Conference Realignment

Oldgoldandwhite

Helluva Engineer
Messages
5,637
Why would you want to slice a pie two, four, or six more ways?
Is there that much money to go around?
I can’t imagine Florida wanting to split money with FSU or Miami.
Or South Carolina splitting theirs with Clemson.
 

SOWEGA Jacket

Helluva Engineer
Messages
1,903
RamblinRed said:
I think there is one item the 'break the GoR' crowd tends to underplay that has become pretty clear over the last 2 weeks.
Where will a team go if it wants to leave the ACC (or any of the other P3)? A program (or its fans) can pine to leave all they want, they have to have somewhere to land. So far it appears there are very few schools remaining where they will have a place to land if they want to leave. The amount of value they have to add in order to be given an offer is really high and right now there are probably fewer than 5 teams nationally that could meet that bar?

In 2021 the only schools with a Top 10 average viewership who will not be in the SEC or B10 by 2025 are Notre Dame and Oregon (#10). The only team in the Top 20 not in one of those 2 conferences is Clemson (#19 in 2021). Clemson's avg viewership is roughly 1/3 of Ohio St's #1 total (and roughly 60% of ND's).

Big10 wouldn't take Oregon even though it is one of the highest rated non-B10 or SEC schools in viewership. I think ND is the only school that has a seat at the table - but then as long as they have access to the playoffs they will never join a conference. ND values exposure over money (and they basically print money as 'The National Catholic University') and have consistently traded the latter for the former. Outside of ND, Oregon and Clemson might eventually be able to get seats, but then who? Unless FSU got back to where it was a decade ago they are unlikely to have a seat.
Everyone can want they money, but they have to convince those that have the money to share it with them - how many do that?

ESPN actually gets more programming from the ACC than any other conference due to it being the only P5 conference where it controls 100% of the media rights, so it is unlikely to want to see the ACC fail.
Click to expand...
Teams will have somewhere to land just like OU, Texas, USC, and UCLA did. The problem many of you have is that you believe if it’s not in the media it isn’t happening. All 4 of those schools worked a deal under cover and everyone was suprised. How many times do you need to be surprised before you realize a lot is happening behind the scenes.

Everything you posted is pure speculation. Just because the BIG isn’t handing out invitations at your pace doesn’t mean they won’t. How in the world do you know Oregon won’t get an invite? And ESPN may not even exist in its current form in a decade from now. One rich entity could buy ESPN next week and rework the entire business model. What if FOX buys ESPN and controls both super conferences? Or what if Disney bought FOX?

The point is no one knows but the recent past tells us college football is not staying the same so to think that the ACC will be untouched until 2036 is not reality. And that is exactly what some of you have said because of the GOR. I think the GOR will be a non factor within 5 years because something or someone will offer more money to have schools in the ACC decide the current GOR is not in their best interest. It’s a dying conference, not because of today but because of the terrible leadership Swofford provided for decades which put us in this weak position.
 
Techster

Techster

Helluva Engineer
Messages
17,876


This is what I cited as the nuclear option ACC schools could choose to take regarding GOR:

Like UNC’s Guskiewicz, Heird is hopeful ESPN will see some advantage in revisiting a network-friendly rights deal, presumably to preserve a partnership that could collapse if a majority of ACC members were to vote to dissolve the conference as a means of circumventing the league’s grant of media rights and finding new homes.

If you read other writers as well as this one, it appears there's a bit of cloud over the ACC. ACC knows the GOR is keeping anyone from realistically leaving, but at the same time they know members are not quite happy with the structure of the media contract and the growing revenue imbalance between the ACC and SEC/B1G. Schools like FSU/Clemson/UNC/Miami, the "elite brands" who compare themselves to the 'Bamas/USC/Ohio State/Texas/etc. in terms of national reach, know they can't compete in the same neighborhood once media revenue gap gets into the $50+ million/year neighborhood. They want to be part of the "haves" not the have nots. That's why Texas/OU/USC/UCLA left conferences they were not only founding members of, but flagship members of those conferences. That's why I don't think a team like UNC or Clemson cares too much about being founding members leaving the ACC...it's what they need to do in order to compete with the other "elite brands" or else resign themselves to 2nd tier status over the next couple of decades.
 

yeti92

Helluva Engineer
Messages
2,668
Techster said:


This is what I cited as the nuclear option ACC schools could choose to take regarding GOR:

Like UNC’s Guskiewicz, Heird is hopeful ESPN will see some advantage in revisiting a network-friendly rights deal, presumably to preserve a partnership that could collapse if a majority of ACC members were to vote to dissolve the conference as a means of circumventing the league’s grant of media rights and finding new homes.

If you read other writers as well as this one, it appears there's a bit of cloud over the ACC. ACC knows the GOR is keeping anyone from realistically leaving, but at the same time they know members are not quite happy with the structure of the media contract and the growing revenue imbalance between the ACC and SEC/B1G. Schools like FSU/Clemson/UNC/Miami, the "elite brands" who compare themselves to the 'Bamas/USC/Ohio State/Texas/etc. in terms of national reach, know they can't compete in the same neighborhood once media revenue gap gets into the $50+ million/year neighborhood. They want to be part of the "haves" not the have nots. That's why Texas/OU/USC/UCLA left conferences they were not only founding members of, but flagship members of those conferences. That's why I don't think a team like UNC or Clemson cares too much about being founding members leaving the ACC...it's what they need to do in order to compete with the other "elite brands" or else resign themselves to 2nd tier status over the next couple of decades.
Click to expand...

UNC has managed only 5 ACC titles since 1953, most recently in 1980, and has never won a national championship. Leaving the ACC to continue to "compete in the same neighborhood" is hilarious, they've never been in the neighborhood.
 

WreckinGT

Helluva Engineer
Messages
3,007
ESPN is in an interesting spot. It can keep the current contract and bleed the conference dry, which will result in less revenue over time for investments they have made as the conference struggles to compete due to the revenue gap or they can renegotiate and invest in the ACC hoping that providing additional revenue up front helps keep the conference and its members relevant on a national scale. Personally, I don't see how riding this thing out is sustainable. Either dissolve the conference or invest in it.
 
Techster

Techster

Helluva Engineer
Messages
17,876
yeti92 said:
UNC has managed only 5 ACC titles since 1953, most recently in 1980, and has never won a national championship. Leaving the ACC to continue to "compete in the same neighborhood" is hilarious, they've never been in the neighborhood.
Click to expand...

It's not just football for UNC, it's also basketball. Whether you choose to believe it or not, UNC is an elite brand. They would be the first team from the ACC the B1G or SEC took if there is no GOR.
 
gdamian

gdamian

Georgia Tech Fan
Messages
79
Techster said:
My $0.02 on the ACC strategy:

Go B1G route. Pre-empt the Big 12 and go after Oregon, Washington, Stanford, Cal, Arizona, Colorado, Utah to lock up the West Coast and open the ACC to bigger markets and schools with good athletic and academic programs.

Oregon/Portland: #25 TV market, AAU member, Nike money and marketing
Washington/Seattle: #14 TV market, AAU member
Stanford-Cal/San Fran-Oakland: #6 TV market, AAU members
Arizona/Phoenix: #12 TV market, AAU member
Colorado/Denver: #17 Market, AAU Member
Utah/Salt Lake: #34 Market, AAU member

All of those programs have historically good, or recently very good programs. They all have a good to great brand in football and basketball.

Academically, they are in line with traditional ACC academic values.

IMO, this is move to keep the ACC viable for both network $$$ purposes, but also down the line. It gives the ACC network increased inventory, and the ability to highlight our conference on the national level, and the post 8pm time slot during football and basketball seasons. It doesn't make the West Coast side dependent on the East Coast side for scheduling purposes, but gives the league the flexibility for compelling week to week matchups.

It also gives us leverage to negotiate with ND a full 8-9 game ACC schedule, which although it wouldn't give ACC the same revenue power of the B1G and SEC, but would help close the gap...which in the long run is probably the best scenario for ACC viability.
Click to expand...
I like this idea a lot. While the B12 has a lot of schools they are not very good properties in general - be proactive and not let them absorb the PAC remnants. So whichever 'best' six you can get from the west would be good. It might be hard to split AZ and ASU (and ASU is probably the nicer property) so you could take them both and leave out CU (for obvious reasons). If you want to raid the B12 take their best two TCU and BYU.
 

GoJacketsInRaleigh

Ramblin' Wreck
Messages
972
gdamian said:
I like this idea a lot. While the B12 has a lot of schools they are not very good properties in general - be proactive and not let them absorb the PAC remnants. So whichever 'best' six you can get from the west would be good. It might be hard to split AZ and ASU (and ASU is probably the nicer property) so you could take them both and leave out CU (for obvious reasons). If you want to raid the B12 take their best two TCU and BYU.
Click to expand...
I'd like to get Texas Tech and Oklahoma State out the B12 too. Texas Tech is investing $200M into a football facility so they clearly aren't accepting second tier status.
 

RamblinRed

Helluva Engineer
Featured Member
Messages
5,742
SOWEGA Jacket said:
Teams will have somewhere to land just like OU, Texas, USC, and UCLA did. The problem many of you have is that you believe if it’s not in the media it isn’t happening. All 4 of those schools worked a deal under cover and everyone was suprised. How many times do you need to be surprised before you realize a lot is happening behind the scenes.

Everything you posted is pure speculation. Just because the BIG isn’t handing out invitations at your pace doesn’t mean they won’t. How in the world do you know Oregon won’t get an invite? And ESPN may not even exist in its current form in a decade from now. One rich entity could buy ESPN next week and rework the entire business model. What if FOX buys ESPN and controls both super conferences? Or what if Disney bought FOX?

The point is no one knows but the recent past tells us college football is not staying the same so to think that the ACC will be untouched until 2036 is not reality. And that is exactly what some of you have said because of the GOR. I think the GOR will be a non factor within 5 years because something or someone will offer more money to have schools in the ACC decide the current GOR is not in their best interest. It’s a dying conference, not because of today but because of the terrible leadership Swofford provided for decades which put us in this weak position.
Click to expand...

I don't expect the ACC in 2036 to be the same as the ACC in 2022. I've said that multiple times.
I've also said I don't expect it to fall apart or to suffer huge losses in terms of number of teams leaving. I don't believe it would be more than 4 schools and I think 2 is more likely.

I don't think that many programs have a landing spot - we simply disagree there.
The 4 schools that have announced changes include three of the biggest FB programs in the country and a 4th program that is better known for basketball but is still a huge school in a gigantic market. Not many other schools look like that.

You are speculating without any evidence that the Big 2 want to add alot of schools - so there are alot of landing spots. I think they probably do not. Oregon is frankly the biggest piece of evidence why. Now would be the most advantageous time for a conference to add Oregon, but it has been reported by multiple sources that Oregon has been told by the B10 they are not interested in them right now and the SEC reportedly doesn't have interest either - even if B10 added ND.

I think probably more than a dozen schools have reached out to the Big 2 in the last 2 weeks and I think all of them have been told, thanks for your interest, we will put you on a list and will let you know if we have any interest.

If Oregon is unable to grab the interest of the Big 2 with no financial penalties for leaving right now, who do you see being attractive to them and why, and when do you think they would be given an offer?
As I've said in the past I think the next inflection point is when the CFP is discussed and finalized, that will determine the future direction of the conferences.
 

WreckinGT

Helluva Engineer
Messages
3,007
RamblinRed said:
I don't expect the ACC in 2036 to be the same as the ACC in 2022. I've said that multiple times.
I've also said I don't expect it to fall apart or to suffer huge losses in terms of number of teams leaving. I don't believe it would be more than 4 schools and I think 2 is more likely.

I don't think that many programs have a landing spot - we simply disagree there.
The 4 schools that have announced changes include three of the biggest FB programs in the country and a 4th program that is better known for basketball but is still a huge school in a gigantic market. Not many other schools look like that.

You are speculating without any evidence that the Big 2 want to add alot of schools - so there are alot of landing spots. I think they probably do not. Oregon is frankly the biggest piece of evidence why. Now would be the most advantageous time for a conference to add Oregon, but it has been reported by multiple sources that Oregon has been told by the B10 they are not interested in them right now and the SEC reportedly doesn't have interest either - even if B10 added ND.

I think probably more than a dozen schools have reached out to the Big 2 in the last 2 weeks and I think all of them have been told, thanks for your interest, we will put you on a list and will let you know if we have any interest.

If Oregon is unable to grab the interest of the Big 2 with no financial penalties for leaving right now, who do you see being attractive to them and why, and when do you think they would be given an offer?
As I've said in the past I think the next inflection point is when the CFP is discussed and finalized, that will determine the future direction of the conferences.
Click to expand...
Personally I think UCLA only got an invite because USC insisted upon it. Its a duplicated market and a program that isn't that valuable. There was no real reason to take them over Oregon. I think the Big 10's main concern is and always has been getting ND. That's why they took USC and it's why they aren't taking anyone else now. Taking Oregon or Washington doesn't move the needle for ND.
 

SOWEGA Jacket

Helluva Engineer
Messages
1,903
RamblinRed said:
I don't expect the ACC in 2036 to be the same as the ACC in 2022. I've said that multiple times.
I've also said I don't expect it to fall apart or to suffer huge losses in terms of number of teams leaving. I don't believe it would be more than 4 schools and I think 2 is more likely.

I don't think that many programs have a landing spot - we simply disagree there.
The 4 schools that have announced changes include three of the biggest FB programs in the country and a 4th program that is better known for basketball but is still a huge school in a gigantic market. Not many other schools look like that.

You are speculating without any evidence that the Big 2 want to add alot of schools - so there are alot of landing spots. I think they probably do not. Oregon is frankly the biggest piece of evidence why. Now would be the most advantageous time for a conference to add Oregon, but it has been reported by multiple sources that Oregon has been told by the B10 they are not interested in them right now and the SEC reportedly doesn't have interest either - even if B10 added ND.

I think probably more than a dozen schools have reached out to the Big 2 in the last 2 weeks and I think all of them have been told, thanks for your interest, we will put you on a list and will let you know if we have any interest.

If Oregon is unable to grab the interest of the Big 2 with no financial penalties for leaving right now, who do you see being attractive to them and why, and when do you think they would be given an offer?
As I've said in the past I think the next inflection point is when the CFP is discussed and finalized, that will determine the future direction of the conferences.
Click to expand...
I hear you on all that. We do just disagree. It’s a constant drip, drip, drip and has been for awhile so I’m not expecting it to stop, especially until 2036. I think you are putting way too much stock into the here and now that schools haven‘t been invited as of today, like Oregon. As of 3 weeks ago none of us had any thoughts of USC/UCLA joining a Midwest league so I’m definitely not putting any stock into the idea that others have been told no or put on a waiting list. That’s fine as of today. The college football scene is ever changing so we should all expect constant changes. I agree the playoff system will change big time over the next decade. I think you’ll see multiple iterations going to 8 or 12 first then going to 20 plus. Those games just bring in too much money to not exist. Like I’ve stated before, kids of today when they are adults will laugh at how it “use to be done” while they are bar hopping watching December/January Madness. It’s gonna be awesome. And way more teams than 1 or 2 will leave the ACC. It’s all about money and Swofford was outmaneuvered at every turn which is why there are a Big 2 and not a Big 3.
 
iceeater1969

iceeater1969

Helluva Engineer
Messages
8,985
SOWEGA Jacket said:
I hear you on all that. We do just disagree. It’s a constant drip, drip, drip and has been for awhile so I’m not expecting it to stop, especially until 2036. I think you are putting way too much stock into the here and now that schools haven‘t been invited as of today, like Oregon. As of 3 weeks ago none of us had any thoughts of USC/UCLA joining a Midwest league so I’m definitely not putting any stock into the idea that others have been told no or put on a waiting list. That’s fine as of today. The college football scene is ever changing so we should all expect constant changes. I agree the playoff system will change big time over the next decade. I think you’ll see multiple iterations going to 8 or 12 first then going to 20 plus. Those games just bring in too much money to not exist. Like I’ve stated before, kids of today when they are adults will laugh at how it “use to be done” while they are bar hopping watching December/January Madness. It’s gonna be awesome. And way more teams than 1 or 2 will leave the ACC. It’s all about money and Swofford was outmaneuvered at every turn which is why there are a Big 2 and not a Big 3.
Click to expand...
Once the big 1 and Sec get to 20 FOOTBALL teams each do they need the NCAA.for football. Our ex prez was president of ncaa board of governors.
NCAA has been late on most of the recent events
 
Top