Conference Realignment

bobongo

Helluva Engineer
Messages
7,575
I can’t find any rules that say “conferences must have at least 8 member schools”.
I couldn't find anything official, but this popped up on Google when I googled "number of schools for a conference in Division I minimum":

Under NCAA regulations, all Division I conferences defined as "multisport conferences" must meet the following criteria: A total of at least seven active Division I members.
 

JacketOff

Helluva Engineer
Messages
2,953
Some of y’all just don’t see the big picture. If teams want to go then no contract written years ago will stop them. We’ve seen this over and over again in sports. Those who still believe a 5 page contract will stop anything until 2036 are delusional.

But you can carry on saying we aren’t lawyers and everything being reported is garbage, etc. Thats fine. But in a few years when lo and behold something breaks please remember that in 2022 you said the GOR will keep everything intact until 2036.
You keep saying this, yet OU and Texas, as well as USC and UCLA are not leaving their current conferences until after their contract periods are up. Not only are those 4 of the biggest brands in college sports, they’re moving to the largest conferences in college sports. Yet none of their lawyers were able to work around their current deals.

You’re the one that’s delusional. You keep saying the same BS over and over and over and over again. For what? To say, “yeah I was right. I’m so smart.” Congrats big guy. See ya in 2036
 

roadkill

Helluva Engineer
Messages
1,826
I can’t find any rules that say “conferences must have at least 8 member schools”. The ESPN/ACC Network deal might have something in the contract that voids the deal if the conference shrinks below viability, but it’s possible that a poison pill is a poison pill.
More practically, member teams can rework the deal. If 4 teams want to leave and cost the remaining 10 teams a ton of money, there’s no majority vote to change the terms of league membership. If 12 out of 14 want to go, then I’m pretty sure the deal will get amended (unless ESPN is suing to stop it).
If FSU and Clemson were free agents, I think they'd have a good shot at SEC acceptance. They aren't "free" right now, though.
You lost me at "cost the remaining teams a ton of money". It seems that the current GoR means that the remaining 10 teams would still be operating under the same ESPN contract and would split the same size pie as before, but then bigger slices for each. What am I missing?
Also, the ACC's deal with ESPN favors ESPN, compared to what ESPN is having to pay the SEC. If, say Clemson/FSU/Miami/some other ACC school left for the SEC, why would ESPN want to pay more than the deal they got with the ACC that is also covered under the GoR?
 

roadkill

Helluva Engineer
Messages
1,826
But here's a question. I read an article yesterday that speculated that FSU, UNC, Miami and Clemson will bolt for the SEC. Why? The enhanced value of the SEC rights will compensate for the GOR buyout.

And ... here's the question. The ACC, without those three, would as a consequence, suffer from a diminution of value for the remaining teams. (I'm wondering if the ACC could even survive in that case.) Which could mean that the recalculated value would be far, far less.

I have no idea if DOV is even in the contracts, but it stands to reason it should. Many management contracts do.
Interesting speculation, but I believe the GoR protects the ACC from diminished value. Essentially, if the media rights of the teams that leave are what determines their value, and those rights are retained by the ACC, then the ACC has no loss of value.
 

MusicalBuzz

Jolly Good Fellow
Messages
226
How exactly do you know this? Why would TX and Oklahoma wait until their GOR are completed with the Big 12? Why would UCLA and USC wait as well. Yes all 4 schools will happen much faster than 2036. But none of those schools tried to beat this legally. I would suspect the conferences carefully wrote these agreements to avoid loopholes.
Seems to me a simple business cost/benefit decision: weigh the benefit of (maybe) new revenue minus cost of doing the legal challenge vs the difference in staying in place and new revenue. The key here being as you alluded the very short time to outlast the respective B12 and PAC agreements.
 

Vespidae

Helluva Engineer
Messages
5,326
Location
Auburn, AL
Interesting speculation, but I believe the GoR protects the ACC from diminished value. Essentially, if the media rights of the teams that leave are what determines their value, and those rights are retained by the ACC, then the ACC has no loss of value.
Fair enough. But isn't the party that determines the majority of the value the same for both; e.g., ESPN? I would think they would restate the values and simply offer a present value buyout of the rights which ... once paid, would pretty much obliterate the ACC.

Fun to speculate, but the reality is .... nobody really knows.
 

MusicalBuzz

Jolly Good Fellow
Messages
226
You keep saying this, yet OU and Texas, as well as USC and UCLA are not leaving their current conferences until after their contract periods are up. Not only are those 4 of the biggest brands in college sports, they’re moving to the largest conferences in college sports. Yet none of their lawyers were able to work around their current deals.

You’re the one that’s delusional. You keep saying the same BS over and over and over and over again. For what? To say, “yeah I was right. I’m so smart.” Congrats big guy. See ya in 2036
Yes, but they’re only waiting a couple years. And they’re still getting revenue; and whereas they might beat a challenge on the current agreement .. no way that comes cheap. And they’re still receiving income. So as I just suggested in a reply it’s just a business decision to play out the agreement for a couple years…but not 14 years, where the cost/benefit of a legal challenge is entirely different.
 

GT_05

Helluva Engineer
Messages
2,370
Interesting speculation, but I believe the GoR protects the ACC from diminished value. Essentially, if the media rights of the teams that leave are what determines their value, and those rights are retained by the ACC, then the ACC has no loss of value.
If the ACC becomes known as second tier sports, I don’t see how the value can be retained. I think the value is dropping, along with the ACC’s leverage, with every power move made by the B1G and SEC. GOR $ is not a static, guaranteed return, as I understand it.
 

roadkill

Helluva Engineer
Messages
1,826
Fair enough. But isn't the party that determines the majority of the value the same for both; e.g., ESPN? I would think they would restate the values and simply offer a present value buyout of the rights which ... once paid, would pretty much obliterate the ACC.

Fun to speculate, but the reality is .... nobody really knows.
Right, which is why I'm thinking ESPN is really the entity calling the shots in any ACC-to-SEC moves. Which is why I said earlier, if I'm ESPN, why would I want to pay more than I already have contracted to pay for the premier teams in the ACC, even if they moved to the SEC? Now, if the move happened, the SEC would have additional leverage with ESPN in terms of their current contract and would undoubtedly want to renegotiate it.
 

roadkill

Helluva Engineer
Messages
1,826
If the ACC becomes known as second tier sports, I don’t see how the value can be retained. I think the value is dropping, along with the ACC’s leverage, with every power move made by the B1G and SEC. GOR $ is not a static, guaranteed return, as I understand it.
Correct, the GoR is not about a certain amount of compensation, and no doubt the perception of the ACC would suffer if those teams left. But perception is not what is in the current contracts.
 

GT_05

Helluva Engineer
Messages
2,370
Fair enough. But isn't the party that determines the majority of the value the same for both; e.g., ESPN? I would think they would restate the values and simply offer a present value buyout of the rights which ... once paid, would pretty much obliterate the ACC.

Fun to speculate, but the reality is .... nobody really knows.
FWIW, I don’t think we will end up in the B1G or SEC. I hope we do for many reasons but I just don’t see it happening. I really do think that Clemson, FSU, Miami, and maybe one more team will try to get out. Frankly, they have more to lose than we do by staying. I think our best hope is for the SEC and B10 attempt to plunder the ACC simultaneously. Maybe we can get out as a package deal.
 

RamblinRed

Helluva Engineer
Featured Member
Messages
5,862
I'll make the same statement here that I made on another board. My totally kooky take on expansion is that in 2036 the ACC will still exist and at least 2/3 of its current membership will still be in it.
If i'm wrong i'm wrong, but i've seen nothing in the last 7 days that suggest any doom is imminent.

FWIW, the Iowa AD said today that while the conference has received interest since the USC and UCLA announcement that right now the B10 is not planning on any more expansion.

I'll be interested to see who the first school will be who will try to take on the contracts as it will be a very precarious place to be. It's sort of a chicken and egg game. There are likely some schools that would be interested in leaving, but financially there is no way for them to do so unless they can get a favorable court judgement. Meanwhile there may be a handful of schools that the Big 2 would be interested in, but they aren't going to provide an invite unless all the potential legal issues are resolved. But a school isn't going to want to take on the legal jeopardy without knowing for sure they can move.

ACC has a exit fee that basically increases every year as it is tied to 3x the TV distribution. Then you have the GoR. That's not about paying money, that is about losing revenue for both the school and its new conference. As the lawyer who said he had seen the GoR stated, it is not even clear where you would file the claim, so you could easily spend a year or more in the legal system just trying to get a decision on where you would have to file suit.

I don't expect the ACC of 2036 to be the same as the ACC of 2022, but I don't think it is going to fall apart and disappear either. So far no P5 conference has fallen apart - even when losing its best programs.
I don't think the Big 2 are nearly as keen on expanding to the size that alot of fans are expecting. If they were then more Pac and B12 schools would be getting grabbed.

At some point there will be more movement. In the short term I think if there is any it will likely involve PAC and B12 teams. I don't see any ACC teams leaving in 2022. Frankly, I don't see any ACC teams leaving in the next few years unless ND jumps to the B10.
 

RonJohn

Helluva Engineer
Messages
4,995
.... So far no P5 conference has fallen apart - even when losing its best programs.
That depends on how you define things. P5 was so-named after the Big East dissolved and reformed as a non-football playing conference. There were six Automatic Qualifying conferences for the big bowls until that happened. I may have the numbers wrong, but 6 of their members moved to the ACC, 1 to the Big10, and 1 to the Big12. I think the rest are now in Conference USA. So, that was not a "P5" conference, but it was an equivalent. If a P5 conference is dissolved, it will no longer be a P5 so you could make the same argument that a P4 conference had never dissolved.
 

RonJohn

Helluva Engineer
Messages
4,995
But here's a question. I read an article yesterday that speculated that FSU, UNC, Miami and Clemson will bolt for the SEC. Why? The enhanced value of the SEC rights will compensate for the GOR buyout.

And ... here's the question. The ACC, without those three, would as a consequence, suffer from a diminution of value for the remaining teams. (I'm wondering if the ACC could even survive in that case.) Which could mean that the recalculated value would be far, far less.

I have no idea if DOV is even in the contracts, but it stands to reason it should. Many management contracts do.
I don't think the media rights value for the SEC would increase. They wouldn't get additional games. I also think the ACC could make good legal arguments that the ACC media rights value would diminish. The ACC would still own and negotiate the media rights for the teams that bolt. If Alabama plays at Clemson, that game would be included in the ACC contract. If FSU and Clemson play in the national championship game, those media rights would be paid to the ACC. How would the value be diminished?
 

slugboy

Moderator
Staff member
Messages
11,491
You lost me at "cost the remaining teams a ton of money". It seems that the current GoR means that the remaining 10 teams would still be operating under the same ESPN contract and would split the same size pie as before, but then bigger slices for each. What am I missing?
Also, the ACC's deal with ESPN favors ESPN, compared to what ESPN is having to pay the SEC. If, say Clemson/FSU/Miami/some other ACC school left for the SEC, why would ESPN want to pay more than the deal they got with the ACC that is also covered under the GoR?
The entire post is about teams voting to change membership requirements (i.e. to return the media rights to the schools).
It would be in the interest of a school like FSU to get out of their agreement so they could go to the SEC. Most of the ACC schools don’t have that option. The easiest way is to take the restrictions out by consensus of the schools.
But why would Syracuse or Pitt or GT let them out of their contract?
It’s a non-starter.
 

Vespidae

Helluva Engineer
Messages
5,326
Location
Auburn, AL
FWIW, I don’t think we will end up in the B1G or SEC. I hope we do for many reasons but I just don’t see it happening. I really do think that Clemson, FSU, Miami, and maybe one more team will try to get out. Frankly, they have more to lose than we do by staying. I think our best hope is for the SEC and B10 attempt to plunder the ACC simultaneously. Maybe we can get out as a package deal.
UNC going to the SEC was a bit of a surprise to me but ... the SEC is swimming in so much money, football can't absorb it all. Auburn just gave Bruce Pearl a $50M contract for basketball. (Remember the days of paying a coach $300K, a shoe contract and a tv show?) Targeting the ACC to take over college basketball makes sense given the economics of college sports and where its going.
 

roadkill

Helluva Engineer
Messages
1,826
The entire post is about teams voting to change membership requirements (i.e. to return the media rights to the schools).
It would be in the interest of a school like FSU to get out of their agreement so they could go to the SEC. Most of the ACC schools don’t have that option. The easiest way is to take the restrictions out by consensus of the schools.
But why would Syracuse or Pitt or GT let them out of their contract?
It’s a non-starter.
I think we are in agreement here. The only way that the lower-value teams in the ACC would agree to amend or dissolve the GoR would be if they all got a better deal as a result, and I don't see that happening unless ESPN goes into total panic mode.
 

forensicbuzz

21st Century Throwback Dad
Messages
8,851
Location
North Shore, Chicago
Here's a thought I just had regarding B1G and expansion into TV markets, how the GoR might play into moves from the ACC, and how that's different than the ACC.

The B1G is about TVs, not eyeballs. So it really doesn't matter if the B1G Network or ACC Network air GT home games. Then B1G is getting their money from having a team in that market ($1.25/set versus $0.25/set, guessing at numbers because I don't care to look them up). So the B1G makes their money whether the rights to the broadcast are theirs or others. So, there's still an incentive to get into large TV markets, regardless of whether they have rights to broadcast or not; they make their money in other ways. The SEC is eyeballs, so broadcast rights do matter. At that point, it's all about the exit fee. Just a thought.
 

SOWEGA Jacket

Helluva Engineer
Messages
2,075
You keep saying this, yet OU and Texas, as well as USC and UCLA are not leaving their current conferences until after their contract periods are up. Not only are those 4 of the biggest brands in college sports, they’re moving to the largest conferences in college sports. Yet none of their lawyers were able to work around their current deals.

You’re the one that’s delusional. You keep saying the same BS over and over and over and over again. For what? To say, “yeah I was right. I’m so smart.” Congrats big guy. See ya in 2036
Dude, so you are comparing some teams who are waiting a couple of years to teams who will fall behind by millions for 14 years? There is no way schools like Clemson, ND, FSU, and Miami are going to be ok with imploding their programs for the next 14 years. Just because you are a fan of a school (like I am) that has made nothing but the wrong choices for 60 years doesn’t mean everyone is else as dumb as we are. And don’t bet against Texas and OU joining the SEC in 2023. But you keep telling yourself that the ACC will be the same until 2036.
 
Top