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

[HtownOrange]

IDK if any conference has enough votes to oust any team. Vandy would be in the same boat as Rutgahs. What I've always believed is that when the endgame approaches, the conferences will just keep adding onerous requirements until schools want out. The Big Boys will be more than happy to be rid of them and will let them out of any GORs that are in effect.

In addition to "securing the NY market for the B1G," the storyline for admitting Rutgahs was to keep Ped State happy by adding 2 opponents that they played frequently in the past (along with Murlin). They may have decided they don't need them anymore since the both of them do go off the schedule at times because Ped State doesn't have any protected rivalries in the B1G.

I agree with your first sentence, Temple was the lone exception because they actually put forth no effort to comply with the NCAA and Conference standards. It is hard to conceive that any existing team is ousted without such egregious violations.

I am not sure that the "Squeeze" (to condense your proposition) will be employed as I think conferences realize that they need bottom feeders just as the pro-sport leagues need bottom feeders. College sports have the "luxury" of having other conferences for now. However, if the P2 ever happens it is not likely that the lesser conferences continue to play the P2 as the disparities will be too great to safely play each other. This remains to be seen.

I agree with your closing paragraph. To add to the mess, the theory originated when SU and Pitt were vetted and available. Had the B1G moved first, the NYC story never matures as Syracuse with PSU and ND pretty much secures NYC on its own, and because the cable market was what it was back then the whole of NY State including NYC was in play, not just NYC. Rutgers has no influence in NYC and less upstate, but I think some thought they may have ben able to carry the state of NY with PSU for cable rates, obviously, if this is correct it failed miserably. Rutgers was never the first, second, or third choice, probably lower as ND was the real first choice, and BC may have been as attractive if NYC could not be included with Rutgers. WVU and Temple were non-starters. Rutgers always seemed to be a knee-jerk reaction to appease PSU, an act of desperation.

 

[HtownOrange]

Sources: FSU, Clemson, ACC expected to settle

FSU and Clemson will vote Tuesday on an agreement that would ultimately result in the settlement of lawsuits between the schools and the ACC, sources told ESPN.

www.espn.com

Bye bye ACC in 5 years

I'm not sure that FSU can save the money to pay the exit fee and buy back their rights. Clemson may be able raise the money to do so but five years on top of the last three can make Clemson look like their historical selves of good/very good and only occasionally great. Will either be attractive to anyone?

And this assumes FSU actually regains their 80s, 90s and 2000s significance. With Norvell's buyout, FSU cannot afford to buy him out for a while, simultaneously, they cannot afford to keep him.

 

[HRE Otto IV]

"While the settlement will not make substantive changes to the grant of rights, it is expected that there will be declining financial penalties for schools who exit prior to 2036 with the steepest decreases coming after 2030 -- something that would apply to any ACC school, not just Clemson and Florida State."

Well, now we know when we can expect UNC and UVA to be joining the B1G. Sometime between 2031 and 2036.

The questions will be (a) how many exit for the B1G and SEC, and (b) will what remains be viable?

Neither the B1G nor the SEC have added more than 2 teams at a time. I think we will need to go through a few more rounds before we see the end game.

I think both conferences want UNC. I think that will be the first domino. I could see the loser then take 2 other ACC teams. That would put the ACC down to 13.5 schools. None of what is leftover will be able to afford leaving before 2036.

Potentially there could be a 2nd wave of B1G/SEC adds in 2036.

Then the ball is in ESPN's court. If they want to keep the ACC together, then the ACC can build with those 13.5 to at least 14 if not more. Otherwise teams will look toward joining the B12.

If SU is left behind, IMO I rather see SU in a 10 team all sports conference. Even if it means less money than the Franken 12. My 2nd choice would be the Franken 12 for FB only and then a 10 team conference for all other sports. I want most of our road games in conference to be regional, and I want a round robin schedule. Going to the B12 for all sports would not be attractive to me.

Also IMO these super conferences make it harder to be successful. There is too much competition which leads to parity. Having parity is nice when it isn't your team being held back.

 

[HRE Otto IV]

Closing in on 72 hours without a post in this thread so I decided to go real controversial:

If states no longer matter in this new age of internet streaming, markets no longer matter, and brands are end-all-be-all, what does the B1G do with Rutgers? Rutgers does not have influence in in NYC so they cannot "Bring" the Big Apple market and nor does Rutgers carry the state of NJ, further Rutgers" Athletics Department sucks so bad Congress looks like budget geniuses. Rutgers has no brand, unless you consider their entire history as a tomato soup can. What happens to to Rutgers? Do they get a permanent pass on the coattails of real ADs within the B1G or does the B1G cut their losses and look elsewhere?

If you are really brave and think Rutgers gets the Temple Treatment which team replaces Rutgers?

Brands take a hit when they aren't consistently successful. You need schools like RU to prop up the rest. If anything the SEC needs to water itself down.

You also want to not be super regional. The SEC being just the Southeast IMO hurts interest from the rest of the country. I do think there is incentive to go national. And for the B1G to get into the South. I think at the very least both of those will happen.

 

[hoopsupstate]

SU is about to lose money from the conference. This is not good news for most of the conference members. Of course certain teams are going to get higher viewership because they’re playing on national tv. If the ACC agrees to have ND play two of Clemson, FSU and Miami every year, how is that fair for the rest of the conference? The ACC is just setting up those three schools to get more money. Miami has brought nothing to the ACC since joining the conference. FSU is still living in the past. Clemson is the only school that has been a national name in football for the past ten years.

 

[JimBoston]

SU is about to lose money from the conference. This is not good news for most of the conference members. Of course certain teams are going to get higher viewership because they’re playing on national tv. If the ACC agrees to have ND play two of Clemson, FSU and Miami every year, how is that fair for the rest of the conference? The ACC is just setting up those three schools to get more money. Miami has brought nothing to the ACC since joining the conference. FSU is still living in the past. Clemson is the only school that has been a national name in football for the past ten years.

So, a conference is now going to have unequal revenue sharing. That is bad news for most schools as what prevents other conferences from doing this?

The clock is now formally ticking on the ACC as schools will be able to leave in 5 years. Syracuse needs to plan for the future.

 

[HtownOrange]

So, a conference is now going to have unequal revenue sharing. That is bad news for most schools as what prevents other conferences from doing this?

The clock is now formally ticking on the ACC as schools will be able to leave in 5 years. Syracuse needs to plan for the future.

SU's plan is to get better at football and hoops. The football side seems to have it's CEO. Hoops, not so much.

 

[JimBoston]

SU's plan is to get better at football and hoops. The football side seems to have it's CEO. Hoops, not so much.

That's great, but what conference will SU be in?

 

[AcAndAc]

"While the settlement will not make substantive changes to the grant of rights, it is expected that there will be declining financial penalties for schools who exit prior to 2036 with the steepest decreases coming after 2030 -- something that would apply to any ACC school, not just Clemson and Florida State."

Well, now we know when we can expect UNC and UVA to be joining the B1G. Sometime between 2031 and 2036.

The questions will be (a) how many exit for the B1G and SEC, and (b) will what remains be viable?

I think the bidding war between SEC/ESPN and B1G/FOX will be interesting for UNC/UVa. The SEC may be more interested in viewership, but why would they want these two schools going B1G (if that means more money to B1G)? These shall be interesting times.

 

[Cusefan69]

Did I read that the ACC capitulated on the exit fee and just the media rights apply only? So the league reswizzled revenue AND gave in on the exit fee? If that's true ACC lawyers AND commissioner should be fired.

 

[AcAndAc]

Did I read that the ACC capitulated on the exit fee and just the media rights apply only? So the league reswizzled revenue AND gave in on the exit fee? If that's true ACC lawyers AND commissioner should be fired.

In the end, the conference was scheduled to die in 2036. FSU and Clemson would have to see what they could get. By pushing this out from now to 2031, and yet making it certain to try to predict/react/prepare, who knows what will happen? At least Wildhack scheduled us a momentum-damaging season next year in football and is destroying the hoops program.

 

[HtownOrange]

That's great, but what conference will SU be in?

If i knew that answer, I would be working with a major network, a major streamer, and/or a major conference - AND I would be very wealthy. If anyone truly knows right now, I would be surprised.

My assessment is that ESPN will want to maintain the ACC and SEC schools. They will want a few more, but not likely to release profitable properties, especially to a competitor (Fox, NBC/CBS, streamer) without a fight. I am not sure that the SEC and ACC remain in their present forms; if the "plan" is to go to two major conferences, the SEC and ACC are likely to merge.

If ESPN fails, I believe the B1G/Fox will take SU. They can effectively kick ESPN out of the northeast for college sports by taking SU and Pitt, regardless of whether BC is included. The northeast has the most dense population and locking ESPN out of it makes ESPN irrelevant, a second-rate network in college sports, which affects long-term viewership as a huge chunk of fans will grow up not knowing about ESPN. Ironically, northeast college sports is what built ESPN from the local cable show it was way back when.

The final option is for SU to stay out of the top level of CFB, though that is expressly NOT the current intent of the BOT.

The above is opinion only, that and $10 can get you a cup of coffee.

 

[AcAndAc]

SU's plan is to get better at football and hoops. The football side seems to have it's CEO. Hoops, not so much.

Syracuse's plan seems to be to hit up donors for $$$ that will be lost.

 

[Toga]

So what has been the breakdown of exit fees and media rights (6 years worth). Is it coincidental that ESPN extended the ACC contract very recently? Should we assume someone leaving would have to forego media $ through 2036 now?

 

[Hoo's That]

{snip

I am not sure that the "Squeeze" (to condense your proposition) will be employed as I think conferences realize that they need bottom feeders just as the pro-sport leagues need bottom feeders. College sports have the "luxury" of having other conferences for now. However, if the P2 ever happens it is not likely that the lesser conferences continue to play the P2 as the disparities will be too great to safely play each other. This remains to be seen.

{snip}

Yes, ever since the adoption of overtime for the regular season, someone has to lose a game, and they always hope it's one of the bottom feeders. What I wonder though, is whether the desire for "mo' money, mo' money, mo' money" will make the Big Boys decide that they want to feed fewer mouths who aren't spending as much as they are. Will resentment over the spending differential make them lose sight of the fact that not as many people as they think are willing to watch 2-7 Alabama play 3-6 Texas in Week 10 as are willing to watch 9-0 SU playing 8-1 Pitt? They're not there yet, but I think that the Big Boys' patience is starting to run thin and they'll become more willing to do something that's really stupid.

I've always felt the most onerous thing that will that will cause the separation is that the Big Boys eventually will want to leave the NCAA so that class attendance is not mandatory. It's a great charade from Harvard on down (at Stanford it's "Science, Technology, and Society") and, IMO, at the Big Boys, administrators are the only ones who want it to continue.

 

[Scooch]

So what has been the breakdown of exit fees and media rights (6 years worth). Is it coincidental that ESPN extended the ACC contract very recently? Should we assume someone leaving would have to forego media $ through 2036 now?

ESPN extended the ACC deal because it is enormously favorable to them. It had little to do with anything else. ESPN is paying a lower rights fee for the ACC now than if the ACC deal was up for bid to all suitors. It made business sense to activate the extension clause in the contract.

No one knows what the 2031-2036 de-escalating fee is for GoR specifically. We'll need those details to leak. But reading between the lines of the reporting, it seems that the fee drops precipitously in 2031 and declines further with every passing year to 2036. That likely means that a school paying the fee is essentially buying back their media rights. So if, say, UNC announces in 2029 that they're exiting for the B1G in 2031 I would imagine they'll be taking their media rights with them.

 

[richmondcuse03]

Did I read that the ACC capitulated on the exit fee and just the media rights apply only? So the league reswizzled revenue AND gave in on the exit fee? If that's true ACC lawyers AND commissioner should be fired.

agreed. terrible deal.

 

[Toga]

ESPN extended the ACC deal because it is enormously favorable to them. It had little to do with anything else. ESPN is paying a lower rights fee for the ACC now than if the ACC deal was up for bid to all suitors. It made business sense to activate the extension clause in the contract.

No one knows what the 2031-2036 de-escalating fee is for GoR specifically. We'll need those details to leak. But reading between the lines of the reporting, it seems that the fee drops precipitously in 2031 and declines further with every passing year to 2036. That likely means that a school paying the fee is essentially buying back their media rights. So if, say, UNC announces in 2029 that they're exiting for the B1G in 2031 I would imagine they'll be taking their media rights with them.

So would the GOR fees drop (on an annual basis) after 2030 or just the exit fee?

 

[HtownOrange]

Syracuse's plan seems to be to hit up donors for $$$ that will be lost.

Thanks for the in depth analysis. Are you free to expound on your assessment?

 

[oldpinepoint]

So would the GOR fees drop (on an annual basis) after 2030 or just the exit fee?

Doubt it, would need espn to sign off on that

 

[DoctorBombay]

Sources: FSU, Clemson, ACC expected to settle

FSU and Clemson will vote Tuesday on an agreement that would ultimately result in the settlement of lawsuits between the schools and the ACC, sources told ESPN.

www.espn.com

Bye bye ACC in 5 years

Translation:
"The good ole boys at ACC HQ caved...again!"

 

[HtownOrange]

Yes, ever since the adoption of overtime for the regular season, someone has to lose a game, and they always hope it's one of the bottom feeders. What I wonder though, is whether the desire for "mo' money, mo' money, mo' money" will make the Big Boys decide that they want to feed fewer mouths who aren't spending as much as they are. Will resentment over the spending differential make them lose sight of the fact that not as many people as they think are willing to watch 2-7 Alabama play 3-6 Texas in Week 10 as are willing to watch 9-0 SU playing 8-1 Pitt? They're not there yet, but I think that the Big Boys' patience is starting to run thin and they'll become more willing to do something that's really stupid.

I've always felt the most onerous thing that will that will cause the separation is that the Big Boys eventually will want to leave the NCAA so that class attendance is not mandatory. It's a great charade from Harvard on down (at Stanford it's "Science, Technology, and Society") and, IMO, at the Big Boys, administrators are the only ones who want it to continue.

Your logic has been consistent and a concern for me. The concern has been lessened when the SEC commissioner admitted there is no plan for a super league. Yes, this is standard, but he indicated that the they need more teams, whether in more conferences (i.e. P4 or more) or two super leagues fielded with 64 or more teams. Your assessment that a 2-7 Alabama v. 3-6 Texas is spot on, not many outside the diehard Alabama and Texas fans will watch that game, which is why a 4-6 BC v. a 3-7 anyone will not draw many fans, CFB fans with no skin in a particular game will watch a game between the bottom feeders when they have a good game with winning teams available on the next channel/stream.

My guess is that a few SEC teams are realizing how top-heavy the SEC actually is. In truth many conferences with 9-12 teams is the right way to go for rivalries and outside competition. A playoff with every conference winner and maybe a couple at-large bids is the best resolution. However, as you correctly point out, are the B1G and SEC ready to share money or is mo' money the immediate goal?

 

[Scooch]

So would the GOR fees drop (on an annual basis) after 2030 or just the exit fee?

I believe the exit free is the only fee, per se, and that the GoR is a different contractual entity. There's not a GoR "fee", it's that you forfeit any media revenue payments until the GoR expiration date.

And I'm guessing that the GoR terms are going to change with this new deal. The GoR binds a school's rights to the conference. I've never been clear on how that impacts the rights holder. ESPN can reduce the league's payments if there are fewer members than they contracted for, but I don't know if they can literally prevent the conference from sunsetting GoRs.

 

[AcAndAc]

Thanks for the in depth analysis. Are you free to expound on your assessment?

The $50M campaign to raise money to pay players? Seems odd that it came out last week and seemed rushed/poor quality (discussed elsewhere)... must have been some behind the scenes discussion of a potential settlement/fee restructuring that prompted Syracuse to get out in front of it.

Now it makes sense... if donors do not make up what the ACC will not be giving us any more... then we cannot compete in football. After a 10-win season, and Fran Brown, no excuses for fans/donors either. If not now, then never.

And, if we cannot pay for a good enough football team, we might as well accept lesser football status and prioritize hoops. Frankly, I am not sure Tulane is worse off than us in football. If they go 13-0, they have a chance.

 

[HRE Otto IV]

If i knew that answer, I would be working with a major network, a major streamer, and/or a major conference - AND I would be very wealthy. If anyone truly knows right now, I would be surprised.

My assessment is that ESPN will want to maintain the ACC and SEC schools. They will want a few more, but not likely to release profitable properties, especially to a competitor (Fox, NBC/CBS, streamer) without a fight. I am not sure that the SEC and ACC remain in their present forms; if the "plan" is to go to two major conferences, the SEC and ACC are likely to merge.

If ESPN fails, I believe the B1G/Fox will take SU. They can effectively kick ESPN out of the northeast for college sports by taking SU and Pitt, regardless of whether BC is included. The northeast has the most dense population and locking ESPN out of it makes ESPN irrelevant, a second-rate network in college sports, which affects long-term viewership as a huge chunk of fans will grow up not knowing about ESPN. Ironically, northeast college sports is what built ESPN from the local cable show it was way back when.

The final option is for SU to stay out of the top level of CFB, though that is expressly NOT the current intent of the BOT.

The above is opinion only, that and $10 can get you a cup of coffee.

Obviously we should do everything we can to get into the B1G or SEC. But if we are left behind, is it worth going to the B12? At that point the B12 isn't top level FB, so does it matter if you are in the best non top level FB league vs being in the 3rd or 4th best non top level?

Sure we would make the most money joining that conference. But there is no way for SU to be consistently good in either sport. What is the point in more TV money if at the same time you decrease your chances at success? Which in turn will hurt fan engagement and result in lower revenues in tickets/donations?

I feel like joining the B12 is chasing a win when you have already lost.