»
Topic: Football Update: ESPN: Can Clemson take the next step?
Replies: 55   Last Post: Apr 21, 2013 9:16 PM by: ArchieOCampbell
This topic has been archived - replies are not allowed.


[ Archives - Tiger Boards Archive ]
Start New Topic
Replies: 55  

Football Update: ESPN: Can Clemson take the next step?

[1]
Posted: Apr 19, 2013 1:15 PM
 

ESPN: Can Clemson take the next step?

Read Update »



LOL at trying to make it seem they care about the coots


Posted: Apr 19, 2013 1:16 PM
 

they won't invite us simply do to money and markets not because they care about what one of their schools that has historically done nothing for them thinks or feels.


It would devastate the coots.

[2]
Posted: Apr 19, 2013 1:18 PM
 

They would have to pull for us in our BCS bowls.


Great point! I'd be hilarious if that took place


Posted: Apr 19, 2013 1:21 PM
 

the fact that they still root for UGA, despite hating them about as much as we don, because they are "in the conference" is laudable. I could care less what FSU, GT, VT, etc do. It's all about Clemson and our reputation.


But everyone complains about SOS and poor conference


Posted: Apr 19, 2013 3:39 PM
 

games when the ACC is losing and looking bad. I pull for the ACC so that the conference games are more exciting when Clemson competes against them. I miss when FSU, Miami, VT, GT, UNC, and NCST are all ranked in the top 25. Shoot, even Wake, BC, and Virginia flirted with it for a little while.


Re: It would devastate the coots.


Posted: Apr 19, 2013 1:23 PM
 

Mentally, emotionally, athletically and financially

2019 white level memberbadge-donor-10yr.jpg

On the other hand,


Posted: Apr 19, 2013 1:32 PM
 

They could claim that they'll have won EVERY Clemson-Carolina game from that point forward. Because even when they lose to an SEC team, they win!


Re: On the other hand,


Posted: Apr 19, 2013 1:46 PM
 

WELL PUT MY FRIEND

military_donation.jpg

S.C would block your entrance so it doesn't matter***


Posted: Apr 19, 2013 1:23 PM
 




If the SEC wanted us they wouldn't care what SC says

[1]
Posted: Apr 19, 2013 1:27 PM
 

They don't because we don't bring a new market to the conference hence no new revenue.


Actually no

[2]
Posted: Apr 19, 2013 2:00 PM
 

I've heard that UGA, Florida, USC, and TA&M have made an alliance to prevent others in their state from joining. They each have large schools in their state that rival them and would steal some lime light.


Re: Actually no


Posted: Apr 19, 2013 2:46 PM
 

Then tell that to the state of Alabama or Mississippi


and tennessee***


Posted: Apr 20, 2013 1:06 PM
 




Re: Actually no


Posted: Apr 20, 2013 2:58 PM
 

If you have proof of an alliance like that, there might be a USA or two who would be interested in the antitrust aspect of it.


The SEC has built its empire with solid products


Posted: Apr 19, 2013 3:43 PM
 

on the field each year. Who wouldn't want to add a school like Clemson to make their product even better? Can't stray away from the formula that got you there in the first place. Maybe I'm just old school like that.


Kentucky football baby. ALL #### DAY!***


Posted: Apr 19, 2013 6:39 PM
 



2019 student level memberbadge-donor-10yr.jpg

There's something in these hills.


It's not that they care what SCU says, they care about….


Posted: Apr 21, 2013 4:43 PM
 

how good we can recruit. If we can recruit this good being in the ACC, Clemson would be signing top 5 classes every year in the SEC. The only thing a lot of these SEC schools can say to recruits that Clemson is also recruiting, is "we're in the SEC". If Clemson was in the SEC, they wouldn't be able to use that any more. And the "we're in the SEC" is sometimes the only thing these kids can say to recruits, because Clemson is such a better University than nearly all of the SEC schools on so many levels.

badge-donor-05yr.jpg

Re:When the SC legislature puts the pressure on the


Posted: Apr 19, 2013 4:01 PM
 

university you had better believe that they will change their minds. Withhold or delay their funding and they will play ball. First, we have to get an offer and I don't know that we really want it.


What the hail makes you think the Clemson administration...


Posted: Apr 19, 2013 8:21 PM
 

and our grads want to join the SEC?

Don't believe these putz here on T-Net. Most of them only care about sports. We alum know there's more to a university's worth and value than how much money it's sports programs generate.

You non-alum need to calm down. I'm not insulting you. I know you are sensitive about this issue but the truth is that you have no say in the matter.

Sincerely

Class of 1988

2019 orange level memberbadge-donor-05yr.jpg

actually, SCU, UGA, UF, AU, UT, LSU, Bama, Ole Miss...


Posted: Apr 21, 2013 4:39 PM
 

would all be against us joining the SEC. Because alot of top recruits in recent years have rebuffed SEC teams and went to Clemson.

badge-donor-05yr.jpg

Re: If the SEC wanted us they wouldn't care what SC says


Posted: Apr 19, 2013 1:28 PM
 

Every school in the sec has a vote on the entrance of new schools. A least they did last year so unless they've changed something.


Is one vote all it takes to block a team?***


Posted: Apr 19, 2013 1:30 PM
 




Re: Is one vote all it takes to block a team?***


Posted: Apr 19, 2013 1:33 PM
 

Honestly I'm not sure if it has to be unanimous or not, but I imagine that they would do whatever they had to do to influence other votes.


You mean they would give out free stays at the Whitney?***

[3]
Posted: Apr 19, 2013 1:40 PM
 



2019 orange level memberbadge-donor-10yr.jpg

"IDIOT POSTER OF THE MONTH SO FAR...GWP-- You have won IPM Award for your failure to completely comprehend a clear post & then choose to attack someone who points out your ignorance. While you are not yet in the same No Class Catagory as deRoberts, ClemTiger117 & Tigerdug23, you are getting closer to the Sewer Dwellers." - coachmac


Re: Is one vote all it takes to block a team?***


Posted: Apr 20, 2013 3:05 PM
 

The ACC rule was a supermajority of 9 or so.


First of all, Auburn is Clemson WITHOUT a lake

[5]
Posted: Apr 19, 2013 1:34 PM
 

And Clemson doesn't give two #### (along with Nuk's ;P) about being compared to an $EC team...they are the epitome of what is wrong with college football $$$.


Well stated and now we just need to make it happen.


Posted: Apr 19, 2013 3:05 PM
 

t

2019 purple level memberbadge-donor-05yr.jpg

yeah but they have a chick fil a


Posted: Apr 19, 2013 4:23 PM
 

on campus


Clemson is the the university of sc!


Posted: Apr 20, 2013 1:05 PM
 

Coots wanna be as popular as Clemson but never will be!


What? Two schools in the same state cant


Posted: Apr 19, 2013 1:43 PM
 

happen? Like in Mississippi? And Tennessee?

badge-donor-05yr.jpg

If the ESPN conference really wanted us in, I don't know if

[1]
Posted: Apr 19, 2013 1:47 PM
 

the coots would be able to block it or not. Not sure what the voting rules/requirements are for the ESPN to add a member.

badge-donor-05yr.jpg

Well, I don't know much about the situation so take


Posted: Apr 19, 2013 1:53 PM
 

everything I say with a grade of slaw...the $EC seems to be all about creating a massive TV market across the southeast which is arguably the richest place for football talent. The SEC has slowly maintained its 'dominance' by winning a great deal of NC for like the past decade and has built a brand that is recognized nationally, especially with ESecPN backing them. So if the $EC wants to continue to expand and increase its revenue, then naturally it would want to incorporate teams in its conference for which they have no market for.

The problem here is that ESecPN is willing to bet that they already have the Clemson market because they know we will watch the USuC game in anticipation of them losing...

In other words, I don't think we'll be joining the $EC anytime soon.


Re: Actually no


Posted: Apr 19, 2013 2:07 PM
 

Yes. Plus Mike Slive has said that if one or more schools oppose the entrance of another then he would veto the motion.


Re: Actually no


Posted: Apr 21, 2013 12:27 PM
 

Mike Slive does not have veto power over his bosses.


Re: Re: Actually no


Posted: Apr 19, 2013 2:51 PM
 

Tell what?


Re: Re: Actually no


Posted: Apr 19, 2013 2:59 PM
 

guys we will remain in the acc or join the big 12. i dont know why people cant accept that we will never be in the sec. we all would like to be in the sec, except barker and the egg heads, for many reasons and including money, BUT it will never happen. next subject. we should have left the acc when uscuck did and joined the sec when we were invited.


Re: Re: Actually no


Posted: Apr 19, 2013 3:59 PM
 

Well said. This guy knows what's up.


Re: Football Update: ESPN: Can Clemson take the next step?


Posted: Apr 19, 2013 4:09 PM
 

What is this CROCK about "not wanting to do that to South Carolina" bull???

Are there not already TWO teams in both the states of Ala and Miss??

That is a lame argument. Besides, since the SEC prides itself on winning football, Clemson would be a better FIT than South Carolina anyway!

The Dirtpeckers have been there for 42 years.....and have contributed NOTHING to that "pride".

military_donation.jpg

Re: Football Update: ESPN: Can Clemson take the next step?

[1]
Posted: Apr 19, 2013 4:29 PM
 

You do realize the "lame" argument brings up is basically comparing apples and oranges.

Auburn, Alabama (two schools from the same state), and Ole Miss/Miss St. (again, same state), were ORIGINAL members of the SEC, right?

It's not like they added Auburn or Ole Miss a few years ago.

That's a lot different than it being 2013 and adding additional members. I'd say there's a big difference adding teams already in the same state that can't offer any additional exposure and markets (the TV ratings/the thing that really matters $$$) as opposed to talking about two sets of same state teams that have been part of the conference since the 1930s.


Re: Football Update: ESPN: Can Clemson take the next step?


Posted: Apr 19, 2013 6:42 PM
 

When the coots went to the sec it was an easy move for them b/c they wasn't a part of nothing. The only thing they brought with them to the sec was the ability to take an ### whipping every year with a smile. Now they have something to pull for, sec sec.

2019 white level memberbadge-donor-10yr.jpg

YES, and if Clemson folks drank from septic tanks...


Posted: Apr 19, 2013 8:15 PM
 

we'd have taken the SEC offer and we'd have been swallowing turd water like the rest of the SEC teams decades ago.

2019 orange level memberbadge-donor-05yr.jpg

Soon and very soon....

[2]
Posted: Apr 20, 2013 12:24 PM
 

It will not matter. Because:

1. Clemson will once again be dominant in football, independent of SECheat affiliation and...

2. We will maintain our Academic integrity by remaining in the far superior Academic ACC!!

Folks, calm down. Clemson stands on their own, and we do not NEED the "SEC".

Clemson is THE recognized University in the State of South Carolina EVERYWHERE outside of Coot-town!

military_donation.jpg

Re: Soon and very soon....


Posted: Apr 20, 2013 1:37 PM
 

Serious question how many 10 win seasons does Clemson have?


Re: Soon and very soon....


Posted: Apr 20, 2013 1:38 PM
 

way way more than the coots.

badge-donor-05yr.jpg

Re: Soon and very soon....


Posted: Apr 20, 2013 3:20 PM
 

I would have guessed about 10, but count 9. I thought the 77 record was better when we played NC notre dame and DNC pitt. Only 5 undefeated seasons.


Re: Re: Is one vote all it takes to block a team?***


Posted: Apr 20, 2013 3:22 PM
 

Look I'm not trying argue with anyone. Mike Slive, commissioner of the sec, stated that if one or more current teams were to vote against the admission of another team then he would veto that teams entrance. UGA, UF, and USCe all have a so called agreememt with each other to help keep FSU, GT, and Clemson out of the sec. As far as Ole Miss, Miss St, Vanderbilt, Tenn, Auburn, and Alabama goes they are all original members of the conference. In regards to the anti-trust aspect of it I'm not a practicing lawyer, but Mike Slive was so if you have any questions ask him. Also, I never said that you guys wanted to join, just that it would be hard for you to now. If Clemson, FSU, Miami, and Va Tech are firing on all cylinders then the acc would be an extremely powerful conference. Don't believe anything that I said look it up for yourselves.


Re: Re: Is one vote all it takes to block a team?***


Posted: Apr 21, 2013 12:22 PM
 

The commissioner doesn't have that power. He actually doesn't have an official role in the process, other than calling the meeting if the president doesn't call it. An invitation requires a 3/4 (11+) vote from the executive committee. Expulsion requires a 2/3 (10+) vote. A simple majority elects the commissioner, and although the constitution doesn't state it, a simple majority likely can remove him. Would Mike Jive go against a supermajority of his bosses as you say? No, of course not.

So, technically it takes four to block. If UT wanted to join and there were 10 votes in favor, there would be pressure on the A&M exec to make it 11.


Re: Re: Soon and very soon....


Posted: Apr 20, 2013 3:48 PM
 

You didn't answer the question how many 10 win seasons?


Re: Re: Soon and very soon....


Posted: Apr 20, 2013 8:48 PM
 

I'm not sure why you are asking this question but Clemson has nine 10+ win seasons.
11-1948, 11-1978, 12-1981, 10-1987, 10-1988, 10-1989, 10-1990, 10-2011, 11-2012

USC has three.
10-1984, 11-2011, 11-2012

Yes, Dabo and Spurrier both have two and USC only has three.

I have a question for you... How much longer will you be satisfied with 10 win seasons but not winning the division or conference?


About 28 min before you made this post, someone above


Posted: Apr 21, 2013 12:57 PM
 

already answered it. Now, what point are you desperately trying to make?

Let me guess, most of those 10 win season will be negated somehow by your logic and then you will tell us how superior Carolina is to Clemson...am I right?


Re: Re: Actually no


Posted: Apr 21, 2013 12:32 PM
 

Look it up for yourself buddy. I'm not going to argue about it.


Re: Re: Actually no


Posted: Apr 21, 2013 1:03 PM
 

From what I've gathered the pact is called the "gentlemen's agreement" and is between uga, uf, and usce.

http://www.syncweekly.com/news/2011/sep/06/changes-sec/


Re: Re: Actually no


Posted: Apr 21, 2013 4:32 PM
 

Even before the league expanded to 14, it took four schools to block a new member, not three.

I shall direct you to the SEC constitution to gather facts:

http://www.secdigitalnetwork.com/Portals/3/SEC%20Website/compliance/Constitution.pdf


Re: Re: Re: Actually no


Posted: Apr 21, 2013 5:25 PM
 

I know what the rules are. I looked them up. I was simply explaining this so called "gentlemen's pact" and what Mike Slive said. I'm not trying to discredit what you said. I'm telling you what has been apparently diacussed amongst certain schools and the commissioner himself. If you want to discuss it with them by all means go ahead.


Re: Re: Re: Actually no


Posted: Apr 21, 2013 9:16 PM
 

At another point a few years ago, Mike Slive also supposedly "said" that his plan was to expand to 16 with UT, A&M, Clemson and FSU. Like most of those stories, there are no direct quotes.


Re: Re: Re: Actually no


Posted: Apr 21, 2013 5:30 PM
 

And by the way it would be easy for those three schools to coerce another school to swing their way. Uga and Uf have alot of pull within the conference. Dang politics.


Replies: 55  
[ Archives - Tiger Boards Archive ]
Start New Topic
4245 people have read this post