I'm More Convinced Than Ever: UConn & UVA to the B1G

[Fishy]

" Dam, been staring at my screen door for the last 15 min. and I'm not receiving anything! Can you help me?

We'll need some mushrooms and maybe just a touch of bourbon.

Then, we wait.

 

[billybud]

It has always been that ESPN has said that they would consider the ACC network after the SEC network was off and running...three-four years or so down the road.

If the SEC network has problems, then you will not see an ACC network.

 

[White Dwarf]

Not going to happen

VA politicians gonna politic.

 

[SouthronCross]

Question: In your scenario where "the SEC and the B1G will carve up the ACC" what to do with the elephant in the room a.k.a. UNC? The Tarheels are the lynchpin of the ACC & have been rumored in many threads as pairing with UVa to the B1G. How to separate the links of UVa-V.Tech & UNC-NC State? Not trying to throw a bucket of water on your enthusiasm, just a reality check.

I do not believe that either UNC or UVA would be the first school to depart the ACC. You are correct in saying that the two have been mentioned as a pair that Jim Delany (UNC alum) would like to see join his league.

Separating UVA-VPI would be no issue, should the ACC ever implode. The Wahoos were never a fan of the Hokies being allowed to join the ACC, but, the VA state government intervened on VPI's behalf, and, the deal was done. Separating Carolina and State would be much more difficult, as the NC General Assembly, and, the UNC BOGs, take a very dim view on the two schools being in separate leagues.

 

[SouthronCross]

UNC will not leave the ACC unless it has to because 1) it has power in the ACC that it would not have in the B1G or SEC and 2) moving out of the ACC would fracture UNC between the academic pro BIG folks and the athletic pro SEC folks.

Absolutely spot on. Not to mention, a large number of big money athletic donors are pro-SEC as well.

Two other issues is what would happen to Duke as the UNC/Duke relationship generates a lot of money (TV and alumni) for both schools and the possible threat to UNC athletics should UNC go to the B1G enabling NC State to go to the SEC.

Another good point, but, when push comes to shove, UNC will look out for No 1 first and foremost. Just speaking for myself, I care more about our rivalries with UVA and NCSU, than anything to do with Duke. Although, UNC might want Duke included in any move to the B1G that they might make.

UVA aligned closely to UNC; but, should the ACC fold, they lean more towards the B1G than the SEC, just look at the 2012 presidential election map for Virginia to see why. I can see V Tech going to the SEC as they have some football cred and would give the SEC a foothold in the DC area. But, the Commonwealth of Virginia used a lot of weight to get V Tech into the ACC and I am not sure they would support a departure unless absolutely necessary.

As has been stated on here many times, the UVA Board of Visitors will NEVER allow their institution to join the SEC. UVA would go B1G, VPI to the SEC, and, both would have what they want.

 

[SouthronCross]

UNC will have to make a choice: either remain as the lynchpin in a weakened ACC or accept an invitation to the SEC. There is no way Delany attempts to pull them into the B1G, at least not until the middle third of the century. UNC would be an even tougher nut than Virginia. They are far more deep south. The culture shock alone would give both the Tar Heels and the B1G more than reason to reject each other.

I would disagree here. The University itself, as well as the state's largest metro areas, are much less Deep South than its rural areas. UNC would fit right into the B1G, but, the larger rank and file of the fanbase would be very unhappy if the school decided to join the league, when an SEC invite would likely be on the table, too.

Plus, what would be Delany's incentive to take on the SEC in its own backyard? Isn't a two-region conference enough of a challenge? Does he really need to attempt a three-region strategy when his current brand requires some re-burnishing? In my opinion, North Carolina is a bridge too far.

Fair points all. But, Jim Delany knows what SEC commissioner Mike Slive also knows...whichever league got UNC would control the TV market in the state. Like many here say about an ACCN being on the air in FL, GA, SC, or KY, the one without UNC would be facing a tough go here.

The SEC on the other hand needs two teams to get to 16 and two states to full-fill its destiny: North Carolina and Virginia. A North Carolina university and the other Virginia school fit nicely. Would the SEC prefer UNC to NC State? I don't know but if I held an executive position in Chapel Hill I'd sure be trying to find out.

The SEC would prefer UNC. What would NCSU bring them? They have accomplished little since winning their 2nd national title in hoops 31 years ago. If Slive were crazy enough to want them, he could kiss getting the SECN on basic cable in NC goodbye.

So, I think the B1G ignores UNC now because the risk of failure is just too troubling: risk of not executing in the northeast and risk of failure in the southeast.

The B1G will be patient, and, wait until the Maryland and Rutgers additions pan out. If both do as well as he hopes, he might be emboldened to go after them. We'll see down the road.

 

[CL82]

I am not aware that it has been published. That said, the ONLY place where such a clause has been brought up is in the WV blogs which, IMO, tell you all you need to know. It supposedly has been patterned after the B12's GOR. Not sure why the ACC would feel compelled to publish it. This seems only an issue with some of the WVU bloggers, which, again, IMO, tells you all you need to know.

You seem to be very fond of the bolded text. It pops up a lot in your posts. I think we understand your point so don't feel compelled to repeat it. Regarding the GOR I am surprised that no one has FOIA'd it. It would be interesting to see exactly what it says. I may take sometime to see if I can track it down.

Here is a summary of Frank the Tank's view of GOR's over on his blog. It is a good read. He suggests that they are simply a wildcard, possibly enforceable, possibly not. He further says that the ambiguity may well be intentional, so that it is impossible to quantify the likely outcome of challenging it. Of course one could also argue that such an agreement would be so vague as to be unenforceable. It's an interesting question.

Edit: Here is the best that I can find:

ACC GOR page 1
ACC GOR page 2
ACC GOR page 3
ACC GOR page 4

That certainly is every bit as vague as Frank suggests. Perhaps the meat of it in the mentioned collateral documents. This isn't 17 page document that we've heard mentioned. Based on this, however, I don't see any reference to any contingency clause.

​

 

[BC1978]

You seem to be very fond of the bolded text. It pops up a lot in your posts. I think we understand your point so don't feel compelled to repeat it. Regarding the GOR I am surprised that no one has FOIA'd it. It would be interesting to see exactly what it says. I may take sometime to see if I can track it down.

Here is a summary of Frank the Tank's view of GOR's over on his blog. It is a good read. He suggests that they are simply a wildcard, possibly enforceable, possibly not. He further says that the ambiguity may well be intentional, so that it is impossible to quantify the likely outcome of challenging it. Of course one could also argue that such an agreement would be so vague as to be unenforceable. It's an interesting question.

Edit: Here is the best that I can find:

ACC GOR page 1
ACC GOR page 2
ACC GOR page 3
ACC GOR page 4

That certainly is every bit as vague as Frank suggests. Perhaps the meat of it in the mentioned collateral documents. This isn't 17 page document that we've heard mentioned. Based on this, however, I don't see any reference to any contingency clause.

​

Hi CL82. Great post! Thanks for the attachments re: the ACC GOR. I also thought Frank's take was interesting. He makes an interesting comment when he refers to the GOR as a wildcard - possible enforceable, possibly not. Even if this were true (which I am not sure it is) this uncertainty does, IMO, make it unlikely that one will be challenged. Specifically:
1. Unlike, say, a hedge fund or a venture capital group, these schools and conferences are much more risk averse. Any challenge will likely consume years in litigation/appeals (since the conference the school is leaving will have, IMO, absolutely no reason to settle since any settlement will mean, for all practical purposes, the end of its GOR). Most importantly, the consequences of losing for a school and the new conference are potentially huge. This is a critical consideration. Unlike the exit fee issue with MD, ALL of the ACC schools willingly signed the GOR. A school would be effectively rolling the dice in launching a challenge.
2. Since 4 of the 5 P5 conferences have GORs, it would seem unlikely that any conference would try to bust the GOR of another conference since they are, in effect, busting their own GOR by doing so.

 

[Fishy]

I have no clue if a GOR is enforceable or not.

But given that a) the Big Ten, Pac-12, Big 12 and ACC have one, and b) that all of the schools in those conferences voluntarily signed one....I have to think that we won't see it challenged any time soon.

It doesn't seem like it's in anyone's best interests. (Except, of course, ours'.)

 

[BC1978]

I have no clue if a GOR is enforceable or not.

But given that a) the Big Ten, Pac-12, Big 12 and ACC have one, and b) that all of the schools in those conferences voluntarily signed one....I have to think that we won't see it challenged any time soon.

It doesn't seem like it's in anyone's best interests. (Except, of course, ours'.)

Agreed, Fishy (and I do understand and appreciate your last point).

Anyways, such a challenge would likely lead to some interesting testimony and cross examination. The challenging school would be challenging the GOR (which they had previously signed and approved), yet they would be moving to a conference that likely has a similar GOR which they would be expected to sign and approve. How they explain THAT seeming contradiction to a judge would be fascinating, IMO.

 

[Matrim55]

Good points. For all we know, internet streaming services could be more lucrative than TV networks...

ESPN just paid 4x the actual current value of live streaming rights for MLS games, while paying (along with Fox) something close to actual value for broadcast rights.

They jumped on it and considered it a bargain because of 1) Demographic drift and technological shift, and 2) Google is two years away from jumping into the fray and paying for live sports webcasts. Once that second part happens, the bidding wars begin.

 

[kyleslamb]

UNC will have to make a choice: either remain as the lynchpin in a weakened ACC or accept an invitation to the SEC. There is no way Delany attempts to pull them into the B1G, at least not until the middle third of the century. UNC would be an even tougher nut than Virginia. They are far more deep south. The culture shock alone would give both the Tar Heels and the B1G more than reason to reject each other. Plus, what would be Delany's incentive to take on the SEC in its own backyard? Isn't a two-region conference enough of a challenge? Does he really need to attempt a three-region strategy when his current brand requires some re-burnishing? In my opinion, North Carolina is a bridge too far.

The SEC on the other hand needs two teams to get to 16 and two states to full-fill its destiny: North Carolina and Virginia. A North Carolina university and the other Virginia school fit nicely. Would the SEC prefer UNC to NC State? I don't know but if I held an executive position in Chapel Hill I'd sure be trying to find out.

So, I think the B1G ignores UNC now because the risk of failure is just too troubling: risk of not executing in the northeast and risk of failure in the southeast.

I apologize if this has been asked/answered already but I'm just making my way through this thread for the first time.

Let me ask you this: how would a division of Georgia Tech, Virginia, Maryland, Rutgers, UConn, Ohio State, Penn State, Michigan and Michigan State really be much different for UNC than what they face now? I don't see how that would be viewed as a culture shock, to be honest. They're already playing up and down the east coast. Those locations wouldn't really be much of a shock. They're already playing at Pitt, BC, Syracuse, etc.

 

[DarthGrumpy]

I apologize if this has been asked/answered already but I'm just making my way through this thread for the first time.

Let me ask you this: how would a division of Georgia Tech, Virginia, Maryland, Rutgers, UConn, Ohio State, Penn State, Michigan and Michigan State really be much different for UNC than what they face now? I don't see how that would be viewed as a culture shock, to be honest. They're already playing up and down the east coast. Those locations wouldn't really be much of a shock. They're already playing at Pitt, BC, Syracuse, etc.

How? In the ACC, UNC is sits on the throne. In the B1G, there are dual thrones, one for Michigan and one for Ohio St who will not share with UNC. As for culture, all of the Northeast and Midwest transplants to the RTP area have no problem with the B1G; but, for the rest, the Civil War is still on and they remember that Michigan Ohio and the rest of the Northeast are full of those damn Yankees.

 

[kyleslamb]

How? In the ACC, UNC is sits on the throne. In the B1G, there are dual thrones, one for Michigan and one for Ohio St who will not share with UNC. As for culture, all of the Northeast and Midwest transplants to the RTP area have no problem with the B1G; but, for the rest, the Civil War is still on and they remember that Michigan Ohio and the rest of the Northeast are full of those damn Yankees.

North Carolina isn't like the deep south. You get that kind of prevailing attitude in Mississippi, Alabama, Southern Georgia and South Carolina, but North Carolina is far more progressive. It's really nothing like some of those other states down here.

UNC already is in with a lot of schools up and down the mid-atlantic and northeast corridor. Going to the Big Ten really wouldn't be much different. And trust me, UNC is just as snobbish about their academics and reputation as the other Big Ten schools. They really aren't a fish out of water if you were to group them in an eastern division with the other newer Big Ten schools/candidates and OSU/Michigan.

 

[Ldandy]

I have to disagree with Kyle. A good portion of UNC's identity is wrapped up in being Southern. While academics at the university might favor inclusion in The B1G, their administration likely realizes that their alumni and legion of T-shirt fans would lose their * at the idea of being a part of a Northern carpetbagger conference. I think for Carolina supporters it would be ACC preservation 1st, followed by joining the SEC with UVA(not happening) or Duke second. I agree with posters here who believe that The B1G should not expand South of VA. That said if they did, Duke w/it's legion of NE supporters or Ga Tech with it's focus on engineering would both likely mesh better with the current conference.

 

[whaler11]

North Carolina like Texas is not leaving a league they own.

Oh they are going to go to Iowa in November or Wisconsin in February without their own referees? Sure thing.

 

[SouthronCross]

How? In the ACC, UNC is sits on the throne. In the B1G, there are dual thrones, one for Michigan and one for Ohio St who will not share with UNC. As for culture, all of the Northeast and Midwest transplants to the RTP area have no problem with the B1G; but, for the rest, the Civil War is still on and they remember that Michigan Ohio and the rest of the Northeast are full of those damn Yankees.

So, you use a stereotype about some Southerners, which, in turn, shows one indicative of some northerners. Nice.

Some of us UNC fans couldn't possibly prefer the SEC, simply because we feel it is more of a good geographical fit than the B1G?

 

[kyleslamb]

North Carolina like Texas is not leaving a league they own.

Oh they are going to go to Iowa in November or Wisconsin in February without their own referees? Sure thing.

They're not going to stay in a league just because they 'own' it if that league is inferior. They have too much pride for that. Of course, they'd like to stay in the ACC as long as it's viable. And they'll do that. But if Virginia, Florida State, etc. start leaving, then they are going to go too.

If/when that ever happens, it comes down to competing in the cutthroat SEC which does not care about academics or going to a league it views as its academic peers and like-minded institutions. The fans probably do largely prefer the SEC, which will be considered. However, the administration and a lot of the board of regents of the system at-large view the Big Ten as a much more suitable option.

The Iowa/Wisconsin examples aren't very relevant. In an Eastern Big Ten division, UNC wouldn't be playing in those types of places but once every 3-4 years, and most of the time would end up playing in September or October. They wouldn't be so narrow minded that having to play one football game in the upper Midwest every half a decade would be a reason to avoid what they may consider their best option.

 

[SouthronCross]

I have to disagree with Kyle. A good portion of UNC's identity is wrapped up in being Southern. While academics at the university might favor inclusion in The B1G, their administration likely realizes that their alumni and legion of T-shirt fans would lose their * at the idea of being a part of a Northern carpetbagger conference. I think for Carolina supporters it would be ACC preservation 1st, followed by joining the SEC with UVA(not happening) or Duke second. I agree with posters here who believe that The B1G should not expand South of VA. That said if they did, Duke w/it's legion of NE supporters or Ga Tech with it's focus on engineering would both likely mesh better with the current conference.

Yes, being a Southern school IS very important to Carolina. Yes, the administration and faculty would very much prefer the B1G. Some very influential alumni, and fans, would be, too.

It would for sure be a huge battle for UNC's future.

And, as much as the admin and faculty would grumble, the athletic department would do exactly what the money people tells it to do. If that is B1G, it will be B1G. If its SEC, it will be SEC.

 

[SouthronCross]

North Carolina like Texas is not leaving a league they own.

Oh they are going to go to Iowa in November or Wisconsin in February without their own referees? Sure thing.

Please. ANY team who has had the huge success on the court has gotten the benefit of the calls in times past. Including UConn.

 

[whaler11]

They're not going to stay in a league just because they 'own' it if that league is inferior. They have too much pride for that. Of course, they'd like to stay in the ACC as long as it's viable. And they'll do that. But if Virginia, Florida State, etc. start leaving, then they are going to go too.

If/when that ever happens, it comes down to competing in the cutthroat SEC which does not care about academics or going to a league it views as its academic peers and like-minded institutions. The fans probably do largely prefer the SEC, which will be considered. However, the administration and a lot of the board of regents of the system at-large view the Big Ten as a much more suitable option.

The Iowa/Wisconsin examples aren't very relevant. In an Eastern Big Ten division, UNC wouldn't be playing in those types of places but once every 3-4 years, and most of the time would end up playing in September or October. They wouldn't be so narrow minded that having to play one football game in the upper Midwest every half a decade would be a reason to avoid what they may consider their best option.

So North Carolina wouldn't play Wisconsin in basketball... except every 4 years

Honestly you don't get UNC and the ACC.. they could have walked away pre GOR but instead held their nose at Louisville and signed.

If you think Virginia is leaving before UNC you get your news from Boneyard fever dreams.

 

[whaler11]

Please. ANY team who has had the huge success on the court hasgotten the benefit of the calls in times past. Including UConn.

Don't take it personally. If I were a UNC fan I'd never want to leave the ACC.

If UConn got Carolina's whistle in the Big East... John Cahill and Tim Higgins hated Calhoun. UConn overcame the officials, they never got the Duke/Carolina advantage.

Let's put it this way... UNC came to Rentschler once and managed to win the game on a safety for holding in the endzone called by Ron Cherry.

Texas, UNC, Michigan... there is nothing as valuable as being the Alpha Dog in a league.

 

[SouthronCross]

They're not going to stay in a league just because they 'own' it if that league is inferior. They have too much pride for that. Of course, they'd like to stay in the ACC as long as it's viable. And they'll do that. But if Virginia, Florida State, etc. start leaving, then they are going to go too.

JMHO, but, neither UNC nor UVA would be the first to leave. FSU would, push some to shove.

If/when that ever happens, it comes down to competing in the cutthroat SEC which does not care about academics or going to a league it views as its academic peers and like-minded institutions. The fans probably do largely prefer the SEC, which will be considered. However, the administration and a lot of the board of regents of the system at-large view the Big Ten as a much more suitable option.

UNC will go wherever the big money people tell them to go. If they say SEC, then, the admininstrationa and BOGs will fall in line.

The Iowa/Wisconsin examples aren't very relevant. In an Eastern Big Ten division, UNC wouldn't be playing in those types of places but once every 3-4 years, and most of the time would end up playing in September or October. They wouldn't be so narrow minded that having to play one football game in the upper Midwest every half a decade would be a reason to avoid what they may consider their best option.

Playing in the upper midwest late in the season will be of no issue, IMHO. Like you say, it will be what the money people decide is the best option.

 

[SouthronCross]

Don't take it personally. If I were a UNC fan I'd never want to leave the ACC.

If UConn got Carolina's whistle in the Big East... John Cahill and Tim Higgins hated Calhoun. UConn overcame the officials, they never got the Duke/Carolina advantage.

Let's put it this way... UNC came to Rentschler once and managed to win the game on a safety for holding in the endzone called by Ron Cherry.

Texas, UNC, Michigan... there is nothing as valuable as being the Alpha Dog in a league.

I didn't take it personally. No worries.

About refs...UConn had their nemesis in Cahill and Higgins. Carolina had theirs in Lenny Wirtz and 'Dick Papparo. While we did not have the total issue you all might have, believe me, you all got the benefit of the doubt on calls in the past, too.

Ron Cherry...LOL. We call folks getting the shaft from him being 'Ron Cherry-ed.'

Our days as alpha dog are over. If that were still the case, UConn would be in the ACC right now. VPI and BC would not be.

 

[whaler11]

I didn't take it personally. No worries.

About refs...UConn had their nemesis in Cahill and Higgins. Carolina had theirs in Lenny Wirtz and Papparo. While we did not have the total issue you all might have, believe me, you all got thebenefit of the doubt on calls in the past, too.

Ron Cherry...LOL. We call folks getting the shaft from him being 'Ron Cherry-ed.'

Our days as alpha dog are over. If that were still the case, UConn would be in the ACC right now. VPI and BC would not be.

Please Carolina still runs the ACC. They threw FSU a bone - but once they did the Noles got back in line.

Anyone who wants to wager even money on Carolina not being in the ACC a decade from now - I'm happy to take it with a 10k limit.