FSU to the SEC?
- Thread starter cjhadley
- Start date
It worked out so well for the Big 12, you know it's really going to work for the ACC.
It could be, I mean things... are probably going to get real weird.
We had the Big 12 almost die (twice), now they seem relatively solidified and poised to take what's left of the Pac-12. The Pac-12 seems the most likely to die at this point, with just very few good additions out there for them.
The ACC is in a better position than either the Big 12 and the Pac-12 simply due to being on the east coast. They can always mop up a few schools like East Carolina, Memphis, South Florida, etc... while there's not many good geographical additions for the other two conferences.
If Notre Dame became a full ACC member it could allow them to be the hunter, perhaps going after Big 12 schools before the new media rights deal. But... I don't know, I think Notre Dame doesn't really need to make that move. There is even a scenario where they join the Big 12 if things get bad enough in the ACC.
At this point in time I think we'll end up with 2 mega conferences and two "power" conferences which. The rest will be pretty much meaningless.
Last edited:
The bizarre thing is.....if they HAD been let in the front door of the Big Ten then in all honesty, they probably never would have been a big deal.
I'm deadly serious.
Pretty hard to make a story out of, "Those bigoted Midwesterners hate us Catholics" if they let you come right in the door. And a lot of their entire history is based on that whole, "They don't like us" resentment factor.
And here's a key point: a lot of the intra-conference rage in the B1G (then the Western Conference) was limiting "coaches" to three years maximum. Do that and either: a) Rockne leaves; or b) isn't a legend anyway.
Notre Dame's entire mystique is the product of prejudice and timing.
What's funny is that NC State and VA Tech are much more SEC-like than Carolina and UVA. They've both football-first fanbases and have had some degree of success in the game, whereas the latter are basketball-first schools. But I absolutely get the draw of adding two Southern flagships.
Completely agree. And I promise it wouldn't be my intention to undo the Fighting Irish history and prestige by dropping them in the Big Ten. They just "fit." In my perfect world, the Big Ten would have added Notre Dame with Penn State and stopped at 12 teams The original Big 12 would never have changed. BYU and Utah would have been the 11th and 12th Pac 12 teams. The ACC would have stopped at 12. And money and tv contracts wouldn't matter.
But they never consult me on these things for some reason. But certainly, in the "war" between Notre Dame and the Big Ten, you would have to say Notre Dame had been victorious for many decades. It seems, however, that may be changing with the Big Ten bringing in billions.
I think that the whole point is to get rid of the idiot Conference Commissioners who can't seem to understand that this is all about money. There are so many AAC, ACC, Mountain West, WAC, ad-nauseum self-important clowns who seem to think their salaries are paid by Divine Providence.
The networks want to pay big, BIG money and they want to deal with maybe two super conferences and tell the rest to stick to intramurals if they're too stupid to take the cash. The Pac-whatever et al have proven that they ARE too stupid. Bye-bye.
As far as Notre Dame, I believe Coach Bryant would welcome them now with open arms. This man was a genius and also had a lot of horse sense. Also, his coach came from Notre Dame, remember? It would give us a leg up on the Big-10 and I believe he'd realize you take them rather than see their draw (and money) go to your competitors.
It's time for the serious players to step up to the line and the unserious to fall behind, where they belong and seem to wish to be, anyway.
The networks want to pay big, BIG money and they want to deal with maybe two super conferences and tell the rest to stick to intramurals if they're too stupid to take the cash. The Pac-whatever et al have proven that they ARE too stupid. Bye-bye.
As far as Notre Dame, I believe Coach Bryant would welcome them now with open arms. This man was a genius and also had a lot of horse sense. Also, his coach came from Notre Dame, remember? It would give us a leg up on the Big-10 and I believe he'd realize you take them rather than see their draw (and money) go to your competitors.
It's time for the serious players to step up to the line and the unserious to fall behind, where they belong and seem to wish to be, anyway.
Last edited:
Does no one on the board have understanding of the current media money payouts to the conferences? If you do, any answers would be welcome.
I don't see that Clemson or FSU bring much value to the SEC. The teams that bring market value are North Carolina, North Carolina St, Virginia , and Virginia Tech. In some combination.
There are more Va. Tech fans than UVA fans in Virginia, and they're also way more into football. I know UVA is a "sexier" choice than Tech, but if it's about TV viewership and advertising, there's probably more value in Tech if we're talking purely football interest.
Also, UVA has a really deep interest in other non-revenue sports like soccer and lacrosse, so the SEC wouldn't be a very good fit for them in that sense.
UVA fans look at Va. Tech as a bunch of hillbilly goobers, and they look at the SEC as the inbred cousins of Tech fans.
I have always prefered Va. Tech over Virginia. I think they would be a better fit for the SEC. I know I'm in the minority on this but I think that NC State would be a good fit for the SEC also. I think if you get them out of the shadow of North Carolina and Duke and into a conference like the SEC their fanbases will grow.
If you took UNC and UVA -- you would have to put them into the same room as UTexas and UGA -- all are arrogant beyond their resumes. I lived in NC for 15 years -- and would take VT and NCSU in a heartbeat. UNC -- nah...don't need them.
The more I read about their attitude towards other colleges and fanbases the less I want either team, especially Virginia. I could be wrong, but I don't remember reading where Vanderbilt has this elitist attitude towards other SEC members and look at the academic reputation that they have.
Virginia sponsors men’s soccer, wrestling, and lacrosse for men. For women they have lacrosse, field hockey, and rowing. Also non-NCAA sport squash.
Tech has wrestling and men’s lacrosse.
UNC has fencing, lacrosse, wrestling, and soccer for men. Women have fencing, lacrosse, field hockey, and rowing.
NCSU sponsors wrestling and soccer for men and the co-Ed sport of rifle.
Both Carolina schools sponsor gymnastics.
Tech has wrestling and men’s lacrosse.
UNC has fencing, lacrosse, wrestling, and soccer for men. Women have fencing, lacrosse, field hockey, and rowing.
NCSU sponsors wrestling and soccer for men and the co-Ed sport of rifle.
Both Carolina schools sponsor gymnastics.
When in doubt...follow the money. No wonder schools are lining up to join us and/or the Big10.
Yup. I hate-hate-hate it but don't blame them. It's not great for college football and is just awful for the other sports. I don't know how baseball and basketball teams in these ginormous, continental-size conferences are supposed to ever go to school given their travel schedules. But it's hard to turn down double or triple the money.
A few decades back Men's Golf went to have tournaments with 12 or so teams rather than matches with another team. Much more economical and easier on travel, etc...except that some of these tournaments were in Japan, Hawaii, and Puerto Rico...
I could see smaller sports doing something like that...Baseball would not work due to lack of pitchers.
Latest threads
-
-
-
-
-
Alabama’s Lebron Named Brooks Wallace Award Player of the Week
- Started by Diamond Tide
- Replies: 0
-