Started By
Message
1
Posted on 5/24/12 at 2:23 pm to Duckie
quote:
Meh, I am not a strong believer that you must add another state to add to a conference. FSU is a national program, not just a Florida program. They would add more televisions than NCState even if you don't gain a market.
Look I don't like the idea of adding NC State either. Just not sure FSU provides enough for what our decisions makers would want. I would like the inclusion of FSU.
Posted on 5/24/12 at 2:24 pm to Tiger Authority
quote:
I'm partial to FSU but it doesn't make much sense either, I just think they would be a good fit for non-monetary reasons.
I think that culturally speaking Clemson and Florida State would be fantastic additions to the SEC. Baseball and football alone.
But the footprint trump card will always cancel out whatever qualities those schools bring to the table. Slive would have to come up with something creative and think outside the box on the TV money (since the almighty TV footprint is the overwhelming reason why FSU and Clemson are a non starter). The state of Florida is a huge market so there's an argument to be made but the state of South Carolina is just too small to consider a second school.
This post was edited on 5/24/12 at 2:25 pm
Posted on 5/24/12 at 2:26 pm to Tiger Authority
quote:
Look I don't like the idea of adding NC State either.
If it was possible, UNC >>> NC State.
Also, if it wasn't for the issue of UF & FSU, I think FSU would be a good addition instead of NC State. Why let the Big 12 get a foothold (even a small one) in Florida?
Posted on 5/24/12 at 2:27 pm to Duckie
If we go to 16 teams and the BIG what ever goes to 16, why not just just form our 32 team league while were at it? 
The new bowl we agreed to can just be the super bowl...frick it, who needs the rest of the country anyway? It's not like they take football seriously anyway.
The new bowl we agreed to can just be the super bowl...frick it, who needs the rest of the country anyway? It's not like they take football seriously anyway. Posted on 5/24/12 at 2:27 pm to BreakawayZou83
I don't think the SEC moves until Clemson and FSU move. If those two teams move, VT is a lock. And at that point, all that stuff Brer posted is meaningless because UNC would be fricking idiots to not move too.
Posted on 5/24/12 at 2:28 pm to Blizzard of Chizz
quote:
If we go to 16 teams and the BIG what ever goes to 16, why not just just form our 32 team league while were at it? The new bowl we agreed to can just be the super bowl...frick it, who needs the rest of the country anyway? It's not like they take football seriously anyway.
You laugh, but this is exactly what is happening.
Posted on 5/24/12 at 2:28 pm to Tiger Authority
quote:
Alright dude we'll see what happens if a team like FSU or Clemson leaves.
That would change everything. Agreed.
But FSU or Clemson would be insanely stupid to bolt the ACC for any conference other than the SEC.
Posted on 5/24/12 at 2:29 pm to BrerTiger
quote:
But FSU or Clemson would be insanely stupid to bolt the ACC for any conference other than the SEC.
I don't think that they are going to ever be invited. And if they think money is better in the big 12, they'll leave. And at that point, I think VT and UNC come to the SEC. That is my prediction, but depends on some things happening.
Posted on 5/24/12 at 2:29 pm to Tiger Authority
quote:
And at that point, all that stuff Brer posted is meaningless because UNC would be fricking idiots to not move too.
Totally agree. In this conference realignment mess, get a seat at the big boy table or risk irrelevancy.
Posted on 5/24/12 at 2:29 pm to Tiger Authority
quote:
I don't think the SEC moves until Clemson and FSU move. If those two teams move, VT is a lock. And at that point, all that stuff Brer posted is meaningless because UNC would be fricking idiots to not move too.
If Clemson or FSU move to the Big 12, I will eat my crow.
And I agree, that if either team (especially both) bolt the ACC that changes everything.
Posted on 5/24/12 at 2:31 pm to BrerTiger
Then we're in agreement. My talk about UNC wasn't based on them moving now, but seeing the writing on the wall regarding the ACC's future for football. That's the money sport. They can make a lot in basketball, but without a football conference, UNC will become Duke.
Posted on 5/24/12 at 2:37 pm to BreakawayZou83
I think Mizzou learned quickly to secure their future. It was not too long ago they all but campaigned for the Big Ten, and then when Nebraska went instead, and Oklahoma and OSU started putting feelers out to the SEC with Texas flirting with the PAC, all the non-states-of-Texas/Oklahoma schools started sweating hard.
Missouri really hit a homerun securing an SEC invite. Unfortunately for the Kansas schools, their football conference future outside of hoping to stay in UT's good graces is grim.
Missouri really hit a homerun securing an SEC invite. Unfortunately for the Kansas schools, their football conference future outside of hoping to stay in UT's good graces is grim.
This post was edited on 5/24/12 at 2:38 pm
Posted on 5/24/12 at 2:37 pm to Tiger Authority
Dude on ESPN can't see what is so clear to everyone else. Sounds like a dumbass.
Posted on 5/24/12 at 2:41 pm to Tiger Authority
quote:
Then we're in agreement.
More or less.
We may quibble about just how stable the ACC is as of this very moment though.
The ACC earlier this month inked a new TV contract with ESPN worth $17.1 million per year per school. That's $4 million more than the old contract. The current Pac 12 deal is $21 million per school per year. Big Ten pulls in $20.7 million per school per year. The current SEC deal is $17 million per year (soon to be renegotiated).
I would guess the new SEC deal will be at least as much, probably slightly more, than the Pac 12 deal.
But the ACC's new deal is in the ballpark of the big boys. A couple million, even five million more a year, isn't a huge enticement to bolt a relatively stable ACC. It's nothing to sneeze at either.
The only real motivation for an ACC school to leave is if they believe that the conference is going down the tubes anyway or some Longhorn Network type nonsense creates the perception (rightly deserved or not) of inequity. I'm not feeling that in the ACC. Maybe I'm not reading the tea leaves right. I just don't see it.
This post was edited on 5/24/12 at 2:49 pm
Posted on 5/24/12 at 2:42 pm to Swoopin
quote:
It was not too long ago they all but campaigned for the Big Ten
Mizzou would totally love to be in the Big Ten if the Big Ten would have them.
Ditto for West Virginia and the ACC.
Love is a two way street.
Posted on 5/24/12 at 2:43 pm to Swoopin
quote:
Missouri really hit a homerun securing an SEC invite.
Yes we did.
quote:
Unfortunately for the Kansas schools, their football conference future outside of hoping to stay in UT's good graces is grim.
They know this, but will never admit it. If you want to see desperation, look at the football forums on phog.net or whatever kU's damn site is called. Seriously half the threads on the front page are hatred spawned from jealousy concerning Mizzou getting into the SEC.
This post was edited on 5/24/12 at 2:44 pm
Posted on 5/24/12 at 2:47 pm to BreakawayZou83
Well maybe you know my story but I had a minor stake in Mizzou landing somewhere decent. I just don't think Mizzou fans should forget how lucky they are for finding a spot because it was not looking good once Nebraska took the invite for Big Ten.
Posted on 5/24/12 at 3:21 pm to Duckie
Much rather have UNC (and maybe UVA over VT).
Posted on 5/24/12 at 3:23 pm to Tiger Authority
quote:
I don't think that they are going to ever be invited. And if they think money is better in the big 12, they'll leave. And at that point, I think VT and UNC come to the SEC. That is my prediction, but depends on some things happening.
FSU was in the early 90's...
Page 3 of 9
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News