ACC Big East merger

[freescooter]

do we want to be in an ACC that has lost UNC, Duke, UVA, FSU, and Clemson?
replace those with Memphis, USF... Delaware? JMU? and us --- surely this would begin the breakdown of the conference as VT, Louisville, NCST, Pitt, Syracuse, look for their lifeline too, just to not be associated with those schools i just mentioned.

Just feels like PAC-12 part 2, and then we'd be stuck in it.

People keep saying this but where do Clemson and FSU go? Where does Duke go for that matter? There is some speculation that UNC and maybe Virginia would be picked up by the BIG 10. But would they really? The Big has been pretty strategic after the Rutgers debacle. The SEC doesn’t need either Clemson or FSU. And reportedly neither Florida nor South Carolina want those adds. And what we saw with the FSU lawsuit was that had they won they’d be the dog who caught the car. Now what? The SEC was pretty clear it had no interest. It was reported they approached the B12. Even less in Clemson. Maybe that changes. Maybe not.

 

[Kolumbo]

do we want to be in an ACC that has lost UNC, Duke, UVA, FSU, and Clemson?
replace those with Memphis, USF... Delaware? JMU? and us --- surely this would begin the breakdown of the conference as VT, Louisville, NCST, Pitt, Syracuse, look for their lifeline too, just to not be associated with those schools i just mentioned.

Just feels like PAC-12 part 2, and then we'd be stuck in it.

Yes. And I think that is about our best hope. The ACC without those 5 programs and perhaps without Miami is still a very good conference. At that point there are likely no other places for anyone to go. 12 ACC programs plus UConn, USF, Memphis, and then maybe a few from Tulane, Temple, ECU, JMU. OSU and Wazzu were dropped but the ACC would still be better than the PAC.

I think Stanford is one of the more surprising drops. It checks every box in a big way, especially for the B1G. Academics, great AD, San Francisco.

 

[Hamms30]

People keep saying this but where do Clemson and FSU go? Where does Duke go for that matter? There is some speculation that UNC and maybe Virginia would be picked up by the BIG 10. But would they really? The Big has been pretty strategic after the Rutgers debacle. The SEC doesn’t need either Clemson or FSU. And reportedly neither Florida nor South Carolina want those adds. And what we saw with the FSU lawsuit was that had they won they’d be the dog who caught the car. Now what? The SEC was pretty clear it had no interest. It was reported they approached the B12. Even less in Clemson. Maybe that changes. Maybe not.

That's what I don't get. What is the added value of adding Duke, UNC or Virginia to your conference? They're football doesn't bring any additional value. They haven't/don't and won't win anything in football. It's just diluting membership payouts for legacy conference members. Oh, they're basketball powerhouses and that could bring a lot of added value to the conference? Well, how about the school with 6 national championships on the men's side in 25 years and 11 on the women's in 30, would that not bring value? Oh... that team is a non-starter because their football team wouldn't bring any value and basketball has no bearing? Makes total sense ¯\(ツ)/¯

Are we not trying to squeeze blood out of a football stone at this point? If the SEC says to ESPN.. we're gonna extend offers to Clemson and FSU so we need more money, at what point does ESPN and ABC say.. well, we pay them 37M now and you want us to pay them 50M? How do we get an extra $26M of value out of them joining the SEC to offset our incremental costs especially now that the value of the ACC would be torpedoed and ROI on the ACC conference could now be negative?

 

[freescooter]

Yes. And I think that is about our best hope. The ACC without those 5 programs and perhaps without Miami is still a very good conference. At that point there are likely no other places for anyone to go. 12 ACC programs plus UConn, USF, Memphis, and then maybe a few from Tulane, Temple, ECU, JMU. OSU and Wazzu were dropped but the ACC would still be better than the PAC.

I think Stanford is one of the more surprising drops. It checks every box in a big way, especially for the B1G. Academics, great AD, San Francisco.

I agree with this. And Stanford and Cal are Duke and UNC. One highly respected private the other a highly respected public. The Big was picking up programs in their neighborhood and skipped right over them. It is a different era and respected academics mean nothing in the brave new world of college sports. Heck Stanford even has a pretty respectable football history.

That is another reason why I take the UNC/Duke to the Big10 stuff with a grin of salt. And I’m not sure the Big is really dying to get into the South anyway. There’s long history with the PAC programs. Not so much with the ACC.

 

[Jetskies]

People keep saying this but where do Clemson and FSU go? Where does Duke go for that matter? There is some speculation that UNC and maybe Virginia would be picked up by the BIG 10. But would they really? The Big has been pretty strategic after the Rutgers debacle. The SEC doesn’t need either Clemson or FSU. And reportedly neither Florida nor South Carolina want those adds. And what we saw with the FSU lawsuit was that had they won they’d be the dog who caught the car. Now what? The SEC was pretty clear it had no interest. It was reported they approached the B12. Even less in Clemson. Maybe that changes. Maybe not.

this makes sense.

for my education, could you elaborate on the rutgers "debacle"? what happened there that makes it a debacle? idk anything about their BIG history except theyre pretty mediocre at football (no surprise there) and certainly not a better overall school than UConn IMO, even with their AAU status and NYC proximity.

I use them all the time as a case study of what UConn would have looked like in an alternate universe, had things gone our way back in 2012/2013 conference alignment wave. We probably would have been better, by virtue of basketball alone. I doubt our football would have been any worse than them.

 

[Rufus]

Debacle implies the B1G regrets adding Rutgers. I've seen no evidence of that.

 

[freescooter]

this makes sense.

for my education, could you elaborate on the rutgers "debacle"? what happened there that makes it a debacle? idk anything about their BIG history except theyre pretty mediocre at football (no surprise there) and certainly not a better overall school than UConn IMO, even with their AAU status and NYC proximity.

I use them all the time as a case study of what UConn would have looked like in an alternate universe, had things gone our way back in 2012/2013 conference alignment wave. We probably would have been better, by virtue of basketball alone. I doubt our football would have been any worse than them.

They brought in a program that was really bad and hasn’t really improved. They were brought in to bring the NY metro area cable and now cable is ancient history. You could also say something similar about Maryland except they were and are mediocre, not awful. Maybe debacle is the wrong term but it was and is clearly a mismatch for both sides.

 

[ZooCougar]

That's what I don't get. What is the added value of adding Duke, UNC or Virginia to your conference? They're football doesn't bring any additional value. They haven't/don't and won't win anything in football. It's just diluting membership payouts for legacy conference members. Oh, they're basketball powerhouses and that could bring a lot of added value to the conference? Well, how about the school with 6 national championships on the men's side in 25 years and 11 on the women's in 30, would that not bring value? Oh... that team is a non-starter because their football team wouldn't bring any value and basketball has no bearing? Makes total sense ¯\(ツ)/¯

Are we not trying to squeeze blood out of a football stone at this point? If the SEC says to ESPN.. we're gonna extend offers to Clemson and FSU so we need more money, at what point does ESPN and ABC say.. well, we pay them 37M now and you want us to pay them 50M? How do we get an extra $26M of value out of them joining the SEC to offset our incremental costs especially now that the value of the ACC would be torpedoed and ROI on the ACC conference could now be negative?

Imagine being this guy and thinking Duke and UNC have no value.

If they don’t have any value then we have big problems.

 

[CL82]

Debacle implies the B1G regrets adding Rutgers. I've seen no evidence of that.

Fans do but not the school presidents.

 

[Rufus]

Fans do but not the school presidents.

That is very true.

 

[CL82]

Imagine being this guy and thinking Duke and UNC have no value.

If they don’t have any value then we have big problems.

We do have big problems.

(FWIW, I'm not confident that either of the P2 would be interested in Duke. UNC, however, is a different story.)

 

[freescooter]

We do have big problems.

(FWIW, I'm not confident that either of the P2 would be interested in Duke. UNC, however, is a different story.)

They are Cal and Stanford. Top academic institutions. Top basketball, better than Cal and Stanford but if top basketball is the measuring stick, UConn and Kansas might be better bets. Football, though? I a suppose if you are desperate to get into North Carolina you’d look at UNC. But they are hardly a football media darling. 45 years since the last ACC championship. But maybe. But seriously, why would you take Duke? Another mouth that brings nothing in the sport you care most about. You know when Duke last won an ACC football title? 1989. Since the league broke into divisions you know how many divisional titles they’ve won? 1. 12 years ago. And just for fun, while they get lots of basketball press, they last won it all a decade ago. They are on the verge of becoming Indiana.