers than your anecdote.

[1Devil]

Here is an article discussing the rumor:

https://trojanswire.usatoday.com/202...o-the-big-ten/

I really do like the idea, except that the article mentions holding the championship game in Vegas which would be a fantastic business move but I would hate personally. Also seems like the Pac-12 would need to expand beyond 10 teams where the article seems to assume they stay at 10.

I don’t like any sort of loose affiliation. However, adding Cal, Stanford, Washington and Oregon to the ACC would be a coup, regardless of how unwieldy it would be.

[CrazyNotCrazie]

It feels to me that everyone is making "partnerships" and "deals" to justify their existence because everyone else is doing it. What would an ACC partnership with the corpse of the Pac-10 accomplish that is incrementally better than the ACC staying on its own? Strength in numbers?

Hopefully the ACC is being thoughtful about this and thinking rather than just reacting.

Regarding Notre Dame, I'm starting to think it has become more of a self-fulfilling prophecy. If you gave another fairly major team a dedicated contract and games on national network television at optimal time slots, I think they would likely attract just as many eyeballs. I think the days of Notre Dame being the default team of choice for a certain segment of the population are over. Yes, they are a major power and a major draw, but they are not the be all and end all. A good friend is a very loyal ND alum (flies from ND to at least one game a year) and a former boss' family were very major donors so I've gotten a peak under the hood and it is a non-trivial entity, but it is not worth all of the deference it gets.

[Acymetric]

It feels to me that everyone is making "partnerships" and "deals" to justify their existence because everyone else is doing it. What would an ACC partnership with the corpse of the Pac-10 accomplish that is incrementally better than the ACC staying on its own? Strength in numbers?

The ACC desperately needs a pretext to renegotiate it's contract with ESPN. The thinking is that adding the new "championship game" between the conferences might accomplish that.

Regarding Notre Dame, I'm starting to think it has become more of a self-fulfilling prophecy.

I think you hit the nail on the head. I kind of feel like it applies to expansion/realignment generally.

[JasonEvans]

It feels to me that everyone is making "partnerships" and "deals" to justify their existence because everyone else is doing it. What would an ACC partnership with the corpse of the Pac-10 accomplish that is incrementally better than the ACC staying on its own? Strength in numbers?

Yeah, I don't see how this moves the needle at all from a monetary standpoint, which is all that matters. How does adding the Pac-12 teams enhance the payout for teams?

Because unless this move (or any move) gets the ACC teams closer to SEC and Big Ten revenues, it changes nothing. The moment the SEC or Big Ten comes calling for Clemson, Virginia, UNC, Arizona, Oregon, or whoever, that team is bolting for a piece of the much bigger pie the SEC/Big have to offer.

-Jason "this seems like a bad move for the ACC as we are already in a better situation than the Pac-12 is... why form a partnership with someone even more troubled than we are?" Evans