Four ACC schools finalizing joining FSU and Clemson in the Big 12

keith · July 18

1 hour ago, Mean Green 93-98 said:

I'm as Mean Green-biased as they come, but a list that leaves out Princeton, Rice, and Northwestern in favor of UTSA, Arizona State, and Colorado State deserves serious skepticism.

I doubt the New AAU is a replacement of the existing AAU members. It looks like the foundation is simply suggesting an updated or modernized set of metrics they feel is important now.

From the slide ... "focused on what its education policy team..." and "...have been judged by their team for exceptional success across a broader array of metrics..." Given these two statements you can probably guess what the broader array of metrics the policy team feels is important now.

NT80 · July 18

39 minutes ago, wardly said:

Just asking, but how do you think the implosion of the ACC will impact UNT? I have not seen us on anyone's wish list.

I expect the ACC will still have some remaining members (like the PAC) after being purged. They will want to retain their brand and rebuild. If they take the best of AAC it will hurt us. If they merge into the AAC it will help us.

wardly · July 18

1 hour ago, NT80 said:

I expect the ACC will still have some remaining members (like the PAC) after being purged. They will want to retain their brand and rebuild. If they take the best of AAC it will hurt us. If they merge into the AAC it will help us.

Good point. Memphis and USF seem to be likely candidates. I can't see a full merger. If they only lose FSU and Clemson they might not add anyone.

MrAlien · July 18

Will the ACC still be attractive to AAC schools with who ever is left? When the Pac12 started imploding, some people thought they might raid the Mountain West but that didnt happen. Will schools commit to a conference that has an uncertain future? Those remaining schools in the ACC will be desperate to join a power conference.

NT80 · July 18

2 hours ago, MrAlien said:

Will the ACC still be attractive to AAC schools with who ever is left? When the Pac12 started imploding, some people thought they might raid the Mountain West but that didnt happen. Will schools commit to a conference that has an uncertain future? Those remaining schools in the ACC will be desperate to join a power conference.

Many MWC schools would love to join the PAC-2, but the exit fee is prohibitive and there is no media deal yet for the new PAC (depends on members). There is a trial merger currently. The PAC-2 only wants 6 MWC schools. A reverse merger has been considered and may be an option. The PAC-2 will decide their plan by Jan/Feb 2025.

Membership in the P-3 for leftover ACC schools will be tight. The Big 12 may absorb some that have media-value but otherwise I expect $mut to be homeless again, lol.

Matt from A700 · July 19

5 hours ago, NT80 said:

Many MWC schools would love to join the PAC-2, but the exit fee is prohibitive and there is no media deal yet for the new PAC (depends on members). There is a trial merger currently. The PAC-2 only wants 6 MWC schools. A reverse merger has been considered and may be an option. The PAC-2 will decide their plan by Jan/Feb 2025.

Could you cite where this information was said? This could align with my UNT-to-the-new-Pac-12 conspiracy if the 2-Pac conference wants to save some room for big-market Texas schools (us, UTSA, Rice and either UTEP or Tulsa). Maybe it's to reserve space for Memphis/Tulane but I doubt the 2-Pac would win those schools over the ACC.

Edited July 19 by Matt from A700

NT80 · July 19

2 hours ago, Matt from A700 said:

Could you site where this information was said? This could align with my UNT-to-the-new-Pac-12 conspiracy if the 2-Pac conference wants to save some room for big-market Texas schools (us, UTSA, Rice and either UTEP or Tulsa). Maybe it's to reserve space for Memphis/Tulane but I doubt the 2-Pac would win those schools over the ACC.

It was from a portion of the interview with WSU Prez Kirk Shultz (below). The Prez and writer referenced another interview with Oregon St AD Scott Barnes and 8 total members (I couldn't find that one, some interviews are behind a paywall)...

Also, one of the fan boards (MWC or WSU) also posted an article that mentioned 6 MWC additions to start, for a total of PAC-8 to meet the initial NCAA requirement of 8 members by summer 2026. It speculated the 6 desirable add-ons would probably be Boise, SDSU, UNLV, Fresno, CSU, & AFA.

.....................................................................................................................................

How important is it for the Pac-12 to stay nimble or lean in terms of the number of future conference members? Scott Barnes, the athletic director at Oregon State, told me he thought the number of teams should be on the right around eight or so. Is that strategy still in play, or is that to be determined as you sort things out?

I think there’s no question that we’re going to try and keep as nimble as possible. And I think you’ve written about this in the past. I mean, we’re watching what happens on the East Coast with the Atlantic Coast Conference, the Clemson and Florida State, lawsuits. And it, unfortunately, feels an awful lot like what the Pac-12 was going through two years ago when USA and UCLA left. And to me, that was really the beginning of the unraveling.

https://www.johncanzano.com/p/canzano-washington-state-president

Edited July 19 by NT80

MrAlien · July 19

what does the Pac-2 even have to offer? The mountain West is a better conference at this point

UNTLifer · July 19

31 minutes ago, MrAlien said:

what does the Pac-2 even have to offer?

Beavs and Cougars

Rudy · July 19

3 hours ago, UNTLifer said:

Beavs and Cougars

Always good things.

Oh, are we still talking football???

wardly · July 19

20 hours ago, Matt from A700 said:

Could you cite where this information was said? This could align with my UNT-to-the-new-Pac-12 conspiracy if the 2-Pac conference wants to save some room for big-market Texas schools (us, UTSA, Rice and either UTEP or Tulsa). Maybe it's to reserve space for Memphis/Tulane but I doubt the 2-Pac would win those schools over the ACC.

None of the schools mentioned, including Memphis and USF, increase the media rights value of any major conference in the nation. While large markets like Temple in Philadelphia may sound good they don't matter if they have no fan base.In addition no one really wants private schools with 4 to 8,000 undergraduates regardless of location .

SMU2006 · July 22

On 7/19/2024 at 6:17 PM, wardly said:

None of the schools mentioned, including Memphis and USF, increase the media rights value of any major conference in the nation. While large markets like Temple in Philadelphia may sound good they don't matter if they have no fan base.In addition no one really wants private schools with 4 to 8,000 undergraduates regardless of location .

Its not about increasing the media rights value. Strength in numbers and adding schools that fit the profile academically. Memphis is absolutely a non-starter for the ACC. USF, however, is an AAU school that is already in the ACC geographic footprint as well as being in a major media market. USF is committing the necessary resources to build an on-campus football stadium as well. The question will be can USF go without media rights revenue? I highly doubt it.

Nothing will happen until FSU/Clemson actually find a way out of the ACC. Pete Thamel reported today that there would be no departure before the 2025-2026 season (almost certainly because FSU/Clemson know they are about to get eviscerated in their North Carolina lawsuit).

As to when they are actually able to wiggle off the hook? That's anyone's guess but its likely a 7-10 year process not 2-3.

NT80 · July 22

2 hours ago, SMU2006 said:

Its not about increasing the media rights value. Strength in numbers and adding schools that fit the profile academically. Memphis is absolutely a non-starter for the ACC. USF, however, is an AAU school that is already in the ACC geographic footprint as well as being in a major media market. USF is committing the necessary resources to build an on-campus football stadium as well. The question will be can USF go without media rights revenue? I highly doubt it.

Nothing will happen until FSU/Clemson actually find a way out of the ACC. Pete Thamel reported today that there would be no departure before the 2025-2026 season (almost certainly because FSU/Clemson know they are about to get eviscerated in their North Carolina lawsuit).

As to when they are actually able to wiggle off the hook? That's anyone's guess but its likely a 7-10 year process not 2-3.

I don't believe being an AAU school is more consideration over strong athletics for many conferences. Rice is an example of a left-behind program with strong academics and AAU.

As for FSU/Clemson money is driving them to get out, and they will continue their attempt as long as the carrot is available in the SEC or Big10. When those slots not longer exist they will be content where they are, but obviously they are being told get out and we will invite you.

wardly · July 22

5 hours ago, SMU2006 said:

Its not about increasing the media rights value. Strength in numbers and adding schools that fit the profile academically. Memphis is absolutely a non-starter for the ACC. USF, however, is an AAU school that is already in the ACC geographic footprint as well as being in a major media market. USF is committing the necessary resources to build an on-campus football stadium as well. The question will be can USF go without media rights revenue? I highly doubt it.

Nothing will happen until FSU/Clemson actually find a way out of the ACC. Pete Thamel reported today that there would be no departure before the 2025-2026 season (almost certainly because FSU/Clemson know they are about to get eviscerated in their North Carolina lawsuit).

As to when they are actually able to wiggle off the hook? That's anyone's guess but its likely a 7-10 year process not 2-3.

Let me revise my original statement. No other university other than SMU can afford to give up all their media rights revenue for 7 or so years. Leaving the AAC you know what it's members are getting which is chump change to what SMU should get at the end of the rainbow. However to the unwashed it makes no sense to add schools who don't increase their media rights revenue, which is why WSU and OSU were left behind. Quite honestly , and I am not being spiteful , I really don't see what the Ponies bring to the table from the ACC's perspective. However I am sure you will enlighten us.

emmitt01 · July 22

8 minutes ago, wardly said:

Let me revise my original statement. No other university other than SMU can afford to give up all their media rights revenue for 7 or so years. Leaving the AAC you know what it's members are getting which is chump change to what SMU should get at the end of the rainbow. However to the unwashed it makes no sense to add schools who don't increase their media rights revenue, which is why WSU and OSU were left behind. Quite honestly , and I am not being spiteful , I really don't see what the Ponies bring to the table from the ACC's perspective. However I am sure you will enlighten us.

They are a traditional college football power, sir! In fact, here is a photo from their glory years.

Photos of the early, already dangerous years of american football, from ...

Edited July 22 by emmitt01

SMU2006 · July 22

17 minutes ago, emmitt01 said:

They are a traditional college football power, sir! In fact, here is a photo from their glory years.

What's sad is the ball carrier in that picture would be RB1 at North Texas.

rcade · July 22

3 hours ago, NT80 said:

As for FSU/Clemson money is driving them to get out, and they will continue their attempt as long as the carrot is available in the SEC or Big10. When those slots not longer exist they will be content where they are, but obviously they are being told get out and we will invite you.

FSU and Clemson will never be content in the ACC because the revenue per school is significantly smaller than in the SEC and Big 10. This trend is getting worse instead of better and isn't helped by the ACC adding three schools with the lowest TV ratings in the conference.

The only possible way to avoid an exit of the conference powers is to divide TV revenue unequally and let the big dogs eat.

rcade · July 22

37 minutes ago, SMU2006 said:

What's sad is the ball carrier in that picture would be RB1 at North Texas.

We tried to get him but your school offered him a a gold horse-drawn carriage.

emmitt01 · July 22

2 hours ago, SMU2006 said:

What's sad is the ball carrier in that picture would be RB1 at North Texas.

He does look fast

UNTLifer · July 22

2 hours ago, SMU2006 said:

What's sad is the ball carrier in that picture would be RB1 at North Texas.

Getting quality RB's to come to Denton has never been an issue.

NT80 · July 22

1 hour ago, rcade said:

FSU and Clemson will never be content in the ACC because the revenue per school is significantly smaller than in the SEC and Big 10. This trend is getting worse instead of better and isn't helped by the ACC adding three schools with the lowest TV ratings in the conference.

The only possible way to avoid an exit of the conference powers is to divide TV revenue unequally and let the big dogs eat.

Yes, thus they will try to get out as long as the spots exist in the SEC or Big10. Eventually (20 members?) those conferences will be deemed closed, unless they consider demotions/banishment of schools like Vanderbilt, Northwestern, etc.

El Paso Eagle · July 22

On 7/17/2024 at 11:18 AM, golfingomez said:

Wasn't there a conference realignment thread dedicated to rumors/speculation?

I guess the Mods/Admins are taking the summer off or don't care about actually having a forum for North Texas Football. By the way they let so many threads that have nothing to do with UNT football be posted; you have to wonder if they even care about UNT football anymore.

wardly · July 22

1 hour ago, El Paso Eagle said:

I guess the Mods/Admins are taking the summer off or don't care about actually having a forum for North Texas Football. By the way they let so many threads that have nothing to do with UNT football be posted; you have to wonder if they even care about UNT football anymore.

I think it depends on who the interloper is. The Arkansas State fan who occasionally posts, in my opinion, interesting information without beating the Red Wolves drum should be welcomed. SMU 2006 not so much.

El Paso Eagle · July 23

15 minutes ago, wardly said:

I think it depends on who the interloper is. The Arkansas State fan who occasionally posts, in my opinion, interesting information without beating the Red Wolves drum should be welcomed. SMU 2006 not so much.

Exactly. It's one thing for fans from other schools to come here and add comments to the post, but it is entirely different when they come here to take shots at UNT.