It's funny...i post somewhere YEARS ago that there would be an AFC and NFC. I thought the Pac and B1G would be one with the SEC and ACC in the other. I just didnt think it would be from just two conferences. I thought it would be made from four.

Reminds me of the time Vince McMahon (owner of WWE) bought WCW (the competition), trimmed the fat and turned a good product into a better one.

I’d hate to see the ACC break up and even be in the same conference as UF, maybe I can tolerate it better if FSU was leading the ACC/NWO into the SEC/WCW.

Besides UF, Auburn is the only other school FSU has a modest history with and it’s in close proximity to Tallahassee. The other SEC schools could be once or twice every 20 years or so and I’d be fine with it.

Yes vote to get rid of this extra HQ expenses over head.

(08-06-2023 08:30 AM)Garrettabc Wrote:  Reminds me of the time Vince McMahon (owner of WWE) bought WCW (the competition), trimmed the fat and turned a good product into a better one.

I’d hate to see the ACC break up and even be in the same conference as UF, maybe I can tolerate it better if FSU was leading the ACC/NWO into the SEC/WCW.

Besides UF, Auburn is the only other school FSU has a modest history with and it’s in close proximity to Tallahassee. The other SEC schools could be once or twice every 20 years or so and I’d be fine with it.

Yes vote to get rid of this extra HQ expenses over head.

What's interesting about Phillips wanting to move the ACC HQ from Greensboro to Charlotte, is that the leased space was like across the street from the ESPN studio that houses the SEC network. A convenient coincidence?

ESPN could use the money they already are spending on Big 12 and maybe pick up 3 or 4 schools from them in a brokered deal and let Fox merge the B1G and Big 12 as a super Conference and ESPN merge the ACC and SEC as a Super Conference that would be your P2 super conferences with like You said jrSEC each retaining their current identities but under one media umbrella and merged corporate control with many in season crossover scheduled games per Their respective conferences

I would like this, can our deal be transferred over to include SEc teams.

(08-06-2023 10:12 AM)domer1978 Wrote:  I would like this, can our deal be transferred over to include SEc teams.

You've got 7 other slots to fill on your schedule. That's plenty of room to play SEC schools ... WITHOUT being obligated to ever play Vandy, Miss State, Ole Miss, Mizzou, and South Carolina.

(08-06-2023 08:30 AM)Garrettabc Wrote:  Reminds me of the time Vince McMahon (owner of WWE) bought WCW (the competition), trimmed the fat and turned a good product into a better one.

I’d hate to see the ACC break up and even be in the same conference as UF, maybe I can tolerate it better if FSU was leading the ACC/NWO into the SEC/WCW.

Besides UF, Auburn is the only other school FSU has a modest history with and it’s in close proximity to Tallahassee. The other SEC schools could be once or twice every 20 years or so and I’d be fine with it.

Yes vote to get rid of this extra HQ expenses over head.

You don't miss games vs lil' Carolina?

(08-06-2023 02:32 PM)esayem Wrote:  

(08-06-2023 08:30 AM)Garrettabc Wrote:  Reminds me of the time Vince McMahon (owner of WWE) bought WCW (the competition), trimmed the fat and turned a good product into a better one.

I’d hate to see the ACC break up and even be in the same conference as UF, maybe I can tolerate it better if FSU was leading the ACC/NWO into the SEC/WCW.

Besides UF, Auburn is the only other school FSU has a modest history with and it’s in close proximity to Tallahassee. The other SEC schools could be once or twice every 20 years or so and I’d be fine with it.

Yes vote to get rid of this extra HQ expenses over head.

You don't miss games vs lil' Carolina?

According to winsapedia these are FSU's historic playing partners:

1. Miami 67 games
2. UF 66 games
3. NC State 42
4. WF 40
5. VT 37
6. Clemson 35
7. Tie South Carolina and Auburn 19

FSU played a lot of Southern Conference teams in the 50's and 60's when they tried to get into the SC and then into the ACC.

In the first 20 years of FSU football they played 62 games against SoCon/ACC schools. (For the record I credit FSU football having started as something as 1952, while they fielded a team for the three years before, its not fair to hold them to what was a jv squad. They played everyone except Duke, UNC, and UVa from time to time in the regular season.

Surprised FSU played USC that much. I remember the 2010 bowl game and a couple games in the early 90s. There were not many memorable games unlike vs Auburn.

(08-06-2023 08:29 PM)Garrettabc Wrote:  Surprised FSU played USC that much. I remember the 2010 bowl game and a couple games in the early 90s. There were not many memorable games unlike vs Auburn.

The records and newspapers of the time indicated you as a proverbial "unindicted co-conspirator" in the SoCon/ACC. There are innumerable mentions of you chasing an invite, you can read it in The State, Daily Tar Heel, Chronicle, Richmond Dispatch, Washington Post, etc., etc. 1971 is the key break year because that's the year South Carolina left over the 800 SAT rule and Duke's interference in South Carolina's recruiting and eligibility.

(08-06-2023 08:29 PM)Garrettabc Wrote:  Surprised FSU played USC that much. I remember the 2010 bowl game and a couple games in the early 90s. There were not many memorable games unlike vs Auburn.

After 'lil carolina left the ACC they had to play what ever school they could schedule until they were picked up off of the trash heap by the SEC.
During that time period, the gamecocks had a heated rivalry with East Carolina.

Everyone put your time capsule thinking caps on and go back to the early 1970's. As the Metro Conference is birthed, what do Miami, VT, SC, FSU, Louisville, and West Virginia have in common relative to Duke and UVa?

Tick tock, tick tock. Times up. Did you get it?

It's not really UNC that makes the ACC "difficult". It's Duke, then UVa. These are Ivy League schools 9 and 10 never invited because of Jim Crow and segregation. Both wanted to go with Penn but could not.

From the teens until 1950 UVa played the Ivy League schools over 30 times - Harvard, Yale, Columbia, Penn, Princeton, Dartmouth. Jim Crow became politically intolerable in the Northeast after 1948 and UVa was essentially locked out.

That's part of the reason they have to come back to the SoCon/ACC - there was no place else to go other than the SEC. From the mid 30's until the mid 1950's Duke had regularly played Pitt, Penn, Army, Colgate, and Navy over 35 times.

Jim Crow is a big reason why Duke and UVa end up in the ACC in the mid 1950's and their immediate action is to recruit UNC to make the ACC into the Ivy League south.

This creates the palpable tension that exists to this day.

(08-06-2023 09:29 PM)SouthernConfBoy Wrote:  From the teens until 1950 UVa played the Ivy League schools over 30 times - Harvard, Yale, Columbia, Penn, Princeton, Dartmouth. Jim Crow became politically intolerable in the Northeast after 1948 and UVa was essentially locked out.

That's part of the reason they have to come back to the SoCon/ACC - there was no place else to go other than the SEC. From the mid 30's until the mid 1950's Duke had regularly played Pitt, Penn, Army, Colgate, and Navy over 35 times.

Jim Crow is a big reason why Duke and UVa end up in the ACC in the mid 1950's and their immediate action is to recruit UNC to make the ACC into the Ivy League south.

This creates the palpable tension that exists to this day.

I say vote 'em both out - the ACC needs someone to blame!

(08-06-2023 08:41 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(08-06-2023 08:29 PM)Garrettabc Wrote:  Surprised FSU played USC that much. I remember the 2010 bowl game and a couple games in the early 90s. There were not many memorable games unlike vs Auburn.

After 'lil carolina left the ACC they had to play what ever school they could schedule until they were picked up off of the trash heap by the SEC.
During that time period, the gamecocks had a heated rivalry with East Carolina.

NCSU and USakerlina played almost every year from 84 til the Cocks joined the SEC.

At least that's what my memory is telling me.

(08-07-2023 07:32 AM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  

(08-06-2023 09:29 PM)SouthernConfBoy Wrote:  From the teens until 1950 UVa played the Ivy League schools over 30 times - Harvard, Yale, Columbia, Penn, Princeton, Dartmouth. Jim Crow became politically intolerable in the Northeast after 1948 and UVa was essentially locked out.

That's part of the reason they have to come back to the SoCon/ACC - there was no place else to go other than the SEC. From the mid 30's until the mid 1950's Duke had regularly played Pitt, Penn, Army, Colgate, and Navy over 35 times.

Jim Crow is a big reason why Duke and UVa end up in the ACC in the mid 1950's and their immediate action is to recruit UNC to make the ACC into the Ivy League south.

This creates the palpable tension that exists to this day.

I say vote 'em both out - the ACC needs someone to blame!

You're gonna get reverse VT'ed by the VA Legislature.

Sent from my Pixel 4a (5G) using CSNbbs mobile app

(08-04-2023 02:23 PM)JRsec Wrote:  For the purposes of the Security of Future Interests of both conferences let me suggest this simple and efficient means of settling the matters at hand.

The ACC portion would remain distinct but would be under the SEC umbrella and the ACCN and SECN would be merged, and all revenues split equally.

The SEC would stay as is and receive its contracted revenue. The ACC would stay as is, but their revenue would be tiered. Those which ESPN deem worthy of SEC pro rata would get it. Tiers of viewership could be used to give more ACC schools a boost to more than they make now, but perhaps 55 million instead of 75. And laggards would receive what they are presently contracted to receive.

This way Miami, Clemson, FSU and Virginia Tech could schedule more games against SEC schools, so their venues are fuller. Likewise, UNC, Duke, Syracuse, Louisville and the like could schedule more games against the SEC schools like Tennessee and Kentucky, LSU, Texas, Oklahoma, etc.

This kind of arrangement could stand for quite some time with no tweaking unless everyone wanted it.

It gets the ACC past the current internal issues, it prevents product from heading to FOX which injures ESPN's dominance of a region which pays them higher ad revenues which in turn is passed on to us,

If the two do this, it gives them ample time to adjust to what is coming.

Thoughts are welcome. BTW: You could also eliminate one set of overhead and combine the officiating.

I'm curious how much cost would be eliminated if there were only one conference instead of two. Does anybody know how much it costs to run the ACC each year (I assume their HQ would be the one that closes)?

(08-07-2023 10:25 AM)ken d Wrote:  

(08-04-2023 02:23 PM)JRsec Wrote:  For the purposes of the Security of Future Interests of both conferences let me suggest this simple and efficient means of settling the matters at hand.

The ACC portion would remain distinct but would be under the SEC umbrella and the ACCN and SECN would be merged, and all revenues split equally.

The SEC would stay as is and receive its contracted revenue. The ACC would stay as is, but their revenue would be tiered. Those which ESPN deem worthy of SEC pro rata would get it. Tiers of viewership could be used to give more ACC schools a boost to more than they make now, but perhaps 55 million instead of 75. And laggards would receive what they are presently contracted to receive.

This way Miami, Clemson, FSU and Virginia Tech could schedule more games against SEC schools, so their venues are fuller. Likewise, UNC, Duke, Syracuse, Louisville and the like could schedule more games against the SEC schools like Tennessee and Kentucky, LSU, Texas, Oklahoma, etc.

This kind of arrangement could stand for quite some time with no tweaking unless everyone wanted it.

It gets the ACC past the current internal issues, it prevents product from heading to FOX which injures ESPN's dominance of a region which pays them higher ad revenues which in turn is passed on to us,

If the two do this, it gives them ample time to adjust to what is coming.

Thoughts are welcome. BTW: You could also eliminate one set of overhead and combine the officiating.

I'm curious how much cost would be eliminated if there were only one conference instead of two. Does anybody know how much it costs to run the ACC each year (I assume their HQ would be the one that closes)?

I'm guessing it's less money than it what it costed for Larry Scott to run the PAC12 (into the ground).

(08-07-2023 10:26 AM)ren.hoek Wrote:  

(08-07-2023 10:25 AM)ken d Wrote:  

(08-04-2023 02:23 PM)JRsec Wrote:  For the purposes of the Security of Future Interests of both conferences let me suggest this simple and efficient means of settling the matters at hand.

The ACC portion would remain distinct but would be under the SEC umbrella and the ACCN and SECN would be merged, and all revenues split equally.

The SEC would stay as is and receive its contracted revenue. The ACC would stay as is, but their revenue would be tiered. Those which ESPN deem worthy of SEC pro rata would get it. Tiers of viewership could be used to give more ACC schools a boost to more than they make now, but perhaps 55 million instead of 75. And laggards would receive what they are presently contracted to receive.

This way Miami, Clemson, FSU and Virginia Tech could schedule more games against SEC schools, so their venues are fuller. Likewise, UNC, Duke, Syracuse, Louisville and the like could schedule more games against the SEC schools like Tennessee and Kentucky, LSU, Texas, Oklahoma, etc.

This kind of arrangement could stand for quite some time with no tweaking unless everyone wanted it.

It gets the ACC past the current internal issues, it prevents product from heading to FOX which injures ESPN's dominance of a region which pays them higher ad revenues which in turn is passed on to us,

If the two do this, it gives them ample time to adjust to what is coming.

Thoughts are welcome. BTW: You could also eliminate one set of overhead and combine the officiating.

I'm curious how much cost would be eliminated if there were only one conference instead of two. Does anybody know how much it costs to run the ACC each year (I assume their HQ would be the one that closes)?

I'm guessing it's less money than it what it costed for Larry Scott to run the PAC12 (into the ground).

Near as I can tell from the league's 990 report, it's about $18 million, which includes a whopping $4.5 in legal expenses. No idea what they were doing there. So, not huge, but still worth eliminating.