(09-25-2022 06:26 PM)OrangeDude Wrote: (09-25-2022 05:55 PM)Skyhawk Wrote: (09-25-2022 05:02 PM)OrangeDude Wrote: (09-25-2022 02:07 PM)Skyhawk Wrote: I think GT is the better blocking move than Duke, if 20. But otherwise, I agree with most of your post.
If 24, then Duke, VA, and 2 of KS, VT, NC state, or Miami.
And then we're back to assembling abc-blocks lol
You may very well be correct. As I see it, and I suspect JRsec does as well, the TWO key blocking moves are UNC and FSU. FSU for the significance of the SEC to have both Florida and FSU similar to the SEC soon having both Texas and Texas A&M. I suspect the Noles will jump ship to the SEC in a heartbeat (apparently might even jump if the B1G offered as well).
UNC has options or can at least argue they have options.
1) Remaining in the ACC where they have a large influence;
2) Agree to go to the SEC where their southern roots are; or
3) Go to the B1G where they may feel more academically suited
Because UNC has options and is in my estimation likely to play the game more strategically than FSU they could (as I see it) use their influence to try and get concessions.
In my mind those concessions include UVA and Duke going with them. I admit, I could be totally wrong about this. In addition I think UNC might also want a safe haven for NC State at the very least and perhaps Wake Forest as well. That does not necessarily mean going with UNC to another conference but going to (or remaining in) another stable conference.
The third and fourth players are ESPN and the ACC conference as a whole since ESPN pays the bills and the ACC has a signed GoR any changes like these will have to navigate through. What are they willing to do and more importantly what are they unwilling to do?
But that is a thread for another day. This one is about ESPN wanting to secure their current holdings, possible SEC expansion of 4 with those members coming from the ACC, and who those 4 might be.
Cheers,
Neil
The problem with those concessions is "seats"
I know the forum want their favourite conferences to gobble all their favourite schools, but that's starting to look less and less realistic.
Otherwise TX and OK would have been allowed to bring along"friends", just for one example.
This works against NC.
Their choice is going to come down to - stay in a conference with all your friends, or leave all but maybe one behind.
Neither P2 is going to let them bring their friends.
So either there is some paradigm shift, or they have to pick one of several not-great choices.
It's easier with Clemson and FSU. - If they leave together, they'll fit right in, with no sense of loss.
But NC? - not-so-much.
It's part of a core 5 or so schools, which, together, could be half a conference by themselves.
So I guess we'll see how this all plays out
I am not saying your view is wrong about FSU and Clemson, but you are assuming that FSU and Clemson will just be able to leave without pushback from the ACC. The ACC is presently tied to a GoR that I see as being a major stumbling block to ANY ACC school leaving the conference before two years or so prior to the ending of the GoR in 2036.
ESPN as the sole and exclusive owner of the ACC's media rights can wait it out if it must and even refuse to increase payouts at the scheduled "look-in" windows. But as I see it, they will not want to. Nor will they want to let slide away others in the conference who will not make it into either a 20 or 24 team SEC. And ESPN certainly doesn't want any of them (particularly the southern based programs) going to the B1G.
Now, of course, we as fans can say "screw ESPN" until we are blue in the face but precisely because there is TIME to develop a plan over the next four years or so all I am saying is that there is time to develop a plan that could meet ESPN's needs, the SEC's wants, and the ACC's needs.
Losing both FSU and Clemson in 4 years time I don't see as being one of those things.
If I were a president of one of the ACC universities and the commissioner brought forth a proposal to vote on letting FSU and Clemson go to the SEC - I'd say screw that. Holding on to both until the end of the GoR. Let them submit their applications to the SEC and wait. Next discussion. Searching for a new commissioner?
Besides, I bet a secret straw poll of the SEC presidents would actually be against adding two more KING BRANDS for reasons I have already outlined above. Only stupid fans like us want to say, "To be the best, you need to play the best" and then once our team has lost 5 of their 8 conference games scratch our heads and say, "why did that happen?"
But I've been known to be wrong before.
Cheers,
Neil
Ok, just to clarify.
The schools granted their media rights to the ACC.
The ACC did not sell them to espn. The ACC licensed those rights as an "ACC package", thus granted to the espn in some way.
It's a distinction, but one that's important.
That means that the ACC can change it's membership and can return any granted rights to any school, without it affecting any other school's grant of rights, or affecting the ACC/espn media licensing agreement.
It's part of why other conferences can replace schools which are leaving with other schools, and not have it affect their media deal. They backfill, sometimes in consultation with the media company, and then see if the new slate of schools still meets the needs of the media agreement.
So the ACC could vote to allow Clemson and FSU to have their rights back, if they so choose, and still have all the other conference GoRs intact, and also keep the ACC/espn media deal intact.
It's just a matter of negotiation and consultation.
That doesn't mean that the leaving schools won't likely pay through the nose lol. But that's what negotiation is for.
If they stay, they other schools get nothing, if they leave, the schools get "something", so it's just a matter of figuring out the break point between nothing and something that both sides can live with.
So that's not the biggest issue.
The bigger issue is to address the various "wants" of the situation. Some of which you note.
Do FSU and Clemson want to leave? I think that's a safe "yes", presuming it's not too costly.
Would ACC allow them to leave? I think that's also a "yes" - to quell disruption, to allow for the addition of more schools with past rivalries, and honestly, if they don't let them leave, that's an opportunity for money that's being left on the table.
Would the SEC want them? I think "yes". There's an escalation going on with the Big10. and if the schools become available, I really doubt that the SEC would shrug their shoulders and let the B10 get those schools.
Plus they enhance the value of existing schools. For example - A Clemson/SC game is likely to be worth more in ratings/media money than some other non-rivalry SC game.
And others (including JRsec) have already talked about market value, florida value, etc. so I won't try to re-tread their paths.
As for "playing the best", I think it could be argued that the SEC already has a bit of that trouble. And so adding these actually help "spread the wealth" as it were.
And would espn like this? I think "yes". They have a relatively low-priced media deal with the ACC which goes over a decade, which, done this way, stays intact.
As long as the backfill is decent - and I picked former big east schools plus UCF - espn should be fine with the choices. They might even up the dollar amount slightly, so that no one takes a pay cut. Why would they? Because they, of everyone, do not want to see the GoR concept tested in court. And FSU/Clemson, if kept in the ACC for too much longer, might very well try. So a small payout, to prevent that, would be in their best interest, especially since they would be picking up extra content with the addition of those big east schools, and the new matchups now possible in the SEC.
(And to bring the Florida cup all the way in-conference, Miami, might move along with them, for similar reasons. If that happened, I think the SEC also grabs Kansas. But that's more of a stretch, due to the ties that Miami has with the former big east schools and ND - they might not want to go to the SEC.)
And so this (plus what I wrote in my other posts) is why I think this move is very much possible.
Will it happen? I dunno - it'll take someone
trying, and I dunno if those involved have the creativity in negotiation or have even the self-motivation, to even start to get something like this done.
But they could...
Wouldn't it be interesting.
/
Replies to Orange Dude's Theory of a Potential ESPN Strategy to Protect Its Holdings
