Conference Realignment

[SOWEGA Jacket]

Sometimes you have to overstate your case to make a point. Perhaps you are doing that.

But here’s the point. The SEC has been overstating their case for 40 years or more, and, as you pointed out, it worked. FSU is now overstating there case. And something may change as a result.

Yep, the ACC has been screwed for a long time. The proof of that is the low esteem many of our fans walk around with. They suggest, in so many words, that Tech deserves to be in the ACC because it’s a crappy league for crappy teams. Others periodically bring up dropping Tech down a division or just giving up on ever competing again at the highest level. Still others will argue that we should be in the B1G or that the biggest mistake in the history of GT sports was leaving the SEC. To be sure, most of us would be happy in the ACC if the conference ever got its act together and started getting some respect. Nobody believes everything is currently hunky dory in the ACC.

But the proof of your argument, well stated, is that B1G members and SEC members don’t complain much and don’t have endless conversations about leaving the conference.

So much to dislike about FSU. So much about their current case is unseemly and vulgar. But the ACC brought this on itself by constantly allowing itself to be talked down to, never getting its marketing act together, and never standing up for its teams. The current conference scandal is not something that happens in the SEC or the B1G.

My only question is whether this latest conference scandal is actually just business as usual for the ACC or whether the status quo is starting to change.

Exactly! I love the ACC. Was born into a Maryland family and became a Tech man on my own. But the ACC lost me and others, we didn’t leave them. To allow yourself to be mocked, ridiculed, and trolled, for decades leads to 2nd tier status of where we are. We just beat the SEC head to head and no one knows it except a few of us. Where is our Commish? I’m done with the ACC leadership and can’t wait for it to disappear at this point.

 

[stinger78]

McMurphy says "if" before heading off into conjecture. His source could be my neighbor.

FSU is playing a risky game, but they are hoping to get a court to answer a question they aren't willing to ask. They could simply withdraw and test the GOR in a more straightforward way. But, they aren't that sure of winning and the cost would catastrophic for their AA.

Is it an NCAA violation if under the table payments from all those “interested programs” to help fund their litigation surfaces in a year or three?

 

[ThatGuy]

With the direction TV $$ is going, I'm not sure when the SEC and B1G renegotiate their next contracts ('30 and '34) if the value of the contracts won't be less than they are now. If that is so, the ACC may have the higher-paying contract (for at least a couple of years).

This. The more I see this situation rage on, the more I realize that a) people have short memories, and b) people assume that everything will continue on the current course.

Based on many indicators, ESPN and/or FOX could find themselves topped out based on what they paid this last contract cycle. If viewers are topping out, and ad revenue isn't coming in, they'll still bid for the media rights to one or both conferences - but I don't know that the bidding will remain as frothy as it is now.

Amazon learned that lesson with Thursday Night Football.

Now, that doesn't mean that CBS or NBC won't enter the fray. There are a lot of things that could happen. And all the consolidation is a good hedge against that. But at a certain point, you reach a level of diminishing returns. Especially when you already overpaid on the last contract, and it nearly broke you.

 

[RonJohn]

FSU is playing a risky game, but they are hoping to get a court to answer a question they aren't willing to ask. They could simply withdraw and test the GOR in a more straightforward way. But, they aren't that sure of winning and the cost would catastrophic for their AA.

I have attempted to say this, but I'm not sure if I have said it directly. IF FSU were confident that they are correct and the GOR is not binding, they would leave the ACC and fight it in court. The fact that they are trying to get a court to rule BEFORE they leave tells me that they are not very confident.

 

[SOWEGA Jacket]

The song remains the same…

Many college sports fans (and many within the ACC) are still accepting it. @SOWEGA Jacket is one of many. This board (several of us at least) is part of a very small and likely shrinking minority of folks who don’t see the inevitable decline (or dissolution) of the ACC. Not to say it won’t happen, or it can’t happen, but that it shouldn’t happen. The ACC will not crumble with FSU’s departure. That is FSU pounding their chest and spewing Internet propaganda. It won’t crumble if FSU and one to two other schools depart either. It will crumble when (if) the middle third of the conference panics and begins making desperate decisions.
To your overarching point, the ACC needs to get its s#** together, advocate for itself, and shore up the 12 or so schools that are not going to get full shares from the BIG or SEC.

I totally agree that the ACC shouldn’t disappear. But mismanagement is mismanagement. A lot of things have disappeared that shouldn’t have, but mismanagement leads to failure and extinction. That is what the Swofford years did to the ACC. So we hired a BIG guy to right the ship and yet his undefeated champ and his entire conference are given a middle finger. And I agree, the ACC won’t crumble if only FSU leaves. But if you believe they are the only ones who will leave at first chance then I understand how shocked you will be. And when has the ACC ever had its stuff together? To their credit there was a period of time they could twist the arms in seeding for March Madness but those days are long gone.

 

[Root4GT]

I wouldnt say the Big 12 is necessarily a better conference. It is certainly more stable. Their best program isn't currently suing the conference. They don't have a group of 7 teams that were reportedly trying to get out of the GOR so they can leave the conference. The ACC has good programs that don't really want to be here anymore. It is obviously the most unstable conference. The Big 12 has some pretty good programs that the P2 has no interest in. That by itself makes them stable. Their programs have no better options.

Their 2 best teams just left the conference and they were replaced with 4 G5 teams and PAC - 12 leftovers. The Big 12 is a good basketball conference. Not on the football radar.

 

[Augusta_Jacket]

Either way though, you seem to think the Big 12 will be the first conference that will ever negotiate a new contract for less than their original contract without losing members. We will see.

I never said it would be less. I said it wouldn't pass the ACCs total.

 

[ThatGuy]

This is only my opinion from a strategy point of view. The third player in almost any stable industry is the most innovative. They have to be ... otherwise, they slowly lose market share because the larger players can offer the same value for less by spreading over a wider market.

The SEC (since that is everyone's favorite whipping boy) has behind the scenes rules/guidelines/suggestions to deliver a consistent, conference-wide product of entertainment. The athletic departments are intertwined to the point that it's like different hotel brands all under the IHG or Marriott label. Spend rates, investment rates, etc ... are all organized conference wide.

The ACC, to my knowledge, doesn't do this and neither do many others. They let each school do their own thing rather than work as a conference to secure a more competitive position. Everyone complains about the SEC but this is exactly what they have been doing for decades. Rinse and repeat.

The ACC needs to find innovations that make for a better game day experience, a product consumers want, supported by technology that people use. Cashless concessions, expedited entry lines for season ticket holders, special VIP promos, etc are all part of the total fan experience. I was a big supporter for simply faster games because attention span for many has reduced significantly. Stadium sight lines have been re-engineered and many SEC (and other schools) have redeveloped their facilities to accommodate the demand. None of the ACC schools have (to my knowledge).

I could go on and on. I don't think the ACC is as inept as many claim, but they do appear to be simply trying to follow the B1G or SEC instead of being the innovator. Which is what they should do.

Again, just my opinion.

Yes. So much this.

If anyone has the time (and wants to geek out on a business case study), the Acquired Podcast on the NFL is a great listen - and a fascinating example of this approach. In some ways, the NFL succeeded largely because they regularly failed into success - but also because they convinced all of their teams to subjugate their own individual revenue to the league, with a strategy of "by growing the whole pie a lot larger, we'll each have a much bigger slice of the pie than our own individual pies would ever amount to." They convinced teams like the NY Giants to give their media rights over to the NFL as a whole, and let the NFL do the negotiating. Even though teams like Green Bay were from much smaller areas, teams from larger areas understood that it was important to have a) parity and b) to have as large a national footprint as they could. It benefitted all of them.

If you look back at the past at least 20 years or so, you can see that that's been the SEC's approach. It's one of the reasons they're regarded the way they are - they put the conference first, and understand the benefits they all get from it. Even if they dislike their rivals, they understand that each of them plays a key part, and if they start questioning the validity of the conference, they shoot themselves in the foot.

It's an approach that makes a lot of sense, when you look at it. Unfortunately, FSU didn't get that memo. Clemson did, UNC to a lesser degree...but FSU decided to burn the house down, then go to sleep in the bedroom. We'll see if it works out for them.

 

[CEB]

I totally agree that the ACC shouldn’t disappear. But mismanagement is mismanagement. A lot of things have disappeared that shouldn’t have, but mismanagement leads to failure and extinction. That is what the Swofford years did to the ACC. So we hired a BIG guy to right the ship and yet his undefeated champ and his entire conference are given a middle finger. And I agree, the ACC won’t crumble if only FSU leaves. But if you believe they are the only ones who will leave at first chance then I understand how shocked you will be. And when has the ACC ever had its stuff together? To their credit there was a period of time they could twist the arms in seeding for March Madness but those days are long gone.

I don’t believe that only FSU goes.
I think there’s a good shot that UNC abandons this thing they “built” (or at least act like they built).
Clemson? Maybe
UVA? Maybe
ND? Maybe.. prob not.
GT? Miami? others? Longshots
Basically, outside of 3-4 schools, no one is getting full shares from BIG / SEC. I could see a couple of the “maybe” schools taking partial shares just to get BIG / SEC slots, but a B12 move is lateral AT BEST and I would think that only panic and mismanagement (which we know the ACC has become famous for) would get us to that point.

If the ACC focuses on the core of the conference and retains the 12-14 schools that won’t sniff BIG / SEC spots, it’ll be fine. BUT.. if history is our teacher, I agree, it could be a very tall order for the ACC

 

[orientalnc]

Basically, outside of 3-4 schools, no one is getting full shares from BIG / SEC.

No one from the ACC will get a full share from the SEC or B1G until their next TV contract. If Texas and OU had to accept less than a full share, FSU ain't getting one.

 

[WreckinGT]

Their 2 best teams just left the conference and they were replaced with 4 G5 teams and PAC - 12 leftovers. The Big 12 is a good basketball conference. Not on the football radar.

I don't really disagree with that but most non ACC fans would say the same about the ACC.

 

[ThatGuy]

The only thing we know about the ESPN option is what FSU filed in the lawsuit. That is probably a version of the option that is spun in a way to make FSU's pleading appear most favorably. Do you know what the option actually is? Do you know that ESPN actually has an option to completely walk away from the contract? Do you know that it isn't actually an option to increase the payouts, but ESPN has to unilaterally decide that? Does anyone who is publicly speaking about it know any of that?

Lawyers don't typically include things in pleadings that they know to be false. However, sometimes lawyers get information from their client and don't push for exact details so that they can make the pleading as convincing as possible. We do not know what the ESPN contract actually says. We do not know that ESPN can just walk away. Too many people are putting too much faith in what FSU is spinning. It might be true. However, I have very little trust in FSU's lawyers, and will need some level of confirmation before I just accept what they say.

Who is stable and who isn't? A few years ago, people were predicting the end of the ACC because it was the worst P5 conference and the most unstable. The Pac12 was looked at as a very stable conference. The Pac12 went under. The ACC makes more money per school from media than the Big12, but people still look at the Big12 as the more stable conference. The powerhouse teams from the Big12 have all left, but people still look at it as the more stable conference. I don't think there is any measure, except internet opinion, that the Big12 is the better conference.

Also worth noting that a little over 10 years ago when the ESPN contract that paved the way for the ACC network was signed, the ACC then had the 3rd biggest media rights deal. In second place was the Big 10, and in 1st place...

...was the Pac12.

It's nearly impossible to say what the media market will be in 6 years when many conferences' agreements come up for renewal. And it's even more difficult to say what it will be like in 2036. The world changes too fast. Heck, 6 years ago GT was coming off of yet another bowl game, and FSU was having a 5-7 season.

So trying to make prognostications of 6 years from now based on the current status of things is more than a little off-base.

 

[RonJohn]

I don't really disagree with that but most non ACC fans would say the same about the ACC.

Most non ACC fans would say that the 2 best teams from the ACC were replaced with 4 G5 teams and Pac12 leftovers?

I assume you were ignoring that part and were saying that most non ACC fans would say that the ACC is not on the football radar. With Texas and Oklahoma gone, two Big 12 teams have made it to the playoffs and two ACC teams have made it to the playoffs. Only one of the Big12 teams was a Big12 team when they made the playoffs. The 2024 Big12 has a total of 2 CFP appearances. The ACC has a total of 7 CFP appearances, mostly Clemson.

Better/worse is a subjective measure. The issue I have is that the "measurements" that determine good/bad change every year, and even many times during the year. Too many college football fans fall for the hype instead of trying to think for themselves. You say that people are in denial and are "coping". However, it appears to me that you are one of the people who just go with whatever the popular opinion is at the time. If someone pics measurements that determine a good conference and stick with that measurement, I would at least respect it. People don't do that. OOC wins are super important, until they are not. Bowl wins are "proof", unless the popular conference loses and then they don't matter. This year, people lambasted the ACC because Louisville lost to Kentucky. During the entire season, no team in the SEC had an OOC win against a better team than Louisville. I can't wrap my head around the circular logic: Louisville is a horrific team because they lost to Kentucky, so the SEC is super strong. But, the SEC did not have a single OOC win against a better team than Louisville so why isn't the SEC weak instead of strong? (Popular sentiment would be that it is important when making Louisville look bad, but it is irrelevant when making the SEC look bad.) It is extremely obvious that people simply decide that the SEC is better than everyone else, and then look for whatever measure in that particular year, or even particular week, that "proves" that the SEC is better. The "proofs" change. Last weeks "proof" might not even be valid again this week if it makes the SEC look bad.

I am not trying to bash the SEC. However, the SEC is not made up of 16 NFL caliber teams. With Texas and Oklahoma, they are adding more top teams. However, they still have Vanderbilt. They still have Miss State. Florida hasn't been doing too well. South Carolina hasn't been doing too well. Popular sentiment would say that even if the SEC doesn't have 16 NFL teams, that they do have 16 Alabamas. Is the SEC better than the ACC and the Big12? Probably. Is the SEC better than the Big10? I don't know that I could answer that. However, the difference between the SEC/Big10 and the ACC isn't as large as the difference between the NFL and the SEC. It isn't even as big as the difference between the ACC and an FCS conference.

 

[SOWEGA Jacket]

I don’t believe that only FSU goes.
I think there’s a good shot that UNC abandons this thing they “built” (or at least act like they built).
Clemson? Maybe
UVA? Maybe
ND? Maybe.. prob not.
GT? Miami? others? Longshots
Basically, outside of 3-4 schools, no one is getting full shares from BIG / SEC. I could see a couple of the “maybe” schools taking partial shares just to get BIG / SEC slots, but a B12 move is lateral AT BEST and I would think that only panic and mismanagement (which we know the ACC has become famous for) would get us to that point.

If the ACC focuses on the core of the conference and retains the 12-14 schools that won’t sniff BIG / SEC spots, it’ll be fine. BUT.. if history is our teacher, I agree, it could be a very tall order for the ACC

Depends on your definition of fine. Are we fine now with all the teams here? Our conference champ just went undefeated and our conference got nothing for it. Is that doing fine? Now, remove FSU, UNC, Clemson, Miami, and GT. Sure, there could still be a conference called the ACC but who would watch? And if FSU doesn’t get an invite do you think an undefeated NC State or Wake would? The big 2 are going to keep growing and either vote to have no auto bids or they’ll simply create their own playoff (which is what I believe will happen after the next round of expansion). All this talk of shares and money is being based on today. New contracts and new media companies will enter the scene and change the equation. FSU simply knows they can’t be held hostage until 2036 because that is how you die as the world passes by. Just watch, we will have an awesome 12 team playoff starting next year where the ACC gets 1 invite. It will be a huge success and everyone will benefit except the ACC.

 

[RonJohn]

So trying to make prognostications of 6 years from now based on the current status of things is more than a little off-base.

The only thing that I would predict is that things will be different. Will Congress force players to be employees? Will courts force the schools to make players employees? Will the NCAA split into "professional" and "amateur" divisions? Those things and many more will cause conference/division/alliance changes that nobody is even discussing today. All of the things that Swaim is "reporting" could be utterly non-important if any of those things happen.

 

[Vespidae]

The big 2 are going to keep growing and either vote to have no auto bids or they’ll simply create their own playoff

100%. It’s Fox v ESPN now. Conferences are increasingly irrelevant. It’s matchups now. That’s the game.

 

[stinger78]

I would say the B12 is more stable right now, partially because their new Commissioner has done a great job of getting all their members to understand what they are and getting them all on the same page.
The B12 is sort of the leftovers conference in many ways - they don't really have any programs left that are going to be of any interest to the P2, but they have come to see that and embrace that. They understand they are never going to get P2 money but are happy just to be able to still be in the 'P' game.

Their Commissioner also believes football and basketball rights could eventually be separated and is preparing in case that happens.

The ACC is more valuable because it has more schools that have a interest outside a small area. The issue for the ACC is that some of those programs wants to grab for the brass ring of the P2 money. Can't fault them for that, though you could make an argument that it would actually be better to try to make the ACC better as a group. ACC as a conference could never get P2 money - it simply lacks the large schools and alumni bases for that.

FSU has decided it doesn't want to be in the ACC long term and is making a hail mary legal play to get out. Maybe they hit on it, but the odds don't appear high. If they don't then they really put themselves in a bad spot. They have a bunch of conference mates that have no respect or belief that they will work with them and to get out would require a huge sum of money at that point. In addition, the P2 have to sort of look at them and be thinking - how good of conference member will they be if we bring them in.

The number of football programs that have done better after 'moving up' in conference is very small. Most have done worse.

Your 4th paragraph is gold. Well said!

 

[ThatGuy]

That was after USC, UCLA, and Colorado had announced they were leaving and after their own leadership blew up talks with ESPN when ESPN offered the conference 30 million per team per year and the Pac 12 leadership laughably counter offered at 50 million.

Point of information: Your timeline is off.

In the fall of 2022, prior to Colorado, USC, and UCLA leaving, ESPN supposedly offered the Pac12 $30M per team. Soon thereafter, the Pac12 made a counteroffer of $50M per team, and ESPN decided the figures were simply too far apart and walked away.

This happened BEFORE USC and UCLA announced their intentions to head to the Big10. They announced their intent to leave in December 2022.

This past fall (2023), after no TV deal was presented by a certain date, CU announced their plans to leave. After which, Apple presented their offer for $23M per school, with an upside for subscription revenue. After which, Washington & Oregon, then Arizona/Arizona State, bailed.

So the Pac12 got an offer for $30M per team when it included Washington, Oregon, USC, UCLA, and Colorado (and the rest of the teams). After USC, UCLA and Colorado bailed, they got a streaming-only offer from Apple of $23M/team.

Which suggests that as @Augusta_Jacket posted (see below), since the Pac12 with all its "good" teams could only get a lower offer than the ACC currently makes per team, it's not likely the Big12 without Oklahoma and Texas would get a similar deal as the ACC.


I'm pasting the thread below, to jog your memory (and to help everyone else follow along).

Considering the PAC-12 when it still included USC, UCLA, Washington and Oregon Couldn't get a deal as good as the ACC it's highly doubtful a Big-12 sans Texas and Oklahoma approach what we have.

The Big 12 already has a 32 million dollar a year deal compared to the ACC's 40 million dollar deal. You don't think in 5 years they will be able to negotiate that higher?

There is no incentive for a Big 12 team to go anywhere except to the P2 conferences. Leaving a stable conference, with teams you have some history against for an obviously unstable conference for a few million more per year seems like pretty bad plan.

No. Again. See the offer to the PAC last year with USC, UCLA, Oregon and Washington still in the conference. There is no school currently in the Big-12 worth what those 4 are.

There was no offer to the PAC last year with USC and UCLA. USC and UCLA announced they were leaving in July of 2022. I can't find anything detailing any offers the conference received before that. If you have it then please share. From most reports, they weren't even in deep negotiations at that point. What we do know is that after USC, UCLA, and Colorado decided to leave, the Pac 12 had a starting offer from ESPN for 30 million a year per team. I find it a bit hard to believe that they couldnt get 40 million per team with USC, UCLA, and Colorado.

Either way though, you seem to think the Big 12 will be the first conference that will ever negotiate a new contract for less than their original contract without losing members. We will see.

 

[ThatGuy]

The only thing that I would predict is that things will be different. Will Congress force players to be employees? Will courts force the schools to make players employees? Will the NCAA split into "professional" and "amateur" divisions? Those things and many more will cause conference/division/alliance changes that nobody is even discussing today. All of the things that Swaim is "reporting" could be utterly non-important if any of those things happen.

Precisely.

 

[WreckinGT]

Point of information: Your timeline is off.

In the fall of 2022, prior to Colorado, USC, and UCLA leaving, ESPN supposedly offered the Pac12 $30M per team. Soon thereafter, the Pac12 made a counteroffer of $50M per team, and ESPN decided the figures were simply too far apart and walked away.

This happened BEFORE USC and UCLA announced their intentions to head to the Big10. They announced their intent to leave in December 2023.

This past fall (2023), after no TV deal was presented by a certain date, CU announced their plans to leave. After which, Apple presented their offer for $23M per school, with an upside for subscription revenue. After which, Washington & Oregon, then Arizona/Arizona State, bailed.

So the Pac12 got an offer for $30M per team when it included Washington, Oregon, USC, UCLA, and Colorado (and the rest of the teams). After USC, UCLA and Colorado bailed, they got a streaming-only offer from Apple of $23M/team.

Which suggests that as @Augusta_Jacket posted (see below), since the Pac12 with all its "good" teams could only get a lower offer than the ACC currently makes per team, it's not likely the Big12 without Oklahoma and Texas would get a similar deal as the ACC.


I'm pasting the thread below, to jog your memory (and to help everyone else follow along).

Im not sure what you are looking at but USC and UCLA did not announce they were leaving last month (Dec 2023). They announced it in June of 2022.

USC, UCLA approved to move to Big Ten in 2024

USC and UCLA were notified Thursday night that their application to join the Big Ten has been accepted.

www.espn.com