Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Post Reply 
If the SEC did expand again and did so from the ACC who should we take and why?
Author Message
Bookmark and Share
JRsec Offline
Super Moderator
*

Posts: 37,903
Joined: Mar 2012
Reputation: 7737
I Root For: SEC
Location:
Post: #321
RE: If the SEC did expand again and did so from the ACC who should we take and why?
(04-26-2021 09:03 PM)Transic_nyc Wrote:  With the new apportionment of the Congressional seats for the next ten years, I think that's going to influence where the Big Ten leaders might go. If that's the case then getting into the state of NC might become a necessary move. Especially when we have no realistic chance of getting into the larger Southern states. Taking in Missouri in exchange for giving up Nebraska is an acceptable move in that it would potentially reenergize both fan bases. Missouri is a "border" state, so the conference's influence could extend transregionally, if that's even a word.
If the SEC gave up Missouri to the Big 10, had Vanderbilt opt for a partial status , and landed North Carolina, Duke, Virginia, and Florida State, then I think that would be just about perfect for us.

Duke, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, North Carolina, South Carolina, Tennessee, Virginia
Alabama, Arkansas, Auburn, Florida State, Louisiana State, Mississippi, Mississippi State, Texas A&M
*Vanderbilt

Big 10:
Indiana, Maryland, N.C. State, Ohio State, Penn State, Purdue, Rutgers, Virginia Tech
Illinois, Iowa, Michigan, Michigan State, Minnesota, Missouri, Northwestern, Wisconsin

Those make for some pretty nice divisions. With all of Virginia and North Carolina accounted for except Wake Forest the rest is pretty easy.

Big 12:
Iowa State, Kansas, Kansas State, Nebraska, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State
Baylor, Georgia Tech, Miami, Texas, Texas Christian, Texas Tech
Boston College, Clemson, Louisville, Pittsburgh, Syracuse, West Virginia
*Notre Dame
04-26-2021 09:28 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
AllTideUp Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 5,154
Joined: Jul 2015
Reputation: 559
I Root For: Alabama
Location:
Post: #322
RE: If the SEC did expand again and did so from the ACC who should we take and why?
(04-26-2021 09:03 PM)Transic_nyc Wrote:  With the new apportionment of the Congressional seats for the next ten years, I think that's going to influence where the Big Ten leaders might go. If that's the case then getting into the state of NC might become a necessary move. Especially when we have no realistic chance of getting into the larger Southern states. Taking in Missouri in exchange for giving up Nebraska is an acceptable move in that it would potentially reenergize both fan bases. Missouri is a "border" state, so the conference's influence could extend transregionally, if that's even a word.

Is that anything like the Trans-Siberian Orchestra?
04-28-2021 12:30 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
PAW79 Offline
Bench Warmer
*

Posts: 117
Joined: Apr 2020
Reputation: 37
I Root For: Clemson
Location:
Post: #323
RE: If the SEC did expand again and did so from the ACC who should we take and why?
(04-26-2021 09:28 PM)JRsec Wrote:  
(04-26-2021 09:03 PM)Transic_nyc Wrote:  With the new apportionment of the Congressional seats for the next ten years, I think that's going to influence where the Big Ten leaders might go. If that's the case then getting into the state of NC might become a necessary move. Especially when we have no realistic chance of getting into the larger Southern states. Taking in Missouri in exchange for giving up Nebraska is an acceptable move in that it would potentially reenergize both fan bases. Missouri is a "border" state, so the conference's influence could extend transregionally, if that's even a word.
If the SEC gave up Missouri to the Big 10, had Vanderbilt opt for a partial status , and landed North Carolina, Duke, Virginia, and Florida State, then I think that would be just about perfect for us.

Duke, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, North Carolina, South Carolina, Tennessee, Virginia
Alabama, Arkansas, Auburn, Florida State, Louisiana State, Mississippi, Mississippi State, Texas A&M
*Vanderbilt

Big 10:
Indiana, Maryland, N.C. State, Ohio State, Penn State, Purdue, Rutgers, Virginia Tech
Illinois, Iowa, Michigan, Michigan State, Minnesota, Missouri, Northwestern, Wisconsin

Those make for some pretty nice divisions. With all of Virginia and North Carolina accounted for except Wake Forest the rest is pretty easy.

Big 12:
Iowa State, Kansas, Kansas State, Nebraska, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State
Baylor, Georgia Tech, Miami, Texas, Texas Christian, Texas Tech
Boston College, Clemson, Louisville, Pittsburgh, Syracuse, West Virginia
*Notre Dame

This proposed Big 12 conference would almost certainly garner a much better TV contract than either the existing ACC or Big 12 conferences have and would allow the schools in this new conference to close the monetary gap that currently exists with the SEC and Big 10. The new conference would also create some exciting new matchups and reestablish a big traditional rivalry game from the past (OU-Neb).

Even though the money aspect would improve drastically and there would be some exciting potential games with teams like Texas, OU, and Neb, speaking purely from a Clemson perspective, this new conference would be a veritable wasteland. There is only one traditional rival (Ga Tech) and they are not even in Clemson’s pod. WVU would likely be a decent rival but BC, UL, Pitt, and Syracuse do not now nor will they ever consistently pique the interest of most Clemson fans. I think this new conference alignment would more likely than not have a very negative impact on Clemson’s recruiting in the three states that are its prime recruiting grounds – NC, GA, and FL. Other than Ga Tech, the travel involved for Clemson would be horrendous. Below are the driving distances (miles) from Clemson to each of their proposed new conference mates.

Pod 1
UL 439
WVU 492
Pitt 579
Syr 856
BC 964

AVG = 666 miles (can you say omen!)

Pod 2
GT 121
Mia 728
TCU 941
Bay 949
UT 1,049
TT 1,250

AVG = 840 miles

Pod 3
KU 950
OU 982
OSU 982
KSU 1,029
ISU 1,040
NU 1,103

AVG = 1,014 miles

Overall AVG = 850 miles

Only one school (Ga Tech) is within reasonable driving distance while only two other schools (WVU and UL) can be driven to within 7 to 8 hours – this would definitely impact attendance (home and away). For reference, UGA is a school that would be a natural rival for Clemson and is located only 79 miles away. While these distances may not be insurmountable for the football program, they would most certainly be a major burden for all of the other sports.

The other issue I see is that Clemson's in state rival (South Carolina) will continue to be in another conference. With these larger conferences, you will almost certainly have to go to at least 9 if not 10 conference games. This will either negatively impact Clemson's ability to schedule SC and keep 8 home games every year or require us to drop them from our schedule. Of course, other schools would be in the same boat (UGA/GT, UK/UL, VT/UVA, UNC/NCSU, etc.)

An increased payout is definitely needed and would be most welcomed. Potential matchups with UT, OU, and Neb would generate tons of excitement. However, given the choice to remain in the current ACC or move to this new “frankenconference”, I think most Clemson faculty, admins/coaches, and fans would opt to stay with the current ACC.
04-28-2021 12:35 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
JRsec Offline
Super Moderator
*

Posts: 37,903
Joined: Mar 2012
Reputation: 7737
I Root For: SEC
Location:
Post: #324
RE: If the SEC did expand again and did so from the ACC who should we take and why?
(04-28-2021 12:35 PM)PAW79 Wrote:  
(04-26-2021 09:28 PM)JRsec Wrote:  
(04-26-2021 09:03 PM)Transic_nyc Wrote:  With the new apportionment of the Congressional seats for the next ten years, I think that's going to influence where the Big Ten leaders might go. If that's the case then getting into the state of NC might become a necessary move. Especially when we have no realistic chance of getting into the larger Southern states. Taking in Missouri in exchange for giving up Nebraska is an acceptable move in that it would potentially reenergize both fan bases. Missouri is a "border" state, so the conference's influence could extend transregionally, if that's even a word.
If the SEC gave up Missouri to the Big 10, had Vanderbilt opt for a partial status , and landed North Carolina, Duke, Virginia, and Florida State, then I think that would be just about perfect for us.

Duke, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, North Carolina, South Carolina, Tennessee, Virginia
Alabama, Arkansas, Auburn, Florida State, Louisiana State, Mississippi, Mississippi State, Texas A&M
*Vanderbilt

Big 10:
Indiana, Maryland, N.C. State, Ohio State, Penn State, Purdue, Rutgers, Virginia Tech
Illinois, Iowa, Michigan, Michigan State, Minnesota, Missouri, Northwestern, Wisconsin

Those make for some pretty nice divisions. With all of Virginia and North Carolina accounted for except Wake Forest the rest is pretty easy.

Big 12:
Iowa State, Kansas, Kansas State, Nebraska, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State
Baylor, Georgia Tech, Miami, Texas, Texas Christian, Texas Tech
Boston College, Clemson, Louisville, Pittsburgh, Syracuse, West Virginia
*Notre Dame

This proposed Big 12 conference would almost certainly garner a much better TV contract than either the existing ACC or Big 12 conferences have and would allow the schools in this new conference to close the monetary gap that currently exists with the SEC and Big 10. The new conference would also create some exciting new matchups and reestablish a big traditional rivalry game from the past (OU-Neb).

Even though the money aspect would improve drastically and there would be some exciting potential games with teams like Texas, OU, and Neb, speaking purely from a Clemson perspective, this new conference would be a veritable wasteland. There is only one traditional rival (Ga Tech) and they are not even in Clemson’s pod. WVU would likely be a decent rival but BC, UL, Pitt, and Syracuse do not now nor will they ever consistently pique the interest of most Clemson fans. I think this new conference alignment would more likely than not have a very negative impact on Clemson’s recruiting in the three states that are its prime recruiting grounds – NC, GA, and FL. Other than Ga Tech, the travel involved for Clemson would be horrendous. Below are the driving distances (miles) from Clemson to each of their proposed new conference mates.

Pod 1
UL 439
WVU 492
Pitt 579
Syr 856
BC 964

AVG = 666 miles (can you say omen!)

Pod 2
GT 121
Mia 728
TCU 941
Bay 949
UT 1,049
TT 1,250

AVG = 840 miles

Pod 3
KU 950
OU 982
OSU 982
KSU 1,029
ISU 1,040
NU 1,103

AVG = 1,014 miles

Overall AVG = 850 miles

Only one school (Ga Tech) is within reasonable driving distance while only two other schools (WVU and UL) can be driven to within 7 to 8 hours – this would definitely impact attendance (home and away). For reference, UGA is a school that would be a natural rival for Clemson and is located only 79 miles away. While these distances may not be insurmountable for the football program, they would most certainly be a major burden for all of the other sports.

The other issue I see is that Clemson's in state rival (South Carolina) will continue to be in another conference. With these larger conferences, you will almost certainly have to go to at least 9 if not 10 conference games. This will either negatively impact Clemson's ability to schedule SC and keep 8 home games every year or require us to drop them from our schedule. Of course, other schools would be in the same boat (UGA/GT, UK/UL, VT/UVA, UNC/NCSU, etc.)

An increased payout is definitely needed and would be most welcomed. Potential matchups with UT, OU, and Neb would generate tons of excitement. However, given the choice to remain in the current ACC or move to this new “frankenconference”, I think most Clemson faculty, admins/coaches, and fans would opt to stay with the current ACC.

If in the end there is an ACC to stay with, yes. The monetary difference is going to be massive. There is some speculation that Saban may not stick around for all of the coming changes. If so, Momma will be calling Dabo.

I'd put Clemson in the SEC if we moved to 3 conferences of 20. I'd place most of the Big 12 with the PAC, most of the Southern ACC with the SEC, and most of the Northerly ACC with the Big 10.

Notre Dame would have to join in full:

Duke, North Carolina, Virginia, Pittsburgh, Notre Dame and Syracuse to the Big 10.

Clemson, Florida State, Georgia Tech, (Miami/Louisville), N.C. State, Virginia Tech to the SEC.

Iowa State, Kansas, Kansas State, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Texas, Texas Tech, and (Baylor/TCU) to the PAC.

T.C.U. is probably preferable to the PAC because it's seminary is independent of the Undergraduate and other graduate studies, Baylor's is not.

If Vanderbilt stays after all of the coming changes then Louisville is probably preferable to Miami, if Vanderbilt leaves Miami as a private takes their spot.

B.C., Wake Forest, Baylor, West Virginia (Vandy or Miami) would be the 5 out. Miami's academics might edge out Louisville and their numbers should edge out Georgia Tech, but Georgia will be obligated to protect Tech whether they want to or not because the State has made that clear in past realignment anxieties, and Louisville has strong business numbers, but Kentucky is less concerned about them than Georgia is about Tech. It would be an interesting way to balance competition so it probably won't happen but at least it would be regional and likely would not leave any division Satan's distance for average travel.
04-28-2021 01:49 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
PAW79 Offline
Bench Warmer
*

Posts: 117
Joined: Apr 2020
Reputation: 37
I Root For: Clemson
Location:
Post: #325
RE: If the SEC did expand again and did so from the ACC who should we take and why?
(04-28-2021 01:49 PM)JRsec Wrote:  
(04-28-2021 12:35 PM)PAW79 Wrote:  
(04-26-2021 09:28 PM)JRsec Wrote:  
(04-26-2021 09:03 PM)Transic_nyc Wrote:  With the new apportionment of the Congressional seats for the next ten years, I think that's going to influence where the Big Ten leaders might go. If that's the case then getting into the state of NC might become a necessary move. Especially when we have no realistic chance of getting into the larger Southern states. Taking in Missouri in exchange for giving up Nebraska is an acceptable move in that it would potentially reenergize both fan bases. Missouri is a "border" state, so the conference's influence could extend transregionally, if that's even a word.
If the SEC gave up Missouri to the Big 10, had Vanderbilt opt for a partial status , and landed North Carolina, Duke, Virginia, and Florida State, then I think that would be just about perfect for us.

Duke, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, North Carolina, South Carolina, Tennessee, Virginia
Alabama, Arkansas, Auburn, Florida State, Louisiana State, Mississippi, Mississippi State, Texas A&M
*Vanderbilt

Big 10:
Indiana, Maryland, N.C. State, Ohio State, Penn State, Purdue, Rutgers, Virginia Tech
Illinois, Iowa, Michigan, Michigan State, Minnesota, Missouri, Northwestern, Wisconsin

Those make for some pretty nice divisions. With all of Virginia and North Carolina accounted for except Wake Forest the rest is pretty easy.

Big 12:
Iowa State, Kansas, Kansas State, Nebraska, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State
Baylor, Georgia Tech, Miami, Texas, Texas Christian, Texas Tech
Boston College, Clemson, Louisville, Pittsburgh, Syracuse, West Virginia
*Notre Dame

This proposed Big 12 conference would almost certainly garner a much better TV contract than either the existing ACC or Big 12 conferences have and would allow the schools in this new conference to close the monetary gap that currently exists with the SEC and Big 10. The new conference would also create some exciting new matchups and reestablish a big traditional rivalry game from the past (OU-Neb).

Even though the money aspect would improve drastically and there would be some exciting potential games with teams like Texas, OU, and Neb, speaking purely from a Clemson perspective, this new conference would be a veritable wasteland. There is only one traditional rival (Ga Tech) and they are not even in Clemson’s pod. WVU would likely be a decent rival but BC, UL, Pitt, and Syracuse do not now nor will they ever consistently pique the interest of most Clemson fans. I think this new conference alignment would more likely than not have a very negative impact on Clemson’s recruiting in the three states that are its prime recruiting grounds – NC, GA, and FL. Other than Ga Tech, the travel involved for Clemson would be horrendous. Below are the driving distances (miles) from Clemson to each of their proposed new conference mates.

Pod 1
UL 439
WVU 492
Pitt 579
Syr 856
BC 964

AVG = 666 miles (can you say omen!)

Pod 2
GT 121
Mia 728
TCU 941
Bay 949
UT 1,049
TT 1,250

AVG = 840 miles

Pod 3
KU 950
OU 982
OSU 982
KSU 1,029
ISU 1,040
NU 1,103

AVG = 1,014 miles

Overall AVG = 850 miles

Only one school (Ga Tech) is within reasonable driving distance while only two other schools (WVU and UL) can be driven to within 7 to 8 hours – this would definitely impact attendance (home and away). For reference, UGA is a school that would be a natural rival for Clemson and is located only 79 miles away. While these distances may not be insurmountable for the football program, they would most certainly be a major burden for all of the other sports.

The other issue I see is that Clemson's in state rival (South Carolina) will continue to be in another conference. With these larger conferences, you will almost certainly have to go to at least 9 if not 10 conference games. This will either negatively impact Clemson's ability to schedule SC and keep 8 home games every year or require us to drop them from our schedule. Of course, other schools would be in the same boat (UGA/GT, UK/UL, VT/UVA, UNC/NCSU, etc.)

An increased payout is definitely needed and would be most welcomed. Potential matchups with UT, OU, and Neb would generate tons of excitement. However, given the choice to remain in the current ACC or move to this new “frankenconference”, I think most Clemson faculty, admins/coaches, and fans would opt to stay with the current ACC.

If in the end there is an ACC to stay with, yes. The monetary difference is going to be massive. There is some speculation that Saban may not stick around for all of the coming changes. If so, Momma will be calling Dabo.

I'd put Clemson in the SEC if we moved to 3 conferences of 20. I'd place most of the Big 12 with the PAC, most of the Southern ACC with the SEC, and most of the Northerly ACC with the Big 10.

Notre Dame would have to join in full:

Duke, North Carolina, Virginia, Pittsburgh, Notre Dame and Syracuse to the Big 10.

Clemson, Florida State, Georgia Tech, (Miami/Louisville), N.C. State, Virginia Tech to the SEC.

Iowa State, Kansas, Kansas State, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Texas, Texas Tech, and (Baylor/TCU) to the PAC.

T.C.U. is probably preferable to the PAC because it's seminary is independent of the Undergraduate and other graduate studies, Baylor's is not.

If Vanderbilt stays after all of the coming changes then Louisville is probably preferable to Miami, if Vanderbilt leaves Miami as a private takes their spot.

B.C., Wake Forest, Baylor, West Virginia (Vandy or Miami) would be the 5 out. Miami's academics might edge out Louisville and their numbers should edge out Georgia Tech, but Georgia will be obligated to protect Tech whether they want to or not because the State has made that clear in past realignment anxieties, and Louisville has strong business numbers, but Kentucky is less concerned about them than Georgia is about Tech. It would be an interesting way to balance competition so it probably won't happen but at least it would be regional and likely would not leave any division Satan's distance for average travel.

JR - thanks for the quick reply. A few comments on your comments and one last observation.

1. The money difference is massive now and appears that it will only get worse. As the only school in the ACC who is totally and completely “all in” for football (apologies FSU and VT), this monetary difference will ultimately override the concerns I pointed out. If an option is presented that reduces or eliminates the gap, I can see them exercising that option regardless of the other issues it presents and their disdain for that option if this truly is the only way to stay competitive in football.

2. I think its clear that ND will not be joining any conference unless presented with much the same scenario as Clemson – they will join if that is the only option to save their football program and allow access to national championships.

3. I am not so sure Dabo will move if/when Momma comes calling. It could happen but at this point in time I would say it is not anywhere close to the done deal many people think it will be. Dabo has said he is completely happy at Clemson and that he does not want to move - he has so far shown to be a man of his word. He makes plenty of money now so I don’t think a big raise would lure him away. He has said “never say never” so a move cannot be ruled out. Of course, any future changes to Clemson’s commitment to football and/or athletic administration would impact his decision.

4. Clemson is in no man’s land. The ACC stinks in football and I don’t see any drastic improvement in the near or distant future. The money difference is significant and only going to get worse. If Clemson stays in the ACC, eventually this difference will catch up to them. While Clemson offers a lot to a conference from a football standpoint, they are just middling at best when it comes to academics and basketball – the other items often cited when looking at conference membership realignments. Clemson does not offer enough solely from a football standpoint to entice the SEC to offer membership and their BB / academics do nothing for the SEC. The Big 10 is a non-starter due to academics (AAU). So, as much as Clemson wants to be part of a conference that prioritizes football, they have zero leverage. It would really be disheartening to see a school like Duke who doesn’t give a rip about football (and probably never will) get a golden ticket to the SEC while Clemson is left behind in some pieced together conference. Oh well, life is not fair!

Also ……. was “My Dad’s advice to me” intended for me specifically or just in general??
04-28-2021 03:49 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
JRsec Offline
Super Moderator
*

Posts: 37,903
Joined: Mar 2012
Reputation: 7737
I Root For: SEC
Location:
Post: #326
RE: If the SEC did expand again and did so from the ACC who should we take and why?
(04-28-2021 03:49 PM)PAW79 Wrote:  
(04-28-2021 01:49 PM)JRsec Wrote:  
(04-28-2021 12:35 PM)PAW79 Wrote:  
(04-26-2021 09:28 PM)JRsec Wrote:  
(04-26-2021 09:03 PM)Transic_nyc Wrote:  With the new apportionment of the Congressional seats for the next ten years, I think that's going to influence where the Big Ten leaders might go. If that's the case then getting into the state of NC might become a necessary move. Especially when we have no realistic chance of getting into the larger Southern states. Taking in Missouri in exchange for giving up Nebraska is an acceptable move in that it would potentially reenergize both fan bases. Missouri is a "border" state, so the conference's influence could extend transregionally, if that's even a word.
If the SEC gave up Missouri to the Big 10, had Vanderbilt opt for a partial status , and landed North Carolina, Duke, Virginia, and Florida State, then I think that would be just about perfect for us.

Duke, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, North Carolina, South Carolina, Tennessee, Virginia
Alabama, Arkansas, Auburn, Florida State, Louisiana State, Mississippi, Mississippi State, Texas A&M
*Vanderbilt

Big 10:
Indiana, Maryland, N.C. State, Ohio State, Penn State, Purdue, Rutgers, Virginia Tech
Illinois, Iowa, Michigan, Michigan State, Minnesota, Missouri, Northwestern, Wisconsin

Those make for some pretty nice divisions. With all of Virginia and North Carolina accounted for except Wake Forest the rest is pretty easy.

Big 12:
Iowa State, Kansas, Kansas State, Nebraska, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State
Baylor, Georgia Tech, Miami, Texas, Texas Christian, Texas Tech
Boston College, Clemson, Louisville, Pittsburgh, Syracuse, West Virginia
*Notre Dame

This proposed Big 12 conference would almost certainly garner a much better TV contract than either the existing ACC or Big 12 conferences have and would allow the schools in this new conference to close the monetary gap that currently exists with the SEC and Big 10. The new conference would also create some exciting new matchups and reestablish a big traditional rivalry game from the past (OU-Neb).

Even though the money aspect would improve drastically and there would be some exciting potential games with teams like Texas, OU, and Neb, speaking purely from a Clemson perspective, this new conference would be a veritable wasteland. There is only one traditional rival (Ga Tech) and they are not even in Clemson’s pod. WVU would likely be a decent rival but BC, UL, Pitt, and Syracuse do not now nor will they ever consistently pique the interest of most Clemson fans. I think this new conference alignment would more likely than not have a very negative impact on Clemson’s recruiting in the three states that are its prime recruiting grounds – NC, GA, and FL. Other than Ga Tech, the travel involved for Clemson would be horrendous. Below are the driving distances (miles) from Clemson to each of their proposed new conference mates.

Pod 1
UL 439
WVU 492
Pitt 579
Syr 856
BC 964

AVG = 666 miles (can you say omen!)

Pod 2
GT 121
Mia 728
TCU 941
Bay 949
UT 1,049
TT 1,250

AVG = 840 miles

Pod 3
KU 950
OU 982
OSU 982
KSU 1,029
ISU 1,040
NU 1,103

AVG = 1,014 miles

Overall AVG = 850 miles

Only one school (Ga Tech) is within reasonable driving distance while only two other schools (WVU and UL) can be driven to within 7 to 8 hours – this would definitely impact attendance (home and away). For reference, UGA is a school that would be a natural rival for Clemson and is located only 79 miles away. While these distances may not be insurmountable for the football program, they would most certainly be a major burden for all of the other sports.

The other issue I see is that Clemson's in state rival (South Carolina) will continue to be in another conference. With these larger conferences, you will almost certainly have to go to at least 9 if not 10 conference games. This will either negatively impact Clemson's ability to schedule SC and keep 8 home games every year or require us to drop them from our schedule. Of course, other schools would be in the same boat (UGA/GT, UK/UL, VT/UVA, UNC/NCSU, etc.)

An increased payout is definitely needed and would be most welcomed. Potential matchups with UT, OU, and Neb would generate tons of excitement. However, given the choice to remain in the current ACC or move to this new “frankenconference”, I think most Clemson faculty, admins/coaches, and fans would opt to stay with the current ACC.

If in the end there is an ACC to stay with, yes. The monetary difference is going to be massive. There is some speculation that Saban may not stick around for all of the coming changes. If so, Momma will be calling Dabo.

I'd put Clemson in the SEC if we moved to 3 conferences of 20. I'd place most of the Big 12 with the PAC, most of the Southern ACC with the SEC, and most of the Northerly ACC with the Big 10.

Notre Dame would have to join in full:

Duke, North Carolina, Virginia, Pittsburgh, Notre Dame and Syracuse to the Big 10.

Clemson, Florida State, Georgia Tech, (Miami/Louisville), N.C. State, Virginia Tech to the SEC.

Iowa State, Kansas, Kansas State, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Texas, Texas Tech, and (Baylor/TCU) to the PAC.

T.C.U. is probably preferable to the PAC because it's seminary is independent of the Undergraduate and other graduate studies, Baylor's is not.

If Vanderbilt stays after all of the coming changes then Louisville is probably preferable to Miami, if Vanderbilt leaves Miami as a private takes their spot.

B.C., Wake Forest, Baylor, West Virginia (Vandy or Miami) would be the 5 out. Miami's academics might edge out Louisville and their numbers should edge out Georgia Tech, but Georgia will be obligated to protect Tech whether they want to or not because the State has made that clear in past realignment anxieties, and Louisville has strong business numbers, but Kentucky is less concerned about them than Georgia is about Tech. It would be an interesting way to balance competition so it probably won't happen but at least it would be regional and likely would not leave any division Satan's distance for average travel.

JR - thanks for the quick reply. A few comments on your comments and one last observation.

1. The money difference is massive now and appears that it will only get worse. As the only school in the ACC who is totally and completely “all in” for football (apologies FSU and VT), this monetary difference will ultimately override the concerns I pointed out. If an option is presented that reduces or eliminates the gap, I can see them exercising that option regardless of the other issues it presents and their disdain for that option if this truly is the only way to stay competitive in football.

2. I think its clear that ND will not be joining any conference unless presented with much the same scenario as Clemson – they will join if that is the only option to save their football program and allow access to national championships.

3. I am not so sure Dabo will move if/when Momma comes calling. It could happen but at this point in time I would say it is not anywhere close to the done deal many people think it will be. Dabo has said he is completely happy at Clemson and that he does not want to move - he has so far shown to be a man of his word. He makes plenty of money now so I don’t think a big raise would lure him away. He has said “never say never” so a move cannot be ruled out. Of course, any future changes to Clemson’s commitment to football and/or athletic administration would impact his decision.

4. Clemson is in no man’s land. The ACC stinks in football and I don’t see any drastic improvement in the near or distant future. The money difference is significant and only going to get worse. If Clemson stays in the ACC, eventually this difference will catch up to them. While Clemson offers a lot to a conference from a football standpoint, they are just middling at best when it comes to academics and basketball – the other items often cited when looking at conference membership realignments. Clemson does not offer enough solely from a football standpoint to entice the SEC to offer membership and their BB / academics do nothing for the SEC. The Big 10 is a non-starter due to academics (AAU). So, as much as Clemson wants to be part of a conference that prioritizes football, they have zero leverage. It would really be disheartening to see a school like Duke who doesn’t give a rip about football (and probably never will) get a golden ticket to the SEC while Clemson is left behind in some pieced together conference. Oh well, life is not fair!

Also ……. was “My Dad’s advice to me” intended for me specifically or just in general??

In 1992 the SEC's first six targets were Texas, Texas A&M, Arkansas, an unnamed friend of Texas (Oklahoma) and Florida State and Clemson. Texas dropped out taking OU with them, A&M was stuck without political cover but maintained conversations, I believe that ESPN the entity the SEC used to value FSU used that information to help the ACC which they were interested in acquiring beat the SEC by a day to FSU with an offer just slightly better than ours so they would have a school in Florida that they had full access to, and this is more than a theory, but with much in realignment it can't be proved, so it's an allegation. Clemson was interested if FSU was. When they withdrew a Clemson Trustee or whatever you call them there phoned a friend of his who was in the same position for South Carolina, told them of our interest in expanding and they joined Arkansas as the pair. Arkansas joined because Broyles had gotten wind that Texas and Nebraska and Oklahoma were cooking up the Big 12 and that only 4 SWC schools would be moving and the Hogs weren't one of them.

So, had Texas and A&M said yes, and F.S.U. had followed it is likely that Clemson could have joined the SEC in 1992, and that quite possibly Arkansas and Oklahoma would have made it 16. Kramer was thinking big before settling for the 2 to get the CCG. I had family in on all of this at the time.

Clemson would be a solid addition for the SEC as a content driver, especially if they joined with Florida State since both South Carolina and Florida wanted their inclusion in 2010. The gentlemen's agreement Slive asked for is not what internet BS made it out to be. We had to have 2 new markets in 2010 to be able to renegotiate the contract. Slive asked for a gentlemen's agreement from South Carolina and Florida's president not to nominate Clemson and F.S.U. until the renegotiation clause was fulfilled. So A&M and Missouri (in for OU which insisted OSU come as well) were the two. Slive's promise was that in the future nothing but profitability would be the guide and no prohibitions on in state rivals would be required. That's very different from the blackball crap which never happened, and wouldn't among presidents. F.S.U. would add a little o the SEC even today because it would give the SEC advertising rate leverage for Florida. Clemson, if they stay good would give us a content multiplier meaning that every time they played an SEC team of substance we would have a solid national ratings number which in turn provides a higher ad rate. Clemson joining would be a wash. But if Texas and Oklahoma weren't available Clemson and F.S.U. would give the SEC the hammer on all Southeastern football. So from a branding perspective the two most SEC like programs left in the Southeast would be members. And that's nothing to sneeze at.

So it's not impossible. It's been considered before, and even announced by ESPN on a crawler after the Maryland defection (another story for when I have more time) and then pulled back by ESPN because N.D. wasn't going to affiliate if the football first schools were gone. So if something happens to the ACC it's quite possible still.
04-28-2021 04:23 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Transic_nyc Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 2,401
Joined: Jun 2014
Reputation: 194
I Root For: Return To Stability
Location:
Post: #327
RE: If the SEC did expand again and did so from the ACC who should we take and why?
(04-26-2021 09:28 PM)JRsec Wrote:  
(04-26-2021 09:03 PM)Transic_nyc Wrote:  With the new apportionment of the Congressional seats for the next ten years, I think that's going to influence where the Big Ten leaders might go. If that's the case then getting into the state of NC might become a necessary move. Especially when we have no realistic chance of getting into the larger Southern states. Taking in Missouri in exchange for giving up Nebraska is an acceptable move in that it would potentially reenergize both fan bases. Missouri is a "border" state, so the conference's influence could extend transregionally, if that's even a word.
If the SEC gave up Missouri to the Big 10, had Vanderbilt opt for a partial status , and landed North Carolina, Duke, Virginia, and Florida State, then I think that would be just about perfect for us.

Duke, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, North Carolina, South Carolina, Tennessee, Virginia
Alabama, Arkansas, Auburn, Florida State, Louisiana State, Mississippi, Mississippi State, Texas A&M
*Vanderbilt

Big 10:
Indiana, Maryland, N.C. State, Ohio State, Penn State, Purdue, Rutgers, Virginia Tech
Illinois, Iowa, Michigan, Michigan State, Minnesota, Missouri, Northwestern, Wisconsin

Those make for some pretty nice divisions. With all of Virginia and North Carolina accounted for except Wake Forest the rest is pretty easy.

Big 12:
Iowa State, Kansas, Kansas State, Nebraska, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State
Baylor, Georgia Tech, Miami, Texas, Texas Christian, Texas Tech
Boston College, Clemson, Louisville, Pittsburgh, Syracuse, West Virginia
*Notre Dame

Maybe instead of Georgia Tech and Miami I would put West Virginia and Pitt in with the Texas schools. The Texas schools already fly into Pittsburgh's airport at least once a year in the Big 12. Then Clemson's division would make better sense:

Louisville, Miami, Clemson, Georgia Tech, Syracuse, Boston College

Since Syracuse's stadium is a dome they would only have to make one "problematic" trip North.
04-28-2021 10:35 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
BePcr07 Offline
All American
*

Posts: 4,900
Joined: Dec 2015
Reputation: 342
I Root For: Boise St & Zags
Location:
Post: #328
RE: If the SEC did expand again and did so from the ACC who should we take and why?
SEC, now at 16 with Oklahoma and Texas, goes to 20 with Clemson, Florida St, North Carolina St, and Virginia Tech. Alignment options: 4 pods of 5 schools each, 5 pods of 4 schools each, or divisionless; 2 divisions of 10 schools each is effectiveness two conferences which would likely not work well for scheduling.

4x5
9 conference games: 4 pod games + another pod (5 games)

5x4
8 conference games: 3 pod games + another pod (4 games)
9 conference games: 3 pod games + 2 games other pods (6 games)

Divisionless
9 conference games: 3 permanent rivals + 6 other games
- play everyone every 3 years; complete cycle every 8 years
07-25-2021 11:40 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
JRsec Offline
Super Moderator
*

Posts: 37,903
Joined: Mar 2012
Reputation: 7737
I Root For: SEC
Location:
Post: #329
RE: If the SEC did expand again and did so from the ACC who should we take and why?
I'd say we wait until Texas and Oklahoma clear and join and then we listen to overtures from Florida State. The Noles are most concerned and ESPN could make much more from them in the SEC.

And at this juncture I believe ESPN will build top notch programs around Alabama, Texas A&M, Auburn, Oklahoma, Texas, Florida, Georgia, and LSU.

As the conference grows we'll be seeing Florida inundated by schools wanting a trip there for a recruiting presence. FSU insures they keep their rivalry and it doubles members chance of making that Florida Trip.

At some point we need to approach Vandy about an all but football membership and that model could help land a Duke that UNC all in might insist upon. If we add noone else we could play 16 with FSU in and Vandy adds 1 more to a hoops rotation and baseball.

Once FSU is in it opens other options.
07-27-2021 01:50 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
OdinFrigg Online
Gone Fishing
*

Posts: 1,793
Joined: Oct 2017
Reputation: 400
I Root For: Canine & Avian
Location: 4,250 mi sw of Oslo
Post: #330
RE: If the SEC did expand again and did so from the ACC who should we take and why?
Clemson denies the rumors they are in discussions with the SEC per expansion.

Doubtful Clemson would acknowledge it even if it is true.

https://www.wyff4.com/article/clemson-re...c/37202984
08-04-2021 11:02 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
JRsec Offline
Super Moderator
*

Posts: 37,903
Joined: Mar 2012
Reputation: 7737
I Root For: SEC
Location:
Post: #331
RE: If the SEC did expand again and did so from the ACC who should we take and why?
(08-04-2021 11:02 AM)OdinFrigg Wrote:  Clemson denies the rumors they are in discussions with the SEC per expansion.

Doubtful Clemson would acknowledge it even if it is true.

https://www.wyff4.com/article/clemson-re...c/37202984

Clemson can say that as long as their administration isn't. A faculty member or coach is another matter.
08-04-2021 11:09 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
OdinFrigg Online
Gone Fishing
*

Posts: 1,793
Joined: Oct 2017
Reputation: 400
I Root For: Canine & Avian
Location: 4,250 mi sw of Oslo
Post: #332
RE: If the SEC did expand again and did so from the ACC who should we take and why?
This opinion expresses FSU & Clemson are talking to the SEC.

https://www.si.com/college/georgia/news/...out-to-sec
(This post was last modified: 08-05-2021 05:09 AM by OdinFrigg.)
08-04-2021 05:53 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
JRsec Offline
Super Moderator
*

Posts: 37,903
Joined: Mar 2012
Reputation: 7737
I Root For: SEC
Location:
Post: #333
RE: If the SEC did expand again and did so from the ACC who should we take and why?
It is time to revisit expansion from the ACC. However, a few differentiations should be made.

1. Does it add a new market.

2. Does the addition give the SEC advertising leverage in a large state (20 million plus).

3. Does the addition surpass the SEC's average valuation per school of $612,804,143 per school.

4. Under the assumption of basketball being freed of the NCAA does the school earn enough with its basketball value doubled?

5. Do they add academically.

Considering those factors here is the ranking of the candidates:

1. Notre Dame: It meets conditions 1, 3, & 5. It's national draw meets condition 2, and condition 4 is unnecessary.

2. Kansas: It meets conditions 1, 3 (using #4), & 5

3. Louisville: It meets conditions 3 (using #4)

4. North Carolina: It meets conditions 1 & 5 and branding wise is a content multiplier. It's iffy that they meet the average even with all perks considered. But as a Southern Academic they would be accepted.

5. Duke: It meets conditions 1 alone, & 5. Total value using #4 exceeds that of UNC. Academically see UNC for the reason they would be accepted.

6. Florida State: It meets conditions 2 and using #4 is more valuable than UNC. Academically it's a wash.

7. Virginia Tech: It meets condition 1. It lags even considering #4. Wash academically.

8. Clemson: It adds more value than Virginia Tech. Wash academically.

Conclusions:

If the SEC expanded to 20 these would be the preferences:
1. Notre Dame, Kansas, North Carolina, Florida State (I don't consider N.D. likely so the rest of the configurations will be minus the Irish)
2. Kansas, North Carolina, Florida State, Duke
3. Kansas, North Carolina, Duke, Louisville
4. North Carolina, Duke, Florida State, Clemson
5. North Carolina, Duke, Florida State, Virginia Tech
6. Kansas, North Carolina, Duke, Virginia Tech

I'll leave you to debate these. Here's the value of each with doubling hoops:

SEC Average: $612,804,143
1. Notre Dame: $942,841,562
2. Kansas: $846,960,519 (hoops 319,470,000 x 2 = 638,940,000 which is major)
3. Louisville: $652,565,745 (hoops 238,400,00 x 2 = 476,800,000)
4. Duke: $470,502,331 (hoops 201,500,000 x 2 = 403,000,000)
5. Florida State $449,396,745 (plus ad leverage in Florida and a key 2nd school)
6. North Carolina: $445,946,919 (hoops 145,350,000 x 2 = 290,700,000)
7. Clemson: $437,211,865
8. Virginia Tech: $382,395,398 (adds new market)


A few comments:
1. I think ESPN would love option one. Those 4 would be worth the money to ESPN.
2. I think #2 would be optimum for a variety of reasons. It leaves ND out, but nicely consolidates the SEC while leaving great value for the ACC or B12. So it serves the SEC and ESPN well.
3. If option 2 ESPN can use Notre Dame, Virginia, N.C. State and Miami as leverage for the Big 10 and a continued % of rights.
4. If ESPN want's to form a league all 8 or a combination of most with some variance moves the SEC tp 24 with tremendous branding.
(This post was last modified: 12-17-2021 01:31 AM by JRsec.)
12-17-2021 01:16 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Fighting Muskie Offline
Senior Chief Realignmentologist
*

Posts: 11,795
Joined: Sep 2016
Reputation: 789
I Root For: Ohio St, UC,MAC
Location: Biden Cesspool
Post: #334
RE: If the SEC did expand again and did so from the ACC who should we take and why?
If I were going to do a mega league, I’d do 40–all the Big Ten plus all the SEC, and then 10 more.

I’d move Missouri over to the Big Ten and add ND, USC, Washington, and Oregon.

For the SEC, I’d add Clemson, Florida St, Louisville, Virginia Tech, and NC State.

I think that pretty much covers all the biggest brands.
12-18-2021 03:08 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
JRsec Offline
Super Moderator
*

Posts: 37,903
Joined: Mar 2012
Reputation: 7737
I Root For: SEC
Location:
Post: #335
RE: If the SEC did expand again and did so from the ACC who should we take and why?
(12-18-2021 03:08 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  If I were going to do a mega league, I’d do 40–all the Big Ten plus all the SEC, and then 10 more.

I’d move Missouri over to the Big Ten and add ND, USC, Washington, and Oregon.

For the SEC, I’d add Clemson, Florida St, Louisville, Virginia Tech, and NC State.

I think that pretty much covers all the biggest brands.

A few issues:
1. Kentucky is not supportive of Louisville
2. UNC has a much greater draw than N.C. State
3. Clemson doesn't add enough value.

So, at a flat 20 with just adding 4: Florida State for ad leverage in their state, North Carolina and Virginia Tech for nearly 21 million more viewers, and Kansas to keep Missouri happy.

It works better division wise for the Big 10:
Colorado, Utah, Oregon, Washington, and USC for your Western division and N.D..

Besides I gave the numbers for those even remotely close to meeting the new SEC minimums and N.C. State didn't even make that cut.

N.D is the only one who would qualify for either conference (SEC/B1G). Kansas qualifies for either if hoops are free of the NCAA. And only then could the SEC consider UNC or Duke.

FSU is borderline when all factors are considered.

And Clemson, which doesn't add enough, may be about to return to its old norms. Their AD, OC, & DC are gone, and Dabo will stay for the bowl but is looking around.
12-18-2021 03:25 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Fighting Muskie Offline
Senior Chief Realignmentologist
*

Posts: 11,795
Joined: Sep 2016
Reputation: 789
I Root For: Ohio St, UC,MAC
Location: Biden Cesspool
Post: #336
RE: If the SEC did expand again and did so from the ACC who should we take and why?
My main focus was looking at valuable programs that are invested in sports. When you factor in both basketball and football, Louisville is a pretty valuable program to have in your mix. Florida St, Clemson, NC State, and VT are all schools that are invested in their programs.

UNC is a school that I feel like just goes through the motions and gives the facade of trying in football. Their snobby history just doesn’t seem conducive to what the SEC wants to do and I think they’d be a prima donna to work with. If the SEC wants to go into NC, the Ag school seems like the much better fit. (That’s one of things I’ve always admired about the SEC, they are aren’t a stuck up groups of academic elitists and that’s what seems to endear Southerners to their local SEC teams. )
12-18-2021 11:26 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
JRsec Offline
Super Moderator
*

Posts: 37,903
Joined: Mar 2012
Reputation: 7737
I Root For: SEC
Location:
Post: #337
RE: If the SEC did expand again and did so from the ACC who should we take and why?
(12-18-2021 11:26 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  My main focus was looking at valuable programs that are invested in sports. When you factor in both basketball and football, Louisville is a pretty valuable program to have in your mix. Florida St, Clemson, NC State, and VT are all schools that are invested in their programs.

UNC is a school that I feel like just goes through the motions and gives the facade of trying in football. Their snobby history just doesn’t seem conducive to what the SEC wants to do and I think they’d be a prima donna to work with. If the SEC wants to go into NC, the Ag school seems like the much better fit. (That’s one of things I’ve always admired about the SEC, they are aren’t a stuck up groups of academic elitists and that’s what seems to endear Southerners to their local SEC teams. )

It's simply a numbers issue in North Carolina. UNC delivers ad leverage for the state. The others don't. They deliver subscriptions but not as many eyeballs. In Virginia it's Tech that delivers a bit more, but it's almost a wash. Tech does however have the better attendance and UVa the better academic profile.
(This post was last modified: 12-19-2021 12:03 AM by JRsec.)
12-19-2021 12:02 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Transic_nyc Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 2,401
Joined: Jun 2014
Reputation: 194
I Root For: Return To Stability
Location:
Post: #338
RE: If the SEC did expand again and did so from the ACC who should we take and why?
Three-prong strategy:

- Tighten the footprint of the Big 12

- Re-focus the ACC into a football-first conference

- The SEC becomes the all-sports conference, no longer as football heavy


How:

Move North Carolina, Virginia, Duke to the SEC. Pick up South Florida along the way

The ACC ends the geographical isolation of Central Florida, Cincinnati and West Virginia by bringing them in

The Big 12 picks up Memphis and Southern Methodist, recreating a division that closely resembles the Southwest Conference, with Memphis playing the role of Arkansas. Then finishes off by picking up Colorado State, to bridge the gap between BYU and OK State/KSU/KU/ISU

Check out the "new" ACC, with the sports focus in parentheses:

Miami (football)
Syracuse (basketball/lacrosse)
Pitt (football)
Louisville (basketball/football)
West Virginia (football)
Cincinnati (football/basketball)
Virginia Tech (football)
Wake Forest (basketball)
Boston College (hockey)
Florida State (football)
Clemson (football)
Georgia Tech (football)
Central Florida (football)
NC State (football/basketball)

Wouldn't this conference be much more stable in the long run?
03-11-2022 08:48 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
PAW79 Offline
Bench Warmer
*

Posts: 117
Joined: Apr 2020
Reputation: 37
I Root For: Clemson
Location:
Post: #339
RE: If the SEC did expand again and did so from the ACC who should we take and why?
(03-11-2022 08:48 AM)Transic_nyc Wrote:  Three-prong strategy:

- Tighten the footprint of the Big 12

- Re-focus the ACC into a football-first conference

- The SEC becomes the all-sports conference, no longer as football heavy


How:

Move North Carolina, Virginia, Duke to the SEC. Pick up South Florida along the way

The ACC ends the geographical isolation of Central Florida, Cincinnati and West Virginia by bringing them in

The Big 12 picks up Memphis and Southern Methodist, recreating a division that closely resembles the Southwest Conference, with Memphis playing the role of Arkansas. Then finishes off by picking up Colorado State, to bridge the gap between BYU and OK State/KSU/KU/ISU

Check out the "new" ACC, with the sports focus in parentheses:

Miami (football)
Syracuse (basketball/lacrosse)
Pitt (football)
Louisville (basketball/football)
West Virginia (football)
Cincinnati (football/basketball)
Virginia Tech (football)
Wake Forest (basketball)
Boston College (hockey)
Florida State (football)
Clemson (football)
Georgia Tech (football)
Central Florida (football)
NC State (football/basketball)

Wouldn't this conference be much more stable in the long run?

This is just another pieced together conference with zero identity and geographic cohesiveness. As I stated in a couple of previous posts, Clemson has little to no leverage to try and improve it's financial lot (i.e move to SEC or Big 10) so they could very well end up in such a makeshift conference. If a conference like this is truly the best Clemson can hope for, then it may just be time for Clemson to say screw it, accept it's fate, and make the move to FCS where they can hopefully challenge NDSU for football supremacy.
03-11-2022 12:16 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
JRsec Offline
Super Moderator
*

Posts: 37,903
Joined: Mar 2012
Reputation: 7737
I Root For: SEC
Location:
Post: #340
RE: If the SEC did expand again and did so from the ACC who should we take and why?
In all likelihood 1 of 4 things will appeal to ESPN:

1. Protect the Brands: Duke, North Carolina, Clemson and FSU to the SEC.

2. Protect the Markets: Florida State, Kansas, North Carolina, Virginia Tech/UVa

3. Build Hoops: Kansas, North Carolina, Duke, Virginia

4. Build Hoops and Markets: Duke, North Carolina, Virginia, FSU/Miami/S.Florida


1. Simple it builds and protects brands and then ESPN merges B12 and ACC schools into one 20 school conference.

2. Could work but UNC isn't coming w/o Duke.

3. This could easily appeal to ESPN who would want Clemson and FSU along with Va Tech and Miami to anchor the value of the new conference.

4. This could also appeal to ESPN and expand SEC presence in Fla.
03-14-2022 07:20 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 




User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)


Copyright © 2002-2024 Collegiate Sports Nation Bulletin Board System (CSNbbs), All Rights Reserved.
CSNbbs is an independent fan site and is in no way affiliated to the NCAA or any of the schools and conferences it represents.
This site monetizes links. FTC Disclosure.
We allow third-party companies to serve ads and/or collect certain anonymous information when you visit our web site. These companies may use non-personally identifiable information (e.g., click stream information, browser type, time and date, subject of advertisements clicked or scrolled over) during your visits to this and other Web sites in order to provide advertisements about goods and services likely to be of greater interest to you. These companies typically use a cookie or third party web beacon to collect this information. To learn more about this behavioral advertising practice or to opt-out of this type of advertising, you can visit http://www.networkadvertising.org.
Powered By MyBB, © 2002-2024 MyBB Group.