Dukie wrote:Graceland Tar Heel wrote:BillgoCU wrote:Agreed, this is good news.
Clemson and FSU, schools with fewer big-money grads, but plenty of loyal fans, get money more consistent with their SEC neighbors, and the conference stays together. I don't want a world that is "just SEC and Big10"
I'm cool with it.
My views:
1. BT and SEC clearly want there to be just 2 Major conferences, which will allow them to have control over nearly 100% of the post-season money that is part of D1A (FBS)
2. By 2036 there will be either just 2 or maybe 3 accepted Major conferences.
3. Either ACC (better chance if it has the stomach to save itself) or Big 12 could be a 3rd major, but only 1 can remain Major. The one that gets that slot must take real value from the other.
4. I think the ACC to save itself as true Major must dump its dead weight and expand beyond 17 members. That likely requires the ACC finding a sugar daddy who wants to get into Major college sports broadcasting and will pay for the rights to the new larger ACC inventory. Bezos/Amazon and Cook/Apple have both shown that they want much more live sports programming.
5. 17 of 18 BT members are state Flagship and/or Land Grant schools. 15 of 16 SEC members also meet that criteria. The ACC has only 3 Flagships, none with a football history in recent decades worth talking about, and only 3 Land Grants. WE also have FSU, which is neither but has a statewide fan base like a Flagship or Land Grant. We have too many private schools, especially in areas that do not turn out a lot of top recruits. We have 2 private schools located in the far northeast, which is easily the most dead weight region in the country for CFB talent production and fans. We also have Wake, which since the death of the SWC has been the smallest school In a Major conference. NC cannot adequately support 4 schools in a Major conference.
So the most dead weight is obvious. Also obvious is what the the ACC needs more of: state Flagship and/or Land Grant schools with some football history over the past 30 years or so; other large state schools with some football history in this century; schools located in states that produce a whole lot of talent; schools located in states that watch a lot of CFB; schools with boosters with proven histories of investing in their school's football.
This is all pretty much true, though there are schools that meet neither the flagship nor land-grant criteria that are still valuable (Georgia Tech). And I'm not even sure it's required for the ACC to boot any members--the new revenue deal will cut the earnings of Wake and BC and they'll just deal with it, much as being a junior member in an expanded ACC is still going to be way better for them than joining whatever version of the American there is in the future. But the ACC should definitely be looking, by the 2030 timeframe, to get Cal and Stanford off of their lonely island by basically trying to get the Four Corners flagships plus Kansas in the boat, decapitating the "Big" "12". However, I share your doubt about whether the ACC schools are savvy and/or mercenary enough to do it.
The BT and SEC have made the economy of Major CFB a brutal one that aims to destroy. In such a situation, only the rich can afford to support pure charity cases, especially when the number is more than 1. The simple fact is that WVU vs anyone is going to draw more TV viewers than Wake vs the same schools. Dittonwith BC. BC vs ND or PSU will get the highest numbers for BC< but PSU and ND vs WVU will still draw more viewers.
To survive as Major and be able to cut the revenue gap a bit, the ACC must drop dead weight, and then replace with schools that will draw more TV viewers than the dead weight. I think the ACC also must become super sized. That almost certainly requires ESPN partnering with another entity like Amazon or Apple which will televise a certain number of ACC games from the larger league inventory.
Drop BC, Cuse, and Wake. Buy them out in some form. Add UofA, AZ ZSt, Utah, and Colorado. All 4 are large AAU schools. All 4 have much more academically in common with Calford and the ACC's old guard than with anything in the current Big 12. The 2 AZ schools have massive numbers of students from CA and alums living in CA, which will increase the ACC TV numbers in CA. Having all 4 will mean that the ACC can advertise across MT that the ACC is the only Major conference with teams located in MT. The area is sparsely populated, but at least the ACC would own it. And that would provide the very valuable bridge between TX and CA.
Then secure as much of DFW as possible. I would add TCU to have the only two DFW located schools in a Major conference. I also would add Baylor and TTU. The former because per capita Baylor alums have as much clout in TX politics as UT alums and because Baylor is located just south of the DFW TV market. The latter because TTU is a large state university with a healthy athletics department (much more so than Houston) with successes in both revenue sports in recent years. Best of all, the TV market with the largest number of TTU alums is DFW. Right now, ESPN pays full carriage to the ACC only for DFW because of SMU's location. Adding TTU and Baylor would mean getting that for the Lubbock and Waco markets as well, while also, along with adding TCU, significantly strengthening the ACC presence in the VERY important DFW market.
Then I would finish off ACC football by adding WVU and Cincy. WVU is both flagship and land grant, though the state is very small. However, WV people living elsewhere have an unmatchable loyalty to the state of their ancestry and to WVU teams. The Backyard Brawl is a major college sports blood rivalry. WVU fans travel in amazing numbers anywhere within 4 or 5, even 6, hours drive of WV, and they fill Pittsburgh when playing there. That fiery passion is captured on TV, and the ACC needs a whole to more of that in football.
Cincy, a very large state school, is Louisville's most played rival in both revenue sports and is located 100 miles away in football obsessed and football recruit filled OH.
In addition to having that ability too assert in ads that the ACC is the only Major conference with NT teams, the ACC that I would love to see also could assert over and over that it is the only conference ever to have at least 1 team in each of the 5 states that annually produce the most D1 football recruits: CA, TX, GA, FL, and OH.
23 teams would mean 22 league foes. I would have each play 4 annual rivals. That would leave 18 members to be played. I would have them divided into 3 groups of 6 and rotated, meaning each team would play 10 ACC games per year. And face each league member at least once every 3 years. That league schedule would diminish the need to play BT and SECV OOC while making certain games are interesting enough to get better TV numbers than the ACC has ever drawn.
Also, all games vs 1AA (FCS) teams would be banned.
Half measures cannot save the ACC as a Major conference past 2036, maybe past 2031. The ACC will either go big or go home. And I do NOT want UNC in either BT or SEC.
Posted: Mon Mar 03, 2025 10:50 am