Cal, Stanford, SMU leaving ACC for......

[Topper]

FSU wants more money as does everyone else. Leaving the ACC may or may not (doesnt look like it at this moment) result in a financial reward for them given their current contractual obligation. But not making the final four is not a problem that they solve by being in the SEC or Big 10.

[Graceland Tar Heel]

On a personal note this year's playoff outcome has ruined college football for me. I'm not being dramatic. The spirit of the game that drove me to levels of obsession was broken this weekend. I will always support my Mustangs, no matter what. However, we are now dealing with a corrupt system(NCAA, committee, etc).

#ponyup

I agree 100% with all this. The events of Sunday have shown just how corrupt college football has become. I will always support my Mustangs, but I feel guilty contributing to such a corrupt organization as the NCAA by watching the games.

The NCAA does not own and control the CFB playoffs. It is clear that the BT and SEC, with their backers Fox and Disney/ESPN own it all. And they intend a rigged game. They will allow the rest of us some scraps, but only if we play things as they demand.

[Graceland Tar Heel]

FSU wants more money as does everyone else. Leaving the ACC may or may not (doesnt look like it at this moment) result in a financial reward for them given their current contractual obligation. But not making the final four is not a problem that they solve by being in the SEC or Big 10.

FSU in the SEC would lose every advantage it has over league mates in the ACC - and they are considerable. The SEC is filled with such schools that have what FSU has, while the ACCV osnfilled with private schools and small state schools that are Elite or want to be Elite.

And for FSU in the BT to really matter, it must not use its base in the Southeast which means to Neds a ahkf dozen or so other ACC schools also in the BT.

FSU leaving the ACC could make its football mediocre on the national scale for the long term. Masking rash decisions based just on getting more money now often turns out that way.

[PonyTime]

FSU wants more money as does everyone else. Leaving the ACC may or may not (doesnt look like it at this moment) result in a financial reward for them given their current contractual obligation. But not making the final four is not a problem that they solve by being in the SEC or Big 10.

FSU in the SEC would lose every advantage it has over league mates in the ACC - and they are considerable. The SEC is filled with such schools that have what FSU has, while the ACCV osnfilled with private schools and small state schools that are Elite or want to be Elite.

And for FSU in the BT to really matter, it must not use its base in the Southeast which means to Neds a ahkf dozen or so other ACC schools also in the BT.

FSU leaving the ACC could make its football mediocre on the national scale for the long term. Masking rash decisions based just on getting more money now often turns out that way.

Our former friends in College Station know this all too well.

[Graceland Tar Heel]

Going into conference championship week, the top 11 P5 teams consisted of: 3 SEC (GA, AL and MO), 2 BigXII (UT, OK), 2 ACC (FSU, LOU), 2 PAC (OR, UW) and 2 BIG (UM, OSU).

Had there been a 12-team playoff this year, there would have been excellent balance among the P5 conferences. Of course, there aren’t 12 teams in the mix this year, but it does go to show that there will be ample representation of all conferences under the new format.

All of this talk about Clemson, MIA and FSU leaving the ACC is knee-jerk and shallow. Those schools have a better crack at the playoffs by remaining in the ACC, beating "weak" teams, and exiting the regular season with 12-0, 11-1 or 10-2, records, not by leaving to become also-rans in the SEC with 8-4 or 9-3 records.

ACC football quality is actually quite good. Not great, like SEC, but most years at least as good top to bottom as the BT. What the ACC lacks is large state U flagships and land grants that have HUGE fan bases, and which have big football history. FSU is the only such ACC school. UNC would be the smallest state school in the BT, and UNC is larger than UVA, GT, and Clemson.

So if the ACC weathers all this storming going on, the best football programs in the ACC have a great shot every year of making the playoffs. What OU is going to discover is that its history and its stadium mean nothing in the SEC. Filled, raucous 80,000 seat stadiums are a dime a dozen in the SEC. The only 2 filled, raucous 80K stadiums in the ACC are at FSU and Clemson, and they provide true home field advantage.

And Miami is funny. Miami has 0 ACC championships and only 1 Championship Game appearance (even UNC has 2). That smallish private school in the SEC would be more likely to drop to just above Vandy than to become what it was in the 1980s through 2002. But in the ACC, it has a real chance to recover as a big winner.

[Graceland Tar Heel]

FSU wants more money as does everyone else. Leaving the ACC may or may not (doesnt look like it at this moment) result in a financial reward for them given their current contractual obligation. But not making the final four is not a problem that they solve by being in the SEC or Big 10.

FSU in the SEC would lose every advantage it has over league mates in the ACC - and they are considerable. The SEC is filled with such schools that have what FSU has, while the ACCV osnfilled with private schools and small state schools that are Elite or want to be Elite.

And for FSU in the BT to really matter, it must not use its base in the Southeast which means to Neds a ahkf dozen or so other ACC schools also in the BT.

FSU leaving the ACC could make its football mediocre on the national scale for the long term. Masking rash decisions based just on getting more money now often turns out that way.

Our former friends in College Station know this all too well.

Its very funny that Aggie wanted to get shed of Texas and then the SEC dropped Texas right back on their heads. Aggie no longer is able to sell itself as the only TX schools in the SEC, which means it now is going to lost much of the easy top refuting it had to Texas, OU, and maybe even LSU. A&M is soon to be just nothing for the SEC now that the SEC has Texas.

And if Aggie could leave for the ACC, A&M would be very valuable to the ACC because its presence would make having SMU really big.

Quite simply for state schools, most times that #2 school/program is definitely better off if it is not in the same major conference as the state's #1 school/program.

[EastStang]

FSU has another problem to move to SEC. UF. They are the only SEC school in Florida. While they might talk roses and unicorns, there is no way they want FSU in the SEC. Other schools will drop blackballs for them. SC for reciprocal blackball of Clemson. UT and OU as well.

[leopold]

I'm sorry but that's a half-assed article with absolutely no insight. Yeah, FSU is upset and the sky is blue and water is wet. Multiple points here to consider:

1. A 13-0 school was bound to be left out; it was only a matter of time. Why? Because they have FOUR spots for FIVE 'major' conferences. So, the powers that be, INCLUDING THE ACC, were fine with this when they either came up with or agreed to this brilliant solution. They played themselves, so sorry.

2. It's the SEC and B1G's world, and we all know it. It didn't take this playoff to reveal that. Arkansas, Maryland, A&M, Mizzou, Washington, Oregon, UT, and OU have all shown that.

3. ESPN has barred the door to FSU and Clemson leaving, so they're stuck for now. Let me repeat that:

IT"S NOT THE GRANT OF RIGHTS HOLDING FSU AND CLEMSON BACK, IT'S ESPN.

A decade ago, A&M left the Big XII and joined the SEC, opening the door for one other school to join them. Multiple reports had the SEC presidents wanting founding SEC member Georgia Tech to rejoin the conference as the 14th school, but they got overruled and ended up with Mizzou. Why?

Mizzou came from the Big XII who's primary TV contract was with Fox while the ACCs with ESPN. ESPN wanted another school to add to its collection and they got what they wanted.

Moving FSU to either the B1G or SEC not only doesn't add to its coterie of schools, but it also creates problems for them, primarily in the form of watering down its product. FSU playing mediocre ACC schools gives each game a marquee name, but if they move it to the SEC the sheer number of interesting games drops while potentially creating a 'Nebraska' effect that waters down their product. Keep FSU and CU playing mediocre programs like Maryland and Boston College (and now SMU), giving those games value, rather than throwing them into an increasingly overstuffed SEC. Keep in mind, this is all even before we get to the legal stuff.

A&M, Mizzou, Washington, Oregon, UT, and OU - All schools from 'non-ESPN' conferences. (The LHN was becoming an albatross around UT's neck and they know it.)

If ESPN wanted FSU in the SEC or Clemson in the B10 it would be done by now. They're stuck and so is everyone else, at least until the TV deal ends.

[Graceland Tar Heel]

I'm sorry but that's a half-assed article with absolutely no insight. Yeah, FSU is upset and the sky is blue and water is wet. Multiple points here to consider:

1. A 13-0 school was bound to be left out; it was only a matter of time. Why? Because they have FOUR spots for FIVE 'major' conferences. So, the powers that be, INCLUDING THE ACC, were fine with this when they either came up with or agreed to this brilliant solution. They played themselves, so sorry.

2. It's the SEC and B1G's world, and we all know it. It didn't take this playoff to reveal that. Arkansas, Maryland, A&M, Mizzou, Washington, Oregon, UT, and OU have all shown that.

3. ESPN has barred the door to FSU and Clemson leaving, so they're stuck for now. Let me repeat that:

IT"S NOT THE GRANT OF RIGHTS HOLDING FSU AND CLEMSON BACK, IT'S ESPN.

A decade ago, A&M left the Big XII and joined the SEC, opening the door for one other school to join them. Multiple reports had the SEC presidents wanting founding SEC member Georgia Tech to rejoin the conference as the 14th school, but they got overruled and ended up with Mizzou. Why?

Mizzou came from the Big XII who's primary TV contract was with Fox while the ACCs with ESPN. ESPN wanted another school to add to its collection and they got what they wanted.

Moving FSU to either the B1G or SEC not only doesn't add to its coterie of schools, but it also creates problems for them, primarily in the form of watering down its product. FSU playing mediocre ACC schools gives each game a marquee name, but if they move it to the SEC the sheer number of interesting games drops while potentially creating a 'Nebraska' effect that waters down their product. Keep FSU and CU playing mediocre programs like Maryland and Boston College (and now SMU), giving those games value, rather than throwing them into an increasingly overstuffed SEC. Keep in mind, this is all even before we get to the legal stuff.

A&M, Mizzou, Washington, Oregon, UT, and OU - All schools from 'non-ESPN' conferences. (The LHN was becoming an albatross around UT's neck and they know it.)

If ESPN wanted FSU in the SEC or Clemson in the B10 it would be done by now. They're stuck and so is everyone else, at least until the TV deal ends.

Do you think you could explain this to FSU fans and Big 12 fans?

[highlander]

Do you think you could explain this to FSU fans and Big 12 fans?

I would suggest starting with something easier, like explaining it to your dog, and working your way up from there.

[Topper]

FSU wants more money as does everyone else. Leaving the ACC may or may not (doesnt look like it at this moment) result in a financial reward for them given their current contractual obligation. But not making the final four is not a problem that they solve by being in the SEC or Big 10.

FSU in the SEC would lose every advantage it has over league mates in the ACC - and they are considerable. The SEC is filled with such schools that have what FSU has, while the ACCV osnfilled with private schools and small state schools that are Elite or want to be Elite.

And for FSU in the BT to really matter, it must not use its base in the Southeast which means to Neds a ahkf dozen or so other ACC schools also in the BT.

FSU leaving the ACC could make its football mediocre on the national scale for the long term. Masking rash decisions based just on getting more money now often turns out that way.

For FSU's sake, assuming that there is any basis for the theories set forth in the article exist at all, they should study what happened to Nebraska and Arkansas when the set sail in deeper water. I suspect that the same thing will happen to Oklahoma in the SEC. I am undecided on UT's fate in the SEC. I don't think that they would be 12-1 right now had they played an SEC schedule this year.

[ponyte]

One of the first Big conference raids was the Big 10 poaching Nebraska. Wow, that was a great move for Big Red. Not once has Nebraska been mentioned in this thread and others. Reason, only the real old remember when Nebraska was a football powerhouse.

Leaving the Big 2 (OU & Nebraska) was a killer to the success of their teams. But I'm sure the money makes being a loser just swell.

There are downsides to moving to another conference.

Colorado never seemed much of an influence in the PAC 12. Now they are back in the Big XII. Wow, that moved worked out for them as well. Back to a sinking conference without much gain from the PAC 12

We have all seen what happen to Arkyland. Initially did pretty good while the Texas connections were still solid. Now, its an also ran school.

The key for SMU is to buy solid top end talent and buy solid top end coaches so we can be a desired winner when the next round of conference raids occur.

[EastStang]

If we can get ourselves into the top half of the ACC, we'll be relevant. If we can win one championship, we'd be made. To do that means being better than Clemson and FSU and still handle VT, UNC, Louisville and the others. I suspect Stanford may resurrect itself in the future as well. After all they gave us Elway, McCaffrey, Lofton and Luck.

[Graceland Tar Heel]

FSU wants more money as does everyone else. Leaving the ACC may or may not (doesnt look like it at this moment) result in a financial reward for them given their current contractual obligation. But not making the final four is not a problem that they solve by being in the SEC or Big 10.

FSU in the SEC would lose every advantage it has over league mates in the ACC - and they are considerable. The SEC is filled with such schools that have what FSU has, while the ACCV osnfilled with private schools and small state schools that are Elite or want to be Elite.

And for FSU in the BT to really matter, it must not use its base in the Southeast which means to Neds a ahkf dozen or so other ACC schools also in the BT.

FSU leaving the ACC could make its football mediocre on the national scale for the long term. Masking rash decisions based just on getting more money now often turns out that way.

For FSU's sake, assuming that there is any basis for the theories set forth in the article exist at all, they should study what happened to Nebraska and Arkansas when the set sail in deeper water. I suspect that the same thing will happen to Oklahoma in the SEC. I am undecided on UT's fate in the SEC. I don't think that they would be 12-1 right now had they played an SEC schedule this year.

And to cast how you close in another night, the ACC once again beat the SEC head to head (we also beat there BT head to head this year). Yet ESPN Talking heads spent a whole lot of time preaching about SEC quality playing role in justifying leaving out undefeated FSU.

The very good thing about what happened is that it seems the often very thick skulls of FSU fans have been penetrated with eh realization that ESPN intends to sacrifice FSU as well as the rest if the ACC to the SEC. And all of it has again unleashed FSU talk about the BT better for the university than thew SEC ever could be.

So now I need to go back to when the ACC stole FSU away from there SEC at literally the last second. The SEC had taken Arkansas, and had notified FSU that it was at the top if its list to be #12, and the SEC would be I Tallhassee in week, after it had finalized every part of the movie with Arkansas. The ACC got its delegation into Tallahassee last of a Friday afternoon and through Sunday afternoon showed FSU what to had in mind and how FSU would fit. The ACC promised FSU that it would gain three things from ACC membership: 1) it finally would win football national championships, 2) its athletics department would stop losing money almost every year and also be able to add new non-revenue sports and become nationally competitive in many of them, 3) the university's academic stature would grow.

All 3 have come true. The last was the one that SEC people laughed at the most as ridiculous, but now FSU indeed is widely assumed to be among the 2 or 3 schools that next will get into the AAU. FSU was an open admission school for FL natives as late as the 1980s. And now all kinds of FSU alums are like administrators and faculty in that they want that academic prestige - hence their focus on the BT rather the SEC. So now the key is to keep FSU people calm and seeing that their best move is lose some money vis vis UF now for a spell and wait out the ESPN deal, and then the ACC on the open market at full strength will be paid very well. NBC and CBS are working with Fox on the BT, and both those other networks clearly want more top level college athletics. They will payt nicely to have the ACC, if it remains at full strength.

I see SMU as even more important to that than the ACC having Cal-ford, because TX is far more focused on college sports than is CA. And I think that among them, Fox, NBCm and CBS all will know that their working to go right at the SEC on its geographic fringes will pay off big time eventually. So I think we would then see the ACC adding perhaps TCU< Baylor, and TTU to have major clout in TX, especially in and near DFW.

[MV pony]

Never TCU.