ACC votes to add Stanford, Cal, SMU: Conference presidents approve expansion to 18 schools

[Punkbo]

ACC is going to implode sooner rather than later, but they're a strong academic conference at the top.

Even more reason to not join the ACC for non-revenue sports. If the league implodes, you’ve accomplished very little.

 

[Vuce]

I love when @Fishy gets this way. Stanford successfully fields a lot of non-revenue sports. This is part of the great college experience which is Stanford. If you check a map, the ACC schools are a bit distant from Palo Alto. These student-athletes will need to travel far distances to engage in their athletic endeavors. This is probably not favorable for their academic profile. Understood?

Why do you care about Stanford so much?

 

[TheHorde]

College sports is becoming a parody

 

[Fishy]

I love when @Fishy gets this way. Stanford successfully fields a lot of non-revenue sports. This is part of the great college experience which is Stanford. If you check a map, the ACC schools are a bit distant from Palo Alto. These student-athletes will need to travel far distances to engage in their athletic endeavors. This is probably not favorable for their academic profile. Understood?

Lol…when does this guy realize that the Pac 12 went away? Stanford had no place to play these vaunted non-revenue sports.

 

[Punkbo]

Why do you care about Stanford so much?

I value elite academic institutions.

 

[Travelman6]

This is even dumber.

I’m very sure that Stanford and Cal will still be elite academic institutions despite their new association with checks notes Duke, North Carolina and Virginia.

Oh yes, the UNC who created fake classes for their athletes.

 

[HuskyHawk]

I value elite academic institutions.

Great. So they now joined the conference that has more of them than any but the Ivy. Stanford, Cal, UVA, UNC, Duke, GT, Miami, BC, Wake. Did you want them to instead play with Utah State, Wyoming, SDSU, Fresno and Colorado State?

 

[Vuce]

I value elite academic institutions.

Rice is an elite academic institution. What are your thoughts about them sharing a conference with Memphis, East Carolina and UAB?

 

[ConnHuskBask]

Lol...this is insane.

Their conference imploded. You want them to do what? Sit there? Join the American? Stop playing sports?

That's what the national media has been urging UConn to do for the last decade with respect to football. Odd how that works.

 

[superjohn]

ACC was already dead man walking, this just ensures it.

 

[nelsonmuntz]

While not the end of the world, there is no way to put a good spin on this for UConn. The ACC looked at us, knows the value we add, and added three programs on the other side of the continent, 2 of which have never won anything of note in the last 50-60 years.

I don't think UConn should have taken a deal like SMU got, but as far as we know, it was never offered to UConn. I think the window to grab a big linear deal has closed for UConn, but UConn football needs a schedule, and everyone seems to hate us.

 

[BlueMAB]

I value elite academic institutions.

I don't have a dog in this fight, but can you explain how the 93%+/- of the student body that doesn't play a sport is harmed academically by the conference affiliation for non-academic competition?

 

[Kenny11]

I don't even remember what SMU stands for

 

[upstater]

I can't wrap my head around most of this. Mainly I wonder what's in it for those that voted them in. I get that they are more financially secure at 15 members if a few walk away. BUT they have to carry SMU's dead ass into eternity now. Unless many leave for the B12. BUT how does that help those left behind?

I also wonder about vote shares here. Does SMU get a full vote? If so, they're not going to side with the people pushing for payout differentials.

Even better, if I'm SMU, receiving no money for 9 years, I'm going to vote with FSU and Clemson when it comes to dissolution of the league. Maybe SMU doesn't have a vote however. But if it did it would certainly want to get paid quicker, through a new media deal covering ALL members.

The only incentive here for ESPN is that this speeds up ACC dissolution, gets them out of this horrid contract that runs until 2036, and forces the conference to take a lesser payout. Meanwhile ESPN still owns 1/2 or more of the B12 contract so they'll still have the most valuable properties, they'll pay less for BC and Wake Forest.

Oddly, there's an in here for UConn if more than 3 members leave the ACC (and I do see that happening).

ESPN just agreed to pay for the ACC importing a bomb into the conference, because when that bomb goes off, ESPN will dissolve the contract and come out ahead.

But why did the ACC do this? This weakens them massively? They could've held onto the GOR and added new members once they got wind of the departures.

 

[Vowelguy]

I think this really hurts our football scheduling too. The ACC having uneven scheduling lead to a lot of our P5 home/home arrangements. Looking at this year and future years, 12 out of 18 of our home/home games are against the ACC. That will probably be going away.

Unless they are increasing the number of conference games, the ACC will have just as many non-conf games to fill as before.

 

[Vowelguy]

It is what it is. If nothing else, it means we can stop thinking about realignment now.

Nah, within days we will hear on this board of a new scheme that will mean UConn is going P5.

 

[ConnHuskBask]

I can't wrap my head around most of this. Mainly I wonder what's in it for those that voted them in. I get that they are more financially secure at 15 members if a few walk away. BUT they have to carry SMU's dead ass into eternity now. Unless many leave for the B12. BUT how does that help those left behind?

I also wonder about vote shares here. Does SMU get a full vote? If so, they're not going to side with the people pushing for payout differentials.

Even better, if I'm SMU, receiving no money for 9 years, I'm going to vote with FSU and Clemson when it comes to dissolution of the league. Maybe SMU doesn't have a vote however. But if it did it would certainly want to get paid quicker, through a new media deal covering ALL members.

The only incentive here for ESPN is that this speeds up ACC dissolution, gets them out of this horrid contract that runs until 2036, and forces the conference to take a lesser payout. Meanwhile ESPN still owns 1/2 or more of the B12 contract so they'll still have the most valuable properties, they'll pay less for BC and Wake Forest.

Oddly, there's an in here for UConn if more than 3 members leave the ACC (and I do see that happening).

ESPN just agreed to pay for the ACC importing a bomb into the conference, because when they bomb goes off, ESPN will dissolve the contract and come out ahead.

But why did the ACC do this? This weakens them massively? They could've held onto the GOR and added new members once they got wind of the departures.

It's simply squeezing out a few more million a year for the next decade until the well runs dry. Nothing more than that.

 

[superjohn]

Smu will actually make more in year 8 alone than we make in years 1-7 collecting media rights?

Aggressive arrangement.

Are we too good, to negotiate?

There won't be an ACC in 8 years.

ACC hates us, it was never happening.

 

[Vowelguy]

Oddly, there's an in here for UConn if more than 3 members leave the ACC (and I do see that happening).

.

Did I say days? I meant minutes.

 

[navery12]

Unless they are increasing the number of conference games, the ACC will have just as many non-conf games to fill as before.

But that's exactly what is likely happening, they're at 14 (*15 w/ Notre Dame) now, and going to 17/18. That lends itself perfectly to moving the conference schedule from 8 to 9 games

 

[upstater]

It's simply squeezing out a few more million a year for the next decade until the well runs dry. Nothing more than that.

They are stuck with these schools though after that decade. That would be my problem.

 

[upstater]

There won't be an ACC in 8 years.

ACC hates us, it was never happening.

You don't think there will be a remnants of the ACC? I get that the top properties will all leave for the B12, B1G and SEC, but surely the B12 isn't going to add 14 new members.

 

[navery12]

You don't think there will be a remnants of the ACC? I get that the top properties will all leave for the B12, B1G and SEC, but surely the B12 isn't going to add 14 new members.

There will be remnants of the ACC, but it's going to be teams nobody wants to be in a conference with and not viewed as a power conference

 

[upstater]

Nah, within days we will hear on this board of a new scheme that will mean UConn is going P5.

There is no more P5.

That being said, the ACC has to add more members when schools depart. They could add Tulane, they could Memphis, they could add New Mexico. But they will try to add.

 

[upstater]

There will be remnants of the ACC, but it's going to be teams nobody wants to be in a conference with and not viewed as a power conference

Well, UConn will want to be in that conference.