(04-24-2016 02:47 PM)SMUmustangs Wrote:  

(04-24-2016 01:14 PM)hawghiggs Wrote:  I think that ESPN will find away to create a ACC network. This goes along with the idea that Texas will go independent. If UT fans have to buy the ACC network to watch games and ACC fans have to buy the Longhorn network to watch games. Then ESPN really does win.

People often predict that Texas will go Independent. However, no one has adequately answered the question......What would they do with their non-football sports..

Some say they would take a ND type deal with the ACC. IMO that will never happen. Get out map and see how far Austin, Texas is from Syracuse and all of the East Coast.

They will not require their other sports to travel that far for every conference road game.

Texas is not the type of program to settle for something.

With Texas A&M in the SEC and the SEC and ACC having a tremendous amount of common ground, I don't see the issue. Is the PAC12 that much closer? The B1G ?
Texas to the ACC as a full member or partial member is not a crazy idea based on geography.

If OU and KU joined the big 10 than texas would have to do something.

1) keep the big 12 together but go indy in football. I could see Texas go for SMU, Houston, Cincy, and Memphis with BYU getting a football only. Probably be a short term project than texas bolts.

2) Join the ACC. Could go full if ND were willing or cut the same deal as ND. ACC might jump to 18 with 1 from UCONN/CINCY and TCU/Baylor

3) Join the big 10, who knows how big they would get and who else joins. I doubt the big 10 would add any other texas school but maybe missouri would be a target.

4) Join the SEC. Not sure who the SEC would also add. Maybe even Tulane to balance things.

5) Join the pac 12 with texas tech, houston and TCU or Okla State.

I would lean towards choice 5 post OU/KU going to a 16 team Big 10 with TCU, so its 4 texas school's.

Kansas's table to the B1G likely left the building with the new TV deal. Kansas doesn't bring enough punch now to increase the pie enough.

FSU via the state of Florida

Georgia Tech via the state of Georiga

UNC via the state of North Carolina

UVA via the state of Virginia

Some school in Texas via the state of Texas

Oklahoma for a football brand to increase conference payouts for bowl games, etc.

(04-24-2016 01:55 PM)TerryD Wrote:  

(04-24-2016 10:35 AM)billybobby777 Wrote:  Now that the SEC has seen how much more $ the big 10 is getting for their tv product, I predict they will make a move to come closer to the big 10 in $. They will move to add FSU and UNC to the SEC East and will slide Mizzou to the SEC West. GOR be damned. It's a perception thing, and the SEC will do what it has to do. After the ACC loses those two, the big 12 will quickly add Virginia Tech and 1 other. (Pitt probably). At some point the big ten will add two ACC schools as well, probably UVA and Duke. My prediction.
Cheers!

Man will colonize Mars by 2050. My prediction.

2075.
Cheers!

(04-24-2016 01:16 PM)billybobby777 Wrote:  

(04-24-2016 12:24 PM)JRsec Wrote:  Billybobby, I think the SEC would be interested in Florida State, but only if they were forcing ESPN's hand to get out of the ACC. In that event ESPN might consent to the move just to keep them in the ESPN family, albeit in the SEC.

In 2010 ESPN said they wouldn't pay for Florida State to move to the SEC. They didn't want to destabilize the value of the ACC by robbing it of their best football program.

But if F.S.U. seriously flirts with FOX and the Big 10 then ESPN's stance toward F.S.U. in the SEC might well change.

You could remove Florida State from the ACC without killing the conference. You could not remove North Carolina from the ACC without killing the conference, particularly if Virginia and Duke left for the Big 10. Keep in mind that if Florida State left for the SEC it would technically open 2 or 3 slots for the ACC depending upon whether N.D. goes all in, or remains independent. Texas and a pair of Texas schools or some other kind of arrangement like that could then be made although I don't think that is the ACC's first choice. It might be their best choice however to get a network.

If the SEC landed F.S.U. I think their next move would be to try to land Oklahoma. The Sooners give the SEC the DFW market and they deliver a new state. Those two brands (F.S.U. and OU) dramatically increase content value within the SEC, deliver a larger chunk of Texas, add Oklahoma, and insure prime rates in the state of Florida here on out. At this juncture of realignment I would say those would be our two strongest moves. And they would be moves that did not create the destruction of the ACC.

I agree with most of what you write JRSEC, I also think the SEC would take OU in a second. I don't agree with the idea of the SEC trying to protect the ACC. On the contrary, I beleive the SEC is not even neutral on this. A further weakened ACC only benifits the SEC. Not that the ACC is any kind of threat to them in football, but FSU and Clemson take a little bit of the fans in that region. Also, the SEC could have had their "champion" bowl be against the ACC. Nope, they chose the Big 12. The SEC would never allow its champion to be paired against the ACC champion even if ND was part of the mix. In football, the SEC (rightly so) considers the ACC below them.
Cheers!

Billybobby, I understand your reasoning and if it was just about the desires of the SEC I would agree with you. But, it's not about what the SEC does or does not want. It's about what ESPN will pay us to do. We don't protect the ACC per se. ESPN does. Without the Big 12 who else would we partner with? ESPN & FOX will want the Rose & Sugar pairings because it guarantees either a North South championship game or a East West championship game. Either way you maximize the number of households that are likely to watch.

(04-24-2016 04:46 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(04-24-2016 01:16 PM)billybobby777 Wrote:  

(04-24-2016 12:24 PM)JRsec Wrote:  Billybobby, I think the SEC would be interested in Florida State, but only if they were forcing ESPN's hand to get out of the ACC. In that event ESPN might consent to the move just to keep them in the ESPN family, albeit in the SEC.

In 2010 ESPN said they wouldn't pay for Florida State to move to the SEC. They didn't want to destabilize the value of the ACC by robbing it of their best football program.

But if F.S.U. seriously flirts with FOX and the Big 10 then ESPN's stance toward F.S.U. in the SEC might well change.

You could remove Florida State from the ACC without killing the conference. You could not remove North Carolina from the ACC without killing the conference, particularly if Virginia and Duke left for the Big 10. Keep in mind that if Florida State left for the SEC it would technically open 2 or 3 slots for the ACC depending upon whether N.D. goes all in, or remains independent. Texas and a pair of Texas schools or some other kind of arrangement like that could then be made although I don't think that is the ACC's first choice. It might be their best choice however to get a network.

If the SEC landed F.S.U. I think their next move would be to try to land Oklahoma. The Sooners give the SEC the DFW market and they deliver a new state. Those two brands (F.S.U. and OU) dramatically increase content value within the SEC, deliver a larger chunk of Texas, add Oklahoma, and insure prime rates in the state of Florida here on out. At this juncture of realignment I would say those would be our two strongest moves. And they would be moves that did not create the destruction of the ACC.

I agree with most of what you write JRSEC, I also think the SEC would take OU in a second. I don't agree with the idea of the SEC trying to protect the ACC. On the contrary, I beleive the SEC is not even neutral on this. A further weakened ACC only benifits the SEC. Not that the ACC is any kind of threat to them in football, but FSU and Clemson take a little bit of the fans in that region. Also, the SEC could have had their "champion" bowl be against the ACC. Nope, they chose the Big 12. The SEC would never allow its champion to be paired against the ACC champion even if ND was part of the mix. In football, the SEC (rightly so) considers the ACC below them.
Cheers!

Billybobby, I understand your reasoning and if it was just about the desires of the SEC I would agree with you. But, it's not about what the SEC does or does not want. It's about what ESPN will pay us to do. We don't protect the ACC per se. ESPN does. Without the Big 12 who else would we partner with? ESPN & FOX will want the Rose & Sugar pairings because it guarantees either a North South championship game or a East West championship game. Either way you maximize the number of households that are likely to watch.

It's just my opinion but, I don't think the fans of the teams in the Big 12, SEC, or ACC give a shyte who wins the "Grand Daddy of them All". Our section of the country know and care about "our section of the country". That the Big 12 major teams hesitated moving to Pac12 and the ACC major schools hesitated moving B1G both show the strength of regional fan bases.

(04-24-2016 05:16 PM)Dasville Wrote:  

(04-24-2016 04:46 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(04-24-2016 01:16 PM)billybobby777 Wrote:  

(04-24-2016 12:24 PM)JRsec Wrote:  Billybobby, I think the SEC would be interested in Florida State, but only if they were forcing ESPN's hand to get out of the ACC. In that event ESPN might consent to the move just to keep them in the ESPN family, albeit in the SEC.

In 2010 ESPN said they wouldn't pay for Florida State to move to the SEC. They didn't want to destabilize the value of the ACC by robbing it of their best football program.

But if F.S.U. seriously flirts with FOX and the Big 10 then ESPN's stance toward F.S.U. in the SEC might well change.

You could remove Florida State from the ACC without killing the conference. You could not remove North Carolina from the ACC without killing the conference, particularly if Virginia and Duke left for the Big 10. Keep in mind that if Florida State left for the SEC it would technically open 2 or 3 slots for the ACC depending upon whether N.D. goes all in, or remains independent. Texas and a pair of Texas schools or some other kind of arrangement like that could then be made although I don't think that is the ACC's first choice. It might be their best choice however to get a network.

If the SEC landed F.S.U. I think their next move would be to try to land Oklahoma. The Sooners give the SEC the DFW market and they deliver a new state. Those two brands (F.S.U. and OU) dramatically increase content value within the SEC, deliver a larger chunk of Texas, add Oklahoma, and insure prime rates in the state of Florida here on out. At this juncture of realignment I would say those would be our two strongest moves. And they would be moves that did not create the destruction of the ACC.

I agree with most of what you write JRSEC, I also think the SEC would take OU in a second. I don't agree with the idea of the SEC trying to protect the ACC. On the contrary, I beleive the SEC is not even neutral on this. A further weakened ACC only benifits the SEC. Not that the ACC is any kind of threat to them in football, but FSU and Clemson take a little bit of the fans in that region. Also, the SEC could have had their "champion" bowl be against the ACC. Nope, they chose the Big 12. The SEC would never allow its champion to be paired against the ACC champion even if ND was part of the mix. In football, the SEC (rightly so) considers the ACC below them.
Cheers!

Billybobby, I understand your reasoning and if it was just about the desires of the SEC I would agree with you. But, it's not about what the SEC does or does not want. It's about what ESPN will pay us to do. We don't protect the ACC per se. ESPN does. Without the Big 12 who else would we partner with? ESPN & FOX will want the Rose & Sugar pairings because it guarantees either a North South championship game or a East West championship game. Either way you maximize the number of households that are likely to watch.

It's just my opinion but, I don't think the fans of the teams in the Big 12, SEC, or ACC give a shyte who wins the "Grand Daddy of them All". Our section of the country know and care about "our section of the country". That the Big 12 major teams hesitated moving to Pac12 and the ACC major schools hesitated moving B1G both show the strength of regional fan bases.

Dasville, you misread my post and I did not make it clearer because I had already referred to the bowls, but the thought being tossed around now is that if we move to a P4 with the Big 12 going away that establishing the Rose Bowl as the PAC vs Big 10 champ for one playoff spot might become an annual and the SEC vs ACC in the Sugar Bowl might become the other annual semi game. The championship would be moved around. So it would keep Football Southern right up until the championship game for our conferences in the Southeast.

(04-24-2016 03:17 PM)Dasville Wrote:  

(04-24-2016 02:47 PM)SMUmustangs Wrote:  

(04-24-2016 01:14 PM)hawghiggs Wrote:  I think that ESPN will find away to create a ACC network. This goes along with the idea that Texas will go independent. If UT fans have to buy the ACC network to watch games and ACC fans have to buy the Longhorn network to watch games. Then ESPN really does win.

People often predict that Texas will go Independent. However, no one has adequately answered the question......What would they do with their non-football sports..

Some say they would take a ND type deal with the ACC. IMO that will never happen. Get out map and see how far Austin, Texas is from Syracuse and all of the East Coast.

They will not require their other sports to travel that far for every conference road game.

Texas is not the type of program to settle for something.

With Texas A&M in the SEC and the SEC and ACC having a tremendous amount of common ground, I don't see the issue. Is the PAC12 that much closer? The B1G ?
Texas to the ACC as a full member or partial member is not a crazy idea based on geography.

I do not understand your first sentence. Please clarify.

No the PAC is not closer..the Big is. However, we are not talking all sports..just non-football. And Texas flirtation with the PAC included other schools from the Big12 in all sports.

Texas to the ACC or PAC in non-football sports only with no other teams from the Big 12 is a crazy idea.

Again this is about Texas going Indy in football and placing their Olympic sports in the ACC. Hope you understand that.

That is a lot different than joining the PAC in all sports with OU, OSU, Tech and maybe KU. .

I'm actually surprised the PAC-12 isn't more interested in expanding east (as least by report) - not only to get a larger TV deal and more quality schools/programs, but also to get into a new part of the country. They could easily make a push for Texas/Oklahoma/OK-State/Tech Tech to get to 16. Getting Texas/Oklahoma would be huge for them, IMO.

(04-24-2016 06:17 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(04-24-2016 05:16 PM)Dasville Wrote:  

(04-24-2016 04:46 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(04-24-2016 01:16 PM)billybobby777 Wrote:  

(04-24-2016 12:24 PM)JRsec Wrote:  Billybobby, I think the SEC would be interested in Florida State, but only if they were forcing ESPN's hand to get out of the ACC. In that event ESPN might consent to the move just to keep them in the ESPN family, albeit in the SEC.

In 2010 ESPN said they wouldn't pay for Florida State to move to the SEC. They didn't want to destabilize the value of the ACC by robbing it of their best football program.

But if F.S.U. seriously flirts with FOX and the Big 10 then ESPN's stance toward F.S.U. in the SEC might well change.

You could remove Florida State from the ACC without killing the conference. You could not remove North Carolina from the ACC without killing the conference, particularly if Virginia and Duke left for the Big 10. Keep in mind that if Florida State left for the SEC it would technically open 2 or 3 slots for the ACC depending upon whether N.D. goes all in, or remains independent. Texas and a pair of Texas schools or some other kind of arrangement like that could then be made although I don't think that is the ACC's first choice. It might be their best choice however to get a network.

If the SEC landed F.S.U. I think their next move would be to try to land Oklahoma. The Sooners give the SEC the DFW market and they deliver a new state. Those two brands (F.S.U. and OU) dramatically increase content value within the SEC, deliver a larger chunk of Texas, add Oklahoma, and insure prime rates in the state of Florida here on out. At this juncture of realignment I would say those would be our two strongest moves. And they would be moves that did not create the destruction of the ACC.

I agree with most of what you write JRSEC, I also think the SEC would take OU in a second. I don't agree with the idea of the SEC trying to protect the ACC. On the contrary, I beleive the SEC is not even neutral on this. A further weakened ACC only benifits the SEC. Not that the ACC is any kind of threat to them in football, but FSU and Clemson take a little bit of the fans in that region. Also, the SEC could have had their "champion" bowl be against the ACC. Nope, they chose the Big 12. The SEC would never allow its champion to be paired against the ACC champion even if ND was part of the mix. In football, the SEC (rightly so) considers the ACC below them.
Cheers!

Billybobby, I understand your reasoning and if it was just about the desires of the SEC I would agree with you. But, it's not about what the SEC does or does not want. It's about what ESPN will pay us to do. We don't protect the ACC per se. ESPN does. Without the Big 12 who else would we partner with? ESPN & FOX will want the Rose & Sugar pairings because it guarantees either a North South championship game or a East West championship game. Either way you maximize the number of households that are likely to watch.

It's just my opinion but, I don't think the fans of the teams in the Big 12, SEC, or ACC give a shyte who wins the "Grand Daddy of them All". Our section of the country know and care about "our section of the country". That the Big 12 major teams hesitated moving to Pac12 and the ACC major schools hesitated moving B1G both show the strength of regional fan bases.

Dasville, you misread my post and I did not make it clearer because I had already referred to the bowls, but the thought being tossed around now is that if we move to a P4 with the Big 12 going away that establishing the Rose Bowl as the PAC vs Big 10 champ for one playoff spot might become an annual and the SEC vs ACC in the Sugar Bowl might become the other annual semi game. The championship would be moved around. So it would keep Football Southern right up until the championship game for our conferences in the Southeast.

Jrsec I apologize because I am reactionary. I do have a chip on my shoulder. But look at it. A Big 12/ SEC/ACC interest is just not there for the Rose. Does that have implication for realignment? Idk.

(04-24-2016 06:57 PM)Dasville Wrote:  

(04-24-2016 06:17 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(04-24-2016 05:16 PM)Dasville Wrote:  

(04-24-2016 04:46 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(04-24-2016 01:16 PM)billybobby777 Wrote:  I agree with most of what you write JRSEC, I also think the SEC would take OU in a second. I don't agree with the idea of the SEC trying to protect the ACC. On the contrary, I beleive the SEC is not even neutral on this. A further weakened ACC only benifits the SEC. Not that the ACC is any kind of threat to them in football, but FSU and Clemson take a little bit of the fans in that region. Also, the SEC could have had their "champion" bowl be against the ACC. Nope, they chose the Big 12. The SEC would never allow its champion to be paired against the ACC champion even if ND was part of the mix. In football, the SEC (rightly so) considers the ACC below them.
Cheers!

Billybobby, I understand your reasoning and if it was just about the desires of the SEC I would agree with you. But, it's not about what the SEC does or does not want. It's about what ESPN will pay us to do. We don't protect the ACC per se. ESPN does. Without the Big 12 who else would we partner with? ESPN & FOX will want the Rose & Sugar pairings because it guarantees either a North South championship game or a East West championship game. Either way you maximize the number of households that are likely to watch.

It's just my opinion but, I don't think the fans of the teams in the Big 12, SEC, or ACC give a shyte who wins the "Grand Daddy of them All". Our section of the country know and care about "our section of the country". That the Big 12 major teams hesitated moving to Pac12 and the ACC major schools hesitated moving B1G both show the strength of regional fan bases.

Dasville, you misread my post and I did not make it clearer because I had already referred to the bowls, but the thought being tossed around now is that if we move to a P4 with the Big 12 going away that establishing the Rose Bowl as the PAC vs Big 10 champ for one playoff spot might become an annual and the SEC vs ACC in the Sugar Bowl might become the other annual semi game. The championship would be moved around. So it would keep Football Southern right up until the championship game for our conferences in the Southeast.

Jrsec I apologize because I am reactionary. I do have a chip on my shoulder. But look at it. A Big 12/ SEC/ACC interest is just not there for the Rose. Does that have implication for realignment? Idk.

Dasville at no place in any of my posts have I suggested that an ACC or SEC, or Big 12 school for that matter would go to the Rose Bowl. I have said twice that the Rose Bowl might well become a semifinal game matching the champions of the PAC and Big 10. And I said that the Sugar Bowl might well become a semifinal game matching the champions of the SEC and ACC.

In no place did I indicate that the Rose Bowl had anything to do with the SEC or ACC, or Big 12, or that it had anything to do with realignment.

(04-24-2016 07:21 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(04-24-2016 06:57 PM)Dasville Wrote:  

(04-24-2016 06:17 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(04-24-2016 05:16 PM)Dasville Wrote:  

(04-24-2016 04:46 PM)JRsec Wrote:  Billybobby, I understand your reasoning and if it was just about the desires of the SEC I would agree with you. But, it's not about what the SEC does or does not want. It's about what ESPN will pay us to do. We don't protect the ACC per se. ESPN does. Without the Big 12 who else would we partner with? ESPN & FOX will want the Rose & Sugar pairings because it guarantees either a North South championship game or a East West championship game. Either way you maximize the number of households that are likely to watch.

It's just my opinion but, I don't think the fans of the teams in the Big 12, SEC, or ACC give a shyte who wins the "Grand Daddy of them All". Our section of the country know and care about "our section of the country". That the Big 12 major teams hesitated moving to Pac12 and the ACC major schools hesitated moving B1G both show the strength of regional fan bases.

Dasville, you misread my post and I did not make it clearer because I had already referred to the bowls, but the thought being tossed around now is that if we move to a P4 with the Big 12 going away that establishing the Rose Bowl as the PAC vs Big 10 champ for one playoff spot might become an annual and the SEC vs ACC in the Sugar Bowl might become the other annual semi game. The championship would be moved around. So it would keep Football Southern right up until the championship game for our conferences in the Southeast.

Jrsec I apologize because I am reactionary. I do have a chip on my shoulder. But look at it. A Big 12/ SEC/ACC interest is just not there for the Rose. Does that have implication for realignment? Idk.

Dasville at no place in any of my posts have I suggested that an ACC or SEC, or Big 12 school for that matter would go to the Rose Bowl. I have said twice that the Rose Bowl might well become a semifinal game matching the champions of the PAC and Big 10. And I said that the Sugar Bowl might well become a semifinal game matching the champions of the SEC and ACC.

In no place did I indicate that the Rose Bowl had anything to do with the SEC or ACC, or Big 12, or that it had anything to do with realignment.

I agree that you did not express any view toward the Rose Bowl (which is larger than the B1g vs Pac12) and in no way do I think Bowls, in general, are larger than the participating conferences. All Bowls can form alliances as they see fit and that are best for themselves and can pay the participants as much as they want based on their own monetary concerns.

(04-24-2016 01:46 PM)10thMountain Wrote:  UNC can object to the SEC for many reasons but trying to play the "our academics are just too good" after all their academic cheating scandals just rings a little hollow.

Oh it's hollow and hypocritical and asinine, but they will still say it. I'm not gonna say UNC will never leave the ACC, but they run that league in much the same way that Texas runs the B12, so they are gonna have to see the league is dying before they go.

(04-24-2016 07:23 PM)Rabbit_in_Red Wrote:  Welp, the OP is stupid. That'll never happen. Sorry. Move along.

Said the Louisville fan, after 4 threads. You are much nicer when you use the "Wilke" handle.
Cheers!

(04-24-2016 11:49 AM)Nebraskafan Wrote:  

(04-24-2016 10:35 AM)billybobby777 Wrote:  Now that the SEC has seen how much more $ the big 10 is getting for their tv product, I predict they will make a move to come closer to the big 10 in $. They will move to add FSU and UNC to the SEC East and will slide Mizzou to the SEC West. GOR be damned. It's a perception thing, and the SEC will do what it has to do. After the ACC loses those two, the big 12 will quickly add Virginia Tech and 1 other. (Pitt probably). At some point the big ten will add two ACC schools as well, probably UVA and Duke. My prediction.
Cheers!

Let me know which bank ESPN is going to take a loan from.

The academia folks at UNC want nothing to do with the SEC. This is well known.

I think JR put it best, that's pure internet myth.

(04-24-2016 10:05 PM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  

(04-24-2016 11:49 AM)Nebraskafan Wrote:  

(04-24-2016 10:35 AM)billybobby777 Wrote:  Now that the SEC has seen how much more $ the big 10 is getting for their tv product, I predict they will make a move to come closer to the big 10 in $. They will move to add FSU and UNC to the SEC East and will slide Mizzou to the SEC West. GOR be damned. It's a perception thing, and the SEC will do what it has to do. After the ACC loses those two, the big 12 will quickly add Virginia Tech and 1 other. (Pitt probably). At some point the big ten will add two ACC schools as well, probably UVA and Duke. My prediction.
Cheers!

Let me know which bank ESPN is going to take a loan from.

The academia folks at UNC want nothing to do with the SEC. This is well known.

I think JR put it best, that's pure internet myth.

Not a myth at all. 100% real world reality.

Yeah, totally going to happen.

(04-24-2016 10:00 PM)billybobby777 Wrote:  

(04-24-2016 07:23 PM)Rabbit_in_Red Wrote:  Welp, the OP is stupid. That'll never happen. Sorry. Move along.

Said the Louisville fan, after 4 threads. You are much nicer when you use the "Wilke" handle.
Cheers!

Sorry, the ACC does not want ECU

Can I get Tuesday's lottery numbers?

I predict the return of Miami under Mark Richt will be a game changer for the ACC.