(04-30-2015 10:05 PM)JRsec Wrote: 1. N.C. State is controlled by a Board of Regents most of whom are Chapel Hill graduates. They will not vote for N.C. State to leave the conference, especially for the Big 10 or SEC where their earning potential would tip the balance of power over U.N.C..
Who's to say a dedicated campaign to take NCSU out of the ACC, like what happened with TAMU, wouldn't have made a difference? Perhaps it's because while there is a segment of the fanbase that wanted the SEC there were enough Pack fans who wanted to stay in the ACC that there wasn't any serious movement as a result. Yes, the way the UNC BoR is structured complicates that matter but there could have been a political compromise done in a way that doesn't threaten Chapel Hill's standing in the conference.
Quote:2. Speckman and Barron lied along with Swafford to the B.O.T. of F.S.U. about the network feasibility. That's why they signed the G.O.R. and why they are publicly woofing about it now.
Well, that remains to be seen if FSU were lied to or not. I would think that they have lawyers and accountants pouring through every detail of the contract before they signed it. If there were any problems they could've voiced them or rejected the contract outright. FSU folks do tend to complain a lot, though.
Quote:3. You tell me how the ACCN is going to get off the ground when Swafford's boy was sold rights at Raycom and he then sold them (sublet) to a New York Fox affiliate? That sublet runs for 7 more years. At the earliest they get their network in 2021. That is unless something major happens like Texas joining and the LHN becoming the seed around which it grows. The only problem there is that Chapel Hill doesn't want Texas and neither do Duke or Virginia. They know that Texas will want at least one pal. Right now the N.C. & U.V.A. voting block in the ACC is 6 schools out of 14 full members with Clemson voting with them most of the time. Add Texas and a buddy and suddenly F.S.U., Georgia Tech, Miami, and possibly Clemson along with Louisville start voting with the Horns and friend. Then it only takes Syracuse, Pitt or B.C. to spoil the stranglehold that the Heels have had on the ACC for decades.
The Four-Letter Monster. They want that East Coast corridor and the Big Ten and SEC aren't going to be able to take every ACC school there is. Pitt isn't joining the Big Ten because of State Penn. Syracuse-Duke, UNC-Ville, Syracuse-Ville, Virginia-UNC and Duke-Virginia basketball games draw big ratings. It was basketball, not football, that provided the impetus for Big Ten fans to demand the BTN on their cable systems. Basketball is even more of a priority in the ACC.
Considering that the first goal of the members in a conference is to keep and build up that conference, I would have to think that the good of the ACC would be foremost on the minds of UNC, even if it means bringing in Texas as a partial football member. The former Big East was broken by petty squabbling and small-time thinking. Private Catholic schools couldn't care less about maintaining an all-sports conference because they were afraid of football monies swamping their basketball-first identities. The old Big East had the potential of being the East Coast conference but couldn't execute. I would think the ACC had learned those lessons and won't let any pettiness bring them down. They would have to get rid of Swofford to unlock that potential.
Quote:4. The ACC is three cultures held together by a G.O.R. and ESPN's desire to try and land the Irish. The network stockpiled targets that Delany would have been interested in to try to gain leverage. The took F.S.U. to keep the SEC from becoming too powerful in 1991. ESPN didn't own as big a chunk of SEC rights back then. The sewed up Texas and Kansas's T3 to gain leverage on the PAC and to thwart as long as they could Big 10 expansion to the West. They want a price for their product. This is all about having desirable assets sewn up so that everyone has to come to them in order to grow their markets.
Here is where you and I greatly differ. I like the idea of programs from different regions competing against each other, whether it's in football, basketball or baseball/lacrosse/field hockey. You stick to a more traditional understanding of college sports, where regionalism matters more. As an East Coast person, I've seen the experience of being in a regionally-based conference and I don't want to go through that again. I would prefer playing Purdue and Minnesota if it means that I'm part of a conference that understands the importance of cohesion and stability. The Big Ten is worlds far from the fly-by-night operation of the former Big East. Should the ACC stick together they should understand the potential of different regions competing against each other and market it effectively.
Quote:5. I'd say that outside of the states of Virginia and North Carolina the ACC is no more stable than the Big 12. Louisville was a compromise. Florida State, Clemson, Miami, and Georgia Tech are football first schools as is Virginia Tech. N.C. State would like to be like Louisville but they can't grow in their present demographic and with U.N.C.'s political influence over their decisions. The Former Big East schools still are on the outside looking in and always will be and they know it. The funny thing is the money. North Carolina pretends not to love it because they don't have budgets that permit athletic expansion and academic expansion and they don't want to compete with schools with 100 million dollar athletic budgets, let alone Texas's 162 million dollar athletic budget. They pretend to not want the money because they want to maintain control and maintain it cheaply. If other schools in their conference started earning more money and spending it on athletics then U.N.C would have to as well. That's why the refuse to let N.C. State out of the conference even though 4 North Carolina schools in their footprint is bad for revenue enhancement. A N.C. State in either the SEC or Big 10 breaks the bank on athletics in the State of North Carolina and Duke, U.N.C. and Wake want nothing to do with that.
So the facts are these. If the Big 10 takes Virginia Tech it starts a run on the football product getting the heck out of Dodge. Ditto if the SEC takes Virginia Tech or Florida State. Clemson money would then force a change at their school. Georgia Tech would follow suit because while small and elite they love their history and the game. Louisville would then be forced to make a decision as they would be looking at a declining revenue base once again and they are too smart to play that game twice. That run would also force the former Big East schools to sit up and take note and listen to the only voice that could help them, the Big 10, if it even wanted to help them.
I think at that point that Virginia drops football and essentially becomes a quasi Ivy. North Carolina flirts with that idea but wealthy boosters force them to stay in and try to leverage Duke a place. Wake Forest bows out of football and does the Virginia play. Poor N.C. State remains handcuffed until the end.
That is exactly what Texas and Oklahoma are waiting on. If the Big 10 breaches the ACC ESPN will shelter a few products in the SEC and use the rest to build up the Big 12 where they will own 50% of the T1 & T2 rights and where the LHN morphed into a Big 12N becomes essentially theirs.
Personally I think Syracuse and Virginia Tech would be the gets for the Big 10 and Duke and North Carolina would go the SEC. But even if that was reversed and Virginia Tech came to the SEC along with either Clemson or Florida State the only part of the outcome that would likely change would be N.D. If Duke and North Carolina go to the Big 10 then N.D. might likely follow. Then you guys fill it out with either Syracuse or Pitt and frankly Syracuse gives you a bit more of New York.
I think the SEC would then solidify. They would take N.C. State for the market, Virginia Tech for the market, Florida State for the brand and round it out with Clemson (who can fill any venue and adds content) or Georgia Tech for another AAU school. The other would join those below along with either Tulane, B.Y.U., or Cincinnati in the Big 12 (16).
(Pitt, Boston College, Miami, Louisville)
If I had a dollar every time someone says he has found a way to force the Domers into a football conference I would be a wealthy man today. Being located in the area I'm in I am very familiar with the Domer mindset. Football independence is to them RELIGION. There is no rational or logical basis for their stance that I'm aware of. It's part of their very core identity (OK, I'm channeling TerryD here, please forgive me). A Domer is essentially arrogant, thinks he knows everything there is to know about football, stubborn, vindictive, parochial and that's on a good day.
They live to antagonize others and, historically, the Big Ten has been their favorite target. What makes them different than, say, a State Penn, is being a private school they don't have to answer to politicians or average concerned citizens. They only answer to their donors and alumni (and the Catholic Church, whenever they feel like doing whatever they want). The alumni dollars tell them to keep to their stance of independence, AFAIK.
Also, college athletics at the top tend to be dominated by old money types. To them, the names matter. Baylor may have a better football team than Notre Dame but Notre Dame gets these crusty elite types all warm and fuzzy. I've witnessed this recently when ND participated in a Pinstripe Bowl against Rutgers. The media was all gaga over the Domers, even though they had another forgettable season by their standards.
Quote:6. In the end it is better to build a football conference around Oklahoma and Texas than it is to try and build a hybrid conference around North Carolina and Duke. ESPN will see it that way. The only thing that put the brakes on this already was Notre Dame holding out the possibility that they would join ESPN's only exclusive club of 100% owned schools. So if Chapel Hill rejects Texas and friends ESPN may get tired of holding properties that refuse to spend to draw the sports interest and the parts of the ACC might well prove more valuable separated.
I say it's 50/50 and that is why the Big 12 holds. They may not love each other but they are making more money. The money is why the ACC can't hold out forever.
The Big 12 was once a great conference, when it had the whole of the Big 8 plus 4 schools from the SWC. Big East-type squabbling has whittled their power down to now depending on four other conferences to keep them in the game. Also, they're in an area of the country that is sparse in population apart from Texas. There are good fans out there but they can only carry so much. The Big 12 may get to live another day but I doubt any ACC program would like the travel to those places on a regular basis.
