(04-13-2021 03:07 PM)random asian guy Wrote:  Wake is not going anywhere.

Remeber the OBE conference? When VT was in the Big East in early 2000s, I was wondering why the Big East didn’t drop deadweight basketball teams like Providence or Seton Hall. The Big East didn’t shed a tear when Temple got booted. But that conference had never even considered dropping Providence or Seton Hall. In fact, they actually added more small basketball schools like DePaul.

Why? Beacuse these small Catholic basketball schools were/are the Big East. They were the core members whereas the football schools like WVU or VT were not.

For the ACC, the four NC schools and UVa are the voting block. They are the ACC. If Wake Forest and some other core schools got dropped, and the UNC and UVa lose their political power in the ACC, why would UNC/UVa stay? They would leave for a better paying conference.

Here is how I see the ACC voting block - as a staggered pyramid:

1. UNC/Duke
2. UNC/Duke/UVa - These are the "blues"
3. UNC/Duke/NCSU - A different kind of block
4. UNC/Duke/UVa/NCSU/WF - This is "Tobacco Road"
5. UNC/Duke/UVa/NCSU/WF/CU/VT/GT - This is the old ACC (yes this were VT is)

A smaller block is the old Big East:

1. BC/Syracuse/Pitt (No VT is not here)
2. When this block expands it adds Lousiville

Florida block

1. FSU/Miami (Miami actually meshes better than FSU)

Culturally:

ACC culture is Tidewater/Southeastern Atlantic with the exception of Clemson which is fully southern.

Clemson and FSU are the two "southern" schools.

ND, BC, Pitt, and Syracuse are "Yankee" schools even though technically Pitt is "Yinzer".

Miami is not quite southern, but not quite Hispanic.

Smarmy, patrician, paternalism is the core value of the ACC. That's what pisses off Clemson and FSU. Miami tends to get along with it. ND and BC handle paternalism very well. Syracuse much less so as well as Pitt.

You are correct to say that core will not "drop" Wake Forest. They will do their patrician duty to see that WF is kept whole in whatever manner is practical and I include VT in that.

Maybe the best thing is for B10 and SEC to add 7 schools and each go to 21 with three divisions:

To the Big 10 - GT/NC State/VT/Miami/Syracuse/Kansas/Mizzou
To the SEC - UNC/UVa/Clemson/FSU/WF/Texas/OU/Ok State

Picking ups the pieces - BC/Duke/Pitt/West Va/Louisville/Iowa State/Kansas State/TT/TCU/Baylor

Nobody is arguing about voting blocks.

That is not the topic. Not sure why the confusion.

If the ACC doesn't make major changes....it's future is like the Big East.....it will exist, but not in the world of big time college football.

Wake will not be in the world of big time college football......regardless of whether the ACC votes them out or not. Same for any small revenue school outside of the P2.

For some reason the ACC thinks it's position is permanent and thus they can protect some schools. They really can't protect ANYONE unless they know like a UNC/UVA, that the BIG or SEC would take them. But when they go.....Wake won't get an invite (FSU might not either).

(04-13-2021 04:02 PM)nole Wrote:  Nobody is arguing about voting blocks.

That is not the topic. Not sure why the confusion.

If the ACC doesn't make major changes....it's future is like the Big East.....it will exist, but not in the world of big time college football.

Wake will not be in the world of big time college football......regardless of whether the ACC votes them out or not. Same for any small revenue school outside of the P2.

For some reason the ACC thinks it's position is permanent and thus they can protect some schools. They really can't protect ANYONE unless they know like a UNC/UVA, that the BIG or SEC would take them. But when they go.....Wake won't get an invite (FSU might not either).

Excellent post!

I agree that the ACC will survive, but it could easily be relegated to "American Athletic Conference" tweener status.

I also agree that the ACC won't (can't?) boot Wake and/or Duke... but they sure better consider making them non-football members!

(04-13-2021 04:15 PM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  

(04-13-2021 04:02 PM)nole Wrote:  Nobody is arguing about voting blocks.

That is not the topic. Not sure why the confusion.

If the ACC doesn't make major changes....it's future is like the Big East.....it will exist, but not in the world of big time college football.

Wake will not be in the world of big time college football......regardless of whether the ACC votes them out or not. Same for any small revenue school outside of the P2.

For some reason the ACC thinks it's position is permanent and thus they can protect some schools. They really can't protect ANYONE unless they know like a UNC/UVA, that the BIG or SEC would take them. But when they go.....Wake won't get an invite (FSU might not either).

Excellent post!

I agree that the ACC will survive, but it could easily be relegated to "American Athletic Conference" tweener status.

I also agree that the ACC won't (can't?) boot Wake and/or Duke... but they sure better consider making them non-football members!

Make them an offer that they can't refuse.

(04-13-2021 04:30 PM)TexanMark Wrote:  

(04-13-2021 04:15 PM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  

(04-13-2021 04:02 PM)nole Wrote:  Nobody is arguing about voting blocks.

That is not the topic. Not sure why the confusion.

If the ACC doesn't make major changes....it's future is like the Big East.....it will exist, but not in the world of big time college football.

Wake will not be in the world of big time college football......regardless of whether the ACC votes them out or not. Same for any small revenue school outside of the P2.

For some reason the ACC thinks it's position is permanent and thus they can protect some schools. They really can't protect ANYONE unless they know like a UNC/UVA, that the BIG or SEC would take them. But when they go.....Wake won't get an invite (FSU might not either).

Excellent post!

I agree that the ACC will survive, but it could easily be relegated to "American Athletic Conference" tweener status.

I also agree that the ACC won't (can't?) boot Wake and/or Duke... but they sure better consider making them non-football members!

Make them an offer that they can't refuse.

Mark, can you swing a Wegmans for each of their campuses to sweeten the pot?

(04-13-2021 03:54 PM)Statefan Wrote:  

(04-13-2021 03:07 PM)random asian guy Wrote:  Wake is not going anywhere.

Remeber the OBE conference? When VT was in the Big East in early 2000s, I was wondering why the Big East didn’t drop deadweight basketball teams like Providence or Seton Hall. The Big East didn’t shed a tear when Temple got booted. But that conference had never even considered dropping Providence or Seton Hall. In fact, they actually added more small basketball schools like DePaul.

Why? Beacuse these small Catholic basketball schools were/are the Big East. They were the core members whereas the football schools like WVU or VT were not.

For the ACC, the four NC schools and UVa are the voting block. They are the ACC. If Wake Forest and some other core schools got dropped, and the UNC and UVa lose their political power in the ACC, why would UNC/UVa stay? They would leave for a better paying conference.

Here is how I see the ACC voting block - as a staggered pyramid:

1. UNC/Duke
2. UNC/Duke/UVa - These are the "blues"
3. UNC/Duke/NCSU - A different kind of block
4. UNC/Duke/UVa/NCSU/WF - This is "Tobacco Road"
5. UNC/Duke/UVa/NCSU/WF/CU/VT/GT - This is the old ACC (yes this were VT is)

A smaller block is the old Big East:

1. BC/Syracuse/Pitt (No VT is not here)
2. When this block expands it adds Lousiville

Florida block

1. FSU/Miami (Miami actually meshes better than FSU)

Culturally:

ACC culture is Tidewater/Southeastern Atlantic with the exception of Clemson which is fully southern.

Clemson and FSU are the two "southern" schools.

ND, BC, Pitt, and Syracuse are "Yankee" schools even though technically Pitt is "Yinzer".

Miami is not quite southern, but not quite Hispanic.

Smarmy, patrician, paternalism is the core value of the ACC. That's what pisses off Clemson and FSU. Miami tends to get along with it. ND and BC handle paternalism very well. Syracuse much less so as well as Pitt.

You are correct to say that core will not "drop" Wake Forest. They will do their patrician duty to see that WF is kept whole in whatever manner is practical and I include VT in that.

What about Louisville?

Maryland was old ACC IMO, but never fit 100% because of their own antics.

(04-13-2021 04:15 PM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  

(04-13-2021 04:02 PM)nole Wrote:  Nobody is arguing about voting blocks.

That is not the topic. Not sure why the confusion.

If the ACC doesn't make major changes....it's future is like the Big East.....it will exist, but not in the world of big time college football.

Wake will not be in the world of big time college football......regardless of whether the ACC votes them out or not. Same for any small revenue school outside of the P2.

For some reason the ACC thinks it's position is permanent and thus they can protect some schools. They really can't protect ANYONE unless they know like a UNC/UVA, that the BIG or SEC would take them. But when they go.....Wake won't get an invite (FSU might not either).

Excellent post!

I agree that the ACC will survive, but it could easily be relegated to "American Athletic Conference" tweener status.

I also agree that the ACC won't (can't?) boot Wake and/or Duke... but they sure better consider making them non-football members!

When the commissioner goes to ESPN asking for more money, these are the things that ESPN will tell him. He can then go back to the Presidents and relay the information, they THEY will have to decide whether or not to ask Duke and Wake (or BC and Syracuse) to drop down in football etc. or decide to accept less media distribution monies.
I suspect many ACC presidents will then have to decide whether or not to be the Universities they were founded to be or become minor leagues for professional athletics.

(04-13-2021 07:45 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(04-13-2021 04:15 PM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  

(04-13-2021 04:02 PM)nole Wrote:  Nobody is arguing about voting blocks.

That is not the topic. Not sure why the confusion.

If the ACC doesn't make major changes....it's future is like the Big East.....it will exist, but not in the world of big time college football.

Wake will not be in the world of big time college football......regardless of whether the ACC votes them out or not. Same for any small revenue school outside of the P2.

For some reason the ACC thinks it's position is permanent and thus they can protect some schools. They really can't protect ANYONE unless they know like a UNC/UVA, that the BIG or SEC would take them. But when they go.....Wake won't get an invite (FSU might not either).

Excellent post!

I agree that the ACC will survive, but it could easily be relegated to "American Athletic Conference" tweener status.

I also agree that the ACC won't (can't?) boot Wake and/or Duke... but they sure better consider making them non-football members!

When the commissioner goes to ESPN asking for more money, these are the things that ESPN will tell him. He can then go back to the Presidents and relay the information, they THEY will have to decide whether or not to ask Duke and Wake (or BC and Syracuse) to drop down in football etc. or decide to accept less media distribution monies.
I suspect many ACC presidents will then have to decide whether or not to be the Universities they were founded to be or become minor leagues for professional athletics.

Don't need to wait for ESPN to lay out that ultimatum. It's here. Message board posters saw this coming a decade ago....I damn sure hope these 'leaders' don't need to wait for a meeting to understand what the environment is.

SEC leaders/B1G leaders knew where this was headed 15 years ago....more.

Honestly, you make my point.....some schools will want to play at the higher level, P2, others won't but think they can hold on to the revenue for as long as they can (which is why nobody is pure.....those who hold their nose up at "professional athletics" are happy to cash those checks......they just want their cake and eat it too).

ACC and it's individual schools all needed to decide what they want. But if it's:

A) Status quo
B) The money of the highest level of college football but without the commitment
C) 75% of the money of the highest level of college football and to pretend to be something different
D) A basketball school who gets the CFB money.

All of these are going to be a dead end. Might take 3 years, might take 15, but massive change is coming.

(04-13-2021 07:45 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(04-13-2021 04:15 PM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  

(04-13-2021 04:02 PM)nole Wrote:  Nobody is arguing about voting blocks.

That is not the topic. Not sure why the confusion.

If the ACC doesn't make major changes....it's future is like the Big East.....it will exist, but not in the world of big time college football.

Wake will not be in the world of big time college football......regardless of whether the ACC votes them out or not. Same for any small revenue school outside of the P2.

For some reason the ACC thinks it's position is permanent and thus they can protect some schools. They really can't protect ANYONE unless they know like a UNC/UVA, that the BIG or SEC would take them. But when they go.....Wake won't get an invite (FSU might not either).

Excellent post!

I agree that the ACC will survive, but it could easily be relegated to "American Athletic Conference" tweener status.

I also agree that the ACC won't (can't?) boot Wake and/or Duke... but they sure better consider making them non-football members!

When the commissioner goes to ESPN asking for more money, these are the things that ESPN will tell him. He can then go back to the Presidents and relay the information, they THEY will have to decide whether or not to ask Duke and Wake (or BC and Syracuse) to drop down in football etc. or decide to accept less media distribution monies.
I suspect many ACC presidents will then have to decide whether or not to be the Universities they were founded to be or become minor leagues for professional athletics.

This will be happening to a lesser or greater degree in EVERY conference. The ACC will not be alone in confronting this decision. The PAC, Big 10, and possibly even some in the SEC will be faced with the same decisions. The only conference I don't see having a major soul searching is the Big 12 and possibly the SEC.

When this issue is decided, then we will know how many conferences we will have in the P pay division and in the P no pay division. And then we will know how many schools and conferences comprise each. I suspect the majority will opt to allow NIL and to pay a stipend. I suspect more than many think will opt for something else. The upper tier could easily be 48 to 56 schools. We'll see.

If I had to guess I'd say 11 SEC schools will allow NIL and pay stipends and 3 will have to think about it and that in the end 13 will likely make the jump and 1 may not.

I think the Big 10 will have more that will have to think about it, but most will make the jump. I have no clue about the PAC but they've pushed the issue so they may be all in.

I strongly believe the football first schools of the ACC will be all in as well.

This is what everyone meant when they spoke of radical change coming. Radical in the way business will be conducted and radical in the change it could bring to some conferences, and likely a consolidation among the P conferences to at least 4 and possibly 3.

(04-13-2021 05:05 PM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  

(04-13-2021 04:30 PM)TexanMark Wrote:  

(04-13-2021 04:15 PM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  

(04-13-2021 04:02 PM)nole Wrote:  Nobody is arguing about voting blocks.

That is not the topic. Not sure why the confusion.

If the ACC doesn't make major changes....it's future is like the Big East.....it will exist, but not in the world of big time college football.

Wake will not be in the world of big time college football......regardless of whether the ACC votes them out or not. Same for any small revenue school outside of the P2.

For some reason the ACC thinks it's position is permanent and thus they can protect some schools. They really can't protect ANYONE unless they know like a UNC/UVA, that the BIG or SEC would take them. But when they go.....Wake won't get an invite (FSU might not either).

Excellent post!

I agree that the ACC will survive, but it could easily be relegated to "American Athletic Conference" tweener status.

I also agree that the ACC won't (can't?) boot Wake and/or Duke... but they sure better consider making them non-football members!

Make them an offer that they can't refuse.

Mark, can you swing a Wegmans for each of their campuses to sweeten the pot?

Ha Ha...Food Lion would have a conniption fit
It'd be awesome. You want one in Greenville?

(04-13-2021 06:33 PM)esayem Wrote:  

(04-13-2021 03:54 PM)Statefan Wrote:  

(04-13-2021 03:07 PM)random asian guy Wrote:  Wake is not going anywhere.

Remeber the OBE conference? When VT was in the Big East in early 2000s, I was wondering why the Big East didn’t drop deadweight basketball teams like Providence or Seton Hall. The Big East didn’t shed a tear when Temple got booted. But that conference had never even considered dropping Providence or Seton Hall. In fact, they actually added more small basketball schools like DePaul.

Why? Beacuse these small Catholic basketball schools were/are the Big East. They were the core members whereas the football schools like WVU or VT were not.

For the ACC, the four NC schools and UVa are the voting block. They are the ACC. If Wake Forest and some other core schools got dropped, and the UNC and UVa lose their political power in the ACC, why would UNC/UVa stay? They would leave for a better paying conference.

Here is how I see the ACC voting block - as a staggered pyramid:

1. UNC/Duke
2. UNC/Duke/UVa - These are the "blues"
3. UNC/Duke/NCSU - A different kind of block
4. UNC/Duke/UVa/NCSU/WF - This is "Tobacco Road"
5. UNC/Duke/UVa/NCSU/WF/CU/VT/GT - This is the old ACC (yes this were VT is)

A smaller block is the old Big East:

1. BC/Syracuse/Pitt (No VT is not here)
2. When this block expands it adds Lousiville

Florida block

1. FSU/Miami (Miami actually meshes better than FSU)

Culturally:

ACC culture is Tidewater/Southeastern Atlantic with the exception of Clemson which is fully southern.

Clemson and FSU are the two "southern" schools.

ND, BC, Pitt, and Syracuse are "Yankee" schools even though technically Pitt is "Yinzer".

Miami is not quite southern, but not quite Hispanic.

Smarmy, patrician, paternalism is the core value of the ACC. That's what pisses off Clemson and FSU. Miami tends to get along with it. ND and BC handle paternalism very well. Syracuse much less so as well as Pitt.

You are correct to say that core will not "drop" Wake Forest. They will do their patrician duty to see that WF is kept whole in whatever manner is practical and I include VT in that.

What about Louisville?

Maryland was old ACC IMO, but never fit 100% because of their own antics.

I think Louisville hangs mostly with Pitt/Cuse/ND/BC and sometimes FSU/Clemson

(04-13-2021 08:00 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(04-13-2021 07:45 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(04-13-2021 04:15 PM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  

(04-13-2021 04:02 PM)nole Wrote:  Nobody is arguing about voting blocks.

That is not the topic. Not sure why the confusion.

If the ACC doesn't make major changes....it's future is like the Big East.....it will exist, but not in the world of big time college football.

Wake will not be in the world of big time college football......regardless of whether the ACC votes them out or not. Same for any small revenue school outside of the P2.

For some reason the ACC thinks it's position is permanent and thus they can protect some schools. They really can't protect ANYONE unless they know like a UNC/UVA, that the BIG or SEC would take them. But when they go.....Wake won't get an invite (FSU might not either).

Excellent post!

I agree that the ACC will survive, but it could easily be relegated to "American Athletic Conference" tweener status.

I also agree that the ACC won't (can't?) boot Wake and/or Duke... but they sure better consider making them non-football members!

When the commissioner goes to ESPN asking for more money, these are the things that ESPN will tell him. He can then go back to the Presidents and relay the information, they THEY will have to decide whether or not to ask Duke and Wake (or BC and Syracuse) to drop down in football etc. or decide to accept less media distribution monies.
I suspect many ACC presidents will then have to decide whether or not to be the Universities they were founded to be or become minor leagues for professional athletics.

This will be happening to a lesser or greater degree in EVERY conference. The ACC will not be alone in confronting this decision. The PAC, Big 10, and possibly even some in the SEC will be faced with the same decisions. The only conference I don't see having a major soul searching is the Big 12 and possibly the SEC.

When this issue is decided, then we will know how many conferences we will have in the P pay division and in the P no pay division. And then we will know how many schools and conferences comprise each. I suspect the majority will opt to allow NIL and to pay a stipend. I suspect more than many think will opt for something else. The upper tier could easily be 48 to 56 schools. We'll see.

If I had to guess I'd say 11 SEC schools will allow NIL and pay stipends and 3 will have to think about it and that in the end 13 will likely make the jump and 1 may not.

I think the Big 10 will have more that will have to think about it, but most will make the jump. I have no clue about the PAC but they've pushed the issue so they may be all in.

I strongly believe the football first schools of the ACC will be all in as well.

This is what everyone meant when they spoke of radical change coming. Radical in the way business will be conducted and radical in the change it could bring to some conferences, and likely a consolidation among the P conferences to at least 4 and possibly 3.

At the end of the day, the only ACC schools to leave the fold as "football first" schools might be Florida State and Clemson. The SEC defectors to the ACC side most likely would include Vanderbilt and possibly Kentucky.

(04-13-2021 08:43 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(04-13-2021 08:00 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(04-13-2021 07:45 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(04-13-2021 04:15 PM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  

(04-13-2021 04:02 PM)nole Wrote:  Nobody is arguing about voting blocks.

That is not the topic. Not sure why the confusion.

If the ACC doesn't make major changes....it's future is like the Big East.....it will exist, but not in the world of big time college football.

Wake will not be in the world of big time college football......regardless of whether the ACC votes them out or not. Same for any small revenue school outside of the P2.

For some reason the ACC thinks it's position is permanent and thus they can protect some schools. They really can't protect ANYONE unless they know like a UNC/UVA, that the BIG or SEC would take them. But when they go.....Wake won't get an invite (FSU might not either).

Excellent post!

I agree that the ACC will survive, but it could easily be relegated to "American Athletic Conference" tweener status.

I also agree that the ACC won't (can't?) boot Wake and/or Duke... but they sure better consider making them non-football members!

When the commissioner goes to ESPN asking for more money, these are the things that ESPN will tell him. He can then go back to the Presidents and relay the information, they THEY will have to decide whether or not to ask Duke and Wake (or BC and Syracuse) to drop down in football etc. or decide to accept less media distribution monies.
I suspect many ACC presidents will then have to decide whether or not to be the Universities they were founded to be or become minor leagues for professional athletics.

This will be happening to a lesser or greater degree in EVERY conference. The ACC will not be alone in confronting this decision. The PAC, Big 10, and possibly even some in the SEC will be faced with the same decisions. The only conference I don't see having a major soul searching is the Big 12 and possibly the SEC.

When this issue is decided, then we will know how many conferences we will have in the P pay division and in the P no pay division. And then we will know how many schools and conferences comprise each. I suspect the majority will opt to allow NIL and to pay a stipend. I suspect more than many think will opt for something else. The upper tier could easily be 48 to 56 schools. We'll see.

If I had to guess I'd say 11 SEC schools will allow NIL and pay stipends and 3 will have to think about it and that in the end 13 will likely make the jump and 1 may not.

I think the Big 10 will have more that will have to think about it, but most will make the jump. I have no clue about the PAC but they've pushed the issue so they may be all in.

I strongly believe the football first schools of the ACC will be all in as well.

This is what everyone meant when they spoke of radical change coming. Radical in the way business will be conducted and radical in the change it could bring to some conferences, and likely a consolidation among the P conferences to at least 4 and possibly 3.

At the end of the day, the only ACC schools to leave the fold as "football first" schools might be Florida State and Clemson. The SEC defectors to the ACC side most likely would include Vanderbilt and possibly Kentucky.

I'm not so sure about that. I don't think Miami and Georgia Tech can be that easily counted out. State politics might well prevent Va Tech and N.C. State. So I can see that. I think Louisville is another that would definitely be in. I'm not counting Notre Dame as an ACC member for this matter, but I think they would be in as well. So I see 4 possibly 6 that would go in. Your Four Carolina schools and the Virginia schools not. B.C., Syracuse and Pitt would be the question?

(04-13-2021 07:45 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(04-13-2021 04:15 PM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  

(04-13-2021 04:02 PM)nole Wrote:  Nobody is arguing about voting blocks.

That is not the topic. Not sure why the confusion.

If the ACC doesn't make major changes....it's future is like the Big East.....it will exist, but not in the world of big time college football.

Wake will not be in the world of big time college football......regardless of whether the ACC votes them out or not. Same for any small revenue school outside of the P2.

For some reason the ACC thinks it's position is permanent and thus they can protect some schools. They really can't protect ANYONE unless they know like a UNC/UVA, that the BIG or SEC would take them. But when they go.....Wake won't get an invite (FSU might not either).

Excellent post!

I agree that the ACC will survive, but it could easily be relegated to "American Athletic Conference" tweener status.

I also agree that the ACC won't (can't?) boot Wake and/or Duke... but they sure better consider making them non-football members!

When the commissioner goes to ESPN asking for more money, these are the things that ESPN will tell him. He can then go back to the Presidents and relay the information, they THEY will have to decide whether or not to ask Duke and Wake (or BC and Syracuse) to drop down in football etc. or decide to accept less media distribution monies.
I suspect many ACC presidents will then have to decide whether or not to be the Universities they were founded to be or become minor leagues for professional athletics.

The fact of the matter is that football and basketball have been minor leagues for professional athletics for many decades. All the school presidents have understood this for a long time. This has been the bargain made in order to create unique branding for the schools.

Ivy League school presidents determined the implications of this bargain in the 1950s...and they made the choice to de-emphasize football. The transition in basketball has been more gradual. Nevertheless, there is little doubt that many elite recruits go to universities overwhelmingly to help develop their trade (as big-time professional athletes).

The major change that will occur in the next several years is that athletes may benefit financially, comparable to the financial windfalls already made by universities and administrative staff. The University of Michigan reported that 34 athletic administrative staff earn over $100k per year...college athletics is already very professional.

IMO, ESPN does not need to make any suggestions regarding universities that don’t invest significantly in football. University presidents and the commissioner know the issues, they just need to make the decisions. Athletics drives branding prestige to the universities. Most ACC schools (FSU, ND, Clemson, Miami, GT, VT, Louisville, Pitt, etc.) have already committed to the future model.

(04-13-2021 09:00 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(04-13-2021 08:43 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(04-13-2021 08:00 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(04-13-2021 07:45 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(04-13-2021 04:15 PM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  Excellent post!

I agree that the ACC will survive, but it could easily be relegated to "American Athletic Conference" tweener status.

I also agree that the ACC won't (can't?) boot Wake and/or Duke... but they sure better consider making them non-football members!

When the commissioner goes to ESPN asking for more money, these are the things that ESPN will tell him. He can then go back to the Presidents and relay the information, they THEY will have to decide whether or not to ask Duke and Wake (or BC and Syracuse) to drop down in football etc. or decide to accept less media distribution monies.
I suspect many ACC presidents will then have to decide whether or not to be the Universities they were founded to be or become minor leagues for professional athletics.

This will be happening to a lesser or greater degree in EVERY conference. The ACC will not be alone in confronting this decision. The PAC, Big 10, and possibly even some in the SEC will be faced with the same decisions. The only conference I don't see having a major soul searching is the Big 12 and possibly the SEC.

When this issue is decided, then we will know how many conferences we will have in the P pay division and in the P no pay division. And then we will know how many schools and conferences comprise each. I suspect the majority will opt to allow NIL and to pay a stipend. I suspect more than many think will opt for something else. The upper tier could easily be 48 to 56 schools. We'll see.

If I had to guess I'd say 11 SEC schools will allow NIL and pay stipends and 3 will have to think about it and that in the end 13 will likely make the jump and 1 may not.

I think the Big 10 will have more that will have to think about it, but most will make the jump. I have no clue about the PAC but they've pushed the issue so they may be all in.

I strongly believe the football first schools of the ACC will be all in as well.

This is what everyone meant when they spoke of radical change coming. Radical in the way business will be conducted and radical in the change it could bring to some conferences, and likely a consolidation among the P conferences to at least 4 and possibly 3.

At the end of the day, the only ACC schools to leave the fold as "football first" schools might be Florida State and Clemson. The SEC defectors to the ACC side most likely would include Vanderbilt and possibly Kentucky.

I'm not so sure about that. I don't think Miami and Georgia Tech can be that easily counted out. State politics might well prevent Va Tech and N.C. State. So I can see that. I think Louisville is another that would definitely be in. I'm not counting Notre Dame as an ACC member for this matter, but I think they would be in as well. So I see 4 possibly 6 that would go in. Your Four Carolina schools and the Virginia schools not. B.C., Syracuse and Pitt would be the question?

Clemson has little other than football. There once was baseball, but baseball has become so competitive, the rest of their peers have caught and surpassed them. What Clemson does have is an 80,000 seat stadium and the ability to fill it.
Florida State is in a bind. In the last 30 years or so their academic reputation has soared, but their athletic department is awash is red ink. They probably will feel that they are in too deep to turn around.
But the idea that private research Universities (or public ones that act like privates) will forsake their academic mission in favor of a few athletic dollars is lame.
Louisville like Kentucky won't kill their golden geese to chase football glory. They are victims of poor locations and know it's easier to import 15 basketball players than it is to try to convince 100 to come to play football. These two schools will eventually side with their athletic peers and stop chasing a dream they can't consistently be competitive in.
When University Presidents are facing truly long term decisions, their main goal will be to serve and preserve their institutions, not pursue athletic endeavors.

Neither UF or FSU are in great locations in respect to the rest of the state and recruits. However, Gainesville is much more accessible of the two. As with human nature:. losing shows you the hardcore dedicated base. FSU can still bounce back quickly. Folks from Tampa, JAX and Orlando have to return to fill those 80K seats and winning is key. The rise of USF, UCF and to a lesser extent FAU/FIU has siphoned off some fans statewide. Not sure FSU will ever get back to glory days but let's see when they string a couple a couple 11/12 win seasons together.

(04-13-2021 08:43 PM)XLance Wrote:  At the end of the day, the only ACC schools to leave the fold as "football first" schools might be Florida State and Clemson.

If that were to happen Todd Stansbury would be on the phone to Athens, the GABOR, the state legislature, and Birmingham the next day. And while GT might not bring new markets to the SEC, it greatly improves inventory and the gate all around, especially if Missouri goes West where it belongs and Auburn goes East where it belongs.

(04-14-2021 09:07 AM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:  

(04-13-2021 08:43 PM)XLance Wrote:  At the end of the day, the only ACC schools to leave the fold as "football first" schools might be Florida State and Clemson.

If that were to happen Todd Stansbury would be on the phone to Athens, the GABOR, the state legislature, and Birmingham the next day. And while GT might not bring new markets to the SEC, it greatly improves inventory and the gate all around, especially if Missouri goes West where it belongs and Auburn goes East where it belongs.

Agree that athletic directors, coaches, student-athletes, boosters and alumni will overwhelmingly seek to maintain the prestige from big-time athletics. A school like UVA (UNC?, GT?) could be successful regardless of its strategic direction on athletics, but I don’t see university presidents at these prestigious public flagship institutions giving-up on their hard-earned branding advantages.

Most universities are immense conglomerates. For example, many university health systems are heavily into primary care, public health and insurance...fields that have little synergy with traditional academics. Universities are not divesting from health systems as these business models evolve. Managing big-time athletics is just part of presidents’ diverse responsibilities.

(04-14-2021 09:07 AM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:  

(04-13-2021 08:43 PM)XLance Wrote:  At the end of the day, the only ACC schools to leave the fold as "football first" schools might be Florida State and Clemson.

If that were to happen Todd Stansbury would be on the phone to Athens, the GABOR, the state legislature, and Birmingham the next day. And while GT might not bring new markets to the SEC, it greatly improves inventory and the gate all around, especially if Missouri goes West where it belongs and Auburn goes East where it belongs.

Isn't Todd Stansbury the Athletic Director?

Decisions of this magnitude are WAY, WAY above his pay grade