Yep. You have every Top Tier ACC member screaming how horrible the GOR is, and it’s what is keeping them from making the top tier money they believe they deserve, and people think Oregon and Washington are going to sign up for that? Why?
David Hale: ACC exploring WVU, SMU, UO/UW for possible expansion
- Thread starter HailToPitt725
- Start date
Yep. You have every Top Tier ACC member screaming how horrible the GOR is, and it’s what is keeping them from making the top tier money they believe they deserve, and people think Oregon and Washington are going to sign up for that? Why?
What would any of these schools bring? Is it simply the markets? Does that matter if no one watches these teams, because they don't. There is no history of rivalries you'd be restoring and not a single one of these teams brings an intriguing matchup that would draw eyes. Outside of SMU, they all generally stink at football.
I don’t think that invite is coming anytime soon, though. Maybe in the 2030’s. And I think that’s getting clearer to those schools.
But at the end of the day, if you’re Oregon and Washington, maybe it makes sense to say, “we’re going to get more money from the ACC than the PAC-12 or Big 12. Let’s take this, sign onto the grant of rights, and if shit hits the fan there in the early 2030’s and the grant of rights falls apart, no big deal, we’ll be making more money until then than we’re getting now.”
Then it's a no-brainer, in my opinion. Only reason not to is if you're clinging to this unrealistic notion that you're going to kiss and make up with Clemson and FSU at some point. You're not. So even if you bring every team's payout down by $2M/year in the name of future sustainability, I say no big deal.
Yeah, everything I say is speaking from the perspective of the ACC conference itself. If I look at all of this from a Pitt perspective, I start to care way less, because it doesn't matter if the ACC flops, as long as we end up on our feet. That said, I think we're in Group 3, so I won't pretend as though there is no concern whatsoever.
From a fans perspective, I don't understand why anyone would want to rush out of the ACC for either of the Big 2. What is the end game for the fans? The bad programs don't suddenly win with the extra money and teams like Texas A&M who are all-in on football are still mediocre. None of the extra TV money is used to enhance the gameday experience unless you purchase premium seats. Boosters are still expected to donate money to the collectives to pay the players rather than the players get a share of the revenue they generate. Most importantly, teams like Clemson, FSU, UNC, etc. all can be top dogs in the ACC and compete for titles every year. They are just another team in a VERY deep SEC and a top heavy Big 10.
I think those 4 groups are a great breakout. And as a fan, and I think just based on reality, Pitt falls into group 3. We have no shot at the SEC or BIG, but have a decent shot at that 3rd conference, but it's not a guarantee depending on how things fall or play out.
I think if the remains of the ACC get together with some schools from teh Big XII and Pac, and create an all new conference, I think Pitt would be ok. But say the Big XII is the one that comes out as the 3rd in name only, and takes say an NC State and VT if they don't get in the P2 and room runs out, Pitt may be screwed.
I mean, look at the group of 7 schools just in the ACC alone, those are probably the more valuable brands, and Pitt wasn't included. That is reality.
Because you’re wrong.
You cannot compete for anything as a second fiddle school. At least for what you think you should compete for.
When the disparity between UF and Miami/FSU is going to grow to a staggering number, and the prestige of the Big 2 continues to grow every year, you’re no longer even competing with them.
FSU’s AD was talking about FSU being in a fight with *UCF* in the future at this revenue rate. He’s not even pretending FSU will be in the same footing as UF.
And that’s your concern if you’re an FSU fan.
And all of those schools know that directly paying players is coming.
For most fans, it is about the fear of the future and what the sport will look like, and whether they will be able to survive. The idea is that it is better to be in the midfield of the Big Ten and SEC because no matter what comes you should be safe.
The sport is better when every region in the country is strong and fans are engaged but it is also hard to fault conferences and schools for doing what they think they need to do to compete.
It is hard for fans to separate what is good for the sport and what is good for their school. NIL is a great example of this, most fans think players should be able to make money but wanted the rules shaped so they don't harm their school.
The ACC is already second fiddle to those conferences and FSU can't compete in this conference. It's not magically going to compete in one of the Big 2 conferences. Pitt is becoming a team that can compete for an ACC title every year. If they ever joined the Big 10 or SEC those odds would go toward zero.
Being in the middle of those conferences has no appeal to me. Watching Pitt the past few years has been infinitely more fun because they've had the talent and the ability to compete for a conference title and everything that comes with that championship. Leaving that to be the lucky team to finish behind the top 4 teams in the Big 10 each year, eh.
I get what you're saying, and I think both sides have merit. People don't want to be on a sinking ship, so it's about getting your foot in the door now and figuring the rest out later. At the same time, when schools like Maryland, which wasn't even "ACC good," actually upgrade their competition, it doesn't really bode well from an entertainment standpoint.
This is irrelevant.
Look at Alabama. It sucked for decades outside of 1992.
You’re insane if you think the thing that allowed it to stop sucking wasn’t lots and lots of money.
Maybe you do nothing with the money. But you have no hope without it.
pittdan77
Athletic Director
I don't think they believe they're next up for the B1G. If they were worth adding, they would have gone in with USC and UCLA. I also wouldn't just assume the ACC wants them either.
My guess is that Pitt did not want to be “included”.
Agree with what you said.
Schools, mostly the 2 big conferences, don’t give two hot damns about “what’s good for the sport”. They only care about money.
And if the supposed inevitable happens and the SEC and B1G are much superior to everyone else then so be it.
Those two can play elevated semi-pro ball and the rest can play college football. The big 2 can gobble up all 12 playoff spots and be happy while everyone else will play real college football.
At that point, why would anyone (except maybe the farmers and good ol boys who have no other entertainment alternatives) want to watch semi-pro football when you can watch Pro Football and still watch your school play college football.
To the fans of the SEC & B1G I say:
Be careful what you wish for you may just get it.
Last edited:
If the ACC plans to expand coast to coast, they would be making a mistake by not including Arizona State. Sort of decent football, huge (and growing) metro area. The biggest undergrad enrollment. Fantastic (and easy) place for road trips for both the athletes and fans (Sky Harbor airport is great with plenty of daily flights and practically next to Sun Devil Stadium). ASU is just behind Oregon in terms of my favorite choices if we try to poach the PAC.
I'll take obvious answers for $200 Alex....
What is it's their best option available?
Clemson and Florida St aren't gone. They can't get out of the contract, and they have nowhere to go if they did.
We’re in Group 4. I hope most realize. We might start out in Group 3, aka get an invite to the B12…. but I don’t think the also-ran football league will be viable for Pitt for very long.
Only in this absurd bizarro world environment does Oregon or Washington make more sense in the ATLANTIC COAST Conference than West Virginia....I would have no issues whatsoever with them.
Yup. Heck, I remember when people scoffed at Louisville being in the ACC or TCU joining the Big East… we don’t make the rules, just have to play by them now.
I don’t understand the fuss. Pitt is currently in the third best conference (ACC) and will land in the third best conference (whichever conference remains of ACC or Big 12).
This is what I was about to post. Where exactly do FSU and Clemson think they're going? FSU can't compete in the ACC for the last several years despite significantly more resources and effort than every team that's not Clemson, and Clemson isn't exactly a blue blood and has a long run of mediocre football in the recent past.
They (mainly FSU) can bitch and moan all they want but they're not going anywhere for a long, long time.
Last edited:
Except that in the coming apocalypse, the “third best conference” (and all other conferences) will be locked out of the true national championship.
Making it minor league football.
For some schools that won’t be a deal breaker. They’ll play football on pleasant Saturday’s in front of a couple thousand spirited alum that make the trip back to campus for nostalgia. Some game’s might get shown on the CW or TBS, or some cut rate streaming services. A few shekels will get paid to the schools (fractions of what we see now of course)…but still have a very expensive football program to maintain. But some will be able to do ok.
But IMO that will not be tenable for Pitt. This is not a minor league sports friendly town. We’ll drop like a stone in regional awareness (sh*t, it’s tough enough right now, with the current ‘third best conference’ that still CAN win a natty).
News flash…… college football already is minor league football.
The possible future with the B1G & SEC being on top and everyone else a distant third or below means that BIG & SEC will be playing semi- pro football and the rest will be playing college football.
I’d rather watch pro football than semi pro football and watch my team compete in college football.
Second news flash….. schools like Pitt including ~ 95 % of all college football teams are, and have been for quite some time, locked out of the true national championship.
The ACC has 1 huge problem that will keep it from attracting any P5 school to come on board. The 2036 Albatros.
Thanks but no thanks.
You didn't want WVU all through the years, now the feeling is mutual.
Just sell the entire conference to the Saudis.
They love soccer, the ACC is really good at soccer.
A billion dollars falling from the sky all up and down the east coast.....
Problem solved
They love soccer, the ACC is really good at soccer.
A billion dollars falling from the sky all up and down the east coast.....
Problem solved
That doesn’t matter. The brand is what matters. They will be wanted by the big or sec
Bottom line is that the ACC needs to do whatever it takes to add Oregon and Washington. I dont see how they dont add value. That's 2 new states for ACCN and a late night window. The problem is they want to be in the B10 and dont want to wait until 2036 with the ACC GOR. So the most likely scenario is they join the holding tank known as the Big 12 until the B10 lets them join.
No, we think that the ACC should be making the offer. If Oregon and Washington don't join it should be because they choose not to join, not because the ACC thinks they aren't worth it.
Doesn't matter what the ACC thinks they are worth. It is what ESPN tells the ACC they are worth.
Doesn't matter either way. The reality is that those are two quality programs and will add value to the ACC, either now or in the future.
Sitting and doing nothing and trying to wait out the next 13 years (!) is not a viable option. The ACC needs to evolve to stay relevant in the national picture. Specifically to stay the clear #3 conference.
The best (only) way that remains to do that would be to merge with the best of the remaining PAC (Oregon, Wash, the California and Arizona schools) and perhaps SDSU.
Does that bring .01 more net revenue in the first year, which some here seem to think is the sole criterium? Probably no. Does it up a huge new portion of the country and provide intriguing new content and matchups under our umbrella? Of course. It’s obvious this must be done by each passing day.
At the same time the ACC focuses on itself, we must work actively with the B12 and the other G5 FBS conferences. To enact pressure on politicians. To thwart the plans of the SEC and B10 (and its network partners) to form its own championship conference.
The legal weapon? Antitrust. Dozens and dozens of schools in dozens of states will suffer dramatically in revenue — many schools such as us will drop the sport completely — if suddenly locked out of the “Major league” of college football.
This in turn will hurt thousands of support businesses and jobs at those schools, when attendance plummets or disappears totally.
Most importantly (and this must be impressed on the pols getting bribed by the SEC and B10 to do nothing), non-revenue and specifically WOMEN’S sports will be harmed immensely when the revenue from football shrinks or disappears at all those locked out schools. Thousands of dropped or impoverished women athletes.
Get to it.
The best (only) way that remains to do that would be to merge with the best of the remaining PAC (Oregon, Wash, the California and Arizona schools) and perhaps SDSU.
Does that bring .01 more net revenue in the first year, which some here seem to think is the sole criterium? Probably no. Does it up a huge new portion of the country and provide intriguing new content and matchups under our umbrella? Of course. It’s obvious this must be done by each passing day.
At the same time the ACC focuses on itself, we must work actively with the B12 and the other G5 FBS conferences. To enact pressure on politicians. To thwart the plans of the SEC and B10 (and its network partners) to form its own championship conference.
The legal weapon? Antitrust. Dozens and dozens of schools in dozens of states will suffer dramatically in revenue — many schools such as us will drop the sport completely — if suddenly locked out of the “Major league” of college football.
This in turn will hurt thousands of support businesses and jobs at those schools, when attendance plummets or disappears totally.
Most importantly (and this must be impressed on the pols getting bribed by the SEC and B10 to do nothing), non-revenue and specifically WOMEN’S sports will be harmed immensely when the revenue from football shrinks or disappears at all those locked out schools. Thousands of dropped or impoverished women athletes.
Get to it.
Similar threads
Latest posts
-
-
-
-
Recruiting Article Pitt hosting an international prospect
- Latest: TheSpecialSauce
-