VT is a land-grant school. In most states, those schools have the largest enrollment.
ACC has six schools with undergrad enrollment below 15K and five schools between 15K and 20K. That doesnât drive a lot of eyeballs to the screen when 11 of 15 (or 10 of 14 for football) schools are below 20K. League schools should be very fortunate to have an ACC Network with so few living alums.
1 Like
Eight schools need a place to go.
There is no sound financial reason for either the SEC or B1G to expand for the foreseeable future. They maximized per school payouts for new TV deals by adding Texas/OU and USC/UCLA, respectively.
The next big pot of money is from expanding the playoff. This will give both leagues multiple opportunities to get two or more teams invited every season. Why expand beyond 16 members, thereby, producing diminishing payouts for each school?
Notre Dame is the only school that can move the needle and they are not interested in joining a conference for football.
I donât see ACC schools going anywhere for a number of years. ACC fans should stop complaining and push the ADs to invest consistently in football to obtain better results. If Miami or FSU were performing at or near Clemsonâs level over the past 6 or 7 years, the ACC would have a much better deal with ESPN. In the short term, until the league produces better play, lease out the ACC Network to the Pac-12. It would expand the âin-the-footprintâ designation for both conferences and produce greater revenue to share as a partnership.
8 Likes
AgreeâŠ
How are the ACC teams supposed to get better when bottom tier SEC and BIG schools can outspend them in everything. The train has left the station.
7 Likes
It does make it very challenging, but there are other sources of money besides the tv contracts.
Miami has been blowing through those other sources and my understanding is that FSUs financial situation is a mess. And again big and sec teams have those too
3 Likes
Wasnât saying any of this is imminent, just that it could all collapse suddenly and quickly (down the road). If any combo of UNCheat/â â â â /UVa/Clemson/FSU/Miami decide to go â and all are very nice pieces akin to UCLA/USC â then everyone might head for the exits and the GOR becomes meaningless. And itâs not just B10 and SEC, the Big12 could easily come after schools if the ACC starts crumbling.
My point was just the 8-leaving scenario isnât as far fetched as people make it.
4 Likes
In terms of conference realignment and the future of the ACC going forward, I think Step 1 is ND deciding what they want to do, but 1A is that the Big12âs TV contract ends in about 2.5 years.
Because 8 teams need to leave the ACC for greener pastures to end the GOR and thereâs no chance the B1G and SEC see 8 ACC teams good enough to take. They only want to take schools valuable enough to increase the size of the conference financial pie and thereâs no way UVA (and probably not UNCheat, either) have valuable enough rights that either conference could pay $100M and still increase the pie for everyone else.
The exception to this is if either conference gets everyone they want and end up at some annoying number of schools like 23. Then, if it works out that thereâs enough value in going from 23 to 24 to make up for that 24th team falling short of the mark, and the remaining school thatâs the best fit is UVA, then maybe. I think thatâs unlikely, but its possible. And no one wants to go through all this hassle to make whatâs currently a lateral move to the Big12, so itâd be really hard to get to 8 teams wanting to blow up the GOR.
However, what is both possible and actually likely is the Big12 renegotiating their TV contract when it expires after the '24-25 season and walking away with a bunch more money. The ACC, Pac12 and Big12 are currently all decently close in revenue (with the Big12 a little ahead, iirc).
But what if the Big12 hits a home run in negotiations and suddenly gets another $10M/school? Now the gap is big enough that the Big12 carves out a middle tier for itself. Thatâs how you get up to 8 teams wanting to leave the ACC. The B1G and SEC want to maybe take 2 teams each, the Big12 could interested in 4 (since their hurdle to expand their pie is a lot lower, theyâll be interested in more teams than the SEC or B1G). And if it starts to happen, itâll happen fast as everyone is watching to see if this is going to happen and will be racing to the exits, trying to negotiate a landing spot rather than getting stuck out in the cold.
So, unless the ACC and the PAC12 start talking about something serious like merging or whatever in the interim, Iâd look for the end of the '25 season as when the fireworks happen. Worth noting the Pac12âs contract expires at the end of the '24 season. But I donât think itâll matter because theyâre already wounded and going down. Unless something weird happens, like the Pac12 absorbing the ACC to take advantage of the earlier negotiation date, which would result in a total chaos free-for-all, I suspect.
4 Likes
This is one of the most important pieces, but also one Iâm not totally sure about. Iâm not saying UNC and UVA are worth $100 million a year each⊠but Iâm also weirdly not sure they arenât. Being premier flagship universities in two very fast-growing states is pretty attractive. Obviously I think UNC has a stronger case than we do, but as neither of the super conferences have a presence in our states, I could imagine some analyst saying âwell, if you look in the long term and assume X, Y, and Z, UNC and UVA are actually worth acquiring and would grow the pie shares in the long term.â
But maybe thatâs wishful thinking. Itâs just an interesting question of what our actual value is though. Would be interested to read an actual professional assessment of it, but unlikely that will ever be made public.
5 Likes
How did Cincinnati get better with a huge financial differential as a AAC member? Or, Central Florida having to compete in recruiting against the SEC and ACC? Everything doesnât have to be served on a silver platter! Right now, and for the next several years, the differential of revenue is still manageable, and it still requires proper decision making at the administrative and coaching levels to succeed.
For example, Miami just put a major infusion of funds into its football, in terms of annual operating budget, coaching salaries, recruiting, and a continued expansion in facilities, not to mention a very active NIL Collective. Today, the 'Canes are ranked 6th in recruiting according to On3. They just scooped up the nationâs #1 OL prospect, a resident of Alabama, and beat out Saban, Dabo, and Kirby for him. Many of the prospects donât seem as concerned with conference realignment as some on this board.
Along with Miami, Clemson is ranked #5 in recruiting for 2023, with Louisville, FSU, and UNCheat in the top 20. And what must happen with these quality recruiting classes? ACC programs canât squander the talent, as UNCheat has done under Mack Brown. They need to win the key non-conference regular season match ups and bowl games. Thatâs how schools/conferences move the needle.
By the way, if financial disparity was the sole determining factor, the University of Texas-Austin would be sweeping championships in most sports. They have an annual athletics operating budget of over $200M. It is $80M more than Clemson and $150M above Cincinnati. Both of those schools have achieved in football what Texas has not â earned a football playoff spot,
6 Likes
Also research money involved on the Big Ten side. Harder to distill into one round number but Iâve seen some suggest it makes football money look insignificant.
4 Likes
As long as ACC schools have no prospective home to realign in a new conference, it remains far fetched to get â8â schools to walk away from the conference simultaneously. Including 3 founding members, and a 4th that were all together the leagueâs first season of operations.
What is the economic case for the SEC/B1G accepting future schools? And Iâm not discussing ND. As there is absolutely zero evidence coming from Father John Jenkins, the schoolâs president, or AD Jack Swarbrick, that the Irish want to join a conference for football. It is part of that schoolâs DNA and the alumni have contributed sizably for football to remain independent.
There isnât a viable economic case for SEC/B1G to invite any additional schools. With cable/satellite subscribers declining each year, markets are becoming less of a factor in driving income. Yes, there are still a sizable level of on-the-cord subscribers, but you canât make a case for long term growth for a B1G by adding Oregon/Washington or UNCheat/UVA. The addition would represent a lower percentage of per school payouts. It is all about eyeballs, and schools like Texas, OU, and USC will bring them for football and a number of other sports.
Yes, something radical like the Big 12 merging with the Pac-12 is possible, creating an Uber-sized conference. But it is hard to see Sanford and Cal going for such a radical change, as well as it is somewhat of a reach for Oregon/UDub. But would 8-10 ACC schools all join together to jump to the Big 12 as part of forming a new mega-league? Sure, I guess that is possible if configured in a way to keep some since of geographic continuity. And not to mention, it generates the right amount of money. But could such a conference reach $80M to $90M per school with 20+ members?
3 Likes
I totally get your argument. My one quibble is that without us seeing the actual financial analyses of these things, Iâm not one hundred percent sure that this statement is true. Might be likely, but I donât know that itâs certain.
Also, thereâs a ton of things in college football that were largely unimaginable a decade or two ago, but that happened. Not all of them were smart rational decisions by conferences either. So while we can look at the pieces on the board and say âItâs just hard to see X happenâ, well, it could still happen. I realize thatâs not a sound basis for projecting forward, but I just think itâs an interesting exercise to think âIf I were writing this post in 2010, what would I have listed as extremely unlikely or something we just canât see happening.â
All of that is to say, I agree with a lot/most of the points youâve made. I just think I probably see things as somewhat less stable than you do. But thatâs the fun of discussing all of this.
4 Likes
Probably not, but it might be able to reach $60M+. A big step down from B1G and SEC but a big step up from Pac12 and ACC.
2 Likes
I find it highly amusing that the Big XII can claim to be the most stable Mid-3 conference solely because no other conferences want any of their schools. Or the ACC can claim stability because of the GOR and the related awful TV contract itâs attached to. And somehow the PAC-12 might be in a worse position than the Mountain West.
4 Likes
Any of the B12âs remaining schools. Theyâre stable because theyâve already been stripped for parts. Yeah, its wild that everyoneâs weaknesses are now the duct tape keeping them intact.
2 Likes
Remember, neither school has a league TV network that is viable. BTN and SECN are printing money for each league. The ACC wouldnât be over $30M, soon to pass $40M, with out the ACCN. The ACC could get to $60M with its current deal, based upon an expanded playoff structure, several schools performing at a high level for playoff participation and a performance bump at the next âlook-inâ year with ESPN.
3 Likes
I feel like you would know this Mikey. Say there is no ACC in 2-3 years. Who is holding the bag at our new ACC network? Trak shaver and Roman?
3 Likes
You make a great point about being unable to see too far into the future. Thatâs why Iâm not among those trashing John Swofford for making the deal with ESPN in 2016 for 20 years.
First of all, the ACCâs football product wasnât very good when Swofford was negotiating back then in 2015/2016 following Marylandâs departure, along with Louisville joining. Sure, Clemson had ascended to the top of college football, but FSU was in decline, with Jimbo Fisher screaming at his administration constantly to invest, or the Noles would be unable to remain competitive at the top. Miami was stuck in mediocrity, and no other school had emerged to even put together a consistent 3 or 4 years of 9 or 10-win seasons consecutively to be considered among the top 10-12 programs.
Add to that, the ACC has the smallest living collective alumni among the Power-5 conferences. And Swofford was pushing ESPN to launch a league network. Well, in order for that to happen, Swofford (and ACC Presidents/Chancellors/ADs) agreed to certain concessions â building linear and streaming broadcast production studios on each campus to handle all on-site sporting events, with executive production directed from Bristol. This was an enormous expense for each school. Plus, they had to staff it with full time, experienced professionals, supported with student interns.
Next, ESPN wasnât going to take this level of risk for a short term engagement, they wanted a 20-year commitment, especially with Notre Dame in the mix for all sports but football. ESPN would sell it as part of its bundle package. But as we know, it took until January for ACCN to become fully distributed, leaving considerable money on the table for the past three years.
This was a really good deal for the ACC at the time. Swofford didnât want to launch the ACC Network without a proven partner and he was watching first-hand the collapse of the Pac-12 Network, along with the debt it produced for the league over the past 7 years. And quite frankly, if the Pac-12 Network hadnât failed so miserably, with a decent level of income flowing from it, as well as the playoff expansion was agreed upon last December as expected, USC/UCLA very likely would have remained in the conference.
Andy Staples of The Athletic wrote this morning, and Iâll borrow a small piece of his article. He said, relating to the ACC: âIn the short term, I donât think anyoneâs going anywhere. Iâve yet to hear an airtight legal argument for getting out of the grant of rights dealâŠIf Iâm the Big Ten or SEC, though, right now Iâm happy where Iâm atâŠYouâre already lapping the field financially, you will have a vice grip on any legislative preferences [FBS/CFP], you donât need other schools to survive and nobodyâs leaving you for greener pastures.â
ACCâs best case is to convince the Pac-12 to stay together, offer the ACC Network platform for their content. The 3-hour time difference offers some good working blocks of continuous time for both leagues. Having both conferences realize an expanded âin-the-footprintâ income with a partnership is a plus. Both leagues maintain their current structure, and it keeps the Big 12 marginalized.
Then, the ACC needs to focus on the football assets it already has, which are significant if they can capitalize upon them â Clemson, Miami, FSU, ND for 5 games per season, head-to-head match ups with SEC schools, and a collection of mid-tier football programs that need to produce better out-of-conference results.
7 Likes