Fans Predict Mass Exodus From ACC As Conference Reportedly Vets Candidates
BY JACOB ELSEY
“Talks died down after football season’s start, but they’ve started back up with October rolling in. One notable source predicted that the Tigers, Seminoles, North Carolina, and Virginia would eventually leave as a “block of four,” for either the Big Ten or SEC. Of course, the one thing standing in the way is that television agreement that ties the schools to the conference for the next decade-plus. Those teams have reportedly been exploring ways out of the deal, and recent news has many believing that they have.”
Sports show host and columnist Jim Williams has been a credible source in the past. Bio from his twitter feed: Washington-based CEO LJC. Media consulting. 7 Time Emmy Award winning TV producer & director. Host of Stream On w/Jim Williams - Forbes & Zenger columnist.
** Edited by WBGV at 10/10/2023, 1:15:03 PM
58 Replies
Pony up $300 million from each and happy if they leave tomorrow, if UVA
wants to continue the series home and away as OOC opponents I won't be opposed either. Gives many Richmond and NOVA Hokies an close proximity home away from home game they can attend
(In response to this post by WBGV)
That would be the most unHoo like thing ever...not buying it
(In response to this post by WBGV)
S
Stech
2y
end of June, so it’s the majority.
BTW, Virginia Tech didn’t leave UVA behind when some thought they would, and UVA is not leaving Virginia Tech behind, nor will UNC leave NCSU behind. So will the SEC take 7 or will 4 go to the SEC and 3 to the B1G? Since there are no Divisions, you don’t need an even number for the conference.
PS I am not saying this will happen, but I do believe it’s the only way it could happen, Mag 7 plus 1 before the end of June.
** Edited by Stech at 10/11/2023, 1:46:31 PM
(In response to this post by WBGV)
E
EDGEMAN
2y
Pros:
1. a lot of schools, so games won't get stale
Cons:
1. a lot of schools means their individual payout decreases with every school added. They're approaching G5 payouts.
2. no conference channel.
3. travel expenses will double or triple.
4. most games will be outside of their primary recruiting areas.
(In response to this post by Stech)
2y
(In response to this post by EDGEMAN)
2y
Pros:
A power conferences currently have a lot of schools, so matchups will be compelling.
Cons:
The highest payout in the G5 currently is approximately $7M per year in the AAC. Schools will not be added unless ESPN, FOX, or some other entity that wants that content ponies up the money. No different than any other conference.
If, and I say If, any current ACC schools end up in the B12, it will be because of a PAC style implosion. I don't see that happening, but if it does, the ACCN will be involved in such a merger.
The larger the conference, the easier it will be to have regional scheduling for non revenue sports. It will be the football and basketball schools that would bare the brunt of travel. Could actually be an advantage over the BIG.
Recruiting is now national for the Blue Bloods and Brands in both football and basketball. I'm not sure that will ever change.
The ACC needs to survive as a conference in my view, but I thought the same about the PAC. If the PAC can implode, there is nothing off the table.
(In response to this post by EDGEMAN)
T
TDVick
2y
championship matchups might be this year? In the ACC and Pac12, so many teams don't play each other in the regular season that a number of matchups can occur. With the divisions you could at least make the case that the division standings were a preliminary play-in. In the ACC you have UL, UNC, Mia along with FSU and longshots Clemson and Duke. Because of this, there will likely be fuzzy, arbitrary selection criteria that determine the participants. We could easily have UM-UL or UL-UNC in the ACCCG.
The complaint about college football was that its crowning process was arbitrary. In some ways it has become even more arbitrary. When the playoff goes to 12 it will be less so, but the conference championship games won't mean much. The year before last UGA didn't have much incentive to show up against Bama and got routed, but still won the title.
(In response to this post by Big12 guy)
M
Mercury
2y
The timing of the Plyfly deal and playfly relationships with the Big 10, and specifically Maryland, Va Rutgers and other Big 10 schools and Fox........ .. Also, the interest in Playfly capabilities on innovative ways to raise more funds from corporate sponsorship, naming rights etc. While I was critical of Whit promoting the associate AD's with specific responsibilities, maybe that is to free up Whit to 'special, strategic initiatives"/. I dont know... but change in long term partners are not usually VT forte.
(In response to this post by Stech)
S
Stech
2y
to on the Subscriber Board?
** Edited by Stech at 10/11/2023, 2:25:43 PM
(In response to this post by Mercury)
M
Mercury
2y
earlier in the week....
I thought even the video i posted on the subscriber board would hit me.
1. the AD of BC leading the interview... many of the board has a big dislike for him..... but obviously in the AD world all is great.
2. Also, whit in general..causes discussion......
I dont think folks dont realize the change that will occur with PLayfly. It is really question if broadcast team, remains, the video content will be different. and the way that VT athletic information is distributed... Some good, some bad.. but also would love to see the contract (if Central florida got 113 million for 10 years) which is more than 10 years of american conference revenue sharing.
(In response to this post by Stech)
T
TDVick
2y
This is not a criticism of Whit. But it is one of college football or media in general. You would think that at some point in time the old box TV, media rights framework would get tossed. Everyone could keep their own rights or figure out splits with the other team or conference and do something like an affiliate marketing click model. People should be able to drag and drop whatever they want to watch. I try to watch ESPN through my cable login and it never works. There are so many hoops to jump through. It seems like such a stupid bull**** way of doing things. Figure out the price you want. If your product is part of a bundle, figure out what your cut of the bundle is and then let people purchase it - without all these idiotic headaches.
Maybe they need to do some kind of antitrust to pry these markets open. You can get a taco delivered to your house easier than the college football game that you want to watch.
** Edited by TDVick at 10/12/2023, 9:02:24 AM
(In response to this post by Mercury)
2y
VT
UVA
UNC
State
Miami
Fsu
Clemson
GT.
24 teams with 3 divisions of 8. That above be a division. Getting teams based on rivalries sells.
(In response to this post by Stech)
S
Stech
2y
IMHO will stay in the ACC, and they will make the ACC stand for Academic Conference of Champions! They will be happy there. As Louisville will be happy in the new B12.
However, remember I said this is the only way I can see it happening sooner rather than later. I am not saying it’s happening, sooner rather than later.
** Edited by Stech at 10/11/2023, 2:07:16 PM
(In response to this post by MrFantastic!)
2y
THen Louisville for GT???? Rival game with KY probably sells for good of bball
(In response to this post by Stech)
S
Stech
2y
have changed, but when it first came out, the FSU people were saying Louisville to the B12.
Just telling you what I have heard, but again, I am not saying this will happen, I am saying I think the majority will need to leave before the end of June, not just 4 teams IMHO.
(In response to this post by MrFantastic!)
2y
trip. Academically acceptable and pretty decent football history. Maybe one of SMU’s permanent rivals.
(In response to this post by WBGV)
H
HOO86
2y
They have played 50 times. I'd be happy with Tulane as well. I also think we should circle back on Connecticut. I know they are not a popular choice here, but they have enough of an Athletics Budget to complete in the ACC.
(In response to this post by seekoHoG)
T
Truthahn
2y
If there is any truth to this, then we would be bringing in Wash State and Oregon State now.
As for later, we will get a crack at some B12 teams in 2030. If that fails, or we are too dumb to try it, maybe we pull the emergency lever on USF and Memphis in 2036.
Regardless, I think we should be talking to UConn now about everything except FB. I doubt anything serious is happening about any of those others at this time.
(In response to this post by WBGV)
2y
take UConn's football, you don't get UConn.
(In response to this post by Truthahn)
T
Truthahn
2y
I think they would gladly join the acc for the same arrangement.
(In response to this post by Big12 guy)
2y
What does the ACC, or B12 for that matter, offer them for basketball only that the Big East doesn't?
(In response to this post by Truthahn)
H
hoodat
2y
WV, Cincinnati, Tulane, Uconn, Memphis will join the ACC. FSU, Clemson and UNC all realize the ACC isn't all that bad once ND finally joins! Might also add 1 or 2 more West Coast schools to form a working pod of 6
West pod of 6 (Stanford, Cal, Oregon St, Wash St, SMU, Tulane).
Mid-America pod of 6 (Memphis, Louisville, WV, Cincy, Pitt, VT).
Private school pod of 6 (Syracuse, BC, Wake, Duke, Miami, ND).
Mid-Atlantic pod of 6 (Uconn, UNC, UVA, NC State, FSU, GT)
....maybe swap VT and Uconn to keep VT in the mid-atlantic pod
** Edited by hoodat at 10/10/2023, 3:49:27 PM
** Edited by hoodat at 10/10/2023, 3:54:42 PM
** Edited by hoodat at 10/10/2023, 3:55:13 PM
(In response to this post by WBGV)
H
hoodat
2y
(In response to this post by Big12 guy)
2y
B12 is looking to add some basketball only blue bloods, and if they do that, no one will be leaving the B12.
(In response to this post by hoodat)
T
Truthahn
2y
What is your exit fee? It must be similar to the ACCs. I think the B12 has gotten good at building a Golden wall around itself. Our GOR came from the B12 after all. I would not be surprise if our exit fee structure did as well.
(In response to this post by Big12 guy)
2y
would argue the same for the ACC around 2036.
If you haven't noticed, there is a clear line from the P2 to the rest of us. I think many here are holding out hope that a P3 will emerge, but it is what it is. The reality, is that there are only a handful of football schools that could still make that jump, and it won't be the entire ACC, and it won't be the B12.
Basketball consolidation is next at bat. The B12 will separate the basketball rights from the football rights, and it just might generate enough money to stay competitive in football.
(In response to this post by Truthahn)
"Notable sources" are once again unnamed....
"Reportedly", "Believing" , bla bla bla.......
IMHO, "IF" any ACC school knew a way out of the GOR, they would've already reported it. Of the ACC schools listed, only UVA and UNC have enough cash to leave right now. I honestly don't think UVA and UNC really want to leave their beloved ACC. Clemson and FSU are the poorest universities in the ACC along with Louisville. All the other ACC schools have endowments over $1 billion.
(In response to this post by WBGV)
T
Truthahn
2y
(In response to this post by Old Line Hokie)
2y
into chaos based upon a legal "theory". If I am the ACC, anybody that wants to leave is going to be in court for YEARS. ACC keeps the money in the meantime and the offending parties starve to death financially.
(In response to this post by WBGV)
imagine the tax payer issues in those states
"So let me get this right, our instate tuition, which is considered a benefit to people who pay taxes in this state, is going up because why again"?
Don't give me,"the money is separate" argument...no one believes that
(In response to this post by VT ChemE 1986)
2y
be in court for several years? Nobody not named Notre Dame brings enough to the table to make it worthwhile.
(In response to this post by VT ChemE 1986)
2y
But that is not the way it will happen. If the departing schools are “in court for YEARS” the conference will also be there. Who has the advantage when accumulating years of legal fees? (Not The ACC.) I think the “FSU’s” will offer a generous settlement and allow the conference to decide how badly they really want to starve the offending parties. Will The ACC come out ahead by refusing the settlement offer?
(In response to this post by VT ChemE 1986)
2y
are going to offer any ACC team a landing spot as long as the GOR is deemed enforceable. Do not expect it will take long for courts to make that determination.
It has been suggested the most likely way to void the GOR would be to dissolve the ACC. NCSU made that unlikely when they voted to add the 3 new members.
(In response to this post by 33laszlo99)
2
2hhoop3
2y
the individual schools have the advantage over the ACC when accumulating years of legal fees?
(In response to this post by 33laszlo99)
2
2hhoop3
2y
First, it is not many against one. It is those going versus those staying in reality. Second, I don't think you have calculated the resources available and the depth of the the pockets properly. The conference has the purse strings and even with a spinning meter the fees are small relative to the dollars at stake. You are going to need far more before I would buy either one of those arguments.
(In response to this post by 33laszlo99)
2
2hhoop3
2y
which so far you are unable to defend. Like I have told you before opinions are fine, they are even better if they don't collapse under the first challenge.
(In response to this post by 33laszlo99)
2y
You would not accept any opinion nor any defense of an opinion which goes against your preferred outcome. I give my reasons not "defense". That you disagree with them is not a consideration.
(In response to this post by 2hhoop3)
2
2hhoop3
2y
projecting future events. You are dead wrong about accepting a defense that goes against my preferred outcome.
I am happy to consider any defense intelligently constructed and supported. You made a statement about your belief of a legal advantage. When questioned about why you believed that you threw out two reasons for your "opinion". When those reasons were challenged you immediately reverted to your standard it's an opinion, not selling anything mantra. Absolutely no defense, explanation or pushback to the explanations that challenged your opinion. That is the same thing you did previously when challenged over the distinction between GOR and exit fees. What that tells me is you throw things out with little to no thought or understanding hoping it sticks but, have little real interest in supporting that stance and challenging positions that go against your preferred outcome, which ironically is the charge you just tried to level against me.
To be clear, I have strong opinions and beliefs from time to time and the fact I defend them has nothing to do with what I will accept IF shown where I may be in error. This is a discussion board and you claim to be interested in discussion. There is very little opportunity for discussion when you will not or cannot defend the positions you choose to take.
(In response to this post by 33laszlo99)
2y
possible realignment? Where are all of your serious points to refute my "opinion"?
VTchem... posted an "opinion" that litigation would go on for years. I didn't see his fact sheet or listed examples. Shouldn't you be demanding his follow-up support/proof/documentation? Of course not, you like his "opinion".
I offer a scenario that, if realized, would make you unhappy. So you have decided to be mad at me, call me a troll.
Can you accept that others on this board are capable of judging for themselves what they read here? They don't need you to protect them from my dangerous ideas. It's clearly personal for you. Get over it.
(In response to this post by 2hhoop3)
2
2hhoop3
2y
judge, you're just upset that you are unable to intelligently defend your assertions yet again. I am not insecure about realignment its coming, I just challenge people like you who have opinions but, have obviously put little or no thought into the reality of the situation and how it will transpire.
I refuted your points that it was one against many and that they had deeper pockets and you were just unwilling or unable to go further in defense of your point. Trying to draw VT chem's post in just shows your lack of understanding as the fact a court case could drag on for years is a reasonable possibility in no need of further support. Anybody that has any familiarity with the justice system knows that.
I'm not attempting to protect anyone just challenging you to show your "dangerous ideas" are more than hopeful, lightly considered ramblings. It would appear you are the one who needs to get over it.
(In response to this post by 33laszlo99)
2y
Was it over when the Germans bombed Pearl Harbor?!
(In response to this post by 2hhoop3)
2y
to pay their school's settlement. The number would have to be north of $100M per school. Before I pulled the trigger as the school AD and president I would want that money in the bank.
(In response to this post by 33laszlo99)
R
RJHokie
2y
There is the matter of an estimated $500+ million for the remaining grant of rights period.
(In response to this post by VT ChemE 1986)
R
RJHokie
2y
And the agreements were structured to be that way.
(In response to this post by VT ChemE 1986)
2
2hhoop3
2y
all over again. Same clickbait stories and same cast of clickbait trolls throwing the same stuff against walls to see if anything might stick this time around.
(In response to this post by RJHokie)
2y
“Just when we thought that the expansion discussions were over prior to the season after Stanford, Cal, and SMU joined the ACC it appears that the now bi-coastal conference is looking to add more programs.
. . . . .
Let's take a look at which programs may get the nod and what they bring to the table. Similar to the Pac-12 expansion era, I will be providing their media and academic rankings, while including their record in 2023 as the conference likely wants competitive programs.”
(In response to this post by WBGV)
S
Stech
2y
(In response to this post by WBGV)
Any person on any conference realignment board could post this...
stuff. The guy's list leaves out the most likely ACC addition UConn. ;)
(In response to this post by WBGV)