Key quotes from New York Times article on conference shakeup
I still think reactions to the Big XII-SEC Bowl game was overblown. I found Pete Thamel's article the most evenhanded. Here are a few bits that stood out to me:
The Big 12, which has 10 teams, will eventually want to grow back to 12. Florida State would pine to keep its football relevance. (The twist, of course, is that the A.C.C.’s national irrelevance can basically be traced to the struggles of Florida State and Miami, which could be the top targets to be poached.) Don’t expect any major moves until a playoff plan is settled.The ACC has options and some leverage. If Florida State bails before the playoff plan is laid out, that is on them. I hope the ACC is acting aggressively. I am less concerned with money and most concerned with playoff access.
This union will probably create tiers of college football. The four-team playoff that has been discussed would make up the first tier. The next tier would be this game, known as the Champions Bowl, and the Rose Bowl. While neither game would have the cachet of the national semifinal and national title games, they could be put in favorable time slots on New Year’s Day and considered the best leftovers.
This new bowl is essentially the NIT. Why would Florida State leave over access to the NIT? If it is a money issue, the ACC can form a new bowl too. Play the No. 2/No. 3 Big Ten team in the Meadowlands every year. On at FedexField! We have access to big markets and big stadiums. This is not a big deal if cooler heads prevail.
The ACC has made some short sighted deals and seen its best teams play lousy football on the biggest stages. That's in the past. If we get out-maneuvered on these deals, then its on the ACC to join the have nots and the NCAA to form a true playoff.