MEGA Conference Realignment and lawsuits Megathread(Its still personal)

[Handsome Squidbum]

You're comparing a year where UNC had their second best record in Football since 1997, and Miami had our second worst record since 1997... lol.
That chart I posted accounts for 10 years of ratings, and results had Miami at 6, and UNC at 33 among ACC/Pac/B12 teams.

Sure B10/SEC may have a what have you done for me lately approach, but it certainly wont be based solely off 1 or 2 years. If it were, Miami might be above UNC for basketball lol

Miami also had the biggest budget ever in school history in 2022 yet the # of average viewers dropped by almost half between 2021 and 2022. Here's another good analysis by Pat Forde that ranks overall desirability of a program in terms of conference realignment. Includes football ratings over the last five years.

Ranking all 69 Power 5 schools by college sports value - Sports Illustrated

If the college sports started over, who would be most coveted? We break it down with a formula.

www.si.com

UNC is slightly ahead of UM. Sure you can quibble with Fordes rankings or argue that your viewership #s from 2010-2020 should carry more weight for a conference commissioner than 2017 to 2022. Maybe it will, maybe it won't. Point is you said there is zero argument for either the B1G or SEC to take UNC over UM. I don't think it's as slam dunk a case as you do.

UM hasn't invested in sports for the vast majority of its history and it was only last year, after being embarrassed by a TV announcer , that the UM brass said its going to put money into winning. Like I said, if I'm a conference commissioner, I'd wait to see a sustained commitment over multiple years to verify that the change is sincere and not just a one time surge to take the heat off the program. If so, then the program can get an invite the next time around. The big 2 dont need UM. We needed to impress and we haven't. It's not personal, it's just business.

 

[calinative umstudent]

Miami also had the biggest budget ever in school history in 2022 yet the # of average viewers dropped by almost half between 2021 and 2022. Here's another good analysis by Pat Forde that ranks overall desirability of a program in terms of conference realignment. Includes football ratings over the last five years.

Ranking all 69 Power 5 schools by college sports value - Sports Illustrated

If the college sports started over, who would be most coveted? We break it down with a formula.

www.si.com

UNC is slightly ahead of UM. Sure you can quibble with Fordes rankings or argue that your viewership #s from 2010-2020 should carry more weight for a conference commissioner than 2017 to 2022. Maybe it will, maybe it won't. Point is you said there is zero argument for either the B1G or SEC to take UNC over UM. I don't think it's as slam dunk a case as you do.

UM hasn't invested in sports for the vast majority of its history and it was only last year, after being embarrassed by a TV announcer , that the UM brass said its going to put money into winning. Like I said, if I'm a conference commissioner, I'd wait to see a sustained commitment over multiple years to verify that the change is sincere and not just a one time surge to take the heat off the program. If so, then the program can get an invite the next time around. The big 2 dont need UM. We needed to impress and we haven't. It's not personal, it's just business.

Actually I said there is zero argument for UVA. I said there isn't a great argument for UNC if this is primarily Football oriented. Which unless you ONLY look at last years results, I still don't think there is.

 

[Handsome Squidbum]

Actually I said there is zero argument for UVA. I said there isn't a great argument for UNC if this is primarily Football oriented. Which unless you ONLY look at last years results, I still don't think there is.

Fair enough. I hope you are right.

 

[Ispyin]

So much pussification in this thread

 

[Angry Ibis]

So much pussification in this thread

Everything is so ominous…. Can’t do anything until 2036 and then we’ll be only team left in the ACC … woe is us!

 

[TampaJunk]

Notre Dame would never join the SEC. They care about academic rankings.

acc or big ten or stay independent.

I don’t think the SEC would even invite them- it’s a moot point.

They belong in the BIG.

 

[TampaJunk]

They dont need ND that’s for sure but they would absolutely figure out a way to take ND as a full member if they wanted in Just to keep them out of the big ten. now one thing for sure is neither the big ten or sec would do this all sports but football things - they would either be in all the way or not- no “just the tip baby” crap

but Notre dame would not go SEC - if they did anything If acc implodes and the landscape somehow forced them it would be big 10

I hope they stay independent and continue to crap out.

 

[Rellyrell]

Thanks for this, over a 10 year span which we've been awful in we're still pulling Clemson level viewership (while they've been at the highest they've ever been).

I did some digging and pulled some data for some recent seasons. Not much analysis as to why these seasons other than trying to characterize them as Overperforming/Average/Awful seasons. I wanted to see how the ratings would fluctuate:

For 2022 the numbers are god awful (along with the record). Only 3 games that really mattered in terms of ratings - we can't have seasons like this and expect to get in to a P2 conference.
View attachment 232727

2017 was arguably the best season we've had in 20 years and it shows that when we're on we're an extremely attractive draw. I'm really hoping that with the $ the university is spending this type of season will be the norm moving forward. I think if we start putting in consecutive 9-10 win seasons it'll be pretty hard to be left out given the amount of eyeballs we bring.

View attachment 232728

2021 was your average season the last 20 years. Some hype to begin the season along with some high tier OOC games but ultimately we fizzled out.
View attachment 232729

Noticed both in 2021 & 2022 the highest viewed games were against SEC teams & Clemson; so the ? is were these viewers organically from our fan base or our opponents’? I think we know the answer to that.

 

[CaneThang2020]

I'm sure football will be the main driver. It's a "what have you done for me lately" world.



Let's look at 2022. UM announces it is finally making a commitment to football, all that noise. And what was the viewership result after a 12 game season?

Average # of viewers per week -
#49 UNC - 849k
#59 UM - 609k

And look at the list of teams that cracked 4 million viewers in 2022. From the ACC,

Clemson 3x
FSU 2x
Nc St, Pitt, Syracuse

Certainly matchups have a lot to do with it. Syracuse probably makes the list because of Clemson. Yet UM doesn't make the list- my guess is everyone knew Clemson was going to stomp UM into a mud hole and no one wanted to see that, but they expected Syracuse would be competitive with Clemson (and they were).

And the other interesting numbers are in 2021. UM and UNC drew about the same number of average viewers (a bit above 1 million). So UM under Diaz had a little under twice as many average viewers per game than UM under Cristobal.

It kinda makes sense though. From personal observation - when UM started rallying at mid point of 2021 , I got interested and watched every game. In 2022, I turned the game off at halftime of MTSU and didnt watch another full game after that. Obvious how the season would turn out.

Sounds to me like you're part of the problem of why we can't get a B1G or SEC invite....j/k lol. Seriously though, it's hard to accurately describe what happened during 2022 if we don't watch the games....even though it hurts like heck to sit through it.

Here's to hoping 2023 will be 2-3 games better than 2022 W/L total.

 

[calinative umstudent]

Noticed both in 2021 & 2022 the highest viewed games were against SEC teams & Clemson; so the ? is were these viewers organically from our fan base or our opponents’? I think we know the answer to that.

That’s why you look at averages or medians. In which case Miami is 6th and still above most… we have the higher peak and higher median/avg. and if we joined the SEC we have all games closer to the peak and above the median than we currently do as far as viewer interest is concerned

 

[Rellyrell]

That’s why you look at averages or medians. In which case Miami is 6th and still above most… we have the higher peak and higher median/avg. and if we joined the SEC we have all games closer to the peak and above the median than we currently do as far as viewer interest is concerned

I’m not sure where u’re getting that info from.

 

[DerpaDerp]

If the ACC were smart. And it isn't. It would offer ND a great deal then say you have 48 hours to consider it, or you are out of the league as of 2024.

That ends this debacle one way or another. If they say no, which they wouldn't then you fly to the WC and sit with the Pac8 (or what's left of it) and hammer out a coast to coast league and tell ESPN and whomever else, to start opening the wallet. You've got from 12 noon to 9pm start times covered in one fell swoop.

there are two outcomes to a merger:

— The grant-of-rights remains in place as incoming Pac-12 schools commit to the partnership until 2036. (LOL)

— The grant-of-rights is broken in order to force a shorter contract cycle and a renegotiation of the ACC’s current deal. (Likely)

Could it happen? A majority of the ACC’s 14 full-time members would need to approve — because ESPN probably wouldn’t break the deal willingly.

Is there a way to construct a merger that benefits ESPN in both value and duration? Perhaps.

That said, you would not discount the potential for a merger down the road. In fact, much of the Pac-12’s current calculation with its media rights negotiations is designed to set the conference up for the next stage in the evolution of college football.

That phase could begin in the late 2020s or early 2030s, at the start of the next media contract cycle for the Big Ten, Big 12 and Pac-12.

In that world, the Big Ten doesn’t create a western arm (with Oregon, Washington, Cal and Stanford), and the Pac-12 members are willing to sign a grant-of-rights deal into the mid-to-late 2030s.

If the Big Ten doesn’t expand, the chances of the SEC growing again are diminished, adding stability on the ACC’s side. USC and UCLA then, have taken a B1G ride and the cost factors and travel expenditures might become more prohibitive making other schools consider doing a merger which keeps their western arm intact.

Why would ESPN want to help the ACC and Pac-12 on a new network?

Money and the ability to stabilize two of its main brands is the answer.

The ACC Network has at present about 48 million subscribers and could benefit from the number of homes they could add in Arizona, California, Colorado, Oregon, Utah and Washington.

In the states where there is an ACC team the network is getting about $2 per month from its cable deals through ESPN. Put the Pac teams in there and the fees will go a bit higher while adding new subs producing some impressive dollar per month figures.

East Division Clemson Duke North Carolina Florida State Miami Virginia Virginia Tech Syracuse Boston College NCSU Pittsburgh

West Division Cal Stanford Oregon Washington Utah Arizona Arizona State Louisville Washington State Oregon State Colorado

3 divisions could also be done including UL, CU, UVA, VT, and a few others keeping the ACC intact
Miami would be in the southern division with Clemson and FSU. 8 teams per division.

 

[Cryptical Envelopment]

If the ACC were smart. And it isn't. It would offer ND a great deal then say you have 48 hours to consider it, or you are out of the league as of 2024.

That ends this debacle one way or another. If they say no, which they wouldn't then you fly to the WC and sit with the Pac8 (or what's left of it) and hammer out a coast to coast league and tell ESPN and whomever else, to start opening the wallet. You've got from 12 noon to 9pm start times covered in one fell swoop.

there are two outcomes to a merger:

— The grant-of-rights remains in place as incoming Pac-12 schools commit to the partnership until 2036. (LOL)

— The grant-of-rights is broken in order to force a shorter contract cycle and a renegotiation of the ACC’s current deal. (Likely)

Could it happen? A majority of the ACC’s 14 full-time members would need to approve — because ESPN probably wouldn’t break the deal willingly.

Is there a way to construct a merger that benefits ESPN in both value and duration? Perhaps.

That said, you would not discount the potential for a merger down the road. In fact, much of the Pac-12’s current calculation with its media rights negotiations is designed to set the conference up for the next stage in the evolution of college football.

That phase could begin in the late 2020s or early 2030s, at the start of the next media contract cycle for the Big Ten, Big 12 and Pac-12.

In that world, the Big Ten doesn’t create a western arm (with Oregon, Washington, Cal and Stanford), and the Pac-12 members are willing to sign a grant-of-rights deal into the mid-to-late 2030s.

If the Big Ten doesn’t expand, the chances of the SEC growing again are diminished, adding stability on the ACC’s side. USC and UCLA then, have taken a B1G ride and the cost factors and travel expenditures might become more prohibitive making other schools consider doing a merger which keeps their western arm intact.

Why would ESPN want to help the ACC and Pac-12 on a new network?

Money and the ability to stabilize two of its main brands is the answer.

The ACC Network has at present about 48 million subscribers and could benefit from the number of homes they could add in Arizona, California, Colorado, Oregon, Utah and Washington.

In the states where there is an ACC team the network is getting about $2 per month from its cable deals through ESPN. Put the Pac teams in there and the fees will go a bit higher while adding new subs producing some impressive dollar per month figures.

East Division Clemson Duke North Carolina Florida State Miami Virginia Virginia Tech Syracuse Boston College NCSU Pittsburgh

West Division Cal Stanford Oregon Washington Utah Arizona Arizona State Louisville Washington State Oregon State Colorado

3 divisions could also be done including UL, CU, UVA, VT, and a few others keeping the ACC intact
Miami would be in the southern division with Clemson and FSU. 8 teams per division.

ND has a contract with the ACC that runs for many more years. So, nope. The end.

But for the sake of argument, so you want to offer Notre Dame a "great deal?" LOL. WTF does that mean? There are no negotiations, no "deals." You join as a full share member, or you don't. Unless you are saying that ND should get a bigger slice of the pie than Clemson, Miami, FSU, UNC, etc? Yeah, that will work lol.

This board is starting to peak!

 

[DerpaDerp]

ND has a contract with the ACC that runs for many more years. So, nope. The end.

But for the sake of argument, so you want to offer Notre Dame a "great deal?" LOL. WTF does that mean? There are no negotiations, no "deals." You join as a full share member, or you don't. Unless you are saying that ND should get a bigger slice of the pie than Clemson, Miami, FSU, UNC, etc? Yeah, that will work lol.

This board is starting to peak!

I am not talking about in or out. It should be painfully obvious without having to spell it out in detail, that the element I was alluding to, was money.

Seeing as to how the lingering conversion regarding FSU and Clemson wanting more money, it would serve to reason that what I was suggesting was a new money deal considering the contract would then be up for renegotiation with the TV contract.

Or do I need to write 6 paragraphs for you to understand what I'm saying?
/asking for a friend

 

[DamnLiesAndStatistics]

I’m not sure where u’re getting that info from.

The point he's trying to make is actually what you made in the original post he was responding to.

"Noticed both in 2021 & 2022 the highest viewed games were against SEC teams & Clemson"

If we're in the SEC, that's what most of our games look like, and that becomes a more relevant metric than our average viewership against BC and Syracuse. The SEC isn't trying to buy Miami. It's trying to buy "Miami vs Florida and Miami vs LSU" (if they were trying to lure us)

Edit* Our games would obviously be less attractive if we were in conference than out of conference, but you get the point. Our current stats aren't necessarily predictive

 

[NorthernVirginiaCane]

If the ACC were smart. And it isn't. It would offer ND a great deal then say you have 48 hours to consider it, or you are out of the league as of 2024.

That ends this debacle one way or another. If they say no, which they wouldn't then you fly to the WC and sit with the Pac8 (or what's left of it) and hammer out a coast to coast league and tell ESPN and whomever else, to start opening the wallet. You've got from 12 noon to 9pm start times covered in one fell swoop.

there are two outcomes to a merger:

— The grant-of-rights remains in place as incoming Pac-12 schools commit to the partnership until 2036. (LOL)

— The grant-of-rights is broken in order to force a shorter contract cycle and a renegotiation of the ACC’s current deal. (Likely)

Could it happen? A majority of the ACC’s 14 full-time members would need to approve — because ESPN probably wouldn’t break the deal willingly.

Is there a way to construct a merger that benefits ESPN in both value and duration? Perhaps.

That said, you would not discount the potential for a merger down the road. In fact, much of the Pac-12’s current calculation with its media rights negotiations is designed to set the conference up for the next stage in the evolution of college football.

That phase could begin in the late 2020s or early 2030s, at the start of the next media contract cycle for the Big Ten, Big 12 and Pac-12.

In that world, the Big Ten doesn’t create a western arm (with Oregon, Washington, Cal and Stanford), and the Pac-12 members are willing to sign a grant-of-rights deal into the mid-to-late 2030s.

If the Big Ten doesn’t expand, the chances of the SEC growing again are diminished, adding stability on the ACC’s side. USC and UCLA then, have taken a B1G ride and the cost factors and travel expenditures might become more prohibitive making other schools consider doing a merger which keeps their western arm intact.

Why would ESPN want to help the ACC and Pac-12 on a new network?

Money and the ability to stabilize two of its main brands is the answer.

The ACC Network has at present about 48 million subscribers and could benefit from the number of homes they could add in Arizona, California, Colorado, Oregon, Utah and Washington.

In the states where there is an ACC team the network is getting about $2 per month from its cable deals through ESPN. Put the Pac teams in there and the fees will go a bit higher while adding new subs producing some impressive dollar per month figures.

East Division Clemson Duke North Carolina Florida State Miami Virginia Virginia Tech Syracuse Boston College NCSU Pittsburgh

West Division Cal Stanford Oregon Washington Utah Arizona Arizona State Louisville Washington State Oregon State Colorado

3 divisions could also be done including UL, CU, UVA, VT, and a few others keeping the ACC intact
Miami would be in the southern division with Clemson and FSU. 8 teams per division.

Just to humor you, I like the idea of dumping Wake, but why dumping Georgia Tech? They actually have a ton of potential.

And why add Washington State and Oregon State? Send them to the Mountain West ...

 

[Cryptical Envelopment]

I am not talking about in or out. It should be painfully obvious without having to spell it out in detail, that the element I was alluding to, was money.

Seeing as to how the lingering conversion regarding FSU and Clemson wanting more money, it would serve to reason that what I was suggesting was a new money deal considering the contract would then be up for renegotiation with the TV contract.

Or do I need to write 6 paragraphs for you to understand what I'm saying?
/asking for a friend

You already wrote six paragraphs though, and it didn't work. Actually you wrote a lot more than six. And you literally wrote that the ACC should put a gun to ND's head and even gamed it out, specifically saying that ND "wouldn't say no" before you went off the reservation.

I explained why an ND ultimatum is a non-starter. ND is never, ever joining this dying husk of a conference under any circumstances, even if they could make more money with us than on their own or in the B1G. It's a suicide mission, a ticking time bomb. An acid-doused game of musical chairs with a hint of Russian roulette. And no, the GOR isn't going to be allowed to be contracted under any circumstances by the lesser programs that would be harmed.

And the whole merger thing, my god. I jsut skipped that initially for my own sanity. No, the top programs that want to leave the ACC right now are not going to want to stay because we added the leftover dregs of a USC/UCLA-less Pac-12, as if Oregon, Washington and Colorado, and probably Arizona (****, maybe even Utah) aren't likely to jump ship anyway.

Did you mean "conversation" or "conversion" in your second paragraph? /asking for a friend

Assuming you actually meant the former (if not, then I'm really not sure what you meant), FSU and Clemson, (etc.) don't want more money to stay. Well, they will take it now while we're all stuck in purgatory, even though they know it would be another nail in the coffin for the ACC, because they are out first chance regardless. No revenue sharing adjustment is going to keep them in long-term. They, like everyone else in the biz, knows that a conference that distributes inequitably is a dead conference. It doesn't work. They are just trying to create chaos and instability. It's a chess move. The ACC doesn't work. They want out.

Did I write enough paragraphs for you to understand what I'm saying? I made sure it was six for you! Or do you need more?

 

[Rickd]

You already wrote six paragraphs though, and it didn't work. Actually you wrote a lot more than six. And you literally wrote that the ACC should put a gun to ND's head and even gamed it out, specifically saying that ND "wouldn't say no" before you went off the reservation.

I explained why a ND ultimatum a non-starter. ND is never, ever joining this dying husk of a conference under any circumstances, even if they could make more money with us than on their own or in the B1G. It's a suicide mission, a ticking time bomb. An acid-doused game of musical chairs with a hint of Russian roulette. And no, the GOR isn't going to be allowed to be contracted under any circumstances by the lesser programs that would be harmed.

And the whole merger thing, my god. I jsut skipped that initially for my own sanity. No, the top programs that want to leave the ACC right now are not going to want to stay because we add the leftover dregs of a USC/UCLA-less Pac-12, as if Oregon, Washington and Colorado, and probably Arizona (****, maybe even Utah) aren't likely to jump ship anyway.

Did you mean "conversation" or "conversion" in your second paragraph? /asking for a friend

Assuming you actually meant the former (if not, then I'm really not sure what you meant), FSU and Clemson, (etc.) don't want more money. Well, they will take it now while we're all stuck in purgatory, even though they know it would be another nail in the coffin for the ACC, because they are out first chance regardless. No revenue sharing adjustment is going to keep them in long-term. They, like everyone else in the biz, knows that a conference that distributes inequitably is a dead conference. It doesn't work. They are just trying to create chaos and instability. It's a chess move. The ACC doesn't work. They want out.

Did I write enough paragraphs for you to understand what I'm saying? I made sure it was six for you! Or do you need more?

Believe Derpa has way too much time on his hands. The last thing ND is even vaguely considering is becoming more aligned with the weak ACC conference. Same with the major brands IN the ACC (UM, Clemson, FSU). There is a reason that Radakovich and the Clemson AD have been working on an exit strategy ... because it makes the most sense. All of the fantasy projections of a 3rd "super conference" consisting of UM / FSU / Clemson along with select current ACC and Pac 12 members is just that ... pure fantasy. UM / Clemson / FSU are MAJOR brands and will, in some configuration, run with the big dogs.

 

[No_Fly_Zone]

I am not talking about in or out. It should be painfully obvious without having to spell it out in detail, that the element I was alluding to, was money.

Seeing as to how the lingering conversion regarding FSU and Clemson wanting more money, it would serve to reason that what I was suggesting was a new money deal considering the contract would then be up for renegotiation with the TV contract.

Or do I need to write 6 paragraphs for you to understand what I'm saying?
/asking for a friend

1. How exactly does adding ND to the ACC automatically make the conference's (horrible) TV contract up for renegotiation? Have you actually seen the contract, or at least similar TV contracts? Does the contract expressly provide that adding ACC members triggers a renegotiation of the contract?

2. Are you alluding to providing ND a much larger share of contract funds compared the other ACC members as an enticement? That's bad policy and I suspect schools like UM, FSU, UNC, and Clemson would vote that down.

3. It is my understanding ND football can only contractually join the ACC or remain independent, at least until the grant of rights expires in 2036. That's part of ND's deal to be an ACC school for all sports minus football and ice hockey. This makes it pretty unlikely the ACC could ever threaten to pull ND from its "Olympic sports" contract without paying millions of dollars for a breach of contract (to ND, but also likely to ESPN), though that would depend on the precise contract terms.

4. The time to try and bring ND 100% into the ACC was during the COVID year. The ACC let them off the hook, or maybe the ACC tried but couldn't make the deal. Either way, I doubt the conference will never, ever have better leverage than it did at that moment. If the ACC couldn't convince ND to fully join in 2020, I doubt it will be able to convince ND to fully join the ACC in the next decade plus. Especially considering the ACC's bad TV deal and the fact ND can separately negotiate its own football TV contract with NBC (which expires in 2025). Even in the record-setting COVID season, the ACC only distributed $34.9 million to Notre Dame. That's more than ND gets under its current deal, but nowhere near the projected $60 million/year Sports Business Journal projects ND will land from NBC in 2025.

TLDR? ND has no incentive to join the ACC. There is nothing the ACC can do to force ND's hand. ND would have to be run by some of the dumbest ******* business people in sports to join the ACC (which is impossible, because the dumbest ******* business people in sports apparently work for the ACC).

 

[NorthernVirginiaCane]

If ND is getting $60mm a year just for football (ie they keep getting their distribution from the acc for basketball), then the ACC contract is really really undermarket. I mean, duh, but like $15-$20mm/year undermarket. Not Big Ten money but maybe close enough if they go uneven distributions.

Don't forget ND plays 4-6 ACC teams a year as part of their deal.

Only think that might save the ACC is a Disney bankruptcy.