(08-05-2022 01:21 PM)TerryD Wrote:  What schools are going to sign the required ACC GOR and bind themselves there for 14 years?

Are any schools that have a glimmer of hope of getting a Big Ten or SEC invitation going to do so?

That’s been the question since the news Texas and Oklahoma were leaving The Big 12 broke.

It’s not a question if they will bind themselves to The ACC. The real question is will they bind themselves to their present conference. That’s what will bring real stability to The PAC or The Big 12.

I would expect Oregon, Washington, Stanford and Cal Berkeley to refuse to resign a PAC Grant of Rights.

In The Big 12 I don’t see Kansas, Oklahoma State, West Virginia or Cincinnati agreeing to sign a GOR.

If that happens there will be no stability in The PAC or Big 12.

The question then becomes who would be willing to sign The ACC GOR. Is 10 - 12 years of stability worth it to Kansas, Oklahoma State, West Virginia or Cincinnati?

Is it worth taking a chance that the paradigm changes in the next decade and no one leaves The ACC?

As JR and I were talking yesterday, any one leaving The ACC needs to leave now before there is paradigm shift and this window closes. Targeted schools in The ACC will never be worth more to The SEC or The Big Ten than they are today.

To make any ACC move possible ESPN may be able to work out an equitable deal with schools like Louisville, Wake and Boston College who have limited options to agree to break the GOR. Then it becomes a money and access issue.

If ESPN agreed to pay the remaining ACC schools say 70 million a year, or a figure that makes The ACC the clear “Best of The Rest” conference for the next decade, they may be able to strike a deal.

With a substantial pay raise The ACC should be able to recruit replacements from The Big 12 and The PAC to build a true BOTR conference.

(08-05-2022 03:21 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(08-05-2022 01:11 PM)bill dazzle Wrote:  This comment is telling:

As one administrator recently surmised, “It’s become the Big 2 (SEC, Big Ten), Other 1 (ACC) and Group of 7.”

Telling in how delusional the ACC administrator is in thinking the ACC is much different than the nBig12 and Pac 10. Guessing it was a North Carolina, Duke or Georgia Tech administrator.

If no ACC schools left, and they added best of PAC and Big 12, I think it would be true IF they could get to a different rights holder. Being on ESPN will always limit prime viewing real estate.

The issue is stability. Like the Big12 the last 12 years- generally top 3 in performance, but with schools looking to leave for SEC or BIG. And given it would be viewed as looking to move "up", even though they likely would have similar on-field (and better on court) success as all but the SEC elites, the perception is still there given the known desire by schools to go BIG or SEC

(08-05-2022 04:42 PM)CardinalJim Wrote:  

(08-05-2022 01:21 PM)TerryD Wrote:  What schools are going to sign the required ACC GOR and bind themselves there for 14 years?

Are any schools that have a glimmer of hope of getting a Big Ten or SEC invitation going to do so?

That’s been the question since the news Texas and Oklahoma were leaving The Big 12 broke.

It’s not a question if they will bind themselves to The ACC. The real question is will they bind themselves to their present conference. That’s what will bring real stability to The PAC or The Big 12.

I would expect Oregon, Washington, Stanford and Cal Berkeley to refuse to resign a PAC Grant of Rights.

In The Big 12 I don’t see Kansas, Oklahoma State, West Virginia or Cincinnati agreeing to sign a GOR.

If that happens there will be no stability in The PAC or Big 12.

The question then becomes who would be willing to sign The ACC GOR. Is 10 - 12 years of stability worth it to Kansas, Oklahoma State, West Virginia or Cincinnati?

No, he was correct, the question is, what P2 hopeful will be willing to agree to the ACC GOR.

Those schools are not avoiding GORs with their conferences, just to sign an even worse GOR with the ACC. Good god man!

It is very unlikely any P2 hopeful is joining the ACC if it is viewed that the GOR is prohibitive to moving. And if it is not prohibitive, then it is a bait and switch in terms of being more attractive- being on ESPN's 2nd conference rather than getting on a OTA network is bad for 3rd super conference. WVU is probably the only one that would not care about that, and may just want the ACC brand badly enough regardless of what schools are left in it

If left to the market, the best of the rest conference, the 3rd super conference, will likely have a P2 promotion friendly GOR. This will serve as a mechanism to aggregate all remaining schools of value. Schools of lesser value are not splitting because of this, as they inherently would make less leaving those schools that want the promotion ability.

The Big 12 will either offer UW and Oregon, KU, and all schools manageable P2 promotion buyouts, or a shorter GOR. This helps lure Oregon and UW, and thus the 4 corners, which also should want it given if the P2 reaches 48, some of those could be in play. Or they could go to the ACC and get locked in for 14 years if the GOR is "ironclad". And if it is not ironclad, you're becoming Midwest oasis to join Wake, BC, Cuse, Pitt and hoping for EPSN to remember you when filling out its prime Tier 1 timeslots.

(08-05-2022 05:01 PM)Big 12 fan too Wrote:  

(08-05-2022 03:21 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(08-05-2022 01:11 PM)bill dazzle Wrote:  This comment is telling:

As one administrator recently surmised, “It’s become the Big 2 (SEC, Big Ten), Other 1 (ACC) and Group of 7.”

Telling in how delusional the ACC administrator is in thinking the ACC is much different than the nBig12 and Pac 10. Guessing it was a North Carolina, Duke or Georgia Tech administrator.

If no ACC schools left, and they added best of PAC and Big 12, I think it would be true IF they could get to a different rights holder. Being on ESPN will always limit prime viewing real estate.

The issue is stability. Like the Big12 the last 12 years- generally top 3 in performance, but with schools looking to leave for SEC or BIG. And given it would be viewed as looking to move "up", even though they likely would have similar on-field (and better on court) success as all but the SEC elites, the perception is still there given the known desire by schools to go BIG or SEC

The only thing that will bring stability to The Big 12 would be a renewed Grant of Rights. I doubt that happens anymore than it will in The PAC.

(08-05-2022 05:13 PM)Big 12 fan too Wrote:  

(08-05-2022 04:42 PM)CardinalJim Wrote:  

(08-05-2022 01:21 PM)TerryD Wrote:  What schools are going to sign the required ACC GOR and bind themselves there for 14 years?

Are any schools that have a glimmer of hope of getting a Big Ten or SEC invitation going to do so?

That’s been the question since the news Texas and Oklahoma were leaving The Big 12 broke.

It’s not a question if they will bind themselves to The ACC. The real question is will they bind themselves to their present conference. That’s what will bring real stability to The PAC or The Big 12.

I would expect Oregon, Washington, Stanford and Cal Berkeley to refuse to resign a PAC Grant of Rights.

In The Big 12 I don’t see Kansas, Oklahoma State, West Virginia or Cincinnati agreeing to sign a GOR.

If that happens there will be no stability in The PAC or Big 12.

The question then becomes who would be willing to sign The ACC GOR. Is 10 - 12 years of stability worth it to Kansas, Oklahoma State, West Virginia or Cincinnati?

No, he was correct, the question is, what P2 hopeful will be willing to agree to the ACC GOR.

Those schools are not avoiding GORs with their conferences, just to sign an even worse GOR with the ACC. Good god man!

It is very unlikely any P2 hopeful is joining the ACC if it is viewed that the GOR is prohibitive to moving. And if it is not prohibitive, then it is a bait and switch in terms of being more attractive- being on ESPN's 2nd conference rather than getting on a OTA network is bad for 3rd super conference. WVU is probably the only one that would not care about that, and may just want the ACC brand badly enough regardless of what schools are left in it

If left to the market, the best of the rest conference, the 3rd super conference, will likely have a P2 promotion friendly GOR. This will serve as a mechanism to aggregate all remaining schools of value. Schools of lesser value are not splitting because of this, as they inherently would make less leaving those schools that want the promotion ability.

The Big 12 will either offer UW and Oregon, KU, and all schools manageable P2 promotion buyouts, or a shorter GOR. This helps lure Oregon and UW, and thus the 4 corners, which also should want it given if the P2 reaches 48, some of those could be in play. Or they could go to the ACC and get locked in for 14 years if the GOR is "ironclad". And if it is not ironclad, you're becoming Midwest oasis to join Wake, BC, Cuse, Pitt and hoping for EPSN to remember you when filling out its prime Tier 1 timeslots.

All the value to The Big Ten or The SEC has already be taken from The Big 12 except Kansas or perhaps Oklahoma State. In The PAC, Washington, Stanford, Oregon and Cal Berkeley could be the next up for The Big Ten.

That’s about anyone outside of The ACC with any value to The Big Ten or The SEC.

Everyone else is going to be looking for the biggest pay out they can get.

(08-05-2022 01:36 PM)CoastalJuan Wrote:  

(08-05-2022 11:34 AM)random asian guy Wrote:  People on this board doesn’t want to believe, but the ACC is third in the pecking order (as the article indicates) and will act soon instead of waiting until it loses some members.

Act how?

ACC is #3 because they still have a couple of top tier teams in Clemson and FSU. The problem is that all other top tier targets are now in the BIG or SEC.

If we presume that the ACC can't steal from the BIG/SEC, which most of us agree with...

Then there is no hypothetical upside for the ACC, only downside. There is no one to steal that gets it out of 3rd. It can either stay the same and stay the 3rd, or lose teams and drop. Most of us see that as an eventuality, even if it's not for another decade.

And if/when the ACC loses its top brands, it's hard to see it being above #5. They will still have their basketball brands, but Kansas is still in the Big 12 for a reason.

(08-05-2022 12:22 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(08-05-2022 11:49 AM)random asian guy Wrote:  

(08-05-2022 11:36 AM)bullet Wrote:  

(08-05-2022 11:34 AM)random asian guy Wrote:  People on this board doesn’t want to believe, but the ACC is third in the pecking order (as the article indicates) and will act soon instead of waiting until it loses some members.

How will it act with the albatross of a contract?

What does ESPN want? What the ACC wants is mostly irrelevant at this point.

Both parites want money. If there is a realistic move that can enrich both parties, then they will do it.

I just cant figure out how it would ever make sense for ESPN. They have all the SEC and its a great league. They have all the ACC---and its a great league---and--better yet---ESPN has the ACC locked up for what is looking like an incredibly cheap long term price. When the realignment goal from BOTH the ACC and SEC is getting more money from ESPN and ESPN already owns the rights to every single school in both conferences---hard to see where there is going to be much enthusiasm for that project from ESPN. Now, once that ACC contract and GOR expire---then yeah---ESPN would be very interested---but I cant imagine they would be interested until that time.

People on this board talked a lot about B12 adding eight schools from the Pac but for some reason cannot fathom the idea of the Pac schools joining the ACC.

ESPN gave a low ball offer to Pac. It seems like Pac wants a lot more than. What if ESPN moves some of the valuable Pac schools to ACC?

1. ESPN will continue to have a coverage in the West Coast and the games for Pacific time zone. ESPN will drop the remaining Pac schools or give them very low payout, meaning some cost reduction for ESPN.

2. The ACC schools will get a few million dollar raise. Not much but still better than no raise. The move will also solidify the ACC’s status as undisputable #3 and provide the conference a better playoff access.

3. For the Pac schools moving to ACC, the ACC money, while much lower than the SEC money or BIG money, would be still a lot better than B12 money or Pac money. Again the playoff access will be a consideration for those schools.

We have all seen this movie before. What happened to the Big East after the ESPN had moved Pitt and Cuse to the ACC? The ESPN pays peanuts to AAC now.

(08-05-2022 01:21 PM)TerryD Wrote:  

(08-05-2022 11:49 AM)random asian guy Wrote:  

(08-05-2022 11:36 AM)bullet Wrote:  

(08-05-2022 11:34 AM)random asian guy Wrote:  People on this board doesn’t want to believe, but the ACC is third in the pecking order (as the article indicates) and will act soon instead of waiting until it loses some members.

How will it act with the albatross of a contract?

What does ESPN want? What the ACC wants is mostly irrelevant at this point.

Both parites want money. If there is a realistic move that can enrich both parties, then they will do it.

What schools are going to sign the required ACC GOR and bind themselves there for 14 years?

Are any schools that have a glimmer of hope of getting a Big Ten or SEC invitation going to do so?

I told you before.

ND will most likely stay until the end of the GOR or close to the end. They value the indepence. But more importantly, if they want to leave early, the divorce process will be very very messy not only because of the GoR buyout and the exit fee but also because of their contractual obligation not to join another conference. In other words, the next big bang will most likely happen at the end of ACC GOR anyway

In addition, the only Pac school that might get an invitation from BIG is Stanford. The other schools don’t have enough value and they know it. The Big Ten will finalize their media deal soon. Unless they add more schools before the media deal (which I don’t think will happen), expect the ACC to make a move after the Big Ten media deal.

(08-05-2022 03:20 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  At this point, I think the SEC and Big 10 need to get together, find out how much additional money they can make as 24 or even 28 team leagues as a product of being able to offer a large volume of quality content to streaming partners and go ahead and swallow up the rest of the value brands and emerge as a new self governing entity outside of the NCAA’s purview.

What makes you think this isn't already happening? IMO the P2 along with their network handlers are already moving towards agreements on how to absorb the best of the rest and separate themselves from the NCAA. I think they will want to have their leagues set by the time the new CFP format and contract negotiations are underway. So what does that give us, 3 years? I guess we'll see.

(08-05-2022 06:03 PM)SouthEastAlaska Wrote:  

(08-05-2022 03:20 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  At this point, I think the SEC and Big 10 need to get together, find out how much additional money they can make as 24 or even 28 team leagues as a product of being able to offer a large volume of quality content to streaming partners and go ahead and swallow up the rest of the value brands and emerge as a new self governing entity outside of the NCAA’s purview.

What makes you think this isn't already happening? IMO the P2 along with their network handlers are already moving towards agreements on how to absorb the best of the rest and separate themselves from the NCAA. I think they will want to have their leagues set by the time the new CFP format and contract negotiations are underway. So what does that give us, 3 years? I guess we'll see.

OUT wasn’t well received by FOX. Mostly in the execution, I believe.

Did they get their revenge with USC, and now things are square? Perhaps, although the BIG getting USC during their new deal hardly a surprise or deviation from what seemed planned imo

I’m cheering for a corporate Cold War. But Fox knows they’d lose that game…or do they? Do they think they can get FSU, Miami, UNC, UVa, Duke on a march to ND? If they could pull that off, why settle for a tie? I’m guessing they know what would occur is that espn would spend to prevent it. Espn having its assets across two conferences is actually better for FOX long term than ESPN having the SEC dominate both sports.

(08-05-2022 08:12 PM)Big 12 fan too Wrote:  

(08-05-2022 06:03 PM)SouthEastAlaska Wrote:  

(08-05-2022 03:20 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  At this point, I think the SEC and Big 10 need to get together, find out how much additional money they can make as 24 or even 28 team leagues as a product of being able to offer a large volume of quality content to streaming partners and go ahead and swallow up the rest of the value brands and emerge as a new self governing entity outside of the NCAA’s purview.

What makes you think this isn't already happening? IMO the P2 along with their network handlers are already moving towards agreements on how to absorb the best of the rest and separate themselves from the NCAA. I think they will want to have their leagues set by the time the new CFP format and contract negotiations are underway. So what does that give us, 3 years? I guess we'll see.

OUT wasn’t well received by FOX. Mostly in the execution, I believe.

Did they get their revenge with USC, and now things are square? Perhaps, although the BIG getting USC during their new deal hardly a surprise or deviation from what seemed planned imo

I’m cheering for a corporate Cold War. But Fox knows they’d lose that game…or do they? Do they think they can get FSU, Miami, UNC, UVa, Duke on a march to ND? If they could pull that off, why settle for a tie? I’m guessing they know what would occur is that espn would spend to prevent it. Espn having its assets across two conferences is actually better for FOX long term than ESPN having the SEC dominate both sports.

No USC and UCLA got the B1G no where near to even, the goal is ND to be close to even. The B1G will be DMA's, brands, academics and be nation wide, the SEC will be much more homogenized, Southern culture, southern location, Football centric. It will look like they aren't working together, that's the point, just like Dems and Republicans, but they will be. Sorry for the politics

(08-05-2022 03:21 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(08-05-2022 01:11 PM)bill dazzle Wrote:  This comment is telling:

As one administrator recently surmised, “It’s become the Big 2 (SEC, Big Ten), Other 1 (ACC) and Group of 7.”

Telling in how delusional the ACC administrator is in thinking the ACC is much different than the nBig12 and Pac 10.

Not delusional at all. The ACC is in a more stable spot. It has a successful revenue-generating network, and it's resistant to poaching because of that GoR you've heard so much about.

B12 has no network. The PAC's network hasn't panned out. Both leagues are nearing the end of their network contracts. Both are being raided.

So the ACC is better situated for now.

Still: there is a Super 2. No league outside of those two drives its own destiny.

(08-05-2022 08:56 PM)Gitanole Wrote:  

(08-05-2022 03:21 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(08-05-2022 01:11 PM)bill dazzle Wrote:  This comment is telling:

As one administrator recently surmised, “It’s become the Big 2 (SEC, Big Ten), Other 1 (ACC) and Group of 7.”

Telling in how delusional the ACC administrator is in thinking the ACC is much different than the nBig12 and Pac 10.

Not delusional at all. The ACC is in a more stable spot. It has a successful revenue-generating network, and it's resistant to poaching because of that GoR you've heard so much about.

B12 has no network. The PAC's network hasn't panned out. Both leagues are nearing the end of their network contracts. Both are being raided.

So the ACC is better situated for now.

Still: there is a Super 2. No league outside of those two drives its own destiny.

The Big 12's network is ESPN+. Conference networks are a dying model. The ACC is anchored to a mediocre one. It is also anchored to a long term contract. Its not going to make notably more and because it is tied up for another 14 years, will probably make less than the Pac and Big 12.

The Big 12 and Pac 12 are further ahead of the G schools than they are behind the P2. And they are basically even with the ACC. Only an idiot would think the ACC is on a different tier. But ACC administrators did trust John Swofford.....

(08-05-2022 08:56 PM)Gitanole Wrote:  

(08-05-2022 03:21 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(08-05-2022 01:11 PM)bill dazzle Wrote:  This comment is telling:

As one administrator recently surmised, “It’s become the Big 2 (SEC, Big Ten), Other 1 (ACC) and Group of 7.”

Telling in how delusional the ACC administrator is in thinking the ACC is much different than the nBig12 and Pac 10.

Not delusional at all. The ACC is in a more stable spot. It has a successful revenue-generating network, and it's resistant to poaching because of that GoR you've heard so much about.

B12 has no network. The PAC's network hasn't panned out. Both leagues are nearing the end of their network contracts. Both are being raided.

So the ACC is better situated for now.

Still: there is a Super 2. No league outside of those two drives its own destiny.

Being stable has nothing to do with the comment. The MAC is stable. Nor does a network. The Mountain West has a network

It is a comment about perception and pay.

And the ACC is not stable. The GOR is not for perpetuity and everyone can see what is coming sooner or later unless it has revenue of P2.

And even then unlikely, as it is already a P2 era in perception, the "other guy" role mentioned in the quote is not something you pass on a P2 for, if offered. IF ESPN can pay schools while in the ACC at a P2 level, they will be willing and wanting to move them to a P2. Sooner than later. 10 years may be a lot to FSU waiting out GOR, but it is nothing in terms of a Big 12 or PAC school moving.

If the ACC does not lose schools, it is a peer of PAC and Big 12. No "other guy" conference gets out-viewed by the American Conference for championship games. If it loses schools, it is potentially gone.

(08-05-2022 01:21 PM)TerryD Wrote:  

(08-05-2022 11:49 AM)random asian guy Wrote:  

(08-05-2022 11:36 AM)bullet Wrote:  

(08-05-2022 11:34 AM)random asian guy Wrote:  People on this board doesn’t want to believe, but the ACC is third in the pecking order (as the article indicates) and will act soon instead of waiting until it loses some members.

How will it act with the albatross of a contract?

What does ESPN want? What the ACC wants is mostly irrelevant at this point.

Both parites want money. If there is a realistic move that can enrich both parties, then they will do it.

What schools are going to sign the required ACC GOR and bind themselves there for 14 years?

If SMU had their early 80's boosters, I'd draft them in a heartbeat. I'd love another NIL Daddy Warbucks in a new market.

We are in an interim stage of the final state. There is nothing to stop it.

Notre Dame, Clemson and Florida State can make the crossing --for the latter two provided they do not suffer a prolonged slump the next decade-- on football brand value alone. Stanford, Washington, Oregon, North Carolina and Miami are very likely to have networks desire for market and sponsor coverage. Virginia and Cal are probably Hail Mary territory. By the numbers Louisville should be in the picture, and you can argue for Arizona, Arizona State, Baylor, Oklahoma State (although I expect a drop with Bedlam ending, a fading into K State level of pretty decent support) or Virginia Tech on the basis of eyeballs. But as we all know eyeballs are not the same value, those on the coast have considerably more buying power and influence.

But in the end you are going to have two super conferences, probably of 20 schools, of such high media value that they will be the NFC and AFC or college football. The other conferences will look like a blend of mid majors. The AAC and MWC getting dinged as back fill for the ACC and Pac-12 should they suffer more erosion. But the gap wont be 2:1 in money of the mid 2020s, but more 4:1 as the contracts for the 2 get larger while those of the 3 get smaller or best case stay flat (less in real dollars). The gap could grow to 6:1 or more by the mid-2030s effectvely ending any prospect of further crossings.

There really isn't anything that can be done about it. Clean up, as JRsec points out, will be done at the discretion of the networks, The two colossi have been formed, it's just who else and what other markets do they want coverage for in these that they think the long term payoff is worth a bit of overpay. Interest in the others will fall off, as they wont be big time anymore.

Basketball will be a great leveling place, as a Memphis, Kansas, Duke, UConn and Arizona can still go head to head with the football schools that excluded them. But a reckoning is coming for that arena as well, although I expect it to be more inclusive, perhaps 6 conferences instead of just 2.

(08-05-2022 05:42 PM)random asian guy Wrote:  

(08-05-2022 01:36 PM)CoastalJuan Wrote:  

(08-05-2022 11:34 AM)random asian guy Wrote:  People on this board doesn’t want to believe, but the ACC is third in the pecking order (as the article indicates) and will act soon instead of waiting until it loses some members.

Act how?

ACC is #3 because they still have a couple of top tier teams in Clemson and FSU. The problem is that all other top tier targets are now in the BIG or SEC.

If we presume that the ACC can't steal from the BIG/SEC, which most of us agree with...

Then there is no hypothetical upside for the ACC, only downside. There is no one to steal that gets it out of 3rd. It can either stay the same and stay the 3rd, or lose teams and drop. Most of us see that as an eventuality, even if it's not for another decade.

And if/when the ACC loses its top brands, it's hard to see it being above #5. They will still have their basketball brands, but Kansas is still in the Big 12 for a reason.

(08-05-2022 12:22 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(08-05-2022 11:49 AM)random asian guy Wrote:  

(08-05-2022 11:36 AM)bullet Wrote:  

(08-05-2022 11:34 AM)random asian guy Wrote:  People on this board doesn’t want to believe, but the ACC is third in the pecking order (as the article indicates) and will act soon instead of waiting until it loses some members.

How will it act with the albatross of a contract?

What does ESPN want? What the ACC wants is mostly irrelevant at this point.

Both parites want money. If there is a realistic move that can enrich both parties, then they will do it.

I just cant figure out how it would ever make sense for ESPN. They have all the SEC and its a great league. They have all the ACC---and its a great league---and--better yet---ESPN has the ACC locked up for what is looking like an incredibly cheap long term price. When the realignment goal from BOTH the ACC and SEC is getting more money from ESPN and ESPN already owns the rights to every single school in both conferences---hard to see where there is going to be much enthusiasm for that project from ESPN. Now, once that ACC contract and GOR expire---then yeah---ESPN would be very interested---but I cant imagine they would be interested until that time.

People on this board talked a lot about B12 adding eight schools from the Pac but for some reason cannot fathom the idea of the Pac schools joining the ACC.

ESPN gave a low ball offer to Pac. It seems like Pac wants a lot more than. What if ESPN moves some of the valuable Pac schools to ACC?

1. ESPN will continue to have a coverage in the West Coast and the games for Pacific time zone. ESPN will drop the remaining Pac schools or give them very low payout, meaning some cost reduction for ESPN.

2. The ACC schools will get a few million dollar raise. Not much but still better than no raise. The move will also solidify the ACC’s status as undisputable #3 and provide the conference a better playoff access.

3. For the Pac schools moving to ACC, the ACC money, while much lower than the SEC money or BIG money, would be still a lot better than B12 money or Pac money. Again the playoff access will be a consideration for those schools.

We have all seen this movie before. What happened to the Big East after the ESPN had moved Pitt and Cuse to the ACC? The ESPN pays peanuts to AAC now.

I don't see Oregon, Washington, Cal, or the 'Ferd being willing to listen to ESPN and move to the ACC or anywhere else but the B1G.

Now, that said, maybe the other more valuable PAC schools still around would be willing to listen to ESPN. Not sure where 'Zona stands on this, but I am sure that they will give it some thought. However, I don't really see the ACC as having any interest in the 4 corners schools.

(08-05-2022 11:21 PM)Stugray2 Wrote:  We are in an interim stage of the final state. There is nothing to stop it.

Notre Dame, Clemson and Florida State can make the crossing --for the latter two provided they do not suffer a prolonged slump the next decade-- on football brand value alone. Stanford, Washington, Oregon, North Carolina and Miami are very likely to have networks desire for market and sponsor coverage. Virginia and Cal are probably Hail Mary territory. By the numbers Louisville should be in the picture, and you can argue for Arizona, Arizona State, Baylor, Oklahoma State (although I expect a drop with Bedlam ending, a fading into K State level of pretty decent support) or Virginia Tech on the basis of eyeballs. But as we all know eyeballs are not the same value, those on the coast have considerably more buying power and influence.

But in the end you are going to have two super conferences, probably of 20 schools, of such high media value that they will be the NFC and AFC or college football. The other conferences will look like a blend of mid majors. The AAC and MWC getting dinged as back fill for the ACC and Pac-12 should they suffer more erosion. But the gap wont be 2:1 in money of the mid 2020s, but more 4:1 as the contracts for the 2 get larger while those of the 3 get smaller or best case stay flat (less in real dollars). The gap could grow to 6:1 or more by the mid-2030s effectvely ending any prospect of further crossings.

There really isn't anything that can be done about it. Clean up, as JRsec points out, will be done at the discretion of the networks, The two colossi have been formed, it's just who else and what other markets do they want coverage for in these that they think the long term payoff is worth a bit of overpay. Interest in the others will fall off, as they wont be big time anymore.

Basketball will be a great leveling place, as a Memphis, Kansas, Duke, UConn and Arizona can still go head to head with the football schools that excluded them. But a reckoning is coming for that arena as well, although I expect it to be more inclusive, perhaps 6 conferences instead of just 2.

The only possible tenable path for those outside the P2 is consolidation ASAP- with little to no backfill- and ideally getting a network other than Fox or espn

The PAC and ACC foolishly didn’t see what was apparent, and instead went with the Alliance. The consolidation of non-P2 should have started then. It would be egregiously shortsighted for the 4 corners to make the mistake again.

Whether that’s even enough is questionable, but staggering on as 3 conferences backfilling should be ruled out as soon as the 4 corners come to grips that the P5 era is dead. Conference name, peer groups etc are relics of yesteryear. And if PAC wounded pride too great, the Big 12 schools should consider going east. 10-12 schools leveraging ESPN’s need to provide ACC leftovers something in exchange for moving top schools.

Not ideal to be with ESPN over a OTA in a Big 24, which if Big 16 occurs, could happen. But the important thing is consolidation as soon as possible.

(08-06-2022 12:53 AM)Big 12 fan too Wrote:  

(08-05-2022 11:21 PM)Stugray2 Wrote:  We are in an interim stage of the final state. There is nothing to stop it.

Notre Dame, Clemson and Florida State can make the crossing --for the latter two provided they do not suffer a prolonged slump the next decade-- on football brand value alone. Stanford, Washington, Oregon, North Carolina and Miami are very likely to have networks desire for market and sponsor coverage. Virginia and Cal are probably Hail Mary territory. By the numbers Louisville should be in the picture, and you can argue for Arizona, Arizona State, Baylor, Oklahoma State (although I expect a drop with Bedlam ending, a fading into K State level of pretty decent support) or Virginia Tech on the basis of eyeballs. But as we all know eyeballs are not the same value, those on the coast have considerably more buying power and influence.

But in the end you are going to have two super conferences, probably of 20 schools, of such high media value that they will be the NFC and AFC or college football. The other conferences will look like a blend of mid majors. The AAC and MWC getting dinged as back fill for the ACC and Pac-12 should they suffer more erosion. But the gap wont be 2:1 in money of the mid 2020s, but more 4:1 as the contracts for the 2 get larger while those of the 3 get smaller or best case stay flat (less in real dollars). The gap could grow to 6:1 or more by the mid-2030s effectvely ending any prospect of further crossings.

There really isn't anything that can be done about it. Clean up, as JRsec points out, will be done at the discretion of the networks, The two colossi have been formed, it's just who else and what other markets do they want coverage for in these that they think the long term payoff is worth a bit of overpay. Interest in the others will fall off, as they wont be big time anymore.

Basketball will be a great leveling place, as a Memphis, Kansas, Duke, UConn and Arizona can still go head to head with the football schools that excluded them. But a reckoning is coming for that arena as well, although I expect it to be more inclusive, perhaps 6 conferences instead of just 2.

The only possible tenable path for those outside the P2 is consolidation ASAP- with little to no backfill- and ideally getting a network other than Fox or espn

The PAC and ACC foolishly didn’t see what was apparent, and instead went with the Alliance. The consolidation of non-P2 should have started then. It would be egregiously shortsighted for the 4 corners to make the mistake again.

Whether that’s even enough is questionable, but staggering on as 3 conferences backfilling should be ruled out as soon as the 4 corners come to grips that the P5 era is dead. Conference name, peer groups etc are relics of yesteryear. And if PAC wounded pride too great, the Big 12 schools should consider going east. 10-12 schools leveraging ESPN’s need to provide ACC leftovers something in exchange for moving top schools.

Not ideal to be with ESPN over a OTA in a Big 24, which if Big 16 occurs, could happen. But the important thing is consolidation as soon as possible.

Footnote on not going to ESPN or FOX: C-USA, a G5 conference, actually did just this in the past. Ask Marshall, USM, UAB, UTSA, ODU, Rice, Charlotte, and FAU how that turned out.

(08-05-2022 05:13 PM)Big 12 fan too Wrote:  

(08-05-2022 04:42 PM)CardinalJim Wrote:  

(08-05-2022 01:21 PM)TerryD Wrote:  What schools are going to sign the required ACC GOR and bind themselves there for 14 years?

Are any schools that have a glimmer of hope of getting a Big Ten or SEC invitation going to do so?

That’s been the question since the news Texas and Oklahoma were leaving The Big 12 broke.

It’s not a question if they will bind themselves to The ACC. The real question is will they bind themselves to their present conference. That’s what will bring real stability to The PAC or The Big 12.

I would expect Oregon, Washington, Stanford and Cal Berkeley to refuse to resign a PAC Grant of Rights.

In The Big 12 I don’t see Kansas, Oklahoma State, West Virginia or Cincinnati agreeing to sign a GOR.

If that happens there will be no stability in The PAC or Big 12.

The question then becomes who would be willing to sign The ACC GOR. Is 10 - 12 years of stability worth it to Kansas, Oklahoma State, West Virginia or Cincinnati?

No, he was correct, the question is, what P2 hopeful will be willing to agree to the ACC GOR.

Those schools are not avoiding GORs with their conferences, just to sign an even worse GOR with the ACC. Good god man!

It is very unlikely any P2 hopeful is joining the ACC if it is viewed that the GOR is prohibitive to moving. And if it is not prohibitive, then it is a bait and switch in terms of being more attractive- being on ESPN's 2nd conference rather than getting on a OTA network is bad for 3rd super conference. WVU is probably the only one that would not care about that, and may just want the ACC brand badly enough regardless of what schools are left in it

If left to the market, the best of the rest conference, the 3rd super conference, will likely have a P2 promotion friendly GOR. This will serve as a mechanism to aggregate all remaining schools of value. Schools of lesser value are not splitting because of this, as they inherently would make less leaving those schools that want the promotion ability.

The Big 12 will either offer UW and Oregon, KU, and all schools manageable P2 promotion buyouts, or a shorter GOR. This helps lure Oregon and UW, and thus the 4 corners, which also should want it given if the P2 reaches 48, some of those could be in play. Or they could go to the ACC and get locked in for 14 years if the GOR is "ironclad". And if it is not ironclad, you're becoming Midwest oasis to join Wake, BC, Cuse, Pitt and hoping for EPSN to remember you when filling out its prime Tier 1 timeslots.

If you are going to have a P2 promotion friendly GoR, what's the point of having one at all?

(08-05-2022 05:42 PM)random asian guy Wrote:  

(08-05-2022 01:36 PM)CoastalJuan Wrote:  

(08-05-2022 11:34 AM)random asian guy Wrote:  People on this board doesn’t want to believe, but the ACC is third in the pecking order (as the article indicates) and will act soon instead of waiting until it loses some members.

Act how?

ACC is #3 because they still have a couple of top tier teams in Clemson and FSU. The problem is that all other top tier targets are now in the BIG or SEC.

If we presume that the ACC can't steal from the BIG/SEC, which most of us agree with...

Then there is no hypothetical upside for the ACC, only downside. There is no one to steal that gets it out of 3rd. It can either stay the same and stay the 3rd, or lose teams and drop. Most of us see that as an eventuality, even if it's not for another decade.

And if/when the ACC loses its top brands, it's hard to see it being above #5. They will still have their basketball brands, but Kansas is still in the Big 12 for a reason.

(08-05-2022 12:22 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(08-05-2022 11:49 AM)random asian guy Wrote:  

(08-05-2022 11:36 AM)bullet Wrote:  

(08-05-2022 11:34 AM)random asian guy Wrote:  People on this board doesn’t want to believe, but the ACC is third in the pecking order (as the article indicates) and will act soon instead of waiting until it loses some members.

How will it act with the albatross of a contract?

What does ESPN want? What the ACC wants is mostly irrelevant at this point.

Both parites want money. If there is a realistic move that can enrich both parties, then they will do it.

I just cant figure out how it would ever make sense for ESPN. They have all the SEC and its a great league. They have all the ACC---and its a great league---and--better yet---ESPN has the ACC locked up for what is looking like an incredibly cheap long term price. When the realignment goal from BOTH the ACC and SEC is getting more money from ESPN and ESPN already owns the rights to every single school in both conferences---hard to see where there is going to be much enthusiasm for that project from ESPN. Now, once that ACC contract and GOR expire---then yeah---ESPN would be very interested---but I cant imagine they would be interested until that time.

People on this board talked a lot about B12 adding eight schools from the Pac but for some reason cannot fathom the idea of the Pac schools joining the ACC.

ESPN gave a low ball offer to Pac. It seems like Pac wants a lot more than. What if ESPN moves some of the valuable Pac schools to ACC?

1. ESPN will continue to have a coverage in the West Coast and the games for Pacific time zone. ESPN will drop the remaining Pac schools or give them very low payout, meaning some cost reduction for ESPN.

2. The ACC schools will get a few million dollar raise. Not much but still better than no raise. The move will also solidify the ACC’s status as undisputable #3 and provide the conference a better playoff access.

3. For the Pac schools moving to ACC, the ACC money, while much lower than the SEC money or BIG money, would be still a lot better than B12 money or Pac money. Again the playoff access will be a consideration for those schools.

We have all seen this movie before. What happened to the Big East after the ESPN had moved Pitt and Cuse to the ACC? The ESPN pays peanuts to AAC now.

1-The ACC is already the undisputed #3.

2-The networks don't want a P3, they want a clear delineation of east/west and north/south (P4). It also save them a lot of money. Why pay two 24 team leagues top dollar and one "other" 24 team league a lesser amount, when they could market to 4 distinct areas of the country while only paying 2 sixteen team leagues top dollar and two "other" sixteen or eighteen team leagues a lesser but acceptable amount?