Expansion/Realignment Talk Heating Up Again

[Rogue Cock]

Personally I can see the B10 wanting Oregon, Washington, Clemson and FSU...Although not a Clemson fan, I would love to see Washington and Oregon as well as Michigan, OSU come to Death Valley. I have family who graduated from UW so I would attend the game pulling for the Huskies.

But here is the big question: For all the arrogance UNC fans have said about not wanting to be a part of the SEC and wanting to be in the B10, what happens if this happens and the SEC does not offer UNC? what happens to the ACC..

Just don't see Clemson or FSU in the B1G.....they simply don't bring the academics or research funding that the B1G needs....unless the B1G does something that they have never done before and block a member schools from participating in the $1B+ research funding the conference distributes.

 

[Rogue Cock]

I seriously doubt Clemson is in contention for the B1G, as you stated they simply do not get enough research money. FSU apparently was close to being admitted to the AAU but came up slightly short. I'm with you, Barstool got the schools wrong, or at least 2 of them.

I wasn't surprised by Miami or UND earning a AAU bid, FSU would have surprised me though. But I admit I haven't kept up with FSU in the past 30+ years.

 

[Harvard Gamecock]

I wasn't surprised by Miami or UND earning a AAU bid, FSU would have surprised me though. But I admit I haven't kept up with FSU in the past 30+ years.

The big surprise, at least for me, was USF being admitted to the AAU.

 

[Carolina Doc]

I can understand many around here who wear a slight smile when thinking about the demise of the ACC, as we do not think of Clemson and UNC with any fondness. But having been a fan of the old ACC, I would view that breakup with some sadness and regret. Those were great times for following the regional college teams and great rivalries were formed - as mentioned, we still hate the tobacco road schools. The ACC basketball tournament, for those too young to remember, was simply the BEST there was in sports viewing.

Perhaps our future sports entertainment with the paid professional players will be better. Time will tell. But it will certainly take many, many years to develop anything close to the rivalries that we used to enjoy.

 

[Prestonyte]

I can understand many around here who wear a slight smile when thinking about the demise of the ACC, as we do not think of Clemson and UNC with any fondness. But having been a fan of the old ACC, I would view that breakup with some sadness and regret. Those were great times for following the regional college teams and great rivalries were formed - as mentioned, we still hate the tobacco road schools. The ACC basketball tournament, for those too young to remember, was simply the BEST there was in sports viewing.

Perhaps our future sports entertainment with the paid professional players will be better. Time will tell. But it will certainly take many, many years to develop anything close to the rivalries that we used to enjoy.

Agree on what the ACC BB Tourney used to be for me. I was glued to the TV with pizzas my parents picked up for me to keep me nourished during that time. For some reason, visions of Charlie Scott shooting jumpers are still in my head

 

[Harvard Gamecock]

I can understand many around here who wear a slight smile when thinking about the demise of the ACC, as we do not think of Clemson and UNC with any fondness. But having been a fan of the old ACC, I would view that breakup with some sadness and regret. Those were great times for following the regional college teams and great rivalries were formed - as mentioned, we still hate the tobacco road schools. The ACC basketball tournament, for those too young to remember, was simply the BEST there was in sports viewing.

Perhaps our future sports entertainment with the paid professional players will be better. Time will tell. But it will certainly take many, many years to develop anything close to the rivalries that we used to enjoy.

Truth be told, I feel most on here are going to miss ACC rivalries more than they care to admit.

 

[Thunderstick]

Who are the two? Lurker, above mentioned, FSU and Miami.

I dunno.

 

[Thunderstick]

Truth be told, I feel most on here are going to miss ACC rivalries more than they care to admit.

With the exception of Clemson our ACC rivalries were largely basketball based -- UNC, Duke, NC State, Maryland, Wake. I certainly miss those days!!

 

[KingWard]

With the exception of Clemson our ACC rivalries were largely basketball based -- UNC, Duke, NC State, Maryland, Wake. I certainly miss those days!!

I agree. There was mutual hatred we will never know in any other league - unless some of those schools were to wind up in the SEC.

 

[Yard_Pimps]

Who are the two? Lurker, above mentioned, FSU and Miami.

I believe FSU and Clemson but that’s my personal opinion. It’s all about football and those two are at the top of the ACC when it comes to views and branding.

 

[gamecock stock]

I believe FSU and Clemson but that’s my personal opinion. It’s all about football and those two are at the top of the ACC when it comes to views and branding.

Is there anything to Clemson and FSU to the BIG? Would be a weird looking conference. Think it would open the door for the SEC to go into North Carolina and Virginia to solidify the conference as a southern conference, where most people are moving to.

 

[Harvard Gamecock]

Is there anything to Clemson and FSU to the BIG? Would be a weird looking conference. Think it would open the door for the SEC to go into North Carolina and Virginia to solidify the conference as a southern conference, where most people are moving to.

I've heard serious conversations about FSU, but except for rumors today (and that's all they are) nothing about Clemson to the B1G.

 

[KingWard]

Washington Regents meeting tonight. Nothing might come out of it but it is NOT a regular meeting.

 

[CockofEarle…]

This is a pay site but they are getting some play on Google and other outlets. If Oregon and Washington bolt for the Big 10 (announcement "around Memorial Day"" is suggested here), - it's going to be really on as the Big 12 goes after the Arizona schools and Colorado. I don't see the SEC sitting the next round out, but that's just me. https://realdawghuskies.com/. If TV money is reaching saturation, the SEC schools will come out better if the conference stays at 16. It could get intriguing.

U started this stampede!

 

[Mic4usc]

I like the league that is emerging and I like 16 teams. I honestly hope Sankey's perspectives, whatever they are, turn out to be always correct because the SEC is reposing a huge amount of trust in him to lead. His leadership extends to areas that will make or break the league in terms of preeminence.

The thoughts of the B1G outflanking us by expanding into the South or picking off Notre Dame trouble me. But whatever yields the most money PER school in the long run will prove to be the winning formula, I think.

We are located in the most talent rich region. I really don’t think the SEC will ever be overtaken by any other conference for that reason. It would take a colossal failure in leadership for a long period of time.

 

[KingWard]

We are located in the most talent rich region. I really don’t think the SEC will ever be overtaken by any other conference for that reason. It would take a colossal failure in leadership for a long period of time.

You mean such as those in charge of the Pac 12 right now. It wasn't always that way.

 

[18IsTheMan]

National titles since 2007

SEC: 31
Big 10: 1

Nuff said.

 

[KingWard]

National titles since 2007

SEC: 31
Big 10: 1

Nuff said.

Which might be what's driving them. The resources are there. Wouldn't you be looking for remedies?

But which sports are you talking about? If this is football, you'd have to be including championships that are voted on by various entities, so that a school could win multiple ones the same year. But the BCS started in 1998. Only one national championship in football since then.

If you're talking about all sports, I believe they have won way more than one.

 

[18IsTheMan]

Which might be what's driving them. The resources are there. Wouldn't you be looking for remedies?

But which sports are you talking about? If this is football, you'd have to be including championships that are voted on by various entities, so that a school could win multiple ones the same year. But the BCS started in 1998. Only one national championship in football since then.

If you're talking about all sports, I believe they have won way more than one.

It was football, basketball, baseball, softball.

Really, the only two that matter are football and basketball...with football being the most important. I don't know what the basketball tally is, but football is 17-1. It's a laughable disparity.

I just don't see how the moves they are making remedy the yawning gap between the SEC and Big 10. If not for the fact that they have old blue blood with the likes of OSU, UM and PSU, the Big 10 wouldn't even worth talking about. Nobody they've added changes the calculus when it comes to football titles. And neither do rumored additions. The closest they come is the addition of SoCal, but they haven't won since 2004 (vacated by BCS). IF the goal is win titles, nothing they have done or are rumored to be doing addresses that. SEC is curb stomping the Big 10.

If there was a direct correlation between revenue and titles, Texas and Texas A&M would have more trophies than you can count.

It could be the Big 10 isn't really concerned about winning and only wants to secure tv markets and revenue. I'd rather have titles. But it seems the focus of the college game has shifted or is shifting where it's now more about markets and revenue than competing. This is just one more way we are trending to the pro model. Look at how much money Dan Snyder just made on his sale of the Redskins compared to his initial investment, and they sucked the whole time he was owner. It's not about winning.

 

[KingWard]

It was football, basketball, baseball, softball.

Really, the only two that matter are football and basketball...with football being the most important. I don't know what the basketball tally is, but football is 17-1. It's a laughable disparity.

I just don't see how the moves they are making remedy the yawning gap between the SEC and Big 10. If not for the fact that they have old blue blood with the likes of OSU, UM and PSU, the Big 10 wouldn't even worth talking about. Nobody they've added changes the calculus when it comes to football titles. And neither do rumored additions. The closest they come is the addition of SoCal, but they haven't won since 2004 (vacated by BCS). IF the goal is win titles, nothing they have done or are rumored to be doing addresses that. SEC is curb stomping the Big 10.

If there was a direct correlation between revenue and titles, Texas and Texas A&M would have more trophies than you can count.

It could be the Big 10 isn't really concerned about winning and only wants to secure tv markets and revenue. I'd rather have titles. But it seems the focus of the college game has shifted or is shifting where it's now more about markets and revenue than competing. This is just one more way we are trending to the pro model. Look at how much money Dan Snyder just made on his sale of the Redskins compared to his initial investment, and they sucked the whole time he was owner. It's not about winning.

It doesn't matter what any of us "can't see". At the very least, they will attain many more interesting matchups and interinstitutional relationships. They will expand their visibility and enhance their brand. They will enjoy the athletic contests versus other premier universities and make an @$$ of money in the process.

I don't think they will owe anyone any apologies or explanations 20 years hence. If they do, it won't be my spectacle to watch.

Something's happening that you don't like, and you've made it your business to decry it. That's certainly your prerogative. But millions are going to enjoy it, whatever "it" turns out to be.

I would also add that, if this turns out to be an errant course for any league, that league(s) has the opportunity - if they also have the will - to realign again at some point into something more compartmentalized.

 

[18IsTheMan]

It doesn't matter what any of us "can't see". At the very least, they will attain many more interesting matchups and interinstitutional relationships. They will expand their visibility and enhance their brand. They will enjoy the athletic contests versus other premier universities and make an @$$ of money in the process.

I don't think they will owe anyone any apologies or explanations 20 years hence. If they do, it won't be my spectacle to watch.

Something's happening that you don't like, and you've made it your business to decry it. That's certainly your prerogative. But millions are going to enjoy it, whatever "it" turns out to be.

I would also add that, if this turns out to be an errant course for any league, that league(s) has the opportunity - if they also have the will - to realign again at some point into something more compartmentalized.

I don't disagree with any of that. But your post perfectly sums up what this is about. In short, it's not about winning. If I'm Sankey and my conference is winning titles every year, what do I care if the Big 10 adds Cal and Stanford? For every interesting matchup they create, it's offset by a Maryland/Cal matchup.

You seem to have shifted course, though. In older threads, you mostly lamented the direction of expansion. Now you seem to embrace it.

 

[Lurker123]

National titles since 2007

SEC: 31
Big 10: 1

Nuff said.

To be fair, given these numbers, chasing FSU and Clemson would quadruple their titles in that timeframe. Just a thought.

 

[gamecock stock]

FSU did not jump this week. Waiting is not making the cost any less. I'm wondering if the Noles just want to make noise, letting off steam, so that they feel better.

 

[Prestonyte]

FSU did not jump this week. Waiting is not making the cost any less. I'm wondering if the Noles just want to make noise, letting off steam, so that they feel better.

Checking which way the wind is blowing

 

[18IsTheMan]

To be fair, given these numbers, chasing FSU and Clemson would quadruple their titles in that timeframe. Just a thought.

True. But neither school fits with their academic profile.

 

[gamecock stock]

Checking which way the wind is blowing

In the meantime, the ACC seems to be telling Florida State: "Make the check out to: 'Atlantic Coast Conference'".

 

[KingWard]

I don't disagree with any of that. But your post perfectly sums up what this is about. In short, it's not about winning. If I'm Sankey and my conference is winning titles every year, what do I care if the Big 10 adds Cal and Stanford? For every interesting matchup they create, it's offset by a Maryland/Cal matchup.

You seem to have shifted course, though. In older threads, you mostly lamented the direction of expansion. Now you seem to embrace it.

I agree that some pf these teams aren't sexy.

 

[Mic4usc]

You mean such as those in charge of the Pac 12 right now. It wasn't always that way.

I hear you, but it still took at least a decade of incompetence. I think the fanbases in the south East would fight against that incompetence much harder than west coast fans. It sounds like most PAC-12 presidents have downplayed athletics to their own peril.

I think TV money is making the game almost unrecognizable, but that means you need leadership that knows how to navigate the current climate. The PAC didn’t come close to making the right hires.

 

[Rogue Cock]

I hear you, but it still took at least a decade of incompetence. I think the fanbases in the south East would fight against that incompetence much harder than west coast fans. It sounds like most PAC-12 presidents have downplayed athletics to their own peril.

I think TV money is making the game almost unrecognizable, but that means you need leadership that knows how to navigate the current climate. The PAC didn’t come close to making the right hires.

There was a good article that came out a couple of days ago regarding all the missteps the PAC commish made....including deals that were turned down, schools that could have been added, and flat out promising better deals that couldn't be delivered.

 

[KingWard]

I hear you, but it still took at least a decade of incompetence. I think the fanbases in the south East would fight against that incompetence much harder than west coast fans. It sounds like most PAC-12 presidents have downplayed athletics to their own peril.

I think TV money is making the game almost unrecognizable, but that means you need leadership that knows how to navigate the current climate. The PAC didn’t come close to making the right hires.

The current guy has been a stumblebum in a class by himself. It's amazing to basically lose a century-old conference.

 

[Rogue Cock]

Here's another proposed loophole to provide FSU an out. Ludicrous, but what isn't right now.



A couple of problems with this argument: One BIG difference between what Texas did and what Florida would be doing. The Texas protection was for TXTech against an employee (Leach) who was suing them for wrongful termination, etc. ALL intrastate. The Florida State situation involves interstate groups....which would more than likely wind up in federal court (conflict of laws) if Florida tried anything like that.

Plus the GOR would not necessarily have a choice of law provision, since that would more than likely be covered under the ACC organizing documents. The organizing document choice of law would most likely be Delaware or the state the ACC was formed in, if not Delaware.

 

[KingWard]

Here's another proposed loophole to provide FSU an out. Ludicrous, but what isn't right now.



A couple of problems with this argument: One BIG difference between what Texas did and what Florida would be doing. The Texas protection was for TXTech against an employee (Leach) who was suing them for wrongful termination, etc. ALL intrastate. The Florida State situation involves interstate groups....which would more than likely wind up in federal court (conflict of laws) if Florida tried anything like that.

Plus the GOR would not necessarily have a choice of law provision, since that would more than likely be covered under the ACC organizing documents. The organizing document choice of law would most likely be Delaware or the state the ACC was formed in, if not Delaware.

I'm not a lawyer. I don't even play one on TV, but I just don't see how in the world they can break the GOR.

And that boy up at North Carolina proved what a league loyalist he is by getting on FSU for even TALKING about leaving.

I think the ACC schools are stuck hard in cement, those who are hoping for broader horizons.

 

[Rogue Cock]

I'm not a lawyer. I don't even play one on TV, but I just don't see how in the world they can break the GOR.

And that boy up at North Carolina proved what a league loyalist he is by getting on FSU for even TALKING about leaving.

I think the ACC schools are stuck hard in cement, those who are hoping for broader horizons.

They will probably have to dissolve the conference to do that. And if it is based on the NC Non-Profit Act that would require a simple majority.....what I don't know is if the organizing documents for the ACC require a higher number.

 

[KingWard]

Arizona State and Utah to the Big 12 tonight! MAN, this is scintillating!!

 

[Deleted11512]

They will probably have to dissolve the conference to do that. And if it is based on the NC Non-Profit Act that would require a simple majority.....what I don't know is if the organizing documents for the ACC require a higher number.

I can’t imagine they would have such an iron clad agreement with a simple majority dissolution clause.

 

[Rogue Cock]

I can’t imagine they would have such an iron clad agreement with a simple majority dissolution clause.

Someone just posted in another thread that industry insiders thinks it is similar to the Big XII GOR 8-10-12 rule, which my understanding is that 8, 10 or 12 teams could leave and the remaining members would be the only ones that could vote to dissolve the conference.

In what I was referring to was typically the organizing documents or state law would control dissolution, they could always amend the organizing documents to require a higher percentage needed. But a general non-governing agreement such as a GOR would not necessarily have those provisions unless there was also an amendment to the organizing documents included in that agreement. Problem is no one has released what the ACC's GOR includes in it.....though it sounds as though doing quick math that to simply pull out with the exit fee and the GOR would cost a school somewhere between $450-500M.

 

[Deleted11512]

Someone just posted in another thread that industry insiders thinks it is similar to the Big XII GOR 8-10-12 rule, which my understanding is that 8, 10 or 12 teams could leave and the remaining members would be the only ones that could vote to dissolve the conference.

In what I was referring to was typically the organizing documents or state law would control dissolution, they could always amend the organizing documents to require a higher percentage needed. But a general non-governing agreement such as a GOR would not necessarily have those provisions unless there was also an amendment to the organizing documents included in that agreement. Problem is no one has released what the ACC's GOR includes in it.....though it sounds as though doing quick math that to simply pull out with the exit fee and the GOR would cost a school somewhere between $450-500M.

Yep. I’m with you on that. I also read that if it was found that a B12 school was actively shopping around they could have their voting rights stripped. Interesting stuff.

 

[Deleted11512]

Someone just posted in another thread that industry insiders thinks it is similar to the Big XII GOR 8-10-12 rule, which my understanding is that 8, 10 or 12 teams could leave and the remaining members would be the only ones that could vote to dissolve the conference.

In what I was referring to was typically the organizing documents or state law would control dissolution, they could always amend the organizing documents to require a higher percentage needed. But a general non-governing agreement such as a GOR would not necessarily have those provisions unless there was also an amendment to the organizing documents included in that agreement. Problem is no one has released what the ACC's GOR includes in it.....though it sounds as though doing quick math that to simply pull out with the exit fee and the GOR would cost a school somewhere between $450-500M.

Yep. I’m with you on that. I also read that if it was found that a B12 school was actively shopping around they could have their voting rights stripped. Interesting stuff.