UCF_rustbucket

2 hours ago, Bull Matrix said:

I doubt the ACC falls apart lol. They have too much going for it. If any conference falls apart it will be more than likely the big 12 as they continue to lose schools 

Quite the opposite. The only thing holding the ACC together like duct tape is the GOR. Otherwise the top programs would looking for the exit because there's no conceivable way to catch up to the SEC and B1G without adding like 2 or 3 ND caliber programs. The Big 12 is ironically in a more stable position because they *don't* have FSU/Clemson level programs worth taking anymore. There's good depth but at 16+ teams, the SEC and B1G won't make more money by adding to the middle of the conference. It's OU/UT types or bust. 

43 minutes ago, Bull Matrix said:

Rule number 1

Never trust the media. Never….

Stay tuned as things are about to get even crazier 

Right, so don't trust that ESPN will be nice and give more money just because lol

20 minutes ago, GoBulls84 said:

^This^

FSU and Clemson aren't trying to do away with the GOR so they can get everyone in the conference what would be an incremental pay bump. They're doing it so they have an easier path to taking that SEC invite and getting that sweet sweet SEC cash.

 

Also as an aside, was perusing a Louisville board to see how they were handling things and was amazed to see that some of them had the opinion that they'd  have a shot at being headed to the SEC.

Lmao they're not alone. Colorado and Utah fans think they're B1G material and there were Texas Tech and Oklahoma State boards that were convinced they were SEC locks back when this round of raids started.

5 minutes ago, Bull Matrix said:

But more importantly I do believe that ACC will find away to break the GOR and negotiate a better TV deal. Basically there will be SEC Big Ten ACC & PAC 12 as your top four power conferences moving forward….

I think you're misunderstanding what the GOR is for. It's not the roadblock for negotiating a pay bump. The GOR is an agreement between the ACC and it's members, not ESPN, that each member gives up ownership of their TV rights to the conference for a period of time that matches the current tv deal. This is meant to disincentivize teams from leaving because the old school method of just raising conference exit fees wasn't really stopping anyone. 

If the GOR code is somehow cracked by the magnificent 7 lawyers, it doesn't change anything between the ACC and ESPN. All it does is make it significantly cheaper for the Clemson's and FSUs to leave if the SEC offers. 

29 minutes ago, Bull Matrix said:

Lmao ND would run out of there so fast. The Big East, Big 12, and B1G would be tripping over themselves to offer ND.

41 minutes ago, USF_Bullsharks said:

This is a big one that most people aren't talking about. Why wont they vote to disolve GOR to gain leverage on a new tv deal. Sure, some of those schools also want to leave the ACC (mainly FSU/Clemson), but schools like VaTech also just... want more money. I'm surprised that GaTech is not in that group. Assuming this happens and the GOR is disolved, FSU/Clemson accept SEC invites, USF/UConn/Tulane/Navy/Army to the ACC would be a great package, as ND would probably pull out too.

Edit: Do not think Memphis would be a take in a strong or weak ACC. They should be B12 worthy.  

Some are talking about it, but it's not really a solution that makes sense. ESPN has no reason to just pay the ACC more than they already are. The ACC insisted on a conference network so this pay structure from ESPN makes financial sense for them to get their money back on that investment. Dissolving the GOR just means the ACC can no longer hold the TV rights of individual members hostage as a method to keep them from leaving. Doesn't directly change their deal with ESPN. 

3 hours ago, Bull Matrix said:

With all that said. We are going to be fine. You can walk into a bar and have a legitimate argument that the AAC is one of the top 6 rated conferences year end & year out. Looking forward to it all….

The old AAC was definitely #6. New AAC? TBD. Can definitely achieve it but could need an adjustment period like the old AAC. First 3 years of the CFP era saw 3 different G5 conferences go to the NY6. Next 6 years after that was AAC dominance.

58 minutes ago, Peatearpan said:

I honestly feel like Miami would be picked up by the B1G. Clemson and FSU to SEC. UNC to either of those two (highest bidder I guess?) I feel like Duke would be snagged by either as well. Stanford and maybe Oregon to the B1G?

I am surprised the SEC has not tried to expand further west. I think after all those dominoes fall and the dust settles, 2 elite leagues in the SEC/B1G, two middling leagues with B12 and PAC/ACC Frankenstein, and then some kind G3 with the AAC/MWC merger, CUSA finally dies, and MAC and Sun Belt divvy up the corpse.

The SEC could get pretty much whoever they want but at 16, the league is already a little clunky for scheduling. Go beyond that and it's worse or you're really just 2 different conferences duct taped as 1.

It also has to benefit the SEC and make them more money. With so many mouths to feed, new adds only make sense if you add to the top of your league like with Texas and Oklahoma. Adding someone like WVU or Oklahoma State doesn't do that even though they'd be solid in the middle portion of the conference. Mizzou lucked out joining when they did because they're not the kind of top end program that would be attractive to add now.

19 hours ago, Bull Awakening said:

I’m hoping people will eventually drop the p5 and understand that it is the 6 top rated conference starting in 2024

I don't see if happening. The gap is still there between the current P5 and G5, now with the added gap from the P2 to the Middle 3. It's a media term and ESPN and Fox will keep pushing it to pimp out their tv properties.

2 hours ago, Bull Awakening said:

Gonna keep saying it until the cows come home. USF will more than likely end up in the  ACC. big 12 is a long shot due burn bridges. I will be shocked if the big 12 is around that much longer with all the bad decisions that already have been made 

TV deal in hand for the Big 12 while the PAC 12 is still unsure. No teams that are a real need for the SEC or B1G, so conference is stable. Can't see a reason why the Big 12 won't be around. The PAC is the one at risk until they get a tv deal signed.

1 hour ago, Bull Awakening said:

Would be interesting if USF is still in AAC by then. But it looking more likely that both UConn & USF will be replacing FSU & Clemson in the ACC

SMU is looking likely to beat USF out of the AAC. But don't take that personally or as an insult. You can do a lot to make yourself an attractive expansion candidate but timing luck is still needed. A conference that can fit SMU just happened to have an opening now. But still wait and see if they'll really get the invite and not get the rug pulled from under them at the end.

41 minutes ago, Bullcocky said:

Who are Charlotte, Rice, and UTSA?  I've never heard of those schools. I know a few Bama fans and one FAU had, but I'm not sure if he knows they have a football team. Hope we run the table in conference so we can play a school that I've heard of. Lol.

Charlotte and UTSA have relatively new football programs. About a decade ish. But Charlotte was a former conference mate of USF back in CUSA 1.0 but they were a non-football school back then. And then Rice is a team with similar ish history to Tulane and SMU, who they were with in CUSA 2.0. Highly ranked academically, private school, used to be in the SWC, left orphaned after the Big 8/12 raided it and hasn't really done much since. Good baseball I believe though.

6 hours ago, Jim Johnson said:

Yes, the PAC is negotiating with ESPN and Amazon.  ESPN wants those Pac 12 After Dark games, to be sure.  However it seems Amazon will be the primary partner -- like Fox is for the B1G and ESPN is for the ACC.  So while some games will be on ESPN, if Amazon is the primary partner they will get not only most of the games, but probably get the best games as well.

I think you are right, tho.  The Pac 10 will add SDSU and SMU and sign a deal for $35 to $40 million.  It will also transfer the Pac 12 Network infrastructure to Amazon (they use NFL Network infrastructure for their Thursday night NFL games).

The PAC 12 may receive a total annual payout of $35-$40M once you add in CFP money and NCAA credits. But right now the rumblings are that the TV portion is struggling to even reach the $31M of the Big 12. 

9 hours ago, CousinRicky said:

Isn't Prime video part of having a Prime membership? I don't pay any extra and watch Prime shows.

It is, but I'm saying that because it's an all inclusive subscriber count for all Prime services, we can't assume every single Prime subscriber is actively using the Prime video portion. Since some of them, myself included, subscribe to prime for shipping benefits and almost never use video. Vs ESPN+ or Netflix, which only have 1 service so it's pretty straightforward. Though it's a good advantage for Amazon to have a large reach already, even if not everyone is taking full advantage of Prime video yet. 

1 hour ago, Bull94 said:

Cable is going the way of the newspaper

I'd be ecstatic if we were on Prime.

I don't even turn on the cable box when looking for our games. Just boot up roku espn app.

# of cable households are declining rapidly every year. # of prime members increasing every year.

 

# of cable households in US in 2022

76 Million

down 18 million since 2017

 

# of amazon prime members in US in 2022

164 Million

up 64 million since 2017

It is going the way of the dinosaur but it's not the primary choice for live sports watchers just yet. When comparing prime numbers though there's probably a better number because I don't think all 164M signed up for Prime video. I'm sure many just use the shopping benefits.

5 hours ago, Friscobull said:

You are a good guy with great information however never understood why you hang out on here, especially now?  I can’t imagine hanging out on a c message board, what’s the point.  Serious question and not attacking you because you are a good dude, If you care to opine I am interested.

I like actual sports talks with different fan bases. I'm also in a couple of general sports discussion Facebook groups. The right ones though, because there was a "Big 12 trash talk" page I got invited to and it was probably as civil as you'd expect lol so that's not particularly my bag. Y'all have some good discussions here and I like to join in on them. But to actually contribute, because if I came here just to dunk on you guys I'd have been banned right away lol

4 hours ago, BullsFanInTX said:

They were in lower conferences that we were. 12 schools have passed us by for power conferences invites the past decade. 
 

TWELVE. 

I'm trying to think of all 12. Does this already include SMU or SDSU or not until something official? 

Depending on which schools are on your 12, how many actually passed you by vs were older schools already with more established football and athletics overall? Take Louisville for example. They were brought up from CUSA to the Big East with you guys, but I would argue they had a much better case for football vs just the potential of the FL market, which is all USF had at that point with barely any history as a football program. 

On 2/3/2023 at 10:57 AM, Mike Stuben said:

I don't know, but they lost a recruit to Purdue this year, and I almost tweeted out a SpcaceU reference 

If it's that's guy you're referring to, he was never committed to us or even being recruited by us. But On3 decided to claim he flipped from us somehow. Not sure if they got confused because we signed an OL transfer from Stanford.

https://mobile.twitter.com/On3sports/status/1620803818953875457?ref_src=twsrc^tfw|twcamp^tweetembed|twterm^1620803818953875457|twgr^|twcon^s1_&ref_url=

11 hours ago, Bull Awakening said:

I can’t disagree with you on that. However there is a very slim chance or basically no chance at all that USF will ever end up in the big 12. By the time that happens basically most of the teams will be gone. Why would we want to be in a conference that is set out west? Especially with the 12 team playoff I really lost most of the desire for USF to go to big 12. ACC is a much better situation for USF and with MK’s ACC connections i will be surprised if that invite doesn’t happen. USF has a state of an art OCS on the way and is in a more regional conference that has an easier path to the playoffs. We have it made 

I think we can assume the same about the ACC though. They're not going to add G5 teams unless raided. There's no amount of success USF (or other G5) can have that a fully in tact 14 team ACC will send them an invite for. And even then it's not a given, they'd need to lose enough teams to feel that it would benefit their stability by adding G5 teams. Because if they lose 2 they may stay put at 12. But lose 4 to 6 and for sure USF would be at the top of the list. But now it's a greatly diminished ACC that looks a whole lot like the old Big East. Which is to say much better than AAC 2.0, but I'd say a weaker football conference than the new Big 12.

Lol there are no Kansas and Ok st rumors. No one wants them. That's likely old rumors from 2021 when Texas and OU left. The Big 12 is safe for at least a decade. My money would be on the ACC being in the most danger next go around since they have a few of the most attractive teams left. The Big 12 has a bunch of solid B tier P5 teams worth playing with, but no flagship type like Texas, OU, USC, and UCLA worth raiding for the SEC and B1G.

22 hours ago, puc86 said:

If you went back through since the start of the playoffs and expanded the logic how many times would there be more than one G5 teams in the playoffs?

 

I've taken a look at this. From 2014 onward (the entirety of the CFP era), this only happens once. The 2020 COVID season where the PAC 12 was left out. But very much and anomaly since the PAC only played half a season and then had to have 2nd place PAC north finisher Oregon replace Washington in the title game due to a COVID outbreak, and then Oregon actually won. So Cincy and coastal were both ranked about Oregon.

But during the regular seasons, it's not even close. All the P5 champs are safely in. The 7th highest ranked conference champs (aka 2nd highest ranked G5) is usually in the 20s or unranked, while the lowest P5 champs are at worst just outside the top 10.

40 minutes ago, Bull Awakening said:

Yes exactly! The question is how many conferences will start chasing USF once the OCS is being built. Probably at least ACC & Big 12. SBC is already chasing USF’s tail…

P5 will keep a close eye on USF, but none will chase. They have the leverage and no need to add G5 teams until chaos happens. As is tradition.

1 hour ago, Triple B said:

Definitely agree that CJS staying put us back a bit but not sure how seriously it did ..... but I'm not begrudging someone for staying for a playoff game and just glad that CAG didn't have to make that choice.

Agree with you. There's limited positive impact that could be had since the transition class will have a lot of misses in the early signing day era. But it was a bad look for CJS to not even approach his new job with a sense of urgency. CAG is at least trying even though this first class will likely be his worst at USF due to the time constraints on putting it together.

19 minutes ago, Skingraft said:

A bit disturbing that we recruited so poorly on the side of the ball that needed the most work.... Could be wrong.... Just does not look good on paper..... Like, literally... That did not look good on paper

I think it's just tough with the 2.5 week turnaround time between getting hired and the early signing day to do significant recruiting work. Golesh will probably keep looking for pieces in areas of need with transfers. Especially the second wave that comes after spring camp. The 2024 class will be a better indicator of how good/bad his staff is at recruiting with a full year to work on the class.

27 minutes ago, BullsFanInTX said:

They are not in there. Even if they did get downgraded they are not included. It says 10 3 stars and we should have 13 if they were downgraded. 

I believe any transfers don't get factored in until they're regraded since the old ranking isn't really indicative of who they are now. We have 8 transfers and only 2 are giving us points since the rest haven't been regraded. The 2 4-stars are unlikely to remain 4-stars for y'all.