Stanskey said in May that not only was the SEC into expanding their footprint, they also wanted to restore or maintain matchups. Those were his words. It was in an interview.
Report: Clemson and FSU may be stuck
- Thread starter 18IsTheMan
- Start date
Both cowherd and Joel klatt. But I’m sure you will consider them not reputable. There are several who have stated they are not going to stay in the ACC and will land in the SEC or BIG
Just about every talking head disagrees with you. Clemson and FSU is a top 20 if not a top 15 brand in college football. Just do a simple search. Clemson has been in the top 10 most watched for a while now. You don’t think that plays in to it you’re delusional. Take off the garnet glasses and look at them objectively for a second.
Even last year when they weren’t in a playoff hunt they were ranked 10th at an average of 2.57M views a year. Go back to 2013 prior to the playoff runs and they are still 17th. But you’re right they are not a national brand. Smdh
***** I’m sure I’ll be called a Clemson fan but I’ll give credit where credit is due. Hate them all you want but dablow greatly increased that brand at an important time . Hate to say it.
Last edited:
Well, they are wrong about the B1G....especially with respect to Clemson. They are looking simply (and myopically) at the athletic side. I know nothing about what the SEC wants to do....except was has been reported which is all over the place.
I don’t know much about Klatt, but cowherd is a blowhard that I don’t ouch stock. I’ll stick with they guys I referenced. There’s a difference in being watched and being a brand. They were a laughing stock nationally before 2015, even while winning 10/11 games. The were constantly disrespected in the national media. I’m sure you remember Clemsoning. They have benefitted from being one of the top 2 programs in a very weak football conference.
I know they’ve been a top program for the last 10 years or so. But they certainly don’t carry a national following. Not sure why that’s so appalling to you?
Post a link. Not trying to be a jerk, but I don’t see anything where he’s stated the SEC is “into” expanding. He’s said the exact opposite all year. But even if that’s true, expanding the footprint
Greg Sankey reinforces that SEC in no rush to expand beyond 16, focused on present
SEC Commissioner Greg Sankey says the conference is in no rush to move past 16 teams and will just be looking ahead to the future.
Greg Sankey not rushing to expand SEC again beyond 16 teams
The SEC seems to be sitting tight at 16 teams starting in 2024, at least for now.
lsutigerswire.usatoday.com
SEC Commissioner Greg Sankey says expanding beyond 16 teams 'isn't an active thought process'
The SEC's stance on expansion is firm.
247sports.com
Bear Bryant said it. Bama was in the absolute doldrums when he took the job. But it was "home" and he had already gotten Texas A&M in trouble in order to with the Southwest Conference championship. So, he came back "home" rather than going someplace else because "it's always easier at a place where they have won before". Places like that are always trolling for the right man, a man who can get all the pieces together. Sometimes it takes awhile to find him.
Too early to tell. He's likeable, sure enough.Yep. I think we got our guy too!
so in 2015 they were a laughing stock all while still being ranked in the top 20 most watched teams got it. You realize how stupid that sounds. This all boils down to eyes on screens. There’s no denying that Clemson is in the top 20 consistently. You can choice to ignore it all you want but it doesn’t change the facts.
Last edited:
Have law school classmates who are in the academic administration of 2 B1G schools. They both vehemently dismiss the Clemson rumors....both stating the B1G will not take any step that will diminish its academic reputation. A small school like Miami pulls in over 4 times the research money that Clemson does.....that may be where you want to look for a possible addition to the B1G.
HaHa. You don't know the B1G well at all. The tail does not wag the dog in that conference. The TV money is not near big enough to overcome the research money that the conference controls. Call them academic snobs if you want, but they've earned it.
They were crappier before 2015. My point is they never fall out of the top 20 most watched teams from year to year. That’s my point people watch them. That’s all.
Clemson gets more eyes on screen than us for one simple reason: ABC. Them being far and away the best team in the ACC means they get to be in the 8PM slot on ABC almost every week. You could put Citadel in that slot and the ratings would blow out a noon ESPN game. Clemson isn't a national brand, hell most people still have no idea what state they're in. But they play at 8PM on ABC so they get eyes. Millions more households have ABC than have ESPN.
All that will be out the window if the B1G starts plucking teams from down here - you mark my words. And in that case, the timing of what he'll have to do won't be up to him, either. He'll be caught in the thundering currents of the ultimate round of meaningful expansion and he will have to go along. Y'all need to understand something: that while the SEC shocked the world by adding Texas and Oklahoma, the SEC is no longer in control of what happens going forward. The B1G has seized the joystick.Post a link. Not trying to be a jerk, but I don’t see anything where he’s stated the SEC is “into” expanding. He’s said the exact opposite all year. But even if that’s true, expanding the footprint
Greg Sankey reinforces that SEC in no rush to expand beyond 16, focused on present
SEC Commissioner Greg Sankey says the conference is in no rush to move past 16 teams and will just be looking ahead to the future.www.on3.com
Greg Sankey not rushing to expand SEC again beyond 16 teams
The SEC seems to be sitting tight at 16 teams starting in 2024, at least for now.
SEC Commissioner Greg Sankey says expanding beyond 16 teams 'isn't an active thought process'
The SEC's stance on expansion is firm.
I don’t disagree. There won’t be any more meaningful expansion until B1G/SEC are comfortable blowing up the ACC, if that happens. I just believe that’s not going to be a possibility until 2030. Sankey has proven to have great instincts on several big decisions, so I’ll trust his leadership. B1G has always had the joystick.
They did get that slot 3 times last year. Not sure if that qualifies as almost every week, it was 3 consecutive weeks. Of course, then it's a chicken/egg debate. Are they getting good slots because people want to see them, or are people seeing them because they get good slots?
As for them being a national brand, I sense a lot of rivalry feelings getting mixed up in that. So I just googled the question to look for opinions outside of SC. They seem to be generally considered a top national brand.
2022 College Football Brand rankings released
College Sports website Official Visit releases top 40 college football programs according to their brand ranking survey
I noticed Clemson was 5th on more than one of those, so I wonder if they got it from the same source.
Regardless, it seems the people arguing that Clemson is not a national brand are arguing because they don't WANT them to be.
The hatred has clouded any sense of objectivity.
They did get that slot 3 times last year. Not sure if that qualifies as almost every week, it was 3 consecutive weeks. Of course, then it's a chicken/egg debate. Are they getting good slots because people want to see them, or are people seeing them because they get good slots?
As for them being a national brand, I sense a lot of rivalry feelings getting mixed up in that. So I just googled the question to look for opinions outside of SC. They seem to be generally considered a top national brand.
2022 College Football Brand rankings released
College Sports website Official Visit releases top 40 college football programs according to their brand ranking survey
I noticed Clemson was 5th on more than one of those, so I wonder if they got it from the same source.
Regardless, it seems the people arguing that Clemson is not a national brand are arguing because they don't WANT them to be.
The first 2 links were a survey of 1,000 HS football players. So I'll pass on that one as a legit valuation.
The other put a little more into it, and had Clemsux at 12. He had us at 21. He used attendance as a metric. ESPN couldn't give 2 craps about attendance when valuing for a national TV contract. I'm not saying they're not valuable. I'm not saying they're not currently an elite football program, obviously they are. What I am saying is they're not a national brand. They get viewers b/c they've been ranked in the top 10. Every week I look at the CFB schedule to see what top 10 teams are playing, and that's what I plan on watching outside of USC. I don't care who it is. That's what I'm watching....or if there is an intriguing SEC matchup that is relevant to USC.
I guarantee you ESPN has a team of analyst and actuaries that are pouring over the weekly ratings and adjusting for relevancy. Yes, Clem/Wake was very highly viewed. Was that b/c people love watching Clem, or was it b/c it looked like there was about to be a massive upset that went to 2OT that people wanted to witness? Same for our game against UT last year. It got ratings b/c it was out of control and folks tuned in to see what was going on. What they want to see is, when Clemson plays Louisville and it's a 34-17 game, does anyone watch. The answer is no. Or at least not enough to add to a small market you already have distribution in.
No, it's common sense. You can be an elite football program right now, and not be a national brand. If they were that valuable of a national brand they'd be in the SEC by now.
They are our main rival. Sometimes it's hard to set that aside, hence why I went looking for opinions outside the state. There are many, and they have a general consensus.
Yep and if the B1G gets UNC and UVA they will be invincible and the ACC will be gutted.
Lurker provided 4 sources that stated Clemson was a national brand, so regardless what our fans WANT to think, or want to dismiss the source(s) they are considered a national brand.
As to your last sentence, Are you suggesting that a school has to be in the SEC to be considered a national brand ?
I would never attach myself with the word never, never is a very long time
I don’t know if the market argument against it is that big of a deal. The SEC has two teams in Alabama, two teams in Tennessee, two teams in Mississippi and will have two teams in Texas. Two teams in Florida and two teams in South Carolina won’t be a big deal.
They did get that slot 3 times last year. Not sure if that qualifies as almost every week, it was 3 consecutive weeks. Of course, then it's a chicken/egg debate. Are they getting good slots because people want to see them, or are people seeing them because they get good slots?
As for them being a national brand, I sense a lot of rivalry feelings getting mixed up in that. So I just googled the question to look for opinions outside of SC. They seem to be generally considered a top national brand.
2022 College Football Brand rankings released
College Sports website Official Visit releases top 40 college football programs according to their brand ranking survey
I noticed Clemson was 5th on more than one of those, so I wonder if they got it from the same source.
Regardless, it seems the people arguing that Clemson is not a national brand are arguing because they don't WANT them to be.
BINGO, scream it louder for all those that don’t understand.
Reaching national brand status is one thing, but staying there is much more difficult.
It's very easy to lose that luster! There one year and a couple of years later - gone!
Miami
Nebraska
Texas
Gamecock Baseball
Bud Light
didn't take years
It's very easy to lose that luster! There one year and a couple of years later - gone!
Miami
Nebraska
Texas
Gamecock Baseball
Bud Light
didn't take years2019- Clemson beat the crap out of Louisville. They were ranked #2 and Louisville was unranked. 2.7 million people watched that game.
2018- they beat them by 60 points and 1.77M people still watched.
So your theory sir just doesn’t hold water.
Just so you have an idea of how 2.7m ranks week to week. On average that would put it in the top 7 games watched any given week.
Note I have every year for the last 6 years. I picked one of the lowest viewership years.
They can penetrate the Southern tier but the SEC cannot reciprocate. The only thing up there worth having is Notre Dame and they ain't coming to the SEC.
Especially in as foolish a position as that.
We’ll, if 1,000 high school kids think Clem is a top 5 brand then I guess that settles it!!
TV wasn’t a thing when the SEC was created. TX is an actual top national brand. You take them if you’ve already got 3 teams in TX.
We get that you don’t see the forest for the trees due to blind loyalty. You’re the only one in here and in the media that doesn’t consider Clemson a national brand.