Expansion

smokey_wasp said:
My guess is the ACC has given up on keeping FSU and (probably) Clemson in the fold, but figures the NC schools may be persuadable. I think this is partially a move to pre-fill those spots instead of back-filling later. Get UNC on board, bring in 3 new schools and you never need FSU or Clemson's vote on anything the ACC wants to do again.
Click to expand...
Agree, Adding SMU, Cal and Stanford is a move to keep the ACC in business after 3-4 departures. This is what the Big 12 did and survived and the PAC 12 did not.

Granted that this is a desperate move, but it is a move that is needed as to protect the unwanted schools by BIG (FOX) and SEC (ESPN) - and that may mean GT - so it is a good hedge bet for GT
 
Buzzilla said:
" A small group of ACC presidents "

Wonder if that "small group" includes presidents from FSU, Clemson, UNC and NCST.
Click to expand...
They decided to admit SMU, Cal, and Stanford on the condition that they vote to end the grant of rights.
 
I think FSU to the SEC is a long shot. UF doesn't want them obviously, and the dirty secret is Bama & AUB don't want them either. Both Bama & AUB want to recruit south Alabama and the Florida pan handle without competing with FSU. I would be surprised if UGA wants Clemson in the SEC for a similar reason. And for academic reasons, FSU and/or Clemson could be a hard sell to the B1G. So despite all the noise and fuss those 2 may not be leaving the ACC no matter how much they want to.
 
aeromech said:
I think FSU to the SEC is a long shot. UF doesn't want them obviously, and the dirty secret is Bama & AUB don't want them either. Both Bama & AUB want to recruit south Alabama and the Florida pan handle without competing with FSU. I would be surprised if UGA wants Clemson in the SEC for a similar reason. And for academic reasons, FSU and/or Clemson could be a hard sell to the B1G. So despite all the noise and fuss those 2 may not be leaving the ACC no matter how much they want to.
Click to expand...
UF isn't gonna have a choice if the legislators in Tallahassee tell them they better support FSU to the SEC. Virginia got Virginia Tech into the ACC that way
 
aeromech said:
I think FSU to the SEC is a long shot. UF doesn't want them obviously, and the dirty secret is Bama & AUB don't want them either. Both Bama & AUB want to recruit south Alabama and the Florida pan handle without competing with FSU. I would be surprised if UGA wants Clemson in the SEC for a similar reason. And for academic reasons, FSU and/or Clemson could be a hard sell to the B1G. So despite all the noise and fuss those 2 may not be leaving the ACC no matter how much they want to.
Click to expand...
You don’t think they are competing with FSU for recruits now?
 
JJacket said:
UF isn't gonna have a choice if the legislators in Tallahassee tell them they better support FSU to the SEC. Virginia got Virginia Tech into the ACC that way
Click to expand...

That is probably only applicable if the SEC raids the ACC like the ACC raided the Big East. Even if they force the UF vote, it may not be enough to get them in. If the SEC went after Clemson & FSU, I could see AUB, Bama, MSU, & UGA all voting 'No'; even if state legislatures force UF and USC to support it. FSU and Clemson really don't bring much to the SEC except additional local competition.
 
mookie43 said:
I will engage....here is verbiage from the current PAC12 deal

The new Pac-12 TV deals are a wrap and this is a big one for everyone. At $3 billion over 12 years, the Pac-12 will rake in roughly $250 million per year in the largest TV deal for any conference in the country. That means each of the 12 member schools will pocket about $21 million annually when this deal begins in 2012-2013, a far cry from the current TV deal that nets the conference less than $60 million annually.

So the new deal was reportedly for $23 million per school.....negotiated a year after two new marquee names departed for the B1G.....and somehow that means the money is drying up.....

Was it as much as they hoped...no.....but think what an ACC deal would bring if Clemson and FSU left and no one was added.
Click to expand...
The PAC-12 is dead and no one was willing to pay the going rates to keep it alive. Now you have 4 orphaned programs with no home and no deal for TV revenue. The money has certainly dried up for them.

The same future awaits the ACC. If ESPN wanted to save the ACC and stabilize it's future they would have already done it. They could renegotiate the GOR deal with or without Cal/Stanford/SMU and pay a competitive rate relative to what they pay the SEC and have it done before the sun went down.

But they won't. They won't because 1) their business model is fatally flawed and ESPN is eventually going broke and they know it and 2) even if they had the money to invest they realize the return value on the ACC isn't there. FSU/Clemson/UNC/NCST know it. The ACC leadership knows it.

These broadcast rights holders have over-extended themselves and created massive imbalances and now the casualties are starting to emerge. There will be more. Probably sooner than later.
 
aeromech said:
That is probably only applicable if the SEC raids the ACC like the ACC raided the Big East. Even if they force the UF vote, it may not be enough to get them in. If the SEC went after Clemson & FSU, I could see AUB, Bama, MSU, & UGA all voting 'No'; even if state legislatures force UF and USC to support it. FSU and Clemson really don't bring much to the SEC except additional local competition.
Click to expand...
Point is, UF won't be the veto or in the ney column. The state would force a yes. Meanwhile, Georgia legislators would probably just attempt to make GT a part of UGA to get in and fold the team.
 
Buzzilla said:
The PAC-12 is dead and no one was willing to pay the going rates to keep it alive. Now you have 4 orphaned programs with no home and no deal for TV revenue. The money has certainly dried up for them.

The same future awaits the ACC. If ESPN wanted to save the ACC and stabilize it's future they would have already done it. They could renegotiate the GOR deal with or without Cal/Stanford/SMU and pay a competitive rate relative to what they pay the SEC and have it done before the sun went down.

But they won't. They won't because 1) their business model is fatally flawed and ESPN is eventually going broke and they know it and 2) even if they had the money to invest they realize the return value on the ACC isn't there. FSU/Clemson/UNC/NCST know it. The ACC leadership knows it.

These broadcast rights holders have over-extended themselves and created massive imbalances and now the casualties are starting to emerge. There will be more. Probably sooner than later.
Click to expand...

ESPN won’t pay the ACC the going rate for the SEC because the ACC doesn’t have a product that merits it. Since FSU joined, the ACC has really only managed 1 top 10 team and 1 top 25 team per year. That is one marketable game based on rankings. Toss in a 4 team clump in NC that doesn’t draw interest outside of that state (for football), and you have a pretty bad product to sell.

It isn’t like the ACC hasn’t tried. Bringing in Miami was a good move, except they couldn’t compete in the ACC. VT worked out even though they were unwanted. But they followed a predictable path once their coach retired. GT took a shot running an unconventional offense but couldn’t put together good back to back seasons. UL came in when they were hot in FB and BB and then flopped. FSU collapsed while Clemson rose.
 
aeromech said:
That is probably only applicable if the SEC raids the ACC like the ACC raided the Big East. Even if they force the UF vote, it may not be enough to get them in. If the SEC went after Clemson & FSU, I could see AUB, Bama, MSU, & UGA all voting 'No'; even if state legislatures force UF and USC to support it. FSU and Clemson really don't bring much to the SEC except additional local competition.
Click to expand...
I believe i’ve read that UF sponsored fsu for the SEC back in the early 90’s

Clemson and FSU would bring the sec more high quality matchups and better national ratings
 
WracerX said:
ESPN won’t pay the ACC the going rate for the SEC because the ACC doesn’t have a product that merits it. Since FSU joined, the ACC has really only managed 1 top 10 team and 1 top 25 team per year. That is one marketable game based on rankings. Toss in a 4 team clump in NC that doesn’t draw interest outside of that state (for football), and you have a pretty bad product to sell.

It isn’t like the ACC hasn’t tried. Bringing in Miami was a good move, except they couldn’t compete in the ACC. VT worked out even though they were unwanted. But they followed a predictable path once their coach retired. GT took a shot running an unconventional offense but couldn’t put together good back to back seasons. UL came in when they were hot in FB and BB and then flopped. FSU collapsed while Clemson rose.
Click to expand...
Even ND ratings vs. ACC teams (excluding FSU, UM, and Clem) are not great
 
aeromech said:
That's the point. Right now they can compete for recruits against FSU by telling recruits it is better to play in the SEC. If FSU is in the SEC it becomes harder to recruit against them.
Click to expand...
The thing is, FSU almost always plays at least two of the better SEC schools each year, and always Clemson and Miami. I don’t think that spiel doesn’t really fly. It is why I hope GT, as Key makes improvements, will also add another SEC team each year in addition to playing UGA. Even as an independent, Tech played UGA, Auburn and Tennessee each year
 
donsue said:
The thing is, FSU almost always plays at least two of the better SEC schools each year, and always Clemson and Miami. I don’t think that spiel doesn’t really fly. It is why I hope GT, as Key makes improvements, will also add another SEC team each year in addition to playing UGA. Even as an independent, Tech played UGA, Auburn and Tennessee each year
Click to expand...
Tech should add Auburn back on a semi rotating basis similar to what Georgia does with Clemson. Sprinkle in Vandy, Kentucky, and Miss St on occasion.
 
donsue said:
The thing is, FSU almost always plays at least two of the better SEC schools each year, and always Clemson and Miami. I don’t think that spiel doesn’t really fly. It is why I hope GT, as Key makes improvements, will also add another SEC team each year in addition to playing UGA. Even as an independent, Tech played UGA, Auburn and Tennessee each year
Click to expand...

FSU doesn’t want to join the SEC because it will make them worse. And they wouldn’t pay a $120M buyout fee if the results were neutral.

Joining the SEC would make FSU better. And a better FSU weakens Auburn, UF, uga, and AL pretty much in that order. Maybe flip AL and uga.
But maybe adding FSU raises all boats. That is what the SEC would have to decide.
 
smokey_wasp said:
Click to expand...

As I said earlier, this doesn't move the needle much. I would be surprised if the schools blocking the expansion change their minds based on the paltry increase they still have to compete for. It doesn't narrow the gap measurably against what ESPN is paying the SEC and that's the problem.

It's not just about getting more money. It's about the money you aren't getting relative to the SEC and B1G programs.
 
Buzzilla said:
As I said earlier, this doesn't move the needle much. I would be surprised if the schools blocking the expansion change their minds based on the paltry increase they still have to compete for. It doesn't narrow the gap measurably against what ESPN is paying the SEC and that's the problem.

It's not just about getting more money. It's about the money you aren't getting relative to the SEC and B1G programs.
Click to expand...

ACC isn't gonna get what the SEC and B1G are getting. They could tear up the GOR today and start over and it still isn't happening. They'd be lucky to get as good a deal as they have now. Adding a little extra revenue certainly isn't going to hurt anybody.

My guess is they are going to convince the UNC president to go along more because of academics and Olympic Sports than money, though.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top