ACC ded

It's about adding to the cable/satellite/subscription TV market. Sometimes, that is the State, sometimes it's just the market. USC and UCLA added big $$ to the B1G network. So I would think the B1G would be most interested in:
1) Miami and/or FSU
2) GT
3) UNC
4) UVA
5) Clemson



awfulannouncing.com

Adding USC and UCLA could give Big Ten Network a huge revenue boost

Going from the out-of-footprint per-subscriber fee to the in-footprint one even for just Los Angeles would massively boost Big Ten Network.
awfulannouncing.com awfulannouncing.com
 
gt9589 said:
That's what I don't get. How has NC State and VT become more relevant than us? Or France for that matter? We have more history than those two schools, plus we were in the SEC. Have we become that unpopular??
Click to expand...
No one cares about history. Just ask Tulane.
 
justafan said:
Whichever the megaconference, we'd have to win a lot to not be a second-class citizen. Has quickly become the case in the ACC.

Big Ten seems like a bad idea to me based on the geography of conference members. Sorry but I still think this matters a lot. I think we'll look back on this period of wild conference expansion (and NIL and Portal) as madness. Only way Big Ten is sensible is if a lot of ACC teams go with us.
Click to expand...
Beggars can’t be choosers.
 
juraitwaluzka said:
I already look at it as madness, college football has changed into something else and it's something I don't particularly enjoy, which is why Georgia Tech football is the only football I care about and that's because of Tech not because of college football. The college football that we all grew up with is dead, likely never to return.
Click to expand...
Sorry, but it changed over 4 decades ago for the worse when Bryant, Dye, Dooley and Switzer bought players and the NCAA turned its head. Just because so many fans never cared to look behind the curtain doesn’t mean it was pure. You were living a hoax. College football is the same today as it was 40 years ago and I still enjoy it even though I know how corrupt and unfair the system is which means only about half the games have an unknown outcome. The only thing different today is the number of players who transfer. That’s it. Players were getting paid back then just like today. Players transferred back then just like today. The only way to make it fair is for the charade of NCAA enforcement to die and just let any team take any player at any time. At least then every team would be operating under the same standard. I really believed NIL would now allow a school like GT to start buying players legally. Instead what it showed me is that GT has no intentions to use the system like everyone else. And our fanbase will continue to trot out excuses about “student athletes” as if anyone is listening instead of laughing.
 
Tampa Jacket said:
One of the problems for Tech is the Atlanta television market is 90% Georgia fans. Not sure that would move the needle enough for the B1G 10. Strong academics is really our best card.
Click to expand...

It's not the ratings that matter, it's having a conference team in the market. Even if 0 people in Atlanta watch GT games, the Big Ten network gets roughly 15 times the revenue from each cable subscriber in the area with the school in the conference. It's a population of 6 million people with $1.50 subscriber fees vs $0.10 subscriber fees. If the Big Ten network subscriber rate in Atlanta is similar to the rest of the country, there are probably roughly 1 million people subscribed. That's $1.5 million vs $100,000 (I'm assuming monthly).

That's the value of Georgia Tech for the B1G.
 
Ohio State and Michigan do not have more fans or alums in Georgia than Tech does. Good Grief already.

The thing that interests me, is how strongly FSU said they did not want to play Tech regularly in football. I can't help but think that Tech has reached back to the Big Ten and FSU knows it and refuses to help support Tech in any way. FSU is going to be in a tough spot coming up and they know it. (So is Tech if they don't get their act together and move back up to the Top Five in football in the ACC.)

It's unclear about Clemson. Well known, nice coaches sell. The Big Ten could use a few more top football programs. Clemson is not going to the SEC, how about the Big Ten?

If you look at the 7 teams who openly brought moving up, more than anything I would guess they wanted to start their own 8 team football league. FSU, Clemson, NCS, VPI, do not clearly have an open option coming up. UNC and UVA does but they want to remain kingpins. The easiest way to make more money for the bigger football schools is to drop BC, Syracuse, Wake, Duke, GT of late.

But it was also a play to negotiate more money from the conference and it looks like it is worked.
 
RoanokeJacket said:
I wonder if they have more alums in Atlanta than GT has. That may be dumb to wonder but cumulatively they probably are 30x the size of GT and our alums go everywhere.
Click to expand...
That's a tired old excuse. Atlanta has 6.2 million in the metro area now. Back in the 80's, the population sign on Roswell Road going towards Sandy Springs had it at about 2 million. Atlanta is now the 8th largest metro area in the United States.

There should be plenty of GT grads in metro to fill our stadium.

If I were the BIG10 commissioner, I'd be on the phone with GT and Miami. To metro areas with 6 million+ people. Airport hubs. Mild weather in Georgia. Nearly tropical in Miami. Just do it. No brainier
 
midatlantech said:
Ohio State and Michigan do not have more fans or alums in Georgia than Tech does. Good Grief already.

The thing that interests me, is how strongly FSU said they did not want to play Tech regularly in football. I can't help but think that Tech has reached back to the Big Ten and FSU knows it and refuses to help support Tech in any way. FSU is going to be in a tough spot coming up and they know it. (So is Tech if they don't get their act together and move back up to the Top Five in football in the ACC.)

It's unclear about Clemson. Well known, nice coaches sell. The Big Ten could use a few more top football programs. Clemson is not going to the SEC, how about the Big Ten?

If you look at the 7 teams who openly brought moving up, more than anything I would guess they wanted to start their own 8 team football league. FSU, Clemson, NCS, VPI, do not clearly have an open option coming up. UNC and UVA does but they want to remain kingpins. The easiest way to make more money for the bigger football schools is to drop BC, Syracuse, Wake, Duke, GT of late.

But it was also a play to negotiate more money from the conference and it looks like it is worked.
Click to expand...
When did FSU say they didn't want to play GT? This is literally the first time I have ever heard that.
 
JJacket said:
When did FSU say they didn't want to play GT? This is literally the first time I have ever heard that.
Click to expand...

When the ACC blew up the divisions. FSU picked Cuse over us. It was an admin decision, not a fan decision.

GT is a bad pickup for FSU just as Wake would be. Win and no one cares. Lose and everyone writes you off for the year. And there is a fair chance you are going to lose if you are FSU.
 
WracerX said:
When the ACC blew up the divisions. FSU picked Cuse over us. It was an admin decision, not a fan decision.

GT is a bad pickup for FSU just as Wake would be. Win and no one cares. Lose and everyone writes you off for the year. And there is a fair chance you are going to lose if you are FSU.
Click to expand...
FSU didn't "pick" Syracuse. The ACC, in their ultimate wisdom, decided that FSU shouldn't play the team closest to their campus on a yearly basis. The ACC felt it was unimportant for the city with the largest FSU alum base to get to see their team play in Atlanta every other year.

This decision also cost GT AND FSU home game revenue.
FSU at GT at Atlanta = sellout
GT at FSU in Tallahassee = sellout
Syracuse at FSU in Tallahassee = no sellout

It is like the old bastards running the ACC WANT GT and FSU to suffer financially. FSU vs GT is a no brainier for every season.
 
midatlantech said:
Ohio State and Michigan do not have more fans or alums in Georgia than Tech does. Good Grief already.

The thing that interests me, is how strongly FSU said they did not want to play Tech regularly in football. I can't help but think that Tech has reached back to the Big Ten and FSU knows it and refuses to help support Tech in any way. FSU is going to be in a tough spot coming up and they know it. (So is Tech if they don't get their act together and move back up to the Top Five in football in the ACC.)

It's unclear about Clemson. Well known, nice coaches sell. The Big Ten could use a few more top football programs. Clemson is not going to the SEC, how about the Big Ten?

If you look at the 7 teams who openly brought moving up, more than anything I would guess they wanted to start their own 8 team football league. FSU, Clemson, NCS, VPI, do not clearly have an open option coming up. UNC and UVA does but they want to remain kingpins. The easiest way to make more money for the bigger football schools is to drop BC, Syracuse, Wake, Duke, GT of late.

But it was also a play to negotiate more money from the conference and it looks like it is worked.
Click to expand...
What makes you think Clemson is not going to the SEC? You think South Carolina can block them from getting in? If it came down to it, they would kick South Carolina out just to get Clemson in.
 
GoGATech said:
What makes you think Clemson is not going to the SEC? You think South Carolina can block them from getting in? If it came down to it, they would kick South Carolina out just to get Clemson in.
Click to expand...
Isn't it amazing how it will likely end up that USuCk ends up supporting Clemson to the SEC. Florida would probably support FSU to the SEC. UGAg lead the charge in 1979 to keep GT out of the SEC and got USuCk in. For öööös sake they brought ööööing MISSOURI in. Good God.

I hope Vince Dooley is burning in eternal hellfire.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top