The domino effect has been accelerated with increased massive force. The Big Ten and the SEC are raiding the ACC for more expansion. Florida State, Clemson, Georgia Tech, UNC, Duke, Virginia, Virginia Tech, N.C. State, are schools that have been in discussions with either the Big Ten, SEC, or both. The ACC has acquired Pitt, Syracuse, and Notre Dame (all sports except football) coming in soon. UCONN is about to replace Maryland (should be announced soon). That's a solid soccer university, and overall soccer area, for the ACC. But one, some, or most of those schools above in bold text, may end up leaving the ACC, for greener pastures (such as the Big Ten or SEC). Money talks. One domino just fell (Maryland). When one domino falls, what happens to the others? Others will see they can "get out" too, for more money, and a more stable conference. The three "stable" super conferences in the future, are the SEC, Big Ten, and Pac 12. Those are the only power conferences not to lose a single member to another conference. The ACC seal has been broken. The Big Ten proved its superiority over the ACC. You won't see a Big Ten school leave for the ACC. But you will see at least one ACC school leave for the Big Ten (as we just saw). Stay tuned. These expansion effforts aren't done. The Big Ten wants to get to at least 16 universities. The SEC wants to at least match that, to stay equal or ahead of the Big Ten (and vice-versa).
The Big10 superiority has never really been questioned. But you need to be careful with your absolutes. The B1G lost Chicago in the dim past. And the SEC lost Sewanee, Ga Tech, and Tulane. And did you know that Idaho and Montana were PAC members once? I didn't
Oh, I meant in the realignment era, in just the past 2-3 years, ever since conference realignment started its move forward with real velocity. But I get your point. Attention Maryland soccer fans. You will be happy in the Big Ten. Just this past year, the Big Ten Network televised over 60 conference matches, from men's and women's soccer collectively in the conference. Almost half of those were live, the others were on delay by student broadcasting (although those student broadcast matches were on live on the Internet, tape delayed for HD viewing on the television a day or two later). See link below. I am NudgeWester in that link, as you can probably tell. Yes, go Northwestern soccer, lol. I have since e-mailed the Big Ten, and pointed out how the Pac 12 dominates them in total soccer coverage. That e-mail occured right before the Big Ten tournament. They replied back, and have stated that they plan to air even more soccer coverage on their network next season. So they will indeed continue to increase their coverage. They all but guaranteed it. Not to mention, through a contact of mine in the recent past I have heard they are interested in having BTN-2 (a 2nd Big Ten network channel), devoted more to Olympic and Women's sports (but would still have football and basketball on it for leverage and viewer-ship ratings). It would be negotiated as a package deal with the regular Big Ten Network channel. They would get even more revenue from cable/satelleting companies, by having two channels instead of one. Revenue sports (football and basketball) will also be on that channel (both channels), to help sell to cable/satellite providers. When doing research, Fox is buying out the YES network (the network of the New York Yankees). Fox is also part owner of the Big Ten Network (49% owner of the network). Fox will be at the negotiations, and will force YES and both BTN channels down cable/satellite companies throat on "Basic Cable" and "Expanded Cable" lineups (as opposed to on sports tiers). Cable/Satellite companies in the east will not be able to refuse carrying New York Yankees games, or else they lose a lot of their customer base. Simply put, Fox, and the Big Ten, are on board with strong-arming these cable/satellite companies in to carrying those networks. This expedited this particular acquisition (expansion of Maryland and Rutgers) to the Big Ten that much quicker. So ACC fans, and Maryland fans, you will like being a member of the Big Ten. It gives increased exposure to watch your soccer team on television that much more, and increasingly more in the future as the Big Ten adds its 2nd network. The Big Ten will not go the Pac 12 route by having six regional channels. Instead, two 24-hour networks are more than suitable enough for their soon to be 16-team super conference. Here is the article showing 60+ matches televised for 2012. It will continue to grow, and possibly double in televised collegiate soccer coverage soon. Article: http://btn.com/2012/08/07/btn-will-air-more-soccer-than-ever-before/
Here's another link citing sources, including sources with ties to a university president, regarding expansion. Looks like the ACC may lose a few universities sooner than we could imagine (to the Big Ten, SEC, and Big 12). The Big Ten has received an application from UNC to join the Big Ten. http://www.eersauthority.com/expansion-update-acc-on-the-brink/
If this comes to pass, the ACC will be a 5 1/2 school conference with a half billion dollar war chest collected from exit fees. Maybe they will then turn around and buy the B1G
If a company were told that their initial investment would cost $50,000,000, and they would get an annual increase in profit of $20,000,0000, they would do it in a heartbeat. Initial Investment = $50,000,000 Year 1 - $20,000,000 - additional TV revenue compared to now Year 2 - $20,000,000 - additional TV revenue compared to now Year 3 - $20,000,000 (they reach break-even by the midway point of year 3) Year 4 - $20,000,000 Year 5 - $20,000,000 every year afterwards - $20,000,000 (or more, as TV rights get renegotiated) The ACC schools are supposed to yield anywhere from an additional $16,000,000 - $25,000,000 per year (television revenue) in the Big Ten, compared to what they get now in the ACC. It's totally worth it for them to do that. Now, the Big Ten is supposed to be worth close to $500,000,000 soon in television revenue alone per year. They're up to an estimated $400,000,000 by adding Rutgers and Maryland. Bumping from 14 to 16 schools would move it up closer to $500,000,000, by expanding their footprint more in to the populated south (especially if they get the Atlanta market, by adding Georgia Tech). And that's just with one Big Ten network channel. Imagine if they add a 2nd Big Ten channel (which they plan to do), and charge cable/satellite companies (per subscriber) even that much more. Even if 8 schools left the ACC * $50 million exit fee = one time inheritence of $400 million for the ACC. $400 million .... That money is still not enough to buy one year's worth of Big Ten television revenue, with 16 Big Ten schools. In all honesty, I don't know what the ACC would do if they lost about 8 schools. Even 6 schools. I know they would merge with the Big East leftovers, and keep a basketball-first conference. They would still play football. I feel bad for schools like Boston College and Pitt, if they can't find a better home. I'm not surprised that Duke or Wake aren't courted by anyone. Duke is running 3rd in North Carolina (behind UNC and N.C. State) for being wanted as free agent universities by other conferences. Wake Forest is 4th on that list. They have no chance at getting in to the Big Ten, SEC, or Big 12. But you're right, the ACC will be rich for one year with money from exit fees. One year's worth of television revenue in wealth obtained from exit fees. They need to use that money wisely as they would try to rebuild a broken conference.
The analysis of the last three weeks and in particular your summation of if certainly drives home the point about what we have come to in college athletics. If there was ever any doubt, this makes it all abundantly clear what is going on. With the exception of the Ivy League and a few other D-I conferences... D-I athletics, and in particular big-time collegiate athletic conferences are not about sport. They are not about rivalries. They are not about team or school spirit. They are not about the players or their well being. They are not about student athletes. (They have nothing to do with the student's academic progress.) They do not support amateurism. They are not about students supporting their teams. They are not controlled to make sane regional scheduling. They are not controlled by the NCAA (which was nominally set up to referee this sphere by putting university presidents in charge.) They ARE about greed and money tied to football. Pure and simple. IT IS WHAT IT IS. The only sane way to go is to cut football (and maybe basketball) off on their own and have conferences set up for those purposes. Then the Olympic sports could stay in sane regional conferences. For example, a school could join three or more conferences depending on the sport. BCS schools would have their own conferences for big money professional football teams. Basketball schools would have their own conferences for their round-ball pros in training. And then then there would be regional conferences for soccer, volleyball, track&field, softball, etc. The NCAA may be irrelevant or not in the Olympic sports. Let the big money go its own way and try to salvage sanity in the non revenue sports. But even that might not be possible.
Actually, I was kidding. The last act the schools leaving the conference will make is to vote for the elimination of exit fees, and they will have Maryland as the tipping vote.
The leftovers from the ACC and Big East (and any other leftovers out there who used to be in prime conferences) would need to form one conference. This would probably drive BYU to eventually join a conference for football, and Notre Dame for football as well. I see both ultimately joining the Big 12 in the end. Notre Dame's president and A.D. have a very good relationship with Texas, and vice versa. In fact, the three of them (Texas, Notre Dame, and BYU) all had discussions a year or two ago about possibly creating their own conference one day. I don't think that's feasible anymore. I see Texas being able to bully Notre Dame in to joining their conference (Big 12) before it's all said and done. And BYU will eventually be the 16th member (or within the ultimate 16 schools in the Big 12). It could end up looking something like this: BIG: OSU, PSU, Mich, MSU, Neb, Wis, Ill, Iowa, Pur, NW, Ind, Minn, MD, Rut, UNC, UVA, GT SEC: UF, Tenn, GA, UK, Van, SC, LSU, Ala, Aub, Ark, Miss, Miss St, A&M, Mizzou, VT, NC State Big 12: TX, ND, BYU, Okla, Ok. St, TT, Bayl, Kan, KSU, I-State, WVU, TCU, Mia, FSU, Lou, Clem Pac 16: USC, UCLA, Stan, Cal, Ariz, ASU, Ore, OSU, Was, WSU, Col, Utah, SD State, Houston, Hawaii, Fresno ACC: Pitt, Wake, Duke, BC, Syracuse, UCONN, South Florida, Memphis, UCF, ECU, Cin, Temple, Villanova, Navy (and Georgetown, St. John's, Seton Hall, and Marquette for Basketball and Olympic sports).
I mean influence (re: money). The two schools have pondered about joining together, to make more money for both of them.
The money right now says that Notre Dame stays independent in Football. Texas's model isn't that they are willing to share with anybody, which is what lead to the Big12 imploding.
... Please stop guessing at Pac16 configurations. It's clear you have no idea at all in regards to them. The Pac conference would sooner go to the original 8 than a Pac16 like this.
Again, I'm kidding about the Pac 12. I'm making fun of them, since they won't have anyone left to grab for free agents. They would just stay at 12, and the inside word is that they're already somewhat regretting the addition of Colorado/Utah.
True. The qualifications that the Pac is likely to insist upon and the geographical location makes the pickings somewhat slim. That being said, think they're fine with 12 if the usual suspects stay suspects. Couldn't have gotten the new tv deal without them and the other options (besides the usual 4, or should I say 2 and their tagalong pair) weren't going to fit or meet the requirements. CO and Utah are fine imo but they'll just take a little time to get up to speed.
Not everyone was on board with Colorado and/or Utah's academics though. As far as television deals are concerned, they absolutely were great fits, to help get Denver and Salt Lake markets. They needed more markets away from just the west coast only. Now their footprint is nearly the entire western 30% of the geographic map of America.
Big chunks of that map are empty space. That 30% is a bit less impressive than it at first sounds once you get away from the coast. If geography ruled, they were just as well off when Idaho and Montana were in the PAC.
Oh agreed. But the other options were worse. There really aren't that many universities in the western half of the US that were available and whose academics would have matched Utah / Colorado's (plus: culture, d1 status, market). Yes.
Oh, I thought I was on a Soccer Website then I read this post and found out I was on a Football website! First, The moves being made by all these conferences is only about money....bottom line! Second, Soccer especially Womens Soccer has nothing to do with it. Womens Soccer is the farthest from their minds! Womens Soccer keeps Women Appeased and Title 9 alive. Third, Notre Dame(arguably the Biggest money grab college) didn't join the Big Ten for a couple reasons, money, Money, MONEY! They can make more Money being independent(even though they contract 5 games a year with ACC schools). They can make a tremendous amount of Money in Basketball and other sports.... the ACC just fit them better. Or maybe the ACC worked it out that ND could remain Independent and the Big Ten wouldn't work with them...HumHum! Lastly, How many recruits list the ACC as their first thing when deciding what school they want to go to? I would think the School, Coach, Location, Degree, Money,Playing Time, etc would be the first thing out of most recruits mouths. Womens Soccer at most of the Big schools will succeed no matter what league they are in!
You're preaching to the choir there. Of course it's about money, and of course it revolves around football, and not collegiate soccer (men's or women's). TV markets, demand from American football fans in those markets, overall expanded geographic footprint in new markets for television and recruiting, and total revenue overall, is what it's all about. Top academic institutions with premier research infrastructure, political pull, and grant money, etc., are also part of the equation as well, especially among university presidents. Women's collegiate soccer would make any university president laugh (male or female president). It is the last thing on their minds, as far as factoring in to this equation. All they care about is complying with Title IX, and nothing additional to it. Expansion has nothing to do with Title IX. Those athletes will still get to play, it just might be in a lesser league for some.
Yeah, I keep hearing that, but the choices in the last couple years have little to do with academics. Stop kidding yourself and look at the record. University presidents I am sure talk about academic integrity every time they meet, but if the money is right, they will make that choice. And the record for "special admits" shows they are willing to sacrifice academics for success on the field every time. Freedom of information requests show, for example, that U of California schools routinely admit over 90% special admits in all sports.
This is true everywhere these days, but less so in the Pac 12. The university presidents would never vote to allow horrible academic schools to join the Pac 12 conference, no matter what money they'd bring in. I guess Colorado and Utah were considered mediocre enough academically. Anyone worse than them academically, will not get in.
C'mon. Colorado made Playboy's top party school list for like 25 years running. They were there even there when I was in school in the 60's. http://abcnews.go.com/OnCampus/playboy-ranks-top-10-party-schools/t/story?id=13382984 Penn State and Arizona State are next.