• The KillerFrogs

ACC officially votes to add Cal, Stanford, SMU

Wexahu

Full Member
The ACC's big problem is that the thing that made conferences originally make sense--geographic proximity and coherence--is no longer what makes them profitable. It's all about TV now, which calls for name brand matchups between good teams, and/or geographic spread across multiple time zones. A splinter conference of eight ACC members wouldn't fix that, it would only make the pie slices a little bigger for each member by cutting out the dead weight. They could join with half of the Big 12 members, perhaps, but at that point you'd be cutting the pie 16 ways again and switching BC and Syracuse for Colorado and TCU isn't going to get you into the realm of Big Ten money. If you're going to the trouble of killing the conference it's only worth it if you join the SEC or Big Ten.

I think most likely the biggest brands will just jump and go to law to stall on the financial penalties, gambling that in the wreckage the remaining members will fight each other for the last four-ish life raft spots in the Big 12 and dissolve the conference.

But these questions are less important than what the overarching governance structure of college football is going to be, anyway. SMU is probably screwed no matter what, but the Big 12 might be too at this rate.
It blows my mind how decisions are being made that completely make no sense other than they result in collecting an extra $10-20M per year. Call it $30M a year if you want, doesn't matter. In the grand scheme of things and considering the size of the universities making these decisions, that just isn't a lot of money.
 

Limey Frog

Full Member
It blows my mind how decisions are being made that completely make no sense other than they result in collecting an extra $10-20M per year. Call it $30M a year if you want, doesn't matter. In the grand scheme of things and considering the size of the universities making these decisions, that just isn't a lot of money.
Not enough to justify blowing up something with 150 years of history that is so deeply ingrained in American culture. It's as though universities are run by self-absorbed careerists who adhere to no greater principles than their own reputations and don't care about their country's cultural patrimony...
 

Zubaz

Member
What 150 years of history? The ACC didn't exist until the 50's, and even before this most recent expansion like half of their teams didn't join until the 2000's. You're carrying a torch for a past that never existed.

Also, there's not a University in this country that doesn't think $20-30 million is a lot of money. Out of here with that stuff.
 

Limey Frog

Full Member
What 150 years of history? The ACC didn't exist until the 50's, and even before this most recent expansion like half of their teams didn't join until the 2000's. You're carrying a torch for a past that never existed.

Also, there's not a University in this country that doesn't think $20-30 million is a lot of money. Out of here with that stuff.
College football broadly, not just the ACC. The game has continually evolved but there are important constants that no longer count for anything in decision-making: regionalism and traditional rivalries most notably.
 

Zubaz

Member
College football broadly, not just the ACC. The game has continually evolved but there are important constants that no longer count for anything in decision-making: regionalism and traditional rivalries most notably.
Those "important constants" aren't nearly as constant as people act. That's kinda the point.
 

Wexahu

Full Member
What 150 years of history? The ACC didn't exist until the 50's, and even before this most recent expansion like half of their teams didn't join until the 2000's. You're carrying a torch for a past that never existed.

Also, there's not a University in this country that doesn't think $20-30 million is a lot of money. Out of here with that stuff.
LOL.

$20-30M/year, relatively speaking and for what we are talking about, isn't a lot of money to many of these Universities. They might think it's a lot of money in the same way our federal government thinks a spending "decrease" from a 3% increase to a 1% increase is a draconian spending cut.

Northwestern is building a $800M stadium.
 
Last edited:

froginmn

Full Member
LOL.

$20-30M/year, relatively speaking and for what we are talking about, isn't a lot of money to many of these Universities. They might think it's a lot of money in the same way our federal government thinks a spending "decrease" from a 3% increase to a 1% increase is a draconian spending cut.

Northwestern is building an $800M stadium.
For a State school that's a small accounting error.

 
Not enough to justify blowing up something with 150 years of history that is so deeply ingrained in American culture. It's as though universities are run by self-absorbed careerists who adhere to no greater principles than their own reputations and don't care about their country's cultural patrimony...
I think College Football went to hell when they allowed the damned infernal forward pass.
 

Wexahu

Full Member
I think College Football went to hell when they allowed the damned infernal forward pass.
IMO it gradually started going to hell when they added the CFP. That ushered in the era where seemingly nothing else matters to universities except money.

Maybe it’s always been that way but it didn’t seem like it 15-20 years ago. For sure going back 30+ years. Always seemed like there was some money being left on the table for the sake of the sport.
 

DeepEllumFrog

Full Member
LOL.

$20-30M/year, relatively speaking and for what we are talking about, isn't a lot of money to many of these Universities. They might think it's a lot of money in the same way our federal government thinks a spending "decrease" from a 3% increase to a 1% increase is a draconian spending cut.

Northwestern is building a $800M stadium.
How is Northwestern paying for it?
 

OICU812

Active Member
IMO it gradually started going to hell when they added the CFP. That ushered in the era where seemingly nothing else matters to universities except money.

Maybe it’s always been that way but it didn’t seem like it 15-20 years ago. For sure going back 30+ years. Always seemed like there was some money being left on the table for the sake of the sport.
For me it was BcS. There was absolutely nothing wrong with the old bowl system, it was great. Nothing in the world wrong with 2, or even 3 teams having great seasons, winning a big bowl game, and then arguing about who was best. Heck there’s even an exception that proves the rule: If aggy can go 7-4 and lose in the Liberty Bowl and claim a National Title, all is well.
But no, we Had To Have a “clear winner,” because the NFL does and they make the most bank so it must be right. . . Kudos on creating an NFL JV, good luck with all that.
 

Zubaz

Member
For me it was BcS. There was absolutely nothing wrong with the old bowl system, it was great. Nothing in the world wrong with 2, or even 3 teams having great seasons, winning a big bowl game, and then arguing about who was best. Heck there’s even an exception that proves the rule: If aggy can go 7-4 and lose in the Liberty Bowl and claim a National Title, all is well.
But no, we Had To Have a “clear winner,” because the NFL does and they make the most bank so it must be right. . . Kudos on creating an NFL JV, good luck with all that.
"It was the CFP"
"It was conference realignment"
"It was the BCS"
"It was the Bowl Alliance/Coailition"
"It was the death of the SWC"
"It was cable television"
"It was the Oklahoma SCOTUS decision"
we-didnt-start-the-fire-d7690bb362704dbfa9f07a7f21566e73.jpg

"
 

Latest posts

Top