menu
Logo
99+
Bobcat Attack Menu
Logo
99+
Ohio Football Topic
Topic: ACC Upheaval
Page: 1 of 2
mail
person
giacomo
5/18/2023 7:30 AM
https://pge.post-gazette.com/.pf/showstory/202305170083/3

Seven schools looking to get out.
mail
person
GoCats105
5/18/2023 11:03 AM
Smells like sour grapes on the part of three schools (Clemson, Miami and FSU) when the SEC and Big Ten expanded but didn't reach out to them instead. They made their deal with the ACC and signed away their GOR. They have no one to blame but themselves. Also, good luck!
mail
greencat
5/18/2023 12:25 PM
Georgia would have a crap-attack if nearby Clemson joined the SEC. Not sure how overjoyed Florida would be about FSU either. I could see NC State and VaTech in the SEC to geographically balance out Texas and Oklahoma joining.
mail
person
CoachPMac
5/18/2023 1:49 PM
greencat wrote:expand_more
Georgia would have a crap-attack if nearby Clemson joined the SEC. Not sure how overjoyed Florida would be about FSU either. I could see NC State and VaTech in the SEC to geographically balance out Texas and Oklahoma joining.
At one time there was an agreement in place that South Carolina could veto Clemson, Georgia could veto Georgia Tech, and Florida could veto Florida State. I don’t know if that agreement still stands, but it’s unlikely any of those moves happen in the near future anyway. I think you’re right in that if any moves are made it would involve one of the North Carolina schools and one of the Virginia schools. Some major donors for South Carolina are still salty with UNC over South Carolina’s departure from the ACC years ago.
mail
person
GoCats105
5/18/2023 2:13 PM
CoachPMac wrote:expand_more
Georgia would have a crap-attack if nearby Clemson joined the SEC. Not sure how overjoyed Florida would be about FSU either. I could see NC State and VaTech in the SEC to geographically balance out Texas and Oklahoma joining.
At one time there was an agreement in place that South Carolina could veto Clemson, Georgia could veto Georgia Tech, and Florida could veto Florida State. I don’t know if that agreement still stands, but it’s unlikely any of those moves happen in the near future anyway. I think you’re right in that if any moves are made it would involve one of the North Carolina schools and one of the Virginia schools. Some major donors for South Carolina are still salty with UNC over South Carolina’s departure from the ACC years ago.
There was also a time when the SEC first expanded in 1992 that they pursued Florida State, but Bobby Bowden said no. Kinda worked out for everyone at the time.
mail
M.D.W.S.T
5/18/2023 3:57 PM
If I've said it once, I've said it a dozen times... the winners of all this conference upheaval will be the teams that didn't cave to the money.

Everyone wants to join the SUPERSEC and the MEGAHUGETEN... right up until they go 7-7 and all their fans are complaining about Notre Dame going 14-0 every year.

Money is great. Losses get entire athletic departments fired.
Last Edited: 5/18/2023 3:58:36 PM by M.D.W.S.T
mail
greencat
5/18/2023 6:21 PM
I could see this scenario:

Virginia and Vanderbilt (SEC) to the BigTen.

Texas and Okie to the SEC is already going to happen.

Miami, VaTech, UNC, NC State to the SEC.

Pitt (if Penn State agrees to it) to the Big Ten with Syracuse and BC

GaTech will drop down to the AAC if unlucky.

FSU and Clemson will be the start of Big12 eastern expansion. Maybe GaTech.

Not sure what happens to Duke. I would love to see an academic school conference with Duke, Vandy, Tulane, Rice, Furman, etc. But will never happen.
mail
person
CatsUp
5/18/2023 10:24 PM
Does this mean a Peden expansion to 32,000 (instead of 50,000) gets us into the remnants of the ACC?
mail
person
Urban Bobcat
5/18/2023 11:28 PM
CatsUp wrote:expand_more
Does this mean a Peden expansion to 32,000 (instead of 50,000) gets us into the remnants of the ACC?
If the ACC was that gutted our stadium size probably wouldn't be an issue.

Ohio will probably be in the MAC all the way up the the great apocalypse.
Last Edited: 5/18/2023 11:29:17 PM by Urban Bobcat
mail
person
Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame
5/19/2023 9:02 AM
M.D.W.S.T wrote:expand_more
If I've said it once, I've said it a dozen times... the winners of all this conference upheaval will be the teams that didn't cave to the money.

Everyone wants to join the SUPERSEC and the MEGAHUGETEN... right up until they go 7-7 and all their fans are complaining about Notre Dame going 14-0 every year.

Money is great. Losses get entire athletic departments fired.
Sure, except that athletic departments aren't the people that work for them. They're a department of a larger organization, and one that -- in this scenario -- prints cash.

At an individual level, there will be some losers at schools that go 7-7. But the schools themselves aren't going to consider it a loss because they had to fire some people.
mail
person
GoCats105
5/19/2023 11:02 AM
At this point I wouldn't hate a 2-conference mega league - basically some sort of quasi NFL farm system - and let everyone else have their own division of NCAA football. Or I could easily see a system similar to European soccer where teams move in and out of divisions based on winning/losing. I wouldn't hate that either.

When you get down to brass tacks, there are only about 15-20 schools each year who have a legitimate shot at winning a national title as things stand now. So you take that 20, and a few extra off the top - let's call it 32 just for funsies, 16 each for the Big Ten and SEC. The rest keep doing what they're doing now.
mail
person
Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame
5/19/2023 1:42 PM
GoCats105 wrote:expand_more
At this point I wouldn't hate a 2-conference mega league - basically some sort of quasi NFL farm system - and let everyone else have their own division of NCAA football. Or I could easily see a system similar to European soccer where teams move in and out of divisions based on winning/losing. I wouldn't hate that either.

When you get down to brass tacks, there are only about 15-20 schools each year who have a legitimate shot at winning a national title as things stand now. So you take that 20, and a few extra off the top - let's call it 32 just for funsies, 16 each for the Big Ten and SEC. The rest keep doing what they're doing now.
This is, effectively, the case now. There are schools that are eligible for the national championship, and there are schools that are not. All that's different is that right now the schools that are not get to pretend they are.
mail
person
GoCats105
5/19/2023 4:50 PM
Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame wrote:expand_more
At this point I wouldn't hate a 2-conference mega league - basically some sort of quasi NFL farm system - and let everyone else have their own division of NCAA football. Or I could easily see a system similar to European soccer where teams move in and out of divisions based on winning/losing. I wouldn't hate that either.

When you get down to brass tacks, there are only about 15-20 schools each year who have a legitimate shot at winning a national title as things stand now. So you take that 20, and a few extra off the top - let's call it 32 just for funsies, 16 each for the Big Ten and SEC. The rest keep doing what they're doing now.
This is, effectively, the case now. There are schools that are eligible for the national championship, and there are schools that are not. All that's different is that right now the schools that are not get to pretend they are.
Yeah. When you think about it, conferences like the MAC and Sun Belt aren't really in as much trouble as is perceived. They know their lanes. Schools like Wake Forest, Syracuse, Illinois, Rutgers and Washington State are the ones whose lives could change if things get really crazy here in the next 5-10 years.
mail
person
Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame
5/19/2023 8:02 PM
GoCats105 wrote:expand_more
At this point I wouldn't hate a 2-conference mega league - basically some sort of quasi NFL farm system - and let everyone else have their own division of NCAA football. Or I could easily see a system similar to European soccer where teams move in and out of divisions based on winning/losing. I wouldn't hate that either.

When you get down to brass tacks, there are only about 15-20 schools each year who have a legitimate shot at winning a national title as things stand now. So you take that 20, and a few extra off the top - let's call it 32 just for funsies, 16 each for the Big Ten and SEC. The rest keep doing what they're doing now.
This is, effectively, the case now. There are schools that are eligible for the national championship, and there are schools that are not. All that's different is that right now the schools that are not get to pretend they are.
Yeah. When you think about it, conferences like the MAC and Sun Belt aren't really in as much trouble as is perceived. They know their lanes. Schools like Wake Forest, Syracuse, Illinois, Rutgers and Washington State are the ones whose lives could change if things get really crazy here in the next 5-10 years.
The risk for the MAC is that they no longer get the payday games vs. P5 schools. That hits budgets hard for a lot of schools.
mail
The Optimist
5/19/2023 9:40 PM
GoCats105 wrote:expand_more
At this point I wouldn't hate a 2-conference mega league - basically some sort of quasi NFL farm system - and let everyone else have their own division of NCAA football. Or I could easily see a system similar to European soccer where teams move in and out of divisions based on winning/losing. I wouldn't hate that either.

When you get down to brass tacks, there are only about 15-20 schools each year who have a legitimate shot at winning a national title as things stand now. So you take that 20, and a few extra off the top - let's call it 32 just for funsies, 16 each for the Big Ten and SEC. The rest keep doing what they're doing now.
This is, effectively, the case now. There are schools that are eligible for the national championship, and there are schools that are not. All that's different is that right now the schools that are not get to pretend they are.
Yeah. When you think about it, conferences like the MAC and Sun Belt aren't really in as much trouble as is perceived. They know their lanes. Schools like Wake Forest, Syracuse, Illinois, Rutgers and Washington State are the ones whose lives could change if things get really crazy here in the next 5-10 years.

It's conceivable Syracuse will come crying to the MAC for a football only deal. Their fan's arrogance will make Temple and UMass look like nothing
mail
person
Pataskala
5/19/2023 10:25 PM
None of the ACC schools really offers anything to make them attractive to the SE/B10. By adding Texas and Oklahoma, the SEC shows it's looking for schools that can bring money into the league. Same for B10's addition of USC and UCLA. None of the ACC schools has any real draw that can add to the SEC/B10 coffers. I can see some sort of B12-Pac12 merger in the next few years but nobody wants to cover the ACC exit fees (>$120 million per team) given the fairly mediocre product that would be coming into a conference.
mail
person
Deciduous Forest Cat
5/20/2023 1:27 PM
The Optimist wrote:expand_more
At this point I wouldn't hate a 2-conference mega league - basically some sort of quasi NFL farm system - and let everyone else have their own division of NCAA football. Or I could easily see a system similar to European soccer where teams move in and out of divisions based on winning/losing. I wouldn't hate that either.

When you get down to brass tacks, there are only about 15-20 schools each year who have a legitimate shot at winning a national title as things stand now. So you take that 20, and a few extra off the top - let's call it 32 just for funsies, 16 each for the Big Ten and SEC. The rest keep doing what they're doing now.
This is, effectively, the case now. There are schools that are eligible for the national championship, and there are schools that are not. All that's different is that right now the schools that are not get to pretend they are.
Yeah. When you think about it, conferences like the MAC and Sun Belt aren't really in as much trouble as is perceived. They know their lanes. Schools like Wake Forest, Syracuse, Illinois, Rutgers and Washington State are the ones whose lives could change if things get really crazy here in the next 5-10 years.

It's conceivable Syracuse will come crying to the MAC for a football only deal. Their fan's arrogance will make Temple and UMass look like nothing
This is sarcasm right? I get it.
mail
person
Pataskala
5/20/2023 3:21 PM
Deciduous Forest Cat wrote:expand_more
At this point I wouldn't hate a 2-conference mega league - basically some sort of quasi NFL farm system - and let everyone else have their own division of NCAA football. Or I could easily see a system similar to European soccer where teams move in and out of divisions based on winning/losing. I wouldn't hate that either.

When you get down to brass tacks, there are only about 15-20 schools each year who have a legitimate shot at winning a national title as things stand now. So you take that 20, and a few extra off the top - let's call it 32 just for funsies, 16 each for the Big Ten and SEC. The rest keep doing what they're doing now.
This is, effectively, the case now. There are schools that are eligible for the national championship, and there are schools that are not. All that's different is that right now the schools that are not get to pretend they are.
Yeah. When you think about it, conferences like the MAC and Sun Belt aren't really in as much trouble as is perceived. They know their lanes. Schools like Wake Forest, Syracuse, Illinois, Rutgers and Washington State are the ones whose lives could change if things get really crazy here in the next 5-10 years.

It's conceivable Syracuse will come crying to the MAC for a football only deal. Their fan's arrogance will make Temple and UMass look like nothing
This is sarcasm right? I get it.
The MAC is maybe the only place where Cuse could win a football championship.
mail
person
giacomo
5/21/2023 8:58 AM
GoCats105 wrote:expand_more
At this point I wouldn't hate a 2-conference mega league - basically some sort of quasi NFL farm system - and let everyone else have their own division of NCAA football. Or I could easily see a system similar to European soccer where teams move in and out of divisions based on winning/losing. I wouldn't hate that either.

When you get down to brass tacks, there are only about 15-20 schools each year who have a legitimate shot at winning a national title as things stand now. So you take that 20, and a few extra off the top - let's call it 32 just for funsies, 16 each for the Big Ten and SEC. The rest keep doing what they're doing now.
I agree. But the rest of the schools won’t be able to chase the big dream, no matter how impossible it may be. The second tier of the Big 10 for example, they have just as little hope of winning the national championship as MAC schools, but they and their boosters get to dream and donate big and pay their coaches millions.
mail
person
Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame
5/21/2023 11:05 AM
giacomo wrote:expand_more
I agree. But the rest of the schools won’t be able to chase the big dream, no matter how impossible it may be. The second tier of the Big 10 for example, they have just as little hope of winning the national championship as MAC schools, but they and their boosters get to dream and donate big and pay their coaches millions.
The second tier of the Big 10 may have little hope of winning the national championship, practically speaking. But they don't have structural barriers which making it literally impossible. That's a big difference.
mail
TWT
5/21/2023 11:03 PM
giacomo wrote:expand_more
At this point I wouldn't hate a 2-conference mega league - basically some sort of quasi NFL farm system - and let everyone else have their own division of NCAA football. Or I could easily see a system similar to European soccer where teams move in and out of divisions based on winning/losing. I wouldn't hate that either.

When you get down to brass tacks, there are only about 15-20 schools each year who have a legitimate shot at winning a national title as things stand now. So you take that 20, and a few extra off the top - let's call it 32 just for funsies, 16 each for the Big Ten and SEC. The rest keep doing what they're doing now.
I agree. But the rest of the schools won’t be able to chase the big dream, no matter how impossible it may be. The second tier of the Big 10 for example, they have just as little hope of winning the national championship as MAC schools, but they and their boosters get to dream and donate big and pay their coaches millions.
A feature of the new NIL era is that boosters have the power to withdraw support and for player sponsorships and starve a coaching regime of talent they aren't excited for. That can be fatal for recruiting.
mail
TWT
5/22/2023 10:02 AM
Quote:expand_more
What can the ACC do as a league?

The only way the ACC can receive significantly more money from ESPN is by expanding. Sources told Action Network that if the ACC adds additional teams — whether from the Power 5 or Group of Five — ESPN contractually must pay the ACC a pro-rata amount for each new member.

The ACC, if it desired, could add four more schools (almost certainly Group of Five programs), pay them a reduced amount and split the remaining revenue between the existing members. However, that likely would only increase the current membership’s revenue by a few million dollars a year until the new members would earn full shares.

https://www.actionnetwork.com/ncaaf/acc-at-crossroads-mag...
This could make a lot of sense for the ACC. Normally when a P5 expands and does a half share thing its applicable for 5 years until the end of the contract but in this case the ACC is all the way out until 2036 which is a while. Then the ACC could lock up SMU, Tulane, UConn, USF so the Big 12 and PAC 12 can't have them which helps stategically.

Then with the unequal revenue sharing in the ACC for the CFP and NCAA money is more significant than it sounds because the CFP is expanding and each appearance is going to be worth greatly more than it was before. Clemson could make out big with keeping 75% of its playoff appearance money. If the revenue difference is 30 million between what they would earn in the SEC that gap would narrow. 30 million is also not that much when the athletic budgets at some of these programs are $150 million an institutional budgets in the billions.
mail
person
GoCats105
5/22/2023 10:30 AM
Campus Flow wrote:expand_more
At this point I wouldn't hate a 2-conference mega league - basically some sort of quasi NFL farm system - and let everyone else have their own division of NCAA football. Or I could easily see a system similar to European soccer where teams move in and out of divisions based on winning/losing. I wouldn't hate that either.

When you get down to brass tacks, there are only about 15-20 schools each year who have a legitimate shot at winning a national title as things stand now. So you take that 20, and a few extra off the top - let's call it 32 just for funsies, 16 each for the Big Ten and SEC. The rest keep doing what they're doing now.
I agree. But the rest of the schools won’t be able to chase the big dream, no matter how impossible it may be. The second tier of the Big 10 for example, they have just as little hope of winning the national championship as MAC schools, but they and their boosters get to dream and donate big and pay their coaches millions.
A feature of the new NIL era is that boosters have the power to withdraw support and for player sponsorships and starve a coaching regime of talent they aren't excited for. That can be fatal for recruiting.
I hate to break this to you, but that's how it's always been.
mail
TWT
5/24/2023 12:48 AM
GoCats105 wrote:expand_more
At this point I wouldn't hate a 2-conference mega league - basically some sort of quasi NFL farm system - and let everyone else have their own division of NCAA football. Or I could easily see a system similar to European soccer where teams move in and out of divisions based on winning/losing. I wouldn't hate that either.

When you get down to brass tacks, there are only about 15-20 schools each year who have a legitimate shot at winning a national title as things stand now. So you take that 20, and a few extra off the top - let's call it 32 just for funsies, 16 each for the Big Ten and SEC. The rest keep doing what they're doing now.
I agree. But the rest of the schools won’t be able to chase the big dream, no matter how impossible it may be. The second tier of the Big 10 for example, they have just as little hope of winning the national championship as MAC schools, but they and their boosters get to dream and donate big and pay their coaches millions.
A feature of the new NIL era is that boosters have the power to withdraw support and for player sponsorships and starve a coaching regime of talent they aren't excited for. That can be fatal for recruiting.
I hate to break this to you, but that's how it's always been.
No because in the past a coach on the hot seat meant a reduction of donations to the athletic department which over time would put pressure on a staff. The coach however could turn its fortunes around by example pulling out a PAC 12 or a Big 12 championship because the reduction of donor interest to the athletic department didn't direclty impact recruiting.

With NIL collectives required to pay players in order to atract them donors can handcuff a coaching staff by refusing to commit 5 star money, destroying the recruiting class. There is a reason the biggest public crying about NIL is coming from Alabama and Ohio State as their recruiting can go one way or another quite quickly over NIL contributions.
mail
person
Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame
5/24/2023 8:59 AM
Campus Flow wrote:expand_more
No because in the past a coach on the hot seat meant a reduction of donations to the athletic department which over time would put pressure on a staff. The coach however could turn its fortunes around by example pulling out a PAC 12 or a Big 12 championship because the reduction of donor interest to the athletic department didn't direclty impact recruiting. [/QUOTE]Think this is naive. You think every other coaching staff recruiting against embattled coaches aren't making sure every recruit knows that coaching staff is on the hot seat? You think parents and the recruits themselves can't read thew internet?

[QUOTE=Campus Flow]
With NIL collectives required to pay players in order to atract them donors can handcuff a coaching staff by refusing to commit 5 star money, destroying the recruiting class. There is a reason the biggest public crying about NIL is coming from Alabama and Ohio State as their recruiting can go one way or another quite quickly over NIL contributions.
There is a reason for this, but I'm not sure you've hit on it. I think the reason is that Alabama and Ohio State have had recruiting advantages and been at the top of the heap for quite a while now, and this has the potential to level the playing field. What matters is no longer solely how much money goes into a weight room and player dorms; it's also how much money goes to the player. And that's a variable they can't fully control.
Showing Messages: 1 - 25 of 28
reply
vertical_align_top
vertical_align_center
vertical_align_bottom
add_comment
chevron_forward
MAC News Links



extra small (< 576px)
small (>= 576px)
medium (>= 768px)
large (>= 992px)
x-large (>= 1200px)
xx-large (>= 1400px)