trails the SEC by a large margin for year round programming.

by Nielsen.

** Edited by Stech at 12/22/2023, 6:17:15 PM ** Edited by Stech at 12/22/2023, 6:30:11 PM

If you support the notion that a 64-school break-away model is the best path for VT, it's my opinion today's FSU action is good. It keeps the ball going forward in a big way and moves the chains. The ACC GOR has to die or change for that 64-team scenario to be realized. So props to FSU for taking this step.

is a pipedream. This whole thing is to cull the former P5 by about half from the top tier.

They've won. They will fight like hell to maintain their enormous advantage.

Parity for VT is not assured in this upheaval.

These to institutions have "won" the realignment sweepstakes. And they will call the shots if the near term. And I don't think either one of them wants this. Or at least the version that Chip Kelly, and those advancing his idea, are describing.

All that want to participate in pay for play can, but if you are not in one of the P2, a lot of other sports will likely cut scholarships, especially on the *Men’s side. At least that’s what I am hearing right now. *I am guessing because everybody is right now, but I think a lot of those scholarships will turn into Academic for Men. Did you see the Virginia Tech Men’s Golf teams GPA? They are all mainly A students.

minimum number of sports requirement will be for all 3/4 division levels once the NCAA re-org dust settles.

Pay for Play as proposed by the NCAA is not going to happen. That was nonsense rhetoric spewed by the NCAA to give the appearance that they are "working on the issues" facing college sports. The answer to the question of player salaries will come out of a courtroom. When (not if, but when) we start paying college athletes it will apply to, at least, all Division I schools. If you're Div. I you should be making plans to meet a varsity payroll. For Roanokie: These conferences have no particular target number for membership. As long as expansion grows the pot, they will continue to expand. When the media partners stop adding money for expansion, the expansion is over. Not until then. The 64 team breakaway is also rhetoric. The rich conferences may withdraw from the NCAA and form their own regulatory body. But they will not exclude any school or conference from joining and competing for championships. I think it will look very much like Division I looks today.

However, I think the argument is better made that they would be acting as monopolies by poaching some programs from other conferences and not other deserving ones. That may be one reason why they haven’t broken away from the NCAA altogether. They don’t want to be so exclusive.

He was not that green a business man. The excuse was that ESPN excised that long contract through a desire for the ACCN. It was still a big mistake to make a business agreement like that under those circumstances. I remember being amazed back then when all the ACC schools signed that bad contract. Some things just cannot be satisfactorily explained that go on at these major college institutions. I think that lousy contract coming to fruition was just a bad example. It always best benefited ESPN and now ESPN apparently wants out from under it.

Is the GOR agreement between the conference and schools separate from the TV contract between the ACC and ESPN? The above post seems to come from a position that ESPN is a part of the GOR or maybe better put the whole thing is a 3 party, ESPN, ACC and the individual member schools contract. But the more I read, ESPN seems to have nothing to do with the GOR with the exception that the ACC would have to show ESPN they had a GOR similar to every other league had to do. And the individual schools by the separate GOR empowered the conference to do the ESPN negotiating for the ACC network and TV deal.

The conference administrators administer it on the conference members as an insurance type guarantee to Big Media. Big Media needs that guarantee to exactly plan & balance income & expense for a specific number of years ahead. That is very important to Big Media but conference administrators have self interests themselves that must be met the duration of those contracts. This is all fueled by greed just like everything else. I do have a revision on something I said in that previous comment. I had heard years back that the lengthy ACC GOR was signed due a desire for the ACCN. I just read something much different in the FSU Lawsuit that ESPN posted, I have the Link posted in a header above on this board. That FSU Lawsuit states that ESPN threatened to never do business again with the ACC if that GOR contract was not extended for 9 years from June 30, 2027 to 2036. That threat was made to the ACC by ESPN when the contract negotiations were reopened in 2016. That is how & why the GOR contract went from 11 years to 20 years. ** Edited by WarHog38 at 12/22/2023, 11:05:22 PM

first. Then decide how the pay-to-play will look (if they go that route). At that point everything will look a lot clearer to people because there will only be a few pieces left that need to be put into place.

I am now pondering if the SEC will go to 20 members. That is now a dead serious question to ask. I always liked the SEC with 12 members, it was that way for 20 years. Play everybody yearly in your six team division and those schools in the other division were played every several years. Not 8 or 9 years between meetings as with 14 schools. This all will help ESPN consolidate their package presented on the cable networks. More bang most likely for bigger bucks. It just streamlines things and gets rid of some overhead with those messy conference contracts & their networks. I heard someone here once say that the ACCN was a big money maker for ESPN. I had always heard everywhere else that the SECN was the ESPN big cash cow. Now that SECN will surely be the ESPN big lone cash cow. You are hearing noise about the Big 12 still being very interested in adding Gonzaga for basketball. I think the Big 12 going that route would be wise. A lot easier to produce 5 member big winning basketball teams than the 22 and more member winning football squads. I think what is left in the ACC as the Dukes & Wakes may very well land in the Big 12 for basketball. The Big 12 can have a basketball product that matches the P2 when they will apparently never will be able to do so in football. I don't know if ESPN would ever be interested in basketball. Maybe not if belt tightening is the prime objective.

deal just to chase top dollar from the most bidders.

answer will likely dictate all the points you mention. Until everyone knows how many schools are opting to go this route and what it will look like in practice the future can end up going down any number of potential paths. For example, if the pay-to-play schools end up doing their own thing in all sports, then conferences like the Big XII may rethink their future because the money for NCAA DI sports may not be there because it is reallocated to the pay-to-play schools. Plus, the pay-to-play conferences may not want to add any new members now/near future if there is any risk that they might leave the conference because the schools don't want to embrace the pay-to-play model for whatever reasons. Whereas if the pay-to-play schools are still competing with the other DI conference, then the Big XII and other conferences will likely be motivated to evolve into a national conference too because it will help increase the value of their future media contracts. Right now there are still too many unknowns indicate if the future of college athletics will be somewhat similar to the current structure now or if it will be radically different.

if ND goes to the Big 10. Wishful thinking.

However the SEC has seemed somewhat picky even on Big 12 schools. Slive was kind of backed into the corner taking Missouri then having 13 schools, I think Missouri was a last resort for Slive. Even though Slive did smile real big when he talked about SEC access to media markets in St. Louis & Kansas City. The SEC also just simply sat tight on all that commotion out west as the B1G expanded to 18 members. I think that is the big question. Does the SEC actually put matching the B1G in total members above most all else? I just do not know.

Rather what the ESPN/SEC and Fox/ B10 want to do re the mid Atlantic and SE markets are the remaining questions. Does ESPN strong arm the SEC to take FSU and Clemson to lock the BIG/Big Network out of the SE? Or are they content to allow the Big/BTnetwork to come into the SE taking FSU and Clemson and doing battle with them for ratings? Will either of ESPN/SEC or Fox/Big take all 4 of the VA.NC schools to lock the other out of that area or are they content to do battle there as well?

on in the B12. Some pretty good teams the ACC passed on as well, and it's the latter that is the problem. And ya, I know it's not popular on this board, but if FSU is successful, there won't be a bidding war for schools after the best 25 - 33% are taken. Where that line is drawn is above my paygrade, but I've been wrong before.