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

[721Comstock]

https://x.com/ByBerkowitz/status/1923439015585341946?t=Op6eUSmOKNGU88MwP0D0Kw&s=19

Don't seem so bad.

Solid 3rd place, behind the B1G & $€¢, as expected.

But not nearly as far behind as many have feared.

 

[TexanMark]

Solid 3rd place, behind the B1G & $€¢, as expected.

But not nearly as far behind as many have feared.

But unfortunately it'll widen as the new contracts kick in

 

[javadoc]

Solid 3rd place, behind the B1G & $€¢, as expected.

But not nearly as far behind as many have feared.

How much of that pie, for each conference, is taxed?

 

[Cusefan69]

Solid 3rd place, behind the B1G & $€¢, as expected.

But not nearly as far behind as many have feared.

And people have stated we should pivot to the Big12. No way. We should raid their teams. Grab Utah. Grab Arizona. I would grab Kansas to buttress hoops.

 

[Toga]

And people have stated we should pivot to the Big12. No way. We should raid their teams. Grab Utah. Grab Arizona. I would grab Kansas to buttress hoops.

I used to live in Tucson. I would do a roadie just for the elite Mexican food.

 

[HtownOrange]

And people have stated we should pivot to the Big12. No way. We should raid their teams. Grab Utah. Grab Arizona. I would grab Kansas to buttress hoops.

The ACC can only add teams with value that ESPN will pay for. Otherwise, the ACC will be diluting their per team share of the revenue. ESPN has already indicated that the Big 12 schools do not add sufficient value at this time. ESPN was our turned with the SMU, Stanford and Cal adds as it was.

 

[Toga]

The ACC can only add teams with value that ESPN will pay for. Otherwise, the ACC will be diluting their per team share of the revenue. ESPN has already indicated that the Big 12 schools do not add sufficient value at this time. ESPN was our turned with the SMU, Stanford and Cal adds as it was.

There has to be some value to having more late night games.

 

[HtownOrange]

There has to be some value to having more late night games.

There is always some value. The issue for ESPN is whether the value is sufficient to pay a new team a full share. After adding the new three ESPN voiced their position against further adds for now.

We may see ESPN push for a ninth game, as the did with the SEC.

 

[TexanMark]

I think the ACC has 1 more add they can do for a full share from ESPN

 

[richmondcuse03]

I think the ACC has 1 more add they can do for a full share from ESPN

I'd strengthen hoops first, then FB, with a Kansas. Huge fanbase, too. Matters as they're launching a new streaming service.

 

[qdawgg]

Where’s the poster that argued endlessly the B12 was making more than us. This is an even bigger gap than I expected.

 

[Hoo's That]

And people have stated we should pivot to the Big12. No way. We should raid their teams. Grab Utah. Grab Arizona. I would grab Kansas to buttress hoops.

For the lacrosse AQ, most definitely.

 

[HtownOrange]

I think the ACC has 1 more add they can do for a full share from ESPN

I believe you are correct, but ESPN voiced a lot of concern as they were not fully on board with the SMU/Stanford/Cal adds. If I recall there was a gentlemen's agreement that the ACC would not use the last add without ESPN's consent.

NOTE: This may be part of why ESPN fought so hard to limit the carriage rates to the metro areas, that and increased revenue on their part. I do think the streaming services are cutting into the old cable rates rules and the revenues are likely to change over the next couple of TV contract cycles. Imagine: Rutgers got into the B1G because they were close to NYC and now they could get booted because they carry nothing, even in their own DMA.

 

[Consigliere]

There is always some value. The issue for ESPN is whether the value is sufficient to pay a new team a full share. After adding the new three ESPN voiced their position against further adds for now.

We may see ESPN push for a ninth game, as the did with the SEC.

If ESPN wants a nine game schedule ACC has to either add or subtract 1 team. Have to have an even number.

 

[Cusefan0307]

Where’s the poster that argued endlessly the B12 was making more than us. This is an even bigger gap than I expected.

When it comes to conference realignment the number one rule is the board is always wrong.

 

[kcsu]

It has been obvious to me and others that the
ACC is well positioned as the third best and most profitable conference. If there is to be another add the league needs to focus on a large population school and geographic area. One that hopefully brings Football and Basketball into play and if possible one that takes a reduced payout, in essence following the last three schools. San Diego State and UNLV are two schools that I would look at along with one of either Central or South Florida. I believe that each of these schools can be brought into the conference at a discount and would end up being an accretive addition.

 

[SU94]

Did not see this coming. Would not be against it …

Power conferences working on contract to bind schools to new enforcement rules, with strict punishments

In a stunning move, the four power conferences have drafted a contract that would bind schools to new enforcement rules and require them to waive the right to sue over decisions, sources tell Yahoo Sports.

sports.yahoo.com

 

[orange79]

Did not see this coming. Would not be against it …

Power conferences working on contract to bind schools to new enforcement rules, with strict punishments

In a stunning move, the four power conferences have drafted a contract that would bind schools to new enforcement rules and require them to waive the right to sue over decisions, sources tell Yahoo Sports.

sports.yahoo.com

This will be incredibly hard to enforce, signatures notwithstanding.

And how they get schools to sign a document that commits them to possibly breaking state laws seems like a non-starter to this non-lawyer knucklehead.

 

[HtownOrange]

Did not see this coming. Would not be against it …

Power conferences working on contract to bind schools to new enforcement rules, with strict punishments

In a stunning move, the four power conferences have drafted a contract that would bind schools to new enforcement rules and require them to waive the right to sue over decisions, sources tell Yahoo Sports.

sports.yahoo.com

A state entity generally may not sign an agreement which forces the state entity to violate state laws. Private schools can be held to the agreement, but if the state schools cannot sign the document - or if the school does and the state refuses to enforce the agreement - why would any private school sign?

Besides, if a school is being forced to sign the agreement, the schools NOT in the SEC and B1G should force an equal distribution, or one TV deal for all, whatever you want to call it. Why sign on to a terrible deal that will forever hold your school back? Use your leverage now, while you can.

This agreement, and the fact that Yahoo heard of it in February, may be sufficient to push more federal legislators to want to get involved. I am surprised this agreement has gotten this far. With all the schools that have law schools on top of their legal departments and outside counsel, this scheme appears to fail on its face.

 

[SU94]

A state entity generally may not sign an agreement which forces the state entity to violate state laws. Private schools can be held to the agreement, but if the state schools cannot sign the document - or if the school does and the state refuses to enforce the agreement - why would any private school sign?

Besides, if a school is being forced to sign the agreement, the schools NOT in the SEC and B1G should force an equal distribution, or one TV deal for all, whatever you want to call it. Why sign on to a terrible deal that will forever hold your school back? Use your leverage now, while you can.

This agreement, and the fact that Yahoo heard of it in February, may be sufficient to push more federal legislators to want to get involved. I am surprised this agreement has gotten this far. With all the schools that have law schools on top of their legal departments and outside counsel, this scheme appears to fail on its face.

I’d have to read the piece again (and I don’t want to), but it seems (at face value) that the schools and conferences actually want it. They want some reasonable structure and more importantly, some semblances of cost certainty and competitive balances.

That’s how I read it. Quotes from Oklahoma AD included. The Sooners haven’t thrived the last 30 years based on in-state HS talent. They paid players. Plenty of them. But what they don’t want is Texas, Bama and Tennessee to pay players more than they can justifiably afford and relegate their program to second-tier status.

Most schools will want this. SU will. Ohio State and about 4-5 SEC programs/boosters will not.

 

[HtownOrange]

I’d have to read the piece again (and I don’t want to), but it seems (at face value) that the schools and co ferences actually want it. They want some reasonable structure and more importantly, some semblances of cost certainty and competitive balances.

That’s how I read it. Quotes from Oklahoma AD included. The Sooners haven’t thrived the last 30 years based on in-state HS talent. They paid players. Plenty of them. But what they don’t want is Texas, Bama and Tennessee to pay players more than they can justifiably afford and relegate their program to second-tier status.

Most schools will want this. SU will. Ohio State and about 4-5 SEC programs/boosters will not.

I agree, any business wants to control costs. Your example of OU is spot on* in that they cannot afford an “arms race” with UT, Alabama, Michigan, an tOSU. The issue is whether an agreement between various state entities from several states can supersede the various states laws.

Application: Assume Tennessee goes off the rails, by contract, they get the death penalty ( no money, booted from their conference, cannot play teams within the agreement), the State of Tennessee has an interest in protecting the University of Tennessee and declares the agreement null and void as against state interest. What then? Generally, states are sovereigns and aside from the federal constitution, have free reign, the State of Tennessee would win and the agreement fails. X the number of affected states. Unless each sate legislature binds themselves to the agreement there is not much meat to the agreement when it comes to enforcement. (This assumes no federal oversight as that is the real goal, self governing by the schools and conferences)

Essentially, any agreement is only as good as the people upholding the agreement. Does anyone believe the SEC and B1G have abided by NCAA rules thes past decades? Not a chance, everyone knows that half or more of the SEC athletes couldn’t qualify to graduate middle school let alone get into college; and let’s not get started on the illegal money. It is safe to presume the issue will arise, and soon.

Besides, FSU has proved that embarrassing partners (shaming) will get you what you want, in spite of legally sound agreements. All UT would have to do is threaten to expose all of the documents, everyone will cave, even third parties like ESPN.

I know the schools, conferences, networks, and NCAA want to keep the government out of the picture, but without a true means of enforcement of the agreement, the agreement means nothing. The individual state schools cannot obligate the state to self harm.

This issue is a good find on your part. It opens up a can of worms.

P.S. I reserve the right to revise my opinion as more facts and information are made available.



*OU has more Texas talent than most schools, 25-30 players.

 

[kcsu]

I agree, any business wants to control costs. Your example of OU is spot on* in that they cannot afford an “arms race” with UT, Alabama, Michigan, an tOSU. The issue is whether an agreement between various state entities from several states can supersede the various states laws.

Application: Assume Tennessee goes off the rails, by contract, they get the death penalty ( no money, booted from their conference, cannot play teams within the agreement), the State of Tennessee has an interest in protecting the University of Tennessee and declares the agreement null and void as against state interest. What then? Generally, states are sovereigns and aside from the federal constitution, have free reign, the State of Tennessee would win and the agreement fails. X the number of affected states. Unless each sate legislature binds themselves to the agreement there is not much meat to the agreement when it comes to enforcement. (This assumes no federal oversight as that is the real goal, self governing by the schools and conferences)

Essentially, any agreement is only as good as the people upholding the agreement. Does anyone believe the SEC and B1G have abided by NCAA rules thes past decades? Not a chance, everyone knows that half or more of the SEC athletes couldn’t qualify to graduate middle school let alone get into college; and let’s not get started on the illegal money. It is safe to presume the issue will arise, and soon.

Besides, FSU has proved that embarrassing partners (shaming) will get you what you want, in spite of legally sound agreements. All UT would have to do is threaten to expose all of the documents, everyone will cave, even third parties like ESPN.

I know the schools, conferences, networks, and NCAA want to keep the government out of the picture, but without a true means of enforcement of the agreement, the agreement means nothing. The individual state schools cannot obligate the state to self harm.

This issue is a good find on your part. It opens up a can of worms.

P.S. I reserve the right to revise my opinion as more facts and information are made available.



*OU has more Texas talent than most schools, 25-30 players.

What would Tennessee win if the teams from the other states refused to play them?
The state of Tennessee in this example can side with their state school but that doesn't mean that Tennessee could force another state school or the league to abide by their ruling. It takes two to tango and Tennessee could be left on an island.

 

[kcsu]

I'd strengthen hoops first, then FB, with a Kansas. Huge fanbase, too. Matters as they're launching a new streaming service.

Hoops don't matter

 

[oldpinepoint]

Hoops don't matter

College hoops has really cratered imo during the NIL era. I find it almost unwatchable

 

[HtownOrange]

What would Tennessee win if the teams from the other states refused to play them?
The state of Tennessee in this example can side with their state school but that doesn't mean that Tennessee could force another state school or the league to abide by their ruling. It takes two to tango and Tennessee could be left on an island.

Once the contract is voided Tennessee can sue the contract schools for the loss of revenue. It's a mess, many different outcomes are possible. Regardless, once the lawsuits start flying, the house of cards falls down.

Is it possible to get each participating state to sign on? Yes, but as we see on the article, the State of Tennessee is already fighting the issue. I assume other states will be reluctant to sign on.