forums

MEGA Conference Realignment and lawsuits Megathread(Its still personal)

Imukat said:
He must have screwed up something.
Click to expand...
Lee-Fitting-768x432-2244298739.jpeg


Yep, screwed up for ESPN, circa 2023.
 
Advertisement
calinative umstudent said:
With Stanford and Cal making a combined $17M/yr and SMU making $0M/yr, but it raising ESPNs payout to ACC by $72M/yr, it's a NET +$55M/yr to current conference members. Assuming they strategically distribute that, I can't imagine NCSt would vote against any longer. Same with UVA/VTech/etc. And it's not like this money would be going to ND. The only 4 schools that really still wouldn't likely want this is FSU, Clemson, UNC, and Miami because those are the 4 that can actually make more money elsewhere. The rest will make as much or more by remaining in the ACC, especially with an additional $55M to distribute.

If we are being 100% honest, IF Stanford, Cal, and SMU join the ACC, the only thing it actually really changes is that Conference dissolution is likely off the table as an option. So it means paying min $120M in Exit fee, and then getting out of GOR through court or settlement.
Click to expand...

Trying to be 100% honest and also trying to follow the reasoning here:

So NC State, which "voted" against expansion last time, will vote in favor this time for an extra ~$5M (pro rata share + increased Tier 3/ACCN payout) because ... the pot was sweetened just a bit to swing the Wolfpack's vote?

And Miami, which apparently (?) "abstained" last time out of "respect for Stanford" will vote "no" (when it matters) to expansion because it does, in fact, have a P2 conference option or vote "yes" either out of unyielding respect for Stanford or because we really ain't got no place else to go.

Meh Tonight Show GIF by The Tonight Show Starring Jimmy Fallon
 
Last edited:
calinative umstudent said:
With Stanford and Cal making a combined $17M/yr and SMU making $0M/yr, but it raising ESPNs payout to ACC by $72M/yr, it's a NET +$55M/yr to current conference members. Assuming they strategically distribute that, I can't imagine NCSt would vote against any longer. Same with UVA/VTech/etc. And it's not like this money would be going to ND. The only 4 schools that really still wouldn't likely want this is FSU, Clemson, UNC, and Miami because those are the 4 that can actually make more money elsewhere. The rest will make as much or more by remaining in the ACC, especially with an additional $55M to distribute.

If we are being 100% honest, IF Stanford, Cal, and SMU join the ACC, the only thing it actually really changes is that Conference dissolution is likely off the table as an option. So it means paying min $120M in Exit fee, and then getting out of GOR through court or settlement.
Click to expand...


I would simply point out one additional thing.

All the conference members who might vote YES because "more money" are unlikely to see the money. It is far more likely that Clemson or F$U or Miami or North Carolina will get the extra "success bounty" payout.

I certainly hope Beta Blake isn't voting YES because he thinks Boston College will ever get one penny more.
 
Cane6 said:
Only way acc schools could allow them to join is if they don’t have a vote to dissolve the conference
Click to expand...


Would be hilarious if...

---September 1, 2023 - Stanford, Cal, SMU invited to join, and will receive full voting rights on September 1, 2024

---September 2, 2023 - Stanford, Cal, SMU sign the worst GOR in history, and the ACC flips their rights to ESPN until 2036

---September 3, 2023 - Eight ACC teams vote to dissolve the ACC...OR....Miami, Clemson, F$U, and Team 4 give notice to exit the ACC
 
Advertisement
TheOriginalCane said:
I would simply point out one additional thing.

All the conference members who might vote YES because "more money" are unlikely to see the money. It is far more likely that Clemson or F$U or Miami or North Carolina will get the extra "success bounty" payout.

I certainly hope Beta Blake isn't voting YES because he thinks Boston College will ever get one penny more.
Click to expand...
The other schools would vote yes because they want to do whatever they can to keep the conference together.
 
TooColdToHold said:
The other schools would vote yes because they want to do whatever they can to keep the conference together.
Click to expand...


I'm aware of that. I'm pointing out the falseness of the "mo money" argument, and saying that EVERY **** thing that the ACC has done the last few years has had a secret unspoken subtext of "keeping the marriage together for the kids".

The ACC is miserable. The ACC has never figured out how to make ITSELF a strong conference. So the ACC has spent years and millions building all kinds of poison pills.

We just have to be honest at this point. Annul this marriage.
 
calinative umstudent said:
With Stanford and Cal making a combined $17M/yr and SMU making $0M/yr, but it raising ESPNs payout to ACC by $72M/yr, it's a NET +$55M/yr to current conference members. Assuming they strategically distribute that, I can't imagine NCSt would vote against any longer. Same with UVA/VTech/etc. And it's not like this money would be going to ND. The only 4 schools that really still wouldn't likely want this is FSU, Clemson, UNC, and Miami because those are the 4 that can actually make more money elsewhere. The rest will make as much or more by remaining in the ACC, especially with an additional $55M to distribute.

If we are being 100% honest, IF Stanford, Cal, and SMU join the ACC, the only thing it actually really changes is that Conference dissolution is likely off the table as an option. So it means paying min $120M in Exit fee, and then getting out of GOR through court or settlement.
Click to expand...
How again do these 3 schools joining ACC raise payout to $72MM/yr?
 
Empirical Cane said:
How again do these 3 schools joining ACC raise payout to $72MM/yr?
Click to expand...


I believe that was the "quoted number" that ESPN would be willing to pay for the addition of those 3 teams.

Not sure if that would also involve 9 or 10 ACC games (thus, more inventory).

But it was the number that got reported in the press (and I'm suuuuure there was no hidden agenda in leaking that information)...
 
Advertisement
B1G FOXy has seen the pricetag for Cal/Stanford to the ACC: About $8.5M each, including a travel stipend.

That's not equal to the "discount for the desperate" half-share that landed Oregon/U-Dub

That's not half of the half-share that landed the Ducks and Huskies.

It's like a little over a quarter of what those two Pacific Northwest schools will be paid in the B1G

B1g FOXy is not going to pass on two elite academic schools the university presidents want, two schools that help fill out an ideal West Coast scheduling pod for non-revenue sports and, most importantly, whose alignment with the Big Ten helps further destabilize the ACC and moves one step closer to shaking loose Notre Dame and a few other expansion targets.

Not for the price of what schools like USF are making in the American

And not when there's a fourth TV window (Saturday night 10:30 ET/7:30 PT) still to be sold as well as a potential Friday night package

Bay Area schools to the ACC is not happening
 
Last edited:
Advertisement
IF the ACC adds Cal/Stan/SMU and takes the conference to 18 ... the nuclear reboot is pretty much off the table and the list realistic programs that might have the option to leave is chopped down to those that FOX / EXPN might actually negotiate a GOR buyout / transfer / trade for. That apparently is a small group that would consist of FSU / Clemson / Miami / UNC as the most valued brands. So nobody is "leaving on their own" but will be 'taken' based on network desires and ability to negotiate a deal. UM needs at least a 9 win season ... got to start getting "eyeballs" back on UM games regardless of opponent. There is already discussion in various forums regarding changing the media distribution in conferences from "everybody gets the same" to an "earned distribution". The B10 example of OSU / Md / Rutgers is used as a prime example of the inequity of the current model.

Rutgers barely averages 800,000 viewers per game and OSU will grab as many as 6 million. Should be an interesting next few years.
 
Empirical Cane said:
How again do these 3 schools joining ACC raise payout to $72MM/yr?
Click to expand...

Here you go EC

The ACC (like the SEC and Big 12) has a pro rata agreement with ESPN (Per Burke Magnus of ESPN, there may be slight differences in those agreements).

The pro rata designates all new members get a full Tier 1 media rights share from Day One.

In the ACC's case, one pro rata share is $24M annually ($24M x 3 new members = $72M).

Of that $72M, about $17M would go to Cal and Stanford (roughly a 30% share and a travel stipend of about $1.5M). SMU wouldn't get ****.

So the total amount for the existing 14.5 schools to divvy up would be around $55M (plus whatever increases come from additional distribution of the ACCN).

Bottom line: It's a small turkey and however Jim Phillips carves it up, there's gonna be a problem
 
Last edited:
Advertisement
Rickd said:
The B10 example of OSU / Md / Rutgers is used as a prime example of the inequity of the current model.

Rutgers barely averages 800,000 viewers per game and OSU will grab as many as 6 million. Should be an interesting next few years.
Click to expand...

Everybody gets the same media rights share works when the pie is big enough: See SEC, where Sankey sends the same check to UF and Vandy every year.

Everybody gets the same media rights share doesn't work when the pie isn't big enough: See ACC, where FSU's complaint is that it doesn't make as much as UF. If the Noles were making as much as the Gators, they wouldn't give a **** what BC and Wake were getting.

The problem is the ACC pie is too small for schools that want to compete on the highest level
 
Hold My Beer said:
Everybody gets the same media rights share works when the pie is big enough: See SEC, where Sankey sends the same check to UF and Vandy every year.

Everybody gets the same media rights share doesn't work when the pie isn't big enough: See ACC, where FSU's complaint is that it doesn't make as much as UF. If the Noles were making as much as the Gators, they wouldn't give a **** what BC and Wake were getting.

The problem is the ACC pie is too small for schools that want to compete on the highest level
Click to expand...
I know what the current media distribution practice is .... BUT there are already discussions amongst B10 AD's regarding the "inequity" of the current model ... and the example THEY POINTED TO is OSU / Michigan and Md / Rutgers. Makes no sense for Rutgers with barely 800,000 viewers per game to get the same MEDIA PAYOUT as schools that average 6 million per game.
 
Advertisement
Back
Top