If you want to talk ASUN smack or ramble ad nauseum about your favorite pro or major college teams, this is the place to let it rip.

Moderators: jcmanson, Sly Fox, BuryYourDuke

#651418
I'd be surprised if the ACC survive after 2030. All it takes is 8 schools to say deuces and the conference crumbles. Clemson was basically the only saving the conference and they have been forward for a bit (that could change with the new OC coming in). Yes, basketball is still good but now other conferences can take the basketball superiority at anytime. It's funny that they believe not playing or limiting G5 teams will help promote views, then i have a few bridges that I'll like to sell for a good price. ACC is like the the least dominant power five conference and haven't been that really relaxed outside of Clemson. I see Clemson going to the SEC and don't be shocked if FSU somehow joins them (we know Florida does not want that). What would be interesting if some of the old Big East schools have a talk and negotiate with the Jesuits up north into reestablishing a football division again. Not sure if that'll happen but anything is possible.
#651420
cruzan_flame13 wrote: February 1st, 2023, 5:22 pm I'd be surprised if the ACC survive after 2030. All it takes is 8 schools to say deuces and the conference crumbles. Clemson was basically the only saving the conference and they have been forward for a bit (that could change with the new OC coming in). Yes, basketball is still good but now other conferences can take the basketball superiority at anytime. It's funny that they believe not playing or limiting G5 teams will help promote views, then i have a few bridges that I'll like to sell for a good price. ACC is like the the least dominant power five conference and haven't been that really relaxed outside of Clemson. I see Clemson going to the SEC and don't be shocked if FSU somehow joins them (we know Florida does not want that). What would be interesting if some of the old Big East schools have a talk and negotiate with the Jesuits up north into reestablishing a football division again. Not sure if that'll happen but anything is possible.
The ACC is in a tough spot since they have a clear divide in the conference between basketball and football focused schools which makes it tough to keep everyone happy. I don't believe more than 4 ACC schools end up leaving the conference. Clemson, Florida St, UNC, UVA, and potentially GT are the only schools I can see drawing interest from the SEC or B1G. There's always the outside chance that the Big 12 picks up a couple schools but i'm not sure who they would pursue. If at least 8 schools remain it would be very easy for the ACC to back fill and keep moving forward albeit in a weaker state in football. They are still a great basketball conference but they haven't been the best basketball conference in awhile. The B1G, Big east and big 12 are all better and with the addition of Oklahoma and Texas the SEC could pass them soon if the bottom of the conference develops a pulse.

Refusing to play G5s on the road really will improve their visibility because the home team controls the tv rights. Anytime a bottom tier ACC school plays at a G5 they are relegating themselves to ESPN+ unless they are lucky and get picked up by ESPNU. At least if they play an extra home game or on the road against another lower tier P5 they will be nationally televised on a conference network. This is partially why everyone loves to play Notre Dame and P5s also had no issues playing BYU, both programs regularly play home games on national TV. I can't say that I like that decision because it directly hurts our ability to find attractive home games but if i was the ACC commissioner I would've made the same recommendation. I believe P5s playing the occasional road game against local G5s is great for the sport overall but its bad for a P5 conference desperately clinging to any relevance they have remaining.
#651425
Ill flame wrote: February 1st, 2023, 8:55 pm
cruzan_flame13 wrote: February 1st, 2023, 5:22 pm I'd be surprised if the ACC survive after 2030. All it takes is 8 schools to say deuces and the conference crumbles. Clemson was basically the only saving the conference and they have been forward for a bit (that could change with the new OC coming in). Yes, basketball is still good but now other conferences can take the basketball superiority at anytime. It's funny that they believe not playing or limiting G5 teams will help promote views, then i have a few bridges that I'll like to sell for a good price. ACC is like the the least dominant power five conference and haven't been that really relaxed outside of Clemson. I see Clemson going to the SEC and don't be shocked if FSU somehow joins them (we know Florida does not want that). What would be interesting if some of the old Big East schools have a talk and negotiate with the Jesuits up north into reestablishing a football division again. Not sure if that'll happen but anything is possible.
The ACC is in a tough spot since they have a clear divide in the conference between basketball and football focused schools which makes it tough to keep everyone happy. I don't believe more than 4 ACC schools end up leaving the conference. Clemson, Florida St, UNC, UVA, and potentially GT are the only schools I can see drawing interest from the SEC or B1G. There's always the outside chance that the Big 12 picks up a couple schools but i'm not sure who they would pursue. If at least 8 schools remain it would be very easy for the ACC to back fill and keep moving forward albeit in a weaker state in football. They are still a great basketball conference but they haven't been the best basketball conference in awhile. The B1G, Big east and big 12 are all better and with the addition of Oklahoma and Texas the SEC could pass them soon if the bottom of the conference develops a pulse.

Refusing to play G5s on the road really will improve their visibility because the home team controls the tv rights. Anytime a bottom tier ACC school plays at a G5 they are relegating themselves to ESPN+ unless they are lucky and get picked up by ESPNU. At least if they play an extra home game or on the road against another lower tier P5 they will be nationally televised on a conference network. This is partially why everyone loves to play Notre Dame and P5s also had no issues playing BYU, both programs regularly play home games on national TV. I can't say that I like that decision because it directly hurts our ability to find attractive home games but if i was the ACC commissioner I would've made the same recommendation. I believe P5s playing the occasional road game against local G5s is great for the sport overall but its bad for a P5 conference desperately clinging to any relevance they have remaining.
2 home games vs g5 ( 2 for 1 ) still makes more sense than a 1 for 1 lower level P5 out of conference matchup financially and tv $ which probably falls under tier 2 or 3 rights. This is all about “perception”. Clemson is the only school that has the cache to avoid a 2 for 1 with a G5 regardless of “recruiting area”. OU still plays at Tulsa occasionally. VT plays at ODU for a reason. Commish is just embarrassed about recent history and awfulness of every Program not named Clemson - Sure it’s great when your top 3 blue bloods ( cough, cough ) play 1 big non con annually and avoiding G5 away games - but forcing that on the rest of ACC mediocre teams who are trying to just make a bowl - dumb on all accounts and from every angle - including financial.
cruzan_flame13 liked this
#651427
tyndal23 wrote: February 2nd, 2023, 1:33 am
2 home games vs g5 ( 2 for 1 ) still makes more sense than a 1 for 1 lower level P5 out of conference matchup financially and tv $ which probably falls under tier 2 or 3 rights. This is all about “perception”. Clemson is the only school that has the cache to avoid a 2 for 1 with a G5 regardless of “recruiting area”. OU still plays at Tulsa occasionally. VT plays at ODU for a reason. Commish is just embarrassed about recent history and awfulness of every Program not named Clemson - Sure it’s great when your top 3 blue bloods ( cough, cough ) play 1 big non con annually and avoiding G5 away games - but forcing that on the rest of ACC mediocre teams who are trying to just make a bowl - dumb on all accounts and from every angle - including financial.
You are right, it is about perception. The ACC commissioner admitted it would be more expensive to avoid 2 for 1s. Clearly he feels that having P5 teams regularly playing on the road against G5s on ESPN+ makes them look inferior to their peers in the B1G and SEC and he's right. You don't see Indiana playing @ ball state and they are equally as mediocre of a football program as several ACC schools. Instead they pay big money to bring in bad G5s and get solid ratings on BTN instead of saving a million dollars and not being televised. I know that if LU was in a position where they could pay a little more out of pocket and get significantly more tv exposure you would love the idea so how is this any different?
#651428
Again, perception is the key word - meaning, the perception of @tyndal23.

In the samples he mentions (OU-Tulsa, VT-ODU), there is something to be gained. For the overwhelming majority of ACC P5’s vs. regional G5’s, what is there to be gained by the P5 playing in the G5’s house? Answer: nothing.
#651433
JK37 wrote: February 2nd, 2023, 10:10 am Again, perception is the key word - meaning, the perception of @tyndal23.

In the samples he mentions (OU-Tulsa, VT-ODU), there is something to be gained. For the overwhelming majority of ACC P5’s vs. regional G5’s, what is there to be gained by the P5 playing in the G5’s house? Answer: nothing.
Once again, an extra home game and a better chance of winning. In some cases like BT - recruiting. As for perception - been my premise all along - I hate G5 perception and college football has been based on perception for 150 years. I never wanted anything to do with it - avoid it at all costs. Go Army.
#651437
JK37 wrote: February 2nd, 2023, 6:30 pm It’s not an extra home game if it costs you a road game to get it. And that road game comes with a higher likelihood of losing
My math must be bad - 2 home games for 1 away game vs 1 home game vs 1 away game with a much higher chance of losing. . Now Duke has to add another P5 series and pay $1 million plus to get a G5 to come visit as a 1 off - I am sure 6-8 or so ACC teams are thrilled when their goal is to scratch out a Bowl. But - I agree with the Commish 100 percent - losing to G5 sucks even if it cost money and
you don’t go to a bowl- play P5 instead. I just don’t think ACC AD’s and coaches are thrilled about it.
#651438
ACC schools essentially follow the same scheduling model as the SEC. 8 conference games, 1 P5, 2 G5s, 1 FCS. Notre dame fills that P5 slot about a third of the time which means a home and home with another P5 fills up the rest of the P5 slots. Almost every SEC school just pays the 2 G5s and FCS school for a home game unless they add another P5 at a neutral site. Why would the ACC do anything different? The SEC model works well at inflating mediocre teams with easy wins. There are certainly more pros than cons. It's not as fun for the fans though.
#651444
tyndal23 wrote: February 2nd, 2023, 7:18 pm
JK37 wrote: February 2nd, 2023, 6:30 pm It’s not an extra home game if it costs you a road game to get it. And that road game comes with a higher likelihood of losing
My math must be bad - 2 home games for 1 away game vs 1 home game vs 1 away game with a much higher chance of losing. . Now Duke has to add another P5 series and pay $1 million plus to get a G5 to come visit as a 1 off - I am sure 6-8 or so ACC teams are thrilled when their goal is to scratch out a Bowl. But - I agree with the Commish 100 percent - losing to G5 sucks even if it cost money and
you don’t go to a bowl- play P5 instead. I just don’t think ACC AD’s and coaches are thrilled about it.
It is. You’re acting like $1M is a lot of money to these programs. It’s not.

Every single ACC AD would take the 1/1 with a P5 over a 2/1 with a G5. Losing to a P5 is explainable. Just playing a G5 is a lose-lose proposition.

But even better options exist! Just buy all wins non-con. With the expanded playoff, there’s even less reason to play fellow P5’s in non-con. Just bag 3-4 easily winnable non-con’s and go undefeated or one-loss in conference. You don’t have to finish Top 4 anymore, just Top 11.

G5’s have one guaranteed spot in the playoff. Yay! The trade off is even fewer P5’s willing to give G5’s a chance.
#651446
JK37 wrote: February 2nd, 2023, 11:28 pm
tyndal23 wrote: February 2nd, 2023, 7:18 pm
JK37 wrote: February 2nd, 2023, 6:30 pm It’s not an extra home game if it costs you a road game to get it. And that road game comes with a higher likelihood of losing
My math must be bad - 2 home games for 1 away game vs 1 home game vs 1 away game with a much higher chance of losing. . Now Duke has to add another P5 series and pay $1 million plus to get a G5 to come visit as a 1 off - I am sure 6-8 or so ACC teams are thrilled when their goal is to scratch out a Bowl. But - I agree with the Commish 100 percent - losing to G5 sucks even if it cost money and
you don’t go to a bowl- play P5 instead. I just don’t think ACC AD’s and coaches are thrilled about it.
It is. You’re acting like $1M is a lot of money to these programs. It’s not.

Every single ACC AD would take the 1/1 with a P5 over a 2/1 with a G5. Losing to a P5 is explainable. Just playing a G5 is a lose-lose proposition.

But even better options exist! Just buy all wins non-con. With the expanded playoff, there’s even less reason to play fellow P5’s in non-con. Just bag 3-4 easily winnable non-con’s and go undefeated or one-loss in conference. You don’t have to finish Top 4 anymore, just Top 11.

G5’s have one guaranteed spot in the playoff. Yay! The trade off is even fewer P5’s willing to give G5’s a chance.
Ok - fill out the non con schedule for everyone not named Clemson and tell me how they get bowl eligible. Only 1 FCS game counts. What does that leave ? If every AD much preferred P5 non con - why haven’t they done it ? Perhaps they were trying to get bowl eligible ?
#651449
ballcoach15 wrote: February 3rd, 2023, 9:48 am P5 and G5 should have never been separated back whenever they did it. D1 should be D1, regardless of conference $$$$$$ or size of school.

Back in 1951 Wyoming beat Washington & Lee 20-7 in the Gator Bowl.
You keep saying this but it doesn’t make sense in light of your other statements. VT used to play VMI every year. Is that what you want? Because you also rail against playing ‘Cupcakes’. That game would certainly qualify.
Your beloved Alabama spends quantitatively more than lots of other schools on football. So you want their entire schedule to be cupcakes?
Or are you saying you want one big Country Spanning Super Conference with a Salary and Spending cap? Meaning teams like LU would only be allowed to spend as much as say FIU on football? Please try and clarify how you accomplish your desire
#651467
ballcoach15 wrote: February 3rd, 2023, 9:03 pm It's probably too late now to balance out the country. NCAA should have never allowed the Power 5s to separate from rest of NCAA. But they were scared P5s would leave NCAA and form their own organization.
So what’s your point?
#651474
tyndal23 wrote: February 3rd, 2023, 12:57 am
JK37 wrote: February 2nd, 2023, 11:28 pm
tyndal23 wrote: February 2nd, 2023, 7:18 pm

My math must be bad - 2 home games for 1 away game vs 1 home game vs 1 away game with a much higher chance of losing. . Now Duke has to add another P5 series and pay $1 million plus to get a G5 to come visit as a 1 off - I am sure 6-8 or so ACC teams are thrilled when their goal is to scratch out a Bowl. But - I agree with the Commish 100 percent - losing to G5 sucks even if it cost money and
you don’t go to a bowl- play P5 instead. I just don’t think ACC AD’s and coaches are thrilled about it.
It is. You’re acting like $1M is a lot of money to these programs. It’s not.

Every single ACC AD would take the 1/1 with a P5 over a 2/1 with a G5. Losing to a P5 is explainable. Just playing a G5 is a lose-lose proposition.

But even better options exist! Just buy all wins non-con. With the expanded playoff, there’s even less reason to play fellow P5’s in non-con. Just bag 3-4 easily winnable non-con’s and go undefeated or one-loss in conference. You don’t have to finish Top 4 anymore, just Top 11.

G5’s have one guaranteed spot in the playoff. Yay! The trade off is even fewer P5’s willing to give G5’s a chance.
Ok - fill out the non con schedule for everyone not named Clemson and tell me how they get bowl eligible. Only 1 FCS game counts. What does that leave ? If every AD much preferred P5 non con - why haven’t they done it ? Perhaps they were trying to get bowl eligible ?
They pay G5’s so they don’t have to return the game. You started by comparing 2-1’s vs. G5’s to 1-1’s vs. P5’s. The 1-1vP5 is clearly better of those two. But the best option of all is the 1-0 vs. G5/FCS. (And maybe sprinkle in one 1-1 or neutral game vs P5 on national TV.)
Election 2022 and 2024

:roll: https://media1.tenor.com/m/7pikdD_H8ekAA[…]

New Mexico State

1 change and a couple of tweaks. But we swung bats[…]

2024 Recruiting Discussion

Ihnen will likely be granted a hardship year b[…]

2024 CUSA Tennis Tournament

Lady Flames fall 4-1 to FIU :(