I don't think FSU will have to wait until 2036 to get this issue resolved.
HAIL TO PITT!!!!
OT: The official ACC all things thread
- Thread starter JayDogSmooth
- Start date
I don't think FSU will have to wait until 2036 to get this issue resolved.
HAIL TO PITT!!!!
I’m willing to believe anything regarding conference realignment, but there is no way Notre Dame would join the Big 12. That move checks zero boxes. Notre Dame will either be an independent, stay in the ACC, or join the Big Ten. In the Big Ten, they fit the academic profile, they are in the geographic footprint of other universities like them, and they have several traditional opponents, like USC, Indiana, Michigan, Michigan State, etc. Let’s not forget that they would make MUCH more $$$ too.
What it boils down to is timing. History means nothing. If Georgia Tech, Cuse and BC had the recent success that Clemson and FSU have instead, those three schools would be expansion targets. FSU and Clemson want to get out now while the gettin’ is good. They matter now. That might not always be the case.
The sad part of College Football is: at one time Pitt's research funding and academics would have been a part of how the B1G looked at Pitt as a possible member.
Now those two are afterthoughts when it comes to what the BIG will look at if they expand .
At one time those things might have been a bigger part of what counted when the B1G looked at when it was considering membership then they are now
So I can see where you're coming from when you state : "I am not saying that Research Funding would give Pitt an edge in getting into the B1G."
Pitt is in most aspects a B1G type school.
However, Penn State is in Pennsylvania and therefore the B1G is looking at new demographics for future members.
Pitt almost was admitted to the B1G but Michigan State at the time got the nod.
Pitt was admitted to the ACC because they were looking to expand their demographics and expanded North into Pennsylvania.
Understand the logic of all this in the new era of college sports.
HAIL TO PITT!!!!
Clemson yes, FSU no
Clemson has been on another level for the past decade - but absent of 1981, were fairly underwhelming
FSU has been pretty consistent for the past 45 + years
GT & Cuse haven’t been relavent since the mid 90s, BC since mid-late 2000s
Right, and if recent success was reversed then those three would be clamoring publicly to get out. But now Clemson and FSU have more going for them. Remember, BC and GT are in big markets but that’s not enough this time around. Relevance matters more than it did when RU was added because the exisiting pie is huge. Mathematically more difficult to increase revenue for 18 existing members than it was going to 14.
There is no P4. It’s a P2 and then the ACC and Big XII.
The only thing GT and BC have going for them is big markets
That's literally it
GT hasn't been revalent in 30 years
BC did the USF flash in the pan to the top 5 I believe in 2007, but they've never been consistently elite
Cuse hasn't been a force in 35 years
None of those schools have the cache, money, fans or pull to be calling any shots, ever
They're milking the league for all it's worth, contributing very little yet benefiting greatly
In more recent times, UCF was hot to trot in 2017
Yet nobody (including the networks and leagues) takes them seriously
Miami hasn't been relevant in 20 years, yet they're still in talks about moving
Why?
B/c their brand is strong
Bingo
If there was a true P4, the college football world wouldn't have been all up in arms after the playoff snub
You’re making my point for me. Relevance is the ticket. Miami isn’t crying and suing to get out because it’s very short in that currency these days. Same with UCF. Miami isn’t the brand you think it is anymore. How many Miami fans at the Pinstripe lol ?
Miami isn't making noise b/c they're not all in on athletics and they have a ton of money coming in via the med school
They're brand, when they're good, is still very strong (and, when they're good, it's better then Clemson's)
Clemson, on the other hand, is the one making noise (and smartly I might add) due to their recent success; yet still, even before Dabo came in, they were big, just not nearly as big as now
FSU is a different story - good for 50 years, elite for 30 of them (only 3 natty's shows how tough it is to win one)
My point is Cuse, GT and BC could be doing what they're doing success wise 30 years ago now, and nobody would give a shit
No fans, no brand, no anything really
Clemson is the one who's hot to trot b/c of recent success - but they're all in
Miami is sitting back raking in money via other sources and has one foot out of athletics - but could jump back in under the right leadership and enough people stepping up $$$
FSU is all in, has the cache to back it up and is not willing to go back to the 70s and sucking ass
With the 4 Conference all having automatic qualifying teams for the NCP there is a P-4.
With the 4 new Pac teams coming to the B1G some of them will have to be satisfied with becoming mediocre.
Teams like Rutgers, Purdue, Nebraska, Iowa etc. all expect to qualify for the NCP in the future.
They do not want to remain mediocre or at the bottom of the B1G.
Competition for the Top Spots. Penn State, Michigan, Ohio State will just have to move aside for the new schools.
HAIL TO PITT!!!!
Last edited:
The issue is we are about 1-2 years away from when B10 and SEC teams are getting paid 30-40M more than thr B12 and ACC.
Then you will see schools take the best coaches.
Players will have sees 2 years of the B10 and SEC getting 3-4 teams each into the playoffs with the Big12 and ACC getting 1-2 in. FSU and Clemson are likely on there way somewhere else....
Even is FSU and Clemson do end up in the B12, not enough brands for great games.
The B10 would have 5-6 with SEC having 6-7 big Brands. B12 would be a distant 3rd with the ACC way behind.
It will just take 1-2 years for the picture to clear up. In the meantime the B12 and ACC teams will still be under the delusion that something will save them and things will be ok.
Then you will see schools take the best coaches.
Players will have sees 2 years of the B10 and SEC getting 3-4 teams each into the playoffs with the Big12 and ACC getting 1-2 in. FSU and Clemson are likely on there way somewhere else....
Even is FSU and Clemson do end up in the B12, not enough brands for great games.
The B10 would have 5-6 with SEC having 6-7 big Brands. B12 would be a distant 3rd with the ACC way behind.
It will just take 1-2 years for the picture to clear up. In the meantime the B12 and ACC teams will still be under the delusion that something will save them and things will be ok.
honestly Smooth, you often say sh*t that may sound intelligent and convincing but instead shows that you don’t know what you’re talking about.
Med school revenue has absolutely nothing to do with wealth of athletic programs. Med school revenue recovers med school costs. Everywhere. The university may support the med school for specific development objectives big and small but the reverse flow of research revenue to athletics does not happen.
Suggesting the Canes football team doesn’t need a bigger conference payout like FSU does because of its med school is the most incorrect and uninformed view I’ve seen posted here about any topic in a long time from anyone besides Fieldhouse Al of La Mancha.
So, quit now. Stop.
Med school revenue has absolutely nothing to do with wealth of athletic programs. Med school revenue recovers med school costs. Everywhere. The university may support the med school for specific development objectives big and small but the reverse flow of research revenue to athletics does not happen.
Suggesting the Canes football team doesn’t need a bigger conference payout like FSU does because of its med school is the most incorrect and uninformed view I’ve seen posted here about any topic in a long time from anyone besides Fieldhouse Al of La Mancha.
So, quit now. Stop.
The Group of Five schools get a bid too. So you have that going for you.
Wait until you see the TV lineup this year. See what conferences are getting the prime slots. Like all of them.
As for the competition, those west coast schools have resources. They will be fine. I’m sure USC and Oregon fans would rather line up against the best, rather than beat up on Cal and Arizona State.
Rutgers has a tough hill to climb against Penn State, Michigan State, Wisconsin, Ohio State, Nebraska, USC, Washington, Michigan, Oregon, Iowa, etc. but better that than stepping down a level and playing an ACC schedule. Sure we would win a lot more games, but no one would care.
That's exactly why they're worried, and trying to get out asap
Can't fall behind 40/50 mil year and hope to compete
You could be right about that, my buddy huge Canes fan and donor is the one who told me that
Sounded suspicious, but most things in Miami are a tad sketch
Regarding the rest of the post, you conveniently ignored those pesky facts
Let's review, shall we?
1. Miami isn't all in on athletics - that's correct, as Donna neutered them, Nevin castrated them, and Ruiz, with all his theatrics and alleged money, hasn't gotten them to the promised land. That, their partly attendance, off campus stadium, shitty fans and rag tag athletic department, make them easy to rank on
2. Their brand, when they're on, is legit. More popular than the Fins in South Florida. 30 for 30's out the ass. I hate 'em, but when they're hot, you can't argue their reach
3. Clemson - massive fan base. IPTAY is one of the biggest booster organizations out there. Once they get their NIL figured out, they should be a force. What's Preacher Man has done there is amazing - let's see if he can keep it up with Daddy set to run on full throttle now that Norvell's got them going again
4. Cuse, BC, GT - Dogshit. End of story.
5. FSU - No explanation needed
You said history means nothing, which contradicts the fact that Miami's brand, when on, is legit. 5 natty's in 40 years will do that.
SC hasn't been on in 20 years and they're reach is far and wide.
There's programs that just have the "It factor"
FSU. Miami. USC. ND. Texas. Michigan. Ohio State.
Massive ratings, large fanbases, documentaries made about them, etc.
Then there's programs who have had some success that nobody gives a shit about
The 3 midgets you mentioned plus UCF come to mind
Here's the million dollar question - Could they rise and be relevant?
I'd venture to say no, but...
With NIL, anything is possible
Not ‘could be’. Is fact.
Further, no, Miami’s history doesn’t mean a thing. The national brand isn’t strong. They are not the belle of the ball anymore. It’s not their time. Maybe Cristobal turns back the clock and the next Kosar, Kelly or Vinny T suit up but no conference has a middling Miami team on speed dial because of 1985.
Further, no, Miami’s history doesn’t mean a thing. The national brand isn’t strong. They are not the belle of the ball anymore. It’s not their time. Maybe Cristobal turns back the clock and the next Kosar, Kelly or Vinny T suit up but no conference has a middling Miami team on speed dial because of 1985.
Actually, it does
You don’t get two 30 for 30s by mistake
Their 2001 team had something like 17 draft picks
They've won 5 nattys in the past 40 years revolutionized swag, and made the iconic smoke entrance a national trend
They’ve got a much higher ceiling than Clemson in regard to reach and brand
If Mario can coach even remotely the equivalent of a pop Warner assistant this year, watch out
With that being said, I hope they go winless and get outscored 900-0
Contradicting yourself yet again. “If Mario can coach”, et cetera. You keep saying it’s about winning but pivot to brand and history which don’t matter.
You don’t think Brand and history matter?
Tell me you’re joking
Absent of getting mudholed by bans in the playoffs, When was the last time Notre Dame was relevant?
How many bowl games in a row did they lose?
When was the last time they were consistently dominant?
Late 80s, early 90s - so 30 years ago
How about Texas? besides Vince young going off in the 2006 Rose Bowl against USC, when else, besides this year, have they been Elite?
When was the last time USC was Elite? I was when PCA was there with linert and Bush and Lendell, White, etc. so 15 years ago.
There’s a lot that goes into it. It’s not just winning, nor is it just brand.
But brand goes along way, especially when you’re not winning, and have won in the past and built up that street cred
Notre Dame and Texas would be the two hottest free agents on the block, had Texas not joined the SEC
They both been rather pedestrian in the past 30 years… so, since that’s the case, why do you think they would be sought after….
There’s the Bluebloods
The Newbloods
And schools that move the needle
The only variable (s) are markets, brand, ratings and history (to a certain extent)
UCF is a prime example of being 15 years late to the game (nationally), but 35 years late (in state) - they have little to no shot of being consistently revalent - but, thanks to NIL, you can’t rule them out
On the contrary there’s Oregon. They didn’t come on the scene until what, early / mid 2000s once the Phil Knight money started coming in - now they’re regularly in the mix, in one of the Big 2 conferences, still being funded by Phil and one of those aforementioned schools that move the needle
Thank God things were different in 2012 when we (Rutgers) got the B1G invite.
Cable boxes mattered much more back then - and, in fairness, it was a great move by the B1G as getting us raised their profile and ultimately, their $$$ bottom line
I don’t know if we would have gotten in present day all things considered- one of the guys more tuned in to that side of things can probably answer that better than I
Last edited:
I get your point, but Syracuse and BC weren’t great choice examples because being a private school is definitely a notable negative in terms of the “flavor of the times” argument. Notre Dame is kind of the lone exception there and they kind of kill BC’s potential “in” at capturing the broad catholic fan market. When RU does well we have all of NJ behind us. We’re “NJ flagship school” and there’s a sense of local pride that goes along with being good and it expands to metro NYC area too since there is no public flagship in our neighboring state.
Private schools just don’t get the bandwagon effect in quite the same way. Especially ones like Cuse located in remote areas.
Eh. The other side of that coin though is Rutgers athletics not getting nearly $100m in media revenue annually.
Can’t really lament how college athletics and expansion is driven by what schools will add the most money and also cheer the Big Ten for having a $1b media deal with Rutgers getting nearly $100m a year.
New Jersey borders three states, New York, Pennsylvania, and Delaware.
New York has two flagship universities, University at Buffalo and Stony Brook University.
In Pennsylvania and Delaware, Penn State's University Park campus and the University of Delaware function as flagships.
Boston College football was white hot in the early 1980s with Flutie. In the 1990s and early 2000s, the team did 12 winning seasons in a row, including 8 bowl championships in 8 straight years. At the same time, New England Patriots attendance was the worst in the NFL. The stadium and parking were decrepit, the team was bad, and the fans attending games were drunk and disorderly.
Then, the New England Patriots built a new stadium with paved parking lots, hired coach Bill Belichick, and drafted quarterback Tom Brady. Football interest in Massachusetts and across New England turned from Boston College to the Patriots.
Boston College football will struggle to recapture then 1980s, 1990s, and early 2020s success. Rutgers has access to a deep in-state high school sports talent pool along with access to more government money for sports facilities. Boston College lacks both, especially in football and basketball.
Last edited:
"Rutgers athletics not getting nearly $100m in media revenue annually."
"Rutgers getting nearly $100m a year."
These statements are contradictory. Can you clarify?
I think he mistyped not instead of now
The original post was lamenting Pitt's research funding not being a factor in conference expansion.
The flip side of that coin, "conference expansion considering such items as research funding, instead of primarily market" , is then Rutgers would NOT be getting nearly $100m a year.
If the Big Ten expanded with Pitt (large, public, research oriented) instead of ND (small, private, catholic) it would be a better cultural fit but much less beneficial financially.
You can't have your cake and eat it too.
If you are excited over Rutgers getting nearly $100m/year, that's only because fincianal numbers are the leading expansion consideration.
That is why I asked for a clarification.
On media rights, Rutgers reported $44,137,387 for fiscal 2023. I doubt Rutgers is suddenly doubling its media rights revenue in fiscal 2024 or fiscal 2025.
The approximately $100mm is at the end of the current contract.
The Big Ten also distributes bowl money equally to all schools. And I’m not so clear on this, but RU probably gets a decent amount of money from the Men’s and Women’s BBall tournies.
The designation of Buffalo and Stony Brook as the flagships, IMHO, represents politics more than anything else -- they are located at each end of the state in major metropolitan areas. Binghamton compares favorably to both in many ways.
Those schools' problem is that they are not well-known outside the state and, IMHO, one big reason is that none of the schools have a prestigious athletic program. There really is a point to a school making an investment in intercollegiate athletics.
Those SUNY schools are not viewed as flagship representatives of NY state for sports and never will be.
For the purpose of revenue generating potential, NY doesn’t have a representative flagship that could step up to the plate for football. Those are all regional schools where realistically - your talking about alumni support only. NYC residents do not and would not ever identify with following the sports at any those schools. Arguably - Albany would have the greatest long term potential as New Yorkers might identify with the state capital in a theoretical bandwagon situation. But it’s extremely unlikely. A stand out season or 2 from army would probably pose the biggest local regional threat but it’s still minimal.
It’s a blend of considerations, no? We have research funding and the academic distinction that the conference is looking for to meet the cultural expectations.
Financial considerations always blended current situation (which was big for us at the time when eye balls on TV screens mattered a lot) and future potential (which remains a tremendous plus for Rutgers that few up and coming programs could ever match). Every program gets a following boost when they are good. The question is how much of one? When Buffalo or even Syracuse has a good team they are not a big regional story throughout the state. The boost they get is mostly from more engaged alum. Rutgers is vastly different. Not only are we the clear flagship of NJ, we are the only one (we don’t have Pitt and Penn St. or Michigan and Michigan State). How many states with a population size like NJ have that? On top of this - Rutgers cultural identity is reasonably aligned with the NYC metro population that sits 40 minutes away (were viewed basically as a local residual suburb like Long Island) - we’re not Buffalo or Syracuse - hours and hours away in tundra. There’s massive bandwagon potential if we could ever feature an elite season.
You are correct that football bowl revenues are split equally across the teams.
Here are Rutgers athletics department revenues related conference distributions in fiscal year 2023.
Media Rights $44,137,387
NCAA Distributions $4,680,845
Conference Distributions (Non Media and Non Football Bowl) $4,048,754
Conference Distributions of Football Bowl Generated Revenue $7,734,857
Total Conference Distributions $60,601,843.
Source: Rutgers University
Is the approximately $100 million media rights or total conference distributions? Either way, I'll believe the popular $100 million amount when it is reported in Rutgers athletics financial reports. Hopefully, Pat Hobbs and team have a clear outlook for B1G payouts to Rutgers across the next several years.
The flagship designation is backed by 9-figure capital investments in new academic buildings at Buffalo and Stony Brook. In addition, SUNY research spending will be directed to the flagships, such as an artificial intelligence hub at Stony Brook.
Buffalo and Stony Brook, like all SUNY schools, focus on educating New York residents. Rutgers is the same in New Jersey, though B1G membership has increased exposure to sports-oriented people. The three flagships do a poor job attracting out-of-state students to their universities and bringing fans into their football stadiums.
All three schools, measuring by football, have been climbing the ladder on intercollegiate athletics though. Buffalo and Stony Brook played division 3 football as recently as the 1990s. Now, they compete at the FBS and FCS levels. In an age of radical conference realignment, Buffalo and Stony Brook to ACC cannot be ruled out.
There is no way the ACC wants those schools. Buffalo offers nothing they do not get from Syracuse which is close to nothing to begin with - it may be public but that’s only an advantage when your location and identity is somewhat representative of your metro hub (if you have one). Buffalo is located in a rural part of the state nowhere near metro NYC. Even if Buffalo football takes off - your not going to have random folks from NYC jumping on their bandwagon.
Stonybrook is known as a regional commuter school where kids often go home on the weekends. Their alum are known to be apathetic towards athletics. Albany would be best choice to be positioned as NY’s representative public school because of its location in the state capital but that is a reach too.
Last edited:
Pete Thamel
@PeteThamel
Have been told by multiple sources that there’s no expectation for Florida State or Clemson to notify the ACC they intend to leave by the Aug. 15 deadline to depart after the upcoming year. That’s the deadline to declare intentions to exit for the 2025-26 year.
