Conference Realignment

[stech81]

WA and OR are getting $30M per year from B1G with no additional travel allowance. Increases $1M per year until the next TV contract.

Based on the reporting for right now it sounds like Stanford and Cal would get $24-28M with all ACC schools getting some additional money for travel allowances (i'm assuming Stanford and Cal may get more than others, but who knows). So Cal and Stanford are likely looking at a potential deal that is relatively in line with what WA or OR got.
It also further reinforces the idea that there are very few schools that move the needle to where they are likely to get a full share from the Big 2. My personal opinion is that the 2 ACC schools with the best chance of getting a full share are UNC And UVA - because they are the most likely to produce a bidding war between the SEC and B1G. They are the 'state' schools in the 2 most populous states (excluding NY) that do not have an SEC or B1G team in them, and both are states that are growing at solid clips. Sankey has already implied that FSU would not get a full share from the SEC.
I also wonder about the priority of the 2 FL schools to the B1G. Would it prefer the larger school, or the one that is more highly though of academically that is in a big city. I sort of feel like if B1G had the choice it might prioritize Miami over FSU as it seems like more of a fit in the well regarded school in a large market.

The other big note in that article is that ACC's contract with ESPN does have a 'pro rata' clause. So if ACC adds any of these schools it gets an additional full share of money from ESPN (ie. an extra $40ish Million per year per school). It sounds like assuming Stanford and Cal came in at 70% and SMU paid its own way for 5 years that you are talking about an extra $64M per year ($12M each for Stanford and Cal and $40M for SMU if they forgo payments) for at least 5 years to distribute to members. That is not alot, but would likely at least cover additional travel costs.

It's not a slam dunk, but if you think number of members provides some security (ie. having more members means if someone leaves you still have a legitimate conference left), then I understand what the line of thinking is.

Just asking what if Cal and Stanford only want football how would ESPN pay out ?

 

[cpf2001]

SMU is deep with money; light speculation from growing up in that area: seeing TCU do so well in the smaller town next door must be driving them crazy.

ND being hit by the money spigot being turned off could certainly shake some things up. And I’m sure couldn’t happen to a nicer crew.

 

[CEB]

WA and OR are getting $30M per year from B1G with no additional travel allowance. Increases $1M per year until the next TV contract.

Based on the reporting for right now it sounds like Stanford and Cal would get $24-28M with all ACC schools getting some additional money for travel allowances (i'm assuming Stanford and Cal may get more than others, but who knows). So Cal and Stanford are likely looking at a potential deal that is relatively in line with what WA or OR got.
It also further reinforces the idea that there are very few schools that move the needle to where they are likely to get a full share from the Big 2. My personal opinion is that the 2 ACC schools with the best chance of getting a full share are UNC And UVA - because they are the most likely to produce a bidding war between the SEC and B1G. They are the 'state' schools in the 2 most populous states (excluding NY) that do not have an SEC or B1G team in them, and both are states that are growing at solid clips. Sankey has already implied that FSU would not get a full share from the SEC.
I also wonder about the priority of the 2 FL schools to the B1G. Would it prefer the larger school, or the one that is more highly though of academically that is in a big city. I sort of feel like if B1G had the choice it might prioritize Miami over FSU as it seems like more of a fit in the well regarded school in a large market.

The other big note in that article is that ACC's contract with ESPN does have a 'pro rata' clause. So if ACC adds any of these schools it gets an additional full share of money from ESPN (ie. an extra $40ish Million per year per school). It sounds like assuming Stanford and Cal came in at 70% and SMU paid its own way for 5 years that you are talking about an extra $64M per year ($12M each for Stanford and Cal and $40M for SMU if they forgo payments) for at least 5 years to distribute to members. That is not alot, but would likely at least cover additional travel costs.

It's not a slam dunk, but if you think number of members provides some security (ie. having more members means if someone leaves you still have a legitimate conference left), then I understand what the line of thinking is.

interesting info... with the pro rata clause you describe, this now seems like a bigger hurdle for ESPN than it does for ACC members. It begs the question how the last two viable PAC members could be worth $40m to ESPN... is the deal worded in such a way that the ACC is guaranteed that money with the addition of members? That seems odd and surprised ESPN would agree to it. Surely they have the right to squash it...
If you’re saying that existing members are putting $10m-$12m in their pocket for at least the next few years, that changes my outlook on this getting votes it needs to happen

 

[Papa Foxtrot]

It sounds like assuming Stanford and Cal came in at 70% and SMU paid its own way for 5 years that you are talking about an extra $64M per year ($12M each for Stanford and Cal and $40M for SMU if they forgo payments) for at least 5 years to distribute to members. That is not alot, but would likely at least cover additional travel costs.

I was just wondering what the voting requirement is for expansion; majority or unanimous? If unanimous, what will Phillips be forced to give up to get Clemson & F$U to sign on? If majority, be prepared for greatly increased bellyaching from Tally & Clem...

 

[Lotta Booze]

that's some serious dough

 

[stech81]

I was just wondering what the voting requirement is for expansion; majority or unanimous? If unanimous, what will Phillips be forced to give up to get Clemson & F$U to sign on? If majority, be prepared for greatly increased bellyaching from Tally & Clem...

11 votes for yes would do it.
Not sure why everyone includes Clemson with FSU. The only one crying is FSU.

 

[stech81]

that's some serious dough

Wish they would give something to FSU to shut the F up.

 

[Techwood Relict]

If unanimous, what will Phillips be forced to give up to get Clemson & F$U to sign on? If majority, be prepared for greatly increased bellyaching from Tally & Clem...

If majority, be prepared for a while lot less give a damn from everyone not in Tally & Clem....

Not that I ever wanted to any less, but I think every team would now want to wear out the Noles, just because.

 

[GTweatherguy]

I heard NBC is balking at the numbers ND wants. The issue is with the number of viewers is more like GT than the Irish like to admit. According to Football Scoop, over the last 3 years ND is averaging 2.34 million viewers and 7 of those 19 games were under 2 million. A part of the problem is their schedule. Last year they hosted Marshall, BYU, UNLV, and BC. The year before it was Toledo, Navy, and GT. NBC is sticking a lot of those games on Peacock.

This year they have Navy, Tennessee State, and Central Michigan. They host Ohio State and USC, but those are the only home games likely to draw more than 3 million.

Hypothetically, how would a ND addition to the ACC in football change the ESPN contract/distribution per year for ACC teams? In other words, what is the marginal gain in $M they bring to the pot? Any ideas?

 

[CEB]

Hypothetically, how would a ND addition to the ACC in football change the ESPN contract/distribution per year for ACC teams? In other words, what is the marginal gain in $M they bring to the pot? Any ideas?

If the pro rata clause laid out by @RamblinRed Is what I interpreted it to be, it sounds like they’re worth about $40 million.
ND=/=SMU, So I believe there is missing context. I’d love to know more if someone has the info.

 

[g0lftime]

It sure seems like nothing much else is going to happen until the new TV contracts are finalized. SEC says they are done for now. B1G looks to be done. B12 is making lots of moves but may be done. ND may not be worth as much as they think they are. I won't miss FSU one second if they buy their way out of the ACC which is looking less likely.

 

[Oldgoldandwhite]

NBC and ESPN might could work out an arrangement to get ND in.

 

[Lotta Booze]

would look pretty dumb if we added Cal and Stanford at ND's behest and then then they still stay independent in football

 

[Vespidae]

would look pretty dumb if we added Cal and Stanford at ND's behest and then then they still stay independent in football

Fine. And ND .. stay independent. But you have to merge your TV deal with ours.

 

[CEB]

11 votes for yes would do it.
Not sure why everyone includes Clemson with FSU. The only one crying is FSU.

If Clemson said “no thanks” to the BIG/SEC, that would probably be the most newsworthy thing out of this entire expansion fiasco.

 

[Oldgoldandwhite]

Fine. And ND .. stay independent. But you have to merge your TV deal with ours.

Speaking of ND. I would love to play them every year at the Benz. Split the gate.

 

[LT 1967]

I realize that words that we hear on TV talk shows are pretty cheap. However, I watched the SEC Commissioner on the SEC network being interviewed by Paul Finebaum(No Friend of the ACC or Tech).

Greg Sankey made it pretty clear that the SEC had no plans for further expansion. He said that the conference had no desire to be larger or to be in 4 time zones.

Finebaum who has made a crusade of pushing for Clemson and FSU to move to the SEC had a pretty confirming comment today when he answered a caller by saying, "FSU is not getting in the SEC anytime soon" and hung up on the caller. I believe Sankey has given him some advice!

 

[Techster]

Don't agree with a good percentage of what he's saying, but posting this here for the GT mentions:

 

[Northeast Stinger]

SMU, Stanford, and California would potentially add to the long term health of the ACC, but I am curious about the odd number of teams. Does this mean Phillips is also talking to someone else?

Bingo.

 

[eetech]

B1G does not care the FSU isn't the dominant "FSU" of the 90's. What they care about is FSU's ability to pull in eyeballs...and FSU has been one of the best teams at pulling in eyeballs for the last 3 decades. FSU is also in a state that's strategic to B1G's growth. Here's a deep dive into a historical viewership:

How Many Viewers Did Your NCAA Team Attract?

We take a look at EVERY FBS team and also compare league by league! Who's the top ten in viewership? How do the ACC schools rank relative to each other? How big a boost does Alabama give the SEC West? It's all inside.

sicem365.com

The ACC has three main brands pacing them with FSU, Clemson, and Miami generally in that order. It’s not shocking as FSU is probably the closest to being a blue blood and had nationally relevant success from 2013-2015. Clemson obviously has had an incredible amount of success and has been elite all decade. Miami hasn’t been dominant but their brand is immense.

If you want to know why Miami is also a target, there's your answer.

FSU has long been rumored to be a B1G target. I doubt they're saber rattling without having discussions with other conferences.

I think Miami would be smart to consider independence as well.

They have the kind of national brand that could actually make it work.

Maybe schedule annual home and away games with Notre Dame as well, with a Catholics vs Convicts series every year.

If the 7 teams are to be believed, and if 8 teams can break the GoR, Tech would be wise to agree to be the 8th team as long as they are allowed to tag along with the teams going to the B1G. Though Tech lacks the brand and viewership numbers and size, the academic prestige and allowing inroads in Atlanta, might be sufficient in addition to being the last team that breaks the GoR.