Conference Realignment

[RonJohn]

One of the more interesting aspects of what Sankey said, and what he's openly telling the public, is that school Presidents ultimately make the expansion decisions and who gets invited...NOT ADs or Conference Commissioners. What criteria conference Presidents have is totally different than what fans and media think.

This is the same thing I pointed out about the Josh Pate podcast. He strikes me as a loud and obnoxious guy. He sounds the same as SEC fans arguing at a bar on a Saturday in the fall. Mostly bluster, whether their statements are factual or even are directly opposite of what they said five minutes ago. He seems to just now understand that the university presidents don't see the situation the same as fans do.

With the way that public discourse has evolved over the last decade or more, people believe that you either agree with them 100%, or disagree with them 100%. If I post that matchups and ratings are not the only thing that matters to decision makers in realignment, people believe that I am saying that matchups and ratings will have zero impact on realignment. I have not tried to say that at all. Matchups will matter. Ratings will matter. Media markets will matter. AAU will matter to the Big10 presidents. History will matter. Existing academic coordination will matter. Existing research cooperation will matter. Many other factors will matter. I don't know how much weight will be placed on any of those things. Nobody else does either, probably including the people who would ultimately make the decisions. It is a shame that conversations about anything, including realignment are automatically segregated into things like pro-FSU and anti-FSU tribes. I am definitely not pro-FSU, but I am not automatically against anything that someone from FSU says simply because they are from FSU. If people could have actual substantive discussions and learn from each other, the discussions would be far more interesting to me.

 

[Techster]

I did say earlier in the thread that McMurphy's quotes are from anonymous sources, so I take them with a grain of salt:

The current post you are referring to was just a repudiation of the notion that Texas is a much worse partner than FSU.

Even though I don't trust anonymous sources, McMurphy has at least claimed that Big10 "university presidents" are some of his sources. That doesn't gain credibility in my view because we don't know who they actually are and the sources are not willing to put their face to the quotes. However, it is somewhat better than something like "some people in the Big10".

The thing I found interesting about the Pate podcast is his apparent change of opinion, more than his anonymous quotes. He is a blowhard and I don't pay much attention to him. I am not certain of what he has been saying before. In this podcast, he says that until a few weeks ago, he was certain that FSU would have a landing spot in the Big10 or SEC. He repeated the quote from a "Big10 university president". Then he went on a diatribe about how the only thing he considers when discussing realignment is matchups, and that is based on his perspective as a fan. But that he now realizes that the people who will actually make such decisions are not looking from a fan perspective. They have different views and priorities and are looking at things that fans don't place any value on. He is just now realizing that the blowhard fan viewpoint is not the only viewpoint in the world, and that fans ranting on the internet will not be what makes decisions on realignment.

My issue with what you said is it's incongruous with your past statements about sources and what is being referenced. Your opinion on FSU and Texas is just that...your opinion. Just because you feel that FSU is a "bad partner" doesn't mean others who actually make the expansion decision feel the same way. Further, the fact you would defend your opinion by citing a reporter (who I think is one of the better reporters on the expansion topic) who is citing "anonymous" sources is uneven with the threshold you've held previously held for such discussions.

If you want to see why fan opinions mean squat in this, let's look at Texas again. They were the lynchpin (with the help of A&M) in blowing up the old Southwest Conference:

x.com

x.com

Also, they were such a bad "partner" in the Big 12 they ran off Missouri, Texas A&M, Colorado, and Nebraska. To go beyond that, instead of helping the league become a premier conference, they lorded over the league with uneven revenue distributions and going solo with the Longhorn Network instead of being inclusive a conference wide network.

I don't think it gets much "nuclear" (your words) than that for a conference partner. Even after all that, the ACC, PAC 12, and SEC all wanted Texas to join their conference...which the SEC eventually ended up "winning". Point is, if a school has a big enough fanbase, brings in great ratings and a big market, Presidents will overlook all of it. At the end of the day, it's a business...fans feelings for a school have little to do with business decisions.

 

[RonJohn]

My issue with what you said is it's incongruous with your past statements about sources and what is being referenced. Your opinion on FSU and Texas is just that...your opinion. Just because you feel that FSU is a "bad partner" doesn't mean others who actually make the expansion decision feel the same way. Further, the fact you would defend your opinion by citing a reporter (who I think is one of the better reporters on the expansion topic) who is citing "anonymous" sources is uneven with the threshold you've held previously held for such discussions.

If you want to see why fan opinions mean squat in this, let's look at Texas again. They were the lynchpin (with the help of A&M) in blowing up the old Southwest Conference:

x.com

x.com

Also, they were such a bad "partner" in the Big 12 they ran off Missouri, Texas A&M, Colorado, and Nebraska. To go beyond that, instead of helping the league become a premier conference, they lorded over the league with uneven revenue distributions and going solo with the Longhorn Network instead of being inclusive a conference wide network.

I don't think it gets much "nuclear" (your words) than that for a conference partner. Even after all that, the ACC, PAC 12, and SEC all wanted Texas to join their conference...which the SEC eventually ended up "winning". Point is, if a school has a big enough fanbase, brings in great ratings and a big market, Presidents will overlook all of it. At the end of the day, it's a business...fans feelings for a school have little to do with business decisions.

I don't think I have tried to say that FSU being a worse partner is an undeniable fact. It is just my opinion.

If you want to look at the things that Texas did to make them a bad partner: The demanded more money than the rest of the conference. They declared publicly that they were the most important piece of the Big12 and that the conference couldn't survive without them. They demanded extra media rights for themselves exclusively. They attempted to bully the rest of the conference to agree with them: How many of those things has FSU done in the past two years? I don't remember demanding extra media rights for themselves exclusively, but they might have. They have done all of the other things. Texas never sued the Big12. Texas never tried to simply break the GOR with the Big12. FSU has done almost every thing that Texas did to be declared a bad partner. On top of that, FSU filed a lawsuit and has gotten the Florida AG to pressure the media partner to disclose confidential information. Did Texas ever threaten ESPN of Fox directly?

 

[Techster]

I don't think I have tried to say that FSU being a worse partner is an undeniable fact. It is just my opinion.

If you want to look at the things that Texas did to make them a bad partner: The demanded more money than the rest of the conference. They declared publicly that they were the most important piece of the Big12 and that the conference couldn't survive without them. They demanded extra media rights for themselves exclusively. They attempted to bully the rest of the conference to agree with them: How many of those things has FSU done in the past two years? I don't remember demanding extra media rights for themselves exclusively, but they might have. They have done all of the other things. Texas never sued the Big12. Texas never tried to simply break the GOR with the Big12. FSU has done almost every thing that Texas did to be declared a bad partner. On top of that, FSU filed a lawsuit and has gotten the Florida AG to pressure the media partner to disclose confidential information. Did Texas ever threaten ESPN of Fox directly?

You're trying to argue degrees and give examples of BOTH schools being terrible. IMO, helping to blow up one conference and lording over another conference is far worse than FSU trying to improve their situation. It doesn't matter, how you or I view the degree of sh!ttiness of either schools, they're both sh!t however you slice it. At the end of the day, FSU will find a home that's better than the ACC because they have a large fanbase, pull in a lot of viewers, and they're in the Florida market...a market one of the P2 conferences desperately wants to be in. It's the same circumstance Texas had, but they had the right cache for other conferences to desperately want them. I also believe if Texas had to wait another decade to leave the Big 12 like FSU has to, there very well might be another GOR lawsuit playing out in the courts. It was just a fortuitous time for the Big 12 GOR to end for Texas (and Oklahoma).

 

[roadkill]

You're trying to argue degrees and give examples of BOTH schools being terrible. IMO, helping to blow up one conference and lording over another conference is far worse than FSU trying to improve their situation. It doesn't matter, how you or I view the degree of sh!ttiness of either schools, they're both sh!t however you slice it. At the end of the day, FSU will find a home that's better than the ACC because they have a large fanbase, pull in a lot of viewers, and they're in the Florida market...a market one of the P2 conferences desperately wants to be in. It's the same circumstance Texas had, but they had the right cache for other conferences to desperately want them. I also believe if Texas had to wait another decade to leave the Big 12 like FSU has to, there very well might be another GOR lawsuit playing out in the courts. It was just a fortuitous time for the Big 12 GOR to end for Texas (and Oklahoma).

My opinion is that the argument that "Texas is worse than FSU yet they were accepted into the SEC" has an apples-to-oranges comparison element. So it's less important to determine which is worse, and more important to consider the current situation for FSU.

To me, and this is again just an opinion...if I put myself in the shoes of a school’s president tasked with decisions around expansion, FSU’s litigation-in-process, where they are essentially trying to renege on agreements they signed with their conference, and demanding the disclosure of confidential business contracts, is certainly hard to overlook, even if their addition otherwise makes business sense. So the “anonymous sources” quotes have a ring of truth and logic. Time will tell.

 

[TechPhi97]

It’s not a question of Atlanta. It’s a question of Nielsen-rated viewership. Tech, because of the way they have scheduled, is invisible.

There are a ton of Big 10 alumni in Atlanta, so I think there is built in interest here. I also think Nielsen-rated viewership is going to be impacted by TV decisions around network/time, so those need to be controlled for.

 

[iopjacket]

IMO, after the legal dust settles, lawyers for the both the BIG and SEC will advise the University Presidents on GOR lawsuit risk and cost before voting on inviting FSU or Clemson. I think the SEC is more likely to extend invites. Again IMO, the BIG seems more focused on TV market rights and school academic ratings. The SEC seems more focused on big rivalry games. Both leagues no. 1 focus is making money, they just have slightly different views on how to achieve it. My guess is neither will get an invite to the P2.

 

[yeti92]

You're trying to argue degrees and give examples of BOTH schools being terrible. IMO, helping to blow up one conference and lording over another conference is far worse than FSU trying to improve their situation. It doesn't matter, how you or I view the degree of sh!ttiness of either schools, they're both sh!t however you slice it. At the end of the day, FSU will find a home that's better than the ACC because they have a large fanbase, pull in a lot of viewers, and they're in the Florida market...a market one of the P2 conferences desperately wants to be in. It's the same circumstance Texas had, but they had the right cache for other conferences to desperately want them. I also believe if Texas had to wait another decade to leave the Big 12 like FSU has to, there very well might be another GOR lawsuit playing out in the courts. It was just a fortuitous time for the Big 12 GOR to end for Texas (and Oklahoma).

Correct me if I'm wrong, but Texas is a significantly stronger university academically than Florida State, one of those factors that the presidents making realignment decisions consider.

 

[Vespidae]

There are a ton of Big 10 alumni in Atlanta, so I think there is built in interest here. I also think Nielsen-rated viewership is going to be impacted by TV decisions around network/time, so those need to be controlled for.

I’m not sure what point it is that you’re making. Are you claiming viewership will increase by a jump to the B1G? By how much?

 

[CEB]

IMO, after the legal dust settles, lawyers for the both the BIG and SEC will advise the University Presidents on GOR lawsuit risk and cost before voting on inviting FSU or Clemson. I think the SEC is more likely to extend invites. Again IMO, the BIG seems more focused on TV market rights and school academic ratings. The SEC seems more focused on big rivalry games. Both leagues no. 1 focus is making money, they just have slightly different views on how to achieve it. My guess is neither will get an invite to the P2.

I don’t think the legal dust settles until all GOR related issues are resolved. It needs to be defeated or released/ bought out.
Although it could TECHNICALLY happen, there really isn’t a feasible scenario in which the BIG or SEC is engaged with a team that is bound by GOR to another conference… if that’s what you meant.

Now, conferences admitting FSU might have risks to their own GOR! FSU has proven they aren’t fans of these agreements. Wonder if they would sign up again with another conference?

 

[stinger78]

You're trying to argue degrees and give examples of BOTH schools being terrible. IMO, helping to blow up one conference and lording over another conference is far worse than FSU trying to improve their situation. It doesn't matter, how you or I view the degree of sh!ttiness of either schools, they're both sh!t however you slice it. At the end of the day, FSU will find a home that's better than the ACC because they have a large fanbase, pull in a lot of viewers, and they're in the Florida market...a market one of the P2 conferences desperately wants to be in. It's the same circumstance Texas had, but they had the right cache for other conferences to desperately want them. I also believe if Texas had to wait another decade to leave the Big 12 like FSU has to, there very well might be another GOR lawsuit playing out in the courts. It was just a fortuitous time for the Big 12 GOR to end for Texas (and Oklahoma).

You guys are debating which is the bigger knucklehead?

 

[orientalnc]

Changing the subject just a bit, I think there is something many are overlooking. If FSU leaves the ACC without retaining their media rights, the ACC will likely have to continue giving them an equal share of the distribution. The ACC cannot simply take the rights without paying for them. The catch may be that FSU might not want to provide access to ESPN for production of the broadcasts. But, if FSU lands in the Big12 or SEC, their games would still be on ESPN, so it might not matter to them which ESPN crew shows up. I think the ACC might try to impose a discount on the distribution to FSU due to the costs of litigation, but FSU could still be getting close to $50K from the ACC.

 

[Vespidae]

Changing the subject just a bit, I think there is something many are overlooking. If FSU leaves the ACC without retaining their media rights, the ACC will likely have to continue giving them an equal share of the distribution. The ACC cannot simply take the rights without paying for them. The catch may be that FSU might not want to provide access to ESPN for production of the broadcasts. But, if FSU lands in the Big12 or SEC, their games would still be on ESPN, so it might not matter to them which ESPN crew shows up. I think the ACC might try to impose a discount on the distribution to FSU due to the costs of litigation, but FSU could still be getting close to $50K from the ACC.

Do you think that is even realistic? They have no value without media rights and I believe they committed as part of the GoR, the right of ESPN to gain access. I think the ACC would pursue real damages if FSU tried to block access.

 

[RonJohn]

Changing the subject just a bit, I think there is something many are overlooking. If FSU leaves the ACC without retaining their media rights, the ACC will likely have to continue giving them an equal share of the distribution. The ACC cannot simply take the rights without paying for them. The catch may be that FSU might not want to provide access to ESPN for production of the broadcasts. But, if FSU lands in the Big12 or SEC, their games would still be on ESPN, so it might not matter to them which ESPN crew shows up. I think the ACC might try to impose a discount on the distribution to FSU due to the costs of litigation, but FSU could still be getting close to $50K from the ACC.

That isn't true. I believe the ACC bylaws remove payments to a conference when it announces their intention to leave the conference. The GOR isn't a media contract. It is an assignment of rights to the ACC. IOW, the ACC owns those media rights until 2036. There isn't anything in the GOR about distribution of money, only the assignment of the media rights.

 

[RonJohn]

Do you think that is even realistic? They have no value without media rights and I believe they committed as part of the GoR, the right of ESPN to gain access. I think the ACC would pursue real damages if FSU tried to block access.

Plus it would hurt FSU in recruiting. Who would want to go play for FSU if they are the only FBS team to have no home games on TV? Kind of the opposite of the 80s when kids wanted to play for ND because they were on TV every week.

 

[CEB]

Changing the subject just a bit, I think there is something many are overlooking. If FSU leaves the ACC without retaining their media rights, the ACC will likely have to continue giving them an equal share of the distribution. The ACC cannot simply take the rights without paying for them. The catch may be that FSU might not want to provide access to ESPN for production of the broadcasts. But, if FSU lands in the Big12 or SEC, their games would still be on ESPN, so it might not matter to them which ESPN crew shows up. I think the ACC might try to impose a discount on the distribution to FSU due to the costs of litigation, but FSU could still be getting close to $50K from the ACC.

While you may be touching on the area of compromise to be reached, I think the documents stand alone in a manner that legally allows the ACC to do exactly that.
- FSU gave their rights to the ACC.
- ACC used the collective rights to get a media contract.
- Revenues are distributed to ACC Members.

FSU can cease to be a member and that does not change the fact that they’ve pledged their media rights regardless of membership.

That said, I think if / when this get to the bargaining table, it’s a valid point that if they live up to the GOR, they should have some share of revenue. Everyone will be interested in treading very lightly here, though… this type of situation is exactly what GOR is structured to prevent and the precedent could be dangerous. I could see this happening behind closed doors and ultimately settling on a buyout rather than this scenario.

 

[CEB]

Do you think that is even realistic? They have no value without media rights and I believe they committed as part of the GoR, the right of ESPN to gain access. I think the ACC would pursue real damages if FSU tried to block access.

No.
If the whole thing is about media value, no one is going anywhere without their media rights. It’s a fun exercise but a virtual impossibility.
Now maybe FSU thinks that P2 membership is more about survival and would sacrifice money and media for it… that would be a really desperate and stupid act at this point. I’d be interested to see how it goes for them!

 

[Techster]

You guys are debating which is the bigger knucklehead?

Pretty much.

 

[Towaliga]

I'm a newer flan, class of 2020.. That guy was dumb af..

Since you graduated in 2020, please don’t tell me you think TFG is the 2nd or 3rd best GT coach of all time!

 

[Vespidae]

No.
If the whole thing is about media value, no one is going anywhere without their media rights. It’s a fun exercise but a virtual impossibility.
Now maybe FSU thinks that P2 membership is more about survival and would sacrifice money and media for it… that would be a really desperate and stupid act at this point. I’d be interested to see how it goes for them!

There’s an interesting read that CVC, a PE firm, may inject $1 Billion into the B12 to be distributed to members or used to buy out FSU and Clemson, making them able to join the conference. The downside is that those programs will likely have to cut costs and sports programs to pay the investment back.

Big bets.