Sankey indirectly says there is no interest in adding FSU

[18IsTheMan]

The comments were made in what was presented as a hypothetical scenario that FSU approached the league about joining, so his comments were, by extension, hypothetical. He said "Well, we really had this great session where I talked about, really focused on our 16, and our presidents have said very clearly: We’re not going to be to be entangled in legal issues around any consideration of expansion. So, it’s not a conversation. And we’re not going to take our pie and slice it into more pieces."

SEC commissioner Greg Sankey: We have no interest in adding Florida State

"We’re not going to take our pie and slice it into more pieces," SEC commissioner Greg Sankey said when asked about Florida State.

www.tallahassee.com

I still think FSU and Clemson end up in the SEC somehow, but it is a valid point that you have to ask if they increase value enough to actually increase per/school payout after dividing the pie up into that many more pieces. I'm not sure they do, and it doesn't sound like he thinks they do either. If adding the schools results in decreased per/school payouts, then why do it?

 

[Harvard Gamecock]

The comments were made in what was presented as a hypothetical scenario that FSU approached the league about joining, so his comments were, by extension, hypothetical. He said "Well, we really had this great session where I talked about, really focused on our 16, and our presidents have said very clearly: We’re not going to be to be entangled in legal issues around any consideration of expansion. So, it’s not a conversation. And we’re not going to take our pie and slice it into more pieces."

SEC commissioner Greg Sankey: We have no interest in adding Florida State

"We’re not going to take our pie and slice it into more pieces," SEC commissioner Greg Sankey said when asked about Florida State.

www.tallahassee.com

I still think FSU and Clemson end up in the SEC, but it is a valid point that you have to ask if they increase value enough to actually increase per/school payout after dividing the pie up into that many more pieces. I'm not sure they do, and it doesn't sound like he thinks they do either. If adding the schools results in decreased per/school payouts, then why do it?

And there is the telling remark. Legal Issues.
Just wait till all of that is settled, and then let's see how adamant he is about not expanding.

 

[atl-cock]

Like VPI and the ACC, F$U had their nose against the SEC's glass window for a few decades before joining the ACC in 1990.

 

[18IsTheMan]

And there is the telling remark. Legal Issues.
Just wait till all of that is settled, and then let's see how adamant he is about not expanding.

Do you think FSU and Clemson add enough value to increase or at least maintain per/school payout? If they don't, is there an advantage to adding teams from areas where you already have teams?

 

[PrestonyteParrot]

Do you think FSU and Clemson add enough value to increase or at least maintain per/school payout? If they don't, is there an advantage to adding teams from areas where you already have teams?

They would have to add a minimum of the value of a current share each, about $52M, but probably considerably more.
No, adding teams from your area doesn't provide an advantage but there is the angle of playing ''prevent defense'' for protection.

 

[18IsTheMan]

They would have to add a minimum of the value of a current share each, about $52M, but probably considerably more.
No, adding teams from your area doesn't provide an advantage but there is the angle of playing ''prevent defense'' for protection.

I agree with the latter, but I think there is next to no threat of Clemson or FSU going to the Big 10. It's just not a fit. Them going to the Big 12 makes no sense either.

 

[gamecock stock]

The animosity and opposition from a long-time member Florida should not be underestimated. I'm in the camp of doubting that FSU and Clemson will ever become members of the SEC. And I say that as one who would not be opposed one bit if they came in. Clemson's easy path to the playoffs, along with that recruiting pitch, would then be OVER!!!! I believe that the SEC, as has been tradition, is looking to add schools from new markets, specifically the large states of North Carolina and Virginia. I believe Goal A is UNC and UVA. Backup Goal B is NC State and Virginia Tech.

 

[Yard_Pimps]

They would have to add a minimum of the value of a current share each, about $52M, but probably considerably more.
No, adding teams from your area doesn't provide an advantage but there is the angle of playing ''prevent defense'' for protection.

So the chance of having more high profile matchups that people want to say doesn’t increase your evaluation? You lost me there. People will watch FSU Georgia or fsu lsu. There is already proof to that. (I don’t really count the playoff debacle) we are talking conference games. People who still feel tv is regional are not paying attention to the models.

 

[Yard_Pimps]

The animosity and opposition from a long-time member Florida should not be underestimated. I'm in the camp of doubting that FSU and Clemson will ever become members of the SEC. And I say that as one who would not be opposed one bit if they came in. Clemson's easy path to the playoffs, along with that recruiting pitch, would then be OVER!!!! I believe that the SEC, as has been tradition, is looking to add schools from new markets, specifically the large states of North Carolina and Virginia. I believe Goal A is UNC and UVA. Backup Goal B is NC State and Virginia Tech.

I just don’t buy this. Adding a region or team that doesn’t watch football just doesn’t get you anywhere. Virginians don’t watch college football like NC or even SC. Keep in mind that it’s not about cable subscriptions anymore for espn as they are looking to go streaming only. Football has become national not regional which is why I think it will be about inventory of games that will draw 6+ million views. Virginia or Va tech are not getting you that and proof is in the current data. You think more Virginians are going to watch college football because they join the sec. I don’t buy it because they will be winning less.


Also are y’all really that naive that you think the two highest evaluated teams in the ACC are willing to spend millions of dollars to get out of a conference without having a soft landing? That blows my mind if you do. I sure as heck wouldn’t leave my million dollar job to go find a 2 million dollar job without finding a home first.

 

[gamecock stock]

I just don’t buy this. Adding a region or team that doesn’t watch football just doesn’t get you anywhere. Virginians don’t watch college football like NC or even SC. Keep in mind that it’s not about cable subscriptions anymore for espn as they are looking to go streaming only. Football has become national not regional which is why I think it will be about inventory of games that will draw 6+ million views. Virginia or Va tech are not getting you that and proof is in the current data. You think more Virginians are going to watch college football because they join the sec. I don’t buy it because they will be winning less.


Also are y’all really that naive that you think the two highest evaluated teams in the ACC are willing to spend millions of dollars to get out of a conference without having a soft landing? That blows my mind if you do. I sure as heck wouldn’t leave my million dollar job to go find a 2 million dollar job without finding a home first.

I would not underestimate the lure of adding the 9th and 12th biggest states population-wise in the nation and getting into the DC area. As I've said before, relevance come and goes but geography is forever. You think Clemson in the Tommy Bowden and Tommy West eras would be valued?

 

[atl-cock]

I just don’t buy this. Adding a region or team that doesn’t watch football just doesn’t get you anywhere. Virginians don’t watch college football like NC or even SC. Keep in mind that it’s not about cable subscriptions anymore for espn as they are looking to go streaming only. Football has become national not regional which is why I think it will be about inventory of games that will draw 6+ million views. Virginia or Va tech are not getting you that and proof is in the current data. You think more Virginians are going to watch college football because they join the sec. I don’t buy it because they will be winning less.


Also are y’all really that naive that you think the two highest evaluated teams in the ACC are willing to spend millions of dollars to get out of a conference without having a soft landing? That blows my mind if you do. I sure as heck wouldn’t leave my million dollar job to go find a 2 million dollar job without finding a home first.

Wouldn't surprise me if administrators or their agents from Clemron & F$U have had back-channel discussions with the Big XII, B1G, and SEC.

Notwithstanding whether or not either institution would be a good fit for any of these conferences, I imagine that the discussions range from "we'll talk if/when you leave the ACC" to a deal in place, but contingent on the schools seceding from the ACC.

Again WTF - why did they agree to the GOR in the first place?

 

[gamecock stock]

Wouldn't surprise me if administrators or their agents from Clemron & F$U have had back-channel discussions with the Big XII, B1G, and SEC.

Notwithstanding whether or not either institution would be a good fit for any of these conferences, I imagine that the discussion range from "we'll talk if/when you leave the ACC" to a deal in place, but contingent on the schools seceding from the ACC.

Again WTF - why did they agree to the GOR in the first place?

My thought has evolved to them ending up in the Big 12. That landing place seems, to me, to be their only option.

 

[Lurker123]

I would not underestimate the lure of adding the 9th and 12th biggest states population-wise in the nation and getting into the DC area. As I've said before, relevance come and goes but geography is forever. You think Clemson in the Tommy Bowden and Tommy West eras would be valued?

He brings up a good point though, about streaming making the markets less of a driver. I wonder how much impact that really has.

I also can't help but think of this. UNC and UVA are two teams that we normally make fun of clemson for having to play in front of half filled stadiums. But now they are more valuable than FSU and Clemson as additions?

I get the TV market idea. But I also see the "match up" idea too.

 

[gamecock stock]

He brings up a good point though, about streaming making the markets less of a driver. I wonder how much impact that really has.

I also can't help but think of this. UNC and UVA are two teams that we normally make fun of clemson for having to play in front of half filled stadiums. But now they are more valuable than FSU and Clemson as additions?

I get the TV market idea. But I also see the "match up" idea too.

I see the match up idea too. If Clemson, especially Clemson, and Florida State, could assure of being nationally relevant forever, that would be a good argument to me. But in the entire decade of the 1960s, Clemson won just 51% of their games. From 1970-1976, they won 38% of their games. Then, they hired Danny Ford. We all know how he made them nationally relevant during his time there. Ford was later hired by Arkansas and got fired for not producing enough wins. From 1993-2008, Clemson won 58% of their games. Would such a team be an attractive, must-watch matchup to a national viewership? If we could be assured of them staying nationally relevant forever. that's one thing. But, if they joined the SEC, would they be winning 80% of their games, like they have in the ACC under Dabo? We see how Danny Ford did when he coached in the SEC at a school that basically has no in-state competition. Again, I'm all for them joining the SEC because it would take away their free and easy path to the playoff, and take away that recruiting pitch. If my reasoning is wrong, I'm open to changing my mind. And none of us KNOW how the Florida and South Carolina people feel about the Noles and Tigers joining the SEC. And not long ago, (several months ago) there was a writeup here on the On3 site by one of the journalists, connected to the SEC, saying unequivocally that Florida State and Clemson would never, never be invited into the SEC. EVER! Again, I, myself am not opposed to them coming into the SEC, especially Clemson (for selfish reasons). I don't need to be sold on Clemson and FSU being invited to the SEC. I'm just not certain it's in the cards.

Again, if any of my reasoning above is faulty, I am open to changing my opinion. Believe me, I want to change my opinion, for selfish reasons.

 

[KingWard]

The comments were made in what was presented as a hypothetical scenario that FSU approached the league about joining, so his comments were, by extension, hypothetical. He said "Well, we really had this great session where I talked about, really focused on our 16, and our presidents have said very clearly: We’re not going to be to be entangled in legal issues around any consideration of expansion. So, it’s not a conversation. And we’re not going to take our pie and slice it into more pieces."

SEC commissioner Greg Sankey: We have no interest in adding Florida State

"We’re not going to take our pie and slice it into more pieces," SEC commissioner Greg Sankey said when asked about Florida State.

www.tallahassee.com

I still think FSU and Clemson end up in the SEC somehow, but it is a valid point that you have to ask if they increase value enough to actually increase per/school payout after dividing the pie up into that many more pieces. I'm not sure they do, and it doesn't sound like he thinks they do either. If adding the schools results in decreased per/school payouts, then why do it?

That's very oblique. And very conditional.

 

[Yard_Pimps]

Again, if any of my reasoning above is faulty, I am open to changing my opinion. Believe me, I want to change my opinion, for selfish reasons.
[/QUOTE]
So you’re believing a “well connected” journalist. You mean all the ones who have mostly been wrong. Sounds like solid logic. The sec and the BIG are staying silent not to catch a lawsuit. The big 12 doesn’t have a play in the game and are simply trying to stay relevant.

One could also argue that those two schools are ranked near the top in national championships won. Clemson is also the 20th most winning college football team in the country so I’m not sure exactly what your point is. Every team has in and out decades. Some have national championship seasons and those two teams have had more than anyone else you’re going to find still on the big board. We are talking football because it is king.

 

[gamecock stock]

Again, if any of my reasoning above is faulty, I am open to changing my opinion. Believe me, I want to change my opinion, for selfish reasons.

So you’re believing a “well connected” journalist. You mean all the ones who have mostly been wrong. Sounds like solid logic. The sec and the BIG are staying silent not to catch a lawsuit. The big 12 doesn’t have a play in the game and are simply trying to stay relevant.

One could also argue that those two schools are ranked near the top in national championships won. Clemson is also the 20th most winning college football team in the country so I’m not sure exactly what your point is. Every team has in and out decades. Some have national championship seasons and those two teams have had more than anyone else you’re going to find still on the big board. We are talking football because it is king.
[/QUOTE]
Was that the ONLY reason I gave? Read again. I WANT Clemson in the SEC for the reasons I gave.

I believe I showed that Clemson has had periods of down years, and for long stretches. And I guarantee you that Clemson would not win 80% of its games in the SEC, not even close.

Again, I WANT Clemson in the SEC.

 

[atl-cock]

I like the idea of your biggest rival being in the same conference as you are, regardless of conference.

 

[atl-cock]

My thought has evolved to them ending up in the Big 12. That landing place seems, to me, to be their only option.

If the Big XII is your only option. might as well stay in the ACC, IMO.

 

[18IsTheMan]

If the Big XII is your only option. might as well stay in the ACC, IMO.

Big 12 makes no sense at all to me. They still won't come close to SEC/Big 10 money, and they'll be playing teams like UCF, Iowa State, Kansas, etc. Looking over that list of teams in the Big 12, there's not one matchup that's compelling for Clemson/FSU.

 

[gamecock stock]

If the Big XII is your only option. might as well stay in the ACC, IMO.

I believe they and FSU would use a B12 option to blackmail the ACC to change their revenue sharing distribution. They don't want to give up their wimpy ACC schedule. There's no way they want to give up that easy route to the playoffs. At most, the SEC, for example, will get 4 teams into the playoffs. Win the ACC, which Clemson has done most of this past decade, they are in. It will be hard as hell to get one of those 4 spots in the SEC. Dabo will retire before taking on a SEC football schedule.

 

[Harvard Gamecock]

Do you think FSU and Clemson add enough value to increase or at least maintain per/school payout? If they don't, is there an advantage to adding teams from areas where you already have teams?

It doesn't matter what I, or you, or anyone on this board thinks. What matters is what ESPN/SEC/B1G and B1g 12 think, and how they view matchups for future viewing.
Change is imminent, brace yourself.

 

[18IsTheMan]

It doesn't matter what I, or you, or anyone on this board thinks. What matters is what ESPN/SEC/B1G and B1g 12 think, and how they view matchups for future viewing.
Change is imminent, brace yourself.

well, if what we think doesn't matter, why does anyone keep talking about this ACC stuff? why do we talk about anything on here, for that matter? shut the forum domain down.

 

[Harvard Gamecock]

well, if what we think doesn't matter, why does anyone keep talking about this ACC stuff? why do we talk about anything on here, for that matter? shut the forum domain down.

It was not my intention to be adversarial, I was attempting to address your direct question if I thought FSU/Clemson add value.
I was attempting to emphasize that the only opinon that matters in that regard will be ESPN and the SEC.

 

[18IsTheMan]

It was not my intention to be adversarial, I was attempting to address your direct question if I thought FSU/Clemson add value.
I was attempting to emphasize that the only opinon that matters in that regard will be ESPN and the SEC.

too salty this am...my bad.

 

[18IsTheMan]

Wouldn't surprise me if administrators or their agents from Clemron & F$U have had back-channel discussions with the Big XII, B1G, and SEC.

And it also would not surprise me if Phillips and Sankey have been in touch. Perhaps the reason Phillips publicly staked out such a strong position at the ACC meetings is that he's talked with Sankey and they have a gentleman's agreement.

In fact, I would say it's almost a certainty they have been in contact.

One thing both the SEC and Big 10 want to avoid like poison is looking like they played any part whatsoever in the destruction of the ACC. If their media rights deal was expiring and teams were leaving or the teams were just buying their way out, that's a different story.

 

[08Tiger]

I see the match up idea too. If Clemson, especially Clemson, and Florida State, could assure of being nationally relevant forever, that would be a good argument to me. But in the entire decade of the 1960s, Clemson won just 51% of their games. From 1970-1976, they won 38% of their games. Then, they hired Danny Ford. We all know how he made them nationally relevant during his time there. Ford was later hired by Arkansas and got fired for not producing enough wins. From 1993-2008, Clemson won 58% of their games. Would such a team be an attractive, must-watch matchup to a national viewership? If we could be assured of them staying nationally relevant forever. that's one thing. But, if they joined the SEC, would they be winning 80% of their games, like they have in the ACC under Dabo? We see how Danny Ford did when he coached in the SEC at a school that basically has no in-state competition. Again, I'm all for them joining the SEC because it would take away their free and easy path to the playoff, and take away that recruiting pitch. If my reasoning is wrong, I'm open to changing my mind. And none of us KNOW how the Florida and South Carolina people feel about the Noles and Tigers joining the SEC. And not long ago, (several months ago) there was a writeup here on the On3 site by one of the journalists, connected to the SEC, saying unequivocally that Florida State and Clemson would never, never be invited into the SEC. EVER! Again, I, myself am not opposed to them coming into the SEC, especially Clemson (for selfish reasons). I don't need to be sold on Clemson and FSU being invited to the SEC. I'm just not certain it's in the cards.

Again, if any of my reasoning above is faulty, I am open to changing my opinion. Believe me, I want to change my opinion, for selfish reasons.

If this is the logic being applied to assess new membership in the SEC, a number of current members better hope the same isn't applied internally to justify continued membership.

 

[gamecock stock]

If this is the logic being applied to assess new membership in the SEC, a number of current members better hope the same isn't applied internally to justify continued membership.

I'm sure that's your dream.

 

[08Tiger]

I'm sure that's your dream.

Haha I can't lie and say it wouldn't make me laugh. But I truly hope college football doesn't go down that path.

 

[gamecock stock]

Haha I can't lie and say it wouldn't make me laugh. But I truly hope college football doesn't go down that path.

I am sure you do. Wink....Wink. LOL

 

[Lurker123]

And it also would not surprise me if Phillips and Sankey have been in touch. Perhaps the reason Phillips publicly staked out such a strong position at the ACC meetings is that he's talked with Sankey and they have a gentleman's agreement.

In fact, I would say it's almost a certainty they have been in contact.

One thing both the SEC and Big 10 want to avoid like poison is looking like they played any part whatsoever in the destruction of the ACC. If their media rights deal was expiring and teams were leaving or the teams were just buying their way out, that's a different story.

One point. Why would they not want to be seen as destroying the ACC if the B10 just openly did ot to the P12?

 

[18IsTheMan]

One point. Why would they not want to be seen as destroying the ACC if the B10 just openly did ot to the P12?

I suppose if Clemson and FSU wanted to make an agreement with the Big 10 for after their GOR expires in 2036, I guess it wouldn't be viewed that way.

 

[RUMMENIGGE]

If the Big XII is your only option. might as well stay in the ACC, IMO.

I can agree with that

Since the creation of Big12 (Big Eight plus SWC) there is only six remaining teams left. Texas AM, Missouri, Colorado (returning to Big 12 2024) Nebraska, Texas and Oklahoma all departed the Big 12 for one reason or another. These teams were considered the top tier of the Big 12. What this demonstrates is that the Big 12 is not stable and the conference is wreckable.

Big 12 identity in football is mainly Oklahoma State with pieces of the Pacific 12 and the American Athletic Conference teams and one ex Big East team and one rare independent team. I just do not see ratings toping the charts for Big 12 football and would not be a good move for clemson or Florida State.

 

[Gamecock Vet]

The comments were made in what was presented as a hypothetical scenario that FSU approached the league about joining, so his comments were, by extension, hypothetical. He said "Well, we really had this great session where I talked about, really focused on our 16, and our presidents have said very clearly: We’re not going to be to be entangled in legal issues around any consideration of expansion. So, it’s not a conversation. And we’re not going to take our pie and slice it into more pieces."

SEC commissioner Greg Sankey: We have no interest in adding Florida State

"We’re not going to take our pie and slice it into more pieces," SEC commissioner Greg Sankey said when asked about Florida State.

www.tallahassee.com

I still think FSU and Clemson end up in the SEC somehow, but it is a valid point that you have to ask if they increase value enough to actually increase per/school payout after dividing the pie up into that many more pieces. I'm not sure they do, and it doesn't sound like he thinks they do either. If adding the schools results in decreased per/school payouts, then why do it?

Screw Clempson!! Let them flail around without a true home

 

[atl-cock]

Big 12 makes no sense at all to me. They still won't come close to SEC/Big 10 money, and they'll be playing teams like UCF, Iowa State, Kansas, etc. Looking over that list of teams in the Big 12, there's not one matchup that's compelling for Clemson/FSU.

Regardless of sport.

 

[atl-cock]

I believe they and FSU would use a B12 option to blackmail the ACC to change their revenue sharing distribution. They don't want to give up their wimpy ACC schedule. There's no way they want to give up that easy route to the playoffs. At most, the SEC, for example, will get 4 teams into the playoffs. Win the ACC, which Clemson has done most of this past decade, they are in. It will be hard as hell to get one of those 4 spots in the SEC. Dabo will retire before taking on a SEC football schedule.

I think the ACC will reject demands for an uneven revenue distribution.

 

[atl-cock]

If this is the logic being applied to assess new membership in the SEC, a number of current members better hope the same isn't applied internally to justify continued membership.

While football is undeniably a major part of the SEC, it's not the be-all and end-all. And Birmingham recognizes this.

 

[Gamecock Jacque]

I think the ACC will reject demands for an uneven revenue distribution.

The ACC will go the way the Pac12 went.

 

[atl-cock]

I can agree with that

Since the creation of Big12 (Big Eight plus SWC) there is only six remaining teams left. Texas AM, Missouri, Colorado (returning to Big 12 2024) Nebraska, Texas and Oklahoma all departed the Big 12 for one reason or another. These teams were considered the top tier of the Big 12. What this demonstrates is that the Big 12 is not stable and the conference is wreckable.

Big 12 identity in football is mainly Oklahoma State with pieces of the Pacific 12 and the American Athletic Conference teams and one ex Big East team and one rare independent team. I just do not see ratings toping the charts for Big 12 football and would not be a good move for clemson or Florida State.

Big 8 was fine until the SWC imploded and four members joined up to form the Big XII. I still contend the bully in Austin wrecked this conference, which should have had their own TV channel instead of Austin launching the Longhorn Network

 

[1Mcreekcock]

Like VPI and the ACC, F$U had their nose against the SEC's glass window for a few decades before joining the ACC in 1990.

Word on the street back then was that fsu turned down the SEC and then we were offered. Even if fsu finds a way out of the acc where are they going? B1G won't touch them...they are not AAU accredited and the university has proven they put athletics above academics. As for the SEC...they won't have enough member votes for admission.