Pac 12 Realignment

[GretnaGrn]

Curious as to when this last happened. You keep saying people push back on it but I don't see anyone doing it.

People push back on his certainty of exact numbers based on a letter (in which the university had a reason to make it sound low) and two people walking around counting seats (which doesn't count for all tickets that can be sold). And he interprets anything less than total submission to his logic, as being in disagreement, and he always has to be right, so he does what he does. When the argument is maybe over, at most, a couple thousand seats. But for some people, being an a--hat is just fun.

I've muted and only see when y'all respond to him, so nowadays I'm just more mad at y'all for engaging cause that's the only reason I even know he's still pulling all of this

This. The mute function is really useful and, at this stage, recommended for such pointless, repetitive, circular efforts by certain folks.

[1309th WAVE]

SERENITY NOW!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[ml wave]

Curious as to when this last happened. You keep saying people push back on it but I don't see anyone doing it.

I've muted and only see when y'all respond to him, so nowadays I'm just more mad at y'all for engaging cause that's the only reason I even know he's still pulling all of this

I mean, surely deep down you know that anyway.

[PeteRasche]

Nothing kills threads and overall interest in this board like:

[Marathon Wave]

Wavedom, your fandom is appreciated but your persistence arguing with every poster about our football stadium and other facilities has become beyond tiresome to me. I have but one question for you.

When the time comes to expand Yulman, can we please use that giant steel girder that you've been carrying up your ass in the construction of the upper deck?

Thanks in advance!

Who knows one day you might get out of diapers and grow up and be a man. Get thicker skin.

Is this irony?

Irony of the steel girder style.

The dumbathon continues.

So speaketh the biggest wearer of diapers. I'm right and everyone else is wrong cause that's what my mom always told me.

[wavedom]

Curious as to when this last happened. You keep saying people push back on it but I don't see anyone doing it.

People push back on his certainty of exact numbers based on a letter (in which the university had a reason to make it sound low) and two people walking around counting seats (which doesn't count for all tickets that can be sold). And he interprets anything less than total submission to his logic, as being in disagreement, and he always has to be right, so he does what he does. When the argument is maybe over, at most, a couple thousand seats. But for some people, being an a--hat is just fun.

I've muted and only see when y'all respond to him, so nowadays I'm just more mad at y'all for engaging cause that's the only reason I even know he's still pulling all of this

The university had no reason to make it low. They wanted to prevent the flyover of the Fire Dickson banner. As usual you have no idea what you're talking about and make a complete azz of yourself.

[wavedom]

Wavedom, I don't think anyone who has been following the realignment stuff doubts that conferences are telling us "you need to do X, Y, and Z, facility-wise." That's pretty much a given. Whether or not those numbers thrown out on the internet are real or not, they are very reasonable for a P5 league. I just looked and the ACC's smallest basketball venue (Miami) is under 8000, so it's *possible* that Devlin could be expanded to that capacity***. Of course, we all know the ideal is to build a parking deck/IPF/APC/basketball arena on the Rosen lot... but for some reason Tulane says that spot is off-limits. The football stadium, as we know, was built to expand, it's just a NIMBY fight question. I'm sure we could get it to 40,000.

*** A loooong time ago there were plans drawn up which would have cantilevered the north seating over the Pocket Park and expanded the south into the gravel yard - the difficulty of that is that the entire roof would have to be raised. I have no idea what capacity could be reached with the roof and walls as they are now, but it's definitely not "full".

Pete,

Definitely agree as to what should be done on Rosen. If Tulane wants in they are going to have to give that back to athletics. As to Yulman you are talking about adding over 17,000 seats. The south endzone abuts Reily so it doesn't appear there's any room there. On the north end you have to be careful what you do as you don't want to impede the mini field space from having the football ops. building put there. On the eastside there can be a 3rd deck. The second deek has around 3,500 seats. On the west side if it can be agreed on then a deck there would be another 3,500. So youre' talking about 10,000 seats in the north end zone. Hopefully we get to see how it turns out.

I don't think the ACC (or whoever) is going to audit the number of seats. We're going to say capacity is 30k now and we'll add 10k to get to 40k. Personally, I doubt the ACC without FSU/Clemson/etc would have as much of an issue with the size of Yulman as the Big12 (possibly with UT and Oklahoma...what was the time frame of this conversation, the current Big12 expansion or the previous one we were involved in years ago?).

Speaking of, I've been meaning to ask you...what do you think is going on with our attendance numbers? We reported almost 27k for USA, exactly 30,000 for Ole Miss (that's a hint that the 30k capacity is a bogus number...not one ticket/person more or less?), and almost 23k for Nicholls...I'm not challenging your capacity claims, I'm asking, for example, how do you think we come up with a 27k figure for USA which is well more than number of seats? Or how do we get ~23k for Nicholls which is basically capacity but the stadium was obviously not full?

Well you think they'll lie to the ACC. I think the ACC will more more diligent than that. If Tulane says capacity is 30,00 the letter exist from Tulane to the FAA that says the total capacity of the facility is less than 28,000 and the letter states the 30,000 is just for reporting purposes,i.e., a lie. So doubt that works. As to what the ACC wants that's convenient conjecture on your part. The conversation was this month.

The numbers are made up. Plain and simple. The stadium as is never has and never will hold 30,000 for football. It also won't hold 27,000 for football as that is total capacity of the facility which would include the field being completely lined with chairs for a graduation ceremony. Tough to hold a game while that's going on.

Like I said, no I don't think the ACC will send someone to meet you there to count the seats. They're not going to FOIA the FAA to get the mythical letter. We'll tell them our capacity is 30k and that we're expanding by 10k (or whatever).

No, sorry, that conversation did not happen this month. Maybe you had your conversation this month but there's no way that the Big12 was talking to us about expansion this month. I'm guessing that conversation happened when we met with them 4 years ago at a time when they ultimately decided not to expand https://www.nola.com/sports/tulane/tula ... 61f5d.html. That was a Big12 with Texas and Oklahoma in it, safe to say that things have changed now and that version of the Big12 in no way compares to a future version of the ACC without it's big football schools.

Live in denial all you want. A major conference is going to do site visits and no one in their right mind is accepting the 30,000 number. The letter isn't mythical. I know Bay has read it. it's been posted on this site. You love searching old stuff so find it.

Living in denial again. The conversation between the poster and the B12 booster happened this month and it was about this last round of expansion not the one 4 years ago. I know that upsets your little world but that's your problem not mine. The ACC your talking about will also be minus its big football schools.

You obviously think Tulane can lie its way into a mPower conference. I don't think so. I trhink if it's a true Power conference we will have to commit to to build out to what they want . The only other way is to have what was a Power conference get so shredded they won't any longer be a Power conference and they'll ignore the facility issue

I've read the letter. Again, that minutiae is not going to come up to the ACC. They'll come do a site visit (not count the seats), get wined and dined in the Glazer club and wowed by however many millions we say that we're paying for the expansion.

The last round of expansion? When they added Colorado, Arizona, Arizona St, and Utah? And we were never even a remote possibility for the Big12 due to their TV contract which forced ESPN to increase revenue pro rata if they added P5 schools but not if they added G5? Forget 40k, our stadium could seat 80,000 and we wouldn't have gone to Big 12 over any of those schools. Yeah, I know the ACC I'm talking about will be minus its big football schools...that's my point. Syracuse, WF, Duke, BC...they're not going to care about the size of our stadium, they're not going to bring a million visiting fans, and they don't have the stroke to make those kind of demands like a UT/Oklahoma/FSU would. Now Fogelman, I'm sure they could have something to say about that.

As far as what the ACC will do IF there is even an opening remains to be seen. The smallness of the stadium jumps out art anyone that walks in it. If the conference is so degraded that they don't care that doesn't bode well. Their contract will be downsized accordingly. So yes likely better than what we get now but not Power conference money and football wise less competition wise than when we had Cincy, UCF and Houston.

The last round they didn't know they were going to get those schools and were looking at all their options. So yes the conversation was in this last round.

It's pretty clear Yormark has no interest in expanding with G5 teams. They didn't know they were going to get those schools but they weren't expanding unless they did. They got the 4 corners, they're trying to get FSU/Clemson and would probably settle for picking over ACC leftovers, there's never been any reports of interest in Tulane under Yormark. They would have had to take a cut in TV revenue to add us...someone along the line is passing old information to you.

Nope.

[2palmer0]

Wavedom, I don't think anyone who has been following the realignment stuff doubts that conferences are telling us "you need to do X, Y, and Z, facility-wise." That's pretty much a given. Whether or not those numbers thrown out on the internet are real or not, they are very reasonable for a P5 league. I just looked and the ACC's smallest basketball venue (Miami) is under 8000, so it's *possible* that Devlin could be expanded to that capacity***. Of course, we all know the ideal is to build a parking deck/IPF/APC/basketball arena on the Rosen lot... but for some reason Tulane says that spot is off-limits. The football stadium, as we know, was built to expand, it's just a NIMBY fight question. I'm sure we could get it to 40,000.

*** A loooong time ago there were plans drawn up which would have cantilevered the north seating over the Pocket Park and expanded the south into the gravel yard - the difficulty of that is that the entire roof would have to be raised. I have no idea what capacity could be reached with the roof and walls as they are now, but it's definitely not "full".

Pete,

Definitely agree as to what should be done on Rosen. If Tulane wants in they are going to have to give that back to athletics. As to Yulman you are talking about adding over 17,000 seats. The south endzone abuts Reily so it doesn't appear there's any room there. On the north end you have to be careful what you do as you don't want to impede the mini field space from having the football ops. building put there. On the eastside there can be a 3rd deck. The second deek has around 3,500 seats. On the west side if it can be agreed on then a deck there would be another 3,500. So youre' talking about 10,000 seats in the north end zone. Hopefully we get to see how it turns out.

I don't think the ACC (or whoever) is going to audit the number of seats. We're going to say capacity is 30k now and we'll add 10k to get to 40k. Personally, I doubt the ACC without FSU/Clemson/etc would have as much of an issue with the size of Yulman as the Big12 (possibly with UT and Oklahoma...what was the time frame of this conversation, the current Big12 expansion or the previous one we were involved in years ago?).

Speaking of, I've been meaning to ask you...what do you think is going on with our attendance numbers? We reported almost 27k for USA, exactly 30,000 for Ole Miss (that's a hint that the 30k capacity is a bogus number...not one ticket/person more or less?), and almost 23k for Nicholls...I'm not challenging your capacity claims, I'm asking, for example, how do you think we come up with a 27k figure for USA which is well more than number of seats? Or how do we get ~23k for Nicholls which is basically capacity but the stadium was obviously not full?

Well you think they'll lie to the ACC. I think the ACC will more more diligent than that. If Tulane says capacity is 30,00 the letter exist from Tulane to the FAA that says the total capacity of the facility is less than 28,000 and the letter states the 30,000 is just for reporting purposes,i.e., a lie. So doubt that works. As to what the ACC wants that's convenient conjecture on your part. The conversation was this month.

The numbers are made up. Plain and simple. The stadium as is never has and never will hold 30,000 for football. It also won't hold 27,000 for football as that is total capacity of the facility which would include the field being completely lined with chairs for a graduation ceremony. Tough to hold a game while that's going on.

Like I said, no I don't think the ACC will send someone to meet you there to count the seats. They're not going to FOIA the FAA to get the mythical letter. We'll tell them our capacity is 30k and that we're expanding by 10k (or whatever).

No, sorry, that conversation did not happen this month. Maybe you had your conversation this month but there's no way that the Big12 was talking to us about expansion this month. I'm guessing that conversation happened when we met with them 4 years ago at a time when they ultimately decided not to expand https://www.nola.com/sports/tulane/tula ... 61f5d.html. That was a Big12 with Texas and Oklahoma in it, safe to say that things have changed now and that version of the Big12 in no way compares to a future version of the ACC without it's big football schools.

Live in denial all you want. A major conference is going to do site visits and no one in their right mind is accepting the 30,000 number. The letter isn't mythical. I know Bay has read it. it's been posted on this site. You love searching old stuff so find it.

Living in denial again. The conversation between the poster and the B12 booster happened this month and it was about this last round of expansion not the one 4 years ago. I know that upsets your little world but that's your problem not mine. The ACC your talking about will also be minus its big football schools.

You obviously think Tulane can lie its way into a mPower conference. I don't think so. I trhink if it's a true Power conference we will have to commit to to build out to what they want . The only other way is to have what was a Power conference get so shredded they won't any longer be a Power conference and they'll ignore the facility issue

I've read the letter. Again, that minutiae is not going to come up to the ACC. They'll come do a site visit (not count the seats), get wined and dined in the Glazer club and wowed by however many millions we say that we're paying for the expansion.

The last round of expansion? When they added Colorado, Arizona, Arizona St, and Utah? And we were never even a remote possibility for the Big12 due to their TV contract which forced ESPN to increase revenue pro rata if they added P5 schools but not if they added G5? Forget 40k, our stadium could seat 80,000 and we wouldn't have gone to Big 12 over any of those schools. Yeah, I know the ACC I'm talking about will be minus its big football schools...that's my point. Syracuse, WF, Duke, BC...they're not going to care about the size of our stadium, they're not going to bring a million visiting fans, and they don't have the stroke to make those kind of demands like a UT/Oklahoma/FSU would. Now Fogelman, I'm sure they could have something to say about that.

As far as what the ACC will do IF there is even an opening remains to be seen. The smallness of the stadium jumps out art anyone that walks in it. If the conference is so degraded that they don't care that doesn't bode well. Their contract will be downsized accordingly. So yes likely better than what we get now but not Power conference money and football wise less competition wise than when we had Cincy, UCF and Houston.

The last round they didn't know they were going to get those schools and were looking at all their options. So yes the conversation was in this last round.

It's pretty clear Yormark has no interest in expanding with G5 teams. They didn't know they were going to get those schools but they weren't expanding unless they did. They got the 4 corners, they're trying to get FSU/Clemson and would probably settle for picking over ACC leftovers, there's never been any reports of interest in Tulane under Yormark. They would have had to take a cut in TV revenue to add us...someone along the line is passing old information to you.

Nope.

Look how quickly we can add pages to the thread with quotes!

[WaveProf]

Wavedom, I've said it before and I'll say it again, seek professional help, for your own good. It isn't even funny or enraging at this point, it's just sad to watch. And I'm not interested in engaging in the details of anything you want to argue, it does me, you, nor anybody, any good. I hope for the best for you, but it is what it is. Everyone is more or less telling you the same thing, and yet you think everyone else is to blame. Seek help.

[WaveProf]

To get back on track, the P2 finally has a date set with the leaving ten......Nov 12. So things might slow down yet again until then.

[wavedom]

Wavedom, I've said it before and I'll say it again, seek professional help, for your own good. It isn't even funny or enraging at this point, it's just sad to watch. And I'm not interested in engaging in the details of anything you want to argue, it does me, you, nor anybody, any good. I hope for the best for you, but it is what it is. Everyone is more or less telling you the same thing, and yet you think everyone else is to blame. Seek help.

You have nothing as usual . Par for the course.I know your teaching career hasn't gone well. Your psychiatry career is a dumpster fire.

[2palmer0]

To get back on track, the P2 finally has a date set with the leaving ten......Nov 12. So things might slow down yet again until then.

On that front maybe but it seems the ACC talk is just heating up! A lot of fans appear to be excited for the impending ACC breakup but I think many ACC teams might find they value themselves more than the market will. I see 2-4 teams at most being valuable enough to warrant P2 interest which hopefully leaves enough left to keep their contract, which is on par with the BIG 12, which should in turn prevent complete disintegration like we saw with the Pac. Then the Big10 and SEC will have finished concentrating the biggest brands and can get to work jettisoning the dead weight from their own conferences, perhaps by forming some new organization to avoid any legal issues with actually kicking teams out of their conferences. I have seen nothing to indicate a ceiling on institutional greed. You can't convince me the next step after looking outward to see what value you can gobble up won't be to look inward (the way Clemson and FSU have been) and seriously wonder why you're paying Northwestern, Rutgers, and Vanderbilt 80 million a year for their contributions to the conference.

[wavedom]

IF those schools are leaving, and I haven't seen anyone post a credible source on that, then they have a deal in place with one of the P2. Like you I don't think they are worth what they think they are and so I doubt such a move at this point. They certainly aren't going to leave without such an arrangement and then say hey look I'm available come and get me.

[WaveProf]

I know your teaching career hasn't gone well.

Dude, I'm an award winning teacher that has made it to full professor at a younger age than most any of my peers in an era when most of my peers didn't even get a job, and I'm employed at a university an hour from where my wife got a job, and it's her hometown and our favorite place in the US. I'm not saying I've done anything to deserve most of that, honestly it was mostly blind luck, and anyone who thinks they got a job in the economy I came out of grad school in who doesn't think it was mostly blind luck is probably out of touch..........*but* talk about being so delusional that you don't even know how to try to hurt the person you want to hurt. I did pretty well, especially for not really caring that much. I work to live, I don't live to work, and would have been pretty happy even if I didn't end up pretty successful. I like teaching fine, but it ain't what I live for. Newsflash: not everyone is as petty, elitist, and dumb as you are. If you want to upset me, work harder.

I'm glad, for once, I read one of your posts because I got a good chuckle, but I'm going to *try* to stop engaging because one shouldn't feed the bears.

[WaveProf]

On that front maybe but it seems the ACC talk is just heating up! A lot of fans appear to be excited for the impending ACC breakup but I think many ACC teams might find they value themselves more than the market will. I see 2-4 teams at most being valuable enough to warrant P2 interest which hopefully leaves enough left to keep their contract, which is on par with the BIG 12, which should in turn prevent complete disintegration like we saw with the Pac. Then the Big10 and SEC will have finished concentrating the biggest brands and can get to work jettisoning the dead weight from their own conferences, perhaps by forming some new organization to avoid any legal issues with actually kicking teams out of their conferences. I have seen nothing to indicate a ceiling on institutional greed. You can't convince me the next step after looking outward to see what value you can gobble up won't be to look inward (the way Clemson and FSU have been) and seriously wonder why you're paying Northwestern, Rutgers, and Vanderbilt 80 million a year for their contributions to the conference.

Regardless of how it impacts Tulane, it's hard for me to get "excited" about the hastening demise of college football. And I'm pessimistic that even if we get in the ACC it will really matter in 10-20 years. Though getting in gives us better chances than getting left out, surely.

[2palmer0]

I think FSU is the only sure fire "brand" if that's what's driving the bus. Clemson is obviously a quality program under Dabo but from a brand perspective is a smallish state school in a small state with a competing state school already in the SEC. UNC and Duke have basketball brands, I have no idea why UVA is mentioned for anything. Lacrosse bros around me in New England like to wear their hats? As a child of the 80's/90's, I'm probably biased by nostalgia and don't have a good handle on Miami. Are they still really a major brand outside of their own heads and my memory? Obviously in number of starter jackets sold in the 90's they moved the needle but they don't have a large alumni base and haven't been relevant in 20 years. Miami is notoriously fickle with their pro teams, does the city really support the U? Are kids in the midwest tuning in to Miami games and buying miami merch?
I really don't know. My parents went to NC State so I grew up watching them and view them as with the bulk of the ACC as more comparable to the current Big12 level of teams. I'm no expert but it seems the ACC's current media contact appropriately values them at about the same as the Big12.

[GretnaGrn]

Honestly, I don't think even FSU is as valuable as FSU thinks it is. I'm not at all sure the SEC would want them (and Florida is sure to lobby against them); if they did take them, it would be at a very, very steep discount. They certainly don't bring as many eyes as Texas and Oklahoma.

[ml wave]

I have no idea why UVA is mentioned for anything.

Big state school in a big state. I believe NC and VA are the two biggest states with no SEC/BIG presence.

[ml wave]

Honestly, I don't think even FSU is as valuable as FSU thinks it is. I'm not at all sure the SEC would want them (and Florida is sure to lobby against them); if they did take them, it would be at a very, very steep discount. They certainly don't bring as many eyes as Texas and Oklahoma.

Clemson is similarly positioned...that's why I think there's a chance those two may wind up in the Big12.

[PeteRasche]

As it stands, the Big 10 will be at 18, Big 12 at 16, SEC at 16, ACC at 17 (18 if you count ND).

I used to think the SEC would eventually raid the ACC, but the more I think about it, I doubt the SEC wants any ACC schools. They have South Carolina and Florida, they don't need Clemson and FSU from the same state. I think it will be the Big 10 and Big 12 only. The Big 12 is desperate to portray themselves as equal to the P2, so they will go hard after the big names, Clemson and FSU. The Big 10 might consider those two, but I more likely see them going the route of UNC and UVA, possibly Duke and Miami too. Those are more in line with the Big 10's perceived academic rep. The Big 12 has said they are not adding any more G5s, only P5s, and adding Clemson and FSU would be a huge coup (they'd probably throw the proverbial bank truck at them)... but I don't know how many more ACC schools the Big 12 would want beyond those two.

The wildcard here obviously is that we're actually talking about what TV wants. Big 10 and Big 12 are primarily Fox entities, right? And ACC is ESPN. The Big 12, ahem, Fox, might relish completely raiding the ACC simply to decimate the locked-in ESPN content. So the real question is whether the Big 12 goes for football names (taking 2) or goes for the ESPN-kill (taking 8 ).

Regardless, they're going to have to pay to break up the GOR situation... a LOT of money. My guess is there will be some "collusion" between the Big 10 and Big 12 - like neither would make the move to break up the ACC if they didn't know the other was on board - and Fox will be pulling those strings (and I can envision ESPN suing the pants off Fox for it, too.)

[wavedom]

I know your teaching career hasn't gone well.

Dude, I'm an award winning teacher that has made it to full professor at a younger age than most any of my peers in an era when most of my peers didn't even get a job, and I'm employed at a university an hour from where my wife got a job, and it's her hometown and our favorite place in the US. I'm not saying I've done anything to deserve most of that, honestly it was mostly blind luck, and anyone who thinks they got a job in the economy I came out of grad school in who doesn't think it was mostly blind luck is probably out of touch..........*but* talk about being so delusional that you don't even know how to try to hurt the person you want to hurt. I did pretty well, especially for not really caring that much. I work to live, I don't live to work, and would have been pretty happy even if I didn't end up pretty successful. I like teaching fine, but it ain't what I live for. Newsflash: not everyone is as petty, elitist, and dumb as you are. If you want to upset me, work harder.

I'm glad, for once, I read one of your posts because I got a good chuckle, but I'm going to *try* to stop engaging because one shouldn't feed the bears.

Cool story child. Glad to see I didn't hurt your feelings.

[ml wave]

As it stands, the Big 10 will be at 18, Big 12 at 16, SEC at 16, ACC at 17 (18 if you count ND).

I used to think the SEC would eventually raid the ACC, but the more I think about it, I doubt the SEC wants any ACC schools. They have South Carolina and Florida, they don't need Clemson and FSU from the same state. I think it will be the Big 10 and Big 12 only. The Big 12 is desperate to portray themselves as equal to the P2, so they will go hard after the big names, Clemson and FSU. The Big 10 might consider those two, but I more likely see them going the route of UNC and UVA, possibly Duke and Miami too. Those are more in line with the Big 10's perceived academic rep. The Big 12 has said they are not adding any more G5s, only P5s, and adding Clemson and FSU would be a huge coup (they'd probably throw the proverbial bank truck at them)... but I don't know how many more ACC schools the Big 12 would want beyond those two.

The wildcard here obviously is that we're actually talking about what TV wants. Big 10 and Big 12 are primarily Fox entities, right? And ACC is ESPN. The Big 12, ahem, Fox, might relish completely raiding the ACC simply to decimate the locked-in ESPN content. So the real question is whether the Big 12 goes for football names (taking 2) or goes for the ESPN-kill (taking 8 ).

Regardless, they're going to have to pay to break up the GOR situation... a LOT of money. My guess is there will be some "collusion" between the Big 10 and Big 12 - like neither would make the move to break up the ACC if they didn't know the other was on board - and Fox will be pulling those strings (and I can envision ESPN suing the pants off Fox for it, too.)

The Big12 I think is something like 2/3 or 3/4 ESPN. Contracts with both but weighted heavier to ESPN. If the Big 12 gets FSU/Clemson, could also see them adding Pitt and Louisville. If UNC/Duke/UVa/Miami go to the BIG, that leaves NCSt, Wake, BC, GT, VT, Syracuse, Cal, Stanford, SMU. Obviously a good conference for us to join but that TV deal would be going down. They'd probably also look at UConn and of course the west coast schools (OSU, WSU, SDSU). Not sure how/if Memphis would fit...academics may be a deal breaker? It could be worse for us.

[wavedom]

As it stands, the Big 10 will be at 18, Big 12 at 16, SEC at 16, ACC at 17 (18 if you count ND).

I used to think the SEC would eventually raid the ACC, but the more I think about it, I doubt the SEC wants any ACC schools. They have South Carolina and Florida, they don't need Clemson and FSU from the same state. I think it will be the Big 10 and Big 12 only. The Big 12 is desperate to portray themselves as equal to the P2, so they will go hard after the big names, Clemson and FSU. The Big 10 might consider those two, but I more likely see them going the route of UNC and UVA, possibly Duke and Miami too. Those are more in line with the Big 10's perceived academic rep. The Big 12 has said they are not adding any more G5s, only P5s, and adding Clemson and FSU would be a huge coup (they'd probably throw the proverbial bank truck at them)... but I don't know how many more ACC schools the Big 12 would want beyond those two.

The wildcard here obviously is that we're actually talking about what TV wants. Big 10 and Big 12 are primarily Fox entities, right? And ACC is ESPN. The Big 12, ahem, Fox, might relish completely raiding the ACC simply to decimate the locked-in ESPN content. So the real question is whether the Big 12 goes for football names (taking 2) or goes for the ESPN-kill (taking 8 ).

Regardless, they're going to have to pay to break up the GOR situation... a LOT of money. My guess is there will be some "collusion" between the Big 10 and Big 12 - like neither would make the move to break up the ACC if they didn't know the other was on board - and Fox will be pulling those strings (and I can envision ESPN suing the pants off Fox for it, too.)

Can't see FSU and Clemson going to the B12 . It would be at best even to the money they currently get or possibly a little less. You say they'll throw the bank truck at them. Well for the conference to do that the teams would have to say we'll all give up a lot a year so you can use it to reel them in. That's not happening. It's really the network that has the money and has to pay and as we've all agreed they aren't worth what they think they're worth. So can't see the network saying we'll pay those 2 $70 million while the rest of you get your usual $32 million. So if they are leaving , especially with what they are going to have to pay to leave, it's going to be one of the P2. But again we've agreed they aren't really valued there. So I ask again is there a credible source saying this is going to happen?

[PeteRasche]

If the Big 12 gets FSU/Clemson, could also see them adding Pitt and Louisville. If UNC/Duke/UVa/Miami go to the BIG, that leaves NCSt, Wake, BC, GT, VT, Syracuse, Cal, Stanford, SMU. Obviously a good conference for us to join but that TV deal would be going down.

This past summer there was a lot of concern about whatever shell of a conference the PAC ended up as, being worth Tulane joining, and concern about the payouts being low, or "even worth the costs of west coast travel" and whatnot. However, I think we all have quickly become aware, as this football season has thrown it in our faces, of just how important it is for us to GET OUT OF THE AAC. Whatever the TV deal is of the new ACC, even if it's $500 more than the AAC, we need to get out of the AAC, if for no other reason than perception.

So I ask again is there a credible source saying this is going to happen?

I don't know if this last line was for me specifically or just to the thread as a whole, but there was absolutely nothing in my post that indicated sources or leaks, it was 100% my personal guesses (hence the "I thinks").

[tulaneoutlaw]

I could see the big 10 wanting into Florida via fsu or miami. Good recruiting and I don't mean just for athletes. Those schools are pulling more students from out of state these days.