Conference Realignment

gte447f

Ramblin' Wreck
Messages
991
You are correct. SMU's Dallas/Fort Worth (#5 overall) is now the biggest single market in ACC's portfolio.
Too bad nobody in DFW could care less about college football, or at least that’s the impression I got when I lived there for a short while years ago. Certainly nothing like here in the south (see what I did there).
 

UgaBlows

Helluva Engineer
Messages
6,680
Too bad nobody in DFW could care less about college football, or at least that’s the impression I got when I lived there for a short while years ago. Certainly nothing like here in the south (see what I did there).
I find that hard to believe but It doesn’t matter, they are all getting billed for it anyway
 

slugboy

Moderator
Staff member
Messages
11,238
The Athletic (NY Times) takes a jaded view of the “offer”

https://www.nytimes.com/athletic/57...-proposal-lawsuit/?source=user_shared_article
ACC could quiet Florida State, Clemson, but why give in to desperation play?

Their conclusion:
But the facts remain the same. The ACC holds every ounce of leverage, and Clemson and FSU saying they’ll stay in the league only under their terms is the ultimate walk-back, a desperation play. Which in turn means if the ACC goes along, it’s only offering those schools the dollar-lined off-ramp they’re desperately seeking.
 

cpf2001

Helluva Engineer
Messages
1,069
I find that hard to believe but It doesn’t matter, they are all getting billed for it anyway
Grew up there, DFW definitely isn’t Atlanta in terms of overall level of CFB interest. And SMU will have an uphill climb against UT, A&M, OU, etc. Lots of alums of those and lots of transplants in general in DFW (similar to Atlanta in that way).

TCU is on the other, smaller, side of the metroplex but has had a lot more success, without turning into a power conference ratings juggernaut.
 

RonJohn

Helluva Engineer
Messages
4,857
Grew up there, DFW definitely isn’t Atlanta in terms of overall level of CFB interest. And SMU will have an uphill climb against UT, A&M, OU, etc. Lots of alums of those and lots of transplants in general in DFW (similar to Atlanta in that way).

TCU is on the other, smaller, side of the metroplex but has had a lot more success, without turning into a power conference ratings juggernaut.
Whether people watch or not, having SMU in the conference automatically pulls in about $2.7 million per month into the ACC Network.
 

cpf2001

Helluva Engineer
Messages
1,069
He is a Carolina grad that lives in Raleigh and covers UNC and Duke. I would pretty much expect this opinion.
I don’t have access past their paywall, but is it opinion, or media pushback initiated from more central ACC sources to counter Clemson/FSU-sourced rumors about the ACC giving in on things soon? That could also be expected.
 

SOWEGA Jacket

Helluva Engineer
Messages
2,044
Did y’all forget SMU in the 80’s? They sold out and had a fanbase. If you win and have some stud players the eyeballs will come. Everyone loves a winner.
 

RonJohn

Helluva Engineer
Messages
4,857
He is a Carolina grad that lives in Raleigh and covers UNC and Duke. I would pretty much expect this opinion.
If you feel it is a good deal, please let me know what the advantage to the rest of the ACC is. FSU and Clemson get more money, while the rest of the ACC doesn't? FSU and Clemson have a guaranteed departure in 2030? The lawsuits could easily take that long for a departure, even if they win. What is the positive side for the rest of the conference?
 

GTThor

Jolly Good Fellow
Messages
284
Per source, don’t be shocked if GT and Tulane end up back in the SEC.

I didn’t believe them, but they claimed to have some inside knowledge.

?????
 

forensicbuzz

21st Century Throwback Dad
Messages
8,598
Location
North Shore, Chicago
3. The school presidents recognize the ACC is a better conference with Clemson and FSU.

I'm not advocating giving FSU/Clemson dumb type of concessions, but there might be something that could be enticing to those schools that wouldn't set a bad precedent for all of the other schools. I have no idea what that would be, but most on this board aren't even willing to discuss possibilities.

I think it was only recently the ACC decided to offer performance based bonuses. There might be other things that are reasonable that we aren't privy to.
Why? You don’t need to. They’re tethered to the ACC and all the belly-aching isn’t going to change that.
 

orientalnc

Helluva Engineer
Retired Staff
Messages
9,778
Location
Oriental, NC
Why? You don’t need to. They’re tethered to the ACC and all the belly-aching isn’t going to change that.
I will answer the question @Richard7125 asks for you. The ACC could tell FSU and Clemson they wish they would drop the lawsuit now, but there will be no reduction in the exit fee nor any offer to allow either school to buy back its media rights. What the ACC will offer is a promise to not sue for recovery of its attorney fees and court costs. But, only if both schools accept defeat in court with prejudice. And, very soon.
 

yoshiki2

Jolly Good Fellow
Messages
118
Too bad nobody in DFW could care less about college football, or at least that’s the impression I got when I lived there for a short while years ago. Certainly nothing like here in the south (see what I did there).
Texas is part of the South! Do you mean Southeast?
 

Richard7125

Jolly Good Fellow
Messages
446
Why? You don’t need to. They’re tethered to the ACC and all the belly-aching isn’t going to change that.
It wasn’t until a year or two ago that the ACC agreed to give a bigger payout to the schools that went to bigger bowls, made the playoffs, etc. I’m pretty sure that was at the urging of FSU/Clemson (and maybe some others). I was shocked something like that wasn’t in place already. There could be other levers similar to that which would be very reasonable.
 

gtbeak

Ramblin' Wreck
Messages
519
Texas is part of the South! Do you mean Southeast?
It's a little bit of an inside joke. If you've ever lived in Texas you will know they (at least not the natives, this may be changing with recent population shifts) don't consider themselves to be part of the south or the southwest. They are Texas, a region unto their own. The south is east of the Mississippi and also northern Louisiana/southern Arkansas, and the southwest is Arizona, New Mexico, and southern Colorado.
 

RonJohn

Helluva Engineer
Messages
4,857
It wasn’t until a year or two ago that the ACC agreed to give a bigger payout to the schools that went to bigger bowls, made the playoffs, etc. I’m pretty sure that was at the urging of FSU/Clemson (and maybe some others). I was shocked something like that wasn’t in place already. There could be other levers similar to that which would be very reasonable.
There was something similar in place already. However, it wasn't significant. Schools that made bowl games, tournaments, etc received more money. However, it was along the lines of travel fund money instead of anything significant. There has historically been a difference of a few million dollars between schools who were successful and those who were not. FSU is looking to get the same amount of money as UF. They said as much last year. They want the ACC to pay them along the lines of $50 million above what they are currently receiving.
 

forensicbuzz

21st Century Throwback Dad
Messages
8,598
Location
North Shore, Chicago
It wasn’t until a year or two ago that the ACC agreed to give a bigger payout to the schools that went to bigger bowls, made the playoffs, etc. I’m pretty sure that was at the urging of FSU/Clemson (and maybe some others). I was shocked something like that wasn’t in place already. There could be other levers similar to that which would be very reasonable.
I have no problem having a uneven revenue sharing based on performance. I have a problem with disproportionate revenue sharing based on the school. Sorry, not going to happen. We're not going to give you more becuase you're Clemson or you're FSU. If you want more, earn it on the field. The way our contract with ESPN for the ACCN is set up, GT should be getting the largest portion of that pie because they bring the most carriage fees to the pool. SMU would, but they've agreed to get nothing for a bedroom in the house.
 

RonJohn

Helluva Engineer
Messages
4,857
I have no problem having a uneven revenue sharing based on performance. I have a problem with disproportionate revenue sharing based on the school. Sorry, not going to happen. We're not going to give you more becuase you're Clemson or you're FSU. If you want more, earn it on the field. The way our contract with ESPN for the ACCN is set up, GT should be getting the largest portion of that pie because they bring the most carriage fees to the pool. SMU would, but they've agreed to get nothing for a bedroom in the house.
SMU is receiving money from the ACC. They are not receiving media rights money, but they are receiving other monies. I don't know how the ACCN is set up, but I would think the revenue from the network is not "media rights" money. All ACC teams are required to have production and broadcast capabilities. SMU will be producing and broadcasting content to the ACCN. I think they will receive money for that.

Clemson hasn't been publicly broadcasting trash. FSU has been framing the entire discussion about unequal revenue sharing around viewership and overall athletic budgets. If the ACC were to have uneven revenue sharing based on that, then FSU would have more money and a large budget (in part because of uneven revenue sharing) and would continue to have higher viewership (based in large part on uneven budget and which time-slots and networks they are put on). It would be a circular system in which they get stronger because of uneven revenue sharing, and then they get more revenue because they are stronger ..........

Uneven sharing based on conference wins, bowl/CFP appearances, BBall wins, tournament game appearances, etc. could be workable. Anything that immediately creates tiers would result in a top 3-4 teams that get stronger and stronger, while the rest of the conference gets weaker and weaker. The result would be that in a few years, the top 3-4 teams would be hurt by the rest of the conference being so weak. That would inevitably lead to a breakup of the conference. I would say that FSU doesn't want that, but I think that is exactly what they want. They want to get stronger so that the rest of the world can see the large gap between them and the rest of the conference that they see with their garnet colored glasses.
 
Top