That would be the negotiated buyout. So the real number is higher. The ACC doesn't have to budge on the bigger number if they choose not to. Hope they stand their ground and make it hurt for leaving.
The teams leaving Carrie’s the football end of the conference. I get the payout and all but the ACC has already collected hundreds millions and failed to create an elite conference.
The ACC could be successful in making sure no legit team ever finds themselves doing business with the conference. It’s very similar as when we let guys transfer and waive the ability to make them sit a year. It doesn’t bode well for the future. If a team doesn’t want to be in a conference, it’s best to make a deal that both sides can live with.
If $300,000,000.00 is a negotiated amount, does anyone know the full amount? Also, installments over 10-years without any interest mentioned sounds like a Hole wrote that from deamland. Can't see any move involving exit fees without having another conference bid secured and why would the ACC allow itself to then be weakened like that? Makes no sense to me. ACC seems to hold a strong hand.
Normally I'd agree but if it means the demotion of a conference to clearly second tier, or irrelevance, maybe they should play more hardball. Especially if they hold a very strong hand like the ACC. Delay a few years with massive buyouts and they may buy enough time to stay relevant. I could care less as long as it's messy and painful for the Holes. LOL! Sounds like them to pay $300,000,000 thinking they're the crown jewel of college football and then wind-up in the Sun Belt. We overlook it's the TV networks driving and dictating a lot of this conference realignment, IMO. Once a conference is hurt enough that the TV ratings would take a nosedive, the networks involved will put a stop to it.
I haven't seen the full cost but based on the article that FSU will negotiate a buyout, it has to be higher.
What legit teams would go to the ACC? No one from the SEC or B10 are going to the ACC so who would except a team from a lower conference who wouldn't have leverage.
Sure feels like all of these rumors are being floated by Noles, but to what end I can't figure out. They desperately want an SEC or B1G invite, but I don't think one is coming so they don't really have any leverage, this is all bluster.
Just my opinion, but if the Big-10 really wanted Oregon and Washington, they would have taken then along with USC and UCLA. I'm just not sure why they'd have waited. Maybe they didn't want the story leaked and figured working with the 2 schools would help keep it from getting leaked. Will be interesting to see what happens. The Pac-12 is done. I think after the Pac-12 TV presentation, which I believe will amount to nothing, ASU, Arizona and Utah (four-corners) will probably announce they're going to Big-12 too. Big-12 would love to have them all. I actually think CU announcing was probably planned by the four corners to destabilize any TV deal the Pac-12 might present. In my opinion, those 4 schools are all going to Big-12. The rest of the conference may do the same and I think the Big-12 would love to have them all. Oregon and Washington may have to go independent if they don't want to be under contractual obligation thinking the Big-10 will eventually grab them. I actually hope FSU and Clemson find a good landing spot. UNC, Washington and Oregon too. It would be kind of sad to see these prominent programs get left out of the top level of college athletics ... I'm sure many here are hoping to see FSU fail.
$300 million? Added to the last buyout? Added to infrastructure improvements? Added to NIL and slush fund accounts? Damn, the farmers growing corn and tobacco around Quincy must be doing real good. Lol
I know for a fact a large UW booster, and former boss of mine, has zero interest in Washington ever going to the BIG12. Culturally, UW doesn't fit. The money doesn't really fit either. UCLA is going to spend an extra estimated $5 million on travel going to the B1G. Still worth it, when B1G money is about $25 million or more than UCLA can receive in any other conference. But UW and Oregon? They are looking at similar travel budgets if they join the BIG12, and payout isn't likely be significantly more than $5 million difference. The reason the B1G hasn't taken UW and Oregon yet is nobody wants to be the one who kills the PAC. At this point, I wish someone would just pull the damn trigger already. The PAC is wounded deeply, and dying. Killing it one way or another would be merciful. Utah is another sticking point. Rumors are the BIG12 have been calling, but Utah isn't answering. The Utes feel they have arrived having won the PAC the last two years, and believe they are better than the BIG12, which now has their rivals, BYU. It's a similar feeling between UF and FSU, and for the past decade, Utah was in a better spot. Now that the tables have turned, Utah is refusing to accept this reality. The PAC TV contract from Apple is being presented today. It's rumored to be $70 million for the PAC12 Channel and assets, which would pay off all the debt the conference owes Comcast. Then $20 million per school guaranteed, ladders up to $45 million a year if a certain number of subscribers is reached. Unlikely to reach that number, and best guesses is closer to $25 to $30 million a year per school. Contract said to be for 5 years, which expires 2030. Contract is good for up to 12 teams, with any additions receiving 1/2 share to start, and stepping up to full share by year 5. Apple would have all rights, but also retain the right to sell any game. ESPN has said to have some interest in some PAC-12 after dark games they would buy from Apple.
ACC football, FSU look for money answers with conference jump possible We will know by August 15th. According to this article, FSU has to declare they are leaving the ACC or they have to stay another 2 years.
The SEC needs to do some soul-searching and ask themselves the following: What do we truly care about? 1. Expanding our footprint and TV markets in order to increase our revenue? or 2. Stopping the B1G from one-upping us and encroaching on our territory? I think the answer is #1. Adding F$U to the SEC brings us no new markets. It would dilute the pot. And if the B1G is hell bent on expanding into Florida they will add Miami if the SEC takes F$U or even USF who gained AAU membership recently. It would be a simple chess move to keep the B1G out of our back yard and it could certainly backfire if the B1G adds another FL team anyways. If 18 or 20 SEC members is something we wanna make happen, start with UNC/NCSU and Va Tech. That gets us a whole bunch of TV markets that F$U cannot deliver.
“Markets” are becoming less relevant because of new delivery systems that allow “streaming.” The next contracts will be about conference packages. Like entertainment services—how many and which to subscribe to. If you’re a UF fan you will subscribe to the one carrying those games and other relevant ones— presumably SEC. How many subscriptions will someone pay for to watch an occasional Illinois or Virginia Tech game?
Maybe I'm naïve, but I don't necessarily see why the SEC (or B1G) needs to go to 18 or 20 teams. If they do, its because they're picking off more prime programs like Texas and OU, but I doubt they do it just to expand their footprint or anything like that. New TV markets aren't as important as they once were, the SEC Network is already pretty standard on most cable packages and streaming makes geography even less important. VT and UNC don't add enough value for the SEC's media rights to increase the average payouts across the SEC. If the SEC is going to add programs, it needs to be on the level of the top half of SEC programs in terms of ratings and popularity, i.e. Bama/UGA/LSU/Texas/OU/UF/aTm. I would assume VT's popularity likely fits in around the end of the next tier of programs like Tenn/Auburn/Arkansas/Kentucky/SoCar. Note I've listed 12 SEC programs that I think bring more value than VT, even if you quibble with one or two they clearly fall in bottom half of the SEC and would dilute the pot more than add to it. Clemson and FSU you can at least argue are on par, in terms of brand value, with the first tier of SEC programs I listed before. But if the rumors are true that UF/UK/UGA/SoCar have a pact to block adding schools from their states then I think its a no-go on those programs and the SEC sits tight for a little while. Which means I think FSU will just twist in the wind and whine about their ACC payout for the foreseeable future.
The reason for the super conference is TV profitability. ESPN is losing cable subscribers daily, and will one day, sooner or later, go full streaming. And like any business, ESPN is going to want to maximize profits. The theory is two super conferences, the SEC and the B1G, might be the most profitable. A 24 team SEC would allow ESPN to drop all other conferences and still have plenty of content. A 6-team SEC playoff with the winner playing the winner of a 6-team B1G playoff for the NC would drive plenty of revenue. It would essentially be the NFL model, only slightly altered for college. The SEC likely doesn't want to go there. In this model, the SEC and B1G have teams on both coasts and all areas in between. But ESPN, FOX, Comcast, and CBS may push hard for this model. Only time will tell.
