(03-13-2013 03:26 PM)TerryD Wrote:  My thoughts:

ND will be included in this scheduling alliance because both Texas and ND want OOC games with each other. Why not integrate them in this "alliance" ?

I think that part of the ND/ACC deal may be modified to include more games against Florida State and Clemson (maybe as high profile season openers) in an effort to keep them "happier" in the ACC.

PLUS, let's not forget - it also keeps the TV folks happier, too! ($$$)

(03-13-2013 03:32 PM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  

(03-13-2013 03:26 PM)TerryD Wrote:  My thoughts:

ND will be included in this scheduling alliance because both Texas and ND want OOC games with each other. Why not integrate them in this "alliance" ?

I think that part of the ND/ACC deal may be modified to include more games against Florida State and Clemson (maybe as high profile season openers) in an effort to keep them "happier" in the ACC.

PLUS, let's not forget - it also keeps the TV folks happier, too! ($$$)

Yeah, that is the same thing, isn't it?

I don't see why a tripartite scheduling agreement cannot be worked out.

See, I think that ESPN will push this and will also push UConn to the ACC (and may pay enough money for it) soon without any defections while ND stays an "affiliate" forever.

I think that such back room discussions may be taking place to hold off the other conferences from raiding the ACC.

Either that, or my meds need to be adjusted.....

(03-13-2013 01:47 PM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  

(03-13-2013 01:29 PM)4x4hokies Wrote:  

(03-13-2013 01:20 PM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  Which teams would you like to see play each other?
I'll go first:
Texas vs. Notre Dame, Florida State
Oklahoma vs. Miami
W Virginia vs. Pittsburgh, Syracuse, Va Tech, Virginia, Louisville
Texas Tech, Okie St vs. Clemson
Who else?

This isn't the first time I've seen Notre Dame mentioned. Why would they be included...they aren't part of the ACC in football?

You are right - ND will not be an ACC football team for the foreseeable future. Still, I'm willing to guess that Texas & ND will find a way to play each other. Will Texas play actual ACC teams - maybe VT? Sure!

Within the last 10 years Texas has played home and home vs. Carolina and I know played NC State in Raleigh.

(03-13-2013 03:08 PM)Big 12 Wrote:  

(03-13-2013 01:57 PM)4x4hokies Wrote:  

(03-13-2013 01:47 PM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  

(03-13-2013 01:29 PM)4x4hokies Wrote:  

(03-13-2013 01:20 PM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  Which teams would you like to see play each other?
I'll go first:
Texas vs. Notre Dame, Florida State
Oklahoma vs. Miami
W Virginia vs. Pittsburgh, Syracuse, Va Tech, Virginia, Louisville
Texas Tech, Okie St vs. Clemson
Who else?

This isn't the first time I've seen Notre Dame mentioned. Why would they be included...they aren't part of the ACC in football?

You are right - ND will not be an ACC football team for the foreseeable future. Still, I'm willing to guess that Texas & ND will find a way to play each other. Will Texas play actual ACC teams - maybe VT? Sure!

In the sense of a B12/ACC scheduling scheme, ND would not be included. Any games they have w/ Texas are on their own.

Texas and ND are schedule to play in 2015, 2016, 2019 & 2020:

http://www.mackbrown-texasfootball.com/s...dules.html

Touch you

(03-13-2013 03:45 PM)TerryD Wrote:  

(03-13-2013 03:32 PM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  

(03-13-2013 03:26 PM)TerryD Wrote:  My thoughts:

ND will be included in this scheduling alliance because both Texas and ND want OOC games with each other. Why not integrate them in this "alliance" ?

I think that part of the ND/ACC deal may be modified to include more games against Florida State and Clemson (maybe as high profile season openers) in an effort to keep them "happier" in the ACC.

PLUS, let's not forget - it also keeps the TV folks happier, too! ($$$)

Yeah, that is the same thing, isn't it?

I don't see why a tripartite scheduling agreement cannot be worked out.

See, I think that ESPN will push this and will also push UConn to the ACC (and may pay enough money for it) soon without any defections while ND stays an "affiliate" forever.

I think that such back room discussions may be taking place to hold off the other conferences from raiding the ACC.

Either that, or my meds need to be adjusted.....

IMO, you definitely do need your meds adjusted if you a tossing around the word "tripartite" on a sports blog!

Tripartite Agreement

(03-13-2013 04:15 PM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  

(03-13-2013 03:45 PM)TerryD Wrote:  

(03-13-2013 03:32 PM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  

(03-13-2013 03:26 PM)TerryD Wrote:  My thoughts:

ND will be included in this scheduling alliance because both Texas and ND want OOC games with each other. Why not integrate them in this "alliance" ?

I think that part of the ND/ACC deal may be modified to include more games against Florida State and Clemson (maybe as high profile season openers) in an effort to keep them "happier" in the ACC.

PLUS, let's not forget - it also keeps the TV folks happier, too! ($$$)

Yeah, that is the same thing, isn't it?

I don't see why a tripartite scheduling agreement cannot be worked out.

See, I think that ESPN will push this and will also push UConn to the ACC (and may pay enough money for it) soon without any defections while ND stays an "affiliate" forever.

I think that such back room discussions may be taking place to hold off the other conferences from raiding the ACC.

Either that, or my meds need to be adjusted.....

IMO, you definitely do need your meds adjusted if you a tossing around the word "tripartite" on a sports blog!

Lol, a political science major in undergrad and a lifelong history (especially military history) buff.

What can I say ?

In my young man days I did some umpiring for 3 age groups of baseball from little league to high school age stuff. I also called corporate, city, and church league softball. Out of all of those the most grizzly spit slinging, ruthless, rough games were church league slow pitch softball, especially if two big Baptist churches were going at it. Therefore I would like to see the annual game between Baylor and Wake Forest (although I know the latter is not affiliated with a denomination any longer). I figure there will still be some fervor in the match, perhaps more than Vanderbilt can muster for the Demon Deacons.

(03-13-2013 08:06 PM)JRsec Wrote:  In my young man days I did some umpiring for 3 age groups of baseball from little league to high school age stuff. I also called corporate, city, and church league softball. Out of all of those the most grizzly spit slinging, ruthless, rough games were church league slow pitch softball, especially if two big Baptist churches were going at it. Therefore I would like to see the annual game between Baylor and Wake Forest (although I know the latter is not affiliated with a denomination any longer). I figure there will still be some fervor in the match, perhaps more than Vanderbilt can muster for the Demon Deacons.

So JR are you calling the Bears for the SEC?

One should never count out a bunch of Baptists in the South.

(03-13-2013 08:06 PM)JRsec Wrote:  In my young man days I did some umpiring for 3 age groups of baseball from little league to high school age stuff. I also called corporate, city, and church league softball. Out of all of those the most grizzly spit slinging, ruthless, rough games were church league slow pitch softball, especially if two big Baptist churches were going at it. Therefore I would like to see the annual game between Baylor and Wake Forest (although I know the latter is not affiliated with a denomination any longer). I figure there will still be some fervor in the match, perhaps more than Vanderbilt can muster for the Demon Deacons.

Baylor vs. Duke would also be nice, but I have to agree that WF would be the logical place to start. For those of us who attended BU in the 80's it might help us deal with the current less than regular matchups with Rice and SMU.

(03-13-2013 08:06 PM)JRsec Wrote:  In my young man days I did some umpiring for 3 age groups of baseball from little league to high school age stuff. I also called corporate, city, and church league softball. Out of all of those the most grizzly spit slinging, ruthless, rough games were church league slow pitch softball, especially if two big Baptist churches were going at it. Therefore I would like to see the annual game between Baylor and Wake Forest (although I know the latter is not affiliated with a denomination any longer). I figure there will still be some fervor in the match, perhaps more than Vanderbilt can muster for the Demon Deacons.

Good call! These 2 did a home & home in 2008/09. Wake won @Baylor 41-13, but then Baylor returned the favor by upsetting the Deacs in Winston-Salem 24-21. That was also the first look at RGIII for many on the East coast.

(03-13-2013 02:45 PM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  

(03-13-2013 02:16 PM)bitcruncher Wrote:  

(03-13-2013 01:48 PM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  

(03-13-2013 01:26 PM)bitcruncher Wrote:  WVU vs. Kentucky, Tennessee, Ohio State, Penn State would be nice too...

To my knowledge none of those teams has applied for membership in the ACC, but then you WVU guys do seem to hear all of the realignment rumors first!

They just happen to be close enough to the WV border that it would be nice to play them occasionally. But other than a rare game here and there with Kentucky, WVU has never played 'em...

Don't feel bad - Tennessee avoids Va Tech like the plague. Maybe we should let them win every now & then, so they'll play us more?

I'd just like to see the Mountaineers without having to travel more than 15 miles round trip...

(03-13-2013 08:34 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(03-13-2013 08:06 PM)JRsec Wrote:  In my young man days I did some umpiring for 3 age groups of baseball from little league to high school age stuff. I also called corporate, city, and church league softball. Out of all of those the most grizzly spit slinging, ruthless, rough games were church league slow pitch softball, especially if two big Baptist churches were going at it. Therefore I would like to see the annual game between Baylor and Wake Forest (although I know the latter is not affiliated with a denomination any longer). I figure there will still be some fervor in the match, perhaps more than Vanderbilt can muster for the Demon Deacons.

So JR are you calling the Bears for the SEC?

One should never count out a bunch of Baptists in the South.

I doubt Slive goes for Baylor, but it wouldn't bother me if he ever did. I figure if Texas ever goes to the West with friends that Baylor placed either in the ACC or SEC would be the best bet for them. If the SEC feels it needs the DFW market and the choice is between T.C.U. and Baylor, I would take the Bears. Plus their new stadium is going to be a really cool place to watch a game. By the way I've got nothing against Baptists, I married one. And the only minister I ever had to toss was a Methodist.

(03-13-2013 08:43 PM)bitcruncher Wrote:  

(03-13-2013 02:45 PM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  

(03-13-2013 02:16 PM)bitcruncher Wrote:  

(03-13-2013 01:48 PM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  

(03-13-2013 01:26 PM)bitcruncher Wrote:  WVU vs. Kentucky, Tennessee, Ohio State, Penn State would be nice too...

To my knowledge none of those teams has applied for membership in the ACC, but then you WVU guys do seem to hear all of the realignment rumors first!

They just happen to be close enough to the WV border that it would be nice to play them occasionally. But other than a rare game here and there with Kentucky, WVU has never played 'em...

Don't feel bad - Tennessee avoids Va Tech like the plague. Maybe we should let them win every now & then, so they'll play us more?

I'd just like to see the Mountaineers without having to travel more than 15 miles round trip...

I still think a great Northern division for the SEC would be:
Kentucky, Pittsburgh, Tennessee, Virginia Tech, and West Virginia.
It could simply be called The Feud Division.

(03-13-2013 03:28 PM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  

(03-13-2013 03:09 PM)Dr. Isaly von Yinzer Wrote:  From Pitt's perspective, my choices would be Texas, Oklahoma and I guess West Virginia. None of those other teams interest me in the least.

Yeah, that IS a problem... to be fair, there are ACC teams which don't exactly excite the Big XII fan bases, either. Still, that may not matter - I think the idea for this ACC/Big12 alliance is to create a bunch of made-for-TV games. At most we are talking 10 games since I doubt any Big 12 team wants to play 2 ACC opponents per year. We can always have one of the NC schools play Kansas and one the other small schools could play Iowa State (if desired).

Amen. Other than FSU and Miami...meh.

(03-13-2013 08:58 PM)FreshPrinceOfDarkness Wrote:  

(03-13-2013 03:28 PM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  

(03-13-2013 03:09 PM)Dr. Isaly von Yinzer Wrote:  From Pitt's perspective, my choices would be Texas, Oklahoma and I guess West Virginia. None of those other teams interest me in the least.

Yeah, that IS a problem... to be fair, there are ACC teams which don't exactly excite the Big XII fan bases, either. Still, that may not matter - I think the idea for this ACC/Big12 alliance is to create a bunch of made-for-TV games. At most we are talking 10 games since I doubt any Big 12 team wants to play 2 ACC opponents per year. We can always have one of the NC schools play Kansas and one the other small schools could play Iowa State (if desired).

Amen. Other than FSU and Miami...meh.

Of course, the last time Texas Tech played NC State, that turned out to be a pretty good game...

NC State 51
Texas Tech 48
September 21, 2002
Jones AT&T Stadium, LUBBOCK, TX

I may not be the only one who remembers that game, either...

http://lubbockonline.com/sports-red-raid...-opponents

(03-13-2013 08:58 PM)FreshPrinceOfDarkness Wrote:  

(03-13-2013 03:28 PM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  

(03-13-2013 03:09 PM)Dr. Isaly von Yinzer Wrote:  From Pitt's perspective, my choices would be Texas, Oklahoma and I guess West Virginia. None of those other teams interest me in the least.

Yeah, that IS a problem... to be fair, there are ACC teams which don't exactly excite the Big XII fan bases, either. Still, that may not matter - I think the idea for this ACC/Big12 alliance is to create a bunch of made-for-TV games. At most we are talking 10 games since I doubt any Big 12 team wants to play 2 ACC opponents per year. We can always have one of the NC schools play Kansas and one the other small schools could play Iowa State (if desired).

Amen. Other than FSU and Miami...meh.

We'll show up regardless of the opponent but we wouldn't be thrilled playing Pitt.

I'd rather play NC State, Clemson, Florida St, Miami, Georgia Tech.

(03-13-2013 09:27 PM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  

(03-13-2013 08:58 PM)FreshPrinceOfDarkness Wrote:  

(03-13-2013 03:28 PM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  

(03-13-2013 03:09 PM)Dr. Isaly von Yinzer Wrote:  From Pitt's perspective, my choices would be Texas, Oklahoma and I guess West Virginia. None of those other teams interest me in the least.

Yeah, that IS a problem... to be fair, there are ACC teams which don't exactly excite the Big XII fan bases, either. Still, that may not matter - I think the idea for this ACC/Big12 alliance is to create a bunch of made-for-TV games. At most we are talking 10 games since I doubt any Big 12 team wants to play 2 ACC opponents per year. We can always have one of the NC schools play Kansas and one the other small schools could play Iowa State (if desired).

Amen. Other than FSU and Miami...meh.

Of course, the last time Texas Tech played NC State, that turned out to be a pretty good game...

NC State 51
Texas Tech 48
September 21, 2002
Jones AT&T Stadium, LUBBOCK, TX

I may not be the only one who remembers that game, either...

http://lubbockonline.com/sports-red-raid...-opponents

I remember it well. NC State was kicking the crap out of us and we made a huge 4th quarter comeback only to lose in OT by 3.

(03-13-2013 03:29 PM)CardFan1 Wrote:  Yes Bit, every time I visit or pass through Columbus, I see the Wheeling ,WV signs and think as neighbors to Ohio that I can't recall OSU playing WVU. Talk about Backyard rivalries, that would be a great one.

WVU and OSU last played each other back in 1998 (I think it was one of those defunct Kickoff Classics). I looked it up and the two schools have only played each other 6 times, 4 of which were at the turn of the 20th century.

As for why the two schools haven't played I would venture it would have to do with conference (affiliation) and the fact OSU doesn't schedule anyone on a consistent basis OOC. They've only played UK 3 times ever and they are also geographically close. Even if you look at other heavyweights they have only played Notre Dame (also geographically) close 5 times. They only played PSU about 6-7 times before they joined the B10.

(03-13-2013 08:49 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(03-13-2013 08:43 PM)bitcruncher Wrote:  

(03-13-2013 02:45 PM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  

(03-13-2013 02:16 PM)bitcruncher Wrote:  

(03-13-2013 01:48 PM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  To my knowledge none of those teams has applied for membership in the ACC, but then you WVU guys do seem to hear all of the realignment rumors first!

They just happen to be close enough to the WV border that it would be nice to play them occasionally. But other than a rare game here and there with Kentucky, WVU has never played 'em...

Don't feel bad - Tennessee avoids Va Tech like the plague. Maybe we should let them win every now & then, so they'll play us more?

I'd just like to see the Mountaineers without having to travel more than 15 miles round trip...

I still think a great Northern division for the SEC would be:
Kentucky, Pittsburgh, Tennessee, Virginia Tech, and West Virginia.
It could simply be called The Feud Division.

IMO that would be a very good division for the SEC, and would generate a lot of interest in the area. It might even change the college football culture around Pittsburgh, generating more interest in Pitt athletics than any other efforts have to date...