Conference Realignment
- Thread starter orientalnc
- Start date
Techster
Helluva Engineer
- Messages
- 18,235
For the B1G. Any time leadership for a conference leaves it could change things.
billga99
Ramblin' Wreck
- Messages
- 819
He has already done what needs to be done for the next few years in terms of revenue. They have already locked in a very substantial TV revenue contract spread between multiple networks....Fox, CBS and NBC. That will provide them tremendous exposure in addition to money. I don't think this has virtually any impact on future expansion thoughts since I think most of those would be years away with the only possibility being additional West Coast teams to supplement USC and UCLA.
ChicagobasedJacket
Jolly Good Fellow
- Messages
- 420
I think Warren leaving actually harms any additional expansion. He wanted to expand more but it was too much internal pushback.
ChicagobasedJacket
Jolly Good Fellow
- Messages
- 420
This article mentions the pushback he received regarding further expansion.
SOWEGA Jacket
Helluva Engineer
- Messages
- 2,075
Y’all aren’t seeing what’s in front of you. Expansion is inevitable. With the expanded playoffs and the money, school exposure, and meaningful games, the playoffs will expand further beyond 12 and the SEC and BIG will want a bigger piece of the pie so they’ll expand to get more playoff teams. It’s about money and nothing else. Money will lead to expansion.
iceeater1969
Helluva Engineer
- Messages
- 9,649
I heard that Sec, Big 10 are run by business types from outside college ranks.
.
.
LT 1967
Jolly Good Fellow
- Messages
- 497
GT has no one to blame but ourselves. We were part of or had an invite to the two biggest players in college sports, the SEC and B1G. We left the SEC due to hubris, and turned down the B1G due to lack of foresight.
The SEC decision cost us for decades, and almost crippled our sports department for good...not to mention ceded Atlanta to UGA and other SEC teams. That's not even taking into consideration what's going on with SEC revenues today. GT fans forget that our school had a lot of clout in the SEC at the time and was one of the more respected members.
I keep hearing that turning down the B1G is only bad today because we can't predict the future and hindsight is what makes it worse. I would vehemently disagree with that. In 2012, B1G was paying member schools $25 million versus the ACC's $17 million. That's a 47% difference. 2012 was also the first year the B1G Network revenue payouts started (and arguably, when the gap started widening between B1G and everyone else), and revenue projections were forecasted to increase over the years. The ACC Network wasn't even a thought at the time, and if anyone followed media revenue trends, revenue for sports programming was exploding during that time. The gap was only going to grow wider and wider. Lack of foresight on GT's part ignored all of that to stay in the ACC. That's only what the public is privy to, I'm sure Radakovich and GT were privy to far more than what the public knew about, and there's a reason why Radakovich pushed hard for GT to join the B1G and left for Clemson because turning down the B1G was a sign to Radakovich that GT didn't want to compete on a higher tier. Anyone think Maryland saw the revenue forecast model and jumped as fast as possible to the B1G even knowing it would cost them $31 million in the short term? Schools don't pay $31 million without knowing how much the long term gains are.
College Football
Find all the latest college football news, live coverage, videos, highlights, stats, predictions, and results right here on NBC Sports.collegefootball.nbcsports.com
Let's also remember how the ACC treats GT. Did anyone think the ACC wasn't acting in the best interest of the Tobacco Road schools instead of the conference as a whole? Losing GT, and the biggest market in the South, could have been a disaster for the ACC long term.
So here we are. We've lost hundreds of millions over the last decade, have a MASSIVE debt load, and we just paid $10+ million we don't really have to the worst coach since I've been a GT fan. Oh, we're also locked into a media contract that looks worse and worse as the years go by. As I said above, we have no one to blame but ourselves.
Agree with many of your points. As most of the Swarm members are aware,
Tech tried to obtain an invitation to rejoin the SEC in 1977. We were voted
down by the SEC (AJC 11-28-77).
However, did Georgia Tech have a legitimate possibility of rejoining the SEC in the 1989-1990 period?
I recommend the following Articles concerning this subject:
Southern Part of Hell by Bernie Reeves 7-9-14
Article contains a quote by John Swofford(UNC AD at the Time-1990) stating that ''Florida State was being added because GT had informed the ACC that Tech would leave the ACC and join the SEC unless the ACC landed a Florida TV Market School".
Here are 6 More schools SEC should ADD Knox News-USA Today Network
8-12-21 Toppmeyer and Adams
Former SEC Commissioner(1989-90) Harvey Schiller is Quoted as saying "The SEC was interested in Adding GT, but Georgia Tech was not interested".
Finebaum: How Texas almost joined the SEC. Article from 2010--Updated 2019
Contains a Quote by Harvey Schiller that "Vince Dooley was pushing for Tech to be Re-admitted to the SEC". According to Schiller UF was also pushing for FSU and Miami. They felt this was the only way to control Recruiting!
So, my question to the Swarm: Did We Double Down on the disastrous decision
to leave the SEC in 1964. I am drawn to this subject because I was at Tech from 1962 through summer Qtr. of 1966 and saw two years of SEC play and two years of Independence! Also, this was the last four years of the Dodd era.
I realize many on the Swarm might
in
iceeater1969
Helluva Engineer
- Messages
- 9,649
In 65 when my Alabama grad parents found out i wanted to go to gt, it provoked a family crisis. Solved by the lessor evil "least he isnt going to fla or the hated auburn" .
I got here, loved the sec games, then figured out we were out of SEC. Still saddens me we thought we were like ND. Loved Tech when i got out. Loved
Gt football from the start
I hope we can restore our football from the depths and be relavent in a few years.
I got here, loved the sec games, then figured out we were out of SEC. Still saddens me we thought we were like ND. Loved Tech when i got out. Loved
Gt football from the start
I hope we can restore our football from the depths and be relavent in a few years.
LT 1967
Jolly Good Fellow
- Messages
- 497
Agree! Hopefully Coach Key and a renewed commitment will bring us back to revelance!
stinger 1957
Helluva Engineer
- Messages
- 1,473
GT matters to the ND administration because they recruit the SE and Georgia and we are an assured win most of the time.
Techwood Relict
Helluva Engineer
- Messages
- 1,414
I'd see that as a current snapshot, but it might be leaving short a bit of historical context for the younger fonts. Our matchup has some depth to it. Here's a short encapsulation. It's not all the way up to date, but has some interesting bits.
stinger 1957
Helluva Engineer
- Messages
- 1,473
Some reason I could not get the "body" of the article to open, probably me.I'd see that as a current snapshot, but it might be leaving short a bit of historical context for the younger fonts. Our matchup has some depth to it. Here's a short encapsulation. It's not all the way up to date, but has some interesting bits.
Bennett
Jolly Good Fellow
- Messages
- 478
- Location
- Atlanta Georgia
My favorite is where the article says ND has won 11 national titles while GT claims 4.I'd see that as a current snapshot, but it might be leaving short a bit of historical context for the younger fonts. Our matchup has some depth to it. Here's a short encapsulation. It's not all the way up to date, but has some interesting bits.
CINCYMETJACKET
Helluva Engineer
- Messages
- 1,216
My least favorite is the title after his introduction in big, bold letters that says "Notre Dame vs. Georgia Football History". Second would be noting that Notre Dame has 7 Heisman winners, while Tech doesn't have one yet, without noting that the trophy is named after a former Georgia Tech head coach.
Techwood Relict
Helluva Engineer
- Messages
- 1,414
I like that 358 rushing yards in a game seems like a lot until one recognizes Eddie Lee Ivery with 356 yards rushing against Air Force in 1978 all by himself and 604!! team rushing yards against Kansas (that's a lot of 3 yards and a cloud of dust in the wind runs) in 2011.
LT 1967
Jolly Good Fellow
- Messages
- 497
I consider myself to be a Traditionalist. I am very hopeful the SEC and Big 10 will not expand past 16. I am hopeful
the University Presidents will take a stand on the principle that every Student Athletic should play every Conference
team Home and Away before graduating.
The ACC has set the format to do this with the 3/5 schedule (3 Permanent 5 Rotators). According to pundits, the SEC will follow this format with a 3/6 schedule (9 Conference Games). This could Affect Tech vs. Georgia!
If the Big 10 goes to 18 Schools, they would likely have to set up a 1/8, one permanent with 8 rotators (to stay at 9 Conference games). If they go to 20 Teams. I believe they have to go to 1/9 or10 Conference games each year. This leaves absolutely no room for Intra-Conference Games, assuming they still want 7 home games with two Group of 5 teams each year.
Just some food for thought.
Last edited:
- Messages
- 8,094
- Location
- Augusta, Georgia
How "traditionalist" exactly? The 1930 Southern Conference, the predecessor to the current SEC, had 23 members. Many whom never/rarely played each other. This isn't exactly new ground we are treading.
LT 1967
Jolly Good Fellow
- Messages
- 497
I Guess my "Traditionalist" thinking comes from my time at Tech from 1962-67. I believe Rivalries develop from proximity and playing
repetitive games like the long rivalries we had developed with Auburn, Georgia, Tenn, and Alabama. For example, Tech's major rivals were within
a two-to-four-hour drive and the games were played every year. I do understand that we did not play all teams in the conference during the 60s, but most of the ones that we played were repeated every year. We may have rotated Vandy and Kentucky.
How traditional you asked. I would go back to the 1980s and 1990s in the ACC with 8 or 9 teams when the ACC teams played round robin and played every year. I believe this is the only way to develop rivalries and have a TRUE regular season Champion. With divisions or the rotation system which we are moving to, it will be difficult to balance strength of schedules. The ACC schedulers will be deciding on the strength of schedule for each team. I shudder!
Also, I believe the product is greatly diluted when you go past 10 teams, particularly when these teams are scattered over the entire East Coast.
Hope this answers your question to some degree.
.