Interesting CBS article on Most Overhyped

[Graceland Tar Heel]

10 teams of the past decade. https://www.cbssports.com/college-footb ... st-decade/ That is another way of saying, the 10 programs that have been the biggest failures over the past 10 years based on what they had and should have had.

The SEC has the most teams with 5:Aggie, Auburn, Florida, Texas, Tennessee
The ACC has 3: FSU, UNC, and Miami

So why does the media generally praise the SEC endlessly as The Best while damning the ACC as nothing? I think the answer is simple: the richest are always protected and promoted, while those with such less are anything but helped as they struggle to keep their heads above water.

The truth is that even with those 5 SEC teams underachieving, the SEC is better in football than the ACC. Why and how? Think of all the other SEC teams that average at least 70K: UGA, Bama, LSU, Arkansas, OU, even Mizzou. CFB wealth and power are based on the collective ability of league members to draw the largest TV audiences, and that correlates directly with the league's average attendance figures.

The other very strong correlation between CFB wealth and power is the league being filled with state Flagship and/or Land Grant schools. 15 of 16 SEC members and 17 of 18 BT members fit that bill. The larger those schools the richer that league will be as well. All ACC state schools would be seen as small in the Big Ten.

In contrast, the ACC has only 2 schools that are capable of averaging even 80K per game: FSU and Clemson. The ACC has 6 private schools (not counting ND). The largest ACC school, FSU, is neither a Flagship nor a Land Grant, though its fan power statewide suggests that most FL people see it as another FL land grant/flagship.

So while the SEC has much wiggle room to be a really good league in football with a large TV fan base because of the kind of schools it has, the ACC has no wiggle room. If any of its premier Brands are underachieving, the ACC is hurt badly. Another way to phrase the full import of that is: the more that ACC schools like Wake and BC and Syracuse win, the worse it is long term for the ACC.

Once again, even if the ACC can survive the next few years intact with nobody leaving in 2031, when the buyout is way down, the ACC faces a scary future. The SEC especially, but also the BT, seems determined to arrange a whole bunch of OOC games with the other, which will largely cut out the ACC from playing those two richest leagues. The SEC and BT will then argue that ACC overall schedules are far too weak for the ACC to be represented by more than maybe 1 team in the playoffs. controlled by Sec and BT.

So the ACC must now act aggressively and wisely in order to secure its future as the 3rd most powerful conference. Not roughly equal with the Big 12 - definitely the #3. I think 3 things are in order, are, in fact, required: cut dead weight in terms of TV football drawing power; replace those schools with schools that meet itv lowest 2 of the 3 prime criteria: large state flagship and/or Land Grant with decent football history; other large state school with decent football history; school located in states and TV markets that turn out a lot of football talent and are proven to love CFB.

If that reconfigured ACC gets large enough, the league easily then can play 10 league games, which will almost totally eliminate the need to bow and scrape before the SEC and BT for OOC games.

[EastStang]

I think Va. Tech generates 75,000 per game for most games. Don't know about Louisville, Pitt or Syracuse. Secondly, its nice to talk about cutting dead weight, but who do you add? No SEC or B1G team is going to join the ACC. ND is not going to join us. That leaves Big XII teams. ISU, KSU, KU, OSU, TT, UU, ASU, UA that fit large state school status. BYU is kind of the Mormon ND and draws well. So, who do you add? And when you cut the "dead weight" that has a price. Because BC is a member, the ACC Network is must carry in Boston cable systems. Don't know what that translates into in dollars, but it has a value. UVA and VT give us the DC Market for must carry. Does UNC, NCS, Duke and Wake give us the Charlotte market for cable? GT gives us the Atlanta market for cable. Calford gives us the Bay Area and maybe all of Cali. SMU- Dallas. So, are we trading the Boston TV market for Lubbock, or Ames, or Lawrence or Manhattan, KS or Provo, or Stillwater, or Tempe? Wake is another story. However, they have been been very competitive over the last decade and even made it to a championship game, I think. So, its never easy.

[highlander]

I think Va. Tech generates 75,000 per game for most games. Don't know about Louisville, Pitt or Syracuse. Secondly, its nice to talk about cutting dead weight, but who do you add? No SEC or B1G team is going to join the ACC. ND is not going to join us. That leaves Big XII teams. ISU, KSU, KU, OSU, TT, UU, ASU, UA that fit large state school status. BYU is kind of the Mormon ND and draws well. So, who do you add? And when you cut the "dead weight" that has a price. Because BC is a member, the ACC Network is must carry in Boston cable systems. Don't know what that translates into in dollars, but it has a value. UVA and VT give us the DC Market for must carry. Does UNC, NCS, Duke and Wake give us the Charlotte market for cable? GT gives us the Atlanta market for cable. Calford gives us the Bay Area and maybe all of Cali. SMU- Dallas. So, are we trading the Boston TV market for Lubbock, or Ames, or Lawrence or Manhattan, KS or Provo, or Stillwater, or Tempe? Wake is another story. However, they have been been very competitive over the last decade and even made it to a championship game, I think. So, its never easy.

We just need to add 1 team so we can mathematically go to a 9-game conf schedule. Or we can drop Stanford -- I'm not sure their current student body would even notice.

[Charleston Pony]

SMU is in trouble if the criteria for "big time football" comes down to the size of our stadium, our average attendance or media ratings/fan following. As the 2nd smallest school in the ACC (both student enrollment and stadium size wise), SMU has recently been an over-achiever on the gridiron. While our enrollment is slightly lower than Notre Dame's, there is no comparison in the size of our fan bases. With continued success, it is possible SMU could become Dallas' team although the non-college aligned football fans in this city are going to pay more attention to the Cowboys or Longwhorns than our Mustangs. We just have to hope SMU can sustain success as a member of the ACC in both football and basketball so when the next round of conference realignment comes it will be hard to leave SMU out of the discussion.

[Charleston Pony]

Too much time on my hands this morning so I researched ACC schools to ranks the schools with the largest student enrollment vs football stadium capacity. List of highest enrollment with ranking of football stadium size:

1. Georgia Tech 48k enrollment 55k stadium (10th)
2. California 46k vs 63k (6th)
3. FSU 43k vs 79k (2nd)
4.Virginia Tech 38k vs 66k (4th)
5.NCSU 37k vs 57k (9th)
6.Pitt 34k vs 68k (3rd)
7. UNC 32k vs 51k (11th)
8. Clemson 29k vs 81k (1st)
9.Virginia 26k vs 62k (7th)
10. Syracuse 23k vs 49k (13th)
11. Louisville 22k vs 61k (8th)
12.Miami 20k vs 65k (5th)
13 Stanford 18k vs 50k (12th)
14.Duke 17k vs 40k (15th)
15. Boston College 15k vs 44k (14th)
16. SMU 12k vs 33k (16th)
17. Wake Forest 9k vs 32k (17th)

Plenty of factors go into enrollment vs stadium capacity numbers and I should note that Pitt and Miami use professional stadiums rather than on-campus facilities. I haven't looked at average attendance for all ACC schools (as a percentage of stadium capacity) but those rankings are perhaps the most important measurement of the support each program has and the game day environment. I've always felt that 30k engaged fans in Ford is a good crowd for SMU but we need a big name opponent to consider a game in Jerry World or The Cotton Bowl. I just hate to give up the home field advantage we have with a capacity crowd in Ford.

[highlander]

Too much time on my hands this morning so I researched ACC schools to ranks the schools with the largest student enrollment vs football stadium capacity. List of highest enrollment with ranking of football stadium size:

1. Georgia Tech 48k enrollment 55k stadium (10th)
2. California 46k vs 63k (6th)
3. FSU 43k vs 79k (2nd)
4.Virginia Tech 38k vs 66k (4th)
5.NCSU 37k vs 57k (9th)
6.Pitt 34k vs 68k (3rd)
7. UNC 32k vs 51k (11th)
8. Clemson 29k vs 81k (1st)
9.Virginia 26k vs 62k (7th)
10. Syracuse 23k vs 49k (13th)
11. Louisville 22k vs 61k (8th)
12.Miami 20k vs 65k (5th)
13 Stanford 18k vs 50k (12th)
14.Duke 17k vs 40k (15th)
15. Boston College 15k vs 44k (14th)
16. SMU 12k vs 33k (16th)
17. Wake Forest 9k vs 32k (17th)

Plenty of factors go into enrollment vs stadium capacity numbers and I should note that Pitt and Miami use professional stadiums rather than on-campus facilities. I haven't looked at average attendance for all ACC schools (as a percentage of stadium capacity) but those rankings are perhaps the most important measurement of the support each program has and the game day environment. I've always felt that 30k engaged fans in Ford is a good crowd for SMU but we need a big name opponent to consider a game in Jerry World or The Cotton Bowl. I just hate to give up the home field advantage we have with a capacity crowd in Ford.

I think you can throw our attendance numbers prior to last year out the window.

[highlander]

SMU is in trouble if the criteria for "big time football" comes down to the size of our stadium, our average attendance or media ratings/fan following. As the 2nd smallest school in the ACC (both student enrollment and stadium size wise), SMU has recently been an over-achiever on the gridiron. While our enrollment is slightly lower than Notre Dame's, there is no comparison in the size of our fan bases. With continued success, it is possible SMU could become Dallas' team although the non-college aligned football fans in this city are going to pay more attention to the Cowboys or Longwhorns than our Mustangs. We just have to hope SMU can sustain success as a member of the ACC in both football and basketball so when the next round of conference realignment comes it will be hard to leave SMU out of the discussion.

the Cowboys are doing their best to help us out right now.