Since college expansion is back in the news and Notre Dame has committed to join the ACC for football if it ever decides independence is not the road to a spot in the playoffs, would you like to see UK jump from the SEC to the ACC as the 16th team if invited?
Would UK accept an ACC invitation?
- Thread starter WahooCard
- Start date
UK is in a great situation with the SEC. Can't imagine the school ever jumping to another league.
No, and I can't imagine they'd ever want us. Conference realignment is all about football, and we don't bring a prestigious enough football program. They do not care about Basketball, no conference does. It's just a bonus.
Second, we'd be batpoop insane to ever leave the SEC. More money than all the other conferences, more exposure, more stability.
Second, we'd be batpoop insane to ever leave the SEC. More money than all the other conferences, more exposure, more stability.
No chance. Can't see trading in being a bottom dweller in football and stomping a overall weaker BB slate for Winning at FB and facing a stronger slate during the BB season.
The SEC brought in $34 million dollars last year to each school. The ACC brought in $22 million. I can think of 12 million reasons to say no.
How the new ACC network affects the payouts is unknown. But for a basketball school, the challenge should be to play against the best each year and that is in the ACC.
If our football team is ever birthed to being a decent team, then the SEC is the home, past and future. Bottom line, we are a charter school that is never going to leave money on the table to play in a tougher basketball conference.
No.
Uavel has crawled from the MVC through about 12 other conferences to get to the ACC. Kentucky doesn't need to do that.
I'll go against the grain here. I think a move to the ACC would be a good move for UK. Here is why:
1) Better cultural fit, in terms of basketball first mentality (much to my chagrin)
2) Better academics (except for bottom feeders UL and FSU); university presidents care a lot about this
3) If ND joins as a full-time member along with UK and maybe a Texas, then the ACC would be on par with the SEC in terms of star power.
4) Much easier to win in football.
I like the SEC, but I think this would be a good move for UK.
1) Better cultural fit, in terms of basketball first mentality (much to my chagrin)
2) Better academics (except for bottom feeders UL and FSU); university presidents care a lot about this
3) If ND joins as a full-time member along with UK and maybe a Texas, then the ACC would be on par with the SEC in terms of star power.
4) Much easier to win in football.
I like the SEC, but I think this would be a good move for UK.
I would never want UK to leave the SEC. SEC football is the best in the country. UK just needs to start competing at a higher level. Though it won’t happen, I do wish that UNC and Duke would join the SEC. This would make the SEC the best football and basketball conference.
oh and FWIW Notre Dame ain't never joining the ACC football full time & giving up indy status
Is that the only thing Card fans have to brag on these days.... IF this team joins the ACC, we will be all powerful.... It must be like winning the lottery for UL fans... If they do join the ACC, and Texas joins the big 10, then you will still be in third or fourth place... Imagine what it's like playing in the SEC Card....
Unless the ACC paid (which it doesn't) as much as the SEC then no, it would never be considered by anyone.
The landscape of college athletics will likely change a great deal in the next 10-15 years. I won't be shocked if we don't end up with 4 16 team conference with some kind of playoff like the smaller schools have now. The other 64 FBS teams will form something else with the same principles.. There will be alot of politics involved by getting in the top 64 because the payouts will likely be at least doubled that of the next group. Top non P5 teams will be trying to replace the weaker P5 teams, and some will get in over the weaker programs. That may be completely wrong, but I think its a real possibility.
This makes no sense to me. Are you saying if ND, UK, and Texas join the ACC it is on par with the SEC and yet easier for us to win in football?
Just not sure how both 3 and 4 can be accurate. It is either 3 or 4.
Don't be so sure. They signed the grant of rights and can't join another conference any time before 2036. Plus, with the emphasis that the committee is placing on Conference championships and with the winnable nature of the ACC, I could certainly see ND in the ACC full time sooner rather than later.
On #3, I said that with those three brands in the ACC, then the ACC would eclipse UK in star power (and thus, would command huge dollars from TV - this is in direct response to these guys who say that the SEC dollars will forever be so much larger than ACC dollars).
And yes, even with ND and Texas, I think the ACC would be an easier path to winning football than the SEC. My reasoning is that the middle and bottom of the SEC is much stronger than that of the ACC which still has Syracuse, BC, Wake, UVA, NC St, et al.
Other than the money, which obviously trumps all other considerations, I would welcome a move to the ACC. The basketball rivalries and competition would be way better...Duke, UNC, UL. Football in the ACC isn't exactly chopped liver, with Clemson, FL State, Va Tech and Ga Tech.
One thing you are forgetting, Texas is the conference killer. They played a huge part of killing the old Southwest conference, almost killed the Big12 and did turn it into a 10 team conference. They have their Longhorn network and could don't care about the other conference members. I think they are tied into the Longhorn network until 2025. First day they are members, they will act and expect everyone else to agree they are responsible for the ACC. Why any established conference would want them I don't know. My prediction their first demand is they get a higher percentage of the payouts because bring more TVs to the conference, and they could be right, but should the conference do that, and would the rest of the conference accept it?
Only people that would possibly want to go to the ACC is basketball people... Cat fans of football want to be just where we're at, in the best conference in the USA.......
Personally, after all the awards that our basketball team has won in the SEC, why go to the ACC....
Personally, after all the awards that our basketball team has won in the SEC, why go to the ACC....
Last edited:
No, I'd hate to flush over 80 years of rivalries down the toilet to play the likes of wake forest, boston college, and syracuse on a regular basis. Granted, UK has gotten some pretty lopsided records during those 80 years but I like UK playing who they play and the culture of the ACC just isn't the same.
My wife went to grad school at NC State, which fashions itself as North Carolina's football school. Beyond the fact that ECU has a better claim to that title recently and the UL-level inferiority complex of NC State fans, the tailgating and game day atmosphere in Raleigh was lacking and something just seemed off. And don't even get me started on UNC's parking garage "tailgating." UK would easily be one of the top 5 overall game day atmospheres in the ACC if they moved.
I'll stick with the SEC
My wife went to grad school at NC State, which fashions itself as North Carolina's football school. Beyond the fact that ECU has a better claim to that title recently and the UL-level inferiority complex of NC State fans, the tailgating and game day atmosphere in Raleigh was lacking and something just seemed off. And don't even get me started on UNC's parking garage "tailgating." UK would easily be one of the top 5 overall game day atmospheres in the ACC if they moved.
I'll stick with the SEC
Your points on Texas are well-founded and I'm not forgetting them. My counter-point is that Texas would have to know coming into their new home that they aren't the big kid on the block in the SEC. They'll be treated as one of 15 or 16 members, all equal in stature. That's the way that the SEC has always operated and will continue to operate. In the Big 12, Texas is by far the most important member. In the SEC, they're more important than Florida or Alabama or KY or Georgia.
Not true. I"m football first. I'm tired of losing. It's probably a moot point, but I would jump in a heartbeat.
Rivalries? For football, who in the SEC considers UK to be a rival? Vandy? Tennessee perhaps, but I've long said that UK doesn't hold up its end of the bargain in football and UT doesn't hold up its end of the bargain in basketball (both schools should do much better than they have in the "second sport" at each school).
For basketball, there isn't a single school that has been able to challenge UK over the long term. Switch to the ACC, and you get UL, UNC, and Duke, all huge rivals in basketball.
I have a reverence for the SEC, but let's not romanticize how life in the SEC has been for us.
Very true with regard to it being a pretty poor history. I meant "rivalries" along the lines of teams we play regularly. Despite the tall odds I enjoy watching in-conference games with my dad and granddad and hearing the memories of past successes, and heartbreaks. I've experienced a little of both myself.
Guess it comes down to the fact I'd rather compete against familiar, albeit tougher foes and lose than go somewhere new and not play the same teams anymore and win a few more games. Can't fault anyone for wanting to erase our admittedly dismal SEC past though
Guess it comes down to the fact I'd rather compete against familiar, albeit tougher foes and lose than go somewhere new and not play the same teams anymore and win a few more games. Can't fault anyone for wanting to erase our admittedly dismal SEC past though
Fair enough. I'd love nothing better than to have a winning SEC football program. I'm just disgusted by the school's unwillingness to do what it takes to win in the SEC over the long term. All else equal, I'd prefer to play UT and Florida and Georgia over Clemson, Wake, and BC, but I want to win more than anything else.
Definitely agree that the administration has messed the proverbial bed the better part of the past 60 years. The disallowing of out of state recruiting in the 50s was monumentally stupid was just the first in a long line of bad decisions and lack of football support
UK is a charter member of The SEC going back to the old Southern Conference. One can never say never, but UK is highly unlikely to leave.
Expansion in the SEC is conjecture at best. The Big 10 took Rutgers and Maryland for the New York, Baltimore and Washington, DC TV markets. Where realistically does the SEC expand? Oklahoma and Oklahoma State brings Tulsa and Oklahoma City TV markets that tie in to existing SEC markets of Little Rock and Kansas City. Both schools are athletically and academically suitable for the SEC. Again, this is only an opinion not a declaration of where the SEC expands, if indeed the conference considers the matter.
Expansion in the SEC is conjecture at best. The Big 10 took Rutgers and Maryland for the New York, Baltimore and Washington, DC TV markets. Where realistically does the SEC expand? Oklahoma and Oklahoma State brings Tulsa and Oklahoma City TV markets that tie in to existing SEC markets of Little Rock and Kansas City. Both schools are athletically and academically suitable for the SEC. Again, this is only an opinion not a declaration of where the SEC expands, if indeed the conference considers the matter.
First off, I’m going to play both sides on this issue because I graduated from Florida State, however my daughter will soon be competing on the Kentucky gymnastics team. I love both schools and both conferences. For now I think Kentucky would be crazy to leave the SEC because of the 12 to 14 million dollar difference in the annual payout. However this could change over the course of the next 5 to 8 years. If conference network revenue goes the route of cord cutting (which pretty much everyone says is going to happen) then there will be a reduction in the contracts forthcoming for all of the conference networks. As it stands now, Directv, DishTV and almost all cable providers air the BTN and SEC networks. The reason that the conference networks pay so well is because everyone who has Directv, DishTV and cable pays about .66 cents every month for the SEC Network and .39 cents every month for the BTN Network. The SEC Network is broadcast into about 69,000,000 homes, and the BTN Network is broadcast into about 79,000,000 homes. This is about to change.
A recent eMarketer report stated that 23% of U.S. households, by 2019, won’t be subscribed to any type of cable service or satellite service. Cord cutting started a few years ago and is accelerating at a very quick rate. Of the 69,000,000 and 79,000,000 households mentioned above, only a fraction of that wants to receive the conference networks, and don’t feel it’s appropriate to be forced to pay for it if they don’t want it. That idea coupled with the fact that everyone is tired of paying $150.00 a month, or more, for their cable/satellite bill, will eventually bring down the cable and satellite businesses, or at least reduce their profits significantly. The cable businesses will have a greatly reduced market in cord cutting because many will choose to stream their television programming through their cable. But this will only just barely keep the cable companies afloat. The satellite companies are in trouble unless they can somehow perfect satellite internet coverage which at this point is very poor.
The cord cutting has affected Disney/ESPN. Their profits (or lack thereof) from cable/satellite have resulted in mass layoffs at ESPN and Disney. If the reduction in profit margin continues (which it will), the conference network contracts, when renegotiated, will be done so for less than what we see today.
No longer will the networks be packaged in a cable/satellite bundle and forced upon people. People will have to subscribe to the conference network individually and stream it. No longer will these networks be broadcast into 69,000,000 and 79,000,000 households like today. Those subscribing to the networks individually will be a fraction of those figures.
Another concern for the SEC Network (or for that matter any network) will be the capability to stream the network in many of the rural areas that will desire the SEC Network. Many rural areas of the south don’t have cable. As mentioned above, satellite companies have not perfected the ability to provide internet coverage, especially in rural areas. This potentially could be a problem in the future.
When the above begins to occur, that’s when Kentucky might want to consider moving if they were to receive an offer. The ACC is a better basketball conference, however it is nowhere near the football conference that the SEC conference is. Football would be easier in the ACC…no doubt. Don’t forget Kentucky beat my Noles in a Bowl game about eight years ago. With all that said, I consider the SEC to be a more prestigious sports conference than the ACC.
A recent eMarketer report stated that 23% of U.S. households, by 2019, won’t be subscribed to any type of cable service or satellite service. Cord cutting started a few years ago and is accelerating at a very quick rate. Of the 69,000,000 and 79,000,000 households mentioned above, only a fraction of that wants to receive the conference networks, and don’t feel it’s appropriate to be forced to pay for it if they don’t want it. That idea coupled with the fact that everyone is tired of paying $150.00 a month, or more, for their cable/satellite bill, will eventually bring down the cable and satellite businesses, or at least reduce their profits significantly. The cable businesses will have a greatly reduced market in cord cutting because many will choose to stream their television programming through their cable. But this will only just barely keep the cable companies afloat. The satellite companies are in trouble unless they can somehow perfect satellite internet coverage which at this point is very poor.
The cord cutting has affected Disney/ESPN. Their profits (or lack thereof) from cable/satellite have resulted in mass layoffs at ESPN and Disney. If the reduction in profit margin continues (which it will), the conference network contracts, when renegotiated, will be done so for less than what we see today.
No longer will the networks be packaged in a cable/satellite bundle and forced upon people. People will have to subscribe to the conference network individually and stream it. No longer will these networks be broadcast into 69,000,000 and 79,000,000 households like today. Those subscribing to the networks individually will be a fraction of those figures.
Another concern for the SEC Network (or for that matter any network) will be the capability to stream the network in many of the rural areas that will desire the SEC Network. Many rural areas of the south don’t have cable. As mentioned above, satellite companies have not perfected the ability to provide internet coverage, especially in rural areas. This potentially could be a problem in the future.
When the above begins to occur, that’s when Kentucky might want to consider moving if they were to receive an offer. The ACC is a better basketball conference, however it is nowhere near the football conference that the SEC conference is. Football would be easier in the ACC…no doubt. Don’t forget Kentucky beat my Noles in a Bowl game about eight years ago. With all that said, I consider the SEC to be a more prestigious sports conference than the ACC.