Tweet of the Day
ACC appears to be gaining steam for a possible move involving Texas if Big 12 falls apart. ... http://bit.ly/qECav9ChipBrownOB Chip Brown
Expanding on ACC Expansion -
Hook'em Horns Edition
Chip Brown is something of an unofficial, unaffiliated, three degrees of separation mouthpiece for the Texas athletics department. Therefore, when he posts something on conference expansion concerning Texas, you need to take a step back and consider the motives. To me, there are two possibilities for Brown's recent Texas to the ACC posts:
- Gamesmanship - Conference realignment is just an extension of the Red River Rivalry. This past weekend the leadership of Oklahoma and Texas met to discuss the future of the Big XII. Texas came away with the impression that the Oklahoma train has already left the Big XII station and is heading west to the Pac-12. Is Oklahoma trying to force Texas's hand for equal revenue share in exchange for keeping the Big XII intact? Is this Texas trying to let Oklahoma know that it won't just automatically follow it to the Pac-12, i.e. leverage? Is the leverage message intended for the Pac-12 or is it the Big 10?
- Opinion Maker/Propaganda - Is this the first step in selling the move the ACC for the Long Horns? A review of the free boards over at OrangeBloods.com reveals that it is not an immediately popular sentiment. Free boards aren't really the place for good information or informed opinions though.
- Student Athlete - traveling east is easier on student athletes gaining hours across timezones when returning home after games versus losing hours traveling equal distance west.
- Academics - the ACC is the strongest BCS conference and it is not even close. Texas is a nice fit academically, better than the Pac-12.
- Football and Basketball - While the ACC has underperformed recently, it has rich tradition. FSU, Miami, Virginia Tech, and Georgia Tech for football. ACC's basketball tradition is unquestionable.
- The non-revenue sports - The ACC is a strong conference for non-revenue sports, especially baseball and women's basketball. Texas is a nice fit.
- The Longhorn Network (LHN)-
This could easily be No. 1 on the list. It's that important for Texas to hold together LHN.
It will be a bit of a sales job and will require the help of ESPN, but in all likelihood Texas can keep the Longhorn Network and its revenue ($15 million per year for 20 years) by going to the ACC, something the Pac-12 would be unwilling to consider.
The ACC is in the first year of a new, 12-year deal with ESPN, which controls the Tier 1, 2 and 3 TV rights in the ACC. And with no Big 12 left to spend money on (in all likelihood), ESPN can probably help make the Longhorn Network palatable to the ACC by giving the ACC a break-the-bank television deal with Texas on board that will blow the ACC members away.
Consider it a reward to the ACC for accepting Texas' unique revenue stream. But there would be incentive for the ACC to take Texas. The Southeastern Conference and Big Ten stand to poach schools out of the ACC if it appears the college arms race is leading to 16-team super conferences.
Why does it makes senses for the ACC? Same reasons.
Texas is a good fit because of academics, school values as a research institution and overall sports culture (broad view, not just limited to football). Additionally, the expansion into Texas for the ACC media markets will create a huge increase in Tier 1 media rights value. There is a preexisting contractual relationship with the ACC, Texas, and ESPN, such that the contracts can be amended to reflect the substantial increase in market value for the addition of Texas and the Texas media market.
Further, I am of the opinion that ACC schools don't have anything to fear from the LHN because no schools directly compete against them geographically. It is hard for an east coast school to go into Texas and pluck out most recruits. Forget about a national recruit. In the case of the ACC member schools, an unequal division of revenue (that is primarily derived from the Texas geographic region any way) is not going to change that. The LHN would like to broadcast 2-3 Tier 2 or Tier 3 home games a year as well as the Texas spring game. The revenue that is derived from the LHN is driven by people willing to pay a premium to watch the Longhorns lineup against and play an FCS team or the dooks/BCs/WFs of the college football world. That game has no national or regional interest, outside of Texas; therefore, why not let Texas keep the value that it creates because of who it is? It does not harm the rest of the ACC as it did Texas A&M, Oklahoma, or Arkansas which were trying to compete in the burnt orange shadow of UT. Which begs the question -
- if Texas joins the ACC, do you add regional schools, e.g. Baylor, Missouri, Kansas, to prevent Texas isolation or do you intentional create isolation to prevent the animosity that was created in the Big XII because of the Longhorn Network that ultimately made it crumble?
The blue print for ACC expansion would be into four 4-team pods. The benefits of the pod system would be:
- Preserve regional rivalries
- Reduce travel expense, especially for non-revenue sports
- Manufactures additional end of season intrigue
For Texas, the 4-team pod will allow a flexibility of schedule that will enable them to continue the Red River Rivalry as well as the Texas A&M rivalry (if the Aggies are willing to schedule it). This will also help Florida State, Clemson, and Georgia Tech with scheduling balance while maintaining their traditional in-state rivalry games.
For traditional football powers that are competing on the national stage, there will be at least two marquee games in-conference games anually. The first would be the in-pod rivalry that would develop. In my illustrative hypothetical, I paired Texas and Clemson. Remember, it is only a hypothetical and could easily be another team that is a better fit depending on expansion. The second marquee game will be discussed later in the post. I am calling it "Pod Match Up Game." Sexy, I know.
Reduce Travel Expenses - This pretty self-explanatory. If you need to more detail, please quit reading my blog. You just looking at it is dumbing it down and that is saying something.
End of Season Intrigue - First of all, a disclaimer: I have not seen my idea in print or heard about it from anyone, which is disappointing because my plan is genius if I do say so myself. I call it the
"Four Pod Play-in Plan"
There is nothing more exciting than a playoff. Therefore, instead of scheduling eight firm conference games (three pod games and five out-of-pod games), schedule seven conference games (three pod games and four out-of-pod games) and a "pod match up game" in the final week of the season. Rank the pods by strength, one through four, according to total BCS system points. Match up the strongest pod's team against the weakest pod's team - 1v1, 2v2, 3v3, and 4v4 such that the 1v1 is a play-in game to conference championship. Match up the second and third strongest pods in the same way.
For illustration purposes, in my hypothetical scenario, the ACC adds Texas, Missouri, Notre Dame and Pitt. Why Texas, Missouri, Notre Dame, and Pitt? Expanded media footprint with large state schools that value excellence in both academics and sports. Notre Dame is a reach but if Texas joins the ACC while maintaining the LHN, a similar proposition could be accepted by the Irish. I digress though. The four pods are broken down as such with the order of finish within each individual pod:
North Pod East Pod West Pod South Pod
1 - Notre Dame Virginia Tech Texas Florida State
2 - Maryland North Carolina Clemson Georgia Tech
3 - Pittsburgh NC State Missouri Miami
4 - Boston College Virginia dook Wake Forest
Hypothetically and for illustrative purposes, the North Pod is first because it has the most aggregate BCS points of all the pods, i.e. the combined total BCS points for Notre Dame, Maryland, Pittsburgh and BC are more than the total for each of the other individual pods. The East Pod is last because it has the fewest aggregate BCS points of all the pods. Therefore, the North 1 (Notre Dame) would play the East 1 (Virginia Tech), the North 2 (Maryland) would play East 2 (North Carolina), ect. The West Pod 1 (Texas) would play the South Pod 1 (Florida State), West Pod 2 (Clemson) against South Pod 2 (Georgia Tech), ect. In the pod match up game, the team with the most BCS points gets home field advantage, home field is not assigned to the pod. This rewards the better team with an additional home game and home game revenues.
Further, the 1v1 games are play-in games to the ACC championship game. Therefore, the winner of Notre Dame-Virginia Tech would play the winner of Texas-Florida State in the ACC championship game.
It would create a mini-conference tournament that combines "the entire season is a play off" theory with an actual playoff is a playoff plan. Talk about exciting. The ACC would guarantee two marquee nationally relevant games to close the regular season and build excitement towards the ACC championship game. Imagine the ESPN coverage in the week leading up the championship game.
This has value, just like Texas in the ACC.
No comments:
Post a Comment