Thamel: power commissioner privately concede realignment not done, "inevitably ACC will be poached"

[UCHuskies08]

We are FAR better off in the B1G or the Big 12. Or of course, the SEC. Still can't believe people care so much for the ACC when it is going to become Wake Forest, Temple and probably BC.

Because that's still better than SMU, ECU, Tulane, Tulsa/UMass....

 

[pj]

The ideal situation is a 20 team B1G or SEC that adds UConn, UVa, UNC, Duke, SU and (I'm throwing up in my mouth as I type this) BC. Gives the Northern and mid atlantic schools some regional rivals, and locks up the Eastern seaboard from the Carolinas to Maine for the ACC, or Florida to Maine for the SEC. It is highly unlikely this ever happens, but that would be the ideal end game for UConn IMO.

Ideal scenario for 20 team B1G: UConn, UVa, UNC, Georgia Tech, FSU, either Duke or Clemson or Notre Dame for #20.
Ideal scenario for 18 team SEC: UNC, Duke, UVa, UConn ... two from the Big 12 (Texas, Texas Tech? or Kansas/KState if Texas/Oklahoma stick together or go Pac 12?) to go to 20 and four from the Big 12 (Texas, TT, Oklahoma, OSU or Kansas) for 22.

No ideal scenario has us sharing the limelight with BC or Cuse. Rutgers would be the best local partner, then Penn State.

 

[The Funster]

I still have a hard time wrapping my head around what could happen. IMO, the ACC "should" stay alive. In the big conference model the PAC has to add teams and the only place those teams can come from is the Big 12. And, assuming that, the next question is "How many power conferences?" If the answer is 3 x 20 then obviously it would be PAC, SEC and B1G. If it is 4 power conferences (and the Big 12 is gone) then there has to be enough left of the ACC for it to actually be a power conference. I still think antitrust is a factor going forward.

I also think the best way to handle it is if the conferences decides to proceed logically, in tandem, to evenly distribute teams as opposed to the "raiding" concept currently being employed.