One of the points on my original post was a reference to learning from our past history. The last time the current players were all together and a conference and the conference was losing members was the old southern conference.
Completely different time and issues. It is interesting the president of vt was also the chair of the conference the year the acc split off. That was when our journey through the wilderness began. Academic needs vs athletic needs debates existed back then too as well as when the sec schools split off.
When you have a position like chair of a bcs committee, I assume there are duties and information that can help us. However, when dominoes fall, positions change. The position of chairman may give us a false comfort that we know is about to happen.
If part of our strategy is to stick in the acc. Don't be surprised to be left in that wilderness when the UVA,unc,Maryland, nd take a big 10 offer.
By the way if history repeats itself, the academic side will be hurt too because those academic partnerships we have with the acc will stop becuase those partners are now in the big ten and they would have new partners in the CIC as part of the big ten.
I guess if status quo is "fine" then we have a chance of being fine...
Originally Posted by Stech
So, I suppose it will work out but seems like a mess now. Correct.
I have tried on multiple occasions to tell people what you said, but there some that want us in the SEC and some that just don't get how strong a position that VT is in right now.
In the mean time, this should help Will bring back the page looks.
But, I'm not sure status quo will be fine. With these bowl arrangements and TV deals, the money gap will grow, making it harder to compete over time if you have less money. Coaches will use the lower-money conferences as training grounds for the big boy jobs (as they do now, but the ACC could now be a stepping stone job instead of a career job).
Again, some type of ND-level deal could close that money gap, but the ACC will likely need to give up some of that to the Domers, if not most in the near term.
And having Steger as head of the BCS committee feels a little bit like being head of the buggy whip manufacturer's association circa 1900 or so. You may know what's going on but it doesn't mean you can stop it or bend it to your extreme advantage.
I suppose you (Stech) have some knowledge of the goings on but I can't seem to connect the dots on how this will come out fine if fine is better than the status quo, which I think it needs to be to be OK in the long run.
Of course, in the long run, you never know what could happen. 20 years from now, people may be sick of college football, with the greed, over-exposure, cheating, same teams winning year after year. At that point, a more well-rounded conference could be an advantage if you aren't already too far behind. I'm a football guy, so don't think this likely...but you never know.
On another topic...is there any way the ACC could form a network for third-tier stuff (Olympic sports, etc.) and wrap in schools like Johns Hopkins (Lacrosse), some of the Ivy's and other northeastern schools (hockey), and basically east coast schools for baseball, soccer, etc.? I probably wouldn't watch this much but you would probably find enough people interested up and down the east coast to make it viable if expenses weren't too high. With the ACC being decent in many of these sports, it would run the operation (perhaps with an NBC, Fox, or whomever) and manage all the revenue sharing. Just a thought...
Those two statements are completely contradictory of each other. The ACC being forced to play at best the Champ of the Big East or non-BCS conference team is much worse than what we have now. The reason for that is the Big East is gutted, and the biggest 'name' programs we can expect to play in that conference in the bowl game going forward are the likes of UofL, Rutgers, UConn, and Cinci. From the other conferences, you're looking at playing at best the 3rd place finishers.
The payout for our biggest game going forward that we can play in the postseason is going to drastically fall. Drastically. We no longer can guarantee a marquee matchup. No matter who plays in the Orange Bowl, the sizzle of the matchup will pale in comparison to the B12-SEC and P12-B10 games, regardless of who they have in it. Unless we get in the Playoff, which will not happen most years, our champion is playing in a 3rd tier game at best. And you better believe the conference is going to get paid like it.
The gap in TV revenue was already present between the ACC and the others before this. This alliance cements the fact that it will continue to grow going forward, while they negotiate bigger deals, and the ACC remains where it is, having maximized the funds they will ever receive.
I guess I don't understand who everybody thought the ACC champ was going to be playing in the Orange Bowl in the future. We were never going to be playing the SEC or Big 12 champ or runner-up anyway. Those teams were going to be playing in either the new playoff (where, by the way, the ACC champ might be anyway) or the Sugar/Fiesta Bowls. The only thing that's going to matter in the 4-team playoff model is whether or not the ACC champ qualifies for that playoff in a given year. If they do, great. If they don't, who cares if the ACC champ is going to end up playing a #3 or 4 team from one of the other 4 leagues instead of a #2 or 3 team? The Orange Bowl still will NOT have to take a Big East or non-BCS team. THAT is the upside of doing away with AQ status. The ACC champ, even if it fails to make a playoff, will not have to play a Rutgers, UConn, or Cincinnati in the Orange Bowl.
Nor will we. And if what you suggest is true, which it is, then we would NEVER have a shot at playing SEC #2 in the Orange Bowl. I think this impacts the Orange Bowl TV contract and the money becomes more unequal.
We never had a shot at playing SEC #2 in the Orange Bowl anyway. Not in the old system. Not in the new system. This new bowl game does nothing to change that.
There is only one player of the four which offer a seat that has an athletic and academic organization associated with membership. Problem is there are others in our conference who are aau that would be taken ahead of us.
That is a risky move if it requires us to stick by those very organization with whom we would be competing. You are opening yourself up to processes you do not control.
I think we are over playing our hand and will wind up paying for it.
Finally not even notre dame joining will save the acc. See history of big east and the endless rumors they are moving to the conference of the day which never happens.