ADVERTISEMENT

Blog links Clemson, FSU, Ohio State, Michigan to SEC

It was an unwritten rule that if a member school did not want an in-state school to be admitted, they wouldn't be. While yes, that unwritten rule has been broken as Texas is being admitted even though A&M doesn't want it, there are major ******* which dont apply to FSU/Clemson

* Texas A&M hasnt even been in the league 10 years
* Texas Longhorn football is one of maybe the Top 15 sports brands in the USA....in all sports pro and college and the richest program in college football. FSU and Clemson they are not.
* The admission of Texas makes the league boatloads of new money and further opens Texas recruiting doors.as the Big 12 is now dead for all intents and purposes. The SEC already "owns" Florida recruiting and SC recruiting...they aint much there.
I don’t think it’s as likely that they go SEC as it is B1G.

The ACC really has a contract problem. They are waiting on something to happen that likely will never happen because it doesn’t have to happen. All of these schools in the neighborhood of Clemson (an SEC program...NOT an ACC type program) making TONS more money.

President Clements understands what’s at play. He’s incredibly proactive. None of these decisions are about 2023 or 2024. Clemson isn’t a top 5-8 brand but it’s a top 3 brand with Dabo right now. That won’t always be the case.

These decisions are all about $$. Not emotion. Not academics. Not history. And most certainly not cable subscriptions.

Even the underbelly in the conferences that make it need to be worried. Rutgers has no business making the $$ they do.
 
Last edited:
I don’t think it’s as likely that they go SEC as it is B1G.

The ACC really has a contract problem. They are waiting on something to happen that likely will never happen because it doesn’t have to happen. All of these schools in the neighborhood of Clemson (an SEC program...NOT an ACC type program) making TONS more money.

President Clements understands what’s at play. He’s incredibly proactive. None of these decisions are about 2023 or 2024. Clemson isn’t a top 5-8 brand but it’s a top 3 brand with Dabo right now. That won’t always be the case.

These decisions are all about $$. Not emotion. Not academics. Not history. And most certainly not cable subscriptions.

Even the underbelly in the conferences that make it need to be worried. Rutgers has no business making the $$ they do.
I agree they are much more likely to go to the Big Ten but if you're Clemson, how much more money do you need to make the CFP and win NC's? Why cant non-profif college football be at least about winning? No one cares about winning. Money is all that matters. Even Rutgers fans are overjoyed with sucking so bad because their program makes money. Fans dont get this money. I don't understand it.

ACC teams have all the money they need to win football games. I mean 8 of the games they play is vs each other. How much would the extra $20 million per year help Pitt beat the P5 OOC team they always lose to? Would the extra $20 million help Clemson beat South Carolina even worse?
 
  • Like
Reactions: pittiswhereiamfrom2
I agree they are much more likely to go to the Big Ten but if you're Clemson, how much more money do you need to make the CFP and win NC's? Why cant non-profif college football be at least about winning? No one cares about winning. Money is all that matters. Even Rutgers fans are overjoyed with sucking so bad because their program makes money. Fans dont get this money. I don't understand it.

ACC teams have all the money they need to win football games. I mean 8 of the games they play is vs each other. How much would the extra $20 million per year help Pitt beat the P5 OOC team they always lose to? Would the extra $20 million help Clemson beat South Carolina even worse?
Fans apparently like it when their athletic department and university officials line their pockets through creative embezzlement.

I suppose that is kind of a win.
 
I agree they are much more likely to go to the Big Ten but if you're Clemson, how much more money do you need to make the CFP and win NC's? Why cant non-profif college football be at least about winning? No one cares about winning. Money is all that matters. Even Rutgers fans are overjoyed with sucking so bad because their program makes money. Fans dont get this money. I don't understand it.

ACC teams have all the money they need to win football games. I mean 8 of the games they play is vs each other. How much would the extra $20 million per year help Pitt beat the P5 OOC team they always lose to? Would the extra $20 million help Clemson beat South Carolina even worse?
Have you seen WVU’s brand new football facility? Getting approximately 40-45M a year can build lots of nice things. Now times that by almost 2.

Cash matters because this is a competition. It’s not about making a ton of cash. It’s about making a ton of cash and being in same ballpark as the others....otherwise, recruits don’t choose you.
 
It was an unwritten rule that if a member school did not want an in-state school to be admitted, they wouldn't be. While yes, that unwritten rule has been broken as Texas is being admitted even though A&M doesn't want it, there are major ******* which dont apply to FSU/Clemson

* Texas A&M hasnt even been in the league 10 years
* Texas Longhorn football is one of maybe the Top 15 sports brands in the USA....in all sports pro and college and the richest program in college football. FSU and Clemson they are not.
* The admission of Texas makes the league boatloads of new money and further opens Texas recruiting doors.as the Big 12 is now dead for all intents and purposes. The SEC already "owns" Florida recruiting and SC recruiting...they aint much there.

The SEC could kneecap the entire ACC if they were to lure FSU & Clemson.

Not saying they will or won't but that's some pretty attractive low hanging fruit.

Even if that were to happen, the ACC still has a viable football conference, imo. But they are vulnerable, just like the Pac 12.

I think last year was a big eye opener for the P5 schools. I think they realize the product is better with more conference games and they are tired of basically subsidizing G5 schools.
 
From ACC Commissioner Philips

New #ACC commissioner Jim Philips has been quite candid. He clearly emphasized to all members that football is the priority. Funding starts with football. Clearly he’s looking for all members to ‘step io their financial investment’.
American football
 
Have you seen WVU’s brand new football facility? Getting approximately 40-45M a year can build lots of nice things. Now times that by almost 2.

Cash matters because this is a competition. It’s not about making a ton of cash. It’s about making a ton of cash and being in same ballpark as the others....otherwise, recruits don’t choose you.
We’ll keep in mind you’re talking to a guy who doesn’t believe kids can be blown away on a visit. As if some visits don’t stand out well above others for any number of reasons.
 
Lol. The SEC will NEVER add FSU and Clemson. Duplicate markets and Florida and South Carolina won't let them. They will be listened to unlike A&M and Mizzou.

And the SEC has a better shot of landing the Patriots/Brady dynasty than OSU or Michigan
That doesn’t make sense. You’re saying the SEC values SC more than Texas A&M, and Texas more than Clemson?
 
  • Like
Reactions: WVUinColumbus
Have you seen WVU’s brand new football facility? Getting approximately 40-45M a year can build lots of nice things. Now times that by almost 2.

Cash matters because this is a competition. It’s not about making a ton of cash. It’s about making a ton of cash and being in same ballpark as the others....otherwise, recruits don’t choose you.
Then why isnt WVU as good as Clemson?

At some point, lets be honest, the money is too much and is just being wasted on things that arent needed. Recording studios in football facilities, in reality, are only going to get you a few recruits you otherwise wouldn't have gotten.

Alabama has a staff of what, 20 analysts, and they don't even win it every year. The money is being spent because it has to be but use it on player salaries so an extra $20 million put into facilities and coaching doesn't to go anywhere close to as far as that $20 million in player salaries. If they could pay players, then I'd agree that the money would be crucial. Otherwise, Vandy could be offering kids $500K/year to play for them when Clemson can only offer $250K.
 
That doesn’t make sense. You’re saying the SEC values SC more than Texas A&M, and Texas more than Clemson?
They certainly value Texas more than Clemson. No one will debate that one.

I'm saying this was a unique opportunity. It was an opportunity to get the Yankees, Manchester United, the Lakers. That's what the Texas brand is. Clemson and Florida State they are not.
 
They certainly value Texas more than Clemson. No one will debate that one.

I'm saying this was a unique opportunity. It was an opportunity to get the Yankees, Manchester United, the Lakers. That's what the Texas brand is. Clemson and Florida State they are not.
I could be missing something I acknowledge that. But how does adding Texas financially help Old Miss, Kentucky, etc. that much more than Clemson? Texas can have donors giving the football program a billion dollars a year, they aren’t going to be sharing any of that with Vandy. UT sales a lot of t-shirts, memorabilia etc, but how much of that will go to the SEC, and then they split it 15 ways.
Obviously the TV money is the big deal. But does ESPN, Fox, value perennial 8-5 Texas that much over Clemson? Maybe I’m underestimating the number of people living in Indiana, Florida, etc that would rather watch Texas playing football on a Saturday night than Clemson.
Again I’m no expert on this, and guess I’m missing something.
 
I could be missing something I acknowledge that. But how does adding Texas financially help Old Miss, Kentucky, etc. that much more than Clemson? Texas can have donors giving the football program a billion dollars a year, they aren’t going to be sharing any of that with Vandy. UT sales a lot of t-shirts, memorabilia etc, but how much of that will go to the SEC, and then they split it 15 ways.
Obviously the TV money is the big deal. But does ESPN, Fox, value perennial 8-5 Texas that much over Clemson? Maybe I’m underestimating the number of people living in Indiana, Florida, etc that would rather watch Texas playing football on a Saturday night than Clemson.
Again I’m no expert on this, and guess I’m missing something.
Barrett Sallee just said on SXM that the addition of UT and OU could double the SEC TV contract.

My guess is that your underestimating the value of UT.
 
Sorry for going around and around on this. Why specifically does Texas’s “brand”matter that much?
Example, if Clemson vs Virginia Tech is on ABC on a Saturday night, and Texas vs Kansas St is on Fox opposite. Would the ratings for the Texas game blow the Clemson game away? I guess I just don’t get how ratings for SEC games will significantly increase if Texas joins the conference.
I guess I’m just looking for a tangible example of why it’s worth it for the networks to double the SEC contact.
 
Sorry for going around and around on this. Why specifically does Texas’s “brand”matter that much?
Example, if Clemson vs Virginia Tech is on ABC on a Saturday night, and Texas vs Kansas St is on Fox opposite. Would the ratings for the Texas game blow the Clemson game away? I guess I just don’t get how ratings for SEC games will significantly increase if Texas joins the conference.
I guess I’m just looking for a tangible example of why it’s worth it for the networks to double the SEC contact.
I don’t think either game would draw significantly better than the other. However, Clemson vs Texas would be one of the highest-rated games of the season. Now, imagine those types of matchups occur on a weekly basis. That’s the idea behind a “super league.”

The SEC already had the most “brands” of any conference, meaning they’d likely draw the most “casual” viewers if they’re flipping through the channels. Adding two more blue bloods increases that exponentially, allowing them to double their revenue value.
 
I guess I’m just looking for a tangible example of why it’s worth it for the networks to double the SEC contact.


For how many schools was ESPN willing to give the school their own dedicated television network?

If Clemson's 3rd tier television rights weren't held by the ACC do you really think that ESPN would be looking to start a Tiger Network with those rights? Seriously?
 
From ACC Commissioner Philips

New #ACC commissioner Jim Philips has been quite candid. He clearly emphasized to all members that football is the priority. Funding starts with football. Clearly he’s looking for all members to ‘step io their financial investment’.
American football

Hope Pitt administration FIGURES this out!
 
And I’m “interested” in becoming a member at Oakmont and/or Fox Chapel
Country Clubs.

They’re all big names obviously. But any team can express interest. The internet is great but it’s made it too easy for too many people to have a platform. And sometimes it’s not easy to separate real news/scoop from click bait artists.

Yep. What matters is RECIPROCAL & MUTUAL interest. Having one party interested in something that requires two parties to be interested is half-assed.
 
  • Like
Reactions: WannyandWalt
does ESPN, Fox, value perennial 8-5 Texas that much over Clemson?
Are you kidding? A million times, yes. Texas, in essence, is a "national team" in that they are THE team in a football-crazed state of 30 million people, which is basically like a medium-sized country. Not only that, if you arent a Longhorn fan in Texas, you LOATHE them and tune in just to root against them.

Clemson is a regional program in a small market. There is a reason you see Ohio State vs Purdue and Penn State vs Indiana on ABC at 3:30 instead of Clemson vs NC State. And there is no guarantee Clemson will be Top 5 forever. If Dabo ever leaves, they could be back to that nice 9-3/8-4 program and then what? What would they bring? Texas will always be Texas.
 
The great mystery is how Texas could be so ordinary the past 10 years with all these resources. They should be the Clemson of the big 12
Because you cant pay the players. Which is why I said that all this money they are making is somewhat irrelevant because they have to spend it on coaching and facilities with the hope that leads to better recruits. Not every recruit is going to pick a school because they have gold-plated benches in the locker room.
 
Here's the thing on these "rumors". Were there any rumors about Oklahoma or Texas to the SEC? No. Not until it actually was happening. Were there any rumors about Pitt and the Case to the ACC. Again, I am on these forums every day and none of us knew until we saw the bottom ticker scrawling across ESPN about the breaking news.

My point, all of this is pure conjecture, these "rumors" are just people adding 2+2 and getting 5.
 
Are you kidding? A million times, yes. Texas, in essence, is a "national team" in that they are THE team in a football-crazed state of 30 million people, which is basically like a medium-sized country. Not only that, if you arent a Longhorn fan in Texas, you LOATHE them and tune in just to root against them.

Clemson is a regional program in a small market. There is a reason you see Ohio State vs Purdue and Penn State vs Indiana on ABC at 3:30 instead of Clemson vs NC State. And there is no guarantee Clemson will be Top 5 forever. If Dabo ever leaves, they could be back to that nice 9-3/8-4 program and then what? What would they bring? Texas will always be Texas.
Just people aren't getting it are they? It is like saying "does the ACC value perennial 7-5 Pitt an d 5-7 Syracuse over WVU who occasionally finishes in the top 10 back in 2014?
 
Here's the thing on these "rumors". Were there any rumors about Oklahoma or Texas to the SEC? No. Not until it actually was happening. Were there any rumors about Pitt and the Case to the ACC. Again, I am on these forums every day and none of us knew until we saw the bottom ticker scrawling across ESPN about the breaking news.

My point, all of this is pure conjecture, these "rumors" are just people adding 2+2 and getting 5.
This! The only reason Texas and Oklahoma to the SEC got out was due to A&M making a last ditch effort to sabotage the deal. People on this board are acting like a tweet from Jim Bob Joe Jack Billy Smith who writes for a blog but gets no pay is gospel, it’s not!
 
Barrett Sallee just said on SXM that the addition of UT and OU could double the SEC TV contract.

My guess is that your underestimating the value of UT.
That's stupid. It is implying UT and OU by themselves are worth as much as the entire SEC. If that was true, UT and OU would form a conference of two and split it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: RaleighPittFan
That's stupid. It is implying UT and OU by themselves are worth as much as the entire SEC. If that was true, UT and OU would form a conference of two and split it.
No it doesn’t at all. Your rationale is false. The collection of SEC teams and UT/OU is MUCH MUCH more valuable than the SEC or UT/OU, separately.

You don’t understand how this works. Aren’t you the guy who is a disciple of US News academia reports? If so, this is unsurprising that you’d be fooled here too. Academia loves suckers like you.
 
No it doesn’t at all. Your rationale is false. The collection of SEC teams and UT/OU is MUCH MUCH more valuable than the SEC or UT/OU, separately.

You don’t understand how this works. Aren’t you the guy who is a disciple of US News academia reports? If so, this is unsurprising that you’d be fooled here too. Academia loves suckers like you.

I love Paco but he is the definition of Academia, first, middle , last , all before a good football team
 
Espn would have to pay about 700m more a year than they do now to double it. In the legit national media articles, their sources have said the addition would be making ut and ou whole (which would be around 120m total) and maybe and extra 1-2m per team.

It was noted that the industry sources stated that there is a saturation point due to the number of games, time slots, and other conferences that are under the espn umbrella. On top of that espn is looking to make a sizeable bid for the new playoffs on top of all of their other inventory.

Time will tell though.
 
Espn would have to pay about 700m more a year than they do now to double it. In the legit national media articles, their sources have said the addition would be making ut and ou whole (which would be around 120m total) and maybe and extra 1-2m per team.

It was noted that the industry sources stated that there is a saturation point due to the number of games, time slots, and other conferences that are under the espn umbrella. On top of that espn is looking to make a sizeable bid for the new playoffs on top of all of their other inventory.

Time will tell though.
But what about the UT “brand” ?
That’s got to be worth at least 700 million a year. 😀
 
Are you kidding? A million times, yes. Texas, in essence, is a "national team" in that they are THE team in a football-crazed state of 30 million people, which is basically like a medium-sized country. Not only that, if you arent a Longhorn fan in Texas, you LOATHE them and tune in just to root against them.

Clemson is a regional program in a small market. There is a reason you see Ohio State vs Purdue and Penn State vs Indiana on ABC at 3:30 instead of Clemson vs NC State. And there is no guarantee Clemson will be Top 5 forever. If Dabo ever leaves, they could be back to that nice 9-3/8-4 program and then what? What would they bring? Texas will always be Texas.


Come on guys, if it's so obvious that even SMF can figure it out surely the rest of you could too.

:p
 
For how many schools was ESPN willing to give the school their own dedicated television network?

If Clemson's 3rd tier television rights weren't held by the ACC do you really think that ESPN would be looking to start a Tiger Network with those rights? Seriously?
The Longhorn network bled money and was going away. No individual school deserves their own network. It's stupid and a money loser. ESPN learned their lesson real quick.
 
Then why isnt WVU as good as Clemson?

At some point, lets be honest, the money is too much and is just being wasted on things that arent needed. Recording studios in football facilities, in reality, are only going to get you a few recruits you otherwise wouldn't have gotten.

Alabama has a staff of what, 20 analysts, and they don't even win it every year. The money is being spent because it has to be but use it on player salaries so an extra $20 million put into facilities and coaching doesn't to go anywhere close to as far as that $20 million in player salaries. If they could pay players, then I'd agree that the money would be crucial. Otherwise, Vandy could be offering kids $500K/year to play for them when Clemson can only offer $250K.
Please take a moment and think. Clemson is not the equivalent to Texas and OU in the current instance. UT and OU are schools within weak conferences. You clearly don’t understand ACC traditions locations and reality. The ACC schools are about not just football. Yes football is important but it is a total sport league.
 
No it doesn’t at all. Your rationale is false. The collection of SEC teams and UT/OU is MUCH MUCH more valuable than the SEC or UT/OU, separately.

You don’t understand how this works. Aren’t you the guy who is a disciple of US News academia reports? If so, this is unsurprising that you’d be fooled here too. Academia loves suckers like you.
UT and OU additions on their own are not doubling the SEC payout. The suggestion that is would is ridiculous.

Most people in the industry think the media contract projections floated prior to this news have already baked these additions in based on the fact the SEC has been negotiating with these two since December. UT and OU will contribute to increased payout, but will not be responsible for doubling it on its own (if in fact it doubles).

[edit] And just noticed the Panthers post above, which also addresses this well.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: ThePanthers
ADVERTISEMENT