Expansion

stinger78 said:
No quibble about the effectiveness of the GOR, it’s the length of the contract that is the issue. ESPN knows no ACC team can leave for a long time as they’re in a relatively new deal, so there is no incentive to renegotiate. The only way out may be through expanding the conference and forcing a look-in. If they can get Stanford, Cal, and SMU in, that adds CA and TX to the conference - the two most populous states. It might make a look-in profitable for the conference.
Click to expand...

The other problem with the long contract is the look-in option may still be kind of a problem for us if the way the contract work is that we are negotiating with only ESPN.
 
stinger78 said:
Maybe, but who’s going to tell them that?
Click to expand...

The rest of the ACC. Personally, I’d leave out UL too. Not that there is anything wrong with their athletics, they are just sort of an outlier from the rest of the league.
 
stinger78 said:
No quibble about the effectiveness of the GOR, it’s the length of the contract that is the issue. ESPN knows no ACC team can leave for a long time as they’re in a relatively new deal, so there is no incentive to renegotiate. The only way out may be through expanding the conference and forcing a look-in. If they can get Stanford, Cal, and SMU in, that adds CA and TX to the conference - the two most populous states. It might make a look-in profitable for the conference.
Click to expand...
FWIW, these are the average attendance figures from 2022 for the three schools;
SMU; 24,000
Cal; 38,000
Stanford; 29,000
I am racking my brain trying to figure out how these programs strengthen the ACC
 
I still don’t see any downside.

Option 1: blow up the ACC, go to the B1G.

Oops, didn’t work. Looks like will have to go to…

Option 2: stay in a crappy ACC but FSU, Clemson, and UNC are gone and now we’ve got Stanford, Cal, and SMU to deal with.

A failed explosion gets you to the same spot, just faster. Got to risk it for the biscuit. Go B1G or go home.
 
verdi said:
Cal and Stanford are desperate. Please don’t offer them full membership.

Offer them some scammy affiliate memberships for a few years and profit from it. Humiliate them in some way. For instance, force them to get rid of the stupid tree mascot to assert dominance.

Use the profits to alleviate the revenue gap.

This isn’t the time for niceties. This is war.
Click to expand...

They all laughed. They all jeered. But nay, we were fighting. The ACC was fighting.

We are going to win. ACC unite! Genius moves being made. Big!
 
ScionOfSouthland said:
I still don’t see any downside.

Option 1: blow up the ACC, go to the B1G.

Oops, didn’t work. Looks like will have to go to…

Option 2: stay in a crappy ACC but FSU, Clemson, and UNC are gone and now we’ve got Stanford, Cal, and SMU to deal with.

A failed explosion gets you to the same spot, just faster. Got to risk it for the biscuit. Go B1G or go home.
Click to expand...
You hit on the point. A bunch of people on here want to lambaste FSU and Clemson for being proactive. Nothing may come of any of this, but what would it hurt for the decision makers at GT to show they are proactive as well?
 
donsue said:
FWIW, these are the average attendance figures from 2022 for the three schools;
SMU; 24,000
Cal; 38,000
Stanford; 29,000
I am racking my brain trying to figure out how these programs strengthen the ACC
Click to expand...
In the old world of college football, they don’t. Because current financial models are built off of potential TV viewership, adding both Texas and California viewers into the ACCN and broadcasts bumps up the advertising fees ESPN/Disney can charge. Part of those dollars falls into conference.
 
stinger78 said:
In the old world of college football, they don’t. Because current financial models are built off of potential TV viewership, adding both Texas and California viewers into the ACCN and broadcasts bumps up the advertising fees ESPN/Disney can charge. Part of those dollars falls into conference.
Click to expand...
I would like to see the numbers on how SMU football moves the needle in Dallas. I promise you it is minuscule. The same for Cal in the Bay area
 
donsue said:
I would like to see the numbers on how SMU football moves the needle in Dallas. I promise you it is minuscule. The same for Cal in the Bay area
Click to expand...
We know. A few of y'all have been harping on it
 
donsue said:
I would like to see the numbers on how SMU football moves the needle in Dallas. I promise you it is minuscule. The same for Cal in the Bay area
Click to expand...
1693353788457.png
 
ScionOfSouthland said:
Got to risk it for the biscuit. Go B1G or go home.
Click to expand...


How do “we” know that GT hasn’t tried to contact the B1G and was told no thanks?

GT to the B1G only makes sense with a southern group of schools. Don’t think that GT has much stand alone value right now.
 
donsue said:
I would like to see the numbers on how SMU football moves the needle in Dallas. I promise you it is minuscule. The same for Cal in the Bay area
Click to expand...
Granted, not huge TV stock, and it would be better to be talking about Oklahoma or Oregon rather than SMU and Cal. However, there are just no big-name programs still out there. It's either add teams like that or stand pat.
 
Second report I've seen that "the votes still aren't there" for the Calford Express.

 
Why not think outside the box here, any way we can sign some Russian schools? Get Putin involved. Many rubles to be had. Only game in town on state run TV. Add sponsors, change name to ACCKGB. Profit.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top