(04-18-2022 02:38 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(04-18-2022 01:27 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(04-18-2022 01:13 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(04-18-2022 12:45 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(04-18-2022 04:59 AM)XLance Wrote:  If the stories are true that FOX and the B1G have wrapped up their negotiations and plan to make the terms public around Memorial Day, it would only make sense that if the B1G were going to expand, the new school(s) would be included.
It's interesting that the USC talk has surfaced, now.
The PAC without USC may be on par with the Big 12 losing Texas and Oklahoma.

In terms of % of value the PAC 12 would need to lose their top 5 value of schools to equal the % of loss suffered by the Big 12. In order of value: Washington, Oregon, U.S.C., U.C.L.A., and Arizona State would do it. Add Colorado as a bridge and you have a very nice addition. Only U.C.L.A. would likely not get approval. Sub Utah and you now have contiguity all the way to the B1G, and another state.

JR, there is no combination anywhere that could match Texas and Oklahoma in terms of value for any conference.
But the B1G needs to start somewhere and USC is probably at the top of the list in terms of value that is contract available within the next few years. I would probably pair with Arizona (large, 50K, AAU, no California, Oregon or Washington political impediments).
If the SEC chose to get larger, the B1G could counter with Stanford/Notre Dame (if contract available).

X, the SEC can gain all of the balance, academics, and value it wants by having a solid, but expanded South.

We are extremely pigskin strong. We are headed for 12 P games and more than a doubling of hoops values. The SEC wants to keep the B1G out of the South and has no interest West of Oklahoma and Texas.

Duke, Kansas, North Carolina and Virginia accomplish many objectives for the SEC.
All enhance academics. Kansas sets the NW corner. Viginia sets the NE corner. Duke and UNC and Kansas when added to Kentucky gives the SEC the 4 winningest basketball programs of all time and when added to SEC hoops makes it #1 in hoops. None of those 4 are football giants so when added to Vanderbilt and Kentucky (usually) they balance the SEC's football strength when 12 P games will be the norm. And defensively they essentially lock the B1G out of our region.

It would be the best offensive and defensive move that the SEC and ESPN could make.

I am not disagreeing with your assessment, I'm just trying to explore a path to get the B1G to 20 also.
Take your SEC blinders off for a minute, nobody is trying to horn on the SEC's solid south.

I gave you a path to the B1G at 20. Arizona/Stanford, Colorado, Oregon, Southern Cal, Utah, Washington.

Stanford adds more value than Arizona, but Arizona adds a state. Arizona State is better value wise than both but is not AAU.

Now, as to blinders I don't have them. I'm just focused on the South because that is what the SEC has stated it is focused upon. Once that is secure what the Big Ten does or doesn't do is of no consequence to us.

(04-15-2022 08:28 PM)JRsec Wrote:  Clemson, Florida, Florida State, Georgia, Georgia Tech, South Carolina
Alabama, Auburn, Mississippi, Mississippi State, Tennessee, Vanderbilt
Arkansas, Louisiana State, Missouri, Oklahoma, Texas, Texas A&M
Duke, Kentucky, North Carolina, N.C. State, Virginia, Virginia Tech

Hard to find fault in that organization. How about a wild card.

Vanderbilt as a non-FB member. Backfill Vanderbilt with LSU. Backfill LSU with Kansas.

In case you need two or four non-FB members for balance, in order of preference: Wake Forest, Georgetown, Villanova

(04-18-2022 03:14 PM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:  

(04-15-2022 08:28 PM)JRsec Wrote:  Clemson, Florida, Florida State, Georgia, Georgia Tech, South Carolina
Alabama, Auburn, Mississippi, Mississippi State, Tennessee, Vanderbilt
Arkansas, Louisiana State, Missouri, Oklahoma, Texas, Texas A&M
Duke, Kentucky, North Carolina, N.C. State, Virginia, Virginia Tech

Hard to find fault in that organization. How about a wild card.

Vanderbilt as a non-FB member. Backfill Vanderbilt with LSU. Backfill LSU with Kansas.

In case you need two or four non-FB members for balance, in order of preference: Wake Forest, Georgetown, Villanova

I think Wake Forest and Vanderbilt as non football members could be accommodated. I don't see the SEC being interested in any school outside of the South other than Kansas because of their fit with Oklahoma, Texas and Missouri, and because they establish a firm Northwest Corner to the New SEC footprint. Take a peek at the map. The SEC wants its identity to be Southern.

(04-18-2022 02:46 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(04-18-2022 02:38 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(04-18-2022 01:27 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(04-18-2022 01:13 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(04-18-2022 12:45 PM)JRsec Wrote:  In terms of % of value the PAC 12 would need to lose their top 5 value of schools to equal the % of loss suffered by the Big 12. In order of value: Washington, Oregon, U.S.C., U.C.L.A., and Arizona State would do it. Add Colorado as a bridge and you have a very nice addition. Only U.C.L.A. would likely not get approval. Sub Utah and you now have contiguity all the way to the B1G, and another state.

JR, there is no combination anywhere that could match Texas and Oklahoma in terms of value for any conference.
But the B1G needs to start somewhere and USC is probably at the top of the list in terms of value that is contract available within the next few years. I would probably pair with Arizona (large, 50K, AAU, no California, Oregon or Washington political impediments).
If the SEC chose to get larger, the B1G could counter with Stanford/Notre Dame (if contract available).

X, the SEC can gain all of the balance, academics, and value it wants by having a solid, but expanded South.

We are extremely pigskin strong. We are headed for 12 P games and more than a doubling of hoops values. The SEC wants to keep the B1G out of the South and has no interest West of Oklahoma and Texas.

Duke, Kansas, North Carolina and Virginia accomplish many objectives for the SEC.
All enhance academics. Kansas sets the NW corner. Viginia sets the NE corner. Duke and UNC and Kansas when added to Kentucky gives the SEC the 4 winningest basketball programs of all time and when added to SEC hoops makes it #1 in hoops. None of those 4 are football giants so when added to Vanderbilt and Kentucky (usually) they balance the SEC's football strength when 12 P games will be the norm. And defensively they essentially lock the B1G out of our region.

It would be the best offensive and defensive move that the SEC and ESPN could make.

I am not disagreeing with your assessment, I'm just trying to explore a path to get the B1G to 20 also.
Take your SEC blinders off for a minute, nobody is trying to horn on the SEC's solid south.

I gave you a path to the B1G at 20. Arizona/Stanford, Colorado, Oregon, Southern Cal, Utah, Washington.

Stanford adds more value than Arizona, but Arizona adds a state. Arizona State is better value wise than both but is not AAU.

Now, as to blinders I don't have them. I'm just focused on the South because that is what the SEC has stated it is focused upon. Once that is secure what the Big Ten does or doesn't do is of no consequence to us.

A big tent of 40 to 48 teams in a P2 always made sense from a corporate perspective.

I’m a fan of the north-south split as next step

Having coterminous conferences is an option if we truly reached a single entity. A BIG FSU hating a SEC UF can make a region watch both conferences. You in essence can nearly double book, but that would take complete overhaul and likely destroy the fibers that make college sports work

(04-18-2022 03:18 PM)JRsec Wrote:  I think Wake Forest and Vanderbilt as non football members could be accommodated. I don't see the SEC being interested in any school outside of the South other than Kansas because of their fit with Oklahoma, Texas and Missouri, and because they establish a firm Northwest Corner to the New SEC footprint. Take a peek at the map. The SEC wants its identity to be Southern.

The pool of schools in the SE at the big boy table who'd be willing to accept a position that states "we can't really compete in football" is pretty much two: Vandy, WF. If you needed to take more than that ... slim pickins.


Sorry I hit edit instead of reply.

This is JRsec's reply:

The thing is taking two is an accommodation. It's even numbers so it won't impact basketball and baseball scheduling and the need for more just doesn't exist so it's not a restriction on options. I can see Wake and Vandy needing accommodation to smooth out the move, which would be the only reason to do this.

(04-18-2022 01:27 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(04-18-2022 01:13 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(04-18-2022 12:45 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(04-18-2022 04:59 AM)XLance Wrote:  If the stories are true that FOX and the B1G have wrapped up their negotiations and plan to make the terms public around Memorial Day, it would only make sense that if the B1G were going to expand, the new school(s) would be included.
It's interesting that the USC talk has surfaced, now.
The PAC without USC may be on par with the Big 12 losing Texas and Oklahoma.

In terms of % of value the PAC 12 would need to lose their top 5 value of schools to equal the % of loss suffered by the Big 12. In order of value: Washington, Oregon, U.S.C., U.C.L.A., and Arizona State would do it. Add Colorado as a bridge and you have a very nice addition. Only U.C.L.A. would likely not get approval. Sub Utah and you now have contiguity all the way to the B1G, and another state.

JR, there is no combination anywhere that could match Texas and Oklahoma in terms of value for any conference.
But the B1G needs to start somewhere and USC is probably at the top of the list in terms of value that is contract available within the next few years. I would probably pair with Arizona (large, 50K, AAU, no California, Oregon or Washington political impediments).
If the SEC chose to get larger, the B1G could counter with Stanford/Notre Dame (if contract available).

X, the SEC can gain all of the balance, academics, and value it wants by having a solid, but expanded South.

We are extremely pigskin strong. We are headed for 12 P games and more than a doubling of hoops values. The SEC wants to keep the B1G out of the South and has no interest West of Oklahoma and Texas.

Duke, Kansas, North Carolina and Virginia accomplish many objectives for the SEC.
All enhance academics. Kansas sets the NW corner. Viginia sets the NE corner. Duke and UNC and Kansas when added to Kentucky gives the SEC the 4 winningest basketball programs of all time and when added to SEC hoops makes it #1 in hoops. None of those 4 are football giants so when added to Vanderbilt and Kentucky (usually) they balance the SEC's football strength when 12 P games will be the norm. And defensively they essentially lock the B1G out of our region.

It would be the best offensive and defensive move that the SEC and ESPN could make.

When, pray tell, do you expect these things to take place, JR?

(04-20-2022 12:36 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(04-18-2022 01:27 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(04-18-2022 01:13 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(04-18-2022 12:45 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(04-18-2022 04:59 AM)XLance Wrote:  If the stories are true that FOX and the B1G have wrapped up their negotiations and plan to make the terms public around Memorial Day, it would only make sense that if the B1G were going to expand, the new school(s) would be included.
It's interesting that the USC talk has surfaced, now.
The PAC without USC may be on par with the Big 12 losing Texas and Oklahoma.

In terms of % of value the PAC 12 would need to lose their top 5 value of schools to equal the % of loss suffered by the Big 12. In order of value: Washington, Oregon, U.S.C., U.C.L.A., and Arizona State would do it. Add Colorado as a bridge and you have a very nice addition. Only U.C.L.A. would likely not get approval. Sub Utah and you now have contiguity all the way to the B1G, and another state.

JR, there is no combination anywhere that could match Texas and Oklahoma in terms of value for any conference.
But the B1G needs to start somewhere and USC is probably at the top of the list in terms of value that is contract available within the next few years. I would probably pair with Arizona (large, 50K, AAU, no California, Oregon or Washington political impediments).
If the SEC chose to get larger, the B1G could counter with Stanford/Notre Dame (if contract available).

X, the SEC can gain all of the balance, academics, and value it wants by having a solid, but expanded South.

We are extremely pigskin strong. We are headed for 12 P games and more than a doubling of hoops values. The SEC wants to keep the B1G out of the South and has no interest West of Oklahoma and Texas.

Duke, Kansas, North Carolina and Virginia accomplish many objectives for the SEC.
All enhance academics. Kansas sets the NW corner. Viginia sets the NE corner. Duke and UNC and Kansas when added to Kentucky gives the SEC the 4 winningest basketball programs of all time and when added to SEC hoops makes it #1 in hoops. None of those 4 are football giants so when added to Vanderbilt and Kentucky (usually) they balance the SEC's football strength when 12 P games will be the norm. And defensively they essentially lock the B1G out of our region.

It would be the best offensive and defensive move that the SEC and ESPN could make.

When, pray tell, do you expect these things to take place, JR?

Since college sports became a thing realignment and consolidation have moved at glacial speeds, slow and steady, but always moving. But even glaciers can have sudden movement, even massive sudden movement when they calve. This can be due to long pent up pressure or sudden changes in the environment. We are undergoing not one, but several sudden changes in the environment. NIL, Pay for Play, a National Debt Crisis, a Pandemic, Bommer Die Off which eliminates many non corporate contributions and a decline in overall college enrollment.

While I realize that you are trying to be smug, natural pressure wise the ACC schools are staring into a financial deficit of 40 - 50 million per year to the B1G and SEC, which I might as well call your abyss. So toss in the aforementioned environmental pressures working in concert upon what has been glacial change until recently and I would say calving could happen at anytime in the next 2 to 5 years, or even as soon as, though less probably, Summer of 2023.

(04-18-2022 03:14 PM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:  

(04-15-2022 08:28 PM)JRsec Wrote:  Clemson, Florida, Florida State, Georgia, Georgia Tech, South Carolina
Alabama, Auburn, Mississippi, Mississippi State, Tennessee, Vanderbilt
Arkansas, Louisiana State, Missouri, Oklahoma, Texas, Texas A&M
Duke, Kentucky, North Carolina, N.C. State, Virginia, Virginia Tech

Hard to find fault in that organization. How about a wild card.

Vanderbilt as a non-FB member. Backfill Vanderbilt with LSU. Backfill LSU with Kansas.

In case you need two or four non-FB members for balance, in order of preference: Wake Forest, Georgetown, Villanova

Maybe trade Louisville for NC State to give UK an instate rival in the “basketball” division.

(04-18-2022 03:14 PM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:  

(04-15-2022 08:28 PM)JRsec Wrote:  Clemson, Florida, Florida State, Georgia, Georgia Tech, South Carolina
Alabama, Auburn, Mississippi, Mississippi State, Tennessee, Vanderbilt
Arkansas, Louisiana State, Missouri, Oklahoma, Texas, Texas A&M
Duke, Kentucky, North Carolina, N.C. State, Virginia, Virginia Tech

Hard to find fault in that organization. How about a wild card.

Vanderbilt as a non-FB member. Backfill Vanderbilt with LSU. Backfill LSU with Kansas.

In case you need two or four non-FB members for balance, in order of preference: Wake Forest, Georgetown, Villanova

Not really a wild card to me, because I have been saying that for awhile. Frank the Tank is the one who has been fighting that one tooth and nail. To him, it's too much against "tradition." I swear some of these traditionalists would rather bungee jump off the Empire State Building than "abandon" or "change tradition."

(04-18-2022 03:14 PM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:  

(04-15-2022 08:28 PM)JRsec Wrote:  Clemson, Florida, Florida State, Georgia, Georgia Tech, South Carolina
Alabama, Auburn, Mississippi, Mississippi State, Tennessee, Vanderbilt
Arkansas, Louisiana State, Missouri, Oklahoma, Texas, Texas A&M
Duke, Kentucky, North Carolina, N.C. State, Virginia, Virginia Tech

Hard to find fault in that organization. How about a wild card.

Vanderbilt as a non-FB member. Backfill Vanderbilt with LSU. Backfill LSU with Kansas.

In case you need two or four non-FB members for balance, in order of preference: Wake Forest, Georgetown, Villanova

How about another wildcard: USF, UCF, or East Carolina as a football-only member to balance out non-football Vandy??

(04-18-2022 02:38 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(04-18-2022 01:27 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(04-18-2022 01:13 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(04-18-2022 12:45 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(04-18-2022 04:59 AM)XLance Wrote:  If the stories are true that FOX and the B1G have wrapped up their negotiations and plan to make the terms public around Memorial Day, it would only make sense that if the B1G were going to expand, the new school(s) would be included.
It's interesting that the USC talk has surfaced, now.
The PAC without USC may be on par with the Big 12 losing Texas and Oklahoma.

In terms of % of value the PAC 12 would need to lose their top 5 value of schools to equal the % of loss suffered by the Big 12. In order of value: Washington, Oregon, U.S.C., U.C.L.A., and Arizona State would do it. Add Colorado as a bridge and you have a very nice addition. Only U.C.L.A. would likely not get approval. Sub Utah and you now have contiguity all the way to the B1G, and another state.

JR, there is no combination anywhere that could match Texas and Oklahoma in terms of value for any conference.
But the B1G needs to start somewhere and USC is probably at the top of the list in terms of value that is contract available within the next few years. I would probably pair with Arizona (large, 50K, AAU, no California, Oregon or Washington political impediments).
If the SEC chose to get larger, the B1G could counter with Stanford/Notre Dame (if contract available).

X, the SEC can gain all of the balance, academics, and value it wants by having a solid, but expanded South.

We are extremely pigskin strong. We are headed for 12 P games and more than a doubling of hoops values. The SEC wants to keep the B1G out of the South and has no interest West of Oklahoma and Texas.

Duke, Kansas, North Carolina and Virginia accomplish many objectives for the SEC.
All enhance academics. Kansas sets the NW corner. Viginia sets the NE corner. Duke and UNC and Kansas when added to Kentucky gives the SEC the 4 winningest basketball programs of all time and when added to SEC hoops makes it #1 in hoops. None of those 4 are football giants so when added to Vanderbilt and Kentucky (usually) they balance the SEC's football strength when 12 P games will be the norm. And defensively they essentially lock the B1G out of our region.

It would be the best offensive and defensive move that the SEC and ESPN could make.

I am not disagreeing with your assessment, I'm just trying to explore a path to get the B1G to 20 also.
Take your SEC blinders off for a minute, nobody is trying to horn on the SEC's solid south.

XLance, think like Jeff Bezos or one of Sam Walton's kids for a minute. You want a monopoly. You want to block competitors. I can guarantee you right now that Bezos and Sam Walton's children could care a less about Microsoft or McDonald's. Why?? They aren't competitors!! Statefan and myself have already laid out a plan how the B1G could compete, and yes, that does involve taking some southern schools, albeit different ones that you have not really bothered to mention. But right now, really the SEC could care less what the B1G does until the states of Georgia and Florida are involved. E$PN is different and wants to protect the entire ACC and SEC. They want zero threats to their monopoly, and they will use whatever weapons that they have in their arsenal (i.e. ACC GoR, SEC, loss of exposure from E$PN tv stations) to protect it.

(04-21-2022 01:19 AM)DawgNBama Wrote:  

(04-18-2022 02:38 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(04-18-2022 01:27 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(04-18-2022 01:13 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(04-18-2022 12:45 PM)JRsec Wrote:  In terms of % of value the PAC 12 would need to lose their top 5 value of schools to equal the % of loss suffered by the Big 12. In order of value: Washington, Oregon, U.S.C., U.C.L.A., and Arizona State would do it. Add Colorado as a bridge and you have a very nice addition. Only U.C.L.A. would likely not get approval. Sub Utah and you now have contiguity all the way to the B1G, and another state.

JR, there is no combination anywhere that could match Texas and Oklahoma in terms of value for any conference.
But the B1G needs to start somewhere and USC is probably at the top of the list in terms of value that is contract available within the next few years. I would probably pair with Arizona (large, 50K, AAU, no California, Oregon or Washington political impediments).
If the SEC chose to get larger, the B1G could counter with Stanford/Notre Dame (if contract available).

X, the SEC can gain all of the balance, academics, and value it wants by having a solid, but expanded South.

We are extremely pigskin strong. We are headed for 12 P games and more than a doubling of hoops values. The SEC wants to keep the B1G out of the South and has no interest West of Oklahoma and Texas.

Duke, Kansas, North Carolina and Virginia accomplish many objectives for the SEC.
All enhance academics. Kansas sets the NW corner. Viginia sets the NE corner. Duke and UNC and Kansas when added to Kentucky gives the SEC the 4 winningest basketball programs of all time and when added to SEC hoops makes it #1 in hoops. None of those 4 are football giants so when added to Vanderbilt and Kentucky (usually) they balance the SEC's football strength when 12 P games will be the norm. And defensively they essentially lock the B1G out of our region.

It would be the best offensive and defensive move that the SEC and ESPN could make.

I am not disagreeing with your assessment, I'm just trying to explore a path to get the B1G to 20 also.
Take your SEC blinders off for a minute, nobody is trying to horn on the SEC's solid south.

XLance, think like Jeff Bezos or one of Sam Walton's kids for a minute. You want a monopoly. You want to block competitors. I can guarantee you right now that Bezos and Sam Walton's children could care a less about Microsoft or McDonald's. Why?? They aren't competitors!! Statefan and myself have already laid out a plan how the B1G could compete, and yes, that does involve taking some southern schools, albeit different ones that you have not really bothered to mention. But right now, really the SEC could care less what the B1G does until the states of Georgia and Florida are involved. E$PN is different and wants to protect the entire ACC and SEC. They want zero threats to their monopoly, and they will use whatever weapons that they have in their arsenal (i.e. ACC GoR, SEC, loss of exposure from E$PN tv stations) to protect it.

Please refresh my memory. Which southern schools were you and Statefan suggesting that the B1G should expand with?

If the Big Ten were to expand into the SE, their first choices would likely be UVA and UNC, after which they'd consider Clemson and Georgia Tech.

If ESPN and/or the SEC thought that was likely to happen, they'd jump through hoops to block the B1G by absorbing UVA and UNC into the SEC - taking Duke as well, if necessary.

The fact that Clemson and FSU "fit" in the SEC is irrelevant.

The fact that Kentucky and South Carolina "fit" in the ACC is irrelevant.

ESPN's monopoly on the SE is the driving force now.

If the ACC loses those 3 teams above, they could be replaced with WVU, Cincinnati, and UCF without losing ANY football power. What's more, I'm not convinced that ESPN wouldn't pay the new ACC MORE because there would be better football match-ups.

(04-21-2022 04:26 AM)XLance Wrote:  

(04-21-2022 01:19 AM)DawgNBama Wrote:  

(04-18-2022 02:38 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(04-18-2022 01:27 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(04-18-2022 01:13 PM)XLance Wrote:  JR, there is no combination anywhere that could match Texas and Oklahoma in terms of value for any conference.
But the B1G needs to start somewhere and USC is probably at the top of the list in terms of value that is contract available within the next few years. I would probably pair with Arizona (large, 50K, AAU, no California, Oregon or Washington political impediments).
If the SEC chose to get larger, the B1G could counter with Stanford/Notre Dame (if contract available).

X, the SEC can gain all of the balance, academics, and value it wants by having a solid, but expanded South.

We are extremely pigskin strong. We are headed for 12 P games and more than a doubling of hoops values. The SEC wants to keep the B1G out of the South and has no interest West of Oklahoma and Texas.

Duke, Kansas, North Carolina and Virginia accomplish many objectives for the SEC.
All enhance academics. Kansas sets the NW corner. Viginia sets the NE corner. Duke and UNC and Kansas when added to Kentucky gives the SEC the 4 winningest basketball programs of all time and when added to SEC hoops makes it #1 in hoops. None of those 4 are football giants so when added to Vanderbilt and Kentucky (usually) they balance the SEC's football strength when 12 P games will be the norm. And defensively they essentially lock the B1G out of our region.

It would be the best offensive and defensive move that the SEC and ESPN could make.

I am not disagreeing with your assessment, I'm just trying to explore a path to get the B1G to 20 also.
Take your SEC blinders off for a minute, nobody is trying to horn on the SEC's solid south.

XLance, think like Jeff Bezos or one of Sam Walton's kids for a minute. You want a monopoly. You want to block competitors. I can guarantee you right now that Bezos and Sam Walton's children could care a less about Microsoft or McDonald's. Why?? They aren't competitors!! Statefan and myself have already laid out a plan how the B1G could compete, and yes, that does involve taking some southern schools, albeit different ones that you have not really bothered to mention. But right now, really the SEC could care less what the B1G does until the states of Georgia and Florida are involved. E$PN is different and wants to protect the entire ACC and SEC. They want zero threats to their monopoly, and they will use whatever weapons that they have in their arsenal (i.e. ACC GoR, SEC, loss of exposure from E$PN tv stations) to protect it.

Please refresh my memory. Which southern schools were you and Statefan suggesting that the B1G should expand with?

NC State and Virginia Tech

(04-21-2022 09:43 AM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  If the Big Ten were to expand into the SE, their first choices would likely be UVA and UNC, after which they'd consider Clemson and Georgia Tech.

If ESPN and/or the SEC thought that was likely to happen, they'd jump through hoops to block the B1G by absorbing UVA and UNC into the SEC - taking Duke as well, if necessary.

The fact that Clemson and FSU "fit" in the SEC is irrelevant.

The fact that Kentucky and South Carolina "fit" in the ACC is irrelevant.

ESPN's monopoly on the SE is the driving force now.

If the ACC loses those 3 teams above, they could be replaced with WVU, Cincinnati, and UCF without losing ANY football power. What's more, I'm not convinced that ESPN wouldn't pay the new ACC MORE because there would be better football match-ups.

Interesting scenario Mark. Of course the biggest loser(s) would be Carolina, UVa, and Duke.
Being perpetually destined for mediocrity on the gridiron with not hope of success even with more money in your pocket is not what I would call a win-win, or give enough hope to boosters to reach a little deeper in their pockets. None of those three are very successful in football now, but at least they have hope that one day........

Actually you hit on something that would actually make the ACC and the SEC more money:
Move Clemson and Florida State into the SEC where they fit better.
Move Kentucky and South Carolina into the ACC with two of the four (USF, UCF, Cincinnati, and West Virginia).

(04-21-2022 03:11 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(04-21-2022 09:43 AM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  If the Big Ten were to expand into the SE, their first choices would likely be UVA and UNC, after which they'd consider Clemson and Georgia Tech.

If ESPN and/or the SEC thought that was likely to happen, they'd jump through hoops to block the B1G by absorbing UVA and UNC into the SEC - taking Duke as well, if necessary.

The fact that Clemson and FSU "fit" in the SEC is irrelevant.

The fact that Kentucky and South Carolina "fit" in the ACC is irrelevant.

ESPN's monopoly on the SE is the driving force now.

If the ACC loses those 3 teams above, they could be replaced with WVU, Cincinnati, and UCF without losing ANY football power. What's more, I'm not convinced that ESPN wouldn't pay the new ACC MORE because there would be better football match-ups.

Interesting scenario Mark. Of course the biggest loser(s) would be Carolina, UVa, and Duke.
Being perpetually destined for mediocrity on the gridiron with not hope of success even with more money in your pocket is not what I would call a win-win, or give enough hope to boosters to reach a little deeper in their pockets. None of those three are very successful in football now, but at least they have hope that one day........

Actually you hit on something that would actually make the ACC and the SEC more money:
Move Clemson and Florida State into the SEC where they fit better.
Move Kentucky and South Carolina into the ACC with two of the three (UCF/Cincinnati/West Virginia).

Carolina, Duke, and UVA are mediocre on the gridiron now. I wouldn't call them losers because they lose 1-2 more games in the Big 10 or SEC. The only real way they "lose" would be if they go from 6-6 or 7-5 to 5-7 and go to fewer bowls and are Duke's Mayo Bowls that big of a prize?

(04-21-2022 03:11 PM)XLance Wrote:  Interesting scenario Mark. Of course the biggest loser(s) would be Carolina, UVa, and Duke.
Being perpetually destined for mediocrity on the gridiron with not hope of success even with more money in your pocket is not what I would call a win-win, or give enough hope to boosters to reach a little deeper in their pockets. None of those three are very successful in football now, but at least they have hope that one day........

1. How many ACC football titles have the 3 of you won in the last 21 years?
2. If you always played each other, had the opportunity to play Wake and State OOC as often as you liked, and added South Carolina to the annual schedule, how much would the boosters complain?
3. How many MBB championships could you win with an extra $50M and annual games with Kentucky (and possibly Kansas too)?

(04-21-2022 03:11 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(04-21-2022 09:43 AM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  If the Big Ten were to expand into the SE, their first choices would likely be UVA and UNC, after which they'd consider Clemson and Georgia Tech.

If ESPN and/or the SEC thought that was likely to happen, they'd jump through hoops to block the B1G by absorbing UVA and UNC into the SEC - taking Duke as well, if necessary.

The fact that Clemson and FSU "fit" in the SEC is irrelevant.

The fact that Kentucky and South Carolina "fit" in the ACC is irrelevant.

ESPN's monopoly on the SE is the driving force now.

If the ACC loses those 3 teams above, they could be replaced with WVU, Cincinnati, and UCF without losing ANY football power. What's more, I'm not convinced that ESPN wouldn't pay the new ACC MORE because there would be better football match-ups.

Interesting scenario Mark. Of course the biggest loser(s) would be Carolina, UVa, and Duke.
Being perpetually destined for mediocrity on the gridiron with not hope of success even with more money in your pocket is not what I would call a win-win, or give enough hope to boosters to reach a little deeper in their pockets. None of those three are very successful in football now, but at least they have hope that one day........

Actually you hit on something that would actually make the ACC and the SEC more money:
Move Clemson and Florida State into the SEC where they fit better.
Move Kentucky and South Carolina into the ACC with two of the four (USF, UCF, Cincinnati, and West Virginia).

I know you want to save the ACC XLance, but it looks like Colonel George Armstrong Custer's Tenth Cavalry Regiment after Little Bighorn at this point.

(04-21-2022 09:43 AM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  If the Big Ten were to expand into the SE, their first choices would likely be UVA and UNC, after which they'd consider Clemson and Georgia Tech.

If ESPN and/or the SEC thought that was likely to happen, they'd jump through hoops to block the B1G by absorbing UVA and UNC into the SEC - taking Duke as well, if necessary.

The fact that Clemson and FSU "fit" in the SEC is irrelevant.

The fact that Kentucky and South Carolina "fit" in the ACC is irrelevant.

ESPN's monopoly on the SE is the driving force now.

If the ACC loses those 3 teams above, they could be replaced with WVU, Cincinnati, and UCF without losing ANY football power. What's more, I'm not convinced that ESPN wouldn't pay the new ACC MORE because there would be better football match-ups.

Inviting Clemson would be the single greatest deviation of form in the 120 years of the B10. ND's research totals are ranked 109 by the National Sciences Foundation. Their ARWU rank is 90-110. For comparison Nebraska's number are 81 for NSF and 63-89 for ARWU. Using the midpoint between Nebraska - the weakest academically in the B10 and ND, not a graduate research powerhouse, the rough ceiling for a B10 School is no more than about 90 on both counts. Take the NSF as a volume grade and the ARWU as a quality grade. WF for example is 102 on NSF and 111-129 ARWU and that is with a relatively tiny campus and no major physics or high energy engineering. Clemson is 107 and 153-168. Big research at Clemson begins with the automobile industry and Germans moving into Greenville and Spartanburg 40 years ago. While Clemson has made great strides in research, the State of SC has always lagged behind Ga, TN, and NC because of historical quirks.

Another serious defect for a Clemson Big 10 acceptance is that Big 10 coeds are usually unattractive - not Duke ugly, but unattractive. Clemson coeds are almost as beautiful as girls at Auburn, Ole Miss, and in Athens. The wives and girlfriends of Big 10 ptb just wont allow that to happen.

(04-21-2022 06:51 PM)Statefan Wrote:  Another serious defect for a Clemson Big 10 acceptance is that Big 10 coeds are usually unattractive - not Duke ugly, but unattractive. Clemson coeds are almost as beautiful as girls at Auburn, Ole Miss, and in Athens. The wives and girlfriends of Big 10 ptb just wont allow that to happen.

Hey! I can't speak for all 14 Big Ten schools but I found plenty of Illinois females attractive enough when I was there.