Ruh Roh... the BE might be getting an unpleasant SURPRISE

[Waquoit]

It is simply not true. The hoops schools could break away and team up with the best of the A10 and do better than that.

Like PC? Their Tier 3 games are played on the Cox Sports Channel. A channel so successful that Cox dropped it from their own extended basic tier.

 

[CTGoonie]

Well now, that all depends (in the immortal words of Bill Clinton) on what your definition of Pipedream is. If you mean Pipedream as it originally was derived--from one's irrational delusions after smoking a pipe filled with Opium, then I would agree. But the BiG difference here is that my pipe isn't filled with Opium--it's filled with Herbs(t).

There is a difference between Herbst wanting the invite to the B10 and Herbst actually having a shot at the invite. What are the odds in your opinion of Uconn getting an invite to the B10?

 

[CL82]

Do you think UConn wants to wait 5-10 years for the NNBE to start realizing its potential? No I don't. I think that we should realize the economic value of the new version of our conference (which is largely derived by touching upon a lot of household across a lot of time zones) within 6 months. Keep in mind that though we may know what the value is, we won't "realize" it until our existing contracts lapse. If we #BegHarder and somehow manage to get an ACC / B10 invite, should we then sit tight for a year to learn the fate of the NBC/fox negotiations? This is kind of a loaded question, so let me break it down into its component parts. 1) I think we'll know what the value of contract is within 6 months. 2) If the B1G comes a calling we say yes. We don't ask any questions; we don't negotiate; we say yes. Then we drop to our knees and thank the lord. Now the B1G has its own problems for us, including travel, no natural rivals, and difficulty of competition. All that is outweighed by stability, quality leadership, prestige, the league's academic consortium and of course the value of its contract. 3) If the ACC comes calling the answer isn't as easy. Are FSU, Clemson, GT, Virginia and Maryland gone? If so then I think the answer is no. If some of them have left we'd have to think about it. That baby step up might not be the best choice for us. If all of those programs have still around the answer is probably yes, although we'll still be on the outside of the big 4 conferences looking in. Sorry if my questions sound like #WhineHarder. It doesn't but when you nearly blew a load in your pants with joy because of a craptastic unsourced article said our conference sucks...well that kinda did. Personally I am curious as to what the league can get if it holds together, but I'm not curious enough to wait patiently to find out, all the time giving Louisville and Rutgers more time to map their escape routes. I think it was you who had a throwaway line about the Big East school's "prisoner’s dilemma'. I think that is spot one of the biggest impediments to stability for our conference and is fast become the biggest one for the ACC as well. Now we're just fans, we can take one side or another. I hope UConn's decision makers are doing both #BegHarder and #ClapHarder, in case we can leave the NNBE in the case of the former, or if we can't in the case of the latter.

 

[HartbeatHusky]

Like PC? Their Tier 3 games are played on the Cox Sports Channel. A channel so successful that Cox dropped it from their own extended basic tier.

I didn't mention PC when I listed the top basketball draws for a reason. If what you are saying is true than it would make more sense for the popular teams to simply opt out of the conferences media deal and form their own media deals with regional sports stations. UConn, Georgetown, Villanova, ect. can get more than $1m per year on their own.

 

[Jericho]

Thanks for that brilliant summary.

Thanks for your brilliant reply

 

[junglehusky]

CL, I mostly agree with your points. I just think it's hard to guess the value we're going to get with instability being a huge part of the equation. In regards to the first point, it's not just that the NNBE football product is under the big 4 conferences, or that it will take at least a few years to measure up to its potential, it's the public perception that could impact what the networks offer. Sure it's been a chicken-and-egg question with ESPN... but we have to be honest about whether all the new FB teams as an aggregate help or hurt the product, perceptions, and potential value. Boise is the only positive, all the rest just don't match up. They're there for the markets and it's an open question how many eyeballs in Texas will watch SMU/UH instead of UT and the rest.

I'm starting to ramble, so I'll make one small point. As to the original article, yes we should all take it with a grain of salt (I was only half joking about Carl having to ignore ignore ignore). If the deal comes in lower than $130, believe me I would take no joy in that... what the response of UConn's decision makers is depends on how low, I suppose.

 

[Jericho]

Question for Jericho and Observer,

What is the ACC deal worth if the league is Duke, BCU, Wake, Syracuse, Maryland, Pitt, and Miami?

I don't know why you feel the need to single me out, as I think you know the answer. But obviously it's not worth as much. Schools like Duke (a true national brand in hoops), Miami, Maryland and to an extent Pitt bring something to the table. But it's not Super exciting.

 

[CL82]

CL, I mostly agree with your points. I just think it's hard to guess the value we're going to get with instability being a huge part of the equation. In regards to the first point, it's not just that the NNBE football product is under the big 4 conferences, or that it will take at least a few years to measure up to its potential, it's the public perception that could impact what the networks offer. Sure it's been a chicken-and-egg question with ESPN... but we have to be honest about whether all the new FB teams as an aggregate help or hurt the product, perceptions, and potential value. Boise is the only positive, all the rest just don't match up. They're there for the markets and it's an open question how many eyeballs in Texas will watch SMU/UH instead of UT and the rest.

I'm starting to ramble, so I'll make one small point. As to the original article, yes we should all take it with a grain of salt (I was only half joking about Carl having to ignore ignore ignore). If the deal comes in lower than $130, believe me I would take no joy in that... what the response of UConn's decision makers is depends on how low, I suppose.

Fair enough. I think the biggest place where we disagree is the value of the new schools. I don't love having them in conference but I think they do bring value in that we've got product that allows NBC (or whomever) the ability to present programming across an entire programming day. I don't think we can be sure of the value one way or another until the new contract is inked. Until then, I'll be cautiously hopeful.

 

[Waquoit]

I didn't mention PC when I listed the top basketball draws for a reason. If what you are saying is true than it would make more sense for the popular teams to simply opt out of the conferences media deal and form their own media deals with regional sports stations. UConn, Georgetown, Villanova, ect. can get more than $1m per year on their own.

How many teams make up the "etc" you mention? Marquette maybe?

 

[pj]

The posters who think we don't have a chance of going to the Big Ten are overlooking two things:
1) Why was it Pitt and Syracuse to the ACC, when UConn and Rutgers would have been much more valuable? Because UConn and Rutgers are heading to the Big Ten.
2) The brand value to the Big Ten of a presence in NYC. Michigan, Ohio State, Penn State want to have a NY area game on their schedule annually. With UConn and Rutgers, they get one each year. They're looking at the population of NJ/NY/NE as an audience for Michigan/OSU/PSU/Nebraska etc.

The trouble with the NBE media contract is going to be this: UConn and Rutgers (and Louisville) will not allow the contract to prevent their departure ... so the networks will have to lowball the bid or include a provision for reducing payouts upon departures.

The other wild card is if a recession hits soon, these media valuations could shrink suddenly.

 

[UCFBfan]

The posters who think we don't have a chance of going to the Big Ten are overlooking two things:
1) Why was it Pitt and Syracuse to the ACC, when UConn and Rutgers would have been much more valuable? Because UConn and Rutgers are heading to the Big Ten.

Sorry but that's a load of bs. The reason it was Pitt and Syracuse was because BC didn't want UConn and so Syracuse was the next best thing they could get to NYC. Rutgers was left out because let's face it, they don't bring any strength in any sport to the ACC. Nor will they bring anything to the B1G. RU and UConn football is equal yet UConn brings much larger basketball fan base in both men's and women's sports. The ACC was hoping that Syracuse would be enough to garner some of the NYC market while knowing that RU and UConn would always be on the table.

2) The brand value to the Big Ten of a presence in NYC. Michigan, Ohio State, Penn State want to have a NY area game on their schedule annually. With UConn and Rutgers, they get one each year. They're looking at the population of NJ/NY/NE as an audience for Michigan/OSU/PSU/Nebraska etc.

I agree with this but I just don't see why they'd wanna water down their football product with UConn or Rutgers. Even if RU and UConn go to the ACC, the B1G has GOTTA know that they can have either of those schools at any time, no matter if they are in the ACC or NBE.

So I still can't see why UConn should be expecting a B1G invite anytime in the next decade.....

 

[whaler11]

Thinking about the Big 10 and UConn is similar to when I pass the Powerball billboards on the highway and fantasize about what kind of spectacle I'd make as I quit my job.

 

[pj]

I rather doubt that BC's fear of competition was the primary driver of choice of schools. I know there are media reports that support that view. But money is the dominant driver of these decisions. The real reason Pitt and Syracuse were invited is because they were eager to go. The whole thing could happen quickly. If they'd tried for Rutgers and UConn, we would have gone to the Big Ten, and taken years to negotiate the outcome. ESPN needed the resolution to happen quickly, or they were in danger of losing the Big East contract and having a weak ACC.

Of course once the ACC takes Syracuse they're hoping they can capture NYC. If they don't then picking Syracuse was a colossal fail for them. But if you really want NYC you would go for teams with a physical presence in the market - like Rutgers and UConn.

As for the Big Ten watering down their football product, (a) Rutgers and UConn will be elevated by being in the Big Ten and (b) superior to Indiana/Purdue/Illinois/Minnesota/Iowa/Northwestern, so it's really keeping football quality the same. But the media value is tremendous. Exposure in northeast markets, and becoming more of a national league, are worth a lot of money.

It comes down to this: media market size and dollars drive the decisions. Rutgers and UConn are both top 40 programs nationally by that measure, the top available programs, and together are worth more than either individually because they bring NYC. The people who gain the most by taking in Rutgers and UConn are the prestige national programs who already have NYC/NE/NJ fans - Michigan, Ohio State, Penn State, Notre Dame. There's a reason Notre Dame wanted to be in the Big East for basketball, and it's the same reason the Big Ten will want Rutgers and UConn for football.

 

[HartbeatHusky]

How many teams make up the "etc" you mention? Marquette maybe?

The top tier of hoops programs are UConn, Louisville, Villanova, Notre Dame, Georgetown, Cincinnati, Marquette, and soon Temple and Memphis. St. John's has a good market and is relevant if decent. Those 10 teams alone could garner a good basketball deal. To suggest the Big East basketball product is not worth anything is ridiculous. Houston, Orlando, and Dallas will be good markets for Big East basketball once the bigger name schools start to play games there and drive up interest in the product.

 

[Jericho]

The posters who think we don't have a chance of going to the Big Ten are overlooking two things:
1) Why was it Pitt and Syracuse to the ACC, when UConn and Rutgers would have been much more valuable? Because UConn and Rutgers are heading to the Big Ten.
2) The brand value to the Big Ten of a presence in NYC. Michigan, Ohio State, Penn State want to have a NY area game on their schedule annually. With UConn and Rutgers, they get one each year. They're looking at the population of NJ/NY/NE as an audience for Michigan/OSU/PSU/Nebraska etc.

The trouble with the NBE media contract is going to be this: UConn and Rutgers (and Louisville) will not allow the contract to prevent their departure ... so the networks will have to lowball the bid or include a provision for reducing payouts upon departures.

The other wild card is if a recession hits soon, these media valuations could shrink suddenly.

This is kind of a bizarre assembly of wishes and hopes. Are you seriously suggesting that the ACC took Pitt and Syracuse because Rutgers and UConn said no? Do you have any evidence to back this up? Because it certainly seemed like UConn was begging to get into the ACC after those two left. I don't know where you get the idea that they're just waiting on the Big 10. If the Big 10 wanted them, why haven't they invited them? What exactly is the hold up? The new Big East deal won't matter one lick in allowing UConn or Rutgers to leave. Conference bylaws that dictate that. UConn could give its walking papers right now. The problem is no one is willing to take them.

The biggest reason I don't see UConn in the Big 10 is I don't see the Big 10 wanting to expand. Sure, they'll make more money if they can. And they'd gladly take Notre Dame. But any other school is going to need to bring in big money just to keep the existing school's shares in tact. The Big 10 paid out over $24 million per school this past year (except Nebraska). That means any new school has to bring in $24 million in revenue just to break even. If Rutgers and UConn were worth $24 million each, why was the old Big East deal worth so little? Why is the new Big East deal projected to be worth so much less than $24 million per school?

Even if you believe the Big 10 "has" to expand, why exactly wouldn't the conference just take a bunch of ACC schools like Maryland, Virginia, or UNC? The best shot UConn has in the Big 10 is as a partner to Notre Dame. If Notre Dame joined, they'd want a 14th. The 14th would likely be Rutgers or UConn.

 

[mavblues]

This is kind of a bizarre assembly of wishes and hopes. Are you seriously suggesting that the ACC took Pitt and Syracuse because Rutgers and UConn said no? Do you have any evidence to back this up? Because it certainly seemed like UConn was begging to get into the ACC after those two left. I don't know where you get the idea that they're just waiting on the Big 10. If the Big 10 wanted them, why haven't they invited them? What exactly is the hold up? The new Big East deal won't matter one lick in allowing UConn or Rutgers to leave. Conference bylaws that dictate that. UConn could give its walking papers right now. The problem is no one is willing to take them.

The biggest reason I don't see UConn in the Big 10 is I don't see the Big 10 wanting to expand. Sure, they'll make more money if they can. And they'd gladly take Notre Dame. But any other school is going to need to bring in big money just to keep the existing school's shares in tact. The Big 10 paid out over $24 million per school this past year (except Nebraska). That means any new school has to bring in $24 million in revenue just to break even. If Rutgers and UConn were worth $24 million each, why was the old Big East deal worth so little? Why is the new Big East deal projected to be worth so much less than $24 million per school?

Even if you believe the Big 10 "has" to expand, why exactly wouldn't the conference just take a bunch of ACC schools like Maryland, Virginia, or UNC? The best shot UConn has in the Big 10 is as a partner to Notre Dame. If Notre Dame joined, they'd want a 14th. The 14th would likely be Rutgers or UConn.

UConn/Rutgers don't have to be worth $24MM per school, their markets do. It doesn't even matter if people will tune in to watch UConn or Rutgers. As long as adding those schools will trigger cable systems to add BTN, that adds eyeballs for the "big boy" football programs, puts money in their pockets, and makes area alumni very happy.

If you can't understand that the TriState area is worth more than North Carolina, Maryland, or Virginia, then there's not much more I can say to clarify that for you.

You are putting (historically) higher profile programs into a new and very large market. That translates into $$.

 

[pj]

Are you seriously suggesting that the ACC took Pitt and Syracuse because Rutgers and UConn said no? Do you have any evidence to back this up? Because it certainly seemed like UConn was begging to get into the ACC after those two left.

No. What I'm saying is that ESPN drove the ACC expansion and they promoted Pitt and Cuse to the ACC because they knew Pitt and Cuse would jump immediately. Rutgers and UConn, more attractive schools with options, would have explored options and done due diligence -- ACC, Big 10, Big East. The Big Ten wouldn't act quickly, and the Big East option would have waited to see what offers the TV networks gave on a new contract. ESPN couldn't have made it happen in the time frame they needed.

What ESPN had to avert was (a) the Big East stays together, auctions its TV rights to another network, so ESPN loses its Big East programming, and (b) its ACC property is now the lowest-compensated of the six BCS networks and schools are looking to jump ship. It could have been left with nothing.

So it grew its ACC property and devalued the Big East. And it had to get that done in a few months. It knew enough of the situation to know that Pitt and Cuse jumping was the only way to get it done.

Once Pitt and Cuse were gone, then of course the ACC was much more attractive to UConn. But not so much before.

As for the Big Ten wanting to expand, the money will improve. The northeast media markets are just too valuable.

You're right that the potential fragmentation of the ACC opens competition to UConn/Rutgers from UNC/UVa/Md. If Notre Dame joins the Big Ten, they'll be looking for 3 schools, and the southern schools might seem a better fit, since it could be hard to find a good third to go with UConn/Rutgers.

 

[uconndogs]

We would have jumped immediately.

 

[Jericho]

UConn/Rutgers don't have to be worth $24MM per school, their markets do. It doesn't even matter if people will tune in to watch UConn or Rutgers. As long as adding those schools will trigger cable systems to add BTN, that adds eyeballs for the "big boy" football programs, puts money in their pockets, and makes area alumni very happy.

If you can't understand that the TriState area is worth more than North Carolina, Maryland, or Virginia, then there's not much more I can say to clarify that for you.

You are putting (historically) higher profile programs into a new and very large market. That translates into $$.

This kind of thinking is what I don't get. UConn and Rutgers have little fans, but by adding them you immediately add entire markets full of bucketloads of money? If it was merely about adding schools from populous states, wouldn't Syracuse be at the top of the list? It's the same troubled logic of the SEC adding NC State. NC State may be located in a populated state, but they do not deliver the NC market. And UConn and Rutgers would have to be able to deliver the New York market to make it work. Without enough people caring about their programs, they deliver squat. Who's to say the existing Big 10 cannot carry the New York market as is? They have the closest big name program (Penn State) and the big name match-ups of schools Like Michigan, OSU, and Nebraska have to be as attractive as anything UConn/Rutgers can pony up.

New York is 3rd in population. Florida is 4th. Pennsylvania is 6th. Georgia is 9th. North Carolina is 10th. Virginia is 12th. Massachusetts is 14th. and Maryland is 19th. That's 8 states in the Top 20. And they all have ACC schools (most of them the biggest collegiate team in the state). In the end, it has not helped the ACC all that much... Population along is not everything

 

[Dann]

No. What I'm saying is that ESPN drove the ACC expansion and they promoted Pitt and Cuse to the ACC because they knew Pitt and Cuse would jump immediately. Rutgers and UConn, more attractive schools with options, would have explored options and done due diligence -- ACC, Big 10, Big East. The Big Ten wouldn't act quickly, and the Big East option would have waited to see what offers the TV networks gave on a new contract. ESPN couldn't have made it happen in the time frame they needed.

What ESPN had to avert was (a) the Big East stays together, auctions its TV rights to another network, so ESPN loses its Big East programming, and (b) its ACC property is now the lowest-compensated of the six BCS networks and schools are looking to jump ship. It could have been left with nothing.

So it grew its ACC property and devalued the Big East. And it had to get that done in a few months. It knew enough of the situation to know that Pitt and Cuse jumping was the only way to get it done.

Once Pitt and Cuse were gone, then of course the ACC was much more attractive to UConn. But not so much before.

As for the Big Ten wanting to expand, the money will improve. The northeast media markets are just too valuable.

You're right that the potential fragmentation of the ACC opens competition to UConn/Rutgers from UNC/UVa/Md. If Notre Dame joins the Big Ten, they'll be looking for 3 schools, and the southern schools might seem a better fit, since it could be hard to find a good third to go with UConn/Rutgers.

-the b12 needed teams for a ship game. hey contacted a ton of schools. pitt and wvu among them. the acc got wind becuase pitt went running to the acc saying look i got a b12 invite lalala.
-the acc says ok time to protect turf and go for it. they go to espn and say were going to 14. espn says here are the numbers for each school on your list(all big east schools)
-the numbers tell swafford that wvu is the clear #1 add. there is almost a tie for 2nd with lville and uconn. cuse, pitt and ruty are next all very close to each other.
-espn says listen, if u add the best fball school and the best bball school from the big east we can pay up on the contract. then u can add 2 more down the line of pitt/cuse/ruty and be all good.
-swafford says sorry but wvu academics are not for tobacco road and same with lville. and bc doesn't like uconn. so were going to add pitt and cuse.
-espn says dont do it the tv won't be good enough. swafford says we will give u more inventory so we can fudge it back side and the numbers dont look so bad at first glance
-espn gives them a new contract. fsu and clem have had enough. they knew who had value and who didn't and are now going to the b12 as result i think...

tobacco road could have taken wvu and uconn. the best of each sport. both also are good enough at the other major sport and are good at other sports. then they could get to 16 later. in doing so the b12 never comes back to life and the acc is one of the big 4. the bball schools also would have split form the big east in that mess. major srewup by swofford.

-he pissed off espn so much. then the dagger is fsu/clem. espn is losing 2 of its biggest draws(espn gets those 2 100% in the acc contract) basically to fox/espn 50/50. so espn now says f it, the guy wants to treat us like that they bring it. we will lead the way to ripping the acc apart. and to boot after its all done were going to put duke and crew with the big east bball schools and buy them for 2mil a year. hahahahaha espn says. sit and watch. see you in 2016 when nd starts its first year in a conf.

 

[mavblues]

This kind of thinking is what I don't get. UConn and Rutgers have little fans, but by adding them you immediately add entire markets full of bucketloads of money? If it was merely about adding schools from populous states, wouldn't Syracuse be at the top of the list? It's the same troubled logic of the SEC adding NC State. NC State may be located in a populated state, but they do not deliver the NC market. And UConn and Rutgers would have to be able to deliver the New York market to make it work. Without enough people caring about their programs, they deliver squat. Who's to say the existing Big 10 cannot carry the New York market as is? They have the closest big name program (Penn State) and the big name match-ups of schools Like Michigan, OSU, and Nebraska have to be as attractive as anything UConn/Rutgers can pony up.

New York is 3rd in population. Florida is 4th. Pennsylvania is 6th. Georgia is 9th. North Carolina is 10th. Virginia is 12th. Massachusetts is 14th. and Maryland is 19th. That's 8 states in the Top 20. And they all have ACC schools (most of them the biggest collegiate team in the state). In the end, it has not helped the ACC all that much... Population along is not everything

I'll try to use smaller words.

You have historically popular football programs in the B1G.

You have a large market in the TriState area, which aforesaid programs currently do not have access to via BTN.

Adding UConn/Rutgers guarantees that BTN becomes an option on all cable systems across the TriState area. If they price it right, it's on expanded basic.

So what I am saying is that UConn & Rutgers could suck for all eternity. It's their market that is attractive to the B1G. Neither UConn not Rutgers has to deliver the market. They are IN the market. That's enough. You could add St. Johns' flag football team to the B1G - as long as it gets BTN on the cable systems, that's what counts.

As far as the B1G carrying the TriState market as-is, how is that working out for them as it relates to BTN availability?

Finally, you reference the ACC programs and population, then make the bold (and inaccurate) statement that population isn't helping them. Really???? It's routinely discussed here and on other boards that the BE has had superior results to the ACC on the field in recent years (and the BE supposedly sucks). Given that, why did the ACC get the money they did? Because they have higher SAT scores?

The real answer to that question is exactly why the BE will get a nice contract when it is allowed to negotiate (assuming the BE can hold together). It's also why UConn/Rutgers would be attractive to the B1G.

 

[Nostical]

Adding UConn/Rutgers guarantees that BTN becomes an option on all cable systems across the TriState area........ it's ....UConn & Rutgers....market that is attractive to the B1G. Neither UConn not Rutgers has to deliver the market. They are IN the market. That's enough.

Listen to Mavblues. He speaks the truth.

 

[FfldCntyFan]

I wish that it were as easy as Mavblues is claiming but if it were, we likely would already be in the B1G, not hoping that somehow a better home than what we currently have ends up inviting us.

Does anyone really believe that adding UConn and Rutgers would give the B1G enough clout to require every cable, satellite and optical provider in the states of New Jersey and Connecticut to carry the BTN on its basic tier yet also charge each provider for the right to carry the network (at I believe $1.10 per household month)?

If being in the market (as opposed to actually delivering some portion of that market) is enough, why would any member consider leaving the BE (as we are in larger markets than anyone)? Unfortunately Mavblues has taken the rhetoric (and public stance) of the BE's leadership (in attempting to put a positive spin on what we are about to become) and swallowed it hook, line and sinker.

 

[CL82]

I wish that it were as easy as Mavblues is claiming but if it were, we likely would already be in the B1G, not hoping that somehow a better home than what we currently have ends up inviting us.

Does anyone really believe that adding UConn and Rutgers would give the B1G enough clout to require every cable, satellite and optical provider in the states of New Jersey and Connecticut to carry the BTN on its basic tier yet also charge each provider for the right to carry the network (at I believe $1.10 per household month)?

If being in the market (as opposed to actually delivering some portion of that market) is enough, why would any member consider leaving the BE (as we are in larger markets than anyone)? Unfortunately Mavblues has taken the rhetoric (and public stance) of the BE's leadership (in attempting to put a positive spin on what we are about to become) and swallowed it hook, line and sinker.

I don't know. SNY got picked up in CT pretty fast once it had Husky BB and football on it. Heck getting the WBB contract has people screaming about access. Do I think that's enough for B1G membership, well no of course not, but we love our Huskies and reach into CT and the NY metro area is a big part of what we bring to the table.

 

[UCFBfan]

I don't know. SNY got picked up in CT pretty fast once it had Husky BB and football on it. Heck getting the WBB contract has people screaming about access. Do I think that's enough for B1G membership, well no of course not, but we love our Huskies and reach into CT and the NY metro area is a big part of what we bring to the table.

I agree with you on the part about CT getting it if UConn gets an invite. Your example of SNY is a great one. However, I don't see the same happening in NJ and they have more subscribers than CT ever will.

I have to say that FfldCntyFan is right that if UConn and Rutgers really brought this much revenue they'd already be either the B1G or even ACC

Sent from my DROIDX using Tapatalk 2