(03-17-2013 01:36 AM)JRsec Wrote:  

(03-17-2013 01:12 AM)Zombiewoof Wrote:  The way I am reading his statements is that he is saying that on the one hand the ACC is strong and there is every reason to believe the conference can remain so, especially given the numbers of eyeballs in the conference footprint. On the other hand, I think he is suggesting that if the ACC starts to lose additional members then Duke will do whatever is necessary to preserve its position as one of the haves, including joining the exodus. If it becomes apparent to him that North Carolina and Virginia plan to join another conference, he will hitch his wagon to UNC and go along for the ride.

I think Gamecock pegged it about right. Lip service to football and cash to basketball. If the ACC is raided then U.N.C. will be protecting N.C. State at the behest of the State's insistence. They have to support both public universities. Maybe Duke is sending signals to other conferences that they will be willing to step up football spending and will not totally be pigskin dead weight.

I think the more enlightening news of the Day was the financial aid package for Maryland. It seems to indicate that the Big 10 expects the 52 million dollar exit fee will hold. If so more defections from the ACC will be unlikely. N.D.'s joining early seems to indicate the same. We'll see.

Once again, no it doesn't signal that the Big Ten expects the whole 52 million dollar exit fee to hold up. All the Baltimore Sun indicated is that the Big Ten is paying Maryland 20-30 million dollars. That could be a partial payment or a full payment, we do not know. It all depends upon agreements that we will never see or know about until this is all over.

The Big Ten's agreement with Maryland could have been to help with the full amount or it could have been that they would help out with what the initial exit fee was before the increase.

We don't know but you and others are showing an obvious agenda in this by trying to overplay what was said in the Baltimore Sun. It doesn't matter that you are because this is all talk and wont make a difference as to how things actually go but you are better than that JR. I expect others to spin it but not you.

He is using the UCONN situation as a guide. UCONN is one of the top brands in college basketball but they are left to rot in the old BE because of their lack of football. So what happens to Duke if the ACC implodes, the same may happen to them. Duke's situation is vastly different however. If the ACC loses a few teams, even what's leftover will get a much better contract that what the old BE got this year.

Personally, this whole article shows how much strength the ACC can potentially have. If everyone holds, then they can become the #3 revenue generating conference surpassing the B12 and Pac 12. At that point, they could have the SEC and Big 10 in their sights but I don't know if they can pass them. Truthfully, however, #3 is good enough.

(03-17-2013 07:21 AM)He1nousOne Wrote:  

(03-17-2013 01:36 AM)JRsec Wrote:  

(03-17-2013 01:12 AM)Zombiewoof Wrote:  The way I am reading his statements is that he is saying that on the one hand the ACC is strong and there is every reason to believe the conference can remain so, especially given the numbers of eyeballs in the conference footprint. On the other hand, I think he is suggesting that if the ACC starts to lose additional members then Duke will do whatever is necessary to preserve its position as one of the haves, including joining the exodus. If it becomes apparent to him that North Carolina and Virginia plan to join another conference, he will hitch his wagon to UNC and go along for the ride.

I think Gamecock pegged it about right. Lip service to football and cash to basketball. If the ACC is raided then U.N.C. will be protecting N.C. State at the behest of the State's insistence. They have to support both public universities. Maybe Duke is sending signals to other conferences that they will be willing to step up football spending and will not totally be pigskin dead weight.

I think the more enlightening news of the Day was the financial aid package for Maryland. It seems to indicate that the Big 10 expects the 52 million dollar exit fee will hold. If so more defections from the ACC will be unlikely. N.D.'s joining early seems to indicate the same. We'll see.

Once again, no it doesn't signal that the Big Ten expects the whole 52 million dollar exit fee to hold up. All the Baltimore Sun indicated is that the Big Ten is paying Maryland 20-30 million dollars. That could be a partial payment or a full payment, we do not know. It all depends upon agreements that we will never see or know about until this is all over.

The Big Ten's agreement with Maryland could have been to help with the full amount or it could have been that they would help out with what the initial exit fee was before the increase.

We don't know but you and others are showing an obvious agenda in this by trying to overplay what was said in the Baltimore Sun. It doesn't matter that you are because this is all talk and wont make a difference as to how things actually go but you are better than that JR. I expect others to spin it but not you.

So the Big 10 different offer any of this to Nebraska when they brought them on board. Rutgers is getting nothing either. And the Big 10 is giving a ton of cash up front to MARYLAND just to get them to jump? You and I both know there's more to the story here.

Furthermore, it begs the question can the Big 10 even afford to take anymore ACC teams. Now with this information out there, any new teams will demand even more than what Maryland is getting. Can you imagine what it would cost to get UNC or UVA to leave the ACC?

"my opinion and professional instinct is that we’ve never had more solidarity within the ACC,” he said.

They've been reading the boards and finally "got it" :)

I took it as if ACC totally implodes, Duke could be left out like Uconn.
Rest is mostly message board fodder.

"If everyone holds, then they can become the #3 revenue generating conference surpassing the B12 and Pac 12."

The ACC's TV deal is still new and it was completed when the ACC had more teams than the Big 12 and a much larger population footprint than the Big 12 and it came out substantially lower per team than the Big 12 AND that included Tier 3 for football. There seems to be no basis in fact for your optimism for the ACC's revenue potential. The free market has already spoken. If your optimism was legit, there would already be an ACC GOR signed and the rumors of the conference being raided would be dead.

(03-17-2013 07:39 AM)Big 12 Wrote:  "If everyone holds, then they can become the #3 revenue generating conference surpassing the B12 and Pac 12."

The ACC's TV deal is still new and it was completed when the ACC had more teams than the Big 12 and a much larger population footprint than the Big 12 and it came out substantially lower per team than the Big 12 AND that included Tier 3 for football. There seems to be no basis in fact for your optimism for the ACC's revenue potential. The free market has already spoken. If your optimism was legit, there would already be an ACC GOR signed and the rumors of the conference being raided would be dead.

Obviously you need to read the article again. There are revenue streams the ACC hasn't even started using yet. Big 12 and Pac 12 are tapped out. Pac 12 network isn't generating as much revenue as anticipated. Unless they rip apart the Big 12, they can't expand with worthy members. Big 12 has the smallest footprint and can't expand so they are tapped out. No growth potential. ACC has tons of growth potential and they have the largest footprint. ACC signed their deal when FSU and Miami were having down seasons. It's all a matter of timing. All of that will get resolved. ND just joined. Basketball will be ridiculous. Football is getting better. Just get used to Mr. Texas. You wanted to be in the ACC too.

I have to say, I am shocked that any ACC fans can draw optimism from this article. The AD at the school of the #1 basketball program is focusing like a laser now to make football more successful. Why? Because that is the driving force in realignment. After all of the fluff talk and all of the BS, you don't undertake a paradigm shift like this unless you are nervous about the future.

Just a small point and probably off topic, I wish to raise a very small point. But he left out one private institution that has done extremely well, TCU. And another relevant private IA football playing school.

Tulsa, withn CUSA, a private school of 4,167 students (the official bean count) has won 2 Liberty Bowls, one more than the CUSA-11 combined since TU joined CUSA. TU has more conference championships than any other school in CUSA since TU joined CUSA.

For a small school in a small state, Tulsa has done as much as any private school in IA football. By all measures, TU football should have folded by now. But, yet, there it is. A strong player within its CUSA conference.

Many of TU's colleagues say CUSA has "held us back." My response is if TU, a private school of hgh academic standards of only 4,167 students can succeed in CUSA, then why can't you?

(03-17-2013 07:46 AM)jaminandjachin Wrote:  

(03-17-2013 07:39 AM)Big 12 Wrote:  "If everyone holds, then they can become the #3 revenue generating conference surpassing the B12 and Pac 12."

The ACC's TV deal is still new and it was completed when the ACC had more teams than the Big 12 and a much larger population footprint than the Big 12 and it came out substantially lower per team than the Big 12 AND that included Tier 3 for football. There seems to be no basis in fact for your optimism for the ACC's revenue potential. The free market has already spoken. If your optimism was legit, there would already be an ACC GOR signed and the rumors of the conference being raided would be dead.

There are revenue streams the ACC hasn't even started using yet. Big 12 and Pac 12 are tapped out.

It will hit you.....when the next round of ACC defections happen, and they will happen, you will remember how silly your statement really was.....

(03-17-2013 07:49 AM)Big 12 Wrote:  

(03-17-2013 07:46 AM)jaminandjachin Wrote:  

(03-17-2013 07:39 AM)Big 12 Wrote:  "If everyone holds, then they can become the #3 revenue generating conference surpassing the B12 and Pac 12."

The ACC's TV deal is still new and it was completed when the ACC had more teams than the Big 12 and a much larger population footprint than the Big 12 and it came out substantially lower per team than the Big 12 AND that included Tier 3 for football. There seems to be no basis in fact for your optimism for the ACC's revenue potential. The free market has already spoken. If your optimism was legit, there would already be an ACC GOR signed and the rumors of the conference being raided would be dead.

There are revenue streams the ACC hasn't even started using yet. Big 12 and Pac 12 are tapped out.

It will hit you.....when the next round of ACC defections happen, and they will happen, you will remember how silly your statement really was.....

So let me ask you this. Why do you think it will happen? Why do you want it to happen?

Regardless of anyone's viewpoint, this was a good article, a nice historical summary and also got down to population numbers. And population numbers equal tv audience.

I like numbers. But it is difficult to find a number for intensity. For example, I draw no difference in "raw numbers" bewtween a Louisville versus a Cincinnati or Pitt. But, yet, when I turn on the tv, the intensity of the support of Louisivlle football and basketball jumps out of the tv screen. There is a tremendous support and enthusiasm there that one cannot put a number on.

I think SEC has intensity big time. Ditto for B12. But, as a casual observer of ACC, the broad based intensity does not seem to be as deep or strong as other conferences. The ACC has schools like Miami, WF, Duke, Boston College, and Syracuse.....whose school support doesn't seem to translate into the broad based state wide support you see in SEC, B12, B1G.

(03-17-2013 07:58 AM)Tallgrass Wrote:  Regardless of anyone's viewpoint, this was a good article, a nice historical summary and also got down to population numbers. And population numbers equal tv audience.

I like numbers. But it is difficult to find a number for intensity. For example, I draw no difference in "raw numbers" bewtween a Louisville versus a Cincinnati or Pitt. But, yet, when I turn on the tv, the intensity of the support of Louisivlle football and basketball jumps out of the tv screen. There is a tremendous support and enthusiasm there that one cannot put a number on.

I think SEC has intensity big time. Ditto for B12. But, as a casual observer of ACC, the broad based intensity does not seem to be as deep or strong as other conferences. The ACC has schools like Miami, WF, Duke, Boston College, and Syracuse.....whose school support doesn't seem to translate into the broad based state wide support you see in SEC, B12, B1G.

This is correct. SEC fan bases are highly intense when they are playing each other or another highly ranked team. Florida fans showed no enthusiasm to play Louisville. A few years ago Bama fans did the same thing against Utah. Duke basketball is intense and so is Syracuse basketball. BC is intense when they play ND. Miami just has to start winning again. Big 10 fans are great and for the most part, so are Big 12 programs.

(03-17-2013 07:52 AM)jaminandjachin Wrote:  

(03-17-2013 07:49 AM)Big 12 Wrote:  

(03-17-2013 07:46 AM)jaminandjachin Wrote:  

(03-17-2013 07:39 AM)Big 12 Wrote:  "If everyone holds, then they can become the #3 revenue generating conference surpassing the B12 and Pac 12."

The ACC's TV deal is still new and it was completed when the ACC had more teams than the Big 12 and a much larger population footprint than the Big 12 and it came out substantially lower per team than the Big 12 AND that included Tier 3 for football. There seems to be no basis in fact for your optimism for the ACC's revenue potential. The free market has already spoken. If your optimism was legit, there would already be an ACC GOR signed and the rumors of the conference being raided would be dead.

There are revenue streams the ACC hasn't even started using yet. Big 12 and Pac 12 are tapped out.

It will hit you.....when the next round of ACC defections happen, and they will happen, you will remember how silly your statement really was.....

So let me ask you this. Why do you think it will happen? Why do you want it to happen?

I think the majority of posters on this board would have liked that this current realignment circus never started. Where did it start? It started with the PAC and its invitation to the Texas/Oklahoma schools. Everyone on this boards seems to enjoy bashing the Texas Longhorns, especially when the LHN came into being. But it was the PAC, who considers itself a high academic ranked conference. that started this current money grab.

Then Nebraska to B1G and Colorado to PAC. Followed by TAMU and then Mizzouri to SEC. Then Pitt and Syracuse to ACC. Then Rutgers and MD to B1G. C7 recovered its history and became what its DNA are, a basketball Catholic conference.

So here wer are, all forced to play with the future of many college programs in the hands of a few tv executives and conference commissioners. And no where is this turmoil so accurately played out, is in the posts of the many sports fans on this board.

In answer to your question, each poster wants the realignment to play out to benefit their school or, alternatively, not be greatly damaged. It is a question that does not need to be asked on this board.

(03-17-2013 08:06 AM)Tallgrass Wrote:  

(03-17-2013 07:52 AM)jaminandjachin Wrote:  

(03-17-2013 07:49 AM)Big 12 Wrote:  

(03-17-2013 07:46 AM)jaminandjachin Wrote:  

(03-17-2013 07:39 AM)Big 12 Wrote:  "If everyone holds, then they can become the #3 revenue generating conference surpassing the B12 and Pac 12."

The ACC's TV deal is still new and it was completed when the ACC had more teams than the Big 12 and a much larger population footprint than the Big 12 and it came out substantially lower per team than the Big 12 AND that included Tier 3 for football. There seems to be no basis in fact for your optimism for the ACC's revenue potential. The free market has already spoken. If your optimism was legit, there would already be an ACC GOR signed and the rumors of the conference being raided would be dead.

There are revenue streams the ACC hasn't even started using yet. Big 12 and Pac 12 are tapped out.

It will hit you.....when the next round of ACC defections happen, and they will happen, you will remember how silly your statement really was.....

So let me ask you this. Why do you think it will happen? Why do you want it to happen?

I think the majority of posters on this board would have liked that this current realignment circus never started. Where did it start? It started with the PAC and its invitation to the Texas/Oklahoma schools. Everyone on this boards seems to enjoy bashing the Texas Longhorns, especially when the LHN came into being. But it was the PAC, who considers itself a high academic ranked conference. that started this current money grab.

Then Nebraska to B1G and Colorado to PAC. Followed by TAMU and then Mizzouri to SEC. Then Pitt and Syracuse to ACC. Then Rutgers and MD to B1G. C7 recovered its history and became what its DNA are, a basketball Catholic conference.

So here wer are, all forced to play with the future of many college programs in the hands of a few tv executives and conference commissioners. And no where is this turmoil so accurately played out, is in the posts of the many sports fans on this board.

In answer to your question, each poster wants the realignment to play out to benefit their school or, alternatively, not be greatly damaged. It is a question that does not need to be asked on this board.

I asked a poster who roots for Texas/Big 12 a simple question. Most Big 12 posters speak nothing but gloom and doom for the ACC. He asked why should ACC supporters be optimistic. I asked why does he want the ACC to be destroyed.

(03-17-2013 08:18 AM)jaminandjachin Wrote:  

(03-17-2013 08:06 AM)Tallgrass Wrote:  

(03-17-2013 07:52 AM)jaminandjachin Wrote:  

(03-17-2013 07:49 AM)Big 12 Wrote:  

(03-17-2013 07:46 AM)jaminandjachin Wrote:  There are revenue streams the ACC hasn't even started using yet. Big 12 and Pac 12 are tapped out.

It will hit you.....when the next round of ACC defections happen, and they will happen, you will remember how silly your statement really was.....

So let me ask you this. Why do you think it will happen? Why do you want it to happen?

I think the majority of posters on this board would have liked that this current realignment circus never started. Where did it start? It started with the PAC and its invitation to the Texas/Oklahoma schools. Everyone on this boards seems to enjoy bashing the Texas Longhorns, especially when the LHN came into being. But it was the PAC, who considers itself a high academic ranked conference. that started this current money grab.

Then Nebraska to B1G and Colorado to PAC. Followed by TAMU and then Mizzouri to SEC. Then Pitt and Syracuse to ACC. Then Rutgers and MD to B1G. C7 recovered its history and became what its DNA are, a basketball Catholic conference.

So here wer are, all forced to play with the future of many college programs in the hands of a few tv executives and conference commissioners. And no where is this turmoil so accurately played out, is in the posts of the many sports fans on this board.

In answer to your question, each poster wants the realignment to play out to benefit their school or, alternatively, not be greatly damaged. It is a question that does not need to be asked on this board.

I asked a poster who roots for Texas/Big 12 a simple question. Most Big 12 posters speak nothing but gloom and doom for the ACC. He asked why should ACC supporters be optimistic. I asked why does he want the ACC to be destroyed.

The B12 and ACC both share the position of having more doom and gloom posts directed at each, respectively. It is the game we are all forced to play.

(03-17-2013 07:52 AM)jaminandjachin Wrote:  

(03-17-2013 07:49 AM)Big 12 Wrote:  

(03-17-2013 07:46 AM)jaminandjachin Wrote:  

(03-17-2013 07:39 AM)Big 12 Wrote:  "If everyone holds, then they can become the #3 revenue generating conference surpassing the B12 and Pac 12."

The ACC's TV deal is still new and it was completed when the ACC had more teams than the Big 12 and a much larger population footprint than the Big 12 and it came out substantially lower per team than the Big 12 AND that included Tier 3 for football. There seems to be no basis in fact for your optimism for the ACC's revenue potential. The free market has already spoken. If your optimism was legit, there would already be an ACC GOR signed and the rumors of the conference being raided would be dead.

There are revenue streams the ACC hasn't even started using yet. Big 12 and Pac 12 are tapped out.

It will hit you.....when the next round of ACC defections happen, and they will happen, you will remember how silly your statement really was.....

So let me ask you this. Why do you think it will happen? Why do you want it to happen?

Had all the original BEast football members had stuck around, the ACC would be looking up at The BEast. But they didn't stick around, and we are where we are today...

(03-17-2013 08:41 AM)bitcruncher Wrote:  

(03-17-2013 07:52 AM)jaminandjachin Wrote:  

(03-17-2013 07:49 AM)Big 12 Wrote:  

(03-17-2013 07:46 AM)jaminandjachin Wrote:  

(03-17-2013 07:39 AM)Big 12 Wrote:  "If everyone holds, then they can become the #3 revenue generating conference surpassing the B12 and Pac 12."

The ACC's TV deal is still new and it was completed when the ACC had more teams than the Big 12 and a much larger population footprint than the Big 12 and it came out substantially lower per team than the Big 12 AND that included Tier 3 for football. There seems to be no basis in fact for your optimism for the ACC's revenue potential. The free market has already spoken. If your optimism was legit, there would already be an ACC GOR signed and the rumors of the conference being raided would be dead.

There are revenue streams the ACC hasn't even started using yet. Big 12 and Pac 12 are tapped out.

It will hit you.....when the next round of ACC defections happen, and they will happen, you will remember how silly your statement really was.....

So let me ask you this. Why do you think it will happen? Why do you want it to happen?

Had all the original BEast football members had stuck around, the ACC would be looking up at The BEast. But they didn't stick around, and we are where we are today...

For me, both the old B8 and BE were in the same position, two good conferences competetively..,..but without the tv audience to enable the football programs to survive. When SEC expanded to 12 and added the conference championship game which paid double the Rose Bowl payout at that time, it put the fear of Gawd into B8. Looking back, I think the BE went thru the same meat grinder.

(03-17-2013 09:00 AM)Tallgrass Wrote:  

(03-17-2013 08:41 AM)bitcruncher Wrote:  

(03-17-2013 07:52 AM)jaminandjachin Wrote:  

(03-17-2013 07:49 AM)Big 12 Wrote:  

(03-17-2013 07:46 AM)jaminandjachin Wrote:  There are revenue streams the ACC hasn't even started using yet. Big 12 and Pac 12 are tapped out.

It will hit you.....when the next round of ACC defections happen, and they will happen, you will remember how silly your statement really was.....

So let me ask you this. Why do you think it will happen? Why do you want it to happen?

Had all the original BEast football members had stuck around, the ACC would be looking up at The BEast. But they didn't stick around, and we are where we are today...

For me, both the old B8 and BE were in the same position, two good conferences competetively..,..but without the tv audience to enable the football programs to survive. When SEC expanded to 12 and added the conference championship game which paid double the Rose Bowl payout at that time, it put the fear of Gawd into B8. Looking back, I think the BE went thru the same meat grinder.

WVU pushed for BEast football to move to 12 teams at the start, to match the SEC. The BEast could have had FSU and Clemson at that time just by inviting them. Clemson was at odds with the ACC leadership, and FSU would have loved an alignment with Miami, while they were still at the height of their national prominence. But that argument held little weight, since WVU was being invited as a partial member, and nobody was listening...

(03-17-2013 09:04 AM)bitcruncher Wrote:  

(03-17-2013 09:00 AM)Tallgrass Wrote:  

(03-17-2013 08:41 AM)bitcruncher Wrote:  

(03-17-2013 07:52 AM)jaminandjachin Wrote:  

(03-17-2013 07:49 AM)Big 12 Wrote:  It will hit you.....when the next round of ACC defections happen, and they will happen, you will remember how silly your statement really was.....

So let me ask you this. Why do you think it will happen? Why do you want it to happen?

Had all the original BEast football members had stuck around, the ACC would be looking up at The BEast. But they didn't stick around, and we are where we are today...

For me, both the old B8 and BE were in the same position, two good conferences competetively..,..but without the tv audience to enable the football programs to survive. When SEC expanded to 12 and added the conference championship game which paid double the Rose Bowl payout at that time, it put the fear of Gawd into B8. Looking back, I think the BE went thru the same meat grinder.

WVU pushed for BEast football to move to 12 teams at the start, to match the SEC. The BEast could have had FSU and Clemson at that time just by inviting them. Clemson was at odds with the ACC leadership, and FSU would have loved an alignment with Miami, while they were still at the height of their national prominence. But that argument held little weight, since WVU was being invited as a partial member, and nobody was listening...

http://csnbbs.com/showthread.php?tid=624585&pid=9107214