FSU finally shoots down idiotic Big 12 chat

bwolff said:
And the ratings would suck. Sure we would reach NY, but the northeast is overrate IMO because they are so pro sport centered.

Florida may be a little better if USF and UCF build different programs, but outside UF, FSU, and to a lesser extent Miami no one in Florida really gives a ----.
Click to expand...

You realize we averaged only 3700 more fans per game than USF, right (48232 to 44550)? Pretty sure they didn't benefit from home games against uga, climpson, VT, etc. either.
 
andrew said:
Didn't the last "imaginary conference expansion apocalypse" end with two teams being added to the ACC?
Click to expand...

Yes, but it was proactive once again, just as 2003 was.

There are too many teams for 4 16-team leagues. That's only 64 teams. There would be lawsuits all over the place by multiple teams that got left out with the kind of money such a tournament would draw. But if you did that, you could run a conference champ and 4 at-large teams in an 8-team playoff. It would be huge.

The upshot is the ACC's not going anywhere, because it will be more than 4 conferences, and the NC schools will never hang up on their basketball league. So it is a stable situation. There is nowhere for the teams to go. The worst that could happen is maybe FSU and CU go SEC, and GT and UMD go B1G. That still leaves 10 teams with UConn and Rutgers looking for a home.
 
ncjacket said:
This. I'm not a fan of Swofford's but you have to have something to negotiate with to get the kind of deals you guys seem to think we deserve. For a conference that has had NO impact on the national championship discussion EVER, he hasn't done a bad job.
Click to expand...

This is correct and it applies to Tech too. We are going to be left behind if we can't find a way to bring top level players.
 
So, is the ACC going to be the new Big East? We get all the Big East teams and then get pillaged 2 by 2 until all that is left is mediocre at best?

One of three things needs to be happening NOW:
1) ACC needs to be bringing in Penn State and N.D., or;
2) ACC needs to be bringing in Oklahoma and Texas/Ok State, or;
3) Bud needs to be on the phone with the Big 10 and GT needs to be moving.

To hell with sitting back and seeing what happens. Where there is smoke there is fire. F$U is gone. Others will follow.
 
stinger78 said:
The upshot is the ACC's not going anywhere, because it will be more than 4 conferences, and the NC schools will never hang up on their basketball league. So it is a stable situation. There is nowhere for the teams to go. The worst that could happen is maybe FSU and CU go SEC, and GT and UMD go B1G. That still leaves 10 teams with UConn and Rutgers looking for a home.
Click to expand...

Part of the reason we won't leave the ACC for the Big 12 (and I believe this applies to FSU and Clemson as well). The stability of the Big12 is absolutely in question in comparison to the ACC. If the teams stay tight here the ACC will be fine and will not be left out in the cold. Any solution will include the ACC. The Big12 worries me becasue I believe, even if we joined, when the SEC, Big10, and Pac10 decided to move to 16 the Big12 would simply disintegrate.
 
Legal Jacket said:
You realize we averaged only 3700 more fans per game than USF, right (48232 to 44550)? Pretty sure they didn't benefit from home games against uga, climpson, VT, etc. either.
Click to expand...

This belongs in the "we need to open a liberal arts program" discussion. Opening up our academics will 1) allow us to recruit better players,
2) become the USC of the South,
3) put butts in the seats.
 
BuzzLaw said:
To hell with sitting back and seeing what happens. Where there is smoke there is fire. F$U is gone. Others will follow.
Click to expand...

I seem to remember the last time there was smoke (talk of the SEC pillaging the ACC), the ACC actually ended up adding two teams. I'm not saying FSU won't leave, but there is no reason for this level of worry.
 
BuzzLaw said:
One of three things needs to be happening NOW:
1) ACC needs to be bringing in Penn State and N.D., or;
2) ACC needs to be bringing in Oklahoma and Texas/Ok State, or;
3) Bud needs to be on the phone with the Big 10 and GT needs to be moving.
Click to expand...

1) Yes.
2) No.
3) Yes.
 
dressedcheeseside said:
What if they just scrapped the divisions altogether and used a yearly rotating schedule minus one or two permanent rivalry games? Then just take the two top ranked teams to play in the Championship game?
Click to expand...

This works better with 12 teams; a round-robin 11-game season. But it could also work with 14 teams; there would be two "new" teams on the schedule each season, as it rotates through the conference. I like it. It adds weight to a conference champion, and it eliminates the patsy OOC games that most people dislike.
 
TechPreacher said:
This works better with 12 teams; a round-robin 11-game season. But it could also work with 14 teams; there would be two "new" teams on the schedule each season, as it rotates through the conference. I like it. It adds weight to a conference champion, and it eliminates the patsy OOC games that most people dislike.
Click to expand...

This was an idea I had where the top teams in the conference play the hardest schedule and the bottom teams in the conference play the easiest. This allows more teams to be in the bowl game race, not to mention the ACCC, and would simulate the NFL's method of keeping everyone in it til late in the season.

IF the BCS used conference champions only and we were guaranteed a spot, this would be the way to go. But Swofford continues to push an agenda that I don't fully understand.

He wants exposure over money. I think that's stupid quite frankly. There is enough exposure, we need fans in the seats and more control of our game times.

He wants the Top Four teams in the BCS to go to the playoffs. I think this is completely dumb for the ACC considering that the big boys out of the SEC, Big Ten, et al, are guaranteed to start ahead of our players every year. Now if this is about money, i.e. the ACC gets a full cut every year regardless and we are just pushing for the highest revenue, then it could be a good decision.

Add in the stupid divisional setups...We need to expand interest in the ACC and the things he's doing just doesn't seem to be the best choice for that.

Regarding Tech. I've been preaching that Tech is going to be left behind with our high and mighty attitude. We are not pulling the ratings instate and won't until we compete with UGA. We are smack dab in the middle of the SEC/ACC problem in the the southeast and one could argue is the primary problem for the ACC.

I've argued that we should make some simple changes and I really feel that we are about to be too late. If we are not a strong player we could get left behind. As a strong player, the ACC is immediately stronger. As a strong player, we will have options.

Every answer to our problems is directly related to Tech's commitment to football. I think we're making the wrong decisions right now.
 
BuzzLaw said:
So, is the ACC going to be the new Big East? We get all the Big East teams and then get pillaged 2 by 2 until all that is left is mediocre at best?

One of three things needs to be happening NOW:
1) ACC needs to be bringing in Penn State and N.D., or;
2) ACC needs to be bringing in Oklahoma and Texas/Ok State, or;
3) Bud needs to be on the phone with the Big 10 and GT needs to be moving.

To hell with sitting back and seeing what happens. Where there is smoke there is fire. F$U is gone. Others will follow.
Click to expand...

1 and 3 make the most sense to me, I do believe that GT needs to be prepared for whatever shakeup occurs and we do not want to be scrambling for a decent option when the logjam breaks.

It seems like Big 10(refuse to call it Big Whatever for now) OR getting the plum of ND in particular might eventually happen. I am still chapped as are many others about the impact that leaving the SEC has had on GT over the years. I don't like the Big 10 geographic issues but sure do like the money and exposure that exists with that conference.

Ignoring the academic argument for a moment (since Vandy is still there and pretty decent academically), but as far as sports and especially football is concerned that one move is still causing problems for us today, but I am afraid that the SEC pipedream is just that.

I do not have ANY confidence in Swofford which is a real shame, but I do not want to see GT left in the dust of the eventual changes that are going to likely happen.
 
I gotta hand it to FSU. For years, Tech fans have bitched about the conference's favor for the NC schools and basketball, bowl tie-ins, Swofford's leadership, etc. FSU is putting it all on the table now. Good for them. If we were FSU fans, we'd be elated. Sure, anything other than the SEC isn't a perfect geographical fit. But it's eat or be eaten at this point. Because.....

If there is one thing we've learned in the last several years, its that by the time comments leak to the public, decisions have already been made. Sure, nothing is final yet. But let's all be honest -- FSU is gone.

The Big 12 would be insane - literally - if they didn't invite them after their conference meetings in 2 weeks. FSU is a brand that any major conference would like to add.

The second thing we've learned is that once a conference is raided, it usually happens more than once. And the ACC is not like the Big 12 -- we can't lose a Nebraska (FSU) and a Texas A&M (Clemson) and still have legit heavyweights to attract solid replacement teams and TV money (Texas, Oklahoma).

I think this is the deathknell for the conference as a major. Time to get on the phone with the Big 10.
 
I still don't see it. The Big12 has proven its instability. If there is another round of conference expansion it will lose teams to the Pac10, Big10 and SEC and will once again be scouring the floor for new members. The ACC, on the other hand, has a significantly greater promise of stability.
 
THWUGA said:
I gotta hand it to FSU. For years, Tech fans have bitched about the conference's favor for the NC schools and basketball, bowl tie-ins, Swofford's leadership, etc. FSU is putting it all on the table now. Good for them. If we were FSU fans, we'd be elated. Sure, anything other than the SEC isn't a perfect geographical fit. But it's eat or be eaten at this point. Because.....

If there is one thing we've learned in the last several years, its that by the time comments leak to the public, decisions have already been made. Sure, nothing is final yet. But let's all be honest -- FSU is gone.

The Big 12 would be insane - literally - if they didn't invite them after their conference meetings in 2 weeks. FSU is a brand that any major conference would like to add.

The second thing we've learned is that once a conference is raided, it usually happens more than once. And the ACC is not like the Big 12 -- we can't lose a Nebraska (FSU) and a Texas A&M (Clemson) and still have legit heavyweights to attract solid replacement teams and TV money (Texas, Oklahoma).

I think this is the deathknell for the conference as a major. Time to get on the phone with the Big 10.
Click to expand...

FSU isn't leaving until they can convince a team or two to join them. Now if they decide to leave and take say Clemson, USF and UCF with them, all bets are off.
 
THWUGA said:
I gotta hand it to FSU. For years, Tech fans have bitched about the conference's favor for the NC schools and basketball, bowl tie-ins, Swofford's leadership, etc. FSU is putting it all on the table now. Good for them. If we were FSU fans, we'd be elated. Sure, anything other than the SEC isn't a perfect geographical fit. But it's eat or be eaten at this point. Because.....

If there is one thing we've learned in the last several years, its that by the time comments leak to the public, decisions have already been made. Sure, nothing is final yet. But let's all be honest -- FSU is gone.

The Big 12 would be insane - literally - if they didn't invite them after their conference meetings in 2 weeks. FSU is a brand that any major conference would like to add.

The second thing we've learned is that once a conference is raided, it usually happens more than once. And the ACC is not like the Big 12 -- we can't lose a Nebraska (FSU) and a Texas A&M (Clemson) and still have legit heavyweights to attract solid replacement teams and TV money (Texas, Oklahoma).

I think this is the deathknell for the conference as a major. Time to get on the phone with the Big 10.
Click to expand...

What makes you think the Big 10 has ANY interest in us? From a sports perspective, we're Iowa State, just further away. We would be the smallest school with the smallest alumni base. Face it, they're holding out for Notre Dame and will expand when they get that plum. The ACC has a next to zero chance of getting Notre Dame, they have shown that they follow the money and the ACC doesn't have it.

You also forget that Colorado and Missouri also left UT's little conference. There are problems there. The ACC is far from dead, unlike the Big East. At worse, if Clemson and FSU left, we would raid them again for what's left. We aren't as attractive to another conference as Maryland, Virginia, VT, UNC, NC State, Pitt, or BC in the ACC alone. We were lucky to even be accepted to the ACC after a failed attempt to be an independent, something which Clemson or FSU should worry about if they jump to the remnants of the Big 12, which is just the remnants of the old Southwest Conference that failed.
 
midatlantech said:
FSU isn't leaving until they can convince a team or two to join them. Now if they decide to leave and take say Clemson, USF and UCF with them, all bets are off.
Click to expand...

Louisville.
 
GT1992 said:
What makes you think the Big 10 has ANY interest in us? From a sports perspective, we're Iowa State, just further away. We would be the smallest school with the smallest alumni base. Face it, they're holding out for Notre Dame and will expand when they get that plum. The ACC has a next to zero chance of getting Notre Dame, they have shown that they follow the money and the ACC doesn't have it.

You also forget that Colorado and Missouri also left UT's little conference. There are problems there. The ACC is far from dead, unlike the Big East. At worse, if Clemson and FSU left, we would raid them again for what's left. We aren't as attractive to another conference as Maryland, Virginia, VT, UNC, NC State, Pitt, or BC in the ACC alone. We were lucky to even be accepted to the ACC after a failed attempt to be an independent, something which Clemson or FSU should worry about if they jump to the remnants of the Big 12, which is just the remnants of the old Southwest Conference that failed.
Click to expand...

I didn't forget CU or Mizzou -- but neither is Colorado or TAMU. The Big 12 being able to attract a brand like FSU after losing those big 2 alone shows the conference's strength.
 
THWUGA said:
I didn't forget CU or Mizzou -- but neither is Colorado or TAMU. The Big 12 being able to attract a brand like FSU after losing those big 2 alone shows the conference's strength.
Click to expand...

It actually just shows that if a school like FSU would get back on top of the football world, that the ACC would be considered an equal to the big boys almost immediately.

As to the poster about the Big Ten, yes, I think Tech could be in an awkward position. I don't see the ACC splintering, but if so, we'd be in a tough spot. UNC, MD are top destinations. What happens with those schools, and UVA/VPI, will affect how far Tech will drop or rise.

The real problem with the ACC is too many tiny duds in Wake and Duke in the money making football arena. Tech is rougly equal to Pitt, BC and Miami except that Miami will return one day. The big markets and big viewerships are nestled in FSU, UNC, MD, NCS, UVA/VPI, (Miami next because they do move the dial) and then maybe Tech. We could be in an awkward position and hence why I wish we'd choose to compete a notch higher in football.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top