Expansion

I don't get the appeal of a mega conference. 9 teams would be ideal. Round robin. I bet any SEC fan would prefer a conference of UGAg, Alabama, Tennessee, Auburn, Florida, Ole Miss, LSU, FSU, and Clemson over anything they have now.

I guess it ultimately is just greed.
 
JJacket said:
I don't get the appeal of a mega conference. 9 teams would be ideal. Round robin. I bet any SEC fan would prefer a conference of UGAg, Alabama, Tennessee, Auburn, Florida, Ole Miss, LSU, FSU, and Clemson over anything they have now.

I guess it ultimately is just greed.
Click to expand...
Especially with a 12 team playoff now
 
BuzzedATL said:
If FSU and Clemson leave the ACC but the conference sticks together and maintains its autobid to the playoffs….you gotta like our chances of going to the playoffs at least once every 3-4 seasons right?
Click to expand...

Maintaining the auto bid is the key. Expect the SEC and B1G to push for 12 at-large. They are already griping about auto-bids in light of the PAC's collapse.
 
The mega conferences are essentially creating a FBS+. They don’t want to share the money with 130 teams. The hey would rather share 90% of that money amongst 50 teams.

This move is really an initial cut on the smaller P5 teams that have been benefiting from the P5 system without really putting in much.
 
WracerX said:
The mega conferences are essentially creating a FBS+. They don’t want to share the money with 130 teams. The hey would rather share 90% of that money amongst 50 teams.

This move is really an initial cut on the smaller P5 teams that have been benefiting from the P5 system without really putting in much.
Click to expand...
It is why I think Vandy will eventually be booted from the SEC. Yes, they are good at baseball. Nobody cares.
 
WracerX said:
The mega conferences are essentially creating a FBS+. They don’t want to share the money with 130 teams. The hey would rather share 90% of that money amongst 50 teams.

This move is really an initial cut on the smaller P5 teams that have been benefiting from the P5 system without really putting in much.
Click to expand...
This. So then, why do we want to play in their sandbox?

If 30 out of 130 programs consider themselves above the other 90 programs, why not just let them go (good riddance!) and create a league from the 100 or so programs left?

The only way one can make GA Tech a candidate for that "elite" group is if one considers NIL, the portal, and (to date) unprecedented institutional support as game-changers for our program. We have not competed consistently on that level since the 1950's. Yes, we have had transitory blips from time to time, but not for a period longer than 2-3 years at most.

If the top management at GT sees that support as a high priority, and will support that on an ongoing basis, it can be done. I see that as the biggest hurdle to clear for Tech. IMPO, we can do anything we set our minds to do in the academic/athletic environment. The key is that support.
 
Interesting.
Georgia Tech coming in at #26.

Current ACC:
Notre Dame #5 (If you want to count them)
Florida State #13
Miami #16
Clemson #18
Georgia Tech #26
Pitt #28
Virginia Tech #38
North Carolina #40
Duke #43
Syracuse #47
Boston College #53
NC State #60
Louisville #61
Virginia #76
Wake Forest #86

Other notable programs:
Oregon #29
Stanford #31
Army #35
Navy #41
Cal #45
Utah #55
Oregon State #56
Mississippi State #57
South Carolina #58
Rice #63 (T)
Tulane #63 (T)
Vanderbilt #103
 
stinger78 said:
This. So then, why do we want to play in their sandbox?

If 30 out of 130 programs consider themselves above the other 90 programs, why not just let them go (good riddance!) and create a league from the 100 or so programs left?

The only way one can make GA Tech a candidate for that "elite" group is if one considers NIL, the portal, and (to date) unprecedented institutional support as game-changers for our program. We have not competed consistently on that level since the 1950's. Yes, we have had transitory blips from time to time, but not for a period longer than 2-3 years at most.

If the top management at GT sees that support as a high priority, and will support that on an ongoing basis, it can be done. I see that as the biggest hurdle to clear for Tech. IMPO, we can do anything we set our minds to do in the academic/athletic environment. The key is that support.
Click to expand...

No matter where you draw the line, there are going to be consistently good teams and consistently bad teams. There will be a slow turnover of those teams too.

But the big players also need to avoid being ‘bad’ for extended periods of time as well. So the big conferences need teams that will be competitive, but not consistently good.

I think the right number is probably 64 teams (or half of FBS). There isn’t a relegation league for football, so you are stuck with stinkers who got in on luck (Vandy). I think there should be a move to minimum requirements like they imposed on FBS a few years ago.

You can’t be considered for the top 64 if you don’t have a 50k+ stadium. Your attendance must average 40k+/year over a 5 year period. Those kinds of numbers might move us out of the big time. It might move in schools like UCF. You would end up with something like the system for HS where the big schools play each other.

Schools like Tech would probably have to decide is they wanted to drop down or have a combined football team (GT+GState).

Sadly, the old college football is dead.
 
Buzzilla said:
Interesting.
Georgia Tech coming in at #26.

Current ACC:
Notre Dame #5 (If you want to count them)
Florida State #13
Miami #16
Clemson #18
Georgia Tech #26
Pitt #28
Virginia Tech #38
North Carolina #40
Duke #43
Syracuse #47
Boston College #53
NC State #60
Louisville #61
Virginia #76
Wake Forest #86

Other notable programs:
Oregon #29
Stanford #31
Army #35
Navy #41
Cal #45
Utah #55
Oregon State #56
Mississippi State #57
South Carolina #58
Rice #63 (T)
Tulane #63 (T)
Vanderbilt #103
Click to expand...
per link in article we were #6 for the 50's
 
BuzzinWreck78 said:
per link in article we were #6 for the 50's
Click to expand...
60's, 70's, 80's, 00's, 10's were not great for Tech in the rankings. A very respectable #21 for the 90's (mostly from 1990).

Tech's all time #26 ranking is mostly from what is now ancient history and a few very good years mixed in since. Maybe the rest of the 2020's will be our decade.

It's interesting that some bottom dwellers have never risen above. I'm looking at you Vanderbilt.
 
JJacket said:
It is why I think Vandy will eventually be booted from the SEC. Yes, they are good at baseball. Nobody cares.
Click to expand...
I’m curious - and I’m sure it varies by conference - but how exactly does a conference go about booting a member?
 
gt9589 said:
I heard that a couple of Ohio State FB games will be on the ‘Peacock’ in addition to other conference games. NBCs pay network. Their fans aren’t happy lol. Part of that mega TV deal with Fox, CBS and NBC.
Click to expand...
Peacock is already a part of Xfinity and is as cheap as $4.99 a month otherwise. tOSU fans are upset about nothing.

Only the tip of the iceberg as it relates to games on non traditional cable TV networks. Apple will eventually use that $200 million they were giving the now PAC-4 to some league.
 
ClubSeats said:
I’m curious - and I’m sure it varies by conference - but how exactly does a conference go about booting a member?
Click to expand...
Not sure, but I guess if all the other members decided to vote on it and it wasn't vetoed, I'd guess Vandy would get a buyout and told they are gone.
 
USCJacket said:
Peacock is already a part of Xfinity and is as cheap as $4.99 a month otherwise. tOSU fans are upset about nothing.

Only the tip of the iceberg as it relates to games on non traditional cable TV networks. Apple will eventually use that $200 million they were giving the now PAC-4 to some league.
Click to expand...

There is probably a market for ’not live’ sports, but that would kill the live sports market.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top