ACC rumors

[basedog]

Could be the end of this conference. Seems SEC could go to 20 team conference.

Btw what schools in the ACC do u consider a blue blood?

[StarkVegasSteve]

Carolina and Duke are blue bloods in basketball. That's it.

They have no baseball blue bloods and despite Clemson thinking they are one in football, they're not. They bottled a really good run together for about 7 years but outside of that they are Auburn. And we don't consider Auburn a blue blood. And no I do not consider FSU one either.

[basedog]

I agree also, I can see any 4 teams joining from ACC to sec, we can compete against pretty good.

[BravesDoggy]

Snagging a team in NC seems to make sense since the SEC has a big presence in Charlotte. Maybe NC and FSU. I don't think it would be necessary to mess with Virginia teams. They would stick out like a sore thumb kinda like Missouri does.

[TrapGame]

Sounds like the SEC is on its way to becoming the first super conference.

[StarkVegasSteve]

Snagging a team in NC seems to make sense since the SEC has a big presence in Charlotte. Maybe NC and FSU. I don't think it would be necessary to mess with Virginia teams. They would stick out like a sore thumb kinda like Missouri does.

If they add 4, and that's a HUGE IF, I think it'll be UNC, Clemson, UVA, and FSU. I personally don't see that happening and tend to think they'll just add two, which would be UNC and UVA. Florida DOES NOT want Florida St in the SEC and South Carolina DOES NOT want Clemson. Now I know the SEC kind of threw A&M's opinion to the side with Texas but that was a bit different. It was Texas. Clemson nor FSU are even in the same atmosphere as Texas.

[Quaoarsking]

If they add 4, and that's a HUGE IF, I think it'll be UNC, Clemson, UVA, and FSU. I personally don't see that happening and tend to think they'll just add two, which would be UNC and UVA. Florida DOES NOT want Florida St in the SEC and South Carolina DOES NOT want Clemson. Now I know the SEC kind of threw A&M's opinion to the side with Texas but that was a bit different. It was Texas. Clemson nor FSU are even in the same atmosphere as Texas.

I read online a couple years ago that Florida has lowered its opposition to adding Florida State.

I predict Florida State, Clemson, North Carolina and NC State as the 4 to come to the SEC, with Virginia choosing the Big 10 over an SEC offer.

[basedog]

I can see the ACC breaking up and Sec going to 20. Big -0 will add 4 teams as well. Look at PAC 12 , they aren't the same nor is Big 12. Sec and Big 10 will dominate with expansions and hopefully one day break away from the NCAA.
JMO

[deltadawg63]

Those past days of not adding another school from an existing state are gone after Texas joined over TAMU's quiet objection. It will be UNC and FSU or Clemson initially. FSU and Clemson will race each other to be the next one after UNC. The next move will cause the collapse of the ACC with the Big Ten adding Virginia and Duke then there will be a rush by NCSU, Miami, VT, BC, etc. to join Big Ten or SEC.

[HoopsDawg]

I read online a couple years ago that Florida has lowered its opposition to adding Florida State.

I predict Florida State, Clemson, North Carolina and NC State as the 4 to come to the SEC, with Virginia choosing the Big 10 over an SEC offer.

NC State is not an attractive option.

UNC and UVA would be the big adds. Followed by FSU and Clemson. Those would be the 20.

[Goldendawg]

NC State is not an attractive option.

UNC and UVA would be the big adds. Followed by FSU and Clemson. Those would be the 20.

And you can bet no matter the four they take, the two toughest in football will immediately hit our schedule the first year replacing two "weaker" foes. If the league goes to 9 SEC games we will get the toughest of the four.

[BeardoMSU]

"They're going to boot us for NCState!"

- some negative nancy (probably) soon

[Quaoarsking]

NC State is not an attractive option.

UNC and UVA would be the big adds. Followed by FSU and Clemson. Those would be the 20.

I agree that UVA is more desirable to us than NC State, but I also think UVA will ultimately choose the Big 10 over us. I'm not 100% sure of that, probably 70:30.

NC State is a large public university - it would be in the top half of the conference in enrollment and academics and would be a good backup plan for the conference. It has the feel of an "SEC school."

[DownwardDawg]

If they add 4, and that's a HUGE IF, I think it'll be UNC, Clemson, UVA, and FSU. I personally don't see that happening and tend to think they'll just add two, which would be UNC and UVA. Florida DOES NOT want Florida St in the SEC and South Carolina DOES NOT want Clemson. Now I know the SEC kind of threw A&M's opinion to the side with Texas but that was a bit different. It was Texas. Clemson nor FSU are even in the same atmosphere as Texas.

FSU will definitely be one. There is no doubt.

[Santiago]

Seems for sure the fight between big 10 and SEC is UNC and UVA.
Academically they seem more Big 10.
But UNC would do well if in the SEC footprint.

[coachnorm]

If they add 4, and that's a HUGE IF, I think it'll be UNC, Clemson, UVA, and FSU. I personally don't see that happening and tend to think they'll just add two, which would be UNC and UVA. Florida DOES NOT want Florida St in the SEC and South Carolina DOES NOT want Clemson. Now I know the SEC kind of threw A&M's opinion to the side with Texas but that was a bit different. It was Texas. Clemson nor FSU are even in the same atmosphere as Texas.

Does Disney and the BIG money even care what Florida or South Carolina feel about Florida State or Clemson? The power base for conference expansion has shifted profoundly over the past few years. The power base would tell Florida and South Carolina to shut up and understand the real food chain of the SEC?

[viverlibre]

this is still 4 or 5 years away, but if the SEC can add one team, UNC would be it. FSU would be number two, then UVA? Who would be the fourth, Clempson? UVA only for a new market, not for sports pedigree. Duke for the Bball?

[Brobi-wan]

Why would UVA be a big add? Don’t they suck at everything not baseball?

[Lance Harbor]

Carolina and Duke are blue bloods in basketball. That's it.

They have no baseball blue bloods and despite Clemson thinking they are one in football, they're not. They bottled a really good run together for about 7 years but outside of that they are Auburn. And we don't consider Auburn a blue blood. And no I do not consider FSU one either.

Clemson has been relevant for quite a while going back to the 70's and 80's. And FSU even longer. Agreed on Auburn.

[Coach34]

Why would UVA be a big add? Don’t they suck at everything not baseball?

This. I think Va would be in down the line and more in line with the Big Ten. NC/Fla St/Miami/Clemson would be the obvious top 4 teams

[TheLostDawg]

Why would UVA be a big add? Don’t they suck at everything not baseball?

They had a run at baseball like Clemson did at football. It's over now

[ZedFedder]

UVA was great in basketball, but I think that is over too.

[MoreCowbell]

Carolina and Duke are blue bloods in basketball. That's it.

They have no baseball blue bloods and despite Clemson thinking they are one in football, they're not. They bottled a really good run together for about 7 years but outside of that they are Auburn. And we don't consider Auburn a blue blood. And no I do not consider FSU one either.

Maybe not blue blood status but they?re a top 15-20 program in the major 3

[The Federalist Engineer]

The reverse slam ...

13 SEC teams leave to join the XLT Conference ... leaving Vandy and MSU and Mizzou as the only members of the "SEC".

We then have to merge with the runts of the Pillaged ACC and snag the Eastern half of the Big 12.

MSU, Mizzou, and Vandy
+
UVA, NCSU, Wake, Georgia Tech, Louisville
+
Ok State, Kansas, TCU, Kansas State

[PGHBulldogBG]

There are 6 teams left needing a home. FSU, Clemson, Miami, UNC, UVA and Va Tech. 4 will come to the SEC and 2 to the Big 10. Not sure who goes where but that will most likely be the final straw for the 2 super conferences and expansion. The question is which 4 go SEC and which 2 go Big 10. That will put each conference at 20 teams

[BrunswickDawg]

The reverse slam ...

13 SEC teams leave to join the XLT Conference ... leaving Vandy and MSU and Mizzou as the only members of the "SEC".

We then have to merge with the runts of the Pillaged ACC and snag the Eastern half of the Big 12.

MSU, Mizzou, and Vandy
+
UVA, NCSU, Wake, Georgia Tech, Louisville
+
Ok State, Kansas, TCU, Kansas State

By no means do I want that to happen -
But, setting aside the $ impact, MSU football would be very competitive in that league.

[Dawgface]

By no means do I want that to happen -
But, setting aside the $ impact, MSU football would be very competitive in that league.

It wouldn’t shock me if it happened.

[99jc]

The reverse slam ...

13 SEC teams leave to join the XLT Conference ... leaving Vandy and MSU and Mizzou as the only members of the "SEC".

We then have to merge with the runts of the Pillaged ACC and snag the Eastern half of the Big 12.

MSU, Mizzou, and Vandy
+
UVA, NCSU, Wake, Georgia Tech, Louisville
+
Ok State, Kansas, TCU, Kansas State

put the crack pipe up good lord

[DownwardDawg]

It wouldn’t shock me if it happened.

I would be beyond shocked.

[viverlibre]

The reverse slam ...

13 SEC teams leave to join the XLT Conference ... leaving Vandy and MSU and Mizzou as the only members of the "SEC".

We then have to merge with the runts of the Pillaged ACC and snag the Eastern half of the Big 12.

MSU, Mizzou, and Vandy
+
UVA, NCSU, Wake, Georgia Tech, Louisville
+
Ok State, Kansas, TCU, Kansas State

Why do we have so many self loathing, low T fans? We have way too many fans who deep down inside want this to happen, else they wouldn't obsess about it. The SEC and Big 10 and their current teams, aren't going anywhere.

[Tater]

Why do we have so many self loathing, low T fans? We have way too many fans who deep down inside want this to happen, else they wouldn't obsess about it. The SEC and Big 10 and their current teams, aren't going anywhere.

Id only be ok with it if we got a Spirits of St. Louis type deal in the lawsuit that will follow. Give us a slice of broadcasting (TV and streaming) rights in perpetuity that would fund us as a top dog for years to come.

OM will also be left behind in any eventual contraction. And likely if it goes to one team in the state, we have more sway than most seem to think. The chopping block is actually OM at 16. State at 15. Kentucky at 14. Vandy at 13.

[DownwardDawg]

Why do we have so many self loathing, low T fans? We have way too many fans who deep down inside want this to happen, else they wouldn't obsess about it. The SEC and Big 10 and their current teams, aren't going anywhere.

I think he was just pointing out another POV. Just for conversation. That's how I read it anyway.

[MStateDawg]

They have no baseball blue bloods


Uhhh, Miami & Florida State are absolutely baseball blue bloods and UNC & Clemson are at least debatable.

[StarkVegasSteve]

Uhhh, Miami & Florida State are absolutely baseball blue bloods and UNC & Clemson are at least debatable.

Florida State has won exactly ZERO national championships. ZERO. I might give you Miami, although they've been up and down since the early 00s. Bluebloods aren't up and down.

North Carolina has ZERO national championships. ZERO.

Clemson has ZERO national championships. ZERO


Also, no conference is taking a team because of a non revenue sport. Basketball and Football will be the only reason teams make it.

[MStateDawg]

Florida State has won exactly ZERO national championships. ZERO. I might give you Miami, although they've been up and down since the early 00s.
Florida State has 24 trips to Omaha and 3 Runner Ups. They are absolutely a blue blood.



Bluebloods aren't up and down.
There are examples of blue bloods in every sport that have down periods. It happens.



Also, no conference is taking a team because of a non revenue sport.
Who said otherwise?

[Tater]

Florida State has won exactly ZERO national championships. ZERO. I might give you Miami, although they've been up and down since the early 00s. Bluebloods aren't up and down.

North Carolina has ZERO national championships. ZERO.

Clemson has ZERO national championships. ZERO


Also, no conference is taking a team because of a non revenue sport. Basketball and Football will be the only reason teams make it.

To further emphasize your point. We aren't blue bloods and neither is LSU. Both are New bloods.

Texsa, USC, Arizona State, Arizona, Miami and Fullerton. LSU is probably another 10 before we say sure as most people alive will only remember them as good rather than newcomers. Their first CWS appearance was 40 years ago. Okie and Stanford are debatable as well. FSU needs a title for consideration.

[StarkVegasSteve]

Florida State has 24 trips to Omaha and 3 Runner Ups. They are absolutely a blue blood.



There are examples of blue bloods in every sport that have down periods. It happens.



Who said otherwise?

But no national championships. Blue Bloods win the big one. They are a solid program, but they're not a blue blood. Honestly, there's one blue blood in college baseball, Louisiana State University. That's it. They've been up for almost 50 years. They've missed the tournament 4 times since 1986 and have now won 8 national championships, along with 20 trips to Omaha since 1986(that's a 40% hit rate. We have an 8% hit rate). That's the blue blood. That's the standard. Everyone else is just playing catch up.

[R2Dawg]

Florida State has won exactly ZERO national championships. ZERO. I might give you Miami, although they've been up and down since the early 00s. Bluebloods aren't up and down.

North Carolina has ZERO national championships. ZERO.

Clemson has ZERO national championships. ZERO


Also, no conference is taking a team because of a non revenue sport. Basketball and Football will be the only reason teams make it.

FSU been to Omaha more than anyone. They are a blueblood.

Bluebloods are up and down. Bama ain't always been on top, they had some bad years in several stretches in my life.

There is no real definition for blue blood but when you go to championship round more than anyone, that has to count. Ark been to Omaha 12 times but never won, I'd count them as one. There stadium, fans, investment, they care and they produce.

[MStateDawg]

there's one blue blood in college baseball, Louisiana State University.

If you can't admit that Texas is a blue blood, then there's no point in me continuing debating this subject with you.
Texas has 38 trips to the College World Series along with 6 titles and 6 Runner-ups.
To put that 38 number in perspective: LSU has only made the tournament 37 times. YES, Texas has been to Omaha more times than LSU has made the tournament. Texas is 1,000,000% a baseball blue blood along with several other schools.

[StarkVegasSteve]

If you can't admit that Texas is a blue blood, then there's no point in me continuing debating this subject with you.
Texas has 38 trips to the College World Series along with 6 titles and 6 Runner-ups.
To put that 38 number in perspective: LSU has only made the tournament 37 times. YES, Texas has been to Omaha more times than LSU has made the tournament. Texas is 1,000,000% a baseball blue blood along with several other schools.

They're not. Again, there's one blue blood. LSU. They were great in later part of the 80s, they were incredible in the 90s, they were great in the 00s, they were great in 10s, and now they're back on one of those incredible streaks in 20s. Again, hit rate of 40% of winning it when they get to Omaha. That's unheard of. Texas is 16%. I think you're confusing my take. I'm not saying that Texas or Florida St or Miami or [insert program] isn't a great program or even elite. But those teams had runs with great coaches, just like Dedeaux at USC. And honestly, like I think we can be under O'Conner.

Texas was really good under Gustafson and really good under Garido. They won two national championships a piece. But they haven't won it since 05 and haven't made the championship series since 09. We've made it twice since then and we're not a blue blood.

Florida St was incredibly consistent under Mike Martin, but he didn't win the big one. Same reason Arkansas isn't a blue blood.

Miami was really good Ron Fraser and were really good Jim Morris. They probably underachieved a bit tbh. But they haven't really been there since. They tailed off at the end of Morris and Gino wasn't very good. This new guy may get them back.

Then there's LSU. It took Skip two years to get it rolling and it hasn't stopped since. Skip won it more times between 91 and 00 than most programs have won it. EVER. Texas, who you say is a blue blood has only won it 6 times total. Skip won it 5 in 10 years. Hell Smoke Laval was fired and went to a regional, a super, and two CWS trips in 5 years. Manieri won one and went to Omaha 4 more times. And now there's Jay who's won 2 in 4 years. There's everyone else and then there's LSU. They are the standard. I mean LSU has crap coaches get to Omaha and bad coaches that win it. When they get a good coach, it's over. In other words, the coaches don't really matter because they're going to get there. But if they have a good one it's over. You can't say that about other schools.

[Tater]

They're not. Again, there's one blue blood. LSU. They were great in later part of the 80s, they were incredible in the 90s, they were great in the 00s, they were great in 10s, and now they're back on one of those incredible streaks in 20s. Again, hit rate of 40% of winning it when they get to Omaha. That's unheard of. Texas is 16%. I think you're confusing my take. I'm not saying that Texas or Florida St or Miami or [insert program] isn't a great program or even elite. But those teams had runs with great coaches, just like Dedeaux at USC. And honestly, like I think we can be under O'Conner.

Texas was really good under Gustafson and really good under Garido. They won two national championships a piece. But they haven't won it since 05 and haven't made the championship series since 09. We've made it twice since then and we're not a blue blood.

Florida St was incredibly consistent under Mike Martin, but he didn't win the big one. Same reason Arkansas isn't a blue blood.

Miami was really good Ron Fraser and were really good Jim Morris. They probably underachieved a bit tbh. But they haven't really been there since. They tailed off at the end of Morris and Gino wasn't very good. This new guy may get them back.

Then there's LSU. It took Skip two years to get it rolling and it hasn't stopped since. Skip won it more times between 91 and 00 than most programs have won it. EVER. Texas, who you say is a blue blood has only won it 6 times total. Skip won it 5 in 10 years. Hell Smoke Laval was fired and went to a regional, a super, and two CWS trips in 5 years. Manieri won one and went to Omaha 4 more times. And now there's Jay who's won 2 in 4 years. There's everyone else and then there's LSU. They are the standard. I mean LSU has crap coaches get to Omaha and bad coaches that win it. When they get a good coach, it's over. In other words, the coaches don't really matter because they're going to get there. But if they have a good one it's over. You can't say that about other schools.

Steve, you're conflating "blue blood" with a different definition. UConn ain't a Men's basketball blue blood. LSU ain't a baseball blue blood. They're both an elite team that is currently the best program.

Blue blood have been a top dawg and in contention perenially with multiple titles as far back as anyone alive can really remember.

Plenty of people alive still remember the 50s, 60s, 70s. LSU baseball and Uconn basketball were nothing then.

[BrunswickDawg]

They're not. Again, there's one blue blood. LSU. They were great in later part of the 80s, they were incredible in the 90s, they were great in the 00s, they were great in 10s, and now they're back on one of those incredible streaks in 20s. Again, hit rate of 40% of winning it when they get to Omaha. That's unheard of. Texas is 16%. I think you're confusing my take. I'm not saying that Texas or Florida St or Miami or [insert program] isn't a great program or even elite. But those teams had runs with great coaches, just like Dedeaux at USC. And honestly, like I think we can be under O'Conner.

Texas was really good under Gustafson and really good under Garido. They won two national championships a piece. But they haven't won it since 05 and haven't made the championship series since 09. We've made it twice since then and we're not a blue blood.

Florida St was incredibly consistent under Mike Martin, but he didn't win the big one. Same reason Arkansas isn't a blue blood.

Miami was really good Ron Fraser and were really good Jim Morris. They probably underachieved a bit tbh. But they haven't really been there since. They tailed off at the end of Morris and Gino wasn't very good. This new guy may get them back.

Then there's LSU. It took Skip two years to get it rolling and it hasn't stopped since. Skip won it more times between 91 and 00 than most programs have won it. EVER. Texas, who you say is a blue blood has only won it 6 times total. Skip won it 5 in 10 years. Hell Smoke Laval was fired and went to a regional, a super, and two CWS trips in 5 years. Manieri won one and went to Omaha 4 more times. And now there's Jay who's won 2 in 4 years. There's everyone else and then there's LSU. They are the standard. I mean LSU has crap coaches get to Omaha and bad coaches that win it. When they get a good coach, it's over. In other words, the coaches don't really matter because they're going to get there. But if they have a good one it's over. You can't say that about other schools.

I'm going to disagree a lot. First - LSU doe not have more titles than anyone EVER. That belongs to USC and their 12.
Second, being a blue blood is about longevity and consistency, and market recognition, not just National Titles. If you have multiple Nattys, Multiple CWS appearances, and sustained runs of postseasons over decades, and you are who people think of when they think of the sport - you are a blue blood.

LSU, Texas, Miami, USC, Arizona and ASU are the blue bloods. They've done it the longest, have won the most, and are still consistently showing up in Omaha even if they haven't won in a while. CBB has far more parody in it than any college sport over the past 25 years with 17 different programs having won in that time. You can argue about which of those is the greatest program, but LSU is not in it alone.

[StarkVegasSteve]

I'm going to disagree a lot. First - LSU doe not have more titles than anyone EVER. That belongs to USC and their 12.
Second, being a blue blood is about longevity and consistency, and market recognition, not just National Titles. If you have multiple Nattys, Multiple CWS appearances, and sustained runs of postseasons over decades, and you are who people think of when they think of the sport - you are a blue blood.

LSU, Texas, Miami, USC, Arizona and ASU are the blue bloods. They've done it the longest, have won the most, and are still consistently showing up in Omaha even if they haven't won in a while. CBB has far more parody in it than any college sport over the past 25 years with 17 different programs having won in that time. You can argue about which of those is the greatest program, but LSU is not in it alone.

Texas is probably the only one you could argue with me and I'd relent some. The rest, haven't really been relevant in 20+ years. It's like I said, they had good coaches, but they're not good programs anymore. Like Arizona had a really good run under Jay and a damn good run under Andy Lopez. But what about the end of Kindall or the Stitt era? Same with Arizona St. They were great under Jim Brock and pretty dang good under Pat Murphy. But Esmay and Smith......average. And Bloomquist looks to be more Tracy Smith than Jim Brock.

I mean is anyone going to say that Tennessee is a blue blood? I mean they were really good in the 50s, Delmonico bottled a 10 run from 95-05, and they are elite under Vitello. But I don't see anyone saying they're a blue blood program? Why? They have as many championships this century as Arizona. They have as many CWS appearances this century as Arizona. They've won more championships this century than Arizona St and had more CWS appearances. So by your definition Tennessee is a blue blood. Do you consider them one? I don't. I think they've had two elite coaches that have bottled runs.

Also never said they've won more titles than anyone. I said Skip had a 10 year run where he won more titles than MOST programs. For example, he won more than Miami has ever won. He won more than Arizona has ever won. He won as many as Arizona St has ever won.

[PGHBulldogBG]

LOL@ our fans thinking baseball matters in conference realignment

[FISHDAWG]

Seems like I remember the ACC having an enormous buy out to escape the conference. This alone is preventable medicine

[The Federalist Engineer]

Seems like I remember the ACC having an enormous buy out to escape the conference. This alone is preventable medicine

"The current ACC exit fee for schools looking to leave the conference is $165 million for the 2025-26 fiscal year, which decreases by $18 million each year until it reaches a flat rate of $75 million in the 2030-31 fiscal year and remains at that level until 2036."

It's a big figure but TAM spent $90M just to fire Jimbo Fisher. I think Bjork found a vulnerable and cognitively challenged widow and snagged the fortune. UNC has Micheal Jordan, he can give them some sneaker money.

[viverlibre]

"The current ACC exit fee for schools looking to leave the conference is $165 million for the 2025-26 fiscal year, which decreases by $18 million each year until it reaches a flat rate of $75 million in the 2030-31 fiscal year and remains at that level until 2036."


Yes, it will likely be 2030 before any of this happens (unless there is some type of major media rights renegotiation), but that will be here before here we know it. It looks like the Big 12 has it's act together more than the ACC, so the ACC may be the odd man out.

[Quaoarsking]

There's also the possibility of the SEC, Big 10, and Big 12 coordinating to all take enough teams away from the ACC that they have a vote and change the buyout rules.

But I don't anticipate that, because even if they all go to 20, that's only 10 teams leaving the ACC (out of 18), and I assume it's more than a simply majority needed.

[Tbonewannabe]

"The current ACC exit fee for schools looking to leave the conference is $165 million for the 2025-26 fiscal year, which decreases by $18 million each year until it reaches a flat rate of $75 million in the 2030-31 fiscal year and remains at that level until 2036."

It's a big figure but TAM spent $90M just to fire Jimbo Fisher. I think Bjork found a vulnerable and cognitively challenged widow and snagged the fortune. UNC has Micheal Jordan, he can give them some sneaker money.

Isn't Jordan a tight ass with money. He doesn't just give it away. Look up Charles Barkley talking about Jordan not tipping wait staff.

[The Federalist Engineer]

There's also the possibility of the SEC, Big 10, and Big 12 coordinating to all take enough teams away from the ACC that they have a vote and change the buyout rules.

But I don't anticipate that, because even if they all go to 20, that's only 10 teams leaving the ACC (out of 18), and I assume it's more than a simply majority needed.

Yeah, Duke or UNC might worth buying out, like help them pay the vig. If you buyout One of them, gives you a 90% chance of getting the other in 2032. Gives you a big option on NC State. Duke has a huge Walmart fan base in the Northeast. They are the Notre Dame of basketball. UNC alone is the load-bearing pillar for the ACC. Even in South Carolina, the word "Carolina" is referring to UNC. The gamecocks are almost a Southern Miss to South Carolina sports fans. The Gamecocks are basically Alumni fans.

If the SEC lets UNC become a free-agent in 2032. There will be a huge bidding war to win versus the Big 10.

[Political Hack]

ESPN will chase the TV markets... so Miami is in. We'll add a North Carolina school and Virginia school too. I could see Miami, UNC, Duke, and VaTech.

Clemson, Florida State, Virginia, & NC State would be the other possibilities. However, money wins. So TV markets win.

[The Federalist Engineer]

50% of all viewership of football is 18 schools. Alabama, Auburn, LSU, Tennessee, Texas, Georgia, Florida, and Oklahoma are in this group.

In 2024 numbers 8 of top 10 were SEC and only Michigan and Ohio State were the non-SEC. The chart is logarithmic so #1 and #18 are miles apart.

Of this group, Florida State and Clemson are the ACC schools.

Come to think about it, I have never watched an ACC football game, without MSU involvement, since the UVA-FSU game with Ronde and Tiki Barber about 30 years ago.

[Goldendawg]

"They're going to boot us for NCState!"

- some negative nancy (probably) soon

That some on here think we would be OK dropping to a lesser conference and winning is a joke. Without SEC $ we would be USM 2.0 with more empty seats, little interest and many less programs in all sports. Would also hit overall enrollment very hard.

[Political Hack]

50% of all viewership of football is 18 schools. Alabama, Auburn, LSU, Tennessee, Texas, Georgia, Florida, and Oklahoma are in this group.

In 2024 numbers 8 of top 10 were SEC and only Michigan and Ohio State were the non-SEC. The chart is logarithmic so #1 and #18 are miles apart.

Of this group, Florida State and Clemson are the ACC schools.

Come to think about it, I have never watched an ACC football game, without MSU involvement, since the UVA-FSU game with Ronde and Tiki Barber about 30 years ago.

Viewership is huge, but they want to sell commercials in new spaces too. Florida already has the panhandle, so it makes me question Florida State. Same with Clemson/SC. That said, I think FSU and Clemson are much more closely aligned with SEC schools from a cultural standpoint. I'd be ok with Miami or Florida State. I'd be ok with Clemson too, but I 100% expect them to push in North Carolina and possibly Virginia for at least two teams.

[The Federalist Engineer]

Viewership is huge, but they want to sell commercials in new spaces too. Florida already has the panhandle, so it makes me question Florida State. Same with Clemson/SC. That said, I think FSU and Clemson are much more closely aligned with SEC schools from a cultural standpoint. I'd be ok with Miami or Florida State. I'd be ok with Clemson too, but I 100% expect them to push in North Carolina and possibly Virginia for at least two teams.

Numbers for Laughs:

(1) SEC Championship Game - 16M viewers
(2) Big 10 CG- 10M viewers
---- Poptart Bowl 7M ----
(3) ACC CG- 6M

SEC had 9 regular season games with more viewers than Pop Tarts. The ACC had none.

[Quaoarsking]

I don't see Miami as that great of an add, honestly. I suspect they don't make the "power 2" unless both go to 24. They just don't have that many fans, especially when they're down (which is often).

[Jack Lambert]

Who would think the Big12 without TX or OK would survive longer than the ACC if that happens.