Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Post Reply 
If the SEC did expand again and did so from the ACC who should we take and why?
Author Message
Bookmark and Share
JRsec Offline
Super Moderator
*

Posts: 31,861
Joined: Mar 2012
Reputation: 4741
I Root For: SEC
Location:
Post: #1
If the SEC did expand again and did so from the ACC who should we take and why?
Given the potential gap in earnings between an SEC w/network and an ACC wo/network perhaps it is time we gave equal consideration to growth from our neighbor and fellow ESPN property. So who do you think the SEC should pursue, how should we pursue them, and what contingencies do you foresee?

Of course I follow the popular sentiment that the SEC should seek schools from North Carolina and Virginia. So should the ACC expand by adding 3 from the Big 12 and the SEC could grow to 16 from the ACC by consent of the two conferences and the network then I would very much be in favor of the ACC taking Texas, Oklahoma, and Oklahoma State and N.C. State and Virginia Tech coming over the the SEC so that the ACC lost no footprint, while gaining 29 million more potential viewers. I still believe that would be a huge win win for ESPN and I believe for both conferences. The two could mirror each other for rivalries and yet would contain arguably the best football talent and at least equal basketball talent to any other conference. The LHN could be morphed into an ACCN and the income gap closed.

Then the two conferences might look like this:
SEC: Kentucky, N.C. State, South Carolina, Virginia Tech
Auburn, Florida, Georgia, Vanderbilt
Alabama, Mississippi, Mississippi State, Tennessee
Arkansas, L.S.U., Missouri, Texas A&M

ACC: Miami, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Texas
Boston College, Louisville, Pittsburgh, Syracuse
Duke, North Carolina, Virginia, Wake Forest
Clemson, Florida State, Georgia Tech, Wake Forest
*Notre Dame

But, should the Big 10 refuse to cooperate by taking Kansas and another and the PAC decide to stand pat then this workaround could only happen at the end of the GOR. Otherwise the SEC and ACC would both have to move to 18 to take enough Big 12 schools to end the GOR. In that case Oklahoma State and Kansas State/Baylor/West Virginia to the SEC with Kansas/Kansas State/Baylor/WVU and Iowa State to the ACC in addition to the previous schools named would still get it done.

Each conference could then have 3 divisions of 6 with a wild card in the Conference Championship Series.

The SEC might look something like this:
Arkansas, Kansas, Louisiana State, Missouri, Oklahoma State, Texas A&M

Alabama, Auburn, Florida, Georgia, Mississippi, Mississippi State

Kentucky, N.C. State, South Carolina, Tennessee, Vanderbilt, Virginia Tech

The ACC might look something like this:
Baylor, Iowa State, Kansas State, Oklahoma, Texas, Texas Tech

Clemson, Florida State, Georgia Tech, North Carolina, Miami, Wake Forest

Boston College, Duke, Pittsburgh, Syracuse, Virginia, West Virginia

*Notre Dame

Now I don't know about you guys but those are two very solid conferences.
(This post was last modified: 08-17-2014 02:52 AM by JRsec.)
08-10-2014 07:38 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Advertisement


hawghiggs Offline
All American
*

Posts: 3,792
Joined: May 2008
Reputation: 124
I Root For: Arkansas
Location:
Post: #2
RE: If the SEC did expand again and did so from the ACC who should we take and why?
This doesn't answer your question. But I would go with Cincinnati and SMU.
08-10-2014 10:57 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
jhawkmvp Offline
2nd String
*

Posts: 443
Joined: Dec 2013
Reputation: 35
I Root For: Kansas
Location: Over the Rainbow
Post: #3
RE: If the SEC did expand again and did so from the ACC who should we take and why?
The first scenario is not going to happen with just Texas, OU, and OSU. Texas politics would eviscerate the Longhorns if OU got to protect OSU and Texas left TTU, Baylor, and TCU behind, not to mention doubling up in OK (TX would be fine) in a 3 school addition would not be the best use of an expansion slot. A&M would have the inside track to surpassing UT in FB permanently, if they moved like this. Texas will require at least 1, and more likely 2 TX schools. Also, to be honest, I don't think Texas and OU would find that move all that appealing. They would have much less control and influence there as well. I think they only move if 4-6 B12 schools move there, just like FSU and Clemson/GT were not interested in a B12 move without 4-6 schools going together. Also Texas despises Miami due to some issues in the past. That division would not thrill Texas.

I think your second scenario is much more plausible. This scenario fits better with what I think Texas would need.
(This post was last modified: 08-11-2014 01:02 AM by jhawkmvp.)
08-11-2014 12:44 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
He1nousOne Offline
The One you Love to Hate.
*

Posts: 13,285
Joined: Oct 2011
Reputation: 215
I Root For: Iowa/ASU
Location: Arizona
Post: #4
RE: If the SEC did expand again and did so from the ACC who should we take and why?
(08-11-2014 12:44 AM)jhawkmvp Wrote:  The first scenario is not going to happen with just Texas, OU, and OSU. Texas politics would eviscerate the Longhorns if OU got to protect OSU and Texas left TTU, Baylor, and TCU behind, not to mention doubling up in OK (TX would be fine) in a 3 school addition would not be the best use of an expansion slot. A&M would have the inside track to surpassing UT in FB permanently, if they moved like this. Texas will require at least 1, and more likely 2 TX schools. Also, to be honest, I don't think Texas and OU would find that move all that appealing. They would have much less control and influence there as well. I think they only move if 4-6 B12 schools move there, just like FSU and Clemson/GT were not interested in a B12 move without 4-6 schools going together. Also Texas despises Miami due to some issues in the past. That division would not thrill Texas.

I think your second scenario is much more plausible. This scenario fits better with what I think Texas would need.

In the end, I think we will see one more big realignment upheaval and either the ACC or B12 will get absorbed into the other four conferences. If Dodds is right in his article on the O'Bannon decision this could happen soon.

07-coffee3

I do believe I said something about Dodd recently.
08-11-2014 01:03 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
jhawkmvp Offline
2nd String
*

Posts: 443
Joined: Dec 2013
Reputation: 35
I Root For: Kansas
Location: Over the Rainbow
Post: #5
RE: If the SEC did expand again and did so from the ACC who should we take and why?
(08-11-2014 01:03 AM)He1nousOne Wrote:  
(08-11-2014 12:44 AM)jhawkmvp Wrote:  The first scenario is not going to happen with just Texas, OU, and OSU. Texas politics would eviscerate the Longhorns if OU got to protect OSU and Texas left TTU, Baylor, and TCU behind, not to mention doubling up in OK (TX would be fine) in a 3 school addition would not be the best use of an expansion slot. A&M would have the inside track to surpassing UT in FB permanently, if they moved like this. Texas will require at least 1, and more likely 2 TX schools. Also, to be honest, I don't think Texas and OU would find that move all that appealing. They would have much less control and influence there as well. I think they only move if 4-6 B12 schools move there, just like FSU and Clemson/GT were not interested in a B12 move without 4-6 schools going together. Also Texas despises Miami due to some issues in the past. That division would not thrill Texas.

I think your second scenario is much more plausible. This scenario fits better with what I think Texas would need.

In the end, I think we will see one more big realignment upheaval and either the ACC or B12 will get absorbed into the other four conferences. If Dodds is right in his article on the O'Bannon decision this could happen soon.

07-coffee3

I do believe I said something about Dodd recently.

Yes. I agree with your posts in other threads (if I remember correctly) that the next move will be a huge one. I hope he is right that is happens soon. It was also interesting to see his the elite of the elite consolidation comment. Sounds like there might be less than 65 schools when all is said and done since the P5 would be the elite. But he really did not go into detail with it.
08-11-2014 01:16 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
He1nousOne Offline
The One you Love to Hate.
*

Posts: 13,285
Joined: Oct 2011
Reputation: 215
I Root For: Iowa/ASU
Location: Arizona
Post: #6
RE: If the SEC did expand again and did so from the ACC who should we take and why?
(08-11-2014 01:16 AM)jhawkmvp Wrote:  
(08-11-2014 01:03 AM)He1nousOne Wrote:  
(08-11-2014 12:44 AM)jhawkmvp Wrote:  The first scenario is not going to happen with just Texas, OU, and OSU. Texas politics would eviscerate the Longhorns if OU got to protect OSU and Texas left TTU, Baylor, and TCU behind, not to mention doubling up in OK (TX would be fine) in a 3 school addition would not be the best use of an expansion slot. A&M would have the inside track to surpassing UT in FB permanently, if they moved like this. Texas will require at least 1, and more likely 2 TX schools. Also, to be honest, I don't think Texas and OU would find that move all that appealing. They would have much less control and influence there as well. I think they only move if 4-6 B12 schools move there, just like FSU and Clemson/GT were not interested in a B12 move without 4-6 schools going together. Also Texas despises Miami due to some issues in the past. That division would not thrill Texas.

I think your second scenario is much more plausible. This scenario fits better with what I think Texas would need.

In the end, I think we will see one more big realignment upheaval and either the ACC or B12 will get absorbed into the other four conferences. If Dodds is right in his article on the O'Bannon decision this could happen soon.

07-coffee3

I do believe I said something about Dodd recently.

Yes. I agree with your posts in other threads (if I remember correctly) that the next move will be a huge one. I hope he is right that is happens soon. It was also interesting to see his the elite of the elite consolidation comment. Sounds like there might be less than 65 schools when all is said and done since the P5 would be the elite. But he really did not go into detail with it.

It is comments like that which make me believe in the possibility of him being the sounding board for some folks. It is public comments like that which can stir certain decision makers to action and thus help others in the negotiations.

I don't think it will ever come to something as drastic as what you are speaking of. Another compromise will be made but that threat of the elite moving on, it is the same as the threat of the P5 moving on from the rest. That threat will help get the job done.
08-11-2014 08:32 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Advertisement


10thMountain Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 7,310
Joined: Jan 2008
Reputation: 340
I Root For: A&M, TCU
Location:
Post: #7
RE: If the SEC did expand again and did so from the ACC who should we take and why?
As I've said before, the only additions to the SEC worth making are a combo of UNC/NCSU/UVA/VT to bring in 18 million more people to the footprint
08-11-2014 10:46 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
JRsec Offline
Super Moderator
*

Posts: 31,861
Joined: Mar 2012
Reputation: 4741
I Root For: SEC
Location:
Post: #8
RE: If the SEC did expand again and did so from the ACC who should we take and why?
Quite frankly the other scenario is that the ACC can't get a network started anytime soon because FOX, YES, and Raycom refuse to sell the material they purchased for 7 years back in time to make one count. 2017 could easily become 2021. Tick Tock.

Let's assume that the SEC is able to make 40 million per team by 2017 and the ACCN is still 4 years away and the Big 10 is in the second year of new contract that pays them 42 million per school. How long before an ACC bumped up to maybe 24 million a year by 2017 crumbles under the pressure.

Pitt, Boston College, Syracuse, Virginia, Duke, and North Carolina would fill out the Big 10 in a wonderful fashion. They get a New York school, add Massachusetts to their footprint, gain a bigger portion of Pennsylvania and add North Carolina and Virginia to their footprint. If N.D. makes a tough choice to join them because of the company traveling with them then perhaps Duke gets left out.

That means the SEC becomes rock solid in the South. Clemson, Florida State, Virginia Tech, N.C. State, Georgia Tech, and either Louisville, Miami, or Duke round it out to 20.

Wake is out and at that point I have to believe the PACN caves into ESPN or FOX or both and picks up 8 of the Big 12 schools (everyone but T.C.U. and West Virginia). The P5 becomes the P4 and 65 shrinks to a very solid 60.

The tough luck for West Virginia is that it takes 12 to dissolve the ACC. With six going to the Big 10 and six going to the SEC they are odd man out. It takes 8 to dissolve the Big 12. Last in would be the first out there.

Why would the SEC take those schools now? 1.40 per subscription within their footprint. Now the profit becomes how much of your footprint can you saturate. F.S.U. Clemson, and Louisville would help saturate their states. N.C. State and Virginia Tech are new large markets at 1.40 per household. The question then becomes does Duke add enough in hoops, and whether Georgia Tech's viewership for football would add up to enough. Miami carries households outside of the footprint but not a great deal more of Florida than F.S.U. and the Gators can claim already.

West Virginia or a second Texas school would be nice, but I doubt we would move past 20, although if there was a conference that could justify it with some quality teams remaining it would be the SEC. (Miami, West Virginia, Duke, Georgia Tech would make for a nice 24.)
(This post was last modified: 08-17-2014 02:57 AM by JRsec.)
08-11-2014 10:23 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Transic_nyc Online
1st String
*

Posts: 2,199
Joined: Jun 2014
Reputation: 154
I Root For: RU/Big Ten
Location:
Post: #9
RE: If the SEC did expand again and did so from the ACC who should we take and why?
I'm far from a pro-ACC person. However, I think we undervalue the desire of the core schools to stick together no matter what. I regard three schools as truly core: UVA, Duke and UNC. Wake is also a player in this group. Syracuse, Boston College, Pitt and Louisville, being newbies who had no guarantee of safety beyond the ACC, will also stick to this group. Notre Dame will hang with them just to avoid The Worst Fate That Could Befall Man (or TWFTCBM, for short 03-wink). So that's 9 that I count as likely to hang together. So who do that leaves:

Maryland - already switched to the Big Ten. Was considered an outlier while in the ACC

Clemson - another founding member but also one with a large number of fans only focused on football, which clashes with the interests of admins and other officials who want a more well-rounded AD

Florida State - a relative newcomer with similar issues as Clemson, a proven football power who had been in the shadow of UF until recently

Miami - was known for its baseball until those Hurricane football teams in the 80s. Private school profile make it more likely to stick to UVA-Duke-UNC group

Georgia Tech - former SEC school who would stick to the UVA-Duke-UNC group because of academics

NC State - UNC system bylaws make it difficult for them to move but potential for an A&M-type break is there for them, if they can seize it

Virginia Tech - state politics assured them a seat at the table but would they even move up further?

The way I see it is this: they already share six states with other conferences and, yet, manage to compete. What would sharing two more do to hurt more?

If there is one school that I could defend breaking the AAU seal for it is VT. They have a profile that is similar to several Big Ten school like Purdue. Their research numbers are pretty good for a non-AAU school. If they can stay in the top fifty then I think that they can fit. As well, they help solidify the DMV footprint for markets and recruiting. I think they're AAU-in-waiting.

I know both SEC and Big Ten want those two states but may end up splitting them. The Old North State would be open to you. Unless you somehow pry both UNC/Duke you may end up having to take #16 from elsewhere. There's none better than FSU. It helps with Tier 1 and makes sure that there's no better football league in the South.

How would the ACC look like after? Well, it would still have the core schools (unless the SEC convinced the Heels to jump but let's say it's the Wolfpack): VA,NC,Duke,Cuse,Pitt,Louisville,Miami,GT,Clemson,Wake,BC. That's still a decent league. One add would be UCF, which a fast-growing school in a city with not much pro competition (no NFL, no MLB). That helps address the Florida access. Football program rising, while still young. On campus stadium a big plus. Basketball needs work but that wouldn't be an issue here. 12 would be a good number but if they need more numbers then Cincy is available. I would think ND still sticks with them, as they still want those markets, plus playing in Orlando would be very appealing to them.

Sometimes money isn't everything and the core ACC schools sticking together would prove it.
08-12-2014 05:22 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
IR4CU Offline
Bench Warmer
*

Posts: 139
Joined: Apr 2012
Reputation: 26
I Root For: Clemson
Location:
Post: #10
RE: If the SEC did expand again and did so from the ACC who should we take and why?
(08-12-2014 05:22 AM)Transic_nyc Wrote:  I'm far from a pro-ACC person. However, I think we undervalue the desire of the core schools to stick together no matter what. I regard three schools as truly core: UVA, Duke and UNC. Wake is also a player in this group. Syracuse, Boston College, Pitt and Louisville, being newbies who had no guarantee of safety beyond the ACC, will also stick to this group. Notre Dame will hang with them just to avoid The Worst Fate That Could Befall Man (or TWFTCBM, for short 03-wink). So that's 9 that I count as likely to hang together. So who do that leaves:

Maryland - already switched to the Big Ten. Was considered an outlier while in the ACC

Clemson - another founding member but also one with a large number of fans only focused on football, which clashes with the interests of admins and other officials who want a more well-rounded AD

Florida State - a relative newcomer with similar issues as Clemson, a proven football power who had been in the shadow of UF until recently

Miami - was known for its baseball until those Hurricane football teams in the 80s. Private school profile make it more likely to stick to UVA-Duke-UNC group

Georgia Tech - former SEC school who would stick to the UVA-Duke-UNC group because of academics

NC State - UNC system bylaws make it difficult for them to move but potential for an A&M-type break is there for them, if they can seize it

Virginia Tech - state politics assured them a seat at the table but would they even move up further?

The way I see it is this: they already share six states with other conferences and, yet, manage to compete. What would sharing two more do to hurt more?

If there is one school that I could defend breaking the AAU seal for it is VT. They have a profile that is similar to several Big Ten school like Purdue. Their research numbers are pretty good for a non-AAU school. If they can stay in the top fifty then I think that they can fit. As well, they help solidify the DMV footprint for markets and recruiting. I think they're AAU-in-waiting.

I know both SEC and Big Ten want those two states but may end up splitting them. The Old North State would be open to you. Unless you somehow pry both UNC/Duke you may end up having to take #16 from elsewhere. There's none better than FSU. It helps with Tier 1 and makes sure that there's no better football league in the South.

How would the ACC look like after? Well, it would still have the core schools (unless the SEC convinced the Heels to jump but let's say it's the Wolfpack): VA,NC,Duke,Cuse,Pitt,Louisville,Miami,GT,Clemson,Wake,BC. That's still a decent league. One add would be UCF, which a fast-growing school in a city with not much pro competition (no NFL, no MLB). That helps address the Florida access. Football program rising, while still young. On campus stadium a big plus. Basketball needs work but that wouldn't be an issue here. 12 would be a good number but if they need more numbers then Cincy is available. I would think ND still sticks with them, as they still want those markets, plus playing in Orlando would be very appealing to them.

Sometimes money isn't everything and the core ACC schools sticking together would prove it.

I agree that Clemson is divided - most fans would rather be in the SEC while most of the faculty/admin would prefer to stay in the ACC. However, if the ACC morphed into the league you have listed above, I doubt that Clemson would willingly stay if they had any other options. The financial divide between them and South Carolina would be too great and the hit they would take from a recruiting standpoint would be substantial. I think admin and athletic dept heads would roll if they willing chose to stay in this reconfigured ACC and the admins and athletic dept folks are savvy enough to know this.
08-12-2014 05:50 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
JRsec Offline
Super Moderator
*

Posts: 31,861
Joined: Mar 2012
Reputation: 4741
I Root For: SEC
Location:
Post: #11
RE: If the SEC did expand again and did so from the ACC who should we take and why?
(08-12-2014 05:50 PM)IR4CU Wrote:  
(08-12-2014 05:22 AM)Transic_nyc Wrote:  I'm far from a pro-ACC person. However, I think we undervalue the desire of the core schools to stick together no matter what. I regard three schools as truly core: UVA, Duke and UNC. Wake is also a player in this group. Syracuse, Boston College, Pitt and Louisville, being newbies who had no guarantee of safety beyond the ACC, will also stick to this group. Notre Dame will hang with them just to avoid The Worst Fate That Could Befall Man (or TWFTCBM, for short 03-wink). So that's 9 that I count as likely to hang together. So who do that leaves:

Maryland - already switched to the Big Ten. Was considered an outlier while in the ACC

Clemson - another founding member but also one with a large number of fans only focused on football, which clashes with the interests of admins and other officials who want a more well-rounded AD

Florida State - a relative newcomer with similar issues as Clemson, a proven football power who had been in the shadow of UF until recently

Miami - was known for its baseball until those Hurricane football teams in the 80s. Private school profile make it more likely to stick to UVA-Duke-UNC group

Georgia Tech - former SEC school who would stick to the UVA-Duke-UNC group because of academics

NC State - UNC system bylaws make it difficult for them to move but potential for an A&M-type break is there for them, if they can seize it

Virginia Tech - state politics assured them a seat at the table but would they even move up further?

The way I see it is this: they already share six states with other conferences and, yet, manage to compete. What would sharing two more do to hurt more?

If there is one school that I could defend breaking the AAU seal for it is VT. They have a profile that is similar to several Big Ten school like Purdue. Their research numbers are pretty good for a non-AAU school. If they can stay in the top fifty then I think that they can fit. As well, they help solidify the DMV footprint for markets and recruiting. I think they're AAU-in-waiting.

I know both SEC and Big Ten want those two states but may end up splitting them. The Old North State would be open to you. Unless you somehow pry both UNC/Duke you may end up having to take #16 from elsewhere. There's none better than FSU. It helps with Tier 1 and makes sure that there's no better football league in the South.

How would the ACC look like after? Well, it would still have the core schools (unless the SEC convinced the Heels to jump but let's say it's the Wolfpack): VA,NC,Duke,Cuse,Pitt,Louisville,Miami,GT,Clemson,Wake,BC. That's still a decent league. One add would be UCF, which a fast-growing school in a city with not much pro competition (no NFL, no MLB). That helps address the Florida access. Football program rising, while still young. On campus stadium a big plus. Basketball needs work but that wouldn't be an issue here. 12 would be a good number but if they need more numbers then Cincy is available. I would think ND still sticks with them, as they still want those markets, plus playing in Orlando would be very appealing to them.

Sometimes money isn't everything and the core ACC schools sticking together would prove it.

I agree that Clemson is divided - most fans would rather be in the SEC while most of the faculty/admin would prefer to stay in the ACC. However, if the ACC morphed into the league you have listed above, I doubt that Clemson would willingly stay if they had any other options. The financial divide between them and South Carolina would be too great and the hit they would take from a recruiting standpoint would be substantial. I think admin and athletic dept heads would roll if they willing chose to stay in this reconfigured ACC and the admins and athletic dept folks are savvy enough to know this.

When realignment is over and the "footprint" model has done its job, Networks will likely use saturation statistics to apportion market shares rather than continuing to pay two or more conferences full money for 1 state. When that happens the conferences that have both expanded footprint and consolidated key states will have the leverage.

It is for that reason that the SEC should absolutely take Florida State, Georgia Tech and Clemson. North Carolina has too many schools to try to saturate their market and the culture of Virginia is too stratified now to call it truly Southern. Taking Virginia Tech and a North Carolina school is all the SEC needs to do there. Splitting those states will be more efficient than trying to saturate them. But in the Southeast where the SECN will be receiving $1.40 per household holding the SECN tier package it will be essential to achieve that saturation. Florida State and Clemson are important for several reasons. They are simply the two most SEC like schools outside of the SEC. So for brand protection they are important. They also have the highest attendance for all ACC schools. Cutting off any desire for the Big 10 to encroach below North Carolina is also essential for the SEC. Georgia Tech, Clemson, and F.S.U. create a barrier that puts Miami on an island and as a small private school on an island I doubt the Big 10 would come calling. Solid SEC states would then be South Carolina, Georgia, Florida, Alabama, Mississippi, Arkansas, Louisiana, and Missouri. We would only share markets of any size in Texas, Kentucky, and North Carolina and Virginia. In other words we would only truly share our borders.

Owning the most supportive region of the country to college sports, it's most attentive audience, and its best recruiting grounds would then cement SEC leverage for a long time to come.
(This post was last modified: 08-13-2014 05:11 PM by JRsec.)
08-12-2014 06:22 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Advertisement


CintiFan Offline
2nd String
*

Posts: 305
Joined: Nov 2013
Reputation: 24
I Root For: Ohio St./ Cinti
Location:
Post: #12
RE: If the SEC did expand again and did so from the ACC who should we take and why?
(08-12-2014 06:22 PM)JRsec Wrote:  
(08-12-2014 05:50 PM)IR4CU Wrote:  
(08-12-2014 05:22 AM)Transic_nyc Wrote:  I'm far from a pro-ACC person. However, I think we undervalue the desire of the core schools to stick together no matter what. I regard three schools as truly core: UVA, Duke and UNC. Wake is also a player in this group. Syracuse, Boston College, Pitt and Louisville, being newbies who had no guarantee of safety beyond the ACC, will also stick to this group. Notre Dame will hang with them just to avoid The Worst Fate That Could Befall Man (or TWFTCBM, for short 03-wink). So that's 9 that I count as likely to hang together. So who do that leaves:

Maryland - already switched to the Big Ten. Was considered an outlier while in the ACC

Clemson - another founding member but also one with a large number of fans only focused on football, which clashes with the interests of admins and other officials who want a more well-rounded AD

Florida State - a relative newcomer with similar issues as Clemson, a proven football power who had been in the shadow of UF until recently

Miami - was known for its baseball until those Hurricane football teams in the 80s. Private school profile make it more likely to stick to UVA-Duke-UNC group

Georgia Tech - former SEC school who would stick to the UVA-Duke-UNC group because of academics

NC State - UNC system bylaws make it difficult for them to move but potential for an A&M-type break is there for them, if they can seize it

Virginia Tech - state politics assured them a seat at the table but would they even move up further?

The way I see it is this: they already share six states with other conferences and, yet, manage to compete. What would sharing two more do to hurt more?

If there is one school that I could defend breaking the AAU seal for it is VT. They have a profile that is similar to several Big Ten school like Purdue. Their research numbers are pretty good for a non-AAU school. If they can stay in the top fifty then I think that they can fit. As well, they help solidify the DMV footprint for markets and recruiting. I think they're AAU-in-waiting.

I know both SEC and Big Ten want those two states but may end up splitting them. The Old North State would be open to you. Unless you somehow pry both UNC/Duke you may end up having to take #16 from elsewhere. There's none better than FSU. It helps with Tier 1 and makes sure that there's no better football league in the South.

How would the ACC look like after? Well, it would still have the core schools (unless the SEC convinced the Heels to jump but let's say it's the Wolfpack): VA,NC,Duke,Cuse,Pitt,Louisville,Miami,GT,Clemson,Wake,BC. That's still a decent league. One add would be UCF, which a fast-growing school in a city with not much pro competition (no NFL, no MLB). That helps address the Florida access. Football program rising, while still young. On campus stadium a big plus. Basketball needs work but that wouldn't be an issue here. 12 would be a good number but if they need more numbers then Cincy is available. I would think ND still sticks with them, as they still want those markets, plus playing in Orlando would be very appealing to them.

Sometimes money isn't everything and the core ACC schools sticking together would prove it.

I agree that Clemson is divided - most fans would rather be in the SEC while most of the faculty/admin would prefer to stay in the ACC. However, if the ACC morphed into the league you have listed above, I doubt that Clemson would willingly stay if they had any other options. The financial divide between them and South Carolina would be too great and the hit they would take from a recruiting standpoint would be substantial. I think admin and athletic dept heads would roll if they willing chose to stay in this reconfigured ACC and the admins and athletic dept folks are savvy enough to know this.

When realignment is over and the "footprint" model has done its job, Networks will likely use saturation statistics to apportion market shares rather than continuing to pay two or more conferences full money for 1 state. When that happens the conferences that have both expanded footprint and consolidated key states will have the leverage.

It is for that reason that the SEC should absolutely take Florida State, Georgia Tech and Clemson. North Carolina has too many schools to try to saturate their market and the culture of Virginia is to stratified now to call it truly Southern. Taking Virginia Tech and a North Carolina school is all the SEC needs to do there. Splitting those states will be more efficient than trying to saturate them. But in the Southeast where the SECN will be receiving $1.40 per household holding the SECN tier package it will be essential to achieve that saturation. Florida State and Clemson are important for several reasons. They are simply the two most SEC like schools outside of the SEC. So for brand protection they are important. They also have the highest attendance for all ACC schools. Cutting off any desire for the Big 10 to encroach below North Carolina is also essential for the SEC. Georgia Tech, Clemson, and F.S.U. create a barrier that puts Miami on an island and as a small private school on an island I doubt the Big 10 would come calling. Solid SEC states would then be South Carolina, Georgia, Florida, Alabama, Mississippi, Arkansas, Louisiana, and Missouri. We would only share markets of any size in Texas, Kentucky, and North Carolina and Virginia. In other words we would only truly share our borders.

Owning the most supportive region of the country to college sports, it's most attentive audience, and its best recruiting grounds would then cement SEC leverage for a long time to come.

One fundamental question to ask is how many spots would be available in the SEC? If the SEC stops at 16, that means only two and if I were an SEC administrator, I'd take VTech and FSU.

I don't think the core group of UVA, NC and Duke want to go anywhere, and as long as they hang together schools like Pitt, Syracuse, BC, Wake and Miami will stay with them because the have have no ready made landing spot in any other conference. I assume NC State would likewise stay.

The risk to the SEC in Va is potential competition from the BIG, but I doubt UVA would leave if NC stays. VTech, on the other hand, might be more inclined to leave but it may go BIG instead. VTech fits the BIG large, land grant, state research model to a "T" except for the lack of an AAU membership, but it is a very well regarded engineering school that academically matches up well with the likes of Purdue, Illinois, Michigan and Wisconsin. If you look on their website, you'll see that most of the schools VTech identifies as peer institutions are BIG schools and they have scheduled lots of OOC games with BIG teams over the next few years. If the SEC took VTech, that would effectively block the BIG from going south unless both UVA and UNC decided to join and that's not very likely to happen.

I know NC State is the popular choice to add with VTech, but FSU would be more important. The risk to the SEC, I think, is not so much that FSU leaves for a spot in the Big 12 or BIG, but that the ACC and Big 12 work out some sort of merger, brokered by Notre Dame and Texas, that combines most of the teams in the two conferences into a new, more powerful conference. A conference with Texas, Oklahoma, FSU, Notre Dame, Clemson and others would be a strong competitor both on the field and for media rights - directly competing with the SEC in its backyard, but having a much larger geographic reach up the east coast seaboard and nationwide with ND. The SEC might be able to derail that outcome by taking the best ACC football program off the table.
08-12-2014 10:51 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
jhawkmvp Offline
2nd String
*

Posts: 443
Joined: Dec 2013
Reputation: 35
I Root For: Kansas
Location: Over the Rainbow
Post: #13
RE: If the SEC did expand again and did so from the ACC who should we take and why?
This is why i think the next move will be radical. I think the next moves will eliminate a conference or two and will require the surviving conferences to accept most of the the B12 and/or ACC (4 or 2/3 conference model) due to GoR issues. If most of those ACC schools could double their TV money and have a place in the power structure do they still all remain unified? Almost half have joined in roughly the past decade from the Big East. So it is not like those schools have 25+ years together in the ACC, outside of the VA/NC schools for the most part. I think right now they stay unified, like mentioned, because many are worried they will lose their place at the table (as well as the fact the money discrepancy has not widened to critical levels yet). If all, or nearly all, are taken care of I think they jump at the extra money once the gap really starts to widen. JRSec's scenario lays out how it could happen well.

Financial pressure is only going to increase with the changes coming to the power conferences (stipends, trusts, maybe more depending on cases coming in the near future). The ACC is going to suffer the most under this new pressure. The B12 ADs are more profitable and less subsidized than the ACC ADs and, IMO, better equipped, in general, to handle the new financial pressures. Before August I would have put the odds as the ACC surviving over the B12 by a 2 or 3 to 1 margin. Now I think it is close to dead even on who survives. The B12 geography and lack of cohesion still hurts it, even though, financially, it is stronger. Who knows, maybe they both die in a 2-3 conference model.
(This post was last modified: 08-13-2014 11:05 AM by jhawkmvp.)
08-13-2014 11:04 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
chargeradio Offline
Vamos Morados
*

Posts: 7,099
Joined: Mar 2007
Reputation: 100
I Root For: ALA, KY, USA
Location: Louisville, KY
Post: #14
If the SEC did expand again and did so from the ACC who should we take and why?
If it becomes necessary to destroy the ACC in order for the SEC to get the schools it wants, would the Pac 12 setup an East Coast quad?

SEC adds Virginia Tech, NC State
Big 10 adds Virginia, UNC
Pac 12 adds Duke, Miami, Notre Dame, Boston College
Big 12 adds Louisville, Pittsburgh, Syracuse, Clemson, Florida State, Georgia Tech

Wake Forest joins the Big East and plays as a football-only member of the Pac 16 in place of Notre Dame
08-13-2014 05:03 PM
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
JRsec Offline
Super Moderator
*

Posts: 31,861
Joined: Mar 2012
Reputation: 4741
I Root For: SEC
Location:
Post: #15
RE: If the SEC did expand again and did so from the ACC who should we take and why?
The ESPN absorption scenario:
At 18:
SEC:
Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, N.C. State, South Carolina, Virginia Tech

Alabama, Auburn, Mississippi, Mississippi State, Tennessee, Vanderbilt

Arkansas, Baylor, Louisiana State, Missouri, Oklahoma State, Texas A&M

ACC:

Iowa State, Louisville, Kansas, Oklahoma, Texas, Texas Tech

Boston College, North Carolina, Pittsburgh, Syracuse, Virginia, West Virginia

Clemson, Duke, Florida State, Georgia Tech, Miami, Wake Forest

At 20:
SEC:
Arkansas, Kansas, Missouri, Oklahoma State, Texas Tech

Alabama, L.S.U., Mississippi, Mississippi State, Texas A&M

Auburn, Florida, Georgia, Tennessee, Vanderbilt

Kentucky, N.C. State, South Carolina, Virginia Tech, West Virginia

SEC:
Baylor, Iowa State, Kansas State, Oklahoma, Texas

Boston College, Connecticut, Notre Dame, Pittsburgh, Syracuse

Duke, Louisville, North Carolina, Virginia, Wake Forest

Clemson, Florida State, Georgia Tech, Miami, Tulane

I like 18 better.
(This post was last modified: 08-13-2014 06:35 PM by JRsec.)
08-13-2014 06:34 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
vandiver49 Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 8,530
Joined: Aug 2011
Reputation: 315
I Root For: USNA/UTK
Location: West GA
Post: #16
RE: If the SEC did expand again and did so from the ACC who should we take and why?
(08-13-2014 05:03 PM)chargeradio Wrote:  If it becomes necessary to destroy the ACC in order for the SEC to get the schools it wants, would the Pac 12 setup an East Coast quad?

SEC adds Virginia Tech, NC State
Big 10 adds Virginia, UNC
Pac 12 adds Duke, Miami, Notre Dame, Boston College
Big 12 adds Louisville, Pittsburgh, Syracuse, Clemson, Florida State, Georgia Tech

Wake Forest joins the Big East and plays as a football-only member of the Pac 16 in place of Notre Dame

I don't think so. That's just too much of a stretch and lacks a worthy enough King to keep it afloat. I think the next major play in realignment has to come from FOX with regard to whether or not they are serious in splitting the CFB empire with ESPN.

As for who the SEC gets from the ACC...I'd like to offer a a slightly unconventional team to pair with NCSU: UVA. Now, I know the probability it low but if Texas gets the partial deal a la ND, the football credibility is improved, but not stable. Thus I don't think ESPN would be willing to let VT move as such a shift would undo all the shoring the Longhorns provide.
08-14-2014 07:27 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Advertisement


jhawkmvp Offline
2nd String
*

Posts: 443
Joined: Dec 2013
Reputation: 35
I Root For: Kansas
Location: Over the Rainbow
Post: #17
RE: If the SEC did expand again and did so from the ACC who should we take and why?
(08-13-2014 05:03 PM)chargeradio Wrote:  If it becomes necessary to destroy the ACC in order for the SEC to get the schools it wants, would the Pac 12 setup an East Coast quad?

SEC adds Virginia Tech, NC State
Big 10 adds Virginia, UNC
Pac 12 adds Duke, Miami, Notre Dame, Boston College
Big 12 adds Louisville, Pittsburgh, Syracuse, Clemson, Florida State, Georgia Tech

Wake Forest joins the Big East and plays as a football-only member of the Pac 16 in place of Notre Dame

My guess is Miami and Syracuse would get switched. FSU is in OU's (UT and OSU) shoe's, in that they need either UF or Miami in the same conference with them or else it limits their OOC scheduling too much, if they continue the rivalry. Texas is not a Miami fan, but if FSU required them UT would say welcome on board.

B10, SEC, or B12 could also go to 20 (or 2 go to 18), if the PAC did not make an eastern pod. ND would probably try to land a partial membership with the B12 or, maybe, the PAC. I doubt they ever join the B10 in full. Their fans seem very anti-B10 membership.
(This post was last modified: 08-15-2014 10:51 AM by jhawkmvp.)
08-15-2014 10:47 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
JRsec Offline
Super Moderator
*

Posts: 31,861
Joined: Mar 2012
Reputation: 4741
I Root For: SEC
Location:
Post: #18
RE: If the SEC did expand again and did so from the ACC who should we take and why?
(08-13-2014 11:04 AM)jhawkmvp Wrote:  This is why i think the next move will be radical. I think the next moves will eliminate a conference or two and will require the surviving conferences to accept most of the the B12 and/or ACC (4 or 2/3 conference model) due to GoR issues. If most of those ACC schools could double their TV money and have a place in the power structure do they still all remain unified? Almost half have joined in roughly the past decade from the Big East. So it is not like those schools have 25+ years together in the ACC, outside of the VA/NC schools for the most part. I think right now they stay unified, like mentioned, because many are worried they will lose their place at the table (as well as the fact the money discrepancy has not widened to critical levels yet). If all, or nearly all, are taken care of I think they jump at the extra money once the gap really starts to widen. JRSec's scenario lays out how it could happen well.

Financial pressure is only going to increase with the changes coming to the power conferences (stipends, trusts, maybe more depending on cases coming in the near future). The ACC is going to suffer the most under this new pressure. The B12 ADs are more profitable and less subsidized than the ACC ADs and, IMO, better equipped, in general, to handle the new financial pressures. Before August I would have put the odds as the ACC surviving over the B12 by a 2 or 3 to 1 margin. Now I think it is close to dead even on who survives. The B12 geography and lack of cohesion still hurts it, even though, financially, it is stronger. Who knows, maybe they both die in a 2-3 conference model.

Along with financial pressure you have to ask these questions. Would B.C., Pitt, Syracuse, and yes Notre Dame be more interested in a 10 school Eastern Division of the Big 10 that looked like this:
Boston College, Duke/U.N.C., Maryland, Notre Dame, Penn State, Pittsburgh, Purdue, Rutgers, Syracuse, Virginia
and would the Old Big 10 be happier with a Western Division like this:
Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Michigan, Michigan State, Minnesota, Nebraska, Northwestern, Ohio State, Wisconsin.

Travel will play an important part of keeping expenses down and maximizing profits. Traditional games will keep attendance higher. You look at these two groupings and you realize that travel between most of them is either already accepted, or is reasonably compact as in the East. Plus those are the games that the fans of those schools want most to see.

Ditto in the South:
SEC West:
Alabama, Auburn, Arkansas, Florida State, Louisiana State, Mississippi, Mississippi State, Missouri, Texas A&M, Vanderbilt
SEC East:
Clemson, Florida, Georgia, Georgia Tech, Kentucky, Miami, N.C. State, South Carolina, Tennessee, Virginia Tech

Both sides have access to Florida and Florida State gets two massive sellouts with Auburn and Alabama. 4 divisions makes any of these scenarios even more regional.

I think that where we are headed economically, that travel, home crowds, and overhead will all become bigger issues. And I contend what better way to keep fans energized than to give them the games they really want annually.

And there is even something to be said for a PAC similarly configured:
Arizona, Arizona State, California, Cal Los Angeles, Oregon, Oregon State, Southern Cal, Stanford, Washington, Washington State
Baylor, Colorado, Iowa State, Kansas, Kansas State, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Texas, Texas Tech, Utah

Even in the wide open spaces of the West and Mid West the two divisions basically stay what most people expect in the way of travel and represent schools they are most accustomed to playing.

Of all of the regions the SEC would be the one that could most easily accommodate 24 schools. Take the mix presented and add Louisville, West Virginia, one more of N.C. State, U.N.C., & Duke, and either Baylor or T.C.U. and you reduce the P5 to a P4 and the field from 65 to 64.
(This post was last modified: 08-17-2014 03:30 AM by JRsec.)
08-17-2014 03:22 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Transic_nyc Online
1st String
*

Posts: 2,199
Joined: Jun 2014
Reputation: 154
I Root For: RU/Big Ten
Location:
Post: #19
RE: If the SEC did expand again and did so from the ACC who should we take and why?
JRSec,

I would have to admit that lineup for the East is intriguing. You'd have at least two football powers, at least three historical basketball powers and the old Big Ten fans find a way to shuffle Purdue off somewhere. 03-wink However, I think you could switch out Northwestern with Purdue and we might have something. Both Purdue and Michigan State value their in-state rivalries, while both have had good relations with the Domers. Northwestern, being private, doesn't have that same issue with Illinois as intensely as the other two. Maybe have a guaranteed game between the two every year. Yet I could see why Northwestern and Notre Dame could be in separate divisions, as each would be the "Chicago representative" of the two.

Then there's the NC/Duke conundrum. Is there space for both? Can the two be separated? I could see Duke, as it is a private and leans more towards the Northeast but the COP/C would prefer a state school in that state. Duke in the SEC would look awkward, for sure.

I have heard that the PAC may have similar issues against Baylor, which is why, like with BYU, they aren't keen on taking them. Maybe Baylor and TCU can switch places or Houston takes the PAC spot and Baylor goes to the SEC with TCU, Louisville and West Virginia.

TCU, Baylor, A&M, LSU, Arkansas, Mizzou
Ole Miss, MSU, AL, Aub, Van, FSU
KY, TN, Louisville, West Virginia, VT, NCSU
Clemson, GT, GA, FL, Miami, SCar

A "Best of the Rest" conference might look like this:

UConn, Temple, East Carolina, USF, UCF, Navy, Memphis, Cincinnati
BYU, San Diego State, New Mexico, Colorado State, Fresno State, Boise State, UNLV, Air Force

"New" Big East could look like this:

Georgetown, St. John's, Providence, Wake Forest, Duke, Villanova, Richmond, Seton Hall
Creighton, DePaul, Dayton, St. Louis, Marquette, Butler, Xavier, Duquense

This would get a much-improved media contract with Fox with ESPN getting back into airing BE basketball games with Duke being a marquee program.
08-17-2014 01:10 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
JRsec Offline
Super Moderator
*

Posts: 31,861
Joined: Mar 2012
Reputation: 4741
I Root For: SEC
Location:
Post: #20
RE: If the SEC did expand again and did so from the ACC who should we take and why?
(08-17-2014 01:10 PM)Transic_nyc Wrote:  JRSec,

I would have to admit that lineup for the East is intriguing. You'd have at least two football powers, at least three historical basketball powers and the old Big Ten fans find a way to shuffle Purdue off somewhere. 03-wink However, I think you could switch out Northwestern with Purdue and we might have something. Both Purdue and Michigan State value their in-state rivalries, while both have had good relations with the Domers. Northwestern, being private, doesn't have that same issue with Illinois as intensely as the other two. Maybe have a guaranteed game between the two every year. Yet I could see why Northwestern and Notre Dame could be in separate divisions, as each would be the "Chicago representative" of the two.

Then there's the NC/Duke conundrum. Is there space for both? Can the two be separated? I could see Duke, as it is a private and leans more towards the Northeast but the COP/C would prefer a state school in that state. Duke in the SEC would look awkward, for sure.

I have heard that the PAC may have similar issues against Baylor, which is why, like with BYU, they aren't keen on taking them. Maybe Baylor and TCU can switch places or Houston takes the PAC spot and Baylor goes to the SEC with TCU, Louisville and West Virginia.

TCU, Baylor, A&M, LSU, Arkansas, Mizzou
Ole Miss, MSU, AL, Aub, Van, FSU
KY, TN, Louisville, West Virginia, VT, NCSU
Clemson, GT, GA, FL, Miami, SCar

A "Best of the Rest" conference might look like this:

UConn, Temple, East Carolina, USF, UCF, Navy, Memphis, Cincinnati
BYU, San Diego State, New Mexico, Colorado State, Fresno State, Boise State, UNLV, Air Force

"New" Big East could look like this:

Georgetown, St. John's, Providence, Wake Forest, Duke, Villanova, Richmond, Seton Hall
Creighton, DePaul, Dayton, St. Louis, Marquette, Butler, Xavier, Duquense

This would get a much-improved media contract with Fox with ESPN getting back into airing BE basketball games with Duke being a marquee program.

It is possible that Baylor could get in with the insistence of Texas, but yes there have been some B.Y.U. like rumblings pertaining to Baylor, but compared to the LDS they are very very mild. But you could be right about the issues. I also concede that North Carolina might be the more natural choice for the Big 10 rather than Duke, but then I didn't prejudge where North Carolina would choose to go in that eventuality. But, yeah, your suggestions would certainly work.
08-17-2014 01:49 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 




User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)


Copyright © 2002-2023 Collegiate Sports Nation Bulletin Board System (CSNbbs), All Rights Reserved.
CSNbbs is an independent fan site and is in no way affiliated to the NCAA or any of the schools and conferences it represents.
This site monetizes links. FTC Disclosure.
We allow third-party companies to serve ads and/or collect certain anonymous information when you visit our web site. These companies may use non-personally identifiable information (e.g., click stream information, browser type, time and date, subject of advertisements clicked or scrolled over) during your visits to this and other Web sites in order to provide advertisements about goods and services likely to be of greater interest to you. These companies typically use a cookie or third party web beacon to collect this information. To learn more about this behavioral advertising practice or to opt-out of this type of advertising, you can visit http://www.networkadvertising.org.
Powered By MyBB, © 2002-2023 MyBB Group.