(08-18-2023 08:40 AM)CrazyPaco Wrote:  

(08-18-2023 07:42 AM)dgrace4cards Wrote:  Friday morning update from JW Media...

SMU, Stanford, and Cal all willing to come for free for first few years
also
He's reporting that PAC 4 met yesterday and discussed 1 option of all 4 coming to ACC...to me that would make more logistics sense, with a full pod out west....would OSU and Wazu accept same deal to come for free for a few years?

Most importantly, does JW Media still hold credibility in the conference realignment world of reporting...

https://twitter.com/JWMediaDC/status/169...48904?s=20

If true, on paper that would appear to be a at least $5-8m bump per existing member. I don't know how you turn that down, but who knows if the offer is real or the numbers right.

The problem is that a few years down the road that bump disappears and the West coast schools may start costing you money. Also, you introduce instability. Any West coast teams you add will be looking at resurrecting the PAC the entire time they're part of the ACC. They might even find a way.

(08-18-2023 08:48 AM)Hallcity Wrote:  

(08-18-2023 08:40 AM)CrazyPaco Wrote:  

(08-18-2023 07:42 AM)dgrace4cards Wrote:  Friday morning update from JW Media...

SMU, Stanford, and Cal all willing to come for free for first few years
also
He's reporting that PAC 4 met yesterday and discussed 1 option of all 4 coming to ACC...to me that would make more logistics sense, with a full pod out west....would OSU and Wazu accept same deal to come for free for a few years?

Most importantly, does JW Media still hold credibility in the conference realignment world of reporting...

https://twitter.com/JWMediaDC/status/169...48904?s=20

If true, on paper that would appear to be a at least $5-8m bump per existing member. I don't know how you turn that down, but who knows if the offer is real or the numbers right.

The problem is that a few years down the road that bump disappears and the West coast schools may start costing you money. Also, you introduce instability. Any West coast teams you add will be looking at resurrecting the PAC the entire time they're part of the ACC. They might even find a way.

I personally think this is like a 5-7 year fix....then after that we'll all be living in a P2 or P3 for all sports and ACC will be one of the academic/athletic non football/lower tier conferences after contraction/consolidation....so IMO at least Stanford/Cal maybe SMU too playing long game to get into the conference now, once 8+ leave ACC for the other 3 conferences, this one will likely include Vandy, Northwestern, etc in it once its all said and done.

(08-18-2023 08:48 AM)Hallcity Wrote:  

(08-18-2023 08:40 AM)CrazyPaco Wrote:  

(08-18-2023 07:42 AM)dgrace4cards Wrote:  Friday morning update from JW Media...

SMU, Stanford, and Cal all willing to come for free for first few years
also
He's reporting that PAC 4 met yesterday and discussed 1 option of all 4 coming to ACC...to me that would make more logistics sense, with a full pod out west....would OSU and Wazu accept same deal to come for free for a few years?

Most importantly, does JW Media still hold credibility in the conference realignment world of reporting...

https://twitter.com/JWMediaDC/status/169...48904?s=20

If true, on paper that would appear to be a at least $5-8m bump per existing member. I don't know how you turn that down, but who knows if the offer is real or the numbers right.

The problem is that a few years down the road that bump disappears and the West coast schools may start costing you money. Also, you introduce instability. Any West coast teams you add will be looking at resurrecting the PAC the entire time they're part of the ACC. They might even find a way.

There's is no resurrecting the Pac.

(08-18-2023 11:11 AM)CrazyPaco Wrote:  

(08-18-2023 08:48 AM)Hallcity Wrote:  

(08-18-2023 08:40 AM)CrazyPaco Wrote:  

(08-18-2023 07:42 AM)dgrace4cards Wrote:  Friday morning update from JW Media...

SMU, Stanford, and Cal all willing to come for free for first few years
also
He's reporting that PAC 4 met yesterday and discussed 1 option of all 4 coming to ACC...to me that would make more logistics sense, with a full pod out west....would OSU and Wazu accept same deal to come for free for a few years?

Most importantly, does JW Media still hold credibility in the conference realignment world of reporting...

https://twitter.com/JWMediaDC/status/169...48904?s=20

If true, on paper that would appear to be a at least $5-8m bump per existing member. I don't know how you turn that down, but who knows if the offer is real or the numbers right.

The problem is that a few years down the road that bump disappears and the West coast schools may start costing you money. Also, you introduce instability. Any West coast teams you add will be looking at resurrecting the PAC the entire time they're part of the ACC. They might even find a way.

There's is no resurrecting the Pac.

But they may recruit the old Pac members such as Utah and ASU. And I view that as a positive move. The ACC would lose FSU and potentially others before 2036. Arizona schools and Utah schools would be perfect replacement candidates.

That’s why adding Stanford and Cal would be a great strategic move. I am sure it would give $5 to $8 million boost. My concern is some members may block the expansion for a non monetary reason.

(08-18-2023 12:05 PM)random asian guy Wrote:  

(08-18-2023 11:11 AM)CrazyPaco Wrote:  

(08-18-2023 08:48 AM)Hallcity Wrote:  

(08-18-2023 08:40 AM)CrazyPaco Wrote:  

(08-18-2023 07:42 AM)dgrace4cards Wrote:  Friday morning update from JW Media...

SMU, Stanford, and Cal all willing to come for free for first few years
also
He's reporting that PAC 4 met yesterday and discussed 1 option of all 4 coming to ACC...to me that would make more logistics sense, with a full pod out west....would OSU and Wazu accept same deal to come for free for a few years?

Most importantly, does JW Media still hold credibility in the conference realignment world of reporting...

https://twitter.com/JWMediaDC/status/169...48904?s=20

If true, on paper that would appear to be a at least $5-8m bump per existing member. I don't know how you turn that down, but who knows if the offer is real or the numbers right.

The problem is that a few years down the road that bump disappears and the West coast schools may start costing you money. Also, you introduce instability. Any West coast teams you add will be looking at resurrecting the PAC the entire time they're part of the ACC. They might even find a way.

There's is no resurrecting the Pac.

But they may recruit the old Pac members such as USC, UCLA, U of A Utah and ASU. And I view that as a positive move. The ACC would lose FSU and potentially others before 2036. Arizona schools and Utah schools would be perfect replacement candidates.

That’s why adding Stanford and Cal would be a great strategic move. I am sure it would give $5 to $8 million boost. My concern is some members may block the expansion for a non monetary reason.

DO UNTO OTHERS

(08-18-2023 12:33 PM)green Wrote:  

(08-18-2023 12:05 PM)random asian guy Wrote:  

(08-18-2023 11:11 AM)CrazyPaco Wrote:  

(08-18-2023 08:48 AM)Hallcity Wrote:  

(08-18-2023 08:40 AM)CrazyPaco Wrote:  If true, on paper that would appear to be a at least $5-8m bump per existing member. I don't know how you turn that down, but who knows if the offer is real or the numbers right.

The problem is that a few years down the road that bump disappears and the West coast schools may start costing you money. Also, you introduce instability. Any West coast teams you add will be looking at resurrecting the PAC the entire time they're part of the ACC. They might even find a way.

There's is no resurrecting the Pac.

But they may recruit the old Pac members such as USC, UCLA, U of A Utah and ASU. And I view that as a positive move. The ACC would lose FSU and potentially others before 2036. Arizona schools and Utah schools would be perfect replacement candidates.

That’s why adding Stanford and Cal would be a great strategic move. I am sure it would give $5 to $8 million boost. My concern is some members may block the expansion for a non monetary reason.

DO UNTO OTHERS

Wutchu saying? Get BYU instead?

(08-18-2023 08:48 AM)Hallcity Wrote:  

(08-18-2023 08:40 AM)CrazyPaco Wrote:  

(08-18-2023 07:42 AM)dgrace4cards Wrote:  Friday morning update from JW Media...

SMU, Stanford, and Cal all willing to come for free for first few years
also
He's reporting that PAC 4 met yesterday and discussed 1 option of all 4 coming to ACC...to me that would make more logistics sense, with a full pod out west....would OSU and Wazu accept same deal to come for free for a few years?

Most importantly, does JW Media still hold credibility in the conference realignment world of reporting...

https://twitter.com/JWMediaDC/status/169...48904?s=20

If true, on paper that would appear to be a at least $5-8m bump per existing member. I don't know how you turn that down, but who knows if the offer is real or the numbers right.

The problem is that a few years down the road that bump disappears and the West coast schools may start costing you money. Also, you introduce instability. Any West coast teams you add will be looking at resurrecting the PAC the entire time they're part of the ACC. They might even find a way.

could get espn to agree to make up the difference at the next look in

(08-18-2023 01:04 PM)Chris02m1 Wrote:  

(08-18-2023 08:48 AM)Hallcity Wrote:  

(08-18-2023 08:40 AM)CrazyPaco Wrote:  

(08-18-2023 07:42 AM)dgrace4cards Wrote:  Friday morning update from JW Media...

SMU, Stanford, and Cal all willing to come for free for first few years
also
He's reporting that PAC 4 met yesterday and discussed 1 option of all 4 coming to ACC...to me that would make more logistics sense, with a full pod out west....would OSU and Wazu accept same deal to come for free for a few years?

Most importantly, does JW Media still hold credibility in the conference realignment world of reporting...

https://twitter.com/JWMediaDC/status/169...48904?s=20

If true, on paper that would appear to be a at least $5-8m bump per existing member. I don't know how you turn that down, but who knows if the offer is real or the numbers right.

The problem is that a few years down the road that bump disappears and the West coast schools may start costing you money. Also, you introduce instability. Any West coast teams you add will be looking at resurrecting the PAC the entire time they're part of the ACC. They might even find a way.

could get espn to agree to make up the difference at the next look in

Or look at it this way, take a 5 years of a $5-8m ...or $25 to $40m total per existing team...or take nothing. That $40m may be approaching enough for FSU to buy themselves out of 1 year of the GOR! (but probably not)

Is the ACC now in super secret bunker mode on all of this? So far nothing today...

could be

(08-18-2023 01:33 PM)dgrace4cards Wrote:  Is the ACC now in super secret bunker mode on all of this? So far nothing today...

The radio silence could mean that all parties have signed NDAs, which would mean that things are serious. I don't want either west coast schools, but I could hold my nose and swallow Stanford. Cal just makes me projectile vomit.

SMU isn't near as bad as those, but it just smacks of desperation (which is probably where we are).

(08-18-2023 02:17 PM)ren.hoek Wrote:  

(08-18-2023 01:33 PM)dgrace4cards Wrote:  Is the ACC now in super secret bunker mode on all of this? So far nothing today...

The radio silence could mean that all parties have signed NDAs, which would mean that things are serious. I don't want either west coast schools, but I could hold my nose and swallow Stanford. Cal just makes me projectile vomit.

SMU isn't near as bad as those, but it just smacks of desperation (which is probably where we are).

The silence could mean that nothing much is going on other than pleading by Stanford and Cal. The pleading may not be hopeless but it may not have gotten anywhere yet.

(08-18-2023 02:17 PM)ren.hoek Wrote:  

(08-18-2023 01:33 PM)dgrace4cards Wrote:  Is the ACC now in super secret bunker mode on all of this? So far nothing today...

The radio silence could mean that all parties have signed NDAs, which would mean that things are serious. I don't want either west coast schools, but I could hold my nose and swallow Stanford. Cal just makes me projectile vomit.

SMU isn't near as bad as those, but it just smacks of desperation (which is probably where we are).

I stick to my position that I prefer Stanford + SMU only.

However, I've warmed up to Cal after doing some research.
- Cal averages more attendance than either Stanford or SMU.
- Football spending, according to 2021-22 EADA reports:
SMU spent $27,075,598 on Football.
Stanford spent $32,114,372 on Football.
Cal spent $34,014,920 Football.
So the Bears actually spent the most of these three.

(08-18-2023 09:00 AM)dgrace4cards Wrote:  

(08-18-2023 08:48 AM)Hallcity Wrote:  

(08-18-2023 08:40 AM)CrazyPaco Wrote:  

(08-18-2023 07:42 AM)dgrace4cards Wrote:  Friday morning update from JW Media...

SMU, Stanford, and Cal all willing to come for free for first few years
also
He's reporting that PAC 4 met yesterday and discussed 1 option of all 4 coming to ACC...to me that would make more logistics sense, with a full pod out west....would OSU and Wazu accept same deal to come for free for a few years?

Most importantly, does JW Media still hold credibility in the conference realignment world of reporting...

https://twitter.com/JWMediaDC/status/169...48904?s=20

If true, on paper that would appear to be a at least $5-8m bump per existing member. I don't know how you turn that down, but who knows if the offer is real or the numbers right.

The problem is that a few years down the road that bump disappears and the West coast schools may start costing you money. Also, you introduce instability. Any West coast teams you add will be looking at resurrecting the PAC the entire time they're part of the ACC. They might even find a way.

I personally think this is like a 5-7 year fix....then after that we'll all be living in a P2 or P3 for all sports and ACC will be one of the academic/athletic non football/lower tier conferences after contraction/consolidation....so IMO at least Stanford/Cal maybe SMU too playing long game to get into the conference now, once 8+ leave ACC for the other 3 conferences, this one will likely include Vandy, Northwestern, etc in it once its all said and done.

IMHO, this is all about being the preferred Middle 2 (M2) conference. The P2 have separated themselves financially. The B1G and SEC have the biggest brands and stadiums. No one can consistently catch-up to the revenues of the P2. Nevertheless, there is no reason why any ACC program needs to leave for the B12…except for the fear being induced by FSU.

There is now race to solidify how the M2 interact and add value to elite athletics.

The B12 rebuilt itself by completely eschewing geographical rivalries and aggregating the best football and basketball free agents. The B12 embraced the opportunity to kill the PAC, realizing that media needed willing partners. The B12 is still missing marquee football brands, but they now have a lot of football depth (TCU, Utah, Okie State, West Virginia, BYU, etc.). In basketball, they have one blue blood (Kansas) plus a couple of programs have also won championships. Their status as a power conference is now on solid grounds.

The ACC has strong brands that compete for national championships in both football and basketball. Unfortunately, proven national brands are also prized assets by the P2…hence the paradox of a weak ACC because of its championship caliber brands. Expansion, especially with other power programs, allows the ACC to solidify and gain leverage with media. By providing substantial revenue bonuses when competing for national championships in revenue generating sports, maybe the ACC can be a viable alternative amongst the power conferences. Expansion is not just a 5 to 7 year financial fix, it will also position the ACC favorably when the B12, B1G and SEC are negotiating their next round of media deals.

(08-18-2023 03:10 PM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  

(08-18-2023 02:17 PM)ren.hoek Wrote:  

(08-18-2023 01:33 PM)dgrace4cards Wrote:  Is the ACC now in super secret bunker mode on all of this? So far nothing today...

The radio silence could mean that all parties have signed NDAs, which would mean that things are serious. I don't want either west coast schools, but I could hold my nose and swallow Stanford. Cal just makes me projectile vomit.

SMU isn't near as bad as those, but it just smacks of desperation (which is probably where we are).

I stick to my position that I prefer Stanford + SMU only.

However, I've warmed up to Cal after doing some research.
- Cal averages more attendance than either Stanford or SMU.
- Football spending, according to 2021-22 EADA reports:
SMU spent $27,075,598 on Football.
Stanford spent $32,114,372 on Football.
Cal spent $34,014,920 Football.
So the Bears actually spent the most of these three.

How much of that spending is a debt service payment on the stadium? If you are spending 30-34 m a year on football but can't win more than an average of 5 games what does that prove?

In the last 7 years Cal has won a total of 10 games against FBS schools with a winning record. Think about that.

Since 2010 they have 15 such wins.

(08-18-2023 09:24 PM)SouthernConfBoy Wrote:  

(08-18-2023 03:10 PM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  

(08-18-2023 02:17 PM)ren.hoek Wrote:  

(08-18-2023 01:33 PM)dgrace4cards Wrote:  Is the ACC now in super secret bunker mode on all of this? So far nothing today...

The radio silence could mean that all parties have signed NDAs, which would mean that things are serious. I don't want either west coast schools, but I could hold my nose and swallow Stanford. Cal just makes me projectile vomit.

SMU isn't near as bad as those, but it just smacks of desperation (which is probably where we are).

I stick to my position that I prefer Stanford + SMU only.

However, I've warmed up to Cal after doing some research.
- Cal averages more attendance than either Stanford or SMU.
- Football spending, according to 2021-22 EADA reports:
SMU spent $27,075,598 on Football.
Stanford spent $32,114,372 on Football.
Cal spent $34,014,920 Football.
So the Bears actually spent the most of these three.

How much of that spending is a debt service payment on the stadium? If you are spending 30-34 m a year on football but can't win more than an average of 5 games what does that prove?

Soy boyz are not good at football.

(08-18-2023 03:10 PM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  

(08-18-2023 02:17 PM)ren.hoek Wrote:  

(08-18-2023 01:33 PM)dgrace4cards Wrote:  Is the ACC now in super secret bunker mode on all of this? So far nothing today...

The radio silence could mean that all parties have signed NDAs, which would mean that things are serious. I don't want either west coast schools, but I could hold my nose and swallow Stanford. Cal just makes me projectile vomit.

SMU isn't near as bad as those, but it just smacks of desperation (which is probably where we are).

I stick to my position that I prefer Stanford + SMU only.

However, I've warmed up to Cal after doing some research.
- Cal averages more attendance than either Stanford or SMU.
- Football spending, according to 2021-22 EADA reports:
SMU spent $27,075,598 on Football.
Stanford spent $32,114,372 on Football.
Cal spent $34,014,920 Football.
So the Bears actually spent the most of these three.

BUT.......you are dealing with the state of California.

There is a team in the ACC with as many such football wins over the last 15 years as Cal. Their name is Duke.

Mull that over for a moment. Would you allow another Duke football into the ACC? And over that time frame Duke beat a top ten GT squad, beat Northwestern 4 times, beat Kansas and ND once each and beat Baylor twice. They beat UCF in their bowl game last year. They hung with TAMU in a 50 point thriller Peach Bowl in that time frame.

Unlike Cal, Duke happens to have this thing called a basketball program. I hear they have some success with it.

(08-18-2023 10:07 PM)SouthernConfBoy Wrote:  There is a team in the ACC with as many such football wins over the last 15 years as Cal. Their name is Duke.

Mull that over for a moment. Would you allow another Duke football into the ACC? And over that time frame Duke beat a top ten GT squad, beat Northwestern 4 times, beat Kansas and ND once each and beat Baylor twice. They beat UCF in their bowl game last year. They hung with TAMU in a 50 point thriller Peach Bowl in that time frame.

Unlike Cal, Duke happens to have this thing called a basketball program. I hear they have some success with it.

So today I've heard Cal compared to Duke and SMU compared to Wake Forest. No one said those things a few days ago. Is this justification? Even if it is, that doesn't make it wrong.

No news reporting on Friday. Just more rumors/tweets.

Even MHVer3 said the ACC may vote on Saturday or Monday.

So we will see.