Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Poll: Who Benefits the Most in This Swap Scenario?
ACC
SEC
Both Equally Win
Both Equally Lose
[Show Results]
 
Post Reply 
Pros and Cons of SEC/ACC Realignment Scenario
Author Message
CitrusUCF Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 6,547
Joined: Jan 2008
Reputation: 190
I Root For: UCF
Location: NW Ark.
Post: #21
RE: Pros and Cons of SEC/ACC Realignment Scenario
(01-03-2021 03:10 AM)JRsec Wrote:  
(01-03-2021 01:16 AM)bigblueblindness Wrote:  Just for thought fodder... Mississippi State, Vanderbilt, and Auburn move to the ACC in exchange for North Carolina and Virginia to the SEC. Who benefits the most with this arrangement? I have some thoughts but will wait for some other initial posts:
If the SEC needs a private school for freedom of information protection T.C.U. would make a fine travel companion for Oklahoma or Texas should we expand.

I have heard this cited before about why Vanderbilt is a valuable member, but I do not believe it has any basis in fact. The SEC itself is not subject to any state public records laws, but each individual university other than Vanderbilt is. Any SEC documents held by the University of Florida itself (not the UF Athletic Association for various other reasons) are subject to public records unless the university tries to claim a trade secrets exemption, but that is a tight exemption unlikely to apply here. The fact that a private entity is a member of the organization to which the documents apply is utterly meaningless in an assessment of whether it is a public record under Florida law.
(This post was last modified: 01-04-2021 10:32 AM by CitrusUCF.)
01-04-2021 10:30 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
JRsec Offline
Super Moderator
*

Posts: 26,051
Joined: Mar 2012
Reputation: 2898
I Root For: SEC
Location:
Post: #22
RE: Pros and Cons of SEC/ACC Realignment Scenario
(01-04-2021 10:21 AM)ken d Wrote:  
(01-03-2021 03:10 AM)JRsec Wrote:  
(01-03-2021 01:16 AM)bigblueblindness Wrote:  Just for thought fodder... Mississippi State, Vanderbilt, and Auburn move to the ACC in exchange for North Carolina and Virginia to the SEC. Who benefits the most with this arrangement? I have some thoughts but will wait for some other initial posts:

Vanderbilt for N.C. State and no other trades. The ACC gains a baseball power, an AAU school, and access to ad rights in Tennessee. The SEC swaps a bottom dweller in their strongest sport, a bottom dweller in their weakest sport and gains a middler in both while getting in return another solid baseball program.

Tennessee keeps enough of the state for the SEC not to miss Vanderbilt and Duke, North Carolina and Wake Forest is probably still 1 too many North Carolina schools for the ACC.

Vanderbilt is with peers and N.C. State is free of Tar Heel domination. If the SEC needs a private school for freedom of information protection T.C.U. would make a fine travel companion for Oklahoma or Texas should we expand.

Oh, and Nashville is a lovely fan destination for Hill Folk nostalgic for the Grand Ole Opry so Virginians and North Carolinians should love the trip. And on the flip side Nashville natives love New England and Bill Dazzle might just dance a jig to have all of his pigs under one blanket. I hope that makes you hungry Bill!

This is the only ACC/SEC swap I can see where the trade would have benefit to both parties. The ACC loses no market and gains one of 7 million and the SEC loses no market and gains one of 10 million. The ACC improves academically and the SEC improves competitively. South Carolina and N.C. State can become a divisional rivalry, not to mention Tennessee. And Vanderbilt should fare better against an ACC schedule.

And ESPN might likely approve.07-coffee3

At least N.C. State doesn't have a Bulldog or Tiger for a mascot. The SEC has 3 Tigers and 2 Bulldogs. But I warn you the Commodore mascot is really really creepy to the kids!

Oh, I almost forgot to mention that Vanderbilt to be so hoity toity is indeed inclusive. The women's bowling team has 1 national championship which really appeals to some of the beer and brat fans that due to job opportunities in the South is a growing demographic in many of our states. If they only played Softball or had a Bass Fishing team things might have worked out better for them in the SEC.

Oh well that's our final offer take it or leave it!

That actually makes sense, though I'm not sure you could get the schools to agree to the swap. If the issue is money, and money only, you might persuade Vandy to take a paycut by having them split the difference with NC State. Vandy's payout is decreased by one half the difference between the SEC payout and the ACC payout, and NC State gets a pay raise of that same difference.

But I'm going to be a little contrarian and suggest that, as much as State complains about UNC domination through the shared BOT, they also like the excuse it gives them for their lack of ACC championships. I don't think they would give that up easily, especially when this trade would probably make conference championships even harder to come by.

I know you said this was your final offer, but would you consider sweetening the deal by adding Wake Forest and Kentucky? There's your private school for FOIA purposes and it gives both State and Kentucky another familiar conference rival that they can occasionally beat.

Actually Ken D the post was mostly an attempt at humor. But, I did pick that particular swap scenario because it had some merits for both conferences. In that respect only I would suggest that Vanderbilt has much less need of the revenue due to campus priorities than does N.C. State. Remaining in a viable P conference might be enough for them and being in a conference where it is easier to compete might improve their overall athletic department.

That said I think your argument about competitiveness is accurate. The question there is would doubling their athletic revenue allow them to greatly improve? It's possible but certainly no guarantee. It would depend upon AD priorities and how well they recruited not only North Carolina but South Carolina, Georgia, Florida, Alabama, and Louisiana.

As to the FOIA matters which I readily admit is something I've heard often enough to believe our Central Florida friend above casts some doubt upon that which sounds much more plausible than having conferences keep their records at the private school's campus, or other such stories. The SEC would certainly be fine without Vanderbilt athletically, but they are family. I snipe at them because they have been absolute obstructionists to conference guidelines for capacity and updating of facilities and because it seems they are perfectly happy, in spite of lip service to the contrary, to remain a whipping boy with little investment in athletics yet deriving full shares.

And of course logically there is the age old logic of why would the SEC trade with the SEC when the economic disparity could simply allow them to take what they wished provided the party they take truly wanted to leave the ACC. For such moves 2037 is not that far away though it is quite possibly beyond my scope of remaining years. In institutional life a decade is nothing to wait out.
01-04-2021 12:33 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
AllTideUp Offline
All American
*

Posts: 4,030
Joined: Jul 2015
Reputation: 232
I Root For: Alabama
Location:
Post: #23
RE: Pros and Cons of SEC/ACC Realignment Scenario
(01-04-2021 10:30 AM)CitrusUCF Wrote:  
(01-03-2021 03:10 AM)JRsec Wrote:  
(01-03-2021 01:16 AM)bigblueblindness Wrote:  Just for thought fodder... Mississippi State, Vanderbilt, and Auburn move to the ACC in exchange for North Carolina and Virginia to the SEC. Who benefits the most with this arrangement? I have some thoughts but will wait for some other initial posts:
If the SEC needs a private school for freedom of information protection T.C.U. would make a fine travel companion for Oklahoma or Texas should we expand.

I have heard this cited before about why Vanderbilt is a valuable member, but I do not believe it has any basis in fact. The SEC itself is not subject to any state public records laws, but each individual university other than Vanderbilt is. Any SEC documents held by the University of Florida itself (not the UF Athletic Association for various other reasons) are subject to public records unless the university tries to claim a trade secrets exemption, but that is a tight exemption unlikely to apply here. The fact that a private entity is a member of the organization to which the documents apply is utterly meaningless in an assessment of whether it is a public record under Florida law.

If that's the case then move Vanderbilt to the ACC along with Notre Dame cementing their presence. Vandy will perform better in most years with a more modest investment even though they lose some money on the TV side.

Move Texas, Oklahoma, and Kansas to the SEC and it's all pretty tightly contained.
01-04-2021 12:48 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
AllTideUp Offline
All American
*

Posts: 4,030
Joined: Jul 2015
Reputation: 232
I Root For: Alabama
Location:
Post: #24
RE: Pros and Cons of SEC/ACC Realignment Scenario
(01-04-2021 12:33 PM)JRsec Wrote:  Actually Ken D the post was mostly an attempt at humor. But, I did pick that particular swap scenario because it had some merits for both conferences. In that respect only I would suggest that Vanderbilt has much less need of the revenue due to campus priorities than does N.C. State. Remaining in a viable P conference might be enough for them and being in a conference where it is easier to compete might improve their overall athletic department.

That said I think your argument about competitiveness is accurate. The question there is would doubling their athletic revenue allow them to greatly improve? It's possible but certainly no guarantee. It would depend upon AD priorities and how well they recruited not only North Carolina but South Carolina, Georgia, Florida, Alabama, and Louisiana.

As to the FOIA matters which I readily admit is something I've heard often enough to believe our Central Florida friend above casts some doubt upon that which sounds much more plausible than having conferences keep their records at the private school's campus, or other such stories. The SEC would certainly be fine without Vanderbilt athletically, but they are family. I snipe at them because they have been absolute obstructionists to conference guidelines for capacity and updating of facilities and because it seems they are perfectly happy, in spite of lip service to the contrary, to remain a whipping boy with little investment in athletics yet deriving full shares.

And of course logically there is the age old logic of why would the SEC trade with the SEC when the economic disparity could simply allow them to take what they wished provided the party they take truly wanted to leave the ACC. For such moves 2037 is not that far away though it is quite possibly beyond my scope of remaining years. In institutional life a decade is nothing to wait out.

Vanderbilt would lose some money moving to the ACC as their 16th, however, they wouldn't have to increase their investment very much to improve their results in most sports.

The problem with investing in order to compete at the SEC level is they would likely have to spend a higher percentage of their conference share in order to make it worthwhile. Why spend the money then if you're not going to attain elite athletic status? Just bank it and keep coasting...

Or they could reduce their intake by moving to the ACC, bump up their investment more modestly and probably accomplish more in the sphere of attracting attention. It's not like they're going to get the top TV timeslots with the SEC anyway unless they really broke the bank and tried to be Northwestern.
01-04-2021 12:54 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
JRsec Offline
Super Moderator
*

Posts: 26,051
Joined: Mar 2012
Reputation: 2898
I Root For: SEC
Location:
Post: #25
RE: Pros and Cons of SEC/ACC Realignment Scenario
(01-04-2021 12:54 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  
(01-04-2021 12:33 PM)JRsec Wrote:  Actually Ken D the post was mostly an attempt at humor. But, I did pick that particular swap scenario because it had some merits for both conferences. In that respect only I would suggest that Vanderbilt has much less need of the revenue due to campus priorities than does N.C. State. Remaining in a viable P conference might be enough for them and being in a conference where it is easier to compete might improve their overall athletic department.

That said I think your argument about competitiveness is accurate. The question there is would doubling their athletic revenue allow them to greatly improve? It's possible but certainly no guarantee. It would depend upon AD priorities and how well they recruited not only North Carolina but South Carolina, Georgia, Florida, Alabama, and Louisiana.

As to the FOIA matters which I readily admit is something I've heard often enough to believe our Central Florida friend above casts some doubt upon that which sounds much more plausible than having conferences keep their records at the private school's campus, or other such stories. The SEC would certainly be fine without Vanderbilt athletically, but they are family. I snipe at them because they have been absolute obstructionists to conference guidelines for capacity and updating of facilities and because it seems they are perfectly happy, in spite of lip service to the contrary, to remain a whipping boy with little investment in athletics yet deriving full shares.

And of course logically there is the age old logic of why would the SEC trade with the SEC when the economic disparity could simply allow them to take what they wished provided the party they take truly wanted to leave the ACC. For such moves 2037 is not that far away though it is quite possibly beyond my scope of remaining years. In institutional life a decade is nothing to wait out.

Vanderbilt would lose some money moving to the ACC as their 16th, however, they wouldn't have to increase their investment very much to improve their results in most sports.

The problem with investing in order to compete at the SEC level is they would likely have to spend a higher percentage of their conference share in order to make it worthwhile. Why spend the money then if you're not going to attain elite athletic status? Just bank it and keep coasting...

Or they could reduce their intake by moving to the ACC, bump up their investment more modestly and probably accomplish more in the sphere of attracting attention. It's not like they're going to get the top TV timeslots with the SEC anyway unless they really broke the bank and tried to be Northwestern.

They would definitely get more exposure for their buck in the ACC and they would also have more peers (AAU privates or highly ranked privates).

I would love to see a simple sweep of Texas, Oklahoma and Kansas to the SEC. That's 45% of the total worth of the Big 12 in 3 schools with a Vanderbilt departure making it possible. What was it Gordon Gekko said in Wall Street? Greed is good! It's definitely a greedy move but one no doubt that ESPN might like to make. Anytime you can pay 3 schools to get 45% of the value of a conference it's a big win.
01-04-2021 12:59 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Statefan Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,878
Joined: May 2018
Reputation: 132
I Root For: .
Location:
Post: #26
RE: Pros and Cons of SEC/ACC Realignment Scenario
Carolina will not allow to have a medical school - you can be damn sure they will not allow us to move to the SEC or B10.

Actually that statement is overly harsh toward the Tar Heels, there is and always has been another player in the UNC System hiding behind the Tar Heels and seeking to eliminate competition from Raleigh. We can cut a deal with UNC, but we can't cut a deal with UNC and Duke when the Blue Devil is whispering in the Ram's ear.
(This post was last modified: 01-04-2021 06:21 PM by Statefan.)
01-04-2021 06:18 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
XLance Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 9,894
Joined: Mar 2008
Reputation: 321
I Root For: Carolina
Location:
Post: #27
RE: Pros and Cons of SEC/ACC Realignment Scenario
(01-04-2021 06:18 PM)Statefan Wrote:  Carolina will not allow to have a medical school - you can be damn sure they will not allow us to move to the SEC or B10.

Actually that statement is overly harsh toward the Tar Heels, there is and always has been another player in the UNC System hiding behind the Tar Heels and seeking to eliminate competition from Raleigh. We can cut a deal with UNC, but we can't cut a deal with UNC and Duke when the Blue Devil is whispering in the Ram's ear.

Since State is only 21 miles from Duke and 26 miles from Carolina, another medical school in the same location just does not make sense.
Besides a cow college is the perfect spot for a vet school.
Wake Forest (another research hospital) is only 89 miles west of State.
01-04-2021 08:13 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
NJ2MDTerp Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,181
Joined: Aug 2013
Reputation: 35
I Root For: Maryland
Location:
Post: #28
RE: Pros and Cons of SEC/ACC Realignment Scenario
(01-04-2021 08:13 PM)XLance Wrote:  
(01-04-2021 06:18 PM)Statefan Wrote:  Carolina will not allow to have a medical school - you can be damn sure they will not allow us to move to the SEC or B10.

Actually that statement is overly harsh toward the Tar Heels, there is and always has been another player in the UNC System hiding behind the Tar Heels and seeking to eliminate competition from Raleigh. We can cut a deal with UNC, but we can't cut a deal with UNC and Duke when the Blue Devil is whispering in the Ram's ear.

Since State is only 21 miles from Duke and 26 miles from Carolina, another medical school in the same location just does not make sense.
Besides a cow college is the perfect spot for a vet school.
Wake Forest (another research hospital) is only 89 miles west of State.
If that's the case, why doesn't State operate a medical campus in Charlotte? Yes I realize UNCC is there.
01-04-2021 08:52 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
bigblueblindness Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 2,018
Joined: Apr 2013
Reputation: 45
I Root For: UK, Lipscomb
Location: Nashville
Post: #29
RE: Pros and Cons of SEC/ACC Realignment Scenario
Thanks for the interesting replies, and I did not anticipate the conversation turning to be primarily about NC State. Below is my brief rationale for the initial thought that incorporates feedback from the posts:

- Using the EADA gross revenue data from the last three available seasons (2017, 18, 19), the average yearly revenue of UNC is $98,252,715, and UVA is $102,434,403. Together, that is basically a $100,000,000 per school addition to the SEC. On the other hand, Auburn is a whopping average of $149,163,064, Mississippi State is $92,279,666, and Vandy is $81,540,112. Together, that is basically a $108 million per school addition to the ACC. In a per school swap based purely on $$$, the ACC wins in this scenario.

- Using these same averages among all schools, the SEC average revenue per school is about $132 million per year. The ACC average revenue per school is about $105 million, and that is with throwing in Notre Dame as a full member for argument's sake. With this swap, the SEC actually becomes $132.7 million per year, and the ACC becomes $106 million per year. So, that is basically a wash, but it is important to note that no one loses per school revenue averages in this scenario.

- In terms of footprint, this arrangement adds completely new states/markets for both conferences and retains each in-state rival as an SEC-ACC matchup. As JR mentioned, this is an ESPN dream. For those who care about such things, this also puts all the state "flagships" into the same conference, although Auburn really seems to operate more like a flagship in Alabama like TAMU does in Texas. In any case, you get the idea. The SEC wins by having only one school per state and adding two new states, and the ACC wins by adding three new states without losing any (plus reducing the crowd in the state of NC).

- Academically, the argument will be in the eye of the beholder. The biggest complaint would be adding Mississippi State, but they are not too dissimilar from Louisville in broad metrics. Both are fine schools, especially when viewed through a broad lens of ranking all universities in America. The ACC would be at a crossroads of what they want to become as an athletic conference. Sticking with the cream of the cream is fine if that is the chosen path, but that has also partially contributed to the PAC's mess when potentially adding Texas Tech and/or Oklahoma State seemed to wreck the idea of adding Texas and Oklahoma several years back. Again, eye of the beholder, so I will not go further down this path.

- Athletically, all of these teams have ready-made rivals in the opposite conference in addition to in-state rivals. You can succeed in all sports in both the SEC and ACC, and there is plenty of room to add the most significant lost conference rivals as non-conference foes every few years. Again, wash here on a per school basis.

- Perhaps most significantly is what is does for the major prize... bridging to Texas. I don't want to get in the weeds here, but Texas is becoming more and more significant, wealthy, and populated year after year. The SEC does not need geography at this point; they need roster spots to add tag-along schools if needed. The ACC has a geography issue right now, but much of that is alleviated by building the bridge through Alabama and Mississippi to Texas' doorstep. Neither move assures that a Texas school or "the" Texas school would eventually join either conference, but it certainly doesn't hurt. Yes, this arrangement takes away a roster spot for the ACC, but the realistic scenario is that the ACC would balloon to near 20 members if they broach the Big 12 and would resemble more of a two-division cooperative (southeastern and mid-Atlantic).

In all, it feels like a swap where both sides are excited about some aspects and grudgingly accept others, but crunching the numbers shows it is a good course for growth potential for both parties. Emotions would get in the way here because it is dealing with deeply rooted members in both conferences. Again, just fodder for thought, and I look forward to NC State joining the SEC soon based on the direction of this thread's conversation 04-cheers
01-04-2021 10:14 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
JRsec Offline
Super Moderator
*

Posts: 26,051
Joined: Mar 2012
Reputation: 2898
I Root For: SEC
Location:
Post: #30
RE: Pros and Cons of SEC/ACC Realignment Scenario
(01-04-2021 10:14 PM)bigblueblindness Wrote:  Thanks for the interesting replies, and I did not anticipate the conversation turning to be primarily about NC State. Below is my brief rationale for the initial thought that incorporates feedback from the posts:

- Using the EADA gross revenue data from the last three available seasons (2017, 18, 19), the average yearly revenue of UNC is $98,252,715, and UVA is $102,434,403. Together, that is basically a $100,000,000 per school addition to the SEC. On the other hand, Auburn is a whopping average of $149,163,064, Mississippi State is $92,279,666, and Vandy is $81,540,112. Together, that is basically a $108 million per school addition to the ACC. In a per school swap based purely on $$$, the ACC wins in this scenario.

- Using these same averages among all schools, the SEC average revenue per school is about $132 million per year. The ACC average revenue per school is about $105 million, and that is with throwing in Notre Dame as a full member for argument's sake. With this swap, the SEC actually becomes $132.7 million per year, and the ACC becomes $106 million per year. So, that is basically a wash, but it is important to note that no one loses per school revenue averages in this scenario.

- In terms of footprint, this arrangement adds completely new states/markets for both conferences and retains each in-state rival as an SEC-ACC matchup. As JR mentioned, this is an ESPN dream. For those who care about such things, this also puts all the state "flagships" into the same conference, although Auburn really seems to operate more like a flagship in Alabama like TAMU does in Texas. In any case, you get the idea. The SEC wins by having only one school per state and adding two new states, and the ACC wins by adding three new states without losing any (plus reducing the crowd in the state of NC).

- Academically, the argument will be in the eye of the beholder. The biggest complaint would be adding Mississippi State, but they are not too dissimilar from Louisville in broad metrics. Both are fine schools, especially when viewed through a broad lens of ranking all universities in America. The ACC would be at a crossroads of what they want to become as an athletic conference. Sticking with the cream of the cream is fine if that is the chosen path, but that has also partially contributed to the PAC's mess when potentially adding Texas Tech and/or Oklahoma State seemed to wreck the idea of adding Texas and Oklahoma several years back. Again, eye of the beholder, so I will not go further down this path.

- Athletically, all of these teams have ready-made rivals in the opposite conference in addition to in-state rivals. You can succeed in all sports in both the SEC and ACC, and there is plenty of room to add the most significant lost conference rivals as non-conference foes every few years. Again, wash here on a per school basis.

- Perhaps most significantly is what is does for the major prize... bridging to Texas. I don't want to get in the weeds here, but Texas is becoming more and more significant, wealthy, and populated year after year. The SEC does not need geography at this point; they need roster spots to add tag-along schools if needed. The ACC has a geography issue right now, but much of that is alleviated by building the bridge through Alabama and Mississippi to Texas' doorstep. Neither move assures that a Texas school or "the" Texas school would eventually join either conference, but it certainly doesn't hurt. Yes, this arrangement takes away a roster spot for the ACC, but the realistic scenario is that the ACC would balloon to near 20 members if they broach the Big 12 and would resemble more of a two-division cooperative (southeastern and mid-Atlantic).

In all, it feels like a swap where both sides are excited about some aspects and grudgingly accept others, but crunching the numbers shows it is a good course for growth potential for both parties. Emotions would get in the way here because it is dealing with deeply rooted members in both conferences. Again, just fodder for thought, and I look forward to NC State joining the SEC soon based on the direction of this thread's conversation 04-cheers

You miscalculated by not incorporating the most recent contract data. Each SEC school will be making ~ 17 million more annually in media revenue beginning in 2024. The ACC deal is not up for renewal until 2036. That's a difference of 200 million per school in the interim 12 years.07-coffee3
01-04-2021 10:53 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
CarlSmithCenter Offline
2nd String
*

Posts: 279
Joined: Jun 2014
Reputation: 27
I Root For: Ball So Hard U
Location:
Post: #31
RE: Pros and Cons of SEC/ACC Realignment Scenario
Vandy and Kentucky for NC State and Georgia Tech.

SEC East: NCSU, SCAR, UGA, GT, Bama, Auburn, UF
SEC South: UT, Ole Miss, MSU, LSU, A&M, Mizzou, Arkansas

ACC Coastal: BC, Cuse, Pitt, Louisville, VT, Vandy, Miami
ACC Atlantic: Duke, UNC, Clemson, Kentucky, UVA, Wake, FSU
01-04-2021 11:51 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
XLance Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 9,894
Joined: Mar 2008
Reputation: 321
I Root For: Carolina
Location:
Post: #32
RE: Pros and Cons of SEC/ACC Realignment Scenario
(01-04-2021 08:52 PM)NJ2MDTerp Wrote:  
(01-04-2021 08:13 PM)XLance Wrote:  
(01-04-2021 06:18 PM)Statefan Wrote:  Carolina will not allow to have a medical school - you can be damn sure they will not allow us to move to the SEC or B10.

Actually that statement is overly harsh toward the Tar Heels, there is and always has been another player in the UNC System hiding behind the Tar Heels and seeking to eliminate competition from Raleigh. We can cut a deal with UNC, but we can't cut a deal with UNC and Duke when the Blue Devil is whispering in the Ram's ear.

Since State is only 21 miles from Duke and 26 miles from Carolina, another medical school in the same location just does not make sense.
Besides a cow college is the perfect spot for a vet school.
Wake Forest (another research hospital) is only 89 miles west of State.
If that's the case, why doesn't State operate a medical campus in Charlotte? Yes I realize UNCC is there.

Wake Forest already operates a medical campus in Charlotte.
https://charlotte.wfu.edu/degree-program...al-school/


The University system also operates a medical school at East Carolina.
Many of those graduates are bound through scholarships to serve for a period of time in rural health service in the eastern part of NC.
If the North Carolina system add another medical school, it would probably be located at either Appalachian State (Boone) or at Western Carolina (Cullowhee) to serve the rural needs of the western part of the state.
(This post was last modified: 01-05-2021 06:10 AM by XLance.)
01-05-2021 06:00 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Wahoowa84 Offline
Special Teams
*

Posts: 501
Joined: Oct 2017
Reputation: 72
I Root For: UVa
Location:
Post: #33
RE: Pros and Cons of SEC/ACC Realignment Scenario
(01-04-2021 10:14 PM)bigblueblindness Wrote:  Thanks for the interesting replies, and I did not anticipate the conversation turning to be primarily about NC State. Below is my brief rationale for the initial thought that incorporates feedback from the posts:

- Using the EADA gross revenue data from the last three available seasons (2017, 18, 19), the average yearly revenue of UNC is $98,252,715, and UVA is $102,434,403. Together, that is basically a $100,000,000 per school addition to the SEC. On the other hand, Auburn is a whopping average of $149,163,064, Mississippi State is $92,279,666, and Vandy is $81,540,112. Together, that is basically a $108 million per school addition to the ACC. In a per school swap based purely on $$$, the ACC wins in this scenario.

- Using these same averages among all schools, the SEC average revenue per school is about $132 million per year. The ACC average revenue per school is about $105 million, and that is with throwing in Notre Dame as a full member for argument's sake. With this swap, the SEC actually becomes $132.7 million per year, and the ACC becomes $106 million per year. So, that is basically a wash, but it is important to note that no one loses per school revenue averages in this scenario.

- In terms of footprint, this arrangement adds completely new states/markets for both conferences and retains each in-state rival as an SEC-ACC matchup. As JR mentioned, this is an ESPN dream. For those who care about such things, this also puts all the state "flagships" into the same conference, although Auburn really seems to operate more like a flagship in Alabama like TAMU does in Texas. In any case, you get the idea. The SEC wins by having only one school per state and adding two new states, and the ACC wins by adding three new states without losing any (plus reducing the crowd in the state of NC).

- Academically, the argument will be in the eye of the beholder. The biggest complaint would be adding Mississippi State, but they are not too dissimilar from Louisville in broad metrics. Both are fine schools, especially when viewed through a broad lens of ranking all universities in America. The ACC would be at a crossroads of what they want to become as an athletic conference. Sticking with the cream of the cream is fine if that is the chosen path, but that has also partially contributed to the PAC's mess when potentially adding Texas Tech and/or Oklahoma State seemed to wreck the idea of adding Texas and Oklahoma several years back. Again, eye of the beholder, so I will not go further down this path.

- Athletically, all of these teams have ready-made rivals in the opposite conference in addition to in-state rivals. You can succeed in all sports in both the SEC and ACC, and there is plenty of room to add the most significant lost conference rivals as non-conference foes every few years. Again, wash here on a per school basis.

- Perhaps most significantly is what is does for the major prize... bridging to Texas. I don't want to get in the weeds here, but Texas is becoming more and more significant, wealthy, and populated year after year. The SEC does not need geography at this point; they need roster spots to add tag-along schools if needed. The ACC has a geography issue right now, but much of that is alleviated by building the bridge through Alabama and Mississippi to Texas' doorstep. Neither move assures that a Texas school or "the" Texas school would eventually join either conference, but it certainly doesn't hurt. Yes, this arrangement takes away a roster spot for the ACC, but the realistic scenario is that the ACC would balloon to near 20 members if they broach the Big 12 and would resemble more of a two-division cooperative (southeastern and mid-Atlantic).

In all, it feels like a swap where both sides are excited about some aspects and grudgingly accept others, but crunching the numbers shows it is a good course for growth potential for both parties. Emotions would get in the way here because it is dealing with deeply rooted members in both conferences. Again, just fodder for thought, and I look forward to NC State joining the SEC soon based on the direction of this thread's conversation 04-cheers
If the major prize is capturing Texas, then it’s probably best to wait until UT-Austin is open to discussions (moving) before making any changes. Athletics at Texas, Oklahoma and Notre Dame are all valuable commodities that ESPN would love to obtain and sign-up for long term contracts. The media rights of the ACC and SEC are both locked into ESPN and would be vehicles for ESPN’s plans.

I actually believe that it would be better for the universities’ athletics within the same state, to be in the same conference. To actually minimize travel for non-revenue sports and enhance rivalries. The financial/business models for football and basketball should also actually be separated from other sports. In football and basketball, the value of collegiate brands are widely different...and the disparity is growing, even within conferences. It could be that UT-Austin football may not want to continue to subsidize the B12, much less Vanderbilt or Mississippi State, nor Wake Forest or UVA.
01-05-2021 09:56 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
schmolik Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,626
Joined: Sep 2019
Reputation: 60
I Root For: UIUC, PSU, Nova
Location: Philadelphia Suburbs
Post: #34
RE: Pros and Cons of SEC/ACC Realignment Scenario
(01-05-2021 09:56 AM)Wahoowa84 Wrote:  If the major prize is capturing Texas, then it’s probably best to wait until UT-Austin is open to discussions (moving) before making any changes. Athletics at Texas, Oklahoma and Notre Dame are all valuable commodities that ESPN would love to obtain and sign-up for long term contracts. The media rights of the ACC and SEC are both locked into ESPN and would be vehicles for ESPN’s plans.

I actually believe that it would be better for the universities’ athletics within the same state, to be in the same conference. To actually minimize travel for non-revenue sports and enhance rivalries. The financial/business models for football and basketball should also actually be separated from other sports. In football and basketball, the value of collegiate brands are widely different...and the disparity is growing, even within conferences. It could be that UT-Austin football may not want to continue to subsidize the B12, much less Vanderbilt or Mississippi State, nor Wake Forest or UVA.

Couldn't agree more. I would love to see Florida and Florida State, Kentucky and Louisville, Texas and Texas A&M (not ACC-SEC but similar argument).
01-05-2021 10:33 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Otacon Offline
Special Teams
*

Posts: 858
Joined: Aug 2009
Reputation: 49
I Root For: West Virginia
Location: West Virginia
Post: #35
RE: Pros and Cons of SEC/ACC Realignment Scenario
Can someone tell me the affinity for NC State? I guess I know nothing about them, because they don't really seem to be great in anything I'm aware of...
01-05-2021 11:33 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
CitrusUCF Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 6,547
Joined: Jan 2008
Reputation: 190
I Root For: UCF
Location: NW Ark.
Post: #36
RE: Pros and Cons of SEC/ACC Realignment Scenario
(01-05-2021 11:33 AM)Otacon Wrote:  Can someone tell me the affinity for NC State? I guess I know nothing about them, because they don't really seem to be great in anything I'm aware of...

Something along the lines of state flagship equivalent in a big Southern state that the SEC isn't in, big city (accessible), a bit more football focused than UNC, and more attainable for the SEC than UNC.
01-05-2021 12:03 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
JRsec Offline
Super Moderator
*

Posts: 26,051
Joined: Mar 2012
Reputation: 2898
I Root For: SEC
Location:
Post: #37
RE: Pros and Cons of SEC/ACC Realignment Scenario
(01-05-2021 12:03 PM)CitrusUCF Wrote:  
(01-05-2021 11:33 AM)Otacon Wrote:  Can someone tell me the affinity for NC State? I guess I know nothing about them, because they don't really seem to be great in anything I'm aware of...

Something along the lines of state flagship equivalent in a big Southern state that the SEC isn't in, big city (accessible), a bit more football focused than UNC, and more attainable for the SEC than UNC.

Actually the only way N.C. State adds to the bottom line of the SEC is by replacing the last place school in our economic pecking order, and that would be Vanderbilt. Replace them with a school that brings new markets (Vanderbilt doesn't for the SEC) and which annually competes at a higher level than Vanderbilt (and N.C.State does, and the conference enhances its status in competition quality, markets, and slightly in revenue.

That's about the only allure.
01-05-2021 12:47 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
CitrusUCF Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 6,547
Joined: Jan 2008
Reputation: 190
I Root For: UCF
Location: NW Ark.
Post: #38
RE: Pros and Cons of SEC/ACC Realignment Scenario
(01-05-2021 12:47 PM)JRsec Wrote:  
(01-05-2021 12:03 PM)CitrusUCF Wrote:  
(01-05-2021 11:33 AM)Otacon Wrote:  Can someone tell me the affinity for NC State? I guess I know nothing about them, because they don't really seem to be great in anything I'm aware of...

Something along the lines of state flagship equivalent in a big Southern state that the SEC isn't in, big city (accessible), a bit more football focused than UNC, and more attainable for the SEC than UNC.

Actually the only way N.C. State adds to the bottom line of the SEC is by replacing the last place school in our economic pecking order, and that would be Vanderbilt. Replace them with a school that brings new markets (Vanderbilt doesn't for the SEC) and which annually competes at a higher level than Vanderbilt (and N.C.State does, and the conference enhances its status in competition quality, markets, and slightly in revenue.

That's about the only allure.

There's just no way that NC State, a flagship-equivalent school in a large state with four large media markets (#21, #27, parts of #38, #49) is worth less than Ole Miss or Mississippi State.
(This post was last modified: 01-05-2021 03:14 PM by CitrusUCF.)
01-05-2021 03:12 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
JRsec Offline
Super Moderator
*

Posts: 26,051
Joined: Mar 2012
Reputation: 2898
I Root For: SEC
Location:
Post: #39
RE: Pros and Cons of SEC/ACC Realignment Scenario
(01-05-2021 03:12 PM)CitrusUCF Wrote:  
(01-05-2021 12:47 PM)JRsec Wrote:  
(01-05-2021 12:03 PM)CitrusUCF Wrote:  
(01-05-2021 11:33 AM)Otacon Wrote:  Can someone tell me the affinity for NC State? I guess I know nothing about them, because they don't really seem to be great in anything I'm aware of...

Something along the lines of state flagship equivalent in a big Southern state that the SEC isn't in, big city (accessible), a bit more football focused than UNC, and more attainable for the SEC than UNC.

Actually the only way N.C. State adds to the bottom line of the SEC is by replacing the last place school in our economic pecking order, and that would be Vanderbilt. Replace them with a school that brings new markets (Vanderbilt doesn't for the SEC) and which annually competes at a higher level than Vanderbilt (and N.C.State does, and the conference enhances its status in competition quality, markets, and slightly in revenue.

That's about the only allure.

There's just no way that NC State, a flagship-equivalent school in a large state with four large media markets (#21, #27, parts of #38, #49) is worth less than Ole Miss or Mississippi State.

Oh yes there is. In 2010-2 the payout models were based on the number of households in a state that purchased cable for T1 and T2 rights and conference networks were paid by subscription as well. So adding new demographics of size was more relevant. With the advent o smart TV that has shifted. Now the game is based on how many actually watch an event, not just the number of people who pay for a cable subscription that includes ESPN / FS1 etc.

What the SEC absolutely wins hands down is the percentage of actual viewers to the number of potential viewers and nobody else is even close in this metric. It is why the future payouts will slightly favor the SEC over the Big 10. Advertisers now base their rates with the networks on actual viewers and they no longer pay for potential viewers. Thank you smart TV's.

So the question is not whether the Mississippi schools reach markets that #27, 21, 38, and 49 in number of possible viewers but rather how many in Mississippi actually watch Mississippi State and Ole Miss football. The ACC and PAC 12 are by far the least viewed conferences and by a significant margin as they seem to battle each other for last each year. So the real issue is in those four top 50 markets how many people actually watch N.C. State football? In 2018 Miss State had 22 million viewers total in nationally televised games. Ole Miss had 12 million and N.C. State had 9 million. There is the new pay model difference. In the old days nobody actually knew the total numbers outside of the state of Mississippi, or even in it for that matter.

Now what that means really is that the Mississippi schools played big games against monster brands like A&M, L.S.U., Alabama and Auburn (all top 15 nationally). N.C. State may have had a game against F.S.U.

So the point is the conference itself has synergy for eyeballs. The ACC doesn't generate the interest in football as a whole as the SEC, Big 10, and Big 12 do. Basketball is a different matter, but basketball is only 20% of most media contract revenue.

So there's your answer. Advertisers pay for actual eyeballs today rather than potential eyeballs. They want national draw games which the ACC doesn't produce nearly as many of as the SEC or Big 10, and about the only place market size still matters is in the conference Network money which is just a fraction of the T1&T2 revenue and even that now is based on actual viewers in terms of how much each school gets for each subscription. The SEC at its peak averaged .74 cents per sub and the Big 10 .57 per sub and the PAC 12 .11 cents per sub. Nice for about 6 or 7 million for the SEC at its peak, but hardly a game changer now.
01-05-2021 03:57 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
CitrusUCF Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 6,547
Joined: Jan 2008
Reputation: 190
I Root For: UCF
Location: NW Ark.
Post: #40
RE: Pros and Cons of SEC/ACC Realignment Scenario
(01-05-2021 03:57 PM)JRsec Wrote:  
(01-05-2021 03:12 PM)CitrusUCF Wrote:  
(01-05-2021 12:47 PM)JRsec Wrote:  
(01-05-2021 12:03 PM)CitrusUCF Wrote:  
(01-05-2021 11:33 AM)Otacon Wrote:  Can someone tell me the affinity for NC State? I guess I know nothing about them, because they don't really seem to be great in anything I'm aware of...

Something along the lines of state flagship equivalent in a big Southern state that the SEC isn't in, big city (accessible), a bit more football focused than UNC, and more attainable for the SEC than UNC.

Actually the only way N.C. State adds to the bottom line of the SEC is by replacing the last place school in our economic pecking order, and that would be Vanderbilt. Replace them with a school that brings new markets (Vanderbilt doesn't for the SEC) and which annually competes at a higher level than Vanderbilt (and N.C.State does, and the conference enhances its status in competition quality, markets, and slightly in revenue.

That's about the only allure.

There's just no way that NC State, a flagship-equivalent school in a large state with four large media markets (#21, #27, parts of #38, #49) is worth less than Ole Miss or Mississippi State.

Oh yes there is. In 2010-2 the payout models were based on the number of households in a state that purchased cable for T1 and T2 rights and conference networks were paid by subscription as well. So adding new demographics of size was more relevant. With the advent o smart TV that has shifted. Now the game is based on how many actually watch an event, not just the number of people who pay for a cable subscription that includes ESPN / FS1 etc.

What the SEC absolutely wins hands down is the percentage of actual viewers to the number of potential viewers and nobody else is even close in this metric. It is why the future payouts will slightly favor the SEC over the Big 10. Advertisers now base their rates with the networks on actual viewers and they no longer pay for potential viewers. Thank you smart TV's.

So the question is not whether the Mississippi schools reach markets that #27, 21, 38, and 49 in number of possible viewers but rather how many in Mississippi actually watch Mississippi State and Ole Miss football. The ACC and PAC 12 are by far the least viewed conferences and by a significant margin as they seem to battle each other for last each year. So the real issue is in those four top 50 markets how many people actually watch N.C. State football? In 2018 Miss State had 22 million viewers total in nationally televised games. Ole Miss had 12 million and N.C. State had 9 million. There is the new pay model difference. In the old days nobody actually knew the total numbers outside of the state of Mississippi, or even in it for that matter.

Now what that means really is that the Mississippi schools played big games against monster brands like A&M, L.S.U., Alabama and Auburn (all top 15 nationally). N.C. State may have had a game against F.S.U.

So the point is the conference itself has synergy for eyeballs. The ACC doesn't generate the interest in football as a whole as the SEC, Big 10, and Big 12 do. Basketball is a different matter, but basketball is only 20% of most media contract revenue.

So there's your answer. Advertisers pay for actual eyeballs today rather than potential eyeballs. They want national draw games which the ACC doesn't produce nearly as many of as the SEC or Big 10, and about the only place market size still matters is in the conference Network money which is just a fraction of the T1&T2 revenue and even that now is based on actual viewers in terms of how much each school gets for each subscription. The SEC at its peak averaged .74 cents per sub and the Big 10 .57 per sub and the PAC 12 .11 cents per sub. Nice for about 6 or 7 million for the SEC at its peak, but hardly a game changer now.

But by your own admission, you don't know what NC State vs Alabama/LSU/Florida/Georgia would generate versus Ole Miss/Miss State. It is almost certainly higher when North Carolina dwarfs Mississippi as a state, even if the engagement rate in Mississippi is higher. The national interest is a ceteris paribus, because no one outside of Mississippi gives a flying f--- about either of those schools unless they're playing an actual national brand, so NC State would draw the same national interest in playing an SEC national brand and would add additional eyeballs in NC, which would be greater than the Mississippi schools.
01-05-2021 04:58 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 




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


Copyright © 2002-2021 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, © 2002-2021 MyBB Group.