Big 12 Expansion (new thread)

[Itjustdoesn'tmatter]

Totally fair but in that case if clemson and lets say FSU were to leave in 2036 they would most likely try to add 2 more schools. At this point close to half the conference wouldn't have a landing spot kinda like the big 12 which is why the big 12 added and didn't disband. Now in 2036 all bets are off and who knows what will happen then but speculating on something 14 years in the future is a fools errand.

Yes, it's clearly a fools errand, but interesting.

As I understand the BIG XII rules, we could have disbanded if 8 of 10 voted to do so. The fear was being the 2 teams that didn't have a landing place. Using you're scenario, If Clemson & FSU agreed to go to the Sec in 2036 (assuming they have the same 75% rule) if 9 of the 12 remaining had invites, wouldn't they just say screw it and pull the plug? (or perhaps I should say drown the 3)

Again, I don't know what happens to GOR if the ACC disbands.

 

[Jkclone15]

On that note, if the ACC did break up, who would be a target for the BIG XII?

Louisville fits into our current footprint the best, and WVU would push for Pitt to be included. The rest of the schools would probably be trying to poach our eastern time zone schools from us in turn, or do a full conference merger like we tried to do with the PAC.

I'm curious what scenario WVU fans would be rooting for if some combination of UVA, UNC, Clemson, and FSU are snapped up.

 

[CascadeClone]

This post shows just how little you understand about the ACC's ironclad GOR. No ACC team is going anywhere for at least 10 years. The SEC just hit their homerun and the big ten doesn't want anything to change. ESPN doesn't want to renegotiate when they have such an amazing deal already with the ACC. This isnt the NBA where people just demand to leave mid contract. The ACC signed a deal and they have to live with it.

I would agree, but it's feasible that if ESPN made "an offer they can't refuse" it could happen. Suppose they said, "look the biggies are going sooner or later, and you will be on your own - do you want this new contract at same money NOW or do you want to risk ending up in C-USA?"

That's kind of what ESPN did to the Big12, but without the offer up front; they jsut hoped it would collapse. Now they know that doesn't work, they could buy their way into it, if they wanted to.

It's possible, maybe not likely, but possible.

 

[CascadeClone]

Louisville fits into our current footprint the best, and WVU would push for Pitt to be included. The rest of the schools would probably be trying to poach our eastern time zone schools from us in turn, or do a full conference merger like we tried to do with the PAC.

Ga Tech, UNC, Pitt, UVa, Duke are all AAU. Really, any/all of them would be decent fits in the B1G. Let's guess they take 4, but leave either Pitt of GT. And let's assume the SEC would want Clemson and FSU.

Of the leftovers... LVille, GaTech (or Pitt), then I suppose Va Tech, and Syracuse? It gets pretty BigEast-y faster than I thought it would.

The thing is, do you want to go east this way, or west to get leftover Pac teams? If you go east, you are getting the 3rd string, really, that the SEC and B1G didn't want. If you go west, it's 2nd string, and there's a lot less competition. Although also bad time zone. Custer decision I suppose. Maybe you do both and make your own 20 or 24 team league, east and west of the Mississippi... It'd be the SEC, B1G, and Big24.

 

[Gilbyone]

A FANTASY (OR NOT)

The B1G looks East for future expansion. Perhaps the B12 could work with the B1G to split the ACC between them. They would take schools from the northern half and we take from the southern half. They get say 4 and we get say 4, leaving 6 to blow in the wind.

How much fun would it be to add Clemson, Florida State, Miami, and Georgia Tech to the B12, and the B1G could take Syracuse, Pitt, NC, and Duke. B12 football would get better, and B1G basketball would also.

AHHH how much fun to dream.........

 

[WhoISthis]

Totally fair but in that case if clemson and lets say FSU were to leave in 2036 they would most likely try to add 2 more schools. At this point close to half the conference wouldn't have a landing spot kinda like the big 12 which is why the big 12 added and didn't disband. Now in 2036 all bets are off and who knows what will happen then but speculating on something 14 years in the future is a fools errand.

OuT says hi

There won't be anyone left to add to close the pay gap, and even UNC will bail on playing Wake and BC 5 times each. But that doesn't matter because this is going down well before 2036.

 

[Gilbyone]

A point about the GOR:

If over half of the schools in a conference leave, the leaving majority can dissolve the conference and eliminate the GOR. This is what almost happened the last time with the B12, and is what UT/O hoped would happen this time. We are now 10 schools, if ISU, KU, OkS, and KSt split to the B1G and P12, the 6 departing schools could dissolve the conference and there would be no GOR payment. I assume that the same would be true with the ACC. ESPN would not care as they would still have their teams to broadcast. The only broadcast problems would arise from the secondary broadcasters.

By the way, does anyone know what is happening with the Texas network payment with them going to the SEC?

 

[WhoISthis]

Yes, it's clearly a fools errand, but interesting.

As I understand the BIG XII rules, we could have disbanded if 8 of 10 voted to do so. The fear was being the 2 teams that didn't have a landing place. Using you're scenario, If Clemson & FSU agreed to go to the Sec in 2036 (assuming they have the same 75% rule) if 9 of the 12 remaining had invites, wouldn't they just say screw it and pull the plug? (or perhaps I should say drown the 3)

Again, I don't know what happens to GOR if the ACC disbands.

He is a Spartan on an ISU message board talking realignment- such errands are his thing.

GOR won't be an issue- enough teams will get pay raises to dissolve the ACC- it is just the timing that people do not agree on.

 

[FriendlySpartan]

OuT says hi

There won't be anyone left to add to close the pay gap, and even UNC will bail on playing Wake and BC 5 times each. But that doesn't matter because this is going down well before 2036.

People didn't think there was anyone left to close the big 12 pay gap but alot of people seem to think you wont take that big of a hit. CFB is cyclical. Clemson was a pathetic program known for falling on its face in any meaningful game before dabo came along. Once we get NLI for a few years the whole landscape is going to change and that is why the big ten wants a pause on expansion. If they dont agree to pick up ACC teams which is kinda what the alliance is there for then nothing is happening untill the 2030's.

I get that you love talking about expansion and wildly speculating but you come off sounding like you have some knowledge when your theories of what is going to happen changes by the hour.

 

[2speedy1]

This post shows just how little you understand about the ACC's ironclad GOR. No ACC team is going anywhere for at least 10 years. The SEC just hit their homerun and the big ten doesn't want anything to change. ESPN doesn't want to renegotiate when they have such an amazing deal already with the ACC. This isnt the NBA where people just demand to leave mid contract. The ACC signed a deal and they have to live with it.

I've read that the ACC GOR has a clause in it that a significant change in membership triggers a new negotiation phase. I have only heard this is regards to adding schools, and that adding ND would trigger it. Adding WVU alone might not be enough. But Not sure if losing schools would, because that is the reason for the GOR in the first place.

But in the case if the ACC adds say WVU and someone else and it does open the GOR up again in this clause I do not know if that also means the others like Clemson and FSU are also free to leave at that time because the GOR is null. Or if it is just the case that they can renegotiate for more money..and the current contract is enforced until they do or dont.

 

[FriendlySpartan]

I've read that the ACC GOR has a clause in it that a significant change in membership triggers a new negotiation phase. I have only heard this is regards to adding schools, and that adding ND would trigger it. Adding WVU alone might not be enough. But Not sure if losing schools would, because that is the reason for the GOR in the first place.

But in the case if the ACC adds say WVU and someone else and it does open the GOR up again in this clause I do not know if that also means the others like Clemson and FSU are also free to leave at that time because the GOR is null. Or if it is just the case that they can renegotiate for more money..and the current contract is enforced until they do or dont.

It enters a new negotiation phase but that doesn't allow teams to leave. Its in place to allow for new members to receive fractional payouts and not be full members. ND is different because if they agreed to go anywhere their value is worth a full portion.

 

[Cyforce]

If we don't have Memphis, then ISU is likely to be in the WVU, UCin & UCF pod.

No thank you!

A. Pods suck

B. We stay with the Kansas', Houston can suck it newbie and get the Missouri in the SEC east treatment.

 

[cykadelic2]

I've read that the ACC GOR has a clause in it that a significant change in membership triggers a new negotiation phase. I have only heard this is regards to adding schools, and that adding ND would trigger it. Adding WVU alone might not be enough. But Not sure if losing schools would, because that is the reason for the GOR in the first place.

But in the case if the ACC adds say WVU and someone else and it does open the GOR up again in this clause I do not know if that also means the others like Clemson and FSU are also free to leave at that time because the GOR is null. Or if it is just the case that they can renegotiate for more money..and the current contract is enforced until they do or dont.

Adding schools could enable renegotiation but not void the GOR based on what I’ve read. And that is the primary reason for their involvement in the Alliance IMO.

 

[2speedy1]

Adding schools could enable renegotiation but not void the GOR based on what I’ve read. And that is the primary reason for their involvement in the Alliance IMO.

I think this is why some believe they will push to add, because they want to renegotiate their deal, to a better payout. Thus hopefully keeping the Clemsons happy moving forward, and for the future. Making it less likely they get poached from by the SEC and B1G if they have a better deal than what they have moving forward.

I didnt think it would let anyone out, but I wasnt positive. But adding a couple teams and getting a better media deal would help solidify their position moving forward against the others. Because I think we all know that alliance is more or less just for show.

 

[WhoISthis]

This post shows just how little you understand about the ACC's ironclad GOR. No ACC team is going anywhere for at least 10 years. The SEC just hit their homerun and the big ten doesn't want anything to change. ESPN doesn't want to renegotiate when they have such an amazing deal already with the ACC. This isnt the NBA where people just demand to leave mid contract. The ACC signed a deal and they have to live with it.

This posts shows you don't know the contradictions in your objection to an early end to the ACC. You also apparently do not understand the motivations behind the networks segregating.

You said 10 years- so you admit the GOR is not ironclad and not enough to prevent early departures. Good. It is just the timing we disagree on.

Things are not on the BIG timeline. If their leadership is of Delaney's quality, they'll accept this and exploit the situation. You aren't familiar with the SEC. They didn't hit their home run, they just added runners to the bases.

As to the amazing deal with the ACC, that is false. ESPN makes more in profits from moving Clemson (and Co) to a conference in which they have higher valuations. Clemson makes more for ESPN in the SEC. The same is likely true with a few more to the BIG. Meanwhile, ESPN saves money from the ACC disbanding and BC/Wake types to $9 million/year in the AAC. This is entirely what realignment is about to the networks.

In terms of when the ACC GOR breaks, as you admit it is not ironclad, the extrinsic value of being in a conference that is dead after 2036 very quickly degrades. In a vacuum, UNC may pass on monetary gains and hang on until the end. But others cannot afford to wait. Clemson will never have as high of valuation. Duke, uncertainty with post Coach K. Leverage in getting Duke coupled to UNC erodes with each year. Then there are the programs that may feel at risk of having a home in the BIG or SEC being leveraged to be first movers. This isn't even getting into ESPN being a broker like only the other side of the ACC GOR can be, or the real fact the GOR likely could be challenged in litigation by ESPN, Clemson and Co.

 

[Itjustdoesn'tmatter]

A. Pods suck

B. We stay with the Kansas', Houston can suck it newbie and get the Missouri in the SEC east treatment.

So you would have 7 division games and 3 conference games? Just wondering what the other options are.

 

[isucy86]

The ACC GOR might be a big hurdle for schools to legally overcome by 2036. But I doubt that Clemson is going to sit by for 15 years and accept $30M+ less/year than SEC & Big10 schools if they have options. The outgoing FSU President said as much in an interview.

One possible area of leverage could be Playoff monies. In the last deal the P5 conferences received 80% of the $600M and then each conference split those monies. If the 12 team playoff was going to bring in $2M- then the ACC could decide how to split up the money to its member schools.

With a little arm twisting, Clemson could convince fellow ACC schools to pay teams that earn Playoff berths a bigger share (aka $30M). The other 13 schools still split a pretty big chunk of playoff money.

 

[Itjustdoesn'tmatter]

The ACC GOR might be a big hurdle for schools to legally overcome by 2036. But I doubt that Clemson is going to sit by for 15 years and accept $30M+ less/year than SEC & Big10 schools if they have options. The outgoing FSU President said as much in an interview.

I would agree, but people have said the same thing about OuT. Are they going to sit by for 4 years or are they going to cut a deal? I could see Clemson "waiting" 15 years knowing that it's not going to be 15 years BECAUSE they just cut a deal. (Just like OuT)

 

[WhoISthis]

1.)People didn't think there was anyone left to close the big 12 pay gap but alot of people seem to think you wont take that big of a hit. CFB is cyclical.

2.)Clemson was a pathetic program known for falling on its face in any meaningful game before dabo came along.

3.)Once we get NLI for a few years the whole landscape is going to change and that is why the big ten wants a pause on expansion.

I get that you love talking about expansion and wildly speculating but you come off sounding like you have some knowledge when your theories of what is going to happen changes by the hour.

1.) The gap is not narrowing- it is growing. The Big 12 3.0 will be less than the Big 12 2.0 in a time in which TV deals are going up. UNC may be okay with making way less than peers, but they'll be one of the few

2.)That is exactly why the ACC will not be reaching its GOR. There is a large incentive, particularly for Clemson and Co, to cash in on Clemson's likely peak valuation. UNC may be able to wait, but others will latch on to whatever offer comes. Duke with Coach K retiring wants to move that risk off the books too, and UNC's ability to move them only goes down as the GOR end nears.

3.) It's the SEC's world. No action or inaction can be made without factoring that in. And the SEC has fully embraced NLI, now. Potentially UNC, UVA and a few others could have an agreement for a move to be made in the long-term, similar to what OuT was working on but longer, but as soon as the becomes public, a prisoners dilemma kicks in for the rest.

 

[FriendlySpartan]

This posts shows you don't know the contradictions in your objection to an early end to the ACC. You also apparently do not understand the motivations behind the networks segregating.

You said 10 years- so you admit the GOR is not ironclad and not enough to prevent early departures. Good. It is just the timing we disagree on.

Things are not on the BIG timeline. If their leadership is of Delaney's quality, they'll accept this and exploit the situation. You aren't familiar with the SEC. They didn't hit their home run, they just added runners to the bases.

As to the amazing deal with the ACC, that is false. ESPN makes more in profits from moving Clemson (and Co) to a conference in which they have higher valuations. Clemson makes more for ESPN in the SEC. The same is likely true with a few more to the BIG. Meanwhile, ESPN saves money from the ACC disbanding and BC/Wake types to $9 million/year in the AAC. This is entirely what realignment is about to the networks.

In terms of when the ACC GOR breaks, as you admit it is not ironclad, the extrinsic value of being in a conference that is dead after 2036 very quickly degrades. In a vacuum, UNC may pass on monetary gains and hang on until the end. But others cannot afford to wait. Clemson will never have as high of valuation. Duke, uncertainty with post Coach K. Leverage in getting Duke coupled to UNC erodes with each year. Then there are the programs that may feel at risk of having a home in the BIG or SEC being leveraged to be first movers. This isn't even getting into ESPN being a broker like only the other side of the ACC GOR can be, or the real fact the GOR likely could be challenged in litigation by ESPN, Clemson and Co.

Lets check your reading comprehension. I said "at least 10 years" that takes us to 2032 (rounding up) which is when negotiations could possibly start. Just because negotiations start doesn't mean that the schools would leave before the GOR is up. We still dont know for sure when OuT is getting out of the Big 12.

Also to check your comprehension again i believe i have said for months that the ACC's GOR is ironclad in fact i use the term ironclad multiple times.

You have absolutely zero proof that moving Clemson to the SEC nets ESPN more profits then the bargain deal they have with them for the next 14 years. There is also a real possibility that moving them to the SEC dilutes their brand the same way texas is going to be a mid tier team there and how nebraska is in the big ten.

Also the entire point of the alliance is that they dont poach schools from each other. As long as the big ten holds that line the schools from the ACC cant go anywhere. These GOR aren't easily breakable