Expansion

CiraldoForever said:
Why do other conferences look so smooth and decisive in what they do, while the ACC looks so ridiculous trying to make an expansion decision in public for three weeks and letting it drag into the FB season? Why would anybody do business this way. Why would anybody want to join a conference like this? Why does ND get a vote on things affecting FB? Man, the last year has proven the person who's the commissioner of a conference is very important. This is embarrassing.
Click to expand...
ESPN has been a big road block. They don't have much money to spend. I like this expansion because everything is gonna change within 5 years anyways. We should at least make more money in the meantime.
 
AmpuTECHture said:
ESPN has been a big road block. They don't have much money to spend. I like this expansion because everything is gonna change within 5 years anyways. We should at least make more money in the meantime.
Click to expand...
ESPN paying top dollar for every sport has bit them in the ass. If I were head of ESPN, we'd pay premium for (in this order) the NFL, MLB, P5 CFB. Major drop off to whatever else. Maybe the NBA, but that öööö is legit bad nowadays. Maybe NCAA BB.
 
AmpuTECHture said:
ESPN has been a big road block. They don't have much money to spend. I like this expansion because everything is gonna change within 5 years anyways. We should at least make more money in the meantime.
Click to expand...
No one will be getting more money, new teams will get less or nothing and existing teams will get the same plus additional funds to cover west coast travel
 
THWG247 said:
How does this make financial sense once the new teams start taking full 40 mil/year shares?
Click to expand...
it doesn't, but by then, ACC implodes. which is why i can't figure out why fsu and clems against it. since they obviously havent figured out a way out of GOR, might as well earn a few extra bucks waiting for it to expire.
 
greenmachine said:
it doesn't, but by then, ACC implodes. which is why i can't figure out why fsu and clems against it. since they obviously havent figured out a way out of GOR, might as well earn a few extra bucks waiting for it to expire.
Click to expand...

If they get in now, is the deal better than it was last week? If Stanford, Cal, and SMU can move enough political capital, that may be helpful in the next round of consolidation. Or maybe not. Maybe it bumps and ACC school because those three aren’t already out of the game.
 
USCJacket said:
Gibbs could have gone to LSU etc out of HS. So the SEC option was always there. When he decided to leave GT he wanted to play for a chance to win an NC knowing GT was a sinking ship. Do you blame him? He made a business decision. Good for him. But to insinuate from the start that it had anything to do with upping his draft status is pure speculation. His late 1st round early 2nd round draft status would not have changed had he stayed at GT. His film for 2 years in a bad offense with no offensive line was proof enough of his elite talent.

You’re seriously bringing up when FSU joined the ACC in 1992? Things have drastically changed across the political landscape in college athletics over the last 30 years. The SEC and B1G are the 2 top conferences and have been for quite some time. They have the $$$ and pull to make any decision they want regarding expansion. FSU and Clemson see the writing on the wall and understand the financial impact the 2 super conferences will have to their member school’s starting in the near future.

But I think ignoring what idiot Swafford did by putting the ACC in the position it’s in by raiding the Big East and adding 2 football schools (Miami, VT), 3 hoops schools (Cuse, BC and UofL) and Pitt who has been up and down in both has been a disaster. Outside of Miami, VT and UofL none of the other schools have national fanbases. He built a conference based on the wrong sports….Hoops.

So the fact is, FSU and Clemson don’t care about being members in a dying conference. Do you blame them? But to continue down this mindset you’re in that FSU and Clemson aren’t the top 2 choices in the next round of SEC expansion is just ignoring reality. They are the 2 perfect schools for that conference.
Click to expand...
I don't blame him for leaving.

I blame him for quitting in his last two games at Tech. Just like I blame Sims. I will root for them to fail everywhere they go.
 
What happens to the Pac12 network with the end of the Pac12? Does it become ACCN2 if we take on the remnants of their dying corpse?
 
AmpuTECHture said:
ESPN has been a big road block. They don't have much money to spend. I like this expansion because everything is gonna change within 5 years anyways. We should at least make more money in the meantime.
Click to expand...
Why? I say let some teams die.

Stanford will be a direct competitor to GT when the ACC falls, if we allow them membership.
 
greenmachine said:
it doesn't, but by then, ACC implodes. which is why i can't figure out why fsu and clems against it. since they obviously havent figured out a way out of GOR, might as well earn a few extra bucks waiting for it to expire.
Click to expand...
FSU and Clemson are opposing it as leverage to try to get themselves out of the ACC and the GOR. It's that simple.
 
1982Jacket said:
I don't blame him for leaving.

I blame him for quitting in his last two games at Tech. Just like I blame Sims. I will root for them to fail everywhere they go.
Click to expand...
Yes, I got a nice view of Sims refusing to play when we needed him.
 
1982Jacket said:
No one - and I mean NO ONE - in DFW gives two öööös about SMU.
Click to expand...
And no one, and I mean NO ONE, in ATL gives a öööö about GT right now.

The NCAA has attempted to kill one football program in history, SMU. They have a decent stadium that looks like it was built with future expansion in mind. Having a foothold in Texas helps the ACC.
 
1982Jacket said:
Which teams? Tech? Why or why not? TIA!
Click to expand...
The leftover Pac-12 teams can die. Why should the ACC bail them out with any money? Their other option is joining the Mountain West.

I can see having SMU in Texas that is at least geographically close enough that travel isn't as big an issue and they are going to self fund for the first several years.

Stanford and Cal are useless to the ACC especially when you get past the big two sports of Football and Basketball. Giving them 20mil a year is about 19mil more than they will make in the lower conferences that are options.

If we bring them on, the ACC allows them to continue to play on a national stage. Then when the ACC inevitably gets broken up and absorbed by the BIG or SEC, GT will have a direct competitor in Stanford. Both high academic schools in larger metro areas with serviceable teams. However, Stanford will have the upper hand because they already have other teams in the BIG that would need to fill out a West Coast pod. We on the other hand will be surrounded by a bunch of rabid SEC teams and no incentive for the SEC to take us.

Why not go ahead and kill Stanford now?
 
JJacket said:
And no one, and I mean NO ONE, in ATL gives a öööö about GT right now.

The NCAA has attempted to kill one football program in history, SMU. They have a decent stadium that looks like it was built with future expansion in mind. Having a foothold in Texas helps the ACC.
Click to expand...

"And no one, and I mean NO ONE, in ATL gives a öööö about GT right now."

I do not disagree. How could I? I mean, there's a reason that they keep consigning us to Bally TV Hell.

But the post I responded to acted like admitting SMU was going to get the ACC all these Dallas market eyeballs. Uh, no.
 
smokey_wasp said:


This has been my thought, too. Pre-filling spots instead of scrambling to back-fill.
Click to expand...


Surely the contract language allows the ACC to refuse any such renegotiation that is not in their favor, with the only remedy for EPSN would be to cancel the remaining portion of the contract.

I'm no lawyer but I have been negotiating contracts for 20+ years and no one in their right mind should sign a contract that allows the terms to be renegotiated without a termination clause that would allow either party out if certain conditions occur.
 
coit said:
Surely the contract language allows the ACC to refuse any such renegotiation that is not in their favor, with the only remedy for EPSN would be to cancel the remaining portion of the contract.

I'm no lawyer but I have been negotiating contracts for 20+ years and no one in their right mind should sign a contract that allows the terms to be renegotiated without a termination clause that would allow either party out if certain conditions occur.
Click to expand...
There are always out clauses in contracts.
 
1982Jacket said:
"And no one, and I mean NO ONE, in ATL gives a öööö about GT right now."

I do not disagree. How could I? I mean, there's a reason that they keep consigning us to Bally TV Hell.

But the post I responded to acted like admitting SMU was going to get the ACC all these Dallas market eyeballs. Uh, no.
Click to expand...
I like SMU because SMU has money. I think they are still building from the ruins the NCAA made of their program.

Remember, at one point, they wanted CPJ, and were reportedly going to pay him MORE per year than us, but he ultimately chose GT because he sincerely felt he could win a national championship here.

And we were a LOT closer to a natty in 2014 than most folks realize
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top