SMU2006
-
Posts
605 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
2 -
Points
9,255 [ Donate ]
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Gallery
GoMeanGreen.com
Posts posted by SMU2006
-
-
11 minutes ago, meangreenbob said:11 minutes ago, meangreenbob said:
Billionaires can become paupers overnight and the pride always comes before the fall.
The dollar is precariously hanging by a thread so be careful boasting about your money men.
Listen, you’re over here on our board really for no other reason than to boast, and brag about the possibility of smu buying their way into the ACC. I personably think you have some issues you need to work out. You can start by heading back over to your fan board and join in on the conversation with your fans. Being over here speaks volumes about your lack of integrity.
Feel pretty confident that the money guys aren't monitoring the value of the dollar. Economy will be just fine. Guys like David Miller and Clark Hunt have amassed phenomenal fortunes. Thankfully for SMU they are generous men.
I personally hope we keep UNT on the schedule. Unlike the cowards in FW I do think its a good thing for the region for SMU, TCU, and UNT to play each other. Odds are TCU will never play North Texas, especially if they are trying to get an 8 game home schedule like Diabetes Dykes has been throwing out there.
-
2
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
-
20 hours ago, Cougar King said:
Poverty program problems.
We don't need the money.
-
3
-
2
-
1
-
2
-
1
-
-
14 minutes ago, Pavlovs Eagle said:
"earmarked"
I hereby pledge $500m to UNT Athletics.
I hope they come through on those pledges when you consistently lose to everyone but BC, Wake, and GT.
Congrats on potentially becoming the Rutgers of the ACC! Will you both end up in the MAC within ten years or will it happen sooner?
Difference here is we actually have billionaires who can do it (and already have their names on buildings around campus).
-
3
-
2
-
1
-
-
15 minutes ago, ntmeangreen11 said:
Fair enough but if the hypothetical P5-G5 split actually happened they have possibly bought their spot at the table, can't argue with that.
I do believe donor fatigue will set in, and in short order. I know SMU has some donors with deep pockets but how long will they donate at that level while the football team wins 3-5 games.
Nothing could be further from the truth re: donor fatigue.
Just speaking anecdotally here but the Mustang Club and other fundraising arms have been inundated with donations and pledges in the last few weeks. Also, prominent donors have already earmarked over $100m for the next several years contingent upon ACC invitation.
This will be a catalyst for historic fundraising at SMU across the board.
-
3
-
3
-
-
10 minutes ago, MCMLXXX said:
Stanford, the bell-cow of the group, and Cal are proposing to forgo a majority of revenue distribution for multiple years if they receive an invitation to the conference. The schools have agreed to start at 30% of distribution, or about $8 million each. SMU will forgo at least seven years without distribution and as many as nine. However, those figures are fluid and discussions are ongoing.
Between NCAAT credits and other non-TV related revenue SMU will make more than the $7m due via The American's TV rights package annually. Also, donors have earmarked roughly $150m immediately to be deployed upon official acceptance into the ACC.
-
1
-
2
-
-
2 minutes ago, NT80 said:
When the ACC kicks you out because you're not competitive in anything then you'll understand. It's not always about $$. The quality of the conference matters too. Money can't buy you ethics, obviously.
You're right. With a Top 10 NIL how could we ever compete with the likes of Boston College, Syracuse, GA Tech, and PITT....
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
-
7 minutes ago, NT80 said:
It's not about having more money, it's about integrity and using the money correctly....and legally, unlike in 1980.
Tell me what is illegal about what SMU is doing. I'll wait.
-
1
-
1
-
-
4 minutes ago, NT80 said:
So you admit it's not about being equal in quality to the level, it's just about being able to con/buy your way into that level.
Not at all.
SMU is more financially committed than any G5 and half the P5's in the country. Leveraging that financial commitment to improve conference affiliation is just good business. Plain and simple.
-
1
-
-
1 minute ago, untbowler said:
I hope Aresco does not allow SMU to keep their olympic sports in AAC. Tell them to take them all because AAC is no longer their home
SMU is in for all sports.
-
1
-
-
2 minutes ago, UNTethered Eagle said:
Does this finally validate y'all? It's extremely odd that you are here, leading me to believe you are not.
I'm not sure its validation but its certainly proof positive that the SMU brass has leveraged its assets and positioned the university to make a significant move up.
Time will tell if we can validate that investment. I'm hopeful.
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
-
26 minutes ago, greenminer said:2 minutes ago, aprice said:
I just like watching my team play. Worrying about being in an exclusive club is kind of juvenile tbh. Especially when youre willing to fork over up to 200 million to do it. It's just kind of sad really how insecure these boosters are.
At the end of the day it comes across as desperate and pathetic. DFW will never care about SMU and stunts like this is the reason why. How are you going to pick up a fan base when this is your story? A story of buying access with excessive wealth. Who is going to get behind that? I'm guessing the boosters already know this which is why they would never move up without bribes.
The school isn't forking over a dime. Its a handful of alumni who are doing this.
Also, there is an additional $50-100m earmarked to be greenlit the moment the ACC deal goes down from the Hunt/Miller/Brookshire/Fords that is engineered to keep the NIL and operational budgets in line with other ACC schools.
Having billionaires is a super cool cheat code.
-
1
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, DentonLurker said:59 minutes ago, greenminer said:
If you think about it, both of us are trying to build the base and maximize opportunity to stay at the top level. But one is trying to reach out to the region and say "let's grow where we are planted and figure this out". The other is putting on lipstick and offering itself up to P2 as the village bicycle.
The journey to P2 isn't done yet. When the ACC dissolves, and the P2 are securing their place in the next cycle, will the P2 seek schools that have built their base and a winning tradition, or will they want a program that offers nothing but money - a resource they already have?
When/if that occurs (again the ACC grant of rights runs through 2036) it'll be about the exact same thing that realignment is about now.
Money.
As long as that is the central component I like SMU's chances to navigate those waters and land in a situation that FAR exceeds the AAC.
-
1
-
-
Just now, DentonLurker said:
Maybe, but I doubt it. Why would the SEC and Big 10 be okay with a reworked Big 12 and a reworked ACC being on equal footing?
B/c the networks need the content.
I think there is a very good chance FSU/Clemson head off to the SEC or Big 10 eventually but there are still 8-10 ACC schools that will not have a landing spot. The networks will want to keep the ACC alive. Same for the Big 12.
-
1
-
-
2 minutes ago, meangreenbob said:
What do you mean we would do the same?
You talking about whoring yourself out along with your dignity to get something you couldn’t get any other way?If UNT had a chance to be associated with the following institutions (US News Ranking:)
Stanford (#3) Duke (#10) CAL-Berkeley (#20) Notre Dame (#18) UVA (#25) UNC (#29) WF (#29) BC (#36) GA Tech (#44) FSU (#55) Miami (#55) VA Tech (#62) Syracuse (#62) and NC State (#72) you wouldn't do it?
That is just intellectually dishonest. UNT would do unspeakable things to join those ranks if it had the financial means to do so.
-
2
-
1
-
-
1 minute ago, DentonLurker said:
Don’t kid yourself. It’s going to be a Power 2, and then SMU is going to be left out just like the rest of us.
I know some people have given lip service to this, but the reality is these decisions aren’t really being made with academics very high on the priority list.
There is already a Power 2 but the Big 12 and ACC will continue to exist within the context of what will essentially be D1A.
Everything else will be D1AA including scheduling/bowls/etc.
-
2
-
1
-
1
-
-
1 minute ago, NT80 said:
Yes, people will come to see those marquee teams, they won't be coming to see Smut. Of the 20,000 at the game, 15,000 will be cheering for the opponent.
Yet SMU has better attendance despite UNT having 5x the undergrads......
-
2
-
1
-
1
-
-
6 minutes ago, UNTLifer said:
So short-sighted. From my vantage point, smuT is so averse to sharing a conference with us that they now have alumni willing to fund a move forgoing annual revenue for seven years to a conference that appears to be going the way of the PAC12 in seven years.
"Being associated" with these universities doesn't put you on their level. smuT isn't. In many respects, you aren't on UNT's level other than having a superior "good ol' boy network". This just reeks of the little kid that nobody wants to play with, but his family has cash, so the other kids let him tag-a-long so they can have access to said cash.
Go, please go. I hop Arresco and the AAC administrators tell you to not come running back home when the ACC is gobbled up by the Big10 and SEC and you are left in a position similar to WA St. and OR St.
It has nothing to do with being associated with UNT in isolation and everything to do with being associated with an objectively better group of peer institutions both academically and athletically.
Yes give me a conference with a dozen schools in the USNWR Top 100 (including SMU) as opposed to the AAC with just Rice and Tulane. This isn't even factoring in the vastly superior on-field and on-court improvement.
Its nothing more than that. UNT would do the same if they could.
-
1
-
2
-
1
-
1
-
-
Just now, NorthTexan95 said:
Maybe ... and if we did, you would be at the front of the line making fun of UNT.
Not at all. Do whatever you can to move up.
The reality is that there is going to be a break from the NCAA by the Power 4 in the next decade. For SMU this was all about doing anything and everything it can to secure a place at the table before the break occurs.
You can hate it all you want but if UNT had the cash to do it they would.
-
2
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, aprice said:
No they didn't. These conferences were created by whoever had the must alumni in their state houses to lobby for their team to be a part of the "in" club, or sheer luck or convenience.
What did wazzuu, oregon, state oklahoma state, texas tech, baylor, etc to do "earn" anything? We still have g5 powerhouses such as Boise State excluded after doing EVERYTHING to do deserve it.
Lets not pretend that the P5 universe was somehow based on merit. The landscape has always been built by insecure alumni in politics who wanted to elevate their school by punching downwards towards anyone not them.
That said, what SMU is doing feels worse because its just overtly corrupt. In the past it was all behind closed doors. I can't wait for this to backfire spectacularly though
So let me get this straight.
If UNT had the financial resources to do something like this to be associated with elite institutions such as Stanford, CAL, Duke, Wake, UVA, UNC, BC, et al...... you wouldn't support it?
SMU is doing the exact same thing that others have done in realignment. Use your advantages to leverage your way up the ladder.
-
2
-
1
-
1
-
-
lol. Its going to be fun revisiting this thread from time to time.
-
2
-
2
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
-
2 hours ago, NT80 said:
It will happen eventually. If it's 2 years, 5 years, or the whole 13 years, the ACC will lose 3-5 schools, causing another domino effect in conferences again.
Predicting what will happen in 5-7 years with respect to realignment is a fool's errand. No one had UT/OU to the SEC nor USC/UCLA to the B1G in 2017.
If you're playing the odds the B1G is not going to expand until it can get a 100% no from Notre Dame. As long as NBC is willing to give Notre Dame their sweetheart deal along with getting to play a unique, national schedule I don't think ND can be swayed (regardless of the monetary disadvantage).
If the B1G can get ND they will then turn their sights to UNC and UVA. In all likelihood FSU and Clemson go to the SEC. It is certainly possible the B1G raids the PAC for UW/Oregon but the Michigan and Ohio State AD's are both on record as saying they do not want anymore westward expansion. Nothing about UW/Oregon has changed since last summer when they were there to be had along with USC/UCLA.
This is why I believe there will be either a formal merger or alliance between the PAC and ACC. Both are vulnerable to eventual expansion by the B1G and SEC so why not try to get out ahead of it now and secure landing spots for the likely programs that do not get selected for what will eventually be the Power 2? After the PAC secures their media rights deal (again....its going to be announced to coincide with the PAC basketball tourney) I fully expect an announcement with the ACC to come shortly thereafter.
The endgame here is that in the next decade there is going to be a complete breakaway from the NCAA. There will be a Power 2 of the SEC and B1G while the PAC/ACC and Big 12 will be on the second tier. They will schedule each other exclusively all but eliminating a matchup with schools from the MWC, AAC, MAC, Sun Belt, CUSA. I could see a consolidation of a few remaining G5's that have the funding/NIL to keep up the fight to form a "best of the rest" conference while most of the other conferences/programs will be relegated to what will essentially be Division 2.
-
3
-
-
Army, LA Tech, and Texas State are the ones that make the most sense IMO.
-
1
-
1
-
6
-
1
-
-
47 minutes ago, NT80 said:
They will negotiate themselves out early for a chance to join the SEC, just like uT and oU did from the Big12.
ACC schools would gladly accept an instant extra $150m toward their programs.
UT and OU negotiated out of a deal a whole one year early.
FSU is locked into the GoR for another 13 years. Its not happening.
-
1
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, NT80 said:
It won't happen. The ACC school's grant of media rights are tied up until 2036. A few schools can afford to pay a $120M exit fee to join the SEC but most will not or can not. The PAC is wanting a 5-year GOR with it's new media deal, if they can ever find one, lol.
PAC media rights will be announced the week of the PAC 12 basketball tourney.
Looks like ACC about to add SMUt Cal and Stanford
in Conference ReAlignment
Posted
NIL I'm in for $300/month. Not a mega donor by any means.
Season tickets for football and basketball for the last 15 years. Stopped donating to the Mustang Club when NIL became a thing.