Bio not provided
Sure, the Big 12 deal IS admittedly speculative, as is the argument of "how much will they lose if they leave the ACC?" The whole argument is based on "ifs." Sure, it is a possibility that all of those rivalries could be lost. Unlikely, I would say. Part of the rumor involved FSU wanting Miami to go to the Big XII as well, with some saying that the BIG XII would concede that in order to get FSU. If that is true, then obviously they still keep Miami.
What if UF doesn't schedule them in any sport (I list this one set of teams, but it applies to all SEC vs ACC rival scenarios)? Why would any of them do that? Granted the SEC or Big XII could go to nine conference games. So what? To my knowledge, it seems that most rivalries that are being lost so far involve two teams who were conference partners who no longer will be, and probably in the case of Texas and aTm, there is most likely some spite involved.
Can't exactly compare conference rivalries with non-conference rivalries. Why would these SEC teams cancels their non-conference rivals? Spite? "Well, it turns out that in fact, yes, there was a gentlemen's agreement to block your schools from admission into the SEC (I have no idea if that's true), which we did, but since you ended up in a better situation than you were in anyway, we're going to stop playing you." Okay. If that's the reasoning, they can go fornicate themselves. They'd lose out just as well.
If the ACC no longer schedules them for any sport? Why in the hell would they still want games scheduled against the ACC?
Recruiting? FSU recruited out-of-state quite well in their independent years throughout the '70s, '80s, and early '90s. They haven't been in a conference with a team from Texas, but they've recruited Texas quite well. California as well. They recruited Georgia well before being in the ACC with GT.
Perhaps UNC and Duke are wolves in sheeps clothing. Perhaps UT and OU are the same. Still a better situation without a conference commissioner in the corner of the wolves.
Thrown to the lions of UT and OU? Please. I realize any of the mighty SEC teams could hang in the lesser Big XII, because if they can compete in the SEC, they can handle UT and OU, but not FSU. We've heard that before. As a Florida Gator quarterback, a young Steve Spurrier and his Gators - who had always had much success against FSU in it's infancy - wore stickers on their helmets in the mid-'60s that said, "Never, FSU, never." How'd that work out for him?
Do I see the lesser Big XII teams selling more tickets than the lesser ACC teams? Well, back to speculation here, but if the way many of the rumors put it, an Eastern Division will be created within the Big XII. This could potentially be FSU, Clemson, West Virginia, Miami, Georgia Tech, and Louisville. I feel comfortable that UF would continue to be a rivalry, and the rumors also state that Texas would be FSU's permanent cross-divisional rival, and OU as Clemson's, then yes, if it is anything remotely close to that, I'd say it beats Wake, Boston College, NC State, Duke, Virginia, etc., every day of the week.
My only real question is, a ton of the fans of the teams it really effects view this as a very positive possibility. The nay-sayers all seem to be SEC fans and fans of ACC teams not in the discussion. Wonder why that is?
2 years, 2 months ago on New ACC Deal Should Hush Rumors Of Teams Leaving
I believe Lou is referring to the fact that the Big XII just verbally agreed to a deal (to be signed today, I believe) that already gives each of the Big XII teams $20 million a year for Tier 1 and 2 rights. There is supposedly a clause that ups the payout by $2 million per team if certain teams are added in pairs. Therefore, if FSU and Clemson are added, that would probably increase payout to $24 million per team. While the ACC deal is $17 million for tiers 1, 2, and 3, the Big XII leaves 3rd tier rights to be shopped by the individual universities. Some people claim the Texas and Florida are able to bring in an addition $10 million a year on their 3rd-tier rights, implying the Seminoles could bring in between $6-$10 million on third-tier. Most rational Seminoles fans are more conservative and realistic in our numbers and say that it would probably be closer to $3 - $5 million. Therefore, that sets us at around or above the $25 million mark.
It SHOULD?!? What Seminoles and Clemson fans have YOU been talking to?
I realize that Mr. Pennington and MRSEC.com never flat-out said that Florida State was going to the SEC, but wasn't that what you, Mr. Pennington, implied last year on September 21st, 2011? http://mrsec.com/2011/09/fsu-negotiated-down-the-accs-new-exit-fee/
Your article pointed out how FSU President Barron had fought to increase the ACC exit fee only to $20 million, instead of the proposed $34 million. It also pointed out how then-chairman of the board of trustees Andy Haggard had stated that FSU had formed an expansion exploratory committee, and later recanted this statement, but ended his statement, "I don’t see any SEC possibilities. But hey, we’ll listen.” You continued by adding a list of "things we know" which pointed a certain direction, but smartly ended with "Add it all up and… hell if I know."
I also found it strange at that time how in the first article you continuously praised FSU as being a "perfect fit" for the SEC, and that "Florida State is the biggest name in the South not already in the SEC." Two days later, you posted this article, http://mrsec.com/2011/09/fsu-is-it-better-to-reign-in-football-hell-or-serve-in-gridiron-heaven/, in which the tone was somewhat changed. While still seemingly in favor of FSU-to-the-SEC, it wasn't quite as complimentary, suggesting FSU should go, but that they wouldn't amount to much in the mighty SEC as they would in the weaker ACC. Did rumors change in the two days, and this article was written to offer reason why maybe they wouldn't go after all? Just curious.
I just find it odd that while it's true you never flat-out said FSU was moving, you certainly suggested the possibility, and even highlighted the "evidence" which could have been viewed as supporting the assumption. Yet, in this article, you completely write-off the rumors of a move to the Big XII as bunk. Why? What is the difference? Is it that a Big XII move would not be beneficial to the SEC? I truly respect the SEC, and the SEC will always be the SEC - I am not knocking it. I also am not delusional in thinking the SEC "needs" FSU or any other one school. I AM saying that while the SEC would still be a great, super-competitive conference, that perhaps it wouldn't be quite as convenient with other major players recruiting SEC country, and another major conference that would appeal to a lot of the recruits who generally would go SEC to play with and against the toughest. If I were in a position of power with the SEC or one of it's member schools, I would not want to believe in the possibility of Florida State and Clemson to the Big XII either. Those two schools alone already recruit well enough against the SEC, but bringing Oklahoma and Texas, not to mention West Virginia and Oklahoma State into SEC country to recruit as well? Well, I suppose that would be a nightmare!
Is it really that hard to believe that if *most* people involved with the Big XII, Florida State and Clemson were trying to keep a lid on things for the time being, is it THAT improbable that no one called up one of your sources to notify the mighty SEC?
With true respect to the SEC and their powerhouse members, Mr. Slive as a shrewd businessman, and all of the national championships (let alone the streak of six) I do realize that a conference of Florida State, Clemson, Texas, Oklahoma, West Virginia, Okie State, etc. and possibly other decent brands would be quite a brand in and of itself, and may seem somewhat a threat to the death-grip the SEC has held on the southeast for so long. God-forbid another conference close-by dare to rival the mighty SEC in TV deals.
Reading this article felt simply like you were just knocking "the competition," or "colleagues" or however you want to put it - people who do the same job as yourself - when in reality, they don't know your sources, and you don't know theirs either. Much information is coming from Horus "The Dude" Sneed of West Virginia site Eerinsider.com, and many people have written him off simply based on the playful nickname, but the Mr. Sneed has sworn on Twitter that if these things don't happen, he will quit writing for Eerinsider and quit Tweeting. Granted, people make promises like this all the time and don't follow through (Celebrities swearing to leave the country if certain candidates are elected, etc.), but I certainly wouldn't set myself up to look like a fool over something if I made it up or had questionable sources. Mr. Sneed's most recent article on the subject is here:
Another article, even more interesting is by Cory Fravel of Clemson's Cemetery-hill.com:
I have no idea if these schools will move or not. I have no idea how reliable the "sources" of the people making these claims. I would say that it seems there is just enough valid points that imply the move as truth as there is that makes it appear false. I also know that the writers on these pages are flat-out risking all credibility and their reputation by posting this information. My point is simply, these are not all random anonymous posters on message boards, and in reality, whether they are right or wrong, Mr. Sneed and Mr. Fravel - as well as their sources - seem every bit as credible as yourself and your sources, with the exception that I haven't seen them act two completely different ways depending on which conference would benefit most in realignment (and all silly nicknames aside).
2 years, 2 months ago on Here We Go Again: As Summer Starts, Realignment Chatter Heats Up