By registering with us, you'll be able to discuss, share and private message with other members of our Texas Longhorns message board community.
SignUp Now!Every single conference has dead wt. hopefully no more than 33%. Also, if ur dead wt can make a bowl game twice a decade that would be good. All conferences need some dead wt but the type that can once a decade win 8 games makes it good.ACC is a step fown because the bottom 40% of that league is full of deadweight.
The top half of the ACC can be very profitable under the right circumstances.
Big 12 doesn't have as strong a top half (from a TV sets and potential, but the Big 12 has 2 behemoths and not as many deadweight teams.
Combine the top 4 to 6 teams in the Big 12 with the top half of the ACC and you get a very nice balance.
U make some good point but by ur calculations, Texas is not a Sec state.Since when did Notre Dam join the ACC in football. Last I counted they were still independent and will always be.Also, who is the ACC school in NJ? Last I heard Rutgers was going to the BIG. The ACC footprint is a bit of a stretch. Lets look at the states.
FL, GA, NC, SC, VA, KY, MA, NY, PA.
In these states, FSU is 2nd to FL in fan passion but that is pretty close, so Florida is an ACC state.
GA is an SEC state with a few GA Tech fans in Atlanta. There are more Auburn fans in GA than GA Tech Fans. Tech is the 3rd school in the state. I would not give the ACC a strong presence here.
NC - ACC dominates the state. 4 schools, no competition.
VA - ACC controls the state.
KY - SEC State, Louisville has such a tiny market share in the state, it would be unfair to call KY an ACC state. Most cable operators would see that as the case too.
MA - Boston is a Pro Sports town. But BC is a nice addition otherwise.
PA - Penn is a Big 10 state. Penn State controls the state. Pitt has a small niche following in Pittsburgh and Western PA. However 90% of the fans follow Penn State. I don't thing fans would clamor to see ACC football because of Pitt.
NY - Syracuse is nice, but they are not NYC. Western NY is a different animal and not the New York Market.
You see, In reality you do not get the fan base in the new ACC that they are trying to sell. The schools are all #2-3 in their state and do not control the market. That is why the upside is not there and it is illusory
Besides NC and MA. The ACC will not be the dominate conference in the market vying for attention. It will always be the little brother to the SEC. Unless North Carolina becomes the next Florida, this will not change.
Yes, such a league would be a monster. But would ND want it? Not as much as it plans to make hay in the ACC. Of the Big 12, ND wants to have a close relationship with Texas, would be fine with playing Baylor and OU fairly often, and might care to play TCU in the Jerry Dome once per decade. But the rest - no interest.ACC is a step fown because the bottom 40% of that league is full of deadweight.
The top half of the ACC can be very profitable under the right circumstances.
Big 12 doesn't have as strong a top half (from a TV sets and potential, but the Big 12 has 2 behemoths and not as many deadweight teams.
Combine the top 4 to 6 teams in the Big 12 with the top half of the ACC and you get a very nice balance.
Im pretty sure ND doesnt care to play Wake Forrest or Duke also.Yes, such a league would be a monster. But would ND want it? Not as much as it plans to make hay in the ACC. Of the Big 12, ND wants to have a close relationship with Texas, would be fine with playing Baylor and OU fairly often, and might care to play TCU in the Jerry Dome once per decade. But the rest - no interest.
Of the ACC, the only school that ND has no interest in playing is NC State, and that is because there are three other NC schools in the conference. For reasons of recruiting or ND fans living nearby or football history or institutional ties, ND is happy to play the other 13.
And that doesn't speak to what ND wants for the rest of its sports.
Here is an ESPN article on ACC football as bowls approach.Every single conference has dead wt. hopefully no more than 33%. Also, if ur dead wt can make a bowl game twice a decade that would be good. All conferences need some dead wt but the type that can once a decade win 8 games makes it good.
In very recent years, ND has played Home-Away series with both Wake Forest and Duke. The same ND that refused, for example, to play Rutgers unless it agreed to play its Home games vs. ND at Giants stadium played in the home stadiums of both Duke and Wake Forest. Neither stadium seats more than 35,000.Im pretty sure ND doesnt care to play Wake Forrest or Duke also.
None of the major Irish football boosters is ready to play an 8 game conference schedule every year. But when they are, they will be where they want to be, which is where Father Jenkins and the rest of administration want them to be.Hey I like the Acc and would not be opposed of Texas joining it. For me, its btw Acc and Pac. Also, you make some nice Acc points but if ND really loved Acc they would join it, not be there bc they have to join a conf and rather have Acc >Big12/Big10.
kinda like irishfred said, to become allied with ND, Texas doesnt need to join Acc, just schedule an ongoing home and away with ND. I would be one of the best and most watched game of the year.None of the major Irish football boosters is ready to play an 8 game conference schedule every year. But when they are, they will be where they want to be, which is where Father Jenkins and the rest of administration want them to be.
The issue regarding Texas is that Jack Swarbrick and most powerful football boosters really want Texas to become linked with ND, which means in the ACC. Whether that is Texas joining as a half member or a full member in football is probably no big deal as far as ND is concerned.
It's a shame that Texas was so myopic before the last conference shakeup occurred - they could have made the jump to being an independent before effectively forcing A&M to take their ball and leave the playground. Had that occurred, the landscape today could have turned out much different - and better - for UT.
As I have said before - the only team that does not care any less about the LHN is Notre Dame. That was obvious during the last conference shakeups - and why Jack was down in Austin talking about a possible ally in the independent world. Too bad it did not become a reality - those coveted conference championships were too much to drop and leave behind. So was the A&M rivalry...
Just get a 10 year series with Notre Dame and feel how big college football can be in Austin, Texas. It will not affect your "conference play" at all - but it will be the biggest game of the year in Austin and South Bend. It will be televised from coast to coast. It's the perfect rebound from the aggie breakup - and it would be great for all parties involved. Go Irish!
yep, you sound exactly like a Big Tenner. All you needed to do was preach the land grant schools as be all and end all, and then you would have hit every point.Look at the Flagship Schools in each conference (not the best football schools)
SEC
Miss - Ole Miss
FL - FL
AR - AR
TN - TN
GA - UGA
SC - SC
MO - Mizzou
AL - Bama
KY - Kentucky - If you have not been to Kentucky, they bleed blue and no one cares about Louisville, even in football.
LA - LSU
TX - They do not have the flagship School, which is why they would take Texas in a second (but T&AM is the next closest thing to Texas, it is not like they took Tech or Baylor)
BIG
OH- Ohio State
MI - Michigan
MN - Minnesota
NE - Nebraska
IN - Indiana
NJ - Rutgers
MD - Maryland
IL - Illinois
IA - Iowa
PA - Penn State
WI - Wisconsin (They have the flagship in every state where the BIG Competes
PAC
AZ - Arizona
UT - Utah
CO - Colorado
CA - UCLA/CAL
OR - OR
WA - WA (again every state they operate, the flagship school is in the conference)
BIG XII
TX - Tex
WV - West Virginia
OK - Oklahoma
KS - Kansas
IA - (They do not have the flagship school)
ACC
NC - UNC
VA - UVA
GA - Does not have Flagship school in conf
FL - DOes not have flagship school in conf
KY - Does not have flagship school in conf
SC - Does not have flagship school in conf
MA - does not have the flagship school in conf
NY - Does not have flagship school in conf
PA - Does not have flagship school in conf
If you see a theme here, it is that the ACC is the worst fit for Texas culturally. Texas is a flagship, it will go with other flagship universities. The ACC is filled with a lot of #2&3 schools in the state. Nice schools but not the chief defining school in the area (It is no wonder why UNC controls the ACC, they are one of the few flagship schools). Flagship schools are large research institutions, and pretty much are almost always public. They have the biggest sway in their respective statehouses when it comes to education. THis is what Texas is. This is not what ACC schools are. Culturally, the ACC would be the worst fit for Texas and the administration. This is why they talk the BIG or PAC. Remember, geography is not of much concern to administrators because they are not from Texas anymore, they come from all over.
As much as I would have rather seen ND in the BIG, they are a good fit for the ACC. ND is not a large research university, they are liberal arts focused, they are a private school, and are a smaller school. This fits the profile of ACC schools much better than BIG schools. Texas on the other hand is a massive state school and one of the premier research schools in the country. Don't you think they would want to be with other like minded schools. That is why the ACC will not work culturally.
If all you think and care about is football, that is true, assuming it could last. if you care about and want the rest, then matters are much more difficult.kinda like irishfred said, to become allied with ND, Texas doesnt need to join Acc, just schedule an ongoing home and away with ND. I would be one of the best and most watched game of the year.
