(03-24-2023 04:30 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(03-24-2023 01:47 PM)DawgNBama Wrote:  Discuss please

It boils down to this: Would the SEC rather make revenue from the addition of Virginia Tech as a new market, or would it be wiser to keep the Big 10 out of Florida and dominate a market of 22 million people, and provide a 2nd and 3rd opportunity to the SEC schools who all want to play games in Florida for recruiting and just don't get many chances with only Florida in the Conference, and 6 of their games are dedicated to the East division.

Pretty Clearly Florida State, North Carolina, and Clemson are the best fits/or bring the strongest markets. If you want to control Florida (and add a part of the state where the SEC presence has been less than dominant) then add Miami. Taking Miami also reduces with the addition of North Carolina, the likelihood the Big 10 would attempt to take Ga Tech. Georgia Tech is merely a nice step to Florida. If there is nothing in Florida to get, the Big 10 likely focuses on Duke and Virginia and possibly Pitt.

Now what really hurts Virginia Tech and Miami's chances is the likelihood that N.C. State will be a requirement to land UNC. And I think the SEC would do that to lock down that state. If that happens the SEC finishes out with the Two Carolinas, FSU, and Clemson. And we take Clemson because they are the most SEC like campus and team with the most SEC like facilities, and because South Carolina very much wants them in.

If, as expected, UNC is willing to come along solo, then an acceptable 4th could be any of UVA, Va Tech, or Miami. If UNC needs NC St then we don't need either of them. NC State is similar to OSU, and we wouldn't let OU bring them along back before we were in such a dominant position.

The B1G won't take GT for the same reason we won't; they decrease the bottom line.

(03-27-2023 10:35 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(03-27-2023 08:19 PM)OdinFrigg Wrote:  Listening to a considerable amount of local Clemson chatter, they want much more $$$$$. They would be happy with SEC-level money while remaining in the ACC. Clemson, FSU, Miami, UNC, etc., know they will not receive P2-standard revenue in the ACC, even if the conference moves to unequal distributions.

I suppose, theotetically, the SEC could bring an eight member ACC division under its umbrella. How much more will ESPN fork-out to those schools for changing their label?

I keep repeating: get that Charlotte market while adding FSU and Clemson. Miami can be gravy.

That is the ideal foursome for the SEC. i guess the question will always be what does ESPN want since they are paying for it.

Those are the 4 best brands and markets. But maybe ESPN doesn't want to cave on having a monopoly in Florida. It would cost them money if FOX got in.

Florida State, Clemson, MIami, North Carolina? Do you deep six Clemson because South Carolina gives us the state? Then you are looking at Florida State, Miami, North Carolina and Virginia Tech.

What if ESPN is worried about losing the top basketball brands to FOX and figures the SEC football is tough enough? Duke, Kansas, North Carolina and Virginia, or perhaps a compromise with the SEC who needs a second Florida school to meet demand for games in that state from conference members. Now it changes again, Florida State, North Carolina, Duke and Virginia. And frankly that configuration, much as I wouldn't like it is likely if ESPN has concerns to protect those brands. You can like Miami, and love Va Tech, but they aren't the brands of those 4. And note who else is absent, Clemson.

So there is a lot of food for thought here and a lot more permutations than many would believe. And this is the sole reason a move to 8 is not impossible, though less profitable. At least at 8 Clemson and Miami are in. The beef now is who is #7 and #8? Here's where I speculate on Kansas and Colorado. Two new states, two state flagships, 10 million new SEC potential viewers, a new time zone, the blueblood in hoops who only is second to Kentucky in earnings, and a great vacation destination for SEC fans. Is that worth more than nearby Georgia Tech? Worth more than N.C. State? And if Virginia is coming on board is it worth more than adding Virginia Tech? Which would ESPN prefer? So first four Duke, North Carolina, Virginia (the three amigos and most sought TV brands), Florida State, Miami to keep the Sunshine monopoly, Clemson because they are the most like us, and....... So far you have 3 state AAU flagships in this catch. Florida State is considered Flagship and along with Miami they are in the running for AAU in the future. N.C. State and Va Tech are likely ahead of them in this regard. Colorado and Kansas are AAU state flagships in new states.

You guys solve it.

That's a very realistic combo, depending upon what the landscape looks like when the ACC teams are free. It would certainly be fun watching the B1G trying to contort themselves into inviting Clemson but fighting amongst themselves about their weaker Academics. I think they'd probably go with UW/UO, then either stop at 18 or bring in Clemson + VT for 20.

(03-31-2023 05:24 PM)bryanw1995 Wrote:  

(03-27-2023 10:35 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(03-27-2023 08:19 PM)OdinFrigg Wrote:  Listening to a considerable amount of local Clemson chatter, they want much more $$$$$. They would be happy with SEC-level money while remaining in the ACC. Clemson, FSU, Miami, UNC, etc., know they will not receive P2-standard revenue in the ACC, even if the conference moves to unequal distributions.

I suppose, theotetically, the SEC could bring an eight member ACC division under its umbrella. How much more will ESPN fork-out to those schools for changing their label?

I keep repeating: get that Charlotte market while adding FSU and Clemson. Miami can be gravy.

That is the ideal foursome for the SEC. i guess the question will always be what does ESPN want since they are paying for it.

Those are the 4 best brands and markets. But maybe ESPN doesn't want to cave on having a monopoly in Florida. It would cost them money if FOX got in.

Florida State, Clemson, MIami, North Carolina? Do you deep six Clemson because South Carolina gives us the state? Then you are looking at Florida State, Miami, North Carolina and Virginia Tech.

What if ESPN is worried about losing the top basketball brands to FOX and figures the SEC football is tough enough? Duke, Kansas, North Carolina and Virginia, or perhaps a compromise with the SEC who needs a second Florida school to meet demand for games in that state from conference members. Now it changes again, Florida State, North Carolina, Duke and Virginia. And frankly that configuration, much as I wouldn't like it is likely if ESPN has concerns to protect those brands. You can like Miami, and love Va Tech, but they aren't the brands of those 4. And note who else is absent, Clemson.

So there is a lot of food for thought here and a lot more permutations than many would believe. And this is the sole reason a move to 8 is not impossible, though less profitable. At least at 8 Clemson and Miami are in. The beef now is who is #7 and #8? Here's where I speculate on Kansas and Colorado. Two new states, two state flagships, 10 million new SEC potential viewers, a new time zone, the blueblood in hoops who only is second to Kentucky in earnings, and a great vacation destination for SEC fans. Is that worth more than nearby Georgia Tech? Worth more than N.C. State? And if Virginia is coming on board is it worth more than adding Virginia Tech? Which would ESPN prefer? So first four Duke, North Carolina, Virginia (the three amigos and most sought TV brands), Florida State, Miami to keep the Sunshine monopoly, Clemson because they are the most like us, and....... So far you have 3 state AAU flagships in this catch. Florida State is considered Flagship and along with Miami they are in the running for AAU in the future. N.C. State and Va Tech are likely ahead of them in this regard. Colorado and Kansas are AAU state flagships in new states.

You guys solve it.

That's a very realistic combo, depending upon what the landscape looks like when the ACC teams are free. It would certainly be fun watching the B1G trying to contort themselves into inviting Clemson but fighting amongst themselves about their weaker Academics. I think they'd probably go with UW/UO, then either stop at 18 or bring in Clemson + VT for 20.

I know it sounds crazy and illogical to us, but I can see the B1G going after Stanford. IMO, for all practical intents & purposes, the 'Ferd is a West Coast Ivy, something that is irrestible to the B1G, while we debate on taking Miami and/or Duke.
Plus, when the B1G goes after a new market, they look to see how many B1G alumni are there first. I know this is a foreign concept for us, but it is the quirky way that the B1G works

I don’t believe Clemson will be the initial maverick. The charter member won’t burn the bridges. It would be less so for UNC and other schools in North Carolina and Virginia.

Florida State and Miami may “team up” on embarking formally in challenging the ACC’s GoR. Make it a “Florida” thing at first. There can be a positive strategy in that.

Get a SEC secret promise, and lobby ESPN for $upport.