FSU is stuck
1. ESPN has zero incentive to let them go to the SEC or pay the SEC to add them. If FSU leaves, then ESPN's investment in the ACC network takes a hit and they really don't want that.
2. If FSU goes to a non ESPN conference like the B1G, I'd imagine that there would be huge lawsuits for the damages to the ACC network value. ESPN really doesn't want to lose them to the B1G and allow a foothold in the south.
Leaving before the GOR is up is pure internet fantasy. I think it's more likely that ESPN pays to keep the ACC together and viable, whatever that means
34 Replies
3y
acc more money for the exchange of dropping some deadwood and adding more appropriate schools. I'm sure there are some people "unscrupulous" enough to cause the GOR to go south.
(In response to this post by ren_hoek)
S
Stech
3y
to want that either.
Some schools in the ACC (you know who they are) invest a fraction of schools like FSU in sports, and they get similar income. The ACC has at least 8 schools that the SEC and B1G would like to have in their Conference, but it makes no cents with the GOR as it is today.
** Edited by Stech at 4/8/2023, 9:09:37 PM
(In response to this post by ren_hoek)
M
Mercury
3y
Well can make it easy, instead of prorated share, make it simply, here's the bottom-line on the budget xxxx, (should be based on the top 6 athletic budgets) and if others are 40 percent less well, 40 percent less than the full equity.
(In response to this post by Stech)
It should have been based on performance from the start IMO.
I hardly even consider that to be "unequal". It's just common sense and fairness.
(In response to this post by Stech)
S
Stech
3y
can they do for winning schools especially in football to keep up? It wasn't that long ago that Virginia Tech won 4 ACC football titles and Clemson was a revolving door for coaches. It's all about the head coach, Alabama went a long time from Bear to Saban, UNC struggled after Dean until they landed Roy Williams. FSU has not found another Bobby Bowden and Virginia Tech has not found another Frank Beamer, but who knows, maybe they are there now and we just don't know it?
Bottom line paying for performance at the top in football and basketball is no longer just a want to, it's have to IMHO,
(In response to this post by Maroon Baboon)
M
Mercury
3y
If they produce top 10 program, with winning he ACC, as well as top tier men's and women's basketball, and baseball... they wouldn't have to make any drama would they.
I wonder what they do with all the money they suppose to have???
(In response to this post by ren_hoek)
3y
(In response to this post by Stech)
3y
They're not like Texas.
One thing is for sure, they go nuclear on the GOR unless they know they have an invite.
Escaping the GOR is pure fantasy anyway, though.
(In response to this post by Atlee Hokie)
3y
Over several recent years they averaged ~2.06 million TV viewers per game. That number might not be in The SEC top ten. (it's 2nd in The ACC) Their home attd. is over 65,000, also modest by SEC standards. None the less, I think they would fit in with the SEC stable of brands and earn their keep.
But it's a marginal gain for The SEC. This is not the hill to die on for Sankey or ESPN. But can they allow The B1G to just stroll into Florida and beak the monopoly?
(In response to this post by ren_hoek)
3y
Brands are the SEC forte, though.
My question remains, if ESPN pays for FSU to move to the SEC, will they make enough money to replace what the ACC network makes?
(In response to this post by 33laszlo99)
3y
More than both combined if you go back 30 years.
(In response to this post by ren_hoek)
W
WarHog38
3y
(In response to this post by Red Hokie)
W
WarHog38
3y
Oklahoma has 7 National Football Championship Titles
Texas has 4 National Football Championship Titles
Florida State has 3 National Football Championship Titles
Florida has 3 National Football Championship Titles
FSU does merit being in the SEC. However they are not the college football blue bloods that merit the respect of the Sooners & Longhorns. FSU are a better match to Florida beyond being in the same state.
(In response to this post by WarHog38)
2
2hhoop3
3y
in perspective since 2010 Alabama has more national championships than Texas has in its history, one less than Oklahoma has in its history and an equal number to Florida and Florida State combined.
(In response to this post by WarHog38)
2
2hhoop3
3y
what is a reasonable shelf life for a school to trade off of mystique in the absence of significant on field performance? The second question is what would people deem significant on field performance?
(In response to this post by WarHog38)
W
WarHog38
3y
It is all based on history. I think it is similar to the generational changes overall in this society. A program lousy for 20 - 25 years becomes irrelevant to everyone including their own fan base. About 10 years does it for the average football fan outside that school's fan base. Significant performance would be several 10 win seasons lined up.
(In response to this post by 2hhoop3)
2
2hhoop3
3y
the reply. I am not sure Ten win seasons alone do it depending on schedules and if a school has 10 or greater win seasons but, spits the bit come playoff time it raises the question of whether they are really that good. I am not talking about playing competitive games and just losing but, losing by wide margins for the most part.
(In response to this post by WarHog38)
W
WarHog38
3y
An Alabama fan would surely give you a lot different answers. Two or three 10 win seasons lined up denotes a good team in the SEC. I don't think such a team would lose by a wide margin to anyone. Petrino was the last Arkansas coach to accomplish those type seasons at Arkansas. Those Petrino teams never lost games by a wide margin to anyone. Not even to Alabama.
You said significant. Winning SEC Championships is a great program in the SEC. Then those SEC Champs usually get the natty. Nobody has been racking those up except Alabama as you correctly noted.
(In response to this post by 2hhoop3)
2
2hhoop3
3y
given the current state of the Seminole program, however, that might change were the B1G to come sniffing around. However, it is very questionable whether adding FSU is accretive to the current B1G deal and nobody wants an extra mouth to feed that doesn't bring enough money to the table to feed itself.
(In response to this post by ren_hoek)
3y
I believe they talk all the time through unofficial channels. FSU could have something, maybe not, and maybe they don't care. Just plunging into the deep end.
(In response to this post by Atlee Hokie)
W
WarHog38
3y
Country. It was in response to a question about SEC expansion. I remember hearing Mike Slive say the same thing a decade ago. I think those phone calls are viewed as private by all concerned. All In the strictest confidence. I think the SEC commissioner would then be either affirmative or negative to straight questions asked. Especially if realistic scenarios were presented to him. I think the SEC Commissioner & soon to be B1G Commissioner are both receiving these type calls from most all ACC members. FSU has caused that with the recent rhetoric giving a 5 year tolerance as a breaking point. I think every ACC member is mapping strategies based on those commissioner conversations. Even Wake Forest or Boston College. Those schools have nothing in stone or even signed. However they pretty well know their options. That is why I think FSU is not totally bluffing. They do have an invite from somebody. Maybe the SEC & B1G both the way they keep repeating the same complaining spiel.
** Edited by WarHog38 at 4/8/2023, 12:17:52 AM
(In response to this post by 33laszlo99)
3y
Recently the UNC pres. had a conversation with Jim Delany and a transcription of the call was acquired by a reporter through FOIA. Off-campus meetings with proxy
parties and devoid of paper records are the safe way to go. (not on any official calendars either)
(In response to this post by WarHog38)
W
WarHog38
3y
Reminds of Trump's telephone call to Ukraine. Surely done on those back channels as you somewhat reasoned out. Sankey never stated exactly who he was talking to representing any school.
(In response to this post by 33laszlo99)
3y
being audio recorded. Not the same thing.
UNC pres. my still be talking to Delany, but you can bet it's not on his office phone.
(In response to this post by WarHog38)
3y
Not sure that ESPN has finances to "pay" ACC to keep it together anymore.
(In response to this post by ren_hoek)
3y
My theory is that ESPN has been egregiously underpaying the ACC
(In response to this post by cvillehokie92)
M
Mercury
3y
Before the ACCN, the noisy folks of FSU and Clemson, demanded that the ACC get a network and adjust the contract to match the SEC. They hounded the commissioner and threaten to leave yada yada. ACC got their network, with the cost, of receiving lower rights to pay for the capital of putting up the network and then promise to generate more $$$. All were happy.
My bet was ESPN knew their future was SEC all the way, therefore, if they could get ACC games to the ACCN it frees up up space for SEC, and guess what they got it. If ACC just worked within the same framework and increased rights without the network they would have contractually be able to still be on ABC and ESPN networks.
Now, funny FSU and clemson seems to not remember all this drama and want to stir it up again....
I get the rights issue however, there is alot of history before institutions can cast stones.
(In response to this post by ren_hoek)
H
HOO86
3y
It looks to me like ESPN is replacing the Big Ten slots with SEC. Not replacing ACC slots. ESPN sees the ACC as its basketball conference. Simple as that IMO.
(In response to this post by Mercury)
E
EDGEMAN
3y
...basketball too.
In football, ESPN gives the SEC at least 2X the coverage the ACC receives...probably closer to 3X. In basketball, the SEC is at least on even footing with the ACC if you're talking about coverage. If you're talking about NCAAT bids, they SEC is probably getting preferential treatment now...or at least the ACC is getting less coverage/preference than we deserve.
The SEC is just biding their time until they make the ACC irrelevant. Don't expect the future contract to come close to the SEC's future contract, and that's why the large public research universities who are attractive to the P2 will be working for an invitation.
(In response to this post by HOO86)
M
Mercury
3y
All im saying is, the value of football product in the ACC for 5-7 years hasn't been good for ESPN eyes....and they are paying the value.
If FSU Miami VT, UNC NC State Clemson and UVA were dominant in football, there wouldn't be a problem.
However, I do think ESPN likes SEC and the drama, the crazy shenanigans, the trash talking like LSU, its like UFC on Steroids. The ACC schools generally are not receptive to that conduct... classy schools but not for WWE events.
(In response to this post by HOO86)
Non P2 teams are gonna need to learn to play Moneyball.
Not sure what that's gonna look like on the football side. But we'll see.
(In response to this post by ren_hoek)