I know Skipper was being somewhat facetious, but he did say the ACC still had the state of Florida with Miami. Adding Stanford, Cal, Oregon, Washington, Utah, Arizona, Arizona State and Colorado would add lots of TV sets. Maybe I'd replace Utah with a Texas school to make even more cash or replace ASU even though I'd like to see both Aizona schools together. Almost 100 million addiitonal people if a Texas school is included with the Pac schools. I'm guessing the new and expanded ACC would have about 67% of the nation's population within its geographic footprint.

They could potentially be competitive, but the idea that you will get BIG or SEC media money at this juncture is day dreaming. The answer, in my humble opinion, is the PAC, Big12, and ACC join forces, and negotiate a media deal together. If the top remaining brands leave, that's on them, and there is no way anyone can stop them as long as the networks can pit one conference against the other. Keep the auto's for the playoffs, as that is where the power will be moving forward. VT is a good program that should be included in the P2, but so is Oklahoma State. There isn't a guarantee that your school makes the cut, whether they deserve it or not. Expanding to 14 got you BC, Cuse, and a couple of others that don't bring home the bacon. Jury is out on the Big12 expansion, but at least they have stability. ESPN and FOX have spoken loud and clear - they are NOT going to give every team Bug10 or SEC money.

...have tiny fan bases. The per-team payout isn't going to improve much with the current lineup. The ACC would need to contract before adding any large public universities. Forget about adding any small private schools. We have more of those now than all P5 conferences combined.

No differently then any other FBS school that have made investments, and have improved their facilities, and pay their coaches. History is a double edged sword. Many brands lean on it, and are not competitive today. History has also cut out some very good institutions that are competitive today, have made the investments, but don't have the legacy wins, or were not in a decent conference. Many deserving teams were left out of the playoffs because of the conference they were in. Until recently, you couldn't control which conference you were in. The "brands" were built on exclusivity. In history for example, how many times has OSU played an SEC team? How many times has an ACC team played a PAC team? They are going for a national conference of league if you will. I just don't see it, but I'm not cutting the checks. The future will be in the playoffs, and every thing a school should do now is put themselves in a position to be in the playoffs. FSU will falter in the SEC or BIG - I don't care how much money they have.

If it meant ESPN could enrich the ACC's programming, as well as keep Cal/Stanford/Oregon/Washington away from from the B1G/Fox, would the mouse willingly shave a few years off the ACC GOR to entice those schools? Not a LOT of years, but maybe scale it back from 2036 to 2032 (or maybe add a look-in somewhere in there)? An addition of that magnitude would at least call for some sort of tweak/renegotiation. Plus, an annual UW/Miami series would greatly amuse me. I'm not sure if there are any other FBS schools with more geographical distance between them than those two.

and I also think ratings will mean more with Streaming looking for a National Audience instead of a regional audience, Also, if you take enough of them, you can cut cost for other sports, by going to divisions for the Olympic sports. My biggest question is the B1G going to do this first and beat us to the punch? This is just a guess, but I think the GOR stands, but the look in is at least cut in half, if this happens. ** Edited by Stech at 3/2/2023, 9:52:46 AM

They fly from both Miami and Ft Lauderdale Direct Non-Stop to Seattle.

About 8 mins. ** Edited by Maroon Baboon at 3/2/2023, 1:29:14 AM

He says the ACC should take 8 Pac-12 schools. Doesn't mention the specific 8, but says we should do it for the ACCN subscribers. California would be huge of course. but he doesn't mention any states outside the PAC-12 footprint. But getting into Texas would be also big. I think when you start to look at other states to go into, it's slim pickings outside the Pac-12 footprint (re: state populations and decent football programs available) after that. California is over 3-times as large, and Texas is nearly 3-times as large, as the next largest state that the ACC is NOT currently in (Illinois). ** Edited by Maroon Baboon at 3/2/2023, 2:04:11 AM

It would get Texas subscribers for the ACC Network. I would then take Tulane and get Louisiana too, and those two would have a travel partner. I wouldn't take 8 from the PAC12. I'd take 6 (Stanford, Cal, Washington, Oregon, Arizona, and Colorado). I still want Cincinnati and WVU, but Jim Phillips let the ship sail on those. Overall I'm glad to hear John Skipper come to the same conclusion that we've basically come to here on this board. The ACC has to expand to grow revenue. We have to both add content for ESPN to show as well as add subscribers for the ACC Network in order to increase revenue. We don't have to eliminate the GOR, just add more members to sign on to it. This would be more revenue for all the choices named through 2037. The PAC 12 is now looking at $25 million each tops. SMU and Tulane less.

states are those with a Power 5 football team? California (Cal & Stanford, Fox has So. Cal with 2, we need No. Cal, if the population is big enough take 2 for ratings. Ratings will mean more with streaming, because as he said they are taking a national approach) Oregon Arizona (take both, big state that's growing) Utah (growing like crazy) Colorado Ohio (No GOR signed in the B12 for a reason, and if he's right the ACC/PAC could get SEC/B1G money, Cincy is on the table) West Virginia (Same as Cincy, small population, but they pull viewers like an SEC school in small states because of their rabid fan base) Maryland (Navy. lol, full disclosure, I have a lot of ties to the Naval Academy and I love going to games there) So I ask you, are there any other states that ESPN could pick up a P5 school, that they are not in? Especially a state that Fox is in.

I don't know what Jim Phillips is doing other than lip service, but if he would go out and get 8 from the PAC12, he should push hard to have the Rose Bowl tie the ACC in with tha Big Ten. Add the Rose Bowl to the Orange Bowl for the ACC.

And you left out Washington from the PAC12. It's the second most populous state in the PAC12. You could look at Boise State, and perhaps Nevada and New Mexico. Nevada has similar population to Utah. New Mexico has similar population to Idaho. But if we are going to do all of that, I'd rather pick up Connecticut which is similar population to Utah and Nevada. And if you still think Cincinnati and WVU are available, they are my preference. But we would have to act right away on those. No opportunity for delay.

is signed, but admittedly it is a long shot. Those other states would make interesting states to be in, but like or not, some of the Presidents seem to vote for associating with higher rated academic schools. I forgot about UCONN, but are they into football enough to get ratings or subscribers? My biggest concern in all of this, is Jim Phillips negotiating for the ACC or the B1G right now? I guess time will tell.

They went to a bowl game this past season. As long as he continues to improve they'll grow the interest back. We can't really get them in full until after 2026 because of their buyout from the Big East. It's steep, but it drops in half after 2026. We could take the football now, and then pick up the rest after 2026.

worked things out.

We already have BC and Syracuse. Two NE universities with tiny fan bases.

The ACC in its current formation merging with most of the Pac is the ACC's salvation. A TV Contract can then be negotiated with ESPN that will be somewhat compatible to the SEC & B1G. That merger needs to be done in the very near future. However it would mean scrapping that old 2036 GOR contract for a new TV Contact. I want to play devil's advocate with this next paragraph about John Skipper's put down of FSU. Skipper was the man at ESPN that wheeled & dealed using GOR's as the backbone to cement an entire conference membership to TV football games that were/are the lifeblood of ESPN. The last thing the John Skipper's of these media giants that broadcast college football games desire is a serious court test on one of their GOR backed contracts. Skipper had a cocaine addiction that literally caused his resignation at ESPN. He would have been fired. Skipper is probably still a ESPN team player on those GOR's. Skipper needs to do all he can to persuade ESPN into that ACC & PAC merger. He has no substantive reason to belittle FSU.

Some valuable information transpired here. John S. (no, not Swofford) gave up some data I have been seeking. First, how many cable subscribers in The PAC, and what is the rate for cable carriage. He threw out ballpark figures of 15 million cable subs and approximately $2.00 per (sound right?), referring to ACCN. Anybody know where to find the count of cable subs by state? I found only one, California, (6.25 million) mentioned incidentally in a news article. He sounds somewhat like the typical message board poster when he says things like, (paraphrasing) "The PAC has ten schools and they (ACC) should take eight of them." Since he is in a discussion about cable carriage, I assume he is excluding OSU and WSU. Does he think it is that simple? That The ACC invites them to join and they jump right in? I'm not convinced that even OSU and WSU would go for it. And if they decide to dissolve The PAC, the six or eight top schools will simply show up at the meeting with a charter forming the new Pacific Hopeful Conference and put their goods on the market that same day without the weaker programs. Ah, now I begin to sound like the typical message board poster? Using Skippers crude estimates the addition of UCLA/USC may cost The B1G nothing. The BTN carriage fees will just about cover it. The B1G will not rush to add Cal or Stanford. They probably have assurances for future inclusion. Total PAC is ~15 million subs @ ~$2 = ~$30 mil per mo. and ~$360 mil. annually. Cal. only is ~6.25 mil. subs for ~$12.5 mil. per mo. and ~$150 mil. annually (~42% of PAC total.) Up for grabs in The PAC is ~8.5 million subs for ~$17.5 mil. per mo. and ~$210 annually (58% of total PAC.) I don't think The B1G can leave all of this on the table. Skipper agrees with most observers that the GoR will hold. No problem with his sayng so. Other media vets, like Bob Thompson exhibit bias in these discussions too, but this is the first time I have seen a call for punitive action against any school. He suggests that The ACC should expel FSU for "whining." He goes beyond simple subjectivity with that behavior.

the Conference get more money. Some of the smaller schools especially in North Carolina may not want to expand. So FSU and the rest of the ACC bigger schools need to say, you don't expand, the big schools are going to vote for unequal revenue. Believe me, the smaller schools don't want that. I also don't think the GOR is on the table, but I do think that a shorter renegotiation on what they are paid is on the table.

They are urging The ACC to go find more money, as long as the money isn't paid by ESPN. They feel some vulnerability from FSU's emergence as a ungrateful "troublemaker" who should be slapped down. The renegotiation you refer to is the old standby "look-in" that we so often think can fix an unfair situation. The look-n will bring about a contract adjustment if it will benefit both parties enough to proceed. It is not there to ensure "fairness."

and the parameters for adjustment, good or bad, are defined in the original agreement as well as remedies/methods of appeal. It is about ensuring that a long term contract remains relevant in the market for both parties. Fyi, the numbers Skipper threw out for subscribers are not way off but, I think you will find the rate($2) varies substantially.