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

[pokercuse08]

I’m not a huge fan of this. Seems crazy to only add 2 west coast teams by themselves. If we are going to do it, wonder if it would make sense to grab Washington state and Oregon state as well.

Think of this as the B1G adding USC and UCLA. It's impossible for this to be the only domino to fall due to logistics, it's just the first move of a series of moves. Adding Washington State and Oregon State now is a weaker move than waiting and seeing how the board develops. My guess is they'll study SDSU, UNLV, maybe a couple others, and the next addition will be SMU + ???, or maybe SMU + three others.

Ideally they should be positioning to pick off the best of the Big 12 in a few years.

Part of the reason I think they should add SMU now is that it gives SMU a few years to make itself and thus the ACC more valuable before they are forced to make their next move. If SMU can buy itself a top 25 team or better in that window, which is not impossible in this era, it could help position the ACC as a clear #3 conference.

The Big 12's strategy to get enough basketball powers to avoid being able to be left out of the big basketball tournament (if it wanted to have any legitimacy) also applies to having enough football powers. The ACC can put together a mix of both if they can pick 3-4 schools that are *potential* sleeping giants in football and hit on one or two of them.

One thing people also need to consider is that there is not going to be any being left out and still fielding a top flight basketball team. If there are two super leagues holding national championships between them, and they're paying players or their NIL deals are way better, the top talent is all going to end up there - both in terms of coaches and players.

We're either in or we're out, that applies to both Syracuse and the ACC. There isn't going to be a mid-major football but major basketball soft landing IMO. This is naked capitalism, and it has to be analyzed accordingly (unless/until the bubble eventually pops).

The goal for Syracuse is to make it into a top 2 conference OR to be in the third best conference AND have that conference be included in the championship competitions. The goal for the ACC is to be the third best conference AND to be included in championship competitions.

 

[WoadBlue]

That's why Cal works - 33K undergrads and 450K alums. AND it's a world class institution.

But Cal has nothing else - including alums who care about any Cal sport, much less care to donate to it. That is a huge part of why the Cal athletics department is always at least several towns of millions on dollars in debt.

If you pair Cal with Oregon, Washington, and Stanford (which has the best per capita alum support in the country for its total athletics department), then you have winner. And that apparently is what Phillips was offering, but Washington wanted to keep begging the BT and when the BT offered it and Oregon, they took it.

 

[WoadBlue]

Think of this as the B1G adding USC and UCLA. It's impossible for this to be the only domino to fall due to logistics, it's just the first move of a series of moves. Adding Washington State and Oregon State now is a weaker move than waiting and seeing how the board develops. My guess is they'll study SDSU, UNLV, maybe a couple others, and the next addition will be SMU + ???, or maybe SMU + three others.

Ideally they should be positioning to pick off the best of the Big 12 in a few years.

Part of the reason I think they should add SMU now is that it gives SMU a few years to make itself and thus the ACC more valuable before they are forced to make their next move. If SMU can buy itself a top 25 team or better in that window, which is not impossible in this era, it could help position the ACC as a clear #3 conference.

The Big 12's strategy to get enough basketball powers to avoid being able to be left out of the big basketball tournament (if it wanted to have any legitimacy) also applies to having enough football powers. The ACC can put together a mix of both if they can pick 3-4 schools that are *potential* sleeping giants in football and hit on one or two of them.

One thing people also need to consider is that there is not going to be any being left out and still fielding a top flight basketball team. If there are two super leagues holding national championships between them, and they're paying players or their NIL deals are way better, the top talent is all going to end up there - both in terms of coaches and players.

We're either in or we're out, that applies to both Syracuse and the ACC. There isn't going to be a mid-major football but major basketball soft landing IMO. This is naked capitalism, and it has to be analyzed accordingly (unless/until the bubble eventually pops).

The goal for Syracuse is to make it into a top 2 conference OR to be in the third best conference AND have that conference be included in the championship competitions. The goal for the ACC is to be the third best conference AND to be included in championship competitions.

If we are talking schools that are potential football big winners that are not now tied a large GOR, then Stanford and SMU top the list. If we also think about schools that are in a large GOR situation but might choose ACC, then we have Cincy and WVU.

 

[HRE Otto IV]

Funny I was told here that adding Washington, Oregon, Arizona State, Stanford, and Cal would dilute the ACC payout but now people are saying we should take Stanford, Cal, Washington State, and Oregon State?

I think taking Stanford, Cal, SMU makes a lot of sense due to SF, Dallas, and ACCN fees. Having 17 in FB is not ideal but it is workable, even more so if ND adds a 6th ACC game.

If you want an even number I think taking the above 3 and Washington State is a possibility. I don't see the value in Oregon State. Not a big state (ACCN) and no big market (OTA). I think you can say the same about San Diego State and UNLV. They don't add big states (ACCN) or big markets (OTA). All the teams just mentioned have poor attendance, which doesn't indicate a strong following.

With 4 additions you can keep the current 3 perm rivals for current ACC members (which I oppose having 4 is better) and you can have the 4 new teams play each other for their 3 perm rivals. That IMO is the main advantage to adding 4 now. But maybe ESPN wants 3+ Western teams for ACC After Dark. Having only 2 makes it harder to have as many games.

IMO it is better to stay at 17 and have 4 perm rivals. Then wait out the B12. No need to go after Western teams now who don't add a whole lot.

 

[EnviroSciGuy]

Sick. Any teams located next to the Indian Ocean we could pull in next?

Actually there is a land grant school that may fit the criteria. NIL opportunities galore!

Unibetsedåt Guåhan | University of Guam

Situated in the heart of Mangilao overlooking beautiful Pago Bay, the University of Guam campus boasts a breathtaking ocean view, cool breezes, and modern, island-inspired architecture.

www.uog.edu

 

[Newhouser]

I get the additions - I guess - but won't watch one west coast game that SU isn't involved in, and honestly only if our teams are performing at a high level, or are fun to watch. Buys the ACC some time I guess, but I still think the long term trajectory of SU football is not great.

 

[CU44SE]

Think of this as the B1G adding USC and UCLA. It's impossible for this to be the only domino to fall due to logistics, it's just the first move of a series of moves. Adding Washington State and Oregon State now is a weaker move than waiting and seeing how the board develops. My guess is they'll study SDSU, UNLV, maybe a couple others, and the next addition will be SMU + ???, or maybe SMU + three others.

Ideally they should be positioning to pick off the best of the Big 12 in a few years.

Part of the reason I think they should add SMU now is that it gives SMU a few years to make itself and thus the ACC more valuable before they are forced to make their next move. If SMU can buy itself a top 25 team or better in that window, which is not impossible in this era, it could help position the ACC as a clear #3 conference.

The Big 12's strategy to get enough basketball powers to avoid being able to be left out of the big basketball tournament (if it wanted to have any legitimacy) also applies to having enough football powers. The ACC can put together a mix of both if they can pick 3-4 schools that are *potential* sleeping giants in football and hit on one or two of them.

One thing people also need to consider is that there is not going to be any being left out and still fielding a top flight basketball team. If there are two super leagues holding national championships between them, and they're paying players or their NIL deals are way better, the top talent is all going to end up there - both in terms of coaches and players.

We're either in or we're out, that applies to both Syracuse and the ACC. There isn't going to be a mid-major football but major basketball soft landing IMO. This is naked capitalism, and it has to be analyzed accordingly (unless/until the bubble eventually pops).

The goal for Syracuse is to make it into a top 2 conference OR to be in the third best conference AND have that conference be included in the championship competitions. The goal for the ACC is to be the third best conference AND to be included in championship competitions.

Personally, I would rather wait till 2030 as you described above, when I think we would be able to pry away Cincinnati, WVU, and other Big 12 institutions.

However, I believe with the framework I layed out, you split the extra 120 million dollars you gained by adding these schools (half of new members payout). Top 6 football teams would split 80 million (13 million) and top 6 basketball teams would split 40 million (7 million). Giving a program the ability to make 20 million extra dollars each year by fielding good, competitive programs.

Yes I understand my idea won’t happen. But that’s is a way for the money to make sense. Again, I am against the ACC making a reactive move as I believe they are currently doing. At this point I think it is more beneficial to let things play out.

 

[kcsu]

Does anyone actually have a sense that this is happening?

 

[EnviroSciGuy]

I'm not seeing any confirmations of a vote occurring. This seems to be emanating from one guy that supposedly has inside connections at Cal. If it's happening today, we should have updates soon.

 

[Qbobby]

Sorry, I've been told I have no sense.

 

[OrangeXtreme]

Does anyone actually have a sense that this is happening?

Jake thought it was, and that's good enough for me.

 

[kcsu]

Jake thought it was, and that's good enough for me.

If Jake thought, it was happening you can bank on it.

 

[Acesn8s]

I’m for adding teams, Stanford absolutely, but the rest? Now I understand Stanford needs travel partners, but I feel ACC missed the mark. Hopefully whatever additions are made adds some significant value like 15 million a year per school, otherwise the travel for all these sports will eat up the profits.

 

[Chris02M]

the travel costs will be mostly for Stanford and Cal though so its not really that relevant

 

[sutomcat]

Jake thought it was, and that's good enough for me.

There are multiple reputable web sites confirming a meeting will be held of the ACC presidents today. It reportedly started at 8 AM.

The fact it is the ACC presidents and the fact it was announced publicly implies to me that there was a change in the voting and there is a reason to meet again.

Like Jake, I expect an announcement today that the ACC is expanding. No mention of SMU in any of the chatter. It appears to just be Cal and Stanford.

I think the ACC saw many of the logical candidates it was banking on taking if it was to lose a school or two disappearing and finally decided to be proactive.

I bet the ACC ADs would not vote in favor of this move. This was driven by the ACC presidents. I think they felt if they must expand, they want to take peer institutions that position the ACC more to the long term vision they have.

This is a rare time the presidents of a conference have stood up and voted for what they believe (and the hell with the ADs).

There are some rumors this is for football and basketball only. It will be interesting to see if this extends to all Olympic sports.

 

[Orangefizz]

I get the additions - I guess - but won't watch one west coast game that SU isn't involved in, and honestly only if our teams are performing at a high level, or are fun to watch. Buys the ACC some time I guess, but I still think the long term trajectory of SU football is not great.

In my opinion here’s what our future looks like 10 years from now. It will be some combination of these schools.

ACC Big14 East
Boston College
UConn
Syracuse
Pittsburgh
West Virginia
Cincinnati
Louisville
Memphis
Duke
Wake Forest
Georgia Tech
UCF
South Florida
Tulane
SMU
(Virginia Tech)
(NC State)

Personally, I think the Big Ten will add Virginia and North Carolina but if the SEC acts first and takes UVA/UNC, there is no place for Virginia Tech and NC State so they would be added to the ACC/B12 conference.

 

[Hoo's That]

So given the demise of the PAC, what year are they likely to join?

Mountain West?

 

[PhatOrange]

In my opinion here’s what our future looks like 10 years from now. It will be some combination of these schools.

ACC Big14 East
Boston College
UConn
Syracuse
Pittsburgh
West Virginia
Cincinnati
Louisville
Memphis
Duke
Wake Forest
Georgia Tech
UCF
South Florida
Tulane
SMU
(Virginia Tech)
(NC State)

Personally, I think the Big Ten will add Virginia and North Carolina but if the SEC acts first and takes UVA/UNC, there is no place for Virginia Tech and NC State so they would be added to the ACC/B12 conference.

You're probably right sigh.

If it's truly a battle for eyeballs and markets it would make sense for the Big 10 or SEC to add Syracuse and Boston College. The Big 10 would have 3/4 of the country locked up and the entire Northeast. The SEC would be firmly regulated to the Southern quadrant.

I think an interesting play would be for the SEC to go right up the East coast. While they don't want to add 2 small NE private schools, wouldn't it be a smart media move for them to do so? Go right up the East coast and add UVA, UNC, Pitt, Syracuse AND BC ? They'd be planting a pretty firm flag in middle of Big10 country and I have to assume TV would eat it up.

On a random Saturday which primetime games do you more often watch? I know for me I watch the SEC games. I'd love to know the ratings for the Big10 vs SEC in the Northeast corridor.

As ridiculous as it might sound I think the SEC moving into the Northeast market would be smart.

 

[Hoo's That]

But Cal has nothing else - including alums who care about any Cal sport, much less care to donate to it. That is a huge part of why the Cal athletics department is always at least several towns of millions on dollars in debt.

If you pair Cal with Oregon, Washington, and Stanford (which has the best per capita alum support in the country for its total athletics department), then you have winner. And that apparently is what Phillips was offering, but Washington wanted to keep begging the BT and when the BT offered it and Oregon, they took it.

The primary cause of the size of Cal's debt is the mandatory earthquake safety upgrades to their stadium. They cost over $400 million and the school administration is picking up just under half, leaving the $275 million for the athletic department to fund.

 

[Chip]

And if I asked Jennifer Aniston out on a date 30 years ago, she still would have laughed at me.

You don't know that, you should have asked her?

If my math is right, 30 years ago is before Friends started, so I, for one, liked your chances.

 

[Cuse181]

I wonder if this will be what truly kills the ACC. Picking up two deadweight pacific teams in a desperate attempt to remain relevant can only spell disaster. I assume ESPN wants nothing to do with a renegotiation that would pay MORE to the ACC in 2035-2036, the CFP is already finding it difficult to find people to pay for first round games signaling an end of the infinite money glitch, and I don’t think there is a single school happy about this potential arrangement outside of the deadweight getting saved.

The landscape will begin to fragment again, and I feel the Big 12 will be the first to fall simply because their deal is up in 31 vs. ACCs 36

 

[721Comstock]

Calford are coming.

So, you’re saying that Cal can get right back in this thing?

 

[Bayside44]

This is why I admire Brent Yormark from the big 12 conference. He is Bold and aggressive. If we had him is ACC leadership, I bet he would’ve pushed to make this happen.

He took a bunch of schools that had no where to go and got them together, in a deal that's likely going to be over in seven years, for less money than we make.

 

[Bayside44]

Clueless

No one reads anything.

 

[pokercuse08]

A lot of people are still analyzing this based on past conditions. Nobody is adding Boston College for the Boston TV market. Cable is dying, and DTC/streaming is the future.

That's good news for Syracuse, since we're basically a bubble team that punches above its market size in viewership.