ACC on life support, 7 members getting ready to pull the plug

Deep Creek said:
More people watch brand named teams like Texas, USC, Nebraska, etal even if they AREN'T ranked. And they do so at a higher rate than teams like Cal, Baylor, Purdue, Miss State, etal even if those teams ARE ranked.
Click to expand...

Sometimes but look at TCU's numbers this year, I bet it was higher than average, especially towards end of year.

Typically USC and Texas started the season with a lot of hype and higher ranks and got views until they lost 2-3 games. They have been far more competitive and visible than Miami or many of the ACC teams that I described.

Texas was 10-4 just 3-4 seasons ago and finished in top 10. Even this past season, they finished ranked. They played in the National Title in 2009 (that isn't as long ago as you think).

USC won a Conference Title in last 6-7 years and has typically been ranked most seasons in that span. If you posted both programs AP ranking information, I think you will see that in most of the past 10-15 seasons, they have been ranked at least 1-2 weeks every year and for most, even half or more of the year.
 
WhosYourDawggy said:
What the ACC needs to do is figure out how to make their product better so that ESPN would want to renegotiate. The only want to do that that I can think of is to merge with the PAC. The ACC-PAC can then offer a somewhat better product, get more money, and reduce the length of the GOR.
Click to expand...
When you merge two mediocre conferences together doesn't that just make it a bigger mediocre conference?
 
Volbound1700 said:
USC won a Conference Title in last 6-7 years and has typically been ranked most seasons in that span. If you posted both programs AP ranking information, I think you will see that in most of the past 10-15 seasons, they have been ranked at least 1-2 weeks every year and for most, even half or more of the year.
Click to expand...
You are missing my point. Schools like Texas and USC get good viewership regardless of their quality of play. Nebraska is a good example. They've had terrible years lately and still got higher viewership numbers than higher ranked teams that aren't "brands".
 
Deep Creek said:
When you merge two mediocre conferences together doesn't that just make it a bigger mediocre conference?
Click to expand...
It does, but it also does a couple things:

1. It likely changes the situation enough that the existing media deal has to be re-negotiated. That is what the SEC is arguing with ESPN about ... we added OU and TX, and we are going to 9 IC games. That changes enough you have to re-negotiate.

2. It would add some more exciting games. Not much, but some.

3. It opens up the West time slot to ESPN if they stay in the game with the ACC-PAC.

4. It allows them to shorten the length of the deal. They still need to get better for the next deal to be better.

5. It may allow them to have a shorter GOR. Haven't really thought through all that.
 
Deep Creek said:
You are missing my point. Schools like Texas and USC get good viewership regardless of their quality of play. Nebraska is a good example. They've had terrible years lately and still got higher viewership numbers than higher ranked teams that aren't "brands".
Click to expand...
Texas is the gold standard. They literally are the most valuable CFB team there is, yet they haven't won shit for a long time.
 
WhosYourDawggy said:
Texas is the gold standard. They literally are the most valuable CFB team there is, yet they haven't won shit for a long time.
Click to expand...
And don't forget.
If Texas Coaches didn't have Oklahoma training, they would have exactly ZERO National Championships.

Wrap your head around that.
 
Sometimes people Hate your team because you have beat their ass so much.

Sometimes people Hate your team because of the success the past 75 years.

Sometimes people Hate your team because their fans run their mouth non stop and suck most of the time. Looking at you Texas


And sometimes people Hate your team because of your fight song. Because they hear it non stop every time you score.









 
Last edited:
That Fight Song is a money maker


Which ACC fight songs do you hate.

We'll wait.
 
Look, VT is not currently where we were 20 or even 10 years ago. Football is cyclical for the most part and while down now, there is a passion to bring it back.

I think that word and commitment to football, "passion", can hold weight over the long term. However, with the upheaval of conferences in the recent past, no one is willing to wait for a resurgence.

VT is certainly a football school, but we'll never have the recruiting power of the "blue bloods". Being in the top 25 consistently is not the same as being in the top 10. So while VT could make a run every now and then, we just don't have the backing to be a contender each year.

That has to be considered with any conference alignment. Academics aren't precluding us necessarily, even if other schools in consideration are a better choice, but what additional athletic/ media revenue can we add is the biggest issue.


I personally think the ACC is a great fit for VT and if it were to dissolve, then I would hope we could be attractive to the SEC or BIG, but we're not going to be a first thought. Just the nature of the beast and I'm realistically happy with making the top 25... hell, a bowl game recently, competing for a conference championship, and maybe getting into the playoff where anything could happen. I'm still a Hokie through and through.
 
wildturkey said:
Yeah, no. The conference is dead. It's no coincidence the number of schools involved is the number needed to break the GOR and dissolve the conference. It's also extremely telling that UNC is one of the schools involved when historically, UNC has been the #1 defender of backing the ACC and its brand. If a school like that is in the talks, then the situation is no longer viable. They aren't on board. The unequal revenue sharing is just a band aid on a massive bleeding wound. It's only a matter of time now. Whether its actually later this summer, a year from now, 2 years for now it makes little difference. There will be major movement within the near future and they damn sure won't be waiting out the run of the contract. There's too much money on the table for the schools and for the P2
Click to expand...
lol what they going to do? they have 8 malcontents? 4 schools go the BiG which drives down it's per school payout? Same as with the SEC taking 2 of them?

Ehh they might not like it but they are stuck.. BC, Syracuse, WF, Pitt..louisville and Duke.. all have greener pastures elsewhere? If I'm them, let the schools who want to walk..walk but make sure you get that sweet money
 
Cobrabit said:
VT is certainly a football school, but we'll never have the recruiting power of the "blue bloods". Being in the top 25 consistently is not the same as being in the top 10. So while VT could make a run every now and then, we just don't have the backing to be a contender each year.
Click to expand...
From someone whose team was top 10 most of the time under Richt and is now top 2, top 3 with a few top 1s under Smart, I can tell you there is a huge difference between 1,2,3 and 4-10. It's actually pretty amazing. I followed recruiting way to closely under each coach. I pinch myself daily.

I've posted here often that I am for parity in CFB even if it isn't in my school's best interest. I hope that the transfer portal, NIL, and expanded CFP will bring that about. I also want a threepeat, so I ain't living what I am believing.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top