If the B1G decides not to expand, then the P3 will drive on; perhaps they’ll add some ACC schools.
If aTm joins the B1G, same deal.
Not sure what your point is.
Won’t affect UH at all.
because they HAVEN’T disintegrated and adding 3 new schools helped ensure they wouldn’t because they had the majority votes over the 2-4 disgruntled schools.
The Big 12 was down to 8 and they never disintegrated
And no, you weren’t merely “brainstorming.”
You were ADVOCATING for the PAC over the Big 12, even claiming that the PAC was better because the Big 12 was “unstable.”
Boy, was that ever WRONG!!!
The EXACT OPPOSITE was true.
Why can’t you simply admit that you were 100% WRONG on that (unless OPPOSITE day was in effect), and take the L?
I think I’ve told you that not being able/willing to admit when you are wrong/debunked/disproven, as you were on that, is NOT a good look.
As for your first point…STAY TUNED!!! If four teams leave (which is widely rumored), then ESPN can renegotiate its contract, and it’ll almost certainly be for LESS given the loss of the most valuable brands. Adding Califord and SMU will NOT prevent that.
As for your second point, the Big 12 had four brands available that made for good expansion. They were the ONLY such G5 brands. That’s it. No other G5s out there were/are truly P5 worthy. That’s why SMU didn’t get any money for joining the ACC.
The ACC now, by contrast, could be in the same situation that the PAC admitted it was in when it lost USC and UCLA. The PAC admitted that there were NO viable expansion candidates out there that could make up for that.
The ACC will be in the same boat WHEN (not if) its big brands leave.
There likewise won’t be any viable expansion candidates. If they try to add schools anyway (which they might), then they won’t improve as a conference and will not have value comparable to the P3.
That’s why I say…the SMU move was NOT brilliant. It simply spurred on the departure of the ACC’s biggest brands and now puts them in a position to be stuck in a conference which won’t be anywhere close to the P3 in value once all the dust settles.
Not sure what you think is “brilliant” about that.
As for nobody knowing what’s going to happen, AGAIN, for the BILLIONTH…KILLIONTH time, no one knows for sure what’s going to happen…BUT MOST PEOPLE HAVE A PRETTY GOOD IDEA.
No one knew for sure that the PAC would disintegrate and the four corners schools go to the Big 12…BUT MOST PEOPLE HAD A PRETTY GOOD IDEA that that’s exactly what was going to happen after USC and UCLA left…and were already predicting that it would happen here and elsewhere.
And ya know what? It happened.
Same for the ACC. Is there a minute chance that FSU and Clemson won’t leave? Perhaps. But most people are betting against it, and wisely so.
Certainly the ACC are going to lose it’s most important schools and likely lose prestige and TV revenue. But the ACC is going to survive. The 8 or 9 members left after raids will still be a viable P4 conference and i bet their champ still gets an auto spot in playoffs. SMUs move was one they HAD to make to retain any semblance of big time sports. Their alternatives were truly terrible. SMU gets to be in a league with old time power schools like Boston College, Wake Forest, Syracuse and Georgia Tech and still play big time football and basketball. I think they did a good job…
1 Like
Geography.
Whatever conference UT is in won’t affect the University of Texas.
They could be in the Big 12, PAC12, ACC, SEC or B1G, and they will continue to get the same donor support, media support, academic rankings, and overall media market buy-in.
The B1G as a conference would benefit more from UT being a member than it would benefit UT.
If that makes sense
They’ll still be a viable conference, and may even add more schools.
But whether they’ll still be considered a “power” conference is perhaps still TBD.
Adding the UConns, Memphises, and Tulanes of this world won’t necessarily boost their prestige in football.
They certainly won’t add much monetary value.
Perhaps they could retain autonomy status, if nothing else, but money and prestige-wide, they’ll be well behind the P3.
The future of the ACC is not up to the ACC. It’s up to ESPN.
Fact of the matter is, ESPN has yet to extend their media option with the ACC. If FSU and Clemson end up leaving (along with UNC), then the ACC won’t be able to extend their deal at it’s current strucutre. ESPN will either not offer any deal at all, or they will offer them a deal that’s much lower due to their best brands being out.
Miami, Louisville, NC State, Virginia Tech, Duke, etc… are not going to accept that.
The best remaining schools will make more money by joining the Big 12, and because the ACC would be left without a media deal, the GOR would automatically be voided without any exit penalties.
So, perhaps the ACC brand will survive (just like the PAC#), but the conference will not be an autonomy/power conference. There are no teams in the G5 that will help the ACC remain a power conference enough to entice Miami or Louisville to stay.\
edit: @uhlaw97 pretty much repeating what uhlaw said above
1 Like
This guy realigns!
~Russfest
1 Like
This is Greg Swaim clickbait. It would have been nice to not be in a conference with those people, but there is absolutely no way that A&M pulls the plug on SEC membership. Joining the SEC is the best - non academic - thing to ever happen to A&M other than Rudder overruling the regents to allow women in 1962.