FSU vs The ACC

[OmahaCuse]

Excellent summation of Nebraska's position in the B1G. The only positive thing they accomplished was getting away from Texas.

And made a extra 60M a year

 

[TexanMark]

FSU is screwed. Clemson better hope they have a great season or they will go back to being a small cow town

Clemson has a significant portion of their fanbase just as insecure and psycho as FSU. I wonder if they regret getting involved?

 

[TexanMark]

Markets don’t mean nearly as much in today’s sports media landscape, where acquiring streaming service subscribers is priority one. It’s much more about brands now. And FSU is, and likely will always be, a farrrr bigger brand than UCF.

Not necessarily

If Orlando doesn't get an NFL team I can see UCF evolving. FSU is such a pain to get to. It might take 20 more years but UCF has really come on since joining the AAC and now the Big 12.

The ACC's problem is 4 teams in NC. No state should have more than 2 save for mega states like CA, TX and FL.

Drop WF and add UCF and Utah. Cincy and WVU should be looked at too.

 

[TexanMark]

This is why UConn is a no brainer to the ACC that people seem to not understand.

Give them a ND deal and see if they can build FB.

The problem is...can Syracuse, BC and Pitt afford losing some recruits to Yukon in FB?

 

[baggerbob]

Excellent summation of Nebraska's position in the B1G. The only positive thing they accomplished was getting away from Texas.

And they lost their entire recruiting grounds by going to the Big.

 

[baggerbob]

Give them a ND deal and see if they can build FB.

The problem is...can Syracuse, BC and Pitt afford losing some recruits to Yukon in FB?

Yes the more good teams in the Northeast, will let us shut others out, like the Big, and Big 12.

 

[Scooch]

Not necessarily

If Orlando doesn't get an NFL team I can see UCF evolving. FSU is such a pain to get to. It might take 20 more years but UCF has really come on since joining the AAC and now the Big 12.

The ACC's problem is 4 teams in NC. No state should have more than 2 save for mega states like CA, TX and FL.

Drop WF and add UCF and Utah. Cincy and WVU should be looked at too.

I'd suggest that the ACC's problem is that it kinda sucks at football. A 17 team conference needs to be able to put 5-6 teams in the top 25, and at least 2 in the top 10, consistently. They really need to be nabbing at least 3 playoff spots every year.

The ACC has been either FSU or Clemson and the 13 dwarves for wayyyy too long.

 

[WoadBlue]

Give them a ND deal and see if they can build FB.

The problem is...can Syracuse, BC and Pitt afford losing some recruits to Yukon in FB?

The answer to your question is: NO, in thunder!. Nor any, at all, TV fans.

The simple fact is that the northeast produces far too few top football recruits and far too few hardcore fans of CFB for the region to be host of a Major conference for football. That is the reason that BE football was never going to make it. For there t have been any chance, PSU had to be in the league, and even then BRE+|E football would have required teams from south of the Mason-Dixon line (WVU, VT, Miami, USF, Louisville, etc.) and/ or teams from the midwest (Cincy). What the northeast can do in basketball cannot be replicated in football for those 2 reasons.

And that also then necessarily means that the fewer schools packed in northeastern states that play Major college football, the better for those that do.

 

[WoadBlue]

I'd suggest that the ACC's problem is that it kinda sucks at football. A 17 team conference needs to be able to put 5-6 teams in the top 25, and at least 2 in the top 10, consistently. They really need to be nabbing at least 3 playoff spots every year.

The ACC has been either FSU or Clemson and the 13 dwarves for wayyyy too long.

And yet we have sen several years diuring which the 14 team ACC has had 10 bowl teams. That is far from sucking.

What ACC football has had is super depth with few teams climbing above the depth to have a top 10 ranking. You cannot undo that problem without access to more top level recruits. You can get that only by dropping teams in areas with very poor recruiting and in over saturated states. You also are hurt by having too many small private schools.

You want to make a couple moves that can help ACC football get deeper over the next decade? Then I say drop BC and Wake, and replace with Cincinnati (that TV market turns out at last as many D1 football recruits as NY and all New England combined) and perhaps another FL or TX schools. Also helping is adding flagship and/or land grant teams with recent Major Bowl success (think Utah) and any flagship or land grant team with a red hot rivalry with ACC members (WVU, for example).

 

[orlandoorange]

22M?

All in all IMO Miami is the better choice. The B18 has enough brands and most of their fanbases are larger and more loyal than that of FSU. They don't need FSU. They need to be in Florida and adding a school in South Alabama in the end isn't worth it IMO.

Miami doesn't have that large of a following statewide and hasn't done much for some time.

I get your point about location, but statewide you're a gator or a nole.

 

[baggerbob]

And yet we have sen several years diuring which the 14 team ACC has had 10 bowl teams. That is far from sucking.

What ACC football has had is super depth with few teams climbing above the depth to have a top 10 ranking. You cannot undo that problem without access to more top level recruits. You can get that only by dropping teams in areas with very poor recruiting and in over saturated states. You also are hurt by having too many small private schools.

You want to make a couple moves that can help ACC football get deeper over the next decade? Then I say drop BC and Wake, and replace with Cincinnati (that TV market turns out at last as many D1 football recruits as NY and all New England combined) and perhaps another FL or TX schools. Also helping is adding flagship and/or land grant teams with recent Major Bowl success (think Utah) and any flagship or land grant team with a red hot rivalry with ACC members (WVU, for example).

Cincinnati, and West Virginia would be good adds, but Unless Miami, Virginia Tech, and Syracuse get back in the top 10 to 20 range consistently the league is going nowhere.

 

[Cusester]

The Acc needs to develop a plan for when the Big 12’s grant of rights expires and sell that plan to Clemson and the traitors At FSU. Be proactive!!!

 

[Scooch]

And yet we have sen several years diuring which the 14 team ACC has had 10 bowl teams. That is far from sucking.

What ACC football has had is super depth with few teams climbing above the depth to have a top 10 ranking. You cannot undo that problem without access to more top level recruits. You can get that only by dropping teams in areas with very poor recruiting and in over saturated states. You also are hurt by having too many small private schools.

You want to make a couple moves that can help ACC football get deeper over the next decade? Then I say drop BC and Wake, and replace with Cincinnati (that TV market turns out at last as many D1 football recruits as NY and all New England combined) and perhaps another FL or TX schools. Also helping is adding flagship and/or land grant teams with recent Major Bowl success (think Utah) and any flagship or land grant team with a red hot rivalry with ACC members (WVU, for example).

10 bowl games? Seriously? In an age when 6-6 gets you into a bowl? That’s hardly an accomplishment.

Also, we’re not solving a thing by picking off low hanging fruit like BC and Wake.

Miami, FSU, VaTech, Clemson… these were supposed to be the ACC’s standard bearers. The teams perennially competing for the top 10, and national title shots. Two of them have done that. It’s not enough.

Cuse, Pitt, UNC, Louisville, GaTech, NC State… these were not just supposed to be depth, but programs that should be in the top 25 often, and playing very meaningful games late in the season. That has happened far too infrequently.

The whole conference has been an utter disappointment for years.

 

[TexanMark]

Cuse very much is part of the blame. We have been wandering in the wilderness since 2002 with just one quick uptick and a few other decent teams.

The next few years could decide the program's direction. P3 or P4 or recast as a mid major. We better average 40K+ this year.

 

[gmoney44]

Its n

It's not considered 4th by the Networks.
The ACC is going to be fine. It's the 12 that needs to worry when their contract is up.

I don’t think they need to worry at all. They have no one left that anyone wants.

 

[Scooch]

Cuse very much is part of the blame. We have been wandering in the wilderness since 2002 with just one quick uptick and a few other decent teams.

The next few years could decide the program's direction. P3 or P4 or recast as a mid major. We better average 40K+ this year.

Agree completely.

I think it’s quite possible that we end up with 2 1/2 power conferences. A bigger Big Ten and SEC, and then a best of the rest that is formed out of the Big 12 (under a different name). My hunch is the latter will be our landing spot eventually, after half the current ACC goes elsewhere.

 

[baggerbob]

Cuse very much is part of the blame. We have been wandering in the wilderness since 2002 with just one quick uptick and a few other decent teams.

The next few years could decide the program's direction. P3 or P4 or recast as a mid major. We better average 40K+ this year.

Glad to see someone agree with me, we were supposed to be one of the 5 teams consistently in the top 10, to 20 range, and haven't done our job.

 

[Scooch]

Glad to see someone agree with me, we were supposed to be one of the 5 teams consistently in the top 10, to 20 range, and haven't done our job.

That may be overstating it somewhat. When it was announced that we were joining the ACC the 2012 season hadn’t even happened yet. At that point we hadn’t been ranked at all in 10 years.

The ACC thought they were getting a top 10 hoops program (they did… for one season) and a once good football program that had fallen on hard times. They knew we had potential, but being consistently in the top 20 hadnt happened in quite a while.

That being said, I do agree that the conference thought we’d be a helluva lot better than what they got.

 

[longtimefan]

That may be overstating it somewhat. When it was announced that we were joining the ACC the 2012 season hadn’t even happened yet. At that point we hadn’t been ranked at all in 10 years.

The ACC thought they were getting a top 10 hoops program (they did… for one season) and a once good football program that had fallen on hard times. They knew we had potential, but being consistently in the top 20 hadnt happened in quite a while.

That being said, I do agree that the conference thought we’d be a helluva lot better than what they got.

Remember, the invitation of 2012 was to some extent a makeup for the screw job of 2003. The marquee SU programs were both much better at that time.

 

[kcsu]

Agree completely.

I think it’s quite possible that we end up with 2 1/2 power conferences. A bigger Big Ten and SEC, and then a best of the rest that is formed out of the Big 12 (under a different name). My hunch is the latter will be our landing spot eventually, after half the current ACC goes elsewhere.

I dont think that will happen. I actually think that the ACC will poach some 12 teams when their GOR is up in a few years

 

[baggerbob]

I dont think that will happen. I actually think that the ACC will poach some 12 teams when their GOR is up in a few years

Another problem the ACC has always had is they are perceived as a Basketball Conference. That's why leaving everything in North Carolina was always a bad idea.
Outsiders look at North Carolina, NC St, Duke, and Wake Forest as basketball schools with no real history in football.
The Schools with history, are Miami, FSU, Clemson, Virginia Tech, Georgia Tech, Syracuse, and Pittsburgh.
But people first think of Where the conference is located, and basketball comes as their first thought.

 

[IthacaMatt]

You just have to look at Penn St. They used to compete for National Championships, and were the beast of the east.
Now they are the 3rd best team in their division.

And, in fact they are probably one of more successful teams who have switched conferences.

 

[IthacaMatt]

Not only has college ignored it ("socialism"), but they've actively moved in the opposite direction. I have zero optimism that they'll adopt more of that philosophy. It's all greed and selfishness all the time.

Kind of like America, sadly.

 

[Hoo's That]

Agree completely.

I think it’s quite possible that we end up with 2 1/2 power conferences. A bigger Big Ten and SEC, and then a best of the rest that is formed out of the Big 12 (under a different name). My hunch is the latter will be our landing spot eventually, after half the current ACC goes elsewhere.

The creation of the two ultraconferences will more likely (IMO) involve subtracting from and not adding to. The B1G and SEC will get rid of who they consider their dead wood, and it won't be limited to Northwestern and Vanderbilt.

 

[dan7800]

The creation of the two ultraconferences will more likely (IMO) involve subtracting from and not adding to. The B1G and SEC will get rid of who they consider their dead wood, and it won't be limited to Northwestern and Vanderbilt.

Would that even be realistically possible? Additionally, some of the deadwood schools such as Rutgers, Northwestern, Vanderbilt etc... are highly ranked academically