Pac12 dissolution discussion
- Thread starter rotorocker
- Start date
The domino's are starting to fall
Noles, Clemson & UNC all on record advocating for unequal revenue sharing
UNC very surprising, as the ACC is their baby and they get catered to every which way
With UNC could it be they just throw it out there to see if it goes anywhere. If it does great. If not, nothing to lose?
Rutgers95 - go over to the Georgia Tech forum and they will tell you otherwise. Number of posts where they talk about how their AD had done the ground work to get Georgia Tech into the Big Ten before the Administration decided otherwise.
2023 ACC News & Discussion
While that maybe true, we don't need to be the only reason E$PN is making money when we don't see any benefit. Unfortunately, the "leaders" in the ACC forfeited any leverage we have when they signed the GOR. ESPN is going to work the ACC like a rented mule until our media contract and GOR...
Unfortunately, the "leaders" in the ACC forfeited any leverage we have when they signed the GOR. ESPN is going to work the ACC like a rented mule until our media contract and GOR finally ends.
If you want to be mad at anyone, be mad at GT for not accepting the B1G invite in 2012, and ACC leadership for signing a short sighted long term agreement.
FWIW, I wrote this earlier in the thread, the FSU writer has shared that GT has an invite to the B1G waiting. Will that change in 13 years when the ACC's GOR ends? That's certainly a possibility. It also dovetails into the B1G's "professional sports expansion" model: Capture schools in all the major sports markets. It also makes sense because B1G pushed for GT to join in 2012 before they made a move with Rutgers. Right now Atlanta is the biggest sports market in the South...but with shifting tides of the population, it's a possibility one of the Florida markets could overtake Atlanta in time. Combined, Florida is the bigger market given all of their big metro areas.
FSU has been rumored to have an invite with the B1G for a while now. FSU making noise, IMO, is them seeing the $75 million/YEAR coming soon, and knowing the ACC won't come close to that.
I think they're all throwing it out there, whether there's any substance is up for debate
But the fact that UNC, the ACC's leader/lynchpin, is outwardly saying it, is surprising to me
I've heard similar in regard to the B10 and GTRutgers95 - go over to the Georgia Tech forum and they will tell you otherwise. Number of posts where they talk about how their AD had done the ground work to get Georgia Tech into the Big Ten before the Administration decided otherwise.
2023 ACC News & Discussion
While that maybe true, we don't need to be the only reason E$PN is making money when we don't see any benefit. Unfortunately, the "leaders" in the ACC forfeited any leverage we have when they signed the GOR. ESPN is going to work the ACC like a rented mule until our media contract and GOR...gtswarm.com
Unfortunately, the "leaders" in the ACC forfeited any leverage we have when they signed the GOR. ESPN is going to work the ACC like a rented mule until our media contract and GOR finally ends.
If you want to be mad at anyone, be mad at GT for not accepting the B1G invite in 2012, and ACC leadership for signing a short sighted long term agreement.
FWIW, I wrote this earlier in the thread, the FSU writer has shared that GT has an invite to the B1G waiting. Will that change in 13 years when the ACC's GOR ends? That's certainly a possibility. It also dovetails into the B1G's "professional sports expansion" model: Capture schools in all the major sports markets. It also makes sense because B1G pushed for GT to join in 2012 before they made a move with Rutgers. Right now Atlanta is the biggest sports market in the South...but with shifting tides of the population, it's a possibility one of the Florida markets could overtake Atlanta in time. Combined, Florida is the bigger market given all of their big metro areas.
FSU has been rumored to have an invite with the B1G for a while now. FSU making noise, IMO, is them seeing the $75 million/YEAR coming soon, and knowing the ACC won't come close to that.
Re. the B10 and FSU, I know they've been talking, but opinions differ on whether they have an official invite
My buddy who's big up in boosters says they do, and he's been right on most things re. expansion, so I'll take his word for it
It makes sense on all levels - but if offered by both the SEC / B1G, for FB related reasons, I'd prefer the SEC
However, the whispers are they (school, admins, prez. AD, coaches, etc.) majority prefer the B1G
jaydogsmooth1, understand both points of view (fans vs administration). I find that most administrators (school presidents and board of regents) prefer what the Big 10 can do for their school. Fans only look at one perspective, while the school President looks at it from a 30,000 foot view.
I am an tOSU grad/fan. Recently I took a look at Ohio State's budget. The over all budget for 2022 was $8.8 Billion Revenue vs $8.2 Billion expense. The athletic department had about $250 Million budget, or about 2.8% of the budget. If you think about the approximate revenue of $75 Million in media money, it is about 0.85% of the overall budget. I believe the athletic budget is just under 3% of the budget.
In the grand scheme of things, athletics is minor in comparison to the rest of the budget. The fans don't get how important everything else is. And how important the ties you can create with your conference mates can be through collaboration. Read an article out of New Jersey talking about how Rutgers had benefitted on the academic side through collaboration with other Big 10 universities. The article talked a little about the various departments at Rutgers meeting (believe zoom calls) with their counter parts at other Big 10 universities once a month. Talking about the latest advances and what was happening at their school.
The article in particular touch on the Big 10 Cancer Consortium. How through it, the individual at Rutgers was able to get a large enough trial group to run a trial that otherwise he would not been able to do. Real benefit to the public (whole country when you think about it), to Rutgers and this professor in his pursuit of beating a specific cancer. Without Rutgers being in the Big 10, most likely this would not happen OR be that much harder to carry out.
It is things like this, non Big 10 schools see as a major gain. Other conferences are trying to copy this, BUT the Big 10 has been doing this since the late 50's.
Excellent points and spot on
Strictly for fb rivalries, I’d prefer SEC
But that’s minuscule in the grand scheme of things, especially considering where these schools are currently on the academic / research side, and where they’re looking to be in 20/30 years
W all of the great schools in the B1G, I don’t know how anyone coukd say no if offered - too many benefits IMO
Also, from an FSU perspective athletically, they may prefer to be in a separate conference as UF.
Being in the same conference, they could get overshadowed by the bigger, older, more established state university.
Comparing apples to apples, they are the number five rated public university and FSU is number 19th rated.
So they are always competing for state dollars, political, wrangling, etc. even though they are both the co state flagship schools
From an athletic standpoint, they’re athletic department is very strong and it’s always had more money, so separating the schools in two separate conferences could be the better move, as even though with football they are pretty much even with all things (nattys, heismans, draft picks, etc), UF is more popular in state while FSU is the more national brand
Being in the same conference, they could get overshadowed by the bigger, older, more established state university.
Comparing apples to apples, they are the number five rated public university and FSU is number 19th rated.
So they are always competing for state dollars, political, wrangling, etc. even though they are both the co state flagship schools
From an athletic standpoint, they’re athletic department is very strong and it’s always had more money, so separating the schools in two separate conferences could be the better move, as even though with football they are pretty much even with all things (nattys, heismans, draft picks, etc), UF is more popular in state while FSU is the more national brand
If you ever saw articles describing the process it took for Rutgers inclusion in the BIG. It took on all the secrecy of the Manhattan Project. Secret meetings and all.
Any leaks and Rutgers could have lost out on an invitation.
USC and UCLA total surprise. No leaks.
I’m surprised to read here, boosters openly saying FSU has an invite. Georgia Tech had an invite? I find that hard to believe. Not that they might have something in the works. Just surprised they would openly talk about it.
Any leaks and Rutgers could have lost out on an invitation.
USC and UCLA total surprise. No leaks.
I’m surprised to read here, boosters openly saying FSU has an invite. Georgia Tech had an invite? I find that hard to believe. Not that they might have something in the works. Just surprised they would openly talk about it.
Wow, a lot of speculation and Wild predictions!
How about this? The equality experts in the federal government convince the FTC that there are monopolies and that all conferences need to be broken up and every school becomes an independent.
How about this? The equality experts in the federal government convince the FTC that there are monopolies and that all conferences need to be broken up and every school becomes an independent.
The only thing I’ll say is the more things change the more they stay the same.
I agree the BIG and SEC are set but never say never.
As for the B1G expanding;
West Coast Partners for USC & UCLA to cut down travel expense and bring in new TV markets.
Oregon and Washington for their TV markets California and Stanford for travel and those 2 school's academic rating.
SEC really doesn't have a reason to expand ,except to bring in
top football programs like FSU and Clemson for PR purposes
( being considered the top football conference)
As for the Big 12:
adding a new TV rights area that brings with it
ASU ( Phoenix #10)
Arizona ( Tuscon 68)
Colorado (Denver market #18)
Utah (Salt Lake 33)
ACC expansion would be an effort to bring in new TV markets
so the TV rights might be worth more
Memphis is in the #48 market but if #18 Nashville is included
might add value when selling conference TV rights But I'm hard pressed to think of any other program that might help TV rights rate hike.
As for the PAC (Group of 6 turning the P-5 into P-4 or merge with WAC and the G5 will be the what all mid major conferences are designated as )
50 yd line RR, I basically agree with what you are saying.
Having followed expansion since the mid 80's. With the Big 10, it is has always been non disclosure agreements between the Big 10 and the various parties. The only time I know of that it broke before any rumors was with Maryland. A few weeks prior to the announcement (Maryland), some disgruntled board members (I believe) broke the news Maryland was in talks with the Big 10. By then it was just about done.
I know from what I read about Nebraska and their situation at the time. In the last week or two of the negotiations. Nebraska was pretty confident that they would be admitted. Tom Osborne had taken a survey of the various coaches about their feelings about going to the Big 10. All were in favor. Yet nothing broke in the news from any of those coaches.
Usually, the dance is like this. The school approaches the Big 10 about how they can apply/join the Big 10. The Big 10 if interested enters into a non disclosure agreement with the school and both parties enter into talks sharing data. If after the lawyers and beans counters from both sides agree. And both parties still want to move forward.
It becomes a case of wink wink nod nod. The school is told that they need to officially apply (really a formality at this point). The conference presidents and chancellors discuss it and vote on admission (again more a formality). Neither party wants to be embarrassed. The school is approved and admitted with a set date of entry.
What I do believe, what has happened with Georgia Tech, they got past the talk phase BUT Georgia Tech never applied. It was there but Georgia Tech never went forward with it.
With Florida State, I believe talks have happened. Just preliminary at that. Along the lines, FSU, "If we applied would it be seriously considered?" Big 10, "We would seriously take a look at." If a no go, the Big 10 would have told them so politely. Probably no more than that. People inside FSU believe that if they applied, they would likely get in. And people run with it. I am of the camp, that if FSU applied, they would gain entrance. Go back to what Warren said, he knew what the presidents would allow and not allow.
Go back to when Penn State was admitted. Penn State's in was that their previous president was now at Illinois. He knew the situation at Penn State (them interested in Big 10 membership). The president at Illinois acted as an intermediary and helped Penn State gain admission.
In almost every case, there has been somebody at the interested school that has ties to the Big 10. Either the Big 10 office or one of the universities.
GT NEVER had an offer, I know first hand and my posts during that time, prior to all happening, have been validated. GT never had an offer, their board is throwing shit on a wallRutgers95 - go over to the Georgia Tech forum and they will tell you otherwise. Number of posts where they talk about how their AD had done the ground work to get Georgia Tech into the Big Ten before the Administration decided otherwise.
2023 ACC News & Discussion
While that maybe true, we don't need to be the only reason E$PN is making money when we don't see any benefit. Unfortunately, the "leaders" in the ACC forfeited any leverage we have when they signed the GOR. ESPN is going to work the ACC like a rented mule until our media contract and GOR...
Unfortunately, the "leaders" in the ACC forfeited any leverage we have when they signed the GOR. ESPN is going to work the ACC like a rented mule until our media contract and GOR finally ends.
If you want to be mad at anyone, be mad at GT for not accepting the B1G invite in 2012, and ACC leadership for signing a short sighted long term agreement.
FWIW, I wrote this earlier in the thread, the FSU writer has shared that GT has an invite to the B1G waiting. Will that change in 13 years when the ACC's GOR ends? That's certainly a possibility. It also dovetails into the B1G's "professional sports expansion" model: Capture schools in all the major sports markets. It also makes sense because B1G pushed for GT to join in 2012 before they made a move with Rutgers. Right now Atlanta is the biggest sports market in the South...but with shifting tides of the population, it's a possibility one of the Florida markets could overtake Atlanta in time. Combined, Florida is the bigger market given all of their big metro areas.
FSU has been rumored to have an invite with the B1G for a while now. FSU making noise, IMO, is them seeing the $75 million/YEAR coming soon, and knowing the ACC won't come close to that.
lol Big never even spoke to GT. Now the Big fielded calls of course but GT no......
they never had an invite, it's fking stupid to even suggest it and to do so based on a fan msg board. RU continue to show the world how dumb they are
Yeah, like the PAC12 tradition 🙄. The lack of understanding is not understanding financials. Traditions can change quickly with the right financial incentives. Feel free to save this.
pac12 doesn't have the tradition, dedication to tradition nor the cultur that the BIG or SEC does. you are really looking at apples and oranges. in the SEC and BIG, you've got generational fans that span 100yrs. The PAC12 is nothing like this
Wut? The Pac12 traditions and culture are just as deep as the Big and SEC. The difference is the West Coast has a smaller overall market base than the Big 2 conferences.
My opinion:
The status quo destroyed the tradition.
When other conferences were expanding to make their TV rights package stronger,the PAC felt they didn't need to do that and when TV rights negotiations came up for renewal a poor offer ( compared to other conferences) was made along with their Commissioner not being able to sell rights to the PAC Network (that just started ) to some cable companies made the PAC fall to far behind to bring in the type of programs that could make it considered a good conference.
That and the timezone it's members played in made for most college football viewers( outside of west coast area) not turn
on the games.
Yes - this I agree with. 100%. The Pac 12 has lagged badly - mostly, I think, from the failure of the Pac 12 network. When I moved to NorCal, I used to be able to watch Cal and Stanford pretty much all the time. Games were on local and national channels. Over time, I've had DirecTV, Comcast and now YouTubeTV. Now, Cal and Stanford are only on the air occasionally (less these days because stink in both football and basketball).
BTW, when the Pac-12 finally announces their deal, I expect the money to be roughly in line with what the ACC and Big 12 are getting (ballpark $30 million per year per school). I admit to be not being sure what SDSU and SMU may bring to the party, but suspect they accept a Rutgers-type phase-in. I expect the Pac-12 to stay together. Jumping to the Big 12 doesn't seem like a step forward for any of the programs.
Wait a minute. The Pac-12 tried to get Texas and Oklahoma; when they couldn't, they got Colorado and Utah. You can say a lot of bad things about the Pac-12's leadership, but you can't say they didn't try to expand.
True and some think the PAC was being used as a pawn by Texas so they could start the Longhorn Network without the Big 12 opposing it.
I believe (at the time) the PAC didn't want Oklahoma State like the Sooners wanted along with them.
All in all I think the PAC didn't push he matter and walked away from making a deal with those two programs.
PAC Commissioner Scott said after walking away:
"After careful review we have determined that it is in the best interests of our member institutions, student-athletes and fans to remain a 12-team conference. While we have great respect for all of the institutions that have contacted us, and certain expansion proposals were financially attractive, we have a strong conference structure and culture of equality that we are committed to preserve. With new landmark TV agreements and plans to launch our innovative television networks, we are going to focus solely on these great assets, our strong heritage and the bright future in front of us."
It wasn't unreasonable to think that taking Oklahoma State would forego a better expansion opportunity. As for Scott's quote, it is the equivalent of coach-speak; the conference would have been happy to take on two more teams if they had been the right two teams.
The ACC schools are up the proverbial creek without a paddle. 3 schools, or 4 schools or 5 schools can make all the public noise they want, but they have absolutely no leverage. The other members just sit on their hands and nothing happens. The noisy schools need at least 8 votes to end the GOR. To get there they will need some of their fellow members to agree to put a gun to their head and pull the trigger. EVERYONE knows that the reason these noisy schools want to end the GOR is NOT because they want to negotiate more money for all conference members, it is because they want to bolt to another conference, thus imploding the ACC and leaving the others without that paddle. The reason I say that it will change in a few years is that the discrepancy in money is so bad that I think some of those schools may do crazy things to end it. I don't know exactly what they will be. But be careful. ESPN needs to protect its deal. IF/when it gets to the point where enough members are willing to support the noisy schools, look for ESPN to offer enough additional money to erode that secondary support.
The ACC is an interesting study. It has some of the best traditions in college sports, at least in basketball. The four NC schools are the core of this tradition. Maryland was a part of it before they said sayonara. Virginia is also a big part of it. But adding the Big East schools eroded that tradition without adding any major new ones. It is still hard for me to believe that UNC will separate from Duke, or NCState for that matter, but it may happen. Money can't really overcome deep seated traditions, especially when there is enough to go around, as there is now in the B1G and SEC. But the disparity is so bad in what ESPN did to the ACC that tradition may not be strong enough to hold everyone together.
Absolutely agree, but when never happens there will be an identifiable reason for it which does not exist right now.
Newsflash… you’re not going to get 8 schools at once to simotaneousely make noise
Shit, I’m surprised Clemson & UNC openly vouched for unequal revenue sharing so soon after Alford put the league on blast
Follow the noise. The top 3 schools in the league are all openly wanting more money
than the other schools
As I’ve said countless times, the conference is dead man walking
There’s zero shot it makes it til 2036
The Wheels are already in motion for SEC & B1G additions
B1G expansion. USC and UCLA agreed to join without partners. The threat from the UC Regents is history. There are no combinations of west coast TV markets, except LA, that will pay the B1G enough money to pay all the schools at least as much as members are making now. You can be sure the B1G has already checked this out. If there were such markets, the PAC12 would not be in so much trouble.
The SEC is already considered the top football conference. You suggest that they need FSU and Clemson to maintain that position and will be willing to pay those schools tons of their members money for the privilege to use their names.
Big12. Yep, they can add mid-sized markets, but who will pay them very much for that content that no one needs. If those markets are so valuable, why is the PAC12 in so much trouble? People keep trying to make the argument that the parts of the PAC12 are worth more than the whole. That by eliminating WSU and OSU the media rights will be worth substantially more. For those people, I have a bridge in Brooklyn I would like to sell you. That does not mean that some of these moves may not happen. Rats are known to leave a sinking ship. But it also does not mean that it will produce the benefits some are claiming for the B1G or Big12 or ACC.
The is a reason that the often predicted implosion of the PAC12 has not yet happened. The remaining members know that they are worth more together than they are separately. I believe they will continue to work toward improving that value by giving content providers more reasons to want their content. Putting PAC12 schools in another conference does not change the fact that they play their home games in the Mountain and Pacific time zones.
Hey, we can all believe what we want. Yet, facts are still important. The important fact here is that your 3 schools have absolutely no leverage. They can't end the GOR, they can't pass unequal revenue sharing. To use the vernacular, they can't do sh*t!.
Someone does not understand the PAC12 traditions. You should start with Stanford / Cal, then move on to Washington / WSU, Oregon / OSU and Arizona / ASU. There are not as many or as long as the SEC and B1G, but these are solid ties that bind. Interestingly enough the PAC12 has always been built on pairs of rivals. It might not be so hard to break up the conference, but it is likely whatever happens will maintain these rivalry pairs to a great extent.
Correct they need 8 to end it
The big 4 (including UVA) are no brainers
You’ll need landing places for the others - BC, Cuse and Wake are out
GT, Pitt, Duke are interesting
Ville, NC state, VT and Miami don’t need much convincing, as the ~500 million dollar difference between the ACC and the SEC/B1G over the next 13 years will (and in some cases, already has) gotten their attention
But how credible is the threat to bolt from the ACC if neither the B1G or SEC want to expand? Where would UNC go? That's what I was trying to ask.
The Pac-10 (as it now is) can conceivably survive without expanding so long as all four non-coastal schools (Arizona, Arizona State, Colorado and Utah) don't bolt. Losing just two means the conference still has eight schools. It could take Fresno State and San Diego State, but it would hold its nose -- those are considered second-tier schools, and beside, to be blunt, Fresno State fans are considered exceptionally obnoxious.
I had thought that maybe the Regents of the University of California could strong-arm the B1G into taking Cal, which would also undoubtedly bring along Stanford. But UCLA benefits so much financially from joining the B1G that it didn't happen. Instead, UCLA is going to subsidize Cal for the loss of revenue from not having UCLA as a conference opponent, and UCLA will still come out way ahead. One might think that the B1G would want Cal/Stanford for the sake of carriage fees in the San Francisco media market, but I guess the dollars aren't big enough.
I believe that the idea that UNC would leave the ACC on its own is greatly overstated. The ties between the 4 NC schools are deep and old. Those four schools, along with UVA, GT and the northern stepchildren, have the leverage that the 3 noisy schools do not have and can hold the conference together. I also believe that that combo of schools has enough leverage with ESPN to create a compromise that most of the ACC will support. We have to remember that the ACC is still a valuable property for the network and worth much more together than having a couple of those schools in the SEC (its property) or the B1G (Not its property). Can you imagine ESPN (and Dickie V) letting Duke / UNC go without a fight? It is likely that ESPN will value the traditions of the ACC (south), and some of its markets, enough agree to a compromise financial solution that keeps the conference together and in the ESPN portfolio.
Too many leaks and rumor regarding PAC teams leaving for the B12. Usually these things come out of nowhere. Nothing will happen
Could be wrong but my opinion is:
The subsidy and travel expenses will have UCLA trying to bring in Cal and Stanford while the B1G adds Washington and Oregon to lock up the west coast .
West Coast Football will be part of triple headers on the BTN and bring more exposure to the B1G West Coast members that usually play too late for east coast fans to stay up for when they travel to central and eastern time zone opponents. .
East Coast and Central B1G Programs playing in the West Coast will have the BTN get great TV ratings at the Pacific time zone.
That and the chance Arizona,ASU, Utah and Colorado don't like the TV package the PAC gets might see them bolt to the B-12 making for easy pickings of picking up the 4 PAC programs I mentioned and having them join under the type of terms Rutgers got, or maybe even a worse begibning with longer time to get to full revenue sharing.
Except that…UNC is one of the aforementioned 3 noisy schools
So under your premise, noisy UNC will influence NCS, Duke & wake
In reality…Wake has no invective, Duke is debateable while NCS has a lot of motivation
The only compromise is more money. No more empty promises, no more John Swofford, no more shunning football
Latest posts
-
-
Baseball Coastal Carolina defeats Rutgers 10-0 in Game One (7 Innings)
- Latest: rubaseball78
