Conference realignment "Rumors" "tweets" "etc"

[UCF_rustbucket]

5 minutes ago, TallyBull said:

My thoughts FWIW (not much):

1. ACC is highly unlikely to ever take WSU, OSU, or Boise. Or Memphis. Just not enough bang for the buck from a media rights perspective - even for the Big 12. Plus, I don't think the ACC really wants to expand west. Adding Cal, Stanford, and SMU was a concession to ND, which will soon split for the B1G. I think those schools eventually realize that if they're not in the P2, they're better off reconstituting the Pac-12 with WSU, OSU, and a few other additions like SDSU, Boise, and Memphis, than remaining in the ACC. 

2. First three ACC adds, in order, would be UConn, USF, and Tulane. I think they probably only replace 1:1 and plan for the future departures of Cal and Stanford. SMU could either stick around or join the reconstituted Pac-12 described above.

3. Being in the ACC is far better than our current situation. It will still be viewed as a big step up from where we are in terms of money and prestige. I think the ACC survives on a level comparable to the Big 12 and reconstituted Pac-12. 

1. Agreed, the 3 western teams are too far and not good enough adds for being that far. Memphis I'd give dark horse chances depending on how many the ACC needs to add.

2. 1:1 probably makes sense though I wonder if it kicks in right away or if they're okay getting a little smaller. Meaning if they only lose FSU and Clemson to go down to 15 football members, they could stand pat potentially instead of adding to get back to 17. But if they start losing beyond that then they'll add.

3. Watered down P4 > G5 and it's not even close. The Big 12 and ACC CFP payments alone are bigger than the total payout for the AAC (TV + CFP+ bowls + NCAA credits).

[Bull94]

11 minutes ago, TallyBull said:

My thoughts FWIW (not much):

1. ACC is highly unlikely to ever take WSU, OSU, or Boise. Or Memphis. Just not enough bang for the buck from a media rights perspective - even for the Big 12. Plus, I don't think the ACC really wants to expand west. Adding Cal, Stanford, and SMU was a concession to ND, which will soon split for the B1G. I think those schools eventually realize that if they're not in the P2, they're better off reconstituting the Pac-12 with WSU, OSU, and a few other additions like SDSU, Boise, and Memphis, than remaining in the ACC. 

2. First three ACC adds, in order, would be UConn, USF, and Tulane. I think they probably only replace 1:1 and plan for the future departures of Cal and Stanford. SMU could either stick around or join the reconstituted Pac-12 described above.

3. Being in the ACC is far better than our current situation. It will still be viewed as a big step up from where we are in terms of money and prestige. I think the ACC survives on a level comparable to the Big 12 and reconstituted Pac-12. 

Cal and Stanford wanted nothing to do with big 12 for the academic reputation. they will not want anything to do with boise, sdsu and memphis

[TallyBull]

3 minutes ago, UCF_rustbucket said:

1. Agreed, the 3 western teams are too far and not good enough adds for being that far. Memphis I'd give dark horse chances depending on how many the ACC needs to add.

2. 1:1 probably makes sense though I wonder if it kicks in right away or if they're okay getting a little smaller. Meaning if they only lose FSU and Clemson to go down to 15 football members, they could stand pat potentially instead of adding to get back to 17. But if they start losing beyond that then they'll add.

3. Watered down P4 > G5 and it's not even close. The Big 12 and ACC CFP payments alone are bigger than the total payout for the AAC (TV + CFP+ bowls + NCAA credits).

Definitely possible but I think it's unlikely they lose only two. I think they'll lose however many schools have (under the table) P2 invites. I'm thinking some combination of FSU, Clemson, UNC, and Virginia get the call to P2 eventually and the ACC won't want to risk dipping below 15 teams at any point. 

[TallyBull]

3 minutes ago, Bull94 said:

Cal and Stanford wanted nothing to do with big 12 for the academic reputation. they will not want anything to do with boise, sdsu and memphis

True but that assumes they're getting the upside they anticipated getting in the ACC (money, CFP access, prestige, etc.). If, however, the ACC takes a step or two back due to losing significant teams, I think going back to a reconstituted Pac-12 is more likely long-term than staying in the ACC (with or without those schools). At some point Cal and Stanford will just have to suck it up. They have no long-term future in a watered-down east coast league. Might as well rebuild a watered-down west coast league, or join the Big 12 in protest, and save the travel headaches.

[Bull94]

2 minutes ago, TallyBull said:

True but that assumes they're getting the upside they anticipated getting in the ACC (money, CFP access, prestige, etc.). If, however, the ACC takes a step or two back due to losing significant teams, I think going back to a reconstituted Pac-12 is more likely long-term than staying in the ACC (with or without those schools). At some point Cal and Stanford will just have to suck it up. They have no long-term future in a watered-down east coast league. Might as well rebuild a watered-down west coast league, or join the Big 12 in protest, and save the travel headaches.

I just don't see it. even if they lose top few teams, The ACC is academically heads and shoulders above the big 12 or reconstituted pac 2. I think this still actually matters to some schools.

[UCF_rustbucket]

7 minutes ago, Bull94 said:

I just don't see it. even if they lose top few teams, The ACC is academically heads and shoulders above the big 12 or reconstituted pac 2. I think this still actually matters to some schools.

The PAC 2 also has a much bigger problem than trying to compete academically with the ACC. Right now it barely exists and there's not much incentive for anyone other than the MWC teams to really give it consideration. And in that case it's mostly for a full merger. 

[belgianbull]

3 minutes ago, Bull94 said:

I just don't see it. even if they lose top few teams, The ACC is academically heads and shoulders above the big 12 or reconstituted pac 2. I think this still actually matters to some schools.

I don't know. If a Duke, Stanford, Cal. Pitt, and Georgia Tech get the choice between being in a conference with us, Tulane, Syracuse, Wake Forrest, and Boston College or the Big 12, they will fall over themselves to get in the Big 12.

Again assuming the ACC loses more than 4 teams. If its just 4 the ACC will be fine. If its more the Big 12 will be in a good position.

[UCF_rustbucket]

21 minutes ago, TallyBull said:

Definitely possible but I think it's unlikely they lose only two. I think they'll lose however many schools have (under the table) P2 invites. I'm thinking some combination of FSU, Clemson, UNC, and Virginia get the call to P2 eventually and the ACC won't want to risk dipping below 15 teams at any point. 

Great point. Because if they lost 4 to the P2 they're now at 13 and there could be panic that if they don't stabilize quick enough, they'll lose another 4 to the Big 12 just like the PAC did.

[TallyBull]

8 minutes ago, belgianbull said:

I don't know. If a Duke, Stanford, Cal. Pitt, and Georgia Tech get the choice between being in a conference with us, Tulane, Syracuse, Wake Forrest, and Boston College or the Big 12, they will fall over themselves to get in the Big 12.

Again assuming the ACC loses more than 4 teams. If its just 4 the ACC will be fine. If its more the Big 12 will be in a good position.

I think this is the best possible result for USF. UNC and Virginia end up in the B1G, and FSU and Clemson end up in the SEC. Everyone else stays, they tack on UConn and USF (maybe also Tulane?), and they leave a little room for potential Big 12 poaching down the road (Utah, Kansas). 

On a separate note, this could all happen very quickly. If FSU, Clemson, UNC, and Virginia all leave via settlement, the ACC needs to be on the horn to add back up to 16-17 at basically the same time to keep the ESPN contract, assuming that contract isn't modified at some point.

Edited March 19 by TallyBull

[Mike Stuben]

14 minutes ago, TallyBull said:

I think this is the best possible result for USF. UNC and Virginia end up in the B1G, and FSU and Clemson end up in the SEC. Everyone else stays, they tack on UConn and USF (maybe also Tulane?), and they leave a little room for potential Big 12 poaching down the road (Utah, Kansas). 

On a separate note, this could all happen very quickly. If FSU, Clemson, UNC, and Virginia all leave via settlement, the ACC needs to be on the horn to add back up to 16-17 at basically the same time to keep the ESPN contract, assuming that contract isn't modified at some point.

I think they add one less than what leaves to get to 16. So if 4 leave, I think 3 get added (USF, UConn, Tulane)