As much as I and others would like to move Florida State out of the ACC, it just won't happen (mostly for the reasons that we have already discussed).
Clay Travis' trial balloon was just that, a trial balloon that didn't fly. When Virginia Tech feigned interest in the SEC, it was just part of their plot to gain ACC interest, it worked and the Hokies are where they have always wanted to be.
This brings us back to that third or 4th contingency. The SEC gets Oklahoma (but has to take Oklahoma State too) and Texas but will have to shed one school in the east to get back to 16. Yep! South Carolina returns to the ACC. The Cocks don't really do much for us athletically. When Spurrier retires their football will go back to being mediocre (but they do have an 80,000 seat stadium that they will fill up even with an 0-11 team). What South Carolina does is helps define our territory vs. the SEC and will solve our division dilemma.
The Atlantic can become: FSU, Clemson, SC, NCSU, Wake Forest, GT, Virginia Tech and Louisville.
The Coastal will be: Miami, Dook, Carolina, UVa, Pitt, Syracuse, West Virginia and BC. I know its a little lopsided but it is somewhat geographical.
The SEC really gets what they have always wanted Texas and A&M.
Or even if H1 might have had a lucky guess and Oklahoma were to end up in the B1G, The SEC would still take Oklahoma State with Texas and just add Baylor for #16. The PAC could have Texas Tech, TCU, Kansas State, and Iowa State while the B1G picks up Kansas and Oklahoma.

(05-02-2015 02:59 PM)XLance Wrote:  As much as I and others would like to move Florida State out of the ACC, it just won't happen (mostly for the reasons that we have already discussed).
Clay Travis' trial balloon was just that, a trial balloon that didn't fly. When Virginia Tech feigned interest in the SEC, it was just part of their plot to gain ACC interest, it worked and the Hokies are where they have always wanted to be.
This brings us back to that third or 4th contingency. The SEC gets Oklahoma (but has to take Oklahoma State too) and Texas but will have to shed one school in the east to get back to 16. Yep! South Carolina returns to the ACC. The Cocks don't really do much for us athletically. When Spurrier retires their football will go back to being mediocre (but they do have an 80,000 seat stadium that they will fill up even with an 0-11 team). What South Carolina does is helps define our territory vs. the SEC and will solve our division dilemma.
The Atlantic can become: FSU, Clemson, SC, NCSU, Wake Forest, GT, Virginia Tech and Louisville.
The Coastal will be: Miami, Dook, Carolina, UVa, Pitt, Syracuse, West Virginia and BC. I know its a little lopsided but it is somewhat geographical.
The SEC really gets what they have always wanted Texas and A&M.
Or even if H1 might have had a lucky guess and Oklahoma were to end up in the B1G, The SEC would still take Oklahoma State with Texas and just add Baylor for #16. The PAC could have Texas Tech, TCU, Kansas State, and Iowa State while the B1G picks up Kansas and Oklahoma.

Okay, I think giving up South Carolina (if they wanted to go) might be a long term peace offering between the conferences. But we would only do it to get Texas and Oklahoma. I can't see the Sooners heading to the Big 10 if both Okie State and the Horns were in the SEC. That really would cut them off from their recruiting base. I said long term peace offering because we would be giving up our bridge play into North Carolina. If we keep Missouri that really gives us more of a solid Western boundary.

But you know XLance if the SEC doesn't want to give up that bridge to North Carolina the best solution for us would be simply to expand to 18 and take Texas, Texas Tech or Baylor (Texas's choice), Oklahoma and Oklahoma State and stop at 18 and not even fool with dealing with the ACC. With the added content value of Texas and Oklahoma and with all three Texas state schools, or if Baylor the three oldest Texas schools, and some kind of bequest from Boone someday, I think the SEC's best play is to simply wait until the money differential coaxes our final expansion away from your conference. So I still favor 18 with our own version of Texahoma.

Look what we would have:

Arkansas, Missouri, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Texas, Texas Tech
Alabama, Louisiana State, Mississippi, Mississippi State, Texas A&M, Vanderbilt
Auburn, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, South Carolina, Tennessee

Now even you have to admit that regionally this is one of the strongest and most regionally compact alignments that you have seen. Then if anything ever happens to the ACC we could simply add 6 more to form a 24 school conference.

Clemson, Florida State, Georgia Tech, Louisville, N.C. State and Virginia Tech would make one helluva nice 4th division.

We would play everyone in our division, 1 permanent rival, and one rotating division each year and that would be our 12 games. We wouldn't have to share our region with anyone.

We'd have the Southwest Division, the Southeast Division, the Atlantic Coast Division and the Gulf Coast Division. That would be a grand vision for the Southeastern Conference. We ought to just go ahead and do it.

(05-02-2015 03:47 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(05-02-2015 02:59 PM)XLance Wrote:  As much as I and others would like to move Florida State out of the ACC, it just won't happen (mostly for the reasons that we have already discussed).
Clay Travis' trial balloon was just that, a trial balloon that didn't fly. When Virginia Tech feigned interest in the SEC, it was just part of their plot to gain ACC interest, it worked and the Hokies are where they have always wanted to be.
This brings us back to that third or 4th contingency. The SEC gets Oklahoma (but has to take Oklahoma State too) and Texas but will have to shed one school in the east to get back to 16. Yep! South Carolina returns to the ACC. The Cocks don't really do much for us athletically. When Spurrier retires their football will go back to being mediocre (but they do have an 80,000 seat stadium that they will fill up even with an 0-11 team). What South Carolina does is helps define our territory vs. the SEC and will solve our division dilemma.
The Atlantic can become: FSU, Clemson, SC, NCSU, Wake Forest, GT, Virginia Tech and Louisville.
The Coastal will be: Miami, Dook, Carolina, UVa, Pitt, Syracuse, West Virginia and BC. I know its a little lopsided but it is somewhat geographical.
The SEC really gets what they have always wanted Texas and A&M.
Or even if H1 might have had a lucky guess and Oklahoma were to end up in the B1G, The SEC would still take Oklahoma State with Texas and just add Baylor for #16. The PAC could have Texas Tech, TCU, Kansas State, and Iowa State while the B1G picks up Kansas and Oklahoma.

Okay, I think giving up South Carolina (if they wanted to go) might be a long term peace offering between the conferences. But we would only do it to get Texas and Oklahoma. I can't see the Sooners heading to the Big 10 if both Okie State and the Horns were in the SEC. That really would cut them off from their recruiting base. I said long term peace offering because we would be giving up our bridge play into North Carolina. If we keep Missouri that really gives us more of a solid Western boundary.

But you know XLance if the SEC doesn't want to give up that bridge to North Carolina the best solution for us would be simply to expand to 18 and take Texas, Texas Tech or Baylor (Texas's choice), Oklahoma and Oklahoma State and stop at 18 and not even fool with dealing with the ACC. With the added content value of Texas and Oklahoma and with all three Texas state schools, or if Baylor the three oldest Texas schools, and some kind of bequest from Boone someday, I think the SEC's best play is to simply wait until the money differential coaxes our final expansion away from your conference. So I still favor 18 with our own version of Texahoma.

The expansion to 16 is risky, to go to 18 would be downright scary. One reason that we all stopped at 14 was to catch our breaths and see if a 14 team conference could hold together.
IMO Notre Dame will stay a semi-independent as long as they want to and it's just serendipitous that there are 64 other P5 schools. But they are just in the wrong places.
What the SEC needs is just a pod of four schools in the west (not including A&M). That's four out of Texas, Texas Tech, Baylor, TCU, Oklahoma or Oklahoma State. As long as one of the four is either Texas or Oklahoma it really does not matter who the other three are.
If 16 works, I'm not sure any conference will have any desire to give 18 a try. If you have too much inventory, then you start to have petty jealousy over who gets to be on the good TV spots and the conference will eventually break apart. The SEC will never need that "bridge" into North Carolina, you'll have your hands too full in Texas to worry about us.

(05-02-2015 04:26 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(05-02-2015 03:47 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(05-02-2015 02:59 PM)XLance Wrote:  As much as I and others would like to move Florida State out of the ACC, it just won't happen (mostly for the reasons that we have already discussed).
Clay Travis' trial balloon was just that, a trial balloon that didn't fly. When Virginia Tech feigned interest in the SEC, it was just part of their plot to gain ACC interest, it worked and the Hokies are where they have always wanted to be.
This brings us back to that third or 4th contingency. The SEC gets Oklahoma (but has to take Oklahoma State too) and Texas but will have to shed one school in the east to get back to 16. Yep! South Carolina returns to the ACC. The Cocks don't really do much for us athletically. When Spurrier retires their football will go back to being mediocre (but they do have an 80,000 seat stadium that they will fill up even with an 0-11 team). What South Carolina does is helps define our territory vs. the SEC and will solve our division dilemma.
The Atlantic can become: FSU, Clemson, SC, NCSU, Wake Forest, GT, Virginia Tech and Louisville.
The Coastal will be: Miami, Dook, Carolina, UVa, Pitt, Syracuse, West Virginia and BC. I know its a little lopsided but it is somewhat geographical.
The SEC really gets what they have always wanted Texas and A&M.
Or even if H1 might have had a lucky guess and Oklahoma were to end up in the B1G, The SEC would still take Oklahoma State with Texas and just add Baylor for #16. The PAC could have Texas Tech, TCU, Kansas State, and Iowa State while the B1G picks up Kansas and Oklahoma.

Okay, I think giving up South Carolina (if they wanted to go) might be a long term peace offering between the conferences. But we would only do it to get Texas and Oklahoma. I can't see the Sooners heading to the Big 10 if both Okie State and the Horns were in the SEC. That really would cut them off from their recruiting base. I said long term peace offering because we would be giving up our bridge play into North Carolina. If we keep Missouri that really gives us more of a solid Western boundary.

But you know XLance if the SEC doesn't want to give up that bridge to North Carolina the best solution for us would be simply to expand to 18 and take Texas, Texas Tech or Baylor (Texas's choice), Oklahoma and Oklahoma State and stop at 18 and not even fool with dealing with the ACC. With the added content value of Texas and Oklahoma and with all three Texas state schools, or if Baylor the three oldest Texas schools, and some kind of bequest from Boone someday, I think the SEC's best play is to simply wait until the money differential coaxes our final expansion away from your conference. So I still favor 18 with our own version of Texahoma.

The expansion to 16 is risky, to go to 18 would be downright scary. One reason that we all stopped at 14 was to catch our breaths and see if a 14 team conference could hold together.
IMO Notre Dame will stay a semi-independent as long as they want to and it's just serendipitous that there are 64 other P5 schools. But they are just in the wrong places.
What the SEC needs is just a pod of four schools in the west (not including A&M). That's four out of Texas, Texas Tech, Baylor, TCU, Oklahoma or Oklahoma State. As long as one of the four is either Texas or Oklahoma it really does not matter who the other three are.
If 16 works, I'm not sure any conference will have any desire to give 18 a try. If you have too much inventory, then you start to have petty jealousy over who gets to be on the good TV spots and the conference will eventually break apart. The SEC will never need that "bridge" into North Carolina, you'll have your hands too full in Texas to worry about us.

At 18 you have 3 tremendously well grouped divisions. You have 1 conference Wild Card to hold interest for many more of our school's fan bases deep into the season. And you have divisions that essentially function as six team conferences.

At 24 you have much more leverage, you dominate your expanded footprint instead of sharing it. You play 12 conference games and never share a dime of your money with anyone until the National Championship round.

You have the CBS prime time game, two day slots for ESPN & ESPN2, and a prime time slot for ABC at night. Then you have 4 channels for your network (one for each 6 team division and all 4 for a bundled price). Each has two time slots for broadcasts on Saturday. Now you have all 12 games on every week. There is no need to squabble over who's on the tube because everyone is every week. For minor sports and non revenue sports you play within a region (which consists of two divisions). All tournaments then involve the top placing schools from each region. In baseball you play 5 series against your divisional opponents and 6 against a rotating division. Everyone within the 2 competing divisions plays the same 11 series then every year. It's actually more fair than the present set up. In basketball you play a double round robin in your division and then play 3 schools each from the other three divisions (these rotate annually) for 19 regular season conference games. It actually works quite well.

(05-02-2015 04:32 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(05-02-2015 04:26 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(05-02-2015 03:47 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(05-02-2015 02:59 PM)XLance Wrote:  As much as I and others would like to move Florida State out of the ACC, it just won't happen (mostly for the reasons that we have already discussed).
Clay Travis' trial balloon was just that, a trial balloon that didn't fly. When Virginia Tech feigned interest in the SEC, it was just part of their plot to gain ACC interest, it worked and the Hokies are where they have always wanted to be.
This brings us back to that third or 4th contingency. The SEC gets Oklahoma (but has to take Oklahoma State too) and Texas but will have to shed one school in the east to get back to 16. Yep! South Carolina returns to the ACC. The Cocks don't really do much for us athletically. When Spurrier retires their football will go back to being mediocre (but they do have an 80,000 seat stadium that they will fill up even with an 0-11 team). What South Carolina does is helps define our territory vs. the SEC and will solve our division dilemma.
The Atlantic can become: FSU, Clemson, SC, NCSU, Wake Forest, GT, Virginia Tech and Louisville.
The Coastal will be: Miami, Dook, Carolina, UVa, Pitt, Syracuse, West Virginia and BC. I know its a little lopsided but it is somewhat geographical.
The SEC really gets what they have always wanted Texas and A&M.
Or even if H1 might have had a lucky guess and Oklahoma were to end up in the B1G, The SEC would still take Oklahoma State with Texas and just add Baylor for #16. The PAC could have Texas Tech, TCU, Kansas State, and Iowa State while the B1G picks up Kansas and Oklahoma.

Okay, I think giving up South Carolina (if they wanted to go) might be a long term peace offering between the conferences. But we would only do it to get Texas and Oklahoma. I can't see the Sooners heading to the Big 10 if both Okie State and the Horns were in the SEC. That really would cut them off from their recruiting base. I said long term peace offering because we would be giving up our bridge play into North Carolina. If we keep Missouri that really gives us more of a solid Western boundary.

But you know XLance if the SEC doesn't want to give up that bridge to North Carolina the best solution for us would be simply to expand to 18 and take Texas, Texas Tech or Baylor (Texas's choice), Oklahoma and Oklahoma State and stop at 18 and not even fool with dealing with the ACC. With the added content value of Texas and Oklahoma and with all three Texas state schools, or if Baylor the three oldest Texas schools, and some kind of bequest from Boone someday, I think the SEC's best play is to simply wait until the money differential coaxes our final expansion away from your conference. So I still favor 18 with our own version of Texahoma.

The expansion to 16 is risky, to go to 18 would be downright scary. One reason that we all stopped at 14 was to catch our breaths and see if a 14 team conference could hold together.
IMO Notre Dame will stay a semi-independent as long as they want to and it's just serendipitous that there are 64 other P5 schools. But they are just in the wrong places.
What the SEC needs is just a pod of four schools in the west (not including A&M). That's four out of Texas, Texas Tech, Baylor, TCU, Oklahoma or Oklahoma State. As long as one of the four is either Texas or Oklahoma it really does not matter who the other three are.
If 16 works, I'm not sure any conference will have any desire to give 18 a try. If you have too much inventory, then you start to have petty jealousy over who gets to be on the good TV spots and the conference will eventually break apart. The SEC will never need that "bridge" into North Carolina, you'll have your hands too full in Texas to worry about us.

At 18 you have 3 tremendously well grouped divisions. You have 1 conference Wild Card to hold interest for many more of our school's fan bases deep into the season. And you have divisions that essentially function as six team conferences.

At 24 you have much more leverage, you dominate your expanded footprint instead of sharing it. You play 12 conference games and never share a dime of your money with anyone until the National Championship round.

You have the CBS prime time game, two day slots for ESPN & ESPN2, and a prime time slot for ABC at night. Then you have 4 channels for your network (one for each 6 team division and all 4 for a bundled price). Each has two time slots for broadcasts on Saturday. Now you have all 12 games on every week. There is no need to squabble over who's on the tube because everyone is every week. For minor sports and non revenue sports you play within a region (which consists of two divisions). All tournaments then involve the top placing schools from each region. In baseball you play 5 series against your divisional opponents and 6 against a rotating division. Everyone within the 2 competing divisions plays the same 11 series then every year. It's actually more fair than the present set up. In basketball you play a double round robin in your division and then play 3 schools each from the other three divisions (these rotate annually) for 19 regular season conference games. It actually works quite well.

JR, I agree with what you have laid out, but I don't believe that ESPN will ever allow the conferences to have that much leverage, do you?

(05-02-2015 05:00 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(05-02-2015 04:32 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(05-02-2015 04:26 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(05-02-2015 03:47 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(05-02-2015 02:59 PM)XLance Wrote:  As much as I and others would like to move Florida State out of the ACC, it just won't happen (mostly for the reasons that we have already discussed).
Clay Travis' trial balloon was just that, a trial balloon that didn't fly. When Virginia Tech feigned interest in the SEC, it was just part of their plot to gain ACC interest, it worked and the Hokies are where they have always wanted to be.
This brings us back to that third or 4th contingency. The SEC gets Oklahoma (but has to take Oklahoma State too) and Texas but will have to shed one school in the east to get back to 16. Yep! South Carolina returns to the ACC. The Cocks don't really do much for us athletically. When Spurrier retires their football will go back to being mediocre (but they do have an 80,000 seat stadium that they will fill up even with an 0-11 team). What South Carolina does is helps define our territory vs. the SEC and will solve our division dilemma.
The Atlantic can become: FSU, Clemson, SC, NCSU, Wake Forest, GT, Virginia Tech and Louisville.
The Coastal will be: Miami, Dook, Carolina, UVa, Pitt, Syracuse, West Virginia and BC. I know its a little lopsided but it is somewhat geographical.
The SEC really gets what they have always wanted Texas and A&M.
Or even if H1 might have had a lucky guess and Oklahoma were to end up in the B1G, The SEC would still take Oklahoma State with Texas and just add Baylor for #16. The PAC could have Texas Tech, TCU, Kansas State, and Iowa State while the B1G picks up Kansas and Oklahoma.

Okay, I think giving up South Carolina (if they wanted to go) might be a long term peace offering between the conferences. But we would only do it to get Texas and Oklahoma. I can't see the Sooners heading to the Big 10 if both Okie State and the Horns were in the SEC. That really would cut them off from their recruiting base. I said long term peace offering because we would be giving up our bridge play into North Carolina. If we keep Missouri that really gives us more of a solid Western boundary.

But you know XLance if the SEC doesn't want to give up that bridge to North Carolina the best solution for us would be simply to expand to 18 and take Texas, Texas Tech or Baylor (Texas's choice), Oklahoma and Oklahoma State and stop at 18 and not even fool with dealing with the ACC. With the added content value of Texas and Oklahoma and with all three Texas state schools, or if Baylor the three oldest Texas schools, and some kind of bequest from Boone someday, I think the SEC's best play is to simply wait until the money differential coaxes our final expansion away from your conference. So I still favor 18 with our own version of Texahoma.

The expansion to 16 is risky, to go to 18 would be downright scary. One reason that we all stopped at 14 was to catch our breaths and see if a 14 team conference could hold together.
IMO Notre Dame will stay a semi-independent as long as they want to and it's just serendipitous that there are 64 other P5 schools. But they are just in the wrong places.
What the SEC needs is just a pod of four schools in the west (not including A&M). That's four out of Texas, Texas Tech, Baylor, TCU, Oklahoma or Oklahoma State. As long as one of the four is either Texas or Oklahoma it really does not matter who the other three are.
If 16 works, I'm not sure any conference will have any desire to give 18 a try. If you have too much inventory, then you start to have petty jealousy over who gets to be on the good TV spots and the conference will eventually break apart. The SEC will never need that "bridge" into North Carolina, you'll have your hands too full in Texas to worry about us.

At 18 you have 3 tremendously well grouped divisions. You have 1 conference Wild Card to hold interest for many more of our school's fan bases deep into the season. And you have divisions that essentially function as six team conferences.

At 24 you have much more leverage, you dominate your expanded footprint instead of sharing it. You play 12 conference games and never share a dime of your money with anyone until the National Championship round.

You have the CBS prime time game, two day slots for ESPN & ESPN2, and a prime time slot for ABC at night. Then you have 4 channels for your network (one for each 6 team division and all 4 for a bundled price). Each has two time slots for broadcasts on Saturday. Now you have all 12 games on every week. There is no need to squabble over who's on the tube because everyone is every week. For minor sports and non revenue sports you play within a region (which consists of two divisions). All tournaments then involve the top placing schools from each region. In baseball you play 5 series against your divisional opponents and 6 against a rotating division. Everyone within the 2 competing divisions plays the same 11 series then every year. It's actually more fair than the present set up. In basketball you play a double round robin in your division and then play 3 schools each from the other three divisions (these rotate annually) for 19 regular season conference games. It actually works quite well.

JR, I agree with what you have laid out, but I don't believe that ESPN will ever allow the conferences to have that much leverage, do you?

That's a valid question with a complicated answer. Their inclination would be not to allow it. However with an opportunity to monetize completely the most sports frenzied region of the country with a lineup of top brand schools on a network that they own would have to be awfully tempting. I can't think of a more comprehensive sports package for entertainment value anywhere. Everyone would make money so I think, yes they would do it. Especially if they leveraged enough of the rest of the content by cashing in on those that would obviously be headed to the Big 10 for perhaps a similar endeavor.

To the North we might have this:

Duke, Maryland, North Carolina, Penn State, Pittsburgh, Virginia

Boston College, Connecticut, Notre Dame, Miami, Rutgers, Syracuse

Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Michigan State, Ohio State, Purdue

Iowa, Kansas, Minnesota, Nebraska, Northwestern, Wisconsin

Florida State. Need I say more?

(05-11-2015 11:50 AM)JoeJag Wrote:  Florida State. Need I say more?

Just one, Clemson. Those two are the most SEC like programs outside of Oklahoma and Texas. N.C. State and Virginia Tech are great for markets but both would be hard pressed to stay middle of the pack in the SEC.

Texas isn't like the SEC, sorry. Texas A&M, now they are like the SEC.

Back to the original question: If the SEC did expand again and did so from the ACC, who should we take and why?

Answer: Cincinnati.

But first, we've got to get Cincy into the ACC.

(05-13-2015 09:17 AM)colohank Wrote:  Back to the original question: If the SEC did expand again and did so from the ACC, who should we take and why?

Answer: Cincinnati.

But first, we've got to get Cincy into the ACC.

At 24 I think Cincy has a chance. If it is the ACC that ever breaks up then lets look at this:

At 16: Virginia Tech and Florida State
At 18: Virginia Tech, N.C. State, Clemson and Florida State
At 20: Virginia Tech, N.C. State, Clemson, Florida State, Georgia Tech and Louisville.
At 24: Virginia Tech, N.C. State, Clemson, Florida State, Georgia Tech, Louisville
West Virginia, Baylor, Cincinnati, and Miami.

Given the recent news that an ACCN is not forthcoming on any kind of timely manner and the economic disparity between the ACC and their two next door neighbors, and given that Notre Dame has given no indication that a full membership is in the offing and that both Texas and North Carolina are cooling way down on the idea of Texas being extended any kind of partial membership or full membership in the ACC this question must be revisited.

I think that the likelihood that either or both of the Big 10 and SEC could expand out of the ACC is rising again. Clearly both conferences could profit from Eastern expansion into Virginia and North Carolina. I think both could go to 16 from the ACC roster. But given proximity, markets and brands they both will be tempted to be a bit greedier while they can. I don't think 20 gives either of them 6 profitable additions. But I do believe that both could find combinations of 4 that would be profitable.

Strategically taking 4 apiece keeps both the SEC and Big 10 in a position where their strength and advantage over the Big 12 could keep some Big 12 schools in the mix for the future, or could put enough pressure on the Big 12 and PAC that a merger of those two could reduce the number of P5 conferences to 3, each covered by a network, enriched by the loss of two sets of conference overhead, by the extra bowl tie ins, and by the elimination of a few of the weaker P5 schools.

But first things first let's have a refreshing of past thoughts on expansion out of the ACC.

I don't think the Big 10 would take 4 unless they could land Notre Dame. And while the Irish say never and mean it, the walls on their independence are slowly closing in on them. Realistically what do they do if the ACC disappears? I don't think they will be given a track to the playoffs without the ACC unless they join another conference in full. Face it folks if we move to a P4 or a P3 without the ACC Notre Dame is out of options in all likelihood. Should the Big 10 make some adjustments and take Syracuse, Boston College, and Virginia Tech then Notre Dame will be pressed into making 1 of 5 choices.

1. Hold their noses and swallow their pride and join the Big 10 where, face it, they would have a much better chance to make the playoffs than they would in the SEC. If they have Syracuse and B.C. they can add Maryland and Penn State if they wanted and have plenty of East Coast / Beltway exposure.

2. Thumb their noses at the Big 10 and totally screw up their program by joining the SEC out of spite.

3. Spend oodles of money ferrying their minor sports to their new PAC home.

4. Remain independent and concede that they will never be in the playoffs.

5. Form a new conference and hope for enough football umpf that they could beg a slot under the right conditions. The problem with this approach is that virtually all of the football first talent will have migrated to one of the remaining P conferences.

Therefore I posit that option 1 makes the most sense. While they hate the Big 10 they make the most revenue from this decision for TV, they save the most in travel, they maintain the East Coast / Beltway exposure that they want and a scheduling agreement with the SEC that places the Irish in the Southeast annually against a big name school is all they would need as long as they keep a California school as well.

Big 10 adds Syracuse and Boston College and gets Virginia Tech for markets and Notre Dame for content.

SEC adds Duke to get North Carolina, picks up Virginia who stays with Duke and North Carolina and finally adds Florida State for content and to keep pressure on the Big 12.

Clemson, Georgia Tech, Miami, N.C. State, Louisville, and Pitt are left for the Big 12. If the Big 12 wants to get to 18 and maximize markets for a converted LHN to a Big 12N then they add Cincinnati and B.Y.U..

Their moves help them to stabilize but keep them clearly in 3rd place behind the Big 10 and SEC.

Big 10 East:
Boston College, Maryland, Notre Dame, Penn State, Rutgers, Virginia Tech

Big 10 Central:
Indiana, Michigan, Michigan State, Ohio State, Purdue, Syracuse

Big 10 West:
Illinois, Iowa, Minnesota, Nebraska, Northwestern, Wisconsin


SEC East:
Duke, Florida, Georgia, North Carolina, South Carolina, Virginia

SEC Central:
Alabama, Auburn, Florida State, Kentucky, Tennessee, Vanderbilt

SEC West:
Arkansas, Louisiana State, Mississippi, Mississippi State, Missouri, Texas A&M

Big 12 East:
Clemson, Georgia Tech, Miami, N.C. State, Pittsburgh, West Virginia

Big 12 North:
Cincinnati, Iowa State, Kansas, Louisville, Oklahoma, T.C.U.

Big 12 South:
Baylor, Brigham Young, Kansas State, Oklahoma State, Texas, Texas Tech

All three conferences play 10 conference games. 5 division games and 2 each against the other two divisions and 1 permanent rival.



Now if the Big 10 and SEC want to force the Big 12 out then they take 6 each from the ACC.

In that case the Big 10 picks up N.C. State for a market addition and Pitt because they are AAU and a friend of N.D..

The SEC picks up Clemson and Georgia Tech.

Those moves frustrate Big 12 attempts to expand markets and force 8 of the Big 12 schools to merge with the PAC and we wind up with something like this:

Big 10 Northeast:
Boston College, Notre Dame, Pittsburgh, Rutgers, Syracuse

Big 10 Southeast:
Maryland, Penn State, Purdue, N.C. State, Virginia Tech

Big 10 Central:
Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Michigan State, Ohio State

Big 10 West:
Iowa, Minnesota, Nebraska, Northwestern, Wisconsin


SEC Northeast:
Duke, North Carolina, South Carolina, Tennessee, Virginia

SEC Northwest:
Arkansas, Kentucky, Mississippi, Missouri, Vanderbilt

SEC Southeast:
Auburn, Clemson, Florida, Georgia, Georgia Tech,

SEC Southwest:
Alabama, Florida State, Louisiana State, Mississippi State, Texas A&M

PAC Northwest:
Oregon, Oregon State, Stanford, Washington, Washington State

PAC Southwest:
Arizona, Arizona State, California, U.C.L.A., U.S.C.

PAC Northeast:
Iowa State, Kansas, Kansas State, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State

PAC Southeast:
Colorado, Texas, T.C.U., Texas Tech, Utah

I still see the B1G going after AAU schools first. It would take a special school like ND or OU for them to look past that requirement.

The first step of the breakup of the ACC will require some of the football schools to leave. When the ACC realizes they can't get that value back, it will fall apart.

A combo of Clemson/FSU to the B12 or SEC would get things started. I could also see the B12, with Fox's interest in southeastern markets, offer Clemson/FSU/Miami/GT to start a nice B12 eastern division and possibly a B12 Network.

At that point, it's a scramble.

(10-31-2015 04:23 PM)murrdcu Wrote:  I still see the B1G going after AAU schools first. It would take a special school like ND or OU for them to look past that requirement.

The first step of the breakup of the ACC will require some of the football schools to leave. When the ACC realizes they can't get that value back, it will fall apart.

A combo of Clemson/FSU to the B12 or SEC would get things started. I could also see the B12, with Fox's interest in southeastern markets, offer Clemson/FSU/Miami/GT to start a nice B12 eastern division and possibly a B12 Network.

At that point, it's a scramble.

Murrdcu UNC has already held talks with the SEC as a contingency to an ACC breakup. We want AAU schools too! The Big 10 may go after them but that doesn't mean they are going to get them. I think we would take Duke (which was UNC's requirement in the contingency) in order to land the Heels. The question then is whether Virginia wants the Big 10 or to stay with Duke & UNC? No matter what the Cavs choose I believe the SEC gets into Virginia. There's nothing wrong with Tech to the SEC. With 3 we need a 4th and we aren't taking Pitt, B.C., or Syracuse. If we really want AAU at that point we take Ga Tech. If we want to balance three weak football entries we take the Seminoles.

Now if we are just moving to 16 we take U.N.C. and Duke. But if the ACC is breaking up why would we pass on a Virginia School?

(10-31-2015 04:31 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(10-31-2015 04:23 PM)murrdcu Wrote:  I still see the B1G going after AAU schools first. It would take a special school like ND or OU for them to look past that requirement.

The first step of the breakup of the ACC will require some of the football schools to leave. When the ACC realizes they can't get that value back, it will fall apart.

A combo of Clemson/FSU to the B12 or SEC would get things started. I could also see the B12, with Fox's interest in southeastern markets, offer Clemson/FSU/Miami/GT to start a nice B12 eastern division and possibly a B12 Network.

At that point, it's a scramble.

Murrdcu UNC has already held talks with the SEC as a contingency to an ACC breakup. We want AAU schools too! The Big 10 may go after them but that doesn't mean they are going to get them. I think we would take Duke (which was UNC's requirement in the contingency) in order to land the Heels. The question then is whether Virginia wants the Big 10 or to stay with Duke & UNC? No matter what the Cavs choose I believe the SEC gets into Virginia. There's nothing wrong with Tech to the SEC. With 3 we need a 4th and we aren't taking Pitt, B.C., or Syracuse. If we really want AAU at that point we take Ga Tech. If we want to balance three weak football entries we take the Seminoles.

Now if we are just moving to 16 we take U.N.C. and Duke. But if the ACC is breaking up why would we pass on a Virginia School?

If the SEC landed UNC, Duke and either UVA or VT, I would call OU. If they are happy where they are at, taking a FSU or Clemson makes sense. All I know is WVU would not get looked at as UNC and Duke just don't like them and probably would make that a condition if they joined and knew there was another spot open.

(10-31-2015 06:09 PM)murrdcu Wrote:  

(10-31-2015 04:31 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(10-31-2015 04:23 PM)murrdcu Wrote:  I still see the B1G going after AAU schools first. It would take a special school like ND or OU for them to look past that requirement.

The first step of the breakup of the ACC will require some of the football schools to leave. When the ACC realizes they can't get that value back, it will fall apart.

A combo of Clemson/FSU to the B12 or SEC would get things started. I could also see the B12, with Fox's interest in southeastern markets, offer Clemson/FSU/Miami/GT to start a nice B12 eastern division and possibly a B12 Network.

At that point, it's a scramble.

Murrdcu UNC has already held talks with the SEC as a contingency to an ACC breakup. We want AAU schools too! The Big 10 may go after them but that doesn't mean they are going to get them. I think we would take Duke (which was UNC's requirement in the contingency) in order to land the Heels. The question then is whether Virginia wants the Big 10 or to stay with Duke & UNC? No matter what the Cavs choose I believe the SEC gets into Virginia. There's nothing wrong with Tech to the SEC. With 3 we need a 4th and we aren't taking Pitt, B.C., or Syracuse. If we really want AAU at that point we take Ga Tech. If we want to balance three weak football entries we take the Seminoles.

Now if we are just moving to 16 we take U.N.C. and Duke. But if the ACC is breaking up why would we pass on a Virginia School?

If the SEC landed UNC, Duke and either UVA or VT, I would call OU. If they are happy where they are at, taking a FSU or Clemson makes sense. All I know is WVU would not get looked at as UNC and Duke just don't like them and probably would make that a condition if they joined and knew there was another spot open.

Who mentioned WVU? I agree they don't get a look. I like the idea of asking OU, but I think F.S.U. is the better brand move than Clemson and also the better defensive move. Nobody would ever be able to get a leg up on the SEC in Florida with both of the top two Florida schools in the SEC. Plus playing a second Florida school is better for everyone else's recruiting. Clemson is SEC like, and I like them, but F.S.U. adds more.

Schools I would want from the ACC should it come apart:

FSU, Clemson, GT, UNC, Duke, NC State, UVA, VT, Pitt, Louisville

The others don't do much for us.

Now I'm not saying we should try to get all 10 even though I wouldn't have a problem with that. I am saying some combo of those schools is the way to go.

I do agree that UNC and Duke probably end up in the SEC in this scenario. In all honesty, I think we should take 6 while we can get them. That may leave the trimmings slim for the Big Ten, but I'm perfectly fine with trying to establish supremacy over that league. If we can get 6 schools that we want then I say go for it.

After UNC and Duke, I say we should target a VA school. I'm actually fine with both VA schools and I don't know if they have any interest in staying together, but if both are willing to come then I say go for that. UVA is the old money and the AAU institution while VT is the brand of the future while also adding a strong football program.

Next I say, go for FSU and Clemson. If we want to put pressure on the Big 12 to fish or cut bait then this is the combo that does it. There are no better 2 expansion options for them.

So let's say we can't get 2 VA schools. At that point I'm open to either Pitt or GT. I think tapping into Western PA would be a good move albeit the school not being remotely Southern. I don't see the Big Ten taking Pitt as the brand is not a strong one like ND or FSU. It makes sense that you add schools within the current footprint only if the content is strong. Pitt is worth much more to the SEC or the Big 12 for that matter than it is to the Big Ten. It's also an AAU school and there aren't a lot of solid AAU schools lying around so I think the SEC would be wise to jump on that.

GT is also fine. I would rather the Big Ten not get into Atlanta, but if GT is not near the top of our list then I think that makes Pitt all the more valuable. After NC and VA, there aren't any large markets on our borders other than PA and OH. I know PA isn't really a border state, but it's pretty close especially by air. If the Big Ten lands a VA and NC school next time then I would prefer they not also land a GA school. Or if they do then I think we need to counter with another large new market.

My first choice:

SEC North: Kentucky, Tennessee, Vanderbilt, UVA, VT
SEC East: FSU, Clemson, UNC, Duke, South Carolina
SEC Central: Mississippi State, Alabama, Auburn, Georgia, Florida
SEC West: Texas A&M, LSU, Arkansas, Missouri, Ole Miss

4 division games, 3 permanent rivals against 1 team from each of the other divisions, 3 rotating games against 1 each from the other divisions.

You could play 10 games, preserve a great deal of rivalries, create new regional rivalries, and make sure everyone plays everyone at least once every 4 years. I don't think it could get any better than that.

(10-31-2015 10:43 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  Schools I would want from the ACC should it come apart:

FSU, Clemson, GT, UNC, Duke, NC State, UVA, VT, Pitt, Louisville

The others don't do much for us.

Now I'm not saying we should try to get all 10 even though I wouldn't have a problem with that. I am saying some combo of those schools is the way to go.

I do agree that UNC and Duke probably end up in the SEC in this scenario. In all honesty, I think we should take 6 while we can get them. That may leave the trimmings slim for the Big Ten, but I'm perfectly fine with trying to establish supremacy over that league. If we can get 6 schools that we want then I say go for it.

After UNC and Duke, I say we should target a VA school. I'm actually fine with both VA schools and I don't know if they have any interest in staying together, but if both are willing to come then I say go for that. UVA is the old money and the AAU institution while VT is the brand of the future while also adding a strong football program.

Next I say, go for FSU and Clemson. If we want to put pressure on the Big 12 to fish or cut bait then this is the combo that does it. There are no better 2 expansion options for them.

So let's say we can't get 2 VA schools. At that point I'm open to either Pitt or GT. I think tapping into Western PA would be a good move albeit the school not being remotely Southern. I don't see the Big Ten taking Pitt as the brand is not a strong one like ND or FSU. It makes sense that you add schools within the current footprint only if the content is strong. Pitt is worth much more to the SEC or the Big 12 for that matter than it is to the Big Ten. It's also an AAU school and there aren't a lot of solid AAU schools lying around so I think the SEC would be wise to jump on that.

GT is also fine. I would rather the Big Ten not get into Atlanta, but if GT is not near the top of our list then I think that makes Pitt all the more valuable. After NC and VA, there aren't any large markets on our borders other than PA and OH. I know PA isn't really a border state, but it's pretty close especially by air. If the Big Ten lands a VA and NC school next time then I would prefer they not also land a GA school. Or if they do then I think we need to counter with another large new market.

My first choice:

SEC North: Kentucky, Tennessee, Vanderbilt, UVA, VT
SEC East: FSU, Clemson, UNC, Duke, South Carolina
SEC Central: Mississippi State, Alabama, Auburn, Georgia, Florida
SEC West: Texas A&M, LSU, Arkansas, Missouri, Ole Miss

4 division games, 3 permanent rivals against 1 team from each of the other divisions, 3 rotating games against 1 each from the other divisions.

You could play 10 games, preserve a great deal of rivalries, create new regional rivalries, and make sure everyone plays everyone at least once every 4 years. I don't think it could get any better than that.

Drop Louisville and Pitt and we can agree. We want to keep the SEC culturally cohesive (unlike the ACC) and Kentucky is the only conference school that is dead set against their in state rival ever being a member besides the Aggies.

(11-01-2015 12:31 AM)JRsec Wrote:  

(10-31-2015 10:43 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  Schools I would want from the ACC should it come apart:

FSU, Clemson, GT, UNC, Duke, NC State, UVA, VT, Pitt, Louisville

The others don't do much for us.

Now I'm not saying we should try to get all 10 even though I wouldn't have a problem with that. I am saying some combo of those schools is the way to go.

I do agree that UNC and Duke probably end up in the SEC in this scenario. In all honesty, I think we should take 6 while we can get them. That may leave the trimmings slim for the Big Ten, but I'm perfectly fine with trying to establish supremacy over that league. If we can get 6 schools that we want then I say go for it.

After UNC and Duke, I say we should target a VA school. I'm actually fine with both VA schools and I don't know if they have any interest in staying together, but if both are willing to come then I say go for that. UVA is the old money and the AAU institution while VT is the brand of the future while also adding a strong football program.

Next I say, go for FSU and Clemson. If we want to put pressure on the Big 12 to fish or cut bait then this is the combo that does it. There are no better 2 expansion options for them.

So let's say we can't get 2 VA schools. At that point I'm open to either Pitt or GT. I think tapping into Western PA would be a good move albeit the school not being remotely Southern. I don't see the Big Ten taking Pitt as the brand is not a strong one like ND or FSU. It makes sense that you add schools within the current footprint only if the content is strong. Pitt is worth much more to the SEC or the Big 12 for that matter than it is to the Big Ten. It's also an AAU school and there aren't a lot of solid AAU schools lying around so I think the SEC would be wise to jump on that.

GT is also fine. I would rather the Big Ten not get into Atlanta, but if GT is not near the top of our list then I think that makes Pitt all the more valuable. After NC and VA, there aren't any large markets on our borders other than PA and OH. I know PA isn't really a border state, but it's pretty close especially by air. If the Big Ten lands a VA and NC school next time then I would prefer they not also land a GA school. Or if they do then I think we need to counter with another large new market.

My first choice:

SEC North: Kentucky, Tennessee, Vanderbilt, UVA, VT
SEC East: FSU, Clemson, UNC, Duke, South Carolina
SEC Central: Mississippi State, Alabama, Auburn, Georgia, Florida
SEC West: Texas A&M, LSU, Arkansas, Missouri, Ole Miss

4 division games, 3 permanent rivals against 1 team from each of the other divisions, 3 rotating games against 1 each from the other divisions.

You could play 10 games, preserve a great deal of rivalries, create new regional rivalries, and make sure everyone plays everyone at least once every 4 years. I don't think it could get any better than that.

Drop Louisville and Pitt and we can agree. We want to keep the SEC culturally cohesive (unlike the ACC) and Kentucky is the only conference school that is dead set against their in state rival ever being a member besides the Aggies.

Yeah, I think that is an admirable goal and I don't think Pitt would be likely anyway.

I don't see the major brands ending up in the Big 12 because I see ESPN wanting to preserve as much content in the SEC as possible.

Big Ten gets:

Notre Dame, Syracuse, Boston College, Georgia Tech

Big 12 gets:

Miami, Louisville, Pitt, NC State

(11-01-2015 04:15 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  

(11-01-2015 12:31 AM)JRsec Wrote:  

(10-31-2015 10:43 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  Schools I would want from the ACC should it come apart:

FSU, Clemson, GT, UNC, Duke, NC State, UVA, VT, Pitt, Louisville

The others don't do much for us.

Now I'm not saying we should try to get all 10 even though I wouldn't have a problem with that. I am saying some combo of those schools is the way to go.

I do agree that UNC and Duke probably end up in the SEC in this scenario. In all honesty, I think we should take 6 while we can get them. That may leave the trimmings slim for the Big Ten, but I'm perfectly fine with trying to establish supremacy over that league. If we can get 6 schools that we want then I say go for it.

After UNC and Duke, I say we should target a VA school. I'm actually fine with both VA schools and I don't know if they have any interest in staying together, but if both are willing to come then I say go for that. UVA is the old money and the AAU institution while VT is the brand of the future while also adding a strong football program.

Next I say, go for FSU and Clemson. If we want to put pressure on the Big 12 to fish or cut bait then this is the combo that does it. There are no better 2 expansion options for them.

So let's say we can't get 2 VA schools. At that point I'm open to either Pitt or GT. I think tapping into Western PA would be a good move albeit the school not being remotely Southern. I don't see the Big Ten taking Pitt as the brand is not a strong one like ND or FSU. It makes sense that you add schools within the current footprint only if the content is strong. Pitt is worth much more to the SEC or the Big 12 for that matter than it is to the Big Ten. It's also an AAU school and there aren't a lot of solid AAU schools lying around so I think the SEC would be wise to jump on that.

GT is also fine. I would rather the Big Ten not get into Atlanta, but if GT is not near the top of our list then I think that makes Pitt all the more valuable. After NC and VA, there aren't any large markets on our borders other than PA and OH. I know PA isn't really a border state, but it's pretty close especially by air. If the Big Ten lands a VA and NC school next time then I would prefer they not also land a GA school. Or if they do then I think we need to counter with another large new market.

My first choice:

SEC North: Kentucky, Tennessee, Vanderbilt, UVA, VT
SEC East: FSU, Clemson, UNC, Duke, South Carolina
SEC Central: Mississippi State, Alabama, Auburn, Georgia, Florida
SEC West: Texas A&M, LSU, Arkansas, Missouri, Ole Miss

4 division games, 3 permanent rivals against 1 team from each of the other divisions, 3 rotating games against 1 each from the other divisions.

You could play 10 games, preserve a great deal of rivalries, create new regional rivalries, and make sure everyone plays everyone at least once every 4 years. I don't think it could get any better than that.

Drop Louisville and Pitt and we can agree. We want to keep the SEC culturally cohesive (unlike the ACC) and Kentucky is the only conference school that is dead set against their in state rival ever being a member besides the Aggies.

Yeah, I think that is an admirable goal and I don't think Pitt would be likely anyway.

I don't see the major brands ending up in the Big 12 because I see ESPN wanting to preserve as much content in the SEC as possible.

Big Ten gets:

Notre Dame, Syracuse, Boston College, Georgia Tech

Big 12 gets:

Miami, Louisville, Pitt, NC State

Have the SEC pick up FSU, Clemson, UNC, NCSU, Duke, UVa and it's a perfect 20. Taking 3 from NC isn't necessarily ideal but it is advantageous for a few reasons. First, UNC and NCSU are nearly impossible to separate, as are UNC and Duke. Taking all 3 keeps Delaney out of NC and bolsters basketball.

The B1G would probably take VT and maybe GT at that point.