SMU to ACC?

Ramblin' Dan said:
SMU and Tulane would satisfy me as a conference survival mechanism :dunno: . Such a move would certainly make more sense than going after Stanford and Cal. And I'll always say "öööö no" to UConn.
Click to expand...

I'm sorry but adding SMU and Tulane to me is no different that adding East Carolina and La Tech, just an act of desperation by the ACC to expand. Even adding the likes of Stanford, Cal, Oregon St., and Wash. St. don't excite me much. Maybe if the ACC adding Stanford got ND to join fully that would sort of be worth it. I still think the ACC missed the boat when we didn't add UCF while poaching the B12 when it was down. If we are down to poaching the American Conference it is just sad. Maybe we should add MTSU and UAB while we are on a roll.
 
JJacket said:
Reminds you of my ex wife?
Click to expand...
27EB1C8F-2D3E-4AB9-845A-01D4E624718C.jpeg
 
aeromech said:
I'm sorry but adding SMU and Tulane to me is no different that adding East Carolina and La Tech, just an act of desperation by the ACC to expand. Even adding the likes of Stanford, Cal, Oregon St., and Wash. St. don't excite me much. Maybe if the ACC adding Stanford got ND to join fully that would sort of be worth it. I still think the ACC missed the boat when we didn't add UCF while poaching the B12 when it was down. If we are down to poaching the American Conference it is just sad. Maybe we should add MTSU and UAB while we are on a roll.
Click to expand...
Except that they are both in major media markets, each have a rich history, Tulane was just in an NY6 bowl, and SMU literally has $Texas, yes exactly the same.

If the only thing holding SMU and their donors back is being in a P5, I say let's get crazy and give the pony express the opportunity to upset the apple cart
 
G776T said:
Except that they are both in major media markets, each have a rich history, Tulane was just in an NY6 bowl, and SMU literally has $Texas, yes exactly the same.

If the only thing holding SMU and their donors back is being in a P5, I say let's get crazy and give the pony express the opportunity to upset the apple cart
Click to expand...
SMU willing to give up 5 years revenue to get in ACC

 
WREKedinTexas said:
SMU willing to give up 5 years revenue to get in ACC

Click to expand...

This is exactly the type of gamble the acc needs if it truly is a dead man walking, and it comes with little risk if the acc doesn't have to pay them for 5 years. If they bring back past glory then the ACC is stronger, if they don't, who cares, the acc was dead anyway.

Stanford and cal are known commodities and will do nothing long term for the acc (although they would make it by far the strongest non football conference, if that matters), SMU is a cheap lottery ticket
 
G776T said:
Except that they are both in major media markets, each have a rich history, Tulane was just in an NY6 bowl, and SMU literally has $Texas, yes exactly the same.

If the only thing holding SMU and their donors back is being in a P5, I say let's get crazy and give the pony express the opportunity to upset the apple cart
Click to expand...
meh, tulane is arguably better football program, but stanford and cal still get lot more media coverage.
 
California and Texas are two of the biggest tv markets in the country! TV probably pays for these teams on their own. I would take Tulane if they committed to bigtime football again, and then we'd have a great travel destination too. Then I'd look for one more school to connect and make them all the "west". (I had hoped that we could ink Utah.)

Oakland lost their NFL team, I think there is opportunity for Cal and Stan to increase their fan base.

I also think there is a chance that Tech ends up in a depleted ACC and at that point should become an 8-12 school conference. Stanford would be an awesome addition, Cal too. College football is depleting weaker teams now. It is not clear if Tech gets the big time invite, or have to deal with what Stanford is dealing with. We should double down on a like minded, smaller conference for the future.

There is also a slim chance that ND gets nudged into the ACC, this would help.
 
G776T said:
This is exactly the type of gamble the acc needs if it truly is a dead man walking, and it comes with little risk if the acc doesn't have to pay them for 5 years. If they bring back past glory then the ACC is stronger, if they don't, who cares, the acc was dead anyway.

Stanford and cal are known commodities and will do nothing long term for the acc (although they would make it by far the strongest non football conference, if that matters), SMU is a cheap lottery ticket
Click to expand...

I guess if we end up staying in the ACC, then I guess it is better to be in an ACC with Stanford & Cal. ACC may want to add some of Wash. St., Oregon St, and/or San Diego St. as well to make a western pod. SMU doesn't excite me (as in I don't care about a GT vs. SMU matchup); but as a free lottery ticket I guess that makes it interesting for the ACC. Are there any other interesting wildcard teams for up for grabs? Memphis? Navy? Fresno? UNLV?
 
GT needs to go all in on an SEC invite. It’s slightly less ludicrous than adding SMU, Cal, and Stanford…three programs that bring absolutely nothing to the ACC under modern rules. nobody gives a öööö about academics in conference athletics anymore. It is what it is.

and if I understand correctly, Notre Dame is a conference voting member yet they keep all their TV money. Talk about a terrible deal for the conference and win for Notre Dame. ACC is the BlackBerry of athletic conferences….once promising but now irrelevant.
 
Make this deal work. SMU adds without paying. Stanford and Cal are quality institutions. I hate the geography but we need to add some teams in case of defections. It needs to be at least revenue neutral. Stanford and Cal I think have little leverage for arguing no haircut in payout.
 
79tech said:
Make this deal work. SMU adds without paying. Stanford and Cal are quality institutions. I hate the geography but we need to add some teams in case of defections. It needs to be at least revenue neutral. Stanford and Cal I think have little leverage for arguing no haircut in payout.
Click to expand...
See here's the thing, the bolded doesn't actually matter to anyone paying the money anymore.
 
CornerBlitz said:
GT needs to go all in on an SEC invite. It’s slightly less ludicrous than adding SMU, Cal, and Stanford…three programs that bring absolutely nothing to the ACC under modern rules. nobody gives a öööö about academics in conference athletics anymore. It is what it is.

and if I understand correctly, Notre Dame is a conference voting member yet they keep all their TV money. Talk about a terrible deal for the conference and win for Notre Dame. ACC is the BlackBerry of athletic conferences….once promising but now irrelevant.
Click to expand...
While I agree that GT should be in the SEC (never should have left in the first place) what value add does GT bring to the table currently?

Before you ask that question about FSU and Clemson, keep in mind the TV numbers, stadium size, etc both those schools bring to the table.

In a perfect world GT would be a part of the SEC’s expansion, but GT is more suited for the B1G or B12. Both leagues present a much better overall football league compared to the current ACC. BC, Duke, Syracuse, UVA, Miami, Wake don’t generally come close to filling the stands. Boring environments to watch games in person or on TV. Add Louisville and VT who don’t always sell out now.

Same can’t be said for a majority of current and future B1G or B12 stadiums. Atmosphere does help the perception of a school and league overall.
 
USCJacket said:
While I agree that GT should be in the SEC (never should have left in the first place) what value add does GT bring to the table currently?

Before you ask that question about FSU and Clemson, keep in mind the TV numbers, stadium size, etc both those schools bring to the table.

In a perfect world GT would be a part of the SEC’s expansion, but GT is more suited for the B1G or B12. Both leagues present a much better overall football league compared to the current ACC. BC, Duke, Syracuse, UVA, Miami, Wake don’t generally come close to filling the stands. Boring environments to watch games in person or on TV. Add Louisville and VT who don’t always sell out now.

Same can’t be said for a majority of current and future B1G or B12 stadiums. Atmosphere does help the perception of a school and league overall.
Click to expand...

I don't think GT to the SEC is ever gonna happen and I am not convinced it should.
 
smokey_wasp said:
I don't think GT to the SEC is ever gonna happen and I am not convinced it should.
Click to expand...
The only way it could possibly happen is to block the B1G from having a toehold in Atlanta. So, whether someone prefers the SEC or B1G for Tech is irrelevant to what that person should want the Hill to be doing right now. Courting the B1G for an invite is the only way forward for either goal.
 
After really thinking about it the SEC should add GT, FSU and Clemson. All this market stuff will play out over time. It would also help them to get into Virginia and North Carolina. Really the thing needed is the matchups. If GT can get to an O’Leary or early Johnson level then they provide that with many former SEC foes. It’s actually what made the Sec what it is today.
 
KrazieJacket said:
After really thinking about it the SEC should add GT, FSU and Clemson. All this market stuff will play out over time. It would also help them to get into Virginia and North Carolina. Really the thing needed is the matchups. If GT can get to an O’Leary or early Johnson level then they provide that with many former SEC foes. It’s actually what made the Sec what it is today.
Click to expand...

I agree. Keep us in a regional conference (SEC) where we have natural rivalries and for travel purposes. In all honesty, FB is strongest in the Southeast, besides a handful of teams in the BIG. Or, stay in the ACC. Without F$U and Clemson, the ACC is just another second tier conference unless ND comes in to save the day and joins in FB. I am not a fan of us going to the BIG. That's like being in a pre-NFL conference that crosses the continent. Makes about as much sense as when the Falcons were in the NFC West back in the day.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top