A New Alliance Between the B12, ACC, and Notre Dame?

[M-Red]

Major changes are coming to the BCS. The SEC is rolling and will most likely expand to 16 soon.


The PAC and BIG are creating a formal partnership for OOC scheduling and bowl tie-ins (particularly the Rose Bowl). It also gives fans in the Midwest and West Coast a historical-traditional coming home of sorts. It's what they've really always wanted.


The B12 should do the same because it's a smart way to provide conference stability and guard against Realignment chaos. So what about a partnership between the B12, the ACC, and Notre Dame?


The B12 would bring the Texoma football powers, the CTZ, great fanbases and TV ratings, and the palatial Cotton Bowl. The ACC would bring terrific universities, good TV ratings in the Southeast and MidAtlantic, and the Orange Bowl. Notre Dame is Notre Dame.


The Cotton Bowl and the Orange Bowl tie-in would return tradition and history to the all fans of the B12. It would also be a great deal for the ACC....and Notre Dame.


Thoughts? Problems?




tl; dr = A new partnership between the B12/ACC/ND with the Cotton/Orange would be a great way forward after the new BCS changes.

[Bottlecap]

don't mix the name of our great state with the $#@! pile that is oklahoma ever again. -rep.

[Blank]

The SEC is rolling and will most likely expand to 16 soon.

Um, no.

[Stringer]

Link?

[S11]

The SEC is rolling and will most likely expand to 16 soon.

Who would the SEC take? UT and OU won't go (UT due to own decision OU due to lil bro OSU) and none of the Big 12 other schools would make them money in all honesty. The ACC schools said no already so write off UNC, Duke, NC State, Miami, FSU, GT, Clemson, UVA, VT, Maryland, etc. Schools like UNC and VT were pursued before Mizzou was. I doubt Cincy, Louisville, USF, UCF, or UH has any appeal to the SEC.

I do agree the Big 12 should ally itself with the ACC and ND though.

[mdmost]

The ACC sucks. It has 3 teams that are exciting nationally, Va. Tech, FSU and Miami. Clemson is good but they don't generate the national excitement of the other 3. The Big 12 has some good OOC games coming up. TCU has LSU and Arkansas in 2013-2016. WVU has FSU this season and next and Michigan State in 2014 & 2015. OU has Notre Dame, Tennessee, Ohio State, and LSU in 2 year increments. KSU has Auburn in 2014. Texas has Ole Miss, BYU, UCLA, Cal, USC, ND, and Arkie on the schedule. oSu, Baylor, ISU, Tech and Kansas need to trade in their pussy schedules for some good OOC games. At least ISU has Iowa every year. Tech and Baylor's schedule is ridiculously terrible.

[PhillyD]

I love the idea and think it is a good one. I'm not sure that there are any problems with it that couldn't be worked through. Notre Dame may be hesitant because they want their Northeast Catholic league but I think the key to it is making it work and keeping them in it would be a loose partnership that affords everyone flexibility.

The basketball potential of this partnership would be immense.

[PatrickMcHorn]

The ACC sucks. It has 3 teams that are exciting nationally, Va. Tech, FSU and Miami. Clemson is good but they don't generate the national excitement of the other 3. The Big 12 has some good OOC games coming up. TCU has LSU and Arkansas in 2013-2016. WVU has FSU this season and next and Michigan State in 2014 & 2015. OU has Notre Dame, Tennessee, Ohio State, and LSU in 2 year increments. KSU has Auburn in 2014. Texas has Ole Miss, BYU, UCLA, Cal, USC, ND, and Arkie on the schedule. oSu, Baylor, ISU, Tech and Kansas need to trade in their pussy schedules for some good OOC games. At least ISU has Iowa every year. Tech and Baylor's schedule is ridiculously terrible.

The Big 12 only really has 2 exciting National teams, but I agree otherwise. We don't need to partner up with some other conference, and with 9 conference games for the immediate future, I think every Big 12 team should pretty much guarantee themselves 3 non-conference wins, with one big time home and home.

[Swanson]

Not this $#@! again.

[XOVERX]

Not this $#@! again.

Dude, this is the realignment board. What other $#@! do you expect will be discussed on this board?

Moving on, I think we're moving to 12 very soon. Probably this month.

I don't think any decisions with respect to alliances can even be considered until the B12 gets back to at least 12 teams.

Then let's see which teams.

As for the SEC, ideally they would want Texas and OU. Since that's not happening, the SEC would like one school each out of the States of North Carolina and Virginia. I don't think the SEC would take OU/OSU as a pair.

Problem is, the SEC was unable to pry VT out of Virginia to pair with aggy this last time around. There might be a way to breach the ACC, but I'm not sure the SEC can climb the ACC walls. That would probably take another conference prying at the ACC from the edges -- targeting a school like Maryland or maybe FSU, if either of those could be enticed. Once one ACC school agrees to leave, then maybe the SEC, B1G, and B12 could dismantle the remainder of the ACC.

I can understand the SEC wanting to expand, though. 14-team leagues are inherently hell to schedule, since they are unbalanced, and teams can miss playing each other for years and years, unless you're willing to drop down to 2 OOC games per year, which most schools find to be unacceptable. Scheduling problems are exacerabated in 14-team leagues with "protected rivalry" schemes, which the SEC employs. The SEC and ACC are going to hate scheduling in their 14-team conferences.

A 16-team conference solves the scheduling problems, allowing a school to play a full conference schedule of 7 games with 5 OOC games. Add in a "protected rivalry" system, and you get 8 conference games with 4 OOC games, which is the same as a 12-team league, and more OOC games than a 10-team league.

[ERhine]

16???

What drugs are you on?

[XOVERX]

I'm not sure if you're talking to me ERhine, but if you are, I don't understand your question. 16 what? Do you mean, "how does 16 teams solve your scheduling problem?" If so, it's just simple arithmatic. Think about it. The answer is obvious.

[Durant Durant]

don't mix the name of our great state with the $#@! pile that is oklahoma ever again. -rep.

$#@!ing this. uphalling!

[JayhawkScott]

I think the Big XII would be wise to consider this as well with either the ACC or the SEC to keep those two leagues from partnering up. Personally, I think it should be the SEC, but the ACC would be fine to pair up with as well. It's a probably not a good idea to not even consider it and then get burnt if the ACC and SEC join forces leaving the Big XII as the only league that isn't alligned with another major conference.

[M-Red]

The ACC sucks.

So does the BIG. And most of the PAC. This deal could give the Orange/Cotton Bowls yearly first dibs on five big-time helmet schools ---ND, TX, OU, FSU, Miami ---and a bunch of solid 2nd tier programs. That's roughly equivalent to the PAC/BIG.


But I do agree the OOC angle isn't as important. The annual bowl tie-ins with the Cotton and Orange would be the important part.


I think the ACC would be the best choice for the B12 for a few reasons, but I'm open to listening to a pro-SEC argument. Just want to see the B12 be proactive with its future from now on.

[TexEx09]

So does the BIG. And most of the PAC. This deal could give the Orange/Cotton Bowls yearly first dibs on five big-time helmet schools ---ND, TX, OU, FSU, Miami ---and a bunch of solid 2nd tier programs. That's roughly equivalent to the PAC/BIG.


But I do agree the OOC angle isn't as important. The annual bowl tie-ins with the Cotton and Orange would be the important part.


I think the ACC would be the best choice for the B12 for a few reasons, but I'm open to listening to a pro-SEC argument. Just want to see the B12 be proactive with its future from now on.

I am ok with this as long as they move the Cotton Bowl back to the Fair Grounds, and out of that $#@! HOLE which is jerryworld...

[TexasWolf]

Interesting post. I disagree that the SEC is going to 16 anytime soon. They have their eye on two schools, UT and OU, but neither are ready to leave the safe confines of the Big 12. For now, the SEC is going to consolidate their recent additions, and keep on working on us and the sooners.

I like the idea of a partnership...if the plan is to keep the Big 12 going. Assuming that's the plan, it would be cool to set up a conference challenge with the ACC or SEC.

[Cocky Bovine]

Clemson is good...

West Virginia just scored again.

[markstanco]

West Virginia just scored again.

This. Clemson is a tier 2 program who's fans think they are tier 1.

[bigbend1812]

don't mix the name of our great state with the $#@! pile that is oklahoma ever again. -rep.

1234fukou

[Rimbo]

The ACC sucks. It has 3 teams that are exciting nationally, Va. Tech, FSU and Miami. Clemson is good but they don't generate the national excitement of the other 3.

The SEC sucks. It has 3 teams that are exciting nationally, Florida, Alabama and LSU. Arkansas is good but they don't generate the national excitement of the other 3.

Sorry... I don't mean to mock you. Rather, I mean to point out that the SEC is bull$#@!.

[John Coctostan]

Link?

I think the title of this thread has given you the mistaken notion that the OP was relying on, you know, actual facts and not just pulling stuff out his ass.

[Kentucky92]

I don't understand why schools are gung ho for these conference agreements that limit flexibility in scheduling. The top schools can already play whoever they want. For the schools that struggle to get to a bowl, it's better to play a creampuff instead of another bottom feeder that will win half the time.

[M-Red]

I think the title of this thread has given you the mistaken notion that the OP was relying on, you know, actual facts and not just pulling stuff out his ass.

Did it need a $#@!ing disclaimer for the half-literate here? Asking the Realignment board an open-ended question about conferences isn't pulling stuff out of my ass.


You ADHD mufukas need to try and stay focused.

[DLev]

So does the BIG. And most of the PAC. This deal could give the Orange/Cotton Bowls yearly first dibs on five big-time helmet schools ---ND, TX, OU, FSU, Miami ---and a bunch of solid 2nd tier programs. That's roughly equivalent to the PAC/BIG.


But I do agree the OOC angle isn't as important. The annual bowl tie-ins with the Cotton and Orange would be the important part.


I think the ACC would be the best choice for the B12 for a few reasons, but I'm open to listening to a pro-SEC argument. Just want to see the B12 be proactive with its future from now on.

Jesus, let me start at the beginning.

Even though you are referencing the Big 10/Pac 10 deal, you seem to know nothing about it. It is about scheduling additional matchups during the REGULAR season; it has nothing to do with the post season. The Big 12 has no control over the Cotton Bowl. The Cotton Bowl has a contract with the Big 12 and a separate contract with the SEC. Are you proposing that the Big 12 order the Cotton Bowl to cancel its contract with the SEC and enter into a new one with the ACC? That ought to really raise the profile of the game. And what pick would you like out of the ACC? At best, you can get the first pick after the BCS, although I doubt the ACC would be interested in giving up their slot in the Peach (Chik-Fil-A Bowl) or Gator (Champ Sports), so you're looking at best at the 3rd or 4th best team from the ACC, and in cases like this year where the BCS takes 2, the 4th or 5th best team. And I seriously don't have a $#@!ing clue what you mean by an Orange Bowl tie in. The Orange Bowl is a BCS bowl and is governed by their contract. Are you suggesting that the Big 12 push to give up its Fiesta Bowl default tie in for its BCS birth and instead have an annual match up against the ACC champ in the Orange Bowl? Are you suggesting that the Big 12 always be guaranteed 2 BCS teams, the champ in the Fiesta and the runner up in the Orange? I don't think you understand how bowls work.

As for some alliance that would somehow increase regular season match ups, meh. Schools can schedule out of conference however they want.

[Haggis]

Who would the SEC take? UT and OU won't go (UT due to own decision OU due to lil bro OSU) and none of the Big 12 other schools would make them money in all honesty. The ACC schools said no already so write off UNC, Duke, NC State, Miami, FSU, GT, Clemson, UVA, VT, Maryland, etc. Schools like UNC and VT were pursued before Mizzou was. I doubt Cincy, Louisville, USF, UCF, or UH has any appeal to the SEC.

I do agree the Big 12 should ally itself with the ACC and ND though.

North Carolina State and Virginia Tech.

[FCHorn]

Be no reason for the acc to pair themselves with the big12 when the sec is on their doorstep...makes more sense logistically and regionally....just don't see it...

It works for the PAC/big10 because they have had a long long history of collaborating together.....

But should the acc/sec happen I wonder how that bodes for the big12.....

[Lone Star]

Be no reason for the acc to pair themselves with the big12 when the sec is on their doorstep...makes more sense logistically and regionally....just don't see it...

I do. because basketball conference or not the ACC isn't interested in guaranteeing a set up that puts their conference at 0-14 before the season even starts unless there is some favorable pairings of VT and FSU with middle of the road SEC teams. At least with the Big-12 they might still lose more than win but it wouldn't be automatic.

[TJ]

Hey guys, what do you think of CFB playoffs?

[SpadeS]

North Carolina State and Virginia Tech.

North Carolina State is under the UNC system. They are literally tied at the hip with North Carolina-Chapel Hill. They aren't going anywhere.

[Haggis]

North Carolina State is under the UNC system. They are literally tied at the hip with North Carolina-Chapel Hill. They aren't going anywhere.

Not as much as you might think. We could have said the same thing about aggy.

[SpadeS]

Not as much as you might think. We could have said the same thing about aggy.

There is a difference between Texas and aggy. Texas and aggy are not part of the same system. North Carolina and North Carolina State are. They are joined at the hip.

[boomhorn]

North Carolina State is under the UNC system. They are literally tied at the hip with North Carolina-Chapel Hill. They aren't going anywhere.

Not as much as you might think. We could have said the same thing about aggy.

exactly... this ^ man... , unless SEC pulls rabbit out ass & lands OU & UT, it will be NCSU + VPI...

[boomhorn]

There is a difference between Texas and aggy. Texas and aggy are not part of the same system. North Carolina and North Carolina State are. They are joined at the hip.

the SEC "gives money,money,money to seperate hip joints"...

[Haggis]

There is a difference between Texas and aggy. Texas and aggy are not part of the same system. North Carolina and North Carolina State are. They are joined at the hip.

The UNC people would be fine to let NC State go I think. They miss them like we miss aggy. UVA would love to get rid of VT.

[DLev]

The UNC people would be fine to let NC State go I think. They miss them like we miss aggy. UVA would love to get rid of VT.

I don't think you have a clue what you are talking about. UVA moved heaven and earth to get VaTech its ACC invite. VaTech is in no position to repay that spent political capitol by abandoning UVA and I see no reason why UVA would be inclined to let VaTech go and damage the ACC's already weak football reputation in the process.

[Haggis]

I don't think you have a clue what you are talking about. UVA moved heaven and earth to get VaTech its ACC invite. VaTech is in no position to repay that spent political capitol by abandoning UVA and I see no reason why UVA would be inclined to let VaTech go and damage the ACC's already weak football reputation in the process.

Au contrare (sp). UVA did move heavens and earth at VT's urgings/political pressures. Imagine if aggy had used us to get into the Big 12. Really think we'd miss them?

[boomhorn]

UVA moved heaven and earth to get VaTech its ACC invite. VaTech is in no position to repay that spent political capitol by abandoning UVA

for the virginia gov'na made uva do that for vpi...

[DLev]

Au contrare (sp). UVA did move heavens and earth at VT's urgings/political pressures. Imagine if aggy had used us to get into the Big 12. Really think we'd miss them?

We don't miss aggy because they are a $#@! program and them leaving does not hurt the Big 12 or us. VaTech leaving would drastically hurt ACC football and in turn hurt UVA. Huge difference.

[boomhorn]

Au contrare (sp). UVA did move heavens and earth at VT's urgings/political pressures. Imagine if aggy had used us to get into the Big 12. Really think we'd miss them?

thats right, like baylor forced in the Big12... was ready to leave them for PAC twice in 1 year...

[Haggis]

We don't miss aggy because they are a $#@! program and them leaving does not hurt the Big 12 or us. VaTech leaving would drastically hurt ACC football and in turn hurt UVA. Huge difference.

If you honestly believe trading aggy and mizzou for tcu and wvu from a money standpoint isn't a loss...cmon.

[DLev]

If you honestly believe trading aggy and mizzou for tcu and wvu from a money standpoint isn't a loss...cmon.

You're completely missing the point. Texas is a national brand that doesn't need Texas A&M, which made it OK for Texas not to do everything in its power to force aTm to stay. UVA absolutely needs a strong conference to succeed in football and VaTech is a huge part of the ACC's strength. Texas had the luxury to tell aTm to $#@! off because we're fine without them. UVA has no such luxury. But more importantly, you're claiming UVA WANTS VaTech to leave and using Texas and aTm as proof. But Texas' preference was always for aTm to stay or to take aTm with them. Texas just made the decision after aTm was determined to leave that it wasn't going to try to stop them. So for you to claim without any justification that UVA wants VaTech to leave is just stupid.

I'm done engaging with you on this. You obviously don't have the first $#@!ing clue and these were discussions that were had ad nauseum months ago.

[Haggis]

You're completely missing the point. Texas is a national brand that doesn't need Texas A&M, which made it OK for Texas not to do everything in its power to force aTm to stay. UVA absolutely needs a strong conference to succeed in football and VaTech is a huge part of the ACC's strength. Texas had the luxury to tell aTm to $#@! off because we're fine without them. UVA has no such luxury. But more importantly, you're claiming UVA WANTS VaTech to leave and using Texas and aTm as proof. But Texas' preference was always for aTm to stay or to take aTm with them. Texas just made the decision after aTm was determined to leave that it wasn't going to try to stop them. So for you to claim without any justification that UVA wants VaTech to leave is just stupid.

I'm done engaging with you on this. You obviously don't have the first $#@!ing clue and these were discussions that were had ad nauseum months ago.

Your first mistake is thinking UVA wanted VT in the ACC in the first place. They were reluctant at best. Football at UVA is a lot less important than it is here.