OT: D1

[IUPbigINDIANS]

I think many could have said the same for Cincinnati 15-20 years ago. I'm not saying Temple can supplant Penn State if they do X, Y, Z - but if they can string together some home run hires that result in on & off field success, they can significantly elevate themselves.

The hurdle is always KEEPING your home run hires.

The 'P2' will make this even harder as that will be the level every coach strives to reach. Get your stock up at a Temple type and get on the first bus out of town.

P2 will be 'the show'. They will own every major TV market. ESPN and Fox will cover them full force. The rest will get afterthought status.

The current ACC is the interesting item. Those schools are locked up through 2036. The exit fee is gigantic. We'll see if they stick to it.

Sounds like there are just (4) ACC targets - NC, Clemson, Miami and FSU. However, I have to think Duke is appealing despite its dumpster fire football program. NC's population is growing off the charts and Duke is basketball blue blood.

Clemson, FSU and Miami are just natural fits in the SEC. It sounds like North Carolina is the BIG target.

[ctrabs74]

The hurdle is always KEEPING your home run hires.

The 'P2' will make this even harder as that will be the level every coach strives to reach. Get your stock up at a Temple type and get on the first bus out of town.

P2 will be 'the show'. They will own every major TV market. ESPN and Fox will cover them full force. The rest will get afterthought status.

The current ACC is the interesting item. Those schools are locked up through 2036. The exit fee is gigantic. We'll see if they stick to it.

Sounds like there are just (4) ACC targets - NC, Clemson, Miami and FSU. However, I have to think Duke is appealing despite its dumpster fire football program. NC's population is growing off the charts and Duke is basketball blue blood.

Clemson, FSU and Miami are just natural fits in the SEC. It sounds like North Carolina is the BIG target.

UCLA hoops hasn't exactly been UCLA hoops after Wooden retired. Yes, they had some success with a national title in the 80s or 90s, but they've fallen off the radar up until a few years ago. Does anyone really think Duke is gonna be Duke without Coach K on the sidelines? That might ultimately hurt Duke in the short term (though being an AAU member along with UNC Chapel Hill might help getting UNC and Duke together in the B1G).

[iupgroundhog]

I think many could have said the same for Cincinnati 15-20 years ago. I'm not saying Temple can supplant Penn State if they do X, Y, Z - but if they can string together some home run hires that result in on & off field success, they can significantly elevate themselves.

People have been saying that about Temple football since the days when Bill Cosby was on the team.

[canadarican]

Personally, I think there's a better chance the ACC adds some schools rather than loses. Especially why would they leave for the Big 12

[IUPbigINDIANS]

Personally, I think there's a better chance the ACC adds some schools rather than loses. Especially why would they leave for the Big 12

WVU is such an obvious choice for the ACC. I'd also try and poach Cincinnati and UCF.

[canadarican]

WVU is such an obvious choice for the ACC. I'd also try and poach Cincinnati and UCF.

Agree on WVU. I want to say that Cincinnati applied for ACC membership back when Louisville was added but could be wrong. I also know Villanova applied for membership and was going to move their football to FBS around the same time. But I just don't see the SEC or Big Ten poaching the ACC due to massive exit fee and grant of rights deal. At least not until 2036 as someone mentioned.

But hey, I also don't look at the Big Ten adding USC and UCLA as a "response" to the SEC adding Texas and Oklahoma. If I didn't have a family friend who was an assistant equipment manager at UCLA, I wouldn't know they still played football. And USC has been irrelevant longer than Texas has. That's not me pooing on the Big Ten, but just my lack of respect for those 2 schools.

[EastStroud13]

Anyone who the Big Ten and SEC want, they'll get eventually. It might not be this year, but money talks. The Pac, Big 12, and ACC need to be planning accordingly.

[IUPbigINDIANS]

Agree on WVU. I want to say that Cincinnati applied for ACC membership back when Louisville was added but could be wrong. I also know Villanova applied for membership and was going to move their football to FBS around the same time. But I just don't see the SEC or Big Ten poaching the ACC due to massive exit fee and grant of rights deal. At least not until 2036 as someone mentioned.

But hey, I also don't look at the Big Ten adding USC and UCLA as a "response" to the SEC adding Texas and Oklahoma. If I didn't have a family friend who was an assistant equipment manager at UCLA, I wouldn't know they still played football. And USC has been irrelevant longer than Texas has. That's not me pooing on the Big Ten, but just my lack of respect for those 2 schools.

I'd agree but the caveat is USC and UCLA bring the whole Hollywood vibe to the BIG. And, now that you can legally throw money around (think Pete C. doing it illegally) ... logic would say USC could quickly come roaring back. Lincoln R. may get Troy rolling again quickly.

USC is a glamor football program (albeit not recently).

I'd assume USC was the main target. UCLA was included in the package.

[ctrabs74]

I'd agree but the caveat is USC and UCLA bring the whole Hollywood vibe to the BIG. And, now that you can legally throw money around (think Pete C. doing it illegally) ... logic would say USC could quickly come roaring back. Lincoln R. may get Troy rolling again quickly.

USC is a glamor football program (albeit not recently).

I'd assume USC was the main target. UCLA was included in the package.

Lincoln Riley is going to be a rude awakening when USC becomes a mid-pack team in the B1G...

[ctrabs74]

Agree on WVU. I want to say that Cincinnati applied for ACC membership back when Louisville was added but could be wrong. I also know Villanova applied for membership and was going to move their football to FBS around the same time. But I just don't see the SEC or Big Ten poaching the ACC due to massive exit fee and grant of rights deal. At least not until 2036 as someone mentioned.

Part of the issues with Villanova football moving up to FBS was the inability to either upgrade their stadium to FCS standards or secure an appropriate venue to host FBS football (what's now known as Subaru Park in Chester was considered as the "home" venue as I recall).

But hey, I also don't look at the Big Ten adding USC and UCLA as a "response" to the SEC adding Texas and Oklahoma. If I didn't have a family friend who was an assistant equipment manager at UCLA, I wouldn't know they still played football. And USC has been irrelevant longer than Texas has. That's not me pooing on the Big Ten, but just my lack of respect for those 2 schools.

The B1G is basically repeating the same mistakes Delaney made when the B1G added Rutgers and Maryland because of the New York and DC markets, respectively. Unless USC and UCLA step up their game in the next few years, the addition of those two schools because of the LA market is not going to age well.

[IUPNation]

I'm old enough to remember when it was Temple, then St Joe's running Big Five hoops and Villanova was the afterthought (though, Penn would kinda sneak into the mix once in a while under Fran Dunphy; LaSalle, well, they're the Mansfield of the Big Five hoops scene). Now, I hadn't realized that St. Joe's fired Martelli until he ended up as the interim head coach at Michigan while Juwan Howard was suspended (which shows you how much St Joe's has fallen too).

The Big 5 is now Villanova and the 4 Nobodies.

[IUPNation]

West Virginiastan needs to move to the ACC. They are such an oddity in the Little 12.

[IUPbigINDIANS]

Part of the issues with Villanova football moving up to FBS was the inability to either upgrade their stadium to FCS standards or secure an appropriate venue to host FBS football (what's now known as Subaru Park in Chester was considered as the "home" venue as I recall).



The B1G is basically repeating the same mistakes Delaney made when the B1G added Rutgers and Maryland because of the New York and DC markets, respectively. Unless USC and UCLA step up their game in the next few years, the addition of those two schools because of the LA market is not going to age well.

USC and UCLA is a far reach to compare to Maryland and Rutgers.

[ctrabs74]

USC and UCLA is a far reach to compare to Maryland and Rutgers.

Have you seen USC and UCLA over the past decade?

[Ship69]

Have you seen USC and UCLA over the past decade?

USC is 90-49 over the past decade with five top 25 finishes, including two top 10, and it's probably one of the worst decades in their history. I think they're sitting on a little more potential than Rutgers or Maryland. And the California schools' overall sports programs are very good.