Conference Realignment

[Techster]

I can't speak for @Augusta_Jacket , but I believe he was responding to people who are saying that ACC teams will flock to the Big12. I have many doubts that any team will leave the ACC to make less money in the Big12. I doubt it even more with the GOR issues and with an exit fee from the ACC. Even if the GOR is nullified and the exit fee is reduced to $30 million, what school would pay $30 million to move to a conference with more travel and $2-5 million less in revenue per year? (using your estimates for the difference in revenue.)

All of the prognosticators predicted that the ACC would be the first P5 conference to fall. The PAC12 fell. Now, prognosticators are saying that the ACC is the weakest of the P4 teams, and will be the next to fall. If we ignore the GOR and exit fee issues, the ACC's contract through 2036 is larger than the Big12's. Yet the prognosticators speak as though the ACC is well behind the Big12. The 2024 Big12 won't have any teams left with a real national brand. The only CFP appearance left in the Big12 will be TCU's 2022 appearance. The 2024 ACC will still have FSU, UNC, Miami, Clemson, VT. Maybe FSU will leave in 2025. Maybe UNC will be able to overcome the political issues that have arisen in the last couple of weeks and leave in 2026-28. However, there are still contractual issues involved, and I think it is just as likely that all of the teams stay until at least 2030. There is no measure by which the Big12 is a better conference than the ACC. The ACC isn't at the level of the SEC or Big10, but they are solidly the third conference, no matter what measure you want to use. All of the prognosticators simply ignore that.

I don't remember seeing anyone say the ACC would be first to fall...strictly because the ACC had the GOR. If anything, the Big 12 was targeted as "most likely to fall" given everyone knew UTexas and OU were leaving.

I think the issue with the "ACC is solidly 3rd" statement is that it includes UNC and FSU...for now. At present, yes, the ACC is slightly ahead of the Big12.

The discussion is more about what happens to the ACC when UNC and FSU (at minimum) leave for either the SEC or B1G. The calculus of which conference is better off changes at that point, and ACC teams leaving for the Big 12 is definitely on the table when that happens.

 

[RonJohn]

I don't remember seeing anyone say the ACC would be first to fall...strictly because the ACC had the GOR. If anything, the Big 12 was targeted as "most likely to fall" given everyone knew UTexas and OU were leaving.

I think the issue with the "ACC is solidly 3rd" statement is that it includes UNC and FSU...for now. At present, yes, the ACC is slightly ahead of the Big12.

The discussion is more about what happens to the ACC when UNC and FSU (at minimum) leave for either the SEC or B1G. The calculus of which conference is better off changes at that point, and ACC teams leaving for the Big 12 is definitely on the table when that happens.

If the ESPN contract is still in place, then the ACC will still be making more money per year than the Big12. That makes leaving for the Big12 a non-starter, even if the GOR nor exit fee are considered. We still don't really know what the ESPN option is all about. Some people are far too eager to simply accept the not totally specific interpretation listed in the FSU lawsuit.

 

[Techster]

If the ESPN contract is still in place, then the ACC will still be making more money per year than the Big12. That makes leaving for the Big12 a non-starter, even if the GOR nor exit fee are considered. We still don't really know what the ESPN option is all about. Some people are far too eager to simply accept the not totally specific interpretation listed in the FSU lawsuit.

I'm talking about after 2036. We know for certain that the ACCs media revenue is locked in till then.

It's after 2036 that things get dicey for the ACC.

 

[Augusta_Jacket]

The gap closes considerably at the end of the 2024-2025 season. The ACC will still be ahead, but it won't be that big. Big12 is still working off the contract that Texas and OU are/were part of.

Correct. The gap will narrow. My point still stands. The Big-12 in October of 2022 was not able to sign a TV deal equal to, much less better than, the supposedly bad deal the ACC signed almost a decade ago. There is brand power in the ACC. Some of that will diminish if FSU bolts, but I don't think it will diminish that much if we retain the other schools and maybe even poach a B12 school or three.

The other thing people forget is that ESPN gets the rights to all the ACC home games against Notre Dame, and we've added Stanford, whom they play yearly, to the fold. If all we lose is a bitter FSU, our TV contract in 2036 will be pretty darn good. Not SEC/B1G good, but good nonetheless.

 

[Vespidae]

he other thing people forget is that ESPN gets the rights to all the ACC home games against Notre Dame, and we've added Stanford, whom they play yearly, to the fold. If all we lose is a bitter FSU, our TV contract in 2036 will be pretty darn good. Not SEC/B1G good, but good nonetheless.

If FSU and Clemson bolts, the ACC would be the easiest path for Notre Dame into the CFP. We're adding 2 of their preferred opponents (Stanford and Cal) already ... renegotiate the media rights then and it might be interesting.

 

[stinger 1957]

I'm talking about after 2036. We know for certain that the ACCs media revenue is locked in till then.

It's after 2036 that things get dicey for the ACC.

I thought ESPN had an out in 2027 if they decide to not exercise something or other, if that is true then the ACC's revenue does not appear to be locked in until 2036.
Frankly I hope they don't exercise whatever it is that they need to do and let's get the inevitable over with, let CFB shake out however it is going to shake. out.

 

[WreckinGT]

I thought ESPN had an out in 2027 if they decide to not exercise something or other, if that is true then the ACC's revenue does not appear to be locked in until 2036.
Frankly I hope they don't exercise whatever it is that they need to do and let's get the inevitable over with, let CFB shake out however it is going to shake. out.

I'm with you. Lets blow this thing up and get things moving. 12 years in purgatory sounds awful.

 

[Augusta_Jacket]

I thought ESPN had an out in 2027 if they decide to not exercise something or other, if that is true then the ACC's revenue does not appear to be locked in until 2036.
Frankly I hope they don't exercise whatever it is that they need to do and let's get the inevitable over with, let CFB shake out however it is going to shake. out.

The TV deal has always been billed as through 2036, which is why the GOR was extended until 2036. The option is most likely related to the ACC network itself, not the TV deal with ESPN.

 

[SOWEGA Jacket]

I'm with you. Let’s blow this thing up and get things moving. 12 years in purgatory sounds awful.

Realistically, we’ve already been in purgatory for years. Our undefeated conference champ didn’t get an invite. We’ll get 4 whopping bids to March Madness. Can’t wait until the regionals and super regionals get announced while Phillips hides in his office (or under Sankey’s desk).

 

[L41k18]

It's after 2036 that things get dicey for the ACC.

Everything will be far different in 2036, and I'm not just talking about CFB. To make 2036 assumptions based on today's landscape (in any field or endeavor) is lunacy.

 

[L41k18]

If FSU and Clemson bolts, the ACC would be the easiest path for Notre Dame into the CFP. We're adding 2 of their preferred opponents (Stanford and Cal) already ... renegotiate the media rights then and it might be interesting.

Cal is a preferred opponent of Notre Dame?? Since when?

 

[UgaBlows]

UVA would add another state to their foot print, a big state school, an AAU member, and a program fairly solid in many sports other than football currently. Just what the Big 10 typically looks for. We have all of that except the big state school part. We are also a candidate though. What I think would be interesting is if the Big 10 just said, screw it, we are going to 24. They decide to add GT, UNC, UVA, Clemson, FSU, and Miami. Word of this gets out ahead of time. What would the SEC do? That would be planting the flag in 5 southern states.

UVA is actually not that big- 22k enrollment, VT has 30,500, GT 27k

That would be pretty great if they added those 6 ACC teams, I am all for it. I have to think the SEC would make a play for most of the same schools.

 

[Vespidae]

Cal is a preferred opponent of Notre Dame?? Since when?

Didn't ND lobby for them to join the ACC? I will see if I can find theor quote on it.

 

[L41k18]

Didn't ND lobby for them to join the ACC? I will see if I can find theor quote on it.

I don't recall them playing each other in football. Maybe they have, but certainly not regularly.

 

[L41k18]

Haha well played

 

[WreckinGT]

The TV deal has always been billed as through 2036, which is why the GOR was extended until 2036. The option is most likely related to the ACC network itself, not the TV deal with ESPN.

No its not. The only reason we know about the option is because FSU leaked it in their legal complaint. This is what they said:

It is a widely repeated misconception that the ACC’s multi-media rights agreement expires in 2036. As explained below, in truth, the multi-media rights agreement expires in 2027 unless ESPN chooses to exercise its unilateral option through 2036, a decision ESPN has no duty to make until February 2025, thanks to other additional conference mismanagement detailed below

Followed by:

For reasons never explained to FLORIDA STATE, the 2016 ACC Tier I Agreement granted ESPN a unilateral option to extend that agreement with its already out-of-market rates an additional nine years beyond its expiration on June 30, 2027, or until 2036 (the “Unilateral ESPN Nine-Year Option”).

How are you guys interpreting that as the ACC network? There is nothing anywhere that even hints that the option is for the ACC network.

 

[RonJohn]

How are you guys interpreting that as the ACC network? There is nothing anywhere that even hints that the option is for the ACC network.

That is an interpretation of what the "nine-year option" is, it isn't the text from the contract that explains in detail what it is. It could simply be a misinterpretation. There are no contract wording details, so there are only "hints" about what FSU wants to "hint" about.

Also, there are multiple ways of reading the last quote you put in there. "unilateral option to extend --- with its already out-of-market rates". If they are stating the contract exactly correct, does that mean that they have a nine-year option to extend or cancel the contract, or does that mean that they have a nine-year option to use the predetermined rates and not increase them? Words can impress a meaning, but actually mean something else. That is why in this entire discussion I have been warning to refrain from deciding conclusively what the facts are from just pieces of information. The public used to have enough information to believe the Earth is flat. Once they obtained more information, most now understand that the Earth is round. Partial information often leads to the wrong conclusions.

EDIT: Even more questions about the wording in the FSU complaint. "...2016 ACC Tier I Agreement granted ESPN a unilateral option to extend that agreement..." Does "that" refer to the 2016 ACC Tier I Agreement, or a different agreement. I am not a lawyer, but I believe most lawyers would expressly make it clear what agreement is being discussed. "That" can be ambiguous. It could refer to the ACC Network. (Not saying it does, just pointing out that it isn't extremely clear.) Words are very important in contracts and in legal filings. Lawyers will spend lots of time analyzing a contract for where commas are placed, or what multiple meanings a pronoun in the contract could have. In fact, most contracts I have dealt with have definitions of what each term in the contract is and refrain from using pronouns. I have read thousands of legal filings, but many that I have have definitions for who the plaintiff is, who the defendant is, what all of the contracts involved are, what the law being referenced is, and they don't leave things up to understanding of pronouns.

 

[Augusta_Jacket]

To be completely honest, if the GOR holds and ESPN decides NOT to exercise the option and frees us up to renegotiate we might actually be in better shape financially.

 

[Techster]

I thought ESPN had an out in 2027 if they decide to not exercise something or other, if that is true then the ACC's revenue does not appear to be locked in until 2036.
Frankly I hope they don't exercise whatever it is that they need to do and let's get the inevitable over with, let CFB shake out however it is going to shake. out.

According to FSU, ESPN has an option to pull out in 2026-2027. They would be a fool to do so because the contract with the ACC is extremely favorable for them, and I've read that it's more profitable than the SEC contract for them.

However, there's always a chance ESPN could be working behind the scenes to move schools (UNC/UVA) to the SEC or the Big 12 (every other attractive ACC school) and rid themselves of the ACC contract altogether to consolidate the schools in their media portfolio and focus on growing the SEC even further. That's essentially what ESPN was accused of by the Big 12 when Texas and Oklahoma moved to the SEC.



Bowlsby further noted that Oklahoma and Texas have been taking part in Big 12 strategy meetings—during which proprietary information was shared—while working in secret to abandon the conference for the SEC.

"It causes me to further suspect [ESPN] had their hands all over the Texas and Oklahoma move to the SEC," Bowlsby said. "They were as deceptive as you can possibly be. There are right and wrong ways to these things. They sought to deceive us from the very beginning."

The commissioner called the network's actions "tortious interference" and claims he has documented evidence to back up his claims.


Tortious interference is why schools leaving a conference always claim they were the ones that reached out to the conference (*wink wink*).

It's also funny how ESPN quickly gave the Big12 a new deal and helped facilitate the demise of the PAC 12 and moved some of those schools to the Big 12.

If no one is paying attention, ESPN is not a friendly partner with the ACC (or any conference not named the SEC). They would be more than happy to have the best schools from the ACC in the SEC and do away with their ACC obligations.

 

[Techster]

Everything will be far different in 2036, and I'm not just talking about CFB. To make 2036 assumptions based on today's landscape (in any field or endeavor) is lunacy.

I agree. With the breaking news of a shared streaming service between the sports media heavyweights, NFL in talks to acquire a big interest in ESPN, I think we're more likely to see less conferences in the future.

Also keep in mind about conference consolidation: At some point, the schools will have to directly pay SAs. Where will that money come from? Money that was once earmarked for schools in various conferences getting shifted to consolidated mega conferences. SAs getting paid is coming, and I think media companies and the mega conferences know that and are putting in motion a way to address that.