(11-12-2014 09:55 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(11-12-2014 09:06 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(11-12-2014 08:51 PM)CintiFan Wrote:  jhawk, I think your arguments actually support my scenario more than yours although I agree with much of what you say.

For starters, let's agree on the obvious: the SEC, BIG and PAC are survivors under any scenario and Big 12 and ACC are the potentially unstable conferences.

The Big 12 is more unstable because a single member, Texas, has the power to decide whether the conference survives or dies. If Texas decides to leave, the conference disbands. Two other schools, Oklahoma and Kansas, have the power to force Texas' hand because if they decide to leave, Texas alone may not have the ability to keep the conference intact because, at this point, there are not enough quality replacements for OK and KU. Yes, there are other good schools in the Big 12, but if Texas leaves, or OK & KU leave the conference doesn't have enough geographic diversity or national name brands to remain viable. In that sense, I agree with you that OK is a key player in the Big 12's future survival.

In contrast, no single member can kill the ACC nor does any small group of teams have the ability decimate the conference. FSU's departure would hurt but the conference would survive. Even a UVA/UNC move to the BIG or SEC would not kill the ACC. It has a much broader geographic reach, with teams like Syracuse, Pitt, South Carolina and Miami, who would still remain and that geographic breadth, with fairly good teams, would still garner a fairly nice TV contract, just not SEC/BIG size.

All of this will be moot, of course, when ND, Texas and FSU announce the formation of a new conference.

South Carolina is an SEC school. Look, 85% of the money generated by the conference comes from football. Did you know that the top money makers in the ACC are the following: Florida State, North Carolina, Clemson, Virginia Tech, Duke and N.C. State? Did you know the top attendance leaders in football are: Clemson, Florida State, Virginia Tech, and N.C. State and that the rest annually fall below 50,000? Should there be an exodus of football first schools it is not inconceivable that the football contract of the ACC would fall by 30 to 50% depending upon whether or not such a move would also cause the Irish to seek another haven.

Economic disparity is greatest for the ACC. Potential to close the disparity gap is the lowest for the next 6 years in the ACC. It remains to be seen what sanctions will be levied upon U.N.C., but should they receive post season bans in basketball, Syracuse (presently under investigation) receive post season bans in basketball, and Florida State (being investigated on title IX violations) receive post season bans in football and baseball the non performance of those top schools in those respective sports could violate the GOR. If Virginia Tech, N.C. State, Florida State, and Clemson leave (and Georgia Tech would take that opportunity as well and quite possibly Miami) then you don't have enough earning potential left for the rest to stay viable, especially if Syracuse and U.N.C. remain suspended from tourney action. Duke would become the sole standard bearer.

I'm sorry but you assessment of what happens to the ACC with the loss of football first schools is grossly optimistic.

There is much yet to be seen unveiled in the ACC's future. Hence, Texas and OU wait. And it is much more profitable to build a football conference around Texas and Oklahoma than it is to build one around North Carolina, Duke, and Virginia.

JR, FYI during Butch Davis' tenure as head football coach Carolina averaged 5,000 more fans per game than State has capacity.

The data I was drawing on is only about 2 years old now (2012 season). So I looked up the reported numbers for 2013:
Clemson: 82,048
Florida State: 75,421
Virginia Tech: 63,999
Miami: 53,837 (the Florida game at the pro stadium drew 76,000 plus which bumped their average considerably)
N.C. State: 53,178
North Carolina: 51,500 (congratulations you broke 50,000 but still finished behind N.C. State)