(12-09-2014 04:44 PM)Dasville Wrote:  The only way I see Texas and ND in the ACC CCG is if they both agreed to 7 games. Texas would play every team in the Atlantic and ND would play everyone in the Coastal. They could flip every other year. That way the ACC can keep the importance of the Divisions so everyone has a shot at the Title. That would take care of the P5 requirement and still keep it in-house. That would be enough for the ACC to offer up the CCG. They both could keep their Networks and arrangements.

Texas and ND could actually double dip. Depending on who they schedule out of conference and how they do, they could fail to make the ACC CCG but still make the Playoff as an Independent. It could screw the ACC but we would be crying all the way to the bank.

Unless the ACC would be willing to give FSU a similar deal, I say BS.

(12-09-2014 05:38 PM)nole Wrote:  

(12-09-2014 04:44 PM)Dasville Wrote:  The only way I see Texas and ND in the ACC CCG is if they both agreed to 7 games. Texas would play every team in the Atlantic and ND would play everyone in the Coastal. They could flip every other year. That way the ACC can keep the importance of the Divisions so everyone has a shot at the Title. That would take care of the P5 requirement and still keep it in-house. That would be enough for the ACC to offer up the CCG. They both could keep their Networks and arrangements.

Texas and ND could actually double dip. Depending on who they schedule out of conference and how they do, they could fail to make the ACC CCG but still make the Playoff as an Independent. It could screw the ACC but we would be crying all the way to the bank.

Unless the ACC would be willing to give FSU a similar deal, I say BS.

The ACC most likely would be willing, but ESPN wouldn't and they know be$t.

(12-09-2014 05:37 PM)nzmorange Wrote:  

(12-09-2014 05:26 PM)lumberpack4 Wrote:  

(12-09-2014 03:33 PM)Marge Schott Wrote:  Why do people think Notre Dame would force the ACC to take Navy? That's just stupid talk.

No that's not stupid talk. ND could name their partner as the 16th member and get that member the 12 votes needed. The reason they would do that is to continue their loyalty to Navy who saved ND as a institution and have the Navy game continue as a conference game.

MD's exit from the ACC changes the nature of who is blackballed and who has become more attractive because MD is gone. Navy and West Virginia are the beneficiaries of that exit as MD would blackball both.

That's not to say Navy is ideal or preferred.

In fact the ACC does not need a 16th if the conference can become division-less or split into three divisions of five. There are cases for or against any internal league strutuctre and the internal structure would be integral to any addition.

For the record, only a few schools would add to the ACC's bottom line in a VERY significant way (adding $3 or million per year per team (about $50 million annually net or more):

Ohio State, Michigan, Michigan State, Tennessee, Alabama, LSU, Texas - this is not a large list. None of them are unhappy where they are.

Only a few schools would cover their additional costs to the league and make some money per team for the ACC (adding about $2 million or more or $30 million annually net):

Penn State, Indiana, Auburn, Florida, Oklahoma, Kansas, Illinois, Northwestern, Vandy, Ole Miss.

The following would pay their way but probably add no net revenue to the league:

West Virginia, Purdue, Miss State, Baylor, TCU, Ok, State, Iowa State, and perhaps Cincy.

The following would represent a sure net loss:

Tulane, Navy, UConn

Now, not every team mentioned above would be the least bit interested, some would never get to a vote, some already have too many blackballs against them.

MSU > PSU and Vandy & NW > WVU How do you figure?

New territory for the ACC and the ACC network. The current ACC footprint overlaps PA and into West Va so that's not virgin territory.

The ACC has no penetration into Michigan, other than the occasional ND game that is off interest to Michiganders. The same goes with TN although VT has a little market penetration into the Tri-Cities.

That doesn't mean that PSU or West Virginia would not be the better additions, just less likely to bump up the TV contract as much as adding completely virgin territory, although you might make the case that PSU delivers New Jersey and in that sense they would go to the top line. In fact you make a good case for that.

Look at it this way, what would Georgia or South Carolina add to the ACC from a TV standpoint.

(12-09-2014 05:45 PM)lumberpack4 Wrote:  

(12-09-2014 05:37 PM)nzmorange Wrote:  

(12-09-2014 05:26 PM)lumberpack4 Wrote:  

(12-09-2014 03:33 PM)Marge Schott Wrote:  Why do people think Notre Dame would force the ACC to take Navy? That's just stupid talk.

No that's not stupid talk. ND could name their partner as the 16th member and get that member the 12 votes needed. The reason they would do that is to continue their loyalty to Navy who saved ND as a institution and have the Navy game continue as a conference game.

MD's exit from the ACC changes the nature of who is blackballed and who has become more attractive because MD is gone. Navy and West Virginia are the beneficiaries of that exit as MD would blackball both.

That's not to say Navy is ideal or preferred.

In fact the ACC does not need a 16th if the conference can become division-less or split into three divisions of five. There are cases for or against any internal league strutuctre and the internal structure would be integral to any addition.

For the record, only a few schools would add to the ACC's bottom line in a VERY significant way (adding $3 or million per year per team (about $50 million annually net or more):

Ohio State, Michigan, Michigan State, Tennessee, Penn State, Alabama, LSU, Texas - this is not a large list. Only one is a little unhappy where they are. FIXED

Only a few schools would cover their additional costs to the league and make some money per team for the ACC (adding about $2 million or more or $30 million annually net):

Penn State, Indiana, Auburn, Florida, Oklahoma, Kansas, Illinois, Northwestern, Vandy, Ole Miss.

The following would pay their way but probably add no net revenue to the league:

West Virginia, Purdue, Miss State, Baylor, TCU, Ok, State, Iowa State, and perhaps Cincy.

The following would represent a sure net loss:

Tulane, Navy, UConn

Now, not every team mentioned above would be the least bit interested, some would never get to a vote, some already have too many blackballs against them.

MSU > PSU and Vandy & NW > WVU How do you figure?

New territory for the ACC and the ACC network. The current ACC footprint overlaps PA and into West Va so that's not virgin territory.

The ACC has no penetration into Michigan, other than the occasional ND game that is off interest to Michiganders. The same goes with TN although VT has a little market penetration into the Tri-Cities.

That doesn't mean that PSU or West Virginia would not be the better additions, just less likely to bump up the TV contract as much as adding completely virgin territory, although you might make the case that PSU delivers New Jersey and in that sense they would go to the top line. In fact you make a good case for that.

Look at it this way, what would Georgia or South Carolina add to the ACC from a TV standpoint.

(12-09-2014 05:45 PM)lumberpack4 Wrote:  

(12-09-2014 05:37 PM)nzmorange Wrote:  

(12-09-2014 05:26 PM)lumberpack4 Wrote:  

(12-09-2014 03:33 PM)Marge Schott Wrote:  Why do people think Notre Dame would force the ACC to take Navy? That's just stupid talk.

No that's not stupid talk. ND could name their partner as the 16th member and get that member the 12 votes needed. The reason they would do that is to continue their loyalty to Navy who saved ND as a institution and have the Navy game continue as a conference game.

MD's exit from the ACC changes the nature of who is blackballed and who has become more attractive because MD is gone. Navy and West Virginia are the beneficiaries of that exit as MD would blackball both.

That's not to say Navy is ideal or preferred.

In fact the ACC does not need a 16th if the conference can become division-less or split into three divisions of five. There are cases for or against any internal league strutuctre and the internal structure would be integral to any addition.

For the record, only a few schools would add to the ACC's bottom line in a VERY significant way (adding $3 or million per year per team (about $50 million annually net or more):

Ohio State, Michigan, Michigan State, Tennessee, Alabama, LSU, Texas - this is not a large list. None of them are unhappy where they are.

Only a few schools would cover their additional costs to the league and make some money per team for the ACC (adding about $2 million or more or $30 million annually net):

Penn State, Indiana, Auburn, Florida, Oklahoma, Kansas, Illinois, Northwestern, Vandy, Ole Miss.

The following would pay their way but probably add no net revenue to the league:

West Virginia, Purdue, Miss State, Baylor, TCU, Ok, State, Iowa State, and perhaps Cincy.

The following would represent a sure net loss:

Tulane, Navy, UConn

Now, not every team mentioned above would be the least bit interested, some would never get to a vote, some already have too many blackballs against them.

MSU > PSU and Vandy & NW > WVU How do you figure?

New territory for the ACC and the ACC network. The current ACC footprint overlaps PA and into West Va so that's not virgin territory.

The ACC has no penetration into Michigan, other than the occasional ND game that is off interest to Michiganders. The same goes with TN although VT has a little market penetration into the Tri-Cities.

That doesn't mean that PSU or West Virginia would not be the better additions, just less likely to bump up the TV contract as much as adding completely virgin territory, although you might make the case that PSU delivers New Jersey and in that sense they would go to the top line. In fact you make a good case for that.

Look at it this way, what would Georgia or South Carolina add to the ACC from a TV standpoint.

"New territory for the ACC and the ACC network."
How does this create value? PSU has more fans and more interesting match-ups. That creates attention/interest/passion, which can be monetized. Geography cannot.

"Look at it this way, what would Georgia or South Carolina add to the ACC from a TV standpoint."
Both would add fans and rivalry games. Both of those drive up carriage rates and ratings (which in turn translates into higher advertising fees). In short, they would add money.

(12-09-2014 05:26 PM)lumberpack4 Wrote:  

(12-09-2014 03:33 PM)Marge Schott Wrote:  Why do people think Notre Dame would force the ACC to take Navy? That's just stupid talk.

No that's not stupid talk. ND could name their partner as the 16th member and get that member the 12 votes needed. The reason they would do that is to continue their loyalty to Navy who saved ND as a institution and have the Navy game continue as a conference game.

MD's exit from the ACC changes the nature of who is blackballed and who has become more attractive because MD is gone. Navy and West Virginia are the beneficiaries of that exit as MD would blackball both.

That's not to say Navy is ideal or preferred.

In fact the ACC does not need a 16th if the conference can become division-less or split into three divisions of five. There are cases for or against any internal league strutuctre and the internal structure would be integral to any addition.

For the record, only a few schools would add to the ACC's bottom line in a VERY significant way (adding $3 or million per year per team (about $50 million annually net or more):

Ohio State, Michigan, Michigan State, Tennessee, Alabama, LSU, Texas - this is not a large list. None of them are unhappy where they are.

Only a few schools would cover their additional costs to the league and make some money per team for the ACC (adding about $2 million or more or $30 million annually net):

Penn State, Indiana, Auburn, Florida, Oklahoma, Kansas, Illinois, Northwestern, Vandy, Ole Miss.

The following would pay their way but probably add no net revenue to the league:

West Virginia, Purdue, Miss State, Baylor, TCU, Ok, State, Iowa State, and perhaps Cincy.

The following would represent a sure net loss:

Tulane, Navy, UConn

Now, not every team mentioned above would be the least bit interested, some would never get to a vote, some already have too many blackballs against them.

What?!?! No Toronto? McGill? Dailhousie?

If Notre Dame is #15 .... this should be the #16 shopping list:


Giggity:
Tennessee
Pedo State


Meh:
Cincinnati
Kentucky
Rutgers


Ewww:
Maryland
West Virginia


:
UCONN

ACC Atlantic North:
Notre Dame, Syracuse, Pittsburgh, Boston College

ACC Atlantic South:
Virginia, Virginia Tech, Louisville, (Tennessee/Pedo State/Maryland/Cincinnati/Kentucky/WV/Rutgers)

ACC Coastal North:
Wake Forest, North Carolina, Duke, NC State

ACC Coastal South:
Georgia Tech, Clemson, Miami, FSU

(12-09-2014 06:19 PM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:  If Notre Dame is #15 .... this should be the #16 shopping list:


Giggity:
Tennessee
Pedo State


Meh:
Cincinnati
Kentucky
Rutgers


Ewww:
Maryland
West Virginia


:
UCONN

GTS, I see you are still on the Tennessee kick........well at least you are consistent.
The Vols don't really do much for me, but I really like the geography, and we could use another big stadium school.

(12-09-2014 06:33 PM)XLance Wrote:  GTS, I see you are still on the Tennessee kick........well at least you are consistent.
The Vols don't really do much for me, but I really like the geography, and we could use another big stadium school.

TN has enormous resources. Eastern TN is one of the best CFB markets in the country (Top 10). They travel well. They would help solidify deep south (read: good) bowl bids. They would be natural rivals with VT and GT. They're close to UofL. Pretty close to the triangle too (just under 5 hours straight down I-40). Strong geographical fit. Their biggest SEC rivalries aren't really rivalries not matter how crappy TN gets on the field (Vandy/Kentucky). It would be met with great approval of not just the TV execs but of the schools carrying the weight in football as well.

(12-09-2014 06:39 PM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:  

(12-09-2014 06:33 PM)XLance Wrote:  GTS, I see you are still on the Tennessee kick........well at least you are consistent.
The Vols don't really do much for me, but I really like the geography, and we could use another big stadium school.

TN has enormous resources. Eastern TN is one of the best CFB markets in the country (Top 10). They travel well. They would help solidify deep south (read: good) bowl bids. They would be natural rivals with VT and GT. They're close to UofL. Pretty close to the triangle too (just under 5 hours straight down I-40). Strong geographical fit. Their biggest SEC rivalries aren't really rivalries not matter how crappy TN gets on the field (Vandy/Kentucky). It would be met with great approval of not just the TV execs but of the schools carrying the weight in football as well.

Have you seen any evidence of interest on their part (school or fans)?

Navy isn't happening. Ever.

(12-09-2014 02:23 PM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  if the ACC needed a #16, I'd go in this order:

1. Cincinnati - gets into Ohio
2. Navy (football only) + Georgetown (all other sports) - gets into Maryland
3. Memphis - gets into Tennessee
4. Houston, Rice, or SMU - gets into Texas, but boy that's a long commute!

I hope it is Texas and Notre Dame. Then to minimize the traveling cost, it has to be North vs South.

North:
BC
Syracuse
Pitt
Notre Dame
VT
Virginia
Louisville
Miami

South:
Texas
Florida State
Clemson
GTech
UNC
Duke
NC State
Wake Forest

(12-09-2014 06:46 PM)XLance Wrote:  Have you seen any evidence of interest on their part (school or fans)?

Let's find out.

http://goo.gl/forms/EOuVRPXk7t

GTS,
North Carolina (the State) could re-claim the entire state of Tennessee.
Even better, we could finance the another uprising in hopes of recreating the State of Franklin (again).

I don't believe ND would lobby that hard for Navy. Outside of football, ND rarely schedules Navy. Yes, they did schedule a mens BB game this year. Navy football is G5 caliber but the rest of their (many, many) sports are FCS level. Navy has national name recognition but do they really deliver the MD/DC area?

If the ACC ever took Texas, even in some Notre Dame type of agreement, it'd be stupid to shut out Oklahoma, which is what basically all of you are saying. You take both, 100% of the time, every time.

(12-09-2014 06:54 PM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:  

(12-09-2014 06:46 PM)XLance Wrote:  Have you seen any evidence of interest on their part (school or fans)?

Let's find out.

http://goo.gl/forms/EOuVRPXk7t

Early returns suggest Pedo State and Couch Burner U as the realistic choices at least when it comes to fan support.

(12-09-2014 07:54 PM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:  

(12-09-2014 06:54 PM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:  

(12-09-2014 06:46 PM)XLance Wrote:  Have you seen any evidence of interest on their part (school or fans)?

Let's find out.

http://goo.gl/forms/EOuVRPXk7t

Early returns suggest Pedo State and Couch Burner U as the realistic choices at least when it comes to fan support.

SU, Pitt, BC, WVU/ND, PSU/ND, VT, Miami, and UL would be a lot of fun.
WF, Duke, UNC, NCSU, UVA, Clemson, GT, and FSU would also be a lot of fun.

Modified BIG EAST v. 90's ACC <-- The division race would feel like a conference race, and the conference championship game would be awesome because of the heightened division pride. There would also be true northern firepower to balance out the southern firepower.

1,000% endorse for GT a return to the 90's FB slate.