(01-19-2024 08:56 PM)esayem Wrote: Of course this thread is derailed by know-it-alls who know absolutely nothing about UNC, NC politics, and the general state of college athletics in NC.
• Stop bringing up Oklahoma and Oklahoma State. This is a totally different situation with their own governance and has nothing to do with the UNC system.
• The UC system might be a bit similar, but California could be its own country with its own politics which don't emphasize athletics quite the way we do on Tobacco Road. Plus, it's obvious UC Berkeley and UCLA don't have the same relationship—culturally or otherwise—as Carolina and State. The lack of synergy was evident in summer 2022.
• We just saw Arizona State get dragged kicking and screaming into the Big XII. Anyone want to cite that example? Their PTB were very vocal the entire time while people here blew it off.
• Are there some people that want Carolina in the SEC? Sure. Big Ten? Sure. ACC? Absolutely. Are there people high up that actually pull strings that want Carolina and State to remain together? Definitely.
• Adding Carolina and State is the ONLY way a conference gets the entire state. It's more like the power of having Texas and TAMU together than Ohio State and Cincinnati. It's more like Indiana and Purdue vs Georgia and Georgia Tech. People, you just have to trust me on this lol... I might know a liiiiitle bit more about it than you.
IMO, Oklahoma and Oklahoma State is a relevant comparison because, specific details aside (and yes, I know the devil is often in the details, but still), I think there is a similarity in that in both Oklahoma and North Carolina there was/is strong political sentiment that the schools stay in the same conference.
I do understand that the state of North Carolina has, and may well exercise, its power to mandate that UNC not go anywhere that NC State isn't brought along with too. I just don't believe that will sway the decision making of the B1G or SEC.
That's because ...
As to your last point, to me, UNC is the flagship university of the state. If a conference gets UNC, then IMO it gets more than enough of the state to satisfy whatever revenue or status claims it may want. I don't see it in any way like having Texas and Texas AM. IMO, Texas AM brought a ton of state value to the SEC, and Texas adds a ton more. Texas is so vast and rich and football crazy that it, to use your term above, is kind of like its own country such that even having one of the two powerhouse schools means there is plenty of value in having the other too. But if the SEC or B1G had UNC, then the added value of NC State would be trivial, IMO, not nearly worth it.
So IMO, either the SEC or B1G would likely give the state of North Carolina the choice of allowing UNC to join them, or neither joining them.
Maybe we'll see.
(This post was last modified: 01-20-2024 09:56 AM by quo vadis.)
(01-19-2024 08:56 PM)esayem Wrote: Of course this thread is derailed by know-it-alls who know absolutely nothing about UNC, NC politics, and the general state of college athletics in NC.
• Stop bringing up Oklahoma and Oklahoma State. This is a totally different situation with their own governance and has nothing to do with the UNC system.
• The UC system might be a bit similar, but California could be its own country with its own politics which don't emphasize athletics quite the way we do on Tobacco Road. Plus, it's obvious UC Berkeley and UCLA don't have the same relationship—culturally or otherwise—as Carolina and State. The lack of synergy was evident in summer 2022.
• We just saw Arizona State get dragged kicking and screaming into the Big XII. Anyone want to cite that example? Their PTB were very vocal the entire time while people here blew it off.
• Are there some people that want Carolina in the SEC? Sure. Big Ten? Sure. ACC? Absolutely. Are there people high up that actually pull strings that want Carolina and State to remain together? Definitely.
• Adding Carolina and State is the ONLY way a conference gets the entire state. It's more like the power of having Texas and TAMU together than Ohio State and Cincinnati. It's more like Indiana and Purdue vs Georgia and Georgia Tech. People, you just have to trust me on this lol... I might know a liiiiitle bit more about it than you.
IMO, Oklahoma and Oklahoma State is a relevant comparison because, specific details aside (and yes, I know the devil is often in the details, but still), I think there is a similarity in that in both Oklahoma and North Carolina there was/is strong political sentiment that the schools stay in the same conference.
I do understand that the state of North Carolina has, and may well exercise, its power to mandate that UNC not go anywhere that NC State isn't brought along with too. I just don't believe that will sway the decision making of the B1G or SEC.
That's because ...
As to your last point, to me, UNC is the flagship university of the state. If a conference gets UNC, then IMO it gets more than enough of the state to satisfy whatever revenue or status claims it may want. I don't see it in any way like having Texas and Texas AM. IMO, Texas AM brought a ton of state value to the SEC, and Texas adds a ton more. Texas is so vast and rich and football crazy that it, to use your term above, is kind of like its own country such that even having one of the two powerhouse schools means there is plenty of value in having the other too. But if the SEC or B1G had UNC, then the added value of NC State would be trivial, IMO, not nearly worth it.
So IMO, either the SEC or B1G would likely give the state of North Carolina the choice of allowing UNC to join them, or neither joining them.
Maybe we'll see.
Whatever the SEC/B1G would or wouldn't do is irrelevant, if the ACC is the best option on the table from the BOG perspective then that what will happen. Anything can change but I think were looking into the 2030's before any move is politically possible
From an SEC perspective, if going to 20, I think it’s worth it to make those 4 Florida St, Clemson, UNC, and NC St
ESPN, their partner, ultimately wants to keep the Big 10 and other broadcasters out of NC & VA. It precludes the Big 10 from making an academic minded UVA & UNC pairing, forcing the SEC to counter with NC St and VT. UVA is not a great sports school and has a smaller following than instate VT. They look far less attractive to the Big 10 without the Tar Heels.
NC St has the potential to grow into an “SEC-style” brand where Duke doesn’t. It simply doesn’t make sense to pay football blueblood level pay to a basketball blueblood. ESPN still retains Duke tv rights in the ACC.
If the SEC needs a 20th school and NC state politics are posing a potential hurdle, NC St is the way to go.
If NC politics aren’t a problem, choose Miami or VT.
(01-20-2024 09:51 AM)goodknightfl Wrote: AZ state and Utah may have gotten in ACC at 1/2 rate like Cal/Stanford.
To derail the thread again, yes, good point. Maybe 25 million. Utah ASU is a better multiplier for the Big 12. Late night BBall (as bad as Utah may be), BYU rivalry, and great football that pairs better with Okie St, TCU types. FSU versus those schools, home or away, doesn’t foster anything, and they wouldn’t have played nearly as often anyhow. That’s why they got the 31 million each.
The west wing will never work. The PAC2 would certainly take it, but what’s the point? Sending Pitt and Cuse out there makes little sense. It’s looking like the ACC will survive this if they can maintain dominance in VA and NC, but the automatic NYD QF bowl has to come into question without FSU Clemson.
(This post was last modified: 01-20-2024 10:55 AM by RUScarlets.)
(01-19-2024 08:56 PM)esayem Wrote: Of course this thread is derailed by know-it-alls who know absolutely nothing about UNC, NC politics, and the general state of college athletics in NC.
• Stop bringing up Oklahoma and Oklahoma State. This is a totally different situation with their own governance and has nothing to do with the UNC system.
• The UC system might be a bit similar, but California could be its own country with its own politics which don't emphasize athletics quite the way we do on Tobacco Road. Plus, it's obvious UC Berkeley and UCLA don't have the same relationship—culturally or otherwise—as Carolina and State. The lack of synergy was evident in summer 2022.
• We just saw Arizona State get dragged kicking and screaming into the Big XII. Anyone want to cite that example? Their PTB were very vocal the entire time while people here blew it off.
• Are there some people that want Carolina in the SEC? Sure. Big Ten? Sure. ACC? Absolutely. Are there people high up that actually pull strings that want Carolina and State to remain together? Definitely.
• Adding Carolina and State is the ONLY way a conference gets the entire state. It's more like the power of having Texas and TAMU together than Ohio State and Cincinnati. It's more like Indiana and Purdue vs Georgia and Georgia Tech. People, you just have to trust me on this lol... I might know a liiiiitle bit more about it than you.
This has been my take. Same way for the Virginias.
Kansas, Missouri, Oklahoma, Arkansas, Texas, Texas A&M. Colorado?
LSU, Ole Miss, MSU, Vandy, Tennessee, Kentucky. Louiville?
Alabama, Auburn, FSU, Florida, Georgia, GT or Miami or both.
Clemson, SC, NC, NCST, UVA, VT. Duke?
(This post was last modified: 01-20-2024 04:09 PM by Porcine.)
(01-20-2024 12:09 AM)bryanw1995 Wrote: That's funny because Texas was blocked from joining the Big 8 with just A&M due to political interference in the '90s, and they were in fact stuck with Texas Tech and Barely (and later TCU) for over 25 years after the end of the SWC. If UNC was "like Texas" then they'd work hard to be shed of schools like NC St, or at least be allowed to make their own decision on their Conference.
I would argue that UNC has some similarities to Texas, but they also bring in about half as much athletics revenue. UNC would in fact be very near the bottom in Athletics revenue if they were to join tomorrow and immediately get full SEC shares from day 1. Sure, they're cocky as an institution and their grads are also cocky, but that's kind of the point of inviting only flagships (or near-flagships). Everyone in the SEC is like that.
“Schools like NC State”?!? NC State is the engineering/ag school of the UNC system. The universities work together. This isn’t Texas where there are like 15 different university systems with governors and senators lobbying for conference inclusion lol
Schools like NC St, as in schools that aren't the "flagship" and are not even a clear #2 in their own region, get a little over 2m eyeballs avg in their best games each year, schools that have stadium capacity and/or attendance in the 40-60k range, and raise money and spend towards the lower end of their own conference. ie, I was commenting on their fitness for discussion for SEC membership financially, not their curriculum.
NC St looks a lot like Ok St, Texas Tech, UH, Baylor, Iowa St, and others that OUT, Missouri and A&M left behind. They're not elite Academically, either. It's tough to see why we'd want to replace a bunch of middle of the pack schools in our own neighborhood for middle of the pack schools 1200 miles away. UNC? Yeah, they're worth it to us, they're an AAU Flagship in a 10.5m population state, and they're a Basketball Blue Blood. Duke? T1 Academics, $13b endowment, Basketball Blue Blood. You can get behind that. But NC St has nothing to hang their hat on. Avg sized football stadium. Avg attendance. Avg (for M2) tv numbers. Avg fanbase. Somewhat below avg Athletic revenues and spending. They're a poor man's Virginia Tech.
bolded - "Looks a lot like"... to you.
I've been as much a proponent of OK State to the SEC as anyone, but I just don't think you can compare the situation with OK State with NC State.
Different state, different market, different academics level, just different circumstances.
If you don't want them, well, that's fair, we all have our opinions.
But if the SEC is going to 20 (which is one of the possibilities laid out), then I think FSU/Clemson/NC/NC State, are not a bad grouping.
And one other thing...
Everyone has seen what happens when you join a conference without another school you have a history with (looks at Nebraska). If the SEC wants to add NC as a successful school, being aware of that is in their interest.
A&M and Missouri barely had any history together, we've only played each other 16 times total, and yet we both have thrived in the SEC. If UNC is unable to thrive in the SEC with Miami, FSU or Clemson as a partner, rather than little brother NC St from down the road, then perhaps they're not a good fit for the SEC, after all.
When I say "looks a lot like" Ok St, I think that the comparison is obvious. The people making these decisions are primarily concerned about the financial bottom line impact to the Conference of adding a school. NC St would be a negative for the SEC, and Ok St would hurt our bottom line by roughly the same amount.
Politely disagree. NC State is in a unique situation in that NCSU is located in the same metro area as the state of NC's flagship university, UNC-Chapel Hill. Furthermore, Duke University, the South's equivalent of Harvard or Yale, is located in the same metro area. If you bothered to read any of SouthernConBoy's posts on the ACC board or sent him a PM as to why this is the case, he will tell you it was because of politics and NCSU was originally going to be in Charlotte had not state leaders scuttled the plan. Basically, imagine A&M being in San Antonio instead of College Station, and imagine Rice or SMU being in San Marcos. That's situation NC State finds itself in, IMO.
Watching the Youtube video that I have linked below will also help explain things, IMO:
(01-19-2024 07:01 PM)bryanw1995 Wrote: Meh. Perhaps the law passes, perhaps not. But with no B1G interest in NC St at all, the SEC could just send out "cut loose NC St" smoke signals and UNC would be able to control their own destiny if they have the political clout to do so. We made OU cut Ok St loose, after all, and OU is a bigger overall Brand than UNC while Ok St is at least as strong as (and probably a bit more desirable than" NC St.
This is like a Conference realignment poison pill. It doesn't help NC St any, but it does make UNC's path murkier.
Nothing new to those who understand the political nature of the UNC System. The President/BOG /State Government will have major influence over UNC/NCSU & their conference affiliation. Doesn't matter what the B1G or SEC thinks about it
OU could have joined with A&M. However, their President, a former Oklahoma Governor, refused to leave without OSU. The SEC passed, and waited.
If I were a UNC fan, I'd be fighting this legislation. It forces you to only have one Conference option and hope that the SEC will suddenly decide that money doesn't matter.
From the SEC perspective, I think that we'd like all 4 of Clemson/UNC/FSU/Miami, but if we only can get 2 of them then that would be fine, too. Let UNC die on the vine for a decade or 2 and see if they change their minds. Any of the other 3 would be more likely to bring in additional revenue in the short or medium term than UNC, anyway.
Ummm….I guess you don’t know much about the ACC.
UNC is like Texas of the ACC. They (ane their fans) won’t fight the legislation just to get into the BIG or the SEC.
That's funny because Texas was blocked from joining the Big 8 with just A&M due to political interference in the '90s, and they were in fact stuck with Texas Tech and Barely (and later TCU) for over 25 years after the end of the SWC. If UNC was "like Texas" then they'd work hard to be shed of schools like NC St, or at least be allowed to make their own decision on their Conference.
I would argue that UNC has some similarities to Texas, but they also bring in about half as much athletics revenue. UNC would in fact be very near the bottom in Athletics revenue if they were to join tomorrow and immediately get full SEC shares from day 1. Sure, they're cocky as an institution and their grads are also cocky, but that's kind of the point of inviting only flagships (or near-flagships). Everyone in the SEC is like that.
Of course, Texas is much more valuable than UNC.
But my point still stands. UNC and its fans are cocky and won’t fight the legislation just to get into the BIG or the SEC.
TTU and Balyor joining the original B12 following UT and A&M is a good example. The political intervention does matter for a conference realignment.
If this legislation passes, UNC joins the SEC with NCSU or both schools stay in the ACC. Either outcome would be acceptable to UNC and that’s another reason why UNC won’t fight the legislation.
(01-19-2024 08:56 PM)esayem Wrote: Of course this thread is derailed by know-it-alls who know absolutely nothing about UNC, NC politics, and the general state of college athletics in NC.
• Stop bringing up Oklahoma and Oklahoma State. This is a totally different situation with their own governance and has nothing to do with the UNC system.
• The UC system might be a bit similar, but California could be its own country with its own politics which don't emphasize athletics quite the way we do on Tobacco Road. Plus, it's obvious UC Berkeley and UCLA don't have the same relationship—culturally or otherwise—as Carolina and State. The lack of synergy was evident in summer 2022.
• We just saw Arizona State get dragged kicking and screaming into the Big XII. Anyone want to cite that example? Their PTB were very vocal the entire time while people here blew it off.
• Are there some people that want Carolina in the SEC? Sure. Big Ten? Sure. ACC? Absolutely. Are there people high up that actually pull strings that want Carolina and State to remain together? Definitely.
• Adding Carolina and State is the ONLY way a conference gets the entire state. It's more like the power of having Texas and TAMU together than Ohio State and Cincinnati. It's more like Indiana and Purdue vs Georgia and Georgia Tech. People, you just have to trust me on this lol... I might know a liiiiitle bit more about it than you.
IMO, Oklahoma and Oklahoma State is a relevant comparison because, specific details aside (and yes, I know the devil is often in the details, but still), I think there is a similarity in that in both Oklahoma and North Carolina there was/is strong political sentiment that the schools stay in the same conference.
I do understand that the state of North Carolina has, and may well exercise, its power to mandate that UNC not go anywhere that NC State isn't brought along with too. I just don't believe that will sway the decision making of the B1G or SEC.
That's because ...
As to your last point, to me, UNC is the flagship university of the state. If a conference gets UNC, then IMO it gets more than enough of the state to satisfy whatever revenue or status claims it may want. I don't see it in any way like having Texas and Texas AM. IMO, Texas AM brought a ton of state value to the SEC, and Texas adds a ton more. Texas is so vast and rich and football crazy that it, to use your term above, is kind of like its own country such that even having one of the two powerhouse schools means there is plenty of value in having the other too. But if the SEC or B1G had UNC, then the added value of NC State would be trivial, IMO, not nearly worth it.
So IMO, either the SEC or B1G would likely give the state of North Carolina the choice of allowing UNC to join them, or neither joining them.
Maybe we'll see.
That's fine, we can disagree here. NC is the ninth largest state by population and growing like crazy while Oklahoma is at 28 and growing at around half the rate.
(01-20-2024 01:02 AM)TeamRamRod1 Wrote: They have to make noise for their constituents but when it comes down to it, they know it's better to have 1 school in a P2 conference than no schools in a P2 conference.
Strongly disagree.
I think NC politicians don’t mind or actually prefer UNC and NC State staying in the ACC.
People have to realize that the ACC is a very North Carolina-centric conference. Its HQ is there. Its football championship is held in Charlotte, and many ACC tournaments happen in North Carolina.
I remember reading posts on here about how UNC + Duke would be a pair, and I was met with backlash for saying it would be UNC + NC State, not UNC + Duke. State politics is a crazy thing, and Duke isn't part of it.
That said, I'm still not convinced UNC will have an in-state partner at all if/when they move for more money.
(01-19-2024 08:56 PM)esayem Wrote: • Adding Carolina and State is the ONLY way a conference gets the entire state. It's more like the power of having Texas and TAMU together than Ohio State and Cincinnati. It's more like Indiana and Purdue vs Georgia and Georgia Tech. People, you just have to trust me on this lol... I might know a liiiiitle bit more about it than you.
The SEC/Big Ten doesn't need the "entire state". They would be fine with just the top brand.
(01-20-2024 12:35 PM)Yosef181 Wrote: I remember reading posts on here about how UNC + Duke would be a pair, and I was met with backlash for saying it would be UNC + NC State, not UNC + Duke. State politics is a crazy thing, and Duke isn't part of it.
That said, I'm still not convinced UNC will have an in-state partner at all if/when they move for more money.
FWIW, if someone were to tell me that five years from now, either UNC and Duke or UNC and NC State were in the SEC or B1G and to guess which, I would guess UNC + Duke.
IMO, Duke, as an elite private with blue blood hoops, brings genuine and complementary value that NC State does not.
(01-20-2024 10:49 AM)Fighting Muskie Wrote: My thoughts regarding UNC/NC St:
From an SEC perspective, if going to 20, I think it’s worth it to make those 4 Florida St, Clemson, UNC, and NC St
ESPN, their partner, ultimately wants to keep the Big 10 and other broadcasters out of NC & VA. It precludes the Big 10 from making an academic minded UVA & UNC pairing, forcing the SEC to counter with NC St and VT. UVA is not a great sports school and has a smaller following than instate VT. They look far less attractive to the Big 10 without the Tar Heels.
NC St has the potential to grow into an “SEC-style” brand where Duke doesn’t. It simply doesn’t make sense to pay football blueblood level pay to a basketball blueblood. ESPN still retains Duke tv rights in the ACC.
If the SEC needs a 20th school and NC state politics are posing a potential hurdle, NC St is the way to go.
If NC politics aren’t a problem, choose Miami or VT.
Virginia and Virginia Tech may end up in a similar situation to UNC and NC State. If that happens, the SEC may not be able to take VT with out UVA. NC State would be #20 then because Florida and Florida State don't want Miami (FL) in the same conference with them, let alone Florida and Florida State wanting to be in the same conference together. The same could be said about Clemson and South Carolina.
We’re past the days where politicians could influence realignment as it was the case for Baylor and Texas Tech in the 1990’s and Virginia Tech in the 2000’s.
See Texas/Texas A&M, Oklahoma/Oklahoma State, Cal/UCLA, Oregon/Oregon State, Washington/Washington State.
North Carolina will fight any board, legislature, politicians at the state and federal level if its inclusion in the P2 is jeopardized by its little brother North Carolina State.
Don’t ever underestimate what people or in this case schools do for money.
The same applies to the Kansas and Arizona schools if a P2 spot for just one is offered. North Carolina is not big enough to warrant two schools in the same conference like California, Texas and Florida.
North Carolina or NC State won't be able to leave the ACC without approval from the UNC System president and its board of governors under a proposal to be considered by the board next week.
The policy change would allow either the president or the board of governors to stop a conference change. It comes at a time when Florida State is challenging the conference in court and the biggest brands in college athletics are concentrating in two major conferences — the SEC and the Big Ten.
An initial draft of the policy change was first considered in October. It would have given the president "the opportunity to weigh in."
The current version gives the president and board explicit power to approve or thwart a move.
...
"I really think Carolina and State ought to be in the same conference," said House Speaker Tim Moore, R-Cleveland. "I really think they ought to do that. And I think you’d have a lot of resistance to seeing them split off in different conferences."
Said Senate leader Phil Berger, R-Rockingham: "There is something about the rivalries that exist that i think would be damaged if we have the larger schools within North Carolina in different conferences. I would not like to see that happen. Whether or not that’s something that would be appropriate for the legislature to step in or not, I have not really thought about it that way."
This potentially has very significant implications. If the B10 doesn't want NCSU, UNC's only possible P2 destination is the SEC.
ESPN is certainly not in a rush. So if that happens, I would expect the earliest to be 2033 when the SEC's media contract expires.
Thank you Senator Berger for ensuring the ACC will stay together!
(01-20-2024 12:58 PM)UTEPDallas Wrote: We’re past the days where politicians could influence realignment as it was the case for Baylor and Texas Tech in the 1990’s and Virginia Tech in the 2000’s.
See Texas/Texas A&M, Oklahoma/Oklahoma State, Cal/UCLA, Oregon/Oregon State, Washington/Washington State.
North Carolina will fight any board, legislature, politicians at the state and federal level if its inclusion in the P2 is jeopardized by its little brother North Carolina State.
Don’t ever underestimate what people or in this case schools do for money.
The same applies to the Kansas and Arizona schools if a P2 spot for just one is offered. North Carolina is not big enough to warrant two schools in the same conference like California, Texas and Florida.
Going to disagree, neither UNC or NCSU can fight his proposal should it come to pass nor would they. I know it's hard for some on this board to understand but it's not even clear UNC wants to leave
01-20-2024 01:18 PM
bill dazzle
Craft beer and urban living enthusiast
Posts: 10,729
Joined: Aug 2016
Reputation: 983
I Root For: Vandy/Memphis/DePaul/UNC
Location: Nashville
North Carolina is the nation's ninth-most populated state, with an estimated about 10.8 million people. The state and Georgia (No. 8 with 11.03 million) will move past Illinois (No. 6) and Ohio (No. 7) sooner rather than later (if current growth rates for the four states remain).
It's hard to fathom neither the SEC nor the Big Ten wanting a presence in North Carolina. Now, whether UNC would want to leave the ACC for either league (and with or without NCST) ...
The SEC will be very strategic with additional slots they extend. No North Carolina school may be in the first two that are added IF the SEC adds anytime soon. I'd say FSU will get picked, and maybe Clemson, if they follow right behind FSU exiting the ACC if the will is there. Clemson is not a slam-dunk right now, and will need to overcome some resistance from three, possibly four, mostly nearby SEC schools. FSU and Clemson are the ACC's football heavyweights and will add the money to the pot.
(This post was last modified: 01-20-2024 01:46 PM by OdinFrigg.)
What the board is telling them is any move needs to be justified by a budget plan. They need to have their ducks in a row. It doesn't bind them.
IMO they are realists. They recognize UNC has a high likelihood of getting an SEC or B1G invite at some point of time, but NC State has almost exactly zero chance. Instead the requirement to present a financial plan is an opportunity to enact a "Calimony" subsidy for NC State, where both schools get more money should the Tarheels get an invite. And they really can't turn it down, since it's $50M or more per year difference in revenue by the start of the 2030s.
(01-20-2024 12:58 PM)UTEPDallas Wrote: We’re past the days where politicians could influence realignment as it was the case for Baylor and Texas Tech in the 1990’s and Virginia Tech in the 2000’s.
See Texas/Texas A&M, Oklahoma/Oklahoma State, Cal/UCLA, Oregon/Oregon State, Washington/Washington State.
North Carolina will fight any board, legislature, politicians at the state and federal level if its inclusion in the P2 is jeopardized by its little brother North Carolina State.
Don’t ever underestimate what people or in this case schools do for money.
The same applies to the Kansas and Arizona schools if a P2 spot for just one is offered. North Carolina is not big enough to warrant two schools in the same conference like California, Texas and Florida.
Going to disagree, neither UNC or NCSU can fight his proposal should it come to pass nor would they. I know it's hard for some on this board to understand but it's not even clear UNC wants to leave
Haven’t we learned anything in the last two decades?
When it comes to realignment, expect the unexpected.
This is not 2010.
North Carolina can say they love the ACC and there’s no other place they would rather be. We have to be very naive if we believe that. As JRSec pointed in another thread days ago, giants don’t move unless they have to. UNC might not be a giant like USC, Texas and Oklahoma but they’re big enough in the ACC to be considered a “giant.” The writing is in the wall for the ACC won’t be part of the power structure. I find it hard to believe UNC would decline an invitation to a P2 league because of their little brother NC State and their love for the ACC.
/
UNC and NC State becoming a package deal?
