All Hokie, All the Time. Period. Presented by First Bank & Trust Company

W
WBGV OP
Oct 26, 2023 at 12:00 PM ET
ACC’s Jim Phillips reinforces decision to expand, suggests basketball
tournament may not include all members. By Brendan Marks “Atlantic Coast Conference commissioner Jim Phillips, speaking Wednesday for the first time since the league’s decision to add Cal, Stanford and SMU, reiterated why the league opted to expand — but did not preclude additional future movement. “Getting to 18 protects the ACC, now and into the future,” Phillips said at ACC Tipoff. “Schools will ultimately make the decisions that they want.” For those who think that the GOR guarantees that the ACC will be stable until 2036, you have to ask yourself what is Commissioner Philips talking about when he said “Getting to 18 protects the ACC, now and into the future”. Protects it from what?

59 Replies

MrBayAreaHokie MrBayAreaHokie
protection from implosion
seekoHoG seekoHoG
Reduces the likelihood that enough votes can be had to
dissolve the conference. Some on TSL have suggested the GOR plus departure fees make leaving the conference nearly impossible in the next several years. One possible solution might be for a coalition of schools to vote to disband the conference thus nullifying the GOR. With 18 teams, creating that coalition will be more difficult.
S
Stech
After June 30th correct, before then, it’s still 8 for the majority.
seekoHoG seekoHoG
For that to happen it would mean that all 8 would likely have an
agreement in place with one or more conferences thus indicating their intention to join a new conference. Something I read during last expansion frenzy was that the B12's bylaws/charter state a team loses its voting privilege once it has indicated its intention to leave the conference. It was suggested the ACC bylaws would likely say something similar. IF that is the case (??), would the 8 even be able to vote on a move to dissolve the conference? Are there 8 teams in the ACC that would be willing vote to dissolve the conference without at least a "gentleman's agreement" for a soft landing spot? I've tried to do some research on the question but there so much rumor and speculation and not a lot of factual information for me to be certain of what's possible and what's not.
S
Stech
“If” it were to happen, I don’t think it will dissolve the Conference. IMHO
“if” it were to happen the ACC survives, and ACC would stand for Academic Champions Conference. They would get USF, Tulane amongst others. Then the 8 who leave, go to court, and make the case that the GOR should not hold up, because it’s not anywhere close to being the same Conference they signed the agreement with, when they signed it. Then the court pushes them to settle, with some type of penalty fee, but not their entire media money. Maybe something like $100 million per school, which the 8 accept because they can make that up over about 3 years because of the P2 will pay them about $40 million more a year in their new Conference. The ACC receives around a Billion dollars, not bad. Yeah I know, it would take a lot for this to happen, but IMHO it’s possible, and it would fit Kurt Herbstreit’s big bang after the year’s season is over. ** Edited by Stech at 10/29/2023, 8:38:40 PM
SunDevilHokie SunDevilHokie
To your point of 8 schools needing a known conference spot
All 8 would almost have to be going to SEC or BIG. The third option is Big12 which isn’t an improvement over ACC, no football powers, and doesn’t currently have a conference media outlet. There’s just no where to go near term for that many schools.
2
2hhoop3
How do you believe.......
the 8 would defend the argument that it was in fact their own actions which caused the claim they are trying to make? Do you really believe a judge would nudge a settlement that based on your amount represents no more than $0.30 on the dollar of what would be due under the GOR if enforced? Do you believe that it is realistic there will be P2 deals in hand for a minimum of 8 by June 30, 2024? How do you see the 8, their conference landing spots and potentially even the TV partners avoiding being dragged in to court by the ACC and remaining schools under claims of contract interference? I am not saying what you propose is impossible but, I am saying the potential hurdles, a few of which I have identified above for your consideration, are likely higher bars to clear than you may believe. I think all this comes to an end under two possible scenarios, (1)ESPN and FOX come up with a plan likely involving a lot of money and access that makes it palatable for the other conferences/schools to forego the rights/remedies under the existing GOR or (2) enough time passes that the remaining values of the existing GORs make settlement negotiations more manageable for all sides.
S
Stech
You make good points for the steep hill to climb and I’m not sure it can be
climbed. If it’s too far for 8 to climb, then I think 2-3 to climb it is almost impossible. That said, if it does happen, I agree ESPN and possibly Fox will play a part even though the GOR is with the ACC. The other big thing that could rock everything, is football and basketball players being treated like employees, with compensation and benefits. That’s such a huge change, it’s hard to say what that will do College sports. I have a question for you, Herbstreit said we would likely see another round of Conference changes after the season ends. What do you think he was talking about there? He’s incredibly connected, thus his comment on that is very intriguing. ** Edited by Stech at 10/29/2023, 11:24:10 PM
2
2hhoop3
I agree with everything......
you said and, in fact, I pondered asking you the exact same question you have now put to me. My opinion, purely a WAG, is that Herbie as an ESPN college football big fish is privy to what ESPN may or may not be willing to do with regard to realignment and CFP expansion. He is also situated uniquely with ties at Ohio State, Clemson and a few other schools to have insight into the thinking of the BIG(aka FOX) and the SEC as well. He is reading the tea leaves and making an educated guess based on the dominoes falling a particular way. The dominoes include the ND/NBC situation, CFP expansion talks and the likely regulatory challenges looming for the NCAA. These things all come to a head no later than 2025/2026 making it likely something gets done before 2024 season, as pushing until after 2024 season tightens the window substantially. I also think that whatever happens pretty much rolls off of ND as the lynchpin.
HokieAl HokieAl
My left field guess is that CFP expansion could be a tipping point
The ESPN contract expires after 2025. So depending on how the expanded playoff contract is divided up across media partners, that could trigger a whole different approach. My guess, a similar model to the college basketball tournament. Shorten the regular season for football to 10 games. Then expand the playoff to 32 teams (5 rounds get us 31 games across media partners). Or go NFL style and give some byes to top 4 and have a total of 36 teams and 33 games across 6 rounds. This gives conferences more money opportunities. Makes conference expansion unnecessary. And still allows 20-40 average teams to play in meaningless bowls and keep that tradition alive. Some schools with bad records might have only 10 games a year, but allow them to schedule end of season "exhibition" games that don't count against eligibility in order to get one more game for revenue and practice of young players. Good teams benefit and bad teams are no worse off, while also keeping the conferences safe from any further crazy changes.
B
Big12 guy
I'd rather see home games than byes.
3
33laszlo99
Unlikely that they would reduce the regular season schedule. There over
130 FBS programs playing those last two games. That's too much TV content, ticket sales, etc. to just be replaced by two rounds of playoffs. I saw a proposal for The B1G to have a four-team playoff for their conference championship. But the first round (four teams) would be the twelfth regular season game, and all of the other programs would be paired-up based on conference standings for their twelfth regular game.
2
2hhoop3
It certainly could be.....
and what you suggest is also not out of the realm of possibility. My reason for ND comment is that chronologically the ND deadline hits before the CFP and ESPN contract expiration.
3
33laszlo99
It's going to be popcorn-worthy viewing.
I don’t expect there to be any defending of arguments, just finger pointing and placing of blame… to no avail. As far as a judge-nudge. I have seen posts by lawyers that indicate a preference for cash settlements versus enforced performance. I’ll go with that. But I anticipate mediation, not litigation, to avoid discovery. I don’t think eight departures will be necessary. Four would suffice, especially if one of them is ND. TV partners and conferences will remain on the sidelines unless/until the ACC invites their participation. I have said all along that I really don’t know how this works out. But I have been convinced that it was coming ever since Alford & Co. performed their little drama at the public Board Meeting. They wouldn’t talk like that unless they meant it.
3
33laszlo99
I think this is exactly what will play out. FSU and Clemson are not
hiding their intentions. We can only guess about others. The one event that could accelerate the process would be the departure of Notre Dame for The B1G. That would bump up the B1G media payout and make it easier for ACC malcontents to act. This would also make life more difficult for The SEC/ESPN to outbid The B1G for those teams.
R
RJHokie
Dissolving the conference may not be what’s needed.
Eight schools leaving the conference most likely effectively dissolves the GOR since that many schools leaving probably voids the ESPN contract.
2
2hhoop3
I want to make sure.....
I understand what you are saying. I get that 8 leaving likely could void the ESPN TV contract. Not sure those two are effectively or practically linked. The GOR is an individual agreement between each school and the conference. What ESPN has is an assignment of those agreements which reverts to the ACC IF ESPN no longer has a TV deal with the ACC. If that characterization is accurate the GOR would not cease to exist. It seems a fairly complicated issue likely resolved only through court or settlement and I am guessing since no court challenge is available as precedent and settlements have been deferred to near contract end and/or TV partners coming to the table to subsidize, a similar scenario will unfold for the ACC now.
R
RJHokie
Voiding the contract might not be an accurate description.
Perhaps a significant reduction of the contract is a better description. If eight members left (VT, U Va, GT, FSU, Clemson, UNC, NCSU, Miami), that would most likely trigger a very significant reduction in the value of the contract - maybe 50% or more. As Stech indicates, this would probably trigger a push for a fair settlement of the GOR value from the leaving schools. The exit fee would be another matter though. At ~ $120 million per school, I’m not sure how much negotiation the conference would allow on that. At any rate, the total $s are going to be extremely large. I think decreasing the major conferences to a Big Two would be counterproductive. The top 70-80 schools would probably be better off to combine into one conference and negotiate an NFL type of media agreement(s). The remaining Big Conference would be better served to then create 7 to 8 ten team regional divisions and schedule crossover games among the division teams, some made exclusively for TV, others for regional interest, etc. Just spitballing, but I can also foresee the feds getting involved at some point, which could be catastrophic and full of political controversy.
2
2hhoop3
I hear what you are saying......
my response would be the same as to Stech's legal theory. The actions of the school's leaving is what devalued the contract but, the actual media rights of the individual schools would have to be proven by a decrease in value in the conference where they land before I would argue any adjustment should even be considered. Why should they be entitled to a fair value reduction that is based solely on an injury created by their actions? It is analogous to me agreeing to buy a car from you for say a $100K, wrecking it prior to purchase and then telling you I deserve to only pay $50K because of the damage. Your other spitballing thoughts I can get substantially on board with.
R
RJHokie
Agree. The discounted value of those rights is basically
what would be negotiated for a lump sum settlement. But no matter which direction you take, it’s not gonna be cheap, and there’s gonna be a lot of hidden costs that arise to the top before the carnage is over.
2
2hhoop3
I agree........
it will be expensive. The ACC and its members have through the agreement a contract valuing each member's media rights at $40 MM per annum through 2036 at a minimum. There are likely escalators that increase that value at 2026 and 2031 look ins. The exit fee of $120MM is non-negotiable if I am the ACC and the GOR fee involves a calculation starting with the $40MM number adjusting for any likely escalation and discounting those projected cash flow values based on the negotiated payment terms. IMO, the ACC is obligated to the conference as a whole and the remaining members and that would be my view whether VT was on the staying or going end of the transaction. That being said, other factors including but not limited to the probability of success and cost of litigation, the soft cost of time away from conference and school business, etc. would all be fair game IMO in determining a fair and final settlement.
seekoHoG seekoHoG
Maybe I'm wrong but I thought the GOR was an agreement by each team
with the ACC conference and completely separate from the ACC's deal with ESPN. It seems to me as long as there is an ACC conference the GOR would still apply and the media rights for any team(s) that leaves still belongs to the ACC.
S
Stech
It is with the ACC, but the 8 could negotiate together and come up with a
payoff. I go into detail above, I suspect the ACC would get about a Billion dollars from the 8 , that they can afford to pay off over 2-3 years because, they will make around $40 million more being in a P2 Conference.
M
Mercury
Wouldnt that be national drama???
S
Stech
So much has happened already, I think people are almost immune to it, the
Big Bang is going to be paying football and basketball players. Do they break off from NCAA and other athletes at school? If so, how many will follow this model? Or will laws be passed that say it’s the only model you can have? Way more questions than answers!!
3
33laszlo99
If student athletes are employees, why would only some of them require
compensation? I think they will all get paid and at the same modest rate. The "employee" status will not make student athletes rich. NIL will deliver the big bucks.
S
Stech
Many student athletes (non-revs) get little or no scholarship at P5 schools
So while I understand what you’re saying, how are they going to find the money to pay non-revs when many don’t get much if any scholarship money. The only way the money works IMHO, is if they have a delineation between revenue generating and non revenue generating sports teams. Even then, football and at some schools basketball, pays for much of the non revenue sports. How do you make up that deficit left by that money being paid to football and basketball players, to cover non revenue sports? We are talking about hundreds of millions of dollars. Maybe all non rev athletes can only get academic money like the Ivies and D3, but scholarships are only a fraction of the cost of the sports team. Honestly, I have more questions than answers on this situation.
3
33laszlo99
I agree that it is unsettling. Some programs will be damaged. But I expect
any court ruling to simply determine if the athletes are, or are not, employees. If they are, then the state labor laws come into account. I also expect the athletes to form collective bargaining unions, which tend to seek overall equal treatment of members. That means there will be pressure to pay all athletes, FB, MBB, Field Hockey, Tennis, everyone, the same rate. It may be based on the media revenue where that figure is substantial enough. Less prosperous programs may be as low as minimum wage. Even at minimum wage cuts could come, and Title IX will speak.
1
134024Hokie
WSU and Oregon State
Whynot also grab WSU and Oregon State, grab all the PAC money, make PAC Pod
1
134024Hokie
PODS
North POD: Loserville, Syracuse, BC, ND Mid Atlantic: VT, UVA, Pitt, Add WVU North Cackalacky: NCSU, UNC, Puke and WF South POD: GT, Clemson, FSU, Miami West OSU, WSU, Stan, Cal
Maroon Baboon Maroon Baboon
No need for Pods, but just make sure the Pac-4 play one another each year.
And then preserve the rivalries in the East that need preserving. Then just roll over everyone through to play as often as possible. In fact, Pods are a hindrance to good scheduling TBH. But yeah, give me the Beavs and the Cougs. ** Edited by Maroon Baboon at 10/30/2023, 12:49:53 AM
VTNuke VTNuke
And SMU is where?
anotherdamnyankeehokie anotherdamnyankeehokie
Put SMU there just like the NFL the NFC East includes a team from Dallas
So why not just imitate the NFL and a SMU talispace team for the Northeast
anotherdamnyankeehokie anotherdamnyankeehokie
ND should not be included in a pod they ar obligated to 5 ACC opponents
as OOC only
B
Big12 guy
Seems on paper to be a no brainer, but WSU/OSU bring about
as many eyeballs as Cal, without the academic clout. I don't think ESPN would pay for it. Now if the stupid happens, and the ACC loses 3 teams, they just might make sense then.
M
Millpoint
Translation
FSU, Clemson and UNC will be leaving and we need Cal, Stanford and SMU to keep our ESPN contract valid
S
Stech
They need 8 to leave, or it’s financial suicide, WADR you need to stop 3 as
the number that will leave. I have enjoyed your post in the past, but the only way the GOR breaks is if 8 leave before June 30th, and even that would create many court proceedings IMHO. However, I could see the court ruling if the majority leave, it’s not the contract they signed.
M
Millpoint
Time will tell and we shall see
Everything is negotiable especially with ESPN involved.
S
Stech
The GOR is not with ESPN, they need the Conference majority to have any
chance of breaking it in court.
M
Millpoint
I’m aware of that
S
Stech
So why l do you think there is a Mag 7 plus 1 in the ACC?
H
HokiesACC2004
Pay on the way out, I'm good
W
Windows NT
3 x120 mil = 360 mil. ACC does Venmo
S
Stech
That’s just the down payment, if only 3 leave.
V
VTNSC
Who says UNC leaving? other than the 7 (which includes VT) have only heard
speculation or worse assumptions.
M
Mercury
exactly and BTW UNC CH with the Chancellor of UNC system must comply
All campuses of the UNC university System are explicitly prohibited for any representative or agent the any campus to discuss conference realignment without the firm approval of the Chancellor. (which is not UNC Chapel Hill). The state has made it explicitly clear on that. So, UNC right now is pretty boxed in. The system learned from the the University California laziefare issue with UCLA negotiating independently. guess what to get UC system approval, UCLA must give 20 million a year of Big 10 revenue to UC Berkeley every year. (that's what you get for being rogue) Dont think folks know that North Carolina public universities are basically one university with campuses at Chapel Hill, Raleigh Greenville (East Carolina) Charlotte (UNC Charlotte), Ashville, Greensborro and appalachian st)
R
RJHokie
You omitted Wilmington and Pembroke…..
and possibly a few others…..
2
2hhoop3
Do you ever consider......
actually verifying what you say is true before you say it? UCLA will pay UC Berkeley between $2MM and $10MM a year, not $20MM. You also may want to get a clearer understanding of exactly what UNCCH or other schools may or may not do in the confines of the UNC system.
B
Brewing_Hokie
We do gotta give some credit, his spelling is better! 😂
B
Brewing_Hokie
😂😂 ^POTD
M
Millpoint
Well they voted against ACC expansion along with FSU and Clemson
I think that speaks volumes. They will have their choice to join the Big Ten or SEC.
H
HokiesACC2004
Not really
They just don't like expansion.
H
HOO86
UNC voted against expansion in 2002 to add Miami and VT also.
The faculty at UNC controls the Chancellor, and they don't like expansion. I don't read their voting against expansion as wanting to leave. FSU threatened to leave when the ACC added Pitt and Syracuse. We've heard their bluster before as well. When Notre Dame came it calmed them down for a while.
VTNuke VTNuke
Yeah, because the faculty at UNC has so much integrity....fake news
And classes
2
2hhoop3
The big money........
guys control everything at UNC. Faculty at UNC have always had a higher opinion of themselves and what they control than actual reality.
mrcaniac mrcaniac
UNC always votes against expansion
They voted against SMU, Cal, Stan, Louisville, Syracuse, Pitt, VT, BC, and Miami. I don't know if they voted against ND, FSU, or Georgia Tech when they joined, but they could have. The only school that they probably voted for in ACC expansion was UVA. Their explanation for voting against SMU, Cal, and Stanford was over travel, yet they will join a conference (B1G) that will require more travel out west than they have now? No, they are just grandstanding. They could be leaving in 2036, but they aren't going to leave in 2025, nor will Clemson/FSU/UVA. 2 of those can marginally pay/raise the money to buy out the GOR and exit fees (UNC/UVA), the other 2 cannot.
MrBayAreaHokie MrBayAreaHokie
UNC thinks Michael Jordan is still there
they are the most delusional school in the country
V
VTNSC
At sometime in the distant future I hope
RTFC RTFC
They voted against expansion
to appease all the old light blue blooded bubba alum who would rather go back to an eight team league that prioritizes basketball...all the while the university level UNC bean counters knew NCSU's vote would carry the day and they would get expansion. Now this is independent of whether UNC leaves the ACC - They won't lead the charge (at least publicly) , but will respond quickly when the end is near...