PAC-10 To Issue Invites - Is this the beginning of Conference Expansion?

[usf97]

Another report acknowledging the validity of the Pac-10 possible pillage of the Big 12.

I'm told A&M AD Bill Byrne has told his staff, coaches the reports the Aggies may go to the Pac-10 are true, but he didn't return a call.

http://collegefootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2010/06/04/tweet-am-coaches-staff-told-pac-10-rumors-are-true/

Then I like the letter from the ISU president.

http://blogs.desmoinesregister.com/dmr/index.php/2010/06/04/your-thoughts-please-on-the-pollard-geoffroy-letter/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed:+cyclones-blog+(Des+Moines+Register+Staff+Blogs+%C2%BB+Cyclones)

You know, in previous scenarios, USF and Cincy looked like they could be in trouble but now it really looks like the losers could be these 4 leftover Big 12 teams (i.e. Kansas, KSU, ISU and Baylor).

Geography hurts them in that they aren't near any other decent conferences. Maybe the Big Ten takes one of them. But they may be back with Houston and SMU in CUSA. The only thing going in that group is Kansas basketball.

[Doc]

I can see the B10 taking Kansas (along with Mizzou and Nebraska) on their way to 16.  ISU would be a stretch (although I believe they are AAU), and ND to round it out (if the Irish sense the four-conf-playoff tourney coming and thus their only chance for a "National Championship").  K-State and Baylor would have to hope Texas/TAMU go to the SEC, and the P10 picks them over MWC options.  Really too much speculation -- just have to wait and see.

[dabull80]

I'm waiting for the politicians to jump in once an anouncement is made.  They bark alot but not much more

[South_Florida_Flip]

We'd have 8 football schools to their 5-6.  But actually, 16-teams strong.  I would most certainly stand with our non-football members in this scenario, with no reason to expand.

You think that all Big East football members would somehow stay in tact? I can't see Rutgers saying no the Big 10 unless ND say yes and the Big 10 bails on Rutgers.

[tampabull]

We'd have 8 football schools to their 5-6.  But actually, 16-teams strong.  I would most certainly stand with our non-football members in this scenario, with no reason to expand.

You think that all Big East football members would somehow stay in tact? I can't see Rutgers saying no the Big 10 unless ND say yes and the Big 10 bails on Rutgers.

We would have 7 schools to there 5-6, plus the potential to start are own network in a couple years.  I don't see any other big east school getting an invite to the big 10 other than rutgers.  none of the other schools add much in respect to the big 10 network.  Uconn won't go cause academics.  The big 10 would much rather go after maryland than uconn

[Guest]

We'd have 8 football schools to their 5-6.  But actually, 16-teams strong.  I would most certainly stand with our non-football members in this scenario, with no reason to expand.

You think that all Big East football members would somehow stay in tact? I can't see Rutgers saying no the Big 10 unless ND say yes and the Big 10 bails on Rutgers.

We would have 7 schools to there 5-6, plus the potential to start are own network in a couple years.  I don't see any other big east school getting an invite to the big 10 other than rutgers.  none of the other schools add much in respect to the big 10 network.  Uconn won't go cause academics.  The big 10 would much rather go after maryland than uconn

First, the ACC will not lose 6 or 7 teams... the most they will lose is four to the SEC and maybe one to the Big Ten (Maryland).  The ACC will have as many or MORE teams than the Big East football side after the first round of expansion.

Second, you're discounting the Upstate New York cable market that Syracuse would bring to the table -- which is really about basketball.

Moreover, you still don't seem to grasp that the Big East non-football schools have more say about conference "expansion" - they won't go for a 20-team mega conference.

Chances are better than the remaining Big East football teams move to the ACC after the ACC is raised than the other way around.

[tampabull]

We'd have 8 football schools to their 5-6. But actually, 16-teams strong. I would most certainly stand with our non-football members in this scenario, with no reason to expand.

You think that all Big East football members would somehow stay in tact? I can't see Rutgers saying no the Big 10 unless ND say yes and the Big 10 bails on Rutgers.

We would have 7 schools to there 5-6, plus the potential to start are own network in a couple years. I don't see any other big east school getting an invite to the big 10 other than rutgers. none of the other schools add much in respect to the big 10 network. Uconn won't go cause academics. The big 10 would much rather go after maryland than uconn

First, the ACC will not lose 6 or 7 teams... the most they will lose is four to the SEC and maybe one to the Big Ten (Maryland). The ACC will have as many or MORE teams than the Big East football side after the first round of expansion.

Second, you're discounting the Upstate New York cable market that Syracuse would bring to the table -- which is really about basketball.

Moreover, you still don't seem to grasp that the Big East non-football schools have more say about conference "expansion" - they won't go for a 20-team mega conference.

Chances are better than the remaining Big East football teams move to the ACC after the ACC is raised than the other way around.

you are probably right.  That is what I would do if i was commish.  The big east will be an all basketball conference more than likely.  The football schools don't carry enough clout to boot out the non football members.  I just think it would be financially lucrative to have a big east network.  The acc wouldn't be able to do that in the near future, because of the ESPN contract they just signed.

[Guest]

you are probably right.  That is what I would do if i was commish.  The big east will be an all basketball conference more than likely.  The football schools don't carry enough clout to boot out the non football members.  I just think it would be financially lucrative to have a big east network.  The acc wouldn't be able to do that in the near future, because of the ESPN contract they just signed.

It's not that they don't have the "clout" -- they actually don't have the LEGAL AUTHORITY in the Big East charter to boot the non-football members.  The non-football members hold the power.  Not to mention the potential loss of Rutgers, Syracuse, or more.

That said, the ACC contract most likely contains a "renegotiation" clause if the composition of the conference changes.  So you can forget the contract with ESPN -- any changes to the ACC will effectively (if not legally) void that contract.

In fact, an "ACC Network" with the Big East football programs would be FAR more lucrative than a Big East (Basketball) Network.

[tampabull]

I also see ND caving and joining the Big 10.  I know their ratings are dwindling.  I heard somewhere that their ratings last year was a 1.  Shows get canceled with a 5 rating.  It would probably make more sense for NBC trying to get a deal with a superconference or a good basketball conference than renewing in 2015 with ND.  Fanhouse had an article last year that their ratings were half of all the other conferences games.

http://ncaafootball.fanhouse.com/2009/06/15/as-notre-dames-tv-money-dwindles-so-too-should-its-independenc/

[tampabull]

In fact, an "ACC Network" with the Big East football programs would be FAR more lucrative than a Big East (Basketball) Network.

My statement was assuming the non football schools get the boot, and the big east football schools merge with the left over acc schools.  Like I said I was just stating what I would do as commish to generate more income and save the big east.