Expansion

05GTCorndog said:
How do you know the ACC doesn't have a plan? The plan could be to stand pat. There are moving pieces at play. You can't just add 2-3 garbage schools and then demand a renegotiation of the contract with ESPN to increase per school payout. Maybe the ACC did try to add Oregon, Washington, Cal and Stanford (which would've been a 'big' move). Maybe ESPN wasn't onboard with throwing more money at the contract to make a move worthwhile. If ESPN is having financial struggles, why would they want to increase their ACC payout to more schools unless they were sure it would really increase the value of the contract. Perhaps the SEC and BigTen deals are way overvalued and come next re-up, the money starts to dry up if ESPN isn't writing massive checks. There could be a bubble that is about to burst.

Could the ACC have added UCF, Cincy and Houston two years ago? Probably. That move would've been laughed at when BigTen added USC and UCLA and SEC adding OU and Texas. There was no move to make for the ACC that really made sense. I'm fine not adding mediocre schools just to expand.
Click to expand...
No disrespect but one Stanford is worth 5 UVF's or Cincinnati. IMO Stanford would be a nice addition.
 
OptionJacket said:
You are forgetting the the thing that will increase the revenue which is what this expansion is all about - AN EXTENDED PLAYOFF. So, to say those teams will be like Nebraska is comparing Apples to Oranges. Sure in a 2 team or 4 team playoff with 5 power conferences you have what we’ve seen which is a lot of programs on the outside looking in after 1 or 2 losses. But this is all about the playoff money on top of the TV deals. These 2 conferences will now either demand a 20 plus team playoff or will simply create their own playoff to fill time slots in December that are now empty. The NFL playoffs start around January 13. So from December 4 (conference title games) thru January 13 the sports world is empty except for NFL regular season games, meaningless regular season NBA games, and worthless bowl games outside the small playoff we have now.

I think it is going to be awesome to have meaningful college football from rivalry week in November all the way thru the 2nd week in January. As a GT fan I love that now in those years when we put it together, ala 2014, that we’ll get our Cinderella chance. Of course, I’m sure the ACC‘s current suicide pact will screw us so I’m not holding my breath but at least I’ll have something to watch instead of the Pollyanna Bowl.
Click to expand...

I could very easily envision the long game of the SEC and B1G to be the AFC and NFC of college football
 
ScionOfSouthland said:
The evidence of the ACC not having a plan is the fact that they are in reaction mode all the time. I could buy staying put but why flirt with WV, Washington, & Oregon in that case. It would be a waste of everyone’s time. And now having serious expansion talks with Stanford, Cal, and SMU after the PAC 12 gets poached. It looks to me like the ACC got caught flat footed and didn’t read into what the SEC and B1G were up to. At least the Big 12 responded to shifting reality in time and gobbled up some second rate schools.

With FSU and Clemson out there leaking their unhappiness with the GOR you know they are turning the screws on the conference adding new teams. Further dilution is a non-starter for them, and frankly I don’t think there are really any teams left that are going to increase conference revenues.

We are in a suicide pact right now IMO. FSU and Clemson are having their parking spots held in the SEC. They have no incentive to expand. You can guarantee the B1G is talking occasionally with the teams they want. If you’re the ACC commissioner your options are to either wait until the conference finally dies or pull off some kind of miracle poaching of the Big 12. I don’t see another path forward.
Click to expand...

Agree 100%. After UCLA/USC left, the PAC's demise was becoming more and more evident. The Big XII was also weakened when Texas and OU left. And the ACC did öööö all. They could have reached out to some PAC schools like Oregon/Washington/Utah/AZ/ASU etc. but still could have taken Cal and Stanford for their academics, since that's what the ACC is obsessed with. Like Oregon, Washington, Cal and Stanford could have been a package. I don't think anyone would turn their nose up at that, or hell even both Arizona schools and Cal & Stanford. Doesn't make sense geographically but that doesn't matter anymore. May not have worked since most PAC schools would likely balk at playing on the east coast but I doubt the ACC even tried.

But I think the ACC really blew it with the Big XII. After it was announced that Texas and OU were leaving in 2021, the ACC should have pounced on a couple of schools. TCU comes to mind - it's a good school and in a major television market. The ACC also could have gone after WV/OkSt maybe since academics don't really matter (see admission of Louisville). But they did nothing and are now going after only some of the scraps of the PAC and a G5 school.

Personally, I don't really have a problem with SMU. They had been playing against the big boys in the Southwest Conference but got the death penalty and relegated to an inferior conference. But it just seems like a reach now that all the "big names" have been taken. If the ACC had been more proactive about pushing westward and was able rope in a couple of bigger names along with SMU, I wouldn't have a problem with that. It would almost be forward thinking. But now it just feels like a reach.

Edit: Also, ND needs to öööö off. Where the hell do they get off pushing for Cal and Stanford for full membership when they won't even join in football?
 
jdubjacket said:
But I think the ACC really blew it with the Big XII. After it was announced that Texas and OU were leaving in 2021, the ACC should have pounced on a couple of schools. TCU comes to mind - it's a good school and in a major television market. The ACC also could have gone after WV/OkSt maybe since academics don't really matter (see admission of Louisville). But they did nothing and are now going after only some of the scraps of the PAC and a G5 school.

Personally, I don't really have a problem with SMU. They had been playing against the big boys in the Southwest Conference but got the death penalty and relegated to an inferior conference. But it just seems like a reach now that all the "big names" have been taken. If the ACC had been more proactive about pushing westward and was able rope in a couple of bigger names along with SMU, I wouldn't have a problem with that. It would almost be forward thinking. But now it just feels like a reach.
Click to expand...
I feel bad for Cal and Stanford I guess cause in a few years this will be us.

But I still think the ACC should look at SMU and take a chance. Not going to find someone to play 5 years for free.
 
05GTCorndog said:
ESPN is still incredibly profitable. The margins are shrinking and there are definite headwinds, but ESPN is not hemorrhaging money like so many on here keep saying (not necessarily you)
Click to expand...
That is routinely said by the same people who have a certain perspective that clouds nearly every thought and creeps into nearly every subject. Facts won't get in the way of them Corndog you know that.
 
stech81 said:
I feel bad for Cal and Stanford I guess cause in a few years this will be us.

But I still think the ACC should look at SMU and take a chance. Not going to find someone to play 5 years for free.
Click to expand...
Agree with your first sentence, but woah not the second.

The ACC shouldn't take a single more member unless there is a material increase in the per-member payout (not just initially), which results in a NET increase after increased expenses for all sports thanks to a growing footprint. Period. After that, it shouldn't take a single member that adds a below-average brand. SEC is adds Texas and OU, B1G adds Oregon and UW, B12 adds Colorado and Utah... and this board wants to add SMU? App State?

This is the reality for the ACC's options because they just can't pull in meaningful schools, and our big programs want out entirely. If Cabrera and Batt can't see the writing on the wall right now, and aren't trying to do whatever they can to get us out of the ACC, well then they simply aren't the strategic leaders they say they are. I hope they are.
 
ScionOfSouthland said:
I could very easily envision the long game of the SEC and B1G to be the AFC and NFC of college football
Click to expand...

That would suck for everyone. Fans and student athletes (outside of FB). SEC is still regional in that they don't have a gap in their map and only cross two time zones. Of all the conferences they hold all the cards unfortunately. I hope they lose every OOC game this year and the NC comes out of the Big XII, ACC or some lower tier conference.
 
ScionOfSouthland said:
I could very easily envision the long game of the SEC and B1G to be the AFC and NFC of college football
Click to expand...
That is when I quit watching SEC and B1G football. Don't need it, don't want it, will not worry about it. Woke = BROKE, and this ESPN led assault on college sports is going to be one heck of a train wreck. We have yet to see the Securities and Exchange Commission, schools lawyering up and Congress get involved.
It's coming.
 
WREKedinTexas said:
That is when I quit watching SEC and B1G football. Don't need it, don't want it, will not worry about it. Woke = BROKE, and this ESPN led assault on college sports is going to be one heck of a train wreck. We have yet to see the Securities and Exchange Commission, schools lawyering up and Congress get involved.
It's coming.
Click to expand...
Come one now. If Congress didn’t get involved when the bowl system was rigged to cheat teams and Congress didn’t get involved with inequitable enforcement by the NCAA then those hoping for a white knight will be sad when Congress does nothing. Now, I admit you’ll have politicians blabbering and looking for the spotlight but ultimately they will do nothing because they have no role.

I for one am thankful for any team or conference who pushes for an expanded playoff which will ultimately give us a legit champ. Sorry, but having journalists pick the Natty, or a 2 team playoff, or a 4 team playoff that excludes everyone else is a joke. The public has been brainwashed to accept this by those who are hoarding the money. In no other sport is this considered legit. Do only the top 4 golfers get invited to the Masters? Does any other sports league only invite 4 teams to play for their championship? I can’t understand why everyone puts their head in the sand regarding a totally bogus way to pick a champion. At least we have 2 conferences who, due to greed, are trying to advance the playoff ball.
 
OptionJacket said:
Come one now. If Congress didn’t get involved when the bowl system was rigged to cheat teams and Congress didn’t get involved with inequitable enforcement by the NCAA then those hoping for a white knight will be sad when Congress does nothing. Now, I admit you’ll have politicians blabbering and looking for the spotlight but ultimately they will do nothing because they have no role.

I for one am thankful for any team or conference who pushes for an expanded playoff which will ultimately give us a legit champ. Sorry, but having journalists pick the Natty, or a 2 team playoff, or a 4 team playoff that excludes everyone else is a joke. The public has been brainwashed to accept this by those who are hoarding the money. In no other sport is this considered legit. Do only the top 4 golfers get invited to the Masters? Does any other sports league only invite 4 teams to play for their championship? I can’t understand why everyone puts their head in the sand regarding a totally bogus way to pick a champion. At least we have 2 conferences who, due to greed, are trying to advance the playoff ball.
Click to expand...
Every college that has a sport that gets revenue from the revenue earning sport is going to be affected.
Every community that suffers a financial loss due to the sudden dynamics change is going to seek their state for legal action to stop the impact.
ESPN is laying off reporters. You can't buy ESPN stock. It isn't on a stock exchange. Disney is the cash cow and they are going broke. People are cutting the cord.
Nobody has looked at the effect of student athletes having to fly 2 to 4 hours to play a 2 hour game, fly back and possibly attend class the next day.
Yes it is coming. Those idiots in suits that never played a down of anything in their life, that only want the MONEY, are going to find themselves on the losing end of a very big legal battle.
 
jdubjacket said:
Agree 100%. After UCLA/USC left, the PAC's demise was becoming more and more evident. The Big XII was also weakened when Texas and OU left. And the ACC did öööö all. They could have reached out to some PAC schools like Oregon/Washington/Utah/AZ/ASU etc. but still could have taken Cal and Stanford for their academics, since that's what the ACC is obsessed with. Like Oregon, Washington, Cal and Stanford could have been a package. I don't think anyone would turn their nose up at that, or hell even both Arizona schools and Cal & Stanford. Doesn't make sense geographically but that doesn't matter anymore. May not have worked since most PAC schools would likely balk at playing on the east coast but I doubt the ACC even tried.

But I think the ACC really blew it with the Big XII. After it was announced that Texas and OU were leaving in 2021, the ACC should have pounced on a couple of schools. TCU comes to mind - it's a good school and in a major television market. The ACC also could have gone after WV/OkSt maybe since academics don't really matter (see admission of Louisville). But they did nothing and are now going after only some of the scraps of the PAC and a G5 school.

Personally, I don't really have a problem with SMU. They had been playing against the big boys in the Southwest Conference but got the death penalty and relegated to an inferior conference. But it just seems like a reach now that all the "big names" have been taken. If the ACC had been more proactive about pushing westward and was able rope in a couple of bigger names along with SMU, I wouldn't have a problem with that. It would almost be forward thinking. But now it just feels like a reach.

Edit: Also, ND needs to öööö off. Where the hell do they get off pushing for Cal and Stanford for full membership when they won't even join in football?
Click to expand...

So is the ACC obsessed with academics, or academics don't really matter?
 
jdubjacket said:
They’re obsessed with academics despite them not mattering anymore.
Click to expand...

I think they got over the academics obsession back when they added Clemson, then FSU. They have basically ignored academics since then with VT, Louisville, etc. It isn't like the B1G where you pretty much have to be an AAU school.
 
WREKedinTexas said:
Every college that has a sport that gets revenue from the revenue earning sport is going to be affected.
Every community that suffers a financial loss due to the sudden dynamics change is going to seek their state for legal action to stop the impact.
ESPN is laying off reporters. You can't buy ESPN stock. It isn't on a stock exchange. Disney is the cash cow and they are going broke. People are cutting the cord.
Nobody has looked at the effect of student athletes having to fly 2 to 4 hours to play a 2 hour game, fly back and possibly attend class the next day.
Yes it is coming. Those idiots in suits that never played a down of anything in their life, that only want the MONEY, are going to find themselves on the losing end of a very big legal battle.
Click to expand...
Disney ain’t going broke dumbass
 
aeromech said:
I think they got over the academics obsession back when they added Clemson, then FSU. They have basically ignored academics since then with VT, Louisville, etc. It isn't like the B1G where you pretty much have to be an AAU school.
Click to expand...
Clemson was a founding member of the ACC in 1953.

Point taken with F$U in 1992.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top