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

outofyourmind said:
I have a hard time thinking the fans of FSU and Clemson would want to join the BIG.
Click to expand...
I went to the last two days of the Big 12 baseball tournament last Friday/Sat at Globe Life. Sat among both OU and OSU fans during the final game Saturday. Started asking them their opinions about OU heading to the SEC. Believe it or not, even the OSU fans agreed OU couldn't afford to turn down the difference in money.

And the topic of "donor fatigue" came up. A couple of OU fans said they hoped OU would stop requesting more donations from them since the SEC revenue would be so much more. A couple of other OU fans told them to "dream on" because they didn't see that happening. In fact, they said it would probably go the other way when revenue sharing with players and if NIL doesn't get some regulations.
 
duckboy33 said:
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.
Click to expand...
I think you vastly underestimate the feelings of the Kentucky, USCjr, MSU, Arky level schools. They have zero chance to win a conference championship or get into the CFP if you add FSU and Clemson. That has to matter at some point. Stop and think about SEC expansion - USCjr and Arkansas were in order to go to divisions in the 90s and have a CCG. Mizzou and ATM were clear linear cable/SECN market grabs. And OU and TX simply landed in their lap. USCjr, Arky, Mizzou, and ATM did not threaten the original Big 6 - AU, UA, UGA, LSU, UF, UTjr. The Big 6 would regularly beat all those newly added schools. TX and OU were something you just had to do as the money was huge ... it corresponded with the new TV contract, the move to "eyeballs" counting, and the CFP expansion. But now, the original SEC teams, and even some of the Big 6 (especially AU, UTjr, and UF), along with the four expansion teams, must look at wins and losses. Adding two more Tier 1 teams will not be attractive to them. Period. And, as I laid out above, they do not bring additive revenue. 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 teams that don't provide additive revenue but two losses to two-thirds of the leagues.

While I still don't get the revenue aspect of UNC/UVa, this may be why people assume the SEC is open to them. Even if they aren't additive but can get pro-rata shares, they are not seen as two more losses. In fact, most teams would see them as two wins.
 
TaikoTiger said:
Most would prefer SEC because proximity to other schools
But reality is we're going to the BIG
Click to expand...
I’m really not trying to get into an argument over this.

But not now nor ever will Clemson get an invite to the B1G.
 
WhosYourDawggy said:
I think you vastly underestimate the feelings of the Kentucky, USCjr, MSU, Arky level schools. They have zero chance to win a conference championship or get into the CFP if you add FSU and Clemson. That has to matter at some point. Stop and think about SEC expansion - USCjr and Arkansas were in order to go to divisions in the 90s and have a CCG. Mizzou and ATM were clear linear cable/SECN market grabs. And OU and TX simply landed in their lap. USCjr, Arky, Mizzou, and ATM did not threaten the original Big 6 - AU, UA, UGA, LSU, UF, UTjr. The Big 6 would regularly beat all those newly added schools. TX and OU were something you just had to do as the money was huge ... it corresponded with the new TV contract, the move to "eyeballs" counting, and the CFP expansion. But now, the original SEC teams, and even some of the Big 6 (especially AU, UTjr, and UF), along with the four expansion teams, must look at wins and losses. Adding two more Tier 1 teams will not be attractive to them. Period. And, as I laid out above, they do not bring additive revenue. 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 teams that don't provide additive revenue but two losses to two-thirds of the leagues.

While I still don't get the revenue aspect of UNC/UVa, this may be why people assume the SEC is open to them. Even if they aren't additive but can get pro-rata shares, they are not seen as two more losses. In fact, most teams would see them as two wins.
Click to expand...
UNC is a definite win for the top half of SEC. UVA is a possible win for Vandy on a yearly basis.
 
Deep Creek said:
And the topic of "donor fatigue" came up. A couple of OU fans said they hoped OU would stop requesting more donations from them since the SEC revenue would be so much more. A couple of other OU fans told them to "dream on" because they didn't see that happening. In fact, they said it would probably go the other way when revenue sharing with players and if NIL doesn't get some regulations.
Click to expand...
they are gonna have to pass the hat around if they want Haywood/Rodgers/Fasusi

the transfer DT cost them more than they previously thought it was after he gave heavy consideration to UT and LSU
 
BTW I think the SEC should stay as is..only school I would take right now is ND if they wanted to join..
 
TaikoTiger said:
Most would prefer SEC because proximity to other schools
But reality is we're going to the BIG
Click to expand...
I’ll believe that when I see it. FSU, maybe if (and likely when) they get AAU status and they dig themselves out of this GOR either by winning or waiting it out to a lesser payout near the end of the deal and cutting their losses. To FSU credit, they DID make a commitment to improve their academics and move the University higher up those ranks. Probably to make themselves more B1G attractive.
 
Thiefery said:
BTW I think the SEC should stay as is..only school I would take right now is ND if they wanted to join..
Click to expand...
I see no reason for the, to make any other move outside of ND. But if that happened, pair them with UNC at that point.
 
ralphiewvu said:
I’m really not trying to get into an argument over this.

But not now nor ever will Clemson get an invite to the B1G.
Click to expand...
I miss watching VT/Pitt/WVU Duke it out for conference bragging rights, perhaps if ACC does finally implode we can see it in conference again.
 
ralphiewvu said:
I’m really not trying to get into an argument over this.

But not now nor ever will Clemson get an invite to the B1G.
Click to expand...

rfjeff9 said:
I’ll believe that when I see it. FSU, maybe if (and likely when) they get AAU status and they dig themselves out of this GOR either by winning or waiting it out to a lesser payout near the end of the deal and cutting their losses. To FSU credit, they DID make a commitment to improve their academics and move the University higher up those ranks. Probably to make themselves more B1G attractive.
Click to expand...

I would be less confident if didn't add Oregon who ranks behind Clemson and FSU in academics and R&D spending but they did and even over schools like Cal and Stanford. After academics, Clem & FSU checks almost every other box in reasons to be added to the conference



 
Thiefery said:
BTW I think the SEC should stay as is..only school I would take right now is ND if they wanted to join..
Click to expand...
ND is only going to join a conference when the B1G and SEC decide to form their own playoff just between those two conferences and everyone else is left out. At that point ND is going to want in very reluctantly.

Everyone assumes that the B1G is the leader and I think if they pulled something like adding ND an Stanford at the same time that would make too much sense to pass up because they could essentially put USC, Stanford as NDs yearly appointments and automatically solve some of the B1G travel issues because they are already making those trips.

To go into the SEC (which eventually will go to a 9 game schedule) will ND really want to play a 9 game SEC schedule and the rest of their games be USC, Stanford and Navy? They couldn't even fit another game on their schedule so it would be fixed for pretty much eternity with no wiggle room. At that point the B1G becomes their only real option from a schedule standpoint. They would play a 9 game conference schedule (which included USC and Stanford) plus Navy and it leaves them 2 spots to play a Texas, Georgia, or Miami type game.
 
Thiefery said:
BTW I think the SEC should stay as is..only school I would take right now is ND if they wanted to join..
Click to expand...
Yeah, ND is a take for anyone. But they are going to make P2 money, so there is no reason for them to jump into either P2 conference. They can just stay in the ACC for non-football, 5 football games, and then schedule well for the other 7.
 
TaikoTiger said:
I would be less confident if didn't add Oregon who ranks behind Clemson and FSU in academics and R&D spending but they did and even over schools like Cal and Stanford. After academics, Clem & FSU checks almost every other box in reasons to be added to the conference



Click to expand...

That guy is a fucking idiot. Genetics guy. The guy who does the charts is a sharp dude.
 
WhosYourDawggy said:
That guy is a fucking idiot. Genetics guy. The guy who does the charts is a sharp dude.
Click to expand...
Genetics has been stupidly amusing for several months now,.

I've seen several of these charts in various flavors but same format - even saw one about research budgets comparing the schools. Johns Hopkins was clownstomping the field. Almost a no brainer for their joining B1G a decade ago, who wouldn't want to be a part of that?
 
rfjeff9 said:
Genetics has been stupidly amusing for several months now,.

I've seen several of these charts in various flavors but same format - even saw one about research budgets comparing the schools. Johns Hopkins was clownstomping the field. Almost a no brainer for their joining B1G a decade ago, who wouldn't want to be a part of that?
Click to expand...
Genetics blocked me on Twitter because I kept responding ... "this guy is just making this shit up. A lot of us have been saying the same thing on sports boards for years. He has no inside knowledge. No one is telling some random dude on X inside info. Top sports writers, sure. Rando on X, nah." Then he blocked me.

The funny thing is to watch all the Clemson and FSU goobers hanging on his every word. Now, don't get me wrong, both schools could end up in the B1G and he would be "right" - but that would just be an educated guess.
 
WhosYourDawggy said:
I think you vastly underestimate the feelings of the Kentucky, USCjr, MSU, Arky level schools. They have zero chance to win a conference championship or get into the CFP if you add FSU and Clemson. That has to matter at some point. Stop and think about SEC expansion - USCjr and Arkansas were in order to go to divisions in the 90s and have a CCG. Mizzou and ATM were clear linear cable/SECN market grabs. And OU and TX simply landed in their lap. USCjr, Arky, Mizzou, and ATM did not threaten the original Big 6 - AU, UA, UGA, LSU, UF, UTjr. The Big 6 would regularly beat all those newly added schools. TX and OU were something you just had to do as the money was huge ... it corresponded with the new TV contract, the move to "eyeballs" counting, and the CFP expansion. But now, the original SEC teams, and even some of the Big 6 (especially AU, UTjr, and UF), along with the four expansion teams, must look at wins and losses. Adding two more Tier 1 teams will not be attractive to them. Period. And, as I laid out above, they do not bring additive revenue. 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 teams that don't provide additive revenue but two losses to two-thirds of the leagues.

While I still don't get the revenue aspect of UNC/UVa, this may be why people assume the SEC is open to them. Even if they aren't additive but can get pro-rata shares, they are not seen as two more losses. In fact, most teams would see them as two wins.
Click to expand...

I read the Florida's AD's comments. I know what he said. We aren't in disagreement. He said that if adding teams increases the payout to each team, they will be voted in. He hinted that there would be no animus towards rival schools. There's no other way to interpret those comments IMO.

You don't believe those schools would be additive. I don't necessarily agree but if you're right, then I agree that they won't be added. I think if you look at FSU's TV numbers (and that was a against an ACC schedule) it's clear that they bring potential value to the league. I'll grant you that Clemson is more of a wash and I think there's a stronger case to be made against them. This is the legitimate point.

The argument about UK, USCjr, MSU and Arkansas is silly though. Those schools already have almost no chance of winning the SEC right now. They had almost no chance before adding Texas and OU. They would have almost no chance after potentially adding FSU/Clemson. What are we talking about? The SEC voted yes on two more losses when they added OU/UT and didn't think twice about it. If you make the schools more money, they will vote yes. That's the key. That's always been the key.
 
rfjeff9 said:
Genetics has been stupidly amusing for several months now,.

I've seen several of these charts in various flavors but same format - even saw one about research budgets comparing the schools. Johns Hopkins was clownstomping the field. Almost a no brainer for their joining B1G a decade ago, who wouldn't want to be a part of that?
Click to expand...

And Oregon?

 
ralphiewvu said:
I’m really not trying to get into an argument over this.

But not now nor ever will Clemson get an invite to the B1G.
Click to expand...

Think Tim Robinson GIF by NETFLIX
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top