Conference Realignment

[Techster]

One of the questions I have is a little hard to encapsulate succinctly so bear with me.

Tech was once the hottest ticket in town and had a national following. Yes, I’m going way back. We don’t have to go over all the reasons for why this is no longer the case. Media has changed, entertainment has changed, sports have changed, news has changed, the country has changed, and Tech is no longer considered a national power, and these are all starting points for different conversations.

My question is, has there ever been a team of Tech’s national reputation and draw, that has gone through the decades long decline we have, who has gone back to being a nationally recognized power and has recovered the same drawing power and media share they once had?

I can’t think of any team that has done that but I don’t know which factor that is a feature of, other than failure to win consistently, but that is an interesting thought experiment to me if you have an opinion.

I was not old enough in the 1980's to remember (or care), but hasn't GT made the top 10 at some point in the season or in final rankings every decade since 1990? 1990's was Ross and O'Leary and we made the top 10 rankings under both. In the 2000's it was O'Leary/Gailey/Johnson, and we did during that time as well. During the 2010's, CPJ made the top 10 in 2014. 2020's is the only time (so far) that we have not.

Obviously, making top 10 one or a few times a decade doesn't come close to Dodd years, but that's a high bar few teams can match. Even 'Bama had periods of losing and barely being mentioned on the national level as they've been the past couple decades.

I do agree that of all the "old national powers" GT seems to have fallen the furthest for the longest amount of time. A lot of that is self inflicted, but as you said, that's a whole other discussion.

 

[Vespidae]

One of the questions I have is a little hard to encapsulate succinctly so bear with me.

Tech was once the hottest ticket in town and had a national following. Yes, I’m going way back. We don’t have to go over all the reasons for why this is no longer the case. Media has changed, entertainment has changed, sports have changed, news has changed, the country has changed, and Tech is no longer considered a national power, and these are all starting points for different conversations.

My question is, has there ever been a team of Tech’s national reputation and draw, that has gone through the decades long decline we have, who has gone back to being a nationally recognized power and has recovered the same drawing power and media share they once had?

I can’t think of any team that has done that but I don’t know which factor that is a feature of, other than failure to win consistently, but that is an interesting thought experiment to me if you have an opinion.

Media share is nebulous. That's because that was never really an issue until the 1990's. Games just weren't broadcast that much and athletic departments weren't relying on it the way they have now.

Miami and Pitt are the closest ones I can think of. NCAA studies show that attendance (think of it as a proxy for fanbase) are lowest for teams in urban areas. Their problems are they haven't been able to sustain it.

To answer your question, it is very difficult to get back on top once you lose it. Look at Oklahoma ... it's been 24 years since they one and they have a ton of resource advantages. Same with Tennessee.

Re Tech specifically .... I doubt we will ever see Scarlett Johansen wearing a Tech sweatshirt (a la Marilyn Monroe) or a world leader (Khrushev) singing the Ramblin Reck again.

If I were in Admissions, I would offer free scholarships to prominent influencers kids. Group affiliation is the best way to gin something up ... and the cost would be negligible. The first step is deciding you want to do something about it.

 

[Northeast Stinger]

My issue with what you said is it's incongruous with your past statements about sources and what is being referenced. Your opinion on FSU and Texas is just that...your opinion. Just because you feel that FSU is a "bad partner" doesn't mean others who actually make the expansion decision feel the same way. Further, the fact you would defend your opinion by citing a reporter (who I think is one of the better reporters on the expansion topic) who is citing "anonymous" sources is uneven with the threshold you've held previously held for such discussions.

If you want to see why fan opinions mean squat in this, let's look at Texas again. They were the lynchpin (with the help of A&M) in blowing up the old Southwest Conference:

x.com

x.com

Also, they were such a bad "partner" in the Big 12 they ran off Missouri, Texas A&M, Colorado, and Nebraska. To go beyond that, instead of helping the league become a premier conference, they lorded over the league with uneven revenue distributions and going solo with the Longhorn Network instead of being inclusive a conference wide network.

I don't think it gets much "nuclear" (your words) than that for a conference partner. Even after all that, the ACC, PAC 12, and SEC all wanted Texas to join their conference...which the SEC eventually ended up "winning". Point is, if a school has a big enough fanbase, brings in great ratings and a big market, Presidents will overlook all of it. At the end of the day, it's a business...fans feelings for a school have little to do with business decisions.

You are certainly correct that conferences wanted Texas regardless of them bullying other schools and not being a conference “team player.”

To a lesser extent Notre Dame would fit that mold. They act superior to all other teams and pretty much have to have their way all the time but every conference in the nation would love to have them as a full time partner because of their fan base, national stature and ability to attract eyeballs.

 

[Vespidae]

I chat with an FSU alum regularly and he is convinced ESPN will opt out of the ACC contract next year. He believes the ACCN is losing money.

I just checked GTAA's financial statements. They received $9M from the ACCN ... so multiply that by 15 for the total conference. That's $135M to ESPN. Profit.

 

[Northeast Stinger]

Media share is nebulous. That's because that was never really an issue until the 1990's. Games just weren't broadcast that much and athletic departments weren't relying on it the way they have now.

Miami and Pitt are the closest ones I can think of. NCAA studies show that attendance (think of it as a proxy for fanbase) are lowest for teams in urban areas. Their problems are they haven't been able to sustain it.

To answer your question, it is very difficult to get back on top once you lose it. Look at Oklahoma ... it's been 24 years since they one and they have a ton of resource advantages. Same with Tennessee.

Re Tech specifically .... I doubt we will ever see Scarlett Johansen wearing a Tech sweatshirt (a la Marilyn Monroe) or a world leader (Khrushev) singing the Ramblin Reck again.

If I were in Admissions, I would offer free scholarships to prominent influencers kids. Group affiliation is the best way to gin something up ... and the cost would be negligible. The first step is deciding you want to do something about it.

That’s helpful but let me press you a little further. I would have to check historical records so please don’t side track on specifics if I am off on specifics but let’s say Oklahoma was a national power for almost five decades, even rivaling Notre Dame in some of Notre Dame’s glory years. If they were to regain that level of winning and be a formidable foe for the Alabamas, Georgias, Ohio States and Michigans of the world, wouldn’t that be all it would take for them to get back to their former glory? Wouldn’t the same be true for Tennessee?

 

[Schlandy]

What? Nobody is talking about Tech moving to the Big 12.

I’ve see it more

 

[Vespidae]

That’s helpful but let me press you a little further. I would have to check historical records so please don’t side track on specifics if I am off on specifics but let’s say Oklahoma was a national power for almost five decades, even rivaling Notre Dame in some of Notre Dame’s glory years. If they were to regain that level of winning and be a formidable foe for the Alabamas, Georgias, Ohio States and Michigans of the world, wouldn’t that be all it would take for them to get back to their former glory? Wouldn’t the same be true for Tennessee?

I deleted my original response and will just say this.

I did a project with the Kansas City Chiefs about 15 years ago. They were terrible! Horribly run, no strategy, it was management by stream of consciousness (no joke). So, in a word ... it's possible.

 

[roadkill]

One of the questions I have is a little hard to encapsulate succinctly so bear with me.

Tech was once the hottest ticket in town and had a national following. Yes, I’m going way back. We don’t have to go over all the reasons for why this is no longer the case. Media has changed, entertainment has changed, sports have changed, news has changed, the country has changed, and Tech is no longer considered a national power, and these are all starting points for different conversations.

My question is, has there ever been a team of Tech’s national reputation and draw, that has gone through the decades long decline we have, who has gone back to being a nationally recognized power and has recovered the same drawing power and media share they once had?

I can’t think of any team that has done that but I don’t know which factor that is a feature of, other than failure to win consistently, but that is an interesting thought experiment to me if you have an opinion.

I think the answer is no.

Not too difficult of a question, if you allow for "the same drawing power and media share" to be subjective. I don't know how else to approach it.

Let's assume that your criteria for "nationally recognized power" means a program that is expected to be in the championship hunt, or in the last couple of decades has been there (BCS championship game or CFP) multiple times. On top of that, they would have had to have been a blueblood at some time in the past but fallen out of the national picture for at least a couple of decades.

The teams @Vespidae mentioned - Miami, Pitt, Oklahoma, Tenn - don't fit this criteria. Miami, Pitt, and Tenn because they haven't returned to national prominence (perhaps Miami has a shot if they can improve their game-day coaching), and Oklahoma, while not winning it all, has been in the championship playoffs 6 times in the last 20 years. I still consider Oklahoma to be in the elite tier, and I don't think anyone is very surprised when they see them in the CFP.

Tech has never seen sustained success at the elite level since the 50's. O'Leary had a good run, but not enough to return Tech to national power status. Any other time we have been able to put together a top-ten season, it has been an isolated blip. As you mentioned, consistency has been our weakness.

 

[Vespidae]

I think the answer is no.

Not too difficult of a question, if you allow for "the same drawing power and media share" to be subjective. I don't know how else to approach it.

Let's assume that your criteria for "nationally recognized power" means a program that is expected to be in the championship hunt, or in the last couple of decades has been there (BCS championship game or CFP) multiple times. On top of that, they would have had to have been a blueblood at some time in the past but fallen out of the national picture for at least a couple of decades.

The teams @Vespidae mentioned - Miami, Pitt, Oklahoma, Tenn - don't fit this criteria. Miami, Pitt, and Tenn because they haven't returned to national prominence (perhaps Miami has a shot if they can improve their game-day coaching), and Oklahoma, while not winning it all, has been in the championship playoffs 6 times in the last 20 years. I still consider Oklahoma to be in the elite tier, and I don't think anyone is very surprised when they see them in the CFP.

Tech has never seen sustained success at the elite level since the 50's. O'Leary had a good run, but not enough to return Tech to national power status. Any other time we have been able to put together a top-ten season, it has been an isolated blip. As you mentioned, consistency has been our weakness.

My numbers are dated, but it might be useful.

To field a competitive D1 football team takes about $75M in revenue. To field a competitive basketball team takes $5-10M.

I think at this point, Tech has to decide what is important. Vandy, by example, has all but given up trying to be competitive in football. They tend to have other sports such as golf, baseball, etc that they tend to support because well, they CAN compete.

I think Tech would be very, very happy to have a competitive D1 football program that averages an 8 win season and then invest in other programs that can distinguish Tech. I really have no idea but I'm pretty just JBatt does.

 

[roadkill]

My numbers are dated, but it might be useful.

To field a competitive D1 football team takes about $75M in revenue. To field a competitive basketball team takes $5-10M.

I think at this point, Tech has to decide what is important. Vandy, by example, has all but given up trying to be competitive in football. They tend to have other sports such as golf, baseball, etc that they tend to support because well, they CAN compete.

I think Tech would be very, very happy to have a competitive D1 football program that averages an 8 win season and then invest in other programs that can distinguish Tech. I really have no idea but I'm pretty just JBatt does.

I believe there is some synergy between football and basketball in the sense that being elite in either garners positive name recognition for the other. If you can be very good-to-elite in both, so much the better. If you are also good at some of the other programs, that's icing on the cake.

It appears that Tech's leadership (Cabrera and Batt) thinks it's important. Do we have the $$ it takes to sustain competitiveness at the highest level? I don't know, but if the hiring binge we've been on over the last year for both programs is any indication, we are trying. The jury is still out on our head coach hires, but trends are positive. Recruiting has certainly picked up in both sports.

 

[Vespidae]

I’ve see it more

Tech moving to the Big 12 is not going to happen. In fact, Tech is most likely going to stay in the ACC. And why? Because Notre Dame wants it that way. Notre Dame wants the ACC to survive.

Why does Notre Dame care that the ACC survives? Three reasons:

1. Notre Dame values their independence and feels strongly that they will continue to do so well into the future. Notre Dame has played ACC teams since 2014 — and the Irish are 40-10 (.800) in those games. Playing the ACC allows them to stay independent – and competitive – in the College Football Playoff landscape. The overall health of the ACC makes that possible.
2. It also helps Notre Dame if one of its traditional rivals – Stanford - does not go to the Big Ten. At that point, the Big Ten would have USC, Stanford, Michigan, Michigan State and Purdue – pretty much everyone with the exception of Army and Navy that Notre Dame could even begin to call a traditional rival. Under such a scenario, the Big Ten apply pressure on the Irish at that point to join the conference or be denied teams to schedule.
3. The ACC being viable keeps the CFP open for Notre Dame. In the current 12-team CFP setup, the Irish can make the playoff as an at-large team despite not playing in a conference championship game. Notre Dame cannot get a first-round bye, however. As long as the ACC is considered a power conference, then the Irish's playoff path will not change much. In other words, they do not need to be in the Big Ten or SEC ... yet.

The long-term health of the ACC benefits Notre Dame, which wants to remain independent. A stable and healthy ACC makes that possible. I will bet that the ACC Presidents know this even if most of us fans don't.

/Sporting News

 

[Schlandy]

Tech moving to the Big 12 is not going to happen. In fact, Tech is most likely going to stay in the ACC. And why? Because Notre Dame wants it that way. Notre Dame wants the ACC to survive.

Why does Notre Dame care that the ACC survives? Three reasons:

1. Notre Dame values their independence and feels strongly that they will continue to do so well into the future. Notre Dame has played ACC teams since 2014 — and the Irish are 40-10 (.800) in those games. Playing the ACC allows them to stay independent – and competitive – in the College Football Playoff landscape. The overall health of the ACC makes that possible.
2. It also helps Notre Dame if one of its traditional rivals – Stanford - does not go to the Big Ten. At that point, the Big Ten would have USC, Stanford, Michigan, Michigan State and Purdue – pretty much everyone with the exception of Army and Navy that Notre Dame could even begin to call a traditional rival. Under such a scenario, the Big Ten apply pressure on the Irish at that point to join the conference or be denied teams to schedule.
3. The ACC being viable keeps the CFP open for Notre Dame. In the current 12-team CFP setup, the Irish can make the playoff as an at-large team despite not playing in a conference championship game. Notre Dame cannot get a first-round bye, however. As long as the ACC is considered a power conference, then the Irish's playoff path will not change much. In other words, they do not need to be in the Big Ten or SEC ... yet.

The long-term health of the ACC benefits Notre Dame, which wants to remain independent. A stable and healthy ACC makes that possible. I will bet that the ACC Presidents know this even if most of us fans don't.

/Sporting News

Yeah that sucks, very believable though.

 

[Techster]

GT won 7 games in 2024. Batt and GT have announced an increase of 30% of the football budget, which may be the highest one year percentage increase for the football team in my lifetime. IMO, that does not say GT is happy with 8 wins a season. If anything, that says GT is positioning the flagship sports program to make a big move. Saying GT is happy with 8 wins a season is also antithetical to what Cabrera has stated for his vision of the GT football (hint: It's not to be mediocre to average).

If you look at it from a spend standpoint, GT is paying its OC Buster Faulkner factory level money ($1 million/season).

https://footballscoop.com/news/the-highest-paid-offensive-coordinators-in-college-football-2024-edition

IMO, GT is going with a top down approach with football. Invest heavily in its biggest program, help rebuild its success on the national level, and let the money and increased media attention trickle down to other programs. This approach is what SEC teams have done, and most of the factory programs across the country are doing. I think if the money does flow in from the increased investment in football, I expect the emphasis to increase football spending to continue, and the expectation that our football program wins more than just 8 games a season.

 

[RonJohn]

I just checked GTAA's financial statements. They received $9M from the ACCN ... so multiply that by 15 for the total conference. That's $135M to ESPN. Profit.

The problem with arguing with FSU fans is that facts don't matter. If FSU fans believe that the ACCN is losing money, then they will believe that it is losing money. Even if you show them the actual books of the ACCN they will believe that the ACCN is losing money. FSU fans are like flat earthers, they believe what they want even if all of the available evidence points in the other direction.

 

[Schlandy]

The problem with arguing with FSU fans is that facts don't matter. If FSU fans believe that the ACCN is losing money, then they will believe that it is losing money. Even if you show them the actual books of the ACCN they will believe that the ACCN is losing money. FSU fans are like flat earthers, they believe what they want even if all of the available evidence points in the other direction.

Yeah that school is never getting AAU accredited

 

[Root4GT]

One of the questions I have is a little hard to encapsulate succinctly so bear with me.

Tech was once the hottest ticket in town and had a national following. Yes, I’m going way back. We don’t have to go over all the reasons for why this is no longer the case. Media has changed, entertainment has changed, sports have changed, news has changed, the country has changed, and Tech is no longer considered a national power, and these are all starting points for different conversations.

My question is, has there ever been a team of Tech’s national reputation and draw, that has gone through the decades long decline we have, who has gone back to being a nationally recognized power and has recovered the same drawing power and media share they once had?

I can’t think of any team that has done that but I don’t know which factor that is a feature of, other than failure to win consistently, but that is an interesting thought experiment to me if you have an opinion.

You would have to go back to when the Ivy League schools and Army were powers. Of course that is before College Football became a bg National Sport

 

[GTpdm]

I doubt we will ever see Scarlett Johansen wearing a Tech sweatshirt..

You just had to throw that image out there. Gonna be stuck in my head for a long time.

 

[UgaBlows]

The problem with arguing with FSU fans is that facts don't matter. If FSU fans believe that the ACCN is losing money, then they will believe that it is losing money. Even if you show them the actual books of the ACCN they will believe that the ACCN is losing money. FSU fans are like flat earthers, they believe what they want even if all of the available evidence points in the other direction.

I just don’t understand how we as a society have gotten to this point where facts are optional depending on whether they fit your narrative or not.

 

[stinger78]

I just don’t understand how we as a society have gotten to this point where facts are optional depending on whether they fit your narrative or not.

Postmodernism: Your narrative determines the “facts.”

 

[Augusta_Jacket]

I just don’t understand how we as a society have gotten to this point where facts are optional depending on whether they fit your narrative or not.

When truth is relative, so is everything else...