Would UNC and UVA be "takes" for the B1G?
Eight years ago, ESPN, The Sporting News, and other publications wrote "heavily sourced" stories about these two schools being active targets for the B1G, based on their academics, strength across most major sports, and their willingness to part with their existing franchise affiliation. Frankly, having been to both college towns, I think they'd both be excellent additions. As a bonus, it'd leave Duke adrift, without a logical place to go.
Haven't seen the stories flying lately, but if OU and Texas go to SEC, then the whole super-conference stories will start percolating. Thoughts?
I don’t think UNC would ever leave Duke because of how much that rivalry to means to hoops.
Who knows though these days.
Agreed. I think people forget that Football isn't necessarily the main sport at some of these schools. Duke and UNC ARE the ACC in Basketball.
Unfortunately though, this is all driven by athletic departments chasing football dollars. Athletic departments have shown multiple times that they'll gladly toss tradition and rivalries aside for more money
Nebraska left Oklahoma behind... and when that happened, people were screaming that this was one of the biggest rivalries in all of college football.
I know that's not at UNC-Duke levels, but it does show that the whole rivalries thing is not necessarily a barrier to leaving for more $$$
A&M and Texas was a big rivalry too. No reason they couldn't still play non conference games like Florida and FSU so agree that that is a distant consideration compared to money.
It was the opposite. OU left Nebraska. OU said they wanted Texas to remain as their annual rivalry game. So OU/Nebraska went from being an annual game to whenever the cross over schedule had them playing each other.
I'm still surprised Maryland left considering their traditional rivalries with Duke, UNC and Virginia across multiple sports.
Maryland was the Illinois of the ACC. They were determined to be rivals of someone. The crazies at Cameron used to give the Terps one of my favorites "NOT OUR RIVAL (clap-clap-clapclapclap)."
It's easy to schedule those games as non-conference in basketball.
Perhaps I'm being a bit cynical but I believe that soon it will be the best team money can buy. A wealthy alumni base, regardless of the school's prior sports' history, should be able to become competitive by buying coaching and player talent assuming it has boosters willing to spend the necessary dollars.
I keep thinking that Denard could have left Michigan a rich man had he been born a few years later.
Those would be good options to add. They're both strong programs in basketball and Mack Brown is bringing UNC football back to relevance. I'd also add VT as another ACC program to target if realignment moves forward.
I figured if Texas and OU disband truly leave, then the Big 12 would have little chance of staying alive and they'd get picked over by other conferences. Looking at it geographically, Iowa St. and West Virginia make a lot of sense. They wouldn't add a ton to new markets but they're regularly average to above-average programs.
Maybe Missouri gets unhappy about Texas and OU and they decide they want a new conference as well. Kansas/Kansas St. are geographically close too. Cincy is another option but that's a super longshot because Ohio St. would never allow another Ohio team to join the Big Ten.
OSU would never let Cincinnati into the conference. I still want Pitt. And Notre Dame.
Even the To hell with ND.
I agree about Pitt and also that, in so many ways, notre dame makes logical sense. If not the dames, then Syracuse would be my 2a.
Otherwise, if we raid the ACC for teams other than those, UVA and VT could make sense.
I don't think Cinci has Big Ten stature.
ISU and WVU are probably the last Big 12 teams the B1G would ever consider, WVU particularly would have zero chance. Athletic competitiveness means almost nothing (see: Rutgers). Both schools have terrible academics (EDIT: ISU has better academics than I thought), and negligible added media exposure. Kansas and KSU are barely higher on the pecking order, but Kansas could probably make a case like Nebraska (EDIT: put ISU in this slightly higher tier with Kansas). Cinci has zero chance.
The B1G would add almost every ACC school before it added any non-OU/Texas Big 12 school.
Isu has decent academics. They are aau accredited.
Did not realize that, you're right. So yeah, they're in the Kansas tier of not ideal but plausible.
From a purely academic and athletic standpoint, of course. They are premier, rich, public institutions which fits the Big Ten profile (extra nice is that they are in states with growing population).
Will it ever happen? Not a chance (unless the Big Ten is going to 24 teams, which I'd hate, but I'm not in charge).
- North Carolina is tied with Duke and North Carolina State
- Virginia is tied with Virginia Tech
If that second one doesn't seem right, remember, these are public institutions and that means governors and legislatures get involved...heavily.
Virginia’s Governor issued marching orders: UVA President John Casteen could only support an ACC Expansion vote that included Virginia Tech
https://sonsofsaturday.com/vt/articles/hokie-history-virginia-techs-path-to-the-acc
But everyone said Oklahoma couldn't go without Oklahoma St, and that's apparently not going to be an issue.
Do I think UNC would leave Duke or NCSt? Probably not. Could they? Absolutely.
if that happens, you can always pressure a governor by saying "hey i have pictures of you in blackface that will torpedo your career so...uh...er"
Eh, that was a former governor, I'm not sure how much his desires even matter, and VT has only recently been in a conference with UVA.
That said, I agree that UNC is less likely to leave and I'd take UVA and VT to make 16 teams.
That former governor is now the senior US Senator for the state of Virginia. His thoughts very much matter. Politicians live for this stuff -- they're not going to let VA Tech be "left behind" etc.
But in any case, if it does happen, Virginia and Virginia Tech together is much, much more likely than UNC and any other school -- but I don't think either is particularly likely, as the reason Maryland left the ACC is 1) money and 2) UMD always felt overlooked and that there was a bias against them by the ACC's head honchos based in Greensboro, NC.
The Virginia schools don't seem to hold that grudge, and the ACC has done better about money since Maryland left (not as good as the B1G, but certainly OK and much better than the PAC 12).
That's because Maryland, although a traditional ACC school, is very much on the periphery of the ACC geographic footprint which is primarily Virginia and the Carolinas. Had the Big Ten had Penn State from the beginning, you could say that UMD was just as good a fit geographically for the Big Ten as the ACC. Of course, if there was a real Big East, that's where Penn State, Maryland, Rutgers, Syracuse, Pitt, BC, Miami, UCONN---and possibly ND---should be naturally, based on geographic, demographic, and cultural logic. But who said anything about logic?
Periphery? They share a massive border with VA and those states are as linked as any two in the union. It's called the DMV area for a reason (DC, Maryland, Virgina). They have several other ACC schools to the north of them. They're pretty smack dab in the middle of the footprint.
If UT and OU to the SEC happens it might bring back talk of the B1G/PAC12 coming together. They tried to make a collaboration happen back in 2011 where all sports would compete across conferences but if fell apart.
People can say what they want about Jim Delaney but I would have more confidence with him successfully navigating this whole thing than Mr. Warren. I hope I’m pleasantly surprised.
https://www.espn.com/college-sports/story/_/id/7396843/big-ten-pac-12-grow-scheduling-partnership
I agree with this thought.
If the B1G truly believes the long range outcome of conference reshuffling is inevitable, and somewhat "borderless", as a first step to a B1G/Pac12 super-conference they should look at the 4 California schools - USC, UCLA, Stanford, and Cal - and create an 18 school conference.
There would be 9 schools in the "west" or non-EST time zone, and 9 schools in the east. The academics of the 4 schools would align well with the Big10, and you would have the NoCal and SoCal television markets.
I wouldn't mind expanding out to the West coast, though it would mess with kickoff times. You'd have to almost completely drop non-conference games though to make it work. Otherwise you'd see very long stretches where certain teams never play each other.
18 teams
9 team divisions
12 conference games a year + championship
Game Breakdown: 9 (division) + 3 (cross-division)
6 teams not played each season
Rotate the 3 cross-divisional teams every single year (you'd have to lose back to back home-home games) which means you play all cross-divisional teams once every 3 years, rotating home field each time. You'd also have to give up permanent rivalry games every year with any team outside your division. I know some people would absolutely hate this model, though I'm not sure I would mind it...it might add a bit more "weight" to some of those "rivalry" games like MN for The Jug if we only get one shot at it every 3 years (for example). Idk, just a thought.
This could work, in theory. Though the smaller conference schools would lose out on a ton of revenue and you'd also lose those three "ramp up" games to get ready for the conference season. This could put more weight / emphasis on scheduling "balance".
Also, IF they were to ever move to a conference like this, I would prefer that the divisions NOT be geographically determined. Personally, I would want to mix things up more and play new teams. I know, I know, crucify me now for being okay with not playing Sparty or getting butchered by OSU every season. As long as both divisions are appropriately balanced with strong and weak teams, I'd be cool with it.
If you have 9 teams, you only play 8 games - you dont play yourself which makes this more attractive - 4 x-over games
Lol yup. Excellent point. Math is hard you know
TV game lineups are very marketable- essentially a better triple-header line-up than present
Game 1) 12:00 Noon ET - East division games
Game 2) 3:30pm ET (12 Noon PT) - marquee East game or marquee West Div game
Game 3) 7:00pm or 8:00pm ET (4:00 pm PT) - marquee West coast game or marquee East game
Game 4) 10:00pm ET - West division games; this last one may not be weekly
But you can matchup two marquee games for both west and east coasts.
Good plan, though I'd swap Oregon for Stanford.
It does feel like we're on the verge of a feeding frenzy of realignment. Big Ten and PAC 12 better be ready.
Yeah some conference realignment moves don't really have ripple effects. OU and Texas leaving the Big XII for the SEC is probably the biggest nuclear bomb that could realistically happen in CFB. The Big XII is 100% toast when it happens, the B1G is not gonna let the SEC grow exponentially larger than them, the ACC may or may not do something and the Pac-12 almost certainly is going to snatch up a couple stragglers from the ruins of that conference.
I could see Texas Tech, Baylor, TCU, Kansas State, and Oklahoma State flirting with the Pac-12. B1G likely will kick the tires on Kansas (for that basketball money). No idea what happens with Iowa State since Iowa likely blocks them from joining B1G. Maybe they too flirt with Pac-12.
The AAC could also look to take the Big XII's spot at the 5th power conference. Or maybe the Big XII salvages itself by gobbling up the largest G5 teams like Cincinnati, Houston, Boise State, UCF or Memphis.
All I know for sure is it's about to get crazy
Yes! Can we trade Maryland and Rutgers for other ACC Schools as well?
Rutgers is going to be a tougher opponent with Schiano and will be a trap game for the next few years. Get Nebraska out of here though
It's crazy that we're here with Nebraska but you're not wrong about them not really bringing much to the table.
There's no way Duke or UNC go to the Big 10.
To me the obvious one to attempt to get is Notre Dame.
Kansas, Pitt, Iowa State, and Cincinnati should be looked at too.
You can forget about Notre Dame. They'd never join the Big Ten. They'd never join any conference because quite frankly they don't have to. They are the only big time program that could survive independently. They've proven they don't need to play a conference title game to get into the playoff so as long as they at least go 11-1 they're going to be in the conversation. If they go undefeated they'll be in no matter what else happens.
And then I imagine if they join a conference they may have to kiss the big fat contract good-bye with NBC where they telecast all their home games.
Which, oddly, could work out well for the other 64 Power 5 teams, if they are all able to be neatly tucked into 4 16-team conferences.
Interesting part would be to see which of the remaining three conferences have the most pull for the bigger names...and if geography is even a consideration.
They are the only big time program that could survive independently.
There is absolutely no reason to believe that. There's nothing special about ND anymore. Their last national title was 33 years ago.
A lot of programs could survive as independents - including Michigan. We just don't see the need to do it, and like playing our historic rivals. ND's history is as an independent, and they don't want to change that.
I could see Texas going independent. The Longhorn Network is big step in that direction.
There's nothing special about them competitively but they still command a larger national audience than any other program, and that's what matters. That's how they can get an NBC contract just for themselves. I do think the strength of that following exists with boomer catholics so it won't be nearly as strong in a couple decades. But it is something special that they have still.
I agree that Texas and Michigan and OSU and maybe a couple other teams could be fine as independents. I don't think anyone would command a solo TV deal like Notre Dame does.
I’d prefer the additions of ND/Pitt, but UNC/VA would be fine. Really, outside of UT/OU, there are no attractive programs out there that are probably looking to switch conferences that would actually elevate the Big 10/14. Notre Dame is practically an ACC team at this point, and nobody else out there really makes sense.
If you add two more teams and become a 16 team conference, what’s even the point of being a conference when you only play maybe 1-2 teams from the other division per year. Conferences made sense when they were 10-12 teams at the max, but now it’s just an arms race that totally makes conference games pointless.
I’m at the point where if Texas/Oklahoma join the SEC, that the Big14 needs to just say “screw” it and merge with the SEC/ACC and start the era of the premier league of college football. It’s gonna happen eventually anyway, so may as well pull the bandaid off and go all in now.
Assuming ND to the ACC (to hell with ND) Pitt makes the most geographical sense of ACC schools, however they do not bring much to the table athletic or otherwise. Unless Oklahoma is tied to Texas, I think going after the Sooners would be a good idea. Could restore their rivalry with Nebraska.
That would allow Texas governing body to push for Texas Tech to the SEC and have all three of their major public state schools in the same conference. (Not that the SEC would take Texas Tech, but just a thought).
UVA and VT is a package deal. Not a terrible package, but you have to take both.
I just don't want to see a reach like Louisville and West Virginia to get to 16 teams.
I think we are on an inevitable road to 4 super conferences. Big 12 is odd man out once their anchors leave and the rest of those schools will be scrambling without a ton of landing spots.
Minimal chance the B1G would take Louisville or WVU (or Cinci for that matter).
If the B1G gets to 16, it'll be with some combo of Pitt, Syracuse, BC, UVA, VT, UNC, Duke, NCST, Wake Forest or Missouri with Kansas, ISU and KSU as last resorts if none of the former schools can be pried away from the ACC.
Those schools would be great for BB, but absolutely worthless on the football field, outside of maybe ISU (as long as Campbell is there). Not gonna lie, I'd almost rather Texas join the B1G and let Oklahoma and others move to the SEC. Don't know why, could be just a feeling, but Texas doesn't seem to "fit" when I picture SEC teams / programs.
Yeah, academically and culturally (Austin) fit better with the B1G. Would be awesome to add Texas to the B1G, IMO. I think it'd open up Texas recruiting more to Michigan. Probably comes as a package deal with OU though (who would be nice to add as well although I'd be better to break up OU and Texas, IMO).
when I enrolled in grad school in chapel hill 20 years ago I would have never imagined that my to alma maters would be in the same conference. I like the idea.
*too alma maters
Some of these comments clearly don't have academic reputation (something that's important in the Big Ten) of schools in mind. From that perspective, West Virginia (for example) would never be seriously discussed.
It's not the only such school in the thread.
Also: I'll bet some people on the Atlantic coast are asking what it would take to pry Michigan from the Big Ten. Same with OSU and the SEC .......
I don't think the Big Ten or PAC 12 or SEC will lose teams to other conferences, save for perhaps some reshuffling of a team or two amongst some of their newer members. None of those conferences have lost a team in the past several decades, I don't believe. Those just aren't conferences that schools leave.
It's the ACC and Big 12 that have been much less stable in the past couple decades and which will experience the most shifting, especially if OU and Texas were to leave.