Expansion madness continues!

[Deleted11512]

When you look at the expansion that has happened over the years it boils down to 2 absolutes:

1. They always happen at the END of a media deal. Why?? BC doing it in the middle is very risky and very expensive. Why would any conference take on that risk if they don't have to?? Just wait it out when the risk is mitigated. Remember, these are athletic departments that aim to spend every dollar they bring in. Whatever they have to spend on exit fees/legal fees they're not spending on their programs. They're not large, multi national corporations sitting on hordes of cash.

2. They're never loudly publicized. There may be whispers in the weeks leading up, but it's NEVER the AD/BOD out there making threats (like the idiots at FSU). Typically if you're working on a move you don't want it in the market place until it's done.

The two lead me to believe that nobody is leaving the ACC anytime soon. FSU is acting as a caged animal.

 

[Deleted11512]

Sankey told A&M to shut up and take it when the league added Texas.

Neither Clemson nor FSU is TX. He told them that b/c it added to the per school distribution. Prevailing thought is that adding Clem and FSU would NOT do that, so there's really no need for them.

 

[18IsTheMan]

Neither Clemson nor FSU is TX. He told them that b/c it added to the per school distribution. Prevailing thought is that adding Clem and FSU would NOT do that, so there's really no need for them.

I don't fully disagree. It depends on who you ask. Some believe they would increase per/team revenue. Some don't. Florida State IS a major brand still, in spite of recent struggles.

 

[gamecock stock]

Sankey told A&M to shut up and take it when the league added Texas.

That's a somewhat different situation. Texas is THE school in that state. So much so that they could form their own network. And I don't think that TAM has the pull that charter members Florida and Georgia have, especially if those 2 plus South Carolina and Kentucky formed a pact to keep out certain schools. This is one of those situations where we don't know what we don't know.

 

[18IsTheMan]

That's a somewhat different situation. Texas is THE school in that state. So much so that they could form their own network. And I don't think that TAM has the pull that charter members Florida and Georgia have, especially if those 2 plus South Carolina and Kentucky formed a pact to keep out certain schools. This is one of those situations where we don't know what we don't know.

Those are important distinctions to make, for sure. I guess my point is, if Sankey determines it's good for the league's bottom line, it won't matter what we think.

 

[Deleted11512]

That's a somewhat different situation. Texas is THE school in that state. So much so that they could form their own network. And I don't think that TAM has the pull that charter members Florida and Georgia have, especially if those 2 plus South Carolina and Kentucky formed a pact to keep out certain schools. This is one of those situations where we don't know what we don't know.

True. The wishes of one school won't outweigh the finances of every other member. However, the voices of 4 strong members may be enough to whip votes.

 

[Deleted11512]

The ACC held an exploratory call this morning on adding Stanford/Cal. They are "still evaluating" the decision. While there wasn't a vote, perhaps enough potential interest to keep the conversation moving along.

 

[18IsTheMan]

The ACC held an exploratory call this morning on adding Stanford/Cal. They are "still evaluating" the decision. While there wasn't a vote, perhaps enough potential interest to keep the conversation moving along.

Pat Forde thinks it makes sense b/c there is academic alignment and b/c Stanford and Cal are monsters in Olympic sports. That may enough to offset the lack of football prowess.

Of course, you have the logistics. But if the Big 10 can do it, why not the ACC?

It seems they should be able to renegotiate their deal with ESPN and bump the money up considerably from what they agreed to 7 years ago before the market totally blew up like it is today. It still would be considerably less than what the SEC or Big 10 is getting but it might be enough to stave off extinction. The conference does have name power with teams like FSU, Clemson, Duke and UNC. Stanford and Cal would get partial shares but would certainly eventually want a full share.

This is all assuming ESPN is in a financial position to be handing out more money.

 

[Deleted11512]

Pat Forde thinks it makes sense b/c there is academic alignment and b/c Stanford and Cal are monsters in Olympic sports. That may enough to offset the lack of football prowess.

Of course, you have the logistics. But if the Big 10 can do it, why not the ACC?

It seems they should be able to renegotiate their deal with ESPN and bump the money up considerably from what they agreed to 7 years ago before the market totally blew up like it is today. It still would be considerably less than what the SEC or Big 10 is getting but it might be enough to stave off extinction. The conference does have name power with teams like FSU, Clemson, Duke and UNC. Stanford and Cal would get partial shares but would certainly eventually want a full share.

This is all assuming ESPN is in a financial position to be handing out more money.

There are many possibilities. Stanford and Cal don't really have any other options. I think you're right with the partial shares. The best way to eat an elephant is a bite at a time. I still stand by my opinion that they don't have any other options in the ACC currently either. So you might as well pick up these two, give them partials, increase the current programs by a few million and see if you can't replicate that process until it gets closer to 2036.

 

[92Pony]

Ouch. Can we trade with Clem?? Sheesh.

I do think once this happens the two conferences will work together on a media deal like the NFL. It makes no sense for them to compete with each other. Make the networks compete for one product.

We're further east than most everyone in the South and East divisions. And why would Miami, UF, and FSU be in the East and not South.... when they're southernmost of all?

 

[Rogue Cock]

Pat Forde thinks it makes sense b/c there is academic alignment and b/c Stanford and Cal are monsters in Olympic sports. That may enough to offset the lack of football prowess.

Of course, you have the logistics. But if the Big 10 can do it, why not the ACC?

It seems they should be able to renegotiate their deal with ESPN and bump the money up considerably from what they agreed to 7 years ago before the market totally blew up like it is today. It still would be considerably less than what the SEC or Big 10 is getting but it might be enough to stave off extinction. The conference does have name power with teams like FSU, Clemson, Duke and UNC. Stanford and Cal would get partial shares but would certainly eventually want a full share.

This is all assuming ESPN is in a financial position to be handing out more money.

They really don’t have to renegotiate with ESPN. Conference networks still have subscription revenues based on population of a new market. If the market is big enough, the ACCN simply has to be in it….regardless of who, if any, watches it. It’s not going to be SEC or B1G type money but it will help a good bit.

 

[18IsTheMan]

They really don’t have to renegotiate with ESPN. Conference networks still have subscription revenues based on population of a new market. If the market is big enough, the ACCN simply has to be in it….regardless of who, if any, watches it. It’s not going to be SEC or B1G type money but it will help a good bit.

Yeah, good point. It was pointed out in another thread about the addition of SMU to the ACC that the DFW area has surpassed 8 million and is on track to be #3 nationally within a decade. That is a MASSIVE market, whether folks are watching SMU or not.

 

[Deleted11512]

They really don’t have to renegotiate with ESPN. Conference networks still have subscription revenues based on population of a new market. If the market is big enough, the ACCN simply has to be in it….regardless of who, if any, watches it. It’s not going to be SEC or B1G type money but it will help a good bit.

True. I'm not sure ESPN would view them any more valuable of a conference for adding Cal/Stan/SMU, but the carriage fees alone would be a nice bump.

 

[Rogue Cock]

True. I'm not sure ESPN would view them any more valuable of a conference for adding Cal/Stan/SMU, but the carriage fees alone would be a nice bump.

Thanks, I had forgotten what they were called.

 

[Deleted11512]

Thanks, I had forgotten what they were called.

I was thinking about it this morning...we've all turned into lawyers, athletic directors, university presidents, and TV execs overnight!!