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

[Hoo's That]

One thing he doesn't cover is that, if players are held to be employees, then you can have a union(s). That's not necessarily a totally bad thing, since school/conferences can negotiate things like limits on NIL craziness with a union which they couldn't with individual players. The NCAA would likely have a diminishing role.

Under Federal labor law you can't require state entities to negotiate with unions, so all state schools would be exempt. That's been said since the Northwestern case allowed players unions.

 

[Hoo's That]

How the hell do we pay out less than the Big12? ESPN has to straighten that out.

Our board had a post that the Big XII figure has been debunked.

 

[cusefan88]

This stuff sucks. I just want to play Pitt BC WVU annually in football and basketball. UConn, Gtown, Nova, and St. John's in bball.

Maybe someday sanity will prevail and regions will matter again.

 

[HtownOrange]

I agree with you that the ACC deal isn't that bad. But, relative to B1G, SEC, and even new BIG12 deal, it's clearly behind, and that won't change. There's too much football dead weight in the ACC, in an era, where football is king. Syracuse is part of that problem, along with Duke, BC, Wake, others. Those programs that are desirable to the B1G and SEC WILL get poached, that's been proven beyond a doubt. Is it proactive for SU to not look to get off the lounge deck of the Titanic; preferablely before our toes feel the chill of the North Atlantic. Sitting back and collecting a check, until the conference dies, might not be the way to go here.

When did I say SU should collect a check? When did panic become a legitimate strategy in any organization?

SU should and does look our for SU's best interest. Dumping the ACC (which has demonstrably been decided is virtually impossible at this time) is not a choice. As such, SU is making the best of the situation, improving their value. Recall, when SU joined the ACC, nobody knew this was coming, SU does not operate in the full visibility of everyone. They were also on the B1G's target list. When SU and Pitt jumped, the B1G had to react and got stuck with Rutgers. (Kind of defeats everyone's claims that the superconferences will not consider bottom feeders, but that argument is from others).

Post hard numbers and prove jumping ship right now is the best option, Factor in all variables: Exit fees, loss of broadcasts rights, compare the cost of purchasing back the broadcast rights, which conferences will take SU right now, ESPN's rights to SU's broadcasts, playing in front of SU alumni and non-alumn fans (like me) v. Iowa, Lubbock, et al., travel, new costs, etc.

 

[Cuse'91]

When did I say SU should collect a check? When did panic become a legitimate strategy in any organization?

SU should and does look our for SU's best interest. Dumping the ACC (which has demonstrably been decided is virtually impossible at this time) is not a choice. As such, SU is making the best of the situation, improving their value. Recall, when SU joined the ACC, nobody knew this was coming, SU does not operate in the full visibility of everyone. They were also on the B1G's target list. When SU and Pitt jumped, the B1G had to react and got stuck with Rutgers. (Kind of defeats everyone's claims that the superconferences will not consider bottom feeders, but that argument is from others).

Post hard numbers and prove jumping ship right now is the best option, Factor in all variables: Exit fees, loss of broadcasts rights, compare the cost of purchasing back the broadcast rights, which conferences will take SU right now, ESPN's rights to SU's broadcasts, playing in front of SU alumni and non-alumn fans (like me) v. Iowa, Lubbock, et al., travel, new costs, etc.

I, personally feel, the ACC will breakup, that is an inevitability. Some might argue that isn't the case. Really, I would rather have us work as a block with Pitt, BC, and perhaps others, to create the best from a less than ideal situation. But, the ACC expansion, proved we can't count on others to not look after only themselves(e.g. Boston College). There is no end game for football relevance that involves only a NorthEast regional conference; we have to be a part of some type of national entity. BIG12 has the advantages of geography, and actual football prowess, even without UT and OK. All we have to do is look at the West Virginia model. It's not like they wanted to be a sole outlier in a travel nightmare conference; they had no choice. At least, we will have some company with us when it happens to us.

 

[WoadBlue]

SU athletics generally are a positive cash flow returning money to the university most years.

I never said SU should not look out for the university. I believe the situation is not near as dire as the inter web talkers. Most don’t look at the facts.

The ACC deal was good when it happened, it is meh today. However, the ACC pays out more than the projections, has look-ins, and key schools are improving their sport. Factor in the B1G shares gate revenue puffing up their payouts and that they will not start at $80million annually, the situation is not near as bad. Throw in ESPN has invested heavily in the ACC (buying the broadcast rights), in the ACCN, has no incentive to destroying a cash cow nor has incentive to allow profitable partners to go make money for competitors, and you see the ACC has some leverage.

Does this equate to the same payout? No. Though it does give one time. The GOR is more costly to buyout now than it will be in 5 years or 10 years. Maybe then the break even analysis is viable, especially with SU sports performance trending up.

The issue is that panicking over internet loud mouths who don’t use facts or at best cherry pick facts is not a sound financial plan. Top investors don’t chase movers, they project the movers over long terms and buy them when the time is right. Look at the top people in any field, they usually don’t follow the crowd.

But face what the ACC has that is a drag down all the time. WE only have 2 schools with truly large football fans bases. Making that worse, we have the smallest schools in a Major conference and the most private schools among Major conferences. WE have only 2 state flagship universities (2 and a half if you buy the FSU claim about itself), only 3 state land grant schools. All those things mean the ACC will always be held down. Winning can change none of that.

So what do we need done: Fewer small privates and more larger state schools, especially flagships and/or land grants, but also large as FSU is large, and located on. state with a lot of football history and football passion.

Specifically what would I do along those lines? I would want ESPN to tell me how much more we woqpuod get by dropping Wake and BC and replace them with WVU and Cincinnati. The fact is that for virtually 10-0% of games every season, both WVU and Cincy will draw more viewers, up to a million more, per game than will Wake and BC against the same opponents.

I now think that if something like that cannot be done to get the ACC more money, then the ACC as we know it is headed right toward death.

 

[sutomcat]

Our board had a post that the Big XII figure has been debunked.

Yes, ESPN made sure the new B12 deal gave those schools less money than the ACC. And the ACC has a network and the B12 does not. The ACC will make more money than the B12, even if they add some middling schools from the P12.

 

[kcsu]

But face what the ACC has that is a drag down all the time. WE only have 2 schools with truly large football fans bases. Making that worse, we have the smallest schools in a Major conference and the most private schools among Major conferences. WE have only 2 state flagship universities (2 and a half if you buy the FSU claim about itself), only 3 state land grant schools. All those things mean the ACC will always be held down. Winning can change none of that.

So what do we need done: Fewer small privates and more larger state schools, especially flagships and/or land grants, but also large as FSU is large, and located on. state with a lot of football history and football passion.

Specifically what would I do along those lines? I would want ESPN to tell me how much more we woqpuod get by dropping Wake and BC and replace them with WVU and Cincinnati. The fact is that for virtually 10-0% of games every season, both WVU and Cincy will draw more viewers, up to a million more, per game than will Wake and BC against the same opponents.

I now think that if something like that cannot be done to get the ACC more money, then the ACC as we know it is headed right toward death.

No its not. It will remain in 3rd position.

 

[Cuse'91]

Yes, ESPN made sure the new B12 deal gave those schools less money than the ACC. And the ACC has a network and the B12 does not. The ACC will make more money than the B12, even if they add some middling schools from the P12.

Even if that is true, that's assuming status quo. But, Big12 has already lost all of its "desirable schools," e.g. Nebraska, A&M, Texas, Oklahoma; ACC is in line to be seriously raided. Also, Big12 will negotiate again, before ACC deal ends.

 

[sutomcat]

Even if that is true, that's assuming status quo. But, Big12 has already lost all of its "desirable schools," e.g. Nebraska, A&M, Texas, Oklahoma; ACC is in line to be seriously raided. Also, Big12 will negotiate again, before ACC deal ends.

It Is true. You were incorrect. The new B12 contract is a 6 year deal that ends in 2030-31. The B12 schools will be getting less money than the ACC schools at least until then.

Maybe you might be right sometime in 2031.

 

[kcsu]

It Is true. You were incorrect. The new B12 contract is a 6 year deal that ends in 2030-31. The B12 schools will be getting less money than the ACC schools at least until then.

Maybe you might be right sometime in 2031.

Spot on and ill add that if the ACC went lets say 10 years as is the value at the time of negotiations will be significant. Streaming will own eyes by than and between Amazon, Apple ect... plus Espn the bidding for the ACC will significantly close the gap with the Big and SEC

 

[Cuse'91]

I guess we have to hope everyone is stuck on this train until 2036; and, then deal with whatever happens after that.

 

[WoadBlue]

No its not. It will remain in 3rd position.

3rd that was a long way off is one thing. 3rd that is much closer is another thing entirely. If we can get to the latter 3rd, we are fine.

 

[TerryD]

It don't think anyone imagines ND doing anything against its self interest at this point. Just as the BigEast and ACC wouldn't have allowed ND BB and Olympic sports into their leagues, without benefit to themselves. Fairly clear now, to all those involved, to not expect ND to ride in on a white horse for anyone.

Of course not. ND signs contracts with those conferences, then fulfils the terms. Nothing more.

The Big East had 15 other members and the ACC has 14. Both existed well before ND joined them.

For some reason, the cause of the demise of these conferences is not the mismanagement and lack of eyeballs among those other members, but is ND's fault.

 

[Cuse'91]

No chance that any current ACC schools would backstab us. Looking at you Louisville, Boston College...

 

[DoctorBombay]

It's blowhards like fsu and Miami that are leading the implosion charge. If the ACC sticks it out and approaches ESPN as a unified front, they can maybe come out of this in pretty good shape.
Greed and impatience has killed many a business in the past, and will do so in the future. It's just a part of doing business. We need more pragmatism and less blogger speculation and sensationalism.

 

[JimBoston]

Yes, ESPN made sure the new B12 deal gave those schools less money than the ACC. And the ACC has a network and the B12 does not. The ACC will make more money than the B12, even if they add some middling schools from the P12.

The ACC got a bump from the ACCN and another bump from Comcast putting the ACCN on their systems. Now, the ACCN subs will go into a secular decline just like ESPN is in a LT sub decline. ESPN is looking into streaming ESPN, but it would cost consumers anywhere from $30 to $50 per month depending on which ESPN channels (ACCN, SECN, ESPN, ESPN2, ESPNU,...) would be included and how much consumers would pay. The question for the ACCN is would consumers pay for it if it becomes a streaming service because that is coming?

 

[All4SU]

Can we please play this for the ADs, networks, NCAA, SEC/Big10, ACC, boosters with bags of cash, as well as the fans who have lost their way…

JUST STOP IT (Click Here)

 

[baggerbob]

No chance that any current ACC schools would backstab us. Looking at you Louisville, Boston College...

Boston College already did to get in the ACC.

 

[TheCusian]

I think I speak for all Syracuse fans and maybe all CFB fans when I say I’m tired of hearing what ND fans think about just about anything related to conferences.

 

[HouClone]

Yes, ESPN made sure the new B12 deal gave those schools less money than the ACC. And the ACC has a network and the B12 does not. The ACC will make more money than the B12, even if they add some middling schools from the P12.

Yeah, the ACC has a network but ESPN is only paying $17 million for ESPN. ACC probably gets another $12 million from the ACCN which will grow upwards with Comcast on board.

The Big 12 existing media deal is $28 million from ESPN/Fox. The difference is the Big 12 received about $14.6 million in championship games, bowls, and NCAA basketball shares. The Big 12 only had to split with 10 teams. Plus, the Big 12 has been the best college basketball conference with the highest NCAA basketball payouts. Thus, that is why the Big 12 has been $3-$4 million+ ahead of the ACC for years.

Going forward, the ACC will receive more money from the ACCN. But the Big 12's new media deal, even without Oklahoma and Texas, is an increase to $31.6 million each. The conference will have more mouths to feed at 12 schools so the post season will be less. I would say the post season football payout will be less with 2 large brands leaving but UT has been a joke for years and OU was a joke last season.

Thus, I see it being close going forward in total payout for the ACC and Big 12. But the Big 12 rights comes up in 2031 so they will get another boost then.

 

[HtownOrange]

But face what the ACC has that is a drag down all the time. WE only have 2 schools with truly large football fans bases. Making that worse, we have the smallest schools in a Major conference and the most private schools among Major conferences. WE have only 2 state flagship universities (2 and a half if you buy the FSU claim about itself), only 3 state land grant schools. All those things mean the ACC will always be held down. Winning can change none of that.

So what do we need done: Fewer small privates and more larger state schools, especially flagships and/or land grants, but also large as FSU is large, and located on. state with a lot of football history and football passion.

Specifically what would I do along those lines? I would want ESPN to tell me how much more we woqpuod get by dropping Wake and BC and replace them with WVU and Cincinnati. The fact is that for virtually 10-0% of games every season, both WVU and Cincy will draw more viewers, up to a million more, per game than will Wake and BC against the same opponents.

I now think that if something like that cannot be done to get the ACC more money, then the ACC as we know it is headed right toward death.

I am not worried about saving the ACC. Whether the ACC survives or not is immaterial. What is material right now is that the 14 schools that make up the ACC are are bound together by the GOR. The bonds cannot easily be broken, it does no good to pretend that there is an easy way out (simply disband the ACC, ignore ESPN's rights, forget that all 14 schools need a soft landing or there is no incentive to even pursue disbanding the ACC or attempting to negotiate with ESPN, etc.)

I don't think the ACC will drop any team in otherwise good standing, nor will any other conference for that matter. Doing so will destroy the conference .

I agree with you that the ACC should be working with ESPN for real hard number on projections and increases (there are two more look-ins during the contract). I suspect that some are in contact with ESPN, though I would have no doubt the mouth from FSU is not a part of that team.

I add that your assessment may seem bleak, but the truth is that there are positives, too.
- Several of the top 10 populous states are within the ACC footprint,
- that though the northeast is not CFB dominant it is hoops dominant,
- SU is New York's de facto State school in the P5,
- SU and Miami are large private schools,
- the ACC footprint is projected to increase in population, most of the B1G will decrease or stagnate in projections,
- too many top dogs in the B1G and SEC will fall to the middle of the pack, interest will wane
- FSU and Miami are on the rise. SU and Pitt are on the rise. UNC under Mack is decent. Some old powers can boost the ACC value.
- Thirteen years is a long time, the GOR buys time for teams to prove up. If not, then teams will go their own way.
- The Big12 will want more teams and more east coast exposure. Even if they take the PAC teams, the east coast is not likely to watch many of the Big12 games. The present teams are not heavily followed in the east and the exciting teams have left the Big12 and PAC.

 

[HtownOrange]

Even if that is true, that's assuming status quo. But, Big12 has already lost all of its "desirable schools," e.g. Nebraska, A&M, Texas, Oklahoma; ACC is in line to be seriously raided. Also, Big12 will negotiate again, before ACC deal ends.

The ACC has two more look-ins during the present GOR.

 

[David321]

I think I speak for all Syracuse fans and maybe all CFB fans when I say I’m tired of hearing what ND fans think about just about anything related to conferences.

They’re everywhere, can’t even escape them here lol.

 

[Toga]

I think I speak for all Syracuse fans and maybe all CFB fans when I say I’m tired of hearing what ND fans think about just about anything related to conferences.

Or on anything at all really.