(05-10-2022 03:28 PM)esayem Wrote:  

(05-10-2022 03:17 PM)PeteTheChop Wrote:  

(05-10-2022 02:54 PM)esayem Wrote:  Don’t be surprised if FSU gets Clemson, GT, and Miami as their annual football rivals. Their schedule will be markedly improved, and they won’t be playing BC and Syracuse the same season anymore.

Hello?

FSU's schedule has included Clemson and FSU every season since the Noles joined the SEC.

Maybe our friend Gamenole can comment about his excitement of playing GT every season.

(05-10-2022 02:54 PM)esayem Wrote:  Miami will also get Louisville and Clemson on the schedule much more often than now. Not that it matters who they play, the Canes have a total bandwagon fanbase so they’ll be there to watch as long as they’re winning.

We don't care about playing U of L any more in football than they care about playing us in men's basketball.

Instead of schedule tweaks, how about some info on the ACC-ESPN "look-in" meeting scheduled for this spring and how that might help narrow the ever-widening revenue gap between the Birmingham and Greensboro operations?

Not sure why some folks are so opposed to FSU and Clemson wanting to leave for a much-wealthier football-centric conference that also happens to be a far better cultural fit?

The Tobacco Road schools are strong enough to keep the ACC going even if those two leave.

Maybe just maybe Notre Dame will change its mind and join for all sports.

FSU has a large presence in Atlanta and it’s the closest conference opponent.

I’m not against FSU fans wanting to join the SEC, and the university certainly looked the part 30 years ago, but maybe the president has a different opinion these days.

Clemson is much more complicated than FSU. So if you don’t know much about the people that run the place and their culture, it won’t make sense. They could have withdrawn with SC, and they didn’t. They could have withdrawn and joined the SEC in 1990, according to JRSEC, but they didn’t. It’s much more complex than “let’s go to the SEC and make more money!”

It becomes much less complex when more money is $500+ million over a decade rather than a million or so a year.

1990 is a LONG time ago.

(05-10-2022 03:17 PM)PeteTheChop Wrote:  

(05-10-2022 02:54 PM)esayem Wrote:  Don’t be surprised if FSU gets Clemson, GT, and Miami as their annual football rivals. Their schedule will be markedly improved, and they won’t be playing BC and Syracuse the same season anymore.

Hello?

FSU's schedule has included Clemson and FSU every season since the Noles joined the SEC.

Maybe our friend Gamenole can comment about his excitement of playing GT every season.

(05-10-2022 02:54 PM)esayem Wrote:  Miami will also get Louisville and Clemson on the schedule much more often than now. Not that it matters who they play, the Canes have a total bandwagon fanbase so they’ll be there to watch as long as they’re winning.

We don't care about playing U of L any more in football than they care about playing us in men's basketball.

Instead of schedule tweaks, how about some info on the ACC-ESPN "look-in" meeting scheduled for this spring and how that might help narrow the ever-widening revenue gap between the Birmingham and Greensboro operations?

Not sure why some folks are so opposed to FSU and Clemson wanting to leave for a much-wealthier football-centric conference that also happens to be a far better cultural fit?

The Tobacco Road schools are strong enough to keep the ACC going even if those two leave.

Maybe just maybe Notre Dame will change its mind and join for all sports.

The ACC ESPN look in—? Hahaha.
See the infamous AAC ESPN “look in” that fans talked about for years.
There is no such thing.

I think the P4 are quite comfortable at this point. They have their defacto upper division that will control the CFP. Meanwhile the G6 gets paid and gets to label themselves as D1 conferences in the same division as the SEC and B1G even though we all know that’s a farce

(05-10-2022 01:42 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(05-10-2022 12:57 PM)dbackjon Wrote:  There is no real reason to breakaway. Financially or otherwise

I agree with this.

IMO, the P5, on balance, benefit considerably from having the G5 around, and they are well aware of that.

If the G5 didn't exist, the P5 would have to invent them, IMO.

Once the "autonomy" thing was settled 10 years ago, it's been all good for the P5, IMO.

I agree as well. Been saying for years that it's a symbiotic relationship.

(05-10-2022 03:17 PM)PeteTheChop Wrote:  

(05-10-2022 02:54 PM)esayem Wrote:  Don’t be surprised if FSU gets Clemson, GT, and Miami as their annual football rivals. Their schedule will be markedly improved, and they won’t be playing BC and Syracuse the same season anymore.

Hello?

FSU's schedule has included Clemson and FSU every season since the Noles joined the SEC.

Maybe our friend Gamenole can comment about his excitement of playing GT every season.

(05-10-2022 02:54 PM)esayem Wrote:  Miami will also get Louisville and Clemson on the schedule much more often than now. Not that it matters who they play, the Canes have a total bandwagon fanbase so they’ll be there to watch as long as they’re winning.

We don't care about playing U of L any more in football than they care about playing us in men's basketball.

Instead of schedule tweaks, how about some info on the ACC-ESPN "look-in" meeting scheduled for this spring and how that might help narrow the ever-widening revenue gap between the Birmingham and Greensboro operations?

Not sure why some folks are so opposed to FSU and Clemson wanting to leave for a much-wealthier football-centric conference that also happens to be a far better cultural fit?

The Tobacco Road schools are strong enough to keep the ACC going even if those two leave.

Maybe just maybe Notre Dame will change its mind and join for all sports.

We will NEVER join the ACC. We tried it, hated it. I like the ACC as a fan (basketball).

(05-10-2022 12:54 PM)CliftonAve Wrote:  https://www.on3.com/news/jim-phillips-pr...12-pac-12/

How would the ACC Commissioner know what the boosters were planning?

(05-10-2022 02:32 PM)Stugray2 Wrote:  The operative word, unspoken, is "yet." That he had to quell the rumor of immediate departure tells you such thinking is much farther along than many realize.

But at the moment we are seeing views and opinions all over the map from various P5 coaches and administrators. And right now the NCAA is bending over backwards to let the P5 get their way, because the threat is real.

I firmly believe this will happen, but only after the next set of media contracts and after everyone has a couple years of dealing with NIL under their belt. The P5 still cannot agree on the CFP and they have various views on media -- I am in the camp of believing that ESPN has already peaked and they are about to enter an era of serious erosion from competition from far deeper pockets in the consolidating media, entertainment and tech industries. The money is about to get larger, and the incentive to dump the NCAA as an agency and directly contract their own playoffs and tournament is literally in the $Billions annually. Inertia, lack of current consensus (but building) and some uncertainty about the media direction (needs clarity) are what is in the way. But I think the clock is ticking, and I expect a move in about three years time.

Correct Stu! All of this Summer will be planning and finding consensus on the plan. They already know who they wish to have involved in the breakaway. And frankly why would Phillips be included? He's proven to be in line with Warren and an obstructionist. I find it interesting that Kliavkoff and Sankey are spending some time together, but then they do have some common ground on issues. The SEC already has direct relationships with ACC members and is on cordial terms with most Big 10 power football programs. This concept is not recent and has been talked behind the scenes in earnest for about 3 years among AD's down here.

The only thing holding up things is some kind of sense of how to govern conduct around NIL without violating the court ruling, and waiting on the Pay for Play ruling. I'm not sure we are even waiting on contracts. The one that truly matters is the Big 10's and should it include an expansion then Boom! Things will happen quickly from there. I see several triggers which could set it in motion and no real stop signs.

The concept is a lot older than three years. Try 50 years!

The NCAA failed at allowing it to happen in ‘75, ‘78, ‘81, ‘90, and so in. As matter of fact, the more FCS directional schools moving to FBS and Division II, III etc schools moving to D1, the more likely it will actually happen.

I find it humorous that people predicting this “novel” idea believe they are some sort of guru. Try again!

(05-10-2022 06:26 PM)Big 12 fan too Wrote:  

(05-10-2022 03:28 PM)esayem Wrote:  

(05-10-2022 03:17 PM)PeteTheChop Wrote:  

(05-10-2022 02:54 PM)esayem Wrote:  Don’t be surprised if FSU gets Clemson, GT, and Miami as their annual football rivals. Their schedule will be markedly improved, and they won’t be playing BC and Syracuse the same season anymore.

Hello?

FSU's schedule has included Clemson and FSU every season since the Noles joined the SEC.

Maybe our friend Gamenole can comment about his excitement of playing GT every season.

(05-10-2022 02:54 PM)esayem Wrote:  Miami will also get Louisville and Clemson on the schedule much more often than now. Not that it matters who they play, the Canes have a total bandwagon fanbase so they’ll be there to watch as long as they’re winning.

We don't care about playing U of L any more in football than they care about playing us in men's basketball.

Instead of schedule tweaks, how about some info on the ACC-ESPN "look-in" meeting scheduled for this spring and how that might help narrow the ever-widening revenue gap between the Birmingham and Greensboro operations?

Not sure why some folks are so opposed to FSU and Clemson wanting to leave for a much-wealthier football-centric conference that also happens to be a far better cultural fit?

The Tobacco Road schools are strong enough to keep the ACC going even if those two leave.

Maybe just maybe Notre Dame will change its mind and join for all sports.

FSU has a large presence in Atlanta and it’s the closest conference opponent.

I’m not against FSU fans wanting to join the SEC, and the university certainly looked the part 30 years ago, but maybe the president has a different opinion these days.

Clemson is much more complicated than FSU. So if you don’t know much about the people that run the place and their culture, it won’t make sense. They could have withdrawn with SC, and they didn’t. They could have withdrawn and joined the SEC in 1990, according to JRSEC, but they didn’t. It’s much more complex than “let’s go to the SEC and make more money!”

It becomes much less complex when more money is $500+ million over a decade rather than a million or so a year.

1990 is a LONG time ago.

Let’s allow history to speak for itself. It’s not hard to predict **** a hundred people have already said on a message board.

Do you honestly believe Clemson and their fans would have had a better decade making more money while playing in the SEC?

(05-10-2022 02:32 PM)Stugray2 Wrote:  The operative word, unspoken, is "yet." That he had to quell the rumor of immediate departure tells you such thinking is much farther along than many realize.

But at the moment we are seeing views and opinions all over the map from various P5 coaches and administrators. And right now the NCAA is bending over backwards to let the P5 get their way, because the threat is real.

I firmly believe this will happen, but only after the next set of media contracts and after everyone has a couple years of dealing with NIL under their belt. The P5 still cannot agree on the CFP and they have various views on media -- I am in the camp of believing that ESPN has already peaked and they are about to enter an era of serious erosion from competition from far deeper pockets in the consolidating media, entertainment and tech industries. The money is about to get larger, and the incentive to dump the NCAA as an agency and directly contract their own playoffs and tournament is literally in the $Billions annually. Inertia, lack of current consensus (but building) and some uncertainty about the media direction (needs clarity) are what is in the way. But I think the clock is ticking, and I expect a move in about three years time.

ESPN and legacy broadcasters still have a delivery advantage. And sports will be their last stand. ESPN may not be the invisible hand forever, but they will be the entity that fills the commissioner role and reorganizes major college athletics imo.

Major changes will happen soon, but waiting on more NIL data and Johnson vs NCAA prudent.

It doesn’t even need to be a full breakaway. Certainly not a P1. The real threat of a breakaway is enough to get major improvements.

(05-10-2022 07:30 PM)esayem Wrote:  

(05-10-2022 06:26 PM)Big 12 fan too Wrote:  

(05-10-2022 03:28 PM)esayem Wrote:  

(05-10-2022 03:17 PM)PeteTheChop Wrote:  

(05-10-2022 02:54 PM)esayem Wrote:  Don’t be surprised if FSU gets Clemson, GT, and Miami as their annual football rivals. Their schedule will be markedly improved, and they won’t be playing BC and Syracuse the same season anymore.

Hello?

FSU's schedule has included Clemson and FSU every season since the Noles joined the SEC.

Maybe our friend Gamenole can comment about his excitement of playing GT every season.

(05-10-2022 02:54 PM)esayem Wrote:  Miami will also get Louisville and Clemson on the schedule much more often than now. Not that it matters who they play, the Canes have a total bandwagon fanbase so they’ll be there to watch as long as they’re winning.

We don't care about playing U of L any more in football than they care about playing us in men's basketball.

Instead of schedule tweaks, how about some info on the ACC-ESPN "look-in" meeting scheduled for this spring and how that might help narrow the ever-widening revenue gap between the Birmingham and Greensboro operations?

Not sure why some folks are so opposed to FSU and Clemson wanting to leave for a much-wealthier football-centric conference that also happens to be a far better cultural fit?

The Tobacco Road schools are strong enough to keep the ACC going even if those two leave.

Maybe just maybe Notre Dame will change its mind and join for all sports.

FSU has a large presence in Atlanta and it’s the closest conference opponent.

I’m not against FSU fans wanting to join the SEC, and the university certainly looked the part 30 years ago, but maybe the president has a different opinion these days.

Clemson is much more complicated than FSU. So if you don’t know much about the people that run the place and their culture, it won’t make sense. They could have withdrawn with SC, and they didn’t. They could have withdrawn and joined the SEC in 1990, according to JRSEC, but they didn’t. It’s much more complex than “let’s go to the SEC and make more money!”

It becomes much less complex when more money is $500+ million over a decade rather than a million or so a year.

1990 is a LONG time ago.

Let’s allow history to speak for itself. It’s not hard to predict **** a hundred people have already said on a message board.

Do you honestly believe Clemson and their fans would have had a better decade making more money while playing in the SEC?

Again, history doesn’t speak to the current revenue disparities.

Likewise, it is about the future decades. Do you honestly think Clemson wants to risk being in a 2 tier conference making less than half their region peers? Particularly as paying athletes becomes how you get recruits?

(05-10-2022 07:26 PM)esayem Wrote:  The concept is a lot older than three years. Try 50 years!

The NCAA failed at allowing it to happen in ‘75, ‘78, ‘81, ‘90, and so in. As matter of fact, the more FCS directional schools moving to FBS and Division II, III etc schools moving to D1, the more likely it will actually happen.

I find it humorous that people predicting this “novel” idea believe they are some sort of guru. Try again!

I think I may have told you, as I have posted it several times over the years, but John McKay and Bear Bryant were the first in my memory to propose it in the very early 70's.

The reason it was not acted upon was practical then. The cost of travel versus the meager media revenue of that era made it DOA to have a far-flung super conference.

It has percolated over the decades but when travel was no longer an issue schools all were making more in the late 80's and early 90's and all were competitive and more importantly had no idea what top values were. This led to some bad contracts.

The AD's and presidents now have estimates based on size, scope and composition of the super "league" more than conference. 110-120 million depending upon the size has been tendered and verified by outside firms. Basketball (not an issue for Bear and McKay) now adds fuel as 2.25 x present earnings has been kicked around.

The last 3 years (beginning just before COVID) has led to a lot of communication between schools. It's much farther down the road as a concept than the press has been told. It picked up steam with the Alston suit. It took off with he Alston ruling.

Stu is correct that many are only waiting to see how NIL is handled and what the Pay for Play ruling will say. Texas and Oklahoma's move was the first response to this. There will be many more responses.

The concept hasn't been Novel since '71. I've never been a Guru either. I simply know what is being discussed and what is likely.

How old is my thread on Time, Money and Economic Disparity? Eight years ago I told a laughing dismissive board it was a hostile takeover by corporate media entities. Still laughing now Esayem? Texas and Oklahoma to the SEC was first viably discussed in the SEC presidents' meeting ~1987. Was serious in '89-90. Then not. Then off and on until NIL. Texas and Oklahoma administrations, boosters and AD's were then compelled to act. They are only the first.

Here I endured the Texas and Oklahoma will never join the SEC comments. I listened to all the reasons the Big 10's academics would win out. Yawn!

Now I'm hearing it again when UNC called the SEC in 2011 after Maryland announced and "allegedly" (I say this because officially unofficial emissaries were used) visited Birmingham incognito 3 days after the OU/UT leak.

I'd love to see Tobacky Road head to the B1G. It's just not what has been lined up behind the scenes. And ESPN has a say.

What's happened here for years is I tell you what's coming and the board screams never because some talking head didn't say it. You live in confident denial, slink off when wrong, and slowly regain the courage to hurl insults again just in time to again be proven wrong.

How many times have I had to tell you that beat writers get a headline once something has happened. When it doesn't happen after being rumored they are given a gloss (spin) depending upon whether it makes a school or a conference look better. Things planned which fall apart "simply never happened" and that's for legal reasons.

Breakaway talks are well advanced. But believe what you must. But no P5 AD wants to live with a 40-50 million dollar deficit for 11 years and no president wants to suffer in the public eye. Time, money, and economic disparity have done their work.

(05-10-2022 07:44 PM)Big 12 fan too Wrote:  Again, history doesn’t speak to the current revenue disparities.

Likewise, it is about the future decades. Do you honestly think Clemson wants to risk being in a 2 tier conference making less than half their region peers? Particularly as paying athletes becomes how you get recruits?

I checked out a few of the ACC message boards, including InsideCarolina.

A little bit surprising to see, but on multiple (and lengthy) threads recently the overwhelming consensus is that the ACC is running on fumes and UNC needs to be on the next train to the B1G or the SEC as soon as possible.

Looks like very, very few of the Tar Heel fans expect — or even want — the ACC to remain intact until 2035.

(05-10-2022 08:14 PM)PeteTheChop Wrote:  

(05-10-2022 07:44 PM)Big 12 fan too Wrote:  Again, history doesn’t speak to the current revenue disparities.

Likewise, it is about the future decades. Do you honestly think Clemson wants to risk being in a 2 tier conference making less than half their region peers? Particularly as paying athletes becomes how you get recruits?

I checked out a few of the ACC message boards, including InsideCarolina.

A little bit surprising to see, but on multiple (and lengthy) threads recently the overwhelming consensus was that the ACC is running on fumes and UNC needs to be on the next train to B1G or SEC as soon as possible.

Looked like very, very few of the Tar Heel fans expect — or even want — the ACC to remain intact until 2035.

Only those in Titanic denial insist the ship is unsinkable and amid the increased listing decide to have a snifter of Brandy and shoot some Snooker. This is when even third class recognizes what their senses tell them while the enlightened prefer to die believing lies.

(05-10-2022 08:14 PM)PeteTheChop Wrote:  

(05-10-2022 07:44 PM)Big 12 fan too Wrote:  Again, history doesn’t speak to the current revenue disparities.

Likewise, it is about the future decades. Do you honestly think Clemson wants to risk being in a 2 tier conference making less than half their region peers? Particularly as paying athletes becomes how you get recruits?

I checked out a few of the ACC message boards, including InsideCarolina.

A little bit surprising to see, but on multiple (and lengthy) threads recently the overwhelming consensus is that the ACC is running on fumes and UNC needs to be on the next train to the B1G or the SEC as soon as possible.

Looks like very, very few of the Tar Heel fans expect — or even want — the ACC to remain intact until 2035.

As they should imo. Right now, they have the influence and ability to have some say. That goes out the closer we get to the GOR. All that leverage exchanged for what, a huge cost to boosters in order to compete.

UNC should be pushing to preserve as much of the ACC as a regional division in national P2. And the schools they want included in that. Likely in the SEC. UNC in the BIG is too similar to when the ACC grabbed the Big East schools. The ACC ratings for out of area matchups not good.

Are there 7 ACC schools plus KU that add value? If it facilitates a new entity with different basketball revenues, I think so

(05-10-2022 08:14 PM)PeteTheChop Wrote:  

(05-10-2022 07:44 PM)Big 12 fan too Wrote:  Again, history doesn’t speak to the current revenue disparities.

Likewise, it is about the future decades. Do you honestly think Clemson wants to risk being in a 2 tier conference making less than half their region peers? Particularly as paying athletes becomes how you get recruits?

I checked out a few of the ACC message boards, including InsideCarolina.

A little bit surprising to see, but on multiple (and lengthy) threads recently the overwhelming consensus is that the ACC is running on fumes and UNC needs to be on the next train to the B1G or the SEC as soon as possible.

Looks like very, very few of the Tar Heel fans expect — or even want — the ACC to remain intact until 2035.

As they should imo. Right now, they have the influence and ability to have some say. That goes out the closer we get to the GOR. All that leverage exchanged for what, a huge cost to boosters in order to compete.

UNC should be pushing to preserve as much of the ACC as a regional division in national P2. And the schools they want included in that. Likely in the SEC. UNC in the BIG is too similar to when the ACC grabbed the Big East schools. The ACC ratings for out of area matchups not good.

Are there 7 ACC schools plus KU that add value? If it facilitates a new entity with different basketball revenues, I think so

If the Power 5 breaks away from the NCAA, they won't be alone. They will need to have a clean break which means they will need enough programs in each sport to have national championships. I fully believe the Big East (power basketball conference) and Mountain West (premier sports league in its region) will make the cut. If there is a split, I believe Gonzaga will join the Big East and the WCC will be out. The other two conferences that I think might make the cut are the A-10 and American. However, if the Big 12 scoops up some AAC teams, that latter is DOA.

(05-10-2022 08:18 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(05-10-2022 08:14 PM)PeteTheChop Wrote:  

(05-10-2022 07:44 PM)Big 12 fan too Wrote:  Again, history doesn’t speak to the current revenue disparities.

Likewise, it is about the future decades. Do you honestly think Clemson wants to risk being in a 2 tier conference making less than half their region peers? Particularly as paying athletes becomes how you get recruits?

I checked out a few of the ACC message boards, including InsideCarolina.

A little bit surprising to see, but on multiple (and lengthy) threads recently the overwhelming consensus was that the ACC is running on fumes and UNC needs to be on the next train to B1G or SEC as soon as possible.

Looked like very, very few of the Tar Heel fans expect — or even want — the ACC to remain intact until 2035.

Only those in Titanic denial insist the ship is unsinkable and amid the increased listing decide to have a snifter of Brandy and shoot some Snooker. This is when even third class recognizes what their senses tell them while the enlightened prefer to die believing lies.

If the ACC wants to avoid getting partitioned like the Ottoman Empire they need Clemson’s 2021 to be an aberration, Miami’s investment in Cristobal and Radokovich to pay off, and FSU and Virginia Tech to become perennial 9-10 win schools again. Beyond that, the less B1G rights ESPN gets this round the more likely I think it is that the Mouse eventually caves and increases the ACC’s per school payout before 2036, not enough to put them on par with the SEC or B1G but enough to maintain conference inertia, lest they lose Virginia, Carolina, Duke, and Georgia Tech to the B1G, which would tank the value of the ACC Network and ESPN’s investment in the league. I also don’t buy the notion that ESPN will help facilitate moving Clemson and FSU to the SEC —- neither has the popularity of Texas or OU, neither/both would increase the SEC’s bottom line enough to justify having two more mouths to feed, and ESPN has no monetary incentive to pay the Tigers or Noles more money for rights they already control.

(05-10-2022 08:37 PM)CarlSmithCenter Wrote:  

(05-10-2022 08:18 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(05-10-2022 08:14 PM)PeteTheChop Wrote:  

(05-10-2022 07:44 PM)Big 12 fan too Wrote:  Again, history doesn’t speak to the current revenue disparities.

Likewise, it is about the future decades. Do you honestly think Clemson wants to risk being in a 2 tier conference making less than half their region peers? Particularly as paying athletes becomes how you get recruits?

I checked out a few of the ACC message boards, including InsideCarolina.

A little bit surprising to see, but on multiple (and lengthy) threads recently the overwhelming consensus was that the ACC is running on fumes and UNC needs to be on the next train to B1G or SEC as soon as possible.

Looked like very, very few of the Tar Heel fans expect — or even want — the ACC to remain intact until 2035.

Only those in Titanic denial insist the ship is unsinkable and amid the increased listing decide to have a snifter of Brandy and shoot some Snooker. This is when even third class recognizes what their senses tell them while the enlightened prefer to die believing lies.

If the ACC wants to avoid getting partitioned like the Ottoman Empire they need Clemson’s 2021 to be an aberration, Miami’s investment in Cristobal and Radokovich to pay off, and FSU and Virginia Tech to become perennial 9-10 win schools again. Beyond that, the less B1G rights ESPN gets this round the more likely I think it is that the Mouse eventually caves and increases the ACC’s per school payout before 2036, not enough to put them on par with the SEC or B1G but enough to maintain conference inertia, lest they lose Virginia, Carolina, Duke, and Georgia Tech to the B1G, which would tank the value of the ACC Network and ESPN’s investment in the league.

Do some homework on values. You can find some in a thread by Nerdlinger at the top of the P5 subforum.

The most valuable ACC schools are in order: Louisville, Florida State, Clemson, and Virginia Tech.

If the B1G landed Duke, UNC, and Virginia the would acquire:

North Carolina (5th in ACC value), Duke (7th), Georgia Tech (9th) and Virginia (11th).

The SEC would then be free to take 1-4 in value. If the SEC wanted to protect the deep South they would offer Ga Tech, N.C. State, Miami and Kansas and move to 24. This would leave the B1G #6 Syracuse or # 12 (AAU) Pitt.

Donors and Fan Interest say UNC/Duke tries to grab 2 SEC slots. Why Duke? Duke wants to stay with UNC. Anyway we can wait and see. Should be fun!

(05-10-2022 08:35 PM)shizzle787 Wrote:  If the Power 5 breaks away from the NCAA, they won't be alone. They will need to have a clean break which means they will need enough programs in each sport to have national championships. I fully believe the Big East (power basketball conference) and Mountain West (premier sports league in its region) will make the cut. If there is a split, I believe Gonzaga will join the Big East and the WCC will be out. The other two conferences that I think might make the cut are the A-10 and American. However, if the Big 12 scoops up some AAC teams, that latter is DOA.

Why do they need a clean break?
What’s the difference between basketball only schools making the cut in this new entity, and these major football schools keeping other sports in the NCAA?

I think moving both revenue sports makes sense on the macro level so you can redo the tournament payouts. I don’t see the NCAA or the new entity banning the invitation of mid and low majors to the postseason