• 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

Dropped all the way from #4 preseason to #7 in the final poll last year.
 
PhDeac said:
Realignment reset: The Athletic writers draft new college football conferences from scratch https://theathletic.com/2751717/202...ew-college-football-conferences-from-scratch/

Eight writers drafted 10 teams each. Wake Forest is the only Power 5 program that didn’t get picked.

UNC, State, and Duke got picked in the 3-5 rounds respectively. BC was the last ACC team at #72.
Click to expand...

TheAthletic did the same thing based on college basketball. 6 teams with 12 picks. Wake didn't get picked. Even our old friend Eamonn Brennan picked DePaul over Wake with his last pick. State was an 11th round pick. Here are the 12th round picks: New Mexico, Vermont, Rutgers, DePaul, St. John's, and Saint Mary's.
https://theathletic.com/2764906/202...afts-new-mens-college-basketball-conferences/
 
PhDeac said:
TheAthletic did the same thing based on college basketball. 6 teams with 12 picks. Wake didn't get picked. Even our old friend Eamonn Brennan picked DePaul over Wake with his last pick. State was an 11th round pick. Here are the 12th round picks: New Mexico, Vermont, Rutgers, DePaul, St. John's, and Saint Mary's.
https://theathletic.com/2764906/202...afts-new-mens-college-basketball-conferences/
Click to expand...


I hope that whatever passes for our marketing department is paying attention. If our (formerly) flagship program can't get a slot in the top 72 of anyone who has a press credential, something is amiss. It's not like Vermont is spending big bucks on sports marketing. If I were the AD I would hire a third party marketing firm to figure out (a) why is our brand so awful, and (b) what can we do about it.
 
Other ACC teams omitted include Clemson, Tech, Miami, and BC.
 
deacdixieboy said:
I love this. I hope they also agree to not schedule the SEC teams outside of rivalry games.
Click to expand...

If they really wanted to make the point about the SEC being too powerful they would even cancel the rivalry games.
 
Is the idea that they would eventually have to pay to play?

I was reading that something like this sort of bloc/coalition/alliance could be the only way to counter the power and money that the SEC wields.

I believe one complication is the ACC’s ties to ESPN. Which makes me wonder why it’s not ACC/SEC vs PAC/B1G/ whatever’s left of the B12. Then we have our annual Fox vs ESPN for the national championship. Ah, tradition.
 
DeacDaddy said:
Is the idea that they would eventually have to pay to play?

I was reading that something like this sort of bloc/coalition/alliance could be the only way to counter the power and money that the SEC wields.

I believe one complication is the ACC’s ties to ESPN. Which makes me wonder why it’s not ACC/SEC vs PAC/B1G/ whatever’s left of the B12. Then we have our annual Fox vs ESPN for the national championship. Ah, tradition.
Click to expand...

One driver may be that the current ACC Commissioner came from a B1G school. He certainly has greater famiarity with the B1G AD'S and Commissioner than he dies with the SEC Commissioner and AD'S.

Obviously the B1G and Pac12 have a long standing relationship based in part on the Rose Bowl.

ACC may also be somewhat wary of SEC trying to poach some ACC schools. That noise has happened before.
 
This alliance would benefit from a 4 or 6 team playoff that only includes conference champs or a top 4 ND. A 4 team would likely exclude the Big XII and both would further encourage ND to join the ACC.
 
Agreed. Playoff expansion, apart from a tournament of conference champions, only benefits the SEC. Must resist it.

I think the proposed alliance conferences have a lot in common academically.

ACC is in uncomfortable position of association with ESPN who may be working for its destruction for the benefit of the SEC.
 
Exactly. The goal of this alliance should be for the ACC to get out of the thumb of ESPN/SEC without losing any members.
 
I like it but gotta keep rivalry games with SEC…. Clemson and FSU are two most likely targets to flip so do we don’t need to mess with their huge rival games.
 
The conference alliance is going to mean more competitive schedules and generally more losses for the best teams from those conferences. It behooves them to expand the playoff so that their conference gets a spot in the playoff table. Otherwise your three loss PAC champ is gonna be left holding their dicks.

I think they were just putting the kibosh on expansion until they came up with a plan to counter the SEC's move. As it stands, would you rather have 2 SEC teams in a 4 team playoff, or 3 in an 8 team playoff, or 4 in a 12 team playoff? Expansion is in everybody's interest.
 
4 team playoff where only conference Champs get in would screw the SEC and force ND’s hand. I’m for that.
 
Last edited:
ELC, you couldn’t be more wrong. Guess you’re an SEC homer like TheReff and Biff now. If a conference alliance brings more competitive schedules and more noncon losses for conference champs, the best thing for the ACC, Pac-12, and Big Ten would be a playoff of only conference champs.

The conference championship games would be that much more important. Teams could play schedule compelling noncon games without fear that the SEC East runner-up would take their spot. A 3 loss Pac-12 champ would get left out of a 12 team expansion in favor of a 4th or 5th SEC team.

A 4 or 6 champ playoff also makes sure the Rose Bowl is between at least the Pac-12 and Big Ten runners up.

Hopefully this alliance isn’t working under the delusion that there’s an even playing field and every conference can get multiple teams in. No way. The SEC will get more teams in every time.
 
Nobody wants a playoff limited to only conference champs because there are invariably shitty conference champs. You then have the same problem you had with the NCAA basketball tourney when it was similarly limited. And only the PAC and BIG care about their precious Rose Bowl matchups, which have been effectively neutered for 20 years now when the heathens from other conferences started making appearances in that game. If those three want to isolate themselves and go back to the days of split NCs, that's their problem. If they want what is good for CFB, they'll quit acting like little bitches. Expansion was a done deal when we had 5 big conferences and simple math meant at least one was going to be left out. Now that there are soon to be 4 big conferences, somehow the thinking has changed and it's short-sided, not to mention self-serving. Had the Big 10 poached OU and TX, I guarantee they would be singing a different tune.
 
Y'all are missing the point here. This is between Universities run by Presidents and Universities run by Athletics. The SEC has gone all in for football at all costs. The ACC has powerful CEO's. So does the Big Ten. This shit ain't near over. In fact, in the end we could be way better off.
 
macktheknife said:
Y'all are missing the point here. This is between Universities run by Presidents and Universities run by Athletics. The SEC has gone all in for football at all costs. The ACC has powerful CEO's. So does the Big Ten. This shit ain't near over. In fact, in the end we could be way better off.
Click to expand...

This is a good take. The SEC has just proven they don't care about anything else and were willing to make the first big move. It won't be the last move in college football. And there are going to be some really intelligent people taking a very hard look at what the landscape is going to look like given that the SEC has played its card.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top