Here we go again. Conference expansion

BrentwoodJacket said:
OK. I did too. Still an easy path for ND.
Click to expand...
Which is good for the conference at least initially. VT and WV aren’t going to stay down forever and that division has a lot of appeal in terms of rivalry matchups. It’s actually better than the south in terms of rivalry because we get stuck with wake, Duke and Louisville.
 
GT flunkout said:
Yeah, if it was solely about building interest in Regional rivalries it's hard to imagine anything besting WVU. Couches burning in Charlottesville to the absolute horror of the wine and cheese crowd. Carnal sibling relations in Blacksburg. Battle for the Golden Meth Pipe in the Backyard Brawl with Pitt.

Edit - almost forgot the Hatfield and McCoy connection that would have to be made for WVU and Louisville.

I'm all in favor of WVU being Notre Dame's +1, but not by themselves.
Click to expand...
This… let this be written on the ACCs tombstone in 2040.
 
savbandjacket said:
Which is good for the conference at least initially. VT and WV aren’t going to stay down forever and that division has a lot of appeal in terms of rivalry matchups. It’s actually better than the south in terms of rivalry because we get stuck with wake, Duke and Louisville.
Click to expand...
I thought Louisville was in the North.
 
BrentwoodJacket said:
You are still one team short in the North. ND should be thrilled since they will be in the conference championship game every year.
Click to expand...
Could try putting Louisville back in the conference and add them to the north. Or have we booted them already?
 
AmpuTECHture said:
I was listening to the Athletic's Big 12 podcast today and they said that there is apparently some agreement between TCU, Baylor, and TTU to stay together. Agreements don't seem to mean much today, so take it as you will, but I also get the sense TCU wouldn't work out so well.

If we could add ND, WVU, PSU, and some other school, we could end up with North and South 9 team divisions, each with 8 game round robin with clear division winners and a championship game with the division winners. Non divisional games would be OCC games.
Click to expand...

That Texas group together is the only thing that provides value. No one is looking to add one of those schools individually. Alone, they don't move the needle. But collectively they provide some market saturation. Adding TCU alone doesn't do much. Sure they are in a big media market, but they are about the 10th biggest sports team in that market. Add Baylor and TT and suddenly you get more penetration (giggity). Also, keeping them together keeps some traditional rivalries together that keeps those teams more relevant. Simply adding TCU and having them play Colorado, Utah, UCLA, etc. each year doesn't help in those markets. I don't know if that is enough to make them viable for another conference, but it gives them a better shot by sticking together.
 
Fun fact, the road trip from TCU to Georgia Tech is roughly the same as the road trip from TCU to UofColorado. Now you kind of see the dilemma TCU is in. The closest PAC12 or ACC school is a 12 hour drive.
 
The ACC needs to move forward and compete or they will lose Clemson and/or FSU.

ND needs to be in or cast away and replaced. Make them an offer with 2x TV revenue share and if they say no start process to remove them. WV is by far more logical addition and is misfit in the B12 already. They should be offered.

If ND doesn't join I would make strong push for OK State.
 
ramblinwise1 said:
The ACC needs to move forward and compete or they will lose Clemson and/or FSU.

ND needs to be in or cast away and replaced. Make them an offer with 2x TV revenue share and if they say no start process to remove them. WV is by far more logical addition and is misfit in the B12 already. They should be offered.

If ND doesn't join I would make strong push for OK State.
Click to expand...
I want ND, WVU and Ok State.
 
130 or so schools are eligible to compete each year towards the CFP. Clearly the vast majority of them have no chance whatsoever of getting there as they are missing either the dedication by the Alumni, school, or are in a geographically uncompetitive location. Use your own excuse. So how many schools truly have the needed resources to compete at the highest level? Aren't the rest, at best, just wannabees, or still just reminisce off the past when they may have been relevant?

Do high schools that win the State Championship in Class AA feel less successful than schools that win it in AAAAAA? What is wrong with accepting that different divisions in the sport might make some sense? Let the Top 30 or so create the Mega League and let the rest come up with something else. The end game of where this realignment is all headed remains a big secret for some reason with only Mickey Mouse and few others driving the ship. If they are in the process of creating a new Mega league, do we have the slightest chance of being included? If not, what would be the best option looking long-term for the health and happiness of our level commitment and resources? Have you looked at the amount of still unsold seats for that game coming up against the Mutts? Prime seats that I'm sure they're lapping up. At least we'll be getting their money.

The biggest problem I see for some schools with this is a dramatic change in their revenue forecast. Schools that have leveraged their balance sheets in order to try to keep up with the big boys may be in for some serious reckoning.
 
Last edited:
We don't want to admit that we don't belong in the "highest classification". If its 30 teams then we probably don't. I still like the concept of the 64 team super-division which is 4 16 team conferences. Logically those would be the SEC, ACC, B1G and "something out West". The SOW conference would be good to the PAC12 + some of the B12. If SEC takes 2 and ACC takes 2 there are only 6 left. The PAC12 only needs 4 more to get to 16. The BIG only has 14 and needs to pick up 2 more: ND+Iowa ST would be good for them (I don't think the ACC will get ND). If ND does go ACC then BIG needs another of the leftovers in G12, probably KS. Or Cincinnati.

So 60-70 teams need to drop down to "FBS-B" and reform their own conferences.

Now you won't want to hear this but if GT wants to be in the top tier we need to add all the other "standard" sports or we may get left behind.
 
Last edited:
ramblinwise1 said:
We don't want to admit that we don't belong in the "highest classification". If its 30 teams then we probably don't. I still like the concept of the 64 team super-division which is 4 16 team conferences. Logically those would be the SEC, ACC, B1G and "something out West". The SOW conference would be good to the PAC12 + some of the B12. If SEC takes 2 and ACC takes 2 there are only 6 left. The PAC12 only needs 4 more to get to 16. The BIG only has 14 and needs to pick up 2 more: ND+Iowa ST would be good for them (I don't think the ACC will get ND). If ND does go ACC then BIG needs another of the leftovers in G12, probably KS. Or Cincinnati.

So 60-70 teams need to drop down to "FBS-B" and reform their own conferences.

Now you won't want to hear this but if GT wants to be in the top tier we need to add all the other "standard" sports or we may get left behind.
Click to expand...

While four 16-team conferences sorting it all out every year sounds nice, I'm afraid at this point it is idealistic. It's pretty clear that the top schools are in the process of bunching up in only one or two conferences. I suppose if you threw all the remnants on the table and and picked out the few competitive schools from the Big 12 and Pac 12, ignoring the politics and characteristics, you could probably come up with a decent group, though still one that pales in comparison to what has been created in the SEC. You could do the same thing with the ACC and Big 10, but the hurdles to accomplish this would be enormous, not to mention an acquiescence from ND. One or two power conferences and a couple of weaker ones competing as equals is going to be a tough sell.
I'm just afraid the ultimate direction this is headed is away from the simple 4 conference structure.
 
manjano mdudu said:
While four 16-team conferences sorting it all out every year sounds nice, I'm afraid at this point it is idealistic. It's pretty clear that the top schools are in the process of bunching up in only one or two conferences. I suppose if you threw all the remnants on the table and and picked out the few competitive schools from the Big 12 and Pac 12, ignoring the politics and characteristics, you could probably come up with a decent group, though still one that pales in comparison to what has been created in the SEC. You could do the same thing with the ACC and Big 10, but the hurdles to accomplish this would be enormous, not to mention an acquiescence from ND. One or two power conferences and a couple of weaker ones competing as equals is going to be a tough sell.
I'm just afraid the ultimate direction this is headed is away from the simple 4 conference structure.
Click to expand...
This isn’t true until the SEC sheds both Mississippi schools, Vandy, and Missouri.
 
Notre Dame is going to do what Notre Dame wants to do in terms of independent/conference - the ACC has done a good job of tieng them to the ACC should independence not look good for them. So we should quit gnashing teeth over this and give Swofford some credit for starting the ball with bringing them into the conference. We have leverage over all other conferences with regards to Notre Dame. As far as what action to do otherwise - go get Oklahoma St and West Virginia, Those two would add depth to the conference football wise and are not bad basketball schools. They are a net positive and they should be interested in coming.

The issue is if West Virginia wants to and Oklahoma State doesn't. It should be a package deal or no deal. Also Oklahoma St will be somewhat a fish out of water but hey so was Missouri and A&M in the SEC.

The other option is just start a super conference by bringing in all 8 of the remaining Big 12. A 22 team conference would be strange but its possible to make it work. Play 3-4 teams every year and other 18 in rotation or something like that. Scheduling can be figured out.

The super conference is probably the best idea. It gives protection in that you have so many teams the SEC and Big Integer have to include you in discussions. It also gives you a higher probability of having a top team. Who knows who will go on a run with a good coach and be a top 8 team. Could be Baylor, West Virginia, Pitt, GT, UNC - you just don't know. Wasn't that long ago that UNC's football team was a dumpster. That's why the super conference is probably the best idea. I think the Big 12 would agree to it.

Doing nothing is dangerous and could be a death knoll if some of your teams get picked off or the conference just doesn't have a good team - i. e. the PAC right now.
 
Last edited:
05GTCorndog said:
That Texas group together is the only thing that provides value. No one is looking to add one of those schools individually. Alone, they don't move the needle. But collectively they provide some market saturation. Adding TCU alone doesn't do much. Sure they are in a big media market, but they are about the 10th biggest sports team in that market. Add Baylor and TT and suddenly you get more penetration (giggity). Also, keeping them together keeps some traditional rivalries together that keeps those teams more relevant. Simply adding TCU and having them play Colorado, Utah, UCLA, etc. each year doesn't help in those markets. I don't know if that is enough to make them viable for another conference, but it gives them a better shot by sticking together.
Click to expand...

I think it would help the ACC if we added TCU, Baylor, Texas Tech and Oklahoma State. I think that collectively those teams would give us a significant presence in Texas and Oklahoma. I think that those teams are better football schools than a lot of teams in the ACC now. I think this would be a good answer to what the SEC did. I also think that we should tell ND we're getting ready to do this and that they're welcome to join as full members, but that we don't have room for partial members anymore. Just a thought.
 
The SEC wants to take over college sports and control the TV markets. The ACC has a crappy TV deal. In short the ACC needs to go away. ESPN has the TV deal with both the ACC and the SEC. Why not let the SEC take over the ACC? You end up with 30 teams. Add ND and WV or Okla St to get to 32. You make the SEC dominate in all sports both men’s and women’s.

Agree to a ten game conference schedule in football to give ESPN more content. Have 3 common opponents each year and rotate the other 28 teams 7 per year so that you play all 31 teams every 4 years. Top two teams at the end of the year play for the league championship.

It brings all of the ACC-SEC rivalries back together in one league. It puts Kentucky in a basketball league with UNC and Duke.
 
mookie43 said:
The SEC wants to take over college sports and control the TV markets. The ACC has a crappy TV deal. In short the ACC needs to go away. ESPN has the TV deal with both the ACC and the SEC. Why not let the SEC take over the ACC? You end up with 30 teams. Add ND and WV or Okla St to get to 32. You make the SEC dominate in all sports both men’s and women’s.

Agree to a ten game conference schedule in football to give ESPN more content. Have 3 common opponents each year and rotate the other 28 teams 7 per year so that you play all 31 teams every 4 years. Top two teams at the end of the year play for the league championship.

It brings all of the ACC-SEC rivalries back together in one league. It puts Kentucky in a basketball league with UNC and Duke.
Click to expand...

Why would they dilute the SEC and the matchups that they currently have?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top