Conference realignment "Rumors" "tweets" "etc"

[Bull Matrix]

I guess the BIG question is did FSU or Clemson have any other power conferences trying to sway them away from the ACC when they were winning BIG? Crazy how things can change when programs start losing.

[Gismo]

Why should the ACC agree? 
 

 

[Rocky Style]

1 minute ago, Gismo said:

Why should the ACC agree? 

Yeah if all this is happening, it means they have all the leverage now.  

[Bull Matrix]

3 minutes ago, BullyPulpit said:

Come on, man. I appreciate your positivity in what is otherwise a pretty negative Board at times, but you have gone from saying USF to the ACC is pretty much a done deal to now saying it is awesome that we get to wait 6 more years and hope that there is more of a shakeup at that time that opens up a spot in the ACC for us. We are stuck between a rock and a hard place here. The answer now seems to be to go to the PAC with Memphis and Tulane, sign a GOR that runs until 2030, and hope that we win a lot in the next 6 years. 

That is pretty much where I am at now that we are seeing both FSU & Clemson possibly staying in the ACC. I think I was worried that USF would lock themselves in a GOR with PAC while the ACC was still in limbo. So now the path becomes a little more clear that USF should be joining Memphis & Tulane due to the AAC commish thinking too small imo. Tulane, Memphis, and USF have power conference aspirations so it would make more sense to continue to pursue that imo.

[Cat941]

11 minutes ago, BullyPulpit said:

It isn't. What it should do is allow USF to try and join the PAC so long as the GoR ends by 2030. It seems that literally every bit of news that breaks regarding realignment ends up bad for USF. It would be funny if it weren't so painful and disappointing. 

Yep.  

[Bull Matrix]

1 minute ago, Rocky Style said:

Yeah if all this is happening, it means they have all the leverage now.  

Hell yeah! These are crazy times lol. 

[Rocky Style]

1 minute ago, Cat941 said:

Yep.  

It would be funny if everyone is so confused they end up in a bizarre place like Stanford and then the dust settles and we are playing Nevada every year for some reason.  

[BullyPulpit]

4 minutes ago, Gismo said:

Why should the ACC agree? 
 

 

Because the lawsuit is a crapshoot. You want certainty as a business. Whether your conference shakeup happens in 2036 or 2030, its going to inevitably happen. This eliminates the lawsuit and allows time for them to see if an unbalanced revenue sharing model will be viable. It actually COULD prolong the ACC as a conference if it works and everyone is happy/content with the outcome. 

[CF is NFL Jr]

10 minutes ago, BullyPulpit said:

Come on, man. I appreciate your positivity in what is otherwise a pretty negative Board at times, but you have gone from saying USF to the ACC is pretty much a done deal to now saying it is awesome that we get to wait 6 more years and hope that there is more of a shakeup at that time that opens up a spot in the ACC for us. We are stuck between a rock and a hard place here. The answer now seems to be to go to the PAC with Memphis and Tulane, sign a GOR that runs until 2030, and hope that we win a lot in the next 6 years. 

While the ACC would be nice, our fate was always tied to FSU and Clemson leaving...at the moment.  If FSU and Clemson stay, all of the TV contracts come up in the early 2030s.  We have to win whatever conference we are in.  We have to make some noise.  We need to stop scheduling big teams and start focusing on winning games.  period. The days of play anyone anywhere are long gone.  Headlines are made by G5 teams going undefeated, or close to it. Time to put our pride aside and play the game that gets you ahead now. 

[Bull Matrix]

Anyway. Now that it looks like the ACC will stay together for now will they try to expand out west to help bridge the travel gap for Cal, Stanford, SMU? If so do they take Utah or others? If big 12 loses teams will they expand east to help UCiF, Cincy, and WVU? Interesting turn of events.