IT’S TIME: Why Miami should leave the ACC and go to the AAC

Joined
Dec 22, 2011
Messages
4,522
BOT is all about the $$$$, no way they would ever downgrade to a non power 5 conference.
I believe BOT loves $$$$ ACC generates and where football program is presently somewhere between #15 -#30 & a
minor bowl game and they are not breaking the bank $$$$ on costs.
stone cold winner for BOT which i doubt wants a true return to national prominence

You also do not understand how this works.

I'm a UM alum. I just got my e-mail from Julio Frenk, and we dropped in the academic rankings again. By the way, Miami does 5-year contracts with University presidents, and Frenk has 1 more year left, period. Donna got 3 contracts, Foote got 4. Stanford went 20 years. Pearson went 10 years. Ashe went 25 years.

So, yeah, the BoT has a lot on their plate, and I'm hoping we get a clean sweep on University president and UM AD in 2020. But this nonsense about the BoT "not caring" and "wanting to be cheap" is just insane.

The US News Rankings are the #1 issue on their minds. And one of the key factors (and way to jack yourself up in the rankings) is based on SELECTIVITY INDEX. That means, we need a sh!te-ton more people to apply to UM. And one of the key drivers of that metric (because, hey, we ARE talking about 17 year olds) is having a winning football team. That is why F$U climbed the academic issue when Jimbo and his rapists were winning football games, and it is why UM has been sliding since the early days of Shalala and the dominance of the 2000-2002 teams.

They get it. But we have also been hamstrung by sub-standard ACC and Nike revenues. We are catching back up, and when we start posting 10+ win seasons, I can "visionary-like" predict the future, which is that UM's academic rankings will begin to climb again.

The UM Board of Trustees is not like the owners of the Pittsburgh Pirates or Kansas City Royals (at least until a few years ago), content to field losing teams while raking in cash. The UM BoT doesn't get a dime for running a "cheap" football team. If anything, they would try to divert more resources if they could be guaranteed wins (and the eventual bump in academic rankings).

So, yeah, it's time to flush Julio and Blake and start fresh, but it would also be helpful to give Manny and Dan slightly more than 2 games to change the offense that Richt left us with.
 

UMovement

Freshman
Joined
Apr 21, 2013
Messages
2,159
You also do not understand how this works.

I'm a UM alum. I just got my e-mail from Julio Frenk, and we dropped in the academic rankings again. By the way, Miami does 5-year contracts with University presidents, and Frenk has 1 more year left, period. Donna got 3 contracts, Foote got 4. Stanford went 20 years. Pearson went 10 years. Ashe went 25 years.

So, yeah, the BoT has a lot on their plate, and I'm hoping we get a clean sweep on University president and UM AD in 2020. But this nonsense about the BoT "not caring" and "wanting to be cheap" is just insane.

The US News Rankings are the #1 issue on their minds. And one of the key factors (and way to jack yourself up in the rankings) is based on SELECTIVITY INDEX. That means, we need a sh!te-ton more people to apply to UM. And one of the key drivers of that metric (because, hey, we ARE talking about 17 year olds) is having a winning football team. That is why F$U climbed the academic issue when Jimbo and his rapists were winning football games, and it is why UM has been sliding since the early days of Shalala and the dominance of the 2000-2002 teams.

They get it. But we have also been hamstrung by sub-standard ACC and Nike revenues. We are catching back up, and when we start posting 10+ win seasons, I can "visionary-like" predict the future, which is that UM's academic rankings will begin to climb again.

The UM Board of Trustees is not like the owners of the Pittsburgh Pirates or Kansas City Royals (at least until a few years ago), content to field losing teams while raking in cash. The UM BoT doesn't get a dime for running a "cheap" football team. If anything, they would try to divert more resources if they could be guaranteed wins (and the eventual bump in academic rankings).

So, yeah, it's time to flush Julio and Blake and start fresh, but it would also be helpful to give Manny and Dan slightly more than 2 games to change the offense that Richt left us with.
This is both very insightful and concerning. Thank you.
 

g8rh8rMD

Junior
Joined
May 21, 2016
Messages
4,130
Look, I do agree with you, we have to be open-minded as to what the future holds. Having said that, the OP did start the thread with the following two words: "IT'S TIME". And it clearly is NOT time for a change. Maybe there will be change in the future. But not now.

As for streaming, I think it is going to take a lot more time. Look at all of the posts on the ACC Network. There are absolutely streaming options for ACCN. But most people do not have the hardware, the bandwidth, or the knowledge for it at this time. And the manufacturers have not yet rolled out any homerun pieces of hardware (or apps). Some are good, but it is not uniform.

Remember this...for a while, people with tech skills had the ability to digitally record broadcast shows, but it took money, knowledge, and hardware to do so. Then TiVo came out with one simple box that could record shows to a hard drive. They had a virtual monopoly for a while, but eventually the cable companies latched onto it and they produced their own boring, charmless, featureless "DVR" boxes.

Also keep in mind that some of those streaming companies are part of broadcast conglomerates (Disney) or might be acquired by broadcast conglomerates. It's like Coca Cola also selling bottled water and sports drinks. As the delivery of content changes, it will be advantageous for traditional broadcast companies to acquire a streaming service so that they can be prepared for both ends of the technology-shift continuum.

The funny thing is, people who are complaining about "$200 cable bills" might end up paying for 10 different $20 streaming services. Content costs money (assuming you don't ask some of the CIS pirates how to steal it all).

My ultimate point on streaming is very simple. If Amazon or Netflix (and I picked Amazon because of Bezos) are going to get into live sports, they are not going to spend SO MUCH MONEY to vault the #6 conference into Power 5 territory. As I pointed out before, the ACCN is connected to ESPN, which is owned by Disney. If there was ever some sort of serious money-play in streaming services, Disney will figure out a way to pay and compete for content using Disney+.

But the original poster was yapping about playing more games in warm weather and having more "natural rivalries" with AAC teams, and that sh!te is just crazy. I would be ashamed to present any of his "spreadsheets" to someone in power at UM when, within the first few lines, you can see that he has UConn still in the AAC.
Can't disagree with much, if anything you've said there. My main point was to explain that the idea should not be dismissed out of hand on the basis that not being in a "Power 5" conference would mean the permanent end of relevance for UM football. That term, Power 5, is only like a decade old, and is 100% certain to be disrupted in time.

But yes, the main conclusion remains, it is not NOW the time to leave the ACC. Period. The grant of rights issue is the end of the conversation. Not even any point in discussing where we should go IF we were to leave the ACC since we're not leaving any time soon.
 

UMovement

Freshman
Joined
Apr 21, 2013
Messages
2,159
My dude, you are nuts. The "numbers" do not, in fact, "speak for themselves". You have misread and misunderstood the numbers. And you have clearly deluded yourself on "visionary" status.

Here's the thing. If you were talking about selling a consumer good, you might have a point on "market sizes" and whatnot. But college football is not a packaged good. It involves emotional loyalties and continuing to "buy" your favorite team even when they are down.

You still haven't addressed one of my key points, which is how "physical proximity" to a major market delivers the major market population. It is indisputable that LSU is far more popular in New Orleans than Tulane is, so jumping into the AAC with Tulane is not going to give us some huge presence and/or dominance in New Orleans. Nobody in Philly really cares about Temple football; we've been in a conference with Temple before, and that didn't somehow transform Miami's name-awareness and market share in Philly. And for you to claim that the Texas freaking Longhorns are "not so much" a huge factor in Dallas - seriously, where did you pull that conclusion from, if not your rectum?

I don't care about the "long game" when you ignore the "short game" and you wreck your program waiting around for your long-term investment to pay off. There are REAL and measurable losses with leaving the ACC and joining the AAC. If you thought that Miami was struggling to make the Top 4 back when we had 10 wins, and if you have ignored what has happened to perfect-record UCF, imagine what will happen to Miami when we are undefeated after beating up on Tulane and Temple as our CONFERENCE opponents.

And, again, if "streaming" is so hot for college football content, then Miami is not the dealbreaker on them making a play for the AAC. Streaming services could get that **** on the cheap RIGHT NOW. The AAC has very little revenue, compared to the Power 5. Miami jumping to the AAC would not suddenly crack open the checkbooks of all the streaming services.

Nobody is disputing that streaming will be a bigger and bigger deal in the future, but stop pretending that we need to jump to the AAC RIGHT FVCKING NOW when that is insane.

If somebody pays big bucks for the AAC simply because most of those schools are in larger cities (many of which don't really root hard for those schools), then I guarantee you that there will be even more money for the Power 5. Because THOSE SCHOOLS (collectively) have a nearly 100 year record of pumping out alums, and then those alums come to the games, those alums watch on TV, AND WITH THE MAGIC OF STREAMING, WHICH IS NOT LIMITED BY GEOGRAPHY, those alums will pay for, and watch, any damn streaming service that carries those schools. Even if many of those schools are in small college towns.

All of your "market size" analysis is garbage. It really is. Even in Orlando, where UCF is the SECOND-LARGEST UNIVERSITY in the entire US, you can still walk into any sporting goods store and find as much UF and F$U merch as UCF merch. You can go to any sports bar and find as many Gaytor and Semenhole fans as Knights fans. And that is the "best" team in the AAC with the largest alum base and one of the largest metro markets on your list.

Keep spinning your stuff to Fortune 500, you clearly don't understand how college football fanbases work. It doesn't matter which city you live in. What matters is who you grew up rooting for and/or what college you attended.
College football is absolutely a packed good, you just spoke about buying Uf and FSU merchandise in the Orlando market. I use to tell clients that marketing is ‘sharing our vision’ but that’s never what we were working on behind the scenes. Marketing was and is always about telling people what to think. That merchandise is in there because of someone’s good marketing a long time ago and proximity. Focusing on where alumni is after the fact, how did they decide which school to go to in the first place is the result of marketing and recruiting.

Hypothetically speaking! let’s say Jarren blows up to be a Heisman candidate. You have a marketing budget that allows for 10 building size billboards. You want to put those up in ACC locations or AAC locations? That’s what I mean by numbers, potential new fans, students and players. The AAC clearly has better recruiting areas.

 

sdaly12

Recruit
Joined
Oct 5, 2012
Messages
498
You also do not understand how this works.

I'm a UM alum. I just got my e-mail from Julio Frenk, and we dropped in the academic rankings again. By the way, Miami does 5-year contracts with University presidents, and Frenk has 1 more year left, period. Donna got 3 contracts, Foote got 4. Stanford went 20 years. Pearson went 10 years. Ashe went 25 years.

So, yeah, the BoT has a lot on their plate, and I'm hoping we get a clean sweep on University president and UM AD in 2020. But this nonsense about the BoT "not caring" and "wanting to be cheap" is just insane.

The US News Rankings are the #1 issue on their minds. And one of the key factors (and way to jack yourself up in the rankings) is based on SELECTIVITY INDEX. That means, we need a sh!te-ton more people to apply to UM. And one of the key drivers of that metric (because, hey, we ARE talking about 17 year olds) is having a winning football team. That is why F$U climbed the academic issue when Jimbo and his rapists were winning football games, and it is why UM has been sliding since the early days of Shalala and the dominance of the 2000-2002 teams.

They get it. But we have also been hamstrung by sub-standard ACC and Nike revenues. We are catching back up, and when we start posting 10+ win seasons, I can "visionary-like" predict the future, which is that UM's academic rankings will begin to climb again.

The UM Board of Trustees is not like the owners of the Pittsburgh Pirates or Kansas City Royals (at least until a few years ago), content to field losing teams while raking in cash. The UM BoT doesn't get a dime for running a "cheap" football team. If anything, they would try to divert more resources if they could be guaranteed wins (and the eventual bump in academic rankings).

So, yeah, it's time to flush Julio and Blake and start fresh, but it would also be helpful to give Manny and Dan slightly more than 2 games to change the offense that Richt left us with.
economic facts of life on competition..... look were all the talent is headed in S.Fla out of town.....
we have 15 + year of dead average football, seems a strong indicator something is missing at BOT level.
do not believe a change at HC level is an answer however not a fan of Blake....
the comment on BOT in general was a thought i have had since the days of Donna, do not believe the BOT cared for the 'brash" canes that Johnson had on the field during that run
BTW only 5 schools have $$$ and know how to spend it Bama, UGA, Clemson,OSU,OU, this year LSU joins the club
massive drop after that .....
 

TheEye

Cane Grad!
Joined
Feb 12, 2013
Messages
3,597
GOOD NIGHT ................


Coaching ,Coaching Coaching is why we're
not winning ......
No it isn’t. Every coach here yields the same results.
 
Joined
Dec 22, 2011
Messages
4,522
College football is absolutely a packed good, you just spoke about buying Uf and FSU merchandise in the Orlando market. I use to tell clients that marketing is ‘sharing our vision’ but that’s never what we were working on behind the scenes. Marketing was and is always about telling people what to think. That merchandise is in there because of someone’s good marketing a long time ago and proximity. Focusing on where alumni is after the fact, how did they decide which school to go to in the first place is the result of marketing and recruiting.

Hypothetically speaking! let’s say Jarren blows up to be a Heisman candidate. You have a marketing budget that allows for 10 building size billboards. You want to put those up in ACC locations or AAC locations? That’s what I mean by numbers, potential new fans, students and players. The AAC clearly has better recruiting areas.


Oh, good lord, you misinterpret, literally, everything that is said against your ridiculous arguments.

BEING a college football fan, the concept of being a fan, the actions of being a fan, are NOT a "packed good" simply because merchandise is an ancillary part of the process. My point was to show you that the "Orlando market" is not delivered to the AAC just because UCF has a campus located there. Schools from far away (Gainesville and Tallahassee) have just as much, if not MORE of a fanbase than the "home team" has. The "merchandise" is not there because the "marketing" is there, the merchandise is in store because the FANS are there in Orlando. Stop answering every point like a heel-dragging dope. It's not just Orlando people who "decided" to go to UF or F$U and move back to Orlando, it's that Orlando has more jobs than Gainesville and Tallahassee. Deal with reality and stop treating this like a childish marketing exercise.

As for what you know about Heisman campaigns...are you freaking serious? You do realize that the Heisman voters include former Heisman winners and...870 sportswriters, made up of 145 voters in each of 6 regions. You don't get extra voters because you live in a big city. So, no, I'm not going to put up 10 billboards in 10 AAC locations, that's ridiculous. That would have just as much impact on the voters as 10 billboards in 10 ACC locations. You just don't get it.

As for the AAC having "better recruiting areas", you have clearly passed into the zone of insanity. First, UM and F$U out-recruit UCF and USF in Florida. As for Texas, I don't care, we are not going to pull Texas recruits because they will get to play against SMU and Houston, because if they are the quality of players we need, they will go to Texas or Texas A&M. Or even Baylor or TCU. You seriously believe we would suddenly be signing Tennessee kids...because Memphis? Forget that, talented Tennessee kids go to Tennessee. Talented Ohio kids go to Ohio Taint, not Miami because because because we play Cincy.

Look, your nonsensical "marketing" and "streaming" arguments are getting tiring. I'm just about done with this. There is no way in hell that the AAC is, in any way, a better choice than the ACC.

Seriously, I wish you luck in your business endeavors, because if anyone ever pranked you by putting you in front of the UM Board of Trustees, you presentation would last all of 5 minutes before the entire room was convulsed in laughter.
 

504CANE4LIFE

Recruit
Joined
Feb 18, 2013
Messages
193
SMMFH, so I guess letting us know about your work background was suppose to make this bull sound great or something? Da ACC was thinking bout DaU & fsu in championship games so they definitely want Da U to win. At the end of the day its bout the money, you should know that Mr.500 and having Miami win is a no brainer for the conference. It's even more a reason now cause it can be Clemson or FSU now, if Miami get the ball rolling than it's what they wanting all these years and finally get it. Get ur think up Mr.500 and try another proposal. Geesh that company must have been 500.
 

Klamalama

Senior
Joined
Jan 19, 2012
Messages
5,452
You also do not understand how this works.

I'm a UM alum. I just got my e-mail from Julio Frenk, and we dropped in the academic rankings again. By the way, Miami does 5-year contracts with University presidents, and Frenk has 1 more year left, period. Donna got 3 contracts, Foote got 4. Stanford went 20 years. Pearson went 10 years. Ashe went 25 years.

So, yeah, the BoT has a lot on their plate, and I'm hoping we get a clean sweep on University president and UM AD in 2020. But this nonsense about the BoT "not caring" and "wanting to be cheap" is just insane.

The US News Rankings are the #1 issue on their minds. And one of the key factors (and way to jack yourself up in the rankings) is based on SELECTIVITY INDEX. That means, we need a sh!te-ton more people to apply to UM. And one of the key drivers of that metric (because, hey, we ARE talking about 17 year olds) is having a winning football team. That is why F$U climbed the academic issue when Jimbo and his rapists were winning football games, and it is why UM has been sliding since the early days of Shalala and the dominance of the 2000-2002 teams.

They get it. But we have also been hamstrung by sub-standard ACC and Nike revenues. We are catching back up, and when we start posting 10+ win seasons, I can "visionary-like" predict the future, which is that UM's academic rankings will begin to climb again.

The UM Board of Trustees is not like the owners of the Pittsburgh Pirates or Kansas City Royals (at least until a few years ago), content to field losing teams while raking in cash. The UM BoT doesn't get a dime for running a "cheap" football team. If anything, they would try to divert more resources if they could be guaranteed wins (and the eventual bump in academic rankings).

So, yeah, it's time to flush Julio and Blake and start fresh, but it would also be helpful to give Manny and Dan slightly more than 2 games to change the offense that Richt left us with.
The BOT’s football related hires for the last 2 decades speak for themselves. Their incompetence is out in the open. They are the root problem.
 

5Rings&an Asterisk

Sophomore
Joined
Dec 26, 2018
Messages
786
Miami is not a geographical outlier in the ACC. We were in the Big East. Most of the schools were in the northeast. We wanted to play up there because we have a large alumni base, which is why we told the Big East we wanted B.C. and Syracuse to come along. Regarding metro area, only Miami, USC are the only elite program that play in a large metro area. Most other schools are in small towns.
 

561Cane

Senior
Joined
Nov 4, 2011
Messages
3,167
Firstly, let me say that I was a Managing Consultant for Fortune 500 companies in the past but I always took a different approach to considering whether a project was profitable or not. My time in the entertainment industry taught me that every successful project should tell an impactful story and I applied this knowledge to consulting. So I would always prepare a clear, concise, one-page treatment to any MC project just like a producer would; the difference being that I would present a spreadsheet instead of a synopsis of the script. No matter what, I would always let the numbers tell the story.

Thus I present several reasons as to why Miami should move to the AAC:

Miami is not a cultural fit for the ACC.
  • The ACC is primarily a wannabe Ivy League conglomerate that emphasizes basketball.
  • They only tolerate Miami for access to a primary market.
Miami is also an outlier geographically.
  • The bulk of the ACC is located in or near the Carolinas.
The ACC does not want to be represented by a school like Miami.
  • Therefore we will always get treated unfairly
  • Whether it’s biased officiating or out right racism which is documentable.
The ACC does not promote Miami, the most recognized brand in college football.
  • The ACCN is a clear example of of where the marketing priorities of the ACC lie, and it’s not UM.
The locations of ACC are not in ideal marketing locations.
  • The only rapidly growing areas outside of Miami are the research triangle and Tallahassee.
  • Both of these areas are negligible due to school loyalty and the meaningful population that impacts growth being transient students.
Miami is the largest metropolitan area and only primary market in the ACC but has no leverage.
  • The conference alignment is not set up correctly and the championship game is in Charlotte.
  • Neither of these are favorable for Miami.
The ACC only has 1 consistently ranked playoff team (Clemson) and is just as weak as the AAC.
  • The ACC is weaker now than its ever been on every level.
  • The national perception of the ACC is just as bad or worse than the ACC.
We have no built in rival in the ACC. Why are we traveling to Pitt or Duke on rivalry week?
  • The ACC didn’t provide any advantages in football or basketball.
The marketing value of cities in the ACC is far less than the AAC.

On the contrary:

The AAC misses Miami, the former Big East appreciated and celebrated Miami.
  • Miami instantly legitimizes the AAC as a Power conference.
  • UCF is consistently ranked and needs another high profile opponent.
Miami is a much better cultural fit in AAC.
  • The AAC has has much better metropolitan locations.
  • If you look at the states that produce the most NFL talent.
  • The AAC provides a much better recruiting advantage and marketing exposure.
  • Tampa, Orlando, Houston, Dallas, New Orleans, DMV, Philly, Ohio, Memphis, Ohio & Connecticut.
The AAC presents new marketing and greater opportunities for networks and sponsors.
  • Conference realignment could have UM playing in Florida or warm climates most of the season.
  • AAC locations would increase fan support due to ease of accessibility and desirable locations.
Because of weaker teams in the AAC, UM could schedule more high profile out of conference games.
  • AAC have several primary markets in cities that are thriving and growing.
  • We have built in rivals in the AAC.
  • We could possibly play FSU, UF, UCF, USF, FIU, FAU & FAMU In one season. True state champs.
We could add an up and coming Georgia State team and retain the ATL/GA market.
  • Adding Miami would make the AAC better than the ACC in football and closer in basketball.
We need our own conference.

It’s time - if you have UM connections, please submit this for real analysis. Thank you.
It’s always all about The U

View attachment 97063
S
T
U
P
I
D
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
 

TemplarCane

Junior
Joined
Nov 12, 2015
Messages
4,358
Hypothetically speaking, I am placing billboards for Jarren’s Heisman campaign in select, fertile recruiting areas in the current recruiting cycle. The ads are to sell The U to recruits, not Heisman voters. Specifically, areas with a number of highly rated QB recruits.

The former winners and voting media will already be familiar with Jarren, and subjected to specific target marketing. If Jarren were indeed a serious Heisman contender the voters will already be familiar with him. He would be putting up big numbers and a highly or top-ranked team witnessed in TV every Saturday. Most voters are regionally biased, and toward players seen on TV.
 
Top