Key tweets, and it's all gone to Hell. | Page 87 | The Boneyard

Key tweets, and it's all gone to Hell.

junglehusky said:
Admissions. I've talked about this a while ago - universities like being in a conference with peer institutions that draw from a similar pool of high school students. You can easily see where Brown or Cornell benefits from being in an athletic league with Harvard and Yale - they want to draw from the same population of students. A high school guidance counselor might be more apt to suggest applying to say, University of Utah as a 2nd/3rd choice when that school is associated with UC Berkeley and Washington. On this front, UConn probably would prefer to associate with the ACC and attract students who are applying to UVA, Duke and UNC. SMU and Baylor may be pretty good schools, but the type of student who applies to those (or to say, Kansas State) is probably not the main type of student UConn wants to attract. And vice versa - kids from New England / New York who grew up fans of UConn, and are applying to UConn, probably won't pick too many AAC or B12 schools as their backup. Geography is a component, but it's more than that.
Expand ...
You just though of a new argument for UConn inclusion in the B12
Texas,Oklahoma,Kansas,Iowa State somewhat peers can benefit by getting New England Studends
 
Fishy said:
Last warning - the thread is for key tweets.

Your ability to comprehend the concept will determine your ability to continue to exist here.
Expand ...


Is that the carrot?

Where's the stick?

Lots of threads to post opinions in, take charge.

or do you know the imminent future, and don't give a rats ass

  1. ps When i see my serious ACC insider neighbor, he's with the Clemson ft team right now representing the ACC, I'll ask specifics trying to tie him down. He's too high up and usually says that UConn is a strong state school and will end up AOK.. Last time he referred to 4-6 years before true expansion, unless the Big 12 makes a move. He has always thought UConn would be a good travel partner for WVU, but then again he has past ties to WVU ( among others).
Go UConn - take the Big 12 if they extend it. Seems like the ACC and B1G don't really care enough to trump.

This ACC/B1G view, or laise faire, is reality and its not carwash news.
 
.-.
Greg Flugaur ‏@flugempire 13m13 minutes ago

We hope to garner more info once Dereg votes concludes. Leading candidates UCONN-UH-CINCY will make final pitches & negotiate pay schedules.
 
mavblues said:
Greg Flugaur ‏@flugempire 13m13 minutes ago

We hope to garner more info once Dereg votes concludes. Leading candidates UCONN-UH-CINCY will make final pitches & negotiate pay schedules.
Expand ...

Hate to get technical, but while Flugs is a nice guy and always has known and tweeted about what kind of value we bring to a P5 conference, he falls under the Non-Key Twitterati grouping. This thread is reserved for tweets/messages from journalists, school/conference leaders, etc.
 
This to me falls in key tweet category ..if different mod's can move it:
  1. Stewart Mandel ‏@slmandel 10m10 minutes ago
    For those hoping for Big 12 expansion ... Next week's NCAA convention just got very interesting.

    12 retweets11 likes

  2. Stewart Mandel ‏@slmandel 17m17 minutes ago
    John Swofford on conference title game deregulation: "A year ago I thought that would have passed easily. Now we'll have to see."

    7 retweets1 like

  3. Stewart Mandel ‏@slmandel 24m24 minutes ago
    Sankey: The SEC Big 12 prime time Sugar Bowl is important to them. "We will protect that." No talk of moving it so playoff not on NYE.

    5 retweets3 likes

  4. Stewart Mandel ‏@slmandel 26m26 minutes ago
    Sankey said there is an "openness" to explore options for Big 12 to host a title game with 10 teams, but they are happy with status quo.

    5 retweets1 like

  5. Stewart Mandel ‏@slmandel 27m27 minutes ago
    SEC commissioner Greg Sankey just said he will not support ACC/big 12 title game deregulation as originally proposed. Vote is next week.
 
Last edited:
Looks like the SEC and B1G are calling the ACC out. Delaney's addendum was specifically aimed at the ACC...they are going to force Stafford into having a CCG played by 2 division winners. IMHO SEC, B!G, and PAC-12 will all vote together on this.
 
I wonder a bit if the Big 12 sudden public flirtation with us is their way of saying that there will consequences if you vote against our CCG plan. Those consequences being the loss of a desirable piece (Connecticut) and competition on the East coast. An attempt to change the cost/benefit analysis a bit to the favor there proposal makes sense but it may be a too Storrs-centric view.
 
Last edited:
.-.
CL82 said:
I wonder a bit if the Big 12 sudden public flirtation with us is there way of saying that there will consequences if you vote against our CCG plan. Those consequences bieng the loss of a desirable piece (Connecticut) and competition on the East coast. An attempt to change the cost/benefit analysis a bit to the favor there proposal makes sense but it may be a too Storrs-centric view.
Expand ...
IMHO that public flirtation is a shot at the ACC more than anything else.
 
Chuck Carlton ‏@ChuckCarltonDMN · 1h1 hour ago
SEC commissioner Greg Sankey says he's sympathetic to Big 12 but won't support conference title game deregulation as currently proposed.

Chuck Carlton ‏@ChuckCarltonDMN · 1h1 hour ago
Vote on conference title game deregulation scheduled this week at NCAA convention. Power 5 has 2 votes per conf, group of five 1 per con f.

Chuck Carlton ‏@ChuckCarltonDMN · 52m52 minutes ago
Conference USA commissioner Judy MacLeod through a spokesman says it's finalizing input from members on conf title game deregulation vote.

Chuck CarltonVerified account
@ChuckCarltonDMN
Reporting on all things Big 12 for the Dallas Morning News. Like the conference I cover, I've improbably survived a couple rounds of realignment.
 
If the Big 10, SEC, and Pac-12 all vote against it, only 2 G5 conferences will have to vote against it for it to fail. From what others have said (and it makes sense), the MAC will follow its big brother the Big 10, leaving only one more conference, likely the AAC, to vote against it. I get the feeling it will be shot down.
 
How is the AAC planning to vote? And could a lot of these rumors simply be designed to move (scare?) G5 votes?

The way I see it, under the current proposal, the non-G5 votes are 6-4...G5 votes can very easily push the CG deregulation over the line, no?
 
shizzle787 said:
If the Big 10, SEC, and Pac-12 all vote against it, only 2 G5 conferences will have to vote against it for it to fail. From what others have said (and it makes sense), the MAC will follow its big brother the Big 10, leaving only one more conference, likely the AAC, to vote against it. I get the feeling it will be shot down.
Expand ...
100% agree....
 
There are too many schools in the AAC that will vote against it because they are hoping for an invite to the B12 once it is voted down. UConn, Cincinnati, Memphis, Houston, USF, UCF...all hoping for a B12 invite.
 
.-.
shizzle787 said:
If the Big 10, SEC, and Pac-12 all vote against it, only 2 G5 conferences will have to vote against it for it to fail. From what others have said (and it makes sense), the MAC will follow its big brother the Big 10, leaving only one more conference, likely the AAC, to vote against it. I get the feeling it will be shot down.
Expand ...

Remember rule #1 of realignment.

The AAC's vote will be the deciding vote (cast on the AAC's behalf by UConn). The AAC decides to vote FOR the B12's proposal, allowing the B12 to hold a championship game without expanding. UConn will be forced to cast the deciding vote and vote against it's own best interests.
 
Dooley said:
There are too many schools in the AAC that will vote against it because they are hoping for an invite to the B12 once it is voted down. UConn, Cincinnati, Memphis, Houston, USF, UCF...all hoping for a B12 invite.
Expand ...

That's kind of my point...the Big12 essentially has AAC members playing Russian roulette right now. If you are USF/UCF, are you really willing to risk pushing out 2 of Houston, Cinci and UConn, backfilling with USM and UMASS and renegotiating the TV deal? There must be some hard math going on right now in several AD offices.
 
The P5 conferences should have never threatened the G5 with no more football games. That would be a good incentive to do the bidding of the P of the P5.
 
CL82 said:
I wonder a bit if the Big 12 sudden public flirtation with us is their way of saying that there will consequences if you vote against our CCG plan. Those consequences being the loss of a desirable piece (Connecticut) and competition on the East coast. An attempt to change the cost/benefit analysis a bit to the favor there proposal makes sense but it may be a too Storrs-centric view.
Expand ...
I certainly hope so , but based on passed actions it seems the the B12 is rudderless. Its very hard to think strategically when your dodging the rocks.
It seems to me the conference with the most to lose ( ACC)would have made a preemptive move by now.
 
AZHuskiePop said:
I certainly hope so , but based on passed actions it seems the the B12 is rudderless. Its very hard to think strategically when your dodging the rocks.
It seems to me the conference with the most to lose ( ACC)would have made a preemptive move by now.
Expand ...
The ACC isn't making a preemptive strike because they can't. Adding two schools (the most likely strike) in UConn and Cincy, for example, would increase the number of basketball schools to 17 (an awkward number) and increase the football conference to 16 to 2 eight-team divisions, meaning the conference would have to go 9 football games minimum (which is something they don't want to do). Adding a conference game would result in less ACC teams percentage-wise making a bowl, less home games on average per team, and would all but forever destroy the possibility (although already slim) of ND joining for football (as that would mean the conference would have to expand beyond 16).
 
B1G, SEC, and Pac 12 have 80 votes between them...ACC and B-12 only have 48. Add the MAC's 12 votes because they are voting with he B1G and that's 92 votes against right off them top.
Here are the remaining conferences with number of votes:
AAC 12 votes
CUSA 13 votes (UAB is back in 2017 bringing them back to 14)
Mountain West 12 votes
Sunbelt 11 votes (Coastal Carolina will make 12 teams in 2017)
Independent's 3 (ND, BYU, UMass)
That makes 51 votes not committed (that we know of)....only 1 of those conferences has to vote with the BiG, SEC, Pac-12 and MAC to vote this down.
 
.-.
AZHuskiePop said:
I certainly hope so , but based on passed actions it seems the the B12 is rudderless. Its very hard to think strategically when your dodging the rocks.
It seems to me the conference with the most to lose ( ACC)would have made a preemptive move by now.
Expand ...
Taking shizzle's response a bit further, the ACC's only possible preemptive strike would be adding Texas in a deal similar to what ND currently has.

If this were to happen, all roadblocks to the B-12 expanding would disappear.
 
FfldCntyFan said:
Taking shizzle's response a bit further, the ACC's only possible preemptive strike would be adding Texas in a deal similar to what ND currently has.

If this were to happen, all roadblocks to the B-12 expanding would disappear.
Expand ...
I've often thought that could be Texas and the ACC's next move as it helps both, but Texas likes being king of its own so we'll see.
 
FDNY99 said:
This to me falls in key tweet category ..if different mod's can move it:
  1. Stewart Mandel ‏@slmandel 10m10 minutes ago
    For those hoping for Big 12 expansion ... Next week's NCAA convention just got very interesting.

    12 retweets11 likes

  2. Stewart Mandel ‏@slmandel 17m17 minutes ago
    John Swofford on conference title game deregulation: "A year ago I thought that would have passed easily. Now we'll have to see."

    7 retweets1 like

  3. Stewart Mandel ‏@slmandel 24m24 minutes ago
    Sankey: The SEC Big 12 prime time Sugar Bowl is important to them. "We will protect that." No talk of moving it so playoff not on NYE.

    5 retweets3 likes

  4. Stewart Mandel ‏@slmandel 26m26 minutes ago
    Sankey said there is an "openness" to explore options for Big 12 to host a title game with 10 teams, but they are happy with status quo.

    5 retweets1 like

  5. Stewart Mandel ‏@slmandel 27m27 minutes ago
    SEC commissioner Greg Sankey just said he will not support ACC/big 12 title game deregulation as originally proposed. Vote is next week.
Expand ...

slmandel 1:36pm via Twitter for iPhone
Bob Bowlsby: "We do not want to add members or be forced to play two divisions." NCAA proposal vote next week
http://www.foxsports.com/college-fo...-sec-greg-sankey-ncaa-rule-change-vote-011016
 
WestHartHusk said:
That's kind of my point...the Big12 essentially has AAC members playing Russian roulette right now. If you are USF/UCF, are you really willing to risk pushing out 2 of Houston, Cinci and UConn, backfilling with USM and UMASS and renegotiating the TV deal? There must be some hard math going on right now in several AD offices.
Expand ...

Although the AAC doesn't know which 2 teams the B12 would take, they know that 2 would leave, leaving the remaining 10 in a weaker position and possibly terminating the TV contract. So 10 teams would be harmed and 2 helped. The AAC would side with the unknown 10 who would be harmed over the unknown 2 who would be helped.
 
UMass might like to see us gone. Or anyone gone for that matter. And why would ND even need to vote on this? They may just pass.
 
.-.
You must log in or register to reply here.

Forum statistics

Threads
168,195
Messages
4,556,343
Members
10,442
Latest member
Virginiafan


Top Bottom