PDA

View Full Version : College Football Realignment



Pages : 1 2 [3]

Boston Red
11-27-2012, 05:19 PM
Nancy Zimpher becomes a hero to UC sports fans everywhere?

WMR
11-27-2012, 05:41 PM
The ACC prefers UC to UL?

nmculbreth
11-27-2012, 05:58 PM
Can anyone tell me what academic qualifications have to do with a conference? How are the libraries or science depts linked in any way after joining a conference? I've never understood that

So the conference can keep up the charade that they're serving some sort of higher purpose rather than simply trying to maximize revenue? It's a total farce but if it's the card that gets UC out of the Big East so be it.

Boston Red
11-27-2012, 06:14 PM
The ACC prefers UC to UL?

UC prefers UC to UofL.

joshnky
11-27-2012, 06:19 PM
The ACC prefers UC to UL?

No

KronoRed
11-27-2012, 07:11 PM
I wonder how many of these teams will actually end up in the BE, already rumors that San Diego State, Boise and Navy are rethinking the move.

Slyder
11-27-2012, 07:43 PM
I wonder how many of these teams will actually end up in the BE, already rumors that San Diego State, Boise and Navy are rethinking the move.

I keep waiting for the bball schools to do something and merge with a selection of schools like Dayton, George Mason, etc and go back to what its core has always been big time basketball and just stop sponsering football at the d1 level.

Caveat Emperor
11-27-2012, 08:36 PM
Word is that UConn and Louisville both don't have the votes in the ACC. The academic bluebloods are balking at Louisville's rankings, the on-field performance schools are holding out for a better program than UConn.

joshnky
11-27-2012, 08:41 PM
Word is that UConn and Louisville both don't have the votes in the ACC. The academic bluebloods are balking at Louisville's rankings, the on-field performance schools are holding out for a better program than UConn.

Twitter just blew up with reports that Louisville is one vote short of an ACC bid. I'm not sure how close uconn is but it will likely get done for Louisville if this is true.

Hoosier Red
11-27-2012, 10:23 PM
I'm glad to see that the Bearcats are making a push to go to the ACC. I think that'd be a great fit

Can anyone tell me what academic qualifications have to do with a conference? How are the libraries or science depts linked in any way after joining a conference? I've never understood that

It's more hot air than anything, but the B1G Ten has tried to build it's brand around similar universities. Everyone(except Northwestern) is a large research university and the various institutions do collaborate on some things. I remember the libraries had a joint borrowing program when I was there.

As far as I have heard, the "cultural fit" seems to matter most in the B1G Ten, next in the Pac-10, then the ACC and Big East at least pay lip service to it, and the SEC and Big 12 don't seem to care a whole lot.

WMR
11-27-2012, 10:57 PM
It's more hot air than anything, but the B1G Ten has tried to build it's brand around similar universities. Everyone(except Northwestern) is a large research university and the various institutions do collaborate on some things. I remember the libraries had a joint borrowing program when I was there.

As far as I have heard, the "cultural fit" seems to matter most in the B1G Ten, next in the Pac-10, then the ACC and Big East at least pay lip service to it, and the SEC and Big 12 don't seem to care a whole lot.

Rutgers?? :lol:

The SEC is a very homogenous league outside Vanderbilt, which is one of the preeminent schools in the country with a campus that still feels very SEC despite the fact that it's in the middle of a big city. SEC has shown an eye towards maximizing new markets, like everyone else, but they certainly haven't neglected to make sure their expansion has made sense and fits culturally into the rest of the league. I would say SEC has done the best of that hands down to this point. The SEC's ability to be incredibly selective to whom they extend a membership offer is their trump card.

Texas A&M and Missouri fit better culturally into the SEC than Rutgers does in the Big Ten, by far.

Slyder
11-27-2012, 11:06 PM
Texas A&M and Missouri fit better culturally into the SEC than Rutgers does in the Big Ten, by far.

Missouri goes against about everything the SEC normally goes for IMO. Missouri was about nothing more but potential TV sets. I said it then and I'll say it again WVU would have been more of a fit within the SEC but Slive decided it was better to chase the TV dollars than the ability to compete athletically.

Hoosier Red
11-27-2012, 11:17 PM
Rutgers?? :lol:

The SEC is a very homogenous league outside Vanderbilt, which is one of the preeminent schools in the country with a campus that still feels very SEC despite the fact that it's in the middle of a big city.

Texas A&M and Missouri fit better culturally into the SEC than Rutgers does in the Big Ten, by far.

Perhaps you're right. It's simply what I've heard of the priorities of those making the choices.

It's hard to define culture, but by just about any measure, Rutgers is a good fit culturally. It's athletically that they'll face challenged to measure up.

Essentially the B1G Ten has been consistent in bringing large state universities that are well thought of academically. The term I've heard a lot is the Land Grant Universities.

Rutgers is THE State University of New Jersey:), it has an enrollment of over 50K and is the top public university in the state.

IslandRed
11-27-2012, 11:49 PM
Twitter just blew up with reports that Louisville is one vote short of an ACC bid. I'm not sure how close uconn is but it will likely get done for Louisville if this is true.

Word now is an ACC expansion vote in the morning. You never know, but I'd guess both Louisville and UConn get in. They usually don't call roll unless the straw poll already has told them how it's going to go.

KronoRed
11-28-2012, 01:28 AM
Missouri goes against about everything the SEC normally goes for IMO. Missouri was about nothing more but potential TV sets. I said it then and I'll say it again WVU would have been more of a fit within the SEC but Slive decided it was better to chase the TV dollars than the ability to compete athletically.

I agree, Mizzo is also on board because they were available and easy to get, nobody wanted to go with 13 members for even one season and West Virginia had the big east 27 month malarkey hanging over their head, that and some throwing a fit over their academics, hysterical when you consider the poor academics that are a tradition in Mississippi.

Slyder
11-28-2012, 01:46 AM
I agree, Mizzo is also on board because they were available and easy to get, nobody wanted to go with 13 members for even one season and West Virginia had the big east 27 month malarkey hanging over their head, that and some throwing a fit over their academics, hysterical when you consider the poor academics that are a tradition in Mississippi.

Not to mention the fact that WVU HAS to accept ANYONE from the state of West Virginia it is in their by laws (I believe). WVU has produced any number of high performing individuals (especially from the medical field) but because they have to accept pretty much everyone they get crapped on by the almight university polls...

cumberlandreds
11-28-2012, 07:41 AM
Word now is an ACC expansion vote in the morning. You never know, but I'd guess both Louisville and UConn get in. They usually don't call roll unless the straw poll already has told them how it's going to go.

They are only voting on Louisville. In fact the vote has probably already happened. It was a 7 AM vote time. It was expected the ACC would vote them in.

joshnky
11-28-2012, 08:11 AM
They are only voting on Louisville. In fact the vote has probably already happened. It was a 7 AM vote time. It was expected the ACC would vote them in.

It's official. Louisville's in.

Caveat Emperor
11-28-2012, 08:18 AM
It's official. Louisville's in.

University of Cincinnati athletics died this morning.

Oh well, at least I can go watch a real baseball team play without driving 90 minutes each way.:D

wolfboy
11-28-2012, 09:17 AM
University of Cincinnati athletics died this morning.

Oh well, at least I can go watch a real baseball team play without driving 90 minutes each way.:D

I'm sorry, but the Eeyore stuff is just ridiculous.

Cincinnati basketball won two national championships, one runner up, six final fours, eight elite eights, twenty three tourney appearances, and won twenty six conference championships WITHOUT the Big East or the ACC. They're far from dead.

Cincinnati football will take a hit if it stays in CUSA 2.0, but that's not a guarantee either. Either way, it's far from "dead." Conference realignment is far from over.

joshnky
11-28-2012, 09:26 AM
I'm sorry, but the Eeyore stuff is just ridiculous.

Cincinnati basketball won two national championships, one runner up, six final fours, eight elite eights, twenty three tourney appearances, and won twenty six conference championships WITHOUT the Big East or the ACC. They're far from dead.

Cincinnati football will take a hit if it stays in CUSA 2.0, but that's not a guarantee either. Either way, it's far from "dead." Conference realignment is far from over.

I wouldn't be surprised to see the non-football schools split and keep the big east name. As a Louisville fan I was starting to consider the MAC a better landing place than the big east. Decent football and basketball and a good geographic fit. Would cincy ever make that switch?

wolfboy
11-28-2012, 09:37 AM
I wouldn't be surprised to see the non-football schools split and keep the big east name. As a Louisville fan I was starting to consider the MAC a better landing place than the big east. Decent football and basketball and a good geographic fit. Would cincy ever make that switch?

UC has more to gain in basketball by playing Toledo, Bowling Green, and Akron than Memphis, Temple, UConn, USF, Houston, and SDSU? Even if the Catholic schools break off that makes zero sense.

In football it makes more sense to play Kent State every year than Boise, East Carolina, Houston, and SMU?

I'm happy you guys got the invite to the ACC, but it really seems like your hatred of the Big East has risen to the level of delusion. The Big East isn't much as a conference anymore, but it's clearly the best of the rest outside of the "big 5." If (and I mean If), UC has any chance of moving up to another conference, it will come as a member of the Big East. Zero chance it happens as a member of the MAC.

Boston Red
11-28-2012, 09:41 AM
Assuming Boise joins, that's right. If Boise stays in the MWC, the MWC probably becomes the best of the rest.

In any event, I fully expect the ACC to be further raided by the Big Ten, SEC and Big XII, so I think UC probably ends up at some point in an ACC that looks a LOT like the old Big East.

wolfboy
11-28-2012, 09:45 AM
Assuming Boise joins, that's right. If Boise stays in the MWC, the MWC probably becomes the best of the rest.

In any event, I fully expect the ACC to be further raided by the Big Ten, SEC and Big XII, so I think UC probably ends up at some point in an ACC that looks a LOT like the old Big East.

It won't happen. Have you seen what the MWC has for a television contract? Boise might get less than they bargained for in the new Big East t.v. deal, but it's a fortune compared to what the MWC has.

wolfboy
11-28-2012, 09:48 AM
Assuming Boise joins, that's right. If Boise stays in the MWC, the MWC probably becomes the best of the rest.

In any event, I fully expect the ACC to be further raided by the Big Ten, SEC and Big XII, so I think UC probably ends up at some point in an ACC that looks a LOT like the old Big East.

Yep. If I'm UL, I'm celebrating with cautious optimism today. The ACC is already facing the same perception battle the Big East has had for years. If FSU and/or Clemson bolt, there isn't a whole lot left in football. Bad time for programs like Ga. Tech. and the U to be on a down swing. As conferences continue to consolidate, there's little doubt the ACC is facing some rough waters ahead. They just learned that even a 50M exit fee isn't enough to keep programs around. Without a GOR, they should be concerned.

IslandRed
11-28-2012, 09:48 AM
They are only voting on Louisville. In fact the vote has probably already happened. It was a 7 AM vote time. It was expected the ACC would vote them in.

Yep, and this is why I don't bet on sports for a living!

And to others' statements that realignment isn't finished, that's probably true. There are, literally, eight ACC programs at risk of being poached by the B1G, SEC or Big 12. One more big move and the avalanche might start.

Reds Freak
11-28-2012, 09:56 AM
Yep, and this is why I don't bet on sports for a living!

And to others' statements that realignment isn't finished, that's probably true. There are, literally, eight ACC programs at risk of being poached by the B1G, SEC or Big 12. One more big move and the avalanche might start.

I think the only thing that saves the ACC is if they can convince Notre Dame to join as a full member. Legally, does Louisville joining the ACC affect the $50M that Maryland owes for leaving?

wolfboy
11-28-2012, 10:01 AM
I think the only thing that saves the ACC is if they can convince Notre Dame to join as a full member. Legally, does Louisville joining the ACC affect the $50M that Maryland owes for leaving?

The ACC can keep dreaming. There may have been a chance when ND was on the verge of being irrelevant. Now that they're back in the spotlight? No way. The ACC is falling for the same sweet nothings the Big East listened to for years. Not gonna happen.

Sea Ray
11-28-2012, 10:46 AM
University of Cincinnati athletics died this morning.

Oh well, at least I can go watch a real baseball team play without driving 90 minutes each way.:D

Nothing's dead yet. This stuff is still in flux. There's still a lot more movement yet to be done

paintmered
11-28-2012, 10:54 AM
Nothing's dead yet. This stuff is still in flux. There's still a lot more movement yet to be done

The amount of near-term future movement is tied to how much Maryland pays in exit fees to the ACC. If that number goes low, then it's essentially free agency for current ACC programs. Supposedly, the ACC took Louisville because other conferences are sniffing around, and they felt it was most important to secure them while they could. UC and UCONN will be available in the next round.

Louisville leaving the Big East is another kick to the midsection for us UC fans. We've had plenty of them before, and there may be more to come. But if you're looking for hope, look towards the Maryland v. ACC lawsuit. That will determine our future.

mdccclxix
11-28-2012, 11:04 AM
I personally believe UC's football program would blossom in the big 12, as the name recognition of Texas, Oklahoma, etc would draw much more interest in Cincinnati. I think that will be best case for UC.

wolfboy
11-28-2012, 11:14 AM
I personally believe UC's football program would blossom in the big 12, as the name recognition of Texas, Oklahoma, etc would draw much more interest in Cincinnati. I think that will be best case for UC.

It's a long shot, but I tend to agree. The ACC could have as many instability issues going forward as the Big East has had in recent history. Add that to the fact that the ACC will essentially be the Big East once this is all said and done, and it just doesn't excite me as a fan. At least we'd get a nicer paycheck for athletics.

medford
11-28-2012, 12:12 PM
It won't happen. Have you seen what the MWC has for a television contract? Boise might get less than they bargained for in the new Big East t.v. deal, but it's a fortune compared to what the MWC has.

Roughly $1 mil per team.

Big East currently gets roughly $40 mil a season, $3 mil per football team.

w/ the depatures of Syracuse, Pitt, Louisville & WVU, plus the turmoil around UConn & UC, perhaps others, will the new big east get enough money for Boise than they could get in a revamped MWC to justify trips out to Conneticut, Cincy, Philly, & Central Florida?

There's currently 13 teams set to be members in football in 2015. If you assume the big east retains its $40 mil a year TV deal (good or bad assumption I don't know, I'm no TV exec) and you also assume that the football-BBall split is 70-30 to satisfy the alleged min split ratio in Boise's "escape clause" that would give each of those football schools roughly $1.86 mil a year.

How much does it cost to travel to half of Annapolis, Conn, Cincy, Tampa, Orlando, ECU and/or Philly every year? Certainly they have travel issues everywhere they play, but most of the MWC is significantly closer than 75% of the new big east.

In short, the next TV deal for the Big East is going to have to take a huge jump over the current Big East deal for Boise to see a significant increase over what they see this year. An unnamed TV exec said the Big East would be "lucky" to get $75-$100 mil annually in their next deal. That was prior to the Rutgers & Louisville departures, Tulane/ECU additions.

Caveat Emperor
11-28-2012, 12:39 PM
The amount of near-term future movement is tied to how much Maryland pays in exit fees to the ACC. If that number goes low, then it's essentially free agency for current ACC programs. Supposedly, the ACC took Louisville because other conferences are sniffing around, and they felt it was most important to secure them while they could. UC and UCONN will be available in the next round.

Louisville leaving the Big East is another kick to the midsection for us UC fans. We've had plenty of them before, and there may be more to come. But if you're looking for hope, look towards the Maryland v. ACC lawsuit. That will determine our future.

The longer this all takes, the more difficult it will be to keep any sort of momentum for UC football. They're going to probably lose Jones at the end of this season, and their recruiting is definitely going to take a hit from the loss of the AQ slot. Going forward, if they're having trouble selling tickets to current BE games, they'll have a hell of a time selling tickets to games against teams like Tulane, SMU, Houston, and Memphis.

The TV deal is going to be a dog -- especially if Boise State doesn't stick around. Even with Boise, I think they'll be hard-pressed to wrangle out even the same amount of money they're currently getting. You're probably looking at a lot of mid-week games in any new TV deal, which will further impact attendance.

There's also the issue of facilities -- Nippert & 5/3 are in desperate need of upgrades, and it's going to get tougher and tougher to find money for those projects when boosters are seeing low-level competition coming through town.

Really, there's nothing UC can do right now except pray really hard this holding pattern isn't years, because the state of the program is going to deteriorate significantly if they're forced to live in the Big East much longer.

wolfboy
11-28-2012, 12:44 PM
Roughly $1 mil per team.

Big East currently gets roughly $40 mil a season, $3 mil per football team.

w/ the depatures of Syracuse, Pitt, Louisville & WVU, plus the turmoil around UConn & UC, perhaps others, will the new big east get enough money for Boise than they could get in a revamped MWC to justify trips out to Conneticut, Cincy, Philly, & Central Florida?

There's currently 13 teams set to be members in football in 2015. If you assume the big east retains its $40 mil a year TV deal (good or bad assumption I don't know, I'm no TV exec) and you also assume that the football-BBall split is 70-30 to satisfy the alleged min split ratio in Boise's "escape clause" that would give each of those football schools roughly $1.86 mil a year.

How much does it cost to travel to half of Annapolis, Conn, Cincy, Tampa, Orlando, ECU and/or Philly every year? Certainly they have travel issues everywhere they play, but most of the MWC is significantly closer than 75% of the new big east.

In short, the next TV deal for the Big East is going to have to take a huge jump over the current Big East deal for Boise to see a significant increase over what they see this year. An unnamed TV exec said the Big East would be "lucky" to get $75-$100 mil annually in their next deal. That was prior to the Rutgers & Louisville departures, Tulane/ECU additions.

Not quite. The MWC contract is around 8 million a year. For the 2013 season, they have ten teams lined up: Air Force, CSU, New Mexico, UNLV, Wyoming, Fresno St., Nevada, Hawaii, San Jose St., and Utah State. That's 800,000 per school as it stands. Now we're talking about Boise State and SDSU returning? 8 million divided by twelve. Now we're at 667,000? Do you really think they're going to jump back to that?

medford
11-28-2012, 01:11 PM
Not quite. The MWC contract is around 8 million a year. For the 2013 season, they have ten teams lined up: Air Force, CSU, New Mexico, UNLV, Wyoming, Fresno St., Nevada, Hawaii, San Jose St., and Utah State. That's 800,000 per school as it stands. Now we're talking about Boise State and SDSU returning? 8 million divided by twelve. Now we're at 667,000? Do you really think they're going to jump back to that?

If BSU & SDSU jumped back, and if the "best of the rest" concept has BYU thinking that a conference is now their best chance of getting to a big bowl and is willing to go back, I'm sure they'd get a shot to renew their TV deal.

At any rate, that doesn't matter until it is known what the next Big East TV deal is worth, and how much the additional travel is worth (not to mention splitting up their sports programs in 2 different conferences) to BSU.

mdccclxix
11-28-2012, 01:40 PM
I think UC does end up in the the depleted ACC within a year and a half. I'll be a lot like the BE of 3 years ago, without the AQ, although I think a BE team would have qualified for an AQ slot for most every year even without it, so the argument is that the 5th conference, the outsider, will be just as likely to get that slot every year anyway. Go 10-1, 10-2 every year and you're almost definitely in.

paintmered
11-28-2012, 01:58 PM
I think UC does end up in the the depleted ACC within a year and a half. I'll be a lot like the BE of 3 years ago, without the AQ, although I think a BE team would have qualified for an AQ slot for most every year even without it, so the argument is that the 5th conference, the outsider, will be just as likely to get that slot every year anyway. Go 10-1, 10-2 every year and you're almost definitely in.

The ACC also owns the Orange Bowl, something the Big East doesn't have an analogue.

wolfboy
11-28-2012, 02:03 PM
The ACC also owns the Orange Bowl, something the Big East doesn't have an analogue.

Yep. And the ACC still has decent basketball - something that's increasingly difficult to say about the Big East.

paintmered
11-28-2012, 02:18 PM
And the other shoe may have just dropped... rumors of Butch Jones to Purdue.

Edit: and to think, only four years ago, UC was one play from the National Championship game. Damn.

Slyder
11-28-2012, 02:38 PM
Yep. And the ACC still has decent basketball - something that's increasingly difficult to say about the Big East.

Any conference that still has UConn, G'Town, Nova, Marquette will still have decent basketball. As deep as previous years? No but I am still certain Big East will be among the upper echelons of bball.

I still keep waiting for the basketball schools to get sick of all this football and stop sponsering it as a D1 sport (although with Nova and others they could probably do it on a D1AA or D2 level and be decent).

wolfboy
11-28-2012, 02:44 PM
Any conference that still has UConn, G'Town, Nova, Marquette will still have decent basketball. As deep as previous years? No but I am still certain Big East will be among the upper echelons of bball.

I still keep waiting for the basketball schools to get sick of all this football and stop sponsering it as a D1 sport (although with Nova and others they could probably do it on a D1AA or D2 level and be decent).

Temple and Memphis as well. But that's today. Who knows what happens tomorrow.

And when you talk about bball schools dropping football, are you talking about UC?

paintmered
11-28-2012, 02:45 PM
Temple and Memphis as well. But that's today. Who knows what happens tomorrow.

And when you talk about bball schools dropping football, are you talking about UC?

I assume he's talking about St. John's, Georgetown, Villanova, etc walking away from what the Big East has become.

Slyder
11-28-2012, 02:55 PM
I assume he's talking about St. John's, Georgetown, Villanova, etc walking away from what the Big East has become.

I am. Considering the only original member left is Temple this isn't what the basketball schools signed up for in 1993.

wolfboy
11-28-2012, 03:10 PM
I am. Considering the only original member left is Temple this isn't what the basketball schools signed up for in 1993.

Gotcha. Completely misread it.

There's been talk of the bball schools dissolving the league. If UC and UConn had gone with UL, I believe they would have had the votes. If that happens, the remaining schools should assemble a football only league and keep everything else regional. That keeps travel costs down, and then you can get a contract for the sport that really matters in a t.v. contract: football.

Caveat Emperor
11-28-2012, 04:40 PM
And the other shoe may have just dropped... rumors of Butch Jones to Purdue.

Edit: and to think, only four years ago, UC was one play from the National Championship game. Damn.

Over on Bearcat Banter, they've got a plane owned by the Purdue Board of Trustees in Cincinnati on Sunday -- the day Jones allegedly interviewed.

This fits with what I've heard from other places.

They should just announce it today, so that I can mark down November 28th, 2012 as the worst day in UC athletics history.

Reds Freak
11-28-2012, 04:57 PM
And the other shoe may have just dropped... rumors of Butch Jones to Purdue.

Edit: and to think, only four years ago, UC was one play from the National Championship game. Damn.

Of all the coaching openings Butch was rumored to be in the running for, this one makes the most sense for him and the school. I think he'll be a great fit there.

Boston Red
11-28-2012, 05:04 PM
Purdue is an awful job. He'll lose a lot and get fired. But at least he'll make some pretty good coin in the process.

kaldaniels
11-28-2012, 05:04 PM
Whats the consensus here...

It is a lack of the athletic department et al. doing their job to find a slot in a power conference for UC?

Or is it just the way it is, with UC being left out in the game of musical chairs, though no fault of their own.

kaldaniels
11-28-2012, 05:06 PM
Purdue is an awful job. He'll lose a lot and get fired. But at least he'll make some pretty good coin in the process.

I wouldn't say it is an awful job, but I certainly don't view it as the best fit/best destination for Jones right now. I'm not gonna go as far as saying it is a lateral move, but it is only a small step up the national coaching ladder.

Caveat Emperor
11-28-2012, 05:10 PM
Whats the consensus here...

It is a lack of the athletic department et al. doing their job to find a slot in a power conference for UC?

Or is it just the way it is, with UC being left out in the game of musical chairs, though no fault of their own.

It's the result of a lot of factors -- some of it falls on the UC ADs office for not continuing to press with upgrades on facilities (and by "facilities" I mean Nippert & 5/3 -- because non-revenue sports don't matter in these conversations) and continuing to build up the physical assets of the program. Some of it falls on the UC Administration for continuing to believe the Big East could be fixed after WVU left.

A lot of it really also falls on the fans and alums of UC. The Bearcats don't have nearly enough deep-pocketed alums funding the athletic department, and they certainly don't have enough alums who are fans and buy tickets.

nmculbreth
11-28-2012, 06:21 PM
Purdue is an awful job. He'll lose a lot and get fired. But at least he'll make some pretty good coin in the process.

From what I've read UC already pays Butch Jones more than Purdue paid Danny Hope and that UC has a larger pool for assistants than Purdue, so it seems unlikely that they'd be offering a substantial pay raise assuming that they were able to lure Butch away from UC. If Butch leaves for Purdue it'll have far more to do with UC's weak position in the realignment musical chairs nonsense than it does with getting a better gig.

Purdue is a dead end job and I can't see why any up and coming coach would be interested in taking the job if they're looking to work their way up the coaching ladder. It's not quite as bad as UK or IU, but at the same time it's hard to see that program being anything more than mediocre competing against the likes of OSU and Michigan and both of the two previous coaches got fired for being bad to mediocre.

With the number of other BCS-level jobs with vacancies I find it hard to believe that Butch Jones would want to settle for Purdue. Even if he can't find a legitimate upgrade (i.e. Tennessee or Auburn) and has to stick around UC for another season he'll likely be in a good position to be able to land a good gig after next season and at the very worst he'd be able to find a Purdue-level gig.

wolfboy
11-28-2012, 06:54 PM
Whats the consensus here...

It is a lack of the athletic department et al. doing their job to find a slot in a power conference for UC?

Or is it just the way it is, with UC being left out in the game of musical chairs, though no fault of their own.

Past administrations? Yes. Current? No. Too little, too late? We'll see.

Gallen5862
11-28-2012, 07:40 PM
http://frankthetank.wordpress.com/

Putting aside whether the ACC would actually add Navy or not, I think there’s at least enough substantive reasoning behind why it would work for the ACC that it shouldn’t be dismissed out of hand. Navy obviously fits in with the ACC’s academic standards while providing a foothold back in the state of Maryland (which is a hole for the ACC now with Maryland having defected to the Big Ten). In terms of national TV value, the Navy brand is still quite strong – to the extent that TV money (or lack thereof relative to other power conferences) is the overriding concern to current ACC members (and I honestly think that’s the main issue as opposed to the strength of the football league on-the-field), Navy is arguably more valuable to the TV networks than Louisville or UConn regardless of how the Midshipmen have performed football-wise lately. With Notre Dame as a non-football member in the ACC, Navy could be added as a football-only member to get the membership ranks for both football and basketball back to even numbers. Finally, speaking of Notre Dame, the Irish have an iron-clad rivalry with Navy, so the ACC might be able to convince the Domers to have that game in addition to the 5-game partial conference schedule that they’ll be playing starting in 2014, which would give the ACC a total of 6 Notre Dame games per year (3 of which would be guaranteed to be part of the ACC TV package).

ACC Sports
@ACCSports
David Glenn's sources say ACC discussing expansion this week, 3 potential targets: Louisville, UConn and Navy

Slyder
11-28-2012, 07:59 PM
http://frankthetank.wordpress.com/

Putting aside whether the ACC would actually add Navy or not, I think there’s at least enough substantive reasoning behind why it would work for the ACC that it shouldn’t be dismissed out of hand. Navy obviously fits in with the ACC’s academic standards while providing a foothold back in the state of Maryland (which is a hole for the ACC now with Maryland having defected to the Big Ten). In terms of national TV value, the Navy brand is still quite strong – to the extent that TV money (or lack thereof relative to other power conferences) is the overriding concern to current ACC members (and I honestly think that’s the main issue as opposed to the strength of the football league on-the-field), Navy is arguably more valuable to the TV networks than Louisville or UConn regardless of how the Midshipmen have performed football-wise lately. With Notre Dame as a non-football member in the ACC, Navy could be added as a football-only member to get the membership ranks for both football and basketball back to even numbers. Finally, speaking of Notre Dame, the Irish have an iron-clad rivalry with Navy, so the ACC might be able to convince the Domers to have that game in addition to the 5-game partial conference schedule that they’ll be playing starting in 2014, which would give the ACC a total of 6 Notre Dame games per year (3 of which would be guaranteed to be part of the ACC TV package).

ACC Sports
@ACCSports
David Glenn's sources say ACC discussing expansion this week, 3 potential targets: Louisville, UConn and Navy


Adding Navy as football only just adds more to the belief that ACC is Big East 2.0. I find it hysterical that the ones who started all this crap are being drug down by it. Unless you get a deal to show the games via the Military network they are chasing $ that are not likely to be there.

ACC hurts itself with the public perception more than anything Navy could add as football only. Its a desperate attempt by a bunch of blue blood snobs to try and keep themselves together. Karma has just walked in kicked Swofford and the blue bloods in the nuts and if what I am hearing is true Karma is not done.

wolfboy
11-28-2012, 08:01 PM
Adding Navy as football only just adds more to the belief that ACC is Big East 2.0. I find it hysterical that the ones who started all this crap are being drug down by it. Unless you get a deal to show the games via the Military network they are chasing $ that are not likely to be there.

ACC hurts itself with the public perception more than anything Navy could add as football only. Its a desperate attempt by a bunch of blue blood snobs to try and keep themselves together. Karma has just walked in kicked Swofford and the blue bloods in the nuts and if what I am hearing is true Karma is not done.

WVU fan, right? :evil:

WVRed
11-28-2012, 08:30 PM
Missouri goes against about everything the SEC normally goes for IMO. Missouri was about nothing more but potential TV sets. I said it then and I'll say it again WVU would have been more of a fit within the SEC but Slive decided it was better to chase the TV dollars than the ability to compete athletically.

I don't think WVU ever had a realistic shot of getting into the SEC. Even then, Missouri has had some decent teams in football and they have shown signs of being an improvement in basketball.

WVU had two things working against them in the SEC:

1. TV sets. WVU added nothing new to the SEC that it didn't already have. The major news carrier for the area is based out of Charleston and Huntington (which shares a border with Kentucky) and UK games are aired on these stations.

2. Recruiting. Even though Missouri doesn't add much here, Texas A&M was a gift. WVU doesn't offer any talent pipelines for teams to recruit into and like other SEC schools (Kentucky) has to draw talent from other states.

I view WVU in the same light as Nebraska. Rich football tradition and passionate fans, but nothing more. If anything, the move to the Big 12 likely exposed WVU and the lack of talent needed to compete with the top teams in the conference. Imagine what that would have been like going against Georgia, Florida, South Carolina, and likely Texas A&M and some of the teams in the SEC West?

Slyder
11-28-2012, 09:11 PM
I don't think WVU ever had a realistic shot of getting into the SEC. Even then, Missouri has had some decent teams in football and they have shown signs of being an improvement in basketball.

WVU had two things working against them in the SEC:

1. TV sets. WVU added nothing new to the SEC that it didn't already have. The major news carrier for the area is based out of Charleston and Huntington (which shares a border with Kentucky) and UK games are aired on these stations.

I have always hated the TV set debate, because for example you hear about aTm putting the SEC on in the "state of Texas" when WVU is closer to Pittsburgh, DC, Virginia, Ohio than aTm is to most of Texas and WVU has a large number of alumni all across the eastern US that we don't get credit for. New Markets for SEC games if they can find someone for coverage even if they dont land UNC/NC State. We have a wider following than just the state of West Virginia, look at the numbers when we are on prime time and the fact we have among the highest ratings on ESPN's midweek games all time, meanwhile Missouri grabs what? maybe 1/10 of potential tvs and when was the last 5 times they were in prime time spots?


2. Recruiting. Even though Missouri doesn't add much here, Texas A&M was a gift. WVU doesn't offer any talent pipelines for teams to recruit into and like other SEC schools (Kentucky) has to draw talent from other states.

Putting the SEC on the doorstep of Western PA, Ohio, Tidewater when most of them don't even need the extra recruiting grounds.


I view WVU in the same light as Nebraska. Rich football tradition and passionate fans, but nothing more. If anything, the move to the Big 12 likely exposed WVU and the lack of talent needed to compete with the top teams in the conference. Imagine what that would have been like going against Georgia, Florida, South Carolina, and likely Texas A&M and some of the teams in the SEC West?

It's fair to bring up depth. When I saw the media day prediction of 2nd in the Big 12 I thought we were in trouble. We always seem to do better when we are the underdog and can sneak up on people.

Given time to recruit walking into places and able to say "Come play the best college football has to offer and be close enough to home for your family to see" in Tidewater, western PA, etc and I almost guarentee you we would see an expansion of recruiting. Our recruiting this year with the big 12 has been better than the last 5 or 6 years.

We may never be king year in and out but I feel we with time would have become a team that could compete at an extremely high level year in and year out.

cincrazy
11-28-2012, 09:13 PM
I haven't read through much of this thread, all I have to add is that the realignment is a joke. San Diego State... in the Big East? Really. HAHA.

Slyder
11-28-2012, 09:18 PM
WVU fan, right? :evil:

Yep but I know a few people at OSU and Penn State. They say its not over with but it maybe a couple years. B1G wants 16 teams for their network.

Slyder
11-28-2012, 09:31 PM
Congrats to Louisville getting into the ACC hopefully it fits well and you all have an escape route if it does. Always liked Louisville they stepped up and started being a rival until the Big East finished unravelled. I wish UC, UConn, USF, and Louisville would all find other shelter before this is done because each did what they needed and felt none really slacked while in the Big East.

wolfboy
11-28-2012, 09:36 PM
I have always hated the TV set debate, because for example you hear about aTm putting the SEC on in the "state of Texas" when WVU is closer to Pittsburgh, DC, Virginia, Ohio than aTm is to most of Texas and WVU has a large number of alumni all across the eastern US that we don't get credit for. New Markets for SEC games if they can find someone for coverage even if they dont land UNC/NC State. We have a wider following than just the state of West Virginia, look at the numbers when we are on prime time and the fact we have among the highest ratings on ESPN's midweek games all time, meanwhile Missouri grabs what? maybe 1/10 of potential tvs and when was the last 5 times they were in prime time spots?



Putting the SEC on the doorstep of Western PA, Ohio, Tidewater when most of them don't even need the extra recruiting grounds.



It's fair to bring up depth. When I saw the media day prediction of 2nd in the Big 12 I thought we were in trouble. We always seem to do better when we are the underdog and can sneak up on people.

Given time to recruit walking into places and able to say "Come play the best college football has to offer and be close enough to home for your family to see" in Tidewater, western PA, etc and I almost guarentee you we would see an expansion of recruiting. Our recruiting this year with the big 12 has been better than the last 5 or 6 years.

We may never be king year in and out but I feel we with time would have become a team that could compete at an extremely high level year in and year out.

Have you read this article? My favorite read out of the latest realignment mess.

http://www.grantland.com/story/_/id/8654190/on-urban-meyer-ohio-state-wisconsin-big-ten-expanding-include-maryland-rutgers

Hate to say it, but even if you're now partially creeping into the PA, Virginia, DC, and (minimally) Ohio recruiting grounds, you probably aren't getting enough to close the gap with guys like Texas and Okla/State. You guys are secretly my favorite team in the B12 now. I'm rooting for you, but I think it's going to be a tough road.

Slyder
11-28-2012, 09:47 PM
Have you read this article? My favorite read out of the latest realignment mess.

http://www.grantland.com/story/_/id/8654190/on-urban-meyer-ohio-state-wisconsin-big-ten-expanding-include-maryland-rutgers

Hate to say it, but even if you're now partially creeping into the PA, Virginia, DC, and (minimally) Ohio recruiting grounds, you probably aren't getting enough to close the gap with guys like Texas and Okla/State. You guys are secretly my favorite team in the B12 now. I'm rooting for you, but I think it's going to be a tough road.

Thats the thing we've been exceeding expectations for years. First it was lil ole WVU could never compete (Enter Nehlen), then after the first raid WVU is going to get drug down with the ship (3 BcS victories) to buy time, then it was SEC or Bust... Enter Ollie and here we are, and "you'll never get a highly sought cordinator/coach that doesn't have ties (like Rod) again. I still have faith that Holger mania is going to run wild in Morgantown for many years, he didn't inherit the depth needed to compete but thats more on the previous administration only getting like 17-20 rather than 22-25 like most of the Big 12 schools.

*Edit*
Before we were competing against Ohio State as a Big East school, we shall see what happens when with the Big 12 association. Or if we continue to look toward Florida and more towards Texas.

wolfboy
11-28-2012, 09:55 PM
Thats the thing we've been exceeding expectations for years. First it was lil ole WVU could never compete (Enter Nehlen), then after the first raid WVU is going to get drug down with the ship (3 BcS victories) to buy time, then it was SEC or Bust... Enter Ollie and here we are, and "you'll never get a highly sought cordinator/coach that doesn't have ties (like Rod) again. I still have faith that Holger mania is going to run wild in Morgantown for many years, he didn't inherit the depth needed to compete but thats more on the previous administration only getting like 17-20 rather than 22-25 like most of the Big 12 schools.

I love the enthusiasm, I really do. In fact, I think it's almost unmatched in college sports (c'mon, is it THAT hard to root for Ohio State or Alabama in football or UNC or UK in basketball?). That being said, the story only ends well if that enthusiasm meets the cold, hard reality of college football these days. I wish you the best and hope you continue to overachieve. I'm cautiously optimistic on that front.

Slyder
11-28-2012, 10:11 PM
I love the enthusiasm, I really do. In fact, I think it's almost unmatched in college sports (c'mon, is it THAT hard to root for Ohio State or Alabama in football or UNC or UK in basketball?). That being said, the story only ends well if that enthusiasm meets the cold, hard reality of college football these days. I wish you the best and hope you continue to overachieve. I'm cautiously optimistic on that front.

And that was a very excellent read. I thought for years Maryland would make a great fit for Big 10 and why I think if/when they try to expand again Ga Tech may jump UNC and Virginia if for any other reason than demographics with Miami (if they aren't completely decimated by NCAA as a real dark horse. I (secretly) use to enjoy watching Big 10 games, while usually more traditional style you still saw speed guys like Desmond Howard, Charles Woodson, etc on the field but any more the Big 10 had become boring. Where have the coaches gone? I use to really enjoy watching Purdue throw it around when they had Drew Brees it was ahead of its time. If you give me a choice right now to have to watch between the conferences Big 10 Ranks above ACC but below about everyone else.

ACC made the same mistakes not worrying about their on field product and just grabbing the biggest markets they could. The one difference is the Big 10 had the foresight to setup the tv network FIRST and then go for the markets. The ACC has no way to market the fact they got Boston and Miami in the first raid. The only reason they remained relevant on the national stage was a little school from little ole Blacksburg, VA whom they didn't want in the first place. They've had to sale about everything just to try and keep up and still fail (~17 mil per team compared to 25 mil for big 12). It's why I don't think the ACC survives the SEC and even Big 12 have laid the ground work for money making machines with a good on field product, the ACC still thinks that basketball is most important. Its the same mistake the Big East made a decade ago.

Gallen5862
11-29-2012, 01:55 PM
http://articles.courant.com/2012-11-28/sports/hc-louisville-to-acc-20121128_1_acc-bylaws-louisville-uconn-officials

ACC Adds Louisville, Snubs UConn
November 28, 2012|By PAUL DOYLE, pdoyle@courant.com, The Hartford Courant

ACC Sports Journal reported the UConn, Louisville, Cincinnati, Navy and South Florida pursued the ACC, but only Louisville has the votes needed from the 11 current members.

Pittsburgh and Syracuse are future members, while Notre Dame will bring all of its sports but football to the conference. There has been speculation the ACC could invite three candidates, expanding to 16 members in football. But ESPN.com reports the conference will add only one member because the other Big East candidates (UConn, Cincinnati) have not other landing spots and will be available at a later date.

An ACC source told the ACC Sports Journal that Wednesday’s vote will likely be for one candidate.

Sea Ray
11-29-2012, 02:45 PM
I would certainly hope UC would trump U Conn

wolfboy
11-29-2012, 02:57 PM
I would certainly hope UC would trump U Conn

I don't know. If it comes down to UConn v. UC, the big question is whether the ACC is willing to compromise on academics for a second time. The Louisville choice was clearly a nod to FSU and Clemson. Does the next round then become a choice for tobacco road? If that's the case, I think UConn wins hands down.

Caveat Emperor
11-29-2012, 03:03 PM
I don't know. If it comes down to UConn v. UC, the big question is whether the ACC is willing to compromise on academics for a second time. The Louisville choice was clearly a nod to FSU and Clemson. Does the next round then become a choice for tobacco road? If that's the case, I think UConn wins hands down.

They'll do whatever ESPN tells them to do, honestly -- because the next addition to the ACC will likely result from a defection of a top football property.

Boston Red
11-29-2012, 03:29 PM
I'm sure UConn is an okay school, but no one views UConn as any sort of academic powerhouse.

wolfboy
11-29-2012, 04:54 PM
I'm sure UConn is an okay school, but no one views UConn as any sort of academic powerhouse.

No, but among the available options, they help keep this alive: http://www.theacc.com/genrel/092012aao.html

Slyder
11-29-2012, 10:09 PM
I don't see how NCAA keeps this from eventually going to court under the Sherman Anti-Trust Act. The Big 10, ESPN, etc IMO have been trying to setup a monopoly where they control A) all the money, B) all the competition, C) where everyone plays, etc. I've found myself having fun speculating who ends up where because I have no real control over any of it but when you look at the big picture...

A) Universities are butchering themselves
B) Student athletes are being thrown under the bus for the greed of a select few. Especially those that play multiple games a week (basketball, soccer, etc).
C) Congress hasn't gotten involved yet because the same "class" is in charge of both. They wine and dine each other talking about how much their endowments are.
D) NCAA's been nuetered a long time ago.

One of three things will seriously end up with this either someone will find a way to take this to court and win reducing the power of individual conferences, b) congressional oversight, c) people will stop caring as every major rivalry will eventually be shredded up and thrown away for the chase of dollars.

Reds Freak
11-30-2012, 08:05 AM
I don't see how NCAA keeps this from eventually going to court under the Sherman Anti-Trust Act. The Big 10, ESPN, etc IMO have been trying to setup a monopoly where they control A) all the money, B) all the competition, C) where everyone plays, etc. I've found myself having fun speculating who ends up where because I have no real control over any of it but when you look at the big picture...

A) Universities are butchering themselves
B) Student athletes are being thrown under the bus for the greed of a select few. Especially those that play multiple games a week (basketball, soccer, etc).
C) Congress hasn't gotten involved yet because the same "class" is in charge of both. They wine and dine each other talking about how much their endowments are.
D) NCAA's been nuetered a long time ago.

One of three things will seriously end up with this either someone will find a way to take this to court and win reducing the power of individual conferences, b) congressional oversight, c) people will stop caring as every major rivalry will eventually be shredded up and thrown away for the chase of dollars.

I think the NCAA has been hesitant to get involved in this because they're afraid the moment they do, the 'Big 5' conferences are bolting and creating their own governing body.

WMR
11-30-2012, 10:09 AM
At this point, I wish the big 12, 10, SEC, and PAC would just go to 16 and get this over with. Better to just rip the band aid off at once.

I guess you may see that depending on the MD case...

RiverRat13
11-30-2012, 12:45 PM
Rumors today that Georgia Tech to the B1G is a done deal.

bucksfan2
11-30-2012, 01:24 PM
Rumors today that Georgia Tech to the B1G is a done deal.

Who will be the next school?

Did the B1G do UC a solid? Taking anther team from the ACC gives the Bearcats hope again.

wolfboy
11-30-2012, 01:27 PM
Who will be the next school?

Did the B1G do UC a solid? Taking anther team from the ACC gives the Bearcats hope again.

The original tweet that started all this has been removed. Lots of smoke, but I don't know if we can say fire just yet.

Boston Red
11-30-2012, 01:43 PM
I think it's the same WV know-nothings (just these particular guys, not WV folks in general) that are stirring up the rumors and others and just running with those rumors.

Caveat Emperor
11-30-2012, 03:11 PM
Who will be the next school?

Did the B1G do UC a solid? Taking anther team from the ACC gives the Bearcats hope again.

It'll be UConn. They and Louisville were the two finalists the last time -- UC was an 11th hour push.

Gallen5862
11-30-2012, 07:54 PM
http://collegesportsinfo.com/2012/11...n-caa-in-2013/


College of Charleston to Join CAA in 2013

After a month of negotiating with the CAA, College of Charleston has accepted an invitation to join the CAA for the 2013-2014 season. The move gives the CAA a school to replace Georgia St., VCU and ODU, which have already left or leaving next year. Charleston gains more recruiting and exposure in the northeast due to their association with the CAA.

KronoRed
11-30-2012, 10:09 PM
Who will be the next school?


Virginia.

If the SEC moves on NC and Virginia Tech then UC can expect an invite, to the new Big East.

Gallen5862
12-01-2012, 07:29 PM
http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/college/chi-dave-doeren-nc-state-northern-illinois-20121201,0,2147572.story

Doeren to leave NIU for N.C State
Won't coach Huskies in bowl game

Dave Doeren guided Northern Illinois to back-to-back Mid-American Conference championships, and now he is headed to North Carolina State, the school announced Saturday afternoon.

Doeren informed the NIU players of his decision to accept the N.C. State position Saturday night. Then NIU athletic director Jeff Compher addressed the players.

Revering4Blue
12-01-2012, 07:36 PM
http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/college/chi-dave-doeren-nc-state-northern-illinois-20121201,0,2147572.story

Doeren to leave NIU for N.C State
Won't coach Huskies in bowl game

Dave Doeren guided Northern Illinois to back-to-back Mid-American Conference championships, and now he is headed to North Carolina State, the school announced Saturday afternoon.

Doeren informed the NIU players of his decision to accept the N.C. State position Saturday night. Then NIU athletic director Jeff Compher addressed the players.

I like this hire.

Doeren is a defensive-minded coach who also features an exciting offense. He'll do well with ACC caliber talent and, believe it or not, there is a lot of talent in the NC/SC area.

Gallen5862
12-01-2012, 07:56 PM
Thanks for the info. I am a NC State fan. I am hoping he works out well. Hopefully he gets to coach NC State's bowl game.

Slyder
12-05-2012, 11:48 AM
Latest news is that Rutgers is sueing the Big East to get out of the 27 month wait period to join Big 10 in 2014.

Caveat Emperor
12-05-2012, 05:34 PM
Sue. Renegotiate buyout to reduced price to avoid litigation.

Wash. Rinse. Repeat.

Slyder
12-05-2012, 05:50 PM
Sue. Renegotiate buyout to reduced price to avoid litigation.

Wash. Rinse. Repeat.

Figure they'll pay about what Syracuse and Pitt paid to get out (7.5 mil).

zjr1717
12-13-2012, 02:47 AM
http://espn.go.com/college-sports/story/_/id/8742607/seven-catholic-schools-leaning-leaving-big- east-sources-say


The presidents of the Big East's seven Catholic, non-Football Bowl Subdivision schools are expected to decide on their future in the Big East in the coming days, and it "would be an upset" if they remained in the league, sources told ESPN.


The end is nigh.

KronoRed
12-13-2012, 07:51 AM
Wow, the A-10 is going to have 2 dozen members.

Gallen5862
12-13-2012, 10:20 AM
http://espn.go.com/college-sports/story/_/id/8742607/seven-catholic-schools-leaning-leaving-big-%20east-sources-say

If the seven schools decide to move to a new league they would keep their automatic berth in the NCAA Tournament according to NCAA rules, which state that, as long as they have been in the same league for five years, a group of seven universities would keep their bid after a move together

Slyder
12-13-2012, 10:27 AM
Wow, the A-10 is going to have 2 dozen members.

I see it more as basketball schools taking the name with them and selecting specfic schools and "starting over".

Hoosier Red
12-13-2012, 03:46 PM
I see it more as basketball schools taking the name with them and selecting specfic schools and "starting over".

I agree Slyder. I think they'd add Xavier, Dayton, and either Creighton or Butler to get to 10 originally.

reds1869
12-13-2012, 04:21 PM
I agree Slyder. I think they'd add Xavier, Dayton, and either Creighton or Butler to get to 10 originally.

I think St. Louis is another strong possibility.

nmculbreth
12-13-2012, 04:43 PM
I see it more as basketball schools taking the name with them and selecting specfic schools and "starting over".

Word. The basketball schools are looking to part ways because the football additions are hurting their brand, the last thing they want to do is adopt the A-10 brand and include the likes of Duquesne, LaSalle, Fordham and Rhode Island. The far more likely scenario is that they're going to try to keep the Big East brand, the tournament in MSG and then cherry pick the best of the A10 to get to 10 or 12 teams.

The days of being the premier college basketball conference are over but Georgetown, Villanova, Marquette and St. Johns with the likes of Xavier, UMass and Butler could still be a very respectable conference.

LawFive
12-13-2012, 05:34 PM
I don't have time to pull quotes right now, but even in 2004-2005 after the BE expanded, folks were saying that he league was too big for its own good and that the bball-only schools would eventually break off. UC fans better have enjoyed this ride while it lasted.

wolfboy
12-13-2012, 05:41 PM
I don't have time to pull quotes right now, but even in 2004-2005 after the BE expanded, folks were saying that he league was too big for its own good and that the bball-only schools would eventually break off. UC fans better have enjoyed this ride while it lasted.

Why? We have a bball team ranked #11 nationally, a football team that's showed no signs of slowing down, and we're about to announce a massive renovation plan for Nippert. Why does everyone assume that the Big East is giving UC anything worthwhile as it stands today? By contrast, I'd argue that we're the most attractive all around property the Big East has left. I think we'll manage to survive.

Slyder
12-13-2012, 05:52 PM
Why? We have a bball team ranked #11 nationally, a football team that's showed no signs of slowing down, and we're about to announce a massive renovation plan for Nippert. Why does everyone assume that the Big East is giving UC anything worthwhile as it stands today? By contrast, I'd argue that we're the most attractive all around property the Big East has left. I think we'll manage to survive.

One thing I wonder if they would discuss is letting UC, UConn, USF stick around for all other sports while they find permanent homes. This is why I thought you might see someone try and get creative for a football only "best of" conference who that was the ONLY sport that league would sponsor.

Assumption:
Big 12 takes NC State/Clemson, Va Tech, FSU and Miami to get to 14.
SEC takes UNC and Duke to get to 16.
B1G takes Ga Tech and Virginia to get to 16.

Would the remaints be able to cobble something together FOOTBALL ONLY to try and maximize what tv dollars they can get while all the other sports cut cost by staying more local based?

texasdave
12-13-2012, 07:48 PM
The departure of the seven Catholic Big East basketball schools from the league appears to be inching toward inevitability.

"I think it's certain the seven schools will leave, barring some substantial financial or legal impediment," a source with direct knowledge of the situation told SI.com.

Read More: http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/college-basketball/news/20121213/big-east-basketball/#ixzz2EyzuqPRV

LawFive
12-13-2012, 08:57 PM
Why? We have a bball team ranked #11 nationally, a football team that's showed no signs of slowing down, and we're about to announce a massive renovation plan for Nippert. Why does everyone assume that the Big East is giving UC anything worthwhile as it stands today? By contrast, I'd argue that we're the most attractive all around property the Big East has left. I think we'll manage to survive.

I don't disagree that UC is attractive, but the only opinion which matters is that of the other power conferences. So far they have not seen fit to extend UC an invite. What I was saying here is that it appears we have seen the last of the "premier" schedules for a while...especially on the bb side. Kinda difficult to get excited over heading to the Shoe to see Tulane, Houston, UCF etc. on the schedule when you've spent the last 7 seasons playing the Novas, Georgetowns, Syracuses, etc. of the world.

wolfboy
12-13-2012, 09:30 PM
I don't disagree that UC is attractive, but the only opinion which matters is that of the other power conferences. So far they have not seen fit to extend UC an invite. What I was saying here is that it appears we have seen the last of the "premier" schedules for a while...especially on the bb side. Kinda difficult to get excited over heading to the Shoe to see Tulane, Houston, UCF etc. on the schedule when you've spent the last 7 seasons playing the Novas, Georgetowns, Syracuses, etc. of the world.

I don't know how attractive UC is, but they're moving in the right direction internally. My point was more that the BE schedule wasn't all that great even with the C7 there. Syracuse, Pitt, ND, UL, and WVU are bigger losses than Georgetown, 'Nova, SJU, etc... The Big East stunk whether the C7 left or not. UC was the best all around product theyhad left, and that ain't a ton to hang your at on.

jojo
12-13-2012, 10:12 PM
One thing I wonder if they would discuss is letting UC, UConn, USF stick around for all other sports while they find permanent homes. This is why I thought you might see someone try and get creative for a football only "best of" conference who that was the ONLY sport that league would sponsor.

Assumption:
Big 12 takes NC State/Clemson, Va Tech, FSU and Miami to get to 14.
SEC takes UNC and Duke to get to 16.
B1G takes Ga Tech and Virginia to get to 16.

Would the remaints be able to cobble something together FOOTBALL ONLY to try and maximize what tv dollars they can get while all the other sports cut cost by staying more local based?

Duke and NC to the SEC would never happen.

WVRed
12-13-2012, 10:17 PM
Duke and NC to the SEC would never happen.

If there were no other options for the SEC I could see taking them. That being said, I'd rather look at UVA or Virginia Tech and NC State first.

KronoRed
12-14-2012, 07:09 AM
The SEC has been hard to read, A&M came to them first, I do think it will be a huge mistake on their part if they let the b1g into SEC states (Georgia), inviting Tech back might piss the pups off but it's better for the conference.

mdccclxix
12-14-2012, 10:43 AM
I'll believe the BE7 split when I see it. I think working on something with Memphis, Temple, SMU (Larry Brown), UC & Uconn (which those last two can't wait to leave), may be best while adding Xavier and a few others. It's always been a jacked up conference, now it's just a little bit moreso. I don't really care for St. Johns (purgatory), Providance (biblical history), DePaul (leperacy), Seton Hall (lukewarm). Those teams do almost nothing for me, or perhaps even less than nothing. Georgetown is the only team that has a clearly better tradition than Xavier. Villanova and Marquette have some FF's, but are largely the very same as Xavier. I'm just not feeling the huge upgrade. Nor am I feeling like this is all bound to happen.

wolfboy
12-14-2012, 11:29 AM
DeCourcy article on UConn and UC's plan of action:

http://aol.sportingnews.com/ncaa-basketball/story/2012-12-14/cincinnati-uconn-acc-big-east-leaving-conference-realignment-connecticut

jojo
12-14-2012, 12:12 PM
UConn, Cincinnati, South Florida, Memphis, Temple, Boise State, San Diego State, UNLV, New Mexico and possibly BYU or Central Florida?

Color me unwilling to watch.

kaldaniels
12-14-2012, 12:17 PM
UConn, Cincinnati, South Florida, Memphis, Temple, Boise State, San Diego State, UNLV, New Mexico and possibly BYU or Central Florida?

Color me unwilling to watch.

http://www.kansastravel.org/geographicalcenter.htm

Got your conference championship game site all picked out.

mdccclxix
12-14-2012, 01:02 PM
UConn, Cincinnati, South Florida, Memphis, Temple, Boise State, San Diego State, UNLV, New Mexico and possibly BYU or Central Florida?

Color me unwilling to watch.

That looks like a good bracket from the NCAA tourney. There are several horrible games football wise, though. IMO, these national arrangements will be laughed at and demolished within 5 years, especially if their other sports will have to put up with this travel.

mdccclxix
12-14-2012, 01:04 PM
http://www.kansastravel.org/geographicalcenter.htm

Got your conference championship game site all picked out.

Haha, I love the "Kansas Attractions" link at the bottom. That's an oxymoron in the context of that site.

Caveat Emperor
12-14-2012, 01:20 PM
UConn, Cincinnati, South Florida, Memphis, Temple, Boise State, San Diego State, UNLV, New Mexico and possibly BYU or Central Florida?

Color me unwilling to watch.

This conference would be lucky to generate $3-$4 million per school in a media rights deal.

Better off being in a regional area to minimize travel costs.

wolfboy
12-14-2012, 01:24 PM
UConn, Cincinnati, South Florida, Memphis, Temple, Boise State, San Diego State, UNLV, New Mexico and possibly BYU or Central Florida?

Color me unwilling to watch.

You're an SEC guy. Honestly, I wouldn't expect you to watch.

wolfboy
12-14-2012, 01:27 PM
That looks like a good bracket from the NCAA tourney. There are several horrible games football wise, though. IMO, these national arrangements will be laughed at and demolished within 5 years, especially if their other sports will have to put up with this travel.

Nine potential tourney teams.

As for football, I hear a lot about travel costs, etc... but that isn't important right now. Everyone outside of the ACC, B1G, B12, P10, and SEC is in a scramble to become the most relevant conference of the have nots. With the new playoff and bowl structure, you've got every incentive to maximize SoS and try to monopolize the one at large bowl bid. Otherwise, it's a toss up between everyone outside of the big 5. That's why you won't see UC joining the MAC or some other

nmculbreth
12-14-2012, 05:13 PM
This conference would be lucky to generate $3-$4 million per school in a media rights deal.

Better off being in a regional area to minimize travel costs.

Joining the MAC to cut down travel costs would be penny wise and pound foolish.

The program is moving in the right direction internally, the administration and BOT are finally showing the willingness to invest in the future of the athletic department and they're one or two defections away from ending up in one of the five remaining power conferences. The second UC decided to join the MAC all of this progress would come to a screeching halt and the program would never recover.

I'd much rather eat the costs of extra travel expenses playing the best of the rest and waiting for a seat at the table than simply walking away.

Mutaman
12-14-2012, 05:31 PM
Georgetown is the only team that has a clearly better tradition than Xavier. Villanova and Marquette have some FF's, but are largely the very same as Xavier.

I might need a translation but if you're saying Xavier has as good a "tradition" as Marquette, you need to spend a little time in the library. Start with A for Al.

wolfboy
12-14-2012, 10:38 PM
I might need a translation but if you're saying Xavier has as good a "tradition" as Marquette, you need to spend a little time in the library. Start with A for Al.

Agreed. Xavier hasn't even made a final four. Marquette has a national championship, a runner up, and three final four appearances. Xavier has made a few elite eights, but Marquette has gone to three times as many. Xavier has a lot to be proud of, but that's just silly.

Caveat Emperor
12-15-2012, 12:39 AM
Joining the MAC to cut down travel costs would be penny wise and pound foolish.

The program is moving in the right direction internally, the administration and BOT are finally showing the willingness to invest in the future of the athletic department and they're one or two defections away from ending up in one of the five remaining power conferences. The second UC decided to join the MAC all of this progress would come to a screeching halt and the program would never recover.

I'd much rather eat the costs of extra travel expenses playing the best of the rest and waiting for a seat at the table than simply walking away.

The best of the rest isn't demonstrably better than the MAC -- especially if UC goes to the MAC w/ UConn & USF in tow.

jojo
12-15-2012, 01:03 AM
You're an SEC guy. Honestly, I wouldn't expect you to watch.

Who would you expect to watch New Mexico play Memphis in football?

wolfboy
12-15-2012, 09:46 AM
Who would you expect to watch New Mexico play Memphis in football?

I wasn't being flippant with that comment. Just noting that you're a fan of the SEC, so I wouldn't expect you to have much interest in whatever this new conference will be called.

As to your example, I think it's unfair to single out UNM and Memphis because in all likelihood, that game wouldn't be televised anywhere other than locally. Same goes for Vandy v. Ole Miss, Minnesota v. Northwestern, Iowa State v. Kansas, Wake Forest v. Duke, etc... Every conference has its stinker games.

The real question here is not New Mexico v. Memphis, but Boise State v. Cincinnati, or SJSU v. Temple. For the casual fan, would that ever have a tenth of the appeal of an LSU v. 'Bama matchup? No way. Of course, that will be reflected in the television deal.

That being said, as a UC fan, I'm much more interested in games between UC's conference mates than I am other games. If two teams from UC's conference are playing, I'll watch. In fact, I'll watch most conference games over a B1G matchup for example (or at least flip back and forth). I'd imagine there are many other conference viewers that would as well. Fans of other conferences would have little to no interest, but that's expected.

wolfboy
12-15-2012, 09:49 AM
The best of the rest isn't demonstrably better than the MAC -- especially if UC goes to the MAC w/ UConn & USF in tow.

The MAC generates zero revenue for football. Moreover, the MAC offers just about nothing in the way of strength of schedule. Just because the universe aligned this year for NIU football doesn't mean it's a good idea to bet the farm on MAC football superiority.

Reds4Life
12-15-2012, 09:52 AM
All of this realignment stuff has actually decreased my interest in college football. I am not a diehard, just a casual fan who will watch some games, and the flat out greed in all of this is truely disgusting.

jojo
12-15-2012, 01:34 PM
I wasn't being flippant with that comment. Just noting that you're a fan of the SEC, so I wouldn't expect you to have much interest in whatever this new conference will be called.

As to your example, I think it's unfair to single out UNM and Memphis because in all likelihood, that game wouldn't be televised anywhere other than locally. Same goes for Vandy v. Ole Miss, Minnesota v. Northwestern, Iowa State v. Kansas, Wake Forest v. Duke, etc... Every conference has its stinker games.

The real question here is not New Mexico v. Memphis, but Boise State v. Cincinnati, or SJSU v. Temple. For the casual fan, would that ever have a tenth of the appeal of an LSU v. 'Bama matchup? No way. Of course, that will be reflected in the television deal.

That being said, as a UC fan, I'm much more interested in games between UC's conference mates than I am other games. If two teams from UC's conference are playing, I'll watch. In fact, I'll watch most conference games over a B1G matchup for example (or at least flip back and forth). I'd imagine there are many other conference viewers that would as well. Fans of other conferences would have little to no interest, but that's expected.

UC vs BSU is the only match up in the proposed conference that would likely draw any interest outside of conference devotees. But I think on any given Saturday 80% of conference member fans would watch gmes from other conferences rather than match ups between their conference members.

chicoruiz
12-15-2012, 01:49 PM
I think it's reaching a point where being in the same conference for all sports is going to be the exception rather than the rule. If Cincinnati ends up in a cross-country conference for football and basketball, fine, but why tie all the other non-revenue sports to that same conference? Shouldn't there be different, geographically-based conferences for non-revenue sports?

Of course I think the whole cross-country conference thing may be a red herring designed to pressure the ACC into accepting Cincinnati and UConn...

Slyder
12-15-2012, 03:19 PM
The Catholic 7 have moved to leave as a unit. I fully expect them to go out and cherry pick basketball programs now. One name still being bandied about is Notre Dame, would the Domers go back on their deal with the ACC?

I take no joy in the death of the Big East and will always have fond memories of the conference. So many things could have gone right but in the end their focus was on the wrong sport and it cost the league everything.

Gallen5862
12-15-2012, 03:30 PM
http://espn.go.com/college-sports/story/_/id/8749700/seven-schools-decide-leave-big-east-pursue-new-basketball-framework

Seven schools leaving Big East

WASHINGTON -- The seven Big East schools that don't play FBS football have decided to leave the conference and pursue a new basketball framework.


The presidents of the seven schools made the announcement Saturday, saying it was a unanimous vote. The schools are: DePaul, Georgetown, Marquette, Providence, St. John's, Seton Hall and Villanova.


Big East spokesperson John Paquette told ESPN.com the seven schools will leave on June 30, 2015, per conference bylaws.

The move leaves Connecticut, a founding member of the league in 1979, Cincinnati and South Florida -- three current members with FBS football programs -- up in the air concerning their futures.

Slyder
12-15-2012, 03:32 PM
http://espn.go.com/college-sports/story/_/id/8749700/seven-schools-decide-leave-big-east-pursue-new-basketball-framework

Seven schools leaving Big East

WASHINGTON -- The seven Big East schools that don't play FBS football have decided to leave the conference and pursue a new basketball framework.


The presidents of the seven schools made the announcement Saturday, saying it was a unanimous vote. The schools are: DePaul, Georgetown, Marquette, Providence, St. John's, Seton Hall and Villanova.


Big East spokesperson John Paquette told ESPN.com the seven schools will leave on June 30, 2015, per conference bylaws.

The move leaves Connecticut, a founding member of the league in 1979, Cincinnati and South Florida -- three current members with FBS football programs -- up in the air concerning their futures.

I didn't think they'd wait that long to leave. I thought there were a couple provisions in there for a more immediate split.

IslandRed
12-15-2012, 04:36 PM
I didn't think they'd wait that long to leave. I thought there were a couple provisions in there for a more immediate split.

At least from what one or two people wrote on Twitter, the provisions of which you speak are the early exit fees -- and by giving the 27 months' notice they don't have to pay anything. I'm guessing there's no immediate financial benefit to getting out today that merits paying the full exit fee or litigating the issue. They may also be gambling that, as a bloc, they'll be sufficiently in the way of the remaining teams' move-forward plans that the rest of the league says "fine, just leave already."

Sea Ray
12-15-2012, 04:55 PM
At least from what one or two people wrote on Twitter, the provisions of which you speak are the early exit fees -- and by giving the 27 months' notice they don't have to pay anything. I'm guessing there's no immediate financial benefit to getting out today that merits paying the full exit fee or litigating the issue. They may also be gambling that, as a bloc, they'll be sufficiently in the way of the remaining teams' move-forward plans that the rest of the league says "fine, just leave already."

If nothing else those exit fees should be a financial boon to U Conn and UC.

wolfboy
12-15-2012, 05:37 PM
UC vs BSU is the only match up in the proposed conference that would likely draw any interest outside of conference devotees. But I think on any given Saturday 80% of conference member fans would watch gmes from other conferences rather than match ups between their conference members.

I don't think either one of us has anything other than anecdotal evidence to go on, but in my experience the more than casual fan is watching the conference game, unless it's an absolute stinker like Memphis v Temple. Either way, you make it sound like these guys have a choice. What do they do? Just dissolve football because they can't be the SEC? I can tell you that if they did, the SEC or B1G wouldn't get my money instead. If they go 4/16 and shut my school out, the considerable sum of money I spend toward UC football is probably going back to the NFL. I'll be done with college football and I'm sure a lot of other people will be as well.

Caveat Emperor
12-15-2012, 05:47 PM
The MAC generates zero revenue for football. Moreover, the MAC offers just about nothing in the way of strength of schedule. Just because the universe aligned this year for NIU football doesn't mean it's a good idea to bet the farm on MAC football superiority.

This new "best of the rest" conference will offer nothing by way of strength of schedule and will also generate next to no revenue for football.

Six to one, half a dozen to the other. You could put UConn and UC in the MAC and it would be a better conference than the "best of the rest" without those two.

No matter what UC does, it's not going to make TV money for football. It's a no win situation, so may as well avoid some complex solution.

jojo
12-15-2012, 07:07 PM
I don't think either one of us has anything other than anecdotal evidence to go on, but in my experience the more than casual fan is watching the conference game, unless it's an absolute stinker like Memphis v Temple. Either way, you make it sound like these guys have a choice. What do they do? Just dissolve football because they can't be the SEC? I can tell you that if they did, the SEC or B1G wouldn't get my money instead. If they go 4/16 and shut my school out, the considerable sum of money I spend toward UC football is probably going back to the NFL. I'll be done with college football and I'm sure a lot of other people will be as well.

In my experience, devout football fans gravitate to the best games. A fan will watch his team no matter what but the rest of the saturday he basically acts like a fun gun for hire.

The hypothetical conference above would consistently fail to offer and meat for the fan searching for his next game. Literally ESPN 12 might carry some of the conferences games but then again the Appalachian State game might preempt it...

dabvu2498
12-15-2012, 07:15 PM
The best of the rest isn't demonstrably better than the MAC -- especially if UC goes to the MAC w/ UConn & USF in tow.

Using the logic of geography, USF should join the Sun Belt or C-USA. They're better leagues than the MAC anyway.

wolfboy
12-15-2012, 07:17 PM
This new "best of the rest" conference will offer nothing by way of strength of schedule and will also generate next to no revenue for football.

Six to one, half a dozen to the other. You could put UConn and UC in the MAC and it would be a better conference than the "best of the rest" without those two.

No matter what UC does, it's not going to make TV money for football. It's a no win situation, so may as well avoid some complex solution.

It will generate significantly more revenue than the MAC. If I have a chance tomorrow, I'll link articles saying as much.

wolfboy
12-15-2012, 07:19 PM
In my experience, devout football fans gravitate to the best games. A fan will watch his team no matter what but the rest of the saturday he basically acts like a fun gun for hire.

The hypothetical conference above would consistently fail to offer and meat for the fan searching for his next game. Literally ESPN 12 might carry some of the conferences games but then again the Appalachian State game might preempt it...

In my experience, devout fans want to know how conference mates are playing. As to the ESPN 12 comment, not really sure what that adds to the conversation.

jojo
12-15-2012, 07:25 PM
In my experience, devout fans want to know how conference mates are playing. As to the ESPN 12 comment, not really sure what that adds to the conversation.

It makes a specific point that is very relevant. Devout fans can check the internet to see how conference mates fared. They can spend their attention watching actual compelling football. And make no mistake, given the hypothetical conference outlined, there is not enough devout fandom to get many games on tv.

nmculbreth
12-15-2012, 10:30 PM
This new "best of the rest" conference will offer nothing by way of strength of schedule and will also generate next to no revenue for football.

Six to one, half a dozen to the other. You could put UConn and UC in the MAC and it would be a better conference than the "best of the rest" without those two.

No matter what UC does, it's not going to make TV money for football. It's a no win situation, so may as well avoid some complex solution.

I respectfully disagree.

I think the inclusion of schools like Boise State and BYU makes the best of the rest conference demonstrably better than what the MAC offers and most of the programs being mentioned offer far more growth potential than any team currently residing in the MAC. If nothing else consider the disparity in marketplaces; on one side you've got Tampa, Orlando, Philadelphia and San Diego and on the other you've got rust belt cities like Toledo, Akron and Buffalo. Not to mention the fact that the quality of basketball with UConn, UC, BYU, UNLV, SDSU, New Mexico and Temple would be roughly 1000x better than what you'd find in the MAC, or frankly what the Catholic league will probably be able to offer.

Ultimately I think UC will end up in a better situation before the Big East disintegration comes to pass but they've also got to prepare for the worst and IMHO the proposed best of the rest is less awful than the MAC.

Assembly Hall
12-16-2012, 03:55 PM
Ultimately I think UC will end up in a better situation before the Big East disintegration comes to pass but they've also got to prepare for the worst and IMHO the proposed best of the rest is less awful than the MAC.

I agree with that comment.

The next dominoes that fall will come from the ACC. It will be interesting to see how it all works out for UC.

Chip R
12-17-2012, 09:03 AM
I saw this on another message board and they were from Saturday morning and nothing's happened yet so take it with a grain of salt.


The following tweets are from Dave Reynolds, Bradley MBB beat writer. Take out of them what you will as he is the only source I've found on this and I'm personally wary until someone else provides true confirmation, especially from any of the schools involved. If true, this could be some serious breaking news...

10:43am - I'm hearing that announcements on Creighton and Evansville leaving Valley are coming today.

10:44am - Creighton going to the Catholic conference, Evansville to the Horizon.

10:44am - Valpo, UW-Milwaukee, Loyola, UIC, Oral Roberts among candidates to replace them in the MVC.

wolfboy
12-17-2012, 11:22 AM
I think the following link addresses the points raised by both CE and jojo:

http://www.sportsmediawatch.com/2012/12/college-football-wrap-tv-ratings-for-almost-every-game-this-season/

As to jojo's point, clearly the teams in this new conference won't get as many appearances as other conferences; however, they will still get more television exposure than the everyone outside of the big 5.

I think the link also supports two points I've made: (i) that people do in fact watch these teams; and, (ii) that the big 5 conferences have games that few people watch. Cincinnati and Boise, the two flagship programs for this new conference had respectable ratings for their televised games, ranging from 1.0 to 2.7. Granted, this is nowhere near the premier match ups from the power 5 conferences, but no one is claiming that this new conference stacks up with those guys. If you add in BYU, that's another team that can bring a respectable rating. Outside of the Pitt game, even USF did pretty well in its televised games.

Are these ratings on par with premier SEC matchups? Heck no. At the same time, they're hardly "ESPN 12" material. I know you don't care for these teams jojo, but I think these ratings show that at least some people do. There is some value in a media deal for this conference, especially since NBC is desperate for inventory and it's the only conference on the market right now. Will it approach anything remotely close to what even the ACC gets? No way. Then again, as the sixth best conference in college football, it will get the sixth best contract.

As to CE's point about the MAC, I think these ratings show just how terrible a move that would be for UC. The MAC championship game, which sent NIU to a BCS bowl, only garnered a .9 rating. No one cares about MAC football at all, and UC would destroy its football program if it joined up with the MAC. Even with the Cinderella story of NIU this year, no one really watched.

I think the best move for UC right now, if they can negotiate it, is to go all sports with the new C7 league, and go football only with the teams mentioned in the DeCourcy article. The C7 bball contract should be fairly lucrative, and they can add icing to the cake with the new football conference. In the mean time, keep winning, upgrade facilities, and see where you land when realignment crops up again.

Caveat Emperor
12-17-2012, 02:13 PM
The total value for a "New" BE media package (including Boise, prior to the defection of LOU and the catholic split) was $40-$60m per year. Assuming those losses push the deal to the low end ($40m), that works out to $2.8-$3.3M per school in a 12 or 14 team league. Again, it's better than any other deal out there, but not demonstrably better than what UC, UCONN and USF could do if they just added themselves, as a bloc, to some other conference. Every solution is bad, the question UC needs to ask is whether they want to make no money flying cross country or no money travelling locally.

Also there's this -- everyone knows UC is looking to bolt at first chance. There's a chance no conference will have them (especially a conference looking to lure BYU) if UC isn't willing to sign a Grant of Rights. That would be suicide for UC athletics.

ETA: The scenario you're advocating also assumes the catholic league would have UC. That's not a guarantee, especially if they're trying to lure Xavier.

Chip R
12-17-2012, 02:36 PM
ETA: The scenario you're advocating also assumes the catholic league would have UC. That's not a guarantee, especially if they're trying to lure Xavier.

It'll be tough to lure any A-10 teams away from there since they just signed a deal with 3 networks for $40M over 8 years.

Brutus
12-17-2012, 02:41 PM
It'll be tough to lure any A-10 teams away from there since they just signed a deal with 3 networks for $40M over 8 years.

That's only $350k per school. That won't be hard to lure entire a team away...at all.

Boston Red
12-17-2012, 03:04 PM
It'll be tough to lure any A-10 teams away from there since they just signed a deal with 3 networks for $40M over 8 years.

Xavier will say yes before they can even finish getting the question out.

Caveat Emperor
12-17-2012, 03:34 PM
Yeah -- that's a no-brainer switch for Xavier, and I'd be shocked if the Catholic League doesn't get more money from a media deal than the A10.

Mack and Bobinski are already dreaming of championship games at MSG and hosting Georgetown, Marquette and 'Nova every season.

jojo
12-17-2012, 03:36 PM
I think the following link addresses the points raised by both CE and jojo:

http://www.sportsmediawatch.com/2012/12/college-football-wrap-tv-ratings-for-almost-every-game-this-season/

As to jojo's point, clearly the teams in this new conference won't get as many appearances as other conferences; however, they will still get more television exposure than the everyone outside of the big 5.

I think the link also supports two points I've made: (i) that people do in fact watch these teams; and, (ii) that the big 5 conferences have games that few people watch. Cincinnati and Boise, the two flagship programs for this new conference had respectable ratings for their televised games, ranging from 1.0 to 2.7. Granted, this is nowhere near the premier match ups from the power 5 conferences, but no one is claiming that this new conference stacks up with those guys. If you add in BYU, that's another team that can bring a respectable rating. Outside of the Pitt game, even USF did pretty well in its televised games.

Are these ratings on par with premier SEC matchups? Heck no. At the same time, they're hardly "ESPN 12" material. I know you don't care for these teams jojo, but I think these ratings show that at least some people do. There is some value in a media deal for this conference, especially since NBC is desperate for inventory and it's the only conference on the market right now. Will it approach anything remotely close to what even the ACC gets? No way. Then again, as the sixth best conference in college football, it will get the sixth best contract.

As to CE's point about the MAC, I think these ratings show just how terrible a move that would be for UC. The MAC championship game, which sent NIU to a BCS bowl, only garnered a .9 rating. No one cares about MAC football at all, and UC would destroy its football program if it joined up with the MAC. Even with the Cinderella story of NIU this year, no one really watched.

I think the best move for UC right now, if they can negotiate it, is to go all sports with the new C7 league, and go football only with the teams mentioned in the DeCourcy article. The C7 bball contract should be fairly lucrative, and they can add icing to the cake with the new football conference. In the mean time, keep winning, upgrade facilities, and see where you land when realignment crops up again.

I think UC should shoot higher.

Caveat Emperor
12-17-2012, 03:56 PM
I think UC should shoot higher.

I agree (you associate with mid-majors, you're going to inevitably get lumped in with mid-majors), but no one else wants them. They either would have to go independent (and get no TV money at all) or join some conference full of bad programs.

wolfboy
12-17-2012, 04:38 PM
I think UC should shoot higher.

I hope and believe that they are jojo; however, they still have to deal with the current reality.


I read this Dennis Dodd article today: http://www.cbssports.com/collegefootball/story/21414150/as-big-east-crumbles-race-begins-to-be-power-conference-no-6

It has a few interesting tidbits about UC:


• The intentions of Cincinnati, Connecticut, the ACC and possibly more. So far, the two schools have not been thrown lifelines to BCS leagues, but are on record as being willing to jump. Cincinnati has a surprising amount of juice at this point. It has been to a BCS bowl. It draws surprisingly good TV ratings in basketball. Call it the best player left on the board.

"Cincinnati is more valuable than what is being let on," an industry source said.

Caveat Emperor
12-17-2012, 06:02 PM
Per Bret McMurphy, UC will have a press conference tomorrow afternoon to reveal plans and concept drawings for an expanded Nippert Stadium.

paintmered
12-17-2012, 06:07 PM
Cool, can't wait to see the renderings.

Gallen5862
04-22-2013, 06:44 PM
http://espn.go.com/college-football/story/_/id/9200081/acc-schools-ok-media-rights-deal-sources-say

Media deal OK'd to solidify ACC

PASADENA, Calif. -- The Atlantic Coast Conference presidents approved Monday a grant of media rights for the league through 2026-27, effectively halting the exodus of any schools to other conferences.

The move solidifies the future of the ACC, which had several teams that had been speculated as targets of the Big Ten.

The ACC's grant of rights makes it untenable financially for a school to leave, guaranteeing in the 14 years of the deal that a school's media rights, including revenue, for all home games would remain with the ACC regardless of the school's affiliation.



"This announcement further highlights the continued solidarity and commitment by our member institutions," ACC commissioner John Swofford said in a statement. "The Council of Presidents has shown tremendous leadership in insuring the ACC is extremely well positioned with unlimited potential."

IslandRed
04-22-2013, 08:57 PM
The scorecard:

Happy -- John Swofford... ACC presidents... Notre Dame, Louisville, Pittsburgh and Syracuse... basketball-first people... fans of most ACC schools... everyone tired of hearing about conference realignment.

Disappointed -- Jim Delany (if the B1G really had designs on certain ACC schools as rumored)... UConn and Cincinnati... some NC State and Virginia Tech fans who hoped this whole mess would land them in the SEC... the Florida State fans who have never liked the ACC.

WVRed
04-22-2013, 09:13 PM
The scorecard:

Happy -- John Swofford... ACC presidents... Notre Dame, Louisville, Pittsburgh and Syracuse... basketball-first people... fans of most ACC schools... everyone tired of hearing about conference realignment.

Disappointed -- Jim Delany (if the B1G really had designs on certain ACC schools as rumored)... UConn and Cincinnati... some NC State and Virginia Tech fans who hoped this whole mess would land them in the SEC... the Florida State fans who have never liked the ACC.

It goes into effect in 2014, which means if the Big 12, B1G, or SEC wants to get a deal done, it has to do so before then.

It can still happen, but I have my doubts.

Boston Red
04-22-2013, 09:44 PM
It goes into effect in 2014

It's effective immediately.

http://www.theacc.com/genrel/042213aaa.html

April 22, 2013

Greensboro, N.C. - The Atlantic Coast Conference Council of Presidents announced today that each of the current and future 15-member institutions has signed a grant of media rights, effective immediately.

KronoRed
04-22-2013, 10:57 PM
If those schools wanted out or thought they might have a shot elsewhere they would not have signed this deal.

UC gets screwed now but they can probably win the Big East/whatever every year from now on.

wolfboy
04-22-2013, 11:06 PM
I largely agree that the GOR is a big barrier to further expansion; however, I sincerely believe that the 5 conferences will not stay at 10/12/14/14/15. Those are just weird numbers for conferences that are on relatively equal footing.

Caveat Emperor
04-23-2013, 12:50 AM
UC gets screwed now but they can probably win the Big East/whatever every year from now on.

The money, exposure and bowl-access disparity between the power conferences and the non-power will relegate UC to MAC-level recruits almost immediately.

They'll lose any dominance over their new conference as soon as the current crop of recruits departs, IMO.

wolfboy
04-23-2013, 04:05 PM
The money, exposure and bowl-access disparity between the power conferences and the non-power will relegate UC to MAC-level recruits almost immediately.

They'll lose any dominance over their new conference as soon as the current crop of recruits departs, IMO.

Complete b.s.

KronoRed
04-23-2013, 07:35 PM
The money, exposure and bowl-access disparity between the power conferences and the non-power will relegate UC to MAC-level recruits almost immediately.

They'll lose any dominance over their new conference as soon as the current crop of recruits departs, IMO.

If they can be aggressive in their OOC scheduling they could pull off what Boise has, kings of a crap conference with a few big games a year.

Slyder
04-23-2013, 09:40 PM
It's effective immediately.

http://www.theacc.com/genrel/042213aaa.html

April 22, 2013

Greensboro, N.C. - The Atlantic Coast Conference Council of Presidents announced today that each of the current and future 15-member institutions has signed a grant of media rights, effective immediately.

I really cannot believe that schools like FSU and Clemson are linking themselves to the fifth best conference when they know what their direct competitors are going to be able to make in B1G, SEC, and to a lesser extent Big 12 and PAC. They have already (arguably) sold everything they've got and are scheduled to make at least 7-8 mil less than Big 12 (and that doesn't even include Big 12 Tier 3, which is an additional revenue stream). They are pretty much locking themselves in to a ship made of deadwood that is barely sea worthy.

I think this ensures a 3x20 future, as SEC will CRUSH anything an "ACC network" will produce, B1G is pretty much locked in unopposed in the midwest, and PAC is completely unopposed from Colorado west. By the time these GoR (both the Big 12 and ACC) run out those networks will be fully implemented and running at peak effectiveness. ACC and Big 12 will not be able to compete.

I personally expect (hope):
Texas, Oklahoma, and little brothers head west (KSU and Baylor also?).
WVU, TCU, Va Tech, UNC (or State) to SEC.
UVa, UNC (or Someone like Mizzou), Duke, Kansas, and others to B1G.
The scraps bind together to try and be a "best of the rest" conference. I don't see Big 12 or ACC being left in tact one or the other name will go on but it will look like the red headed step child with a mix-match of teams that don't really fit any of the big 3.

wolfboy
04-23-2013, 10:13 PM
If they can be aggressive in their OOC scheduling they could pull off what Boise has, kings of a crap conference with a few big games a year.

Exactly. The notion that UC is somehow going to drop off a cliff in recruiting with guys like TT, Eddie Gran, and Robert Prunty is just looney. The notion that they can't regularly win a conference with the likes of USF, ECU, and Houston is equally as looney.

Boston Red
04-23-2013, 11:37 PM
I think this ensures a 3x20 future

A quite distant future.

IslandRed
04-24-2013, 10:34 AM
I really cannot believe that schools like FSU and Clemson are linking themselves to the fifth best conference when they know what their direct competitors are going to be able to make in B1G, SEC, and to a lesser extent Big 12 and PAC. They have already (arguably) sold everything they've got and are scheduled to make at least 7-8 mil less than Big 12 (and that doesn't even include Big 12 Tier 3, which is an additional revenue stream). They are pretty much locking themselves in to a ship made of deadwood that is barely sea worthy.

I know a lot of FSU fans are disappointed, and while I was lukewarm on a jump to the Big 12, I was hoping there was some fire behind the smoke of FSU and the B1G talking. Still... if/when the ACC Network gets going (and there's no reason it shouldn't succeed what with the league's demographic footprint), they shouldn't be any worse off financially than the Big 12.

But mostly, FSU and Clemson were stuck. By most reports, the Big 12 wasn't going to invite them unless the ACC broke apart, which wasn't going to happen unless the B1G and SEC raided the ACC first. The linchpin was the B1G and in the end, the schools they wanted didn't want to leave the ACC.

WVRed
04-24-2013, 10:55 AM
I know a lot of FSU fans are disappointed, and while I was lukewarm on a jump to the Big 12, I was hoping there was some fire behind the smoke of FSU and the B1G talking. Still... if/when the ACC Network gets going (and there's no reason it shouldn't succeed what with the league's demographic footprint), they shouldn't be any worse off financially than the Big 12.

But mostly, FSU and Clemson were stuck. By most reports, the Big 12 wasn't going to invite them unless the ACC broke apart, which wasn't going to happen unless the B1G and SEC raided the ACC first. The linchpin was the B1G and in the end, the schools they wanted didn't want to leave the ACC.

What's really scary is the best conference in terms of money and stability is the one who hasn't taken the media rights from their prospective teams. (SEC) I think a lot of that has to do with the media deal from ESPN keeping the conference locked in for the foreseeable future. It would make sense for the Big 12 to target LSU or Arkansas if that were the case.

I thought the Big 12 was waiting to see what happened with the Maryland lawsuit. If anything, this move was a precaution to Maryland winning and not having to pay the buyout and the other schools becoming defacto free agents.

WMR
04-24-2013, 11:19 AM
You know how much the SEC charges/penalizes a school that wants to leave?


0.

LOL.

Caveat Emperor
04-24-2013, 12:42 PM
Exactly. The notion that UC is somehow going to drop off a cliff in recruiting with guys like TT, Eddie Gran, and Robert Prunty is just looney. The notion that they can't regularly win a conference with the likes of USF, ECU, and Houston is equally as looney.

They'll drop off a cliff because they'll be facing a financial disparity of, at minimum, 10-1 over every major conference before ticket 1 is even sold. Boise State and TCU never had to compete on that unequal of a playing field when they were fighting the good fight as non-BCS upstarts.

The money disparity is mind-boggling -- it's the functional equivalent of UC being a Motel 6 at $30 v. EVERY OTHER SCHOOL in the 5 major conferences being the Waldorf-Astoria at $300 per night.

That's the difference you're selling to recruits. That's the financial imbalance you're facing when trying to retain coaches and assistants. That's the disparity you're competing against that is used to build new buidlings, shiny new weight rooms and locker rooms, invest in new technology to aid training, etc.

I'm sure UC will be very competitive in the new "AAC" -- but what is the competition level of the AAC going to be? I'm suspecting it'll fall somewhere around the current MWC (better than the MAC, but at least two or three degrees below the PAC 12, Big 12, Big 10, SEC, ACC). You'll have a tough time bringing top-tier opponents on home-home scheduling arrangements, meaning lots of road games if you want a quality OOC schedule.

Can UC continue to be a force nationally? Sure, anything is possible. But, TCU and Boise State are the outliers here. For every 1 of them, there are 30 other D1 programs at lower levels who simply lack the resources and recruits to win anything more than their conference schedule.

wolfboy
04-24-2013, 01:33 PM
They'll drop off a cliff because they'll be facing a financial disparity of, at minimum, 10-1 over every major conference before ticket 1 is even sold. Boise State and TCU never had to compete on that unequal of a playing field when they were fighting the good fight as non-BCS upstarts.

The money disparity is mind-boggling -- it's the functional equivalent of UC being a Motel 6 at $30 v. EVERY OTHER SCHOOL in the 5 major conferences being the Waldorf-Astoria at $300 per night.

Everyone is aware of the financial disparity.



That's the difference you're selling to recruits.

You sell winning and exposure to recruits. While the AAC t.v. contract is short on cash, it's not short on exposure. In addition, UC still has the ability to capture the access bowl for the playoff. In fact, there's little reason why they can't be in competition for that spot every year with a school like Boise. After a few more years of cellar dwelling, do you honestly think a recruit is going to think they have a better chance of being in the playoff at Indiana, Minnesota, or Pitt than at UC?

Even still, you suggest that UC will immediately be relegated to MAC level recruits, which is absolutely ridiculous. Perhaps they drop down to MWC level recruits, but in what universe is that equivalent to what the MAC is able to land?


That's the financial imbalance you're facing when trying to retain coaches and assistants. That's the disparity you're competing against that is used to build new buidlings, shiny new weight rooms and locker rooms, invest in new technology to aid training, etc.

While this is true in part, it's not a death sentence. Time will tell, but I don't see TT leaving because UC can't pay him.


I'm sure UC will be very competitive in the new "AAC" -- but what is the competition level of the AAC going to be? I'm suspecting it'll fall somewhere around the current MWC (better than the MAC, but at least two or three degrees below the PAC 12, Big 12, Big 10, SEC, ACC). You'll have a tough time bringing top-tier opponents on home-home scheduling arrangements, meaning lots of road games if you want a quality OOC schedule.

It's better than the MWC top to bottom, and there's no reason the conference can't capture the access bowl in the playoff year after year. As to the home-home scheduling agreements, not buying it for a second. Look around at some of the home and home arrangements schools in the AAC have landed just in recent months.


Can UC continue to be a force nationally? Sure, anything is possible. But, TCU and Boise State are the outliers here. For every 1 of them, there are 30 other D1 programs at lower levels who simply lack the resources and recruits to win anything more than their conference schedule.

According to your post above, UC won't even be able to compete within its own conference once its current recruits are gone. :rolleyes: Okay. Spoken like a true Xavier fan.

Fil3232
04-24-2013, 01:45 PM
It's better than the MWC top to bottom, and there's no reason the conference can't capture the access bowl in the playoff year after year. As to the home-home scheduling agreements, not buying it for a second. Look around at some of the home and home arrangements schools in the AAC have landed just in recent months.

Speaking strictly in terms of capturing the access spot into the College Football Playoff, I don't think it would be in UC's best interest for the AAC to be all that good top to bottom. The 'Boise model' is predicated in no small part on annual 8-0 conference records. Having a clean record has proven to go a lot further than winning a deeper league with 2+ total losses in CFB.

Edit: This is under the current polling and BCS ranking method. If/when an RPI-like device is implemented to rank teams for the playoff, conference strength obviously becomes critical. Should be interesting...

wolfboy
04-24-2013, 01:53 PM
Speaking strictly in terms of capturing the access spot into the College Football Playoff, I don't think it would be in UC's best interest for the AAC to be all that good top to bottom. The 'Boise model' is predicated in no small part on annual 8-0 conference records. Having a clean record has proven to go a lot further than winning a deeper league with 2+ total losses in CFB.

You make a good point; however, I think the top AAC team will have the benefit of a better strength of schedule. If the AAC beats itself up, then Boise likely lands the top spot. If a team from the AAC can separate itself from the rest of the conference, I think it gets the nod over Boise, even if Boise runs the table in the MWC.

Still, my point stands that you have a better chance of getting that spot as a top team in the AAC than you do on a bottom feeder team from the B1G, SEC, ACC, etc....

Caveat Emperor
04-24-2013, 02:05 PM
Everyone is aware of the financial disparity.

Everyone is aware, but not everyone is willing to accept the extreme disadvantage it places on every school not in a major conference.


You sell winning and exposure to recruits. While the AAC t.v. contract is short on cash, it's not short on exposure. In addition, UC still has the ability to capture the access bowl for the playoff. In fact, there's little reason why they can't be in competition for that spot every year with a school like Boise. After a few more years of cellar dwelling, do you honestly think a recruit is going to think they have a better chance of being in the playoff at Indiana, Minnesota, or Pitt than at UC?

The ESPN deal provides that the network will broadcast 65 football games from the AAC every season -- but it doesn't specify the manner in which those games will be broadcast, other than to say they'll be on the "ESPN Family of Networks." That can (and I expect will) include internet-only ESPN3 "broadcasts" and regional coverage. Additionally, the contract is said to allow ESPN to farm out coverage of certain games to other local providers (such as FSN).

In reality, I expect the AAC will have relatively few truly "national" broadcasts -- mostly on weeknights like the MAC currently receives.

We'll have to see how it actually plays out, but I'm guessing that the "exposure" of the AAC will be somewhere around the level of what C-USA had previously. If that is the case, it'll be an uphill battle convincing recruits that they're better off (for getting noticed and being seen on TV) at an AAC schoo like Cincinnati v. a lower-tier big-conference school like Minn or Indiana.

Also, it's important to note that the "Access Bowl" that the AAC is fighting for (along with C-USA, MWC & MAC) is not the same as the playoff you're referring to. In reality, the odds of an AAC (or, really, any non-power conference team) getting a playoff slot is fairly remote, as they will only go to the Top 4 teams in college football.

The other thing to remember about the AAC's shot at an "Access Bowl" is this: It isn't earned on the field, per se. In every other conference, the shot at a major bowl is earned by Ws and Ls. You win the SEC/Pac12/ACC/Big10/SEC, you make a big bowl. In the AAC, you not only have to win the conference, you also have to be ranked ahead of everyone else in the "Group of 5" -- meaning that an undefeated UC team, champion of the AAC, could be bumped by an undefeated Boise State based on rankings alone. Or, worse, a 1-loss UC team (champion of the AAC) could be bumped by an undefeated Akron team that happens to hold a higher ranking.

You tell me what's easier to sell a recruit on: Come here, win your games, and play in a big bowl OR Come here, win your games, and hope the BCS computers and human pollsters like you better than some other school.

That's not even getting into the idea of being unable to sell kids on quality of oppositions they'll be facing (Getting to play in an 80% empty Superdome v. Tulane ain't exactly the same as selling a kid on playing against Michigan in the Big House or getting to visit the Swamp in Gainsville).


It's better than the MWC top to bottom, and there's no reason the conference can't capture the access bowl in the playoff year after year. As to the home-home scheduling agreements, not buying it for a second. Look around at some of the home and home arrangements schools in the AAC have landed just in recent months.

It's better than the MWC, but not by much. Both have strong flagships that are roughly equal in UC and Boise (advantage Boise, due to BCS success and rankings), sold mid-tier programs in UCONN/USF v. Fresno State / Nevada (clear advantage AAC), a service academy in Navy & Air Force (wash), and a whole lot of awful down at the bottom (wash). It comes down to what bad programs do you like more -- SMU, Tulane, Memphis, UCF, Temple or Colorado State, Wyoming, UNLV, New Mexico, SDSU.

I won't fault you for picking the AAC, but it's not like we're comparing a Bugatti to Yugo here.

As for scheduling -- it's all recent. A lot of these negotiations have been weeks/months in the making. Check back with me in 2-3 years and see how many home-home deals the AAC is getting with major college opponents.


According to your post above, UC won't even be able to compete within its own conference once its current recruits are gone. :rolleyes: Okay. Spoken like a true Xavier fan.

I said they wouldn't be able to dominate, not that they wouldn't be able to compete.

And yeah, I'm a Xavier hoops fan, but I've been a (paying, attending) UC football fan for a long time too. I like college football and want UC to be part of the landscape, but I'm also not delusional.

Fil3232
04-24-2013, 02:22 PM
Still, my point stands that you have a better chance of getting that spot as a top team in the AAC than you do on a bottom feeder team from the B1G, SEC, ACC, etc....

No doubt about that.

The rub (to Caveat's earlier point) is those perenial bottom feeders from power conferences are assured to be in a position to hire away top coaching talent from the lower ranks largely because of their annual TV revenue advantages.

UC was ultimately chasing revenue equality with upper-tier CFB programs through ACC/B12 membership. That ship has seemingly sailed, all but ensuring UC will be a stepping stone program over the long haul. It's impossible to consistently compete on a national level when a school can't afford to keep elite coaches.

wolfboy
04-24-2013, 04:17 PM
Everyone is aware, but not everyone is willing to accept the extreme disadvantage it places on every school not in a major conference.

Again, you'll get no disagreement that the deal is abysmal on the financial side for UC.



The ESPN deal provides that the network will broadcast 65 football games from the AAC every season -- but it doesn't specify the manner in which those games will be broadcast, other than to say they'll be on the "ESPN Family of Networks." That can (and I expect will) include internet-only ESPN3 "broadcasts" and regional coverage. Additionally, the contract is said to allow ESPN to farm out coverage of certain games to other local providers (such as FSN).

In reality, I expect the AAC will have relatively few truly "national" broadcasts -- mostly on weeknights like the MAC currently receives.

We'll have to see how it actually plays out, but I'm guessing that the "exposure" of the AAC will be somewhere around the level of what C-USA had previously. If that is the case, it'll be an uphill battle convincing recruits that they're better off (for getting noticed and being seen on TV) at an AAC schoo like Cincinnati v. a lower-tier big-conference school like Minn or Indiana.


You're right about the t.v. deal, but this is hardly any worse than what the Big East had previously. Not only that, but Cincinnati is poised to be the marquee team out of the AAC, so they can expect to get many if not most of the prime slots out of that deal. You make it sound like UC can expect to have every game on FSN or ESPN3. Simply not going to happen. Also, the deal will give the conference a lot of spots during the week, with some scattered throughout the weekend. Again, how is that worse than the exposure they had under the prior Big East t.v. deal? (at least in football)



Also, it's important to note that the "Access Bowl" that the AAC is fighting for (along with C-USA, MWC & MAC) is not the same as the playoff you're referring to. In reality, the odds of an AAC (or, really, any non-power conference team) getting a playoff slot is fairly remote, as they will only go to the Top 4 teams in college football.

The other thing to remember about the AAC's shot at an "Access Bowl" is this: It isn't earned on the field, per se. In every other conference, the shot at a major bowl is earned by Ws and Ls. You win the SEC/Pac12/ACC/Big10/SEC, you make a big bowl. In the AAC, you not only have to win the conference, you also have to be ranked ahead of everyone else in the "Group of 5" -- meaning that an undefeated UC team, champion of the AAC, could be bumped by an undefeated Boise State based on rankings alone. Or, worse, a 1-loss UC team (champion of the AAC) could be bumped by an undefeated Akron team that happens to hold a higher ranking.

You tell me what's easier to sell a recruit on: Come here, win your games, and play in a big bowl OR Come here, win your games, and hope the BCS computers and human pollsters like you better than some other school.

That's not even getting into the idea of being unable to sell kids on quality of oppositions they'll be facing (Getting to play in an 80% empty Superdome v. Tulane ain't exactly the same as selling a kid on playing against Michigan in the Big House or getting to visit the Swamp in Gainsville).

Do you think kids were sold on Boise because games against UNLV were the epitome of excitement? No. Boise's pitch to recruits was that they'd get them to a BCS Bowl. That's the exact same pitch UC can offer here. No, the access bowl isn't a guaranteed playoff spot, but if the playoff had been in place in '09, UC would have been in it. Not to mention that the access bowl is the equivalent of the non-NC BCS bowls under the existing system. Do you think kids shrug off the idea of playing in a BCS bowl?

I also completely disagree with the notion that it's easier to reach an access/playoff bowl in a power conference. Is it easier for Ohio State, Alabama, Oregon, Florida State, or Oklahoma? Sure, but your chances of reaching any noteworthy bowl at schools like Indiana, Illinois, Northwestern, Boston College, etc... are next to none. UC is not and will never recruit against the first group of schools, but has always recruited against the second. UC can still offer a better chance at a playoff or a big time bowl than any of those programs.




It's better than the MWC, but not by much. Both have strong flagships that are roughly equal in UC and Boise (advantage Boise, due to BCS success and rankings), sold mid-tier programs in UCONN/USF v. Fresno State / Nevada (clear advantage AAC), a service academy in Navy & Air Force (wash), and a whole lot of awful down at the bottom (wash). It comes down to what bad programs do you like more -- SMU, Tulane, Memphis, UCF, Temple or Colorado State, Wyoming, UNLV, New Mexico, SDSU.

I won't fault you for picking the AAC, but it's not like we're comparing a Bugatti to Yugo here.

I agree that the AAC is pretty close to the MWC, but only because Boise is a solid flagship program. Programs like Fresno State and Nevada are much more comparable to programs like UCF and SMU, but the AAC also has USF, UConn, ECU, and Tulsa.

In either event, there's really no question that in most years, that access bowl will go to either the AAC or the MWC. I like the chances there.


As for scheduling -- it's all recent. A lot of these negotiations have been weeks/months in the making. Check back with me in 2-3 years and see how many home-home deals the AAC is getting with major college opponents.

Remains to be seen. There's nothing even in the last few months to indicate that home and home matchups with power conference teams won't be possible going forward.


I said they wouldn't be able to dominate, not that they wouldn't be able to compete.

I don't think I read your post wrong. You referenced an immediate retreat to MAC level recruits and a complete inability to dominate the AAC. I disagree entirely.


And yeah, I'm a Xavier hoops fan, but I've been a (paying, attending) UC football fan for a long time too. I like college football and want UC to be part of the landscape, but I'm also not delusional.

Errrr....uhhh....so you're one of those. I'll defer to the Rules of Evidence... :D


RULE 616. Methods of impeachment

In addition to other methods, a witness may be impeached by any of the following
methods:

(A)Bias.
Bias, prejudice, interest, or any motive to misrepresent may be shown to
impeach the witness either by examination of the witness or by extrinsic evidence.

IslandRed
04-24-2013, 05:10 PM
I thought the Big 12 was waiting to see what happened with the Maryland lawsuit. If anything, this move was a precaution to Maryland winning and not having to pay the buyout and the other schools becoming defacto free agents.

That was what I thought last summer. The recent speculation, though, said the Big 12 wasn't going to move unless the other leagues gutted the ACC first.

But yes, I fully understand why the ACC wanted the GoR, and why ESPN was insisting on it before getting serious about discussions for more money/ACC Network etc. From what I've read, most every other school would have signed the GoR long ago. FSU has been the holdout. FSU giving in to the GoR tells me it either loves the potential of the ACC Network enough to bet on it, or they just didn't have anywhere else to go. (Or both.) And since the league will make considerably more going forward with the GoR-based deal than without it, there was a substantial cost to continuing the holdout.

Having said that, I would love to have been a fly on the wall to know how far those FSU/B1G discussions actually went.