• 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

I hate to be the bearer of bad news, but I don't think adding SMU is going to help the ACC's all-time record against the SEC.

Stanford 6-1
California 6-10
SMU 14-27-2
 
TheReff said:
ACC title game last year. We are hanging our hat on same in 2021.
Click to expand...
more than that I think most in the world would say a 11 win season is much better than a 9 win season. 2 games or 20% diff. is pretty big diff when only 12-13 games. You win 9 - meh, you win double digits you have had a special season.
 
saltydeac said:
more than that I think most in the world would say a 11 win season is much better than a 9 win season. 2 games or 20% diff. is pretty big diff when only 12-13 games. You win 9 - meh, you win double digits you have had a special season.
Click to expand...

Yeah, UNC-CH losing four straight games to close out the season really wrecked their W-L total. :cool:
 
BarcaDeac said:
pretty cool to have the Pony Express, John Elway, and Beast Mode joining fellow ACC legends Doug Flutie, Dan Marino, and Vinny Testaverde.
Click to expand...
Throw in Jim Brown, Carmelo Anthony, Tony Dorsett, Donovan McNabb, and Prime Time. Conference of legends!
 
Notre Dame is directing this whole deal. If you take these schools we commit into perpetuity if we join a conference it’s the ACC. So yet again they screw the ACC. Watch and learn.
 
donaldross said:
Bobby Jones was the ACC’s best golfer.

Raymond Floyd is closer to Arnie than Arnie was to Jones.

Colin Morikowa (Cal) may end up on the Floyd/Arnie tier (several majors but way fewer than 10)
Click to expand...

Colin Morikawa needs to have Ray Floyd's major career to pass Brooks Koepka.
 
So, four schools opposed the initial plan to add Cal & Stanford (and possibly SMU). Those four schools are: FSU, Clemson, UNC and NC State.

The speculated rationale for the no votes were:

  • FSU wants out of the ACC, and one way (perhaps the only way) for FSU to leave the ACC and not lose a ton of money via GOR is for the ACC to dissolve. By adding three schools with no other options, it becomes less likely that ACC will dissolve before 2036. So, FSU is never supporting adding members to the ACC.
  • While not as clear, it appears, at a minimum, Clemson wants to keep its options open, and based on the rationale above, adding those three schools would limit Clemson's options until 2036
  • Also, while not as clear (as FSU is run by idiots revealing their hand on every deal), UNC may have the same thinking as Clemson, and also, just not want to further water-down the conference by adding members from different timezones, as it appears that there are still decision-makers at UNC that still romanticize about the ACC before expansion; simply stated, they liked it better when the ACC was essentially a North Carolina-based conference, and they were the big dog (that's never going to happen if they join another conference).
  • NC State, who are probably upset at FSU for challenging the Pack as to the most delusional fan-base, seem to think that they are tethered to UNC, and that if UNC does get an offer from the Big 10 or SEC, they would be part of the package.... don't think the Pack should hold their breath while waiting for an SEC or Big 10 offer.
So, as poorly run as many believe the ACC are, the conference is not dumb enough to go through another vote on expansion without believing that at least one of those four has had a change of heart. Clear that its not FSU, as those dopes continue to grasp to the pipe dream that the SEC is on the verge of inviting them, and it's the ACC affiliation that holding the Noles back. Keep thinking that Drew Weatherford... So, that means that Clemson, UNC or NC State has changed its mind. Since State is apparently just letting UNC decide things, it would seem like either Clemson or UNC (or both) are now open to ACC expansion. For UNC or Clemson, I would not think its just the extra money that they might get if SMU, Stanford and Cal agree to no share for an extra couple of years. Wouldn't think a call by George Bush or Condeleeza Rice would be enough either. Maybe the SEC and Big 10 made it clear that they aren't adding anytime soon. Would love to know the machinations.
 
Last edited:
MichDeac25 said:
Yeah article said it may be going in to a separate pot that would be distributed differently than the rest of ACC funds. So might be trying to keep FSU happy from this side pot.
Click to expand...
It doesn't make sense to me to placate FSU right now. They are stuck with the GOR. I wouldn't give them more money now/short-term, when they can't go anywhere. They don't have leverage currently. When they do have leverage years later, giving them more money now won't have any influence on their decision to act in their own interest at the expense of the conference.
 
Biff Ochocinco Tannen said:
Max Homa. ACC Legend.

I'm surprised you didn't jump on Bryson DeChambeau as the obvious ascender to the highest tiers.

Payne Stewart is another good one.

Also, what about Brooks Koepka, who has three more majors than Morikowa, though he is 7 years older ?
Click to expand...
Excellent point on Koepka. His resume will match Arnie when done.

Folks don’t like Brooks so they will defend Palmer to the end regardless of the facts.
 
saltydeac said:
more than that I think most in the world would say a 11 win season is much better than a 9 win season. 2 games or 20% diff. is pretty big diff when only 12-13 games. You win 9 - meh, you win double digits you have had a special season.
Click to expand...
Most also recognize the context of making the championship game out of Clemson's division vs Duke's. There were more games played those years than just the conference championship.
 
Tobacco Road said:
It doesn't make sense to me to placate FSU right now. They are stuck with the GOR. I wouldn't give them more money now/short-term, when they can't go anywhere. They don't have leverage currently. When they do have leverage years later, giving them more money now won't have any influence on their decision to act in their own interest at the expense of the conference.
Click to expand...
that plus I'm hoping the ACC ADs that are most influential are savvy enough business leaders that aren't going to reward bad behavior knowing that only weakens the conference and lets others know they can go barking to the media as well to try and manipulate outcomes. I think the public comments on paying extra for performance is a great solution that will resonate with Clemson as they know they have a program set up to continue to dominate and potentially structure it so they can make more than a SEC/B10 school, while Noles fret knowing they have poor leadership and will wallow in mediocrity and unable to take advantage of a performance driven payout no matter the # of 5 stars they bring in.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top