Stanford, Cal, SMU to the ACC...

[NDblitz]

You may be correct. I also wonder why any top program in the big or sec will want to add nd to a schedule that will be much more challenging starting 2024. Is bama still scheduled for 28,29? Maybe it’s 29,30 I can’t remember? Why is bama interested in a series with us when their sec schedule is getting harder and they have a ccg to contend with? I could easily see sc saying , we’ll play nd every other year. Additional travel and a more challenging schedule why does sc want to lower their chances of playoff spot? Looking at future schedules I’m not seeing many games I’m scheduling vacations around

You factor in SC will play UCLA Oregon and UW every year in this new format. Plus at least one and potentially 2-3 of Wisconsin Ohio Michigan and Penn State I could really see this happening. With Cal and Stanford potentially in the ACC. Adding them to the rotation would still create the yearly trip to CA.

 

[NDblitz]

Hello all. Respect to you and your fine University, and greetings from a Ramblin' Wreck from Georgia Tech.

In your deliberations, here's something to consider: the ACC is obviously at a crossroads right now. Everyone in the ACC wants to keep the conference together (that's why we all signed the GOR), but in the next few years, the money has to change. FSU (loudly) and some others (quietly), including my alma mater are considering all options right now.

If the B10 and SEC come in and make offers that can't be refused to 4-8 programs, then the ACC will go the way of the P12, and the Irish will be without a home for their Olympic sports. They might then, even be forced into tucking their tail and joining the B10 in order to find a home for them.

The ONE thing that could insure that would not happen, is if Notre Dame went ahead and joined the ACC for football. Then, the ESPN contract could be renegotiated, and the true THIRD power league would be created.

Make that negotiation now, while you're in the position of power and the ACC is in need. You'll get it done on your terms, and help save a little bit of sanity in college football too.

I think this potential new deal should solve that. Looks like additional 10 ish million for the ACC teams. Stanford and Cal take a smaller cut and SMU takes no money (crazy) .

 

[ivan brunetti]

I think this potential new deal should solve that. Looks like additional 10 ish million for the ACC teams. Stanford and Cal take a smaller cut and SMU takes no money (crazy) .

Closer to $4 million per school while Stanford and Cal are only taking $7 million per year. And that is if it is an even split. FSU and Clemson want more than an even cut.

 

[tbonesays]

Someone needs to make FSU and offer they can't refuse.

 

[Whatsthegoodword]

I did not know about the offer from the other conference, or that Tech tried to rejoin the SEC. Was it a stand alone offer or was it the BUG took a group of schools from the ACC.

Yeah, the B10 is a bunch greedy bastards. Our home is in the ACC - or maaaybe the SEC that we helped found. The B10 offered us along with Maryland. I'm not sure if that was before or after the Rutgers offer. They want(ed) a foothold in the South, and I'll bet that they still do. Please pardon the Georgia Tech history lesson. It's a long story, but here comes the highlights:

We left the SEC in 1964 over "the 140 rule" and "processing" players. At the time, SEC schools were allowed 140(!) football and basketball scholarships, total. Bobby Dodd (and Tech) refused to pull the scholarship of players that didn't play well, and he asked the same of his SEC brethren. Their scruples were creating a competitive disadvantage. A big meeting was planned, and the vote failed 6-6 when Bear Bryant didn't show, sending his President in his place. Bryant had agreed face-to-face to vote with Dodd. So, we left the SEC at that meeting.

Scheduling was different then, and over the course of our time in the SEC, we had not played either of the Mississippi schools hardly at all. Dodd didn't like the train trip to Oxford or Starkville (can you imagine?), and he liked to schedule more substantial opponents. We had the largest stadium in the South at the time, and he used that advantage to dictate our schedule to his terms. All of that assholery came home to roost when we later applied for readmission to the SEC. Our identity had been there, and the decision to leave had been foolhardy. UGA sponsored our application with the support of Coach Bryant, but the Mississippi schools voted against us both times; once in the '70s, and the second time in the early '80s right before we joined the ACC.

 

[Whatsthegoodword]

Closer to $4 million per school while Stanford and Cal are only taking $7 million per year. And that is if it is an even split. FSU and Clemson want more than an even cut.

The proposal is for a series of incentive payments for Championships, bowl appearances, instead of an annual uneven split. Clemson supports that idea (of course), while FSU is still being obstinate. Of course, that would mean that Wake would be earning more cash than the Seminoles. 😂

I think the idea is foolish, and that the money should be divided equally. That's part of what a conference is - a bargaining collective - a partnership of like minded institutions.

 

[Shakin' Down the Thunder]

The proposal is for a series of incentive payments for Championships, bowl appearances, instead of an annual uneven split. Clemson supports that idea (of course), while FSU is still being obstinate. Of course, that would mean that Wake would be earning more cash than the Seminoles. 😂

I think the idea is foolish, and that the money should be divided equally. That's part of what a conference is - a bargaining collective - a partnership of like minded institutions.

Do you have any insight on what are the barriers to ACC members earning $60-80 million a year? It's my understanding ACC schools are making about $30 million, while Big 10 and SEC are making $60-80, or will eventually. I can't understand why there's such a discrepancy. I would think the programs/markets of ACC schools are closer in competitiveness, fans, and viewers to BIG 10 and SEC than further apart.

 

[ivan brunetti]

Do you have any insight on what are the barriers to ACC members earning $60-80 million a year? It's my understanding ACC schools are making about $30 million, while Big 10 and SEC are making $60-80, or will eventually. I can't understand why there's such a discrepancy. I would think the programs/markets of ACC schools are closer in competitiveness, fans, and viewers to BIG 10 and SEC than further apart.

FSU has a reasonable fan base. Clemson is smaller and in a relatively poor state. UNC is a basketball school. None of these can match the fan base size of programs like ND, Ohio State, Georgia, Michigan, etc.

If the ACC was renegotiating their media rights this year, they would get a bit more than the B12. Perhaps $40 million per school.

 

[Bob Rodes]

The Big 10 literally despises Notre Dame.

Speculation IMO.

 

[stu4don]

The academic conference. Northwestern should sign on. Bunch of top 25 rated colleges. College football, not semi pro.

 

[deadirishpoet]

Well all the "why do we play so many ACC teams" people could get happy if this happens. Stanford would obviously eat up one of the spots. Or do you think they would be an in addition to the other 5 games?

Stanford students/fanbaae barely go to their home game i would be surprised if they traveled....I can imagine its the same for Cal.

 

[deadirishpoet]

Speculation IMO.

I believe that's the Big 10 despises ND as well.....that's to bad because if there is a conference ND would belong in i would think it's the B10

 

[burmafrd1943]

Speculation IMO.

Historical fact dude.

Once it was about religion; now its about money.

ND is the prize every conference would love to have but we turn them all down.

Some get really cranky about being told NO. Especially if they think its going to cost them money they want in the future. anyone thinking any of the conferences now area about ANYTHING BUT MONEY is a moron.

with the ridiculously expanded playoffs, getting into them is no longer all that much of a challenge. You go 10-2 and you are in. 11-1 and pretty much anyone no matter how obscure is in. I personally predict you will see teams 8-3 or worse find their ways in. The regular season is thus significantly de-valued; worrying about strong enough schedules to get in no longer is a concern. Just makes money the only factor anyone cares about.

And all the little teams with no real chance before now see one; and thus a big pot of gold in many ways.

They know they have ZERO chance of winning more than one game but it will still be a major feather in the caps of teams that usually up till now barely ever had a shot at anything beyond the Cheap Discount Bowl.

 

[ivan brunetti]

Historical fact dude.

Once it was about religion; now its about money.

ND is the prize every conference would love to have but we turn them all down.

Some get really cranky about being told NO. Especially if they think its going to cost them money they want in the future. anyone thinking any of the conferences now area about ANYTHING BUT MONEY is a moron.

with the ridiculously expanded playoffs, getting into them is no longer all that much of a challenge. You go 10-2 and you are in. 11-1 and pretty much anyone no matter how obscure is in. I personally predict you will see teams 8-3 or worse find their ways in. The regular season is thus significantly de-valued; worrying about strong enough schedules to get in no longer is a concern. Just makes money the only factor anyone cares about.

And all the little teams with no real chance before now see one; and thus a big pot of gold in many ways.

They know they have ZERO chance of winning more than one game but it will still be a major feather in the caps of teams that usually up till now barely ever had a shot at anything beyond the Cheap Discount Bowl.

Wait until the playoff only involves teams in conferences. Some will get really cranky being told NO.

 

[Bob Rodes]

Historical fact dude.

The historical fact is that Fielding Yost despised Knute Rockne, and had no love for Catholics, and did everything he could to keep Notre Dame out of the Big Ten. Using that fact to infer that the entire Big Ten hates Notre Dame 100 years later is called "stereotyping."

Once it was about religion; now its about money.

Notre Dame's deal with the ACC makes more money if ND decides to join as a full member. Notre Dame essentially takes a pay cut to remain independent. So explain how that fact supports your position, or clarify your position to make it more specific.

Some get really cranky about being told NO. Especially if they think its going to cost them money they want in the future.

Well, now, ain't that the truth! Here I agree with you entirely.

anyone thinking any of the conferences now area about ANYTHING BUT MONEY is a moron.

Calling people who disagree with you morons is, well, moronic. It means that you have so little confidence in your position that you perceive any other position as a threat that you need to attack. But you might be right. Then again, you might be wrong.

My take is this. Business is a tool whose purpose is to make money. One of the issues with business is that it can get to the point where the people using it allow the requirements of business to supersede the requirements of humanity ("I'd like to help you, but I got a business to run"), and then it becomes, as you say, all about the money. Whether CFB has gotten to that point, however, is a matter of speculation.

with the ridiculously expanded playoffs, getting into them is no longer all that much of a challenge. You go 10-2 and you are in. 11-1 and pretty much anyone no matter how obscure is in. I personally predict you will see teams 8-3 or worse find their ways in.

I expect you're right about 9-3 teams finding their way in at times. I don't see a problem with that, personally. Winning the playoffs will be as much of a challenge as it is now.

The regular season is thus significantly de-valued; worrying about strong enough schedules to get in no longer is a concern.

I think you're overstating the case. De-valued, sure. Significantly, not sure. But weak schedules are of course still a concern. Maybe a bit less of one, and I'm good with that. Pumping money into the FCS is good for college sports. And the other side of the coin is that deserving teams are less likely to be left out. A 10-2 Notre Dame team with a schedule as tough as this year's, for example.

Just makes money the only factor anyone cares about.

I can't see where this follows from the rest of your arguments at all.

And all the little teams with no real chance before now see one; and thus a big pot of gold in many ways.

A 10-2 Notre Dame team with this year's schedule, for example. And why isn't spreading the wealth a good thing?

They know they have ZERO chance of winning more than one game but it will still be a major feather in the caps of teams that usually up till now barely ever had a shot at anything beyond the Cheap Discount Bowl.

Yup. And I think that's a good thing, personally. Another point is that if schools aren't all fighting to be in a four-team playoff, then the "arms race" might calm down some. Perhaps an expanded playoff will save money, and I'll certainly agree that teams are quite happy to do that.

 

[bizzybecknd]

The historical fact is that Fielding Yost despised Knute Rockne, and had no love for Catholics, and did everything he could to keep Notre Dame out of the Big Ten. Using that fact to state that the entire Big Ten hates Notre Dame 100 years later is called "stereotyping."

Notre Dame's deal with the ACC makes more money if ND decides to join as a full member. Notre Dame essentially takes a pay cut to remain independent. So explain how that fact supports your position, or clarify your position to make it more specific.

Well, now, ain't that the truth! Here I agree with you entirely.

Calling people who disagree with you morons is, well, moronic. It means that you have so little confidence in your position that you perceive any other position as a threat that you need to attack. But you might be right. Then again, you might be wrong. My take is this. Business is a tool whose purpose is to make money. One of the issues with business is that it can get to the point where the people using it allow the requirements of business to supersede the requirements of humanity ("I'd like to help you, but I got a business to run"), and then it becomes, as you say, all about the money.

I expect you're right about 9-3 teams finding their way in at times. I don't see a problem with that, personally. Winning the playoffs will be as much of a challenge as it is now.

I think you're overstating the case. De-valued, sure. Significantly, not sure. But weak schedules are of course still a concern. Maybe a bit less of one, and I'm good with that. Pumping money into the FCS is good for college sports. And the other side of the coin is that deserving teams are less likely to be left out. A 10-2 Notre Dame team with a schedule as tough as this year's, for example.

I can't see where this follows from the rest of your arguments at all.

A 10-2 Notre Dame team with this year's schedule, for example. "Big pot of gold in many ways?" How big? In what ways?

Yup. And I think that's a good thing, personally. Another point is that if schools aren't all fighting to be in a four-team playoff, then the "arms race" might calm down some. Perhaps an expanded playoff will save money, and I'll certainly agree that teams are quite happy to do that.

Post more Bob!

 

[BGI User 1596]

Post more Bob!

Bob’s your uncle!

 

[tbonesays]

Notre Dame's deal with the ACC makes more money if ND decides to join as a full member. Notre Dame essentially takes a pay cut to remain independent. So explain how that fact supports your position, or clarify your position to make it more specific.

For many schools the tv payout IS the athletic budget. For schools like ND it is portion of the total.

 

[Whatsthegoodword]

Do you have any insight on what are the barriers to ACC members earning $60-80 million a year? It's my understanding ACC schools are making about $30 million, while Big 10 and SEC are making $60-80, or will eventually. I can't understand why there's such a discrepancy. I would think the programs/markets of ACC schools are closer in competitiveness, fans, and viewers to BIG 10 and SEC than further apart.

ACC teams are earning ~$40M now from the conference. That includes the media deal, NCAA tourney shares, and ACCN profits. Right now we’re about $10M behind the SEC, and $18M behind the B10. The gap gets worse once their new contracts kick in. That’s what all the hand wringing is about.

The gap would be there regardless, but it’s SO big because of timing. We negotiated our deal right before the media rights deals blew up, and the B10 did theirs right at their peak, before cord-cutting accelerated. There’s some buyers remorse with FOX now because they overpaid the B10.

The good news: we have a “look in” to the contract scheduled with ESPN in three years. If the media economy settles down, and if we can post good numbers between now and then, a lot of the revenue gap should be wiped out. Of course, having the Irish in on the deal would help those negotiations tremendously.

 

[tbonesays]

ACC teams are earning ~$40M now from the conference. That includes the media deal, NCAA tourney shares, and ACCN profits. Right now we’re about $10M behind the SEC, and $18M behind the B10. The gap gets worse once their new contracts kick in. That’s what all the hand wringing is about.

The gap would be there regardless, but it’s SO big because of timing. We negotiated our deal right before the media rights deals blew up, and the B10 did theirs right at their peak, before cord-cutting accelerated. There’s some buyers remorse with FOX now because they overpaid the B10.

The good news: we have a “look in” to the contract scheduled with ESPN in three years. If the media economy settles down, and if we can post good numbers between now and then, a lot of the revenue gap should be wiped out. Of course, having the Irish in on the deal would help those negotiations tremendously.

Why does no one mention that the ACC has smaller schools where 1 million goes a lot farther than at a enormous university?

 

[TDIrish27]

While I was surprised that NC St flipped I still believe all this conference stuff is gone in 5-6 years.

CFB is going to go to an NFL model. They'll be 60 Power 5 schools-----likely 6 Divisions of 10-----you'll play your Division and 3 crossovers which will rotate annually and they'll be a 12 team Playoff .

There will be Power 5 conference members who will be cast aside .

My advice to the marginal programs is don't stay poor for too long.

 

[Whatsthegoodword]

While I was surprised that NC St flipped I still believe all this conference stuff is gone in 5-6 years.

CFB is going to go to an NFL model. They'll be 60 Power 5 schools-----likely 6 Divisions of 10-----you'll play your Division and 3 crossovers which will rotate annually and they'll be a 12 team Playoff .

There will be Power 5 conference members who will be cast aside .

My advice to the marginal programs is don't stay poor for too long.

It certainly looks that way. Some say that this ACC expansion was all about preparing for THAT coming earthquake - especially on Stanford & SMU’s part. I’ve heard that the Presidents & ADs were debating that topic, with them on both sides of “why are we wasting our time with this when we know what’s coming?”

Personally I don’t think that move can happen unless it is a big number - like you say, 60 teams. (Many have speculated 30 or 40.) Look at all the hand wringing over Stanford and Cal being “left out,” and the blue bloods need someone to beat…

 

[Whatsthegoodword]

Why does no one mention that the ACC has smaller schools where 1 million goes a lot farther than at a enormous university?

That’s true in some ways, but we have to pay the same coach salaries as Massive State U; provide the same support for the same number of athletes. The only real lever we have is the number of sports we choose to compete in, and Title IX complicates that.