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

[SURules]

No Baseball or Softball...but they have Equestrian.

They have men’s and women’s golf. I really wish we supported golf teams but we have a really good field hockey team and SMU doesn’t field a field hockey team.

 

[CuseTG2003]

I know that football drives the bus, and hoops is great, but I’d like to see the ACC absolutely own lacrosse and soccer. I don’t give a hoot about baseball or hockey.

Lacrosse is one of the fastest growing sports in the country and has been for awhile.

 

[shantydaze]

It would be interesting to see how non-football sports would be treated under such a model. I have to assume that both the Pac and MWC would both still be in existence for non-football sports. Would all sports be part of the relegation model or would there be a permanent basketball/non-revenue sports split between the conferences? It would such of the Wazzu women's volleyball team to win the Pac conference championship only to be relegated to the Mountain West the next year because of the football team's failures.

 

[HRE Otto IV]

It would be interesting to see how non-football sports would be treated under such a model. I have to assume that both the Pac and MWC would both still be in existence for non-football sports. Would all sports be part of the relegation model or would there be a permanent basketball/non-revenue sports split between the conferences? It would such of the Wazzu women's volleyball team to win the Pac conference championship only to be relegated to the Mountain West the next year because of the football team's failures.

I think the relegation would be for FB only. So let's say the merged all sports PAC/MWC gets $9M per team per year. The FB schools in the PAC (premier) get $12M and the teams in the MWC get $6M.

With 14 schools I would think you go 7 in each league, with bottom 3 PAC being relegated and top 3 MWC being promoted.

So by last year's records this year would look like:

PAC
Oregon State, Washington State, Boise State, Fresno State, San Diego State, Wyoming, Utah State

MWC
San Jose State, Air Force, UNLV, Colorado State, Hawaii, Nevada, New Mexico

 

[FRANKIEFAN]

I know that football drives the bus, and hoops is great, but I’d like to see the ACC absolutely own lacrosse and soccer. I don’t give a hoot about baseball or hockey.

They already do soccer NC last year and in Lax the top 3 teams were ACC schools and #4 wasn't close.

 

[WoadBlue]

They have men’s and women’s golf. I really wish we supported golf teams but we have a really good field hockey team and SMU doesn’t field a field hockey team.

Field Hockey, like lacrosse, is very much associated with Elite schools in the East. So, SMU should be willing to embrace FH after it has added lacrosse. Use those sports as a way to help mark itself as the TX school most like the elite schools of the East Coast.

 

[WoadBlue]

I know that football drives the bus, and hoops is great, but I’d like to see the ACC absolutely own lacrosse and soccer. I don’t give a hoot about baseball or hockey.

Top level college baseball is very good and also very fun to watch. But Syracuse should not try to get a team back. It is much easier done in a warm area of the country that has an early spring

 

[oldpinepoint]

Top level college baseball is very good and also very fun to watch.

Come on now, that’s just crazy

 

[ECE '76]

Field Hockey, like lacrosse, is very much associated with Elite schools in the East. So, SMU should be willing to embrace FH after it has added lacrosse. Use those sports as a way to help mark itself as the TX school most like the elite schools of the East Coast.

Speaking of field hockey, I remember watching the Stanford team practice way back when I was a grad student there. Stanford and Cal are already playing the sport in an east coast league. They are both members of America East for their field hockey programs, along with Cal-Davis. Looking at Stanford's field hockey schedule is an example of how non-revenue sports will probaby be scheduled in the ACC. Stanford is on a quarter system, so they play a lot of games before the Fall quarter starts in late September (26th).

They play league games against teams like Bryant, Vermont, UMass Lowell, UAlbany, Maine, and UNH. Their non-league games are also east coast schools and/or B1G.

Field Hockey 2023

Field Hockey 2023

gostanford.com

 

[HRE Otto IV]

Interesting article. Looks like Texas and Oklahoma are getting out for free? So much for the B12 GOR and B12 exit fee.

If true, they are forgoing B12 revenue for next year, which makes no sense. They won't be in the conference! Why would they get paid? The B12 got completely hosed.

Also the 4 team addition this year means payouts are divided by 14 vs 10, which is less money for all the schools. So if they paid out $40M last year, this year teams will only get $33M instead (the 4 new teams are only getting $18M and not a full share).

And why would the B12 count that reduced $7M as part of the exit agreement when it is applied to every team?

Also interesting Texas/Oklahoma will miss out on most of the SEC money in year 1. In the ACC, SMU will give up money for several years and Stanford/Cal are taking reduced shares for several years. Same as Oregon/Washington to the B18. But in the B12? They had to give a $2.5M bonus to Colorado to get them to leave the PAC! That should tell you about where the B12 stands.

Yormark isn't looking to be the genius some have made him out to be.

 

[richmondcuse03]

Interesting article. Looks like Texas and Oklahoma are getting out for free? So much for the B12 GOR and B12 exit fee.

If true, they are forgoing B12 revenue for next year, which makes no sense. They won't be in the conference! Why would they get paid? The B12 got completely hosed.

Also the 4 team addition this year means payouts are divided by 14 vs 10, which is less money for all the schools. So if they paid out $40M last year, this year teams will only get $33M instead (the 4 new teams are only getting $18M and not a full share).

And why would the B12 count that reduced $7M as part of the exit agreement when it is applied to every team?

Also interesting Texas/Oklahoma will miss out on most of the SEC money in year 1. In the ACC, SMU will give up money for several years and Stanford/Cal are taking reduced shares for several years. Same as Oregon/Washington to the B18. But in the B12? They had to give a $2.5M bonus to Colorado to get them to leave the PAC! That should tell you about where the B12 stands.

Yormark isn't looking to be the genius some have made him out to be.

One AD notes they got 65% of what the original buyout would have been under the GOR.

I suspect ESPN/TV, as the story alludes to, stepped in with some money to facilitate this move and make it cleaner for them and to avoid any litigation.

 

[HRE Otto IV]

One AD notes they got 65% of what the original buyout would have been under the GOR.

I suspect ESPN/TV, as the story alludes to, stepped in with some money to facilitate this move and make it cleaner for them and to avoid any litigation.

The B12 is playing games with numbers. Texas and Oklahoma were supposed to pay a $160M combined exit fee ($40M x 2 years x 2 teams). The payouts are now $33M and not $40M. So the B12 is getting $66M instead of $160M (41.25%).

ESPN isn't reducing the total value for next season. So the B12 gets an extra $50M next year that they wouldn't have. But that is being paid by ESPN and not Texas nor Oklahoma, who are both paying and forgoing nothing from the B12. That seems insane.

 

[FRANKIEFAN]

Come on now, that’s just crazy

Ping ping ping. College bb and softball is awful I wish theyd push back the lax season so it could get the tv coverage their tournament have when NHL and NBA are almost over with few games left and there’s nothing to air.

 

[HRE Otto IV]

Actually it seems even worse for the B12.

I believe the current TV deal was originally about $25M per team. The B12 paid out from other income about $15M per team, so about $40M total. Adding the 4 new teams reduced that to about $33M for the old teams, while the new teams get about $18M.

ESPN/FOX are not paying a pro rata for the 4 new teams in 2023 and 2024. They will not reduce the payout in 2024 when Texas and Oklahoma leave.

So ESPN doesn't pay a dime more. FOX doesn't pay a dime more. Texas doesn't pay a dime. Oklahoma doesn't pay a dime.

The roughly $65M that would have gone to Texas and Oklahoma gets distributed to the leftover 8 teams. So they get about $8M each and takes them to about $40M total, which is where they were last year (2022) anyway.

So in the end there was no buyout for one year of the GOR and there was no exit fee.


Which all goes back to my point before. ESPN moved 2 schools from the B12 to the SEC. Since they did not reduce the total TV value, there was no GOR buyout. When ESPN can afford it, they can do the same with the ACC Tier 1/2 TV rights. The question is at what point can they afford it, not if the GOR can be broken.

The bigger issue is the ACCN. That plus the 3 year revenue exit fee, will need to be negotiated. I think the ACC would settle for withholding one year's revenue. So if a team wanted to leave for the SEC, they would have no conference revenue for their last year in the ACC and likely reduced revenue for their 1st year in the SEC. Maybe $100M in lost revenue but no actual payment.

If the SEC wanted an ACC team (they might have no interest), and ESPN can afford to do so (can they?), the GOR will not get in the way.

 

[qdawgg]

Actually it seems even worse for the B12.

I believe the current TV deal was originally about $25M per team. The B12 paid out from other income about $15M per team, so about $40M total. Adding the 4 new teams reduced that to about $33M for the old teams, while the new teams get about $18M.

ESPN/FOX are not paying a pro rata for the 4 new teams in 2023 and 2024. They will not reduce the payout in 2024 when Texas and Oklahoma leave.

So ESPN doesn't pay a dime more. FOX doesn't pay a dime more. Texas doesn't pay a dime. Oklahoma doesn't pay a dime.

The roughly $65M that would have gone to Texas and Oklahoma gets distributed to the leftover 8 teams. So they get about $8M each and takes them to about $40M total, which is where they were last year (2022) anyway.

So in the end there was no buyout for one year of the GOR and there was no exit fee.


Which all goes back to my point before. ESPN moved 2 schools from the B12 to the SEC. Since they did not reduce the total TV value, there was no GOR buyout. When ESPN can afford it, they can do the same with the ACC Tier 1/2 TV rights. The question is at what point can they afford it, not if the GOR can be broken.

The bigger issue is the ACCN. That plus the 3 year revenue exit fee, will need to be negotiated. I think the ACC would settle for withholding one year's revenue. So if a team wanted to leave for the SEC, they would have no conference revenue for their last year in the ACC and likely reduced revenue for their 1st year in the SEC. Maybe $100M in lost revenue but no actual payment.

If the SEC wanted an ACC team (they might have no interest), and ESPN can afford to do so (can they?), the GOR will not get in the way.

Nobody is arguing the GOR is going to prevent a team leaving when there’s a year or even maybe 1-3 yrs left. But nobody is leaving right now or they would have already. The GOR has prevented that.

 

[TexanMark]

Speaking of field hockey, I remember watching the Stanford team practice way back when I was a grad student there. Stanford and Cal are already playing the sport in an east coast league. They are both members of America East for their field hockey programs, along with Cal-Davis. Looking at Stanford's field hockey schedule is an example of how non-revenue sports will probaby be scheduled in the ACC. Stanford is on a quarter system, so they play a lot of games before the Fall quarter starts in late September (26th).

They play league games against teams like Bryant, Vermont, UMass Lowell, UAlbany, Maine, and UNH. Their non-league games are also east coast schools and/or B1G.

Field Hockey 2023

Field Hockey 2023

gostanford.com

Might as well add UC Davis as an associate member to keep CalFord happy

 

[EnviroSciGuy]

Might as well add UC Davis as an associate member to keep CalFord happy

Great ag school.

 

[TexanMark]

Great ag school.

Exc school overall but super liberal which ain't me lol

I taught 3 years down the highway at Sac St...I had UCDavis cadets in my class. They usually were the smartest kids in my class.

 

[EnviroSciGuy]

Exc school overall but super liberal which ain't me lol

I taught 3 years down the highway at Sac St...I had UCDavis cadets in my class. They usually were the smartest kids in my class.

Yep, very strong academics. Not much name recognition back east unless you have a connection or work in some of their specialty areas, but they are a top-notch institution on the west coast. Their football team is often pretty strong at the FCS level as well. I think they've taken down (former) PAC-12 opponents in therecent past.

 

[sutomcat]

Yep, very strong academics. Not much name recognition back east unless you have a connection or work in some of their specialty areas, but they are a top-notch institution on the west coast. Their football team is often pretty strong at the FCS level as well. I think they've taken down (former) PAC-12 opponents in therecent past.

The Good Doctor approves of this post!

 

[javadoc]

Great ag school.

Mondavi arts center is sweet. As is the food science and wine scholarship there, with such a benefactor.

 

[Hoo's That]

Saw this on another board I visit as a proposed scheduling system for the new ACC. It's a 4-4-4-4 system, 4 permanent opponents and 3 slates of 4 opponents that rotate after home-and-home. Each team would get to play every other in a 6-year cycle. This keeps the conference schedule at 8 games, so the teams with SEC rivals don't lose an OOC game. IT IS NOT PODS, One poster proposed a swap so that NC State gets Clemson and Wake gets FSU to keep the Textile Bowl going. Going to this system also would allow the ACC to keep from having to choose whether UVa or NCSU is UNC's second permanent opponent in 2-7-7 and the resumption of the Duke-Ga Tech. match-up which had been continuous since 1937 until this year.

UVA: VPI, Ga Tech, Cal, UNC
UNC: Carolina 3, UVA
NC St: Carolina 3, FSU
Wake: Carolina 3, Clemson
Duke: Carolina 3, Ga Tech
Ga Tech: Clemson, Duke, UVA, Stan
Clemson: Ga Tech, Miami, FSU, Wake
FSU: Clemson, Miami, NC St, SMU
VPI: UVA, Pitt, Lou, Miami
Miami: FSU, VPI, Clemson, Syracuse
Syracuse: Pitt, BC, Miami, Stan
Pitt: BC, VPI, Cuse, Lou
BC: Lou, Cuse, Pitt, Cal
Lou: Pitt, VPI, SMU, BC
Stanford: Cal, Ga Tech, SMU, Cuse
Cal: Stan, UVA, SMU, BC
SMU: Cal, Stan, FSU, Lou

 

[JRHEETER]

Saw this on another board I visit as a proposed scheduling system for the new ACC. It's a 4-4-4-4 system, 4 permanent opponents and 3 slates of 4 opponents that rotate after home-and-home. Each team would get to play every other in a 6-year cycle. This keeps the conference schedule at 8 games, so the teams with SEC rivals don't lose an OOC game. IT IS NOT PODS, One poster proposed a swap so that NC State gets Clemson and Wake gets FSU to keep the Textile Bowl going. Going to this system also would allow the ACC to keep from having to choose whether UVa or NCSU is UNC's second permanent opponent in 2-7-7 and the resumption of the Duke-Ga Tech. match-up which had been continuous since 1937 until this year.

UVA: VPI, Ga Tech, Cal, UNC
UNC: Carolina 3, UVA
NC St: Carolina 3, FSU
Wake: Carolina 3, Clemson
Duke: Carolina 3, Ga Tech
Ga Tech: Clemson, Duke, UVA, Stan
Clemson: Tech, Miami, FSU, Wake
FSU: Clemson, Miami, NC St, SMU
VPI: UVA, Pitt, Lou, Miami
Miami: FSU, VPI, Clemson, Syracuse
Syracuse: Pitt, BC, Miami, Stan
Pitt: BC, VPI, Cuse, Lou
BC: Lou, Cuse, Pitt, Cal
Lou: Pitt, VPI, SMU, BC
Stanford: Cal, Ga Tech, SMU, Cuse
Cal: Stan, UVA, SMU, BC
SMU: Cal, Stan, FSU, Lou

We have a winner

 

[CousCuse]

Cuse must get SMU.

 

[CuseCactus]

I’d LOVE getting Stanford or Cal.