ACC & Expansion: August Discussion~Texas
The folks over at Frank the Tank have been having some fun with expansion scenarios involving Big XII teams. As always, it is the imperialistic Big 10 looking to find colonies (schools) in new lands (markets). One person even posed the Texas/Oklahoma/Kansas/UConn idea. Well, our ACC is in a battle for survival. It is “eat” or “be eaten.” The Confidential believes that it is the ACC that needs to have its eyes on Texas. Any conference would be glad to have Texas, if the ACC can pull it off, it would cement the conference in the top 4. But how to do it?
Let’s address those who say that Texas to the ACC is impossible. Texas and the ACC have talked in the past. See Chip Brown’s article as to why Texas would want the ACC. This predates the Confidential. And Texas to the ACC would be that much smoother given ESPN’s role with the Longhorn Network and the ACC.
Why would Texas move? Notre Dame has set in motion the potential for creativity. Texas could be allowed to keep the rights to some games as a lure to get them on board. For all the talk of “setting precedent,” the only thing that matters is survival. The Big East did not fail because Miami made more money than Rutgers. The Big East failed because Miami left for more money. The Big East did not fail because it was a hybrid. It failed because it could not come up with a financial model that worked well enough for its best schools.
Giving special treatment may not be necessary in the Big 10 or SEC, but the ACC is not looking to compete with those conferences–it is looking to survive and thrive. The Confidential is of a mindset that the Big XII and ACC may end up in a battle to the death. There may not be room for 5 conferences. Becoming the #4 conference is much more important than how you get there. So do whatever it takes to get Texas and worry about it later.
How to do it? Presumably, Texas cannot move without Texas Tech or Oklahoma. The latter presumably cannot move without Oklahoma State. So there you go… a foursome that will likely travel en masse. How might that look?
How about this for the first four years:
Northeast: Syracuse, Boston College, Pitt, Louisville
Atlantic: North Carolina, NC State, Duke, Virginia, Virginia Tech
Coastal: Florida State, Miami, Georgia Tech, Clemson, Wake Forest
Southwest: Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Texas Tech, Texas
Sure, it stinks for Wake Forest–but the reality is that Wake Forest simply does not have a position to argue right now. If the ACC implodes, Wake Forest will be the team most likely to not find a seat. It is what it is.
But, with these uneven pods, the Northeast and Southwest could swap between the Atlantic and Coastal to always have an 8 game schedule. If a 9 game schedule… then the NE and SW could rotate through one game, same with the Atlantic and Coastal. This way… a Northeast team would always play each other… play the Atlantic and Coastal teams every other year… and play a Southwest team every 4 years. It’s not perfect. The loss of games between the Atlantic and Coastal schools is troubling.
The Coastal would have four solid football schools, all located in close proximity. A good way to beef up the strength of schedule.
Notre Dame? Work in their 5 game obligation, as possible.
Another option would be to go to 20 and have pods of 5, rotating more broadly. Presumably, some duo of UConn, West Virginia, Kansas, Baylor, and TCU would be in the mix for that.
The pod configurations could be changed after four years to allow more of the historical ACC rivalries to resume again. There are certainly a lot of options.
What do you think? Should the ACC pursue Texas at all costs?
The Confidential 
I say take Texas & Tech & let the others goto the PAC. The big question is the $$$, if everyone can keep the same payout, if not more, then I don’t see it happening. I myself wouldn’t mind going to 16, 18 or 20 if it meant survival but I think the ACC is stable with the GOR. Would it be wise to give Texas a similar deal as Notre Dames?
See, I like the idea of giving Texas the Notre Dame treatment, and here’s why: it doesn’t matter if Texas joins the ACC, as long as the Big XII dies. Harsh, but true.
Your premise, that there is a battle for survival between the ACC & B12, is on the mark. In general, making a play for UT is a good strategy.
Right now the media giants are making a bundle of money on sports and consolidation of college conferences allows schools to extract more of the revenue. Both the ACC & B12 relatively weak conferences…compared to the B1G, SEC & PAC.
Making the ACC accommodating to UT works on several levels. First, it shows that the ACC can grow and thrive as a larger entity. Second, UT is the brand program in college football. Third, it forces other leagues to offer less than ideal compromises in order to to maintain their standing. Finally, it demonstrates the relative weakness of the B12.
The one concern with going after UT is that it may drive out some of the traditional ACC members. UMD President Loh mentioned the ND accommodation as a reason for them leaving the ACC. Schools like UVA & UNC are at risk of flight if there are too many accommodations to ND & UT.
Texas does not get added without UNC’s blessing.
As for UVa, if they are a better fit for the Big 10, so be it. If they would rather play games against Indiana and Minnesota, don’t let the door hit you in the arse. UVa and Maryland are good at lacrosse, decent at hoops, and an afterthought in football. Cannot let the tail wag the dog.
It was UVA that pushed and got VT in whether than Cuse, so you might what to hear it but UVA still has a lot of voice in the matter. Also UNC has been mentioned as going to the Big x and so if UNC would whether play Indiana, Minnesota, and Purdue then don’t let the door hit ya where the good Lord split ya.
There are some Big 12 fans concerned that a conference championship fame may soon be required to make the playoffs, if that happens then they have to expand. Their viable targets are BYU, Cincy, UConn, USF & UCF. Their payouts will go down. Will Texas want to be apart of that watered down conference making less money? Dodds has already said that he would prefer to go east then west. Oh, & if the CCG happened then ND would have to come all in.
Not sure Teas is concerned about the money from TV revenue.
Also, if you are the Big 10, Big XII, and SEC, why force a conference championship? It just means that Notre Dame HAS to go to the ACC by contract. And Notre Dame in the ACC could mean fewer games for Stanford, as ND has to play Navy and USC every year OOC.
As long as the ACC plays 8 or 9 conference games then ND will have room to play Navy, USC, and Stanford. ND would like to keep the conference games to 8 or less allowing them to play MSU also.
I’m all for it. Honestly, I think fans of schools like UNC and UVA (myself included) would be much happier with those additions than when we added BC back in 05′. Texas is a much better cultural fit. The losses between the teams in the Atlantic and Coastal here would be a HUGE problem though. If the teams in the Atlantic had a choice, they would pick the schools in the Coastal first EVERY time. UNC and UVA have a lot less in common with the Northeast and Big Ten schools than most bloggers/the media want people to believe. We’re a southern school and the vast majority of our student body is from NC. We have to play Clemson, FSU, etc. or the fan interest just isn’t there.
I’m totally with ya on that, both UNC and UVA pride themselves as southern academic schools, but if God forbid the ACC were to implode then both would be going somewhere together. IMHO
There maybe ways to keep these games. You could use Pods or break up into east & west divisions. West could be Texas, Notre Dame, Texas Tech, Kansas, Louisville, Pitt, Syracuse, Boston College, Kansas St & Baylor. East could be Florida St, Clemson, Georgia Tech, Virginia, N Carolina, NC State, Duke, Wake Forest, Virginia Tech & Miami. I would prefer pods over this & i’m not normally a pod fan but it would protect rivalries.
Take Kansas while we’re at it, ND will join for a 20 school conference.
Sounds good to me. Either eat or be eaten.
I think that the ACC has more leverage than before now that it has the GOR. Maybe it’s wishful thinking on my part, but I think if winning a conference is a big prerequisite for entry into the playoffs, then ND would have to go all-in with the ACC…
I think you are right on – it is and will still be kill or be killed. Have to go for Texas. I still think had the ACC invited West Virginia at the time, the Big 12 would have been done. The academic prestige is a secondary issue nowadays. I also think bringing UConn at some point is a necessity just to prevent the Big 12 or Big 10 from expanding. UConn is the best school out there not locked up in one of the big five.
If the ACC was going to 18 then they might as well go to 20. Throw Kansas in with Texas, Texas Tech, Oklahoma and Oklahoma State. Hopefully Notre Dame would join if not add Cincinnati or UConn. Have 4 divisions for football,
North-BC, Louisville, Pitt, Syracuse, Notre Dame (Cincy, UConn)
East-Duke, NC, NCSU, UVa, VT
South-Clemson, GT, FSU, Miami, Wake
West-Kansas, OU, Okie State, Texas and Texas Tech
First thing, wow, adding Kansas plus either Cincinnati or UConn to the other ACC basketball powers.
Second, wow adding Oklahoma and Texas to ACC football.
I thought about that too.
I like it but can you get Kansas without Kansas St?
Hellz yes!
🙂
Pingback: Allen Iverson to Retire from the NBA? How is this news? | ATLANTIC COAST CONFIDENTIAL
Assuming the ACC would take this deal (including Kansas and UConn to get to 20) and these 6 schools would agree, not only would the ACC be the #1 basketball conference and the #2 football conference, but it would have a population base of 120 Million people!
(TX: 26 million, NY: 19.6, FL: 19.3, PA: 12.8, GA: 9.9, NC: 9.8, etc).
Now THAT is stability!
… check that: 131 Million!
(I had added NYC instead of NY)
I love it. It would be incredible to have Kansas in the ACC, espicially with Texas and Oklahoma. Would Kansas fans support a move to the ACC or would they prefer to stay in the Big 12?
To be in the 20 team ACC conference that is proposed here, HELLZ YEAH Kansas would want to be part of that!
I’m ok with Texas, especially if they bring Oklahoma. If the price is TT and OSU that is icing on the cake. If we add 4, I say add Kansas and go to 20.
I like pods but I think they have to have even numbers. I am very leery of making the pods too regional. One of the proposed pods has all BE members, another all B12 members. One has 3 of 5 BE members, the other 4 of 5 charter members. I think that leads to an us vs them attitude and makes a split too easy. The “zipper” mode, despite its faults, minimized that. I have no idea how to accomplish that with 20 teams.
Money would help keep it together. This would be the top academic conference, the greatest basketball conference ever created and would potentialy replace the SEC as the top football conference as well. Based on the B1G tv model, this would excede what they have created.
With Pods, you would rotate them each year so that would avoid the us vs them attitude. So over the course of 3 years, every school would spend at least 1 year in the same Division as every other school.
Year 1:
Division A = Pod1 + Pod2
Division B = Pod 3 + Pod 4
Year 2:
Division A = Pod1 + Pod3
Division B = Pod 2 + Pod 4
Year 3:
Division A = Pod1 + Pod4
Division B = Pod 2 + Pod 3