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

[TaikoTiger]

And honestly I hope you guys don't for selfish reasons. I still harbor hope if a few ACC schools bounce that we can get invited to take a place. (Provided the situation is safe) Honestly though you guys will probably get that SEC invite.

Believe me, nothing I want more for CFB is to go back to how it's been with regional conferences like it was 20 years ago with the Big East, A&M/Mizz in Big12, and etc.

As it is right now, my best guess for FSU / Clem landing spot is the BIG. Biggest reason is unfortunately FSU & Clem will not get an invite from SEC because of Fear as stated below

Explain why they would want another team in the SEC better than them?

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:
- They are likely losses to 80-90% of the SEC teams who already don't want more losses - see the 8th game scenario.

Re-read the UF President's statement. It's very carefully worded. There is no way that can be read in any way to say that they would bring in two losses to two-thirds of the leagues.

It's not silly at all ... it's basically what they said when they didn't approve the 9th game. They know a 9th game means they will add a loss more than they will add a win.

Most teams in the SEC are glad to get a bowl game. Add a 9th game and bring in FSU and Clemson and many of those teams stop getting to bowl games. All of them are now 2 more teams down the pecking order with little chance at the CFP. Adding those teams means you get one of them every other year. That's an extra loss per year for most of the teams. Add the 9th game and now they get 2 more losses in most years.

 

[WhosYourDawggy]

Believe me, nothing I want more for CFB is to go back to how it's been with regional conferences like it was 20 years ago with the Big East, A&M/Mizz in Big12, and etc.

As it is right now, my best guess for FSU / Clem landing spot is the BIG. Biggest reason is unfortunately FSU & Clem will not get an invite from SEC because of Fear as stated below

I am not sure the word I would use is "Fear." UGA doesn't fear Clemson, but we probably don't see the value of adding you to the SEC. Hell, we play you guys five times in the next ten years. Bama, Texas, OU, LSU ... none of them fear you. For everyone else, they are just being practical. Based on recent results, you would more likely be a loss to many SEC teams. If you don't provide additive value, bringing you in makes no sense.

What's interesting to me is that you guys think you would walk into the B1G or SEC and still be the Clemson you have been the last decade. When you suddenly have to play AU, UA, UGA, LSU, UT, UTjr, OU, ATM, and OM, I can assure you that losses will follow. Being in the ACC has been a primary reason for your success, along with two generational QBs. I think you would/will struggle in the other two leagues. You'll have success, but it won't be like what you have had the last decade. There is a reason UF, UTjr, ATM, AU, and even UGA (under Richt) have had their ups and downs. It's just tougher sledding in the SEC.

I can't possible imagine that other than the money you would prefer the B1G. Games in Nebraska, Minnesota, even Oregon and Washington. That is going to suck.

 

[Deep Creek]

Colorado has destroyed the interest in their football program by running a terrible operation for decades. If the Deion experiment fails, they're right back to the bottom.

Arizona and ASU are huge underachievers. Arizona had a nice year last year but in the big picture they're a below average program that doesn't register on the national stage.

Utah has come up from the G5 ranks and passed all of them in less than 15 years. They're the rising program in that region.

None of what you stated is wrong. I agree with all of it. Not arguing one bit of it.

Again, recent quality of football isn't the deciding factor. How many eyeballs they can draw from now to eternity is. No?

 

[Deep Creek]

You may be right about UF not wanting FSU. I'm sure Aggy was the same way with Texas. How did that end? With Texas being unanimously approved by all the SEC members. Why? Because it made them more money. That's the issue. It's always been the issue.

Wait a damn minute. You say it is about money in this case but it is about quality football when it comes to Utah. Indian speak out of both sides of mouth.

 

[rfjeff9]

FWIW, UGA will be AAU in the not far off future. The only thing holding us back was the medical school angle that knocked Nebraska out. UGA just announced the opening of a medical school in Athens.

You know what's crazy - I thought UGA already had a medical school. Maybe I am remembering pharmacy.

So in GA, was Emory and Mercer the only options?

 

[rfjeff9]

If they can afford it, Clemson would be smart to stay in the ACC and be the football king. Get in the CFP every year. I could really see Clemson getting into the B1G or SEC and then suddenly dropping back to pre-Dabo levels.

Stepping into the Big Boys conference and suddenly finding you are the 4th or 5th best team when you had been #1 in ACC for a decade can't be fun.

Clemson is trending down a bit and FSU is on the rise again. VT/GT are looking better, but not ready to challenge Clemson yet. Never can tell about Louisville, they can be dangerous. NCSU could upset anybody in ACC on any given Saturday, especially in Raleigh.

Clemson can enjoy competitive longevity in ACC and with a ACC champ tie in to the playoff, they are still sitting pretty especially if FSU leaves. For now anyway. I'd sit it out for a few more years. If I am Clemson, do I jump if invited? For the money, yes. But panic in FSU fashion now?

No.

 

[Wild Turkey]

You know what's crazy - I thought UGA already had a medical school. Maybe I am remembering pharmacy.

So in GA, was Emory and Mercer the only options?

Most states only have 1 or 2 med schools and Georgia also has Moorehouse.

There are even fewer Vet Schools as some states have none like Kentucky. A ton of Kentucky money goes into Auburn's vet school, especially in the equine programs.

 

[WhosYourDawggy]

You know what's crazy - I thought UGA already had a medical school. Maybe I am remembering pharmacy.

So in GA, was Emory and Mercer the only options?

A lot of people think that. The Medical School of Georgia is located in Augusta and is not related to UGA and is not run by the Regent System. This will be a true UGA Med School. It's very exciting and will be big for not only UGA but also Athens.

 

[WhosYourDawggy]

Most states only have 1 or 2 med schools and Georgia also has Moorehouse.

There are even fewer Vet Schools as some states have none like Kentucky. A ton of Kentucky money goes into Auburn's vet school, especially in the equine programs.

Hard to believe Kentucky doesn't have a vet school dedicated to large animals what with their horse industry.

My best UGA travel buddy's daughter just got into UGA Vet school. It ain't easy. She had to wait 2 years, retake exams, work for a vet.

 

[rfjeff9]

A lot of people think that. The Medical School of Georgia is located in Augusta and is not related to UGA and is not run by the Regent System. This will be a true UGA Med School. It's very exciting and will be big for not only UGA but also Athens.

Dang that's right. There IS something in Augusta. I just conflated it with being part of UGA.

 

[Wild Turkey]

Hard to believe Kentucky doesn't have a vet school dedicated to large animals what with their horse industry.

My best UGA travel buddy's daughter just got into UGA Vet school. It ain't easy. She had to wait 2 years, retake exams, work for a vet.

I honestly don't get it because they are predicting a vet shortage in the next 10 years and that prices for care are going to go way up. You would think they would be expanding these programs and getting kids through.

I bet there are a lot of kids who considered a vet track and learned they may have to sit for 2 years and did something else. My brother's dream was to go to Duke's law school and he got in but would have had to wait for a year so he looked at Vandy and Texas but chose Texas because it was about 50K cheaper than Vandy. It worked out for him.

 

[duckboy33]

Wait a damn minute. You say it is about money in this case but it is about quality football when it comes to Utah. Indian speak out of both sides of mouth.

Yes. There's a huge correlation between quality of play and TV ratings. Save me the response where you point out the exception.

 

[OlyDuck]

What's interesting to me is that you guys think you would walk into the B1G or SEC and still be the Clemson you have been the last decade. When you suddenly have to play AU, UA, UGA, LSU, UT, UTjr, OU, ATM, and OM, I can assure you that losses will follow.

This has always been whats wrong with arguments about playing in the SEC and it being so hard.

No one plays this slate.
I will be surprised if any team will ever play this slate.
Then you play on notions like naming A&M and Auburn as part of this when they just went 12-13 and 11-14 the last 2 years. but naming them in and among UGA and Bama and their history makes them somehow part of the upper echelon of the SEC meanwhile Missouri went 17-8 the last 2 but they dont have that name history.

 

[WhosYourDawggy]

This has always been whats wrong with arguments about playing in the SEC and it being so hard.

No one plays this slate.
I will be surprised if any team will ever play this slate.
Then you play on notions like naming A&M and Auburn as part of this when they just went 12-13 and 11-14 the last 2 years. but naming them in and among UGA and Bama and their history makes them somehow part of the upper echelon of the SEC meanwhile Missouri went 17-8 the last 2 but they dont have that name history.

I thought it was self-evident that I was simply listing the top teams in the SEC, not saying that you play them all. That said, you play at least half of them per year. Let's assume that Clemson picks up USCjr and FSU as their annual partners in a 2+7+7 format for 18 teams.

Odd years:
USCjr, FSU, | AU, LSU, OM, UT, UGA, Ky, Vandy

Even years:
USCjr, FSU, | UA, ATM, UTjr, OU, UF, Arky, Mizzou

Can you now see the difference between that and an ACC schedule? LOL.

Yes, I included Auburn and ATM, along with UF and UTjr. CFB is cyclical, and you know that. Those teams will be up and down as will be UGA and Bama eventually. But those teams are still far tougher outs than anyone in the ACC. C'mon, we all understand the cyclical nature.

How would Oregon do playing that schedule?

 

[TaikoTiger]

I am not sure the word I would use is "Fear." UGA doesn't fear Clemson, but we probably don't see the value of adding you to the SEC. Hell, we play you guys five times in the next ten years. Bama, Texas, OU, LSU ... none of them fear you. For everyone else, they are just being practical. Based on recent results, you would more likely be a loss to many SEC teams. If you don't provide additive value, bringing you in makes no sense.

What's interesting to me is that you guys think you would walk into the B1G or SEC and still be the Clemson you have been the last decade. When you suddenly have to play AU, UA, UGA, LSU, UT, UTjr, OU, ATM, and OM, I can assure you that losses will follow. Being in the ACC has been a primary reason for your success, along with two generational QBs. I think you would/will struggle in the other two leagues. You'll have success, but it won't be like what you have had the last decade. There is a reason UF, UTjr, ATM, AU, and even UGA (under Richt) have had their ups and downs. It's just tougher sledding in the SEC.

It's the reality of being in today's P2, everyone is taking more losses then what they had before.
It doesn't just apply to Clemson

I can't possible imagine that other than the money you would prefer the B1G.

I know you're a smart person. You're not turning away $50M+ either.
OU, UT, UCLA, USC, Ore, Wash didn't turn away the money, why should Clemson?

 

[ralphiewvu]

ND just got AAU.

 

[Deep Creek]

Yes. There's a huge correlation between quality of play and TV ratings. Save me the response where you point out the exception.

Maybe 50% of the time. Shitty teams get good ratings when they play name brands like Ohio State, Bama, etc. And it ain’t because of their quality of play.

 

[duckboy33]

Maybe 50% of the time. Shitty teams get good ratings when they play name brands like Ohio State, Bama, etc. And it ain’t because of their quality of play.

The name brands are typically the best teams. That's the point. Again, save me the exceptions to the rule.

 

[Wild Turkey]

This has always been whats wrong with arguments about playing in the SEC and it being so hard.

No one plays this slate.
I will be surprised if any team will ever play this slate.
Then you play on notions like naming A&M and Auburn as part of this when they just went 12-13 and 11-14 the last 2 years. but naming them in and among UGA and Bama and their history makes them somehow part of the upper echelon of the SEC meanwhile Missouri went 17-8 the last 2 but they dont have that name history.

Maybe you should keep Auburn out of your mouth until you actually beat them. Remember we were a muffed punt away from beating Bama last year so Auburn is a dangerous team no matter the circumstances.

 

[WhosYourDawggy]

Maybe you should keep Auburn out of your mouth until you actually beat them. Remember we were a muffed punt away from beating Bama last year so Auburn is a dangerous team no matter the circumstances.

Yeah, when the people talk about how terrible UF, Auburn, Tenn are they don't understand that all of them recruit better than 90% of the other teams in CFB. Teams like Kentucky, Ole Miss, USCjr, and even MSU are in the top 35% of recruiting. They have better players than almost all of the teams in the PAC/ACC/B12. If you played them year in and year out, you'd lose your share of games against them. Some of these teams coming into he B1G and the SEC are going to be in for a rude awakening when the find out the midling teams in the P2 aren't like the midling teams in their old conferences.

Shit, we are 19-3 against Auburn in the last 22 games ... and they are still a tough out, especially @Auburn. You can't ever take that game lightly.