Conference realignment "Rumors" "tweets" "etc"

[Cubanbull]

7 minutes ago, FanFromAfar said:

The comparison isn't PAC vs Big 12, it is Pac vs Big 16 or Big 18. Whatever each of these conferences can get on their own, a Big 16 or Big 18 will do better.

More T1 games, bigger footprint, better ability to do both late night and conventional slots. Exporting the PAC brands to parts of the nation less apathetic, etc.

The PAC is at risk because of many reasons, many related to why even the failure that was Larry Scott tried to make the PAC less PAC starting as early as 2010. It is why despite those efforts, only CU has gone west. Regrettably for them, I must add. It has effectively set their athletics back to the point they are no longer a leading candidate for P2. 

The Big 12 on the other hand is 5-deep into losing schools to the P2, and yet, will have equal or slightly better contract. Flyover states and Texas, although I'd never live there, care greatly about their college athletics. 

 

 

You actually think that the Big12 without Texas and Oklahoma are going to get same or better contract? If you think 5hats true then it’s not worth my time going back and forth on you on that? I’ll just say we will find out who is right very soon.

As for the Big12 adding 4-6 PAC schools well I don’t think that’s going to happen either,but time will tell.

I have a feeling you have emotional attachments to the Big12 that are making you think they are way more attractive than they really are. They have no flagships.

Edited August 7, 2022 by Cubanbull

[Cubanbull]

13 minutes ago, Eric Ruby said:

Yup

Disagree. The PAC might not look anything like it currently does but it will still exist.

If Notre Dame stays independent with a new TV contract, the PAC as it is will be around longer than 5 years.

[FanFromAfar]

29 minutes ago, Cubanbull said:

You actually think that the Big12 without Texas and Oklahoma are going to get same or better contract? If you think 5hats true then it’s not worth my time going back and forth on you on that? I’ll just say we will find out who is right very soon.

As for the Big12 adding 4-6 PAC schools well I don’t think that’s going to happen either,but time will tell.

I have a feeling you have emotional attachments to the Big12 that are making you think they are way more attractive than they really are. They have no flagships.

 

That is not what was contended. 

 

What was claimed is even after losing 5 schools to P2, it should be similar, if not slightly better, to PAC. Particularly with PAC unwilling to sign long GOR, which can cap the step-change, as the networks normally make their money on the backend (hence big jumps between deals). The Big 12 had a lead over the PAC. Losing OUT eats into that, but somewhat offset by PAC losing USC/UCLA 

Both were in line for a jump. I don't think the methodology behind Navigate's projections is very sophisticated, but they had the escalation of rights (thanks TINA) offsetting the hit. Put it this way, the Big 12 was comfortably 3rd and in line for a big jump with OUT. Now, they should be around the same. That will depend on who is in on the BIG deal. If NBC is out, or NBC and CBS are out of BIG deal, it is good news for other conferences. 

But you missed the main point. Whatever these two conferences get on their own, adding 4-6 PAC to Big 12 will be more. For many reasons, including simply there is less competing supply. 

 

I am a realignment fan, with contacts at USF and Big 12, as well as other entities. I do have to defend the Big 12 here because there is a lot of ignorance. For example, things like flagships. That carries no weight with the networks. There is a huge difference between brand schools, and brand programs. The BIG as a P2 is not as beholden to the networks, and can afford to spend on such relics of last century conference structure, but leftover realignment will be about the networks. Many reasons for the ignorance, but as you should now see, the movement of 2010, 2011, and 2021 were not really Big 12 issues, as the economics behind them were true for PAC and ACC as well. That's why the ACC leadership wanted the ridiculously long GOR and why the PAC was trying to make a P3 back in 2010. The Big 12 as never anything more than a corporate marriage, and hence more easily succumbed to the economics driving consolidation. 

 

Edited August 7, 2022 by FanFromAfar

[Cubanbull]

10 minutes ago, FanFromAfar said:

 

That is not what was contended. 

 

What was claimed is even after losing 5 schools to P2, it should be similar, if not slightly better, to PAC. Particularly with PAC unwilling to sign long GOR, which can cap the step-change, as the networks normally make their money on the backend (hence big jumps between deals). The Big 12 had a lead over the PAC. Losing OUT eats into that, but somewhat offset by PAC losing USC/UCLA 

Both were in line for a jump. I don't think the methodology behind Navigate's projections is very sophisticated, but they had the escalation of rights (thanks TINA) offsetting the hit. Put it this way, the Big 12 was comfortably 3rd and in line for a big jump with OUT. Now, they should be around the same. That will depend on who is in on the BIG deal. If NBC is out, or NBC and CBS are out of BIG deal, it is good news for other conferences. 

But you missed the main point. Whatever these two conferences get on their own, adding 4-6 PAC to Big 12 will be more. For many reasons, including simply there is less competing supply. 

 

I am a realignment fan, with contacts at USF and Big 12, as well as other entities. I do have to defend the Big 12 here because there is a lot of ignorance. For example, things like flagships. That carries no weight with the networks. There is a huge difference between brand schools, and brand programs. The BIG as a P2 is not as beholden to the networks, and can afford to spend on such relics of last century conference structure, but leftover realignment will be about the networks. Many reasons for the ignorance, but as you should now see, the movement of 2010, 2011, and 2021 were not really Big 12 issues, as the economics behind them were true for PAC and ACC as well. That's why the ACC leadership wanted the ridiculously long GOR and why the PAC was trying to make a P3 back in 2010. The Big 12 as never anything more than a corporate marriage, and hence more easily succumbed to the economics driving consolidation. 

 

LOL, Navigate’s projections. Ok let’s wait and see we will all have our answers in next couple of years. Hope you come back then and discuss the real outcome. I will still be here.

[Jim Johnson]

1 hour ago, Eric Ruby said:

It’s a grant of rights, not a TV contract. It grants the media rights for every school thru 2036 to the ACC, no matter where they go. The whole point of it was to make it virtually impossible to get out of. I never say never, but it’s been looked at and nobody is challenging it. It’s this:

1. ACC Grant if Rights - ACC owns TV media rights to all schools thru 2036

2. ESPN TV contract buyout. $35 mil per every year left on the contract thru 2036z

3. Exit fee of $120 million 

 

 

The ACC only owns the TV media rights only for those home games covered by the current ESPN agreement.  The Grant of Rights does not apply to any new agreement, if any, that the conference reaches with ESPN.  The conference has discussed renegotiating the ESPN contract to provide a tiered payment... and some (like @Cubanbull) have suggested the ACC could add teams, which could trigger a renegotiation of the TV contract.

No one is challenging it because no one has a guaranteed landing spot, not because of the terms of the contract.  Why would UNC challenge the GoR unless they are guaranteed an invited from the Big Ten?  It's a chicken-egg situation.

The ACC may not break apart now, but the Big Ten is looking at a 6-year contract, and I would suspect some ACC teams will challenge the GoR in 2030, when the potential $$ penalty will be significantly lower.

[Eric Ruby]

7 minutes ago, Jim Johnson said:

The ACC only owns the TV media rights only for those home games covered by the current ESPN agreement.  The Grant of Rights does not apply to any new agreement, if any, that the conference reaches with ESPN.  The conference has discussed renegotiating the ESPN contract to provide a tiered payment... and some (like @Cubanbull) have suggested the ACC could add teams, which could trigger a renegotiation of the TV contract.

No one is challenging it because no one has a guaranteed landing spot, not because of the terms of the contract.  Why would UNC challenge the GoR unless they are guaranteed an invited from the Big Ten?  It's a chicken-egg situation.

The ACC may not break apart now, but the Big Ten is looking at a 6-year contract, and I would suspect some ACC teams will challenge the GoR in 2030, when the potential $$ penalty will be significantly lower.

No school is gonna make any money on away games or take any deal where they hope for away game money. No network will make that happen. It’s senseless.  It’s silliness to think so. Again, no P5 school would do that for season ticket sales with a better schedule, either. It’s not even the same ballpark.

Edited August 7, 2022 by Eric Ruby

[Jim Johnson]

4 minutes ago, Eric Ruby said:

No school is gonna make any money on away games or take any deal where they hope for away game money. No network will make that happen. It’s senseless.  It’s silliness to think so. Again, no P5 school would do that for season ticket sales with a better schedule, either. It’s not even the same ballpark.

I am not sure what you mean here...

Schools only have rights to home games anyway... Southern Miss @ Miami rights are Miami's - granted to the ACC.  Miami @ Texas A&M rights are Texas A&M's - granted to the SEC.

This is why Clemson @ Notre Dame this year is under the Notre Dame contract with NBC and the Notre Dame @ UNC game is under the ESPN contract with the ACC.

 

[Cubanbull]

As I said we will start getting our answers very soon.

First BigTen finalizes contract and we will find out how many networks get a piece. We should know this year

Second: PAC gets its contract, we should know by next year

Third:/Big12 contract comes up. We should know by 2024

My opinion.

The BigTen gets a huge contract with many networks and stays at 16 for now.

The PAC either stays at 10 if they are dumb or add two, more likely SDSU and SMU. Their contract will be in 30-35 million range

The Big12 will get theirs done for a similar amount 30-35 million

This will probably stays quo from now until 2026-30, By this time ACC will need to get their tv contract renegotiated.

I still think for USF best bet will be Big12 with ACC a longer shot, but I don’t see any USF moves out of AAC before 2025 season.

So let’s concentrate on building facilities, showing up to games, donating and USF winning games.

 

[Eric Ruby]

Brett Yormark is intense. He’s also in good standing with the B1G commish, Warren. Things are gonna get interesting imo. I am standing by the fact that when USF’s next step up happens, it’ll be Big12. That TV market is advised by networks. UCF got invited because of future projections of TV value due to large alumni. USF has 50k students. Both are in huge markets and combined are #4 nationally. It’s well known. USF’s future is not the ACC, it’s the Big12. Your AD is waiting on a Big12 deal, before ACC. We’ll see what happens, but it’s not SDSU, it’s eastern, I think.

[Eric Ruby]

24 minutes ago, Jim Johnson said:

The ACC only owns the TV media rights only for those home games covered by the current ESPN agreement.  The Grant of Rights does not apply to any new agreement, if any, that the conference reaches with ESPN.  The conference has discussed renegotiating the ESPN contract to provide a tiered payment... and some (like @Cubanbull) have suggested the ACC could add teams, which could trigger a renegotiation of the TV contract.

No one is challenging it because no one has a guaranteed landing spot, not because of the terms of the contract.  Why would UNC challenge the GoR unless they are guaranteed an invited from the Big Ten?  It's a chicken-egg situation.

The ACC may not break apart now, but the Big Ten is looking at a 6-year contract, and I would suspect some ACC teams will challenge the GoR in 2030, when the potential $$ penalty will be significantly lower.

It does not matter. No ACC team makes any $$ for those way games in a new conference. They’re not gonna make 50% of the $100 mil playing away games. Plus the ESPN $500 mil buyout + $120 mil exit fee. No team will do that. They’ll be negative.