Mag 7+1 vote to disband and start a new league with better TV deal. Yes/No?
Would you go for this?
** Edited by 132863Hokie at 8/21/2023, 2:19:31 PM
59 Replies
2y
(In response to this post by 132863Hokie)
2y
The Mag7 plus Washington, Oregon and ND would have been awesome, but oh well.
I don't consider Louisville, Duke, Cuse or Pittsburgh to be worthless. Wake and BC yes.
(In response to this post by 132863Hokie)
X
xx97
2y
(In response to this post by SpeakToDamien)
2y
The market value for the following brands are all higher than any teams in the Big12:
Unquestionably superior brands to anyone in the Big12: UNC, FSU, CLEMSON
Most likely super brands to anyone in the Big 12: VT, UVA, MIAMI, NCSU
Maybe not superior brands, but top half: Pitt, GT
In football, what is the Big12's most valuable brand? OKSU? K State? Arizona? Baylor? TCU?
The only Tier 1 program the Big12 has is Kansas in basketball, but even that is matched in the ACC with Duke.
(In response to this post by xx97)
2y
want out.
The B12 may only have 2 like that, as in ASU and Utah, but they were happy to sign on.
The B12 will only be a factor if your conference doesn't find a way to stick together - otherwise, this thread wouldn't exist.
There are 4 P5 schools out there for the taking, in addition to about 4 or 5 really good G5 programs that are ready to make the jump.
What's going to happen is the top ACC teams will figure out a way out of the GOR, and those are the ones against expansion now.
reminds me of Texas, Oklahoma, USC, UCLA, Oregon, and Washington - all schools that were against expansion.
Leave the B12 out of this, I don't see how they are involved. if your conference falters, it won't be because the B12 is there, it will be because the ACC couldn't figure it out.
(In response to this post by jesuisvtguy)
2y
there are 7 teams that met to discuss how to increase revenues and one team that has openly stated that if revenues don't increase, they will have to think about doing something. There are in no way, shape or form, 7 teams that want out.
(In response to this post by Big12 guy)
2y
(In response to this post by Vienna_Hokie)
2y
believe and could being the operative words. None of them are being offered more elsewhere and none could afford to take it given the contract they signed....so "want to leave" is an assumption with no facts (actual public statements, even by FSU) to support it.
(In response to this post by GodfatherHokie)
2y
(In response to this post by Vienna_Hokie)
2y
Seven teams met to discuss how to increase revenue because they are not happy with their revenue. That is a fact. They want to leave is a click bait statement. As a matter of fact, even FSU has not stated that they want to leave, what they have said is that if there isn't a change to the revenue situation, they will have to look at other options. Again, that's a known fact. The only people saying FSU wants to leave the conference are ..... click bait writers.
(In response to this post by Big12 guy)
2y
other Universities joined them. I don't think you can pretend it was a nothing burger.
(In response to this post by Vienna_Hokie)
2y
being unhappy and being able to do anything about it are two very different things.
No way they can get 7 others to join them in dissolving the conference unless all 8 have P2 homes, so throw temper tantrums and make carefully worded threats or better yet, leave and pay the rest of the conference a ton of money while you scrape by or sell your soul to some private equity group (which isn't going to do it, because the numbers don't work).
(In response to this post by Big12 guy)
2y
are watching.
(In response to this post by Vienna_Hokie)
2y
else, it's just noise and the non 7 or whatever you want to call them, aren't going anywhere because they can't get more elsewhere. If the big boys leave, they can create their own clone of the B12 and get less at that point, would be beyond stupid to hasten that end.
(In response to this post by Big12 guy)
X
xx97
2y
Those metrics are TV and revenue distribution. Computer rankings. No school has ever chosen the ACC over the B12 with invites from both while the ACC is currently trying to getv3 schools the b12 outright rejected (Stanford, California, SMU) on board.
You live in a world of intangibles, concepts, and personal opinion. The numbers and tangible facts say otherwise.
(In response to this post by jesuisvtguy)
2y
(In response to this post by xx97)
X
xx97
2y
Big 12 was getting between $42-$44.9 million per school. The ACC just $37.9-$41.3 million per school.
Source: https://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/college/2023/05/19/...
Basically the lowest paid B12 school was getting more from conference distributions than the top ACC school was and that was on the old media deal. The B12 is getting a bump up. The ACC is still on the same deal for the next 13 years.
B12 > ACC.
Tangibly, proven true.
(In response to this post by SpeakToDamien)
2y
I'm not suggesting the ACC doesn't have problems. Sure, the Big12 is more stable than the ACC, but that's not because it is better.
The ACC is not trying to get 3 schools the B12 "rejected". It is considering if it would be a collective value add... and the fact Stanford is allegedly willing to join for free makes it pretty clear the ACC is valuable. I don't see anyone asking to join the Big12 at a huge discount.
** Edited by jesuisvtguy at 8/21/2023, 5:34:08 PM
(In response to this post by xx97)
2
2hhoop3
2y
and "asking to join the Big 12 at a huge discount" seems pretty relevant to both your response and the post you attempted to respond to.
(In response to this post by xx97)
X
xx97
2y
(In response to this post by 2hhoop3)
2
2hhoop3
2y
they didn't want it at the discount. Reading comprehension is your friend.
(In response to this post by xx97)
X
xx97
2y
(In response to this post by 2hhoop3)
2
2hhoop3
2y
reading comprehension is your friend. I direct you to the post that started this discussion where the poster made the statement he didn't see anyone looking to join the Big 12 at a huge discount. You responded Arizona, Arizona State and Utah. Unless you can show where they joined for a discount as opposed to full share they don't qualify. Moreover, saying they had talks and didn't want it does not rule out the possibility they didn't want it at the discount offered. I realize you're new here but, that doesn't mean you are not expected to read and at least relevantly respond.
(In response to this post by xx97)
X
xx97
2y
Discount or not. There is nothing to offer. LOL. Talk about "reading comprehension".
(In response to this post by 2hhoop3)
2
2hhoop3
2y
didn't want those schools or those schools didn't want the Big 12 at any price? Or, maybe the Big 12 full share credit line from the networks ran out at a lesser number once enough schools were secured to torpedo the PAC 12? If the Big 12 was more desirable to Stanford why wouldn't they offer the Big 12 the same discount deal they have reportedly offered the ACC?
(In response to this post by xx97)
X
xx97
2y
Stanford, California, and SMU offer nothing of value to the b12.
(In response to this post by 2hhoop3)
2
2hhoop3
2y
your response on? Also, if Stanford would come running as you assert, why wouldn't they offer the Big 12 the same no revenue share they reportedly are proposing to the ACC which would undoubtedly be of value to the Big 12 given their present collection of G5s and P5 castoffs?
(In response to this post by xx97)
X
xx97
2y
bang you. Wake up.
The B12 said "we're done". There is no one left of value out there. Stanford would be dilutive at any share.
(In response to this post by 2hhoop3)
2
2hhoop3
2y
dilutive if they are taking no share and, if they offered that as your question who says they didn't would imply, the question still stands as to why the Big 12 would not accept? Based on your responses in this thread it's pretty certain you're not intelligent enough to get any girl no matter what you offer her so you should probably be the one waking up.
(In response to this post by xx97)
X
xx97
2y
Of course schools can be dilutive with no share. Eventually they WILL get a share. That's a temporary fixture.
By your logic, any school that offers no share should be invited. Many would do that. The fact there is a down the road time period that must be accounted for and the current brand eroding the quality of the league's play. LOL.
SMU, as well, would take a zero share AND their left nut. They aren't getting in.
Guy, the B12 saying "We're done. We're not doing anything" is not Stanford rejecting anything.
(In response to this post by 2hhoop3)
2
2hhoop3
2y
5 - 7 years is a significant amount of time not to be dilutive as well as add value longer term. That would be especially true with Stanford cast against the current B12 membership roster. My logic in no way means any school is a candidate but, it does mean schools are considered on an individual basis. You haven't really answered any of the questions asked because you can't for whatever reason. Here is one that should be easy for you. Where did you go to college and what school do you pull for?
(In response to this post by xx97)
X
xx97
2y
You keep avoiding the monkey in the room. Stanford would offer the Big Ten zero as well we presume? Why is the Big Ten, like the B12, not interested in that?
Only the MWC, AAC, and ACC are considering Stanford and Cal. That's it. The top 3 conferences have not.
(In response to this post by 2hhoop3)
2
2hhoop3
2y
of the previous questions you have been asked, even the most simple recent one or show me where you have asked this question to me previously and I will be happy to answer it. Or you can keep ducking and avoiding them and further confirm to everyone that you are nothing more than an ignorant little troll best ignored.
(In response to this post by xx97)
X
xx97
2y
Why don't conferences add schools all the time for zero distribution ? Specifically, why would the B10 and B12 not consider it?
(In response to this post by 2hhoop3)
2
2hhoop3
2y
I see nor answer any of the questions asked. See ya troll.
(In response to this post by xx97)
X
xx97
2y
I've answered all of your questions. Stanford is dilutive to the B12's brand.
Now I'll ask you the same question? Why did the BIG not take Stanford up on the $0 offer either? You seem frightened of the answer.
Owning you was way too easy!
** Edited by xx97 at 8/22/2023, 2:03:04 PM
(In response to this post by 2hhoop3)
2y
like most B12 members, it was a fallback.
(In response to this post by xx97)
X
xx97
2y
ASU's President acknowledged those discussions were had. At the end of the day, they weren't entertaining any offer to the ACC. The B12 was clearly a better option.
(In response to this post by Vienna_Hokie)
2y
(In response to this post by xx97)
X
xx97
2y
The ACC wanted to take Cal, Stanford, Utah, Arizona, and Arizona State as a group.
ASU's President essentially confirmed those discussions. Those schools wanted nothing to do with the ACC as long as they had a B12 invite.
** Edited by xx97 at 8/21/2023, 9:44:36 PM
(In response to this post by Vienna_Hokie)
2y
First, more BS has been floated by "sources" in this crap than anything. Unless I see a statement from a school official, it is just more clickbait. What you posted is just another tweet from another twit.
Second, AZ, ASU and UT (Colorado too) would have been stupid to even consider the ACC if the Big12 was a possibility. Same reason it is stupid for the ACC to expand to the west coast, those 3 schools are a geographic and cultural fit with the B12. That doesn't mean the B12 is superior, it means it is better for them.
(In response to this post by xx97)
X
xx97
2y
He was clear with his words. He wanted nothing to do with the ACC.
(In response to this post by Vienna_Hokie)
2y
I am now convinced the ACC is done...and ND is joining the BIG and FSU is leaving tomorrow and the B12 without a single national brand is the top power broker in CFB. Yep.
(In response to this post by xx97)
X
xx97
2y
And the B12 provides more to its schools
(In response to this post by IB4TECH)
2y
is because you have 7 schools that want to break up the ACC. If it wasn't for them, there would be no discussions about which teams would or would not accept an invitation to the B12. It's kinda dumb really.
(In response to this post by SpeakToDamien)
M
Marooned
2y
Between the schools and the network calling the shots. Very tenuous legal situation for doing so
(In response to this post by 132863Hokie)
2y
the league was
FSU
THE U
GT
Clemson
UNC
State
VT
UVA
With Wake and Duke as members for all others sports
(In response to this post by 132863Hokie)
2y
and add Pitt, L'Ville, WVU in 2031, and ND. Divide into two divisions and require that you only play your division, although it is highly encouraged that you schedule schools from the other division but don't count toward the division standings. ND gets to keep the NBC home deal with some league concessions. NBC also signs on with the new league. Call it the National Bastardized Conference with a Peacock logo.
(In response to this post by MrFantastic!)