Perceptually speaking though Big Ten football was in a better
position than ACC football. The Big Ten had the luxury to add 2 schools that aren't strong in football because they knew it wouldn't negatively impact its football image. Until the ACC's football image improves can the ACC afford to take the risk? If not or the conference can't wait, then should the ACC view UConn as a "first move to make" or as a "last resort?"
Based on the current market model, it could be argued that UConn's market is already covered by BC and Syracuse. Since streaming is becoming more prevalent and it appears that the landscape may be changing, then some are starting to question whether the market model needs to updated to keep with the change in times. So if the ACC is base its decision on UConn's market value, then it needs to make sure it uses the correct model. Otherwise it might end up with "buyer's remorse" which could lead to a divorce when it comes time to renew the GoR.
If the ACC bases UConn's market value just on basketball, then it could signal that the ACC is perfectly content to be known only as a "basketball conference." If that is the case then it will be interesting to see what the football schools do when it comes time to renew the GoR. It would not shock me if they refuse to sign another long-term GoR, there are reports circulating that they are talking with other conferences, or that at least 1 leaves for another conference. A lot of people think that Notre Dame could cause the ACC to have a Big East-like divorce. While I think it is a possibility, I am starting to think adding a school like UConn could cause it too.
|
(
In response to this post by HOO86)
Posted: 09/19/2016 at 2:13PM