In the wake of USC and UCLA moving to the Big Ten, here is what every league in college football should do

#2

n_huffhines

What's it gonna cost?
Joined
Mar 11, 2009
Messages
76,939
Likes
44,678
#2
The realignment, IMO, is the worst part of all of it. I like where we're headed with super conferences, but this interim is so lame. The poaching of the Big East in 2004 was the beginning of the end for the tradition I grew up with. I can't wait until I flip channels and see USC playing Purdue in a conference game and wondering "who gives any **** at all?"
 
#3

RDU VOL#14

I’m a Flawed Character
Joined
Sep 11, 2007
Messages
19,581
Likes
24,666
#3
#6

bamawriter

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 24, 2010
Messages
24,672
Likes
14,009
#6
What’s your opinion on where ACC teams wind up?I’ve said that I don’t see UVA, Duke and Carolina as SEC teams and would be a better fit in the Big 10. What do you think?
I honestly have no idea. I would suspect that UVA and UNC are the prizes for both the Big 10 and SEC, with Va Tech, Duke, and NC State in the second tier. I don't believe that Clemson is as valuable to the SEC as they are to the Big 10. And there's no way that the SEC would even consider Georgia Tech or Miami, but the Big 10 certainly might.

The issue with the Big 10 is the weirdness of their new geography. Your question was about the ACC, but I think any further expansion has to do something to help USC and UCLA. So, while Oregon and Washington were turned down for immediate consideration, I think that those schools along with Colorado and Utah have to be on the Big 10's radar. And as insane as it sounds, I wouldn't rule out the SEC being interested in Utah and CO as well.
 
Last edited:
Likes: RDU VOL#14
#7

RDU VOL#14

I’m a Flawed Character
Joined
Sep 11, 2007
Messages
19,581
Likes
24,666
#7
I honestly have no idea. I would suspect that UVA and UNC are the prizes for both the Big 10 and SEC, with Va Tech, Duke, and NC State in the second tier. I don't believe that Clemson is as valuable to the SEC as they are to the Big 10. And there's no way that the SEC would even consider Georgia Tech or Miami, but the Big 10 certainly might.

The issue with the Big 10 is the weirdness of their new geography. Your question was about the ACC, but I think any further expansion has to do something to help USC and UCLA. So, while Oregon and Washington were turned down for immediate consideration, I think that those schools along with Colorado and Utah have to be on the Big 10's radar. And as insane as it sounds, I wouldn't rule out the SEC being interested in Utah and CO as well.
The SEC expanding to Colorado and Utah would be interesting.
As far as the ACC goes, I heard Andy Staples talking about UNC and State possibly being legally bound. I’m thinking State would be happy to part ways if possible, but that changes things IMO.
 
#15

SpookyAction

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 3, 2019
Messages
1,497
Likes
2,692
#15
I honestly have no idea. I would suspect that UVA and UNC are the prizes for both the Big 10 and SEC, with Va Tech, Duke, and NC State in the second tier. I don't believe that Clemson is as valuable to the SEC as they are to the Big 10. And there's no way that the SEC would even consider Georgia Tech or Miami, but the Big 10 certainly might.

The issue with the Big 10 is the weirdness of their new geography. Your question was about the ACC, but I think any further expansion has to do something to help USC and UCLA. So, while Oregon and Washington were turned down for immediate consideration, I think that those schools along with Colorado and Utah have to be on the Big 10's radar. And as insane as it sounds, I wouldn't rule out the SEC being interested in Utah and CO as well.
VaTech has better tv ratings than UVA. I would think that makes them the preferred target for the SEC. UVA is a better cultural fit with the Big 10.

I don't know if UNC and NCState are linked, but so were OK and OkSt at one time when the expansion talk started during the Dooley years. Remember the splash about OK and TX going to the Pac10 10-12 years ago? and probably both being forced into taking OkSt and aTm with them.

CO wants into the Big10. They qualify academically.
Does Utah have the academic credentials to qualify for the Big10 membership? I can't think of the academic certification they use.
 
#19

volfanhill

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 5, 2011
Messages
25,811
Likes
33,122
#19
What’s your opinion on where ACC teams wind up?I’ve said that I don’t see UVA, Duke and Carolina as SEC teams and would be a better fit in the Big 10. What do you think?
They will be left in the cold. Sorry. Not a big enough money maker and not already married to a conference. UNC will have no problem moving on from duke for tens of millions of dollars. Vandy and duke would be in the same bed. But Vandy is already in the club.
 
#20

RDU VOL#14

I’m a Flawed Character
Joined
Sep 11, 2007
Messages
19,581
Likes
24,666
#20
They will be left in the cold. Sorry. Not a big enough money maker and not already married to a conference. UNC will have no problem moving on from duke for tens of millions of dollars. Vandy and duke would be in the same bed. But Vandy is already in the club.
I don’t know. Duke is a much more valuable brand than Vanderbilt. It might be a dumb way to measure the value, but Duke basketball has a larger # of followers on Instagram than Bama football or some small market NBA teams. We all know that this is football driven and UNC is the flagship university, but from a football perspective they’re the equivalent of bringing in Mizzou . UNC wouldn’t be thought of so highly if it weren’t for the basketball program. Im hoping someone will find that to be the case with Duke too. Hell Duke would get a better TV # in NY/NJ/Connecticut than Rutgers.
 
Likes: Pappy
#25

GVF

Absolut Orange
Joined
Nov 8, 2004
Messages
9,093
Likes
7,003
#25
My preference is not to dilute the SEC brand any more than has been done. I think the conference should not wholesale to a Super-C. Make it known that the other conferences can add as many teams as they want and still not be as good as the SEC. Keep it tight. Keep it regional. Keep it elite. Our current expanded regional footprint is still within the confines of a larger SE without going coast to coast. We have elite competition without placing excessive travel burdens on our schools. Texas and Oklahoma fit within that current footprint coming in. I say we sit on those 16 teams and be the best of the best.

It's a mis-conception to think adding this group of teams, or that group to this conference or that conference will improve their programs. At hte end of hte day, you still have the same schools recruiting the same players. It will not make Duke a football power in the B1G anymore than they currently are in hte ACC. In the same sense, the guys that choose Texas or OK are going there whether they are SEC or Big-12. If anything, it will make recruiting to Texas or OK more difficult. The opportunity to offer to play for a conference champ (or more) for those two schools diminishes exponentially upon entering the SEC full time.

Whatever the college landscape may be, or where it's headed, it's laughable that a west coast team is playing a conference game in the mid-west. See AAC and C-USA. The old BE conference was fine because it stretched the east coast just as the PAC-10 stretched the West coast. And had some decent teams.
 

VN Store




Top