YouPeople wrote: lumber a KU fan on one of the boards I read provided some detailed info about KU and KSU being separate but equal ...I can't find said post but that is what I'm going from...the poster could have been full of it so who knows.


The key with Texas is the LHN which, like the ACC, is owned by ESPN. As it stands now, to get any halfway quality games on the LHN, ESPN has had to play chess with FOX as they both share the conference TV rights. That wouldn't be an issue in the ACC. Raycom (ACC Network) can show games in the NY to Miami footprint and LHN (ACC Network) can show whatever the hell they want out there.  This is where Texas being far away actually helps. UT alums living from NY to Miami will then want the LHN which is to both UT and ESPN's benefit.

As for football, UT can play 6 games vs the ACC, just like ND will....with all 7 of their home games being either on ESPN or the LHN (NO FOX). 


I just don't know if UT can leave all the little brothers behind.

abcfan2005 wrote: Mack was at UNC. Who was at State?

---------------------------------------------
--- lumberpack3 wrote:

You know it just dawned on me that the coaches of Texas's two revenue sports used to be coaches at UNC and NCSU.  Fancy that.

---------------------------------------------

abcfan2005 wrote: Mack was at UNC. Who was at State?

---------------------------------------------
--- lumberpack3 wrote:

You know it just dawned on me that the coaches of Texas's two revenue sports used to be coaches at UNC and NCSU.  Fancy that.

---------------------------------------------

wrcwolf wrote:

---------------------------------------------
--- Herring wrote:

Although the entrenched powers would be against it I would prefer a similar situation to the NFL whereby the NCAA has a global TV contract and there is a lot of parity in the payouts.  It will bring down many of the high value teams but could curb some of the recent idiocity.  

I wouldn't mind some incentives for ranking, ticket sales, record, etc so some teams can get more cash but it doesn't seem right that Mississippi St receives more TV revenue than FSU.  We're talking billions here but I believe the NFL has a good model.

---------------------------------------------

The Supreme Court voted down the NCAA's hold on TV rights already. If you think this is heading towards the socialistic system of the NFL, you will be extremely disappointed. The exact opposite is more likely to happen. The rich are only going to get richer.

NFL model is great for promoting a level field and allowing teams such as Green Bay, Buffalo, Cincinnati, etc... from leaving for bigger markets. Thank Rozelle for understanding that philosophy, but more importantly thank the big market owners back in the 60's, like Mara and Halas, who ok'd giving up millions for the betterment of the league. Green Bay should have statues outside their stadium of those two instead of Lombardi. Without them, that stadium is torn down by now.

Btw, NBCSN has been running a fantastic documentary of the history of the NFL called "Star-Spangled Sundays".

Welcome to PackPride.  I can tell you that the PAC 12 will be involved in the planning and fulfillment of this strategic partnership.  And it would still work out if it is only the Big 12 and ACC.  part of the plan,  friend.

'81

WakeForestIndy wrote: I suppose that doesn't rule out that the PAC 12 could have had discussions with ACC about an alliance. If it's really just an alliance with the Big XII I doubt it goes anywhere.

WakeForestIndy wrote: Thanks for the welcome. This whole alliance thing is pretty interesting. The denials from Slive and Scott specifically mentioned the Big XII. So if the PAC 12 is definitely involved does that mean we shouldn't rule out the SEC either?

pkt89 wrote: I am a little slow.

So, an ACC, Big 12, Pac 10 alliance is greater than a SEC / Big 10 alliance?

That seems to be what is playing out.

If so that is a win for the ACC.  East coast to Westcoast, plus... if the Pac 10 can enter into Asia...gold mine.

YouPeople wrote: Ask yourself...who has a TV network that is struggling to get off the ground and needs inventory? Who has plenty of inventory but has no network?

lumberpack3 wrote: A tidbit passed from Clemson to GT is that ND wants to play Pitt on a yearly basis, upping the ACC games from 5 to 6.  Wonder if the actions of the Big 10 post ND joining the ACC has soured the Golden Domers desire to play more than one Big 10 in a year - or could the be anticipating a boycott by UM and MSU?  I doubt Purdue could afford a league encouraged boycott of ND.

johnnyfever wrote:

lumberpack3 wrote: A tidbit passed from Clemson to GT is that ND wants to play Pitt on a yearly basis, upping the ACC games from 5 to 6.  Wonder if the actions of the Big 10 post ND joining the ACC has soured the Golden Domers desire to play more than one Big 10 in a year - or could the be anticipating a boycott by UM and MSU?  I doubt Purdue could afford a league encouraged boycott of ND.

Or part of ND and Texas playing 6 ACC games as ACC menbers with ND  going from 5 to 6 ACC games?

wrcwolf wrote: I've read on the Internet (you know the French model situation, true or not?) that Notre Dame may increase the ACC games to six with that additional game being alternated on a 2-year basis with Pitt and Boston College. So three home ACC games on NBC and three away ACC games on ABC/ESPN yearly. We'll see.

As for Notre Dame's final game of the season (Thanksgiving Weekend), on even years that is played in the Coliseum against USC. That's not going to change. Of late, the Irish have traveled to Stanford during odd years for their last game. That one probably isn't set in stone, but I doubt Pitt or BC would replace the Cardinal. Now Texas AD DeLoss Dodds hinted at Notre Dame replacing A&M as the Longhorns Thanksgiving opponent during his courtship with Swarbrick a few years ago. They have a four-game series starting in 2015, but those games are scheduled to start the season, not end it. I could see Texas possibly replacing Stanford as Notre Dame's last opponent on odd years maybe.

wrcwolf wrote: Was some talk that both Stanford and Notre Dame were looking at playing this upcoming year's game in China. That was cancelled, but I wouldn't be surprised if that became a reality one of these years.

Lumber, what do you make of UVa discussing a game with Oregon in Europe? Decided on a home-and-home, but that caught me as a bit of a strange idea. What European country has a strong Hoos presence? Holland, or is that just the orange uniforms confusing me? Thumbs up on the out-of-the-box thinking, just don't see UVa drawing all that well in Europe. Maybe it was a typo (Europe, Eugene).

www.virginiasports.com/sports/.../012813aae.html

"We initiated a conversation with Oregon about a potential game in 2017 in Europe," said Virginia Executive Associate Athletics Director Jon Oliver. "As the conversation progressed it became clear we might have an opportunity to initiate a series in 2013 starting in Charlottesville. We saw that as a great opportunity for our program and our fans.



^ That would be somewhat of a plus for the Terps. Going to play Hopkins anyways, but having them in the same conference would take away a bit of the sting of losing UVa, UNC, Duke and incoming Syracuse.

http://www.scacchoops.com/tt_N...nal.asp?NB=8158

http://www.sportsbusinessdaily...s/Colleges.aspx

http://collegesportsblog.dalla...expanding.html/

Cheers,

'81

I wonder which teams Bowlsby has available for a football alliance? 

Texas has added a number of games with ND and we know they want to continue playing ND and want to play a game with the P12.  That leaves just one game since they have a 9 game conference slate and if they are forced to play TAMU that game is gone. 

Iowa State has Iowa and Northern Iowa in fairly long agreements.  Baylor has a fairly long agreement with SMU and WVa and MD have a fairly long agreement.  As badly as MD needs money I can't see MD dropping that without some cash.  OSU, TT, Kansas, and K-State have the most openings in the near future.  OU and TCU have more of their slates completed and OU and TCU have some good games against good OOC team unless the Big10 starts backing out on them. 

As far as the ACC goes, Clemson and GT are tied into two SEC games for the near future.  Louisville and FSU have one SEC game and UVa has a P12 game out into the mid-range future.  I wonder if Bowlsby's idea of an Alliance would mean the B12 drops back to 8 league games? 

lumberpack3 wrote:

I wonder which teams Bowlsby has available for a football alliance? 

Texas has added a number of games with ND and we know they want to continue playing ND and want to play a game with the P12.  That leaves just one game since they have a 9 game conference slate and if they are forced to play TAMU that game is gone. 

Iowa State has Iowa and Northern Iowa in fairly long agreements.  Baylor has a fairly long agreement with SMU and WVa and MD have a fairly long agreement.  As badly as MD needs money I can't see MD dropping that without some cash.  OSU, TT, Kansas, and K-State have the most openings in the near future.  OU and TCU have more of their slates completed and OU and TCU have some good games against good OOC team unless the Big10 starts backing out on them. 

As far as the ACC goes, Clemson and GT are tied into two SEC games for the near future.  Louisville and FSU have one SEC game and UVa has a P12 game out into the mid-range future.  I wonder if Bowlsby's idea of an Alliance would mean the B12 drops back to 8 league games? 

http://www.star-telegram.com/2...ances-with.html

'81