(10-18-2023 05:50 AM)LaBradfordsTWill Wrote:  I read somewhere that Oregon State and Washington State are trying to get invites to either the Big 12 or the ACC after their court cases are finalized and they know if they are keeping the Pac 12 monies. Anyone else hearing rumors on this? I still firmly believe the ACC needs to grab these two now before any defections happen.

I am not even sure if ESPN is going to pay for them. ESPN may pay for one school but I doubt they would pay for both.

The ACC doesn’t really need to expand now unless FSU and/or Clemson leaves. If one school leaves, we should stay at 16. If both of them leave, invite USF.

(10-18-2023 10:37 AM)Garrettabc Wrote:  I feel like there is no long future with west coast teams. Stanford and Cal was a too good to be true flash sale, but if one or both move on, you are then stuck with the 2 least desirable former Pac12 schools. You would have to cut them off, I don’t see any other way to make it work. In the mean time, if they are added, it wouid give Stan and Cal travel partners and former conference foes.

SMU would still be safe.

100%!

The ACC should be thinking "bridge", not "travel partners". This ain't no car pool lane!

OTOH, 20 members is probably inevitable. Don't want to wait for leftovers.!

(10-18-2023 12:02 PM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  

(10-18-2023 10:37 AM)Garrettabc Wrote:  I feel like there is no long future with west coast teams. Stanford and Cal was a too good to be true flash sale, but if one or both move on, you are then stuck with the 2 least desirable former Pac12 schools. You would have to cut them off, I don’t see any other way to make it work. In the mean time, if they are added, it wouid give Stan and Cal travel partners and former conference foes.

SMU would still be safe.

100%!

The ACC should be thinking "bridge", not "travel partners". This ain't no car pool lane!

OTOH, 20 members is probably inevitable. Don't want to wait for leftovers.!

Then pry away Central Florida, Cincinnati, and West Virginia. Get to 20 for football.

It's 900 miles from SF to Pullman Washington. They are not in any sense of the word a travel partner for anyone except Idaho or Gonzaga.

The fact of the matter is that WSU belongs in a conference with Montana, Boise State, Gonzaga, Utah State, Victoria, BC, Alberta, Calgary and Simon Fraser.

Not only is Pullman spatially isolated in Washington State, they are in direct athletic ticket sales competition with Idaho. Admittedly Idaho is small but it's there, and it pulls at least 5,000 football fans that might otherwise attend a game in Pullman as a means of entertainment. The politics for WSU are bad in the State of Washington and always have been.

Oregon State is another matter. But Washington State is a no.

(10-18-2023 01:08 PM)BePcr07 Wrote:  

(10-18-2023 12:02 PM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  

(10-18-2023 10:37 AM)Garrettabc Wrote:  I feel like there is no long future with west coast teams. Stanford and Cal was a too good to be true flash sale, but if one or both move on, you are then stuck with the 2 least desirable former Pac12 schools. You would have to cut them off, I don’t see any other way to make it work. In the mean time, if they are added, it wouid give Stan and Cal travel partners and former conference foes.

SMU would still be safe.

100%!

The ACC should be thinking "bridge", not "travel partners". This ain't no car pool lane!

OTOH, 20 members is probably inevitable. Don't want to wait for leftovers.!

Then pry away Central Florida, Cincinnati, and West Virginia. Get to 20 for football.

There is no money to be made adding West Va to the ACC. The population of WVa is tiny so ACCN money would be negligible. All West Va would do is give a boost to those ACC schools with a stadium much larger than what their home base can fill.

Pitt, UVa, Duke, GT, FSU, and Miami would get a 5000 ticket sales boost. That's just 400K. UNC, State, Clemson, and VT get nothing as they sell out their stadiums. Also, no one wants to travel to Morgantown in the winter for a basketball game. UCF adds nothing that could not be obtained by adding USF.

I’m wondering when will the ACC have to start paying the new members a full share? Will the new members open up any tentalizing new bowl ties?

(10-18-2023 02:44 PM)Garrettabc Wrote:  I’m wondering when will the ACC have to start paying the new members a full share? Will the new members open up any tentalizing new bowl ties?

1. In 9 years

2. Maybe, but which ones? Will bowls even be a thing when the CFP expands to 12 teams?

Wanna get back the Independence Bowl vs Big XII?
Las Vegas Bowl vs Big Ten?
Alamo Bowl vs Big XII?
LA Bowl vs MWC?

Also, what to do about the Holiday and Sun Bowls vs... the ACC?

Personally, I like the Alamo Bowl because it's indoors, in a dome.
The LA and Las Vegas Bowls have really nice stadiums, too.
Shreveport can keep their bowl...

Holiday bowl, ACC vs BigTen bowl: Stan vs Minni, Cal vs Iowa, VT vs UCLA, Pitt vs Wash, etc. The formula is 1 west coast school and 1 other.

Alamo bowl, ACC vs B12, no examples needed.

Could the ACC get back the Gator bowl? It could be one of the better non playoff bowls.

There is another way to look at this. Which are the two most valuable possible additions left to the Big 12 outside of schools in the ACC? Oregon State and Washington State. What G5 schools would be the most likely targets for the Big 12?
San Diego State and South Florida. They don't need Colorado State, and Fresno State isn't in the recruiting grounds that San Diego State is.

If the goal of the ACC is to be the 3rd power conference left standing at the end of this realignment then the safest move to make, is to take Oregon State, Washington State, San Diego State, and South Florida.

Even if the ACC loses Clemson, Florida State, North Carolina and Virginia you have acquired the pieces necessary for the survival of the Big 12 which could still loose Kansas and is likely looking at Gonzaga as a replacement for that kind of hoops star quality.

With those schools in hand and the ACC contracted payout guaranteed you can pull T.C.U., Cincinnati, Iowa State, West Virginia or the Arizona schools and Colorado to complete a whole West Coast division if that's what you wanted.

Yormark, has been building with the assumption that he would eventually pick up the ACC remnant. Beat him to the punch! Take those he would take if he didn't think he was going to take yours. Then cherrypick what you want from his.

The only way the Big 12 is guaranteed to be the 3rd conference is if the ACC does nothing else.

Let's say hypothetically that you lose the four I listed to the SEC and Notre Dame and Kansas join the Big 10.

You'll have 13 schools. Two from the West Coast. Add the Arizona schools Colorado and Utah. You pay more than the Big 12. Cal and Stanford make their world better. Now you have a division of six out west.

You have SMU. It wouldn't hurt to add T.C.U. If you staggered their home and away games the ACC could have a game each week in DFW during the season. Add Kansas State, Oklahoma State, Baylor, and Texas Tech. You know have a division of 6 in Texas.

Pick up Iowa State, and them to B.C., Pitt, Louisville, Syracuse and Virginia Tech you have another division of 6.

What's left? Duke, Georgia Tech, Miami, N.C. State, South Florida, Wake Forest.

You have added one G5 already in SMU. You add another in South Florida.

All the rest of your additions are current P schools.

With that lineup you are the undisputed 3rd conference. Travel is cut down by having 4 regional divisions.

The perks and ways to milk more revenue you get from conference semis and finals. Plus you keep the ACCN and it is literally coast to coast.

Whem everybody gets a full share in 9 years I don’t think the ACC will be making much more than if they have not expanded at all, but at least the legacy schools get that much needed shot in the arm. If everybody can stick together for 9 years, then what’s another 4?

In the case of Stanford and Cal, I wonder if they actually liked playing WOSU? They can still play them OOC. SDSU is kinda intriguing especially if they can keep it going in basketball. USF gets thrown around all the time, I still like them. UConn is another I want. That would be my 20. The bar has been set, all 3 wouid have to come in at a significantly reduced rate.

Could have 4 pods of 5 with USF and SDSU in the western pod. Since FSU looks so far down on USF from their ivory tower, FSU and USF rarely play.

Pod 1 - FSU, UL, GT, SU, Pitt
Pod 2 - UM, BC, VT, Wake, NCSU
Pod 3 - Clem, UNC, UConn, Duke, UVA
Pod 4 - USF, SMU, Cal, Stan, SDSU

By my calculations, the teams in Pods 1-3 wouid need to travel to California once every 2.5 years. I think that’s doable.

(09-08-2023 08:07 AM)LaBradfordsTWill Wrote:  

(09-08-2023 07:54 AM)AeroWolf Wrote:  There is no pressing need to expand at this time. The next expansion cycle will be in 5-6 years. When the BIG, SEC, BigXII reach their next media contract renegotiation. What the ACC will do will be slightly in reaction to how Fox and ESPN manage those three conferences.

It is likely that the ACC will react in the following ways,
1. Replenishment if teams leave likely targets USF, UCF, Uconn, tulane, Cincinnati
2. Westward Expansion KU, UAz, AzSU, Utah, TCU/Baylor

The main goal is too keep the ACCN profitable on paid linear programming (Cable, or streaming) and desirable for major DMA local affiliate OTA programming.

I just can't see Kansas, Arizona, Arizona State, TCU, and Baylor ever wanting to be in the ACC. Utah I can see to maybe to get away from BYU and be associated with the academic schools. The Bearcats might bite, UCF might, and USF/Tulane are easy adds. UConn has political obstacles with certain ACC schools that pose some problems for them.

Not that it’s likely to happen, but there are scenarios where B12 teams become viable expansion candidates for the ACC. The ACC conference payouts could materially exceed the B12 after 2030. ESPN may want to further invest in the ACCN, offering the ACC higher payouts if it enters new markets. The 4C schools depend on California-based out of state students, there is an economic argument for these schools to consider the new ACC to enhance California exposure.

The point is, we don’t know the circumstances that schools will face in 5 to 6 years.

Add Tulane. I love going to New Orleans.

(10-19-2023 11:00 AM)Shannon Panther Wrote:  Add Tulane. I love going to New Orleans.

Nole fans have an easy drive to NOLA and they always turn out well there. If Tulane is in the ACC, it wouid be smart bidnizz to have FSU vs Tulane as an annual. I’m not saying they should be in the ACC, just a limited observation.

(10-19-2023 11:38 AM)Garrettabc Wrote:  

(10-19-2023 11:00 AM)Shannon Panther Wrote:  Add Tulane. I love going to New Orleans.

Nole fans have an easy drive to NOLA and they always turn out well there. If Tulane is in the ACC, it wouid be smart bidnizz to have FSU vs Tulane as an annual. I’m not saying they should be in the ACC, just a limited observation.

IMO, Tulane offers more than Vanderbilt. I had much rather dine in Metairie, take drinks and have beignets in the quarters than visit the Grand Ole Opry and Tulane is usually more competitive in the actual game.

(09-08-2023 07:30 AM)LaBradfordsTWill Wrote:  I know these schools don't seemingly add any value to the payouts, but there would be travel partners for Cal and Stanford. The ACC could go to a pod system to alleviate travel expenses.

The bolded statement says it all. You are right that these three programs would need to be financially subsidized by other ACC programs.

There are at least three programs (FSU, Clemson & UNC) that are claiming an existential threat to the relevancy of their athletic departments resulting from relatively low media payouts. Four additional programs (UVa, VT, NCS & Miami) sufficiently agreed with the dire financial situation that they spearheaded a coalition to add meaningful performance incentives to conference distributions. The three newbies (Cal, SMU & Stanford) already sacrificed their media payouts as part of their conference invitations. So there are already 10 no votes to any expansion with financially dilutive programs.

B12 programs may never become available, but it’s worth the wait to find out.

Any potential ACC expansion candidate from the G5 should do their due diligence with the Pac situation first.

(10-19-2023 11:43 AM)JRsec Wrote:  

(10-19-2023 11:38 AM)Garrettabc Wrote:  

(10-19-2023 11:00 AM)Shannon Panther Wrote:  Add Tulane. I love going to New Orleans.

Nole fans have an easy drive to NOLA and they always turn out well there. If Tulane is in the ACC, it wouid be smart bidnizz to have FSU vs Tulane as an annual. I’m not saying they should be in the ACC, just a limited observation.

IMO, Tulane offers more than Vanderbilt. I had much rather dine in Metairie, take drinks and have beignets in the quarters than visit the Grand Ole Opry and Tulane is usually more competitive in the actual game.

100%!

(09-09-2023 11:21 AM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  

(09-09-2023 10:19 AM)CardFan1 Wrote:  

(09-08-2023 12:47 PM)ChrisLords Wrote:  If there are no B12 candidates available in 2030-2031, then maybe.... OSU and WSU do bring new states and WSU brought good ratings during the Mike Leach era. And USF is a go if FSU leaves. But I think B12 teams will be an option some of which are geographically compatible.

ACC needs to keep a close eye on USF if any inkling of Big 12 or B1G (AAU) moving in on them . ACC would do well to invite USF now . I think only FSU would be a No vote for 18

^^^ THIS ^^^

Zactly FSU...their administration and Internet fanbois stupidly and openly created drama and hurt the ACC. They played their hand.

Bring in USF now and build a FSU replacement. I'd guess the vast majority of ACC fans would love a trip to Tampa Bay occasionally (or Orlando after 2031).

I much prefer FSU to stay...but they obviously think the SEC and or B1G will give them happy endings.

https://x.com/ad_rickhart/status/1715421...OBPKLg0WDw

(10-20-2023 02:20 PM)Pony94 Wrote:  https://x.com/ad_rickhart/status/1715421...OBPKLg0WDw

Got the ACC stationary, it’s official now.