Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Post Reply 
American Athletic finishes ahead of ACC in Massey Composite
Author Message
esayem Offline
Hark The Sound!
*

Posts: 6,190
Joined: Feb 2007
Reputation: 215
I Root For: The Heels
Location: Tobacco Road
Post: #61
RE: American Athletic finishes ahead of ACC in Massey Composite
(01-22-2020 09:34 PM)JRsec Wrote:  
(01-22-2020 09:23 PM)Nerdlinger Wrote:  
(01-22-2020 02:22 PM)Pervis_Griffith Wrote:  
(01-21-2020 08:47 PM)JHS55 Wrote:  The ACC was built by ESPN, and it’s not working, ESPN is paying so much more money for nothing much in return
Pac-12 is sinking under the waves and will continue to be a really bad autonomous conference to be paying big money
ACC is also a bad autonomous conference losing on all fronts, soon these two conferences will lose the big tv payouts

Meanwhile the AAC is the real deal and fans know it, fan support within the AAC has been on a steady rise sense day one
AAC simply fields a better product with a lot less money that fans want to watch, nobody wants to watch teams in the pac or the ACC play each other, so many loser teams that make huge money with nothing to show for it


03-lmfao03-lmfao03-lmfao03-lmfao03-lmfao03-lmfao03-lmfao03-lmfao

Yeah, the AAC is the real deal, even though it's a geographically disparate mishmash of ambitious schools with little connection to one another and any member would leave the others behind in a split second on the off chance an actual power conference were to come calling.

Geographic mishmash of ambitious schools with little connection to one another? That could be the ACC with the Old Big East, the ACC core, and independent Florida State, but further segregated by basketball first vs football first with the hybrid of Louisville.

The ACC is now an eastern time zone conference featuring schools with similar academic profiles. Except for the recent mercenary addition of Louisville which was based solely on football.
(This post was last modified: 01-24-2020 08:16 AM by esayem.)
01-24-2020 08:16 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
bill dazzle Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,158
Joined: Aug 2016
Reputation: 75
I Root For: VUMemIUDePaulNC
Location: Tower Crane Town
Post: #62
RE: American Athletic finishes ahead of ACC in Massey Composite
(01-24-2020 08:16 AM)esayem Wrote:  
(01-22-2020 09:34 PM)JRsec Wrote:  
(01-22-2020 09:23 PM)Nerdlinger Wrote:  
(01-22-2020 02:22 PM)Pervis_Griffith Wrote:  
(01-21-2020 08:47 PM)JHS55 Wrote:  The ACC was built by ESPN, and it’s not working, ESPN is paying so much more money for nothing much in return
Pac-12 is sinking under the waves and will continue to be a really bad autonomous conference to be paying big money
ACC is also a bad autonomous conference losing on all fronts, soon these two conferences will lose the big tv payouts

Meanwhile the AAC is the real deal and fans know it, fan support within the AAC has been on a steady rise sense day one
AAC simply fields a better product with a lot less money that fans want to watch, nobody wants to watch teams in the pac or the ACC play each other, so many loser teams that make huge money with nothing to show for it


03-lmfao03-lmfao03-lmfao03-lmfao03-lmfao03-lmfao03-lmfao03-lmfao

Yeah, the AAC is the real deal, even though it's a geographically disparate mishmash of ambitious schools with little connection to one another and any member would leave the others behind in a split second on the off chance an actual power conference were to come calling.

Geographic mishmash of ambitious schools with little connection to one another? That could be the ACC with the Old Big East, the ACC core, and independent Florida State, but further segregated by basketball first vs football first with the hybrid of Louisville.

The ACC is now an eastern time zone conference featuring schools with similar academic profiles. Except for the recent mercenary addition of Louisville which was based solely on football.


I would disagree slightly with the Louisville add being "solely for football." UL had a history (albeit brief) with Pitt, Syracuse and Notre Dame. So there was a "rivalry element" involved, particularly with hoops. Perhaps a minor thing but worth noting.
01-24-2020 09:20 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
quo vadis Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 33,344
Joined: Aug 2008
Reputation: 853
I Root For: USF/Georgetown
Location: Baton Rouge, LA
Post: #63
RE: American Athletic finishes ahead of ACC in Massey Composite
(01-24-2020 08:16 AM)esayem Wrote:  The ACC is now an eastern time zone conference featuring schools with similar academic profiles. Except for the recent mercenary addition of Louisville which was based solely on football.

Hoops as well. Louisville got in because of their hoops in addition to football.

People forget that circa 2010 - 2012 the ACC hoops was flagging. The Big East had clearly surpassed the ACC as a hoops conference, something that was intolerable to the ACC. It was a sub-motivation to raid the Big East, in addition to the general motivation of eliminating the Big East as a market competitor in the northeast corridor, the only place the ACC could expand.
01-24-2020 09:29 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
CliftonAve Online
Heisman
*

Posts: 15,652
Joined: May 2012
Reputation: 562
I Root For: CinCity Pride
Location:
Post: #64
RE: American Athletic finishes ahead of ACC in Massey Composite
(01-24-2020 09:29 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  
(01-24-2020 08:16 AM)esayem Wrote:  The ACC is now an eastern time zone conference featuring schools with similar academic profiles. Except for the recent mercenary addition of Louisville which was based solely on football.

Hoops as well. Louisville got in because of their hoops in addition to football.

People forget that circa 2010 - 2012 the ACC hoops was flagging. The Big East had clearly surpassed the ACC as a hoops conference, something that was intolerable to the ACC. It was a sub-motivation to raid the Big East, in addition to the general motivation of eliminating the Big East as a market competitor in the northeast corridor, the only place the ACC could expand.

For UofL, it was their entire athletic department along with the revenue generated from within.

I am in complete agreement with you on this.
01-24-2020 09:34 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
natibeast21 Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,410
Joined: Nov 2010
Reputation: 24
I Root For: UC, Ohio State
Location:
Post: #65
RE: American Athletic finishes ahead of ACC in Massey Composite
(01-21-2020 11:13 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  It's been a week since the national title game so the MC results are probably final now. These are the complete post-bowl MC rankings:

1) SEC ... 42.97
2) B12 ... 46.60
3) B1G ... 48.90
4) PAC .... 49.53

5) AAC .... 60.29
6) ACC .... 60.62


7) MWC ... 74.35

So the AAC beats out a P5 conference, that had never happened before. Does that make the AAC a "P6"? Given the gap between both the other "P" and the AAC/ACC, probably best to say that both were tweeners. So we had a P4, a G4, and two tweeners in "on the field" terms.

Basic, wouldn't expect anything different.
01-24-2020 02:07 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
sierrajip Offline
All American
*

Posts: 4,147
Joined: May 2011
Reputation: 79
I Root For: UCF
Location:
Post: #66
RE: American Athletic finishes ahead of ACC in Massey Composite
(01-21-2020 11:54 AM)Garrettabc Wrote:  Until the AAC can do that for several more years, then the AAC will just remain a Pee6.

Or until the ratings and ESPiN says so. Isn't that all that matters.
01-25-2020 05:52 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
sierrajip Offline
All American
*

Posts: 4,147
Joined: May 2011
Reputation: 79
I Root For: UCF
Location:
Post: #67
RE: American Athletic finishes ahead of ACC in Massey Composite
AAC at a sure disadvantage. It does not help that the A5 does not want to play AAC teams in the future, especially at home.
01-25-2020 06:06 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
BruceMcF Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 7,026
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 158
I Root For: Reds/Buckeyes/.
Location:
Post: #68
RE: American Athletic finishes ahead of ACC in Massey Composite
(01-25-2020 05:52 AM)sierrajip Wrote:  
(01-21-2020 11:54 AM)Garrettabc Wrote:  Until the AAC can do that for several more years, then the AAC will just remain a Pee6.

Or until the ratings and ESPiN says so. Isn't that all that matters.

Yes ... if the ratings say so, then it would just be a matter of the timing of the bowl cycle until the AAC gets a NY6 contract bowl offer, at which point they would be officially no longer a Go5 conference ...

... unless those ratings say that there are two AAC schools that move the needle for a P5 offer from the Big12, in which case it's back to the drawing board.
01-25-2020 07:50 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
goodknightfl Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 17,538
Joined: Feb 2004
Reputation: 270
I Root For:
Location:
Post: #69
RE: American Athletic finishes ahead of ACC in Massey Composite
High ranking along with 7.5 mil contract get the AAC king of G status. The p5 are not going to give AAC an equal vote, so we will never achieve power status, and it is unlikely we ever get a contract bowl. We can't even get a mid range bowl for our champ/#2.
01-25-2020 08:41 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
quo vadis Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 33,344
Joined: Aug 2008
Reputation: 853
I Root For: USF/Georgetown
Location: Baton Rouge, LA
Post: #70
RE: American Athletic finishes ahead of ACC in Massey Composite
(01-25-2020 08:41 AM)goodknightfl Wrote:  High ranking along with 7.5 mil contract get the AAC king of G status. The p5 are not going to give AAC an equal vote, so we will never achieve power status, and it is unlikely we ever get a contract bowl. We can't even get a mid range bowl for our champ/#2.

The bowl negotiations and media deal negotiations definitely threw a big wet blanket over AAC "P6" aspirations. The media money was arguably slightly below the low-end of the expected range, which was about $8m - $10m, and for a longer term than desired as well.

And the bowl negotiations were an abortion. At least the new media deal was nominally 3.5x better than the 2012 one in money. The new bowl lineup arguably isn't any better than the 2012 lineup, and the 2012 lineup was dreadful.

Still, beating the ACC on the field is a signal achievement.
01-25-2020 09:44 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
DFW HOYA Offline
All American
*

Posts: 2,974
Joined: May 2004
Reputation: 74
I Root For: The Hoyas
Location: Dallas, TX
Post: #71
RE: American Athletic finishes ahead of ACC in Massey Composite
Meanwhile, the Big East is stronger than expected, surely not what ESPN expected when they tried to put it out of business.

Adding Connecticut will raise the bar even more.
(This post was last modified: 01-25-2020 01:34 PM by DFW HOYA.)
01-25-2020 01:32 PM
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
JHS55 Offline
All American
*

Posts: 2,892
Joined: Jan 2016
Reputation: 105
I Root For: Houston
Location:
Post: #72
RE: American Athletic finishes ahead of ACC in Massey Composite
There is no more room in the A5 club regardless of any other g conference performance on the field or in tv ratings or home attendance, heck if anything the A5 want to have fewer conferences
So the AAC did something better than the ACC , so what!, it doesn’t enhance the AACs chances in becoming a sixth autonomous A conference
If viewership increases enough then more money from next tv contract

“ spoiler alert “, player compensation has the potential to change everything!
01-25-2020 01:52 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
slhNavy91 Offline
All American
*

Posts: 3,779
Joined: Jul 2015
Reputation: 361
I Root For: Navy
Location:
Post: #73
RE: American Athletic finishes ahead of ACC in Massey Composite
Now 97 rankings compiled in Massey's composite.

AAC still in fifth, ahead of the ACC with a mean of 60.31 compared to 60.35
01-26-2020 11:22 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
JRsec Offline
Super Moderator
*

Posts: 22,899
Joined: Mar 2012
Reputation: 2172
I Root For: SEC
Location:
Post: #74
RE: American Athletic finishes ahead of ACC in Massey Composite
(01-24-2020 09:29 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  
(01-24-2020 08:16 AM)esayem Wrote:  The ACC is now an eastern time zone conference featuring schools with similar academic profiles. Except for the recent mercenary addition of Louisville which was based solely on football.

Hoops as well. Louisville got in because of their hoops in addition to football.

People forget that circa 2010 - 2012 the ACC hoops was flagging. The Big East had clearly surpassed the ACC as a hoops conference, something that was intolerable to the ACC. It was a sub-motivation to raid the Big East, in addition to the general motivation of eliminating the Big East as a market competitor in the northeast corridor, the only place the ACC could expand.

History is repeating itself. Only now conferences with more football revenue to invest in hoops are beginning to threaten the basketball first culture of some of the ACC. And again the Big East is shining but the real cracks that are showing are internal the ACC. When Clemson and Florida State hoops are on par with those of Virginia and North Carolina, or exceed them, then their overall business emphasis is becoming outdated.
01-26-2020 11:33 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
bill dazzle Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,158
Joined: Aug 2016
Reputation: 75
I Root For: VUMemIUDePaulNC
Location: Tower Crane Town
Post: #75
RE: American Athletic finishes ahead of ACC in Massey Composite
(01-26-2020 11:33 AM)JRsec Wrote:  
(01-24-2020 09:29 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  
(01-24-2020 08:16 AM)esayem Wrote:  The ACC is now an eastern time zone conference featuring schools with similar academic profiles. Except for the recent mercenary addition of Louisville which was based solely on football.

Hoops as well. Louisville got in because of their hoops in addition to football.

People forget that circa 2010 - 2012 the ACC hoops was flagging. The Big East had clearly surpassed the ACC as a hoops conference, something that was intolerable to the ACC. It was a sub-motivation to raid the Big East, in addition to the general motivation of eliminating the Big East as a market competitor in the northeast corridor, the only place the ACC could expand.

History is repeating itself. Only now conferences with more football revenue to invest in hoops are beginning to threaten the basketball first culture of some of the ACC. And again the Big East is shining but the real cracks that are showing are internal the ACC. When Clemson and Florida State hoops are on par with those of Virginia and North Carolina, or exceed them, then their overall business emphasis is becoming outdated.


Comparing the ACC to the SEC in hoops is somewhat like doing the same thing with the leagues in football. In other words ... the comparisons rarely work well. The ACC is down this year in hoops but is still typically the best basketball league in the nation year in and year out.

The ACC has six programs that would rank in most folks' all-time Top 25: Duke, Syracuse, Louisville, North Carolina State, Notre Dame and North Carolina.

The SEC has two: Kentucky and Arkansas.

True, the SEC is doing much better in basketball now (some strong coaching hires have helped hugely) than it was, say, four to six years ago (when it was underachieving). But I don't see the SEC as a "threat" to ACC basketball superiority anytime soon. The SEC is top three nationally in football, baseball and women's basketball — and that is VERY impressive. However, it would be unlikely to have SEC men's hoops as a Top 3 year in and year out, too. The Big East, Big Ten and ACC (and even, to an extent the Big 12) are every bit as good or better in men's hoops year in and out.

The basketball-first culture in the ACC will be fine. And the league will get better in football.

I cheer for programs in both the SEC and ACC and would hope I look at this with an almost militant objectivity.
01-26-2020 12:09 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
JRsec Offline
Super Moderator
*

Posts: 22,899
Joined: Mar 2012
Reputation: 2172
I Root For: SEC
Location:
Post: #76
RE: American Athletic finishes ahead of ACC in Massey Composite
(01-26-2020 12:09 PM)bill dazzle Wrote:  
(01-26-2020 11:33 AM)JRsec Wrote:  
(01-24-2020 09:29 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  
(01-24-2020 08:16 AM)esayem Wrote:  The ACC is now an eastern time zone conference featuring schools with similar academic profiles. Except for the recent mercenary addition of Louisville which was based solely on football.

Hoops as well. Louisville got in because of their hoops in addition to football.

People forget that circa 2010 - 2012 the ACC hoops was flagging. The Big East had clearly surpassed the ACC as a hoops conference, something that was intolerable to the ACC. It was a sub-motivation to raid the Big East, in addition to the general motivation of eliminating the Big East as a market competitor in the northeast corridor, the only place the ACC could expand.

History is repeating itself. Only now conferences with more football revenue to invest in hoops are beginning to threaten the basketball first culture of some of the ACC. And again the Big East is shining but the real cracks that are showing are internal the ACC. When Clemson and Florida State hoops are on par with those of Virginia and North Carolina, or exceed them, then their overall business emphasis is becoming outdated.


Comparing the ACC to the SEC in hoops is somewhat like doing the same thing with the leagues in football. In other words ... the comparisons rarely work well. The ACC is down this year in hoops but is still typically the best basketball league in the nation year in and year out.

The ACC has six programs that would rank in most folks' all-time Top 25: Duke, Syracuse, Louisville, North Carolina State, Notre Dame and North Carolina.

The SEC has two: Kentucky and Arkansas.

True, the SEC is doing much better in basketball now (some strong coaching hires have helped hugely) than it was, say, four to six years ago (when it was underachieving). But I don't see the SEC as a "threat" to ACC basketball superiority anytime soon. The SEC is top three nationally in football, baseball and women's basketball — and that is VERY impressive. However, it would be unlikely to have SEC men's hoops as a Top 3 year in and year out, too. The Big East, Big Ten and ACC (and even, to an extent the Big 12) are every bit as good or better in men's hoops year in and out.

The basketball-first culture in the ACC will be fine. And the league will get better in football.

I cheer for programs in both the SEC and ACC and would hope I look at this with an almost militant objectivity.

I'm going to start hammering you on missing the point. The locus of this argument is not about basketball history or brands. It is about systemic trajectory. Specifically in this case how not investing in football is permitting those schools who do, even within their own conference, to commit greater resources to the recruitment and development of better basketball.

There's only so much money you can toss at football. But successful football programs generate a lot more gate revenue, donations, and a higher profile for the public to identify with than do basketball programs. And it's not just a one year deal. The slippage has been accreting for some time now and is about to get exponentially worse.

Then there is the question of sustainability. Programs like UNC have had it. Once Coach K retires will Duke have it? But with programs like UNC struggling to stay above 500 it begs the question about their continued success.

Right now they are being overtaken by not only football first programs, but by schools which don't offer football at all.

There seems to be an allocation issue at the heart of this argument. Do we allocate the majority of our budget to just basketball (Big East) or use the overflow of revenue from football to stay, or become, competitive in basketball (Big 10 / SEC).

You'll note that the other conference struggling for relevance in hoops is the PAC where they still budget more for football but don't earn enough to stay consistently competitive in either. I see the same situation happening in the ACC. Funny that it's not happening in the Big 12 but their football is successful enough to still pump enough into basketball to keep it highly competitive.

So the argument I'm making is not the one you so glibly and shallowly responded to. It's not about comparing how many basketball bluebloods a particular conference has. It's about seeing what is actually happening in real time and calculating future trajectories based on current investment and current results. And I'm saying the business model of Tobacco Road is antiquated and not keeping up, especially in a world about to move to pay for play.

That Bill is one reason the WSJ valuations of the ACC are so abysmal. They are 5th in that data set among the P5 and getting lapped significantly by the Big 12 which is worth twice as much, the Big 10 which is worth 3 and half times as much and the SEC which is worth 4 times as much and when those with current success line up with those who are generating more value and that value is heavily football dependent it tells me that basketball first models aren't working, unless basketball first schools drop football and invest fully in hoops to keep up and that is the Big East and some other key mid majors or independents.
(This post was last modified: 01-26-2020 12:31 PM by JRsec.)
01-26-2020 12:28 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
bill dazzle Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,158
Joined: Aug 2016
Reputation: 75
I Root For: VUMemIUDePaulNC
Location: Tower Crane Town
Post: #77
RE: American Athletic finishes ahead of ACC in Massey Composite
(01-26-2020 12:28 PM)JRsec Wrote:  
(01-26-2020 12:09 PM)bill dazzle Wrote:  
(01-26-2020 11:33 AM)JRsec Wrote:  
(01-24-2020 09:29 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  
(01-24-2020 08:16 AM)esayem Wrote:  The ACC is now an eastern time zone conference featuring schools with similar academic profiles. Except for the recent mercenary addition of Louisville which was based solely on football.

Hoops as well. Louisville got in because of their hoops in addition to football.

People forget that circa 2010 - 2012 the ACC hoops was flagging. The Big East had clearly surpassed the ACC as a hoops conference, something that was intolerable to the ACC. It was a sub-motivation to raid the Big East, in addition to the general motivation of eliminating the Big East as a market competitor in the northeast corridor, the only place the ACC could expand.

History is repeating itself. Only now conferences with more football revenue to invest in hoops are beginning to threaten the basketball first culture of some of the ACC. And again the Big East is shining but the real cracks that are showing are internal the ACC. When Clemson and Florida State hoops are on par with those of Virginia and North Carolina, or exceed them, then their overall business emphasis is becoming outdated.


Comparing the ACC to the SEC in hoops is somewhat like doing the same thing with the leagues in football. In other words ... the comparisons rarely work well. The ACC is down this year in hoops but is still typically the best basketball league in the nation year in and year out.

The ACC has six programs that would rank in most folks' all-time Top 25: Duke, Syracuse, Louisville, North Carolina State, Notre Dame and North Carolina.

The SEC has two: Kentucky and Arkansas.

True, the SEC is doing much better in basketball now (some strong coaching hires have helped hugely) than it was, say, four to six years ago (when it was underachieving). But I don't see the SEC as a "threat" to ACC basketball superiority anytime soon. The SEC is top three nationally in football, baseball and women's basketball — and that is VERY impressive. However, it would be unlikely to have SEC men's hoops as a Top 3 year in and year out, too. The Big East, Big Ten and ACC (and even, to an extent the Big 12) are every bit as good or better in men's hoops year in and out.

The basketball-first culture in the ACC will be fine. And the league will get better in football.

I cheer for programs in both the SEC and ACC and would hope I look at this with an almost militant objectivity.

I'm going to start hammering you on missing the point. The locus of this argument is not about basketball history or brands. It is about systemic trajectory. Specifically in this case how not investing in football is permitting those schools who do, even within their own conference, to commit greater resources to the recruitment and development of better basketball.

There's only so much money you can toss at football. But successful football programs generate a lot more gate revenue, donations, and a higher profile for the public to identify with than do basketball programs. And it's not just a one year deal. The slippage has been accreting for some time now and is about to get exponentially worse.

Then there is the question of sustainability. Programs like UNC have had it. Once Coach K retires will Duke have it? But with programs like UNC struggling to stay above 500 it begs the question about their continued success.

Right now they are being overtaken by not only football first programs, but by schools which don't offer football at all.

There seems to be an allocation issue at the heart of this argument. Do we allocate the majority of our budget to just basketball (Big East) or use the overflow of revenue from football to stay, or become, competitive in basketball (Big 10 / SEC).

You'll note that the other conference struggling for relevance in hoops is the PAC where they still budget more for football but don't earn enough to stay consistently competitive in either. I see the same situation happening in the ACC. Funny that it's not happening in the Big 12 but their football is successful enough to still pump enough into basketball to keep it highly competitive.

So the argument I'm making is not the one you so glibly and shallowly responded to. It's not about comparing how many basketball bluebloods a particular conference has. It's about seeing what is actually happening in real time and calculating future trajectories based on current investment and current results. And I'm saying the business model of Tobacco Road is antiquated and not keeping up, especially in a world about to move to pay for play.

That Bill is one reason the WSJ valuations of the ACC are so abysmal. They are 5th in that data set among the P5 and getting lapped significantly by the Big 12 which is worth twice as much, the Big 10 which is worth 3 and half times as much and the SEC which is worth 4 times as much and when those with current success line up with those who are generating more value and that value is heavily football dependent it tells me that basketball first models aren't working, unless basketball first schools drop football and invest fully in hoops to keep up and that is the Big East and some other key mid majors or independents.



Your argument is a very good one overall, JRsec. And there are many SEC and Big Ten programs at which investing in football has helped in hoops (e.g., Penn State and Rutgers in the Big Ten, and Florida and South Carolina in the SEC). I agree with you overall.

However, as with many things, there are always exceptions to the rule. When you type "programs like UNC have had it" do you mean ALL similar athletic programs (that is, programs at big state schools that put an overwhelming emphasis on hoops compared to football)? Because if that's the case, Kentucky and Kansas have "had it," too.

As to Duke, the Blue Devils had at least five coaches prior to Coach K that won at least two-thirds of their games. The program was strong before K arrived and could easily remain strong after he leaves. And Syracuse could be strong after JB leaves. Time will tell.

I don't feel, as you do, that "the business model of Tobacco Road is antiquated and not keeping up, especially in a world about to move to pay for play." However, I do acknowledge that NCState, UNC and Syracuse need to invest more in football and that the risks are concerning. I agree on that. Louisville is investing in football. Duke ... probably not like it should. Notre Dame is a different animal since it doesn't play in the ACC in football.

You have studied this topic and know it well. I have not and am a clueless simpleton regarding it. You also do a great job posting on multiple topics related to college athletics and that I strongly enjoy reading. You very well might be proved correct on this issue. But if you have a strong bias toward the SEC (I assume you are somewhat biased toward the league but don't know if you are strongly biased), that pro-SEC mindset might be slightly contributing to your thoughts that the ACC is in trouble. Overall, you seem to assess such situations with a clinical and reasoned approach, which I respect.

Keep up the fine posting.

Bill
01-26-2020 02:21 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
esayem Offline
Hark The Sound!
*

Posts: 6,190
Joined: Feb 2007
Reputation: 215
I Root For: The Heels
Location: Tobacco Road
Post: #78
RE: American Athletic finishes ahead of ACC in Massey Composite
The trajectory of the actual sport of football is heading downward. The game will eventually need to change or nobody will be playing it.

Virginia just won a national championship, and Duke, Louisville, and Florida State all look capable of Final Four runs. The ACC appreciates everyone’s concern.

Calling Louisville a Big East team is a joke. Were they even in the conference for a decade? Also, the only reason they were invited over UConn was football, so I stand by my claim they were added for football. Being a great basketball program was a bonus.
01-26-2020 02:41 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
JRsec Offline
Super Moderator
*

Posts: 22,899
Joined: Mar 2012
Reputation: 2172
I Root For: SEC
Location:
Post: #79
RE: American Athletic finishes ahead of ACC in Massey Composite
(01-26-2020 02:21 PM)bill dazzle Wrote:  
(01-26-2020 12:28 PM)JRsec Wrote:  
(01-26-2020 12:09 PM)bill dazzle Wrote:  
(01-26-2020 11:33 AM)JRsec Wrote:  
(01-24-2020 09:29 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  Hoops as well. Louisville got in because of their hoops in addition to football.

People forget that circa 2010 - 2012 the ACC hoops was flagging. The Big East had clearly surpassed the ACC as a hoops conference, something that was intolerable to the ACC. It was a sub-motivation to raid the Big East, in addition to the general motivation of eliminating the Big East as a market competitor in the northeast corridor, the only place the ACC could expand.

History is repeating itself. Only now conferences with more football revenue to invest in hoops are beginning to threaten the basketball first culture of some of the ACC. And again the Big East is shining but the real cracks that are showing are internal the ACC. When Clemson and Florida State hoops are on par with those of Virginia and North Carolina, or exceed them, then their overall business emphasis is becoming outdated.


Comparing the ACC to the SEC in hoops is somewhat like doing the same thing with the leagues in football. In other words ... the comparisons rarely work well. The ACC is down this year in hoops but is still typically the best basketball league in the nation year in and year out.

The ACC has six programs that would rank in most folks' all-time Top 25: Duke, Syracuse, Louisville, North Carolina State, Notre Dame and North Carolina.

The SEC has two: Kentucky and Arkansas.

True, the SEC is doing much better in basketball now (some strong coaching hires have helped hugely) than it was, say, four to six years ago (when it was underachieving). But I don't see the SEC as a "threat" to ACC basketball superiority anytime soon. The SEC is top three nationally in football, baseball and women's basketball — and that is VERY impressive. However, it would be unlikely to have SEC men's hoops as a Top 3 year in and year out, too. The Big East, Big Ten and ACC (and even, to an extent the Big 12) are every bit as good or better in men's hoops year in and out.

The basketball-first culture in the ACC will be fine. And the league will get better in football.

I cheer for programs in both the SEC and ACC and would hope I look at this with an almost militant objectivity.

I'm going to start hammering you on missing the point. The locus of this argument is not about basketball history or brands. It is about systemic trajectory. Specifically in this case how not investing in football is permitting those schools who do, even within their own conference, to commit greater resources to the recruitment and development of better basketball.

There's only so much money you can toss at football. But successful football programs generate a lot more gate revenue, donations, and a higher profile for the public to identify with than do basketball programs. And it's not just a one year deal. The slippage has been accreting for some time now and is about to get exponentially worse.

Then there is the question of sustainability. Programs like UNC have had it. Once Coach K retires will Duke have it? But with programs like UNC struggling to stay above 500 it begs the question about their continued success.

Right now they are being overtaken by not only football first programs, but by schools which don't offer football at all.

There seems to be an allocation issue at the heart of this argument. Do we allocate the majority of our budget to just basketball (Big East) or use the overflow of revenue from football to stay, or become, competitive in basketball (Big 10 / SEC).

You'll note that the other conference struggling for relevance in hoops is the PAC where they still budget more for football but don't earn enough to stay consistently competitive in either. I see the same situation happening in the ACC. Funny that it's not happening in the Big 12 but their football is successful enough to still pump enough into basketball to keep it highly competitive.

So the argument I'm making is not the one you so glibly and shallowly responded to. It's not about comparing how many basketball bluebloods a particular conference has. It's about seeing what is actually happening in real time and calculating future trajectories based on current investment and current results. And I'm saying the business model of Tobacco Road is antiquated and not keeping up, especially in a world about to move to pay for play.

That Bill is one reason the WSJ valuations of the ACC are so abysmal. They are 5th in that data set among the P5 and getting lapped significantly by the Big 12 which is worth twice as much, the Big 10 which is worth 3 and half times as much and the SEC which is worth 4 times as much and when those with current success line up with those who are generating more value and that value is heavily football dependent it tells me that basketball first models aren't working, unless basketball first schools drop football and invest fully in hoops to keep up and that is the Big East and some other key mid majors or independents.



Your argument is a very good one overall, JRsec. And there are many SEC and Big Ten programs at which investing in football has helped in hoops (e.g., Penn State and Rutgers in the Big Ten, and Florida and South Carolina in the SEC). I agree with you overall.

However, as with many things, there are always exceptions to the rule. When you type "programs like UNC have had it" do you mean ALL similar athletic programs (that is, programs at big state schools that put an overwhelming emphasis on hoops compared to football)? Because if that's the case, Kentucky and Kansas have "had it," too.

As to Duke, the Blue Devils had at least five coaches prior to Coach K that won at least two-thirds of their games. The program was strong before K arrived and could easily remain strong after he leaves. And Syracuse could be strong after JB leaves. Time will tell.

I don't feel, as you do, that "the business model of Tobacco Road is antiquated and not keeping up, especially in a world about to move to pay for play." However, I do acknowledge that NCState, UNC and Syracuse need to invest more in football and that the risks are concerning. I agree on that. Louisville is investing in football. Duke ... probably not like it should. Notre Dame is a different animal since it doesn't play in the ACC in football.

You have studied this topic and know it well. I have not and am a clueless simpleton regarding it. You also do a great job posting on multiple topics related to college athletics and that I strongly enjoy reading. You very well might be proved correct on this issue. But if you have a strong bias toward the SEC (I assume you are somewhat biased toward the league but don't know if you are strongly biased), that pro-SEC mindset might be slightly contributing to your thoughts that the ACC is in trouble. Overall, you seem to assess such situations with a clinical and reasoned approach, which I respect.

Keep up the fine posting.

Bill

You are still missing a critical distinction. Kansas and Kentucky are the beneficiaries of belonging to football first conferences where media revenue is either equally distributed in total, or equally distributed for T1 and T2 rights giving both a full share valued at football first rates and football first rates for top 10 programs in not only revenue and attendance but programs within the top 20 in all time wins like Texas, Alabama, Oklahoma, Auburn, and Tennessee and a few others.

2 years ago hoops provided about 20% of the overall revenue for most P5 schools (there are exceptions but the % of difference is not significantly larger). Last year (2018 stats for the 2017 season the new stats for 2018 will be out in April) the revenue of college basketball was down 8% on average. So I don't think you can fairly use Kentucky, Indiana, or Kansas by comparison to say U.C.L.A., North Carolina, or Duke.
01-26-2020 02:43 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
bill dazzle Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,158
Joined: Aug 2016
Reputation: 75
I Root For: VUMemIUDePaulNC
Location: Tower Crane Town
Post: #80
RE: American Athletic finishes ahead of ACC in Massey Composite
(01-26-2020 02:43 PM)JRsec Wrote:  
(01-26-2020 02:21 PM)bill dazzle Wrote:  
(01-26-2020 12:28 PM)JRsec Wrote:  
(01-26-2020 12:09 PM)bill dazzle Wrote:  
(01-26-2020 11:33 AM)JRsec Wrote:  History is repeating itself. Only now conferences with more football revenue to invest in hoops are beginning to threaten the basketball first culture of some of the ACC. And again the Big East is shining but the real cracks that are showing are internal the ACC. When Clemson and Florida State hoops are on par with those of Virginia and North Carolina, or exceed them, then their overall business emphasis is becoming outdated.


Comparing the ACC to the SEC in hoops is somewhat like doing the same thing with the leagues in football. In other words ... the comparisons rarely work well. The ACC is down this year in hoops but is still typically the best basketball league in the nation year in and year out.

The ACC has six programs that would rank in most folks' all-time Top 25: Duke, Syracuse, Louisville, North Carolina State, Notre Dame and North Carolina.

The SEC has two: Kentucky and Arkansas.

True, the SEC is doing much better in basketball now (some strong coaching hires have helped hugely) than it was, say, four to six years ago (when it was underachieving). But I don't see the SEC as a "threat" to ACC basketball superiority anytime soon. The SEC is top three nationally in football, baseball and women's basketball — and that is VERY impressive. However, it would be unlikely to have SEC men's hoops as a Top 3 year in and year out, too. The Big East, Big Ten and ACC (and even, to an extent the Big 12) are every bit as good or better in men's hoops year in and out.

The basketball-first culture in the ACC will be fine. And the league will get better in football.

I cheer for programs in both the SEC and ACC and would hope I look at this with an almost militant objectivity.

I'm going to start hammering you on missing the point. The locus of this argument is not about basketball history or brands. It is about systemic trajectory. Specifically in this case how not investing in football is permitting those schools who do, even within their own conference, to commit greater resources to the recruitment and development of better basketball.

There's only so much money you can toss at football. But successful football programs generate a lot more gate revenue, donations, and a higher profile for the public to identify with than do basketball programs. And it's not just a one year deal. The slippage has been accreting for some time now and is about to get exponentially worse.

Then there is the question of sustainability. Programs like UNC have had it. Once Coach K retires will Duke have it? But with programs like UNC struggling to stay above 500 it begs the question about their continued success.

Right now they are being overtaken by not only football first programs, but by schools which don't offer football at all.

There seems to be an allocation issue at the heart of this argument. Do we allocate the majority of our budget to just basketball (Big East) or use the overflow of revenue from football to stay, or become, competitive in basketball (Big 10 / SEC).

You'll note that the other conference struggling for relevance in hoops is the PAC where they still budget more for football but don't earn enough to stay consistently competitive in either. I see the same situation happening in the ACC. Funny that it's not happening in the Big 12 but their football is successful enough to still pump enough into basketball to keep it highly competitive.

So the argument I'm making is not the one you so glibly and shallowly responded to. It's not about comparing how many basketball bluebloods a particular conference has. It's about seeing what is actually happening in real time and calculating future trajectories based on current investment and current results. And I'm saying the business model of Tobacco Road is antiquated and not keeping up, especially in a world about to move to pay for play.

That Bill is one reason the WSJ valuations of the ACC are so abysmal. They are 5th in that data set among the P5 and getting lapped significantly by the Big 12 which is worth twice as much, the Big 10 which is worth 3 and half times as much and the SEC which is worth 4 times as much and when those with current success line up with those who are generating more value and that value is heavily football dependent it tells me that basketball first models aren't working, unless basketball first schools drop football and invest fully in hoops to keep up and that is the Big East and some other key mid majors or independents.



Your argument is a very good one overall, JRsec. And there are many SEC and Big Ten programs at which investing in football has helped in hoops (e.g., Penn State and Rutgers in the Big Ten, and Florida and South Carolina in the SEC). I agree with you overall.

However, as with many things, there are always exceptions to the rule. When you type "programs like UNC have had it" do you mean ALL similar athletic programs (that is, programs at big state schools that put an overwhelming emphasis on hoops compared to football)? Because if that's the case, Kentucky and Kansas have "had it," too.

As to Duke, the Blue Devils had at least five coaches prior to Coach K that won at least two-thirds of their games. The program was strong before K arrived and could easily remain strong after he leaves. And Syracuse could be strong after JB leaves. Time will tell.

I don't feel, as you do, that "the business model of Tobacco Road is antiquated and not keeping up, especially in a world about to move to pay for play." However, I do acknowledge that NCState, UNC and Syracuse need to invest more in football and that the risks are concerning. I agree on that. Louisville is investing in football. Duke ... probably not like it should. Notre Dame is a different animal since it doesn't play in the ACC in football.

You have studied this topic and know it well. I have not and am a clueless simpleton regarding it. You also do a great job posting on multiple topics related to college athletics and that I strongly enjoy reading. You very well might be proved correct on this issue. But if you have a strong bias toward the SEC (I assume you are somewhat biased toward the league but don't know if you are strongly biased), that pro-SEC mindset might be slightly contributing to your thoughts that the ACC is in trouble. Overall, you seem to assess such situations with a clinical and reasoned approach, which I respect.

Keep up the fine posting.

Bill

You are still missing a critical distinction. Kansas and Kentucky are the beneficiaries of belonging to football first conferences where media revenue is either equally distributed in total, or equally distributed for T1 and T2 rights giving both a full share valued at football first rates and football first rates for top 10 programs in not only revenue and attendance but programs within the top 20 in all time wins like Texas, Alabama, Oklahoma, Auburn, and Tennessee and a few others.

2 years ago hoops provided about 20% of the overall revenue for most P5 schools (there are exceptions but the % of difference is not significantly larger). Last year (2018 stats for the 2017 season the new stats for 2018 will be out in April) the revenue of college basketball was down 8% on average. So I don't think you can fairly use Kentucky, Indiana, or Kansas by comparison to say U.C.L.A., North Carolina, or Duke.


Fair points. Again, I don't follow this type info and would not know. So I'm always open to having posters educate me and sway my views.

thx
01-26-2020 05:51 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 




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


Copyright © 2002-2020 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, © 2002-2020 MyBB Group.