http://espn.go.com/blog/bigten/post/_/id...-expansion

Interesting article. The focus is rightly on the Mid-Atlantic, however it is my opinion that the recruiting areas of the ACC are still a little more saturated with talent than those of the B1G. On the other hand, the ACC shares it's most talent laden areas with the SEC to the South and to a lesser degree with the B1G to the North.

The most interesting part of this to me though is the shift of top end talent and how quickly it has happened. To branch that out a little further... Virginia in the Tidewater area and the suburbs of DC are loaded & in North Carolina the talent level is increasing as well. And it goes without saying the talent levels in Texas, Florida, and Georgia are consistently among the best in the nation.

While i wouldnt expect the changes to be as drastic as with the proximate NYC/DC areas, I wonder if an expansion to 20 that included Virginia, North Carolina, Georgia Tech, Florida State, and Texas would yield similar results.

I also look at how much Texas talent the non-Texas based schools have in the Big12 and also consider the dearth of Texas talent on the Nebraska roster since leaving the Big12 and say... for the sake of the B1G West schools maybe we double down on Texas with Houston.

(01-30-2016 03:33 PM)Big Ron Buckeye Wrote:  http://espn.go.com/blog/bigten/post/_/id...-expansion

Interesting article. The focus is rightly on the Mid-Atlantic, however it is my opinion that the recruiting areas of the ACC are still a little more saturated with talent than those of the B1G. On the other hand, the ACC shares it's most talent laden areas with the SEC to the South and to a lesser degree with the B1G to the North.

The most interesting part of this to me though is the shift of top end talent and how quickly it has happened. To branch that out a little further... Virginia in the Tidewater area and the suburbs of DC are loaded & in North Carolina the talent level is increasing as well. And it goes without saying the talent levels in Texas, Florida, and Georgia are consistently among the best in the nation.

While i wouldnt expect the changes to be as drastic as with the proximate NYC/DC areas, I wonder if an expansion to 20 that included Virginia, North Carolina, Georgia Tech, Florida State, and Texas would yield similar results.

I also look at how much Texas talent the non-Texas based schools have in the Big12 and also consider the dearth of Texas talent on the Nebraska roster since leaving the Big12 and say... for the sake of the B1G West schools maybe we double down on Texas with Houston.

First, I'm not surprised with this. Second I think a move into Virginia and North Carolina would yield similar results if the ACC otherwise remained the same. The problem is that it wouldn't and the SEC would most assuredly go after those states as well.

In the latter instance I think the recruiting battles between the SEC and Big 10 in those states would be relatively tit for tat. Move South of there however and I think you hit some significant barriers. Most kids want to play closer to home. The kids you get out of the Southeast now (a lot of which are in Florida) tend to be kids that grew up in the North and going to a Big 10 school is like returning home.

The move in Florida for the Big 10 would be Miami. Though not the brand they once were, the area is nonetheless tied to the Northeast and has a high % of retired Big 10 alums. Tallahassee on the other hand is a spit away from Thomasville, Georgia, and Dothan, Alabama. Many of their kids come from the panhandle area of Florida which is decidedly not made up of Big 10 retirees.

Since the SEC would likely get a bit defensive if you moved South of North Carolina, but less so in Atlanta, I would think the offers to Clemson and Florida State would be quickly forthcoming if the SEC believed the Big 10 was serious. ESPN might be a bit reactionary about those brands as well.

I do see a significant opportunity for the Big 10 to move to 20 however. Syracuse, North Carolina, Virginia and Duke would be a helluva lure for N.D.. Before you get reactionary allow me to say if we were moving to a P3 of 20 schools each (which would be likely with a Big 10 move to 20) then N.D. is going to have to go somewhere.

Syracuse helps cement the basketball crowds of the Northeast and their football would be competitive. But more importantly they would tie the Northeastern lacrosse crowds into the Big 10. Do that and pick up the Mid Atlantic lacrosse schools and you gain academics, the greater foothold in North Carolina and the Beltway than the SEC would with N.C. State and Virginia Tech, and it leaves the Irish really nowhere else to go. Then the question of who to take between Georgia Tech, Boston College (big market & great hockey) and Pitt becomes the relative question on how to get #20.

The SEC would likely take N.C. State & Virginia Tech, solidify its in state rivals with F.S.U., Clemson, and Georgia Tech and then would have a choice to make between Louisville & Miami, or possibly look at taking a second Texas school or a new market.

(01-30-2016 06:06 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(01-30-2016 03:33 PM)Big Ron Buckeye Wrote:  http://espn.go.com/blog/bigten/post/_/id...-expansion

Interesting article. The focus is rightly on the Mid-Atlantic, however it is my opinion that the recruiting areas of the ACC are still a little more saturated with talent than those of the B1G. On the other hand, the ACC shares it's most talent laden areas with the SEC to the South and to a lesser degree with the B1G to the North.

The most interesting part of this to me though is the shift of top end talent and how quickly it has happened. To branch that out a little further... Virginia in the Tidewater area and the suburbs of DC are loaded & in North Carolina the talent level is increasing as well. And it goes without saying the talent levels in Texas, Florida, and Georgia are consistently among the best in the nation.

While i wouldnt expect the changes to be as drastic as with the proximate NYC/DC areas, I wonder if an expansion to 20 that included Virginia, North Carolina, Georgia Tech, Florida State, and Texas would yield similar results.

I also look at how much Texas talent the non-Texas based schools have in the Big12 and also consider the dearth of Texas talent on the Nebraska roster since leaving the Big12 and say... for the sake of the B1G West schools maybe we double down on Texas with Houston.

First, I'm not surprised with this. Second I think a move into Virginia and North Carolina would yield similar results if the ACC otherwise remained the same. The problem is that it wouldn't and the SEC would most assuredly go after those states as well.

In the latter instance I think the recruiting battles between the SEC and Big 10 in those states would be relatively tit for tat. Move South of there however and I think you hit some significant barriers. Most kids want to play closer to home. The kids you get out of the Southeast now (a lot of which are in Florida) tend to be kids that grew up in the North and going to a Big 10 school is like returning home.

The move in Florida for the Big 10 would be Miami. Though not the brand they once were, the area is nonetheless tied to the Northeast and has a high % of retired Big 10 alums. Tallahassee on the other hand is a spit away from Thomasville, Georgia, and Dothan, Alabama. Many of their kids come from the panhandle area of Florida which is decidedly not made up of Big 10 retirees.

Since the SEC would likely get a bit defensive if you moved South of North Carolina, but less so in Atlanta, I would think the offers to Clemson and Florida State would be quickly forthcoming if the SEC believed the Big 10 was serious. ESPN might be a bit reactionary about those brands as well.

I do see a significant opportunity for the Big 10 to move to 20 however. Syracuse, North Carolina, Virginia and Duke would be a helluva lure for N.D.. Before you get reactionary allow me to say if we were moving to a P3 of 20 schools each (which would be likely with a Big 10 move to 20) then N.D. is going to have to go somewhere.

Syracuse helps cement the basketball crowds of the Northeast and their football would be competitive. But more importantly they would tie the Northeastern lacrosse crowds into the Big 10. Do that and pick up the Mid Atlantic lacrosse schools and you gain academics, the greater foothold in North Carolina and the Beltway than the SEC would with N.C. State and Virginia Tech, and it leaves the Irish really nowhere else to go. Then the question of who to take between Georgia Tech, Boston College (big market & great hockey) and Pitt becomes the relative question on how to get #20.

The SEC would likely take N.C. State & Virginia Tech, solidify its in state rivals with F.S.U., Clemson, and Georgia Tech and then would have a choice to make between Louisville & Miami, or possibly look at taking a second Texas school or a new market.

Thanks for Replying JRsec.

In regards to NC State and Va Tech... I think the SEC is interested in them regardless of what the B1G does. New markets, similar culture, win all the way around. Furthermore, I feel like the B1G has a stiffy for UVA, UNC, and possible Duke so there won't be a bidding war for those two schools. And if bringing UVA, UNC, and Duke would mean the B1G winning half of the recruiting battles in those states... I'm all for it. MAJOR WIN!!!

In regards to South of Charlotte... The SEC has been, is, and IMO always be in the dominant position of power. Name the school south of North Carolina that would say no to an SEC invite (sans the GORs penalty). Excluding finances which are a wash, the big card that the B1G has to play is academics, specifically with regard to graduate level research.

In regards to Miami... A goodly portion of the talent in Florida resides south of Interstate 4, As do a great deal of former B1G Alums, as do a great deal of Northern transplants, additionally the culture IMO is similar to that of the Northeast (with of course the exception of weather) . So I agree with you that they would be a solid play on the Florida market. They only reason I think FSU would get the nod is because they are a public school with considerably more support. Miami has a major problem filling up a stadium (even when they are winning). But at the end of the day if we end up with Miami instead of Florida State... I'd say it was a solid addition.

In regards to Georgia Tech... the B1G would fight for Georgia Tech. All of the pluses of Miami (B1G alums, Northern transplants, & big city culture) exists in the Atlanta metro area. Granted, the SEC would be in a seriously advantageous place given that Georgia Tech was a charter member and the history of opponents in the SEC, however I think whatever the B1G had to do they would do to get Tech in the fold.

A side note in regards to duplicate schools. The B1G would stand to earn more money off of Southern Schools than the SEC if for no other reason than higher carriage fees. The SEC already gets top dollar for states comprising the league. To the extent that there are duplicates in existing states, the carriage fee don't go up, which could cause revenue per school to dip. So IMO the B1G a higher probability to go to 20 because the schools that are being spoken about as expansion candidates reside in the SEC footprint already except KU, OU, NC, & VA.

In regards to Syracuse... I saw them joining the B1G before the ACC, but crap happens. They are not the football school they once were which drives the bus nowadays. I'd like UConn over the Cuse as they have just as solid a presence in NYC and Boston. Furthermore UConn is the land grant university in their state and gets WAAAAAY more state support. The Cuse has a fabulous Northeast basketball program and I agree cold develop great rivalries to cement the eastern B1G but if I only had one slot, I'd vote for UConn without hesitating.

Boston College... uh, no. UConn is by far the better New England program. UConn has no competition from pro sports in their state, as opposed to BC which has turned into an afterthought in their own city since Big East Basketball is no longer there. Other than Hockey I see no comparisons that BC wins over UConn.

Pitt... Don't need them. They are overshadowed in their on city by Penn State. We wouldn't gain anything but extra mouth to feed.

Notre Dame... Ah, the Irish. The only way to the Irish is their non-revenue sports. They need a place to park them. I joked with my friend, an ACC fan, that the Irish wanted to play just the tip and the Big East and later the ACC spread eagle for them. I've come to the place that I'm happy with them being independent.

Sorta went on a bit of a circuitous route to say that for both the B1G and SEC adding teams from states you already occupy is a no go. I think that Va Tech and NC State are the clear additions for the SEC. If the B1G is to go to 20 the absolute musts are: UVA, UNC, GT, a Florida School, & Texas. The last spot should be a cage match between UConn, Duke, Syracuse, Oklahoma, Kansas, & Mizzou (I still think they want in the B1G).

(01-30-2016 09:10 PM)Big Ron Buckeye Wrote:  

(01-30-2016 06:06 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(01-30-2016 03:33 PM)Big Ron Buckeye Wrote:  http://espn.go.com/blog/bigten/post/_/id...-expansion

Interesting article. The focus is rightly on the Mid-Atlantic, however it is my opinion that the recruiting areas of the ACC are still a little more saturated with talent than those of the B1G. On the other hand, the ACC shares it's most talent laden areas with the SEC to the South and to a lesser degree with the B1G to the North.

The most interesting part of this to me though is the shift of top end talent and how quickly it has happened. To branch that out a little further... Virginia in the Tidewater area and the suburbs of DC are loaded & in North Carolina the talent level is increasing as well. And it goes without saying the talent levels in Texas, Florida, and Georgia are consistently among the best in the nation.

While i wouldnt expect the changes to be as drastic as with the proximate NYC/DC areas, I wonder if an expansion to 20 that included Virginia, North Carolina, Georgia Tech, Florida State, and Texas would yield similar results.

I also look at how much Texas talent the non-Texas based schools have in the Big12 and also consider the dearth of Texas talent on the Nebraska roster since leaving the Big12 and say... for the sake of the B1G West schools maybe we double down on Texas with Houston.

First, I'm not surprised with this. Second I think a move into Virginia and North Carolina would yield similar results if the ACC otherwise remained the same. The problem is that it wouldn't and the SEC would most assuredly go after those states as well.

In the latter instance I think the recruiting battles between the SEC and Big 10 in those states would be relatively tit for tat. Move South of there however and I think you hit some significant barriers. Most kids want to play closer to home. The kids you get out of the Southeast now (a lot of which are in Florida) tend to be kids that grew up in the North and going to a Big 10 school is like returning home.

The move in Florida for the Big 10 would be Miami. Though not the brand they once were, the area is nonetheless tied to the Northeast and has a high % of retired Big 10 alums. Tallahassee on the other hand is a spit away from Thomasville, Georgia, and Dothan, Alabama. Many of their kids come from the panhandle area of Florida which is decidedly not made up of Big 10 retirees.

Since the SEC would likely get a bit defensive if you moved South of North Carolina, but less so in Atlanta, I would think the offers to Clemson and Florida State would be quickly forthcoming if the SEC believed the Big 10 was serious. ESPN might be a bit reactionary about those brands as well.

I do see a significant opportunity for the Big 10 to move to 20 however. Syracuse, North Carolina, Virginia and Duke would be a helluva lure for N.D.. Before you get reactionary allow me to say if we were moving to a P3 of 20 schools each (which would be likely with a Big 10 move to 20) then N.D. is going to have to go somewhere.

Syracuse helps cement the basketball crowds of the Northeast and their football would be competitive. But more importantly they would tie the Northeastern lacrosse crowds into the Big 10. Do that and pick up the Mid Atlantic lacrosse schools and you gain academics, the greater foothold in North Carolina and the Beltway than the SEC would with N.C. State and Virginia Tech, and it leaves the Irish really nowhere else to go. Then the question of who to take between Georgia Tech, Boston College (big market & great hockey) and Pitt becomes the relative question on how to get #20.

The SEC would likely take N.C. State & Virginia Tech, solidify its in state rivals with F.S.U., Clemson, and Georgia Tech and then would have a choice to make between Louisville & Miami, or possibly look at taking a second Texas school or a new market.

Thanks for Replying JRsec.

In regards to NC State and Va Tech... I think the SEC is interested in them regardless of what the B1G does. New markets, similar culture, win all the way around. Furthermore, I feel like the B1G has a stiffy for UVA, UNC, and possible Duke so there won't be a bidding war for those two schools. And if bringing UVA, UNC, and Duke would mean the B1G winning half of the recruiting battles in those states... I'm all for it. MAJOR WIN!!!

In regards to South of Charlotte... The SEC has been, is, and IMO always be in the dominant position of power. Name the school south of North Carolina that would say no to an SEC invite (sans the GORs penalty). Excluding finances which are a wash, the big card that the B1G has to play is academics, specifically with regard to graduate level research.

In regards to Miami... A goodly portion of the talent in Florida resides south of Interstate 4, As do a great deal of former B1G Alums, as do a great deal of Northern transplants, additionally the culture IMO is similar to that of the Northeast (with of course the exception of weather) . So I agree with you that they would be a solid play on the Florida market. They only reason I think FSU would get the nod is because they are a public school with considerably more support. Miami has a major problem filling up a stadium (even when they are winning). But at the end of the day if we end up with Miami instead of Florida State... I'd say it was a solid addition.

In regards to Georgia Tech... the B1G would fight for Georgia Tech. All of the pluses of Miami (B1G alums, Northern transplants, & big city culture) exists in the Atlanta metro area. Granted, the SEC would be in a seriously advantageous place given that Georgia Tech was a charter member and the history of opponents in the SEC, however I think whatever the B1G had to do they would do to get Tech in the fold.

A side note in regards to duplicate schools. The B1G would stand to earn more money off of Southern Schools than the SEC if for no other reason than higher carriage fees. The SEC already gets top dollar for states comprising the league. To the extent that there are duplicates in existing states, the carriage fee don't go up, which could cause revenue per school to dip. So IMO the B1G a higher probability to go to 20 because the schools that are being spoken about as expansion candidates reside in the SEC footprint already except KU, OU, NC, & VA.

In regards to Syracuse... I saw them joining the B1G before the ACC, but crap happens. They are not the football school they once were which drives the bus nowadays. I'd like UConn over the Cuse as they have just as solid a presence in NYC and Boston. Furthermore UConn is the land grant university in their state and gets WAAAAAY more state support. The Cuse has a fabulous Northeast basketball program and I agree cold develop great rivalries to cement the eastern B1G but if I only had one slot, I'd vote for UConn without hesitating.

Boston College... uh, no. UConn is by far the better New England program. UConn has no competition from pro sports in their state, as opposed to BC which has turned into an afterthought in their own city since Big East Basketball is no longer there. Other than Hockey I see no comparisons that BC wins over UConn.

Pitt... Don't need them. They are overshadowed in their on city by Penn State. We wouldn't gain anything but extra mouth to feed.

Notre Dame... Ah, the Irish. The only way to the Irish is their non-revenue sports. They need a place to park them. I joked with my friend, an ACC fan, that the Irish wanted to play just the tip and the Big East and later the ACC spread eagle for them. I've come to the place that I'm happy with them being independent.

Sorta went on a bit of a circuitous route to say that for both the B1G and SEC adding teams from states you already occupy is a no go. I think that Va Tech and NC State are the clear additions for the SEC. If the B1G is to go to 20 the absolute musts are: UVA, UNC, GT, a Florida School, & Texas. The last spot should be a cage match between UConn, Duke, Syracuse, Oklahoma, Kansas, & Mizzou (I still think they want in the B1G).

I disagree about teams South of North Carolina and I disagree about carriage fees. You can't build a viable model for the future without brands. At some point we make the move to content driven pay models and that point is probably only about a decade away. The SEC would almost certainly offer F.S.U. & Clemson. They are the two most SEC like schools in our footprint and their history and in state rivals would insist upon it.

Yes that's right. The gentlemen's agreement was a term Slive used to ask that Florida State & Clemson not be nominated by Florida & South Carolina both of which were concerned that if conferences continued to grow the OOC games with their in state rivals (the games that drive donations for season ticket books) would be in jeopardy. The SEC needed two new markets to activate its renegotiation clause. So the agreement wasn't about excluding in state rivals, but was about fulfilling the clause that allowed us to renegotiate our value. Slive made that requirement only for 13th & 14th positions. If ESPN loses the ACC they will no longer stand in the way of the SEC going after those two.

Their culture is more closely aligned with ours. Their fans and more importantly their BMD's will turn the Big 10 down and would run out any administration that opposed them.

North Carolina, Duke, & Virginia are more Beltway than Southern now. They are the ones who will care about lacrosse, basketball, and doing what is necessary to preserve that culture. And if the Irish decide they want in I don't see the Big 10 turning them down.

So N.C. State, Virginia Tech, Clemson, & Florida State would most certainly be headed to the SEC if the Big 10 raids the Beltway boys. Tech is on the bubble with us. They don't add to our value in a great way, but the politicians in Georgia expressed their desire to see them return to the SEC should the ACC implode. The Georgia Tech / Auburn game was the Deep South's oldest rivalry until the series ended in the late 70's. We are 1 and a half hours from each others campus and both are right off of I85. Add Georgia and Clemson to the rest of Tech's oldest rivals and you begin to see their dilemma. Just ask GTS where he would want the Jackets if the ACC was no longer viable.

So you can lay out a plot of what you might like to have, but that doesn't mean that they necessarily want you. That goes for our desires as well.

Right now I don't see anyone moving anywhere for probably at least a good 7 years unless enough schools from a conference get placed for dissolution. The networks, conferences, and schools are all concerned about where the economy and the future models of payout for athletics are headed. Realignment is going to be on hold until they have a clearer picture of their future and the courses they need to pursue to capitalize on what changes may come. So IMO we wait.

There are a few big questions with regards to expansion and most of them revolve around financial viability. Proximity and culture are the notable exceptions but even academics boil down to finances if you look at research dollars & higher quality applicants willing to pay more for a perceived better education. But we'll just have to agree to disagree about the financial impact of adding extra schools from states already in the conference fold.
While i agree that brands are fiercely important (no other reason to add Nebraska over Mizzou), i can't ignore what i see in the present system. There is a definite benefit to adding a new market even if the football team is mediocre. Per your post the SEC needed new markets, not SEC like programs in SEC states, to get the network up and running. I'm not downplaying brands, I'm just saying that given the present model, all else being held constant, A school not presently in your footprint is more valuable than one in your footprint. I dont even consider that a stretch in logic.
Now yes people have to turn on the TV and fill up the stadium and Brands play an enormous role in that but i dont see how the SEC makes mire money of Georgia Tech than does the B1G.

(01-31-2016 12:00 AM)Big Ron Buckeye Wrote:  There are a few big questions with regards to expansion and most of them revolve around financial viability. Proximity and culture are the notable exceptions but even academics boil down to finances if you look at research dollars & higher quality applicants willing to pay more for a perceived better education. But we'll just have to agree to disagree about the financial impact of adding extra schools from states already in the conference fold.
While i agree that brands are fiercely important (no other reason to add Nebraska over Mizzou), i can't ignore what i see in the present system. There is a definite benefit to adding a new market even if the football team is mediocre. Per your post the SEC needed new markets, not SEC like programs in SEC states, to get the network up and running. I'm not downplaying brands, I'm just saying that given the present model, all else being held constant, A school not presently in your footprint is more valuable than one in your footprint. I dont even consider that a stretch in logic.
Now yes people have to turn on the TV and fill up the stadium and Brands play an enormous role in that but i dont see how the SEC makes mire money of Georgia Tech than does the B1G.

Just remember that all things will not remain equal. Streaming will eventually shift the emphasis toward brands over markets because as we start to measure value by actual viewers the brands will be sure to deliver year in and year out while good ole State U from semi large state might not.

As to Georgia Tech I realize they would have more value to the Big 10 than the SEC, I'm just saying sometimes politics and culture get involved. Florida State would make us money, but in the current changing model not as much as Virginia Tech or N.C. State. In the model we are heading toward both Florida State and Clemson would be more valuable than N.C. State and possibly Virginia Tech.

I'd say for all of the talk that Oklahoma is actually more valuable to the SEC than to the Big 10, but that one is at least close.

But all of this is why I posted the thread on Time, Monetary Disparity, and Pressure. It is truly advantage Big 10 & SEC.

(01-31-2016 12:28 AM)JRsec Wrote:  

(01-31-2016 12:00 AM)Big Ron Buckeye Wrote:  There are a few big questions with regards to expansion and most of them revolve around financial viability. Proximity and culture are the notable exceptions but even academics boil down to finances if you look at research dollars & higher quality applicants willing to pay more for a perceived better education. But we'll just have to agree to disagree about the financial impact of adding extra schools from states already in the conference fold.
While i agree that brands are fiercely important (no other reason to add Nebraska over Mizzou), i can't ignore what i see in the present system. There is a definite benefit to adding a new market even if the football team is mediocre. Per your post the SEC needed new markets, not SEC like programs in SEC states, to get the network up and running. I'm not downplaying brands, I'm just saying that given the present model, all else being held constant, A school not presently in your footprint is more valuable than one in your footprint. I dont even consider that a stretch in logic.
Now yes people have to turn on the TV and fill up the stadium and Brands play an enormous role in that but i dont see how the SEC makes mire money of Georgia Tech than does the B1G.

Just remember that all things will not remain equal. Streaming will eventually shift the emphasis toward brands over markets because as we start to measure value by actual viewers the brands will be sure to deliver year in and year out while good ole State U from semi large state might not.

As to Georgia Tech I realize they would have more value to the Big 10 than the SEC, I'm just saying sometimes politics and culture get involved. Florida State would make us money, but in the current changing model not as much as Virginia Tech or N.C. State. In the model we are heading toward both Florida State and Clemson would be more valuable than N.C. State and possibly Virginia Tech.

I'd say for all of the talk that Oklahoma is actually more valuable to the SEC than to the Big 10, but that one is at least close.

But all of this is why I posted the thread on Time, Monetary Disparity, and Pressure. It is truly advantage Big 10 & SEC.

Inasmuch as the model going forward turns to streaming is to the extent that actual viewers will drive money to the most successful brands. Totally agree with that. But I'll counter and say the larger your area the more naturally people root for the area team. UCLA is the second most valuable brand in the Pac12 with no other good reason than they are located on LA. That was the case way before cable and remains today. Population does not mean everything but it certainly doesnt hurt.

With respect to Syracuse, I would want to see how their basketball program adjusts to life post-Boeheim. Greg Robinson really killed their football program. If the current cable model changes, I don't think Syracuse would be a viable add.

UConn is a different story. While their football hasn't been strong during their time in FBS, their basketball IS a nationwide brand and would enhance the Big 10 brand. Academically they aren't AAU...yet...but they are working on it. But there's no rush to grab them either. And adding them for football won't change any recruiting dynamics.

I think the Big 10 would go South before they go any further to the Northeast though.

(01-30-2016 03:33 PM)Big Ron Buckeye Wrote:  http://espn.go.com/blog/bigten/post/_/id...-expansion

Interesting article. The focus is rightly on the Mid-Atlantic, however it is my opinion that the recruiting areas of the ACC are still a little more saturated with talent than those of the B1G. On the other hand, the ACC shares it's most talent laden areas with the SEC to the South and to a lesser degree with the B1G to the North.

The most interesting part of this to me though is the shift of top end talent and how quickly it has happened. To branch that out a little further... Virginia in the Tidewater area and the suburbs of DC are loaded & in North Carolina the talent level is increasing as well. And it goes without saying the talent levels in Texas, Florida, and Georgia are consistently among the best in the nation.

While i wouldnt expect the changes to be as drastic as with the proximate NYC/DC areas, I wonder if an expansion to 20 that included Virginia, North Carolina, Georgia Tech, Florida State, and Texas would yield similar results.

I also look at how much Texas talent the non-Texas based schools have in the Big12 and also consider the dearth of Texas talent on the Nebraska roster since leaving the Big12 and say... for the sake of the B1G West schools maybe we double down on Texas with Houston.

Texas will NEVER and I repeat NEVER go to the B1G without a contingent of its regional partners, and the B1G will never add enough off their partners to do it.. A big portion of the value of Texas is based on the regional rivalries. IMO, they wouldn't even think of it with just OU coming either. The league would be too northern centric for them, they would absolutely get drilled in recruiting against the SEC. They also don't want to play football in cold weather in late Oct or Nov.

Texas will either anchor a remade Big 12 with some leftover ACC parts preferably if FSU & Clemson are made available. They may be willing to anchor a pod of 6 schools for the PAC 12, but I don't think they want to go west due to lack of exposure. Unless they can have it in the contract all major sports road games start by 7-8 CST.

(01-30-2016 10:34 PM)JRsec Wrote:  So N.C. State, Virginia Tech, Clemson, & Florida State would most certainly be headed to the SEC if the Big 10 raids the Beltway boys. Tech is on the bubble with us. They don't add to our value in a great way, but the politicians in Georgia expressed their desire to see them return to the SEC should the ACC implode. The Georgia Tech / Auburn game was the Deep South's oldest rivalry until the series ended in the late 70's. We are 1 and a half hours from each others campus and both are right off of I85. Add Georgia and Clemson to the rest of Tech's oldest rivals and you begin to see their dilemma. Just ask GTS where he would want the Jackets if the ACC was no longer viable.

The ideal GT solution is for there to be two megaconferences (Big12+SEC+ACC // B1G + Pac-12 + Cuse + UCONN + BC + ND). Barring that, the ACC through some unfathomable way boots the northern flank and picks up most of the SEC-East and maybe Auburn. Which aint gonna happen.

The list of teams GT is interested in playing is pretty short: UGAg, Clemson, ND, Auburn, TN, Duke, UNC, FSU, VT, UF, Bama, UVA ... more or less in that order. You can probably toss in NCST/WF/Ole Miss/Miss St/Vandy in the "we'd prefer these before random people" bin.

The only way I see GT swallowing all of that and going to the B1G is a stupid huge payday. I mean HUGE dollars. Because the GTAA is essentially functionally bankrupt. They are deeply in debt and doing just well enough to keep it from getting worse and stay on pay off schedule. How in debt? Enough that Fitch does a credit worthiness analysis every year... http://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20...ations-Rev

So, the payday would have to be big enough that they'd not only make serious headway at the debt, but offset a nearly guaranteed 10-15K less per game in football attendance and 3-7K less per game in basketball attendance. I'm sure the halfbackers from Michigan and Ohio State would fill the visiting sections and then some in Atlanta. But everybody else -- and I mean EVERYBODY ELSE in the B1G doesn't move the needle. I can guarantee we'd sell more tickets to actual GT fans to play Mississippi State than we would everybody in the B1G. Basketball would be from a percentages standpoint and even bigger falloff, since the basketball product is so bad visiting fans outnumber GT fans now at most of the "name brand opponent" home games.

Lastly, I feel as though membership of the B1G would serve to only further entrench The Hill at GT, which has spent the last 20 years feverishly throwing up extra academic hurdles. GT is really close to a generational ebb. Deeply in debt. A football program that is 7-6 nearly every year but clocked in an impressive worst-in-a-generation 3-9 this year. A basketball program at the lowest it has been in probably 2 generations and so on life support thanks to Paul Hewitt's contract we can't even fire the incompetent *** clown running the show now because there isn't any money for it. Oh yea -- and baseball and volleyball now stink too. The only thing that hasn't gone down the toilet is golf. Woopie. The current AD came from Xavier --- MOTHER ****ING XAVIER --- which has no football program. Not exactly a P5 promotional bell ringer. And lastly, U(sic)GA has TOTAL control of the GABOR. They effectively have the key to the biggest set of handcuffs GT has right now athletically: restricted majors. And I really mean total control of the GABOR. They gave UGAg an engineering program. But it'll be a cold day in hell before they dare give GT any major liberal arts program.



TL;DR:
1) GT is pretty broken right now.
--- Seriously in debt
--- Historically bad in all the sports that matter
--- Pretty bad in the ones that don't as well
--- The AD inspires ZERO confidence
--- Huge academic recruiting restrictions (both on qualifications and lack of majors)
--- Has no say so or even a fair fight within the GABOR to redress academic grievances

2) The B1G is a poor fit for GT
--- No interest in playing anybody in the league. Seriously. And deep DISINTEREST in playing most of the league.
--- Zero cultural fits
--- Zero academic fits (Northwestern is predicated upon liberal arts)

3) GT's interests are generally split among the ACC/SEC
--- ACC: Clemson, Duke, UNC, FSU, VT, UVA, ND
--- SEC: U(sic)GA, Auburn, TN, UF, Bama
--- GT prefers the academics of the ACC greatly
--- GT prefers the football first culture of the SEC greatly
--- GT prefers the overall mission of the ACC more: To compete in all sports at the highest levels and be good academically. The ACC doesn't really want to be the SEC. It wants to be the Pac-12 of the East Coast.

4) Given #3, the only way GT goes anywhere is if the ACC is either no longer viable or a chunk of GT's interest in the ACC goes elsewhere or a paycheck so outlandishly huge comes along it makes everything else irrelevant. Which is difficult to imagine.

(02-05-2016 06:23 PM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:  

(01-30-2016 10:34 PM)JRsec Wrote:  So N.C. State, Virginia Tech, Clemson, & Florida State would most certainly be headed to the SEC if the Big 10 raids the Beltway boys. Tech is on the bubble with us. They don't add to our value in a great way, but the politicians in Georgia expressed their desire to see them return to the SEC should the ACC implode. The Georgia Tech / Auburn game was the Deep South's oldest rivalry until the series ended in the late 70's. We are 1 and a half hours from each others campus and both are right off of I85. Add Georgia and Clemson to the rest of Tech's oldest rivals and you begin to see their dilemma. Just ask GTS where he would want the Jackets if the ACC was no longer viable.

The ideal GT solution is for there to be two megaconferences (Big12+SEC+ACC // B1G + Pac-12 + Cuse + UCONN + BC + ND). Barring that, the ACC through some unfathomable way boots the northern flank and picks up most of the SEC-East and maybe Auburn. Which aint gonna happen.

The list of teams GT is interested in playing is pretty short: UGAg, Clemson, ND, Auburn, TN, Duke, UNC, FSU, VT, UF, Bama, UVA ... more or less in that order. You can probably toss in NCST/WF/Ole Miss/Miss St/Vandy in the "we'd prefer these before random people" bin.

The only way I see GT swallowing all of that and going to the B1G is a stupid huge payday. I mean HUGE dollars. Because the GTAA is essentially functionally bankrupt. They are deeply in debt and doing just well enough to keep it from getting worse and stay on pay off schedule. How in debt? Enough that Fitch does a credit worthiness analysis every year... http://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20...ations-Rev

So, the payday would have to be big enough that they'd not only make serious headway at the debt, but offset a nearly guaranteed 10-15K less per game in football attendance and 3-7K less per game in basketball attendance. I'm sure the halfbackers from Michigan and Ohio State would fill the visiting sections and then some in Atlanta. But everybody else -- and I mean EVERYBODY ELSE in the B1G doesn't move the needle. I can guarantee we'd sell more tickets to actual GT fans to play Mississippi State than we would everybody in the B1G. Basketball would be from a percentages standpoint and even bigger falloff, since the basketball product is so bad visiting fans outnumber GT fans now at most of the "name brand opponent" home games.

Lastly, I feel as though membership of the B1G would serve to only further entrench The Hill at GT, which has spent the last 20 years feverishly throwing up extra academic hurdles. GT is really close to a generational ebb. Deeply in debt. A football program that is 7-6 nearly every year but clocked in an impressive worst-in-a-generation 3-9 this year. A basketball program at the lowest it has been in probably 2 generations and so on life support thanks to Paul Hewitt's contract we can't even fire the incompetent *** clown running the show now because there isn't any money for it. Oh yea -- and baseball and volleyball now stink too. The only thing that hasn't gone down the toilet is golf. Woopie. The current AD came from Xavier --- MOTHER ****ING XAVIER --- which has no football program. Not exactly a P5 promotional bell ringer. And lastly, U(sic)GA has TOTAL control of the GABOR. They effectively have the key to the biggest set of handcuffs GT has right now athletically: restricted majors. And I really mean total control of the GABOR. They gave UGAg an engineering program. But it'll be a cold day in hell before they dare give GT any major liberal arts program.



TL;DR:
1) GT is pretty broken right now.
--- Seriously in debt
--- Historically bad in all the sports that matter
--- Pretty bad in the ones that don't as well
--- The AD inspires ZERO confidence
--- Huge academic recruiting restrictions (both on qualifications and lack of majors)
--- Has no say so or even a fair fight within the GABOR to redress academic grievances

2) The B1G is a poor fit for GT
--- No interest in playing anybody in the league. Seriously. And deep DISINTEREST in playing most of the league.
--- Zero cultural fits
--- Zero academic fits (Northwestern is predicated upon liberal arts)

3) GT's interests are generally split among the ACC/SEC
--- ACC: Clemson, Duke, UNC, FSU, VT, UVA, ND
--- SEC: U(sic)GA, Auburn, TN, UF, Bama
--- GT prefers the academics of the ACC greatly
--- GT prefers the football first culture of the SEC greatly
--- GT prefers the overall mission of the ACC more: To compete in all sports at the highest levels and be good academically. The ACC doesn't really want to be the SEC. It wants to be the Pac-12 of the East Coast.

4) Given #3, the only way GT goes anywhere is if the ACC is either no longer viable or a chunk of GT's interest in the ACC goes elsewhere or a paycheck so outlandishly huge comes along it makes everything else irrelevant. Which is difficult to imagine.

A lot of what you say about the financial picture of Georgia Tech reminds me of Maryland. At any rate my opinion regarding a Southern B1G Division is that there would have to be 1. A critical mass of at least proximate teams and 2. A shite-load of cash. It is my opinion that #2 would be easier than #1.

Just for argument sake assuming the current division were to be untouched you'd need 7 to create a southern division. Texas plus 6 ACC teams would be a critical mass that wouldnt require a stupid amountof games to be played in Iowa or Minnesota in November. The problem with that many teams is it hardly feels like a conference if you see non-division teamd once every 7 years or so.

(02-05-2016 09:04 PM)Big Ron Buckeye Wrote:  

(02-05-2016 06:23 PM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:  

(01-30-2016 10:34 PM)JRsec Wrote:  So N.C. State, Virginia Tech, Clemson, & Florida State would most certainly be headed to the SEC if the Big 10 raids the Beltway boys. Tech is on the bubble with us. They don't add to our value in a great way, but the politicians in Georgia expressed their desire to see them return to the SEC should the ACC implode. The Georgia Tech / Auburn game was the Deep South's oldest rivalry until the series ended in the late 70's. We are 1 and a half hours from each others campus and both are right off of I85. Add Georgia and Clemson to the rest of Tech's oldest rivals and you begin to see their dilemma. Just ask GTS where he would want the Jackets if the ACC was no longer viable.

The ideal GT solution is for there to be two megaconferences (Big12+SEC+ACC // B1G + Pac-12 + Cuse + UCONN + BC + ND). Barring that, the ACC through some unfathomable way boots the northern flank and picks up most of the SEC-East and maybe Auburn. Which aint gonna happen.

The list of teams GT is interested in playing is pretty short: UGAg, Clemson, ND, Auburn, TN, Duke, UNC, FSU, VT, UF, Bama, UVA ... more or less in that order. You can probably toss in NCST/WF/Ole Miss/Miss St/Vandy in the "we'd prefer these before random people" bin.

The only way I see GT swallowing all of that and going to the B1G is a stupid huge payday. I mean HUGE dollars. Because the GTAA is essentially functionally bankrupt. They are deeply in debt and doing just well enough to keep it from getting worse and stay on pay off schedule. How in debt? Enough that Fitch does a credit worthiness analysis every year... http://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20...ations-Rev

So, the payday would have to be big enough that they'd not only make serious headway at the debt, but offset a nearly guaranteed 10-15K less per game in football attendance and 3-7K less per game in basketball attendance. I'm sure the halfbackers from Michigan and Ohio State would fill the visiting sections and then some in Atlanta. But everybody else -- and I mean EVERYBODY ELSE in the B1G doesn't move the needle. I can guarantee we'd sell more tickets to actual GT fans to play Mississippi State than we would everybody in the B1G. Basketball would be from a percentages standpoint and even bigger falloff, since the basketball product is so bad visiting fans outnumber GT fans now at most of the "name brand opponent" home games.

Lastly, I feel as though membership of the B1G would serve to only further entrench The Hill at GT, which has spent the last 20 years feverishly throwing up extra academic hurdles. GT is really close to a generational ebb. Deeply in debt. A football program that is 7-6 nearly every year but clocked in an impressive worst-in-a-generation 3-9 this year. A basketball program at the lowest it has been in probably 2 generations and so on life support thanks to Paul Hewitt's contract we can't even fire the incompetent *** clown running the show now because there isn't any money for it. Oh yea -- and baseball and volleyball now stink too. The only thing that hasn't gone down the toilet is golf. Woopie. The current AD came from Xavier --- MOTHER ****ING XAVIER --- which has no football program. Not exactly a P5 promotional bell ringer. And lastly, U(sic)GA has TOTAL control of the GABOR. They effectively have the key to the biggest set of handcuffs GT has right now athletically: restricted majors. And I really mean total control of the GABOR. They gave UGAg an engineering program. But it'll be a cold day in hell before they dare give GT any major liberal arts program.



TL;DR:
1) GT is pretty broken right now.
--- Seriously in debt
--- Historically bad in all the sports that matter
--- Pretty bad in the ones that don't as well
--- The AD inspires ZERO confidence
--- Huge academic recruiting restrictions (both on qualifications and lack of majors)
--- Has no say so or even a fair fight within the GABOR to redress academic grievances

2) The B1G is a poor fit for GT
--- No interest in playing anybody in the league. Seriously. And deep DISINTEREST in playing most of the league.
--- Zero cultural fits
--- Zero academic fits (Northwestern is predicated upon liberal arts)

3) GT's interests are generally split among the ACC/SEC
--- ACC: Clemson, Duke, UNC, FSU, VT, UVA, ND
--- SEC: U(sic)GA, Auburn, TN, UF, Bama
--- GT prefers the academics of the ACC greatly
--- GT prefers the football first culture of the SEC greatly
--- GT prefers the overall mission of the ACC more: To compete in all sports at the highest levels and be good academically. The ACC doesn't really want to be the SEC. It wants to be the Pac-12 of the East Coast.

4) Given #3, the only way GT goes anywhere is if the ACC is either no longer viable or a chunk of GT's interest in the ACC goes elsewhere or a paycheck so outlandishly huge comes along it makes everything else irrelevant. Which is difficult to imagine.

A lot of what you say about the financial picture of Georgia Tech reminds me of Maryland. At any rate my opinion regarding a Southern B1G Division is that there would have to be 1. A critical mass of at least proximate teams and 2. A shite-load of cash. It is my opinion that #2 would be easier than #1.

Just for argument sake assuming the current division were to be untouched you'd need 7 to create a southern division. Texas plus 6 ACC teams would be a critical mass that wouldnt require a stupid amountof games to be played in Iowa or Minnesota in November. The problem with that many teams is it hardly feels like a conference if you see non-division teamd once every 7 years or so.

Here is why I believe realignment in the future is going to be different than most folks think:
1. I believe Delany when he said they want to be more of a presence in the East.
2. Actually better basketball brands given the Big 10 more umph for two reasons. There are better basketball brands to be had who are also fine research institutions. And the Big 10's football is still predicated on the same 5 or 6 brands which are highly popular and profitable no matter what may come.
3. To expand toward the East means that the Big 10 could enhance its hockey or hoops, but certainly gain momentum in lacrosse. By doing this the staunchly Midwestern conference embraces part of what it means to be Northeastern.

Duke, Virginia, North Carolina, Syracuse, and Notre Dame all fit together because of this culture and would solidify control of the Northeastern/Beltway region for the Big 10. In this scenario Georgia Tech becomes the West Virginia of the Big 10, not academically, but geographically. Therefore that move IMO won't happen.

The SEC and it's region are roughly synonymous. We like playing other Southern schools during the regular season. Virginia Tech & N.C. State would only add to our market reach and slowly bring a meld of our culture with the Southern roots of what are now beltway states. Their presence would be important for what would eventually be the defining money maker for both the SEC & Big 10. Picking up Florida State, Clemson, Georgia Tech, and either Miami or Louisville would complete the solidification of college sports among large/historic institutions in the South.

Once those two moves are achieved then partnering the Big 10 with the SEC for a slate of basketball, women's basketball, soccer, football, softball, volleyball, gymnastics, swimming, track & field (indoor & outdoor) and baseball competitions annually would be a way to boost ratings not only for the major three sports, but almost all sports across the board. It becomes the conference equivalent of Michigan vs Ohio State or Auburn vs Alabama.

The Big 10 keeps its historical ties to the Rose Bowl and the SEC to the Sugar Bowl, but many of the other bowls become SEC vs Big 10 annual affairs. While we hook up now about 3 or 4 times in a bowl season we could make it as many as 6 times in the future, plus 1 annual game on each others regular schedules across all sports. These kinds of competitions could give the Big 10 a way of scheduling a Southern slate of baseball games in late February and March and give the SEC northern basketball experience which could only benefit our conference. It's a marketing bonanza waiting to be mined.

The obstacles are the buffer conferences: ACC which keeps the SEC from having a complete grip on the Southeast and the Big 10 from solidifying the Northeast as Big 10 country. The only border that would then be left between the two conferences becomes the historic one that defines our rivalry. The Big 12 simply stands in between having a neutral but viable opponent to the West (the PAC) which could also be included on both of our conferences slate of sports for a series a year. Moving them into the Big 12 footprint via expansion places them more firmly next to the SEC & Big 12 and quickens the interest in their sports by proximity and future scheduling.

I only add this. Eliminating two sets of conference overheads is the equivalent for the schools and networks of eliminating two schools from the pie for everyone's sake. Sell the corporate property of the two conferences and divide it among their former member schools. FOX, ESPN and others would have less legal work to do and an easier time managing the scheduling of their events if we moved to a P3.

I really hate the idea of a P3 and IMO it doesn't make sense. For football its terrible because if you have conference champions you have 3 spots, and then we are back to picking and choosing a 4th team for the playoff which I think is bad for the sport. I guess if they go to a 16 team playoff and eliminate the CCG's its not as bad about choosing between team 16 & 17 but I really liked the idea of taking the human element out of it and letting teams play their way in like the NFL.

Also, with a P3 what is really the point of having 3 separate leagues negotiating their own deals? You know the B1G & SEC will be competitive with each other and if the PAC 12 had the best of the Big 12 with the way their network works by paying expenses up front and owning all their profits they should be able to be similar in revenues. Why not just have 64 teams and 4 leaguse and let one governing body negotiate the tv deals and create one revenue stream for conference networks or streaming?

I don't even like 64, I think its too small. I prefer 72 to 80. If you cut out large parts of the country, I think people will tend to gravitate more towards pro sports. I understand fans of Cincy, Temple, Houston, Memphis to name a few don't drive those markets but their involvement definitely increases interest in the overall viewing of the sport. Also, leaving wide areas of the country like New Mexico, Nevada, Idaho with Boise St. out all together.

(01-30-2016 09:10 PM)Big Ron Buckeye Wrote:  

(01-30-2016 06:06 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(01-30-2016 03:33 PM)Big Ron Buckeye Wrote:  http://espn.go.com/blog/bigten/post/_/id...-expansion

Interesting article. The focus is rightly on the Mid-Atlantic, however it is my opinion that the recruiting areas of the ACC are still a little more saturated with talent than those of the B1G. On the other hand, the ACC shares it's most talent laden areas with the SEC to the South and to a lesser degree with the B1G to the North.

The most interesting part of this to me though is the shift of top end talent and how quickly it has happened. To branch that out a little further... Virginia in the Tidewater area and the suburbs of DC are loaded & in North Carolina the talent level is increasing as well. And it goes without saying the talent levels in Texas, Florida, and Georgia are consistently among the best in the nation.

While i wouldnt expect the changes to be as drastic as with the proximate NYC/DC areas, I wonder if an expansion to 20 that included Virginia, North Carolina, Georgia Tech, Florida State, and Texas would yield similar results.

I also look at how much Texas talent the non-Texas based schools have in the Big12 and also consider the dearth of Texas talent on the Nebraska roster since leaving the Big12 and say... for the sake of the B1G West schools maybe we double down on Texas with Houston.

First, I'm not surprised with this. Second I think a move into Virginia and North Carolina would yield similar results if the ACC otherwise remained the same. The problem is that it wouldn't and the SEC would most assuredly go after those states as well.

In the latter instance I think the recruiting battles between the SEC and Big 10 in those states would be relatively tit for tat. Move South of there however and I think you hit some significant barriers. Most kids want to play closer to home. The kids you get out of the Southeast now (a lot of which are in Florida) tend to be kids that grew up in the North and going to a Big 10 school is like returning home.

The move in Florida for the Big 10 would be Miami. Though not the brand they once were, the area is nonetheless tied to the Northeast and has a high % of retired Big 10 alums. Tallahassee on the other hand is a spit away from Thomasville, Georgia, and Dothan, Alabama. Many of their kids come from the panhandle area of Florida which is decidedly not made up of Big 10 retirees.

Since the SEC would likely get a bit defensive if you moved South of North Carolina, but less so in Atlanta, I would think the offers to Clemson and Florida State would be quickly forthcoming if the SEC believed the Big 10 was serious. ESPN might be a bit reactionary about those brands as well.

I do see a significant opportunity for the Big 10 to move to 20 however. Syracuse, North Carolina, Virginia and Duke would be a helluva lure for N.D.. Before you get reactionary allow me to say if we were moving to a P3 of 20 schools each (which would be likely with a Big 10 move to 20) then N.D. is going to have to go somewhere.

Syracuse helps cement the basketball crowds of the Northeast and their football would be competitive. But more importantly they would tie the Northeastern lacrosse crowds into the Big 10. Do that and pick up the Mid Atlantic lacrosse schools and you gain academics, the greater foothold in North Carolina and the Beltway than the SEC would with N.C. State and Virginia Tech, and it leaves the Irish really nowhere else to go. Then the question of who to take between Georgia Tech, Boston College (big market & great hockey) and Pitt becomes the relative question on how to get #20.

The SEC would likely take N.C. State & Virginia Tech, solidify its in state rivals with F.S.U., Clemson, and Georgia Tech and then would have a choice to make between Louisville & Miami, or possibly look at taking a second Texas school or a new market.

Thanks for Replying JRsec.

In regards to NC State and Va Tech... I think the SEC is interested in them regardless of what the B1G does. New markets, similar culture, win all the way around. Furthermore, I feel like the B1G has a stiffy for UVA, UNC, and possible Duke so there won't be a bidding war for those two schools. And if bringing UVA, UNC, and Duke would mean the B1G winning half of the recruiting battles in those states... I'm all for it. MAJOR WIN!!!

In regards to South of Charlotte... The SEC has been, is, and IMO always be in the dominant position of power. Name the school south of North Carolina that would say no to an SEC invite (sans the GORs penalty). Excluding finances which are a wash, the big card that the B1G has to play is academics, specifically with regard to graduate level research.

In regards to Miami... A goodly portion of the talent in Florida resides south of Interstate 4, As do a great deal of former B1G Alums, as do a great deal of Northern transplants, additionally the culture IMO is similar to that of the Northeast (with of course the exception of weather) . So I agree with you that they would be a solid play on the Florida market. They only reason I think FSU would get the nod is because they are a public school with considerably more support. Miami has a major problem filling up a stadium (even when they are winning). But at the end of the day if we end up with Miami instead of Florida State... I'd say it was a solid addition.

In regards to Georgia Tech... the B1G would fight for Georgia Tech. All of the pluses of Miami (B1G alums, Northern transplants, & big city culture) exists in the Atlanta metro area. Granted, the SEC would be in a seriously advantageous place given that Georgia Tech was a charter member and the history of opponents in the SEC, however I think whatever the B1G had to do they would do to get Tech in the fold.

A side note in regards to duplicate schools. The B1G would stand to earn more money off of Southern Schools than the SEC if for no other reason than higher carriage fees. The SEC already gets top dollar for states comprising the league. To the extent that there are duplicates in existing states, the carriage fee don't go up, which could cause revenue per school to dip. So IMO the B1G a higher probability to go to 20 because the schools that are being spoken about as expansion candidates reside in the SEC footprint already except KU, OU, NC, & VA.

In regards to Syracuse... I saw them joining the B1G before the ACC, but crap happens. They are not the football school they once were which drives the bus nowadays. I'd like UConn over the Cuse as they have just as solid a presence in NYC and Boston. Furthermore UConn is the land grant university in their state and gets WAAAAAY more state support. The Cuse has a fabulous Northeast basketball program and I agree cold develop great rivalries to cement the eastern B1G but if I only had one slot, I'd vote for UConn without hesitating.

Boston College... uh, no. UConn is by far the better New England program. UConn has no competition from pro sports in their state, as opposed to BC which has turned into an afterthought in their own city since Big East Basketball is no longer there. Other than Hockey I see no comparisons that BC wins over UConn.

Pitt... Don't need them. They are overshadowed in their on city by Penn State. We wouldn't gain anything but extra mouth to feed.

Notre Dame... Ah, the Irish. The only way to the Irish is their non-revenue sports. They need a place to park them. I joked with my friend, an ACC fan, that the Irish wanted to play just the tip and the Big East and later the ACC spread eagle for them. I've come to the place that I'm happy with them being independent.

Sorta went on a bit of a circuitous route to say that for both the B1G and SEC adding teams from states you already occupy is a no go. I think that Va Tech and NC State are the clear additions for the SEC. If the B1G is to go to 20 the absolute musts are: UVA, UNC, GT, a Florida School, & Texas. The last spot should be a cage match between UConn, Duke, Syracuse, Oklahoma, Kansas, & Mizzou (I still think they want in the B1G).

Welcome. As an ND fan, I have always been there.

(02-05-2016 06:23 PM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:  

(01-30-2016 10:34 PM)JRsec Wrote:  So N.C. State, Virginia Tech, Clemson, & Florida State would most certainly be headed to the SEC if the Big 10 raids the Beltway boys. Tech is on the bubble with us. They don't add to our value in a great way, but the politicians in Georgia expressed their desire to see them return to the SEC should the ACC implode. The Georgia Tech / Auburn game was the Deep South's oldest rivalry until the series ended in the late 70's. We are 1 and a half hours from each others campus and both are right off of I85. Add Georgia and Clemson to the rest of Tech's oldest rivals and you begin to see their dilemma. Just ask GTS where he would want the Jackets if the ACC was no longer viable.

The ideal GT solution is for there to be two megaconferences (Big12+SEC+ACC // B1G + Pac-12 + Cuse + UCONN + BC + ND). Barring that, the ACC through some unfathomable way boots the northern flank and picks up most of the SEC-East and maybe Auburn. Which aint gonna happen.

The list of teams GT is interested in playing is pretty short: UGAg, Clemson, ND, Auburn, TN, Duke, UNC, FSU, VT, UF, Bama, UVA ... more or less in that order. You can probably toss in NCST/WF/Ole Miss/Miss St/Vandy in the "we'd prefer these before random people" bin.

The only way I see GT swallowing all of that and going to the B1G is a stupid huge payday. I mean HUGE dollars. Because the GTAA is essentially functionally bankrupt. They are deeply in debt and doing just well enough to keep it from getting worse and stay on pay off schedule. How in debt? Enough that Fitch does a credit worthiness analysis every year... http://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20...ations-Rev

So, the payday would have to be big enough that they'd not only make serious headway at the debt, but offset a nearly guaranteed 10-15K less per game in football attendance and 3-7K less per game in basketball attendance. I'm sure the halfbackers from Michigan and Ohio State would fill the visiting sections and then some in Atlanta. But everybody else -- and I mean EVERYBODY ELSE in the B1G doesn't move the needle. I can guarantee we'd sell more tickets to actual GT fans to play Mississippi State than we would everybody in the B1G. Basketball would be from a percentages standpoint and even bigger falloff, since the basketball product is so bad visiting fans outnumber GT fans now at most of the "name brand opponent" home games.

Lastly, I feel as though membership of the B1G would serve to only further entrench The Hill at GT, which has spent the last 20 years feverishly throwing up extra academic hurdles. GT is really close to a generational ebb. Deeply in debt. A football program that is 7-6 nearly every year but clocked in an impressive worst-in-a-generation 3-9 this year. A basketball program at the lowest it has been in probably 2 generations and so on life support thanks to Paul Hewitt's contract we can't even fire the incompetent *** clown running the show now because there isn't any money for it. Oh yea -- and baseball and volleyball now stink too. The only thing that hasn't gone down the toilet is golf. Woopie. The current AD came from Xavier --- MOTHER ****ING XAVIER --- which has no football program. Not exactly a P5 promotional bell ringer. And lastly, U(sic)GA has TOTAL control of the GABOR. They effectively have the key to the biggest set of handcuffs GT has right now athletically: restricted majors. And I really mean total control of the GABOR. They gave UGAg an engineering program. But it'll be a cold day in hell before they dare give GT any major liberal arts program.



TL;DR:
1) GT is pretty broken right now.
--- Seriously in debt
--- Historically bad in all the sports that matter
--- Pretty bad in the ones that don't as well
--- The AD inspires ZERO confidence
--- Huge academic recruiting restrictions (both on qualifications and lack of majors)
--- Has no say so or even a fair fight within the GABOR to redress academic grievances

2) The B1G is a poor fit for GT
--- No interest in playing anybody in the league. Seriously. And deep DISINTEREST in playing most of the league.
--- Zero cultural fits
--- Zero academic fits (Northwestern is predicated upon liberal arts)

3) GT's interests are generally split among the ACC/SEC
--- ACC: Clemson, Duke, UNC, FSU, VT, UVA, ND
--- SEC: U(sic)GA, Auburn, TN, UF, Bama
--- GT prefers the academics of the ACC greatly
--- GT prefers the football first culture of the SEC greatly
--- GT prefers the overall mission of the ACC more: To compete in all sports at the highest levels and be good academically. The ACC doesn't really want to be the SEC. It wants to be the Pac-12 of the East Coast.

4) Given #3, the only way GT goes anywhere is if the ACC is either no longer viable or a chunk of GT's interest in the ACC goes elsewhere or a paycheck so outlandishly huge comes along it makes everything else irrelevant. Which is difficult to imagine.

If you're the B1G and you're adding North Carolina, Duke, and Virginia, you might as well bring GIT aboard as well....

I don't see a non-AAU school getting in the B1G unless it's a special case like Notre Dame or possibly FSU

That means no to Syracuse and UConn

(02-05-2016 06:23 PM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:  The only way I see GT swallowing all of that and going to the B1G is a stupid huge payday. I mean HUGE dollars. Because the GTAA is essentially functionally bankrupt. They are deeply in debt and doing just well enough to keep it from getting worse and stay on pay off schedule. How in debt? Enough that Fitch does a credit worthiness analysis every year... http://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20...ations-Rev

I just read on the Hokies forum that GT has raised $275 million for its athletic programs. Shouldn't that amount be sufficient for capital improvements/paying down debt?

See the link below.

http://www.news.gatech.edu/2016/01/19/ca...ic-fashion