Can anyone explain how UCLA/USC in the Big 10 makes sense?

JJacket said:
Good God our leadership is so inept. Really, we should have some sort of legal recourse for having someone of diminished mental capacity getting us into this agreement.

When Miami and VT entered the ACC, there was talk of the ACC challenging the SEC for football dominance. How in the hell did Swofford and crew screw this up so badly?
Click to expand...
The ACC has always been about the Carolina boys. Everyone else doesn’t matter.
 
donsue said:
I think you already know that answer. He never considered any of the ‘newer” programs, including GT, to be of equal importance to Tobacco Road and their elitist basketball conference
Click to expand...
This, this, and then this again. The ACC has and will continue to be dominated by the 4 central NC schools in the sandbox together. All others are there simply so the four can play on the largest stage. When is the last time any of the four were really relevant in football? Clemson, FSU, Miami, and GA Tech have all won NCs in the last 35 years. Add Pitt if you go back to 1975 and Syracuse if you go back to 1959. Boston College, Louisville, UVA, and VPI all join the "big" four with a combined -0-. Basketball is the raison d'etre for the ACC.
 
stinger78 said:
This, this, and then this again. The ACC has and will continue to be dominated by the 4 central NC schools in the sandbox together. All others are there simply so the four can play on the largest stage. When is the last time any of the four were really relevant in football? Clemson, FSU, Miami, and GA Tech have all won NCs in the last 35 years. Add Pitt if you go back to 1975 and Syracuse if you go back to 1959. Boston College, Louisville, UVA, and VPI all join the "big" four with a combined -0-. Basketball is the raison d'etre for the ACC.
Click to expand...
Yes sir! And the only reason they wanted to expand is to provide monies for the little Research Triangle schools. The “vision” of the ACC leaders is so skewed and antiquated it is laughable. While the SEC and BIG10 were in the nuclear age, the ACC was still looking for the key to the Mayberry jail
 
JJacket said:
Good God our leadership is so inept. Really, we should have some sort of legal recourse for having someone of diminished mental capacity getting us into this agreement.

When Miami and VT entered the ACC, there was talk of the ACC challenging the SEC for football dominance. How in the hell did Swofford and crew screw this up so badly?
Click to expand...

If we didn't have the GoR, would we have negotiated a much better deal for the conference and be in a much better position? Or would our top temas have bolted and we would be on the verge of falling out of the P5?

There's no doubt that there are some losers from the ACC GoR. Clemson and FSU would almost certainly be off in another conference making a lot more money right now. And there's no doubt that there's some winners. Wake Forest isn't heading to the Big X or SEC even if the GoR goes away. They're much better off with the ACC locked in the way it is, even at its current TV value.

Then there are the teams where it's uncertain. I believe GT falls into that range. If this becomes a free-for-all, it's possible that we get scooped up by the Big X or the SEC (!) and end up better off. But it's also possible that we get left out and remain in a shell of the ACC without its top four teams and we end up worse off.
 
It makes sense for only one reason - TV revenue. The Big 10 has a footprint in the Los Angeles TV market. They are more attractive to TV/streaming. It makes sense for the other schools - potentially, almost certainly, increased revenue for them. It makes sense for UCLA and USC for the same singular reason - their TV revenue grows tremendously.

In every other way of evaluating it makes no sense - it is a horrible decision. It destroys regional rivalries that fans enjoy seeing and attending. It creates too many schools in the conference which makes conference competition diluted with little objective means of determining true champions. It is awful for athletes who must travel long distances for competition and expensive for parents who want to see their kids compete. It is particularly ridiculous for minor sports that must travel for more games than football plays.

Conference expansion is bad for athletes, fans, and students. It is ultimately bad for the quality of competition. It is only good for media revenue. College Presidents should be ashamed that they have become addicted to athletic media revenue and athletic leaders show their incompetence in not treating major college football separate from other sports. Making UCLA soccer travel to Rutgers for a conference game and Maryland softball travel to USC for a weekend series because of football revenue reveals the lack of understanding, vision, and creativity of those who lead college athletics.
 
77GTFan said:
Making UCLA soccer travel to Rutgers for a conference game and Maryland softball travel to USC for a weekend series because of football revenue reveals the lack of understanding, vision, and creativity of those who lead college athletics.
Click to expand...

Or that the money is too good to turn down.

I think that college football will breakaway into a 30ish team made for TV superleague. If that happens, I would think that many of the schools non-revenue sports will go back to regional games that make sense cost wise.
 
andrew said:
If we didn't have the GoR, would we have negotiated a much better deal for the conference and be in a much better position? Or would our top temas have bolted and we would be on the verge of falling out of the P5?

There's no doubt that there are some losers from the ACC GoR. Clemson and FSU would almost certainly be off in another conference making a lot more money right now. And there's no doubt that there's some winners. Wake Forest isn't heading to the Big X or SEC even if the GoR goes away. They're much better off with the ACC locked in the way it is, even at its current TV value.

Then there are the teams where it's uncertain. I believe GT falls into that range. If this becomes a free-for-all, it's possible that we get scooped up by the Big X or the SEC (!) and end up better off. But it's also possible that we get left out and remain in a shell of the ACC without its top four teams and we end up worse off.
Click to expand...
Personally, I believe it is impossible that the SECheat takes GA Tech. I think they'd take NCSU and VPI in a heartbeat to expand their footprint into two very populous states with relatively high-profile teams. I think Clemson and FSU are largely in the same boat with us, being in states already containing an SECheat team, but their more recent success might make them more attractive, plus there's not the antagonism that we still carry with some having "deserted" them in the past. Just my $.02 worth.
 
Do non-revenue sports actually have to play in a conference? Do they have to play in the same conference as fb and bb?
 
stinger78 said:
Personally, I believe it is impossible that the SECheat takes GA Tech. I think they'd take NCSU and VPI in a heartbeat to expand their footprint into two very populous states with relatively high-profile teams. I think Clemson and FSU are largely in the same boat with us, being in states already containing an SECheat team, but their more recent success might make them more attractive, plus there's not the antagonism that we still carry with some having "deserted" them in the past. Just my $.02 worth.
Click to expand...
Really the only scenario that gets GT back into the SEC is if they want to block the BIG from having a presence in Atlanta
 
77GTFan said:
It makes sense for only one reason - TV revenue. The Big 10 has a footprint in the Los Angeles TV market. They are more attractive to TV/streaming. It makes sense for the other schools - potentially, almost certainly, increased revenue for them. It makes sense for UCLA and USC for the same singular reason - their TV revenue grows tremendously.

In every other way of evaluating it makes no sense - it is a horrible decision. It destroys regional rivalries that fans enjoy seeing and attending. It creates too many schools in the conference which makes conference competition diluted with little objective means of determining true champions. It is awful for athletes who must travel long distances for competition and expensive for parents who want to see their kids compete. It is particularly ridiculous for minor sports that must travel for more games than football plays.

Conference expansion is bad for athletes, fans, and students. It is ultimately bad for the quality of competition. It is only good for media revenue. College Presidents should be ashamed that they have become addicted to athletic media revenue and athletic leaders show their incompetence in not treating major college football separate from other sports. Making UCLA soccer travel to Rutgers for a conference game and Maryland softball travel to USC for a weekend series because of football revenue reveals the lack of understanding, vision, and creativity of those who lead college athletics.
Click to expand...
Big 10 could grab Washington and Oregon for a west coast pod.
Would cut down on travel some.
 
stinger78 said:
Personally, I believe it is impossible that the SECheat takes GA Tech. I think they'd take NCSU and VPI in a heartbeat to expand their footprint into two very populous states with relatively high-profile teams. I think Clemson and FSU are largely in the same boat with us, being in states already containing an SECheat team, but their more recent success might make them more attractive, plus there's not the antagonism that we still carry with some having "deserted" them in the past. Just my $.02 worth.
Click to expand...
Why do people keep thinking states matter in conference expansion? That was important in 2004, now it's just simply about huge fanbases. The SEC had a team in Texas, they didn't expand to get a state they expanded to grab Longhorn fans. Oklahoma is not a big state but there are Sooner fans everywhere.

The SEC would absolutely take Clemson and FSU because they have huge fanbases nationwide. I'm not sure VPI or NCST would be of interest because I'm not really sure how big those teams fan bases really are. I live in Tennessee, I see a few VT stickers around town. Cannot recall the last time I saw anything related to NC State.
 
1982Jacket said:
It doesn't make sense. It makes DOLLARS.
Click to expand...
Seeing the word "dollar" in all caps and in green makes me think of 1 thing:
1680117179284.png
 
rocky top buzz said:
Why do people keep thinking states matter in conference expansion? That was important in 2004, now it's just simply about huge fanbases. The SEC had a team in Texas, they didn't expand to get a state they expanded to grab Longhorn fans. Oklahoma is not a big state but there are Sooner fans everywhere.

The SEC would absolutely take Clemson and FSU because they have huge fanbases nationwide. I'm not sure VPI or NCST would be of interest because I'm not really sure how big those teams fan bases really are. I live in Tennessee, I see a few VT stickers around town. Cannot recall the last time I saw anything related to NC State.
Click to expand...
You are correct. TV Markets by states are a thing of the past. Whether those programs would be offered by the SEC remains to be seen. The biggest leverage programs like Clemson and FSU have with the SEC lies in their interest in the BIG10. SEC programs don’t want the BIG10 getting a foothold in the Deep South
 
clapper said:
Neither of these teams will be allowed by their States to leave unless UVA and UNC are included, respectively.
Click to expand...
1) Why would the SEC prefer the second or third fiddle sports program (NC St) in North Carolina over UNC, anyway?

2) You are absolutely correct abour VT and UVA. One should remember that a major factor in VT getting into the ACC in the first place was that then Virginia governor (and now senator) Mark Warner would NOT let UVA vote for expansion unless VT was part of it, and expansion required a supermajority vote of current members. Swofford really only wanted Cuse, Miami and Boston College. UVA and VT are now joined at the hip.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top