|
Replies: 13
| visibility 1
|
110%er [7971]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 3543
Joined: 10/18/09
|
|
|
|
 |
Orange Blooded [3168]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 2995
Joined: 11/11/02
|
Is that the same UNC that had fake classes for athletes?
Jul 12, 2022, 11:36 PM
|
|
Classes where you just enrolled and required no attendance and test?
Please redo the deal. Time to go.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [27400]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 31839
Joined: 8/19/03
|
Re: Is that the same UNC that had fake classes for athletes?
Jul 13, 2022, 8:44 AM
|
|
A new deal with ESPN could be a life saver and certainly a conference saver. Unlike most of you I DO NOT want to see the league fold. The ACC really is about athletics AND academics and other conferences can’t make that claim.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [31437]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 9146
Joined: 8/31/15
|
Re: Is that the same UNC that had fake classes for athletes?
Jul 13, 2022, 9:26 AM
|
|
@FORESTTIGER I agree but with the other teams increasing revenues I feel we have no other choice. A new deal could not possibly get us what we need with what we currently have to offer.
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Medallion [54006]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 43621
Joined: 11/17/03
|
You can't be serious. UNC cheated more academically than ANY
Jul 13, 2022, 10:31 AM
[ in reply to Re: Is that the same UNC that had fake classes for athletes? ] |
|
school EVER in the history of the NCAA. I mean, when a freshman in his first session of summer school,before the first fall semester,who the school said needed to take a remedial english course....takes a 400 level,non-supervised Black History class where he is required to write a 15 page term paper.......AND HE GATS AN "A"......well, I rest my case.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Standout [344]
TigerPulse: 96%
Posts: 456
Joined: 1/10/21
|
Re: Is that the same UNC that had fake classes for athletes?
Jul 13, 2022, 12:10 PM
[ in reply to Re: Is that the same UNC that had fake classes for athletes? ] |
|
I agree with you. I don't want the ACC to fold either. I am hoping they get aggressive and add some teams and get to a 20 team conference. I think ND is a pipe dream. Bring in West Virginia(it is close and has crazy fan base) Cincinnati (opens Ohio market and they are working their way to being a good football program), gotta get a team or two from Texas to open that market- Texas Tech, TCU, Baylor- any of them would be good, Ok St- gets us another market and also a good football program. Then maybe go for Utah or an Arizona score, opens those markets to us. Hard to go for a PAC 12 team unless we don't have a choice just because of the distance/ travel.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Legend [16338]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 12804
Joined: 11/14/09
|
Re: Is that the same UNC that had fake classes for athletes?
Jul 13, 2022, 12:47 PM
|
|
West Va and Cincy make a lot of sense, but heading any further west to me would take away from the league and harm our other sports. That would give us 10 football-intensive programs that we could position as a separate division, then add four more regionally to fill in the other football division. 20 teams with an upper and lower division, where the upper is rewarded with the difference in the renegotiated rights deal. Better regular seasons, more revenue, and position of strength when deciding on a new post-season model.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Standout [344]
TigerPulse: 96%
Posts: 456
Joined: 1/10/21
|
Re: Is that the same UNC that had fake classes for athletes?
Jul 13, 2022, 3:23 PM
|
|
but I don't think there are any regional schools available for us to bring in and also help the ACC improve. The small schools will not help move the needle. That is why I was looking at the Texas area schools. TV market and bigger football schools.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Legend [16338]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 12804
Joined: 11/14/09
|
Re: Is that the same UNC that had fake classes for athletes?
Jul 13, 2022, 4:32 PM
|
|
I hear what you're saying, but Texas is lost with UT and TAMU - the big dogs - as part of the SEC. There's no Alpha position left there, or in OK either, that delivers a must-see Wow factor.
Adding UCF, USF, Memphis, and say Navy, would be more for the 2nd division football lineup plus filling our OOC G5 style slots. They're all decent markets and all four emphasize football. Three of these could conceivably impress enough and move up to the top division at the expense of a Louisville, Cincinnati, Pitt, maybe UNC or NC State - any program that wasn't delivering on the football product end at the top level consistently enough. The key here would be keeping a tight geographic grip on the East Coast, covering all sports. Navy would be our way of adding Maryland back into the footprint. A top 10 division schedule would deliver the media rights bump, which the top division participants would keep. The rest would help fill out the football schedules for the 6 current ACC teams left out of the top. We would also save a bundle on travel costs for Olympic sports, and allow for more regular family and fan travel on that end also.
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [7220]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 6905
Joined: 1/25/17
|
Re: Is that the same UNC that had fake classes for athletes?
Jul 13, 2022, 12:42 PM
[ in reply to Re: Is that the same UNC that had fake classes for athletes? ] |
|
FORESTTIGER I agree with you about not necessarily wanting to see the demise of the ACC.
But, for different reasons. One day if college football alienates enough people. Or if the CTE stop football crowd starts scaring the Hades out of all the future potential players of the sport - the ACC would have not been scooped up in the hysteria and paranoia of "the moment"!
If the playoffs were expanded to 12 or 8 - I see it as being advantageous to a non-power 2 school like the ACC champ(if that is the case). Which means, unless you want to beg to join the p2 so that your athletic program can get nice things for other non-revenue sports and football. You are stuck in a conference where you do not make as much and your non-revenue sports can't fly 1st class to the games like at those other schools. But, you make the trip and you get the opportunity to compete. Players' compensation isn't paid by the school receiving the big money. That is done by NIL sponsors as of now; so it's anybody's player who can afford to bring the kid in no matter what league they are in(see Jackson St). Travis Hunter won't be the last kid to go to a non-traditional power school; because as long as the money spends why not also get a place that "treats me well" and looks after me in other ways too!
One day if you're the ACC perhaps you can say; "we didn't compromise and we made it through"! Clearly, some factors not being considered when people start talking about money and what it will and will not do.
Be willing to bet Jackson State's "facilities" aren't as nice as Ohio State, Alabama or LSU or Georgia and etc. But, they got the #1 recruit, because of Dion you say! Could be - but Dion or anybody else with the means can get a kid on campus under the current environment. And, they don't have to sit for years to play!
I know they likely will and may feel forced to do so. I am a realist in that way; I just wish they stood their ground for a moment and see a bit more before doing so. Let it play out in other words.
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [5759]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 3373
Joined: 9/1/03
|
Re: ESPN working on new deal for ACC?
Jul 13, 2022, 9:05 AM
|
|
ESPN really does not have any reason to renegotiate a new deal unless to help ACC to agree to expand CFP to 12 teams. That is what ESPN wants and now with the B1G expansion and apparently wanting 12 team playoff the ACC really has no leverage to stop the playoffs from expanding to 12.
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1159]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 772
Joined: 2/25/19
|
Re: ESPN working on new deal for ACC?
Jul 13, 2022, 9:28 AM
|
|
It wasnt really about not wanting to expand. It was about not letting ESPN have exclusive bid rights if they expanded now versus at the end of the contract.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [2947]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 3096
Joined: 9/10/04
|
Re: ESPN working on new deal for ACC?
Jul 13, 2022, 10:16 AM
|
|
I have to agree with the commentator. ESPN’s only motivation is to shorten the contract with the ACC to something like 2026. My perception is that ESPN is losing money on the current deal, so why not end it early. They have basically no high revenue advertising on the ACCN, have had large problems getting cable operators to add the channel, and they are paying ACC schools about $450 million annually for this current deal. Meanwhile, they are almost completely absorbed into making the SEC their exclusive college sports offering. Broadcasting the ACC and PAC12 games is a distraction that’s probably bleeding red ink. In a couple years with a revised GoR set to expire, ESPN can work to broker the few desirable ACC schools into the SEC and let the others drift to somewhere else. The ACC would become defunct. I think ESPN would have no problem with the ACC folding up and getting the loses off their books.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-Conference [447]
TigerPulse: 99%
Posts: 150
Joined: 11/30/16
|
Re: ESPN working on new deal for ACC?
Jul 13, 2022, 10:42 AM
|
|
I don't think ESPN wants any part of FOX dipping down to take UNC, UVa, and likely GT into the B1G, cutting a swath from the Mason Dixon line to the Gulf of Mexico in the process through Virginia, North Carolina, and Georgia. That would open up a whole lot of fertile recruiting ground right smack dab in the middle of SEC (ESPN) territory to the B1G.
I think that alone is enough to get ESPN back to the bargaining table.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Replies: 13
| visibility 1
|
|
|
50
