I say go for the gusto Miami FSU Clemson, Georgia Tech
I say go for the gusto Miami FSU Clemson, Georgia Tech
The only real difference is that UF is dedicated to playing FSU where we are rotating among FSU, ND, Miami, Tennessee, LSU, UCLA, Washington, tOSU etc. Georgia is slightly different because they will actually play some other than GT in OOC (OSU, Boise, Clemson), but Georgia Tech is usually a top 40 team not top 15.
the BIG is going to 16 that much is a lock ... who they get will drive the next phase of realignment ... (if they get UVA and GT) then the ACC is dead
So, Redhawk have you come over? You now think, for sure, that we are going big to 14 or going home and her comes Clemson, FSU, Louisville and Cincinnati?
I really hope we get to 14. I like FSU and Clemson. Louisville good for women's and men's basketball. FSU good for women's soccer.
Cincinnatti -- wish we could find something better, but it would be fun beating the crap out of Tubberville every year. What a douche.
Why settle for Louisville and Cincy so early?
Start with FSU and Miami
you should then be able to get GT and Clemson
next would be UNC and NCST if the SEC and Gig 10 don't expand anymore
Louisville/VT and Cincinnati will be there if one or more of those 6 go elsewhere
The core of the ACC still wants to stay together I think. Is FSU one of that core? I think FSU is playing everyone off everyone else, not unlike UT did 2 years ago when OU/OSU were going to the PAC and Notre Dame did this past summer. I'm not convinced that FSU wants to move from the ACC to the Big 12, or even the SEC. To get them I think it would take a deal like the PAC was offering in 2010 to 6 of the Big 12 schools to come as a group. BUT..again, I think the ACC group really wants to stay together.
To me the key is UNC. If they move then it's on. If they don't, then they could easily keep a core of the ACC together. If that core is there, I'm not convinced that FSU leaves for the Big 12.
The ACC has 14 members. They could lose 2 and be at 12 and could be fine. They could even lose the right 4, replace 2 with Cincinnati and UConn and be just fine as well. The key 2 that the ACC can't lose is UNC....and FSU. GT & Clemson maybe in that "can't lose" group as well.
Miami wants in...even alone. So we could add Miami next week. Miami still moves the TV needle, even with a stadium of empty seats and a mediocre football team with huge looming NCAA penalties.
Can someone start a new thread when something of substance is actually said or happens? That way we do have to sift through 30+ pages of rumors.
I keep hearing this being spouted on message boards the last week or two. Do you have link that supports what you are asserting or is it just another tieback to the tool of wvu and his ilk?
If you think there's nothing going on and that realignment is over, you're not paying attention. Yes, there will be a lot of misinformation. That is on purpose.
Then you are right on a lot of this I think. I think there is a LOT of that going on. But for me on this one, I'm pretty sure that is not the case....but I could be wrong.
I just shared what I heard, and what I got, from people that know people that know stuff. I'm not sure how accurate any of its. They were pretty excited about FSU & Clemson last summer and you see what that got us.
The FSU/Miami stuff is coming from guys with media connections to Fox and a KU insider, "Colton." Doesn't make it legit, but it's not just a moonshiner rumor. Helps the rumoring that Bowlsby keeps doing expansion interviews and the league is having an expansion meeting next week.
You apparently knew what I meant, otherwise you wouldn't have made that statement. I, like most on here, want to know when something significant happens with OU and/or the Big 12. I don't much care if the B1G gets Rutgers. So my statement meant that when we have some concrete news about OU instead of a bunch of rumors that never come to fruition.
Gee told Athletic Council Big Ten expansion talks "ongoing"
Ohio State president E. Gordon Gee told the school’s Athletic Council in December that discussions about further expansion for the Big Ten conference are “ongoing.”
In November, the league announced the addition of Maryland from the Atlantic Coast Conference and Rutgers from the Big East. Nebraska joined the Big Ten for the 2011-12 school year after leaving the Big 12.
It doesn’t appear that the Big Ten is necessarily content to stay at 14 members. According to the minutes of the Dec. 5 Athletic Council meeting obtained by the Dispatch, Gee said “there has been ongoing discussion” about expansion and “believes there is movement towards three or four super conferences that are made up of 16-20 teams.”
When a student member of the Athletic Council asked Gee what direction the Big Ten might take, Gee said “there are opportunities to move further south in the (E)ast and possibly a couple of Midwest universities.”
He did not specify any potential targets but said they will make sure any new school has “like-minded academic integrity.”
The Athletic Council is expected to recommend formally today an increase in Ohio State football ticket prices from $70 to $79 with the addition of "premier" games that would cost significantly more. The board of trustees is expected to vote on the proposal late next week.
4 playoff spots, four "super conferences".about expansion and “believes there is movement towards three or four super conferences that are made up of 16-20 teams.”
Rutgers and Maryland aren't Midwest, either.
Maybe all this ACC talk is a distraction, while the B1G goes after Missouri and Kansas. I can't wait until Dodd comes out and says that 9 members is really the perfect number.
As for B1G taking Missouri, think of the ramification of that, the B1G taking from the perceived impenetrable SEC. Granted it's not the same as taking a Florida or Georgia, but it would be stealing from the school bully's lunch tray for sure.
Bowlsby declined to name the other two leagues, but the Pac-12 Conference is presumed to be one of them because that 12-team league is landlocked with the Big 12 to its east, which makes Pac-12 expansion with like major-college institutions more geographically prohibitive.
Bowlsby said the topic would probably be discussed during the two-day meetings of the Big 12 athletic directors that begin Monday in Grapevine but stressed that “certainly nothing is imminent” about a potential alliance.
Such a partnership would include football and basketball but could be expanded to other sports as well. The agreement could also involve participation between the leagues in bowl games to “share post-season inventory, allowing us more flexibility.”
“It’s purely exploratory,” Bowlsby said, but added that the involved leagues have had “multiple discussions” about it.
Bowlsby said the potential move should not be interpreted as a precursor to future expansion in light of the SEC’s additions of Texas A&M; and Missouri and the Big Ten’s more recent move to invite Maryland from the ACC and Rutgers from the Big Ten.
“If anything, it’s the opposite,” Bowlsby said. “You can begin to get some advantages without taking on any of the disadvantages (of expansion). It’s one option that allows benefits. It’s kind of like friends with benefits. I
ACC commissioner John Swofford could not be reached for comment.
I'm betting ACC/Pac12 and MWC and we end up "expanding" without expanding by playing late season marquee games
What would the alliance even mean? Simply that the ACC would be our out of conference games?
That Statesman article is Texas and Dodd trying to slow this expansion stuff down. Texas doesn't want it because they know they could lose power if you bring in Clemson, FSU, Louisville and one other. Clemson and Louisville would align with us on issues. FSU to because they are likely to get put into the division with Texas.
The talks are just stalling for time, unless they underlying deal is for us and Texas to somehow join the Pac 12 and get them/us to 16 or 20 in a conference.
"Friends with benefits"...give me a break.
In other words, we have just surrendered two playoff spots to the SEC and B1G Ten every year.
And considering the position of the SEC #2, we're essentially rigging up a play-in for the 4th and last spot?
However it specifically works out, I don't think I like it.
We are still at a disadvantage without the 13th game that the ACC and PAC-12 have (CCG). Can you imagine the three-way argument between 12-1 USC, 12-1 FSU and 11-1 OU. Or say it's 11-2 Oregon and 11-1 OU and Oregon just beat 11-1 USC for the Pac-12 Title. We are on the outside looking in.
We need to have a 13th game, a CCG on that final weekend for visibility.
In other words, the PAC-12 and ACC champs could have 14 games under their belt when the playoff committee begins to deliberate. While the Big 12 champ would have 13. Maybe we'd be okay a lot of years...but you know there will be that one year that will cause a ****ing riot. Why not try to avoid that?
I was wondering how the MWC would figure in...maybe that's it.
Maybe the Big 12 champ and the MWC champ will play on CCG weekend giving us 13 before the effective 'quarterfinals'.
Just thinking out loud, people. Don't crucify me.
Another aspect of B1G expansion to think about is the role of the CIC. The CIC benefits from adding more (good) schools into its own network, as it leads to shared resources and leveraged politics with the senators, governors, representatives, and Fortune 500 companies associated with the member institutions. Maryland's state and federal representatives are now budget advocates for the CIC and ostensibly all the member institutions therein. If the B1G keeps expanding, that's more advocates (or allies) in Congress, state capitals, and corporate America. What's good for one university in the CIC is good for all, and what's good for the CIC is good for each university (and thus the states and businesses connected to each university as well). So not only does the coercive tax of a subscriber fee for the Big 10 Network suggest continued spread into new population centers, so does the CIC encourage the same absorption of new territory. It's ingenious and I'm jealous of the strategic thinking.
Good stuff guys
If such a thing is possible, can you imagine a 24 team Big XII/PAC 12 with two cross divisional games at the end of the season (say PAC 1 vs B12 2 and the converse) to see who gets the two bids?
Just another interesting possibility.
A PAC merger dropping WV making a 20 team super conference could be another possibility.
Is it time to unleash our lawyers yet?
I think it is time to face the reality that you were duped. If anything, today's comments by Bowlsby were meant to throw water on a fire the Big 12 knew it couldn't deal with. ACC schools don't want to join the Big 12. They aren't going to be joining the Big 12. Bowlsby couldn't come across blunt because he knew the meltdown that would occur because bloggers in Big 12 land had created unrealistic expectations of what the Big 12 could get. This way he could douse the fire without looking like a complete imbecile.