• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

Conference Realignment Thread: New B1G divisions

Not sure why, but this quote from an ESPN article made me laugh:

"A Big East source from a football-playing school told ESPN on Sunday, "The basketball schools are not thrilled with Tulane" and "would have fallen off the ledge if we would have added East Carolina as a full member."
 
PhDeac said:
Not sure of your point. Texas has seriously talked and not made a move. Like I said, it comes down to the egos of Texas and UNC.

And not sure what is interesting about the above. The East Coast has more people than other regions of the country.
Click to expand...

The point is that the mere fact that Texas was talking seriously seems to logically put that conference on shiftier sand. If it comes down to the egos of Texas and UNC as you said, only one of those schools has been talking and it ain't UNC.

What is interesting about the state populations is that the Big 12 lost a lot of geography when Nebraska and Colorado and Missouri left, and that equals TV viewers. Colorado and Missouri have 5mil and 6 mil people so the Big 12 lost two important states/audiences. Just don't see why the Big 12 gets so much props in the recent realignment. To me, the conferences are:

SEC
Big Ten
Pac-12/ACC
Big 12

The SEC, Big Ten and Pac 12 have strengthened themselves over the last few years. I think the ACC has strengthened itself with the recent additions, but I'll accept that it is arguable. The Big 12 has lost strength in the last 3 years, significant strength.

UConn and Cincy aren't begging to get in the Big 12, they are beggin to get in the ACC
 
"Just don't see why the Big 12 gets so much props in the recent realignment."

Because realignment is about football and the Big 12 has better football programs than the ACC.
 
jaybone said:
The point is that the mere fact that Texas was talking seriously seems to logically put that conference on shiftier sand. If it comes down to the egos of Texas and UNC as you said, only one of those schools has been talking and it ain't UNC.


SEC
Big Ten
Pac-12/ACC
Big 12

The SEC, Big Ten and Pac 12 have strengthened themselves over the last few years. I think the ACC has strengthened itself with the recent additions, but I'll accept that it is arguable. The Big 12 has lost strength in the last 3 years, significant strength.

UConn and Cincy aren't begging to get in the Big 12, they are beggin to get in the ACC
Click to expand...

Big 12 Football > ACC Football = Big 12 $$$ > ACC $$$
 
PhDeac said:
"Just don't see why the Big 12 gets so much props in the recent realignment."

Because realignment is about football and the Big 12 has better football programs than the ACC.
Click to expand...

The Big 12 had significantly better football programs before realignment with Nebraska and Missouri, both of whom played in the Big12 championship in the two or three years before they left. Losing those two and adding West Virginia makes them less better than they were before.

The addition of Syracuse, Pitt, Notre Dame, and Louisville, currently four of the top 5 programs in the Big East are going to make the ACC branding way more dynamic than it has been recently. Not in football right away, but hoping it comes around. The potential must be there, or Cincy would have been begging into the Big12, not the ACC.

The ACC brand is strong as it is, stronger with the additions. What is the Big 12 brand? Seems in transition. They failed to add schools West because of the hangup with Texas. West Virginia jumped because one, the then new Big 12 commissioner put the house in pretty good order, but also because the ACC said no.
 
jaybone, what does all this have to do with my simple point that it comes down to the egos of Texas and UNC?

If either decides to leave their conference, the conference is severely damaged.
 
PhDeac said:
jaybone, what does all this have to do with my simple point that it comes down to the egos of Texas and UNC?

If either decides to leave their conference, the conference is severely damaged.
Click to expand...

Well one, it is an oversimplification that cuts out a chunk of negatives (mizzou, nebraska, colorado). Those schools left directly BECAUSE of Texas' ego/stranglehold over the Big 12. Maryland left indirectly due to the ego/stranglehood over the ACC by a cluster of schools, not just UNC.

All of these things, including the fact that Texas talked to three OTHER conferences in the last 18 months, make your simple point too simple. Regardless, history tells us that if you are correct, UNC has shown more loyalty than Texas both recently and historically.
 
jaybone, I think you're making my point way to complicated.

This is how make a counter argument.

I say: "it comes down to the egos of Texas and UNC."

You counter argue by explaining how it does not come down to the egos of Texas and UNC.

You seem to be arguing that it comes down to Texas' ego which doesn't go against what I posted.
 
Your original point was that the ACC is behind the other four conferences. I argued no. You said it comes down to Texas and UNC. I say that strengthens my argument that the ACC is NOT behind the Big 12. I use the other schools because that supports my argument. Schools are trying to join UNC's conference, not Texas' conference. They trust UNC's ego more than Texas'. Thus I don't consider it a superior conference going forward. That's the counter.
 
Schools are trying to join either.
 
By setting up the Longhorn network, by seeking to go to the Pac 12, by possibly seeking entry into the ACC, Texas' actions demonstrate a weak commitment to the Big 12. For all of its flaws, have not seen the same out of UNC to date. Unlike Texas, UNC's priority seems to be to keep the ACC together - which is a legit argument to claim that the ACC is ahead of the Big 12 in the BCS conference stability order (which I agree with).
 
PhillyDeac said:
Random thought, would UNC go anywhere withouth Duke? I honestly have no idea if either gives a shyte, but curious..
Click to expand...

Don't think so. I don't think UNC would abandon State either. Can't say the same for UNC staying tethered to WF.
 
I think the North Carolina State Legislature will force any move UNC makes contingent on taking the Wolfies with them. Kinda like what happened in Virginia when Tech entered the ACC.
 
Pilchard said:
By setting up the Longhorn network, by seeking to go to the Pac 12, by possibly seeking entry into the ACC, Texas' actions demonstrate a weak commitment to the Big 12. For all of its flaws, have not seen the same out of UNC to date. Unlike Texas, UNC's priority seems to be to keep the ACC together - which is a legit argument to claim that the ACC is ahead of the Big 12 in the BCS conference stability order (which I agree with).
Click to expand...

Texas needs the Big XII in order to keep their power. That's why they haven't left and why they will keep working to safe the Big XII.
 
But that is not necessarily true of Oklahoma and OK state. They too had separate conversations with the pac12 and maybe the sec
 
Pilchard said:
By setting up the Longhorn network, by seeking to go to the Pac 12, by possibly seeking entry into the ACC, Texas' actions demonstrate a weak commitment to the Big 12. For all of its flaws, have not seen the same out of UNC to date. Unlike Texas, UNC's priority seems to be to keep the ACC together - which is a legit argument to claim that the ACC is ahead of the Big 12 in the BCS conference stability order (which I agree with).
Click to expand...

I agree with this assessment of UNC. I hope it continues to be the case.
 
tvcigar said:
I think the North Carolina State Legislature will force any move UNC makes contingent on taking the Wolfies with them. Kinda like what happened in Virginia when Tech entered the ACC.
Click to expand...

Unless a UNC move coincides with a move for NC State (UNC to the Big Television and NC State to the SEC).
 
jaybone said:
Your original point was that the ACC is behind the other four conferences. I argued no. You said it comes down to Texas and UNC. I say that strengthens my argument that the ACC is NOT behind the Big 12. I use the other schools because that supports my argument. Schools are trying to join UNC's conference, not Texas' conference. They trust UNC's ego more than Texas'. Thus I don't consider it a superior conference going forward. That's the counter.
Click to expand...

Are you conveniently leaving out FSU/Clemson's discussions with the Big 12 last year (while many seem to think FSU continues those talks)?
 
Last edited:
Pilchard said:
Don't think so. I don't think UNC would abandon State either. Can't say the same for UNC staying tethered to WF.
Click to expand...

I think they would abandon Duke if the situation becomes dire. I think the only way Duke stays linked to UNC, if UNC decides to leave, is if the Big 10 is willing to go to more than 16 teams. Meanwhile, UNC + NC State are much more linked by the legislature, but they would split if both find a comfortable home (Ie: UNC to Big 10, NC State to SEC).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top