ACC 2006 bowl situation much better per ACC office

Re: ACC 2006 bowl situation much better per ACC of

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
This SEC worship is hysterical. The SEC sucks this year. Ole Miss, Miss St, Arkansas, and Kentucky are all HORRIBLE, worse than any ACC team except Duke. Tennessee and Vandy, slightly better, still easily 4-7 teams if they played in the ACC this year.



[/ QUOTE ]

Even if acc football was better on the field than the sec (its not by a long shot), that's not the point, at least not mine.

[/ QUOTE ]

I was responding to flyjacket, who was claiming we wouldn't even be bowl eligible if we played in the SEC. This is pure poppycock. You and he are quite simply wrong about the strengths of the 2 leagues.

Anyone who thinks the SEC was stronger than the ACC this year either (1) is an SEC fan, (2) formed their opinion in 1978 and will never change it, or (3) is simply not paying attention.

The ACC may not be stronger next year or ever again (although I think we have a good chance), but it is this year.

As to your argument about popularity, yes the SEC is more popular than the ACC. We probably will never catch up in that category, just as the SEC will never catch up to us in basketball. (And yes, I know all of the old farts on here don't give a crap about basketball - no need to trot out that crap again for my sake.)

Do we belong in the ACC or the SEC? Despite all the nostalgia floating around here, we are not a good fit for the SEC. As a football fan, clearly, it would be fun to be in the SEC. It would be fun to pretend to be a teenager and hang out in Panama City to party at spring break, too, but neither would be wise or healthy.
 
Re: ACC 2006 bowl situation much better per ACC of

[ QUOTE ]
Despite all the nostalgia floating around here, we are not a good fit for the SEC.

[/ QUOTE ]

I have still yet to understand this statement that I hear over and over again from those that, for some reason, feel Tech belongs in the ACC. Why? because ACC basketball brings in a few pennies into Tech athletics every year? That is what ACC basketball amounts to when compared to the potential of SEC football - pennies.

Academics? Why would it suffer because we change an athletic conference?

I doubt that interest in Tech basketball would go into a freefall if we moved to the SEC. I'd love to see Vandy, Kentucky, Auburn, Alabama, and Florida come in every year. We'd go in and instantly be an SEC power.

In football, we'd NEVER have to offer a game package again. We'd fill BDS to capacity each and every week - $$$ for the school.

I know it may never happen, but I await our return to the SEC. The only team I would miss would be Clemson.
 
Re: ACC 2006 bowl situation much better per ACC of

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Despite all the nostalgia floating around here, we are not a good fit for the SEC.

[/ QUOTE ]

I have still yet to understand this statement that I hear over and over again from those that, for some reason, feel Tech belongs in the ACC. Why? because ACC basketball brings in a few pennies into Tech athletics every year? That is what ACC basketball amounts to when compared to the potential of SEC football - pennies.

[/ QUOTE ]

I wasn't talking about money - I don't really know where this came from. The ACC schools are much more like GT than the SEC schools - they are, in general, closer in size, in student qualifications, and in academic mission. To put it bluntly, ACC schools are top tiers schools and SEC schools are second-rate diploma factories. There are exceptions on either side of the fence, but that is why I say GT is a "better fit" in the ACC.

As to your arguments about money - I'm not sure what you are talking about. If you take revenues minus expenses we made about the same from basketball as we made from football last season, around $4M. There are certainly many SEC schools that make a lot more than that on football, schools that have 85,000-100,000 seat stadia that they will fill for a game against Louisiana-Monroe. Are you saying that if we go to the SEC, suddenly we will be able to do that? I doubt it. Also our football income will increase in the future due to better ACC bowl deals and better TV contract.

Let's look at a school from the SEC that is similar in size and football tradition to GT: Ole Miss. Not quite as great a football tradition as us, but pretty good, and since they have the benefit of playing in the SEC they should be doing great, right? Last year Ole Miss made about $1M on basketball and about $8M on football. Where is the SEC windfall you describe? Their total from the 2 sports is almost the same as ours.

If you can explain how moving to the SEC will make us able to build and fill a 90,000 seat stadium, I will believe your story about a big increase in revenue. Please be sure to explain how it doesn't work that way for Arkansas and Ole Miss, but it would for us.

[ QUOTE ]
Academics? Why would it suffer because we change an athletic conference?

[/ QUOTE ]

Who said it would? We are better matched as a school to the ACC - going to the SEC wouldn't change the school significantly, it would just mean we were grouped with schools mostly 3-4 times the size of ours with more lax academic standards.

[ QUOTE ]
In football, we'd NEVER have to offer a game package again. We'd fill BDS to capacity each and every week - $$$ for the school.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't see how Ole Miss, Mississippi State, Vandy, Kentucky, or Arkansas would help us fill our stadium. Auburn, Georgia, Tennessee, Florida, Alabama, and South Carolina will fill it - with visiting fans.

[ QUOTE ]
I know it may never happen, but I await our return to the SEC. The only team I would miss would be Clemson.

[/ QUOTE ]

I like where we are, although playing in the SEC would have made for an easier schedule this year. I would enjoy playing Auburn every year again, other than that I can take or leave the SEC.
 
Re: ACC 2006 bowl situation much better per ACC of

[ QUOTE ]
If you take revenues minus expenses we made about the same from basketball as we made from football last season, around $4M

[/ QUOTE ]

You've really made my point for me. If we don't have to sell mini packs and give tickets away for a "band day", we make MORE money from football. We would make more money in football being in the SEC. Period. There is no doubt. We'd have more money in the coffers. Bowl revenues are about the same for both conferences, but our GATE would improve dramatically. Things would improve. We'd be in the heart of the SEC.

I put the lower teir SEC schools - Mississippi, MSU, Kentucky at least on par with NC State, NC, Wake, Maryland - and those are the teams I am supposed to be excited about. No one gets excited about playing any of those ACC schools. I am a season ticket holder and I sure don't. It doesn't appear our fan base is too excited about it either. Vandy and Kentucky are a good BB trade off. Arkansas, of course, wouldn't be there since we would.

As far as filling our stadium. The UGAg game this year showed me something. It SLAPPED me back into reality after my ACC brainwashing. The game had people standing in the aisles. It was packed. It was rocking. It was SEC football. No whine and cheese at this one. No lame Aude Lang Sine and swaying. We couldn't fill for VT and Miami last year. The stadium would fill and rock to Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Tennessee, USC, Auburn, LSU. The best we have in the ACC can't do that.
 
Re: ACC 2006 bowl situation much better per ACC of

[ QUOTE ]
You've really made my point for me. If we don't have to sell mini packs and give tickets away for a "band day", we make MORE money from football. We would make more money in football being in the SEC. Period.

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree we would make more money on football in the SEC. I don't think it would be a lot more, and we would pay the penalty of less basketball money, but we would probably come out with more revenue on the whole in the SEC. Is that your only point? Go to the SEC for a small increase in revenue?
 
Re: ACC 2006 bowl situation much better per ACC of

[ QUOTE ]
Go to the SEC for a small increase in revenue?


[/ QUOTE ]

No, go to the SEC because playing UF, UT, Bama, Auburn, the Mississippi's, USC, LSU is more exciting than who we play now. I would love to see Tennessee roll into BDS one week and Alabama come in the next, or Auburn, or LSU, or USC, or Florida, or in conference UGAg.

It took the UGAg game, along with our screwing by the bowl, to turn me. I will never turn back. I will never again argue the merits of the ACC against an SEC fan again. They win. I want to be there. No more "fearing the Turtle" for me, not that anyone ever has actually feared Maryland.
 
Re: ACC 2006 bowl situation much better per ACC of

Don't remember the total right now, but since we're arguing a moot point thought I'd throw in the fact that the buyout to leave the ACC would effectively negate any increase in revenue we think we'd get for a number of years. Like I said I can't recal the total but it's more than one year's total pay from the ACC.
 
Re: ACC 2006 bowl situation much better per ACC of

[ QUOTE ]

If you can explain how moving to the SEC will make us able to build and fill a 90,000 seat stadium, I will believe your story about a big increase in revenue. Please be sure to explain how it doesn't work that way for Arkansas and Ole Miss, but it would for us.



[/ QUOTE ]


Wouldn't you agree that Oxford, Miss. and Fayetteville, Ark. are a far cry from Atlanta, Ga?

It doesn't bother me that some want to stay put in the acc, but to say we are a poor fit in the sec just doesn't make any sense.

To use your Ole Miss example, where would they be financially if they weren't in the sec? To go a step further, doesn't it speak volumes that Ole Miss. and Tech created the same combined major sport revenues? I am using your figures on this.

Unfortunately, this is probably just a moot discussion, but if we were in the conference that absolutely has Tech surrounded, we would put more people in the seats, recruit more great football players, make more money, and multiply the passion overall about Tech football.
 
Re: ACC 2006 bowl situation much better per ACC of

[ QUOTE ]
Wouldn't you agree that Oxford, Miss. and Fayetteville, Ark. are a far cry from Atlanta, Ga?


[/ QUOTE ]

Yes - they don't have to compete with pro sports!

[ QUOTE ]
It doesn't bother me that some want to stay put in the acc, but to say we are a poor fit in the sec just doesn't make any sense.

[/ QUOTE ]

Care to support that statement?

[ QUOTE ]
... doesn't it speak volumes that Ole Miss. and Tech created the same combined major sport revenues?

[/ QUOTE ]

It doesn't speak volumes to me - it makes sense to me, because our schools are about the same size and have about the same size stadia. If being in the SEC is supposed to be some giant financial windfall, why doesn't it work for Ole Miss?
 
Re: ACC 2006 bowl situation much better per ACC of

[ QUOTE ]
If being in the SEC is supposed to be some giant financial windfall, why doesn't it work for Ole Miss?

[/ QUOTE ]

I think his point is that Ole Miss makes the same money as us BECAUSE they are in the SEC. They'd likely be losing their ass in Conference USA because they are in the middle of podunk nowhere. We are geographically in the center of the SEC, so we'd be in better shape than Ole Miss, Miss State or Arkansas.

[ QUOTE ]
Care to support that statement?


[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, We are in the center of SEC country. What other support is neccessary? I see tons more Tennessee, Alabama, Auburn and Georgia stuff around here than I do any ACC team.

[ QUOTE ]
Yes - they don't have to compete with pro sports!


[/ QUOTE ]

We also have millions more in Atlanta metro area population than they have near Oxford. Millions that are more likely to want to see SEC football than ACC football.

Ole Miss makes pretty good money and supposedly has a great tailgating tradition all while being in the middle of nowhere. The SEC has done wonders for that program. They would not survive out of the SEC. The only reason we survived as an independent program and managed to get into the ACC is because of our location in Atlanta.

We should have lobbied hard when the SEC was considering Arkansas years back - like VT getting into the ACC.
 
Re: ACC 2006 bowl situation much better per ACC of

[ QUOTE ]
I think his point is that Ole Miss makes the same money as us BECAUSE they are in the SEC. They'd likely be losing their ass in Conference USA ...

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm not suggesting we join conference USA.

I used Ole Miss as an example because their student body and stadium are of similar size to ours.

Ole Miss is not as remote as you want to make it. It's only 40 miles from Memphis, so they have that metro population to draw on, and they don't have to compete with the Falcons or UGA like we do. Their competition is far less formidible: Memphis and Mississippi State.

None of your arguments make me believe we would get any large financial gain from the SEC.

[ QUOTE ]
Yes, We are in the center of SEC country.

[/ QUOTE ]

Okay, so we are a good geographic fit to the SEC. I say there is more to this than geography. Is that all you have?

[ QUOTE ]
Ole Miss makes pretty good money and supposedly has a great tailgating tradition all while being in the middle of nowhere.

[/ QUOTE ]

"Great tailgating" is by and large part of the SEC experience. One thing you will consistently hear from SEC fans who visit GT is how rotten it is to tailgate in downtown Atlanta. This is another reason we don't fit the SEC mold and can't depend on attracting the same type of fans SEC schools do.
 
Re: ACC 2006 bowl situation much better per ACC of

[ QUOTE ]
I say there is more to this than geography. Is that all you have?


[/ QUOTE ]

Isn't the geographical locations of the team the most important aspect of this? That is how people generally decide who they root for. Grow up in Alabama, you are likely and Auburn or Bama fan.

You downplay it here like it means nothing. Look at a map. UT just above us on 75, Vandy to the NW up 24, Bama to the west, Auburn to the slight southwest, Georgia to our east with USC on their other side. Florida to the south.
We are the hub of all of those schools and you ask if that is all I GOT?
We play a cluster of NC schools that have little following compared to any of the schools that we are the center of.


[ QUOTE ]
I'm not suggesting we join conference USA.


[/ QUOTE ]

Didn't say you did. I said if MISSISSIPPI were in the Conference USA, they wouldn't make the money they make now. In fact, if they were in the ACC they wouldn't make the money they make now. They make as much money as us because of the SEC.

We are blessed with location, they aren't. There is no comparison between Memphis metro and Atlanta metro, so I don't know where that came from. We do not compete with the Falcons and it would be easier to compete with UGA if we were in the conference of choice in the south - the SEC.
 
Re: ACC 2006 bowl situation much better per ACC of

Here's some more interesting info on this SEC vs. ACC topic that I just tracked down.

If you want to compare being in the SEC with being in the ACC, I can't imagine a more apples-to-apples comparison than Clemson vs. South Carolina. They are both large state universities (although USC is quite a bit larger), they are in South Carolina, their stadia are of similar size, they are both football-centric, neither has a particularly grand football tradition (although Clemson's is better), and lately they have been very competitive with one another.

So, logically, if the SEC is more lucrative financially than the ACC, USC vs. Clemson ought to show it, right?

Problem is, it doesn't.

Last year Clemson made about $12M on football (revenues minus expenses) and $1.5M on basketball, and USC made $11.5M on football and $1.5M on basketball.

Okay, SEC proponents, where is the financial benefit of the SEC?
 
Re: ACC 2006 bowl situation much better per ACC of

Funny thing is, Clemson is at the TOP of the ACC in revenue - if I remember correctly. I'll bet USC isn't at the top of the revenue pile in the SEC. USC is traditionally a LOSER too, unlike Clemson, and they still pack the place - BECAUSE THEY ARE IN THE SEC. One bowl win in the HISTORY of the program. If USC were traditionally a winner, they might have one of those 100k seat stadiums and Clemson might be out of the football business - or be in a UGA/Tech situation.

If they lost like that in the ACC, they'd be like North Carolina or NC State and draw maybe 55K on a good day. USC packs that place because people are interested in seeing UT, UGA, UF, Alabama, Auburn, LSU, Ole Miss etc...They pack their stadium while losing games in droves, unlike Clemson.

Besides, do you think that USC would leave the SEC for the ACC? not a prayer. I'd bet Clemson would jump at the chance to be in the SEC, if offered. We'd probably snub our noses at the SEC and continue to grovel to the NC mafia.
 
Re: ACC 2006 bowl situation much better per ACC of

Just a little meaningless correction, but USC has 3 bowl wins, '95 agianst UWV, '01 and '01 agianst Ohio State, and likely going to add another one this year.

And, to throw my opinion in here. It boils down to passion. Passion is why people want to see us in the SEC, thats the only reason. I am about as fanatical as they come, and it is hard as hell to get excited for anyone north of Clemson. Think about how you feel when we play Auburn/UGA/Clemson, and contrast that to UNC/NCSU/DUKE/Maryland(the fun of playing fridge is gone now, he's at home, no anamosity anymore)/UVA, which ones do you jump out of bed for on gameday? I know my answer, and its not even close. And I think I know why, its cause I don't know ANYONE who are fans of those schools, except the Duke bandwagon trash that comes out of the woodwork around Febuary.

Also travel sucks for us, outside of Clemson/FSU (9/11 of the conference) a day trip is near impossible. Unlike SEC opponent where Auburn/Bama/Hydrant Humpers/Vandy/USC/Tenn/UF are all a LOT easy to travel to.
 
Re: ACC 2006 bowl situation much better per ACC of

[ QUOTE ]
USC is traditionally a LOSER too, unlike Clemson, and they still pack the place - BECAUSE THEY ARE IN THE SEC...USC packs that place because people are interested in seeing UT, UGA, UF, Alabama, Auburn, LSU, Ole Miss etc...

[/ QUOTE ]

Total, absolute garbage. USC was filling that stadium win or lose long before they entered the SEC.

You have nothing but baloney to answer my question. No two schools could be a better benchmark for comparing the impact of league membership on finances, and there is NO difference.

It's fine to want GT in the SEC, but there is no need to try to back that desire with unfounded assertions.
 
Re: ACC 2006 bowl situation much better per ACC of

[ QUOTE ]
Passion is why people want to see us in the SEC, thats the only reason.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm sure you are right, and there's nothing wrong with that! We don't have a football team for money or geography or academics, we have one for fun, and if you think being in the SEC would be more fun that's the best possible reason to want to go there.

[ QUOTE ]
Think about how you feel when we play Auburn/UGA/Clemson, and contrast that to UNC/NCSU/DUKE/Maryland/UVA...

[/ QUOTE ]

I definitely get excited about Auburn. Georgia has nothing to do with conference. Clemson I think we already have in our conference. The teams you didn't list are the issue for me: Arkansas/South Carolina/Ole Miss/Mississippi State/Vandy/Kentucky/Florida/LSU - none of those have any special interest or excitement for me. Auburn, definitely. Alabama & Tennessee, yes, because I know a lot of folks from those schools. UVa/VPI/Maryland/Wake/Duke, none of those excite me, but I do get up for UNC/NC State/FSU/Clemson/Miami. (BC - I will get up for that because we still owe them from 1998.)
 
Re: ACC 2006 bowl situation much better per ACC of

I was contrasting geographically with Clemson/AU/UGA and the Carolina schools. Clemson belongs in the SEC just as much as us.

The missippi schools don't really do it for me, but I can at least respect Vandy as an institute, and would like picking them up for basketball., as for LSU, they've got a darn good tradition of winning down there, and they're pretty much just crazy as hell too, would love to experience that atmosphere at night. LSU is just electric at night.

I'm not going to down on anybody for getting fired up about the carolina schools, thats your perogative, but the vast majority of the fans would love to be back with Au/Bama/UF/Tenn, and it would do a lot to fire up and extend the fanbase. Will it happen? Probably not, so I'm content that we're playing against some amazing teams now (talent level), but most of the ACC conference games have all the passion and rivalry of a Conference USA game.
 
Re: ACC 2006 bowl situation much better per ACC of

Joining the ACC back in '82 was definitely better than being an independent, but anyone who thinks GT would not be better off back in the SEC is either clueless or a fool, IMHO.

As stated above, geography, tradition, passion and excitement are all better for GT in the SEC. Ticket sales would increase as a result, which would lead to better recruiting.

2333971_80X60.jpg
/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/drinking.gif
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top