Conference realignment "Rumors" "tweets" "etc"

[Cubanbull]

1 hour ago, Jim Johnson said:

Tim Brando on Conference Realignment: 'The ACC is the Most Vulnerable'

---

When it comes to straight shooters in college football media, few call it like it is like Tim Brando. Brando joined Pete Mundo's show this past week and when the topic of...

 

There is no doubt the ACC will lose its top teams to BigTen and SEC. It’s a matter of time. The question is how many will actually add money wise to those two leagues. As we have seen from the Texas, Oklahoma, USC and UCLA moves. Has to be a big fish and I don’t think ACC has more than 4 of those at most. So that leaves a 10 team ACC same spot as Big12 and PAC.

Probably Clemson, UNC, FSU and maybe Miami being fourth.

Clemson and FSU head for SEC and UNC/ Miami to BigTen 

[Rocky Style]

The ACC has such awesome history.  This would be a mistake.

[Bull Matrix]

28 minutes ago, Rocky Style said:

The ACC has such awesome history.  This would be a mistake.

Yes I agree. Think all the conferences just got greedy and will end up destroying themselves in the long run. One day maybe not in our lifetime college football will be fixed and much better. Expanded playoffs. Equal access to all conferences. More regional conferences. 

[Jim Johnson]

2 hours ago, Cubanbull said:

There is no doubt the ACC will lose its top teams to BigTen and SEC. It’s a matter of time. The question is how many will actually add money wise to those two leagues. As we have seen from the Texas, Oklahoma, USC and UCLA moves. Has to be a big fish and I don’t think ACC has more than 4 of those at most. So that leaves a 10 team ACC same spot as Big12 and PAC.

Probably Clemson, UNC, FSU and maybe Miami being fourth.

Clemson and FSU head for SEC and UNC/ Miami to BigTen 

First, I don't understand why anyone thinks that the next team in has to be better than all of the other teams already in the conference.  That is an absurd argument because people assume that to divide the pie by one more slice the entire pie has to grow by that amount so no one gets a smaller slice.  UCLA does not add the same value as USC... so why does UNC have to bring more value than USC? Why does Va Tech have to bring more than Texas?  [NOTE: I know it's not you specifically making the argument Cubanbull... just venting at the conventional wisdom.]

That said, IMHO -- Miami would not be fourth it would be sixth.  North Carolina and Virginia would add more value than the Canes because they are strong brands that dominate their respective states.  Which means the Big Ten Network can ask for more carriage fees from cable providers in each state.  Georgia Tech would do the same thing in Atlanta, which is why they were on Delany's list when Maryland and Rutgers were added.  Miami's appeal is more of a national brand (as many people watch to see the Canes lose as win), which brings a different form of value.

Plus, would Louisville and Pittsburgh (and others) explore moving to the Big 12?  Even if only 4 teams (plus Notre Dame) move out of the ACC, that puts the remaining "conference" at #5 in terms of value.  So there may be others leaving to move up to the #3 conference...

The ACC could lose 8 or more teams from their current 14 1/2.

Edited July 24, 2022 by Jim Johnson

[Cubanbull]

41 minutes ago, Jim Johnson said:

First, I don't understand why anyone thinks that the next team in has to be better than all of the other teams already in the conference.  That is an absurd argument because people assume that to divide the pie by one more slice the entire pie has to grow by that amount so no one gets a smaller slice.  UCLA does not add the same value as USC... so why does UNC have to bring more value than USC? Why does Va Tech have to bring more than Texas?  [NOTE: I know it's not you specifically making the argument Cubanbull... just venting at the conventional wisdom.]

That said, IMHO -- Miami would not be fourth it would be sixth.  North Carolina and Virginia would add more value than the Canes because they are strong brands that dominate their respective states.  Which means the Big Ten Network can ask for more carriage fees from cable providers in each state.  Georgia Tech would do the same thing in Atlanta, which is why they were on Delany's list when Maryland and Rutgers were added.  Miami's appeal is more of a national brand (as many people watch to see the Canes lose as win), which brings a different form of value.

Plus, would Louisville and Pittsburgh (and others) explore moving to the Big 12?  Even if only 4 teams (plus Notre Dame) move out of the ACC, that puts the remaining "conference" at #5 in terms of value.  So there may be others leaving to move up to the #3 conference...

The ACC could lose 8 or more teams from their current 14 1/2.

If we look at what happened with Big12 and PAC, we can see that losing 8 from ACC is unlikely. More likely scenario they lose 4 and the ACC moves along like Big12 and PAC. The difference between that ACC with the new Big12 and PAC will be minimal, none of them would have the big name school to drive the conference. So more likely you will see teams stay put, not worth paying exit fees to join a conference that would be similar in stature to that you would leave.

The Miami attraction for BigTen would be to get into Florida market just as they did with the California market. In the case of UCLA they were probably added because USC wouldn’t have gone by itself. The targets for BigTen in ACC are probably UNC, Miami, Virginia and Georgia Tech. But I highly doubt they would add all those four when they still have Oregon, Washington and Stanford out West that would be as attractive and would create a western wing. None of those ACC  four really move the needle as much as USC did. At the end for the BigTen is adding schools that fit them academically and be attractive to ND who is really the big prize left out there

[NewEnglandBull]

17 minutes ago, Cubanbull said:

If we look at what happened with Big12 and PAC, we can see that losing 8 from ACC is unlikely. More likely scenario they lose 4 and the ACC moves along like Big12 and PAC. The difference between that ACC with the new Big12 and PAC will be minimal, none of them would have the big name school to drive the conference. So more likely you will see teams stay put, not worth paying exit fees to join a conference that would be similar in stature to that you would leave.

The Miami attraction for BigTen would be to get into Florida market just as they did with the California market. In the case of UCLA they were probably added because USC wouldn’t have gone by itself. The targets for BigTen in ACC are probably UNC, Miami, Virginia and Georgia Tech. But I highly doubt they would add all those four when they still have Oregon, Washington and Stanford out West that would be as attractive and would create a western wing. None of those ACC  four really move the needle as much as USC did. At the end for the BigTen is adding schools that fit them academically and be attractive to ND who is really the big prize left out there

Your first paragraph, in my opinion, is spot on. Well stated…

[Jim Johnson]

28 minutes ago, Cubanbull said:

If we look at what happened with Big12 and PAC, we can see that losing 8 from ACC is unlikely. More likely scenario they lose 4 and the ACC moves along like Big12 and PAC. The difference between that ACC with the new Big12 and PAC will be minimal, none of them would have the big name school to drive the conference. So more likely you will see teams stay put, not worth paying exit fees to join a conference that would be similar in stature to that you would leave.

The Miami attraction for BigTen would be to get into Florida market just as they did with the California market. In the case of UCLA they were probably added because USC wouldn’t have gone by itself. The targets for BigTen in ACC are probably UNC, Miami, Virginia and Georgia Tech. But I highly doubt they would add all those four when they still have Oregon, Washington and Stanford out West that would be as attractive and would create a western wing. None of those ACC  four really move the needle as much as USC did. At the end for the BigTen is adding schools that fit them academically and be attractive to ND who is really the big prize left out there

That assumes the ACC would remain on par with the Big 12... which is not a given.

[Cubanbull]

4 minutes ago, Jim Johnson said:

That assumes the ACC would remain on par with the Big 12... which is not a given.

The Big12 now has no major names, the ACC without let’s say FSU, Clemson, UNC and Miami would be in the same boat. I don’t understand where all this Big12 will be better than current PAC10 or an ACC10 comes from. None of them have a Power School in their line up.  The difference between those three will be minimal

[Peatearpan]

We will know more about the PAC once their tv negotiations come back. ACC we will most likely not know anything until closer to 2036. ND may stay quiet until then.

[GoBulls84]

We'll know more on the topic today when they unveil the new uniforms ... with a new conference patch on them