Conference realignment "Rumors" "tweets" "etc"

[Peatearpan]

11 minutes ago, Cat941 said:

He says that all three potential ACC teams are willing to forgo media revenue.  Hadn't heard that about Cal.  I thought they were in financial difficulty.  

Maybe Stanford and SMU are propping them up? Also, which person was lobbying for them again? Oliver Luck, George Bush, or Condoleeza Rice?

Who is our most famous/wealthy alumni that isn’t embarrassed to be affiliated with us?

[MaltLiquorBull]

So they’d rather take their chances playing for free in the ACC on the east coast then associate with AAC and MWC teams and get paid?   

[Who'sYourData?]

18 hours ago, Bullrush33 said:

Are there 8 teams worth taking? I don’t see it. 

For Apple, 8 teams in the east and 8 in the west gives you an entire day/night of football each Saturday.  I don't know.what happens, but it has reasons why it would work.

[Cat941]

11 minutes ago, MaltLiquorBull said:

So they’d rather take their chances playing for free in the ACC on the east coast then associate with AAC and MWC teams and get paid?   

I know, right!?  From a leadership position to entry-level.   What about the GOR?  Willing to sign that for 13 more years!?  The other question is: how does ND get their way?  

[BullyPulpit]

1 hour ago, belgianbull said:

Got up this morning in a great mood. Let today be the day that the dominoes start falling in our favor.

Don't get your hopes up too high. With USF, this is how the dominoes falling usually plays out....

[DontPushMe]

19 minutes ago, MaltLiquorBull said:

So they’d rather take their chances playing for free in the ACC on the east coast then associate with AAC and MWC teams and get paid?   

The pay and embarrassment of being associated with aac schools is not worth it. 

 

We should be making the same offer, problem is acc would deny us even for free. 

 

If acc adds 2-4 teams and the pac 4 thing doesn't materialize for us it's time to seriously just shut down the program or go full independent. 

[BullyPulpit]

19 minutes ago, Who'sYourData? said:

For Apple, 8 teams in the east and 8 in the west gives you an entire day/night of football each Saturday.  I don't know.what happens, but it has reasons why it would work.

If there was an Apple contract and it was streaming only, I would hope that the league and Apple got together and offered some revolutionary content. Something like having the coaches mic'd up the entire game or a sideline feed where you can see what's going on. It could be on a 30 second delay and each school could have a representative that has the authority to dump audio to protect play calls and such. 

[TallyBull]

25 minutes ago, MaltLiquorBull said:

So they’d rather take their chances playing for free in the ACC on the east coast then associate with AAC and MWC teams and get paid?   

It's getting a little crazy.

Let's think this through. What are the motivations for joining a "P5" conference?

• More money
• Access to CFP

Set aside the B1G, B12, and SEC for a moment. If your goal is to get into the ACC, but you're giving up the money for 5 years, and the ACC may no longer exist as a "power" conference in 5 years because the B1G, B12, and SEC are going to poach most of your teams, isn't there a significant risk that you will both make no money over that timeframe and ultimately lose what you perceive to be better access to the CFP?

While the G5's access isn't as good as in a P5 conference, it seems like there's momentum of guaranteeing G5 teams at least one, possibly two, spots in the CFP. So if you're making no money and have similar (admittedly not equal) access to the CFP in the AAC, is this all worth it?

Seems to me like the snooty officials at Stanford and Cal, and the desperate boosters at SMU, haven't really thought this through. I guess the gamble could pay off if the ACC sticks together? But maybe I'm missing something. 

Edited August 18, 2023 by TallyBull

[Bull Gooner]

33 minutes ago, Peatearpan said:

Maybe Stanford and SMU are propping them up? Also, which person was lobbying for them again? Oliver Luck, George Bush, or Condoleeza Rice?

Who is our most famous/wealthy alumni that isn’t embarrassed to be affiliated with us?

Maybe Drew from Office Space?

Edited August 18, 2023 by Bull Gooner

[BullyPulpit]

1 minute ago, TallyBull said:

It's getting a little crazy.

Let's think this through. What are the motivations for joining a "P5" conference?

• More money
• Access to CFP

Set aside the B1G, B12, and SEC for a moment. If your goal is to get into the ACC, but you're giving up the money for 5 years, and the ACC may no longer exist as a "power" conference in 5 years because the B1G, B12, and SEC are going to poach most of your teams, isn't there a significant risk that you will both make no money over that timeframe and ultimately lose what you perceive to be better access to the CFP?

While the G5's access isn't as good as in a P5 conference, it seems like there's momentum of guaranteeing G5 teams at least one, possibly two, spots in the CFP. So if you're making no money and have similar (admittedly not equal) access to the CFP, is this all worth it?

Seems to me like the snooty officials at Stanford and Cal, and the desperate boosters at SMU, haven't really thought this through. I guess the gamble could pay off if the ACC sticks together? But maybe I'm missing something. 

There is zero risk for SMU and Stanford. They clearly have the rich boosters that will make it worthwhile. In reality, they are foregoing $50 to $75 million (no way a new PAC deal would be worth more than $15 million per year) over the course of 5 years in order to avoid the tarnishing of associating with the G5 dregs, in the case of Stanford and Cal, and to try to elevate their program as better than the rest of the trash, in the case of SMU. If we had the money and opportunity to do so, we would be foolish not to. I am not going to search my old posts for this, but I have been advocating this for years for us to get into the Big 12 prior to the last 2 rounds of realignment.