Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Post Reply 
Can the ACC survive itself?
Author Message
Bookmark and Share
Lenvillecards Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 6,458
Joined: Nov 2013
Reputation: 376
I Root For: Louisville
Location:
Post: #21
Can the ACC survive itself?
(06-15-2016 09:06 AM)XLance Wrote:  
(06-15-2016 09:00 AM)Lenvillecards Wrote:  
(06-15-2016 08:54 AM)XLance Wrote:  
(06-14-2016 10:21 PM)murrdcu Wrote:  I find it hard to believe that the ACC would have trouble getting the votes needed to a just the number of football conference games by an additional game if it guaranteed them a network, additional revenues, and long term stability.

Now, I understand the concerns of the couple of schools that have permanent yearly rivalries with SEC opponents. I don't see those games going away as they are big money games that drive season ticket sales and fund raising efforts.

I'm not saying that this will ever happen but..........

Several Georgia Tech folks that I know will say that they had rather play Auburn than Georgia (there is some real hate between Georgia and Georgia Tech). What you may see in the future is some sort of 4 way rotation between Georgia, Auburn, Georgia Tech and Clemson.
Many of the Clemson people want to get Georgia on their schedules. You never know what might happen in a cross conference situation when the SECN and the ACCN are marketed together. It is curious that South Carolina and North Carolina/North Carolina State have started to schedule one another in Charlotte on a semi regular basis.

Instead of the ACC & SEC going to 9 games, I would rather see them schedule a "challenge week" or something. This would create additional content for ESPN & the conference networks while resolving the 7 home games & other concerns.

Who are you going to get to play the professional team in Tuscaloosa?

The football schools in the ACC would love to have a shot at them.
06-15-2016 09:48 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
ericsaid Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 9,233
Joined: May 2013
Reputation: 227
I Root For: App. State/ECU
Location: High Point, NC
Post: #22
RE: Can the ACC survive itself?
(06-12-2016 03:54 PM)JRsec Wrote:  
(06-12-2016 02:01 PM)IR4CU Wrote:  I posted this on the ACC board but thought I would post it here as well as I am definitely interested in thoughts from folks from the SEC on this subject.

Notwithstanding any external forces such as the SEC, Big 10, or ESPN, I wonder if the ACC will be able to win the long term battle against it's most deadly enemy - itself. Based on the vitriol from the fans concerning the potential nine game football conference schedule, I have my doubts. On this topic alone, it is clear that the fans are torn, the administrations are torn, and the athletic departments are torn - heck even fans of the same school appear to be torn. No matter how this issue is resolved, some schools are going to be very upset. I think this stems from the fact that as a group, we do not have any overall common ground in terms of history, culture, or athletics. Think about this ... if each ACC institution could have one and only one men's sports program, which sport would each school pick? Clemson, FSU, Miami, and VT would most definitely pick football. GT, Louisville, and NC State would be torn between football and basketball - I think GT would ultimately pick football and NCSU and UL would ultimately pick basketball. Duke, UNC, Syracuse, Wake, and UVA would definitely pick basketball (although Syracuse might pick Lacrosse). I am unsure where Pitt would fall - I am guessing football but it might be basketball?? Boston College would most likely pick hockey. So, is it any wonder that this league goes through so much turmoil on every decision: it really does come down to basketball vs football where we are pretty evenly divided and as far as I have seen so far, none of the schools are truly willing to make significant compromises. Then, if you look at geography and history, we have old Big East vs old ACC and North vs South. It's a wonder this conference hasn't already imploded (or exploded!). Now compare this to the SEC - they have one school (Kentucky) that would select basketball, one school (Vanderbilt) who may select either or possibly baseball - the remaining 12 schools are 100% on board for football. I am not saying that this makes the SEC "better" than the ACC but they are most definitely of the same mind and work together for the same goals as a conference - from a football and ultimately from a revenue standpoint, this has served them very well. Will the ACC ever get to this level of like mindedness? Unfortunately, I seriously doubt it will and therein lies the true enemy of our conference and the one that ultimately may lead to it's demise at some point in the future.

I have been verbally attacked by ACC fan boys for referring to the conference as ESPN's version of Frankenstein's monster. I did so precisely for the reasons you presented. It is a conference cobbled together by ESPN in part to shelter Old Big East property they didn't want to fall into Delany's hands when the BTN was still an independent network. In part to keep Florida State from going to the SEC in '91 because it feared the SEC would gain too much leverage. Georgia Tech was the only natural addition that they have made. And, now you can add the hybrid relationship with Notre Dame which at the time was more like an organ donor to keep the conference alive.

The problem now is that the pieces can't move to their natural destinations. IMO Florida State and Clemson do belong in the SEC. I could see the SEC accommodating Virginia Tech as well. N.C. State / North Carolina would only be market grabs. Miami is a decent addition but if we had Florida State do we really need them? I don't think so.

Pitt and Syrcause, and possibly B.C. belong in the Big 10, or back in the Big East.
Virginia and Duke need to drop down a division and join the Ivy League. UNC?

These kinds of placements could have happened before FOX bought the majority interest in the BTN. Then ESPN could have retained the B1G rights and utilized them for Hockey, Lacrosse, and Basketball and used the SEC for Football, Baseball, and Gymnastics. Then the more natural movements would have made some sense.

But to answer your question I think ESPN, like the Gothic Dr., is stuck with the havoc wrought by its creation!

Wait, so you think ESPN is against the SEC? The SEC is ESPN's cash cow.
07-12-2016 05:37 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
JRsec Offline
Super Moderator
*

Posts: 37,888
Joined: Mar 2012
Reputation: 7737
I Root For: SEC
Location:
Post: #23
RE: Can the ACC survive itself?
(07-12-2016 05:37 PM)ericsaid Wrote:  
(06-12-2016 03:54 PM)JRsec Wrote:  
(06-12-2016 02:01 PM)IR4CU Wrote:  I posted this on the ACC board but thought I would post it here as well as I am definitely interested in thoughts from folks from the SEC on this subject.

Notwithstanding any external forces such as the SEC, Big 10, or ESPN, I wonder if the ACC will be able to win the long term battle against it's most deadly enemy - itself. Based on the vitriol from the fans concerning the potential nine game football conference schedule, I have my doubts. On this topic alone, it is clear that the fans are torn, the administrations are torn, and the athletic departments are torn - heck even fans of the same school appear to be torn. No matter how this issue is resolved, some schools are going to be very upset. I think this stems from the fact that as a group, we do not have any overall common ground in terms of history, culture, or athletics. Think about this ... if each ACC institution could have one and only one men's sports program, which sport would each school pick? Clemson, FSU, Miami, and VT would most definitely pick football. GT, Louisville, and NC State would be torn between football and basketball - I think GT would ultimately pick football and NCSU and UL would ultimately pick basketball. Duke, UNC, Syracuse, Wake, and UVA would definitely pick basketball (although Syracuse might pick Lacrosse). I am unsure where Pitt would fall - I am guessing football but it might be basketball?? Boston College would most likely pick hockey. So, is it any wonder that this league goes through so much turmoil on every decision: it really does come down to basketball vs football where we are pretty evenly divided and as far as I have seen so far, none of the schools are truly willing to make significant compromises. Then, if you look at geography and history, we have old Big East vs old ACC and North vs South. It's a wonder this conference hasn't already imploded (or exploded!). Now compare this to the SEC - they have one school (Kentucky) that would select basketball, one school (Vanderbilt) who may select either or possibly baseball - the remaining 12 schools are 100% on board for football. I am not saying that this makes the SEC "better" than the ACC but they are most definitely of the same mind and work together for the same goals as a conference - from a football and ultimately from a revenue standpoint, this has served them very well. Will the ACC ever get to this level of like mindedness? Unfortunately, I seriously doubt it will and therein lies the true enemy of our conference and the one that ultimately may lead to it's demise at some point in the future.

I have been verbally attacked by ACC fan boys for referring to the conference as ESPN's version of Frankenstein's monster. I did so precisely for the reasons you presented. It is a conference cobbled together by ESPN in part to shelter Old Big East property they didn't want to fall into Delany's hands when the BTN was still an independent network. In part to keep Florida State from going to the SEC in '91 because it feared the SEC would gain too much leverage. Georgia Tech was the only natural addition that they have made. And, now you can add the hybrid relationship with Notre Dame which at the time was more like an organ donor to keep the conference alive.

The problem now is that the pieces can't move to their natural destinations. IMO Florida State and Clemson do belong in the SEC. I could see the SEC accommodating Virginia Tech as well. N.C. State / North Carolina would only be market grabs. Miami is a decent addition but if we had Florida State do we really need them? I don't think so.

Pitt and Syrcause, and possibly B.C. belong in the Big 10, or back in the Big East.
Virginia and Duke need to drop down a division and join the Ivy League. UNC?

These kinds of placements could have happened before FOX bought the majority interest in the BTN. Then ESPN could have retained the B1G rights and utilized them for Hockey, Lacrosse, and Basketball and used the SEC for Football, Baseball, and Gymnastics. Then the more natural movements would have made some sense.

But to answer your question I think ESPN, like the Gothic Dr., is stuck with the havoc wrought by its creation!

Wait, so you think ESPN is against the SEC? The SEC is ESPN's cash cow.

ESPN is not against the SEC. They were against an SEC in 1991 that wasn't fully under their control from landing the one product in Florida that would have given the SEC unquestioned control over a major State and market. F.S.U. added more value to the ACC which was ESPN's soon to be 100% owned conference than ESPN could attain from F.S.U.'s membership in a partially owned SEC. ESPN is for ESPN. Feeding the cash cow comes second.
07-13-2016 05:50 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
XLance Online
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 14,231
Joined: Mar 2008
Reputation: 762
I Root For: Carolina
Location: Greensboro, NC
Post: #24
RE: Can the ACC survive itself?
(07-13-2016 05:50 PM)JRsec Wrote:  
(07-12-2016 05:37 PM)ericsaid Wrote:  
(06-12-2016 03:54 PM)JRsec Wrote:  
(06-12-2016 02:01 PM)IR4CU Wrote:  I posted this on the ACC board but thought I would post it here as well as I am definitely interested in thoughts from folks from the SEC on this subject.

Notwithstanding any external forces such as the SEC, Big 10, or ESPN, I wonder if the ACC will be able to win the long term battle against it's most deadly enemy - itself. Based on the vitriol from the fans concerning the potential nine game football conference schedule, I have my doubts. On this topic alone, it is clear that the fans are torn, the administrations are torn, and the athletic departments are torn - heck even fans of the same school appear to be torn. No matter how this issue is resolved, some schools are going to be very upset. I think this stems from the fact that as a group, we do not have any overall common ground in terms of history, culture, or athletics. Think about this ... if each ACC institution could have one and only one men's sports program, which sport would each school pick? Clemson, FSU, Miami, and VT would most definitely pick football. GT, Louisville, and NC State would be torn between football and basketball - I think GT would ultimately pick football and NCSU and UL would ultimately pick basketball. Duke, UNC, Syracuse, Wake, and UVA would definitely pick basketball (although Syracuse might pick Lacrosse). I am unsure where Pitt would fall - I am guessing football but it might be basketball?? Boston College would most likely pick hockey. So, is it any wonder that this league goes through so much turmoil on every decision: it really does come down to basketball vs football where we are pretty evenly divided and as far as I have seen so far, none of the schools are truly willing to make significant compromises. Then, if you look at geography and history, we have old Big East vs old ACC and North vs South. It's a wonder this conference hasn't already imploded (or exploded!). Now compare this to the SEC - they have one school (Kentucky) that would select basketball, one school (Vanderbilt) who may select either or possibly baseball - the remaining 12 schools are 100% on board for football. I am not saying that this makes the SEC "better" than the ACC but they are most definitely of the same mind and work together for the same goals as a conference - from a football and ultimately from a revenue standpoint, this has served them very well. Will the ACC ever get to this level of like mindedness? Unfortunately, I seriously doubt it will and therein lies the true enemy of our conference and the one that ultimately may lead to it's demise at some point in the future.

I have been verbally attacked by ACC fan boys for referring to the conference as ESPN's version of Frankenstein's monster. I did so precisely for the reasons you presented. It is a conference cobbled together by ESPN in part to shelter Old Big East property they didn't want to fall into Delany's hands when the BTN was still an independent network. In part to keep Florida State from going to the SEC in '91 because it feared the SEC would gain too much leverage. Georgia Tech was the only natural addition that they have made. And, now you can add the hybrid relationship with Notre Dame which at the time was more like an organ donor to keep the conference alive.

The problem now is that the pieces can't move to their natural destinations. IMO Florida State and Clemson do belong in the SEC. I could see the SEC accommodating Virginia Tech as well. N.C. State / North Carolina would only be market grabs. Miami is a decent addition but if we had Florida State do we really need them? I don't think so.

Pitt and Syrcause, and possibly B.C. belong in the Big 10, or back in the Big East.
Virginia and Duke need to drop down a division and join the Ivy League. UNC?

These kinds of placements could have happened before FOX bought the majority interest in the BTN. Then ESPN could have retained the B1G rights and utilized them for Hockey, Lacrosse, and Basketball and used the SEC for Football, Baseball, and Gymnastics. Then the more natural movements would have made some sense.

But to answer your question I think ESPN, like the Gothic Dr., is stuck with the havoc wrought by its creation!

Wait, so you think ESPN is against the SEC? The SEC is ESPN's cash cow.

ESPN is not against the SEC. They were against an SEC in 1991 that wasn't fully under their control from landing the one product in Florida that would have given the SEC unquestioned control over a major State and market. F.S.U. added more value to the ACC which was ESPN's soon to be 100% owned conference than ESPN could attain from F.S.U.'s membership in a partially owned SEC. ESPN is for ESPN. Feeding the cash cow comes second.

After re-reading several accounts of FSU's move to the ACC, not a single one mentioned ESPN. Not on the ACC side or not from the SEC perspective. The one thing that does keep turning up, however, is that FSU avoided talking to the SEC so that they could find out if they had been accepted by the ACC (in effect turning down a SEC offer).
You can try to re-write history if you want, but the truth is FSU had an opportunity to go to either the SEC or the ACC and rejected the SEC in favor of an offer from the ACC (and ESPN had not one single thing to do with it).
07-14-2016 12:20 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
JRsec Offline
Super Moderator
*

Posts: 37,888
Joined: Mar 2012
Reputation: 7737
I Root For: SEC
Location:
Post: #25
RE: Can the ACC survive itself?
(07-14-2016 12:20 PM)XLance Wrote:  
(07-13-2016 05:50 PM)JRsec Wrote:  
(07-12-2016 05:37 PM)ericsaid Wrote:  
(06-12-2016 03:54 PM)JRsec Wrote:  
(06-12-2016 02:01 PM)IR4CU Wrote:  I posted this on the ACC board but thought I would post it here as well as I am definitely interested in thoughts from folks from the SEC on this subject.

Notwithstanding any external forces such as the SEC, Big 10, or ESPN, I wonder if the ACC will be able to win the long term battle against it's most deadly enemy - itself. Based on the vitriol from the fans concerning the potential nine game football conference schedule, I have my doubts. On this topic alone, it is clear that the fans are torn, the administrations are torn, and the athletic departments are torn - heck even fans of the same school appear to be torn. No matter how this issue is resolved, some schools are going to be very upset. I think this stems from the fact that as a group, we do not have any overall common ground in terms of history, culture, or athletics. Think about this ... if each ACC institution could have one and only one men's sports program, which sport would each school pick? Clemson, FSU, Miami, and VT would most definitely pick football. GT, Louisville, and NC State would be torn between football and basketball - I think GT would ultimately pick football and NCSU and UL would ultimately pick basketball. Duke, UNC, Syracuse, Wake, and UVA would definitely pick basketball (although Syracuse might pick Lacrosse). I am unsure where Pitt would fall - I am guessing football but it might be basketball?? Boston College would most likely pick hockey. So, is it any wonder that this league goes through so much turmoil on every decision: it really does come down to basketball vs football where we are pretty evenly divided and as far as I have seen so far, none of the schools are truly willing to make significant compromises. Then, if you look at geography and history, we have old Big East vs old ACC and North vs South. It's a wonder this conference hasn't already imploded (or exploded!). Now compare this to the SEC - they have one school (Kentucky) that would select basketball, one school (Vanderbilt) who may select either or possibly baseball - the remaining 12 schools are 100% on board for football. I am not saying that this makes the SEC "better" than the ACC but they are most definitely of the same mind and work together for the same goals as a conference - from a football and ultimately from a revenue standpoint, this has served them very well. Will the ACC ever get to this level of like mindedness? Unfortunately, I seriously doubt it will and therein lies the true enemy of our conference and the one that ultimately may lead to it's demise at some point in the future.

I have been verbally attacked by ACC fan boys for referring to the conference as ESPN's version of Frankenstein's monster. I did so precisely for the reasons you presented. It is a conference cobbled together by ESPN in part to shelter Old Big East property they didn't want to fall into Delany's hands when the BTN was still an independent network. In part to keep Florida State from going to the SEC in '91 because it feared the SEC would gain too much leverage. Georgia Tech was the only natural addition that they have made. And, now you can add the hybrid relationship with Notre Dame which at the time was more like an organ donor to keep the conference alive.

The problem now is that the pieces can't move to their natural destinations. IMO Florida State and Clemson do belong in the SEC. I could see the SEC accommodating Virginia Tech as well. N.C. State / North Carolina would only be market grabs. Miami is a decent addition but if we had Florida State do we really need them? I don't think so.

Pitt and Syrcause, and possibly B.C. belong in the Big 10, or back in the Big East.
Virginia and Duke need to drop down a division and join the Ivy League. UNC?

These kinds of placements could have happened before FOX bought the majority interest in the BTN. Then ESPN could have retained the B1G rights and utilized them for Hockey, Lacrosse, and Basketball and used the SEC for Football, Baseball, and Gymnastics. Then the more natural movements would have made some sense.

But to answer your question I think ESPN, like the Gothic Dr., is stuck with the havoc wrought by its creation!

Wait, so you think ESPN is against the SEC? The SEC is ESPN's cash cow.

ESPN is not against the SEC. They were against an SEC in 1991 that wasn't fully under their control from landing the one product in Florida that would have given the SEC unquestioned control over a major State and market. F.S.U. added more value to the ACC which was ESPN's soon to be 100% owned conference than ESPN could attain from F.S.U.'s membership in a partially owned SEC. ESPN is for ESPN. Feeding the cash cow comes second.

After re-reading several accounts of FSU's move to the ACC, not a single one mentioned ESPN. Not on the ACC side or not from the SEC perspective. The one thing that does keep turning up, however, is that FSU avoided talking to the SEC so that they could find out if they had been accepted by the ACC (in effect turning down a SEC offer).
You can try to re-write history if you want, but the truth is FSU had an opportunity to go to either the SEC or the ACC and rejected the SEC in favor of an offer from the ACC (and ESPN had not one single thing to do with it).

In 1991 ESPN still gave the valuations. That put them in a position to play the players. The rebuilding of the ACC was definitely on their agenda. The fact that nobody's story mentioned it is irrelevant. What they did back then was much more covert than what they do today.
07-14-2016 12:58 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
XLance Online
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 14,231
Joined: Mar 2008
Reputation: 762
I Root For: Carolina
Location: Greensboro, NC
Post: #26
RE: Can the ACC survive itself?
(07-14-2016 12:58 PM)JRsec Wrote:  
(07-14-2016 12:20 PM)XLance Wrote:  
(07-13-2016 05:50 PM)JRsec Wrote:  
(07-12-2016 05:37 PM)ericsaid Wrote:  
(06-12-2016 03:54 PM)JRsec Wrote:  I have been verbally attacked by ACC fan boys for referring to the conference as ESPN's version of Frankenstein's monster. I did so precisely for the reasons you presented. It is a conference cobbled together by ESPN in part to shelter Old Big East property they didn't want to fall into Delany's hands when the BTN was still an independent network. In part to keep Florida State from going to the SEC in '91 because it feared the SEC would gain too much leverage. Georgia Tech was the only natural addition that they have made. And, now you can add the hybrid relationship with Notre Dame which at the time was more like an organ donor to keep the conference alive.

The problem now is that the pieces can't move to their natural destinations. IMO Florida State and Clemson do belong in the SEC. I could see the SEC accommodating Virginia Tech as well. N.C. State / North Carolina would only be market grabs. Miami is a decent addition but if we had Florida State do we really need them? I don't think so.

Pitt and Syrcause, and possibly B.C. belong in the Big 10, or back in the Big East.
Virginia and Duke need to drop down a division and join the Ivy League. UNC?

These kinds of placements could have happened before FOX bought the majority interest in the BTN. Then ESPN could have retained the B1G rights and utilized them for Hockey, Lacrosse, and Basketball and used the SEC for Football, Baseball, and Gymnastics. Then the more natural movements would have made some sense.

But to answer your question I think ESPN, like the Gothic Dr., is stuck with the havoc wrought by its creation!

Wait, so you think ESPN is against the SEC? The SEC is ESPN's cash cow.

ESPN is not against the SEC. They were against an SEC in 1991 that wasn't fully under their control from landing the one product in Florida that would have given the SEC unquestioned control over a major State and market. F.S.U. added more value to the ACC which was ESPN's soon to be 100% owned conference than ESPN could attain from F.S.U.'s membership in a partially owned SEC. ESPN is for ESPN. Feeding the cash cow comes second.

After re-reading several accounts of FSU's move to the ACC, not a single one mentioned ESPN. Not on the ACC side or not from the SEC perspective. The one thing that does keep turning up, however, is that FSU avoided talking to the SEC so that they could find out if they had been accepted by the ACC (in effect turning down a SEC offer).
You can try to re-write history if you want, but the truth is FSU had an opportunity to go to either the SEC or the ACC and rejected the SEC in favor of an offer from the ACC (and ESPN had not one single thing to do with it).

In 1991 ESPN still gave the valuations. That put them in a position to play the players. The rebuilding of the ACC was definitely on their agenda. The fact that nobody's story mentioned it is irrelevant. What they did back then was much more covert than what they do today.

It's time for the little man with the flag.
07-14-2016 03:09 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
JRsec Offline
Super Moderator
*

Posts: 37,888
Joined: Mar 2012
Reputation: 7737
I Root For: SEC
Location:
Post: #27
RE: Can the ACC survive itself?
(07-14-2016 03:09 PM)XLance Wrote:  
(07-14-2016 12:58 PM)JRsec Wrote:  
(07-14-2016 12:20 PM)XLance Wrote:  
(07-13-2016 05:50 PM)JRsec Wrote:  
(07-12-2016 05:37 PM)ericsaid Wrote:  Wait, so you think ESPN is against the SEC? The SEC is ESPN's cash cow.

ESPN is not against the SEC. They were against an SEC in 1991 that wasn't fully under their control from landing the one product in Florida that would have given the SEC unquestioned control over a major State and market. F.S.U. added more value to the ACC which was ESPN's soon to be 100% owned conference than ESPN could attain from F.S.U.'s membership in a partially owned SEC. ESPN is for ESPN. Feeding the cash cow comes second.

After re-reading several accounts of FSU's move to the ACC, not a single one mentioned ESPN. Not on the ACC side or not from the SEC perspective. The one thing that does keep turning up, however, is that FSU avoided talking to the SEC so that they could find out if they had been accepted by the ACC (in effect turning down a SEC offer).
You can try to re-write history if you want, but the truth is FSU had an opportunity to go to either the SEC or the ACC and rejected the SEC in favor of an offer from the ACC (and ESPN had not one single thing to do with it).

In 1991 ESPN still gave the valuations. That put them in a position to play the players. The rebuilding of the ACC was definitely on their agenda. The fact that nobody's story mentioned it is irrelevant. What they did back then was much more covert than what they do today.

It's time for the little man with the flag.

No it's time for you to grow up. Very little is as it appears to be. What is claimed and what is done are two different things. E.G. most elections, politics in general, stock hype, and pharmaceutical claims! Face it, P.T. Barnum had us nailed!
07-14-2016 04:03 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Lenvillecards Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 6,458
Joined: Nov 2013
Reputation: 376
I Root For: Louisville
Location:
Post: #28
Can the ACC survive itself?
How strong was ESPN back then? They certainly weren't the world leader like they are now. The 3 major broadcast networks were stronger in sports. The conferences were very similar in payouts as well. Teams moved for different reasons than they are now but no doubt ESPN was planning on the future.
07-14-2016 07:46 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Ewglenn Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 5,172
Joined: Oct 2015
Reputation: 252
I Root For: MTSU
Location: Murfreesboro
Post: #29
RE: Can the ACC survive itself?
(06-15-2016 08:54 AM)Lenvillecards Wrote:  
(06-14-2016 10:21 PM)murrdcu Wrote:  I find it hard to believe that the ACC would have trouble getting the votes needed to a just the number of football conference games by an additional game if it guaranteed them a network, additional revenues, and long term stability.

Now, I understand the concerns of the couple of schools that have permanent yearly rivalries with SEC opponents. I don't see those games going away as they are big money games that drive season ticket sales and fund raising efforts.

FSU & Clemson fans are the only ones fussing about it. It really only affects Clemson since they often schedule 2 P5 opponents which would make nearly impossible to have 7 home games every year. That's been the only opposition to it on the ACC board. If it came with a network & a hefty check I think it would easily be passed. It would depend on the form of the network & the revenue it generated.

The only instate rivalry game that may go away is Louisville & Kentucky. UK hasn't expressed much interest in keeping it going & have eluded to canceling it if the SEC went to 9 games. With the Cats tough conference schedule it may be in their best interest to schedule a more winnable game to increase their chances of making a bowl. If the ACC were to go to 9 games then I would like to see UL use that spot to schedule a higher level P5. I'm not saying that I don't enjoy beating UK but the game has served its purpose, it sparked football interest in the state. I don't think the game will go away completely but if one or both conferences go to 9 games then it will likely become part of a rotation, played every other year or two.

If anything forced Clemson to drop USC Clemson would bolt. No way they would give up that game. Even having to trade a home game against UGA or Auburn for Pitt would tick off a lot of fans.
07-14-2016 08:50 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
JRsec Offline
Super Moderator
*

Posts: 37,888
Joined: Mar 2012
Reputation: 7737
I Root For: SEC
Location:
Post: #30
RE: Can the ACC survive itself?
(07-14-2016 07:46 PM)Lenvillecards Wrote:  How strong was ESPN back then? They certainly weren't the world leader like they are now. The 3 major broadcast networks were stronger in sports. The conferences were very similar in payouts as well. Teams moved for different reasons than they are now but no doubt ESPN was planning on the future.

By the early 90's ESPN was emerging as a force. Clearly they had a hand in the early shaping of the rebuilt ACC. What they feared was that if the SEC acquired the powers that we were seeking in '91 that we would have too much leverage going forward. It was in their interest to break up the SEC's plans to move to 16 in '91. Texas, A&M, Arkansas, Oklahoma, Clemson and Florida State were the field we were thinking of attaining. OU was a shadow candidate totally dependent upon what Texas did. Clemson was wary of making a move but was interested in which direction F.S.U. went. Of the original 6 candidates Clemson showed the least real interest at that time.

Had the SEC succeeded it would have gutted the old SWC, hobbled the Big 12, and destroyed any chance of the ACC remaining in consideration as a football conference. ESPN saw the ACC as a cheap way to obtain large East Coast markets, and they saw the Big East as a product they needed to keep away from the Big 10.
07-14-2016 09:21 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
USAFMEDIC Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 5,914
Joined: Jun 2010
Reputation: 189
I Root For: MIZZOU/FSU/USM
Location: Biloxi, MS
Post: #31
RE: Can the ACC survive itself?
(06-12-2016 03:54 PM)JRsec Wrote:  
(06-12-2016 02:01 PM)IR4CU Wrote:  I posted this on the ACC board but thought I would post it here as well as I am definitely interested in thoughts from folks from the SEC on this subject.

Notwithstanding any external forces such as the SEC, Big 10, or ESPN, I wonder if the ACC will be able to win the long term battle against it's most deadly enemy - itself. Based on the vitriol from the fans concerning the potential nine game football conference schedule, I have my doubts. On this topic alone, it is clear that the fans are torn, the administrations are torn, and the athletic departments are torn - heck even fans of the same school appear to be torn. No matter how this issue is resolved, some schools are going to be very upset. I think this stems from the fact that as a group, we do not have any overall common ground in terms of history, culture, or athletics. Think about this ... if each ACC institution could have one and only one men's sports program, which sport would each school pick? Clemson, FSU, Miami, and VT would most definitely pick football. GT, Louisville, and NC State would be torn between football and basketball - I think GT would ultimately pick football and NCSU and UL would ultimately pick basketball. Duke, UNC, Syracuse, Wake, and UVA would definitely pick basketball (although Syracuse might pick Lacrosse). I am unsure where Pitt would fall - I am guessing football but it might be basketball?? Boston College would most likely pick hockey. So, is it any wonder that this league goes through so much turmoil on every decision: it really does come down to basketball vs football where we are pretty evenly divided and as far as I have seen so far, none of the schools are truly willing to make significant compromises. Then, if you look at geography and history, we have old Big East vs old ACC and North vs South. It's a wonder this conference hasn't already imploded (or exploded!). Now compare this to the SEC - they have one school (Kentucky) that would select basketball, one school (Vanderbilt) who may select either or possibly baseball - the remaining 12 schools are 100% on board for football. I am not saying that this makes the SEC "better" than the ACC but they are most definitely of the same mind and work together for the same goals as a conference - from a football and ultimately from a revenue standpoint, this has served them very well. Will the ACC ever get to this level of like mindedness? Unfortunately, I seriously doubt it will and therein lies the true enemy of our conference and the one that ultimately may lead to it's demise at some point in the future.

I have been verbally attacked by ACC fan boys for referring to the conference as ESPN's version of Frankenstein's monster. I did so precisely for the reasons you presented. It is a conference cobbled together by ESPN in part to shelter Old Big East property they didn't want to fall into Delany's hands when the BTN was still an independent network. In part to keep Florida State from going to the SEC in '91 because it feared the SEC would gain too much leverage. Georgia Tech was the only natural addition that they have made. And, now you can add the hybrid relationship with Notre Dame which at the time was more like an organ donor to keep the conference alive.

The problem now is that the pieces can't move to their natural destinations. IMO Florida State and Clemson do belong in the SEC. I could see the SEC accommodating Virginia Tech as well. N.C. State / North Carolina would only be market grabs. Miami is a decent addition but if we had Florida State do we really need them? I don't think so.

Pitt and Syrcause, and possibly B.C. belong in the Big 10, or back in the Big East.
Virginia and Duke need to drop down a division and join the Ivy League. UNC?

These kinds of placements could have happened before FOX bought the majority interest in the BTN. Then ESPN could have retained the B1G rights and utilized them for Hockey, Lacrosse, and Basketball and used the SEC for Football, Baseball, and Gymnastics. Then the more natural movements would have made some sense.

But to answer your question I think ESPN, like the Gothic Dr., is stuck with the havoc wrought by its creation!
I still do not get the ND/ACC thing. At least Texas, as a would be member, is actually on the Atlantic Gulf coast. Reminds me of the old BE asking Boise State to join.
(This post was last modified: 07-14-2016 11:43 PM by USAFMEDIC.)
07-14-2016 11:40 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Lenvillecards Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 6,458
Joined: Nov 2013
Reputation: 376
I Root For: Louisville
Location:
Post: #32
Can the ACC survive itself?
(07-14-2016 11:40 PM)USAFMEDIC Wrote:  
(06-12-2016 03:54 PM)JRsec Wrote:  
(06-12-2016 02:01 PM)IR4CU Wrote:  I posted this on the ACC board but thought I would post it here as well as I am definitely interested in thoughts from folks from the SEC on this subject.

Notwithstanding any external forces such as the SEC, Big 10, or ESPN, I wonder if the ACC will be able to win the long term battle against it's most deadly enemy - itself. Based on the vitriol from the fans concerning the potential nine game football conference schedule, I have my doubts. On this topic alone, it is clear that the fans are torn, the administrations are torn, and the athletic departments are torn - heck even fans of the same school appear to be torn. No matter how this issue is resolved, some schools are going to be very upset. I think this stems from the fact that as a group, we do not have any overall common ground in terms of history, culture, or athletics. Think about this ... if each ACC institution could have one and only one men's sports program, which sport would each school pick? Clemson, FSU, Miami, and VT would most definitely pick football. GT, Louisville, and NC State would be torn between football and basketball - I think GT would ultimately pick football and NCSU and UL would ultimately pick basketball. Duke, UNC, Syracuse, Wake, and UVA would definitely pick basketball (although Syracuse might pick Lacrosse). I am unsure where Pitt would fall - I am guessing football but it might be basketball?? Boston College would most likely pick hockey. So, is it any wonder that this league goes through so much turmoil on every decision: it really does come down to basketball vs football where we are pretty evenly divided and as far as I have seen so far, none of the schools are truly willing to make significant compromises. Then, if you look at geography and history, we have old Big East vs old ACC and North vs South. It's a wonder this conference hasn't already imploded (or exploded!). Now compare this to the SEC - they have one school (Kentucky) that would select basketball, one school (Vanderbilt) who may select either or possibly baseball - the remaining 12 schools are 100% on board for football. I am not saying that this makes the SEC "better" than the ACC but they are most definitely of the same mind and work together for the same goals as a conference - from a football and ultimately from a revenue standpoint, this has served them very well. Will the ACC ever get to this level of like mindedness? Unfortunately, I seriously doubt it will and therein lies the true enemy of our conference and the one that ultimately may lead to it's demise at some point in the future.

I have been verbally attacked by ACC fan boys for referring to the conference as ESPN's version of Frankenstein's monster. I did so precisely for the reasons you presented. It is a conference cobbled together by ESPN in part to shelter Old Big East property they didn't want to fall into Delany's hands when the BTN was still an independent network. In part to keep Florida State from going to the SEC in '91 because it feared the SEC would gain too much leverage. Georgia Tech was the only natural addition that they have made. And, now you can add the hybrid relationship with Notre Dame which at the time was more like an organ donor to keep the conference alive.

The problem now is that the pieces can't move to their natural destinations. IMO Florida State and Clemson do belong in the SEC. I could see the SEC accommodating Virginia Tech as well. N.C. State / North Carolina would only be market grabs. Miami is a decent addition but if we had Florida State do we really need them? I don't think so.

Pitt and Syrcause, and possibly B.C. belong in the Big 10, or back in the Big East.
Virginia and Duke need to drop down a division and join the Ivy League. UNC?

These kinds of placements could have happened before FOX bought the majority interest in the BTN. Then ESPN could have retained the B1G rights and utilized them for Hockey, Lacrosse, and Basketball and used the SEC for Football, Baseball, and Gymnastics. Then the more natural movements would have made some sense.

But to answer your question I think ESPN, like the Gothic Dr., is stuck with the havoc wrought by its creation!
I still do not get the ND/ACC thing. At least Texas, as a would be member, is actually on the Atlantic Gulf coast. Reminds me of the old BE asking Boise State to join.

As conferences get larger, do their names really describe who they are anymore? The Big 10 is at 14 & the Big 12 is at 10 & both have moved east. Missouri, Arkansas & A&M aren't southeastern & Louisville, ND & Pittsburgh aren't coastal. The only power conference that has stayed true to their name somewhat is the PAC.
07-15-2016 08:51 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
AllTideUp Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 5,154
Joined: Jul 2015
Reputation: 559
I Root For: Alabama
Location:
Post: #33
RE: Can the ACC survive itself?
(07-15-2016 08:51 AM)Lenvillecards Wrote:  
(07-14-2016 11:40 PM)USAFMEDIC Wrote:  I still do not get the ND/ACC thing. At least Texas, as a would be member, is actually on the Atlantic Gulf coast. Reminds me of the old BE asking Boise State to join.

As conferences get larger, do their names really describe who they are anymore? The Big 10 is at 14 & the Big 12 is at 10 & both have moved east. Missouri, Arkansas & A&M aren't southeastern & Louisville, ND & Pittsburgh aren't coastal. The only power conference that has stayed true to their name somewhat is the PAC.

Even there, the PAC has taken the Arizona schools, Utah, and Colorado. I think everyone has expanded outside their region at this point.
07-16-2016 01:04 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
TerryD Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 14,874
Joined: Feb 2006
Reputation: 895
I Root For: Notre Dame
Location: Grayson Highlands
Post: #34
RE: Can the ACC survive itself?
Yes.
07-18-2016 08:48 PM
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Nebraskafan Offline
Banned

Posts: 1,342
Joined: Jul 2015
I Root For: Nebreaska
Location:
Post: #35
RE: Can the ACC survive itself?
(07-18-2016 08:48 PM)TerryD Wrote:  Yes.

ACC schools are now locked up for the next 20 years. We can finally put 6 years worth of speculation to rest.
07-19-2016 07:20 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Lenvillecards Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 6,458
Joined: Nov 2013
Reputation: 376
I Root For: Louisville
Location:
Post: #36
Can the ACC survive itself?
(07-19-2016 07:20 AM)Nebraskafan Wrote:  
(07-18-2016 08:48 PM)TerryD Wrote:  Yes.

ACC schools are now locked up for the next 20 years. We can finally put 6 years worth of speculation to rest.

Obviously this puts the B12 in jeopardy but does it also put pressure on the PAC with its failing network?
07-19-2016 09:57 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 




User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)


Copyright © 2002-2024 Collegiate Sports Nation Bulletin Board System (CSNbbs), All Rights Reserved.
CSNbbs is an independent fan site and is in no way affiliated to the NCAA or any of the schools and conferences it represents.
This site monetizes links. FTC Disclosure.
We allow third-party companies to serve ads and/or collect certain anonymous information when you visit our web site. These companies may use non-personally identifiable information (e.g., click stream information, browser type, time and date, subject of advertisements clicked or scrolled over) during your visits to this and other Web sites in order to provide advertisements about goods and services likely to be of greater interest to you. These companies typically use a cookie or third party web beacon to collect this information. To learn more about this behavioral advertising practice or to opt-out of this type of advertising, you can visit http://www.networkadvertising.org.
Powered By MyBB, © 2002-2024 MyBB Group.