From ACC

[JasonB]

First we were in the SWC and it was killed off. Then we were in the WAC and it was killed off. Then we were in the Big East and it was killed off. We were considered by the PAC and it was killed off. Now we want in the ACC and it is doomed in a few years. We’ll never be invited by the Big10 or the SEC, they don’t even want any of the Big12, so what’s the point? We are at least in a conference that is somewhat stable. We earn $7 M per year. We have a good media contract, and good leadership, we may be in the best spot we can be in. Should we give that up? We may not even have that option. But if we do, is it wise to give up what we have? Or is it better to dominate the conference we’re in?

Look, I have been here for a long time, and I don't want to be mean. But YES, we absolutely want to give up what we have.

Do you want your degree to be associated with the schools in the AAC or the ACC? The upgrade brings significant value to every single graduate of SMU.

On top of that, the vast majority of schools in this country run a significant deficit in the athletics department. That is because of the cost of athletics and facilities, which state schools have to take loans out for. At SMU, our donors pay for our buildings and facilities. Because of the associated increase in ticket sales and ticket prices, SMU has the opportunity to be one of the few athletic departments in the country that run a profit. Yes, THAT much money is about to pour into our school from advertisements and ticket sales. When Clemson comes to play in football, we are going to sell 30,000 tickets at $200 bucks a pop. When Duke comes to town, tickets at Moody are going to sell for $500 each. Do the math.

The ACC has a GOR agreement that will give us 10 years of stability in the conference. Plenty of time to show that we belong at the highest level. And with the donors who are sitting on the sideline right now and will start investing in our program (both facilities and NIL), we will for sure continue to have a top ten NIL program in the country, which will give us top ten rosters in football and basketball each year to compete on the national stage. Once our foot is in the door, we aren't going to get left out again, even if the ACC does implode for some reason down the line.

I hope this happens. With Thamel reporting, we have the blessing from ESPN, and it sounds like things are moving in the right direction. Fingers crossed. But 100%, joining the ACC is a no-brainer and is something we should all be hoping for.

[mtrout]

The best time to get into a power conference was 20 years ago
The next best time is now (at extreme cost)

We're like the kid who waited until the last week of the semester to do his homework

[EastStang]

To put it in perspective. $7 Million is 7/10th of one percent of $1 Billion. So, if our billionaire donors are behind this, then it's less than 1/7th of the interest they earn on their money. So, we aren't giving up much in the grand scheme of things.

[BaylorHistory]

The best time to get into a power conference was 20 years ago
The next best time is now (at extreme cost)

We're like the kid who waited until the last week of the semester to do his homework

Correct, and now it's time for TCU to stop pretending that the rivalry is beneath them right? right? right?!?

Hopefully this leads a path to all 3 schools playing each other every year in some form or fashion. I'd be excited to see what SMU can do in the ACC and I think you'd be in the top half from the jump.

[Water Pony]

First we were in the SWC and it was killed off. Then we were in the WAC and it was killed off. Then we were in the Big East and it was killed off. We were considered by the PAC and it was killed off. Now we want in the ACC and it is doomed in a few years. We’ll never be invited by the Big10 or the SEC, they don’t even want any of the Big12, so what’s the point? We are at least in a conference that is somewhat stable. We earn $7 M per year. We have a good media contract, and good leadership, we may be in the best spot we can be in. Should we give that up? We may not even have that option. But if we do, is it wise to give up what we have? Or is it better to dominate the conference we’re in?

Look, I have been here for a long time, and I don't want to be mean. But YES, we absolutely want to give up what we have.

Do you want your degree to be associated with the schools in the AAC or the ACC? The upgrade brings significant value to every single graduate of SMU.

On top of that, the vast majority of schools in this country run a significant deficit in the athletics department. That is because of the cost of athletics and facilities, which state schools have to take loans out for. At SMU, our donors pay for our buildings and facilities. Because of the associated increase in ticket sales and ticket prices, SMU has the opportunity to be one of the few athletic departments in the country that run a profit. Yes, THAT much money is about to pour into our school from advertisements and ticket sales. When Clemson comes to play in football, we are going to sell 30,000 tickets at $200 bucks a pop. When Duke comes to town, tickets at Moody are going to sell for $500 each. Do the math.

The ACC has a GOR agreement that will give us 10 years of stability in the conference. Plenty of time to show that we belong at the highest level. And with the donors who are sitting on the sideline right now and will start investing in our program (both facilities and NIL), we will for sure continue to have a top ten NIL program in the country, which will give us top ten rosters in football and basketball each year to compete on the national stage. Once our foot is in the door, we aren't going to get left out again, even if the ACC does implode for some reason down the line.

I hope this happens. With Thamel reporting, we have the blessing from ESPN, and it sounds like things are moving in the right direction. Fingers crossed. But 100%, joining the ACC is a no-brainer and is something we should all be hoping for.

Thanks for reminding everyone that the association with the ACC brings value and respect associated with having ACC membership beyond the obvious increase in harder athletic competition. This group of universities and their respective brand will certainly further polish ours.

Our gratitude to our major donors is beyond simple appreciation. Their commitment to the future of SMU in all dimensions is immeasurable and is the only thing which will allows us to reemerge from our lost decades. The hundreds of millions of dollars in new facilities and our schools demonstrates to the ACC Presidents that we are a peer. Thank you!

I have my fingers crossed, but this may actually happen.

[Bergermeister]

Done deal!

[mtrout]

Done deal!

next week

[SMUstang]

I know you can't turn the clock back. And from where we are right now the ACC looks like the best choice. I thought so even when we were being courted by the PAC. We would be aligning ourselves with a lot of other pier universities. A good combination of private and public universities.

[ShantyBoy]

Dude, holy moly. No offense, but this is like watching someone argue with themselves in the mirror. Weren’t you just saying we should stand pat?

[blackoutpony]

First we were in the SWC and it was killed off. Then we were in the WAC and it was killed off. Then we were in the Big East and it was killed off. We were considered by the PAC and it was killed off. Now we want in the ACC and it is doomed in a few years. We’ll never be invited by the Big10 or the SEC, they don’t even want any of the Big12, so what’s the point? We are at least in a conference that is somewhat stable. We earn $7 M per year. We have a good media contract, and good leadership, we may be in the best spot we can be in. Should we give that up? We may not even have that option. But if we do, is it wise to give up what we have? Or is it better to dominate the conference we’re in?

I haven't posted on PF in years, but just came over here to ask you where you get your drugs because only someone high as a kite would think staying in the AAC is better than being in the ACC.

[1983 Cotton Bowl]

First we were in the SWC and it was killed off. Then we were in the WAC and it was killed off. Then we were in the Big East and it was killed off. We were considered by the PAC and it was killed off. Now we want in the ACC and it is doomed in a few years. We’ll never be invited by the Big10 or the SEC, they don’t even want any of the Big12, so what’s the point? We are at least in a conference that is somewhat stable. We earn $7 M per year. We have a good media contract, and good leadership, we may be in the best spot we can be in. Should we give that up? We may not even have that option. But if we do, is it wise to give up what we have? Or is it better to dominate the conference we’re in?

Look, I have been here for a long time, and I don't want to be mean. But YES, we absolutely want to give up what we have.

Do you want your degree to be associated with the schools in the AAC or the ACC? The upgrade brings significant value to every single graduate of SMU.

On top of that, the vast majority of schools in this country run a significant deficit in the athletics department. That is because of the cost of athletics and facilities, which state schools have to take loans out for. At SMU, our donors pay for our buildings and facilities. Because of the associated increase in ticket sales and ticket prices, SMU has the opportunity to be one of the few athletic departments in the country that run a profit. Yes, THAT much money is about to pour into our school from advertisements and ticket sales. When Clemson comes to play in football, we are going to sell 30,000 tickets at $200 bucks a pop. When Duke comes to town, tickets at Moody are going to sell for $500 each. Do the math.

The ACC has a GOR agreement that will give us 10 years of stability in the conference. Plenty of time to show that we belong at the highest level. And with the donors who are sitting on the sideline right now and will start investing in our program (both facilities and NIL), we will for sure continue to have a top ten NIL program in the country, which will give us top ten rosters in football and basketball each year to compete on the national stage. Once our foot is in the door, we aren't going to get left out again, even if the ACC does implode for some reason down the line.

I hope this happens. With Thamel reporting, we have the blessing from ESPN, and it sounds like things are moving in the right direction. Fingers crossed. But 100%, joining the ACC is a no-brainer and is something we should all be hoping for.

This is a good post. I have no idea if this ACC thing will happen or not, but when I got to the part of this post about Duke coming to Moody my blood ran cold. I'm thinking we'll need a substantial upgrade in hoops to play in the ACC and not be humiliated. Football, on the other hand, I think would be in a decent place on day 1. Not win the league decent. . . but competitive decent on most weeks.

[SMU Pony Mom]

If we have the good fortune of being offered membership in the ACC, Grab It!!!! I do not understand any arguments against this and am concerned with some of the short sighted thinking.

[Webmaster]

Mid-day update:
https://www.si.com/college/stanford/football/stanford-and-cal-are-extremely-close-to-becoming-members-of-acc-after-pac-12s-collapse

"SMU, according to sources, would forego their share of the media distribution portion of that pot for multiple years and essentially come into the league earning only from non-media rights distributions such as bowl distribution payouts, College Football Playoff distributions and NCAA tournament units. The money all three new entrants would be forfeiting would then go into a pool to be doled out as part of a so-called “success initiative” that will distribute payouts to all ACC schools based on teams’ performance in postseason play in revenue sports.

Johnson also dove into the positives for everyone involved as Stanford and Cal will now have adequate competition for their Olympic sports rather than dropping down to the Mountain West or American, it gives Florida State and Clemson a chance to earn more money, and also allows for ESPN to have a piece of the West Coast action.

The presidents and athletic directors are set to meet Thursday, and there is growing confidence that it will come to a vote and pass eventually in the future."

[crazy horse]

That was a WONDERFUL post by Jason above. Bravo!

Has anyone even considered the value of being associated with the top universities in the country for Academics? What does that do for research dollars, new applications, growing enrollment, out-of-state enrollees?

No doubt the ACC will be a huge win, even without the media $$$ for a short time. But what does that do for recruiting/portal once the "not in a power conference" ceiling is removed. You know that has been used for years against us by every P5 program recruiting in Texas. And my gosh, you are Coach Lanier recruiting for a team that will be playing Duke, Stanford, UNC every year. Yes, please!

I'm excited!

Thanks to all the donors and leadership who are making this possible!!!

[BaylorHistory]

That was a WONDERFUL post by Jason above. Bravo!

Has anyone even considered the value of being associated with the top universities in the country for Academics? What does that do for research dollars, new applications, growing enrollment, out-of-state enrollees?

No doubt the ACC will be a huge win, even without the media $$$ for a short time. But what does that do for recruiting/portal once the "not in a power conference" ceiling is removed. You know that has been used for years against us by every P5 program recruiting in Texas. And my gosh, you are Coach Lanier recruiting for a team that will be playing Duke, Stanford, UNC every year. Yes, please!

I'm excited!

Thanks to all the donors and leadership who are making this possible!!!

I think SMU's R1 drive will be much more impactful for research dollars, but the football team being promoted will absolutely help with OOS students and applications.