Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 24
  1. #11
    BUGGZY's Avatar
    Join Date
    August 15, 2002
    Location
    Annandale, VA
    Posts
    13,709
    Quote Originally Posted by hokie4ever View Post
    A: TU, Baylor, TCU
    B: UM, FSU, GT
    C: CU, UNC, Duke
    D: UVa, NCSU, Wake
    E: VT, UL, Pitt
    f: ND, BC, Syr

    Two rotating divisions of 9 teams in groups of three.

    Rotation

    ABC
    ADE
    AFB
    ACD
    AEF

    You play your grouping every year and two additional groups. You end up playing everyone home and away every five years.
    i think i would still add a 9th game to allow rivalries to be protected in years where rivals weren't in the same division. in years they are in the same division, allow the league/ESPN to create the best tV/fan friendly matchups with the 9th game.

    with only 8 games, there would be years where FSU doesn't play Clemson, Clemson doesn't play NCSU, uva doesn't play unc, unc doesn't play ncsu, VT doesn't play uva, wake doesn't play dook, etc...

    those annual matchups need to be protected under any format change IMO.
    "This no more resembles that than something unlike something else resembles that." - Loosely quoting PHNC

  2. #12

    Join Date
    December 22, 2002
    Posts
    4,351
    Quote Originally Posted by Maroon Baboon View Post
    I'm not sure why everyone is talking about breaking up the BigXII. Under the same rationale, the ACC could dissolve just as easily. If Slive and Delaney decided they'd each want 4-6 teams each from the ACC, they could force the conference to disband with no exit fee or enforcement of the GOR.

    I don't get it. The ACC just weeks ago was close enough to breaking up that they sign a GOR, and now all of a sudden, Texas is going to become a member? And all this without Oklahoma? Doesn't make sense to me.
    I think that's exactly what the B1G was doin w/ FSU,UVA,GT,&UNC. They wanted the block of them. And I think the SEC could take FSU, Clemson, Miami, and a fourth straggler along in a heartbeat. However, I do think that things are done with the ACC for a while.

  3. #13
    Old Line Hokie's Avatar
    Join Date
    January 05, 2001
    Location
    3659′36″N 7813′30″W
    Posts
    3,481
    Quote Originally Posted by chuckd4vt View Post
    I think that's exactly what the B1G was doin w/ FSU,UVA,GT,&UNC. They wanted the block of them. And I think the SEC could take FSU, Clemson, Miami, and a fourth straggler along in a heartbeat. However, I do think that things are done with the ACC for a while.
    If those 4 you mentioned went to the Big 10, the SEC would've most likely went after Virginia Tech and NC State for new TV markets. Since the SEC had little interest in FSU and Clemson (opposition from UF and USC-e), I think the SEC would've stopped at 16 unless they could get someone Oklahoma or the SEC would have a change of heart on FSU and Clemson. I don't think the SEC would ever consider Miami. Maybe you meant to say "Big 12" not SEC?

  4. #14

    Join Date
    October 14, 2003
    Posts
    10,282
    I'd like to think Clemson would be picked up by the SEC if FSU/GT/UNC/UVa had went to the B1G. I know USCe prefer they not be in, but if the alternative was to send them to the BXII, maybe South Carolina state politics would pressure USCe to do what ever it takes to get them in the SEC (a la UVa-VT). So if they would have taken NCSU and VT, that would be 17. They'd need one more. Duke maybe?
    Quote Originally Posted by Old Line Hokie View Post
    If those 4 you mentioned went to the Big 10, the SEC would've most likely went after Virginia Tech and NC State for new TV markets. Since the SEC had little interest in FSU and Clemson (opposition from UF and USC-e), I think the SEC would've stopped at 16 unless they could get someone Oklahoma or the SEC would have a change of heart on FSU and Clemson. I don't think the SEC would ever consider Miami. Maybe you meant to say "Big 12" not SEC?

  5. #15

    Join Date
    October 14, 2003
    Posts
    10,282
    That was helpful. Thanks. The most interesting part of that was exposing how the Pac was trying to lure OU to get to UT. So UT contacting the ACC in attempt to move East shut them down. Kinda the same thing that teh B1G did with the addition of UMd.
    Quote Originally Posted by Old Line Hokie View Post
    A year ago Texas AD DeLoss Dodds said Oklahoma was the school that wanted to take Oklahoma State, Texas, and Texas Tech to the Pac 10 (now 12), not Texas. Dodds said Texas wanted to remain in the Big 12. A lot of people have Texas and Oklahoma joined to the hip but it sure didn't seem that way when Dodds was talking about realignment.

    Skip to minute 19:40 to hear what Dodds actually said. Its old news but its always good to go back to what he actually said publicly. His West Virginia comments are interesting too.


  6. #16

    Join Date
    February 16, 2001
    Posts
    14,845
    The B1G 10 tried and failed to get ND, UVa, UNC and GT. The SEC knew that they would only get VT and NCSU if the B1G succeeded, but they did not succeed. Consequently, the ACC is far more stable than the Big 12. If the rest of the Big 12 believes that Texas is leaving they are gone so fast it will make your head spin. In fact, some of the Big 12 have been heavily shopping other conferences...as we speak.

    Quote Originally Posted by Maroon Baboon View Post
    I'm not sure why everyone is talking about breaking up the BigXII. Under the same rationale, the ACC could dissolve just as easily. If Slive and Delaney decided they'd each want 4-6 teams each from the ACC, they could force the conference to disband with no exit fee or enforcement of the GOR.

    I don't get it. The ACC just weeks ago was close enough to breaking up that they sign a GOR, and now all of a sudden, Texas is going to become a member? And all this without Oklahoma? Doesn't make sense to me.

  7. #17
    hokiebob01's Avatar
    Join Date
    August 01, 2001
    Location
    Mint Hill, NC
    Posts
    14,525
    The ACC Heads already voted for 9 games once and after they looked into the impact they changed their minds
    Quote Originally Posted by BUGGZY View Post
    i think i would still add a 9th game to allow rivalries to be protected in years where rivals weren't in the same division. in years they are in the same division, allow the league/ESPN to create the best tV/fan friendly matchups with the 9th game.

    with only 8 games, there would be years where FSU doesn't play Clemson, Clemson doesn't play NCSU, uva doesn't play unc, unc doesn't play ncsu, VT doesn't play uva, wake doesn't play dook, etc...

    those annual matchups need to be protected under any format change IMO.
    I don't always talk to UVa Grads but when I do I always order the Large Fries.

  8. #18

    Join Date
    October 14, 2003
    Posts
    10,282
    Did the B1G offer all of them at the same time? Or were they hoping that after getting UMd that they could pick away. Gt first maybe, then work on UVa and UNC?

    If the SEC and B1G had worked together, do you think they could have made offers to the most desirable ACC teams and leaving the rest behind? I figured the only way this could have happened was to offer them all at once since the connections between UVa-VT, UVa-UNC, UNC-Duke, and UNC-NCSt were too strong to pry one of them apart from the other.
    Quote Originally Posted by Stech View Post
    The B1G 10 tried and failed to get ND, UVa, UNC and GT. The SEC knew that they would only get VT and NCSU if the B1G succeeded, but they did not succeed. Consequently, the ACC is far more stable than the Big 12. If the rest of the Big 12 believes that Texas is leaving they are gone so fast it will make your head spin. In fact, some of the Big 12 have been heavily shopping other conferences...as we speak.

  9. #19
    BUGGZY's Avatar
    Join Date
    August 15, 2002
    Location
    Annandale, VA
    Posts
    13,709
    Quote Originally Posted by hokiebob01 View Post
    The ACC Heads already voted for 9 games once and after they looked into the impact they changed their minds
    i know (the impact was only after ND was added to the scheduling BTW), but they also haven't expanded to 18 teams with 6x3 pods. i was simply stating that if that happened, they should have to (re)consider 9 games to maintain rivalries.
    Last edited by BUGGZY; Mon May 06 2013 at 10:04 PM.
    "This no more resembles that than something unlike something else resembles that." - Loosely quoting PHNC

  10. #20
    Old Line Hokie's Avatar
    Join Date
    January 05, 2001
    Location
    3659′36″N 7813′30″W
    Posts
    3,481
    Quote Originally Posted by Stech View Post
    The B1G 10 tried and failed to get ND, UVa, UNC and GT. The SEC knew that they would only get VT and NCSU if the B1G succeeded, but they did not succeed. Consequently, the ACC is far more stable than the Big 12. If the rest of the Big 12 believes that Texas is leaving they are gone so fast it will make your head spin. In fact, some of the Big 12 have been heavily shopping other conferences...as we speak.
    Just like the Big 12 failed to get Notre Dame and Louisville. Now that the ACC is getting closer to a network deal with ESPN, I could see the Pac 12 trying to add a few more members to try to increase the value of the Pac 12 Network. I don't know the money gap between the Pac 12 and the ACC/SEC/B1G. If the gap just got wider, then it's possible the Pac 12 adds a few more new markets (if there are any that would actually increase the network's value?). That's where the Big 12 comes into play. Maybe Oklahoma, Kansas, Texas Tech?????? If a handful of Big 12 schools start shopping around, it is open season on the Big 12. I would expect Jim Delany to be leading the charge. IMHO, Texas, Oklahoma, and Kansas will be the 3 schools everyone will court heavily.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •