Started By
Message
re: Clemson joins FSU in ACC Lawsuit
Posted on 3/20/24 at 8:11 am to scrooster
Posted on 3/20/24 at 8:11 am to scrooster
quote:Sorry, but using those words to describe the league that let in Texas is laughable. I don't want FSU or Clemson, but don't give me this brotherhood shite. It's all about the money.
frick'em both and frick anyone who wants those two poisonous skanks in this honorable brotherhood of a league.
1
Posted on 3/20/24 at 9:32 am to scrooster
Little men are bothered by the ideas of others.
Posted on 3/20/24 at 9:38 am to BilbeauTBaggins
I've said before, the SEC is only adding more teams if it means an immediate higher payout for the existing teams. They'll hold off on expanding until the money is on the table.
I don't see that happening with FSU or Clemson. The SEC didn't even get a bump from Texas and OU joining.
The Big 10 has a different money setup. They need content for the Bog 10 network and having more teams with a national coverage helps with that. The SEC is dependent upon ESPN (or when that deal is up, future TV partners) to offer more money due to the additional teams. You're talking about 2034.before they can put the SEC TV rights up for bid. Unless ESPN offers more cash per team, I can't see the SEC expanding until much closer to that date.
I don't see that happening with FSU or Clemson. The SEC didn't even get a bump from Texas and OU joining.
The Big 10 has a different money setup. They need content for the Bog 10 network and having more teams with a national coverage helps with that. The SEC is dependent upon ESPN (or when that deal is up, future TV partners) to offer more money due to the additional teams. You're talking about 2034.before they can put the SEC TV rights up for bid. Unless ESPN offers more cash per team, I can't see the SEC expanding until much closer to that date.
Posted on 3/20/24 at 10:12 am to onthebay
I wish I could care as much as the big man with big words and the size 16s, but I don’t. It’s not that important. Put that energy into something meaningful, like your community or your family.
Posted on 3/20/24 at 11:01 am to au7342
quote:People say that, but I don't think it's relevant anymore. The networks/streaming services are national.
Personally, I would much prefer teams in Virginia and North Carolina to expand the TV markets.
I'm in Louisiana and an LSU fan,... I watch Clemson because they're known. I watch Ohio State and Oklahoma because they're generally quite good.
I haven't watched a Virginia team since Michael Vick was at Tech, and haven't paid attention to any NC team since the early 80's (with LT and Kelvin Bryant). You add them to the SEC, and all you get are teams you expect a W against when you play.
I do think it's important to stay regional, for travel and fanbase rivalries. To that end, I think the SEC would like to keep Fla State and Clemson, as they fit the profile (good programs in the Southeast), and it locks the Big 10 out of our geographic base. Southeastern football is the best, and has the best talent base.
Posted on 3/20/24 at 11:34 am to Scoob
quote:
People say that, but I don't think it's relevant anymore. The networks/streaming services are national. I'm in Louisiana and an LSU fan,... I watch Clemson because they're known. I watch Ohio State and Oklahoma because they're generally quite good. I haven't watched a Virginia team since Michael Vick was at Tech, and haven't paid attention to any NC team since the early 80's (with LT and Kelvin Bryant). You add them to the SEC, and all you get are teams you expect a W against when you play. I do think it's important to stay regional, for travel and fanbase rivalries. To that end, I think the SEC would like to keep Fla State and Clemson, as they fit the profile (good programs in the Southeast), and it locks the Big 10 out of our geographic base. Southeastern football is the best, and has the best talent base.
Whether you’re getting espn via cable or internet (still cable) makes no difference. It’s been national broadcasts for 3 decades. It’s still about what moves the needle. Clemson and FSU don’t move the needle enough for the SEC, otherwise they would have already been invited. The only teams that would move the needle are Ohio State, Michigan, Notre Dame, and maybe Penn State. Those teams are the core of the big 10, so obviously will never happen. NC and Virginia at least provide new viewers, but the ACC is already owned by espn, so there is no reason to go there either. Clemson and fsu are also not AAU members, which to this point has been a requirement for Big 10 membership. My guess is a further expanded Big 12 that renegotiates its tv deals.
Posted on 3/20/24 at 11:40 am to BilbeauTBaggins
When FSU and Clemson bolt the ACC Georgia Tech is going to have to have a home and as bad as it sucks considering why they left the SEC in the current environment it'd be foolish to not also take their sorry asses. Otherwise the Big whatever the frick they call themselves will and will have a presence in the heart of the SEC. A lose lose situation any way you slice it but we have tossed away everything else that meant anything might as well allow those bastards back into the SEC
Posted on 3/20/24 at 11:44 am to JCdawg
quote:
Whether you’re getting espn via cable or internet (still cable) makes no difference. It’s been national broadcasts for 3 decades. It’s still about what moves the needle. Clemson and FSU don’t move the needle enough for the SEC, otherwise they would have already been invited. The only teams that would move the needle are Ohio State, Michigan, Notre Dame, and maybe Penn State. Those teams are the core of the big 10, so obviously will never happen. NC and Virginia at least provide new viewers, but the ACC is already owned by espn, so there is no reason to go there either. Clemson and fsu are also not AAU members, which to this point has been a requirement for Big 10 membership. My guess is a further expanded Big 12 that renegotiates its tv deals.
Grant of Rights is what is now put in question with Clemson and FSU. ESPN can actually get out of the TV deal in 2027. But they have to submit the exercise of TV rights by 2025 or the deal goes to 2036.
As far as Clemson and FSU are concerned, you never know until you sue, so we shall see. If they get out of their ACC Grant of Rights look for the SEC to come a callin' with open arms.
Posted on 3/20/24 at 11:55 am to nicholastiger
quote:
If Notre Dame is smart they will call the Big Ten offices today
Notre Dame must see the writing on the wall at some point. When FSU, Clemson, UVA, VT, and UNC join the B1G/SEC, it will further solidify their leverage and revenue potential relative to everyone else. But even now, the new CFP deal means that schools like Indiana and Vanderbilt will make more money from the Playoff for being 2-10 than Notre Dame will make for being selected in the Playoff.
I think Virginia and Notre Dame will join the B1G. The SEC will add UNC, VT, Clemson, and FSU. The Big 12 will add Louisville, Miami, NC State and Pitt. I think Duke and GT have outside shots at the B1G or the Big 12. And don't write off Cal or Stanford to the B1G, it seems like a lot of the B1G schools were frustrated by letting them slide to the ACC.
You can bank on this though: none of these conferences are anxious to expand beyond 20 schools. The logistics don't make sense for scheduling alone, and I don't think networks are willing to pay the B1G or SEC pro rata shares for another 6-8 schools.
Posted on 3/20/24 at 12:17 pm to JCdawg
quote:I think what someone else mentioned, here or elsewhere, is inevitable:
Whether you’re getting espn via cable or internet (still cable) makes no difference. It’s been national broadcasts for 3 decades. It’s still about what moves the needle. Clemson and FSU don’t move the needle enough for the SEC, otherwise they would have already been invited. The only teams that would move the needle are Ohio State, Michigan, Notre Dame, and maybe Penn State. Those teams are the core of the big 10, so obviously will never happen. NC and Virginia at least provide new viewers, but the ACC is already owned by espn, so there is no reason to go there either. Clemson and fsu are also not AAU members, which to this point has been a requirement for Big 10 membership. My guess is a further expanded Big 12 that renegotiates its tv deals.
you will see the development of super-conferences, and then some sub-division of them down the road for regional purposes.
The SEC will grow to 20-24 conferences, and then split into 10-12 sub-conferences... maybe 3 groups if you get to 24 or more.
Big 10 will do the same.
I honestly think LSU is one of the holdouts for doing this early, because we (LSU) will want to stay "core/original" SEC, and as things are now, we fit better geographically with the newer Western teams- Ark, the Texas schools, OU etc. It will become more acceptable if we keep with the Miss schools too, and the East gets divided too. You stick Auburn and Bama in the Central, and Fla and UGA go to the East with new member Clemson and Fla State. That way, everyone gets their history/tradition messed with equally
, and it's more palatable. Fla State and Clemson (and to a lesser extent Ga Tech and Miami) are the keys to doing this in a fair manner.
The Big 10 is in a bit worse shape, as they have outliers all over the place without easy fits. Sure, you have the original core, you have the 4 Pac schools, and I suppose Penn State can anchor an East (with Rutgers and Maryland). But it's still not balanced enough; Nebraska just doesn't fit in the West with the Pac schools. Nobody else fits in the East.
I could see the Big 10 raiding the ACC for the Northern, former Big East schools such as Syracuse, Pitt and Boston College, to fill in the East. That would make Penn State pleased as punch.
I can see them WANTING to hit the Southern/core ACC, to get a true Southern group. But I can see the SEC blocking them. Nobody cares if they get a ho-hum UNC, but the SEC doesn't want the Big setting up a Clemson/Fla State 'Deep South' alternative, that's SEC territory.
The SEC and Big 10 are basically playing Risk with each other. It's not just who YOU want, it's also who you don't want THEM to get. If the ACC and Big 12 and survive, great. But if they can't, there are programs in both that you don't want going "over there".
Posted on 3/20/24 at 12:42 pm to Scoob
I think the BIG will take 4 South-Eastern schools to form a Southern pod, and I agree that the SeC will take Clemson and FSU for those premier matchups (and maybe GT to block the BIG from getting into the Atl)
Posted on 3/20/24 at 12:46 pm to bamameister
quote:
As far as Clemson and FSU are concerned, you never know until you sue, so we shall see. If they get out of their ACC Grant of Rights look for the SEC to come a callin' with open arms.
Not much to choose from that would satisfy the whole SEC fanbase.
This post was edited on 3/20/24 at 12:49 pm
Posted on 3/20/24 at 1:00 pm to nicholastiger
quote:
SEC needs to add both for the Super Conference
And USC and Fla are not in a position to block it
Florida has always tried to block FSU from joining.
Posted on 3/20/24 at 1:05 pm to gamecockman12
quote:
Florida has always tried to block FSU from joining.
Bobby Bowden acknowledged years ago that he didn't join the SEC because it was a tougher row to hoe. The Gators didn't stop it then and won't be stopping Superconferences. And when the AC implodes, that is pretty much where we will be.
Posted on 3/20/24 at 1:41 pm to Scoob
quote:
People say that, but I don't think it's relevant anymore. The networks/streaming services are national.
I'm in Louisiana and an LSU fan,... I watch Clemson because they're known. I watch Ohio State and Oklahoma because they're generally quite good.
I haven't watched a Virginia team since Michael Vick was at Tech, and haven't paid attention to any NC team since the early 80's (with LT and Kelvin Bryant). You add them to the SEC, and all you get are teams you expect a W against when you play.
That's not how TV markets work.
TV markets, 90% of the metric, is geographically determined .... in other words, by footprint.
Advertisers and marketers don't care about the scatterings ..... they want the 10 to 8 ring on the target where most of the birdshot will hit. Everything else is gravy.
Few people understand how regionally targeted ad feeds are these day. No longer does every add fed go national ... there is always a certain amount of inventory alloted for regional specific ads.
Virginia and North Carolina are two markets that the SEC has long coveted .... at least as part of Roy Kramer's great vision. He was sure, that one day, the SEC would dominate both of those markets both from a TV footprint perspective AND and talent perspective (academically and athletically).
Of course, Mr Kramer never imagined the level of wokeness that would have to be overcome from both flagship universities which, fwiw, is part of the SEC's lexicon and mandate in modern times. However, from a cultural perspective, NC State and Va Tech would be a better fit in terms of sheer athletic contributions over the long haul.
Posted on 3/20/24 at 2:01 pm to twk
quote:
Sorry, but using those words to describe the league that let in Texas is laughable. I don't want FSU or Clemson, but don't give me this brotherhood shite. It's all about the money.
You're correct ... it IS about the money and both Texas and Oklahoma increases our footprint, are flagship universities in their states ... and they're national, traditional, brands. They both offer well rounded overall athletic departments that bring mulitple additional national championship contender programs into the league.
Increased footprint ..... flagship universities ..... more national championships in various sports for the league.
Neither FSU or CU brings any of that.
Matter of fact, both of them would take a competitive dive, in this league, when forced to compete against our overall schedules. And then the league would be stuck carrying them in the long haul.
Name two sports, for each school, that they would win national championships in .... and don't type "football." Because their football championships are over if they were to enter this league.
Two non football sports. Name them. Anything. Tiddly winks, whatever.
Because every other school in this conference is either a Founding Member OR ... they're a flagship university, that increased the footprint of the conference, that brings/brought more national championships to the conference.
You can name two each for both Texas and Oklahoma. You can't do it for FSU or CU.
Now .... do you want to add FSU and CU to the conference for their men's lacrosse and soccer prowess (if you can call it that)?
Posted on 3/20/24 at 3:00 pm to Scoob
quote:
The SEC will grow to 20-24 conferences, and then split into 10-12 sub-conferences... maybe 3 groups if you get to 24 or more.
Big 10 will do the same.
I assume you mean grow to 20-24 members
Once you do that, you are no longer a conference, but rather, just a confederation of sorts. Unless we increase the number of games played, there is a limit to how big a conference can get and still function like a conference. If you get the SEC up to 24 teams, and try to split it into groups, you'd end up with something like A&M, Texas, OU, Aransas, and Missouri being lumped together, and 1 other school being forced to join a 6-team pod (yes, pod scheduling would be the likely end result) that looks more like the Big XII than the SEC. I'm sure LSU would love that.
Posted on 3/20/24 at 3:38 pm to scrooster
quote:As I said, I don't think that's relevant anymore.
That's not how TV markets work.
TV markets, 90% of the metric, is geographically determined .... in other words, by footprint.
As we go more to a streaming setup, people are going to order services (including ESPN) 'as needed'. The money will come from the subscriptions, not the advertising. They need content, and more people will pay to see Texas vs Clemson, than to see Maryland vs UVA. There will be CFB junkies in Big 10 country who will order ESPN just to watch premium SEC games. They will likely keep it all season for those weekly matchups.
There's a few Big 10 matchups, but not a ton; not enough to encourage SEC (or Big 12) viewers to keep a Big 10 package all season. Might wanna watch Ohio State/Michigan/Oregon/Penn State matchups, but the rest is filler; either boring teams on both sides, or a boring team getting waxed by a good one.
That's the model we're moving to. The more elite teams (such as, yes, Clemson or Oklahoma, with a relatively small footprint, but a big national presence), the more you can market to the nation and keep subscriptions OUTSIDE the footprint.
Posted on 3/20/24 at 3:48 pm to twk
quote:Yeah, my badquote:
The SEC will grow to 20-24 conferences, and then split into 10-12 sub-conferences... maybe 3 groups if you get to 24 or more.
Big 10 will do the same.
I assume you mean grow to 20-24 members
Once you do that, you are no longer a conference, but rather, just a confederation of sorts. Unless we increase the number of games played, there is a limit to how big a conference can get and still function like a conference. If you get the SEC up to 24 teams, and try to split it into groups, you'd end up with something like A&M, Texas, OU, Aransas, and Missouri being lumped together, and 1 other school being forced to join a 6-team pod (yes, pod scheduling would be the likely end result) that looks more like the Big XII than the SEC. I'm sure LSU would love that.
In my opinion, the SEC is working towards 24+ MEMBERS.
And what will occur, is as you call it, pods... or spin-off conferences under the umbrella, or whatever. 24 teams give you the option of 3 groups of 8; 7 game round-robin for that group, then say 2 from each of the others, then 1 random true OOC for the actual "must have" rivalries in other conferences (or if you still want to play down). Or maybe 2 from one group, and 1 from the other, and rotate back and forth.
That isolates/concentrates the SEC games, and squeezes the other conferences out.
It's not current business as usual with the scheduling, but the current model will go away.
Posted on 3/20/24 at 4:17 pm to Scoob
quote:
As I said, I don't think that's relevant anymore.
As we go more to a streaming setup, people are going to order services (including ESPN) 'as needed'. The money will come from the subscriptions, not the advertising. They need content, and more people will pay to see Texas vs Clemson, than to see Maryland vs UVA. There will be CFB junkies in Big 10 country who will order ESPN just to watch premium SEC games. They will likely keep it all season for those weekly matchups.
There's a few Big 10 matchups, but not a ton; not enough to encourage SEC (or Big 12) viewers to keep a Big 10 package all season. Might wanna watch Ohio State/Michigan/Oregon/Penn State matchups, but the rest is filler; either boring teams on both sides, or a boring team getting waxed by a good one.
That's the model we're moving to. The more elite teams (such as, yes, Clemson or Oklahoma, with a relatively small footprint, but a big national presence), the more you can market to the nation and keep subscriptions OUTSIDE the footprint.
Ok friend, listen .... not arguing here because this is the internet and thus it's all a fruitless endeavor unless I'm on the German Sheppard boards or the Physics forums where I'm learning applicable lessons. But scoob .... you're insane if you believe the TV profit model is built around subscriptions. They already tried that with college football PPV and it didn't work. It barely works as an NFL/NBA/MLB add-on package model geared toward the bettors.
Subscription fees (a few bucks per household per month) garnered via streaming services are for basic operating costs. That's it. They in no way are structured for profit. Profit is generated through ad revenue and through ticket sales and stadium related revenue and club related donor revenue .... on a college level.
Ad revenue is everything. And a great portion of add revenue, for college games, is generated via local/regional ad campaigns from businesses such as auto dealerships (a huge market segment), restaurants/hotels/tourism/entertainment (all on a local/regional scale), legal services and medical services. At least 30% of every event (inventory) are local/regional ad spots. Another 5% is allocated for the streaming service itself, depending upon their subscription deal, for their sales department to sell. Another 5% goes to charitable foundations (think Tunnel 2 Towers) and to the schools themselves for self promotion as well as spots to all one or both conferences, and the remaining 60% goes to the content provider ..... ESPN, CBS, ABC, FOX, et al.
The objective has always been, but until now has never been realized, to have a prime time marquee matchup every Saturday afternoon (1A) as well as a (1B) matchup for prime time Saturday night along with a bunch of filler inventory (2, 3, 4, 5, 6) with the other games.
OOC game ad revenue (broadcast rights) will continue to be governed by homefield advantage with the refs coming from the visiting (or sometimes neutral) conference.
In short, to counter your claim, Clemson and FSU will continue to have the option to schedule SEC teams as OOC games, in addition to their instate rivalry games. But they bring nothing to the conference as full-fledged members.
Anyways, this is now beating a dead horse. It's not gonna happen, it gets us nowhere. If anything it would permanently hamstring the conference. It would open the door for the B1G to swoop in and embed themselves in NC and VA, with flagship universities, when the ACC implodes.
Let the B1G gorge itself to death. It's better for the SEC to stay lean and mean.
This post was edited on 3/20/24 at 4:53 pm
Page 3 of 4
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News