AAC Hypothetical

[CornCobPipes]

Is UConn still considering dropping down with football? And the AAC needs a replacement? Or, is it the AAC planning to expand to 14 like most of P5s?

[VNova]

Is UConn still considering dropping down with football? And the AAC needs a replacement? Or, is it the AAC planning to expand to 14 like most of P5s?

UCONN already dropped and AAC has a waiver until 2021. Nothing really happening on that front as of late.

[hotrod2001]

I'm with ericsaid, I don't see how anyone could say the AAC is not a better conference or want to be in a conference with GSU/ODU/UNC instead of Cincy/ECU/Houston/Memphis/UCF. Those are much more intriguing match ups, we'd have much higher chance year in and year out of staying ranked after a loss, and would be in better contention for the Access Bowl.

We have the same path to the access bowl now as we would in the AAC. There is little doubt that the conference is better, but is it a good move? Expenses. Assumed tv revenue. It would be a big gamble for the same result.

Let me ask you this. Should Clemson move to the SEC? More money. Better conference. Better match ups. They have a path to the NC in the ACC. So, would this be a smart move for Clemson?

That's a bit of a false equivalency though. The Sun Belt Conference is always going to be at a disadvantage in terms of exposure and "love" by committees and pollsters. The only reason it gets talked about at the moment is because of our run this year, most people outside of the conference still think it's a doormat despite the stats over the last four years saying otherwise. Same kind of goes for the MAC and C-USA too. AAC by far gets more exposure nationally than the other G5's by a mile so you have to sit and wonder what is more important to the program: be geographically closer to mediocre programs or be in a conference with a little more sparseness geographically but with a larger nation-wide audience and a much larger revenue share for the athletics department.

Me, I think if you get an opportunity to go to the American we should take it. The opportunity to have the likes of SMU, Houston, Cincinatti, UCF and ECU come to Kidd Brewer Stadium annually would be a huge draw compared to the likes of Charlotte, Texas State or MTSU. You'd have the attention and if you get on a run like what we are doing this year, you'd be in the rankings a lot sooner and your path to a NY6 is a lot more clearer than it would be if you were in the Sun Belt or MWC where running the table is the minimum you can do for consideration.

I wouldn't mind having to prove our worth of a full membership, we've had to do that before and maybe with the allure of bringing our other sports up to the AAC, our recruiting, exposure and support would increase as well. I've always seen App as a contingency situation where if given the opportunity, the school's sports teams can grow into a position if an invite to a larger conference was ever given. Give us a chance to prove we can pack 30k+ into KBS each week and that we own the Charlotte/Triad/WNC/Tri-Cities geographical footprint and we'd deliver. You just need to give App that opportunity to reach for it.

[citroknight]

AAC TV pays $7M per school, SBC $1ishM

Depends how much football only get you. It’s really that simple.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.sbnati ... ealignment

Yeah, but how much are their budgets? You can't just look at what's coming in. ECU is in the red last I heard.

Promised TV deal is what got CUSA in trouble.

Just a correction on this, there was no promised TV deal for CUSA. Nor is the AAC at risk for ESPN to randomly go back on their word and pay them less than agreed to. The only way for the AAC to get less money is the exact same reason CUSA lost money: membership change.

CUSA had a TV deal with ESPN based on the members it had in the era I call CUSA 2.0, which were UCF, ECU, Memphis, Houston, SMU, Tulsa, Tulane, Rice, Marshall, Southern Miss, UAB, and UTEP. When 7 of those teams left to the Big East/AAC, gone were most of the winning programs and large markets. So for a year or so, CUSA 3.0 got to ride out a deal that was based on the previous membership. Once it came time to negotiate a new deal, it wasn't even going to start from where the old one was valued because the new members were significantly less established. That's what happened.

The AAC deal also has membership clauses. I don't remember if the exact details ever got out, but it would either be if the AAC loses X amount of members, the deal probably has to be renegotiated or goes down a set amount. I'm betting there's also a clause like in the old deal tied to specific members leaving. Aka if the UCF and Houston's of the league are out, then so is the value of the deal for ESPN.

[citroknight]

Is UConn still considering dropping down with football? And the AAC needs a replacement? Or, is it the AAC planning to expand to 14 like most of P5s?

For now UConn is remaining an FBS Independent. But that's a hard path if you're not ND or BYU. So I wouldn't be shocked if eventually they either drop down to FCS and play in a regional New England league or get rid of football altogether.

For now, no planned replacement. For the 2020-2021 seasons, the AAC will have 11 teams and go without divisions. The schedules still pretty much follow the geographical pairings of the east and west divisions, but since there technically won't be divisions, the AAC will send the two teams with the best records to play in the AAC title game. This is what the Big 12 does and it requires round robin play, but the AAC got a waiver to not have to do round robin for two years or else that would've meant a 10 game conference schedule.

The AAC is trying to avoid adding a 12th member so the long term goal is to push for the rules to change and make it so a divisonless conference sending it's two best teams to play in the championship doesn't require round robin play. If that fails, then they'll probably begin to seriously consider a backfill for UConn.

[NattyBumppo'sRevenge]

If we can start consistently beating them out for the top G5 spot, they might be more inclined to bring us in, instead of having to compete with the SunBelt for the NY6.

[rbarthle17]

Anyone thinking the Sun Belt is "rising" as it pertains to football is deluding themselves. Any statistical comparison will show that the Sun Belt is at or near the bottom of all FBS conferences, with the majority of its teams in the bottom 1/4 of all FBS schools. If it wasn't for us and Louisiana this year, Sun Belt would be dead last.

The SBC has been a great first step into the FBS world for us. And given that it's expected that landscapes will change, our time in the SBC will be finite. What's the next step? No idea. But when you take away human biases and look at the cold numbers, it's the SBC, CUSA, and the MAC fighting for last place when it comes to power in football.

[Rick83]

If we get offered by the AAC we take it. If we don't, I'll continue enjoying dominating our Sun Belt Brethren and playing the role of spoiler for the AAC/Boise run to the NY6.
The difference in the money and prestige means we wouldn't have to worry about Memphis, Cincy, or the likes hiring Drink & staff away. Those guys could easily double+ his compensation and give him a higher platform to get noticed by a rich P5. Satt had to show sustained domination in the Sun Belt to get a credible offer from a mid-tier P5 program and even then some of their fans were dubious of the hire at the time. Drink is young, smart, and ambitious so he's going to want to climb the college football ladder. If we were to join the AAC then we'd be able to hold onto him and his staff longer.
Also, Doug Gillin needs to be paid or we're going to lose him, especially if Kerns turns out to be a good hire which all indications at the moment show that he was. Gillin has shown so far that he's a high-performer who can get things done...I'd like to keep him as long as possible and would hate to lose him to a Memphis-type school merely because they can double his compensation.
Also, if the playoffs do expand, and I believe they will, then we're going to be in a better position to be the G5 rep if we're in the AAC. Obviously, the AAC membership could change and there is the possibility of a conference re-alignment in the 20s but there is absolutely no way to predict that either of those things will happen or how we would shake out in it if they did happen. So, assuming the economics of the AAC membership makes sense for whatever is offered then we graciously accept an invitation.

[Rick83]

If we get offered by the AAC we take it. If we don't, I'll continue enjoying dominating our Sun Belt Brethren and playing the role of spoiler for the AAC/Boise run to the NY6.
The difference in the money and prestige means we wouldn't have to worry about Memphis, Cincy, or the likes hiring Drink & staff away. Those guys could easily double+ his compensation and give him a higher platform to get noticed by a rich P5. Satt had to show sustained domination in the Sun Belt to get a credible offer from a mid-tier P5 program and even then some of their fans were dubious of the hire at the time. Drink is young, smart, and ambitious so he's going to want to climb the college football ladder. If we were to join the AAC then we'd be able to hold onto him and his staff longer.
Also, Doug Gillin needs to be paid or we're going to lose him, especially if Kerns turns out to be a good hire which all indications at the moment show that he was. Gillin has shown so far that he's a high-performer who can get things done...I'd like to keep him as long as possible and would hate to lose him to a Memphis-type school merely because they can double his compensation.
Also, if the playoffs do expand, and I believe they will, then we're going to be in a better position to be the G5 rep if we're in the AAC. Obviously, the AAC membership could change and there is the possibility of a conference re-alignment in the 20s but there is absolutely no way to predict that either of those things will happen or how we would shake out in it if they did happen. So, assuming the economics of the AAC membership makes sense for whatever is offered then we graciously accept an invitation.

Sorry, forgot to add this: We graciously accept the AAC invitation and then unapologetically start kicking some AAC ass...

[BallantyneApp]

If we can start consistently beating them out for the top G5 spot, they might be more inclined to bring us in, instead of having to compete with the SunBelt for the NY6.

This, more than anything is our path. We're not going to have other sports that impress the AAC (even with a turnaround in basketball). But if they are consistently having to have their commisioner come out to take pot shots at us in football, they might throw around an invite to keep it all under the AAC umbrella.

[Black Saturday]

Except that we really don't have the same path to the NY6 - look at this year. There are 2 AAC teams ahead of us in the CFP rankings with arguably similar (or worse) resumes and either is pretty much universally accepted by the wider media as a shoe in if one of them wins out, regardless of what we do. We're still playing from behind in the Belt.

Yes. This sums it up perfectly.

But we're ahead of a one loss SMU team from the AAC. Yes, if we win out this year and don't get help we will be left out. That's life. Ask Auburn how it feels to go 13-0 and not play for the NC in 2004.

If we do win out we might be ranked at the beginning of next season. Pre season rankings can come in very handy. We are gaining respect as we go. The path exists in the AAC and the SB.

Clemson runs the risk of being left out because their strength of schedule too. Should they move to the SEC?

Comparing our situation to Clemson is absurd. On a year in year out basis the AAC will give us a better chance of getting the Access Bowl slot because the quality of teams in that conference are better from top to bottom. Youre looking at this year as an isolated snapshot but that is not realistic. Most years we wont have beat 2 P5 teams so we will need conference games to bolster our standing (which we will not get in the SBC). Clemson runs a risk this one year, do they usually run a risk? NO. Youve set up a weird straw man here, but the fact that you keep going to that well doesn't prove anything. There is a reason Willie Fritz left a on the rise GaSou to go coach at Tulane. The conference (from top to bottom again) is perceived by and large as better, they have better budgets, and a bigger slice of TV revenues. We had your attitude one time before (ie its too big a gamble to test out) and we got left behind in D1-AA and have been trying to play catch-up ever since. I have full faith DG is working as much magic as he can to help us take the next step. When it comes. We must go.

The parallels are there. Clemson will always run the risk since their strength of schedule will always be inferior. Did you see them drop in the polls without losing a game?

We run the risk because of the exact same thing. Clemson going to the SEC to increase revenue and strength of schedule is no different than us go to the AAC for the same reasons.

I was on board for FBS from day #1. FCS was a waste land. This is something completely different.

SB provides many of the same opportunities as the AAC. As good, no. But they are there for the taking. So why chop up the athletic program and chase assumed money that has zero guarantee, when we can continue to progressively evolve taking smart lower risk moves in the process.

One move is erratic. The other is strategic.

Football is the MONEY sport that puts numbers into the coffers of these P5 schools. The SEC Commissioner was smart enough get out ahead of the TV money deals. The SEC Network, and their partners ESPN, CBS all have promoted, propagandized, pushed, brain-washed, or what ever description you want to add, that the SEC is the place to be for potential athletes and to sports fans. So where is the top athlete going to lean to play football? They have built a well oiled machine. Maybe that is why ACC football overall is not on par with the SEC now?

[AppStFan1]

Yes. This sums it up perfectly.

But we're ahead of a one loss SMU team from the AAC. Yes, if we win out this year and don't get help we will be left out. That's life. Ask Auburn how it feels to go 13-0 and not play for the NC in 2004.

If we do win out we might be ranked at the beginning of next season. Pre season rankings can come in very handy. We are gaining respect as we go. The path exists in the AAC and the SB.

Clemson runs the risk of being left out because their strength of schedule too. Should they move to the SEC?

Comparing our situation to Clemson is absurd. On a year in year out basis the AAC will give us a better chance of getting the Access Bowl slot because the quality of teams in that conference are better from top to bottom. Youre looking at this year as an isolated snapshot but that is not realistic. Most years we wont have beat 2 P5 teams so we will need conference games to bolster our standing (which we will not get in the SBC). Clemson runs a risk this one year, do they usually run a risk? NO. Youve set up a weird straw man here, but the fact that you keep going to that well doesn't prove anything. There is a reason Willie Fritz left a on the rise GaSou to go coach at Tulane. The conference (from top to bottom again) is perceived by and large as better, they have better budgets, and a bigger slice of TV revenues. We had your attitude one time before (ie its too big a gamble to test out) and we got left behind in D1-AA and have been trying to play catch-up ever since. I have full faith DG is working as much magic as he can to help us take the next step. When it comes. We must go.

The parallels are there. Clemson will always run the risk since their strength of schedule will always be inferior. Did you see them drop in the polls without losing a game?

We run the risk because of the exact same thing. Clemson going to the SEC to increase revenue and strength of schedule is no different than us go to the AAC for the same reasons.

I was on board for FBS from day #1. FCS was a waste land. This is something completely different.

SB provides many of the same opportunities as the AAC. As good, no. But they are there for the taking. So why chop up the athletic program and chase assumed money that has zero guarantee, when we can continue to progressively evolve taking smart lower risk moves in the process.

One move is erratic. The other is strategic.

Football is the MONEY sport that puts numbers into the coffers of these P5 schools. The SEC Commissioner was smart enough get out ahead of the TV money deals. The SEC Network, and their partners ESPN, CBS all have promoted, propagandized, pushed, brain-washed, or what ever description you want to add, that the SEC is the place to be for potential athletes and to sports fans. So where is the top athlete going to lean to play football? They have built a well oiled machine. Maybe that is why ACC football overall is not on par with the SEC now?

There is no question the SEC's big 4 are better than any 4 in any other league but outside of Alabama, LSU, Georgia, and Auburn the rest of the league right now is really no better than the rest of the ACC below Clemson. I mean if you stacked the ACC and SEC teams together I think you could argue that the order is LSU, Clemson, Alabama, Georgia, and then the next 4 teams could be any order of VT, Pitt, UVA, Wake Forest, etc. The ACC just has one huge gap.

It just seems that the AAC adding App State would further strengthen the league you could argue with Cincy, App, SMU, UCF, Navy, and Memphis the AAC is just as good as the ACC and the SEC below the top 4 teams.

SEC has done a good job making it seem the SEC is the top league but it is top heavy with 4 really good teams, then 3 good to above average teams (Florida, Texas A&M, Missouri). The issue is right now there are a lot of teams (South Carolina, Tennessee, Ole Miss, Miss St, Vandy, Kentucky) that I don' think could win the AAC or even SBC from the SEC.

[AppStFan1]

If we get offered by the AAC we take it. If we don't, I'll continue enjoying dominating our Sun Belt Brethren and playing the role of spoiler for the AAC/Boise run to the NY6.
The difference in the money and prestige means we wouldn't have to worry about Memphis, Cincy, or the likes hiring Drink & staff away. Those guys could easily double+ his compensation and give him a higher platform to get noticed by a rich P5. Satt had to show sustained domination in the Sun Belt to get a credible offer from a mid-tier P5 program and even then some of their fans were dubious of the hire at the time. Drink is young, smart, and ambitious so he's going to want to climb the college football ladder. If we were to join the AAC then we'd be able to hold onto him and his staff longer.
Also, Doug Gillin needs to be paid or we're going to lose him, especially if Kerns turns out to be a good hire which all indications at the moment show that he was. Gillin has shown so far that he's a high-performer who can get things done...I'd like to keep him as long as possible and would hate to lose him to a Memphis-type school merely because they can double his compensation.
Also, if the playoffs do expand, and I believe they will, then we're going to be in a better position to be the G5 rep if we're in the AAC. Obviously, the AAC membership could change and there is the possibility of a conference re-alignment in the 20s but there is absolutely no way to predict that either of those things will happen or how we would shake out in it if they did happen. So, assuming the economics of the AAC membership makes sense for whatever is offered then we graciously accept an invitation.

There is no question if AAC comes calling that we will go. It would be a huge mistake not to. I am glad for our time in the SBC but if we ever want to be a serious NY6 candidate we need to win the AAC. A big reason why I have said all along that 1 loss, no matter who to, will destroy our NY6 dreams because we don't have the depth in our league that gives us games to rebound and really move up the polls. All we can do is hope teams in front of us lose and win by more than the spread.

Look at it this way. If we go from 24 to 22 in a week it is because of teams losing. There is no win on our schedule that can vault us up 4-5+ spots even with those right in front of us winning. If Cincy were to beat Memphis by 14 they would possibly pass a couple of teams who win ahead of them if they struggle against non ranked team. That won't happen for us. ULL is the only one that may look good but even then they don't have a marquee win that proves they are a good team. I don't think they deserve votes in the top 25 because they are just beating bad teams right now. They struggled for a while with South Alabama so I don't see how us beating them should be a case where we can argue that we should skip past the AAC champ at the end. We need help as long as we are in the SBC.

The only way for us to keep anyone is to pay well. ADs, like coaches, follow the money. Right now Memphis does pay more than App so I can't blame those guys if they went to a school like that. It is another reason to go to AAC because the payout is more and we would then have an even better shot at keeping good people.

[ericsaid]

AAC TV pays $7M per school, SBC $1ishM

Depends how much football only get you. It’s really that simple.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.sbnati ... ealignment

Yeah, but how much are their budgets? You can't just look at what's coming in. ECU is in the red last I heard.

Promised TV deal is what got CUSA in trouble.

ECU was in the Red because they increased their spending beyond the money coming in. Part of that is because donations fell and attendance fell after Ruffin, an ECU alum, was fired for seemingly no plausible reason. The AD's stance was that Ruffin wasn't taking ECU to a championship level while Head Coach, despite one real down season after Lincoln Riley, Shane Carden, and Justin Hardy left and graduated, respectively.

Now Compher AND Montgomery, are gone. ECU has already performed better in year zero with Mike Houston than any of the three years with Montgomery. The loss of revenue had little to do with the AAC and more to do with mismanagement of the entire athletics department.

App should count their blessings when it comes to Gillin and the Chancellors that have been in place.

[ericsaid]

Anyone thinking the Sun Belt is "rising" as it pertains to football is deluding themselves. Any statistical comparison will show that the Sun Belt is at or near the bottom of all FBS conferences, with the majority of its teams in the bottom 1/4 of all FBS schools. If it wasn't for us and Louisiana this year, Sun Belt would be dead last.

The SBC has been a great first step into the FBS world for us. And given that it's expected that landscapes will change, our time in the SBC will be finite. What's the next step? No idea. But when you take away human biases and look at the cold numbers, it's the SBC, CUSA, and the MAC fighting for last place when it comes to power in football.

The Sun Belt is the third G5 conference and has been since New Mexico State and Idaho were not renewed. Losing MTSU and WKU, in football, ended up not being detrimental because Georgia Southern and App were added. NMSU and Idaho were akin to the F_U schools and that deadweight was dumped twice.

The Sun Belt is in a good position for what it is, but it's not likely to surpass the MWC until you have the top two or three teams in the Sun Belt consistently beating average P5 programs that they should beat. Louisiana beating Mississippi State would've helped the conference a lot this year and Louisiana would likely be ranked at this moment. But that's not what happened.

[AppStFan1]

AAC TV pays $7M per school, SBC $1ishM

Depends how much football only get you. It’s really that simple.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.sbnati ... ealignment

Yeah, but how much are their budgets? You can't just look at what's coming in. ECU is in the red last I heard.

Promised TV deal is what got CUSA in trouble.

ECU was in the Red because they increased their spending beyond the money coming in. Part of that is because donations fell and attendance fell after Ruffin, an ECU alum, was fired for seemingly no plausible reason. The AD's stance was that Ruffin wasn't taking ECU to a championship level while Head Coach, despite one real down season after Lincoln Riley, Shane Carden, and Justin Hardy left and graduated, respectively.

Now Compher AND Montgomery, are gone. ECU has already performed better in year zero with Mike Houston than any of the three years with Montgomery. The loss of revenue had little to do with the AAC and more to do with mismanagement of the entire athletics department.

App should count their blessings when it comes to Gillin and the Chancellors that have been in place.

No question. Any South Carolina fan would gladly trade ADs with us but nobody in Boone would want to trade ADs with them. We are lucky for sure.

[ericsaid]

Their fans are truly insufferable and their pride in their conference bizarre.

AAC fans basically meet the definition of little-man syndrome.

When the Big12 gobbles up Boise and two or three of the AAC teams in the next realignment, it’ll be no different than the conference we are in right now.

Moving is a waste of our time. #funbelt

The Big XII isn't going to take Boise State. The Big XII could take Cincinnati and Houston but I'd imagine Texas, Texas Tech, TCU, and Baylor would be against adding Houston. UCF would be the outlier but they seem to be an extreme outlier in the geography that makes the Big XII the Big XII. There is a different brand of football, regionally, in each conference. If it's just about money, UCF is still a directional school and in the Big XII they would be going against flagship programs.

I'd consider a likely scenario that, should the AAC continue to produce NY6 teams and perform on par with the ACC, they push for an automatic bid being RESTORED to the Old Big East. It shouldn't be considered as granted because technically the American lost the ability to keep the Big East brand.

At this point, I'd suggest that the AAC deserves an autobid to NY6 because the teams that they send generally win or perform on par with the "Power 5" program that they play.

[ericsaid]

AAC TV pays $7M per school, SBC $1ishM

Depends how much football only get you. It’s really that simple.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.sbnati ... ealignment

Yeah, but how much are their budgets? You can't just look at what's coming in. ECU is in the red last I heard.

Promised TV deal is what got CUSA in trouble.

ECU was in the Red because they increased their spending beyond the money coming in. Part of that is because donations fell and attendance fell after Ruffin, an ECU alum, was fired for seemingly no plausible reason. The AD's stance was that Ruffin wasn't taking ECU to a championship level while Head Coach, despite one real down season after Lincoln Riley, Shane Carden, and Justin Hardy left and graduated, respectively.

Now Compher AND Montgomery, are gone. ECU has already performed better in year zero with Mike Houston than any of the three years with Montgomery. The loss of revenue had little to do with the AAC and more to do with mismanagement of the entire athletics department.

App should count their blessings when it comes to Gillin and the Chancellors that have been in place.

No question. Any South Carolina fan would gladly trade ADs with us but nobody in Boone would want to trade ADs with them. We are lucky for sure.

South Carolina has the issue of being a perennially average program. What is success to them? Winning a National Championship in any major sport outside of baseball? No. They are a baseball school. It's what they do.

There will be decent seasons in football but, by in large, they aren't going to compete year in and year out with Florida or Georgia.

[APPdiesel]

I've skimmed through James Madison and NDSU threads about this same topic and we sound almost as crazy as them.

Clemson doesn't join the SEC because the ACC gives them a path to the playoff every year. App can sit tight in the Sunbelt because this year proves the Sunbelt can provide a path to the NY6. We've been here 5 years and a lot of you feel entitled to a cotton bowl just because we beat a decent UNC and a crappy USC. Take the damn stairs.

If any realignment occurs I still favor luring 2 away from CUSA. A swap doesn't work because they're not going to just trade their 2 best eastern teams for 2 of our worst western ones no matter how tidy it looks on a map. Blowing up and starting over implies a decade of instability and growing pains from a league administrative standpoint. Small course corrections get us where we want to be, not massive over-steers.

[AppStFan1]

AAC TV pays $7M per school, SBC $1ishM

Depends how much football only get you. It’s really that simple.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.sbnati ... ealignment

Yeah, but how much are their budgets? You can't just look at what's coming in. ECU is in the red last I heard.

Promised TV deal is what got CUSA in trouble.

ECU was in the Red because they increased their spending beyond the money coming in. Part of that is because donations fell and attendance fell after Ruffin, an ECU alum, was fired for seemingly no plausible reason. The AD's stance was that Ruffin wasn't taking ECU to a championship level while Head Coach, despite one real down season after Lincoln Riley, Shane Carden, and Justin Hardy left and graduated, respectively.

Now Compher AND Montgomery, are gone. ECU has already performed better in year zero with Mike Houston than any of the three years with Montgomery. The loss of revenue had little to do with the AAC and more to do with mismanagement of the entire athletics department.

App should count their blessings when it comes to Gillin and the Chancellors that have been in place.

No question. Any South Carolina fan would gladly trade ADs with us but nobody in Boone would want to trade ADs with them. We are lucky for sure.

South Carolina has the issue of being a perennially average program. What is success to them? Winning a National Championship in any major sport outside of baseball? No. They are a baseball school. It's what they do.

There will be decent seasons in football but, by in large, they aren't going to compete year in and year out with Florida or Georgia.

Well they have two factions in their fan base. One who has accepted what you just said. Then they have a portion who went there during Spurrier years and believe that if they have competent leadership that they should be able to win big. They really need to go to the ACC if they want to compete for titles year in and year out but as long as Florida and UGA have good coaches it will be tough for SC to be better than 3rd place in the SEC East.

Regardless, they have been Clemson's little brother for the most part and have underachieved. I don't think they should be a top 10 program but they should be a top 25 or top 40 type program every year with all that they have.

With the current regime they are destined for more 3-9, 4-8, 5-7 type seasons. I would love for their current leadership to stay in place at least through 2027. lol