• 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

JohnToms said:
tiered payouts based on success in football and to a lesser extent basketball?
Click to expand...

Not necessarily. It's just a numbers game. If you want Clemson and FSU in the SEC, but it is going to cost you 500 million a piece due to contract issues with the ACC, you try to take enough schools to dissolve the conference. If Wake and NC State each averaged 526k and 525k viewers per game last year, but they were in a conference that caused that number to double on average per game, solely based on the "it just means more" eyeballs across the southeast, then they wouldn't be hurting the revenue sharing as much. Also, you have two schools that have proven recently that they would take that increased revenue and invest it back into the program in an attempt to improve the product.

Then you have Duke... they averaged 64k viewers per game last year. That might be below sunbelt level.
 
I think if we get to close to that point and the ACC is left out in the cold, you'd be able to find 8 teams ready to do anything to protect their place in the college sports (football) hierarchy, and the ACC would be done. The thing is, the SEC doesn't need FSU, they just might like to have it in a defensive move against the B1G and the same goes for Clemson and Miami.

Either of those leagues cold just pick off teams from the Big XII and Pac 12, plus Notre Dame, and laugh at John Swofford for all eternity.

Edit: I was responding to '71 who apparently deleted his post and reposted it below.
 
Last edited:
BiffTannen said:
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.
Click to expand...

But why is there a break even point at all? Unless the SEC agrees to subsidize some of the lost TV revenue to the ACC somehow, they'd be getting nothing until 2036 (pre-negotiations). So, unless Clemson thinks there's a chance they get left out in the cold and are undesirable in 2036, why wouldn't they just stay with the ACC and collect our lower, but still $30+ million annual TV revenue until then, and then jump?
 
CamLemons said:
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
Click to expand...

Maybe Oregon and Washington are just not the right schools. SEC/BIG expanding to 20 teams each and dropping out of the NCAA has real value to the two conferences and Fox and ESPN. 20 teams in each would allow Fox and ESPN to set up SEC/BIG NFL-style playoffs and a college Super Bowl. Who knows what the value of that is to the 2 leagues and networks?

Does the ACC dissolve if 8 schools vote as a block to do so? If so, SEC and BIG can kill off the ACC. BIG wants ND. UNC, Duke, and UVA (all AAU universities) would be quality additions, gets them to 20. If the SEC takes Clemson, Miami, FSU, and one of VT/NCS/Lousiville, it goes to 20. While that wouldn't add major markets for ESPN, the ACC's dissolution gets ESPN off the hook for $36 million a year for each school left out of expansion (projected to grow to perhaps $60 million by the end of the decade) and kills off the ACC Network. SEC and BIG re-negotiate their ESPN and Fox media rights and jointly dominate college football and basketball.
 
Because it's like a death penalty to their football program for at least six years. They almost have to do something or accept playing in what amounts to a G5 league in a few years. Which is why something's going to get worked out before 12 years from now. The ACC's "big" teams have enough pull that they can either fix the ACC or flush the thing down the toilet for their own benefit. They will find a way.
 
tigerswood said:
But why is there a break even point at all? Unless the SEC agrees to subsidize some of the lost TV revenue to the ACC somehow, they'd be getting nothing until 2036 (pre-negotiations). So, unless Clemson thinks there's a chance they get left out in the cold and are undesirable in 2036, why wouldn't they just stay with the ACC and collect our lower, but still $30+ million annual TV revenue until then, and then jump?
Click to expand...

My understanding is that the teams who would leave would simply have to pay their $30M+ (or whatever the exactly number is) per season to the ACC and then they'd pocket whatever amount over that the Big Ten or SEC pays out to member schools - you'd therefore reach a point where the net coming from the new conference exceeds the gross you'd get from being an ACC member.
 
The emphasis on TV markets is overstated. It's important but at this point the SEC and Big 10 are more interested in brands. The big changes of the last year, with OU and UT to SEC and USC and UCLA to Big 10, are all about brand. Regardless of recent success, those four schools are nationally known brands from college football. That's why Clemson, FSU, Miami are attractive.
 
WFU71 said:
Maybe Oregon and Washington are just not the right schools. SEC/BIG expanding to 20 teams each and dropping out of the NCAA has real value to the two conferences and Fox and ESPN. 20 teams in each would allow Fox and ESPN to set up SEC/BIG NFL-style playoffs and a college Super Bowl. Who knows what the value of that is to the 2 leagues and networks?

Does the ACC dissolve if 8 schools vote as a block to do so? If so, SEC and BIG can kill off the ACC. BIG wants ND. UNC, Duke, and UVA (all AAU universities) would be quality additions, gets them to 20. If the SEC takes Clemson, Miami, FSU, and one of VT/NCS/Lousiville, it goes to 20. While that wouldn't add major markets for ESPN, the ACC's dissolution gets ESPN off the hook for $36 million a year for each school left out of expansion (projected to grow to perhaps $60 million by the end of the decade) and kills off the ACC Network. SEC and BIG re-negotiate their ESPN and Fox media rights and jointly dominate college football and basketball.
Click to expand...

I get the AAU thing, but I'm not sure what the appeal is for Duke in this football driven expansion. Paying them BIG or SEC money would be the equivalent of taking piles of cash in the parking lot and setting it on fire.
 
JKW385 said:
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.
Click to expand...

All good points. And we’ll never know if Ol’ Bud could have kept it going. The 9-6 loss to us in Lane Stadium in Clawson’s first year (I think) should have made it clear it was time for Beamer to let it go.
 
CamLemons said:
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
Click to expand...

I listened to the podcast today and I thought those were really good points.

I’ll add that if ESPN wants to televise games between SEC schools and Clemson, FSU, and Miami, they can set up the games already because they own the rights to both conferences.

I’m not sure why ESPN would want to go all in on a Super League. I’m not sure there’s that much money in it for them vs. how much it could weaken their other properties.
 
88Deac said:
All good points. And we’ll never know if Ol’ Bud could have kept it going. The 9-6 loss to us in Lane Stadium in Clawson’s first year (I think) should have made it clear it was time for Beamer to let it go.
Click to expand...

Yeah that was rock bottom - 0-0 at end of regulation and it was at Groves in 2014- and yes that was DC’s first year. Beamer coached one more year to end of 2015. Yeah I don’t know if BF would have taken them to the CFP but they would be better in shape than they are now if he had even coached 3-4 years and kept them relevant nationally. I heard he enjoyed way too many Buds and Fosters which is I’m sure is part of the reason he was never a HC.
 
WFU71 said:
Maybe Oregon and Washington are just not the right schools. SEC/BIG expanding to 20 teams each and dropping out of the NCAA has real value to the two conferences and Fox and ESPN. 20 teams in each would allow Fox and ESPN to set up SEC/BIG NFL-style playoffs and a college Super Bowl. Who knows what the value of that is to the 2 leagues and networks?

Does the ACC dissolve if 8 schools vote as a block to do so? If so, SEC and BIG can kill off the ACC. BIG wants ND. UNC, Duke, and UVA (all AAU universities) would be quality additions, gets them to 20. If the SEC takes Clemson, Miami, FSU, and one of VT/NCS/Lousiville, it goes to 20. While that wouldn't add major markets for ESPN, the ACC's dissolution gets ESPN off the hook for $36 million a year for each school left out of expansion (projected to grow to perhaps $60 million by the end of the decade) and kills off the ACC Network. SEC and BIG re-negotiate their ESPN and Fox media rights and jointly dominate college football and basketball.
Click to expand...

Eh the only thing that makes someone the "right school" is how much money they bring in. People that have run the numbers before say they won't bring in enough

There's a reason UCLA/USC were brought in to the Big Ten and not any other school just as there was a reason the SEC only poached Texas and OU from the Big 12.

The ACC dissolving actually does hurt ESPN. There's value to them in having brands they want to broadcast for cheap until closer to the end. Louisville doesn't add as much value as fans think, neither do NC State nor Virginia Tech. Not saying at the end of all of this in a few years they all don't end up there, but none of those brands are worth you 1) losing a few ND games a year for relatively cheap and 2) getting Clemson/Miami/FSU rights for cheap. You ride that off as much as possible.

Big Ten can want a lot of things, but they're not breaking the bank for Duke or UVA or even UNC if they're not breaking the bank for Oregon or Washington
 
JKW385 said:
Yeah that was rock bottom - 0-0 at end of regulation and it was at Groves in 2014- and yes that was DC’s first year. Beamer coached one more year to end of 2015. Yeah I don’t know if BF would have taken them to the CFP but they would be better in shape than they are now if he had even coached 3-4 years and kept them relevant nationally. I heard he enjoyed way too many Buds and Fosters which is I’m sure is part of the reason he was never a HC.
Click to expand...

I’ve heard a lot of hearsay BF likes the women and bottle more a little…
 
More than a little.* Not sure he ever got an offer at a good sized school.
 
Any money that gets “negotiated away” if a team leaves the conference is ultimately money that should’ve ended up mainly in Wake Forest’s and a few other “conference undesirables’” pockets.
 
So we are going to have two major conferences with teams on each coast. Thrilling matches like UCLA at Maryland and UCF at Cal.
 
according to that article, Cal would be on the outside looking in along with Stanford, Wazzou, Oregon State (Stanford hoping ND throws them the ultimate lifeline by partnering to enter the B1G)
 
Call me a homer or eternal optimist, but I think somehow the ACC gets Notre Dame to join in all sports. ND loves playing games in the growing, recruit rich south and I don't see them wanting to be second fiddle or on even standing with THE Ohio State, Michigan, USC ect. The ACC will have to give them a sweetheart deal and probably guarantee a certain higher payout, but I just have this feeling Phillips gets it done.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top