Bilas on Uconn left out of expansion

[CL82]

It is absolutely going to hold.

Probably, at least until say 2034 at the earliest. At that point whatever the equivalent money damages are for breaching the GOR might be affordable for moves to one of the P2.

 

[hoopsfan22]

It is absolutely going to hold.

Have you seen the contract?

 

[upstater]

Lol, what’s the status of each of these programs in your hypothetical? What is the status of other programs? What is the status of other conferences? What is the likely prognosis that a decimated ACC will survive? What media partners are associated with the ACC at that time? What areas do those media partners want to emphasize? What are the stability of the other conferences? What is the relative media deals of the other conferences? What is the perspective media deal for the decimated ACC? Etc…

Are you just trolling on this or do you actually not see all the variables?

I already answered those questions in the 1st post I made.

I gave you which schools would go to which conferences. That's already been detailed.

The rest of the schools would be left behind in the ACC. At that point, they'd have one of 3 options. Add football schools (the worst choice outside of UConn and USF). Try to join the B12 (not sure why the B12 would take them, but maybe a couple). Merge with the BE. of the 3 choices, the BE one is the one that makes the most sense.

 

[CL82]

I already answered those questions in the 1st post I made.

I gave you which schools would go to which conferences. That's already been detailed.

The rest of the schools would be left behind in the ACC. At that point, they'd have one of 3 options. Add football schools (the worst choice outside of UConn and USF). Try to join the B12 (not sure why the B12 would take them, but maybe a couple). Merge with the BE. of the 3 choices, the BE one is the one that makes the most sense.

Lol, I’m out. Agree to disagree on it.

 

[CTFAN4LIFE]

Is there any way if Notre Dame pulled its Olympic sports that a legal loophole would be created to nullify the ACC GOR? Or, is it such an unknown that we'd all be guessing? (Yes, I realize that the document has been on total lockdown since the day it was created/signed). Everyone seems to think that it is so simple (maybe 4 pages?) that it will be difficult to break legally. What are the basic arguments to get out of something so simple? Insanity, coercion, drunkenness when signing, etc. What else could break it? Any lawyers want to weigh in?

 

[HuskyHawk]

Probably, at least until say 2034 at the earliest. At that point whatever the equivalent money damages are for breaching the GOR might be affordable for moves to one of the P2.

Have you seen the contract?

Yes. It's an EPSN league. The SEC is an ESPN league. The B1G is a Fox league. The Big 12 has a split contract 60/40.

So, the GOR gives the TV rights to ACC schools to ESPN, no matter what league they play in. Looking at Upstaters prognostication of doom, clear issues arise. ESPN will not pay SEC rates for FSU and Clemson, because it already has that content. Fox will not give any additional $ to the B1G for content that it cannot air, and B1G schools will not dilute their payout to bring in UNC, UVA or others.

But what motivations do exist? The Pac has no contract after this season, but is split. The Big 12 is also split, details here. Big 12 reaches new media deals with ESPN, Fox
"For the “A” package, ESPN gets the top four football picks each season, six of the top eight picks, eight of the top 12 picks and 12 of the top 20 picks. As part of the deal, ESPN also gets the rights to the Big 12 football championship game and the basketball tournament championship game."

So the logical moves align to what I said. ESPN takes 60% of the Big 12 by moving it to the ACC and paying roughly what they pay now. The rest merges with the Pac, solidifying it which would be enough to get Fox to bid on it. Fox then gets the content it could add to the B1G (UW, Oregon, Stanford, Cal) but pays much less for it.

 

[TheCatsLair]

Yes. It's an EPSN league. The SEC is an ESPN league. The B1G is a Fox league. The Big 12 has a split contract 60/40.

So, the GOR gives the TV rights to ACC schools to ESPN, no matter what league they play in. Looking at Upstaters prognostication of doom, clear issues arise. ESPN will not pay SEC rates for FSU and Clemson, because it already has that content. Fox will not give any additional $ to the B1G for content that it cannot air, and B1G schools will not dilute their payout to bring in UNC, UVA or others.

But what motivations do exist? The Pac has no contract after this season, but is split. The Big 12 is also split, details here. Big 12 reaches new media deals with ESPN, Fox
"For the “A” package, ESPN gets the top four football picks each season, six of the top eight picks, eight of the top 12 picks and 12 of the top 20 picks. As part of the deal, ESPN also gets the rights to the Big 12 football championship game and the basketball tournament championship game."

So the logical moves align to what I said. ESPN takes 60% of the Big 12 by moving it to the ACC and paying roughly what they pay now. The rest merges with the Pac, solidifying it which would be enough to get Fox to bid on it. Fox then gets the content it could add to the B1G (UW, Oregon, Stanford, Cal) but pays much less for it.

It makes zero sense for ESPN to move Big 12 schools to the ACC. They could have done that in 2021 if it added value. The Big 12 and ACC by themselves adds value

 

[CTFAN4LIFE]

It seems that two factors would drive added value in the years ahead for the top conferences:

1 - replace football underlings that take a full share but don't drive tv ratings (e.g. Vandy, etc.) with programs stuck in less than desirable matchups (i.e. FSU/Clemson/Notre Dame that play Wake or Duke, etc.).

2 - bring in basketball powerhouses such as UConn, Gonzaga, etc).

Everything else is really just moving checkers on the board for little reason. For the most part, the biggest value-add creations in #1 are stuck in the ACC GOR or are stuck in the PAC (Oregon). Seems like Oregon could move pretty freely in the next year or two. UConn/Gonzaga are pretty free as well.

Item #1 appears to be far off, but does the Big12 get bold and make things happen? Seems like it's up to them and the Big10. Something should happen in the next couple of months.

 

[CL82]

Yes. It's an EPSN league. The SEC is an ESPN league. The B1G is a Fox league. The Big 12 has a split contract 60/40.

So, the GOR gives the TV rights to ACC schools to ESPN, no matter what league they play in. Looking at Upstaters prognostication of doom, clear issues arise. ESPN will not pay SEC rates for FSU and Clemson, because it already has that content. Fox will not give any additional $ to the B1G for content that it cannot air, and B1G schools will not dilute their payout to bring in UNC, UVA or others.

But what motivations do exist? The Pac has no contract after this season, but is split. The Big 12 is also split, details here. Big 12 reaches new media deals with ESPN, Fox
"For the “A” package, ESPN gets the top four football picks each season, six of the top eight picks, eight of the top 12 picks and 12 of the top 20 picks. As part of the deal, ESPN also gets the rights to the Big 12 football championship game and the basketball tournament championship game."

So the logical moves align to what I said. ESPN takes 60% of the Big 12 by moving it to the ACC and paying roughly what they pay now. The rest merges with the Pac, solidifying it which would be enough to get Fox to bid on it. Fox then gets the content it could add to the B1G (UW, Oregon, Stanford, Cal) but pays much less for it.

Or….

The big 10 picks up two ACC schools, say, UNC and UVA; the SEC picks up two ACC schools, say FSU and Clemson ESPN picks up one or two of the remainders and move them to the big 12. The rest are de facto relegated.

Why would ESPN pick up some ACC schools and pay them a premium in the big 12? Because then the remaining ACC schools get severely discounted.

 

[CTFAN4LIFE]

ESPN and Fox will only want the top brands to move from conferences not the SEC or the B1G. FSU moving into the SEC or B1G drives added value because FSU playing against other big brands drives incremental viewers/casual fans. If FSU is playing Wake Forest it's a yawner for the casual fan, but if FSU is playing Alabama or Ohio State then those matchups will bring more eyeballs than when FSU plays the other "top" brands in the ACC because those other top ACC brands aren't as strong as the top brands in the SEC or B1G. Simple logic and math drive these tv-propelled realignment decisions.

 

[upstater]

Yes. It's an EPSN league. The SEC is an ESPN league. The B1G is a Fox league. The Big 12 has a split contract 60/40.

So, the GOR gives the TV rights to ACC schools to ESPN, no matter what league they play in. Looking at Upstaters prognostication of doom, clear issues arise. ESPN will not pay SEC rates for FSU and Clemson, because it already has that content. Fox will not give any additional $ to the B1G for content that it cannot air, and B1G schools will not dilute their payout to bring in UNC, UVA or others.

But what motivations do exist? The Pac has no contract after this season, but is split. The Big 12 is also split, details here. Big 12 reaches new media deals with ESPN, Fox
"For the “A” package, ESPN gets the top four football picks each season, six of the top eight picks, eight of the top 12 picks and 12 of the top 20 picks. As part of the deal, ESPN also gets the rights to the Big 12 football championship game and the basketball tournament championship game."

So the logical moves align to what I said. ESPN takes 60% of the Big 12 by moving it to the ACC and paying roughly what they pay now. The rest merges with the Pac, solidifying it which would be enough to get Fox to bid on it. Fox then gets the content it could add to the B1G (UW, Oregon, Stanford, Cal) but pays much less for it.

You're missing the forest for the trees.

There will be 2 national conferences.

The B1G wants a presence in the southeast. It should be beyond obvious by now that they want to be everywhere.

The SEC and the B1G are literally competing to take the prime real estate of the ACC. If one doesn't want to do that out of deference to Mickey Mouse, the other one will.

The TV people have almost zilch to do with this. It's about the 2 goliaths of college sports.

The idea that the states of Virginia and North Carolina would be considered a dilution to the states of Iowa and Nebraska? That's too much.

This is prime real estate. We're talking about 2 national conferences with 40 total members.

 

[CTFAN4LIFE]

You're missing the forest for the trees.

There will be 2 national conferences.

The B1G wants a presence in the southeast. It should be beyond obvious by now that they want to be everywhere.

The SEC and the B1G are literally competing to take the prime real estate of the ACC. If one doesn't want to do that out of deference to Mickey Mouse, the other one will.

The TV people have almost zilch to do with this. It's about the 2 goliaths of college sports.

The idea that the states of Virginia and North Carolina would be considered a dilution to the states of Iowa and Nebraska? That's too much.

This is prime real estate. We're talking about 2 national conferences with 40 total members.

^^^^The TV people have almost zilch to do with this. It's about the 2 goliaths of college sports.

The TV people have at least 51% of all of these decisions because no one wants to take a haircut revenue wise. You have to get the yea votes from the Northwesterns, the Vanderbilts, etc as much as you do from the Ohio States and the Alabamas. The only way to avoid the haircut is to bring in schools that the tv people value. Period.

 

[HuskyinWRNY]

The weaker conference is always the one that gets raided. The Pac-12 was the stronger conference and could have had 4 Big 12 schools. They voted against it. Then UCLA/USC left and now the Big 12 is the stronger conference and will likely steal a couple from the Pac. If the ACC loses their most important members, those Big 12 schools aren't going to join the ACC. I think the ideal short term scenario for UConn is the Big 12 adding 3 west members and needing a 4th member to balance it out. Maybe the team that won the most recent national title in hoops??

I wish, but I don't think that will happen.

 

[Viet Vet]

Love my Huskies (class of ‘74) but let’s not ignore that this year’s basketball championship final was the lowest rated, and least watched, on record.

UConn doesn’t move the needle like UNC, Duke, Kansas, Kentucky, Indiana. We may be a “Blue Blood” program now, but we are not national TV must-see.

THAT is what the networks pay for.

 

[HuskyHawk]

You're missing the forest for the trees.

There will be 2 national conferences.

The B1G wants a presence in the southeast. It should be beyond obvious by now that they want to be everywhere.

The SEC and the B1G are literally competing to take the prime real estate of the ACC. If one doesn't want to do that out of deference to Mickey Mouse, the other one will.

The TV people have almost zilch to do with this. It's about the 2 goliaths of college sports.

The idea that the states of Virginia and North Carolina would be considered a dilution to the states of Iowa and Nebraska? That's too much.

This is prime real estate. We're talking about 2 national conferences with 40 total members.

None of that is true. There won’t be two conferences. It will be 3-4. It may go to 2, but to do that they’d need to kick Vandy, Miss State, Northwestern, Rutgers, Maryland to the curb. That doesn’t happen until the break from the NCAA. The two conference model has to be just the elite.

 

[CL82]

Love my Huskies (class of ‘74) but let’s not ignore that this year’s basketball championship final was the lowest rated, and least watched, on record.

UConn doesn’t move the needle like UNC, Duke, Kansas, Kentucky, Indiana. We may be a “Blue Blood” program now, but we are not national TV must-see.

THAT is what the networks pay for.

Lol, do you think that the opponent and the start time had anything to do with that?

 

[noeynox]

Lol, do you think that the opponent and the start time had anything to do with that?

There is always more than one way to interpret data.

 

[noeynox]

@John , Don't laugh, the numbers don't lie.

 

[upstater]

^^^^The TV people have almost zilch to do with this. It's about the 2 goliaths of college sports.

The TV people have at least 51% of all of these decisions because no one wants to take a haircut revenue wise. You have to get the yea votes from the Northwesterns, the Vanderbilts, etc as much as you do from the Ohio States and the Alabamas. The only way to avoid the haircut is to bring in schools that the tv people value. Period.

What do you think the TV people are going to do when the B1G grabs whatever ACC schools they want? Punish them? They are over at Fox. The ACC is at ESPN. The B1G grabs those schools and ends up stealing prime real estate from under the SECs nose. You think the SEC hasn't thought of this?

The TV people will do nothing but watch because this is a fight to the death.

 

[upstater]

None of that is true. There won’t be two conferences. It will be 3-4. It may go to 2, but to do that they’d need to kick Vandy, Miss State, Northwestern, Rutgers, Maryland to the curb. That doesn’t happen until the break from the NCAA. The two conference model has to be just the elite.

Of course there will be more than 2, but I'm talking about a big 2. No more Power 5. No more Power 4. When the SEC and B1G swallow up the ACC, the other conferences really won't matter (for football).

 

[upstater]

Love my Huskies (class of ‘74) but let’s not ignore that this year’s basketball championship final was the lowest rated, and least watched, on record.

UConn doesn’t move the needle like UNC, Duke, Kansas, Kentucky, Indiana. We may be a “Blue Blood” program now, but we are not national TV must-see.

THAT is what the networks pay for.

If you looked inside the numbers, you'd see that the audience fell off when UConn got a 20 point lead. Then there's the other half of the equation. You have to play an opponent people want to see. This game was as big a foregone conclusion as 2004. No one gave SDSU a chance.

A tight game between UConn and, say, Miami would've had much higher ratings.

Consider that the Georgia vs. TCU national championship (a blowout) had lower ratings than any NCAA men's title game in recorded history, until UConn - SDSU.

Until last week, the 2nd lowest rated game in NCAA men's championship history was last year's Kansas vs. North Carolina, which only had 2m more viewers than UConn-SDSU this year. So much for blue bloods. They were tied with the 2021 championship for low viewers. In fact, every year since 2018 they've gone lower than all previous years (2019 excepted).

Last fact, streaming on the March Madness app was up 20%+ over last year. Nielsen can't account for all the people watching on Apps.

 

[CTFAN4LIFE]

What do you think the TV people are going to do when the B1G grabs whatever ACC schools they want? Punish them? They are over at Fox. The ACC is at ESPN. The B1G grabs those schools and ends up stealing prime real estate from under the SECs nose. You think the SEC hasn't thought of this?

The TV people will do nothing but watch because this is a fight to the death.

So, you're saying that realignment is driven by the conferences acting on their own wishes with no input from tv partners?

 

[Kolumbo]

You're missing the forest for the trees.

There will be 2 national conferences.

The B1G wants a presence in the southeast. It should be beyond obvious by now that they want to be everywhere.

The SEC and the B1G are literally competing to take the prime real estate of the ACC. If one doesn't want to do that out of deference to Mickey Mouse, the other one will.

The TV people have almost zilch to do with this. It's about the 2 goliaths of college sports.

The idea that the states of Virginia and North Carolina would be considered a dilution to the states of Iowa and Nebraska? That's too much.

This is prime real estate. We're talking about 2 national conferences with 40 total members.

Fight the good fight upstater. I'm with you.

The ACC was always doomed in terms of CR. It has 4 count 'em 4 programs in a single market - Raleigh-Durham. Two of which are basketball privates. That kills your conference right there. Then it goes and invites a mish-mash of catholics/privates/commuter schools. That's called a double-tap. People argue against adding a 2nd program from states like Ohio and Florida because it's all about adding additional markets yet the ACC is stockpiled in North Carolina. Of course those programs water down the take. It's a complete cluster F and has no basis for building a surviving conference. The GOR is imprisoning FSU and Clemson with Wake, Duke, L-Ville, BCU, Cuse.

The B1G and SEC can manage with Norhwestern and Vandy just fine until those universities decide they don't want to be part of the NFL farm system.

 

[ScottVib]

If TV were fully in charge the conferences in general would look much different. Almost all of the P5 privates would be out as would be the second schools in the majority of states. Interestingly if they were allowed to start from scratch the Big XII would still largely be intact because the properties in that league are largely the second (or worse) choices throughout the markets they represent.

If there was going to be a full break-away you could easily see some sort of entity bankrolling the exit fees and allowing the national conference start up. I don't think that will happen, so Northwestern, Mississippi State, Vanderbilt, etc win the lottery of having the right friends at the right time.

 

[upstater]

Fight the good fight upstater. I'm with you.

The ACC was always doomed in terms of CR. It has 4 count 'em 4 programs in a single market - Raleigh-Durham. Two of which are basketball privates. That kills your conference right there. Then it goes and invites a mish-mash of catholics/privates/commuter schools. That's called a double-tap. People argue against adding a 2nd program from states like Ohio and Florida because it's all about adding additional markets yet the ACC is stockpiled in North Carolina. Of course those programs water down the take. It's a complete cluster F and has no basis for building a surviving conference. The GOR is imprisoning FSU and Clemson with Wake, Duke, L-Ville, BCU, Cuse.

The B1G and SEC can manage with Norhwestern and Vandy just fine until those universities decide they don't want to be part of the NFL farm system.

Exactly

 

[upstater]

So, you're saying that realignment is driven by the conferences acting on their own wishes with no input from tv partners?

At this point, yes. Not earlier. This is game theory at this point. Can the SEC lock the B1G out of the Atlantic coast? That's the only thing that matters. TV will not determine this incredibly crucial game for the B1G, and even if it could, the B1G is at Fox. Fox would be thrilled to see it grab ACC/ESPN teams

 

[CTFAN4LIFE]

At this point, yes. Not earlier. This is game theory at this point. Can the SEC lock the B1G out of the Atlantic coast? That's the only thing that matters. TV will not determine this incredibly crucial game for the B1G, and even if it could, the B1G is at Fox. Fox would be thrilled to see it grab ACC/ESPN teams

I don't see it that way and I don't think college presidents do either. College presidents are driving through the conference commissioners who are driven by tv executives and media consultants to grow revenues for their athletic departments. College presidents are leaders that have to balance issues across their entire enterprise, including academics and research endeavors. Do not underestimate that the presidents are somewhat collegial within their peer groups - they collaborate on education and research issues while competing against each other on the playing fields. College presidents play nice because these academics don't want to burn a bridge to their potential next employer as the presidents move within the world of academia. Conferences (i.e. a collective of college presidents) typically have gone out of their way to not pillage other conferences, except for the ACC doing so with regards to the BE football schools. And the BE's original composition of the C7 and larger football playing schools were ripe for the picking because it had two factions within it. No other major conference had such disfunction as the BE did and that was the reason for its demise.

If this was a game of conquering territory as you say, why hasn't the B1G done more pillaging? They hold the most power/resources yet have only added 2 schools (Maryland/Rutgers) in 2014 and one in 2011 (Nebraska). Now, their next two adds are LA schools - driven by Fox's desires to get the LA market. Fox is market-driven, as opposed to ESPN which is brand-driven.

I just don't see the game theory. I see it as money and stability driven not a game of war.

 

[upstater]

I don't see it that way and I don't think college presidents do either. College presidents are driving through the conference commissioners who are driven by tv executives and media consultants to grow revenues for their athletic departments. College presidents are leaders that have to balance issues across their entire enterprise, including academics and research endeavors. Do not underestimate that the presidents are somewhat collegial within their peer groups - they collaborate on education and research issues while competing against each other on the playing fields. College presidents play nice because these academics don't want to burn a bridge to their potential next employer as the presidents move within the world of academia. Conferences (i.e. a collective of college presidents) typically have gone out of their way to not pillage other conferences, except for the ACC doing so with regards to the BE football schools. And the BE's original composition of the C7 and larger football playing schools were ripe for the picking because it had two factions within it. No other major conference had such disfunction as the BE did and that was the reason for its demise.

If this was a game of conquering territory as you say, why hasn't the B1G done more pillaging? They hold the most power/resources yet have only added 2 schools (Maryland/Rutgers) in 2014 and one in 2011 (Nebraska). Now, their next two adds are LA schools - driven by Fox's desires to get the LA market. Fox is market-driven, as opposed to ESPN which is brand-driven.

I just don't see the game theory. I see it as money and stability driven not a game of war.

Saw a recent report (this week) in the Chronicle of High Ed about the job of College President. The vast majority of them now expect to be at only one school for 5 years max. When discussing the job, athletics rated as among the least of their concerns, it was right above "student life" at the very bottom.

Their biggest concern is putting together a budget (i.e. feeling as though they can't do it well) and fund raising. About 20 things below that before they come to athletics. The job has changed.

Why hasn't the B1G done more pillaging? I'm kind of stunned that you asked that. It's not enough that they took schools out the BE, B12, ACC and Pac10? They are in all corners of the country except for the southeast. That's their next destination.

 

[dayooper]

Saw a recent report (this week) in the Chronicle of High Ed about the job of College President. The vast majority of them now expect to be at only one school for 5 years max. When discussing the job, athletics rated as among the least of their concerns, it was right above "student life" at the very bottom.

Their biggest concern is putting together a budget (i.e. feeling as though they can't do it well) and fund raising. About 20 things below that before they come to athletics. The job has changed.

Why hasn't the B1G done more pillaging? I'm kind of stunned that you asked that. It's not enough that they took schools out the BE, B12, ACC and Pac10? They are in all corners of the country except for the southeast. That's their next destination.

They aren’t in the NW …. Yet

 

[CTFAN4LIFE]

Saw a recent report (this week) in the Chronicle of High Ed about the job of College President. The vast majority of them now expect to be at only one school for 5 years max. When discussing the job, athletics rated as among the least of their concerns, it was right above "student life" at the very bottom.

Their biggest concern is putting together a budget (i.e. feeling as though they can't do it well) and fund raising. About 20 things below that before they come to athletics. The job has changed.

Why hasn't the B1G done more pillaging? I'm kind of stunned that you asked that. It's not enough that they took schools out the BE, B12, ACC and Pac10? They are in all corners of the country except for the southeast. That's their next destination.

I think you just made my point for me in that college presidents are prioritizing many other aspects of their jobs over athletics and therefore aren't playing a war game of territory- taking. And, by the B1G bringing in 3 schools over a 12 year period to date, that's one every four years. That doesn't feel like territory taking to me. That feels like thoughtful/selective additions guided by tv revenue growth strategy. What else could you explain it to be?