ADVERTISEMENT

OT: New ACC Deal To Reward Clemson and FSU?

So what's the purpose of FBS football and D-1 CBB?

Is it not "bring similar schools together and coordinate so you have have a reasonable level of competition among a group of teams that are similar"?

Why isnt there the same duty when everyone is in the same league and competing for the same championship?
That's a good point. There is some obligation, but not the same degree. You can have wildly different quality between conferences and that only impacts a handful of the games. But most games are within a conference, and if we want to see competitive games for the good of the sport, it's really important that the conferences are internally competitive. Otherwise literally every game but 1 or 2 every year will be a scrimmage and a snoozefest.

And in this thread we are talking about the obligations of the conferences to their members in terms of revenue distribution. The conference has a responsibility to the schools in the conference.
 
  • Like
Reactions: William J. Leggett
Cliff Notes…
Immediate entry into the Big Ten or SEC was preferred

For a variety of reasons, well that wasn’t deemed possible or pragmatic at the moment, Plan B was hatched, which has been talked about four months

Above is what Plan B is, which is certainly not the first option, but the next best thing and win-win for all parties involved

It cuts the yearly money gap significantly, and shorten the grant of rights, as well as as the buyout amount for that
This is still Plan B. If the opportunity for Plan A develops, they are gone. The SEC and B10 are about more than just money.
 
We played nice (entirely too nice) in the sandbox for 30 years and are now 40/50 mil year behind peers due to negliance of confetence leadership and conference mates not living up to their end of the bargin
And based on that, it's now ok to not play nice and create inequities? Change the agreed upon terms when FSU and Clemson agreed upon when they willingly entered their sucky deal? I'm not aware of what ends of the bargain were not met by the other members.
 
  • Like
Reactions: William J. Leggett
And based on that, it's now ok to not play nice and create inequities? Change the agreed upon terms when FSU and Clemson agreed upon when they willingly entered their sucky deal? I'm not aware of what ends of the bargain were not met by the other members.
Let me ask you this

If you did the right thing and were an ideal conference mate for 30 years, produced multiple championships and revenue for the conference, under the guys of the fellow conference, partner schools and conference leadership doing the best to keep the conference at a minimum in the conversation financially as their peers and the Big Ten and SEC…

And then, in return, the conference screwed you and did not live up to their end of the bargain, thereby relegating you to possible irrevalance due to no fault of your own, what type of action (after years of sacrifice and hard work, to get to the top of the mountain and achieve consistent greatness, while your conference mates, sans Clemson, did not live up to their end of the bargain but didn’t hesitate to cash checks due to your success) would you take?
 
  • Like
Reactions: cicero grimes
Funny, I'm pretty sure someone on here had inside info the FSU was going to the Big Ten and the announcement was coming soon. Mmmm I guess the inside info was just a lot of BS. Doesn't surprise me at all given the source.
 
Funny, I'm pretty sure someone on here had inside info the FSU was going to the Big Ten and the announcement was coming soon. Mmmm I guess the inside info was just a lot of BS. Doesn't surprise me at all given the source.
I was going on the information I was given, and then, if you’d like to go back & read, I also said that this was the likely outcome of the information given was changed

I’d like to keep things civil between you and I, so if it’s OK with you, let’s keep each other’s names out of our mouth and strictly stick to the facts
 
This elminates any chance of FSU, Clemson or others coming to the Big Ten in the future. There is no way they would get the necessary votes from any school that is not Ohio State, Penn State, or Michigan, because the other members know what they pushed. They have pretty much sealed their fate in the ACC.
If the revenue they can bring in is right, they will be accepted.
Money is the driving factor when conferences look at programs that want to join.
Right now FSU and Clemson won't bring enough , but let the SEC start looking their way and the B1G
might change it's mind and accept Clemson & FSU as members to keep them from making the SEC stronger and gain a foothold in the south
 
Works for me. I'm happy with the 18 teams the B1G has. Circle back around 2029 or so once the next B1G Media deal is up and kick the tires on UVA/UNC then.
I think this thing about adding Virginia North Carolina is outdated. The issue about Market footprint isn't the same as it was years ago. I understand that the conference network still get the subscription fees based on the market, but the idea for markets on regular broadcast games has pretty much disappeared. I don't think any of the networks have been doing the regional broadcast for several years now. I think all of them just do National feeds on each of their games. That being the case, I don't see the market footprint being as big of an issue is it used to be, and those I don't think that schools like Virginia in particular anywhere near as attractive as they were in the past.
 
If the revenue they can bring in is right, they will be accepted.
Money is the driving factor when conferences look at programs that want to join.
Right now FSU and Clemson won't bring enough , but let the SEC start looking their way and the B1G
might change it's mind and accept Clemson & FSU as members to keep them from making the SEC stronger and gain a foothold in the south
This 👆👆👆
Money runs the show, feelings be damned
 
I was going on the information I was given, and then, if you’d like to go back & read, I also said that this was the likely outcome of the information given was changed

I’d like to keep things civil between you and I, so if it’s OK with you, let’s keep each other’s names out of our mouth and strictly stick to the facts
You seem like a god dude but you consistently told e wet person this board they were gone. The only thing you changed was the date it would happen. You have been correct less than a broken clock. Like I said, seem like a good dude and I enjoyed reading your posts but you were told more than once your definitive statements were over the top
 
As I stated a few months ago, this was a likely outcome if leaving was not in the best interest of the dissatisfied schools

It’ll be a win-win as FSU and Clemson will get more money per year based on different metrics, and the buyout will be significantly reduced by five years, cutting it until 2031 for far less money
Wait. No mention of FSU’s impending move to BIG announcement before Feb?

GO RU
 
  • Haha
Reactions: WhiteBus
You seem like a god dude but you consistently told e wet person this board they were gone. The only thing you changed was the date it would happen. You have been correct less than a broken clock. Like I said, seem like a good dude and I enjoyed reading your posts but you were told more than once your definitive statements were over the top
As ive stated multiple times, i only go on information ive heard

Once the info changed, i reported back here on that (announcement by 2/1/25 staying in league for another ~5 years w increased revenue and less years / GOR $$ buyout)
 
They struck a deal
League got security, Noles got $$ based off metrics, and time / $$ off GOR
FSU and Clemson wasn't sure if they'd win and despit the money they shelled out trying to leave might wind up losing their case and have to stay until the GOR ran out.
The ACC felt it could win but it was costing them more then they found acceptable, though necessary to survive, and knew they would might wind up having other programs thinking about jumping ship when the GOR expires just to make sure they don't wind up holding the bag like some of the PAC programs did when that conference lost it's top programs to the B1G and others went B-12 .
So a compromise was reached to satisfy Clemson and FSU's desire to receive more money and the other conference members desire for stability by giving Clemson and FSU what they wanted in exchange for staying .
My concern now is after seeing how the ACC compromised with it's better football programs, will the top ACC basketball programs start wanting the same treatment
 
FSU and Clemson wasn't sure if they'd win and despit the money they shelled out trying to leave might wind up losing their case and have to stay until the GOR ran out.
The ACC felt it could win but it was costing them more then they found acceptable, though necessary to survive, and knew they would might wind up having other programs thinking about jumping ship when the GOR expires just to make sure they don't wind up holding the bag like some of the PAC programs did when that conference lost it's top programs to the B1G and others went B-12 .
So a compromise was reached to satisfy Clemson and FSU's desire to receive more money and the other conference members desire for stability by giving Clemson and FSU what they wanted in exchange for staying .
My concern now is after seeing how the ACC compromised with it's better football programs, will the top ACC basketball programs start wanting the same treatment

With only 2 teams in the top 25 and getting destroyed by the SEC in the head to head, the B-Balls teams might not say much. Plus Bball has a lower revenue percentage.

Ironically, the teams sacrificing money will be their Northern teams.. Pitt, Syracuse, Boston College, Virginia... Less competition for northeast kids possibly.
 
FSU and Clemson wasn't sure if they'd win and despit the money they shelled out trying to leave might wind up losing their case and have to stay until the GOR ran out.
The ACC felt it could win but it was costing them more then they found acceptable, though necessary to survive, and knew they would might wind up having other programs thinking about jumping ship when the GOR expires just to make sure they don't wind up holding the bag like some of the PAC programs did when that conference lost it's top programs to the B1G and others went B-12 .
So a compromise was reached to satisfy Clemson and FSU's desire to receive more money and the other conference members desire for stability by giving Clemson and FSU what they wanted in exchange for staying .
My concern now is after seeing how the ACC compromised with it's better football programs, will the top ACC basketball programs start wanting the same treatment
Pretty much, nor was the ACC convinced the GOR would hold up

Rather than risk it, both parties decided to make a deal

Win/win for all sides
 
You seem like a god dude but you consistently told e wet person this board they were gone. The only thing you changed was the date it would happen. You have been correct less than a broken clock. Like I said, seem like a good dude and I enjoyed reading your posts but you were told more than once your definitive statements were over the top
He is over the top on many things including what he claims to be.
 
There is already precedent in college athletics that certain conferences are more important that others and deserve more revenue (see individual media revenue deals for conferences).

The logical next step is to extend that to individual teams within conferences.

If the NCAA (and the entire college athletics world) recognizes that not all teams are equal in terms of revenue, then why wouldn’t conferences too?

How do you determine which individual teams get the rewards? Difference is that the conferences negotiate the media terms on behalf of the entire property / conference. I guess if you let individual programs negotiate their own deals intra-conference?

FWIW....I'm a proponent of complete revenue sharing, but it will likely never happen in the NCAA.
 
How do you determine which individual teams get the rewards? Difference is that the conferences negotiate the media terms on behalf of the entire property / conference. I guess if you let individual programs negotiate their own deals intra-conference?

FWIW....I'm a proponent of complete revenue sharing, but it will likely never happen in the NCAA.
Just a crazy idea …Maybe the good team that drive the tv contracts ?
 
As ive stated multiple times, i only go on information ive heard

Once the info changed, i reported back here on that (announcement by 2/1/25 staying in league for another ~5 years w increased revenue and less years / GOR $$ buyout)
But you don’t post it that way. You posted your info as if the people you were getting it from were in the room. They were the ones making the deals and it was a done deal.
 
But you don’t post it that way. You posted your info as if the people you were getting it from were in the room. They were the ones making the deals and it was a done deal.
They were, and are, right in the mix
Things change, and quickly, in a high stskes game like this
 
Wait, you mean we should have some doubt about his claims of donating all his money to 5 different RU sports and going to all the games while posting as if he's the biggest FSU fan alive on this board? Hmmmmm.
And his magic car getting him to places in minutes not hours while drunk?
 
They were, and are, right in the mix
Things change, and quickly, in a high stskes game like this
I have noticed on most sports sites, with the rare exception, those getting their info from informed sources are wrong far more then they are right.
 
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT