The alliance scheduling agreement already looks dead in football

[Hoo's That]

Titler IX causes all kinds of trouble.

Title IX is the main problem for the major players. There has long been a story "on the street" that Florida State has a sugar daddy who will pony up the money to pay for both lacrosse teams if they can get their Title IX numbers to work. It was hoped that Corrigan's becoming the AD at State would mean they'd restart their team. They do have a plyer in the lacrosse Hall of Fame who's the father of two players who went to UVa. The "little guys" (you know, the D-3 schools that moved up to D-1 for the basketball money) all love Title IX because a goodly number of them don't play football, so their number is easier to reach and they know it keeps D-1 MLax from turning into D-1 basketball with their competitiveness totally gone because the SEC, Pac-12, and the remainders of the B1G and ACC can't meet the number.

Saturday vs. SU, UVa will start a Texan in the goal and one at close defense, one close defenseman from Minnesota and one from California, and a Texan at long-stick midfielder, who played close defense last year.

 

[HtownOrange]

Title IX is the main problem for the major players. There has long been a story "on the street" that Florida State has a sugar daddy who will pony up the money to pay for both lacrosse teams if they can get their Title IX numbers to work. It was hoped that Corrigan's becoming the AD at State would mean they'd restart their team. They do have a plyer in the lacrosse Hall of Fame who's the father of two players who went to UVa. The "little guys" (you know, the D-3 schools that moved up to D-1 for the basketball money) all love Title IX because a goodly number of them don't play football, so their number is easier to reach and they know it keeps D-1 MLax from turning into D-1 basketball with their competitiveness totally gone because the SEC, Pac-12, and the remainders of the B1G and ACC can't meet the number.

Saturday vs. SU, UVa will start a Texan in the goal and one at close defense, one close defenseman from Minnesota and one from California, and a Texan at long-stick midfielder, who played close defense last year.

Wait until you see where our starters are from...

Title IX is a problem, but the P5 have no legitimate argument when each conference rakes in far more money that the other conferences. The actual costs are very small in the big picture. Besides, if Rutgers can afford to lose $73MM annually while funding lacrosse, then the remaining schools can lose a little on lacrosse. Besides, most schools don't field women's lacrosse teams, starting up both makes Title IX moot (unless you are GATech and need another men's sport because the ratio favors men).

Anyway, if the B1G is really looking $100MM payouts, then each schools should be forced - by their conference - to field baseball/softball, lacrosse (m/w teams), and hockey (m/w teams). The SEC should do likewise, though they should have another option for hockey, just sayin'... The ACC being a bit behind, should require each school field a lacrosse team (and baseball, yes, SU, I am looking at you!). After all, this is about educating people, not about making money...*

*the preceding paragraph was written in sarcastic font for those who may lack a "sarcasm font" on their device.)

 

[kcsu]

The ACC will be fine. Why because ESPN is finally getting competition. Now that they can see the end of their monopoly i believe they have every reason to strengthen what they already own. The last thing they want is to have the ACC and its growing population, rich content get picked apart by leagues they dont control.
My two cents is we get a bump within 3 years and i wouldn't rule out an alliance with the X or the Pac with Mouse money.

 

[TheCusian]

The ACC will be fine. Why because ESPN is finally getting competition. Now that they can see the end of their monopoly i believe they have every reason to strengthen what they already own. The last thing they want is to have the ACC and its growing population, rich content get picked apart by leagues they dont control.
My two cents is we get a bump within 3 years and i wouldn't rule out an alliance with the X or the Pac with Mouse money.

yeah but they are mad at us <insert eyeroll>

 

[Alsacs]

yeah but they are mad at us <insert eyeroll>

Your snark ignores ESPN destroyed the Big East and gutted the Big XII.
But eye roll you really get this stuff.

 

[Alsacs]

 

[HRE Otto IV]

Your snark ignores ESPN destroyed the Big East and gutted the Big XII.
But eye roll you really get this stuff.

ESPN wanted to consolidate the inventory that they already owned. So those conferences going away didn't hurt. If the ACC dies then ESPN loses a ton of inventory. If anything they should want to overpay to prevent that from happening.

 

[HRE Otto IV]

That was a silly article. The B1G could have blocked expansion on their own, or with the P12. They didn't need the ACC. The SEC can't control the playoff format, the others have to agree.

 

[Alsacs]

ESPN wanted to consolidate the inventory that they already owned. So those conferences going away didn't hurt. If the ACC dies then ESPN loses a ton of inventory. If anything they should want to overpay to prevent that from happening.

ESPN is going to get the value it can out of its current deal.
Then suck the value it wants out of the ACC if the ACC tries to actually get more money than ESPN wants to pay.

It’s what they did to the Big XII.
They didn’t want to pay 400 million a year for the Big XIi so pay the SEC an extra 100+ and take the value out of the conference.

I know you get business.

ESPN will do the same thing to the ACC.

 

[Killdozer]

ESPN is going to get the value it can out of its current deal.
Then suck the value it wants out of the ACC if the ACC tries to actually get more money than ESPN wants to pay.

It’s what they did to the Big XII.
They didn’t want to pay 400 million a year for the Big XIi so pay the SEC an extra 100+ and take the value out of the conference.

I know you get business.

ESPN will do the same thing to the ACC.

So you are saying that the ACC will not exist after their contract is up?

 

[HRE Otto IV]

ESPN is going to get the value it can out of its current deal.
Then suck the value it wants out of the ACC if the ACC tries to actually get more money than ESPN wants to pay.

It’s what they did to the Big XII.
They didn’t want to pay 400 million a year for the Big XIi so pay the SEC an extra 100+ and take the value out of the conference.

I know you get business.

ESPN will do the same thing to the ACC.

The choices for ESPN are:

A. Keep the ACC happy now (lookin bumps) and then offer a contract extension in 2034 where they are overpaying the ACC.

or

B. Milk the ACC and then in 2034 see the B1G/FOX steal all of the ACC teams of value (UNC, Duke, UVA, GA Tech, Notre Dame, FSU, Clemson, Miami, SU, BC and maybe Pitt).


If ESPN doesn't choose A, then they are stuck with the SEC only for all major college sports. That is fine for football but they will have a lot less content December through August.

Edit

As to the B12, ESPN owned Texas the only real value add. As long as Texas was happy ESPN didn't need to poor money in. Then ESPN pushed Texas to the SEC, leaving nothing behind. That won't happen in the ACC as UNC/Duke rather be in the B1G than SEC, and the B1G wants them as well.

 

[Alsacs]

So you are saying that the ACC will not exist after their contract is up?

I am saying the ACC needs to stop aligning with the Big Ten which doesn’t care about the ACC.

The SEC leaves the ACC alone. The Big Ten wants to take value ffom it.

Align with ESPN and the SEC. Know where your bread is buttered.

ESPN knows what it is doing.
The ACC literally gets nothing out of this alliance.
It’s stupid.

 

[Chip]

I am saying the ACC needs to stop aligning with the Big Ten which doesn’t care about the ACC.

The SEC leaves the ACC alone. The Big Ten wants to take value ffom it.

Align with ESPN and the SEC. Know where your bread is buttered.

ESPN knows what it is doing.
The ACC literally gets nothing out of this alliance.
It’s stupid.

I think alliances are stupid. The current one was just a kneejerk reaction.

The SEC has everything it wants. Everyone should just accept it and get on with their conference lives.

 

[Alsacs]

The choices for ESPN are:

A. Keep the ACC happy now (lookin bumps) and then offer a contract extension in 2034 where they are overpaying the ACC.

or

B. Milk the ACC and then in 2034 see the B1G/FOX steal all of the ACC teams of value (UNC, Duke, UVA, GA Tech, Notre Dame, FSU, Clemson, Miami, SU, BC and maybe Pitt).


If ESPN doesn't choose A, then they are stuck with the SEC only for all major college sports. That is fine for football but they will have a lot less content December through August.

Edit

As to the B12, ESPN owned Texas the only real value add. As long as Texas was happy ESPN didn't need to poor money in. Then ESPN pushed Texas to the SEC, leaving nothing behind. That won't happen in the ACC as UNC/Duke rather be in the B1G than SEC, and the B1G wants them as well.

B isn’t happening IMO.

Also ESPN isn’t stupid they gut a conference before that conference makes a move.
The Big Ten may take a couple ACC schools its not taking what you suggest.

Adding a couple of ACC schools is all they would do.

 

[Alsacs]

What the ACC needs to do is align with ESPN and the SEC.

Let the Big Ten be stuck with the Pac-12.

The fact the ACC/Big Ten/Pac-12 ignored the Big XII in this alliance was even dumber.

They left them out of in the cold and the conference rebounded with BYU/UCF/Houston/Cincinnati nobody has a clue if they will vote with the alliance? They voted for expansion of the CFB. They should be pissed with the SEC but they voted with them.

This chit needs to realized. ACC aligning with Big Ten is stupid.

 

[HRE Otto IV]

B isn’t happening IMO.

Also ESPN isn’t stupid they gut a conference before that conference makes a move.
The Big Ten may take a couple ACC schools its not taking what you suggest.

Adding a couple of ACC schools is all they would do.

Why would the B1G leave any of those schools from that list behind?

 

[Alsacs]

The only way shake ND and force them to move is to get the SEC onboard with a conference affiliation requirement.

The Big Ten won’t help the ACC with that. I mean if the Big Ten caree about the ACC they could have proposed that but they want Notre Dame so why help the ACC.

It’s chit like this people just ignore.
Syracuse won’t be a midmajor but we are going to be in P5 leftovers.

Which is fine. It won’t be poor its just a tier down from SEC and B1G.

 

[HRE Otto IV]

I am saying the ACC needs to stop aligning with the Big Ten which doesn’t care about the ACC.

The SEC leaves the ACC alone. The Big Ten wants to take value ffom it.

Align with ESPN and the SEC. Know where your bread is buttered.

ESPN knows what it is doing.
The ACC literally gets nothing out of this alliance.
It’s stupid.

If the powers within the ACC see the B1G as their future, why would they align with their past (ESPN)?

 

[Alsacs]

Why would the B1G leave any of those schools from that list behind?

Why would the Big Ten lower than annual payouts to add Pittsburgh, Syracuse?
Big Ten would want North Carolina, Duke, Virginia, and then maybe Clemson, Florida State or Georgia Tech.

I don’t know who the 4th would be but UNC/UVA/Duke are a package.

 

[Alsacs]

If the powers within the ACC see the B1G as their future, why would they align with their past (ESPN)?

Then hello UNC/Duke/UVa/VPI to the SEC in 2034.
ESPN isn’t stupid.

 

[HRE Otto IV]

Why would the Big Ten lower than annual payouts to add Pittsburgh, Syracuse?
Big Ten would want North Carolina, Duke, Virginia, and then maybe Clemson, Florida State or Georgia Tech.

I don’t know who the 4th would be but UNC/UVA/Duke are a package.

Why would the payouts go down by adding Pitt? The networks will give the B1G what they want to keep them happy.

 

[HRE Otto IV]

Then hello UNC/Duke/UVa/VPI to the SEC in 2034.
ESPN isn’t stupid.

The powers are UNC/Duke/UVA so why would they go to the SEC?

ESPN has no leverage. They need to keep the ACC together or eventually lose it.

 

[Alsacs]

I

The powers are UNC/Duke/UVA so why would they go to the SEC?

ESPN has no leverage. They need to keep the ACC together or eventually lose it.

i respect you so I am just going to say we have different points. I don’t want to really explain it anymore.
It’s fine. I like your posts so I am just going to end this here.

 

[TheCusian]

Your snark ignores ESPN destroyed the Big East and gutted the Big XII.
But eye roll you really get this stuff.

I'm not worried and neither should you. ESPN ain't junking it's network or all that mad at the ACC. The ACC network just got picked up after some bruising fights.

Truth is ESPN got greedy, tried to roll the playoff thing in while courting two more teams to the SEC - got caught. They had to know it looked like a naked power grab with little benefit to the ACC. A little hand slap reminder that we're not their lap dogs isn't the worst outcome.

<insert eye roll at your comment lol>

 

[TheCusian]

The truth about all of these conference cold wars is that the sport would be better off:

- If more parity existed across regions, financially and in recruiting
- with a overarching leadership entity that has teeth to suppress cheating and make decisions in the sports best interests (like what the NCAA should be)

Short of that, all of this stuff is greedy folks shooting themselves in the foot for short term gain. Let the SEC and B1G eat cake. It's already a hard product to enjoy unless you like gambling or follow like 10-15 teams