Reply to thread

Message

[QUOTE="WoadBlue, post: 4688340, member: 1145"]
There is  a very strong correlation between a league's average attendance and that league's consistent TV viewing audience. And the networks pay for those TV viewers. That means that you are gambling foolishly when you add schools with poor attendance. That is the reason I was screaming HELL NO! about the ACC adding BC. WE already had Wake and Dook; adding BC was like daring the football goods to teach us a lesson.

Obviously WVU would be less than thrilled about the ACC if FSU and/or Clemson and/or UNC and/or VT were leaving. But surely WVU would make its fans much happier by plating ACC schools. WVU fans live in nice numbers in PA, OH, MD, VA, NC, and even GA and FL. They would help sell out tickets all over the ACC (except Boston).

What I doubt is that ESPN would pay much beyond what we now get per team to just add WVU to have 15 football members and 16 for hoops. I believe ESPN would more likely suggest that WVU could be a replacement for Wake or BC, and that trade might be worth something.

USF is more intriguing now that it (A) has AAU status and (B) is building an on-campus football stadium. All those USF alums could see ACC membership as ideal for the university's rise in academic stature and respond with a huge increase in fan support for the Bulls.

I am not ready to accept that the BT and SEC get to destroy CFB by creating a duopoly in terms of money. I think the ACC can survive at full strength, but it may take becoming cut throat. That's what happens when you allow Gordon Gekkos to take over college sports.
[/QUOTE]

Verification

What is a Syracuse fan's favorite color?