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

[Toga]

Not Wake or BC - total waste of time and money, even if done for a dollar.

The simple fact is that the ACC is way behind the 8 ball in all this because we have far too many private schools, too many smaller state schools, not enough state Flagships and Land Grants, and not even a third as many schools with 80K+ stadiums as we need.

What that means is that if either FSU or Clemson leaves, then the ACC as we know it is going to start to collapse. That's why the most stupid thing Syracuse can do is take any stand that FSU and Clemson find detrimental to them. The ACC can lose Syracuse and not miss a beat, but the ACC must keep both FSU and Clemson because losing one means both are gone, and so will UNC and UVA and Miami and anybody else who can get into either SEC or BT.

In that case, what is left of the ACC will be worth less to TV than is the current Big 12. ESPN then would fold up the ACCN and merge what it can with the SECN. The remaining ACC (meaning those who could not get into the Big 12) would be a peer of the new Pac.

The ACC can survive at full strength, but it will take the league office and the least valuable members acting very wisely and carefully. I think it will require league membership pruning, and replacement with large state schools, for ESPN to cough up better money and so stabilize things.

What state schools might join?

 

[SWC75]

Not Wake or BC - total waste of time and money, even if done for a dollar.

The simple fact is that the ACC is way behind the 8 ball in all this because we have far too many private schools, too many smaller state schools, not enough state Flagships and Land Grants, and not even a third as many schools with 80K+ stadiums as we need.

What that means is that if either FSU or Clemson leaves, then the ACC as we know it is going to start to collapse. That's why the most stupid thing Syracuse can do is take any stand that FSU and Clemson find detrimental to them. The ACC can lose Syracuse and not miss a beat, but the ACC must keep both FSU and Clemson because losing one means both are gone, and so will UNC and UVA and Miami and anybody else who can get into either SEC or BT.

In that case, what is left of the ACC will be worth less to TV than is the current Big 12. ESPN then would fold up the ACCN and merge what it can with the SECN. The remaining ACC (meaning those who could not get into the Big 12) would be a peer of the new Pac.

The ACC can survive at full strength, but it will take the league office and the least valuable members acting very wisely and carefully. I think it will require league membership pruning, and replacement with large state schools, for ESPN to cough up better money and so stabilize things.

I think we'll wind up in a cozy little conference of "far too many private schools, too many smaller state schools" and might be having more fun than we are now.

 

[WoadBlue]

I think we'll wind up in a cozy little conference of "far too many private schools, too many smaller state schools" and might be having more fun than we are now.

Well, Syracuse could make that choice right now. And so could BC and Wake.

 

[WoadBlue]

What state schools might join?

Depends on how the ACC proceeds. If the SCC is happy top sit back, none would that can matter. If the ACC is aggressive to be the 3rd of 3 Major conferences, then it will be able to draw rather. freely from the Big 12, over a few years, as long as ESPN and/or some other entity will pay for a league larger than 17. If the ACC is passive, over time the ACC will lose its most valuable members to the SEC and BT, and most of the rest will want to get into the Big 12. AS Yormark has seemed rather sincere in his silly desire to have UConn basketball, I assume he'd want Syracuse. But I do not think he'd want BC or Wake.

 

[DomeStranger]

UNC piece in NYT:

Documents reveal UNC’s conference realignment approach: A code name, ACC ‘in financial decline’

UNC’s behind-closed-doors exploration of conference realignment and its future in the ACC was known by only a code name.

www.nytimes.com

I wouldn't be be surprised if UNC leaked this info. They read about the FSU, Clemson, Miami sweetheart deals and want in.

 

[Cusester]

Oh look, Woad is here again to tell us how screwed we Syracuse fans are. He is kind of a reverse RutgersAl. Instead of telling us how great his school is, Woad tells us how bad our school is. Al is always welcome here. Woad? Not so much.

 

[HtownOrange]

Not Wake or BC - total waste of time and money, even if done for a dollar.

The simple fact is that the ACC is way behind the 8 ball in all this because we have far too many private schools, too many smaller state schools, not enough state Flagships and Land Grants, and not even a third as many schools with 80K+ stadiums as we need.

What that means is that if either FSU or Clemson leaves, then the ACC as we know it is going to start to collapse. That's why the most stupid thing Syracuse can do is take any stand that FSU and Clemson find detrimental to them. The ACC can lose Syracuse and not miss a beat, but the ACC must keep both FSU and Clemson because losing one means both are gone, and so will UNC and UVA and Miami and anybody else who can get into either SEC or BT.

In that case, what is left of the ACC will be worth less to TV than is the current Big 12. ESPN then would fold up the ACCN and merge what it can with the SECN. The remaining ACC (meaning those who could not get into the Big 12) would be a peer of the new Pac.

The ACC can survive at full strength, but it will take the league office and the least valuable members acting very wisely and carefully. I think it will require league membership pruning, and replacement with large state schools, for ESPN to cough up better money and so stabilize things.

If you carry through with your expressed thoughts above, you will discover you disprove your own arguments. Don't let facts get in the way of a false narrative.


Woad's arguments: "Wake and SU cause all of the ACC's problems. UNC with Clemson and FSU will save the day."

 

[DoctorBombay]

Depends on how the ACC proceeds. If the SCC is happy top sit back, none would that can matter. If the ACC is aggressive to be the 3rd of 3 Major conferences, then it will be able to draw rather. freely from the Big 12, over a few years, as long as ESPN and/or some other entity will pay for a league larger than 17. If the ACC is passive,(AGAIN!!), over time the ACC will lose its most valuable members to the SEC and BT, and most of the rest will want to get into the Big 12. AS Yormark has seemed rather sincere in his silly desire to have UConn basketball, I assume he'd want Syracuse. But I do not think he'd want BC or Wake.

History has shown that on matters such as this, the ACC has typically been a reactive, rather than proactive, conference. ACC leadership is a lot like the French in WWII, dutifully fighting the last war, although the reality on the ground has drastically changed.
Say what you will about Yormack but he takes action for the B12, instead of just sitting around and waiting to see when the next shoe will drop. Hell, he seems prepared to invite everyone and their half-brother if that's what it takes.
The ACC is the one with the TV network, East and Atlantic coast presence and potential eyeballs to be mined. Now is when ACC leadership should be looking to shore up the conference's foundations, by approaching ESPN on sweetening the deal, looking at alternatives like Amazon, Netflix, and other streaming services as potential options. I'm not a fan of private equity, but it should definitely get a long hard look from Charlotte HQ.
This is no longer bizness-as-usual, this conference is on the precipice of total annihilation. Time for Phillips to make some bold and decisive moves moving forward. The Big12 should not be the one w/ more options as the 3rd best conference.

 

[sutomcat]

If you carry through with your expressed thoughts above, you will discover you disprove your own arguments. Don't let facts get in the way of a false narrative.


Woad's arguments: "Wake and SU cause all of the ACC's problems. UNC with Clemson and FSU will save the day."

Agree.

Ignores that one of the ‘golden three’ ACC schools getting special treatment is small and private..

Ignores that the most valuable school affiliated with the ACC, the one being accommodated with the proposed changes, is also small and private.

The only thing that kept this regional, backward and largely irrelevant for football conference alive was a series of expansions that added programs with more tradition, prestige, national interest and bigger markets.

A conference with four schools in NC and zero in Florida or north of the Mason-Dixon Line was destined to never be good in football. Get a clue.

 

[AcAndAc]

Agree.

Ignores that one of the ‘golden three’ ACC schools getting special treatment is small and private..

Ignores that the most valuable school affiliated with the ACC, the one being accommodated with the proposed changes, is also small and private.

The only thing that kept this regional, backward and largely irrelevant for football conference alive was a series of expansions that added programs with more tradition, prestige, national interest and bigger markets.

A conference with four schools in NC and zero in Florida or north of the Mason-Dixon Line was destined to never be good in football. Get a clue.

The reality is that this is like sandlot sports. The SEC/B1G are fighting each other to rob all other conferences of anything that adds value. They are going to be Coke and Pepsi eventually.

The good news is that the bar to add value is getting higher. If they make $60M per year, they need to add schools that bring in $60M per year (and not just $40M). And UNC is the most valuable asset out there because it packages a new market for both the SEC/B1G. Clemson and FSU add no new markets for the SEC. To be sure, their games will be watched though, so you cannot completely rule it out.

I could see the SEC pivot towards hoops by adding UNC, UVa, Duke, and Kansas. Geographically sane. Academically sound. Would add great hoops to the current dominant conference. The SEC just said that they are trying to add value to Saturdays post-football. See this weekends Auburn-Alabama game, purposefully scheduled for TV. For football, provide another MW team for those teams. Not great football schools, which actually means more wins for the Alabamas and Georgias. Would justify a 9th conference game. They do not want to do that because it adds losses. This way, they would keep wins and the $$$ in conference. Adding value?

SEC West: Kansas, Missouri, Arkansas, Oklahoma, Texas, Texas A&M, Mississippi, Mississippi State, LSU, Kentucky

SEC East: Alabama, Auburn, Georgia, Florida, South Carolina, Virginia, UNC, Duke, Tennessee, Vanderbilt

Let's hope not.

 

[kcsu]

Im sure that Syracuse has looked into its options as well. As i have posted the extension firmly plants the ACC in a solid third position. I expect that the ACC will add a team or two when the Big 12 deal is up.

In the meantime, SU continues to build its football profile which is what matters.

 

[orange79]

I could see the SEC pivot towards hoops by adding UNC, UVa, Duke, and Kansas.

Why would they do that? The SEC currently has 9 of their 16 teams ranked in the top 22. Possibly 10 or 11 of their teams could make the NCAAT.

They don't need ACC hoops.

 

[AcAndAc]

Why would they do that? The SEC currently has 9 of their 16 teams ranked in the top 22. Possibly 10 or 11 of their teams could make the NCAAT.

They don't need ACC hoops.

See the point about football. They are stuck at 8 conference games. That forces teams to schedule OOC games against P4, enriching other conferences/networks. But 9 games as is means adding losses, to the jeopardy of playoff aspirations. Pivoting towards hoops gives plausible deniability. Plus, there is concern that football is waning as a participation sport. Maybe they have an eye on the future. Alternatively, perhaps football gets carved out of the NCAA in the future or conference decisions become (a) football; and (b) all other sports. That would solve the issue with Title IX (or its future replacement). You no longer have 100 scholarships to counter-balance. In the end, who knows? But if people in charge are not considering broader adverse options, the ACC is doomed.

 

[orange79]

See the point about football. They are stuck at 8 conference games. That forces teams to schedule OOC games against P4, enriching other conferences/networks. But 9 games as is means adding losses, to the jeopardy of playoff aspirations. Pivoting towards hoops gives plausible deniability. Plus, there is concern that football is waning as a participation sport. Maybe they have an eye on the future. Alternatively, perhaps football gets carved out of the NCAA in the future or conference decisions become (a) football; and (b) all other sports. That would solve the issue with Title IX (or its future replacement). You no longer have 100 scholarships to counter-balance. In the end, who knows? But if people in charge are not considering broader adverse options, the ACC is doomed.

Sorry, I'm just not buying it.

If they add ACC teams, so be it. It may well happen. But basketball is way down the list of reasons.

 

[HtownOrange]

Sorry, I'm just not buying it.

If they add ACC teams, so be it. It may well happen. But basketball is way down the list of reasons.

This. Expansion will be driven by adding value across the board. The SEC and B1G have valid contenders in hoops and do not "need" hoops to expand. The reality is that baseball and lacrosse offer popular viewing in the spring and this is likely the the new focus to drive viewership.

College sports networks were built around hoops and then football, which overtook the hoops leagues. The problem is that the networks must run throughout the year and football and hoops runs from September to March. Also, colleges are closed from late May through August (sports wise). Extending viewership through May and into June is a largely untapped market.

The problem with other college sports is they lack excitement, in general. While I admire the work and skill dedicated to rowers, it simply lacks the action for most viewers. I am no gymnastics fan, but some people like it. These are largely untapped sources of revenue but are more likely destined to streaming and off-hours broadcasts than for prime viewing. These are areas in which the ACC can make large strides as several schools largely support the non-revenue sports. And kudos to all networks, conferences and schools for attempting to make access more available.

I think the SEC and B1G could expand for football but then the conferences must have divisions and rivalries to develop more interested viewing. The hinderance is that the top teams do not want to dilute their earnings, how do they get from point A to point Z? This is what buys the ACC and other conferences time.

 

[sutomcat]

Sorry, I'm just not buying it.

If they add ACC teams, so be it. It may well happen. But basketball is way down the list of reasons.

Agree.

At this point, I think the ACC schools are stuck with the ACC. Not just until 2036.

The SEC and B1G are making so much money, adding any of the ACC schools is not going to improve their bottom line. All that would do it create worse travel and scheduling problems, encrouch on established territories (for the SEC anyway) and possibly lower the take for teams.

Yes, it would also hurt the ACC but I don't think they care about that conference any longer. They are not a threat now.

If an ACC wants to leave, they have one choice. The B12. Which is a step down. No network, worse markets, more travel; it makes no sense right now.

The one exception to this is Notre Dame. They can go where they want. Will they stay in the ACC? Not sure.

 

[oldpinepoint]

Agree.

At this point, I think the ACC schools are stuck with the ACC. Not just until 2036.

The SEC and B1G are making so much money, adding any of the ACC schools is not going to improve their bottom line. All that would do it create worse travel and scheduling problems, encrouch on established territories (for the SEC anyway) and possibly lower the take for teams.

Yes, it would also hurt the ACC but I don't think they care about that conference any longer. They are not a threat now.

If an ACC wants to leave, they have one choice. The B12. Which is a step down. No network, worse markets, more travel; it makes no sense right now.

The one exception to this is Notre Dame. They can go where they want. Will they stay in the ACC? Not sure.

I still think the SEC and Big Ten could kick out members down the road. Would you rather have Rutgers or UNC. Vanderbilt or FSU.

 

[sutomcat]

I still think the SEC and Big Ten could kick out members down the road. Would you rather have Rutgers or UNC. Vanderbilt or FSU.

That is not going to be a trivial matter. The SEC and B1G networks are co-owned by Fox/ESPN and the conference schools.

If you boot Rutgers, you have to buy their share of the B1G network. Same with Vanderbilt.

I believe there are signed contracts in place that will make kicking a conference school out extremely difficult and costly. School presidents are the decision makers here and they might not care as strongly as some about the benefits of replacing FSU or Vanderbilt. I know Florida is not going to support that. Ever.

 

[kcsu]

Agree.

At this point, I think the ACC schools are stuck with the ACC. Not just until 2036.

The SEC and B1G are making so much money, adding any of the ACC schools is not going to improve their bottom line. All that would do it create worse travel and scheduling problems, encrouch on established territories (for the SEC anyway) and possibly lower the take for teams.

Yes, it would also hurt the ACC but I don't think they care about that conference any longer. They are not a threat now.

If an ACC wants to leave, they have one choice. The B12. Which is a step down. No network, worse markets, more travel; it makes no sense right now.

The one exception to this is Notre Dame. They can go where they want. Will they stay in the ACC? Not sure.

ND has a great deal with the ACC. I doubt they leave. Independent in Football. Great league for the rest of their sports. Clear path to the playoff. No need for ND to go anywhere

 

[HtownOrange]

That is not going to be a trivial matter. The SEC and B1G networks are co-owned by Fox/ESPN and the conference schools.

If you boot Rutgers, you have to buy their share of the B1G network. Same with Vanderbilt.

I believe there are signed contracts in place that will make kicking a conference school out extremely difficult and costly. School presidents are the decision makers here and they might not care as strongly as some about the benefits of replacing FSU or Vanderbilt. I know Florida is not going to support that. Ever.

Solid points. I would add that each conference has a rather high threshold for kicking out a member and the members on the lower end realize that if you remove a lower team and bring in a higher level team, i.e. kick out Vandy for Clemson, that makes the lower level teams USC(east) and Mississippi State closer to being voted out. Also, the more top heavy a conference is, the less wins are available in conference for the big boys. A conference must have its' tomato soup cans to kick around.

The only school that would truly be considered for removal would be Rutgers but mainly because they suck, have not built up their AD as agreed and upgraded their facilities, don't have attendance, etc. Even then, the likelihood of Rutgers being forced out is barely above zero.

 

[Newhouser]

Agree.

At this point, I think the ACC schools are stuck with the ACC. Not just until 2036.

The SEC and B1G are making so much money, adding any of the ACC schools is not going to improve their bottom line. All that would do it create worse travel and scheduling problems, encrouch on established territories (for the SEC anyway) and possibly lower the take for teams.

Yes, it would also hurt the ACC but I don't think they care about that conference any longer. They are not a threat now.

If an ACC wants to leave, they have one choice. The B12. Which is a step down. No network, worse markets, more travel; it makes no sense right now.

The one exception to this is Notre Dame. They can go where they want. Will they stay in the ACC? Not sure.

I agree and don't see ND staying in a league that is clearly second tier.

 

[oldpinepoint]

That is not going to be a trivial matter. The SEC and B1G networks are co-owned by Fox/ESPN and the conference schools.

If you boot Rutgers, you have to buy their share of the B1G network. Same with Vanderbilt.

I believe there are signed contracts in place that will make kicking a conference school out extremely difficult and costly. School presidents are the decision makers here and they might not care as strongly as some about the benefits of replacing FSU or Vanderbilt. I know Florida is not going to support that. Ever.

I don’t think we have seen the final form of conference realignment, who’s to say there isn’t further consolidation into one super league which will change the rules. While there are contracts I’m unsure if they are in perpetuity, end when tv does or what. But there is always way out.

 

[HtownOrange]

I agree and don't see ND staying in a league that is clearly second tier.

ND is not in a league for football, has a scheduling template, and can play anyone. TerryD has discussed this plenty of times, research his posts.

ND likes several games with schools on the east coast, especially in the Catholic population centers, from which a major portion of their student body is recruited. Likewise, a couple west coast schools annually, 1-2 in the southeast, 1-2 in the mid-west and Navy. This template is not rock-solid, but is a general pattern seen over time. This leaves 1-2 games for anyone ND wishes to play.

If ND joins a conference, they are committed to the general region of the conference with a few OOC choices. The B1G offers little on the east coast, the SEC is more regionalized. The ACC offers ND the best of both worlds, an average of five games annually, scheduling to include late October and November when it is harder to fill OOC games for any school, and covers the entire east coast. Adding Stanford that much better for ND as one of their west coast teams will count as the five ACC games.

Your point is valid, but with the other info, it lends itself to have ND keep the ACC as a viable 3rd place significant conference.

 

[kirbivore]

History has shown that on matters such as this, the ACC has typically been a reactive, rather than proactive, conference. ACC leadership is a lot like the French in WWII, dutifully fighting the last war, although the reality on the ground has drastically changed

A perfect fit for the Syracuse Athletic Dept.

 

[WoadBlue]

Oh look, Woad is here again to tell us how screwed we Syracuse fans are. He is kind of a reverse RutgersAl. Instead of telling us how great his school is, Woad tells us how bad our school is. Al is always welcome here. Woad? Not so much.

Your school? I always mention the two biggest dead weights in the ACC, which are BC and Wake. Which one is your school?

What I do think most Syracuse fans do not want to see is how little value there is in the entire Northeast for Major CFB. It is not a recent problem, and there is no sign it ever will get better.

That Big East way of seeing things, which means missing how deep and wide are the regional problems, is also found, in a different form, in much of the Old Guard ACC. I grew up in SEC country, not in NC. So I see what the ACC always has lacked and has refused to act wisely and forcefully to get (except when landing FSU). I can see that about the ACC because I know SEC football very well.

And look at the results: now, SEC basketball rules the national roost. How did that happen? Because football is so MUCH BIGGER than basketball, eventually in a free market for conferences, any league with huge football fan bases would be able to buy out even the most successful basketball-first leagues.

And it is all about the passionate football fan bases. TV pays for viewers. Quite simply, a 6-6 Auburn team (#2 football program and fan base in its own small state) will always be a better TV draw than a 9-3 Syracuse team. Per capita, nobody in NY gives a half damn about Major CFB. And New England is even worse. And almost all those north easterners who do watch a lot of Major CFB root first for ND or PSU. TV knows that - hence the SEC TV deal compared to the ACC deal.

The ACC is facing an existential crisis. This is about surviving. But that has 2 basic meanings. The Pac survives, but it never again will be close to being seen as Major (its 2 least valuable members of the 12 are the only old members left). The SWC has been dead for a long time. Either fate could await the ACC. Or the ACC could get wildly aggressive and save itself as MAJOR. But that will require very tough leadership that is determined to keep the ACC as MAJOR.

That need to aggressively remain MAJOR holds true even if SEC and BT agree to never add another school. As things now stand, they will keep on getting new TV deals that get ever more above the ACC deals. Before long that disparity will mean everybody agrees that we have only 2 MAJOR conferences, and then all the rest. None of which really matters, most of which definitely matter zilch.

Here are things that I know to be true:

1. Major CFB wealth and power are very much about state flagship and land grant schools: 17 of 18 BT members and 15 of 16 SEC members. In contrast, the ACC has 3 Flagships and 3 Land Grants among 17 members. Almost all those schools are quite large, all in the BT are very large.

2. The South and the Midwest are the two regions with the largest numbers of and most passionate CFB fans. Per capita, the northeast has so few passionate CFB fans that it really does not register. Literally, save for PSU, a network can afford to just ignore the Northeast. That no longer can be said of the MT zone, nor can it be said of the PT zone, though per capita that area watches less college sports than it did 30 and 40 years ago.

3. Passion for CBB means nothing in this. As football is worth about 10 times more than basketball, a league could have UNC, Dook, UK, Louisville, IU, Purdue, Syracuse, UConn, and KU and still die very quickly because its football would not be worth runny compared to the BT and SEC.

4. Having teams in states that have large numbers of passionate CFB fans and also produce a lot of HS football talent makes it much easier for that league to be good or great on the field and acquire and keep passionate fans. Conversely the more teams a league has in states and regions with poor HS football and per capita poor CFB TV viewing, the harder it will be for that league to be very good on the field year after year and to acquire and maintain large TV fan bases.

ACC leaders must come to accept all that and know it is futile to deny or fight any of it, and then figure out how to better position the ACC to compete against the SEC and BT for TV viewers at least as much on football fields.