https://sports.yahoo.com/sources-acc-considering-smu-in-addition-to-cal-...
Maybe even more important: The university would arrive at a reduced rate. Employing a rich donor base and a healthy desire to advance to the Power Four level, the university is open to forgoing conference distribution pay for its first several years in a new league. SMU officials held similar conversations with Pac-12 administrators.
That is a very interesting wrinkle that makes it a more tenable situation for current league members.
Forums:
DISCLAIMER: Forum topics may not have been written or edited by The Key Play staff.
Comments
Seems like Phillips is behind the curve on improving the conference but trying to be pseudo ahead of the curve so the ACC will at least exist as a tier 2/3 conference after the GOR is up.
The only positive to this is I live about 2 miles from Southern Millionaires University so I would get a game here once every (checks notes) ~30 years.
Hm.
The school that got the death penalty joining the conference with the two teams (UNC and Miami) who were closest to receiving the death penalty, since.
How reduced of a share after the first few years. If it improves the money situation might not be a terrible idea. Sounds like they need clout/promotion more than money. Also think they would get smacked around in the ACC regardless
Lol smu would be playing in the acc championship game within 3 years. They're not going to get smacked around. We thought liberty and odu would get smacked around and, well, they didn't.
No thank you
Exactly
What if SMU was located within the ACC's footprint, would that change your opinion?
It would not affect mine. Trying to bring in minor league teams is worse when you do it inside your footprint
I think that's kind of harsh. SMU has a rabid booster base and some modern-ish history. If we're on a path where NIL money correlates to success, I think SMU will hang around top 25-40 program nationally.
If SMU was in a power league and NIL money = Sucess then they will be higher than that, SMU knows how to pay players, they have big time boosters. They make that Houston money look poor. They know how to cover up the fact that their star running back killed 5 hookers. They would make the SEC look clean if they got back into pushing football.
It may be harsh, but while other conferences are adding teams to build the conference brand, we are here discussing how our conference would build a teams brand. That's the fundamental issue with our current situation IMO
I'm all for expanding our footprint but it only makes sense to do it incrementally, where there's not this sudden jump in travel costs, or in one fell swoop, where we pick up enough teams that are geographically close to each other that they can make up a division.
There are not enough quality teams to form a "west" division for the ACC. I don't se how adding SMU helps us a whole lot unless it's the first piece of a bigger puzzle. Unfortunately, the big dogs have already stolen the best pieces to that puzzle.
Also, I am leaning towards wanting us to embrace mediocrity and just going ahead and adding a crap ton of teams in our footprint so we can institute promotion/relegation. The conference doesn't necessarily take a hit in reputation because you admit that the bottom half is just that. You make the top half play 8 games against each other and tack on a couple from the scrubs league. Evaluate every few years and reshuffle based on success/failure.
That would be an interesting model and make for good TV. What teams do you think would be interested and what teams do you think would make the most sense?
Anyway to create meaningful games makes for good television. VT has to beat SMU to maintain their status as a tier 1 ACC team is a lot better story line than VT has to beat SMU to play in the roofclaim.com bowl game.
Good question.... I would definitely be more into it, but not that into it. I would not have been into UCF, or UConn.
Reframing the question: what schools in our footprint would I be excited about?
I would gladly trade the bottom third of the ACC for the top third of the SunBelt, but that is also, not realistic. I also would gladly add 8 sunbelt teams, embrace promotion/relegation, but that too, will not happen.
As an Annapolis native, I like the idea of Navy, but I know that is a bad idea for a variety of reasons.
Coming full circle on this exercise... the problem with the ACC is that it's already a Frankenstein conference that has too many schools with conflicting cultures and goals. Rather than becoming more frankstein-esk, maybe we just chill and see what happens?
I just don't see how SMU improves the situation for anyone (other than maybe SMU).
I think WVU should be our top target if we're looking to expand, but 1) would they even want to join now with the Big 12 stabilizing itself, 2) would they want to sign on to this GoR, and 3) are they additive to the tv contract? Think the answer to those are probably no at this point. But they make the most sense from a geographic fit perspective as well as competition and rivalries (Black Diamond and Back Yard Brawl, history with several other former Big East schools, good rivalry potential with other ACC schools).
Yea I could go on and on here, but at the end of the day, I just don't see the point of ACC expansion. I can't think of one team that is both (1) willing to move to the ACC and (2) able to raise conference revenue by over $2m/school (still not enough, but I digress).
At the end the day, ACC teams just need to get better. If FSU, Clemmy, Miami, and VT can each win 10+ games most years and UNC, GT, Louisville, Pitt, NC St can win 8 games most years, and the rest of the teams just can avoid losing to G5/FCS teams, then this conference can demand the cash to compete with the P2.
But right now the ACC's product is garbage. Can't sell that shit to anyone who isn't already in the family.
Agree - I honestly think with unequal revenue sharing, the top football brands in the ACC can keep up in the short term. They just need to get better. The Big Ten has always had more revenue than the SEC, but that hasn't helped them win more titles. FSU, VT, and Miami have just been hot garbage most of the last 5-7 years (still not totally buying into the FSU hype this year even). Clemson can't be the only school carrying the football banner for the league.
Nobody in the ACC with the exception of some VT fans wants to invite the Cousins into the
ACC and have to deal with their "unique behavior". The add nothing to the academic standing of the conference and nearly nothing to the population base of ACC viewership. Yes, VT has a long history of playing against them, but there is also a very valid reason why we stopped scheduling them, which has not been forgotten. Let them continue to be somebody else's headache.
I think Pitt fans would be into it. Most that I know enjoy the Backyard Brawl
Okay, I'll say it: Who gives a flying fuck about the "academic standing of the conference"?!? The ACC exists to provide competition for sports competition, not debate club matches. If West Virginia has good athletics (read: football) success, and significant eyeballs on them when they play, then bring them in. If not, don't. But don't couch in terms of "academic standing". That's just a UVA-type horseshit argument.
Lets also not forget that when we were joining the ACC that this argument was used against us joining the leauge.
IIRC it was the UNC President at the time that said we were not strong enough academically (which is pretty ironic in hindsight).
This being the case I agree with LBT that we should not be the ones making this "UVA-Type horseshit argument".
Honestly, the "academic standing" argument went out the window when Louisville joined the conference
In 2023... zero people except mouth breathing rival fans.. care about academics or cheating. Zero people. Nobody cares in 2023. If a potted plant can get into your school like ASU, WVU and Louisville? nobody gives a fuck. Oh you cheat? openly? ok decide your own bowl ban punishment and we will shun your head coach from 5 years ago. nobody fucking cares. The academics argument is bullshit, the cheating argument is bullshit. Cheat openly and often and align your conference with 100% admission schools. Done.
There are academic aspects to conference affiliation. I don't know specifics, but my wife was in grad school at Maryland when they switched to the B1G and she said there were notable changes. One that I remember was some sort of sharing of resources or integration between the school's library system.
So you're saying whatever conference WVU ends up in, all the schools in said conference will have access to their coloring books?
So if WVU joins they actually have to get a library or two?
University presidents.
WVU would've been a proactive move years ago, but now they are in a more stable situation. It seems unlikely it's going to happen. But I agree with basically everything you said.
Hey Joe! I can't find a way to message you directly, so I'm replying here. I put together a spreadsheet with possible ACC acquisition targets, including 2023 Massey CFB ranking and Neilson TV market rank. I searched, but can't find instructions on posting a table. Suggestion: Post all how-to instructions (tables, Imgur, etc) in the Tips section listed in the menu at the bottom of the forum, where they can easily be found. A direct message link to admins wouldn't hurt either. Thanks!
Here you go. Definitely bookmark whatever site you use to convert your spreadsheet to html.
man, whoever put together those instructions is a real mensch.
JFC. If we're going to add someone at this point Memphis is the only school of decent relevance. Should have tried to nab Cincy, UCF, WVU last year if we wanted to stay relevant as a conference.
None of these schools are close to providing a full share of value except WVU and maybe in the future UCF.
But if SMU wants to come in for free and can get us decent numbers in the Dallas market is there really a negative to it? (Besides SMU being a mid brand). Say they can make us $40 mil for another ~$3 mil per year per school, doesn't solve our problems but is it a negative? Idk might be worth it, but we need a lot more than that
UCF is one of the biggest schools in the country with competitive football and decent basketball in a major market. I know we already have that market, but especially with cord cutting we should care about market share more than market coverage. Cincy adds value because competitive sports, rabid fan base, major city market, natural rivalries, and they've made as many CFPs as FSU.
The real value in doing this last summer is undercutting the Big 12. They stabilized and are now expanding west because they added UCF, Cincy, Houston, BYU. If the ACC had taken two of those teams and poached WVU, there's a chance the Big 12 falls apart.
If you're gonna do something lame like invite SMU to stay relevant, then you really need to to do something else to at least look like you're serious about being relevant and extend an invite to NDSU.
#TX2ACC
Here comes ECU sneaking in the back door next.
So best G5/Pac4 teams by new TV market is
Temple at 4th
SMU at 5th
Cal at 10th
USF at 13th
Charlotte at 21st
San Diego at 30th
Temple doesn't move the needle, I am not entirely sure Tampa is a new market with FSU being in the ACC, Charlotte is probably not a new market either, San Diego and cal are to far. SMU might be the best by a long shot and they are a bit far.
SMU is right in the middle of Dallas so if it was all about TV markets then you can see why SMU would be an attractive option. DFW is a major airport so it also makes travel easier for fans since if you live near a decent sized airport there are a lot of direct flight options.
Yeah I see why they are an option and look like 2nd best market wise, but just because I can hope on a plane at Dulles easily doesn't really matter to me for conference re-alignment. VT fans watching games in Dallas doesn't get VT any more money. How many fans are going to go out for anything but a weekend game? So basketball really isnt an option unless we get lucky. The travel for other sports is going to cost more. Travel from bburg isn't going to be great, it's going to Charlotte and then getting on a commercial flight to Dallas for every one that doesn't play football or basketball. It's worse for cuse amd BC too.
If we increase travel costs for other sports without increasing revenue then that is less money for the ACC teams to spend on improving football.
This is all so fucking stupid
Stupid indeed. The ACC, for championing themselves as academics, looks pretty fucking dumb right now
Power 4?? Not anymore...
This would be hella stupid.
Maybe we were all wrong about Fu's emphasis on TX, and the man was just ahead of his time. /S
*ducks
My dvice to the ACC:
I don't think Cal, Stanford, and SMU bring enough to the table to even consider diluting our payout. Dallas is probably Texas Longhorns territory more than SMU. I am not sure if there is enough value to offset increased travel costs for the Olympic sports.
If you really want to play Stanford, sign them up for a 1 and 1 or just invite them here. After all, they aren't going to be in a conference next year.
The only way I can really get on board with this is if it's Notre Dame-like situation (ACC agrees to 3 OOC games per team, many of which will be on ACCN, etc), but way more favorable towards the ACC.
The whole "invite team X to a conference" because of "recruiting" is total utter horeshit, and has never worked in history. It didn't work in the Big East to invite USF and the fucking prized "florida" recruiting ground to their league. Didn't work, didn't mean a fucking thing. And no, the "Dallas" recruiting angle won't do a fucking thing for the ACC either. nothing. The fact is that nothing works to elevate recruiting except for money and large scale winning. NOTHING else helps. nothing. VT playing at ODU? to help recruiting? laughing my fucking ass off. That HURT recruiting more than anything the past 30 years. A different helmet every game? nope, recruiting for VT got worse the more cobbled together uniforms we wear. Schools substantially elevate their recruiting by winning major games- NY6, conference championships, and with money. Nothing else. Not inviting california or texas schools to your league- nope.
I see where you are going with this....forget California, forget Texas....we need to tap into virgin soil, as far as the NCAA goes...we invite the Acadia University Axemen to leave Canadian Interuniversity Sports league, join the NCAA and the ACC, and boom - the ACC is now a hotbed for recruiting Canada.
Inviting one team won't changes things, but inviting multiple teams (or moving to a difference conference) will. For example:
This is very true, and the only real reason to add SMU to the ACC would be trying to add a new TV market for when the next TV deal comes around. We all know the problem here for the ACC, we have screwd ourselves and missed the sweet spot for TV deals which IMHO will be down significantly the next time a new TV deal would roll around for the conference. The only way it works of for us on the TV money front is if we are somehow able to break the GoR without penalty and somehow get invited to either the B1G or SEC.
I am not sure who I am stealing this from, but this is some small dick energy right here.