B1G can’t just grab ACC schools. The GOR pretty much prevents that. If the Big 12 had had a GOR in place a few years ago, Texas and Oklahoma never would have left, unless they were basically willing to turn over 1/3 of their endowments.
Bilas on Uconn left out of expansion
- Thread starter B1GEast
- Start date
Oklahoma, Texas agree to leave Big 12 year early
Oklahoma and Texas will leave the Big 12 for the SEC after the 2023-24 season, a year earlier than previously announced.
www.espn.com
I’m pretty sure they had a GOR w the old B12 deal. That’s why UT & OK were willing to wait it out before both sides realized it made sense to settle a year early. I
It still cost them $50MM each to get out a year early for anyone wanting to try and do the math on the 13 years remaining on the ACC deal
- Joined
- Feb 4, 2012
- Messages
- 15,558
- Reaction Score
- 17,720
Tournament rotates between sites.
Perhaps a stretch, but the 2:50-3:300 minute mark talks about the western time zone, breaking into the eastern time media market because that is where the selection committees and the talking heads are, ranking serves.
MWC commissioner Gloria Nevarez:
MW commissioner Gloria Nevarez on her new job, future of college athletes, living in Tahoe
MWC commissioner Gloria Nevarez:
MW commissioner Gloria Nevarez on her new job, future of college athletes, living in Tahoe
Wish vould edit instead of separate post but the MWC has a 6 yr 270M media contract expiring in 2026.
The Mountain West’s new TV deal is a short-term boost with long-term questions for Boise State
The Mountain West’s new TV deal is a short-term boost with long-term questions for Boise State
All GOR’s are not equal, the one that binds ACC schools to the conference is like an anchor from a Nimitz class aircraft carrier while I would compare the Big 12’s version to a bicycle lock. Clemson, Miami and especially FSU would have jumped ship years ago if they could’ve. The only alternative they have is to negotiate with and get Notre Dame to join in join in football too, Let’s not forget the history that Virginia Tech has in football too when Frank Beamer coached them. If Notre Dame is interested, and they might be with certain stipulations, then the ACC immediately has a 6 or 7 team nucleus that they can build on, not to mention a lock on basketball and March Madness. At that point they could to do some poaching themselves, the SEC and B1G have no GOR whatsoever. At that point with continuing improvement in Football and both basketball programs, as well as baseball and ice hockey, UConn becomes very very attractive. The ACC is far far from being picked apart. I would not count out John Swofford just yet.Oklahoma, Texas agree to leave Big 12 year early
Oklahoma and Texas will leave the Big 12 for the SEC after the 2023-24 season, a year earlier than previously announced.
I’m pretty sure they had a GOR w the old B12 deal. That’s why UT & OK were willing to wait it out before both sides realized it made sense to settle a year early. I
It still cost them $50MM each to get out a year early for anyone wanting to try and do the math on the 13 years remaining on the ACC deal
- Joined
- Aug 13, 2013
- Messages
- 8,896
- Reaction Score
- 8,431
You won't hear an official peep from an ACC school initiating an exit until after this year's conference payout which is coming up.
And most probably not then.
But...I do think that the real owners (the networks) might have a plan to shift assets over a period to increase the number of games drawing big ratings and to enhance their future CFP playoffs. There seems to be a drive to consolidate into 2, maybe 3, relevant conferences.
Since the NFL model is a money maker...major 20-24 team conferences in an NFL light model with their championship games as part of the CFP to determine byes.
With the advent of college players making money and transferring for a better NIL deal, the haves will swamp the have nots anyway.
It is shaping up to be an ESPN vs Fox property world. SEC vs B1G.
The ACC GOR does have the language that the schools grant their rights to the ACC solely for the purpose of meeting their obligations in the ESPN contract. If, somehow, ESPN can allow the remaining programs to be held held harmless, the contract obligations to ESPN may be met.
Notre Dame will eventually be forced to go to the B1G...ESPN may not want to harm the future draw of FSU, Clemson by letting the progarms lose value over a decade...and there is little chance that ESPN will work to have a current ESPN property go to the Fox side of the business. Unless there is some horse trading to go on.
If the B1G brings in another 4 Pac programs and Notre Dame, the SEC may forced to counter (with ESPN whispering in their ear). And, I believe, the SEC culture is one that doesn't contemplate going way out of their region...Southern tier, southern conference...Texas and Oklahoma were contiguous with SEC states.
And most probably not then.
But...I do think that the real owners (the networks) might have a plan to shift assets over a period to increase the number of games drawing big ratings and to enhance their future CFP playoffs. There seems to be a drive to consolidate into 2, maybe 3, relevant conferences.
Since the NFL model is a money maker...major 20-24 team conferences in an NFL light model with their championship games as part of the CFP to determine byes.
With the advent of college players making money and transferring for a better NIL deal, the haves will swamp the have nots anyway.
It is shaping up to be an ESPN vs Fox property world. SEC vs B1G.
The ACC GOR does have the language that the schools grant their rights to the ACC solely for the purpose of meeting their obligations in the ESPN contract. If, somehow, ESPN can allow the remaining programs to be held held harmless, the contract obligations to ESPN may be met.
Notre Dame will eventually be forced to go to the B1G...ESPN may not want to harm the future draw of FSU, Clemson by letting the progarms lose value over a decade...and there is little chance that ESPN will work to have a current ESPN property go to the Fox side of the business. Unless there is some horse trading to go on.
If the B1G brings in another 4 Pac programs and Notre Dame, the SEC may forced to counter (with ESPN whispering in their ear). And, I believe, the SEC culture is one that doesn't contemplate going way out of their region...Southern tier, southern conference...Texas and Oklahoma were contiguous with SEC states.
- Joined
- Aug 26, 2011
- Messages
- 21,280
- Reaction Score
- 48,962
Swofford?
- Joined
- Jan 21, 2016
- Messages
- 2,351
- Reaction Score
- 5,748
BC Interruption reported several years ago "Adding a new member of the conference requires a three-fourths majority..."
- Joined
- Aug 13, 2013
- Messages
- 8,896
- Reaction Score
- 8,431
11 (3/4 of 14)....and ND can not vote if football is included.
Regarding the value of schools:
When the Big 12 did their dog and pony show in 2016 with UConn, BYU, Houston, Cincinnati, Memphis and UCF, there was a story written by John Ourand in which he said: "The Big 12’s TV partners are pushing back on the conference’s plans to expand. ESPN and Fox Sports believe that expansion with schools from outside the power five conferences will water down the Big 12 and make it less valuable, not more, sources said. Both networks, according to sources, are digging their heels in against paying those kinds of increases based on expansion with schools outside the power five." It ended up that ESPN and Fox paid the Big12 a nominal amount NOT to expand.
Yet, 5 years later, the BIg12 added Houston, BYU, Cincinnati, and UCF. Suddenly, their value changed from G5 value to Power 5 value.
When the Big 12 did their dog and pony show in 2016 with UConn, BYU, Houston, Cincinnati, Memphis and UCF, there was a story written by John Ourand in which he said: "The Big 12’s TV partners are pushing back on the conference’s plans to expand. ESPN and Fox Sports believe that expansion with schools from outside the power five conferences will water down the Big 12 and make it less valuable, not more, sources said. Both networks, according to sources, are digging their heels in against paying those kinds of increases based on expansion with schools outside the power five." It ended up that ESPN and Fox paid the Big12 a nominal amount NOT to expand.
Yet, 5 years later, the BIg12 added Houston, BYU, Cincinnati, and UCF. Suddenly, their value changed from G5 value to Power 5 value.
Paying more money for FSU or Clemson rights they already own isn’t something ESPN is going to actively encourage.
Furthermore moving ACC teams to the SEC does nothing to bolster the playoffs. It does a lot to increase the number of 2 & 3 loss teams in the postseason. They’d much prefer an undefeated or 1-loss ACC champion in the playoff than a 2-3 loss 3rd/4th team from the SEC.
Given the playoff is the six highest ranked conference champions don’t you think they’d rather Clemson or FSU as the ACC representative instead of Pitt or UNC?
Furthermore playoff games that are rematches are less likely to be a draw unless they’re semifinal or finals. Forcing more of those rematches in the first round only further diminishes the playoff property.
- Joined
- Aug 26, 2011
- Messages
- 21,280
- Reaction Score
- 48,962
Pure fantasy that espn is gonna facilitate Clemson and FSU to go to the SEC to pay them double AND keep the rest of the ACC whole in the process.
- Joined
- Sep 21, 2011
- Messages
- 5,829
- Reaction Score
- 14,429
The top of the AAC was always competitive to all but the elite p5 programs .
I criticized that conference for ignoring basketball but that was far and away the best g5 football conference
Did any MW teams other than possibly SDSU going to a teetering Pac12 get consideration?
- Joined
- Aug 13, 2013
- Messages
- 8,896
- Reaction Score
- 8,431
Nicole Auebach (Big Ten Network, the Athletic)..said that the ACC were the teams most coveted by the Big Ten and SEC...
"A couple of days ago on the Andy Staples Podcast Nicole talked about the ACC schools. She mentions that the ACC schools are what the Big Ten and SEC covet. I provided a link to the most important part of what she said yesterday. Nicole is trustworthy. "
"A couple of days ago on the Andy Staples Podcast Nicole talked about the ACC schools. She mentions that the ACC schools are what the Big Ten and SEC covet. I provided a link to the most important part of what she said yesterday. Nicole is trustworthy. "
I don't doubt this. What I doubt is the willingness of those schools to pay the settlement it would take to get out of the GOR. A lot of the Clemson/FSU fan hopes/theories/wishful thinking stem from the thought that although the GOR is to the ACC... it's a GOR for the purpose of fulfilling TV obligations and that ESPN would be willing to waive those obligations if those schools were to go to a different tv partner league.
Except what they fail to answer beyond a "well there would be more games with value in the SEC deal" what value it has for ESPN to do that. The first issue, is why ESPN at a time where Disney is cutting budgets would willingly pay nearly double for television rights they already own? The second issue, is without two highly valued teams worth of content how is the ACC able to meet their TV obligations to ESPN? That set of obligations is a two-way street, ESPN agrees to pay a certain amount for a certain amount of content of a certain quality. If there isn't a revenue reason for ESPN to support moving FSU or Clemson to the SEC they certainly aren't going to consider the ACC meeting their obligations without FSU or Clemson.
For this argument to work, ESPN has to be willing to "overpay" (or at least pay more) for Clemson/FSU; while significantly overpaying for the remaining ACC content... it's just not going to happen. Clemson & FSU fans have been working to twist themselves in knots trying to find ways to escape with their local press catering to what they want to read, but for there to be a way to make it work, it would have to work for Clemson/FSU; the SEC & ACC; and in particular, ESPN/Disney. The arguments read much the same way you'd hear the "trade ideas" that would come through on the FAN... "Hey Mike, what do you think about the Yankees getting Ohtani & Trout from the Angels for Frankie Montas & Franchy Cordero." Escaping that GOR is going to have to be a scenario that works for ALL sides.
- Joined
- Aug 13, 2013
- Messages
- 8,896
- Reaction Score
- 8,431
Here's the deal...with ESPN.
They have a bunch of poor performing (TV watching wise) programs in the ACC....BC, Cuse, Wake, GT, et al. Probably not worth a contract increase for the conference even if currently undervalued.
ESPN has two teams in the ACC that currently have more value and bring in twice the revenue than the ACC average. ESPN can let the ACC go into a second tier, including the two top performers. Or ESPN could invest in the two teams.
Why would ESPN move to see that that those ESPN properties don't wither over the next decade ?
Only one reason...money. The bean counters would have to work out the potential increased value to ESPN for Clemson/FSU in the SEC.
Last year's FSU game with LSU:
"The Seminoles and Tigers drew 7.6 million viewers on ABC, making it the network’s third most-viewed Sunday night opener on record. That figure is even more impressive when you consider neither team was ranked at kickoff."
ESPN just agreed to pay $300 million per year to pry the sEC game of the week from CBS. Why? Beancounters.
FSU has H@H's scheduled with LSU, Bama, Georgia, and they have the annual rivalry game with Florida....low level signalling.
They have a bunch of poor performing (TV watching wise) programs in the ACC....BC, Cuse, Wake, GT, et al. Probably not worth a contract increase for the conference even if currently undervalued.
ESPN has two teams in the ACC that currently have more value and bring in twice the revenue than the ACC average. ESPN can let the ACC go into a second tier, including the two top performers. Or ESPN could invest in the two teams.
Why would ESPN move to see that that those ESPN properties don't wither over the next decade ?
Only one reason...money. The bean counters would have to work out the potential increased value to ESPN for Clemson/FSU in the SEC.
Last year's FSU game with LSU:
"The Seminoles and Tigers drew 7.6 million viewers on ABC, making it the network’s third most-viewed Sunday night opener on record. That figure is even more impressive when you consider neither team was ranked at kickoff."
ESPN just agreed to pay $300 million per year to pry the sEC game of the week from CBS. Why? Beancounters.
FSU has H@H's scheduled with LSU, Bama, Georgia, and they have the annual rivalry game with Florida....low level signalling.
Last edited:
You have to realize, ESPN doesn't care about FSU or Clemson. If they whither, they tell the story of the one-time great program and they use the remaining fan-base to fill out secondary network time-slots... filling the prime time slots with SEC teams whom they already own.
They aren't going to move into an arrangement where they pay more than twice the value for 13 other properties (counting Notre Dame's partial share); to double the pay for 2 particular properties... whose rights they already own, it's bad business... to those same bean-counters. They will pay an absurd price for the NBA soon, the premium properties will continue to get dollars, but they aren't going to compete against themselves to pay a premium for two good college football programs.
Plus looking near term, what's more valuable for ESPN? Florida State or Clemson becoming just another program in an SEC that's already stacked? Adding more losses to the potentially premium properties. Casual fans tune into premium/blue blood/dynasty programs. FSU or Clemson as perennial 10+ win teams; conference champions in the playoffs draws a bigger number than FSU or Clemson as 4th team out of the SEC with a 9-3 mark. The argument seems to be predicated that FSU/Clemson have far more value as just another SEC team?
Disney's not worried about developing FSU or Clemson. Nor are they worried if they fall off before they'd be available to the SEC. They are worried about driving ratings now, they'll figure out 2028, 2030, 2035 when they get there. FSU - LSU drives a number as an interconference attraction and can be arranged in premium spots with little competition (like the season opening Sunday night) where it's special and a loss for FSU means they might finish 12-1 before the playoff instead of 13-0. FSU - LSU week 7 is another SEC regular season game (albeit a nice one). It has significantly more competition than that season kickoff and features 4-2 LSU vs. 5-1 FSU. By the end of the season that FSU property that looked great in the playoff as a seed protected ACC champ at 13-1; is the 8-seeded seminoles at 9-3. That 8-9 matchup against the Pac-12 champion or heaven forbid a 9-3 Iowa team; is much less valuable.
FSU & Clemson fans are twisting themselves in knots worried about how they stay competitive financially for the next decade (much the way UConn fans have) and have convinced themselves that ESPN/Disney care specifically about the value of their programs long-term. They don't. They aren't going to invest in paying FSU/Clemson more to prop up what would be mid-tier value SEC properties; while then dramatically overpaying the remaining ACC teams to stave off lawsuits. They'll continue to leverage FSU and Clemson's current value, hope the two schools figure it out and worry about the rest when they get there.
They aren't going to move into an arrangement where they pay more than twice the value for 13 other properties (counting Notre Dame's partial share); to double the pay for 2 particular properties... whose rights they already own, it's bad business... to those same bean-counters. They will pay an absurd price for the NBA soon, the premium properties will continue to get dollars, but they aren't going to compete against themselves to pay a premium for two good college football programs.
Plus looking near term, what's more valuable for ESPN? Florida State or Clemson becoming just another program in an SEC that's already stacked? Adding more losses to the potentially premium properties. Casual fans tune into premium/blue blood/dynasty programs. FSU or Clemson as perennial 10+ win teams; conference champions in the playoffs draws a bigger number than FSU or Clemson as 4th team out of the SEC with a 9-3 mark. The argument seems to be predicated that FSU/Clemson have far more value as just another SEC team?
Disney's not worried about developing FSU or Clemson. Nor are they worried if they fall off before they'd be available to the SEC. They are worried about driving ratings now, they'll figure out 2028, 2030, 2035 when they get there. FSU - LSU drives a number as an interconference attraction and can be arranged in premium spots with little competition (like the season opening Sunday night) where it's special and a loss for FSU means they might finish 12-1 before the playoff instead of 13-0. FSU - LSU week 7 is another SEC regular season game (albeit a nice one). It has significantly more competition than that season kickoff and features 4-2 LSU vs. 5-1 FSU. By the end of the season that FSU property that looked great in the playoff as a seed protected ACC champ at 13-1; is the 8-seeded seminoles at 9-3. That 8-9 matchup against the Pac-12 champion or heaven forbid a 9-3 Iowa team; is much less valuable.
FSU & Clemson fans are twisting themselves in knots worried about how they stay competitive financially for the next decade (much the way UConn fans have) and have convinced themselves that ESPN/Disney care specifically about the value of their programs long-term. They don't. They aren't going to invest in paying FSU/Clemson more to prop up what would be mid-tier value SEC properties; while then dramatically overpaying the remaining ACC teams to stave off lawsuits. They'll continue to leverage FSU and Clemson's current value, hope the two schools figure it out and worry about the rest when they get there.
No signaling... just ESPN happily enjoying 8 premium matchups; 4 of which come at a reduced rate under the ACC rights... that potential profit subsidizing the overpayment ESPN is currently making to have to air that Pitt-UNC game in secondary timeslot.
Ultimately I'd happily be wrong.. chaos and change is UConn's friend to potentially finding a better home for its programs. However if you're looking at the ACC without Garnet/Gold or Orange/Purple glasses, it's hard to find a deal that works for the schools, the conferences AND Disney/ESPN that ends with FSU & Clemson in the SEC before it gets to a point where FSU/Clemson are willing to buyout the decade left on the GOR
If you don’t think he’s still involved in the decision making then I have a bridge to sell you.
- Joined
- Aug 13, 2013
- Messages
- 8,896
- Reaction Score
- 8,431
FSU sets its OOC schedule...
I enjoyed the matches in the way back with the BIG...but the B1G did not want to come to Tallahassee...played two in Columbus, two in Michigan's Big House, Indiana, home and home (bless 'em) with Michigan State.
You may be right about ESPN/FSU/Clemson....time will tell.
I enjoyed the matches in the way back with the BIG...but the B1G did not want to come to Tallahassee...played two in Columbus, two in Michigan's Big House, Indiana, home and home (bless 'em) with Michigan State.
You may be right about ESPN/FSU/Clemson....time will tell.
Great football programs and their traditions become that way because of one thing, great coaching, no if’s, and’s, or but’s.
Does UConn's desire (really mine) for a B10 invite benefit from the ACC's GOR seemingly onerous contract length and costs?
Exit 4
This space for rent
- Joined
- Feb 3, 2012
- Messages
- 10,665
- Reaction Score
- 40,150
This is exactly why I don't think the ACC implodes - at least not for another 7-10 years. I really don't see how/why ESPN is going to help the SEC add teams that ESPN already controls at double the price unless these teams move for a partial share. And I am not convinced the SEC schools really want more serious competition in their league. Sure, add UVA or UNC, those schools aren't going to hurt the SEC stalwarts, but Clemson and FSU possibly pushing on Georgia and Florida- don't think so.