According to Forbes magazine, four times in the past years Michigan state has bled red ink, tens of millions of dollars. Iowa for years has tried to off load a ton of expenses on to the state and was loaned money. It's not just the settlement funds. Ohio State said it planned for a deficit this year, but it came in much larger than expected. As late as 10 years ago, 90% of the athletic D1 departments depended on university subsidies. The Columbian (Missouri) has done some very good reporting that the most of the SEC schools, for example, must be subsidized by their schools, have been for many years and will be in the foreseeable future. For example, South Carolina has had only one year of surplus in the past five years. Arkansas' yearly revenues is up $30 million since 2021. But the annual expenses is up $50 million. Until the SEC and Big 10 get aa handle of their expenses, they will squeeze every penny they can.
Realignment Megathread (All The Moves)
- Thread starter ISUcyclones11
- Start date
I don’t think you realize you’re essentially saying the same thing
There’s never been a time in which “more” wasn’t appealing to schools.
He’s correct that the fact that even schools at the very top still need (want) more, because they see no reason not to, exemplifies how the sport is vulnerable to investors forming a super league
It won’t be from Ohio State choosing to be in a deficit this year while $297 million.
It’ll be from the middle P2 and top of ACC/Big 12 trying to keep. The USC, A$M, UNC, FSU types, many of which already have mercenary history and blood on their hands from previous realignment
You realize how many D1 AD’s there are vs comparing them to the P2 correct?
Almost all of the big ten has been in a deficit for 2020-2022 due to the Covid decisions. MSU posted a profit last year and gave money back. This year was a loss due to the settlement funds being prepared. Michigan posted a massive profit.
Again these AD’s almost always purposely operate at a deficit. If they wanted to they could easily make money in the P2 but they don’t need to and the university isn’t pushing them too
I'll see you on that and raise you "That will definitely happen".
Have a tough time believing the "schools didn't know what was being agreed to". I am sure when the contracts were signed the University Presidents, Athletic Directors and University Lawyers were 100% knowledgeable about what they signed on to.
And if it's true the agreements are only housed in NC, if they had any concerns they could have hopped a plane and reviewed the docs at the ACC offices. Nobody got the wool pulled over their eyes. They have buyers remorse after not understanding that time is money and time doesn't stand still.
Also, not sure what there is to see unless the GOR changed. I doubt ESPN volunteered to change the financial aspects of the deal. This is more about the ACC schools deciding to distribute media rights money differently after knowing ESPN was still writing the checks.
I think I read that the argument was not that they didnt know what they signed, but that what they signed was changed after they signed/agreed, without their knowledge.
Which I think if I remember right was that they gave/added ESPN an opt out clause after the fact, and never gave the schools the same opt out, and did not tell the schools of the added opt out for ESPN.
How true it is that the schools were not informed of this addition to the contract is not known because they have not argued in court or presented evidence of anything at this point. Right now its just he said/she said.
Very simple: drunken sailors who are not being held accountable to anyone have no incentive to stop drinking.
Michigan State people need analogies to understand, it appears.
My thought is tiers. Top 20-24 rapture out to level 1. The other 50-100 become "college football". Maybe theres one crossover game per team per year, but basically 2 separate leagues, separate playoffs, etc.
I think you COULD do relegation /promotion, with revenue ratcheting for those going down. But if its hard to imagine the big brands agreeing to even cooperate at all, its impossible to imagine 50 other nervous teams agreeing to risk going down a notch. Plus its just not in the US mindset at all.
I would put premier league happening at like 60%, but something w relegation at like 10%.
They aren’t. This graph is from TJ Altimore who spreads lies about realignment and higher ed data. He has a schtick to put Big 12 institutions down. That 31.7 figure doesn’t include NCAA tourney basketball credits for the Big 12 but does for the other 3 power conferences in that graph.
Anything like this that would trigger 50%-75% payout cuts for over half of the existing 70 P4 schools (including ISU) isn't acceptable.
So what is the true disparity between ACC schools and Big 12 schools, on average?
They are essentially equal today. Based on what I can discern from the article below, ESPN will kick in more money for the ACC as part of picking up their option to televise the ACC through 2036 if the ACC creates more marquee matchups among the top ACC teams and with Notre Dame. So it looks the ACC schools will be able to earn a bit more on average as compared to the Big 12, but we will have to wait and see. The top tier ACC schools will earn far more than the bottom tier ACC schools under their proposed new distribution argreement (which hasn't been finalized).
If that's not unsettling enough for the bottom tier ACC schools, "Clemson and Florida State are asking the ACC to agree to reduce penalties for exiting the grant of rights after 2031, when TV contracts for the Big Ten, SEC and Big 12 are set to expire."
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
Thanks for the response.They are essentially equal today. Based on what I can discern from the article below, ESPN will kick in more money for the ACC as part of picking up their option to televise the ACC through 2036 if the ACC creates more marquee matchups among the top ACC teams and with Notre Dame. So it looks the ACC schools will be able to earn a bit more on average as compared to the Big 12, but we will have to wait and see. The top tier ACC schools will earn far more than the bottom tier ACC schools under their proposed new distribution argreement (which hasn't been finalized).
If that's not unsettling enough for the bottom tier ACC schools, "Clemson and Florida State are asking the ACC to agree to reduce penalties for exiting the grant of rights after 2031, when TV contracts for the Big Ten, SEC and Big 12 are set to expire."
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.
So this Altimore doucher is many millions off in his graphic and is pushing it around like he’s the one tell the whole truth?
So let me guess - with the Belichek hire, SEC goes after UNC, (have to take NCSTATE as a package deal forever).
Big 10 takes Florida or Miami.
Notre Dame can go where they wish, I assume Big 10. Nice to pull them towards B12, give them the Longhorn deal - we need viewership.
If the go with 20-24 super league - no one selected from Big12.
Yormark, will earn his pay the next two years.
Big 10 takes Florida or Miami.
Notre Dame can go where they wish, I assume Big 10. Nice to pull them towards B12, give them the Longhorn deal - we need viewership.
If the go with 20-24 super league - no one selected from Big12.
Yormark, will earn his pay the next two years.
I thought the 31.7 was the big12 base from ESPN/FOX, starting this coming year. Which doesn't include, bowls, ncaa, ccg...
