Why does everyone think 8 is the magic number necessary to dissolve the ACC?
To AMEND the ACC Constitution, it takes a 75% supermajority. You can look it up. I did. It is not hard.
Yet folks suggest that it would only take 50%+1 to blow it all up?
Pac12 dissolution discussion
- Thread starter rotorocker
- Start date
To AMEND the ACC Constitution, it takes a 75% supermajority. You can look it up. I did. It is not hard.
Yet folks suggest that it would only take 50%+1 to blow it all up?
It won’t be the tv revenue, it will be the post season revenue so theoretically it’s up for grabs to anyone to get the extra share if they qualify for the CFP. It’s not written in stone that is FSU, Clemson etc.. Also getting to bowls might qualify for some extra money too.
From the article:
The league's athletic directors left a second day of occasionally contentious meetings feeling optimistic that schools would coalesce around a plan that would afford a larger share of postseason revenue -- including from a soon-to-expand College Football Playoff -- to the teams participating in those postseason games rather than dividing it equally among all members.
The ACC's annual spring meetings began Monday amid reports that seven schools had lawyers examine the league's grant of rights, which allocates each team's broadcast rights to the league through the year 2036, and had discussed potential exit strategies.
Those reports were met with intense frustration inside the AD's meeting room, with multiple members admitting to raised voices and a few profanities exchanged that Miami's Dan Radakovich chalked up as "an airing of grievances."
"People had to say where they were and why do you feel that way," Radakovich said.
The discussion of potential departures was "probably overblown," Alford said, with a number of other athletic directors, including at schools rumored to be among those looking for an exit, saying the reports were not substantive.
"Everyone has taken a look at the grant of rights," one athletic director said. "You'd be crazy not to. But no one is going anywhere."
To exit the ACC, a school would need to pay an exit fee of three times its annual revenue (approximately $120 million) and would risk losing the right to broadcast their games because of the grant of rights. It's a possibility schools have discussed, Radakovich said, but not one anyone is eager to undertake.
Sounds like the old Big East. This won't be sustainable. Give Warren credit to limit B1G deal to 2030 and renegotiate once more before Big 12 and ACC deals expire.
I do think by 2035 the discussion will swing to something like LIV Golf v. PGA where the cream of the crop schools with national media presence will be talking about leaving their conference (24 to 32 teams across the SEC, Big Ten, Big 12, ACC, PAC-12 and ND) and forming a new league to grab a new media deal that will rival a notch below NFL money leaving the rest to a significant notch below (think AAC level). Even the SEC and Big Ten will not be able to stay in tact as a conference. Money will drive this and the process is probably already staritng toward each school looking out for itself financially more so and not trusting the remainder of their conference bretheren.
Retired711, the real question is Stanford. Some people question whether Stanford wants to compete with NIL and they wonder what they are going to do. Also, from what I have heard (not sure) Stanford does not play well with others when it comes to collaboration (research). From what I follow on the Cal board, they would die to get to the Big 10. They know their survival depends on it. I understand their situation. But, the silence makes one wonder in a positive manner. It might be a while, that is the problem for them. Some people believe that in a worst case scenario, the Big 10 might step in and save them. Cal is definite worth it for the collaboration they would bring.
As far as Stanford and ND, don't read that much into that. What I am about to say is what I have gleaned from ND boards over the years. Only 2 programs mean anything to ND, Navy and USC. They have been playing USC for almost 100 years. Navy kept them open playing football during WW II and they feel they have an obligation to Navy. They have been playing Stanford less than 40 years. It was a means between them and USC of playing a game on the west coast every year. ND wears their independence as a badge of honor. ND has a lot of big donors who have threaten to withhold funds if they joined a conference. It will be definitely their last resort to join a conference.
I've also always doubted the theory that Notre Dame's decision to join the Big Ten would hinge on Stanford. (or "Stanfurd" as some Cal fans would put it.) I don't know if collaboration is a big deal for an institution two time zones away from the other Big Ten schools. My guess is that there's plenty of informal collaboration anyway between researchers at Cal and other places. I also think we all may tend to overestimate how important collaboration is in the minds of Big Ten decision. In the last anlaysis, it's all about $$. Finally, I don't think you should take seriously *anything* you read on the Cal board about Stanford just as you wouldn't believe anything on the Ohio State board about Michigan or vice versa.
P.S. Stanford alums have money and I'm sure would be more than happy to raise NIL funds to recruit and retain athletes. Remember that Silicon Valley is nearby. Remember also the taunt that Stanford fans direct at Cal fans: "you'll be working for us someday!"
It wouldn’t hinge on Stanford, it would be just another carrot on top of a stack of carrots. Long time rivals USC, Michigan, MSU, Purdue would be in the conference. They also like to play a national schedule and the conference would be national with teams possibly up and down the east, west and midwest and also across population centers and recruiting hotbeds. It’s the total package that makes it enticing not Stanford alone. They would just be one of many carrots.
From the article:
Those seven schools—Clemson, Florida State, North Carolina, Miami, North Carolina State, Virginia and Virginia Tech—are not expected to continue any group meetings or pursue a group exit.
As SI reported Monday, there were few solutions for the seven schools that did not involve significant legal battles from fellow members, the league office and ESPN, whose TV contract with the league coincides with the grant of rights. How much revenue a new model would pay ACC schools cannot bridge the sizable gap between the league and its competition in the SEC and Big Ten under the current agreement. While $5 or $10 million extra certainly is not immaterial, it also isn’t the $30 or $40 million an ACC school would need for complete monetary parity, a reality Alford acknowledges.
This is why I say the B12 is a wash at best financially and not a landing spot for schools.
From the article:
We’re the third-best media agreement right now, we want to stay the third-best. We've been able to compete with them being the third-best.”
Those seven schools—Clemson, Florida State, North Carolina, Miami, North Carolina State, Virginia and Virginia Tech—are not expected to continue any group meetings or pursue a group exit.
As SI reported Monday, there were few solutions for the seven schools that did not involve significant legal battles from fellow members, the league office and ESPN, whose TV contract with the league coincides with the grant of rights. How much revenue a new model would pay ACC schools cannot bridge the sizable gap between the league and its competition in the SEC and Big Ten under the current agreement. While $5 or $10 million extra certainly is not immaterial, it also isn’t the $30 or $40 million an ACC school would need for complete monetary parity, a reality Alford acknowledges.
This is why I say the B12 is a wash at best financially and not a landing spot for schools.
From the article:
We’re the third-best media agreement right now, we want to stay the third-best. We've been able to compete with them being the third-best.”
Last edited:
From a BC site (ouch):
www.bcinterruption.com
Seven ACC Schools Have Met With Lawyers To Investigate the Possibility of Breaking Up the Conference
The beginning of the end?
www.bcinterruption.com
Meeting with lawyers is easy. It's the rest of the process that's hard.From a BC site (ouch):
Seven ACC Schools Have Met With Lawyers To Investigate the Possibility of Breaking Up the Conference
The beginning of the end?
it's not a theory but they play them every year for 40yrs so it matters to them. ND carefully crafts their perception and persona and they fully understand that as a private institution, athletics drives the bus just as much as academics. You are who you associate with
b12, I'm sure has in the contracts, can renegotiate or has kickers in the tv contracts should content and quality grow. the contract is in no way stagnant, would be shocked beyond belief if it were.
That's fair, but it can be argued that the ACC did not hold up their end of the bargain by staying competitive in the ever changing landscape of college athletics, thereby literally ruining schools chances to compete for titles
You can't come back from a minimum 500 million dollar deficit over the next 13 years - it's impossible and will kill these schools. That's the reason they'll never go anywhere near 2036 in the ACC, regardless of the GOR
I think that's true and some say there is a pro rata arrangement but IMO that's a best case scenario, I wouldn't expect any appreciable bump in money because none of the names that would jump are earth shattering.
Like I said, most schools that jump or look to jump conferences generally don't want to but financial circumstances force them. I don't see any appreciable financial difference between the ACC and B12. It easier for a couple teams more geographically suited to the ACC to move in that direction than a bunch from the east move towards a more texas/midwest centric conference for likely not much financial gain. This assumes the ACC still has a solid group in place after whatever schools leave to the B10/SEC.
BTW the B12's new 31-32M dollar deal also includes its tier 3 rights, which IIRC are going to ESPN+ as opposed to their current one which doesn't include tier 3. If the ACC, still has schools in NC and FL that's probably more lucrative to them through the ACCN than an ESPN+ deal. IMO if there are still 9-10 schools left in the ACC after all is said and done, I think it's a wash financially with the B12 and the ACC would still be an attractive spot geographically for UCF/WVU in 2030. Maybe UConn and Cincy could be added to the mix as well.
no self respecting American reads anything from msn
As you can see, the MSN item is a link to a Sports Illustrated article.
Looking for my violin …..From a BC site (ouch):
Seven ACC Schools Have Met With Lawyers To Investigate the Possibility of Breaking Up the Conference
The beginning of the end?
DeFillipo started the destruction of the Big East so they should understand this well.
as you can see, it doesn't matter as they get credit for the click. fk off tard, not hitting that bs
It appears that in the last 24 hours the tone of the rumors has changed to back those of us who have been saying it wasn’t going to be that easy to get out or dissolve the conference, with the impetus switching to the unequal revenue sharing.
It sounds like a team with consistent football success might be able cut that deficit by 100-150 million, but nobody is getting out until closer to the end of the contract (when the math makes paying the fees to get out more favorable).
The "gag" order was apparently issued Monday night to the AD's
Alford's "we're happy in the ACC" was one of the funnier things I've heard
He's made his feelings known
Unequal revenue sharing is the first step, but really a band aid on Niagara Falls
Play nice in the sandbox until a few other dominoes fall, collect some additional revenue from the league, then GTFO first chance you get
yup
but how dumb are those schools to give up revenue to satiate a few schools who will leave at first light? dumb is an undersatement
Jesus stop please. There is no gag order, stop reading the bs from the boards and interjecting.
as I said, it's 75% to break the GOR, FSU was never getting out and no one has invited anyone.
please please just stop
I respect your knowledge but we'll agree to disagree on numerous things, including the Noles getting out
I've said 2-3 years based off what I've heard - whether it's 2026, 2027, or 2030, I'm confident in the people I've spoken to
Whether or not that comes to fruition certainly remains to be seen, as we're all in agreement that the GOR is a massive obstacle to overcome
Eye for an eye leaves the word blind.
People (not saying you) bemoan NIL and how college athletics is all “money money money.” Ask “what about playing for the love of the game?”
And then get all giddy over conferences destroying other conferences purely to make more money and destroy athletic departments.
sorry if that came off rude, that was not my intent. I'm merely saying let's slow down on after the fact tells is all
take that liberal bs out of your mouth when you're talking to me
seriously however, a slow, 1000 year body screeching death akin to the sarlacc is fine for me with the sara and sewercuse
Haha. Thats not my view.
I would agree. Destroy all the other conferences if it means Rutgers gets more money. A level playing field would be terrible. We're in the 1%.
Especially if it means SHU and SU get left behind.
All good
I enjoy talking about college FB and am fascinated by realignment
I agree though - there's a lot of information coming out. Some is clearly BS, others might have legs. I think we can all agree on a few things
1. GOR is a massive obstacle
2. ACC is an awful conference
3. All members (FSU included) had their head in the sand for far too long to let things get to this point
No complaints from me about NIL or transfer portal etc...I see opportunity as good as its ever been for teams down the totem pole. Cincy, TCU in a 4 team playoff, autobids, CFP expansion etc..Look at the final 4 this year of the NCAA tourney and teams that aren't in the P5 getting ranked high and having high seeds in the tourney.
The complaint is it's not fair but that's a given and always has been, accept it. There will never be full parity but I see opportunity as good as ever when you see what's actually happening.
From the article:
But as Virginia Tech athletic director Whit Babcock made clear, folks have explored potential alternatives. And that shouldn’t be revelatory.
“I would classify it as a number of conversations,” Babcock told The Times-Dispatch, “usually in small groups, on interpretations of grant of rights, of bylaws of the league, of options that may be out there. But as you know, the grant of rights has been looked at a lot of times by a lot of people.”
Realignment chatter “does make everybody paranoid and jumpy and consider trust,” Babcock said.
“I think it was less than ideal that it came out, but it’s been a catalyst for some real conversation and maybe getting to things a little faster that we’ve been working on as the ACC.”
Babcock declined comment on whether Virginia Tech and/or the seven schools together have met with other conferences. Why the reticence?
“The tough thing about being an AD in times of conference realignment, real or perceived, is there’s nothing you can really say that’s the perfect answer,
Babcock said the conversations weren’t as organized as many interpreted Monday and that several included subsets of the seven. Topics included not only the grant of rights, but also ACC bylaws to ascertain what is required to change the revenue-sharing formula — at least 10 of 15 presidents must approve.
But as Virginia Tech athletic director Whit Babcock made clear, folks have explored potential alternatives. And that shouldn’t be revelatory.
“I would classify it as a number of conversations,” Babcock told The Times-Dispatch, “usually in small groups, on interpretations of grant of rights, of bylaws of the league, of options that may be out there. But as you know, the grant of rights has been looked at a lot of times by a lot of people.”
Realignment chatter “does make everybody paranoid and jumpy and consider trust,” Babcock said.
“I think it was less than ideal that it came out, but it’s been a catalyst for some real conversation and maybe getting to things a little faster that we’ve been working on as the ACC.”
Babcock declined comment on whether Virginia Tech and/or the seven schools together have met with other conferences. Why the reticence?
“The tough thing about being an AD in times of conference realignment, real or perceived, is there’s nothing you can really say that’s the perfect answer,
Babcock said the conversations weren’t as organized as many interpreted Monday and that several included subsets of the seven. Topics included not only the grant of rights, but also ACC bylaws to ascertain what is required to change the revenue-sharing formula — at least 10 of 15 presidents must approve.
Everybody is always together and looking to make conference __________ as strong as it can be ... until the invite comes (or whatever's necessary) enabling them to leave.
It's just particularly satisfying having it happen to this particular group of schools, considering it's what they did to us.
Jim Phillips doing his best Baghdad Bob impersonations I see.
Do you really think the credibility of the Sports Illustrated article is undermined by there being a link on msn.com to it??
How could the SEC prevent Georgia Tech from joining the Big Ten?? And how does ESPN go about stopping North Carolina from leaving the ACC?? This tweet by a former Star-Ledger reporter doesn't pass the laugh test IMHO.
