RE: What if Pitt, Syracuse, and BC petitioned to be voted out/released from ACC?
I like this thread, and everyone's responses.
Everyone has an opinion, and it's great - seeing those thoughts and opinions help get a cross-section of what you all think.
And I think that has value.
So for example, when I see some consider the 3 schools as "the bottom" and happy to see them go, yet others saying that playing those schools in the northeast has value - I think something can be assessed from that.
The three clearly have value, have things they bring to the table, but that value apparently is getting overlooked.
So let's look at this from Pittsburgh's point of view.
And for this, I'm going to presume that their leadership is not this: "Hey I don't care what happens on the long term - 2036 is a long ways off and by then I'll be off to my next job, so the losses will be someone else's headache. I'll just sit on my backside and pretend that there are no long term concerns to investigate, because nobody wants to hear that right now. I'll just take credit for keeping things where they are. Then I'll leave before the rough waters start."
By the way, in any company, a manager with that attitude should be fired.
So let's presume the leadership at Pittsburgh is as aware of things that are going on as we are (more, likely).
We see all over the internet that ACC/B12/PAC potentially being poached by B10 or SEC is what is driving things right now.
But the thing is, to be real, there are only so many "seats" available.
For example, not that long ago, people were talking about what G5 schools the B12 needed to survive. Memphis appears near the top of every short list.
But look what happened when the PAC schools appeared to be available. Suddenly Memphis is no longer a part of the conversation.
Even now that things "seem" to be cooling as far as the PAC and the B10, everyone is in a holding pattern. - Do you (B12) accept schools now, if you think PAC may still be available later? It's a conundrum.
And PAC not having a exit fee, and media rights nearing an end, really makes them seem the most vulnerable.
But the PAC isn't going to invite Pittsburgh for one of its open seats.
Neither is SEC. And Pitt would seem to be rather low on the list of B10's choices. These days, Kansas is even sounding higher.
Now add that to the current upheavals in the media industry - including a certain shift for more live and unscripted programming for ota broadcast - and sports is at the head of the line on that.
Plus the changes coming due to NIL, paying players, revamping the CFP, and honestly, revamping the NCAA itself.
And what happened with UConn could be seen as a cautionary tale. In that game of musical chairs, it didn't get one of the available chairs - Pittsburgh did that time - and they (UConn) ended up on the outside looking in.
Pitt should not be feeling comfortable.
Every day is a step closer to 2036, and anytime between now and then, the music will stop. And when it does, there are a lot of other schools that will get a chair (an invite) before Pitt.
So if you want a seat at the table, you need to act now.
Waiting for a one-time payout from leaving members may be nice on the short term, but it's not bright for the long term.
So what are your options? B10 and SEC only seem to want the southern ACC schools. And what's left when they are done will not likely be part of P3 or 4 by any means.
Same with the PAC, plus it's on the other side of the country.
And as we are even still finding out (e.g. news about a Penn state offer leading to the additions of Maryland and Rutgers) - geography matters.
Will the Big12 likely survive? yes.
Kansas is in a similar situation as Pitt, and much of the rest of the B12 would seem to be only "desperation" invites. Other conferences: "We need a quick backfill, so we'll take the best we can."
And it's interesting that the B12 is grabbing so many of those "best of" options. Common consensus seems to be Memphis, SMU, and USF are the next best choices. Colorado state became less of one once Colorado appeared to possibly be on the table.
And would anyone leave the B12 for the PAC, for the same or less money and knowing that tomorrow the Big10 could invite 2-4 (or more) PAC schools and spoil your day?
So B12 is not likely going anywhere.
Plus the B12 now will have Cin and WV. Two long time rivals from the past.
And going to the B12, you suddenly are higher in the pecking order in a conference, and would likely have more of a voice going forward.
So based on all of the above, and more, joining the B12 would appear to be the best long term option Pittsburgh can make.
The only reasons I see against it is if you were to believe that the ACC is not going to be poached of it's 4 or more biggest brands/schools at some point between now and 2036. Does anyone seriously believe that?
And no backfill makes up for that. Especially since the B12 seems to be grabbing up all the best of the G5.
Plus, if the ACC was planning on sticking around they would have grabbed Cin and maybe others, to solidify regions, markets, and geography. But they haven't. One could argue that's due to the media deal, but I doubt that - media deals typically have expansion clauses. So it's likely because more members = more potential no votes when it's time for the wanna-be leavers to leave.
So ok, moving forward on this idea. the next thing you need to do is to create a pod to make scheduling easier, to make yourself even more attractive to the B12. So you bring Syracuse, and maybe Boston College along. With the added benefit that it turns their possible no votes into yes votes.
For the B12, that helps make WV and Cin happy. and is a pod of 4 or 5.
And add SMU, USF, and Memphis, and you (B12) lock down most of the rest of ACC's backfill options. And add Memphis to that eastern pod for 6 - that's a division.
That's 3 divisions of 6:
East - Pittsburgh, Syracuse, BC, Cin, WV, Memphis
Central/FL - IA state, KS state, KS, OK state, USF, UCF
Texas/BYU - Baylor, TCU, SMU, Houston, Texas tech, BYU
Or arrange them however else.
And if 24 is the target, there's still room for a west division of the 4 corners, plus 2 more.
Yes, Pitt and Kansas would still be waiting and hoping for that B10 invite. But is it better for Pitt to wait in the ACC for that B10 invite that may never happen, and be left with only a few bad options the closer they get to 2036? Because it's doubtful if even the B12 would be willing or interested at that point. And suddenly Pitt feels a bit like UConn of the past. Looking at an ACC that looks a little too similar to the old AAC...
Or should they take advantage of the current realignment climate and see if they can negotiate a vote to leave now. And even better - leave as friends. Avoiding the previous animosity that we've seen between KS/MO, or cal to ucla, etc.
Anyway, I'm still wondering if anyone sees any downside to this. And so far, I'm only hearing short term advantages.
Can anyone think of any others?
(This post was last modified: 08-04-2022 03:51 AM by Skyhawk.)
|