Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Post Reply 
How much should the ACC bend backward to get ND?
Author Message
XLance Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 14,233
Joined: Mar 2008
Reputation: 762
I Root For: Carolina
Location: Greensboro, NC
Post: #41
RE: How much should the ACC bend backward to get ND?
Our agreement with Notre Dame is fair to both parties. There is no reason at all to offer any more concessions to the Irish.
The ACC doesn't need any more of Notre Dame than they are ready to give willingly.
08-14-2021 06:18 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Fighting Muskie Offline
Senior Chief Realignmentologist
*

Posts: 11,795
Joined: Sep 2016
Reputation: 789
I Root For: Ohio St, UC,MAC
Location: Biden Cesspool
Post: #42
RE: How much should the ACC bend backward to get ND?
If BC/WF/Duke/Syracuse etc still want to be in a power conference in 15 years I think they are going to have to accept uneven revenue distribution to A) land ND and B) keep FSU and Clemson happy.

With that said, I think the plan should be to move to 16 teams—ND plus a team of their choice.

The conference schedule would only REQUIRE 7 division games (additional OOC games within the conference could be arranged by individual schools).

Moving to 4 rotating pods would help ensure that some of the more exciting match ups occur with greater regularity and ND doesn’t feel “incestuous” by playing the same 6-7 schools each year (ND fan’s words, not mine)
08-14-2021 06:25 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
ren.hoek Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,361
Joined: Sep 2013
Reputation: 149
I Root For: Clemson
Location:
Post: #43
RE: How much should the ACC bend backward to get ND?
(08-14-2021 06:25 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  If BC/WF/Duke/Syracuse etc still want to be in a power conference in 15 years I think they are going to have to accept uneven revenue distribution to A) land ND and B) keep FSU and Clemson happy.

With that said, I think the plan should be to move to 16 teams—ND plus a team of their choice.

The conference schedule would only REQUIRE 7 division games (additional OOC games within the conference could be arranged by individual schools).

Moving to 4 rotating pods would help ensure that some of the more exciting match ups occur with greater regularity and ND doesn’t feel “incestuous” by playing the same 6-7 schools each year (ND fan’s words, not mine)
Here is my view of things...
1. ND won't join in football. Ever. We should stop pretending this might happen.
2. Even if they did, they would play a full conference schedule just like everyone else. The idea that they'd play less but still be eligible for the championship is utterly ludicrous and would never happen. VT, Clemson, FSU, and any other school that cares about football would revolt.
3. There are no additions not named ND that will add to everyone's bottom line.
4. Divisions should be abolished in favor of a 9 game schedule with 5 permanent and 4 rotating. This ensures the interesting and valuable matchups are annual affairs and allows you to play every team in 2 years.
5. No more FCS games. Those rights are worthless to ESPN. Schedule a G5/6 team instead.
08-14-2021 06:46 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
JRsec Offline
Super Moderator
*

Posts: 37,902
Joined: Mar 2012
Reputation: 7737
I Root For: SEC
Location:
Post: #44
RE: How much should the ACC bend backward to get ND?
(08-14-2021 06:46 PM)ren.hoek Wrote:  
(08-14-2021 06:25 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  If BC/WF/Duke/Syracuse etc still want to be in a power conference in 15 years I think they are going to have to accept uneven revenue distribution to A) land ND and B) keep FSU and Clemson happy.

With that said, I think the plan should be to move to 16 teams—ND plus a team of their choice.

The conference schedule would only REQUIRE 7 division games (additional OOC games within the conference could be arranged by individual schools).

Moving to 4 rotating pods would help ensure that some of the more exciting match ups occur with greater regularity and ND doesn’t feel “incestuous” by playing the same 6-7 schools each year (ND fan’s words, not mine)
Here is my view of things...
1. ND won't join in football. Ever. We should stop pretending this might happen.
2. Even if they did, they would play a full conference schedule just like everyone else. The idea that they'd play less but still be eligible for the championship is utterly ludicrous and would never happen. VT, Clemson, FSU, and any other school that cares about football would revolt.
3. There are no additions not named ND that will add to everyone's bottom line.
4. Divisions should be abolished in favor of a 9 game schedule with 5 permanent and 4 rotating. This ensures the interesting and valuable matchups are annual affairs and allows you to play every team in 2 years.
5. No more FCS games. Those rights are worthless to ESPN. Schedule a G5/6 team instead.

The bolded one is false. Kansas and TCU add marginally. But even if they were pro rata any 2 schools would open up the ACC's contract, activate a renegotiation clause, and get your woefully underpaid contract updated in a way a look in never will, with a comprehensive re-evaluation of T1, T2, and T3 rights. What's more it would add 23-24 (depending on whether the new schools play each other) more games to sell in football alone. Not to mention Kansas is a hoops content multiplier, so added dollars there as well.
08-14-2021 07:13 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Statefan Offline
Banned

Posts: 3,511
Joined: May 2018
I Root For: .
Location:
Post: #45
RE: How much should the ACC bend backward to get ND?
(08-14-2021 07:13 PM)JRsec Wrote:  
(08-14-2021 06:46 PM)ren.hoek Wrote:  
(08-14-2021 06:25 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  If BC/WF/Duke/Syracuse etc still want to be in a power conference in 15 years I think they are going to have to accept uneven revenue distribution to A) land ND and B) keep FSU and Clemson happy.

With that said, I think the plan should be to move to 16 teams—ND plus a team of their choice.

The conference schedule would only REQUIRE 7 division games (additional OOC games within the conference could be arranged by individual schools).

Moving to 4 rotating pods would help ensure that some of the more exciting match ups occur with greater regularity and ND doesn’t feel “incestuous” by playing the same 6-7 schools each year (ND fan’s words, not mine)
Here is my view of things...
1. ND won't join in football. Ever. We should stop pretending this might happen.
2. Even if they did, they would play a full conference schedule just like everyone else. The idea that they'd play less but still be eligible for the championship is utterly ludicrous and would never happen. VT, Clemson, FSU, and any other school that cares about football would revolt.
3. There are no additions not named ND that will add to everyone's bottom line.
4. Divisions should be abolished in favor of a 9 game schedule with 5 permanent and 4 rotating. This ensures the interesting and valuable matchups are annual affairs and allows you to play every team in 2 years.
5. No more FCS games. Those rights are worthless to ESPN. Schedule a G5/6 team instead.

The bolded one is false. Kansas and TCU add marginally. But even if they were pro rata any 2 schools would open up the ACC's contract, activate a renegotiation clause, and get your woefully underpaid contract updated in a way a look in never will, with a comprehensive re-evaluation of T1, T2, and T3 rights. What's more it would add 23-24 (depending on whether the new schools play each other) more games to sell in football alone. Not to mention Kansas is a hoops content multiplier, so added dollars there as well.

You can make a possibly acceptable two way pod with 16:

Kansas, Pitt, Syr, FSU
TCU, NC State, WF, Miami
Louis, UNC, Duke, GT
VT, UVa, BC, Clemson

Clemson would get:

FSU, Miami, GT, BC, UVa, and VT every year then one of the following three -

Syracuse/WF/Duke, Pitt/NC State/UNC, and Kansas/Louis/TCU

It's a 6 - 3 set up that allows you to play all 15 every three years.

VT would have UVa, BC, Clemson, TCU, Louisville, and Kansas every year and then -

Pitt/UNC/NC State
WF/Duke/Syracuse
GT/Miami/FSU
(This post was last modified: 08-14-2021 08:14 PM by Statefan.)
08-14-2021 08:09 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
ren.hoek Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,361
Joined: Sep 2013
Reputation: 149
I Root For: Clemson
Location:
Post: #46
RE: How much should the ACC bend backward to get ND?
(08-14-2021 07:13 PM)JRsec Wrote:  
(08-14-2021 06:46 PM)ren.hoek Wrote:  
(08-14-2021 06:25 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  If BC/WF/Duke/Syracuse etc still want to be in a power conference in 15 years I think they are going to have to accept uneven revenue distribution to A) land ND and B) keep FSU and Clemson happy.

With that said, I think the plan should be to move to 16 teams—ND plus a team of their choice.

The conference schedule would only REQUIRE 7 division games (additional OOC games within the conference could be arranged by individual schools).

Moving to 4 rotating pods would help ensure that some of the more exciting match ups occur with greater regularity and ND doesn’t feel “incestuous” by playing the same 6-7 schools each year (ND fan’s words, not mine)
Here is my view of things...
1. ND won't join in football. Ever. We should stop pretending this might happen.
2. Even if they did, they would play a full conference schedule just like everyone else. The idea that they'd play less but still be eligible for the championship is utterly ludicrous and would never happen. VT, Clemson, FSU, and any other school that cares about football would revolt.
3. There are no additions not named ND that will add to everyone's bottom line.
4. Divisions should be abolished in favor of a 9 game schedule with 5 permanent and 4 rotating. This ensures the interesting and valuable matchups are annual affairs and allows you to play every team in 2 years.
5. No more FCS games. Those rights are worthless to ESPN. Schedule a G5/6 team instead.

The bolded one is false. Kansas and TCU add marginally. But even if they were pro rata any 2 schools would open up the ACC's contract, activate a renegotiation clause, and get your woefully underpaid contract updated in a way a look in never will, with a comprehensive re-evaluation of T1, T2, and T3 rights. What's more it would add 23-24 (depending on whether the new schools play each other) more games to sell in football alone. Not to mention Kansas is a hoops content multiplier, so added dollars there as well.

I'd hate to add yet another dumpster fire of a football program to the ACC, even though Kansas is unassailably awesome in basketball. The one thing that may drive ACC expansion is the opportunity to renegotiate that awful contract that the previous commissioner, whose name I won't speak, hung around our neck like a millstone. That is an interesting possibility, but I'd prefer to not make ACC football even worse. That being said, football is the primary driver of tv contracts, but I've long thought that the ACC basketball was much more valuable than what they are paid under the current contract.
(This post was last modified: 08-14-2021 08:50 PM by ren.hoek.)
08-14-2021 08:46 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
JRsec Offline
Super Moderator
*

Posts: 37,902
Joined: Mar 2012
Reputation: 7737
I Root For: SEC
Location:
Post: #47
RE: How much should the ACC bend backward to get ND?
(08-14-2021 08:46 PM)ren.hoek Wrote:  
(08-14-2021 07:13 PM)JRsec Wrote:  
(08-14-2021 06:46 PM)ren.hoek Wrote:  
(08-14-2021 06:25 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  If BC/WF/Duke/Syracuse etc still want to be in a power conference in 15 years I think they are going to have to accept uneven revenue distribution to A) land ND and B) keep FSU and Clemson happy.

With that said, I think the plan should be to move to 16 teams—ND plus a team of their choice.

The conference schedule would only REQUIRE 7 division games (additional OOC games within the conference could be arranged by individual schools).

Moving to 4 rotating pods would help ensure that some of the more exciting match ups occur with greater regularity and ND doesn’t feel “incestuous” by playing the same 6-7 schools each year (ND fan’s words, not mine)
Here is my view of things...
1. ND won't join in football. Ever. We should stop pretending this might happen.
2. Even if they did, they would play a full conference schedule just like everyone else. The idea that they'd play less but still be eligible for the championship is utterly ludicrous and would never happen. VT, Clemson, FSU, and any other school that cares about football would revolt.
3. There are no additions not named ND that will add to everyone's bottom line.
4. Divisions should be abolished in favor of a 9 game schedule with 5 permanent and 4 rotating. This ensures the interesting and valuable matchups are annual affairs and allows you to play every team in 2 years.
5. No more FCS games. Those rights are worthless to ESPN. Schedule a G5/6 team instead.

The bolded one is false. Kansas and TCU add marginally. But even if they were pro rata any 2 schools would open up the ACC's contract, activate a renegotiation clause, and get your woefully underpaid contract updated in a way a look in never will, with a comprehensive re-evaluation of T1, T2, and T3 rights. What's more it would add 23-24 (depending on whether the new schools play each other) more games to sell in football alone. Not to mention Kansas is a hoops content multiplier, so added dollars there as well.

I'd hate to add yet another dumpster fire of a football program to the ACC, even though Kansas is unassailably awesome in basketball. The one thing that may drive ACC expansion is the opportunity to renegotiate that awful contract that the previous commissioner, whose name I won't speak, hung around our neck like a millstone. That is an interesting possibility, but I'd prefer to not make ACC football even worse. That being said, football is the primary driver of tv contracts, but I've long thought that the ACC basketball was much more valuable than what they are paid under the current contract.

That's what I don't understand about associating with the Cali / Mich & Minnesota alliance. Their big unspoken agenda is to prevent a breakaway from the NCAA because the NCAA is a bureaucracy that shares a political agenda with them.

There are schools in both the PAC and B1G which don't agree with the directions of their conferences and may be amenable to a breakaway. If one happened nobody would benefit more than basketball schools because their earnings would approach 40% of a schools athletic revenue. That's over double what they earn now, but it won't happen under the NCAA. It's why I don't understand BB first schools who are willing to die on the NCAA's scraps after they buy votes from the programs there for a handout and the NCAA's self funding 2 endowments which get about 80 million a year.
08-14-2021 09:12 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Hokie Mark Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 23,727
Joined: Sep 2011
Reputation: 1392
I Root For: VT, ACC teams
Location: Greensboro, NC
Post: #48
RE: How much should the ACC bend backward to get ND?
(08-14-2021 09:12 PM)JRsec Wrote:  
(08-14-2021 08:46 PM)ren.hoek Wrote:  
(08-14-2021 07:13 PM)JRsec Wrote:  
(08-14-2021 06:46 PM)ren.hoek Wrote:  Here is my view of things...
1. ND won't join in football. Ever. We should stop pretending this might happen.
2. Even if they did, they would play a full conference schedule just like everyone else. The idea that they'd play less but still be eligible for the championship is utterly ludicrous and would never happen. VT, Clemson, FSU, and any other school that cares about football would revolt.
3. There are no additions not named ND that will add to everyone's bottom line.
4. Divisions should be abolished in favor of a 9 game schedule with 5 permanent and 4 rotating. This ensures the interesting and valuable matchups are annual affairs and allows you to play every team in 2 years.
5. No more FCS games. Those rights are worthless to ESPN. Schedule a G5/6 team instead.

The bolded one is false. Kansas and TCU add marginally. But even if they were pro rata any 2 schools would open up the ACC's contract, activate a renegotiation clause, and get your woefully underpaid contract updated in a way a look in never will, with a comprehensive re-evaluation of T1, T2, and T3 rights. What's more it would add 23-24 (depending on whether the new schools play each other) more games to sell in football alone. Not to mention Kansas is a hoops content multiplier, so added dollars there as well.

I'd hate to add yet another dumpster fire of a football program to the ACC, even though Kansas is unassailably awesome in basketball. The one thing that may drive ACC expansion is the opportunity to renegotiate that awful contract that the previous commissioner, whose name I won't speak, hung around our neck like a millstone. That is an interesting possibility, but I'd prefer to not make ACC football even worse. That being said, football is the primary driver of tv contracts, but I've long thought that the ACC basketball was much more valuable than what they are paid under the current contract.

That's what I don't understand about associating with the Cali / Mich & Minnesota alliance. Their big unspoken agenda is to prevent a breakaway from the NCAA because the NCAA is a bureaucracy that shares a political agenda with them.

There are schools in both the PAC and B1G which don't agree with the directions of their conferences and may be amenable to a breakaway. If one happened nobody would benefit more than basketball schools because their earnings would approach 40% of a schools athletic revenue. That's over double what they earn now, but it won't happen under the NCAA. It's why I don't understand BB first schools who are willing to die on the NCAA's scraps after they buy votes from the programs there for a handout and the NCAA's self funding 2 endowments which get about 80 million a year.

The ACC Commissioner has a responsibility to find out what the Big Ten and Pac-12 have in mind. He also needs to be talking to ESPN about annexing 2 teams from the Big XII. He then needs to do what's best for his current employer.
(This post was last modified: 08-14-2021 09:20 PM by Hokie Mark.)
08-14-2021 09:19 PM
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
JRsec Offline
Super Moderator
*

Posts: 37,902
Joined: Mar 2012
Reputation: 7737
I Root For: SEC
Location:
Post: #49
RE: How much should the ACC bend backward to get ND?
(08-14-2021 09:19 PM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  
(08-14-2021 09:12 PM)JRsec Wrote:  
(08-14-2021 08:46 PM)ren.hoek Wrote:  
(08-14-2021 07:13 PM)JRsec Wrote:  
(08-14-2021 06:46 PM)ren.hoek Wrote:  Here is my view of things...
1. ND won't join in football. Ever. We should stop pretending this might happen.
2. Even if they did, they would play a full conference schedule just like everyone else. The idea that they'd play less but still be eligible for the championship is utterly ludicrous and would never happen. VT, Clemson, FSU, and any other school that cares about football would revolt.
3. There are no additions not named ND that will add to everyone's bottom line.
4. Divisions should be abolished in favor of a 9 game schedule with 5 permanent and 4 rotating. This ensures the interesting and valuable matchups are annual affairs and allows you to play every team in 2 years.
5. No more FCS games. Those rights are worthless to ESPN. Schedule a G5/6 team instead.

The bolded one is false. Kansas and TCU add marginally. But even if they were pro rata any 2 schools would open up the ACC's contract, activate a renegotiation clause, and get your woefully underpaid contract updated in a way a look in never will, with a comprehensive re-evaluation of T1, T2, and T3 rights. What's more it would add 23-24 (depending on whether the new schools play each other) more games to sell in football alone. Not to mention Kansas is a hoops content multiplier, so added dollars there as well.

I'd hate to add yet another dumpster fire of a football program to the ACC, even though Kansas is unassailably awesome in basketball. The one thing that may drive ACC expansion is the opportunity to renegotiate that awful contract that the previous commissioner, whose name I won't speak, hung around our neck like a millstone. That is an interesting possibility, but I'd prefer to not make ACC football even worse. That being said, football is the primary driver of tv contracts, but I've long thought that the ACC basketball was much more valuable than what they are paid under the current contract.

That's what I don't understand about associating with the Cali / Mich & Minnesota alliance. Their big unspoken agenda is to prevent a breakaway from the NCAA because the NCAA is a bureaucracy that shares a political agenda with them.

There are schools in both the PAC and B1G which don't agree with the directions of their conferences and may be amenable to a breakaway. If one happened nobody would benefit more than basketball schools because their earnings would approach 40% of a schools athletic revenue. That's over double what they earn now, but it won't happen under the NCAA. It's why I don't understand BB first schools who are willing to die on the NCAA's scraps after they buy votes from the programs there for a handout and the NCAA's self funding 2 endowments which get about 80 million a year.

The ACC Commissioner has a responsibility to find out what the Big Ten and Pac-12 have in mind. He also needs to be talking to ESPN about annexing 2 teams from the Big XII. He then needs to do what's best for his current employer.

This #1 at all times.

#2 is correct.

#3 is a worthy trip to get a feel for what's going on but he should have issued a non committal statement after the meeting got played by the press to cause trouble. That's either naive or complicit and either is a bad look.

But #3 is really too high for this. #3 should be gain respect from ESPN and use it to help your charge. Did his trip accomplish that, or raise more questions? IMO, until I see evidence to the contrary he was played.
08-14-2021 09:38 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
nole Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,883
Joined: Mar 2014
Reputation: 210
I Root For: FSU
Location:
Post: #50
RE: How much should the ACC bend backward to get ND?
(08-14-2021 06:25 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  If BC/WF/Duke/Syracuse etc still want to be in a power conference in 15 years I think they are going to have to accept uneven revenue distribution to A) land ND and B) keep FSU and Clemson happy.

With that said, I think the plan should be to move to 16 teams—ND plus a team of their choice.

The conference schedule would only REQUIRE 7 division games (additional OOC games within the conference could be arranged by individual schools).

Moving to 4 rotating pods would help ensure that some of the more exciting match ups occur with greater regularity and ND doesn’t feel “incestuous” by playing the same 6-7 schools each year (ND fan’s words, not mine)

This is correct but I would include anyone that might jump. That is more than just Clemson and FSU (UNC, UVA, Va Tech, Ga Tech, NC State).

But you are correct, those schools need to make this adjustment or cement the future of the ACC which will end like the Big 12.
08-14-2021 09:52 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
random asian guy Offline
All American
*

Posts: 3,192
Joined: Aug 2014
Reputation: 331
I Root For: VT, Georgetown
Location:
Post: #51
RE: How much should the ACC bend backward to get ND?
(08-14-2021 06:25 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  If BC/WF/Duke/Syracuse etc still want to be in a power conference in 15 years I think they are going to have to accept uneven revenue distribution to A) land ND and B) keep FSU and Clemson happy.

With that said, I think the plan should be to move to 16 teams—ND plus a team of their choice.

The conference schedule would only REQUIRE 7 division games (additional OOC games within the conference could be arranged by individual schools).

Moving to 4 rotating pods would help ensure that some of the more exciting match ups occur with greater regularity and ND doesn’t feel “incestuous” by playing the same 6-7 schools each year (ND fan’s words, not mine)

I largely agree with this.

The best offer that the ACC can make is:

1) unequal distribution
2) Navy as 16th member (unless PSU wants to join)
3) four pods and seven conference games for ND
4) ND, Navy, BC, and Pitt in a same pod

Just to be clear, this doesn’t mean that 1) the ACC should make this offer and 2) ND will accept. A big factor would be how much more the ESPN is willing to pay.
08-14-2021 11:47 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Fighting Muskie Offline
Senior Chief Realignmentologist
*

Posts: 11,795
Joined: Sep 2016
Reputation: 789
I Root For: Ohio St, UC,MAC
Location: Biden Cesspool
Post: #52
RE: How much should the ACC bend backward to get ND?
(08-14-2021 11:47 PM)random asian guy Wrote:  
(08-14-2021 06:25 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  If BC/WF/Duke/Syracuse etc still want to be in a power conference in 15 years I think they are going to have to accept uneven revenue distribution to A) land ND and B) keep FSU and Clemson happy.

With that said, I think the plan should be to move to 16 teams—ND plus a team of their choice.

The conference schedule would only REQUIRE 7 division games (additional OOC games within the conference could be arranged by individual schools).

Moving to 4 rotating pods would help ensure that some of the more exciting match ups occur with greater regularity and ND doesn’t feel “incestuous” by playing the same 6-7 schools each year (ND fan’s words, not mine)

I largely agree with this.

The best offer that the ACC can make is:

1) unequal distribution
2) Navy as 16th member (unless PSU wants to join)
3) four pods and seven conference games for ND
4) ND, Navy, BC, and Pitt in a same pod

Just to be clear, this doesn’t mean that 1) the ACC should make this offer and 2) ND will accept. A big factor would be how much more the ESPN is willing to pay.

Navy is probably not interested in ACC Football membership.
08-16-2021 01:15 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
TerryD Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 14,881
Joined: Feb 2006
Reputation: 898
I Root For: Notre Dame
Location: Grayson Highlands
Post: #53
RE: How much should the ACC bend backward to get ND?
(08-16-2021 01:15 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  
(08-14-2021 11:47 PM)random asian guy Wrote:  
(08-14-2021 06:25 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  If BC/WF/Duke/Syracuse etc still want to be in a power conference in 15 years I think they are going to have to accept uneven revenue distribution to A) land ND and B) keep FSU and Clemson happy.

With that said, I think the plan should be to move to 16 teams—ND plus a team of their choice.

The conference schedule would only REQUIRE 7 division games (additional OOC games within the conference could be arranged by individual schools).

Moving to 4 rotating pods would help ensure that some of the more exciting match ups occur with greater regularity and ND doesn’t feel “incestuous” by playing the same 6-7 schools each year (ND fan’s words, not mine)

I largely agree with this.

The best offer that the ACC can make is:

1) unequal distribution
2) Navy as 16th member (unless PSU wants to join)
3) four pods and seven conference games for ND
4) ND, Navy, BC, and Pitt in a same pod

Just to be clear, this doesn’t mean that 1) the ACC should make this offer and 2) ND will accept. A big factor would be how much more the ESPN is willing to pay.

Navy is probably not interested in ACC Football membership.

Neither is ND, but here we are.
08-16-2021 02:14 PM
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
IHAVETRIED Offline
Special Teams
*

Posts: 561
Joined: Oct 2013
Reputation: 43
I Root For: Louisville
Location:
Post: #54
RE: How much should the ACC bend backward to get ND?
(08-16-2021 02:14 PM)TerryD Wrote:  
(08-16-2021 01:15 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  
(08-14-2021 11:47 PM)random asian guy Wrote:  
(08-14-2021 06:25 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  If BC/WF/Duke/Syracuse etc still want to be in a power conference in 15 years I think they are going to have to accept uneven revenue distribution to A) land ND and B) keep FSU and Clemson happy.

With that said, I think the plan should be to move to 16 teams—ND plus a team of their choice.

The conference schedule would only REQUIRE 7 division games (additional OOC games within the conference could be arranged by individual schools).

Moving to 4 rotating pods would help ensure that some of the more exciting match ups occur with greater regularity and ND doesn’t feel “incestuous” by playing the same 6-7 schools each year (ND fan’s words, not mine)

I largely agree with this.

The best offer that the ACC can make is:

1) unequal distribution
2) Navy as 16th member (unless PSU wants to join)
3) four pods and seven conference games for ND
4) ND, Navy, BC, and Pitt in a same pod

Just to be clear, this doesn’t mean that 1) the ACC should make this offer and 2) ND will accept. A big factor would be how much more the ESPN is willing to pay.

Navy is probably not interested in ACC Football membership.

Neither is ND, but here we are.

I just want to say that I don't see ND doing this under any circumstances, but IF they were forced into a corner, this could be a better outcome than many they might think of.
08-16-2021 02:18 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Wolfman Offline
All American
*

Posts: 4,459
Joined: Nov 2011
Reputation: 181
I Root For: The Cartel
Location: Raleigh, NC
Post: #55
RE: How much should the ACC bend backward to get ND?
None. ND and the ACC have a good partnership. As an ACC fan I'd love to see ND bring football in. As a realist, I know that isn't going to happen. I'm OK with that.

Navy likes their Olympic sports in the Patriot league. If they didn't they would have moved them to the AAC a long time ago.
08-17-2021 07:49 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
ken d Online
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 17,335
Joined: Dec 2013
Reputation: 1211
I Root For: college sports
Location: Raleigh
Post: #56
RE: How much should the ACC bend backward to get ND?
(08-14-2021 08:46 PM)ren.hoek Wrote:  I'd hate to add yet another dumpster fire of a football program to the ACC, even though Kansas is unassailably awesome in basketball. The one thing that may drive ACC expansion is the opportunity to renegotiate that awful contract that the previous commissioner, whose name I won't speak, hung around our neck like a millstone. That is an interesting possibility, but I'd prefer to not make ACC football even worse. That being said, football is the primary driver of tv contracts, but I've long thought that the ACC basketball was much more valuable than what they are paid under the current contract.

Renegotiation is a two way street. There is no assurance that the result will be better for the ACC.

As far as the blame for the "bad" ESPN contract, schools like Clemson and Florida State have nobody to blame but themselves. If it's so bad, why did they vote for it? It had to be unanimous or it wouldn't have happened. So those schools must have believed it was better than any alternative they could get (including leaving the ACC). My guess is - they were right.
08-17-2021 01:58 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Fighting Muskie Offline
Senior Chief Realignmentologist
*

Posts: 11,795
Joined: Sep 2016
Reputation: 789
I Root For: Ohio St, UC,MAC
Location: Biden Cesspool
Post: #57
RE: How much should the ACC bend backward to get ND?
(08-14-2021 06:46 PM)ren.hoek Wrote:  
(08-14-2021 06:25 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  If BC/WF/Duke/Syracuse etc still want to be in a power conference in 15 years I think they are going to have to accept uneven revenue distribution to A) land ND and B) keep FSU and Clemson happy.

With that said, I think the plan should be to move to 16 teams—ND plus a team of their choice.

The conference schedule would only REQUIRE 7 division games (additional OOC games within the conference could be arranged by individual schools).

Moving to 4 rotating pods would help ensure that some of the more exciting match ups occur with greater regularity and ND doesn’t feel “incestuous” by playing the same 6-7 schools each year (ND fan’s words, not mine)
Here is my view of things...
1. ND won't join in football. Ever. We should stop pretending this might happen.
2. Even if they did, they would play a full conference schedule just like everyone else. The idea that they'd play less but still be eligible for the championship is utterly ludicrous and would never happen. VT, Clemson, FSU, and any other school that cares about football would revolt.
3. There are no additions not named ND that will add to everyone's bottom line.
4. Divisions should be abolished in favor of a 9 game schedule with 5 permanent and 4 rotating. This ensures the interesting and valuable matchups are annual affairs and allows you to play every team in 2 years.
5. No more FCS games. Those rights are worthless to ESPN. Schedule a G5/6 team instead.

The 7 required conference games isn’t just for ND—it would extend to the whole conference. Some schools could opt for just 7, many would probably prefer 8-9, but they’d all have that scheduling freedom.

You need a 16th because even divisions work better—not really getting around that one. And divisionless doesn’t work—I did a study on it. About 1/3rd of the time you get a messy tie.

I hate FCS games too and never advocated for them.
08-19-2021 01:31 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Statefan Offline
Banned

Posts: 3,511
Joined: May 2018
I Root For: .
Location:
Post: #58
RE: How much should the ACC bend backward to get ND?
(08-19-2021 01:31 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  
(08-14-2021 06:46 PM)ren.hoek Wrote:  
(08-14-2021 06:25 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  If BC/WF/Duke/Syracuse etc still want to be in a power conference in 15 years I think they are going to have to accept uneven revenue distribution to A) land ND and B) keep FSU and Clemson happy.

With that said, I think the plan should be to move to 16 teams—ND plus a team of their choice.

The conference schedule would only REQUIRE 7 division games (additional OOC games within the conference could be arranged by individual schools).

Moving to 4 rotating pods would help ensure that some of the more exciting match ups occur with greater regularity and ND doesn’t feel “incestuous” by playing the same 6-7 schools each year (ND fan’s words, not mine)
Here is my view of things...
1. ND won't join in football. Ever. We should stop pretending this might happen.
2. Even if they did, they would play a full conference schedule just like everyone else. The idea that they'd play less but still be eligible for the championship is utterly ludicrous and would never happen. VT, Clemson, FSU, and any other school that cares about football would revolt.
3. There are no additions not named ND that will add to everyone's bottom line.
4. Divisions should be abolished in favor of a 9 game schedule with 5 permanent and 4 rotating. This ensures the interesting and valuable matchups are annual affairs and allows you to play every team in 2 years.
5. No more FCS games. Those rights are worthless to ESPN. Schedule a G5/6 team instead.

The 7 required conference games isn’t just for ND—it would extend to the whole conference. Some schools could opt for just 7, many would probably prefer 8-9, but they’d all have that scheduling freedom.

You need a 16th because even divisions work better—not really getting around that one. And divisionless doesn’t work—I did a study on it. About 1/3rd of the time you get a messy tie.

I hate FCS games too and never advocated for them.


We have been breaking ties in this conference since 1921. I understand that others may not grasp the concept.
08-19-2021 02:23 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Hokie Mark Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 23,727
Joined: Sep 2011
Reputation: 1392
I Root For: VT, ACC teams
Location: Greensboro, NC
Post: #59
RE: How much should the ACC bend backward to get ND?
(08-19-2021 01:31 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  You need a 16th because even divisions work better—not really getting around that one. And divisionless doesn’t work—I did a study on it. About 1/3rd of the time you get a messy tie.

Not sure what kind of study was done, but I find it unlikely that divisionless scheduling results in significantly more ties than rigid divisions.

Also, remind me how long the Big Ten played with 11 teams - did that seem to be a major problem?
08-19-2021 02:33 PM
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Statefan Offline
Banned

Posts: 3,511
Joined: May 2018
I Root For: .
Location:
Post: #60
RE: How much should the ACC bend backward to get ND?
(08-19-2021 01:31 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  
(08-14-2021 06:46 PM)ren.hoek Wrote:  
(08-14-2021 06:25 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  If BC/WF/Duke/Syracuse etc still want to be in a power conference in 15 years I think they are going to have to accept uneven revenue distribution to A) land ND and B) keep FSU and Clemson happy.

With that said, I think the plan should be to move to 16 teams—ND plus a team of their choice.

The conference schedule would only REQUIRE 7 division games (additional OOC games within the conference could be arranged by individual schools).

Moving to 4 rotating pods would help ensure that some of the more exciting match ups occur with greater regularity and ND doesn’t feel “incestuous” by playing the same 6-7 schools each year (ND fan’s words, not mine)
Here is my view of things...
1. ND won't join in football. Ever. We should stop pretending this might happen.
2. Even if they did, they would play a full conference schedule just like everyone else. The idea that they'd play less but still be eligible for the championship is utterly ludicrous and would never happen. VT, Clemson, FSU, and any other school that cares about football would revolt.
3. There are no additions not named ND that will add to everyone's bottom line.
4. Divisions should be abolished in favor of a 9 game schedule with 5 permanent and 4 rotating. This ensures the interesting and valuable matchups are annual affairs and allows you to play every team in 2 years.
5. No more FCS games. Those rights are worthless to ESPN. Schedule a G5/6 team instead.

The 7 required conference games isn’t just for ND—it would extend to the whole conference. Some schools could opt for just 7, many would probably prefer 8-9, but they’d all have that scheduling freedom.

You need a 16th because even divisions work better—not really getting around that one. And divisionless doesn’t work—I did a study on it. About 1/3rd of the time you get a messy tie.

I hate FCS games too and never advocated for them.


We have been breaking ties in this conference since 1921. I understand that others may not grasp the concept. In 2019 Syracuse lost to Pitt, so Pitt plays Clemson. in 2015 Clemson lost to GT so GT would have played FSU. You have to go all the way back to 2008 to find a complicated finish with BC, VT, FSU, and GT all tied. Then it becomes an easy round robin comparison with BC and GT having just one loss against the group, while FSU and VT had two.

It's not rocket science.

Once every quarter of a century you might have a set of ties that require a coin flip. The aggrieved team will always be able to claim what they will.
(This post was last modified: 08-19-2021 02:42 PM by Statefan.)
08-19-2021 02:39 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 




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


Copyright © 2002-2024 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, © 2002-2024 MyBB Group.