(09-15-2017 04:46 AM)XLance Wrote:  

(09-14-2017 06:15 PM)JRsec Wrote:  Pretty much. But as to the distribution I would say this if we are going to 18:
SEC: Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Kansas, Texas Tech/Iowa State.
ACC: Texas, T.C.U., West Virginia,
AAC: Kansas State, Baylor, Texas Tech/Iowa State

That gets her done. Arkansas State Fan posted a pertinent detail on the main board today, the need to look at the number of sports offered by these schools and the kinds of sports offered by these schools.

The Big 12 programs really only match the SEC in that regard. The ACC is more country club sport oriented outside of the top 3. The Big 10 and PAC offer more ancillary sports. So from a profitability standpoint the Big 12 philosophy matches that of the SEC. The others not so much.

This is probably the only scenario where the ACC moves out of the ETZ and takes any Big 12 teams other than West Virginia.
I think the SEC would end up with Texas Tech instead of Iowa State, JR. Politics #1. It also gives Oklahoma State a semblance of a rivalry https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oklahoma_S...ll_rivalry with a team NOT out of the old Big 8.

Except that Texas Tech offers us nothing if we're not required to take them in order to get the Longhorns. In that scenario, TCU is actually far more valuable to us if we're taking a TX school not named UT.

I don't see us making special arrangements to ensure that the ACC lands Texas when we would prefer to have the same target. No more than we're going to facilitate the B1G landing OU by taking Oklahoma State to make sure they're safe.

ESPN is powerful, but they're not omnipotent.

If the ACC is going to get Texas then there needs to be some compensation for that if we are expected to cooperate...

A lot of money would be nice, but ESPN isn't going to want to pay a ton just to make sure a program like Texas Tech has a safe landing spot. It's nothing against the Red Raiders who would actually fit in the SEC pretty well. It's a nice school built around a nice community with passionate fans...

The problem is that it's far away from the major population centers of the state so not only is that an issue with travel, but it's also an issue with recruiting. There's a reason TTU has never been a perennial power and obviously they're not likely to become one...that's the 2nd reason by the way. I would say that TTU might as well be in another state, but frankly it would make them more valuable if they were so at least we could tap a new market if that were the case.

The main problem is that TTU doesn't give us anything we don't already have. We've already got a great presence in the state with A&M. Arkansas and LSU help as well. Assuming we're landing OU and OSU then our exposure will shoot like a rocket given all the additional match-ups in the region.

TCU would give us a direct presence in one of the largest media markets in the country so that would have value. TTU just doesn't offer much.

But I can also understand why Texas Tech would be a bridge too far for the ACC. There's the travel issue mainly and the fact that Tech wouldn't give them anything that Texas or TCU wouldn't give them...

There is a solution though...

SEC adds Texas Tech, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Kansas, Iowa State, and Virginia Tech

ACC adds Notre Dame, Cincinnati, West Virginia, Texas, TCU, Tulane, and UConn

The SEC gains a much needed brand in the DC/Mid-Atlantic region while the ACC lands their much needed presence in Texas.

The ACC gets WVU to cover most of what they lose by shedding VT while the two are used to play an annual game in DC. It's yet another opportunity for an SEC/ACC match-up and it simultaneously helps exposure for both in the DC area.

The ACC gets another good academic Southern school in Tulane while helping to bridge the gap between TX and FL.

UC helps lock down sub rates and ad fees in the state of OH.

UConn increases exposure in NYC and helps to offset some of the football first additions that are otherwise being made.

For one, let's remember that the ACC didn't really want Virginia Tech in the first place. The politicos in VA basically had to blackmail UVA to get the Hokies in. By contrast, the SEC would benefit from Virginia Tech immensely and only the OU addition in this arrangement would be more significant to us.

(09-15-2017 02:34 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  If the ACC is going to get Texas then there needs to be some compensation for that if we are expected to cooperate...
There is a solution though...

SEC adds Texas Tech, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Kansas, Iowa State, and Virginia Tech

ACC adds Notre Dame, Cincinnati, West Virginia, Texas, TCU, Tulane, and

If the ACC was going to allow a few schools to swap over to the SEC, I would have to think the current FSU administration would at least explore that opportunity like they explore that option like they did years earlier.

I'll play along and say the more natural additions would beaded:

SEC adds Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Virginia Tech, West Virginia, Florida State, Kansas

ACC adds Norte Dame, Texas, Texas Tech, TCU, Cincinnati, UConn

SEC adds Bedlam. Ninja Swofford convinces ND to go all in if Texas joins in full too. Texas wants some friends for travel reasons. ACC says no to Baylor, ESPN suggests moving VT to SEC. ACC agrees if WVU is not part of ACC. FSU wants to go too. Resistance from ACC, but more money is still added with ND and Texas even if FSU goes. ACC adds more markets with Cincinnati (Ohio) and UConn (NYC and Boston)

(09-15-2017 05:22 PM)murrdcu Wrote:  

(09-15-2017 02:34 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  If the ACC is going to get Texas then there needs to be some compensation for that if we are expected to cooperate...
There is a solution though...

SEC adds Texas Tech, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Kansas, Iowa State, and Virginia Tech

ACC adds Notre Dame, Cincinnati, West Virginia, Texas, TCU, Tulane, and

If the ACC was going to allow a few schools to swap over to the SEC, I would have to think the current FSU administration would at least explore that opportunity like they explore that option like they did years earlier.

I'll play along and say the more natural additions would beaded:

SEC adds Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Virginia Tech, West Virginia, Florida State, Kansas

ACC adds Norte Dame, Texas, Texas Tech, TCU, Cincinnati, UConn

SEC adds Bedlam. Ninja Swofford convinces ND to go all in if Texas joins in full too. Texas wants some friends for travel reasons. ACC says no to Baylor, ESPN suggests moving VT to SEC. ACC agrees if WVU is not part of ACC. FSU wants to go too. Resistance from ACC, but more money is still added with ND and Texas even if FSU goes. ACC adds more markets with Cincinnati (Ohio) and UConn (NYC and Boston)

The Old Deal should be resurrected:

N.C. State & Virginia Tech to the SEC along with T.C.U. and Kansas
Notre Dame joins in full. Texas, Texas Tech, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State and West Virginia to the ACC.

The ACC gets a dramatic boost in content and markets. They lose nothing but two duplicates to pull it off. The SEC gains 3 new markets (2 of them significant), a major basketball brand, and entry into DFW.

ACC:
North: Boston College, Louisville, Notre Dame, Pittsburgh, Syracuse, West Virginia
South: Clemson, Duke, Georgia Tech, North Carolina, Virginia, Wake Forest
West: Florida State, Miami, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Texas, Texas Tech

SEC:
East: Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, N.C. State, South Carolina, Virginia Tech
South: Alabama, Auburn, Mississippi, Mississippi State, Tennessee, Vanderbilt
West: Arkansas, Kansas, Louisiana State, Missouri, Texas A&M, T.C.U.

(09-15-2017 07:50 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(09-15-2017 05:22 PM)murrdcu Wrote:  

(09-15-2017 02:34 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  If the ACC is going to get Texas then there needs to be some compensation for that if we are expected to cooperate...
There is a solution though...

SEC adds Texas Tech, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Kansas, Iowa State, and Virginia Tech

ACC adds Notre Dame, Cincinnati, West Virginia, Texas, TCU, Tulane, and

If the ACC was going to allow a few schools to swap over to the SEC, I would have to think the current FSU administration would at least explore that opportunity like they explore that option like they did years earlier.

I'll play along and say the more natural additions would beaded:

SEC adds Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Virginia Tech, West Virginia, Florida State, Kansas

ACC adds Norte Dame, Texas, Texas Tech, TCU, Cincinnati, UConn

SEC adds Bedlam. Ninja Swofford convinces ND to go all in if Texas joins in full too. Texas wants some friends for travel reasons. ACC says no to Baylor, ESPN suggests moving VT to SEC. ACC agrees if WVU is not part of ACC. FSU wants to go too. Resistance from ACC, but more money is still added with ND and Texas even if FSU goes. ACC adds more markets with Cincinnati (Ohio) and UConn (NYC and Boston)

The Old Deal should be resurrected:

N.C. State & Virginia Tech to the SEC along with T.C.U. and Kansas
Notre Dame joins in full. Texas, Texas Tech, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State and West Virginia to the ACC.

The ACC gets a dramatic boost in content and markets. They lose nothing but two duplicates to pull it off. The SEC gains 3 new markets (2 of them significant), a major basketball brand, and entry into DFW.

ACC:
North: Boston College, Louisville, Notre Dame, Pittsburgh, Syracuse, West Virginia
South: Clemson, Duke, Georgia Tech, North Carolina, Virginia, Wake Forest
West: Florida State, Miami, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Texas, Texas Tech

SEC:
East: Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, N.C. State, South Carolina, Virginia Tech
South: Alabama, Auburn, Mississippi, Mississippi State, Tennessee, Vanderbilt
West: Arkansas, Kansas, Louisiana State, Missouri, Texas A&M, T.C.U.

If the ACC was reluctant to agree to accept Oklahoma, we sure as the world are not going to agree to accept Oklahoma State.

(09-17-2017 01:55 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(09-15-2017 07:50 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(09-15-2017 05:22 PM)murrdcu Wrote:  

(09-15-2017 02:34 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  If the ACC is going to get Texas then there needs to be some compensation for that if we are expected to cooperate...
There is a solution though...

SEC adds Texas Tech, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Kansas, Iowa State, and Virginia Tech

ACC adds Notre Dame, Cincinnati, West Virginia, Texas, TCU, Tulane, and

If the ACC was going to allow a few schools to swap over to the SEC, I would have to think the current FSU administration would at least explore that opportunity like they explore that option like they did years earlier.

I'll play along and say the more natural additions would beaded:

SEC adds Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Virginia Tech, West Virginia, Florida State, Kansas

ACC adds Norte Dame, Texas, Texas Tech, TCU, Cincinnati, UConn

SEC adds Bedlam. Ninja Swofford convinces ND to go all in if Texas joins in full too. Texas wants some friends for travel reasons. ACC says no to Baylor, ESPN suggests moving VT to SEC. ACC agrees if WVU is not part of ACC. FSU wants to go too. Resistance from ACC, but more money is still added with ND and Texas even if FSU goes. ACC adds more markets with Cincinnati (Ohio) and UConn (NYC and Boston)

The Old Deal should be resurrected:

N.C. State & Virginia Tech to the SEC along with T.C.U. and Kansas
Notre Dame joins in full. Texas, Texas Tech, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State and West Virginia to the ACC.

The ACC gets a dramatic boost in content and markets. They lose nothing but two duplicates to pull it off. The SEC gains 3 new markets (2 of them significant), a major basketball brand, and entry into DFW.

ACC:
North: Boston College, Louisville, Notre Dame, Pittsburgh, Syracuse, West Virginia
South: Clemson, Duke, Georgia Tech, North Carolina, Virginia, Wake Forest
West: Florida State, Miami, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Texas, Texas Tech

SEC:
East: Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, N.C. State, South Carolina, Virginia Tech
South: Alabama, Auburn, Mississippi, Mississippi State, Tennessee, Vanderbilt
West: Arkansas, Kansas, Louisiana State, Missouri, Texas A&M, T.C.U.

If the ACC was reluctant to agree to accept Oklahoma, we sure as the world are not going to agree to accept Oklahoma State.

That's fine. By talking about SEC expansion from the Big 12, I have only been pointing out the reasons we should sever ties with ESPN in 2035 and take who we wish. The only reason the Big 12 has been on our menu this time around and the last was because that's what we were paid to do. Yes we wanted into Texas in '91. And then we were willing to take OU along with Texas, Texas A&M and Arkansas to make it happen.

Now it doesn't really matter who we get to shore up DFW. And our legitimate interests lie to the East. So if you guys don't want to do what is necessary to secure yourselves long term that suits our interests just fine.

(09-17-2017 04:02 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(09-17-2017 01:55 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(09-15-2017 07:50 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(09-15-2017 05:22 PM)murrdcu Wrote:  

(09-15-2017 02:34 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  If the ACC is going to get Texas then there needs to be some compensation for that if we are expected to cooperate...
There is a solution though...

SEC adds Texas Tech, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Kansas, Iowa State, and Virginia Tech

ACC adds Notre Dame, Cincinnati, West Virginia, Texas, TCU, Tulane, and

If the ACC was going to allow a few schools to swap over to the SEC, I would have to think the current FSU administration would at least explore that opportunity like they explore that option like they did years earlier.

I'll play along and say the more natural additions would beaded:

SEC adds Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Virginia Tech, West Virginia, Florida State, Kansas

ACC adds Norte Dame, Texas, Texas Tech, TCU, Cincinnati, UConn

SEC adds Bedlam. Ninja Swofford convinces ND to go all in if Texas joins in full too. Texas wants some friends for travel reasons. ACC says no to Baylor, ESPN suggests moving VT to SEC. ACC agrees if WVU is not part of ACC. FSU wants to go too. Resistance from ACC, but more money is still added with ND and Texas even if FSU goes. ACC adds more markets with Cincinnati (Ohio) and UConn (NYC and Boston)

The Old Deal should be resurrected:

N.C. State & Virginia Tech to the SEC along with T.C.U. and Kansas
Notre Dame joins in full. Texas, Texas Tech, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State and West Virginia to the ACC.

The ACC gets a dramatic boost in content and markets. They lose nothing but two duplicates to pull it off. The SEC gains 3 new markets (2 of them significant), a major basketball brand, and entry into DFW.

ACC:
North: Boston College, Louisville, Notre Dame, Pittsburgh, Syracuse, West Virginia
South: Clemson, Duke, Georgia Tech, North Carolina, Virginia, Wake Forest
West: Florida State, Miami, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Texas, Texas Tech

SEC:
East: Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, N.C. State, South Carolina, Virginia Tech
South: Alabama, Auburn, Mississippi, Mississippi State, Tennessee, Vanderbilt
West: Arkansas, Kansas, Louisiana State, Missouri, Texas A&M, T.C.U.

If the ACC was reluctant to agree to accept Oklahoma, we sure as the world are not going to agree to accept Oklahoma State.

That's fine. By talking about SEC expansion from the Big 12, I have only been pointing out the reasons we should sever ties with ESPN in 2035 and take who we wish. The only reason the Big 12 has been on our menu this time around and the last was because that's what we were paid to do. Yes we wanted into Texas in '91. And then we were willing to take OU along with Texas, Texas A&M and Arkansas to make it happen.

Now it doesn't really matter who we get to shore up DFW. And our legitimate interests lie to the East. So if you guys don't want to do what is necessary to secure yourselves long term that suits our interests just fine.

And who keeps saying that the market model is dead?
The truth is that regionalism will drive markets and viewing habits in the future. The SEC's main problem is that their #1 target, Texas, doesn't want to join and it's imperative that the SEC lands Oklahoma to access the DFW market.

(09-17-2017 04:29 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(09-17-2017 04:02 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(09-17-2017 01:55 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(09-15-2017 07:50 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(09-15-2017 05:22 PM)murrdcu Wrote:  If the ACC was going to allow a few schools to swap over to the SEC, I would have to think the current FSU administration would at least explore that opportunity like they explore that option like they did years earlier.

I'll play along and say the more natural additions would beaded:

SEC adds Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Virginia Tech, West Virginia, Florida State, Kansas

ACC adds Norte Dame, Texas, Texas Tech, TCU, Cincinnati, UConn

SEC adds Bedlam. Ninja Swofford convinces ND to go all in if Texas joins in full too. Texas wants some friends for travel reasons. ACC says no to Baylor, ESPN suggests moving VT to SEC. ACC agrees if WVU is not part of ACC. FSU wants to go too. Resistance from ACC, but more money is still added with ND and Texas even if FSU goes. ACC adds more markets with Cincinnati (Ohio) and UConn (NYC and Boston)

The Old Deal should be resurrected:

N.C. State & Virginia Tech to the SEC along with T.C.U. and Kansas
Notre Dame joins in full. Texas, Texas Tech, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State and West Virginia to the ACC.

The ACC gets a dramatic boost in content and markets. They lose nothing but two duplicates to pull it off. The SEC gains 3 new markets (2 of them significant), a major basketball brand, and entry into DFW.

ACC:
North: Boston College, Louisville, Notre Dame, Pittsburgh, Syracuse, West Virginia
South: Clemson, Duke, Georgia Tech, North Carolina, Virginia, Wake Forest
West: Florida State, Miami, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Texas, Texas Tech

SEC:
East: Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, N.C. State, South Carolina, Virginia Tech
South: Alabama, Auburn, Mississippi, Mississippi State, Tennessee, Vanderbilt
West: Arkansas, Kansas, Louisiana State, Missouri, Texas A&M, T.C.U.

If the ACC was reluctant to agree to accept Oklahoma, we sure as the world are not going to agree to accept Oklahoma State.

That's fine. By talking about SEC expansion from the Big 12, I have only been pointing out the reasons we should sever ties with ESPN in 2035 and take who we wish. The only reason the Big 12 has been on our menu this time around and the last was because that's what we were paid to do. Yes we wanted into Texas in '91. And then we were willing to take OU along with Texas, Texas A&M and Arkansas to make it happen.

Now it doesn't really matter who we get to shore up DFW. And our legitimate interests lie to the East. So if you guys don't want to do what is necessary to secure yourselves long term that suits our interests just fine.

And who keeps saying that the market model is dead?
The truth is that regionalism will drive markets and viewing habits in the future. The SEC's main problem is that their #1 target, Texas, doesn't want to join your league and it's imperative that they land Oklahoma to access the DFW market.

That's just your stilted Tobacco Road view of the world coming through. We can get DFW with Oklahoma, T.C.U. or Texas. Even Oklahoma State has uses there. The whole point is that we don't have to have Texas at all.

My point is that the SEC should be proactive in escaping ESPN. That way we can operate in our own self interest without intervention and without regard for what the hell Chapel Hill thinks. SEC severance from ESPN means the abject loss of any power that Skipper permits Tobacco Road to have, and it means freedom for the SEC to do what is best for it, and not the damned network!

(09-17-2017 01:55 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(09-15-2017 07:50 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(09-15-2017 05:22 PM)murrdcu Wrote:  

(09-15-2017 02:34 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  If the ACC is going to get Texas then there needs to be some compensation for that if we are expected to cooperate...
There is a solution though...

SEC adds Texas Tech, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Kansas, Iowa State, and Virginia Tech

ACC adds Notre Dame, Cincinnati, West Virginia, Texas, TCU, Tulane, and

If the ACC was going to allow a few schools to swap over to the SEC, I would have to think the current FSU administration would at least explore that opportunity like they explore that option like they did years earlier.

I'll play along and say the more natural additions would beaded:

SEC adds Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Virginia Tech, West Virginia, Florida State, Kansas

ACC adds Norte Dame, Texas, Texas Tech, TCU, Cincinnati, UConn

SEC adds Bedlam. Ninja Swofford convinces ND to go all in if Texas joins in full too. Texas wants some friends for travel reasons. ACC says no to Baylor, ESPN suggests moving VT to SEC. ACC agrees if WVU is not part of ACC. FSU wants to go too. Resistance from ACC, but more money is still added with ND and Texas even if FSU goes. ACC adds more markets with Cincinnati (Ohio) and UConn (NYC and Boston)

The Old Deal should be resurrected:

N.C. State & Virginia Tech to the SEC along with T.C.U. and Kansas
Notre Dame joins in full. Texas, Texas Tech, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State and West Virginia to the ACC.

The ACC gets a dramatic boost in content and markets. They lose nothing but two duplicates to pull it off. The SEC gains 3 new markets (2 of them significant), a major basketball brand, and entry into DFW.

ACC:
North: Boston College, Louisville, Notre Dame, Pittsburgh, Syracuse, West Virginia
South: Clemson, Duke, Georgia Tech, North Carolina, Virginia, Wake Forest
West: Florida State, Miami, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Texas, Texas Tech

SEC:
East: Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, N.C. State, South Carolina, Virginia Tech
South: Alabama, Auburn, Mississippi, Mississippi State, Tennessee, Vanderbilt
West: Arkansas, Kansas, Louisiana State, Missouri, Texas A&M, T.C.U.

If the ACC was reluctant to agree to accept Oklahoma, we sure as the world are not going to agree to accept Oklahoma State.

Didn't you say earlier that if ESPN was capable of guiding UT, OU, KU, and ND into the ACC that you all would accept regardless of what Duke thought?

I mean...

Either ESPN offered you that deal and the ACC balked or the ACC has some bizarre objection to OU and simply won't take them...

But it can't be both.

(09-17-2017 05:07 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  

(09-17-2017 01:55 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(09-15-2017 07:50 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(09-15-2017 05:22 PM)murrdcu Wrote:  

(09-15-2017 02:34 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  If the ACC is going to get Texas then there needs to be some compensation for that if we are expected to cooperate...
There is a solution though...

SEC adds Texas Tech, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Kansas, Iowa State, and Virginia Tech

ACC adds Notre Dame, Cincinnati, West Virginia, Texas, TCU, Tulane, and

If the ACC was going to allow a few schools to swap over to the SEC, I would have to think the current FSU administration would at least explore that opportunity like they explore that option like they did years earlier.

I'll play along and say the more natural additions would beaded:

SEC adds Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Virginia Tech, West Virginia, Florida State, Kansas

ACC adds Norte Dame, Texas, Texas Tech, TCU, Cincinnati, UConn

SEC adds Bedlam. Ninja Swofford convinces ND to go all in if Texas joins in full too. Texas wants some friends for travel reasons. ACC says no to Baylor, ESPN suggests moving VT to SEC. ACC agrees if WVU is not part of ACC. FSU wants to go too. Resistance from ACC, but more money is still added with ND and Texas even if FSU goes. ACC adds more markets with Cincinnati (Ohio) and UConn (NYC and Boston)

The Old Deal should be resurrected:

N.C. State & Virginia Tech to the SEC along with T.C.U. and Kansas
Notre Dame joins in full. Texas, Texas Tech, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State and West Virginia to the ACC.

The ACC gets a dramatic boost in content and markets. They lose nothing but two duplicates to pull it off. The SEC gains 3 new markets (2 of them significant), a major basketball brand, and entry into DFW.

ACC:
North: Boston College, Louisville, Notre Dame, Pittsburgh, Syracuse, West Virginia
South: Clemson, Duke, Georgia Tech, North Carolina, Virginia, Wake Forest
West: Florida State, Miami, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Texas, Texas Tech

SEC:
East: Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, N.C. State, South Carolina, Virginia Tech
South: Alabama, Auburn, Mississippi, Mississippi State, Tennessee, Vanderbilt
West: Arkansas, Kansas, Louisiana State, Missouri, Texas A&M, T.C.U.

If the ACC was reluctant to agree to accept Oklahoma, we sure as the world are not going to agree to accept Oklahoma State.

Didn't you say earlier that if ESPN was capable of guiding UT, OU, KU, and ND into the ACC that you all would accept regardless of what Duke thought?

I mean...

Either ESPN offered you that deal and the ACC balked or the ACC has some bizarre objection to OU and simply won't take them...

But it can't be both.

The point was that ESPN couldn't.

(09-17-2017 07:46 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(09-17-2017 05:07 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  

(09-17-2017 01:55 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(09-15-2017 07:50 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(09-15-2017 05:22 PM)murrdcu Wrote:  If the ACC was going to allow a few schools to swap over to the SEC, I would have to think the current FSU administration would at least explore that opportunity like they explore that option like they did years earlier.

I'll play along and say the more natural additions would beaded:

SEC adds Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Virginia Tech, West Virginia, Florida State, Kansas

ACC adds Norte Dame, Texas, Texas Tech, TCU, Cincinnati, UConn

SEC adds Bedlam. Ninja Swofford convinces ND to go all in if Texas joins in full too. Texas wants some friends for travel reasons. ACC says no to Baylor, ESPN suggests moving VT to SEC. ACC agrees if WVU is not part of ACC. FSU wants to go too. Resistance from ACC, but more money is still added with ND and Texas even if FSU goes. ACC adds more markets with Cincinnati (Ohio) and UConn (NYC and Boston)

The Old Deal should be resurrected:

N.C. State & Virginia Tech to the SEC along with T.C.U. and Kansas
Notre Dame joins in full. Texas, Texas Tech, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State and West Virginia to the ACC.

The ACC gets a dramatic boost in content and markets. They lose nothing but two duplicates to pull it off. The SEC gains 3 new markets (2 of them significant), a major basketball brand, and entry into DFW.

ACC:
North: Boston College, Louisville, Notre Dame, Pittsburgh, Syracuse, West Virginia
South: Clemson, Duke, Georgia Tech, North Carolina, Virginia, Wake Forest
West: Florida State, Miami, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Texas, Texas Tech

SEC:
East: Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, N.C. State, South Carolina, Virginia Tech
South: Alabama, Auburn, Mississippi, Mississippi State, Tennessee, Vanderbilt
West: Arkansas, Kansas, Louisiana State, Missouri, Texas A&M, T.C.U.

If the ACC was reluctant to agree to accept Oklahoma, we sure as the world are not going to agree to accept Oklahoma State.

Didn't you say earlier that if ESPN was capable of guiding UT, OU, KU, and ND into the ACC that you all would accept regardless of what Duke thought?

I mean...

Either ESPN offered you that deal and the ACC balked or the ACC has some bizarre objection to OU and simply won't take them...

But it can't be both.

The point was that ESPN couldn't.

So there's no reluctance to take Oklahoma?

(09-17-2017 08:27 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  

(09-17-2017 07:46 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(09-17-2017 05:07 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  

(09-17-2017 01:55 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(09-15-2017 07:50 PM)JRsec Wrote:  The Old Deal should be resurrected:

N.C. State & Virginia Tech to the SEC along with T.C.U. and Kansas
Notre Dame joins in full. Texas, Texas Tech, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State and West Virginia to the ACC.

The ACC gets a dramatic boost in content and markets. They lose nothing but two duplicates to pull it off. The SEC gains 3 new markets (2 of them significant), a major basketball brand, and entry into DFW.

ACC:
North: Boston College, Louisville, Notre Dame, Pittsburgh, Syracuse, West Virginia
South: Clemson, Duke, Georgia Tech, North Carolina, Virginia, Wake Forest
West: Florida State, Miami, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Texas, Texas Tech

SEC:
East: Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, N.C. State, South Carolina, Virginia Tech
South: Alabama, Auburn, Mississippi, Mississippi State, Tennessee, Vanderbilt
West: Arkansas, Kansas, Louisiana State, Missouri, Texas A&M, T.C.U.

If the ACC was reluctant to agree to accept Oklahoma, we sure as the world are not going to agree to accept Oklahoma State.

Didn't you say earlier that if ESPN was capable of guiding UT, OU, KU, and ND into the ACC that you all would accept regardless of what Duke thought?

I mean...

Either ESPN offered you that deal and the ACC balked or the ACC has some bizarre objection to OU and simply won't take them...

But it can't be both.

The point was that ESPN couldn't.

So there's no reluctance to take Oklahoma?

Not only reluctance to take Oklahoma, but would never take Texas Tech or Oklahoma State.

(09-17-2017 08:39 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(09-17-2017 08:27 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  

(09-17-2017 07:46 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(09-17-2017 05:07 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  

(09-17-2017 01:55 PM)XLance Wrote:  If the ACC was reluctant to agree to accept Oklahoma, we sure as the world are not going to agree to accept Oklahoma State.

Didn't you say earlier that if ESPN was capable of guiding UT, OU, KU, and ND into the ACC that you all would accept regardless of what Duke thought?

I mean...

Either ESPN offered you that deal and the ACC balked or the ACC has some bizarre objection to OU and simply won't take them...

But it can't be both.

The point was that ESPN couldn't.

So there's no reluctance to take Oklahoma?

Not only reluctance to take Oklahoma, but would never take Texas Tech or Oklahoma State.

The deal was shot down because North Carolina / Virginia / Duke / & Wake Forest didn't want to give up two votes (N.C. State & Virginia Tech) in order to acquire Texas, Oklahoma, Kansas & Notre Dame in full.

That move would have taken the ACC to 16 schools without losing Maryland. Tobacco Road would have held four votes and might not be able to count on Clemson's consent in a new football first conference where Friends of N.D. (B.C., Syracuse, & Pitt) might side with Friends of Texas (Oklahoma and Kansas) and the football first schools of the ACC (Georgia Tech, Clemson, and Florida State). That's a potential voting block of 10 schools out of 16 with Maryland being a swing vote.

Bye bye UNC & Duke control!

That's what went wrong with the deal and ESPN was for it, not against it! Why? It would have given them two solid brand conferences to juxtapose against one another and would have cut the underbelly of the B1G's television markets giving ESPN a way into key cities without having to invest in the Big 10.

(09-17-2017 09:52 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(09-17-2017 08:39 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(09-17-2017 08:27 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  

(09-17-2017 07:46 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(09-17-2017 05:07 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  Didn't you say earlier that if ESPN was capable of guiding UT, OU, KU, and ND into the ACC that you all would accept regardless of what Duke thought?

I mean...

Either ESPN offered you that deal and the ACC balked or the ACC has some bizarre objection to OU and simply won't take them...

But it can't be both.

The point was that ESPN couldn't.

So there's no reluctance to take Oklahoma?

Not only reluctance to take Oklahoma, but would never take Texas Tech or Oklahoma State.

The deal was shot down because North Carolina / Virginia / Duke / & Wake Forest didn't want to give up two votes (N.C. State & Virginia Tech) in order to acquire Texas, Oklahoma, Kansas & Notre Dame in full.

That move would have taken the ACC to 16 schools without losing Maryland. Tobacco Road would have held four votes and might not be able to count on Clemson's consent in a new football first conference where Friends of N.D. (B.C., Syracuse, & Pitt) might side with Friends of Texas (Oklahoma and Kansas) and the football first schools of the ACC (Georgia Tech, Clemson, and Florida State). That's a potential voting block of 10 schools out of 16 with Maryland being a swing vote.

Bye bye UNC & Duke control!

That's what went wrong with the deal and ESPN was for it, not against it! Why? It would have given them two solid brand conferences to juxtapose against one another and would have cut the underbelly of the B1G's television markets giving ESPN a way into key cities without having to invest in the Big 10.

Another internet myth.
Duke and Carolina lose control? Duke and Carolina opposed expansion beyond 9 teams with the consultant suggested trio of Syracuse, Miami and Boston College and when it seemed inevitable tried to slow expansion tried to get the conference to add Miami only.

(09-17-2017 08:39 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(09-17-2017 08:27 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  

(09-17-2017 07:46 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(09-17-2017 05:07 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  

(09-17-2017 01:55 PM)XLance Wrote:  If the ACC was reluctant to agree to accept Oklahoma, we sure as the world are not going to agree to accept Oklahoma State.

Didn't you say earlier that if ESPN was capable of guiding UT, OU, KU, and ND into the ACC that you all would accept regardless of what Duke thought?

I mean...

Either ESPN offered you that deal and the ACC balked or the ACC has some bizarre objection to OU and simply won't take them...

But it can't be both.

The point was that ESPN couldn't.

So there's no reluctance to take Oklahoma?

Not only reluctance to take Oklahoma, but would never take Texas Tech or Oklahoma State.

Actually, I misspoke earlier.

What I meant to say was that either ESPN offered to make that deal and the ACC balked at Oklahoma or there's no reluctance to take OU and the deal was never offered.

Point is, you are contradicting yourself.

(09-18-2017 06:32 AM)AllTideUp Wrote:  

(09-17-2017 08:39 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(09-17-2017 08:27 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  

(09-17-2017 07:46 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(09-17-2017 05:07 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  Didn't you say earlier that if ESPN was capable of guiding UT, OU, KU, and ND into the ACC that you all would accept regardless of what Duke thought?

I mean...

Either ESPN offered you that deal and the ACC balked or the ACC has some bizarre objection to OU and simply won't take them...

But it can't be both.

The point was that ESPN couldn't.

So there's no reluctance to take Oklahoma?

Not only reluctance to take Oklahoma, but would never take Texas Tech or Oklahoma State.

Actually, I misspoke earlier.

What I meant to say was that either ESPN offered to make that deal and the ACC balked at Oklahoma or there's no reluctance to take OU and the deal was never offered.

Point is, you are contradicting yourself.

^

"N.C. State & Virginia Tech to the SEC along with T.C.U. and Kansas
Notre Dame joins in full. Texas, Texas Tech, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State and West Virginia to the ACC."

I'm not one to support "trading" VT or any other university out of the ACC, especially for nonsense like UCONN or Tulane, but I wouldn't oppose the trade mentioned by JR, provided that VT & NC State don't object. Bringing in Texas, Oklahoma & ND would definitely raise the profile of the ACC. I would trade TT for Houston though if possible.

I would prefer the earlier mentioning of placing Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Kansas & Iowa State into the SEC & Texas, TCU, WV & ND into the ACC over the above proposal.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

(09-18-2017 09:41 AM)Lenvillecards Wrote:  "N.C. State & Virginia Tech to the SEC along with T.C.U. and Kansas
Notre Dame joins in full. Texas, Texas Tech, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State and West Virginia to the ACC."

I'm not one to support "trading" VT or any other university out of the ACC, especially for nonsense like UCONN or Tulane, but I wouldn't oppose the trade mentioned by JR, provided that VT & NC State don't object. Bringing in Texas, Oklahoma & ND would definitely raise the profile of the ACC. I would trade TT for Houston though if possible.

I would prefer the earlier mentioning of placing Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Kansas & Iowa State into the SEC & Texas, TCU, WV & ND into the ACC over the above proposal.

If its a strict "trade" then it should come with no penalties and the willingness of both Virginia Tech and North Carolina St which would add two SEC/ACC matchups.

I would try to boost the basketball footprint of the SEC with Kansas and Iowa St. I suspect Texas would lobby for Texas Tech over TCU.

SEC + North Carolina St, Virginia Tech, Kansas, Iowa St
ACC (- North Carolina St, Virginia Tech) + Texas, Texas Tech, Oklahoma, Oklahoma St, West Virginia, Notre Dame
PAC + TCU, Houston

SEC
West: Iowa St, Kansas, Missouri, Arkansas, Texas A&M, LSU
Central: Tennessee, Vanderbilt, Mississippi, Mississippi St, Alabama, Auburn
East: Kentucky, Virginia Tech, North Carolina St, South Carolina, Georgia, Florida

ACC
North: Notre Dame, Boston College, Syracuse, Pittsburgh, West Virginia, Louisville
East: Virginia, North Carolina, Duke, Wake Forest, Clemson, Georgia Tech
West: Texas, Texas Tech, Oklahoma, Oklahoma St, Florida St, Miami

PAC
North: Washington, Washington St, Oregon, Oregon St, California, Stanford, TCU
South: USC, UCLA, Arizona, Arizona St, Utah, Colorado, Houston

(09-18-2017 07:03 AM)XLance Wrote:  

(09-18-2017 06:32 AM)AllTideUp Wrote:  

(09-17-2017 08:39 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(09-17-2017 08:27 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  

(09-17-2017 07:46 PM)XLance Wrote:  The point was that ESPN couldn't.

So there's no reluctance to take Oklahoma?

Not only reluctance to take Oklahoma, but would never take Texas Tech or Oklahoma State.

Actually, I misspoke earlier.

What I meant to say was that either ESPN offered to make that deal and the ACC balked at Oklahoma or there's no reluctance to take OU and the deal was never offered.

Point is, you are contradicting yourself.

^

Then when did the ACC have an opportunity to be reluctant over an OU addition? When did Duke put the kibosh on such a deal as you have mentioned in the past?

It can't be both.

(09-18-2017 04:52 AM)XLance Wrote:  

(09-17-2017 09:52 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(09-17-2017 08:39 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(09-17-2017 08:27 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  

(09-17-2017 07:46 PM)XLance Wrote:  The point was that ESPN couldn't.

So there's no reluctance to take Oklahoma?

Not only reluctance to take Oklahoma, but would never take Texas Tech or Oklahoma State.

The deal was shot down because North Carolina / Virginia / Duke / & Wake Forest didn't want to give up two votes (N.C. State & Virginia Tech) in order to acquire Texas, Oklahoma, Kansas & Notre Dame in full.

That move would have taken the ACC to 16 schools without losing Maryland. Tobacco Road would have held four votes and might not be able to count on Clemson's consent in a new football first conference where Friends of N.D. (B.C., Syracuse, & Pitt) might side with Friends of Texas (Oklahoma and Kansas) and the football first schools of the ACC (Georgia Tech, Clemson, and Florida State). That's a potential voting block of 10 schools out of 16 with Maryland being a swing vote.

Bye bye UNC & Duke control!

That's what went wrong with the deal and ESPN was for it, not against it! Why? It would have given them two solid brand conferences to juxtapose against one another and would have cut the underbelly of the B1G's television markets giving ESPN a way into key cities without having to invest in the Big 10.

Another internet myth.
Duke and Carolina lose control? Duke and Carolina opposed expansion beyond 9 teams with the consultant suggested trio of Syracuse, Miami and Boston College and when it seemed inevitable tried to slow expansion tried to get the conference to add Miami only.

It's not myth.

Myth's don't involve a conference trip to West Virginia to meet at the Greenbriar with officials from Virginia Tech.

Myth's don't involve leaks of information to people like Clay Travis so they can spread the word about two school the SEC had not heretofore ever discussed, ie Va Tech & N.C. State.

Myth's don't force the SEC to back off a school they've had interest in since '91 (Oklahoma) so that we go after another school never before considered (Missouri).

Myth's don't agree to the movement of Florida State and Clemson as ESPN did and announced on their crawler only to revoke it when N.D. agrees to be a partial anyway.

Myth's don't cause a lifelong member of a conference like Maryland to bolt when a deal that would have given them the resources they needed to stay gets torpedoed at the last moment and the exit fees raised.

Exit fees? Another myth?

Myth's don't cause AD's like Cunningham to seek out Birmingham to make sure that UNC and Duke has a safe landing spot if the ACC blows.

Yeah Bubba, just another internet myth.

It was a fouled up deal plain and simple, and one the above events all had as their epicenter. And which all of the above felt the gravity of.

And I might add a myth that led to the GOR's of both the Big 12 and ACC just to try to hold the situation in stasis.

And I'm also sure it's just a myth that ESPN drug its feet in creating the ACCN just because they felt like instead of because there was no longer the core of product that they had anticipated having to do it with?

Sorry Charlie but you're going to have to do better than that, or putting up some little emoticon to defend this position.

In the world of circumstantial evidence the preponderance of evidence from actual events is on my side and nothing but the word of a fraudulent institution that conducted over 2 decades of phony classes and lied about it is on the other.