Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 15 of 15
  1. #11
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    January 14, 2012
    Posts
    354
    The Big-10 was in a similar situation for a long time. It wasn't until the ACC deal took ND off the table for good that they felt free to expand to 14. In fact, they were stuck at 11 for the longest time because they wanted that 12th spot for ND whenever they decided to join. When 14-team conferences were becoming more feasible because of the TV dollars involved, only then did they add Nebraska, holding out hope that ND could be part of a future expansion to 14.

  2. #12
    Quote Originally Posted by Old Line Hokie View Post
    "Damned if you do, damned if you don't." That's how I've felt about Notre Dame since the day Swofford announced they were joining.

    As for 16, I've thought about that too. With existing GORs in place, only a few schools are somewhat attractive from the AAC like UConn, Cincinnati, and maybe USF. If Cincinnati could expand their footprint beyond southwest Ohio and maybe get into the Columbus and Cleveland markets, then they would be a nice addition. The problem is Columbus is the home of The Ohio State University and people in Cleveland hate everything Cincinnati. UConn gives the ACC another team for NYC viewers to follow since southwestern Connecticut is in the NYC TV market. UConn/Syracuse would bring good ratings for men's hoops in NYC. Connecticut with its 3.6 million population has more residents than other BCS school states like Iowa, Utah, Arkansas, Kansas, Nebraska, Mississippi, and West Virginia. Some "hope" that Texas joins the ACC or even 4 Big 12 schools, but that is more unrealistic than UConn or Cincinnati or even WVU.
    WRT to the "Cleveland Market," I am not sure that is necessarily an issue with Cincy. From a TV perspective, the ACC may be able to get its feet "wet" in the Cleveland market through Pitt given the close proximity of the 2 cities.

  3. #13

    Join Date
    September 23, 2001
    Posts
    8,806
    Quote Originally Posted by VTHokie2000 View Post
    WRT to the "Cleveland Market," I am not sure that is necessarily an issue with Cincy. From a TV perspective, the ACC may be able to get its feet "wet" in the Cleveland market through Pitt given the close proximity of the 2 cities.
    Having lived in the Cleveland area before, I can say no one there cares at all about Cincinnati or Pitt. Literally they get no coverage and no one talks about them. It's all Ohio State all the time. Ohio is a distant second, then the local teams (Cleveland State, Kent State, Akron).

  4. #14
    Quote Originally Posted by hokieball View Post
    Having lived in the Cleveland area before, I can say no one there cares at all about Cincinnati or Pitt. Literally they get no coverage and no one talks about them. It's all Ohio State all the time. Ohio is a distant second, then the local teams (Cleveland State, Kent State, Akron).
    Now I may be splitting hairs here, but I am not looking at it from the perspective of the market's interest in Cincy or Pitt. I am looking at it from the opportunity the ACC will have to broadcast regional games. For example, where I live I get what was the Big East regional package even though the closest Big East school was Temple. Why wouldn't the ACC (or any conference) use the same formula for its regional package? Now I am sure the network televising the Big East regional games and the Big East was not expecting to win the rating battle. What the Big East was hoping for was the opportunity to expand its brand of football and maybe catch the interest of casual college football fans channel surfing because their team was not playing at that time slot. Heck sometimes I even tuned into the Big East game because the Big Ten games (on ESPN, ESPN2, and ESPNU) and the regional ACC game were not "interesting" enough to watch. From the network's perspective, it is hoping that enough people decide to tune into the game to justify the rate they charge local companies to advertise during the game. Realistically it does not expect to be able to compete with national broadcasts or the regional broadcasts of national media outlets (i.e. ABC, CBS, ESPN, Fox, and NBC).

  5. #15

    Join Date
    October 07, 1999
    Posts
    75,976
    Quote Originally Posted by HOO86 View Post
    The ACC has taken a gamble on Notre Dame. The ACC has wanted Notre Dame since Gene Corrigan was commisioner in the 80s, and he proposed the current arrangement then. But he didn't get support at that time. The ACC is obviously hopeful that Notre Dame will like the place well enough to come on board if their fans begin to develop rivalries in the conference. At this point half the ACC schools have played Notre Dame less than 5 times ever. If they do decide to consider joining, it will be after hosting every ACC team in South Bend and getting closer to renewal of the contracts in 12 years. What the ACC has done is taken Notre Dame off the market for any other conference.

    I don't think that the ACC should be held hostage. The 14 member scheduling is not good. 16 member scheduling is better. The ACC needs to launch this network and analyze whether it makes sense to go past 16 in the future. If it does look like the trend that Gordon Gee talked about (18 to 20 members in conferences), then the ACC can go ahead and get to 16 football with Notre Dame at 17. But we need to get this network going first to pay for it.
    Definitely agree with this. I think the ACC's plan all along has been to get Notre Dame in as far as they could get them to start, and then wait for their fan base to get used to playing in the ACC for all other sports and for some real rivalries to develop in football. It may take 5-10 years, but I think that Notre Dame will eventually come in as a full conference member for football too.

Posting Permissions

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