Realignment talk not going away

[redswingline 1057]

12 minutes ago, Napoleon said:

This whole thing of parents having to be at every game is just bizarre to me. 

I had siblings who also played soccer growing up on Saturdays and both parents worked.

There is nothing bizarre about parents wanting to see their kids play.

There is also nothing bizarre about a kid that decides to play locally/ regionally so that he can be near his family.

Edited September 1, 2023 by redswingline

[Doc Sam Beckett 5793]

11 minutes ago, redswingline said:

That may be the case, but I think the fact that there are 20-21 NFL teams east of Missouri has a lot to do with that.

 

 

11 minutes ago, redswingline said:

That may be the case, but I think the fact that there are 20-21 NFL teams east of Missouri has a lot to do with that.

 

 

[ztejas 43464]

8 minutes ago, oSuJeff97 said:

My initial thought was just do your NIL thing and absolutely dominate the AAC for the next 7 years... win 10+ games every year and they will definitely be in play for the expanded CFP... then you've put yourself in position for the next round of Prestige Worldwide shit in like 10 years but they can probably do it using the route you described and they get the prestige of being in P4 much sooner.

The issue is that you are rolling the dice that the CFP committee doesn't say "yeah - all but these 4 conferences are dogshit so we're just gonna do 4 auto bids and 8 at large"

You can't assume that the current CFP format will stay the same. 

And - playing in a real conference should make every athletic program better. More transparency, better TV slots, better games on the schedule, more fan involvement and booster money because you're giving them something to be excited about vs. beating UAB 52-10 at home.

[DanTheHorn 4925]

Just now, oSuJeff97 said:

Yes I was.

Comparing the state of college football in 2023 to the 1980s is pretty ludicrous, IMO.

Donors at SMU took care of the Pony Express, now donors have told SMU join the ACC with no payout and we got you. SMU has been dying to be relevant again and now they have the means and conference to do so. They may not be able to get the recruits that BIG and SEC get but they could buy being a contender in the ACC for the yearly playoff automatic bid.  Please provide more detail as to how comparing desire and money spent in the 80's to win games is different from desire and money spent on NIL to win games in 2024. It was cheating then? So what everyone spent less. Now it is just more expensive? If your answer is the second it leads back to my original point, it will not be a problem.

https://www.smu.edu/AboutSMU/annual-report/2021-2022-principal-and-major-donors

[ButtFumble 5180]

https://www.thecentersquare.com/north_carolina/article_5d0fb188-3e25-11ea-bd19-a727caa23dd9.html

the above link is a bit dated of course, but it shows the private schools in addition to the public ones

https://sports.usatoday.com/ncaa/finances

this link shows the 2022 numbers

the above is from the USA Today showing where programs stand if you remove the academic side subsidy because IMO no one should be impressed that a school can spend a lot of tuition and student fee money on athletics and call it "revenue" all the more so well beyond student approved fees

when you look at those list the Big 12 is pretty cohesive as a conference and has programs that are pretty well in the middle of the P5 budget wise especially without subsidies.....in addition the Big 12 has very low subsidies and if you look at the USA Today links for each program the Big 12 has been moving to reduce academic side subsidies for a number of years.....da covid hurt those efforts, but I am sure they will get right back on track

the ACC has a lot of very high subsidy programs and if you go with the idea that their private schools that are at the mid to ower levels budget wise in the 2018 data have probably not found massive sources of new revenues then the Big 12 is pretty competitive and the Big 12 has really avoided the very bottom of the P5 budgets where the PAC 12 had a much greater number of teams and where some ACC private teams are

with the Big 12 BYU and Cincy should be able to reduce their subsidies a great deal and still have a good budget with an eventual full Big 12 share.....only UH (of course) will really be sucking ass with a reduced subsidy or sucking ass with a massively embarrassing subsidy (and no their alumni and donors are not going to step up that is all UH bullshit)

the Big 12 will be getting a slight bump with the new contract (probably $1 to $2 million per member) over the end of the current deal and it will scale up from there.....while the ACC will have the new money from StanCaMu to split up, but otherwise they are in the same deal as now for another 12 or so years

and if any of the top teams leave the ACC you have to wonder what ESPN will do with their contract

and the Big 12 will sign another new deal long before the ACC does

so the Big 12 is pretty competitive money wise with the ACC with the exception of Louisville, FSU, and Clemson, but on the bottom end the Big 12 looks a lot better IMO

in addition Cal is just a fucking financial disaster with an $18 million per year debt service coming up and debt that will last them for another 60 fucking years.....and they are not taking a lot less money than in the PAC 12....SMU will see a bump overall, but they will probably remain in the bottom of P5 budgets long term

[camel at sea 589]

The SMU recruiting pitch will be NIL + "you'll get to play against Notre Dame, Florida State, Miami, etc."  Some players/parents will get starry-eyed about the big name football opponents and kind of look past the less interesting games / road trips with Cal, Wake, BC, etc.  The Big 12 recruiting pitch will be NIL + "you'll play games close to home, practice in elite facilities, play most of your games against great local programs."  Some players/parents will prefer being more local, with games the family can attend, better school facilities, etc.  

Big 12 schools will have to be competitive with SMU on the NIL front.  Most of them will.  Some Big 12 schools will need to add marquee OOC games to equal out SMU's in-league marquee games sales pitch and they probably will.  SMU will probably need to significantly upgrade facilities, win a lot of games, and develop fan support.  I'd guess SMU upgrades facilities (though they are pretty far behind Big 12 schools in that arms race) and I bet SMU turns into a good but not elite program in the ACC. 

[animaltobacco11 107]

11 minutes ago, DanTheHorn said:

Donors at SMU took care of the Pony Express, now donors have told SMU join the ACC with no payout and we got you. SMU has been dying to be relevant again and now they have the means and conference to do so. They may not be able to get the recruits that BIG and SEC get but they could buy being a contender in the ACC for the yearly playoff automatic bid.  Please provide more detail as to how comparing desire and money spent in the 80's to win games is different from desire and money spent on NIL to win games in 2024. It was cheating then? So what everyone spent less. Now it is just more expensive? If your answer is the second it leads back to my original point, it will not be a problem.

https://www.smu.edu/AboutSMU/annual-report/2021-2022-principal-and-major-donors

Funny how it's all alum's with c/o dates and then a random PwC LLP $100k donation smack dab in the middle.

[DanTheHorn 4925]

6 minutes ago, animaltobacco11 said:

Funny how it's all alum's with c/o dates and then a random PwC LLP $100k donation smack dab in the middle.

The folks that seem to give the most to athletics seem to be the Armstrong's all I could find from 2019 was the following and I don't know if it is the same guy.

"Independent geologist Bill Armstrong and his small Denver exploration company may have found the third largest hydrocarbon field ever discovered in the US, on Alaska’s North Slope."

 

Edited September 1, 2023 by DanTheHorn

[ztejas 43464]

30 minutes ago, camel at sea said:

The SMU recruiting pitch will be NIL + "you'll get to play against Notre Dame, Florida State, Miami, etc."  Some players/parents will get starry-eyed about the big name football opponents and kind of look past the less interesting games / road trips with Cal, Wake, BC, etc.  The Big 12 recruiting pitch will be NIL + "you'll play games close to home, practice in elite facilities, play most of your games against great local programs."  Some players/parents will prefer being more local, with games the family can attend, better school facilities, etc.  

Big 12 schools will have to be competitive with SMU on the NIL front.  Most of them will.  Some Big 12 schools will need to add marquee OOC games to equal out SMU's in-league marquee games sales pitch and they probably will.  SMU will probably need to significantly upgrade facilities, win a lot of games, and develop fan support.  I'd guess SMU upgrades facilities (though they are pretty far behind Big 12 schools in that arms race) and I bet SMU turns into a good but not elite program in the ACC. 

https://dallasinnovates.com/smu-breaks-ground-on-100m-end-zone-complex-at-gerald-j-ford-stadium/

And we are already ahead of most B12 schools when it comes to NIL. They have catching up to do - not the other way around. 

[Ghost of LL 15531]

1 hour ago, redswingline said:

I don't have ill-will towards SMU. I'm just being pragmatic here.

-It is not like they were dominating the AAC. Even though the ACC may arguably be the shittiest 'power' conference, it's still a big step up. SMU isn't going to all of the sudden start out recruiting everyone in the state. Money may buy some guys but you still need a staff that is top notch and wants to actually stay there.

-Why would TX kids want to go play on the east coast? Do you think their parents would be on board with missing half their games?

-The fan support is meek at best.

-Who is to say the ACC actually makes it to 2036? What if it implodes in 4-5 years, or in say, 2030 when the buyout isn't nearly what it is right now?

Like I'm saying - it's a big risk without the high reward.

There's no risk here.  At all.  

SMU's goal was to be in a Top-4 conference.  It's now in a Top-4 conference.

What's the risk?  That the ACC may lose FSU, Clemson, and UNC in a decade?  I mean, ok.  But it also might not.  And regardless--the playoff and media landscape is going to be entirely different in ten years.  

This is an obvious decision for SMU.  The notion that they should stay in the AAC with the likes of North Texas and Memphis when they can get into the ACC is absurd in the extreme.

59 minutes ago, nnm said:

I feel like I’m in crazy land here. In what universe is SMU’s 9 years of no TV revenue, a junior high stadium that they can’t fill, and 30 years of futility, better than TCU coming off a NCG?

They're in a better conference.  They have more NIL support.  And they have vastly better alumni/donor support. 

On a purely forward-looking basis, that puts SMU in a better position.

That's not to say that SMU is going to be able to turn all that into a better program than TCU's.  But it is to say that it puts them in a place where they ought to be able to.

[WelfareBuysMyWeed 5388]

Some fucking death penalty if SMU is allowed to just waltz into a P5 conference after only 40 years of misery.

[redswingline 1057]

6 minutes ago, Ghost of LL said:

There's no risk here.  At all. 

What's the risk? 

Where's the risk? It's all over the place.

-Not getting paid for 9 years

-The likelihood that they  continue to suck + no TV revenue during that span

-Assuming the alumni will continue to fork over money after 4-5-6 years if they still suck

-Assuming that being in the ACC makes SMU better on the field

-Assuming the ACC doesn't implode much sooner than 2036

-Not putting your football team in a position to succeed. Remember - they suck. Forcing a below average program to play better competition isn't a recipe for success.

 

Let's look at northwestern in the Big 10. They suck. The fact that they have 2x more TV revenue now than what they had 10 years ago, did not change their course. They continue to suck.

How does that apply to SMU?  SMU is going to suck, without the TV money.

 

[Welshy 907]

On 8/30/2023 at 10:22 PM, Satchel said:

Well, let’s not get carried away here. The state of Oklahoma was not then and is not now a racial panacea (neither is Texas) it appears the OU coaches brought the rest of the state kicking and screaming to a level of racial tolerance that they learned to embrace, once the wins started piling up.

 

"Wait...wut? We could have just written a check?" -Rice

[nnm 36417]

18 hours ago, Ghost of LL said:

They're in a better conference.  They have more NIL support.  And they have vastly better alumni/donor support. 

When did I step into the LOL thread? Where has all that alumni, donor, and NIL support been for 30 years? TCUs alumni and donors stepped up when TCU was in crap conferences and built them to the point they literally played for a championship. In equivalent conferences, SMU donors and alumni did exactly nothing. 
And better conference is a matter of significant debate in 2024-25 form and significant doubt going forward. 
Go home SMU fans. You’re coked to the gills. 

Edited September 2, 2023 by nnm

[Welshy 907]

1 minute ago, nnm said:

When did I step into the LOL thread? Where has all that alumni, donor, and NIL support been for 30 years? TCUs alumni and donors stepped up when TCU was in crap conferences and built them to the point they literally played for a championship. On equivalent conferences, SMU donors and alumni did exactly nothing. 
And better conference is a matter of significant debate in 2024-25 form and significant doubt going forward. 
Go home SMU fans. You’re coked to the gills. 

No, no. Sleeping giant. 100 year decision. 

[Nueces River Rat 5539]

32 minutes ago, WelfareBuysMyWeed said:

Some fucking death penalty if SMU is allowed to just waltz into a P5 conference after only 40 years of misery.

But you know some of those old timers who are still alive as well former players of that era are looking at all the NIL stuff and saying holy shit it's now almost legal to do what we got shit canned for.   

[SimonBolivar 10958]

34 minutes ago, redswingline said:

 

 

Let's look at northwestern in the Big 10. They suck. The fact that they have 2x more TV revenue now than what they had 10 years ago, did not change their course. They continue to suck.

 

Northwestern isn't amazing and they're bad more often than not, but they have had SOME success on the football field. Imagine where their football program would be if they got MAC money instead of B1G money. They'd have even less support and success than they have today.

[4th&Five 41558]

11 minutes ago, nnm said:

When did I step into the LOL thread? Where has all that alumni, donor, and NIL support been for 30 years? TCUs alumni and donors stepped up when TCU was in crap conferences and built them to the point they literally played for a championship. On equivalent conferences, SMU donors and alumni did exactly nothing. 
And better conference is a matter of significant debate in 2024-25 form and significant doubt going forward. 
Go home SMU fans. You’re coked to the gills. 

And where’d TCU find the coaching staff to lead them to the NCG? Do they go there if SMU is heading to the ACC at the time?

[TrashMaster G 17558]

1 hour ago, animaltobacco11 said:

Funny how it's all alum's with c/o dates and then a random PwC LLP $100k donation smack dab in the middle.

*alums

Jfc.

[WelfareBuysMyWeed 5388]

2 minutes ago, TrashMaster G said:

*alums

Jfc.

Alumnodes

[Ghost of LL 15531]

40 minutes ago, redswingline said:

Where's the risk? It's all over the place.

-Not getting paid for 9 years

-The likelihood that they  continue to suck + no TV revenue during that span

-Assuming the alumni will continue to fork over money after 4-5-6 years if they still suck

-Assuming that being in the ACC makes SMU better on the field

-Assuming the ACC doesn't implode much sooner than 2036

-Not putting your football team in a position to succeed. Remember - they suck. Forcing a below average program to play better competition isn't a recipe for success.

 

Let's look at northwestern in the Big 10. They suck. The fact that they have 2x more TV revenue now than what they had 10 years ago, did not change their course. They continue to suck.

How does that apply to SMU?  SMU is going to suck, without the TV money.

 

I distinctly feel like you don't understand the concept of "risk."

It's not certain that SMU is going to be a great program in the ACC.  But what is the alternative?  Staying in the AAC?

SMU may not be a great program in the ACC.  But it will definitely never be a great program in the AAC.

SMU will make more money in the ACC--the math was done for you some pages ago--even without T1 television money.  So even if they continue to "suck" (though I would dispute that characterization), it comes at no monetary or reputational cost.

There's genuinely no risk based on the place from which SMU starts.

14 minutes ago, nnm said:

When did I step into the LOL thread? Where has all that alumni, donor, and NIL support been for 30 years? TCUs alumni and donors stepped up when TCU was in crap conferences and built them to the point they literally played for a championship. On equivalent conferences, SMU donors and alumni did exactly nothing. 
And better conference is a matter of significant debate in 2024-25 form and significant doubt going forward. 
Go home SMU fans. You’re coked to the gills. 

SMU and TCU have never been in "equivalent conferences."  And NIL support hasn't existed for 30 years because . . . and I think this is kinda important . . . NIL hasn't been a thing for thirty years.

Look at the world over the past two years since NIL has been a thing.  SMU has done very well in the transfer portal.  And that's with them getting kneecapped when their coach left for TCU.  But as queried above--would that happen today now that SMU is in the ACC?

[WelfareBuysMyWeed 5388]

6 minutes ago, Ghost of LL said:

SMU and TCU have never been in "equivalent conferences."

 

[Welshy 907]

5 minutes ago, WelfareBuysMyWeed said:

 

[WelfareBuysMyWeed 5388]

2 minutes ago, Welshy said:

Their entire point was that SMU wasn't throwing their booster money around when they roamed the wilderness like TCU did. The retort was that they were never in similar conferences where said money being spent could be justified. When SMU was in the SWC, the infamously threw their money around, to the point where it killed the fucking conference.

Edited September 1, 2023 by WelfareBuysMyWeed

[WelfareBuysMyWeed 5388]

18 minutes ago, Ghost of LL said:

would that happen today now that SMU is in the ACC?

Yes, because SMU isn't making a damn dime in the ACC. Cougar High is a perfect example of a wimpy school trying to bridge the gap with booster money, and they couldn't do it. The difference between P5 conference money and what your boosters can bring in every year is enormous and insurmountable for small programs. SMU is now a G5 school cosplaying as P5. They're gonna get their shit smacked so fucking hard.

[Alot 80]

33 minutes ago, Nueces River Rat said:

But you know some of those old timers who are still alive as well former players of that era are looking at all the NIL stuff and saying holy shit it's now almost legal to do what we got shit canned for.   

I know one of each, old timer and former player. This is exactly what they are saying. Their money is now back in play. Much how many of us at Texas are feeling.  We can finally fully leverage our financial advantage.

[ztejas 43464]

18 minutes ago, WelfareBuysMyWeed said:

Yes, because SMU isn't making a damn dime in the ACC. Cougar High is a perfect example of a wimpy school trying to bridge the gap with booster money, and they couldn't do it. The difference between P5 conference money and what your boosters can bring in every year is enormous and insurmountable for small programs. SMU is now a G5 school cosplaying as P5. They're gonna get their shit smacked so fucking hard.

Wait... you think UH has comparable booster money to SMU? Have you ever been on SMU's campus?

The lack of TV money isn't ideal but if there are any schools that can make up for it elsewhere then SMU is one of them. We had a donor drop $50 million by himself 18 months ago for a facilities upgrade. And we have much bigger donors than him. 

[nnm 36417]

The notion that SMU money is vast and untapped (and exponentially more than TCU) is laughable. If these daddy warbucks guys had wanted to fund a resurgent program, they could have at any time. They haven’t. They don’t care. There’s not a big war chest just waiting to be unleashed on the world. It’s an apathetic (at best) alumni base. 

As a proxy for the money that the alumni are willing to throw to their school, look at their endowments. TCU’s endowment is 2.1B.  SMU’s is 1.9B. (UT System is 31B).  If SMU alumni were exponentially more wealthy than TCU, don’t you think those would look different? SMU has shown no ability to get athletic funding. TCU has.
 

SMU has about 100 fans that care, total. Apparently two or three of them are in this thread. 
This isn’t 1983. Dickerson isn’t driving through that door in his Trans-Am. 

Go home SMU fan.  You’re coked to the gills. 

[statsman 5471]

This year, Phil Steele has SMU rated as the 49th best in the nation, better than these B12 teams: 50. OSU, 54. WVU, 57. BYU, 68. UH, 71. Cincy. (Also ahead of incoming ASU, UA and CU). 

[WelfareBuysMyWeed 5388]

9 minutes ago, ztejas said:

Wait... you think UH has comparable booster money to SMU? Have you ever been on SMU's campus?

The lack of TV money isn't ideal but if there are any schools that can make up for it elsewhere then SMU is one of them. We had a donor drop $50 million by himself 18 months ago for a facilities upgrade. And we have much bigger donors than him. 

I'm saying boosters won't throw money into an infinite void. If boosters had enough money to make SMU into a juggernaut, they'd have been independent, not begging for a geological laughing spot in a precarious conference.

[ztejas 43464]

9 minutes ago, nnm said:

The notion that SMU money is vast and untapped (and exponentially more than TCU) is laughable. If these daddy warbucks guys had wanted to fund a resurgent program, they could have at any time. They haven’t. They don’t care. There’s not a big war chest just waiting to be unleashed on the world. It’s an apathetic (at best) alumni base. 

As a proxy for the money that the alumni are willing to throw to their school, look at their endowments. TCU’s endowment is 2.1B.  SMU’s is 1.9B. (UT System is 31B).  If SMU alumni were exponentially more wealthy than TCU, don’t you think those would look different? SMU has shown no ability to get athletic funding. TCU has.
 

SMU has about 100 fans that care, total. Apparently two or three of them are in this thread. 
This isn’t 1983. Dickerson isn’t driving through that door in his Trans-Am. 

First - pretty sure you're a TCU fan so I'm not going to get overly dragged into this - I know it's been a hard day for y'all. 

Second - SMU alums and students didn't* care for awhile. That has started to turn around the past 5 years to where, yes, we are starting to see fairly exorbitant gifts to the athletic program come in. Whatever the exit fee was for leaving the AAC and whatever the lost revenue will be from forfeiting TV money in the ACC has apparently already been picked up by donors. 

SMU didn't give a shit for awhile. NIL started to change that - returning to a power conference will get even more alums on board. We'll see how it turns out. We had a decent program and fan support pre-death penalty. 

[ztejas 43464]

7 minutes ago, WelfareBuysMyWeed said:

I'm saying boosters won't throw money into an infinite void. If boosters had enough money to make SMU into a juggernaut, they'd have been independent, not begging for a geological laughing spot in a precarious conference.

They already are. I'm not sure why some of you are treating this as a hypothetical. SMU just bought its way into a P4 conference and has the bag game rolling again. 

SMU not dumping money into athletics 15 years ago has nothing to do with the dump trucks that have been backed up lately.

You think TCU making the CFP didn't light a fire under some of these mega millionaire/billionaires asses? 

[mdmost 43004]

I can't wait for this year's Iron Skillet but man this is so laughably bad and aggy like.

 

[DanTheHorn 4925]

13 minutes ago, mdmost said:

I can't wait for this year's Iron Skillet but man this is so laughably bad and aggy like.

 

Well right now and until Clemson, Florida State, Miami and UNC leave the conference and Notre Dame stops scheduling 5 games it will be a true statement by a mile.

Edited September 1, 2023 by DanTheHorn

[ztejas 43464]

21 minutes ago, mdmost said:

I can't wait for this year's Iron Skillet but man this is so laughably bad and aggy like.

 

I think you underestimate how petty this rivalry has gotten. Keep in mind they just canceled the series after next season. After hiring our HC. After backing out of the game in 2020. After losing in FW in 2019. Which they did again in 2021. 

There's a lot of bad blood and dick-measuring going on right now on top of a perpetual recruiting battle.

I mean yes - it's a corny-ass statement but tempers are running high. 

Edited September 1, 2023 by ztejas

[Hurtlocker 2212]

I really don't give a fuck about SMU, but why wouldn't you do it.   You only get paid $7m a year now, let's say you have a $20m buyout.   So, for just shy of $100m you get to build excitement and place yourself in the upper two tiers of the haves for exposure and money going forward.    Kind of a no brainer.

What I can't get is why the ACC would do it.  I can't imagine this makes FSU/Clemson/UNC want to stick around longer and the optics of them not wanting it and ND wanting it is going to sting

Edited September 1, 2023 by Hurtlocker

[Steel Shank 9426]

20 minutes ago, ztejas said:

I think you underestimate how petty this rivalry has gotten. Keep in mind they just canceled the series after next season. After hiring our HC. After backing out of the game in 2020. After losing in FW in 2019. Which they did again in 2021. 

There's a lot of bad blood and dick-measuring going on right now on top of a perpetual recruiting battle.

I mean yes - it's a corny-ass statement but tempers are running high. 

If your women are running a little hot, let me know and I'll make a run up there and "address" things.

You know, for old time sakes.

[statsman 5471]

It’s a very simple plan. SMU already has NIL to cover everyone on the roster, $36k per year. (Texas is at $100k, and TT is at $25k). That helped, but they heard from recruits that they wanted to be in a major conference. Now, they are. 
 
Now, will better pay be enough to overcome the “prestige” of the B12? I don’t know. I know recruits are excited about games in Ames, Waco, Stillwater, Lubbock. I don’t know if they will accept Atlanta, the Bay Area, and Tobacco Road instead. Maybe SMU can sell them anyway. 

[statsman 5471]

12 minutes ago, Hurtlocker said:

I really don't give a fuck about SMU, but why wouldn't you do it.   You only get paid $7m a year now, let's say you have a $20m buyout.   So, for just shy of $100m you get to build excitement and place yourself in the upper two tiers of the haves for exposure and money going forward.    Kind of a no brainer.

What I can't get is why the ACC would do it.  I can't imagine this makes FSU/Clemson/UNC want to stick around longer and the optics of them not wanting it and ND wanting it is going to sting

Texas recruits. The same thing TCU, TT and UH use to pump themselves to conferences. 

[John80 157]

Before this expansion I'm sure the ACC knew that FSU, Clemson and UNC will be leaving as soon as they can and there aren't any good options. What kind of money will the ACC get without those schools?

[bullet 1597]

4 hours ago, Doc Sam Beckett said:

Why wouldn't that alone put them above the Big 12? Which conference do you think will win a national championship first, or have better success in the playoffs? And I think you're under selling the give a shit with the rest of the conference. Hell, I'd bet Miami wins a national championship before anyone in the Big 12 after Texas/OU leave. 

The ACC has pretty consistently been well behind the Big 12 in average strength in both football and basketball for a number of years.  The additions probably balance OU and UT in basketball in the short run as both of us have been down.  So basketball stays the same.  The Big 12 will drop in football strength, but its not clear it will drop below the ACC.   While Clemson has been great, despite UT's struggles, we do have a better record than the Seminoles, Canes  and Hokies over the last 6 years.

[ztejas 43464]

24 minutes ago, Steel Shank said:

If your women are running a little hot, let me know and I'll make a run up there and "address" things.

You know, for old time sakes.

Tell them you're from the ACC committee on student life and you want to make sure they're "ACC material".

[cochamps 1879]

34 minutes ago, Hurtlocker said:

I really don't give a fuck about SMU, but why wouldn't you do it.   You only get paid $7m a year now, let's say you have a $20m buyout.   So, for just shy of $100m you get to build excitement and place yourself in the upper two tiers of the haves for exposure and money going forward.    Kind of a no brainer.

What I can't get is why the ACC would do it.  I can't imagine this makes FSU/Clemson/UNC want to stick around longer and the optics of them not wanting it and ND wanting it is going to sting

ACC schools get to keep SMU's money plus the discounts given by the Bay Area Bombers.

[ztejas 43464]

14 minutes ago, bullet said:

The ACC has pretty consistently been well behind the Big 12 in average strength in both football and basketball for a number of years.  The additions probably balance OU and UT in basketball in the short run as both of us have been down.  So basketball stays the same.  The Big 12 will drop in football strength, but its not clear it will drop below the ACC.   While Clemson has been great, despite UT's struggles, we do have a better record than the Seminoles, Canes  and Hokies over the last 6 years.

I agree. They should be around the same in both sports. 

Edited September 2, 2023 by ztejas

[bullet 1597]

1 hour ago, nnm said:

The notion that SMU money is vast and untapped (and exponentially more than TCU) is laughable. If these daddy warbucks guys had wanted to fund a resurgent program, they could have at any time. They haven’t. They don’t care. There’s not a big war chest just waiting to be unleashed on the world. It’s an apathetic (at best) alumni base. 

As a proxy for the money that the alumni are willing to throw to their school, look at their endowments. TCU’s endowment is 2.1B.  SMU’s is 1.9B. (UT System is 31B).  If SMU alumni were exponentially more wealthy than TCU, don’t you think those would look different? SMU has shown no ability to get athletic funding. TCU has.
 

SMU has about 100 fans that care, total. Apparently two or three of them are in this thread. 
This isn’t 1983. Dickerson isn’t driving through that door in his Trans-Am. 

Go home SMU fan.  You’re coked to the gills. 

For at least the last 5 years, SMU has been spending more than any G5 program but UConn and sometimes BYU.  In 2019-20 they were #68 just behind WSU and ahead of Houston and $7.5 million ahead of #70 Memphis.

Hasn't translated into great success, but they have been spending.

[ztejas 43464]

19 minutes ago, bullet said:

For at least the last 5 years, SMU has been spending more than any G5 program but UConn and sometimes BYU.  In 2019-20 they were #68 just behind WSU and ahead of Houston and $7.5 million ahead of #70 Memphis.

Hasn't translated into great success, but they have been spending.

I would assume you're referencing year over year AD spending. I would assume it doesn't include NIL or program gifts - which is where SMU will catch the teams above it. 

Also - not trying to dominate the thread - just feel like barely anyone here is plugged into some of the SMU behind the scenes stuff and I'd like to correct the record where I can. 

Also I'm jacked to the tits.

Edited September 2, 2023 by ztejas

[Doc Sam Beckett 5793]

48 minutes ago, bullet said:

The ACC has pretty consistently been well behind the Big 12 in average strength in both football and basketball for a number of years.  The additions probably balance OU and UT in basketball in the short run as both of us have been down.  So basketball stays the same.  The Big 12 will drop in football strength, but its not clear it will drop below the ACC.   While Clemson has been great, despite UT's struggles, we do have a better record than the Seminoles, Canes  and Hokies over the last 6 years.

Lol I know you hate the ACC, but what a load of shit. Average strength? 

College basketball championships:

Big 12: 2022, 2021, 2008

ACC: 2019, 2017, 2015, 2010, 2009 etc etc

College football championships:

Big 12: 2005, 2000 (UT, OU) both leaving 

ACC: 2018, 2016, 2013, 2001, 1999...

 

You can hang your hat on "average strength," which I'm not sure I even agree with, but who gives a shit if KSU beats Pitt in week 3. One thing nobody is talking about is whether the Big 12 can even maintain decent  recruiting without bellcows Texas and Oklahoma. I don't think we're going to see any Big 12 teams in the top 15 of recruiting rankings anytime soon moving forward. I also don't see any team in the new Big 12 that's going to win a national championship in football any time soon. I do see that in the ACC. As far as basketball, I'd call it a wash at best. 

[redswingline 1057]

3 hours ago, Ghost of LL said:

 

even if they continue to "suck" (though I would dispute that characterization)

 

 

They have not won a conference title since 1984 and their best finish in the last 10 years was 3rd place in their division. Plus, you know, the litany of shitty seasons between then (1984) and now.  The program sucks.

 

Edited September 2, 2023 by redswingline

[ButtFumble 5180]

this is a great move for SMU no matter what.....the money in the ACC is probably the same or perhaps a bit better.....they will sell a ton more tickets for a lot more money at least at first......it will fire up their donors too

but as a comparison to TCU......TCU did not "just hire the SMU coach to go to a championship" TCU in the 17 seasons prior to last year was ranked 10 times, 6 were in the top 10 and one was #9/#11 so an average of #10......one of them was #2 and one was #3......and again that is exclusive of the #2 last year so it is not like TCU "finally found their coach"

TCU has 100% of their facilities built out especially football, basketball, and baseball.....SMU has basketball built out, no baseball and no room for a baseball stajium, and football needs a lot of work at this point

the TCU endowment is $2,400,814,000 and SMU is $1,958,460,000

https://www.nacubo.org/-/media/Nacubo/Documents/research/2022-NTSE-Public-Tables--Endowment-Market-Values--FINAL.ashx?la=en&hash=362DC3F9BDEB1DF0C22B05D544AD24D1C44E318D

both are in the middle of capital campaigns with a $1.5 billion goal for SMU and $1 billion for TCU....in the last few SMU tends to set the goal and get just past it while TCU tends to set the goal and go well past it for both of them to end with similar dollars (says something about the overall style differences of TCU vs SMU)

I would say that TCU has more of their overall campus built out while SMU still has some major building projects they are doing (somehow) and that is probably related to SMU being even more squeezed for space than TCU

SMU has the law school and a school of engineering while TCU has their new medical school (that needs to be built out) and their engineering is still only a department.....SMU is about $49 million in research with TCU $15.3.......both are putting a lot more emphasis on that

I would say that overall TCU has spent their money better and they are in a better position, but SMU is making some noise......but TCU has plenty left to pull from and TCU has shown the ability to do that and to deploy those resources more effectively IMO 

[ButtFumble 5180]

22 minutes ago, Doc Sam Beckett said:

Lol I know you hate the ACC, but what a load of shit. Average strength? 

College basketball championships:

Big 12: 2022, 2021, 2008

ACC: 2019, 2017, 2015, 2010, 2009 etc etc

College football championships:

Big 12: 2005, 2000 (UT, OU) both leaving 

ACC: 2018, 2016, 2013, 2001, 1999...

 

You can hang your hat on "average strength," which I'm not sure I even agree with, but who gives a shit if KSU beats Pitt in week 3. One thing nobody is talking about is whether the Big 12 can even maintain decent  recruiting without bellcows Texas and Oklahoma. I don't think we're going to see any Big 12 teams in the top 15 of recruiting rankings anytime soon moving forward. I also don't see any team in the new Big 12 that's going to win a national championship in football any time soon. I do see that in the ACC. As far as basketball, I'd call it a wash at best. 

lets be honest this is a bit like jumbo fisher talking shit about TCU getting beat badly by UGA after beating Michigan and playing in the NC and ending the season ranked #2 with a head coach in his first year there (that took over a program with a ton or resources) while jumbo is one of the highest paid coaches in the game, has unlimited resources, and is in the SEC SEC SEC.....and shit the bed and missed a bowl game and lost to App State at home in his 5th season after taking over a program that was hardly on life support and after having the highest priced freshman class in the history of evAR

you can't talk about the conference you are in while only concentrating on the best programs and ignoring the rest and you also can't talk about a conference you are in without paying attention to your own program (unless you are 85% of the Big 10 and aggy)

and if Texas was not shitting the bed in the Big 12 and OU was not "big gaming it" perhaps the Big 12 would be a bit better in those stats.....it was the big boys in the Big 12 that let the Big 12 down if you want to look at what Clemson did for the ACC

and with basketball it was mostly historically strong programs winning those NCs while in the Big 12 you have Baylor getting one and you also have Tech about 10 seconds and an unfortunate touch of an out of bounds ball from winning one

Edited September 2, 2023 by ButtFumble