Is the ACC in trouble?

As a curtesy to FSU, a state college in Florida, UF always in the SEC conference every year, recommend FSU for SEC membership. But it never passed a vote in the SEC conference until the SEC was going to expand to two more conference. But as mentioned, Bowden killed it.

And one more thing that the SEC wanted to do after Bowden screwed it, SEC reached out to the University of Miami. But that didn’t get anywhere. So, the SEC went for a third choice. And that worked! The SEC finally got a new member for the SEC East! And the Winner was…..The University of South Carolina Gamecocks! They had been in the ACC and was tired of North Carolina Tar Hills running everything. Of course they didn’t realize that Alabama ran the SEC! Yes, just ask Georgia Tech why they left the SEC.

And just one more thing, as Columbo always said……if anyone is interested…..

 

The Atlantic Coast Conference (ACC) Conference and the Southeastern Conference (SEC) Conference. Interesting terminology on this thread.

 

Sorry, but I think we can all drop the pretense that any of this has anything to do with academics anymore. It's all about the benjamins.

 

I could see 32 or 48 teams breaking away and leaving all the dead weight behind.

 

Exactly. Tell Bama fans how dumb they are. They just laugh and say look at the scoreboard. Football is not academia. They couldn’t even get in if it weren’t for sports and they don’t participate in tge same curriculum as the average student.

 

Big 10 will get to them first.

 

Well, the B1G does care more about AAU than the SEC based on them expanding only with AAU schools (Nebraska was expelled after their acceptance into the B1G). The SEC OTOH accepted OU who's not an AAU member, but I would suspect that it was the only way to get UTa.

 

I know another poster that suggested this, several times, when the NIL and transfer portal changes were announced.

 

There are clearly only 30 or so teams competing on the same level anyway. Scheduling games that are meaningless to try to prop up some other institutions. Finances is a dumb way to play sports.

 

There would be some major questions to answer if 48 teams broke away from the NCAA for football. Would these schools stay with the NCAA for all other sports? And what about playing games from the non-48? Or would the 48 only schedule amongst themselves. If it's the latter, then that's the end of cupcake games, which are often beneficial for both teams. The cupcake gets paid, and the big school, in most cases, gets to play some deeper guys and build some depth.

As for the ACC, they are in a bad position. ESPN isn't going to let them out of the GOR easily. ESPN is facing increased payments for the SEC, NFL, and others, while seeing their revenue stream from cable/satellite diminishing every month. ESPN also just laid off a number of employees. They have the ACC on the hook for cheap, and won't want to let go.

If, and it's a big if, the ACC Magnificent 7 can find an 8th to dissolve the conference, who picks them up? The B1G 10 is on record stating AAU schools only, which the two valuable AAU schools in the ACC are Virginia and North Carolina. The most valuable ACC schools, FSU, Miami, and Clemson are not. I don't see the SEC adding 6 schools from the ACC. Wouldn't add the value, nor would ESPN be happy about having to expand payments to 6 schools. Clemson? Yes. FSU, Miami, NC State, Virginia Tech, and an 8th unnamed ACC school? Not a slam dunk the SEC adds these.

These schools would likely be welcomed in the BIG12. But would say a Virginia Tech be happy about getting only $30 million a year from the BIG12 when Clemson is now in the SEC earning $60 million, and North Carolina is in the B1G getting $65 million?

Meanwhile, on the west coast, Washington and Oregon have been vetted by the B1G, and deemed acceptable, as both are AAU. But while UW and OU are valuable, they probably aren't worth $60 million a year. In addition, the B1G Presidents were happy to give the PAC a major body blow by taking the L.A. schools, but have been hesitant to take the knock-out blow. If the PAC crumbles because the 4-corner schools leave for the BIG12, the B1G would take the PNW schools at a discount.

Personally, I don't see the PAC crumbling. 3 out of the 4 PAC corner schools, (Arizona, Colorado, and Utah) are AAU, and there is only one BIG12 school that is AAU (Kansas). The 4-corner schools also have more alumni and get more students from the state of California than all BIG12 states combined, which is why San Diego State is likely to get a PAC invite. My guess is, this round, the PAC survives, and signs a 5 year GOR with Apple as the primary, with some combo of ESPN and NBC, with the total package close to, or even ahead of the BIG12's package.

This will hold things steady for a few years, until the next round of negotiations. By then, we'll know more about the success or failure of streaming live sports, and just how bad ESPN is hemorrhaging from cable/satellite subscriber losses. Or if they are thriving with ESPN+.

In my opinion, the next round will see the end of 5 power conferences one way or another.

 

This is a good point that nobody is really talking about. These networks that have set up these huge TV deals with the conferences and other sports are seeing their audiences dwindle. There is going to be a point where something has to give. TV subscriptions are dwindling with people cutting the cord and I think a lot of that is due to people being fed up with increased carriage fees for programming they don't want (largely sports) and of course more availability of online options that don't cost money (RokuTV, Freeve). I'm not sure what happens when the ESPN and these networks can't afford to pay for what they're contracted to pay.

You need to look no further than the troubles Bally Sports is having with it's MLB package. Diamond Sports Group has already defaulted on payments for 5 of the 14 MLB teams they telecast and may file for chapter 11 bankruptcy.

I think these networks are realizing they can't overpay for these deals.

 

Just a quick and minor correction: USCe left the ACC in 1971, wholly unrelated to joining the SEC. They didn’t join the SEC until 20 years later in 1991.

Here’s the Wikipedia quick and not necessarily reliable cite:
South Carolina Gamecocks - Wikipedia

 

If you look at it through objective lens, it’s arguable that UF fits better in the Big 10 than the SEC.

 

I think there are really 2 primary questions here.

First of all, what's the master plan going on behind the scenes between the SEC and Big 10? I really think there has to be some coordination going on behind the scenes. Do they each plan to add 2 more more to get to 18 each or do they expand beyond that? That's the really big question.

I think the answer to that question may lie in what remaining programs in the ACC, Pac-12 and Big-12 are going to generate the additional revenue to make them worth taking. In my opinion there aren't many. If for the sake of argument you put that target number at $70 million per year. The only 2 schools that I think are slam dunks out there are Notre Dame and UNC. That's why I put those 2 schools at the top of my list for both the SEC and Big-10 in my previous post. The SEC and Big-10 have already taken the other 4 available slam dunks (OU, Texas, USC and UCLA).

After that I think it gets a little dicey. FSU, Clemson, UVA, Washington, Oregon, NCSU, VT are probably all close, but I'm not sure any of them reach that benchmark but would all likely be candidates. Okey State, Kansas, Miami, ASU, Arizona, GT, Utah, Colorado, Cal, Stanford and Iowa State probably don't make that cut but could get consideration. The rest of the Pac-12, Big-12 and ACC are probably not even in the picture.

If Notre Dame doesn't decide to join a conference, I'm not sure if anything else happens to the Big-10 and SEC. I honestly don't know if any of those other schools I listed, GOR or not, is going to entice the SEC or Big-10 to make a move.

Then there will just be a bigger and bigger divide between the SEC/Big-10 and the other conferences. Unless something dramatic happens, the schools that don't somehow find a way into the SEC or Big-10 are likely to become second tier programs. That would be a real shame for some pretty good programs.

As for the Pac-12, I don't think it will go away. I could see them taking a few teams from the Mountain West (maybe SDSU, Boise State, Fresno State, Air Force, UNLV and BYU) to get to 16. They'd clearly be a second tier conference, like the Big-12, but I think they could get a more marketable TV deal with and bigger West Coast footprint. I don't see it happening but I've always said that the Pac-12 should to try and get a big Texas school (maybe Texas Tech) but I'm not sure Texas Tech would view that as any better than a lateral move. I always envisioned Texas and OU going to the Pac-12 really saving that conference.

 

please explain this statement

 

Or don’t.

 

Nah I want to hear this one

 

The PAC wants a presence in S. California. San Diego State is the most logical choice. Just so many alumni and future students, including prep talent in S. California. California is the lifeblood of not only PAC sports, but the schools as well. Out of state tuition at Arizona is around the same as in-state in California, and cost of living in Tempe and Tucson are much less expensive. Give a Cali kid a scholarship reduction, and it's often cheaper, all-in costs, to go to school in Arizona! And out of state tuition is about 3X what it costs in-state in Arizona, so the school gets more money too.

The PAC is also considering SMU, which is located in the Dallas metro area for expansion. It's a third-tier athletic school in Texas, but it is a Texas presence.

I agree that the top two conferences are the SEC and B1G, and everyone else is fighting for third place scraps. Also completely agree that the only Grand prize left on the board is Notre Dame. I'd put UNC, Clemson, FSU, Miami, Oregon, and Washington as 1st prizes. The rest of the P5 like the Arizona schools have value, but are behind the listed, and will likely never be part of the SEC or B1G.

I'm hopeful that by the next round of negotiations, the PAC and ACC can merge. A conference with Clemson, FSU, Miami, Oregon, Washington, and Utah at the top for football, plus Arizona and Duke for basketball may be third behind the B1G and SEC, but it's not a huge, distant third. Would likely be good enough remain competitive. The problem is there are currently 14 ACC schools and 10 PAC schools. A full merge without dropping some of the dead weight probably isn't good enough. Or, if the SEC and B1G take the top by taking Clemson, FSU, Oregon, and Washington, then you're left with a bunch of also-rans with not enough at the top, and the merge becomes another BIG12. A lot of nice-to-have programs, but no must-haves.

If there is a future with only 32 or 48 top teams, then that would really suck for some P5 schools. Arizona wouldn't make the 32 cut, and is on the bubble for 48. If the number is 64, I'm more confident Arizona would make it in.