This year the ACC had 3 #1 seeds in Duke, Virginia, and UNC. All three of those seeds are still playing and could reach the Final Four. In fact, if FSU beats Gonzaga, the Final Four could turn into a second ACC tournament. The even if Duke loses to Virginia Tech, it could still be four ACC teams in Minneapolis.

On the other hand, the Final Four could also be: Michigan, Michigan State, Purdue, and Houston. Or it could be LSU, TN, KY, and Florida State.

A few years ago Mike Slive was blunt, "We have to get better in basketball." Since then, our basketball coaching ranks have improved, our scheduling has improved and we have got more teams in and they have gone further in the tournament than in the past. I am probably biased as a TN fan right now, but I do hope that the TN-KY rivalry continues putting on games like in the tournament for several years.

In the meantime, the ACC has also won two of the last three football championships, and three of the last six. No SEC team outside the state of Alabama has won it all since 2008 Florida.

Its probably not quite time for Sankey to say "We have to get better in football" (Georgia has been inches away the past couple of years). But, we are encroaching on the ACC's basketball territory and the ACC is encroaching on the SEC's football territory.

As a TN fan, it has been a while since basketball seemed to be the "bigger sport" over football, but the new era of recruiting and demographics, etc. have made that possible not only short term, but possibly long term (though I am still high on Pruitt).

When we talk expansion, we recognize that basketball does not move the meter nearly as much as football. And really, regarding football, it hasn't been the ACC as a whole, it has been Clemson and FSU that have the national championships.

For a while, several posters here have said Clemson and FSU are our best cultural fits. National championships in football back that up, and I think we now have another valid reason to take them: Protecting our football dominance.

But, surprisingly, the SEC is starting to or has always had a basketball culture that could potentially rival the ACC/Big 10. Yes, its mostly about coaches and Williams and Kryzyzeski are getting older, and Buzz may move on from Virginia Tech to Texas A&M as it is. And no, I'm not forgetting about wanting Texas/OK (though as I have posted on here for a while, I am much higher on OK than on Texas despite the admitted financial benefits to Texas, because I believe OK is a better cultural fit and because of potential problems Texas brings and dealing with A&M if we let Texas in.) And yes, the ACC is locked up for a good long while. But strategically speaking, if we take Clemson/FSU to protect our football dominance, I wonder if we really should make basketball-driven moves.

For one, the "sports rights bubble" may be about to pop (though again, people have been saying that for a while and it hasn't happened yet). For another, football does have alot of problems with concussions, etc. (I know basketball isn't injury free either.) For another, getting strong basketball schools also happens to coincide with strong academic schools.

But if the SEC can take a few of the ACCs basketball blue bloods, or I guess even just one AND we have protected our football dominance, we create a true super-conference.

Caveat: The FBI probe is still ongoing. If some schools get hammered by the NCAA over it, it could change the landscape drastically.

In addition, picking carefully might not hurt our football culture either: If Buzz stays at Virginia Tech and their football recovers, they could be a good basketball get as well as football get. We've already mentioned FSU. Duke does have issues as a smaller private, but UNC would definitely be a jewel if we could get them, especially without Duke, but even with Duke.

If we took FSU and Clemson for "football" and grabbed just UNC, we could still have room for a Texas or OK though without their "little brothers." We could also still grab Kansas if we so wanted.

I went to high school in Virginia where during the ACC tournament, my Latin teacher put the Duke game on the TV as we "worked." I can imagine a day when that happens in SEC country. Whether its for TN-KY, KY-UNC, UNC-Duke, or whatever matchup, I think the SEC can and should make even more strides at become a basketball conference, while still not neglecting to protect their football image.

If this seems like a lot of words to say something obvious, I guess my main point is this: SEC is basketball is on the rise even as football may be declining a bit. ACC football is on the rise, and encroaching on our territory. Let's reverse this trend and push back against the ACC by being even better not just at football but at the ACC's sport too.

(03-27-2019 06:20 PM)Soobahk40050 Wrote:  This year the ACC had 3 #1 seeds in Duke, Virginia, and UNC. All three of those seeds are still playing and could reach the Final Four. In fact, if FSU beats Gonzaga, the Final Four could turn into a second ACC tournament. The even if Duke loses to Virginia Tech, it could still be four ACC teams in Minneapolis.

On the other hand, the Final Four could also be: Michigan, Michigan State, Purdue, and Houston. Or it could be LSU, TN, KY, and Florida State.

A few years ago Mike Slive was blunt, "We have to get better in basketball." Since then, our basketball coaching ranks have improved, our scheduling has improved and we have got more teams in and they have gone further in the tournament than in the past. I am probably biased as a TN fan right now, but I do hope that the TN-KY rivalry continues putting on games like in the tournament for several years.

In the meantime, the ACC has also won two of the last three football championships, and three of the last six. No SEC team outside the state of Alabama has won it all since 2008 Florida.

Its probably not quite time for Sankey to say "We have to get better in football" (Georgia has been inches away the past couple of years). But, we are encroaching on the ACC's basketball territory and the ACC is encroaching on the SEC's football territory.

As a TN fan, it has been a while since basketball seemed to be the "bigger sport" over football, but the new era of recruiting and demographics, etc. have made that possible not only short term, but possibly long term (though I am still high on Pruitt).

When we talk expansion, we recognize that basketball does not move the meter nearly as much as football. And really, regarding football, it hasn't been the ACC as a whole, it has been Clemson and FSU that have the national championships.

For a while, several posters here have said Clemson and FSU are our best cultural fits. National championships in football back that up, and I think we now have another valid reason to take them: Protecting our football dominance.

But, surprisingly, the SEC is starting to or has always had a basketball culture that could potentially rival the ACC/Big 10. Yes, its mostly about coaches and Williams and Kryzyzeski are getting older, and Buzz may move on from Virginia Tech to Texas A&M as it is. And no, I'm not forgetting about wanting Texas/OK (though as I have posted on here for a while, I am much higher on OK than on Texas despite the admitted financial benefits to Texas, because I believe OK is a better cultural fit and because of potential problems Texas brings and dealing with A&M if we let Texas in.) And yes, the ACC is locked up for a good long while. But strategically speaking, if we take Clemson/FSU to protect our football dominance, I wonder if we really should make basketball-driven moves.

For one, the "sports rights bubble" may be about to pop (though again, people have been saying that for a while and it hasn't happened yet). For another, football does have alot of problems with concussions, etc. (I know basketball isn't injury free either.) For another, getting strong basketball schools also happens to coincide with strong academic schools.

But if the SEC can take a few of the ACCs basketball blue bloods, or I guess even just one AND we have protected our football dominance, we create a true super-conference.

Caveat: The FBI probe is still ongoing. If some schools get hammered by the NCAA over it, it could change the landscape drastically.

In addition, picking carefully might not hurt our football culture either: If Buzz stays at Virginia Tech and their football recovers, they could be a good basketball get as well as football get. We've already mentioned FSU. Duke does have issues as a smaller private, but UNC would definitely be a jewel if we could get them, especially without Duke, but even with Duke.

If we took FSU and Clemson for "football" and grabbed just UNC, we could still have room for a Texas or OK though without their "little brothers." We could also still grab Kansas if we so wanted.

I went to high school in Virginia where during the ACC tournament, my Latin teacher put the Duke game on the TV as we "worked." I can imagine a day when that happens in SEC country. Whether its for TN-KY, KY-UNC, UNC-Duke, or whatever matchup, I think the SEC can and should make even more strides at become a basketball conference, while still not neglecting to protect their football image.

If this seems like a lot of words to say something obvious, I guess my main point is this: SEC is basketball is on the rise even as football may be declining a bit. ACC football is on the rise, and encroaching on our territory. Let's reverse this trend and push back against the ACC by being even better not just at football but at the ACC's sport too.

Is it really surprising that the last 13 of the last 17 national championships have been won by teams from South Carolina down to Alabama and back over to Florida and that the state most likely to challenge them is Georgia?

What that tells me is just how much of a serious lock the deep South has over football. And that hold will only get stronger. Only Ohio State has taken a championship out of the Old South in the last 14 years.

I'm not sure we need to do anything with the ACC in regards to expansion. I think ESPN needs the SEC to land Texas and Oklahoma if possible and in the future a merger of the SEC and ACC in some fashion may happen more naturally, especially if our basketball takes off. Between the SEC with the cream of the Big 12 and the ACC ESPN has domination over these sports: Football, Baseball, Softball, Women's Gymnastics, and a supreme level of talent in Swimming & Diving, Track & Field, Golf, Tennis, Lacrosse, Women's Basketball, Men's Basketball, and a growing strength in Women's Soccer.

The Big 10 doesn't have a dominance in any sport although they remain competitive in most, and the PAC is hardly a P conference performance wise.

Whether the SEC and ACC agree to a mere scheduling alliance, or whether they fully merge is really irrelevant. We control the college sports world between us.

As to the ACC's football strength it is really only two schools, Clemson and Florida State and other than SEC schools nobody in the ACC can really compete with them for recruits.

As Tennessee reasserts itself in football, and if South Carolina will finally hire themselves another stellar coach, the between a strong South Carolina, an emerging power in Georgia, and a resurgent Tennessee Clemson's current strength will recede because they don't have the finances to battle all 3 programs at their strength. They only became powerful because Richt was a gross underachiever, Muschamp isn't organized enough to be a headman, and Tennessee has been a dumpster fire. That left from Atlanta to North Carolina and Northeastern Florida wide open for Clemson to amass talent. Clemson's rise is because the SEC East sucked for about 7 years.

(03-27-2019 07:55 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(03-27-2019 06:20 PM)Soobahk40050 Wrote:  This year the ACC had 3 #1 seeds in Duke, Virginia, and UNC. All three of those seeds are still playing and could reach the Final Four. In fact, if FSU beats Gonzaga, the Final Four could turn into a second ACC tournament. The even if Duke loses to Virginia Tech, it could still be four ACC teams in Minneapolis.

On the other hand, the Final Four could also be: Michigan, Michigan State, Purdue, and Houston. Or it could be LSU, TN, KY, and Florida State.

A few years ago Mike Slive was blunt, "We have to get better in basketball." Since then, our basketball coaching ranks have improved, our scheduling has improved and we have got more teams in and they have gone further in the tournament than in the past. I am probably biased as a TN fan right now, but I do hope that the TN-KY rivalry continues putting on games like in the tournament for several years.

In the meantime, the ACC has also won two of the last three football championships, and three of the last six. No SEC team outside the state of Alabama has won it all since 2008 Florida.

Its probably not quite time for Sankey to say "We have to get better in football" (Georgia has been inches away the past couple of years). But, we are encroaching on the ACC's basketball territory and the ACC is encroaching on the SEC's football territory.

As a TN fan, it has been a while since basketball seemed to be the "bigger sport" over football, but the new era of recruiting and demographics, etc. have made that possible not only short term, but possibly long term (though I am still high on Pruitt).

When we talk expansion, we recognize that basketball does not move the meter nearly as much as football. And really, regarding football, it hasn't been the ACC as a whole, it has been Clemson and FSU that have the national championships.

For a while, several posters here have said Clemson and FSU are our best cultural fits. National championships in football back that up, and I think we now have another valid reason to take them: Protecting our football dominance.

But, surprisingly, the SEC is starting to or has always had a basketball culture that could potentially rival the ACC/Big 10. Yes, its mostly about coaches and Williams and Kryzyzeski are getting older, and Buzz may move on from Virginia Tech to Texas A&M as it is. And no, I'm not forgetting about wanting Texas/OK (though as I have posted on here for a while, I am much higher on OK than on Texas despite the admitted financial benefits to Texas, because I believe OK is a better cultural fit and because of potential problems Texas brings and dealing with A&M if we let Texas in.) And yes, the ACC is locked up for a good long while. But strategically speaking, if we take Clemson/FSU to protect our football dominance, I wonder if we really should make basketball-driven moves.

For one, the "sports rights bubble" may be about to pop (though again, people have been saying that for a while and it hasn't happened yet). For another, football does have alot of problems with concussions, etc. (I know basketball isn't injury free either.) For another, getting strong basketball schools also happens to coincide with strong academic schools.

But if the SEC can take a few of the ACCs basketball blue bloods, or I guess even just one AND we have protected our football dominance, we create a true super-conference.

Caveat: The FBI probe is still ongoing. If some schools get hammered by the NCAA over it, it could change the landscape drastically.

In addition, picking carefully might not hurt our football culture either: If Buzz stays at Virginia Tech and their football recovers, they could be a good basketball get as well as football get. We've already mentioned FSU. Duke does have issues as a smaller private, but UNC would definitely be a jewel if we could get them, especially without Duke, but even with Duke.

If we took FSU and Clemson for "football" and grabbed just UNC, we could still have room for a Texas or OK though without their "little brothers." We could also still grab Kansas if we so wanted.

I went to high school in Virginia where during the ACC tournament, my Latin teacher put the Duke game on the TV as we "worked." I can imagine a day when that happens in SEC country. Whether its for TN-KY, KY-UNC, UNC-Duke, or whatever matchup, I think the SEC can and should make even more strides at become a basketball conference, while still not neglecting to protect their football image.

If this seems like a lot of words to say something obvious, I guess my main point is this: SEC is basketball is on the rise even as football may be declining a bit. ACC football is on the rise, and encroaching on our territory. Let's reverse this trend and push back against the ACC by being even better not just at football but at the ACC's sport too.

Is it really surprising that the last 13 of the last 17 national championships have been won by teams from South Carolina down to Alabama and back over to Florida and that the state most likely to challenge them is Georgia?

What that tells me is just how much of a serious lock the deep South has over football. And that hold will only get stronger. Only Ohio State has taken a championship out of the Old South in the last 14 years.

I'm not sure we need to do anything with the ACC in regards to expansion. I think ESPN needs the SEC to land Texas and Oklahoma if possible and in the future a merger of the SEC and ACC in some fashion may happen more naturally, especially if our basketball takes off. Between the SEC with the cream of the Big 12 and the ACC ESPN has domination over these sports: Football, Baseball, Softball, Women's Gymnastics, and a supreme level of talent in Swimming & Diving, Track & Field, Golf, Tennis, Lacrosse, Women's Basketball, Men's Basketball, and a growing strength in Women's Soccer.

The Big 10 doesn't have a dominance in any sport although they remain competitive in most, and the PAC is hardly a P conference performance wise.

Whether the SEC and ACC agree to a mere scheduling alliance, or whether they fully merge is really irrelevant. We control the college sports world between us.

As to the ACC's football strength it is really only two schools, Clemson and Florida State and other than SEC schools nobody in the ACC can really compete with them for recruits.

As Tennessee reasserts itself in football, and if South Carolina will finally hire themselves another stellar coach, the between a strong South Carolina, an emerging power in Georgia, and a resurgent Tennessee Clemson's current strength will recede because they don't have the finances to battle all 3 programs at their strength. They only became powerful because Richt was a gross underachiever, Muschamp isn't organized enough to be a headman, and Tennessee has been a dumpster fire. That left from Atlanta to North Carolina and Northeastern Florida wide open for Clemson to amass talent. Clemson's rise is because the SEC East sucked for about 7 years.

Agree. To add, Clemson hustles at recruiting. Dabo and his assistants are quite charming in connnecting with recruits and their parents. Also, their coaching enhances player bonding. We saw at Tennessee what happens when player bonding and motivation breaks down and coaches lose control and player loyalty.
JRsec pointed out something I have thought but would not say about Muschamp. He doesn't show great organizational skills. He is good at addressing individual aspects, but consolidating and synthesizing a program with consistency at a high level appears to be a struggle. Given the solid pay his assistants receive, some of his hirings are perplexing. Yet there still appears to be a pattern of gradual overall program improvement each year. But having a break-out year, winning the SEC East, just continues to be out of reach. What is Muschamp's ceiling and how long will it take? To be fair to Muschamp, who has been in the job long enough to make some waves in the SEC, Spurrier got bored and lazy his couple or so years, and left a mess as to recruiting.