If I had to make a bet on what will happen, here is my best guess...
First, this upcoming football season is going to hopefully pay a lot of dividends coming up. If we are in the national conversation as a playoff contender and add a new "IT" team to the ACC, "The Hokies are BACK Baybeeee!", then we will end up in a particularly good spot.
We are fortunate that the only two high-population states that are in the conference re-shuffle derby are Virginia and North Carolina. That makes us extremely valuable. I am convinced that Clemson and FSU are in the courts right now because they only have one viable option, the B1G. The SEC does not need either school. They do not get any new markets from either one. The lawfare going on is going to cause the ACC to implode and they only see one lifeboat.
I do think that the Virginia and North Carolina-based state schools have an interesting component in that all four will be viable in either the B1G or the $EC. I think Tech and NCSU are a better fit for the $EC and I think uva and UNCheat are a better fit for the B1G. I think the politicos in either state will be happy if the flagship universities find a home in either league, not necessarily the same league, just one of the well-fortified Two.
So here is my guess, and it is just a guess. The $EC will likely want new markets in NC and VA. They have a share of the Charlotte market and would love to strike into B1G country with the DC market. The B1G and their Fox-owned affiliate in DC desire a rock-solid ownership of the college football TV market. The reason they took both SC and UCLA was to appease the Fox-owned local broadcast network. My guess is that they want the same win for channel 5 in Washington. Everyone knows that Maryland, especially in football, has little to no juice on the south side of the Potomac River. Therefore, Fox will want the B1G to add at least one Virginia school, if not both.
This puts Tech and uva in a better position than even FSU, Clemson, or Miami. They have the big media market that both leagues covet.
If I were in Vegas, or the Hard Rock Sports Book in Tampa, and had $10 to wager, my bet is that as soon as the ACC implodes, that Tech and NCSU will receive $EC invites. The SEC is far different academically than it was 20 years ago. I expect uva and UnCheat to head off to the B1G along with Clemson and FSU. I think Louisville will go to the Big XII along with GT. I think Duke, Wake, Syracuse, BC and others will become a league like the Big East while retaining the ACC name. Miami is a wild card and will be a hot free agent. ND will cling to football independence and will either remain in the new-look ACC or will join the Big East for all other sports.
These are just my guesses, Whit Babcock gave away the plot when he introduced Coach Duffy and hinted, ever so slightly, at a possible league change. It will be like 2003 all over again once this music starts in this new, high stake musical chairs game. I like our chances of grabbing a seat. Time will tell.
** Edited by CobbCountyHokie at 5/10/2024, 11:27:03 AM
33 Replies
will say it again
NCState, UNC, UVa and VT are a giant block, which delivers the eyeballs of over 19MM people in two states the SEC and B1G are not in today. I think the whole thing will go as a block. Either of the two will take all four and a massive dagger to the other P2.
I agree with you 100% that Clemson and FSU are in court because the SEC doesn't want them.
The ACC will remain as the private school conference(Wake, Duke, Stanford, Pitt, SMU, Cuse, etc) - There should be a private school conference like this imho
(In response to this post by CobbCountyHokie)
S
Stech
2y
because the ACC becomes the Academic Conference of Champions and that fits them better than the B12. I think if the Mag 7 leaves the ACC, they grab UCONN to replace UNC’s basketball success, USF to stay in Florida, San Diego State to get Southern Cal area, Colorado State to make it 4 out west, and Tulane and Rice to get into big market private schools that have basketball growth potential. Two places that ND likes to recruit for all sports. However, that’s just a guess too.
(In response to this post by CobbCountyHokie)
W
WarHog38
2y
Probably not in the next two years as the College Football Playoff is now set for the next several years. However how stable is that P2 & NCAA relationship with Sankey recently threatening to exit the NCAA to get what he wants at the Playoff bargaining table? Sankey quickly got what he wanted but was he just bluffing? Sankey was surely taken seriously by the rest of D1 football.
I think Sankey was dead serious. The threat of a P2 unified by the public alliance of the two plus a bunch of cozy meetings between Sankey & Petitti recently taking place. I think this all just strengthens the possibility of the P2 leaving the NCAA. I would even say it probably means that NCAA departure is in the not so long distance plans of the P2.
Could that effect the possible expansion plans of both the SEC & B1G in the near future. I think so. I think it could cause the SEC & B1G to take more schools. The SEC & B1G being totally autonomous from the NCAA would quickly create a huge void between the P2 and the rest of college football. It will be a huge void of haves & have nots, money wise and athletic product fielded & put on courts.
Of course the biggest concern by the P2 is money. Having schools in every state or populace region will just enable the P2 to negotiate the biggest media deal possible. This all probably means the SEC & B1G getting well above 20 members each.
(In response to this post by CobbCountyHokie)
2y
body; and they will invite just about everyone to join them. They have no desire to isolate themselves. Some suggest that the playoff committee should be that replacement. I disagree; they are too political and small-minded. The replacement must be a for-profit enterprise staffed by real businessmen.
(In response to this post by WarHog38)
I'm not sure how enthusiastic the SEC will be to take NCSU if they don't
get UNC. I also think UVa will go where UNC goes. So, if you buy that UNC is a huge must-have and such a must have, that a conference would take those three, then I think that puts VT as the odd man out. But that being said, I think we could get in the Big Ten with perhaps some sort of 4-combination of Clemson, FSU, and one of either Kansas, GT, Colorado or an AZ school. Of the latter group, Kansas would be most likely. But I could also see Kansas going to the SEC with UNC, UVa and NCSU to renew its rivalry with Mizzou.
WRT GT, I know they have been down as football and basketball power, but if the B1G would take Clemson and FSU, this would give the B1G cover to possibly take a lesser power to gain a large market, growing state and another venue to play football in the South.
BTW, there is a caller and poster of Flugaur's show and who appears on other realignment YouTube shows named "Immaculate". He's an Iowa guy and very informative. And he has been putting forth the idea that the B1G will take FSU, Clemson, Miami and either VT or KU. And I think a lot of B1G fans would prefer VT to UVa all things considered.
(In response to this post by CobbCountyHokie)
D
dayooper
2y
I love the energy of the stadium during game day.
(In response to this post by Maroon Baboon)
Awesome. Which school are you a fan/student/alum of?
(In response to this post by dayooper)
2y
Always informative and balanced. A good understanding of strategy with a unique insight on the macro economics / media dollars at play.
(In response to this post by CobbCountyHokie)
2y
To me, the one thing that VT brings to the SEC or B1G is being in a bordering high income/high education state where neither conference has an outpost.
Cable subscriptions may be declining, but creating more cash flow for either conference from their networks is something VT can provide that FSU and Clemson can't.
VT/UVa/UNC/NCSU divide up very cleanly, should the SEC and B1G decide to do so.
(In response to this post by CobbCountyHokie)
2y
Clemson seems flawed to me. Maybe those two schools don't bring in a new geographical territory for the SEC. But they do bring in a much larger television audience. Television viewership is far superior to geographic territory. And when you compare fsu's television numbers to Virginia Tech's television numbers, there is a massive difference. The SEC has shown a willingness to have two schools in the same state, look at Texas. I think they would be fine with two schools from Florida. Similar arguments could be made about Clemson. Either of those two schools would be chosen by the Sec ahead of any North Carolina or Virginia schools. Geography might be important, but money is most important. Florida State and Clemson simply bring more money. That's an easy choice.
(In response to this post by CobbCountyHokie)
2y
Adding new partners is about the future and there is no guarantee Clemson will maintain its success or ratings 10, 20, 30 years in the future vs some other schools - particularly when the playing field is more level financially.
(In response to this post by wwhokie1)
2y
Years into the future. But if I'm the SEC, I'm betting on the future success of Clemson and FSU before I'm betting on the future success of Virginia Tech. That does not mean I don't think Virginia Tech can have success in the future. But I would certainly give Clemson an FSU greater odds. And there is no sign that Virginia Tech would have a level playing Field with Clemson and FSU when it comes to finances. And we would not have a level playing Field with other SEC schools. Virginia Tech is well behind these schools when it comes to athletic budget. The SEC simply would find Clemson and FSU more valuable than Virginia Tech. And everything points to either of those schools having greater success in the future in the SEC than Virginia Tech would have. Of course there's no guarantee but I would certainly take those odds.
(In response to this post by marcbvtgm)
S
Stech
2y
already. Texas only had one school to beat to get in the SEC, A&M. On the other hand, FSU and Clemson have the University of Florida, Georgia, South Carolina, Kentucky and probably Tennessee that love having the recruiting edge over both by saying they are not in the SEC. That’s a huge hurdle for both of them. Remember the Presidents of the Universities are the ones that vote. Their attitude towards football is very different than the ACC, and even the B1G that prefers AAU Universities or one’s close to getting in the AAU. The SEC Presidents don’t want to do anything to hurt their football programs.
** Edited by Stech at 5/11/2024, 1:13:08 AM
(In response to this post by wwhokie1)
2y
Clemson is only more valuable when looking at the recent time slice of 2013 to 2024. I would wager that VT's brand appeal and draw from 2000 to 2013 was far better than Clemson... and had the SEC expanded at that time, then VT would be more attractive than Clemson. Ultimately, I don't think there really is a big difference between Clemson and VT, and when Dabo retires or hits the declining years (similar to Beamer), people are going to tune out.
For example, Syracuse was attractive in 1995 because they won - and were occasionally top 10... but they are irrelevant now.
For VT, you only need to give the school the right platform, sprinkle a bit of magic/luck, and find the right coach... and people will tune in avidly. We have such an amazing base.
Regarding FSU, it is unquestionable that they will likely have a perpetually stronger brand name than VT, regardless of performance droughts. However, there are some disadvantages.
I'm sure the SEC or Big10 would love to grab the 9th and 11th most populated states respectively (NC and VA), especially if they can grab the flagships or largest schools in the state. Combined, NC and VA would be about the 4th largest populated state in the country.
We will see.
(In response to this post by wwhokie1)
R
ren_hoek
2y
Ratings would skyrocket with an SEC schedule. Clemson and FSU make ESPN a lot more money in the SEC.
(In response to this post by wwhokie1)
V
VPI_1998
2y
has a bigger national profile. Clemson? Not so sure. They have had a remarkable decade - they had a once in a generation coaching hire who was a master motivator and recruiter, energized the fan and alumni base and brought that program to remarkable heights. Remember Clemson before and after Danny Ford (up until Dabo)? Most people don't. Were they a national power who brought huge ratings with a huge alumni base and big fan base? I can't say for sure but I would suspect not. Point being - Clemson could and most likely will have a lull. They are potentially one bad coaching hire away from mediocrity. They are not Bama, Ohio State, Michigan, USC, et. al. Will they be the huge draw then? Even Nebraska and FSU - programs that were at the top of college footbal for over a decade - fell to earth for several years and ratings for their games (especially Nebraksa) fell.
Will the SEC powers want 2 teams from a small poulation state receiving the same payout as Bama? They already have Mississippi/MSU. Maybe I'm obtuse and naive, but I don't see it.
** Edited by VPI_1998 at 5/10/2024, 6:00:14 PM
(In response to this post by wwhokie1)
2y
And their first one in 1981. But more importantly they have the fan support and the donor support. 1981 was a lifetime ago in college sports. Things have changed so much over the past 20 years. But this Does show that their football program was significant at times prior to their recent success. It's not about where you were 40 years ago. It's about where you are now. And Clemson's at a really good place. This is why Virginia Tech is putting So much effort in football right now. It's about where we are now, and showing that our football program is bigger than Frank Beamer. Clemson has already shown that their football program is bigger than dabo Sweeney
** Edited by wwhokie1 at 5/10/2024, 7:07:35 PM
** Edited by wwhokie1 at 5/10/2024, 7:08:44 PM
(In response to this post by VPI_1998)
2y
It is about where you will be in the future. There is no guarantee that the sustained and long term ceiling for Clemson is any higher than that of VT. Sure, their recent success does bode well for them, and props for their performance, as it is an important data point that they can elevate their brand... but staying on top of the mountain is very hard... and Clemson doesn't have the "it factor" that ensures they can rebound quickly once their head man leaves. There are already signs things are cracking. That doesn't mean VT is better than Clemson, as we have the same challenges... but a wise man once said "Let's see how VT does once Beamer gets past his glory years"... and the same will be said of Clemson with Dabo.
Of course, there are certain schools VT will almost certainly never catch with brand appeal (Georgia, Texas, Alabama, Notre Dame, Michigan, Ohio State, Oklahoma, etc), as those are brand synonymous with the definition of College football... but once you get to Tier 2/3 (Clemson, VT, NCSU, Michigan State, etc)... there isn't much difference and it comes down to other factors.
(In response to this post by wwhokie1)
M
Marooned
2y
is the fact that they seem to want to poach from us in the sports they care about. Be it Buzz going to TAMU, Brooks going to UK, or the much rumored Brinks truck maneuver to try to grab Drones by LSU. Is there any other program in the ACC or elsewhere that has had to contend with the SEC’s overtures for its talent the way we have?
(In response to this post by CobbCountyHokie)
2y
I agree. I think the SEC has wanted VT ever since we played Alabama in Atlanta. We travel well and fit their culture 100%. We also would help recruiting and markets. It's pretty much a no brainer. I actually think we are more attractive than UVA to the SEC.
** Edited by Sunsetunderground at 5/10/2024, 12:40:21 PM
(In response to this post by CobbCountyHokie)
2y
in the middle of SEC territory, dominate the commodore's stadium, just like the SEC breatren Tenn, Ga Ala do.... That will definitely raise eyes in SEC land (and of course a dominant win)..
(In response to this post by Sunsetunderground)
2y
People read too much into it, thinking he was hinting VT is going to the B1G.
(In response to this post by Sunsetunderground)
O
ombandit
2y
he was talking about the new coach and nothing more.
This board is now Conspiracy HQ…
smh
(In response to this post by hokieball)
2y
but I remember that there was a comment about "whatever league we are in" or something likely much more nuanced than that.
(In response to this post by Sunsetunderground)
2y
Partially to see how VT is doing on the field, but mainly to see how ESPN treats VT and the other ACC schools.
It will be interesting to see what channels the put games on, what days, and what times. They can easily bury or promote any team, even a playoff level team, if they want.
The tell will be any ACC teams/games on the main channels (ABC or ESPN). Secondary would be ESPN 2, third level is ESPN U. All of the above have Nielsen ratings captured. Anything on ACCN is not reported in ratings and is quietly buried. Anything on ESPN+ for online only is bottom rung and for the not good teams.
If VT is winning and getting shown on the main networks, then I’ll lean SEC and feel that we have a shot. If we are winning but getting buried by ESPN then my lean is BIG.
(In response to this post by CobbCountyHokie)
2y
they have a singular narrative - SEC, SEC, SEC. The ACC gets zero promotion, nada, zilch, none. It's a big reason the conference is in the pickle it's in - its biggest media partner is hostile towards its interests. If you're waiting on ESPN to promote an ACC program, or the ACC generally, then I really pray you're not holding your breath.
(In response to this post by HokieAl)
O
obguthr
2y
I can't imagine any conference going to 20+ teams without breaking away from the G7. And if there is such a split, it will require more than 40 teams, probably at least 48.
(In response to this post by CobbCountyHokie)
V
VPI_1998
2y
schools will not tolerate sharing revenue with the likes of Vandy, Northwestern, Rutgers, et. al. The only way they can shed that weight is to break off.
(In response to this post by obguthr)