(10-09-2026 12:15 PM)random asian guy Wrote:  ....
Pure speculation, but let’s think about this.

1. The Gang of Four allegedly considers a PE-funded structure outside of a traditional conference.
2. The current PCSA bill requires at least three years of independence.
3. The settlement terms between FSU/Clemson and the ACC let ACC schools (at least six members) leave the ACC to join a “single sport league, conference or other association.”

So what I can envision is an association of independent schools only for football.

They would play other independent schools in that association, but there would be no rules forcing them to. They could schedule anyone they want.

The association would negotiate the collective media deal for them, with the money split based on the contribution each member makes.

This would be only for football so they would continue playing basketball and other sports in their current conference. Technically, ND could join this “association of independents” for football.

Again, this is pure speculation and I don’t think it will happen, but it’s the type of idea FSU and Clemson would explore as a fallback option in my view.

Well seen.



The ACC litigation settlement terms set a flat exit fee of $75M per school should at least six current members become independents in one sport or form/join a unique entity for it.

Schools who do this remain ACC members in all other sports. The provision essentially allows a Notre Dame option for everybody.

Something like this could get a body of schools through an interim indie period, as you say.

It takes at least six schools to do it. Notre Dame can be one of them.

Giving destination conferences a ceiling of 22 rather than 20 could help effect the move.



For reasons.





Speculation, of course.
__

(10-09-2026 02:19 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(10-09-2026 07:19 AM)JRsec Wrote:  

(10-09-2026 06:48 AM)Gitanole Wrote:  

(10-09-2026 06:37 AM)JRsec Wrote:  

(10-09-2026 12:29 AM)Gitanole Wrote:  Same difference, though. If it ‘has been asserted over and over again by conference officials’ that the P2 feel blissed out at 18–20, for some reason Mr. Levine and Mr. Campbell don’t seem very reassured by those assertions. And for some reason Mr. Sankey and Mr. Petitti don’t show much concern that they don’t.

Meanwhile, it’s an odd Business 101 class where university presidents in a pair of billion-dollar conferences referred to as “Power Two” have no agency—in which these helpless victims don’t really want their enterprises to expand, but a handful of schools can somehow invite themselves in at gunpoint because networks.

Could be true, though. And I admit that last bit sounds entertaining.

Let’s see what happens.

Nah, it seems to me that the only ones who are concerned are the ones who sued to get out of the bad relationship only to find that getting all dressed up to start a new courtship didn't get them the attention they wanted and now they are pissed that their exes are the ones getting the attention. So they are the ones pushing to get in.

The four schools “pushing to get in” are Clemson, Florida State, Miami, and North Carolina.

And as usual one of those is a spy to see what the rest of you are actually doing. North Carolina, Virginia, and possibly Duke are the exes. Clemson and FSU wanted out and sued to get free. The cap hurts Clemson and FSU because the only real suitor for them is the SEC who wants new markets.

The irony here Gitanole is that between the late 70's and early 80's FSU pushed sweetly to get into the SEC. For most of that time the SEC was happy at 10 and didn't see the need to expand. They didn't reject FSU, they were just happy with the status quo. And what was the point anyway as the NCAA was the sole arbitar of selling college football rights to ABC sports. 1983 and OU/UGa vs the NCAA changed that but nobody really knew what to do when the case was initially settled. In stepped ESPN who grasped the fact that there were conferences to be dealt with and that those conferences hadn't been built with media revenue in mind.

The SWC had only a two-state footprint. The first ones to get snapped up were independents and Arkansas who was that non Texas school in the SWC. The SEC looked around and decided that FSU held some allure so they offered them a slot. After all of the inquiries and solicitations made by FSU the SEC was rejected. Okay, U of Fl carried most of the state anyway. Clemson was also flirted with by the SEC and their trustee involved in part of the discussion called a buddy at South Carolina when they backed out of the talks with the SEC. South Carolina took their place.

Thirty years passed. The SEC got stronger, got wealthier, the ACC didn't advance at the same speed and their 2 million dollar better payout in 1991, largely due to basketball at the time, didn't keep up with the new football money. Why? Football had been liberated from the NCAA but basketball had not.

Now the cable value isn't determined by footprint but rather something similar in nature, market reach. The game and its payout have been redefined by the factors important to the carriers. The sad irony here is that opportunity knocked in 1991 and Clemson and FSU turned it down for what then looked like a large 2 million. The SEC had a school in Florida, and thanks to a Clemson trustee acquired one in South Carolina. Now the same entity that helped the ACC gain your school for their market purposes in Florida, will pay the SEC more handsomely to take those you are seeking to flee. And will do so to keep them out of their competitor's hands and to hold onto your brand and Clemson's to prop up the value of those who would remain in the ACC.

The 19-member cap perfectly fit Notre Dame, Duke, North Carolina and Virginia for an exit. The Big Ten was interested in Notre Dame and would likely settle for any kind of a relationship with them. The SEC is interested in the North Carolina and Virginia markets because they add 20 million potential viewers to their footprint. The SEC doesn't reject the two most SEC like schools not in its conference and is still fond of FSU and Clemson. They just aren't interested because we aren't getting paid enough to take them but would be rewarded to take the markets of the others.

The only thing pressuring Congress to bump the cap are your representatives and your Senators should this bill wind up in negotiation with the House.

Like some of my fellow SEC fans who post here I had hoped to one day see FSU and Clemson in the conference. I realize now that the likelihood of that is dwindling. It's not our fault, and it's not really yours but it is the nature of the business model we are now under. And that model is now controlled by corporate profit models imposed upon the schools by the carriers who push our product, and unfortunately don't know when to stop changing it.

The true irony is that those schools which dragged their feet to keep control in the ACC from being corporatized are the ones most likely to jump ship for the bigger payday. And it's that irony I relate here, not the nostalgia of what might have been.

After reading JRsec's post I googled "do corporate interests always win?"

AI response: Corporate interests often dominate political outcomes due to their significant influence.

ouch!

(10-09-2026 09:24 AM)Dr Dawgma III Wrote:  

(10-09-2026 07:47 AM)Gitanole Wrote:  

(10-09-2026 07:10 AM)Dr Dawgma III Wrote:  The major takeaway is that the Anti-Bill 4 want to sunset PE prevention. That is essentially a P1 prevention. Is it a negotiation tactic?

So the fours schools could be saying if you’re not going to expand with us, we are going to link up with PE and get the gears turning on a P1. Bold move, but not one I think has any chance of working because they’ve only got 21 (?) signatures of support.

Could it be 3D chess to create panic in SEC/B1G reps to try and push this thing through before the Blue Wave comes crashing down and washes this bill away?

The PE detail is an eyebrow raiser, but it may simply be a mechanism to help the four schools and/or the P2 leagues finance more migration in a brief period of time. If needed.

When in doubt, it’s often useful to think prosaic.

An example scenario (not a forecast): As we know, the ACC exit fee doesn’t drop to $75M for a few years yet. What if interest exists in getting a last flurry of realignment done before then? In time to organize, say, for a revised postseason? Maybe it helps all involved to widen the financing options.

__

PE is still allowed at the individual level so no that makes no sense.

Yes, didn't Utah sign a PE agreement last year or early this year?

(10-09-2026 02:27 PM)Gitanole Wrote:  

(10-09-2026 12:15 PM)random asian guy Wrote:  ....
Pure speculation, but let’s think about this.

1. The Gang of Four allegedly considers a PE-funded structure outside of a traditional conference.
2. The current PCSA bill requires at least three years of independence.
3. The settlement terms between FSU/Clemson and the ACC let ACC schools (at least six members) leave the ACC to join a “single sport league, conference or other association.”

So what I can envision is an association of independent schools only for football.

They would play other independent schools in that association, but there would be no rules forcing them to. They could schedule anyone they want.

The association would negotiate the collective media deal for them, with the money split based on the contribution each member makes.

This would be only for football so they would continue playing basketball and other sports in their current conference. Technically, ND could join this “association of independents” for football.

Again, this is pure speculation and I don’t think it will happen, but it’s the type of idea FSU and Clemson would explore as a fallback option in my view.

Well seen.



The ACC litigation settlement terms set a flat exit fee of $75M per school should at least six current members become independents in one sport or form/join a unique entity for it.

Schools who do this remain ACC members in all other sports. The provision essentially allows a Notre Dame option for everybody.

Something like this could get a body of schools through an interim indie period.

It takes at least six schools to do it. Notre Dame can be one of them.

Giving destination conferences a ceiling of 22 rather than 20 could help effect the move.

I am pretty sure the 6 schools leaving provision does not allow 6 schools to leave with the final $75 mil exit fee floor, but the effect is the same. The yearly $18 mil decrease still applies. What it does allow is for the exit fee to be cut $50%, but no lower the $75 mil even applying the 50% deduction.

This means for the 2026 to 2027 exit fee of $147 mil, if 6 teams leave for football and keep the rest of their sports in the ACC, the exit fee would be practically the same as the $75 mil floor in 2030 for one school leaving ($147/2). That is why they need the conference cap to be 22 and for the independence requirement to go away. If these 2 changes to the pcsa are made 6 ACC schools leaving together get out next year.

(10-09-2026 02:07 PM)Gitanole Wrote:  

(10-09-2026 09:24 AM)Dr Dawgma III Wrote:  

(10-09-2026 07:47 AM)Gitanole Wrote:  The PE detail is an eyebrow raiser, but it may simply be a mechanism to help the four schools and/or the P2 leagues finance more migration in a brief period of time. If needed.

When in doubt, it’s often useful to think prosaic.

An example scenario (not a forecast): As we know, the ACC exit fee doesn’t drop to $75M for a few years yet. What if interest exists in getting a last flurry of realignment done before then? In time to organize, say, for a revised postseason? Maybe it helps all involved to widen the financing options.

PE is still allowed at the individual level so no that makes no sense.

It makes sense. There are more ways for interested parties to handle so-far-undetermined capital expenses than at the ‘individual level’ (presumably you mean university level) provided one has not placed them out of reach a priori.

You’re doubling down? PE funded conference composition is what is disallowed by the PCSA. Borrowing money to move conferences is not affected.

(10-04-2026 05:09 PM)Stugray2 Wrote:  The PCSA probably passes when congress comes back after the election recess. And it passes as is, or with only a minor commonsense adjustment for a problem all sides agree on, because it has to survive reconciliation (the Senate has said this is it, no changes). That means 20 & 3 is the rule.

Yes, some ACC schools want bigger max and no independence period, but that isn't happening. Honestly, I don't think 3 years of Indy football is going to stop anyone. Any school the B1G or SEC adds will almost certainly negotiate a scheduling agreement to cover their three years of football independence, to at least get a couple games in October and November. They will be hurting for TV money, but no doubt they'll get some decent money for the two or three B1G/SEC and any other A4 opponents they host. Almost certainly any schools joining the B1G or SEC will agree to play each other to help fill out the schedule (e.g., say Miami, FSU, Clemson and North Carolina all move; they will no doubt agree to play each other in October/November as well). They'll fill September with A4 opponents. Getting 8 is easy enough, but 10 all three years to qualify for the CFP might be near impossible. No doubt they'll ask for a waiver. Also, how much CFP money they'll get will very much be up in the air, have to be negotiated.

Thinking this through, even best case scenario, the ACC schools have a point about the costs to them, potentially three lost seasons.

The key, IMO, would be to line up 2 P4 OOC games per month vs the Big XII before making the move. If you see these teams do that, you'll know what's up (remember, you read it here first!)

(10-09-2026 07:10 AM)Dr Dawgma III Wrote:  ....
Bold move, but not one I think has any chance of working because they’ve only got 21 (?) signatures of support.
....

“They have 21 signatures of support.” = fact
“They only have 21 signatures of support.” = spin

Votes matter. Yeas and Nays.

Votes in Congress make law.

We don’t have a window right now on what votes are doing in the House. We will see soon enough.

A public signature at the start of debate? If it helps an incumbent in a political campaign, we may see one. If it invites distraction or mixed response on the campaign trail, we probably will not.

Regardless: votes matter. Votes make law.


* A public service message brought to you courtesy of the United States Senate.

(10-09-2026 02:50 PM)Lurker Above Wrote:  I am pretty sure the 6 schools leaving provision does not allow 6 schools to leave with the final $75 mil exit fee floor
....

ACC schools will now have what is formally known as an “option of limited withdrawal” that allows six or more member institutions to disassociate from the conference in a specific sport to join a “single sport league, conference or other association” along with other schools in the group. Should a group of ACC schools exercise this option, they’d each owe $75 million or 50% of the current withdrawal fee to the conference (whichever is greater).

https://awfulannouncing.com/college-foot...emson.html

(10-09-2026 03:17 PM)Gitanole Wrote:  

(10-09-2026 07:10 AM)Dr Dawgma III Wrote:  ....
Bold move, but not one I think has any chance of working because they’ve only got 21 (?) signatures of support.
....

“They have 21 signatures of support.” = fact
“They only have 21 signatures of support.” = spin

Votes matter. Yeas and Nays.

Votes in Congress make law.

We don’t have a window right now on what votes are doing in the House. We will see soon enough.

A public signature at the start of debate? If it helps an incumbent in a political campaign, we may see one. If it invites distraction or mixed response on the campaign trail, we probably will not.

Regardless: votes matter. Votes make law.


* A public service message brought to you courtesy of the United States Senate.

Signatures don’t really mean anything at all, you’re correct there.

21 out of 400+ is where the “only” came from btw

(10-09-2026 03:04 PM)Dr Dawgma III Wrote:  ...
PE funded conference composition is what is disallowed by the PCSA.
....

The request for removal thus indicates that PE funded conference composition could be a factor in whatever the interested parties have in mind.

We do not know exactly what they have in mind. Conjectures here are airware.

(10-09-2026 03:27 PM)Gitanole Wrote:  

(10-09-2026 02:50 PM)Lurker Above Wrote:  I am pretty sure the 6 schools leaving provision does not allow 6 schools to leave with the final $75 mil exit fee floor
....

ACC schools will now have what is formally known as an “option of limited withdrawal” that allows six or more member institutions to disassociate from the conference in a specific sport to join a “single sport league, conference or other association” along with other schools in the group. Should a group of ACC schools exercise this option, they’d each owe $75 million or 50% of the current withdrawal fee to the conference (whichever is greater).

https://awfulannouncing.com/college-foot...emson.html

It hardly matters at this point with the ACC exit fee winding down each year to 75 million anyways.

(10-09-2026 04:00 PM)Kittonhead Wrote:  

(10-09-2026 03:27 PM)Gitanole Wrote:  ACC schools will now have what is formally known as an “option of limited withdrawal” that allows six or more member institutions to disassociate from the conference in a specific sport to join a “single sport league, conference or other association” along with other schools in the group. Should a group of ACC schools exercise this option, they’d each owe $75 million or 50% of the current withdrawal fee to the conference (whichever is greater).

https://awfulannouncing.com/college-foot...emson.html

It hardly matters at this point with the ACC exit fee winding down each year to 75 million anyways.

It could make a two- or three-year difference.

The ACC exit fee reaches $75 million in 2030-31. Schools going indie in one sport could get started as early as 2027 for the same amount.

Three years... hmm. Where have we heard that span of time mentioned before?

CFP changes are also on the calendar. Another factor to log under ‘field awareness.’

__

(10-09-2026 04:09 PM)Gitanole Wrote:  

(10-09-2026 04:00 PM)Kittonhead Wrote:  

(10-09-2026 03:27 PM)Gitanole Wrote:  ACC schools will now have what is formally known as an “option of limited withdrawal” that allows six or more member institutions to disassociate from the conference in a specific sport to join a “single sport league, conference or other association” along with other schools in the group. Should a group of ACC schools exercise this option, they’d each owe $75 million or 50% of the current withdrawal fee to the conference (whichever is greater).

https://awfulannouncing.com/college-foot...emson.html

It hardly matters at this point with the ACC exit fee winding down each year to 75 million anyways.

It could make a two- or three-year difference.

The ACC exit fee reaches $75 million in 2030-31. Schools going indie in one sport could get started as early as 2027 for the same amount.

Three years... hmm. Where have we heard that span of time mentioned before?

CFP changes are also on the calendar. Another factor to log under ‘field awareness.’

__

But there are no indications the B1G or SEC are on the verge of expanding at this point. B1G ends in 2029-30 and SEC ends 2033-34. They could even extend a few years afterward.

Now I think if the B1G decides to expand in 2029 it will put more pressure on the SEC to also do the same if Florida State, Miami, UNC end up in a bidding war of sorts. Possibly it will be a few years beyond 2029 even. It also depends on the economy at the time and if sports valuations continue to grow.

(10-09-2026 01:54 PM)schmolik Wrote:  North Carolina:


Clemson:

Thanks for sharing these. Additional reports:

NC statement (247, On3)
https://247sports.com/college/north-caro...291023049/
https://sports.yahoo.com/articles/north-...20116.html

Clemson statement (Tigernet)
https://www.tigernet.com/clemson-footbal...-act-49844

Current evidence suggests the PCSA will get serious consideration in the House.

Midterm elections can reset the board, though.
We’ll see how things look after the confetti is swept.

(10-09-2026 05:06 PM)Kittonhead Wrote:  

(10-09-2026 04:09 PM)Gitanole Wrote:  

(10-09-2026 04:00 PM)Kittonhead Wrote:  

(10-09-2026 03:27 PM)Gitanole Wrote:  ACC schools will now have what is formally known as an “option of limited withdrawal” that allows six or more member institutions to disassociate from the conference in a specific sport to join a “single sport league, conference or other association” along with other schools in the group. Should a group of ACC schools exercise this option, they’d each owe $75 million or 50% of the current withdrawal fee to the conference (whichever is greater).

https://awfulannouncing.com/college-foot...emson.html

It hardly matters at this point with the ACC exit fee winding down each year to 75 million anyways.

It could make a two- or three-year difference.

The ACC exit fee reaches $75 million in 2030-31. Schools going indie in one sport could get started as early as 2027 for the same amount.

Three years... hmm. Where have we heard that span of time mentioned before?

CFP changes are also on the calendar. Another factor to log under ‘field awareness.’

__

But there are no indications the B1G or SEC are on the verge of expanding at this point. B1G ends in 2029-30 and SEC ends 2033-34. They could even extend a few years afterward.

Now I think if the B1G decides to expand in 2029 it will put more pressure on the SEC to also do the same if Florida State, Miami, UNC end up in a bidding war of sorts. Possibly it will be a few years beyond 2029 even. It also depends on the economy at the time and if sports valuations continue to grow.

The Big Ten and SEC will say that they are not interested in additions at this time and it will be true. But if the schools that either or both wants were to become available, they aren't going to wait for a contract period to act. In the case of the SEC ESPN would be clued in anyway. For FOX they will have pre-approved the ones they are interested in seeing in the Big Ten and funds will be there in either case to make it happen. This is likely to be the last set of additions made for quite a while. They aren't playing this round assuming the same conveniences with which they approached the previous additions. Both will be playing the realignment game for keeps.

(10-09-2026 05:06 PM)Kittonhead Wrote:  

(10-09-2026 04:09 PM)Gitanole Wrote:  

(10-09-2026 04:00 PM)Kittonhead Wrote:  

(10-09-2026 03:27 PM)Gitanole Wrote:  ACC schools will now have what is formally known as an “option of limited withdrawal” that allows six or more member institutions to disassociate from the conference in a specific sport to join a “single sport league, conference or other association” along with other schools in the group. Should a group of ACC schools exercise this option, they’d each owe $75 million or 50% of the current withdrawal fee to the conference (whichever is greater).

https://awfulannouncing.com/college-foot...emson.html

It hardly matters at this point with the ACC exit fee winding down each year to 75 million anyways.

It could make a two- or three-year difference.

The ACC exit fee reaches $75 million in 2030-31. Schools going indie in one sport could get started as early as 2027 for the same amount.

Three years... hmm. Where have we heard that span of time mentioned before?

CFP changes are also on the calendar. Another factor to log under ‘field awareness.’

But there are no indications the B1G or SEC are on the verge of expanding at this point. B1G ends in 2029-30 and SEC ends 2033-34. They could even extend a few years afterward.

Now I think if the B1G decides to expand in 2029 it will put more pressure on the SEC to also do the same if Florida State, Miami, UNC end up in a bidding war of sorts. Possibly it will be a few years beyond 2029 even. It also depends on the economy at the time and if sports valuations continue to grow.

Also no indications they aren’t. The variables are many and we’re not in the meetings.

Field awareness, as I said. I just showed you a multimillion-dollar difference a university president has to consider where you were under the impression something ‘hardly matters.’

Point acknowledged about the expiration dates on media contracts. Obviously these are another important factor in the picture.

(10-09-2026 05:29 PM)Gitanole Wrote:  

(10-09-2026 05:06 PM)Kittonhead Wrote:  

(10-09-2026 04:09 PM)Gitanole Wrote:  

(10-09-2026 04:00 PM)Kittonhead Wrote:  

(10-09-2026 03:27 PM)Gitanole Wrote:  ACC schools will now have what is formally known as an “option of limited withdrawal” that allows six or more member institutions to disassociate from the conference in a specific sport to join a “single sport league, conference or other association” along with other schools in the group. Should a group of ACC schools exercise this option, they’d each owe $75 million or 50% of the current withdrawal fee to the conference (whichever is greater).

https://awfulannouncing.com/college-foot...emson.html

It hardly matters at this point with the ACC exit fee winding down each year to 75 million anyways.

It could make a two- or three-year difference.

The ACC exit fee reaches $75 million in 2030-31. Schools going indie in one sport could get started as early as 2027 for the same amount.

Three years... hmm. Where have we heard that span of time mentioned before?

CFP changes are also on the calendar. Another factor to log under ‘field awareness.’

But there are no indications the B1G or SEC are on the verge of expanding at this point. B1G ends in 2029-30 and SEC ends 2033-34. They could even extend a few years afterward.

Now I think if the B1G decides to expand in 2029 it will put more pressure on the SEC to also do the same if Florida State, Miami, UNC end up in a bidding war of sorts. Possibly it will be a few years beyond 2029 even. It also depends on the economy at the time and if sports valuations continue to grow.

Also no indications they aren’t. The variables are many and we’re not in the meetings.

Field awareness, as I said. I just showed you a multimillion-dollar difference a university president has to consider where you were under the impression something ‘hardly matters.’

Point acknowledged about the media contracts. Obviously these represent another factor in the picture.

Again I do think it hardly matters when the exit fee for 2030-31 (joining 4 years from now) is 75 million dollars. I really don't think an ACC gang of schools will be joining before that. We are already past the standard 1 year required notice of 2027-28. If the P2 announced expansion tomorrow you would then be talking 2028-29 at the earliest and there is no indication that is imminent. If notice isn't given by June 30th (8 months away) next year that kicks back to 2029-30.

What is to stop Florida State and whomever else to request joining a P2 2030-31 to ensure a reduced fee? It is very unlikely a P2 will force them in early costing them to pay more.

P2 is more focused on the playoff expansion and getting the PCSA passed right now more than anything. Its unclear yet what the final form of the PCSA will be at this moment but they want something passed.

(10-09-2026 05:22 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(10-09-2026 05:06 PM)Kittonhead Wrote:  

(10-09-2026 04:09 PM)Gitanole Wrote:  

(10-09-2026 04:00 PM)Kittonhead Wrote:  

(10-09-2026 03:27 PM)Gitanole Wrote:  ACC schools will now have what is formally known as an “option of limited withdrawal” that allows six or more member institutions to disassociate from the conference in a specific sport to join a “single sport league, conference or other association” along with other schools in the group. Should a group of ACC schools exercise this option, they’d each owe $75 million or 50% of the current withdrawal fee to the conference (whichever is greater).

https://awfulannouncing.com/college-foot...emson.html

It hardly matters at this point with the ACC exit fee winding down each year to 75 million anyways.

It could make a two- or three-year difference.

The ACC exit fee reaches $75 million in 2030-31. Schools going indie in one sport could get started as early as 2027 for the same amount.

Three years... hmm. Where have we heard that span of time mentioned before?

CFP changes are also on the calendar. Another factor to log under ‘field awareness.’

__

But there are no indications the B1G or SEC are on the verge of expanding at this point. B1G ends in 2029-30 and SEC ends 2033-34. They could even extend a few years afterward.

Now I think if the B1G decides to expand in 2029 it will put more pressure on the SEC to also do the same if Florida State, Miami, UNC end up in a bidding war of sorts. Possibly it will be a few years beyond 2029 even. It also depends on the economy at the time and if sports valuations continue to grow.

The Big Ten and SEC will say that they are not interested in additions at this time and it will be true. But if the schools that either or both wants were to become available, they aren't going to wait for a contract period to act. In the case of the SEC ESPN would be clued in anyway. For FOX they will have pre-approved the ones they are interested in seeing in the Big Ten and funds will be there in either case to make it happen. This is likely to be the last set of additions made for quite a while. They aren't playing this round assuming the same conveniences with which they approached the previous additions. Both will be playing the realignment game for keeps.

I feel safe saying though if Florida State wants to hold off joining a P2 until 2030-31 that request will be honored. A normal full year notice at this point puts you at 2028-29. There is the thinking the P2 wants to expand ASAP and if that was the case they would have already done it.

Gang of four vs Money & Power

(10-09-2026 05:41 PM)Kittonhead Wrote:  

(10-09-2026 05:29 PM)Gitanole Wrote:  

(10-09-2026 05:06 PM)Kittonhead Wrote:  

(10-09-2026 04:09 PM)Gitanole Wrote:  

(10-09-2026 04:00 PM)Kittonhead Wrote:  It hardly matters at this point with the ACC exit fee winding down each year to 75 million anyways.

It could make a two- or three-year difference.

The ACC exit fee reaches $75 million in 2030-31. Schools going indie in one sport could get started as early as 2027 for the same amount.

Three years... hmm. Where have we heard that span of time mentioned before?

CFP changes are also on the calendar. Another factor to log under ‘field awareness.’

But there are no indications the B1G or SEC are on the verge of expanding at this point. B1G ends in 2029-30 and SEC ends 2033-34. They could even extend a few years afterward.

Now I think if the B1G decides to expand in 2029 it will put more pressure on the SEC to also do the same if Florida State, Miami, UNC end up in a bidding war of sorts. Possibly it will be a few years beyond 2029 even. It also depends on the economy at the time and if sports valuations continue to grow.

Also no indications they aren’t. The variables are many and we’re not in the meetings.

Field awareness, as I said. I just showed you a multimillion-dollar difference a university president has to consider where you were under the impression something ‘hardly matters.’

Point acknowledged about the media contracts. Obviously these represent another factor in the picture.

Again I do think it hardly matters when the exit fee for 2030-31 (joining 4 years from now) is 75 million dollars. I really don't think an ACC gang of schools will be joining before that. We are already past the standard 1 year required notice of 2027-28. If the P2 announced expansion tomorrow you would then be talking 2028-29 at the earliest and there is no indication that is imminent. If notice isn't given by June 30th (8 months away) next year that kicks back to 2029-30.

What is to stop Florida State and whomever else to request joining a P2 2030-31 to ensure a reduced fee? It is very unlikely a P2 will force them in early costing them to pay more.

P2 is more focused on the playoff expansion and getting the PCSA passed right now more than anything. Its unclear yet what the final form of the PCSA will be at this moment but they want something passed.

1. College presidents and ADs can multitask. The PCSA is a priority but one they can't babysit because it's in the hands of Congress.

2. The CFP expansion is a perfunctory task that is dependent on financial impact studies.

3. Neither the SEC or Big Ten will wait if a school they really would love to have in the conference calls. All these message board agendas about contract expirations being required for getting more money immediately, etc are a fiction. It's a convenience if the moves are sure. It's an obstacle if you need to act and their media partners are quite aware of that and aware of the particular importance of this round of realignment. FOX will have pre-approved the schools they would like to see under Big Ten control and ESPN will simply know from both parties whether a move is happening because both contracts belong fully to ESPN and the Big 12's is 50% theirs. Moves may happen later if independence is require but the relationships will be formalized and their entry accounted for in revenue when it happens. Nobody is waiting for anything to happen. Assuming that the caps will not move backwards to 18, the Big Ten can plan on two and the SEC up to 4 if the cap stays at 20. And they'll know by January if that's going to be the case.

4. If ESPN approves of a move of a few ACC schools to the SEC it is quite possible that all of that could be set up in house and ready to go, when the proper notifications have been made and any Congressionally required waiting period served and none of you would know a thing about it until the planned announcement. The commissioners would know and the replacements for the ACC schools might be in a process also well underway and you wouldn't know it. There are advantages to not telling the public anything until it is done. Stories about who is looking and who is being considered really don't help the process.