• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

Conference Expansion: Stanford, California and SMU Join the ACC

I don't understand, assuming the ACC GoR is iron-clad, how any team is going to leave before 2036. The whole point of going to the B1G/SEC would be significantly increased TV revenue. But if you leave, you have to pay the ACC that revenue until the GoR expires (along with $52 million), so how would that make any sense? Is the only fear that the opportunity might not be in place in 2036 to join one of the "Big 2", so it's important to "strike while the iron is hot" now and accept hundreds of millions in losses?
 
Bud Foster was not head coach material. He wasn’t a very DC in his last years, either. Admitting VT to the ACC almost didn’t happen. UVA was forced to flip its vote to let them in by the legislature and Governor of Va by threatening to cut its funding if they voted to keep VT out.
 
Bud Foster was not head coach material. He wasn’t a very DC in his last years, either. Admitting VT to the ACC almost didn’t happen. UVA was forced to flip its vote to let them in by the legislature and Governor of Va by threatening to cut its funding if they voted to keep VT out.

I agree it was an arranged marriage, but they were a very strong program when they came in nonetheless- so in a way- fell into our lap - they had finished season twice in top 10 in last 5 years when they came in and after they came in, they finished season ranked 10 and 7 in 2004 and 2005. They really started to fall off after 2011 and that’s when FB should have retired - instead he waited another 4 years. On BF- yeah in 2017-2019- he was past his prime and not that effective but you can’t tell me he wouldn’t have been a good HC in 2012.
 
Governor Warner reminded the UVA President and Board that they “serve at the pleasure of the Governor.” So: vote to keep VT out of any expansion, and you’re fired.
 
I think DC under Beamer was a good fit for Bud. Not sure he would have been a good head of the program.
 
I don't understand, assuming the ACC GoR is iron-clad, how any team is going to leave before 2036. The whole point of going to the B1G/SEC would be significantly increased TV revenue. But if you leave, you have to pay the ACC that revenue until the GoR expires (along with $52 million), so how would that make any sense? Is the only fear that the opportunity might not be in place in 2036 to join one of the "Big 2", so it's important to "strike while the iron is hot" now and accept hundreds of millions in losses?

Because if you're Clemson or FSU and your biggest rivals from the SEC are getting $30 million a year more than you, you can only stomach it for so long. At some point to makes financial sense to leave the ACC and pay off the GOR or lose that money for a few years, assuming you can make it happen legally.

There's no way this thing goes to 2036 in its current state. And if it does the ACC will be completely hobbled by the 30+ teams in the B1G and SEC.
 
Another part of the grant of rights is permissions. As in permission to have a broadcast made from the school. Any school trying to leave may not have permission from the ACC Office to have any broadcast for any sport originate from its facilities. No home game broadcasts for 14 years make any school much less attractive.
 
I think DC under Beamer was a good fit for Bud. Not sure he would have been a good head of the program.

I don’t entirely disagree with that but my point is that generally speaking - you are better off elevating an assistant rather than having a legend be there too long to keep a program relevant even if the “next guy” isn’t the long-term answer. Look at Texas with Mack Brown, FSU with Bobby Bowden, Fulmer with Tennessee, Osborne with Nebraska, etc. I think all their alums would agree those guys stayed 4-5 years too long. Those programs have a lot more resources than VT and it set them all back 5+ years. Could argue that Nebraska never recovered from that but their fall is much more complicated than that. Same can be said for Tennessee.
 
There's no way this thing goes to 2036 in its current state. And if it does the ACC will be completely hobbled by the 30+ teams in the B1G and SEC.

You'd have to think enough teams would want to opt out that they could dissolve the conference right? Is that even a thing?
 
I don’t entirely disagree with that but my point is that generally speaking - you are better off elevating an assistant rather than having a legend be there too long to keep a program relevant even if the “next guy” isn’t the long-term answer. Look at Texas with Mack Brown, FSU with Bobby Bowden, Fulmer with Tennessee, Osborne with Nebraska, etc. I think all their alums would agree those guys stayed 4-5 years too long. Those programs have a lot more resources than VT and it set them all back 5+ years. Could argue that Nebraska never recovered from that but their fall is much more complicated than that. Same can be said for Tennessee.

Osborne retired after going 13-0 and winning his third NC in four seasons - Nebraska didn't turn into a pile of hot garbage until they decided to can Frank Solich for being unable to continue that historic level of success.
 
ACC is probably on the phone right now with ND, Oregon and maybe Stanford. They want to add brands, not necessarily tv markets anymore. UCLA went to the Big 10 not because they are really good at football, but because the Big 10 wanted the brand. If the ACC cant do something to increase revenue and increase big games, they will probably be poached soon.

These are the only schools that I have heard mentioned so far that would add value to the ACC because they are all nationally known brands.
 
You'd have to think enough teams would want to opt out that they could dissolve the conference right? Is that even a thing?

This is the pitch that needs to be made by some of the small schools. "It will cost you less to just bring us with you than it will to leave us behind." Small schools would see an increase in brand value by being attached to a mega conference, so it might not be a horrible idea.
 
tiered payouts based on success in football and to a lesser extent basketball?
 
Osborne retired after going 13-0 and winning his third NC in four seasons - Nebraska didn't turn into a pile of hot garbage until they decided to can Frank Solich for being unable to continue that historic level of success.

Solich took them to a national championship game, no less.
 
Because if you're Clemson or FSU and your biggest rivals from the SEC are getting $30 million a year more than you, you can only stomach it for so long. At some point to makes financial sense to leave the ACC and pay off the GOR or lose that money for a few years, assuming you can make it happen legally.

There's no way this thing goes to 2036 in its current state. And if it does the ACC will be completely hobbled by the 30+ teams in the B1G and SEC.

So you take $0 for 14 years instead of $30+ million per year to bolt? I guess the thinking is that the ACC would have to negotiate on the exit fees/requirements and a school could get off much easier than $52 million plus all TV rights until 2036? I know Maryland only paid $31 million instead of $52 million after a bunch of negotiations.
 
You'd have to think enough teams would want to opt out that they could dissolve the conference right? Is that even a thing?

That is a thing, but there has to be an incentive in you wanting to leave.

Said this on the podcast, but if Oregon and Washington (two very large brands, Oregon has *NIKE*) won't generate enough money for the Big Ten to justify taking them, that should be a warning shot to places like Louisville/UNC/Pitt etc that you're not worth as much as you think you are.

To the SEC, why would ESPN pay more money to get you out of a conference when they already own your rights? They can continue to throw you on TV for cheap, even in a reworked deal + uneven revenue sharing, and they can just pile up the money
 
So you take $0 for 14 years instead of $30+ million per year to bolt? I guess the thinking is that the ACC would have to negotiate on the exit fees/requirements and a school could get off much easier than $52 million plus all TV rights until 2036? I know Maryland only paid $31 million instead of $52 million after a bunch of negotiations.

Something like that, but what I just suggested was that an ACC team may stick around for a few more years until the financial breakpoint comes and it's worthwhile to make the leap. And yes, there would be some negotiation.

However, the new CFP arrangement, whatever it is, is probably going to dictate a lot of decisions. And that's coming sooner, rather than later. And ultimately, the longer the bigger brands stick around the ACC, the more they'll see their brands, and their ability to compete, diminished by the B1G and the SEC.
 
Back
Top