• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

Conference Expansion: Stanford, California and SMU Join the ACC

MichDeac25 said:
Then you haven't been reading the right things. There has been plenty of discussion that the NCAA is going to be defunct for football and possibly for basketball as well.

You were really, really wrong on your NIL prediction ("Watch the worst thing that happens from this be that some female track and field athlete makes money off her TikTok.") and you're really, really wrong here on NIL's impact on conferences.
Click to expand...

That a misreading of my prior posts and a misreading of my post above. I don’t think NIL is bad so framing any NIL as the “worst thing” is blatantly wrong. Along with that, you’re mischaracterizing my posts about gender equity and NIL and that NIL would impact more than just the star QB. I’ve clearly been proven to be right that NIL $$$ won’t just follow who gets highlights on ESPN.

My point is that the conference realignment process than began years ago is motivated by TV execs and college presidents. I didn’t think that was a debatable point especially not under the idea that it’s motivated by a new policy that’s barely a year old. It doesn’t make chronological sense. Even a broader point that all these moves are about helping kids get paid is laughable.

But anyway, feel free to direct me to all these articles about the new student-athlete model of the Super League. I know it will likely peel off for football. That’s an obvious step toward college presidents controlling more of the revenue.

But will it involve some sort of revenue-sharing, player unions, etc that are part of pro sports? I haven’t seen any of that discussion much less the idea that is the motivating factor. I’m sure I can counter any article you can find speculating how much the new SEC will pay player with an article on much money ESPN will pay per school for TV rights.
 
There is a greater chance no teams leave ACC than a doomsday 6-8 teams jumping ship in next 2 years but I don’t see how in 2030 at the latest FSU, Clemson, and Miami are in the same conference as WF. I have hope that it’s possible UVA, UNC, Duke, State, VT, GT stick around with some sweetheart deal that bends over LOWF. I could care less if LVille and Pitt move on provided there are enough schools to have a viable conference. Those were arranged marriages. Would like to see BC and Cuse stick around- BC more so.
 
JKW385 said:
I don’t think it’s that Duke itself has that much more appeal than us - it’s more that they have a rival 8 miles away that is on paper - most attractive team in the ACC not named Clemson for Big 2. They are more attractive than FSU or Miami at the moment in my opinion- not if those programs are back to early 2000’s form. UNC is gonna look out for Duke, State, and LOWF in that order
Click to expand...

Right. I think most folks agree that unc is desirable enough to drag a rival with them. The question is whether it’s duke or state. duke seems most likely given the marketability of that basketball game and the reputation of that rival.
 
Deacfreak07 said:
Right. I think most folks agree that unc is desirable enough to drag a rival with them. The question is whether it’s duke or state. duke seems most likely given the marketability of that basketball game and the reputation of that rival.
Click to expand...

Yeah and no one outside of State fans cares about State. Now, I think most Wake fans know this is the case with Wake, but State fans really do think they are a desirable property.
 
NIL is a stop gap measure. When Schools are at $100 Million TV revenue players are going to demand a cut. They might unionize to get it. So the players get say $20 million plus an education. I think that's where we are going.
 
BarcaDeac said:
Yeah and no one outside of State fans cares about State. Now, I think most Wake fans know this is the case with Wake, but State fans really do think they are a desirable property.
Click to expand...

We would definitely win Director’s Cup for most self-aware/self-depreciating fan base. Being a WF fan builds character - a tradition unlike no other
 
Just don't get this idea that Carolina is a strong enough draw that they're going to take another team with them when they're really not.
 
ChrisL68 said:
Just don't get this idea that Carolina is a strong enough draw that they're going to take another team with them when they're really not.
Click to expand...

I don’t know for sure if they do have clout to bring in someone else but they are the only member of ACC who is going to think twice about other schools’ interests (with LOWF way down the list). Clemson, FSU, and Miami would go by themselves yesterday and not think twice. UVA might have some concern for VT but they’ve only been in same conference since 2004.
 
JKW385 said:
I don’t know for sure if they do have clout to bring in someone else but they are the only member of ACC who is going to think twice about other schools’ interests (with LOWF way down the list). Clemson, FSU, and Miami would go by themselves yesterday and not think twice. UVA might have some concern for VT but they’ve only been in same conference since 2004.
Click to expand...

To to clarify - it’s not benevolence for Tarholes to care about Duke and State- it’s purely juicing the deal for more money given the uniqueness of both of those rivalries
 
PhDeac said:
That a misreading of my prior posts and a misreading of my post above. I don’t think NIL is bad so framing any NIL as the “worst thing” is blatantly wrong. Along with that, you’re mischaracterizing my posts about gender equity and NIL and that NIL would impact more than just the star QB. I’ve clearly been proven to be right that NIL $$$ won’t just follow who gets highlights on ESPN.

My point is that the conference realignment process than began years ago is motivated by TV execs and college presidents. I didn’t think that was a debatable point especially not under the idea that it’s motivated by a new policy that’s barely a year old. It doesn’t make chronological sense. Even a broader point that all these moves are about helping kids get paid is laughable.

But anyway, feel free to direct me to all these articles about the new student-athlete model of the Super League. I know it will likely peel off for football. That’s an obvious step toward college presidents controlling more of the revenue.

But will it involve some sort of revenue-sharing, player unions, etc that are part of pro sports? I haven’t seen any of that discussion much less the idea that is the motivating factor. I’m sure I can counter any article you can find speculating how much the new SEC will pay player with an article on much money ESPN will pay per school for TV rights.
Click to expand...

On 6-21-21, off the "SCOTUS 9-0 Ruling: 'The NCAA Is Not Above the Law" thread:

PhDeac: "I think the big stories out of this are going to be more about athletes who monetize their Instagram than a 1980s type concern about schools brokering endorsement deals to steal athletes."

There were some bad takes on that thread. A year later, it's clear that it's more about the organization of donors and schools to fund players now. And this is why the schools are moving in this direction. Yes, do TV execs want to make more money? Absolutely. But it's also about Presidents and ADs of Universities actings as CEOs determining how best to protect their school's interests going forward. And that involves positioning your school to get the most money. Because the most money will be able to attract the best athletes, partly because of the arms race of facilities, and partly because athletes are now being paid. Watch for that dam to continue to erode. And the schools that have the most money will be able to spread that around to non-rev sports as well. If schools are able to form a few mega conferences, they would probably prefer to regulate themselves somehow in terms of payments to players so that they can cap that "expense" somehow. But to do that, there has to be a collective group with real revenue.

So the fear is that there's going to be a clear best tier of major college sports with those players making the most money. And your school is either going to be part of it or your school isn't going to be really competing in college athletics anymore - at least not in terms of people watching them on TV.
 
The vast majority of actual NIL deals were signed by athletes who are already enrolled. A few 5 stars signed NIL deals and there’s the rumors about A&M.

You’re trying to project your fears into reality and ignoring the facts.
 
JKW385 said:
I honestly think Mega Conference is going to have biggest effect on non-revenue sports as they are going to now have unprecedented cash for chartered planes, recruiting budgets, facilities for women’s volleyball, tennis, cross country, etc. those sports historically Wake has done very well in as it’s typically smart upper/middle class kids that are attracted to schools like Wake and parents can pay the full tuition. Now, those kids are going to be wined and dined just like football and men’s basketball. Even if we are left out of this round of Mega Conference, it doesn’t mean we’re left out forever - control what we can control, continue to invest in facilities, keep DC happy, and get creative with NIL. We already have a fraction of budgets as these Mega schools and are competitive and/or beat them on the field.
Click to expand...

no
 
Since about 1980 American society has valued money and the acclimation of personal wealth over anything else. “Greed is good” is our national ethos.

I’m surprised it took this long. Wake has been living on borrowed time most of my life.
 
BillBrasky said:
Since about 1980 American society has valued money and the acclimation of personal wealth over anything else. “Greed is good” is our national ethos.

I’m surprised it took this long. Wake has been living on borrowed time most of my life.
Click to expand...

It’s been since way before the 1980s. Read a history book.
 
DeaconCav06 said:
It’s been since way before the 1980s. Read a history book.
Click to expand...

If you’re talking the Gilded Age and Plantation economics before that, then we agree, but I’m not sure that’s a type of society we should strive to be. But maybe you disagree.

Post Great Depression American society prioritized and worshipped the mega wealthy far less than we do today.

In Reaganomics the Wake Forests of the world always lose in the end, so here we are.
 
Last edited:
BillBrasky said:
If you’re talking the Gilded Age and Plantation economics before that, then we agree, but I’m not sure that’s a type of society we should strive to be. But maybe you disagree.

Post Great Depression American society prioritized and worshipped the mega wealthy far less than we do today.

In Reaganomics the Wake Forests of the world always lose in the end, so here we are.
Click to expand...
Reaganomics is left wing ideology today.
 
BillBrasky said:
If you’re talking the Gilded Age and Plantation economics before that, then we agree, but I’m not sure that’s a type of society we should strive to be. But maybe you disagree.

Post Great Depression American society prioritized and worshipped the mega wealthy far less than we do today.

In Reaganomics the Wake Forests of the world always lose in the end, so here we are.
Click to expand...

Do you get nose bleeds from how high your horse is?
 
macktheknife said:
Reaganomics is left wing ideology today.
Click to expand...

It's the ideology of the Centrist Left for sure, and that's why income inequality is so extreme.

DeaconCav06 said:
Do you get nose bleeds from how high your horse is?
Click to expand...

For a prep school kid with a couple of fancy degrees I'd expect more than this. Your response makes me sad, I expected more out of you.

That being said I just moved into an apartment that costs twice as much as anywhere I lived before. I'm not a martyr. There's very little public will to make our society any better, where all selfish hypocrites. I'm just not acting surprised anymore when this shit happens. If you open your eyes its pretty obvious where this is all going.
 
I actually don't expect alot more movement, simply because there are few assets worth purchasing.

There was an article today where a B10 AD is quoted as saying that Washington and Oregon, while having some value, are not worth a full share of the new B10 contract. So at least for now it appears like neither is likely to get a B10 invite in the immediate future. If those 2 schools are not seen as adding enough value how many schools are, I expect it may be enough to count on one hand.

Fans of every school are clamoring to get into the Big 2, but realistically there may not be more than another 2-4 that ultimately get invites. Those conferences are only going to extend an invitation if they think it is additive to their contract.
Fans keep thinking how big the SEC and B10 will become, when they may need to think more in terms of how small they may remain. There is no guarantee they even go to 20 teams. Maybe they stay at 16, maybe they go to 18. There is no guarantee they have an appetite for a 20+ league conference and right now it feels like it will be less than that.

The one truly valuable brand out there is ND. I don't think B10 will do anything else until they know what ND is going to do. If they truly want ND then I could see them taking Stanford as well as that would then bring the 5 biggest rivals for ND into the same conference. Their FB program is not part of the ACC's GoR, though their other sports are, so they are the one school that could relatively easily make the change an have limited repurcussions.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top