Sources: ESPN OK's option to televise ACC sports through '36

[IthacaMatt]

Agree. When you look at which states are net givers vs net receivers of federal funds, you’re going to see a shakeout if spending goes down.

I would love to see California and New York withhold their federal tax receipts if Trump doesn't something sufficiently stupid as to warrant it. (And let's be honest, that shouldn't take too long at all ...)

 

[hoopsupstate]

I would love to see California and New York withhold their federal tax receipts if Trump doesn't something sufficiently stupid as to warrant it. (And let's be honest, that shouldn't take too long at all ...)

I believe New York only receives about 78% of the taxes they send to Washington. New York is subsidizing a lot of southern states.

 

[HtownOrange]

Agree. When you look at which states are net givers vs net receivers of federal funds, you’re going to see a shakeout if spending goes down.

Agreed, I think you will also see it at the state level and university level, too. There is no way for Rutgers to justify 2-3 decades of AD losses and coverups. Further, Rutgers is not a fiscally well run university, controls will either become self imposed or imposed from above (state/federal). New Jersey is a mismanaged state and cannot afford to throw dollars at Rutgers so they can be the perennial tomato soup can for the B1G.

The Ohio State University AD lost $38MM for the 2023-2024, that will not be sustainable, especially once they spend another $20MM on NIL from the school side paying all athletes, tOSU is in better shape than Rutgers, though (sorry SU2NASA).

Regardless, the market will play a huge role in this arena, too, as the new student pool is dropping and will do so for a long time, essentially until their is a Baby Boom equivalent event. Schools must make themselves more relevant to be attractive to prospective schools. Essentially, we are entering a student's (buyer's) market.

 

[Toga]

Agreed, I think you will also see it at the state level and university level, too. There is no way for Rutgers to justify 2-3 decades of AD losses and coverups. Further, Rutgers is not a fiscally well run university, controls will either become self imposed or imposed from above (state/federal). New Jersey is a mismanaged state and cannot afford to throw dollars at Rutgers so they can be the perennial tomato soup can for the B1G.

The Ohio State University AD lost $38MM for the 2023-2024, that will not be sustainable, especially once they spend another $20MM on NIL from the school side paying all athletes, tOSU is in better shape than Rutgers, though (sorry SU2NASA).

Regardless, the market will play a huge role in this arena, too, as the new student pool is dropping and will do so for a long time, essentially until their is a Baby Boom equivalent event. Schools must make themselves more relevant to be attractive to prospective schools. Essentially, we are entering a student's (buyer's) market.

The student pool may further constrict because of AI. Certainly some majors may become defunct. Some prospective students may lean towards jobs you need an actual human to complete.

 

[kcsu]

I believe we might end up in the Big which would want to dominate the East coast audience. It will take Pstate coming on board but i could see SU there.

 

[Scooch]

While from a "business consolidation" perspective this makes a ton of sense, how in the world is the NCAA going to sell a 2 conference duopoly as a national championship? I just don't see it.

Remember that the CFP isn't an NCAA sponsored championship. The NCAA only sponsors a football title game at the FCS, D2 and D3 levels. So they don't need to sell anything.

The CFP will likely do just what it does today. They'll give a couple token bids to other conferences that aren't "power" leagues. So in any given season we'd likely see the B1G and SEC account for, say, 13 of the 16 qualifiers. With the champs or highest rated schools among the National Big 12, Mountain/Pac/West/12 and the American/Belt/USA/MAC getting the others.

 

[richmondcuse03]

Remember that the CFP isn't an NCAA sponsored championship. The NCAA only sponsors a football title game at the FCS, D2 and D3 levels. So they don't need to sell anything.

The CFP will likely do just what it does today. They'll give a couple token bids to other conferences that aren't "power" leagues. So in any given season we'd likely see the B1G and SEC account for, say, 13 of the 16 qualifiers. With the champs or highest rated schools among the National Big 12, Mountain/Pac/West/12 and the American/Belt/USA/MAC getting the others.

The part I struggle with is at what point do you lose a lot of the national audience by basically concentrating on only 1/3 of the country. You end up ignoring huge population centers and making cfb truly a regional sport. The nfl is so successful because of parity and the fact that every part of country is covered. I don’t see how the cfb overall revenue pool grows if you shrink the audience. The southern schools don’t have enough students form the northeast to recruit to create that much fan loyalty outside their core areas.

 

[Scooch]

The part I struggle with is at what point do you lose a lot of the national audience by basically concentrating on only 1/3 of the country. You end up ignoring huge population centers and making cfb truly a regional sport. The nfl is so successful because of parity and the fact that every part of country is covered. I don’t see how the cfb overall revenue pool grows if you shrink the audience. The southern schools don’t have enough students form the northeast to recruit to create that much fan loyalty outside their core areas.

I get your point. Although, what part of the country would the B1G and SEC be ignoring if they poached teams from the ACC?

Let's just say the B1G takes UNC, UVA, Duke, Miami, Georgia Tech. And maybe the SEC takes Clemson, Florida State, Virginia Tech and NC State. Something like that.

At that point it's...Colorado/Arizona? New York/Boston? Those are the big populations centers that aren't represented? And we all know that there's no single school that "delivers" NY or Boston. The interest in those markets are for the big event games, which would still occur.

I don't want this to happen. I just think the greed of the B1G and SEC, coupled with there being no guardrails on college athletics, is going to lead where most everything else in America has gone over the past couple decades. That being, massive consolidation and a gigantic gap between haves and have nots.

 

[IthacaMatt]

The student pool may further constrict because of AI. Certainly some majors may become defunct. Some prospective students may lean towards jobs you need an actual human to complete.

I don't think so. Some AI "guru" said a year ago that 40-50% of all "knowledge jobs" would be replaced by now. Good call. I see so many out of work lawyers, accountants, and engineers because of that damn AI.

 

[Orangefizz]

I get your point. Although, what part of the country would the B1G and SEC be ignoring if they poached teams from the ACC?

Let's just say the B1G takes UNC, UVA, Duke, Miami, Georgia Tech. And maybe the SEC takes Clemson, Florida State, Virginia Tech and NC State. Something like that.

At that point it's...Colorado/Arizona? New York/Boston? Those are the big populations centers that aren't represented? And we all know that there's no single school that "delivers" NY or Boston. The interest in those markets are for the big event games, which would still occur.

I don't want this to happen. I just think the greed of the B1G and SEC, coupled with there being no guardrails on college athletics, is going to lead where most everything else in America has gone over the past couple decades. That being, massive consolidation and a gigantic gap between haves and have nots.

Penn St and ND deliver the northeast market.

 

[IthacaMatt]

I get your point. Although, what part of the country would the B1G and SEC be ignoring if they poached teams from the ACC?

Let's just say the B1G takes UNC, UVA, Duke, Miami, Georgia Tech. And maybe the SEC takes Clemson, Florida State, Virginia Tech and NC State. Something like that.

At that point it's...Colorado/Arizona? New York/Boston? Those are the big populations centers that aren't represented? And we all know that there's no single school that "delivers" NY or Boston. The interest in those markets are for the big event games, which would still occur.

I don't want this to happen. I just think the greed of the B1G and SEC, coupled with there being no guardrails on college athletics, is going to lead where most everything else in America has gone over the past couple decades. That being, massive consolidation and a gigantic gap between haves and have nots.

I just don't see how conferences can have more than 20 teams, like you're suggesting here. Doesn't mean it won't happen, because they are well along the way in ruining college sports. But this would be a disaster.

 

[dan7800]

At that point it's...Colorado/Arizona? New York/Boston? Those are the big populations centers that aren't represented? And we all know that there's no single school that "delivers" NY or Boston. The interest in those markets are for the big event games, which would still occur.

That jerk NJ school has NY -- supposedly.

 

[David321]

What is FSU's argument for more revenue, is it based on their ratings or something? It's not like they're ever consistent on the field.

 

[SmilinBob]

Isn't the extra revenue paid to the schools that are the most successful and not directed towards any one school? For example: Go to the Championship game and you get a bigger cut?

 

[kcsu]

Isn't the extra revenue paid to the schools that are the most successful and not directed towards any one school? For example: Go to the Championship game and you get a bigger cut?

That was the plan based on the existing contract. I haven't dug into this yet but I believe the new plan is also going to have a ratings component as well.
Wins will matter but so will viewership. By creating marquee games ( FSU ND, Clemson ND) more often through a disproportionate scheduling arrangement, ESPN increases viewership and revenue. The schools that create the additional revenue receive an increased distribution of revenue vs today's equal split.
In short. More wins equals more money. College playoff appearances equal more money and increased viewership equals more money for the schools that produce the above revenue streams.
The part that I understand but unfortunately puts Syracuse in a second tier position within the ACC revenue pecking order is that by giving both FSU and Clemson extra ND games they are assured of increased viewership.
Now if that increases the overall revenue for all teams even though Clemson and FSU would get a higher payout it is still a positive for the league and all of its members as every school gets an increase and the league remains intact and keeps two of its strongest brands in the league.
Syracuse needs to play the long game. Change today will result in a weaker position for us. 2031 and 2036 are an eternity from now. I strongly believe that between today and 2036 because of legislation and an eventual collective bargaining agreement that Syracuse and other like schools will be in a good place.
Last season proved that we have the resources currently to be competitive. The extension and retention of our current members clearly solidifies the ACC as the 3rd most powerful league. Our goal has to be based on winning within our league. Period. By doing so we then have an opportunity to compete against the other leagues. Going forward I hope that our athletic department schedules our non conference games accordingly.
Playing a difficult non conference schedule doesn't make much of a difference if our team isn't able to compete within the league as a result of being beaten up by too many non conference challenges.
Sorry for the long winded post but I will be relieved when the extension is finalized.
It provides stability and enough financial resources for SU to remain competitive and relevant while this new collegiate model evolves.