I am still seeing the Big chatter from time to time. What would happen? Notre Dame refuses to play football. So add West Virginia and Cincinnati. What do you think?

Boston College
Syracuse
Pittsburgh
West Virginia
Cincinnati
Louisville
Virginia Tech
North Carolina State
Duke
Wake Forest
Clemson
George Tech
Florida State
Miami

Hypothetically, what if we didn't speculate on conference shifts until SOMETHING happens that might set things in motion???

It is difficult to see UNC going somewhere without having to take Duke and NC State along. It is difficult to see UVA going somewhere without having to take VT along. And by the time you've collected all that baggage together, they're going to want GT to come along, and GT is going to want Clemson to come along, and Clemson is going to want FSU to come along. The nucleus of this conference is fairly well tight nit. The Big East teams, with the exception of VT due to political reasons, do not share those bonds. If this conference were to split it would be because the ACC 9 + VT went elsewhere, likely to form a league similar in nature to my signature.

(09-24-2015 01:51 PM)Wilkie01 Wrote:  I am still seeing the Big chatter from time to time. What would happen? Notre Dame refuses to play football. So add West Virginia and Cincinnati. What do you think?

Boston College
Syracuse
Pittsburgh
West Virginia
Cincinnati
Louisville
Virginia Tech
North Carolina State
Duke
Wake Forest
Clemson
George Tech
Florida State
Miami

Wilkie-- Luv Ya, but what is the purpose of this post other than simply mental 'bation?

It makes me feel queasy thinking about any team leaving the ACC because I think our conference is solid, but if I had to choose two going to the B1G, it would be Miami and BC.
At that point we could take 4.

Texas, Oklahoma, Kansas, WVU.

(09-24-2015 02:45 PM)IHAVETRIED Wrote:  

(09-24-2015 01:51 PM)Wilkie01 Wrote:  I am still seeing the Big chatter from time to time. What would happen? Notre Dame refuses to play football. So add West Virginia and Cincinnati. What do you think?

Boston College
Syracuse
Pittsburgh
West Virginia
Cincinnati
Louisville
Virginia Tech
North Carolina State
Duke
Wake Forest
Clemson
George Tech
Florida State
Miami

Wilkie-- Luv Ya, but what is the purpose of this post other than simply mental 'bation?

FSU guys were talking about it. But it makes you wonder. The Big still wants UVA and NC as 15 and 16.

Here is where I got the idea from this post on this board. Discord in Chapel Hill?

If (hypothetically) Carolina and UVa left the ACC, the conference would cease to exist.

(09-24-2015 02:51 PM)Wilkie01 Wrote:  FSU guys were talking about it. But it makes you wonder.

No it doesn't.

Please merge this thread with the Discord in Chapel Hill nonsense...

Hypothetically the ACC could add 5-6 from the Big 12 with Texas, Oklahoma & friends to become a stronger athletic conference.

If ONLY UNC and UVa left the ACC, ESPN would pay the same for the remaining 12 as they now pay for 14 (because the league wouldn't lose any market and not that much content, tbh - remember, football is worth 4X as much as basketball). In other words, I think every other team's payout would increase by about 17%

(09-24-2015 03:35 PM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  If ONLY UNC and UVa left the ACC, ESPN would pay the same for the remaining 12 as they now pay for 14 (because the league wouldn't lose any market and not that much content, tbh - remember, football is worth 4X as much as basketball). In other words, I think every other team's payout would increase by about 17%

If it's just about the market and nothing else then the ACC should just replace UNC and UVA with Appalachian State and Old Dominion.

(09-24-2015 03:42 PM)jaminandjachin Wrote:  If it's just about the market and nothing else then the ACC should just replace UNC and UVA with Appalachian State and Old Dominion.

Maybe UNC really is intentionally bad at football.

(09-24-2015 05:13 PM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:  

(09-24-2015 03:42 PM)jaminandjachin Wrote:  If it's just about the market and nothing else then the ACC should just replace UNC and UVA with Appalachian State and Old Dominion.

Maybe UNC really is intentionally bad at football.

Swag you do realize I was being sarcastic right? The previous poster made it seem like the ACC losing UNC and UVA was no big deal because there would be no market loss. Well there's more to the story than just TV markets.

(09-24-2015 05:20 PM)jaminandjachin Wrote:  

(09-24-2015 05:13 PM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:  

(09-24-2015 03:42 PM)jaminandjachin Wrote:  If it's just about the market and nothing else then the ACC should just replace UNC and UVA with Appalachian State and Old Dominion.

Maybe UNC really is intentionally bad at football.

Swag you do realize I was being sarcastic right? The previous poster made it seem like the ACC losing UNC and UVA was no big deal because there would be no market loss. Well there's more to the story than just TV markets.

When it comes to the sport that drives the bus (football) ... mehhhhhhhhhhh well ya know he may have a point. West Virginia is, for TV dollars, an upgrade. Cincinnati is a push. Now taking in the whole picture (including hoops and academics and culture) I'd consider them a downgrade. I don't fancy being the SEC and having the ends justify any means. But if the ACC wants to go down the soulless road, UVA and UNC not being able to cast no votes would pretty much be the end of the line for the have-your-academic-cake-and-eat-it-too aspect of the conference. GT wants the academics and culture but wants balance with football and is willing to bend if it has to for the sake of football. That's why they voted for Louisville. Duke and maybe Wake would be the only votes left in the conference for UCONN-style teams. It'd be over for that voting block.

Would anybody miss them? Not really.

Heck, the football would actually improve without those two.

I laugh in the face of anyone who says the conference would cease to exist.

(09-24-2015 06:28 PM)Marge Schott Wrote:  Would anybody miss them? Not really.

Heck, the football would actually improve without those two.

I laugh in the face of anyone who says the conference would cease to exist.

I don't think you quit get it. FSU never helped start a conference or hasn't been in one since 1953. Unlike Maryland, UVA and UNC have a sense of loyalty to the ACC. If UNC and UVA left, the reason why they left would be the downfall of the conference.

Something else that gets missed, football from an overall conference standpoint drives the bus. However, IF you are one of the following three teams that rule doesn't apply: UNC, Duke, Kentucky. Those basketball brands are just as strong as football....and the first two are in the same conference.

(09-24-2015 07:05 PM)jaminandjachin Wrote:  

(09-24-2015 06:28 PM)Marge Schott Wrote:  Would anybody miss them? Not really.

Heck, the football would actually improve without those two.

I laugh in the face of anyone who says the conference would cease to exist.

I don't think you quit get it. FSU never helped start a conference or hasn't been in one since 1953. Unlike Maryland, UVA and UNC have a sense of loyalty to the ACC. If UNC and UVA left, the reason why they left would be the downfall of the conference.

Something else that gets missed, football from an overall conference standpoint drives the bus. However, IF you are one of the following three teams that rule doesn't apply: UNC, Duke, Kentucky. Those basketball brands are just as strong as football....and the first two are in the same conference.

Neither UNC or UVa have a viable place to go because neither are going to be able to do what is necessary to have big time football. Without big time football and the support football fans filling a 70-80 seat football stadium, neither UNC or UVa generate enough money to support football and basketball at the highest level and support a full slate of men's and women's non-revenue sports at the highest level.

Neither UNC nor UVA are joining an athletic conference where they go from being in the top quartile in revenue to being in the middle. The numbers were crunched on this over three years ago and UNC determined they need 50 million more a year, over and above any new tv revenue to compete year in and year out with Ohio State and Michigan in all sports. UVa has the nearly same numbers and VT and NC State have both seen the UVa and UNC numbers and can make the same calculations for the B10 and SEC.

$50 million more a year to stay where you are in the conference pecking order that's what UNC and UVa face - you move only if you are stupid or broke. For VT and NC State, they would have to generate $30-35 million to maintain their ACC place in the SEC pecking order.

The internal state politics in NC, nor Va are in place to support such moves. UNC and UVa bind NC State, VT, Duke, and probably GT and WF so if they leave, the ACC would cease to exist because it would likely change the homes of at least VT, Duke, NC State and GT.

(09-24-2015 07:36 PM)lumberpack4 Wrote:  

(09-24-2015 07:05 PM)jaminandjachin Wrote:  

(09-24-2015 06:28 PM)Marge Schott Wrote:  Would anybody miss them? Not really.

Heck, the football would actually improve without those two.

I laugh in the face of anyone who says the conference would cease to exist.

I don't think you quit get it. FSU never helped start a conference or hasn't been in one since 1953. Unlike Maryland, UVA and UNC have a sense of loyalty to the ACC. If UNC and UVA left, the reason why they left would be the downfall of the conference.

Something else that gets missed, football from an overall conference standpoint drives the bus. However, IF you are one of the following three teams that rule doesn't apply: UNC, Duke, Kentucky. Those basketball brands are just as strong as football....and the first two are in the same conference.

Neither UNC or UVa have a viable place to go because neither are going to be able to do what is necessary to have big time football. Without big time football and the support football fans filling a 70-80 seat football stadium, neither UNC or UVa generate enough money to support football and basketball at the highest level and support a full slate of men's and women's non-revenue sports at the highest level.

Neither UNC nor UVA are joining an athletic conference where they go from being in the top quartile in revenue to being in the middle. The numbers were crunched on this over three years ago and UNC determined they need 50 million more a year, over and above any new tv revenue to compete year in and year out with Ohio State and Michigan in all sports. UVa has the nearly same numbers and VT and NC State have both seen the UVa and UNC numbers and can make the same calculations for the B10 and SEC.

$50 million more a year to stay where you are in the conference pecking order that's what UNC and UVa face - you move only if you are stupid or broke. For VT and NC State, they would have to generate $30-35 million to maintain their ACC place in the SEC pecking order.

The internal state politics in NC, nor Va are in place to support such moves. UNC and UVa bind NC State, VT, Duke, and probably GT and WF so if they leave, the ACC would cease to exist because it would likely change the homes of at least VT, Duke, NC State and GT.

Conference realignment should have taught you that you don't need big time football to get into the B1G or SEC. B1G took Maryland and Rutgers. They would love to have Virginia and North Carolina.

(09-24-2015 07:05 PM)jaminandjachin Wrote:  I don't think you quit get it... Unlike Maryland, UVA and UNC have a sense of loyalty to the ACC. If UNC and UVA left, the reason why they left would be the downfall of the conference.

I agree this hypothetical is so unlikely as to be comical, but the question was what if UNC and UVa left together (and presumably no other programs with them). In that scenario, I truly believe the ACC would be just fine.

Do I want UNC and UVa to leave? No, I just want them to play better football and win some P5 non-conference games!

(09-24-2015 07:44 PM)jaminandjachin Wrote:  

(09-24-2015 07:36 PM)lumberpack4 Wrote:  

(09-24-2015 07:05 PM)jaminandjachin Wrote:  

(09-24-2015 06:28 PM)Marge Schott Wrote:  Would anybody miss them? Not really.

Heck, the football would actually improve without those two.

I laugh in the face of anyone who says the conference would cease to exist.

I don't think you quit get it. FSU never helped start a conference or hasn't been in one since 1953. Unlike Maryland, UVA and UNC have a sense of loyalty to the ACC. If UNC and UVA left, the reason why they left would be the downfall of the conference.

Something else that gets missed, football from an overall conference standpoint drives the bus. However, IF you are one of the following three teams that rule doesn't apply: UNC, Duke, Kentucky. Those basketball brands are just as strong as football....and the first two are in the same conference.

Neither UNC or UVa have a viable place to go because neither are going to be able to do what is necessary to have big time football. Without big time football and the support football fans filling a 70-80 seat football stadium, neither UNC or UVa generate enough money to support football and basketball at the highest level and support a full slate of men's and women's non-revenue sports at the highest level.

Neither UNC nor UVA are joining an athletic conference where they go from being in the top quartile in revenue to being in the middle. The numbers were crunched on this over three years ago and UNC determined they need 50 million more a year, over and above any new tv revenue to compete year in and year out with Ohio State and Michigan in all sports. UVa has the nearly same numbers and VT and NC State have both seen the UVa and UNC numbers and can make the same calculations for the B10 and SEC.

$50 million more a year to stay where you are in the conference pecking order that's what UNC and UVa face - you move only if you are stupid or broke. For VT and NC State, they would have to generate $30-35 million to maintain their ACC place in the SEC pecking order.

The internal state politics in NC, nor Va are in place to support such moves. UNC and UVa bind NC State, VT, Duke, and probably GT and WF so if they leave, the ACC would cease to exist because it would likely change the homes of at least VT, Duke, NC State and GT.

Conference realignment should have taught you that you don't need big time football to get into the B1G or SEC. B1G took Maryland and Rutgers. They would love to have Virginia and North Carolina.

I think you misread me. Of course the B10 or SEC would love UNC or UVa, but UNC and UVA would not love them and neither relish the prospect of having to cough up so much more money to compete. Part of the self identity at both places is that of being able to compete in all sports within the conference and to have the best facilities in the conference. Neither UNC, nor UVa want to join a spending war with Ohio State, Michigan, Penn State, Alabama, Florida, or TAMU, because the truth is neither can sustain that spending as public universities due to the underlying politics in NC and Va (call someone at the law firm of McGuire Woods - they can explain it all)

Only Duke can spend with Michigan, Ohio State, Penn State, Florida, Alabama, TAMU, Stanford, and USC. Texas and Stanford are the only two P-5's that have access to more money than Duke that can be applied to sports.