Conference realignment "Rumors" "tweets" "etc"

[puc86]

1 minute ago, Rocky Style said:

That's because we just started going to the gym and looksmaxing.

What if it’s just that we are too available and have not demonstrated our desirability to other suitors? Why would the ACC ever need to pick us if we are always going to be there as a forever fall back option? You can’t value people that don’t value themselves.

[00Bull]

1 hour ago, puc86 said:

I really do not understand how people think it’s a choice between the ACC and the pac, when the only options appear to be the aac and the pac. Well with the added bonus of the aac continuing its progression towards being completely obliterated.

The ACC just chosen smu over us, that means they just aren’t into us. The ACC has options to settle things faster regarding expansion but their continued response is that they would rather hold on for just one more day and not break free from the pain, that means they just aren’t into us. For 12 years and 4432 pages people have talked about the ACC but the ACC has not talked about us, that means they just aren’t into us. 
 

To date there is absolutely no indication the ACC has any plans that involve us at any time for any reason but if we want to give them one last call before we commit… sure go for it. But if they aren’t signing any kind of binding agreement you have to go with the first person that has had even the slightest tangible possibility of an actual escape from this complete and total nightmare that has been the last 12 years. 
 

The ACC is free to make an offer to us today, there is no requirement that they wait another decade to do so and there is nothing that requires that if we wait the rest of our lives pining over them that they would then be required to invite us. Today is our Independence Day.
 

So if you think you have any friends or connections in the ACC, if you think you just have to be sure, if you think you have some type of compelling case, make that pitch sell your heart out and either hit that home run or have your heart broken one last time but under no circumstance do you make life altering decisions based purely on hopes and dreams that have millions of variables. 
 

Make up something like provisional member, have conditions for membership, get invited with less payout for x years, get invited with no payout until someone else leaves, get partial membership, get absolutely anything that has some kind of guarantee in any kind of binding contract but if you are about to commit to someone else and you can’t even get the smallest token of consideration back, you have your answer and it’s time to take your only actual option.

We don’t need to know how much more we value the ACC than the pac, everyone knows that answer but there needs to be some indication that there is any scenario in which the ACC is actually going to value us over any other alternative (and then that needs to be committed to paper) in order to pass on something real for something that will still exist exclusively in our imagination.

Of course USF is not going to the ACC…we are going to B1G. Why settle for hamburger when you can have steak, am I right or am I right?

 

Edited 1 hour ago by 00Bull

[belgianbull]

8 hours ago, Rex Havoc said:

They better have a deal pretty much done to turn down the PAC. We cannot turn down a “sure thing” for a maybe. We don’t want to get stuck playing FIU, App State, ECU, Temple, etc. for years. 

I agree. Also joining the Pac today would not preclude us joining the ACC tomorrow. Just like Houston joining the AAC didn't preclude them from joining the Big 12, or Colorado switching back and forth between the PAC and Big 12

We have to remember that Memphis ,Tulane, and  San Diego State,, as well as OSU have ACC or Big 12 aspirations so if there is a gor + exit fees it will likely be a weak one.

 

Edited 1 hour ago by belgianbull

[puc86]

Just now, 00Bull said:

Of course USF is not going to the ACC…we are going to B1G. Why settle for hamburger when you can have steak, am I right or am I right?

I mean obviously the B1G not making a serious offer to the teams the ACC are killing themselves to keep while the ACC has made no serious offers to us has to be a positive sign that they are looking to go slumming in the aac. 

[puc86]

4 minutes ago, belgianbull said:

I agree. Also joining the Pac today would not preclude us joining the ACC tomorrow. Just like Houston joining the AAC didn't preclude them from joining the Big 12, or Colorado switching back and forth between the PAC and Big 12

We have to remember that Memphis ,Tulane, and  San Diego State,, as well as OSU have ACC or Big 12 aspirations so if there is a gor + exit fees it will likely be a weak one.

 

The easiest way to find a better job is to have a job, the easiest way to get a hotter girlfriend is to have a girlfriend and the easiest way to never go anywhere in life is the keep doing nothing and hoping one day someone else is going to randomly decide now they are going to give you a shot. If you are stagnant you are falling behind and we have stayed in this place longer than anyone.

[Peatearpan]

My thought it, what if we join the PAC and raise ticket prices immediately to help cover the eventual buyout when we leave?

People will want to see better teams, we have slightly better access to the CFP, and would have recruiting grounds out west.

[00Bull]

8 minutes ago, puc86 said:

I mean obviously the B1G not making a serious offer to the teams the ACC are killing themselves to keep while the ACC has made no serious offers to us has to be a positive sign that they are looking to go slumming in the aac. 

B1G clearly sent out a cease and desist to other conferences attempting to pursue USF. 

[puc86]

15 minutes ago, 00Bull said:

B1G clearly sent out a cease and desist to other conferences attempting to pursue USF. 

I mean it’s not like they can find any other higher profile, in better conferences that could also be tumultuous situations, that are currently climbing the rankings, Florida teams, that also have aau status… how many of those would you find one of those at Raymond James Stadium tonight at 7?

Edited 1 hour ago by puc86

[Friscobull]

54 minutes ago, 00Bull said:

Of course USF is not going to the ACC…we are going to B1G. Why settle for hamburger when you can have steak, am I right or am I right?

 

[Jim Johnson]

9 hours ago, hm101 said:

Joining the PAC means a gamble on: 

1. FSU staying stuck in the ACC - AND - 
2. The TV deal being worth it

We have in the AAC:

1. Good TV exposure
2. Good destinations for fans
3. Reasonable travel for athletes
4. A very good path to the playoffs, with our OOC SOS (next year: @ UF, @ UM, Boise State, FCS - 12-0 and we are in the CFP)

I'll say it again - in business you don't overreact to your competition's last move. You stick with your long term strategy. 

Vote AAC this November. Er, weekend. 

You raise excellent points.

First, FSU is stuck in the ACC.  That is not a gamble.  Two points in support of this:

• The lawsuits for FSU and Clemson will take years to complete. The ACC has no reason to settle them, and is unlikely to do so.  There are four lawsuits in question, all of them have to go through the legal process and then the appeal process.  That will take the three or four years, at best. 
• Second point here, there is a report the ACC is considering reworking their GOR to expire sooner (2030), with an alternative revenue distribution in the meantime.    This proposal, if it gets adopted, will likely mean FSU and Clemson will drop their lawsuits and remain in the ACC through the end of the decade.

Second, the rumored PAC 12 distribution is being rumored at $12 to $15 million.  That is more than the current $8M+ USF gets from the AAC.  Yes, travel costs will increase by $2 to $3M.  So, if the number is $12M, that basically is a break even for USF.  Anything above that becomes 'profit' in this scenario.  A business that has the chance to make $3M per year MORE would have to entertain that option.  I believe this number only makes sense because four AAC teams will join the six already in the PAC.

As for the AAC:

1. The exposure will get worse without Tulane, Memphis, and UTSA.  More games shifted to ESPN+, and the national perception the AAC has take a big step back.  That may or may not be worse than the PAC 12 -- we don't have any clue what the PAC 12 media deal will be - it will likely include some streaming along with over the air/cable.
2. As for the destinations consider losing New Orleans, Memphis, and San Antonio.  Replacing them with Boone (NC), Colorado Springs, and San Marcos (TX).  The only negative about the new destinations, really, is that other than Tulane and Memphis - USF fans will have to fly instead of drive.
3. Yes, travel for athletes will be negatively impacted - especially when you factor in the time differences.  However, that is offset with additional funds to support student athletes.
4. The path to the playoffs is better in the PAC 12 than the watered down AAC.  The same OOC in general plus better competition in the PAC 12 means a 10-2 PAC 12 team has a better chance than a 10-2 AAC team.  (A 12-0 team from any conference is likely in the CFP - see Liberty)

One thing you're not considering in the new PAC 12 -- attendance at the OCS will be higher.  In 2023, several games would not have sold out the OCS: Rice, Charlotte, and Temple did not come close to selling out.  But more recognizable names like Boise State, Wazzu, San Diego State will likely guarantee sell outs.

All things considered, I believe moving to the PAC 12 for 5 years is the better move than staying put for 5 years. 

 

Edited 49 minutes ago by Jim Johnson