Expansion/Realignment Talk Heating Up Again
- Thread starter KingWard
- Start date
Let me know when you think it should have happened if that window closes. Meanwhile, David Hale writes today on ESPN+
Last edited:
Yeah, that’s what I’ve been saying. This issue just didn’t pop up on their radar. As soon as the SEC/ESPN 3:30 contract $ was made public they knew they were screwed. They’ve been trying to find a way for a while now.
The great pumpkin ain’t coming.
To get the most up-to-date information on expansion or realignment discussions in any context, I recommend checking reputable news sources, sports news outlets, or relevant websites for the latest updates. Expansion and realignment talks can occur in various industries and fields, so it's essential to specify the context you're interested in for more accurate and current information.
No, the announcement date I referred to is fluid, the intention of movement is solid.
Looks like we’re getting spammed by bots. It’s going on in several other threads as well.Amazingly helpful.
When I was first appraised of this development, I personally thought this short window was entirely too optimistic. However, that is just my personal opinion. I will neither be surprised if it does, or does not happen.
On another issue you inquired about, this is from the article you posted from David Hale.
Although Florida State has worked with several legal teams over the past two years to examine the school's options -- something several other ACC schools have also done
This jives with what I heard back before this group of 7 stuff came out. It's a group of them that have been tearing this thing apart looking for an out, and they're sharing notes. So it's not just FSU's team, or just Clem's team...you've had a very large group of attorneys picking this thing apart with a common goal, and they haven't cracked the code after 2-3 years. At some point, you go to survival mode...which is what I think the P12/ACC talk is about.
I can not speak to the veracity of that statement.
What I do know, if after thorough and exhaustive examinations, if some loopholes have been discovered, it would hardly be to their benefit of the schools and/or legal teams to make such announcements (or intended leaks)until they would be ready to formally and legally challenge the contract.
Absolutely. They would have to determine if the pending litigation is worth it as well. Plan B (holding on for dear life) might seem like the better option to them, even if they could technically get out of it.
If they could get out, and just as an example join the B1G there is absolutely no sound reason to stay in the ACC. 30mil per year vs 100mil per year is a very persuasive argument.
(And I can tell you, there is one school in particular that wants to leave, and the sooner it happens the better. They have absolutely no intention of holding on)
On the surface, yes. It's a no brainer. But it's likely more than just an exit fee and media rights, and it's very likely we'll never know being that the contract isn't public. One reason to stay would be if there were a risk they couldn't operate while in litigation...which I have seen in agreements in my career. The ACC could then say "fine, leave and pay this exit fee. And we're going to handcuff you for at least 2 years with litigation."
I know they want to leave. We'll find out how good their lawyers are.
I still think there's room for 3 power conferences. If the ACC/B12/P12 can get their ducks in a row that would be a great conference. Take the top 6 from each one.
I don't see that, even though I know the ACC has explored some Pac 12 teams (as well as other teams) and found the financial potential not lucrative enough.
Geography might not matter as it used to, but it still matters some. Travel costs. The farther you travel, the more it costs. That applies to fans as well as to teams.
In this regard, as well as in others, the SEC is in the catbird seat way better than anyone else right now. At least on the map, it's a contiguous footprint that is clustered more so than spread out. Just add Oklahoma.
Last edited:
ACC commish Phillips said Thursday they continue to actively look for expansion targets. But as you said, nothing accretive has been found yet. I don't know how much that is true anymore. A flight is a flight. There are really no good options within driving distance. So any expansion is going to add travel costs.I don't see that, even though I know the ACC has explored some Pac 12 teams (as well as other teams) and found the financial potential not lucrative enough.
Geography might not matter as it used to, but it still matters some. Travel costs. The farther you travel, the more it costs. That applies to fans as well as to teams.
In this regard, as well as in others, the SEC is in the catbird seat way better than anyone else right now. At least on the map, it's a contiguous footprint that is clustered more so than spread out. Just add Oklahoma.
At this point, Phillips is reminding me of the one party who refuses to believe they are actually going to be divorced, although they know they are about to get served.
I think they still want to play in front of fans. Fans who have the means and inclination like to do road games. I came to the point where I enjoyed road games more than home games. If there are going to be fewer fans than there used to be due to total cost, schools will change their stadiums over to the NFL concept. But I'll tell you what, I'm just not seeing the Pac 12 and the ACC getting together in a bi-coastal conference. And I don't see where the Big 12 needs either one of them beyond picking up the desirable pieces of a league that's coming apart - not a true merger. I'll admit, I'm thrashing around here a little bit because of all the players and moving pieces involved. I don't know what's going to happen.
Last edited:
A lot of possibilities, that’s for sure. Unfortunately butts in the seats are becoming less and less important.
I do think the B12 needs a couple of bigger names. Who are the big players now? TCU, Baylor, OK St? Eh, who cares.
Just saw this rumor. I'm not vouching for the legitimacy of the content, just passing along what I read.
-FOX Sports wants a national conference to broadcast and not only is pushing for the immediate addition of Oregon / Washington but wants FSU / Clemson / Miami to the extent that FOX will assist in paying a portion of financial exit penalties.
-ESPN is now concerned that they might be getting boxed out of the upcoming bidding for the expanded 16 team college playoffs in 2026 with the threat of
Fox / CBS / NBC outbidding them and leaving them out entirely. That would leave ESPN out of March Madness and the College Football Playoffs. That reality could provide incentive for ESPN to "play nice" and become more flexible on the ACC GOR releases for certain programs.
-FOX Sports wants a national conference to broadcast and not only is pushing for the immediate addition of Oregon / Washington but wants FSU / Clemson / Miami to the extent that FOX will assist in paying a portion of financial exit penalties.
-ESPN is now concerned that they might be getting boxed out of the upcoming bidding for the expanded 16 team college playoffs in 2026 with the threat of
Fox / CBS / NBC outbidding them and leaving them out entirely. That would leave ESPN out of March Madness and the College Football Playoffs. That reality could provide incentive for ESPN to "play nice" and become more flexible on the ACC GOR releases for certain programs.
The rumor I saw had just FSU and Miami from the southeast, but I wouldn't be surprised to see Clemson added in there.
Everything that has happened or will happen in the wake of the SEC's coming expansion to 16 teams in contiguous states will be reactionary and thereby likely inferior. I'll lay that out there right now.
Right off the bat, I admit I know little about conference realignment and claim less.
I THINK that if a certain minimum of schools left the ACC, that would end the GOR. I could be wrong about that. Obviously some ACC schools don't like the current situation, understandably so. I wonder if any thought has been given by the "football-first" schools to leave the ACC as a group to form a new league? I believe they could form a good football league in decent markets without being watered down by basketball.
I THINK that if a certain minimum of schools left the ACC, that would end the GOR. I could be wrong about that. Obviously some ACC schools don't like the current situation, understandably so. I wonder if any thought has been given by the "football-first" schools to leave the ACC as a group to form a new league? I believe they could form a good football league in decent markets without being watered down by basketball.
Yes, and arnt the Bowl games going to be fun, with the sophomore and freshman players of Washington State vs Ohio State. And what will the Sugar Bowl do? Will they go back to having two sec teams play a second time or might the fish out a second rate, Big 12 team to beat up on? The Big 12‘s best will be playing each other, again, in the Orange and Cotton bowls.
Re matches are so interesting. Boy oh boy, won’t new years day be fun!
So if this is the case, 30mil vs 100mil...pay the exit fee....I'm sure there are plenty of multi-millionaires supporting Clemson and FSU also....Heck Clemson just raised an enormous amount of money from boosters....
The flip side is, where does Clemson and FSU go, if boosters pony up the money?
My guess is, the only schools of interest to the SEC would be UNC and UVA. I don't think VA Tech and NCSU will bring much to the table. Course UNC and UVA don't either as far as viewership (football). Clemson and FSU will...
I believe if the SEC was to look at the states of NC and VA, they would look to see what schools in those states have had success in football. Other words, their potential for success when expanding the SEC's geographical footprint. NC State has had success under Dave Doeren, Tom O'Brien and Dick Sheridan. Virginia Tech has had success under Frank Beamer and Bill Dooley.
All of this discussion is nice but the SEC has long since decided which two (?) ACC teams it wants. It also has a Plan B if its two choices aren't available. Bottom line, our discussions are fun and amusing but, it has already been decided, boyos.
Last edited:
From The Athletic:
Florida State has a virtual board of trustees meeting scheduled for Aug. 2, which should be worth monitoring. The Seminoles would have to give notice of their withdrawal from the ACC by Aug. 15 in order to be able to compete in a new league by fall 2024. (And, well, then there’s the subsequent question of where they’d go. And then how much it’d cost to pay the exit fee and to get out of the grant of rights…)
Conference realignment mailbag: Answers about ACC, Boise State, CFP implications and more (msn.com)
Florida State has a virtual board of trustees meeting scheduled for Aug. 2, which should be worth monitoring. The Seminoles would have to give notice of their withdrawal from the ACC by Aug. 15 in order to be able to compete in a new league by fall 2024. (And, well, then there’s the subsequent question of where they’d go. And then how much it’d cost to pay the exit fee and to get out of the grant of rights…)
Conference realignment mailbag: Answers about ACC, Boise State, CFP implications and more (msn.com)
Wouldn't be surprised if it's already planned, with contingencies.
But since they're not sharing those plans, this will kill the off-season faster than anything.
I think it's more about views on TV. I would love to have NCSU and VT over UNC/UVA BUT, the SEC wants the Flagship state universities. I'm sure without a doubt NCSU and VT has more viewership than UNC and UVA for football.
When talking about the state of NC, Clemson, UT and we are big draws in Charlotte, Asheville & Wilmington in terms of viewership, with Clemson probably the biggest.
From what I've heard the B1G won't go for FSU or Clemson.....they simply don't get enough research money following them to carry their weight academically or for research funding. Think Barstool got it wrong, they are looking at 2/3 schools but those schools have to carry their weight academically.,,,unless they completely shut off Clemson and FSU from participating in the BTAA. They've added schools to the BTAA without them being conference members, so I guess they could do the opposite.
At this point, I'm letting it play out. I'm not venturing a prediction. Some folks on the West Coast are speculating Oregon to the Big 12. These rumors are not in complete accord.
Personally I can see the B10 wanting Oregon, Washington, Clemson and FSU...Although not a Clemson fan, I would love to see Washington and Oregon as well as Michigan, OSU come to Death Valley. I have family who graduated from UW so I would attend the game pulling for the Huskies.
But here is the big question: For all the arrogance UNC fans have said about not wanting to be a part of the SEC and wanting to be in the B10, what happens if the SEC does not offer UNC? what happens to the ACC..
I seriously doubt Clemson is in contention for the B1G, as you stated they simply do not get enough research money. FSU apparently was close to being admitted to the AAU but came up slightly short. I'm with you, Barstool got the schools wrong, or at least 2 of them.