(11-18-2023 02:49 AM)DawgNBama Wrote:  

(11-17-2023 03:33 PM)msm96wolf Wrote:  

(11-17-2023 12:55 PM)bryanw1995 Wrote:  

(11-15-2023 06:51 PM)bill dazzle Wrote:  

(11-15-2023 06:42 PM)Garden_KC Wrote:  Its sounds reasonable on its surface but if the ACC does get raided 4, 6 or even 8 programs at that point it becomes another 2PAC situation.

XII will cherry pick who they want. Others may prefer to revive the BE football conference which only died because Syracuse and Pitt left making what was left over a G5 conference. Go back to playing the conference tournament in MSG and rejoining your rivals.

From the deep thinking perspective, UConn by joining the BE before its basketball brand tanked in the AAC made the right call.

If the ACC eventually loses, say, six members, I could foresee the remaining members staying together and inviting UConn, Tulane and USF (maybe a few others). An ACC with, say, Boston College, Pitt, Syracuse, Louisville, Wake Forest, Notre Dame, etc., would be attractive to UConn.

If the ACC loses 6 members, Louisville will either be one of the 6 or they'll immediately jump to the Big 12, likely with a few others in tow.

Assuming the six are Duke, UNC, UVA, Clemson, Miami, FSU

I see NCSU, VT , Louisville, GT and SMU try to bolt to the B12.

Call me crazy, but I don't see NCSU or VT going to the B12. Louisville, unfortunately, I could see, thanks to Kentucky. (Could be wrong, but I believe that UK has blackballed Louisville from the SEC; a real shame considering that the SEC could really use Louisville hoops, IMO. No such blackball exists for FSU or Clemson or even GT).

The XII is every ACC school’s 3rd choice behind the B1G and SEC (assuming the ACC isn’t viable). If the XII doesn’t work then they’ll likely look to the Big East for membership then on down.

(11-17-2023 12:50 PM)bill dazzle Wrote:  To Frank's point: It might be a bit challenging for some of the younger posters to fully understand what it's like for some universities and their athletics programs (and UConn, BYU, Tulane and Memphis are excellent examples) to deal with "group" status.

As to Memphis specifically, and as I've posted many times, the Tigers athletics program was, in many respects, better off in the 1970s and 1980s, when its football program was an independent (thus no stigma attached with being a "group" member) and its other sports were in the reasonably prestigious Metro Conference.

Fast forward to today. If Memphis had any way of removing itself from the "group" label, I would support it. But there simply is no alternative to the AAC. Even if the Big East wanted Memphis (and it almost certainly would not), the Tiger football program has too much to lose being independent. UConn football can stomach year after year of losing and not benefiting from the various plusses leagues offer football programs. Memphis football cannot. Memphis football offers a "value" (of sorts) that UConn football does not and likely never will (and I post that with huge respect for UConn as a university and its athletics programs).

In short, UConn benefits (and, to a large extent, due to lucky circumstances) from an extremely unusual situation.

There was also no G5 or non-BCS back in the 80's.

It was 1-A or 1-AA. MAC was thought to be a 1-AA conference by a lot of people or a tweener 1-AA/I-A conference. They were often time not included in the score ticker at the bottom of the screen.

Even the Big West had some "major" cachet to it with UNLV basketball.

You can't compare being an Independent in the 80's to doing it in the 20's.

Am I the only one who thinks Louisville and others, would stick with the ACCi if it loses members? IMO more would be going on than just raiding the ACC. The schools considered the most likely to be left behind would add Tulane, USF, UConn. Cal , Stanford and maybe SMU go to the B12 and WVU and Cincy to the ACC. Kansas becomes the wild card. The P4 least interested in them is the SEC. At that point there would be many moving parts. Perhaps the ACC and B12 can have an arrangement where the waive exit fees in order to swap members

(11-18-2023 11:34 AM)gosports1 Wrote:  Am I the only one who thinks Louisville and others, would stick with the ACCi if it loses members? IMO more would be going on than just raiding the ACC. The schools considered the most likely to be left behind would add Tulane, USF, UConn. Cal , Stanford and maybe SMU go to the B12 and WVU and Cincy to the ACC. Kansas becomes the wild card. The P4 least interested in them is the SEC. At that point there would be many moving parts. Perhaps the ACC and B12 can have an arrangement where the waive exit fees in order to swap members

What I’d say that is the widespread assumption that it’s a fait accompli that schools would move from the ACC to the Big 12 is way overstated in the same way that the number of actually viable ACC candidates for the Big Ten and SEC are way overstated. I think the ACC carries on even if it lost its 6 most valuable schools (and I honestly don’t think they’d lose more than 4 schools - realignment is clearly about unambiguous football value now and not the 2010s formula where markets in and of themselves can bring value).

(11-18-2023 11:56 AM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  

(11-18-2023 11:34 AM)gosports1 Wrote:  Am I the only one who thinks Louisville and others, would stick with the ACCi if it loses members? IMO more would be going on than just raiding the ACC. The schools considered the most likely to be left behind would add Tulane, USF, UConn. Cal , Stanford and maybe SMU go to the B12 and WVU and Cincy to the ACC. Kansas becomes the wild card. The P4 least interested in them is the SEC. At that point there would be many moving parts. Perhaps the ACC and B12 can have an arrangement where the waive exit fees in order to swap members

What I’d say that is the widespread assumption that it’s a fait accompli that schools would move from the ACC to the Big 12 is way overstated in the same way that the number of actually viable ACC candidates for the Big Ten and SEC are way overstated. I think the ACC carries on even if it lost its 6 most valuable schools (and I honestly don’t think they’d lose more than 4 schools - realignment is clearly about unambiguous football value now and not the 2010s formula where markets in and of themselves can bring value).

You and I have been very consistent with this shared viewpoint.

Now cue somebody posting a Mag 7 meme—which totally ignores the mission of the group which was to achieve more revenue and unequal sharing. It has absolutely no correlation to the value those schools would bring to the SEC or Big Ten.

(11-18-2023 11:34 AM)gosports1 Wrote:  Am I the only one who thinks Louisville and others, would stick with the ACCi if it loses members? IMO more would be going on than just raiding the ACC. The schools considered the most likely to be left behind would add Tulane, USF, UConn. Cal , Stanford and maybe SMU go to the B12 and WVU and Cincy to the ACC. Kansas becomes the wild card. The P4 least interested in them is the SEC. At that point there would be many moving parts. Perhaps the ACC and B12 can have an arrangement where the waive exit fees in order to swap members

Horse trading between the ACC and XII might be the right move but I think its wishful thinking.

What I think has a greater probability is when the ACC contract opens up for members to head to the SEC/B1G there might also be a few XII schools getting that call (Kansas, Oklahoma St, TCU, Colorado, Arizona State) if the B1G/SEC don't get everything they want out of an ACC raid.

For instance UVA decides the B1G is where they want to be when their FB isn't that strong and the SEC needs a 4th school they might decide to go west not east and pick up an Oklahoma State or something. That means the XII has a hole to fill and could consider SMU or Cal/Stan to fill that gap. It could also mean the XII has a diminished TV value moving forward and so UCF, UC, WVU or one of the three might be compelled to take an offer in the ACC.

Same with the B1G. Maybe they'll end up going to 23 with ND, UVA, Miami and then Colorado and Arizona St in the west which would be a big hit to the XII. Having 6 out west would be fairly decent since each of those programs can play 5 FB and 10 BB games regionally.

I really think the MAC wouldn't be a bad way to go for UConn FB particularly if you could combine the addition with Villanova which can now move up to FBS more freely without a 15,000 attendance requirement.

Connecticut
Villanova
Buffalo
Akron
Kent State
Ohio
Miami U.

That is not a bad regional divison for UConn in FB.

Its a division they could dominate with their resource advantages while they wait for a power conference situation to emerge.

One thing I will say is if the P4 is giving everyone an even cut of money based on how many schools are in their conference you may see the same thing in the G5 ranks and independents. It is very well possible UConn ends up with the same money share from the CFP they would otherwise earn in a conference.

It could be G5 conferences set rules to determine how that CFP money is distributed within the conference so the top performing schools have a greater share of the money like what is done with the NCAAT money in some of the conferences.

(11-18-2023 10:29 AM)Garden_KC Wrote:  

(11-17-2023 12:50 PM)bill dazzle Wrote:  To Frank's point: It might be a bit challenging for some of the younger posters to fully understand what it's like for some universities and their athletics programs (and UConn, BYU, Tulane and Memphis are excellent examples) to deal with "group" status.

As to Memphis specifically, and as I've posted many times, the Tigers athletics program was, in many respects, better off in the 1970s and 1980s, when its football program was an independent (thus no stigma attached with being a "group" member) and its other sports were in the reasonably prestigious Metro Conference.

Fast forward to today. If Memphis had any way of removing itself from the "group" label, I would support it. But there simply is no alternative to the AAC. Even if the Big East wanted Memphis (and it almost certainly would not), the Tiger football program has too much to lose being independent. UConn football can stomach year after year of losing and not benefiting from the various plusses leagues offer football programs. Memphis football cannot. Memphis football offers a "value" (of sorts) that UConn football does not and likely never will (and I post that with huge respect for UConn as a university and its athletics programs).

In short, UConn benefits (and, to a large extent, due to lucky circumstances) from an extremely unusual situation.

There was also no G5 or non-BCS back in the 80's.

It was 1-A or 1-AA. MAC was thought to be a 1-AA conference by a lot of people or a tweener 1-AA/I-A conference. They were often time not included in the score ticker at the bottom of the screen.

Even the Big West had some "major" cachet to it with UNLV basketball.

You can't compare being an Independent in the 80's to doing it in the 20's.

Two very different eras, no doubt.

(11-18-2023 11:34 AM)gosports1 Wrote:  Am I the only one who thinks Louisville and others, would stick with the ACCi if it loses members? IMO more would be going on than just raiding the ACC. The schools considered the most likely to be left behind would add Tulane, USF, UConn. Cal , Stanford and maybe SMU go to the B12 and WVU and Cincy to the ACC. Kansas becomes the wild card. The P4 least interested in them is the SEC. At that point there would be many moving parts. Perhaps the ACC and B12 can have an arrangement where the waive exit fees in order to swap members

I'm with you. Even if the ACC loses six members, it will still have 12. Add four more (UConn, Tulane, USF and _____) and the league continues. And I don't foresee Cincy, West Virginia and/or UCF moving from the Big 12 to the ACC.

But I've been wrong many times before.

(11-18-2023 12:16 PM)esayem Wrote:  

(11-18-2023 11:56 AM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  

(11-18-2023 11:34 AM)gosports1 Wrote:  Am I the only one who thinks Louisville and others, would stick with the ACCi if it loses members? IMO more would be going on than just raiding the ACC. The schools considered the most likely to be left behind would add Tulane, USF, UConn. Cal , Stanford and maybe SMU go to the B12 and WVU and Cincy to the ACC. Kansas becomes the wild card. The P4 least interested in them is the SEC. At that point there would be many moving parts. Perhaps the ACC and B12 can have an arrangement where the waive exit fees in order to swap members

What I’d say that is the widespread assumption that it’s a fait accompli that schools would move from the ACC to the Big 12 is way overstated in the same way that the number of actually viable ACC candidates for the Big Ten and SEC are way overstated. I think the ACC carries on even if it lost its 6 most valuable schools (and I honestly don’t think they’d lose more than 4 schools - realignment is clearly about unambiguous football value now and not the 2010s formula where markets in and of themselves can bring value).

You and I have been very consistent with this shared viewpoint.

Now cue somebody posting a Mag 7 meme—which totally ignores the mission of the group which was to achieve more revenue and unequal sharing. It has absolutely no correlation to the value those schools would bring to the SEC or Big Ten.

I wouldn't count ACC leadership out. I don't get the seemingly lack of respect and quick to dismiss the ACC as doomed for failure. This is coming from someone who was pissed when the ACC kept coming back to raid the BE. Turns out, that athletically, that was the best situation for my school.

(11-18-2023 07:53 PM)bill dazzle Wrote:  

(11-18-2023 11:34 AM)gosports1 Wrote:  Am I the only one who thinks Louisville and others, would stick with the ACCi if it loses members? IMO more would be going on than just raiding the ACC. The schools considered the most likely to be left behind would add Tulane, USF, UConn. Cal , Stanford and maybe SMU go to the B12 and WVU and Cincy to the ACC. Kansas becomes the wild card. The P4 least interested in them is the SEC. At that point there would be many moving parts. Perhaps the ACC and B12 can have an arrangement where the waive exit fees in order to swap members

I'm with you. Even if the ACC loses six members, it will still have 12. Add four more (UConn, Tulane, USF and _____) and the league continues. And I don't foresee Cincy, West Virginia and/or UCF moving from the Big 12 to the ACC.

But I've been wrong many times before.

I'm confident that UConn, Tulane and USF cut it as candidates for ACC membership.

But what about once you get beyond that? It becomes a real drop off for the ACC.

What if the XII takes a hit and snaps them up first? Tulane is right in the XII footprint.

Who would have thought 10 years ago that SMU would be in the ACC before UConn?

(11-18-2023 08:08 PM)gosports1 Wrote:  

(11-18-2023 12:16 PM)esayem Wrote:  

(11-18-2023 11:56 AM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  

(11-18-2023 11:34 AM)gosports1 Wrote:  Am I the only one who thinks Louisville and others, would stick with the ACCi if it loses members? IMO more would be going on than just raiding the ACC. The schools considered the most likely to be left behind would add Tulane, USF, UConn. Cal , Stanford and maybe SMU go to the B12 and WVU and Cincy to the ACC. Kansas becomes the wild card. The P4 least interested in them is the SEC. At that point there would be many moving parts. Perhaps the ACC and B12 can have an arrangement where the waive exit fees in order to swap members

What I’d say that is the widespread assumption that it’s a fait accompli that schools would move from the ACC to the Big 12 is way overstated in the same way that the number of actually viable ACC candidates for the Big Ten and SEC are way overstated. I think the ACC carries on even if it lost its 6 most valuable schools (and I honestly don’t think they’d lose more than 4 schools - realignment is clearly about unambiguous football value now and not the 2010s formula where markets in and of themselves can bring value).

You and I have been very consistent with this shared viewpoint.

Now cue somebody posting a Mag 7 meme—which totally ignores the mission of the group which was to achieve more revenue and unequal sharing. It has absolutely no correlation to the value those schools would bring to the SEC or Big Ten.

I wouldn't count ACC leadership out. I don't get the seemingly lack of respect and quick to dismiss the ACC as doomed for failure. This is coming from someone who was pissed when the ACC kept coming back to raid the BE. Turns out, that athletically, that was the best situation for my school.

Another factor to the ACC's unraveling is what will Notre Dame do?

ND is not going to associate with an ACC that has programs like Old Dominion and East Carolina in it. That is G5 product.

They may be more than alright herding everyone up back into the Big East.

I put the probability of this eventually happening low right now. Maybe 10 to 15% but it if does come to fruition UConn is sitting in the right spot since they are already in the BE which is my point.