❓: Which FSU outcome most improves VT's track position to a P2 invite?
FSU to B1G -or- B1G to SEC.
Or, is it for FSU to somehow crash and burn and be stuck in the ACC?
23 Replies
2y
Then FSU wins the suit and the GOR is broken. ESPN decides unilaterally in 2026 to not renew the ACC payouts at current rate. And we have a jailbreak with the ACC top tier.
FSU UNC VT UVA NCSU UM CU ND get split up across the P2.
Stanford and Cal go back to the new PAC or B12.
Lville Pitt Wake Duke BC Cuse GT go to B12 or other.
(In response to this post by Maroon Baboon)
2y
I could see the ACC and FSU fighting for months about which court to have this tried in. It wouldn't be hard for the ACC to delay this out for a long time.
(In response to this post by HokieAl)
2y
Seriously, this whole pay for play game is not what college sports should be about. I say we stay out of it.
(In response to this post by Maroon Baboon)
M
Marooned
2y
You’re resigning yourself to being a developmental squad to the P2 schools, which has its own inferences for how you relate to them as a whole.
(In response to this post by VT ChemE 1986)
2y
and VT is not invited for whatever reason.
(In response to this post by Maroon Baboon)
2y
I’ve fallen into the VT, UVA, UNC, and NC State to the SEC camp. So if Miami and Clemson go with FSU to the B1G even better for VT to get the SEC.
(In response to this post by Maroon Baboon)
2y
We will never have another winning season in our lifetime. For what? A few extra bucks?
(In response to this post by hokieball)
2y
Else, we get poached in those sports by schools with more money to spend, and we risk becoming irrelevant in every sport.
(In response to this post by VT ChemE 1986)
S
Stech
2y
and we won plenty of Conference Championships. Same would happen in the SEC IMHO. As father said a million times, you are only as good as you think you are, and not a dang bit better.
(In response to this post by VT ChemE 1986)
2y
The world of college athletics has devolved into a semi-pro league. Count me out
(In response to this post by Stech)
S
Stech
2y
the only ones not getting paid in a Billion dollar industry IMHO. So I am not tainted by them getting paid. I am tainted by Jimbo Fisher getting 76 million for doing a crappy job on the field.
That said, I am very concerned about all the Olympic Sports getting scholarships, but I think or hope they resolve through Academic Scholarships without pay. The GPA’s of our Olympic Sports are usually outstanding, with most if not all having to go through regular admissions to be accepted.
(In response to this post by VT ChemE 1986)
2y
did he do wrong, really? They offered him that salary; and he took it. When they wanted him gone, they offered him the cash-out; and he took it. Those Aggie knuckleheads could have insisted on minimum performance goals or more reasonable separation terms. But they saw Jimbo as a quick-fix for their fading program. They thought they could buy championships. I view the Aggies as the greedy ones. Jimbo just accepted their foolish, short-sighted generosity.
(In response to this post by Stech)
S
Stech
2y
(In response to this post by 33laszlo99)
2y
They might even go as far to say that the only sports that schools should sponsor at the DI level are football and men's basketball because those are the only sports people really care about. I disagree with that position because I don't believe that is the intent of establishing collegiate athletics. It is possible the intent got warped with the SCOTUS ruling in 1984, but that is an entirely different discussion.
Unfortunately, they may not be wrong that the only reason the Olympic sports exist is because of Title IX. So you do have a reason to be concern about the future of Olympic Sports because they are at risk from multiple angles. If football and basketball get paid, then it is likely lawsuits will be brought to ensure the Olympic Sports get paid too which could put them at risk to be on the chopping block as schools look for ways to reduce their cost. If the schools now only offer academic scholarships to the Olympic Sports, then where is the justification for the NCAA to continue to have multiple divisions within it? Will the schools legally be able to pay some athletes a salary and other athletes only offer athletic scholarships? It is too bad the Olympic Sports often get lost/overlooked in these discussions because they may be the most impacted by whatever decisions are made on this issue.
(In response to this post by Stech)
2y
You'd have Vandy, Tennessee, South Carolina, Arkansas, Mississippi State, Missouri, Auburn and Florida as well. Surely we'd be able to win some of those. We'd probably lose a lot to LSU, Alabama, and Georgia. The rest we should strive to compete with.
(In response to this post by VT ChemE 1986)
2y
(In response to this post by VT ChemE 1986)
2y
ACC w boring football. I’d rather go against the best and who knows what might happen 10 - 20 yrs down road. We have the culture and desire to compete at that level.
(In response to this post by VT ChemE 1986)
2y
It seems like a more fun league from a fan perspective and as the saying goes, “You gotta be in it to win it.” Things ebb and flow and you may possibly over-rating the SEC on a whole. There’s also good basketball and really good baseball for year round fun.
There are other bonuses like the SEC is still for the better part a regional conference with schools within driving distance of VT and covers fertile recruiting grounds in the South.
(In response to this post by VT ChemE 1986)
M
Marooned
2y
Maybe expansion will change that; but there isn’t the commitment to the non-revs we’re used to experiencing.
(In response to this post by hokieball)
M
Marooned
2y
There are only so many slots to go around.
Besides, do you really want to be in a conference with F$U long term, all other factors being equal?
(In response to this post by Maroon Baboon)
H
HOO86
2y
(In response to this post by Big12 guy)
2y
(In response to this post by HOO86)