Conference Realignment - What's next?

OSUPSYCHO said:
The problem is they can’t just add teams without either getting the media partners to at least add them at the same payout or they will end up diluting the current payouts which is a no go. Media partners are the ones controlling this, not the conferences.
Click to expand...

Partially true. Adding teams after a media deal is done does add new content that they then have to sell. That is how the B1G did it when they added Oregon and Washington. Adding them in at reduced shares mitigated it, but I don't think anyone in the B1G made less then. The B1G would have to do that again to add ACC schools.

The SEC on the other hand though has Pro Rata expansion clauses with ESPN. Now you need to work with your partners (ESPN) and keep them happy when you do that. The ACC added Stan/Cal/SMU against ESPN's wishes to try to take advantage of the contract. That all said, I don't think ESPN would have much issue with paying pro rata for adding major brands that increase the value of the overall content. Also, The SEC can add members at reduced shares. That effectively INCREASES payouts for existing members thanks to the overall pro rata pay bump (basically what the ACC did with Stan/Cal/SMU).

OSUPSYCHO said:
More likely is that the breakaway will end up happening around 2030. This is the best way to make more money for all as well as get the rules they want put into place.
Click to expand...

This is definitely possible. We are building toward big changes. It is just (and will be) murky what those are. If there is a breakaway the most likely outcome is that it would include the Big 12 (or most of the Big 12 schools). There is just too much political muck that would be stirred up by trying to break only 40-ish teams away. Look at the crazy hub-bub that happened when just Stanford and Cal were initially left out of the new P4. The death of the ACC will make that look VERY tame. The B1G and SEC breaking away without 30+ existing/recent Power conference schools would be the political shit storm to end all shit storms.

So IMHO, the MINIMUM a breakaway could happen with would be 48 schools, but even that I consider very unlikely. I think 56-64 is the most likely with it maxing around 72. Probably a bell curve around the 60 mark. My best guess is that they try to do it with the lower side to begin with (48 or so) and then politics pushes it up. Though I don't like OSU's situation, I consider it VERY unlikely we would get left out in a breakaway scenario.
 
Last edited:
PorcupinePoke said:
Partially true. Adding teams after a media deal is done does add new content that they then have to sell. That is how the B1G did it when they added Oregon and Washington. Adding them in at reduced shares mitigated it, but I don't think anyone in the B1G made less then. The B1G would have to do that again to add ACC schools.

The SEC on the other hand though has Pro Rata expansion clauses with ESPN. Now you need to work with your partners (ESPN) and keep them happy when you do that. The ACC added Stan/Cal/SMU against ESPN's wishes to try to take advantage of the contract. That all said, I don't think ESPN would have much issue with paying pro rata for adding major brands that increase the value of the overall content. Also, The SEC can add members at reduced shares. That effectively INCREASES payouts for existing members thanks to the overall pro rata pay bump (basically what the ACC did with Stan/Cal/SMU).



This is definitely possible. We are building toward big changes. It is just (and will be) murky what those are. If there is a breakaway the most likely outcome is that it would include the Big 12 (or most of the Big 12 schools). There is just too much political muck that would be stirred up by trying to break only 40-ish teams away. Look at the crazy hub-bub that happened when just Stanford and Cal were initially left out of the new P4. The death of the ACC will make that look VERY tame. The B1G and SEC breaking away without 30+ existing/recent Power conference schools would be the political shit storm to end all shit storms.

So IMHO, the MINIMUM a breakaway could happen with would be 48 schools, but even that I consider very unlikely. I think 56-64 is the most likely with it maxing around 72. Probably a bell curve around the 60 mark. My best guess is that they try to do it with the lower side to begin with (48 or so) and then politics pushes it up. Though I don't like OSU's situation, I consider it VERY unlikely we would get left out in a breakaway scenario.
Click to expand...
The media partners have made it clear that they want more than just 48 teams in this breakaway. Since they hold the purse strings I expect 64 to be more likely.
 
Nothing will happen immediately. There is still no real evidence that anyone in the ACC brings money to the table for the P2. Oregon/Wash had to accept reduced shares with the Pac-12 future ahead of them, FSU would be taking a pay cut with reduced shares. In a good season they'll be banking over $60 million, maybe closer to $70. While the lowest tier of the ACC will probably drop around or below Big 12 pay.

I think 2030 requires more consideration for the middle programs. I also don't believe the B12 clearly gets the scraps, as I don't believe there are more than 3 or 4 properties in the ACC even sort of worth it for the P2. Let's say Clemson, FSU, and UNC get poached.

A conference of Miami, Va Tech, NC State, Georgia Tech, Louisville, Duke, with the ND deal could be very attractive to some Big 12 brands. I think the ACC will be pulling on the weak links of Colorado and Utah. Kansas is most certainly willing to listen. The four corner schools could help the ACC with a 6 team western flank. Kansas would be an excellent pairing with UL, Duke, Syracuse, and ACC MBB tradition. If Tx Tech can keep their oil billionaires engaged, they could become a less advantageously located but more popular SMU (SMU was in the bottom 4 of ACC team ratings last year, they just have a small alumni base and FSU was top 4 despite their horrible season).

In this case I don't think BYU has a path to the ACC.

Honestly, with the way NIL is playing out I am worried about OSU if the ACC doesn't get raided beyond the biggest two or three and manages to keep their ND deal. I feel like we could end up where Kansas was back when the PAC was looking at adding us with OU & UT. I worry we could be their 7th best choice (assuming they maintain their snobbery toward WVU & UConn both of whom who are geographic fits and state flagships) due to NIL potential, location, and university fit.
 
Last edited:
The realignment will happen, but by the time it happens there may not be 70 schools that can afford it. After I saw the football ticket prices and the Posse parking I am coming close to saying no more. There is absolutely no way a young family can afford this. We have always bought our kids tickets and parking but this is enough to make my wife and me have a hard conversation. We had best be ready to have 40,000 seats filled game to game. I’m not going to pay that much for .500 seasons and we made every game of 0-10-1.
 
andylicious said:
The realignment will happen, but by the time it happens there may not be 70 schools that can afford it. After I saw the football ticket prices and the Posse parking I am coming close to saying no more. There is absolutely no way a young family can afford this. We have always bought our kids tickets and parking but this is enough to make my wife and me have a hard conversation. We had best be ready to have 40,000 seats filled game to game. I’m not going to pay that much for .500 seasons and we made every game of 0-10-1.
Click to expand...
This old guy can't take the heat on the north side early in the season. We have had 4 tickets but we will probably cut back to 2 or 3 going forward.
 
My son is dropping his tickets this season because they just had their 3rd trial and the eldest starts soccer this fall. I was thinking I'd pick up his tickets, just so I could control who sits next to us. When I saw the ticket price increase I said eff that. If all the seats went up as much as ours, ticket increases will cover more than half the $20 million settlement.

If the season tix continue to sell out, that is. Given the timing relative to last season's debacle, that's a big if.
 
This is a way out there thought, but what if the best of the ACC broke away and then grabbed the best of the Big 12 to form a 16 ish team conference to challenge the B1G and SEC. that is legitimately something that could happen in 2030 or so. OSU would absolutely be a part of that. Crazy, but just something to think about.
 
OSU79 said:
My son is dropping his tickets this season because they just had their 3rd trial and the eldest starts soccer this fall. I was thinking I'd pick up his tickets, just so I could control who sits next to us. When I saw the ticket price increase I said eff that. If all the seats went up as much as ours, ticket increases will cover more than half the $20 million settlement.

If the season tix continue to sell out, that is. Given the timing relative to last season's debacle, that's a big if.
Click to expand...
Yeah, Playoff money was supposed to cover that. Obviously it isn't.
 
PorcupinePoke said:
This is a way out there thought, but what if the best of the ACC broke away and then grabbed the best of the Big 12 to form a 16 ish team conference to challenge the B1G and SEC. that is legitimately something that could happen in 2030 or so. OSU would absolutely be a part of that. Crazy, but just something to think about.
Click to expand...
I'm not sold there are more than 3 teams the P2 will care about from the ACC, definitely not more than 4.

I believe we are on shaky ground with NIL and need to have some great seasons leading up to 2030.
 
celldweller7 said:
I'm not sold there are more than 3 teams the P2 will care about from the ACC, definitely not more than 4.

I believe we are on shaky ground with NIL and need to have some great seasons leading up to 2030.
Click to expand...
FSU, Clem, and ND are all for sure. UNC seems pretty universally thought in there too, but I've seen others say they don't really have the metrics outside of that. Miami should be up there too.

My best guess is that UNC goes to the SEC with FSU and Clem. The fourth either being UVA, NCST, or Kansas. Then ND goes to the Big Ten with either Stanford or Miami.

Louisville is a virtual lock for the Big 12. VT is the next most likely with NCST being third. Miami is a lock if they don't make it in to the SEC or B1G. If they do many think the 4th would be Pitt, but I lean more toward GT.
 
PorcupinePoke said:
FSU, Clem, and ND are all for sure. UNC seems pretty universally thought in there too, but I've seen others say they don't really have the metrics outside of that. Miami should be up there too.

My best guess is that UNC goes to the SEC with FSU and Clem. The fourth either being UVA, NCST, or Kansas. Then ND goes to the Big Ten with either Stanford or Miami.

Louisville is a virtual lock for the Big 12. VT is the next most likely with NCST being third. Miami is a lock if they don't make it in to the SEC or B1G. If they do many think the 4th would be Pitt, but I lean more toward GT.
Click to expand...
ND will take them all to court for antitrust violations before they ever join a conference as a full member. As long as ND has direct access to the CFP they will be football independents, if that access closes, they will go to court. If the ACC collapses, they will move their non-FB sports back to the Big East or engage in a partial membership/scheduling alliance deal with the Big 12.

If Stanford was headed to the B1G, they'd already be there. The B1G could've had them for literally free and they passed.

UNC, FSU, and Clemson are the only ones who'd presumptively be non-dilutive to the B1G or SEC. Miami is borderline.

An ACC with Miami, NC State, Va Tech, Georgia Tech, Stanford, Duke is more brand heavy than the current Big 12 whose biggest brands are probably Kansas & BYU (and Colorado with Coach Prime). We also know that the western branch of the Big 12 has absolutely no loyalty to the conference with programs like Utah openly antagonistic.

KU is dilutive to either P2 conference unless they gain control of March Madness and can funnel more of that money directly to the conferences.
 
celldweller7 said:
ND will take them all to court for antitrust violations before they ever join a conference as a full member. As long as ND has direct access to the CFP they will be football independents, if that access closes, they will go to court. If the ACC collapses, they will move their non-FB sports back to the Big East or engage in a partial membership/scheduling alliance deal with the Big 12.

If Stanford was headed to the B1G, they'd already be there. The B1G could've had them for literally free and they passed.

UNC, FSU, and Clemson are the only ones who'd presumptively be non-dilutive to the B1G or SEC. Miami is borderline.

An ACC with Miami, NC State, Va Tech, Georgia Tech, Stanford, Duke is more brand heavy than the current Big 12 whose biggest brands are probably Kansas & BYU (and Colorado with Coach Prime). We also know that the western branch of the Big 12 has absolutely no loyalty to the conference with programs like Utah openly antagonistic.

KU is dilutive to either P2 conference unless they gain control of March Madness and can funnel more of that money directly to the conferences.
Click to expand...
Yeah. Even with OU and Texas the Big 12 was trash. Now that they've departed and with the additions - it's now complete garbage. Honestly, I'm surprised the Big 12 is still considered a "power" anything.

It is what it is, I guess. I'll support OSU until my final breath.
 
celldweller7 said:
ND will take them all to court for antitrust violations before they ever join a conference as a full member. As long as ND has direct access to the CFP they will be football independents, if that access closes, they will go to court. If the ACC collapses, they will move their non-FB sports back to the Big East or engage in a partial membership/scheduling alliance deal with the Big 12.

If Stanford was headed to the B1G, they'd already be there. The B1G could've had them for literally free and they passed.

UNC, FSU, and Clemson are the only ones who'd presumptively be non-dilutive to the B1G or SEC. Miami is borderline.

An ACC with Miami, NC State, Va Tech, Georgia Tech, Stanford, Duke is more brand heavy than the current Big 12 whose biggest brands are probably Kansas & BYU (and Colorado with Coach Prime). We also know that the western branch of the Big 12 has absolutely no loyalty to the conference with programs like Utah openly antagonistic.

KU is dilutive to either P2 conference unless they gain control of March Madness and can funnel more of that money directly to the conferences.
Click to expand...
Wait until next Sunday when you see the sec w 12-13 in the tournament. ESPN all season has been downplaying the ACC. North Carolina is 20-12 and 13-7 and espn keeps saying bubble. OU is 18-12 and 6-12 and they are in. Same for Texas.

Same for Baylor. As much as I despise them how are they 18-13 and 10-10 w probably 2 lottery picks and they “still have work to do”?

I predict 12 sec, 8 BiG10, 5 ACC and 7 Big12.

They are shifting the narrative on basketball already to set up conference realignment.
 
HacklemanPoke said:
Wait until next Sunday when you see the sec w 12-13 in the tournament. ESPN all season has been downplaying the ACC. North Carolina is 20-12 and 13-7 and espn keeps saying bubble. OU is 18-12 and 6-12 and they are in. Same for Texas.

Same for Baylor. As much as I despise them how are they 18-13 and 10-10 w probably 2 lottery picks and they “still have work to do”?

I predict 12 sec, 8 BiG10, 5 ACC and 7 Big12.

They are shifting the narrative on basketball already to set up conference realignment.
Click to expand...
ESPN is trying to sell advertising, they aren't selling news.

Once you cross that bridge in your head it won't irritate you. They are just pandering to brands and if it happens to align with reality, that's cool too.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top