Don't stick a fork in the ACC yet...

The only real question now is what will be the next rumor that has all the youtube closet reditters gleefully predicting a team is jumping from one to another.

I have Washington State amd Oregon State invited to ACC. I mean, why not at this point?
 
WhosYourDawggy said:
Explain why VU, Ky, MU, MSU, OM, USCjr, UF, AU, ATM would want another team in the SEC better than them? And that's assuming that UGA, UT, OU, UA, and LSU are ambivalent. FSU, at best, gets pro rata money, so no one makes more. Scheduling is fucked up. The have to additive CFP value. So, how do you convince that first set of schools to let in another team that is likely to beat them when they get nothing back from it?
Click to expand...

They added Texas and Oklahoma and most SEC teams are not better than them. This is a business. If bringing in FSU makes the SEC more money, they will vote yes. Florida's AD basically said the same thing today. It's common sense.

FSU seems to be trending towards the Big Ten, however.
 
WhosYourDawggy said:
Nonsense. If you settle, you are telling UNC, Clemson, and the others that you need to keep that the GOR can't stand up. All they have to do is file a suit, and you will settle with them. The issues raised by FSU aren't specific to them. Settling is losing for the ACC. All they have to lose is a couple million in fees. That's nothing to a business like that.
Click to expand...

Cool. When the ACC settles, we can revisit this thread.
 
1717029709767.png
 
duckboy33 said:
They added Texas and Oklahoma and most SEC teams are not better than them. This is a business. If bringing in FSU makes the SEC more money, they will vote yes. Florida's AD basically said the same thing today. It's common sense.

FSU seems to be trending towards the Big Ten, however.
Click to expand...
Everyone would have taken Texas and Oklahoma. Ouside of Notre Dame, they were the two most valuable teams available. They approached the SEC and it made sense.

At some point it doesn't make sense. You could see that when the teams voted not to go to the 8th game. Now, we will get to the 8th game once they get more money.

The UF President didn't say what you think he said. He said that they consider any situation and if 3/4 vote for it, it happens. That happens when it's in the best interest of the SEC.

I don't believe the SEC thinks that adding FSU and Clemson is in the best interest of the SEC:

- At best, they gain pro-rata shares, but they won't cause the pro-rata share to go up like Texas and Oklahoma did.
- They have no CFP value the way the CFP shares were determined (that surprised me).
- They provide no new "markets" - UF and USCjr already have done that.
- They aren't Blue Bloods like Texas and OU.
- They are likely losses to 80-90% of the SEC teams who already don't want more losses - see the 8th game scenario.
 
WhosYourDawggy said:
Everyone would have taken Texas and Oklahoma. Ouside of Notre Dame, they were the two most valuable teams available. They approached the SEC and it made sense.

At some point it doesn't make sense. You could see that when the teams voted not to go to the 8th game. Now, we will get to the 8th game once they get more money.

The UF President didn't say what you think he said. He said that they consider any situation and if 3/4 vote for it, it happens. That happens when it's in the best interest of the SEC.

I don't believe the SEC thinks that adding FSU and Clemson is in the best interest of the SEC:

- At best, they gain pro-rata shares, but they won't cause the pro-rata share to go up like Texas and Oklahoma did.
- They have no CFP value the way the CFP shares were determined (that surprised me).
- They provide no new "markets" - UF and USCjr already have done that.
- They aren't Blue Bloods like Texas and OU.
- They are likely losses to 80-90% of the SEC teams who already don't want more losses - see the 8th game scenario.
Click to expand...

There is some truth to what you are saying. I always said "if" the SEC makes more money by bringing in FSU and Clemson, they will do it. I just reject the notion that schools will vote "no" because they see it as 2 more losses. That doesn't matter. If they bring value, they will vote yes. Now if you don't think they bring value to the SEC, that's a different conversation. I think based on their TV ratings, FSU would bring value to the SEC. Clemson is closer to a wash.

It would be fair to point out that FSU and Clemson bring more value to the Big Ten than they do the SEC. The Big Ten wants to expand their footprint into the south east and these are the most valuable brands in the south east outside of the SEC. When (not if) the ACC settles with FSU/Clemson, I'd expect the Big Ten to move quickly to add FSU. My guess is that's how it plays out. I don't think it's going to be a mass exodus from the ACC. I'm sure the SEC would like to move north and add UNC and UVA. However, as we've discussed, UNC exiting the ACC is more complicated than FSU or Clemson. They have to deal with the NC government and NC State. Would the SEC be willing to add NC State just to get UNC? I'm not sure but I'm sure it's not their ideal scenario. I wouldn't be surprised if the SEC waited until they can cleanly add UNC and UVA.
 
I have a hard time thinking the fans of FSU and Clemson would want to join the BIG.
 
outofyourmind said:
I have a hard time thinking the fans of FSU and Clemson would want to join the BIG.
Click to expand...
couple that i've seen on twitter feel the pathway to the CFP isn't as challenging in the BiG compared to the SEC


oh and the money...
 
Had an interesting conversation last night with a guy who usually has some pretty good information and does have some connections and here are some things he said in regards to expansion (these are boosters talking to each other mainly) and I'm going to categorize them:

Comments that are consistent with things I've heard in the past and believe to be true:
- SEC does not want to go more than 20 teams and prefers to stop at 18 (more is not necessarily better and can create problems).
- UNC is the number one target of the SEC and the only prize they really want
- ND will stay independent until they absolutely don't have to and will take a haircut to do it (no surprise to anyone)

Comments that I can believe are PROBABLY true based on things I've heard in the past:
- SEC is NOT interested in FSU and if they break off they will be picked up by the B1G because they want in the Florida market and FOX wants in that market as well
- Sankey will not consider Clemson unless UNC comes with them because they don't want to add just one team
- UNC prefers the SEC option but would like UVA to be their preferred "travel partner" into the conference (long history there)

Comments that I was hearing for the first time and not fully buying:
- UNC does not want Duke in the SEC with them (basically black balling Duke)
- Duke would most likely stay in the ACC or go with other schools to the Big 12.
- SEC may have to take NC State with UNC for the NC legislature to let it happen (that is pretty messy to be honest and not sure it would be worth it at that point but who knows)
- Clemson does not yet have a guaranteed invite to either the B1G or SEC at this point but the SEC would be interested in a UNC and Clemson combo.

My Predictions Based Purely on Gut:
- FSU will eventually get out of the ACC before GOR is up but it will be longer than people think it will be and they will go to the B1G.
- Clemson will make noise but will allow FSU to take lead position and spend their money trying to figure out how to get out of the ACC then make their move if it isn't too expensive. They will be much more conservative with their checkbook than FSU.
- UNC will make noise inside the conference but won't make moves or outside announcements until they know they have an out and won't get blocked by politics.
- The SEC will not get involved until UNC is on the board and would stick with what they have before they expand just to expand.


The B1G will be much more aggressive with expansion than the SEC will be and it will be interesting to see which is the smarter path. The B1G will have the advantage in numbers and geographic influence but will the cost and aggregation offset those advantages? At this point the best move by the SEC is to just be done because personally, I like a UNC/Clemson combo or a UNC/Duke combo (just me personally) but am not fired up at all about UNC/UVA combo or UNC/NCState combo and would pass. I'm on a island but I think having Kentucky, Duke and UNC in the same conference would elevate men's basketball to the top and right now that is the only major sport the SEC is not at the top in. The B1G can add as many teams as they want but if your conference is consistently dominating in football, men's and women's basketball plus baseball and softball and bringing home the hardware that is what matters not how many members you have.
 
Does adding UNC move the needle for SEC enough to go after them, along with one more team, take your pick who. I thought NCSU had a better fanbase and viewership but could be wrong.

I do not see a reason for either conference to add anyone right now in the next few years. Maybe there is some grand number both are going for later, and UNC is the best target left as I don’t think SEC will do Clemson or FSU, it gains them nothing they don't already have. At the same time, UNC isn’t elite on the gridiron but certainly has a basketball following worth having.

As for B1G, I still think that there will be hesitation in just knee jerk adding FSU. I doubt an invite comes for them mostly because they will still be litigating with ACC several more years (and their behavior thus far is not winning them friends in the eye of public perception) and their AAU status is still up in the air, which the B1G Presidents seem to care about quite a bit. FSU research budget is on the low side so will it satisfy BTAA research collaboration? This last may not be a factor because Cal is #2 but B1G already has the best team in that state. Nevertheless, there is a reason John Hopkins joined B1G, and it wasn't Football, it was research. UNC is Top 10.
 
rfjeff9 said:
Does adding UNC move the needle for SEC enough to go after them, along with one more team, take your pick who. I thought NCSU had a better fanbase and viewership but could be wrong.
Click to expand...
That is the question that has been asked over and over and there is no good answer.

On paper no.

However all I can tell you is the consistent information I have been given not only personally from people I trust but also hinted at in articles, interviews and such is that UNC is prize the SEC wants and the reasons I've always heard are:

1. Geographically it fits and wraps up the major southern territory (note the only Southeastern territory that the SEC doesn't not control is North Carolina and Virginia).
2. North Carolina is viewed as a massive market that is untapped as far as college football interest is concerned and the belief is the SEC can change that.
3. UNC's academic reputation
4. Basketball pedigree

When I first started hearing this it made a ton of sense because of how the cable market worked for example Missouri made a ton of sense under the old cable market because it drove revenue in the state if people watch or not. That isn't the case anymore because things have changed dramatically and it really doesn't make sense under the new model that most likely is going to be the future where ratings drive everything.

The only thing I can speculate is that UNC has been a long-term target and the powers that be just don't want to give it up because at that point its the only thing that would make sense meaning egos have entered the equation. To that point I will say what the B1G is doing doesn't make any sense either but I think a lot of that was ego driven as well in response to the SEC adding Texas and Oklahoma.

From the UNC standpoint and politics involved my understanding is that UNC prefers things stay as they are because they weld huge influence in the ACC but economics are making it tough for them to compete with ACC money and again egos are entering the conversation.

At the end of the day we will see what happens.
 
duckboy33 said:
I agree on Stanford. I'm not convinced the door has totally shut on them. I don't think the door is totally shut on Utah either. That's the real reason they have an out for the Big 12 and the reason their coach made the comments that he did. They have P2 aspirations and are on the Big Ten's radar. I'm not saying either will definitely end up in the Big Ten but it's possible.
Click to expand...
Just curious. Other than recent success, why is Utah considered more valuable than Zona, ASU or Colorado? Most of this realignment hasn't been based on recent quality football. It has been based on how much viewership you can bring.
 
Jon Deaux said:
The thing Florida is going to do in the next half century is cash those big SEC checks. They ain't going anywhere. Wouldn't bother me one bit if they did jump. They can take A&M, Mizzu, and South Carolina with them. Then the ACC can keep FSU and Clemson.
Click to expand...
That's what a lot of SEC schools will do. They'll cash 'em without having to perform well. What a deal. Sign me up.
 
duckboy33 said:
They added Texas and Oklahoma and most SEC teams are not better than them. This is a business. If bringing in FSU makes the SEC more money, they will vote yes. Florida's AD basically said the same thing today. It's common sense.

FSU seems to be trending towards the Big Ten, however.
Click to expand...
Ahhh, but most SEC teams think they are better. Haven't you been paying attention. SEC fans have been warning both Texas and OU fans how much more difficult it will be in the SEC. Playing Kentucky and Miss State will be much more difficult than playing Oklahoma State and Texas Tech.
 
outofyourmind said:
I have a hard time thinking the fans of FSU and Clemson would want to join the BIG.
Click to expand...
200.gif
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top