Conference Realignment

[RonJohn]

If you look at the viewership chart, the top 4 ACC teams are (in order of most average viewers):

1. FSU
2. Clemson
3. Miami
4. Louisville

Let's look at the pattern of what's happened to this point that's changed the landscape.

1. Texas and OU going to the SEC
2. USC and UCLA going to the B1G

It's well known that the B1G covets FSU and/or Miami for the exploding Florida market. Clemson is also an expansion target. Anyone here have any faith that the ACC will keep the top 3 members of the ACC in terms of viewership? What happened when the PAC12 and BIG12 lost their respective "biggest brands"? The PAC12 is all but dead with all 4 members remaining, and two are openly talking to other conferences. The Big12 had to take a reduced media payout, but they were smart enough to add some nice pieces in terms of markets and programs with upside. Their bigger paydays will come on the next contract.

So what happens to the ACC when (there's no "ifs" here) FSU, Clemson, and Miami all bolt? There are ZERO programs left on the national landscape that can back fill the viewership that the ACC will lose when those programs bolt. If anyone doesn't think they'll bolt when the Death Star B1G or SEC comes knocking with their $100 million+ annual payout, well those programs are much smarter than GT leadership back in 2012/2013. It's likely UNC is gone as well as they've been holding off the B1G and SEC for decades...but when the media distribution shrinks in 2036 because our most watched members will want to join the club of the "haves", UNC won't be able to hold out any longer if they want to sustain their "blueblood" status. ACC won't be able to command the dollars that the Big12/SEC/B1G command, and the ACC most likely loses Louisville/VT/NC State/Syracuse/possibly GT to the Big12 because the ACC media value will crater without the "brand" ACC programs.

IMO, the ACC's last chance at viability would have been working something out with the remaining PAC12 members years ago. Trying to fill in the geographical gap with a Texas school like UHouston or Baylor would have been a good move. The PAC 12 schools remaining after USC and UCLA bolted REALLY REALLY tried to stick together, and that was the ACC's chance to capitalize. Unfortunately, ACC shuffled about until most of the remaining PAC12 schools found other homes.

I grew up watching GT in the ACC. I was born well after GT left the SEC so I have no recollection of any of the SEC battles GT had. The ACC is all I've known in terms of GT fandom. You're right, it is VERY sad what's going on. However, that's the nature of business. You either adjust, or die. GT stayed in the ACC for sentimental reasons in 2012/2013, and we may have sealed our fate at that time.

**Something else I touched on earlier in this thread that's interesting to ponder. Would the ACC have survived had GT moved to the B1G in 2012? Atlanta's media market carriage fees probably formed a big part of the ACC's valuation at the time. Had GT moved to the B1G, would that have precipitated other schools to move as well given the ACC no longer could have capitalized on carriage fees of Atlanta and GT? Interesting how GT is central to the ACC's future in one shape or another.

My biggest issue with your analysis is that you are taking today's situation and projecting it to be exactly the same way in 7-13 years with the exception that the GOR has expired or is closer to expiring. The situation could be drastically different. For example, you believe that the Big12 is going to get an excellent TV contract when their new one expires. I am not so sure about that. What teams did they add that really move the needle? AZ, ASU, Utah, BYU? Which one of those is the giant that will make their contract go way up? Will TV broadcasters actually have money to raise their contracts, or will the cord-cutting finally restrict sports spending? You seem certain that the Big12 will eclipse the ACC in the next contract. They are behind the ACC in their current contract which just started, seven years after the ACC contract started.

I am not so sure that the Big10 wants FSU at the moment. If they want to have a Florida school it would probably be UF or Miami. Why? They probably can't pull UF out of the SEC, but they could get Miami, which is in a bigger city and is already an AAU school. People believe that the Big10 won't care about AAU in the future, but even if they reduce the importance in comparing Miami and FSU you get similar brands, both in the state of Florida for markets/recruiting/etc, but one of them has AAU status. If both are similar in other regards, that would likely push Miami as the choice. I don't think the SEC would be very eager to get FSU either. I am certain that UF wouldn't want them. The SEC is already limited to the Southeast. Future expansion will probably be centered on expanding their region instead of simply add more teams. UNC and Virginia are the two most pundants discuss being wanted by either and even both of the Big10 and SEC.

The thing that would be best for the ACC is if: Clemson keeps playing well, FSU starts playing like FSU of the 90s, Miami starts playing like Miami of the 80s and early 2000s, GT goes on a streak of 10 plus win season, another few teams start playing well. If 5 different teams from the ACC win the CFP in the next 7 years, the conversation will be completely different. It is pretty certain that nothing is happening within the next few years. Every team needs to be working their butts off to make the future bright for themselves primarily, but if every team does that then the conference will be in very good shape.

 

[CuseJacket]

No scoop, just a good 10 min listen

 

[RonJohn]

Yes, it's quite well known the B1G covets FSU. Probably one of the worst secrets in college sports at the moment. The B1G isn't getting involved because of the GOR so it's up to FSU to figure it out. Do you think FSU is making this stink because they're praying the SEC or B1G takes them? Anyone making a stink as big as FSU most likely knows they missing out but can't legally get out of their current situation.

I think they are just a bunch of blowhards. They sound like drunk SEC fans shouting wuuf wuuf wuuf... sec....sec....sec...

They have one more week to announce if they want to leave before the 2024 season. If they do announce that they are leaving, I do not think they will get an offer from either of the two big conferences. At this point, there would be legal wrangling over the GOR, which almost certainly procludes an invitation. I don't think either is looking to add more at the current moment, even if the GOR wasn't an issue. FSU would most likely be left with nowhere to go. Which leads me to the belief that all of the shouting and whining is for other purposes. Force uneven conference payments? Force ESPN to offer more money?

 

[rfjeff9]

GT being very quiet about all this. Is it possible we already have a landing spot in back pocket kept tightly under wraps if and when this house of cards suddenly fall?

 

[iceeater1969]

If you look at the viewership chart, the top 4 ACC teams are (in order of most average viewers):

1. FSU
2. Clemson
3. Miami
4. Louisville

Let's look at the pattern of what's happened to this point that's changed the landscape.

1. Texas and OU going to the SEC
2. USC and UCLA going to the B1G

It's well known that the B1G covets FSU and/or Miami for the exploding Florida market. Clemson is also an expansion target. Anyone here have any faith that the ACC will keep the top 3 members of the ACC in terms of viewership? What happened when the PAC12 and BIG12 lost their respective "biggest brands"? The PAC12 is all but dead with all 4 members remaining, and two are openly talking to other conferences. The Big12 had to take a reduced media payout, but they were smart enough to add some nice pieces in terms of markets and programs with upside. Their bigger paydays will come on the next contract.

So what happens to the ACC when (there's no "ifs" here) FSU, Clemson, and Miami all bolt? There are ZERO programs left on the national landscape that can back fill the viewership that the ACC will lose when those programs bolt. If anyone doesn't think they'll bolt when the Death Star B1G or SEC comes knocking with their $100 million+ annual payout, well those programs are much smarter than GT leadership back in 2012/2013. It's likely UNC is gone as well as they've been holding off the B1G and SEC for decades...but when the media distribution shrinks in 2036 because our most watched members will want to join the club of the "haves", UNC won't be able to hold out any longer if they want to sustain their "blueblood" status. ACC won't be able to command the dollars that the Big12/SEC/B1G command, and the ACC most likely loses Louisville/VT/NC State/Syracuse/possibly GT to the Big12 because the ACC media value will crater without the "brand" ACC programs.

IMO, the ACC's last chance at viability would have been working something out with the remaining PAC12 members years ago. Trying to fill in the geographical gap with a Texas school like UHouston or Baylor would have been a good move. The PAC 12 schools remaining after USC and UCLA bolted REALLY REALLY tried to stick together, and that was the ACC's chance to capitalize. Unfortunately, ACC shuffled about until most of the remaining PAC12 schools found other homes.

I grew up watching GT in the ACC. I was born well after GT left the SEC so I have no recollection of any of the SEC battles GT had. The ACC is all I've known in terms of GT fandom. You're right, it is VERY sad what's going on. However, that's the nature of business. You either adjust, or die. GT stayed in the ACC for sentimental reasons in 2012/2013, and we may have sealed our fate at that time.

**Something else I touched on earlier in this thread that's interesting to ponder. Would the ACC have survived had GT moved to the B1G in 2012? Atlanta's media market carriage fees probably formed a big part of the ACC's valuation at the time. Had GT moved to the B1G, would that have precipitated other schools to move as well given the ACC no longer could have capitalized on carriage fees of Atlanta and GT? Interesting how GT is central to the ACC's future in one shape or another.

Lets get U of H , SMU that are in mega cities w great high school football. They have lots of Tech grads nearby. Throw in Baylor .
Now big 12 can pick teams to west and northwest. We surround the SEC which are all in small city . Overtime we dominate.

 

[Techster]

Which is probably how all of this ends....

 

[rfjeff9]

 

[orientalnc]

SMU would attract more eyes playing in the ACC than in a G5 conference. It was once a power in the old SWC.

I understand the reasons for considering Stanford and California, but why SMU when that creates an odd number of members? It could mean the ND discussion is real.

 

[Oldgoldandwhite]

They should get Tulane as well, thats 3 major tv markets added

Agree.
As far as FSU, let them leave and see if they get a landing spot. I doubt it.

 

[Augusta_Jacket]

GT being very quiet about all this. Is it possible we already have a landing spot in back pocket kept tightly under wraps if and when this house of cards suddenly fall?

 

[Buzzter]

Folks: Please stop the insanity. Do we sell out or see a sea of empty seats at BFD@HGF if we were to play Sanford, Cal, SMU or some of these other orphan teams nobody wants? We will get left behind and become one of them nobody wants.

 

[RamblinRed]

SMU was prepared to buy its way into the PAC. It is now prepared to buy its way into the ACC.
Given they are willing to forgo money its worth seeing if the financials make sense.
As has already been shown, ACC is not going to make any move that would dilute the current shares.

Some articles

California, Stanford interested in ACC: Conference set to evaluate viability of adding Pac-12 teams

Two calls were set this week for key ACC parties to discuss adding the Bay Area programs

www.cbssports.com

"Cal and Stanford have shown interest in joining the ACC, industry sources tell CBS Sports. What's not known is whether the interest is being reciprocated by the conference."

The biggest question in a potential addition of Cal and Stanford by the ACC is whether expanding with those programs would bring enough prominence into the conference to raise the average annual value (AAV) of its media rights contract with ESPN. ACC schools are expected upwards of $40 million from the deal, more than the Big 12 average ($31.7 million) but significantly less than their peers in the Big Ten and SEC.


SDSU's failed attempt to create a new P5 conference.

San Diego State fails in attempt to create new 'Power Five' conference with Pac-12, Mountain West, AAC members

SDSU denies that it unsuccessfully tried to rally a group of major programs into a new league

www.cbssports.com

I think this is the important quote from the article
"Does it make sense to take the best of the American, remaining Pac and best of the Mountain West and create a new conference that [would] potentially fight for A5 designation? In general, I think it does," an industry source said. "I just am not sure what value that would bring from a network standpoint. ESPN and Fox … have already spent their money."


ESPN Story, lots under discussion. ACC schools that want to leave don't appear to have anywhere to go right now.

Sources: ACC meets, still evaluating Stanford, Cal

The ACC presidents met Tuesday morning about the potential addition of Stanford and Cal but did not vote on the matter, sources told ESPN. Instead, the league will continue to explore the additions and is "still evaluating" the schools, sources said.

www.espn.com

"I think the undercurrent is that this is clearly evolving," one ACC source said of the collegiate landscape. "For us to sit here and say it's not going to evolve, or be different than what it is today, would be really shortsighted. I'm not sure what schools are going to do, but to sit here and say it's going to be static -- that isn't happening."

Without the move being significantly financially additive, the support is far from unanimous. The cost of travel would need to be addressed, as the idea of Stanford and Cal getting less than a full share has been discussed. Some of that money could be shifted to travel costs.

The ACC schools exploring exiting also do not appear to have anywhere to immediately go, which layers the move in complications.

That leaves the other ACC schools seeking some security, which both Cal and Stanford would represent as strong academic schools with established brands and athletic departments.

"The value equation isn't always tied to money," an ACC source told ESPN. "Are we really going to sit here and say two of the best institutions in the world have no value? That's a crazy notion to me."



Finally, Sankey basically telling FSU they don't have a home in the SEC without bringing in a whole share - which FSU doesn't.


I think Sankey is basically saying the financial truth that so many fans and schools simply want to disregard and pretend is not something that has to be thought about. There are very few schools that could jump to the Big 2 and get a full share. SEC is saying it won't take anyone unless they get a full share. B1G has shown it is willing to expand if you are willing to put yourself at a huge disadvantage against your new conference mates. Neither are going to consider taking an ACC School until they have extricated themselves from the legal issues.
The fact, as shown in one of the articles above that the programmers don't really have more money to spend, greatly limits any movement options right now.


It feels like if the ACC can find a way to add some combination of Stanford, Cal and SMU without it diluting current shares then it will probably happen.
If it requires schools taking a pay cut, then it doesn't.

Maybe the most likely outcome right now is that ACC adds some combination of those 3 at less than full shares and it able to increase its total media payout slightly due to ACC Network carriage. But honestly, who knows.

Honestly i'd take FSU's money right now. Given they would owe the ACC over $500M. SEC is making it clear it doesn't see them as offering a full share, which means their only option is going to be the B1G, probably at a share close to what they are receiving from the ACC already and certainly not enough to cover any huge buyout they would have to make.

 

[slugboy]

SMU was prepared to buy its way into the PAC. It is now prepared to buy its way into the ACC.
Given they are willing to forgo money its worth seeing if the financials make sense.
As has already been shown, ACC is not going to make any move that would dilute the current shares.

Some articles

California, Stanford interested in ACC: Conference set to evaluate viability of adding Pac-12 teams

Two calls were set this week for key ACC parties to discuss adding the Bay Area programs

www.cbssports.com

"Cal and Stanford have shown interest in joining the ACC, industry sources tell CBS Sports. What's not known is whether the interest is being reciprocated by the conference."

The biggest question in a potential addition of Cal and Stanford by the ACC is whether expanding with those programs would bring enough prominence into the conference to raise the average annual value (AAV) of its media rights contract with ESPN. ACC schools are expected upwards of $40 million from the deal, more than the Big 12 average ($31.7 million) but significantly less than their peers in the Big Ten and SEC.


SDSU's failed attempt to create a new P5 conference.

San Diego State fails in attempt to create new 'Power Five' conference with Pac-12, Mountain West, AAC members

SDSU denies that it unsuccessfully tried to rally a group of major programs into a new league

www.cbssports.com

I think this is the important quote from the article
"Does it make sense to take the best of the American, remaining Pac and best of the Mountain West and create a new conference that [would] potentially fight for A5 designation? In general, I think it does," an industry source said. "I just am not sure what value that would bring from a network standpoint. ESPN and Fox … have already spent their money."


ESPN Story, lots under discussion. ACC schools that want to leave don't appear to have anywhere to go right now.

Sources: ACC meets, still evaluating Stanford, Cal

The ACC presidents met Tuesday morning about the potential addition of Stanford and Cal but did not vote on the matter, sources told ESPN. Instead, the league will continue to explore the additions and is "still evaluating" the schools, sources said.

www.espn.com

"I think the undercurrent is that this is clearly evolving," one ACC source said of the collegiate landscape. "For us to sit here and say it's not going to evolve, or be different than what it is today, would be really shortsighted. I'm not sure what schools are going to do, but to sit here and say it's going to be static -- that isn't happening."

Without the move being significantly financially additive, the support is far from unanimous. The cost of travel would need to be addressed, as the idea of Stanford and Cal getting less than a full share has been discussed. Some of that money could be shifted to travel costs.

The ACC schools exploring exiting also do not appear to have anywhere to immediately go, which layers the move in complications.

That leaves the other ACC schools seeking some security, which both Cal and Stanford would represent as strong academic schools with established brands and athletic departments.

"The value equation isn't always tied to money," an ACC source told ESPN. "Are we really going to sit here and say two of the best institutions in the world have no value? That's a crazy notion to me."



Finally, Sankey basically telling FSU they don't have a home in the SEC without bringing in a whole share - which FSU doesn't.


I think Sankey is basically saying the financial truth that so many fans and schools simply want to disregard and pretend is not something that has to be thought about. There are very few schools that could jump to the Big 2 and get a full share. SEC is saying it won't take anyone unless they get a full share. B1G has shown it is willing to expand if you are willing to put yourself at a huge disadvantage against your new conference mates. Neither are going to consider taking an ACC School until they have extricated themselves from the legal issues.
The fact, as shown in one of the articles above that the programmers don't really have more money to spend, greatly limits any movement options right now.


It feels like if the ACC can find a way to add some combination of Stanford, Cal and SMU without it diluting current shares then it will probably happen.
If it requires schools taking a pay cut, then it doesn't.

Maybe the most likely outcome right now is that ACC adds some combination of those 3 at less than full shares and it able to increase its total media payout slightly due to ACC Network carriage. But honestly, who knows.

Honestly i'd take FSU's money right now. Given they would owe the ACC over $500M. SEC is making it clear it doesn't see them as offering a full share, which means their only option is going to be the B1G, probably at a share close to what they are receiving from the ACC already and certainly not enough to cover any huge buyout they would have to make.

I won’t write as much, but some Miami fans think they have a B1G full share waiting on them, and that the Big 12 would not be interested in GT.

i have also seen an amazing amount of self-proclaimed actual lawyers giving free legal advice on the GOR. Most GOOD lawyers I know say “that’s not my area” and stop there.

 

[CEB]

It feels like if the ACC can find a way to add some combination of Stanford, Cal and SMU without it diluting current shares then it will probably happen.
If it requires schools taking a pay cut, then it doesn't.

Maybe the most likely outcome right now is that ACC adds some combination of those 3 at less than full shares and it able to increase its total media payout slightly due to ACC Network carriage. But honestly, who knows.

This part kind of worries me. Just being better than “negative” isn’t much of a test. I’m hoping this is step one of a bigger play (ND?), but that’s a REAL long shot I think.
This move (if made) feels like a “post-ACC as we know it” play. Stanford and Cal make some sense even if it’s status quo revenue wise for existing members. SMU feels like we are really betting on an “up and coming” program.
It’s ironic that we lament one of the ACCs shortcomings in the media arms race is the concentration of smallish private schools in the ACC and we would run out to grab another.... possibly two..

 

[Northeast Stinger]

so, to summarize this 142 page thread:

the GOR will hold, we're in good shape, or the GOR won't hold, and we're not in good shape.

somehow, in either scenario, GT is screwed and woe is us.

you're welcome.

You left out a third possibility. The GOR holds and it exacerbates the problem for Tech because complacency and lack of planning means no safe place for Tech to land when the house of cards eventually collapses.

 

[GoJacketsInRaleigh]

This part kind of worries me. Just being better than “negative” isn’t much of a test. I’m hoping this is step one of a bigger play (ND?), but that’s a REAL long shot I think.
This move (if made) feels like a “post-ACC as we know it” play. Stanford and Cal make some sense even if it’s status quo revenue wise for existing members. SMU feels like we are really betting on an “up and coming” program.
It’s ironic that we lament one of the ACCs shortcomings in the media arms race is the concentration of smallish private schools in the ACC and we would run out to grab another.... possibly two..

We are betting on those schools adding revenue through the ACC Network in SF, Oakland, and Dallas. If that's the strategy, let's add Temple too!!

Let's go back to divisions for scheduling in football and create better content.

First Division - get 65% of revenue
Clemson
FSU
Miami
GT
Louisville
UNC
NC State
UVA
VT

Second division - get 35% of revenue
Duke
Wake Forest
BC
Syracuse
Pittsburgh
Stanford
Cal
SMU
#18 addition

Let ND schedule whoever the hell they want. Or join full time, go in the top division and put VT in the bottom division.

 

[CEB]

We are betting on those schools adding revenue through the ACC Network in SF, Oakland, and Dallas. If that's the strategy, let's add Temple too!!

One thing we should all agree on is that we are NOT doing anymore $@#%!!! favors for Temple.

 

[CEB]

We are betting on those schools adding revenue through the ACC Network in SF, Oakland, and Dallas. If that's the strategy, let's add Temple too!!

Let's go back to divisions for scheduling in football and create better content.

First Division - get 65% of revenue
Clemson
FSU
Miami
GT
Louisville
UNC
NC State
UVA
VT

Second division - get 35% of revenue
Duke
Wake Forest
BC
Syracuse
Pittsburgh
Stanford
Cal
SMU
#18 addition

Let ND schedule whoever the hell they want. Or join full time, go in the top division and put VT in the bottom division.

Kidding aside, interesting scenario.
Hard divisions is tough... especially when you put GT up top and a very recent pair of ACCCG participants (Pitt / WF) in the bottom.
Maybe we still play our division-less schedule but have the payout tiers based on performance that year?
For the record, I still don’t like unequal payouts within the conference. At least not for “base” media contracts and revenues. I have no problem with an “ear what you kill” approach to postseason bonuses / revenue.

 

[Augusta_Jacket]

vis a vis Notre Dame:

1. We are contracted with them through 2036, so we have to supply 5 games a year to them.
2. Per the contract, if they join a conference, the contract states it has to be the ACC. After 2036 they can join any conference.
3. As long as ND has access to the playoffs, and a willing TV partner able to keep them financially competitive, there is no impetus for ND to give up independence.

IMO, it is a longshot bid to get ND in the ACC unless any part of point number three above collapses catastrophically for them. Since the B1G covets them, there is no way that they won't work to make sure ND has playoff access, which means TV contracts remain our only hope.

In short, there is little reason to expect ND to join the ACC in the near term.

 

[TooTall]

vis a vis Notre Dame:

1. We are contracted with them through 2036, so we have to supply 5 games a year to them.
2. Per the contract, if they join a conference, the contract states it has to be the ACC. After 2036 they can join any conference.
3. As long as ND has access to the playoffs, and a willing TV partner able to keep them financially competitive, there is no impetus for ND to give up independence.

IMO, it is a longshot bid to get ND in the ACC unless any part of point number three above collapses catastrophically for them. Since the B1G covets them, there is no way that they won't work to make sure ND has playoff access, which means TV contracts remain our only hope.

In short, there is little reason to expect ND to join the ACC in the near term.

Agreed with some BUT there are a few wrenches in there. With all their rivals going to "super conferences" (who will move to 9-10 conference games a year very soon) who will they play outside of the 5 ACC games that gives them a meaningful schedule? We already saw the Michigan dropped them so it is possible. Does USC want to keep up the rivalry with a BIG10 schedule? Maybe NBC is willing to add other ACC games along with ND in a split like E$PN and CBS did with the $EC? ND getting a hall pass for a shortcut into the playoffs isn't going to last much longer.