GTTerrific
Dodd-Like
- Joined
- Nov 19, 2001
- Messages
- 4,035
Beesnut, that could very well happen. Another thing that's up is ACC tv basketball contracts. That's going to have a big say in what happens.
Taking the ACC to 12 teams
- Thread starter ConyersJacket
- Start date
I don't think expansion will take place until the BCS contract runs out in 2006. However, I think that there will be a large, chain-reaction type of movement to give all of the major conferences 12 teams. This will also involve some movement of teams from the Big 12 and the SEC. (One possible guess: Colorado goes to the Pac 10 & Arkansas goes to the Big 12.) Until we see where the various schools progress, there is no telling what happens.
As for what happens to the ACC, Wake Forest & Duke aren't going anywhere. They will revise the provisions some way to keep them.
When the ACC decides to add three teams, I think there will be some compromise involved in order to satisfy the Tobacco Road schools about academics and another school that Wake Forest & Duke can keep up with in football. My guess for the three schools are Miami, Virginia Tech & Navy.
As for what happens to the ACC, Wake Forest & Duke aren't going anywhere. They will revise the provisions some way to keep them.
When the ACC decides to add three teams, I think there will be some compromise involved in order to satisfy the Tobacco Road schools about academics and another school that Wake Forest & Duke can keep up with in football. My guess for the three schools are Miami, Virginia Tech & Navy.
Well since you asked... if the Tobacco Road schools continue to stall the expansion then I feel that FSU will leave and take Clemson and GT with them. The Big East, SEC or perhaps a brand new conference would be my guesses for where we end up.
The ACC would be foolish to not start working on expansion now rather than waiting until the last moment and getting the leftovers. I do not see Navy staying at the 1-A level especially with the women's sports requirements.
With the TV contracts up and a playoff system looming on the horizon we need a very strong and talented conference. We are headed in that direction to a degree now but we can by no means compete with the SEC or Big 12 from top to bottom. We need to in order to secure our place in the conference pecking order.
I know Duke and Wake are tired of losing football games and do not want to dilute the basketball money any further but should they fail to change their minds then look for the ACC TV contract to get a bit smaller next time around... especially with UNC floundering in basketball.
The ACC would be foolish to not start working on expansion now rather than waiting until the last moment and getting the leftovers. I do not see Navy staying at the 1-A level especially with the women's sports requirements.
With the TV contracts up and a playoff system looming on the horizon we need a very strong and talented conference. We are headed in that direction to a degree now but we can by no means compete with the SEC or Big 12 from top to bottom. We need to in order to secure our place in the conference pecking order.
I know Duke and Wake are tired of losing football games and do not want to dilute the basketball money any further but should they fail to change their minds then look for the ACC TV contract to get a bit smaller next time around... especially with UNC floundering in basketball.
The main problem with expansion (I am pro-expansion, but I can see pitfalls) is the revenue-sharing that we currently have in place is pretty lucrative. It gives us the largest payout per-team of any conference.
IMO, that should be the major concern. Most likely, adding a couple of teams to the trough will dilute our payouts, unless each team can help us bring in an additional 8 million or so.
So, schools like Miami and VT will have to be able to add substantial revenue to this conference or we'll suffer a little financially.
It's likely that we will expand and take a short-term loss (on a per-team payout basis) in order to position ourselves for a long-term gain. Having a school like Miami would really help with any future TV contracts and would position us for better bowl contracts and a chance at another BCS slot.
Should be interesting.
IMO, that should be the major concern. Most likely, adding a couple of teams to the trough will dilute our payouts, unless each team can help us bring in an additional 8 million or so.
So, schools like Miami and VT will have to be able to add substantial revenue to this conference or we'll suffer a little financially.
It's likely that we will expand and take a short-term loss (on a per-team payout basis) in order to position ourselves for a long-term gain. Having a school like Miami would really help with any future TV contracts and would position us for better bowl contracts and a chance at another BCS slot.
Should be interesting.
Schools like Miami, VT, and Syracuse will add to the bottom line. Can you imagine going to ABC and cutting our own TV deal? With these type of schools added to the conference we will have our own negotiating poewr and not have to rely on the NCAA to look after us. Notre Dame and the SEC did this and they are making serious bank. The SEC made more money than any other conference this past year and their split per school was right there with ours.
Again it depends on who we add and if we wait until the leftovers are all that is left we lose!
coldbeer
Jolly Good Fellow
- Joined
- Dec 3, 2001
- Messages
- 1,836
<font size="2" face="Arial, Verdana, Sans-Serif">That's the problem. The way some folks think is that Miami and VT don't add to the bottom line. The ACC network already covers every market in FL and VA. Adding those two schools doesn't add anymore potential TV sets to the networks bidding on ACC sports packages. That's why you always heard folks argue for Syracuse, BC, and Rutgers. more TV sets equals more dollars (at least in theory).
getwrecked
Flats Noob
- Joined
- Nov 19, 2001
- Messages
- 765
On the one hand you make a good point, and on the other I see some holes in the argument.
Can we agree that in college football it's not about big city markets, but rather fan base? Most of the great programs are in smaller towns - and most of the great fan bases are from schools in smaller towns - save Miami. But Miami is an interesting exception because they have a very difficult time getting people to come to their home games, but they have a huge national following. But I digress...
Recent expansion by the SEC and Big 10 seems to validate your theory. The SEC expanded into small markets (Columbia and Fayetteville)...but they were in states that had no SEC presence. Even the Big 10 was willing to go into Happy Valley to get a foot in Pennsylvania.
OTOH, I would venture to say that even if the actual coverage of ACC games did not expand, there would be many more viewers because Miami and VT would draw more viewers in the same area. And when Miami goes on national TV, they make a big splash. Would it be enough to make a difference? I dunno.
Can we agree that in college football it's not about big city markets, but rather fan base? Most of the great programs are in smaller towns - and most of the great fan bases are from schools in smaller towns - save Miami. But Miami is an interesting exception because they have a very difficult time getting people to come to their home games, but they have a huge national following. But I digress...
Recent expansion by the SEC and Big 10 seems to validate your theory. The SEC expanded into small markets (Columbia and Fayetteville)...but they were in states that had no SEC presence. Even the Big 10 was willing to go into Happy Valley to get a foot in Pennsylvania.
OTOH, I would venture to say that even if the actual coverage of ACC games did not expand, there would be many more viewers because Miami and VT would draw more viewers in the same area. And when Miami goes on national TV, they make a big splash. Would it be enough to make a difference? I dunno.
getwrecked
Flats Noob
- Joined
- Nov 19, 2001
- Messages
- 765
BTW, does the ACC TV market actually extend down to Miami? I can't believe that they would have an ACC game on instead of the Canes.
Coldbeer... I understand the TV market is what a lot of olks look at. However with a playoff looming, and yes it is coming, I would rather have two or three teams from the ACC be a part of it than only one or none at all. Adding the type caliber schools of VT, Miami, Syracuse, BC or whatever greatly enhances the perception fo the ACC as a football conference, adds to the value of our baseball and basketball, and helps a ton on the strength of schedule.
TV market is not as important in college ball as some might think. Strength of conference seems to be playing a big part on where teams end up ranked.
TV market is not as important in college ball as some might think. Strength of conference seems to be playing a big part on where teams end up ranked.
ConyersJacket
Varsity Lurker
- Joined
- Jul 11, 2002
- Messages
- 387
On the money side, what about the championship game? And TV revenues from that one game? Or is it insignificant? I don't think it is.
FHstinger
Dodd-Like
- Joined
- Dec 22, 2001
- Messages
- 2,665
<font size="2" face="Arial, Verdana, Sans-Serif">I agree with a Division setup where we could separate Miami and Florida State. I dont care how good we are, I don't want to play BOTH of them EVERY year unless 1 game is the ACC Championship. I balanced mine a little differently though. I want the GT-VA game every year.
1: Miami, GT, Duke, NC State, Virginia, Clemson
2: FSU, NC, WF, WV, VT, Maryland</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Arial, Verdana, Sans-Serif">Remember, storm, there are eight ACC games. That includes the five in your division and three from the other division. Therefore, keeping rivalries intact won't be a big problem. We should not have trouble keeping UVA on the schedule with three to choose from the "north" division.
- Joined
- Dec 31, 1969
- Messages
- 0
<font size="2" face="Arial, Verdana, Sans-Serif">Yes, but wouldn't those 3 out of division games rotate between the 6 north division teams? Otherwise, everyone in the south division would want to play the 2 patsies WF and WV every year instead of FSU or VT. In order to keep the GT-VA rivalry intact, I would think we would have to be in the same division.
FHstinger
Dodd-Like
- Joined
- Dec 22, 2001
- Messages
- 2,665
<font size="2" face="Arial, Verdana, Sans-Serif">Yes, but wouldn't those 3 out of division games rotate between the 6 north division teams? Otherwise, everyone in the south division would want to play the 2 patsies WF and WV every year instead of FSU or VT. In order to keep the GT-VA rivalry intact, I would think we would have to be in the same division.</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Arial, Verdana, Sans-Serif">Of the 3 out of division ACC games, one is permanent and two rotate every two years IIRC. In the SEC, for example, UGAg(east) plays Auburn(west) every year as their permanent out of division SEC game.