(08-25-2022 10:03 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  

(08-25-2022 09:21 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(08-25-2022 08:49 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  Based on all the factors discussed, if you had to rank expansion candidates 1-16, how would you rank them JR?

I am assuming you mean collectively for the SEC and B1G:
1. Notre Dame

Big Gap

2. Florida State

Gap

3. North Carolina (essential brand nice sized state)
4. Washington (essential West Coast brand)
5. Oregon (essential West Coast brand)
6 & 7. Virginia/Virginia Tech (Medium state Academic Flagship/Best Sports Property)

Gap
8. Clemson (only this low because they likely are not a B1G candidate)
9. Louisville (see Clemson)
10. Miami (only this low because they are #3 Florida school)
11. Kansas (if hoops are freed, they rise significantly)
12. Stanford
13. N.C. State
14. Duke (if hoops are freed, they rise significantly)
15. Georgia Tech
16. Syracuse (because of N.Y. ratings)
17. Pittsburgh (would be higher but SEC likely not interested)
18. California (you are being blackmailed, but they are a leading academic school)

I was actually thinking in terms of how the SEC would evaluate the programs available since what they are looking for and prioritize isn’t necessarily what the Big 10 emphasizes.

Based on what you have there:

1. FSU
2. UNC
T-3. UVA/VT
5. Clemson
6. Louisville
7. Miami
8. Kansas
9. NC St
10. Duke
11. GT

Would Sankey and Co be able to live with the Big 10 getting Miami and Kansas? That would give you guys a very homogeneous southern in identity conference.

I thought that to be a potential compromise. If we have UNC / Duke or NC State (UNC's choice) / Virginia / Ga Tech / Clemson / FSU / Louisville / and Va Tech

then we have plenty of added hoops. Kansas then becomes less essential to Kentucky, so the question is how Missouri, Oklahoma, and Texas feel about it?

Miami is not ours, is different culturally, and wouldn't impact our add rates too much.

I'd say it's possible.

(08-25-2022 10:27 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(08-25-2022 10:03 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  

(08-25-2022 09:21 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(08-25-2022 08:49 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  Based on all the factors discussed, if you had to rank expansion candidates 1-16, how would you rank them JR?

I am assuming you mean collectively for the SEC and B1G:
1. Notre Dame

Big Gap

2. Florida State

Gap

3. North Carolina (essential brand nice sized state)
4. Washington (essential West Coast brand)
5. Oregon (essential West Coast brand)
6 & 7. Virginia/Virginia Tech (Medium state Academic Flagship/Best Sports Property)

Gap
8. Clemson (only this low because they likely are not a B1G candidate)
9. Louisville (see Clemson)
10. Miami (only this low because they are #3 Florida school)
11. Kansas (if hoops are freed, they rise significantly)
12. Stanford
13. N.C. State
14. Duke (if hoops are freed, they rise significantly)
15. Georgia Tech
16. Syracuse (because of N.Y. ratings)
17. Pittsburgh (would be higher but SEC likely not interested)
18. California (you are being blackmailed, but they are a leading academic school)

I was actually thinking in terms of how the SEC would evaluate the programs available since what they are looking for and prioritize isn’t necessarily what the Big 10 emphasizes.

Based on what you have there:

1. FSU
2. UNC
T-3. UVA/VT
5. Clemson
6. Louisville
7. Miami
8. Kansas
9. NC St
10. Duke
11. GT

Would Sankey and Co be able to live with the Big 10 getting Miami and Kansas? That would give you guys a very homogeneous southern in identity conference.

I thought that to be a potential compromise. If we have UNC / Duke or NC State (UNC's choice) / Virginia / Ga Tech / Clemson / FSU / Louisville / and Va Tech

then we have plenty of added hoops. Kansas then becomes less essential to Kentucky, so the question is how Missouri, Oklahoma, and Texas feel about it?

Miami is not ours, is different culturally, and wouldn't impact our add rates too much.

I'd say it's possible.

With Duke and GT both being fringe options for the SEC, would the SEC cause a fuss if the Big 10 took one of them?

If only Duke was somewhere like Connecticut, closer to where their students actually come from; that would make the decision a little easier.

(08-26-2022 07:28 AM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  

(08-25-2022 10:27 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(08-25-2022 10:03 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  

(08-25-2022 09:21 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(08-25-2022 08:49 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  Based on all the factors discussed, if you had to rank expansion candidates 1-16, how would you rank them JR?

I am assuming you mean collectively for the SEC and B1G:
1. Notre Dame

Big Gap

2. Florida State

Gap

3. North Carolina (essential brand nice sized state)
4. Washington (essential West Coast brand)
5. Oregon (essential West Coast brand)
6 & 7. Virginia/Virginia Tech (Medium state Academic Flagship/Best Sports Property)

Gap
8. Clemson (only this low because they likely are not a B1G candidate)
9. Louisville (see Clemson)
10. Miami (only this low because they are #3 Florida school)
11. Kansas (if hoops are freed, they rise significantly)
12. Stanford
13. N.C. State
14. Duke (if hoops are freed, they rise significantly)
15. Georgia Tech
16. Syracuse (because of N.Y. ratings)
17. Pittsburgh (would be higher but SEC likely not interested)
18. California (you are being blackmailed, but they are a leading academic school)

I was actually thinking in terms of how the SEC would evaluate the programs available since what they are looking for and prioritize isn’t necessarily what the Big 10 emphasizes.

Based on what you have there:

1. FSU
2. UNC
T-3. UVA/VT
5. Clemson
6. Louisville
7. Miami
8. Kansas
9. NC St
10. Duke
11. GT

Would Sankey and Co be able to live with the Big 10 getting Miami and Kansas? That would give you guys a very homogeneous southern in identity conference.

I thought that to be a potential compromise. If we have UNC / Duke or NC State (UNC's choice) / Virginia / Ga Tech / Clemson / FSU / Louisville / and Va Tech

then we have plenty of added hoops. Kansas then becomes less essential to Kentucky, so the question is how Missouri, Oklahoma, and Texas feel about it?

Miami is not ours, is different culturally, and wouldn't impact our add rates too much.

I'd say it's possible.

With Duke and GT both being fringe options for the SEC, would the SEC cause a fuss if the Big 10 took one of them?

If only Duke was somewhere like Connecticut, closer to where their students actually come from; that would make the decision a little easier.

Here's the conundrum with that pair. The SEC might not care about Duke, but UNC might. If UNC chooses NC State as travel mate, then no problem. If they pick Duke, there is one, and it's a problem because I don't see the SEC as being willing to cede any of the Atlanta market, or Georgia.

I posted once, reread the thread, deleted my post and now I'm posting again, its been a roller coaster.

2 things to ask the board experts:

1) Is it a foregone conclusion that UNC chooses the SEC? It seems to be that however things break down the one between Big 10/SEC with UNC at the end is the "winner," even with me being high on NC State.

2) I see a lot of TCU as a potential 24th school for the SEC. Could SMU take their place? Slightly higher academics, with a larger total student body (yes, more graduate students though). TCU does have the larger stadium but I think SMU has the money to grow it. It might be knit-picky at that point, but I feel like (completely subjectively) that they might be a better cultural fit.

(08-26-2022 04:52 PM)Soobahk40050 Wrote:  I posted once, reread the thread, deleted my post and now I'm posting again, its been a roller coaster.

2 things to ask the board experts:

1) Is it a foregone conclusion that UNC chooses the SEC? It seems to be that however things break down the one between Big 10/SEC with UNC at the end is the "winner," even with me being high on NC State.

2) I see a lot of TCU as a potential 24th school for the SEC. Could SMU take their place? Slightly higher academics, with a larger total student body (yes, more graduate students though). TCU does have the larger stadium but I think SMU has the money to grow it. It might be knit-picky at that point, but I feel like (completely subjectively) that they might be a better cultural fit.

1. Let's solve the UNC issue. Yes they carry more of their state. Yes the SEC and B1G will want them. Yes their academics prefer the B1G and were likely educated there, but yes their donors and fans prefer the SEC and so far the consumers of athletics at Texas, Texas A&M, and Oklahoma have chosen the SEC and the consumers have won in each case. Why? It's athletics, we are closer, and we fit their culture better.

However, none of that will determine this issue. ESPN simply won't surrender the brand even if it means dragging this out for 14 years. With the money at stake I just don't think that happens.

2. The SEC has 2 objectives where the ACC is concerned. No Big 10 schools in the Deep South. And, preserve rivalries.

Florida State, Georgia Tech, and Clemson are the Deep South rivalries to be protected.

North Carolina will be granted a rival. Duke is private. It is believed NC State will be the rival because the N.C. University System will insist upon it.

If we take Virginia taking Tech as well makes sense due to rivalry.

That's 7. How about Louisville? 15th in revenue and solid in the big 3 men's sports.
Miami? Deep South, rivals with FSU and UF and in a different region of the State, though not what you would call Deep South culture.

If the B1G lands Notre Dame after taking Cal, Stanford, Oregon and Washington, they have 3 left. I could see Duke and Virginia headed to the Big 10 which needs another New England / NE school to help Penn State and Rutgers. IMO Syracuse would be the best actually giving them a school in New York. Pitt duplicates PSU's market, and B.C. hockey would be a plus, I'm just not sure they would have the impact of 'Cuse.

Should that happen the SEC could close out with Miami. We wouldn't need Kansas with Louisville and UNC which could easily rival up with Tennessee.

That's 12 ACC schools placed, enough to vote dissolution without any doubts.

I'm sure the Big Ten wants a Florida presence, but even they would see the value of N.D., Duke, Virginia and a presence in NY.

Muskie will likely feel differently. But the SEC would be well situated with: Clemson, Florida State, Georgia Tech, Louisville, Miami, North Carolina, N.C. State, Virginia Tech.

(08-26-2022 05:21 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(08-26-2022 04:52 PM)Soobahk40050 Wrote:  I posted once, reread the thread, deleted my post and now I'm posting again, its been a roller coaster.

2 things to ask the board experts:

1) Is it a foregone conclusion that UNC chooses the SEC? It seems to be that however things break down the one between Big 10/SEC with UNC at the end is the "winner," even with me being high on NC State.

2) I see a lot of TCU as a potential 24th school for the SEC. Could SMU take their place? Slightly higher academics, with a larger total student body (yes, more graduate students though). TCU does have the larger stadium but I think SMU has the money to grow it. It might be knit-picky at that point, but I feel like (completely subjectively) that they might be a better cultural fit.

1. Let's solve the UNC issue. Yes they carry more of their state. Yes the SEC and B1G will want them. Yes their academics prefer the B1G and were likely educated there, but yes their donors and fans prefer the SEC and so far the consumers of athletics at Texas, Texas A&M, and Oklahoma have chosen the SEC and the consumers have won in each case. Why? It's athletics, we are closer, and we fit their culture better.

However, none of that will determine this issue. ESPN simply won't surrender the brand even if it means dragging this out for 14 years. With the money at stake I just don't think that happens.

2. The SEC has 2 objectives where the ACC is concerned. No Big 10 schools in the Deep South. And, preserve rivalries.

Florida State, Georgia Tech, and Clemson are the Deep South rivalries to be protected.

North Carolina will be granted a rival. Duke is private. It is believed NC State will be the rival because the N.C. University System will insist upon it.

If we take Virginia taking Tech as well makes sense due to rivalry.

That's 7. How about Louisville? 15th in revenue and solid in the big 3 men's sports.
Miami? Deep South, rivals with FSU and UF and in a different region of the State, though not what you would call Deep South culture.

If the B1G lands Notre Dame after taking Cal, Stanford, Oregon and Washington, they have 3 left. I could see Duke and Virginia headed to the Big 10 which needs another New England / NE school to help Penn State and Rutgers. IMO Syracuse would be the best actually giving them a school in New York. Pitt duplicates PSU's market, and B.C. hockey would be a plus, I'm just not sure they would have the impact of 'Cuse.

Should that happen the SEC could close out with Miami. We wouldn't need Kansas with Louisville and UNC which could easily rival up with Tennessee.

That's 12 ACC schools placed, enough to vote dissolution without any doubts.

I'm sure the Big Ten wants a Florida presence, but even they would see the value of N.D., Duke, Virginia and a presence in NY.

Muskie will likely feel differently. But the SEC would be well situated with: Clemson, Florida State, Georgia Tech, Louisville, Miami, North Carolina, N.C. State, Virginia Tech.

I think most of what you said is likely (until you started talking about Syracuse and Pitt).

But I think NC is likely to the B10. As an SEC booster, I understand why you see them going south. I've honestly wobbled on the fence about this myself. But you said the magic word: Academics. Sports doesn't lead these schools. I know as posters on the boards, we'd like to think that's true, but school leaders answer to a lot of masters. And as others have noted: Money isn't the over-riding issue for these schools.

All that said, while there's a chance that B10 might get FSU, I think you're right and they are heading south.

I think SEC likely has a lock on these 7, if they want them: Clemson, Florida State, Georgia Tech, Louisville, Miami, N.C. State, Virginia Tech.

Miami being the weakest link, as you note, but I agree the Florida cup is likely a draw. Plus, we really need to stop ignoring how travel influences these things. It's not everything, but it does have a value/cost.

So if the B10 gets NC, VA, and Duke, I think that would be all they would invite from the ACC, unless they get Miami with a travel partner.

Which means the B10 takes either 3 or 5 from the PAC, which it could easily do. (plus ND could get in the mix.)

And for it's 8th, SEC could take Kansas to replace NC as a basketball power, and to help supplement the western schools: Missouri and Oklahoma are looking as kind of outliers, and adding Kansas would help shore that up.

(08-26-2022 05:42 PM)Skyhawk Wrote:  

(08-26-2022 05:21 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(08-26-2022 04:52 PM)Soobahk40050 Wrote:  I posted once, reread the thread, deleted my post and now I'm posting again, its been a roller coaster.

2 things to ask the board experts:

1) Is it a foregone conclusion that UNC chooses the SEC? It seems to be that however things break down the one between Big 10/SEC with UNC at the end is the "winner," even with me being high on NC State.

2) I see a lot of TCU as a potential 24th school for the SEC. Could SMU take their place? Slightly higher academics, with a larger total student body (yes, more graduate students though). TCU does have the larger stadium but I think SMU has the money to grow it. It might be knit-picky at that point, but I feel like (completely subjectively) that they might be a better cultural fit.

1. Let's solve the UNC issue. Yes they carry more of their state. Yes the SEC and B1G will want them. Yes their academics prefer the B1G and were likely educated there, but yes their donors and fans prefer the SEC and so far the consumers of athletics at Texas, Texas A&M, and Oklahoma have chosen the SEC and the consumers have won in each case. Why? It's athletics, we are closer, and we fit their culture better.

However, none of that will determine this issue. ESPN simply won't surrender the brand even if it means dragging this out for 14 years. With the money at stake I just don't think that happens.

2. The SEC has 2 objectives where the ACC is concerned. No Big 10 schools in the Deep South. And, preserve rivalries.

Florida State, Georgia Tech, and Clemson are the Deep South rivalries to be protected.

North Carolina will be granted a rival. Duke is private. It is believed NC State will be the rival because the N.C. University System will insist upon it.

If we take Virginia taking Tech as well makes sense due to rivalry.

That's 7. How about Louisville? 15th in revenue and solid in the big 3 men's sports.
Miami? Deep South, rivals with FSU and UF and in a different region of the State, though not what you would call Deep South culture.

If the B1G lands Notre Dame after taking Cal, Stanford, Oregon and Washington, they have 3 left. I could see Duke and Virginia headed to the Big 10 which needs another New England / NE school to help Penn State and Rutgers. IMO Syracuse would be the best actually giving them a school in New York. Pitt duplicates PSU's market, and B.C. hockey would be a plus, I'm just not sure they would have the impact of 'Cuse.

Should that happen the SEC could close out with Miami. We wouldn't need Kansas with Louisville and UNC which could easily rival up with Tennessee.

That's 12 ACC schools placed, enough to vote dissolution without any doubts.

I'm sure the Big Ten wants a Florida presence, but even they would see the value of N.D., Duke, Virginia and a presence in NY.

Muskie will likely feel differently. But the SEC would be well situated with: Clemson, Florida State, Georgia Tech, Louisville, Miami, North Carolina, N.C. State, Virginia Tech.

I think most of what you said is likely (until you started talking about Syracuse and Pitt).

But I think NC is likely to the B10. As an SEC booster, I understand why you see them going south. I've honestly wobbled on the fence about this myself. But you said the magic word: Academics. Sports doesn't lead these schools. I know as posters on the boards, we'd like to think that's true, but school leaders answer to a lot of masters. And as others have noted: Money isn't the over-riding issue for these schools.

All that said, while there's a chance that B10 might get FSU, I think you're right and they are heading south.

I think SEC likely has a lock on these 7, if they want them: Clemson, Florida State, Georgia Tech, Louisville, Miami, N.C. State, Virginia Tech.

Miami being the weakest link, as you note, but I agree the Florida cup is likely a draw. Plus, we really need to stop ignoring how travel influences these things. It's not everything, but it does have a value/cost.

So if the B10 gets NC, VA, and Duke, I think that would be all they would invite from the ACC, unless they get Miami with a travel partner.

Which means the B10 takes either 3 or 5 from the PAC, which it could easily do. (plus ND could get in the mix.)

And for it's 8th, SEC could take Kansas to replace NC as a basketball power, and to help supplement the western schools: Missouri and Oklahoma are looking as kind of outliers, and adding Kansas would help shore that up.

I can't say it wouldn't work for me because UNC is a much larger issue than even Aggie fans could imagine Texas to be. My overriding point stands. ESPN is the entity which must be overcome.

And so you know, my opinion is also formed because UNC came to the SEC in 2010, and had an unofficial, yet official, ambassador visit 3 days after the Texas announcement and with a buddy from Clemson. Whatever may be in the works has been since July 2021.

And you are wrong about academics taking precedence over sports matters. Sports has a consumer base. Academics don't.

(08-26-2022 05:54 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(08-26-2022 05:42 PM)Skyhawk Wrote:  

(08-26-2022 05:21 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(08-26-2022 04:52 PM)Soobahk40050 Wrote:  I posted once, reread the thread, deleted my post and now I'm posting again, its been a roller coaster.

2 things to ask the board experts:

1) Is it a foregone conclusion that UNC chooses the SEC? It seems to be that however things break down the one between Big 10/SEC with UNC at the end is the "winner," even with me being high on NC State.

2) I see a lot of TCU as a potential 24th school for the SEC. Could SMU take their place? Slightly higher academics, with a larger total student body (yes, more graduate students though). TCU does have the larger stadium but I think SMU has the money to grow it. It might be knit-picky at that point, but I feel like (completely subjectively) that they might be a better cultural fit.

1. Let's solve the UNC issue. Yes they carry more of their state. Yes the SEC and B1G will want them. Yes their academics prefer the B1G and were likely educated there, but yes their donors and fans prefer the SEC and so far the consumers of athletics at Texas, Texas A&M, and Oklahoma have chosen the SEC and the consumers have won in each case. Why? It's athletics, we are closer, and we fit their culture better.

However, none of that will determine this issue. ESPN simply won't surrender the brand even if it means dragging this out for 14 years. With the money at stake I just don't think that happens.

2. The SEC has 2 objectives where the ACC is concerned. No Big 10 schools in the Deep South. And, preserve rivalries.

Florida State, Georgia Tech, and Clemson are the Deep South rivalries to be protected.

North Carolina will be granted a rival. Duke is private. It is believed NC State will be the rival because the N.C. University System will insist upon it.

If we take Virginia taking Tech as well makes sense due to rivalry.

That's 7. How about Louisville? 15th in revenue and solid in the big 3 men's sports.
Miami? Deep South, rivals with FSU and UF and in a different region of the State, though not what you would call Deep South culture.

If the B1G lands Notre Dame after taking Cal, Stanford, Oregon and Washington, they have 3 left. I could see Duke and Virginia headed to the Big 10 which needs another New England / NE school to help Penn State and Rutgers. IMO Syracuse would be the best actually giving them a school in New York. Pitt duplicates PSU's market, and B.C. hockey would be a plus, I'm just not sure they would have the impact of 'Cuse.

Should that happen the SEC could close out with Miami. We wouldn't need Kansas with Louisville and UNC which could easily rival up with Tennessee.

That's 12 ACC schools placed, enough to vote dissolution without any doubts.

I'm sure the Big Ten wants a Florida presence, but even they would see the value of N.D., Duke, Virginia and a presence in NY.

Muskie will likely feel differently. But the SEC would be well situated with: Clemson, Florida State, Georgia Tech, Louisville, Miami, North Carolina, N.C. State, Virginia Tech.

I think most of what you said is likely (until you started talking about Syracuse and Pitt).

But I think NC is likely to the B10. As an SEC booster, I understand why you see them going south. I've honestly wobbled on the fence about this myself. But you said the magic word: Academics. Sports doesn't lead these schools. I know as posters on the boards, we'd like to think that's true, but school leaders answer to a lot of masters. And as others have noted: Money isn't the over-riding issue for these schools.

All that said, while there's a chance that B10 might get FSU, I think you're right and they are heading south.

I think SEC likely has a lock on these 7, if they want them: Clemson, Florida State, Georgia Tech, Louisville, Miami, N.C. State, Virginia Tech.

Miami being the weakest link, as you note, but I agree the Florida cup is likely a draw. Plus, we really need to stop ignoring how travel influences these things. It's not everything, but it does have a value/cost.

So if the B10 gets NC, VA, and Duke, I think that would be all they would invite from the ACC, unless they get Miami with a travel partner.

Which means the B10 takes either 3 or 5 from the PAC, which it could easily do. (plus ND could get in the mix.)

And for it's 8th, SEC could take Kansas to replace NC as a basketball power, and to help supplement the western schools: Missouri and Oklahoma are looking as kind of outliers, and adding Kansas would help shore that up.

I can't say it wouldn't work for me because UNC is a much larger issue than even Aggie fans could imagine Texas to be. My overriding point stands. ESPN is the entity which must be overcome.

And so you know, my opinion is also formed because UNC came to the SEC in 2010, and had an unofficial, yet official, ambassador visit 3 days after the Texas announcement and with a buddy from Clemson. Whatever may be in the works has been since July 2021.

And you are wrong about academics taking precedence over sports matters. Sports has a consumer base. Academics don't.

And Delaney talked with NC during those rounds of realignment too.

Talk happens.

And I wasn't talking all schools. For some schools, sports is a major importance for various reasons.

But because money is less of an issue here (for NC), so too are sports media deals, in this process.

But we're both prognosticating about likelihoods. It could all come down to timing, or, quite possibly, some decision-maker flipping a coin. lol

(08-26-2022 06:11 PM)Skyhawk Wrote:  

(08-26-2022 05:54 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(08-26-2022 05:42 PM)Skyhawk Wrote:  

(08-26-2022 05:21 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(08-26-2022 04:52 PM)Soobahk40050 Wrote:  I posted once, reread the thread, deleted my post and now I'm posting again, its been a roller coaster.

2 things to ask the board experts:

1) Is it a foregone conclusion that UNC chooses the SEC? It seems to be that however things break down the one between Big 10/SEC with UNC at the end is the "winner," even with me being high on NC State.

2) I see a lot of TCU as a potential 24th school for the SEC. Could SMU take their place? Slightly higher academics, with a larger total student body (yes, more graduate students though). TCU does have the larger stadium but I think SMU has the money to grow it. It might be knit-picky at that point, but I feel like (completely subjectively) that they might be a better cultural fit.

1. Let's solve the UNC issue. Yes they carry more of their state. Yes the SEC and B1G will want them. Yes their academics prefer the B1G and were likely educated there, but yes their donors and fans prefer the SEC and so far the consumers of athletics at Texas, Texas A&M, and Oklahoma have chosen the SEC and the consumers have won in each case. Why? It's athletics, we are closer, and we fit their culture better.

However, none of that will determine this issue. ESPN simply won't surrender the brand even if it means dragging this out for 14 years. With the money at stake I just don't think that happens.

2. The SEC has 2 objectives where the ACC is concerned. No Big 10 schools in the Deep South. And, preserve rivalries.

Florida State, Georgia Tech, and Clemson are the Deep South rivalries to be protected.

North Carolina will be granted a rival. Duke is private. It is believed NC State will be the rival because the N.C. University System will insist upon it.

If we take Virginia taking Tech as well makes sense due to rivalry.

That's 7. How about Louisville? 15th in revenue and solid in the big 3 men's sports.
Miami? Deep South, rivals with FSU and UF and in a different region of the State, though not what you would call Deep South culture.

If the B1G lands Notre Dame after taking Cal, Stanford, Oregon and Washington, they have 3 left. I could see Duke and Virginia headed to the Big 10 which needs another New England / NE school to help Penn State and Rutgers. IMO Syracuse would be the best actually giving them a school in New York. Pitt duplicates PSU's market, and B.C. hockey would be a plus, I'm just not sure they would have the impact of 'Cuse.

Should that happen the SEC could close out with Miami. We wouldn't need Kansas with Louisville and UNC which could easily rival up with Tennessee.

That's 12 ACC schools placed, enough to vote dissolution without any doubts.

I'm sure the Big Ten wants a Florida presence, but even they would see the value of N.D., Duke, Virginia and a presence in NY.

Muskie will likely feel differently. But the SEC would be well situated with: Clemson, Florida State, Georgia Tech, Louisville, Miami, North Carolina, N.C. State, Virginia Tech.

I think most of what you said is likely (until you started talking about Syracuse and Pitt).

But I think NC is likely to the B10. As an SEC booster, I understand why you see them going south. I've honestly wobbled on the fence about this myself. But you said the magic word: Academics. Sports doesn't lead these schools. I know as posters on the boards, we'd like to think that's true, but school leaders answer to a lot of masters. And as others have noted: Money isn't the over-riding issue for these schools.

All that said, while there's a chance that B10 might get FSU, I think you're right and they are heading south.

I think SEC likely has a lock on these 7, if they want them: Clemson, Florida State, Georgia Tech, Louisville, Miami, N.C. State, Virginia Tech.

Miami being the weakest link, as you note, but I agree the Florida cup is likely a draw. Plus, we really need to stop ignoring how travel influences these things. It's not everything, but it does have a value/cost.

So if the B10 gets NC, VA, and Duke, I think that would be all they would invite from the ACC, unless they get Miami with a travel partner.

Which means the B10 takes either 3 or 5 from the PAC, which it could easily do. (plus ND could get in the mix.)

And for it's 8th, SEC could take Kansas to replace NC as a basketball power, and to help supplement the western schools: Missouri and Oklahoma are looking as kind of outliers, and adding Kansas would help shore that up.

I can't say it wouldn't work for me because UNC is a much larger issue than even Aggie fans could imagine Texas to be. My overriding point stands. ESPN is the entity which must be overcome.

And so you know, my opinion is also formed because UNC came to the SEC in 2010, and had an unofficial, yet official, ambassador visit 3 days after the Texas announcement and with a buddy from Clemson. Whatever may be in the works has been since July 2021.

And you are wrong about academics taking precedence over sports matters. Sports has a consumer base. Academics don't.

And Delaney talked with NC during those rounds of realignment too.

Talk happens.

And I wasn't talking all schools. For some schools, sports is a major importance for various reasons.

But because money is less of an issue here (for NC), so too are sports media deals, in this process.

But we're both prognosticating about likelihoods. It could all come down to timing, or, quite possibly, some decision-maker flipping a coin. lol

It wasn't talk! They asked if the ACC suffered more departures (UVa and Ga Tech were rumored in the wake of MD) would Slive take Duke with them. We said yes. The ACC settled down and they stayed. July 2021 wasn't just a query either. Cunningham actually polled their donors in late 2011 and only 1 out of over 100 preferred the B1G to the SEC.

I'm not prognosticating anything. I'm telling you what has transpired! You might take note as it is why I appear to be correct about surprising things. Not guessing helps a lot! IMO ESPN is the hurdle because UNC is a ratings power in hoops. They won't just give up rights they hold for 14 more years. If movement happens it will be where ESPN still controls the rights and that is not the Big 10. ESPN is concerned about sports product, not academics. Virginia isn't as solid a product as Va Tech. Duke isn't as solid as UNC or N.C. State. In fact, sans K they are as yet an unknown hoops value. We'll assume they remain strong. In football we are talking 20,000 plus in the stands. So yes, I can see ESPN saying bye!

ESPN will not let FSU, Clemson, UNC, Va Tech, and Miami go. The SEC will want to lock down Atlanta. N.C. State will be the cost of UNC. Louisville or Kansas at 8.

(08-26-2022 06:28 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(08-26-2022 06:11 PM)Skyhawk Wrote:  

(08-26-2022 05:54 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(08-26-2022 05:42 PM)Skyhawk Wrote:  

(08-26-2022 05:21 PM)JRsec Wrote:  1. Let's solve the UNC issue. Yes they carry more of their state. Yes the SEC and B1G will want them. Yes their academics prefer the B1G and were likely educated there, but yes their donors and fans prefer the SEC and so far the consumers of athletics at Texas, Texas A&M, and Oklahoma have chosen the SEC and the consumers have won in each case. Why? It's athletics, we are closer, and we fit their culture better.

However, none of that will determine this issue. ESPN simply won't surrender the brand even if it means dragging this out for 14 years. With the money at stake I just don't think that happens.

2. The SEC has 2 objectives where the ACC is concerned. No Big 10 schools in the Deep South. And, preserve rivalries.

Florida State, Georgia Tech, and Clemson are the Deep South rivalries to be protected.

North Carolina will be granted a rival. Duke is private. It is believed NC State will be the rival because the N.C. University System will insist upon it.

If we take Virginia taking Tech as well makes sense due to rivalry.

That's 7. How about Louisville? 15th in revenue and solid in the big 3 men's sports.
Miami? Deep South, rivals with FSU and UF and in a different region of the State, though not what you would call Deep South culture.

If the B1G lands Notre Dame after taking Cal, Stanford, Oregon and Washington, they have 3 left. I could see Duke and Virginia headed to the Big 10 which needs another New England / NE school to help Penn State and Rutgers. IMO Syracuse would be the best actually giving them a school in New York. Pitt duplicates PSU's market, and B.C. hockey would be a plus, I'm just not sure they would have the impact of 'Cuse.

Should that happen the SEC could close out with Miami. We wouldn't need Kansas with Louisville and UNC which could easily rival up with Tennessee.

That's 12 ACC schools placed, enough to vote dissolution without any doubts.

I'm sure the Big Ten wants a Florida presence, but even they would see the value of N.D., Duke, Virginia and a presence in NY.

Muskie will likely feel differently. But the SEC would be well situated with: Clemson, Florida State, Georgia Tech, Louisville, Miami, North Carolina, N.C. State, Virginia Tech.

I think most of what you said is likely (until you started talking about Syracuse and Pitt).

But I think NC is likely to the B10. As an SEC booster, I understand why you see them going south. I've honestly wobbled on the fence about this myself. But you said the magic word: Academics. Sports doesn't lead these schools. I know as posters on the boards, we'd like to think that's true, but school leaders answer to a lot of masters. And as others have noted: Money isn't the over-riding issue for these schools.

All that said, while there's a chance that B10 might get FSU, I think you're right and they are heading south.

I think SEC likely has a lock on these 7, if they want them: Clemson, Florida State, Georgia Tech, Louisville, Miami, N.C. State, Virginia Tech.

Miami being the weakest link, as you note, but I agree the Florida cup is likely a draw. Plus, we really need to stop ignoring how travel influences these things. It's not everything, but it does have a value/cost.

So if the B10 gets NC, VA, and Duke, I think that would be all they would invite from the ACC, unless they get Miami with a travel partner.

Which means the B10 takes either 3 or 5 from the PAC, which it could easily do. (plus ND could get in the mix.)

And for it's 8th, SEC could take Kansas to replace NC as a basketball power, and to help supplement the western schools: Missouri and Oklahoma are looking as kind of outliers, and adding Kansas would help shore that up.

I can't say it wouldn't work for me because UNC is a much larger issue than even Aggie fans could imagine Texas to be. My overriding point stands. ESPN is the entity which must be overcome.

And so you know, my opinion is also formed because UNC came to the SEC in 2010, and had an unofficial, yet official, ambassador visit 3 days after the Texas announcement and with a buddy from Clemson. Whatever may be in the works has been since July 2021.

And you are wrong about academics taking precedence over sports matters. Sports has a consumer base. Academics don't.

And Delaney talked with NC during those rounds of realignment too.

Talk happens.

And I wasn't talking all schools. For some schools, sports is a major importance for various reasons.

But because money is less of an issue here (for NC), so too are sports media deals, in this process.

But we're both prognosticating about likelihoods. It could all come down to timing, or, quite possibly, some decision-maker flipping a coin. lol

It wasn't talk! They asked if the ACC suffered more departures (UVa and Ga Tech were rumored in the wake of MD) would Slive take Duke with them. We said yes. The ACC settled down and they stayed. July 2021 wasn't just a query either. Cunningham actually polled their donors in late 2011 and only 1 out of over 100 preferred the B1G to the SEC.

I'm not prognosticating anything. I'm telling you what has transpired! You might take note as it is why I appear to be correct about surprising things. Not guessing helps a lot! IMO ESPN is the hurdle because UNC is a ratings power in hoops. They won't just give up rights they hold for 14 more years. If movement happens it will be where ESPN still controls the rights and that is not the Big 10. ESPN is concerned about sports product, not academics. Virginia isn't as solid a product as Va Tech. Duke isn't as solid as UNC or N.C. State. In fact, sans K they are as yet an unknown hoops value. We'll assume they remain strong. In football we are talking 20,000 plus in the stands. So yes, I can see ESPN saying bye!

ESPN will not let FSU, Clemson, UNC, Va Tech, and Miami go. The SEC will want to lock down Atlanta. N.C. State will be the cost of UNC. Louisville or Kansas at 8.

Interesting information. Thank you for sharing that.

It still counts as inquisitive "talk" between them, but it is interesting nonetheless.

(08-26-2022 06:49 PM)Skyhawk Wrote:  

(08-26-2022 06:28 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(08-26-2022 06:11 PM)Skyhawk Wrote:  

(08-26-2022 05:54 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(08-26-2022 05:42 PM)Skyhawk Wrote:  I think most of what you said is likely (until you started talking about Syracuse and Pitt).

But I think NC is likely to the B10. As an SEC booster, I understand why you see them going south. I've honestly wobbled on the fence about this myself. But you said the magic word: Academics. Sports doesn't lead these schools. I know as posters on the boards, we'd like to think that's true, but school leaders answer to a lot of masters. And as others have noted: Money isn't the over-riding issue for these schools.

All that said, while there's a chance that B10 might get FSU, I think you're right and they are heading south.

I think SEC likely has a lock on these 7, if they want them: Clemson, Florida State, Georgia Tech, Louisville, Miami, N.C. State, Virginia Tech.

Miami being the weakest link, as you note, but I agree the Florida cup is likely a draw. Plus, we really need to stop ignoring how travel influences these things. It's not everything, but it does have a value/cost.

So if the B10 gets NC, VA, and Duke, I think that would be all they would invite from the ACC, unless they get Miami with a travel partner.

Which means the B10 takes either 3 or 5 from the PAC, which it could easily do. (plus ND could get in the mix.)

And for it's 8th, SEC could take Kansas to replace NC as a basketball power, and to help supplement the western schools: Missouri and Oklahoma are looking as kind of outliers, and adding Kansas would help shore that up.

I can't say it wouldn't work for me because UNC is a much larger issue than even Aggie fans could imagine Texas to be. My overriding point stands. ESPN is the entity which must be overcome.

And so you know, my opinion is also formed because UNC came to the SEC in 2010, and had an unofficial, yet official, ambassador visit 3 days after the Texas announcement and with a buddy from Clemson. Whatever may be in the works has been since July 2021.

And you are wrong about academics taking precedence over sports matters. Sports has a consumer base. Academics don't.

And Delaney talked with NC during those rounds of realignment too.

Talk happens.

And I wasn't talking all schools. For some schools, sports is a major importance for various reasons.

But because money is less of an issue here (for NC), so too are sports media deals, in this process.

But we're both prognosticating about likelihoods. It could all come down to timing, or, quite possibly, some decision-maker flipping a coin. lol

It wasn't talk! They asked if the ACC suffered more departures (UVa and Ga Tech were rumored in the wake of MD) would Slive take Duke with them. We said yes. The ACC settled down and they stayed. July 2021 wasn't just a query either. Cunningham actually polled their donors in late 2011 and only 1 out of over 100 preferred the B1G to the SEC.

I'm not prognosticating anything. I'm telling you what has transpired! You might take note as it is why I appear to be correct about surprising things. Not guessing helps a lot! IMO ESPN is the hurdle because UNC is a ratings power in hoops. They won't just give up rights they hold for 14 more years. If movement happens it will be where ESPN still controls the rights and that is not the Big 10. ESPN is concerned about sports product, not academics. Virginia isn't as solid a product as Va Tech. Duke isn't as solid as UNC or N.C. State. In fact, sans K they are as yet an unknown hoops value. We'll assume they remain strong. In football we are talking 20,000 plus in the stands. So yes, I can see ESPN saying bye!

ESPN will not let FSU, Clemson, UNC, Va Tech, and Miami go. The SEC will want to lock down Atlanta. N.C. State will be the cost of UNC. Louisville or Kansas at 8.

Interesting information. Thank you for sharing that.

It still counts as inquisitive "talk" between them, but it is interesting nonetheless.

You must be a Millennial, or close to it, as they are the only group that I know which universally must have the last word, and in it deny any possibility of being wrong, no matter how wrong they are. More than inquisitive talk happened between Texas and the SEC for 30 years. There's due diligence talk, inquisitive talk, serious talk, and plans. We are having an inquisitive exchange on your part, serious talk on my part, and I'm saying twice now they have made plans. There's only one progression from there, action.

(08-26-2022 06:28 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(08-26-2022 06:11 PM)Skyhawk Wrote:  

(08-26-2022 05:54 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(08-26-2022 05:42 PM)Skyhawk Wrote:  

(08-26-2022 05:21 PM)JRsec Wrote:  1. Let's solve the UNC issue. Yes they carry more of their state. Yes the SEC and B1G will want them. Yes their academics prefer the B1G and were likely educated there, but yes their donors and fans prefer the SEC and so far the consumers of athletics at Texas, Texas A&M, and Oklahoma have chosen the SEC and the consumers have won in each case. Why? It's athletics, we are closer, and we fit their culture better.

However, none of that will determine this issue. ESPN simply won't surrender the brand even if it means dragging this out for 14 years. With the money at stake I just don't think that happens.

2. The SEC has 2 objectives where the ACC is concerned. No Big 10 schools in the Deep South. And, preserve rivalries.

Florida State, Georgia Tech, and Clemson are the Deep South rivalries to be protected.

North Carolina will be granted a rival. Duke is private. It is believed NC State will be the rival because the N.C. University System will insist upon it.

If we take Virginia taking Tech as well makes sense due to rivalry.

That's 7. How about Louisville? 15th in revenue and solid in the big 3 men's sports.
Miami? Deep South, rivals with FSU and UF and in a different region of the State, though not what you would call Deep South culture.

If the B1G lands Notre Dame after taking Cal, Stanford, Oregon and Washington, they have 3 left. I could see Duke and Virginia headed to the Big 10 which needs another New England / NE school to help Penn State and Rutgers. IMO Syracuse would be the best actually giving them a school in New York. Pitt duplicates PSU's market, and B.C. hockey would be a plus, I'm just not sure they would have the impact of 'Cuse.

Should that happen the SEC could close out with Miami. We wouldn't need Kansas with Louisville and UNC which could easily rival up with Tennessee.

That's 12 ACC schools placed, enough to vote dissolution without any doubts.

I'm sure the Big Ten wants a Florida presence, but even they would see the value of N.D., Duke, Virginia and a presence in NY.

Muskie will likely feel differently. But the SEC would be well situated with: Clemson, Florida State, Georgia Tech, Louisville, Miami, North Carolina, N.C. State, Virginia Tech.

I think most of what you said is likely (until you started talking about Syracuse and Pitt).

But I think NC is likely to the B10. As an SEC booster, I understand why you see them going south. I've honestly wobbled on the fence about this myself. But you said the magic word: Academics. Sports doesn't lead these schools. I know as posters on the boards, we'd like to think that's true, but school leaders answer to a lot of masters. And as others have noted: Money isn't the over-riding issue for these schools.

All that said, while there's a chance that B10 might get FSU, I think you're right and they are heading south.

I think SEC likely has a lock on these 7, if they want them: Clemson, Florida State, Georgia Tech, Louisville, Miami, N.C. State, Virginia Tech.

Miami being the weakest link, as you note, but I agree the Florida cup is likely a draw. Plus, we really need to stop ignoring how travel influences these things. It's not everything, but it does have a value/cost.

So if the B10 gets NC, VA, and Duke, I think that would be all they would invite from the ACC, unless they get Miami with a travel partner.

Which means the B10 takes either 3 or 5 from the PAC, which it could easily do. (plus ND could get in the mix.)

And for it's 8th, SEC could take Kansas to replace NC as a basketball power, and to help supplement the western schools: Missouri and Oklahoma are looking as kind of outliers, and adding Kansas would help shore that up.

I can't say it wouldn't work for me because UNC is a much larger issue than even Aggie fans could imagine Texas to be. My overriding point stands. ESPN is the entity which must be overcome.

And so you know, my opinion is also formed because UNC came to the SEC in 2010, and had an unofficial, yet official, ambassador visit 3 days after the Texas announcement and with a buddy from Clemson. Whatever may be in the works has been since July 2021.

And you are wrong about academics taking precedence over sports matters. Sports has a consumer base. Academics don't.

And Delaney talked with NC during those rounds of realignment too.

Talk happens.

And I wasn't talking all schools. For some schools, sports is a major importance for various reasons.

But because money is less of an issue here (for NC), so too are sports media deals, in this process.

But we're both prognosticating about likelihoods. It could all come down to timing, or, quite possibly, some decision-maker flipping a coin. lol

It wasn't talk! They asked if the ACC suffered more departures (UVa and Ga Tech were rumored in the wake of MD) would Slive take Duke with them. We said yes. The ACC settled down and they stayed. July 2021 wasn't just a query either. Cunningham actually polled their donors in late 2011 and only 1 out of over 100 preferred the B1G to the SEC.

I'm not prognosticating anything. I'm telling you what has transpired! You might take note as it is why I appear to be correct about surprising things. Not guessing helps a lot! IMO ESPN is the hurdle because UNC is a ratings power in hoops. They won't just give up rights they hold for 14 more years. If movement happens it will be where ESPN still controls the rights and that is not the Big 10. ESPN is concerned about sports product, not academics. Virginia isn't as solid a product as Va Tech. Duke isn't as solid as UNC or N.C. State. In fact, sans K they are as yet an unknown hoops value. We'll assume they remain strong. In football we are talking 20,000 plus in the stands. So yes, I can see ESPN saying bye!

ESPN will not let FSU, Clemson, UNC, Va Tech, and Miami go. The SEC will want to lock down Atlanta. N.C. State will be the cost of UNC. Louisville or Kansas at 8.

As a Dawg fan and X'er (on a side note, I have yet to see anyone, besides myself actually identify as a member of Generation X. Although I am sure my generation has failed in several ways, when the going gets tough, we band together and fight. Still proud to be an X'er), I don't see the importance of taking Georgia Tech when both your Tigers and my Dawgs deliver Atlanta, along with Tennessee. If we take Clemson, that further solidifies our (SEC) hold on Atlanta. At that point, the B1G taking Georgia Tech would look like the B1G taking TCU. Who cares if the B1G takes Tech or TCU?? It's one small isolated outposts in hostile territory. I definitely don't get it!!!

(08-26-2022 11:07 PM)DawgNBama Wrote:  

(08-26-2022 06:28 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(08-26-2022 06:11 PM)Skyhawk Wrote:  

(08-26-2022 05:54 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(08-26-2022 05:42 PM)Skyhawk Wrote:  I think most of what you said is likely (until you started talking about Syracuse and Pitt).

But I think NC is likely to the B10. As an SEC booster, I understand why you see them going south. I've honestly wobbled on the fence about this myself. But you said the magic word: Academics. Sports doesn't lead these schools. I know as posters on the boards, we'd like to think that's true, but school leaders answer to a lot of masters. And as others have noted: Money isn't the over-riding issue for these schools.

All that said, while there's a chance that B10 might get FSU, I think you're right and they are heading south.

I think SEC likely has a lock on these 7, if they want them: Clemson, Florida State, Georgia Tech, Louisville, Miami, N.C. State, Virginia Tech.

Miami being the weakest link, as you note, but I agree the Florida cup is likely a draw. Plus, we really need to stop ignoring how travel influences these things. It's not everything, but it does have a value/cost.

So if the B10 gets NC, VA, and Duke, I think that would be all they would invite from the ACC, unless they get Miami with a travel partner.

Which means the B10 takes either 3 or 5 from the PAC, which it could easily do. (plus ND could get in the mix.)

And for it's 8th, SEC could take Kansas to replace NC as a basketball power, and to help supplement the western schools: Missouri and Oklahoma are looking as kind of outliers, and adding Kansas would help shore that up.

I can't say it wouldn't work for me because UNC is a much larger issue than even Aggie fans could imagine Texas to be. My overriding point stands. ESPN is the entity which must be overcome.

And so you know, my opinion is also formed because UNC came to the SEC in 2010, and had an unofficial, yet official, ambassador visit 3 days after the Texas announcement and with a buddy from Clemson. Whatever may be in the works has been since July 2021.

And you are wrong about academics taking precedence over sports matters. Sports has a consumer base. Academics don't.

And Delaney talked with NC during those rounds of realignment too.

Talk happens.

And I wasn't talking all schools. For some schools, sports is a major importance for various reasons.

But because money is less of an issue here (for NC), so too are sports media deals, in this process.

But we're both prognosticating about likelihoods. It could all come down to timing, or, quite possibly, some decision-maker flipping a coin. lol

It wasn't talk! They asked if the ACC suffered more departures (UVa and Ga Tech were rumored in the wake of MD) would Slive take Duke with them. We said yes. The ACC settled down and they stayed. July 2021 wasn't just a query either. Cunningham actually polled their donors in late 2011 and only 1 out of over 100 preferred the B1G to the SEC.

I'm not prognosticating anything. I'm telling you what has transpired! You might take note as it is why I appear to be correct about surprising things. Not guessing helps a lot! IMO ESPN is the hurdle because UNC is a ratings power in hoops. They won't just give up rights they hold for 14 more years. If movement happens it will be where ESPN still controls the rights and that is not the Big 10. ESPN is concerned about sports product, not academics. Virginia isn't as solid a product as Va Tech. Duke isn't as solid as UNC or N.C. State. In fact, sans K they are as yet an unknown hoops value. We'll assume they remain strong. In football we are talking 20,000 plus in the stands. So yes, I can see ESPN saying bye!

ESPN will not let FSU, Clemson, UNC, Va Tech, and Miami go. The SEC will want to lock down Atlanta. N.C. State will be the cost of UNC. Louisville or Kansas at 8.

As a Dawg fan and X'er (on a side note, I have yet to see anyone, besides myself actually identify as a member of Generation X. Although I am sure my generation has failed in several ways, when the going gets tough, we band together and fight. Still proud to be an X'er), I don't see the importance of taking Georgia Tech when both your Tigers and my Dawgs deliver Atlanta, along with Tennessee. If we take Clemson, that further solidifies our (SEC) hold on Atlanta. At that point, the B1G taking Georgia Tech would look like the B1G taking TCU. Who cares if the B1G takes Tech or TCU?? It's one small isolated outposts in hostile territory. I definitely don't get it!!!

Hey! Do you know why the Big Ten wants Notre Dame so badly? N.D. provides a cheaper entry into advertising in every major Northern Midwestern city East of Wisconsin. That cuts into Big 10 profits. Their desire for Georgia Tech gives advertisers a cheaper way into Atlanta and that costs the SEC a chunk of change. Georgia Tech in the ACC might take some cash, but the ACC brand just didn't carry the weight of the SEC in a UGA state. But Georgia Tech in the Big 10 puts a major brand into Atlanta and it cuts into our earnings. The heck with that! Ditto for TCU in DFW. At least in DFW it would be tougher to bump Texas, A&M and Oklahoma by a significant margin. And TCU is way out of B1G norms. Tech is within them. Now don't misunderstand me, the SEC would still earn more in Atlanta than the Big 10, just not as much as we have made.

When I talk about Deep South brand protection this is what I am discussing. We don't want the B1G South of North Carolina, and not South of Virginia would be even better! Virginia is Beltway now, and no longer really the South.

(08-26-2022 11:44 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(08-26-2022 11:07 PM)DawgNBama Wrote:  

(08-26-2022 06:28 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(08-26-2022 06:11 PM)Skyhawk Wrote:  

(08-26-2022 05:54 PM)JRsec Wrote:  I can't say it wouldn't work for me because UNC is a much larger issue than even Aggie fans could imagine Texas to be. My overriding point stands. ESPN is the entity which must be overcome.

And so you know, my opinion is also formed because UNC came to the SEC in 2010, and had an unofficial, yet official, ambassador visit 3 days after the Texas announcement and with a buddy from Clemson. Whatever may be in the works has been since July 2021.

And you are wrong about academics taking precedence over sports matters. Sports has a consumer base. Academics don't.

And Delaney talked with NC during those rounds of realignment too.

Talk happens.

And I wasn't talking all schools. For some schools, sports is a major importance for various reasons.

But because money is less of an issue here (for NC), so too are sports media deals, in this process.

But we're both prognosticating about likelihoods. It could all come down to timing, or, quite possibly, some decision-maker flipping a coin. lol

It wasn't talk! They asked if the ACC suffered more departures (UVa and Ga Tech were rumored in the wake of MD) would Slive take Duke with them. We said yes. The ACC settled down and they stayed. July 2021 wasn't just a query either. Cunningham actually polled their donors in late 2011 and only 1 out of over 100 preferred the B1G to the SEC.

I'm not prognosticating anything. I'm telling you what has transpired! You might take note as it is why I appear to be correct about surprising things. Not guessing helps a lot! IMO ESPN is the hurdle because UNC is a ratings power in hoops. They won't just give up rights they hold for 14 more years. If movement happens it will be where ESPN still controls the rights and that is not the Big 10. ESPN is concerned about sports product, not academics. Virginia isn't as solid a product as Va Tech. Duke isn't as solid as UNC or N.C. State. In fact, sans K they are as yet an unknown hoops value. We'll assume they remain strong. In football we are talking 20,000 plus in the stands. So yes, I can see ESPN saying bye!

ESPN will not let FSU, Clemson, UNC, Va Tech, and Miami go. The SEC will want to lock down Atlanta. N.C. State will be the cost of UNC. Louisville or Kansas at 8.

As a Dawg fan and X'er (on a side note, I have yet to see anyone, besides myself actually identify as a member of Generation X. Although I am sure my generation has failed in several ways, when the going gets tough, we band together and fight. Still proud to be an X'er), I don't see the importance of taking Georgia Tech when both your Tigers and my Dawgs deliver Atlanta, along with Tennessee. If we take Clemson, that further solidifies our (SEC) hold on Atlanta. At that point, the B1G taking Georgia Tech would look like the B1G taking TCU. Who cares if the B1G takes Tech or TCU?? It's one small isolated outposts in hostile territory. I definitely don't get it!!!

Hey! Do you know why the Big Ten wants Notre Dame so badly? N.D. provides a cheaper entry into advertising in every major Northern Midwestern city East of Wisconsin. That cuts into Big 10 profits. Their desire for Georgia Tech gives advertisers a cheaper way into Atlanta and that costs the SEC a chunk of change. Georgia Tech in the ACC might take some cash, but the ACC brand just didn't carry the weight of the SEC in a UGA state. But Georgia Tech in the Big 10 puts a major brand into Atlanta and it cuts into our earnings. The heck with that! Ditto for TCU in DFW. At least in DFW it would be tougher to bump Texas, A&M and Oklahoma by a significant margin. And TCU is way out of B1G norms. Tech is within them. Now don't misunderstand me, the SEC would still earn more in Atlanta than the Big 10, just not as much as we have made.

When I talk about Deep South brand protection this is what I am discussing. We don't want the B1G South of North Carolina, and not South of Virginia would be even better! Virginia is Beltway now, and no longer really the South.

I would think it would be pretty tough to bump UGA, Auburn, and Tennessee in Atlanta. But then again, I know nothing about advertising.

Edit: forgot about basketball. It might be possible to do it in that sport.

Edit 2: I got you now. Bringing Ohio State, Michigan, Penn State into Atlanta might grab a few more viewers than Tech vs UNC, NC State, Virginia.

(08-27-2022 12:10 AM)DawgNBama Wrote:  

(08-26-2022 11:44 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(08-26-2022 11:07 PM)DawgNBama Wrote:  

(08-26-2022 06:28 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(08-26-2022 06:11 PM)Skyhawk Wrote:  And Delaney talked with NC during those rounds of realignment too.

Talk happens.

And I wasn't talking all schools. For some schools, sports is a major importance for various reasons.

But because money is less of an issue here (for NC), so too are sports media deals, in this process.

But we're both prognosticating about likelihoods. It could all come down to timing, or, quite possibly, some decision-maker flipping a coin. lol

It wasn't talk! They asked if the ACC suffered more departures (UVa and Ga Tech were rumored in the wake of MD) would Slive take Duke with them. We said yes. The ACC settled down and they stayed. July 2021 wasn't just a query either. Cunningham actually polled their donors in late 2011 and only 1 out of over 100 preferred the B1G to the SEC.

I'm not prognosticating anything. I'm telling you what has transpired! You might take note as it is why I appear to be correct about surprising things. Not guessing helps a lot! IMO ESPN is the hurdle because UNC is a ratings power in hoops. They won't just give up rights they hold for 14 more years. If movement happens it will be where ESPN still controls the rights and that is not the Big 10. ESPN is concerned about sports product, not academics. Virginia isn't as solid a product as Va Tech. Duke isn't as solid as UNC or N.C. State. In fact, sans K they are as yet an unknown hoops value. We'll assume they remain strong. In football we are talking 20,000 plus in the stands. So yes, I can see ESPN saying bye!

ESPN will not let FSU, Clemson, UNC, Va Tech, and Miami go. The SEC will want to lock down Atlanta. N.C. State will be the cost of UNC. Louisville or Kansas at 8.

As a Dawg fan and X'er (on a side note, I have yet to see anyone, besides myself actually identify as a member of Generation X. Although I am sure my generation has failed in several ways, when the going gets tough, we band together and fight. Still proud to be an X'er), I don't see the importance of taking Georgia Tech when both your Tigers and my Dawgs deliver Atlanta, along with Tennessee. If we take Clemson, that further solidifies our (SEC) hold on Atlanta. At that point, the B1G taking Georgia Tech would look like the B1G taking TCU. Who cares if the B1G takes Tech or TCU?? It's one small isolated outposts in hostile territory. I definitely don't get it!!!

Hey! Do you know why the Big Ten wants Notre Dame so badly? N.D. provides a cheaper entry into advertising in every major Northern Midwestern city East of Wisconsin. That cuts into Big 10 profits. Their desire for Georgia Tech gives advertisers a cheaper way into Atlanta and that costs the SEC a chunk of change. Georgia Tech in the ACC might take some cash, but the ACC brand just didn't carry the weight of the SEC in a UGA state. But Georgia Tech in the Big 10 puts a major brand into Atlanta and it cuts into our earnings. The heck with that! Ditto for TCU in DFW. At least in DFW it would be tougher to bump Texas, A&M and Oklahoma by a significant margin. And TCU is way out of B1G norms. Tech is within them. Now don't misunderstand me, the SEC would still earn more in Atlanta than the Big 10, just not as much as we have made.

When I talk about Deep South brand protection this is what I am discussing. We don't want the B1G South of North Carolina, and not South of Virginia would be even better! Virginia is Beltway now, and no longer really the South.

I would think it would be pretty tough to bump UGA, Auburn, and Tennessee in Atlanta. But then again, I know nothing about advertising.

Edit: forgot about basketball. It might be possible to do it in that sport.

Edit 2: I got you now. Bringing Ohio State, Michigan, Penn State into Atlanta might grab a few more viewers than Tech vs UNC, NC State, Virginia.

I'm an old X'er but still an X'er

(08-26-2022 11:44 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(08-26-2022 11:07 PM)DawgNBama Wrote:  

(08-26-2022 06:28 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(08-26-2022 06:11 PM)Skyhawk Wrote:  

(08-26-2022 05:54 PM)JRsec Wrote:  I can't say it wouldn't work for me because UNC is a much larger issue than even Aggie fans could imagine Texas to be. My overriding point stands. ESPN is the entity which must be overcome.

And so you know, my opinion is also formed because UNC came to the SEC in 2010, and had an unofficial, yet official, ambassador visit 3 days after the Texas announcement and with a buddy from Clemson. Whatever may be in the works has been since July 2021.

And you are wrong about academics taking precedence over sports matters. Sports has a consumer base. Academics don't.

And Delaney talked with NC during those rounds of realignment too.

Talk happens.

And I wasn't talking all schools. For some schools, sports is a major importance for various reasons.

But because money is less of an issue here (for NC), so too are sports media deals, in this process.

But we're both prognosticating about likelihoods. It could all come down to timing, or, quite possibly, some decision-maker flipping a coin. lol

It wasn't talk! They asked if the ACC suffered more departures (UVa and Ga Tech were rumored in the wake of MD) would Slive take Duke with them. We said yes. The ACC settled down and they stayed. July 2021 wasn't just a query either. Cunningham actually polled their donors in late 2011 and only 1 out of over 100 preferred the B1G to the SEC.

I'm not prognosticating anything. I'm telling you what has transpired! You might take note as it is why I appear to be correct about surprising things. Not guessing helps a lot! IMO ESPN is the hurdle because UNC is a ratings power in hoops. They won't just give up rights they hold for 14 more years. If movement happens it will be where ESPN still controls the rights and that is not the Big 10. ESPN is concerned about sports product, not academics. Virginia isn't as solid a product as Va Tech. Duke isn't as solid as UNC or N.C. State. In fact, sans K they are as yet an unknown hoops value. We'll assume they remain strong. In football we are talking 20,000 plus in the stands. So yes, I can see ESPN saying bye!

ESPN will not let FSU, Clemson, UNC, Va Tech, and Miami go. The SEC will want to lock down Atlanta. N.C. State will be the cost of UNC. Louisville or Kansas at 8.

As a Dawg fan and X'er (on a side note, I have yet to see anyone, besides myself actually identify as a member of Generation X. Although I am sure my generation has failed in several ways, when the going gets tough, we band together and fight. Still proud to be an X'er), I don't see the importance of taking Georgia Tech when both your Tigers and my Dawgs deliver Atlanta, along with Tennessee. If we take Clemson, that further solidifies our (SEC) hold on Atlanta. At that point, the B1G taking Georgia Tech would look like the B1G taking TCU. Who cares if the B1G takes Tech or TCU?? It's one small isolated outposts in hostile territory. I definitely don't get it!!!

Hey! Do you know why the Big Ten wants Notre Dame so badly? N.D. provides a cheaper entry into advertising in every major Northern Midwestern city East of Wisconsin. That cuts into Big 10 profits. Their desire for Georgia Tech gives advertisers a cheaper way into Atlanta and that costs the SEC a chunk of change. Georgia Tech in the ACC might take some cash, but the ACC brand just didn't carry the weight of the SEC in a UGA state. But Georgia Tech in the Big 10 puts a major brand into Atlanta and it cuts into our earnings. The heck with that! Ditto for TCU in DFW. At least in DFW it would be tougher to bump Texas, A&M and Oklahoma by a significant margin. And TCU is way out of B1G norms. Tech is within them. Now don't misunderstand me, the SEC would still earn more in Atlanta than the Big 10, just not as much as we have made.

When I talk about Deep South brand protection this is what I am discussing. We don't want the B1G South of North Carolina, and not South of Virginia would be even better! Virginia is Beltway now, and no longer really the South.

Grew up in northern Virginia before my move to east TN and eventually on to Missouri (I'd move back to TN in a heartbeat but wife's family is out here). Northern VA and perhaps most of the state is Beltway now, for sure. But southwest Virginia is still very much southern. Where Virginia Tech itself falls on that line might be a question though.