Conference Merger?

[BrooklynBull]

For what it is worth:

 

[SGBull]

I am not sure why the American would want Ball State and BGSU over us. I feel like our combination of academics and athletics is more appealing.

[UB Horns Up]

On 7/31/2023 at 10:53 AM, SGBull said:

I am not sure why the American would want Ball State and BGSU over us. I feel like our combination of academics and athletics is more appealing.

I don’t think it’s about wanting them over UB Bulls. It’s those schools feel it’s a better fit and opportunity for there university it’s as simple as that. Don’t blame the conferences they alway have a open door the American. If UB wants to spend more money and make that commitment UB would be in the American. I think as a UB Bulls fan I would be happy if UB would spend at St Bonaventure Bonnies level in basketball instead of Canisius and Niagara level that would be more of a improvement than a different conference for UB Bulls basketball. UB Bulls would have more appeal with there first $1 million dollars a year basketball coach. Everyone in Western New York knows Mark Schmidt was the first $1 million dollars a year head coach a year or two ago.
 

Do that stop being cheap along with for the love of UB Bulls football upgrading the UB Stadium scoreboard it’s beyond embarrassing now. Again beg the Buffalo Bills for the High Stadium scoreboard in 2026 it’s light years better then the relic scoreboard UB has now. How bad is it? As a UB fan I don’t care about a conference it doesn’t mean anything with our UB Stadium looking like that. Again I will say this forever I would build a ring around Murchie Field House with as many seats as possible that UB can put in and split the UB Bulls football season between both facilities. UB Stadium for the afternoon day games than Murchie Field House for the ESPN MAC Action night games. Make the Murchie Field House a mini stadium with a production set like Hollywood Studios because that is the future of where this is all going especially the MAC football. Fans don’t want to freeze and I don’t blame them Buffalo is cold weather in November at night. Murchie Field House would be our new November football games home it’s more beautiful than UB Stadium that is like watching Westinghouse building rotting away in the 1980’s Buffalo suburbs Cheektowaga until the NFTA and Airport took it over. You see all the cranes for the Murchie Field House than oh yeah over there we have to actually go to UB Stadium why? Let’s just play here at UB Murchie Field House with some coffee, hot chocolate, cider and donuts and call it a day. I am speak the truth our UB Bulls fan base is older and the UB students have given up attending by November we don’t need more than 5,000 seats find a way to build a ring with seating for the UB Bulls fans attending MAC action games at UB Murchie Field House in my opinion. UB Horns Up! Go Bulls! Let’s Go Buffalo 

Edited August 2, 2023 by UB Horns Up

[BrooklynBull]

11 hours ago, UB Horns Up said:

I would build a ring around Murchie Field House with as many seats as possible that UB can put in and split the UB Bulls football season between both facilities. UB Stadium for the afternoon day games than Murchie Field House for the ESPN MAC Action night games

The number of seats that could be put inside the Murchie Fieldhouse: 0

 

[SGBull]

In my ideal (unrealistic) world. A few southeastern schools leave the ACC and with Syracuse, BC, and Pitt staying they decide to add some more northeastern schools in UB, UConn, and UMass. Will never happen but it would be awesome if it did. 

[UB92]

2 hours ago, SGBull said:

In my ideal (unrealistic) world. A few southeastern schools leave the ACC and with Syracuse, BC, and Pitt staying they decide to add some more northeastern schools in UB, UConn, and UMass. Will never happen but it would be awesome if it did. 

Interesting.  Maybe that's how it can happen.  But I don't think the geographical issues seem to be problematic for anyone at this point (or not initially).  

If Syracuse, BC, and Pitt come calling to UB, etc., something has gone horribly wrong for the ACC.   And it could happen that FSU is the tip of the arrow for the ACC.

https://www.si.com/college/fsu/football/new-report-reveals-seven-schools-actively-exploring-departure-from-acc

If those schools leave for elsewhere (assumedly of Big10 or Big12 or SEC), it would leave:  BC, Duke, Ga Tech, Louisville, Notre Dame (maybe), Pitt, Syracuse and Wake Forest.

You'd have to wonder if those eight schools that are left would band together and try to make a "super conference" out of the leftovers from the PAC10, try to squeeze into one of the other conferences or something else.

As much as it is fun to dream about, UB has made minimal moves to make themselves attractive towards potential conference expansion.  

I don't have a crystal ball, but I see the future as "superconferences" who will play each other...and the rest (AAC, MAC, Sun Belt, etc.) will sort of form an official "second-tier".  I know they do right now (with the Group-of-Five), but I think it will become more of what the FBS is to the FCS.   These teams won't be ranked, etc.   I can see scenarios where the superconferences suck up all of the bowls (a 3 win Minnesota team is likely to draw a higher attendance and a higher TV rating than a 10 win MAC team, for example) in the future.

 

There was an opportunity ... 10+ years ago...for UB to position themselves for today (or the next several years) for conference expansion.  The decision makers decided "no".   Financially it was (and is) likely the right call.  But the sports fan and die hard alumnus is sad about it.

[BrooklynBull]

In other conference news, Arizona is basically on its way to the Big XII.  Arizona State and Utah are a little bit behind.

Washington and Oregon are rumored to the Big 10.  Cal and Stanford are also alleged to be on their way after Washington and Oregon.  https://footballscoop.com/news/oregon-and-washington-to-join-the-big-ten

[promotherobot]

3 hours ago, BrooklynBull said:

In other conference news, Arizona is basically on its way to the Big XII.  Arizona State and Utah are a little bit behind.

Washington and Oregon are rumored to the Big 10.  Cal and Stanford are also alleged to be on their way after Washington and Oregon.  https://footballscoop.com/news/oregon-and-washington-to-join-the-big-ten

 

On 7/30/2023 at 5:28 PM, BrooklynBull said:

For what it is worth:

 

 

 

[promotherobot]

5 hours ago, UB92 said:

Interesting.  Maybe that's how it can happen.  But I don't think the geographical issues seem to be problematic for anyone at this point (or not initially).  

If Syracuse, BC, and Pitt come calling to UB, etc., something has gone horribly wrong for the ACC.   And it could happen that FSU is the tip of the arrow for the ACC.

https://www.si.com/college/fsu/football/new-report-reveals-seven-schools-actively-exploring-departure-from-acc

If those schools leave for elsewhere (assumedly of Big10 or Big12 or SEC), it would leave:  BC, Duke, Ga Tech, Louisville, Notre Dame (maybe), Pitt, Syracuse and Wake Forest.

You'd have to wonder if those eight schools that are left would band together and try to make a "super conference" out of the leftovers from the PAC10, try to squeeze into one of the other conferences or something else.

As much as it is fun to dream about, UB has made minimal moves to make themselves attractive towards potential conference expansion.  

I don't have a crystal ball, but I see the future as "superconferences" who will play each other...and the rest (AAC, MAC, Sun Belt, etc.) will sort of form an official "second-tier".  I know they do right now (with the Group-of-Five), but I think it will become more of what the FBS is to the FCS.   These teams won't be ranked, etc.   I can see scenarios where the superconferences suck up all of the bowls (a 3 win Minnesota team is likely to draw a higher attendance and a higher TV rating than a 10 win MAC team, for example) in the future.

 

There was an opportunity ... 10+ years ago...for UB to position themselves for today (or the next several years) for conference expansion.  The decision makers decided "no".   Financially it was (and is) likely the right call.  But the sports fan and die hard alumnus is sad about it.

 

Maybe Buffalo could organize a SUNY conference with Albany and Stony Brook, and see if anyone else wants to join? UMASS? UCONN? Temple? URI? UNH?

[promotherobot]

Or this could work...

 

[promotherobot]

 

[BrooklynBull]

14 hours ago, promotherobot said:

 

Maybe Buffalo could organize a SUNY conference with Albany and Stony Brook, and see if anyone else wants to join? UMASS? UCONN? Temple? URI? UNH?

NO!

[BrooklynBull]

Some talk now of Cal - Stanford to the ACC, which I  guess would be renamed the ACBAC, Atlantic Coast Bay Area Conference.  If that happens Washington State and Oregon State will look to go to the Mountain West.  Also Big XII is not looking for any more teams.

All info from the D1 Ticker.

[UB92]

4 hours ago, BrooklynBull said:

Some talk now of Cal - Stanford to the ACC, which I  guess would be renamed the ACBAC, Atlantic Coast Bay Area Conference.  If that happens Washington State and Oregon State will look to go to the Mountain West.  Also Big XII is not looking for any more teams.

All info from the D1 Ticker.

I wonder who retains, if anyone, the name "PAC 10 or PAC 12".  There is some value in that name.  If WSU and OSU join up with those MWC schools (and/or others), I think they should just try to keep the PAC 10 name.

This is an interesting story.  The WSU President (who was leading the PAC 12 presidential group) really thought he had kept the conference together with the Apple TV streaming deal and the promise to renegotiate in a few years, but the other schools were negotiating all this time with other places (and paid him lip service).   And now the WSU fanbase is outraged about this.   He really should have had a plan b to jump to once everyone was jumping ship.  But he went down with the ship (and, I guess, took OSU with them).

This sort of thing was inevitable.  It makes sense that two, non-descript PAC 12 schools are going to be casualties of this.  I mean, if you had to select schools that could be left out of this game of P5 conference musical chairs, WSU and OSU would be on a list.

The ACC for Stanford and UC-Berkeley are not done deals.  There is still acrimony in the ACC about their monetary deals...and both those schools don't add much to the conference from a monetary standpoint (other than increasing travel costs).    They look great on paper since they are two of the nation's most prestigious academic institutions, but that doesn't win you football games or increase TV revenues.

Interesting times.

[UB77]

All the talk now is rightfully about the conference version of Hunger Games, but I ultimately see this as an NCAA issue.

With football revenue driving the decisions, at some point someone will say "Why split it with the NCAA?" I could easily see a separate football body of four 16 - team conferences and the NCAA left with basketball, baseball and the Olympic sports. And the lesser football schools. With a much smaller pot of money.

If I'm the NCAA, I'd be very nervous about all of the Fox/ESPN/conference back room meetings.

[Gxtrex]

39 minutes ago, UB77 said:

All the talk now is rightfully about the conference version of Hunger Games, but I ultimately see this as an NCAA issue.

With football revenue driving the decisions, at some point someone will say "Why split it with the NCAA?" I could easily see a separate football body of four 16 - team conferences and the NCAA left with basketball, baseball and the Olympic sports. And the lesser football schools. With a much smaller pot of money.

If I'm the NCAA, I'd be very nervous about all of the Fox/ESPN/conference back room meetings.

If schools leave the NCAA for football, would the NCAA let them participate in NCAA basketball/March Madness? That could be their negotiating power.

[BrooklynBull]

42 minutes ago, UB77 said:

All the talk now is rightfully about the conference version of Hunger Games, but I ultimately see this as an NCAA issue.

With football revenue driving the decisions, at some point someone will say "Why split it with the NCAA?" I could easily see a separate football body of four 16 - team conferences and the NCAA left with basketball, baseball and the Olympic sports. And the lesser football schools. With a much smaller pot of money.

If I'm the NCAA, I'd be very nervous about all of the Fox/ESPN/conference back room meetings.

 

1 minute ago, Gxtrex said:

If schools leave the NCAA for football, would the NCAA let them participate in NCAA basketball/March Madness? That could be their negotiating power.

The NCAA does not run FBS football.  They receive no money from it.  They have not had a say in FBS football for nearly 40 years since Oklahoma beat them in an anti-trust lawsuit.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NCAA_v._Board_of_Regents_of_the_University_of_Oklahoma

Full Supreme Court decision: https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/468/85/

On a side note former Colorado All-American Byron White dissented in hte case.

[Tee4three]

Only a matter of time before football conferences are completely separated from other sports conferences

They already do this in non football/basketball sports already (see hockey/baseball/soccer). Just a matter of time before football is completely separate

I wonder if the sec or big ten eventually comes after G5 schools in attempt to completely control all college football 

[UB Horns Up]

On 8/3/2023 at 5:21 AM, BrooklynBull said:

The number of seats that could be put inside the Murchie Fieldhouse: 0

 

Why can’t UB build a wall around it or raise the ceiling like Buffalo Memorial Auditorium adding Orange Seating Bowl? I don’t understand why that couldn’t be done? The Murchie Field house is more modern and better than outdated UB Track Stadium with a football team playing in it that minimum needs $300 plus million dollars to make it look like a football stadium which isn’t going to happen nor should it. It would be like putting lipstick on a pig it’s just not worth the money.

If the UB Bulls were a real big time athletics program and if New York State gave a care about Buffalo and Western New York which they don’t. UB would build a new UB Waterfront Stadium horse shoe style either at Perry Projects or Outer Harbor with the open end with views overlooking our the Buffalo Waterfront with boating right up to the new UB Stadium like Huskies Stadium in Seattle. Until Buffalo the area starts thinking like that and makes decisions like Seattle we aren’t happening regardless of what the Buffalo Bills do in Orchard Park that path to no where what a disgrace. UB doesn’t get it, neither does Western New York and New York State doesn’t care there is no hope for this Western New York area nor is there hope for UB athletics. Again regardless of Conference this needs to happen for UB Bulls football to ever be fully embraced by the masses of fans in Western New York. 

So since that is the reality basically for the next 50 years no Buffalo Waterfront Stadium because UB refuses to lead on there own just put some seats in the Murchie Field house and move on with it will have to do. UB Bulls are never getting huge crowds at UB North Campus. I live in Amherst it’s not happening. It hasn’t happened in 30 plus years Western New York can have Josh Allen coaching the UB Bulls football team passing out free $100 bills at UB Stadium and Western New York fans aren’t going to UB Stadium that is unfortunately reality. It’s unfortunate but it is what it is. Again UB needs to broker a deal for land with the outer harbor would be the way to go. UB should buy up as much cheap outer harbor land as they can and go from there. Nobody so far wants to buy it to develop it at least for now anyway. But that will happen eventually in the next 50 years either UB Bulls football on there own if they are smart or the Buffalo Bills when they realize there is no future in Orchard Park ever. It’s not going to be Green Bay Packers land with development in Orchard Park if it hasn’t happened in 50 years in Orchard Park why now it makes zero sense. All the development is downtown there is no need to build downtown development in Orchard Park when it already exists downtown Buffalo close by. Same can be said for Amherst with UB Stadium. We aren’t big enough to have three stadium developments. Again look at successful cities than look at my city the land of the lost when it comes to development.

UB Bulls football needs a major waterfront stadium downtown that the Buffalo Bills foolishly passed on. UB Bulls builds on the Buffalo Waterfront Stadium on there own for football and concerts that is the way to go. UB on campus stadium isn’t leading us anywhere big time. The UB Bulls can practice on campus fine but the future is the Buffalo Waterfront Stadium or failure there is no curtain number three for UB Bulls football. Washington Huskies Stadium in Seattle look at YouTube for Huskies Stadium in Seattle that is what is needed for UB Bulls football with UB Bulls land stadium store and development around the new UB Waterfront Stadium downtown. UB needs to cut the Bull with being lead around by the nose by New York State, the Buffalo Bills and actually lead for once. I don’t know who is stupider UB Bulls, the Buffalo Bills, WNY or New York State or the combination of all four dumb, dumb, dumb, and dumber.

Last just remember I was right about New York Bulls being a total failure with no vision. I am 100 percent going to be proven right again but probably long after I am no longer living it will happen at some point for UB Bulls football. I have called Buffalo home for 55 years and counting. My muscular dystrophy is weakening old BSF badly these last five years but I know what is needed for this Western New York community to full accept UB Bulls football in a greater way than now. Yes it’s going to cost money and be a heavy lift for UB but they need to visit Washington Huskies operations out there. They play in a NFL town like Buffalo. Again Buffalo can have 5 cents to it’s name and be snobby about UB Bulls football there not turning there nose up on a Buffalo Waterfront UB Stadium 2 over looking the lake with boat access to drink and tailgate on there boats then into the new UB Waterfront Stadium to watch the UB Bulls football team. UB I understand they are trying to copy the Buffalo Bills with the tailgate suburban parking lot experience but UB Bulls would be better going the Washington Huskies route for football experience in my opinion. UB Horns Up! Go Bulls! Let’s Go Buffalo 

 

 

[BrooklynBull]

6 hours ago, UB Horns Up said:

Why can’t UB build a wall around it or raise the ceiling like Buffalo Memorial Auditorium adding Orange Seating Bowl? I don’t understand why that couldn’t be done?

Basically you are saying to tear down the facility and make it wider and longer.  That is why it cannot be done. Watch the video and you will how little space there is on the sidelines and the end zones to expand it for seating.

 

6 hours ago, UB Horns Up said:

Washington Huskies Stadium in Seattle look at YouTube for Huskies Stadium in Seattle that is what is needed for UB Bulls football with UB Bulls land stadium store and development around the new UB Waterfront Stadium

Husky Stadium is on campus.  UB has enough problems getting students to go to games now.  Why make it harder for them by moving the games downtown.  Taking a boat to games?  How many people go out on boats after October 1 on Lake Erie?  Not many, so even if all games were at noon on Saturdays there would not be many coming on boats.

[UB92]

This conference realignment is really interesting from a business/financial perspective.

In reading some articles (especially today with the ACC not even taking a vote on Cal and Stanford and SMU), I have a real fear that the run which caused the death of the PAC 12 is going to happen in the ACC -- and it will get ugly.

The schools in the ACC have until August 15 to announce if they will leave in 2024, so that's an important date.

Clearly FSU wants out.   I think there are SEVERAL ACC schools that are seeing what happened to the PAC 12 and don't want to be like WSU, OSU, Cal and Stanford...holding the bag at the end and out in the cold.   

This author seems to think that this will play out like the PAC 12...UCLA and USC left a year earlier...and then the chaos happened the next year.   Or, in other words, FSU and Clemson will leave by August 15...and then a decision will be made by the rest of the teams the following year.  I disagree with this since all of the schools in the ACC are already aware of FSU's grumblings (and others), so several are likely making their own deals (or with groups of schools) for certain conferences.  Accordingly, I think there will be even more upheaval on/by August 15.

[BrooklynBull]

5 hours ago, UB92 said:

This conference realignment is really interesting from a business/financial perspective.

In reading some articles (especially today with the ACC not even taking a vote on Cal and Stanford and SMU), I have a real fear that the run which caused the death of the PAC 12 is going to happen in the ACC -- and it will get ugly.

The schools in the ACC have until August 15 to announce if they will leave in 2024, so that's an important date.

Clearly FSU wants out.   I think there are SEVERAL ACC schools that are seeing what happened to the PAC 12 and don't want to be like WSU, OSU, Cal and Stanford...holding the bag at the end and out in the cold.   

This author seems to think that this will play out like the PAC 12...UCLA and USC left a year earlier...and then the chaos happened the next year.   Or, in other words, FSU and Clemson will leave by August 15...and then a decision will be made by the rest of the teams the following year.  I disagree with this since all of the schools in the ACC are already aware of FSU's grumblings (and others), so several are likely making their own deals (or with groups of schools) for certain conferences.  Accordingly, I think there will be even more upheaval on/by August 15.

It is also very expensive to leave the ACC.  The schools have a grant of rights of their media rights to the conference though 2036.  This means the ACC owns the schools broadcast rights to their home games.  So if a school were to leave to another conference, the ACC would own their TV revenue obtained from the other conference.  Which means if a school leaves their TV money goes to the ACC which will then share within the ACC.  Which means they get nothing through 2036.

[UB92]

5 hours ago, BrooklynBull said:

It is also very expensive to leave the ACC.  The schools have a grant of rights of their media rights to the conference though 2036.  This means the ACC owns the schools broadcast rights to their home games.  So if a school were to leave to another conference, the ACC would own their TV revenue obtained from the other conference.  Which means if a school leaves their TV money goes to the ACC which will then share within the ACC.  Which means they get nothing through 2036.

I believe the guy in the article I linked to is a lawyer in that area of law and spoke about how he would approach that.