Looks like Stanford, Cal and SMU could be ACC members tonight
- Thread starter Duke Humphrey
- Start date
Short version:
ESPN's contract with the ACC has a prorata clause that will pay the conference about $24 Million for each new school added.
There is some financial boost that ESPN gets from Texas and California network carriers for having increased rights in Texas and California.
Stanford and Cal would each take 30% (about $8-$9 Million) of a full share for an unstated amount of time.
SMU would totally forego any contract money for 7 to 9 years. They make about $8 Million annually currently from the AAC.
This ends up adding about $50 Million that the conference can divide up (how is currently uncertain) and they're hoping that is enough to entice one of the four no votes (Clemson, NC State, UNC, FSU) to switch over to a yes.
ESPN's contract with the ACC has a prorata clause that will pay the conference about $24 Million for each new school added.
There is some financial boost that ESPN gets from Texas and California network carriers for having increased rights in Texas and California.
Stanford and Cal would each take 30% (about $8-$9 Million) of a full share for an unstated amount of time.
SMU would totally forego any contract money for 7 to 9 years. They make about $8 Million annually currently from the AAC.
This ends up adding about $50 Million that the conference can divide up (how is currently uncertain) and they're hoping that is enough to entice one of the four no votes (Clemson, NC State, UNC, FSU) to switch over to a yes.
So each school gets an average of only $3 million more per year to add 3 schools in far flung sections of the country? And GOR doesn’t change?
Seems extremely unlikely to pass, especially considering that a group of 4 schools have already blocked Cal and Stanford already….don’t see how adding SMU to the mix makes it any better.
Seems extremely unlikely to pass, especially considering that a group of 4 schools have already blocked Cal and Stanford already….don’t see how adding SMU to the mix makes it any better.
Probably more like $8M each for FSU, Clemson and North Carolina and about $2M each for the rest. Pretty desperate move for everyone involved. Cal, Stanford & SMU for taking such a revenue hit, and the ACC for hoping this will make FSU STFU about leaving (which they can't do anyway).
I don't think they plan to divide it equally. I'm thinking this is going towards the 'merit based' financial structure FSU has been pushing.
SMU is good for $24 Million a year for 7-9 years, so $168 Million to $216 Million from ESPN. In exchange, SMU gets to be part of a Power conference and have their foot in the door when the next round of realignment comes.
Is it just to get them to shutup or are there some in the ACC that does not think the grant of rights is as airtight as perceived?
I don't know for a fact how airtight it is. But I do know FSU and Clemson have paid some damn good lawyers a lot of money to find a way out and in at least 3 years they haven't gotten anywhere. FSU was reduced to trying to raise venture capital money to buy their way out this time around. Luckily for them, they got nowhere with that cause if they had, it would have bankrupted them.
I think Clemson/FSU other problem (currently) is that they have no ideal home. SEC isnt interested.... Big10 appears to not be either.
The Atlantic Coast Conference adds schools in California and Texas. Imagine how angry geography teachers must me about all this realignment.
I wonder if Cal/Stanford got turned down by both Big 10 and Big 12. I can't believe it, but Big 12 just seems more stable long term right now, plus they'd get at least some reasonable geographic proximity.
If I'm Oregon St, Washington St, Cal, or Stanford I'm pushing as hard as possible to get into the Big 12. Dealing with 1 east coast and 2 Midwest opponents instead of 14 just makes more sense to me.
If I'm Oregon St, Washington St, Cal, or Stanford I'm pushing as hard as possible to get into the Big 12. Dealing with 1 east coast and 2 Midwest opponents instead of 14 just makes more sense to me.
Is this in the article? The only thing it says about uneven sharing for existing members is based on merit items in football and basketball (CFP / NCAAT, etc.). I don’t see FSU / Clemson / UNC just supporting that alone, without some other blanket assurance for much higher revenue than their peers. And even if they did, I don’t see $8 ~ $9 million more being nearly enough to appease them. The ACC schools are each dozens of millions behind the B1G and SEC….not just $10-$15 million or something like that. Their revenue model needs to be blown up entirely for the “no” schools to be satisfied, not just mortgaged for the next 5-10 years just to kick a few more pennies on the dollar back to the big boys.
Agreed with you this reeks of desperation from all sides. Doesn’t seem to make sense for Cal / Stanford, either. They’d both be better off as independents than under the terrible deal they’d be signing up for. I’d think they’d at least entertain an offer, but I wouldn’t consider it a certainty that they’d accept whatever the current 15 ACC schools are going to agree to put forward.
Last edited:
The additional revenue will be performance based, but in practice it's going to FSU, Clemson and North Carolina. I agree, it's desperate on all sides, and likely not enough to keep FSU from continuing to tilt at that windmill of finding a way out of the GOR agreement.
SEC is very interested in them, its just that they can’t afford to bolt for any other league unless the conference were to dissolve. That’s the only way around the GOR.
Yeah. I think the SEC definitely wants them, they just don't really want them now. Sankey would rather take a few years to digest the Texas & Oklahoma additions before adding any more teams. But if his hand if forced by FSU actually getting out of the GOR, he'll definitely take them now.
Yep this is a survival mechanism, to keep a few happy, and preventative maintenance 5-7 years from now, whenever it is, that the ACC is raided.
Big 12 should get Washington State and Oregon State immediately, at least they are P5 brands, and they solidify themselves as a solid 2nd tier conference. It's pretty obvious now that the next B1G and SEC raids will come from the ACC. They'll be in the defensive position, and the Big 12 could possibly pluck a couple off of them to get to 20 at that time.
Amazing how good of a position the Big 12 is in. Imagine if one of their teams finds a way to win a title?
Gwen Stefani said it best 20 years ago. This shlt is bananas.
Part of me thinks it would be hilarious if the Big 12 acquired all 4 of Stanford, Cal, Oregon State, and Wazzu. They could split into two 10-team divisions where those schools could be paired with Arizona, Arizona State, Colorado, Utah, BYU, etc.
The eastern division could just be “The Heartland” or something. And the western division, I don’t know, maybe something like the “Pacific 10?”
The eastern division could just be “The Heartland” or something. And the western division, I don’t know, maybe something like the “Pacific 10?”
Really should just have all the conferences take a beat and rename themselves. We aren't exclusively Southeastern, the Big 10 and Big 12 need face-lifts, and the ACC swings both ways.
Conference names need be rebranded if numbered or geography names but no longer geographically based
I'm sure if Stanford and Cal were a possibility, they'd already be in the Big 12. I'm guessing they think they are too good for them, and would rather align with the academia of the ACC.
I would say that the B1G messed up by not taking them (and then they could do what you say, but even better, with the actual PAC powers), but I mean they'll still be able to get them anytime they want.
Last edited:
Well you also have Duke, Virginia, and now Miami for basketball, and FSU doesn’t really have a leg up on anyone right now in football. They are roughly even with Miami, NC State, and a few others at present time. They’ve only made one CFP in 9 years. And who knows how relevant Clemson will still be after Dabo. I could see a merit model not really doing much for the big schools.
You could be right. I've got a feeling no matter how the money is split, FSU is going to be bitching about it again next summer and blustering about leaving the conference before doing nothing.
The money you need to look at from an SMU perspective is what they are giving up by leaving the AAC. Currently, that's like $9 million per year and will likely drop once their TV contract is up due to UCF, Cincy & Houston leaving for the Big12. Since they aren't going to get an ACC invite without forgoing payouts, it's really only costing them $63 million for the 7 years (at most).
Not a bad price tag to buy you way into a "Power" conference, especially when the door to making that leap seems to be closing rapidly to those on the outside.
Lots of "Coast to Coast" flights coming up for Stanford and Cal to the East and most all ACC schools headed West to play them there. That sucks, but, beats the alternative of Cal and Stanford having to join some obscure western conference.
Mcmurphy reported its to keep the league at 15 or more if Clemson/FSU/others bolt. If it dips below 15 ESPN can renegotiate the contract.
Nobody uses the full Southeastern Conference name much anymore.
Maybe just rebrand to SEC, like KFC.
A Coastal Conference
All Coastal Conference, plus Louisville & SMU (and really Syracuse too).
If I were the 4 No votes, I would demand to be let out of the agreement (with some penalty, but nowhere near the full penalty) in exchange for switching to Yes. Otherwise what's the motivation to flip?
Nobody’s getting out of the grant of rights, or getting it reduced. That’s just not going to happen. The incentive to change your vote is you can either stay in at the current revenue or you can stay in at an additional $2M-$8M revenue per year.
Last edited:
Now…. As for Oregon State and Washington State, they’re allegedly having conversations with Mountain West and the American in the next few weeks. Both schools have publicly stated their desire is to maintain the Pac name and build it back up.
The current status of each conference:
Mountain West - about $45 Million or $4 Million annually per school from CBS and Fox
Deal runs through 2026
Buyout is $17 Million for 2 year notice and $34 Million for 1 year notice
American - about $90 Million or $8 Million annually per school from ESPN
Deal runs through 2032
Buyout is $10 Million for 27 month notice and $45 Million for shorter (but they settled with UCF, Houston, etc for $18 Million)
My personal feeling is that there is still some value in the Pac name and, if Stanford and Cal get into the ACC, rebuilding the conference should be the route taken, but it’s the most complex. The buyouts for MWC and AAC are going to be cost prohibitive and I don’t know how feasible it would even be for the Mountain West and American members to dissolve that conference and reform under the Pac umbrella. I also don’t know what network would pay more than the existing $4 Million/$8 Million that the MWC/AAC currently get.
The current status of each conference:
Mountain West - about $45 Million or $4 Million annually per school from CBS and Fox
Deal runs through 2026
Buyout is $17 Million for 2 year notice and $34 Million for 1 year notice
American - about $90 Million or $8 Million annually per school from ESPN
Deal runs through 2032
Buyout is $10 Million for 27 month notice and $45 Million for shorter (but they settled with UCF, Houston, etc for $18 Million)
My personal feeling is that there is still some value in the Pac name and, if Stanford and Cal get into the ACC, rebuilding the conference should be the route taken, but it’s the most complex. The buyouts for MWC and AAC are going to be cost prohibitive and I don’t know how feasible it would even be for the Mountain West and American members to dissolve that conference and reform under the Pac umbrella. I also don’t know what network would pay more than the existing $4 Million/$8 Million that the MWC/AAC currently get.
It’s certainly not a bad move for SMU. Sure seems like it is for everyone else, though. And how bad does it suck to see schools willingly jumping into an uneven revenue sharing model. That’s not setting a good precedent for the future of schools like OM and MSU.
Clemson and FSU will be unanimous SEC additions when the time comes.
The 9-game schedule will be unanimous in a few years, too, once ESPN and the league agree to increased payouts for doing so, and also once this round of realignment settles down.
Is it all about money?? Whatever happen to fan convenience to attend a home game. Do the school presidents not care about students and alumni? Greed has always stayed hidden in college sports but today in runs around in broad daylight. Not good.