ACC ded

BuzzedATL said:
Does GT have any history with B1G schools? Other than OSU/Mich/PSU, are any of those other matchups particularly exciting to anyone? At least in the ACC we are playing teams we’ve played against for decades (usually) and we are somewhat neighbors. I’m picturing us playing Minnesota or Wisconsin or Northwestern and I don’t think there’s much rivalry/animosity/competition there right? I guess it beats going down to G5 but if the ACC is sticking around I’d rather stay. Give me a matchup vs VT or Duke any day over those smaller B1G schools
Click to expand...
ditto. been trying to figure out the BIG slob nobbing going on around here. if ACC ded, and we can't get into SEC, then sure, will be only way to generate enough revenue to stay relevant. but who actually wants to watch games against Indiana, minnesota, rutgers?
 
greenmachine said:
ditto. been trying to figure out the BIG slob nobbing going on around here. if ACC ded, and we can't get into SEC, then sure, will be only way to generate enough revenue to stay relevant. but who actually wants to watch games against Indiana, minnesota, rutgers?
Click to expand...
Well that's the point. Nobody does, but I'd much rather watch us play those teams than watch us play Houston, East Carolina, Memphis, Tulane, etc. in conference. We aren't getting into the SEC.

EDIT: Also, you have to figure we wouldn't be the only ones to end up in the B1G if the conference dissolves. I would imagine 4 ACC teams end up in B1G, plus you have USC and UCLA there now and could possibly be 2 more PAC12 teams when it's all said and done if we end up with 2 super conferences. So I wouldn't mind playing a Minnesota or Indiana every now and then when I also get to see USC, UCLA, Ohio State, Michigan, MSU, Penn State, a couple of our current ACC foes, and possibly teams like Oregon or Washington.
 
GoGATech said:
I'm not so sure it is best case, unless like others suggested the ACC can re-negotiate with ESPN and get a better TV deal. As it stands, all ACC schools will be making at minimum $30M less ANNUALY than SEC and B1G schools make off of TV contracts.
Click to expand...

That's why I said "together as a conference for the long term." If all schools were committed to staying together long term, we would be able to get a better TV deal. Not on the same level as the SEC and Big 10, I'm sure, but a substantially smaller gap.

The reason the ACC can't negotiate a new deal now is that it requires dissolving the grant of rights, and as soon as that happens the heavy hitters will bolt.

That's my understanding of the situation anyway. I probaby could have been a little clearer -- I agree that staying as-is right now, under a bad TV deal with the top schools just waiting to leave, is not good.
 
gt9589 said:
If we go to the BIG then I won't be attending any away games. No way in hades I'm driving up to MI or OH. I still think the SEC fits us best. I think the ACC needs to grow a pair and step it up and start winning in all big TV sports (FB, BB, Baseball, etc). We win, we get on TV = more $$.
Click to expand...
Enjoy the games against our new closest conference rival Wale Forest, followed by Pitt!

That’s where this is headed (and has been heading for quite a while). GT people just continue to refuse to see it.
 
B1G and SEC are the new Power 5

ACC, Big 12 and PACxx are the new G5

The rest are the new D1AA

I guess a lot of you guys are fine being in the equivalent of a non-BCS conference. I can’t relate to that. It’s way better to be relevant but suck. Rutgers, Indiana and Vandy are in an infinitely more enviable position that we are, and will be, unless we find a home in one of those two conferences.
 
savbandjacket said:
The weather stuff is overblown. We went to ND on the last weekend before thanksgiving and had a great time other than the score. It was cold but not an issue.
Click to expand...

The problem with the upper Midwest after October is that your likelihood of crazy cold weather goes up a lot. Could be 45 degrees that day, could be -10
 
In the ACC we have a legendary rivalry with Clemson, though they have dominated of late. We have developed a pretty good series with FSU and VT. I enjoy hating Pitt and think it could be a good series over time.

I frankly couldn't care less about the rest of the conference: UVA, UNC, Duke, NCST, WF, Miami, or BC. Just don't care about any of those teams at all.

Leaving the ACC doesn't mean squat. We have a pretty crappy TV deal and a pretty crappy pool of teams in football and a conference that mostly treats Tech as an after thought. If the conference dies, it dies. So be it.

Tech will be fine where ever it lands even if it is out of the SEC or the B1G. Neither of those conferences looks like a club I would want to be in right now. The money looks great but after that, it's a hot mess.

I don't have a clue how they are going to manage so many programs from different parts of the country. The logistics and payout distributions are going to be a big problem before it's all over for the SEC and B1G unless they have a plan they haven't shared yet.

Tech was independent before and it didn't work out very well but maybe 2nd time around could be better. I vote for no conference. Let's go independent and try to get on the schedule of as many of the major programs as possible. UGA and Clemson is a good start.

It's better than staying in this milquetoast romper room of a conference. Tech will be fine regardless.
 
andrew said:
That's why I said "together as a conference for the long term." If all schools were committed to staying together long term, we would be able to get a better TV deal. Not on the same level as the SEC and Big 10, I'm sure, but a substantially smaller gap.

The reason the ACC can't negotiate a new deal now is that it requires dissolving the grant of rights, and as soon as that happens the heavy hitters will bolt.

That's my understanding of the situation anyway. I probaby could have been a little clearer -- I agree that staying as-is right now, under a bad TV deal with the top schools just waiting to leave, is not good.
Click to expand...
Yeah I understand what you're saying now, and I do agree, but I'm just not sure that's possible now. The ACC can't stand pat and get a better deal IMO without expansion, and everybody wants to get into one of those 2 conferences now, so you aren't going to get the cream of the crop to want to join. ACC should have been more pro-active when all this expansion started and maybe there could've been a "Big 3" but I think it's too late for that now.
 
andrew said:
That's why I said "together as a conference for the long term." If all schools were committed to staying together long term, we would be able to get a better TV deal. Not on the same level as the SEC and Big 10, I'm sure, but a substantially smaller gap.

The reason the ACC can't negotiate a new deal now is that it requires dissolving the grant of rights, and as soon as that happens the heavy hitters will bolt.

That's my understanding of the situation anyway. I probaby could have been a little clearer -- I agree that staying as-is right now, under a bad TV deal with the top schools just waiting to leave, is not good.
Click to expand...
When the ACC GOR first came out I remember they talked about periodic "look-ins" where the value of the ACC contract would be adjusted to current market conditions (presumably compared to the other conferences.) I don't know if that was simply wrong information or if the "look-ins" have somehow proved the ACC market value is indeed that far behind the SEC/B1G?
 
B1G will have 16 teams as of August 2024 (USC and UCLA)
Conference TV networks make money from Cable TV / Satellite / Streaming providers based on the number of customers in the home State of the team.

Which ACC teams would add the most value to the B1G cable TV footprint? (in order of state size)
- FSU and/or Miami
- GT
- UNC or NCSU or Duke
- UVA or VPI&SU
- Clemson
- Syracuse
- BC

Which ACC teams would add the most value to the SEC cable TV footprint?
- UNC or NCSU or Duke
- UVA or VPI&SU
- Syracuse
- BC
 
gtleviathan said:
When the ACC GOR first came out I remember they talked about periodic "look-ins" where the value of the ACC contract would be adjusted to current market conditions (presumably compared to the other conferences.) I don't know if that was simply wrong information or if the "look-ins" have somehow proved the ACC market value is indeed that far behind the SEC/B1G?
Click to expand...
I also recall the "look-in" when the contract was first signed. I have not been able to find any info on it though recently
 
I think we're pretty much SEC or bust. The B10 has tv money, but their fans aren't going to travel to BDS - how much money do we lose by having no fans from opposing teams? Having opposing teams actually travel to BDS is a lot of money and it keeps it interesting to play teams that we have history with instead of a bunch of teams we don't care about.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top