|
Replies: 35
| visibility 1
|
All-In [44028]
TigerPulse: 81%
Posts: 32946
Joined: 2/22/03
|
Why are some here so convinced that the ACC is dying?
Nov 20, 2012, 10:27 AM
|
|
I think some of you are buying into the ESPN hype, fueled by internet "experts" who think they know what's going on. Top to bottom, the ACC is in great shape. Football is down right now, but that won't last. Basketball is great, and Olympic sports are great. It has history, good geography of schools (especially compared to most others), and is on good footing financially. Contrary to internet "rumors," the ACC is not getting left behind financially nor are its teams being left out of some super duper playoff system.
So Maryland left. No big deal. We replace them with Louisville, who would be a big upgrade in football and, lately, a big upgrade in basketball as well. They don't give us the academics, but one bad school out of 14 won't be a big deal. Plus, we know they will pay money to support athletics.
Besides, even if the doomsdayers are right and the ACC crumbles - Clemson has planned for that. Don't think for one minute that our administration (Barker, BOT, etc.) hasn't mapped out our every move and has contingency plans in place.
We have arguably the most important rivalry game in our program's history coming up this weekend. Let's not lose sight of that! Go Tigers!
|
|
|
|
 |
All-In [28802]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 58393
Joined: 11/14/03
|
some of them just really want it to happen***
Nov 20, 2012, 10:30 AM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [2826]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 4497
Joined: 9/14/03
|
In football, Maryland was South Carolina w/a BCS appearance.
Nov 20, 2012, 10:32 AM
|
|
No great loss.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Legend [19610]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 16899
Joined: 9/5/02
|
Problem with Louisville is that, under the ACC league
Nov 20, 2012, 10:33 AM
|
|
regulations, half of their athletes would become ineligible. Half of their team is Juco. The ACC allows what, 3-4 non qualifiers?
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [44028]
TigerPulse: 81%
Posts: 32946
Joined: 2/22/03
|
I was not aware of that.***
Nov 20, 2012, 10:35 AM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Heisman Winner [108390]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 64974
Joined: 2/25/06
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [6096]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 13242
Joined: 11/10/00
|
is that why they are now lousy?
Nov 20, 2012, 10:55 AM
|
|
It has taken a few years to wind them down?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Heisman Winner [108390]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 64974
Joined: 2/25/06
|
i don't think they were ever all that great tbh. they are
Nov 20, 2012, 11:03 AM
|
|
a good program who's had 1 poor year in 20, are now 7-33 against top 10 competition, beamer has a losing record in bowl games and welsh owned the hth when he was at uva.
there are a lot of other 'great' programs who've had more down years in the same time period.
i believe vpi has a ceiling and they've reached it. they haven't changed in 26 years of beamer so it's easier to target them. they'll have a decision to make soon.
i do believe the acc had a hand in beamer finally being censured in 2008. it was long overdue. how much that hindered him or the program i'm not sure.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [10360]
TigerPulse: 84%
Posts: 14030
Joined: 11/9/04
|
i don't think it's "dying", but it's not getting better.....
Nov 20, 2012, 10:34 AM
|
|
it's stagnant
we added Pitt and Syracuse............not all for that
Louisville i don't have a problem with EXCEPT we "turned down/didn't ask" WVU b/c of their academics............so why ask Louisville??????
I think they should ask PSU and ND as all or nothin' members and see what happens
as mickey said this morning.......the ACC needs somebody with FOOTBALL to come in
UCONN, Pitt, & Syracuse is not that..........Louisville?...ehh it's ok i think we should shoot for better
i will say this........if FSU leaves the ACC is done.......and so are we if we aren't proactive about the situation
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [44028]
TigerPulse: 81%
Posts: 32946
Joined: 2/22/03
|
Notre Dame and Penn State as full members wouldn't be bad.
Nov 20, 2012, 10:37 AM
|
|
Notre Dame obviously, because their football program is big time. I don't really want Penn State due to their NCAA issues, but they certainly have a lot of potential 5-10 years down the line if they recover.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [10360]
TigerPulse: 84%
Posts: 14030
Joined: 11/9/04
|
you have to look at long term........
Nov 20, 2012, 10:44 AM
|
|
UConn, pitt, syracuse have ZERO long term consistent potential
i know miami is down, but once they get their issues straight they have "potential" to get back to where they once were
VT is having a bad year
but Long term ND, PSU, Clemson, FSU, Miami, and VT would give the ACC a leg to stand on
they wouldn't be the "SEC", BUT.........if you look at the SEC it has about 6 teams that are good-great basically every year........the rest are garbage
the ACC "could" be that with the above mentioned schools LONG TERM, but i have no confidence that will happen under swofford............it's a pipe dream
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [44028]
TigerPulse: 81%
Posts: 32946
Joined: 2/22/03
|
We should focus long term...
Nov 20, 2012, 10:49 AM
|
|
Which means that it makes little sense for some people here to freak out and create these crazy scenarios based upon events that have happened within the last six months.
A long term approach would be a cautious, yet informed, one. The SEC is great at football now, but will they be in 10-20 years? How about 30-40 years?
I agree that Pitt and Syracuse don't bring much to the table from a football perspective now, and perhaps they will never be consistent. But they could be. Who would have predicted ten years ago that some of today's successful football programs would accomplish so much?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Heisman Winner [108390]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 64974
Joined: 2/25/06
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [2245]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 2743
Joined: 1/26/12
|
Re: i don't think it's "dying", but it's not getting better.....
Nov 20, 2012, 11:02 AM
[ in reply to i don't think it's "dying", but it's not getting better..... ] |
|
Boy, I sure don't agree that Syracuse and Pitt are going to be cup cakes or door mats. You better snap on your chin straps. I think for the next couple years we have the upper hand but it will be a fight when we head north.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [39020]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 51623
Joined: 11/20/04
|
Lots of assumptions and irrelevant points in that post.
Nov 20, 2012, 10:36 AM
|
|
You're assuming that Clemson will have some measure of control over its destiny if the ACC crumbles, when in actuality we will be reliant on an invite from the Big XII or SEC.
You're assuming the ACC will take Louisville instead of Connecticut when every single move to this point has bolstered basketball strength at the expense of football.
The strength of Olympic sports is irrelevant, because they don't pay the bills. They are the red states leeching off the financial success of the blue states of football and basketball.
History - irrelevant. Geography - irrelevant.
I see no evidence anywhere for your statement that the ACC isn't getting left behind financially. The SEC, Pac-12 and Big Ten specifically have much sweeter deals than the ACC.
Basically many of you are willing to go down with the ACC ship based on misplaced loyalty to a conference that has never done #### for Clemson. I do not understand that in the slightest.
Clemson first and always.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [44028]
TigerPulse: 81%
Posts: 32946
Joined: 2/22/03
|
It's not blind loyalty to the ACC.
Nov 20, 2012, 10:44 AM
|
|
Just because the ACC isn't perfect doesn't mean that another conference would be any better. Do you honestly think the Big XII, with all the power the University of Texas has, would care about Clemson? How about the SEC, with its good 'ol boy mentality centered around the traditional SEC powers? We would have zero influence in those conferences.
Plus, our road to successful seasons would be MUCH harder there. Our recruiting is already near the top of college football and can't get much better. I don't see why making it harder to win 10+ games a season makes sense. No matter how "powerful" a conference is, losing more than one game a year makes it impossible to play for a national championship and very unlikely to play in a BCS bowl.
I don't see the point in jumping ship when: one, we aren't sure our ship is sinking, and two, we don't really have a reason to feel too confident in the ship we're leaving for. Our administration most definitely has a contingency plan. Why do you think otherwise?
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1632]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 1766
Joined: 1/16/99
|
How much influence does Clemson have in the ACC?
Nov 20, 2012, 10:48 AM
|
|
I would say very little. It's UNC, Duke and everyone else.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [44028]
TigerPulse: 81%
Posts: 32946
Joined: 2/22/03
|
Right, but we would have even less as a new member elsewhere***
Nov 20, 2012, 10:49 AM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [39020]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 51623
Joined: 11/20/04
|
So we lose very little on that front, AND our interests
Nov 20, 2012, 11:01 AM
|
|
would be more closely aligned with those of the members of the other conferences.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [39020]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 51623
Joined: 11/20/04
|
Whether we have influence or not, those conferences
Nov 20, 2012, 11:01 AM
[ in reply to It's not blind loyalty to the ACC. ] |
|
know where their bread is buttered, and that's football. Our lack of influence in the ACC means more emphasis on basketball, even without influence in the SEC or Big XII, the decisions made would be more likely to benefit us as a football school.
Your cowardice regarding an increase in competition is pathetic.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [44028]
TigerPulse: 81%
Posts: 32946
Joined: 2/22/03
|
It's not cowardice, it's being realistic.
Nov 20, 2012, 11:16 AM
|
|
We will have several good games in the ACC each year, plus more if we are winning and playing for conference championships and in BCS bowls. I'm all for playing good competition, but we do that in the ACC. If we win, we'll play the best at the end of each season. No point purposely making it harder for yourself than necessary to make it there.
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1898]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 3418
Joined: 11/7/01
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [39020]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 51623
Joined: 11/20/04
|
List them.***
Nov 20, 2012, 11:33 AM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [39020]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 51623
Joined: 11/20/04
|
Crickets.***
Nov 20, 2012, 12:00 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1299]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 595
Joined: 11/21/04
|
Re: not left behind? what?
Nov 20, 2012, 10:36 AM
|
|
May be you know something I don't but how can you say the ACC is not being left behind financially. Just look at Orange Bowl deal ($55 million) vs. Sugar Bowl (80).
ACC TV contract not close to Big Ten and new SEC contract is going to be a monster.
Chickens will be getting millions and year more than us.
We are at a major crossroads.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [3710]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 4264
Joined: 8/20/10
|
Its not the MAryland loss that is concerning
Nov 20, 2012, 10:37 AM
|
|
If they pay less than 50mil and FSU or others like VT see that we could have more leave. Like FSU could be leaving for Big12. SEC could poach VT and somebody else.
Then we are left standing alone.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [44028]
TigerPulse: 81%
Posts: 32946
Joined: 2/22/03
|
What indications are there that the buyout WON'T be $50 mil?
Nov 20, 2012, 10:39 AM
|
|
People keep suggesting that Maryland won't be required to pay it. I'm sure it will go to court and be challenged there, but the logical assumption at this point is that they WILL have to pay the $50 million since that's what is on the books.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [38514]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 47162
Joined: 10/28/02
|
Maybe the ACC is dying, but...
Nov 20, 2012, 10:42 AM
|
|
If the trend continues as it is, the schools with something to offer will be fine. It's about money and Clemson generates revenue. I'd be much more concerned to be a Vanderbilt fan because if the trend continues they will be replaced.
I'm one that believes that the Big 12 rumors were legit but the Big 12 decided to wait and see what happened. I still think it's a very real possibility that the Big 12 takes a block of ACC schools to go to 14-16 with the SEC taking 2 more to go to 16. These will come from Clemson, FSU, GT, UNC, NCST, UVA, VT, & Miami.
It just seems obvious that there will be 4 16 team conferences. It's a shame, but the writing is on the wall.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Heisman Winner [108390]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 64974
Joined: 2/25/06
|
could be. if i was playing, i'd go hard after osu & ou if
Nov 20, 2012, 10:45 AM
|
|
i was the sec.
espn could handle the rights issue.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [28802]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 58393
Joined: 11/14/03
|
I see the ACC being more of a taker than a giver here
Nov 20, 2012, 11:04 AM
[ in reply to Maybe the ACC is dying, but... ] |
|
and that's the way things had played out until Maryland left. Have to say that was very surprising, but I don't think it really changes the landscape all that much.
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [7026]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 15682
Joined: 10/10/02
|
It's not dying.
Nov 20, 2012, 10:44 AM
|
|
It's morphing into the Big East. Since that was such a stellar conference.
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [8008]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 7958
Joined: 6/30/00
|
Mostly fear, but there are some facts you can't deny.
Nov 20, 2012, 10:45 AM
|
|
1. The ACC has the lowest paid TV contract of all 5 major conferences. In some cases the difference is drastic. THAT IS A FACT. The SEC is about to get more $$.
Even the Big 12, who was near death a year ago, has a better TV deal.
2. The ACC has the lowest paid BCS bowl (Orange) of the major 5.
3. The SEC and BIG10, in addition to receiving 40 mil each from the Rose and Sugar, will also get 27.5 million from the Orange, the same as the ACC, in the six years they are required to play in "our" bowl.
3. The ACC has the WORST secondary bowl lineup of the major 5.
4. The two one loss ACC teams are ranked behind other one loss teams from the major 5 and in some cases behind two loss teams. It will take an undefeated ACC team to ever sniff the four team playoff.
5. The ACC just lost a Charter member, even with a 50 mil buyout.
6. The SEC will not stay at 14 teams. They have already said it is hard to manage. They will add two more.
7. If the SEC doesn't want to stay at 14, why would the BIG10?
8. If ACC football schools (read FSU) can make more money in another conference AND have a fair opportunity to compete at the highest level, don't you think they would be interested?
To ignore these (mostly) facts is called denial.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Aficionado [158]
TigerPulse: 58%
Posts: 729
Joined: 10/11/10
|
14 teams is a challenge for the SEC, but 16 would be...
Nov 20, 2012, 10:54 AM
|
|
...even more of a challenge. their problem is maintaining the tradional rivalries like UGA-Auburn and Alabama-Tennessee. going to 16 would be worst.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [28802]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 58393
Joined: 11/14/03
|
some of those things have to do with the Big East
Nov 20, 2012, 11:02 AM
[ in reply to Mostly fear, but there are some facts you can't deny. ] |
|
and most of them have to do with Miami, FSU, and the middle of the road ACC teams just dropping off in football for some reason. If Clemson, Miami, FSU, GT, NCSt., UNC, BC and UVa are all playing up to their potential, it's a very good football conference. The trouble is that hasn't happened since expansion. It's kind of befuddling, actually, as the ACC should've become a "super-conference" with the teams it added.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [3573]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 6516
Joined: 6/1/99
|
We don't really need a contingency plan
Nov 20, 2012, 11:14 AM
|
|
The fact that we put in the resouces to play top flight football means that no matter what we will remain a player. If the ACC were to crumble, the SEC, Big 10 and Big 12 would all come knocking on our door. If there was no ACC, it becomes a power grab and we would be attractive to all of them. Teams like Clemson, FSU, Miami, GT, VT and maybe NCSU will all be fine. In fact its probably better for us in expansion if the ACC were to crumble and not just defect to another conference. Without an ACC in the way, it becomes as much about competitive balance nationally than TV revenue from a particular geography.
Its the teams like BC, UVA, UNC that have to have contingency plans. They think they want to play football, but do they really? Duke doesn't care. Maryland would likly get left behind if the ACC were to die.
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [8681]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 8888
Joined: 10/19/11
|
Bottom line is
Nov 20, 2012, 11:20 AM
|
|
Clemson has too much of a history to get passed up on if the ACC collapses there will always be a place for us in college football, lets just worry about the current season.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Replies: 35
| visibility 1
|
|
|
50
