(10-16-2023 07:04 PM)bryanw1995 Wrote: (10-16-2023 04:52 PM)random asian guy Wrote: If I were the B10, I would target FSU and Miami.
This move would be very similar to taking USC/UCLA.
Florida is the most important market/recruiting base to the ACC as So Cal was to the Pac 12.
As the Pac 12 was trying to add SDSU to recapture some of that market, the ACC would have to approach USF.
But I don’t think Miami would move before 2036. UNC is definetely not in my opinion. If the B10 wants to expand around 2029, they probably need to persuade FSU and Clemson to challenge the GoR.
It would be very similar to taking USC and UCLA, if the University of Oregon was 10 miles down the road from them. And even that understates things, as UF is slightly ahead of FSU and clearly ahead of Miami in the contest for the hearts and minds of Florida Men. I'd hate to lose FSU to the B1G, but UNC and Clemson would be a nice consolation prize. We could get back to parity, perhaps even a slight advantage, by grabbing UCF at that point, but I think we'd just sit at 18 and laugh as FSU and Miami withered on the B1G vine.
The SEC is not ever taking UCF. I seriously doubt ESPN will lose FSU to the Big 10, or for that matter any ACC school crucial to their marketing strategy. And another thing, there is no parity to which we need to return. The SEC enjoys a 3 billion dollar valuation lead, will have the preponderance of champions from the last 25 years playing in the SEC, and even if FSU by some bizarre coincidence wound up in the Big 10 they would still be playing catch up to us. There is no certainty that Miami heads to the Big 10.
You should look at the valuations, look at the total revenue, check the attendance and do some homework before you glibly guestimate most of your responses. You graduated A&M in '95 and have been in the SEC since 2012. The SEC's realignment plans were formulated in 1990, put into practice in 1991, and have remained largely intact and operational since then. You know Texas A&M and the SWC and Big 12 much better than you know the SEC. But don't feel bad, you know a heckuva lot more about it than West Coasters, New Englanders, and Big 10 speculators. The SEC originally hoped to land Texas, their silent partner in 1990 Oklahoma, Texas A&M, Clemson, Florida State and Arkansas. They hoped that when Clemson backed off the opportunity and one of their trustees called his buddy at South Carolina that when we took the Gamecocks it would one day help us land UNC. Virginia Tech called us in 1990 and the presidents thought them too far away. Virginia would fill in the map with either school. You don't know these things because they weren't a part of your world. I don't see anything which has changed here for the SEC. Miami was a backup to FSU but not a primary objective and really only in a defensive strategy plan the SEC had then in case the Big 10 tried to move down the East Coast.
For the children on this board which for me are my kids ages or less so 50 or younger, this all seems new and recent. It is not. In 1983 when the SCOTUS ruled on Oklahoma and Georgia vs the NCAA all of this kicked in. Add to it a book about building a 16-team super conference from a minor network exec who pointed out how markets could be cobbled together to make a profitable and marketable conference and you don't have to be a rocket scientist to see why it developed as it did. Delany reached out first to Penn State then later to Nebraska expanding the Big 10 East and West. Arkansas and South Carolina did it for the SEC. But the SEC was quite prepared to jump to 16 if it could land the six I listed first. Well, here we are 32 years after that plan was made and the SEC has added Arkansas, Texas, Texas A&M, Oklahoma, Missouri instead of Florida State, and South Carolina instead of Clemson, and we would still likely pick up FSU and Clemson. The futuristic goals of the SEC in 1991 were to get into to North Carolina and then Virginia. Where are we now? What are we talking about now?
ESPN will decide movement prior to 2034. After that the schools could likely find a way to escape the Mouse's clutches. My issue with much of the speculation on this board is that it wholesale ignores business arrangements, who has the leverage, and it ignores the fact that these moves aren't about academics, they are about athletic profits, brand exposure, and donor preferences which take precedence over professors' preferences and those of the administration. UNC will, like Oklahoma and Texas did, decide to join the conference best suited to their business model and their donor base preferences. It's not hard, it's just hard for most of you to accept because it doesn't match your personal biases.
Miami, should the ACC lose them, could do well in the SEC, but would be better suited to the Big 10. Their administration is Big 10. Their audience that cares about football is Big 10. Their location is not SEC. The situation in Tallahassee is a matter of preference and option the same as at Clemson. Their fans and donors would likely prefer the SEC. But they will take whatever option lands them in a P2. The operative question then becomes how important are they to ESPN. AS two of the top 3 earners in the ACC, with solid viewership numbers for national quality games. I see no reason ESPN would want to have them in a FOX controlled conference. Now in 2030 if ESPN wants to nab the Big 10 things could change. I don't see that happening either.
The schools rumored to the SEC make sense. The SEC would love to have Notre Dame. The SEC does not expect that they will apply. Should Notre Dame join anywhere having USC in the Big 10 probably cinches that, especially if they can still have exposure in the Northeast. Wanting games in the South could be a dicey matter to schedule so the Big 10 interest in Miami to partner with them is rational and practical as it meets a Big 10 objective and would likely assist N.D. If the SEC and Big 10 split Virginia, I don't think either would care.
In the end no matter what anyone thinks, the Big 10 will add whoever FOX is willing to pay to get, and the SEC will add from the ACC whoever ESPN pays us to take. If there is to be a battleground anywhere it won't be huge, it will likely be over somebody like Kansas. If you want to know why just count the teams that would be in the new SEC West because at 20 or 24 we go back to divisions most likely when the new upper tier is formed. Then get out a map and pencil in the additions. That's what Sankey wants and if ESPN wants us to shelter Clemson, FSU, North Carolina, Duke or N.C. State, Virginia Tech and pick up Kansas there you have it, or something very much like that.
I doubt there is even much acrimony over it. The networks have another agenda and they are likely working together to finish realignment to get to it. And when that happens the SEC and Big 10 will be partners in one giant rivalry which should make both of them a lot of money. I've never hated the Big 10, I just get sick of endless world conquering scenarios from some of their fans. I'd say so far things are going about like the networks wanted them to go. The froze the PAC 12 into submission, and now they will Gap grow the schools away from the ACC that they want. This isn't the SEC and Big 10 gobbling up college football. It's the SEC and Big 10 getting paid to help ESPN and FOX rearrange it.
/
The Case for Miami as the Big Ten's Number 20
