College Football--Big Ten Expansion
![[Post New]](/jforum/templates/default/images/icon_minipost_new.gif){kind=icon}
Anonymous
Thank you for posting. I agree. The Sports Illustrated article focused on football viewership, academics, attendance at football games, overall athletic program, and Football rank. Also, UNC, Duke, Virginia, Georgia Tech, U Miami, & FSU would all get the Big Ten Conference a footprint in new talent rich recruiting areas of the Southest US. |
Anonymous
|
My impression is that Stanford wants to remain in a Power 5--now Power 4--Conference. Money is secondary--although even a 33.3% Big Ten payout share is more than any other option available to Stanford at this time.
SMU--which is not Big Ten material--is willing to forego 5 years of payout in order to get in to a Pac-4 Conference such as the ACC. At the right price, there is value in Stanford for the Big Ten Conference. Plus, Stanford & Notre Dame have a close relationship and a football rivalry which might help to attract Notre Dame to the Big Ten Conference in the future. |
Anonymous
| Probably won't be any realignment activity until after Tuesday of next week (August 15, 2023) as that is the deadline for ACC teams to report to the ACC that it/they intend to leave. |
Anonymous
|
Supposedly, one vote short. Not sure that I buy that, but it is still a no-go for Cal & Stanford into the ACC.
Reveals which teams support and which teams oppose: https://si.com/colege/2023/08/11/stanford-cal-acc-unlikely-future-unclear-pac-12 |
Anonymous
|
I could be wrong, but I think the FSU decision will have a huge impact on the future of the ACC. The ACC’s focus seems to be on survival rather than competition with other conferences.
I, for one, will not stay up late to watch SMU vs UNC football game. I would watch the same matchup playing basketball. I'm a Texas fan and I'm very excited to join the SEC. Although I have lived in DC for 30 plus years, I have attended Texas games across the country. Even if Texas has a losing record in the SEC, I would much rather hit the grove for tailgating, doing the same in Nashville, Tuscolussa, Athens and the rest of the awesome SEC towns. |
Anonymous
| They all look so weak scurrying around. It’s pathetic. |
Anonymous
Who does? |
Anonymous
If FSU is going I think the votes will be there to add the three schools. No way they add the 3 if FSU stays and Clemson opposes. To me it seems Clemson is key. Flip Clemson and you have the votes. Clemson is flippable. |
Anonymous
Anonymous
|
The problem with this in college sports is that the teams change so much year to year. Many programs have a great team once a decade or so; those teams would have no shot to win a championship because the team from the year before probably wouldn’t have been good enough for them to be in the top division. Look at TCU; mediocre year followed up with making the finals in the playoffs; wouldn’t have happened with this system. |
Anonymous
|
The FSU decision will have a big impact not only on the ACC, but also on college football because of how FSU is raising the money to exit the ACC. FSU is using an investment bank (JP Morgan Chase) and a private equity firm (Sixth Street).
FSU's exit fee may come from selling shares in the team. Next will be conferences that may be purchased. Then player contracts and profit sharing type payments. The money in college football is huge and Wall Street firms are interested. Amatuerism is dead. |
Anonymous
Seems pretty remote. The team belongs to the state government. If the profits go to investors instead of the athletic dept then what’s the point? The AD doesn’t have ownership or authority to sell state property to Wall Street. |
Anonymous
|
ACC: Let’s bring in west coast charity cases.
FSU, Clemson, UNC, NC State: Nah https://twitter.com/mattnorlander/status/1690132086399860739?s=46&t=uZq3YMnIntV4O6bEu3zITA |
Anonymous
I can only take a guess at this point. Some investors/investment groups talk about buying conferences in the future. Probably would be co-ownership. If the state owns the team, then the state would have to consent. Taxpayers might like being relieved of the duty to financially support a team while being rewarded as shareholders. We are almost there as the mediagiants control the football conferences already. If you do a bit of research, there are a few articles on the internet which are free & available on this subject. |
Anonymous
|
The more that I see changes in college football conferences, the more important it is for the Big Ten Conference to invite Stanford to join. This should stop other conferences from attempting to become national coast-to-coast conferences. None of the Big 12, the ACC, or the SEC need to become coast-to-coast conferences. The Big Ten Conference is already there and one is enough in my opinion.
I blame 12 to 15 years of mismanagement of the Pac-12 for opening the door to the first coast-to-coast conference. The Big Ten was the natural conference to take advantage because it is centered in the middle of the country, it is wealthy, and the Big Ten Conference is well managed. The only two schools which could reasonably help the ACC or any other conference on its way to becoming a coast-to-coast conference are Cal & Stanford. UCal-Berkeley has serious financial problems and the Cal Bears are, at best, a mediocre football team, therefore not worth pursuing as a stand alone addition to any Power 4 Conference. The Big Ten Conference should snatch Stanford which has a successful athletics program, is wealthy, and has a rivalry with Notre Dame. Enlisting Stanford into the Big Ten Conference will shut down the opportunity for any other Power 4 Conference from becoming a truly national coast-to-coast conference. One national conference is enough. |