The Clemson football program is heavily invested in what we might see in conference realignment and expansion over the next few months as things drastically change before our eyes.
Texas and Oklahoma have given the Big 12 their notices that they won’t be renewing their grant of rights with the conference following the 2024 season and there are multiple reports that the two schools could file an application to join the SEC as soon as this week.
With two powerful brands in the Longhorns and Sooners joining the SEC, there is widespread speculation on the reactionary moves that the ACC might make to counter.
Even though we’re just a few days into this new conference realignment phase, there have already been plenty of rumors surrounding the ACC and the West Virginia Mountaineers.
West Virginia isn’t beneficial to the ACC or Clemson football
We’ve seen many Clemson football fans who have talked about how West Virginia should’ve joined the ACC the first time around and how the Mountaineers just make sense for the conference.
Here’s why you don’t want that.
West Virginia certainly brings another football brand to the ACC- and that’s important- but let’s not pretend that the Mountaineers are some perennial power.
In the history of their program- which started before Clemson football- West Virginia has won exactly zero National Championships and all of their 15 conference titles either came in the Southern Conference (1953-67) or the Big East (1993-2011). They’ve had five AP top-10 finishes in their history and just two in this millennium.
Are they a better football brand than Syracuse, Boston College or Pittsburgh? You might could make that argument, but this is the problem: What does the ACC get out of West Virginia being a member?
For starters, you’re not adding a big-time fan base. We’re not trying to throw shade at West Virginia. They’ve got a nice brand up there, but it’s a 60,000 seat stadium. There are six schools in the ACC with higher stadium capacities than that.
Is the goal for the ACC to be considered a second-rate citizen to the SEC, and Big Ten for that matter? Because if that’s the goal, then you achieved exactly what you wanted by adding West Virginia.
But if the goal is to actually compete and to build up television revenue then, frankly, all West Virginia is going to be is ‘another mouth to feed.’
They’re going to be the same as a Boston College, a Syracuse, a Virginia. Will there be years where they’re relevant and make an impact? Sure. But most years they’re going to fit comfortably right around that 7-5 or 8-4 mark.
Then, let’s think about the conference perception.
While the SEC is having Texas vs. Kentucky, the ACC is going to have West Virginia vs. Virginia. Do you really think that TV networks are going to choose to broadcast the WVU-UVA game over Texas-Kentucky? The answer is no. As you move up the scale in terms of brands, it only get even harder for the ACC to compete.
West Virginia might make sense from the standpoint of they used to have some Big East rivalries with teams who are now in the ACC, but they make absolutely no sense in any other way, shape or form.
In the end, the Mountaineers would just be another program that Clemson football has to carry year-in and year-out and they certainly don’t have the brand power or recognition to change Notre Dame’s mind about joining the conference or grab ESPN’s attention enough to enter renegotiations with the ACC Network’s contract.