ACC, PAC-12, and BIG alliance / conference realignment

[orangefog]

Hopefully even the rumor of FSU and Clemson leaving, particularly to a different network, forces them to up the ante a bit at the next look in.

 

[tep624]

What credible source has revealed that FSU and Clemson have broken the GOR and will leave the ACC for a mere $300MM? The exit fee alone is 3X the annual revenue, which was $41-$42MM last year, or $123-$126MM, plus the cost of obtaining their media rights which is 12 years at $42MM (probably more but a number for now) X2.1 (the minimum multiplier established by OU and UT).

Then the ACC must agree to the buy out. Let's just ignore the fact that no ACC member has any incentive to agree to the buy out.

Then ESPN must agree to the buy out. Let's just ignore the fact that ESPN will destroy one of it's money making ventures and has no other incentive to agree to the buy out.

And we will completely ignore the fact that FSU and Clemson have no offer to accept a slot in either the B1G or the SEC. I think it safe to assume neither FSU nor Clemson is jumping to the Big 12.

And we will completely ignore the fact that neither FSU nor Clemson have a cool billion laying around the AD's office plus to pay the more likely exit fees.

And we must absolutely forget that the attorneys with each conference, each team, ESPN, and many many private firms have concluded that the GOR cannot be broken outside of a an over-the-top buyout.

So what is the secret that FSU and Clemson figured out that no one else could figure out?

Also I’ve seen this scenario floated around that because ESPN has a contract with the ACC and the SEC that they could just shift FSU over without any repercussion but the conference legally owns the exit fee and legally owns the media rights. So anyone talking ESPN trying to play 3 card monte with teams doesn’t know what they are talking about.

 

[CousCuse]

What credible source has revealed that FSU and Clemson have broken the GOR and will leave the ACC for a mere $300MM? The exit fee alone is 3X the annual revenue, which was $41-$42MM last year, or $123-$126MM, plus the cost of obtaining their media rights which is 12 years at $42MM (probably more but a number for now) X2.1 (the minimum multiplier established by OU and UT).

Then the ACC must agree to the buy out. Let's just ignore the fact that no ACC member has any incentive to agree to the buy out.

Then ESPN must agree to the buy out. Let's just ignore the fact that ESPN will destroy one of it's money making ventures and has no other incentive to agree to the buy out.

And we will completely ignore the fact that FSU and Clemson have no offer to accept a slot in either the B1G or the SEC. I think it safe to assume neither FSU nor Clemson is jumping to the Big 12.

And we will completely ignore the fact that neither FSU nor Clemson have a cool billion laying around the AD's office plus to pay the more likely exit fees.

And we must absolutely forget that the attorneys with each conference, each team, ESPN, and many many private firms have concluded that the GOR cannot be broken outside of a an over-the-top buyout.

So what is the secret that FSU and Clemson figured out that no one else could figure out?

Well, I imagine if this were to go to court, the discovery phase could be very ugly.

 

[elimunelson]

Well, I imagine if this were to go to court, the discovery phase could be very ugly.

Or it was done transparently and is very clean.

Discovery is ugly when something was done backhanded.

 

[orangenauburn]

When the B1G and the SEC signed those mega deals, it changed the calculus. That just happened. If FSU and Clemson left and paid $300 million each that would be $50 million for each of the remaining 12 programs.

But the payout would be double that $300m number people keep posting, which shows how wronf they are.

Why would any ACC school approve those schools leaving for half of what they old owe, currently.

Yes that number will decrease every year, but for them to make the move now, would cost them over a half billion dollars, not including legal fees.

So if those two leave, that would split $1B between the remaining ACC teams.

I'm no math major, but that's a lot of scratch

 

[orangenauburn]

The difference in yearly payout is to astronomical. There's a reason why the FSU administration has freely admitted their looking for an out already, the writings on the wall.

Because they are morons with new leadership who had a ten win season last year, after going 19-27 the four years prior, who are proclaiming they are back to being Bowden era Noles.


I hope they flame out spectacularly this year.

Losses to LSU, Clemson, Florida, Miami, and Syracuse

 

[orangenauburn]

I think it’s dumb anyone worries about anything ten years from now. The landscape won’t be the same and some of us may be dead.

FSU and Clemson might want to think long and hard about any movement. They might not win anything of significance ever again.

They have it made now

Go play in the mud of the BigTen v Ohio State, Michigan, USC, Penn State

You won't be in the playoffs anymore

Enjoy your random ass whipping by a once in a while good year from Purdue, Minnesota, Wisconsin, Nebraska, Maryland, Illinois, Indiana, Michigan State

The only sure thing would be Rutgers and Northwestern

 

[Cusefan0307]

Sorry but that's not correct. 5 years ago you weren't staring down A 35-40+ mill a year differential per year with the SEC and B10. You didnt have USC and UCLA bolting for the B10 for a massive payday and 5 years ago you didn't have a fellow conference school (FSU) openly admitting their looking to leave the conference.

To say it's a ridiculous discussion is absurd and honestly naive to how precarious the situation is right now.

But people still said it. That’s the point. I choose not to care about things ten years from now when nothing ever stays the same for that long.

 

[kcsu]

All anyone needs to do is to look at the PAC 12 to see that the media landscape has dramatically changed.
They will most likely end up with over 75% of their games only available via streaming. No network, no ESPN zilch. Apple TV.
The ACCN is a blessing and the ACC will be fine long term.
Lets stop with the baloney and enjoy our good fortune. Syracuse and the rest of the ACC is in good shape. We have an expanded playoff, a solid agreement with ND and most importantly time is on our side. In 10 years we may all be watching the Micron Nationals win the NBA title and sending our AI assistants to Wegmans to pick up the clams.
Its all good.

 

[elimunelson]

All anyone needs to do is to look at the PAC 12 to see that the media landscape has dramatically changed.
They will most likely end up with over 75% of their games only available via streaming. No network, no ESPN zilch. Apple TV.
The ACCN is a blessing and the ACC will be fine long term.
Lets stop with the baloney and enjoy our good fortune. Syracuse and the rest of the ACC is in good shape. We have an expanded playoff, a solid agreement with ND and most importantly time is on our side. In 10 years we may all be watching the Micron Nationals win the NBA title and sending our AI assistants to Wegmans to pick up the clams.
Its all good.

As khan said to admiral Kirk: let them eat static

It’s all bag of nothing. If they decide to wage war it should be one that the remaining members should enjoy because it’ll be the greatest financial gain ever any way u cut the onion.

FSU is probably led by booster morons so I wouldn’t be surprised by anything but this isn’t a fight they want.

 

[FreakTalksAboutSU]

A couple random thoughts.

1- This is a message board. Speculation and hypothesizing is what fuels it. I think that if you enter a thread about realignment you need to expect it. If wild ideas and concepts, along with realignment-driven anxiety, are not your jam, I'd probably find a more concrete thread to visit.

2- As most of you know, I now follow Arizona football pretty closely and have been paying close attention to how they react here. IMO the PAC-12 deal is pretty shite. Massive dependency on subscribers for teams to make any real $. I suspect Arizona knows it's best path forward is taking the guaranteed $31 mill per year from the Big 12 (which is a solid deal albeit not near the two big conferences). But they also don't want to be the ones solely responsible for "killing" the Big-12, so they likely want to get ASU and Utah on board as well. Last night the AZ board of regents held a special executive session (oversees Arizona and ASU) purportedly to discuss this. We will see what happens.

IMO, Arizona, ASU, and Utah are going to opt to join the Big 12, ultimately ending the PAC-12 as we know it.

3- I don't know what the best path forward for the ACC is but as I see it, the answer is not sitting idly and doing nothing. That doesn't mean overreact, but certainly consider all options. If the PAC-12 dissolves I would absolutely be reaching out to the PAC-12 leftovers and exploring a western division of teams including a half dozen or so of the western schools. I'm not saying I definitely add them as it only works if the dollars work (and they may not want to anyway) but you really do need to kick the tires on all options right now. As it stands, if (and likely when) the PAC-12 falls, the ACC is probably the 4th out of 4 major football conferences remaining. Not an emergency, not even a short term problem, but definitely and intermediate- and long-term concern. And waiting till it is an emergency will ultimately result in the fate that befell the PAC-12.

Again, just my take.

 

[kcsu]

A couple random thoughts.

1- This is a message board. Speculation and hypothesizing is what fuels it. I think that if you enter a thread about realignment you need to expect it. If wild ideas and concepts, along with realignment-driven anxiety, are not your jam, I'd probably find a more concrete thread to visit.

2- As most of you know, I now follow Arizona football pretty closely and have been paying close attention to how they react here. IMO the PAC-12 deal is pretty shite. Massive dependency on subscribers for teams to make any real $. I suspect Arizona knows it's best path forward is taking the guaranteed $31 mill per year from the Big 12 (which is a solid deal albeit not near the two big conferences). But they also don't want to be the ones solely responsible for "killing" the Big-12, so they likely want to get ASU and Utah on board as well. Last night the AZ board of regents held a special executive session (oversees Arizona and ASU) purportedly to discuss this. We will see what happens.

IMO, Arizona, ASU, and Utah are going to opt to join the Big 12, ultimately ending the PAC-12 as we know it.

3- I don't know what the best path forward for the ACC is but as I see it, the answer is not sitting idly and doing nothing. That doesn't mean overreact, but certainly consider all options. If the PAC-12 dissolves I would absolutely be reaching out to the PAC-12 leftovers and exploring a western division of teams including a half dozen or so of the western schools. I'm not saying I definitely add them as it only works if the dollars work (and they may not want to anyway) but you really do need to kick the tires on all options right now. As it stands, if (and likely when) the PAC-12 falls, the ACC is probably the 4th out of 4 major football conferences remaining. Not an emergency, not even a short term problem, but definitely and intermediate- and long-term concern. And waiting till it is an emergency will ultimately result in the fate that befell the PAC-12.

Again, just my take.

If the Pac implodes the play for the ACC is as follows.

Do nothing unless by adding the pac members it is accretive to the current deal and doesnt do anything to weaken the existing GOR

 

[FreakTalksAboutSU]

If the Pac implodes the play for the ACC is as follows.

Do nothing unless by adding the pac members it is accretive to the current deal and doesnt do anything to weaken the existing GOR

Right. And step one is exploring whether adding members actually 1) increases revenue and b) doesn't weaken the GOR.

I don't think we are saying different things. I don't endorse a reactionary move. I endorse aggressive consideration and study, and making a concurrently aggressive move if the numbers make sense.

 

[texascpa]

Well, I imagine if this were to go to court, the discovery phase could be very ugly.

So, give us an example of "very ugly". Mind you, teams of lawyers have been looking at this for years.

 

[texascpa]

A couple random thoughts.

1- This is a message board. Speculation and hypothesizing is what fuels it. I think that if you enter a thread about realignment you need to expect it. If wild ideas and concepts, along with realignment-driven anxiety, are not your jam, I'd probably find a more concrete thread to visit.

Sure, but if you're going to speculate at least do it with reality in mind.

 

[HRE Otto IV]

A couple random thoughts.

1- This is a message board. Speculation and hypothesizing is what fuels it. I think that if you enter a thread about realignment you need to expect it. If wild ideas and concepts, along with realignment-driven anxiety, are not your jam, I'd probably find a more concrete thread to visit.

2- As most of you know, I now follow Arizona football pretty closely and have been paying close attention to how they react here. IMO the PAC-12 deal is pretty shite. Massive dependency on subscribers for teams to make any real $. I suspect Arizona knows it's best path forward is taking the guaranteed $31 mill per year from the Big 12 (which is a solid deal albeit not near the two big conferences). But they also don't want to be the ones solely responsible for "killing" the Big-12, so they likely want to get ASU and Utah on board as well. Last night the AZ board of regents held a special executive session (oversees Arizona and ASU) purportedly to discuss this. We will see what happens.

IMO, Arizona, ASU, and Utah are going to opt to join the Big 12, ultimately ending the PAC-12 as we know it.

3- I don't know what the best path forward for the ACC is but as I see it, the answer is not sitting idly and doing nothing. That doesn't mean overreact, but certainly consider all options. If the PAC-12 dissolves I would absolutely be reaching out to the PAC-12 leftovers and exploring a western division of teams including a half dozen or so of the western schools. I'm not saying I definitely add them as it only works if the dollars work (and they may not want to anyway) but you really do need to kick the tires on all options right now. As it stands, if (and likely when) the PAC-12 falls, the ACC is probably the 4th out of 4 major football conferences remaining. Not an emergency, not even a short term problem, but definitely and intermediate- and long-term concern. And waiting till it is an emergency will ultimately result in the fate that befell the PAC-12.

Again, just my take.

Long term it would be dumb of the B12 to take 2 schools from Arizona and two from Utah. The next TV contract would decrease.

Washington, Oregon, Arizona State, Stanford IMO would add value to the ACC. But 4 isn’t enough to go West. The ACC would likely need to take Cal as well.

I still think that is an increase for the ACC. Problem is that gives the ACC 19 in FB. That is a PIA for scheduling. If you can get ND to agree to a 6th game (more TV value for ACC) then you could try to have the bye teams play ND to help things out.

I don’t think there is a 20th team that adds enough value. Maybe Utah. But based on the PAC TV contract I doubt it.

 

[texascpa]

Sorry but that's not correct. 5 years ago you weren't staring down A 35-40+ mill a year differential per year with the SEC and B10. You didnt have USC and UCLA bolting for the B10 for a massive payday and 5 years ago you didn't have a fellow conference school (FSU) openly admitting their looking to leave the conference.

To say it's a ridiculous discussion is absurd and honestly naive to how precarious the situation is right now.

You had one FSU board member spouting off nonsense who then later backtracked once he realized there wasn't anything that FSU could do.

 

[kcsu]

Long term it would be dumb of the B12 to take 2 schools from Arizona and two from Utah. The next TV contract would decrease.

Washington, Oregon, Arizona State, Stanford IMO would add value to the ACC. But 4 isn’t enough to go West. The ACC would likely need to take Cal as well.

I still think that is an increase for the ACC. Problem is that gives the ACC 19 in FB. That is a PIA for scheduling. If you can get ND to agree to a 6th game (more TV value for ACC) then you could try to have the bye teams play ND to help things out.

I don’t think there is a 20th team that adds enough value. Maybe Utah. But based on the PAC TV contract I doubt it.

In this scenario add Utah and bingo but again it can't hurt the GOR and needs to be a significant increase to handle the travel.

 

[FreakTalksAboutSU]

Long term it would be dumb of the B12 to take 2 schools from Arizona and two from Utah. The next TV contract would decrease.

Washington, Oregon, Arizona State, Stanford IMO would add value to the ACC. But 4 isn’t enough to go West. The ACC would likely need to take Cal as well.

I still think that is an increase for the ACC. Problem is that gives the ACC 19 in FB. That is a PIA for scheduling. If you can get ND to agree to a 6th game (more TV value for ACC) then you could try to have the bye teams play ND to help things out.

I don’t think there is a 20th team that adds enough value. Maybe Utah. But based on the PAC TV contract I doubt it.

Well, I think that this really poor TV deal has forced Arizona's hand, and while their strong preference would be to come to the Big 12 with the other two schools, I think they will split off alone if the conference doesnt want the other 2. Prior to that deal announcement I was not as sure.

If AZ was to go alone, then yeah, your 5 above are a start. I'd probably look to add SDSU as the 20th if I had to pick one. But again I dont know that their profile fits the ACC. Nor do I think Utah's, although they are clearly a good program.

If the Big 12 did go with the 3, then to your point, i really dont know that the remnants have enough to make a western division worth it. Again best case scenario (i understand this is just speculation and not necessarily grounded in reality) would be something like Oregon, Washington, Stanford, Cal, SDSU, and maybe, I dunno...i really cant think of a 6th at that point.

 

[texascpa]

Well, I think that this really poor TV deal has forced Arizona's hand, and while their strong preference would be to come to the Big 12 with the other two schools, I think they will split off alone if the conference doesnt want the other 2. Prior to that deal announcement I was not as sure.

If AZ was to go alone, then yeah, your 5 above are a start. I'd probably look to add SDSU as the 20th if I had to pick one. But again I dont know that their profile fits the ACC.

If the Big 12 did go with the 3, then to your point, i really dont know that the remnants have enough to make a western division worth it. Again best case scenario (i understand this is just speculation and not necessarily grounded in reality) would be something like Oregon, Washington, Stanford, Cal, SDSU, and maybe, I dunno...i really cant think of a 6th at that point.

The deal that was presented yesterday was laughable at best. AppleTV streaming and money based on number of subscribers. That shouldn't give anyone any comfort of the long-term viability of the Pac12. I think Arizona is gone.

 

[Admiral Koga]

Sorry but that's not correct. 5 years ago you weren't staring down A 35-40+ mill a year differential per year with the SEC and B10. You didnt have USC and UCLA bolting for the B10 for a massive payday and 5 years ago you didn't have a fellow conference school (FSU) openly admitting their looking to leave the conference.

To say it's a ridiculous discussion is absurd and honestly naive to how precarious the situation is right now.

But the differential will go to buy back the media rights. So where would Clemson/FSU be ahead? As others have said, things will be much different in 10 years. Then who in their right mind would sign up for 10 years/35 mil+ debt? Especially a cash strapped state school?

 

[Cusefan0307]

This is a good thread. Syracuse is in much better shape than our own fans give us credit for.


We outdraw everyone in the Pac 12 sans Washington, Oregon, and Washington State.

 

[Cusefan0307]

The deal that was presented yesterday was laughable at best. AppleTV streaming and money based on number of subscribers. That shouldn't give anyone any comfort of the long-term viability of the Pac12. I think Arizona is gone.

Does Arizona help the Big12 though? They are near the bottom of that conference in viewers. Then again so was Colorado.

 

[UpstateSM]

If SU wants to move to the big leagues there has never been a more important time for the football team to go 8-4 and the hoops team to be ranked most of the season the next couple of years. Need to be willing to spend to retain coordinators on the football side, too.

Fan support and brand recognition is there but we need to act like big boys when it comes to spending.

 

[JeremyCuse]

But the differential will go to buy back the media rights. So where would Clemson/FSU be ahead? As others have said, things will be much different in 10 years. Then who in their right mind would sign up for 10 years/35 mil+ debt? Especially a cash strapped state school?

FSU and Clemson have no viable way to leave now. As I noted they are locked in for at least another 8+ years but it's clear the current situation won't be tenable to keep them through the end of the current agreement or to re up with the ACC without a massive yearly payout increase. The biggest concern for SU and the other ACC schools is that as the payout gap continues to widen with the B10 and SEC thr FSUs, Clemson and UNCs will simply play out the string until it'd close enough to the end of the GOR where they can try and bolt.