Are we still on the outside looking in?

[OrangeXtreme]

And if the ACC makes a deal with the Big East they are nuts. I would rather the ACC champ play the #3 or #4 SEC team than the #1 Big East team. The Big East is a DEAD football conference with no draws anymore. That game will get NO coverage. Draw NO TV ratings. And if you lose then you lose all respect and if you win you gain nothing because you are supposed to beat a bad BE team. At least if you lose to the #3 or #4 SEC team you are losing to a real team from a real conference. And it might be a 1 or 2 loss team. The BE champ might have 3 or 4 losses!!!

If I'm the Orange Bowl, do I want a BE team that doesn't travel ... or an SEC team that will travel.

 

[BlazeOrange]

You're right...but word on the street is that this will be RPI based and the ACC's sos will put teams at a severe disadvantage to make the playoffs. I'm not saying it will never happen. Just how in the previous system it wasn't impossible for a Big East team to win a NC. However, it won't happen often and the ACC will be considered a lesser football conference while the other four are considered the majors.

The ACC can't compete with the SEC or B1G on strength of schedule, but shouldn't be too far apart from the Pac-12 or Big-12 (unless there are defections). Each has a couple of elite teams, a couple who might occasionally be high ranked, a pack, and a doormat.

 

[Stern]

If I'm the Orange Bowl, do I want a BE team that doesn't travel ... or an SEC team that will travel.

Exactly.

Have an ACC Champ that doesn't make it in the playoff (lets say for an example VT or FSU) vs the BE champ, lets say SMU or Rutgers, or UCONN. Big TV draw there with about 3% of the nation watching and caring about that game.

OR have VT or FSU vs the #3 or #4 SEC team which in a given year could be Auburn, Florida, Arkansas, Tennessee.

Hmm, tough choice (NOT)

 

[BlazeOrange]

If I'm the Orange Bowl, do I want a BE team that doesn't travel ... or an SEC team that will travel.

How sure are we that the Orange Bowl will stick with the ACC - contract in hand sure or logical/wishful thinking sure?
As mentioned above, the #3 or #4 SEC team would be one of Alabama, LSU, Auburn, Florida, Georgia, etc.
However, the #3 or #4 B1G team would be one of Ohio State, Michigan, Nebraska, Penn State.
Any of those schools would bring more fans than all but a couple of the potential ACC champions. And all would bring more national interest.

The Fiesta could then counter with a less attractive but more local Big-12 vs. Pac-12 matchup.

 

[cusenole9]

The ACC can't compete with the SEC or B1G on strength of schedule, but shouldn't be too far apart from the Pac-12 or Big-12 (unless there are defections). Each has a couple of elite teams, a couple who might occasionally be high ranked, a pack, and a doormat.

It's the fact that this is going to blow the revenue gap further apart that is discouraging. I agree that these bowl games are meaningless...except for that one important factor, $.

 

[Don]

well the way I see it the real big loser today is Louiville and any hopes they have a joining the big 12. I think the big 12 and sec now have absolutley no reason to expand any further. Its been said Texas does not favor anymore teams anyway but now i think they for sure wont. Look Texas and Oklahoma play early in the year and the team who has one loss can work their way back into the top four or five easy. If say a no loss Texas team has to play a one loss Oklahoma team for a championship game one of them may knock the other out of a chance to have two teams playing in a 4 team BCS playoff. The worst thing that happens is one of them goes to the BCS and the other play in a lucrative new years bowl game on New years day. Why in the world would you want a championship game? so why in the world would you want to split the pot anymore? I think with this agreement Texas and its allies will fight even harder against more teams and a championship game. Now what team would want to leave the big eight?

As for the SEC what team could make them better? why split there pot anymore? they now have 2 maybe three teams playing every year after New Years.

I don't think the SEC or for sure the Big 12 would not have any need to expand further it adds nothing for them and could hurt them more in a possible BCS 4 team playoff.

 

[rrlbees]

The news here isn't that the SEC is going to play a Big12 team in a bowl. It's that the 2 conferences are working together because they, along with the Big10 and Pac10, feel they are the power conferences and will call the shots. Power and money talk.

Sent from my DROIDX using Tapatalk 2

 

[sdhusky]

i don't think we are on the outside of anything until we start winning. the acc is a good enough platform to be nationally relevant for anybody that is in it. we have increased our revenue, now is time to win games, period.

Exactly. Winning cures all ills. I think its a bit premature to worry about being shut out of a national championship game.

 

[omniorange]

The news here isn't that the SEC is going to play a Big12 team in a bowl. It's that the 2 conferences are working together because they, along with the Big10 and Pac10, feel they are the power conferences and will call the shots. Power and money talk.

Sent from my DROIDX using Tapatalk 2

Exactly, IF the ACC Armageddon scenario plays itself out, congrats to the Big 12.

But just as the Rose doesn't make the Pac on equal footing with the SEC or the BiG, neither does this bowl game make the Big 12 on the same footing either.

They will still need powerhouse additions to that league to protect against UT and OU having teams like they did in the 90s the same way the ACC needed protection against Miami and FSU tanking at the same time in the 00s.

Cheers,
Neil

 

[Fjoinkay]

In football the ACC has always been lesser than those conferences. Always. That's what has annoyed me to no end about the way ESPN treated the Big East in comparison to the ACC over the past several years.

Am I glad SU switched to the ACC? Yes, of course because of the circumstances and the money. But I wish the circumstances had been different and the money.

 

[omniorange]

In football the ACC has always been lesser than those conferences. Always. That's what has annoyed me to no end about the way ESPN treated the Big East in comparison to the ACC over the past several years.

Am I glad SU switched to the ACC? Yes, of course because of the circumstances and the money. But I wish the circumstances had been different and the money.

Well for the 90s and early 00s, the ACC was regarded as FSU and the 8 dwarves and the Big East was regarded as Miami and the 7 dwarves. When ACC expansion took place back in 2003, who knew that the conference would never get a great FSU and a great Miami squad in the same year?

Had that happened (with both playing like they had in the 90s and early 00s), the ACC would have been considered superior to the Pac. Just bad luck that both programs went into a funk at the same time. One only has to go back to the 90s to see a similar slide by both Texas and Oklahoma. Luckily, they had Nebraska and Colorado to carry the league during that time frame. It's why we know the sport is cyclical. FSU and Miami will bounce back. So will Pitt and SU as next level down teams.

Cheers,
Neil

 

[All4SU]

Well for the 90s and early 00s, the ACC was regarded as FSU and the 8 dwarves and the Big East was regarded as Miami and the 7 dwarves. When ACC expansion took place back in 2003, who knew that the conference would never get a great FSU and a great Miami squad in the same year?

Had that happened (with both playing like they had in the 90s and early 00s), the ACC would have been considered superior to the Pac. Just bad luck that both programs went into a funk at the same time. One only has to go back to the 90s to see a similar slide by both Texas and Oklahoma. Luckily, they had Nebraska and Colorado to carry the league during that time frame. It's why we know the sport is cyclical. FSU and Miami will bounce back. So will Pitt and SU as next level down teams.

Cheers,
Neil

Right. And so many people forget how cyclical things are. They think what happened in the last 5 years is the way things always will be.

 

[Fjoinkay]

Clemson won a national championship. FSU was a powerhouse program, and I'm shocked they have yet to return to top tier status. But the ACC has never been a power football conference. The ACC raided the BE so that they could reach that status and it backfired in part because FSU has continued to struggle and in part because Miami has continued to struggle. Virginia Tech has dominated the ACC since the transfer. But again, the ACC has never been a better football conference than the SEC, B1G, Big 12 and probably the Pac 12 at least not in my lifetime.

 

[omniorange]

Clemson won a national championship. FSU was a powerhouse program, and I'm shocked they have yet to return to top tier status. But the ACC has never been a power football conference. The ACC raided the BE so that they could reach that status and it backfired in part because FSU has continued to struggle and in part because Miami has continued to struggle. Virginia Tech has dominated the ACC since the transfer. But again, the ACC has never been a better football conference than the SEC, B1G, Big 12 and probably the Pac 12 at least not in my lifetime.

Not disagreeing with that, but the main reason why that is the case is because the Big 12 (which has only been in existence since 1996) had Nebraska in addition to Colorado and K-State pick up the slack when UT and OU struggled mightily in the 90s. A case could be made that FSU and Miami have been better together than UT and OU during their initial joining together. Now who picks up the slack if they can't get FSU and Clemson?

Who's to say that they won't stumble again or that Miami and FSU won't rise again? If no ACC teams leave, in a decade's time who is willing to bet the Big 12 will still be viewed as a stronger football conference than the ACC? It's all a feeling out process and I believe the pendulum is starting to swing in the ACC's direction if they can survive the next two years without losing any teams.

Cheers,
Neil