Conference Realignment

[LT 1967]

Interesting article by ESPN's David Hale concerning the origin and evolution of the Grant of Rights. David begins with the 1984 Supreme Court ruling that each School owns their media rights, not the NCAA. He relates how there was chaos with each school trying to make individual deals with media outlets and the B1G was the first conference to create an "Assignment of Rights".

Interesting quote by an administrator of another conference who said, "The ACC sold its soul for a Television Network".

'Like smoke coming from the Vatican': The history -- and future -- of the grant of rights

In the ACC, a grant-of-rights agreement appears to hold the key to future realignment. It has been highly secretive and much argued over. What exactly is it, and where did it start?

www.espn.com

 

[LT 1967]

Interesting article. We need to stay in touch with the BIG. Although we aren't mentioned, We are more likely a tarhet of BIG than many of the others listed. I'm sure Batt is active in this regard. Adding ND would solidify the ACC, and the ACC should offer them whatever it takes, since that is really their only hope of surviving this madness.

Agree and I hope President Cabrera stays on good terms with those B1G presidents during their policy and strategy meetings. I still believe GT and Miami will be the targets of the B1G if the ACC implodes. AAU membership, B1G Alums in ATL, Media market, plus the most fertile recruiting areas in the South will prevail.

If the SEC and B1G agree to a Football Challenge Game every year similar to the ACC-SEC Basketball challenge, the B1G will have 10 established games every year. Notre Dame's scheduling options will continue to be diminished. Hopefully, the ACC would be their most likely landing place if the ACC holds together.

 

[stinger78]

Agree and I hope President Cabrera stays on good terms with those B1G presidents during their policy and strategy meetings. I still believe GT and Miami will be the targets of the B1G if the ACC implodes. AAU membership, B1G Alums in ATL, Media market, plus the most fertile recruiting areas in the South will prevail.

If the SEC and B1G agree to a Football Challenge Game every year similar to the ACC-SEC Basketball challenge, the B1G will have 10 established games every year. Notre Dame's scheduling options will continue to be diminished. Hopefully, the ACC would be their most likely landing place if the ACC holds together.

When I read this, I think back to the “alliance” the ACC/B12/P12 made after UTA and OU announced their move to to the SECheat to collaborate to create more inventory. To my knowledge, nothing ever happened. Such a challenge could have been done in short order, and may have saved the P12. Though, it appears that the USC/UCLA and UW/UO deals were already in the works.
This could still be done with the B12 and create some really good games, but you hear nothing of it. SMH.

 

[iceeater1969]

When I read this, I think back to the “alliance” the ACC/B12/P12 made after UTA and OU announced their move to to the SECheat to collaborate to create more inventory. To my knowledge, nothing ever happened. Such a challenge could have been done in short order, and may have saved the P12. Though, it appears that the USC/UCLA and UW/UO deals were already in the works.
This could still be done with the B12 and create some really good games, but you hear nothing of it. SMH.

But too many college prssidents spoil the soup.

 

[GTflyer0116]

The more and more I think about it, college football and college sports in general are complete non-sense these days. We have college football as the focus with no players union, wild west NIL and transfer portal, no central figure for the sport, no one focusing on what the fans care about, and the academic side of college completely brushed to the side. As well, power hungry conference commissioners that don't appear to talk to one another.

I honestly still question where all this is heading in the future. Does anyone else feel this way?

 

[LT 1967]

When I read this, I think back to the “alliance” the ACC/B12/P12 made after UTA and OU announced their move to to the SECheat to collaborate to create more inventory. To my knowledge, nothing ever happened. Such a challenge could have been done in short order, and may have saved the P12. Though, it appears that the USC/UCLA and UW/UO deals were already in the works.
This could still be done with the B12 and create some really good games, but you hear nothing of it. SMH.

Agree. If this deal with the B1G and SEC actually comes to fruition, both the SEC and B1G would have 10 committed games. The B1G is pushing the SEC to go to 9 conference games like the B1G currently has in order to be on equal footing before adding the cross-conference B1G-SEC game.

We could possibly lose the UGA game if this happens. UGA will not want to play 9 SEC teams plus one B1G team plus GT for the 11th Power 4 game. I know Sankey seemed to be in favor of staying at 8 SEC games in order to preserve the four in state ACC-SEC rivalry games, but POWER and MONEY will eventually prevail.

To your point, the ACC needs to establish some type of relationship with the Big 12 in order to have an adequate inventory of games and to maintain some influence in the future of college football including the CFP.

 

[RonJohn]

We could possibly lose the UGA game if this happens. UGA will not want to play 9 SEC teams plus one B1G team plus GT for the 11th Power 4 game. I know Sankey seemed to be in favor of staying at 8 SEC games in order to preserve the four in state ACC-SEC rivalry games, but POWER and MONEY will eventually prevail.

Reportedly, the SEC did not add a 9th conference game because ESPN told them they would not pay additional money for the 9th game. The SEC tried to squeeze more money out of ESPN for having an additional conference game. It was about money. Money is already prevailing.

 

[stinger78]

Reportedly, the SEC did not add a 9th conference game because ESPN told them they would not pay additional money for the 9th game. The SEC tried to squeeze more money out of ESPN for having an additional conference game. It was about money. Money is already prevailing.

Yup. It's all money ball now... and it's only going to get worse. I cannot for the life of me understand why Tech alumni want to wade into that at the most intense level.

Can we at some point just get back to college football and leave the bush-league pros to their own devices?

 

[LT 1967]

Reportedly, the SEC did not add a 9th conference game because ESPN told them they would not pay additional money for the 9th game. The SEC tried to squeeze more money out of ESPN for having an additional conference game. It was about money. Money is already prevailing.

You may be totally correct about the extra money. However, most of the articles I have read concerning the matter use terms like the article below, "Presumably" and "Possibly" because of the money.

Note in the article below, Sankey, when asked about the extra money said: "Money Follows, it does not lead". I believe if he had the votes to add a game, he could ask for the extra money. According to the article, the SEC had to consider that an 8-game schedule makes it easier to get into the CFP. I found it interesting that UGA was one of the schools voting yes for 9 games (According to the article).

Plus, I would ask why the SEC is even discussing an inter-conference game with the B1G in Nashville next week if there was not an expectation of more money. Perhaps, it is just all about CONTROL of the CFP.

Again, that's just a humble opinion. You may be totally correct that ESPN refuses to pay!

SEC sticks with eight-game conference schedule, presumably in part because ESPN didn't offer more money

The SEC will continue playing eight conference games when Texas and Oklahoma officially join the conference, presumably because ESPN didn't pay for a ninth.

awfulannouncing.com

 

[tmhunter52]

Yup. It's all money ball now... and it's only going to get worse. I cannot for the life of me understand why Tech alumni want to wade into that at the most intense level.

Can we at some point just get back to college football and leave the bush-league pros to their own devices?

Nope

 

[LT 1967]

The more and more I think about it, college football and college sports in general are complete non-sense these days. We have college football as the focus with no players union, wild west NIL and transfer portal, no central figure for the sport, no one focusing on what the fans care about, and the academic side of college completely brushed to the side. As well, power hungry conference commissioners that don't appear to talk to one another.

I honestly still question where all this is heading in the future. Does anyone else feel this way?

I definitely feel like you do. We have moved so far past the collegiate model that it is unrecognizable.

You might like the attached CBS article concerning the second negotiated House vs. NCAA agreement which has been submitted to the judge. The first submission was rejected by the Judge. She was apparently concerned about the wording of the agreement concerning the NCAA's request for an independent oversite board (Clearing House) to approve NIL deals with athletes. The goal of the NCAA was to eliminate "pay for play" on NIL deals. The NCAA wanted the athletes to actually do something to earn the money on their NIL deals, like a TV advertisement for Pepsi. If I understand correctly, the current NIL deals are just Donor Collectives raising money and paying the athletes from the collective for their play. The agreement language has been changed and some exceptions from oversight added for Shoe and Apparel companies. The article best describes the situation much better than I can.

I assume everyone knows there will be two distinct sources of revenue for the athletes. They will receive direct pay to play from the universities through the direct revenue sharing agreement plus the NIL possibilities. Per the agreement, the max revenue sharing amount is 23 million per school to be allocated to all athletes, not just football plus each athlete can make their own NIL deal. See below.

I failed to say that there is also the matter of $2.8 Billion that the universities have to supply for back payments to athletes, in addition to above. This will cover the previous 5 years.

MSN

www.msn.com

 

[LT 1967]

Interesting article on relationship between SEC and B1G commissioners.

MSN

 

[stinger78]

I definitely feel like you do. We have moved so far past the collegiate model that it is unrecognizable.

You might like the attached CBS article concerning the second negotiated House vs. NCAA agreement which has been submitted to the judge. The first submission was rejected by the Judge. She was apparently concerned about the wording of the agreement concerning the NCAA's request for an independent oversite board (Clearing House) to approve NIL deals with athletes. The goal of the NCAA was to eliminate "pay for play" on NIL deals. The NCAA wanted the athletes to actually do something to earn the money on their NIL deals, like a TV advertisement for Pepsi. If I understand correctly, the current NIL deals are just Donor Collectives raising money and paying the athletes from the collective for their play. The agreement language has been changed and some exceptions from oversight added for Shoe and Apparel companies. The article best describes the situation much better than I can.

I assume everyone knows there will be two distinct sources of revenue for the athletes. They will receive direct pay to play from the universities through the direct revenue sharing agreement plus the NIL possibilities. Per the agreement, the max revenue sharing amount is 23 million per school to be allocated to all athletes, not just football plus each athlete can make their own NIL deal. See below.

I failed to say that there is also the matter of $2.8 Billion that the universities have to supply for back payments to athletes, in addition to above. This will cover the previous 5 years.

MSN

www.msn.com

I have loved college football my whole life, but I’m now clinging to the last threads. Whenever those go, I’m done. All this is pushing me there fairly quickly.

 

[cpf2001]

Note in the article below, Sankey, when asked about the extra money said: "Money Follows, it does not lead".

IMO this is just a lie cause it’s what people want to hear. Actions say that money is leading here.

 

[iceeater1969]

IMO this is just a lie cause it’s what people want to hear. Actions say that money is leading here.

Look at this weeks top 15.
All have big $$

After that there are some med $ and some under performing big$$

 

[LT 1967]

Reportedly, the SEC did not add a 9th conference game because ESPN told them they would not pay additional money for the 9th game. The SEC tried to squeeze more money out of ESPN for having an additional conference game. It was about money. Money is already prevailing.

Thought you would like this article. This article points out another reason ESPN resists giving additional money for a 9th SEC game. With 9 conference games, the SEC schools give up one home game every other year. Rather than having 7 home games every year while playing two "guarantee" (G5) teams, they would have 6 home games every other year due to the odd number of SEC games.

According to the article, the SEC wants ESPN (Disney) to add enough money to make up for the lost revenue from one home game every other year. I suppose this is in addition to the amount of money the SEC would like to have just for adding a 9th SEC team (article did not clarify that). Anyway, I better understand why ESPN may be resisting additional money for a 9th game.

MSN

 

[LT 1967]

I have loved college football my whole life, but I’m now clinging to the last threads. Whenever those go, I’m done. All this is pushing me there fairly quickly.

Maybe I should not show you the attached article. You may release the last thread. I would not want that to happen. But the article relates the many ills that you and I see in the college game today. Story is by a Colorado Alumnus. He paints a less than attractive picture of the state of the game including a paragraph about the Colorado quarterback (Shedeur Sanders) and his Rolls Royce!!

MSN

www.msn.com

 

[Vespidae]

To put this in perspective, the entire Auburn Athletics budget in 1982 was $1 million. This year, it's $192 million.

That sums up college athletics today. (I still prefer it to pro.)

 

[RonJohn]

Maybe I should not show you the attached article. You may release the last thread. I would not want that to happen. But the article relates the many ills that you and I see in the college game today. Story is by a Colorado Alumnus. He paints a less than attractive picture of the state of the game including a paragraph about the Colorado quarterback (Shedeur Sanders) and his Rolls Royce!!

MSN

www.msn.com

Why does it matter to anyone if the Colorado quarterback has a Rolls Royce? If he wasn't playing football and his dad bought it for him would it still make you upset? College football is loaded with money now. How many more people watched Auburn in 2010 to see Cam Newton play? How many more people watched Florida in the late 2000s to see Tebow play? How many people watched Clemson games in the late 2010s to see Trevor Lawrence play? I am asking about people who had no interest in Auburn, Florida, nor Clemson, but watched those games to see those specific players. Those players made extra money for ESPN, extra money for the announcers, and extra money for Auburn/Florida/Clemson based on their name, and video image.

To put this in perspective, the entire Auburn Athletics budget in 1982 was $1 million. This year, it's $192 million.

That sums up college athletics today. (I still prefer it to pro.)

From what I can find, in 1982 only two Auburn football games were televised. This year, unless the FCS game was streaming only, every game will be televised. It is a different world in college athletics.

 

[Vespidae]

Agreed. Fans today want a Fan Experience, premium seating, fun eats and atmosphere. It all comes with a price.