• 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

donaldross said:
You say this as if we have some sort of right to stay at the highest level of college athletics. We do not. We are free to hop the minor league bus to Boone, Spartanburg, and Conway and cut down all the travel we want. We are likely to be forced into that -- but we are free to head down to the lower levels if we want. I'm sure Clemson and FSU would be quite happy to stay if BC & Wake (the massive revenue losers) moved along.
Click to expand...
Have you even looked at the TV ratings the last couple years? Wake is solidly in the middle of the conference. Go shit somewhere else.
 
Makes much more sense to add navy, a traditional nd opponent to entice nd all-in football membership, than to head west.

nd could solve all problems.
 
Wakeforest22890 said:
In the event that it actually needs to be said (and I cannot believe it actually does), you could probably put together the top college football team from continental Europe combined and they'd go winless against an ACC slate.
Click to expand...
Way better health insurance and benefits coverage in Europe though.
 
SkyDivingDeacon said:
I’d be in favor of an uneven revenue split of some kind. If a University president votes against that, they’re basically saying they don’t think they can win. I bet the ACC would get the votes for it. Figure out league expansion later if we can’t rope ND into joining along with Stanford and Cal (which is the longest of long shots). This might help keep FSU/Clemson from exploring further how to leave the conference.
Click to expand...
The Big XII gave Texas an extra large share of revenue and their own TV network. Texas left anyway. The ACC just adopted a form of bonus money for winning. Almost immediately F$U whined it wasn't enough. They want much more money based on perceived "brand value," not necessarily winning. They voted for the equal distribution plan when it was put into effect.

In theory a conference is about more than football media revenue. That is why the B1G used to require AAU status and adjacency for schools added. That doesn’t seem to be important anymore.
 
bym051d said:
The hockey matches probably get more viewers than BC football and I be the ACC doesn’t see any of that money.
Click to expand...
The ACC definitely doesn’t. BC isn’t in the ACC for hockey because the ACC doesn’t sponsor hockey. Same for ND.
 
deacdixieboy said:
The ACC definitely doesn’t. BC isn’t in the ACC for hockey because the ACC doesn’t sponsor hockey. Same for ND.
Click to expand...
Yeah, I knew we weren't involved and why I guessed we didn't get money from it.
 
deacdixieboy said:
They aren’t middle of the pack in viewership and that’s all that matters.
Click to expand...
People watch Navy when they play Army. Fewer people, but still a nice total, watch Navy-Air Force.

Navy’s game against Notre Same was second from the bottom in Notre Dame’s viewership numbers for non-Peacock games last year.

Other than the academy games, people don’t watch Navy.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top