(11-08-2013 06:39 PM)NJRedMan Wrote:  

(11-08-2013 03:49 PM)Melky Cabrera Wrote:  

(11-08-2013 03:31 PM)CoogNellie Wrote:  Maryland should have just stayed put. I don't see how playing Michigan, OSU, Nebraska is more desirable to the Maryland fanbase than playing FSU, UVA, UNC, etc. Some of these moves made sense but man seeing a true blue ACC team like Maryland in the Big 10 just looks silly to me.

I don't see how playing UVA & UNC is more attractive than playing nearby programs like Penn State & Rutgers. And Florida State more attractive than Nebraska? Why?

Ultimately the big difference in moving to the Big Ten is the CIC. At least it is if you think like a university president. Then, there's the bigger revenue stream from the B1G and it's a no brainer.

I agree, I mean the team i'd compare with FSU in the ACC is Ohio St in the B1G. Both huge games against nationally prominent and historically successful programs. The big difference between the two is i'd bet there are more OSU alum in and around Maryland than there are FSU fans and alum. Lots of B1G alum in the major cities and suburbs of the northeast. You'd be drawing in a lot more ticket buyers from Philly, DC and the suburbs of Jersey and Virginia. I'd say the same about most of the schools in the B1G. Those folks are well known for traveling to see their teams play live. One of the reasons they get great bowl games. That also helps the new schools in the sense you have more people coming into town and more people buying hotel rooms and eating out at the local restaurants.

I just don't see as many schools in the ACC whose fan base could match that level of commitment in FB.

There aren't. The ACC doesn't have as many large schools as the B1G so the fanbase support overall is less. Second, the ACC has a ton of private schools. I believe there are more private schools (or maybe just as many) in the ACC than the other power conferences combined. Most private schools don't have the same commitment to football or at least it's very hard to field a consistently competitive team.

(11-08-2013 06:45 PM)jaminandjachin Wrote:  

(11-08-2013 06:39 PM)NJRedMan Wrote:  

(11-08-2013 03:49 PM)Melky Cabrera Wrote:  

(11-08-2013 03:31 PM)CoogNellie Wrote:  Maryland should have just stayed put. I don't see how playing Michigan, OSU, Nebraska is more desirable to the Maryland fanbase than playing FSU, UVA, UNC, etc. Some of these moves made sense but man seeing a true blue ACC team like Maryland in the Big 10 just looks silly to me.

I don't see how playing UVA & UNC is more attractive than playing nearby programs like Penn State & Rutgers. And Florida State more attractive than Nebraska? Why?

Ultimately the big difference in moving to the Big Ten is the CIC. At least it is if you think like a university president. Then, there's the bigger revenue stream from the B1G and it's a no brainer.

I agree, I mean the team i'd compare with FSU in the ACC is Ohio St in the B1G. Both huge games against nationally prominent and historically successful programs. The big difference between the two is i'd bet there are more OSU alum in and around Maryland than there are FSU fans and alum. Lots of B1G alum in the major cities and suburbs of the northeast. You'd be drawing in a lot more ticket buyers from Philly, DC and the suburbs of Jersey and Virginia. I'd say the same about most of the schools in the B1G. Those folks are well known for traveling to see their teams play live. One of the reasons they get great bowl games. That also helps the new schools in the sense you have more people coming into town and more people buying hotel rooms and eating out at the local restaurants.

I just don't see as many schools in the ACC whose fan base could match that level of commitment in FB.

There aren't. The ACC doesn't have as many large schools as the B1G so the fanbase support overall is less. Second, the ACC has a ton of private schools. I believe there are more private schools (or maybe just as many) in the ACC than the other power conferences combined. Most private schools don't have the same commitment to football or at least it's very hard to field a consistently competitive team.

all others
stanford
usc
tcu
baylor
vanderbilt
northwetern

acc
miami
wake forest
duke
notre dame
syracuse
BC

miami, usc, notre dame, syracuse, BC, byu, smu, tcu

^^^^^
those schools have a lot of FB history

(11-08-2013 02:51 PM)CommuterBob Wrote:  Oh, and if Maryland is by some chance not joining the B1G in 2014, then neither is Rutgers.

Which will make Rutgers fans incredibly angry... that being said I can live with another shot at Louisville.

(11-08-2013 05:10 PM)jaminandjachin Wrote:  

(11-08-2013 05:07 PM)JunkYardCard Wrote:  

(11-08-2013 05:03 PM)mikeinsec127 Wrote:  

(11-08-2013 02:51 PM)CommuterBob Wrote:  Oh, and if Maryland is by some chance not joining the B1G in 2014, then neither is Rutgers.

Hold up there Cowboy. RU is in regardless what happens with Maryland. That being said, Maryland is coming as well. The ACC can wave around a piece of paper, but it can't physically stop a school from leaving. At best the law suit continues, but the moves are all done deals.

Friggin auto correct.

I don't remember the exact math, but scheduling for 13 is supposedly a mess. I know equitable scheduling for 15 is damn near impossible, because that's why Louisville wasn't in the ACC this season. Basically, Rutgers' move to the B1G could definitely be in jeopardy without Maryland.

You can't have an odd number of teams in football and have a championship game.

You can. MAC has done it for years. Just that the scheduling is messy.

(11-08-2013 06:03 PM)jaminandjachin Wrote:  Now I remember where I saw that. It was when A&M joined the SEC

http://outkickthecoverage.com/ncaa-rule-...bility.php

Evidently, the MAC is violating an NCAA rule.

The WHAS reporter is far more informed than Clay Travis. I'm not going to read his typical nonsense before my response (even if he is right about something).

You could have 8 in one division and 5 in the other as long as they play everyone in their division. The problem with odd numbers is you can't play everyone and all the schools have the same number of games. But there is no requirement that you have the same number of games or count cross-division games. You could count ooc games for the conference title is you wanted.

Now there is a question of whether the MAC has gotten a waiver or is violating an NCAA rule because everyone in the east is not playing each other. Someone wrote the MAC once and got no response to that question. One year with 13 they had the messy schedule (some playing 8, some playing 9). The next year everyone had 8 and not everyone in the 7 team division played each other.

You don't need an equal number in each division, but you do need at least 6 teams in each division. Travis quotes the NCAA rule.

(11-08-2013 06:45 PM)jaminandjachin Wrote:  

(11-08-2013 06:39 PM)NJRedMan Wrote:  

(11-08-2013 03:49 PM)Melky Cabrera Wrote:  

(11-08-2013 03:31 PM)CoogNellie Wrote:  Maryland should have just stayed put. I don't see how playing Michigan, OSU, Nebraska is more desirable to the Maryland fanbase than playing FSU, UVA, UNC, etc. Some of these moves made sense but man seeing a true blue ACC team like Maryland in the Big 10 just looks silly to me.

I don't see how playing UVA & UNC is more attractive than playing nearby programs like Penn State & Rutgers. And Florida State more attractive than Nebraska? Why?

Ultimately the big difference in moving to the Big Ten is the CIC. At least it is if you think like a university president. Then, there's the bigger revenue stream from the B1G and it's a no brainer.

I agree, I mean the team i'd compare with FSU in the ACC is Ohio St in the B1G. Both huge games against nationally prominent and historically successful programs. The big difference between the two is i'd bet there are more OSU alum in and around Maryland than there are FSU fans and alum. Lots of B1G alum in the major cities and suburbs of the northeast. You'd be drawing in a lot more ticket buyers from Philly, DC and the suburbs of Jersey and Virginia. I'd say the same about most of the schools in the B1G. Those folks are well known for traveling to see their teams play live. One of the reasons they get great bowl games. That also helps the new schools in the sense you have more people coming into town and more people buying hotel rooms and eating out at the local restaurants.

I just don't see as many schools in the ACC whose fan base could match that level of commitment in FB.

There aren't. The ACC doesn't have as many large schools as the B1G so the fanbase support overall is less. Second, the ACC has a ton of private schools. I believe there are more private schools (or maybe just as many) in the ACC than the other power conferences combined. Most private schools don't have the same commitment to football or at least it's very hard to field a consistently competitive team.

The average B10 school is twice the enrollment size of the average ACC school. ACC schools average about 22K students and the B10 is about 45K. Ohio State and Michigan have almost 500,000 living alums. UNC has the most living alums in the ACC (not counting Maryland) and they have about 250K.

I don't think commitment is the correct word. I think demand is the correct word. If you have less than 100K alums and they are spread around the country, how much demand for seats will exist in your football stadium?

Clemson and ND are the two ACC schools with outsized demand for football tickets based on the size of the school. Clemson has less than 200K alums but an 81K seat stadium they fill. That's one seat for every 2.5 alums. If Ohio State or Michigan had demand like that, their stadiums would need to hold nearly 200,000. My point is that commitment doesn't matter a great deal if there is no demand.

(11-08-2013 09:12 PM)Wedge Wrote:  You don't need an equal number in each division, but you do need at least 6 teams in each division. Travis quotes the NCAA rule.

Well you could have 9 in one and 6 in the other if you chose.

(11-08-2013 09:36 PM)lumberpack4 Wrote:  

(11-08-2013 06:45 PM)jaminandjachin Wrote:  

(11-08-2013 06:39 PM)NJRedMan Wrote:  

(11-08-2013 03:49 PM)Melky Cabrera Wrote:  

(11-08-2013 03:31 PM)CoogNellie Wrote:  Maryland should have just stayed put. I don't see how playing Michigan, OSU, Nebraska is more desirable to the Maryland fanbase than playing FSU, UVA, UNC, etc. Some of these moves made sense but man seeing a true blue ACC team like Maryland in the Big 10 just looks silly to me.

I don't see how playing UVA & UNC is more attractive than playing nearby programs like Penn State & Rutgers. And Florida State more attractive than Nebraska? Why?

Ultimately the big difference in moving to the Big Ten is the CIC. At least it is if you think like a university president. Then, there's the bigger revenue stream from the B1G and it's a no brainer.

I agree, I mean the team i'd compare with FSU in the ACC is Ohio St in the B1G. Both huge games against nationally prominent and historically successful programs. The big difference between the two is i'd bet there are more OSU alum in and around Maryland than there are FSU fans and alum. Lots of B1G alum in the major cities and suburbs of the northeast. You'd be drawing in a lot more ticket buyers from Philly, DC and the suburbs of Jersey and Virginia. I'd say the same about most of the schools in the B1G. Those folks are well known for traveling to see their teams play live. One of the reasons they get great bowl games. That also helps the new schools in the sense you have more people coming into town and more people buying hotel rooms and eating out at the local restaurants.

I just don't see as many schools in the ACC whose fan base could match that level of commitment in FB.

There aren't. The ACC doesn't have as many large schools as the B1G so the fanbase support overall is less. Second, the ACC has a ton of private schools. I believe there are more private schools (or maybe just as many) in the ACC than the other power conferences combined. Most private schools don't have the same commitment to football or at least it's very hard to field a consistently competitive team.

The average B10 school is twice the enrollment size of the average ACC school. ACC schools average about 22K students and the B10 is about 45K. Ohio State and Michigan have almost 500,000 living alums. UNC has the most living alums in the ACC (not counting Maryland) and they have about 250K.

I don't think commitment is the correct word. I think demand is the correct word. If you have less than 100K alums and they are spread around the country, how much demand for seats will exist in your football stadium?

Clemson and ND are the two ACC schools with outsized demand for football tickets based on the size of the school. Clemson has less than 200K alums but an 81K seat stadium they fill. That's one seat for every 2.5 alums. If Ohio State or Michigan had demand like that, their stadiums would need to hold nearly 200,000. My point is that commitment doesn't matter a great deal if there is no demand.

I think commitment is extremely important. Look at what has happened to Baylor and Oregon in the past few years.

Gawd the ACC sucks.

They got a better replacement than what they had, yet the powers that be are so anal retentive and bent on enforcing a rule

(11-08-2013 05:10 PM)jaminandjachin Wrote:  

(11-08-2013 05:07 PM)JunkYardCard Wrote:  

(11-08-2013 05:03 PM)mikeinsec127 Wrote:  

(11-08-2013 02:51 PM)CommuterBob Wrote:  Oh, and if Maryland is by some chance not joining the B1G in 2014, then neither is Rutgers.

Hold up there Cowboy. RU is in regardless what happens with Maryland. That being said, Maryland is coming as well. The ACC can wave around a piece of paper, but it can't physically stop a school from leaving. At best the law suit continues, but the moves are all done deals.

Friggin auto correct.

I don't remember the exact math, but scheduling for 13 is supposedly a mess. I know equitable scheduling for 15 is damn near impossible, because that's why Louisville wasn't in the ACC this season. Basically, Rutgers' move to the B1G could definitely be in jeopardy without Maryland.

You can't have an odd number of teams in football and have a championship game.

The MAC says hello.

The logistics of having only 13 teams for football is not impossible, but it requires a waiver of the NCAA rules because you can't have both a 6-team division and a 7-team division each play a full round-robin with 8 conference games. The MAC gets its waiver every year. But the likelihood of the B1G going along with that just for Rutgers is kind of slim.

Ramsey told 84WHAS' Tony Cruise on Friday that "a lot of things [have to] fall into place" before UofL can join the ACC as planned. "Maryland's got to leave, and they're, you know, challenging their payout that was changed," Ramsey said. "But if they get out, we believe that we'll be ready... to move right in."


Umm, something is not right here. I do not know what it is but university presidents usually chose their words carefully and some of the above seems overly broad and negative.

The phrase "a lot of things must fall into place" would worry me if I'm a Cardinal fan.

I cannot believe the President of Louisville thinks there is any real chance Maryland will not be in the B1G in 2014. It has to be something else, but what? Only the thing that comes to mind is Division 4.

(11-08-2013 04:01 PM)Dasville Wrote:  Longer they are in the ACC, the more $ will be withheld. What $ you may ask? The $ the addition of Maryland to the ACC as a permanent member would bring. Their impact on a network, their impact on the media rights agreement with ESPN. Their staying in the ACC could prompt the ACC/ESPN look-in clause.
IMO!

It would have to. If MD stays, then you've got to pay 15 football schools with money for 14. ESPN would have to pitch in another $20 million a year to cover MD. And presumably another $20 for whoever #16 would be.

(11-08-2013 05:18 PM)L1C4 Wrote:  

(11-08-2013 04:00 PM)CoogNellie Wrote:  

(11-08-2013 03:57 PM)Wedge Wrote:  

(11-08-2013 02:32 PM)orangefan Wrote:  Sounds like a ploy to create leverage in settlement negotiations.

Of course it is. The ACC isn't going to burn its new member Louisville by leaving them marooned in the AAC for an extra year.

This is about as plausible as Bud Selig's recent threat to the Oakland Coliseum to force the Giants to let the A's play their home games at AT&T Park.

It might be in Louisville's best interest to stay in the AAC for a year. They would be maybe 6-6 in the ACC this year and next year will be even rougher without Teddy.

6-6? What are you smoking?

Yeah, I'd have to say 9-3 at worst and that's if they are in the Atlantic and get Miami as a cross over.

(11-09-2013 01:39 AM)ChrisLords Wrote:  Yeah, I'd have to say 9-3 at worst and that's if they are in the Atlantic and get Miami as a cross over.

I guess we will find out next year. If Louisville is better than 6-6 in their first season in the ACC I'll change my name to CardNellie.

(11-09-2013 02:41 AM)CoogNellie Wrote:  

(11-09-2013 01:39 AM)ChrisLords Wrote:  Yeah, I'd have to say 9-3 at worst and that's if they are in the Atlantic and get Miami as a cross over.

I guess we will find out next year. If Louisville is better than 6-6 in their first season in the ACC I'll change my name to CardNellie.

You will be changing...my guess is 8-4 @ worst....the vast majority of the Defense and really the team outside of Bridgewater will be back next year...

Sigh. Reading this thread as a lawyer is giving me the same feeling that I imagine doctors have when they see Jenny McCarthy claiming that she knows more about vaccines than the entire medical profession. There is ZERO chance that the schools don't move next year. ZERO. NOT EVEN A CONSIDERATION. COMPLETELY BASELESS.

Ramsey is just reflecting the legal posturing by the ACC. It will get settled in the end - it's simply that the parties won't ever give an inch publicly (which they shouldn't) until it's completed. Completely alarmist thread here. As someone else noted, a lawsuit didn't stop West Virginia leaving. Maryland might ultimately be forced to pay someone money to the ACC (likely less than the $52 million), but they're never playing another ACC game after this season.

Plus, even of we were to go ahead and put on our tinfoil hats to take Ramsey's comments completely out of proportion, it's not even as of though that Maryland can just say, "We'll just stay in the ACC for free" even if they somehow wanted to. There's almost certainly a substantial breakup fee with the Big Ten if they renege on the deal, so they'd just be shifting litigation from one conference to another one. Those are just the short-term litigation costs. This is separate from the opportunity cost of the fact that even if they had to pay the ACC exit fee in full, that money would be recouped very quickly with even the lower range projected increases in the next Big Ten TV contract. Believe me - Maryland was moving based on assuming that even if they had to pay the entire exit fee, they'd still ultimately come out ahead financially.

Jody Demling, who presently manages Louisville's Scout site and worked for the Louisville Courier-Journal for a decade, said he spoke with everyone of his contacts on campus and every one says this will be done and Louisville will enter The ACC as scheduled.
CJ