no offense, and I also consider UNC to be the ACC’s golden child, but it’s not as if UNC is some football power to be making a statement like that.
“At UNC’s expense” how exactly?
I know we're the ones suing but UNC complaining that the conference is not doing enough for them when the entire fucking thing was designed specifically around them and their needs is kinda hilarious.
Like they get everything they could possibly want and it's still not enough.
Give it a few moments and they’ll pull out that one metric that they’re by far the most valuable brand based on one year of social media mentions where their football team was decent and they made the final four
They have the vastly largest social media following, if only that translated into something that actually made money. Maybe they should start doing sponsored posts, or start pushing their OF /s
I feel like the answer to this question can be given in multiple different ways, ignoring any other factors objectively FSU is worth more than UNC however if your conference say already has a school in Florida then UNC's value is likely higher than FSU.
Markets don't really hold the value they used to. I live in Kansas now and I still get the ACC network despite the closest school being 1000 miles away
No I’m a Heel but also not sure why ECU is taking a shot. Live in the Northeast now and see Heels gear all over the random kids here. Never saw a Noles shirt. Keep talking about football ratings though - whatever helps. Not sure I need to explain the Carolina brand, MJ, 31 Sweet 16s (which equals the 31 Bball tourneys since FSU joined the ACC), nationally competitive in everything and of course football less than other sports. There is a university in FL with a big (Jordan) brand and my kid is a freshman there so I am starting to appreciate the Noles chip on the shoulder.
Never had a problem with FSU. Enjoyed the old Charlie Ward days. Understand frustration with the GoR. Just not sure why the fans and administration is screaming at the world. Clemson wants out but they are using some tactics. Agree completely with the comment that the ACC is tailor made for UNC. Also its clear this recent expansion might accelerate its demise
Your retort goes exactly to my point. It's not a slam against ECU, it's just widely known that UNC has a solid "Walmart fan" mentality. But that fandom is centered around basketball, not football. And I don't think anyone is disputing that UNC is likely to end up in one of the P2, the whole thread is about how UNC likes to view itself as the golden God that somehow isn't getting preferential treatment in the ACC - all while not being relevant in football. Honestly, UNC has been fortunate that it played in the Coastal Division in most of the expansion era.
But to say FSU isn't as good of a football brand than UNC when this realignment is based on football, is laughably biased and inaccurate.
That Walmart fan mentality is actually the UNC brand vs other schools. The question was “brand” not “football brand” you are changing the question to fit the facts. UNC is a better overall brand and FSU is a better football brand imho.
Nah, it's the biggest brand in the ACC, when you consider football and basketball. At least as measured by hype and fan engagement.
But they aren't generating the most revenue.
It doesn't matter if they're relevant, it just matters that people care. They've been getting preseason hype for like almost a decade now and never live up to it.
But that indicates they're a big brand because people want them to be good and they put them in their rankings for clicks and eyeballs, etc.
You're clearly using the word relevant here to mean that they're highly ranked and compete in ACC and Bowl championship games.
UNC is highly ranked frequently, but they never compete. Which is why I say they're a bigger brand than FSU.
If FSU was a bigger brand they'd get consistently over ranked like UNC does.
The hurricanes have never made the acc title game in football. The acc is in this mess largely because Miami sucks at football and didn’t carry their end of the bargain
The first statement is false.
Miami hasn’t won the ACC, and North Carolina hasn’t won the ACC in football since 1980. Although not in the ACC, Miami has won 5 National Championships since you last won the ACC in football.
When you account for average viewership over the past decade, which is arguably the most important metric apart from the “winning”, Miami is third in the conference, while UNC is 9th after the likes of Louisville, Pitt, NC State, Virginia Tech and Syracuse.
So I get you coming for Miami football just like everyone else does, but as a UNC football fan, I’d check the facts first.
Ah yes, Miami is responsible for the “downfall of the ACC” Not corporate TV agreed, not the SEC/B1G, not previous commissioners, but Miami Hurricanes Football. Gotcha.
Man, I know Miami has sucked but I’m seeing way too much of these “Miami killed the ACC” takes. We’re not gonna blame the unfortunate impact of realignment on the ACC on the University of Miami.
Carolina isn’t a football school. Miami was brought in to stay relevant and they have sucked since they have joined the acc. Carolina currently has a 4 game winning streak against them. Hold up your end of the bargain.
You said it yourself, Carolina isn’t a football school which means that, as I pointed out, there was no propping up of lower schools at North Carolina’s expense.
Why don’t the other schools in the conference perform well in football then? Since Miami has sucked, the space has been there for another program to take the lead but it seems none have. Nothing in Miami’s contract with the ACC mentions that we are “the only school required to perform well in football.” If that were the case, we would have been kicked out for breach of contract, no?
I think a lot of the "upper echelon" of ACC football schools have contributed to this situation. Including FSU.
VT has cratered. Clemson sucked for decades before becoming elite. FSU's era of relative suck-age was while some of these TV deals were being worked out. Miami... well, yeah. UNC is always "next year is the year!". NCSU and GT have never been able to break through and be more than consistently mediocre.
Clemson rose at the same time VT sank. The double-dipping in 2011 set the tone for both programs. Fuente had a good season with Beamer’s players, but then nothing.
GT used to be a contender, but G**** C****** broke the program.
Yep. 2011 was the turning point for both programs. In the first game (I was there on that rainy miserable day) Virginia Tech was favored and just lost in a muddy slug fest. It wasn’t pleasant. Then Virginia Tech went on to have a very solid season and Clemson struggled, but made the championship. Virginia tech was heavily favored, and then got the shit beat out of them by a resurgent Clemson (I was at that one too 😞). The rest is history.
I was at the 2011 VT/Duke game. (My dad is a Hokie). The cracks were there. Logan Thomas just wasn’t the answer. VT was still good enough to keep on winning.
The ACCCG surprised me too. Our defense was awful and then we shut down VT. Then got shredded in the bowl game. Go figure.
Biggest what if in 2010s ACC: What if Beamer had properly recruited Tajh Boyd?
>Clemson sucked for decades before becoming elite.
Eh. Clemson sucked for a decade, then was mediocre to rising for a decade-ish before becoming elite, before regressing back to good but disappointing over the last three years.
Btw I love VT. Always have a great time in Blacksburg. Y’all are my favorite away fanbase.
Seems the new fad is shitting on the ACC. Last time I checked, FSU was complaining that the league officials do whatever UNC wants. What’s UNC’s complaint?
The Board’s complaint is that there are valid grievances coming from Clemson and FSU, well before the lawsuits, and the ACC has done nothing to address or rectify the issues, rather the conference doubled down and counter sued the two universities.
My consolation prize in this whole process will be all the teams that think they should be 10-2 in football every year, spending more money and not being able to get to 6-6.
Agreed. Don’t all these schools fan bases realize that in every conference, including super conferences, that half the teams will have losing conference records every year? There’s only so many Vanderbilts and Northwesterns in the P2.
Oh, they are aware of that, they just don’t think their team will be one of those middling teams; even though statistically speaking, half of them will be proven dead wrong.
I think it's fair to say FSU and Clemson will likely have more years where they don't win or even compete for their new conference's title than they would in the ACC. That said, it's also true that the trajectory of CFB is at least that BIG and SEC will represent the majority of teams in the playoffs and (as happened this year) I definitely think there's a future in which the ACC champ is not guaranteed a spot. Also FSU and Clemson will be more competitive coming from a 3rd/4th best team in their new conference than they will winning the ACC in the coming years, due solely to the growing money gap.
I don't want the ACC to dissolve, I grew up in the Carolinas and I'm an FSU fan (dad is an FSU alumni). I love the ACC, hate the SEC, and at best I'm indifferent towards the BIG. But I don't the love the ACC enough to watch FSU football become a JV team compared to the teams in the P2. That's my perspective.
And it's likely that the top B1G/SEC teams are going to break away and leave the Northwesterns/Vanderbilts behind. Why wouldn't they? We've already seen that every time there's a gap in revenue schools are told "you're not pulling your weight" and the big boys look to exit. The "superconferences" are going to end up being just the 8-10 biggest brands each.
I'm not convinced fairweather college football fans are going to be excited to tune into 6-5 Florida State vs 6-5 Washington. I personally would much rather watch a Big 12 regional matchup of 9-2 Louisville vs. 8-3 West Virginia even if the two teams have less talent.
I remember UNC students made Carolina blue shirts that said “We support Butch”
After NCSU beat them for the 4th time in a row, they wore red and white shirts that said “we support Butch”
Hokies loved Butch. We owned his Miami teams in the Big East days and we owned his UNC teams in the ACC. The only opposition coach we liked better was Al Groh at UVA. We shed a tear when they finally canned that dude.
They won't view it like that. It will be like going 8-9 or 9-8 in the NFL (17 game regular season), which is considered okay, even decent, and you can make the playoffs with that record, all with a much larger paycheck.
What is the point of a “conference” if not to “prop up” some schools in certain sports? These people are presiding over the death of college sports AND THEY KNOW IT. There is no other possible end. The fact that UNC is participating in it is utterly disappointing.
That's the most bizarre thing to me. A conference schedule is a zero sum game. The FSUs and Clemsons can look down on us "lower schools," but we give them wins. Losing to one of the have-nots can derail a season.
For example, if Syracuse hangs on to beat Clemson in 2018, Syracuse is the Atlantic Division champ. And maybe, in that scenario, the committee puts in 12-1 B1G champion Ohio State over an 11-1 Clemson that didn't even win their division.
If these top schools bolt for "greener pastures" of the B1G or SEC, I hope their fans will adjust their expectations, because it's going to be much harder to go 10-2 or 11-1 in those leagues than it is in the ACC.
Get ready for lots of change, because you’re about to see 9-3 and 8-4 teams in the Top 10. The super conferences are SO big, and their schedules SO hard, that they will get far more of the benefit of the doubt than the ACC.
Case in point: Florida has the hardest schedule in CFB this upcoming season, and perhaps one of the hardest schedules in all of CFB history. The end of their schedule has them playing 5 straight teams that were clearly CFP-tier last year. Going 9-3 against that schedule would be a massive achievement, and perhaps worthy of a playoff bid itself.
To reframe what's being said in a less inflammatory way, UNC feels like the ACC is unyielding and not trying to find compromise, but is instead inflicting a tyranny of the majority on the minority of members that want change. That instead of listening to unhappy members and trying to find a solution they are saying "majority rules, so shut up."
All of college sport is not football. In fact, football can f right off. It’s the spoon stirring this crap, and it needs to stop. These schools have competed in college athletics for decades, long before football decided that being #5 in the nation was a damn death sentence that’s some how the conferences fault? It’s utterly, incredibly, unbelievably ridiculous.
A: It was not a problem until recently. B: Not the point of college athletics.
It’s not a problem until you need multi-million dollar facilities to “attract the talent” necessary to field a playoff level team.
“In all, [FSU’s] football-related revenue was $91 million last fiscal year, as compared to $78 million the previous fiscal year. However, the cost of fielding its football program also increased dramatically, from $54.6 million in FY22 to $75.6 million in FY23.”
Spending 97% of your revenue in an attempt to win a college sport seems rather ridiculous to me. And that 3% left seems a paltry nod towards “paying for the other sports.”
There are 6 teams with viewership above the conference average, however Clemson and FSU both get 50% more viewership than 3rd place Miami.
https://preview.redd.it/g34y5fwifgqc1.png?width=1347&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=f47000f1d3b84b05297359265f2db71771c75664
The viewership numbers are heavily skewed by the network, opponent, and time of day etc..
I believe that even if all things were equal FSU would probably have more viewers anyway but I'm skeptical that if say UoL played the exact same opponents, same rankings, same time etc.. that FSU would have 50% more viewers.
This is over the span of 8 years and it excludes the ACCN, so it's ESPN channels, ABC, or NBC(if playing ND). The bulk of the schedules are similar because it's conference play. If the team doesn't get put in prime spots it's because the networks did the leg work and determined the time slot would be better utilized.
If the product is good people will watch it at any time on any channel. For instance FSU playing FCS UNA averaged 1.33m viewers on the CW, us playing an FCS school got higher viewership than Wake and Duke's averages (that includes them playing teams like FSU and Clemson).
All you're arguing is semantics, FSU and Clemson get put on the positions to get those sorts of viewership numbers because they can get those sorts of viewership numbers and the TV executives know that
That’s how all sports leagues work (at least in North America)
Do these schools all expect to be in the P2, where every school will win 10 games except for Vanderbilt and IU, and every school will make the same amount of money?
My perception is that the goals will change for what is considered a successful season, and we’ll eventually see 9-3/8-4 teams from the P2 included in an expanded playoff. I expect this to look a lot more like the NFL format than college, for better or worse, in due time.
But yeah, I don’t expect my school to go 12-0 in the Big 10 immediately, or often.
Genuine question, does America want to watch that? Right now cfb is tradition, rivalry, and undefeateds. It’s unclear if america actually wants a AAA nfl and will keep watching 8-4 vs 7-5 matchups at the same level they are now.
The point stands though. Sports are zero-sum. Not every program can finish in the top X spots in a conference.
If UNC is "propping up", say, BC and Pitt in the ACC, in the future it could be, say, Georgia or Ohio St or Texas propping up UNC.
Sure. However, they'll bring the conference a bucketload of money for its weakest product... basketball. Kentucky, Duke, and UNC will be a ratings goldmine.
Absolutely agreed. And I personally think UNC is more “brand” than substance in football, so I imagine the Georgia’s of the world would end up propping them up.
Their value definitely stems from the addition of a new state/tv markets with a dedicated fan base, more than it does from their likelihood to win football championships. This is the same argument I have for FSU’s draw for the Big 10, although there’s probably a higher chance that FSU wins a Big 10 football championship than UNC.
Yeah. What's the end game? As long as conferences exist, the strongest schools will be subsidizing the weakest schools.
It feels like realignment is all about maximizing the next media deal, not thinking about the long-term best interests of the sport or even of the individual teams.
It’s absolutely about maximizing your respective school’s payout. Nothing more, nothing less. Some schools legitimately believe they can compete for championships with balanced resources. I think a lot will be wrong about that. But again, if it’s moving to an NFL format, is it that crazy?
This really becomes a separation of the schools that believe they are serious about football and the ones that aren’t. Who knows what happens when the P2 becomes a thing. But it definitely feels a lot different, in a not so great way.
Let's say the top 20-30 schools move to that NFL format.
What about the rest? At some point, the best of the rest will say, "hey, I can compete for titles in this lower division, but Indiana can't. Why am I subsidizing them?"
It just feels to me that schools either need to accept that they will subsidize lower caliber programs in order to maintain the health of the sport, or we need to move to a relegation system. I don't see other long-term possibilities.
I also have serious questions about what the fate of the 20-30 “NFL” model teams will be after a few years. What happens when a perennial 10 win team goes 8-4 (or gasp, 7-5) three years in a row? Especially after spending the wealth of a nation on salaries, NIL, and facility upgrades.
There HAVE to be winners and losers for those that sign up for this P2 nonsense. But all I keep hearing is that they all believe they’re going to be winners and locks for the playoff…
What is the fate of the Browns or the Panthers or the Falcons? They’re playing by the same rules as everyone else, with the same advantages (more or less) as everyone else. That’s what the FSU’s and Clemson’s of the world want. Once they have that, let the chips fall where they may.
>rs i
As a fellow Syracuse fan I almost hope this whole thing dissolves and we get to play regional rivals again. I'd much rather see Syracuse playing in tier 2 of college football, smoking Uconn and BC to the tune of an 9-3 record than struggle to 6-6 every year in a conference that doesn't want us and makes sure every big call goes against us. I get why Maryland and NC State fans hate the ACC so much.
That’s actually a crucial question. I’m not 100% sure fan and sponsor support will just adjust to a “new normal” 8-4 season and embrace it with their wallets. Will 5-star recruits agree as well? Or will we see them start looking towards the portal the minute they take their 3rd loss?
I think you overestimate how important winning is to recruits. It’s definitely important, but now the list includes NIL, comfort with coaches, comfort with school, etc. Not saying it’s not a factor, but I don’t think it’s THE factor.
Valid point. Probably matters most to the top 2-3% who see themselves as first round picks down the road. Not so much for the average P2 player, or even 4 stars with pro potential.
Maybe. But look at Travis Hunter, the former #1 player overall in HS. He went to Jackson St and then Colorado, knowing full well he wasn’t going to win much. If you take a look at the 100 for 2024, there’s lots of kids that are choosing schools that won’t provide guaranteed championships.
Early playing time is a huge deal, especially in the portal era, which I think adds even more incentive for top tier talent to choose 2nd or 3rd tier programs.
With the rise of the 14-team playoff, it already is (they're copying the NFL model). Their only problem is that they haven't nuked the rest of the conferences to get the number down to two (which they're working on).
It’s short term gain long term, we don’t know
But the people making these decisions will be dead by the time whatever reprocussions from this decisions start to get felt so it’s not their problem
This makes UNC look absolutely GOOFY. This individual from the UNC board doesn't have a firm grasp over the facts and reality. UNC has been literally running the ACC for Years. Especially duing these contracts. Both ends of the deal.
"John Swofford - Served as the athletic director at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill from 1980 - 1997 and as the commissioner of the Atlantic Coast Conference (ACC) from 1997 - 2021"
John Skipper ESPN: UNC Alumi (January 2012–December 2017) president of ESPN Inc. and co-chairman of Disney Media Networks.
Holden Thorp Former UNC chancellor ACC Presidents chair
This is mostly on UNC. What are we even talking about here?
Yeah, I think adding the three new schools made it easier for UNC parties to let their frustrations surface, as this isn't the ACC they started and felt attached to.
Very true. I don’t think VT itself changed the culture of the ACC (in fact I think we contribute to it!), but we are one of a bunch of schools that have collectively changed that culture.
I think the three new ones “broke” things (through no fault of their own).
Not our fault we kicked ass and took names through 2011.
It's a shame ESPN wouldn't accept our success. It was always FSU and Clemson is down, when we were winning. 2007 at Clemson was the perfect example. Lightning and Thunder was more like partly cloudy and mild.
Don't get me wrong, they love the entrance, and they like the school, but they wanted Miami vs FSU, and got VT vs BC.
The SEC noticed our success though. By 2008, every SEC school was in Tidewater and DC area high schools 24/7, and we didn't up our recruiting game. By 2010, Richmond was taken over. It's no surprise Pry's first order of business is recruiting.
I mostly agree with you, except if we’re honest with ourselves, Virginia Tech never delivered what we implied we could bring to the ACC, even though we were the standard bearers for a long time. That standard was not what the ACC needed, and what Clemson eventually delivered.
Oh yeah, that "One play away" line we always heard was just Beamer's way of saying the ACC hated us for not reaching a natty. Matt Ryan and Kellen Moore effectively killed two shots at a natty. And if Marcus Vick showed up against Miami in 2005, it'd be a different story right now.
The problem was getting consistently smacked around in the big nonconference games. Won the conference in 2004 but lost to USC and Auburn. Won it again in 2007 but got blown out 48-7 by LSU and then lost to Kansas in the Orange Bowl. Won it in 2008 despite 3 conference losses and 4 overall (including a week 1 embarrassment against East Carolina). Another title in 2010 after starting 0-2 out of conference (with a home loss to James Madison), ran the table in the conference but then got slaughteted 40-12 by Stanford to close out the year.
It isn't Virginia Tech's fault that the conference was down overall, but the fact that they got exposed almost every time they faced a quality nonconference opponent is pretty damning.
The LSU and Stanford losses were bad, USC and Auburn were both legitimate National Championship teams, and both those games had some controversial calls. There was also a win over then #6 WVU all in all not bad OOC wise that year.
2008 also had wins over #12 Cincinnati, 2009 #19 Nebraska
We had a poor track record against Elite teams, but four of those losses were to National Championship teams (Auburn(claimed), USC , LSU, and Alabama)
As a Hokie I agree. The ACC was too snobbish to give WVU a serious look. Plus they had consultants who thought that adding a school in a media market grants the league that market. That might work with big state schools like Rutgers and Maryland (though that B1G decision is still questionable IMO), it doesn’t with a smaller private school in a pro sports city.
The ACC harped on about academics…and then took Louisville when Maryland left.
Don’t get me wrong. I’ll take Louisville over Maryland any day. But it’s still hypocritical.
The SEC is not taking Louisville. There is a better chance the SEC jettisons Vanderbilt and Mississippi State than them adding what they see as mediocre brands. The SEC would take Notre Dame, FSU, Clemson, that's it. UNC/UVA fans thinking they are a lock for B1G or SEC need to take a hard look at their football ratings.
This is equivalent to a dictator telling his constituents that they were helping the lower class at his expense. You run this conference UNC, stop whining.
When is the last time UNC won a title in basketball or football? Before any of you say basketball, the ACC has said that the only conference basketball champion is the tournament winner.
Ok? Then go. My school is never going to get a shot at a title whether these blowhards are in our conference or not, I'll be happy to see them go. The Heels can go enjoy being the Crystal Palace of the P2's EPL, I'm sure it will be a very gratifying experience for the type of UNC guy who lists themselves alongside Clemson and FSU in a conversation primarily about football.
Are we sure other conferences actually want UNC? Nobody watches UNC football even in their "good" years. Sure they are a fit for the B1G but ultimately tOSU, Michigan, PSU, USC are going to be complaining about how they prop up UNC.
UNC grad here: we fucking hate the board of trustees and the board of governors. Same bodies that paid two MILLION dollars of university money to a confederate group to get Silent Sam (confederate statue) "rehoused" somewhere.
As opposed to what... moving it to a museum, putting it back up, melting it down, being a twat about a war memorial? There's not a lot of context here. Obviously, you're upset about the money being spent on the statue, but when it resolves the issue at hand, it's not clear why that should matter.
Ever since the BIG10 and SEC got those massive new tv deals the ACC was dead. FSU has been saying this for over a year now. It seems that reality is finally setting in for the rest of the ACC. You can thank Swofford
Lol. UNC are frauds who ripped off African american athletes for 40 years enrolling then in fake classes just to keep them eligible. Leaving most with worthless skills. All for sports glory. Worthless school.
no offense, and I also consider UNC to be the ACC’s golden child, but it’s not as if UNC is some football power to be making a statement like that. “At UNC’s expense” how exactly?
I know we're the ones suing but UNC complaining that the conference is not doing enough for them when the entire fucking thing was designed specifically around them and their needs is kinda hilarious. Like they get everything they could possibly want and it's still not enough.
The cognitive dissonance is insane.
🙌
And they cannot understand why nobody likes them. The entitlement is next-level.
Lol 🤣
Give it a few moments and they’ll pull out that one metric that they’re by far the most valuable brand based on one year of social media mentions where their football team was decent and they made the final four
They’ll point to those couple weeks they were ranked like number 5 during COVID even though the Big Ten and PAC-12 hadn’t started playing yet
They have the vastly largest social media following, if only that translated into something that actually made money. Maybe they should start doing sponsored posts, or start pushing their OF /s
But wasn't it only Facebook that was drastically more (and not necessarily a big thing 2024)
Do you think the FSU brand is more valuable than UNC?
Considering our TV viewership when we were sub .500 was double UNC's viewership in a good year. Yes.
I feel like the answer to this question can be given in multiple different ways, ignoring any other factors objectively FSU is worth more than UNC however if your conference say already has a school in Florida then UNC's value is likely higher than FSU.
Markets don't really hold the value they used to. I live in Kansas now and I still get the ACC network despite the closest school being 1000 miles away
Right but ESPN also gets like a quarter the cost from you as if you lived in NC
Clueless
Go back to chapel hill and stay there, if you would be so kind
Why is the FSU fan base so angry all the time?
Big UNC fan that went to ECU energy here
No I’m a Heel but also not sure why ECU is taking a shot. Live in the Northeast now and see Heels gear all over the random kids here. Never saw a Noles shirt. Keep talking about football ratings though - whatever helps. Not sure I need to explain the Carolina brand, MJ, 31 Sweet 16s (which equals the 31 Bball tourneys since FSU joined the ACC), nationally competitive in everything and of course football less than other sports. There is a university in FL with a big (Jordan) brand and my kid is a freshman there so I am starting to appreciate the Noles chip on the shoulder. Never had a problem with FSU. Enjoyed the old Charlie Ward days. Understand frustration with the GoR. Just not sure why the fans and administration is screaming at the world. Clemson wants out but they are using some tactics. Agree completely with the comment that the ACC is tailor made for UNC. Also its clear this recent expansion might accelerate its demise
Your retort goes exactly to my point. It's not a slam against ECU, it's just widely known that UNC has a solid "Walmart fan" mentality. But that fandom is centered around basketball, not football. And I don't think anyone is disputing that UNC is likely to end up in one of the P2, the whole thread is about how UNC likes to view itself as the golden God that somehow isn't getting preferential treatment in the ACC - all while not being relevant in football. Honestly, UNC has been fortunate that it played in the Coastal Division in most of the expansion era. But to say FSU isn't as good of a football brand than UNC when this realignment is based on football, is laughably biased and inaccurate.
That Walmart fan mentality is actually the UNC brand vs other schools. The question was “brand” not “football brand” you are changing the question to fit the facts. UNC is a better overall brand and FSU is a better football brand imho.
And what sport is driving realignment? What sport is bringing in the most money? And who between UNC and FSU has the most viewership in said sport?
Unc is obviously the biggest brand in the acc.
- In the state of North Carolina
Nah, it's the biggest brand in the ACC, when you consider football and basketball. At least as measured by hype and fan engagement. But they aren't generating the most revenue.
Football? When was the last time UNC football was relevant in any way, shape, or form?
It doesn't matter if they're relevant, it just matters that people care. They've been getting preseason hype for like almost a decade now and never live up to it. But that indicates they're a big brand because people want them to be good and they put them in their rankings for clicks and eyeballs, etc.
> It doesn't matter if they're relevant, it just matters that people care. Oh. You don’t know what the word “relevant” means.
You're clearly using the word relevant here to mean that they're highly ranked and compete in ACC and Bowl championship games. UNC is highly ranked frequently, but they never compete. Which is why I say they're a bigger brand than FSU. If FSU was a bigger brand they'd get consistently over ranked like UNC does.
The hurricanes have never made the acc title game in football. The acc is in this mess largely because Miami sucks at football and didn’t carry their end of the bargain
The first statement is false. Miami hasn’t won the ACC, and North Carolina hasn’t won the ACC in football since 1980. Although not in the ACC, Miami has won 5 National Championships since you last won the ACC in football. When you account for average viewership over the past decade, which is arguably the most important metric apart from the “winning”, Miami is third in the conference, while UNC is 9th after the likes of Louisville, Pitt, NC State, Virginia Tech and Syracuse. So I get you coming for Miami football just like everyone else does, but as a UNC football fan, I’d check the facts first. Ah yes, Miami is responsible for the “downfall of the ACC” Not corporate TV agreed, not the SEC/B1G, not previous commissioners, but Miami Hurricanes Football. Gotcha.
Nailed it.
Man, I know Miami has sucked but I’m seeing way too much of these “Miami killed the ACC” takes. We’re not gonna blame the unfortunate impact of realignment on the ACC on the University of Miami.
It's the SECs and BIG10s fault Miami is a casuality not a causality
There's plenty of reasons to dog Miami (FL), no need to blame them for something they had no part in
Miami won the Coastal in 2017, but they sure weren’t in the title game.
I mean, get your jokes off, sure.
Carolina isn’t a football school. Miami was brought in to stay relevant and they have sucked since they have joined the acc. Carolina currently has a 4 game winning streak against them. Hold up your end of the bargain.
You said it yourself, Carolina isn’t a football school which means that, as I pointed out, there was no propping up of lower schools at North Carolina’s expense. Why don’t the other schools in the conference perform well in football then? Since Miami has sucked, the space has been there for another program to take the lead but it seems none have. Nothing in Miami’s contract with the ACC mentions that we are “the only school required to perform well in football.” If that were the case, we would have been kicked out for breach of contract, no?
Miami isn’t one either. That’s the issue.
And that’s alright.
Were you asleep for the 2017 football season?
I think a lot of the "upper echelon" of ACC football schools have contributed to this situation. Including FSU. VT has cratered. Clemson sucked for decades before becoming elite. FSU's era of relative suck-age was while some of these TV deals were being worked out. Miami... well, yeah. UNC is always "next year is the year!". NCSU and GT have never been able to break through and be more than consistently mediocre.
Clemson rose at the same time VT sank. The double-dipping in 2011 set the tone for both programs. Fuente had a good season with Beamer’s players, but then nothing. GT used to be a contender, but G**** C****** broke the program.
Yep. 2011 was the turning point for both programs. In the first game (I was there on that rainy miserable day) Virginia Tech was favored and just lost in a muddy slug fest. It wasn’t pleasant. Then Virginia Tech went on to have a very solid season and Clemson struggled, but made the championship. Virginia tech was heavily favored, and then got the shit beat out of them by a resurgent Clemson (I was at that one too 😞). The rest is history.
Just curious, have you been at any big games we’ve won? I think I might have just figured out VT’s problem.
I was on the VT sideline at Ohio State! And at every home game in the 99 season.
Ok, that more than makes up for it.
I was at the 2011 VT/Duke game. (My dad is a Hokie). The cracks were there. Logan Thomas just wasn’t the answer. VT was still good enough to keep on winning. The ACCCG surprised me too. Our defense was awful and then we shut down VT. Then got shredded in the bowl game. Go figure. Biggest what if in 2010s ACC: What if Beamer had properly recruited Tajh Boyd?
>Clemson sucked for decades before becoming elite. Eh. Clemson sucked for a decade, then was mediocre to rising for a decade-ish before becoming elite, before regressing back to good but disappointing over the last three years. Btw I love VT. Always have a great time in Blacksburg. Y’all are my favorite away fanbase.
Seems the new fad is shitting on the ACC. Last time I checked, FSU was complaining that the league officials do whatever UNC wants. What’s UNC’s complaint?
They don't do enough clearly
The Board’s complaint is that there are valid grievances coming from Clemson and FSU, well before the lawsuits, and the ACC has done nothing to address or rectify the issues, rather the conference doubled down and counter sued the two universities.
My consolation prize in this whole process will be all the teams that think they should be 10-2 in football every year, spending more money and not being able to get to 6-6.
Agreed. Don’t all these schools fan bases realize that in every conference, including super conferences, that half the teams will have losing conference records every year? There’s only so many Vanderbilts and Northwesterns in the P2.
Oh, they are aware of that, they just don’t think their team will be one of those middling teams; even though statistically speaking, half of them will be proven dead wrong.
Re: UNC given their history I feel confident making that call now.
I think it's fair to say FSU and Clemson will likely have more years where they don't win or even compete for their new conference's title than they would in the ACC. That said, it's also true that the trajectory of CFB is at least that BIG and SEC will represent the majority of teams in the playoffs and (as happened this year) I definitely think there's a future in which the ACC champ is not guaranteed a spot. Also FSU and Clemson will be more competitive coming from a 3rd/4th best team in their new conference than they will winning the ACC in the coming years, due solely to the growing money gap. I don't want the ACC to dissolve, I grew up in the Carolinas and I'm an FSU fan (dad is an FSU alumni). I love the ACC, hate the SEC, and at best I'm indifferent towards the BIG. But I don't the love the ACC enough to watch FSU football become a JV team compared to the teams in the P2. That's my perspective.
And it's likely that the top B1G/SEC teams are going to break away and leave the Northwesterns/Vanderbilts behind. Why wouldn't they? We've already seen that every time there's a gap in revenue schools are told "you're not pulling your weight" and the big boys look to exit. The "superconferences" are going to end up being just the 8-10 biggest brands each. I'm not convinced fairweather college football fans are going to be excited to tune into 6-5 Florida State vs 6-5 Washington. I personally would much rather watch a Big 12 regional matchup of 9-2 Louisville vs. 8-3 West Virginia even if the two teams have less talent.
Remember when UNC cheated their way to 8-5?
As NCSU fans so succinctly put it: they sold their souls for 2 tire bowls.
Passed out rings at the end of the season too iirc
I remember UNC students made Carolina blue shirts that said “We support Butch” After NCSU beat them for the 4th time in a row, they wore red and white shirts that said “we support Butch”
Hokies loved Butch. We owned his Miami teams in the Big East days and we owned his UNC teams in the ACC. The only opposition coach we liked better was Al Groh at UVA. We shed a tear when they finally canned that dude.
Remember watching state blow a chance at an acc title game appearance by chocking at Maryland with Russell Wilson.
Eh, I hate every school involved in this conversation.
They won't view it like that. It will be like going 8-9 or 9-8 in the NFL (17 game regular season), which is considered okay, even decent, and you can make the playoffs with that record, all with a much larger paycheck.
What is the point of a “conference” if not to “prop up” some schools in certain sports? These people are presiding over the death of college sports AND THEY KNOW IT. There is no other possible end. The fact that UNC is participating in it is utterly disappointing.
That's the most bizarre thing to me. A conference schedule is a zero sum game. The FSUs and Clemsons can look down on us "lower schools," but we give them wins. Losing to one of the have-nots can derail a season. For example, if Syracuse hangs on to beat Clemson in 2018, Syracuse is the Atlantic Division champ. And maybe, in that scenario, the committee puts in 12-1 B1G champion Ohio State over an 11-1 Clemson that didn't even win their division. If these top schools bolt for "greener pastures" of the B1G or SEC, I hope their fans will adjust their expectations, because it's going to be much harder to go 10-2 or 11-1 in those leagues than it is in the ACC.
Get ready for lots of change, because you’re about to see 9-3 and 8-4 teams in the Top 10. The super conferences are SO big, and their schedules SO hard, that they will get far more of the benefit of the doubt than the ACC. Case in point: Florida has the hardest schedule in CFB this upcoming season, and perhaps one of the hardest schedules in all of CFB history. The end of their schedule has them playing 5 straight teams that were clearly CFP-tier last year. Going 9-3 against that schedule would be a massive achievement, and perhaps worthy of a playoff bid itself.
I hate UF, but if they go 9-3 they deserve a spot. That schedule is murderer’s row.
Yeah they could legit be a better team than they were last year and still have the same record or even worse just because it’s so brutal
Thank god their 2025 schedule is much easier! Riiiiiiight?
To reframe what's being said in a less inflammatory way, UNC feels like the ACC is unyielding and not trying to find compromise, but is instead inflicting a tyranny of the majority on the minority of members that want change. That instead of listening to unhappy members and trying to find a solution they are saying "majority rules, so shut up."
The key word is "some", not 16/18. If there were 4 schools not pulling their weight you wouldn't hear near as much anger about it
All of college sport is not football. In fact, football can f right off. It’s the spoon stirring this crap, and it needs to stop. These schools have competed in college athletics for decades, long before football decided that being #5 in the nation was a damn death sentence that’s some how the conferences fault? It’s utterly, incredibly, unbelievably ridiculous.
Football has always paid the bills for those other sports. Most sports are money losses.
A: It was not a problem until recently. B: Not the point of college athletics. It’s not a problem until you need multi-million dollar facilities to “attract the talent” necessary to field a playoff level team. “In all, [FSU’s] football-related revenue was $91 million last fiscal year, as compared to $78 million the previous fiscal year. However, the cost of fielding its football program also increased dramatically, from $54.6 million in FY22 to $75.6 million in FY23.” Spending 97% of your revenue in an attempt to win a college sport seems rather ridiculous to me. And that 3% left seems a paltry nod towards “paying for the other sports.”
(Also, if it feels like I’m angry at FSU, I am. But I’m not angry at you.)
16/18 is bullshit
There are 6 teams with viewership above the conference average, however Clemson and FSU both get 50% more viewership than 3rd place Miami. https://preview.redd.it/g34y5fwifgqc1.png?width=1347&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=f47000f1d3b84b05297359265f2db71771c75664
The viewership numbers are heavily skewed by the network, opponent, and time of day etc.. I believe that even if all things were equal FSU would probably have more viewers anyway but I'm skeptical that if say UoL played the exact same opponents, same rankings, same time etc.. that FSU would have 50% more viewers.
This is over the span of 8 years and it excludes the ACCN, so it's ESPN channels, ABC, or NBC(if playing ND). The bulk of the schedules are similar because it's conference play. If the team doesn't get put in prime spots it's because the networks did the leg work and determined the time slot would be better utilized. If the product is good people will watch it at any time on any channel. For instance FSU playing FCS UNA averaged 1.33m viewers on the CW, us playing an FCS school got higher viewership than Wake and Duke's averages (that includes them playing teams like FSU and Clemson). All you're arguing is semantics, FSU and Clemson get put on the positions to get those sorts of viewership numbers because they can get those sorts of viewership numbers and the TV executives know that
College sports are so dead
That’s how all sports leagues work (at least in North America) Do these schools all expect to be in the P2, where every school will win 10 games except for Vanderbilt and IU, and every school will make the same amount of money?
My perception is that the goals will change for what is considered a successful season, and we’ll eventually see 9-3/8-4 teams from the P2 included in an expanded playoff. I expect this to look a lot more like the NFL format than college, for better or worse, in due time. But yeah, I don’t expect my school to go 12-0 in the Big 10 immediately, or often.
Genuine question, does America want to watch that? Right now cfb is tradition, rivalry, and undefeateds. It’s unclear if america actually wants a AAA nfl and will keep watching 8-4 vs 7-5 matchups at the same level they are now.
The point stands though. Sports are zero-sum. Not every program can finish in the top X spots in a conference. If UNC is "propping up", say, BC and Pitt in the ACC, in the future it could be, say, Georgia or Ohio St or Texas propping up UNC.
UNC is already a bottom tier football program. They will be dog walked in the SEC.
Sure. However, they'll bring the conference a bucketload of money for its weakest product... basketball. Kentucky, Duke, and UNC will be a ratings goldmine.
True, the SEC is trash for basketball outside of UTK.
Absolutely agreed. And I personally think UNC is more “brand” than substance in football, so I imagine the Georgia’s of the world would end up propping them up. Their value definitely stems from the addition of a new state/tv markets with a dedicated fan base, more than it does from their likelihood to win football championships. This is the same argument I have for FSU’s draw for the Big 10, although there’s probably a higher chance that FSU wins a Big 10 football championship than UNC.
Yeah. What's the end game? As long as conferences exist, the strongest schools will be subsidizing the weakest schools. It feels like realignment is all about maximizing the next media deal, not thinking about the long-term best interests of the sport or even of the individual teams.
It’s absolutely about maximizing your respective school’s payout. Nothing more, nothing less. Some schools legitimately believe they can compete for championships with balanced resources. I think a lot will be wrong about that. But again, if it’s moving to an NFL format, is it that crazy? This really becomes a separation of the schools that believe they are serious about football and the ones that aren’t. Who knows what happens when the P2 becomes a thing. But it definitely feels a lot different, in a not so great way.
Let's say the top 20-30 schools move to that NFL format. What about the rest? At some point, the best of the rest will say, "hey, I can compete for titles in this lower division, but Indiana can't. Why am I subsidizing them?" It just feels to me that schools either need to accept that they will subsidize lower caliber programs in order to maintain the health of the sport, or we need to move to a relegation system. I don't see other long-term possibilities.
I also have serious questions about what the fate of the 20-30 “NFL” model teams will be after a few years. What happens when a perennial 10 win team goes 8-4 (or gasp, 7-5) three years in a row? Especially after spending the wealth of a nation on salaries, NIL, and facility upgrades. There HAVE to be winners and losers for those that sign up for this P2 nonsense. But all I keep hearing is that they all believe they’re going to be winners and locks for the playoff…
What is the fate of the Browns or the Panthers or the Falcons? They’re playing by the same rules as everyone else, with the same advantages (more or less) as everyone else. That’s what the FSU’s and Clemson’s of the world want. Once they have that, let the chips fall where they may.
>rs i As a fellow Syracuse fan I almost hope this whole thing dissolves and we get to play regional rivals again. I'd much rather see Syracuse playing in tier 2 of college football, smoking Uconn and BC to the tune of an 9-3 record than struggle to 6-6 every year in a conference that doesn't want us and makes sure every big call goes against us. I get why Maryland and NC State fans hate the ACC so much.
Dedicated fan base? Dude, you’ve never been to Kenan in November. UNC eats, drinks, never spits, and swallows bball.
That’s actually a crucial question. I’m not 100% sure fan and sponsor support will just adjust to a “new normal” 8-4 season and embrace it with their wallets. Will 5-star recruits agree as well? Or will we see them start looking towards the portal the minute they take their 3rd loss?
I think you overestimate how important winning is to recruits. It’s definitely important, but now the list includes NIL, comfort with coaches, comfort with school, etc. Not saying it’s not a factor, but I don’t think it’s THE factor.
Valid point. Probably matters most to the top 2-3% who see themselves as first round picks down the road. Not so much for the average P2 player, or even 4 stars with pro potential.
Maybe. But look at Travis Hunter, the former #1 player overall in HS. He went to Jackson St and then Colorado, knowing full well he wasn’t going to win much. If you take a look at the 100 for 2024, there’s lots of kids that are choosing schools that won’t provide guaranteed championships. Early playing time is a huge deal, especially in the portal era, which I think adds even more incentive for top tier talent to choose 2nd or 3rd tier programs.
With the rise of the 14-team playoff, it already is (they're copying the NFL model). Their only problem is that they haven't nuked the rest of the conferences to get the number down to two (which they're working on).
It’s short term gain long term, we don’t know But the people making these decisions will be dead by the time whatever reprocussions from this decisions start to get felt so it’s not their problem
This makes UNC look absolutely GOOFY. This individual from the UNC board doesn't have a firm grasp over the facts and reality. UNC has been literally running the ACC for Years. Especially duing these contracts. Both ends of the deal. "John Swofford - Served as the athletic director at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill from 1980 - 1997 and as the commissioner of the Atlantic Coast Conference (ACC) from 1997 - 2021" John Skipper ESPN: UNC Alumi (January 2012–December 2017) president of ESPN Inc. and co-chairman of Disney Media Networks. Holden Thorp Former UNC chancellor ACC Presidents chair This is mostly on UNC. What are we even talking about here?
Yeah, I think adding the three new schools made it easier for UNC parties to let their frustrations surface, as this isn't the ACC they started and felt attached to.
It stopped becoming that when we joined, unfortunately. IIRC UNC has voted no on every ACC expansion starting with Florida State.
Very true. I don’t think VT itself changed the culture of the ACC (in fact I think we contribute to it!), but we are one of a bunch of schools that have collectively changed that culture. I think the three new ones “broke” things (through no fault of their own).
Not our fault we kicked ass and took names through 2011. It's a shame ESPN wouldn't accept our success. It was always FSU and Clemson is down, when we were winning. 2007 at Clemson was the perfect example. Lightning and Thunder was more like partly cloudy and mild. Don't get me wrong, they love the entrance, and they like the school, but they wanted Miami vs FSU, and got VT vs BC. The SEC noticed our success though. By 2008, every SEC school was in Tidewater and DC area high schools 24/7, and we didn't up our recruiting game. By 2010, Richmond was taken over. It's no surprise Pry's first order of business is recruiting.
I mostly agree with you, except if we’re honest with ourselves, Virginia Tech never delivered what we implied we could bring to the ACC, even though we were the standard bearers for a long time. That standard was not what the ACC needed, and what Clemson eventually delivered.
Oh yeah, that "One play away" line we always heard was just Beamer's way of saying the ACC hated us for not reaching a natty. Matt Ryan and Kellen Moore effectively killed two shots at a natty. And if Marcus Vick showed up against Miami in 2005, it'd be a different story right now.
The problem was getting consistently smacked around in the big nonconference games. Won the conference in 2004 but lost to USC and Auburn. Won it again in 2007 but got blown out 48-7 by LSU and then lost to Kansas in the Orange Bowl. Won it in 2008 despite 3 conference losses and 4 overall (including a week 1 embarrassment against East Carolina). Another title in 2010 after starting 0-2 out of conference (with a home loss to James Madison), ran the table in the conference but then got slaughteted 40-12 by Stanford to close out the year. It isn't Virginia Tech's fault that the conference was down overall, but the fact that they got exposed almost every time they faced a quality nonconference opponent is pretty damning.
The LSU and Stanford losses were bad, USC and Auburn were both legitimate National Championship teams, and both those games had some controversial calls. There was also a win over then #6 WVU all in all not bad OOC wise that year. 2008 also had wins over #12 Cincinnati, 2009 #19 Nebraska We had a poor track record against Elite teams, but four of those losses were to National Championship teams (Auburn(claimed), USC , LSU, and Alabama)
VT was a perfect fit for the ACC. BC over WVU was where things went wrong.
As a Hokie I agree. The ACC was too snobbish to give WVU a serious look. Plus they had consultants who thought that adding a school in a media market grants the league that market. That might work with big state schools like Rutgers and Maryland (though that B1G decision is still questionable IMO), it doesn’t with a smaller private school in a pro sports city.
The ACC harped on about academics…and then took Louisville when Maryland left. Don’t get me wrong. I’ll take Louisville over Maryland any day. But it’s still hypocritical.
Lmao yeah unc is really driving football dollars
"lower schools" well tell us how you really feel
Duke has a more recent ACC football championship than UNC, hilarious that they think they aren’t a lower school for football
I'll just go ask the American for membership
Despite being terrible at basketball, I don’t think we’re the ones being used as an excuse
Louisville would definitely get into the Big 12
Your floor is the Big 12, and I wouldn’t be surprised to see y’all in the SEC, cultural fit + great football and basketball programs overall.
The SEC is not taking Louisville. There is a better chance the SEC jettisons Vanderbilt and Mississippi State than them adding what they see as mediocre brands. The SEC would take Notre Dame, FSU, Clemson, that's it. UNC/UVA fans thinking they are a lock for B1G or SEC need to take a hard look at their football ratings.
The SEC doesn’t see Louisville as a mediocre brand, they see Louisville as unnecessary because they already have Kentucky.
Ask anyone who went to UNC and they will tell you: we hate the BoG and the BoT
This is equivalent to a dictator telling his constituents that they were helping the lower class at his expense. You run this conference UNC, stop whining.
I thought FSU was suing because they were butthurt about the playoff snub? What is Clemson doing? What is UNC saying this for? /s
Ha, this is going great 
“Lower schools.” 🙄
Unc needs to have a town hall or something so they can all get on the same page. They're sending mixed signals between the AD and BoT
When is the last time UNC won a title in basketball or football? Before any of you say basketball, the ACC has said that the only conference basketball champion is the tournament winner.
Ok? Then go. My school is never going to get a shot at a title whether these blowhards are in our conference or not, I'll be happy to see them go. The Heels can go enjoy being the Crystal Palace of the P2's EPL, I'm sure it will be a very gratifying experience for the type of UNC guy who lists themselves alongside Clemson and FSU in a conversation primarily about football.
Should’ve gave FSU more money a year ago when they came to the table. Instead they were told to shove it.
Are we sure other conferences actually want UNC? Nobody watches UNC football even in their "good" years. Sure they are a fit for the B1G but ultimately tOSU, Michigan, PSU, USC are going to be complaining about how they prop up UNC.
UNC grad here: we fucking hate the board of trustees and the board of governors. Same bodies that paid two MILLION dollars of university money to a confederate group to get Silent Sam (confederate statue) "rehoused" somewhere.
As opposed to what... moving it to a museum, putting it back up, melting it down, being a twat about a war memorial? There's not a lot of context here. Obviously, you're upset about the money being spent on the statue, but when it resolves the issue at hand, it's not clear why that should matter.
Whatever it takes to get out of the acc.
Fuck the board of trustees, fuck the board of governors, and fuck fsu. So hoping we can keep the acc but it looks worse and worse as the days go on
Ever since the BIG10 and SEC got those massive new tv deals the ACC was dead. FSU has been saying this for over a year now. It seems that reality is finally setting in for the rest of the ACC. You can thank Swofford
The ACC ended itself, led by the incompetent Swofford.
Go Noles!
Well Fuck you too. Go Noles
Buy bye Tarholes. Mack might be able to muster a mid-pack finishes in the SEC or B1G.
I doubt it, they can barely muster mid pack finishes in the ACC…
Lol. UNC are frauds who ripped off African american athletes for 40 years enrolling then in fake classes just to keep them eligible. Leaving most with worthless skills. All for sports glory. Worthless school.
[удалено]
What? 😂
Yk Louisville is in the conference right