Expansion Update

None of what you are hearing on Twitter about Texas or the Big 12 expanding is true. Some of what you are reading has at least a partial basis in fact, but most of the chatter is just recycled rumors recited over and over again until they take on a life of their own.

In early October the Big 12 thought it might be forced to expand in order to have a conference championship game. Their expansion committee reviewed financials submitted by Cincinnati, UCF, USF and UCONN.

Fox and ESPN were part of the appraisal and they decided that none of the candidates offered enough value for consideration without impetus from the playoff committee.

That’s not an insult to the programs mentioned. None of them having been playing FBS football for that long and none of them have the track record of success the Big 12’s unique requirements demand - at least not now.

The Big 12 decided to table the idea of expansion until they know, for certain, the exact formula the playoff committee will use. They have been told their lack of a conference championship game will not hurt them, but until the exact formula is revealed they can’t be sure. They should know sometime over the summer.

Why wait? Isn't money the motivation for everything expansion related?

If the Big XII expands with any AAC school they take a pay cut and none of the Big 12 schools are willing to see their revenues reduced unless they have no other choice.
Again that’s not a slight to Cincinnati, UCF or USF. That’s the reality of the last ten years of television ratings for each school.

I understand the huge demographic market area of Ohio and Florida. I covet the deep recruiting base of both states for the Big XII but the conference doesn’t need untapped television markets.

They don’t have a conference-wide network to monetize additions for market share alone. They can't justify expansion with carriage or affiliation fees. They need big time programs with a history of winning. They need marquee match-ups for primetime that generate Nielsen ratings to justify advertising dollars.

Here’s the problem for the expansion candidates: without using market size as a factor the value of school’s football program is hard to quantify. TV ratings, merchandising, licensing, ticket sales, win-loss percentage and bowl performance become even more important and those factors are quantified over decades not years.

Expansion for the Big XII is only justified if programs with a national reputation that appeal to national television audiences are added. They need name recognition in a program, not demographics, and none of the available candidates has the cachet necessary to punch their ticket into the Big XII.

At least none that are on the East coast. BYU fits the bill on most counts in terms of program prestige, but the Cougars are reluctant to give up their own deal with ESPN especially when it means they can keep Sundays sacred.

The other candidates are all deserving programs but none pass the Big XII’s litmus test.

Add BYU, Cincinnati, UCF, USF, UCONN or Boise State and the revenues go down and that’s a deal-breaker right now for the Big XII.

Expansion is a dead issue… unless the playoff committee decides a conference championship game is weighted in the formula used to select playoff teams. If that happens the Big XII would expand to at least 12 by adding Cincinnati and BYU or UCF.

How likely is that scenario? Not very, according to those in the Big XII. They have been told they will not be penalized for their lack of a championship game.

Is all hope lost  for Cincinnati, UCF, USF, UCONN and BYU? No. The exact formula the playoff committee will use hasn’t been finalized.  If a weighted conference championship game makes it into the formula the Big 12 will move quickly to get to 12.

Remember the review the Big XII did of candidates back in early October I mentioned earlier? A lot of the rumors floating around Twitter and message boards come from those evaluations. People hear that a few schools submitted paperwork and jump to conclusions.

Here's a confession: back when WVU submitted paperwork to the SEC I jumped to conclusions too. I assumed that a school wouldn't submit financial documents to conference unless it had been accepted. 

I didn't have a full understanding of the process then but I know now the submission of financials is just the first step.

 The process is officially called "due diligence" and it's not a rubber-stamp. Factors are included in the submissions like budgets for individual sports and projects on facilities upgrades and such. They also contain information like ticket sales, merchandizing and contributions that are vitally important to the appraisal.

These documents are complex and many people within the schools are needed to compile all the information that's needed. The people who help assemble the packets obviously know what they are for and human nature takes over.

The problem is they only know about the submission.

The fact is that when a school is told no or “not now” it’s kept very quiet. In many cases only the president and athletic director know the outcome.  And the people who helped prepare the documents -- all they know is their school applied to the Big 12 and everyone knows you don't apply unless you know you will be accepted. So they naturally jump to the conclusion that submission means acceptance and that's how rumors are born. 

The other factor is the real unhappiness at Texas. There is a small, but very vocal faction, of Texas boosters who are jealous of the publicity that Texas A&M is receiving. They blame the Big 12 for the Longhorn's recent woes. Fortunately there are those at Texas who understand the real problem is an aging coach who has lost touch with the kids he must recruit.

Yes Texas had discussions with the Big Ten earlier this season. Both evaluated the grant of rights and decided it could not be circumvented and ended their discussions. 

I’m aware of the rumors that Big Ten lawyers think they have found an out for Texas. The Big Ten may have identified a weakness in the Big 12’s grant of rights. That’s unlikely. The grant of rights signed individually by all ten members of the conference is a simple legal instrument that relies on case law for its weight.

The very nature of its simplicity leads to divergent theories on circumventing it, but the undeniable fact is the any legal battle over the grant of rights is almost certain to take longer than 12 years.

The other certainty over any potential legal battle: the court would enforce the rights holder’s claim until complete adjudication.

The risk is just too high for the Big Ten. They could challenge the grant of rights, incur huge legal fees and lose and all the while the Big 12 would retain the rights to broadcast Texas sports and the money derived  from those rights. 

The Big 12 would not settle. Six current members would be fighting for their conference and their seat at the table. They would not disband for the same reason.  Jim Delany knows it would be a fight to the death.

The other rumor about the Big Ten: the one that says the Delany is still watching the outcome of the Maryland suit very closely - keep on eye on that one. I haven’t been able to verify it yet but on the surface that one has teeth.

On Luck and Texas

The first thing I did when I learned that Steve Petersen had been hired to replace Deloss Dodds as athletic director at Texas was to call my good friend Yancey Stubbs.

Yancey is hard a hard one to reach. He prefers a simple life uncluttered by the  dehumanizing intrusion of electronics. No cell phones, no computers, no modern luxuries to distract his thoughts with beeps, whistles or other artificial demands for attention.

He relishes  the peace of a quiet that  promotes contemplative thought and guards his environment against the most annoying conventions of modernity to the point that the only connection he has to the outside world is a single wall-mounted phone in the kitchen.

The phone is old school. A monstrous black thing that rings with a satisfying  "brrrrnnnggg" that rambles through the old farmhouse rattling windows as it sounds the alarm.

He answers the phone on the eighth ring with his characteristic " what fresh hell is this?"

"Dorthy Parker be damned" I say.

"Watch your tongue! She was a lady" he retorts.

With our customary greeting concluded I am free to get down to business.

"Luck didn't get the job."

Silence. Only the white noise of a bad landline connection crackling in my ear tells me the call is still active.

"Is that so" he finally says.

“Thoughts?” I inquire.

Again the line goes silent. Yancey Stubbs is a thoughtful man prone to extended silences as he carefully considers his words. Most find this habit disturbing. I do not. I envy his ability to think before he speaks. 

“Maybe we just misread the situation.” He suggests.

Yancey had a point. Maybe we did all just misread the situation. Could it be possible that our opinion of Oliver Luck is somehow jaundiced?

“Not likely we misread the situation that badly.” Yancey continued.

“I mean there was so much smoke around Luck and Texas it was like the entire state was engulfed in flames. The media can be bamboozled easily enough but for nearly every media out in both Texas and West Virginia to be so wrong tells me there must have been a quick change in direction by Texas that blindsided everyone including Luck.”

Again Yancey was spot on with his analysis. Chip Brown, the usually reliable unofficial mouthpiece of UT president Bill Powers, had said in a radio interview last night that the Longhorn’s coaching staff had been told it was Oliver Luck who would replace Dodds.

I quickly filled Yancey in on what Brown had said on the radio.

“I heard that too.” He responded. “And by all reports WVU was convinced Luck was leaving. So the only thing we can deduce from what we know is that the search committee just changed their mind.”

We both paused to consider the implications.

“Committees are strange beasts.” Yancey said. “They have a way of fudging up the works due to the very nature of consensus building. I’m darn confident that Powers wanted Luck. But he gave up the right to select “his guy” when he formed the committee. An embattled president can’t ignore the recommendation of the committee he formed.”

Yancey had a point. By all accounts the University of Texas is one big jabberwocky of political intrigue.  Maybe the selection committee just liked Steve Patterson more than they liked Oliver Luck or maybe they had an agenda that wanted to hire someone who wasn’t as close to Powers as Luck.

We may never know for sure why Patterson was chosen. However I am fairly certain that Luck wasn’t overlooked because of ambiguous answers over how he would handle Mac Brown. Yancey agreed with my assessment.

“Bullsnot! Athletic directors at Texas serve many masters and can’t fire a head football coach without consultation from the president. I get the feeling the process in Texas would be even more complicated. The athletic director is nothing more than a messenger.”

Again the estimable Mr. Stubbs was on point. Rumors about Luck and expansion always fail to take into consideration the role of the president and the vast political machine running in the background of most universities.

“And whoever said Luck wasn’t hired because of his reluctance to fire Mac Brown has a short memory.” Yancey added.

Just three years ago Oliver Luck fired a popular head coach with back-to-back-to-back 9-3 seasons. Luck didn’t hesitate to make changes. He made radical changes that angered most of the good old boy network. If nothing else Oliver Luck has been an agent of change during his tenure at West Virginia University.

 “I’m glad Patterson got the job. I’m glad Luck is staying.  I paused before continuing. “How long do you think he stays?”

“Not that long. It looks like Ollie has decided he has done all he can for WVU and it’s time to move on.  I don’t think he goes out and looks for another job. I just think he takes the next position in the NFL that’s offered to him.”

Before we had a chance to continue our discussion Yancey excused himself to catch WV public radio’s broadcast of the NY Metropolitan Opera. 

I always appreciate Yancey’s insight. His comments made me recall the circumstances that brought Oliver Luck to West Virginia. Luck had resisted becoming the athletic director at WVU and it took a hard sale by WVU president Jim Clements to convince him to accept the job. 

Now, three years later, Luck had safely navigated WVU out of the dying Big East and into the Big 12. He raised record-level funds for WVU and led the fight for the new baseball stadium and improvements to both the football and basketball facilities. He tackled rowdy fan behavior by thinking completely outside the box and selling beer inside Mountaineer Field. He led the effort to increase revenues by outsourcing Mountaineer broadcasts and ended the series with Marshall.

More importantly Luck cleaned up an athletic department that was demoralized and ineffective. He worked quietly to clean up potentially embarrassing situations within the department and brought WVU athletics into the modern age. 

If Yancey is right and it’s just a matter of time before Luck leaves then everyone who cares about the future of WVU needs to understand it’s not a case of one of our own abandoning the school we love. It’s the opposite – it’s about a former Mountaineer uprooting his life in Houston to save the football program of his beloved WVU.

When he leaves it will be because he has done all he can do for WVU and that too may just be what’s best for West Virginia.

Luck has made enemies. He’s angered many of the old school set and many think that a new face in charge of the department can bring these disenfranchised Mountaineers back into the fold when their money is needed the most.

Maybe that’s true. I’m just glad we don’t have to find out right now. WVU athletics are safe under Oliver Luck’s stewardship.

Recruiting Revisited - The Numbers Game

Recruiting Revisited - The Numbers Game

Mountaineer fans struggling to understand why WVU has performed so badly the last two years need only to look back at the recruiting classes Bill Stewart brought in during his tenure as head coach.

Stewart gets credit for recruiting Geno Smith, Tavon Austin and Stedman Bailey to WVU but in reality the class, based on performance, drops off considerably after those three stars.

The 2009 class would be the r-senior class. The 2010 class is perhaps even worse in terms of contributors and star players.

The 2009 class had 24 recruits and produced only 7 starters including subpar offensive linemen Nick Kindler and Curtis Feight.  13 of the 24 recruits either didn't make it on campus, transferred out or have not contributed.

The 2010 class had 21 recruits and had 10 players who didn't make it on campus or transfered out. Of the 11 players who made it on campus only four, including Bruce Irvin, have significantly contributed.

WVU fans look for a reason for the struggles need only to remember that 23 of the 45 recruits in 2009 and 2010 are no longer with the program.

2008 Recruiting Clas
Player	GS	GP
D.J. Thomas - CB	0	0
Mark Rodgers - RB	0	26
Zach Hulce - RB	0	0
Benji Kemoeatu - C	0	0
Robert Sands - S	31	39
Ja'tavious Miller - LB	0	0
Josh Jenkins - OG	41	36
Jerome Swinton - CB	0	0
Coley White - QB	0	5
J.D. Woods - WR	17	37
Ryan Clarke - FB	16	46
Tyler Urban - FB	22	49
Tevita Finau - DE	0	0
Jorge Wright - DE	26	45
D.J. Shaw - DT	0	0
Bernard Smith - LB	0	0
Courtney Stuart - S	1	18
Brantwon Bowser	0	24
Tyler Bitancurt - K	0	52
Larry Ford - DE	0	5
Joe Madsen - OG	38	38
John Bassler - OT	0	25
Chris Palmer - DT	0	0
Donovan Miles - LB	0	19
J.J. Dorsey - QB	0	0
Jeff Braun - DT	39	50
Terrence Kerns - RB	0	0

2009 Recruiting Clas
Player	GS	GP
Shawne Alston - RB	5	36
Tavon Austin - RB	37	52
Stedman Bailey - WR	34	39
Cole Bowers - OT
Branko Busick - LB	0	3
Will Clarke - DE	30	37
Darwin Cook - S	31	46
Dominik Davenport - DT	0	0
Pat Eger - OT
Curtis Feight - DE
Tevita Finau - DE	0	0
Terence Garvin - S	37	47
Daquan Hargrett - RB	0	6
Logan Heastie - WR	0	0
Jerrard Hunter - WR	0	0
Brodrick Jenkins - WR	11	38
Nick Kindler - OT
Deon Long - WR	0	0
Pat Miller - CB	22	48
Terrance Moore - WR	0	0
Taige Redman - LB	0	13
Jonathan Scott - S	0	0
Geno Smith - QB	39	44
Chris Snook - FB
Ryan Spiker - OG	0	0
Jordan Weingart - OG	0	0

2010 Recruiting Clas
Player	GS	GP
Ismael Banks - CB	12	33
Travis Bell - S	7	8
Barry Brunetti - QB	0	0
Dante Chambers - WR	0	0
Trevor Demko - DE	0	4
Mike Dorsey - S	0	19
Qudral Forte - S	0	0
Troy Gloster - LB	0	16
Bruce Irvin - DE	6	26
Jeremy Johnson - QB	0	0
Trey Johnson - RB	0	0
Benji Kemoeatu - C	0	0
Quantavius Leslie - WR	0	0
Deon Long - WR	0	0
Ivan McCartney - WR	15	39
Doug Rigg - LB	21	43
Jewone Snow - LB	7	18
Quinton Spain - OT	22	34
Wes Tonkery - LB	1	27
Marquis Wallace - OT	0	0
Avery Williams - WR	0	13

Why Am I Wasting My Time

Has Texas signed a non-disclosure agreement with the Big Ten?

Texas had discussions with the Big Ten earlier this year that lead nowhere. As part of that discussion UT was required to sign a non-disclosure agreement because the Big Ten shared proprietary financial information and projections with the Longhorns.

Both Texas and the Big Ten came to the conclusion that the Big 12’s Grant of Rights could not be circumvented and the discussions ended.

There was a small faction of UT boosters who were pushing for Texas to explore its options because of the publicity Texas A&M was receiving.

Fortunately other boosters understood the real problem wasn’t the Big 12 but a coach who had lost touch with his team and been out recruited by Kevin Sumlin.

Bill Power’s, the Texas president, is currently fighting for his job and UT is searching for a new athletic director. They are not looking to leave the Big 12.

Can Texas get out of the Big 12’s Grant of Rights?

No. Many people want to believe both the ACC’s grant of rights and the Big 12’s have an out. They don’t understand the issue. Members of the Big 12 and ACC have sold the television rights for their schools to their conference. They can’t just leave the conference and do without television revenues. That’s deterrent enough but the conference could/would  have the ability to keep the departing team from playing on television for both home and away games.

You can’t challenge the grant of rights in court either and just walk. It’s non-recoverable – meaning your rights are gone until the contract is up. The default would be the conference maintains the rights during the contract term even during ongoing litigation.

Is Luck the next AD at Texas.

Yes. Luck interviewed for the job over the weekend at the Indy airport. He has not been offered the job yet but he has told Jim Clements it is coming. Expect an announcement in 7-10 days.

Did Luck promise UCF membership in the Big 12?

No. Both Luck and UCF AD Stansbury deny this occurred.  Luck has not been acting on behalf of Texas. He is employed by WVU. 

Is Nick Saban the next coach at Texas?

No. Saban sent his agent to Texas to talk to the Longhorns but he is not interested in leaving Alabama.  I suggest you listen to what Kerry Marbury had to say about Nick and Alabama.

Is the Big 12 going to expand?

No. The Big 12’s standing expansion committee was disbanded last week when they decided to table further expansion talks. Working in consultation with their network partners ESPN and Fox the Big 12 determined that none of the available candidates would justify expansion unless the formula used to select the four teams for the playoffs heavily favors a conference champion determined by a conference championship game over one determined by a round-robin regular season schedule. The Big 12 has been told that will not be a factor.

The Big 12, working with their television partners, vetted the best of the available candidates and found they would add only $60 million to the current television contract.  That’s $420 million short – over a 10 year period – of the revenues necessary to maintain the conference’s current disbursement.

Individual Big 12 members would see a reduction in revenues even with the additional $2 million per school from a conference championship game factored in.

None of the Big 12’s members were interested in taking a pay cut.

Has Fox and ESPN agreed to pay for Big 12 expansion?

No.  The Big 12 does not have a conference network and therefore cannot rely on cable carriage fees to pay the $480 price tag for the conference to add 2 schools. The networks make their money and justify the fees paid to the Big 12, by selling advertisements for Big 12 games. They cannot increase the carriage fees for their cable networks base on Big 12 games and therefore only schools with a reputation and a history of performance in regards to national television ratings justify expansion.

They would lose money on the transaction!!!!!

Claiming Fox and ESPN would gain content shows a lack of understanding of how the tv deal is structured.  Adding 2 schools would only increase the available inventory by 6 games per season for each. Those six games are not worth $420 million.

Fox and ESPN have shareholders and both are required by law to attempt to make a profit. Disney has severely curtailed ESPN's spending and may elect to pay the ACC a nominal fee instead of setting up an ACC network. See where I'm going with this? Neither will throw money away.

The above information was gathered and vetted by 10 indepent sources including sources at WVU,  UCF, The Big 12 conference, ESPN, Fox and members of the local and national media.

What’s the Big Ten going to do?

Wait. The Big Ten turned down FSU and that closed the door for them to take UVA and UNC. Expect the Big Ten’s new TV deal to expire at the same time the Big 12’s grant of rights expires.

The Big Ten will wait.

Duke's David Cuttcliffe Overrated

Last night I decided to enjoy the Bowl Season by tweeting during the Cincy-Duke bowl game. Since I hate Duke (and I really hate Duke) my natural inclination was to talk a little smack against Duke and the ACC.

 I didn't go overboard - I didn't use profanity or vulgarisms. What I did was point out that Duke was undeserving of a bowl bid and that David Cuttcliffe, Duke's head football coach, was overrated and in reality not a very good coach. 

The blowback from the Duke and ACC was almost immediate and it was, for the most part, profane, vulgar and often downright stupid. 

Duke's fans showed a fundamental gap in their football knowledge. One Duke fan, who apparently has no idea that WVU has won more BCS bowl games than the entire (ACC), sent me a hateful little message asking what would happen if WVU played Clemson. 

He did not seem to know that WVU played Clemson in the Orange Bowl last year and won 70-33.   

What happened to sports being fun? What happened to lively repartee and the back-and-forth smack of fan bases? I try to be funny and factual. Duke fans, and ACC fans in general, responded with profanity. 

No once cared to make a factual argument or attempted to have fun with it.

They went straight to the "motherf$%#$s" and tired jokes about West Virginia. 

No one wanted to debate Cuttcliffe's anointment as a great coach. No one seemed to care he has never had a winning record at Duke and actually regressed in 2010 and 2011. Five years at Duke and he's produced 9 conference wins and a 21-40 record. 

Good coaches turn around programs in 3 or 4 years and sometimes less. David Cuttcliffe is not a good coach.  Charlie Strong stepped in at Louisville, took over for Steve Kragthrope, and turned around Louisville in only 2 years. Dana Holgorsen seems to have regressed WVU this year but the WVU program he inherited from Bill Stewart was in bad shape ( numbers wise  recruits) and lacked depth at nearly every position. He's turning around the culture of the WVU program. 

What has Cutcliffe done? He hasn't won at Duke. He hasn't produced a single winning season at Duke. Cuttcliffe's earth-shattering 6 win season that won him the ACC coach of the year award is a mirage.  

Cuttcliffe took a bad Duke team and beat Florida International (3-9), North Carolina Central (6-5), and Memphis (4-8). He won a total of 3 ACC games against Wake (5-7 - 3-5 ACC), UVA (4-8 - 2-7 ACC) and UNC (8-5 - 5-3 ACC). 

Duke had only 2 wins against schools with winning records and 1 of those was against MEAC member NC Central. Duke's only claim to be bowl worthy was a win over UNC and if that's the brightest spot on your football resume you deserve to stay at home for the bowl season.

Bill Stewart went 28-12 in his 3 seasons as head coach at WVU with wins in the Fiesta and Car Care bowls. He was fired. 

David Cutcliffe is 21-40 at Duke. He followed up his 5-7 2009 campaign by going 3-9 in both 2010 and 2011 and engineered a 6 win season by adding Memphis, NC Central and Florida International to the schedule and people proclaim him a great coach. 

Just answer me this one question: would Cutcliffe be considered a great coach anywhere but Duke?

Not a single ACC apologist or Duke fan even cared to ask honest questions about Cuttcliffe's coaching resume. Instead they went on the attack and showed their ignorance and hostility towards anyone not willing to worship at the alter of a 6-7 coach with a career record of 65-69. 

Sports are supposed to be fun. Banter and back-and-forth are supposed to be fun and far too many of us have lost perspective and forgotten how to be civil. 

Duke and the ACC showed us exactly why the ACC is doomed last night. A football coach at a basketball school goes 6-7 and wins coach of the year over Jimbo Fisher, Dabo Swinney, Paul Johnson and Al Golden. 

In Response to Mr. Barron

Florida State University President Eric Barron has apparently addressed growing rumors of ACC instability by specifically referring to my "nom de plume" (dudeofWV) as an internet rumor-monger spreading "incorrect" information.

I began writing about conference realignment last January when I postulated the growing concern of Florida State and Clemson over the revenue gap between the ACC and the SEC would lead them to explore options with other conferences.

It was shortly after WVU and Clemson played in the Orange Bowl that I learned substantial discussions were ongoing between the Big 12 and FSU and Clemson.

I am guilty of many things as I have tried to cover expansion. I have sometimes jumped to conclusions and let my enthusiasm get the better of me. However I have always been careful to only write what I was certain was true and I learned the hard way to double-check my facts.

I began posting a blog about WVU and WVU's chances at being invited to the SEC to defend WVU against those who had incorrect assumptions about WVU and West Virginia. My experiences writing about the SEC taught me a valuable lesson – double and triple check facts.

Contacts within a major university like WVU know the power of social media. They know they can release information via social media that a traditional news outlet, like the Charleston Gazette, could never print. Traditional journalism is about what "has happened" not what "could happen" and social media nicely fills that gap.

A conference like the Big 12 or a university like FSU could use social media to plant a rumor to gauge fan support for a conference switch or coaching change – the opportunity to shape opinion is there and universities are becoming more adept at using it.

The danger to bloggers is that information is shared for a reason and that reason always serves the best interest of the university and may or may not be true. I learned that when I was told WVU had submitted paperwork for the SEC. My contact at WVU did not tell me that WVU had only submitted financial information and lead me to believe that WVU had submitted an application for membership.

I learned my lesson well and when I began writing about FSU and Clemson I was very careful about what I did (and did not) write. I took great pains to verify information and reached out to several media members who confirmed the majority of what I had learned. These helpful individuals had no connection to WV or WVU.

At every step in the process I freely shared whatever information I had and I was fortunate enough to have others share their information with me. Every piece of the puzzle was verified and although some details remain murky, like the specifics of the ACC contract, I was able to independently verify each and every one of the items I've written about.

I stand by my assertion that both FSU and Clemson had significant talks with the Big 12 and that both were willing to leave the ACC based on facts collaborated by my media contacts, independent of WVU, who covered FSU, Clemson and the SEC.

Eric Barron can deflect all he wants and try to reassure his boosters but the fact remains the ACC has problems that that threaten their stability.

Eric Barron can't change the fact that the ACC is the lowest paid of the major football conferences. He can't change the fact the ACC's reputation harms Florida State chances of reaching the playoffs in 2014. Barron can't change the fact that the Big 10, SEC and Big 12 covet ACC members and even the $50 million exit fee isn't enough to keep the conference whole.

More importantly Eric Barron can't change the fact that the new BCS playoff system begins in 2013 and the Big 4 are determined that the ACC isn't around to receive their share.

As for Eric Barron calling me out by name I have a few simple questions for him:

1. Have you or anyone acting on FSU's behalf spoken to the Big 10, Big 12 or SEC about conference membership?
2. Have you or any agent of FSU retained outside representation to review or prepare financial documents related to Big 10, Big 12 or SEC membership?
3. Have you or anyone representing FSU spoken to the Big 12 conference in the past 14 days.
4. Have you spoken with senior leadership at Boston College, Clemson, UVA, Virginia Tech Georgia Tech about their plans in regards to ACC membership.

Barron admitted he has been talking to other university presidents and you can bet those presidents are in the Big 10, SEC and Big 12. So until the ACC either releases details of its TV contract or signs a grant-of-rights it would be foolish not to think Eric Barron isn't fulfilling his fiduciary responsibility to explore FSU's options as the Big 10 plans its next move.

As for the criticism… I have done all I can do. I have shared what I know, given up my non de plume and used my real name. I don't own a website, I don't charge for information, I don't benefit from anyway from hits to any website. I'm on record with my opinion that greed is ruining college football and that conference realignment is bad for the game we all love.

And I was warned many, many times not to write about expansion.

Is Jimbo Fisher Leaving FSU?

This is not about expansion; it’s not about Florida State actively seeking Big 12 membership or the drama within the Big 12 when they realized they could actually add FSU.

This is about the fallout coming from FSU’s internal battle between Jimbo Fisher and his supporters on the Board of Trustees and FSU President Eric Baron and the growing possibility that the head coach of one of the most storied programs in college football could leave that program for one struggling in the SEC.

It sounds crazy doesn’t it?

Why would Jimbo want to leave FSU? He has many reasons to stay and weather the storm including the home field advantage in recruiting the Seminoles enjoy in Florida.  Jimbo has the support of FSU’s most influential boosters and the ear of the Board of Trustees. 

Why then would he consider leaving?

It was Jimbo Fisher, fearful of the SEC’s cachet and money, who began the push for FSU to leave the ACC. It was Fisher’s primary benefactors, Jim Smith (Former Chair of FSU’s Board of Trustees) and Andy Haggard, who lead the charge to apply the pressure necessary for Baron to see a change in conference membership was necessary.

Baron resisted leaving the ACC and used the Big 12’s own internal power struggle over expansion to solidify his support on the Board of Trustees and worked with the ACC to bring Notre Dame into the conference as a partial member.

Baron felt that Notre Dame would restore the luster of the ACC and help bridge the gap between the ACC revenues and those of the SEC, Big 12, Big 10 and Pac 12.

Fisher’s primary concern was his football program and he felt the Big 12 offered FSU a brighter future even with Notre Dame as partial member.

Fisher and his supporters pointed out the ACC’s shiny new relationship with Notre Dame helps the Irish far more than it does the ACC.

How does 1 home game with Notre Dame every 6 years benefit FSU?  Doesn’t Notre Dame’s partial membership just provide the Irish with more exposure in the fertile recruiting grounds of FSU?

Baron didn’t share Jimbo’s concerns. He was committed to the ACC and let it be known that football wasn’t his primary concern. Baron pointed out that the ACC granted FSU’s wish to go back to an 8 game conference schedule and Jimbo would have to be happy with that.

Jimbo was far from happy. His original fears concerning the disadvantage of playing of the ACC only grew worse when the Seminoles lost to North Carolina State. 

Jimbo understands what Baron does not -- ACC football does not have the creditability or respect of the four power conferences and the quality of their football is not even close.

The ACC doesn’t have a single BCS victory since the BCS system was implemented. It’s programs, with the exception of Virginia Tech, Clemson and FSU are not nationally respected as football powers. The ACC consistently loses out on recruiting battles with SEC schools and now, with West Virginia in the Big 12, the Mountaineers are a bigger recruiting threat than ever.

Now factor in the increased visibility Texas and Oklahoma  receive in the eastern U.S. due to WVU's Big 12 membership and the spectre of Notre Dame having the same once they become a partial member of the ACC. 

Fisher knows football and when he looks at the landscape in the ACC and the coming changes to college football he knows that even a storied program like FSU will have a hard time overcoming the anchor the stigma of ACC football puts on the Seminole’s championship football aspirations.

More importantly what concerns Fisher is his relationship with Baron and his new found understanding he may not get the support he needs from his administration to compete with the power conferences. 

Can Fisher count on Baron when FSU needs to match the SEC or Big 12 dollar for dollar? Can he afford to schedule enough challenging out of conference games to compensate for the ACC's poor reputation? 

Baron's actions tell Jimbo all he needs to know. 

And it’s that realization has lead  Jimbo Fisher to authorize his representatives to convey to both Auburn and Tennessee that he would be very interested in leading their football programs. 

WVU faced almost the identical situation in 2008 when Rich Rodriguez, still suffering from a devastating loss that kept WVU from the title game, wanted assurances from then WVU president Mike Garrison and former athletic director Eddie Pastilong that he would have all the resources he needed to pursue a national championship at WVU. 

Rodriguez left a meeting with Garrison disappointed that the president would not give him the support he felt the program needed and accepted the Michigan job shortly thereafter. 

Garrison made a mistake that set the Mountaineer program back several years and Eric Baron is about to make the same mistake.

*****

Just because Fisher has authorized his representatives to speak with Auburn and Tennessee doesn't mean he will leave FSU. It only means he has concerns about the level of support his football program will receive from the Baron administration.

This isn't the first time Jimbo has contemplated leaving FSU. Jimbo's people reached out to West Virginia after Rodriguez's departure from WVU and made it known he had interest in coming to WVU. Fisher's $2.5 million buyout was the official reason Jimbo never made it to Morgantown but others inside WVU tell me that Fisher was offered and accepted the job before factions within WVU's foundation refused to honor the agreement to cover Fisher's buyout.