Conference realignment "Rumors" "tweets" "etc"

[USF_Bullsharks]

13 hours ago, DontPushMe said:

We could just take no tv money from the acc for however many years it takes. We get next to nothing from the AAC to begin with and we'd make more in tickets and prestige by being in the acc to make up the difference. 

 

Need to be doing everything we can to get in there, starting by leaving the AAC effective immediately 

The conference distribution - yes we could take an "SMU-like deal" and still earn more than the AAC payout equivalent. BUT, there usually facility upgrades and commitment concessions that come with a conference move that we would not be able to afford like SMU. That's where their boosters stepped in. USF went through these concessions after joining the BE - hence the new baseball/softball complex and the basketball training center, etc. I think we have pretty decent facilities all things considered, so the only thing I suspect the ACC would want from us is a stadium capacity of at least 40k, with a goal of achieving 45-50k in the long term. We should have those same goals for ourselves so that shouldn't be an issue. 

[CousinRicky]

37 minutes ago, USF_Bullsharks said:

The conference distribution - yes we could take an "SMU-like deal" and still earn more than the AAC payout equivalent. BUT, there usually facility upgrades and commitment concessions that come with a conference move that we would not be able to afford like SMU. That's where their boosters stepped in. USF went through these concessions after joining the BE - hence the new baseball/softball complex and the basketball training center, etc. I think we have pretty decent facilities all things considered, so the only thing I suspect the ACC would want from us is a stadium capacity of at least 40k, with a goal of achieving 45-50k in the long term. We should have those same goals for ourselves so that shouldn't be an issue. 

Since home teams only allow a few thousand seats for visiting fans, why does/would a conference worry about how many home team fans show up? As long as you allow the visitors to bring whatever number is normal they really shouldn't care. 

[USF_Bullsharks]

This would put ACC members at ~$50MM this year. 

Has anyone seen numbers for SEC/B12/B1G, or AAC/MWC? 

[Friscobull]

23 minutes ago, CousinRicky said:

Since home teams only allow a few thousand seats for visiting fans, why does/would a conference worry about how many home team fans show up? As long as you allow the visitors to bring whatever number is normal they really shouldn't care. 

It is about optics, playing in a Rinky dink  stadium, example MBB FAU and Tulane is a bad look.  If you want to play with the big boys, you need a big boys stadium, big time environment. 

[Grothe4HeismanII]

1 hour ago, USF_Bullsharks said:

The conference distribution - yes we could take an "SMU-like deal" and still earn more than the AAC payout equivalent. BUT, there usually facility upgrades and commitment concessions that come with a conference move that we would not be able to afford like SMU. That's where their boosters stepped in. USF went through these concessions after joining the BE - hence the new baseball/softball complex and the basketball training center, etc. I think we have pretty decent facilities all things considered, so the only thing I suspect the ACC would want from us is a stadium capacity of at least 40k, with a goal of achieving 45-50k in the long term. We should have those same goals for ourselves so that shouldn't be an issue. 

 

We are not in a position to take the "SMU-like deal." In terms of academics, growing enrollment/revenue projections, AAU status, etc. I cannot see how we are not more valuable than a large number of the current "P4" universities. While I would love to be out of the AAC tomorrow, we should be prudent in evaluating our options.

[CousinRicky]

2 hours ago, Friscobull said:

It is about optics, playing in a Rinky dink  stadium, example MBB FAU and Tulane is a bad look.  If you want to play with the big boys, you need a big boys stadium, big time environment. 

If the stadium is full and rocking I'm not sure an extra 10k in the place will view much differently. IMO it would be better than having 10k extra seats that are empty. 

[BDYZR]

3 hours ago, USF_Bullsharks said:

the ACC would want from us is a stadium capacity of at least 40k, with a goal of achieving 45-50k in the long term.

IMO if any P4 suggested that was a prerequisite we would not be even thinking about a 35k stadium. 

[Triple B]

4 hours ago, USF_Bullsharks said:

I suspect the ACC would want from us is a stadium capacity of at least 40k, with a goal of achieving 45-50k in the long term.

 

20 minutes ago, BDYZR said:

IMO if any P4 suggested that was a prerequisite we would not be even thinking about a 35k stadium. 

My thoughts exactly .... however, may be a good sign that all of a sudden we're seeing 40K pop up in various conversations, although don't remember where and if those involved matter.

[Bear]

1 hour ago, Triple B said:

 

My thoughts exactly .... however, may be a good sign that all of a sudden we're seeing 40K pop up in various conversations, although don't remember where and if those involved matter.

We should have always sought for 40k... It's just a solid round number. 

In the Big East days, they were "hinting" at 50k.

[Ricky the Bull]

My own, unverified opinion is that the delay in final renderings are due to expansion considerations due to a pending conference realignment.  I'll hold onto that until I hear something official.