My guess is twenty years from now football will be a club sport on campus and a nfl development league takes the bulk of the talent. Hmm maybe college baseball format is the future?
I don't think college football will become a club sport. My complete guess is that at some point, the SEC and Big-10 may team with the NFL to become some form of developmental "minor league" like MLB has. I'd like to see NFL teams have a supplemental developmental draft for kids coming out of high school or college underclassman, where the NFL teams can draft and own the signing rights of players. The players are paid directly by the NFL teams and placed (maybe the kid can choose) at one of the SEC/Big-10 schools for development, training and hopefully an education. If the NFL team wants to pull the kid up to the NFL early, they can do that. Or they can trade, cut or do whatever they want. The NFL teams own the rights to the kids through college and compensates them. If/when the kid graduates, the NFL team that owns his rights can sign him directly. If they don't sign him, he becomes a free agent. It's similar to the system the MLB has, except instead of players being placed on minor league teams out of HS, they go to an SEC or Big-10 school. The difference is that the MLB teams don't own the rights to kids that get developed in college. This would effectively take the schools and boosters out of paying the players, which is my major issue. I also think the NFL teams are going to pay more of a fair market value for kids where people now are just throwing money at kids. And maybe it would cut down some of the transfer portal issues. This doesn't really have to dramatically change things. The SEC and Big-10 schools don't have to become minor league professional teams. Kids from secondary conferences outside the SEC and Big-10 could be drafted and either moved up or developed where they are. I think the biggest issue that's going to destroy college football is letting the schools or boosters pay players crazy amounts of money directly. If you put that compensation in the hands of the NFL teams, the kids are going to get a more fair compensation and kids who aren't drafted will be happier just to get a college education. Just one idea.
Virginia just ratified a new law allowing schools to do just that, but Boosters have been doing it for decades.
True and if I was the ACC I would make them pony up the half a billion + to get out. Then they are free to make their own bed. The other point about using this as a tool to angle for a lower payout, what does the ACC have to gain by negotiating a lower amount? None.
This is all just a red herring that someone is fantasizing about chasing. The GOR is between ACC schools and the ACC. ESPN is not a party to it. This is nothing more than fanboy circular logic in claiming that a GOR is null and void if one team leaves the conference. Even if for some reason that leaving the conference blows up the ACC contract with ESPN, there is this little thing called damages to the ACC that FSU will have caused and have to contend with. Even so, the bottom-line is that FSU and Clemson will eventually leave the ACC. They are just trying to bargain down the cost that they will have to incur for them to do so.
I doubt that 9 out of 10 of the boobs over there have any association with UF at all. Its one of the reasons its downright embarrassing to have that group associated with GC.
It's been a few years since I've been there but I remember the boards being quite active even during football or basketball games. In other words- most posters didn't care much about the Gator sports even though TH is an offshoot of a sports board. I'm sure there are exceptions...
Just think about how many schools FSU will effect just to get out of the ACC... How many contracts from other school in the ACC they will essentially be dissolving... if FSU gets their easy way out. They want to right to get out of their contract agreement, when money was worth twice as much as it is now, and they want the right to destroy an entire sports broadcasting network's agreements with all those individual teams in that ACC conference. The price/cost to crush all those schools... the ACC Conference... and ESPN should be expensive.
And on top of that, you have to wonder what effect that FSU fighting to get out of a firm conference contract, that they voluntarily signed, may have on the SEC or Big-10's desire to add them as a member. I mean nobody really knows exactly what the SEC and Big-10 want and how much genuine interest the have in FSU and Clemson, but I've said a few times, I have a feeling that adding any schools not named Notre Dame isn't likely to bring either conference more money right now because I don't think there's any more TV inventory available for more games on the networks. Maybe if they put games on subchannels or ABC does something to put games on Freeform or another channel they own. But let's say the Big-10 and SEC decide to offer, but only at a half share, is FSU going to then take them to court demanding a full share? The SEC and Big-10 may not want to even take that risk.
Depends. If either the SEC or Big10 really wanted fsu, and what the ACC did originally was not "illegal", I would think the conference would just amend the agreements to make sure fsu could not leave at their convenience. Why would a Conference only offer a half share?
My point on the first part is that FSU is not wanting to fulfill their obligation to a contract they voluntarily signed. They're looking for any kind of loophole to get out. Because this is what the Big-10 did with Washington and Oregon. Those 2 schools are only getting a half share until the TV contract is renegotiated. The Big-10 and SEC schools are not going to take a paycut to add new schools and the TV networks aren't going to give the Big-10 and SEC more money. First, at least ABC/ESPN don't have any more money to give and second, every single TV Saturday TV slot is already taken between the SEC, ACC and Big-10 games. The only way to add more games would be weeknight games that don't generate as much revenue or opening more TV spots on other networks.
FSU got the best time slot on ABC but got outrated by 2 to 3 times the number of viewers by the CBS game. That doesn't suggest that FSU can make the SEC money they aren't already making. Then the members get a problem recruiting against FSU once FSU gets into a big boy conference. It doesn't work for member schools in any respect.
I'm not sure that I agree with this. FSU ratings vs CBS was based largely on the ABC coverage being split regionally. I believe at the 3:30 slot, ABC only had ACC showing on the East Coast I believe Big-12 in Central and maybe Pac-12 on PST. Point being that I believe only roughly a third of the country could see the ABC ACC coverage. Don't sell FSU short. They have fans and they would produce viewers for the SEC. The problem again is that there are a limited number of TV slots available on ABC and the ESPN networks. All those TV slots are already filled between the SEC, ACC and new Big-12 TV contracts. There are no more slots, unless they either create new slots by putting games on a new existing network, like Freeform (I don't know if they can), or go back to putting SEC games on Thursdays, which do not generate as much revenue. Adding FSU and Clemson would probably just bump coverage of a couple of existing SEC games. Hence if ABC/ESPN doesn't have a way to generate more revenue, they can't and won't pay the SEC more money. That means that adding FSU and Clemson to the SEC now would require ALL the existing SEC members to take a $6-7 million annual pay cut. More teams splitting the pot. It was the exact same scenario for the Big-10. They weren't willing to take UW and Oregon at a full share for the same reason. But they agreed UW and Oregon were worth taking now for a half share, which was probably a $3-4 million a year pay cut per current member. I believe ANY school hoping to get into the SEC or Big-10 had better be willing to take a half share until the TV contracts are renegotiated. The one exception to that could be Notre Dame because they effectively bring an additional national TV slot with them from NBC.
Do the member universities have a say, a vote? Why would SEC schools want fsu and/or Clemson if required to take less money? To me, the SEC is powerful and sufficient without adding schools.
I'm sure they do. FSU is doing what it's doing thinking that the SEC and Big-10 will fight over them. I'm not sure they will. Long-term, I do think schools like FSU, Clemson, Notre Dame and UNC will end up in the SEC or Big-10. But I personally don't think they'll do it until they need to. My guess is the Big-10 and SEC would prefer to stay exactly where they are until maybe a couple years before the next round of TV deal negotiations, which is several years off. But at that point maybe more game slots are created or maybe streaming takes off and becomes more profitable. Then those schools may have value. Right now they don't. The one scenario where I think the SEC or Big-10 would jump is Notre Dame. Notre Dame has a huge fan base and they have a TV slot locked in that I would assume would go to the conference they join. They have immediate value. The other schools really don't. UW and Oregon got into the Big-10 at a half rate because those schools had no other option and the Big-10 felt it was worth locking them up now and they were worth each member school giving up probably $3-4 million a year. It was a good business move for them long-term.
In excess of 60% of nationwide viewers are in the east coast coverage, so the FSU viewership just still doesn't add up even if you think mountain and pacific viewers are big consumers of the SEC broadcasts (if so, even more reason to believe FSU wouldn't move the needle to give each member a bigger share). I agree that ABC can't make more money on FSU and Clemson in the SEC and would have to at best take a reduced amount from the B1G that has more platforms for viewing.
I've been saying for a while I don't think FSU (or Clemson) is a lock to get picked up by the SEC or B1G. But as soon as the conferences think it will make them an extra buck, they will. This may be incredibly naive, but at some point I think these schools are going to regret creating super conferences that they never win. I said this when Oklahoma and Texas were admitted to the SEC. I get the logic of adding those two ($$$), but a bunch of SEC schools just voted themselves out of playing in the SEC championship game in the foreseeable future. The 12-team playoff will mitigate that, but what happens when schools like UF goes 25+ years without winning the SEC?
