ACC options | Page 13 | The Boneyard

ACC options

upstater said:
How are they worth $100m? If UConn isn't (men's and women's bball) then Kansas isn't.
Expand ...
How is Northwestern? Iowa? Minnesota? Look, it’s a silly argument. Nobody is worth $100m on their own. People keep talking about bringing the value. It’s not reality. Michigan, without Ohio State is worth much less. Same for Ohio State without Michigan. It is all about creating complementary matchups that bring eyeballs. That‘s why they created dozens of stupid names for the matchups. Old oaken bucket or whatever. Auburn vs Alabama is the Iron Bowl. Minnesota vs Wisconsin is Paul Bunyan’s Axe.

I doubt KU gets the call. They are AAU but Mizzou pined for the B1G and landed in the SEC. I think Kansas, where the whole university and town were founded by abolitionists, and team name relates to Bloody Kansas battles over it, would join the SEC. That would be hard to do. But I could see the SEC offering them more than the B1G. The complementary matchups are there. Mizzou, Arkansas, OU, Kentucky.
 
HuskyHawk said:
How is Northwestern? Iowa? Minnesota? Look, it’s a silly argument. Nobody is worth $100m on their own. People keep talking about bringing the value. It’s not reality. Michigan, without Ohio State is worth much less. Same for Ohio State without Michigan. It is all about creating complementary matchups that bring eyeballs. That‘s why they created dozens of stupid names for the matchups. Old oaken bucket or whatever. Auburn vs Alabama is the Iron Bowl. Minnesota vs Wisconsin is Paul Bunyan’s Axe.

I doubt KU gets the call. They are AAU but Mizzou pined for the B1G and landed in the SEC. I think Kansas, where the whole university and town were founded by abolitionists, and team name relates to Bloody Kansas battles over it, would join the SEC. That would be hard to do. But I could see the SEC offering them more than the B1G. The complementary matchups are there. Mizzou, Arkansas, OU, Kentucky.
Expand ...
It's not silly. Those teams were already in the conference.
 
upstater said:
It's not silly. Those teams were already in the conference.
Expand ...
It’s silly when people ask if a single school is worth 100m. The conference is worth 2b because the B1G controls state flagship schools over half the country. To control and demand more money they will target flagship schools like Kansas UVA and NC
 
upstater said:
It's not silly. Those teams were already in the conference.
Expand ...
It's silly because that isn't how it works. Every school used to sell their own rights. Nobody made squat. It wasn't until they started relinquishing the rights to the conference and negotiating collectively that the TV deals started growing. That, in turn, drove expansion and contracting among the conferences. They are all worth more together than they would be individually.

So the question is never "Is X school worth $Y", because the answer to that is always no. The question is "does adding this particular school to the existing ecosystem we have raise the aggregate value of that ecosystem". In the case of USC and UCLA for example, UCLA is mostly meh at football and is above average at basketball. Big market, sure and lots of alumni. But the value for the B1G comes from those old Big Ten/Pac 10 ties and the Rose bowl. Big Ten fans value those matchup highly. Much more than SEC fans would. That drives ratings, as an Indiana fan tunes in to watch Ohio State vs USC.

Could Kansas raise the value of the B1G enough? No, I don't think so. Could it in the SEC? Maybe yes. Now do UNC and UVA, when it comes to the B1G I think the answer is still no. SEC? Maybe yes. Florida State? They think the answer is yes, but I'm betting that for the B1G it is no (SEC is yes). It is close, but B1G fans don't really care about FSU, they might care more about Miami. The most rational SEC expansion, if it came, would probably be FSU, Clemson, UNC and Kansas.

The ACC has blinders on with UConn, because the answer to the ecosystem question is yes for UConn in the ACC. We are a team that moves the needle with fans of every school except FSU.
 
.-.
Khal Drogo said:
It’s silly when people ask if a single school is worth 100m. The conference is worth 2b because the B1G controls state flagship schools over half the country. To control and demand more money they will target flagship schools like Kansas UVA and NC
Expand ...
???
Which one of those 3 schools is NOT like the others?

The conference is worth 2b BECAUSE Michigan, Ohio St, Penn State, Wisconsin and now USC and UCLA are in it. And Rutgers years ago added a ton of value to it as well.

There are 2 D1 P4 universities in Kansas. This is a state of 2.9m people.

The numbers don't make any sense. They aren't UNC or UVa.
 
HuskyHawk said:
It's silly because that isn't how it works. Every school used to sell their own rights. Nobody made squat. It wasn't until they started relinquishing the rights to the conference and negotiating collectively that the TV deals started growing. That, in turn, drove expansion and contracting among the conferences. They are all worth more together than they would be individually.

So the question is never "Is X school worth $Y", because the answer to that is always no. The question is "does adding this particular school to the existing ecosystem we have raise the aggregate value of that ecosystem". In the case of USC and UCLA for example, UCLA is mostly meh at football and is above average at basketball. Big market, sure and lots of alumni. But the value for the B1G comes from those old Big Ten/Pac 10 ties and the Rose bowl. Big Ten fans value those matchup highly. Much more than SEC fans would. That drives ratings, as an Indiana fan tunes in to watch Ohio State vs USC.

Could Kansas raise the value of the B1G enough? No, I don't think so. Could it in the SEC? Maybe yes. Now do UNC and UVA, when it comes to the B1G I think the answer is still no. SEC? Maybe yes. Florida State? They think the answer is yes, but I'm betting that for the B1G it is no (SEC is yes). It is close, but B1G fans don't really care about FSU, they might care more about Miami. The most rational SEC expansion, if it came, would probably be FSU, Clemson, UNC and Kansas.

The ACC has blinders on with UConn, because the answer to the ecosystem question is yes for UConn in the ACC. We are a team that moves the needle with fans of every school except FSU.
Expand ...
You're missing my point.

Northwestern or Iowa would not be invited to the B1G today if they weren't already in the conference.
 
WestCoastHusky said:
An expansion article from the UNC. We have at least one school that wants UConn. I am surprised they are not open to WVU too.

tarheelswire.usatoday.com

Ranking the programs that best fit the ACC for conference realignment

Conference realignment has been the talk of college athletics again this summer with the Big Ten adding Oregon and Washington. Hours later, the Pac-12 suffered a few more losses with Arizona, Arizona State and Utah leaving for the Big 12. There are only four teams
tarheelswire.usatoday.com tarheelswire.usatoday.com
Expand ...
Here's what I'm guessing will happen after the implosion of the ACC. UNC & UVA go to the B1G for a 20 team conference. FSU, Clemson, VT, and NC State go to the SEC for a 20 team conference. Pitt, Louisville, Miami, and Duke go to the B12 to for a 20 team conference.

If that happens, then here is who is left behind in the ACC: BC, Syracuse, Wake, GT, and ND without football. Do we join that conference or stay in the Big East/Indy football?
 
HuskyHawk said:
It's silly because that isn't how it works. Every school used to sell their own rights. Nobody made squat. It wasn't until they started relinquishing the rights to the conference and negotiating collectively that the TV deals started growing. That, in turn, drove expansion and contracting among the conferences. They are all worth more together than they would be individually.

So the question is never "Is X school worth $Y", because the answer to that is always no. The question is "does adding this particular school to the existing ecosystem we have raise the aggregate value of that ecosystem". In the case of USC and UCLA for example, UCLA is mostly meh at football and is above average at basketball. Big market, sure and lots of alumni. But the value for the B1G comes from those old Big Ten/Pac 10 ties and the Rose bowl. Big Ten fans value those matchup highly. Much more than SEC fans would. That drives ratings, as an Indiana fan tunes in to watch Ohio State vs USC.

Could Kansas raise the value of the B1G enough? No, I don't think so. Could it in the SEC? Maybe yes. Now do UNC and UVA, when it comes to the B1G I think the answer is still no. SEC? Maybe yes. Florida State? They think the answer is yes, but I'm betting that for the B1G it is no (SEC is yes). It is close, but B1G fans don't really care about FSU, they might care more about Miami. The most rational SEC expansion, if it came, would probably be FSU, Clemson, UNC and Kansas.

The ACC has blinders on with UConn, because the answer to the ecosystem question is yes for UConn in the ACC. We are a team that moves the needle with fans of every school except FSU.
Expand ...
Nice post! The first two paragraphs explain the conference broadcast rights ecosystem as well as I have seen.
 
upstater said:
???
Which one of those 3 schools is NOT like the others?

The conference is worth 2b BECAUSE Michigan, Ohio St, Penn State, Wisconsin and now USC and UCLA are in it. And Rutgers years ago added a ton of value to it as well.

There are 2 D1 P4 universities in Kansas. This is a state of 2.9m people.

The numbers don't make any sense. They aren't UNC or UVa.
Expand ...
I think size of the conference will take over and will result in ACC’s demise. ACC doesn’t have enough quality like SEC does in football to demand big dollars. In Basketball, ACC still thinks they’re #1 conference and they probably 4 or 5.
 
.-.
HuskyHawk said:
…Could Kansas raise the value of the B1G enough? No, I don't think so. Could it in the SEC? Maybe yes. Now do UNC and UVA, when it comes to the B1G I think the answer is still no. SEC? Maybe yes. Florida State? They think the answer is yes, but I'm betting that for the B1G it is no (SEC is yes). It is close, but B1G fans don't really care about FSU, they might care more about Miami. The most rational SEC expansion, if it came, would probably be FSU, Clemson, UNC and Kansas.

The ACC has blinders on with UConn, because the answer to the ecosystem question is yes for UConn in the ACC. We are a team that moves the needle with fans of every school except FSU.
Expand ...
My own personal so opinion is that I think FSU in the Big10 would be a blast, more so than Miami. Michigan has played FSU a couple times in the past and they have been fun. Miami would be ok, but not the level of FSU. In fact, most Michigan and MSU fans I know would put FSU as the 2nd most non SEC (or future SEC) desirable school out there. Many would even put them over ND.
 
HuskyHawk said:
It's silly because that isn't how it works. Every school used to sell their own rights. Nobody made squat. It wasn't until they started relinquishing the rights to the conference and negotiating collectively that the TV deals started growing. That, in turn, drove expansion and contracting among the conferences. They are all worth more together than they would be individually.

So the question is never "Is X school worth $Y", because the answer to that is always no. The question is "does adding this particular school to the existing ecosystem we have raise the aggregate value of that ecosystem". In the case of USC and UCLA for example, UCLA is mostly meh at football and is above average at basketball. Big market, sure and lots of alumni. But the value for the B1G comes from those old Big Ten/Pac 10 ties and the Rose bowl. Big Ten fans value those matchup highly. Much more than SEC fans would. That drives ratings, as an Indiana fan tunes in to watch Ohio State vs USC.

Could Kansas raise the value of the B1G enough? No, I don't think so. Could it in the SEC? Maybe yes. Now do UNC and UVA, when it comes to the B1G I think the answer is still no. SEC? Maybe yes. Florida State? They think the answer is yes, but I'm betting that for the B1G it is no (SEC is yes). It is close, but B1G fans don't really care about FSU, they might care more about Miami. The most rational SEC expansion, if it came, would probably be FSU, Clemson, UNC and Kansas.

The ACC has blinders on with UConn, because the answer to the ecosystem question is yes for UConn in the ACC. We are a team that moves the needle with fans of every school except FSU.
Expand ...
So many comments everywhere but this guy had a similar take:

"In theory everything hinges on the viability of Fox/B1G stealing a bunch of teams, it's not necessarily why would they just pay us more, it depends on ESPN assessing whether or not FSU and others can dissolve the ACC and ESPN loses FSU and others completely to another network. Also, it's not FSU by itself in a vacuum in the ACC and then by itself in the SEC. You're comparing games like FSU vs Wake (total profit of money in - money out) compared to FSU vs South Carolina (total profit of money in - money out). ESPN can crunch the numbers and say we have 6 useless games of FSU vs ACC nobodies or we can have FSU vs UT, OU, LSU, UGa, etc al. Same thing for Clemson. If they crunch the numbers and say ESPN will make more profit even if we pay those schools an extra $40 million each to change sides then it makes sense.

Not sure why nobody talks about switching to the SEC like this. Imagine ESPN making Jimbo and A&M play in Tallahassee on Labor Day weekend to open 2025 and the ratings that would create, now you might understand why ESPN might actually make more money that way."

www.tomahawknation.com

Noles News: FSU to officially remain in ACC through at least 2024, ESPN puts 7 Seminoles on top 100 list

All the latest in Florida State Seminoles sports
www.tomahawknation.com www.tomahawknation.com
 
huskymedic said:
Expand ...

Gavin, from The Day. Nice.
FSU getting out of the ACC is probably UConn's only hope of joining a conference any time soon. Even if it ends up being with the ACC remnants.
 
Khal Drogo said:
I think size of the conference will take over and will result in ACC’s demise. ACC doesn’t have enough quality like SEC does in football to demand big dollars. In Basketball, ACC still thinks they’re #1 conference and they probably 4 or 5.
Expand ...
??
I can't figure out what you're saying here. We were talking about the B1G taking B12 schools and now the conversation shifts to 2 totally different conferences.

For the record, I still think the ACC is the best bball conference with the SEC being 2nd. But it's certainly not each and every year. Last year, the BE was clearly the best conference with the B12 being 2nd.

Clearly, the B1G is now the 5th best conference.
 
.-.
Kolumbo said:
So many comments everywhere but this guy had a similar take:

"In theory everything hinges on the viability of Fox/B1G stealing a bunch of teams, it's not necessarily why would they just pay us more, it depends on ESPN assessing whether or not FSU and others can dissolve the ACC and ESPN loses FSU and others completely to another network. Also, it's not FSU by itself in a vacuum in the ACC and then by itself in the SEC. You're comparing games like FSU vs Wake (total profit of money in - money out) compared to FSU vs South Carolina (total profit of money in - money out). ESPN can crunch the numbers and say we have 6 useless games of FSU vs ACC nobodies or we can have FSU vs UT, OU, LSU, UGa, etc al. Same thing for Clemson. If they crunch the numbers and say ESPN will make more profit even if we pay those schools an extra $40 million each to change sides then it makes sense.

Not sure why nobody talks about switching to the SEC like this. Imagine ESPN making Jimbo and A&M play in Tallahassee on Labor Day weekend to open 2025 and the ratings that would create, now you might understand why ESPN might actually make more money that way."

www.tomahawknation.com

Noles News: FSU to officially remain in ACC through at least 2024, ESPN puts 7 Seminoles on top 100 list

All the latest in Florida State Seminoles sports
www.tomahawknation.com www.tomahawknation.com
Expand ...
But HuskyHawk's response came from my questioning the value of some of these schools to the B1G. In context, the schools we were talking about are the "nobodies" of the quote above. Why would you add more nodobies? If the goal is to add somebodies?

I definitely didn't say that NO SCHOOLS would be added to the SEC and B1G. I think the ACC has 5 schools that could be added.
 
upstater said:
several of those schools wouldn't, including Iowa and Nebraska. I know for a fact there is huge Nebraska regret in the B1G
Expand ...
Nebraska might leave the Big for a Texas-less Big12.

Iowa would never leave the Big.
 
Kolumbo said:
So many comments everywhere but this guy had a similar take:

"In theory everything hinges on the viability of Fox/B1G stealing a bunch of teams, it's not necessarily why would they just pay us more, it depends on ESPN assessing whether or not FSU and others can dissolve the ACC and ESPN loses FSU and others completely to another network. Also, it's not FSU by itself in a vacuum in the ACC and then by itself in the SEC. You're comparing games like FSU vs Wake (total profit of money in - money out) compared to FSU vs South Carolina (total profit of money in - money out). ESPN can crunch the numbers and say we have 6 useless games of FSU vs ACC nobodies or we can have FSU vs UT, OU, LSU, UGa, etc al. Same thing for Clemson. If they crunch the numbers and say ESPN will make more profit even if we pay those schools an extra $40 million each to change sides then it makes sense.

Not sure why nobody talks about switching to the SEC like this. Imagine ESPN making Jimbo and A&M play in Tallahassee on Labor Day weekend to open 2025 and the ratings that would create, now you might understand why ESPN might actually make more money that way."

www.tomahawknation.com

Noles News: FSU to officially remain in ACC through at least 2024, ESPN puts 7 Seminoles on top 100 list

All the latest in Florida State Seminoles sports
www.tomahawknation.com www.tomahawknation.com
Expand ...
All the realignments have networks ESPN and FOX behind it. This is the right way to analyze this. The bottom line is UCONN needs to get some media consultants and crunch some football numbers to present to any of the conferences and/or partners to get our worth out there.
 
One thing to remember is it’s not FSU - Tennessee vs. FSU - Wake in a vacuum…

It’s does FSU - Tennesse become more valuable enough than the Arkansas - Tennessee game that would’ve been in that slot compared to the drop in value from the FSU - Wake vs. Cuse - Wake game they now have for that slot.

FSU makes “worthless” ACC content airable. While they boost the SEC content is it by enough to overcome the cost. Similarly what’s more valuable to ESPNs massive outlay for the playoff? FSU as the 10-2 ACC champions seeded 4th or as a 8-4 at large 8th seed slated for a second round rematch with #1 Alabama (if they win). Especially if that alternative involves a 9-3 Pitt reaching the tournament now as ACC champ blocking an at large bid to Tennessee. (So FSU & Tennessee vs. Pitt & FSU in the playoff)

FSU arguably has much more value to ESPN as the big dawg in the ACC then as a member (say upper class) in the SEC (even before you factor the pro rata costs involved in each deal). I just don’t see a lot of reason for ESPN to bend over backwards to move FSU or anyone else from the ACC before 2036 (I guess the only argument would be a world where they’re lost to the Big Ten and FOX if they don’t match the deal).
 
.-.
upstater said:
several of those schools wouldn't, including Iowa and Nebraska. I know for a fact there is huge Nebraska regret in the B1G
Expand ...
Iowa isn't close to the bottom of the B1G. Middle of the pack. Minnesota is very close to the bottom. The point you miss is that the history helps drive value. State population is irrelevant, or Alabama and Auburn wouldn't be what they are. Iowa is way more valuable in a league with Illinois and Indiana than they would be elsewhere. You'd think UConn fans would have internalized this after our experience in the American. In a vacuum, Memphis is probably on par with many Big East programs, but our fans didn't treat them that way. We would have rather seen our team play a bad Georgetown team.

My point was that USC and UCLA were uniquely valuable to the B1G, not just as big names from a big market, but as schools Big Ten fans always sought to play in the Rose Bowl. Washington and Oregon too, but to a lesser extent. Alabama fans never had that, the Sugar Bowl history was often with the Big XII, and guess where all those top football schools (except Nebraska) ended up? This isn't a coincidence.

The Orange Bowl was a Big 8 game, but they most often faced ACC and SEC teams (sometimes others). Nebraska's history was mostly not with Big Ten schools, and it shows. Maryland has similarly not fared well. There's just no juice for anybody in the B1G in playing Maryland. Those old lingering passions matter in games not between highly ranked teams.

Is any Big XII school on the B1G's radar, that was the question. I think you're right, no. If Colorado got back to winning NCs, maybe. Are any on the SEC's radar? Probably not, but maybe Kansas. For "why" I refer to the history aspect above. There is some "juice" there. Probably not enough.
 
ScottVib said:
One thing to remember is it’s not FSU - Tennessee vs. FSU - Wake in a vacuum…

It’s does FSU - Tennesse become more valuable enough than the Arkansas - Tennessee game that would’ve been in that slot compared to the drop in value from the FSU - Wake vs. Cuse - Wake game they now have for that slot.

FSU makes “worthless” ACC content airable. While they boost the SEC content is it by enough to overcome the cost. Similarly what’s more valuable to ESPNs massive outlay for the playoff? FSU as the 10-2 ACC champions seeded 4th or as a 8-4 at large 8th seed slated for a second round rematch with #1 Alabama (if they win). Especially if that alternative involves a 9-3 Pitt reaching the tournament now as ACC champ blocking an at large bid to Tennessee. (So FSU & Tennessee vs. Pitt & FSU in the playoff)

FSU arguably has much more value to ESPN as the big dawg in the ACC then as a member (say upper class) in the SEC (even before you factor the pro rata costs involved in each deal). I just don’t see a lot of reason for ESPN to bend over backwards to move FSU or anyone else from the ACC before 2036 (I guess the only argument would be a world where they’re lost to the Big Ten and FOX if they don’t match the deal).
Expand ...
This is a key point. Conference size is a problem when it simply replaces a really good game with a really good game. They can only feature so many games a week. Somebody said the B1G hesitation on Washington and Oregon was about this. It will mean fewer of the old Big Ten games even happen. Ohio State vs Oregon is great, unless it replaces Ohio State vs Penn State.
 
HuskyHawk said:
Iowa isn't close to the bottom of the B1G. Middle of the pack. Minnesota is very close to the bottom. The point you miss is that the history helps drive value. State population is irrelevant, or Alabama and Auburn wouldn't be what they are. Iowa is way more valuable in a league with Illinois and Indiana than they would be elsewhere. You'd think UConn fans would have internalized this after our experience in the American. In a vacuum, Memphis is probably on par with many Big East programs, but our fans didn't treat them that way. We would have rather seen our team play a bad Georgetown team.

My point was that USC and UCLA were uniquely valuable to the B1G, not just as big names from a big market, but as schools Big Ten fans always sought to play in the Rose Bowl. Washington and Oregon too, but to a lesser extent. Alabama fans never had that, the Sugar Bowl history was often with the Big XII, and guess where all those top football schools (except Nebraska) ended up? This isn't a coincidence.

The Orange Bowl was a Big 8 game, but they most often faced ACC and SEC teams (sometimes others). Nebraska's history was mostly not with Big Ten schools, and it shows. Maryland has similarly not fared well. There's just no juice for anybody in the B1G in playing Maryland. Those old lingering passions matter in games not between highly ranked teams.

Is any Big XII school on the B1G's radar, that was the question. I think you're right, no. If Colorado got back to winning NCs, maybe. Are any on the SEC's radar? Probably not, but maybe Kansas. For "why" I refer to the history aspect above. There is some "juice" there. Probably not enough.
Expand ...
We're disagreeing on the schools. Not on the overall point. I mean, you're citing a theory to me in which there are less valuable properties that drag a conference, and ones that enhance it. I never disagreed. I only disagree on which schools we're talking about. You're never going to get a lot of eyeballs for some of these schools.

And Maryland matters a lot more $$ to the B1G than Iowa. Not because of tradition. Iowa has them beat. Because there are 2x as many Marylanders, Maryland is the only school in a P4 conference, and you have another couple of 4 million people in DC and Northern Virginia. We're talking 10m people. But the #1 reason is recruiting. There are a helluva lot of good players in Maryland and the capitol area.
 
drayenob said:
Felt good listening to that
Expand ...
Agree, except the whole UConn hasn't been spending on football, they aren't sure whether or not football matters to them, etc narratives. I don't think that narrative will fully go away, but it could be redirected, as we saw here, that Connecticut is now paying attention to football with the hiring of Mora.
 
.-.
You must log in or register to reply here.

Forum statistics

Threads
168,322
Messages
4,563,877
Members
10,458
Latest member
Liam Rainst


Top Bottom