MEGA Conference Realignment and lawsuits Megathread(Its still personal)

[Hold My Beer]

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.

Why do the Jags get the same media rights share as the Cowboys — and have been since they came in the league? Ain't that inequity?

I do think what may happen is schools who make the CFP will get an additional slice of the revenue that goes back to the conference pot, i.e "rewards for on-field success"

One other thing: There always will be fewer haves than have-nots. Where are Ohio State and Michigan and USC and Penn State gonna get the votes to redistribute the media rights money?

(Not trying to change your mind or go against your sources. Just having a discussion here )

 

[Hold My Beer]

"The Harvard of the South" is a reality. I love the Ivy League!!

Dook
Wake
Vandy
Rice
Tulane
Emory

Home-and-home every year.

Instead of JRS, we'll play wherever it is Coral Gables HS plays. Maybe even some doubleheaders just for fun.

Blake James will come back as AD

 

[AuoraCane]

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

That's not the price to ESPN. That's what those three schools will be paid. The reported price tag is $72+/- million. ($24 +/- million each). But yea still less than what FOXy had to pay Oregon/WA.

 

[Rickd]

Why do the Jags get the same media rights share as the Cowboys — and have been since they came in the league? Ain't that inequity?

I do think what may happen is schools who make the CFP will get an additional slice of the revenue that goes back to the conference pot, i.e "rewards for on-field success"

One other thing: There always will be fewer haves than have-nots. Where are Ohio State and Michigan and USC and Penn State gonna get the votes to redistribute the media rights money?

(Not trying to change your mind or go against your sources. Just having a discussion here )

This was a discussion amongst B10 AD's ... not some random twitter subscribers. At some point in the not too distant future the media partners aren't going to be able to continue increasing the annual payouts being agreed to in these new media contracts. Schools like Vandy are floating by with minimal investment in their programs and minimal success ... while Georgia and Bama are investing boatloads of $$$. Stands to reason that as the arms race has escalated that the spoils will eventually be distributed a bit more on the "based on success" model.

 

[Dream School]

How again do these 3 schools joining ACC raise payout to $72MM/yr?

It's not the schools it's the time slot.

ESPN has the chance to have Miami, FSU, Clemson, +whatever other random ACC team is ranked at the time, play by themselves in a 10pm eastern window. Was anyone watching 10p Oregon/Stanford outside of California or Oregon before? Probably not. USC/Cal wasn't moving the needle for the east coast population centers. Will a ton of viewers from the south watch undefeated Clemson/Stanford at 10p? Yeah probably. It's about getting big college football names from college football crazed states watching late at night. They already have the Pac 12 After Dark sickos and degens, this might add more causal viewership. In theory.

 

[Cane6]

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

I like that scenario better than 3 crap schools getting added for a marginal increase in money makes it more difficult for Miami fsu Clemson to leave

But I don’t trust university presidents to read into details

 

[USNAVYCANE]

I’d be ok with Miami taking a half share or less for 5/7 years to join the B1G or sec right now

 

[Rickd]

I’d be ok with Miami taking a half share or less for 5/7 years to join the B1G or sec right now

Not if they have to PAY $300M or some crazy buyout figure.

 

[Hold My Beer]

That's not the price to ESPN. That's what those three schools will be paid. The reported price tag is $72+/- million. ($24 +/- million each). But yea still less than what FOXy had to pay Oregon/WA.

???

ESPN will pay out $72M if the ACC expands with three schools.

But the three schools will only get a combined ~$17M (~8.5M each to the Bay Area schools and nothing to SMU) from the ACC's distributions.

The ACC would divvy up the other ~55M to the current 14.5 schools.

It would only cost the B1G FOXy something like $20M to add Cal-Stan since (apparently) there is no pro rata agreement in place.

The B1G FOXy could then turn around and negotiate another TV deal in an open window with four more schools (UO, UW, Cal, Stan) available as inventory

 

[AuoraCane]

???

ESPN will be out $72M if the ACC expands with three schools.

But the three schools will only get a combined ~$17M (~8.5M each to the Bay Area schools and nothing to SMU) from the ACC's distributions.

The ACC would divvy up the other ~55M to the current 14.5 schools.

It would only cost the B1G FOXy something like $20M to add Cal-Stan since (apparently) there is no pro rata agreement in place.

The B1G FOXy could then turn around and negotiate another TV deal in an open window with four more schools (UO, UW, Cal, Stan) available as inventory

Ahhh gotcha. Your thought process hit me right after I hit post reply.

 

[TooColdToHold]

I’m sure Clemson continues to work on an exit plan, but they continue to keep it classy and close to the vest when making public comments. Every school except FSU is taking the same approach.

 

[USNAVYCANE]

Not if they have to PAY $300M or some crazy buyout figure.

I mean if we didn’t have to pay that

 

[Hold My Beer]

I think the B1G is simply waiting to see how the ACC's vote for/against expansion goes. They can get Stanford and Cal for chicken feed because the ACC's offer is even weaker.

If the expansion vote fails, then the B1G waits out Oregon State and Washington State jumping to the MWC before adding Stanford and Cal (and thus avoiding even more blood on the hands for killing the Pac-12)

If the expansion vote passes, then the B1G may have to speed up its process of adding Stanford and Cal, perhaps even before OSU and WSU "officially" join the MWC.

This is basically the same deal where U-Dub and Oregon were holding out for Arizona (and ASU and Utah) to leave first and go to the Big 12 to where the Huskies and Ducks could say "but we had no choice" when they bailed on the Pac-12

 

[Hold My Beer]

Or what about this scenario?

All 14.5 ACC schools vote "yes" on expansion, then the B1G steps up and grabs Stanford and Cal (who don't want to go to the ACC anyway).

What does Jim Phillips do then?

Ross Dellinger from Yahoo Sports mentioned an ACC source told him the conference could invite only SMU

So then you got 15 schools divvying up $24M.

WTF difference is that gonna make?

What other school out there in a G5 conference can afford/risk taking zero media rights dollars to join a conference on shaky ground?

This whole "plan" is some make-believe **** that ain't ever gonna work.

DanRad just needs to have our ducks in a row and bags packed if/when we get a call from the SEC or B1G

 

[Empirical Cane]

It's not the schools it's the time slot.

ESPN has the chance to have Miami, FSU, Clemson, +whatever other random ACC team is ranked at the time, play by themselves in a 10pm eastern window. Was anyone watching 10p Oregon/Stanford outside of California or Oregon before? Probably not. USC/Cal wasn't moving the needle for the east coast population centers. Will a ton of viewers from the south watch undefeated Clemson/Stanford at 10p? Yeah probably. It's about getting big college football names from college football crazed states watching late at night. They already have the Pac 12 After Dark sickos and degens, this might add more causal viewership. In theory.

Call me skeptical friend. Teams cant play in two time slots at once. Only die hard fans are gonna watch their team at 2300EST.

 

[Empirical Cane]

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

SMU won't tolerate $0 forever. In addition, variable program costs for everyone increase just in travel alone.

 

[calinative umstudent]

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.

Yes, but most are already making more money in the ACC than they could possibly hope to make elsewhere. So for Boston College, who likely has no shot at B12, they’d vote yes because it makes ACC (where they’ll make most money) more likely to survive.

 

[calinative umstudent]

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.

You need 4 No votes. They could have strategically said they’d vote no just to reduce Stanford/Cals cut even further. We don’t know.

NCSt if they actually got an extra $5M per year likely would make more than even a partial P2 distribution. And it significantly decreases the chances of ACC dissolving. That means they could also count on receiving FSU/Clemson/Miamis payout for exit fee.

Idk what Miami will or won’t vote. But really we aren’t leaving the ACC for 24 season. So voting yes does get us more money. The negative is that it basically takes conference dissolution off the table. It doesn’t really change anything else. If we are confident in challenging GOR in court or settling for sibstantially less than people think, paying the exit fee to join Big10/SEC is still no brained

 

[SFbayCane]

"The Harvard of the South" is a reality. I love the Ivy League!!

People think Im joking but Im not. People thinking UM is going to get an invitation to join the Big Ten or SEC are living in denial.

I said from the beginning that our best hope is to get into the Big XII and form a new rivalry with UCF. Now it appears that ship has sailed. Now Im leaning towards a new conference of schools like UM, Stanford, and a few others that want to be considered Ivy League level with slightly better sports programs.

We'll see. I truly hope that I'm wrong but it's just so very rare that I am.

 

[AuoraCane]

People think Im joking but Im not. People thinking UM is going to get an invitation to join the Big Ten or SEC are living in denial.

I said from the beginning that our best hope is to get into the Big XII and form a new rivalry with UCF. Now it appears that ship has sailed. Now Im leaning towards a new conference of schools like UM, Stanford, and a few others that want to be considered Ivy League level with slightly better sports programs.

We'll see. I truly hope that I'm wrong but it's just so very rare that I am.

Huh and get paid less money??? Better off staying in the ACC til 2036.