The Blue Board

We aren't just committed to college football; we're early enrolling in it.

Boards ▾

The Blue Board

We aren't just committed to college football; we're early enrolling in it.

The Green Board

Where the madness isn't just in March.

Pro Football Board

The place for discussion on the NFL

College Baseball Board

The place for discussion on college baseball


ACC destabilizing again?

  • Mt Vesuvious is billowing smoke again with two of UVA, UNC, and potentially GT to the B1G.

  • EerSports


    While I think 2 more will go to the Big 10, UNC will never leave Duke. They would ditch NC State and Wake in a heartbeat, but will never leave Duke.

    signature image signature image signature image
  • a lot buzz lately...

  • Lions247


    They most likely are going to have to. No one wants Duke at this point and UNC can go wherever they want. Might not be able to wait around and hope the Big 10 or SEC agrees to take Duke with them.

    signature image signature image signature image
  • There's simply no way, period, in my mind that the SEC would have signed that Champions' Bowl arrangement with the Big 12 not having to play a conference title game. I also believe there is no way the NCAA says they can have one at 10 teams. So that adds up to having to add two teams for 2014. It seems their interests are.....

    1. Notre Dame
    2. FSU
    3. Clemson
    4. Miami

    So imo FSU and Clemson will be Big 12'in it up in 2014. UVA and GT to B1G, VT and NCSt to SEC and the ACC merges with remaining BE schools.

  • Why don't whats left of the big east & whats left of the ACC just merge, to save one another?

    signature image
  • InsideTheU

    Forrest Gump

    Miami says they will join the NFL because that's where all the players end up anyway. theu

    signature image signature image

  • Bucknuts


    The B1G will let them keep their rivalry...I doubt they extend the offer if they weren't getting some inclination they wanted in. They have been talking for a while.

    signature image signature image signature image
  • People in the know regarding the ACC are well aware that UNC and DUKE are "not" tied at the hip. UNC and UVA are. One will not leave without the other.

  • Anyone have a real link?

  • FSU will be going to the Big Ten with UVA, UNC, and GT. If it happens(and thats a big if) and for it to its going to take UVA or UNC to make the first move. Big time donors from UVA and UNC had a meeting today and if I had to guess it was not about what they were going to have for dinner.

  • 247Sports



    fsufsu said... I've got about 10 great stories on Lane but all you need to know is he will never be a loser, that's for sure.

  • Hope so.

    If the biggest reason to leave the ACC is money, the BIG is #1 on the money list and that won't likely change.


  • 247Sports


    lolz, FSU is not going to the BIG 10

    It will never happen

    fsufsu said... I've got about 10 great stories on Lane but all you need to know is he will never be a loser, that's for sure.

  • Actually, that's going to change very soon. The SEC Network is going live in 2014 and is rumored to be almost doubling current payouts per school.

  • Correct

    Academics, son

  • 247Sports


    That, and why would FSU switch to a conference that is far worse than the ACC ? I see no need for that, the ACC is bad enough

    fsufsu said... I've got about 10 great stories on Lane but all you need to know is he will never be a loser, that's for sure.

  • There are real facts and rumors here, not just video game dreams. FSU to B1G is impossible.

  • If the BIG wants to get into FL for their tv money I say they go with Miami, lil better market than Tallahachett

  • 247Sports


    lolz, not really

    Nobody cares about the Canes right now, have you seen a home game for them ? and after sanctions ? you would be better off asking USF or FIU to join if its south florida you covet

    fsufsu said... I've got about 10 great stories on Lane but all you need to know is he will never be a loser, that's for sure.

  • I'm fine with the Big Ten taking FSU if we can leave NoVaNole with the ACC...shrug

  • 247Sports



    fsufsu said... I've got about 10 great stories on Lane but all you need to know is he will never be a loser, that's for sure.

  • Destabilizing? I wasn't aware that ever got stable?

    signature image signature image signature image
  • This. I will add that I think both UNC and UVA need to make sure the other State schools are covered or have a safe landing place, that would be State and VT respectively. For this reason I think State and VT to the SEC and UVA and UNC to the B1G is the only way this goes down. IMO I think VT didn't go to the SEC in place of Mizzu for similar reasons, but additional reasons as well, VT wants/wanted a good viable ACC and didn't want to be the lynch pin to crash the ACC.

    signature image signature image
  • read this I have seen on expansion written by Charles Babb

    • Expansion
    Why read yet another article opining about a subject which has spilled tankers full of ink, laid waste to forests, and sucked up more Internet bandwidth than the death of Princess Diana? Why not purchase a copy of Rosetta Stone and learn a foreign language? Why not take up a new hobby and use legos to build a scale replica of your favorite stadium? Why not take up a new sport, perfecting the fine art of Caber Tossing or Maide Leisge?
    Because I think there is something – a large something – being missed by the plethora of sportswriters who think they are experts on the subject.
    Riddle me this – why would men and women generally considered smarter than the average Joe make head scratching decisions by adding two teams with less than spectacular athletic departments to a league in need of a national splash?
    Maybe it is because they don’t understand college athletics. Maybe it is due to the egg head syndrome where terrible decisions look good from the bubble of academia but don’t do well in places where the rubber does actually meet the road.
    Or, maybe it is because in the Big Ten, the tail is still not wagging the dog, and it is most decidedly not about the ball (to quote Jim Tressel paraphrasing Lance Armstrong).
    In order to understand the expansion of the Big Ten we must first understand the size and nature of these institutions.
    The universities comprising the Big Ten number 13 and will soon number 15 once Maryland and Rutgers are full members. You might perhaps only be coming up with 12 in your mind and soon to be 14, but you are forgetting the prestigious University of Chicago which still enjoys all privileges of membership but has chosen not to compete on the athletic field. The institutions are typically in the range of 140 years of age and older and many (Penn State, Ohio State, Michigan State, Illinois, Purdue, Nebraska, and Wisconsin to name several) are Land Grant institutions formed via the Morrill Acts. The smallest of the Big Ten Universities are Northwestern and Chicago – both numbering about 15,000 students, while the largest are Minnesota and Ohio State which number roughly 65,000 with undergraduate and postgraduate student bodies.
    These institutions have massive budgets – typically ranging from 2 Billion to nearly 5 Billion annually, and are not controlled by their athletic programs. I repeat, they are not controlled by their athletic programs.
    Most important perhaps in this discussion but rarely mentioned is each of these institutions, with the exception of Nebraska (who lost membership after joining the conference), are members of the prestigious AAU, American Association of Universities. The AAU has only 62 in its select, invitation only club in both the United States and Canada, many of whom have no involvement with FBS football. In fact, when those who do not field a football team at the FBS level are removed, there are just 38 if my count is correct. Pare that number down by those which are already members of the Big Ten, and there are only 26 left in the entire United States and Canada. Subtract those members lacking sufficient geographic proximity and you have just a handful of names remaining. They are the names you might have seen floated over the past few years if you followed this subject closely:
    Colorado, Duke, Georgia Tech, Iowa State, Rutgers, Buffalo, Kansas, Maryland, Missouri, North Carolina, Pittsburgh, Toronto, Virginia, Texas, Texas A&M, and Vanderbilt.
    The Big Ten just added two of those on the list in Rutgers and Maryland. Others, such as Colorado, Texas, Texas A&M, and Missouri seem to have made their choices in expansion. Vanderbilt likely would not leave the SEC, and the University of Toronto probably would have far too much work to do in order to compete on the athletic field. Iowa State and Pittsburgh probably are not candidates as they add no new markets to the Big Ten’s expansion, and neither Buffalo nor Kansas add any key markets.
    This leaves us with Duke University, Georgia Institute of Technology, The University of Virginia, and the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill.
    Perhaps my friends, the Big Ten is serious about its academics. Perhaps the legion of sportswriters lack an understanding of not only the Big Ten as a conference but also how higher education works and where the real money lies.
    Is the Big Ten Network a hugely profitable enterprise which has far exceeded the dreams of many (not mine but perhaps many others)? Yes. Is it big money for many smaller institutions and big money compared to other conference revenues? Without question. Is it the driving force in Big Ten expansion? No. Is it even the biggest revenue contributor in this equation? No.
    I repeat, the Big Ten Network, even at $240,000,000 a year is not the largest financial incentive for conference expansion.
    What is you ask?
    The incentives are threefold:
    • 1. State and Federal Grants.
    With 11 current AAU members and soon to be 13 AAU members, the Big Ten collectively gobbles up billions of dollars in grants. There are likely more than a hundred people employed within the Big Ten whose sole job is to write grant proposals. In fact, it is a safe guess to say the number of professional grant writers within the conference might number several hundred. Why? Because it is big money. If you can hire someone for $40,000 a year, and they can land you 3 grants worth $15,000,000 then you have obviously come out ahead.
    But grant writing is competitive. Each university and often multiple departments within a university are all vying for the same, increasingly limited, dollars. You have to be able to make your pitch better than anyone else, and to do this you want to show the government you are not only stretching those dollars to the fullest by involving the most experts with the best facilities, equipment, and investment in future students. In sum, you are doing the most good with the money entrusted to you.
    How do you improve your grant proposal while simultaneously cutting costs? You collaborate. When you collaborate with another university by sharing your findings with one another, you can frequently double or even triple the work force, design better studies, and emerge with not only more creative results but more reliable results.
    What could adding another 4 AAU members mean to the Big Ten?
    It could mean billions – yes, billions with a ‘B’ in grants. Split 17 ways (including the University of Chicago), each university might take home another $100,000,000 every year. Even if it only resulted in another $40,000,000 a year for each university that’s more than the Big Ten Network athletic payout.
    2. Cost Savings
    If you haven’t noticed, state budgets haven’t exactly been experiencing largesse in the last 5 years. In fact, they have been looking more and more like the Hindenberg as it plunged to the ground in New Jersey following its transatlantic journey. Ohio, Illinois, Wisconsin, Michigan, Minnesota, and Pennsylvania – these are states which were hit particularly hard by the recent recession. They are states in which job growth has not been impressive for perhaps decades, and this means while all the costs for states have skyrocketed…the incoming revenue has not.
    The net result is during the last two decades the percentages of funding from state governments for flagship institutions has plummeted. We’re not talking a few million dollars here. We’re talking a drop in funding in the range of tens of millions – sometimes in a single year. A few years ago, one Midwestern state dropped its funding for state higher education by over $100,000,000.
    When you have a large budget cut there are several ways to balance the books in higher education. First, you can raise tuition. This is normally one of the favorite methods (explaining skyrocketing tuition costs in the last 30 years), but it can only be done so much before students and families choose less expensive alternatives (see the growth of community colleges). Second, you can raise money. Higher education qualifies in most cases as a non-profit entity with the IRS. This means you can solicit donations right alongside the American Red Cross, the Susan G. Komen Foundation, etc. with the same ability to provide a boost to the individual in the form of a tax deduction for every donation. Third (and least attractive to most), you can cut costs. This might mean anything from the elimination of too many copies to the elimination of jobs or an entire academic department which has not been pulling its weight.
    How does expansion save money/cut costs?
    When you expand academically, you can share resources. Say one university has an international campus which is only used at 80% capacity. The 20% ‘vacancy’ is what separates the venture from being profitable instead of a money pit; solve the problem by inviting a sister school to join and fill out that extra 20% as an ‘academic exchange’ program. Or, perhaps you would like to offer additional degree programs or even have need for extra sessions of a particular class (like chemistry or sociology, etc.). You can hire additional professors for hundreds of thousands or even millions of dollars, or you can share costs with a sister school which has faculty not being used to the extent of their contract at this present time. Even better, each school has a physical imprint. By this I mean, each university has its physical facilities (dorms, power plant, classrooms, administrative offices, etc.). Increasingly it is a problem to have massive physical imprints in an Internet age because classroom space is used perhaps 4 hours a day but forces building upkeep, electric, heating/cooling, etc. (not to mention construction costs themselves). Add to this problem the reality each professor is asked to teach only so many sessions and then expected to devote the rest of their time to research. How do you increase student enrollment (raising revenue), use a classroom facility to its fullest potential, and still allow the professors to research (raising revenue through grants or scientific discoveries which can be patented)? Easy. Partner with a sister institution – such as Maryland. Install cameras and viewing screens in the lectures of both your professors and her professors, and then double the class size by allowing the professor to teach one group in person and the other remotely. Bring in an additional graduate student at full tuition if necessary to grade papers and answer questions on whichever end is being taught remotely, and you just saved the university $100,000 a year while upping enrollment (which is a huge increase in revenue as we will see below.
    Multiplied 1,000 times over across the Big Ten conference – how much have you suddenly saved in not only basic salary but also benefits? If you figure each additional top end professional might cost you $100,000 at a bare minimum, you just saved the conference $100,000,000 – a year.
    3. Future Students (cost for out of state vs. in state tuition)
    The Big Ten region has been struggling for a long time and that struggle will only accelerate if politicians do not start adding jobs. Jobs are the key to population growth and population growth is the key to enough students to fund large institutions like those in the Big Ten.
    Let me throw out a few statistics for you as this has been coming a long time. In 1950, US population was roughly 150,000,000 and the Big Ten imprint at that time contained 47.9 of them, or 31% of the whole. Many of these were children and young adults with the future looking incredibly bright. Today, the United States population is better than 300,000,000 and the Big Ten region (without the new additions) holds only 67 million residents. That means only 22% of the population is in the Big Ten footprint. Worse, the country is trending demographically to the coasts and the Southeast which means this downward growth spiral will likely accelerate unless the politicians in the Midwest figure out how to attract more jobs to add millions of families.
    Why does this matter and what does it have to do with Big Ten expansion? Without young families, your pool of prospective students shrink. If it continues to shrink then the institutions will find themselves struggling to survive with their current programs and resources intact.
    All this talk of the Big Ten Network and football obscures where the real money lies. It lies in grants, gifts, and students…
    Yes, students. Contrary to popular opinion tuition doesn’t really cover the costs of education for a university, but it certainly helps. Average yearly tuition, fees, and room and board for an Ohio State student is currently right around $20,000 for an Ohio resident and $35,000 for out of state residents. Let’s just say the average reimbursement per student for Ohio State (undergraduate) is $25,000 per year. With expansion into regions with a younger, growing population the Big Ten is not just trying to get network numbers; they are trying to solidify and grow a student base. Instead of trying to figure out how not to shrink in the future, Ohio State (and the rest of the Big Ten universities) are making plans for growth. Instead of trying to fill a $25,000,000 hole when they drop 1,000 students, the leaders of the Buckeye state are trying to determine how they will spend the windfall of 1,000 extra – and mostly out of state – students which represent $35,000,000 per year just as undergraduates and far more (perhaps as much as $50,0000,000) as graduate students.
    In sum, all this hand wringing and head scratching about why the Big Ten would invite Maryland and Rutgers and be in discussion with other AAU institutions in growth areas is quite simple.
    These institutions are public ivy schools which mesh philosophically while opening doors for collaboration and a true increase in stature and funds which dwarf the Big Ten Network and its value.
    Yes, the Big Ten Network is important. No administrator is going to sneeze at $40,000,000 a year for their athletic department, but in reality neither athletics nor Jim Delaney are pulling the strings. Delaney might be negotiating the deals, but the strings are being pulled by the trustees, the presidents, the chancellors, and the money individuals in the Big Ten who see that expansion and collaboration might be worth $100,000,000 and more in profits and savings to each member institution even before athletics are considered.
    Personally, I expect the Big Ten to continue this direction, and, as I have predicted for close to a decade now, we will ultimately see the emergence of superconferences which secede from the NCAA to form their own playoff in football – worth billions of dollars. At that point, the payoff in athletics, savings, tuition, and grants becomes even greater for the Big Ten.
    Crazy for adding Rutgers and Maryland? Crazy for considering Georgia Tech, North Carolina, Duke, and Virginia?
    Yeah, crazy like a fox.

    signature image signature image