(03-28-2023 03:21 AM)AllTideUp Wrote: (03-27-2023 10:35 PM)JRsec Wrote: (03-27-2023 08:19 PM)OdinFrigg Wrote: Listening to a considerable amount of local Clemson chatter, they want much more $$$$$. They would be happy with SEC-level money while remaining in the ACC. Clemson, FSU, Miami, UNC, etc., know they will not receive P2-standard revenue in the ACC, even if the conference moves to unequal distributions.
I suppose, theotetically, the SEC could bring an eight member ACC division under its umbrella. How much more will ESPN fork-out to those schools for changing their label?
I keep repeating: get that Charlotte market while adding FSU and Clemson. Miami can be gravy.
That is the ideal foursome for the SEC. i guess the question will always be what does ESPN want since they are paying for it.
Those are the 4 best brands and markets. But maybe ESPN doesn't want to cave on having a monopoly in Florida. It would cost them money if FOX got in.
Florida State, Clemson, MIami, North Carolina? Do you deep six Clemson because South Carolina gives us the state? Then you are looking at Florida State, Miami, North Carolina and Virginia Tech.
What if ESPN is worried about losing the top basketball brands to FOX and figures the SEC football is tough enough? Duke, Kansas, North Carolina and Virginia, or perhaps a compromise with the SEC who needs a second Florida school to meet demand for games in that state from conference members. Now it changes again, Florida State, North Carolina, Duke and Virginia. And frankly that configuration, much as I wouldn't like it is likely if ESPN has concerns to protect those brands. You can like Miami, and love Va Tech, but they aren't the brands of those 4. And note who else is absent, Clemson.
So there is a lot of food for thought here and a lot more permutations than many would believe. And this is the sole reason a move to 8 is not impossible, though less profitable. At least at 8 Clemson and Miami are in. The beef now is who is #7 and #8? Here's where I speculate on Kansas and Colorado. Two new states, two state flagships, 10 million new SEC potential viewers, a new time zone, the blueblood in hoops who only is second to Kentucky in earnings, and a great vacation destination for SEC fans. Is that worth more than nearby Georgia Tech? Worth more than N.C. State? And if Virginia is coming on board is it worth more than adding Virginia Tech? Which would ESPN prefer? So first four Duke, North Carolina, Virginia (the three amigos and most sought TV brands), Florida State, Miami to keep the Sunshine monopoly, Clemson because they are the most like us, and....... So far you have 3 state AAU flagships in this catch. Florida State is considered Flagship and along with Miami they are in the running for AAU in the future. N.C. State and Va Tech are likely ahead of them in this regard. Colorado and Kansas are AAU state flagships in new states.
You guys solve it.
The main reason I keep thinking 4 is less likely is because the ACC needs a critical mass of schools, or so the theory goes, to disband the league.
Now, they could allow Florida State to go, but I doubt they would craft a deal to allow all 4 of those schools, who have made noise, to go. I don't think those 4 would be talking about more revenue at this stage unless there was a reasonable exit plan with which to hold over other members.
With that said, I don't see ESPN being super happy about allowing any brands they really want to go to the Big Ten and effectively to Fox. Maybe some in the Big 12 would work, but I don't see this being a great move for ESPN's content value unless most of the best brands end up in the SEC assuming they move at all.
Florida State and Miami, I think would move together. I don't see either preferring the Big Ten and it makes too much sense for both to play in the SEC where their brand value can be maximized. Let's also keep in mind that both have improving basketball programs. Miami has just made the Final Four for example. Florida State is typically pretty good these days. That fits into the SEC vision, and it also is in keeping with a rise in overall basketball revenue. Taking both of those schools does not weaken that effort even if they're primarily football brands.
Clemson makes too much sense from a brand and cultural perspective. I'm sure South Carolina wants them included as that's a huge and prosperous rivalry. Consider also that Clemson already has regional rivalries with other SEC schools...regardless of the conference affiliation, they've been going head to head on the recruiting trail against SEC brass for a long time. They are one of the few programs that has consistently been in the CFP despite ACC revenue being a disadvantage. Basically, Clemson against a ton of other SEC schools makes for good ratings. From a market perspective, they help grab a slice of NC too.
North Carolina seems like one of those ace jewels the presidents used to talk about. I don't see them moving from their state alone though. Would it be Duke? That's the biggest basketball rivalry in the country so it tracks for TV. NC State is the other major state school though and it makes sense the politicos would want to protect them. Both? I suppose it's possible.
Virginia and Virginia Tech both make sense too. New state and they might be tied as well politically.
Georgia Tech makes sense simply because I think the Big Ten might be interested. They did jump all the way across the country for USC and UCLA so geography isn't their primary concern. That and travel from Atlanta to the hubs of the Big Ten wouldn't be all that bad. GT already shares a time zone with many of them so it's not as altogether difficult a travel schedule as going out West would be. Granted, GT doesn't bring the brand value of USC or UCLA for that matter. But if the Big Ten need one more school to even things out? They could do worse. That and the politicians in GA would probably prefer the 2 flagships be in the same league.
Speaking of politics and economics, one of the main reasons I think the SEC might actually look at more schools from the ACC footprint as opposed to the Big 12 footprint is we're talking about overall influence. A couple of flagships or a significant private school from ACC territory is not just about athletic revenue. There's a lot of advantages in being connected to the money infrastructure all the way around of these states and markets. Texas completed the deal for that state rather than initiating it. Texas and Texas A&M together represent a heck of a lot of money and influence in that state. Oklahoma is more significant by itself. Taking Oklahoma State is just not in the same ballpark.
The state of SC is not huge, granted, but South Carolina and Clemson are relatively equal in influence. They both have a large place in the ecosystem. Same for the states of NC and VA.
Kansas makes a lot of sense for content value although ESPN already controls a lot of it so it's not a dire need at this stage from ESPN's perspective. KU is not in a position to demand significantly higher revenue and destabilize their league at the moment...it's just a different situation than what we see in the ACC.
Colorado could be beneficial and technically, they're a free agent unless the PAC signs a deal soon. It's a new, growing state and ESPN doesn't currently have a major presence there. This is assuming the PAC doesn't throw most of their content to ESPN and who knows what's going to happen there.
So what are your picks? I don't disagree with the reasoning, but reasoning in this case is a finger trap. The more you reason the less likely you are to decide.
Here is what I think is likely:
Florida State: Word is they want out and want out very badly. Nobody else in the ACC matches the intensity of their desperation to leave. Does ESPN placate them with a move to the SEC and use the situation to their advantage? I'll answer that later in this post.
If only FSU leaves the ACC, there is plenty of football power left to keep their status. FSU doesn't not cost the ACC a loss of market footprint for the ACCN as long as Miami remains. It may well be within ESPN's comfort zone to move the Noles at a reasonable buyout which helps placate the ACC, along with additions.
Let's say the ACC loses FSU. They've lost a major brand. They have not lost Florida's market. Especially if UCF gets invited, or South Florida. If you replace the Noles with 3 by adding West Virginia and Cincinnati to UCF you add markets in Ohio and reconnect your footprint and maintain 2 destinations in Florida. If ESPN opens the contract for renegotiation the subtraction and additions can be made without voiding the GOR. Florida State leaves for an exit fee. Everyone gets a small raise for the additions, and a larger one for the market additions to the ACCN through the subscription fees added in Ohio.
And there's more which I will address at the end.
To balance the FSU move to the SEC ESPN would take Kansas from the Big 12. Why? Because against schools not nationally recognized Kansas's branding would slip. To protect their value you pit them against brands, particularly former Big 12 brands. Kansas moves for the 50 million Texas and Oklahoma paid.
Won't FOX and the Big 12 raise hell about this? No.
The Big 12 is down to 8 schools, losing its outliers in the process, and not losing the state of Kansas since they retain Kansas State.
The only collusion between FOX and ESPN began with the release of Texas and Oklahoma which seemed to me to have a dangling quid pro quo. I think what's dangling is Notre Dame. I think the Irish will join the Big 10 sooner or later. The move of Florida State opens an opportunity for ESPN to let the Irish either fully go, or look the other way while they partially go. Notre Dame's value monetizes and covers the additions of Washington (which was a slight bump for the Big 10), Oregon (which was essentially a wash for the Big 10), and Stanford (which needed some covering to make it happen).
FOX would like for the Big 10 to move to 20 now. Oregon, Washington, Stanford, and Notre Dame (either fully or partially) accomplish that move profitably. And since the SEC doesn't give a hoot about the PAC 12 schools as a whole, and since the SEC doesn't expect to land Notre Dame if they can pick up a major hoops brand to drive games with Kentucky to rival the Duke / UNC series its a win. We would stay at 18 either in 3 divisions of six or without divisions.
These moves open the door for the New Big 12 to consolidate branding and regionalize more effectively.
They add eight: Arizona, Arizona State, Colorado, Fresno State, Oregon State, San Diego State, Utah, and Washington State. If Cal wants to join drop Fresno, but I doubt they will.
To these very nice 16 schools geographically grouped Yormark adds the more Midwestern and Western top basketball brands without any football affiliations.
This new Big 12 now spends less on travel, makes more for their product, and is given a subscription based network courtesy of the LHN.
The ACC reorganizes with 16 schools, possibly still affiliated in some way with Notre Dame, and looks to join forces with the remaining Eastern Big East schools for hoops expansion.
Now the networks have all of the major hoops programs, all of the major football programs, grouped in 4 conferences which can breakaway and create a new upper tier for both revenue sports.
The SEC and Big 10 are appeased in that neither is raiding the East to keep the other out.
The SEC has its second needed Florida School, South Carolina and Clemson is protected as an OOC rival as are Ga Tech vs Georgia, and Louisville vs Kentucky, and Miami vs Florida or Florida State, or both.
The Big 10 completes its westward expansion, secures Notre Dame in one fashion or another, and NBC and CBS benefit along with FOX, and ESPN keeps everything it wanted to begin with when it preserves its relationship with FSU and adds Kansas.
We end with a P4 in which the Super 2 dominate football branding and the Next 2 go full scope dominating hoops to make up ground.
Why do I think this could be likely?
1. It's simple and the Big 10 additional moves are expected.
2. It preserves the greater alignment in the new P4 and gives full access to those who would have felt they deserved it. So it promotes some G5s and that helps defray legal claims.
3. It doesn't piss any major players off. UNC, Duke, and Virginia keep their conference and earn more. The Big 10 grows and lands its whale. The SEC meets two needs. The Big 12 grows and thrives and eliminates costly travel. FOX and ESPN both get what they want and can work together on the expanded CFP (think 16) and the new Hoops Tourney. The two combined should profit both about 1 billion a year.
4. The SEC prefers smaller to massive and didn't really want the ACC schools we've all talked about unless it absolutely had to take them to keep the Big 10 out of our region. So a healthy ACC minus FSU is totally in our best interest.
