Our last two TV deals happened with 10 years left on our contracts. IMO, 2028 would be a good time to begin TV negotiations, two years later than our average. We can bring in a couple of teams from the B12, joining around 2031, to sweeten the deal. We are, after all, two teams short of the big money standard now. We have room to grow. That is what happened with Pitt and Syracuse, btw. The ACC got a 4-year extension, 2 years into our 12-year contract, and lots more money. The increase (about 15%) did not start until Pitt and Syracuse actually joined a few years later. The situation when we added Pitt and Syracuse was almost exactly as it is now, we had recently signed a long term "bad" contract at a point when other conferences (ironically it was the PAC) were getting new deals worth lots more. We will at least get to try that approach one more time before imploding in 2036.

like a Seth Greenburg VT NCAA bid ending with VT being a first two out.

VT to be wanted - just did not feel that way for Big East or ACC invite - no more - let’s earn it for whatever happens next - Go Hokies!

The path to football success is paved with money, now, more than ever. The P2 have accelerated past the others in media money, and it will get worse quickly. The other money factor is NIL. How will ACC schools fare against those giant alumni hordes in The B1G? Recruiting is not the same old process anymore. How many top 100 or 200 recruits simply maxed-out their NIL value in choosing their school. Waiting-out the GoR is not an option. There will be a challenge, possibly by FSU, or we may see a mass (Mag7) rebellion. Losing ground to the P2 for 13 years is folly. There would be no return to prominence after that. The sooner they act, the better. I hope VT and the other ACC schools are making plans to scrap the GoR (soon) by any means necessary and disperse and/or reconfigure themselves in whatever form will bring them into the big-money tier of college sports. Some schools are going to get hurt. Some will get rich. Nothing will be the same. But as of today, VT's future is a downward trajectory into the abyss. This is just one guy's apocalyptic forecast. Talk me down from the ledge. ** Edited by 33laszlo99 at 7/17/2023, 2:37:36 PM ** Edited by 33laszlo99 at 7/17/2023, 2:39:10 PM

Unless every school has an "iron clad" invitation to the P2 conferences, it isn't going to happen.

want to join the B12. It will only fall apart if the top 2-4 brands bolt, and they go through a process like the PAC is going through now - and I do not see that ever happening either. Maybe a B12 team or two go to the ACC, or an ACC team or two go to the B12, but this idea that teams from either conference are clamoring to get in the other is over the top. Remember, it's not geography, common sense, or what we want as fans that matter here. It's the money and stability that will matter for those not going to the P2 - and I think that is every team out there except 4 or 5 including ND.

change unless they had a better outcome lined up? I've been extremely critical of how things went down in 2012 and our lack of action. However, I can't help but think that there wouldn't be this momentum to break up the conference unless those seven schools had a solid spot. Would the new B12 be better than the current ACC? I have a hard time believing that any school would be proactive in dissolving the current ACC for a B12 spot. It seems like a push or slight step down. The SEC did want us in 2012. I've got to think that all of the 7 schools will get shoe-horned into one of the top 2 conferences. If we or NCSU took part in this without a spot, it would seem to be one of the stupidest things ever. No one would be able to dissemble like they did in 2012 and make some coy statement that we were never invited. Administrators would get asked point blank, "Why did you vote to disband without a landing spot?" Perhaps this is not too reassuring, but my argument basically boils down to "The people at VT and NC State couldn't possible be dumb enough to be doing what they're doing, if they didn't have a top 2 conference option." Does someone scramble to get off the Titanic if there's NOT a life raft? You stay on the deck until the last minute and don't jump into the cold water, UNTIL you have to jump into the cold water. That's where this puzzles me. I don't see where NC State fits into the situation. They are second fiddle in their state and at least VT brings the DC/Nova market. If NC State gets a SEC or B10 spot then a lot of schools should also. When you see Oregon and UW getting stiffed, then it does make you wonder about VT and NC State. If VT is on shaky ground for an SEC or B10 invite, then I view NC State as even shakier, yet they are giving off signals that they want to dissolve either the ACC or the GoR. My hunch is that the basketball money is up for grabs and that means there might be more landing spots. Maybe the the SEC and B10 go to 20 teams, which makes 8 slots. There are 7 ACC teams agitating. I still can't believe that the B10 will leave USC/UCLA so isolated for travel. Maybe they go to 24 and the SEC goes to 20? If hoops is a bigger driver, than Duke is a good candidate for a B10 spot. This basically assumes that 1) the B12 isn't better than the current ACC and 2) even if it were, it wouldn't be by very much and the teams without a spot wouldn't vote to disband to hold back their rivals who did have a spot. ** Edited by TDVick at 7/18/2023, 5:36:28 AM ** Edited by TDVick at 7/18/2023, 6:34:26 PM

At least not as it stands once their two premier programs depart for the SEC. They are loading up their conference with G5 schools, so there will be more mouths to feed on a smaller TV contract than what the ACC currently receives.

group of seven, which makes me think the the B10 isn't that eager to add them or that they are lower down the list than the first seven schools.

Your "Titanic" argument is a good one (the primary one). But we don't know what is going on in the background. We likely know about the Mag7 because it is too large to keep hidden. I think there are countless covert machinations among the schools; maybe a Secret6, Nefarious9, and several Treasonous2's. The Mag7 could be talking about a reconfigured New ACC which includes only selected properties, while privately scheming to bolt to P2 in pairs or individually. These schools cannot be meekly coasting toward 2036. I take the FSU threat seriously. I expect them to break from the conference and challenge the GoR, even if they are alone. The stimulus for my "apocalyptic forecast" was the many posts here about "improving football" or "increasing research" or "scheduling SEC." These are long-term plans. I don't think time allows for it. Things are going to happen between now and 2026. I think The ACC is going be turned upside-down. A few schools will be left-out. A few are golden. The ones in the middle (VT) need to pulling strings, making deals, and kicking down doors... whatever gives them an edge. As for the silence from Duke and GT, they may already have the answers to the questions. Their value is fixed and not necessarily dependent on associations/pairings.

premise is completely wrong. I'm working off the notion that it will take a lot of schools to break it.

it is all speculation, with a little bit of misinterpretation thrown in. The "MAG7" was likely nothing more than a well conceived PR ploy designed to grease the skids for unequal revenue sharing until the next round of real change begins. The next two real tipping points are what transpires with PAC 12 media deal and what transpires with ND media deal. Those two things could lead to more realignment before 2026. After 2026, the impetus for realignment hinges on legislative or regulatory changes or TV/Cable industry shakeup anytime until the next media negotiation rounds 2030 and 2031. That may generate change but, likely the year of change is in the range between 2033 - 2035. FSU is unlikely to challenge the GOR for multiple reasons and the range of years mentioned is when the financial leverage and litigation risks reach acceptable levels.

It was about allowing FSU and Clemson a way to earn more revenue if they perform....no more no less.

is next look in for ACC contract but, the window is too far from 2036 to impact in terms of breaking GOR and depending upon what happens with ND and PAC 12 the landscape may not be unsettled enough to make looking elsewhere or pursuing possible remedies under the contract a wise move.

(Or doesn’t happen) with the look-in will tell a bit more about the landscape and possible trajectories. On a side note - Reading all the published info and between the lines of published info I’m not sold on the $100 million per team Media amounts being thrown around for the Big10 (or even the $70-$80M wrt Fox. The current economics and massive cost cutting measures (yes they seem to be more significant for ESPN) just don’t support it and don’t appear to support it for the next 10-15 years at this current time. Perhaps it does - but I’d have to dig into the details a bit more. Plus we do know the Big10 deal was unsigned when Warren left and included some issues/errors (like the giving of certain inventory to multiple media platforms). Based on my own personal experience with negotiating large deals and contracts there is room for things to change before becoming finalized if not signed and executed. If Fox sees the numbers don’t make sense for them - there could be some adjustments before finalization and the open issues and any like the issue of granting rights/inventory of the same items to multiple entities gives them (Fox) leverage. It’s going to be interesting.

Warren was on his way out the door and he was looking to grab headlines to confirm what the media had ordained as a billion dollar contract. They may still get there in which case it will be headline news but, if it falls short even by a small amount that number will be treated by the media with all the fanfare of an error correction. Just my opinion but, I agree with you that numbers will be under pressure. More importantly, those who are banking on streaming as the next Golden Goose would be wise to look at what is happening on the entertainment side. Subscription revenues, subscriber numbers and profits are all under pressure. People cut the cord to save money but, when they start paying ala carte pricing to get the same content on streaming and then figure the solution for other local programming the current savings is not as significant as they thought and future price hikes likely in the future erode the savings that exists. Interesting times in sports, entertainment and media.

...and other cable hardware. Now that the stupid crazy introductory deals are about over, you're still paying about the same for content whether it comes from a cable company or a streaming service. All of those people saying cable is dead because streaming is the future...possibly, but you really aren't going to save anything. Funny note, you still have to pay (the cable company or someone else) for broadband access, which is about half of your cable bill when you get your television coverage through them.

finding the right mix for a content provider (ex:ESPN) in this case or an actual content “entity” like a sports conference or movie/show studio/channel.

That bump seems to be going away as people pare down their streaming options to fewer subscriptions. From 2020 to 2021 it made all kinds of sense to have subscriptions to multiple streaming services because the networks were devoid of programming. Now those networks are back up to full programming and people are deciding that they have too many streaming services.

...be through a cable system or through a streaming service that carries the ESPN. That's why the major streaming services have done so well. If you don't carry the ESPN and Fox Sports channels, you aren't getting sports fans, especially college sports fans. It really is that simple.

Some people see it as a group of schools who think they have a pre-approved invite to the P2 and are ready to blow up the ACC at a moments notice. Others see it as a group of schools who want unequal revenue sharing. And of this latter group, some want money distribution based on on-the-field performance. Others want distribution based on other things, like attendance, TV ratings, and the like. So. Which is it?

Actually remove the almost

Leadership in the Administration? Do they care? Not too sure if Tim Sand all in . As a Big Clemson fan stated , gee Tech is a good women basketball program and a good softball program . It is what it is. Our fan support is off the chart but not convince out Leadership is aligned . Please share any positive communication from Tim Sands and his team on VT aspiration in athletics ? Rooting hard for Pry success !! Tough job ahead. I only hope he can be that transformative coach for the program .

they are irrelevant

answers, care deeply about the health of the entire athletic program at Virginia Tech, and know that Football drives the bus. I know at least a few of the Board members are HUGE Hokie Football fans. I have faith they have the program's best interests in mind. That being said, if ever Tech had a "choice" that did not depend solely on dollars (and maybe/probably it never will), Dr. Sands would prefer VT staying in an intact ACC, second choice- move to BIG, and third choice- move to SEC. Just my thoughts.

If you think about it - The ACC’s issue is that as Clemson rose - VT, Miami and then a bit later, FSU fell off. Parity has been the conference’s own worst enemy. The ACC needs these 4 programs at their best - at the same time - meaning only losing to each other in conference play and winning OOC games. 4 top 10ish teams. Would be awesome. Sprinkle in teams like NC State, Louisville, UNC or Pitt with great seasons from time to time. This is the on field performance model that has thrust the SEC and Big10 into media darlings and $s. SEC - Bama/LSU/Georgia w/Auburn and Florida (not too recently w/Florida) Big10 - Ohio St/Michigan w/ Penn St being in the mix and a special season from a Mich St, or Wisc or to a lesser extent an Iowa every now and then.

makes that statement when they literally squandered a fifty year conference headstart and a national championship only to finally have an epiphany with an interim head coach who turned out to be much more. The Tigers have made remarkable strides in the last 13 or so years and are to be commended but, that Clemson fan damning with faint praise from the glass house is humorous. VT has challenges, they made mistakes after 1999 and 2000 not taking advantage of the momentum, hopefully they will get back on track faster than Clemson did.

Three reasons for that. 1. The new B12 media contract expires in 2031. And their GOR is tied to that. 2. The ACC media contract and GOR expires in 2036. So this would be a point with not many years left. 3. The expanded playoff starts in 2024, and so does the ACC unequal revenue sharing. So that gives 6 years to try things out and to see which programs can stay in the top tier. Once we get to 2030, it will be clear if the ACC is in a good spot. And it will also be a window for the ACC to finally expand again, if they desire to survive and grow. Two things to note: 1. I'm not mentioning the PAC because I have no clue what their fate will be at this point. 2. The academic side of VT is going to be just as important in deciding what happens. And if the ACC does implode, then I would wager that we push hard for a BIG invite. Football gets a lot of press, but it doesn't control the fate of the school.

We do not need to be at the state were at 10 years ago because the conferences know our potential but showing a positive trajectory certainly would not hurt our position when and if the levee breaks lose on conference expansion

went through a lot coaches between Bear and Saban, but the fans were there. Clemson went through a lot of coaches between Danny (Ford) and Dabo, but their fans still showed up. Virginia Tech has shown this to the SEC, but not many in the ACC have shown that. It’s like the best stock pickers, they choose stocks that have have not lost their desire to improve in spite of the occasional bad market.

VT, Clemson and maybe State do good job fan participation when down. FSU fanbase was terrible when bad. Not sure anyone else in league stands up to 3 above mentioned. FSU probably will have a place. The U seems BIG bound one day if ACC dies. Only U of F has great fanbase in Florida.

Been to multiple games there a year for last 10 years or so (family ties). Their football culture is elite - fanbase, tailgating, in-game experience and Tallahassee itself before and after games. Like any program, it has more energy and excitement when the team is rocking - but FSU always has the Juice.

needs northern students, so the B1G is their number 1 P2 destination. That's why they first wanted Syracuse and BC. Many HS students from there can afford and want to go to Miami to get out of the cold winters. However, the whole thing could be turned upside down, if Jim Phillips and pull a rabbit out of his hat and merge the ACC with the PAC.

By the way, yes, I know that logistically it could be a nightmare to have a league that spans from coast to coast and that the cost of flying the baseball team to play a game at Oregon or Arizona State would certainly be cost prohibitive. Now, I do like the idea of integrating schools like Oregon, Washington, Cal, Stanford, Arizona and ASU into the league. First, it opens a new programming window for the ACC Network. Instead of showing endless reruns of The ACC Huddle with multiple Spurtle ad spots, live games from the Pacific time zone can be shown. Second, I like being in the same neighborhood with academic leaders like Cal and Stanford which can pave tremendous research collaboration. Finally, it boxes in the Big 12 and makes the new look ACC truly a conference with outstanding schools and fans that span across the country.

my only difference of opinion would be research collaboration. I do not think the academic/research side benefits significantly. I think that is driven by the types of projects, the already prior association of the researchers and the choices of the granting agency. IMO, outside the athletic myth the B1G has created, aside from actual on field performance, is the supposed weight/value of AAU and CIC for B1G schools. I am not saying there is no value, I am saying it is overstated just like B1G on field results.

I keep seeing occasionally someone pitching we need to merge with the PAC 10. This makes no kind of sense to me. Why would we want to join a conference that is 2500 miles away; the big 10 took the best 2 teams; if they expand again they may go back for the remaining 2 best teams. Someone help me out here. I just can't see it.

My post you are referring to is more from Jim Phillips point of view, in trying to make more money for the ACC. He really doesn’t have a lot of choices to get there. He could get ND to join, yeah I know, it’s not happening, or he can expand the reach to new areas. The reason I said a rabbit out of a hat is, I think Washington, Oregon, and even Stanford and Cal prefer the New B1G. It’s going to be very hard to capture those 4 schools.

moving from their conference to another - very few in my opinion, unless it's an invite to the P2.

I don’t care if it comes from going to the SEC or B1G or a merger. It would hurt the B12 expansion plans, but that’s not the goal. The goal is more athletic money for Virginia Tech, however we need to get it with what I see as their only options.

They simply have never stopped trying and filling their stadium. That’s what the SEC prides itself on, we just care more.

just kidding! This was swinging for the fences at an affordable price....kind of a win win for them, it is a genius hire, or an affordable fire. Their stadium continues to be filled throughout!

when they hired Paul Dietzell. They’ve always been ambitious.

So many of his decisions were just one step forward, one step back.

an investment to get a better work ethic and better athletes in the program. I think he is doing that faster than I thought he would, I expected he would not land instate top 10 for at least 2 more years. Now he's got to get that offense going this year, he knows how to coach defense, even with sub par tallent. Now start averaging 30+ points a game. That's how you win in today's game.

This is team and culture and how you treat them. He gave the team an opportunity during the first year to show themselves.. all transparent and then he had 'hard discussions'.. and you know the players knew their situation and guess what the kids in 2024 hear how well the staff cares about the players. rubs off.... and now its a buzz.. I wonder what Deon does if this thing just crashes. and leaves Colorado with no culture to rebuild.

and the school and community at large. We need to fill the stadium, win or lose. Need to have good TV ratings. We need to attract talent. These things are a lot easier during a given season if we are headed into November 9-0. They are a lot harder if we are 5-4. We must support our program with all of our might.

I know you are in SEC bubble, but in Virginia there is a couple of items going on 1. VT is happy in the ACC and if it works they stay... and build within 2. VT wants SEC or BIG 10 and would stay in the ACC over the BIG 12 3. VT and UVA are linked tighter, and From the Governor (both parties and general assembly and each BOV) will refuse leaving each other without guarantee for the other. This is the way Virginia works... and Vt and the base here in Virginia is accepting at that.

will continue to be a top conference, with or without a few brands. I don't think any teams want to go to the B12, and i also don't think the ACC will have the media contract issues the PAC are having. The PAC is unique because of their time slots - the ACC does not have that problem, and there is really good football and basketball in the to 2/3's of the conference. Maroon hit the nail on the head - fill up the stadiums, it's easier to recruit from winning, invest in the coached, and just win baby win. Those are the things that VT, her fans, and the alumni can control. Focus on those, and you will be the next TCU playing for a National Championship. If they can do it, VT can as well.

IMHO the MAG7 was FOX desire. Pushing the SEC buttons some. Doubt SEC desires a BIG all down the coast.

Not saying you wrong. I thought that state of VA played a part.? I agree we desire VT at its best. That being said do you really think the higher ups care about nothing more than bluebloods? Whomever they take could have trouble in SEC. Or even BIG.

may be our only saving grace. With that being said, I did find it extremely interesting that the UVa AD said that Mr. Babcock could speak for her when discussing the Magnificent 7 developments at the ACC meetings at Amelia Island. That means, as I have always suspected, that Tech and UVa are a package deal and will go together to their next destination. I think the UVa football program is really going in a bad direction and their recruiting is not good. They should thank their lucky stars of their "blueblood" status and for Tony Bennett.