Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 35
  1. #21

    Join Date
    February 16, 2001
    Posts
    14,845
    The other conferences are not scared of what Notre Dame will do to the ACC. The ACC is no longer in jeopardy of falling apart. The B1G doesn't want ND and ND doesn't want to the B1G. They all want the new playoff and the new division because of the extraordinary money that it will make them all. As Mark Felt said, "follow the money".

    Quote Originally Posted by wwhokie1 View Post
    I don't know that the other conferences will want to pass a rule that will push ND into the ACC. That will strengthen the ACC and move them up in the conference standings. If you were in the BIG 10 would you vote to make the ACC stronger. Especially after ND turned you down.

    I think the more likely scenario is that ND and others will push to expand the playoffs to 8 teams. Most people think that will happen eventually. It would solve ND's issue and they could stay independent.

  2. #22
    Member
    Join Date
    August 07, 2013
    Posts
    91
    Quote Originally Posted by Stech View Post
    The other conferences are not scared of what Notre Dame will do to the ACC. The ACC is no longer in jeopardy of falling apart. The B1G doesn't want ND and ND doesn't want to the B1G. They all want the new playoff and the new division because of the extraordinary money that it will make them all. As Mark Felt said, "follow the money".
    I agree. It takes one more bid stealer away from the group. An ND outside the group is a wild-card but if we were to get a bid from the ACC most conferences would probably view it as a win for the P5.

  3. #23

    Join Date
    December 22, 2002
    Posts
    4,351
    IDK, Michigan, Bama, Oregon, FSU, etc... all have to recruit against the Irish, who have been granted special treatment from all parties. I think those days are numbered. ND will end up doing what the power 5 conferences tell them they have to do in order to remain a part of bigtime college football. If their unique place at the decision making table is taken away, they will quickly be in the ACC. As Steve Spurrier recently lamented, "why is the ND AD even at those meetings?"

  4. #24
    The next shoe to drop will be MD backing out on their commitment to join the B1G. Forcing the ACC to add Cincinnati to get to 16 and the B1G to add UConn to get to 14.

  5. #25
    Edgeman's Avatar
    Join Date
    January 05, 2001
    Location
    Virginia Beach
    Posts
    49,228
    Quote Originally Posted by Old Line Hokie View Post
    That's the #1 reason why I think Texas and Oklahoma don't want to expand past 10.
    Probably that, and the fact they (The B12) were told there would be no additional television money if they added more schools. Their current "10 school" payouts would now be spread across 12 schools (because there are no "value added" schools left to add").

    Really feel, and I've felt this all along, that the Big-12 is the weakest "Big 5" conference in the country. Not only are they the smallest & without a championship game, but every member (except Big TX & the Okies) wants to be somewhere else. The Dude can spin all he wants, but their days really appear to be numbered since their attempt to raid the ACC failed miserably. Which big conference are they going to try to raid next, the SEC? Big-10? Pac-12?

    I still have no idea why the SEC decided to do a joint "runner up" bowl game with the Big-12. It boggles the mind...
    "You start a conversation you can't even finish it
    You're talkin' a lot, but you're not sayin' anything
    When I have nothing to say, my lips are sealed
    Say something once, why say it again?"
    - David Byrne

  6. #26
    MEHOKIE's Avatar
    Join Date
    October 07, 1999
    Location
    In a van.
    Posts
    62,350
    Quote Originally Posted by ChrisLords View Post
    The next shoe to drop will be MD backing out on their commitment to join the B1G. Forcing the ACC to add Cincinnati to get to 16 and the B1G to add UConn to get to 14.
    Not possible. Maryland burnt its bridges

    Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk 4

  7. #27
    Edgeman's Avatar
    Join Date
    January 05, 2001
    Location
    Virginia Beach
    Posts
    49,228
    Quote Originally Posted by MEHOKIE View Post
    Not possible. Maryland burnt its bridges

    Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk 4
    I don't want them back.
    "You start a conversation you can't even finish it
    You're talkin' a lot, but you're not sayin' anything
    When I have nothing to say, my lips are sealed
    Say something once, why say it again?"
    - David Byrne

  8. #28
    Quote Originally Posted by Edgeman View Post
    Probably that, and the fact they (The B12) were told there would be no additional television money if they added more schools. Their current "10 school" payouts would now be spread across 12 schools (because there are no "value added" schools left to add").

    Really feel, and I've felt this all along, that the Big-12 is the weakest "Big 5" conference in the country. Not only are they the smallest & without a championship game, but every member (except Big TX & the Okies) wants to be somewhere else. The Dude can spin all he wants, but their days really appear to be numbered since their attempt to raid the ACC failed miserably. Which big conference are they going to try to raid next, the SEC? Big-10? Pac-12?

    I still have no idea why the SEC decided to do a joint "runner up" bowl game with the Big-12. It boggles the mind...
    The SEC wants to maintain its relationship with the Sugar Bowl and needs to have an opponent from another conference since no one wants to see the Sugar Bowl turned into an "All SEC" bowl. The SEC has several bowl games with the Big Ten, so it could have another one. However, the Big Ten has said it is not giving up its relationship with the Rose Bowl and it wants more bowl games in Florida (hence its agreement with the Orange Bowl). The PAC-12 prefers to have a relationship with the Rose Bowl and Fiesta Bowl, so that eliminates them. The only "major" conference that does not already have 2 bowl arrangements is the ACC and Big XII. From the Sugar Bowl's perspective, it makes more sense to have the Big XII instead of the ACC given the proximity of the schools to New Orleans. Since it is cheaper for Big XII fans to travel to New Orleans, then that should mean more fans will be willing to attend the game. I think the Michigan-VT Sugar Bowl game opened the committee's eyes on what could happen if it has an opponent from outside the region.

    Another reason the SEC could want a partnership with the Big XII is because if the SEC is going to expand, then it probably will look west. I say that because the rivalries the SEC wants to maintain are Alabama-Tennessee, Auburn-Georgia, and Alabama-Auburn. The reason Missouri is not currently in West Division is because it would require either Auburn or Alabama to move to the East Division and force the conference to sacrifice 1 of the annual rivalries I have identified above. The SEC doesn't want to have 2 protected cross-divisional games because that will delay the cross-divisional rotation that much more. I suspect the SEC will eventually expand to 16 teams and will want 2 "western" schools so it can move Alabama and Auburn to the East Division. Once that happens the SEC can abandon the protected cross-divisional game because all the important rivalries will now be in the same division. In terms of the potential western schools, Oklahoma and Texas are probably the crown jewels. Oklahoma and Oklahoma St are connected, so that could become a potential problem. However, if the Big Ten did have a change of heart and extended an invitation to Missouri, then would Missouri decline the offer (factoring in the money the school could make from the CIC)? If Missouri did leave, then that would open the door for the SEC to invite Oklahoma, Oklahoma St, and Texas. The conference would then look like this:

    East Division: S. Carolina, Georgia, Florida, Alabama, Auburn, Vandy, Tennessee, and Kentucky
    West Division: Ole Miss, Mississippi St, LSU, Arkansas, Oklahoma, Oklahoma St, Texas, and Texas A&M

    Just image the reaction from the ACC, Big Ten, and PAC-12 if the SEC would ever look like my suggestion. The SEC would clearly widen the gap from the other conference even further and probably ensure itself of having 2 or 3 teams in the playoffs every year. It would force the other 3 conferences to try to keep up which would be difficult to do even if Notre Dame did join a conference as a full member.

  9. #29
    Quote Originally Posted by VTHokie2000 View Post
    The SEC wants to maintain its relationship with the Sugar Bowl and needs to have an opponent from another conference since no one wants to see the Sugar Bowl turned into an "All SEC" bowl. The SEC has several bowl games with the Big Ten, so it could have another one. However, the Big Ten has said it is not giving up its relationship with the Rose Bowl and it wants more bowl games in Florida (hence its agreement with the Orange Bowl). The PAC-12 prefers to have a relationship with the Rose Bowl and Fiesta Bowl, so that eliminates them. The only "major" conference that does not already have 2 bowl arrangements is the ACC and Big XII. From the Sugar Bowl's perspective, it makes more sense to have the Big XII instead of the ACC given the proximity of the schools to New Orleans. Since it is cheaper for Big XII fans to travel to New Orleans, then that should mean more fans will be willing to attend the game. I think the Michigan-VT Sugar Bowl game opened the committee's eyes on what could happen if it has an opponent from outside the region.

    Another reason the SEC could want a partnership with the Big XII is because if the SEC is going to expand, then it probably will look west. I say that because the rivalries the SEC wants to maintain are Alabama-Tennessee, Auburn-Georgia, and Alabama-Auburn. The reason Missouri is not currently in West Division is because it would require either Auburn or Alabama to move to the East Division and force the conference to sacrifice 1 of the annual rivalries I have identified above. The SEC doesn't want to have 2 protected cross-divisional games because that will delay the cross-divisional rotation that much more. I suspect the SEC will eventually expand to 16 teams and will want 2 "western" schools so it can move Alabama and Auburn to the East Division. Once that happens the SEC can abandon the protected cross-divisional game because all the important rivalries will now be in the same division. In terms of the potential western schools, Oklahoma and Texas are probably the crown jewels. Oklahoma and Oklahoma St are connected, so that could become a potential problem. However, if the Big Ten did have a change of heart and extended an invitation to Missouri, then would Missouri decline the offer (factoring in the money the school could make from the CIC)? If Missouri did leave, then that would open the door for the SEC to invite Oklahoma, Oklahoma St, and Texas. The conference would then look like this:

    East Division: S. Carolina, Georgia, Florida, Alabama, Auburn, Vandy, Tennessee, and Kentucky
    West Division: Ole Miss, Mississippi St, LSU, Arkansas, Oklahoma, Oklahoma St, Texas, and Texas A&M

    Just image the reaction from the ACC, Big Ten, and PAC-12 if the SEC would ever look like my suggestion. The SEC would clearly widen the gap from the other conference even further and probably ensure itself of having 2 or 3 teams in the playoffs every year. It would force the other 3 conferences to try to keep up which would be difficult to do even if Notre Dame did join a conference as a full member.
    I thought when the SEC went to 14 the best idea I saw was move Vandy to the west and bring Bama and Auburn to the east. Then you can make Vandy-Tenn cross divisional rivalry.

  10. #30
    Quote Originally Posted by HokieDevil View Post
    I thought when the SEC went to 14 the best idea I saw was move Vandy to the west and bring Bama and Auburn to the east. Then you can make Vandy-Tenn cross divisional rivalry.
    Even though Vandy in the West could work, I believe the SEC did not want to split schools from the same state. The impact may not be felt in football, but it could be felt in the other sports. Even though the SEC may not officially use divisions for the other sports, I believe they still try to follow a divisional scheduling model. If Vandy was placed in the West Division, then it may be difficult for them to annually play Tennessee and Kentucky twice a year in basketball.

Posting Permissions

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