(03-26-2018 12:47 PM)ren.hoek Wrote:  

(03-26-2018 12:22 PM)murrdcu Wrote:  

(03-26-2018 10:56 AM)JRsec Wrote:  

(03-26-2018 10:37 AM)murrdcu Wrote:  If B1G fails to add KU and OU, would they settle for KU and Syracuse?

Perhaps, one day. They wouldn't even start flirting with Syracuse until 2033 and wouldn't be able to land them until after the next GOR extension for the ACC in about 2035. Or roughly the time a century ago between the end of the Great War (1918) and the rise of Hitler (1933) and his taking of the Sudetenland in 1938. So if Delany eyed Syracuse now a lot has to happen before he marches into Syracuse to raise the Big 10 banner.

So 15 years to wait or if the ACC Network collapses. I still think the ACC Network will be success, just behind both the SEC and B1G channels in terms of profitability

Concur with this. I think the ACCN will be successful, but the B1G and SEC networks will still have a lead. How much the ACCN will narrow that gap remains to be seen. I would think that the ND factor would be beneficial to the carriage rates in the Northeast. There has been speculation that ND would allow the ACCN to get carriage in Chicago. NC, SC, VA, and FL should get very good carriage rates. It's all meaningless speculation by a bunch of non-experts at this point. We'll see.

The ACCN will be successful because ESPN has made is so....

■What was the biggest surprise?

I am blown away by the fact that ESPN was able to get carriage for both ACC Network and SEC Network on cable systems that span Connecticut, Pennsylvania, New Jersey and New York — areas that never will be confused for Tobacco Road or Tuscaloosa. ACC brass, in particular, have to be overjoyed, as this one deal makes its planned 2019 launch as close to a sure thing as you can get.


https://www.bizjournals.com/newyork/news...-deal.html

Late to the party on this thread, so I apologize in advance.

First, the article begins with this: "Syracuse Orange fans can manufacture plenty of enemies, both real and imagined."

It's my experience that this is probably true about all sports fans, but I can tell you it is definitely true of Orange fans.

Heck, even in the Big East there was the belief that the Providence run league office was using us (and UConn to a lesser extent) to keep the Catholic schools afloat especially attendance-wise by ensuring they scheduled us away on Saturdays for Providence, St. Johns, Georgetown and Nova. Not to mention that many thought that the BE office told the bb refs to intentionally let the rough and tumble style play dominate the league to the detriment to our style of play.

Through these and other "complaints", the institution of Syracuse University remained a loyal integral conference member. As for the rest of the true north (BC and Pitt) I suspect they will simply sit back and collect the checks. Neither were significant players behind the scene in the BE except for an occasion here or there (particularly Pitt toward the end, helping secure TCU which was good and heading up the tv contract negotiations which was at best neutral depending upon who you believed was at the core in terms of the league rejecting the ESPN offer).

So, I don't see this article or the antics of what is a very active and zany fan following as a sign of true deep rooted feelings that Syracuse is in anyway dissatisfied with ACC membership. If anything, I suspect university admins are extremely happy we are in the ACC since they have tend to focus on Eastern seaboard not just in terms of recruiting of students but in terms of where our alums currently live. Not to mention that they no doubt enjoy being in the company of so many elite academic private institutions and smaller state institutions that operate more like privates than the larger state schools in the B1G.

I have also come to the conclusion that there is absolutely no two-divisional line-up that will please the super majority of institutions in the league - so as long as the two divisions requirement remains in place to have a conference football championship, it is what it is.

If that rule ever does change and it allows for the removal of divisions altogether (and the ACC stays at an 8 game conference schedule) I could see the ACC designing a 3-5-5 schedule for a 14 team conference and for a 15 team conference it would likely be a 2-6-6 conference schedule. If the league ever expanded to 16 then I think it would be forced to go to a 9 game conference schedule with a 3-6-6 scheduling format. And I honestly don't even want to think of expansion beyond 16.

I actually like the rotation of the ACC men's basketball tourney but I would prefer it be limited to four areas NYC, DC, North Carolina, and Atlanta. And the football championship game can continue to be played in Charlotte - not that I as an older SU fan is likely going to see my Orange playing in said game for a while -

Lastly, it is my hope that the ACCN will be a success, but while the Altice deal is indeed a hopeful sign, I will reserve judgment to see how the Verizon and Spectrum deals work out. I believe the article linked by X mentioned those two were up next for ESPN?

Cheers,
Neil

(04-08-2018 01:09 PM)OrangeDude Wrote:  Late to the party on this thread, so I apologize in advance.

First, the article begins with this: "Syracuse Orange fans can manufacture plenty of enemies, both real and imagined."

It's my experience that this is probably true about all sports fans, but I can tell you it is definitely true of Orange fans.

Heck, even in the Big East there was the belief that the Providence run league office was using us (and UConn to a lesser extent) to keep the Catholic schools afloat especially attendance-wise by ensuring they scheduled us away on Saturdays for Providence, St. Johns, Georgetown and Nova. Not to mention that many thought that the BE office told the bb refs to intentionally let the rough and tumble style play dominate the league to the detriment to our style of play.

Through these and other "complaints", the institution of Syracuse University remained a loyal integral conference member. As for the rest of the true north (BC and Pitt) I suspect they will simply sit back and collect the checks. Neither were significant players behind the scene in the BE except for an occasion here or there (particularly Pitt toward the end, helping secure TCU which was good and heading up the tv contract negotiations which was at best neutral depending upon who you believed was at the core in terms of the league rejecting the ESPN offer).

So, I don't see this article or the antics of what is a very active and zany fan following as a sign of true deep rooted feelings that Syracuse is in anyway dissatisfied with ACC membership. If anything, I suspect university admins are extremely happy we are in the ACC since they have tend to focus on Eastern seaboard not just in terms of recruiting of students but in terms of where our alums currently live. Not to mention that they no doubt enjoy being in the company of so many elite academic private institutions and smaller state institutions that operate more like privates than the larger state schools in the B1G.

I have also come to the conclusion that there is absolutely no two-divisional line-up that will please the super majority of institutions in the league - so as long as the two divisions requirement remains in place to have a conference football championship, it is what it is.

If that rule ever does change and it allows for the removal of divisions altogether (and the ACC stays at an 8 game conference schedule) I could see the ACC designing a 3-5-5 schedule for a 14 team conference and for a 15 team conference it would likely be a 2-6-6 conference schedule. If the league ever expanded to 16 then I think it would be forced to go to a 9 game conference schedule with a 3-6-6 scheduling format. And I honestly don't even want to think of expansion beyond 16.

I actually like the rotation of the ACC men's basketball tourney but I would prefer it be limited to four areas NYC, DC, North Carolina, and Atlanta. And the football championship game can continue to be played in Charlotte - not that I as an older SU fan is likely going to see my Orange playing in said game for a while -

Lastly, it is my hope that the ACCN will be a success, but while the Altice deal is indeed a hopeful sign, I will reserve judgment to see how the Verizon and Spectrum deals work out. I believe the article linked by X mentioned those two were up next for ESPN?

Cheers,
Neil

It was a good off season article to utilize to provoke some conversation. I suspect that everyone is looking in the wrong direction when it comes to realignment. We are looking at who we might add instead of looking to see whose program is so on the edge financially that they may not be able to stay in the expensive football game.

We may well be moving into an economic climate where a confluence of outside pressures leads a number of schools to a sports model more closely akin to the New Big East, and less like that of the Big 10 and SEC.

I really don't look for the ACC to have sustainability problems. I suspect it will be fine moving forward. I don't think the ACCN will be a panacea, but I do think it will help close some of the existing gap.

What I'm thinking will happen now is that the SEC and Big 10 will both look for a couple of key brands which also put them into sympathetic markets and that such a move will be intended to achieve a larger TV rights deal which right now seems to the path du jour of the monkey see monkey do AD's. If either or both are successful it will likely be the last of these moves for quite some time and if the moves occur they will in all likelihood come at the expense of the existing Big 12.

I could see a world in which some of the existing P5 schools will face giving up football in order to minimize athletic expenses. Truly not all of these schools are operating in the black.

An enrollment dip which is occurring for a number of reasons, cost, ROI, debt, and the inability to find better paying entry jobs will play into this. The debt levels of the Federal and State governments which are creating a declining governmental support base, the concentration of corporate grants on specific schools and projects, and what may be a global impairment of trade could all put even greater pressure on the revenue streams of schools. Add to that the virtual extinction of the private individual donor as opposed the corporate ones with more demands and it seems inevitable that schools operating athletics with large subsidies or large debt will succumb.

So we will be a P5 or P4, but in 15 years probably not one of 65 schools, and certainly not one of more. I think we will more than likely be a P5 or 4 of between 54 to 48 within that time span. Those that drop out will very likely be members of the so called P6 of basketball. Our drop outs will still be prominent schools, just without a football profile. And I don't think concussions will have much to do with it, although it could easily be the face saving justification for the moves.

(04-08-2018 01:36 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(04-08-2018 01:09 PM)OrangeDude Wrote:  Late to the party on this thread, so I apologize in advance.

First, the article begins with this: "Syracuse Orange fans can manufacture plenty of enemies, both real and imagined."

It's my experience that this is probably true about all sports fans, but I can tell you it is definitely true of Orange fans.

Heck, even in the Big East there was the belief that the Providence run league office was using us (and UConn to a lesser extent) to keep the Catholic schools afloat especially attendance-wise by ensuring they scheduled us away on Saturdays for Providence, St. Johns, Georgetown and Nova. Not to mention that many thought that the BE office told the bb refs to intentionally let the rough and tumble style play dominate the league to the detriment to our style of play.

Through these and other "complaints", the institution of Syracuse University remained a loyal integral conference member. As for the rest of the true north (BC and Pitt) I suspect they will simply sit back and collect the checks. Neither were significant players behind the scene in the BE except for an occasion here or there (particularly Pitt toward the end, helping secure TCU which was good and heading up the tv contract negotiations which was at best neutral depending upon who you believed was at the core in terms of the league rejecting the ESPN offer).

So, I don't see this article or the antics of what is a very active and zany fan following as a sign of true deep rooted feelings that Syracuse is in anyway dissatisfied with ACC membership. If anything, I suspect university admins are extremely happy we are in the ACC since they have tend to focus on Eastern seaboard not just in terms of recruiting of students but in terms of where our alums currently live. Not to mention that they no doubt enjoy being in the company of so many elite academic private institutions and smaller state institutions that operate more like privates than the larger state schools in the B1G.

I have also come to the conclusion that there is absolutely no two-divisional line-up that will please the super majority of institutions in the league - so as long as the two divisions requirement remains in place to have a conference football championship, it is what it is.

If that rule ever does change and it allows for the removal of divisions altogether (and the ACC stays at an 8 game conference schedule) I could see the ACC designing a 3-5-5 schedule for a 14 team conference and for a 15 team conference it would likely be a 2-6-6 conference schedule. If the league ever expanded to 16 then I think it would be forced to go to a 9 game conference schedule with a 3-6-6 scheduling format. And I honestly don't even want to think of expansion beyond 16.

I actually like the rotation of the ACC men's basketball tourney but I would prefer it be limited to four areas NYC, DC, North Carolina, and Atlanta. And the football championship game can continue to be played in Charlotte - not that I as an older SU fan is likely going to see my Orange playing in said game for a while -

Lastly, it is my hope that the ACCN will be a success, but while the Altice deal is indeed a hopeful sign, I will reserve judgment to see how the Verizon and Spectrum deals work out. I believe the article linked by X mentioned those two were up next for ESPN?

Cheers,
Neil

It was a good off season article to utilize to provoke some conversation. I suspect that everyone is looking in the wrong direction when it comes to realignment. We are looking at who we might add instead of looking to see whose program is so on the edge financially that they may not be able to stay in the expensive football game.

We may well be moving into an economic climate where a confluence of outside pressures leads a number of schools to a sports model more closely akin to the New Big East, and less like that of the Big 10 and SEC.

I really don't look for the ACC to have sustainability problems. I suspect it will be fine moving forward. I don't think the ACCN will be a panacea, but I do think it will help close some of the existing gap.

What I'm thinking will happen now is that the SEC and Big 10 will both look for a couple of key brands which also put them into sympathetic markets and that such a move will be intended to achieve a larger TV rights deal which right now seems to the path du jour of the monkey see monkey do AD's. If either or both are successful it will likely be the last of these moves for quite some time and if the moves occur they will in all likelihood come at the expense of the existing Big 12.

I could see a world in which some of the existing P5 schools will face giving up football in order to minimize athletic expenses. Truly not all of these schools are operating in the black.

An enrollment dip which is occurring for a number of reasons, cost, ROI, debt, and the inability to find better paying entry jobs will play into this. The debt levels of the Federal and State governments which are creating a declining governmental support base, the concentration of corporate grants on specific schools and projects, and what may be a global impairment of trade could all put even greater pressure on the revenue streams of schools. Add to that the virtual extinction of the private individual donor as opposed the corporate ones with more demands and it seems inevitable that schools operating athletics with large subsidies or large debt will succumb.

So we will be a P5 or P4, but in 15 years probably not one of 65 schools, and certainly not one of more. I think we will more than likely be a P5 or 4 of between 54 to 48 within that time span. Those that drop out will very likely be members of the so called P6 of basketball. Our drop outs will still be prominent schools, just without a football profile. And I don't think concussions will have much to do with it, although it could easily be the face saving justification for the moves.

I think that FOX is probably 10 years ahead of a realistic time frame, and 32 could easily grow to 40, but the concept agrees with JR's assertion.

https://www.foxsports.com/college-footba...ame-051616

The majority of the ACC would be in the "left behinds" but allows for the making of a very compatible conference with some of the core ACC schools and a few other left behind schools.

(04-08-2018 04:30 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(04-08-2018 01:36 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(04-08-2018 01:09 PM)OrangeDude Wrote:  Late to the party on this thread, so I apologize in advance.

First, the article begins with this: "Syracuse Orange fans can manufacture plenty of enemies, both real and imagined."

It's my experience that this is probably true about all sports fans, but I can tell you it is definitely true of Orange fans.

Heck, even in the Big East there was the belief that the Providence run league office was using us (and UConn to a lesser extent) to keep the Catholic schools afloat especially attendance-wise by ensuring they scheduled us away on Saturdays for Providence, St. Johns, Georgetown and Nova. Not to mention that many thought that the BE office told the bb refs to intentionally let the rough and tumble style play dominate the league to the detriment to our style of play.

Through these and other "complaints", the institution of Syracuse University remained a loyal integral conference member. As for the rest of the true north (BC and Pitt) I suspect they will simply sit back and collect the checks. Neither were significant players behind the scene in the BE except for an occasion here or there (particularly Pitt toward the end, helping secure TCU which was good and heading up the tv contract negotiations which was at best neutral depending upon who you believed was at the core in terms of the league rejecting the ESPN offer).

So, I don't see this article or the antics of what is a very active and zany fan following as a sign of true deep rooted feelings that Syracuse is in anyway dissatisfied with ACC membership. If anything, I suspect university admins are extremely happy we are in the ACC since they have tend to focus on Eastern seaboard not just in terms of recruiting of students but in terms of where our alums currently live. Not to mention that they no doubt enjoy being in the company of so many elite academic private institutions and smaller state institutions that operate more like privates than the larger state schools in the B1G.

I have also come to the conclusion that there is absolutely no two-divisional line-up that will please the super majority of institutions in the league - so as long as the two divisions requirement remains in place to have a conference football championship, it is what it is.

If that rule ever does change and it allows for the removal of divisions altogether (and the ACC stays at an 8 game conference schedule) I could see the ACC designing a 3-5-5 schedule for a 14 team conference and for a 15 team conference it would likely be a 2-6-6 conference schedule. If the league ever expanded to 16 then I think it would be forced to go to a 9 game conference schedule with a 3-6-6 scheduling format. And I honestly don't even want to think of expansion beyond 16.

I actually like the rotation of the ACC men's basketball tourney but I would prefer it be limited to four areas NYC, DC, North Carolina, and Atlanta. And the football championship game can continue to be played in Charlotte - not that I as an older SU fan is likely going to see my Orange playing in said game for a while -

Lastly, it is my hope that the ACCN will be a success, but while the Altice deal is indeed a hopeful sign, I will reserve judgment to see how the Verizon and Spectrum deals work out. I believe the article linked by X mentioned those two were up next for ESPN?

Cheers,
Neil

It was a good off season article to utilize to provoke some conversation. I suspect that everyone is looking in the wrong direction when it comes to realignment. We are looking at who we might add instead of looking to see whose program is so on the edge financially that they may not be able to stay in the expensive football game.

We may well be moving into an economic climate where a confluence of outside pressures leads a number of schools to a sports model more closely akin to the New Big East, and less like that of the Big 10 and SEC.

I really don't look for the ACC to have sustainability problems. I suspect it will be fine moving forward. I don't think the ACCN will be a panacea, but I do think it will help close some of the existing gap.

What I'm thinking will happen now is that the SEC and Big 10 will both look for a couple of key brands which also put them into sympathetic markets and that such a move will be intended to achieve a larger TV rights deal which right now seems to the path du jour of the monkey see monkey do AD's. If either or both are successful it will likely be the last of these moves for quite some time and if the moves occur they will in all likelihood come at the expense of the existing Big 12.

I could see a world in which some of the existing P5 schools will face giving up football in order to minimize athletic expenses. Truly not all of these schools are operating in the black.

An enrollment dip which is occurring for a number of reasons, cost, ROI, debt, and the inability to find better paying entry jobs will play into this. The debt levels of the Federal and State governments which are creating a declining governmental support base, the concentration of corporate grants on specific schools and projects, and what may be a global impairment of trade could all put even greater pressure on the revenue streams of schools. Add to that the virtual extinction of the private individual donor as opposed the corporate ones with more demands and it seems inevitable that schools operating athletics with large subsidies or large debt will succumb.

So we will be a P5 or P4, but in 15 years probably not one of 65 schools, and certainly not one of more. I think we will more than likely be a P5 or 4 of between 54 to 48 within that time span. Those that drop out will very likely be members of the so called P6 of basketball. Our drop outs will still be prominent schools, just without a football profile. And I don't think concussions will have much to do with it, although it could easily be the face saving justification for the moves.

I think that FOX is probably 10 years ahead of a realistic time frame, and 32 could easily grow to 40, but the concept agrees with JR's assertion.

https://www.foxsports.com/college-footba...ame-051616

The majority of the ACC would be in the "left behinds" but allows for the making of a very compatible conference with some of the core ACC schools and a few other left behind schools.

I think for the sake of draw, and to provide an adequate bell curve we would be looking at 48.

North:

Maryland, Michigan, Michigan State, Notre Dame, Ohio State, Penn State
Iowa, Nebraska, Minnesota, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Wisconsin

East:

Kentucky, Louisville, North Carolina, N.C. State, Virginia Tech, West Virginia
Clemson, Florida, Florida State, Georgia, Miami, South Carolina

South:

Alabama, Auburn, Louisiana State, Mississippi, Mississippi State, Tennessee
Arkansas, Missouri, Kansas State, Texas, Texas A&M, T.C.U.

West:

California, Cal Los Angeles, Oregon, Stanford, Southern Cal, Washington
Arizona, Arizona State, Brigham Young, Colorado, Texas Tech, Utah

The SEC has 13 in. (Vanderbilt out)
The Big 10 has 9 in. (Indiana, Illinois, Northwestern, Purdue, Rutgers out)
The ACC has 7 in. (Boston College, Duke, Georgia Tech, Pittsburgh, Syracuse, Virginia, Wake Forest out)
The Big 12 has 7 in. (Kansas, Baylor, and Iowa State out)
The PAC has 10 in. (Oregon State and Washington State out)

(04-08-2018 07:38 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(04-08-2018 04:30 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(04-08-2018 01:36 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(04-08-2018 01:09 PM)OrangeDude Wrote:  Late to the party on this thread, so I apologize in advance.

First, the article begins with this: "Syracuse Orange fans can manufacture plenty of enemies, both real and imagined."

It's my experience that this is probably true about all sports fans, but I can tell you it is definitely true of Orange fans.

Heck, even in the Big East there was the belief that the Providence run league office was using us (and UConn to a lesser extent) to keep the Catholic schools afloat especially attendance-wise by ensuring they scheduled us away on Saturdays for Providence, St. Johns, Georgetown and Nova. Not to mention that many thought that the BE office told the bb refs to intentionally let the rough and tumble style play dominate the league to the detriment to our style of play.

Through these and other "complaints", the institution of Syracuse University remained a loyal integral conference member. As for the rest of the true north (BC and Pitt) I suspect they will simply sit back and collect the checks. Neither were significant players behind the scene in the BE except for an occasion here or there (particularly Pitt toward the end, helping secure TCU which was good and heading up the tv contract negotiations which was at best neutral depending upon who you believed was at the core in terms of the league rejecting the ESPN offer).

So, I don't see this article or the antics of what is a very active and zany fan following as a sign of true deep rooted feelings that Syracuse is in anyway dissatisfied with ACC membership. If anything, I suspect university admins are extremely happy we are in the ACC since they have tend to focus on Eastern seaboard not just in terms of recruiting of students but in terms of where our alums currently live. Not to mention that they no doubt enjoy being in the company of so many elite academic private institutions and smaller state institutions that operate more like privates than the larger state schools in the B1G.

I have also come to the conclusion that there is absolutely no two-divisional line-up that will please the super majority of institutions in the league - so as long as the two divisions requirement remains in place to have a conference football championship, it is what it is.

If that rule ever does change and it allows for the removal of divisions altogether (and the ACC stays at an 8 game conference schedule) I could see the ACC designing a 3-5-5 schedule for a 14 team conference and for a 15 team conference it would likely be a 2-6-6 conference schedule. If the league ever expanded to 16 then I think it would be forced to go to a 9 game conference schedule with a 3-6-6 scheduling format. And I honestly don't even want to think of expansion beyond 16.

I actually like the rotation of the ACC men's basketball tourney but I would prefer it be limited to four areas NYC, DC, North Carolina, and Atlanta. And the football championship game can continue to be played in Charlotte - not that I as an older SU fan is likely going to see my Orange playing in said game for a while -

Lastly, it is my hope that the ACCN will be a success, but while the Altice deal is indeed a hopeful sign, I will reserve judgment to see how the Verizon and Spectrum deals work out. I believe the article linked by X mentioned those two were up next for ESPN?

Cheers,
Neil

It was a good off season article to utilize to provoke some conversation. I suspect that everyone is looking in the wrong direction when it comes to realignment. We are looking at who we might add instead of looking to see whose program is so on the edge financially that they may not be able to stay in the expensive football game.

We may well be moving into an economic climate where a confluence of outside pressures leads a number of schools to a sports model more closely akin to the New Big East, and less like that of the Big 10 and SEC.

I really don't look for the ACC to have sustainability problems. I suspect it will be fine moving forward. I don't think the ACCN will be a panacea, but I do think it will help close some of the existing gap.

What I'm thinking will happen now is that the SEC and Big 10 will both look for a couple of key brands which also put them into sympathetic markets and that such a move will be intended to achieve a larger TV rights deal which right now seems to the path du jour of the monkey see monkey do AD's. If either or both are successful it will likely be the last of these moves for quite some time and if the moves occur they will in all likelihood come at the expense of the existing Big 12.

I could see a world in which some of the existing P5 schools will face giving up football in order to minimize athletic expenses. Truly not all of these schools are operating in the black.

An enrollment dip which is occurring for a number of reasons, cost, ROI, debt, and the inability to find better paying entry jobs will play into this. The debt levels of the Federal and State governments which are creating a declining governmental support base, the concentration of corporate grants on specific schools and projects, and what may be a global impairment of trade could all put even greater pressure on the revenue streams of schools. Add to that the virtual extinction of the private individual donor as opposed the corporate ones with more demands and it seems inevitable that schools operating athletics with large subsidies or large debt will succumb.

So we will be a P5 or P4, but in 15 years probably not one of 65 schools, and certainly not one of more. I think we will more than likely be a P5 or 4 of between 54 to 48 within that time span. Those that drop out will very likely be members of the so called P6 of basketball. Our drop outs will still be prominent schools, just without a football profile. And I don't think concussions will have much to do with it, although it could easily be the face saving justification for the moves.

I think that FOX is probably 10 years ahead of a realistic time frame, and 32 could easily grow to 40, but the concept agrees with JR's assertion.

https://www.foxsports.com/college-footba...ame-051616

The majority of the ACC would be in the "left behinds" but allows for the making of a very compatible conference with some of the core ACC schools and a few other left behind schools.

I think for the sake of draw, and to provide an adequate bell curve we would be looking at 48.

North:

Maryland, Michigan, Michigan State, Notre Dame, Ohio State, Penn State
Iowa, Nebraska, Minnesota, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Wisconsin

East:

Kentucky, Louisville, North Carolina, N.C. State, Virginia Tech, West Virginia
Clemson, Florida, Florida State, Georgia, Miami, South Carolina

South:

Alabama, Auburn, Louisiana State, Mississippi, Mississippi State, Tennessee
Arkansas, Missouri, Kansas State, Texas, Texas A&M, T.C.U.

West:

California, Cal Los Angeles, Oregon, Stanford, Southern Cal, Washington
Arizona, Arizona State, Brigham Young, Colorado, Texas Tech, Utah

The SEC has 13 in. (Vanderbilt out)
The Big 10 has 9 in. (Indiana, Illinois, Northwestern, Purdue, Rutgers out)
The ACC has 7 in. (Boston College, Duke, Georgia Tech, Pittsburgh, Syracuse, Virginia, Wake Forest out)
The Big 12 has 7 in. (Kansas, Baylor, and Iowa State out)
The PAC has 10 in. (Oregon State and Washington State out)

JR, I appreciate your including Carolina in your list, but I truly believe the Carolina has already made it clear by the 20% seating reduction in Kenan Stadium, that they will not be pursuing the upper echelon in the future.
I think you might revise your list to exclude any school that can't seat more than 60,000 and even that number may be too low.

(04-08-2018 07:59 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(04-08-2018 07:38 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(04-08-2018 04:30 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(04-08-2018 01:36 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(04-08-2018 01:09 PM)OrangeDude Wrote:  Late to the party on this thread, so I apologize in advance.

First, the article begins with this: "Syracuse Orange fans can manufacture plenty of enemies, both real and imagined."

It's my experience that this is probably true about all sports fans, but I can tell you it is definitely true of Orange fans.

Heck, even in the Big East there was the belief that the Providence run league office was using us (and UConn to a lesser extent) to keep the Catholic schools afloat especially attendance-wise by ensuring they scheduled us away on Saturdays for Providence, St. Johns, Georgetown and Nova. Not to mention that many thought that the BE office told the bb refs to intentionally let the rough and tumble style play dominate the league to the detriment to our style of play.

Through these and other "complaints", the institution of Syracuse University remained a loyal integral conference member. As for the rest of the true north (BC and Pitt) I suspect they will simply sit back and collect the checks. Neither were significant players behind the scene in the BE except for an occasion here or there (particularly Pitt toward the end, helping secure TCU which was good and heading up the tv contract negotiations which was at best neutral depending upon who you believed was at the core in terms of the league rejecting the ESPN offer).

So, I don't see this article or the antics of what is a very active and zany fan following as a sign of true deep rooted feelings that Syracuse is in anyway dissatisfied with ACC membership. If anything, I suspect university admins are extremely happy we are in the ACC since they have tend to focus on Eastern seaboard not just in terms of recruiting of students but in terms of where our alums currently live. Not to mention that they no doubt enjoy being in the company of so many elite academic private institutions and smaller state institutions that operate more like privates than the larger state schools in the B1G.

I have also come to the conclusion that there is absolutely no two-divisional line-up that will please the super majority of institutions in the league - so as long as the two divisions requirement remains in place to have a conference football championship, it is what it is.

If that rule ever does change and it allows for the removal of divisions altogether (and the ACC stays at an 8 game conference schedule) I could see the ACC designing a 3-5-5 schedule for a 14 team conference and for a 15 team conference it would likely be a 2-6-6 conference schedule. If the league ever expanded to 16 then I think it would be forced to go to a 9 game conference schedule with a 3-6-6 scheduling format. And I honestly don't even want to think of expansion beyond 16.

I actually like the rotation of the ACC men's basketball tourney but I would prefer it be limited to four areas NYC, DC, North Carolina, and Atlanta. And the football championship game can continue to be played in Charlotte - not that I as an older SU fan is likely going to see my Orange playing in said game for a while -

Lastly, it is my hope that the ACCN will be a success, but while the Altice deal is indeed a hopeful sign, I will reserve judgment to see how the Verizon and Spectrum deals work out. I believe the article linked by X mentioned those two were up next for ESPN?

Cheers,
Neil

It was a good off season article to utilize to provoke some conversation. I suspect that everyone is looking in the wrong direction when it comes to realignment. We are looking at who we might add instead of looking to see whose program is so on the edge financially that they may not be able to stay in the expensive football game.

We may well be moving into an economic climate where a confluence of outside pressures leads a number of schools to a sports model more closely akin to the New Big East, and less like that of the Big 10 and SEC.

I really don't look for the ACC to have sustainability problems. I suspect it will be fine moving forward. I don't think the ACCN will be a panacea, but I do think it will help close some of the existing gap.

What I'm thinking will happen now is that the SEC and Big 10 will both look for a couple of key brands which also put them into sympathetic markets and that such a move will be intended to achieve a larger TV rights deal which right now seems to the path du jour of the monkey see monkey do AD's. If either or both are successful it will likely be the last of these moves for quite some time and if the moves occur they will in all likelihood come at the expense of the existing Big 12.

I could see a world in which some of the existing P5 schools will face giving up football in order to minimize athletic expenses. Truly not all of these schools are operating in the black.

An enrollment dip which is occurring for a number of reasons, cost, ROI, debt, and the inability to find better paying entry jobs will play into this. The debt levels of the Federal and State governments which are creating a declining governmental support base, the concentration of corporate grants on specific schools and projects, and what may be a global impairment of trade could all put even greater pressure on the revenue streams of schools. Add to that the virtual extinction of the private individual donor as opposed the corporate ones with more demands and it seems inevitable that schools operating athletics with large subsidies or large debt will succumb.

So we will be a P5 or P4, but in 15 years probably not one of 65 schools, and certainly not one of more. I think we will more than likely be a P5 or 4 of between 54 to 48 within that time span. Those that drop out will very likely be members of the so called P6 of basketball. Our drop outs will still be prominent schools, just without a football profile. And I don't think concussions will have much to do with it, although it could easily be the face saving justification for the moves.

I think that FOX is probably 10 years ahead of a realistic time frame, and 32 could easily grow to 40, but the concept agrees with JR's assertion.

https://www.foxsports.com/college-footba...ame-051616

The majority of the ACC would be in the "left behinds" but allows for the making of a very compatible conference with some of the core ACC schools and a few other left behind schools.

I think for the sake of draw, and to provide an adequate bell curve we would be looking at 48.

North:

Maryland, Michigan, Michigan State, Notre Dame, Ohio State, Penn State
Iowa, Nebraska, Minnesota, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Wisconsin

East:

Kentucky, Louisville, North Carolina, N.C. State, Virginia Tech, West Virginia
Clemson, Florida, Florida State, Georgia, Miami, South Carolina

South:

Alabama, Auburn, Louisiana State, Mississippi, Mississippi State, Tennessee
Arkansas, Missouri, Kansas State, Texas, Texas A&M, T.C.U.

West:

California, Cal Los Angeles, Oregon, Stanford, Southern Cal, Washington
Arizona, Arizona State, Brigham Young, Colorado, Texas Tech, Utah

The SEC has 13 in. (Vanderbilt out)
The Big 10 has 9 in. (Indiana, Illinois, Northwestern, Purdue, Rutgers out)
The ACC has 7 in. (Boston College, Duke, Georgia Tech, Pittsburgh, Syracuse, Virginia, Wake Forest out)
The Big 12 has 7 in. (Kansas, Baylor, and Iowa State out)
The PAC has 10 in. (Oregon State and Washington State out)

JR, I appreciate your including Carolina in your list, but I truly believe the Carolina has already made it clear by the 20% seating reduction in Kenan Stadium, that they will not be pursuing the upper echelon in the future.
I think you might revise your list to exclude any school that can't seat more than 60,000 and even that number may be too low.

The let's take a look at 40, and at 36.

At 40:

North:

Michigan, Michigan State, Notre Dame, Ohio State, Penn State
Iowa, Minnesota, Nebraska, Oklahoma, Wisconsin

East:

Kentucky, Louisville, N.C. State, Virginia Tech, West Virginia
Clemson, Florida, Florida State, Georgia, South Carolina

South:

Alabama, Auburn, Mississippi, Mississippi State, Tennessee
Arkansas, Louisiana State, Missouri, Texas, Texas A&M,

West:

Arizona, Arizona State, Colorado, Utah, Washington
California, Cal Los Angeles, Oregon, Stanford, Southern Cal

At 36:

North:

Michigan, Michigan State, Notre Dame, Ohio State, Penn State, Virginia Tech
Iowa, Colorado, Nebraska, Minnesota, Missouri, Oklahoma, Wisconsin

South:

Clemson, Florida, Florida State, Georgia, South Carolina, Tennessee
Alabama, Auburn Louisiana State, Mississippi, Mississippi State, Texas A&M

West:

California, Cal Los Angeles, Oregon, Stanford, Southern Cal, Washington
Arizona, Arizona State, Arkansas, Missouri, Texas, Utah

40 looks about right.

(04-09-2018 12:25 AM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  40 looks about right.

Yeah, 40 is about right. No sense in listing which 40 will make it, since that is simply opinion and muddies the overall concept, but 30-32 are obvious. The remaining 8-10 are up for debate.

Cheers,
Neil

(04-09-2018 02:44 AM)OrangeDude Wrote:  

(04-09-2018 12:25 AM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  40 looks about right.

Yeah, 40 is about right. No sense in listing which 40 will make it, since that is simply opinion and muddies the overall concept, but 30-32 are obvious. The remaining 8-10 are up for debate.

Cheers,
Neil

3 X 14 = 42, which has some appeal too... as would 4 X 12 = 48.

(04-09-2018 06:09 AM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  

(04-09-2018 02:44 AM)OrangeDude Wrote:  

(04-09-2018 12:25 AM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  40 looks about right.

Yeah, 40 is about right. No sense in listing which 40 will make it, since that is simply opinion and muddies the overall concept, but 30-32 are obvious. The remaining 8-10 are up for debate.

Cheers,
Neil

3 X 14 = 42, which has some appeal too... as would 4 X 12 = 48.

If the number of teams is pared down it will be will two leagues with at least two divisions. We will not ever see just three conferences.

(04-09-2018 02:44 AM)OrangeDude Wrote:  

(04-09-2018 12:25 AM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  40 looks about right.

Yeah, 40 is about right. No sense in listing which 40 will make it, since that is simply opinion and muddies the overall concept, but 30-32 are obvious. The remaining 8-10 are up for debate.

Cheers,
Neil

No not really. i did have to go region by region, but they are the schools that draw the best attendance and generally earn the most revenue within their conferences and in the case of the SEC and Big 10 the most when considering all conferences. There are some compromises but as in the case of Missouri it is clearly a stronger market as the only P school in a state of 6 million.

(04-09-2018 02:00 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(04-09-2018 02:44 AM)OrangeDude Wrote:  

(04-09-2018 12:25 AM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  40 looks about right.

Yeah, 40 is about right. No sense in listing which 40 will make it, since that is simply opinion and muddies the overall concept, but 30-32 are obvious. The remaining 8-10 are up for debate.

Cheers,
Neil

No not really. i did have to go region by region, but they are the schools that draw the best attendance and generally earn the most revenue within their conferences and in the case of the SEC and Big 10 the most when considering all conferences. There are some compromises but as in the case of Missouri it is clearly a stronger market as the only P school in a state of 6 million.

When you determined this, did you subtract out the conference revenue from those earnings? Example: Is Mississippi State's revenue minus the SEC amount truly significant in comparison with other programs?

In other words, how good would the Rebels revenue look if they were in the ACC getting $15 million less? Would they have any impact on the ACC's revenue in a positive manner were they in the league instead of say, Georgia Tech? Yet you have them in both the groupings of 36 and 40.

Is attendance at their games that significant considering who they play against?

Not saying that they shouldn't make the list at all, but for you to think it isn't even up for debate (which is my contention) is questionable at best.

Cheers,
Neil

(04-09-2018 07:44 PM)OrangeDude Wrote:  

(04-09-2018 02:00 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(04-09-2018 02:44 AM)OrangeDude Wrote:  

(04-09-2018 12:25 AM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  40 looks about right.

Yeah, 40 is about right. No sense in listing which 40 will make it, since that is simply opinion and muddies the overall concept, but 30-32 are obvious. The remaining 8-10 are up for debate.

Cheers,
Neil

No not really. i did have to go region by region, but they are the schools that draw the best attendance and generally earn the most revenue within their conferences and in the case of the SEC and Big 10 the most when considering all conferences. There are some compromises but as in the case of Missouri it is clearly a stronger market as the only P school in a state of 6 million.

When you determined this, did you subtract out the conference revenue from those earnings? Example: Is Mississippi State's revenue minus the SEC amount truly significant in comparison with other programs?

In other words, how good would the Rebels revenue look if they were in the ACC getting $15 million less? Would they have any impact on the ACC's revenue in a positive manner were they in the league instead of say, Georgia Tech? Yet you have them in both the groupings of 36 and 40.

Is attendance at their games that significant considering who they play against?

Not saying that they shouldn't make the list at all, but for you to think it isn't even up for debate (which is my contention) is questionable at best.

Cheers,
Neil

Bulldogs Neil, Mississippi State =bulldogs.

(04-09-2018 07:44 PM)OrangeDude Wrote:  

(04-09-2018 02:00 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(04-09-2018 02:44 AM)OrangeDude Wrote:  

(04-09-2018 12:25 AM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  40 looks about right.

Yeah, 40 is about right. No sense in listing which 40 will make it, since that is simply opinion and muddies the overall concept, but 30-32 are obvious. The remaining 8-10 are up for debate.

Cheers,
Neil

No not really. i did have to go region by region, but they are the schools that draw the best attendance and generally earn the most revenue within their conferences and in the case of the SEC and Big 10 the most when considering all conferences. There are some compromises but as in the case of Missouri it is clearly a stronger market as the only P school in a state of 6 million.

When you determined this, did you subtract out the conference revenue from those earnings? Example: Is Mississippi State's revenue minus the SEC amount truly significant in comparison with other programs?

In other words, how good would the Rebels revenue look if they were in the ACC getting $15 million less? Would they have any impact on the ACC's revenue in a positive manner were they in the league instead of say, Georgia Tech? Yet you have them in both the groupings of 36 and 40.

Is attendance at their games that significant considering who they play against?

Not saying that they shouldn't make the list at all, but for you to think it isn't even up for debate (which is my contention) is questionable at best.

Cheers,
Neil

Neil, the ability to draw a crowd and gross total revenue have a correlation. But the numbers are pinned at the top of the page in the important threads. The simple truth is that the SEC's GTR average was 25 million more than that of any ACC school. Ticket prices, donations, and attendance are all measures of a school's strength. So why should this race be handicapped? And no matter who they played against they averaged more in attendance than all but about 3 or 4 (Notre Dame not incuded since they aren't football members) ACC schools which also made the cut.

There's really not one thing questionable about it. The numbers are there. The only fudging was in trying to fill out geographical 10 team sets.

Mississippi State would have finished 5 in the ACC in attendance and 8 in Gross Total revenue. Ole Miss would have finished just a tad higher in your conference than State.

The would have finished 13th in the SEC in Gross Total Revenue at 89.6 million and they would have finished 11th in the SEC in attendance.

Only 20 schools averaged over 70,000 at home last year.

http://fs.ncaa.org/Docs/stats/football_r...e/2017.pdf

Total Home Attendance
No. School Games Attendance Average
1. Michigan 6 669,534 111,589
2. Ohio St. 7 752,464 107,495
3. Penn St. 7 746,946 106,707
4. Alabama 7 712,053 101,722
5. Texas A&M 7 691,612 98,802
6. LSU 6 591,034 98,506
7. Tennessee 7 670,454 95,779
8. Texas 6 556,667 92,778
9. Georgia 6 556,476 92,746
10. Nebraska 7 628,583 89,798
11. Florida 6 520,290 86,715
12. Oklahoma 6 519,119 86,520
13. Auburn 7 605,120 86,446
14. Clemson 7 565,412 80,773
15. Wisconsin 7 551,766 78,824
16. South Carolina 7 550,099 78,586
17. Notre Dame 7 543,354 77,622
18. Southern California 7 508,781 72,683
19. Michigan St. 7 507,398 72,485
20. Florida St. 6 425,658 70,943
21. Washington 7 481,755 68,822
22. Iowa 7 464,357 66,337
23. Arkansas 7 442,569 63,224
24. Virginia Tech 6 379,284 63,214
25. Miami (FL) 8 469,454 58,682
26. Ole Miss 7 410,414 58,631
27. Mississippi St. 7 406,703 58,100
28. Iowa St. 6 347,586 57,931
29. NC State 6 341,100 56,850
30. Oklahoma St. 6 340,740 56,790