Agree, that scenario will not happen but reduced GOR/Exit fees as suggested by Yahoo could facilitate schools leaving in 2030-31 timeframe.
Realignment Megathread (All The Moves)
- Thread starter ISUcyclones11
- Start date
If schools were to leave the ACC prior to the end of GOR, at this point, that would be bad for us. Because they would be looking to backfill from B12 schools.
As is, with unequal revenue sharing and increased travel, I don’t think the ACC could entice a B12 school (most likely candidates would be Utah and West Virginia). But if they lose say, FSU + Clemson or UNC + UVa, that league could still remain compelling with a more equal revenue share. I could see them being able to poach certain B12 teams in that scenario
.....and as I suggested earlier, the threat of Judicial/Congressional intervention was looming if ESPN didn't pick up the 2027 option and Jim Phillips isn't an ESPN puppet to the extent that Sankey is.
Yeah, this is great for the ACC schools that were on the relegation watch list but I am still skeptical of the ACC's survival as-is beyond 2032 if GOR/Exit fees are drastically reduced as suggested by Yahoo.
And this doesn't change the fact that millions of dollars are being left on the table in TV rights fees with ESPN and Fox controlling P4 and CFP rights through 2032 and they will continue to manipulate their control of those rights beyond 2032. As previously posted, I hope that CBS/Paramount, WBD and Amazon get a fair shot at CFP rights beyond 2032 in order to make a B12 bid much more attractive to them.
And this news certainly doesn't change the existing geographic clustereffs that the B10, B12 and ACC have evolved into. It's ridiculous on the part of ESPN/Fox and the Presidents of those conferences to have reached this current state. And this also doesn't change the ongoing bullying by the SEC and B10 relative to CFP revenue sharing, CFP auto bids, House Settlement back pay, etc.
Last edited:
I'm not sure what this means. It certainly stabilizes the ACC short-term keeping FSU, Clemson, and UNC happyish.
I can also see, mid-term, this causing some instability. Depending upon how low the buy-out drops and how the "Brand Revenue" is distributed, it could cause significant shared revenue decreases to some pretty nice schools. Schools like NCSU, Virginia, Virginia Tech and Louisville could look to move to the B12 if the distribution changes by a bunch. I guess it really depends upon how low of a payment Syracuse, Boston College, Cal and Wake Forest are willing to take to keep even the mid-level schools of the ACC happy.
I can also see, mid-term, this causing some instability. Depending upon how low the buy-out drops and how the "Brand Revenue" is distributed, it could cause significant shared revenue decreases to some pretty nice schools. Schools like NCSU, Virginia, Virginia Tech and Louisville could look to move to the B12 if the distribution changes by a bunch. I guess it really depends upon how low of a payment Syracuse, Boston College, Cal and Wake Forest are willing to take to keep even the mid-level schools of the ACC happy.
Kind of sounds like the old Big12 model doesn't it? Where the more you were on TV, the more money you got. I mean, that isn't unfair I suppose, and encourages you to invest in FB and not suck.This is interesting. They don’t share the exact math but they say their new revenue sharing plan would allow the top teams in the conference to almost entirely make up the revenue gap versus the SEC and BigTen, which I think must mean that the teams at the bottom would be agreeing to take very little. My guess is the teams at the bottom figure that it’s either this or end up like WSU and OSU in the Pac12. Here Is the link:
Under the proposed plan, a percentage of the ACC's television revenue would be included in a "brand" fund, and that money would then be distributed to schools that annually generate the most revenue for the conference in football and men's and women's basketball -- with Clemson, Florida State, Miami and North Carolina likely at the top of the pyramid, sources told ESPN.
Should that agreement be finalized -- something sources said is not imminent but was closely tied to the ESPN option -- Clemson and Florida State would be expected to drop their lawsuits.
Between the brand and success initiatives, it is expected that the ACC schools that maximize both revenue streams could close the gap with Big Ten and SEC schools to as little as a few million annually.
ESPN picks up option to televise ACC through '36
ESPN has agreed to pick up its option to broadcast ACC sports through 2036. The decision comes as the ACC works toward settling lawsuits by Clemson and Florida State.www.espn.com
Does seem like a wide gap between UNC/FSU/Clemson getting what, 4x the other schools? Haven't done any math on it.
I don't see the ACC poaching the B12. At this point, the Big12 is solid but not spectacular brands and wouldn't get that much of the Brand distribution. I guess Colorado has the potential but that depends upon the team continuing to improve and Deon staying. It's not that hard to put a kickstand back up to go for a ride but there are probably only a dozen-ish schools that Deion would go to.
Who are the second class ACC citizens who will be paying the protection money to hold that conference together?
Recent history suggests that the teams asking for uneven distribution will never be satisfied with the amount and ultimately will stab the have-nots in the back on the way out the door anyway.
Feel like this is less about ESPN and more about the willingness of the bottom half of the ACC willing to operate on a lower revenue tier than the top half of the conference. Those bottom tier schools are probably just being realistic after what happened to Oregon State and Washington State.
I suspect as long as the revenue kickers are performance based (viewership & tournament berths) then it's an easier pill to swallow across the 17 schools. And with the CFP playoff money being recently added, it can fund the revenue kickers and not be considered lost revenue by bottom tier programs.
With all the chaos in college sport, it also buys time (2026-2030) for athletic department financials to stabilize/clarify before the Big10's next TV deal. IMO it just kicks-the-can on realignment by 4 years.
I suspect as long as the revenue kickers are performance based (viewership & tournament berths) then it's an easier pill to swallow across the 17 schools. And with the CFP playoff money being recently added, it can fund the revenue kickers and not be considered lost revenue by bottom tier programs.
With all the chaos in college sport, it also buys time (2026-2030) for athletic department financials to stabilize/clarify before the Big10's next TV deal. IMO it just kicks-the-can on realignment by 4 years.
Cal Berkeley hardest hit.
The most expenses, and put in an arrangement with the least income potential.
I can see a situation where they start longing for the PAC, whatever it looks like, over this, very shortly.
Wake Forest, Cal, BC are going to take the hardest hit but Duke, Syracuse, Georgia Tech and Virginia Tech are also probably looking at a haircut.
If I'm AD at one of those schools a haircut is probably acceptable as long as they still have opportunity to be included in a sizeable tournament berth performance pool. For example, I think the CFP payout to the ACC is $275-$300M annually.
So for example if CFP and March Madness money are split 60 (base)/40 (performance) or 70/30 then it's easier for team not making the post season to take less. Knowing they aren't shut out 100% from the money and they have "equal" shot at the upside if they are a playoff/tournament team.
I don’t see it either with how the agreement is being restrucured with unequal revenue sharing. That should be a non-starter for any school who might get a bit of a tickle looking at the ACC. Plus I doubt the ACC is looking to expand with this renewal.
I’m just saying long term that could be the “bad news for B12” part of this. But I don’t see that risk as a likely scenario at this point.
I would also hope they have a provision that is FSU continues to be a national joke that they don’t receive any additional money. Now would be the perfect time to push for that but who knows how much they want to rock the ship.
Happy for no more realignment for 5/6 years though.
It's actually really good. Big 12 could possibly double up on TV contracts and get a couple other partners to broadcast games. ACC is exclusively on ESPN networks outside of the 1 game on CW
That’s a leap. The fact there’s changes in ACC revenue distribution and potentially GOR says otherwise…it’s essentially a settlement. Settlements don’t occur without uncertainty/risk on both sides
If those two schools have a spot in the BIG, and prefer it over the SEC, that’s a reason for ESPN to extend the ACC deal. Making it more costly for any school with sights on the BIG
Ehhh I think you might be making the leap here unless you heard something about the GOR changes.
Those two schools don’t have a spot in the big ten (obv prefer it over the SEC) so that’s the real issue.
ESPN was always going to extend the deal because they are getting a bargain on the rights. Anyone that thought otherwise really doesn’t understand basic economics.
That sounds a lot like the PAC10 when thinking ESPN’s offer was too low, and went to the open market.
It’s particularly ominous if the GOR is amended to let top ACC schools out in 2031, as any new entrants you’re assuming will bid on Big 12 would rather pay to add top of Big 12 to top of ACC.
Probably not a coincidence both CMC and TJ deals end in 2032. As do the NCAAT and CFP deals.
ISU’s best odds of a tenable future is for a 3 conference setup in which the Big 12 takes on the best of rest of ACC
Yep get that, but until we see the details of those changes won’t be able to know. I see what you’re getting at however
