The ND crew
I actually agree with Terry D . They will be in BiG one day . So will some the AAU schools of ACC . I actually think the Big will own the PAC by then or let’s say whomever they desire out of PAC and ACC.
I can see SEC taking some ACC schools . Some that are not AAU. Where would VT land ? Probably inns division of SEC with Clemson, STate and FSU. If VT is AAU by then maybe BIG,
Penn State would love and Eastern presence .
I can see SEC taking some ACC schools . Some that are not AAU. Where would VT land ? Probably inns division of SEC with Clemson, STate and FSU. If VT is AAU by then maybe BIG,
Penn State would love and Eastern presence .
49 Replies
T
Truthahn
4y
Their alumni would consider joining a conference a colossal failure of their administration, and it would cost their jobs. The CF world would have to change massively first.
ND would join the A10 for all non-football sports if need be to keep that going.
ND would join the A10 for all non-football sports if need be to keep that going.
(In response to this post by MrFantastic!)
T
TerryD
4y
....for ND for at least the past thirty years.
ND doesn't like people trying to force it into an arrangement that it is trying very hard to avoid.
The alumni would consider it a surrender like Bataan. Whoever agrees with that will lose their jobs, certainly.
IF there are only two super conferences and a breakaway in ten years or so, ND has to decide whether to opt out of "big time" pay for play (athletes as university employees) and play at a different level (which Swarbrick and Jenkins repeatedly said they would) or join the Big Ten in full in a breakaway for $90 million a year or so (or more by then).
Unless and until then, ND will staunchly remain a football independent.
ND doesn't like people trying to force it into an arrangement that it is trying very hard to avoid.
The alumni would consider it a surrender like Bataan. Whoever agrees with that will lose their jobs, certainly.
IF there are only two super conferences and a breakaway in ten years or so, ND has to decide whether to opt out of "big time" pay for play (athletes as university employees) and play at a different level (which Swarbrick and Jenkins repeatedly said they would) or join the Big Ten in full in a breakaway for $90 million a year or so (or more by then).
Unless and until then, ND will staunchly remain a football independent.
(In response to this post by Truthahn)
E
EDGEMAN
4y
"Show me the money!"
(In response to this post by Truthahn)
4y
in the future and given the fallout of Congress passing the Sports Broadcasting Act of 1961 (specifically what the NFL was willing to give up in order to receive antitrust exemption), I wonder if something similar could happen with this super league. If the super league sees a benefit to receiving antitrust exemption so it can negotiate the TV contracts for the entire league, then it is possible that the league could look like the ACC, Big Ten, Pac-12, and SEC pooled the resources together (at least from a membership standpoint). Essentially the former ACC schools would be the East Division, former Big Ten schools would be the North Division, former SEC schools would be the South Division, and the former Pac-12 schools would be the West Division. I guess the conference names could even become the division names for marketing purposes.
(In response to this post by EDGEMAN)
4y
We will need a home for our sports that are high major. The Big East is a possibility, but will they remain? I am 100% sure that we will not be in the ACC in full in my lifetime. My mind changed on that because of the amount of work we're putting in to secure our independence now. We will continue to align with the SEC and ESPN to maintain the status quo. ESPN is content with a indy ND I believe.
(In response to this post by MrFantastic!)
T
Truthahn
4y
Seems like ND is just picking the proposal that fits them best. If the Alliance proposed limiting the playoff slots per conference, then ND would align with the Alliance (and the SEC would not). It would be dumb not to.
That simple change this year would have put ND into the playoffs over Georgia.
That simple change this year would have put ND into the playoffs over Georgia.
(In response to this post by goldendomer)
4y
with what is best for the ACC. Adding ND to the ACC for football would be a great boost to the conference as we try to gain on the SEC and B1G. I like the idea of ND joining. I just don't believe it will happen in the foreseeable future, so I don't want to plan for it, or waste time on the concept. The current deal with ND is good for both; I am happy with it. Time for people to accept reality. That was the downfall of the Big East, they saw ND as their salvation and ignored the internal needs of the conference - like the football schools breaking away and adding some schools from the ACC. The Big East was a flawed conference, and needed a major overhaul to survive. Focus on what you have control over. The ACC needs to focus on improving in other ways, like improving current programs, especially schools who are supposed to be elite or top programs. IF FSU, Miami, and VT were as expected the ACC would be fine. Throw in improved L'ville, UNC, G.Tech (schools who should be better), and get Pitt and NC State to play as they did this year, even Wake. And the conference could make a case for a decent TV contract. Also, the alliance will hopefully provide opportunities, who knows what if anything will happen with that.
(In response to this post by goldendomer)
E
EDGEMAN
4y
...the playoff. It's not in our best interest. It's time the ACC starts putting its own interests ahead of everything else.
Just saying...
Just saying...
(In response to this post by goldendomer)
4y
To be reconstituted. Blow it up and actually pay the schools vs the NCAA . Billions are on the table there and it plays to the ACC strengths.
(In response to this post by EDGEMAN)
M
Mercury
4y
VT sees it self as peer school as penn state and purdue..
(In response to this post by MrFantastic!)
The B1G and the PAC need to make the Rose Bowl Great Again.
The B1G could expand to the East and maybe ship Nebraska, Iowa and Minnesota to the Pac. Just play the traditional Rose Bowl and the winner take on the SEC in a +1.
Or, keep the conferences smaller and insist the Rose Bowl be a national quarterfinal and go to 8 team playoff.
Or, keep the conferences smaller and insist the Rose Bowl be a national quarterfinal and go to 8 team playoff.
(In response to this post by MrFantastic!)
S
Stech
4y
they needed a mass exodus from the ACC and they never got close.
PS I still have the Finebaum show recorded suggesting right after OU Texas left, that Virginia Tech needed to call the SEC. Again, it didn’t work.
PS I still have the Finebaum show recorded suggesting right after OU Texas left, that Virginia Tech needed to call the SEC. Again, it didn’t work.
(In response to this post by Maroon Baboon)
VT needs to get good again under Pry to give us options in the future.
(In response to this post by Stech)
S
Stech
4y
works out. I honestly thought if the June playoff proposal passed, the ACC as a Power Conference was done.
It didn’t, and now the next big thing is what they do to the NCAA Constitution. It supposedly has to be done by August. Jim Phillips said repeatedly we can’t expand the playoff until we know the role the NCAA will play.
So keep an eye on that one.
It didn’t, and now the next big thing is what they do to the NCAA Constitution. It supposedly has to be done by August. Jim Phillips said repeatedly we can’t expand the playoff until we know the role the NCAA will play.
So keep an eye on that one.
(In response to this post by Maroon Baboon)
4y
B1G adds ND, UVa, UNC, Duke, GT and Miami (or FSU)
SEC adds VT, NC State, Clemson and FSU (or Miami)
SEC adds VT, NC State, Clemson and FSU (or Miami)
(In response to this post by MrFantastic!)
4y
Virginia Tech really isn't in any kind of position to do that.
(In response to this post by Millpoint)
L
lawhokie
4y
of VT sports. Or, if joining was ok, it was a huge mistake to not vigorously lobby for a spot in the SEC when we had a chance, before being locked in by a long term grant of rights.
VT valued academics, basketball, whatever. Now the SEC has added R&D powerhouses A&M and UT while the ACC tacked on Louisville. And how many teams does the ACC have in the top 25 now?
VT was a better choice than Mizzou in every respect, and would have fit so nicely in the SEC East it would have looked like we were destined to be opposite A&M. But somebody threw out the financials and decided we were 'home'. Disaster.
[Post edited by lawhokie at 01/12/2022 11:31AM]
VT valued academics, basketball, whatever. Now the SEC has added R&D powerhouses A&M and UT while the ACC tacked on Louisville. And how many teams does the ACC have in the top 25 now?
VT was a better choice than Mizzou in every respect, and would have fit so nicely in the SEC East it would have looked like we were destined to be opposite A&M. But somebody threw out the financials and decided we were 'home'. Disaster.
[Post edited by lawhokie at 01/12/2022 11:31AM]
(In response to this post by Millpoint)
I wanted to go to the SEC ever since the ACC announced SYR/BC.MIA to ACC
and left us out in the cold to basically use government and the courts to survive. I wanted the SEC to pick WVU and VT up at that point. Didn't happen. Yes, UVa helped us. But we should now be working with UVa for future homes rather than prop up the ACC. If the ACC turns it around, great. But it's been underachieving for two decades. The die is cast.
Oh. And are we not supposed to notice that SEC basketball is now looking a lot better than the ACC? LOL at the people who thought being in the "middle of the ACC footprint" and "ACC basketball" while turning their nose up at "SEC academics" was the wave of the future. Turrible.
I was fine with returning the favor to UVa by us not pursuing the SEC in 2014. But now we need to look out for VT and stop thinking the ACC and the national conference dynamic is like it was in the 1980s-90s.
Oh. And are we not supposed to notice that SEC basketball is now looking a lot better than the ACC? LOL at the people who thought being in the "middle of the ACC footprint" and "ACC basketball" while turning their nose up at "SEC academics" was the wave of the future. Turrible.
I was fine with returning the favor to UVa by us not pursuing the SEC in 2014. But now we need to look out for VT and stop thinking the ACC and the national conference dynamic is like it was in the 1980s-90s.
(In response to this post by lawhokie)
4y
I propose we just make the ACC a better conference rather than jump to another conference. Yeah, I am old school, but not set in my ways to want to keep VT in the ACC for nostalgia's sake. While I consider VT a more oriented football school in the ACC, I do not consider VT a SEC type school. I am not a football at all cost type of Hokie. I do not want to be in the financial escalation war to be the best football team. When I think of VT I think of the school / campus, cowgill hall, and then the sports teams. I am a Hokie club member and I travel 3 1/2 hours each way to go to all the home football games. The grass ain't always greener on the opposite side of the fence. Just my two cents..... I obviously do not want to join the SEC.
(In response to this post by Maroon Baboon)
E
EDGEMAN
4y
They weren't ready to expand.
But on the other hand, what I liked about the ACC was our location. Blacksburg is easy driving distance to half of the conference. At the time we joined, it was one of the most financially secure conferences. Boy has that last one changed.
But on the other hand, what I liked about the ACC was our location. Blacksburg is easy driving distance to half of the conference. At the time we joined, it was one of the most financially secure conferences. Boy has that last one changed.
(In response to this post by Maroon Baboon)
4y
looked to add Miami, VT, WVU, and 1 other school, then it is hard to say where VT would be right now. Instead, JW used the SEC's interest to leverage full membership in the Big East for re-committing to the Big East Football Conference.
(In response to this post by EDGEMAN)
We had no choice but to join the ACC in that scenario.
That's the bottom line. Anything else is just Monday morning quarterbacking.
If we would have held out and stayed in the Big East, we might be in the same situation at WVU right now.
If we would have held out and stayed in the Big East, we might be in the same situation at WVU right now.
(In response to this post by EDGEMAN)
4y
TV deal, if it is in the range predicted. Miami and maybe even FSU could end up being a bad financial investment for the SEC. The problem with too many big time programs is they bring the average up so high that anyone else brings it back down. A school is going to need to add close to 100 million annually to be of value to the SEC. Not many options for SEC expansion going forward without schools taking a cut in payouts to make it happen.
[Post edited by wwhokie1 at 01/12/2022 09:16AM]
[Post edited by wwhokie1 at 01/12/2022 09:16AM]
(In response to this post by Millpoint)
L
lawhokie
4y
SEC members. State of Virginia, capital area presence, and heavy R&D expenses are valuable assets. VT is a better get than Mizzou, all we need is SEC money.
(In response to this post by wwhokie1)
4y
80 million each with the new expanded SEC. So for VT to make sense as a future addition we need to bring in more than that in additional revenue. The SEC will have 16 schools now, if they expand to just 18, with VT plus one other, then VT would need to be worth 98 million additional just to add an extra 1 million to each schools payout. In other words adding two new schools, including VT, would increase payouts form 80 to 81 million if VT brought in an additional 98 million (unlikely), not much incentive. In order to increase the payout to 82 million VT would have to bring in an extra 116 million, 83 million and VT would have to be worth 134 million. There will be 18 schools so an additional million in payout will require an addition 18 million in value. It will be hard for any school to have this much value for the SEC. Expansion will need to be driven by something other than finances for this to happen. That is why even schools like FSU and Miami may not be so appealing at this point.
[Post edited by wwhokie1 at 01/12/2022 10:41AM]
[Post edited by wwhokie1 at 01/12/2022 10:41AM]
(In response to this post by lawhokie)
OU and UT was a massive game changer.
To me, it changed the landscape of college sports more than anything in recent memory, including NIL, including CFP expansion, etc. It seriously diminished the existing BigXII, and it basically put the other conferences on notice that the stakes for conference expansion are now raised. It involves bluebloods and bluebloods only. The tragedy (or reality) is that in order for other conferences keep up, bluebloods must be acquired from other conferences without taking on "dead weight" (read: non-bluebloods), whereby other conferences will be greatly diminished.
The SEC could have easily taken Oklahoma State. Always good in football. Always good in basketball--could keep the Bedlam rivalry as its own. But they didn't. They kicked the Cowboys to the curb.
So to me, there are a few major players in all of this: USC and Notre Dame. These are the bluest of the bluebloods that are not in the B1G or the SEC. While FSU and Clemson are also in that blueblood realm, I don't think they have the same pull as USC and Notre Dame wrt the future of college football.
Bottom line for VT: I don't think the options we hoped we had are quite the same moving forward. That's why I say get good in football again, and do it quickly.
[Post edited by Maroon Baboon at 01/14/2022 09:16AM]
The SEC could have easily taken Oklahoma State. Always good in football. Always good in basketball--could keep the Bedlam rivalry as its own. But they didn't. They kicked the Cowboys to the curb.
So to me, there are a few major players in all of this: USC and Notre Dame. These are the bluest of the bluebloods that are not in the B1G or the SEC. While FSU and Clemson are also in that blueblood realm, I don't think they have the same pull as USC and Notre Dame wrt the future of college football.
Bottom line for VT: I don't think the options we hoped we had are quite the same moving forward. That's why I say get good in football again, and do it quickly.
[Post edited by Maroon Baboon at 01/14/2022 09:16AM]
(In response to this post by wwhokie1)
2
2hhoop3
4y
of the matter. Aside from Notre Dame, USC-W and UCLA, and yes that includes Clemson and FSU in the available group, there are really NO schools that make expansion for the SEC or the Big10 a breakeven or better proposition from a revenue standpoint for the conferences' currently existing or proposed members. Any further expansions outside of the 3 schools mentioned is about further strengthening the conference brand and/or expanding its footprint.
(In response to this post by wwhokie1)
L
lawhokie
4y
from about 100MM to 120MM people. That's a 20% increase in eyeballs through a 12% increase in membership. Plus, adding Virginia Tech allows the SEC to host games at FedEx field due to the large number of Hokie alumni in the capital area. VT also has the innovation campus in NoVa.
Virginia has a population of 9 million, while Mississippi has a population of 3 million and hosts two SEC schools. Virginia would be the fourth most populous SEC state, and (good or bad) would bring a very different blend of fan to the mix by adding NoVa.
And don't forget, VA (sort of) and NC host two NFL teams and bring the metropolitan areas of DC and Charlotte. The SEC would love to own Charlotte. DC maybe not so much, but it has cache.
I think the ACC is a dead man walking and the B1G and SEC will fight over the scraps when it falls apart. In particular, there will be a fight over the NC and VA schools, with UNC, Duke, and UVa being highly valued. VT too I hope given our R&D numbers and highly ranked engineering school.
We'll see. There is more than play here than TV revenue. Even if both schools combined bring in $80MM, that would be a $2M loss per SEC school in TV payout, while Bama, A&M, Texas, etc. have athletic budges in the range of $200MM. And ESPN will increase payouts more than that I'd assume.
[Post edited by lawhokie at 01/12/2022 11:22AM]
Virginia has a population of 9 million, while Mississippi has a population of 3 million and hosts two SEC schools. Virginia would be the fourth most populous SEC state, and (good or bad) would bring a very different blend of fan to the mix by adding NoVa.
And don't forget, VA (sort of) and NC host two NFL teams and bring the metropolitan areas of DC and Charlotte. The SEC would love to own Charlotte. DC maybe not so much, but it has cache.
I think the ACC is a dead man walking and the B1G and SEC will fight over the scraps when it falls apart. In particular, there will be a fight over the NC and VA schools, with UNC, Duke, and UVa being highly valued. VT too I hope given our R&D numbers and highly ranked engineering school.
We'll see. There is more than play here than TV revenue. Even if both schools combined bring in $80MM, that would be a $2M loss per SEC school in TV payout, while Bama, A&M, Texas, etc. have athletic budges in the range of $200MM. And ESPN will increase payouts more than that I'd assume.
[Post edited by lawhokie at 01/12/2022 11:22AM]
(In response to this post by wwhokie1)
4y
some good points for why SEC might want to expand for reasons other than money. However, ask each SEC school if they are willing to take a 4 million annual cut to have access to VA and NC audiences an to play at Fed Ex field where Washington fans don't even want to play. There are reasons other than money to expand. But to take a 4 million cut, those reasons need to be pretty significant. I just think you overestimate the appeal of those reasons to SEC powers. You also have to realize a lot of people in VA and NC are already watching SEC football.
(In response to this post by lawhokie)
E
EDGEMAN
4y
...and adding the right ACC replacements, it makes good sense financially.
Really think SEC and B1X deadwood will be kicked to the curb in the final reorganization of two mega conferences. Look for 80K seat stadiums as the minimum cutoff.
Really think SEC and B1X deadwood will be kicked to the curb in the final reorganization of two mega conferences. Look for 80K seat stadiums as the minimum cutoff.
(In response to this post by wwhokie1)
4y
Personally, I doubt it given that VT opted to expand Lane as if it was a patchwork quilt instead of a football stadium. Assuming 80K is the cutoff, then that likely means VT would be left out in the cold.
(In response to this post by EDGEMAN)
E
EDGEMAN
4y
We have one endzone that is prime for a rebuild.
I can also see VT tearing down the east side stands rebuild it into a "double decker" with modern conveniences if that's what it takes. Clearly we'll need to hit the alumni and corporations hard to fund that project...
I can also see VT tearing down the east side stands rebuild it into a "double decker" with modern conveniences if that's what it takes. Clearly we'll need to hit the alumni and corporations hard to fund that project...
(In response to this post by VTHokie2000)
4y
is an option though given the road between Lane and the outdoor practice field can't be removed for fire and safety reasons. At least I believe that is the only access road to the outdoor practice field and Beamer Barn area.
As far as getting alumni and boosters involved, will enough of them pony up enough cash to cover the major renovation? That may be the $64 million dollar question.
As far as getting alumni and boosters involved, will enough of them pony up enough cash to cover the major renovation? That may be the $64 million dollar question.
(In response to this post by EDGEMAN)
4y
(In response to this post by VTHokie2000)
4y
Arkansas (Donald W. Reynolds Razorback Stadium) = 76,212
Ole Miss (Vaught–Hemingway Stadium) = 64,038
Miss State (Davis Wade Stadium) = 61,337
Now Vandy's stadium is around 50K, but they could always opt to play their home games in the Titans' stadium like what they are doing for the series with VT. Also, there is nothing to prevent a school from expanding its football stadium to meet any minimum requirements.
Ole Miss (Vaught–Hemingway Stadium) = 64,038
Miss State (Davis Wade Stadium) = 61,337
Now Vandy's stadium is around 50K, but they could always opt to play their home games in the Titans' stadium like what they are doing for the series with VT. Also, there is nothing to prevent a school from expanding its football stadium to meet any minimum requirements.
(In response to this post by Lakeridgehokie)
E
EDGEMAN
4y
Ole Miss will probably make it, but MSU is a "dead program walking."
(In response to this post by Lakeridgehokie)
4y
and both MS schools have similar size stadiums. If Ole Miss is grandfathered in, then I would think the same consideration would be given to Miss State.
(In response to this post by EDGEMAN)
4y
up. Which makes for less financial sense to expand, as even fewer teams could improve on what is left behind after the dead wood is removed.
(In response to this post by EDGEMAN)
E
EDGEMAN
4y
I'm thinking the smaller schools, especially the second schools in a low population state might be bumped out of the two "Mega" Conferences in the end.
(In response to this post by wwhokie1)
With all the chest-thumping about the conference membership
by the likes of SEC members and B1G members, along with the greed, the research money and everything else, I've been saying that the bottom third of these conferences better watch their backs from within their own conference.
Tradition has been kicked aside in the last 20 years, so if these schools think that being a longtime member of the conference is going to save them when it all goes down, they are likely wrong.
Tradition has been kicked aside in the last 20 years, so if these schools think that being a longtime member of the conference is going to save them when it all goes down, they are likely wrong.
(In response to this post by EDGEMAN)
4y
I wonder how much the ACC could improve their payouts by dropping back to 12. Same with SEC etc....
[Post edited by wwhokie1 at 01/12/2022 11:04AM]
[Post edited by wwhokie1 at 01/12/2022 11:04AM]
(In response to this post by Maroon Baboon)
Conferences shouldn't be bigger than round robin play will allow.
I think that might be the reason to get rid of teams. I'd like to see an end to all or most OOC games. Makes zero sense to get into super conferences and play only 8 conference games. Just dumb. If teams played 12 conference games (13 members), there would be much more interest in the post season and the regular season would be much better. Junk conference title games and add an extra round of playoffs.
(In response to this post by wwhokie1)
4y
Unless we meet Clemson in the Conference Championship it just feels like we are in different conferences. Clemson and SC play every year.
(In response to this post by Maroon Baboon)
4y
they were not already in the SEC. IF we end up with two "Mega" Conferences, it will be interesting to see what happens with such schools.
(In response to this post by EDGEMAN)
E
EDGEMAN
4y
...goes out the window.
We're talking a "mini NFL" league with the AFC and the NFC.
We're talking a "mini NFL" league with the AFC and the NFC.
(In response to this post by wwhokie1)
4y
scratch and build something that actually makes sense. Too logical to actually happen.
(In response to this post by EDGEMAN)
T
TerryD
4y
Not one bit.
But even a pro-independence Neanderthal like me can see the writing on the wall.
But even a pro-independence Neanderthal like me can see the writing on the wall.
(In response to this post by MrFantastic!)