the teams remaining in the ACC and Big 12. Even if Notre Dame would say, "Yeah, we have seen the light. We are going to make a conference of x amount of teams we cherry pick from the current Big 12 and ACC." I still don't think it will be enough. Plus, ND doing this would be highly unlikely.

I was always a huge advocate of trying to get Texas, Oklahoma, Notre Dame, and some friends to the ACC with a "dedicated rivals" model and scheduling flexibility. I recall it wasn't well received as fans don't like change, but if you don't change others will and you die... hence why the ACC is where it is now. The following remaining teams would still make a very solid conference. While the top may not be quite as good as top of either P2, the bottom would't be as bad and there are still tons of incredible matchups. FSU, CLEMSON, MIAMI, ND, VT, OKSU, UNC, NCSU, UVA, GT, WVU, COL, ASU, AZ, UTAH Sometimes it also takes creativity, so why not create a relegation system so the top 14 teams stay based on whatever metrics you want (eg: win percentage, attendance, viewership, etc). That would allow you to possibly have a system that provides a lower division and a home for teams like the following: KAN, KSU, STAN, CAL, DUKE, PITT, SYR, BC, SMU, BAY, HOU, TX TECH, TEX TECH, IOWA ST, UCF, WSU, OSU If you want to get really creative... you could do an in-season promotion system so after 6 games the top few teams from that group gets added mid-season. It sure would be interesting. ** Edited by jesuisvtguy at 7/26/2024, 8:40:18 AM

would deal with tons of the current problems. Some people look at it as high risk for schools. But I look at it as the opposite, because it is fluid and dealt with by on field results. True competition is what draws interest and viewers. Placement should be based on winning, not based on arbitrary things like TV markets, alumni base, AAU membership, and what not. The problem is, very few people want to even consider such models. It's myopic thinking. It's also greedy and anti-competitive. But even trying it on a smaller scale as you suggest would be a good start (unless the model is so flawed that it is doomed to fail). At present, you could do it with the Big XII and ACC for football. Make 3 tiers. Top tier makes close to P2 money, second tier makes near current ACC-B12 payouts, and third tier makes closer to G5 money. About 11 teams at each tier (5 home and 5 away). You's have to find a way to split the tiers up initially and possibly grandfather clause the money for a temporary period, but this isn't hard to do.

new conference without the drag from the lower teams in either conference. Otherwise, I think the negatives outweigh the positives.

but if they even gave half a crap about football, they should be on this list. They do not and they are not. I think if you add ASU, Utah, and Colorado to the ACC 9, you have a solid national conference of 12 academic and athletic elites. Fewer mouths to feed, broad coverage. As I have said before, I think you could add one of: Dook/Cuse/Pitt/Louisville/GT and have a 10 team regional conference they could hold its own as the potential third power conference, if ESPN would pay for it.

Even if FSU wins their legal case and a judge rules that the ACC GoR can't be enforced against them, I don't think FSU will leave the ACC to join the Big12 or be independent. After FSU is talked back down off the ledge, they will just stay in the ACC until the B1G or SEC comes calling. These rumors about FSU and Clemson going to the Big12 are just nonsense. FSU and Clemson aren't spending hundreds of millions in exit fees and legal fees to break the ACC's grant of rights so that they can go sign up for the Big12's exit fees and GoR. ** Edited by tarheelblue at 7/24/2024, 1:05:49 PM