Conference Realignment

[travgt01]

 

[travgt01]

 

[Techster]

GT is interesting. We're obviously in the biggest market in South, and arguably the most important market for the ACC (and SEC). Anyone ever notice GT never makes a big stink about revenue like FSU/Clemson/VT/UNC?

I wonder if there's a silent understanding between GT and the B1G if the GOR gets worked out or expires. For a team that holds a pretty big card, GT silence has been deafening.

Also, this is the 3rd confirmation I've seen that GT is on "the list" for B1G future expansion.

 

[travgt01]

 

[WrongShadeOfGold]

I can't wait to see the looks on the faces of Michigan and Ohio State fans the first time Miami fans come to town lol

 

[UgaBlows]

If Duh U joined the SEC then Miami fans would become extinct after a few years of road games at LSU, Bama, ugag etc

 

[Vespidae]

I read the article below as to what has the Big Ten brought Rutgers after ten years. This stood out:

"Most of the outside focus on Rutgers joining the Big Ten centered on the costs associated with the move and the struggles most of its sports teams faced to compete initially, not on the ancillary benefits. Rutgers continues lose money on athletics — with no end in sight — and the high-profile football team has struggled mightily."

Rutgers maintains that the academic benefits of joining the Big Ten FAR outweigh just the athletics. But I wonder how many GT alumni interested in sports will support a conference that benefits the school and *may not* benefit athletics?

I have no opinion and don't really care if GT joins the Big or not. I don't think it will be a panacea for the sports teams, hence my interest in comparing how others have done since joining.

How Big Ten changed Rutgers beyond athletics

The benefits of the university’s decision to join the Big Ten go far beyond sports — and yet skepticism in the school’s community remains.

www.nj.com

 

[RonJohn]

IDK, it just seems to me that people are considering it to be "confirmation" when posters on Twitter parrot what other posters on Twitter have already said. Maybe different respectable journalists with multiple different sources are hearing the same thing and coming to the same conclusions. Or then maybe too many people are following a bandwagon of sketchy information because someone posted it online.

 

[RonJohn]

I read the article below as to what has the Big Ten brought Rutgers after ten years. This stood out:

"Most of the outside focus on Rutgers joining the Big Ten centered on the costs associated with the move and the struggles most of its sports teams faced to compete initially, not on the ancillary benefits. Rutgers continues lose money on athletics — with no end in sight — and the high-profile football team has struggled mightily."

Rutgers maintains that the academic benefits of joining the Big Ten FAR outweigh just the athletics. But I wonder how many GT alumni interested in sports will support a conference that benefits the school and *may not* benefit athletics?

I have no opinion and don't really care if GT joins the Big or not. I don't think it will be a panacea for the sports teams, hence my interest in comparing how others have done since joining.

How Big Ten changed Rutgers beyond athletics

The benefits of the university’s decision to join the Big Ten go far beyond sports — and yet skepticism in the school’s community remains.

www.nj.com

More money is better than less money. With that said, there are people who make half a million a year who live paycheck to paycheck and would have big issues if the engine died in their car. More money without planning and discipline doesn't get you anywhere.

I asked you about the academic benefits of the Big10 a few weeks ago, and you seemed to indicate that it wouldn't make a difference. They supposedly share academic resources and they supposedly share and help each other win research contracts. On this I am no expert, and probably even less than a novice, but I think the academic and research sides of the school would probably love to be a part of the Big10 instead of the ACC. It doesn't really matter at the moment because contracts won't allow a move.

 

[Vespidae]

I asked you about the academic benefits of the Big10 a few weeks ago, and you seemed to indicate that it wouldn't make a difference. They supposedly share academic resources and they supposedly share and help each other win research contracts. On this I am no expert, and probably even less than a novice, but I think the academic and research sides of the school would probably love to be a part of the Big10 instead of the ACC.

I thought I responded to this. There is cooperation across the university with other SEC schools, but it is mostly administrative. Academics tend to work with colleagues who collaborate at the publication level for peer-reviewed research and articles and many of those relationships go back decades. (It is usually part of the academic's work expectations to deliver X number of peer-reviewed articles in elite journals per year.)

Pure research may be different. I don't have a perspective on that. That's a whole nuther side of the school.

I will agree though, that GT as an academic institution, would seem to be a better fit with the Big Ten than the ACC. Purely my armchair opinion.

 

[UgaBlows]

Iirc Rutgers has only been getting a partial share of what other BIG members get, that may have changed with the new contract.

 

[Techster]

I read the article below as to what has the Big Ten brought Rutgers after ten years. This stood out:

"Most of the outside focus on Rutgers joining the Big Ten centered on the costs associated with the move and the struggles most of its sports teams faced to compete initially, not on the ancillary benefits. Rutgers continues lose money on athletics — with no end in sight — and the high-profile football team has struggled mightily."

Rutgers maintains that the academic benefits of joining the Big Ten FAR outweigh just the athletics. But I wonder how many GT alumni interested in sports will support a conference that benefits the school and *may not* benefit athletics?

I have no opinion and don't really care if GT joins the Big or not. I don't think it will be a panacea for the sports teams, hence my interest in comparing how others have done since joining.

How Big Ten changed Rutgers beyond athletics

The benefits of the university’s decision to join the Big Ten go far beyond sports — and yet skepticism in the school’s community remains.

www.nj.com

Which makes what former GT President Peterson hinted at about not leaving ACC for B1G due in part to academics kind of head scratching. GT would have gotten the best of both worlds...a high level academic cooperative with B1G member schools, AND high level college athletics with a larger payout (not as big then, but pretty much a Grand Canyon sized difference now and in the future). In the end, Peterson was opposed big business in college sports...so it was probably a case of wrong leadership at an inopportune time.

 

[cpf2001]

That article is light on big-picture "why" answers. Lots of numbers, and saying the Big 10 hasn't fixed things, but no evidence that joining was a mistake. So they're still losing money. What would the alternatives have been? Especially if they want to compete vs fold up shop basically?

In its final season in the American Athletic Conference, Rutgers athletics totaled $76.7 million in expenditures. Rutgers’ expenditures have spiked 54.4% since then, increasing to a school-record $118.4 million in 2020-21. That total pegged Rutgers fifth in the Big Ten in spending, ranking behind Ohio State ($170.6M), Michigan ($148.9M), Penn State ($130.1M) and Wisconsin ($127.1M).

This seems... foolish?

I'd love to know if the Big 10 had any strings attached to the offer - like, you *have* to get competitive spending wise* - but I don't see those answers in this article.

 

[Golden Tornadoes]

Alrighty folks, hop in my time travel machine and take a journey with me. It's 2012, and the B1G gets a knock on the door from Radakovich. He's welcomed in with a sharp looking GT lapel on and takes the seat offered to him. The B1G commish welcomes him and thanks him for taking the time to meet him up in windy Chicago. Radakovich politely states that it was no trouble and he appreciates the invitation to come up. Cutting right to the chase, Radakovich makes the most brilliant pitch of his life to get a silent invite into the B1G. After said meeting, DR makes his way back down to Atlanta and makes the trek up to the Hill. Upon arrival, he lays out a grand design showing the future of GT athletics and how college sports will ultimately become a business. Ahead of his time, he shows Peterson and others how he could launch GT athletics into another golden age by joining this prestigious conference. Understanding his audience, he also points out how the B1G is on the cutting edge in academics and how natural of a fit it would be for future grants and research projects. At the conclusion, Peterson and his confidants retire into his chambers and discuss the validity of DR's idea. BP is quickly inundated with "what if's" and "how's". He realizes this goal is unachievable as college sports will always be focused on amateur athletes. Coming swiftly to a resolution, BP informs DR that his is misguided in his vision and that GT will remain solely focused on helping the ACC become an conference recognizable across the southeast. DR takes this personally, and jets off to Clemson. Meanwhile, unable to sustain any prolonged success, GT athletics fails to capitalize on the idea of increased funding and better facilities. It enters a dark period with only a few bright spots in between. Fast-forward to 2023. The plan that DR unveiled has come to fruition. College athletics has taken on a business-like model and changes have been hard to keep up with. GT, who failed to keep up with the times, now makes moves that should have been made a decade ago. The amateur lovers are long gone. Business men start running things like a business. The B1G commish who let DR have his moment is long gone, BP is long gone, and a new leaf has been turned over. Yet, GT, with all her faults and frustrations, starts to look like the ex-girlfriend who time has turned into a desirous person again. We are like a drug the B1G can't quit. Unlike last time, GT has leadership who understands what the B1G was trying to do all those years ago. No longer is it about excellence on the field. No longer is it about keeping the ACC afloat. Now, it's about putting GT in a position to succeed. Now it's about the Atlanta market and striking a blow to the SEC in this two horse race. Now, GT is the one who has something the others want. Are our leaders now ready to take the plunge? All signs point toward yes, but nobody will really know the answer until a final decision has been made. It's not 2012 anymore, it's 2023. Second chances are hard to come by and repeated mistakes are even harder to overcome. Will we be willing to accept the invitation if it comes our way again?

 

[UgaBlows]

I wonder if at some point the BIG might just preemptively “lock-up“ the ACC schools they really covet the most way ahead of the end of the GOR?

 

[UgaBlows]

That article is light on big-picture "why" answers. Lots of numbers, and saying the Big 10 hasn't fixed things, but no evidence that joining was a mistake. So they're still losing money. What would the alternatives have been? Especially if they want to compete vs fold up shop basically?



This seems... foolish?

I'd love to know if the Big 10 had any strings attached to the offer - like, you *have* to get competitive spending wise* - but I don't see those answers in this article.

Maybe their facilities were shiite and they needed to catch-up to the rest of B10

 

[GTrob21]

Better to be Rutgers in B1G than Texas Tech stuck in the Big12

 

[bobongo]

That article is light on big-picture "why" answers. Lots of numbers, and saying the Big 10 hasn't fixed things, but no evidence that joining was a mistake. So they're still losing money. What would the alternatives have been? Especially if they want to compete vs fold up shop basically?



This seems... foolish?

I'd love to know if the Big 10 had any strings attached to the offer - like, you *have* to get competitive spending wise* - but I don't see those answers in this article.

Rutgers athletics is huge financial failure

Rutgers students and taxpayers on hook for record spending and deficits

nj1015.com

"Rutgers also supplements its athletic department to a greater degree than [any] other conference member, siphoning off funding that could go to educational priorities."

Whatever the reason, I would imagine there's a lot looser regulation in New Jersey than in Georgia about mixing educational and athletic funds.

 

[orientalnc]

Clemson and FSU and Miami and UNC are not going to stand aside while their teams are relegated to a lower status in football. It becomes a matter of survival and members will do whatever it takes to survive when there is so much money at stake. He said he knows there is something happening within the ACC to address this issue. The ACC poohbahs agree that Vandy should not have more football money than Clemson.

I posted this about a week ago after a conversation with my UNC grad neighbor. I have not talked to him again since that day, but he shared a text that indicated there is some movement among the ACC member schools to release the GOR and exit fees for schools that have conference realignment offers in writing. I do not know if that is only for a limited number of ACC member schools, thereby keeping the ACC moniker for the remaining schools (who would then have to share the ESPN revenue with fewer members), or for every member school.

So, let's say six ACC schools leave the conference. Using the info in recent thread posts, GT and Miami go to the B1G and UNC, Clemson, VT and FSU go to the SEC. That leaves eight schools in the ACC (BC, Cuse, Pitt, Duke, NC State, Wake, UL, and UVA) and almost doubles their individual shares of the media payout from ESPN. If you know the conference will be dissolved in 2036, why not make the best deal you can for everyone now?

 

[RonJohn]

I posted this about a week ago after a conversation with my UNC grad neighbor. I have not talked to him again since that day, but he shared a text that indicated there is some movement among the ACC member schools to release the GOR and exit fees for schools that have conference realignment offers in writing. I do not know if that is only for a limited number of ACC member schools, thereby keeping the ACC moniker for the remaining schools (who would then have to share the ESPN revenue with fewer members), or for every member school.

So, let's say six ACC schools leave the conference. Using the info in recent thread posts, GT and Miami go to the B1G and UNC, Clemson, VT and FSU go to the SEC. That leaves eight schools in the ACC (BC, Cuse, Pitt, Duke, NC State, Wake, UL, and UVA) and almost doubles their individual shares of the media payout from ESPN. If you know the conference will be dissolved in 2036, why not make the best deal you can for everyone now?

I don't think that actually works out. I haven't seen the ESPN contract, but I seriously doubt that the contract would allow losing six teams and the associated games with those teams and still pay the same yearly rates. It would be asinine to sign a contract for a set dollar figure and allow for the quantity and/or quality of the product you are paying for the arbitrarily drop. The GOR contract requires every single member to agree to a change. In your scenario, it would maybe happen if it caused the revenue for the remaining teams to increase. But there is no way ESPN will pay the same amount for 4/7ths of the games, or the same for games involving UAB and Middle Tennessee State instead of Clemson and FSU.

The GOR is an issue. This seems like another fan invented way of getting around the GOR that wouldn't actually work.