Gene Sapakoff of Charlston, SC's Post & Courier, who covers Clemson & University of South Carolina, has an interesting piece today on Clemson.

"School administrators indicate an announcement about a Clemson bolt from its growing financial disadvantage in the ACC relative to the SEC and Big Ten schools is coming soon, probably along with Florida State and North Carolina and perhaps another ACC school or more - even as University of South Carolina officials try to block Clemson from the SEC.

How soon?

"Sooner than later," a Clemson senior administrator said last week when asked about a timetable.

Sometime in 2023?

"Stay very tuned," the administrator said.

Sapakoff then goes on to speculate about various permutations of North Carolina, Florida State, Clemson, Miami, and Georgia Tech looking to the SEC, Big Ten, or Big 12.

See for yourself here. I'm sure 12-foot-ladder or other paywall sites would help intrepid fans access the full article.

We may need to accelerate whatever contingency plans are in place for the 2036 ACC collapse, as the ACC may not be a viable option sooner than we think.

Would Cal still be interested in an ACC consisting of: Duke, NC State, Wake Forest, Virginia, Va Tech, Boston College, Pitt, Syracuse, Louiville, Cal, stanford, and SMU? Would anyone?

1. Cal has no choice

2. Best case ACC dissolves and P2 forms

LOL the rumor mill never ends.

But this kind of thing is probably why the rest of the ACC wanted to add more teams.

Did Clemson find $500 million lying around to exit the GOR?

This would be the best possible solution for the UC Berkeley Bears awful ACC affiliation deal. The Big24(30?) would be the de facto relegation level for the p2, and wold have a better tv payout the the Bears would otherwise have. Please do it FSU and others.

Strykur said:

---

Did Clemson find $500 million lying around to exit the GOR?

---

Exactly. If they had a way out of the contract they signed they would already be gone. Or if they suddenly found one now they would be gone now. 3 schools are nowhere near enough to vote to dissolve the conference.

However, we just need to focus on being a winning program in the ACC. Then if these guys blow up the conference we will have as good a shot at the B1G as anyone. Better than most.

Maybe we get the band back together and join forces with OSU and WSU as a west coast pod with SMU and create the PACC. Of course, only after we receive our fair share of Clemson's buyout now that we are members.

KPG said:

---

Gene Sapakoff of Charlston, SC's Post & Courier, who covers Clemson & University of South Carolina, has an interesting piece today on Clemson.

"School administrators indicate an announcement about a Clemson bolt from its growing financial disadvantage in the ACC relative to the SEC and Big Ten schools is coming soon, probably along with Florida State and North Carolina and perhaps another ACC school or more - even as University of South Carolina officials try to block Clemson from the SEC.

How soon?

"Sooner than later," a Clemson senior administrator said last week when asked about a timetable.

Sometime in 2023?

"Stay very tuned," the administrator said.

Sapakoff then goes on to speculate about various permutations of North Carolina, Florida State, Clemson, Miami, and Georgia Tech looking to the SEC, Big Ten, or Big 12.

See for yourself here. I'm sure 12-foot-ladder or other paywall sites would help intrepid fans access the full article.

We may need to accelerate whatever contingency plans are in place for the 2036 ACC collapse, as the ACC may not be a viable option sooner than we think.

Would Cal still be interested in an ACC consisting of: Duke, NC State, Wake Forest, Virginia, Va Tech, Boston College, Pitt, Syracuse, Louiville, Cal, stanford, and SMU? Would anyone?

---

Were else would Cal go? Neither the B1G or Big 12 wants Calford. All time irony, Cal ends up a SEC school, adopts a mascot called Uncle Berkeley, a former slave owner, drops admission standards for football players, and offers free admission to the children of any backer who is wilting to put at least $1 million into NIL. More over, a furious Alabama fires Saban for losing 3 games, someone spikes the Chancellor's tea, she offers Saban a 20 year no cut deal at $10 million annually, and she sends the bill to UCLA.

To make this really perverse, is this where SDSU, OSU and WSU come in and join the ACC? What happens to Notre Dame. If they are willing to join in football, Clemson and the other schools are royally screwed, and Notre Dame gets to call the shots over the conference due to its TV value.

This has so many fascinating aspects to all this.

This may be a financial windfall to Cal if the four teams leaven pay the huge exit fee.

It should also be noted, that even when Cal was brought into the ACC, we knew it would be a short term solution due to the high probability of teams leaving the conference. I doubt it happens as quickly as the Clemson people suggest, but the best programs will leave.

Soon enough there will be two big money conferences in the B1G and SEC, two decent conferences in the Big-12 and the ACC and then everyone else.

wifeisafurd said:

---

KPG said:

---

Gene Sapakoff of Charlston, SC's Post & Courier, who covers Clemson & University of South Carolina, has an interesting piece today on Clemson.

"School administrators indicate an announcement about a Clemson bolt from its growing financial disadvantage in the ACC relative to the SEC and Big Ten schools is coming soon, probably along with Florida State and North Carolina and perhaps another ACC school or more - even as University of South Carolina officials try to block Clemson from the SEC.

How soon?

"Sooner than later," a Clemson senior administrator said last week when asked about a timetable.

Sometime in 2023?

"Stay very tuned," the administrator said.

Sapakoff then goes on to speculate about various permutations of North Carolina, Florida State, Clemson, Miami, and Georgia Tech looking to the SEC, Big Ten, or Big 12.

See for yourself here. I'm sure 12-foot-ladder or other paywall sites would help intrepid fans access the full article.

We may need to accelerate whatever contingency plans are in place for the 2036 ACC collapse, as the ACC may not be a viable option sooner than we think.

Would Cal still be interested in an ACC consisting of: Duke, NC State, Wake Forest, Virginia, Va Tech, Boston College, Pitt, Syracuse, Louiville, Cal, stanford, and SMU? Would anyone?

---

This may be a financial windfall to Cal if the four teams leaven pay the huge exit fee.

---

No chance the existing ACC members vote to share the exit fee with Calford and SMU

DoubtfulBear said:

---

wifeisafurd said:

---

KPG said:

---

Gene Sapakoff of Charlston, SC's Post & Courier, who covers Clemson & University of South Carolina, has an interesting piece today on Clemson.

"School administrators indicate an announcement about a Clemson bolt from its growing financial disadvantage in the ACC relative to the SEC and Big Ten schools is coming soon, probably along with Florida State and North Carolina and perhaps another ACC school or more - even as University of South Carolina officials try to block Clemson from the SEC.

How soon?

"Sooner than later," a Clemson senior administrator said last week when asked about a timetable.

Sometime in 2023?

"Stay very tuned," the administrator said.

Sapakoff then goes on to speculate about various permutations of North Carolina, Florida State, Clemson, Miami, and Georgia Tech looking to the SEC, Big Ten, or Big 12.

See for yourself here. I'm sure 12-foot-ladder or other paywall sites would help intrepid fans access the full article.

We may need to accelerate whatever contingency plans are in place for the 2036 ACC collapse, as the ACC may not be a viable option sooner than we think.

Would Cal still be interested in an ACC consisting of: Duke, NC State, Wake Forest, Virginia, Va Tech, Boston College, Pitt, Syracuse, Louiville, Cal, stanford, and SMU? Would anyone?

---

This may be a financial windfall to Cal if the four teams leaven pay the huge exit fee.

---

No chance the existing ACC members vote to share the exit fee with Calford and SMU

---

Not sure the ACC contract provides for a vote on this matter. It had clear rules for adding new schools. What does it say about exit fee payments?

wifeisafurd said:

---

KPG said:

---

Gene Sapakoff of Charlston, SC's Post & Courier, who covers Clemson & University of South Carolina, has an interesting piece today on Clemson.

"School administrators indicate an announcement about a Clemson bolt from its growing financial disadvantage in the ACC relative to the SEC and Big Ten schools is coming soon, probably along with Florida State and North Carolina and perhaps another ACC school or more - even as University of South Carolina officials try to block Clemson from the SEC.

How soon?

"Sooner than later," a Clemson senior administrator said last week when asked about a timetable.

Sometime in 2023?

"Stay very tuned," the administrator said.

Sapakoff then goes on to speculate about various permutations of North Carolina, Florida State, Clemson, Miami, and Georgia Tech looking to the SEC, Big Ten, or Big 12.

See for yourself here. I'm sure 12-foot-ladder or other paywall sites would help intrepid fans access the full article.

We may need to accelerate whatever contingency plans are in place for the 2036 ACC collapse, as the ACC may not be a viable option sooner than we think.

Would Cal still be interested in an ACC consisting of: Duke, NC State, Wake Forest, Virginia, Va Tech, Boston College, Pitt, Syracuse, Louiville, Cal, stanford, and SMU? Would anyone?

---

Were else would Cal go? Neither the B1G or Big 12 wants Calford...

---

Would they be interested in Stanifornia instead?

golden sloth said:

---

It should also be noted, that even when Cal was brought into the ACC, we knew it would be a short term solution due to the high probability of teams leaving the conference. I doubt it happens as quickly as the Clemson people suggest, but the best programs will leave.

Soon enough there will be two big money conferences in the B1G and SEC, two decent conferences in the Big-12 and the ACC and then everyone else.

---

If this current trend keeps developing to its logical end, teams (more appropriate term here than colleges, given the current zeitgeist) like Ohio State, Michigan, Penn State, Alabama, Georgia, LSU are going to ditch their Minnesotas, Rutgers Mississipis and Vanderbilts, poach Texas and Oklahoma and form a superleague of 14-16 teams and grab a lion's share of media revenues.

wifeisafurd said:

---

KPG said:

---

Gene Sapakoff of Charlston, SC's Post & Courier, who covers Clemson & University of South Carolina, has an interesting piece today on Clemson.

"School administrators indicate an announcement about a Clemson bolt from its growing financial disadvantage in the ACC relative to the SEC and Big Ten schools is coming soon, probably along with Florida State and North Carolina and perhaps another ACC school or more - even as University of South Carolina officials try to block Clemson from the SEC.

How soon?

"Sooner than later," a Clemson senior administrator said last week when asked about a timetable.

Sometime in 2023?

"Stay very tuned," the administrator said.

Sapakoff then goes on to speculate about various permutations of North Carolina, Florida State, Clemson, Miami, and Georgia Tech looking to the SEC, Big Ten, or Big 12.

See for yourself here. I'm sure 12-foot-ladder or other paywall sites would help intrepid fans access the full article.

We may need to accelerate whatever contingency plans are in place for the 2036 ACC collapse, as the ACC may not be a viable option sooner than we think.

Would Cal still be interested in an ACC consisting of: Duke, NC State, Wake Forest, Virginia, Va Tech, Boston College, Pitt, Syracuse, Louiville, Cal, stanford, and SMU? Would anyone?

---

Were else would Cal go? Neither the B1G or Big 12 wants Calford. All time irony, Cal ends up a SEC school, adopts a mascot called Uncle Berkeley, a former slave owner, drops admission standards for football players, and offers free admission to the children of any backer who is wilting to put at least $1 million into NIL. More over, a furious Alabama fires Saban for losing 3 games, someone spikes the Chancellor's tea, she offers Saban a 20 year no cut deal at $10 million annually, and she sends the bill to UCLA.

To make this really perverse, is this where SDSU, OSU and WSU come in and join the ACC? What happens to Notre Dame. If they are willing to join in football, Clemson and the other schools are royally screwed, and Notre Dame gets to call the shots over the conference due to its TV value.

This has so many fascinating aspects to all this.

This may be a financial windfall to Cal if the four teams leaven pay the huge exit fee.

---

I don't see it happening soon, but if it ever comes to pass (2036?) we will deal with it at that time. I expect the college football landscape will be very different by then. In the meantime the ACC is a great spot for us (apart from the money).

Cal88 said:

---

golden sloth said:

---

It should also be noted, that even when Cal was brought into the ACC, we knew it would be a short term solution due to the high probability of teams leaving the conference. I doubt it happens as quickly as the Clemson people suggest, but the best programs will leave.

Soon enough there will be two big money conferences in the B1G and SEC, two decent conferences in the Big-12 and the ACC and then everyone else.

---

If this current trend keeps developing to its logical end, teams (more appropriate term here than colleges, given the current zeitgeist) like Ohio State, Michigan, Penn State, Alabama, Georgia, LSU are going to ditch their Minnesotas, Rutgers Mississipis and Vanderbilts, poach Texas and Oklahoma and form a superleague of 14-16 teams and grab a lion's share of media revenues.

---

We'll, yeah.

DoubtfulBear said:

---

wifeisafurd said:

---

KPG said:

---

Gene Sapakoff of Charlston, SC's Post & Courier, who covers Clemson & University of South Carolina, has an interesting piece today on Clemson.

"School administrators indicate an announcement about a Clemson bolt from its growing financial disadvantage in the ACC relative to the SEC and Big Ten schools is coming soon, probably along with Florida State and North Carolina and perhaps another ACC school or more - even as University of South Carolina officials try to block Clemson from the SEC.

How soon?

"Sooner than later," a Clemson senior administrator said last week when asked about a timetable.

Sometime in 2023?

"Stay very tuned," the administrator said.

Sapakoff then goes on to speculate about various permutations of North Carolina, Florida State, Clemson, Miami, and Georgia Tech looking to the SEC, Big Ten, or Big 12.

See for yourself here. I'm sure 12-foot-ladder or other paywall sites would help intrepid fans access the full article.

We may need to accelerate whatever contingency plans are in place for the 2036 ACC collapse, as the ACC may not be a viable option sooner than we think.

Would Cal still be interested in an ACC consisting of: Duke, NC State, Wake Forest, Virginia, Va Tech, Boston College, Pitt, Syracuse, Louiville, Cal, stanford, and SMU? Would anyone?

---

This may be a financial windfall to Cal if the four teams leaven pay the huge exit fee.

---

No chance the existing ACC members vote to share the exit fee with Calford and SMU

---

The way our PR phrased it we're full members that voluntarily are returning a % of media share revenue only. We thought it was stupid at the time, but maybe it's a blessing in disguise because It says nothing about us taking reduced shares of other forms of revenue which I'd have to imagine includes any possible exit fees or being partial members as far as voting and rights go. I don't think it'd be up to a vote of the ACC members in how that gets distributed.

calumnus said:

---

wifeisafurd said:

---

KPG said:

---

Gene Sapakoff of Charlston, SC's Post & Courier, who covers Clemson & University of South Carolina, has an interesting piece today on Clemson.

"School administrators indicate an announcement about a Clemson bolt from its growing financial disadvantage in the ACC relative to the SEC and Big Ten schools is coming soon, probably along with Florida State and North Carolina and perhaps another ACC school or more - even as University of South Carolina officials try to block Clemson from the SEC.

How soon?

"Sooner than later," a Clemson senior administrator said last week when asked about a timetable.

Sometime in 2023?

"Stay very tuned," the administrator said.

Sapakoff then goes on to speculate about various permutations of North Carolina, Florida State, Clemson, Miami, and Georgia Tech looking to the SEC, Big Ten, or Big 12.

See for yourself here. I'm sure 12-foot-ladder or other paywall sites would help intrepid fans access the full article.

We may need to accelerate whatever contingency plans are in place for the 2036 ACC collapse, as the ACC may not be a viable option sooner than we think.

Would Cal still be interested in an ACC consisting of: Duke, NC State, Wake Forest, Virginia, Va Tech, Boston College, Pitt, Syracuse, Louiville, Cal, stanford, and SMU? Would anyone?

---

Were else would Cal go? Neither the B1G or Big 12 wants Calford. All time irony, Cal ends up a SEC school, adopts a mascot called Uncle Berkeley, a former slave owner, drops admission standards for football players, and offers free admission to the children of any backer who is wilting to put at least $1 million into NIL. More over, a furious Alabama fires Saban for losing 3 games, someone spikes the Chancellor's tea, she offers Saban a 20 year no cut deal at $10 million annually, and she sends the bill to UCLA.

To make this really perverse, is this where SDSU, OSU and WSU come in and join the ACC? What happens to Notre Dame. If they are willing to join in football, Clemson and the other schools are royally screwed, and Notre Dame gets to call the shots over the conference due to its TV value.

This has so many fascinating aspects to all this.

This may be a financial windfall to Cal if the four teams leaven pay the huge exit fee.

---

I don't see it happening soon, but if it ever comes to pass (2036?) we will deal with it at that time. I expect the college football landscape will be very different by then. In the meantime the ACC is a great spot for us (apart from the money).

---

I'm being sarcastic: how do Clemson et al get around the GOR penalty, which currently is very high?

Back to another poster, Cal and Furd, once they are full members, are entitled to 30% share of all tier 1 TV revenues and a full share of all other revenues. So if the GOR penalty is paid after Calford have joined, they each get their share. So timing would be critical. It seems like Clemson and FSU have been threatening to leave for the last several years, so I don't know what is happening in October to cause them to actually leave.

wifeisafurd said:

---

calumnus said:

---

wifeisafurd said:

---

KPG said:

---

Gene Sapakoff of Charlston, SC's Post & Courier, who covers Clemson & University of South Carolina, has an interesting piece today on Clemson.

"School administrators indicate an announcement about a Clemson bolt from its growing financial disadvantage in the ACC relative to the SEC and Big Ten schools is coming soon, probably along with Florida State and North Carolina and perhaps another ACC school or more - even as University of South Carolina officials try to block Clemson from the SEC.

How soon?

"Sooner than later," a Clemson senior administrator said last week when asked about a timetable.

Sometime in 2023?

"Stay very tuned," the administrator said.

Sapakoff then goes on to speculate about various permutations of North Carolina, Florida State, Clemson, Miami, and Georgia Tech looking to the SEC, Big Ten, or Big 12.

See for yourself here. I'm sure 12-foot-ladder or other paywall sites would help intrepid fans access the full article.

We may need to accelerate whatever contingency plans are in place for the 2036 ACC collapse, as the ACC may not be a viable option sooner than we think.

Would Cal still be interested in an ACC consisting of: Duke, NC State, Wake Forest, Virginia, Va Tech, Boston College, Pitt, Syracuse, Louiville, Cal, stanford, and SMU? Would anyone?

---

Were else would Cal go? Neither the B1G or Big 12 wants Calford. All time irony, Cal ends up a SEC school, adopts a mascot called Uncle Berkeley, a former slave owner, drops admission standards for football players, and offers free admission to the children of any backer who is wilting to put at least $1 million into NIL. More over, a furious Alabama fires Saban for losing 3 games, someone spikes the Chancellor's tea, she offers Saban a 20 year no cut deal at $10 million annually, and she sends the bill to UCLA.

To make this really perverse, is this where SDSU, OSU and WSU come in and join the ACC? What happens to Notre Dame. If they are willing to join in football, Clemson and the other schools are royally screwed, and Notre Dame gets to call the shots over the conference due to its TV value.

This has so many fascinating aspects to all this.

This may be a financial windfall to Cal if the four teams leaven pay the huge exit fee.

---

I don't see it happening soon, but if it ever comes to pass (2036?) we will deal with it at that time. I expect the college football landscape will be very different by then. In the meantime the ACC is a great spot for us (apart from the money).

---

I'm being sarcastic: how do Clemson et al get around the GOR penalty, which currently is very high?

Back to another poster, Cal and Furd, once they are full members, are entitled to 30% share of all tier 1 TV revenues and a full share of all other revenues. So if the GOR penalty is paid after Calford have joined, the each get their share. So timing would be critical. It seems like Clemson and FSU have been threatening to leave for the last several years, so I don't know what is happening in October to cause them to actually leave.

---

As I've been saying, if they had a way out of the GORs, they would be out now. I agree, what happens in October that changes anything?

I'd almost like to just let Clemson and FSU pay their $500 million exit fees on an installment plan with a low interest rate.

wifeisafurd said:

---

calumnus said:

---

wifeisafurd said:

---

KPG said:

---

Gene Sapakoff of Charlston, SC's Post & Courier, who covers Clemson & University of South Carolina, has an interesting piece today on Clemson.

"School administrators indicate an announcement about a Clemson bolt from its growing financial disadvantage in the ACC relative to the SEC and Big Ten schools is coming soon, probably along with Florida State and North Carolina and perhaps another ACC school or more - even as University of South Carolina officials try to block Clemson from the SEC.

How soon?

"Sooner than later," a Clemson senior administrator said last week when asked about a timetable.

Sometime in 2023?

"Stay very tuned," the administrator said.

Sapakoff then goes on to speculate about various permutations of North Carolina, Florida State, Clemson, Miami, and Georgia Tech looking to the SEC, Big Ten, or Big 12.

See for yourself here. I'm sure 12-foot-ladder or other paywall sites would help intrepid fans access the full article.

We may need to accelerate whatever contingency plans are in place for the 2036 ACC collapse, as the ACC may not be a viable option sooner than we think.

Would Cal still be interested in an ACC consisting of: Duke, NC State, Wake Forest, Virginia, Va Tech, Boston College, Pitt, Syracuse, Louiville, Cal, stanford, and SMU? Would anyone?

---

Were else would Cal go? Neither the B1G or Big 12 wants Calford. All time irony, Cal ends up a SEC school, adopts a mascot called Uncle Berkeley, a former slave owner, drops admission standards for football players, and offers free admission to the children of any backer who is wilting to put at least $1 million into NIL. More over, a furious Alabama fires Saban for losing 3 games, someone spikes the Chancellor's tea, she offers Saban a 20 year no cut deal at $10 million annually, and she sends the bill to UCLA.

To make this really perverse, is this where SDSU, OSU and WSU come in and join the ACC? What happens to Notre Dame. If they are willing to join in football, Clemson and the other schools are royally screwed, and Notre Dame gets to call the shots over the conference due to its TV value.

This has so many fascinating aspects to all this.

This may be a financial windfall to Cal if the four teams leaven pay the huge exit fee.

---

I don't see it happening soon, but if it ever comes to pass (2036?) we will deal with it at that time. I expect the college football landscape will be very different by then. In the meantime the ACC is a great spot for us (apart from the money).

---

I'm being sarcastic: how do Clemson et al get around the GOR penalty, which currently is very high?

Back to another poster, Cal and Furd, once they are full members, are entitled to 30% share of all tier 1 TV revenues and a full share of all other revenues. So if the GOR penalty is paid after Calford have joined, the each get their share. So timing would be critical. It seems like Clemson and FSU have been threatening to leave for the last several years, so I don't know what is happening in October to cause them to actually leave.

---

I'll tell you what happened.

Clemson went 0-2 in conference play.

Cal88 said:

---

golden sloth said:

---

It should also be noted, that even when Cal was brought into the ACC, we knew it would be a short term solution due to the high probability of teams leaving the conference. I doubt it happens as quickly as the Clemson people suggest, but the best programs will leave.

Soon enough there will be two big money conferences in the B1G and SEC, two decent conferences in the Big-12 and the ACC and then everyone else.

---

If this current trend keeps developing to its logical end, teams (more appropriate term here than colleges, given the current zeitgeist) like Ohio State, Michigan, Penn State, Alabama, Georgia, LSU are going to ditch their Minnesotas, Rutgers Mississipis and Vanderbilts, poach Texas and Oklahoma and form a superleague of 14-16 teams and grab a lion's share of media revenues.

---

I'm not disagreeing with you, but I do have a thought exercise. What do the valuable teams want? They are successful because they have big, passionate fan bases and as such have more money than their peer schools. Over time this has lead to more success which feeds the large fanbase.

But if they move to a new conference where they have more money but no longer enjoy a money advantage over their peers, they are less likely to win as much. Will the decline in success impact the size of their fanbase?

Basically, will the fanbase remain if the teams form a super conference but start going .500? Would the fanbase rather be in their current conferences where they have 3 OOC patsies and another 2 or 3 perennial losers to beat up on, with only 4 truly impactful games to determine the success of the season?

Will Ohio State and Michigan still have the national appeal if both schools are .500 for a decade? Is it success or geography that grants them their fanbase, thus monetary advantage?

golden sloth said:

---

Cal88 said:

---

golden sloth said:

---

It should also be noted, that even when Cal was brought into the ACC, we knew it would be a short term solution due to the high probability of teams leaving the conference. I doubt it happens as quickly as the Clemson people suggest, but the best programs will leave.

Soon enough there will be two big money conferences in the B1G and SEC, two decent conferences in the Big-12 and the ACC and then everyone else.

---

If this current trend keeps developing to its logical end, teams (more appropriate term here than colleges, given the current zeitgeist) like Ohio State, Michigan, Penn State, Alabama, Georgia, LSU are going to ditch their Minnesotas, Rutgers Mississipis and Vanderbilts, poach Texas and Oklahoma and form a superleague of 14-16 teams and grab a lion's share of media revenues.

---

I'm not disagreeing with you, but I do have a thought exercise. What do the valuable teams want? They are successful because they have big, passionate fan bases and as such have more money than their peer schools. Over time this has lead to more success which feeds the large fanbase.

But if they move to a new conference where they have more money but no longer enjoy a money advantage over their peers, they are less likely to win as much. Will the decline in success impact the size of their fanbase?

Basically, will the fanbase remain if the teams form a super conference but start going .500? Would the fanbase rather be in their current conferences where they have 3 OOC patsies and another 2 or 3 perennial losers to beat up on, with only 4 truly impactful games to determine the success of the season?

Will Ohio State and Michigan still have the national appeal if both schools are .500 for a decade? Is it success or geography that grants them their fanbase, thus monetary advantage?

---

Exactly what I have been saying. And if they form a super-league, some of them won't even go .500. Some will start going 2-10.

sycasey said:

---

golden sloth said:

---

Cal88 said:

---

golden sloth said:

---

It should also be noted, that even when Cal was brought into the ACC, we knew it would be a short term solution due to the high probability of teams leaving the conference. I doubt it happens as quickly as the Clemson people suggest, but the best programs will leave.

Soon enough there will be two big money conferences in the B1G and SEC, two decent conferences in the Big-12 and the ACC and then everyone else.

---

If this current trend keeps developing to its logical end, teams (more appropriate term here than colleges, given the current zeitgeist) like Ohio State, Michigan, Penn State, Alabama, Georgia, LSU are going to ditch their Minnesotas, Rutgers Mississipis and Vanderbilts, poach Texas and Oklahoma and form a superleague of 14-16 teams and grab a lion's share of media revenues.

---

I'm not disagreeing with you, but I do have a thought exercise. What do the valuable teams want? They are successful because they have big, passionate fan bases and as such have more money than their peer schools. Over time this has lead to more success which feeds the large fanbase.

But if they move to a new conference where they have more money but no longer enjoy a money advantage over their peers, they are less likely to win as much. Will the decline in success impact the size of their fanbase?

Basically, will the fanbase remain if the teams form a super conference but start going .500? Would the fanbase rather be in their current conferences where they have 3 OOC patsies and another 2 or 3 perennial losers to beat up on, with only 4 truly impactful games to determine the success of the season?

Will Ohio State and Michigan still have the national appeal if both schools are .500 for a decade? Is it success or geography that grants them their fanbase, thus monetary advantage?

---

Exactly what I have been saying. And if they form a super-league, some of them won't even go .500. Some will start going 2-10.

---

Precisely! Fox has essentially orchestrated a multibillion-dollar chicken fight. There will be one winner, barely, and the burlesque appeal will quickly dissolve. Let it happen.

sycasey said:

---

golden sloth said:

---

Cal88 said:

---

golden sloth said:

---

It should also be noted, that even when Cal was brought into the ACC, we knew it would be a short term solution due to the high probability of teams leaving the conference. I doubt it happens as quickly as the Clemson people suggest, but the best programs will leave.

Soon enough there will be two big money conferences in the B1G and SEC, two decent conferences in the Big-12 and the ACC and then everyone else.

---

If this current trend keeps developing to its logical end, teams (more appropriate term here than colleges, given the current zeitgeist) like Ohio State, Michigan, Penn State, Alabama, Georgia, LSU are going to ditch their Minnesotas, Rutgers Mississipis and Vanderbilts, poach Texas and Oklahoma and form a superleague of 14-16 teams and grab a lion's share of media revenues.

---

I'm not disagreeing with you, but I do have a thought exercise. What do the valuable teams want? They are successful because they have big, passionate fan bases and as such have more money than their peer schools. Over time this has lead to more success which feeds the large fanbase.

But if they move to a new conference where they have more money but no longer enjoy a money advantage over their peers, they are less likely to win as much. Will the decline in success impact the size of their fanbase?

Basically, will the fanbase remain if the teams form a super conference but start going .500? Would the fanbase rather be in their current conferences where they have 3 OOC patsies and another 2 or 3 perennial losers to beat up on, with only 4 truly impactful games to determine the success of the season?

Will Ohio State and Michigan still have the national appeal if both schools are .500 for a decade? Is it success or geography that grants them their fanbase, thus monetary advantage?

---

Exactly what I have been saying. And if they form a super-league, some of them won't even go .500. Some will start going 2-10.

---

absent some sort of redistribution formula like the NFL draft, the super league approach probably isn't sustainable.

Those rules only apply to the University of California..not the University of Berkeley Near Contra Costa County, The ACC rules are clearly ambiguous about UBNCCC.

wifeisafurd said:

---

sycasey said:

---

golden sloth said:

---

Cal88 said:

---

golden sloth said:

---

It should also be noted, that even when Cal was brought into the ACC, we knew it would be a short term solution due to the high probability of teams leaving the conference. I doubt it happens as quickly as the Clemson people suggest, but the best programs will leave.

Soon enough there will be two big money conferences in the B1G and SEC, two decent conferences in the Big-12 and the ACC and then everyone else.

---

If this current trend keeps developing to its logical end, teams (more appropriate term here than colleges, given the current zeitgeist) like Ohio State, Michigan, Penn State, Alabama, Georgia, LSU are going to ditch their Minnesotas, Rutgers Mississipis and Vanderbilts, poach Texas and Oklahoma and form a superleague of 14-16 teams and grab a lion's share of media revenues.

---

I'm not disagreeing with you, but I do have a thought exercise. What do the valuable teams want? They are successful because they have big, passionate fan bases and as such have more money than their peer schools. Over time this has lead to more success which feeds the large fanbase.

But if they move to a new conference where they have more money but no longer enjoy a money advantage over their peers, they are less likely to win as much. Will the decline in success impact the size of their fanbase?

Basically, will the fanbase remain if the teams form a super conference but start going .500? Would the fanbase rather be in their current conferences where they have 3 OOC patsies and another 2 or 3 perennial losers to beat up on, with only 4 truly impactful games to determine the success of the season?

Will Ohio State and Michigan still have the national appeal if both schools are .500 for a decade? Is it success or geography that grants them their fanbase, thus monetary advantage?

---

Exactly what I have been saying. And if they form a super-league, some of them won't even go .500. Some will start going 2-10.

---

absent some sort of redistribution formula like the NFL draft, the super league approach probably isn't sustainable.

---

To some extent, this redistribution formula already exists. It's called the transfer portal.

sycasey said:

---

golden sloth said:

---

Cal88 said:

---

golden sloth said:

---

It should also be noted, that even when Cal was brought into the ACC, we knew it would be a short term solution due to the high probability of teams leaving the conference. I doubt it happens as quickly as the Clemson people suggest, but the best programs will leave.

Soon enough there will be two big money conferences in the B1G and SEC, two decent conferences in the Big-12 and the ACC and then everyone else.

---

If this current trend keeps developing to its logical end, teams (more appropriate term here than colleges, given the current zeitgeist) like Ohio State, Michigan, Penn State, Alabama, Georgia, LSU are going to ditch their Minnesotas, Rutgers Mississipis and Vanderbilts, poach Texas and Oklahoma and form a superleague of 14-16 teams and grab a lion's share of media revenues.

---

I'm not disagreeing with you, but I do have a thought exercise. What do the valuable teams want? They are successful because they have big, passionate fan bases and as such have more money than their peer schools. Over time this has lead to more success which feeds the large fanbase.

But if they move to a new conference where they have more money but no longer enjoy a money advantage over their peers, they are less likely to win as much. Will the decline in success impact the size of their fanbase?

Basically, will the fanbase remain if the teams form a super conference but start going .500? Would the fanbase rather be in their current conferences where they have 3 OOC patsies and another 2 or 3 perennial losers to beat up on, with only 4 truly impactful games to determine the success of the season?

Will Ohio State and Michigan still have the national appeal if both schools are .500 for a decade? Is it success or geography that grants them their fanbase, thus monetary advantage?

---

Exactly what I have been saying. And if they form a super-league, some of them won't even go .500. Some will start going 2-10.

---

Also, the super league will not be geographically distributed like the NFL. They will be mostly clustered in the Midwest and Southeast. Once that happens, no one else will care. And people will not just change their allegiance to a team that is 800miles away that they have no connection to.

Maybe this should be a separate thread, but here's my SWAG on an eventual superconference:


Sure Things:
Michigan
TOSU
Wisconsin
Oregon
Washington
USC
PennSt
Auburn
Georgia
Florida
Arkansas
Texas
TAMU
LSU
Tennessee
Florida St
Miami
Clemson
Notre Dame

On the cusp:
UCLA
Iowa
OleMiss
Oklahoma St.
Arizona
Arizona St
Utah
Iowa

golden sloth said:

---

Cal88 said:

---

golden sloth said:

---

It should also be noted, that even when Cal was brought into the ACC, we knew it would be a short term solution due to the high probability of teams leaving the conference. I doubt it happens as quickly as the Clemson people suggest, but the best programs will leave.

Soon enough there will be two big money conferences in the B1G and SEC, two decent conferences in the Big-12 and the ACC and then everyone else.

---

If this current trend keeps developing to its logical end, teams (more appropriate term here than colleges, given the current zeitgeist) like Ohio State, Michigan, Penn State, Alabama, Georgia, LSU are going to ditch their Minnesotas, Rutgers Mississipis and Vanderbilts, poach Texas and Oklahoma and form a superleague of 14-16 teams and grab a lion's share of media revenues.

---

I'm not disagreeing with you, but I do have a thought exercise. What do the valuable teams want? They are successful because they have big, passionate fan bases and as such have more money than their peer schools. Over time this has lead to more success which feeds the large fanbase.

But if they move to a new conference where they have more money but no longer enjoy a money advantage over their peers, they are less likely to win as much. Will the decline in success impact the size of their fanbase?

Basically, will the fanbase remain if the teams form a super conference but start going .500? Would the fanbase rather be in their current conferences where they have 3 OOC patsies and another 2 or 3 perennial losers to beat up on, with only 4 truly impactful games to determine the success of the season?

Will Ohio State and Michigan still have the national appeal if both schools are .500 for a decade? Is it success or geography that grants them their fanbase, thus monetary advantage?

---

The casual fans will not remain with Ohio State and Michigan if they become regular .500 teams. They need Minnesota, Indiana, Rutgers, et al because the Buckeyes and Wolverines need to maintain their 9, 10, or 11 win seasons and to do that, they need opponents whom they beat more than 90% of the time.

It's a mutually beneficial relationship. The football powers like Ohio State and Michigan get their reliable wins, while the likes of Minnesota and Rutgers enjoy the Big Ten money and branding that derives from the popularity and TV appeal of teams like Ohio State and Michigan.

Schools like Clemson figure (probably correctly) that their best move is to try and get into one of the two elite conferences asap, because their football success will eventually fade and they'll go back to being a so-so football program in a small state that already has a school in the SEC.

BearSD said:

---

golden sloth said:

---

Cal88 said:

---

golden sloth said:

---

It should also be noted, that even when Cal was brought into the ACC, we knew it would be a short term solution due to the high probability of teams leaving the conference. I doubt it happens as quickly as the Clemson people suggest, but the best programs will leave.

Soon enough there will be two big money conferences in the B1G and SEC, two decent conferences in the Big-12 and the ACC and then everyone else.

---

If this current trend keeps developing to its logical end, teams (more appropriate term here than colleges, given the current zeitgeist) like Ohio State, Michigan, Penn State, Alabama, Georgia, LSU are going to ditch their Minnesotas, Rutgers Mississipis and Vanderbilts, poach Texas and Oklahoma and form a superleague of 14-16 teams and grab a lion's share of media revenues.

---

I'm not disagreeing with you, but I do have a thought exercise. What do the valuable teams want? They are successful because they have big, passionate fan bases and as such have more money than their peer schools. Over time this has lead to more success which feeds the large fanbase.

But if they move to a new conference where they have more money but no longer enjoy a money advantage over their peers, they are less likely to win as much. Will the decline in success impact the size of their fanbase?

Basically, will the fanbase remain if the teams form a super conference but start going .500? Would the fanbase rather be in their current conferences where they have 3 OOC patsies and another 2 or 3 perennial losers to beat up on, with only 4 truly impactful games to determine the success of the season?

Will Ohio State and Michigan still have the national appeal if both schools are .500 for a decade? Is it success or geography that grants them their fanbase, thus monetary advantage?

---

The casual fans will not remain with Ohio State and Michigan if they become regular .500 teams. They need Minnesota, Indiana, Rutgers, et al because the Buckeyes and Wolverines need to maintain their 9, 10, or 11 win seasons and to do that, they need opponents whom they beat more than 90% of the time.

It's a mutually beneficial relationship. The football powers like Ohio State and Michigan get their reliable wins, while the likes of Minnesota and Rutgers enjoy the Big Ten money and branding that derives from the popularity and TV appeal of teams like Ohio State and Michigan.

Schools like Clemson figure (probably correctly) that their best move is to try and get into one of the two elite conferences asap, because their football success will eventually fade and they'll go back to being a so-so football program in a small state that already has a school in the SEC.

---

How does that make sense? There are plenty of 9-8 teams in the NFL that still have rabid fans. If anything, a superleague is better since otherwise losing more than 1 game means the season is over since you will have no chance of making the CFP. Meanwhile, the top seed NFL teams are expected to have 2-3 losses over the season.

The nfl has rules to try and create parity within the league.

College football has never been and will never be about parity.

Both have become about money.

DoubtfulBear said:

---

BearSD said:

---

golden sloth said:

---

Cal88 said:

---

golden sloth said:

---

It should also be noted, that even when Cal was brought into the ACC, we knew it would be a short term solution due to the high probability of teams leaving the conference. I doubt it happens as quickly as the Clemson people suggest, but the best programs will leave.

Soon enough there will be two big money conferences in the B1G and SEC, two decent conferences in the Big-12 and the ACC and then everyone else.

---

If this current trend keeps developing to its logical end, teams (more appropriate term here than colleges, given the current zeitgeist) like Ohio State, Michigan, Penn State, Alabama, Georgia, LSU are going to ditch their Minnesotas, Rutgers Mississipis and Vanderbilts, poach Texas and Oklahoma and form a superleague of 14-16 teams and grab a lion's share of media revenues.

---

I'm not disagreeing with you, but I do have a thought exercise. What do the valuable teams want? They are successful because they have big, passionate fan bases and as such have more money than their peer schools. Over time this has lead to more success which feeds the large fanbase.

But if they move to a new conference where they have more money but no longer enjoy a money advantage over their peers, they are less likely to win as much. Will the decline in success impact the size of their fanbase?

Basically, will the fanbase remain if the teams form a super conference but start going .500? Would the fanbase rather be in their current conferences where they have 3 OOC patsies and another 2 or 3 perennial losers to beat up on, with only 4 truly impactful games to determine the success of the season?

Will Ohio State and Michigan still have the national appeal if both schools are .500 for a decade? Is it success or geography that grants them their fanbase, thus monetary advantage?

---

The casual fans will not remain with Ohio State and Michigan if they become regular .500 teams. They need Minnesota, Indiana, Rutgers, et al because the Buckeyes and Wolverines need to maintain their 9, 10, or 11 win seasons and to do that, they need opponents whom they beat more than 90% of the time.

It's a mutually beneficial relationship. The football powers like Ohio State and Michigan get their reliable wins, while the likes of Minnesota and Rutgers enjoy the Big Ten money and branding that derives from the popularity and TV appeal of teams like Ohio State and Michigan.

Schools like Clemson figure (probably correctly) that their best move is to try and get into one of the two elite conferences asap, because their football success will eventually fade and they'll go back to being a so-so football program in a small state that already has a school in the SEC.

---

How does that make sense? There are plenty of 9-8 teams in the NFL that still have rabid fans. If anything, a superleague is better since otherwise losing more than 1 game means the season is over since you will have no chance of making the CFP. Meanwhile, the top seed NFL teams are expected to have 2-3 losses over the season.

---

NFL fans never had the expectation that they can win 8 games a year by default, though. Different starting point for college football blueblood fans.

sycasey said:

---

DoubtfulBear said:

---

BearSD said:

---

golden sloth said:

---

Cal88 said:

---

golden sloth said:

---

It should also be noted, that even when Cal was brought into the ACC, we knew it would be a short term solution due to the high probability of teams leaving the conference. I doubt it happens as quickly as the Clemson people suggest, but the best programs will leave.

Soon enough there will be two big money conferences in the B1G and SEC, two decent conferences in the Big-12 and the ACC and then everyone else.

---

If this current trend keeps developing to its logical end, teams (more appropriate term here than colleges, given the current zeitgeist) like Ohio State, Michigan, Penn State, Alabama, Georgia, LSU are going to ditch their Minnesotas, Rutgers Mississipis and Vanderbilts, poach Texas and Oklahoma and form a superleague of 14-16 teams and grab a lion's share of media revenues.

---

I'm not disagreeing with you, but I do have a thought exercise. What do the valuable teams want? They are successful because they have big, passionate fan bases and as such have more money than their peer schools. Over time this has lead to more success which feeds the large fanbase.

But if they move to a new conference where they have more money but no longer enjoy a money advantage over their peers, they are less likely to win as much. Will the decline in success impact the size of their fanbase?

Basically, will the fanbase remain if the teams form a super conference but start going .500? Would the fanbase rather be in their current conferences where they have 3 OOC patsies and another 2 or 3 perennial losers to beat up on, with only 4 truly impactful games to determine the success of the season?

Will Ohio State and Michigan still have the national appeal if both schools are .500 for a decade? Is it success or geography that grants them their fanbase, thus monetary advantage?

---

The casual fans will not remain with Ohio State and Michigan if they become regular .500 teams. They need Minnesota, Indiana, Rutgers, et al because the Buckeyes and Wolverines need to maintain their 9, 10, or 11 win seasons and to do that, they need opponents whom they beat more than 90% of the time.

It's a mutually beneficial relationship. The football powers like Ohio State and Michigan get their reliable wins, while the likes of Minnesota and Rutgers enjoy the Big Ten money and branding that derives from the popularity and TV appeal of teams like Ohio State and Michigan.

Schools like Clemson figure (probably correctly) that their best move is to try and get into one of the two elite conferences asap, because their football success will eventually fade and they'll go back to being a so-so football program in a small state that already has a school in the SEC.

---

How does that make sense? There are plenty of 9-8 teams in the NFL that still have rabid fans. If anything, a superleague is better since otherwise losing more than 1 game means the season is over since you will have no chance of making the CFP. Meanwhile, the top seed NFL teams are expected to have 2-3 losses over the season.

---

NFL fans never had the expectation that they can win 8 games a year by default, though. Different starting point for college football blueblood fans.

---

NFL also has a draft and a collective bargained salary cap. There is parity, and losing pro teams, unlike lower tier universities with losing programs and title ix offset requirements, are just not losing money. Cities/County/States might be loosing hundreds of millons on pro stadium subsidies.

There are only 32 teams in the NFL, and the NFL has enforced parity mechanisms including the draft and the most restrictive salary cap in pro sports.

HearstMining said:

---

Maybe this should be a separate thread, but here's my SWAG on an eventual superconference:


Sure Things:
Michigan
TOSU
Wisconsin
Oregon
Washington
USC
PennSt
Auburn
Georgia
Florida
Arkansas
Texas
TAMU
LSU
Tennessee
Florida St
Miami
Clemson
Notre Dame

On the cusp:
UCLA
Iowa
OleMiss
Oklahoma St.
Arizona
Arizona St
Utah
Iowa

---

Yeah, and notice how HEAVILY tilted this list is towards the South and Midwest (really just the Great Lakes region). I don't think this will work in the long run. The NFL's advantage is that it is legitimately a league with coast-to-coast popularity. When there were big conferences in the South, Midwest, West Coast, Northeast, etc., then college football basically had that. If it goes to the super-league envisioned above then it no longer will.

Everyone knows, including Cal/Stanford/ACC front office/other league schools, that three schools want out. Question is when. That's one reason the ACC expanded. Other 12 original acc schools wanted some security before that happens, but David Hood says Clemson won't be announcing anything next month and is instead focused on revenue distribution & interegating new schools with the revenue they provide.