Key tweets, and it's all gone to Hell.

[noeynox]

Right now no expansion in other conferences keeps ACC members hopeful to fill slots when expansion happens in the future. By feinting that there may be a way out of GOR, it could freeze other conferences from adding now.

I see the logic in this, but i also think Yormack could get his schools to see through this. I said last month the move for the Big 12 was uconn and sdsu. Take away a backfill option from both the pac and acc.

 

[AZHuskiePop]

I can see the SEC and the B1G each taking one of the Virginia schools and one of the North Carolina schools. I'm not sure either conference is in too much of a rush however as there are many things that will need to be worked out prior to further expansion.

I'm not sure any other ACC school has a definitive landing spot that would be an improvement on where they currently are.

I/2 of those schools have an illusion of grandeur. Unless the goal is to break the GOR to blackmail the ACC / ESPN
Please give me one compelling reason that those schools other than FSU and Clemson are a sure thing
Why are they more compelling than
Stamford , Cal , Washington. and Oregon .
Only UVA , UN

I think it's a desperate move on their part. Trying to get the other 7 to concede them more money. Doubt it has any effect.

i agree the list includes teams with no hope for the Super Two
This clearly smacks of extortion of the rest by these magnificent 7 .
Whatever happened to brotherhood ?

 

[Chin Diesel]

I/2 of those schools have an illusion of grandeur. Unless the goal is to break the GOR to blackmail the ACC / ESPN
Please give me one compelling reason that those schools other than FSU and Clemson are a sure thing
Why are they more compelling than
Stamford , Cal , Washington. and Oregon .
Only UVA , UN

i agree the list includes teams with no hope for the Super Two
This clearly smacks of extortion of the rest by these magnificent 7 .
Whatever happened to brotherhood ?

Clemson and FSU bring national brands; UVA and UNC are state flagships in larger states. Those fours should be a gimme. Miami is great for a conference in that it's basically a bowl game for visiting teams to come there any time of year and party it up. GT gets you in to Atlanta and Georgia. Easy flights for any school and another good city to visit for a weekend. VT and NCSU are turd cling-ons. Pitt maybe has a chance in Big12. SU, BCU and WF are nothing to anyone. Duke at least brings a huge basketball program.

 

[FfldCntyFan]

For openers, Stamford is my home town in Connecticut. Stanford is the school in Palo Alto.

I believe that while it is more than a decade out, the end game for the B1G & SEC is 24 members each with four divisions of six schools. The west division of the B1G will be USC, UCLA, Cal, Stanford, Oregon and Washington.

I see the B1G also adding UNC & UVA.

The SEC does not have a presence in two southern states; Virginia and North Carolina. Va Tech and NC St are both more culturally compatible with the SEC than their wine and cheese current in state conference brethren.

Clemson and FSU are in s more difficult spot as they do not match the overall profile the B1G desires and they would be redundant additions to the SEC.

I think there wont be much movement (basically two additional west cost schools to the B1G is all that may happen) until a final decision by ND is made.

 

[Chin Diesel]

For openers, Stamford is my home town in Connecticut. Stanford is the school in Palo Alto.

I believe that while it is more than a decade out, the end game for the B1G & SEC is 24 members each with four divisions of six schools. The west division of the B1G will be USC, UCLA, Cal, Stanford, Oregon and Washington.

I see the B1G also adding UNC & UVA.

The SEC does not have a presence in two southern states; Virginia and North Carolina. Va Tech and NC St are both more culturally compatible with the SEC than their wine and cheese current in state conference brethren.

Clemson and FSU are in s more difficult spot as they do not match the overall profile the B1G desires and they would be redundant additions to the SEC.

I think there wont be much movement (basically two additional west cost schools to the B1G is all that may happen) until a final decision by ND is made.

Agree with an end game of 24 teams each for B1G and SEC. Also agree UNC and UVA are natural fits for the B1G. Whether or not this comes to fruition is beyond me.

 

[Fishy]

I have no idea what the future holds.

I am confident that these schools have gone public because they think they have a play. More importantly they've put the other schools in the conferenc on notice that the remaining seven aren't seen as viable partners. ACC bottom feeders are officially in last rat off the boat and any port in a storm mode.

I am confident that they have no play. If they did have one, they’d be quiet as a church mouse about it while they made their plans.

I mean, really….they think they are going to just break the fundamental agreement by which ESPN was induced to enter into a rights contract and then join another conference and sign the exact same agreement with the exact same company?

Come on.

 

[giddyup]

Agree with an end game of 24 teams each for B1G and SEC. Also agree UNC and UVA are natural fits for the B1G. Whether or not this comes to fruition is beyond me.

I don’t see either as smart fits. They will be shells of their former selves and eaten alive in no time with no regional rivalries week in and out.

 

[HuskyHawk]

I am confident that they have no play. If they did have one, they’d be quiet as a church mouse about it while they made their plans.

I mean, really….they think they are going to just break the fundamental agreement by which ESPN was induced to enter into a rights contract and then join another conference and sign the exact same agreement with the exact same company?

Come on.

I agree. ESPN has the ACC schools for 10+ years. They aren't paying any of them more in the SEC. The B1G board considered going to 24 and the schools rejected it roundly. They do not like the idea of two 12 team conferences. So I can see maybe adding Oregon and Washington, but that's it.

It's 16 with UCLA and USC. Purdue probably moves to the east. If you add Oregon and UW to go to 18, you can move Illinois east. It allows some of the B1G rivalries to stay intact.

 

[CTFAN4LIFE]

I agree. ESPN has the ACC schools for 10+ years. They aren't paying any of them more in the SEC. The B1G board considered going to 24 and the schools rejected it roundly. They do not like the idea of two 12 team conferences. So I can see maybe adding Oregon and Washington, but that's it.

It's 16 with UCLA and USC. Purdue probably moves to the east. If you add Oregon and UW to go to 18, you can move Illinois east. It allows some of the B1G rivalries to stay intact.

ESPN could come out ahead because they would stop overpaying forthe BC's and the Wakes, etc of the ACC and if they went to a big boy football conference now the Clemsons and FSU's playing other big boys would create a synergistic effect when playing those top teams.

 

[Stinger92860]

I agree that league is clearly looking to move west, they aren’t going to take us and 3 western schools

No way any conference goes coast to coast. Next you will be telling me a conference would have a team in New Jersey and 2 teams in California. Utter nonsense.

 

[Chin Diesel]

I am confident that they have no play. If they did have one, they’d be quiet as a church mouse about it while they made their plans.

I mean, really….they think they are going to just break the fundamental agreement by which ESPN was induced to enter into a rights contract and then join another conference and sign the exact same agreement with the exact same company?

Come on.

I'm not saying I think they have a plan, I'm saying I think they think they have a plan. And that planight just be having to fight in public.

Absolutely agree if they had a sure fire way out they'd be silent right up to the announcement.

 

[Dream Jobbed 2.0]

“UConn football bad” is the laziest crap ever. Look what they did with a competent coach for the first time in a decade.

They won a league with Cuse, WVU, Pitt, Rutgers, Louisville, USF 20% of the time they were in it.


I don’t see anyone talking about ND. Do they stay in the ACC sans the magnificent 7? IMO they never should have left the Big East as it is now a Midwest small private Catholic league. Could be something to keep an eye on. Does Ackerman give them all call?

 

[CL82]

I have no idea what the future holds.

I am confident that these schools have gone public because they think they have a play. More importantly they've put the other schools in the conferenc on notice that the remaining seven aren't seen as viable partners. ACC bottom feeders are officially in last rat off the boat and any port in a storm mode.

It's a flex, right? What they're doing is creating doubt in the remaining members of the conference in the GOR in the hopes that other members will explore finding a soft landing place, which in turn would increase the numbers of the current members willing to leave.

 

[CL82]

You can tell how badly our hearts have been stomped on by the lack of reaction to real news involving UConn. We used to get our hopes up more for the West Virginia clowns.

Too many times having the football pulled away from us at the last minute. People aren't going to get over excited over rumors. That said, look how much traffic these conference realignment threads are getting just off of those rumors.

 

[ScottVib]

ESPN could come out ahead because they would stop overpaying forthe BC's and the Wakes, etc of the ACC and if they went to a big boy football conference now the Clemsons and FSU's playing other big boys would create a synergistic effect when playing those top teams.

Except is Clemson content more valuable as a 9-1/10-0 national title contender in the ACC or a 7-3/8-2 at large contender in the SEC.

Expansion is a zero sum games. Some brands that are now strong (like Clemson’s) were built on a recent run of success. Limit/Eliminate that and you limit the value of the brand. Clemson adds no new market to the SEC.

Obviously, they’re a clear top target, but not such a massive target that you overpay other schools to accommodate getting them to the SEC if the SEC needs four to make a move it’s hard to find 4 schools that would be available to them to break-even at that price tier; let alone add value and income to the pot (because you don’t make the move as the SEC to wind up with roughly the same per team dollars as you started with).

 

[FfldCntyFan]

I'm not saying I think they have a plan, I'm saying I think they think they have a plan. And that planight just be having to fight in public.

Absolutely agree if they had a sure fire way out they'd be silent right up to the announcement.

This charade was fodder for local newspapers and the fan base. They need to provide the illusion that there is a chance they'll get out even if everyone knows there isn't a chance.

 

[hoopsfan22]

Except is Clemson content more valuable as a 9-1/10-0 national title contender in the ACC or a 7-3/8-2 at large contender in the SEC.

Expansion is a zero sum games. Some brands that are now strong (like Clemson’s) were built on a recent run of success. Limit/Eliminate that and you limit the value of the brand. Clemson adds no new market to the SEC.

Obviously, they’re a clear top target, but not such a massive target that you overpay other schools to accommodate getting them to the SEC if the SEC needs four to make a move it’s hard to find 4 schools that would be available to them to break-even at that price tier; let alone add value and income to the pot (because you don’t make the move as the SEC to wind up with roughly the same per team dollars as you started with).

The CFP will eventually include the top four teams from the B1G and $EC, so having an "easy path" to the autobid becomes less important.

 

[CTFAN4LIFE]

Except is Clemson content more valuable as a 9-1/10-0 national title contender in the ACC or a 7-3/8-2 at large contender in the SEC.

Expansion is a zero sum games. Some brands that are now strong (like Clemson’s) were built on a recent run of success. Limit/Eliminate that and you limit the value of the brand. Clemson adds no new market to the SEC.

Obviously, they’re a clear top target, but not such a massive target that you overpay other schools to accommodate getting them to the SEC if the SEC needs four to make a move it’s hard to find 4 schools that would be available to them to break-even at that price tier; let alone add value and income to the pot (because you don’t make the move as the SEC to wind up with roughly the same per team dollars as you started with).

Disagree. While expansion overall might be zero sum game, there are definitely positive plays to be made. USC in the B1G is an example. So is Texas in the SEC. And so on.

 

[TRest]

“UConn football bad” is the laziest crap ever. Look what they did with a competent coach for the first time in a decade.

They won a league with Cuse, WVU, Pitt, Rutgers, Louisville, USF 20% of the time they were in it.


I don’t see anyone talking about ND. Do they stay in the ACC sans the magnificent 7? IMO they never should have left the Big East as it is now a Midwest small private Catholic league. Could be something to keep an eye on. Does Ackerman give them all call?

Part of ND's posturing when they left the BE was that it was holding back their olympic sports. ND sees itself at the highest levels of competition, would not be going down a level unless it was also serious about not wanting to compete in a new system where athletes get paid.

 

[Jbirdp5]

No way any conference goes coast to coast. Next you will be telling me a conference would have a team in New Jersey and 2 teams in California. Utter nonsense.

That league is still wondering how they are going to make it work, and they only did it because they were adding two huge brands. This is not the same type of situation

 

[ScottVib]

Disagree. While expansion overall might be zero sum game, there are definitely positive plays to be made. USC in the B1G is an example. So is Texas in the SEC. And so on.

USC and Texas are different kind of brands than say Clemson (or even a Miami). Clemson and Miami are brands who were built on a run of success.. as that success fades so does their star (Miami's star is much dimmer already than it was in the 80s and 90s; even in the early 00s). Texas & USC have the generational success that allows them to weather mediocrity and still retain name value. In addition, they also opened new home markets for the broadcast rights of their new conference's games. Neither Clemson, nor Miami do that.

The ACC has one school football-wise that you'd consider a Texas type brand. That's Florida State. Clemson is on the next tier (due to the recency of their run) and Miami just below that. I don't think you'd find a network clamoring to pay Miami a full-SEC level share as a member in that conference. UNC is probably the third most valuable brand given that it opens a new and growing market and features major generational brand identity (primarily because of basketball) despite football mediocrity.

Ultimately there are positive plays to be made. Just not enough positive plays that if the SEC says they need 4 members that ESPN is going to go out their way to help the schools break the GOR (and it's more far-fetched as some have suggested that they'd keep the leftover ACC whole to help FSU, Clemson, et al avoid litigation for damages should they breach the GOR) to get those members to the SEC. The subsidy that they had to pay to put Miami and say Virginia Tech or NC State as teams 3 and 4, would outweigh any added value from Florida State and Clemson. Plus ESPN can already air Florida State and Clemson at a discount and can get more value out of a higher rated team in a playoff matchup that they own the rights too (say as a 12-1 ACC champion) than if they are qualifying as the 8-4 8th seed. ESPN certainly has not interest in helping breach the GOR so that Fox can add value with UNC and UVA.

My stance isn't that there isn't value to be had in the ACC schools... it's that there isn't enough value to guarantee a P2 landing spot for the number of schools that would be necessary to kill the conference (and at some level Notre Dame gets a vote (and while they have a landing spot, they'd prefer not to use it), which makes the leftover 7, a leftover 8). No school is voting to nuke the GOR and then paying exit fees for a lateral shift to the current Big XII.

 

[ScottVib]

The CFP will eventually include the top four teams from the B1G and $EC, so having an "easy path" to the autobid becomes less important.

Access to the playoff is irrelevant to the point I was making. The argument I was making is airing a CFP game with 4 seeded ACC champion Clemson or Florida State at 12-1 or 13-0 is more attractive than airing the same matchup with the 8th seeded SEC also-ran Clemson or Florida State at 9-3 or 8-4. Even regular season matchups if you're looking for filler ESPN2 content in say the 7:00 timeslot. Clemson at 8-1 vs. even say a Pitt at 5-3 is more attractive than; 6-2 Clemson vs. 5-3 Ole Miss.

 

[Rufus]

The B1G will have value in establishing a presence in the southeast. The top three recruiting states are Texas, Florida and Georgia. The ACC provides coverage in Florida (Florida State, Miami) and Georgia (Georgia Tech). Not to mention they are in top media markets of the fastest growing region in the nation. I think any or all of those three universities would be very strategic additions for the B1G.

 

[ScottVib]

The B1G will have value in establishing a presence in the southeast. The top three recruiting states are Texas, Florida and Georgia. The ACC provides coverage in Florida (Florida State, Miami) and Georgia (Georgia Tech). Not to mention they are in top media markets of the fastest growing region in the nation. I think any or all of those three universities would be very strategic additions for the B1G.

They could be, but is Georgia Tech a $100M/year brand in the Fox/Big Ten mind? Beyond that if Fox takes 4. Let's say they get Miami, Georgia Tech, UVA and UNC. There aren't 4 teams left in the ACC that bring full value to the SEC (FSU, Clemson, Virginia Tech? NC State?).. which means you don't have a majority to nuke the conference. Furthermore you certainly aren't going to have ESPN make it easy to have to pay more for content that it already owns, while sacrificing potentially valuable content to Fox.

 

[Rufus]

They could be, but is Georgia Tech a $100M/year brand in the Fox/Big Ten mind? Beyond that if Fox takes 4. Let's say they get Miami, Georgia Tech, UVA and UNC. There aren't 4 teams left in the ACC that bring full value to the SEC (FSU, Clemson, Virginia Tech? NC State?).. which means you don't have a majority to nuke the conference. Furthermore you certainly aren't going to have ESPN make it easy to have to pay more for content that it already owns, while sacrificing potentially valuable content to Fox.

The value of Georgia Tech isn’t necessarily Georgia Tech. The value of Georgia Tech is Ohio State, Michigan, Penn State and USC playing regularly in Atlanta.