Since the question posed in the OP is "what if", one question I would have is would the ACC replace them, or stay at 14 members (13 football)? Assuming the requirements for a CCG are relaxed, an 8 game schedule with 4 permanent partners and 8 rotating crossovers works pretty well.

(09-25-2015 12:09 PM)Marge Schott Wrote:  Who replaces FSU football? Only one acc school has won a national title since FSU joined the league...

Uva and unc are football turds. Unc is great at basketball but that's covered even if they weren't in the conference.

NC is an over saturated state. And vt is the better va school.

The conference's only current, true football power, in the country's third most populous state v. Two football turds. Hmm, which is more critical to the acc.

I seriously doubt you'd be saying all of this in 2009 when FSU just finished their 6th consecutive season of winning less than 10 games AND 4th time in 5 seasons of losing 5 or more games. They weren't the conference power then, Va Tech was.

Why are UNC and UVA more critical? Because if they left the other schools would panic and leave too. That's not the case with FSU.

(09-25-2015 12:18 PM)ken d Wrote:  Since the question posed in the OP is "what if", one question I would have is would the ACC replace them, or stay at 14 members (13 football)? Assuming the requirements for a CCG are relaxed, an 8 game schedule with 4 permanent partners and 8 rotating crossovers works pretty well.

If CCG rules are relaxed I wouldn't replace them. If they aren't relaxed and even divisions are required I would consider contracting a team and go back to 12.

(09-25-2015 12:26 PM)jaminandjachin Wrote:  

(09-25-2015 12:18 PM)ken d Wrote:  Since the question posed in the OP is "what if", one question I would have is would the ACC replace them, or stay at 14 members (13 football)? Assuming the requirements for a CCG are relaxed, an 8 game schedule with 4 permanent partners and 8 rotating crossovers works pretty well.

If CCG rules are relaxed I wouldn't replace them. If they aren't relaxed and even divisions are required I would consider contracting a team and go back to 12.

Even divisions aren't required under current rules. And as a practical matter, involuntary contraction is nearly impossible.

The problem is similar to the UNC-UVA problem. It is very difficult to imagine them leaving without taking enough with them to make the ACC implode. If FSU goes, it is very difficult to see at least Clemson, and probably GT, not going along for the ride. And there'd be pretty strong impetus to take VT along too I'd suppose, but it wouldn't work because that'd bring along Cavman because lol Virginia legislature. And with Cavman comes UNC and Duke and NCST and probably Wake.....

People keep trying to piecemeal away the ACC 9 ... but it is *VERY* difficult to split them up. It is much easier to divorce them from the Big East teams. It took a hostile takeover of UMD's leadership, a willingness to make their football program permanently irrelevant, and a willingness to trade their football program for cash and titles in women's underwater basket weaving for UMD to leave. You see any other of the ACC 9 ready to go full retard?

(09-25-2015 12:09 PM)Dasville Wrote:  If FSU leaves the ACC we invite WVU and they would join. If FSU leaves the ACC for the Big12 and the ACC invites WVU, I still think they would join.

Doubt it....

(09-25-2015 12:50 PM)ken d Wrote:  

(09-25-2015 12:26 PM)jaminandjachin Wrote:  

(09-25-2015 12:18 PM)ken d Wrote:  Since the question posed in the OP is "what if", one question I would have is would the ACC replace them, or stay at 14 members (13 football)? Assuming the requirements for a CCG are relaxed, an 8 game schedule with 4 permanent partners and 8 rotating crossovers works pretty well.

If CCG rules are relaxed I wouldn't replace them. If they aren't relaxed and even divisions are required I would consider contracting a team and go back to 12.

Even divisions aren't required under current rules. And as a practical matter, involuntary contraction is nearly impossible.

Technically they're not but the ACC is a power 5 conference. If other conferences have even divisions and a CCG then the ACC should as well.

As for contraction, yes it's hard but not impossible. Desperate times require desperate measures.

The Big 12 will disappear way before the possibility of the ACC because of viewership, sorry but their are more people on the east coast and money talks. The SEC will not take a school in a state that they already subside. Realistically other than football is FSU really the biggest catch in the ACC? Think money people not just football success. For God Sake who would've thought the Big1G would take Maryland and Rutgers.

(09-25-2015 01:09 PM)7thHeaven Wrote:  For God Sake who would've thought the Big1G would take Maryland and Rutgers.

...because those are the two they originally wanted.

(09-25-2015 01:25 PM)HRFlossY Wrote:  

(09-25-2015 01:09 PM)7thHeaven Wrote:  For God Sake who would've thought the Big1G would take Maryland and Rutgers.

...because those are the two they originally wanted.

And the next two states are VA and NC, hence they want UNC ad UVA next.

(09-25-2015 12:50 PM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:  The problem is similar to the UNC-UVA problem. It is very difficult to imagine them leaving without taking enough with them to make the ACC implode. If FSU goes, it is very difficult to see at least Clemson, and probably GT, not going along for the ride. And there'd be pretty strong impetus to take VT along too I'd suppose, but it wouldn't work because that'd bring along Cavman because lol Virginia legislature. And with Cavman comes UNC and Duke and NCST and probably Wake.....

People keep trying to piecemeal away the ACC 9 ... but it is *VERY* difficult to split them up. It is much easier to divorce them from the Big East teams. It took a hostile takeover of UMD's leadership, a willingness to make their football program permanently irrelevant, and a willingness to trade their football program for cash and titles in women's underwater basket weaving for UMD to leave. You see any other of the ACC 9 ready to go full retard?

You are correct. About the only thing that seems possible to me would be a de facto divorce by re-creating the Big East as a separate division of the ACC. Since Maryland's departure really leaves an ACC 8, instead of 9, this could be done by bringing in Cincinnati and West Virginia and putting them back with BC, Cuse, Pitt, Louisville, Va Tech and Miami.

So it seems to come down to adding teams and putting FSU and Clemson back with a lot of schools they probably don't care to play, and hoping those two don't decide to go from one (in their view) unstable conference in their region without a network to join another unstable conference in a different region, also without a network.

Which is why I don't see much likelihood of significant movement between P5's. The current lineup isn't perfect, but there doesn't seem to be a better one available.

(09-25-2015 02:22 PM)ken d Wrote:  The current lineup isn't perfect, but there doesn't seem to be a better one available.

On this I disagree.

The next big change will be to league-esk conferences. It makes tremendous sense and makes EVERYBODY more happy and more wealthy. The fans gets to play who they want (read: historic/regional games of interest). This generates more sales at the gate, which are currently suffering in every conference. Nobody wants to see Duke play Syracuse ... but nobody wants to see Florida play Missouri or Colorado play UCLA either. It eliminates the headache of out of conference scheduling and maxes out inventory for TV while guaranteeing seven home games for everybody by allowing a pre-season game against FCS that doesn't count towards the standings.

The marriages are natural. The B1G and Pac-12 cement their Pasadena love affair and pick up UCONN, Notre Dame, and the New England ACC teams. The Big 12, SEC, ACC, and Nebraska create the football as religion conference, which brings back scores of historic and rivalry games (Texas-TAMU, Arkansas-Texas, TN-GT, Mizzou-Kansas, etc). I mean just consider rivalry week:
UVA-VT, UNC-Duke, NCST-WF, Pitt-WVU, UofL-UK, Auburn-Bama, GT-UGAg, USCe-Clemson, TN-Vandy, FSU-UF, Miss-State, LSU-Arkansas, TAMU-Texas, Baylor-TCU, OU-OSU, Mizzou-Kansas, Miami-Nebraska, TTU-KState

Having that kind of action consistently means MULTIPLE dedicated channels HQ'ed in division relevant areas: Charlotte, Atlanta, Birmingham, Dallas. Similarly for the B1G-Pac-12: NYC, Chicago, Denver, LA.

Now THAT is revenue maximization! And nobody gets screwed over so no legislatures or lawyers get involved. And the fans still win. And the ADs still win. And TV still wins.

The future is calling.

(09-25-2015 02:38 PM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:  

(09-25-2015 02:22 PM)ken d Wrote:  The current lineup isn't perfect, but there doesn't seem to be a better one available.

On this I disagree.

The next big change will be to league-esk conferences. It makes tremendous sense and makes EVERYBODY more happy and more wealthy. The fans gets to play who they want (read: historic/regional games of interest). This generates more sales at the gate, which are currently suffering in every conference. Nobody wants to see Duke play Syracuse ... but nobody wants to see Florida play Missouri or Colorado play UCLA either. It eliminates the headache of out of conference scheduling and maxes out inventory for TV while guaranteeing seven home games for everybody by allowing a pre-season game against FCS that doesn't count towards the standings.

The marriages are natural. The B1G and Pac-12 cement their Pasadena love affair and pick up UCONN, Notre Dame, and the New England ACC teams. The Big 12, SEC, ACC, and Nebraska create the football as religion conference, which brings back scores of historic and rivalry games (Texas-TAMU, Arkansas-Texas, TN-GT, Mizzou-Kansas, etc). I mean just consider rivalry week:
UVA-VT, UNC-Duke, NCST-WF, Pitt-WVU, UofL-UK, Auburn-Bama, GT-UGAg, USCe-Clemson, TN-Vandy, FSU-UF, Miss-State, LSU-Arkansas, TAMU-Texas, Baylor-TCU, OU-OSU, Mizzou-Kansas, Miami-Nebraska, TTU-KState

Having that kind of action consistently means MULTIPLE dedicated channels HQ'ed in division relevant areas: Charlotte, Atlanta, Birmingham, Dallas. Similarly for the B1G-Pac-12: NYC, Chicago, Denver, LA.

Now THAT is revenue maximization! And nobody gets screwed over so no legislatures or lawyers get involved. And the fans still win. And the ADs still win. And TV still wins.

The future is calling.

I should have been more precise. I should have said there isn't one more feasible instead of available. 66 schools are not going to turn over their right to choose who they associate with to an omnipotent czar, even if it would earn a few more bucks.

It would be easier to divorce football from all other sports and have every school function as an independent when it comes to gridiron scheduling. Or, just have one massive conference, a la the NFL.

You may be right, and schools may put the athletic money chase ahead of everything else. But I doubt it. If football were producing large revenue streams for academics, maybe. But not when all our experience says that money will just be spent on building athletic Taj Mahals. The P5 schools may want more money, but the fact is that they already have enough money to do what they need to do.

(09-25-2015 11:34 AM)Wilkie01 Wrote:  Really bad thread so far.

Call me a homer for my own post, but I thought that my risk swap derivatives idea was pretty solid.

(09-25-2015 12:52 PM)Otacon Wrote:  

(09-25-2015 12:09 PM)Dasville Wrote:  If FSU leaves the ACC we invite WVU and they would join. If FSU leaves the ACC for the Big12 and the ACC invites WVU, I still think they would join.

Doubt it....

Doubt the ACC would invite you or doubt WVU would join ACC under those circumstances?

I have a far better idea:

Have 8 conferences with 8 teams in each conference. The top team makes an elite eight playoff. You play your conference, half another conference, a spring game against a g5, and either a designated rivalry game or a game that the school has the power to schedule. The 2nd and 3rd teams in each conference make a bowl, such that each conference hosts a bowl and sends s team to a bowl.

(09-25-2015 03:02 PM)ken d Wrote:  66 schools are not going to turn over their right to choose who they associate with to an omnipotent czar, even if it would earn a few more bucks.

*insert Bowlsby etc here*

(09-25-2015 03:07 PM)Dasville Wrote:  

(09-25-2015 12:52 PM)Otacon Wrote:  

(09-25-2015 12:09 PM)Dasville Wrote:  If FSU leaves the ACC we invite WVU and they would join. If FSU leaves the ACC for the Big12 and the ACC invites WVU, I still think they would join.

Doubt it....

Doubt the ACC would invite you or doubt WVU would join ACC under those circumstances?

Is this a suggestion to just swap FSU for West Virginia? Or are there players to be named later?

(09-25-2015 03:21 PM)ken d Wrote:  

(09-25-2015 03:07 PM)Dasville Wrote:  

(09-25-2015 12:52 PM)Otacon Wrote:  

(09-25-2015 12:09 PM)Dasville Wrote:  If FSU leaves the ACC we invite WVU and they would join. If FSU leaves the ACC for the Big12 and the ACC invites WVU, I still think they would join.

Doubt it....

Doubt the ACC would invite you or doubt WVU would join ACC under those circumstances?

Is this a suggestion to just swap FSU for West Virginia? Or are there players to be named later?

I'm the last one to be a WVU advocate but.....on a sheer state by state basis, IMO, WVU brings as much from West Virginia as FSU brings from Florida on a population/viewership level. WVU brings all of West Virginia while FSU brings "part" of Florida. Miami also brings part of Florida and perhaps would draw more if FSU went Indy or Big12. No not a swap. Might be a decent replacement like they were for Missouri in the Big 12.

(09-25-2015 03:33 PM)Dasville Wrote:  

(09-25-2015 03:21 PM)ken d Wrote:  

(09-25-2015 03:07 PM)Dasville Wrote:  

(09-25-2015 12:52 PM)Otacon Wrote:  

(09-25-2015 12:09 PM)Dasville Wrote:  If FSU leaves the ACC we invite WVU and they would join. If FSU leaves the ACC for the Big12 and the ACC invites WVU, I still think they would join.

Doubt it....

Doubt the ACC would invite you or doubt WVU would join ACC under those circumstances?

Is this a suggestion to just swap FSU for West Virginia? Or are there players to be named later?

I'm the last one to be a WVU advocate but.....on a sheer state by state basis, IMO, WVU brings as much from West Virginia as FSU brings from Florida on a population/viewership level. WVU brings all of West Virginia while FSU brings "part" of Florida. Miami also brings part of Florida and perhaps would draw more if FSU went Indy or Big12. No not a swap. Might be a decent replacement like they were for Missouri in the Big 12.

Whether or not WVU delivers more instate eyeballs than FSU, there is little question that FSU brings more eyeballs from all the other states, including states outside the ACC footprint.

The reason I floated the swap idea is that we wouldn't want punitive exit fees and GoRs to prevent an outcome some might want.