Expansion Talk 2021

[RonJohn]

I understand that. Here’s the deal - the SEC made a move to strengthen their conference. The other conferences instead of strengthening their conferences are now just trying to hurt the SEC. I see a difference between the 2 moves. It’s like a youth basketball league where one kid is a freaking baller so the parents of the other teams try and have the league say the kid should play in a higher age bracket because it’s not “fair”. They are mad at the dad who taught his kid to dribble and shoot and now they want to not play that team. I saw this several times when my kids were growing up. As the coach my parents were coming and telling me we should just forfeit rather than watch this kid hang 40 on us. I tried to tell them nicely that that kid did nothing wrong in being good.

The reports are that the other conferences are basically trying to organize a boycott and not play the mean SEC. How about just rise to their level. If the ACC announced tomorrow that they were adding Penn State, Notre Dame, and Nebraska would y’all be happy or say we shouldn’t do it without the other conferences yes vote?

I don't think the other conferences will actually boycott the SEC. However, I would support it if they did. That wouldn't be an attempt to just hurt the SEC. It would be an attempt to maximize what the other conferences have. It appears that the SEC was trying to expand the playoffs exactly because of this expansion. They would likely have preferred to have a vote an the expansion before it was public that Texas and Oklahoma were planning to join the SEC. By your logic, they weren't trying to maximize the SEC, they were trying to hurt the other conferences. The SEC now has more upper tier teams. What do the other conferences have? They have more teams. They have a larger geographic footprint. They could argue that they have more integrity with regard to education and developing people in more than just football. (I won't go into whether that is true or not for every school) If the did boycott the SEC, it wouldn't just be to hurt the SEC, it would be to maximize greater numbers and larger geography.

If the SEC were to be excluded from the CFP, you would have one playoff with a team from: Midwest, East Coast(likely from the Southeast), West Coast, and wherever the fourth came from. Compare that to the SEC CFP which would be all teams from the South, and most from the Southeast. Which would get more national attention: West Coast vs. Midwest vs. East Coast of possibly rotating teams or Alabama, LSU, mutts, and UF every single year in the playoffs? If that were to occur for some time, there probably would be a reconciliation eventually. However, it would be a negotiation on what the groups would like to have. If things continue the way they are now, it will simply be the SEC dictating what everybody else does.

 

[Technut1990]

I am not upset at all. I find all the handwringing quite amusing. The SEC commissioner pulled the pants down of his counterparts and now they are locked away trying to come up with an answer. It’s actually pretty amusing. I have no idea how it will affect GT, but what’s funny is that if the SEC sent an offer our way GT would accept in less than 30 seconds and all of you would be rejoicing (as would I).

and in this tit for tat competition that is forming it prompts The SEC to do exactly that. They won’t go after Tech but it would be logical to me for them to try to break this alliance by simply inviting the bigger schools within it to join. Look for Clemson, Ohio St, Penn St, USC and others to get back door offers. This alliance will have holes in it on its face. How will TV deals be negotiated and pay outs handled ? If Tech plays Wisconsin for example who gets what ? Will TV contracts be negotiated for the individual conferences or for “The Alliance”. Big picture if The Alliance still acts as individuals in the money deals they will still come up short In this battle. They may have the votes to stop certain things but no matter what they do they can’t stop The SEC from presenting marquee money making intra conference games and they can’t control rankings. 5-6 top 10 SEC teams still beats a Straight Flush and The SEC gets most all the big bowl money when invites are handed out.

who would you watch during a regular season game, Oklahoma vs Alabama or Clemson vs Penn St. ? I know which one gets more views in the South. I think I know who continues getting the big TV money, which ultimately helps the formation of the upcoming Super Conference. I think this plays directly into the SECs hands long term.

 

[Technut1990]

I could do six teams. 2 highest ranked conference champions get a bye. 4 have a play-in game and these have to include at least 2 conference champions.

that would be the most logical answer but the question would be do fans buy it ? Do fans think a first place Clemson is better than a 2nd place Oklahoma? Is any Pac 12 winner better than the 2nd place Big 10 team ? It still promotes conference strength arguments and it could look like the The Alliance voted for a plan to keep the SEC teams out of the playoffs.

 

[Technut1990]

There is no information at this point to suggest that the other conferences are boycotting the SEC. In fact sources are saying the opposite:

Calm down. Its ok if the other conferences do things to help themselves as well. Nobody is trying to hurt your conference.

if there is an Alliance scheduling agreement it’s gonna be hard to include The SEC just on its face. How does any Alliance school play its conference schedule, one or two alliance teams and The SEC ? The ACC vs SEC rivalries could still play but if I were The SEC I’d stop those games.

 

[85Escape]

The ACC vs SEC rivalries could still play but if I were The SEC I’d stop those games.

I'm not sure the SEC is planning on having more than one non-SEC P5 on their schedules anyway. Maybe not even that. Don't be surprised if in the new SEC, the mutts drops their Tech game because they have to make room for another cross-conference game (and more TV money.) They can't drop their gimme games, as they need the assured wins to keep their wins totals high after all. And many mutt fans claim that the Tech game isn't a rivalry game anymore. It has been lopsided the last few years for sure, but it wasn't that long ago that we consistently either surprised or put a serious scare in the always-higher-ranked puppies.

What the Alliance can and will do is try to ensure that winning a conference still matters when it comes to the CFP. I'm 100% behind that and really hope they succeed.

 

[SowegaSting]

I wonder if an alliance game will count in the conference win/loss total.

 

[SOWEGA Jacket]

So you guys are pinning your hopes and the future of college football on conferences who either have no top tier teams (PAC 12), or who didn’t want to play an entire season (Big), and have 1 legit team (ACC). This Alliance has no chance to succeed because the other big time programs still in it will leave the minute the phone rings from the SEC. And because the decision makers within those schools live in opposite worlds of each other. Did y’all forget that the Big tried to shut down the sport 12 months ago? Those administrators are still there. It’s just not doable because money talks.

 

[UgaBlows]

I could do six teams. 2 highest ranked conference champions get a bye. 4 have a play-in game and these have to include at least 2 conference champions.

I was listening to Dukes and Bell on 92.9 yesterday and i’m pretty sure they said the Alliance is adamantly against expanding the playoffs. If they manage to keep it at four i think the SEC says to hell with it and forms a separate league with their own national championship. It’s a nice power play by the alliance if they pull it off, they have some leverage by threatening to lockout the sec on scheduling, can prob get non-P5 programs on board by promising them a seat at the table in the playoffs, maybe a guaranteed spot to best non-P5 team

 

[WreckinGT]

if there is an Alliance scheduling agreement it’s gonna be hard to include The SEC just on its face. How does any Alliance school play its conference schedule, one or two alliance teams and The SEC ? The ACC vs SEC rivalries could still play but if I were The SEC I’d stop those games.

If it's one alliance game per year then it's not all that different from now. If it is two then sure, scheduling gets more challenging. It's not impossible though. We could easily play 8 conference games, 2 alliance games, 1 G5/FCS game, and UGA every year. Maybe overall it results in less SEC/Alliance games in the long run but I doubt it would change scheduling them all that much unless the SEC is just upset about it and starts dropping games. Either way, nothing has been announced at this point so the conjecture that all of the other conferences are boycotting the SEC is just unfounded.

 

[GoJacketsInRaleigh]

So you guys are pinning your hopes and the future of college football on conferences who either have no top tier teams (PAC 12), or who didn’t want to play an entire season (Big), and have 1 legit team (ACC). This Alliance has no chance to succeed because the other big time programs still in it will leave the minute the phone rings from the SEC. And because the decision makers within those schools live in opposite worlds of each other. Did y’all forget that the Big tried to shut down the sport 12 months ago? Those administrators are still there. It’s just not doable because money talks.

The alliance is a voting block to control what happens to the playoff. It may be a scheduling agreement to get more non conference games for the networks. Sure WF vs Washington State isn’t getting any viewers. But start making games amongst Clemson, Miami, FSU, ND, a good UNC, Pitt, even us once Collins has another recruiting cycle or two with Ohio St, Michigan, Wisconsin, penn St, Oregon, USC, Washington, Stanford and a few others too and you’ll be able to close the media money gap too.

if these 41 schools wanted to create their own playoff they’d do just fine. And leave the SEC to do their own thing

 

[MidtownJacket]

So you guys are pinning your hopes and the future of college football on conferences who either have no top tier teams (PAC 12), or who didn’t want to play an entire season (Big), and have 1 legit team (ACC). This Alliance has no chance to succeed because the other big time programs still in it will leave the minute the phone rings from the SEC. And because the decision makers within those schools live in opposite worlds of each other. Did y’all forget that the Big tried to shut down the sport 12 months ago? Those administrators are still there. It’s just not doable because money talks.

I would point out that you’ve continued to make this argument (bolder) without the proper context it was in. They tried to delay the start of the season to avoid having to reschedule/postpone/get their member schools sick/handle massive case counts during a global pandemic.

Michigan and Ohio State aren’t looking to lose their football programs. Neither are Wisconsin and Nebraska. Nor Penn State or Iowa. Or, or, or..

It’s disingenuous to say that their conference was trying to exit the sport. They had a different approach to how to handle a global pandemic with a highly transmissible disease that as of the time was still being understood.

Additionally, I’m not sure that the middle tier down of the SEC is that different from the B1G or ACC. It’s hard to know with any certainty but by my eye they’re not. So yes the Bama/LSU/Jowja group looks good but they the only three I think have a shot at a conference title there.

The SEC will starve itself of oxygen if it plays only itself. I am NOT for scheduling Freezeouts with the SEC, I wanna keep COFH, would love to play at MissSt, wouldn’t mind playing Bama (in seasons we don’t play Clemson regular season), etc. I want to see more regional games that have students and fans driving to tail gate. That’s the experience college has that the pros don’t replicate.

What I HOPE would come from the alliance idea is:

1) Protecting regionalism in college sports (which also allows non revenue sports to continue to function without ballooning travel budgets that cause reduction of sport opportunities).

2) Creating some actual teeth to academic progress and requirements for athletes

3) Giving the schools of the Alliance a better collective bargaining position

4) Potentially driving ND into a conference (which would be us due to the other stipulations in the existing partnership agreement we have with them for non football teams)

 

[gville_jacket]

So you guys are pinning your hopes and the future of college football on conferences who either have no top tier teams (PAC 12), or who didn’t want to play an entire season (Big), and have 1 legit team (ACC). This Alliance has no chance to succeed because the other big time programs still in it will leave the minute the phone rings from the SEC. And because the decision makers within those schools live in opposite worlds of each other. Did y’all forget that the Big tried to shut down the sport 12 months ago? Those administrators are still there. It’s just not doable because money talks.

Yes because nothing ever changes, no schools ever get better again or drop off and get worse. Everything has always been exactly the same as it’s always been. /s

USC, Stanford, Oregon will rise again, probably not all at the same time. Michigan, Michigan St, Penn St will all rise again. FSU, Miami, VT will rise again. This alliance allows the schools the time and resources to stay relevant for the cycle to continue.

 

[yjack]

Laying things out from an alliance perspective?

Clemson football: SEC is big mad over ‘The Alliance’

Clemson football fans should relish in the fact that the SEC is extremely upset at the other conferences for not bowing down to its demands.

rubbingtherock.com

 

[WreckinGT]

So you guys are pinning your hopes and the future of college football on conferences who either have no top tier teams (PAC 12), or who didn’t want to play an entire season (Big), and have 1 legit team (ACC). This Alliance has no chance to succeed because the other big time programs still in it will leave the minute the phone rings from the SEC. And because the decision makers within those schools live in opposite worlds of each other. Did y’all forget that the Big tried to shut down the sport 12 months ago? Those administrators are still there. It’s just not doable because money talks.

It was likely either this approach or the Big 10 expanding with the best teams they could get, eventually leading to the Big 10 and SEC being the only real conferences left. We may or may not have been a part of that. Would you have preferred that route instead?

 

[BCJacket]

The only counter to SEC is for the other conferences to isolate the SEC. Unfortunately, the SEC's easy counter to the 'alliance' is to peel one of the conferences off. If any of the three paired with the SEC it would instantly be an utterly dominant force.

I'd be very disappointed, although not surprised, if the ACC commissioners aren't also talking to the SEC and ESPN about options. An SEC-ACC 'alliance' makes a lot of sense for geography, rivalries and power. Unfortunately, a B1G-SEC alliance would be the most valuable. So lucrative, in fact, they could absorb/reimburse the buyouts of teams like Clemson and FSU to bring them in.

A writer, and I can't remember who, recently said that this re-alignment is going to have two kinds of players: The administrators/schools/conferences who think there's rules about this sort of thing. And the ones who will come out on top.

 

[GoJacketsInRaleigh]

The only counter to SEC is for the other conferences to isolate the SEC. Unfortunately, the SEC's easy counter to the 'alliance' is to peel one of the conferences off. If any of the three paired with the SEC it would instantly be an utterly dominant force.

I'd be very disappointed, although not surprised, if the ACC commissioners aren't also talking to the SEC and ESPN about options. An SEC-ACC 'alliance' makes a lot of sense for geography, rivalries and power. Unfortunately, a B1G-SEC alliance would be the most valuable. So lucrative, in fact, they could absorb/reimburse the buyouts of teams like Clemson and FSU to bring them in.

A writer, and I can't remember who, recently said that this re-alignment is going to have two kinds of players: The administrators/schools/conferences who think there's rules about this sort of thing. And the ones who will come out on top.

Even out the money and add a clause that we can’t poach from each other or tell the SEC to piss off

 

[WreckinGT]

The only counter to SEC is for the other conferences to isolate the SEC. Unfortunately, the SEC's easy counter to the 'alliance' is to peel one of the conferences off. If any of the three paired with the SEC it would instantly be an utterly dominant force.

I'd be very disappointed, although not surprised, if the ACC commissioners aren't also talking to the SEC and ESPN about options. An SEC-ACC 'alliance' makes a lot of sense for geography, rivalries and power. Unfortunately, a B1G-SEC alliance would be the most valuable. So lucrative, in fact, they could absorb/reimburse the buyouts of teams like Clemson and FSU to bring them in.

A writer, and I can't remember who, recently said that this re-alignment is going to have two kinds of players: The administrators/schools/conferences who think there's rules about this sort of thing. And the ones who will come out on top.

Im struggling to find any benefit for the ACC in making an alliance with the SEC unless ESPN is willing to renegotiate the ACC deal which is doubtful.

 

[gville_jacket]

The only counter to SEC is for the other conferences to isolate the SEC. Unfortunately, the SEC's easy counter to the 'alliance' is to peel one of the conferences off. If any of the three paired with the SEC it would instantly be an utterly dominant force.

I'd be very disappointed, although not surprised, if the ACC commissioners aren't also talking to the SEC and ESPN about options. An SEC-ACC 'alliance' makes a lot of sense for geography, rivalries and power. Unfortunately, a B1G-SEC alliance would be the most valuable. So lucrative, in fact, they could absorb/reimburse the buyouts of teams like Clemson and FSU to bring them in.

A writer, and I can't remember who, recently said that this re-alignment is going to have two kinds of players: The administrators/schools/conferences who think there's rules about this sort of thing. And the ones who will come out on top.

You’re absolutely right that a B1G-SEC alliance would be the most lucrative, however, I have my doubts the B1G really wants that, no matter how hard OSU/MICH push them

 

[Technut1990]

Even out the money and add a clause that we can’t poach from each other or tell the SEC to piss off

you can’t tell the SEC not to poach The Alliance though. How many Alliance schools leave for The SEC 6 seconds after the invite ? If this turns into a war The SEC can start paying buy outs for other schools right now. What’s Clemson owe to leave The ACC ? Done ! The new SEC TV revenue and some kind of partial repayment plan from Clemson is all that’s needed. If the SEC wants to end this fast they can.

it’s long term suicide to declare war with The SEC. This issue calls for a guerrilla campaign. Time will tell if The Alliance is serious though. If the Big 10 and PAC 12 renegotiate TV deals exclusively for themselves then the biggest issue still separates the conferences and that’s money. The Alliance has to share it to beat the SEC and to share it they have to give The ACC a way out of its current TV deal Before 2036.

 

[RonJohn]

What’s Clemson owe to leave The ACC ?

Right now it is a $50 million buyout, plus media rights thru 2036. If we assume the media rights are $30 million per year (actually lower than what it is right now so that I am not accused of inflating things), that is $450 million at the moment. So Clemson would owe $500 million to leave the ACC. The SEC can't just write a check for that.

If Clemson were to try to leave, there would probably be lawsuits and negotiation involved on their part to try to reduce that and on the ACC's part to try to enforce the full amount. Lawsuits are unpredictable.