(03-13-2015 11:57 AM)domer1978 Wrote:  [quote='Lenvillecards' pid='11871284' dateline='1426265619']
Its nice to know that ND is willing to ride out the ACC until it is destroyed. Sounds like they would be willing to help destroy it. Such great partners!

A time will come when ND will have to decide what's in their best interest. If the ACC is destroyed there would be no other conference that would allow a partial membership.

Sent from my VM670 using Tapatalk 2

ND has a choice. Save a ACC as is. Or start a national alliance type conference with NBC. Think about is where can ND control their scheduling plus save a portion of ACC(they find desirable). Also think about this do you FSU, Clemson and maybe a VT get excited football wise over all those pvt schools? ND maybe yes but not BC or CUSE. ND still has cards but if someone out there offers a great deal to some in ACC then what happen. I know the GOR's play a role. Still time will end those.

(03-13-2015 12:02 PM)TerryD Wrote:  

(03-13-2015 11:53 AM)Lenvillecards Wrote:  Its nice to know that ND is willing to ride out the ACC until it is destroyed. Sounds like they would be willing to help destroy it. Such great partners!

A time will come when ND will have to decide what's in their best interest. If the ACC is destroyed there would be no other conference that would allow a partial membership.

Sent from my VM670 using Tapatalk 2

Well, ND rode out the Big East in just such a fashion. I view conferences (the Big East and the ACC) as temporary business arrangements, at best.

I don't want any of this to happen. It is not me who keeps pushing for ND to join a football conference.

My scenario is not about partial membership. It is about the idea of ND HAVING to join a conference for football.

I don't want it or like it, but....

But, it must massively benefit ND to cause it to move. I am looking at a business partnership with Texas as the best way to do it.

Two divisions, six to eight valuable pieces in each. Championship game to alternate between Atlanta, Indianapolis and Dallas. :)

Conference network, brand new TV deal. Conference championship game.

Or...we can just forget all this nonsense and carry on as is indefinitely.

If you go to a NBC type deal ND will still be INDY in many aspects. Especially with scheduling. Plus the money will be more for them. You can guarantee that.

(03-13-2015 12:02 PM)Thomas J. Crumpecker Wrote:  

(03-13-2015 11:57 AM)domer1978 Wrote:  [quote='Lenvillecards' pid='11871284' dateline='1426265619']
Its nice to know that ND is willing to ride out the ACC until it is destroyed. Sounds like they would be willing to help destroy it. Such great partners!

A time will come when ND will have to decide what's in their best interest. If the ACC is destroyed there would be no other conference that would allow a partial membership.

Sent from my VM670 using Tapatalk 2

ND has a choice. Save a ACC as is. Or start a national alliance type conference with NBC. Think about is where can ND control their scheduling plus save a portion of ACC(they find desirable). Also think about this do you FSU, Clemson and maybe a VT get excited football wise over all those pvt schools? ND maybe yes but not BC or CUSE. ND still has cards but if someone out there offers a great deal to some in ACC then what happen. I know the GOR's play a role. Still time will end those.

ND also could decide to buy Villanova or any other Catholic college but that isn't likely to happen. What you have laid out is so far-fetched that even in my wildest dreams can't see it happen. MSU leaving Big Ten? ND and Texas love fest to join it's own conference(ND and Texas relationship ain't that good man, look that up. Deloss is gone). USC and Stanford leaving 100+ year relationships to follow ND and Texas?

I love me some hyperbole but you lost me.

(03-13-2015 12:08 PM)domer1978 Wrote:  

(03-13-2015 12:02 PM)Thomas J. Crumpecker Wrote:  

(03-13-2015 11:57 AM)domer1978 Wrote:  [quote='Lenvillecards' pid='11871284' dateline='1426265619']
Its nice to know that ND is willing to ride out the ACC until it is destroyed. Sounds like they would be willing to help destroy it. Such great partners!

A time will come when ND will have to decide what's in their best interest. If the ACC is destroyed there would be no other conference that would allow a partial membership.

Sent from my VM670 using Tapatalk 2

ND has a choice. Save a ACC as is. Or start a national alliance type conference with NBC. Think about is where can ND control their scheduling plus save a portion of ACC(they find desirable). Also think about this do you FSU, Clemson and maybe a VT get excited football wise over all those pvt schools? ND maybe yes but not BC or CUSE. ND still has cards but if someone out there offers a great deal to some in ACC then what happen. I know the GOR's play a role. Still time will end those.

ND also could decide to buy Villanova or any other Catholic college but that isn't likely to happen. What you have laid out is so far-fetched that even in my wildest dreams can't see it happen. MSU leaving Big Ten? ND and Texas love fest to join it's own conference(ND and Texas relationship ain't that good man, look that up. Deloss is gone). USC and Stanford leaving 100+ year relationships to follow ND and Texas?

I love me some hyperbole but you lost me.

I understand some your answer domer. I agree on Mich State. As far as Purdue they can't compete in much anything as is. Look at money difference between them and OSU. Or a Michigan. Did you think A & M would ever leave? Others? Big 10 has demographic issues also. Time can change thinking. I mean really MD to the BIG when all their rivals are ACC? Basic point here is ND doesn't have card they use to because of FSU. Now they can control what happens. Thus Packman 81' saying ND/NBC and ACC in same sentence makes some sense. Only thing is which ACC teams plus where will his Wolfpack play their sports?( wait a SEC not the pack being left behind).

(03-13-2015 12:19 PM)Thomas J. Crumpecker Wrote:  

(03-13-2015 12:08 PM)domer1978 Wrote:  

(03-13-2015 12:02 PM)Thomas J. Crumpecker Wrote:  

(03-13-2015 11:57 AM)domer1978 Wrote:  [quote='Lenvillecards' pid='11871284' dateline='1426265619']
Its nice to know that ND is willing to ride out the ACC until it is destroyed. Sounds like they would be willing to help destroy it. Such great partners!

A time will come when ND will have to decide what's in their best interest. If the ACC is destroyed there would be no other conference that would allow a partial membership.

Sent from my VM670 using Tapatalk 2

ND has a choice. Save a ACC as is. Or start a national alliance type conference with NBC. Think about is where can ND control their scheduling plus save a portion of ACC(they find desirable). Also think about this do you FSU, Clemson and maybe a VT get excited football wise over all those pvt schools? ND maybe yes but not BC or CUSE. ND still has cards but if someone out there offers a great deal to some in ACC then what happen. I know the GOR's play a role. Still time will end those.

ND also could decide to buy Villanova or any other Catholic college but that isn't likely to happen. What you have laid out is so far-fetched that even in my wildest dreams can't see it happen. MSU leaving Big Ten? ND and Texas love fest to join it's own conference(ND and Texas relationship ain't that good man, look that up. Deloss is gone). USC and Stanford leaving 100+ year relationships to follow ND and Texas?

I love me some hyperbole but you lost me.

I understand some your answer domer. I agree on Mich State. As far as Purdue they can't compete in much anything as is. Look at money difference between them and OSU. Or a Michigan. Did you think A & M would ever leave? Others? Big 10 has demographic issues also. Time can change thinking. I mean really MD to the BIG when all their rivals are ACC? Basic point here is ND doesn't have card they use to because of FSU. Now they can control what happens. Thus Packman 81' saying ND/NBC and ACC in same sentence makes some sense. Only thing is which ACC teams plus where will his Wolfpack play their sports?( wait a SEC not the pack being left behind).

A & M leaving was not a surprise at all... They have wanted out of Big Tex's shadow for a while.

(03-13-2015 12:25 PM)domer1978 Wrote:  

(03-13-2015 12:19 PM)Thomas J. Crumpecker Wrote:  

(03-13-2015 12:08 PM)domer1978 Wrote:  

(03-13-2015 12:02 PM)Thomas J. Crumpecker Wrote:  

(03-13-2015 11:57 AM)domer1978 Wrote:  [quote='Lenvillecards' pid='11871284' dateline='1426265619']
Its nice to know that ND is willing to ride out the ACC until it is destroyed. Sounds like they would be willing to help destroy it. Such great partners!

A time will come when ND will have to decide what's in their best interest. If the ACC is destroyed there would be no other conference that would allow a partial membership.

Sent from my VM670 using Tapatalk 2

ND has a choice. Save a ACC as is. Or start a national alliance type conference with NBC. Think about is where can ND control their scheduling plus save a portion of ACC(they find desirable). Also think about this do you FSU, Clemson and maybe a VT get excited football wise over all those pvt schools? ND maybe yes but not BC or CUSE. ND still has cards but if someone out there offers a great deal to some in ACC then what happen. I know the GOR's play a role. Still time will end those.

ND also could decide to buy Villanova or any other Catholic college but that isn't likely to happen. What you have laid out is so far-fetched that even in my wildest dreams can't see it happen. MSU leaving Big Ten? ND and Texas love fest to join it's own conference(ND and Texas relationship ain't that good man, look that up. Deloss is gone). USC and Stanford leaving 100+ year relationships to follow ND and Texas?

I love me some hyperbole but you lost me.

I understand some your answer domer. I agree on Mich State. As far as Purdue they can't compete in much anything as is. Look at money difference between them and OSU. Or a Michigan. Did you think A & M would ever leave? Others? Big 10 has demographic issues also. Time can change thinking. I mean really MD to the BIG when all their rivals are ACC? Basic point here is ND doesn't have card they use to because of FSU. Now they can control what happens. Thus Packman 81' saying ND/NBC and ACC in same sentence makes some sense. Only thing is which ACC teams plus where will his Wolfpack play their sports?( wait a SEC not the pack being left behind).

A & M leaving was not a surprise at all... They have wanted out of Big Tex's shadow for a while.

It still shook the foundations of BIG12 and college football. I see your point though. Also does anyone really think ESPN will make FSU happy in next negotiations moneywise? That is without the IRISH. Will VT and Clemson tire of caring conference in football. VT has been down but they are known for football. ND can make alot of people happy. Come aboard a football league where Wake is sometimes a road game. They also can do what I believe will happen. Time will tell.

(03-13-2015 12:25 PM)domer1978 Wrote:  

(03-13-2015 12:19 PM)Thomas J. Crumpecker Wrote:  

(03-13-2015 12:08 PM)domer1978 Wrote:  

(03-13-2015 12:02 PM)Thomas J. Crumpecker Wrote:  

(03-13-2015 11:57 AM)domer1978 Wrote:  [quote='Lenvillecards' pid='11871284' dateline='1426265619']
Its nice to know that ND is willing to ride out the ACC until it is destroyed. Sounds like they would be willing to help destroy it. Such great partners!

A time will come when ND will have to decide what's in their best interest. If the ACC is destroyed there would be no other conference that would allow a partial membership.

Sent from my VM670 using Tapatalk 2

ND has a choice. Save a ACC as is. Or start a national alliance type conference with NBC. Think about is where can ND control their scheduling plus save a portion of ACC(they find desirable). Also think about this do you FSU, Clemson and maybe a VT get excited football wise over all those pvt schools? ND maybe yes but not BC or CUSE. ND still has cards but if someone out there offers a great deal to some in ACC then what happen. I know the GOR's play a role. Still time will end those.

ND also could decide to buy Villanova or any other Catholic college but that isn't likely to happen. What you have laid out is so far-fetched that even in my wildest dreams can't see it happen. MSU leaving Big Ten? ND and Texas love fest to join it's own conference(ND and Texas relationship ain't that good man, look that up. Deloss is gone). USC and Stanford leaving 100+ year relationships to follow ND and Texas?

I love me some hyperbole but you lost me.

I understand some your answer domer. I agree on Mich State. As far as Purdue they can't compete in much anything as is. Look at money difference between them and OSU. Or a Michigan. Did you think A & M would ever leave? Others? Big 10 has demographic issues also. Time can change thinking. I mean really MD to the BIG when all their rivals are ACC? Basic point here is ND doesn't have card they use to because of FSU. Now they can control what happens. Thus Packman 81' saying ND/NBC and ACC in same sentence makes some sense. Only thing is which ACC teams plus where will his Wolfpack play their sports?( wait a SEC not the pack being left behind).

A & M leaving was not a surprise at all... They have wanted out of Big Tex's shadow for a while.

Like I said in my original response, none of this has a snowball's chance in reality for a bunch of overwhelming reasons.

(03-13-2015 12:32 PM)TerryD Wrote:  

(03-13-2015 12:25 PM)domer1978 Wrote:  

(03-13-2015 12:19 PM)Thomas J. Crumpecker Wrote:  

(03-13-2015 12:08 PM)domer1978 Wrote:  

(03-13-2015 12:02 PM)Thomas J. Crumpecker Wrote:  ND has a choice. Save a ACC as is. Or start a national alliance type conference with NBC. Think about is where can ND control their scheduling plus save a portion of ACC(they find desirable). Also think about this do you FSU, Clemson and maybe a VT get excited football wise over all those pvt schools? ND maybe yes but not BC or CUSE. ND still has cards but if someone out there offers a great deal to some in ACC then what happen. I know the GOR's play a role. Still time will end those.

ND also could decide to buy Villanova or any other Catholic college but that isn't likely to happen. What you have laid out is so far-fetched that even in my wildest dreams can't see it happen. MSU leaving Big Ten? ND and Texas love fest to join it's own conference(ND and Texas relationship ain't that good man, look that up. Deloss is gone). USC and Stanford leaving 100+ year relationships to follow ND and Texas?

I love me some hyperbole but you lost me.

I understand some your answer domer. I agree on Mich State. As far as Purdue they can't compete in much anything as is. Look at money difference between them and OSU. Or a Michigan. Did you think A & M would ever leave? Others? Big 10 has demographic issues also. Time can change thinking. I mean really MD to the BIG when all their rivals are ACC? Basic point here is ND doesn't have card they use to because of FSU. Now they can control what happens. Thus Packman 81' saying ND/NBC and ACC in same sentence makes some sense. Only thing is which ACC teams plus where will his Wolfpack play their sports?( wait a SEC not the pack being left behind).

A & M leaving was not a surprise at all... They have wanted out of Big Tex's shadow for a while.

Like I said in my original response, none of this has a snowball's chance in reality for a bunch of overwhelming reasons.

I think what bothers you is that the IRISH power is in question. They can still control many things. Just not the end game of sorts. Still when all is said and done mark it down they will control teams they play in a a league setup.

(03-13-2015 12:41 PM)Thomas J. Crumpecker Wrote:  

(03-13-2015 12:32 PM)TerryD Wrote:  

(03-13-2015 12:25 PM)domer1978 Wrote:  

(03-13-2015 12:19 PM)Thomas J. Crumpecker Wrote:  

(03-13-2015 12:08 PM)domer1978 Wrote:  ND also could decide to buy Villanova or any other Catholic college but that isn't likely to happen. What you have laid out is so far-fetched that even in my wildest dreams can't see it happen. MSU leaving Big Ten? ND and Texas love fest to join it's own conference(ND and Texas relationship ain't that good man, look that up. Deloss is gone). USC and Stanford leaving 100+ year relationships to follow ND and Texas?

I love me some hyperbole but you lost me.

I understand some your answer domer. I agree on Mich State. As far as Purdue they can't compete in much anything as is. Look at money difference between them and OSU. Or a Michigan. Did you think A & M would ever leave? Others? Big 10 has demographic issues also. Time can change thinking. I mean really MD to the BIG when all their rivals are ACC? Basic point here is ND doesn't have card they use to because of FSU. Now they can control what happens. Thus Packman 81' saying ND/NBC and ACC in same sentence makes some sense. Only thing is which ACC teams plus where will his Wolfpack play their sports?( wait a SEC not the pack being left behind).

A & M leaving was not a surprise at all... They have wanted out of Big Tex's shadow for a while.

Like I said in my original response, none of this has a snowball's chance in reality for a bunch of overwhelming reasons.

I think what bothers you is that the IRISH power is in question. They can still control many things. Just not the end game of sorts. Still when all is said and done mark it down they will control teams they play in a a league setup.

Nothing about this "bothers" me. It is not based in any concept of reality, though.

You also really have not laid out any concrete framework for this "idea" of yours.

Put it down in writing, exactly how you imagine it would look and how it would work, just like I did.

Comparisons of the Big East or Big 12 to the ACC are deeply, deeply flawed.

The Big East was an artificial construct designed to take advantage of the expansion of the NCAA Basketball Tournament and it worked well for a while, but never added Penn State and therefore never had a central anchor. The Big 12 was a merger between the Old Big 8 and the four largest SWC schools and the Big 8 schools immediately lost their identity and the center of the conference moved to Texas.

The ACC is like the PAC 12, it has had name changes, but the core of the league has been together in the same conference for nearly a century. The SAIAA started in 1907, was the ACC schools. The Southern Conference started in 1921 was those SAIAA schools plus what would become SEC schools in 1933. The Southern Conference between 1933 and 1953 was the ACC. The current name, picked in 1953, was the result of the larger schools expelling the smaller schools and blackballing VT and WVa.

Point being, UNC, UVa, and Duke will ALWAYS be satisfied with less money to have the conference THEY desire. ND can't trump those three because those three bind VT, NC State, and WF. It's good for the ACC and ND for ND to be in the ACC and the current arrangement, but the ACC does not have to have ND to survive and thrive. To say otherwise means that you don't really understand the nature of the league, but if you are not 40 years or older and been a sports fan living in NC, Va, SC, GA, or MD - you are on the outside of the center of the club.

BC, Syracuse, Pitt, Louisville, and FSU are not insiders in the ACC. The insiders are WF/UNC/Duke/UVa/NC State/VT/Clemson/and GT. Think of them like the sun and the inner planets of the solar system. BC and Miami are in the asteroid belt. FSU and ND are like Saturn and Jupiter, they can disrupt the orbits of the planets and are giants, but they are not the sun - the Sun is UNC/Duke/UVa.

(03-13-2015 12:46 PM)lumberpack4 Wrote:  Comparisons of the Big East or Big 12 to the ACC are deeply, deeply flawed.

The Big East was an artificial construct designed to take advantage of the expansion of the NCAA Basketball Tournament and it worked well for a while, but never added Penn State and therefore never had a central anchor. The Big 12 was a merger between the Old Big 8 and the four largest SWC schools and the Big 8 schools immediately lost their identity and the center of the conference moved to Texas.

The ACC is like the PAC 12, it has had name changes, but the core of the league has been together in the same conference for nearly a century. The SAIAA started in 1907, was the ACC schools. The Southern Conference started in 1921 was those SAIAA schools plus what would become SEC schools in 1933. The Southern Conference between 1933 and 1953 was the ACC. The current name, picked in 1953, was the result of the larger schools expelling the smaller schools and blackballing VT and WVa.

Point being, UNC, UVa, and Duke will ALWAYS be satisfied with less money to have the conference THEY desire. ND can't trump those three because those three bind VT, NC State, and WF. It's good for the ACC and ND for ND to be in the ACC and the current arrangement, but the ACC does not have to have ND to survive and thrive. To say otherwise means that you don't really understand the nature of the league, but if you are not 40 years or older and been a sports fan living in NC, Va, SC, GA, or MD - you are on the outside of the center of the club.

BC, Syracuse, Pitt, Louisville, and FSU are not insiders in the ACC. The insiders are WF/UNC/Duke/UVa/NC State/VT/Clemson/and GT. Think of them like the sun and the inner planets of the solar system. BC and Miami are in the asteroid belt. FSU and ND are like Saturn and Jupiter, they can disrupt the orbits of the planets and are giants, but they are not the sun - the Sun is UNC/Duke/UVa.

Money can distrupt anything my friend.

(03-13-2015 12:46 PM)lumberpack4 Wrote:  Comparisons of the Big East or Big 12 to the ACC are deeply, deeply flawed.

The Big East was an artificial construct designed to take advantage of the expansion of the NCAA Basketball Tournament and it worked well for a while, but never added Penn State and therefore never had a central anchor. The Big 12 was a merger between the Old Big 8 and the four largest SWC schools and the Big 8 schools immediately lost their identity and the center of the conference moved to Texas.

The ACC is like the PAC 12, it has had name changes, but the core of the league has been together in the same conference for nearly a century. The SAIAA started in 1907, was the ACC schools. The Southern Conference started in 1921 was those SAIAA schools plus what would become SEC schools in 1933. The Southern Conference between 1933 and 1953 was the ACC. The current name, picked in 1953, was the result of the larger schools expelling the smaller schools and blackballing VT and WVa.

Point being, UNC, UVa, and Duke will ALWAYS be satisfied with less money to have the conference THEY desire. ND can't trump those three because those three bind VT, NC State, and WF. It's good for the ACC and ND for ND to be in the ACC and the current arrangement, but the ACC does not have to have ND to survive and thrive. To say otherwise means that you don't really understand the nature of the league, but if you are not 40 years or older and been a sports fan living in NC, Va, SC, GA, or MD - you are on the outside of the center of the club.

BC, Syracuse, Pitt, Louisville, and FSU are not insiders in the ACC. The insiders are WF/UNC/Duke/UVa/NC State/VT/Clemson/and GT. Think of them like the sun and the inner planets of the solar system. BC and Miami are in the asteroid belt. FSU and ND are like Saturn and Jupiter, they can disrupt the orbits of the planets and are giants, but they are not the sun - the Sun is UNC/Duke/UVa.

I didn't have Duke or Virginia in my "Fantasyland Conference", only North Carolina. It can be replaced by someone else. UNC, Duke and Virginia could stay together or join separate, other conferences.

I didn't say that the ACC needs ND to survive. But, I don't care enough about the ACC to care who is in the inside or outside, who is the glue or the mule.

I am for the status quo, not looking to bust up the ACC. But, I don't see any way that ND joining the existing ACC for football would be a good deal (for ND, that is). Not for the price of giving up independence.

To get to the point of matching the Big Ten and the SEC in money and power, you would have to create a new conference with the combined power of ND and Texas in it, minus some smaller schools who would dilute the cash payouts.

Anyway, this is an exercise in a "war game" scenario, not real, actual events.

The key to ND playing more ACC football games is two-fold - the structure of the league's divisions and the nature of how you get to the ACC title game.

This is different from a network.

To bring ND into the ACC "all in" for football you have to have something akin to the NFL where there are at least 3 divisions and wherein the divisional games matter most and games outside the division become ancillary to the division. At 15 you can have 3 divisions and a wildcard. You can state that you need to play all your division members plus 2-3 others in the ACC at a minimum to qualify for a 4 team playoff. That brings ND in immediately as they get the best of all worlds at the cost of just two more games, and it makes FSU happy if they to want to play less than 9 ACC games a year.

The arrangement between WF and UNC shows everyone the way to the future.

However to this, the ACC has to have it's conference championship format freed and needs an extra playoff game, with the semis being at home, making FSU very, very happy.

Just for ***** and giggles:

ACC West: ND, Pitt, WF, GT, FSU
ACC South: Miami, Clemson, UNC, UVa, Louisville
ACC North: BC, Syracuse, NC State, Duke, VT

You play your four division opponents. You play two designated rivals in the other division. Then you play at least one and as many as 4 other schools in the conference.

If you are ND and you finish 6-1, and FSU or GT finish 7-1 or 8-1, you better hope for the wildcard. The Southern Conference played football like this between 1921 and 1953 as there numbers in the conference were as high as 23.

This creates an extra division title to play for, and a wildcard to instill hope in early November.

It allows ND to continue to play USC, Stanford, Navy, and one or two others without penalty. It allows FSU or Clemson, or VT to shy away from playing other ACC schools that they don't benefit by playing due to recruiting or lack of fan interest.

Most of all and here's what the football fanatics miss - it prevents the ACC from going to 16 and the loss of the double bye into the ACC Basketball Tourney.

(03-13-2015 12:55 PM)TerryD Wrote:  

(03-13-2015 12:46 PM)lumberpack4 Wrote:  Comparisons of the Big East or Big 12 to the ACC are deeply, deeply flawed.

The Big East was an artificial construct designed to take advantage of the expansion of the NCAA Basketball Tournament and it worked well for a while, but never added Penn State and therefore never had a central anchor. The Big 12 was a merger between the Old Big 8 and the four largest SWC schools and the Big 8 schools immediately lost their identity and the center of the conference moved to Texas.

The ACC is like the PAC 12, it has had name changes, but the core of the league has been together in the same conference for nearly a century. The SAIAA started in 1907, was the ACC schools. The Southern Conference started in 1921 was those SAIAA schools plus what would become SEC schools in 1933. The Southern Conference between 1933 and 1953 was the ACC. The current name, picked in 1953, was the result of the larger schools expelling the smaller schools and blackballing VT and WVa.

Point being, UNC, UVa, and Duke will ALWAYS be satisfied with less money to have the conference THEY desire. ND can't trump those three because those three bind VT, NC State, and WF. It's good for the ACC and ND for ND to be in the ACC and the current arrangement, but the ACC does not have to have ND to survive and thrive. To say otherwise means that you don't really understand the nature of the league, but if you are not 40 years or older and been a sports fan living in NC, Va, SC, GA, or MD - you are on the outside of the center of the club.

BC, Syracuse, Pitt, Louisville, and FSU are not insiders in the ACC. The insiders are WF/UNC/Duke/UVa/NC State/VT/Clemson/and GT. Think of them like the sun and the inner planets of the solar system. BC and Miami are in the asteroid belt. FSU and ND are like Saturn and Jupiter, they can disrupt the orbits of the planets and are giants, but they are not the sun - the Sun is UNC/Duke/UVa.

I didn't have Duke or Virginia in my "Fantasyland Conference", only North Carolina. It can be replaced by someone else. UNC, Duke and Virginia could stay together or join separate, other conferences.

I didn't say that the ACC needs ND to survive. But, I don't care enough about the ACC to care who is in the inside or outside, who is the glue or the mule.

I am for the status quo, not looking to bust up the ACC. But, I don't see any way that ND joining the existing ACC for football would be a good deal (for ND, that is). Not for the price of giving up independence.

To get to the point of matching the Big Ten and the SEC in money and power, you would have to create a new conference with the combined power of ND and Texas in it, minus some smaller schools who would dilute the cash payouts.

Anyway, this is an exercise in a "war game" scenario, not real, actual events.

It doesn't have to be a good deal for ND. It is can they live without an acc. They can but it would be a nat'l type alliance. That being said ND will have a choice though.

(03-13-2015 01:01 PM)lumberpack4 Wrote:  The key to ND playing more ACC football games is two-fold - the structure of the league's divisions and the nature of how you get to the ACC title game.

This is different from a network.

To bring ND into the ACC "all in" for football you have to have something akin to the NFL where there are at least 3 divisions and wherein the divisional games matter most and games outside the division become ancillary to the division. At 15 you can have 3 divisions and a wildcard. You can state that you need to play all your division members plus 2-3 others in the ACC at a minimum to qualify for a 4 team playoff. That brings ND in immediately as they get the best of all worlds at the cost of just two more games, and it makes FSU happy if they to want to play less than 9 ACC games a year.

The arrangement between WF and UNC shows everyone the way to the future.

However to this, the ACC has to have it's conference championship format freed and needs an extra playoff game, with the semis being at home, making FSU very, very happy.

Just for ***** and giggles:

ACC West: ND, Pitt, WF, GT, FSU
ACC South: Miami, Clemson, UNC, UVa, Louisville
ACC North: BC, Syracuse, NC State, Duke, VT

You play your four division opponents. You play two designated rivals in the other division. Then you play at least one and as many as 4 other schools in the conference.

If you are ND and you finish 6-1, and FSU or GT finish 7-1 or 8-1, you better hope for the wildcard. The Southern Conference played football like this between 1921 and 1953 as there numbers in the conference were as high as 23.

This creates an extra division title to play for, and a wildcard to instill hope in early November.

It allows ND to continue to play USC, Stanford, Navy, and one or two others without penalty. It allows FSU or Clemson, or VT to shy away from playing other ACC schools that they don't benefit by playing due to recruiting or lack of fan interest.

Most of all and here's what the football fanatics miss - it prevents the ACC from going to 16 and the loss of the double bye into the ACC Basketball Tourney.

Sounds great. Where is the massive benefit to ND that offsets the massive trauma of giving up independence?

(03-13-2015 01:02 PM)Thomas J. Crumpecker Wrote:  

(03-13-2015 12:55 PM)TerryD Wrote:  

(03-13-2015 12:46 PM)lumberpack4 Wrote:  Comparisons of the Big East or Big 12 to the ACC are deeply, deeply flawed.

The Big East was an artificial construct designed to take advantage of the expansion of the NCAA Basketball Tournament and it worked well for a while, but never added Penn State and therefore never had a central anchor. The Big 12 was a merger between the Old Big 8 and the four largest SWC schools and the Big 8 schools immediately lost their identity and the center of the conference moved to Texas.

The ACC is like the PAC 12, it has had name changes, but the core of the league has been together in the same conference for nearly a century. The SAIAA started in 1907, was the ACC schools. The Southern Conference started in 1921 was those SAIAA schools plus what would become SEC schools in 1933. The Southern Conference between 1933 and 1953 was the ACC. The current name, picked in 1953, was the result of the larger schools expelling the smaller schools and blackballing VT and WVa.

Point being, UNC, UVa, and Duke will ALWAYS be satisfied with less money to have the conference THEY desire. ND can't trump those three because those three bind VT, NC State, and WF. It's good for the ACC and ND for ND to be in the ACC and the current arrangement, but the ACC does not have to have ND to survive and thrive. To say otherwise means that you don't really understand the nature of the league, but if you are not 40 years or older and been a sports fan living in NC, Va, SC, GA, or MD - you are on the outside of the center of the club.

BC, Syracuse, Pitt, Louisville, and FSU are not insiders in the ACC. The insiders are WF/UNC/Duke/UVa/NC State/VT/Clemson/and GT. Think of them like the sun and the inner planets of the solar system. BC and Miami are in the asteroid belt. FSU and ND are like Saturn and Jupiter, they can disrupt the orbits of the planets and are giants, but they are not the sun - the Sun is UNC/Duke/UVa.

I didn't have Duke or Virginia in my "Fantasyland Conference", only North Carolina. It can be replaced by someone else. UNC, Duke and Virginia could stay together or join separate, other conferences.

I didn't say that the ACC needs ND to survive. But, I don't care enough about the ACC to care who is in the inside or outside, who is the glue or the mule.

I am for the status quo, not looking to bust up the ACC. But, I don't see any way that ND joining the existing ACC for football would be a good deal (for ND, that is). Not for the price of giving up independence.

To get to the point of matching the Big Ten and the SEC in money and power, you would have to create a new conference with the combined power of ND and Texas in it, minus some smaller schools who would dilute the cash payouts.

Anyway, this is an exercise in a "war game" scenario, not real, actual events.

It doesn't have to be a good deal for ND. It is can they live without an acc. They can but it would be a nat'l type alliance. That being said ND will have a choice though.

Sounds great. Where is the massive benefit to ND that offsets the massive trauma of giving up independence?

(03-13-2015 12:50 PM)Thomas J. Crumpecker Wrote:  

(03-13-2015 12:46 PM)lumberpack4 Wrote:  Comparisons of the Big East or Big 12 to the ACC are deeply, deeply flawed.

The Big East was an artificial construct designed to take advantage of the expansion of the NCAA Basketball Tournament and it worked well for a while, but never added Penn State and therefore never had a central anchor. The Big 12 was a merger between the Old Big 8 and the four largest SWC schools and the Big 8 schools immediately lost their identity and the center of the conference moved to Texas.

The ACC is like the PAC 12, it has had name changes, but the core of the league has been together in the same conference for nearly a century. The SAIAA started in 1907, was the ACC schools. The Southern Conference started in 1921 was those SAIAA schools plus what would become SEC schools in 1933. The Southern Conference between 1933 and 1953 was the ACC. The current name, picked in 1953, was the result of the larger schools expelling the smaller schools and blackballing VT and WVa.

Point being, UNC, UVa, and Duke will ALWAYS be satisfied with less money to have the conference THEY desire. ND can't trump those three because those three bind VT, NC State, and WF. It's good for the ACC and ND for ND to be in the ACC and the current arrangement, but the ACC does not have to have ND to survive and thrive. To say otherwise means that you don't really understand the nature of the league, but if you are not 40 years or older and been a sports fan living in NC, Va, SC, GA, or MD - you are on the outside of the center of the club.

BC, Syracuse, Pitt, Louisville, and FSU are not insiders in the ACC. The insiders are WF/UNC/Duke/UVa/NC State/VT/Clemson/and GT. Think of them like the sun and the inner planets of the solar system. BC and Miami are in the asteroid belt. FSU and ND are like Saturn and Jupiter, they can disrupt the orbits of the planets and are giants, but they are not the sun - the Sun is UNC/Duke/UVa.

Money can distrupt anything my friend.

Except that the money it takes to disrupt UVa or UNC is beyond what you are talking about - remember we aren't talking about a nearly bankrupt Maryland that had been mismanaged from the Chancellor's office and BOT for thirty years resulting some of the most egregious increases in tuition, room and board for what used to be a public priced university.

We also are not talking about at TAMU with 100 years of butthurt against Texas, or a Nebraska with 20 years of butthurt against Texas.

There is no point to a national conference surrounding Notre Dame, because that alone defeats the attempts of ND to appear to be unique. Conferences also need their doormats because college fan bases at the Ohio States of the world are not going to accept a world were 8-4 is a great season since you lost to ND, Texas, Alabama, and LSU at the last minute.

Quote:Finally received a call back from a good friend and honest and trustworthy person. Has been right on things before. He would only say that negotiations ARE ongoing and that, unfortunately, ND holds most of the cards. Will post more later as I get more info.

Wolfpack81 is back

(03-13-2015 01:04 PM)TerryD Wrote:  

(03-13-2015 01:02 PM)Thomas J. Crumpecker Wrote:  

(03-13-2015 12:55 PM)TerryD Wrote:  

(03-13-2015 12:46 PM)lumberpack4 Wrote:  Comparisons of the Big East or Big 12 to the ACC are deeply, deeply flawed.

The Big East was an artificial construct designed to take advantage of the expansion of the NCAA Basketball Tournament and it worked well for a while, but never added Penn State and therefore never had a central anchor. The Big 12 was a merger between the Old Big 8 and the four largest SWC schools and the Big 8 schools immediately lost their identity and the center of the conference moved to Texas.

The ACC is like the PAC 12, it has had name changes, but the core of the league has been together in the same conference for nearly a century. The SAIAA started in 1907, was the ACC schools. The Southern Conference started in 1921 was those SAIAA schools plus what would become SEC schools in 1933. The Southern Conference between 1933 and 1953 was the ACC. The current name, picked in 1953, was the result of the larger schools expelling the smaller schools and blackballing VT and WVa.

Point being, UNC, UVa, and Duke will ALWAYS be satisfied with less money to have the conference THEY desire. ND can't trump those three because those three bind VT, NC State, and WF. It's good for the ACC and ND for ND to be in the ACC and the current arrangement, but the ACC does not have to have ND to survive and thrive. To say otherwise means that you don't really understand the nature of the league, but if you are not 40 years or older and been a sports fan living in NC, Va, SC, GA, or MD - you are on the outside of the center of the club.

BC, Syracuse, Pitt, Louisville, and FSU are not insiders in the ACC. The insiders are WF/UNC/Duke/UVa/NC State/VT/Clemson/and GT. Think of them like the sun and the inner planets of the solar system. BC and Miami are in the asteroid belt. FSU and ND are like Saturn and Jupiter, they can disrupt the orbits of the planets and are giants, but they are not the sun - the Sun is UNC/Duke/UVa.

I didn't have Duke or Virginia in my "Fantasyland Conference", only North Carolina. It can be replaced by someone else. UNC, Duke and Virginia could stay together or join separate, other conferences.

I didn't say that the ACC needs ND to survive. But, I don't care enough about the ACC to care who is in the inside or outside, who is the glue or the mule.

I am for the status quo, not looking to bust up the ACC. But, I don't see any way that ND joining the existing ACC for football would be a good deal (for ND, that is). Not for the price of giving up independence.

To get to the point of matching the Big Ten and the SEC in money and power, you would have to create a new conference with the combined power of ND and Texas in it, minus some smaller schools who would dilute the cash payouts.

Anyway, this is an exercise in a "war game" scenario, not real, actual events.

It doesn't have to be a good deal for ND. It is can they live without an acc. They can but it would be a nat'l type alliance. That being said ND will have a choice though.

Sounds great. Where is the massive benefit to ND that offsets the massive trauma of giving up independence?

Your benefit is that if you win the ACC title, you get to the National Playoff rather than being totally out of it if you lose two games early in the season. Now, I know your response is to just reload next year and win them all - I respect that, however, your ability to do that has greatly receded over the last 25 years.

You need the ACC more than you want to admit to get to a national title now that it's not a matter of AP voters getting you to a NYD bowl. However, it's also your prerogative to run as high a risk as you desire.

The fact is BYU is more independent than you. Freedom is an illusion. So is your current brand of independence.

(03-13-2015 01:09 PM)lumberpack4 Wrote:  

(03-13-2015 12:50 PM)Thomas J. Crumpecker Wrote:  

(03-13-2015 12:46 PM)lumberpack4 Wrote:  Comparisons of the Big East or Big 12 to the ACC are deeply, deeply flawed.

The Big East was an artificial construct designed to take advantage of the expansion of the NCAA Basketball Tournament and it worked well for a while, but never added Penn State and therefore never had a central anchor. The Big 12 was a merger between the Old Big 8 and the four largest SWC schools and the Big 8 schools immediately lost their identity and the center of the conference moved to Texas.

The ACC is like the PAC 12, it has had name changes, but the core of the league has been together in the same conference for nearly a century. The SAIAA started in 1907, was the ACC schools. The Southern Conference started in 1921 was those SAIAA schools plus what would become SEC schools in 1933. The Southern Conference between 1933 and 1953 was the ACC. The current name, picked in 1953, was the result of the larger schools expelling the smaller schools and blackballing VT and WVa.

Point being, UNC, UVa, and Duke will ALWAYS be satisfied with less money to have the conference THEY desire. ND can't trump those three because those three bind VT, NC State, and WF. It's good for the ACC and ND for ND to be in the ACC and the current arrangement, but the ACC does not have to have ND to survive and thrive. To say otherwise means that you don't really understand the nature of the league, but if you are not 40 years or older and been a sports fan living in NC, Va, SC, GA, or MD - you are on the outside of the center of the club.

BC, Syracuse, Pitt, Louisville, and FSU are not insiders in the ACC. The insiders are WF/UNC/Duke/UVa/NC State/VT/Clemson/and GT. Think of them like the sun and the inner planets of the solar system. BC and Miami are in the asteroid belt. FSU and ND are like Saturn and Jupiter, they can disrupt the orbits of the planets and are giants, but they are not the sun - the Sun is UNC/Duke/UVa.

Money can distrupt anything my friend.

Except that the money it takes to disrupt UVa or UNC is beyond what you are talking about - remember we aren't talking about a nearly bankrupt Maryland that had been mismanaged from the Chancellor's office and BOT for thirty years resulting some of the most egregious increases in tuition, room and board for what used to be a public priced university.

We also are not talking about at TAMU with 100 years of butthurt against Texas, or a Nebraska with 20 years of butthurt against Texas.

There is no point to a national conference surrounding Notre Dame, because that alone defeats the attempts of ND to appear to be unique. Conferences also need their doormats because college fan bases at the Ohio States of the world are not going to accept a world were 8-4 is a great season since you lost to ND, Texas, Alabama, and LSU at the last minute.

They will do that before entering the ACC. Listen before Kelly came to ND the IRISH were worse then BC in football. Think about it. NBC loves the IRISH. I think others are growing tired. FSU just had 2 % athletic budget cuts. What about others with all these bills to be paid? Will BC and Wake have football down the road. ND can help alot of people out. Some will grow tired of their power. Still their end game will be power and NBC a Nat'l league. Remember in that scenario they control whom they play.