I hate what happened to the Pac 12 but there is one positive. Their bowl deals will be up for grabs. All 4 power 5 conferences should benefit.

(08-07-2023 09:30 AM)E2THEX Wrote:  I hate what happened to the Pac 12 but there is one positive. Their bowl deals will be up for grabs. All 4 power 5 conferences should benefit.

Uhhh... Wouldn't that be "power 4" ???

I don’t think the bowl tie ins would affect the ACC much, the ACC dint add more members, but it might change the ACC bowl opponent.

(08-07-2023 10:05 AM)Garrettabc Wrote:  I don’t think the bowl tie ins would affect the ACC much, the ACC dint add more members, but it might change the ACC bowl opponent.

Exactly. And the only Pac-12 bowls worth having are the Rose, Las Vegas, Alamo, Holiday and Sun. The ACC already has the last two, and it's not getting the first three (IMO).

(08-07-2023 10:05 AM)Garrettabc Wrote:  I don’t think the bowl tie ins would affect the ACC much, the ACC dint add more members, but it might change the ACC bowl opponent.

https://twitter.com/JWMediaDC/status/168...7021799425

GONE BUT NOT FORGOTTEN

Adding Stanford and Cal with Oregon and Washington would have been a good move. Adding Stanford and Cal with Oregon State and Washington State doesn't seem like it would cause ESPN to be willing to rework the media deal. I think the ACC waited too long on this. At this point, if you are going to add anyone, I think SMU needs to be one of them to get a full rate on the ACCN in Texas. Beyond that, I really don't love the options. I guess Tulane. I'm not sure if that really helps much though. I guess it depends on how much extra money can be made from the ACCN by adding the state of Texas and an additional state.

Edit: On second thought, if the objective is to make as much money as possible during the remainder of this current media contract, then screw it, add Stanford and SMU. The travel burden is on those schools. It would be a minor inconvenience to existing ACC schools.

(08-07-2023 12:51 PM)Schema Wrote:  Adding Stanford and Cal with Oregon and Washington would have been a good move. Adding Stanford and Cal with Oregon State and Washington State doesn't seem like it would cause ESPN to be willing to rework the media deal. I think the ACC waited too long on this. At this point, if you are going to add anyone, I think SMU needs to be one of them to get a full rate on the ACCN in Texas. Beyond that, I really don't love the options. I guess Tulane. I'm not sure if that really helps much though. I guess it depends on how much extra money can be made from the ACCN by adding the state of Texas and an additional state.

Edit: On second thought, if the objective is to make as much money as possible during the remainder of this current media contract, then screw it, add Stanford and SMU. The travel burden is on those schools. It would be a minor inconvenience to existing ACC schools.

If the ACC is allowed to add 4 teams at pro-rata, add all 4 but give them reduced shares so that existing schools get more. If schools don't want to do that, grease the skids by making the exit fee go down in 2036...