College Football--Big Ten Expansion
![[Post New]](/jforum/templates/default/images/icon_minipost_new.gif){kind=icon}
Anonymous
It is more geographically incoherent than the B1G. The B1G has the whole west coast ..Midwest and Mid Atlantic. Granted .. I think it should add Colorado and Arizona so all states are connected. |
Anonymous
Uh, no. 
|
Anonymous
Texas (as the number one revenue producer in the NCAA) was to much to pass up for the SEC TV revenue rights, no matter what Texas A&Ms objection was. With OU jumping ship as well, it was a solid decision. I'm not sure the additions to the ACC do much. Are you excited to watch SMU vs "anyone" on a given weekend? |
Anonymous
The B1G is generally state flagships and Northwestern. All are part of the AAU (or in the case of Nebraska, was when it was admitted) You were saying? |
Anonymous
I’m not sure what your point is? SMU alumni are excited to watch SMU, as well as the fans of the team they’re playing. That is the most you can say about the majority of teams in most of the time, and I would include FSU in that group in recent years. I think it’s still 2014 in the minds of FSU boosters, but the rest of the world has moved on. In the ACC, Clemson is the only “must watch” team, and their star seems to fading a bit. Besides, SMU was a “must watch” team pre death penalty, and now they have a chance to get there again. We’ll see. Not to mention that there is value to the ACC teams to playing in the heart of the best football recruiting grounds in the US. |
Anonymous
I was saying exactly what I said. The B1G is “mostly” flagships (except for Northwestern), but it is, if anything less geographically coherent than the new ACC. The Big 12 is a little bit more geographically coherent, but less academically coherent. I’d argue that most of the ACC — GaT, UVA, VT, UNC, BC, Duke, Wake, Miami, Notre Dame, etc have more in common with Stanford, Cal & SMU (irrespective of the public/private distinction) than Kansas, Baylor, Cincinnati, UCF, BYU, OSU, TCU, Texas Tech, WVU, etc do with each other. FSU sees itself as an SEC school, but I’m not sure anyone else sees it that way. From what I hear from friends in the college athletics world, Clemson is fine with hanging out with the level of academic schools in the ACC (and not having to get their heads bashed in by UGA, Bama, LSU etc in the regular season every year). I think they’ll keep their options open from a $$ standpoint (someone’s gotta pay Dabo’s big contract), but they have done fine for a football perspective in the current situation. TL/DR — not one of the new “Power 4” conferences is geographically and academically coherent. |
Anonymous
| The Big only needs to add Colorado and Arizona for all its states to touch |
Anonymous
|
’m not sure what your point is? SMU alumni are excited to watch SMU, as well as the fans of the team they’re playing. That is the most you can say about the majority of teams in most of the time, and I would include FSU in that group in recent years. I think it’s still 2014 in the minds of FSU boosters, but the rest of the world has moved on. In the ACC, Clemson is the only “must watch” team, and their star seems to fading a bit.
Besides, SMU was a “must watch” team pre death penalty, and now they have a chance to get there again. We’ll see. Not to mention that there is value to the ACC teams to playing in the heart of the best football recruiting grounds in the US. I played for Texas, so yes. I am biased. I grew up in Dallas watching the "Pony Express". They were cheaters and deserved the death penalty. I am sure that SMU alumni want to watch their team on TV. My point is that I don't want to watch SMU play any school in the ACC. It's just lame TV. If Bama is playing LSU, Texas is plating Oklahoma, Georgia is playing Clemson what game would I watch? SMU vs whatever? |
Anonymous
| Did you say sign you up for SMU Wake Forest in primetime? |
Anonymous
Correct. https://usatoday.com/story/sports/college/columnist/dan-wolken/2023/09/01/acc-expansion-stanford-cal-smu-ponzi-scheme-college-sports/70739725007/ The USA Today article cited above tells it like it is. |
Anonymous
This will not happen anytime during the next decade or two. The Big 10 wants Notre Dame, UNC-Chapel Hill, and would love to attract Texas. |
Anonymous
Disagree. Travel is already exhausting for ACC baseball players due to the number and frequency of games. Tough to be a student while playing baseball in the ACC. Within the past year, I read that baseball is the most expensive collegiate sport regarding travel costs. Will be incredibly expensive for Stanford & Cal baseball to compete in the ACC. I cannot imagine how Stanford & Cal baseball players will cope with the academic side of being a student-athlete. |
Anonymous
|
The effect on recruiting by joining the ACC will be different for Cal & Stanford than it will be for SMU.
SMU will thrive in the ACC. Membership in a Power 4 Conference plus te legalization of NIL money for student-athletes will work in SMU's favor. SMU can afford to buy the best athletes and its boosters are willing to prove it. Stanford & Cal are likely to lose recruits due to the physical & psychological burdens that come with frequent coast-to-coast travel while attempting to pose as student-athletes. Other ACC teams will be fine as travel from the East Coast to the West Coast will not be frequent as the overwhelming majority of ACC teams are located in the East. |
Anonymous
|
Now that Stanford & Cal have a new home in a Power 4 Conference, does this free-up Notre Dame to get closer to the Big Ten ?
Or does this move Notre Dame closer to the ACC ? Notre Dame needed traditional rival Stanford to find a home in a Power 4 Conference in order to maintain its "strength of schedule" rating for CFP consideration. Now that Stanford football is legitimized, does anyone think that Notre Dame is seriously interested in playing football against Cal or SMU ? Or does this make Notre Dame a stronger independent in college football ? |
Anonymous
|
"How do we elevate the Big Ten brand ?"
Asked if Big ten Conference was done expanding at 18 teams, the University of Iowa President responded that she "can't comment" on what they are discussing. https://outkick.com/iowa-president-hints-at-even-more-big-ten-expansion/ What do these comments suggest ? Which schools would "elevate the Big Ten brand" if not chasing dollars ? Notre Dame would elevate the Big Ten brand and increase revenue as would adding Texas which is scheduled to move to the SEC in 2024. UNC-Chapel Hill would elevate the Big Ten brand as would Georgia Tech. Apparently, the Big Ten is currently engaged in discussions. My thought is that only Notre Dame or Texas would be serious targets at this time as UNC is tied up by the ACC GOR agreement. Could Texas or Notre Dame move to the Big Ten Conference soon ? Texas has not yet officially joined the SEC. Texas A&M is already an SEC member school and does not want the University of Texas in the SEC. Can anyone offer additional insights or thoughts about the possibility of U Texas joining the Big Ten Conference instead of the SEC ? Anyone think that the Big Ten Conference is in discussions with Notre Dame ? Or UNC ? |