Athlon reporting rumors that Big Ten is adding Clemson and FSU
Source of the rumor:
"Barstool Sports' Jack McGuire is hearing a rumor that the Big Ten is adding four schools this week: Clemson, Florida State, Oregon and Washington."
Of course there are no details....hmmmm.
Link:
Athlon Sports Article
71 Replies
"Rumor". If true...
Clemson and FSU will pay a hefty exit fee and the B1G won't own their home games until 2036. I can see the B1G realistically adding Oregon and Washington since the Pac-12 is a mess right now but neither will Clemson nor FSU and the B1G benefit because of the ACC's GOR. Let's see if this "rumor" sticks by Friday afternoon.
(In response to this post by VTChip)
3y
Surprises me, though, as Clemson and FSU aren't AAU.
(In response to this post by VTChip)
3y
and no one cares if anyone is AAU.
(In response to this post by Hokie2Hoya)
3y
** Edited by HoakieCup at 7/31/2023, 9:21:34 AM
** Edited by HoakieCup at 7/31/2023, 9:22:02 AM
(In response to this post by VTChip)
3y
Cause ya know, non-binding agreements between conferences are so valuable at preventing poaching....
heard it when I said it out loud to myself.
(In response to this post by HoakieCup)
O
obguthr
3y
(In response to this post by VTChip)
A “serious rumor”? What does that mean? Not even an anonymous source.
(In response to this post by VTChip)
3y
ESPN would be left with a shell of an asset and would be likely to negotiate if it felt there was any realistic way for any two of FSU, Clem, Miami and UNC to get out of the ACC for a non-ESPN conference. Anyone else and they'd just sick their lawyers on them to milk a few $mil out of them as they used the door to push them out.
(In response to this post by VTChip)
3y
change. The B1G needs more TV windows (and additional media money) if they wish to expand. ESPN enjoys a very favorable media deal with The ACC. But if FSU blows-up the GoR, ESPN may be free to dispose of that media deal and cause mass exodus from The ACC. ESPN cannot be happy about losing The B1G footprint and L.A. Making a deal with the new, enlarged B1G gives them all of that former footprint as well as the juicier bites of The ACC. The SEC could easily add some ACC refugees (UNC/UVa?) as well. And The SEC replaces The ACC as ESPN's underpaid, captive conference (2034).
(In response to this post by Vienna_Hokie)
H
hokieZ71
3y
Big Ten is only under partial ESPN control. FSU and Clemson leaving help Fox, NBC, CBS and hurt ESPNs ACC property.
That whole inflation paragraph (in the article linked by goldendomer below in this same thread) leads me to wonder if that’s the angle that’s being worked to get ESPN to the table. That’s ~$10M per year based on the calculation in that article. Same article that says $5M per year potential increase in playoff unequal sharing won’t cut it.
** Edited by hokieZ71 at 7/31/2023, 7:40:56 AM
(In response to this post by Vienna_Hokie)
Even with the unequal CFP revenue sharing that you mention,
if you factor in that the SEC is going to get 4 or more bids in comparison to the ACC's 1, this is probably also driving FSU supporters mad.
** Edited by Maroon Baboon at 7/31/2023, 8:30:01 AM
(In response to this post by hokieZ71)
H
hokieZ71
3y
Not only that but progressing through the playoff will be worth even more. And the SEC and B1G schools are going to be way more competitive due to this unequal revenue stream. If a 12 team playoff has 11 games, those 4 SEC bids could turn into 6-7 total games played in, while the ACC's 1 bid could end up being just a 1 game and out trip.
Controlling the playoff money is the endgame in all of this. It's going to be massive. And Notre Dame, playoff eligible with only a Top 15 ranking or so is going to pocket their whole share every time.
(In response to this post by Maroon Baboon)
3y
one thing to say why aren't you all keeping up with us and driving us more money or we're winning and paying you all to suck... but when you haven't mattered and are one of the primary reasons the conference is viewed as bad (all this before the money inequality became so big), the argument falls a little flat.
(In response to this post by Maroon Baboon)
Any article that doesn't address the GOR and ACC TV contract
can't be serious. And even then, it's usually wild scenarios.
There is a reason Texas and USC waited until near the end of their contract to announce a departure.
(In response to this post by VTChip)
O
obguthr
3y
This won't be litigated if there isn't compelling evidence. No one, FSU or otherwise, seemed to notice there was no provision for inflation adjustments in the media deal when they signed the GOR. That's our own foolishness.I'm thinking everyone put entirely too much trust in Swofford (just as the Pac is trusting Kliavkoff now) and we got burned. Nothing illegal happened here.
(In response to this post by Maroon Baboon)
Just think how bad this current ACC deal would look if the ACC were
actually dominating on the field on the national scene. Insane.
(In response to this post by obguthr)
3y
3 ACC teams competing for playoff every year, winning playoff games (would make them so much better than the BIG). They would have already gone to ESPN and said either renegotiate or we're dissolving the conference and there are lots of takers who would pay us more. The issue now is, ACC football is overpaid for what it is producing.
(In response to this post by Maroon Baboon)
3y
Sorry for the re-post, Domer beat me to it
** Edited by hokiesrule98 at 7/31/2023, 9:07:16 AM
(In response to this post by Maroon Baboon)
2
2hhoop3
3y
this BS up. The writer has a career in fiction maybe but, he fails miserably at facts and real analysis. In fact, that is what his whole opening is about, laying the ground work for when he has to walk it back from the edge. Of course by then he has gotten what he wants, the clicks and a spreading rumor, with no real cost to him or his site since it had no credibility to begin with.
Readers should ask themselves a variety of questions. Who is writing the report? What ties or motivations might they have for the report? Are sources named or generally identified or unnamed? Do the claims hold up when compared to other publicly available information? My gut tells me this is more typical BS from another Big 12 source. They have become very adept at sewing doubt to create chaos in competitors.
(In response to this post by hokiesrule98)
3y
because they have the fewest assets to build around plus the largest number of welfare schools. So they are doing the smart thing which is trying to convince everyone that both the PAC and ACC are ready to implode, figuring that they will get teams who are on the edge and worried they won't have an invite to the ball to fill out their conference USA v2.0 dream.
Everyone thinks CO jumping ship is big news, but CO jumped ship to the PAC because the Big12 was gonna fail, so the only thing we know for sure is that CO is bad at picking winners.
(In response to this post by 2hhoop3)
2
2hhoop3
3y
know about the Big 12 insider site? Could it be a WVU site? Could it be akin to the WVU trolls that regularly spam this board trying to sew seeds of doubt? Wonder why the writer isn't even willing to put his name to the BS he is spewing? I think the answers to those questions are fairly obvious. People just need to take a breath, read the information that comes out, critically think about what is being said, even discuss amongst themselves but, when they link and share BS they just facilitate the spread of bad information.
(In response to this post by Vienna_Hokie)
3y
There are times I wish I could photoshop. Imagining a pic of Deion with his CO coat and cowboy had with PAC logo crossed out, then a BIG12 logo crossed out, then an ACC logo, then an SEC logo....etc.
** Edited by Vienna_Hokie at 7/31/2023, 11:03:10 AM
(In response to this post by 2hhoop3)
2
2hhoop3
3y
Colorado. They were something like 26 - 76 during their time in that PAC 12. They have won more than 5 games in a season about 5 times in this century. They jumped from Big 12 to PAC 12 and now back to Big 12 in a little over 10 years time. Aside from having the Coach Prime hype for maybe a few years are they really a serious P5 conference add? People are losing their minds over the Big game of musical chairs known as conference realignment without even considering that the landscape in 5 or 10 years may look completely different with things going on in regards to athletes as employees, etc. and the upheaval in the media may yield a far different model as well.
(In response to this post by Vienna_Hokie)
3y
while not great, the payout ACC schools are getting is reasonable, except for Clemson TBH who is getting screwed. FSU and Miami need to shut up, they're the reason the conference's rep is so bad right now and it is not because of unequal payouts, they've been irrelevant since before that became an issue.
The whole landscape is changing and the GOR makes it extremely painful for FSU or Miami to undermine the rest of the conference. I do find it funny that Clemson isn't the one you hear about, they have the biggest complaint but at least publicly are being good conference partners. At some point, the GOR becomes an asset that someone is going to want to buy because it brings with it some great brands and properties, if the deal is right, you could get 8 schools to break the GOR and sign another that pays better (and fingers crossed excludes Looooooservile and BC). Knee jerk reactions like adding commuter schools and bouncing back and forth have not worked and likely won't.
** Edited by Vienna_Hokie at 7/31/2023, 11:23:22 AM
(In response to this post by 2hhoop3)
3y
feel free to take BC and Cuse while you're at it.
(In response to this post by Big12 guy)
2
2hhoop3
3y
I think expecting 8 to break the GOR might not be as realistic and easy as some may believe. I guess if everything comes tumbling down by August 15 as some predict we may never know. I'm leaning to the next lookin in 2026 as the indicator. IF it functions as I think it was designed(to protect BOTH sides against a large market imbalance over the agreement's life) then there is a chance to continue. If not, then there will likely be change.
(In response to this post by Vienna_Hokie)
3y
and it would be because a deal is on the table to reconstitute the GOR under better terms with another media partner. I don't believe there are 8 who are going to kill the conference to go off on their own and find better deals, because there aren't 8 that have the value to do so. There are about 12 who together are a valuable package, but as individuals, there are maybe 4.
(In response to this post by 2hhoop3)
This was just posted below 🔽 by goldendomer
(In response to this post by hokiesrule98)
3y
I doubt it, but who knows.
Link:
Linky
(In response to this post by Maroon Baboon)
M
Mercury
3y
Same folks... amazing...
Hey FSU where was your due diligence. If FSU wasn't so demanding back then, ACC would have had a shorter contract and could have bought all of us time. for repositioning.
FSU or west va who are the biggest fraud. Go LSU beat the hell out of them
(In response to this post by goldendomer)
H
HokieZig
3y
From Article
A grant of rights has been an effective tool preventing defections, but it’s effectiveness was rooted in the fact that major conferences split their media rights, at the very least, between two networks – ESPN and Fox.
The SEC’s media rights were split between CBS and ESPN. The Big 12, Big Ten and Pac 12 split their rights with ESPN and Fox.
And here’s where recent history teaches us a lesson. The issue that prevented Oklahoma and Texas from leaving the Big 12 much earlier than 2024 was how to make Fox whole for losing valuable inventory featuring the blackheart traitors.
And that’s why the ACC grant of rights can’t stop FSU from leaving for the SEC. ESPN owns the exclusive rights to both conferences. The ACC can’t revoke ESPN’s exclusive rights to broadcast FSU home games. Doing so would reduce ESPN’s inventory and that means it’s the ACC who loses money, not FSU.
Link:
FSU and Clemson to ACC
(In response to this post by goldendomer)
If it were that easy, FSU would have done it years ago.
How long has FSU been talking **** about leaving? Seems like forever.
(In response to this post by HokieZig)
3y
if some blogger can come up with that scenario, the media rights experts who put these deals together would have seen that simple scenario (especially the two crown jewel South East properties going to the SEC) and accounted for it.
Keep in mind, that deal in many ways was predicated by their inability to keep MD from defecting without paying enough money to make it OK (which to me was a bag of empty cans to take to the recycling center).
Also the problem with the logic of this is that it assumes ESPN is going to be OK with adding FSU or any other ACC property to it's other conference, effectively destroying an asset they have significant money invested in and likely would still be on the hook for payments to the remaining members which are now greatly overstated given the loss of two of the primary revenue generators. They would be giving those schools more than they are now and still giving the others the same amount while bringing in less. Smarter would be ESPN facilitating a joint media rights deal with the SEC and ACC, leveraging the two properties they already own.
(In response to this post by HokieZig)
S
Stech
3y
“Smarter would be ESPN facilitating a joint media rights deal with the SEC and ACC, leveraging the two properties they already own.”
PS I’m really enjoying your legal knowledge on this subject matter. Incredibly interesting times, if nothing else.
** Edited by Stech at 7/31/2023, 9:51:00 AM
(In response to this post by Vienna_Hokie)
3y
A west and midwest conference operating under 2 historical brands (BIG and PAC) and a South and East conference operating under 2 historical brands (ACC and SEC), maybe 3 per with the BIG12 in the BIG and the SWC returning. Some obvious shuffling like MO to the BIG and having to decide what to do with the Duke/NW/BC/Vandy/Wake types who don't bring enough to the table. Each conference with an 8 team FB playoff followed by a legitimate Natty where the winners of the 2 conferences meet, could call it something like the Spectacular Bowl :)
Add the ability to operate non-revenue sports at a lower cost by creating more geographically focused pods.
I think the biggest risk and maybe why it hasn't happened is the potential for anti-trust violations AND the conference corporate people at the ACC/PAC/BIG12 defending their phony baloney jobs. Not to mention that it would for all intents eliminate the NCAA, and I'm sure they're whispering in congresses ear (in other words using their version of bags of cash) about how evil this all is, how the G5 schools are being left out, collusion, etc.
(In response to this post by Stech)
S
Stech
3y
coming out of FSU. However, like the first part says, you won’t know until it’s in the rear view mirror. These things change on a dime.
(In response to this post by goldendomer)
M
Mercury
3y
If it takes 7-8 figures of legal fees to get out of the gor would they do it and who would they sue?? The acc the members??
Also does the acc fight it all they way or after time offer settlement?? A settlement would break the conference.
Also if fsu starts legal challenge; does that bar them from acc business including media access
(In response to this post by Stech)
3y
the inflation part of that just makes the "fraud" numbers larger to make a story. Agreeing to no inflation adjustment was a known risk by all parties, I assume at least a few on the FSU board have some basic education in economics.
The good thing about the fraud line is that it at least provides a real potential avenue and FSU is one of the key properties that ESPN would be willing to pay to keep in the ESPN family (thus the reason the rumor is they are going to the BIG and thus out of the family). If ESPN's lawyers analyze the facts and believe it could be a risk and thus would be expandable to all the properties or at least Clem, Miami and UNC as well, it would give them a reason to renegotiate the payouts in exchange for indemnification that remove that risk (not a lawyer but have negotiated many agreements with vendors where there was potential risk and we settled away the risk by agreeing to a deal and including indemnification clauses that removed that risk from the future, it's how those things are handled). If they don't, they'll sit back and let anyone go play on Fox and while they (ESPN) collects the revenue.
(In response to this post by Stech)
3y
I’m not a lawyer, but I did stay at a Holiday Inn Express last night
** Edited by VTownie at 7/31/2023, 7:28:22 AM
(In response to this post by goldendomer)
If FSU was defrauded, so was every other ACC team.
Unless the numbers shown to FSU were somehow different from what the others were shown.
I'm not sure who to blame for all of this, but any contract that is as long as this one is that makes no variation for inflation is just downright dumb. There's a reason that collective bargaining agreements are usually 3-5 years. The future is too unpredictable for both sides.
I will say this, the article at least makes an attempt to show an avenue out. More than other rumor mongers produce.
(In response to this post by goldendomer)
H
hokieZ71
3y
Even if being used to magnify the losses during the extended 9 year duration of the period FSU was allegedly defrauded into signing away their rights, inflation has been around since the start of economics
It’s also super neat their calculation of the inflation losses almost exactly equal the current exit penalty of the ACC. Cmon, at least make the inflation losses like $147.8M or something like that.
(In response to this post by goldendomer)
3y
the premise is that that ESPN and the conference presented "knowingly" inflated revenue projections to get the board to sign the GOR. Never talked to a software salesman who didn't present unrealistic ROI numbers that they and I and everyone except the business VP who just wanted a business case to get the software he/she wanted to get their next promotion knew were BS, and under this definition, commit fraud. But those numbers, like I'm sure the numbers presented to the FSU board were couched with the legal mumbo jumbo that makes it just a rosy projection rather than fraud.
(In response to this post by Hokie1992)
3y
If the Big Ten wanted to (and could) poach two schools from the ACC, I don't see it being those two. UVA, UNC, maybe even Pitt, but Clemson and FSU seem like an odd fit.
Y'all follow this stuff closer than I do, but it just seems like someone substituted Big Ten for SEC in that rumor.
(In response to this post by VTChip)
O
obguthr
3y
Clemson does not. UNC is much more desirable to the B1G than Clemson.
(In response to this post by Will Stewart)
3y
I think the BIG desires Florida recruiting. Teams with football pulse.
(In response to this post by Will Stewart)
H
hokieZ71
3y
A major brand, past champion in a metropolitan city and a baby blue uniform wearing football program that can never seem to meet its potential.
(In response to this post by Will Stewart)
3y
I see the debate on which combination of schools (i.e. UNC/UVA vs. Clemson/FSU) centering around "value" for three different reasons:
1. Football brand value of the schools (assuming football is driving the financial bus right now);
2. Overall brand value of the schools; and
3. Value of the states the schools are located with respect to the cable model and streaming model (Big Ten hedging its bets because it doesn't know which model will be the preferred one going forward).
If you compare the pairings based on these 3 factors, then I believe you can assume that the Clemson-FSU pairing is more valuable for #1 and #3 (primarily because of FL). While the UNC-UVA pairing is more valuable for #2. #3 could be a toss up depending on where the majority of Big Ten alumni reside (FL vs. VA & NC). Also, the Big Ten's decision to add UCLA and USC shows that the Big Ten isn't willing to have members on an island which is what would happen with Clemson and FSU. Plus, if the Big Ten waits to add Clemson and FSU, then there is no guarantee that they would be available at that time because the SEC decided to add them. Assuming the Big Ten wants to have a member in the state of FL, I think you would agree that the Big Ten would prefer to add FSU than Miami, UCF, or USF.
(In response to this post by Will Stewart)
3y
Do they intend to continue with more PAC properties as well as ACC and... ahem, Notre Dame. This is a rather grand vision of a college athletic conference. Are they building "The P1"?
(In response to this post by VTHokie2000)
3y
same time, I am not sure if people can assume one or another the value of the Pac-Whatever members to the Big Ten. It is possible that the Big Ten could believe the value of each school drops significantly after Oregon and UDub for whatever reason. If that is the case, then the Big Ten could wait to add any of those schools until it makes financial sense to pull the trigger. At this point the Big Ten knows it could add any Pac-Whatever school at any time it wants, so there's no reason to be hasty on making any decisions. As far as the Big Ten's ultimate end goal, I'm not sure it is clear what it is at this time. It is possible the Big Ten may not even know it now.
(In response to this post by 33laszlo99)
3y
This whole thing is nothing but a plot by the NCAA, using the BIG as it's mole to regain control of college football.
(In response to this post by 33laszlo99)
Would be stunned if the B1G would take Pitt, especially with how picky they
seem to be at present. The BTN is already in PA. I doubt PSU wants them. And they don't even play on campus.
VT is more likely to the B1G than Pitt, I think.
(In response to this post by Will Stewart)
M
Marooned
3y
Rumors of something both dramatic and implausible. All the sensationalism, none of risk 😆
(In response to this post by VTChip)
3y
But to humor the what if aspect, this would mean one of two things.
Either they found a way out of the GOR and other ACC schools (VT) will also leave soon.
Or they will pay their way out and other ACC schools will bathe in the bounty of the millions paid. But we also will know for certain that the P2 is the only path to future relevance.
(In response to this post by VTChip)
H
HokieATC
3y
(In response to this post by VTChip)
2
2hhoop3
3y
both originating sources and parrots repeating for hits. Holding sites and reporters accountable is the only way to embarrass the clickbait *****s who continually fling BS against a wall hoping something will stick or if they repeat something over and over and over again circumstances may change, it will happen and they can claim to have had the scoop first.
(In response to this post by VTChip)
3y
You heard it here first!
(In response to this post by 2hhoop3)
2
2hhoop3
3y
on how somebody defines getting it right. Does a guy intermittently claiming since last November that Colorado is going to the Big 12 next week get credit for it finally coming true 9 months later or does he forfeit that right because the other 8 times he made that claim nothing came to fruition?
** Edited by 2hhoop3 at 7/30/2023, 10:40:42 PM
(In response to this post by Big12 guy)
3y
anywhere. I'm assuming no one on this board saw that coming, and based on many of the posters on this board, if anyone would have seen that coming, it would have been posted.
THAT was the shift - so far, everything else is the fallout. The BIG has their money, they're good - they don't need another school. The SEC is fine - they too, don't NEED another school. They both may expand more, but that is pure speculation.
The B12 NEEDED schools to add value. When you have nothing, you have nothing to lose.
(In response to this post by 2hhoop3)
V
vtka93
3y
tend to happen in secrecy without much fanfare.
I do think people overestimate the desire/need for BIG or SEC to expand more.
Honestly, I more see both the BIG and SEC saying one day (like the next TV contract), "Hey the ACC has unequal sharing, maybe we should do that. If you don't agree go find another conference". The greedy always get greedier.
(In response to this post by Big12 guy)
I heard people speak theoretically about it several years ago.
The shocking part is that the B1G took just two schools and is leaving everyone else out to dry.
I thought the B1G would take most or all of the AAU schools.
** Edited by Maroon Baboon at 7/31/2023, 12:09:03 AM
(In response to this post by Big12 guy)
H
hokieZ71
3y
They have the champagne tastes on the beer budget of the ACC.
Next few weeks going to be interesting for sure.
(In response to this post by Big12 guy)
2
2hhoop3
3y
Fluguar saw it coming. Others claim he was fed the info by BIG for other reasons. Some people look at him, the boys on the Monty show, 365, etc. and think they know things. Others just view them and some others as willing dupes or guys just throwing stuff against the wall to see if they can get something to stick. People can decide for themselves whether they lean more to the latter or the former.
(In response to this post by Big12 guy)
3y
So in retrospect it makes perfect sense that USC and UCLA left when they did. Same for Texas and Oklahoma with the Big 12 grant of rights expiring. The ACC's grant of rights is still 13 years away so we shouldn't expect any ACC schools to leave for years.
(In response to this post by Big12 guy)
3y
They were sitting on that deal until the B12 contract expired, but got caught with their pants down.
(In response to this post by tarheelblue)
