Here we go again. Conference expansion

LaFlavor said:
As opposed to the Wake vs. Syracuse matchup? You could cherry pick boring matchups in any conference.
Click to expand...

No öööö. However, the SEC has a higher concentration of teams that create compelling matchups. Why would you dilute that with extra teams (ACC) that don't create good matchups.
 
Olgoldandwhie said:
That’s the reason, be careful what you wish for.
Click to expand...
I don't think the mutt fans are overwhelmingly in favor of f expansion, at least the ones I know. I think they realize their road to the SECC is about to get rougher than the meat of their schedule being Kentucky, Vandy, USuCk, Missouri, and Tennessee
 
05GTCorndog said:
No öööö. However, the SEC has a higher concentration of teams that create compelling matchups. Why would you dilute that with extra teams (ACC) that don't create good matchups.
Click to expand...

I don't follow. I'm talking about the acc and b1g. Not the sec.
 
LaFlavor said:
I don't follow. I'm talking about the acc and b1g. Not the sec.
Click to expand...

It doesn't matter which conference it is. You dilute the meaningful games. Even a öööö matchup in the BigTen like Indiana - Michigan State means more than Wake Forest - Michigan State.

How do you think a merger between the two conferences would actually generate more revenue on a per-school basis?
 
05GTCorndog said:
No öööö. However, the SEC has a higher concentration of teams that create compelling matchups. Why would you dilute that with extra teams (ACC) that don't create good matchups.
Click to expand...

SEC has compelling matchups in the southeast at least. Remember that Army vs. Navy game you poo'ed because it only drew 4.9 M viewers? What you failed to tell people is the LSU vs UF only drew 4.6 M viewers on the same day in the prime time slot. Alabama vs. Arkansas only drew 2.6 M earlier that day. UNC vs Miami drew 3.3 M in the same time slot as Army vs. Navy,. I mean, who on here would think that the following week the ACC Championship would draw 1 M more views than the SEC Championship?

My point is that what is a compelling matchup depends tremendously on where you live in the country even when we've had ESPN pumping the SEC for over a decade.
 
aeromech said:
SEC has compelling matchups in the southeast at least. Remember that Army vs. Navy game you poo'ed because it only drew 4.9 M viewers? What you failed to tell people is the LSU vs UF only drew 4.6 M viewers on the same day in the prime time slot. Alabama vs. Arkansas only drew 2.6 M earlier that day. UNC vs Miami drew 3.3 M in the same time slot as Army vs. Navy,. I mean, who on here would think that the following week the ACC Championship would draw 1 M more views than the SEC Championship?

My point is that what is a compelling matchup depends tremendously on where you live in the country even when we've had ESPN pumping the SEC for over a decade.
Click to expand...

Army and Navy have one compelling matchup a year and it is entirely based on patriotism and has NOTHING to do with football. Stop using them as an example for anything. They add no value to any conference.
 
05GTCorndog said:
Army and Navy have one compelling matchup a year and it is entirely based on patriotism and has NOTHING to do with football. Stop using them as an example for anything. They add no value to any conference.
Click to expand...
And it is pretty much the only game on when it gets played
 
JJacket said:
And it is pretty much the only game on when it gets played
Click to expand...

It was the highest rated game on the day it only got 4.9 M viewers, higher than a couple to top SEC matchups, that was the point of the post. I'm still waiting on the comparison to mighty Kansas.
 
aeromech said:
It was the highest rated game on the day it only got 4.9 M viewers, higher than a couple to top SEC matchups, that was the point of the post. I'm still waiting on the comparison to mighty Kansas.
Click to expand...
Who cares about F'ing Kansas?

And to another poster's point, it draws because it is Army/Navy. Navy vs Duke would end up with 12 viewers
 
JJacket said:
Who cares about F'ing Kansas?

And to another poster's point, it draws because it is Army/Navy. Navy vs Duke would end up with 12 viewers
Click to expand...

Some poster was arguing they belonged in one of power conferences because of their football fan base.

Navy vs Tulane drew 1.3 M viewers, Navy vs Duke may out draw that. :dunno:
 
Last edited:
aeromech said:
Some poster was arguing they belonged in one of power conferences because of their football fan base.

Navy vs Tulane drew 1.3 M viewers, Navy vs Duke may out draw that. :dunno:
Click to expand...
Nobody gives two öööös about putting Navy in a conference.
 
05GTCorndog said:
Army and Navy have one compelling matchup a year and it is entirely based on patriotism and has NOTHING to do with football. Stop using them as an example for anything. They add no value to any conference.
Click to expand...

You mean Army v Syracuse wouldn’t have the same draw as Army v Navy? I am shocked
 
JJacket said:
Nobody gives two öööös about putting Navy in a conference.
Click to expand...

Adding any of the academies/G5 to the ACC is a clear message the conference is over. First it was basketball, then it tried to straddle football, then it went small ball. At that point it is over and Stansbury needs to be on the phone with the BIG to give them everything they ask for.
 
So many of the suggestions on this thread are laughable. Believe it or not, the ACC doesn't just get to pick any team to add to the conference, and I don't think a less desirable team has ever been kicked out of a conference just because the conference thought they can get something better. The ACC is not going to get rid of Duke or Wake Forest. If the trend is to get to 16 teams or some conference teams are lost, there are going to be some realistic ways to deal with it, and there are some pie-in-the-sky, not likely to happen ways. I don't think anyone considers Army and Navy to be a perfect scenario, but it is very realistic. I'd prefer to keep things the way they are, but the ACC should keep any reasonable ideas on the table.
 
jacket67 said:
So many of the suggestions on this thread are laughable. Believe it or not, the ACC doesn't just get to pick any team to add to the conference, and I don't think a less desirable team has ever been kicked out of a conference just because the conference thought they can get something better. The ACC is not going to get rid of Duke or Wake Forest. If the trend is to get to 16 teams or some conference teams are lost, there are going to be some realistic ways to deal with it, and there are some pie-in-the-sky, not likely to happen ways. I don't think anyone considers Army and Navy to be a perfect scenario, but it is very realistic. I'd prefer to keep things the way they are, but the ACC should keep any reasonable ideas on the table.
Click to expand...

You started out so well by saying that almost all of the suggestions were laughable...but then say adding Army and Navy is very realistic. No, it's not even close to realistic, because math.

The only reasonable expansion options are those that increase the average payout per school. That's it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top