I think you guys are overthinking this. Texas A&M didn’t need a follower, neither does Texas. Hell, they thought hard about joining the Pac with Colorado in the 90’s.

Notre Dame, Pitt, BC, Miami

Syracuse, Louisville, VaTech, Wake

UVA, UNC, Duke, State

Clemson, Georgia Tech, FSU, Texas

No divisions. Those are the scheduling partners plus one other permanent rival:

ND-Texas
Pitt-Louis
BC-SU
Miami-FSU
VaTech-UVA
Wake-UNC
Duke-GaTech
State-Clemson

Eff a rotation. Just cook the rest of the schedule however it makes sense for TV. The SEC used to do it back when they had 10 and the old 12 members based on fan interest and rivalries. The perfect rotation stuff is for the birds.

Or totally scrap an even amount of partners, that way games like VaTech-Clemson, Duke-Wake, State-Wake, Texas-Miami, FSU-Louis can be yearly too.

(12-28-2019 11:46 AM)nole Wrote:  I don't know the answers.

My two thoughts:

1) I think EVERY ACC schools needs to follow Clemsons lead. They know what they are doing. Learn from them (FSU included).

2) The ACC overall has a revenue issue. When does it get acknowledged....what are possible solutions? Simple ignoring won't work anymore.

What is it you suggest they do?

Seriously, what can ACC possibly do to change the fact that it is filled with a bunch of schools within a few miles of each other in North Carolina and a bunch of private schools and smallsh public schools?

Nothing John Swofford or anyone else does or says is going to change the fact that Georgia Tech will never be comparable to Georgia, Pitt will never compare to Penn State size wise and Louisville will never have all the advantages that Kentucky enjoys either.

What do you want us to do about that fact besides try our best to compete? Do you want us to quit playing football?

There are no magic wands that will make Boston College comparable to Michigan State or Wake Forest the football equal to Texas A&M.

So, again, what are you realistically asking for here?

I think your problem is not with the ACC, but rather with Florida State’s leadership in deciding to join the ACC over the SEC in the first place. You probably could have had either one at the time and you chose the former over the latter.

It was a probably a very good decision too, because it led to a whole lot of success that you may not of enjoyed in the SEC while competing against much more well-heeled and committed universities. Either way, you’re just going to have to live with it just like we are probably going to have to listen to you barking at the moon while bellyaching about your school’s lot in life for the next however many years.

In the meantime, thanks in large part to Clemson and to a lesser degree Florida State, the ACC is on the verge of its third national championship in the past four years and it’s fourth national championship in the past seven years. So, while things could definitely be better for lots and lots of programs in the conference – and frankly they need to get better – it’s also important to remember that things could definitely be worse as well.

You don’t think the Big Ten, which makes far more money on an annual basis than the ACC could ever dream of making, would sacrifice a helluva lot to win four the past seven national championships? I think they would trade every nickel for it if they could.

(01-08-2020 01:24 PM)Dr. Isaly von Yinzer Wrote:  

(12-28-2019 11:46 AM)nole Wrote:  I don't know the answers.

My two thoughts:

1) I think EVERY ACC schools needs to follow Clemsons lead. They know what they are doing. Learn from them (FSU included).

2) The ACC overall has a revenue issue. When does it get acknowledged....what are possible solutions? Simple ignoring won't work anymore.

What is it you suggest they do?

Seriously, what can ACC possibly do to change the fact that it is filled with a bunch of schools within a few miles of each other in North Carolina and a bunch of private schools and smallsh public schools?

Nothing John Swofford or anyone else does or says is going to change the fact that Georgia Tech will never be comparable to Georgia, Pitt will never compare to Penn State size wise and Louisville will never have all the advantages that Kentucky enjoys either.

What do you want us to do about that fact besides try our best to compete? Do you want us to quit playing football?

There are no magic wands that will make Boston College comparable to Michigan State or Wake Forest the football equal to Texas A&M.

So, again, what are you realistically asking for here?

I think your problem is not with the ACC, but rather with Florida State’s leadership in deciding to join the ACC over the SEC in the first place. You probably could have had either one at the time and you chose the former over the latter.

It was a probably a very good decision too, because it led to a whole lot of success that you may not of enjoyed in the SEC while competing against much more well-heeled and committed universities. Either way, you’re just going to have to live with it just like we are probably going to have to listen to you barking at the moon while bellyaching about your school’s lot in life for the next however many years.

In the meantime, thanks in large part to Clemson and to a lesser degree Florida State, the ACC is on the verge of its third national championship in the past four years and it’s fourth national championship in the past seven years. So, while things could definitely be better for lots and lots of programs in the conference – and frankly they need to get better – it’s also important to remember that things could definitely be worse as well.

(01-08-2020 01:24 PM)Dr. Isaly von Yinzer Wrote:  Seriously, what can ACC possibly do to change the fact that it is filled with a bunch of schools within a few miles of each other in North Carolina and a bunch of private schools and smallsh public schools?

The entire point of the current membership of the conference is TV money. If the ACCN doesn't deliver that TV money then the conference is unstable as the fundamental reason it exists as currently constituted is TV money.

(01-08-2020 01:24 PM)Dr. Isaly von Yinzer Wrote:  Nothing John Swofford or anyone else does or says is going to change the fact that Georgia Tech will never be comparable to Georgia, Pitt will never compare to Penn State size wise and Louisville will never have all the advantages that Kentucky enjoys either.

Louisville looks pretty clearly more competitive in athletics across the board relative to Kentucky. Pitt and Georgia Tech can, and with the right leadership, can again cast their in state cow colleges into the role currently occupied by South Carolina. Get back to me on GT when we get close to the GoR expiring. I suspect the athletic department will look nothing like it has the past 10 years in another 2-3 years. By the time we're at the GoR expiration it'll be over a decade and a half of the correct leadership at AD/President for a change.

(01-08-2020 01:24 PM)Dr. Isaly von Yinzer Wrote:  What do you want us to do about that fact besides try our best to compete?

That's highly questionable. I would argue there are some major programs that by are large are not seriously competing. Vanderbilt phones it in on football and uses the TV payday to instead fund an elite baseball team. There's some of that going on in the ACC too. I'd say BC, Pitt, Duke, and GT had the most atrocious "leadership" over the past 10 years. I still think Duke and Pitt need at minimum a new AD. GT has righted the ship. The new AD at BC if he delivers facilities to go with the new staff might be what the doctor ordered as well.

(01-08-2020 01:24 PM)Dr. Isaly von Yinzer Wrote:  There are no magic wands that will make Boston College comparable to Michigan State or Wake Forest the football equal to Texas A&M.

I'll give you Wake. BC could match Sparty though if they had the right people.

(01-08-2020 01:24 PM)Dr. Isaly von Yinzer Wrote:  So, again, what are you realistically asking for here?

For the ACCN to deliver TV revenue sufficient to make the gap manageable at least. If it can't do that the conference won't hold up.

(01-08-2020 01:24 PM)Dr. Isaly von Yinzer Wrote:  In the meantime, thanks in large part to Clemson and to a lesser degree Florida State, the ACC is on the verge of its third national championship in the past four years and it’s fourth national championship in the past seven years.

You mean solely. Clemson and FSU won and played for those titles, not the ACC. No other ACC team did a damn thing to get Clemson and FSU to where they were.

(01-08-2020 02:35 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  

(01-08-2020 01:24 PM)Dr. Isaly von Yinzer Wrote:  In the meantime, thanks in large part to Clemson and to a lesser degree Florida State, the ACC is on the verge of its third national championship in the past four years and it’s fourth national championship in the past seven years.

You mean solely. Clemson and FSU won and played for those titles, not the ACC. No other ACC team did a damn thing to get Clemson and FSU to where they were.

Yes they did Kap, they lost to FSU and Clemson.

It's one thing to play SC, FSU, Louisville, NC State, GT, and maybe Auburn, or TAMU. It's another to play Alabama, Georgia, SC, Florida, and Auburn, every year with the occasional OOC game with Florida State, etc.

If you can't admit that on average there is a distinctive one win a year advantage in the ACC versus the SEC you are not being truthful. Moreover, your political fights within the conference will be with other football schools looking to stomp your ass. You can win a football related argument in the ACC, but not in the SEC.

I'll be the first to admit that NC State has done next to nothing in football for the last 30 years, but one of the reasons that you have the talent at Dabo's fingertips is that you were able to aggregate any kid for whom Florida State, GT, NC State, and UNC might have gotten 10 years ago.

Without the Washington Generals, the Harlem Globtrotters have no show.

The ACC gives you the best of all worlds. The cost of competing within the conference is less than the Big 10 or SEC. You don't have to directly compete with Michigan, Penn State, and Ohio State, or Alabama, LSU, or Auburn in the SEC in a march toward a league title and a chance to reach the playoffs. You get to schedule an SEC OOC when it conveniences you and the league moves around that game to assist your winning.

Now once you get to the playoffs your ass is on your own. You either have the talent and the game plan or you don't. $20 million more a year is nice, State would love to have it, but Clemson has NEVER had the money or the number of Alumni of Michigan, Notre Dame, Ohio State, Penn State, Alabama, Tennessee, TAMU, Texas, etc., and likely never will. It does not seem to be a hindrance.

(01-08-2020 03:05 PM)Statefan Wrote:  Now once you get to the playoffs your ass is on your own. You either have the talent and the game plan or you don't. $20 million more a year is nice, State would love to have it, but Clemson has NEVER had the money or the number of Alumni of Michigan, Notre Dame, Ohio State, Penn State, Alabama, Tennessee, TAMU, Texas, etc., and likely never will. It does not seem to be a hindrance.

IPTAY. Also, due to Greenville only having a minor league baseball team (affiliate of the Boston Red Sox ... LAME) and a minor league hockey team (affiliate of the NY Rangers .... LAME) Clemson is THE casual sporting draw from the GA/SC state line to Spartanburg. That's a lot of people. And I bet Furman and Wofford probably draw better to their football games than the minor league baseball team does. And that Wofford and Furman's MBB teams draw better than the hockey team.

(01-08-2020 03:05 PM)Statefan Wrote:  

(01-08-2020 02:35 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  

(01-08-2020 01:24 PM)Dr. Isaly von Yinzer Wrote:  In the meantime, thanks in large part to Clemson and to a lesser degree Florida State, the ACC is on the verge of its third national championship in the past four years and it’s fourth national championship in the past seven years.

You mean solely. Clemson and FSU won and played for those titles, not the ACC. No other ACC team did a damn thing to get Clemson and FSU to where they were.

Yes they did Kap, they lost to FSU and Clemson.

It's one thing to play SC, FSU, Louisville, NC State, GT, and maybe Auburn, or TAMU. It's another to play Alabama, Georgia, SC, Florida, and Auburn, every year with the occasional OOC game with Florida State, etc.

If you can't admit that on average there is a distinctive one win a year advantage in the ACC versus the SEC you are not being truthful. Moreover, your political fights within the conference will be with other football schools looking to stomp your ass. You can win a football related argument in the ACC, but not in the SEC.

I'll be the first to admit that NC State has done next to nothing in football for the last 30 years, but one of the reasons that you have the talent at Dabo's fingertips is that you were able to aggregate any kid for whom Florida State, GT, NC State, and UNC might have gotten 10 years ago.

Without the Washington Generals, the Harlem Globtrotters have no show.

Last time I checked the Washington Generals didn't make as much money as the Globetrotters.

And why was Dabo able to do that? Because we had a plan to not suck for 30 years like NC State and UNC have done. Because we weren't running an archaic offense like GT was doing, and because we were actually developing players which FSU wasn't. Again, it was because of what CLEMSON was doing, not the ACC.

If anything the ACC has hindered us. The best defense our offense faces during the regular season is in practice, and conference travel squad rules prevent us from taking more players and building more depth in the blowouts.

(01-08-2020 03:24 PM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:  

(01-08-2020 03:05 PM)Statefan Wrote:  Now once you get to the playoffs your ass is on your own. You either have the talent and the game plan or you don't. $20 million more a year is nice, State would love to have it, but Clemson has NEVER had the money or the number of Alumni of Michigan, Notre Dame, Ohio State, Penn State, Alabama, Tennessee, TAMU, Texas, etc., and likely never will. It does not seem to be a hindrance.

IPTAY. Also, due to Greenville only having a minor league baseball team (affiliate of the Boston Red Sox ... LAME) and a minor league hockey team (affiliate of the NY Rangers .... LAME) Clemson is THE casual sporting draw from the GA/SC state line to Spartanburg. That's a lot of people. And I bet Furman and Wofford probably draw better to their football games than the minor league baseball team does. And that Wofford and Furman's MBB teams draw better than the hockey team.

BMW has been good for Clemson.

Kap, every single Clemson fan I have ever met has been a nice, positive person. Over the years I guess I have met and interacted with hundreds of Tigers, but I have to say you are an extreme outlier with a level of negativity that is amazing. When I read what you write, it's like I can close my eyes and I can see firemen or police officers sitting around the station bitching and moaning about everything.

The revenue gap right now (~$13 million with SEC and ~$25 million with B1G) matters.

When those two renegotiate coming TV contracts, those gaps are going to explode and things will change. Doens't matter if I want change or not. Doesn't matter if the ACC does.

I would of preferred a pro active league that didn't get worked at the negotiating table every time.....but that time has passed.

It's all over but the waiting.

(01-08-2020 04:03 PM)nole Wrote:  The revenue gap right now (~$13 million with SEC and ~$25 million with B1G) matters.

When those two renegotiate coming TV contracts, those gaps are going to explode and things will change. Doens't matter if I want change or not. Doesn't matter if the ACC does.

I would of preferred a pro active league that didn't get worked at the negotiating table every time.....but that time has passed.

It's all over but the waiting.

So you will trade being 1st or 2nd in the ACC to be 3rd or 4th in the SEC? Good luck with that Faustian bargain.

(01-08-2020 04:00 PM)Statefan Wrote:  Kap, every single Clemson fan I have ever met has been a nice, positive person. Over the years I guess I have met and interacted with hundreds of Tigers, but I have to say you are an extreme outlier with a level of negativity that is amazing. When I read what you write, it's like I can close my eyes and I can see firemen or police officers sitting around the station bitching and moaning about everything.

And every time I read your posts I get the vision of someone wearing a tinfoil hat while simultaneously trying to hide from the black helicopter circling overhead out of fear of retribution about the great conspiracy that has taken place to hold NC State back and taking peyote to come up with ideas like the ACC taking Canadian universities over established DI athletic programs.

Unfortunately that applies to every NC State fan I have ever met. You are probably the most delusional, but nowhere, not even Columbia, produces more delusion than Rawlee.

The idea that the ACC helps Clemson and/or FSU by losing to them is ridiculous... even if it's true, that's no selling point!

I happen to think the rest of the ACC has contributed in football (not much this year, mind you, but in the past). How, you ask?

1. By bringing a lot of football tradition (i.e. Syracuse, Pitt, Miami and Georgia Tech won a combined 8 national championships in football from 1959 to 2001), it helped to guarantee that the other "power" conferences would give the ACC a seat at the big boy table. (Prior to the creation of the CFP in 2012-13, FSU and Clemson had a combined 3 national championships between them; since then, those two have won 3 more titles). In addition, various ACC teams have played in and lost championships.
(see https://accfootballrx.blogspot.com/searc...mpionships)

2. Of course the toughest national title game to gain access to was the first one, after the 2013 season. Not only was it only two teams under the old BCS system, but FSU also had to overcome the ACC's bad reputation for losing major bowl games. To add insult to injury, there wasn't a single ranked team among the Noles 4 non-conference opponents. How would FSU impress voters enough to get to the BCS national championship? ACC to the rescue! No less than 4 ACC teams earned top 25 spots prior to playing the Noles: #25 Maryland, #3 Clemson, #7 Miami and #20 Duke. FSU then faced #2 Auburn in the Rose Bowl - the rest is history.

3. Something similar helped catapult Clemson into the CFP playoffs after the 2015 season. Thanks to the ACC granting the Tigers a home game against Notre Dame that year (Clemson still hasn't played the return game, btw - that happens in 2020), Clemson climbed from 12th to 6th in the polls after beating the 6th-ranked Irish. Florida State also brought their #16 ranking into Death Valley, which Clemson also beat to move into the #1 spot. Then, in the ACC CG, the Tigers narrowly defeated #8 UNC (another highly-ranked ACC opponent) to secure a playoff berth. And lest you think that ACC refs are always against the Tigers, keep in mind that UNC was called offside on a successful onside kick late in that game (something the Tigers failed to learn from, apparently, since Alabama executed a similar onside kick - without the penalty - in the title game).

Now, with 4 appearances and 2 championships in the last 4 years, Clemson no longer needed help from the ACC to get into the playoffs this year (although it wasn't a sure thing without that help - which UVA provided by being ranked - barely - for the ACC CG).

Did Clemson and Florida State EARN their national championships? OF COURSE!

Did the other ACC teams "do their part" to help them get there? ABSOLUTELY!

That's my take on it. I'm sure some of you disagree vehemently. Go ahead, take your shots!

(01-08-2020 04:03 PM)nole Wrote:  The revenue gap right now (~$13 million with SEC and ~$25 million with B1G) matters.

When those two renegotiate coming TV contracts, those gaps are going to explode and things will change. Doens't matter if I want change or not. Doesn't matter if the ACC does.

I would of preferred a pro active league that didn't get worked at the negotiating table every time.....but that time has passed.

It's all over but the waiting.

If the rumors JRSEC is hearing (of a new SEC TV contract to pay over $80 million per team per year!) are true, then yeah, that's a HUGE problem for the ACC. It could mean that South Carolina would be able to pay coordinators - maybe even a level of assistants below that - more than most ACC teams can afford to pay their head coaches... it also means Kentucky can hire up 3 potential basketball head coaches as assistants and pay them - and their head coach - more than UNC, Duke or Louisville can afford to match.

That, in a nutshell, is what some ACC fans are concerned about - the ability to hire up all of the best coaches as assistants, thus playing keep away...

Even if your team finds a great coach, they just offer him twice the money and take him away from you. That's how you use a huge monetary advantage to buy championships - don't let anyone else keep good coaches (i.e. what the P5 already does to the G5, but now the Rich 2 would do it to the Middle-income 3).

The airing of grievances is a Festivus tradition.

(01-08-2020 02:03 PM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:  

(01-08-2020 01:24 PM)Dr. Isaly von Yinzer Wrote:  Seriously, what can ACC possibly do to change the fact that it is filled with a bunch of schools within a few miles of each other in North Carolina and a bunch of private schools and smallsh public schools?

The entire point of the current membership of the conference is TV money. If the ACCN doesn't deliver that TV money then the conference is unstable as the fundamental reason it exists as currently constituted is TV money.

The entire point of a conference is not about TV money. Football, Men's basketball and college sports in general are about advertising for the major universities. The name recognition from seeing those schools at the FBS level are far better than occasional commercials for the school. The entire point of a conference is to associate your school with other similar or more highly regarded schools. Ideally a bunch of schools rated highly academically. The ACC has that in spades. There is a lot more keeping the conference together than TV dollars.

When Clemson and FSU signed up for the ACC until 2036, they did so because the 2 major conferences (SEC and B1G) wanted in Virginia and North Carolina more than they wanted big football brands. So Clemson and FSU seeing their options as the Big 12 (that would lose Texas and Oklahoma in 2025) or the ACC, chose to sign up for the long term provided everyone agreed not to leave.

Clemson and FSU still had plenty of leverage though as they demanded the replacement for Maryland be a good football and basketball school like Louisville over the more academically fit UConn who had good basketball but horrendous football. What Louisville lacks in academics, they more than make up for in athletics and revenues.

As a result we have a happy marriage of elite academic institutions that will be together for the next 16 years. After that who knows. I predict every school has there own TV channel or means of distributing games and the broadcast rights will return to the individual schools. In that environment, there may not be any more conferences. Just a bunch of independents. Terry would like that at least.

I’ve been preaching more Independents with their own distribution for some time now.

Also, just because an organization can pay someone more, doesn’t mean that it will happen. Look at the NFL, why aren’t they snatching up every college coordinator under the sun? Why would somebody be an OC when they can be a HC and be a millionaire? Imagine the backlash at the state level if a special teams coach is the fourth highest paid state employee.

(01-08-2020 07:55 PM)ChrisLords Wrote:  

(01-08-2020 02:03 PM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:  

(01-08-2020 01:24 PM)Dr. Isaly von Yinzer Wrote:  Seriously, what can ACC possibly do to change the fact that it is filled with a bunch of schools within a few miles of each other in North Carolina and a bunch of private schools and smallsh public schools?

The entire point of the current membership of the conference is TV money. If the ACCN doesn't deliver that TV money then the conference is unstable as the fundamental reason it exists as currently constituted is TV money.

The entire point of a conference is not about TV money. Football, Men's basketball and college sports in general are about advertising for the major universities. The name recognition from seeing those schools at the FBS level are far better than occasional commercials for the school. The entire point of a conference is to associate your school with other similar or more highly regarded schools. Ideally a bunch of schools rated highly academically. The ACC has that in spades. There is a lot more keeping the conference together than TV dollars.

When Clemson and FSU signed up for the ACC until 2036, they did so because the 2 major conferences (SEC and B1G) wanted in Virginia and North Carolina more than they wanted big football brands. So Clemson and FSU seeing their options as the Big 12 (that would lose Texas and Oklahoma in 2025) or the ACC, chose to sign up for the long term provided everyone agreed not to leave.

Clemson and FSU still had plenty of leverage though as they demanded the replacement for Maryland be a good football and basketball school like Louisville over the more academically fit UConn who had good basketball but horrendous football. What Louisville lacks in Academics, they more than make up for in Athletics and revenues.

As a result we have a happy marriage of elite academic institutions that will be together for the next 16 years. After that who knows. I predict every school has there own TV channel or means of distributing games and the broadcast rights will return to the individual schools. In that environment, there may not be any more conferences. Just a bunch of independents. Terry would like that at least.

Lol. From your mouth to God's ears, Chris.