Big 10 Expansion Thread -Big Ten ready for a playoff .. finally?

[digamma]

Could we get back to the business of what this thread is all about? MORE MIZZOU STADIUM EXPANSION UPDATES, PLEASE.

[tarcone]

Here is a new picture of Mizzous proposed stadium improvements:



Keeping it real for you digamma

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

Clay Travis discusses the VT to the SEC momentum. Also discusses the new SEC network revenues.

Virginia Tech Fans Have SEC Fever : Outkick The Coverage

Clemson BOT calls a meeting for Thursday to discuss realignment.......

http://m.tigernet.com/m/view/story.do?id=10623

[cartman]

The math just doesn't add up in that article. He is making the assumption that viewership is going from 0% to 100%, and that simply isn't the case.

[bronconick]

Travis is an idiot. The BTN works on a 51/49 split between FOX and the league, and there also happens to be costs involved in running a network, like televising games, buying equipment, buying or renting buildings, paying hosts and the like. You don't just say "Every cable/satellite subscriber gave us a buck or two each, ESPN agreed to only take 15% or less of ownership and now we have $450 million."

The SEC network goes nowhere without ESPN granting some rights back to the SEC. They're not doing that without equity in the network, so they'll be pocketing half of the profit after costs, or the SEC can sit and spin until 2024. After all the costs, the BTN has been 7.9 and 7.2 million in the last two years per school. Try thinking around those numbers.

[Swaggs]

According to a WVU "insider," the SEC does not really want to expand but adding UNC (and the state of North Carolina, plus VPI or UVA) would do enough to re-open the CBS contract (plus, it allows CBS and ESPN to keep one of, if not the, top basketball draws).

He suggested that UNC may be the first domino to fall.

Also some rumblings that today may be the day that Clemson (and possibly FSU) declare that they are seeking options.

[Atocep]

Ouch

Brett McMurphy ‏@McMurphyCBS
.@CBSSports sources project Big East media rights at $60M; less than 1/2 what they turned down last yr

[Chubby]

Originally Posted by Swaggs

According to a WVU "insider," the SEC does not really want to expand but adding UNC (and the state of North Carolina, plus VPI or UVA) would do enough to re-open the CBS contract (plus, it allows CBS and ESPN to keep one of, if not the, top basketball draws).

He suggested that UNC may be the first domino to fall.

Also some rumblings that today may be the day that Clemson (and possibly FSU) declare that they are seeking options.

yeah cause UNC is going to leave...

[General Mike]

Originally Posted by Atocep

Ouch

Brett McMurphy ‏@McMurphyCBS
.@CBSSports sources project Big East media rights at $60M; less than 1/2 what they turned down last yr

right. Contract will be closer to 200M than that number if the current group stays together.

[Wolfpack]

Originally Posted by Swaggs

According to a WVU "insider," the SEC does not really want to expand but adding UNC (and the state of North Carolina, plus VPI or UVA) would do enough to re-open the CBS contract (plus, it allows CBS and ESPN to keep one of, if not the, top basketball draws).

He suggested that UNC may be the first domino to fall.

Also some rumblings that today may be the day that Clemson (and possibly FSU) declare that they are seeking options.

Compared to the FSU/Clemson thing, this is pretty much never happening for a few reasons:
*Carolina considers itself public ivy and likely aren't going to go from hobnobbing with Duke and Virginia to hobnobbing with Mississippi State and South Carolina (essentially, NC State and FSU are probably the low end of the ACC academically and they're still better than most of the SEC). This also comes back to the academic scandals that have plagued the football program in the last couple of years. The school's taken some beatings over it and I doubt they'd want to go to a league where academic scandals are a rather casual thing.
*In a similar vein, UNC probably prefers being the big fish in their particular pond. I can't imagine them wanting to be in a conference where only one other school takes basketball with the seriousness they do and where that sport will constantly be drowned out by football no matter what.
*Furthermore, would Kentucky even want to share their pond with UNC? Kentucky's got a relatively sweet gig now, playing in a conference where pretty much everyone else only cares about football. They get their rivalry fix with Louisville and they'll get the occasional challenger or usurper such as Florida, but by and large, the SEC in basketball is owned by them, lock, stock, and barrel. Why invite one of the few schools in the country who could hold a candle to them?

If UNC goes to the SEC, and especially if they're the first domino in any scenario, then it won't matter much because the world absolutely, positively will end on December 21, 2012.

[Ksyrup]

Clemson takes its first steps to inviting a formal inquiry from another conference:

Clemson Trustee: Tigers have not received any viable conference option - CBSSports.com

[CU Tiger]

FWIW there is a guy on Clemson's insider board whose wife is supposedly a paralegal, or otherwise works in a law office with one of Clemson's BOT.

The guy is a huge douchenozzle and generally hated, but he has leaked the last 4 or 5 coaching hires, and numerous other "business" dealings based supposedly on information gained from this office. All that said, according to him a sample member contract from the Big 12 has been provided to review and advise... again according to him contract states 15 members for 2014.

Not sure this guy throws little against the wall, and damn near everything he does sticks...but he is so aloof he is hard to believe.

[Swaggs]

Originally Posted by CU Tiger

FWIW there is a guy on Clemson's insider board whose wife is supposedly a paralegal, or otherwise works in a law office with one of Clemson's BOT.

The guy is a huge douchenozzle and generally hated, but he has leaked the last 4 or 5 coaching hires, and numerous other "business" dealings based supposedly on information gained from this office. All that said, according to him a sample member contract from the Big 12 has been provided to review and advise... again according to him contract states 15 members for 2014.

Not sure this guy throws little against the wall, and damn near everything he does sticks...but he is so aloof he is hard to believe.

I'm guessing that is the model that adds Clemson, FSU, and GT for all sports, Notre Dame for all but football, and BYU as football only.

Otherwise, I'd guess it eliminates BYU altogether, keeps Notre Dame as a partial and then adds in someone else (Louisville? Maryland?) for all sports.

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

More public battling over the playoff system......

Slive not a fan of plus-one football model | The Columbia Daily Tribune - Columbia, Missouri

[Swaggs]

Interesting -- looks like the SEC is planning for a "6-1-1" conference schedule (6 divisional, 1 permanent cross division rival, 1 rotating cross division matchup):SEC official Larry Templeton confirms plans for '6-1-1' scheduling model - CBSSports.com

If conferences do end up going to 16, it does seem likely that they will just become two 8-team mini-conferences. I think the Pac12 and Big Ten got things right with 12 teams and their conference scheduling agreement. 14 teams is too big and doesn't allow for any type of reasonable scheduling arrangements.

The Big East sat at 8 for way too long. I'm not sure if it would have mattered, but if they had 12 at the time of the ACC "raids," they would have had a deeper bench to work with. I hope the Big 12 gets up to twelve and holds tight.

[britrock88]

Originally Posted by Swaggs

Interesting -- looks like the SEC is planning for a "6-1-1" conference schedule (6 divisional, 1 permanent cross division rival, 1 rotating cross division matchup):SEC official Larry Templeton confirms plans for '6-1-1' scheduling model - CBSSports.com

If conferences do end up going to 16, it does seem likely that they will just become two 8-team mini-conferences. I think the Pac12 and Big Ten got things right with 12 teams and their conference scheduling agreement. 14 teams is too big and doesn't allow for any type of reasonable scheduling arrangements.

The Big East sat at 8 for way too long. I'm not sure if it would have mattered, but if they had 12 at the time of the ACC "raids," they would have had a deeper bench to work with. I hope the Big 12 gets up to twelve and holds tight.

This is part of why I'm convinced that these conferences of 14+ teams won't last more than, say, 10 years. Some schools will hardly see each other even though they're conference mates. After a while, there will be envy... factions will begin to form among schools who see themselves as more similar than the others... and we'll end up back at 8 team conferences (until those conference expand to 10/12/14/16). C'est la vie.

(For historical evidence, look to the WAC of the late '90s.)

[CU Tiger]

a 16 team conference could have 4 4 team divisions/regions.
You play your 3 division/region every year. You rotate through the other 3 divisions playing all 4 teams in a division in a given year and have 1 permanent non division rival or 1 floating non division....etc.

i dont think 14/16 work with 2 divisions though.

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

Originally Posted by CU Tiger

a 16 team conference could have 4 4 team divisions/regions.
You play your 3 division/region every year. You rotate through the other 3 divisions playing all 4 teams in a division in a given year and have 1 permanent non division rival or 1 floating non division....etc.

i dont think 14/16 work with 2 divisions though.

This would be the scheduling setup, but the layout would be two divisions. However, I disagree with Swaggs that it's an issue. There's a reason Slive is moving them towards the option where non-champions can still make the playoffs. He's planning on having 16 teams and wants to attempt to have both division champions in a playoff format.

With that said, I think this scenario begs for an eight team playoff, which will happen once the conference move to 16.

[CU Tiger]

Originally Posted by Mizzou B-ball fan

This would be the scheduling setup, but the layout would be two divisions. However, I disagree with Swaggs that it's an issue. There's a reason Slive is moving them towards the option where non-champions can still make the playoffs. He's planning on having 16 teams and wants to attempt to have both division champions in a playoff format.

With that said, I think this scenario begs for an eight team playoff, which will happen once the conference move to 16.

Well now that doesn't work.
Either you have 7 conference games and only 2 floaters, or division teams dont all play each other AND dont have similar opponents.
You have to play every team in your division or else your tie breakers get arbitrary.
I actually think this is the SEC model and they will soon push for an SEC semi-final game between the four pod winners.

[gstelmack]

Originally Posted by Mizzou B-ball fan

He's planning on having 16 teams and wants to attempt to have both division champions in a playoff format.

Well duh, the first round of the playoffs would be when the division champs meet for the conference championship for the right to face the other conference champions for the national championship.

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

Originally Posted by gstelmack

Well duh, the first round of the playoffs would be when the division champs meet for the conference championship for the right to face the other conference champions for the national championship.

You've missed my point. Slive wants to have the opportunity to have both division champs in the playoff. I don't think that's a good idea, but that's what he's wanting to do, whether it's 4 or 8 teams in the playoff. Would probably be OK in the 8 team format, but I agree with others that it should only be conference champs at the four team playoff level. Teams just have to understand that the playoffs start in the conference championship if there's only four teams in the playoff.

[gstelmack]

Originally Posted by Mizzou B-ball fan

You've missed my point. Slive wants to have the opportunity to have both division champs in the playoff. I don't think that's a good idea, but that's what he's wanting to do, whether it's 4 or 8 teams in the playoff. Would probably be OK in the 8 team format, but I agree with others that it should only be conference champs at the four team playoff level. Teams just have to understand that the playoffs start in the conference championship if there's only four teams in the playoff.

Oh, I'm sure he'd love to get as many teams as possible in the playoff. If they want an 8-team playoff, go to 8 conferences. If we're going to end up with 4 super-conferences, then you still have an 8-team playoff, with round 1 being the conference champions. If he wants division winners in the playoffs, then there ARE 8 conferences, they'll just be SEC I, SEC II, B1G I, B1G II, PAC I, PAC II, BIGCC12EAST I, and BIGCC12EAST II.

Otherwise there would be no point to the conference championship games, and I think folks would realise that and they'd stop being money-makers if there was no national championship or Bowl game implications to them.

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

Pretty good summary of the general chaos otherwise known as the B12 meetings this week.

OTC: B12 Meetings Prove Again Texas Gets What They Want & Little Schools Happy To Just Breathe | GregHallKC

[cartman]

But the Big 12 is not going to last more than three or four years, right? RIGHT???...................................

[mckerney]

Originally Posted by cartman

But the Big 12 is not going to last more than three or four years, right? RIGHT???...................................

You mean the conference Texas destroyed like 6 years ago? Doesn't exist today, so it probably won't in the future either.

[cartman]

Originally Posted by mckerney

You mean the conference Texas destroyed like 6 years ago? Doesn't exist today, so it probably won't in the future either.

So you are saying that the Big 12 is a zombie conference? YET ANOTHER SIGN OF THE ZOMBIE APOCALYPSE!!!

[Swaggs]

Hmmm... sounds familiar: - The Washington Post

[Noop]

Originally Posted by Swaggs

Hmmm... sounds familiar: - The Washington Post

I was thinking the same exact thing.

[mckerney]

Originally Posted by cartman

So you are saying that the Big 12 is a zombie conference? YET ANOTHER SIGN OF THE ZOMBIE APOCALYPSE!!!

No, it simply doesn't exist. Anyone who insists otherwise is either insane or spreading anti Missouri propaganda.

[panerd]

Originally Posted by mckerney

You mean the conference Texas destroyed like 6 years ago? Doesn't exist today, so it probably won't in the future either.

No Texas destroyed the SWC like 15 years ago, the Big 8 has only lost 37% of its original members. Of course they did add another Texas school!

[the_meanstrosity]

Originally Posted by Mizzou B-ball fan

Pretty good summary of the general chaos otherwise known as the B12 meetings this week.

OTC: B12 Meetings Prove Again Texas Gets What They Want & Little Schools Happy To Just Breathe | GregHallKC

I'm sorry, but using Greg Hall's uneducated comments to support some argument you are trying to make is a little silly. I think Greg Hall is entertaining, but he no longer has any ties to the media world and simply listens to the local sports talk and makes comments on his personal site. The fact is the Big 12 AD's seem to be of like mind in keeping the conference at 10 right now. I may not agree with that stance, but the AD's and numerous coaches do agree with it. Greg Hall claiming Iowa State's AD is towing the line simply because they would have a better chance of winning the Big 12 with divisions is stupid. That's like suggesting Missouri and Texas A&M went to the SEC because it was an easier path to the national title game. Conference championships is not what conference realignment is about. It's about money.

[the_meanstrosity]

Originally Posted by panerd

No Texas destroyed the SWC like 15 years ago, the Big 8 has only lost 37% of its original members. Of course they did add another Texas school!

Correct me if I'm wrong, but Missouri was one of the schools that voted with Texas during the early years of the Big 12. You made your bed, you laid in it, and then you left for a new bed because you soiled the sheets. It kills me how Missouri whines about Texas, but they sure loved them some Longhorns when the Big 12 was voting where to put the headquarters and who the commissioner should be. Nebraska is the only school that has left that didn't get in bed with Texas early in the Big 12 creation.

[SirFozzie]

If you want a break down of where all the conferences are at and other such information, look no further then this graphic:



http://assets.sbnation.com/assets/11...Conference.png

[britrock88]

I can't take it.

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

Remember this??????

Kansas, Big 10 A Good Fit? - Chicago Tribune

[Swaggs]

Big 12 expansion talk has kind of died down (presumably until after the new postseason format and its numbers are ironed out), but heard an interesting piece today. Fox is interested in trying out nationally broadcasted, Friday night games on the Fox Network channel (not one of the Fox Sports Networks) with the Big 12. If Florida State and Clemson come aboard, they would bump their contract up about $45M per year, in exchange for 3 extra years on the existing contract.

Kind of random, but some outside-of-the-box thinking (ESPN2 and ESPNU have Friday night games now, but the Fox Network actually reaches the most homes in the U.S.).

[CU Tiger]

Originally Posted by Swaggs

Big 12 expansion talk has kind of died down (presumably until after the new postseason format and its numbers are ironed out), but heard an interesting piece today. Fox is interested in trying out nationally broadcasted, Friday night games on the Fox Network channel (not one of the Fox Sports Networks) with the Big 12. If Florida State and Clemson come aboard, they would bump their contract up about $45M per year, in exchange for 3 extra years on the existing contract.

Kind of random, but some outside-of-the-box thinking (ESPN2 and ESPNU have Friday night games now, but the Fox Network actually reaches the most homes in the U.S.).

Clemson actually has in their current ACC media agreement a clause that they will not play Friday night games and will not host Thursday night games.

IF you've been to Clemson you understand the Thursday deal, but the Friday is in deference to HS football and the key role it plays in so many southern towns. I cant imagine FSU and certainly not the texas teams being keen on it either, given the importance of HS football in those states.

Sure in the NE where often HS games have to be played Saturday daytime its not a big deal. But I have literally heard a HS coach say he would never recommend his kids playing at any college that would play on Friday nights.

[panerd]

Originally Posted by CU Tiger

Clemson actually has in their current ACC media agreement a clause that they will not play Friday night games and will not host Thursday night games.

IF you've been to Clemson you understand the Thursday deal, but the Friday is in deference to HS football and the key role it plays in so many southern towns. I cant imagine FSU and certainly not the texas teams being keen on it either, given the importance of HS football in those states.

Sure in the NE where often HS games have to be played Saturday daytime its not a big deal. But I have literally heard a HS coach say he would never recommend his kids playing at any college that would play on Friday nights.

But the Big 12 already has a contract for Friday night games, including the Texas schools. Baylor, TCU, Iowa State, Oklahoma State (where they lost their perfect record), and Mizzou all played in them last year. I don't think loyalty to high school football matters when the $$$ is thrown on the table.

[Marmel]

Originally Posted by CU Tiger

Clemson actually has in their current ACC media agreement a clause that they will not play Friday night games and will not host Thursday night games.

IF you've been to Clemson you understand the Thursday deal, but the Friday is in deference to HS football and the key role it plays in so many southern towns. I cant imagine FSU and certainly not the texas teams being keen on it either, given the importance of HS football in those states.

Sure in the NE where often HS games have to be played Saturday daytime its not a big deal. But I have literally heard a HS coach say he would never recommend his kids playing at any college that would play on Friday nights.

An honest questions from an ignorant northerner: What exactly makes Clemson a desirable target for the Big12, if in fact they even are? From what I can see they have a national title from 30+ years ago and have been average to a little above average since. They haven't finished a season ranked in the top 10 in 20 years. Yes, they have some cool stadium traditions, etc. What gives?

[CU Tiger]

Originally Posted by Marmel

An honest questions from an ignorant northerner: What exactly makes Clemson a desirable target for the Big12, if in fact they even are? From what I can see they have a national title from 30+ years ago and have been average to a little above average since. They haven't finished a season ranked in the top 10 in 20 years. Yes, they have some cool stadium traditions, etc. What gives?

They are 2 hours from Charlotte, NC and 2.5 from Atlanta and have a large number of Alumni in each. Thats two nice TV markets.

They also travel as good as anyone in the country historically.
Consistently finish top 20 in attendance.
They are a top 30ish public institution in terms of Academics.

Other than that, good question I suppose.
Not intended to be a snarky response, we have as nice of facilities as any Ive seen outside of Oregon, a good tradition, great support, and touch some nice TV markets.

Plus for whatever reason TV loves Clemson. When we have any national relevance we dont have any problem getting an inordinate amount of run (which admittedly is rare).

[Swaggs]

Clemson averages almost 78K per game, which is more than any other ACC, Pac 12, or Big East team.

[cartman]

Well, the obvious reason is that the Big 12 feels incredibly empty now that they don't have a member school with a tiger as the mascot anymore. That is a huge hole that the Mizzou departure left behind.

[Marmel]

Originally Posted by CU Tiger

They are 2 hours from Charlotte, NC and 2.5 from Atlanta and have a large number of Alumni in each. Thats two nice TV markets.

They also travel as good as anyone in the country historically.
Consistently finish top 20 in attendance.
They are a top 30ish public institution in terms of Academics.

Other than that, good question I suppose.
Not intended to be a snarky response, we have as nice of facilities as any Ive seen outside of Oregon, a good tradition, great support, and touch some nice TV markets.

Plus for whatever reason TV loves Clemson. When we have any national relevance we dont have any problem getting an inordinate amount of run (which admittedly is rare).

Fair enough. Thanks.
What would make them think about (again, if they even are) move to a Texas-centric conference? Why wouldn't they be perfectly happy (along with FSU) in a conference that now runs up and down the entire East Coast, which is where probably 90%+ of their alumni are? Does anybody really think an undefeated or 1 loss Clemson or FSU, with a good OOC schedule (it looks like Clemson schedules USC and another good team every year) would get left out of a 4 team playoff? I am just not getting it.

[bronconick]

On the night game thing, FSU hasn't hosted a Thursday night game in about a decade because they have classes that take place in rooms in Doak Campbell Stadium and student parking in most of the football lots and everyone around the country including farking ESPN turned it into a giant joke that FSU was cancelling a day of classes for football.

So, every year they play someone in the ACC on the road on Thursday night. This year, it's Virginia Tech. It was NCSU and BC the last two years.

[Swaggs]

I think the biggest problem with the ACC is that they got a crappy TV deal before the Pac 12 broke the bank and re-established the baseline. They also gave away their Tier 3 rights in the crappy TV deal, so the teams are losing a chunk of cash there, too. It seems like they essentially traded the big bucks for exposure (more televised games) and their long-term relationship with Raycom (which televises lower profile games in ACC markets, but buys them from ESPN rather than directly from the ACC -- they apparently have been in business with the ACC for decades and would have gone bankrupt if not for the arrangement between the ACC and ESPN).

That and the above-mentioned fact that, outside of 3-4 teams (Clemson, FSU, VPI, and NC State), they don't travel or have attendance like the SEC or Big 12 teams (or Pac 12) gives them bad bowl arrangements.

[bronconick]

The PAC-12 doesn't travel for crap. They're basically the ACC if the SEC gorilla isn't next door. It shows up in that they have the Rose Bowl and a bunch of December bowls, just like the ACC and the Orange, followed by December madness.

[CU Tiger]

A huge part of Clemson wanting to depart (and I'm speaking for the fan base here not the administration) is a perceived slight by the ACC itself and the tobacco road contingent.

A number of factors contribute but the most recent is the way the UNC scandal went down. Current ACC commissioner John Swofford is not only a UNC alum but also a former UNC AD. At the time of Clemson's NCAA probation in 84 Swofford asked that the ACC specifically add 1 year the the NCAA imposed 2 year probation on the grounds of one count of Academic fraud (a tudor wrote a paper for a student) Swofford stated that Academic integrity must be maintained and Clemson's actions had sullied the reputation of the entire ACC ,most notably public Ivy. Swofford requested the Clemson AD not be present during the discussion and then called for a private anonymous ballot. AT which point Wake Forest and Maryland's AD stood up and walked out. Reportedly GT abstained from voting, not withstanding the motion passed . After UNC's most recent scandal Clemson AD Terry Don Phillips requested the same of the ACC now commissioned by Mr. Swofford himself and a letter of reprimand was issued but a formal vote was not allowed or presented to the member institutions. That's strike on.

That Swoffords own son has an ownership stake in Raycom is strike two.

That Swofford is paid more than Slive or any other conference commissioner is strike three.

Add in that UNC and DUKE retain Tier 3 basketball rights while Clemson and FSU do not retain football rights in the new deal and you have a full fledge war.

Clemson can sling money with most anyone, we have a very fiscally conservative athletic department, and the oldest Alumni Booster organization in the country.

Historically Clemson has owned the in state rivalry with SC, but has watched the arms race escalate and is seeing the financial impacts. SC and their SEC money continue to borrow and Bond their way to facility improvements while Clemson continues to sit on cash reserves (allegedly $75MM)and build out of prior raised funding..... and frankly we are getting sick of it. Clemson brings way more money to the ACC then the ACC brings to Clemson.

We do not have many "Olympic" sports to concern ourselves with travel wise. So travel isnt a huge deal.
Throw in FSU, WVU, add 2 more eastern schools to a 16 team league in an eastern division and the travel isn't really any worse than Boston, or Syracuse (brilliant fawking move there btw)

[Ksyrup]

Originally Posted by bronconick

On the night game thing, FSU hasn't hosted a Thursday night game in about a decade because they have classes that take place in rooms in Doak Campbell Stadium and student parking in most of the football lots and everyone around the country including farking ESPN turned it into a giant joke that FSU was cancelling a day of classes for football.

So, every year they play someone in the ACC on the road on Thursday night. This year, it's Virginia Tech. It was NCSU and BC the last two years.

Even before they had classes at Doak, it was a logistical nightmare. I worked downtown - which is not just a downtown but the capital of the state, all smushed together in a couple square miles - and we had to shut down work before noon to accomodate the game. It's just not something they can handle, or want to handle, even once a year.

[CU Tiger]

Originally Posted by Ksyrup

Even before they had classes at Doak, it was a logistical nightmare. I worked downtown - which is not just a downtown but the capital of the state, all smushed together in a couple square miles - and we had to shut down work before noon to accomodate the game. It's just not something they can handle, or want to handle, even once a year.

Try it in Clemson.
Enrollment is 19,000
The town has a population of 24,000 INCLUDING enrollment.
Every on campus parking spot for students, faculty, maintenance vehicle everything is sold as reserved parking for season ticket holders. Additionally parking is all over the school in any grass areas. literally on campus students are required to move their cars off campus on game days...an aggravation on a saturday, an impossibility on a school day. Now consider that as a donor i pay $2,400/year for that parking spot, and you now tell me I cant use it for one game. lol

[digamma]

Originally Posted by CU Tiger

That Swoffords own son has an ownership stake in Raycom is strike two.

I think Swofford is a little girl just as much as every good non-Tobacco Road ACC fan, but Chad Swofford is an upper level manager at Raycom Sports, which is owned by Raycom Media, based out of Alabama. Though he may have some equity compensation as part of his employment, to my knowledge there is no material "ownership stake." This conspiracy theory has gotten a little bit out of hand.