Unconquered

Sure. The Journalism and Architecture schools would be great, too. But it's about how this can benefit the State of Florida, not FSU. And there'd likely have to be some concession in regards to access to underrepresented populations in the state and a willingness to still educate them (hence my undeveloped idea of some type of FSU-affiliated college to keep access open to those who otherwise may not have it).

So, realignment...

I am now onboard with going to the Big Ten. In my mind it would work out something like this:

* FSU, GT, Miami, Clemson and 2 of VT, UVA, UNC or NC State (or maybe Pitt?) to get to 20. Create two 10-team divisions. It seems unwieldy and it probably is but we're clearly headed to 16 and beyond. The SEC doesn't want to keep Mizzou in the east into perpetuity. The ACC wants to bring ND into the the fold full-time. Big Ten presidents have said they don't think they're done expanding. Apparently our own Barron has said he thinks more is on the way. It would also potentially preserve the "old" Big Ten with a Big Ten division and an "ACC" division. Travel wouldn't be all that different than the current ACC for FSU.

And it'd have to be at least 18 to give FSU some travel partners in the south. It's no different than what we'd require if we were going to the Big 12. Except the Big 12 would only be going to 14 or 16 but wouldn't bring nearly the academic clout or population base that the Big Ten brings.

* BTN and ESPN/Fox revenue would be through the roof. I would have to think this would be gobs and gobs of money that no conference could come close to matching. I'm cool with not having 3rd tier football and basketball rights if it means we actually get paid for giving them up (unlike the ACC) and get paid well for giving them up (unlike the ACC).

* Increased bowl and playoff revenue? Yes, sir. The Big Ten has always sent more teams to the BCS than the ACC and has much better (paying) bowl tie-ins than the ACC. I bet even the Orange would probably cancel its deal with the ACC to add something like Big Ten/SEC vs "Best Available" matchup (alternating between Big Ten and SEC teams).

* It would expand FSU's marketing/branding/penetration into new markets (student recruitment, alumni spreading). Did we have all the alumni in NC, VA, DC, etc that we do now prior to joining the ACC? I would think it was proportionately smaller than now. I see no harm in spreading our influence even further throughout the country. We will always remain Florida-centric so if anyone is concerned, I'm not proposing we alienate our own residents in the process. We could keep enrolling the same amount of Florida residents and then since out of state students pay significantly more of their own tuition (less state-subsidized), maybe we could increase out of state enrollment without affecting in-state. Either way, more applicants is better. More alumni in more cities is better.

* Being affiliated with a bunch of large, public, flagship universities that together conduct billions of dollars of research could help us perception-wise and in tangible ways much more than the ACC has. Our research levels and endowment pale in comparison to most Big Ten universities but in the ACC we have a much cozier neighborhood in these areas. The new environment might give us some extra and potentially needed motivation to pick our game up in these areas to aspire to be like our new conference mates.

***** I'm not saying that is what is going to happen. But I'd prefer that over the ACC, Big 12 or SEC. Think that'd be the best of both the academic and athletic worlds, if only we can hurry up and accept expansion past 14/16. *****

SEC radio was speaking on realignment, yesterday, and they stated that even though the fans of all institutions would love to have FSU, it made no sense financially and in viewership in markets.

They simply believed it would NEVER happen.

The TV contracts are driven by national numbers. We are a more viewed team than anyone in the sEC e Celt Bama and UF. We are about equal to them. So we are value added for TV deals. The ratings number is why CBS would not pay more money for A&M and Mizzou being added in the SEC. They do not turn on sets.

By current NCAA rules I believe you MUST play everyone in your division. So in theory, I guess you'd only face your 9 divisional opponents in a 20-team conference. BUT, you could probably do the whole pod thing, splitting into 4 pods of 5, with two pods combining in different combinations each year to form a division. I'm sure it would be worked out based on what the member institutions preferred.

It'd definitely be more like 2 conferences under one confederation.

As for UF I'm sure we'd still play them. We aren't A&M and afraid of our in-state foes. We simply don't want our current conference to drag us down/hold us back to the point where we are at a competitive disadvantage. We were moving to 9 games in the ACC until a month ago when it was switched back to 8. We had no intentions of ditching UF then. I doubt we'd have any intentions if this 20-team "thing" ever happened.

let me rearrange a little...

A: FSU, GT, UNC, UVA, Maryland

B: Notre Dame, Penn St, BC, Rutgers, Purdue

C: Ohio St, Michigan, Northwestern, Michigan St, Indiana

D: Nebraska, Minnesota, Wisconsin, Iowa, Illinois

I laughed at your GIFs. However, I think he might have had BC in there due to the ND rivalry. Maybe necessary for ND to keep as many of their traditional rivalries in play.

I am of the mindset though that if ND wins the NCG (huge if I know), they will not have to consider joining a conference for the next decade. They will have been a part of a storied season, breaking the SEC stronghold and setting a new CFB TV record. They will have the Playoffs falling over themselves to carve out a favorable qualifying clause for them without conference affiliation. JMO

I understand. I was just showing the lack of analysis in their statements.

Some rivalry. It started in 1975 and has only been played 22 times.

BC is a terrible choice. It just is. And it's even worse from FSU's perspective. We'd be further south than everyone else with none of our 3 biggest rivals within our new conference (GT and VT would be 4th and 5th, imo, fwiw).

Here is the link.

Curious what Eldridge thinks now...?

I guess it would be better if I spelled some of this out, instead of just telling you how wrong Pben is.

1) It doesn't take much research or connection to FSU to know, that some people working high up in the Big 12 also worked at FSU over the last couple decades. It also doesn't take much dot connecting to find out that Spetman has some ties to the same people working in the Big 12.

Point being Pben, if there was even an ounce of credibility inside of you, you would have known about these connections to FSU.

2) FSU has had a standing, committable offer to the Big 12 since last year. FSU took the approach of not saying "no", however instead giving the ACC a chance to come to the drawing board with some real answers for what the future entailed. FSU was looking for 1) Aggressive football growth (and not just adding ND - which hasn't happened - FSUs feelings are more angered by the agreement signed, and would have preferred nothing with ND be done, than what happened). Or 2) Unequal revenue sharing - i.e. eat what you kill - since they took Tier 3 away from all the football schools.

So that brings us to today. The ACC has fallen short. FSU doesn't believe ND is joining full time, and neither does any football school in this conference. FSU will leave - they get a free pass to see how this UMD buyout works, and also an opportunity to gather some regional partners.

The Big1G is another Pben pipe dream that would continue to allow him to be a cheap ass and skip on season tickets, and catch a few roadies near his region, but there is zero chance it happens besides the sugar plums and fairies dancing in his head.

As far as the stability of the Big12 - it's extremely stable. They all signed GORs. Bowlsby is one of the most forward and progressive thinkers when it comes to expansion, and he has his conference dialed to become one of the major powers in CFB. They are a far cry from where they were 2 years ago.

Last, I saw Pben mention that FSU isn't on some sort of time clock to act quickly. Wrong again. FSU has about a 1 year grace period since the 50 million dollar exit fee was put in place. While it will never hold up in court the first year, especially given that FSU publicly voted against it (see, further evidence besides what I have listed that FSU has zero intention on staying a partner with the ACC long term)it could hold up much stronger in court if FSU lets this year go by, and then in 2014 decides they are ready to bolt. They have until August 31st or whatever the date is to declare to get out without harsh penalties. Reason being that it takes a decent amount of time to change the scenario you are in, but any more than a year of doing so, and it becomes harder to prove the fee was unjust. So this is the year.

So wrapping things up, FSU is VERY interested in the Big 12, they are very interested in UMDs legal ventures of getting out of this deal, and they are VERY interested in making a decision by next August, to stay within the grace period so to speak of getting out. For that matter, even the schools that didn't vote "no" to the 50 million, have that 1 year grace period where they have a strong case in court.

Things can always change, and are fluid in expansion, but there isn't any doubt the Big12 is the most serious option for both parties. But this nonsense about it being the "well, if we have to" option, that couldn't be more wrong, and just knowing a couple of the right people at FSU or the Big 12 would reveal some of the relationships FSU has with the Big 12 higher ups that have been established for decades.

SEC - could they throw in a wrench. Absolutely, but as others have said, they are more interested in markets at this time, and less interested in programs.

Big1G - No. LOL. No. The kind of expansion that we would need for this to work, is going to take 2-3 years to put it all together, and FSU doesn't have that kind of time. And frankly, they have much, much, much better relationships with the people that matter in the Big12 than the Big1G, which is basically a brand new courtship - IF - either party was showing any real interest.