(06-01-2015 11:17 PM)GTFletch Wrote:  

(06-01-2015 07:36 PM)nole Wrote:  The attempted argument that FSU shouldn't care about a new $10 million....soon to be $15-$20 million revenue gap because FSU has revenue difference in tix sales and contributions....well, that is hilarious.

That is reality....there are multiple streams of revenue to make up FSU's and others budget total. And it has ALWAYS been true FSU doesn't make as many as others.


But how that equals, FSU doesn't get to or won't worry about a new $10-$20 million gap with SEC peers.....well, that is pure nonsense.


FSU is concerned....VERY concerned and ANY school in the ACC that competes for national titles will be the same (or we will discover there are no other schools in the ACC serious about competing for national titles in football).

While I agree with your point, and the ACC is working on a network.... once that is up and the ACC Schools see $$ from that the point being made is that UF still gets $22M more per year than FSU in Contributions.... So for someone like yourself screaming about TV dollars it is interesting that you are not worried about the $22M .

Also please do not expect for an ACCN to make up for the lack of contributions that an ACC school receives....

Link
http://www.sportsdaynow.com/sec-network-...s-context/


2013-14
Univ of Florida
$22.9M ticket sales
$42.9M contributions
$39.4M rights and licensing
$2.4M student fees
$1.8M school funds
$14.9M "other"
_____________________
$124,611,305 total revenue

2013-14
FsU
$25.5M ticket sales
$22M contributions
$40M rights and licensing
$7.9 student fees
$0 school funds
$8.2M "other"
______________________
$104,774,424 total revenue

FSU fans discuss this all the time...as a booster...I am very aware of the topic. FSU has multiple efforts to address it........I wish I could say the same about the ACC....same leadership...same basketball first mindset....same 'as long as it enriches our commish and the NC area first' mindset. FSU isn't holding itself back.....the ACC is.

Also, this is an ACC board and a thread about conference revenue, so a totally separate topic.

The other HUGE difference is, the gap you are referring to has ALWAYS been there for FSU...it isn't new.

The conference gap IS new and growing. This topic isn't going away...it is only starting. FSU leadership knows it has a HUGE problem that is going to cause massive issues for them.

Back to the subject at hand.

(06-02-2015 10:15 AM)uofl05 Wrote:  

(06-02-2015 08:18 AM)Lou_C Wrote:  

(06-01-2015 07:36 PM)nole Wrote:  The attempted argument that FSU shouldn't care about a new $10 million....soon to be $15-$20 million revenue gap because FSU has revenue difference in tix sales and contributions....well, that is hilarious.

That is reality....there are multiple streams of revenue to make up FSU's and others budget total. And it has ALWAYS been true FSU doesn't make as many as others.


But how that equals, FSU doesn't get to or won't worry about a new $10-$20 million gap with SEC peers.....well, that is pure nonsense.


FSU is concerned....VERY concerned and ANY school in the ACC that competes for national titles will be the same (or we will discover there are no other schools in the ACC serious about competing for national titles in football).

Nobody says they shouldn't care. Everyone needs to do what they need to do to increase ACC revenue. It matters greatly.

But FSU isn't going to fold up shop over it in the next few years. And there's nothing FSU can do today to change the dynamic. They can't just announce they are leaving the ACC...

This is what FSU can do...

1) Continue to maximize non-ACC revenue and use it efficiently. Somehow, despite much less revenue, FSU's facilities are now better than UF's. FSU needs to be smarter than it's SEC peers.

2) Use whatever leverage it has in the ACC to try to ensure the ACC makes financially appropriate decisions around a network and going into the next contract.

3) Continue to improve it's academic profile for the B1G

4) Wait and see if the changing dynamics away from cable change the business model around conference networks and the "new market" phenomenon which resulted in Missouri being more valuable to the SEC than Missouri last time around.

5) Continue to succeed on the football field.


That's all FSU can do, and they should do all of it. It's not like FSU in the ACC is like ND and independence, where they could change it overnight but won't. I get that it's cathartic to complain and express displeasure but you can only work with what you can work with.

Money aside, would you really enjoy going to the B1G? Outside of money I can't think of any reason a long time southern power would want to go there. I have never really enjoyed that conference in any sport, and it seems like a terrible culture fit.

Agreed, but money is issues #1-10 priority with conferences.

If you don't have it....you won't win national titles in football....any conference that provides it is a player....and conference that doesn't will not be a fit for football schools wanting to compete for national titles.

(06-02-2015 08:21 AM)Lou_C Wrote:  

(06-01-2015 07:58 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  

(06-01-2015 07:36 PM)nole Wrote:  The attempted argument that FSU shouldn't care about a new $10 million....soon to be $15-$20 million revenue gap because FSU has revenue difference in tix sales and contributions....well, that is hilarious.

That is reality....there are multiple streams of revenue to make up FSU's and others budget total. And it has ALWAYS been true FSU doesn't make as many as others.


But how that equals, FSU doesn't get to or won't worry about a new $10-$20 million gap with SEC peers.....well, that is pure nonsense.


FSU is concerned....VERY concerned and ANY school in the ACC that competes for national titles will be the same (or we will discover there are no other schools in the ACC serious about competing for national titles in football).

Football will be first, but it ain't going to stop there.

http://www.al.com/sports/index.ssf/2015/...ry_package

Quote:"Our commissioner was pretty straightforward that we needed to, and could, do better in basketball," says Vanderbilt athletic director David Williams. "We as ADs had to come together and say 'Yeah, we could and we should so let's all sort of put egos aside for the betterment of trying to make basketball better.'"

Slive made his own move to rectify the situation by hiring Mark Whitworth as the SEC's basketball czar and Greg Shaheen, the former head of the NCAA tournament, as a scheduling consultant. Their charge: Help conference schools schedule smarter because the league's RPI and other metrics were only as strong as the weakest link.

Sure would be great if our commissioner showed a little leadership and did the same for the ACC in the primary money-making sport in college sports.

Absolutely, the ACC should be taking the same approach to football, and should have 10 years ago at least.

And the fact they haven't, and leadership hasn't changed is FSU's issue. The ACC doesn't want to change. It viewed the GOR as a prison to lock in schools bringing in money....not a kick in the pants to make the changes need to move the conference forward.

(06-02-2015 08:18 AM)Lou_C Wrote:  

(06-01-2015 07:36 PM)nole Wrote:  The attempted argument that FSU shouldn't care about a new $10 million....soon to be $15-$20 million revenue gap because FSU has revenue difference in tix sales and contributions....well, that is hilarious.

That is reality....there are multiple streams of revenue to make up FSU's and others budget total. And it has ALWAYS been true FSU doesn't make as many as others.


But how that equals, FSU doesn't get to or won't worry about a new $10-$20 million gap with SEC peers.....well, that is pure nonsense.


FSU is concerned....VERY concerned and ANY school in the ACC that competes for national titles will be the same (or we will discover there are no other schools in the ACC serious about competing for national titles in football).

Nobody says they shouldn't care. Everyone needs to do what they need to do to increase ACC revenue. It matters greatly.

But FSU isn't going to fold up shop over it in the next few years. And there's nothing FSU can do today to change the dynamic. They can't just announce they are leaving the ACC...

This is what FSU can do...

1) Continue to maximize non-ACC revenue and use it efficiently. Somehow, despite much less revenue, FSU's facilities are now better than UF's. FSU needs to be smarter than it's SEC peers.

2) Use whatever leverage it has in the ACC to try to ensure the ACC makes financially appropriate decisions around a network and going into the next contract.

3) Continue to improve it's academic profile for the B1G

4) Wait and see if the changing dynamics away from cable change the business model around conference networks and the "new market" phenomenon which resulted in Missouri being more valuable to the SEC than Missouri last time around.

5) Continue to succeed on the football field.


That's all FSU can do, and they should do all of it. It's not like FSU in the ACC is like ND and independence, where they could change it overnight but won't. I get that it's cathartic to complain and express displeasure but you can only work with what you can work with.

Lou,
Agree with your list.

If I believed FSU was doing all 1-5....I wouldn't post....they aren't I know they aren't. It was only months ago FSU had a president that was a total 'yes' man to Swofford. A person who insulted another conference's academics in an unprofessional manner he was so entrenched in his mindset.

If you were president and presented those and gave an actionable game plan for those....I would sleep at night. I could write a thesis for you on how FSU's isn't doing those things for all your points.

(06-02-2015 10:24 AM)nole Wrote:  

(06-02-2015 10:15 AM)uofl05 Wrote:  

(06-02-2015 08:18 AM)Lou_C Wrote:  

(06-01-2015 07:36 PM)nole Wrote:  The attempted argument that FSU shouldn't care about a new $10 million....soon to be $15-$20 million revenue gap because FSU has revenue difference in tix sales and contributions....well, that is hilarious.

That is reality....there are multiple streams of revenue to make up FSU's and others budget total. And it has ALWAYS been true FSU doesn't make as many as others.


But how that equals, FSU doesn't get to or won't worry about a new $10-$20 million gap with SEC peers.....well, that is pure nonsense.


FSU is concerned....VERY concerned and ANY school in the ACC that competes for national titles will be the same (or we will discover there are no other schools in the ACC serious about competing for national titles in football).

Nobody says they shouldn't care. Everyone needs to do what they need to do to increase ACC revenue. It matters greatly.

But FSU isn't going to fold up shop over it in the next few years. And there's nothing FSU can do today to change the dynamic. They can't just announce they are leaving the ACC...

This is what FSU can do...

1) Continue to maximize non-ACC revenue and use it efficiently. Somehow, despite much less revenue, FSU's facilities are now better than UF's. FSU needs to be smarter than it's SEC peers.

2) Use whatever leverage it has in the ACC to try to ensure the ACC makes financially appropriate decisions around a network and going into the next contract.

3) Continue to improve it's academic profile for the B1G

4) Wait and see if the changing dynamics away from cable change the business model around conference networks and the "new market" phenomenon which resulted in Missouri being more valuable to the SEC than Missouri last time around.

5) Continue to succeed on the football field.


That's all FSU can do, and they should do all of it. It's not like FSU in the ACC is like ND and independence, where they could change it overnight but won't. I get that it's cathartic to complain and express displeasure but you can only work with what you can work with.

Money aside, would you really enjoy going to the B1G? Outside of money I can't think of any reason a long time southern power would want to go there. I have never really enjoyed that conference in any sport, and it seems like a terrible culture fit.

Agreed, but money is issues #1-10 priority with conferences.

If you don't have it....you won't win national titles in football....any conference that provides it is a player....and conference that doesn't will not be a fit for football schools wanting to compete for national titles.

I do think the B1G is a bad fit. I think the downside of a move to the B1G outweighs $20M in revenue. FSU would be going from a conference in which they're basically at the top of the revenue pile to well down the pecking order, even with the additional money.

It would be the same phenomenon in the SEC, but the SEC is a geographic and cultural fit.

HOWEVER, if you are concerned about the issue, there's only two ways out, so you should be prepared. If nothing else, the prospect of the B1G in Florida would change the SEC's perspective on FSU pretty damn quickly I suspect.

FSU should be doing those five things, which 100% does not preclude the ACC righting the ship from a football and financial perspective.

(06-02-2015 10:28 AM)nole Wrote:  

(06-02-2015 08:18 AM)Lou_C Wrote:  

(06-01-2015 07:36 PM)nole Wrote:  The attempted argument that FSU shouldn't care about a new $10 million....soon to be $15-$20 million revenue gap because FSU has revenue difference in tix sales and contributions....well, that is hilarious.

That is reality....there are multiple streams of revenue to make up FSU's and others budget total. And it has ALWAYS been true FSU doesn't make as many as others.


But how that equals, FSU doesn't get to or won't worry about a new $10-$20 million gap with SEC peers.....well, that is pure nonsense.


FSU is concerned....VERY concerned and ANY school in the ACC that competes for national titles will be the same (or we will discover there are no other schools in the ACC serious about competing for national titles in football).

Nobody says they shouldn't care. Everyone needs to do what they need to do to increase ACC revenue. It matters greatly.

But FSU isn't going to fold up shop over it in the next few years. And there's nothing FSU can do today to change the dynamic. They can't just announce they are leaving the ACC...

This is what FSU can do...

1) Continue to maximize non-ACC revenue and use it efficiently. Somehow, despite much less revenue, FSU's facilities are now better than UF's. FSU needs to be smarter than it's SEC peers.

2) Use whatever leverage it has in the ACC to try to ensure the ACC makes financially appropriate decisions around a network and going into the next contract.

3) Continue to improve it's academic profile for the B1G

4) Wait and see if the changing dynamics away from cable change the business model around conference networks and the "new market" phenomenon which resulted in Missouri being more valuable to the SEC than Missouri last time around.

5) Continue to succeed on the football field.


That's all FSU can do, and they should do all of it. It's not like FSU in the ACC is like ND and independence, where they could change it overnight but won't. I get that it's cathartic to complain and express displeasure but you can only work with what you can work with.

Lou,
Agree with your list.

If I believed FSU was doing all 1-5....I wouldn't post....they aren't I know they aren't. It was only months ago FSU had a president that was a total 'yes' man to Swofford. A person who insulted another conference's academics in an unprofessional manner he was so entrenched in his mindset.

If you were president and presented those and gave an actionable game plan for those....I would sleep at night. I could write a thesis for you on how FSU's isn't doing those things for all your points.

I definitely agree with that. The frustrating thing is that some of us were seeing this writing on the wall many years ago. Conference payout dick-measuring is all the rage now, but it's not like the issues are post-2012...the information was out there.

(06-02-2015 10:51 AM)Lou_C Wrote:  

(06-02-2015 10:24 AM)nole Wrote:  

(06-02-2015 10:15 AM)uofl05 Wrote:  

(06-02-2015 08:18 AM)Lou_C Wrote:  

(06-01-2015 07:36 PM)nole Wrote:  The attempted argument that FSU shouldn't care about a new $10 million....soon to be $15-$20 million revenue gap because FSU has revenue difference in tix sales and contributions....well, that is hilarious.

That is reality....there are multiple streams of revenue to make up FSU's and others budget total. And it has ALWAYS been true FSU doesn't make as many as others.


But how that equals, FSU doesn't get to or won't worry about a new $10-$20 million gap with SEC peers.....well, that is pure nonsense.


FSU is concerned....VERY concerned and ANY school in the ACC that competes for national titles will be the same (or we will discover there are no other schools in the ACC serious about competing for national titles in football).

Nobody says they shouldn't care. Everyone needs to do what they need to do to increase ACC revenue. It matters greatly.

But FSU isn't going to fold up shop over it in the next few years. And there's nothing FSU can do today to change the dynamic. They can't just announce they are leaving the ACC...

This is what FSU can do...

1) Continue to maximize non-ACC revenue and use it efficiently. Somehow, despite much less revenue, FSU's facilities are now better than UF's. FSU needs to be smarter than it's SEC peers.

2) Use whatever leverage it has in the ACC to try to ensure the ACC makes financially appropriate decisions around a network and going into the next contract.

3) Continue to improve it's academic profile for the B1G

4) Wait and see if the changing dynamics away from cable change the business model around conference networks and the "new market" phenomenon which resulted in Missouri being more valuable to the SEC than Missouri last time around.

5) Continue to succeed on the football field.


That's all FSU can do, and they should do all of it. It's not like FSU in the ACC is like ND and independence, where they could change it overnight but won't. I get that it's cathartic to complain and express displeasure but you can only work with what you can work with.

Money aside, would you really enjoy going to the B1G? Outside of money I can't think of any reason a long time southern power would want to go there. I have never really enjoyed that conference in any sport, and it seems like a terrible culture fit.

Agreed, but money is issues #1-10 priority with conferences.

If you don't have it....you won't win national titles in football....any conference that provides it is a player....and conference that doesn't will not be a fit for football schools wanting to compete for national titles.

I do think the B1G is a bad fit. I think the downside of a move to the B1G outweighs $20M in revenue. FSU would be going from a conference in which they're basically at the top of the revenue pile to well down the pecking order, even with the additional money.

It would be the same phenomenon in the SEC, but the SEC is a geographic and cultural fit.

HOWEVER, if you are concerned about the issue, there's only two ways out, so you should be prepared. If nothing else, the prospect of the B1G in Florida would change the SEC's perspective on FSU pretty damn quickly I suspect.

FSU should be doing those five things, which 100% does not preclude the ACC righting the ship from a football and financial perspective.

If it didn't change the SEC's perspective it should. But remember this, the SEC has twice considered F.S.U.. The first one everyone knows about and Bowden decided otherwise. But two years before this last realignment and before we started working behind the scenes with Missouri, the SEC already had backroom positive vibes on A&M. We were looking at making the move to 16 and F.S.U. and Clemson would have been 15 & 16 behind A&M and at the time Oklahoma. We weren't fooling around with the market approach, but were thinking of content and strength additions. All 4 of those schools fit the SEC demographics in size, strength of attendance, travel crowd size, brand, and most importantly and never discussed with fan interest of current SEC fans. The current SEC fans just won't get that excited over North Carolina and Virginia or Virginia Tech. They would be jazzed as hell over F.S.U., & Oklahoma, and very happy with Clemson. A&M was a no brainer.

What is, has, and will be, working against F.S.U. is ESPN who knows that the ACC values would collapse without them. They didn't just say hell no to the SEC's renewed interest in the Noles, they said something even stronger......"We aren't paying you anything for them if you add them." The loose translation of that would be, "Not now, not ever, presumptuous little s***s! At that point the discussion ended for Florida State and Clemson (for similar reasons) and turned instead to a Virginia market addition and a North Carolina market addition. The side note on Oklahoma was as everyone knows (Oklahoma State). In comes Missouri and we are where we are.

So I post this to say it is not that the SEC, its fans, and its desire for great games in great venues that are inhibiting a natural fit of F.S.U. into the SEC, even in spite of the market theory, it is ESPN preventing them. I would hate to think that F.S.U.'s only option out would be to go with FOX. Perhaps what the Noles need to do instead of threatening to bolt to the Big 10 to scare the SEC into making a move, is to threaten to take their product to any FOX backed conference if ESPN doesn't permit their move to the SEC.

(06-02-2015 10:55 AM)Lou_C Wrote:  

(06-02-2015 10:28 AM)nole Wrote:  

(06-02-2015 08:18 AM)Lou_C Wrote:  

(06-01-2015 07:36 PM)nole Wrote:  The attempted argument that FSU shouldn't care about a new $10 million....soon to be $15-$20 million revenue gap because FSU has revenue difference in tix sales and contributions....well, that is hilarious.

That is reality....there are multiple streams of revenue to make up FSU's and others budget total. And it has ALWAYS been true FSU doesn't make as many as others.


But how that equals, FSU doesn't get to or won't worry about a new $10-$20 million gap with SEC peers.....well, that is pure nonsense.


FSU is concerned....VERY concerned and ANY school in the ACC that competes for national titles will be the same (or we will discover there are no other schools in the ACC serious about competing for national titles in football).

Nobody says they shouldn't care. Everyone needs to do what they need to do to increase ACC revenue. It matters greatly.

But FSU isn't going to fold up shop over it in the next few years. And there's nothing FSU can do today to change the dynamic. They can't just announce they are leaving the ACC...

This is what FSU can do...

1) Continue to maximize non-ACC revenue and use it efficiently. Somehow, despite much less revenue, FSU's facilities are now better than UF's. FSU needs to be smarter than it's SEC peers.

2) Use whatever leverage it has in the ACC to try to ensure the ACC makes financially appropriate decisions around a network and going into the next contract.

3) Continue to improve it's academic profile for the B1G

4) Wait and see if the changing dynamics away from cable change the business model around conference networks and the "new market" phenomenon which resulted in Missouri being more valuable to the SEC than Missouri last time around.

5) Continue to succeed on the football field.


That's all FSU can do, and they should do all of it. It's not like FSU in the ACC is like ND and independence, where they could change it overnight but won't. I get that it's cathartic to complain and express displeasure but you can only work with what you can work with.

Lou,
Agree with your list.

If I believed FSU was doing all 1-5....I wouldn't post....they aren't I know they aren't. It was only months ago FSU had a president that was a total 'yes' man to Swofford. A person who insulted another conference's academics in an unprofessional manner he was so entrenched in his mindset.

If you were president and presented those and gave an actionable game plan for those....I would sleep at night. I could write a thesis for you on how FSU's isn't doing those things for all your points.

I definitely agree with that. The frustrating thing is that some of us were seeing this writing on the wall many years ago. Conference payout dick-measuring is all the rage now, but it's not like the issues are post-2012...the information was out there.

FSU and the ACC leadership has been EXTREMELY weak. Reactionary, shallow insights to the issues, refusal to change, refuse to THINK honestly, refusal to even really discuss issues.

Leadership overall has looked at things very superficially and mainly interested in light topic overviews with 'solutions' like 'we need better PR'......sure, but if ANYONE thinks that is the big issues the ACC faces....you don't understand what is happening.

FSU still has weak leadership. The current AD is nowhere on the radar on these issues. He is a step above Spetman but not much. Current BOT is still lost and again is reactionary at best. The ONE BOT that questioned the GOR, was run off. That should tell you everything about FSU. The fact that anyone that questions at FSU is run off.......critically thinking not welcomed. Yet that same group is questioning the GOR within what...2 years of the GOR decision? How do you go from 'kill all those who question' to 18 months later "we aren't sure this was the right decision"....? Morons.

ACC leadership? They just sit around trying to enrich themselves and friends and wish football would go away, Big East was back, and it was 1980 again.

The fact that ACC media/fan bases call Swofford a 'Ninja' just solidifies how out in left field this conference is.....they have no idea what is going on, where the future is headed, etc. Nothing has changed for this conference....it just wants to behave like things are the same.

No confidence in ANY of this leadership.

(06-02-2015 10:51 AM)Lou_C Wrote:  

(06-02-2015 10:24 AM)nole Wrote:  

(06-02-2015 10:15 AM)uofl05 Wrote:  

(06-02-2015 08:18 AM)Lou_C Wrote:  

(06-01-2015 07:36 PM)nole Wrote:  The attempted argument that FSU shouldn't care about a new $10 million....soon to be $15-$20 million revenue gap because FSU has revenue difference in tix sales and contributions....well, that is hilarious.

That is reality....there are multiple streams of revenue to make up FSU's and others budget total. And it has ALWAYS been true FSU doesn't make as many as others.


But how that equals, FSU doesn't get to or won't worry about a new $10-$20 million gap with SEC peers.....well, that is pure nonsense.


FSU is concerned....VERY concerned and ANY school in the ACC that competes for national titles will be the same (or we will discover there are no other schools in the ACC serious about competing for national titles in football).

Nobody says they shouldn't care. Everyone needs to do what they need to do to increase ACC revenue. It matters greatly.

But FSU isn't going to fold up shop over it in the next few years. And there's nothing FSU can do today to change the dynamic. They can't just announce they are leaving the ACC...

This is what FSU can do...

1) Continue to maximize non-ACC revenue and use it efficiently. Somehow, despite much less revenue, FSU's facilities are now better than UF's. FSU needs to be smarter than it's SEC peers.

2) Use whatever leverage it has in the ACC to try to ensure the ACC makes financially appropriate decisions around a network and going into the next contract.

3) Continue to improve it's academic profile for the B1G

4) Wait and see if the changing dynamics away from cable change the business model around conference networks and the "new market" phenomenon which resulted in Missouri being more valuable to the SEC than Missouri last time around.

5) Continue to succeed on the football field.


That's all FSU can do, and they should do all of it. It's not like FSU in the ACC is like ND and independence, where they could change it overnight but won't. I get that it's cathartic to complain and express displeasure but you can only work with what you can work with.

Money aside, would you really enjoy going to the B1G? Outside of money I can't think of any reason a long time southern power would want to go there. I have never really enjoyed that conference in any sport, and it seems like a terrible culture fit.

Agreed, but money is issues #1-10 priority with conferences.

If you don't have it....you won't win national titles in football....any conference that provides it is a player....and conference that doesn't will not be a fit for football schools wanting to compete for national titles.

I do think the B1G is a bad fit. I think the downside of a move to the B1G outweighs $20M in revenue. FSU would be going from a conference in which they're basically at the top of the revenue pile to well down the pecking order, even with the additional money.

It would be the same phenomenon in the SEC, but the SEC is a geographic and cultural fit.

HOWEVER, if you are concerned about the issue, there's only two ways out, so you should be prepared. If nothing else, the prospect of the B1G in Florida would change the SEC's perspective on FSU pretty damn quickly I suspect.

FSU should be doing those five things, which 100% does not preclude the ACC righting the ship from a football and financial perspective.

JMO, but I think you'd see Florida on the phone with the B1G pretty fast, and they'd flip to the Big 10

SEC then grabs FSU

UF people would freak out at the thought of FSU going to the Big 10....

(06-02-2015 12:23 PM)nole Wrote:  ACC leadership? They just sit around trying to enrich themselves and friends and wish football would go away...

???

Nole, I agree with most of what you post here. There are DEFINITE issues with ACC Football, and as sneaky as "Ninja" Swofford has been at times, that doesn't make him a great leader - it just makes him sneaky.

However, I have to take issue with one thing you've stated several times lately - the idea that ACC teams don't care about football (or want it to go away?). If that is true, then tell me why Duke, NC State, Wake Forest, Va Tech and Syracuse all built new indoor practice facilities? [LINK] Even UNC spent money on drainage for their field [LINK]. Pitt, which shares a stadium with the Steelers, is renovating their practice facility and just shelled out some money for a decent coach to boot.

I don't see how you can say they aren't trying NOW. If you want to point out that it took too long and may prove to be too little, too late - have at it, you'll get no argument from me!

(06-02-2015 01:13 PM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  

(06-02-2015 12:23 PM)nole Wrote:  ACC leadership? They just sit around trying to enrich themselves and friends and wish football would go away...

???

Nole, I agree with most of what you post here. There are DEFINITE issues with ACC Football, and as sneaky as "Ninja" Swofford has been at times, that doesn't make him a great leader - it just makes him sneaky.

However, I have to take issue with one thing you've stated several times lately - the idea that ACC teams don't care about football (or want it to go away?). If that is true, then tell me why Duke, NC State, Wake Forest, Va Tech and Syracuse all built new indoor practice facilities? [LINK] Even UNC spent money on drainage for their field [LINK]. Pitt, which shares a stadium with the Steelers, is renovating their practice facility and just shelled out some money for a decent coach to boot.

I don't see how you can say they aren't trying NOW. If you want to point out that it took too long and may prove to be too little, too late - have at it, you'll get no argument from me!

Fair points.

I guess part for me is....it is too little too late. The writing was on the wall LONG ago and it was a reluctance to change.

Most recently, Jim Grobe left Wake pissed off because he felt promises weren't kept. Jim Grobe, who went to a BCS game while at Wake and he didn't get admin support. Would that have EVER happened in basketball? THE best coach ever at Wake...and they ran him off basically. That didn't happen that long ago.

Look at coaches salaries, assistant coaches salaries, and support staff.....the ACC is NOT doing well here ON AVERAGE. Not even close really.

I think the ACC is trying some.....NOT NEARLY ENOUGH....and WAY too late basically.

I think in part, because the ACC is so far behind, it has to make more drastic moves. It HAS to start rewarding schools succeeding in THE money support. If that means doing the same with bball....OK, just tie it as a percent of the revenue earned. But things have to change.....honestly, FSU folks thought they would after the GOR....they were naïve and now are wondering what happened .

(06-02-2015 10:15 AM)uofl05 Wrote:  

(06-02-2015 08:18 AM)Lou_C Wrote:  

(06-01-2015 07:36 PM)nole Wrote:  The attempted argument that FSU shouldn't care about a new $10 million....soon to be $15-$20 million revenue gap because FSU has revenue difference in tix sales and contributions....well, that is hilarious.

That is reality....there are multiple streams of revenue to make up FSU's and others budget total. And it has ALWAYS been true FSU doesn't make as many as others.


But how that equals, FSU doesn't get to or won't worry about a new $10-$20 million gap with SEC peers.....well, that is pure nonsense.


FSU is concerned....VERY concerned and ANY school in the ACC that competes for national titles will be the same (or we will discover there are no other schools in the ACC serious about competing for national titles in football).

Nobody says they shouldn't care. Everyone needs to do what they need to do to increase ACC revenue. It matters greatly.

But FSU isn't going to fold up shop over it in the next few years. And there's nothing FSU can do today to change the dynamic. They can't just announce they are leaving the ACC...

This is what FSU can do...

1) Continue to maximize non-ACC revenue and use it efficiently. Somehow, despite much less revenue, FSU's facilities are now better than UF's. FSU needs to be smarter than it's SEC peers.

2) Use whatever leverage it has in the ACC to try to ensure the ACC makes financially appropriate decisions around a network and going into the next contract.

3) Continue to improve it's academic profile for the B1G

4) Wait and see if the changing dynamics away from cable change the business model around conference networks and the "new market" phenomenon which resulted in Missouri being more valuable to the SEC than Missouri last time around.

5) Continue to succeed on the football field.


That's all FSU can do, and they should do all of it. It's not like FSU in the ACC is like ND and independence, where they could change it overnight but won't. I get that it's cathartic to complain and express displeasure but you can only work with what you can work with.

Money aside, would you really enjoy going to the B1G? Outside of money I can't think of any reason a long time southern power would want to go there. I have never really enjoyed that conference in any sport, and it seems like a terrible culture fit.

It wouldn't be ideal, but neither is the ACC.

There are two issues, neither of which are "culture". What does FSU have in common with BC, Cuse, Pitt and most of the VA/NC wine and cheesers?

1. The first issue is distance. But with the BTN making $7M+ more than the ACC's no-network, and the Big Ten poised to increase it's tier 1 tv deal in the next 1-2 years, the increased travel expenses would easily be offset. The other aspect to distance is that most FSU alumni don't live in the Midwest, so it'd be a further drive for them as well. And FSU probably wouldn't travel well for many Big Ten road games because of it.

Would the Big Ten also invite other schools in order to lessen that travel burden? You would think so. I couldn't tell you if other ACC schools would leave or not though, and 1 or 2 might be necessary for FSU to join the Big Ten. This specifically is probably the biggest hurdle.

2. The second issue is the alignment. How would the Big Ten set it up with 15+ schools? Playing 2 of UM, OSU, PSU, MSU, NU and UW every year would probably be a must, with at least a 3rd game cycling through every year. I'm not going to bother with actual setups, because this board has done plenty to increase ACC frequency, and the Big Ten could just use the same methods. They don't seem nearly as resistant to change as the ACC (eg, a conference network, changing divisions when they didn't work, etc)

Just thinking aloud here, but Nebraska and Penn State would be good yearly matchups. I'm not going to demand Michigan or Ohio State every year just like I don't demand FSU face GT every year ("MORE THAN ONCE EVERY SIX YEARS!"). But those two schools don't have many "true" rivalries in the Big Ten, and would therefore be great partners for FSU.

Who's going to excite FSU fans more for a game in Tallahassee: Minnesota, Purdue, Indiana and NW, or BC, Cuse, UVA and Wake? That's a wash. But at least the Big Ten schools have larger alumni bases and maybe will travel better?

-------------------------

FSU's most recent revenue would put it ahead of 7 current Big Ten publics and most likely Northwestern as well. FSU would be between Georgia and Tennessee in SEC revenue, and would be 6th in the SEC in revenue. And that's before the tv/network revenue boost takes place. So this idea that FSU couldn't compete revenue-wise isn't based in reality.

And for the Big Ten, bringing the state of Florida into the footprint and charging the same rate for the BTN in Florida as the rest of the Midwest and Mid-Atlantic would create a nice bump in revenue.

(06-02-2015 12:23 PM)nole Wrote:  FSU and the ACC leadership has been EXTREMELY weak. Reactionary, shallow insights to the issues, refusal to change, refuse to THINK honestly, refusal to even really discuss issues.

Leadership overall has looked at things very superficially and mainly interested in light topic overviews with 'solutions' like 'we need better PR'......sure, but if ANYONE thinks that is the big issues the ACC faces....you don't understand what is happening.

FSU still has weak leadership. The current AD is nowhere on the radar on these issues. He is a step above Spetman but not much. Current BOT is still lost and again is reactionary at best. The ONE BOT that questioned the GOR, was run off. That should tell you everything about FSU. The fact that anyone that questions at FSU is run off.......critically thinking not welcomed. Yet that same group is questioning the GOR within what...2 years of the GOR decision? How do you go from 'kill all those who question' to 18 months later "we aren't sure this was the right decision"....? Morons.

The better PR was in reference to the national media bashing FSU over Winston.

Who questioned the grant of rights, Haggard? His term as Chair was coming to an end and Bense was already known to be the replacement.

I'll agree that the President, Athletic Director and Board of Trustees is fairly poor at FSU, but this seems like mostly conjecture.

(06-02-2015 12:51 PM)EvilVodka Wrote:  JMO, but I think you'd see Florida on the phone with the B1G pretty fast, and they'd flip to the Big 10

SEC then grabs FSU

UF people would freak out at the thought of FSU going to the Big 10....

I don't agree. UF fans/alumni would freak out if they were to join the Big Ten. They wouldn't want FSU to receive Big Ten money but no chance they would even consider leaving the SEC and allowing FSU to take their spot in their conference of choice.

I'm starting to get sick of this whiny FSU attitude. Just leave and go play with the pig farmers in Iowa already.

You realize you have a lot of fans in the NE and they enjoy getting to see the Noles play within a 4-6 hour drive once or twice a year?

Jim Grobe got fired for running the program into the ground.

(06-02-2015 03:01 PM)WakeForestRanger Wrote:  Jim Grobe got fired for running the program into the ground.

Those laurels must have been very comfortable...

(06-02-2015 02:51 PM)TexanMark Wrote:  I'm starting to get sick of this whiny FSU attitude. Just leave and go play with the pig farmers in Iowa already.

You realize you have a lot of fans in the NE and they enjoy getting to see the Noles play within a 4-6 hour drive once or twice a year?

You don't have to read things you don't like.

I don't personally like or agree with all of comments/opinions being made by FSU fans on the board, either. But that's life.

Just don't become the next Dr. Yinzer. His whole shtick is whining about FSU whiners. Just looks stupid and hypocritical.

Well Marge we know the issues...it is ridiculous IMHO a FSU fan would want to go to the B1G for $$$. Yet out of the other side of the mouth they talk about a bad cultural fit with the newbies.

You think the NC Mafia screws you over in game day calls...try a B1G official when you are playing outdoor in Minneapolis in the late Fall.

(06-02-2015 12:51 PM)EvilVodka Wrote:  

(06-02-2015 10:51 AM)Lou_C Wrote:  

(06-02-2015 10:24 AM)nole Wrote:  

(06-02-2015 10:15 AM)uofl05 Wrote:  

(06-02-2015 08:18 AM)Lou_C Wrote:  Nobody says they shouldn't care. Everyone needs to do what they need to do to increase ACC revenue. It matters greatly.

But FSU isn't going to fold up shop over it in the next few years. And there's nothing FSU can do today to change the dynamic. They can't just announce they are leaving the ACC...

This is what FSU can do...

1) Continue to maximize non-ACC revenue and use it efficiently. Somehow, despite much less revenue, FSU's facilities are now better than UF's. FSU needs to be smarter than it's SEC peers.

2) Use whatever leverage it has in the ACC to try to ensure the ACC makes financially appropriate decisions around a network and going into the next contract.

3) Continue to improve it's academic profile for the B1G

4) Wait and see if the changing dynamics away from cable change the business model around conference networks and the "new market" phenomenon which resulted in Missouri being more valuable to the SEC than Missouri last time around.

5) Continue to succeed on the football field.


That's all FSU can do, and they should do all of it. It's not like FSU in the ACC is like ND and independence, where they could change it overnight but won't. I get that it's cathartic to complain and express displeasure but you can only work with what you can work with.

Money aside, would you really enjoy going to the B1G? Outside of money I can't think of any reason a long time southern power would want to go there. I have never really enjoyed that conference in any sport, and it seems like a terrible culture fit.

Agreed, but money is issues #1-10 priority with conferences.

If you don't have it....you won't win national titles in football....any conference that provides it is a player....and conference that doesn't will not be a fit for football schools wanting to compete for national titles.

I do think the B1G is a bad fit. I think the downside of a move to the B1G outweighs $20M in revenue. FSU would be going from a conference in which they're basically at the top of the revenue pile to well down the pecking order, even with the additional money.

It would be the same phenomenon in the SEC, but the SEC is a geographic and cultural fit.

HOWEVER, if you are concerned about the issue, there's only two ways out, so you should be prepared. If nothing else, the prospect of the B1G in Florida would change the SEC's perspective on FSU pretty damn quickly I suspect.

FSU should be doing those five things, which 100% does not preclude the ACC righting the ship from a football and financial perspective.

JMO, but I think you'd see Florida on the phone with the B1G pretty fast, and they'd flip to the Big 10

SEC then grabs FSU

UF people would freak out at the thought of FSU going to the Big 10....

And once again you would be completely wrong in your assumption. Florida sponsored F.S.U.'s application to the SEC in 1991. Florida was the reason Mike Slive asked for a gentlemen's agreement prior to adding Missouri and Texas A&M two years ago. The gentlemen's agreement was Slive asking the SEC presidents not to sponsor an in state rival for membership until the renegotiation clause of our television contract had been met through the addition of two new markets.

The reason that was necessary was that both South Carolina and Florida wanted to sponsor the addition of their in state rivals and for a couple of extremely good reasons. 1. Clemson and Florida State are the biggest two money generating games on their schedules. 2. Talk of expanding the conference and therefore the number of conference games put those two OOC games in a tight window for scheduling and potentially jeopardized their futures, especially if the ACC expanded as well. Therefore the "gentlemen's agreement" was in a sense a means of preventing the inclusion of those in state schools, but only for the 13th and 14th positions, which also was stated and promised by Slive.

Unfortunately, and like so many things, the internet dumb ass crowd misquoted the event, took the remarks out of their original context, twisted their meaning, and ran with it like a large mouth bass on crack. The result is this constant spew about how one in state school hates another in state school which is so much B.S. as to defy the intentions of most state legislatures which want the well being of all of their state schools and who desire to keep the votes of all of their constituents, the athletic departments of the rivals in question who thrive on maintaining their connections with one another, and the educators who frequently share common goals within the state. It is only the unenlightened fan boys who get it wrong, completely wrong.

For the record Florida had expressed both the concern over losing the Noles on their schedule and their maintained desire for their inclusion in the SEC! Having the Seminoles join would please the Gator administration, not alienate them, nor ever cause them to bolt to the Big 10. Ditto for South Carolina with regards to Clemson where even Spurrier said he would be in favor of their inclusion.

(06-02-2015 04:26 PM)TexanMark Wrote:  Well Marge we know the issues...it is ridiculous IMHO a FSU fan would want to go to the B1G for $$$. Yet out of the other side of the mouth they talk about a bad cultural fit with the newbies.

You think the NC Mafia screws you over in game day calls...try a B1G official when you are playing outdoor in Minneapolis in the late Fall.

In my long comment about joining the Big Ten I said that culture wasn't an issue, and cited FSU having a different "culture" than much of the current ACC, as my reasoning. But in terms of athletics culture, there are more schools in the Big Ten aligned with FSU than in the ACC. I think that's an important distinction, even if it's primarily a midwestern conference.

Who brought up officiating? FSU is used to not getting calls so it's nothing new.

If you don't care if FSU leaves, quit telling me all the reasons FSU should stay and/or won't like the Big Ten. Both sides of the mouth and all.