So about the ACC in MSG

[unclejohn]

So who do you expect the ACC to go after? UCLA? The first run on the Big East made a whole lot of sense. They were at nine teams. They needed three more for a conference play-off game and a big TV payout. They went after schools on the East Coast. Miami made lots of sense for football, as did BC. They didn't really want Va. Tech, but got them. The third one they wanted was Syracuse. If they were going to expand beyond that, the only place to get schools was the Big East. And they expanded when the Big Ten expanded and shook things up, and it looked like an absolute war of attrition. The ACC grabbed Pitt before the Big Ten could. Louisville is going there because it is the only sensible place for them to go to play football. The fact that the Big East did not flourish in football meant that it was vulnerable to being raided, which is why it was looking to add TCU and a few others. I look at football as the villain here, not the ACC. Are they also trying to take over in basketball? Sure, but I expect that conferences are going to do that, and the ACC is miffed by the fact that they were the premier basketball conference back in the day. As for moving their tournament to Saturday night, that just makes sense. It seems it was only scheduled for Sunday to appease the television networks. Now those networks do not seem to care so much. Having their championship decided the day of the selection show caused problems, and sometimes seemed to leave some of their teams out of the picture or sent somewhere unfriendly, (unless they are Duke and NC, who somehow always get to play their first couple of games in the state somewhere.)

[MUBasketball]

They could have easily done it already if it were their primary intentions.

Didn't they? The Big East died. Mission accomplished. The current Big East is a start-up conference that kept the name...and MSG. And the ACC is clearly going after that now too. It's all pretty clear.

[TheSultan]

So who do you expect the ACC to go after? UCLA? The first run on the Big East made a whole lot of sense. They were at nine teams. They needed three more for a conference play-off game and a big TV payout. They went after schools on the East Coast. Miami made lots of sense for football, as did BC. They didn't really want Va. Tech, but got them. The third one they wanted was Syracuse. If they were going to expand beyond that, the only place to get schools was the Big East. And they expanded when the Big Ten expanded and shook things up, and it looked like an absolute war of attrition. The ACC grabbed Pitt before the Big Ten could. Louisville is going there because it is the only sensible place for them to go to play football. The fact that the Big East did not flourish in football meant that it was vulnerable to being raided, which is why it was looking to add TCU and a few others. I look at football as the villain here, not the ACC. Are they also trying to take over in basketball? Sure, but I expect that conferences are going to do that, and the ACC is miffed by the fact that they were the premier basketball conference back in the day. As for moving their tournament to Saturday night, that just makes sense. It seems it was only scheduled for Sunday to appease the television networks. Now those networks do not seem to care so much. Having their championship decided the day of the selection show caused problems, and sometimes seemed to leave some of their teams out of the picture or sent somewhere unfriendly, (unless they are Duke and NC, who somehow always get to play their first couple of games in the state somewhere.)

Yes, this is exactly right. The latest round of expansion was all about expanding football and geographic reach. In the latest round of expansion, very little expansion took place inside of territories where these conferences already existed. And they didn't care about the quality of the football programs involved. The B10 took Maryland and Rutgers. The P12 took Colorado and Utah. The SEC took A&M and Missouri. So it made sense for the ACC to grab what it could - Pitt, Louisville and Syracuse made perfect sense considering their locations and where they stood on the pecking order.

[Goose85]

It's because the ACC is the bottom of the football pile. (And yes, football was by far their primary motivation.) Who else would they raid from? The SEC? The MAC? The BE made the most sense because those schools would say "yes" and it expands their geographic reach.

And if their primary goal was to kill the BE, all they would have had to do is invite Nova and Georgetown as basketball only members, given them each $2 - $3M a year, and the BE is dead. (And both those schools would have accepted that deal in a heartbeat, just like Marquette would have, and it would have cost each of their members peanuts - about $400k per year.)

Pitt, Louisville and Syracuse are not football powers, and may actually hurt the overall football product in the ACC (especially with the departure of Strong to Texas). ND was a football gamble (hoping they join for football), but also hurt the Big East basketball product.

It was a basketball move, and taking ND may have been too, as ND would fit perfect with the Big East (not saying that was the reason).

ND to the ACC could actually hurt ACC football pocketbooks.
Let's say ND is a top dog in football. ND plays, and beats, five ACC teams non conference (could hurt bowl chances).
ND is rated higher, and under the agreement, ACC bowl tie ins also include ND, but ND keeps all their football cash, no sharing 15 ways.

It is possible ND brings nothing hoops related (like this year), and could mean less bowl revenue when ND football is very good.

[TheSultan]

Pitt, Louisville and Syracuse are not football powers, and may actually hurt the overall football product in the ACC (especially with the departure of Strong to Texas). ND was a football gamble (hoping they join for football), but also hurt the Big East basketball product.

It was a basketball move, and taking ND may have been too, as ND would fit perfect with the Big East (not saying that was the reason).

Sorry but it wasn't a basketball move - frankly none of the moves had anything to do with on-the-field quality. As I mentioned above, it was a move about expanding conference geographically to more markets to set themselves up for bigger television contracts. It really could be argued that *none* of the conferences improved themselves football-wise with expansion. All of them got terrible football programs in the process.

[IWB]

I disagree - They can make it look how they want, but there continuing actions suggest the last ACC moves were basketball driven.

[Goose85]

Didn't they? The Big East died. Mission accomplished. The current Big East is a start-up conference that kept the name...and MSG. And the ACC is clearly going after that now too. It's all pretty clear.

Correct, mission accomplished.

ESPN did not want to have to pay another conference big money for content as they have enough, but still did not want other networks having content that could compete with ESPN.

What to do?

Get rid of the Big East (football wise breaking up the conference) instead of paying both the ACC and the Big East similar money for football and basketball. Just take three of the top basketball programs, that also play higher level football, and get that content basically for free. This would justify what they are paying for the ACC and provide them with plenty of content for less than paying both ACC and Big East.

Now Coach K, Boeheim, and ESPN want to make sure they are promoting the top hoop conference, and ESPN doesn't want Fox to succeed, so why not try to move into NY, compete directly, and try to downgrade the Big East and in doing so Fox Sports?

[TheSultan]

Correct, mission accomplished.

ESPN did not want to have to pay another conference big money for content as they have enough, but still did not want other networks having content that could compete with ESPN.

What to do?

Get rid of the Big East (football wise breaking up the conference) instead of paying both the ACC and the Big East similar money for football and basketball. Just take three of the top basketball programs, that also play higher level football, and get that content basically for free. This would justify what they are paying for the ACC and provide them with plenty of content for less than paying both ACC and Big East.

Now Coach K, Boeheim, and ESPN want to make sure they are promoting the top hoop conference, and ESPN doesn't want Fox to succeed, so why not try to move into NY, compete directly, and try to downgrade the Big East and in doing so Fox Sports?

That addresses ESPN's motivations with regards to their programming and dealing with Fox. But the ACC's motivations were about making money in the process. You think that they are going to take Pitt and Syracuse just to say "hey look how good we are at basketball" without ESPN making it worth their while?

Not a chance.

[TheSultan]

I disagree - They can make it look how they want, but there continuing actions suggest the last ACC moves were basketball driven.

They were money driven. Basketball was a fortunate (from their view) side effect.

[IWB]

Goo - Agree with everything you said except for bringing Boeheim into the discussion. He is one guy that despised the move and still despises the move.

The Big 10 tried to get Syracuse a few years back when all of this started. It is my understanding that Boeheim is the one that stepped in and stopped that from happening.

Then when Syracuse left for the ACC, Boeheim immediately blasted the move, only to come out and bless the move a few days later, after his president and other influences stepped in and silenced him. And what did he say in his post game presser after the Syracuse-Pitt game this year? "That was a classic Big East game!"

Boeheim hates being in the ACC. He wants to be in the Big East.