Miami Herald Blog - FSU, UM to SEC; USF to ACC

[Danm1983]

I think Big Ten wants (in preferential order):

1. Notre Dame

2. Rutgers

3. Pittsburgh

4. Missouri

5. Syracuse

SEC would want:

1. FSU

2. Miami

3. Clemson

4. Louisville

5. Georgia Tech

6. West Virginia

7. Kentucky

8. the rest (USF, Memphis, other ridiculous choices)

Wouldn't it be odd if the SEC went nuts and pulled in something odd like Texas and Texas A&M, then after FSU/Miami said no (they'd be crazy to do so but let's theorize), they went after a left-field duo like Duke and UNC. The additions of the 2 Texas schools would solidify football, and the 2 Carolina schools would bolster basketball, and UNC isn't a bad football team either. Duke has a pretty solid lacrosse team I think and they would compete with Vanderbilt for "smart school bragging rights". Obviously that would never happen though. Just a what if.

[Hurricane Mutiny]

Miami would never leave the A.C.C. for the SEC.  The CANES turned down the SEC before Arkansas was asked to join.  I do not see any school leaving the A.C.C.

I believe that both Miami and FSU turned down the SEC.  I think they still would too.  They'd be much smaller fish in the SEC pond and would be lucky to win the SEC East twice in a decade while competing with UF, Tennessee, and Georgia.  I think the SEC might have better luck trying to lure Clemson and Georgia Tech, possibly even Virginia and/or VT.  And they could conceivably offer West Virginia, Lousiville, or even Cincy (Cincinnati considers itself southern and as I native Ohioan I can attest that most Ohioans consider it practically a part of Kentucky - we actually often call it Cincitucky).

The SEC has tons of options if they want to go to 16.  USF could even be an option, though I think we're down on the list.

No disrespect intended, but most of the responses on this thread are indicative of a fanbase that hasn't been involved in college football for very long.

Big 10 and/or SEC expansion has NOTHING to do with whether a team has a shot at winning a particular division, or whether the stadium sells out, or any other silly reasons.

From the conference standpoint, this is ALL about media markets.  And from the schools' standpoint, this is ALL about revenue.

If the SEC expands in the southeast, it would absolutely consider Miami to become dominant in the Top 10 media market of Miami-Lauderdale-West Palm.  FSU brings marginal increases in the south part of the state, better results in the central, and strong performance in secondary markets such as Jax and Pensacola.  Georgia Tech is also a very strong candidate due to the Atlanta market, though it is arguable how much they add that UGa doesn't already bring to the table.  Shockingly enough, USF and UCF would be good candidates based on media markets, but if the SEC adds UM and FSU, it might not be necessary in the SEC's eyes.  Clemson MIGHT be candidate based on historical factors.

If the SEC expands to the west, Texas is choices 1-9, with Texas A&M being choice #10. 

Clearly, a choice such as UM-FSU in the east and UT-aTm in the west not only adds tremendous media markets, but certainly a lot of competitiveness and balance (3 big state schools and a Top 50 private).

This isn't about balancing football and basketball or about which school has a good lacrosse team (really?), this is about locking down big media markets and content...content...and more content, both for the existing TV contracts and for a future cable channel that will follow the Big 10's successful model.

I made this point years ago, but if the BE wants to be smart, it needs to start exploring an alliance with the ACC now, particularly a cable channel.  There would be a TON of content just from past conference hoops games that people would want to see (thus, they would call their local cable companies to get the channel added).  Then, if either conference is hit by Big 10 and/or SEC expansion, another 16 team football conference is ready to roll.

[Danm1983]

This isn't about balancing football and basketball or about which school has a good lacrosse team (really?)

keep taking shots guy. you clearly missed the joke of that. you also missed that it was a totally hypothetical situation. your other points are valid. we all know it's TV market. we're just bantering because no one really knows what will happen at this point. (personally i'm against more than 12 teams in a conference)

and the east coast FL market is large, but it's not all Miami fans. just sayin'. tampa market is probably 40% UF/FSU/UM people.

[cygnus34]

Hurricane Miutiny:

    Since you saw fit to put my reply at the top of your frame, and then said I am part of a fan base that has not followed college football very long.  I don't know how long that should be but I have followed college football since the mid 40's.  Penn was my first favorite, they were a very good team then.  I became a Colorado fan when I lived there and then a CANE fan in 67 when I moved there and am still a CANE fan and a secondary CARD fan now that I live near the Ville. 

I still stand by my statement that I do not believe the CANES would leave the A.C.C. one reason in the SEC every school but one is a large state school with LOTS of MONEY for coaches, facilities and whatever.  The CANES can not match that.  Also why would they move, when the A.C.C. is such a good fit?

[Hurricane Mutiny]

This isn't about balancing football and basketball or about which school has a good lacrosse team (really?)

keep taking shots guy. you clearly missed the joke of that. you also missed that it was a totally hypothetical situation. your other points are valid. we all know it's TV market. we're just bantering because no one really knows what will happen at this point. (personally i'm against more than 12 teams in a conference)

and the east coast FL market is large, but it's not all Miami fans. just sayin'. tampa market is probably 40% UF/FSU/UM people.

Fair enough, Dan.  I ain't mad at ya.

I'm just shocked by the fact that multiple people are actually opining, for instance, that Miami and/or FSU would decline an invitation.  Speaking only for Miami (and I know financial details of our Athletic Department budget), there is no way in hell that Miami would turn down SIGNIFICANTLY more money from the SEC.  We still have a debt to pay off to the Endowment Fund from the years that we had to deficit spend as we emerged from probation and were not getting a guaranteed annual payment from the BE.

Also, as it relates to the east coast of Florida, I think you're missing the point.  Whether UM is the dominant #1 choice on all TVs, the simple fact is that the UM game would be the lead network game in the SoFla markets.  Yes, we all know that UM is a small private school, but we are a huge TV draw, whether that is in our home markets or when we go on the road.  ESPN has experienced some of its all-time highest ratings for UM-FSU games even in years where one or both schools sucked.

So even if UM played at Villanova, that game is going to improve the TV ratings in Villanova's markets.  And the SEC would gain strength by weakening others, i.e., taking one of the marquee teams from the ACC.  Do you think that the SEC would improve its TV contract and/or weaken the ACC's TV contract more by taking Miami or Clemson?

Finally, Miami would certainly benefit in ways that are hard to address otherwise.  For instance, one of our top all-time years in attendance was earlier in the decade when we were able to schedule UF and Tennessee in the same year.  All of a sudden you would FINALLY create the solution to home attendance problems.

[Hurricane Mutiny]

Hurricane Miutiny:

     Since you saw fit to put my reply at the top of your frame, and then said I am part of a fan base that has not followed college football very long.  I don't know how long that should be but I have followed college football since the mid 40's.  Penn was my first favorite, they were a very good team then.  I became a Colorado fan when I lived there and then a CANE fan in 67 when I moved there and am still a CANE fan and a secondary CARD fan now that I live near the Ville. 

I still stand by my statement that I do not believe the CANES would leave the A.C.C. one reason in the SEC every school but one is a large state school with LOTS of MONEY for coaches, facilities and whatever.  The CANES can not match that.  Also why would they move, when the A.C.C. is such a good fit?

Look, I'm not impugning YOUR college football fandom.  But being a fan and understanding the economics of the sport are two different things.

I happen to work for the dominant motorsports companies located in Daytona Beach, and I happen to know quite a lot about sports economics.  For instance, every time that someone complains about the small crowds at the Auto Club Speedway outside of Los Angeles, I laugh, because those people have no idea about the TV revenues that are tied to having a presence in the LA market.  Sure, ticket sales may be low, but Auto Club is one of the most profitable tracks.

So if revenue can be made from a variety of sources, some more lucrative than others, let's think about Miami's history.  We went from a major independent, where our revenue came largely from merchandise and OUR most desirable home games (from a TV revenue standpoint, since we were able to broker deals with the highest bidder)....to a conference where we made a LOT of money when we went to a BCS game, but not much money when we were on probation or rebuilding....to a conference where we now make more money for an 8th place finish than we did as the conference champ in our prior conference.

The bottom line is that it's all about the money.  Again, if Miami makes SIGNIFICANTLY more in the SEC, why would we possibly stay in the ACC?  The culture of the member schools?  Come on, now.

Finally, your comment about money is unbelievably uninformed, and representative of the same misinformation that gets passed around with such gullibility.

Coaching pay?  Miami made a multi-million dollar offer to Schiano before we hired Shannon.  Miami was paying signficant money to Coker.  But you don't just turn around and give identical money to a first-time coach.  Miami can absolutely afford to pay millions to a football coach.  But we won't do so just for the hell of it.  That doesn't mean that we will pay Meyer-Saban-Miles money, but then very few other schools in the country can do so either.  The simple fact is that Miami can and will pay big money for a successful coach, and having MORE money from a power conference will only help.

Facilities?  Are you kidding me?  We play in an NFL stadium.  We just build a brand-new basketball arena.  We just renovated our baseball stadium and tennis stadium.  Our football practice fields are rated as some of the best in the country.  Our weight room regularly draws top NFL stars during the off-season.  The only facility that needs to be renovated and expanded is the offices of the Athletic Department, and that is a LAND and CORAL GABLES ZONING issue, not a money issue.  Coral Gables put a hold on ALL proposed buildings at UM, including our Alumni House, art museum expansion, and dormitory construction while they tried to extort tens of millions from UM for "impact fees".  Once we solve the land issue (i.e., if we sacrifice all on-site parking for the building footprint), we will have some of the best facilities (not biggest) in Florida.

Whatever?  What, exactly, constitutes the whatever?  As I mentioned separately, if Miami joined the SEC, we would likely see a SIGNIFICANT increase in the conference revenue sharing check.  We would be able to hand over larger visiting fan allocations and see a tremendous increase in overall ticket sales.  With more ticket demand, we would see an increase in Hurricane Club donor-level requirements.  Merchandise sales would increase.  And with the NCAA tourney going to 96 teams, you'll see more BE/ACC/SEC/Big 10/Big 12 participants.

So, tell me again, what would be so bad for Miami that we would turn down an SEC bid to stay in the ACC?  "Better fit"?  Sorry, but that's not going to happen.

If the SEC is trying to maximize its TV value (both the network deal and any cable channel content), Miami is a slam dunk.  HUGE media market of its own, and tremendous interest in all other markets.  Miami is the biggest "villain" in college football over the past 3 decades, and people love to hate us, we sell tickets and deliver TV ratings no matter where we go.

Miami wouldn't turn down the SEC.  I guarantee that.

[smazza]

no one would turn down sec except teams west of mississippi

[usf97]

Again I love the reasoning here for SEC expansion:

For the fun of it, let's say the Big Ten becomes the Big 16 and adds Notre Dame, Louisville, West Virginia, Pitt and Cincinnati. (There are other possible variations, obviously, but let's stick with these teams just because, geographically, it makes for some interesting rivalries.) As you can plainly see, this would be a mega-conference that would trump even the SEC.

Would the SEC stand pat and allow itself to fall behind the new Big 16? That doesn't seem very SECish, if you ask me. The SEC (God bless Roy Kramer and Mike Slive) enjoys being the top dog of college football. Fans demand it. Alumni demand it. Heck, even politicians demand it. Ahh, politics. That's where this whole conference-expansion speculation gets really interesting.

SO now the SEC is just going to expand due to the PRIDE of it's fanbase?!?

Makes no sense. I agree with Hurricane Mutiny in that this is ALL about the money but the SEC doesn't need to expand to MAXIMIZE it's TV value. It already has. See this. http://blogs.tampabay.com/gators/2008/08/sec-espn-agree.html Since that is the route the SEC has chosen, do you really see them ripping up this "Milestone" contract. Add more teams and gamble they can get a better deal?

[Hurricane Mutiny]

Again I love the reasoning here for SEC expansion:

For the fun of it, let's say the Big Ten becomes the Big 16 and adds Notre Dame, Louisville, West Virginia, Pitt and Cincinnati. (There are other possible variations, obviously, but let's stick with these teams just because, geographically, it makes for some interesting rivalries.) As you can plainly see, this would be a mega-conference that would trump even the SEC.

Would the SEC stand pat and allow itself to fall behind the new Big 16? That doesn't seem very SECish, if you ask me. The SEC (God bless Roy Kramer and Mike Slive) enjoys being the top dog of college football. Fans demand it. Alumni demand it. Heck, even politicians demand it. Ahh, politics. That's where this whole conference-expansion speculation gets really interesting.

SO now the SEC is just going to expand due to the PRIDE of it's fanbase?!?

Makes no sense. I agree with Hurricane Mutiny in that this is ALL about the money but the SEC doesn't need to expand to MAXIMIZE it's TV value. It already has. See this. http://blogs.tampabay.com/gators/2008/08/sec-espn-agree.html Since that is the route the SEC has chosen, do you really see them ripping up this "Milestone" contract. Add more teams and gamble they can get a better deal?

Brown Bull, while the SEC might not need the "immediate" expansion for this particular TV contract, there is still cable channel money to be made.  Also, the fear of remaining the most desirable sports conference (and highest earning) would be powerful.  Does the SEC sit on its hands as everyone else gets bigger?  Does the SEC wait until someone signs a TV deal that eclipses theirs?

The SEC wouldn't need to tear up the old contract.  If they added 4 teams, they could easily announce a jaw-dropping "extension".  I agree, the whole "conference pride" angle is a bit overblown, but I do believe the SEC would react in a "how can we regain the lead" manner.

There were some rumblings today that the SEC would want to add "slam-dunk teams" if they went to 16, which is why an FSU/UM pairing or a Texas/aTm pairing make so much sense.  Clemson and GaTech are also in the mix, especially due to their histories in the SEC.

[South_Florida_Flip]

The article lost some cred when it said Louisville, WVU and UC to the Big 10.  One reason why only select schools appear on Big 10 list is because it has to do with an academic group which all Big 10 members belong as well as the potential candidates.  Perhaps the writer of the article is not aware of this.  With that being said the landscape would be different because WVU, UL and UC would have to go elsewhere

I thought I saw an article last week that said if the Big 10 went to 16 teams, the UL, WVU, UC and USF would be the most likely candidates to go into the ACC.