"I don't think" - um, I think you would know, dude. Quit acting like someone else would be smack in the middle of that kind of talk if it was happening.

Florida State Big 12 rumors Randy Spetman: Florida State not to Big 12, Randy Spetman 'committed to ACC' - Orlando Sentinel (http://articles.orlandosentinel.com/2012-05-11/sports/os-florida-state-big-12-randy-spetman-0512-20120511_1_acc-and-espn-conference-switch-fsu-ad-randy-spetman)

Brett McMurphy ‏ @McMurphyCBS
Pitt filed a suit today against Big East to guarantee it can join ACC year early on July 1, 2013

Brett McMurphy ‏ @McMurphyCBS
Pitt filed a suit today against Big East to guarantee it can join ACC year early on July 1, 2013

There's fear that if Boise backs out, which is looking more and more likely, the Big East will try to hold them there.

SEC fans will think they are visiting a local H.S. stadium when they travel to Columbia. I hope the expansion upgrades that facility a ton. Otherwise, it is wasted money.

Renderings have been posted by someone who has the drawings. Looks like most of the seats will be added by creating a second deck on the east side of the stadium and an increase in size of the south stands. New media and luxury boxes added to east and south of stadium. Hill on north will be moved in so it's not as far from field, allowing for more room for temporary seating above hill for larger crowds. Two more HD jumbotrons added to south end of stadium.

http://25.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_m3vmu9XMZQ1rw044mo1_1280.jpg

http://24.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_m3vn2pcRPU1rw044mo1_1280.jpg

Warchant.com - FSU BOT Chair blasts ACC, opens door for Big 12 (http://floridastate.rivals.com/content.asp?CID=1364755)

So, uh, don't put those FSU to Big XII rumors away yet.

I had no idea the ACC kept Tier 3 basketball rights but gave away football. If that's not "We're Tobacco Road and we're running this bitch" arrogance, I don't know what is.

To be fair, with tier 3 rights, the tier 3 for football is insignificant. In the case of FSU, it's there one FCS game a year, since the rest of their games are on TV. Where as there are 8 to 10 basketball games OOC that can be sold as tier 3

So, on one hand, the Tier 3 rights mentioned are bogus. The ACC has no Tier 3 TV rights. The FSU president also said they aren't moving. Kind of sounds like Missouri's president from last year, though. Quite possibly the school lawyers jumped on the guy as well, as they really can't talk about leaving until they actually, you know, leave. On the other hand, turns out the contract is heavily backloaded, with only an increase of $1 million next year and not the $4 million originally believed until 2021 with escalator clauses that likely keep the ACC a distant 5th.

The belief is that the boosters possibly put him up to this to start stirring up the outrage that got A&M and Missouri moving.

http://sports.yahoo.com/news/ncaaf--florida-state-trustee-sparks-firestorm-with-desire-to-join-big-12.html;_ylt=AqbhxMYKJFDfTTK34wMIDF8LcykA;_ylu=X3oDMTFsYmxwdDFlBG1pdANCbG9nIEluZGV4IGJ5IEF1dGhvcgRwb3MDMQRzZWMDTWVkaWFCbG9nSW5kZXhUZW1w;_ylg=X3oDMTFrODdzYXZuBGludGwDdXMEbGFuZwNlbi11cwRwc3RhaWQDBHBzdGNhdANhdXRob3IEcHQDc2VjdGlvbnM-;_ylv=3

Don't need to stir up much outrage among the football fans, though. They're already there.

So, on one hand, the Tier 3 rights mentioned are bogus. The ACC has no Tier 3 TV rights. The FSU president also said they aren't moving. Kind of sounds like Missouri's president from last year, though. Quite possibly the school lawyers jumped on the guy as well, as they really can't talk about leaving until they actually, you know, leave. On the other hand, turns out the contract is heavily backloaded, with only an increase of $1 million next year and not the $4 million originally believed until 2021 with escalator clauses that likely keep the ACC a distant 5th.

The belief is that the boosters possibly put him up to this to start stirring up the outrage that got A&M and Missouri moving.

Florida State trustee may have lit the fuse on a potential move to the Big 12 - Yahoo! Sports (http://sports.yahoo.com/news/ncaaf--florida-state-trustee-sparks-firestorm-with-desire-to-join-big-12.html;_ylt=AqbhxMYKJFDfTTK34wMIDF8LcykA;_ylu=X3oDMTFsYmxwdDFlBG1pdANCbG9nIEluZGV4IGJ5IEF1dGhvcgRwb3MDMQRzZWMDTWVkaWFCbG9nSW5kZXhUZW1w;_ylg=X3oDMTFrODdzYXZuBGludGwDdXMEbGFuZwNlbi11cwRwc3RhaWQDBHBzdGNhdANhdXRob3IEcHQDc2VjdGlvbnM-;_ylv=3)

To be fair, it seems likely that the Big 12's deal probably does not start out at the full $20M per year (it is possible, but seems likely that that is the per year average that escalates over time).

Based on the info that has been coming out, I think the ball has been set in motion by the Big 12, Florida State, and Clemson (and probably began at the Big 12 meetings a week or two ago. I think the ACC will have to agree to some form of uneven revenue distribution (whether bowl-related or TV-related) in order to get in the football-centric schools into a competitive neighborhood. Otherwise, schools like FSU, Miami, Clemson, and Georgia Tech will fall significantly behind Florida, South Carolina, and Georgia in the next 15 years. I think one of the key statements made by the Florida State brass is that they are falling behind the Mississippi schools and Vanderbilt in terms of revenue.

This whole ACC thing just feels like the B12 all over again. Denial, followed by outrage when the deal given was relatively underwhelming.

I'd argue that if Florida State, Miami, and Va Tech hadn't lost a step in football, the ACC would have been in much better shape for this round of TV negotiations. FSU can be as ticked off as they want, the fact remains that the ACC added football schools in the last round in preparation for this and they mostly fell flat.

I'd argue that if Florida State, Miami, and Va Tech hadn't lost a step in football, the ACC would have been in much better shape for this round of TV negotiations. FSU can be as ticked off as they want, the fact remains that the ACC added football schools in the last round in preparation for this and they mostly fell flat.

Other conferences have teams step up. Michigan State and Wisconsin in the Big Ten in years where Michigan/OSU/Penn State were down. Oregon and Stanford for USC in the PAC-12. Auburn and Arkansas for Florida in the SEC.

The ACC isn't getting paid because Swofford has chosen maximum exposure for the conference over maximum revenue. It's basically the MAC choosing to play Tuesday night games just to get on TV even though 13 people show up in the stadium writ large. For a majority of the conference, that may be preferable, but obviously not for the schools competing directly with SEC schools.

Total seat capacity will be 81K, which is a 17K increase over the current seat capacity of 64K. The 71K that you wrongly used for your calculation includes the 7K in GA seats. If you include the 7K in GA seating, total capacity will be 88K in the renovated stadium.

Memorial Stadium will be the 6th largest stadium in the SEC and the 12th largest stadium in college football after the expansion.

Look...Clemson doesn't have a big stadium....but 88k counting general admission...that was hot in '92.

Cant believe that kinda cash is required to get THOSE numbers.

Warchant.com - FSU BOT Chair blasts ACC, opens door for Big 12 (http://floridastate.rivals.com/content.asp?CID=1364755)

So, uh, don't put those FSU to Big XII rumors away yet.

I had no idea the ACC kept Tier 3 basketball rights but gave away football. If that's not "We're Tobacco Road and we're running this bitch" arrogance, I don't know what is.

Yeah that might just bite them in the azz...apparently Clemson's Tier 3 FB rights exceed the entire leagues Tier 3 BB rights....this on the heels of the Tobacco Road block on the UNC additional penalty in retribution for the BS UNC pulled on Clemson in 83....has some old time orange money a little unhappy.

I don't think Big XII is imminent....but right now 2014 Clemson in the ACC would surprise, though not shock, me.

Since I don't travel to any games, I'm not sure I care whether FSU plays in the ACC or Big XII. Outside of Miami, I don't particular care about any team in the ACC as far as rivalries go, so replacing those teams with OU, Texas, etc., might provide a little spark of something. SEC is really the only conference where that would matter to me. And with all the television/internet viewing opportunities, I'm not sure I would miss more FSU games just because they left the ACC.

I'm pretty meh on staying or leaving. The ACC feels like only a step above the Big East in prestige, so the move would probably be a good thing overall.

VCU to the A-10 in 2013-14. Good swap of Temple/Charlotte for Butler/VCU.

VCU joining Atlantic 10 in 2013 - CBSSports (http://www.cbssports.com/collegefootball/blog/brett-mcmurphy/19042989)

VCU to the A-10 in 2013-14. Good swap of Temple/Charlotte for Butler/VCU.

VCU joining Atlantic 10 in 2013 - CBSSports (http://www.cbssports.com/collegefootball/blog/brett-mcmurphy/19042989)

I think these kinds of moves could be a good side effect of the moves in the big conferences. I could easily see a few nice mid-major basketball conferences emerge when the dust settles in a few years.

Rumors are swirling that VCU will announce today that they'll begin play in the A-10 this fall.

That would be unprecedented, wouldn't it? Announcing in May and moving that fall?

I hadn't heard that.

I hadn't heard that.


My sources > Yours.

I'm joking of course ;).

Some wannabe newsbreakers on the CAA Message boards are making the claim. "My wife's best friends' hairdresser's daughter plays tiddlywinks at VCU and was told that they will be playing in the A10 this fall".

CAA ADs have been notified that VCU is leaving effective immediately.

Press conference from VCU at 1:30.

Now, I have heard that. Nice job, wm. Also hear that the A10 basically had their pick between either VCU or George Mason and went with VCU over GM.

Wonder if they will let Temple out a year early now to go to the Big East. If not, it's going to be a mighty awkward 15-team league schedule to work out for next season.

I don't claim to have any major sources, I just read the CAA message board and they happened to have this early.

Good for VCU, good for the A-10, bad for the CAA.

Wade Moore is an insider now. :)

Someone change his name to VCUBBF.

Wade Moore is an insider now. :)

Someone change his name to VCUBBF.

Almost spit out my water, thanks guys!

Your ideas are intriguing, and I would like to subscribe to your newsletter.

CAASupaFan with the insider scoop.

+1.

Also, not quite the appropriate place, but VIRGINIA/WISCONSIN in the ACC-Big Ten Challenge! I'll probably die of joy watching Tony Bennett and Bo's swingball go head-to-head.

Let's see if I can keep my streak alive.

There is a rumor of a 2pm announcement for ODU to Conference USA.

No strong validity yet, but it's out there.

FWIW, the source of the rumor:

Twitter (https://twitter.com/#!/hatfieldsports/status/203105322842329088)

2 for 2.

2 for 2.

That means he can't be VCUBBF then.

I think I read in the articles about the ODU jump that the CAA is tyring to continue the "stuff rolls downhill" progression as they look at schools like Davidson and Boston University as potential replacements. There will be a bottom to this at some point, right?

Wonder if Coastal Carolina will fill one of those CAA spots now that they are open to moving from the Big South? With VCU and ODU gone though not sure how much of a move up it would be.

I would think Coastal could still partner nicely with UNC-Wilmington.

2 for 2.

That means he can't be VCUBBF then.
I lol'd.

I think I read in the articles about the ODU jump that the CAA is tyring to continue the "stuff rolls downhill" progression as they look at schools like Davidson and Boston University as potential replacements. There will be a bottom to this at some point, right?

Wonder if Coastal Carolina will fill one of those CAA spots now that they are open to moving from the Big South? With VCU and ODU gone though not sure how much of a move up it would be.

I would think Coastal could still partner nicely with UNC-Wilmington.

I've heard a lot of schools thrown out.

The ones coming up most often are:

Stony Brook
Albany
Davidson
Coastal
UNH (all sports, they are CAA for football already)

Davidson is really mainly brought up by the BBall schools, I'm not sure they'd actually want to leave.

I believe that SB, Albany, and Coastal would all come if asked.


The more I hear, the more I'd be surprised if Stony Brook is not in the CAA by 2014.

Coastal seems like a smart pickup if we don't want UNCW to leave, so I think they're pretty likely. The "problem" with Davidson is football.


So, if I were to take a bet, I'd say the CAA goes for Stony Brook, Albany, and Coastal.

Boston University is not one I've heard thrown around.

Back to football... the SEC and Big12 just agreed to a 5 year deal for their champions to play in a bowl game, starting in 2014. Assuming they aren't in the national championship game/playoff/whatever format that takes.

So, the Big10 and Pac12 have got an agreement to play each other, and now the SEC/Big12 are getting together. Yep, if FSU has any balls, they will bail for the Big12 as quickly as they can. We're headed for that Big 4 Super-Conference thing sooner than most expected.

Rumor has it that it will be played at Jerry World.

I wonder what this does to the other BCS bowls (or former BCS bowls after the playoff restructuring).

It sure sounds like they are rapidly heading towards 4 Super Conferences lining up for Sugar/Rose semifinals and then bidding out the championship games (a la the Super Bowl).

It will be interesting to see how things play out in the next few weeks. If the presidents vote to only allow conference champions, does that finally force Notre Dame into a conference?

Surprising that an elite conference like the SEC would pair up with an obviously dying conference in the Big 12.

Surprising that an elite conference like the SEC would pair up with an obviously dying conference in the Big 12.

Have to wonder if they know what's up with potential new additions. In any event, choosing an almost-dead league less than a year later as their equal and passing up a pretty stable (albeit not great football conference) adding teams like the ACC can only mean bad things for the ACC. FSU better get out while it can.

Looks like Texas is out to destroy the SEC as well for the conference annihilation trifecta!

I wonder what this means for the Fiesta Bowl and Sugar Bowl, since those were the destinations for the respective conference champions, or had first pick if the champ was in the BCS title game.

I'm going to guess it will play out like this:

New Bowl = @ Cowboys Stadium (aka Jerry World) w/ SEC vs B12
Sugar Bowl w/ SEC vs B12 as a National Semifinal
Rose Bowl w/ B10 vs P12 as a National Semifinal
Championship "Bowl" will be bid out, on a rotating basis (a la the Super Bowl)
The New Bowl @ Cowboys Stadium (SEC vs B12), Orange Bowl (ACC vs SEC), Fiesta Bowl (Some combination of B12, B10, and P12), and another bowl that features the Big Ten will comprise the next tier beneath the Semis. Probably some sort of at-large qualifiers in there, too.

Dennis Dodd ‏@dennisdoddcbs
Asked if he were ACC or Big East commish, what would he be thinking today, Neinas: "Better get a good bowl."

Hard to imagine that this doesn't nudge Florida State, Clemson, and VPI toward moving.

If VPI can divorce itself from UVA, I think they are a shoo in for the SEC. I think Clemson lands in the Big 12 and Florida State and the SEC will give each other one last, long look (if the SEC cannot get into North Carolina). Will be interesting to see if Georgia Tech, Maryland, and UVA decide to look elsewhere (all would seem to have multiple landing spots).

The ACC can grab UConn and Louisville and have five of the top 10 basketball programs in the country (UNC, Duke, UConn, Syracuse, and Louisville) and still be a viable football conference.

I'm going to guess it will play out like this:

New Bowl = @ Cowboys Stadium (aka Jerry World) w/ SEC vs B12
Sugar Bowl w/ SEC vs B12 as a National Semifinal
Rose Bowl w/ B10 vs P12 as a National Semifinal
Championship "Bowl" will be bid out, on a rotating basis (a la the Super Bowl)
The New Bowl @ Cowboys Stadium (SEC vs B12), Orange Bowl (ACC vs SEC), Fiesta Bowl (Some combination of B12, B10, and P12), and another bowl that features the Big Ten will comprise the next tier beneath the Semis. Probably some sort of at-large qualifiers in there, too.

There aren't nearly enough SEC teams in your semi-finals.

There aren't nearly enough SEC teams in your semi-finals.

True, but it seems like all the conference commissioners are coming out in favor of the champion-only model (except of the SEC). The contract is supposedly only going to be for 4-years. I wonder if they are doing that to allow all the expansion stuff to shake out and then they will move to a bigger (6- or 8-team) model?

This new bowl is actually great news for the Big East and ACC. Now they can sign an agreement to play each other on Jan 1. That would guarantee that at least one of them would win a major bowl game each year.

I'm going to guess it will play out like this:

New Bowl = @ Cowboys Stadium (aka Jerry World) w/ SEC vs B12
Sugar Bowl w/ SEC vs B12 as a National Semifinal


Huh?

If the end game is 4 power conferences of 16 teams each, and the 4 conferences are Pac, Big10, Big 12 and SEC, where are the 4 new PAC teams coming from?

I hate where college sports, football in particular, is going. It should be more "power" conferences, not less. :(

Huh?

The "New Bowl" is the one that was announced today. It will place the highest non-semifinalists of the Big 12 and SEC against one another. It has been reported that it will be in Cowboys Stadium (but the officials are saying it is up for bid).

The Sugar Bowl is just my guess as to how things will play out once the new, 4-team championship structure is finalized. Many conference commissioners, outside of the SEC, have indicated they want the four highest conference champs (rather than at-large teams) to be the four semifinalists. I'm guessing one semifinal will be the traditional Rose Bowl and the other will be the Sugar Bowl.

I kind of see where this is all going.

The current conference structure continues to consolidate to where we have the 4 x 16 superconference structure. This lasts a decade or so until in one of the conferences (I'll use the PAC-16 as an example) develops a rift based on some fundamental issue. That conference agrees to split into 2 sub-conferences and then 2 independent conferences totally. One of those 8 team conferences get a TV deal that pays each team more than they got in the 16-team conference. The 4 x 16 structure disrupted, the greedy teams in the other superconferences facilitate the split into 2 8-team conferences. 8 x 8 conferences last a little while and then teams start to jump, creating some teams with 10 teams, some with 12, some stay at 8 -- looking remarkably what it looks like now.

lather, rinse, repeat.

I kind of see where this is all going.

The current conference structure continues to consolidate to where we have the 4 x 16 superconference structure. This lasts a decade or so until in one of the conferences (I'll use the PAC-16 as an example) develops a rift based on some fundamental issue. That conference agrees to split into 2 sub-conferences and then 2 independent conferences totally. One of those 8 team conferences get a TV deal that pays each team more than they got in the 16-team conference. The 4 x 16 structure disrupted, the greedy teams in the other superconferences facilitate the split into 2 8-team conferences. 8 x 8 conferences last a little while and then teams start to jump, creating some teams with 10 teams, some with 12, some stay at 8 -- looking remarkably what it looks like now.

lather, rinse, repeat.

And of course, it will be all be the fault of Texas. :D

Thank goodness Missouri is out there working to save us all and expose the Evil that is the University of Texas!

Aside from this separating the ACC from the top 4 conference pretty clearly, the other interesting point is that this is currently a bowl matchup without a bowl. IMO, this is the opening salvo at smashing the current bowl committees. If the bowls want this game, it's not going to come with the current "You have to sell these 1,000 hotel rooms and 15,000 tickets for full price to make your money back for this game" guarantees. They may just create the bowl themselves and split the money 50-50.

Yep. Of course, for the teams that lose tons of money going to bowls, they are the 6-6 teams with the "meh" fanbase who won't have any leverage and will be desperately looking for a bowl invite, so my guess is it won't change much for anyone other than the top tiers. Even within the "power conferences." I seriously doubt the SEC is going to use its clout to help UK get to the 8th place SEC bowl game on its terms and not the bowl's terms.

Ha! Great point.

George Schroeder ‏<S>@</S>GeorgeSchroeder
Seem to recall that champions of SEC & Big 12 could easily have met last season to decide it all...but many didn't want it. Hmm.

Yep. Of course, for the teams that lose tons of money going to bowls, they are the 6-6 teams with the "meh" fanbase who won't have any leverage and will be desperately looking for a bowl invite, so my guess is it won't change much for anyone other than the top tiers. Even within the "power conferences." I seriously doubt the SEC is going to use its clout to help UK get to the 8th place SEC bowl game on its terms and not the bowl's terms.

That part's dealt with by the Big Ten proposal to require 7 wins again. Suddenly you have 35 or so bowls but only enough teams for 27-29. Who offers enough $ to get those tie ins first?

The "New Bowl" is the one that was announced today. It will place the highest non-semifinalists of the Big 12 and SEC against one another. It has been reported that it will be in Cowboys Stadium (but the officials are saying it is up for bid).

The Sugar Bowl is just my guess as to how things will play out once the new, 4-team championship structure is finalized. Many conference commissioners, outside of the SEC, have indicated they want the four highest conference champs (rather than at-large teams) to be the four semifinalists. I'm guessing one semifinal will be the traditional Rose Bowl and the other will be the Sugar Bowl.

Oh, I see. I was just confused, since Ksyrup's post said it was the champions facing off in the new bowl.

Damn, twitter is pretty great right now.

<S>@</S>DanWolken (https://twitter.com/#!/DanWolken): I'm shocked! Shocked! RT <S>@</S>schadjoe (https://twitter.com/#!/schadjoe): Big East would be open to an ACC championship challenge

Andy Hutchins ‏<S>@</S>AndyHutchins
Other things the Big East is open to: Seeing other people to help "rekindle things," partnering with MySpace, leaking things to Joe Schad.

Oh, I see. I was just confused, since Ksyrup's post said it was the champions facing off in the new bowl.

They're calling it the champions bowl. Two conferences likely to place their top team in the 4-team playoff. So basically, a champions bowl of the #2 teams from each conference (#3 in the scenario where 2 from one of the conferences is in the 4-team playoff, if that will be possible).

Or, as I've known it for many years, the Cotton Bowl.

They're calling it the champions bowl. Two conferences likely to place their top team in the 4-team playoff. So basically, a champions bowl of the #2 teams from each conference (#3 in the scenario where 2 from one of the conferences is in the 4-team playoff, if that will be possible).

Sounds aptly named.

Was thinking through scenarios of how (if) this goes down and what UNC does.

They could probably stay and anchor a (football) diminished ACC. I think that the core of North Carolina schools and UVA would probably still be a pretty formidable conference and could still pick off Big East teams.

My initial thought was that they and UVA (along with maybe Maryland and someone else like Duke or Syracuse or Notre Dame or GT) would form a nice extension for the Big Ten footprint, while maintaining the academic integrity and putting the conference in a more emerging population.

The last option I thought of was if they simply decided to be the first team out the door and joined the SEC. That would probably completely screw their rivals. Do Duke and NC State have landing spots outside of the SEC or a Big East/ACC hybrid?

All hypothetical, but UNC to the SEC could have some really interesting ramifications.

So depressed by all this stuff. I think I'm just gonna give up on watching college football completely. I have better things to do with 12 hours on 14 fall saturdays.

Was thinking through scenarios of how (if) this goes down and what UNC does.

They could probably stay and anchor a (football) diminished ACC. I think that the core of North Carolina schools and UVA would probably still be a pretty formidable conference and could still pick off Big East teams.

My initial thought was that they and UVA (along with maybe Maryland and someone else like Duke or Syracuse or Notre Dame or GT) would form a nice extension for the Big Ten footprint, while maintaining the academic integrity and putting the conference in a more emerging population.

The last option I thought of was if they simply decided to be the first team out the door and joined the SEC. That would probably completely screw their rivals. Do Duke and NC State have landing spots outside of the SEC or a Big East/ACC hybrid?

All hypothetical, but UNC to the SEC could have some really interesting ramifications.

Not sure about UNC bolting, they are so tied to Duke right now for rivalries. An interesting thought to me is that with Pitt and Syracuse joining, the home-and-home basketball series between NC State and UNC has been severed. I wonder how NC State would look as the SEC entry into North Carolina? There is a ton of history between the 3 triangle teams and the ACC, I'm not sure any of them are likely, but given the severing of this one tie, I wonder if NC State wouldn't be the most likely of the 3 to jump.

Miami had the absolute worst timing possible for their troubles with the NCAA.

Not sure about UNC bolting, they are so tied to Duke right now for rivalries. An interesting thought to me is that with Pitt and Syracuse joining, the home-and-home basketball series between NC State and UNC has been severed. I wonder how NC State would look as the SEC entry into North Carolina? There is a ton of history between the 3 triangle teams and the ACC, I'm not sure any of them are likely, but given the severing of this one tie, I wonder if NC State wouldn't be the most likely of the 3 to jump.

I think it is pretty well believed that NC State and VPI are the most likely entries for the SEC into those two Southern states (for the reasons you mentioned). The question is, would the UNC-loaded Board allow them to leave without Duke and UNC finding a soft landing spot?

Not sure about UNC bolting, they are so tied to Duke right now for rivalries. An interesting thought to me is that with Pitt and Syracuse joining, the home-and-home basketball series between NC State and UNC has been severed. I wonder how NC State would look as the SEC entry into North Carolina? There is a ton of history between the 3 triangle teams and the ACC, I'm not sure any of them are likely, but given the severing of this one tie, I wonder if NC State wouldn't be the most likely of the 3 to jump.

I think it is pretty well believed that NC State and VPI are the most likely entries for the SEC into those two Southern states (for the reasons you mentioned). The question is, would the UNC-loaded Board allow them to leave without Duke and UNC finding a soft landing spot?

Many State fans are already seeing the writing on the wall at this point and are hoping like crazy that the SEC comes knocking. They believe ACC commish John Swofford pretty much mismanage everything about the most recent round of expansion. The TV contract was icing on the cake. Then again, State fans so hate Swofford's guts (remember, he's a UNC guy) that he could come up with a cure for cancer and State fans would assume he'd only give it to UNC fans just to spite everyone else.

Officially, at least, the State administration has never said anything other than the ACC is where we are and where we will be. However, this deal may just be the event that perhaps pushes the door open a bit more in the backchannels. Whether there has ever been contact between State and other conferences, I don't know, but until now, tradition and loyalty probably negated any interest in moving. However, at some point, these events are just becoming a bit too big to ignore. The question that State will need to ask itself is whether it is content to remain in a powerful basketball conference, but face diminishing returns in football should other schools leave. State and its donor base sunk a freightload of money into football facility improvements over the last decade, so they may not be as content to just stay in a conference that becomes potentially more irrelevant in football in the coming years.

Until now, I had thought the ACC would be able to ride this out relatively intact, but I'm not sure anymore. If FSU and/or Clemson (or Georgia Tech or Miami...) want to remain on the elite stage of college football, I don't think they'll have a chance at it anymore in the ACC.

Of course, depending on the hubris displayed by the newer smaller set of "BCS" conferences (Big 10, Big 12, SEC, Pac 12), it could cause enough consternation with enough other schools that they'll get those letters to Congress written up to try to level the playing field out again.

Agree with much of what you wrote, but there is one wild card. Notre Dame.

If the play-off goes the way of being conference champs only, then that forces ND's hand to join a conference. While the Big 1G seems logical, the ACC is also a candidate. If that happens, then I think the ACC stays together.

I think the ND to ACC is pretty much dead after today's announcement. If they join a conference, it will be either the Big 10 or the Big 12.

We're headed for that Big 4 Super-Conference thing sooner than most expected.

I don't know about that. It was pretty apparent in the last 18 months how quickly we were moving towards that. The other schools not involved have just been in denial up to this point.

There's a far bigger reason for this bowl matchup that no one has brought up thus far. From the Houston Chronicle article this morning:

More importantly for the leagues, that revenue will be in full control of the two conferences, rather than the bowls that traditionally have had a lock on postseason funds. By creating their own bowl, the conferences can decide on their own matchup, name their price to television networks, control costs and not have to feed the bowl monster.

They're totally undermining the existing bowl system in one fell swoop. The bigger existing bowls are going to have to make major concessions or risk seeing the conferences create more of these 'bowl' games where they pocket all the money. A quote from Dodds, errrrrr, a B12 administrator..............

A Big 12 administrator said the two conferences aren't particularly interested in joining forces with an existing bowl unless they get to set the rules. The Big 12 and SEC are seeking to cut out the middle man.

We're going to see a heavy turnover of bowl games in the next few years as the smaller existing ones fold and new ones are created by the conferences to fill the void.

Solomon: Big 12-SEC deal could be big for city - Houston Chronicle (http://www.chron.com/sports/solomon/article/Solomon-Big-12-SEC-deal-could-be-big-for-city-3570331.php)

doesn't the ncaa have to approve new bowls and didn't they put a moratorium on that?

doesn't the ncaa have to approve new bowls and didn't they put a moratorium on that?

Directly from the NCAA website:

The NCAA is a voluntary Association comprised of colleges, universities, conferences and other organizations, and governed through a membership-led committee structure. Within the governance structure, committee members must carefully balance their responsibilities to their respective institutions and/or conferences with the obligation to advance the interests of the Association, the division, or the sport, and ultimately enhance the student-athlete experience. While the fiduciary obligations of committee members to their own institution, their conference, and to the Association ordinarily are not in conflict, it is recognized that as a representative membership organization, committee members’ fiduciary obligations are first to their institution, second to their conference, and third to the Association.

That's code for 'you can leave if you want'. Much like the bowls, the NCAA will have to fall in line or face not being a part of this system.

http://fs.ncaa.org/Docs/Nominating_Committees/coip.pdf

We'll see how this plays out, but one of the better WVU insiders is saying that FSU has agreed to jump to the Big 12 (with the concession that they will get games against Texas and Oklahoma every year -- I'm guessing that means they will be in a division with one and protected rival with the other). For right now, there is not an agreed upon #12, but the Big 12 may go up to 14.

I hope the SEC stays at 14 and VPI joins Florida State.

I don't know about that. It was pretty apparent in the last 18 months how quickly we were moving towards that. The other schools not involved have just been in denial up to this point.

There's a far bigger reason for this bowl matchup that no one has brought up thus far. From the Houston Chronicle article this morning:



They're totally undermining the existing bowl system in one fell swoop. The bigger existing bowls are going to have to make major concessions or risk seeing the conferences create more of these 'bowl' games where they pocket all the money. A quote from Dodds, errrrrr, a B12 administrator..............



We're going to see a heavy turnover of bowl games in the next few years as the smaller existing ones fold and new ones are created by the conferences to fill the void.

Solomon: Big 12-SEC deal could be big for city - Houston Chronicle (http://www.chron.com/sports/solomon/article/Solomon-Big-12-SEC-deal-could-be-big-for-city-3570331.php)

Agreed about the bowl revenues. It took awhile for the writers to figure it out, but this is the first of (I suspect) many bowl arrangements that will favor the teams and conferences, rather than making bowl organizers rich. Have seen estimate that, between television, tickets, sponsors, etc. the game will make between $25-$35M per year for each conference.

It will be interesting to see how the Big Ten and Pac 12 negotiate with the Rose Bowl. The matchup between those two conference is probably the only other one that can fetch that same range of revenue, but can/will they actually cut the Rose Bowl out?

As all this spins about, as a BYU fan...I sit here and wonder what the hell the school is doing. I don't see independence as a survivable option. If we don't get into a conference soon, we are dead.

Agreed about the bowl revenues. It took awhile for the writers to figure it out, but this is the first of (I suspect) many bowl arrangements that will favor the teams and conferences, rather than making bowl organizers rich. Have seen estimate that, between television, tickets, sponsors, etc. the game will make between $25-$35M per year for each conference.

It will be interesting to see how the Big Ten and Pac 12 negotiate with the Rose Bowl. The matchup between those two conference is probably the only other one that can fetch that same range of revenue, but can/will they actually cut the Rose Bowl out?

Heck no, they won't cut the Rose Bowl out. But they've got the bargaining chip they need now with the deal that SEC/B12 has created. No one had taken that step before to show the bowls that they were willing to create a new system that cut them out. Now that they've done that, it's a whole different situation. The bowls are going to have to make major concessions to remain a part of this system. And they'll do so because the alternative is a frightening situation for those host cities and their committees.

Heck no, they won't cut the Rose Bowl out. But they've got the bargaining chip they need now with the deal that SEC/B12 has created. No one had taken that step before to show the bowls that they were willing to create a new system that cut them out. Now that they've done that, it's a whole different situation. The bowls are going to have to make major concessions to remain a part of this system. And they'll do so because the alternative is a frightening situation for those host cities and their committees.

Right, but the relationship between the Rose Bowl and the Pac 12 and Big Ten is so unique, it may not allow those conferences as much leverage to threaten to shop the game around to the highest bidder.

I'm sure the three parties will end up together, but it will be interesting to see if there is a quick and easy negotiation that takes a lot of money away from the Rose Bowl or if there will be a token shopping process where the conference have to pretend that they are willing to leave in order to get top dollar.

As all this spins about, as a BYU fan...I sit here and wonder what the hell the school is doing. I don't see independence as a survivable option. If we don't get into a conference soon, we are dead.

From what I can tell, the BYU AD would love to be in the Big 12 and the Big 12 would love to have them (at least prior to ACC teams potentially being available), but the church and school are opposed to making concessions based on sports.

Right, but the relationship between the Rose Bowl and the Pac 12 and Big Ten is so unique, it may not allow those conferences as much leverage to threaten to shop the game around to the highest bidder.

I'm sure the three parties will end up together, but it will be interesting to see if there is a quick and easy negotiation that takes a lot of money away from the Rose Bowl or if there will be a token shopping process where the conference have to pretend that they are willing to leave in order to get top dollar.

Delany really needs to make some steps in the right direction that keep in line with what's happening. It seems like he's been a step behind through this playoff discussion. I think Scott is the better of the two commissioners and the Rose Bowl is obviously smack-dab in the middle of his territory. Scott needs to be the one to make it happen. If they don't, they risk falling behind financially if the other conference continue to pressure their bowls to make concessions. But I don't think it will reach that point. They'll get something done.

Heck no, they won't cut the Rose Bowl out. But they've got the bargaining chip they need now with the deal that SEC/B12 has created. No one had taken that step before to show the bowls that they were willing to create a new system that cut them out. Now that they've done that, it's a whole different situation. The bowls are going to have to make major concessions to remain a part of this system. And they'll do so because the alternative is a frightening situation for those host cities and their committees.

But reading between the lines isn't this SEC/Big 12 bowl just going to end up being the Cotton Bowl at Jerryworld? Or am I missing something?

From what I can tell, the BYU AD would love to be in the Big 12 and the Big 12 would love to have them (at least prior to ACC teams potentially being available), but the church and school are opposed to making concessions based on sports.

Correct, Sunday play is the major issue with the Big 12 on the sports, but I wouldn't mind being football only in the Big 12 but they do not want that.

It's going to be interesting how this shakes out.

But reading between the lines isn't this SEC/Big 12 bowl just going to end up being the Cotton Bowl at Jerryworld? Or am I missing something?

It may be called the Cotton Bowl, but it is a new business model. It isn't going to be a bowl committee that manages it or assumes expenses/profits. it will be owned by the two conferences, with all the risk/reward assumed by them. You won't hear anymore about ticket guarantees or programs losing money. I suspect, as MBBF noted, that this will be the new model for bowls.

Florida State's potential move to the Big 12

On campus among those of us who are big Football fans this has been a huge debate. Given that I go to an ACC school they have been bashing Florida State, but I think deep down inside the ACC knows or should have known that this would happen after that poor contract with ESPN.

I hope the Big 12 brings Florida State, Georgia Tech, Clemson, and NC State or Virginia Tech. Would help with the travel and add plenty new markets for the Big 12.

Rumors are swirling that the Big XII is actually looking to go to 14 or 16 before the 2013-2014 season.

Rumors are swirling that the Big XII is actually looking to go to 14 or 16 before the 2013-2014 season.

That's pretty much a given. Most would be shocked to not see that happen with both the SEC and B12 after the ACC contract debacle and the football agreement between the two conferences. The SEC will likely grab NC State and a school from the state of Virginia with the B12 picking up the rest to fill out to 16. That just makes sense at this point. It also provides the SEC and B12 with a lot of nice rivalry games to fill out the non-conference slate. The B12 obviously has decided after the MU and A&M move to go the way of 'if you can't beat 'em, join 'em'. It's a wise move and should bode well for them.

http://images.wikia.com/transformers/images/e/e8/Ruined_forever.jpg

The daily expansion item: FSU to the Big 12 – “It is Inevitable” | College Football News, Opinion and Analysis | Chuck Oliver.Net (http://dev.chuckoliver.net/2012/05/fsu-to-the-big-12-it-is-inevitable/)

This report is supposedly noteworthy because it was approved by the folks at FSU (apparently this writer, who I have never heard of before, values his connections within the AD and got approval). That would be in pretty stark contrast to the backtracking that school officials did last week when this type of stuff was floating around.

Ingram Smith is the host of a Seminole podcast over at Tomahawk Nation and according to the owner of the site Ingram's source is rock solid.

This sounds about right. This is the B12 that Mizzou fans grew to know and dislike. I have NO idea who the one pushing hard to prevent it might be.

Sources: Big 12 expansion breakdown: 4 schools OK with it, 4 on fence, 1 pushing hard to make it happen, 1 pushing hard to prevent it.

Dave Sittler Twitter (https://twitter.com/#!/DaveSittler/status/204252144201777152)

I'm guessing KU would be in the "Ok with it" category or possibly fence as we've seen that the only home we have outside the Big XII is an outside shot at the Pac-Whatever or if the ACC stays together and wants hoops

SI

This sounds about right. This is the B12 that Mizzou fans grew to know and dislike. I have NO idea who the one pushing hard to prevent it might be.



Dave Sittler Twitter (https://twitter.com/#!/DaveSittler/status/204252144201777152)


From what the WVU people have been hearing Texas and OU are both ok with going to 12 if it's the right 2 that they're adding. I think it's probably safe to say that FSU and Clemson would be the right 2. For things to be that split I would guess that what he's reporting is how teams view going to 14 because Texas and OU have reportedly been against adding any teams that don't bring significant value. That's a big reason the Louisville to the Big 12 talk died down as the TV networks told the Big 12 neither Cincy or Louisville would add much in terms of dollars to the TV contract.

Supposedly the SEC has also advised the Big 12 to get to 12 teams, but to take a very long look at any 2 they'd consider to get to 14.

Talk in Austin has been back around Notre Dame coming on board, especially if the final playoff structure that is agreed upon requires at least a division championship to be eligible. The Irish TV deal expires in 2015, but there likely won't be time to wait for that to come before making the expansion moves.

Read an interesting piece about why ESPN is in no hurry to keep FSU from leaving the ACC. With Miami already in the ACC (and of course Florida in the SEC), allowing FSU to join the Big 12 gets all of those eyeballs in Florida watching non-SEC and non-ACC games in a (primarily) different timezone and vice versa.

Much like A&M leaving the Big 12 does not really dampen viewership in the Big 12 (while growing that of the SEC), FSU leaving wouldn't cut out the state of Florida and only increases interest elsewhere.

SEC makes adjustments with officiating, considers mid-season review of bad calls on SEC Digital Network........

SEC football officiating makes adjustments for Texas A&M and Missouri arrivals | al.com (http://www.al.com/sports/index.ssf/2012/05/sec_football_officiating_makes.html)

For those that like to follow the financial angle - interesting article in USA Today citing research by a college sports rights-valuation firm that predicts that the Pac-12 will still be pulling in more money per school than any other conference by the time the Pac-12 Network is full steam, even after the SEC renegotiates their current deals:

http://www.usatoday.com/sports/college/story/2012-05-20/Pacific-12-schools-will-see-big-payday-from-TV-deals/55095542/1

dola

Sporting News is reporting that SEC is in process of creating its own TV network, expected to start in 2014. Also reporting that new TV deal should be done relatively soon.

http://aol.sportingnews.com/ncaa-football/story/2012-05-21/sec-espn-cbs-media-rights-deal-cable-channel

darren rovell‏<s>@</s>darrenrovell
SportsBusiness Journal: CBS doesn't want to pay more for new SEC, arguing Missouri & Texas A&M don't add significant value.

.

Enjoying #SECNetworkTVShows

.

I thought the networks had their hands in the whole realignment business anyway -- wouldn't a deal have already been worked out?

Heard from a friend that VT is in full-on panic mode. The recent men's basketball disaster notwithstanding, the writing is on the wall that now - more than ever - the ACC is going to tack heavily towards basketball, leaving VT, FSU, and Miami basically powerless.

As far as the Big 12 is concerned, that's a non-starter in Blacksburg. It's SEC all the way with the only other hope being some amalgam of the ACC, Big East, and Notre Dame to maintain whatever shred of relevancy towards college football is left.

I thought the networks had their hands in the whole realignment business anyway -- wouldn't a deal have already been worked out?

No. CBS is trying to play hardball with their argument, but it's a losing argument. There will be a substantial increase in payout, no matter whether CBS buckles or if an arbitrator decides it.

CBS might have a decent case because they don't really televise all that many games (comparatively) and they likely aren't going to show any additional games (and realistically, how many of the marquee ones are going to show the new teams?).

I would think that the significant bump up for the SEC would come from ESPN with the increased inventory of games

No. CBS is trying to play hardball with their argument, but it's a losing argument. There will be a substantial increase in payout, no matter whether CBS buckles or if an arbitrator decides it.

Keep telling yourself that.

Here's a link to the full article: SEC looking at cable channel as media rights talks with CBS, ESPN near - NCAA Football - Sporting News (http://aol.sportingnews.com/ncaa-football/story/2012-05-21/sec-espn-cbs-media-rights-deal-cable-channel)

This part stands out:

Sources think the conference will reach an agreement with CBS first. Those sources familiar with the discussions predict that CBS will wind up paying a prorated increase or slightly more to the SEC.

The network has balked at paying any type of significant increase, sources say, arguing that the addition of Missouri and Texas A&M does not change its deal.

CBS’s deal with the SEC, negotiated in 2008, pays an average of $55 million a year to the SEC over 15 years. A prorated increase would take the value of that deal up to $65 million a year. The SEC could generate additional revenue by adding more years on the end of the contract.

CBS still will carry the same number of football games each season as part of its package, and network executives are arguing that schools such as Alabama, Florida and LSU—not Missouri and Texas A&M—drive the value of the conference. Without additional inventory, CBS’s stance has been that it shouldn’t pay more solely because the conference added two new schools.

What's CBS going to do? UF/UGA at 3:30 and aTm/UK at 8pm head-to-head with the ABC/ESPN/ESPN2/FOX games? I'm not sure I'd pay all that much for the opportunity, either.

CBS might have a decent case because they don't really televise all that many games (comparatively) and they likely aren't going to show any additional games (and realistically, how many of the marquee ones are going to show the new teams?).

I would think that the significant bump up for the SEC would come from ESPN with the increased inventory of games

This is a fair point assuming no addition of games on Saturday on their network. I had heard they were considering adding a third game before the 3:30 game on CBS. If that doesn't happen, you're absolutely correct.

I take that to mean that the move at first would be basically a wash financially, but the renegotiated deal would get them an extra $12 million/year. Since the SEC distributes all revenue equally, than means that the renegotiation would have to increase by $12 million times the number of teams. Since the current deal with ESPN is for 15 years/$2.2 billion, I don't see the renegotiation adding another $1.6 billion over 10 years for adding two (or even 4) more teams. The CBS deal was also for 15 years, but only $800 million, as CBS doesn't have as many outlets, so bought fewer game rights. I don't see that one increasing a whole lot more either for the addition of 2 or 4 teams.

Hmmm........................

I heard an interview with the Syracuse AD today and in it he mentions something curious. Now, he may be spinning this to make the ACC look better, but here is the gist of it:

He discusses "multimedia rights" as being kept by the schools in the ACC deal while other conference deals the schools lose those rights which bumps the value to around 24-25 mil.

If this is true, I wonder (1) why this has not been reported elsewhere and (2) if true, would FSU, etc still want to jump to the Big12?

Anybody know anything about this?

Interesting article discussing value of schools related to the realignment moves........

What's Your College Football Program Worth? Introducing Realignment Value Rankings - SBNation.com (http://www.sbnation.com/ncaa-football/2012/5/21/3027054/college-football-conference-realignment-teams-schools)

Because perception is reality and the actual value of multimedia rights ain't jack shit when you're recruiting a kid to come to a school that's part of an irrelevant conference.

I heard an interview with the Syracuse AD today and in it he mentions something curious. Now, he may be spinning this to make the ACC look better, but here is the gist of it:

He discusses "multimedia rights" as being kept by the schools in the ACC deal while other conference deals the schools lose those rights which bumps the value to around 24-25 mil.

If this is true, I wonder (1) why this has not been reported elsewhere and (2) if true, would FSU, etc still want to jump to the Big12?

Anybody know anything about this?

Gross is an idiot who thinks its a good idea to play premier opponents 300 miles away from campus. ESPN owns the rights to whatever they want from the ACC.

Gross is an idiot who thinks its a good idea to play premier opponents 300 miles away from campus. ESPN owns the rights to whatever they want from the ACC.

I should have specified I was looking for unbiased opinions.

Several interesting tweets from Greg Swaim today:

I'm told that #ND will jump in #Big12 very soon with Olympic sports, and then football joins after TV contract expires. #BlowsMyMind

The #ND deal apparently was a catalyst for getting #FSU aboard all along. This thing is happening fast now for the #Big12...

The time frame for #ND phasing in football could allow them to phase out contracts with #Purdue, #MSU, #GoBlue, #USC, #Stanford or #Navy.

@TruckinTWrites I believe strongly that #Clemson is in for 2013 with #FSU.

#CardNation sources telling me they have an invite also, but can't get any #Big12 sources to confirm. They won't deny either though.

Sounds too good to be true. I can see ND joining for Olympic sports, but not football. I guess they could continue getting East Coast exposure with Navy and West Coast exposure with USC, but it would be next to impossible to imagine them playing 8 conference games, those two, plus even one more traditional rival (Stanford, Michigan, Michigan State, Purdue, etc.).

If, by some long shot, they do join. I really hope they don't try to leverage the Big 12 into bringing B.C. along (I've heard they will want a Northeast presence to partner with). I would literally rather be in a conference with any other ACC team (plus most of the current/future Big East teams) than B.C.

I guess it makes sense for ND to join the Big 12. Wider exposure to their national fan base. Partnership with the SEC. But it would sure make me mad.
And if ND doesnt join the B1G, I think the B1G stays at 12. Looking over that table posted earlier, I dont see a team that the B1G would go after. Maryland? Rutgers? I dont see it. I dont know how the B1G gets to 16.

I have serious doubts about Notre Dame joining a conference in this decade. However, I think you'll hear more about this sort of thing, because any Irish AD that wants to join a conference is going to have to do some serious selling to boosters, alumni and fans. It's also why you hear less about joining the Big Ten. There's a block of them that would rather drop football then join the Big Ten.

The play-off thing is going to be a huge determining factor. If it is based on conference champions, Notre Dame joins a conference. They don't have the leverage they had in the mid-90s.

Yep. What's been floated is the 3 highest-ranked conference champs and the highest-ranked non-champ. Think ND is ever getting into a playoff in that scenario?

TomahawkNation.com ‏<S>@</S>TomahawkNation
At the 80% football/20% hoops number from TDP/Swofford, <S>#</S>FSU (https://twitter.com/#!/search/%23FSU) / <S>#</S>Clemson (https://twitter.com/#!/search/%23Clemson) made up a quarter of the ACC's value in 2011

TomahawkNation.com ‏<S>@</S>TomahawkNation
Put it another way, FSU/Clem (25%) were about as valuable as BC/Duke/MD/Wake/UNC (27%)

It really is too bad that Maryland and UNC do no take football more seriously. Maryland, in particular, has great academics, a great media market, and access to a tremendous amount of talent.

UNC tried...

Dodds, errrrr, Chip Brown reporting that B12 has interest from four schools.

Sources: ACC schools starting to put out feelers to Big 12 (http://texas.rivals.com/content.asp?CID=1367959)

Someone should let B12 commish Chuck Neinas in on the secret. He insisted yesterday that the B12 had no interest in expanding to 12 or 14 teams. This is what happens when you use this guy as the commish in your conference.

http://ia.media-imdb.com/images/M/MV5BMjAwMjU1MTA4N15BMl5BanBnXkFtZTcwNzAxNTc3NA@@._V1._SY317_.jpg

Dodds, errrrr, Chip Brown reporting that B12 has interest from four schools.

Sources: ACC schools starting to put out feelers to Big 12 (http://texas.rivals.com/content.asp?CID=1367959)

Someone should let B12 commish Chuck Neinas in on the secret. He insisted yesterday that the B12 had no interest in expanding to 12 or 14 teams. This is what happens when you use this guy as the commish in your conference.

http://ia.media-imdb.com/images/M/MV5BMjAwMjU1MTA4N15BMl5BanBnXkFtZTcwNzAxNTc3NA@@._V1._SY317_.jpg

Yet when it was the SEC saying the same thing about Mizzou and aTm, you were all about "of course the conference is saying that, so there are no implications of tampering". Also, your Chip Brown inferiority complex is quite amusing.

Round and round we go.

It's also why you hear less about joining the Big Ten. There's a block of them that would rather drop football then join the Big Ten.

Just curious. Reasons for the anti-Big Ten sentiments?

Yet when it was the SEC saying the same thing about Mizzou and aTm, you were all about "of course the conference is saying that, so there are no implications of tampering". Also, your Chip Brown inferiority complex is quite amusing.

No kidding. Why would a guy on his way out set up his conference for a tampering lawsuit, or even bad PR?

They are playing this the way ever conference has, and should, play it. Deny until the school has made a decision to drive off the cliff, then pretend as if the communications have formally begun at the moment the school publicly outs itself as interested in joining X conference.

Could we get back to the business of what this thread is all about? MORE MIZZOU STADIUM EXPANSION UPDATES, PLEASE.

Here is a new picture of Mizzous proposed stadium improvements:

http://cache.boston.com/bonzai-fba/Globe_Photo/2012/04/19/colosseum__1334834303_0031.png

Keeping it real for you digamma

Clay Travis discusses the VT to the SEC momentum. Also discusses the new SEC network revenues.

Virginia Tech Fans Have SEC Fever : Outkick The Coverage (http://outkickthecoverage.com/virginia-tech-fans-have-sec-fever.php)

Clemson BOT calls a meeting for Thursday to discuss realignment.......

http://m.tigernet.com/m/view/story.do?id=10623

The math just doesn't add up in that article. He is making the assumption that viewership is going from 0% to 100%, and that simply isn't the case.

Travis is an idiot. The BTN works on a 51/49 split between FOX and the league, and there also happens to be costs involved in running a network, like televising games, buying equipment, buying or renting buildings, paying hosts and the like. You don't just say "Every cable/satellite subscriber gave us a buck or two each, ESPN agreed to only take 15% or less of ownership and now we have $450 million."

The SEC network goes nowhere without ESPN granting some rights back to the SEC. They're not doing that without equity in the network, so they'll be pocketing half of the profit after costs, or the SEC can sit and spin until 2024. After all the costs, the BTN has been 7.9 and 7.2 million in the last two years per school. Try thinking around those numbers.

According to a WVU "insider," the SEC does not really want to expand but adding UNC (and the state of North Carolina, plus VPI or UVA) would do enough to re-open the CBS contract (plus, it allows CBS and ESPN to keep one of, if not the, top basketball draws).

He suggested that UNC may be the first domino to fall.

Also some rumblings that today may be the day that Clemson (and possibly FSU) declare that they are seeking options.

Ouch

Brett McMurphy ‏@McMurphyCBS
.@CBSSports sources project Big East media rights at $60M; less than 1/2 what they turned down last yr

According to a WVU "insider," the SEC does not really want to expand but adding UNC (and the state of North Carolina, plus VPI or UVA) would do enough to re-open the CBS contract (plus, it allows CBS and ESPN to keep one of, if not the, top basketball draws).

He suggested that UNC may be the first domino to fall.

Also some rumblings that today may be the day that Clemson (and possibly FSU) declare that they are seeking options.

yeah cause UNC is going to leave...

Ouch

Brett McMurphy ‏@McMurphyCBS
.@CBSSports sources project Big East media rights at $60M; less than 1/2 what they turned down last yr

right. Contract will be closer to 200M than that number if the current group stays together.

According to a WVU "insider," the SEC does not really want to expand but adding UNC (and the state of North Carolina, plus VPI or UVA) would do enough to re-open the CBS contract (plus, it allows CBS and ESPN to keep one of, if not the, top basketball draws).

He suggested that UNC may be the first domino to fall.

Also some rumblings that today may be the day that Clemson (and possibly FSU) declare that they are seeking options.

Compared to the FSU/Clemson thing, this is pretty much never happening for a few reasons:
*Carolina considers itself public ivy and likely aren't going to go from hobnobbing with Duke and Virginia to hobnobbing with Mississippi State and South Carolina (essentially, NC State and FSU are probably the low end of the ACC academically and they're still better than most of the SEC). This also comes back to the academic scandals that have plagued the football program in the last couple of years. The school's taken some beatings over it and I doubt they'd want to go to a league where academic scandals are a rather casual thing.
*In a similar vein, UNC probably prefers being the big fish in their particular pond. I can't imagine them wanting to be in a conference where only one other school takes basketball with the seriousness they do and where that sport will constantly be drowned out by football no matter what.
*Furthermore, would Kentucky even want to share their pond with UNC? Kentucky's got a relatively sweet gig now, playing in a conference where pretty much everyone else only cares about football. They get their rivalry fix with Louisville and they'll get the occasional challenger or usurper such as Florida, but by and large, the SEC in basketball is owned by them, lock, stock, and barrel. Why invite one of the few schools in the country who could hold a candle to them?

If UNC goes to the SEC, and especially if they're the first domino in any scenario, then it won't matter much because the world absolutely, positively will end on December 21, 2012.

Clemson takes its first steps to inviting a formal inquiry from another conference:

Clemson Trustee: Tigers have not received any viable conference option - CBSSports.com (http://www.cbssports.com/collegefootball/blog/eye-on-college-football/19148032/clemson-trustee-have-not-received-any-viable-conference-option)

FWIW there is a guy on Clemson's insider board whose wife is supposedly a paralegal, or otherwise works in a law office with one of Clemson's BOT.

The guy is a huge douchenozzle and generally hated, but he has leaked the last 4 or 5 coaching hires, and numerous other "business" dealings based supposedly on information gained from this office. All that said, according to him a sample member contract from the Big 12 has been provided to review and advise... again according to him contract states 15 members for 2014.

Not sure this guy throws little against the wall, and damn near everything he does sticks...but he is so aloof he is hard to believe.

FWIW there is a guy on Clemson's insider board whose wife is supposedly a paralegal, or otherwise works in a law office with one of Clemson's BOT.

The guy is a huge douchenozzle and generally hated, but he has leaked the last 4 or 5 coaching hires, and numerous other "business" dealings based supposedly on information gained from this office. All that said, according to him a sample member contract from the Big 12 has been provided to review and advise... again according to him contract states 15 members for 2014.

Not sure this guy throws little against the wall, and damn near everything he does sticks...but he is so aloof he is hard to believe.

I'm guessing that is the model that adds Clemson, FSU, and GT for all sports, Notre Dame for all but football, and BYU as football only.

Otherwise, I'd guess it eliminates BYU altogether, keeps Notre Dame as a partial and then adds in someone else (Louisville? Maryland?) for all sports.

More public battling over the playoff system......

Slive not a fan of plus-one football model | The Columbia Daily Tribune - Columbia, Missouri (http://www.columbiatribune.com/news/2012/may/27/slive-not-a-fan-of-plus-one-football-model/)

Interesting -- looks like the SEC is planning for a "6-1-1" conference schedule (6 divisional, 1 permanent cross division rival, 1 rotating cross division matchup):SEC official Larry Templeton confirms plans for '6-1-1' scheduling model - CBSSports.com (http://www.cbssports.com/collegefootball/blog/eye-on-college-football/19167540/sec-official-larry-templeton-confirms-plans-for-611-scheduling-model)

If conferences do end up going to 16, it does seem likely that they will just become two 8-team mini-conferences. I think the Pac12 and Big Ten got things right with 12 teams and their conference scheduling agreement. 14 teams is too big and doesn't allow for any type of reasonable scheduling arrangements.

The Big East sat at 8 for way too long. I'm not sure if it would have mattered, but if they had 12 at the time of the ACC "raids," they would have had a deeper bench to work with. I hope the Big 12 gets up to twelve and holds tight.

Interesting -- looks like the SEC is planning for a "6-1-1" conference schedule (6 divisional, 1 permanent cross division rival, 1 rotating cross division matchup):SEC official Larry Templeton confirms plans for '6-1-1' scheduling model - CBSSports.com (http://www.cbssports.com/collegefootball/blog/eye-on-college-football/19167540/sec-official-larry-templeton-confirms-plans-for-611-scheduling-model)

If conferences do end up going to 16, it does seem likely that they will just become two 8-team mini-conferences. I think the Pac12 and Big Ten got things right with 12 teams and their conference scheduling agreement. 14 teams is too big and doesn't allow for any type of reasonable scheduling arrangements.

The Big East sat at 8 for way too long. I'm not sure if it would have mattered, but if they had 12 at the time of the ACC "raids," they would have had a deeper bench to work with. I hope the Big 12 gets up to twelve and holds tight.

This is part of why I'm convinced that these conferences of 14+ teams won't last more than, say, 10 years. Some schools will hardly see each other even though they're conference mates. After a while, there will be envy... factions will begin to form among schools who see themselves as more similar than the others... and we'll end up back at 8 team conferences (until those conference expand to 10/12/14/16). C'est la vie.

(For historical evidence, look to the WAC of the late '90s.)

a 16 team conference could have 4 4 team divisions/regions.
You play your 3 division/region every year. You rotate through the other 3 divisions playing all 4 teams in a division in a given year and have 1 permanent non division rival or 1 floating non division....etc.

i dont think 14/16 work with 2 divisions though.

a 16 team conference could have 4 4 team divisions/regions.
You play your 3 division/region every year. You rotate through the other 3 divisions playing all 4 teams in a division in a given year and have 1 permanent non division rival or 1 floating non division....etc.

i dont think 14/16 work with 2 divisions though.

This would be the scheduling setup, but the layout would be two divisions. However, I disagree with Swaggs that it's an issue. There's a reason Slive is moving them towards the option where non-champions can still make the playoffs. He's planning on having 16 teams and wants to attempt to have both division champions in a playoff format.

With that said, I think this scenario begs for an eight team playoff, which will happen once the conference move to 16.

This would be the scheduling setup, but the layout would be two divisions. However, I disagree with Swaggs that it's an issue. There's a reason Slive is moving them towards the option where non-champions can still make the playoffs. He's planning on having 16 teams and wants to attempt to have both division champions in a playoff format.

With that said, I think this scenario begs for an eight team playoff, which will happen once the conference move to 16.

Well now that doesn't work.
Either you have 7 conference games and only 2 floaters, or division teams dont all play each other AND dont have similar opponents.
You have to play every team in your division or else your tie breakers get arbitrary.
I actually think this is the SEC model and they will soon push for an SEC semi-final game between the four pod winners.

He's planning on having 16 teams and wants to attempt to have both division champions in a playoff format.

Well duh, the first round of the playoffs would be when the division champs meet for the conference championship for the right to face the other conference champions for the national championship.

Well duh, the first round of the playoffs would be when the division champs meet for the conference championship for the right to face the other conference champions for the national championship.

You've missed my point. Slive wants to have the opportunity to have both division champs in the playoff. I don't think that's a good idea, but that's what he's wanting to do, whether it's 4 or 8 teams in the playoff. Would probably be OK in the 8 team format, but I agree with others that it should only be conference champs at the four team playoff level. Teams just have to understand that the playoffs start in the conference championship if there's only four teams in the playoff.

You've missed my point. Slive wants to have the opportunity to have both division champs in the playoff. I don't think that's a good idea, but that's what he's wanting to do, whether it's 4 or 8 teams in the playoff. Would probably be OK in the 8 team format, but I agree with others that it should only be conference champs at the four team playoff level. Teams just have to understand that the playoffs start in the conference championship if there's only four teams in the playoff.

Oh, I'm sure he'd love to get as many teams as possible in the playoff. If they want an 8-team playoff, go to 8 conferences. If we're going to end up with 4 super-conferences, then you still have an 8-team playoff, with round 1 being the conference champions. If he wants division winners in the playoffs, then there ARE 8 conferences, they'll just be SEC I, SEC II, B1G I, B1G II, PAC I, PAC II, BIGCC12EAST I, and BIGCC12EAST II.

Otherwise there would be no point to the conference championship games, and I think folks would realise that and they'd stop being money-makers if there was no national championship or Bowl game implications to them.

Pretty good summary of the general chaos otherwise known as the B12 meetings this week.

OTC: B12 Meetings Prove Again Texas Gets What They Want & Little Schools Happy To Just Breathe | GregHallKC (http://www.greghallkc.com/?p=2302#more-2302)

But the Big 12 is not going to last more than three or four years, right? RIGHT???...................................

But the Big 12 is not going to last more than three or four years, right? RIGHT???...................................

You mean the conference Texas destroyed like 6 years ago? Doesn't exist today, so it probably won't in the future either.

You mean the conference Texas destroyed like 6 years ago? Doesn't exist today, so it probably won't in the future either.

So you are saying that the Big 12 is a zombie conference? YET ANOTHER SIGN OF THE ZOMBIE APOCALYPSE!!!

Hmmm... sounds familiar: - The Washington Post (http://www.washingtonpost.com/sports/colleges/2011/08/14/gIQAZPVsFJ_story.html)

Hmmm... sounds familiar: - The Washington Post (http://www.washingtonpost.com/sports/colleges/2011/08/14/gIQAZPVsFJ_story.html)

I was thinking the same exact thing.

So you are saying that the Big 12 is a zombie conference? YET ANOTHER SIGN OF THE ZOMBIE APOCALYPSE!!!

No, it simply doesn't exist. Anyone who insists otherwise is either insane or spreading anti Missouri propaganda.

You mean the conference Texas destroyed like 6 years ago? Doesn't exist today, so it probably won't in the future either.

No Texas destroyed the SWC like 15 years ago, the Big 8 has only lost 37% of its original members. Of course they did add another Texas school!

Pretty good summary of the general chaos otherwise known as the B12 meetings this week.

OTC: B12 Meetings Prove Again Texas Gets What They Want & Little Schools Happy To Just Breathe | GregHallKC (http://www.greghallkc.com/?p=2302#more-2302)

I'm sorry, but using Greg Hall's uneducated comments to support some argument you are trying to make is a little silly. I think Greg Hall is entertaining, but he no longer has any ties to the media world and simply listens to the local sports talk and makes comments on his personal site. The fact is the Big 12 AD's seem to be of like mind in keeping the conference at 10 right now. I may not agree with that stance, but the AD's and numerous coaches do agree with it. Greg Hall claiming Iowa State's AD is towing the line simply because they would have a better chance of winning the Big 12 with divisions is stupid. That's like suggesting Missouri and Texas A&M went to the SEC because it was an easier path to the national title game. Conference championships is not what conference realignment is about. It's about money.

No Texas destroyed the SWC like 15 years ago, the Big 8 has only lost 37% of its original members. Of course they did add another Texas school!

Correct me if I'm wrong, but Missouri was one of the schools that voted with Texas during the early years of the Big 12. You made your bed, you laid in it, and then you left for a new bed because you soiled the sheets. It kills me how Missouri whines about Texas, but they sure loved them some Longhorns when the Big 12 was voting where to put the headquarters and who the commissioner should be. Nebraska is the only school that has left that didn't get in bed with Texas early in the Big 12 creation.

If you want a break down of where all the conferences are at and other such information, look no further then this graphic:

http://assets.sbnation.com/assets/1160241/NegotiatingTacticsByConference.png

http://assets.sbnation.com/assets/1160241/NegotiatingTacticsByConference.png

I can't take it.

Remember this??????

Kansas, Big 10 A Good Fit? - Chicago Tribune (http://articles.chicagotribune.com/1993-12-10/sports/9312100144_1_commissioner-jim-delany-big-southwest-missouri)

Big 12 expansion talk has kind of died down (presumably until after the new postseason format and its numbers are ironed out), but heard an interesting piece today. Fox is interested in trying out nationally broadcasted, Friday night games on the Fox Network channel (not one of the Fox Sports Networks) with the Big 12. If Florida State and Clemson come aboard, they would bump their contract up about $45M per year, in exchange for 3 extra years on the existing contract.

Kind of random, but some outside-of-the-box thinking (ESPN2 and ESPNU have Friday night games now, but the Fox Network actually reaches the most homes in the U.S.).

Big 12 expansion talk has kind of died down (presumably until after the new postseason format and its numbers are ironed out), but heard an interesting piece today. Fox is interested in trying out nationally broadcasted, Friday night games on the Fox Network channel (not one of the Fox Sports Networks) with the Big 12. If Florida State and Clemson come aboard, they would bump their contract up about $45M per year, in exchange for 3 extra years on the existing contract.

Kind of random, but some outside-of-the-box thinking (ESPN2 and ESPNU have Friday night games now, but the Fox Network actually reaches the most homes in the U.S.).

Clemson actually has in their current ACC media agreement a clause that they will not play Friday night games and will not host Thursday night games.

IF you've been to Clemson you understand the Thursday deal, but the Friday is in deference to HS football and the key role it plays in so many southern towns. I cant imagine FSU and certainly not the texas teams being keen on it either, given the importance of HS football in those states.

Sure in the NE where often HS games have to be played Saturday daytime its not a big deal. But I have literally heard a HS coach say he would never recommend his kids playing at any college that would play on Friday nights.

Clemson actually has in their current ACC media agreement a clause that they will not play Friday night games and will not host Thursday night games.

IF you've been to Clemson you understand the Thursday deal, but the Friday is in deference to HS football and the key role it plays in so many southern towns. I cant imagine FSU and certainly not the texas teams being keen on it either, given the importance of HS football in those states.

Sure in the NE where often HS games have to be played Saturday daytime its not a big deal. But I have literally heard a HS coach say he would never recommend his kids playing at any college that would play on Friday nights.

But the Big 12 already has a contract for Friday night games, including the Texas schools. Baylor, TCU, Iowa State, Oklahoma State (where they lost their perfect record), and Mizzou all played in them last year. I don't think loyalty to high school football matters when the $$$ is thrown on the table.

Clemson actually has in their current ACC media agreement a clause that they will not play Friday night games and will not host Thursday night games.

IF you've been to Clemson you understand the Thursday deal, but the Friday is in deference to HS football and the key role it plays in so many southern towns. I cant imagine FSU and certainly not the texas teams being keen on it either, given the importance of HS football in those states.

Sure in the NE where often HS games have to be played Saturday daytime its not a big deal. But I have literally heard a HS coach say he would never recommend his kids playing at any college that would play on Friday nights.

An honest questions from an ignorant northerner: What exactly makes Clemson a desirable target for the Big12, if in fact they even are? From what I can see they have a national title from 30+ years ago and have been average to a little above average since. They haven't finished a season ranked in the top 10 in 20 years. Yes, they have some cool stadium traditions, etc. What gives?

An honest questions from an ignorant northerner: What exactly makes Clemson a desirable target for the Big12, if in fact they even are? From what I can see they have a national title from 30+ years ago and have been average to a little above average since. They haven't finished a season ranked in the top 10 in 20 years. Yes, they have some cool stadium traditions, etc. What gives?

They are 2 hours from Charlotte, NC and 2.5 from Atlanta and have a large number of Alumni in each. Thats two nice TV markets.

They also travel as good as anyone in the country historically.
Consistently finish top 20 in attendance.
They are a top 30ish public institution in terms of Academics.

Other than that, good question I suppose.
Not intended to be a snarky response, we have as nice of facilities as any Ive seen outside of Oregon, a good tradition, great support, and touch some nice TV markets.

Plus for whatever reason TV loves Clemson. When we have any national relevance we dont have any problem getting an inordinate amount of run (which admittedly is rare).

Clemson averages almost 78K per game, which is more than any other ACC, Pac 12, or Big East team.

Well, the obvious reason is that the Big 12 feels incredibly empty now that they don't have a member school with a tiger as the mascot anymore. That is a huge hole that the Mizzou departure left behind.

They are 2 hours from Charlotte, NC and 2.5 from Atlanta and have a large number of Alumni in each. Thats two nice TV markets.

They also travel as good as anyone in the country historically.
Consistently finish top 20 in attendance.
They are a top 30ish public institution in terms of Academics.

Other than that, good question I suppose.
Not intended to be a snarky response, we have as nice of facilities as any Ive seen outside of Oregon, a good tradition, great support, and touch some nice TV markets.

Plus for whatever reason TV loves Clemson. When we have any national relevance we dont have any problem getting an inordinate amount of run (which admittedly is rare).

Fair enough. Thanks.
What would make them think about (again, if they even are) move to a Texas-centric conference? Why wouldn't they be perfectly happy (along with FSU) in a conference that now runs up and down the entire East Coast, which is where probably 90%+ of their alumni are? Does anybody really think an undefeated or 1 loss Clemson or FSU, with a good OOC schedule (it looks like Clemson schedules USC and another good team every year) would get left out of a 4 team playoff? I am just not getting it.

On the night game thing, FSU hasn't hosted a Thursday night game in about a decade because they have classes that take place in rooms in Doak Campbell Stadium and student parking in most of the football lots and everyone around the country including farking ESPN turned it into a giant joke that FSU was cancelling a day of classes for football.

So, every year they play someone in the ACC on the road on Thursday night. This year, it's Virginia Tech. It was NCSU and BC the last two years.

I think the biggest problem with the ACC is that they got a crappy TV deal before the Pac 12 broke the bank and re-established the baseline. They also gave away their Tier 3 rights in the crappy TV deal, so the teams are losing a chunk of cash there, too. It seems like they essentially traded the big bucks for exposure (more televised games) and their long-term relationship with Raycom (which televises lower profile games in ACC markets, but buys them from ESPN rather than directly from the ACC -- they apparently have been in business with the ACC for decades and would have gone bankrupt if not for the arrangement between the ACC and ESPN).

That and the above-mentioned fact that, outside of 3-4 teams (Clemson, FSU, VPI, and NC State), they don't travel or have attendance like the SEC or Big 12 teams (or Pac 12) gives them bad bowl arrangements.

The PAC-12 doesn't travel for crap. They're basically the ACC if the SEC gorilla isn't next door. It shows up in that they have the Rose Bowl and a bunch of December bowls, just like the ACC and the Orange, followed by December madness.

A huge part of Clemson wanting to depart (and I'm speaking for the fan base here not the administration) is a perceived slight by the ACC itself and the tobacco road contingent.

A number of factors contribute but the most recent is the way the UNC scandal went down. Current ACC commissioner John Swofford is not only a UNC alum but also a former UNC AD. At the time of Clemson's NCAA probation in 84 Swofford asked that the ACC specifically add 1 year the the NCAA imposed 2 year probation on the grounds of one count of Academic fraud (a tudor wrote a paper for a student) Swofford stated that Academic integrity must be maintained and Clemson's actions had sullied the reputation of the entire ACC ,most notably public Ivy. Swofford requested the Clemson AD not be present during the discussion and then called for a private anonymous ballot. AT which point Wake Forest and Maryland's AD stood up and walked out. Reportedly GT abstained from voting, not withstanding the motion passed . After UNC's most recent scandal Clemson AD Terry Don Phillips requested the same of the ACC now commissioned by Mr. Swofford himself and a letter of reprimand was issued but a formal vote was not allowed or presented to the member institutions. That's strike on.

That Swoffords own son has an ownership stake in Raycom is strike two.

That Swofford is paid more than Slive or any other conference commissioner is strike three.

Add in that UNC and DUKE retain Tier 3 basketball rights while Clemson and FSU do not retain football rights in the new deal and you have a full fledge war.

Clemson can sling money with most anyone, we have a very fiscally conservative athletic department, and the oldest Alumni Booster organization in the country.

Historically Clemson has owned the in state rivalry with SC, but has watched the arms race escalate and is seeing the financial impacts. SC and their SEC money continue to borrow and Bond their way to facility improvements while Clemson continues to sit on cash reserves (allegedly $75MM)and build out of prior raised funding..... and frankly we are getting sick of it. Clemson brings way more money to the ACC then the ACC brings to Clemson.

We do not have many "Olympic" sports to concern ourselves with travel wise. So travel isnt a huge deal.
Throw in FSU, WVU, add 2 more eastern schools to a 16 team league in an eastern division and the travel isn't really any worse than Boston, or Syracuse (brilliant fawking move there btw)

On the night game thing, FSU hasn't hosted a Thursday night game in about a decade because they have classes that take place in rooms in Doak Campbell Stadium and student parking in most of the football lots and everyone around the country including farking ESPN turned it into a giant joke that FSU was cancelling a day of classes for football.

So, every year they play someone in the ACC on the road on Thursday night. This year, it's Virginia Tech. It was NCSU and BC the last two years.

Even before they had classes at Doak, it was a logistical nightmare. I worked downtown - which is not just a downtown but the capital of the state, all smushed together in a couple square miles - and we had to shut down work before noon to accomodate the game. It's just not something they can handle, or want to handle, even once a year.

Even before they had classes at Doak, it was a logistical nightmare. I worked downtown - which is not just a downtown but the capital of the state, all smushed together in a couple square miles - and we had to shut down work before noon to accomodate the game. It's just not something they can handle, or want to handle, even once a year.

Try it in Clemson.
Enrollment is 19,000
The town has a population of 24,000 INCLUDING enrollment.
Every on campus parking spot for students, faculty, maintenance vehicle everything is sold as reserved parking for season ticket holders. Additionally parking is all over the school in any grass areas. literally on campus students are required to move their cars off campus on game days...an aggravation on a saturday, an impossibility on a school day. Now consider that as a donor i pay $2,400/year for that parking spot, and you now tell me I cant use it for one game. lol

That Swoffords own son has an ownership stake in Raycom is strike two.



I think Swofford is a little girl just as much as every good non-Tobacco Road ACC fan, but Chad Swofford is an upper level manager at Raycom Sports, which is owned by Raycom Media, based out of Alabama. Though he may have some equity compensation as part of his employment, to my knowledge there is no material "ownership stake." This conspiracy theory has gotten a little bit out of hand.

Clemson would be released from ever playing on Friday night. For those reasons alone. And they still get the $$$$$$$$$$.

I think the ACC can fix their problems by:

- By not giving the ACC office an equal share of the television money. I don't know how common this is in other leagues, but I can not understand why the league office needs 14 million dollars. This would make sense if the league used the money to pay teams travel expenses, and awarded it as a prize for winning the conference or something.

- Re-align the divisions. Miami, Clemson, Georgia Tech, and Florida State should all be in the same division. Yes it would make the division tough and Virginia Tech would have an easy schedule but at least it will produce better games.

- Fire the refs. The refs are terrible and the constant ineptitude from them is disgusting.

- Stop penalizing teams for not wanting to play on Labor day.

- Schedule. Florida State should play Clemson in September, Miami in October, and Virginia Tech/ North Carolina in November every year. This builds rivalries by having things be familiar, although I think switching Clemson to November would make more sense because it lessens the possibility of play Va. Tech or North Carolina a few weeks later in the ACC title game.

- Schedule. Florida State should play Clemson in September, Miami in October, and Virginia Tech/ North Carolina in November every year. This builds rivalries by having things be familiar, although I think switching Clemson to November would make more sense because it lessens the possibility of play Va. Tech or North Carolina a few weeks later in the ACC title game.

I think this is a good point. I would also say that I think for leagues that have conference championship games, they should be playing the cross-division games early in the season in case they do end up with a rematch.

- Schedule. Florida State should play Clemson in September, Miami in October, and Virginia Tech/ North Carolina in November every year. This builds rivalries by having things be familiar, although I think switching Clemson to November would make more sense because it lessens the possibility of play Va. Tech or North Carolina a few weeks later in the ACC title game.

This is another BIG one to me.
The ACC always seems to throw stones at the non TR teams.
Last year FSU welcomes OU into Tally week 2, in thanks the ACC sends them to Clemson the next week. Its not good for the (ACC Football) to have teams down. If you know FSU is bringing in OU send them to Duke the next week. Or at least to their cross division rival. Granted Clemson played Auburn the same day FSU played OU, but the ACC ended the division race for all intents and purposes the first weekend in October last year.

I agree there should be annual traditions. Heck its a fair bet that Clemson FSU will factor into the Atlantic most years, same goes for VT GT why not go ahead and schedule them the last conference game week every year. Create compelling TV.

Oh yeah, and take a page out of the SECs book. If your traditional rival is an OOC give the team a bye or a team scheduled game the week before rival week. Besides its always fun to watch Florida play Furman in November while SC plays SC State, and UGA plays Carver HS.

Why not let FSU play St Thomas Aquinas the week before the gators come rolling in.

The SEC has done a masterful job of building their brand in this way. Not degrading their talent AT ALL, but they artificially impact their OOC record some what with this tactic.

I think Swofford is a little girl just as much as every good non-Tobacco Road ACC fan, but Chad Swofford is an upper level manager at Raycom Sports, which is owned by Raycom Media, based out of Alabama. Though he may have some equity compensation as part of his employment, to my knowledge there is no material "ownership stake." This conspiracy theory has gotten a little bit out of hand.

1- He is the Senior Director of New Business Development. His previous gig was junior asistant AD at BC.
2- When Raycom was rumored to be filing Chap 11 in 09, Chad bought in at a 33% clip, reportedly with Daddy's money. Unless that assistant AD gig let him drop $7MM in cash.
3- Have you ever been to Raycom's offices? You wouldn't hire them to film your wedding. They are incompetent at best.

This is another BIG one to me.
The ACC always seems to throw stones at the non TR teams.
Last year FSU welcomes OU into Tally week 2, in thanks the ACC sends them to Clemson the next week. Its not good for the (ACC Football) to have teams down. If you know FSU is bringing in OU send them to Duke the next week. Or at least to their cross division rival. Granted Clemson played Auburn the same day FSU played OU, but the ACC ended the division race for all intents and purposes the first weekend in October last year.

I agree there should be annual traditions. Heck its a fair bet that Clemson FSU will factor into the Atlantic most years, same goes for VT GT why not go ahead and schedule them the last conference game week every year. Create compelling TV.

Oh yeah, and take a page out of the SECs book. If your traditional rival is an OOC give the team a bye or a team scheduled game the week before rival week. Besides its always fun to watch Florida play Furman in November while SC plays SC State, and UGA plays Carver HS.

Why not let FSU play St Thomas Aquinas the week before the gators come rolling in.

The SEC has done a masterful job of building their brand in this way. Not degrading their talent AT ALL, but they artificially impact their OOC record some what with this tactic.

Jimbo smacked Spetman around enough that they added Chattanooga to the schedule in 2014 or 15 the week before Florida. GT and Clemson may as well follow suit as long as the ACC isn't going to make any requirements about when non-conference games are scheduled. Of course, as soon as this is done, the ACC will outlaw having 2 non-conference games to end the season.

The ACC's problem is winning non-conference games. They actually play more BCS schools than any of the other leagues. However outside of 2008, they've been .500 or worse vs. them every year since the expansion. The 3 late season SEC games are the cherry on the **** sandwich. Need to win more of those to get any respect as a league.

1- He is the Senior Director of New Business Development. His previous gig was junior asistant AD at BC.
2- When Raycom was rumored to be filing Chap 11 in 09, Chad bought in at a 33% clip, reportedly with Daddy's money. Unless that assistant AD gig let him drop $7MM in cash.
3- Have you ever been to Raycom's offices? You wouldn't hire them to film your wedding. They are incompetent at best.

While it has clearly been difficult at times to tell where Raycom stops and the conference offices begin, the ownership stuff is mostly message board gossip. The ACC/Raycom stuff goes way beyond keeping Chad Swofford employed--and further more, it's been known about for years.

Jimbo smacked Spetman around enough that they added Chattanooga to the schedule in 2014 or 15 the week before Florida. GT and Clemson may as well follow suit as long as the ACC isn't going to make any requirements about when non-conference games are scheduled. Of course, as soon as this is done, the ACC will outlaw having 2 non-conference games to end the season.

The ACC's problem is winning non-conference games. They actually play more BCS schools than any of the other leagues. However outside of 2008, they've been .500 or worse vs. them every year since the expansion. The 3 late season SEC games are the cherry on the **** sandwich. Need to win more of those to get any respect as a league.

Historically Clemson has more than held their own in their series with SC, however the last 3 years SC has been on a historical (for them ) run.

I guess thats kinda my point, the SEC has created a self fulfilling prophecy. For years they rarely schedule quality OOC competition and created the brand based on reputation and how they beat on each other. By self proclaiming to be the home of the best, they attracted the best recruits.


The problem is, the ACC offices actually dictate schedule. A few years ago Clemson had scheduled Coastal Carolina the week before SC but the ACC mandated they take their bye week that week. Forcing Clemson and CC to play on Halloween, when each had planned to have byes on Halloween.

Historically Clemson has more than held their own in their series with SC, however the last 3 years SC has been on a historical (for them ) run.

I guess thats kinda my point, the SEC has created a self fulfilling prophecy. For years they rarely schedule quality OOC competition and created the brand based on reputation and how they beat on each other. By self proclaiming to be the home of the best, they attracted the best recruits.


The problem is, the ACC offices actually dictate schedule. A few years ago Clemson had scheduled Coastal Carolina the week before SC but the ACC mandated they take their bye week that week. Forcing Clemson and CC to play on Halloween, when each had planned to have byes on Halloween.

I have heard that is a common complaint with FSU, as well. They have requested byes or home games in the weeks around the Florida game, but the conference often gives them long road trips.

For all of its faults, the Big East has been very good about scheduling smartly (giving well-placed byes, scheduling anticipated "marquee" match ups in the final weeks, using mid-week games to give teams extra rest rather than short weeks for the most part, etc.).

CU Tiger: Maybe y'all will get another chance to send a nasty letter to Swofford

Report: Class filled with UNC football players under investigation - CBSSports.com (http://www.cbssports.com/collegefootball/blog/eye-on-college-football/19314038/report-class-filled-with-unc-football-players-under-investigation/rss?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter)

More information on upcoming SEC Network. Expected to carry 40-50 football games a year.

SEC Network Could Carry 40-50 Football Games a Season : Outkick The Coverage (http://outkickthecoverage.com/sec-network-could-carry-40-50-football-games-a-season.php)

Interesting tidbit on some of the PAC-12 negotiations in the Bowlsby article in the Tulsa World. Appears that KSU was also a team under consideration for a move to that conference. Surprised that KU was not part of the discussion. These were negotiations that occurred a few months before A&M and Mizzou exited the conference.

http://www.tulsaworld.com/sportsextra/article.aspx?subjectid=231&articleid=20120616_29_B1_ULNSoo664339&rss_lnk=2

In Palo Alto, Bowlsby never thought he would lead the Big 12 into a prosperous future. Especially after last summer, when he met with (OSU's) Hargis, Texas president Bill Powers, Kansas State president Kirk Schulz and Oklahoma AD Joe Castiglione about those schools and others joining the Pac-12.

dola

More info from local radio on the B12 expansion rumors:

1. Multiple AD's in the conference believe the WVU move was made too quickly, with one AD at the meetings here in KC terming it 'an embarrassing move'.

2. Clemson is getting cold feet in regards to a move to the B12 and Florida State refuses to move unless they have a southern partner to go with them AND the money is right.

3. Miami and Georgia Tech have been contacted as backup options should the Clemson/FSU deal fall through.

I would guess that WVU would not have gotten an invitation if the Big 12 knew that some of the better ACC schools might become available. We will never be located in a desirable location or large market and will never be academically elite, so schools like GT, Clemson, Florida State, etc. are much more attractive.

Still, glad that we received and answered the call. Seems like others (possibly Pitt and Louisville, certainly BYU) passed when the Big 12 looked unhealthy, but I'm glad we landed in a better place than the Big East. The ironic thing is that I am sure we would have preferred to be in the ACC (where we geographically fit and would have been in a conference with 4 of our top 5 "rivals"), but now the ACC looks worse off.

There are rumors that something is going to go down this weekend. The pro-Big 12 folks think that it will be Clemson and FSU as full members and Notre Dame as a non-football. Have also seen that Notre Dame is flirting with the ACC. I think the next trigger will be if/when Notre Dame announces an extension with NBC (if they aren't joining the ACC for football, I think FSU and Clemson join the Big 12 so that they can keep up with their geographical rivals).

Some selected recent tweets:

Ingram Smith ‏@IngramSmith
In the last 2 hrs I have had multiple calls saying ND is going to the ACC & Big12. ND is hedging their bets, in the end takes best offer

Brian Ethridge ‏@TruthOrBear247
Was just told by a great source, "Big 12 expansion is imminent."

I would guess that WVU would not have gotten an invitation if the Big 12 knew that some of the better ACC schools might become available. We will never be located in a desirable location or large market and will never be academically elite, so schools like GT, Clemson, Florida State, etc. are much more attractive.

Still, glad that we received and answered the call. Seems like others (possibly Pitt and Louisville, certainly BYU) passed when the Big 12 looked unhealthy, but I'm glad we landed in a better place than the Big East. The ironic thing is that I am sure we would have preferred to be in the ACC (where we geographically fit and would have been in a conference with 4 of our top 5 "rivals"), but now the ACC looks worse off.

There are rumors that something is going to go down this weekend. The pro-Big 12 folks think that it will be Clemson and FSU as full members and Notre Dame as a non-football. Have also seen that Notre Dame is flirting with the ACC. I think the next trigger will be if/when Notre Dame announces an extension with NBC (if they aren't joining the ACC for football, I think FSU and Clemson join the Big 12 so that they can keep up with their geographical rivals).

I find it hilarious that someone thinks that WVU was an embarrassing move, yet says nothing about the TCU move. I'm guessing that has more to do with the Texas-centric conference that the B12 now has more than anything else.

Judging from what's been said around here, I think FSU and Clemson are playing hardball, but are left with few options if they really want to take a step up.

I find it hilarious that someone thinks that WVU was an embarrassing move, yet says nothing about the TCU move. I'm guessing that has more to do with the Texas-centric conference that the B12 now has more than anything else.

Judging from what's been said around here, I think FSU and Clemson are playing hardball, but are left with few options if they really want to take a step up.

I actually agree on TCU -- I think adding them was a pretty short-sighted move, as the market is obviously redundant, their fan-base/alumni are wealthy but few, and they haven't been successful, without Gary Patterson, in a long time. I have heard that the SEC and ACC were sniffing around them, prior to their addition, so it may have been a proactive move (or perceived as such) to keep more hands out of Texas.

The term that keeps coming up is "tortious interference." The Big 12 and their target schools need to make sure that they want each other, without officially engaging. Otherwise, there is apparently the threat of a lawsuit. Although, oddly that has never seemed to stop the ACC itself (or the Big East) from just going for it (with little to no repercussions).

BCS commissioners reach consensus on four-team college football playoff - ESPN (http://espn.go.com/college-football/story/_/id/8078786/commissioners-reach-consensus-four-team-college-football-playoff)

CHICAGO -- The BCS commissioners and Notre Dame's athletic director on Wednesday endorsed a seeded four-team playoff model for college football beginning in the 2014 season.

The commissioners' consensus still must be approved by the BCS presidential oversight committee, which meets June 26 in Washington D.C. If approved, the four-team playoff would replace the BCS system, which has been in place since 1998.

I actually agree on TCU -- I think adding them was a pretty short-sighted move, as the market is obviously redundant, their fan-base/alumni are wealthy but few, and they haven't been successful, without Gary Patterson, in a long time. I have heard that the SEC and ACC were sniffing around them, prior to their addition, so it may have been a proactive move (or perceived as such) to keep more hands out of Texas.

The term that keeps coming up is "tortious interference." The Big 12 and their target schools need to make sure that they want each other, without officially engaging. Otherwise, there is apparently the threat of a lawsuit. Although, oddly that has never seemed to stop the ACC itself (or the Big East) from just going for it (with little to no repercussions).

That last part is because no one actually wants to reach the discovery phase in a lawsuit.

http://www.sbnation.com/ncaa-football/2012/6/4/3061842/college-conference-realignment-big-12-acc-lawsuits/in/2257972

Judging from what's been said around here, I think FSU and Clemson are playing hardball, but are left with few options if they really want to take a step up.

Looks like the ACC deal isnt as bad as maybe first thought.

Currently No ACC school has a copy of the TV contract on campus (reportedly to prevent a FOIA inquiry from making the details public) but the quarterly or bi-annual payments (I'm not clear on which two people who should be in the know have given conflicting reports) received early June was substantially higher than expected. Like $1.5MM-$3MM higher for Clemson. Both sources agreed it would be $6MM more per year than previously expected.

Isn't that because the ACC had two teams in the BCS bowls.

Isn't that because the ACC had two teams in the BCS bowls.

partially
supposedly the contract is also based on a % of ad sales and ad revenue/demand was higher than expected ?

Maybe Jon could weigh in how common that would be but sounded a bit counter intuitive to me

A 2nd bid is worth about $6 million to that conference. So there's about half a million of it. I know FSU got about 2 million more than they budgeted for. Again, no idea where it came from before it arrived.

Somebody's fibbing.

Dodds, errrrr, Chip reports that deal with ND for non-football sports is imminent.

Orangebloods.com - Sources: Irish Olympic sports likely headed to B12 (http://texas.rivals.com/content.asp?CID=1377426)

That article prompted this response from the Notre Dame AD to Chicago Tribune writer Brian Hamilton....

#NotreDame AD Jack Swarbrick on report of non-football sports to Big 12: "I have no idea what prompted that."

A great quote from the recent Big 12 meetings:

A fly on the wall at the Intercontinental picked up this little nugget during the three days of meetings between the Big 12 athletic directors, faculty representatives and presidents in Kansas City. When all the turmoil over realignment the previous two years was brought up, one Big 12 school official piped up, "Well, Missouri was the first to throw their panties on the field." That started the entire thing, and NCAA President Mark Emmert told us he could see the new college football playoff format leading to even more realignment. Asked if there was one conference that Notre Dame would absolutely not join, Big 12 acting Commissioner Chuck Neinas paused, reflected and answered, "Mid-American Conference."

Horns not shut out, thanks to John Fields' golfers (http://www.statesman.com/sports/longhorns/horns-not-shut-out-thanks-to-john-fields-2389615.html)

A great quote from the recent Big 12 meetings:

Horns not shut out, thanks to John Fields' golfers (http://www.statesman.com/sports/longhorns/horns-not-shut-out-thanks-to-john-fields-2389615.html)

Agreed. It's an excellent demonstration of the lack of true leadership the Big 12 is currently dealing with. There are a couple of schools that are more interested in acting in a juvenile manner and making it 'us vs. them' within the conference as opposed to working as a team to better the conference as a whole.

The irony is jaw dropping!

Another argument could be made that once the malcontents left the conference, all of the bitching and moaning from certain teams about how bad and influential and overbearing Texas was being went away, and they were able to move to serious discussions about the new bowl with the SEC, granting the Tier 1 and 2 rights to the conference, and listening to offers from teams that were interested in joining the conference.

making it 'us vs. them'

You mean like "Mizzou (us) vs. Texas (them)"?

Dennis Dodd discusses the winners and losers in the new playoff setup......

Playoff is here, BCS is dead, and SEC still runs the show - NCAA Football - CBSSports.com News, Scores, Stats, Schedule and BCS Rankings (http://www.cbssports.com/collegefootball/story/19393452/playoff-is-here-bcs-is-dead-and-sec-still-runs-the-show)

The irony is jaw dropping!

Another argument could be made that once the malcontents left the conference, all of the bitching and moaning from certain teams about how bad and influential and overbearing Texas was being went away, and they were able to move to serious discussions about the new bowl with the SEC, granting the Tier 1 and 2 rights to the conference, and listening to offers from teams that were interested in joining the conference.

A better way of saying it is that the lesser schools fell in line once the schools that were willing to call Texas to the mat left the conference for greener pastures. Had those schools not done that, Texas wouldn't have given nearly that much up to the smaller schools.

Translation: You're welcome, KU. You can continue to make good money off a losing football program.

Given the new playoff system, the new bowl will likely match up the B12 champion with the 3rd place SEC team. It's an unholy alliance, but I'm not sure it's something to hang your hat on.

Given the new playoff system, the new bowl will likely match up the B12 champion with the 3rd place SEC team. It's an unholy alliance, but I'm not sure it's something to hang your hat on.

Or, if you actually consider facts, it will be the 2nd or 3rd SEC team vs. the 2nd or 3rd Big 12 team. Of the 28 participants in BCS championship games, 9 were from the SEC and 6 were from the Big 12. In the 14 seasons of the BCS, these were the Big 12 and SEC teams that finished #3-5 in the final BCS poll, and would be considered for the other two spots if the new system was used:

2011 - #3 Oklahoma State
2010 - none
2009 - #5 Florida
2008 - #3 Texas, #4 Alabama
2007 - #4 Oklahoma, #5 Georgia
2006 - #4 LSU
2005 - none
2004 - #3 Auburn, #4 Texas
2003 - none
2002 - #3 Georgia
2001 - #3 Colorado, #5 Florida
2000 - none
1999 - #3 Nebraska, #4 Alabama, #5 Tennessee
1998 - #3 Kansas State

I remember when MBBF was pumping up the BIG 10.

I remember when MBBF was pumping up the BIG 10.

It's a great conference!

It's a great conference!

Missouri was one of the main reasons they were looking to expand if I remember correctly.

Big Ten must be kicking itself for missing out on Mizzou!

I sometimes wonder if MBBF actually believes all the crap he spouts. Its like Baghdad Bob.

I think I've linked that pic at least 12 times in this thread.

I find it hilarious that someone thinks that WVU was an embarrassing move, yet says nothing about the TCU move. I'm guessing that has more to do with the Texas-centric conference that the B12 now has more than anything else.

Judging from what's been said around here, I think FSU and Clemson are playing hardball, but are left with few options if they really want to take a step up.

I don't really see anything wrong with WVU. Let's be honest- unless you're the Big Ten, you're only paying lip service, at best, to academics. And even then, didn't they just accept Nebraska into the fold? Not exactly a "get" academically. Hell, of the four schools that have left the Big XII, didn't the Pac-12 get the best academic institution? So let's dispense with the academic side of the argument.

Financially, their endowment is down with Texas Tech, Kansas State, and Oklahoma State at the bottom of the conference so that's disappointing. Enrollment is 30K, similar to all other Big XII schools not named Texas (or Baylor). The basketball arena and football stadiums are in the middle of the pack

Now, TCU is another matter. They just seem so much smaller to me (enrollment of 9000) and in danger of becoming Baylor II. However, endowment is $1.2B!! I never would have guessed that. That makes them on par with Oklahoma and Kansas, only trailing Texas (14B!) in the money department.

Does either really bring any media markets to the table? How many in Dallas are turning into a TCU game? Over Texas or Oklahoma? And how many does WVU bring?

So, let's be honest: when the conference looked battered and bruised, this is who would accept their offer to remain stable. I think WVU will fit in nicely as a middle of the road program and there aren't any others of those in the Big XII footprint (it's not like Illinois or Minnesota or Arkansas were leaving, for instance). Yes, the distance is a bit of a problem but any program of a similar caliber would be even further.

And if the Big XII hadn't picked up these two programs, would anyone from the ACC even be fielding their calls? Or would the ACC and PAC be picking apart the carcass of the weaker conference (Big XII)? I think if the conference doesn't add WVU and TCU (or if they had gone after, say, Louisville- I'm still not keen on the TCU pickup) they're in no position for other conferences to even look at them unless they had made a daring play for 4 teams from the ACC, similar to the rumors of 5 or 6 to the PAC from the Big XII. And those are really hard to coordinate all of the competing interests.

SI

I don't really see anything wrong with WVU. Let's be honest- unless you're the Big Ten, you're only paying lip service, at best, to academics. And even then, didn't they just accept Nebraska into the fold? Not exactly a "get" academically. Hell, of the four schools that have left the Big XII, didn't the Pac-12 get the best academic institution? So let's dispense with the academic side of the argument.

Financially, their endowment is down with Texas Tech, Kansas State, and Oklahoma State at the bottom of the conference so that's disappointing. Enrollment is 30K, similar to all other Big XII schools not named Texas (or Baylor). The basketball arena and football stadiums are in the middle of the pack

Now, TCU is another matter. They just seem so much smaller to me (enrollment of 9000) and in danger of becoming Baylor II. However, endowment is $1.2B!! I never would have guessed that. That makes them on par with Oklahoma and Kansas, only trailing Texas (14B!) in the money department.

Does either really bring any media markets to the table? How many in Dallas are turning into a TCU game? Over Texas or Oklahoma? And how many does WVU bring?

So, let's be honest: when the conference looked battered and bruised, this is who would accept their offer to remain stable. I think WVU will fit in nicely as a middle of the road program and there aren't any others of those in the Big XII footprint (it's not like Illinois or Minnesota or Arkansas were leaving, for instance). Yes, the distance is a bit of a problem but any program of a similar caliber would be even further.

And if the Big XII hadn't picked up these two programs, would anyone from the ACC even be fielding their calls? Or would the ACC and PAC be picking apart the carcass of the weaker conference (Big XII)? I think if the conference doesn't add WVU and TCU (or if they had gone after, say, Louisville- I'm still not keen on the TCU pickup) they're in no position for other conferences to even look at them unless they had made a daring play for 4 teams from the ACC, similar to the rumors of 5 or 6 to the PAC from the Big XII. And those are really hard to coordinate all of the competing interests.

SI

In the end, Neinas has managed to steady the ship and that's all that was really required of him. They brought in generally the best schools that were available and they entered the deal with the SEC. That keeps them stable. Now they have to work through the issue of Texas wanting the status quo as opposed to adding more teams. If they can get Texas to move in the proactive direction, they'll be in good shape.

A better way of saying it is that the lesser schools fell in line once the schools that were willing to call Texas to the mat left the conference for greener pastures. Had those schools not done that, Texas wouldn't have given nearly that much up to the smaller schools.

Translation: You're welcome, KU. You can continue to make good money off a losing football program.

Given the new playoff system, the new bowl will likely match up the B12 champion with the 3rd place SEC team. It's an unholy alliance, but I'm not sure it's something to hang your hat on.

I'm pretty sure that Kansas made much more revenue than Missouri even before the conference revenue sharing; in this article from 2008 it was 86 million for Kansas (with a successful program) to Missouri's 49 million. In 2011 with a struggling football program it was Kansas with 70 million to Missouri's 59 million. But I don't think anyone is surprised you have a false sense of accomplishment for Missouri.

http://espn.go.com/blog/big12/post/_/id/2373/big-12-has-six-of-top-21-national-schools-in-total-revenue

http://espn.go.com/blog/big12/post/_/id/47140/which-big-12-programs-are-most-profitable

I don't really see anything wrong with WVU. Let's be honest- unless you're the Big Ten, you're only paying lip service, at best, to academics. And even then, didn't they just accept Nebraska into the fold? Not exactly a "get" academically. Hell, of the four schools that have left the Big XII, didn't the Pac-12 get the best academic institution? So let's dispense with the academic side of the argument.

Financially, their endowment is down with Texas Tech, Kansas State, and Oklahoma State at the bottom of the conference so that's disappointing. Enrollment is 30K, similar to all other Big XII schools not named Texas (or Baylor). The basketball arena and football stadiums are in the middle of the pack

Now, TCU is another matter. They just seem so much smaller to me (enrollment of 9000) and in danger of becoming Baylor II. However, endowment is $1.2B!! I never would have guessed that. That makes them on par with Oklahoma and Kansas, only trailing Texas (14B!) in the money department.

Does either really bring any media markets to the table? How many in Dallas are turning into a TCU game? Over Texas or Oklahoma? And how many does WVU bring?

So, let's be honest: when the conference looked battered and bruised, this is who would accept their offer to remain stable. I think WVU will fit in nicely as a middle of the road program and there aren't any others of those in the Big XII footprint (it's not like Illinois or Minnesota or Arkansas were leaving, for instance). Yes, the distance is a bit of a problem but any program of a similar caliber would be even further.

And if the Big XII hadn't picked up these two programs, would anyone from the ACC even be fielding their calls? Or would the ACC and PAC be picking apart the carcass of the weaker conference (Big XII)? I think if the conference doesn't add WVU and TCU (or if they had gone after, say, Louisville- I'm still not keen on the TCU pickup) they're in no position for other conferences to even look at them unless they had made a daring play for 4 teams from the ACC, similar to the rumors of 5 or 6 to the PAC from the Big XII. And those are really hard to coordinate all of the competing interests.

SI

Exactly, SI. West Virginia and TCU were good additions that provided some stability. West Virginia was the stronger addition of the two, but TCU's addition made it possible. Do you think the SEC takes Missouri if Texas A&M didn't make the move? Probably not. That's not to say Missouri isn't a good school, but the jewel for the SEC in their recent growth was A&M. The Pac 12 grabbing Utah because of the addition of Colorado.

One of our insiders is saying that the ACC will issue (and it has probably already made its way through) a formal invitation to Notre Dame for both partial and full memberships. ND is obviously expected to turn down the full, but if they take the partial then Clemson will stay and FSU most likely will. ESPN would be willing to renegotiate if Notre Dame joins, obviously.

Also says that the full membership is so full of benefits for Notre Dame, that they would become the highest earning program "by a mile" and that they would be allowed to essentially have their own network (i.e.: keep their deal with NBC aside).

This is the ACC's hail mary and it could work. A lot of the BCS negotiations about allowing for non-conference winners into the 4-team playoff or allowing for an 8-team playoff are being used to force Notre Dame into a conference, apparently (and not surprisingly).

I don't see how Notre Dame basketball, lacrosse and tennis make the ACC a better football conference and increases TV $ enough to change what Clemson and Florida State do.

ACC wants Notre Dame to commit to playing 6 ACC teams per year. They already routinely play Pitt and BC and has played Georgia Tech and Miami frequently in the past, so they wouldn't have to concede a ton (and they'd get to play in areas where there are a lot of Catholics vs Northeastern teams and areas that are great for recruiting vs Southeastern teams). I'm sure that Notre Dame games would be considered marquee match ups and would move the needle a little, but I'm not sure how it could be enough to augment 14 other teams in a significant way. I guess that is the ACC's job to sell. :)

Am seeing that the Big 12 would also like to play 6 games vs Notre Dame, but Notre Dame is requesting that they play 3, with a yearly game against Texas (to be played on Thanksgiving weekend) and a strong preference to play Oklahoma each year. Big 12 officials feel like adding Notre Dame (w/ 3 Big 12 home games) would be enough to get FSU off the fence, which together would boost the Big 12's TV revenue.

Who knows how reliable and whether, if it is true, it will be true tomorrow, but it is coming from a guy that has been reliable in the past and threw out the possibility of Dana Holgorsen becoming coach in waiting a few weeks before new broke (when it seemed like an absurd notion).

Getting Notre Dame for non-football sports while pretty much leaving out the football team is kind of defeating the purpose of getting Notre Dame. There's no sense in putting Notre Dame in its own little category in the conference and letting them make all the money they want on the side. That's more likely to breed resentment at Clemson and FSU, not less. Remember the whole misunderstanding about third-tier rights in the ACC deal? Yeah, now let Notre Dame not only opt out of bringing football into the conference, but let it keep that pile of NBC cash for itself. It was only marginally tolerable when a potential deal considered had Notre Dame keeping double-share of revenues from the current TV deal if they joined the ACC. This deal would be replacing half a loaf with none at all. IMO, this is all or nothing for the ACC. If your source describing the deal is accurate, then Swofford is an infinitely more stupid man than I thought possible (and I already consider him only slightly more intelligent than a small rock at times).

It's really going to come down to ease of access for Notre Dame to reach the new playoffs. While I think the general framework has been agreed upon for selecting the teams, the specific rules governing the selections I don't think have been spelled out. If there are "stipulations" placed on at least a couple of berths (conference champion, top 2 in BCS, etc), then it becomes harder to reach the playoffs as an at-large and more so as an independent. If, however, the selections are without restrictions, then Notre Dame could probably finish anywhere in the top 5 or 6 and feel very good about their chances (gotta make those extra $500 million worthwhile, says the TV execs paying out).

One of our insiders is saying that the ACC will issue (and it has probably already made its way through) a formal invitation to Notre Dame for both partial and full memberships. ND is obviously expected to turn down the full, but if they take the partial then Clemson will stay and FSU most likely will. ESPN would be willing to renegotiate if Notre Dame joins, obviously.

Also says that the full membership is so full of benefits for Notre Dame, that they would become the highest earning program "by a mile" and that they would be allowed to essentially have their own network (i.e.: keep their deal with NBC aside).

This is the ACC's hail mary and it could work. A lot of the BCS negotiations about allowing for non-conference winners into the 4-team playoff or allowing for an 8-team playoff are being used to force Notre Dame into a conference, apparently (and not surprisingly).


I'm hearing this was supposedly an attempt to replace FSU and appease and save Clemson/GT...in one case the appease had the opposite effect.

I think an offer is definitely formally out there. I just think it was a major strategic mistake by Swoffie

Getting Notre Dame for non-football sports while pretty much leaving out the football team is kind of defeating the purpose of getting Notre Dame.

Exactly. Ask the Big East how that arrangement turned (is turning) out.

Hearing that the ACC believes that the addition of Notre Dame + 1 other team will get them in the $24M-neighborhood. That would be full membership for Notre Dame and 16 total teams. The ACC is reportedly offering Notre Dame 1 1/2 shares for a full membership, so they would be up in the mid $30M range.

One of our guys says that the ACC has called WVU, but I don't know if that has any legs or if WVU would go for it at this point.

Hardly seems realistic, but maybe ESPN really, really wants to get Notre Dame away from NBC?

Well you can put that rumor in the shitcan because (1) The ACC never has and never will offer anything to WVU - it was a non-starter from day one and at this point it's so ridiculous a thought it immediately discredits whomever thought that up. WVU can expect an offer from the Ivy League before it gets one from the ACC, and (2) WVU is in the Big 12 so why on earth would they take a step *backwards* and join the ACC? That's almost as laughable as the former reason.

Well you can put that rumor in the shitcan because (1) The ACC never has and never will offer anything to WVU - it was a non-starter from day one and at this point it's so ridiculous a thought it immediately discredits whomever thought that up. WVU can expect an offer from the Ivy League before it gets one from the ACC, and (2) WVU is in the Big 12 so why on earth would they take a step *backwards* and join the ACC? That's almost as laughable as the former reason.

I think you are generally right and I'm just sharing what I am hearing. I don't think it is absurd to think that there was contact, just as there certainly was between Arkansas and the Big 12, WVU and the SEC, Missouri/Rutgers/Pitt/etc. and the Big Ten, etc.

The ACC supposedly voted on WVU last time around and they didn't have the votes (supposedly the Carolina block all voted against them) and probably never will. WVU and Notre Dame don't particularly have any type of relationship, so I'm sure we aren't a team that they would choose to come along for 16 and I don't think we'd be interested with the direction we are moving in (Texas-centric coaching staffs and administrators).

Amazing to see this all play out. Who would have ever thought that this situation would evolve to the point where a school would consider cancelling a game rather than having it televised on a TV network?

All That and a Bag of Mail: How Big of a Disaster is the Longhorn Network? : Outkick The Coverage (http://outkickthecoverage.com/all-that-and-a-bag-of-mail-how-big-of-a-disaster-is-the-longhorn-network.php)

With news that Texas Tech might cancel a game to avoid appearing on the Longhorn Network, how big of a disaster is the LHN?

It's a Titanic like disaster.

ESPN got stuck holding the bag, but it could just as easily have been Fox. ESPN won the bidding and lost the network war.

I mean, I can't even think of any business decision that ESPN has ever made that has played out this poorly. Can y'all?

Maybe the mobile phone business. Remember ESPN Mobile? That failure cost a ton of money, but at least then you could blame being ahead of the market's desire. I mean, people did want to use their phones to keep tabs on sports and their lives, the technology just wasn't good enough yet. So ESPN Mobile was too forward thinking. But the LHN?

No one wants the network. Now or ever. Hell, Texas even had to pay $70,000 to get the network on in its own dorm rooms last year. The games suck, the revenue is pathetic, yet the LHN is continuing to create instability across the entire Big 12 and by extension across all of college football.

If Texas had just gone independent I think things would have been smoother for the rest of college football.

Texas A&M, Colorado, Nebraska, and Missouri are all in different conferences because of it. So are TCU and West Virginia. By extension so are SMU, San Diego State, Boise State, Pitt, Syracuse, basically it all spirals back to the LHN and the instability of Texas in the Big 12.

In historical terms, the Longhorn Network is the football equivalent of the assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand. One set off World War I, the other set off realignment.

ESPN is so profitable in other arenas that the LHN failure is just a rounding error on its books, but this is still an amazing swing and miss.

At what point do they just roll the LHN programming into the existing ESPN structure and give up on distribution? That has to happen soon, right?

One set off World War I, the other set off realignment.

So this network was the reason the ACC grabbed BC, VT, and Miami?

I think you are generally right and I'm just sharing what I am hearing. I don't think it is absurd to think that there was contact, just as there certainly was between Arkansas and the Big 12, WVU and the SEC, Missouri/Rutgers/Pitt/etc. and the Big Ten, etc.

The ACC supposedly voted on WVU last time around and they didn't have the votes (supposedly the Carolina block all voted against them) and probably never will. WVU and Notre Dame don't particularly have any type of relationship, so I'm sure we aren't a team that they would choose to come along for 16 and I don't think we'd be interested with the direction we are moving in (Texas-centric coaching staffs and administrators).

But that does raise a very good point, that is if Notre Dame said "we aren't going to join unless you go to 16" Swofford no doubt would put out an open invitation to every BCS and FBS school on the eastern seabord.

Amazing to see this all play out. Who would have ever thought that this situation would evolve to the point where a school would consider cancelling a game rather than having it televised on a TV network?

Seems overblown by one team refusing to do it. It's not like the rest of the conference can follow suit. At some point somebody has to play them and it's going to be on the LHN. They all knew this going in so protesting it now seems rather poor.

But that does raise a very good point, that is if Notre Dame said "we aren't going to join unless you go to 16" Swofford no doubt would put out an open invitation to every BCS and FBS school on the eastern seabord.

I'm not really sure who gives you much bang for your buck, though. I'm sure Penn State would be the biggest fish, but they aren't leaving the Big Ten and no one is leaving the ACC. Who else is there? UConn, Rutgers, WVU, Temple, UCF or USF, Louisville?

I'd guess that it would be a toss-up between taking a basketball power (Louisville or UConn, although UConn doesn't seem to be too popular with the ACC) or getting Rutgers (gives you a nice, populated state in New Jersey plus some impact in NYC and Philly, and ND could probably swing a deal to play a game in New York (Rutgers or Syracuse) each year.

Seriously, in a package with Notre Dame? The ACC offers EVERYONE. UConn, Rutgers, ODU, Delaware, VCU, Coastal Carolina, Mars Hill, you name it.

As I've said before, those few viewers that the LHN has must be the most influential people in the world, if the network is causing that much pain and hand-wringing.

Lots of chatter in B12-land that expansion is dead for this year.

Playoff official, beginning in 2014. Semis rotate between six bowl sites, championship game to the highest bidder. Teams selected by committee.

Teams selected by committee.

What could go wrong with this?

What could go wrong with this?

It's an improvement over having the coaches (or in many cases their aides) vote people into the BCS championship.

I excited for this new playoff format.

Definitely a step in the right direction. I don't think I'd want to have a larger field than four. At some point when you make the playoff field too big it eliminates the importance of regular season games. With a field of four, I think you still have that.

Sure, it elevates the importance of two bowl games (plus the final) over the others, but the former system elevated one bowl game above all others. So long as the match-ups are interesting and the games are good, the other bowls will be fine.

I don't see the setup announced lasting very long. The semi final games are going to be very tough to sell to fans. How many fans are going to go to be willing to pay for the tickets, make hotel and travel arrangements to see the semi final games, and then do the same for the final?

You'll likely see these games moved to the home team's stadium within a couple of years and then a entirely new set of issues arise when a school out in the middle of nowhere with a 35k seat stadium qualifies.

Still holding out hope for traditional bowl configurations and a +1.

I don't see the setup announced lasting very long. The semi final games are going to be very tough to sell to fans. How many fans are going to go to be willing to pay for the tickets, make hotel and travel arrangements to see the semi final games, and then do the same for the final?

You'll likely see these games moved to the home team's stadium within a couple of years and then a entirely new set of issues arise when a school out in the middle of nowhere with a 35k seat stadium qualifies.

On the ride home I heard the opinion that this is essentially (with the bidding on venue) turning into a second Super Bowl. How many SB attendees are fans of the participants vs those there for an event? It's possible that some fans could be priced out of the final, so they'll go to the semis (and, there's a chance the team won't move on). Or if they're that devoted they'll just pony up for both.

edit: And I kinda doubt the 35k scenario will happen. Boise St could barely even sniff a BCS game that mattered, they or a similar team isn't going to be installed as one of the top two by a committee.

Still holding out hope for traditional bowl configurations and a +1.

That's kind of what this sounded like to me, except with weaker bowl ties.

If I've read it right, 6 bowls will rotate the semi-finals, with higher bidder getting the championship as a non-bowl game.

That's awfully close, in terms of venues, to what we've had for the past few years ... right?

(Or am I reading this wrong, and the semi-finals will be _in addition to_ the usual Sugar Bowl, Orange Bowl, etc? I'm reading it as those bowl games will be 1v4 and 2v3 in their given year)

I think you're reading it right. 2 of the Rose/Cotton/Orange/Sugar/Fiesta/??? will rotate the semis. The final will be a "seventh" game hosted by the highest bidder.

I don't see the setup announced lasting very long. The semi final games are going to be very tough to sell to fans. How many fans are going to go to be willing to pay for the tickets, make hotel and travel arrangements to see the semi final games, and then do the same for the final?

You'll likely see these games moved to the home team's stadium within a couple of years and then a entirely new set of issues arise when a school out in the middle of nowhere with a 35k seat stadium qualifies.

Yeah, it seems silly from a fan's perspective. I think a neutral field championship is fine, but not for the other rounds. Still think an 8, 12, or 16 team playoff with home field for the top seeds sounds like the best option.

2009 would have been an interesting year to pick 4 teams. You had 5 undefeated teams (Alabama, Texas, TCU, Cincinnati, Boise State) plus Florida, with one loss to Alabama in the SEC Championship Game.

It's an improvement over having the coaches (or in many cases their aides) vote people into the BCS championship.

You realize the coaches were only one factor in the whole formula?