(08-22-2017 02:18 PM)Carolina_Low_Country Wrote:  

(08-22-2017 01:30 PM)Stugray2 Wrote:  Reported by Jon Rothstein

https://twitter.com/JonRothstein/status/...2434105346
Jon Rothstein‏Verified account @JonRothstein

Sources: Big Ten programs are preparing for a 20-game league schedule during the 18-19 season. STORY @FanRagSports:
https://www.fanragsports.com/news/rothst...-schedule/

Looks like 2018-19 season, a year ahead of the ACC which will do so in 2019-20 with the ACCN launch.

This follows up on June 12th ESPN report that it was under discussion.
http://www.espn.com/mens-college-basketb...ence-slate

I wonders when the SEC will make the same move. (Doesn't make as much sense for P12 with only 12 schools)

I think you'll will see all the "power" basketball conferences go to 20 game conference slate including the A-10, American, and Big East.

I think to start off the basketball season we need more conference challenges.
ACC vs. Big Ten
SEC vs. Big 12
PAC vs Big East
American vs. A-10

Also the American probably needs to get to 14 basketball schools to help scheduling. Adding VCU and Dayton would help big time.

ACC vs B1G
SEC vs BIG EAST
PAC vs Big XII

That setup would work better. SEC vs BIG EAST used to be a challenge (and might still be one), and BE vs Pac 12 would involve some LONG distance travel and weird time zone games that would be difficult for the visiting fan bases.

Big 10 and Big East play the Gavitt Games, and the ACC and Big 10 have a challenge going already.

The challenges may come at the cost of early season/holiday tournaments.

FWIW, I believe Fox was trying to orchestrate a PAC-12/Big East Challenge a few years ago, but - from what I heard - Arizona and UCLA were not interested in such a challenge because they liked having the flexibility and control over their pre-conference games. Without those two schools involved, there was little point in signing off on such a challenge, so talks fell apart.

Gavitt Games are in place until 2022, but I am leery thinking the B1G would want to extend that series. Hopefully, I am wrong, but we shall see. Michigan State has yet to even appear in the series.

A Big 12/Big East series would be easy to do, since both conferences have ten teams.

(08-23-2017 09:24 AM)CliftonAve Wrote:  

(08-22-2017 03:32 PM)Stugray2 Wrote:  This section is for power and major conferences, not the wanna be called power conferences like the American or A-10, or even the WCC or MWC.

This sentiment right here is what I and many were upset with when GTS said he was going to create a P5 Discussion forum. I understood his logic that there was demand for a board where P5 fans can go to where they can read only P5 focused threads, but I think it was never intended to exclude other fan bases from chiming in. I assume that since you hold this belief, you are now going to refrain from contributing to threads on the other forum that are about G5 programs?

And for the record, I still don't buy that the P5 has any legitimacy when it comes to CBB. UConn, Cincinnati, Memphis, Gonzaga, Temple and Wichita State have decades of excellence in basketball. There's nothing about their basketball budgets that are Mid-Major. There's nothing about attendance that is Mid-Major. Don't give me this crap about them being Mid-Major and then try and convince me they are lesser programs than more than half of teams in power conferences-- in some cases 75-80% of the schools in power conferences.

This was primarily a G5 and Big East message board long before MOST of the P5 fans showed up.

(08-25-2017 09:40 AM)Hood-rich Wrote:  

(08-23-2017 09:24 AM)CliftonAve Wrote:  

(08-22-2017 03:32 PM)Stugray2 Wrote:  This section is for power and major conferences, not the wanna be called power conferences like the American or A-10, or even the WCC or MWC.

This sentiment right here is what I and many were upset with when GTS said he was going to create a P5 Discussion forum. I understood his logic that there was demand for a board where P5 fans can go to where they can read only P5 focused threads, but I think it was never intended to exclude other fan bases from chiming in. I assume that since you hold this belief, you are now going to refrain from contributing to threads on the other forum that are about G5 programs?

And for the record, I still don't buy that the P5 has any legitimacy when it comes to CBB. UConn, Cincinnati, Memphis, Gonzaga, Temple and Wichita State have decades of excellence in basketball. There's nothing about their basketball budgets that are Mid-Major. There's nothing about attendance that is Mid-Major. Don't give me this crap about them being Mid-Major and then try and convince me they are lesser programs than more than half of teams in power conferences-- in some cases 75-80% of the schools in power conferences.

This was primarily a G5 and Big East message board long before MOST of the P5 fans showed up.

If G5 fans don't want to hear what's said on a P5 board then don't read it.

If P5 fans don't want to hear what's said on a G5 board then don't read it.

Very simple solution.

(08-25-2017 11:31 AM)AllTideUp Wrote:  

(08-25-2017 09:40 AM)Hood-rich Wrote:  

(08-23-2017 09:24 AM)CliftonAve Wrote:  

(08-22-2017 03:32 PM)Stugray2 Wrote:  This section is for power and major conferences, not the wanna be called power conferences like the American or A-10, or even the WCC or MWC.

This sentiment right here is what I and many were upset with when GTS said he was going to create a P5 Discussion forum. I understood his logic that there was demand for a board where P5 fans can go to where they can read only P5 focused threads, but I think it was never intended to exclude other fan bases from chiming in. I assume that since you hold this belief, you are now going to refrain from contributing to threads on the other forum that are about G5 programs?

And for the record, I still don't buy that the P5 has any legitimacy when it comes to CBB. UConn, Cincinnati, Memphis, Gonzaga, Temple and Wichita State have decades of excellence in basketball. There's nothing about their basketball budgets that are Mid-Major. There's nothing about attendance that is Mid-Major. Don't give me this crap about them being Mid-Major and then try and convince me they are lesser programs than more than half of teams in power conferences-- in some cases 75-80% of the schools in power conferences.

This was primarily a G5 and Big East message board long before MOST of the P5 fans showed up.

If G5 fans don't want to hear what's said on a P5 board then don't read it.

If P5 fans don't want to hear what's said on a G5 board then don't read it.

Very simple solution.

Of course. But then you've got comments like Stugray's. I'm interested in both groups.

(08-24-2017 08:45 PM)Wedge Wrote:  

(08-24-2017 06:37 PM)Captain Bearcat Wrote:  

(08-24-2017 12:54 PM)Wedge Wrote:  

(08-24-2017 12:44 PM)Captain Bearcat Wrote:  

(08-22-2017 03:04 PM)Wedge Wrote:  No. It makes a lot of sense. It's more difficult to get attractive non-conference opponents to visit because of distance. Also, a 20 game conference schedule would mean that each team plays all but two conference-mates twice each season, everyone gets home games with Arizona and UCLA almost every season, any conference game is better for attendance than an unattractive non-con game, etc. Doesn't mean that the Pac will do it. But it would make sense.

In football, I agree with your sentiment.

But in basketball, the top MWC and WCC schools are equal to the PAC in fanbase/prestige (other than UCLA).

After you factor in the preseason tourneys, each PAC school only needs 1-2 big OOC opponents who are willing to visit. But SDSU, BYU, etc want 5 or more big OOC opponents to make up for their weaker conference schedules.

Gonzaga would be a good draw in any Pac-12 home arena, but none of the other WCC or MWC teams would be even close to as good of a draw in a Pac-12 arena as the Zags.

Bottom line is that conference games sell more tickets than non-conference games unless the opponent is a marquee team. Look at Oregon's game-by-game attendance for last season as one example: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2016%E2%80...tball_team

That's interesting. But Oregon was the exception last year (probably because they weren't expected to be a top-10 team after they started 2-2). Even for Oregon, their highest nonconference attendance was UNLV (which outdrew Alabama)

Here's the other PAC teams that scheduled BYU, Gonzaga, St. Mary's, SDSU, UNLV, New Mexico, or Colorado State last year:

For Arizona State, UNLV outdrew 5/9 home PAC games and #9 Creighton.
For Stanford, St. Mary's (4,079) had higher attendance than 5/8 home PAC games and Colorado State (4,661) had higher attendance than 6/8 home PAC games.
For Colorado, Colorado State outdrew 7/9 home PAC games and #13 Xavier.
For USC, BYU outdrew 7/9 home PAC games.
For Cal, SDSU outdrew 6/9 home PAC games.
For Arizona, the New Mexico game nearly sold out despite being played on December 20th.

Cal and SDSU didn't play in Berkeley last season. Every Cal non-con home game in Berkeley other than Virginia (and, for some reason, Cal Poly) had lower attendance than any conference home game.

Any Pac-12 team could replace one of its non-conference games with another conference home game and sell more tickets. Cal, last year, could have replaced (among others) Wyoming, SE Louisiana, or La Tech with another conference home game and sold another 1,000 or so tickets.

TV is likely to be better as well -- the only Cal non-con home game last season not on PTN was an ESPN2 game vs. Virginia, whereas all but 3 conference home games were on an ESPN channel or FS1.

I understand where you're coming from; you're trying to argue that games against certain WCC or MWC teams don't belong in the "unattractive" opponent category. But you are not disproving my point (see above in the comment that you originally replied to) that "any conference game is better for attendance than an unattractive non-con game". In fact, the stats that you linked support my assertion.

The fact that many of the big WCC/MWC games were played off-site in bigger arenas sort of proves the point that they're big draws.

But I see what you're saying. Your point makes sense IF the move to 20 PAC games results in 2 fewer buy-games.

But will that happen? In football, the move to 9 conference games didn't eliminate the FCS game; instead it reduced the big non-conference matchups.

(08-25-2017 12:16 PM)Hood-rich Wrote:  

(08-25-2017 11:31 AM)AllTideUp Wrote:  

(08-25-2017 09:40 AM)Hood-rich Wrote:  

(08-23-2017 09:24 AM)CliftonAve Wrote:  

(08-22-2017 03:32 PM)Stugray2 Wrote:  This section is for power and major conferences, not the wanna be called power conferences like the American or A-10, or even the WCC or MWC.

This sentiment right here is what I and many were upset with when GTS said he was going to create a P5 Discussion forum. I understood his logic that there was demand for a board where P5 fans can go to where they can read only P5 focused threads, but I think it was never intended to exclude other fan bases from chiming in. I assume that since you hold this belief, you are now going to refrain from contributing to threads on the other forum that are about G5 programs?

And for the record, I still don't buy that the P5 has any legitimacy when it comes to CBB. UConn, Cincinnati, Memphis, Gonzaga, Temple and Wichita State have decades of excellence in basketball. There's nothing about their basketball budgets that are Mid-Major. There's nothing about attendance that is Mid-Major. Don't give me this crap about them being Mid-Major and then try and convince me they are lesser programs than more than half of teams in power conferences-- in some cases 75-80% of the schools in power conferences.

This was primarily a G5 and Big East message board long before MOST of the P5 fans showed up.

If G5 fans don't want to hear what's said on a P5 board then don't read it.

If P5 fans don't want to hear what's said on a G5 board then don't read it.

Very simple solution.

Of course. But then you've got comments like Stugray's. I'm interested in both groups.

That's fine, but you can't expect P5 posters not to take shots on a P5 board. I stopped reading the G5 section a while back because of all the bickering and P5 bashing. That was my prerogative. It wouldn't have made any sense for me to complain to the other posters that they were saying things I didn't like.

I'm glad to have a P5 board with a slightly different set of rules because its fun to interact with the posters from other parts of the country.

People can read whatever they want, but nobody has the right not to be offended.

(08-25-2017 01:40 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  

(08-25-2017 12:16 PM)Hood-rich Wrote:  

(08-25-2017 11:31 AM)AllTideUp Wrote:  

(08-25-2017 09:40 AM)Hood-rich Wrote:  

(08-23-2017 09:24 AM)CliftonAve Wrote:  This sentiment right here is what I and many were upset with when GTS said he was going to create a P5 Discussion forum. I understood his logic that there was demand for a board where P5 fans can go to where they can read only P5 focused threads, but I think it was never intended to exclude other fan bases from chiming in. I assume that since you hold this belief, you are now going to refrain from contributing to threads on the other forum that are about G5 programs?

And for the record, I still don't buy that the P5 has any legitimacy when it comes to CBB. UConn, Cincinnati, Memphis, Gonzaga, Temple and Wichita State have decades of excellence in basketball. There's nothing about their basketball budgets that are Mid-Major. There's nothing about attendance that is Mid-Major. Don't give me this crap about them being Mid-Major and then try and convince me they are lesser programs than more than half of teams in power conferences-- in some cases 75-80% of the schools in power conferences.

This was primarily a G5 and Big East message board long before MOST of the P5 fans showed up.

If G5 fans don't want to hear what's said on a P5 board then don't read it.

If P5 fans don't want to hear what's said on a G5 board then don't read it.

Very simple solution.

Of course. But then you've got comments like Stugray's. I'm interested in both groups.

That's fine, but you can't expect P5 posters not to take shots on a P5 board. I stopped reading the G5 section a while back because of all the bickering and P5 bashing. That was my prerogative. It wouldn't have made any sense for me to complain to the other posters that they were saying things I didn't like.

I'm glad to have a P5 board with a slightly different set of rules because its fun to interact with the posters from other parts of the country.

People can read whatever they want, but nobody has the right not to be offended.

The board was established basically for 1 reason, to segregate the topics that would attract more P conference posters. Virtually 8 of 10 threads on the main board were G or FCS related and many of the thread titles that might pertain to P conferences didn't indicate that in the way the OP worded the titles.

We have gained traffic since segregating the posts. Both boards are open to both sets of posters and with the exception of the objectionable remark above there really hasn't been a problem and most of the P5/G5 crap had begun to settle down.

So I'm giving this interlinear warning to the board. Anyone who foments ill will between the two will be dealt with the same as a malicious troll. Discussing differences is one thing. Insults or turf challenges will not be permitted. The purpose of both sets of forums is discussion.

So if you want to post in either of these forums you will abide by that. And don't expect leniency.

***If you see an offensive or territorial remark on either board then REPORT, do not RETORT, unless you desire to be punished as well!***

JR

(08-23-2017 08:50 PM)CardinalJim Wrote:  The SEC is in a tough spot when it comes college basketball. More league games is not necessarily a good thing for The SEC. That will eliminate an out of conference contest that SEC schools use to boost their RPI. Calipari has said as much when he talks about his team's scheduling philosophy.

What may happen is ESPN may find some creative ways to help boost SEC tournament profiles by encouraging more cross scheduling between The ACC and SEC conferences and sharing those games on both networks.

Just as College Football's Rivalry Week has helped boost football in The ACC, College Basketball Rivalry Week could do the same thing for The SEC. That's why I expect The Big Ten ACC Challenge to come to abrupt end once The ACC Network is up and running. I would expect an SEC ACC Challenge to replace it.
CJ

I hope the B1G/ACC challenge doesn't get replaced by an ACC/SEC challenge. Outside of UK, there aren't any teams that are consistently high on my list of schools that I want to play. UF is probably the 2nd best school in the conference, and I don't remember any UF-SU games that were competitive. I vaguely remember 2 over the last decade or so, and I remember them both being blood baths. To be fair, most SEC FB programs probably see SU that way right now. But nobody is forcing us to play them (like the BIG EAST did when we went all the way down to Arkansas to decimate the SEC's yearly sacrificial lamb in '13ish).

(08-24-2017 10:05 PM)nzmorange Wrote:  

(08-22-2017 02:18 PM)Carolina_Low_Country Wrote:  

(08-22-2017 01:30 PM)Stugray2 Wrote:  Reported by Jon Rothstein

https://twitter.com/JonRothstein/status/...2434105346
Jon Rothstein‏Verified account @JonRothstein

Sources: Big Ten programs are preparing for a 20-game league schedule during the 18-19 season. STORY @FanRagSports:
https://www.fanragsports.com/news/rothst...-schedule/

Looks like 2018-19 season, a year ahead of the ACC which will do so in 2019-20 with the ACCN launch.

This follows up on June 12th ESPN report that it was under discussion.
http://www.espn.com/mens-college-basketb...ence-slate

I wonders when the SEC will make the same move. (Doesn't make as much sense for P12 with only 12 schools)

I think you'll will see all the "power" basketball conferences go to 20 game conference slate including the A-10, American, and Big East.

I think to start off the basketball season we need more conference challenges.
ACC vs. Big Ten
SEC vs. Big 12
PAC vs Big East
American vs. A-10

Also the American probably needs to get to 14 basketball schools to help scheduling. Adding VCU and Dayton would help big time.

ACC vs B1G
SEC vs BIG EAST
PAC vs Big XII

That setup would work better. SEC vs BIG EAST used to be a challenge (and might still be one), and BE vs Pac 12 would involve some LONG distance travel and weird time zone games that would be difficult for the visiting fan bases.

The SEC and Big 12 already have a challenge, but I agree it would be best. The actual best would be:

BIG vs. Big East
ACC vs. SEC
PAC vs. Big 12
American vs. AAC

(08-28-2017 09:23 AM)Carolina_Low_Country Wrote:  

(08-24-2017 10:05 PM)nzmorange Wrote:  

(08-22-2017 02:18 PM)Carolina_Low_Country Wrote:  

(08-22-2017 01:30 PM)Stugray2 Wrote:  Reported by Jon Rothstein

https://twitter.com/JonRothstein/status/...2434105346
Jon Rothstein‏Verified account @JonRothstein

Sources: Big Ten programs are preparing for a 20-game league schedule during the 18-19 season. STORY @FanRagSports:
https://www.fanragsports.com/news/rothst...-schedule/

Looks like 2018-19 season, a year ahead of the ACC which will do so in 2019-20 with the ACCN launch.

This follows up on June 12th ESPN report that it was under discussion.
http://www.espn.com/mens-college-basketb...ence-slate

I wonders when the SEC will make the same move. (Doesn't make as much sense for P12 with only 12 schools)

I think you'll will see all the "power" basketball conferences go to 20 game conference slate including the A-10, American, and Big East.

I think to start off the basketball season we need more conference challenges.
ACC vs. Big Ten
SEC vs. Big 12
PAC vs Big East
American vs. A-10

Also the American probably needs to get to 14 basketball schools to help scheduling. Adding VCU and Dayton would help big time.

ACC vs B1G
SEC vs BIG EAST
PAC vs Big XII

That setup would work better. SEC vs BIG EAST used to be a challenge (and might still be one), and BE vs Pac 12 would involve some LONG distance travel and weird time zone games that would be difficult for the visiting fan bases.

The SEC and Big 12 already have a challenge, but I agree it would be best. The actual best would be:

BIG vs. Big East
ACC vs. SEC
PAC vs. Big 12
American vs. AAC

Huh? Do you mean AAC vs. A-10?

(08-28-2017 09:23 AM)Carolina_Low_Country Wrote:  

(08-24-2017 10:05 PM)nzmorange Wrote:  

(08-22-2017 02:18 PM)Carolina_Low_Country Wrote:  

(08-22-2017 01:30 PM)Stugray2 Wrote:  Reported by Jon Rothstein

https://twitter.com/JonRothstein/status/...2434105346
Jon Rothstein‏Verified account @JonRothstein

Sources: Big Ten programs are preparing for a 20-game league schedule during the 18-19 season. STORY @FanRagSports:
https://www.fanragsports.com/news/rothst...-schedule/

Looks like 2018-19 season, a year ahead of the ACC which will do so in 2019-20 with the ACCN launch.

This follows up on June 12th ESPN report that it was under discussion.
http://www.espn.com/mens-college-basketb...ence-slate

I wonders when the SEC will make the same move. (Doesn't make as much sense for P12 with only 12 schools)

I think you'll will see all the "power" basketball conferences go to 20 game conference slate including the A-10, American, and Big East.

I think to start off the basketball season we need more conference challenges.
ACC vs. Big Ten
SEC vs. Big 12
PAC vs Big East
American vs. A-10

Also the American probably needs to get to 14 basketball schools to help scheduling. Adding VCU and Dayton would help big time.

ACC vs B1G
SEC vs BIG EAST
PAC vs Big XII

That setup would work better. SEC vs BIG EAST used to be a challenge (and might still be one), and BE vs Pac 12 would involve some LONG distance travel and weird time zone games that would be difficult for the visiting fan bases.

The SEC and Big 12 already have a challenge, but I agree it would be best. The actual best would be:

BIG vs. Big East
ACC vs. SEC
PAC vs. Big 12
American vs. A10 (?)

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/SEC–Big_East_Challenge

And I don't think your lineup is better than mine. The two best conferences should play each other, especially since their geography overlaps. Evidence that is approach makes sense can be seen by the fact that they actually do play a challenge against each other.

The BE and SEC make sense because of their history.

The Pac and Big XII make sense because of geography.

(08-26-2017 05:38 PM)nzmorange Wrote:  

(08-23-2017 08:50 PM)CardinalJim Wrote:  The SEC is in a tough spot when it comes college basketball. More league games is not necessarily a good thing for The SEC. That will eliminate an out of conference contest that SEC schools use to boost their RPI. Calipari has said as much when he talks about his team's scheduling philosophy.

What may happen is ESPN may find some creative ways to help boost SEC tournament profiles by encouraging more cross scheduling between The ACC and SEC conferences and sharing those games on both networks.

Just as College Football's Rivalry Week has helped boost football in The ACC, College Basketball Rivalry Week could do the same thing for The SEC. That's why I expect The Big Ten ACC Challenge to come to abrupt end once The ACC Network is up and running. I would expect an SEC ACC Challenge to replace it.
CJ

I hope the B1G/ACC challenge doesn't get replaced by an ACC/SEC challenge. Outside of UK, there aren't any teams that are consistently high on my list of schools that I want to play. UF is probably the 2nd best school in the conference, and I don't remember any UF-SU games that were competitive. I vaguely remember 2 over the last decade or so, and I remember them both being blood baths. To be fair, most SEC FB programs probably see SU that way right now. But nobody is forcing us to play them (like the BIG EAST did when we went all the way down to Arkansas to decimate the SEC's yearly sacrificial lamb in '13ish).

Just a hunch but I would look for ESPN to orchestrate match ups that it can sell on multiple platforms. I wouldn't limit that philosophy to basketball. Think baseball, Olympic sports.

While Big Ten / ACC basketball challenge might offer some better contests for fans, they won't increase inventory for The SEC or ACC Networks. That's something we all have to get used to in the future. ESPN calling the scheduling shots more from a conference level than individual schools.
CJ

(08-29-2017 02:27 AM)CardinalJim Wrote:  

(08-26-2017 05:38 PM)nzmorange Wrote:  

(08-23-2017 08:50 PM)CardinalJim Wrote:  The SEC is in a tough spot when it comes college basketball. More league games is not necessarily a good thing for The SEC. That will eliminate an out of conference contest that SEC schools use to boost their RPI. Calipari has said as much when he talks about his team's scheduling philosophy.

What may happen is ESPN may find some creative ways to help boost SEC tournament profiles by encouraging more cross scheduling between The ACC and SEC conferences and sharing those games on both networks.

Just as College Football's Rivalry Week has helped boost football in The ACC, College Basketball Rivalry Week could do the same thing for The SEC. That's why I expect The Big Ten ACC Challenge to come to abrupt end once The ACC Network is up and running. I would expect an SEC ACC Challenge to replace it.
CJ

I hope the B1G/ACC challenge doesn't get replaced by an ACC/SEC challenge. Outside of UK, there aren't any teams that are consistently high on my list of schools that I want to play. UF is probably the 2nd best school in the conference, and I don't remember any UF-SU games that were competitive. I vaguely remember 2 over the last decade or so, and I remember them both being blood baths. To be fair, most SEC FB programs probably see SU that way right now. But nobody is forcing us to play them (like the BIG EAST did when we went all the way down to Arkansas to decimate the SEC's yearly sacrificial lamb in '13ish).

Just a hunch but I would look for ESPN to orchestrate match ups that it can sell on multiple platforms. I wouldn't limit that philosophy to basketball. Think baseball, Olympic sports.

While Big Ten / ACC basketball challenge might offer some better contests for fans, they won't increase inventory for The SEC or ACC Networks. That's something we all have to get used to in the future. ESPN calling the scheduling shots more from a conference level than individual schools.
CJ

I expect that too. We're seeing more and more SEC/ACC football games being scheduled for the future.

I'm not sure the ACC/Big Ten challenge will ever go away because it's good inventory and ESPN gets half the games. The leagues will have motivation to play a series like that because there are so many non-conference games available and bball is all about RPI.

But yeah, ESPN will orchestrate more SEC/ACC match-ups during that time of year. The ACC could very well play challenges against both leagues, I think.

(08-29-2017 02:27 AM)CardinalJim Wrote:  

(08-26-2017 05:38 PM)nzmorange Wrote:  

(08-23-2017 08:50 PM)CardinalJim Wrote:  The SEC is in a tough spot when it comes college basketball. More league games is not necessarily a good thing for The SEC. That will eliminate an out of conference contest that SEC schools use to boost their RPI. Calipari has said as much when he talks about his team's scheduling philosophy.

What may happen is ESPN may find some creative ways to help boost SEC tournament profiles by encouraging more cross scheduling between The ACC and SEC conferences and sharing those games on both networks.

Just as College Football's Rivalry Week has helped boost football in The ACC, College Basketball Rivalry Week could do the same thing for The SEC. That's why I expect The Big Ten ACC Challenge to come to abrupt end once The ACC Network is up and running. I would expect an SEC ACC Challenge to replace it.
CJ

I hope the B1G/ACC challenge doesn't get replaced by an ACC/SEC challenge. Outside of UK, there aren't any teams that are consistently high on my list of schools that I want to play. UF is probably the 2nd best school in the conference, and I don't remember any UF-SU games that were competitive. I vaguely remember 2 over the last decade or so, and I remember them both being blood baths. To be fair, most SEC FB programs probably see SU that way right now. But nobody is forcing us to play them (like the BIG EAST did when we went all the way down to Arkansas to decimate the SEC's yearly sacrificial lamb in '13ish).

Just a hunch but I would look for ESPN to orchestrate match ups that it can sell on multiple platforms. I wouldn't limit that philosophy to basketball. Think baseball, Olympic sports.

While Big Ten / ACC basketball challenge might offer some better contests for fans, they won't increase inventory for The SEC or ACC Networks. That's something we all have to get used to in the future. ESPN calling the scheduling shots more from a conference level than individual schools.
CJ

How does a SEC-ACC matchup create more inventory than a B1G-ACC matchup + a SEC-???? matchup?

Mathematically speaking, ESPN is walking away w/ the right to the same number of games. The only difference is that more of those games are good ones if the ACC plays the B1G.

(08-29-2017 06:46 AM)AllTideUp Wrote:  

(08-29-2017 02:27 AM)CardinalJim Wrote:  

(08-26-2017 05:38 PM)nzmorange Wrote:  

(08-23-2017 08:50 PM)CardinalJim Wrote:  The SEC is in a tough spot when it comes college basketball. More league games is not necessarily a good thing for The SEC. That will eliminate an out of conference contest that SEC schools use to boost their RPI. Calipari has said as much when he talks about his team's scheduling philosophy.

What may happen is ESPN may find some creative ways to help boost SEC tournament profiles by encouraging more cross scheduling between The ACC and SEC conferences and sharing those games on both networks.

Just as College Football's Rivalry Week has helped boost football in The ACC, College Basketball Rivalry Week could do the same thing for The SEC. That's why I expect The Big Ten ACC Challenge to come to abrupt end once The ACC Network is up and running. I would expect an SEC ACC Challenge to replace it.
CJ

I hope the B1G/ACC challenge doesn't get replaced by an ACC/SEC challenge. Outside of UK, there aren't any teams that are consistently high on my list of schools that I want to play. UF is probably the 2nd best school in the conference, and I don't remember any UF-SU games that were competitive. I vaguely remember 2 over the last decade or so, and I remember them both being blood baths. To be fair, most SEC FB programs probably see SU that way right now. But nobody is forcing us to play them (like the BIG EAST did when we went all the way down to Arkansas to decimate the SEC's yearly sacrificial lamb in '13ish).

Just a hunch but I would look for ESPN to orchestrate match ups that it can sell on multiple platforms. I wouldn't limit that philosophy to basketball. Think baseball, Olympic sports.

While Big Ten / ACC basketball challenge might offer some better contests for fans, they won't increase inventory for The SEC or ACC Networks. That's something we all have to get used to in the future. ESPN calling the scheduling shots more from a conference level than individual schools.
CJ

I expect that too. We're seeing more and more SEC/ACC football games being scheduled for the future.

I'm not sure the ACC/Big Ten challenge will ever go away because it's good inventory and ESPN gets half the games. The leagues will have motivation to play a series like that because there are so many non-conference games available and bball is all about RPI.

But yeah, ESPN will orchestrate more SEC/ACC match-ups during that time of year. The ACC could very well play challenges against both leagues, I think.

There's no way the ACC is going to play two challenges + have a longer basketball schedule. That would be really dumb for the conference, and there's no way the BIG EAST half of the league would be OK w/ losing OOC games against much better and more relevant (new) BIG EAST schools. And the football schools, who just want money, would be against that as well, as would the Dukes and UNCs, who want OOC flexibility to schedule elite teams OOC (or play more home teams).

(08-29-2017 08:00 AM)nzmorange Wrote:  There's no way the ACC is going to play two challenges + have a longer basketball schedule. That would be really dumb for the conference, and there's no way the BIG EAST half of the league would be OK w/ losing OOC games against much better and more relevant (new) BIG EAST schools. And the football schools, who just want money, would be against that as well, as would the Dukes and UNCs, who want OOC flexibility to schedule elite teams OOC (or play more home teams).

There's plenty of games to go around, that's the point.

There's no rule against playing challenges against multiple leagues and the non-conference schedule consumes about 1/3 of the overall number of games. Even if the ACC increases their number of conference games, I haven't heard anyone in the ACC proposing that although maybe you have, then it's not like they would be adding very many.

There's also no reason for the old BE schools to stop playing the current Big East. Again, plenty of games to go around.

Everyone plays a healthy portion of cupcakes and there's really no need to do that.

Basically, an SEC/ACC challenge would consist of one match-up between all the schools. I don't think that's an imposition to any of the elite programs looking to schedule other elite programs.

(08-29-2017 10:49 AM)AllTideUp Wrote:  

(08-29-2017 08:00 AM)nzmorange Wrote:  There's no way the ACC is going to play two challenges + have a longer basketball schedule. That would be really dumb for the conference, and there's no way the BIG EAST half of the league would be OK w/ losing OOC games against much better and more relevant (new) BIG EAST schools. And the football schools, who just want money, would be against that as well, as would the Dukes and UNCs, who want OOC flexibility to schedule elite teams OOC (or play more home teams).

There's plenty of games to go around, that's the point.

There's no rule against playing challenges against multiple leagues and the non-conference schedule consumes about 1/3 of the overall number of games. Even if the ACC increases their number of conference games, I haven't heard anyone in the ACC proposing that although maybe you have, then it's not like they would be adding very many.

There's also no reason for the old BE schools to stop playing the current Big East. Again, plenty of games to go around.

Everyone plays a healthy portion of cupcakes and there's really no need to do that.

Basically, an SEC/ACC challenge would consist of one match-up between all the schools. I don't think that's an imposition to any of the elite programs looking to schedule other elite programs.

That's the thing. There aren't games to go around. Playing a 20 game schedule + historic rivals + a B1G game is already too much. Adding in a random SEC game would mean the loss of a historic rival, which is dumb and doesn't benefit the ACC.

But don't believe me. Look at schedules. Find a year where SU plays all its historic rivals in the same year ... and those schedules were made BEFORE the ACC lengthened its schedules ... and those schedules don't involve random SEC-ACC challenge games.

[EDIT: Nobody is proposing an extension to the regular season because it already happened within the last couple of months.]

[EDIT x2: There's a HUGE need to play cupcakes. Are you nuts?!]

(08-29-2017 11:28 AM)nzmorange Wrote:  That's the thing. There aren't games to go around. Playing a 20 game schedule + historic rivals + a B1G game is already too much. Adding in a random SEC game would mean the loss of a historic rival, which is dumb and doesn't benefit the ACC.

But don't believe me. Look at schedules. Find a year where SU plays all its historic rivals in the same year ... and those schedules were made BEFORE the ACC lengthened its schedules ... and those schedules don't involve random SEC-ACC challenge games.

[EDIT: Nobody is proposing an extension to the regular season because it already happened within the last couple of months.]

[EDIT x2: There's a HUGE need to play cupcakes. Are you nuts?!]

1. Yes, I'm nuts. Have you not been paying attention to my posts?

2. I looked at Syracuse's schedule this year and these are the marquee match-ups...Maryland, Kansas, UConn, and I'll even stretch the definition and give you St. Bonaventure. BUT, they've got Cornell, Iona, Texas Southern, Oakland, Toledo, Colgate, Buffalo, and Eastern Michigan also.

Are you telling me all those schools are traditional rivals of Syracuse? Because that's more than a little ridiculous. I figured there'd be a few more Georgetowns and St. Johns and perhaps a few more of those are scheduled in the future.

Anyway...

Point being, there's obviously enough games to go around. All you have to do is take one of those cupcakes off and play an SEC school that admittedly is not likely to be elite, but is almost certainly better than all those cupcakes.

What's wrong with that?