Conference Realignment

stinger78

Helluva Engineer
Messages
4,990
So you are actually making my point, thanks. If everyone wants to pee on the SEC for football success (while politicking behind the scenes), shouldn't the same argument be made about the ACC?

The SEC built a football program and used it to expand into basketball. (It's been talked about for nearly 30 years, so no surprise.) But ... the ACC was unable to translate it's dominance of college basketball into adjacent sports (i.e., football).

It's not unheard of. But tbh, most of the ACC schools do not emphasize athletics as part of their academic/college experience. So, it's hard to sympathize that "we didn't get the results we wanted, but we didn't really care either". Everyone cares now. $$$$
TBH, you made two points.
1. The ACC got favorable treatment in basketball years ago and no one complained like we do today. That is not true.
2. The other conferences used their football program $ to help build a basketball presence. Probably so.

However, I'd still assert that it was the change in the NCAAT format, allowing many more teams in while restricting the ACC, that allowed the other conferences those slots. Yes, many of the expansion slots went to mid-majors, but the other power conferences also picked up what was taken away from the ACC. There were years we went from 6-7 NCAAT teams to 3-4 teams, a loss of 3-4 teams some years. That is a loss of $$/viewers and a gain of $$/viewers for other conferences. To their credit, they used it to rise up and tell recruits that they could put them in the dance, too.

It's called fair access, and it's really all I want in the CFP... regardless of The Narrative.
 

Vespidae

Helluva Engineer
Messages
5,347
Location
Auburn, AL
TBH, you made two points.
1. The ACC got favorable treatment in basketball years ago and no one complained like we do today. That is not true.
2. The other conferences used their football program $ to help build a basketball presence. Probably so.

However, I'd still assert that it was the change in the NCAAT format, allowing many more teams in while restricting the ACC, that allowed the other conferences those slots. Yes, many of the expansion slots went to mid-majors, but the other power conferences also picked up what was taken away from the ACC. There were years we went from 6-7 NCAAT teams to 3-4 teams, a loss of 3-4 teams some years. That is a loss of $$/viewers and a gain of $$/viewers for other conferences. To their credit, they used it to rise up and tell recruits that they could put them in the dance, too.

It's called fair access, and it's really all I want in the CFP... regardless of The Narrative.
The NCAAT is a good thing, no question. But you have 20-25 games to sort that out. One of the advantages of baseball is 100+ games.

CFB has 12 games. Make it 16, eliminate weekly rankings and there is a fair shot. But rankings gin interest. Otherwise, why not just follow the NFL?

We are headed to that. Eventually.
 

leatherneckjacket

Helluva Engineer
Messages
2,155
Location
Atlanta, GA
The BHAM metro area “was 1,180,631, making it the 50th largest metropolitan statistical area in the United States as of that date.”

BHAM subscribers extend to the northern part of the state. A large percentage of that follow CFB. 538 breaks it down by school and by county.
There are over 7 million people in the Houston metro area.
 

forensicbuzz

21st Century Throwback Dad
Messages
9,099
Location
North Shore, Chicago


Interesting read as to how the SEC rose to prominence. The article suggests it was a combination of luck and timing. Several good points are made to back that up.

A couple of things are left out, in my opinion. First, even though the B1G has won more championships than the SEC, the gap closed fast after the SEC and ESPN made a TV deal. I don’t think that is entirely coincidental.

Second, after the SEC got its *** kicked in several nationally televised intersectional games in the 70s, the SEC began their campaign of “we are the best.” The campaign would go through several iterations such as “SEC speed” and, 8 years ago, “It just means more,” but the campaign was relentless and never lost sight of the goal. Part of that goal was to suggest that every team in the SEC was stronger because of conference competition. “If we lose, it is because we beat each other up.” When the SEC began this campaign they were probably the 3rd strongest conference. But, 30 years later, it finally paid off. The beauty of the campaign is that it seems to influence both humans and computers into believing the conference is strong top to bottom. A Clemson or an FSU generally has more to prove because humans and computers believe they are anomalies within a weak conference. They are always considered a one off event and any loss for them is devastating for national rankings whereas not so much for a top rated SEC team.

Having waged a successful campaign for decades, and then finally turning the corner, the SEC now has the very real advantage of attracting the best recruits, the best coaches, and the best TV contracts. But this was not always the case, and never inevitable. Money, resources and an outstanding PR campaign made the difference. A lesson the ACC has yet to learn.

I think the SEC pulled a Robert Johnson, and one day payment will come due.
 

wrmathis

Ramblin' Wreck
Messages
973
Location
Bonaire GA


Interesting read as to how the SEC rose to prominence. The article suggests it was a combination of luck and timing. Several good points are made to back that up.

A couple of things are left out, in my opinion. First, even though the B1G has won more championships than the SEC, the gap closed fast after the SEC and ESPN made a TV deal. I don’t think that is entirely coincidental.

Second, after the SEC got its *** kicked in several nationally televised intersectional games in the 70s, the SEC began their campaign of “we are the best.” The campaign would go through several iterations such as “SEC speed” and, 8 years ago, “It just means more,” but the campaign was relentless and never lost sight of the goal. Part of that goal was to suggest that every team in the SEC was stronger because of conference competition. “If we lose, it is because we beat each other up.” When the SEC began this campaign they were probably the 3rd strongest conference. But, 30 years later, it finally paid off. The beauty of the campaign is that it seems to influence both humans and computers into believing the conference is strong top to bottom. A Clemson or an FSU generally has more to prove because humans and computers believe they are anomalies within a weak conference. They are always considered a one off event and any loss for them is devastating for national rankings whereas not so much for a top rated SEC team.

Having waged a successful campaign for decades, and then finally turning the corner, the SEC now has the very real advantage of attracting the best recruits, the best coaches, and the best TV contracts. But this was not always the case, and never inevitable. Money, resources and an outstanding PR campaign made the difference. A lesson the ACC has yet to learn.

One other thing is the SEC damn near refusal to go play OOC games outside of the south east.

It does happen occasionally but most the time it doesn’t happen. Think Florida had some ridiculous amount of time between playing an ooc game outside the state of florida

This doesn’t includes bowl games obviously
 

L41k18

Jolly Good Fellow
Messages
177
I'll say this and take the blowback:
The ACC has never been seen as a strong football conference, simply because it wasn't. Go back and look at the ACC champs from the 60s & 70s & 80s. When Clemson won the natty in '81 the whole country was shocked (including the ACC lol).

Later, in the years when conf champs had tie in with the major bowls (Pac 10 & Big 10 Rose, SEC Sugar, Big 8 Orange, SWC Cotton) the ACC had the..... Citrus Bowl.

This whole idea that the ACC's lack of respect is solely the fault of ESPN or SEC propoganda lacks proper historical context.
 

stinger78

Helluva Engineer
Messages
4,990
The NCAAT is a good thing, no question. But you have 20-25 games to sort that out. One of the advantages of baseball is 100+ games.

CFB has 12 games. Make it 16, eliminate weekly rankings and there is a fair shot. But rankings gin interest. Otherwise, why not just follow the NFL?

We are headed to that. Eventually.
On this we agree totally.
 

Vespidae

Helluva Engineer
Messages
5,347
Location
Auburn, AL
I do not know but the rating rankings you shared are meaningless if they do not represent a similar number of households per metro area.

By the way, 4.7% of the 2.6 million Charlotte residents is more than 8.9% of the 1.1 million Birmingham residents.
Ratings are used to price ad inventory. Its a measure of market segment quality, not just reach. It’s the same in print.
 

stinger78

Helluva Engineer
Messages
4,990
I'll say this and take the blowback:
The ACC has never been seen as a strong football conference, simply because it wasn't. Go back and look at the ACC champs from the 60s & 70s & 80s. When Clemson won the natty in '81 the whole country was shocked (including the ACC lol).

Later, in the years when conf champs had tie in with the major bowls (Pac 10 & Big 10 Rose, SEC Sugar, Big 8 Orange, SWC Cotton) the ACC had the..... Citrus Bowl.

This whole idea that the ACC's lack of respect is solely the fault of ESPN or SEC propoganda lacks proper historical context.
Lots of truth here, too. However, in that major bowl alignment where was the ACC supposed to go? There were no more major bowls. Also, the ACC was every bit as good as the old Big 8, which had only Nebraska.

Finally, things change over time. Clemson’s emergence under Danny Ford in the late 70’s/80’s was huge. Adding GT and FSU in the 90’s helped the conference’s football profile, too. Adding Miami and VPI in the 00’s should have brought acceptance.
That’s Clemson, Ga Tech, F$U, and Miami… from 1981 to 2001 those 4 teams held 9 MNC’s. Plus a dynamic VPI program.

Still no respect. Why? The SECheat Narrative, based largely by HtH bolstered mainly by GT’s inability to beat UGA, was spun to show the ACC was a paper tiger. The bulk of inter conference games were GT/UGAg, FSU/UF, and CU/USCe. We were the ones who fell short there.
 

leatherneckjacket

Helluva Engineer
Messages
2,155
Location
Atlanta, GA
Ratings are used to price ad inventory. Its a measure of market segment quality, not just reach. It’s the same in print.
Do you agree that 8.9% of 1.1 people is less than 4.7% of 2.6 people?

My wife has worked in finance for multiple marketing firms that purchase media. The rates for advertisers in Birmingham are low compared to most other cities due to demographics like income and age. Your implication that ESPN is making more money off viewers in Birmingham than other cities is completely inane and wrong.
 

Northeast Stinger

Helluva Engineer
Messages
11,187
Do you agree that 8.9% of 1.1 people is less than 4.7% of 2.6 people?

My wife has worked in finance for multiple marketing firms that purchase media. The rates for advertisers in Birmingham are low compared to most other cities due to demographics like income and age. Your implication that ESPN is making more money off viewers in Birmingham than other cities is completely inane and wrong.
I love how your corrections of other people are so gentle and non-confrontational 🤣
 

SOWEGA Jacket

Helluva Engineer
Messages
2,120
I am glad to see that many of you have woken up to how we got here. It stinks that my conference stood still while the SEC set on an aggressive path to get better. And if any of you ever talk to teenage athletes you’ll quickly see that every high end player is looking to play in that conference in all sports. The SEC’s plan worked probably better than even they imagined it would.

Normally, I would advocate for the ACC to counter it. However, the writing is on the wall that the ACC will be raided at the first opportunity. Hence, my school, GT, needs to ensure they have a landing spot. Fighting FSU or trying to plan the future of the ACC is just a worthless endeavor at this point. And those who always ask, where can these teams go, I simply say the SEC and BIG will grow and will remove teams when needed. What is more valuable to the SEC - a Miami or a Starkville? An Atlanta or a Fayetteville? Same with the BIG. A lot of changes are coming and it’s every team for itself which is why I have no issue with FSU doing what they need to do to ensure their position 10 to 20 years from now.
 


Write your reply...
Top