The best arrangement is to add 9: PAC -OSU/WSU and + KU. KU aligns with the West for CFB and with the East for MBB.
CFB schedule:
West: 8 games round robin plus 1 vs ACC East.
ACC East: 8 games ACC (6 division + 2 cross division) plus either ND or ACC West.

MBB Schedule:
West: 2x round robin (14 games) plus 4 vs ACC east (one home stand, one away)
East: 1x round robin (15 games) plus 2 vs ACC West (home or away), plus one additional protected rival.

Stanford/Cal football-only makes more sense than PN4 as a pod. Frankly, I don't see how pods work with an 18 team conference. The incumbent ACC schools would still gain nothing from either arrangement. I don't think they have much to gain from trips to the Bay area let alone Seattle and Eugene. This is a case where the Bay teams have to pay their way in (as well paying to play in the Big West or other conferences as affiliate members).

(12-20-2022 11:04 AM)DFW HOYA Wrote:  ACC: All-Coastal Conference

OR...

(12-19-2022 04:49 PM)Crayton Wrote:  It is in the air (at least on crazy message boards like this), so attempting to make one thread for all ACC expansion chatter.

Is this a viable path for the ACC?
Would ESPN give the ACC a bump for getting the network late kickoffs?
Is 2 enough? 4?
Does 6 water down ACC culture? Is that good or bad?
Would the ACC pay the PNW more than the XII?
More than the Pac with unequal sharing?
Is stability for 12 years worth more than a B1G gamble in 6?
Would this make FSU/Clemson more anxious to leave? Less?
What schedule format would they use?
How is the ND contract modified?
Does having ND allow them to take an odd number?

We don't have the media spreadsheets to tell us how monetarily viable it is, but I'd say the ACC and PAC forming a two-coast league is definitely one possibility in the picture. Members' needs, strengths, and academic cultures complement each other in many ways. It will be interesting to see what happens.

There is value in the ACC taking anywhere from 4 to 7 teams from the Pac. In addition to the increase in carriage rate for ACC network, the ACC stands to leverage a chance to reopen its broadcast agreement with ESPN. The threat of taking the rights to the open market at a time when ESPN is losing the B1G, is one of the few ways to leverage ESPN. The conferences are of similar academic standings, and a mix of elite public and private schools.
The more Pac teams are taken, the less intercoastal travel is needed.

The reasons this won't happen are as follows:
1. The ACC lacks bold leadership
2. ESPN/ Disney leadership was averse to increases in capital outlays on future sports rights. Perhaps Iger's return will change this? Espn may just be content to keep raking in the profit on the undervalued ACC rights.
3. Such a reworking of the ACC deal might give FSU an avenue to leave the ACC.
4. The revenue would not be equal to or exceed the B1G and SEC. It os likely only 75%
5 The rumor of a B1G invite has made biggest remaining brands hesitant to get around to evaluating this option
6 The PAC leadership would much prefer a partnership over a raid as they want to keep cashing checks.

Time will tell if the opportunity is squandered by the ACC. It would not be the first time the ACC is late to the party, in fact that is more of the norm these days

(12-22-2022 03:02 AM)LeeNobody Wrote:  There is value in the ACC taking anywhere from 4 to 7 teams from the Pac. In addition to the increase in carriage rate for ACC network, the ACC stands to leverage a chance to reopen its broadcast agreement with ESPN. The threat of taking the rights to the open market at a time when ESPN is losing the B1G, is one of the few ways to leverage ESPN. The conferences are of similar academic standings, and a mix of elite public and private schools.
The more Pac teams are taken, the less intercoastal travel is needed.

The reasons this won't happen are as follows:
1. The ACC lacks bold leadership
2. ESPN/ Disney leadership was averse to increases in capital outlays on future sports rights. Perhaps Iger's return will change this? Espn may just be content to keep raking in the profit on the undervalued ACC rights.
3. Such a reworking of the ACC deal might give FSU an avenue to leave the ACC.
4. The revenue would not be equal to or exceed the B1G and SEC. It os likely only 75%
5 The rumor of a B1G invite has made biggest remaining brands hesitant to get around to evaluating this option
6 The PAC leadership would much prefer a partnership over a raid as they want to keep cashing checks.

Time will tell if the opportunity is squandered by the ACC. It would not be the first time the ACC is late to the party, in fact that is more of the norm these days

I’m not sure how the ACC would be squandering the opportunity if you mentioned both ESPN and the Pac having just as much—if not more—of a say in the matter.

(12-22-2022 08:24 AM)esayem Wrote:  

(12-22-2022 03:02 AM)LeeNobody Wrote:  There is value in the ACC taking anywhere from 4 to 7 teams from the Pac. In addition to the increase in carriage rate for ACC network, the ACC stands to leverage a chance to reopen its broadcast agreement with ESPN. The threat of taking the rights to the open market at a time when ESPN is losing the B1G, is one of the few ways to leverage ESPN. The conferences are of similar academic standings, and a mix of elite public and private schools.
The more Pac teams are taken, the less intercoastal travel is needed.

The reasons this won't happen are as follows:
1. The ACC lacks bold leadership
2. ESPN/ Disney leadership was averse to increases in capital outlays on future sports rights. Perhaps Iger's return will change this? Espn may just be content to keep raking in the profit on the undervalued ACC rights.
3. Such a reworking of the ACC deal might give FSU an avenue to leave the ACC.
4. The revenue would not be equal to or exceed the B1G and SEC. It os likely only 75%
5 The rumor of a B1G invite has made biggest remaining brands hesitant to get around to evaluating this option
6 The PAC leadership would much prefer a partnership over a raid as they want to keep cashing checks.

Time will tell if the opportunity is squandered by the ACC. It would not be the first time the ACC is late to the party, in fact that is more of the norm these days

I’m not sure how the ACC would be squandering the opportunity if you mentioned both ESPN and the Pac having just as much—if not more—of a say in the matter.

The ACC has to be the first mover in this scenario. No PAC school is likely to be able to collude with other teams without word getting out. This is why its ACC oppurtunity to squander.

(12-22-2022 08:58 AM)LeeNobody Wrote:  

(12-22-2022 08:24 AM)esayem Wrote:  

(12-22-2022 03:02 AM)LeeNobody Wrote:  There is value in the ACC taking anywhere from 4 to 7 teams from the Pac. In addition to the increase in carriage rate for ACC network, the ACC stands to leverage a chance to reopen its broadcast agreement with ESPN. The threat of taking the rights to the open market at a time when ESPN is losing the B1G, is one of the few ways to leverage ESPN. The conferences are of similar academic standings, and a mix of elite public and private schools.
The more Pac teams are taken, the less intercoastal travel is needed.

The reasons this won't happen are as follows:
1. The ACC lacks bold leadership
2. ESPN/ Disney leadership was averse to increases in capital outlays on future sports rights. Perhaps Iger's return will change this? Espn may just be content to keep raking in the profit on the undervalued ACC rights.
3. Such a reworking of the ACC deal might give FSU an avenue to leave the ACC.
4. The revenue would not be equal to or exceed the B1G and SEC. It os likely only 75%
5 The rumor of a B1G invite has made biggest remaining brands hesitant to get around to evaluating this option
6 The PAC leadership would much prefer a partnership over a raid as they want to keep cashing checks.

Time will tell if the opportunity is squandered by the ACC. It would not be the first time the ACC is late to the party, in fact that is more of the norm these days

I’m not sure how the ACC would be squandering the opportunity if you mentioned both ESPN and the Pac having just as much—if not more—of a say in the matter.

The ACC has to be the first mover in this scenario. No PAC school is likely to be able to collude with other teams without word getting out. This is why its ACC oppurtunity to squander.

I thought I read that they have talked, so that step has already happened.

(12-22-2022 03:02 AM)LeeNobody Wrote:  There is value in the ACC taking anywhere from 4 to 7 teams from the Pac. In addition to the increase in carriage rate for ACC network, the ACC stands to leverage a chance to reopen its broadcast agreement with ESPN. The threat of taking the rights to the open market at a time when ESPN is losing the B1G, is one of the few ways to leverage ESPN. The conferences are of similar academic standings, and a mix of elite public and private schools.
The more Pac teams are taken, the less intercoastal travel is needed.

The reasons this won't happen are as follows:
1. The ACC lacks bold leadership
2. ESPN/ Disney leadership was averse to increases in capital outlays on future sports rights. Perhaps Iger's return will change this? Espn may just be content to keep raking in the profit on the undervalued ACC rights.
3. Such a reworking of the ACC deal might give FSU an avenue to leave the ACC.
4. The revenue would not be equal to or exceed the B1G and SEC. It os likely only 75%
5 The rumor of a B1G invite has made biggest remaining brands hesitant to get around to evaluating this option
6 The PAC leadership would much prefer a partnership over a raid as they want to keep cashing checks.

Time will tell if the opportunity is squandered by the ACC. It would not be the first time the ACC is late to the party, in fact that is more of the norm these days

Phillips really needs to be more aggressive.

(12-20-2022 02:10 PM)jrj84105 Wrote:  The best arrangement is to add 9: PAC -OSU/WSU and + KU. KU aligns with the West for CFB and with the East for MBB.
CFB schedule:
West: 8 games round robin plus 1 vs ACC East.
ACC East: 8 games ACC (6 division + 2 cross division) plus either ND or ACC West.

MBB Schedule:
West: 2x round robin (14 games) plus 4 vs ACC east (one home stand, one away)
East: 1x round robin (15 games) plus 2 vs ACC West (home or away), plus one additional protected rival.

Certainly the tightest schedule. Of course, if you are adding 8 of 10 Pac schools, I think those schools would rather simply merge media deals with ESPN/ACCN than boot members and give up their own CCG.

(12-22-2022 10:41 AM)esayem Wrote:  

(12-22-2022 08:58 AM)LeeNobody Wrote:  The ACC has to be the first mover in this scenario. No PAC school is likely to be able to collude with other teams without word getting out. This is why its ACC oppurtunity to squander.

I thought I read that they have talked, so that step has already happened.

It was a conversation between UNC and the Pac rather than between ACC and X Pac teams. Before USC/UCLA, I remember rumblings last year of a merger too, with a shared CCG (not sure who was leaking that).

I guess that means it is something parties have considered, but some of the issues noted in this thread may nerf the idea.

The money may be more for 3-6 Pac teams jumping over than staying. The ACC would likely distribute any bump unequally. But either the Pac can get a comparable deal solo, the institutional ties with the bottom half of the Pac may not be worth such a modest increase, or being locked up for a decade+ won't fly with the B1G hopefuls.

(12-23-2022 08:32 AM)Crayton Wrote:  

(12-22-2022 10:41 AM)esayem Wrote:  

(12-22-2022 08:58 AM)LeeNobody Wrote:  The ACC has to be the first mover in this scenario. No PAC school is likely to be able to collude with other teams without word getting out. This is why its ACC oppurtunity to squander.

I thought I read that they have talked, so that step has already happened.

It was a conversation between UNC and the Pac rather than between ACC and X Pac teams. Before USC/UCLA, I remember rumblings last year of a merger too, with a shared CCG (not sure who was leaking that).

I guess that means it is something parties have considered, but some of the issues noted in this thread may nerf the idea.

The money may be more for 3-6 Pac teams jumping over than staying. The ACC would likely distribute any bump unequally. But either the Pac can get a comparable deal solo, the institutional ties with the bottom half of the Pac may not be worth such a modest increase, or being locked up for a decade+ won't fly with the B1G hopefuls.

There is one ESPN.com article (not sure if I can find it at this point) claiming that USCw was talking to the SEC and even the ACC about joining before they joined the Big 10.


Never heard of UNC (or anybody else from the ACC) talking to the PAC.