Andrea Adelson, ESPN, reports that the schools not (yet?) supporting ACC expansion with the PAC's San Francisco schools are NC State, North Carolina, Clemson, and Florida State. She also reports differences in enthusiasm between ACC presidents and ACC athletic directors about the idea.

Discussions are not closed, however. A factor in play is the upcoming 8.15 Tuesday deadline for schools to report their intention to remain in the conference for another year.

Full report, no paywall:

https://www.espn.com/college-sports/stor...l-stanford

I mean, it's a weird situation. We have cross-continent conferences now that aren't making major bucks. So does the ACC lean into the new normal and become the de facto Magnolia League? Personally, I think Stanford and Cal could thrive with the opportunity to get out of the LA shadow. I really think SMU has a high ceiling, but they seem to be an afterthought in all this.

As I've said in other threads, Carolina never affirms expansion at the onset of discussions. Never. There's obviously a voting block with the UNC System. What they want? I'm not sure.

(08-11-2023 11:10 PM)Gitanole Wrote:  Andrea Adelson, ESPN, reports that the schools not (yet?) supporting ACC expansion with the PAC's San Francisco schools are N C State, North Carolina, Clemson, and Florida State. She also reports differences in enthusiasm between ACC presidents and ACC athletic directors about the idea.

Discussions are not closed, however. A factor in play is the upcoming 8.15 Tuesday deadline for schools to report their intention to remain in the conference for another year.

Full report, no paywall:

https://www.espn.com/college-sports/stor...l-stanford

I don't think it's surprising that the Presidents see the prestige of the 2 schools, while the ADs are seemingly "meh" lol

(08-12-2023 12:09 AM)Skyhawk Wrote:  

(08-11-2023 11:10 PM)Gitanole Wrote:  Andrea Adelson, ESPN, reports that the schools not (yet?) supporting ACC expansion with the PAC's San Francisco schools are N C State, North Carolina, Clemson, and Florida State. She also reports differences in enthusiasm between ACC presidents and ACC athletic directors about the idea.

Discussions are not closed, however. A factor in play is the upcoming 8.15 Tuesday deadline for schools to report their intention to remain in the conference for another year.

Full report, no paywall:

https://www.espn.com/college-sports/stor...l-stanford

I don't think it's surprising that the Presidents see the prestige of the 2 schools, while the ADs are seemingly "meh" lol

Yeah. When we were told that the ACC was going to start discussions with ADs and presidents meeting separately, it was amusing to imagine how the prevailing winds in each room might differ. lol

(08-12-2023 12:29 AM)Gitanole Wrote:  

(08-12-2023 12:09 AM)Skyhawk Wrote:  

(08-11-2023 11:10 PM)Gitanole Wrote:  Andrea Adelson, ESPN, reports that the schools not (yet?) supporting ACC expansion with the PAC's San Francisco schools are N C State, North Carolina, Clemson, and Florida State. She also reports differences in enthusiasm between ACC presidents and ACC athletic directors about the idea.

Discussions are not closed, however. A factor in play is the upcoming 8.15 Tuesday deadline for schools to report their intention to remain in the conference for another year.

Full report, no paywall:

https://www.espn.com/college-sports/stor...l-stanford

I don't think it's surprising that the Presidents see the prestige of the 2 schools, while the ADs are seemingly "meh" lol

Yeah. When we were told that the ACC was going to start discussions with ADs and presidents meeting separately, it was amusing to imagine how the prevailing winds in each room might differ. lol

Just a note of history. When Penn State was invited into the Big10 in 1989, the ADs overwhelmingly were against them. PSU went behind the backs of the ADs straight to the presidents, which voted them in, by the narrowest of margins.

Point being, the presidents typically hold the reigns.

(08-12-2023 12:39 AM)CrazyPaco Wrote:  Just a note of history. When Penn State was invited into the Big10 in 1989, the ADs overwhelmingly were against them. PSU went behind the backs of the ADs straight to the presidents, which voted them in, by the narrowest of margins.

Point being, the presidents typically hold the reins.

Indeed they do. The buck always stops at that desk.

The argument Notre Dame AD Jack Swarbrick reportedly made on behalf of admitting Stanford and Cal was a president's argument.

(08-11-2023 11:19 PM)esayem Wrote:  I mean, it's a weird situation. We have cross-continent conferences now that aren't making major bucks. So does the ACC lean into the new normal and become the de facto Magnolia League? Personally, I think Stanford and Cal could thrive with the opportunity to get out of the LA shadow. I really think SMU has a high ceiling, but they seem to be an afterthought in all this.

As I've said in other threads, Carolina never affirms expansion at the onset of discussions. Never. There's obviously a voting block with the UNC System. What they want? I'm not sure.

Yes, but typically Duke votes with UNC on these matters.

I think these 4 have a different path in mind.

FSU and Clemson opposition is likely bluster to get more Revenue.

What is the UNC system opposition about? Success in basketball leading to greater revenue? I think UNC and NCState are the likeliest to break to the cause. Just award some more basketball tournaments to Greensboro.

I see SMU, Stanford, Cal on deck... Lets see FSU send that letter on August 15th

(08-12-2023 06:36 AM)GTFletch Wrote:  I see SMU, Stanford, Cal on deck... Lets see FSU send that letter on August 15th

Two of those have no TV deal for next season. OR ST and WSU as a back-up plan for Calford will only wait so long.

Worst case scenario FSU waits out the PAC4.

How important is 8/15 if the preference is starting the blowup of the ACC?

(08-12-2023 06:33 AM)LeeNobody Wrote:  FSU and Clemson opposition is likely bluster to get more Revenue.

What is the UNC system opposition about? Success in basketball leading to greater revenue? I think UNC and NCState are the likeliest to break to the cause. Just award some more basketball tournaments to Greensboro.

For one they want to keep both together if possible. IMO this is more than the BOG's exerting it's influence. I think UNC is sending a message to ND in particular & the rest of the ACC for that matter that whatever issues it wants resolved have to happen

Depending on how the ”vote” was called there could be more no votes than 4. They could have went alphabetical and stopped as soon as there were four votes against.

Offer UNC a bigger split of the basketball revenue.

(08-12-2023 06:33 AM)LeeNobody Wrote:  FSU and Clemson opposition is likely bluster to get more Revenue.

What is the UNC system opposition about? Success in basketball leading to greater revenue? I think UNC and NCState are the likeliest to break to the cause. Just award some more basketball tournaments to Greensboro.

I see this too. They want more performance-based pay and have leverage in this vote. Doubt the ACC will even put such a compromise to a vote though.

(08-12-2023 06:33 AM)LeeNobody Wrote:  FSU and Clemson opposition is likely bluster to get more Revenue.

What is the UNC system opposition about? Success in basketball leading to greater revenue? I think UNC and NCState are the likeliest to break to the cause. Just award some more basketball tournaments to Greensboro.

The ACC is being lapped by the P2 leagues in revenues.

However things work out for Cal and Stanford, ACC schools that intend to compete at the top level have to try something.

I just posted that a new idea came up that ACC might be happy to get rid of the schools making the loudest noise by claiming sovereign immunity from being sued by the ACC if they leave without paying the exit fees.

(08-12-2023 06:02 AM)AllTideUp Wrote:  

(08-11-2023 11:19 PM)esayem Wrote:  I mean, it's a weird situation. We have cross-continent conferences now that aren't making major bucks. So does the ACC lean into the new normal and become the de facto Magnolia League? Personally, I think Stanford and Cal could thrive with the opportunity to get out of the LA shadow. I really think SMU has a high ceiling, but they seem to be an afterthought in all this.

As I've said in other threads, Carolina never affirms expansion at the onset of discussions. Never. There's obviously a voting block with the UNC System. What they want? I'm not sure.

Yes, but typically Duke votes with UNC on these matters.

I think these 4 have a different path in mind.

That difference is easy to explain. North Carolina is fairly confident that it has an exit path to the P2. Duke is decidedly less confident of that.

As to what UNC wants, my best guess is a downward negotiation of the exit fee together with a negotiated buyout of the GoR that is less onerous than mid nine figures.

(08-13-2023 04:30 PM)tf8693 Wrote:  

(08-12-2023 06:02 AM)AllTideUp Wrote:  Yes, but typically Duke votes with UNC on these matters.

I think these 4 have a different path in mind.

That difference is easy to explain. North Carolina is fairly confident that it has an exit path to the P2. Duke is decidedly less confident of that.

As to what UNC wants, my best guess is a downward negotiation of the exit fee together with a negotiated buyout of the GoR that is less onerous than mid nine figures.

Very likely. That's the wish list for every ACC school with a P2 opportunity.

I would rather see the ACC as a whole to vote to abolish the GORs now, and ask everyone before trying to jump ship let’s see what media deal they possibly could pull in via anyone and everyone not named ESPN. Tell all the powers to be for actual time to put forth bids, and if nothing comes back worth noting then so be it. Would rather take my chances now than say 13yrs from now where I would like to call home for the school I root for than continue a path as dead man walking.

(08-11-2023 11:10 PM)Gitanole Wrote:  Andrea Adelson, ESPN, reports that the schools not (yet?) supporting ACC expansion with the PAC's San Francisco schools are N C State, North Carolina, Clemson, and Florida State. She also reports differences in enthusiasm between ACC presidents and ACC athletic directors about the idea.

Discussions are not closed, however. A factor in play is the upcoming 8.15 Tuesday deadline for schools to report their intention to remain in the conference for another year.

Adelson is an ESPN reporter.

Another ESPN reporter, Pete Thamel, reported this on August 9:

The ACC's deliberations on Cal and Stanford have come amid a fascinating moment, as multiple unhappy schools need to make a decision within the next week about whether they want to leave their league.

There is a deadline Tuesday for schools to notify the ACC if they want to leave and change conferences for the 2024 season, a date that has been highlighted because of Florida State's vocal unhappiness about league revenues.

My take: ESPN and the ACC need to see if and how many schools announce a departure before making any decision on expansion. Doesn't make sense to add two schools and lose FSU next week.