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

[TexanMark]

The administration would be dumb not to look at a contingency plan. If the Big 12 wants to expand its Northeast footprint, they could go to Pitt and boom, magnificent 7 becomes 8, and the ACC is no more.

Better Cuse than Pitt, BC.

No one knows if 8 is all that is required. I've heard more like 10 schools due to NC law. Also would 8-10 improve their lot in life? No one is jumping to go to the B12 and do 8-10 ACC teams have guaranteed landing spots in the SEC and B1G.

Additionally no friggin way IMHO does a FSU or Clemson really want to play most away games north of the Ohio River. They whine like lil babies already playing Cuse and BC.

 

[cusefan88]

They should expand and add SDSU, Fresno State, Nevada, and UNLV. Is that so crazy?

 

[CU44SE]

That's why they need to add Uconn, and USF, and convince UCF, and Cincinnati to join the ACC, and not the Big 12.
Keep the Big 12 out of Florida, and Big 10 country.
Let them be confined mostly to Texas, Oklahoma, and Kansas.
That way they never get to be the 3rd conference, ACC will stay 3rd.

I disagree. I think you pod it up and have a west coast, east coast conference. Bring ACCN to west coast and California, Arizona, Utah, Oregon, Washington. Swing big. No reason to add teams that are in the area we already are. You do that and then add a couple Big12 schools (honestly not sure if they signed a GOR yet). But then you have 6 total pods of 5 teams. You would play the pods like nfl divisions.

 

[cuse_future]

No one knows if 8 is all that is required. I've heard more like 10 schools due to NC law. Also would 8-10 improve their lot in life? No one is jumping to go to the B12 and do 8-10 ACC teams have guaranteed landing spots in the SEC and B1G.

Additionally no friggin way IMHO does a FSU or Clemson really want to play most away games north of the Ohio River. They whine like lil babies already playing Cuse and BC.

8 has been the most widely reported. My point is, what is the 8th school is pitt or Louisville and they go to the big 12? CUSE IS SCREWED!

 

[HtownOrange]

8 has been the most widely reported. My point is, what is the 8th school is pitt or Louisville and they go to the big 12? CUSE IS SCREWED!

Eight is the fan hoped for simple majority. Most major decisions require much more, usually at least two-thirds or more. Considering the requirement to vote a school in is much higher, it is highly unlikely a vote to ”break up the band” will be any less.

Besides, if eight was the magic number, it is likely that the SEC and B1G would have worked a deal to get the votes. This assumes you want to ignore all other factors as most of the internet talking heads do. The issue is far more complex than the internet talkers make it out to be.

 

[SmilinBob]

Big 10 goes and gets UNC, Virginia, Miami and ND or Pitt/BC depending on if they can convince ND to join.

SEC gets FSU, VT, NCS and not so sure the 4th would be. I'm curious if they'd be interested in jumping up the east coast.

These are the best moves I can think of for the schools and conferences. Gets them in new states and like minded schools academically.

Lawyers will determine this fate depending on breaking the current contract ties.

 

[cuse_future]

Eight is the fan hoped for simple majority. Most major decisions require much more, usually at least two-thirds or more. Considering the requirement to vote a school in is much higher, it is highly unlikely a vote to ”break up the band” will be any less.

Besides, if eight was the magic number, it is likely that the SEC and B1G would have worked a deal to get the votes. This assumes you want to ignore all other factors as most of the internet talking heads do. The issue is far more complex than the internet talkers make it out to be.

Talking heads on here or in the media? Not sure which is crazier.

All I am saying is that conference realignment is not over and if the pac12 can flounder with so much writing on the wall that at least 7 ACC teams want to leave too, it would make sense for the cuse administration to at least have a backup plan if that does happen. If the Big 12 does want to expand to the NE w/ UConn better cuse than Pitt or BC.

 

[Cusefan69]

You realize its in the ACC contract that by adding any team, they would get the same exact payment as all the other teams currently in the ACC, if not more if it was a bigger brand? There is no team the ACC could add that would bring the team payment down!!

Sincere question for you. Have you read the contract and you honestly understand that those are the “mechanics” of the deal? If so then I would certainly rethink my opinion as that’s would be a new understanding for me. That being said I have a hard time believing that ESPN agreed to a contract that inflates automatically by just adding teams. The media rights deal pays roughly $400 million a year which translates to $35m to $39m per with playoff payouts toggling numbers. I am by no means fluent on the media rights deal but I am skeptical that $400 million goes up for a new addition. Certainly if we added “plus brands” that would bring ESPN to the table but I don’t think there is any auto trigger. Again if my understanding is wrong that is fine and I will rethink my position accordingly. I did read some articles on this to try and brush up on the topic and I did not find any mention of new teams being added automatically get the same payout or more.

 

[kcsu]

Sincere question for you. Have you read the contract and you honestly understand that those are the “mechanics” of the deal? If so then I would certainly rethink my opinion as that’s would be a new understanding for me. That being said I have a hard time believing that ESPN agreed to a contract that inflates automatically by just adding teams. The media rights deal pays roughly $400 million a year which translates to $35m to $39m per with playoff payouts toggling numbers. I am by no means fluent on the media rights deal but I am skeptical that $400 million goes up for a new addition. Certainly if we added “plus brands” that would bring ESPN to the table but I don’t think there is any auto trigger. Again if my understanding is wrong that is fine and I will rethink my position accordingly. I did read some articles on this to try and brush up on the topic and I did not find any mention of new teams being added automatically get the same payout or more.

New teams being added do not AUTOMATICALLY get paid the same by ESPN. The comment is completely incorrect. Some of the post regarding expansion and the ACC GOR are completely insane.

 

[HRE Otto IV]

No one knows if 8 is all that is required. I've heard more like 10 schools due to NC law. Also would 8-10 improve their lot in life? No one is jumping to go to the B12 and do 8-10 ACC teams have guaranteed landing spots in the SEC and B1G.

Additionally no friggin way IMHO does a FSU or Clemson really want to play most away games north of the Ohio River. They whine like lil babies already playing Cuse and BC.

It is most likely 12. The NC law was a kook theory. CUSA had 9 of 14 teams leave and couldn't disband. They paid exit fees. Why would the ACC be different. This is all B12/FSU kookery.

 

[HRE Otto IV]

8 has been the most widely reported. My point is, what is the 8th school is pitt or Louisville and they go to the big 12? CUSE IS SCREWED!

No it hasn't been reported by anyone who is reputable. It has been speculated by propagandists.

 

[HRE Otto IV]

I disagree. I think you pod it up and have a west coast, east coast conference. Bring ACCN to west coast and California, Arizona, Utah, Oregon, Washington. Swing big. No reason to add teams that are in the area we already are. You do that and then add a couple Big12 schools (honestly not sure if they signed a GOR yet). But then you have 6 total pods of 5 teams. You would play the pods like nfl divisions.

That sounds good for the ACC but why would those P10 schools leave behind Washington State, Oregon State, Stanford, Arizona when they can stay together and wait for a B16 invite within 5 years. Committing to the ACC would lock them in for a decade and hurt their in state rivals.

 

[sutomcat]

New teams being added do not AUTOMATICALLY get paid the same by ESPN. The comment is completely incorrect. Some of the post regarding expansion and the ACC GOR are completely insane.

Brett McMurphy says this in the case. As far as I know, he is the source of this info.

Here is a link to his article.

McMurphy: ACC at Crossroads as 'Magnificent 7' Seeks More Revenue

Check out Brett McMurphy's column about where the ACC sits as the "Magnificent 7" schools seek more revenue or a way out of the conference.

www.actionnetwork.com

The nugget appears near the end of the story. I have copied and pasted the relevant section...

What can the ACC do as a league?

The only way the ACC can receive significantly more money from ESPN is by expanding. Sources told Action Network that if the ACC adds additional teams — whether from the Power 5 or Group of Five — ESPN contractually must pay the ACC a pro-rata amount for each new member.

 

[richmondcuse03]

Try 10 years. The ACC grant of rights goes til 2035 or 2036. Schools aren’t going to make a move or announcement until a few years before then. Even Texas and Oklahoma are only getting out of the Big 12 one year before the GOR expires (and three years after they announced their exit) and they didn’t even try to challenge the GOR and are still paying a lot of $$$ to leave one year early.

Bingo. Also I predict a lot will happen over the next 12 years. Programs will rise and fall. Certain sports will be more or less popular. etc etc. impossible to predict. I'll worry about this in 2031.

 

[Bayside44]

Sincere question for you. Have you read the contract and you honestly understand that those are the “mechanics” of the deal? If so then I would certainly rethink my opinion as that’s would be a new understanding for me. That being said I have a hard time believing that ESPN agreed to a contract that inflates automatically by just adding teams. The media rights deal pays roughly $400 million a year which translates to $35m to $39m per with playoff payouts toggling numbers. I am by no means fluent on the media rights deal but I am skeptical that $400 million goes up for a new addition. Certainly if we added “plus brands” that would bring ESPN to the table but I don’t think there is any auto trigger. Again if my understanding is wrong that is fine and I will rethink my position accordingly. I did read some articles on this to try and brush up on the topic and I did not find any mention of new teams being added automatically get the same payout or more.

You're basically right. There is no just add teams to make more money thing or stay the same.

At some point everything is at a tipping point / point of diminishing returns. With cable on the downswing and TV sports (see baseball) about to go through a huge shift with possible smaller pots all this expansion stuff really seems misplaced.

 

[Bayside44]

Brett McMurphy says this in the case. As far as I know, he is the source of this info.

Here is a link to his article.

McMurphy: ACC at Crossroads as 'Magnificent 7' Seeks More Revenue

Check out Brett McMurphy's column about where the ACC sits as the "Magnificent 7" schools seek more revenue or a way out of the conference.

www.actionnetwork.com

The nugget appears near the end of the story. I have copied and pasted the relevant section...

What can the ACC do as a league?

The only way the ACC can receive significantly more money from ESPN is by expanding. Sources told Action Network that if the ACC adds additional teams — whether from the Power 5 or Group of Five — ESPN contractually must pay the ACC a pro-rata amount for each new member.

But the next sentence pretty much goes on to say whatever it is isn't worth it.

Otherwise McMurphy make Brent Axe look like Jimmy Breslin, it's so poorly written.

 

[OrangeXtreme]

Brett McMurphy says this in the case. As far as I know, he is the source of this info.

Here is a link to his article.

McMurphy: ACC at Crossroads as 'Magnificent 7' Seeks More Revenue

Check out Brett McMurphy's column about where the ACC sits as the "Magnificent 7" schools seek more revenue or a way out of the conference.

www.actionnetwork.com

The nugget appears near the end of the story. I have copied and pasted the relevant section...

What can the ACC do as a league?

The only way the ACC can receive significantly more money from ESPN is by expanding. Sources told Action Network that if the ACC adds additional teams — whether from the Power 5 or Group of Five — ESPN contractually must pay the ACC a pro-rata amount for each new member.

So if we add UConn and UMass, ESPN will pay us $80 million more per year?

I don't think so.

 

[orange79]

So if we add UConn and UMass, ESPN will pay us $80 million more per year?

I don't think so.

CousCuse rebuttal coming in 3...2...1...

 

[oldpinepoint]

So if we add UConn and UMass, ESPN will pay us $80 million more per year?

I don't think so.

Don’t worry, South Florida Georgetown, navy, St. John’s, and
Nova will get it done. Oh I forgot Cincinnati who even though joins the b12 in 22 days we can get them too. Freaking looney tunes

 

[sutomcat]

So if we add UConn and UMass, ESPN will pay us $80 million more per year?

I don't think so.

I just posted the link that started that narrative. Don't claim to know what the truth is.

I will say McMurphy has been really good at breaking news related to college athletics for a long time. He clearly has great contacts. Or at least he did for a long time.

That said, he has made a fool of himself recently buying into some conference expansion stuff. Maybe he has lost his mind. Maybe this is legit. At this point, I don't trust anything from anyone if it relates to conference expansion.

 

[CousCuse]

So if we add UConn and UMass, ESPN will pay us $80 million more per year?

I don't think so.

CousCuse rebuttal coming in 3...2...1...

It would be a bold move in a game of conference realignment Risk. I would call it the Yankee gambit.

 

[oldpinepoint]

I just posted the link that started that narrative. Don't claim to know what the truth is.

I will say McMurphy has been really good at breaking news related to college athletics for a long time. He clearly has great contacts. Or at least he did for a long time.

That said, he has made a fool of himself recently buying into some conference expansion stuff. Maybe he has lost his mind. Maybe this is legit. At this point, I don't trust anything from anyone if it relates to conference expansion.

McMurphy lost all credibility to me when he showed up on MVHERs podcast

 

[orange79]

It would be a bold move in a game of conference realignment Risk. I would call it the Yankee gambit.

I would call it a losing proposition, but that's just me.

 

[Cusefan69]

You're basically right. There is no just add teams to make more money thing or stay the same.

At some point everything is at a tipping point / point of diminishing returns. With cable on the downswing and TV sports (see baseball) about to go through a huge shift with possible smaller pots all this expansion stuff really seems misplaced.

Yeah agreed and the mechanics of it make zero sense at all. Though Tom highlights the article where it's articulated but I am guessing he(Mcmurphy)framed that incorrect.

 

[TexanMark]

I'm all for adding USF right now...might as well get them up to speed before FSU bolts to wherever.

Much easier to fly into Tampa vice Tallynasty too.