Bio not provided
Note that the headline includes an oxymoron for a leaderless movement. It would be more accurate as "Occupy Wall Street Volunteer ..."
5 months, 2 weeks ago on Occupy Wall Street leader now works for Google, wants to crowdfund a private militia
@mrjkd There is a real mismatch between twitter/facebook social media and any horizontaal movement without official spokespeople. If the password is tightly held, its susceptible to being hijacked, as it was here, but if its too loosely held, one member can spoil things for everyone.
@scooterthomas27 Or look at Ohio. I am sure one could do a count of counties and get a similar result, but that would be entirely beside the point, since the Cleveland, Columbus and Cincinnati urban areas all require division into multiple districts. As gerrymandered, the City of Columbus is packed into one and the balance of the Columbus Urban Area is spread among neighboring rural areas to create one D district and 3 R districts where a fair districting would create at least 2 D or D-leaning districts. As gerrymanders, some of the most Democratic precincts of Cleveland are put into one majority-minority district that spread down to central Akron, and another as 1/3 of a district that stretches out to downtown Toledo. The balance of the Cleveland Urban Area is spread between one R-leaning district along the Lakeshore and R districts dominated by outer suburban and rural populations. And the Cincinnati Gerrymander takes West Cincinnati and offsets it with Butler Country, and East Cincinnati and offsets it with counties stretching east along the Ohio River.
9 months ago on Conversation @ http://www.newrepublic.com/article/114989/government-shutdown-2013-gerrymandering-isnt-blame
@WarHog38 Florida [hits palm on forehead], how could I forget Florida? Just because they play competitive football doesn't mean they AREN'T an elite research university. After Maryland leaves, it will be 5 AAU schools in the ACC, four in the SEC. If UNC switched to the SEC, the SEC would have *more* AAU schools than the ACC. If after the ACC being destabilized UVA and/or GTech moved to the Big Ten, the ACC would have no more, and possibly fewer, AAU schools than the SEC.
That could well be the "Toto, I don't think we are in Kansas anymore" moment for UNC. But, paradoxically, if both the Big Ten and the SEC are waiting for that to happen, it might never happen, because it seems unlikely that the ACC schools that the Big12 want agree to go to the Big12 unless the ACC is already destabilized, which means its either the SEC or Big Ten who have to move first.
Anyway, people who have oversimplified views of the world have an unfortunate advantage in web forums, because they can come up with an immediate response without any additional thought, while people who have more awareness of how complex, and sometimes contradictory, the real world is are still thinking things through.
@Roggespierre I take the US News and World Report grad school rankings with a grain of salt, but if trying to get an overall view of a school's overall academic status, and not putting too much weight on any individual position, they are still workable. But not only do a lot of schools game the system for their undergraduate rankings, but even more, academic status is not ABOUT undergraduate education, so even if it were 100% accurate, it still would be beside the point.
1 year, 4 months ago on Which Conference Will Win The Realignment War? It Depends On Your Definition Of “Win”
@WarHog38 @Roggespierre Bear down on every advantage ~ Duke football may be lackluster, but its a top-10 national research university with millions of research grants and lots of top-25 grad school programs. Many people talking about academic status on conference discussion boards go to the US News and World Report site and quote the headline ranking ~ but that is the undergraduate ranking, because of the $$$ that USNWR makes every year selling those profiles to HS seniors. The real story in terms of academic status comes when you click through to the ranking of the grad school programs.
Its not JUST about money ~ its partly about academic snobbery. Notre Dame is not a big money research university, but it has top-25 law and business schools, so while academics in a top flight research university would not be popping the corks to get Notre Dame in a conference, they wouldn't look down their nose on Notre Dame either.
@ezgame Private school, NOT a national brand, not a traditional football contender (never mind "King"), not a research university and graduate school academic powerhouse, doesn't guarantee cable carriage across most or all of its state ... Wake Forest is hoping that the ACC hangs together and remains a Major conference, because its not getting an invite from any other Major conference. Its got great undergraduate academics, but that is not a major criteria for anybody.
@Roggespierre Well, one fantastic AAU school, and also Missouri.
@WarHog38 @AllTideUp The SEC may be full of fine educational institutions, but not with elite research universities that "rank with any conference".
But the SEC and ACC are not as different on that front as a lot of people remember. When I was living in Knoxville, there was only one AAU school in the SEC, but the last two adds have been AAU schools. With Maryland leaving, there's only going to be ffive AAU schools in the ACC. So if UNC moved to the SEC, the two conferences would have an equal number of AAU schools.
As a side note, I'd disagree with those who figure that the AAU status is WHY the SEC invited Texas A&M and Mizzou. Both add bigger "home" TV markets than the middle SEC schools. East Texas is the most "southern" part of Texas. And while the majority of Missouri is midwestern, there is a distinctly "southern" section in the southeast corner of the state that makes up about a quarter to a third of the state population.
@WarHog38 In the end though trash talk on an online discussion group is mostly hot air by a small number of loudmouths. I still do not think you can lump UVA and VTech in particular in the same boat. They've got different cultures. If VTech made the jump, they'd not be "anti-SEC" for twenty or thirty years. They could well turn into bigger SEC braggarts than A&M fans talking to UTX fans.
@WarHog38 If an fan of an SEC school goes onto boards of any other conference school, they are going to attract SEC bashing. Haters gonna hate, after all, that's just the way internet forums work, and as the top football conference, SEC backers are going to attract more than their fair share.
But its UVA that attracts more of the academic snootiness, and my impression about VTech fans is they are more football first. Northern VA may be the southern end of the Northeast Corridor, but that's still a big part of why many of them are VTech fans instead of Cavalier fans.
The main worry about NC State would be how much of a step up in class it would be ~ at least in Fall ~ for a program that only spends about $12m on football.
@WarHog38 My impression was that if you did a survey of t-shirt fans of VTech between the SEC and the Big Ten, the SEC would win by a fair margin, but unlike East Tennessee, I've never lived any substantial length of time in either Virginia or North Carolina, so that's just an outside impression.
@WarHog38 Or VTech and Clemson, if Florida, UT, and Georgia are leery of adding FSU.
@ezgame No, its not the Big Ten NETWORK that is in the "catbird seat", its the Big Ten CONFERENCE itself. The first tier contract with ABC/ESPN goes up for renegotiation soon, likely to be split into a broadcast network first tier and cable network second tier. Fox, CBS and ABC will be in the running for the first tier contract, and ESPN and the new "Fox Sports One" or whatever they are going to call it will be in the running for the second tier contract.
The Big Ten Network is not like that, it is a revenue sharing arrangement, so if it generates a larger surplus in a year, it yields more revenue to the Big Ten schools that year. And the contracts it has are with the carriers, which are each on their own terms, so those contracts are not going to be coming up for renewal all in the same year.
1 year, 5 months ago on Big Ten To Add More Conference Games; Is This Another Lure For UVA, GT, UNC And Duke?
@DanHogan @ezgame But that's confusing two different types of influence. Conference realignment is so football focused because of the different economics of football and basketball ~ more of the media value in basketball is in championship tourneys, and only a relatively small fraction of media revenue from the the NCAA tournament gets paid out to participants. Indeed, since part gets paid out to schools based on number of athletic scholarships, and football is the most scholarship hungry sport, basketball media money subsidizes football directly.
But that does not mean that the influence at all schools is anywhere nearly so football focused. Basketball has a lot of clout with alumni givers at UNC, Kansas, Kentucky, Indiana and etc.
The main reason both the SEC and the Big Ten are lusting after UNC in their hearts is because of already important and relatively rapidly growing media markets. But because they are both wooing UNC, what is of interest to UNC becomes of interest to those conferences. The fact that the Big Ten is a more diverse all-sports conference than the SEC is an additional point of differentiation it will use in selling itself to UNC, alongside more prestigious academics, Major as opposed to Mid-Major level basketball strength of schedule and a higher conference payout.
@John at MrSEC @ChaseTheTrainWarren This would seem to push schools to spend the extra money to step up to the FBS, rather than thin out the FBS ~ if an Appalachian State wants to keep getting payday games, and Major Conference schools stop scheduling revenue games with FCS schools, then Appalachian State has to get itself into the Sunbelt, right quick.
1 year, 5 months ago on Big Ten Throws Down The Gauntlet: No More FCS Opponents
@adarpy @AGator For the academic politicians that run the University of Florida, the revolt of t-shirt fans may or may not be such a big deal. However, for the long time members of the SEC, the revolt would extend to academic donors and to political supporters in state legislatures, and that part of the revolt threatens to have a much deeper bite.
A President of Florida, Georgia, Tennessee, Ole Miss, Bama, etc. ... just is not going to flirt with that idea. They are going to let those sleeping dogs lie.
So while the answer to the hypothetical question, "if Florida was thinking about moving interested, would the Big Ten be interested" is a resounding "yes", under anything like current conditions it aint gonna happen, and doesn't need to be considered as a possible move.
1 year, 5 months ago on Which Conference Will Win The Realignment War? It Depends On Your Definition Of “Win”
@GatorBuc2 @AGator If you start from Florida and list "wouldn't go anywhere without, in the end you'll be describing the core of the SEC. Its simpler to boil it down to a simple rule: schools don't leave the SEC, Big Ten or Pac-12. Don't waste any time on scenarios that assue that they do, since the conference commissioners certainly aren't investing a lot of time in any of those scenarios.
Or, as Frank the Tank might say, in conference realignment, sh!t always rolls downhill.
In the end, since multiple AAA minor leagues for football IS a sustainable outcome, the odds are that the SEC and Big Ten both win. The Pac-12 is hemmed in by the Rockies and the paucity of population in the Mountain time zone, otherwise they'd be better positioned to also win from conference realignment, as opposed to just treading water.
@BTN est 2007 I remember my first time going on forums while drunk, though back then it was Usenet rather than World Wide Web. I hope your hangover wasn't too bad.
@Roggespierre @Jimisawesome @JRsec @Seanbo If they were fully fungible, if the value of the commodity followed the commodity wherever it went, then Pitt would have the same value to the Big12, SEC and Big Ten, but clearly Pitt has much less value to the Big Ten than to the other two.
If they were fully fungible, it wouldn't much matter whether realignment was going to occur before, during or after contract negotiation, but since they aren't fully fungible, it does matter. The kind of issues you raise about using contract negotiations with ESPN to ensure that ESPN does not make a move to counter a desired add only works if the contract negotiation is taking place while the realignment negotiations are taking place.
Indeed, to look at an example where that exact kind of thing has happened, look at the NuBigEast and the departure of the C7. Because of the NO vote by 4 schools that are no longer in the NuBigEast or are leaving next year, the BigEast turned down $130m a year. So the Big East was stuck with negotiating realignment while also negotiating a TV contract, and in the process, Fox stepped in and made a side deal with the Catholic 7 instead, resulting in the hybrid Big East league collapsing into a total shambles.
But the Big Ten is going to have a set conference alignment already worked out when its contract comes up for renegotiation. Its either going to have UNC already, or be negotiating its TV deal on the basis of not having UNC.
In the scenarios where the Big Ten is negotiating a move by UNC in the next two years, ESPN is not going to want to screw the Big Ten over and make it likely that the Big Ten would be biased toward the Fox Sport Network rather than to their existing contract partner.
In the scenarios where the collapse of the ACC goes in slow motion, the UNC may move after the new deal is in place, but in that case, the additional value to the existing schools of the Big Ten taking its contract to the open market is likely greater than the additional value of possibly adding UNC sometime in the future and dividing the conference payout by 18 instead of 16. So any concern that there would be blowback for the chance of getting UNC would not prevent the Big Ten from taking it to the open market.
In the scenario where both negotiations are taking place simultaneously, what you raise could well interfere with contract negotiations. But the Big Ten has more sense than to open the door to that, and they can avoid it by not doing both at the same time.
@The regular guy If UNC was available, it would be a bigger revenue win than either NC State or VTech, so if its about $ports money feeding the member universities, the SEC at least has to try to land the biggest pile of money available.
It would be a lot easier for the SEC if the SEC was a Major rather than Mid-Major conference for college basketball, since UNC BBall swings a lot of stick in the UNC community. Those who care about academics and those don't but who care about BBall could make allies in pushing for a move to the Big Ten.
@AGator Would the Big Ten be interested in Florida. Yes, obviously: they have the advantages of FSU, and as the premier public research university in the state of Florida, they do not have the downside of being an academic "fixer-upper". Compared to UVA / UNC / GTech / Duke or UVA / UNC / GTech / FSU, UVA / UNC / GTech / Florida makes the best of both worlds.
As far as the chances of Florida leaving the SEC, serious people could differ in that assessment. Some would say the likelihood is nil, others that the likelihood is negligible. I tend toward the "nil" side. Or to paraphrase Dumb and Dumber, "The odds are less than one in a thousand", "so you are saying there IS a chance!"
@vol66 @Roggespierre We saw that when Maryland couldn't balance its Athletics Department budget, it cut sports. A big part of the appeal of increasing athletics revenue to academics as the big universities is the promise of an Athletics Department budget that is free-standing without requiring a student activities fee to balance its budget.
If the cost per scholarship goes up, without any resulting increase in revenues as a result, athletic departments will be under pressure to cut costs somewhere. Cutting back non-revenue sports is certainly going to be among the ways that budgets are balanced.
@Roggespierre @Jimisawesome @JRsec Why not? Research status is about grad programs, not about undergraduate academics. And graduate schools need to find stipend funding to attract the higher quality graduate students. If for a particular school's circumstances that includes being a Graduate Teaching Associate teaching a night school class, well, money's money.
@Seanbo @Jimisawesome We don't know which one FSU would prefer ~ it would surely be a tussle either way. NC State, Virginia Tech and Clemson may have the SEC as a first choice, but they are not serious options for the Big Ten so its a moot point.
UNC considers itself a southern school, an elite research university and a basketball power. It built a conference for itself that is compatible with all three. Whether it would go slumming in terms of basketball and, especially in the wake of a serious academic scandal, in terms of academics is an open question. And moving from the ACC of 2012 to the Big Ten of 2012 is a much bigger jump than moving from the ACC of 2014, which includes BC, Syracuse and Pitt, to a Big Ten East division or a Big Ten Southern Region under rotating divisions that includes five former ACC schools.
@Roggespierre @Jimisawesome @JRsec @Seanbo That seems to be treating fungibility like a light switch ~ its either fungible or its not ~ as opposed to the reality of it being a matter of degree ~ the close a conference is coming to the expiration of a long term network rights deal and the more revenue it gains on a revenue-share basis rather than on a rights-payment basis, the more fungible the value of the schools are.
In order to take the concern that you raise for ESPN off the table, the Big Ten would have to pre-commit to extending the contract with ESPN years before the current contract expires, and risk taking what their projections indicate to be millions or tens of millions of dollars per school off the table. That just isn't going to happen in order to result in some unknowable change in the likelihood of UNC picking the Big Ten.
Indeed, your scenario assumes that all parties assume that UNC is so closely balanced between going to the SEC and the Big Ten that secondary changes in per school conference payments are going to flip UNC's decision. I think its (1) fairly uncertain how much instability will be required to make UNC prefer moving to staying and (2) relatively UNlikely that if UNC flips to moving as its first priority, that its preference between the SEC and the Big Ten is all that finely balanced. There has been and will continue to be a political fight on which direction to go, and the odds are that one side or the other is going to gain the upper hand in that fight.
And in particular, if the UNC is tilted to going to the Big Ten but there is a sufficient upgrade from ESPN for the ACC rights to get UNC to stay instead ... that itself plus the best market price for Big Ten rights is a perfectly fine outcome for the Big Ten. If the financial incentives continue to be there for consolidation, and UNC is leaning toward the Big Ten in the event it moves, then the Big Ten will keep the lights on for UNC.
@vol66 Part of the reason for that is that its a negligible impact on athletes in the Big Ten (or the SEC, if the SEC adopts it). You can still get injured playing in a cupcake game, after all. The difference in playing time for second string players between being substituted into the third quarter playing an FCS school or being substituted into the fourth quarter playing a "Group of Five" FBS school is not that big of an issue ~ indeed, its no difference at all if the school is trouncing the "Group of Five" FBS school or if the FCS school is giving unexpectedly stiff opposition.
On the scale of issues like different ways players are recruited, its down there below a 0.1 factor. On the scale of issues like concussions and brain injury, its basically zero on the scale.
@Seanbo However, its less than 50/50 that Duke would agree to what many would perceive as slumming with SEC academic standard and second-rank basketball competition. That makes UNC/Duke/VTech/FSU to the SEC less than 50/50. Indeed, its not clear whether Duke to the SEC or FSU to the Big Ten is less likely ~ the primary obstacle to the first is at Duke, the primary obstacle to the second is in the Big Ten.
@Roggespierre @Jimisawesome @JRsec @Seanbo No, with three broadcast television networks and two two-channel national cable networks in the hunt for some slice of rights, the Big Ten is indeed in the catbird seat.
Fox, CBS, or ABC or Fox/CBS or Fox/ABC or CBS/ABC could all be in the hunt for the broadcast network rights, and ESPN and FoxSports will be in the hunt for the cable tier 2 rights, so the eventual rights partner will have to pay a fair share of the expected market value of the rights.
The issue about "if the Big Ten goes here, then that channel over there does this" is a wash ~ equally, if the Big Ten were to go with ABC/ESPN, then that would push Fox / Fox Sports Network to greater coverage of other schools. That doesn't force the Big Ten to go with ESPN for the tier 2 rights and therefore doesn't allow ESPN to get away with low-balling their bid.
@Seanbo "If the SEC took UNC, Duke, Virginia Tech and Florida State"
If the SEC takes those four, no question that the Big Ten takes Virginia and Georgia Tech and stops at 16.
@MikeNiner5 " Any other AAU school the B1G wants, it will get, all others conferences will wait for leftovers" ... I'm assuming that means any AAU school in the ACC ~ it would be an idiotic statement if applied across the board.
Its a plausible claim but not a total certainty. After all, if the Big Ten could just snap its fingers and get any AAU member of the ACC it wants, UVA and UNC would already be announced in an expansion to 16.
@JayBoDingess I actually agree with you here. The only reason the SEC cares about number of AAU schools is because its something that stakeholders inside UNC would pay attention to. And the reason that the SEC wants UNC is not BECAUSE it is an AAU school, but because its the biggest available play for audience in one of the major growth areas on the eastern seaboard.
So the SEC going after UNC is not chasing "AAU schools", the SEC is chasing "a school that is an AAU member".
Now, the Big Ten athletic directors would be happy to have the leeway that the SEC has in chasing schools that are 50th-150th in research, but because of the schools that the Big Ten athletic programs happen to be attached to, they don't.
@mll If the SEC could just "take" UVA and UNC, they would have done so already. Neither school seems particularly eager to slum it academically in the SEC, and UNC doesn't seem particularly eager to leave top-drawer BBall for second rate BBall.
That's where the whole "UNC Plus Duke" notion comes from ~ that adding both would boost both the academic status and the BBall strength of schedule to the point where it wouldn't be such a dramatic drop down in both as it would be for today's SEC.
@LaSportsDude Wake Forest doesn't add much over NC State alone. At FSU, VTech, NC State and looking around for an 18th, that's where I would buy the notion of the SEC inviting Pitt before it gets pulled into the Big12 GOR. Pitt is the one AAU school in the ACC that wouldn't add appreciably to gross Big Ten revenue ~ Duke would add to gross revenue, just not be as much as its share of the conference payout.
@JRsec @Roggespierre I'd reckon the Big Ten expects most schools will continue to schedule "Group of Five" schools on a regular basis in September under the current system ... the Buckeyes, That School Up North, the Huskers and Penn State when they've recovered might go all-Big 5, but they won't insist that the Hawkeyes or Boilermakers or Hoosiers follow suit.
The evolution if the big split occurs would be a Kick Off Classic weekend of all NCAA FBS schools hosted by Top Tier conference schools, in a Top Tier 13 game regular season, to allow everyone to play their 12 Top Tier OOC and conference games Home and Home and still have 7 home games (or equivalent) in their ticket book. If the NCAA FBS division schools have a 12 game season, they finish a week earlier, allowing for a CCG and an eight team championship, with the first round during the Top Tier CCG week and the semi-final round as December bowl games. Then the NCAA FBS championship game can fall in the slot in the schedule between the end of the Access Bowls and the Top Tier NCG.
@Seanbo Getting UNC to move without a safe landing for NC State is a fine trick, given that the two universities have the same board. But if the SEC took those four, you could pretty much guarantee that the Big Ten would take UVA and GTech and then stop at 16 for a while. NC State and Clemson would have to end up at the Big12, since unless NC State ends up somewhere UNC is not going anywhere, and it would not be surprising if the Big12 took Pitt and somebody else to make 14, and the seven teams of the "Big14 East" made up of TCU and six teams actually east of the Mississippi.
@I4Bama There's also Spring Football. When I was watching "The Blind Side", when Big Mike, the hero of the movie is told he'd made the grades to play Spring Football I was like, "huh?" HS Football may be far and away the king of HS sports in NE Ohio, but there just isn't a long enough time between when you can be sure the snow is melted and the end of the school year to fit in a second football season.
1 year, 5 months ago on Why Is The SEC Thriving In Football, Struggling In Basketball? Money
@Roggespierre @mowens75 That's the third thing about moving a step at a time. If the Big Ten invites UVA and GTech, it might prompt the SEC to give up on the SEC Network play for UNC and Duke and go with VTech and either NC State or FSU. That might destabilize the conference enough for a pair of schools worth it to the Big 12 to bit the bullet and make the move. As the balance of gravity shits to the Old Big East, it sinks in with UNC that this isn't the ACC that they were remembering.
@local37220 When the Big Ten had to decide between adding Mizzou and adding nobody, they chose to add nobody.
There is no indication that there's been a big change there, and no reason to think that Mizzou would leave the SEC.
@Roggespierre @vp81955 @local37220 That's thinking like a cable TV / Digital Streaming channel.
One key word here is "churn rate". That is how much of your current subscriber base you need to replace annually just to stay even. A sports network with strong Fall and Winter programming but nothing to watch in the Spring runs the risk of people subscribing a half year and then dropping. The narrower the window when people are not watching, the more likely they just let the subscription tick over.
That's why the SEC would be interested in UNC+Duke in the first place: convert the SEC from the Mid-Major conference that it has become back into a Major basketball conference, and the SEC Network will be looking at a lower churn rate. And UNC+Duke would restore the SEC from second tier back to first tier status in basketball.
If 10%-20% of your winter audience can be sold on watching Lacrosse, that'll cut your churn rate by an appreciable slice. They don't even need to be serious Lacrosse fans ~ people will rationalize staying subscribed to something that they've watched in the past month, even if they never would have subscribed in the first place in order to watch that content.
Another key word here is "demographics". Golf does not get on broadcast TV because of the numbers of people willing to watch grass grow, but because of the average income of those people. You can sell luxury car commercials during Lacrosse games just like you can sell them during golf tournaments.
A third key word is "carriage". Where Lacrosse has the most pull is exactly where the Big Ten has to work on gaining carriage ~ the eastern seaboard, from North Carolina through to New England.
Now, Lacrosse is still a niche sport, but its a much bigger niche on the East Coast than it is in most of the rest of the country.
@mowens75 @FCDore The Big Ten's previous two adds were Kings, even if one is a hobbled King until the sanctions expire. We will find out if Delany can get FSU in or not ~ one advantage of a slower expansion process for the Big Ten is it gives FSU some time to try to get some forward momentum for the ranking of their Law School, which is the strategic piece in building a quality cluster that might get them a gentleman's C on the academic front.
@HawkRaz 18 is no harder to schedule than 20. Have 4 or 5 schools in "East" and "West", 5 or 4 schools in "Central" and (SEC) "South" or (Big Ten) "North", and alternate the two central groups with the two anchor groups to form 9 team championship divisions. Play through the "opposite" division in the ninth game over four or five years,
@iDBrown What's the problem? Schedule two mid-major revenue games, one "Name" OOC Home and Home series, play the OOC Home and Home series Home when your division has 4 Home and Away when your division has 5 home, and you have 7 home games, every season.
@Roggespierre @John at MrSEC @AllTideUp That fits with the step at a time approach.
If UVA, UNC, Duke and GTech all announced on August 14 that they were joining the Big Ten on July 1, 2014, all of a sudden Big Ten Lacrosse would no longer suck: it would be an eight school conference with four old-boy network insiders.
A two step process with UVA and GTech entering in 2015, and having a Lacrosse conference up and running and including the bluest of blue bloods would basically eliminate pushback from that side of the non-revenue sports. And as you said, the clout of that pushback is not about the revenues of the Lacrosse games, its about the incomes of the Lacrosse alums and parents.
@Paris10 If Kentucky needs to schedule three cupcakes to go bowling, why exactly do they deserve to represent the SEC in a bowl game, again?
1 year, 5 months ago on Big Ten Considering A 9- Or 10-Game Conference Schedule
Sagarin's rankings are tilted to the middle of a conference ~ for example, the weights in a 9 school conference are 1-2-3-4-5-4-3-2-1.
The current rankings are:
85.16 Big Ten
83.42 Big East (Vale)
82.36 Big 12
80.67 Mountain West
76.91 Missouri Valley
You could look at that as the MWC nestled up among the Majors ... or you could look at that as the SEC nestled down there among the Mid-Majors.
@AllTideUp @JRsec @Roggespierre @DanHogan You can still do a two division round robin schedule and have number one in each division host number two in the other. The semi-finals gets rid of the situation of the CCG loser being knocked out of the National Playoff by a division runner-up ~ under that lineup, the National Playoff semi-finals would be the SEC champion hosting a #1 or #2 semi-final bowl, and in most years the CCG loser being hosted as the #3 or #4 team.
1 year, 5 months ago on How An SEC-Big XII Scheduling Alliance Could Doom The ACC
@JRsec @AllTideUp @Roggespierre @DanHogan Under current rules you can have two divisions but each division has to play a full round robin. So 20 would be two groups of 10 under those rules, which is why people talk about a group system ~ Year 1: West+Central, East+South, Year2: West+South, East+Central, Year3: West+East, South+Central.
If you can have a two round playoff, you can have three eight team divisions and a wild card or four six team divisions and a semi-final, final conference championship playoff, and 24 would fit.
So definitely have to get the NCAA rules changed before you do that.
Obviously the threat of the SEC doing that is one reason why some other Major conferences might be against that particular rule change.
@AllTideUp @JRsec Don't have too much to complain about, and unable to complain too much are not the same at all. I have full confidence in the ability of LSU fans to find lots to complain about, come hell or high water.
@AllTideUp @JRsec East: Florida, Georgia, South Carolina, North Carolina and FSU would be even more fun.
That South is OK, but if a locked cross division game with Florida was possible for the Vols, it would be even better. Would it make sense to lock West/Central and South/East pairwise, as in Bama-Georgia, Auburn-South Carolina, Kentucky-UNC, Vandy-Duke?
@JRsec @Roggespierre @AllTideUp Now, there's times I could go with a description of Notre Dame as a Big Dick.
Given their "national profile", that two of the schools they want to play are in the Pac-12 and the Pac-12 is geographically constrained, there's a certain sense to Notre Dame to the Pac-12, but the Pac-12 would be unlikely to take a religious school.
@AllTideUp @JRsec @Roggespierre @DanHogan But suppose UVA was willing to stick with this version of the ACC, but wanted an exit path in place in case there was further destabilization. the actions it would take to sort out that exit path would easily generate exactly the same rumors as if it was in fact just waiting for the Maryland exit fee court case in order to know how much to budget for its exit.
The current rumors are certainly COMPATIBLE with UVA heading out the door, but they are also compatible with UVA staying. They'd be doing much the same one way or the other ~ the difference is the announcement that UVA would be making shortly after the Maryland case is decided ~ or exit fee negotiated.
Remember that there is a 15 August 2013 deadline to give notice for an exit on July 1 2014. Given the way that the ACC has been sitting on Maryland's conference payout, UVA has no strong incentive to announce early.
@SouthernBoiSB @JRsec @AllTideUp @Roggespierre @DanHogan Florida could, indeed, support FSU's entry, which would make any "gentleman's agreement" a moot point. As already noted, they did before. There is an old saying, after all, "keep your friends close and your enemies closer". A Florida State lording it over a Big 12 East could grease its path to the twelve Access Bowl spots, and often put it an impressive NCG win away from the National Championship playoff spot. Maybe Florida reckons that if they have to play through the SEC, so should FSU.
@JRsec Sure, the model had potential, but it requires winning a fight, and so it requires convincing the conferences in question that its worthwhile having the fight. If they have higher priorities, such as a higher share of NCAA tourney revenue for participating teams ~ paying 1/3 of GROSS revenues as unit income would be millions more per team for some conferences ~ they may want to keep their powder dry for that fight.
@JRsec And, BTW, on the lineup there with the Vols being in a division with Bama, Florida, Georgia, with Vandy as the division mascot, I'm fine with that. No real strong feelings about Auburn either way but its certainly worth it to have Bama in the division.
You just get the rule change sorted out for reals instead of just on the chalkboard, and we're good to go.
@JRsec Yes, when I say that, I am indeed refraining from casually assuming away the current rules. Waving the current rules away is easier said than done, otherwise they'd already be gone. If the changes in the rules are presumed in resolving the problem of maintaining rivalries, then the change in the rules will come about first, and the increase to 18 schools after, so time enough to look at how the changes in rules affect things when the changes are actually enacted.
As far as the Penn State sanctions ~ Penn State having a down decade is not going to deliver Philadelphia for Pitt. It might allow Pitt to improve on its standing in Western PA, but even then you've still got a contested stake in the less populous part of the state.
@JRsec @AllTideUp @Roggespierre @DanHogan But its not clearcut that Pitt would be profitable in the sense of raising the average profit per school. After all, it wouldn't give any boost to either cable carriage or carriage rates in Philadelphia or elsewhere in eastern Pennsylvania, and eastern PA is where the larger part of the PA population lives. And which SEC school is going to be thrilled with the prospect of playing in Pittsburgh in November?
And 18 has even bigger pushback to face than 16 when it comes to breaking up long standing SEC rivalries.
If the SEC decides that its OK to take FSU, I can see it going to either 16 or 18. If it decides to pass on FSU (whether or not in deference to the purported gentleman's agreement among the single-school states to defer to the decision of the in-state school), there are fewer pairs that raise the average profit per school once the SEC has hit 16.
@JRsec @Roggespierre What academics care about are grad school programs, and I think that FSU's top 25 grad school program is their professional Public Policy school. They'd have to be looking like they were seriously moving up the rankings for their Law School to get people to start saying, "Oh, they're better in some things than you think".
FSU is at least a large public university, so would be a good institutional fit if they could raise their academic rankings. Miami is a much worse institutional fit, I can't see Delany even putting them on his long list.
The prospect of getting GTech into the CIC has apparently got the Big Ten engineering departments watering at the mouth, and at least on USNWR's grad school rankings, there are top-25 engineering departments at the Illini, that school in Ann Arbor, Purdue, WIsconsin, Northwestern and Penn State ~ and two more in the top 30. On the academic side, it would be very popular.
GTech might not be an "odd" add like UVA or UNC, but whether or not it would raise the average media value, it would at least be a net increase in media value, so it would be a more appealing "even" add than Pitt.
@JRsec @AllTideUp @Roggespierre @DanHogan I think VTech is more footloose, and would go to the SEC in a heartbeat. FSU could well be prepared to go as well, at least once they are done their current preliminary investigation of realignment options.
I don't think that losing VTech rattles UNC at all, and I'm not sure that losing FSU does either. If it rattles UVA enough to say yes to going to the Big Ten with GTech, that could well rattle UNC. As far as a fourth for the Big Ten, with FSU gone, there's no reason not to take Duke ~ neither Pitt nor Duke anything of value to football, but Duke adds some value to basketball, which is likely to be enough to act as a tie breaker.
Here's the thing, though: now the Big12 can offer to Miami and Clemson as a pair, and they will almost certainly take it. So the need to take more than two is substantially diminished.
And that's the "FSU to SEC" ACC loses eight scenario ~ there's no hurry for the Big12 to look at any other schools, because the ACC becomes like a holding pond for the Big12, to pick from at its leisure.
Another ACC loses eight scenarios follow from the SEC gives up on UNC and looking to an SEC network when the current subsidiary rights deals expire it offers to VTech and NC State. NC State looks ahead and gets the OK from UNC to look out for itself. That's not enough to unstick UNC. UVA and GTech jump to the Big Ten. After FSU hearing from the Big Ten that they can't overcome the snobbery, that is enough to unstick FSU and Clemson for the Big12. That is finally enough to shake UNC, and UNC and Duke head off to the Big Ten. The Big12 again has the FREEDOM to expand further, but is well positioned to put that off until the expiration of the GOR is coming closer.
@Roggespierre @JRsec I reckon if the SEC head office had its way, it would take UNC and Texas and be done with it. And there's a pair where NEITHER move is on the table as an individual move ~ UNC needs to see that NC State has a soft landing somewhere, and Texas refused to go to the Pac-10 without Texas Tech. When A&M balked, the Pac-10 refused to take Texas Tech without both Texas and A&M, and the whole deal came unraveled, with the Pac-10 ending up with Colorado, the Big12 school that had been the closest institutional fit all along.
I think there is a touch of CDO in the 4x16 layouts (its a lot like OCD but better, because its in alphabetical order). With the population distribution of the country, there's nothing to FORCE the Pac-12 to expand just because the SEC and Big Ten are expanding ~ because expanding with schools that reduce the per-school market value does not help in terms of "keeping up with" the SEC and Big Ten.
And there's climate. Even if the Big Ten could sort out a way to make Big Ten academic snobs OK with FSU ... and FSU academics would be gleeful at joining the Big Ten and CIC ... would FSU want to be playing away to cold weather schools in November? In order to promise they wouldn't, the Big Ten would have to sort out how the playing divisions are going to work, which is a big can of worms in a conference with decades of playing a conference round robin and having rivalries emerge organically rather than along divisional lines.
@JRsec @AllTideUp @Roggespierre @DanHogan If it looks like the ACC is falling apart now and the Big12 is stable for the balance of the decade, they may well be willing to make that move.
In many ways, expanding by 6 east coast teams makes more sense than expanding by 2 ~ for one, it means only one incumbent has to go into the Eastern division against its preference (possibly TCU), since the Mountaineers would obviously be delighted to be in the "Big16 East". Expand by two, and if its Iowa State, Kansas and Kansas State, the Mountaineers, Newbie#1 and Newbie#2, that's awfully unattractive for the Newbies and something that Kansas and Kansas State would not like either.
But despite that outside-in view, it seems that for the immediate future, the first preference of the Big12 is to expand by 2, which seems to imply they have to wait for someone else to destabilize the ACC to the point that there are two schools that they would like to add that would be willing to make the move in order to secure a more stable position ~ obviously their preference would be either FSU/Miami or FSU/Clemson, while at present they seem to be 4th on the list for FSU, behind the ACC as it now stands, the Big Ten, and the SEC (but in which order probably depends on which FSU stakeholder you ask).
And both of the Big Ten's first preferences, UVA and UNC, seem likely to prefer the ACC as it is to moving.
Which leaves everybody waiting on the SEC to make a move that breaks the deadlock. And many in the ACC hoping that the SEC doesn't end up doing a damn thing.
@JRsec @Roggespierre "I understand your rationale but it is built on the notion of equal growth which will ultimately prove to be a myth. Expansion for the Big 10 and SEC is about markets and profitability."
No, its built on the notion that expansion for the Big 10 and SEC is about markets and profitability. A pair of adds that takes the conference from 14 to 16 has to add over 1/7th to the profitability of the conference to be a net gain for current members. A pair of adds that takes the conference from 16 to 18 has to add 1/8th the profitability ~ after the first pair already pushed up the average profitability.
You start to run out of schools that do that. For example, Pitt only does that for the SEC if its the "even" add that is making a much stronger "odd" add possible.l
@Roggespierre @JRsec Its quite distinct from an exit fee, since an exit fee is only owed by an exiting school, while the Grant of Rights is something obtained from all members of the conference, and something that all schools agreeing to it have already gained financial benefit from, in the conference payouts from the tier 1 and tier 2 broadcast rights.
And a fair market value buyout at this stage would be worth far more than the ACC exit fee, since while it would only apply to the school's share of conference media revenue, it would apply for a much longer period.
More broadly, if a voluntary association cannot impose three times the annual revenue it provides its members as an exit fee, it could well be that collegiate football is the biggest business affected by that. However, increase the ability of a copyright holder to renege on a long term rights deal because it has received a better offer from someone else, and you are affecting a whole truckload of Hollywood deals worth substantially more in total than collegiate football is worth. So there are a lot more stakeholders well beyond football itself on the side of defending the GOR than there are on the side of defending the exorbitant ACC exit fee.
@AllTideUp @JRsec @Roggespierre @DanHogan Yes, while the West Virginia bloggers love scenarios of ACC collapse, two each to the SEC, Big Ten, and Big12 spread out over the next four years features in several entirely reasonable scenarios, and the ACC reloading with Cinci, UConn, FB-only Navy and one other in that period is just as reasonable. If Navy comes in, the pressure on Notre Dame to leave its five game football scheduling agreement is substantially lessened, even if Miami is one of the teams heading out the door. If the ACC ended up with BC, Navy and Miami, there would be basically no pressure on Notre Dame to back out of its five game scheduling agreement, as the ACC would have three teams that Notre Dame would be happy to play annually in any event.
I don't know that I'd pick those scenarios as the MOST likely scenarios, but they are quite plausible.
@JRsec @Roggespierre But if the ACC is knocked out, then the Big12 is going to inherit a big chunk of that market that the ACC presently supplies ~ the Big12 that you are projecting eventually collapsing in that scenario is a far different beast than today's Big12.
Obviously as the clock ticks down on the Big12 GOR, then the question becomes what Texas wants ... but if in the meantime the Big12 has added a four or six east coast schools, then East Coast Exposure plus being the big dog of the Big12 West, then there could be a strong pull on UTx toward standing pat rather than joining the Pac-12. And there's no obvious Pac-12 expansion that does not run through Texas.
@vp81955 Note that if boosters were to get the upper hand over the academics and doctors and lawyers, and UNC says they'll got to the SEC if NC State gets to come along ~ UVA, Duke and GTech would also make an appealing combination of schools to add to the Big Ten's research CIC organization ... possibly appealing enough to overcome academic opposition to FSU.
@AllTideUp @DaveHenson The Big Ten Athletic Directors don't want Duke. The Big Ten Network would have no real interest in Duke. On the other hand, Duke would be welcome news among Big Ten academics ~ on some measures, they are the strongest research University in the ACC.
Which is why Duke to the Big Ten is normally stated in terms of some kind of package deal. For instance, if the Big Ten was in a position to get Florida State, that would face a storm of opposition from the academics. If it was a package deal to get UVA, UNC, Duke and FSU ... UVA, UNC and Duke might be just enough research clout to get enough influential stakeholders ~ department chairs, school research committee chairs ~ to publicly buy into the package. And for Indiana and Illinois, the BBall appeal of UNC and Duke might overcome the reluctance to add a non-AAU, below top 50 research school like FSU.
In terms of helping to land UNC, Duke is included in speculation for opposite reasons to the SEC. For SEC, the geographic fit with UNC is no problem, it about a more appealing SEC from a basketball and academic strength perspective. For the Big Ten, basketball and academic strengths are no problem, but UNC would want to have travel partners.
@JRsec @Roggespierre The challenge there is not the season lineup but the season scheduling. Getting the home games in late October and November requires not just the schools agreeing, but the conferences playing along ~ in that lineup that you gave, particularly the Big12 scheduling those school's conference schedules so that Notre Dame can play late season home and away schedules.
Notre Dame has a wide open field in scheduling Home and Home series in September ~ they are a good OOC marquee matchup at home and get you on nationwide TV when you play away. Scheduling home and away series that can be guaranteed to be playable in November, however, is much harder.
Two Major conferences have been willing to commit to cooperate with the scheduling of late season home and home series of their members with Notre Dame. For both, the ACC and the Big 12, the rest of the deal was Notre Dame committing to play five of their schools annually and joining their conference for Olympic sports.
@Roggespierre@JRsec If Notre Dame plays Navy, USC, Stanford and Purdue annually, and starting in 2014 five ACC schools, that gives them the equivalent of a 9 game conference schedule. The NuBigEast desperately wants Navy to follow through on their commitment to join, so if Notre Dame needs flexibility in placing Navy when the Major conferences are in their conference schedule, it seems highly likely it will be granted. That gives Notre Dame six games and a bye to fit into the last seven weeks of the regular season, when OOC conference games with Majors are hard to schedule.
Obviously, their biggest schedule risk would be if the Pac-12 went to 10, but if the Big Ten, SEC and Big12 all went to 10 games, that would be a serious threat to their strength of schedule.
However, that is all far enough in the future to be in "cross that bridge if they come to it" territory.
@Roggespierre @JRsec @AllTideUp Given how much clout the alumni have at Notre Dame, it could indeed involve some measure of long-nurtured grudge against the Big Ten for turning Notre Dame down ... but primarily, Notre Dame's alumni have adopted football independence as an end in itself. Unless and until that changes, that is going to drive Notre Dame to fight to retain football independence if at all possible.
Even if the objective situation changes so that remaining independent is not really viable, it could take a while for that change to settle into the mindset of Notre Dame alumni.
They are still viable as an independent (even if they went to the NCG a year early on their current cycle, because of Oregon / Kansas State implosion week), so any conference realignment speculation ought to pencil Notre Dame in as doing something to maintain their independence.
@WarHog38 @SouthernBoiSB Even with groups (I hate calling them pods, I keep thinking of Invasion of the Body Snatchers), you trade off fewer annual Home and Home series for seeing the whole conference more often. Or else "East" and "West" are anchors that swap "Central" and "South" annually, with perhaps one locked cross-over game and playing through the balance home or away over three years (home and home over six years). That's easier to keep track of than the pure group system ~ you have an even year division and an odd year division ~ but there will still be problems. If Bama is in the South and the Vols are in the Central, and that is a locked cross-division rivalry game, will the rest of the teams in the Central be content playing Bama home and home across a six year cycle?
There's a reason I was in Knoxville studying Econ instead of at Georgia Tech studying Operations Research ~ thinking through the possible combinations starts to give me a headache.
Mind, "inside sources" in an ESPN Insider blog and "inside sources" on a WV ACC-collapse fantasy blog likely mean different things ~ the second could easily be "I know a guy I used to go to school with who now works in UVA admissions and has heard a rumor going around".
@Roggespierre @JRsec No football schools in the C7 means they can't do anything to guarantee Notre Dame home games at the back end of the season, which becomes increasingly important for Notre Dame maintaining its independence as the conferences move toward fewer OOC games.
To take one example, the Big Ten might be persuaded after much haggling to make a concession to let Purdue play Notre Dame on a home and home basis in second half of the season, but only because Purdue would put it as their number one priority (its their only guaranteed national TV game). Michigan and Michigan State have other priorities to pursue and can't put maintaining meeting Notre Dame's needs as a number one priority ~ as we've already seen with Notre Dame's scheduling. But if the Big Ten every moves to ten conference games, Purdue could be in a bind as far as keeping the Notre Dame game on its schedule.
Take the ACC as it stands now, and the C7 breaking away from the Big East, and it just reinforces Notre Dame's decision to enter into its deal with the ACC. The problem is the risk that the ACC that Notre Dame schedules five games with in 2014 and going ahead won't be anything like the same conference by 2016.
@JRsec @Roggespierre @DanHogan While ACC-collapse fans from West Virginia spin dreams of a "Big 16" with six teams raided from the ACC ~ it seems like many Big12 schools are more inclined to a 12 team conference than a 14 or 16 team conference. If they keep their 9 game conference schedule, with two six-team divisions that's your in-division games and 4 out of 6 cross division games, so it would be possible to promise everyone in the East two games with Texas and two games with Oklahoma every three years.
If the ACC is raided and wounded but not to the point of collapse, and one of the schools they reload with from the NuBigEast is Navy, all of a sudden a 5 games ACC commitment is only a net 4 game commitment, since the Navy game is a bedrock commitment game in the ND schedule. BC is not going anywhere, and that's a game Notre Dame wants on their schedule anyway. Its easy to see the ACC retaining four other schools that Notre Dame would like to play half the time, which would make a 5 game commitment a net sacrifice of a single game when all is said and done.
But there's just no telling how things will land. If they had done the deal with the Big12, they would have two good games and three "meh" games on their schedule, but they would at least have certainty going ahead.
@DanHogan @Roggespierre I've heard it had the same deal on the table (Olympic sports member, 5 conference games, guaranteed Notre Dame home games in November) from the Big12. The Buyers Remorse would have to be regarding taking the deal from the ACC instead of the Big 12.
@DanHogan @Roggespierre Compared to the 3-game football tie-in with the Big East, and FOR THE CURRENT ACC, it really only sacrificed a game of flexibility with the ACC deal ~ it wants to play on the East Coast too, and between BC, Miami, FSU, Syracuse, the Hokies and Pitt, with an occasional series with UVA and the Tarheels, going from three with the Big East to Five with the ACC is no big sacrifice ~ especially since it guarantees home games in November which is a major part of Notre Dame retaining its prized independence.
The buyers remorse seems most likely to be the worry that Miami, FSU, the Hokies and/or Pitt might be heading out the door ~ especially if they had been sold on the relative stability of the ACC compared to the instability of the Big East.
@RussH VTech ends up in the Big 12 if (1) they don't end up in the SEC and (2) the ACC is destabilized enough that the Big 12 is more attractive. VTech makes for a great travel partner for the Mountaineers, and the Big 12 would dearly love a slice of the Greater DC media market.
@Roggespierre Makes sense ~ its been looking like the C7 would play the 2013/2014 season in the Big East before heading out, and Louisville will play the 2013/2014 season before heading out, so the Big East will be an attractive basketball conference until the end of next season, when the wheels fall off as they add a bunch of mid-major football schools and only one decent basketball program.
I'm wondering whether the "buyer remorse" comment reflects on the pressure that the ACC was reportedly putting on Notre Dame to up their football commitment to 6 games annually.
@JRsec @The regular guy Also, VTech will deliver more of Northern Virginia, which is the the part of the state where population is growing the fastest.
@WarHog38 @SouthernBoiSB Saying that the SEC has plenty of top tier football programs for an 18 school conference isn't saying I want the SEC to go to 18. I'm not all that eager to see 16. Hell, even at 14, there are some actual SEC schools that the Vols rarely see as it is.
Just saying that the conference insiders seem to be lusting after adding more cable markets and another population growth center to their current population growth centers of Florida and East Texas.
On my own preferences, I'd rather FSU get an invite, but there's a lot to like about NC State and VTech to the SEC.
@DanHogan @JRsec @The regular guy Big Ten circles are widely speculating that the Big Ten will end up with all AAU ACC members but Pitt ~ UVA, UNC, Duke and GTech. And in some circles, complaining about that list and wishing that FSU was an AAU-caliber school.
@The regular guy One big factor that makes UNC+... less likely for the SEC is the UNC/NCState governance ~ they basically have the same governing board. If UNC moves somewhere, that is likely to destabilize the ACC and see it lose its status as a Major conference. So it is very hard for UNC to move somewhere unless it can be sure that NC State has a seat waiting for it in a Major conference.
Since the Big Ten will never take NC State, that makes UNC to the Big Ten and NC State to the SEC more likely, because NC State to the SEC works for NC State no matter who else the SEC adds, while NC State to the Big12 only works with four or more ACC schools in the move.
And UNC knows that they have an open door at the Big Ten, so the governing board doesn't have to worry about NC State moving and leaving UNC in the lurch.
So whether or not UNC+somebody is the SEC's Plan A, if they are convinced that UNC to the SEC is not on the table, NC State and VTech seem likely to be a perfectly fine Plan B.
@kentky95 No reason it should, but Texas agreed to a long term Grant of Rights and the ACC cannot convince their schools to do the same. That's what swung it from everybody expecting the PAC-10 to rip the guts out of the Big12 to now everybody expecting the ACC to be the next Major conference to take the Big Least drop to the Mid-Majors.
@WarHog38 @SouthernBoiSB That's the point. The SEC is a football conference, and football is expensive. The Vols spend over $1m on recruiting, and bucketloads to pay former head coaches not to head coach. If TV sets in North Carolina can shake more dollars out of the pockets of the network executives and more money for an SEC Network from North Carolina cable systems, you can be damn sure Knoxville will be interested in landing UNC.
As far as the idea that the SEC is short of football powerhouse programs and need to reload, who in the hell is the SEC catching up to, exactly? Doesn't look to me like the SEC has got any shortage of marquee programs for an 18 school conference.
@WarHog38@SouthernBoiSB If you are focusing on Duke, you are looking in the wrong place. The point about the academic standing of Duke and its marquee BBall program (which was a marquee BBall program well before Coach K) is to overcome UNC's reluctance n terms of the quality of SEC academics and BBall.
UNC is the biggest value add in the ACC for both the SEC and the Big Ten, and while they are a well regarded university and a BBall King, the reason they are the biggest value is adding that market for showing the marquee football programs that the SEC already has. Is adding a rapidly growing state of 9m+ worth two adds? In pure broadcast money terms, definitely. UNC is worth two adds ~ or close enough to it that a marquee BBall program like Duke rounds it up to being worth two adds..
The argument TO BE ADDRESSED TO squeamish UNC academics is that the ACC once WAS a conference with some very good schools ~ five of the top 50 research universities in the CMUP rankings ~ but if both Duke and UNC go to the SEC, then the SEC will have five of the top 50 (Vandy, Florida, and Texas A&M, plus UNC and Duke. And with Maryland already heading out the door and with UVA and GTech sounding like they may jump ship for the Big Ten, UNC and Duke could end up being the only top 50 schools left in the ACC.
UNC may end up telling the SEC "Hell No", but the SEC is going to make a play for the biggest value school in the ACC first, before settling for the easier fits but lower value adds of NC State and VTech.
@SouthernBoiSB The SEC may think UVA is off the table, and UNC/Duke adds more value than NC State and VTech ~ it would both lock down North Carolina as SEC country, as opposed to a foothold in both NC and Virginia, and also increase the value of the winter scheduling for a coming SEC Network by upgrading the marketability of SEC BBall.
@dafreshness318 Why would the Big Ten want Pitt? They add no network footprint. It adds less revenue than adding UCincinnati.
Of course, Pitt is AAU, and Big Ten fans would not squawk, so if the Big Ten had one great or three good adds and needed one to get to even divisions, Pitt would work for that. But Pitt is only getting into the Big Ten in that kind of evening-up scenario.
@DanHogan The core purpose of a commitment is to get late season home games. Look at BYU with one home game in the second half of its 2012 season and 2 home games in the second half of its 2013 season to get an idea of the challenges of scheduling an independent in today's football environment. ND might prefer four, the host conference might prefer six, but the commitment to play the games has the quid pro quo that the host conference commits to schedule them late in the season.
Why Notre Dame preferred the ACC to the Big12 when both were offering partial membership is the east coast exposure. But AllTideUp notes, under the scenario, the Big16 would have a combination of the biggest Central Time Zone schools and a number of East Coast schools for ND to play.
@MoKelly1 Obviously the big stadium schools wanted 8 home games to maximize ticket revenue, and the weakest schools want a number of games against the Little Sisters of the Poor to maximize their chance of going bowling, while schools in the middle of the Big Ten want to maximize their average number of home games against the marquee schools, so its both ends against the middle. However since the big stadium schools are looking at scheduling one fewer cupcake game and one more home and home contest against a mid-level AQ conference opponent, doing that against a Big Ten opponent and keeping the money in the BTN is more attractive.
10 games seems like framing the question so that 9 conference games seems like a compromise. Instead of asking the question, "ok, stay with 8 or move to 9", its asking the question, "stay at 8, move to 9, or move to 10?". There are six "western" schools (UNL, IA, MN, WI, IL and NW) that want to be in a Western division but several of them will want to play what are going to be the marquee schools in the Eastern division as often as possible. They'll want 10 games and as few locked cross-division games as possible.
Get a minority of schools each pushing for 10, 9 and 8, and "voila", 9 is the compromise result.
@Seanbo10 conference games is not an option for the SEC with locked out of conference rivalry games in place for several schools, so that can simply be set to one side. For 9 conference games, 7 homes games per season is straightforward: schedule two cupcakes at home, and have the OOC home and home contest at home in the year you have 4 conference home games and away in the year when you have 5 conference home games.
Either neutral site games are better financially than a home and home series, making 6 home _ one neutral site "better than 7 home games" or else don't schedule the damn thing.
No longer scheduling 3 cupcake games is a transition that schools with Championship playoff ambitions are going to have to make in any event. Teams without Championship playoff ambitions (in football) can still schedule 3 non-AQ games in pursuit of bowl game eligibility, and alternate between 7 and 8 home games. May as well make those FormerBigEast, Conference-USA, Sunbelt and MAC schools, since that's who they'll likely be playing if they make a bowl.
@JepH Setting aside the annual game in Jacksonville, they each just need their 5home conference schedule when they are away to their (at present) ACC in-state rival, and 4home conference schedule when they are home to their ACC in-state rival. That' plus two payday games is a 7 home game season. Then presuming the game in Jacksonville is better for both schools than playing home and home over two years, that means that 6 homes game plus one annual neutral site game is better for them than 7 homes games.
If the annual game in Jacksonville is a net money loser compared to a home game in alternate years, then don't schedule it.
Under the new playoff system, they are going to have to pare it down to two cupcake games anyway, so may as well have the extra home and home series in-conference where it makes money for everybody from the coming SEC Network.
What makes it seem less than likely is the C7 side of it. The whole point of bolting from the BigEast was to escape the turmoil of football-driven realignment and to put together an attractive basketball conference.
What is adding UC and UConn except re-introducing the turmoil that they are escaping?
1 year, 6 months ago on Latest Realignment Rumors: UC to the Catholic 7 and MWC