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

[TheCusian]

The NFL has roughly equal footing financially between teams (at least through TV money). They agree to the terms and are competitive on the field.

CFB has unequal footing financially and are competitive on the field and off. It creates a weird situation where teams that should be business partners are at each others throats.

No leadership, rutterless ship

 

[oldpinepoint]

Legally I don't know how any conference can cut a school, absent very specific criteria being enacted.

The Big East enacted an attendance criteria, and that was why Temple got the heave-ho.

I guess the B1G could try to enact something specifically targeted at Rutgers or Maryland, but I don't see how that could work.

Absent that, any school "cut" would immediately file a multi-billion dollar lawsuit.

Seems to me the only way to "cut the dead weight" is for a brand new league to form that only invites certain schools. And that would require cooperation between the SEC and B1G that doesn't seem possible.

Well a contract has to end, I would assume at the conclusion if they said hey Rutgers, you suck we don’t want you in the next contract then there is nothing to stop them from doing it. But the world needs ditch diggers too so I think Rutgers will be staying

 

[javadoc]

Based on that chart, Syracuse is currently outspending Kansas State. It's all relative to which state schools you're talking about. We're never going to outspend Florida State, but can we outspend NC State? They spend like 5% more than BC, who you think we should be outspending. How about Baylor? They're private. Syracuse is slightly bigger. Baylor's endowment is $2B, ours is $1.79B. Outspending them would get us on level footing with Virginia Tech.

Why are we focusing on spending money as the measurable goal?

Should we be spending $5M more? On what?

This seems like a silly "KEEP UP WITH THE JONES" situation. When spending in and of itself is the goal, money will find its way to black holes.

 

[pokercuse08]

Why are we focusing on spending money as the measurable goal?

Should we be spending $5M more? On what?

This seems like a silly "KEEP UP WITH THE JONES" situation. When spending in and of itself is the goal, money will find its way to black holes.

Without being closely involved with the program it's hard to say, but for starters, we could have spent what it took to keep our coordinators. Holding onto White over Nebraska would have been tough, but losing Anae to a conference rival is proof we're not paying enough.

Then whatever level we can aspire to in terms of spending, we should have facilities on par with programs spending to that level.

 

[rrlbees]

I don’t get those numbers tossed out in those charts and what they include. Here’s an article from 2 years ago. It’s broken down by sport.

Syracuse reports spending more money than any school in 2 sports. How does each stack up?

A look at how much Syracuse reports spending on each sport.

www.syracuse.com

 

[All4SU]

Without being closely involved with the program it's hard to say, but for starters, we could have spent what it took to keep our coordinators. Holding onto White over Nebraska would have been tough, but losing Anae to a conference rival is proof we're not paying enough.

Then whatever level we can aspire to in terms of spending, we should have facilities on par with programs spending to that level.

Maybe he didn’t like snow. Or maybe he didn’t like HCDB. Or maybe he doesn’t like Wegmans. No way to know it was money that made Anae jump.

 

[qdawgg]

Maybe he didn’t like snow. Or maybe he didn’t like HCDB. Or maybe he doesn’t like Wegmans. No way to know it was money that made Anae jump.

I’d rather spend the $ on Beck anyway. Either way, it doesn’t matter how much extra $ we could have spent, every school loses coaches frequently. The goal is to replace the coaches you will lose with quality replacements. Because you’re going to lose coaches no matter how much extra $ you throw at that issue.

 

[Cuse181]

Without being closely involved with the program it's hard to say, but for starters, we could have spent what it took to keep our coordinators. Holding onto White over Nebraska would have been tough, but losing Anae to a conference rival is proof we're not paying enough.

Then whatever level we can aspire to in terms of spending, we should have facilities on par with programs spending to that level.

Who knows if Dino wanted to keep anae? There was a number of times it looked like they were clashing on the sidelines, the FSU game comes to mind.

 

[Scooch]

Well a contract has to end, I would assume at the conclusion if they said hey Rutgers, you suck we don’t want you in the next contract then there is nothing to stop them from doing it. But the world needs ditch diggers too so I think Rutgers will be staying

Contracts are with each conference's media partner. To the best of my knowledge, there is no "end" to a school's affiliation with a conference unless they choose to exit. There's no renewal or anything like that.

People keep suggesting that a conference can "cut dead weight" when their TV deal ends, but that's not at all how it works.

 

[Cusefan69]

Without being closely involved with the program it's hard to say, but for starters, we could have spent what it took to keep our coordinators. Holding onto White over Nebraska would have been tough, but losing Anae to a conference rival is proof we're not paying enough.

Then whatever level we can aspire to in terms of spending, we should have facilities on par with programs spending to that level.

Who says we "lost " him?

 

[djorange1989]

Who knows if Dino wanted to keep anae? There was a number of times it looked like they were clashing on the sidelines, the FSU game comes to mind.

Yeah it felt like the plan was always to have Beck take over, and after one year of Dino and Anae together the timetable of the plan was moved up

 

[Chip]

Contracts are with each conference's media partner. To the best of my knowledge, there is no "end" to a school's affiliation with a conference unless they choose to exit. There's no renewal or anything like that.

People keep suggesting that a conference can "cut dead weight" when their TV deal ends, but that's not at all how it works.

You can keep telling me that, but I'm not giving up!

Down with Rutgers and down with homework!

 

[SU68]

Syracuse had years of neglect in the AD. We sucked in facilities and salaries. Now we are investing in facilities and will invest more in coaches when construction is done. If we had done it the other way, well-paid coaches would have been trying to recruit to substandard facilities.

 

[WoadBlue]

The B1G network has less distribution than the ACCN. They partnered with Fox and Fox does not have nearly the power than Disney/ABC/ESPN has to get networks added to cable packages. Last I knew, SECN was tops throughout the country with ACCN a close second,.

If the ACCN expands to Texas and California, I would assume this might change.

Stanford alums have major power across CA, nd perhaps especially in Big Tech. So I expect that we would see the ACCN all across CA - remember Berkeley is THE flagship campus of that its system. And things U Cal Berkeley matter a great deal across the state too.

SMU alum power is concentrated across the DFW TV market, but SMU grads also have pretty good clout in Austin. The ACCN could pick up some nice new change in TX too.

 

[sutomcat]

Stanford alums have major power across CA, nd perhaps especially in Big Tech. So I expect that we would see the ACCN all across CA - remember Berkeley is THE flagship campus of that its system. And things U Cal Berkeley matter a great deal across the state too.

SMU alum power is concentrated across the DFW TV market, but SMU grads also have pretty good clout in Austin. The ACCN could pick up some nice new change in TX too.

Even with cable eroding, carriage fee increases in the two biggest states in the union are significant. $50 or $100 million for the conference each year doesn’t close the gap but it is a lot better than nothing.

Do you foresee any circumstances where UNC changes their expansion vote?

 

[rottweiler44]

Why are we focusing on spending money as the measurable goal?

Should we be spending $5M more? On what?

This seems like a silly "KEEP UP WITH THE JONES" situation. When spending in and of itself is the goal, money will find its way to black holes.

According to the Athletics website Syracuse maintains only 7 Mens teams and 12 Womens. Notably no Baseball, Swimming, Wrestling on the Men's side. UNC maintains 12 Mens teams and 14 Womens...these differences will add up fast in creating the disparity

 

[pokercuse08]

I’d rather spend the $ on Beck anyway. Either way, it doesn’t matter how much extra $ we could have spent, every school loses coaches frequently. The goal is to replace the coaches you will lose with quality replacements. Because you’re going to lose coaches no matter how much extra $ you throw at that issue.

The first goal should be to lose them as rarely as possible, the second goal should be to never lose them to parallel moves. The third goal is to replace them with the best replacement possible.

Who knows if Dino wanted to keep anae? There was a number of times it looked like they were clashing on the sidelines, the FSU game comes to mind.

Maybe that's the case in this instance, but it's not like losing assistant coaches has been uncommon. The link someone posted showed 'Cuse being 7th in the ACC and in the mid 40s nationally in football spending, and number 6 in basketball spending. Contrast the historic turnover of the football staff to the basketball staff, and you see quite a difference. Obviously having Boeheim was key to that, and he was willing to take less money to stay here because he was a rare breed, but I think the point remains on the assistants.

 

[pokercuse08]

According to the Athletics website Syracuse maintains only 7 Mens teams and 12 Womens. Notably no Baseball, Swimming, Wrestling on the Men's side. UNC maintains 12 Mens teams and 14 Womens...these differences will add up fast in creating the disparity

That probably accounts for $15-20M. But there's still the higher tuition at Syracuse which is money we're "spending" but not really spending, which counts towards the total. So the extra sports at UNC vs the higher tuition at Syracuse probably means the gap is about $8-13M narrower than the topline numbers would indicate.

It's still a $25-30M gap.

 

[HRE Otto IV]

Contracts are with each conference's media partner. To the best of my knowledge, there is no "end" to a school's affiliation with a conference unless they choose to exit. There's no renewal or anything like that.

People keep suggesting that a conference can "cut dead weight" when their TV deal ends, but that's not at all how it works.

No one is getting kicked out. But if paying players and no classes becomes a thing, would certain schools leave?

Even without paying players I do think Vanderbilt would consider leaving the SEC for the right price. The academic side has to hate being in the SEC and rather be in the ACC. Heck they disbanded their athletic department years ago. They cannot compete in the SEC.

So if they came to a mutual agreement would the SEC give them a Spirits of St Louis type of deal? If they got a 7th of an individual SEC payout each year, wouldn't both parties be content? That is like $10M a year.

This is assuming the ACC would take them as #18, which I think would happen. Vandy can play their two main rivals OOC. Playing an 8 game ACC schedule, Tennessee, and Ole Miss every year is still easier than playing an 8 game SEC schedule and one P4 OOC game. They can be competitive in the ACC.

 

[Scooch]

No one is getting kicked out. But if paying players and no classes becomes a thing, would certain schools leave?

Even without paying players I do think Vanderbilt would consider leaving the SEC for the right price. The academic side has to hate being in the SEC and rather be in the ACC. Heck they disbanded their athletic department years ago. They cannot compete in the SEC.

So if they came to a mutual agreement would the SEC give them a Spirits of St Louis type of deal? If they got a 7th of an individual SEC payout each year, wouldn't both parties be content? That is like $10M a year.

This is assuming the ACC would take them as #18, which I think would happen. Vandy can play their two main rivals OOC. Playing an 8 game ACC schedule, Tennessee, and Ole Miss every year is still easier than playing an 8 game SEC schedule and one P4 OOC game. They can be competitive in the ACC.

I was at Vanderbilt last year, for a game against Ole Miss.

They lovvvvvvvve being in the SEC.

For them football is just a loss leader so that all of their other sports can compete at the very highest level of the best conference in the country. They're not willingly leaving the SEC. Period. Over.

 

[Scooch]

Even with cable eroding, carriage fee increases in the two biggest states in the union are significant. $50 or $100 million for the conference each year doesn’t close the gap but it is a lot better than nothing.

Do you foresee any circumstances where UNC changes their expansion vote?

The ACCN is not making $50-100M from adding Stanford, Cal and SMU. Nowhere close. Sorry.

 

[OrangeXtreme]

 

[HRE Otto IV]

I was at Vanderbilt last year, for a game against Ole Miss.

They lovvvvvvvve being in the SEC.

For them football is just a loss leader so that all of their other sports can compete at the very highest level of the best conference in the country. They're not willingly leaving the SEC. Period. Over.

Ole Miss is a huge rivalry game.

You are probably right, but it is hard to ignore how bad they have been in football. And how much their academic side must hate being with many of the SEC schools.

Since 1959 they have had four non losing SEC seasons. In those season they went 4-2, 4-4, 5-3, 4-4. So only 2 winning SEC seasons. Mizzou has had more SEC success and they have only been in the SEC since 2012.

 

[Scooch]

Ole Miss is a huge rivalry game.

You are probably right, but it is hard to ignore how bad they have been in football. And how much their academic side must hate being with many of the SEC schools.

Since 1959 they have had four non losing SEC seasons. In those season they went 4-2, 4-4, 5-3, 4-4. So only 2 winning SEC seasons. Mizzou has had more SEC success and they have only been in the SEC since 2012.

Why do you assume the academics there hate being in the SEC? There are many excellent schools in that conference.

There are academics at every school that hate big time sports, period. There certainly are at SU. Has nothing to do with the conference.

 

[Bayside44]

Why do you assume the academics there hate being in the SEC? There are many excellent schools in that conference.

There are academics at every school that hate big time sports, period. There certainly are at SU. Has nothing to do with the conference.

Yeah that’s kind of nutty. SEC schools now are chock full of honor roll kids from the northeast and mid Atlantic now.