+- CSNbbs (https://csnbbs.com)
+-- Forum: Active Boards (/forum-769.html)
+--- Forum: Lounge (/forum-564.html)
+---- Forum: College Sports and Conference Realignment (/forum-637.html)
+----- Forum: P5 Discussion (/forum-997.html)
+----- Thread: Clemson to the SEC, would it work??? (/thread-915593.html)
Pages: 1 2
Clemson to the SEC, would it work??? - DawgNBama - 01-27-2021 11:15 AM
For sake of argument, let's pretend Vandy plays in the FCS Pioneer League for football, but plays in the SEC for everything else. We will also pretend that the SEC invited Clemson to join, and they did, taking Vandy's spot in football, but also making the conference a bit unwieldy at 15 teams for Olympic sports, as Clemson is not going to leave any of its teams behind in the ACC.
I will try to run two simulations: one for Clemson's football team and the other for Clemson's men's basketball team.
RE: Clemson to the SEC, would it work??? - ClairtonPanther - 01-27-2021 11:19 AM
It would make Clemson a lot of money and eventually they'd become another Florida or Ga. Very good programs thst just can't get over the hump against Bama.
RE: Clemson to the SEC, would it work??? - DawgNBama - 01-27-2021 11:51 AM
Ok, here is the football simulation:
@Texas A&M win 38-14
LSU win 42-14
S.Carolina win 41-14
Ole Miss loss 24-26
@Mississippi State loss 24-25
@Kentucky win 34-3
Florida loss 21-29
@ Missouri win 54-27 (this is with colder temps and a gusty wind!!)
Tennessee win 58-10
Georgia win 48-7
Clemson finishes the year at 7-3. Not bad!!
RE: Clemson to the SEC, would it work??? - schmolik - 01-27-2021 12:09 PM
(01-27-2021 11:51 AM)DawgNBama Wrote: Ok, here is the football simulation:
@Texas A&M win 38-14
LSU win 42-14
S.Carolina win 41-14
Ole Miss loss 24-26
@Mississippi State loss 24-25
@Kentucky win 34-3
Florida loss 21-29
@ Missouri win 54-27 (this is with colder temps and a gusty wind!!)
Tennessee win 58-10
Georgia win 48-7
Clemson finishes the year at 7-3. Not bad!!
Really? Losing to BOTH Mississippi schools? Come on, not even I hate Clemson that much!
There's a better chance of Kaplony and I getting along than Mississippi going into Clemson and winning.
And then the same team losing to Mississippi beats Georgia 48-7? Are you sure this is football?
RE: Clemson to the SEC, would it work??? - DawgNBama - 01-27-2021 02:09 PM
(01-27-2021 12:09 PM)schmolik Wrote:(01-27-2021 11:51 AM)DawgNBama Wrote: Ok, here is the football simulation:
@Texas A&M win 38-14
LSU win 42-14
S.Carolina win 41-14
Ole Miss loss 24-26
@Mississippi State loss 24-25
@Kentucky win 34-3
Florida loss 21-29
@ Missouri win 54-27 (this is with colder temps and a gusty wind!!)
Tennessee win 58-10
Georgia win 48-7
Clemson finishes the year at 7-3. Not bad!!
Really? Losing to BOTH Mississippi schools? Come on, not even I hate Clemson that much!
There's a better chance of Kaplony and I getting along than Mississippi going into Clemson and winning.
And then the same team losing to Mississippi beats Georgia 48-7? Are you sure this is football?
I'm actually kinda neutral on Clemson. I used http://www.whatifsports.com's college football silmulator, and that is what it spit out!!!
RE: Clemson to the SEC, would it work??? - AllTideUp - 01-27-2021 02:43 PM
(01-27-2021 11:15 AM)DawgNBama Wrote: For sake of argument, let's pretend Vandy plays in the FCS Pioneer League for football, but plays in the SEC for everything else. We will also pretend that the SEC invited Clemson to join, and they did, taking Vandy's spot in football, but also making the conference a bit unwieldy at 15 teams for Olympic sports, as Clemson is not going to leave any of its teams behind in the ACC.
I will try to run two simulations: one for Clemson's football team and the other for Clemson's men's basketball team.
Vanderbilt in the Pioneer League is an interesting premise.
RE: Clemson to the SEC, would it work??? - Transic_nyc - 01-28-2021 02:45 AM
Sports-wise, Clemson envisions itself as a program apart from the other original ACC programs.
Institution-wise, Clemson is similar to the other original ACC institutions.
Thus, the conundrum they face. As an institution, they're more similar to Georgia Tech than they are to Georgia. Clemson offers men's soccer, whereas Georgia does not. Btw, South Carolina and Kentucky are the only SEC programs that offer men's soccer, playing their games in Conference USA. Thus, why some of the ACC fans think that both should head for the ACC.
Florida State, NC State and Virginia Tech are more similar to each other but each are considered second-fiddle to the other public schools in their respective states.
When taken all together, it would explain why a program like Clemson would not want to jump while advocating for scheduling flexibility to make room for OOC games that appeal to their fan base. They want the benefits of playing SEC teams without giving up its ACC membership.
RE: Clemson to the SEC, would it work??? - AllTideUp - 01-28-2021 09:18 PM
(01-28-2021 02:45 AM)Transic_nyc Wrote: Sports-wise, Clemson envisions itself as a program apart from the other original ACC programs.
Institution-wise, Clemson is similar to the other original ACC institutions.
Thus, the conundrum they face. As an institution, they're more similar to Georgia Tech than they are to Georgia. Clemson offers men's soccer, whereas Georgia does not. Btw, South Carolina and Kentucky are the only SEC programs that offer men's soccer, playing their games in Conference USA. Thus, why some of the ACC fans think that both should head for the ACC.
Florida State, NC State and Virginia Tech are more similar to each other but each are considered second-fiddle to the other public schools in their respective states.
When taken all together, it would explain why a program like Clemson would not want to jump while advocating for scheduling flexibility to make room for OOC games that appeal to their fan base. They want the benefits of playing SEC teams without giving up its ACC membership.
I wonder how long some of these olympic sports will actually last.
This season proved just how financially non-viable they are. Not that I expect another pandemic around the corner, but there is always the possibility of another serious financial loss.
How long do these schools put forth the effort to field teams in numerous sports that don't actually generate revenue?
Now, at some schools, these things are recruitment tools, but on the whole, there's still a financial burden being placed on revenue sports.
RE: Clemson to the SEC, would it work??? - Transic_nyc - 01-28-2021 11:35 PM
(01-28-2021 09:18 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:(01-28-2021 02:45 AM)Transic_nyc Wrote: Sports-wise, Clemson envisions itself as a program apart from the other original ACC programs.
Institution-wise, Clemson is similar to the other original ACC institutions.
Thus, the conundrum they face. As an institution, they're more similar to Georgia Tech than they are to Georgia. Clemson offers men's soccer, whereas Georgia does not. Btw, South Carolina and Kentucky are the only SEC programs that offer men's soccer, playing their games in Conference USA. Thus, why some of the ACC fans think that both should head for the ACC.
Florida State, NC State and Virginia Tech are more similar to each other but each are considered second-fiddle to the other public schools in their respective states.
When taken all together, it would explain why a program like Clemson would not want to jump while advocating for scheduling flexibility to make room for OOC games that appeal to their fan base. They want the benefits of playing SEC teams without giving up its ACC membership.
I wonder how long some of these olympic sports will actually last.
This season proved just how financially non-viable they are. Not that I expect another pandemic around the corner, but there is always the possibility of another serious financial loss.
How long do these schools put forth the effort to field teams in numerous sports that don't actually generate revenue?
Now, at some schools, these things are recruitment tools, but on the whole, there's still a financial burden being placed on revenue sports.
These Olympic sports were an outgrowth of the growing affluence of the alumni, at a time when the colleges could afford to entitle non-revenue sports to attract donations. It's an open question whether these sports would be offered years down the road.
However, should that happen then that would be another fig leaf taken away from what many still believe to differentiate college sports from professional sports.
Perhaps smarter people can look to that as a reason to restructure college sports, maybe by separating the sports programs from the colleges, just leasing their names to the organizations that would run the sports leagues.
Or maybe getting out of the sports business for good and just offer students the opportunity to participate in intramural and non-scholarship sports.
Anyway, getting back to the thread topic, I think that Clemson moving out of the ACC is easier said than done due to the reasons I stated two posts above me. It's in a region where football is a religion but its institution profile puts them closer to the ACC schools adjacent to them.
RE: Clemson to the SEC, would it work??? - AllTideUp - 01-28-2021 11:55 PM
(01-28-2021 11:35 PM)Transic_nyc Wrote:(01-28-2021 09:18 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:(01-28-2021 02:45 AM)Transic_nyc Wrote: Sports-wise, Clemson envisions itself as a program apart from the other original ACC programs.
Institution-wise, Clemson is similar to the other original ACC institutions.
Thus, the conundrum they face. As an institution, they're more similar to Georgia Tech than they are to Georgia. Clemson offers men's soccer, whereas Georgia does not. Btw, South Carolina and Kentucky are the only SEC programs that offer men's soccer, playing their games in Conference USA. Thus, why some of the ACC fans think that both should head for the ACC.
Florida State, NC State and Virginia Tech are more similar to each other but each are considered second-fiddle to the other public schools in their respective states.
When taken all together, it would explain why a program like Clemson would not want to jump while advocating for scheduling flexibility to make room for OOC games that appeal to their fan base. They want the benefits of playing SEC teams without giving up its ACC membership.
I wonder how long some of these olympic sports will actually last.
This season proved just how financially non-viable they are. Not that I expect another pandemic around the corner, but there is always the possibility of another serious financial loss.
How long do these schools put forth the effort to field teams in numerous sports that don't actually generate revenue?
Now, at some schools, these things are recruitment tools, but on the whole, there's still a financial burden being placed on revenue sports.
These Olympic sports were an outgrowth of the growing affluence of the alumni, at a time when the colleges could afford to entitle non-revenue sports to attract donations. It's an open question whether these sports would be offered years down the road.
However, should that happen then that would be another fig leaf taken away from what many still believe to differentiate college sports from professional sports.
Perhaps smarter people can look to that as a reason to restructure college sports, maybe by separating the sports programs from the colleges, just leasing their names to the organizations that would run the sports leagues.
Or maybe getting out of the sports business for good and just offer students the opportunity to participate in intramural and non-scholarship sports.
Anyway, getting back to the thread topic, I think that Clemson moving out of the ACC is easier said than done due to the reasons I stated two posts above me. It's in a region where football is a religion but its institution profile puts them closer to the ACC schools adjacent to them.
I agree with that, and in the meantime the ACC GOR will keep them from moving if we're talking about real world factors.
RE: Clemson to the SEC, would it work??? - ClairtonPanther - 01-29-2021 03:25 PM
While we are on this topic. If a conference gets pillaged these next 15-20 years, I anticipate it being the ACC. Schools of the ACC expand the B1G and SECs footprint but also stay within the geographic footprints. At first glance a FSU, Virginia and North Carolina wouldn't make sense to the B1G; however, many retirees, snowbirds and alumni from the rust belt end up in North Carolina and Florida. Then there's alumni that end up in DC. And then Virginia Tech, Clemson and North Carolina makes sense to head to the SEC. What the B12 and PAC do from there remains to be seen.
RE: Clemson to the SEC, would it work??? - JRsec - 01-29-2021 04:53 PM
(01-29-2021 03:25 PM)ClairtonPanther Wrote: While we are on this topic. If a conference gets pillaged these next 15-20 years, I anticipate it being the ACC. Schools of the ACC expand the B1G and SECs footprint but also stay within the geographic footprints. At first glance a FSU, Virginia and North Carolina wouldn't make sense to the B1G; however, many retirees, snowbirds and alumni from the rust belt end up in North Carolina and Florida. Then there's alumni that end up in DC. And then Virginia Tech, Clemson and North Carolina makes sense to head to the SEC. What the B12 and PAC do from there remains to be seen.
The only way that happens is if ESPN winds up with all of the Big 10's rights and decides to maximize individual schools' content value by making such a move. And even then they lack motive. Why pay these schools anymore than you have to pay them if you can schedule cross conference games for the content?
I still believe the Big 12 is the more likely candidate and CP the other issue is valuation. The Big 10 after their new contract will be + or - 2 million of the SEC's 68 million per school. There aren't any ACC schools that would add to the revenue totals of either the SEC or Big 10 at those levels, except Notre Dame and possibly Florida State. But frankly Notre Dame will remain independent as long as they can and Florida State is a total outlier for the Big 10 and Miami has better credentials.
As to Clemson to the SEC they are a solid brand now, but they don't add to the SEC's bottom line anymore like they would have in '92 or 2010-12.
It literally is down to Texas and Oklahoma for the SEC though Notre Dame would add to their value as well, but that's never happening for either party. Florida State is at best a break even for the SEC but one that would give them a better ad rate in Florida so never say never. Quite literally nobody else would do anything but reduce current SEC revenues.
RE: Clemson to the SEC, would it work??? - ClairtonPanther - 01-29-2021 06:44 PM
My key word was "if;" however, you kinda made my point to why major realignment is not going to happen. The 3 biggest players are indeed Oklahoma, Texas and Notre Dame. And the biggest wildcard in things are new players to the game, and that's streaming services. Not to mention CBS is going to want back in on the action. Peacock is on the prowl for content and I could see them giving the Big 12 a payday that not only keeps them afloat, but very profitable.
But for the sake of argument, say Texas, Texas Tech, Oklahoma and Oklahoma State join the PAC, then realignment for the SEC, B1G and ACC is practically over. Nobody out there adds enough value to these contracts to make expansion worthwhile, as you stated. Notre Dame will set out, unless they are forced to (and that's not happening).
There's some cracks between Nebraska and the B1G. I'm doubtful that they leave the B1G, but I wouldn't be surprised if both sides severed ties and move on at some point in the future.
I've chatted to several Oregon fans as well as many UCLA and USC fans; all seem very happy with the PAC, and none heard any rumors of their schools leaving.
RE: Clemson to the SEC, would it work??? - JRsec - 01-29-2021 06:57 PM
(01-29-2021 06:44 PM)ClairtonPanther Wrote: My key word was "if;" however, you kinda made my point to why major realignment is not going to happen. The 3 biggest players are indeed Oklahoma, Texas and Notre Dame. And the biggest wildcard in things are new players to the game, and that's streaming services. Not to mention CBS is going to want back in on the action. Peacock is on the prowl for content and I could see them giving the Big 12 a payday that not only keeps them afloat, but very profitable.
But for the sake of argument, say Texas, Texas Tech, Oklahoma and Oklahoma State join the PAC, then realignment for the SEC, B1G and ACC is practically over. Nobody out there adds enough value to these contracts to make expansion worthwhile, as you stated. Notre Dame will set out, unless they are forced to (and that's not happening).
There's some cracks between Nebraska and the B1G. I'm doubtful that they leave the B1G, but I wouldn't be surprised if both sides severed ties and move on at some point in the future.
I've chatted to several Oregon fans as well as many UCLA and USC fans; all seem very happy with the PAC, and none heard any rumors of their schools leaving.
It's simple until 2035. Either the Big 10 or SEC raids the Big 12 or nothing happens. The PAC doesn't have enough funds to raid the Big 12, even if a 3rd party was interested they don't have the viewers to get the money necessary. The Big 12 is still limited on markets and CBS wouldn't pony up 300 million for the SEC because they couldn't afford it. So I doubt they go above 200 million for anyone else and then with the Big 12 ESPN has bought up T3 rights in advance of the expiration (except OU's which they may have but not yet announced).
There is no super outside player ready to ride over the horizon. Most of them don't have the infrastructure to broadcast from site.
I fully expect ESPN to make a run for all rights in the Big 12. If they can't get that they will try to poach the best brands which is exactly the strategy they followed in 2010-2 but which failed in large part due to Tobacco Roads failure to work with them in the endeavor. Which by the way is the likely reason the ACCN was so late in coming.
Disney owns all rights to the AAC, ACC and SEC. The Big 12 is the next big step in owning all rights to all product for colleges in the regions that are growing and which ae devoted to college sports. This isn't true of the PAC where college sports interest falls more every year or in the Northeast or Northern Midwest where growth is faltering even though there is a love for college sports. As long as ESPN retains close to half of the Big 10 rights they will have everything they want if they land the other half of the Big 12 rights and right now FOX doesn't look like a bidder.
Now all of that said if ESPN buys the Big 12 in total realignment is indeed dead. Scheduling alliances between the Big 12/SEC/ACC would be ESPN's way of utilizing all of the rights profitably. Under those conditions all money stays in the Disney house.
RE: Clemson to the SEC, would it work??? - ClairtonPanther - 01-29-2021 07:21 PM
Peacock (NBC) is a major player, and has the infrastructure. They just bought the WWE Network, and also has NHL and EPL rights. Then there is Amazon, whom is worth more than Disney; if they don't have the infrastructure today, they will tomorrow.
RE: Clemson to the SEC, would it work??? - DawgNBama - 01-30-2021 01:46 AM
Since this is my thread, I'd rather not deal with the ESPN/B12 topic. However, I do believe it could be possible that ESPN could be bought out by one of the FANG down the road, especially when I keep hearing that Disney believes ESPN is losing $$$'s. I could see Amazon going after NBC (would definitely be more their cup of tea, IMO) & CBS/Fox. But that is not a topic for this thread either.
My point is that Clemson would not run roughshod through an SEC schedule. I know folks like to put down the Mississippi schools, but know this: the Mississippi schools love their football!!! Even Alabama cannot afford to take them lightly, and Alabama knows this. Can the Mississippi schools beat my favorite team Georgia?? Yep, they sure can!! Especially if we take them lightly.
At the same time though, Clemson is definitely worthy of competing with the SEC's elite, but I believe most of us, if not all of us already know that. In era of where streaming is becoming important, I would think Clemson would have some value to the SEC, but nothing approaching Notre Dame or Texas' value. Clemson would definitely have more value than WVU would, IMO.
RE: Clemson to the SEC, would it work??? - JRsec - 01-30-2021 02:00 AM
(01-30-2021 01:46 AM)DawgNBama Wrote: Since this is my thread, I'd rather not deal with the ESPN/B12 topic. However, I do believe it could be possible that ESPN could be bought out by one of the FANG down the road, especially when I keep hearing that Disney believes ESPN is losing $$$'s. I could see Amazon going after NBC (would definitely be more their cup of tea, IMO) & CBS/Fox. But that is not a topic for this thread either.
My point is that Clemson would not run roughshod through an SEC schedule. I know folks like to put down the Mississippi schools, but know this: the Mississippi schools love their football!!! Even Alabama cannot afford to take them lightly, and Alabama knows this. Can the Mississippi schools beat my favorite team Georgia?? Yep, they sure can!! Especially if we take them lightly.
At the same time though, Clemson is definitely worthy of competing with the SEC's elite, but I believe most of us, if not all of us already know that. In era of where streaming is becoming important, I would think Clemson would have some value to the SEC, but nothing approaching Notre Dame or Texas' value. Clemson would definitely have more value than WVU would, IMO.
If the ACC and Big 12 were both available to expand out of at the same time I believe Clemson would be the 5th overall in terms of value as a football product behind Texas, Notre Dame, Oklahoma, and Florida State in that order.
If you were gauging it overall for football and basketball combined they might be 6th behind North Carolina, but I emphasize "might". So if you eliminated the top 3 it would be an interesting argument for the next three. Florida State and North Carolina have the larger market, Clemson vs an SEC schedule would probably be worth more for football alone.
So it's an interesting and debatable subject if Oklahoma, Texas and Notre Dame are excluded.
RE: Clemson to the SEC, would it work??? - schmolik - 01-30-2021 08:00 AM
(01-30-2021 01:46 AM)DawgNBama Wrote: Since this is my thread, I'd rather not deal with the ESPN/B12 topic. However, I do believe it could be possible that ESPN could be bought out by one of the FANG down the road, especially when I keep hearing that Disney believes ESPN is losing $$$'s. I could see Amazon going after NBC (would definitely be more their cup of tea, IMO) & CBS/Fox. But that is not a topic for this thread either.
My point is that Clemson would not run roughshod through an SEC schedule. I know folks like to put down the Mississippi schools, but know this: the Mississippi schools love their football!!! Even Alabama cannot afford to take them lightly, and Alabama knows this. Can the Mississippi schools beat my favorite team Georgia?? Yep, they sure can!! Especially if we take them lightly.
At the same time though, Clemson is definitely worthy of competing with the SEC's elite, but I believe most of us, if not all of us already know that. In era of where streaming is becoming important, I would think Clemson would have some value to the SEC, but nothing approaching Notre Dame or Texas' value. Clemson would definitely have more value than WVU would, IMO.
We'll (barring any pandemic setbacks) add another chapter to the Clemson vs. the SEC next Sept. 4 in Charlotte when Clemson plays Georgia. I don't think anyone believes Clemson would dominate the SEC the way they would the ACC. But they'd hold their own. They were 2-2 vs. Alabama in CFP games including 2-1 in championship games.
I think in terms of demographics Clemson doesn't add any new markets that the SEC doesn't already have (and Florida State is more valuable to the SEC because, duh, they're in Florida). But no doubt most college football fans would rather see Clemson play Georgia, Alabama, Florida, and LSU as opposed to beating up the ACC year in and year out (other than ACC fans who want Clemson to stay in the ACC to keep their conference relevant in football).
RE: Clemson to the SEC, would it work??? - XLance - 01-30-2021 08:42 AM
(01-27-2021 11:15 AM)DawgNBama Wrote: For sake of argument, let's pretend Vandy plays in the FCS Pioneer League for football, but plays in the SEC for everything else. We will also pretend that the SEC invited Clemson to join, and they did, taking Vandy's spot in football, but also making the conference a bit unwieldy at 15 teams for Olympic sports, as Clemson is not going to leave any of its teams behind in the ACC.
I will try to run two simulations: one for Clemson's football team and the other for Clemson's men's basketball team.
You just might want to reverse the situation in South Carolina and propose the question: If Clemson were in the SEC and South Carolina had remained in the ACC, which school would be better off?
What about Clemson would have been a success in the SEC where South Carolina working from the same demographics has continually failed to launch?
But you never know about the state of South Carolina.......where else in the USA would you find an underfunded STEM stuck in the far corner of a state, that has managed to develop a stellar academic reputation while at the same time the flagship University located in the state capital lags behind it's regional peers with a pedestrian academic status?
RE: Clemson to the SEC, would it work??? - Wahoowa84 - 01-30-2021 10:18 AM
(01-30-2021 02:00 AM)JRsec Wrote:(01-30-2021 01:46 AM)DawgNBama Wrote: Since this is my thread, I'd rather not deal with the ESPN/B12 topic. However, I do believe it could be possible that ESPN could be bought out by one of the FANG down the road, especially when I keep hearing that Disney believes ESPN is losing $$$'s. I could see Amazon going after NBC (would definitely be more their cup of tea, IMO) & CBS/Fox. But that is not a topic for this thread either.
My point is that Clemson would not run roughshod through an SEC schedule. I know folks like to put down the Mississippi schools, but know this: the Mississippi schools love their football!!! Even Alabama cannot afford to take them lightly, and Alabama knows this. Can the Mississippi schools beat my favorite team Georgia?? Yep, they sure can!! Especially if we take them lightly.
At the same time though, Clemson is definitely worthy of competing with the SEC's elite, but I believe most of us, if not all of us already know that. In era of where streaming is becoming important, I would think Clemson would have some value to the SEC, but nothing approaching Notre Dame or Texas' value. Clemson would definitely have more value than WVU would, IMO.
If the ACC and Big 12 were both available to expand out of at the same time I believe Clemson would be the 5th overall in terms of value as a football product behind Texas, Notre Dame, Oklahoma, and Florida State in that order.
If you were gauging it overall for football and basketball combined they might be 6th behind North Carolina, but I emphasize "might". So if you eliminated the top 3 it would be an interesting argument for the next three. Florida State and North Carolina have the larger market, Clemson vs an SEC schedule would probably be worth more for football alone.
So it's an interesting and debatable subject if Oklahoma, Texas and Notre Dame are excluded.
If we’re ranking the economic value of athletic programs in the B12 and ACC, I believe the sought after programs would be:
1) Texas - far & away the leader
2) Oklahoma - somewhere between the level of Alabama versus Georgia and Florida, a true power program
3 (tied) Notre Dame and Florida State - both would add clear value to any conference average
5 UNC
6 (tied) Clemson and Duke - they are likely break-even propositions into the current financial models of the SEC and BIG