The ACC’s new 17-team plan won’t last
By Aiden Carlson
“With its national success in football, the cash cow of college athletics, and many other sports, Clemson is a school any conference would be over the moon to have. After the ACC’s recent changes, it’s no secret Clemson is looking around trying to find ways to get out of the ACC’s current grant of rights. Clemson voted against ACC expansion over the summer, and having annual games against Georgia Tech and NC State taken away from it likely only pushed it farther towards a breaking point.”
44 Replies
You know what W. Axl Rose said?
Nothin' lasts forever
And we both know hearts can change
And it's hard to hold a candle
In the cold November rain
** Edited by MrBayAreaHokie at 11/10/2023, 7:16:02 PM
(In response to this post by WBGV)
S
Stech
2y
is risky, unless ESPN steps in and makes some kind of arrangement where they help the remaining ACC out financially.
(In response to this post by WBGV)
2y
SEC gets who they want and remaining ACC schools benefit financially. ND is the wildcard. If they do go to Big Ten who goes with them? My guess is Miami if FSU, Clemson, UNC and UVA are off the table.
** Edited by Millpoint at 11/10/2023, 8:04:43 AM
(In response to this post by Stech)
2y
better options at this point means SEC or BIG. What 8 teams would they want? Because if there aren't deals in place for 8, 8 won't vote to disband. Not to mention the fact that the entire scenario I just described, the only realistic scenario that gets this mag 7+1 thing that keeps being thrown about, is collusion at best, fraud at worst and if you assume a chunk of those schools would be going to the BIG, taking money out of ESPN's pockets, they'd have something to say about it.
(In response to this post by Millpoint)
S
Stech
2y
your precedent for collusion?
BTW, I am not saying this is going to happen, but a lot of things people said would never ever happen, have happened over the last about 4 years. Consequently, I have stopped or at least severely limited the absolutes, even though I have a lot of contacts in college sports with a lot of knowledge.
(In response to this post by Vienna_Hokie)
2y
You didn't have all 8 of those schools colluding together to dissolve the Pac-12 so they could all leave at the same time to avoid paying exit fees and break a GoR. The Pac-12 schools left in a very haphazard and uncoordinated way. That's why there wasn't any illegal collusion.
** Edited by tarheelblue at 11/11/2023, 6:09:11 PM
(In response to this post by Stech)
S
Stech
2y
before they left. I am still not buying if they left, the collusion argument is viable. One because there is not a precedent showing on any Conference Expansion that collusion was even brought up. Second, if ESPN steps in to make the remaining ACC whole like they did with the Big 12 when a bunch left, the hurt will go away. Lastly, if UVA, UNC, Miami and maybe Duke go to the B1G and Florida State, Clemson, NC State and Virginia Tech go to the SEC, there are two Conferences involved, and that would make it nearly impossible to prove collusion.
So you have your “opinion” and I have mine, time will tell the real answer.
PS Again, I’m not saying it’s going to happen, but I don’t think it’s impossible either, especially if they start paying Revenue earning Athletes on “Athletic” Scholarships.
** Edited by Stech at 11/12/2023, 8:43:35 AM
(In response to this post by tarheelblue)
2y
When VT and Miami left the Big East for the ACC. And if my memory is correct, the ACC settled the lawsuit by paying the Big East millions of dollars. And the Big 12 threatened to sue ESPN if they didn't stop trying to get Big 12 schools to jump to the American. And ESPN backed off, presumably because their lawyers told them that such a lawsuit would have merit.
** Edited by tarheelblue at 11/12/2023, 2:31:15 PM
(In response to this post by Stech)
S
Stech
2y
their 🏈 Conference fell completely apart. The millions they got was a drop in the bucket. That’s not going to stop expansion, and much more expansion happened/happening as we write these post.
PS Collusion is an illegal act, schools leaving a Conference is not an illegal act.
(In response to this post by tarheelblue)
2y
networks colluding together to destroy the ACC by getting 8 current members to vote to dissolve the conference (severely damaging the other 7 members) with the promise of joining a new conference and getting more TV money would almost certainly be an illegal act of collusion. Schools can leave the ACC, but they can't destroy the conference on their way out the door to avoid honoring the Grant of Rights and paying the exit fee.
(In response to this post by Stech)
S
Stech
2y
was incremental? That’s your argument, if it’s incremental, it’s okay? No way IMHO the courts will see that and call it collusion. Any Attorney worth their weight would bring the Big East football being destroyed by the ACC in to this and point out the hypocrisy.
If the 8 don’t leave, it will be because they don’t want to leave and ESPN isn’t going to pay for them to leave. Sorry, I am not buying the collusion case, no matter how many times you bring it up. Leaving is not illegal and the ACC burned whatever bridge they had by destroying Big East football.
(In response to this post by tarheelblue)
2y
And the departing Big East schools never even tried to disband the conference before they left in an attempt to void a Grant of Rights contract or get out of exit fees they had contractually agreed to pay.
(In response to this post by Stech)
S
Stech
2y
“If” 8 leave, I expect the ESPN/SEC and or Fox/B1G will step in on the Grant of Rights negotiations.
PS Just get Michigan, Penn State and Notre Dame to join the ACC, and the ACC lives on 🤣
(In response to this post by tarheelblue)
2y
~$500 Million for each departing school's GoR buyout, plus ~$120 Million exit fee per school. So if the SEC gets 4 schools and the B1G gets 4 schools, they will each owe the remaining ACC schools about $2.5 Billion each. That's a lot of money, even for the B1G and the SEC, especially when they can just wait another 13 years and then they can get whatever ACC schools they want without having to pay anything at all.
** Edited by tarheelblue at 11/12/2023, 7:16:57 PM
(In response to this post by Stech)
S
Stech
2y
However, most first offers are not accepted. 🤣
PS I doubt the ACC blows up soon, but if they start having to pay revenue producing sports athletes, I think everything gets turned upside down.
(In response to this post by tarheelblue)
2y
subtle, the rights contracts were coming to an end (TX/OU was not as subtle). The PAC12 had allowed its members to become free agents in a way.
Glaring, if 8 schools got together, negotiated deals with other conferences so that they could then turn around and vote together to disband the conference to avoid paying the out fees and rights penalties, that is collusion. Those 8 schools would be conspiring to damage the remaining schools with whom they have a contractual relationship.
I agree on your things have happened that people said would never happen, but you know what hasn't happened? Schools finding a loophole in GOR. As a matter of fact, the length of time TX/OU stayed in the Big12 pretty much shows that that is a tough, if not impossible nut to crack.
The biggest point I was making though is, the never ending mag 7+1 thing, while it makes good click bait, is fundamentally flawed because (through collusion or not) those 8 would have to have agreements with one of the P2 or they would never vote to dissolve the conference, the best they could hope for in that scenario is joining the B12 which is at best a lateral, and the worst is the ACC reforms with a bunch of teams that even the B12 wouldn't take, which would be something akin to the AAC. So the real question has nothing to do with Clem, FSU and cheat, it's whether the SEC and BIG are willing to take 8 schools to get them.
(In response to this post by Stech)
2
2hhoop3
2y
there was not a word about collusion was that Larry Scott had already put the PAC12 on an island, FOX and ESPN were content to carve up a property both had a minimal stake in, and with the help of the Big 12 only 4 of the 12 were originally left twisting in the wind.
(In response to this post by Stech)
S
Stech
2y
State and Washington State would have brought the suit if something in the law was there. Couldn’t the Big East have made a collusion case against the ACC with Miami, VT, BC, Syracuse and Pitt leaving for the ACC? Sorry the 8 may not leave, but I’m not buying collusion will stop it. There is not one precedent in the history of college sports that says collusion can stop Conference Expansion.
(In response to this post by 2hhoop3)
2
2hhoop3
2y
what collusion is and what it takes to prove it and, most importantly, what can be gained by going to court. As far as precedent, up to this point nothing associated with the BE/ACC or the PAC12 tips those three previously mentioned factors. The GOR and potential money to the ACC and those left behind is currently substantial. It is also important to remember that collusion likely becomes easier to prove the more parties that are involved and the fact the ACC is still a fully functioning conference unlike the PAC12.
** Edited by 2hhoop3 at 11/10/2023, 3:05:35 PM
(In response to this post by Stech)
S
Stech
2y
the only way I see it happening is if 8 leave and if ESPN steps in financially to help the ACC. That’s some big “ifs!”
(In response to this post by 2hhoop3)
2
2hhoop3
2y
that at least 8 have to leave and I think everybody recognizes that for anything to work the money has to work first. My response was merely to the role that collusion could play and why it did not work from a precedent standpoint in the earlier situations you cited.
(In response to this post by Stech)
2y
not collusion. The BIG got 4, and the B12 got 4 was not predetermined. If 8 leave the ACC at the same time, on the same announcement, there would be huge problems - that is unless those left behind have value in that "announcement" as well.
Frankly, the mag 7 was a pipe dream, based on rumors, and what some Universities think they are worth. At no time was that even close to a reality, nor, in my opinion, will it ever be.
(In response to this post by 2hhoop3)
2y
as protected rivals?
And I don't see how having only 1 (or 0) protected rivals is "the short end of the stick." I mean, if you don't get a legit rival as protected, sure, but Clemson vs GT/NCSU? Who cares?
(In response to this post by WBGV)
M
Mercury
2y
Clemson only wanted FSU
GT did not want any rivals.
Louisville did not want any rivals
The NC schools wanted to play each other,
UNC got their 3 UVA, State and Duke
NC State got duke UNC and Wake
Duke got UNC, State and Wake
Wake Got State and Duke
VT got who they wanted UVA and Maiami
Miami got ho they wanted, VT and FSU
FSU got who they wanted clemson and Miami
Pitt got who they wanted Cuse and BC
BC got who they wanted Pitt and Cuse
Cuse got Pitt and BC
Stanford got Cal (and agreed to join with SMU)
SMU got who they wanted.
Sooo,, what is the problem???????
(In response to this post by Pylons)
Plus, Clemson and those rivals agreed to the new schedule.
Clemson got FSU, the one that matters.
(In response to this post by Pylons)
R
ren_hoek
2y
Both are salty rivalries that I look forward to watching. There's nothing more delicious than old, regional, historic hate.
(In response to this post by Pylons)
To me, taking Clemson and NC State away was like taking Miami-VT away.
Ditto for Clemson-GT. Giving up all three was a mistake.
These three pairings have played for a long time since before the ACC and Big East basically merged.
The ACC is dumb for not continuing them. Maybe GT sees their schedule as too tough since they already have UGa every year. But c'mon. Having Clemson and UGa on the schedule is good for business.
I will say this, I am not sure whose decision it was to end these three series. Was it one or both schools in the series? Or was it the ACC leadership? Either way. it's a bad look IMO.
(In response to this post by ren_hoek)
2y
expansion means losing rivalries, there is no other choice. It's one of the reasons I think expansion is a bad idea, it takes away from fans with the assumption that it creates national interest. CFB has always been about local and regional interest. There are national brands, but not that many and the local and regional interest always filled the gaps. Now you're taking away those games and replacing them with Wake vs SMU.
(In response to this post by Maroon Baboon)
M
Mercury
2y
Simple as that (they couldn't have 4 out of their 8 games be rival games)
(In response to this post by Maroon Baboon)
R
ren_hoek
2y
Maintain rivalries inside 6 team divisions.
In 2030, add the 4 corner schools to get a western division. Add Cincinnati, TCU, and another to get to 24. Have a north division with the ne'er do well football programs, a mid Atlantic division with NC and VA teams, and a south division with the rest.
(In response to this post by Maroon Baboon)
2y
these never ending statements from click bait sources that include "school x is looking for a way out of the GOR" are just more of the same. At this point, there isn't one and history says, there won't be one.
(In response to this post by WBGV)
S
Stech
2y
majority leave before June 30th and ESPN steps in and brokers a deal to help out the remaining ACC.
(In response to this post by VaTechHokiesACC)
This writer doesn't understand conference realignment.
1. ANY conference will have to change its schedule in the next seven years with one single arrival or departure. But he somehow acts like this is a big deal.
2. He talks about negotiating the grant of rights to keep Clemson, et al. happy. Well, it's already negotiated until 2036 and we have TV partners as a result. If Clemson is mad and the other conferences (B1G or SEC) love them some much as the writer implies, well, they can pay the buyout, which is substantial.
3. WRT to the NC State-Clemson match up, I think this is bad to give up this rivalry and said it here last week. But I don't think this was somehow done to screw over Clemson. Ditto for giving up the GT game. I suspect Clemson had a voice and a choice in this. He also laments about some schools not having a rivalry game. But from what I understand, some schools preferred it that way, such as Louisville.
4. Side note: Clemson from what I understand is one of the schools over the past decade or so who prefers to stay at 8 conference games (I imagine due to their OOC rivalry with South Carolina and now Notre Dame commitment).
** Edited by Maroon Baboon at 11/8/2023, 11:36:17 PM
(In response to this post by WBGV)
E
EDGEMAN
2y
How about we give their ND games to someone else, so that will free up Clemson for a ninth ACC game...lol
Loserville, GT, & F$U also have SEC games at the end of the year. Are they also using that as an excuse to not play a ninth ACC game? Guess their big reason is to reserve an extra game for a home cupcake match up. Even having to pay someone to come in probably nets them more money than playing an extra home ACC game every other year.
(In response to this post by Maroon Baboon)
I like it. But I don't think ND would appreciate NOT playing Clemson or FSU
if those two teams indeed are the ones preventing us from going to 9 games. And I don't really care if ND appreciates it, but I do care about honoring the contract...and I am not sure what it says, but I'm assuming cutting out some teams would go against the deal.
(In response to this post by EDGEMAN)
2y
YouTube video with Greg Flugaur ( The pied piper of college realignment from Minnesota ).
Video : Realignment discussion starts at the 42 minute mark
Length: 20 minutes
(In response to this post by WBGV)
2y
A “pied piper” gets people to follow him by various means. Some definitions suggest that the following is due a charismatic personality and knowledge while other definitions suggest that it due to deception and trickery.
IMO, the reason that some people refer to Greg Flugaur as the “pied piper’ of conference realignment is that he has a large following of people who are interested in this subject and subscribe to or view his YouTube channel. He also provides them with what he calls a “peek around the corner” on conference realignment. He does so in an entertaining fashion full of foreshadows that keep people returning (following him). You can say what you want about his mannerism, but he has an impressive track record that even major news outlets have acknowledged when it’s comes to conference realignment.
(In response to this post by daveinop)
2y
SEC is getting more aggressive in trying to add ACC schools. There has been contact with one school (FSU?). It all depends on ND. If they give up on independence and join the B1G sooner then they will have the choice on who to bring with them (UNC? and others?). If they don't join sooner then there is a path for the SEC to take FSU, Clemson, UNC and UVA (Swim Swam's prediction). He clearly said he is not predicting this will happen, only that there is currently discussions about it. Also still stating things will most likely break in first quarter of 2024. Time will tell and we shall see. He was right about USC and B1G. He was also right about Colorado and other four corners to the Big 12, so it could get interesting. Seems like if it does then the remaining ACC schools will become very rich.
** Edited by Millpoint at 11/9/2023, 11:45:58 AM
(In response to this post by WBGV)
2y
By Ross Dellenger
“At this time next year, the College Football Playoff’s latest rankings will be revealed in a televised broadcast much like they were Tuesday night.
While that’s not changing, so much else is.
By next year, the CFP…
• will have a new executive director.
• will have expanded from four to 12 teams.
• will have developed a new revenue-sharing model.
• will have agreed to a new television deal and long-term contract.
Change is coming.”
(In response to this post by WBGV)
The only poll that matters is the last one. Otherwise, just as useless as
a preseason Heisman watch list. All the other "CFP rankings shows" are a power play and money grab by self-important people who already have too much influence on the sport without putting on a football uniform.
Get these losers out of the sport.
(In response to this post by WBGV)