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
He1nousOne Offline
The One you Love to Hate.
*

Posts: 13,285
Joined: Oct 2011
Reputation: 215
I Root For: Iowa/ASU
Location: Arizona
Post: #41
RE: If the SEC did expand again and did so from the ACC who should we take and why?
(08-30-2014 02:42 AM)Zombiewoof Wrote:  Having been raised a Texas fan and loving the old SWC, I would hate to see them move to the ACC. My preference for them would be true independence like Notre Dame. That way, they could keep traditional rivalries they want to continue and schedule OOC nationally without restrictions.

That said, JR's SEC/ACC expansion scenarios make sense. But my personal preference -- without taking ESPN's desires into consideration -- would be a combination of schools that includes Kansas, Florida State, Notre Dame, Oklahoma, North Carolina and Duke to the SEC. Ideally, I would like to see them add four schools for three divisions of six teams. I assume Notre Dame would not be interested in joining the SEC and I also eliminate my preferred Florida State, North Carolina and Duke from the equation, since demographics, markets and footprint are more important in this discussion, as well as ESPN's interests and preserving a strong ACC. Therefore, I'd be willing to take Kansas, Oklahoma, NC State and Virginia Tech to form an 18-school SEC, leaving the ACC with 12 schools. If Texas were willing to forego independence to join the ACC, the conference could invite five other Big XII members to tag along. A western division of Texas, Baylor (or TCU or Texas Tech), Oklahoma State, Kansas State and Iowa State would have to make the stronger ACC football programs happy. I'd rather Baylor go east and have Texas Tech apply for PAC membership, since they were fired up about going there a couple of years ago. Unfortunately, that would likely leave the alma mater of several of my family members without a home - TCU.

TCU could reunite with Houston and SMU to reform the old SWC, which I would much prefer to a return to the Mountain West, CUSA or AAC membership.

Texas independence like Notre Dame's is exactly what I am calling for and exactly what you want to see.

Texas goes with two other Texas schools and has protected games against them yearly. That means four other games against ACC schools. FSU? Clemson? North Carolina? Virginia Tech? Miami? Louisville? There are other good options too AND they will get more coverage than what the Big 12 is getting from their match ups.

You get yearly match ups with the likes of Oklahoma and Texas Tech on an OOC basis. I am sure Notre Dame would be up for a yearly match up. You get your California game yearly. You can then play two lesser Texas schools as well on a yearly basis.

That is exactly what you want, look at all that gameplay in the State of Texas. It is better than what they have now. They get EVERYTHING that they like about the Big 12 all while moving into a Conference that has a much larger viewership, especially if three Texas schools are admitted. The ACC supports many more sports than the Big 12 does which would allow Texas to be better contenders for the Director's Cup.

It is perfect for Texas.
08-30-2014 10:04 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
He1nousOne Offline
The One you Love to Hate.
*

Posts: 13,285
Joined: Oct 2011
Reputation: 215
I Root For: Iowa/ASU
Location: Arizona
Post: #42
RE: If the SEC did expand again and did so from the ACC who should we take and why?
(08-30-2014 07:10 AM)JRsec Wrote:  
(08-29-2014 10:55 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  
(08-29-2014 09:14 PM)XLance Wrote:  
(08-29-2014 06:50 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  
(08-29-2014 04:54 PM)XLance Wrote:  My money has always been on Oklahoma and Baylor.

IMO Texas moves to the ACC as a last resort (with Notre Dame).
Face it Texas would like to reassemble the SWC and play 80-90% of their games within the state of Texas.
Texas is now a prisoner of their own success. Too good to go anywhere else but not good enough (or generous enough) to share enough wealth to re-invite Nebraska or Missouri (or Arkansas).
So will this give hope to Rice, SMU and Houston (and BYU/New Mexico)? Texas has enough money to wait out the answer

I wholeheartedly disagree with the sentiment about Texas wanting to go back in time. Just the opposite, they show with their conference move and with their OOC scheduling that they are thinking National more than ever.

They definitely will want to maintain their presence within the State of Texas.

That is what is so perfect about a partial membership for Texas with the ACC. They can go to having 6 OOC games and 6 games with the ACC. If they get two other Texas teams into the ACC and are able to get a similar agreement with the ACC that Notre Dame passed on then that means two of those six ACC games would likely be against the two Texas teams that joined the ACC.

One OOC game against Oklahoma, which I count as a Texas game due to the RRR being at the Fairgrounds. One OOC game against Texas Tech. One OOC game against a California team every year. One OOC game against Notre Dame. That leaves two slots which potentially could both be from Texas.

That means six Texas games a year and likely Notre Dame in Texas on some years for a seventh.

They can have the best of both worlds. They can have an extremely strong presence in Texas while at the same time nationalizing themselves into the areas they want to be in.

H1, I don't think that the ACC would take Texas as a partial member.....one is enough. What I would look for is Texas going to the PAC if they want to go anywhere as a partial.

Actually zero is enough, you guys caved in order to get Notre Dame. You really think Swofford and crew wouldn't cave to get a similar brand? It IS the most well funded Athletic Department in the country. They may be Texas but the Austin culture would actually fit quite nicely on the East Coast.

I think you don't like the idea of seeing the ACC do it again. I also think you don't like the idea of the ACC allowing Texas to bring friends. Opening up a large pipeline to the State of Texas though would be huge for much of the ACC that does not reside in the States of Florida, Georgia and South Carolina.

I do appreciate your opinion as a long time ACC and North Carolina guy but on this one I am chalking it up to ESPN being able to leverage this more so than ACC desire.

Swofford would take Texas so fast Bevo wouldn't have time to even moo! The prospect of bolstering a basketball conference with Texas and Notre Dame would be too enticing to pass on. Plus the prospect of 26 million viewers and a ready made network is just too tempting.

If U.N.C./Duke/ or UVa tried to stop it all it would accomplish is to drive Georgia Tech, Florida State, Clemson, and Miami into agreement on the dissolution of the ACC. To reject such an opportunity would end the truce between the basketball and football schools in the ACC. The Big 12 could stand to pick up as many as 6 while the SEC and Big 10 picked up the rest.

Nobody in the ACC claims to want that kind of rift. The result is H1 is right and it's "Yippie ki yay Cow Pattie!"

I don't know if it would cause that drastic of a reaction because earning a dissolution vote in the ACC now would be extremely difficult to do. I would be interested in seeing you break down the numbers on that per school as to whom would be willing to go that route.

I do agree though that passing on a Texas +2 situation would absolutely irritate the football schools. I think you have to look to the likes of Louisville, Pitt and Syracuse as to schools that would absolutely love to see the ACC move into the State of Texas in a very strong manner. If Louisville and Pitt could land in a four team division with Baylor and TCU that would be massively huge for them. By being in the ACC they have a natural bridge to Florida. To have that natural bridge AND all of a sudden find themselves with an extremely strong tie in to the State of Texas?
08-30-2014 10:08 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
john01992 Offline
Former ESPNer still in recovery mode

Posts: 16,277
Joined: Jul 2013
I Root For: John0 out!!!!
Location: The Worst P5 Program
Post: #43
RE: If the SEC did expand again and did so from the ACC who should we take and why?
"Not everyone is as excited to join your league as you think"

I only say this because Big Ten fans just went through a painful lesson on this during realignment. Even obvious moves like FSU/Clemson to the SEC are not so obvious. Schools value the lesser things such as olympic sports, academic association, and having an easier SOS.

I think FSU wanting to leave the ACC was WAY overblown by people who had a clear agenda for the ACC to fail. I think if there was any consideration for FSU about leaving the ACC it was in the form of resentment about the way the ACC disregarded FSU's thoughts and feelings on how the conference should be run during conference realignment with SU/Pitt.

If money is a factor in forcing an ACC school to leave for the SEC, it will be due to a gap so massive that schools will feel that it is at the point of "do or die."

13/14 schools don't sign a GOR + $53 mill exit fee if they didn't have an extremely strong willpower to remain in their current league.
08-30-2014 08:33 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
JRsec Offline
Super Moderator
*

Posts: 31,861
Joined: Mar 2012
Reputation: 4741
I Root For: SEC
Location:
Post: #44
RE: If the SEC did expand again and did so from the ACC who should we take and why?
(08-30-2014 08:33 PM)john01992 Wrote:  "Not everyone is as excited to join your league as you think"

I only say this because Big Ten fans just went through a painful lesson on this during realignment. Even obvious moves like FSU/Clemson to the SEC are not so obvious. Schools value the lesser things such as olympic sports, academic association, and having an easier SOS.

I think FSU wanting to leave the ACC was WAY overblown by people who had a clear agenda for the ACC to fail. I think if there was any consideration for FSU about leaving the ACC it was in the form of resentment about the way the ACC disregarded FSU's thoughts and feelings on how the conference should be run during conference realignment with SU/Pitt.

If money is a factor in forcing an ACC school to leave for the SEC, it will be due to a gap so massive that schools will feel that it is at the point of "do or die."

13/14 schools don't sign a GOR + $53 mill exit fee if they didn't have an extremely strong willpower to remain in their current league.

1. They signed out of fear of losing any leverage if things disintegrated. There is no leverage for better deals in a run. And it was very clear there wouldn't be spots for everyone.

2. The difference will wind up being 8 figures within a few years. Considering the starting earning points of the Big 10 and SEC and how they dominate the top twenty spots in total earnings, such a difference would only enhance a gigantic gap that already exists. Comparing a couple of million on a TV contract is not even 20% of the total picture John. But when the TV money gap grows then the top earners that gross over 100 million a year will have surpassed the top schools in the ACC by as much as 30 million a year, and in some case even a lot more, depending upon the schools compared.

3. I have no doubt but what the core of the ACC wants to stay together, but I wouldn't put much stock in how loyal the football first schools will remain in the face of a chasm that particularly affects Florida State, Clemson, Georgia Tech and Miami. Virginia Tech has some decisions to make too. I wouldn't be too surprised if the Big 10 goes to 16 with Virginia Tech and Kansas at some point. For Wake Forest, Virginia, and Duke it is a moot issue, they will try to stay together. North Carolina will have to do some soul searching at that time. But if the Heels stay as well then the ACC will survive and limp on as a great basketball conference inclusive of Pitt and Syracuse, but it will essentially become the best G6 conference in football and remain a power conference in hoops. Notre Dame? Who knows? I wouldn't even be surprised if Georgia Tech and Miami consciously made the decision to accept a de-emphasis in football and remain with a solid academic core.

But with the right influx of credentials in pigskin I think all of it changes and a solid P4 is born.
(This post was last modified: 08-30-2014 09:01 PM by JRsec.)
08-30-2014 08:48 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Lenvillecards Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 6,442
Joined: Nov 2013
Reputation: 373
I Root For: Louisville
Location:
Post: #45
Re: If the SEC did expand again and did so from the ACC who should we take and why?
I agree with John here & I think the revenue difference is best case/ worst case scenario for the B1G/SEC & the ACC. FSU had a difficult time finding a a partner to leave with. FSU signed the GoR after seeing the revenue potential from Swofford.

Sent from my VM670 using Tapatalk 2
(This post was last modified: 08-31-2014 10:14 AM by Lenvillecards.)
08-31-2014 07:40 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
JRsec Offline
Super Moderator
*

Posts: 31,861
Joined: Mar 2012
Reputation: 4741
I Root For: SEC
Location:
Post: #46
RE: If the SEC did expand again and did so from the ACC who should we take and why?
(08-31-2014 07:40 AM)Lenvillecards Wrote:  I agree with John here & I think the revenue difference is best case/ worst case scenario for the B1G/SEC & the ACC. FSU had a difficult time finding a a partner to leave with. FSU signed the GoR after seeing the revenue potential from Swafford.

Sent from my VM670 using Tapatalk 2

Lenville the disparity is going to be much larger than it is now and the total revenue is the number you need to look at, not TV contracts. It will be a major destabilizing factor.

You are a respectful poster and you are welcome on this board anytime whether you agree or not. But before the ACC crowd jumps you it's "John Swofford".

I think Florida State signed because they had a traitor as a president at the time (now at Penn State) and because Clemson alone wasn't enough of a traveling companion to consider the Big 12 offer seriously, and the SEC was not going to be paid by ESPN to destabilize their investment in the ACC. So FSU really had no option but to sign.
08-31-2014 07:50 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
USAFMEDIC Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 5,865
Joined: Jun 2010
Reputation: 165
I Root For: MIZZOU/FSU/USM
Location: Biloxi, MS
Post: #47
RE: If the SEC did expand again and did so from the ACC who should we take and why?
Every time a contract for the networks comes up for renewal, the new contract will be best for a while, until the next one. The B1G will get a dandy new contract, then the SEC will pass them when their's comes up again. The PAC may hang in there. I do not know about the ACC. I look at the ACC, and sometimes wonder why they have so many problems with this revenue thing. They have a lot of good schools...even in football.
08-31-2014 11:34 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
He1nousOne Offline
The One you Love to Hate.
*

Posts: 13,285
Joined: Oct 2011
Reputation: 215
I Root For: Iowa/ASU
Location: Arizona
Post: #48
RE: If the SEC did expand again and did so from the ACC who should we take and why?
I don't think FSU thought movement to the Big 12 was a good move without more than just Clemson and I don't think they had that kind of support from the schools they would have wanted to go with nor do I think that the Big 12 was ready to do something that drastic.

I do think FSU would have loved to join the Big Ten but they knew it depended on some other schools to their North saying yes first. The chain of dominos never got started.

I am not sure FSU would love to be in the SEC at this point. FSU is already winning championships in the ACC, the SEC would only make it more difficult for them. Perhaps in the future the money difference would be considerable enough but unfortunately they signed that GoR agreement and are now more likely to be held to the 52 million than Maryland was. That means the difference in money between the SEC and ACC would have to be huge.

We all have to face it that the only way we are getting major conference movement is by dissolution and The Big 12 has less votes to worry about than the ACC. That is why Swofford earned his pay, he helped solidify the ACC in advance by making the vote much harder to get.

I do believe 4 votes out of 14 is enough to keep the ACC from being dissolved if they wanted to play hardball and attempt to dissolve it. I think folks could come up with plenty of four vote combinations of schools that would stop that move for whatever reason.
08-31-2014 11:36 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
USAFMEDIC Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 5,865
Joined: Jun 2010
Reputation: 165
I Root For: MIZZOU/FSU/USM
Location: Biloxi, MS
Post: #49
RE: If the SEC did expand again and did so from the ACC who should we take and why?
(08-31-2014 11:36 AM)He1nousOne Wrote:  I don't think FSU thought movement to the Big 12 was a good move without more than just Clemson and I don't think they had that kind of support from the schools they would have wanted to go with nor do I think that the Big 12 was ready to do something that drastic.

I do think FSU would have loved to join the Big Ten but they knew it depended on some other schools to their North saying yes first. The chain of dominos never got started.

I am not sure FSU would love to be in the SEC at this point. FSU is already winning championships in the ACC, the SEC would only make it more difficult for them. Perhaps in the future the money difference would be considerable enough but unfortunately they signed that GoR agreement and are now more likely to be held to the 52 million than Maryland was. That means the difference in money between the SEC and ACC would have to be huge.

We all have to face it that the only way we are getting major conference movement is by dissolution and The Big 12 has less votes to worry about than the ACC. That is why Swofford earned his pay, he helped solidify the ACC in advance by making the vote much harder to get.

I do believe 4 votes out of 14 is enough to keep the ACC from being dissolved if they wanted to play hardball and attempt to dissolve it. I think folks could come up with plenty of four vote combinations of schools that would stop that move for whatever reason.
The four North Carolina schools alone could stop it. And they would.
08-31-2014 11:43 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
He1nousOne Offline
The One you Love to Hate.
*

Posts: 13,285
Joined: Oct 2011
Reputation: 215
I Root For: Iowa/ASU
Location: Arizona
Post: #50
RE: If the SEC did expand again and did so from the ACC who should we take and why?
(08-31-2014 11:43 AM)USAFMEDIC Wrote:  
(08-31-2014 11:36 AM)He1nousOne Wrote:  I don't think FSU thought movement to the Big 12 was a good move without more than just Clemson and I don't think they had that kind of support from the schools they would have wanted to go with nor do I think that the Big 12 was ready to do something that drastic.

I do think FSU would have loved to join the Big Ten but they knew it depended on some other schools to their North saying yes first. The chain of dominos never got started.

I am not sure FSU would love to be in the SEC at this point. FSU is already winning championships in the ACC, the SEC would only make it more difficult for them. Perhaps in the future the money difference would be considerable enough but unfortunately they signed that GoR agreement and are now more likely to be held to the 52 million than Maryland was. That means the difference in money between the SEC and ACC would have to be huge.

We all have to face it that the only way we are getting major conference movement is by dissolution and The Big 12 has less votes to worry about than the ACC. That is why Swofford earned his pay, he helped solidify the ACC in advance by making the vote much harder to get.

I do believe 4 votes out of 14 is enough to keep the ACC from being dissolved if they wanted to play hardball and attempt to dissolve it. I think folks could come up with plenty of four vote combinations of schools that would stop that move for whatever reason.
The four North Carolina schools alone could stop it. And they would.

Or a combination of Louisville, Pitt, Syracuse and Boston College?
I don't really have a prepared reason for that particular combo. The point being that any group of four that felt like where they would end up wouldn't be to their liking as much as the current ACC, they could cease a dissolution.

Placing 10 teams that are centralized for the most part is much easier than placing 14 teams that are all on one side of the country.
08-31-2014 01:25 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
XLance Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 12,088
Joined: Mar 2008
Reputation: 500
I Root For: Carolina
Location: Greensboro, NC
Post: #51
RE: If the SEC did expand again and did so from the ACC who should we take and why?
(08-30-2014 08:48 PM)JRsec Wrote:  
(08-30-2014 08:33 PM)john01992 Wrote:  "Not everyone is as excited to join your league as you think"

I only say this because Big Ten fans just went through a painful lesson on this during realignment. Even obvious moves like FSU/Clemson to the SEC are not so obvious. Schools value the lesser things such as olympic sports, academic association, and having an easier SOS.

I think FSU wanting to leave the ACC was WAY overblown by people who had a clear agenda for the ACC to fail. I think if there was any consideration for FSU about leaving the ACC it was in the form of resentment about the way the ACC disregarded FSU's thoughts and feelings on how the conference should be run during conference realignment with SU/Pitt.

If money is a factor in forcing an ACC school to leave for the SEC, it will be due to a gap so massive that schools will feel that it is at the point of "do or die."

13/14 schools don't sign a GOR + $53 mill exit fee if they didn't have an extremely strong willpower to remain in their current league.

1. They signed out of fear of losing any leverage if things disintegrated. There is no leverage for better deals in a run. And it was very clear there wouldn't be spots for everyone.

2. The difference will wind up being 8 figures within a few years. Considering the starting earning points of the Big 10 and SEC and how they dominate the top twenty spots in total earnings, such a difference would only enhance a gigantic gap that already exists. Comparing a couple of million on a TV contract is not even 20% of the total picture John. But when the TV money gap grows then the top earners that gross over 100 million a year will have surpassed the top schools in the ACC by as much as 30 million a year, and in some case even a lot more, depending upon the schools compared.

3. I have no doubt but what the core of the ACC wants to stay together, but I wouldn't put much stock in how loyal the football first schools will remain in the face of a chasm that particularly affects Florida State, Clemson, Georgia Tech and Miami. Virginia Tech has some decisions to make too. I wouldn't be too surprised if the Big 10 goes to 16 with Virginia Tech and Kansas at some point. For Wake Forest, Virginia, and Duke it is a moot issue, they will try to stay together. North Carolina will have to do some soul searching at that time. But if the Heels stay as well then the ACC will survive and limp on as a great basketball conference inclusive of Pitt and Syracuse, but it will essentially become the best G6 conference in football and remain a power conference in hoops. Notre Dame? Who knows? I wouldn't even be surprised if Georgia Tech and Miami consciously made the decision to accept a de-emphasis in football and remain with a solid academic core.

But with the right influx of credentials in pigskin I think all of it changes and a solid P4 is born.

JR you were doing just great until your last sentence.
1)Let's see you had Va. Tech and Kansas going to the B1G. That's OK, the ACC thrived for over 50 years without Va. Tech, and even though they would be missed, I'm sure the ACC could do just fine without them.
2) No offense to you, but if Carolina's decision came down to the SEC or staying with Duke, UVa, and Wake Forest (and as you said Syracuse and Pitt) well like I said no offense but we won't be bowing to Birmingham. 3)AND as you said if Georgia Tech and Miami decided to stick around too, with Notre Dame (allowing them to keep the same partial deal they already have). Wow! We couldn't ask for anything more.
4) The rest:
Florida State...It's really been nice, but...........I hope they don't let the door hit them in the rear.
NC State? They aren't going anywhere. In one word: politics.
Boston College? Where else are they going to go?
Louisville could go with Florida State to the SEC or stay with the other group in the great basketball league you spoke of. The smart play for the SEC would be to take Louisville. Louisville would strengthen the SEC where they are most vulnerable (their northern perimeter).
So in your scenario, it all comes down to Clemson's decision.
Well I could give you a litany of reasons for the Tigers to go in either direction.

Well I'm going with my gut and say that Clemson stays.04-jawdrop

Now the problem is that the SEC now has 17 teams. Oops! No problem, we can just move the only team in the conference that operates without an athletic department into a situation in which they will have an opportunity to be competitive. And then there is that academic component too. It's a win-win for everyone. You wouldn't see any tears from my side of the fence.04-cheers
(This post was last modified: 08-31-2014 01:49 PM by XLance.)
08-31-2014 01:45 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
USAFMEDIC Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 5,865
Joined: Jun 2010
Reputation: 165
I Root For: MIZZOU/FSU/USM
Location: Biloxi, MS
Post: #52
RE: If the SEC did expand again and did so from the ACC who should we take and why?
(08-31-2014 01:45 PM)XLance Wrote:  
(08-30-2014 08:48 PM)JRsec Wrote:  
(08-30-2014 08:33 PM)john01992 Wrote:  "Not everyone is as excited to join your league as you think"

I only say this because Big Ten fans just went through a painful lesson on this during realignment. Even obvious moves like FSU/Clemson to the SEC are not so obvious. Schools value the lesser things such as olympic sports, academic association, and having an easier SOS.

I think FSU wanting to leave the ACC was WAY overblown by people who had a clear agenda for the ACC to fail. I think if there was any consideration for FSU about leaving the ACC it was in the form of resentment about the way the ACC disregarded FSU's thoughts and feelings on how the conference should be run during conference realignment with SU/Pitt.

If money is a factor in forcing an ACC school to leave for the SEC, it will be due to a gap so massive that schools will feel that it is at the point of "do or die."

13/14 schools don't sign a GOR + $53 mill exit fee if they didn't have an extremely strong willpower to remain in their current league.

1. They signed out of fear of losing any leverage if things disintegrated. There is no leverage for better deals in a run. And it was very clear there wouldn't be spots for everyone.

2. The difference will wind up being 8 figures within a few years. Considering the starting earning points of the Big 10 and SEC and how they dominate the top twenty spots in total earnings, such a difference would only enhance a gigantic gap that already exists. Comparing a couple of million on a TV contract is not even 20% of the total picture John. But when the TV money gap grows then the top earners that gross over 100 million a year will have surpassed the top schools in the ACC by as much as 30 million a year, and in some case even a lot more, depending upon the schools compared.

3. I have no doubt but what the core of the ACC wants to stay together, but I wouldn't put much stock in how loyal the football first schools will remain in the face of a chasm that particularly affects Florida State, Clemson, Georgia Tech and Miami. Virginia Tech has some decisions to make too. I wouldn't be too surprised if the Big 10 goes to 16 with Virginia Tech and Kansas at some point. For Wake Forest, Virginia, and Duke it is a moot issue, they will try to stay together. North Carolina will have to do some soul searching at that time. But if the Heels stay as well then the ACC will survive and limp on as a great basketball conference inclusive of Pitt and Syracuse, but it will essentially become the best G6 conference in football and remain a power conference in hoops. Notre Dame? Who knows? I wouldn't even be surprised if Georgia Tech and Miami consciously made the decision to accept a de-emphasis in football and remain with a solid academic core.

But with the right influx of credentials in pigskin I think all of it changes and a solid P4 is born.

JR you were doing just great until your last sentence.
1)Let's see you had Va. Tech and Kansas going to the B1G. That's OK, the ACC thrived for over 50 years without Va. Tech, and even though they would be missed, I'm sure the ACC could do just fine without them.
2) No offense to you, but if Carolina's decision came down to the SEC or staying with Duke, UVa, and Wake Forest (and as you said Syracuse and Pitt) well like I said no offense but we won't be bowing to Birmingham. 3)AND as you said if Georgia Tech and Miami decided to stick around too, with Notre Dame (allowing them to keep the same partial deal they already have). Wow! We couldn't ask for anything more.
4) The rest:
Florida State...It's really been nice, but...........I hope they don't let the door hit them in the rear.
NC State? They aren't going anywhere. In one word: politics.
Boston College? Where else are they going to go?
Louisville could go with Florida State to the SEC or stay with the other group in the great basketball league you spoke of. The smart play for the SEC would be to take Louisville. Louisville would strengthen the SEC where they are most vulnerable (their northern perimeter).
So in your scenario, it all comes down to Clemson's decision.
Well I could give you a litany of reasons for the Tigers to go in either direction.

Well I'm going with my gut and say that Clemson stays.04-jawdrop

Now the problem is that the SEC now has 17 teams. Oops! No problem, we can just move the only team in the conference that operates without an athletic department into a situation in which they will have an opportunity to be competitive. And then there is that academic component too. It's a win-win for everyone. You wouldn't see any tears from my side of the fence.04-cheers
X ... the problem for the ACC is despite your dislike for FSU, they remain a super national brand, and your network dollars would crumble if they ever left the ACC. Same goes to a lesser degree with Clemson. Like UT and OU leaving the Big XII.
08-31-2014 03:04 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
JRsec Offline
Super Moderator
*

Posts: 31,861
Joined: Mar 2012
Reputation: 4741
I Root For: SEC
Location:
Post: #53
RE: If the SEC did expand again and did so from the ACC who should we take and why?
You can stop a vote with 5. N.D. gets a vote so 75% requires 5. However, dissolution is unlikely unless there is major movement to the Big 10 and SEC, and even perhaps the Big 12. So no, that's not likely. But remember in 10 years if a school wants to move they don't need votes to hold them there. They simply refuse to renew the GOR and they are free to move with little penalty. And that goes for the Big 12 and ACC.
08-31-2014 03:47 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
XLance Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 12,088
Joined: Mar 2008
Reputation: 500
I Root For: Carolina
Location: Greensboro, NC
Post: #54
RE: If the SEC did expand again and did so from the ACC who should we take and why?
(08-31-2014 03:04 PM)USAFMEDIC Wrote:  
(08-31-2014 01:45 PM)XLance Wrote:  
(08-30-2014 08:48 PM)JRsec Wrote:  
(08-30-2014 08:33 PM)john01992 Wrote:  "Not everyone is as excited to join your league as you think"

I only say this because Big Ten fans just went through a painful lesson on this during realignment. Even obvious moves like FSU/Clemson to the SEC are not so obvious. Schools value the lesser things such as olympic sports, academic association, and having an easier SOS.

I think FSU wanting to leave the ACC was WAY overblown by people who had a clear agenda for the ACC to fail. I think if there was any consideration for FSU about leaving the ACC it was in the form of resentment about the way the ACC disregarded FSU's thoughts and feelings on how the conference should be run during conference realignment with SU/Pitt.

If money is a factor in forcing an ACC school to leave for the SEC, it will be due to a gap so massive that schools will feel that it is at the point of "do or die."

13/14 schools don't sign a GOR + $53 mill exit fee if they didn't have an extremely strong willpower to remain in their current league.

1. They signed out of fear of losing any leverage if things disintegrated. There is no leverage for better deals in a run. And it was very clear there wouldn't be spots for everyone.

2. The difference will wind up being 8 figures within a few years. Considering the starting earning points of the Big 10 and SEC and how they dominate the top twenty spots in total earnings, such a difference would only enhance a gigantic gap that already exists. Comparing a couple of million on a TV contract is not even 20% of the total picture John. But when the TV money gap grows then the top earners that gross over 100 million a year will have surpassed the top schools in the ACC by as much as 30 million a year, and in some case even a lot more, depending upon the schools compared.

3. I have no doubt but what the core of the ACC wants to stay together, but I wouldn't put much stock in how loyal the football first schools will remain in the face of a chasm that particularly affects Florida State, Clemson, Georgia Tech and Miami. Virginia Tech has some decisions to make too. I wouldn't be too surprised if the Big 10 goes to 16 with Virginia Tech and Kansas at some point. For Wake Forest, Virginia, and Duke it is a moot issue, they will try to stay together. North Carolina will have to do some soul searching at that time. But if the Heels stay as well then the ACC will survive and limp on as a great basketball conference inclusive of Pitt and Syracuse, but it will essentially become the best G6 conference in football and remain a power conference in hoops. Notre Dame? Who knows? I wouldn't even be surprised if Georgia Tech and Miami consciously made the decision to accept a de-emphasis in football and remain with a solid academic core.

But with the right influx of credentials in pigskin I think all of it changes and a solid P4 is born.

JR you were doing just great until your last sentence.
1)Let's see you had Va. Tech and Kansas going to the B1G. That's OK, the ACC thrived for over 50 years without Va. Tech, and even though they would be missed, I'm sure the ACC could do just fine without them.
2) No offense to you, but if Carolina's decision came down to the SEC or staying with Duke, UVa, and Wake Forest (and as you said Syracuse and Pitt) well like I said no offense but we won't be bowing to Birmingham. 3)AND as you said if Georgia Tech and Miami decided to stick around too, with Notre Dame (allowing them to keep the same partial deal they already have). Wow! We couldn't ask for anything more.
4) The rest:
Florida State...It's really been nice, but...........I hope they don't let the door hit them in the rear.
NC State? They aren't going anywhere. In one word: politics.
Boston College? Where else are they going to go?
Louisville could go with Florida State to the SEC or stay with the other group in the great basketball league you spoke of. The smart play for the SEC would be to take Louisville. Louisville would strengthen the SEC where they are most vulnerable (their northern perimeter).
So in your scenario, it all comes down to Clemson's decision.
Well I could give you a litany of reasons for the Tigers to go in either direction.

Well I'm going with my gut and say that Clemson stays.04-jawdrop

Now the problem is that the SEC now has 17 teams. Oops! No problem, we can just move the only team in the conference that operates without an athletic department into a situation in which they will have an opportunity to be competitive. And then there is that academic component too. It's a win-win for everyone. You wouldn't see any tears from my side of the fence.04-cheers
X ... the problem for the ACC is despite your dislike for FSU, they remain a super national brand, and your network dollars would crumble if they ever left the ACC. Same goes to a lesser degree with Clemson. Like UT and OU leaving the Big XII.

Medic,
FSU has a good athletic program that continues to get better. My problem with the 'noles is that they are not "team" players. I think that stems from being an independent for so many years. I also think that is where some of the friction between Penn State and the B1G comes from, and it is the primary reason that I don't really care to see Notre Dame as a full time member of the ACC.
And while I agree that FSU is a good network draw, I would not put them on the same level as Texas and Oklahoma would be to the Big 12, or Ohio State and Michigan would be to the B1G, or even Southern Cal would be to the PAC.
(This post was last modified: 09-01-2014 10:20 AM by XLance.)
09-01-2014 10:19 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
He1nousOne Offline
The One you Love to Hate.
*

Posts: 13,285
Joined: Oct 2011
Reputation: 215
I Root For: Iowa/ASU
Location: Arizona
Post: #55
RE: If the SEC did expand again and did so from the ACC who should we take and why?
(09-01-2014 10:19 AM)XLance Wrote:  
(08-31-2014 03:04 PM)USAFMEDIC Wrote:  
(08-31-2014 01:45 PM)XLance Wrote:  
(08-30-2014 08:48 PM)JRsec Wrote:  
(08-30-2014 08:33 PM)john01992 Wrote:  "Not everyone is as excited to join your league as you think"

I only say this because Big Ten fans just went through a painful lesson on this during realignment. Even obvious moves like FSU/Clemson to the SEC are not so obvious. Schools value the lesser things such as olympic sports, academic association, and having an easier SOS.

I think FSU wanting to leave the ACC was WAY overblown by people who had a clear agenda for the ACC to fail. I think if there was any consideration for FSU about leaving the ACC it was in the form of resentment about the way the ACC disregarded FSU's thoughts and feelings on how the conference should be run during conference realignment with SU/Pitt.

If money is a factor in forcing an ACC school to leave for the SEC, it will be due to a gap so massive that schools will feel that it is at the point of "do or die."

13/14 schools don't sign a GOR + $53 mill exit fee if they didn't have an extremely strong willpower to remain in their current league.

1. They signed out of fear of losing any leverage if things disintegrated. There is no leverage for better deals in a run. And it was very clear there wouldn't be spots for everyone.

2. The difference will wind up being 8 figures within a few years. Considering the starting earning points of the Big 10 and SEC and how they dominate the top twenty spots in total earnings, such a difference would only enhance a gigantic gap that already exists. Comparing a couple of million on a TV contract is not even 20% of the total picture John. But when the TV money gap grows then the top earners that gross over 100 million a year will have surpassed the top schools in the ACC by as much as 30 million a year, and in some case even a lot more, depending upon the schools compared.

3. I have no doubt but what the core of the ACC wants to stay together, but I wouldn't put much stock in how loyal the football first schools will remain in the face of a chasm that particularly affects Florida State, Clemson, Georgia Tech and Miami. Virginia Tech has some decisions to make too. I wouldn't be too surprised if the Big 10 goes to 16 with Virginia Tech and Kansas at some point. For Wake Forest, Virginia, and Duke it is a moot issue, they will try to stay together. North Carolina will have to do some soul searching at that time. But if the Heels stay as well then the ACC will survive and limp on as a great basketball conference inclusive of Pitt and Syracuse, but it will essentially become the best G6 conference in football and remain a power conference in hoops. Notre Dame? Who knows? I wouldn't even be surprised if Georgia Tech and Miami consciously made the decision to accept a de-emphasis in football and remain with a solid academic core.

But with the right influx of credentials in pigskin I think all of it changes and a solid P4 is born.

JR you were doing just great until your last sentence.
1)Let's see you had Va. Tech and Kansas going to the B1G. That's OK, the ACC thrived for over 50 years without Va. Tech, and even though they would be missed, I'm sure the ACC could do just fine without them.
2) No offense to you, but if Carolina's decision came down to the SEC or staying with Duke, UVa, and Wake Forest (and as you said Syracuse and Pitt) well like I said no offense but we won't be bowing to Birmingham. 3)AND as you said if Georgia Tech and Miami decided to stick around too, with Notre Dame (allowing them to keep the same partial deal they already have). Wow! We couldn't ask for anything more.
4) The rest:
Florida State...It's really been nice, but...........I hope they don't let the door hit them in the rear.
NC State? They aren't going anywhere. In one word: politics.
Boston College? Where else are they going to go?
Louisville could go with Florida State to the SEC or stay with the other group in the great basketball league you spoke of. The smart play for the SEC would be to take Louisville. Louisville would strengthen the SEC where they are most vulnerable (their northern perimeter).
So in your scenario, it all comes down to Clemson's decision.
Well I could give you a litany of reasons for the Tigers to go in either direction.

Well I'm going with my gut and say that Clemson stays.04-jawdrop

Now the problem is that the SEC now has 17 teams. Oops! No problem, we can just move the only team in the conference that operates without an athletic department into a situation in which they will have an opportunity to be competitive. And then there is that academic component too. It's a win-win for everyone. You wouldn't see any tears from my side of the fence.04-cheers
X ... the problem for the ACC is despite your dislike for FSU, they remain a super national brand, and your network dollars would crumble if they ever left the ACC. Same goes to a lesser degree with Clemson. Like UT and OU leaving the Big XII.

Medic,
FSU has a good athletic program that continues to get better. My problem with the 'noles is that they are not "team" players. I think that stems from being an independent for so many years. I also think that is where some of the friction between Penn State and the B1G comes from, and it is the primary reason that I don't really care to see Notre Dame as a full time member of the ACC.
And while I agree that FSU is a good network draw, I would not put them on the same level as Texas and Oklahoma would be to the Big 12, or Ohio State and Michigan would be to the B1G, or even Southern Cal would be to the PAC.

None the less, right now you need them. It's not like their pressure has been a bad thing. Without it your leaders might not have added Louisville. When the ACC picked them up that was a real eye opener for me. That showed that the mentality had changed in ACC land.
09-01-2014 11:44 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
john01992 Offline
Former ESPNer still in recovery mode

Posts: 16,277
Joined: Jul 2013
I Root For: John0 out!!!!
Location: The Worst P5 Program
Post: #56
RE: If the SEC did expand again and did so from the ACC who should we take and why?
(08-30-2014 08:48 PM)JRsec Wrote:  
(08-30-2014 08:33 PM)john01992 Wrote:  "Not everyone is as excited to join your league as you think"

I only say this because Big Ten fans just went through a painful lesson on this during realignment. Even obvious moves like FSU/Clemson to the SEC are not so obvious. Schools value the lesser things such as olympic sports, academic association, and having an easier SOS.

I think FSU wanting to leave the ACC was WAY overblown by people who had a clear agenda for the ACC to fail. I think if there was any consideration for FSU about leaving the ACC it was in the form of resentment about the way the ACC disregarded FSU's thoughts and feelings on how the conference should be run during conference realignment with SU/Pitt.

If money is a factor in forcing an ACC school to leave for the SEC, it will be due to a gap so massive that schools will feel that it is at the point of "do or die."

13/14 schools don't sign a GOR + $53 mill exit fee if they didn't have an extremely strong willpower to remain in their current league.

1. They signed out of fear of losing any leverage if things disintegrated. There is no leverage for better deals in a run. And it was very clear there wouldn't be spots for everyone.

2. The difference will wind up being 8 figures within a few years. Considering the starting earning points of the Big 10 and SEC and how they dominate the top twenty spots in total earnings, such a difference would only enhance a gigantic gap that already exists. Comparing a couple of million on a TV contract is not even 20% of the total picture John. But when the TV money gap grows then the top earners that gross over 100 million a year will have surpassed the top schools in the ACC by as much as 30 million a year, and in some case even a lot more, depending upon the schools compared.

3. I have no doubt but what the core of the ACC wants to stay together, but I wouldn't put much stock in how loyal the football first schools will remain in the face of a chasm that particularly affects Florida State, Clemson, Georgia Tech and Miami. Virginia Tech has some decisions to make too. I wouldn't be too surprised if the Big 10 goes to 16 with Virginia Tech and Kansas at some point. For Wake Forest, Virginia, and Duke it is a moot issue, they will try to stay together. North Carolina will have to do some soul searching at that time. But if the Heels stay as well then the ACC will survive and limp on as a great basketball conference inclusive of Pitt and Syracuse, but it will essentially become the best G6 conference in football and remain a power conference in hoops. Notre Dame? Who knows? I wouldn't even be surprised if Georgia Tech and Miami consciously made the decision to accept a de-emphasis in football and remain with a solid academic core.

But with the right influx of credentials in pigskin I think all of it changes and a solid P4 is born.

1. That is an inference but not a fact. We agree that the core-6 of the ACC has a strong attachment, but I believe you are painfully under estimating the rest of the league. There are benefits to being a large fish in a small pond, and their are academic considerations as well. I'm not saying that an ACC ==> SEC move won't happen, I'm just saying the desirability of ACC schools to do that is not as high as one would assume.

2. We like to think that the conferences are getting paid based on the value that they produce to the networks, but what conference realignment has shown so far is that conferences are getting paid based on what the MARKET is. Despite everything we have seen, the P5 are all sitting at 20 mill per school. That's insane to think about considering there is absolutely no way all the P5 conferences are equal in terms of the TV value they collectively own. TBH I think at this point, sooner or later the T1 & T2 revenue is going to balance out with only minor differences between the P5.

3. The revenue disparity is going to come in conference networks, which only helps my argument because that doesn't exactly help the argument that FSU/CU will leave the ACC. The SEC already has those states and the Big 12 isn't going to build a conference network anytime soon. While the ACC still doesn't have their own network, what we are seeing is a new trend where conferences are having a much easier time starting one up. This is evident with the Big Ten, Pac12, & SEC each progressively starting up their own networks with less hostility from the networks during negotiations.
09-01-2014 07:30 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
JRsec Offline
Super Moderator
*

Posts: 31,861
Joined: Mar 2012
Reputation: 4741
I Root For: SEC
Location:
Post: #57
RE: If the SEC did expand again and did so from the ACC who should we take and why?
(09-01-2014 07:30 PM)john01992 Wrote:  
(08-30-2014 08:48 PM)JRsec Wrote:  
(08-30-2014 08:33 PM)john01992 Wrote:  "Not everyone is as excited to join your league as you think"

I only say this because Big Ten fans just went through a painful lesson on this during realignment. Even obvious moves like FSU/Clemson to the SEC are not so obvious. Schools value the lesser things such as olympic sports, academic association, and having an easier SOS.

I think FSU wanting to leave the ACC was WAY overblown by people who had a clear agenda for the ACC to fail. I think if there was any consideration for FSU about leaving the ACC it was in the form of resentment about the way the ACC disregarded FSU's thoughts and feelings on how the conference should be run during conference realignment with SU/Pitt.

If money is a factor in forcing an ACC school to leave for the SEC, it will be due to a gap so massive that schools will feel that it is at the point of "do or die."

13/14 schools don't sign a GOR + $53 mill exit fee if they didn't have an extremely strong willpower to remain in their current league.

1. They signed out of fear of losing any leverage if things disintegrated. There is no leverage for better deals in a run. And it was very clear there wouldn't be spots for everyone.

2. The difference will wind up being 8 figures within a few years. Considering the starting earning points of the Big 10 and SEC and how they dominate the top twenty spots in total earnings, such a difference would only enhance a gigantic gap that already exists. Comparing a couple of million on a TV contract is not even 20% of the total picture John. But when the TV money gap grows then the top earners that gross over 100 million a year will have surpassed the top schools in the ACC by as much as 30 million a year, and in some case even a lot more, depending upon the schools compared.

3. I have no doubt but what the core of the ACC wants to stay together, but I wouldn't put much stock in how loyal the football first schools will remain in the face of a chasm that particularly affects Florida State, Clemson, Georgia Tech and Miami. Virginia Tech has some decisions to make too. I wouldn't be too surprised if the Big 10 goes to 16 with Virginia Tech and Kansas at some point. For Wake Forest, Virginia, and Duke it is a moot issue, they will try to stay together. North Carolina will have to do some soul searching at that time. But if the Heels stay as well then the ACC will survive and limp on as a great basketball conference inclusive of Pitt and Syracuse, but it will essentially become the best G6 conference in football and remain a power conference in hoops. Notre Dame? Who knows? I wouldn't even be surprised if Georgia Tech and Miami consciously made the decision to accept a de-emphasis in football and remain with a solid academic core.

But with the right influx of credentials in pigskin I think all of it changes and a solid P4 is born.

1. That is an inference but not a fact. We agree that the core-6 of the ACC has a strong attachment, but I believe you are painfully under estimating the rest of the league. There are benefits to being a large fish in a small pond, and their are academic considerations as well. I'm not saying that an ACC ==> SEC move won't happen, I'm just saying the desirability of ACC schools to do that is not as high as one would assume.

2. We like to think that the conferences are getting paid based on the value that they produce to the networks, but what conference realignment has shown so far is that conferences are getting paid based on what the MARKET is. Despite everything we have seen, the P5 are all sitting at 20 mill per school. That's insane to think about considering there is absolutely no way all the P5 conferences are equal in terms of the TV value they collectively own. TBH I think at this point, sooner or later the T1 & T2 revenue is going to balance out with only minor differences between the P5.

3. The revenue disparity is going to come in conference networks, which only helps my argument because that doesn't exactly help the argument that FSU/CU will leave the ACC. The SEC already has those states and the Big 12 isn't going to build a conference network anytime soon. While the ACC still doesn't have their own network, what we are seeing is a new trend where conferences are having a much easier time starting one up. This is evident with the Big Ten, Pac12, & SEC each progressively starting up their own networks with less hostility from the networks during negotiations.

1. The merits of this point aren't clear enough to warrant an argument either way.

2. Revenue disparity is going to be a prime motivating factor to further realignment. The inability to get a network going easily is another. And you are ignoring any property rights that ESPN might obtain due to the placement of product.

The ACC is cobbled together more so than any conference not named the Big 12. It consists of the following subsets some of which share members and some of which do not share members:
Former Big East: Boston College, Miami, Pittsburgh, Syracuse, Virginia Tech

Former Big East.2: Louisville

Core ACC: Clemson, Duke, North Carolina, N.C. State, Virginia, Wake Forest

Former Independent: Georgia Tech and F.S.U.

Still quasi Independent: Notre Dame

Private: Boston College, Notre Dame, Duke, Wake Forest, Miami, Syracuse

Small Public: North Carolina, Virginia, Georgia Tech

Quasi Public: Pittsburgh

Larger Public: Virginia Tech, Florida State, and to a lesser extent Clemson, N.C. State and Louisville

Clearly Football First: Clemson, Florida State, Virginia Tech, Georgia Tech, and to a lesser extent Miami, and independent Notre Dame

Clearly Basketball First: Duke, North Carolina, Virginia, Wake Forest

Leaning Basketball First: Syracuse, Pitt, Boston College, N.C. State

Two Sport: Louisville

So John there is not much cohesion here.

Louisville's happy to be in because they "got nowhere else to go".
Notre Dame is happy to be affiliated because "I did it my way."
Syracuse, Pitt and B.C. just think it's better than the Big East but might be open to Big 10 overtures.
Virginia and North Carolina and Duke just want to rule.
Virginia Tech only feels obligated because Virginia got them in.
N.C. State doesn't have the pull to leave so they are stuck.
Wake Forest wouldn't be a part of any other P5.
Clemson may like the academics, but their interests aren't being optimized and there is dissension in the fan base over staying.
Florida State would leave if a better option truly was available.
Miami knows the ACC is their best chance for now.

In short I just don't buy your argument at all except for tobacco road and Virginia. Everything else is a graft both culturally and athletically. The best that can be said for Syracuse, Pitt and B.C. is that they would be a graft to the Big 10 as well and wouldn't be a perfect fit there either.

In fact the only part of your argument that I agree with totally is that it is the SEC's lack of need of a Georgia, South Carolina and Florida school that keeps things together in the ACC. But then that is because ESPN won't pay the SEC to take Clemson and F.S.U. for now. But if the Mouse could score long term rights to Big 10 product while shedding a portion of overhead to FOX that might change. If not holding onto a premier basketball conference is a must, but not so much that they will keep their most profitable product (the SEC and its new network) out of Virginia and North Carolina markets.

The compromise might be to swap a Vanderbilt for a N.C. State and to let the SEC add two to the West, or to pull that swap and let the SEC add an Oklahoma school and Virginia Tech while the ACC adds West Virginia. Or, for a swap that allows the SEC to add three to the west. But on that we'll see.

I'm not sure how this unfolds yet, but the options are all in ESPN's hands and not that of the SEC and ACC. I do know as the sole owner of ACC property that ESPN is right where they want to be, the sole broker of the best realignment property left on the board for the Big 10. That is why they acquired Pitt and Syracuse for the ACC and why they sewed up T3 for both Kansas and Texas as well. And why they paid the SEC to take Missouri. These chess moves were strategic blocks of Big 10 targets because Delany balked at their deal and started a network of his own which like that of the PAC suffered early distribution problems because of ESPN's pull.

This sure isn't about conferences and it sure is about corporate arm twisting and leveraging of product to secure both product placement and a more productive structure. ESPN knew when they signed the new ACC contract that a network would come up and that is why they so quickly sublet the property. Disparity is their tool, used or not, to either broker or secure the ACC depending on how bigger properties respond to their overtures.
(This post was last modified: 09-01-2014 08:29 PM by JRsec.)
09-01-2014 08:17 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
jhawkmvp Offline
2nd String
*

Posts: 443
Joined: Dec 2013
Reputation: 35
I Root For: Kansas
Location: Over the Rainbow
Post: #58
RE: If the SEC did expand again and did so from the ACC who should we take and why?
Another point is that the longer the SEC is stuck at 14 schools (which really sucks for scheduling) the more likely they are to go ahead and take Clemson and FSU and gut a lot of the ACC's football value. It might not add much value to their network, due to having FL and SC schools already, but it would get the SEC more cash for their T1 and T2 because those schools would result more great match ups with the existing SEC schools the nation would want to see (and SEC T1/T@ is undervalued currently). I think the SEC has thought about going past 16 (look at the rumors of a ACC/SEC/B12 merger meeting).

If that happens can the rest of the ACC stay together? My guess is schools would be looking to bail. UNC expressed concerns about remaining financially competitive when UMD leaked the B1G projections (though it could have strictly been posturing to try to get more cash out of ESPN). Unless Miami returns to glory soon and VT as well there really would not be any FB program remaining there with national interest outside of a few ND away games each year. My guess is that the ACC would not last and the SEC would be able to get a some combo of ACC schools, including schools in VA and NC, that they covet and go to 18 or 20 schools.

UNC is the king of the ACC, but FSU is like OU (Texas is the B12 king) in that if they leave, the kingdom might not be worth ruling anymore due to lost football value, competitiveness, and perception. Both the B12 and ACC are at risk because there are schools of great value who would likely leave if they got the right offer from the B1G or SEC.
(This post was last modified: 09-05-2014 12:15 AM by jhawkmvp.)
09-05-2014 12:11 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
JRsec Offline
Super Moderator
*

Posts: 31,861
Joined: Mar 2012
Reputation: 4741
I Root For: SEC
Location:
Post: #59
RE: If the SEC did expand again and did so from the ACC who should we take and why?
(09-05-2014 12:11 AM)jhawkmvp Wrote:  Another point is that the longer the SEC is stuck at 14 schools (which really sucks for scheduling) the more likely they are to go ahead and take Clemson and FSU and gut a lot of the ACC's football value. It might not add much value to their network, due to having FL and SC schools already, but it would get the SEC more cash for their T1 and T2 because those schools would result more great match ups with the existing SEC schools the nation would want to see (and SEC T1/T@ is undervalued currently). I think the SEC has thought about going past 16 (look at the rumors of a ACC/SEC/B12 merger meeting).

If that happens can the rest of the ACC stay together? My guess is schools would be looking to bail. UNC expressed concerns about remaining financially competitive when UMD leaked the B1G projections (though it could have strictly been posturing to try to get more cash out of ESPN). Unless Miami returns to glory soon and VT as well there really would not be any FB program remaining there with national interest outside of a few ND away games each year. My guess is that the ACC would not last and the SEC would be able to get a some combo of ACC schools, including schools in VA and NC, that they covet and go to 18 or 20 schools.

UNC is the king of the ACC, but FSU is like OU (Texas is the B12 king) in that if they leave, the kingdom might not be worth ruling anymore due to lost football value, competitiveness, and perception. Both the B12 and ACC are at risk because there are schools of great value who would likely leave if they got the right offer from the B1G or SEC.

The big issue looming for the ACC is that I don't see anyway they get a network prior to 2021 when the sublet property rights expire and they can regain all of their T3 property. It corresponds to a couple of years prior to the GOR expiration. That's a potential deadly combination. When the SEC and Big 10 are consistently making more than 40 million per school on just TV rights the pressure will become immense for Clemson and F.S.U. Being outspent majorly by South Carolina and Florida will put them at a severe disadvantage from which the Carolina and Virginia schools are a bit more isolated. Georgia Tech and Miami will have some decisions to make as well.

If both the SEC and Big 10 can agree not to get too greedy there is no reason that each can't move to 20 out of the ACC. Such a move would dissolve the conference eliminating the GOR issue. However since ESPN owns the majority of the SEC and all of the ACC they can make any GOR issues essentially disappear by contract valuation should a school decide to depart the ACC early. All the SEC would have to do is cover 1/2 or a bit more of the 52 million exit fee (which they could easily do with loans if it were necessary). But I don't think we will have to go that route. Virginia, North Carolina and Duke could join B.C. Syracuse and Pitt and solidify the Big 10 quite nicely. If N.D. decides they can't be left out then Pitt or B.C. could be replaced. The SEC picks up N.C. State, Virginia Tech, Clemson, Florida State, Georgia Tech, and either Miami or Louisville and voila the deal is done.

N.D. finds a home if not in the Big 10, Wake is out, and Miami or Louisville goes looking.

Iowa State, Kansas and KState, Oklahoma and Okie St., Texas and Texas Tech, and Baylor all head to the PAC. T.C.U. is out as is W.V.U. in this scenario and we are down to 60 schools distributed geographically into existing networks where no additional overhead is required by the networks. The odd number permits the networks to work in the at large selection they are so desirous of and again it's done.

The teams don't have to be exact but the general idea here is how very doable it truly is, has been, and in some ways has already been set up to be.

I do not ever see Pitt, Syracuse, B.C., or UConn in the SEC. Nor do I ever see Florida State or Clemson in the Big 10. If the Big 10 doesn't want Duke then you might see U.N.C. and Duke to the SEC and N.C. State and Georgia Tech to the Big 10. I think such a quantum shift would necessitate N.D. full affiliation somewhere and the Big 10 is the superior fit for minor sports from an affordability standpoint.

I think disparity in income is the new carrot with which to entice the final moves. We'll see.
09-05-2014 03:29 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
vandiver49 Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 8,530
Joined: Aug 2011
Reputation: 315
I Root For: USNA/UTK
Location: West GA
Post: #60
RE: If the SEC did expand again and did so from the ACC who should we take and why?
(09-05-2014 03:29 AM)JRsec Wrote:  I think disparity in income is the new carrot with which to entice the final moves. We'll see.

Possibly, but since the ACC is owned by ESPN, the Mouse might feel inclined to keep the ACC within range of the SEC and B1G just on general principle. Its a move not without precedent as intervention from FOX and the WWL is the sole reason why the B12 still exists. I'm sure ESPN knows better than us any SEC---> ACC movement would bring into question the latter's stability and it is doubtful that ESPN could find a home for all 14 schools. And lets face it, an ACC addition only benefits to SEC in areas that are ancillary to play on the field.

If any conference is going away its definitely going to be the B12. Less members to disperse, the opportunity to do so is right around the corner, has the weaker brand and the logistics are easier for the rest of the P4 to swallow.
09-05-2014 06:17 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 




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


Copyright © 2002-2023 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, © 2002-2023 MyBB Group.