FSU vs The ACC

[Scooch]

I think the upside is controlled content. ND likes their football, basketball, hockey, lacrosse programs. As an independent they'll need inventory of some sort. Probably an insane idea but great brands do partner with smaller brands. I always see these plumbing companies in the boston area sponsored by the Boston Red Sox.

Feel like it's all changing for sure.

Well, those plumbing companies pay the Sox to be sponsors. I don't think you want SU paying ND to be aligned with them

ND can remain independent in football, where they already have a dedicated streaming service called Peacock. Its financially and logistically advantageous for them to be in a conference for their other sports, and they'll never suffer from a lack of suitors on that front.

Like I mentioned a week or 2 ago, ND is basically outside the conversation of conference issues at this point. Their path is pretty well set.

 

[elimunelson]

Well, those plumbing companies pay the Sox to be sponsors. I don't think you want SU paying ND to be aligned with them

ND can remain independent in football, where they already have a dedicated streaming service called Peacock. Its financially and logistically advantageous for them to be in a conference for their other sports, and they'll never suffer from a lack of suitors on that front.

Like I mentioned a week or 2 ago, ND is basically outside the conversation of conference issues at this point. Their path is pretty well set.

All fair points. I'm spitballing and message boarding with someone (you) who knows more than me about the television game.

 

[Scooch]

All fair points. I'm spitballing and message boarding with someone (you) who knows more than me about the television game.

It's all good!

I find ND's football independence hang-up both noble and odd. I mean, good on them for being maybe the only school in college football that truly values its history and what that means for its brand.

On the other hand, ND is effectively in the "5/8ths of the ACC + Navy + USC" Conference. Their independence is mostly an illusion in terms of year-to-year scheduling since they play the same 7 games every season. One more game of flexibility than other ACC schools, woohoo!

 

[TexanMark]

We lead the nation in lax attendance… with barely 5K fans. I love lacrosse but it’s an incredibly niche sport. There’s no business there.

And as long as Title IX is kicking...it can't grow too much more

 

[Hoo's That]

Shouldn't we be proactive and try and get some streaming revenue for and from our LAX programs now and get ahead of things?

You signed over the rights to broadcast lacrosse to the ACC. 99.99% of your home games that aren't on one of the main ESPN channels or the ACCN are available on ACCN Xtra.

 

[Hoo's That]

Well, those plumbing companies pay the Sox to be sponsors. I don't think you want SU paying ND to be aligned with them

ND can remain independent in football, where they already have a dedicated streaming service called Peacock. Its financially and logistically advantageous for them to be in a conference for their other sports, and they'll never suffer from a lack of suitors on that front.

Like I mentioned a week or 2 ago, ND is basically outside the conversation of conference issues at this point. Their path is pretty well set.

And it was set in concrete when Sankey made sure "non-conference winners" could be in the CFP. ND will gladly trade topping out as the 5th seed for their continued independence.

 

[Scooch]

And it was set in concrete when Sankey made sure "non-conference winners" could be in the CFP. ND will gladly trade topping out as the 5th seed for their continued independence.

And a #5 seed likely won't be a ceiling for long. That top 4 protection is going away soon, I'm sure of it.

 

[WoadBlue]

We agree that ND won’t join a conference for football. We disagree that they have any interest in throwing a life preserver to SU and BC. There’s no real upside for them to do that.

ND is not going to throw any lifeline to BC or Syracuse or Pitt or any other school.

 

[WoadBlue]

It's all good!

I find ND's football independence hang-up both noble and odd. I mean, good on them for being maybe the only school in college football that truly values its history and what that means for its brand.

On the other hand, ND is effectively in the "5/8ths of the ACC + Navy + USC" Conference. Their independence is mostly an illusion in terms of year-to-year scheduling since they play the same 7 games every season. One more game of flexibility than other ACC schools, woohoo!

Yes, it is stupid. And very risky for ND, as ND could act to make certain the ACC is made a permanent P3. That is important because the simple fact is that if the Sec/Disney and BT/Fox combo can destroy the ACC as the Pac is destroyed, they will then move to lose all football to only those 2 leagues. So essentially, ND is either going to be a part of saving the ACC as Major or else be 'forced' into the BT.

 

[baggerbob]

Yes, it is stupid. And very risky for ND, as ND could act to make certain the ACC is made a permanent P3. That is important because the simple fact is that if the Sec/Disney and BT/Fox combo can destroy the ACC as the Pac is destroyed, they will then move to lose all football to only those 2 leagues. So essentially, ND is either going to be a part of saving the ACC as Major or else be 'forced' into the BT.

If ND wanted they could immediately checkmark the SEC, Big, ESPN, Fox, and all of college football by joining the ACC. That would end conference realignment, because they would take themselves off the board.
They are the only piece left on the board that is important.

 

[HtownOrange]

Yes, it is stupid. And very risky for ND, as ND could act to make certain the ACC is made a permanent P3. That is important because the simple fact is that if the Sec/Disney and BT/Fox combo can destroy the ACC as the Pac is destroyed, they will then move to lose all football to only those 2 leagues. So essentially, ND is either going to be a part of saving the ACC as Major or else be 'forced' into the BT.

ESPN has no intent on destroying the ACC or ACC as it is a profitable venture, something the House of Mouse needs right now. The SEC is less powerful than ESPN and cannot take an ACC team without ESPN blessing the move.

I am not sure where interweb fans get the idea that the BTN and SEC run the show. Fox and ESPN control CFB more so than the B1G and SEC. They are players, don't misinterpret my statement. However, neither can add new teams without the respective TV partner blessing the move.

ESPN is not in the business of ruining cash cow properties. Don't expect ESPN to facilitate an FSU, Clemson, UNC, or any other team of value to move away from the ACC.

 

[HouClone]

Looks like we may see more pushback from distributors on conference networks, at least on expansion areas.

 

[BlazeOrange]

I think the ACC and the Big 12 should merge and revive some logical regional divisions.

This would make some sense, but a merger would have to be driven by the league offices. And a merger would make one of those offices redundant. No one is going to push an initiative with a 50% chance of them becoming unemployed if it succeeds.

 

[orange79]

This would make some sense, but a merger would have to be driven by the league offices. And a merger would make one of those offices redundant. No one is going to push an initiative with a 50% chance of them becoming unemployed if it succeeds.

Pretty sure it will never happen, but the bolded statement? Happens all the time in corporate America.

 

[HRE Otto IV]

ESPN has no intent on destroying the ACC or ACC as it is a profitable venture, something the House of Mouse needs right now. The SEC is less powerful than ESPN and cannot take an ACC team without ESPN blessing the move.

I am not sure where interweb fans get the idea that the BTN and SEC run the show. Fox and ESPN control CFB more so than the B1G and SEC. They are players, don't misinterpret my statement. However, neither can add new teams without the respective TV partner blessing the move.

ESPN is not in the business of ruining cash cow properties. Don't expect ESPN to facilitate an FSU, Clemson, UNC, or any other team of value to move away from the ACC.

It just defies logic. ESPN is going to let a bunch of valuable

ESPN has no intent on destroying the ACC or ACC as it is a profitable venture, something the House of Mouse needs right now. The SEC is less powerful than ESPN and cannot take an ACC team without ESPN blessing the move.

I am not sure where interweb fans get the idea that the BTN and SEC run the show. Fox and ESPN control CFB more so than the B1G and SEC. They are players, don't misinterpret my statement. However, neither can add new teams without the respective TV partner blessing the move.

ESPN is not in the business of ruining cash cow properties. Don't expect ESPN to facilitate an FSU, Clemson, UNC, or any other team of value to move away from the ACC.

It just makes no sense. Why would ESPN...

1. Give up cheap long term Tier 1/2 rights?
2. Allow some of the top brands under the ACC umbrella to move to the B18/Fox?
3. Kill the ACCN which has been better than ESPN expected and is about to add San Fran and Dallas to its footprint?


Knowing the above surely ESPN will decline the mythical 2027 extension.


Some of the UConn/B12 stuff defies logic as well. How can UConn get a full non FB share and at the same time all the B12 schools make the same amount of money as they are now? Just from non TV monies alone that isn't possible. You are now dividing by 17. And from the TV money side, I highly doubt that either ESPN or Fox has a pro rata for UConn. On top of that BYU, Cincy, Houston, UCF had to agree to reduced shares when they joined. Why in the heck would they vote Yes for UConn to come in at a full non FB share? Make it make sense.


And I find it funny how sure B12anon is that the ACC can't raid the B12. ESPN has money tied up in the ACC and SEC. They also have to set aside money for the expanded CFB Playoff, which is money they didn't have to use before. Same thing with Fox the B18 and the CFB Playoffs. If both want to keep all those rights, they won't have a lot of money leftover for the B12. Especially if B12 FB starts to falter after losing Texas and Oklahoma.

Right now Fox has an stake in the B18. ESPN has a stake in both the ACC and SEC. Neither has a stake/investment in the B12. That IMO makes the B12 the most vulnerable. That and the fact that the TV rights might dry up when their next contract comes around. It is exactly what happened to the P12.

 

[HtownOrange]

It just defies logic. ESPN is going to let a bunch of valuable


It just makes no sense. Why would ESPN...

1. Give up cheap long term Tier 1/2 rights?
2. Allow some of the top brands under the ACC umbrella to move to the B18/Fox?
3. Kill the ACCN which has been better than ESPN expected and is about to add San Fran and Dallas to its footprint?


Knowing the above surely ESPN will decline the mythical 2027 extension.


Some of the UConn/B12 stuff defies logic as well. How can UConn get a full non FB share and at the same time all the B12 schools make the same amount of money as they are now? Just from non TV monies alone that isn't possible. You are now dividing by 17. And from the TV money side, I highly doubt that either ESPN or Fox has a pro rata for UConn. On top of that BYU, Cincy, Houston, UCF had to agree to reduced shares when they joined. Why in the heck would they vote Yes for UConn to come in at a full non FB share? Make it make sense.


And I find it funny how sure B12anon is that the ACC can't raid the B12. ESPN has money tied up in the ACC and SEC. They also have to set aside money for the expanded CFB Playoff, which is money they didn't have to use before. Same thing with Fox the B18 and the CFB Playoffs. If both want to keep all those rights, they won't have a lot of money leftover for the B12. Especially if B12 FB starts to falter after losing Texas and Oklahoma.

Right now Fox has an stake in the B18. ESPN has a stake in both the ACC and SEC. Neither has a stake/investment in the B12. That IMO makes the B12 the most vulnerable. That and the fact that the TV rights might dry up when their next contract comes around. It is exactly what happened to the P12.

To your points you may add that ESPN and Fox denied the Big 12 a network and a better TV deal. A merger between the ACC and Big 12 is less likely than the ACC poaching teams that ESPN deems worthy and the ACC can tolerate.

ESPN, and Fox -along with the other networks and streamers- are in the business and know far more than any internet blowhard how the real business side works. They will not be making decisions which are likely to cost them no way (or reduce profits). ESPN and Fox have stopped expansion for the to e being because they need the conferences to stabilize and to see whether any other teams will move a needle and if so, for which conference.

 

[HRE Otto IV]

To your points you may add that ESPN and Fox denied the Big 12 a network and a better TV deal. A merger between the ACC and Big 12 is less likely than the ACC poaching teams that ESPN deems worthy and the ACC can tolerate.

ESPN, and Fox -along with the other networks and streamers- are in the business and know far more than any internet blowhard how the real business side works. They will not be making decisions which are likely to cost them no way (or reduce profits). ESPN and Fox have stopped expansion for the to e being because they need the conferences to stabilize and to see whether any other teams will move a needle and if so, for which conference.

Having non B12 Network and having their TV contact up first IMO makes the B12 more vulnerable.

I could easily see…

1. Fox prioritizing funds for the B18 and the playoffs, leaving less for the B12. People are forgetting that the playoff rights (which IMO will be split) are an extra cost that didn’t exist before.

2. ESPN the same with the SEC and the playoffs. Plus money for the ACC.

3. Big 12 FB being a bit down causing the need for the so called B12 rule where a conference champ needs to be Top 10 to get a Top 4 seed. Much like the Big East rule of the BCS era.

4. The B18 or SEC grabbing Kansas (huge BBall brand and fan base, plus KC market) and ASU ( huge school and PHX).

5. The other of the B18 or SEC grabbing two of Arizona, BYU/Utah, Colorado.


I think points 1-4 are very possible. The 5th is less likely. But in either case the ACC will be in a position to pick up any B12 leftovers.

 

[WoadBlue]

ESPN has no intent on destroying the ACC or ACC as it is a profitable venture, something the House of Mouse needs right now. The SEC is less powerful than ESPN and cannot take an ACC team without ESPN blessing the move.

I am not sure where interweb fans get the idea that the BTN and SEC run the show. Fox and ESPN control CFB more so than the B1G and SEC. They are players, don't misinterpret my statement. However, neither can add new teams without the respective TV partner blessing the move.

ESPN is not in the business of ruining cash cow properties. Don't expect ESPN to facilitate an FSU, Clemson, UNC, or any other team of value to move away from the ACC.

The obvious that you miss here is that ESPN losses nothing if FSU, Clemson, UNC etc. were to be moved to the SEC. They would all still be exclusive to ESPN.

ESPN has done nothing to stop any of this. I think that ESPN, perhaps led by Sankey and the SEC being persuasive, assumed that ESPN would keep all the most valuable ACC members by the SEC taking them. And what they have discovered is that things are not like that at all. Not even for FSU. FSU has caught the ACC bug about improved academic stature, and all kinds of people with power at FSU would take BT over SEC for that reason.

So now we have ESPN having to face such things knowing that ESON has been playing hardball against the ACC in the name of cost cutting which has led to all this mess that could mean gutting of the ACC. Just stupid all around by ESPN.

 

[oldpinepoint]

The obvious that you miss here is that ESPN losses nothing if FSU, Clemson, UNC etc. were to be moved to the SEC. They would all still be exclusive to ESPN.

ESPN has done nothing to stop any of this. I think that ESPN, perhaps led by Sankey and the SEC being persuasive, assumed that ESPN would keep all the most valuable ACC members by the SEC taking them. And what they have discovered is that things are not like that at all. Not even for FSU. FSU has caught the ACC bug about improved academic stature, and all kinds of people with power at FSU would take BT over SEC for that reason.

So now we have ESPN having to face such things knowing that ESON has been playing hardball against the ACC in the name of cost cutting which has led to all this mess that could mean gutting of the ACC. Just stupid all around by ESPN.

ESPN loses money, why pay more for the same brand if you already control it.

 

[JRHEETER]

The obvious that you miss here is that ESPN losses nothing if FSU, Clemson, UNC etc. were to be moved to the SEC. They would all still be exclusive to ESPN.

ESPN has done nothing to stop any of this. I think that ESPN, perhaps led by Sankey and the SEC being persuasive, assumed that ESPN would keep all the most valuable ACC members by the SEC taking them. And what they have discovered is that things are not like that at all. Not even for FSU. FSU has caught the ACC bug about improved academic stature, and all kinds of people with power at FSU would take BT over SEC for that reason.

So now we have ESPN having to face such things knowing that ESON has been playing hardball against the ACC in the name of cost cutting which has led to all this mess that could mean gutting of the ACC. Just stupid all around by ESPN.

Actually they do, because it devalues the ACC which they have a whole network dedicated to.

ESPN wants the ACC strong, but not too strong that it challenges is B10 SEC.

 

[WoadBlue]

To your points you may add that ESPN and Fox denied the Big 12 a network and a better TV deal. A merger between the ACC and Big 12 is less likely than the ACC poaching teams that ESPN deems worthy and the ACC can tolerate.

ESPN, and Fox -along with the other networks and streamers- are in the business and know far more than any internet blowhard how the real business side works. They will not be making decisions which are likely to cost them no way (or reduce profits). ESPN and Fox have stopped expansion for the to e being because they need the conferences to stabilize and to see whether any other teams will move a needle and if so, for which conference.

ESPN doing anything to prop up the Big 12 is ed business. The BIUg 12 is mostly Fox. So the best interests of ESPN are to help the ACC become a larger league at the expense of the Big 12 as the next Big 12 deal draws near.

I have read several places that Utah has not signed anything for long term. If that is so, then it explains all that talk over the late spring and early summer that Utah was exploring leaving for the ACC. If Utah has done that ESPN should have made it happen by agreeing to redo the SACC contract favorably for the ACC. That 1 move would make it certain that any Big 12 team that could get into the ACC would make the move as the old Big 12 deal expires. That would allow ESPN to create a Super Sized ACC to advertise as the national conference rivaling the BT in that regard as well as in non-revenue sports.

I think such planning by ESPN would include getting KU into the SEC, because that would greatly help with SEC basketball TV numbers and power ranking. I think that the SEC then would lean hard to making Colorado its 18th because of its Big 8 days and its being the only school in its state that would be in a Major conference.

ESPN must program for all time zones and sports. That means among other things that ESPN needs as many schools as it can get into Major conferences that it broadcasts which are located in MST or PST. That would allow ESPN to arrange Major college football and basketball late night starts (per EST and CST) for both Friday and Saturday, if the ACC gets Utah, Arizona, and Arizona ST while the SEC takes Colorado.

That would leave ESPN with total control over major college sports in MST and with an important presence in CA, which would keep the BT from controlling the West. Do that and then also take a direct shot at the BT by getting Cincinnati into the ACC, and ESPN will have outflanked Fox and the BT.

 

[kcsu]

Actually they do, because it devalues the ACC which they have a whole network dedicated to.

ESPN wants the ACC strong, but not too strong that it challenges is B10 SEC.

ESPN want the ACC to remain in 3rd position. The SEC and Big 10 have always been and will remain the top two leagues. That isn't going to change in my lifetime unless there is a complete remake of college football. The Big 12 for all the bravado BS that PT Barnum spews will always be in the fourth slot unless they get picked apart. If we are smart, we will be making a big play for Big 12 members as we do have a chance to take them down.

 

[HtownOrange]

The obvious that you miss here is that ESPN losses nothing if FSU, Clemson, UNC etc. were to be moved to the SEC. They would all still be exclusive to ESPN.

ESPN has done nothing to stop any of this. I think that ESPN, perhaps led by Sankey and the SEC being persuasive, assumed that ESPN would keep all the most valuable ACC members by the SEC taking them. And what they have discovered is that things are not like that at all. Not even for FSU. FSU has caught the ACC bug about improved academic stature, and all kinds of people with power at FSU would take BT over SEC for that reason.

So now we have ESPN having to face such things knowing that ESON has been playing hardball against the ACC in the name of cost cutting which has led to all this mess that could mean gutting of the ACC. Just stupid all around by ESPN.

Respectfully, you have missed the point that if the ACC barn doors are open it will be a free for all. Fox would not pass on an opportunity to knock ESPN out of the northeast in collegiate sports for decades, likely a cripple blow to ESPN. Fox would likely snag Pitt and SU, both already vetted and considered prior to joining the ACC. Even if BC stayed in the ACC it would be watered down. The SEC and B1G will have taken 9-12 teams.

Don't forget, they are just beginning to realize they need cannon fodder and middle of the pack teams, especially if they plan to go to the P2 route.

ESPN is not likely to destroy one property for the other, that is the definition of tortious interference as the ACC and SEC have separate interests . ESPN cannot be caught with their pants down or everything gets exposed. The chances that ESPN are giving the SEC the nod and wink approval to move FSU and Clemson is minute, the legal implications alone are not worth the thought. Further, the losses to a profitable entity would make the entity, the ACC, worth less than it's present value, possibly less than the Big 12. Again, not a financially sound decision, which would get several big wigs within ESPN fired.

This, it is highly unlikely that ESPN does anything to destroy the ACC. They lose in the Big picture on so many fronts that it is not worth the risks.

The SEC does not rule ESPN, ESPN is the driver in that relationship. The concept that the SEC can demand ESPN to do its bidding is out of whack, the concept would prove extortion on some levels. ESPN makes lots of money off the SEC and will listen to the SEC but ESPN is not likely to destroy the ACC to benefit the SEC nor to give up territory to the B1G.

 

[Hoo's That]

ESPN want the ACC to remain in 3rd position. The SEC and Big 10 have always been and will remain the top two leagues. That isn't going to change in my lifetime unless there is a complete remake of college football. The Big 12 for all the bravado BS that PT Barnum spews will always be in the fourth slot unless they get picked apart. If we are smart, we will be making a big play for Big 12 members as we do have a chance to take them down.

It's coming. It's just a question of "when," not "if." The "fun" thing will be watching the reaction the of fanbases of schools who think they're in to being left out.

 

[HRE Otto IV]

ESPN doing anything to prop up the Big 12 is ed business. The BIUg 12 is mostly Fox. So the best interests of ESPN are to help the ACC become a larger league at the expense of the Big 12 as the next Big 12 deal draws near.

I have read several places that Utah has not signed anything for long term. If that is so, then it explains all that talk over the late spring and early summer that Utah was exploring leaving for the ACC. If Utah has done that ESPN should have made it happen by agreeing to redo the SACC contract favorably for the ACC. That 1 move would make it certain that any Big 12 team that could get into the ACC would make the move as the old Big 12 deal expires. That would allow ESPN to create a Super Sized ACC to advertise as the national conference rivaling the BT in that regard as well as in non-revenue sports.

I think such planning by ESPN would include getting KU into the SEC, because that would greatly help with SEC basketball TV numbers and power ranking. I think that the SEC then would lean hard to making Colorado its 18th because of its Big 8 days and its being the only school in its state that would be in a Major conference.

ESPN must program for all time zones and sports. That means among other things that ESPN needs as many schools as it can get into Major conferences that it broadcasts which are located in MST or PST. That would allow ESPN to arrange Major college football and basketball late night starts (per EST and CST) for both Friday and Saturday, if the ACC gets Utah, Arizona, and Arizona ST while the SEC takes Colorado.

That would leave ESPN with total control over major college sports in MST and with an important presence in CA, which would keep the BT from controlling the West. Do that and then also take a direct shot at the BT by getting Cincinnati into the ACC, and ESPN will have outflanked Fox and the BT.

Wouldn’t make sense for the ACC to take both AZ schools. Would be better off taking Baylor or TCU. Or the SEC could take ASU, who > Colorado, with the ACC getting Colorado instead.