To put it rather bluntly, strip away Mississippi and the SEC has a lot more academic chops, possibly enough to make a UNC, UVA, transition reasonable.

(10-11-2013 12:18 PM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  To put it rather bluntly, strip away Mississippi and the SEC has a lot more academic chops, possibly enough to make a UNC, UVA, transition reasonable.

The thing is that UNC and UVA are very much "wine and cheese" schools as a whole, if you know what I mean. Even the top academic schools in the SEC outside of Vandy (i.e. Florida, Texas A&M) would never be characterized as wine and cheese schools. You can tell the difference immediately walking around either of those campuses.

I'm as big of a Big Ten guy as anyone, yet I have been constantly telling people for the past 3 years that the ACC is stronger than what people give them credit for. They have the combo of culture and academics that university presidents in that conference love. That's not to say that individual schools wouldn't have to adjust if the money gap truly becomes insurmountable, but it's a lot higher threshold than many fans think.

(10-11-2013 12:24 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  

(10-11-2013 12:18 PM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  To put it rather bluntly, strip away Mississippi and the SEC has a lot more academic chops, possibly enough to make a UNC, UVA, transition reasonable.

The thing is that UNC and UVA are very much "wine and cheese" schools as a whole, if you know what I mean. Even the top academic schools in the SEC outside of Vandy (i.e. Florida, Texas A&M) would never be characterized as wine and cheese schools. You can tell the difference immediately walking around either of those campuses.

I'm as big of a Big Ten guy as anyone, yet I have been constantly telling people for the past 3 years that the ACC is stronger than what people give them credit for. They have the combo of culture and academics that university presidents in that conference love. That's not to say that individual schools wouldn't have to adjust if the money gap truly becomes insurmountable, but it's a lot higher threshold than many fans think.

Fair point but I think you're alluding to more of a gap in culture than anything, especially in regards to UVA.

I disagree in terms of UNC. Having been to both schools and seen a lot of each I'd have to say UNC and UA are strikingly similar in the students, much of the administration, and much of what gives the school it's identity. The only difference is the rankings, with UA being in the 70s or so.

(10-11-2013 11:28 AM)USAFMEDIC Wrote:  

(10-11-2013 09:55 AM)bluesox Wrote:  The key to the ACC life is the alliance of the 6 Virginia and North Carolina school's. IF those school's stick together its almost impossible to crack the acc. The sec could with overlap programs but that isn't who they want. Same thing with the big 10 and maybe pitt, syracuse, bc, etc. The only game changer that might have cracked the acc would be big 10 taking FSU. YEt, if the 6 pack of car/va school's still stuck together, the acc is fine even with fsu leaving...its really the 4 pack of uva, va tech, unc and duke. Those school's can build a nice eastern league post any sec or big 10 moves.

Sorry but those four don't make the ABC Game of the Week. Without Clemson and FSU, the conference is AAC #2...

Even without FSU and Clemson, the ACC still has currently ranked #8 Louisville and #13/14 Miami - both undefeated - as well as #24/25 VA Tech and their scheduling arrangement with Notre Dame, which figures into TV games. They also have the option of adding Cincinnati to replace any departing members, which has become almost a perennial top 25 team in the past 6 or 7 years. The key is Miami. If they can engineer a sustained resurgence of their program, the ACC has enough to remain a major player.

As much as football has been the driver in this, it's also impossible to have a conversation about the ACC without including their basketball which is both the best and the most lucrative in the country - especially with the additions of Louisville, Syracuse, etc. More than any other conference in the country, ACC basketball is a big time money and makes the conference as a whole highly desirable to any network.

(10-11-2013 12:29 PM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  

(10-11-2013 12:24 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  

(10-11-2013 12:18 PM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  To put it rather bluntly, strip away Mississippi and the SEC has a lot more academic chops, possibly enough to make a UNC, UVA, transition reasonable.

The thing is that UNC and UVA are very much "wine and cheese" schools as a whole, if you know what I mean. Even the top academic schools in the SEC outside of Vandy (i.e. Florida, Texas A&M) would never be characterized as wine and cheese schools. You can tell the difference immediately walking around either of those campuses.

I'm as big of a Big Ten guy as anyone, yet I have been constantly telling people for the past 3 years that the ACC is stronger than what people give them credit for. They have the combo of culture and academics that university presidents in that conference love. That's not to say that individual schools wouldn't have to adjust if the money gap truly becomes insurmountable, but it's a lot higher threshold than many fans think.

Fair point but I think you're alluding to more of a gap in culture than anything, especially in regards to UVA.

I disagree in terms of UNC. Having been to both schools and seen a lot of each I'd have to say UNC and UA are strikingly similar in the students, much of the administration, and much of what gives the school it's identity. The only difference is the rankings, with UA being in the 70s or so.

If a UNC fan or administrator heard you say that they might off themselves.

Probably not, when I was in undergrad a number of the TAs were from UNC. The reason was that the two schools have very close ties in that department. Likewise, I had several friends who were at UA from UNC for masters and straight-to PhD programs in history.

If the 6 va/nc school's stick together that really limits who the big 10, sec, or big 12 can snap up from the acc. I don't think any school leaves the acc for the big 12 as a first strike, so that league is off the table. If you go with the premise the big 10 and sec won't expand past 16 than whatever is left in the acc is still a good league. I don't see the sec taking 2 from clemson, ga tech, fsu and miami, so really they aren't expanding as a 1st strike either. Thus, if the 6 pack of va/nc school's stick together, the only league that can crack the acc is the big 10 as a first strike. Who could the pick up that they would want? bc, cuse, or pitt? acc those are replace with uconn and cincy + don't think the big 10 would snap 2 of those school's up. The big 10 wouldn't want clemson so 2 from ga tech, fsu and miami, possible but it creates an island.

(10-11-2013 12:24 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  

(10-11-2013 12:18 PM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  To put it rather bluntly, strip away Mississippi and the SEC has a lot more academic chops, possibly enough to make a UNC, UVA, transition reasonable.

The thing is that UNC and UVA are very much "wine and cheese" schools as a whole, if you know what I mean. Even the top academic schools in the SEC outside of Vandy (i.e. Florida, Texas A&M) would never be characterized as wine and cheese schools. You can tell the difference immediately walking around either of those campuses.

I'm as big of a Big Ten guy as anyone, yet I have been constantly telling people for the past 3 years that the ACC is stronger than what people give them credit for. They have the combo of culture and academics that university presidents in that conference love. That's not to say that individual schools wouldn't have to adjust if the money gap truly becomes insurmountable, but it's a lot higher threshold than many fans think.

I agree wholeheartedly with this and it is exactly the reason WVU was never invited to the party. And is took political shenanigans to get VT in.

(10-11-2013 12:15 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  

(10-11-2013 11:25 AM)bigblueblindness Wrote:  Good point, Wedge. Cunningham is a miracle worker at keeping UNC out of a negative spotlight and in a power of position. As it pertains to the recent academic scandals at UNC, he has taken what Ohio State did during the Tressel/Smith/Gee debacle and done the exact opposite. I think the SEC has done a pretty good job of knowing what it is, and UNC fits in on many levels. Believe me, every state and campus has important people that do not fit the stereotypical SEC mold... just do a quick history read on Mike Slive. When I think UNC, the idea of joining and competing against South Carolina, Georgia, Florida, Auburn, Tennessee, and Kentucky does not seem unnatural, especially if UVA were to join that mix.

Once again, though, that's just looking at it from a sports perspective. From an academic and institutional perspective, UVA and UNC are much more like Big Ten schools. (And yes, no matter what football-focused fans want to believe, academic prestige absolutely matters here.) That's really the advantage that the ACC has in retaining both of those schools (particularly UNC) - it's still Southern-based in culture but has the requisite academic prestige. The ACC fits UNC both in terms of athletic culture and academic prestige, whereas they'd be giving up on one of those fronts in either the Big Ten and SEC. That's a pretty powerful combo no matter how much money either the Big Ten or SEC could throw at UNC, not to mention the disproportionate power and influence that UNC has in the ACC that could never be replicated anywhere else. It's a very similar situation as Texas (another high-minded academic institution that wants control even more than money).

Frank, I would have agreed with you on the ACC being as good as possible fit for UNC and UVA athletically and academically until they agreed to add Louisville. I am not discounting Louisville at all as a powerful add, but the ACC can not longer trumpet the high academics standards card after that add. The SEC does have weak academic links (both happen to be in the same state), but what is being offered is access to the flagship schools to most of the states that are growing most quickly and strongly in population, career opportunities, and educational improvement. All of the SEC schools outside of Mississippi have been making strong gains over the last few decades, and it will continue. Additionally, Virginia and UNC are top 10 public schools out of the 53 in P5, but so is Florida. Georgia and Texas A&M are top 20.

Prior to Louisville, the ACC was undoubtedly the top dog with the B1G in terms of academics. However, the Louisville addition is not a massive issue, but it must be factored into how strongly the ACC really views academic prestige. Is it fair to say that the ACC agreed to drop the "prestige" part of academics in order to seek "strong" as adjectives for both academics and athletics?

I agree that part of UNC's draw to maintaining the ACC is similar to Texas in terms of power.

(10-11-2013 01:50 PM)bigblueblindness Wrote:  

(10-11-2013 12:15 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  

(10-11-2013 11:25 AM)bigblueblindness Wrote:  Good point, Wedge. Cunningham is a miracle worker at keeping UNC out of a negative spotlight and in a power of position. As it pertains to the recent academic scandals at UNC, he has taken what Ohio State did during the Tressel/Smith/Gee debacle and done the exact opposite. I think the SEC has done a pretty good job of knowing what it is, and UNC fits in on many levels. Believe me, every state and campus has important people that do not fit the stereotypical SEC mold... just do a quick history read on Mike Slive. When I think UNC, the idea of joining and competing against South Carolina, Georgia, Florida, Auburn, Tennessee, and Kentucky does not seem unnatural, especially if UVA were to join that mix.

Once again, though, that's just looking at it from a sports perspective. From an academic and institutional perspective, UVA and UNC are much more like Big Ten schools. (And yes, no matter what football-focused fans want to believe, academic prestige absolutely matters here.) That's really the advantage that the ACC has in retaining both of those schools (particularly UNC) - it's still Southern-based in culture but has the requisite academic prestige. The ACC fits UNC both in terms of athletic culture and academic prestige, whereas they'd be giving up on one of those fronts in either the Big Ten and SEC. That's a pretty powerful combo no matter how much money either the Big Ten or SEC could throw at UNC, not to mention the disproportionate power and influence that UNC has in the ACC that could never be replicated anywhere else. It's a very similar situation as Texas (another high-minded academic institution that wants control even more than money).

Frank, I would have agreed with you on the ACC being as good as possible fit for UNC and UVA athletically and academically until they agreed to add Louisville. I am not discounting Louisville at all as a powerful add, but the ACC can not longer trumpet the high academics standards card after that add. The SEC does have weak academic links (both happen to be in the same state), but what is being offered is access to the flagship schools to most of the states that are growing most quickly and strongly in population, career opportunities, and educational improvement. All of the SEC schools outside of Mississippi have been making strong gains over the last few decades, and it will continue. Additionally, Virginia and UNC are top 10 public schools out of the 53 in P5, but so is Florida. Georgia and Texas A&M are top 20.

Prior to Louisville, the ACC was undoubtedly the top dog with the B1G in terms of academics. However, the Louisville addition is not a massive issue, but it must be factored into how strongly the ACC really views academic prestige. Is it fair to say that the ACC agreed to drop the "prestige" part of academics in order to seek "strong" as adjectives for both academics and athletics?

I agree that part of UNC's draw to maintaining the ACC is similar to Texas in terms of power.

Great post, and great point in terms of Louisville.

Louisville does change the dynamic in quite a way since it would be the lowest ranked school even in the SEC.

(10-11-2013 12:24 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  

(10-11-2013 12:18 PM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  To put it rather bluntly, strip away Mississippi and the SEC has a lot more academic chops, possibly enough to make a UNC, UVA, transition reasonable.

The thing is that UNC and UVA are very much "wine and cheese" schools as a whole, if you know what I mean. Even the top academic schools in the SEC outside of Vandy (i.e. Florida, Texas A&M) would never be characterized as wine and cheese schools. You can tell the difference immediately walking around either of those campuses.

I'm as big of a Big Ten guy as anyone, yet I have been constantly telling people for the past 3 years that the ACC is stronger than what people give them credit for. They have the combo of culture and academics that university presidents in that conference love. That's not to say that individual schools wouldn't have to adjust if the money gap truly becomes insurmountable, but it's a lot higher threshold than many fans think.

That's true, Frank. I don't see many wine and cheese schools in the Big 10, though, other than Michigan. To be fair, though, if Georgia, Ohio State, Alabama, Wisconsin, Florida, Penn State, or Clemson football was traditionally as bad as UVA and UNC and had a tradition of giving football a secondary status, the wine and cheese crowd that just wants to rub shoulders would probably be the ones going to those games, too. See: Vanderbilt.

(10-11-2013 01:50 PM)bigblueblindness Wrote:  Is it fair to say that the ACC agreed to drop the "prestige" part of academics in order to seek "strong" as adjectives for both academics and athletics?

Well, there's adding Louisville, but not wanting Johns Hopkins lacrosse is kind of a head-scratcher, too.

(10-11-2013 09:33 AM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  

(10-11-2013 09:26 AM)bigblueblindness Wrote:  Here you go... what most from the SEC have been saying for almost a year:

"Cunningham had no shortage of input. A steady stream of emails from alumni, fans and boosters began on Nov. 20.

The notes came from everywhere: from people who graduated from UNC in the 1960s, and those who graduated in the past few years. Former athletes wrote in. There were Rams Club members. And emails from fans who had no tie to the school other than their allegiance.

One came from an Army major who wrote of how he’d followed UNC athletics throughout deployments in Afghanistan and Iraq. He expressed concern about a conference move and wrote, “I will always love Carolina, but my fervor towards our athletic programs would die a rapid death should we choose to enter the BIG TEN.”

The emails – many coming after UNC fans on the message boards at InsideCarolina.com organized a push to fill Cunningham’s inbox – shared roughly the same sentiment: Lead the Tar Heels out of the crumbling ACC, to a better place. The overwhelming majority of fans preferred moving to the SEC. Among the more than 150 pages of emails that Cunningham received in the 10 days after Maryland’s announcement, only one email favored joining the Big Ten."

Read more here: http://www.charlotteobserver.com/2013/10...rylink=cpy

No one should be shocked that the fans prefer the SEC. What university leaders and academic-types would want could be an entirely different story.

Gee Frank, do you really think any institution moves forward without the support of its alumni, boosters, and fans?

(10-11-2013 02:31 PM)JRsec Wrote:  Gee Frank, do you really think any institution moves forward without the support of its alumni, boosters, and fans?

See Maryland.

(10-11-2013 12:31 PM)Melky Cabrera Wrote:  

(10-11-2013 11:28 AM)USAFMEDIC Wrote:  

(10-11-2013 09:55 AM)bluesox Wrote:  The key to the ACC life is the alliance of the 6 Virginia and North Carolina school's. IF those school's stick together its almost impossible to crack the acc. The sec could with overlap programs but that isn't who they want. Same thing with the big 10 and maybe pitt, syracuse, bc, etc. The only game changer that might have cracked the acc would be big 10 taking FSU. YEt, if the 6 pack of car/va school's still stuck together, the acc is fine even with fsu leaving...its really the 4 pack of uva, va tech, unc and duke. Those school's can build a nice eastern league post any sec or big 10 moves.

Sorry but those four don't make the ABC Game of the Week. Without Clemson and FSU, the conference is AAC #2...

Even without FSU and Clemson, the ACC still has currently ranked #8 Louisville and #13/14 Miami - both undefeated - as well as #24/25 VA Tech and their scheduling arrangement with Notre Dame, which figures into TV games. They also have the option of adding Cincinnati to replace any departing members, which has become almost a perennial top 25 team in the past 6 or 7 years. The key is Miami. If they can engineer a sustained resurgence of their program, the ACC has enough to remain a major player.

As much as football has been the driver in this, it's also impossible to have a conversation about the ACC without including their basketball which is both the best and the most lucrative in the country - especially with the additions of Louisville, Syracuse, etc. More than any other conference in the country, ACC basketball is a big time money and makes the conference as a whole highly desirable to any network.

Melky I understand your point, but there is other data to indicate otherwise. Top football attendance schools in the ACC: 1. Clemson, 2. Florida State, 3. Virginia Tech, and N.C. State is either 4th or 5th.

Most viewed football teams in the ACC: See the above list but include North Carolina. (Now this study was done before Syracuse and Pitt came on board but I don't think it will change the order too much at the top 4 or 5 positions.)

Most profitable athletic departments in the ACC. 1. Clemson, 2. North Carolina, 3. Duke, 4. Florida State, 5. Virginia Tech.

Now given that Virginia Tech's football fortunes sans F.S.U. and Clemson would be dire and that as a football first school that might incite them to leave also it is not unreasonable to say if a conference loses 3 of its top attendance leaders, profitable programs, and most watched programs that is likely to fall significantly behind in its earning potential. Now add to that the fact that the conference that picks those teams up will gain additional revenue and the income gap is widened yet further.

F.S.U. and Clemson are the lynch pins to cracking the ACC because they affect the bottom line more than any other duo. They will encourage programs like Virginia Tech and N.C. State to want to leave and even perhaps Georgia Tech. North Carolina and Virginia could simply stick around refill with lesser programs and recapitulate the mistakes of Texas, but the ACC would nevertheless only be a remnant of what it was athletically.

And one other point. If the aforementioned teams ever left even Miami would be on an island.

(10-11-2013 02:47 PM)SeaBlue Wrote:  

(10-11-2013 02:31 PM)JRsec Wrote:  Gee Frank, do you really think any institution moves forward without the support of its alumni, boosters, and fans?

See Maryland.

Did you ever study American History? Maryland was not Southern by conviction. Maryland fought on the side of the North. Maryland today is most decidedly more Norther in culture than it is Southern in culture (if at all), and Maryland is not vested financially like Virginia and North Carolina are and was subject to economic enticements that the others may or may not resist. Furthermore, while Virginia's culture has shifted decidedly Northern by comparison to other Southern states they would still likely choose their familiar and family like relations with U.N.C., Duke and others more than a Big 10 association.

So Sea Blue nice try, but apples, oranges, and pears in this case.

(10-11-2013 03:06 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(10-11-2013 12:31 PM)Melky Cabrera Wrote:  

(10-11-2013 11:28 AM)USAFMEDIC Wrote:  

(10-11-2013 09:55 AM)bluesox Wrote:  The key to the ACC life is the alliance of the 6 Virginia and North Carolina school's. IF those school's stick together its almost impossible to crack the acc. The sec could with overlap programs but that isn't who they want. Same thing with the big 10 and maybe pitt, syracuse, bc, etc. The only game changer that might have cracked the acc would be big 10 taking FSU. YEt, if the 6 pack of car/va school's still stuck together, the acc is fine even with fsu leaving...its really the 4 pack of uva, va tech, unc and duke. Those school's can build a nice eastern league post any sec or big 10 moves.

Sorry but those four don't make the ABC Game of the Week. Without Clemson and FSU, the conference is AAC #2...

Even without FSU and Clemson, the ACC still has currently ranked #8 Louisville and #13/14 Miami - both undefeated - as well as #24/25 VA Tech and their scheduling arrangement with Notre Dame, which figures into TV games. They also have the option of adding Cincinnati to replace any departing members, which has become almost a perennial top 25 team in the past 6 or 7 years. The key is Miami. If they can engineer a sustained resurgence of their program, the ACC has enough to remain a major player.

As much as football has been the driver in this, it's also impossible to have a conversation about the ACC without including their basketball which is both the best and the most lucrative in the country - especially with the additions of Louisville, Syracuse, etc. More than any other conference in the country, ACC basketball is a big time money and makes the conference as a whole highly desirable to any network.

Melky I understand your point, but there is other data to indicate otherwise. Top football attendance schools in the ACC: 1. Clemson, 2. Florida State, 3. Virginia Tech, and N.C. State is either 4th or 5th.

Most viewed football teams in the ACC: See the above list but include North Carolina. (Now this study was done before Syracuse and Pitt came on board but I don't think it will change the order too much at the top 4 or 5 positions.)

Most profitable athletic departments in the ACC. 1. Clemson, 2. North Carolina, 3. Duke, 4. Florida State, 5. Virginia Tech.

Now given that Virginia Tech's football fortunes sans F.S.U. and Clemson would be dire and that as a football first school that might incite them to leave also it is not unreasonable to say if a conference loses 3 of its top attendance leaders, profitable programs, and most watched programs that is likely to fall significantly behind in its earning potential. Now add to that the fact that the conference that picks those teams up will gain additional revenue and the income gap is widened yet further.

F.S.U. and Clemson are the lynch pins to cracking the ACC because they affect the bottom line more than any other duo. They will encourage programs like Virginia Tech and N.C. State to want to leave and even perhaps Georgia Tech. North Carolina and Virginia could simply stick around refill with lesser programs and recapitulate the mistakes of Texas, but the ACC would nevertheless only be a remnant of what it was athletically.

And one other point. If the aforementioned teams ever left even Miami would be on an island.

According to The Business of College Sports, the following are the most profitable athletic departments in the ACC in the following order:

1. Notre Dame
2. Virginia
3. Virginia Tech
4. Louisville (to be admitted 2014)
5. Miami
6. Syracuse
7. North Carolina
8. Duke
9. Clemson
10. NC State

The rest are running at a loss with Florida State reportedly in the red as much as $16 million. It's Florida State's losses that have motivated it to consider conference affiliation elsewhere where they can increase their revenue stream. Their situation is much like Maryland's in that their business model is not working for them and much like Maryland, they were motivated to look elsewhere to change the situation.

This ranking was reported in March, 2012 regarding the 2010-11 academic year and can be found at:

http://businessofcollegesports.com/2012/...partments/

Different lists report different numbers from different years and from different sources. Many simply report raw revenues, ignoring the fact that revenues include subsidies from the universities themselves, thereby disguising their losses.

The losses of either Florida State of Clemson would be offset by the addition of Louisville. UConn is also out there and its addition would be the 11th program in the ACC that actually shows a profit.

I understand the impact of losing football attendance leaders like Clemson and Florida State. But the conference is immediately gaining a top football program, Louisville, to replace at least one of them with an overall athletic department that is much more profitable than either of them even without the benefit yet of the ACC revenue stream from its TV contract. I understand that they don't replace the attendance numbers yet but their success on the field means that the conference's standing doesn't take a hit.

I reiterate that the ACC is the one conference that cannot be analyzed simply on the basis of its football programs because its basketball programs are so much more profitable than anyone else's. This is only enhanced by the recent additions of Syracuse and Louisville (next year), two of college basketball's top ten most profitable programs according to Forbes.

BTW, where are all of these programs that want to leave following the defections of FSU and Clemson going to go?

Are we really still trying to figure out ways to demonstrate that the ACC is doomed?

Holy hell, the House Republicans aren't living in as shameless denial as some of you folks.

If you read this, knowing what we all know now, and your takeaway is that this somehow shows how unstable and vulnerable the ACC is then I don't know what to tell you? You should go back to your college professors and apologize for letting them down.

I don't think it's vulnerable per se to outside influence.

It's a few of the internal issues that could, even though I don't even think its likely, pull one school out and cause a panic.

(10-11-2013 10:27 AM)Melky Cabrera Wrote:  

(10-11-2013 10:18 AM)Marge Schott Wrote:  

(10-11-2013 09:55 AM)bluesox Wrote:  the acc is fine even with fsu leaving...its really the 4 pack of uva, va tech, unc and duke. Those school's can build a nice eastern league post any sec or big 10 moves.

I guess it's debatable what constitutes "nice". Would they be able to keep their Orange Bowl tie long term? Probably not. If FSU is gone Clemson and Miami would have to be looking to tag along, too. The ACC would be the equivalent of the 2005-2011 Big East.

As for the article, that analyst from Wasserman isn't very good at his job. Clearly doing some very ACC-friendly math.

I think we all realize that the ACC will likely be 5th in payouts for the foreseeable future.

The 2005-11 Big East was a very good football league. If the ACC is that good, they won't have a problem.