I'm all for merging.

I'm against divisions. Every conference should be division-less and champions determined by 2 highest ranked teams.

(03-13-2024 04:09 PM)Sicembear11 Wrote:  

(03-13-2024 04:00 PM)Garrettabc Wrote:  The ACC did not take Utah, Az or ASU is because they made a play to get UW and UO and lost out on them at the 11th hour. The ACC also suffers from a clear vision; in their minds they still think they are just a regional conference and they don't really want to expand further west. I think we passed the point of no return in a lot of areas including unequal revenue sharing and going way out of our region.

Stan, Cal, SMU are wonderful money grab opportunities and the ACC seized it. It will boost the ACC14's revenue by another $7-8m a year. The hypocritical part of all of this is that the drum was always beat that the ACC was supposed to be an equal revenue sharing conference, if we passed that threshold of being an unequal revenue sharing conference, then why not use half of that new found wealth to pacify FSU or any other potential dissenters?

If FSU, Clem, UNC are rocking the boat (they were not pro-expansion), then $3m of that extra $7-8m from the 12 other conference mates given to FSU, Clem and UNC would stabilize everything.

Isn't that happening based on bonus payouts for making the playoffs and results in the conference? Most years that will be FSU and Clemson.

I don't think the bonus payments can close the gap in any meaningful sense

(03-13-2024 04:09 PM)Sicembear11 Wrote:  

(03-13-2024 04:00 PM)Garrettabc Wrote:  The ACC did not take Utah, Az or ASU is because they made a play to get UW and UO and lost out on them at the 11th hour. The ACC also suffers from a clear vision; in their minds they still think they are just a regional conference and they don't really want to expand further west. I think we passed the point of no return in a lot of areas including unequal revenue sharing and going way out of our region.

Stan, Cal, SMU are wonderful money grab opportunities and the ACC seized it. It will boost the ACC14's revenue by another $7-8m a year. The hypocritical part of all of this is that the drum was always beat that the ACC was supposed to be an equal revenue sharing conference, if we passed that threshold of being an unequal revenue sharing conference, then why not use half of that new found wealth to pacify FSU or any other potential dissenters?

If FSU, Clem, UNC are rocking the boat (they were not pro-expansion), then $3m of that extra $7-8m from the 12 other conference mates given to FSU, Clem and UNC would stabilize everything.

Isn't that happening based on bonus payouts for making the playoffs and results in the conference? Most years that will be FSU and Clemson.

The ACC resolution to pass the Success Incentive Initiative happened before SMU, Stan and Cal came a long, but you are correct, part of that money coming in from them will go to the SII in which Duke and UNC will also benefit from their elite basketball.

(03-13-2024 04:12 PM)ArmoredUpKnight Wrote:  I'm all for merging.

I'm against divisions. Every conference should be division-less and champions determined by 2 highest ranked teams.

If anything, do pods of 4, play everyone in your pod annually and play 1 team from the other 7 pods or weight the schedule to be a little more geographical.

(03-13-2024 04:35 PM)GoBuckeyes1047 Wrote:  

(03-13-2024 04:12 PM)ArmoredUpKnight Wrote:  I'm all for merging.

I'm against divisions. Every conference should be division-less and champions determined by 2 highest ranked teams.

If anything, do pods of 4, play everyone in your pod annually and play 1 team from the other 7 pods or weight the schedule to be a little more geographical.

I'm for playing games that energize the fans. After being in a conference for a while, you know which games do it and which don't.

(03-13-2024 04:35 PM)GoBuckeyes1047 Wrote:  

(03-13-2024 04:12 PM)ArmoredUpKnight Wrote:  I'm all for merging.

I'm against divisions. Every conference should be division-less and champions determined by 2 highest ranked teams.

If anything, do pods of 4, play everyone in your pod annually and play 1 team from the other 7 pods or weight the schedule to be a little more geographical.

Some pods would be geographically smaller than others, creating an advantage for the Texas pod.

Just program the scheduling computer to create a schedule where the travel distance averages out.

Reading what its writers have been saying for the last year, I get the impression that ESPN prefers all M-level schools to herd themselves into one catch-all conference—or at least one entity for the purposes of negotiation. The now-official M level appears likely to contain the same collection of schools regardless of how the lines around them are drawn.

In ESPN's view, the centrally-situated B12 seems to be as good a bucket as any to throw everyone into. It remains for coastal schools with fussy academic preferences to take the hint.

2028 is shaping up to be a watershed year. ESPN has already chosen that as the year it could be freed of any obligations to the ACC. It is set to make its decision about this in 2025; by that year the interim CFP structure will be in place.

2028 is looking more and more like the starting gun for The Next Big Thing. For football, anyway. Basketball may take more time to settle. We'll see.

I'm gonna go with this thinking of an ACC/B12 merger. If Clemson, FSU, Kansas, Miami, UNC, and UVA left for the P2 (I'm assuming ND refuses to join). I could see 2 options if the ACC and B12 merged.

1. Stay put with 27 football and 28 olympic teams.

2. Expand to 32 football and 33 olympic teams (my 5 would be UCONN, USF, SDSU, Oregon St., and Washington St., but could see Memphis instead of WSU)

A 3rd option if the ACC/B12 didn't lose as many teams and/or if they also wanted to add teams like Colorado St., Tulane, and UNLV, but I think would be less likely, could go up to 35 football and 36 olympic teams.

(03-16-2024 10:40 AM)GoBuckeyes1047 Wrote:  I'm gonna go with this thinking of an ACC/B12 merger. If Clemson, FSU, Kansas, Miami, UNC, and UVA left for the P2 (I'm assuming ND refuses to join). I could see 2 options if the ACC and B12 merged.

1. Stay put with 27 football and 28 olympic teams.

2. Expand to 32 football and 33 olympic teams (my 5 would be UCONN, USF, SDSU, Oregon St., and Washington St., but could see Memphis instead of WSU)

A 3rd option if the ACC/B12 didn't lose as many teams and/or if they also wanted to add teams like Colorado St., Tulane, and UNLV, but I think would be less likely, could go up to 35 football and 36 olympic teams.

There's no need for a merger for NCAA purposes. Just for administrative and TV contracts. But the ACC is still tied up for another dozen years, unless there are serious raids.

(03-14-2024 10:17 PM)Gitanole Wrote:  Reading what its writers have been saying for the last year, I get the impression that ESPN prefers all M-level schools to herd themselves into one catch-all conference—or at least one entity for the purposes of negotiation. The now-official M level appears likely to contain the same collection of schools regardless of how the lines around them are drawn.

In ESPN's view, the centrally-situated B12 seems to be as good a bucket as any to throw everyone into. It remains for coastal schools with fussy academic preferences to take the hint.

2028 is shaping up to be a watershed year. ESPN has already chosen that as the year it could be freed of any obligations to the ACC. It is set to make its decision about this in 2025; by that year the interim CFP structure will be in place.

2028 is looking more and more like the starting gun for The Next Big Thing. For football, anyway. Basketball may take more time to settle. We'll see.

Ehh? Most writers don’t have a clue or even care about what ESPN really prefers on this issue. More importantly, senior ESPN leaders probably don’t have an opinion on the obscure possibility of M2 versus M1. Market forces, individual school choices and conference relationships can all overwhelm the marginal agency of ESPN. They understand that elite level collegiate-athletics is transitioning into a non-amateur model and schools/conferences are focused on their own needs. From the perspective of ESPN, why involve yourself on this issue?

IMHO, ESPN is much more focused on the FSU-ACC lawsuits and the ACC GORs. The potential ramifications of different scenarios are more immediate and important for ESPN.

I think an alliance of sorts makes sense, maybe not a merger though as that has a lot of ramifications on existing contracts. As an allied group of conferences, they can collectively bargain a bit better than if they’re busy tossing knives at each other while the B1G and SEC continuously scoop up more resources

(03-13-2024 12:42 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  Let’s say that Florida St and Clemson do leave the ACC shortly but UNC decides to stay put and without them, additional expansion by the P2 then grinds to a halt.

The ACC backfills with USF and then enters a cooperative partnership with the Big 12–both parties agree to swap their geographic outliers and settle out to the following divisions/pods:

Big 12 Pacific: Stanford, Cal, Arizona, Ariz St, Utah, BYU
Big 12 Plains: Colorado, Kansas, K St, Iowa St, Okla St
Big 12 Southwest: TCU, SMU, Baylor, Texas Tech, Houston

ACC North: BC, Pitt, Cuse, WVU, Cincinnati, L’ville, USF, UCF
ACC South: VT, UVA, NC St, UNC, WF, Duke, GT, Miami

It makes too much sense to actually happen.

That makes sense geographically but what if you tried to split them up academically by US News national rank?

ACC-20 members by US News rank
Stanford - 3
Duke - 7
Cal - 15
Notre Dame(non football) - 20
UNC - 22
VA - 24
Wake - 29
GT - 33
BC - 39
VT - 47
Flor St - 53
UConn - 58
NCSU-60
Miami - 67
Pitt - 67
Cuse - 67
Tulane - 73
Clem - 86
SMU - 89
USF - 89

Big 12 - 20 members by US news rankings
Bay - 93
TCU - 98
Col - 105
Ariz St - 105
Iowa St - 115
Utah - 115
Arizona - 115
BYU - 115
UCF - 124
Hou - 133
Cincy - 142
Ore St - 142
Kansas - 151
Kan St - 170
Wash St - 178
OK St - 185
Lou - 195
WV - 216
TT - 216
Memphis - 269

(03-16-2024 01:20 PM)goofus Wrote:  

(03-13-2024 12:42 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  Let’s say that Florida St and Clemson do leave the ACC shortly but UNC decides to stay put and without them, additional expansion by the P2 then grinds to a halt.

The ACC backfills with USF and then enters a cooperative partnership with the Big 12–both parties agree to swap their geographic outliers and settle out to the following divisions/pods:

Big 12 Pacific: Stanford, Cal, Arizona, Ariz St, Utah, BYU
Big 12 Plains: Colorado, Kansas, K St, Iowa St, Okla St
Big 12 Southwest: TCU, SMU, Baylor, Texas Tech, Houston

ACC North: BC, Pitt, Cuse, WVU, Cincinnati, L’ville, USF, UCF
ACC South: VT, UVA, NC St, UNC, WF, Duke, GT, Miami

It makes too much sense to actually happen.

That makes sense geographically but what if you tried to split them up academically by US News national rank?

ACC-20 members by US News rank
Stanford - 3
Duke - 7
Cal - 15
Notre Dame(non football) - 20
UNC - 22
VA - 24
Wake - 29
GT - 33
BC - 39
VT - 47
Flor St - 53
UConn - 58
NCSU-60
Miami - 67
Pitt - 67
Cuse - 67
Tulane - 73
Clem - 86
SMU - 89
USF - 89

Big 12 - 20 members by US news rankings
Bay - 93
TCU - 98
Col - 105
Ariz St - 105
Iowa St - 115
Utah - 115
Arizona - 115
BYU - 115
UCF - 124
Hou - 133
Cincy - 142
Ore St - 142
Kansas - 151
Kan St - 170
Wash St - 178
OK St - 185
Lou - 195
WV - 216
TT - 216
Memphis - 269

Wow.

(03-13-2024 12:42 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  Let’s say that Florida St and Clemson do leave the ACC shortly but UNC decides to stay put and without them, additional expansion by the P2 then grinds to a halt.

The ACC backfills with USF and then enters a cooperative partnership with the Big 12–both parties agree to swap their geographic outliers and settle out to the following divisions/pods:

Big 12 Pacific: Stanford, Cal, Arizona, Ariz St, Utah, BYU
Big 12 Plains: Colorado, Kansas, K St, Iowa St, Okla St
Big 12 Southwest: TCU, SMU, Baylor, Texas Tech, Houston

ACC North: BC, Pitt, Cuse, WVU, Cincinnati, L’ville, USF, UCF
ACC South: VT, UVA, NC St, UNC, WF, Duke, GT, Miami

It makes too much sense to actually happen.

You clearly don't understand how Yormark operates.

If Florida St and Clemson leave, there will be a period of time where everyone weighs their options. Like what happened in the Big 12 when Texas and OU left, and the Pac 12 when USC and UCLA left.

From there, I suspect the Big 10 and SEC cherry pick the remaining ACC schools at discount rates, and the Big 12 takes Louisville, Pitt and maybe two more.

The rest will either stick together and backfill from the American or go Independent and join the Big East in basketball.

(03-13-2024 12:42 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  Let’s say that Florida St and Clemson do leave the ACC shortly but UNC decides to stay put and without them, additional expansion by the P2 then grinds to a halt.

The ACC backfills with USF and then enters a cooperative partnership with the Big 12–both parties agree to swap their geographic outliers and settle out to the following divisions/pods:

Big 12 Pacific: Stanford, Cal, Arizona, Ariz St, Utah, BYU
Big 12 Plains: Colorado, Kansas, K St, Iowa St, Okla St
Big 12 Southwest: TCU, SMU, Baylor, Texas Tech, Houston

ACC North: BC, Pitt, Cuse, WVU, Cincinnati, L’ville, USF, UCF
ACC South: VT, UVA, NC St, UNC, WF, Duke, GT, Miami

It makes too much sense to actually happen.

I too advocate for common sense geography while maintain a certain power structure. The only sticklers I have is the three division setup of the Big XII and putting UCF and USF in a "north division". You clarified why you set up the Big XII the way you did, and it's someone I can get behind, even though it's still odd looking. Other than that, I agree with you that this will never happen because it makes way too much sense.

(03-16-2024 03:50 PM)CougarRed Wrote:  

(03-13-2024 12:42 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  Let’s say that Florida St and Clemson do leave the ACC shortly but UNC decides to stay put and without them, additional expansion by the P2 then grinds to a halt.

The ACC backfills with USF and then enters a cooperative partnership with the Big 12–both parties agree to swap their geographic outliers and settle out to the following divisions/pods:

Big 12 Pacific: Stanford, Cal, Arizona, Ariz St, Utah, BYU
Big 12 Plains: Colorado, Kansas, K St, Iowa St, Okla St
Big 12 Southwest: TCU, SMU, Baylor, Texas Tech, Houston

ACC North: BC, Pitt, Cuse, WVU, Cincinnati, L’ville, USF, UCF
ACC South: VT, UVA, NC St, UNC, WF, Duke, GT, Miami

It makes too much sense to actually happen.

You clearly don't understand how Yormark operates.

If Florida St and Clemson leave, there will be a period of time where everyone weighs their options. Like what happened in the Big 12 when Texas and OU left, and the Pac 12 when USC and UCLA left.

From there, I suspect the Big 10 and SEC cherry pick the remaining ACC schools at discount rates, and the Big 12 takes Louisville, Pitt and maybe two more.

The rest will either stick together and backfill from the American or go Independent and join the Big East in basketball.

You clearly missed the final sentence of the OP.

(03-16-2024 04:06 PM)andybible1995 Wrote:  

(03-13-2024 12:42 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  Let’s say that Florida St and Clemson do leave the ACC shortly but UNC decides to stay put and without them, additional expansion by the P2 then grinds to a halt.

The ACC backfills with USF and then enters a cooperative partnership with the Big 12–both parties agree to swap their geographic outliers and settle out to the following divisions/pods:

Big 12 Pacific: Stanford, Cal, Arizona, Ariz St, Utah, BYU
Big 12 Plains: Colorado, Kansas, K St, Iowa St, Okla St
Big 12 Southwest: TCU, SMU, Baylor, Texas Tech, Houston

ACC North: BC, Pitt, Cuse, WVU, Cincinnati, L’ville, USF, UCF
ACC South: VT, UVA, NC St, UNC, WF, Duke, GT, Miami

It makes too much sense to actually happen.

I too advocate for common sense geography while maintain a certain power structure. The only sticklers I have is the three division setup of the Big XII and putting UCF and USF in a "north division". You clarified why you set up the Big XII the way you did, and it's someone I can get behind, even though it's still odd looking. Other than that, I agree with you that this will never happen because it makes way too much sense.

Everything south of the panhandle is culturally northern. As with the “Big 12” pods, it was more about preserving rivalries and grouping schools with history together. Greater Tobacco Road isn’t going to want to be separated, and that’s 7 schools. Having Miami as their 8th made sense from an academic perspective. UCF and USF falling into a division of all ex Big East schools works too.

(03-13-2024 12:42 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  Let’s say that Florida St and Clemson do leave the ACC shortly but UNC decides to stay put and without them, additional expansion by the P2 then grinds to a halt.

The ACC backfills with USF and then enters a cooperative partnership with the Big 12–both parties agree to swap their geographic outliers and settle out to the following divisions/pods:

Big 12 Pacific: Stanford, Cal, Arizona, Ariz St, Utah, BYU
Big 12 Plains: Colorado, Kansas, K St, Iowa St, Okla St
Big 12 Southwest: TCU, SMU, Baylor, Texas Tech, Houston

ACC North: BC, Pitt, Cuse, WVU, Cincinnati, L’ville, USF, UCF
ACC South: VT, UVA, NC St, UNC, WF, Duke, GT, Miami

It makes too much sense to actually happen.

Interesting concept.

If you don't mind, this is how I would rearrange the deck chairs

ACC North:
BC, Pitt, Syracuse, West Virginia, Cincinnati, Louisville
ACC Coastal:
UVa, VT, Carolina, Duke, GT, Miami
ACC Atlantic:
Wake Forest, NC State, Clemson, FSU, TCU, SMU

Big 12 West:
Stanford, Cal, Utah, BYU, ASU, Arizona, Colorado, TT
Big 12 East:
Houston, Baylor, OSU, Kansas, KSU, ISU, UCF, USF

This gives the Big 12 and the ACC presence in both Florida and Texas

If, as in your original premise, that Clemson and FSU leave the ACC, the divisions then move to:

ACC North
BC, Syracuse, Pitt, WVU, Cincinnati, Louisville, VT, UVa
ACC South
Carolina, State, Wake, Duke, GT, Miami, TCU, SMU