Key tweets, and it's all gone to Hell. | Page 769 | The Boneyard
.

Key tweets, and it's all gone to Hell.

ZooCougar said:
How so?

If they get $30M or better from an Indy Football contract and then plop their sports in someplace like the Big East haven’t they equaled or bettered their payout?
Expand ...
No. That would be less than they get now. They also share in football playoff money. Even without that they get more than $35M in the ACC ($41.3m last year).

Some people view the ACC through distorted lenses. It's easily the #3 conference, ahead of the Big XII. It's only "unstable" because a few schools think they are worthy of B1G or SEC money (none of the Big XII schools are in that situation). Most of the ACC schools that think that are delusional, just like the Pac schools were.

FSU might attract SEC attention but the B1G wouldn't touch them. Same with Clemson. UNC, playing football as it is now, is probably the main prize. B1G might consider UVA to lock up DC. Maybe.
 
JohnFSilver said:
Late in the season indy is the issue. Once November hits can you get quality games?
Expand ...

I think between their football brand and enormous fanbase they can get the money. Particularly that they have alums who are writing big checks to build a war chest for an ACC exit as we speak.

I mean if SMU can raise $200M to float not getting paid in the ACC for the next three Presidential terms then I think FSU can do all right.

It will be hard for them to schedule for Playoff Appearances. That's what I think the FSU official was referring to.
 
HuskyHawk said:
No. That would be less than they get now. They also share in football playoff money. Even without that they get more than $35M in the ACC ($41.3m last year).

Some people view the ACC through distorted lenses. It's easily the #3 conference, ahead of the Big XII. It's only "unstable" because a few schools think they are worthy of B1G or SEC money (none of the Big XII schools are in that situation). Most of the ACC schools that think that are delusional, just like the Pac schools were.

FSU might attract SEC attention but the B1G wouldn't touch them. Same with Clemson. UNC, playing football as it is now, is probably the main prize. B1G might consider UVA to lock up DC. Maybe.
Expand ...

They could probably make that up too.

They already said it wasn't an option. So it's not they are seriously considering it. Maybe not even unseriously.
 
HuskyHawk said:
No. That would be less than they get now. They also share in football playoff money. Even without that they get more than $35M in the ACC ($41.3m last year).

Some people view the ACC through distorted lenses. It's easily the #3 conference, ahead of the Big XII. It's only "unstable" because a few schools think they are worthy of B1G or SEC money (none of the Big XII schools are in that situation). Most of the ACC schools that think that are delusional, just like the Pac schools were.

FSU might attract SEC attention but the B1G wouldn't touch them. Same with Clemson. UNC, playing football as it is now, is probably the main prize. B1G might consider UVA to lock up DC. Maybe.
Expand ...
There are likely 4 schools that will be poached. If ACC survives losing just 4, it’s poaching from Big 12.
After that, it gets dicey and Big 12 could easily poach some schools.
 
HuskyHawk said:
No. That would be less than they get now. They also share in football playoff money. Even without that they get more than $35M in the ACC ($41.3m last year).

Some people view the ACC through distorted lenses. It's easily the #3 conference, ahead of the Big XII. It's only "unstable" because a few schools think they are worthy of B1G or SEC money (none of the Big XII schools are in that situation). Most of the ACC schools that think that are delusional, just like the Pac schools were.

FSU might attract SEC attention but the B1G wouldn't touch them. Same with Clemson. UNC, playing football as it is now, is probably the main prize. B1G might consider UVA to lock up DC. Maybe.
Expand ...
Also they be losing their college football playoff money as an independent so that's another $15 million to have to make up.
 
For many reasons, going Indy is now hard to do.

1....With media tightening their belts, big contracts for an individual Indy may not be there.

2....Parking non football sports could be a problem

3....The Big 10 and Big 12 are now at 9 conference games, With more teams, I could see the ACC following suit if they lose the Notre Dame 5 games a year.

4....After conference play starts in full swing, scheduling good teams might be tough.

Even Notre Dame may not get the big NBC money that they want...

Former Fox Sports Exec Patrick Cates:
“My big-picture thought is that Notre Dame will need a conference to support a three-time bump long term. I think either the Big Ten or SEC would do. Also, don’t rule out a third new conference in several years. A lot of assumptions are falling apart as pay-TV-bundle economics go flat.”
Expand ...
 
HuskyHawk said:
Some people view the ACC through distorted lenses. It's easily the #3 conference, ahead of the Big XII. It's only "unstable" because a few schools think they are worthy of B1G or SEC money (none of the Big XII schools are in that situation). Most of the ACC schools that think that are delusional, just like the Pac schools were.

FSU might attract SEC attention but the B1G wouldn't touch them. Same with Clemson. UNC, playing football as it is now, is probably the main prize. B1G might consider UVA to lock up DC. Maybe.
Expand ...
You are partially correct. It's hard to tell right now if the Big 12 or ACC are better than the other given the recent adds to both conferences which I think are dilutive to both conferences. What is true is if the SEC takes Clemson and FSU, ACC football is dead. Given the uncertainty of the future ACC composition, I think some schools like VT, Pitt, and Louisville would consider a B12 invite right now if they could.
 
It may be a long, long time before anyone leaves the ACC.

Oh we all yak about it...but that GOR dam has to break.

One thing the administration at FSU and Clemson know...no league will have them until the threat of another conference owning all their home games is quelled.
 
UConnJim said:
You are partially correct. It's hard to tell right now if the Big 12 or ACC are better than the other given the recent adds to both conferences which I think are dilutive to both conferences. What is true is if the SEC takes Clemson and FSU, ACC football is dead. Given the uncertainty of the future ACC composition, I think some schools like VT, Pitt, and Louisville would consider a B12 invite right now if they could.
Expand ...
I don't see it. FSU, Clemson and UNC are better than any program in the Big XII. You can argue Miami is as well. Year to year it varies of course, but right now the top two teams in the future incarnation of the Big XII are Utah and Kansas.

It's not just the new adds that dilute the Big XII, the prior additions do as well. Cinci was added coming off a CFB playoff and is dead last, winless in conference. Houston 1-4 (K State just beat them 41-0), UCF winless. BYU is the only competitive one. It's a worse football conference than the ACC even if they lose FSU and Clemson (and they won't anytime soon).

Big XII is in great shape for basketball but is going to be pretty dreadful for football.
 
HuskyHawk said:
I don't see it. FSU, Clemson and UNC are better than any program in the Big XII. You can argue Miami is as well. Year to year it varies of course, but right now the top two teams in the future incarnation of the Big XII are Utah and Kansas.

It's not just the new adds that dilute the Big XII, the prior additions do as well. Cinci was added coming off a CFB playoff and is dead last, winless in conference. Houston 1-4 (K State just beat them 41-0), UCF winless. BYU is the only competitive one. It's a worse football conference than the ACC even if they lose FSU and Clemson (and they won't anytime soon).

Big XII is in great shape for basketball but is going to be pretty dreadful for football.
Expand ...

The new Big 12 has four ranked teams in the new CFP rankings (Utah, Kansas, Oklahoma State and Kansas State). And that is in a down year. I don't know how that is dreadful. And while they are ranked high the ACC only has 2 ranked teams, FSU and Louisville meaning they only have one team if FSU leaves. How does that make them a worse conference, especially when they're doing this with the new schools getting acclimated and are also adding Utah, Colorado and Arizona in football? And saying that the new schools "dilute" the conference is silly, they are getting adjusted to the conference.

You can't use the diluted line while touting how a school like UConn gets better once P5 money and exposure rolls in (which they would). That works for everyone. Cincinnati is a perfect example of these, they were terrible in their first year in the Big East and then exploded after its second year of power conference exposure. The four previous additions can tap into Ohio, Florida, Texas or in BYU's case national exposure and national title tradition. Those schools will be a force soon enough.
 
Last edited:
What teams really prospered after changing conferences ? A minority, I think.

Rutgers...nope

Maryland...last year was the first year that they won 8 games in the the B1G Did not have above a .500 regular season in 7 of 9 seasons in B1G.

WVU...decent but not like the 4X champs they were in the BE.

Miami...hasn't sniffed an ACC Championship in 20 years.

Cuse and BC...nada

Texas A&M...better than in Big 12...but still not an SEC CCG contender

Nebraska...not the Huskers of the Big 12

Colorado....the Pac wasn't their panacea

Penn State....punching their weight...success story, I guess.
 
billybud said:
What teams really prospered after changing conferences ? A minority, I think.

Rutgers...nope

Maryland...last year was the first year that they won 8 games in the the B1G Did not have above a .500 regular season in 7 of 9 seasons in B1G.

WVU...decent but not like the 4X champs they were in the BE.

Miami...hasn't sniffed an ACC Championship in 20 years.

Cuse and BC...nada

Texas A&M...better than in Big 12...but still not an SEC CCG contender

Nebraska...not the Huskers of the Big 12

Colorado....the Pac wasn't their panacea

Penn State....punching their weight...success story, I guess.
Expand ...
I am not a Rutgers fan, quite the opposite, but they have prospered compared to where they were before B1G money came along. I have said before that of all undeserving athetic programs they hit the jackpot.. and their olympic sports and football have improved. The are middle of the B1G in football now, not ready for OSU or Michigan, but competetive with others, nearly won the B1G in basketball last year, and not so bad in other olympic sports now. All of the above schools have a life raft to guarantee their future, even those that may be in a new ACC after 2036 and that is the most important thing.
 
Notre Dame currently makes $22m annually for football. We can see where the market goes for it with their next contract, but probably only Ohio State and Alabama are on their level.
 
HuskyHawk said:
I don't see it. FSU, Clemson and UNC are better than any program in the Big XII. You can argue Miami is as well. Year to year it varies of course, but right now the top two teams in the future incarnation of the Big XII are Utah and Kansas.

It's not just the new adds that dilute the Big XII, the prior additions do as well. Cinci was added coming off a CFB playoff and is dead last, winless in conference. Houston 1-4 (K State just beat them 41-0), UCF winless. BYU is the only competitive one. It's a worse football conference than the ACC even if they lose FSU and Clemson (and they won't anytime soon).

Big XII is in great shape for basketball but is going to be pretty dreadful for football.
Expand ...
Since 2005, I think the future Big 12 teams have been somewhat comparable to the ACC, although Clemson has won 2 championships and nobody in the Big 12 has. Miami and UNC have not had a top 10 finish.

Top 10 final rankings since 2005:

Big 12:
TCU: 8
Cincinnati: 3
Oklahoma St.: 3
West Virginia: 3
Baylor: 2
UCF: 2
Utah: 2
Houston: 1
Iowa St.: 1
Kansas: 1
Arizona: 0
Arizona St.: 0
BYU: 0
Colorado: 0
Texas Tech: 0
Total = 26


ACC:
Clemson: 8
FSU: 5
Stanford: 5
Virginia Tech: 3
BC: 1
Georgia Tech: 1
Louisville: 1
Pitt: 1
Cal: 0
Duke: 0
Miami: 0
North Carolina: 0
NC State: 0
SMU: 0
Syracuse: 0
Virginia: 0
Wake Forest: 0
Total = 25

If Clemson or FSU leave the ACC down the road, the Big 12 is the clear better football conference.
 
UConnJim said:
Since 2005, I think the future Big 12 teams have been somewhat comparable to the ACC, although Clemson has won 2 championships and nobody in the Big 12 has. Miami and UNC have not had a top 10 finish.

Top 10 final rankings since 2005:

Big 12:
TCU: 8
Cincinnati: 3
Oklahoma St.: 3
West Virginia: 3
Baylor: 2
UCF: 2
Utah: 2
Houston: 1
Iowa St.: 1
Kansas: 1
Arizona: 0
Arizona St.: 0
BYU: 0
Colorado: 0
Texas Tech: 0
Total = 26


ACC:
Clemson: 8
FSU: 5
Stanford: 5
Virginia Tech: 3
BC: 1
Georgia Tech: 1
Louisville: 1
Pitt: 1
Cal: 0
Duke: 0
Miami: 0
North Carolina: 0
NC State: 0
SMU: 0
Syracuse: 0
Virginia: 0
Wake Forest: 0
Total = 25

If Clemson or FSU leave the ACC down the road, the Big 12 is the clear better football conference.
Expand ...
Top 10 is not the relevant measure. Look at Bowl games, Top 25 and TV ratings. Arizona and Miami are not equivalent for TV purposes. Nor are North Carolina and Arizona State. This measure underrates BYU, which is valuable.
 
HuskyHawk said:
Top 10 is not the relevant measure. Look at Bowl games, Top 25 and TV ratings. Arizona and Miami are not equivalent for TV purposes. Nor are North Carolina and Arizona State. This measure underrates BYU, which is valuable.
Expand ...
How can Miami and UNC be better programs when they haven’t had a recent top 10 finish? Attendance is about a wash. As for TV ratings, the Big 12’s championship game last year with Kansas St./TCU had almost triple the TV ratings if the ACC Championship game of Clemson/UNC. The Big 12 game was noon Saturday with no competition and the ACC game was Saturday night and went up against Big 10.
 
UConnJim said:
How can Miami and UNC be better programs when they haven’t had a recent top 10 finish? Attendance is about a wash. As for TV ratings, the Big 12’s championship game last year with Kansas St./TCU had almost triple the TV ratings if the ACC Championship game of Clemson/UNC. The Big 12 game was noon Saturday with no competition and the ACC game was Saturday night and went up against Big 10.
Expand ...
Top 10 is an arbitrary and irrelevant metric. Nobody cares about that. The time of those games tells the story, one is worthy of prime time, the other was not. TCU also drew ratings because a win put them in the playoff, and some fans were rooting against that. I like the Big XII, I grew up a Big 8 fan, but without OU and UT it is pretty weak.
 
HuskyHawk said:
Top 10 is an arbitrary and irrelevant metric. Nobody cares about that. The time of those games tells the story, one is worthy of prime time, the other was not. TCU also drew ratings because a win put them in the playoff, and some fans were rooting against that. I like the Big XII, I grew up a Big 8 fan, but without OU and UT it is pretty weak.
Expand ...
Sagarin ratings adjusted for new additions and subtractions for the ACC and Big 12:

ACC: 73.57
Big 12: 75.88
 

Online statistics

Members online
248
Guests online
3,382
Total visitors
3,630
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
164,828
Messages
4,411,790
Members
10,239
Latest member
Dondadonone


.
..
Top Bottom