The latest on scholarship numbers, the portal, and FSU's ACC lawsuit.
by David Hood - Senior Writer / TIGERNET
“Now let’s go to the lawsuit portion. I have believed that Clemson has held off from suing the ACC – like Florida State – because it’s believed that ACC Commissioner Jim Phillips has lawsuit papers against Clemson sitting in the top of his right-hand drawer, just waiting to be filed. So, Clemson waits.
. . . . . . .
So what does that mean? The ACC is scrambling and in over its head, and it’s becoming more apparent with the amended lawsuit. The latest challenge is weak because the ACC was the initial instigator in filing a contract without a vote.“
** Edited by WBGV at 1/22/2024, 3:06:33 PM
73 Replies
L
lawhokie
2y
including violating contractual obligations of confidentiality, and might not only lose their bid lo leave the ACC, but could be forced to pay damages AND remain stuck in a conference that hates them. The author then concludes that the ACC is in over its head.
Just a tip for you, don’t just read, accept, and regurgitate. To me, it sounds like the ACC was ready for FSU’s stunt and brought the hammer down. Clemson University’s lawyers took note and chose to sit tight.
I don’t know the legal pedigree of the author, David Hood, but he writes like he majored in Sports Studies or something like.
(In response to this post by WBGV)
H
HWA
2y
Ouch.
Might save that reply for my mom, next time she forwards the "newsletter" from her tin-foil neighbor.
When your newsletter includes 37 links, and not one is from a known/legitimate source, maybe that's a clue.
(In response to this post by lawhokie)
R
ren_hoek
2y
He just throws it out there without any justification. I'm not a lawyer, but I don't see how the ACC legal moves indicate scrambling or lack of strategy.
(In response to this post by WBGV)
L
lawhokie
2y
(In response to this post by ren_hoek)
2y
the guy is a big 12 troll.... sorta like the National Enquirer of Big 12 and college football reporting... might be some small very small truths.. must of it results from hyperbole with the big 12 bubble. He probably lives in his mom's basement....
(In response to this post by ren_hoek)
2y
“David got his start in the newspaper business while in high school, covering local high school games for The Greenville News and eventually earning a part-time position. Hood attended Lee University in Tennessee before coming home to resume his duties at The Greenville News. His duties at The News led him to cover the Atlanta Braves, the Atlanta Falcons, the Atlanta Hawks, the Carolina Panthers, Clemson University and the University of South Carolina. During his time at The News, he also worked as freelance reporter for several magazines and newspapers, including The Miami Herald and The Chicago Tribune.
Following his stint at The News, he accepted a full-time position with TigerNet, and during his time with Clemson’s most-recognized site has covered the NCAA Tournament, the NIT, the College World Series, three Orange Bowls, three Sugar Bowls, three Fiesta Bowls, the Cotton Bowl, seven ACC Championship Games, four National Championship Games, and six College Football Playoffs. A resident of Sandy Springs, South Carolina, he reads heavily in his spare time while also chasing his two little boys.”
Seems like a respectable and credible reporter who brings insight to conference realignment outside of the silo that some want to dwell in.
(In response to this post by DMV Gobbler)
L
lawhokie
2y
The mere fact that he draws an incredibly naive conclusion that the ACC is in over its head because the ACC amended its complaint and is seeking injunctive relief (good Heavens!) is unintentionally hilarious. Any lawyer with more than five minutes in practice is laughing at him (not with him).
This guy returned to the Greenville News after “attending” Lee University. Guys like this start paragraphs speculating on complex legal issues with “I have believed that…”. He’s either too clueless or too lazy to call a lawyer friend for a qualified opinion.
He’s a hack and you are eating it up. I have to say that you are probably underestimating the intelligence of the folks on this board as much as you are overestimating Mr. Hood. Don’t assume we’ll just accept what you believe.
(In response to this post by WBGV)
H
Hokie83
2y
But I have my doubts when it comes to expansion and what he actually knows or thinks he knows as well at the Acc vs FSU and Clemson, time will tell I suppose if your believe in him is valid
(In response to this post by WBGV)
2
2hhoop3
2y
actually calling Hood a Big 12 troll or was he more likely referring to someone else?
(In response to this post by Hokie83)
2y
that predicted the 4 corners were correct - and they were excoriated as trolls. I'm not saying anything is true, or untrue, but it's always to look at things from a different angle.
Out here in flyover land, we are watching in disbelief that your conference has been turned upside down because the BIG and SEC got better media contracts. The PAC would still be together is they had a stable contract like the ACC.
We have no delusions of grandeur out here, as none of us ever approached the amount of money that Texas made while in the B12 - yet, they didn't exactly dominate the rest of us in football, or any other sport for that matter. The rich have always been rich, and there has always been a disparity in the amount of money an athletic department makes, and spends.
The media contracts, in my humble opinion, will not determine whether a school can compete, or not. Being in the P2 is the furthest thing one can do to actually compete for a national championship. They may get more money, have the better time slots on TV, but what has actually changed? The blue bloods already had an advantage in money and recruiting - the change is they will now play each other in the regular season, and they will cannibalize each other.
meanwhile, back at the ranch, there will be a sting of no name B12 schools in the playoffs, competing for a national championship, and making names for themselves.
(In response to this post by DMV Gobbler)
V
VTCALS72
2y
But the idea that the system will allow non P2 teams to advance is about like a quarterbackless FSU making it.
I wish you were right about being competitive and having a real opportunity to at least compete for national championships but everything in me says to block that from happening is at least a part of what this expansion is all about. It is to remove all but the "national teams" from being able to take up a slot in the media's football event.
(In response to this post by Big12 guy)
2y
experiment in my opinion. The only reason I watch the top SEC schools and the OSU Michigan games are because they have a direct effect on who the B12 champion will be playing in the playoffs. That goes for any fan of any school in FBS that is not in the P2.
Those fans will turn off the TV if the P2 separates from the rest of college football - and don't forget, the rest of us have basketball, baseball, and all of the Olympic sports championships as leverage.
There will be no semi pro league, and the playoffs will continue to be inclusive, or they will fail for the broadcasters.
(In response to this post by VTCALS72)
2
2hhoop3
2y
the instigator but, their commissioner and his willing mouthpieces and trolls have been willing accomplices for FOX, and maybe ESPN, ever since Yormark came aboard as commissioner. It was a smart play for survival as both the Big12 and PAC 12 could not both survive. The miscalculation by the Big 12 parties is (1)that they can play the same role in the takedown of the ACC and (2) that they will ever be more than a gnat on a bull's ass in the college football world again. For the large majority of this century, even with Texas and Oklahoma, that is all that conference has been.
(In response to this post by Big12 guy)
2y
landing spot for a few that do not get invited to the P2. To imply that they were complicate in the takedown of the PAC is as bad as a lot of the click bait out there, as it's an opinion, and sounds like sour grapes.
The ACC is in the position they are in because they didn't want to be associated with B12 schools, and chose not to expand when the iron was hot. it's the same position the B12 was in when Texas and Oklahoma were the B12 for decades. If the ACC falters, it will be their own fault, not the B12's.
Texas and Oklahoma are gone, the rest landed on their feet, and will be a better conference because of it' Texas and Oklahoma are stellar programs, but the SEC will chew them up, and spit them out - much like they have done to A&M.
8-4 records will not get the playoff berths. That, and Saban saw the writing on the wall - the undefeated and one loss seasons will be much tougher to come by moving forward. The SEC may continue to dominate winning the national championship, for a while, but there will be a LOT of good teams watching from the sidelines.
(In response to this post by 2hhoop3)
2
2hhoop3
2y
nor an opinion. It was a statement of fact. Yormark himself has stated that the schools and money they got is directly attributable to sliding in front of the PAC 12 due to their inability to reach a deal. It was smart on Yormark's part but, it does not mean they were not also complicit in taking down the PAC 12 as the henchmen for FOX and maybe ESPN.
(In response to this post by Big12 guy)
2y
negotiations. ESPN then put their eggs in the B12's basket, and the rest is history. There is nothing out there (proof) that implicates the B12 as a henchman, or is complicate in any way shape or form in the PAC's demise. That is pure opinion, as some always need someone to blame.
If the ACC falters, it will not be because the B12 welcomes some teams, and it will not be the opinionated click bait out there from B12 writers. I reject that theory out of hand.
(In response to this post by 2hhoop3)
2
2hhoop3
2y
the Big 12 will be nothing more than a potential landing spot for ACC teams should the conference cease to exist and they would be coveted additions to the menagerie known as the Big 12. As far as the rest of your prediction about Big 12 teams making a name for themselves in the playoff goes, they might win a game here or there but, stringing together multiple wins to reach the final or even the semis is probably overly optimistic and maybe even nonexistent if the new CFP rules with the next contract further reduce or eliminate AQ spots. The reality is the Big 12 and the ACC(if it still exists) likely assume the role formerly occupied by the B1G in the four team format of being designated roadkill.
(In response to this post by Big12 guy)
2y
in the media corporate rooms. There are a lot of good players generated by the high schools every year. The idea that they will flock to mid and lower tier BIG or SEC schools because the have more media money is an insane concept to me. The B12, and ACC leftovers will be just fine, and the schools that make the investments will compete, and win - no different than it has been for the last 30 years.
(In response to this post by 2hhoop3)
2
2hhoop3
2y
we will see. However, flocking to the SEC or B1G is about more than money. There is a competitive component to it and the best preparation for a shot in the pros. Finally, you may want to take a look at the last 30 years as far as who has been winning.
(In response to this post by Big12 guy)
2y
really changed except who you play in the regular season, and actual access to the playoffs.
I will certainly watch a Toledo - Michigan game in the playoffs if that were to occur. Make no mistake, a game like that will bring ratings nationwide. They wil have to retain access for the rest of FBS to maintain their ratings, and justify their media payouts.
(In response to this post by 2hhoop3)
2
2hhoop3
2y
nothing has changed with respect to winning. Access is an illusion within expansion of the playoff and the reality is the 8 additional playoff games are a money grab at best and likely a reallocation from the other bowls. It is nice you remain optimistic and it would not bother me were you to be right, however, at present I view it as more misguided fantasy.
(In response to this post by Big12 guy)
2y
they "allowed" a G5 to play in a NY6 bowl, but there have been many teams that would have competed for a national title if there was a 12 team playoff. Not every year of course, but there have been a few.
The same could be said about PAC, B12, and ACC teams that have been left out of the national championship game, or 4 team BCS playoff system. They just never got that chance. FSU is the most recent glaring example, but there have been a plethora of one loss teams from the P5 that didn't get a shot at the title.
No doubt there will be top SEC and BIG teams every year - 3 every year with sometimes 4 or 2 as the rarity. That would be 25% of the playoff spots, sometimes 33%. Keep in mind, in the 4 playoff system, the SEC and BIG occasionally got 50% of the invites. Those days are gone, as I don't see the BIG or SEC getting 50% of the playoff spots ever again if the ACC can stay intact - and I hope they do.
Tell you what - if the ACC let teams keep their postseason money moving forward, FSU would drop their suit IMHO. Not a larger share, but all of it. UNC keeping all of their tournament money? They too would stay. Include the conference championship game in that? Gives the uneven distribution they want, but they have to earn it.
It's a concept I never see being discussed, mostly because mid a low level teams wouldn't share in that money - and they would never vote for it.
If the B12 did that, FSU, Clemson, and UNC would give the B12 a look - as the pathway to the playoffs is a bit easier than playing the blue bloods in the regular season.
(In response to this post by 2hhoop3)
2
2hhoop3
2y
if you believe there are many, maybe even any, that would have competed for a national championship. That is unless you define TCU's participation last year as really competing for a championship. Access is an illusion in terms of competitive reality.
You are also delusional if you believe UNC is ever giving the Big 12 a look and Clemson is only slightly less far fetched. FSU has proven what they are and I would put nothing past them. However, the uneven distribution is really nothing more than a band aid on the differences in conference revenue levels and a death knell in terms of competitive parity within a conference. We are clearly at opposite ends of the spectrum in terms of what is realistic and it will be interesting to see which view eventually proves closer to reality. Of course that outcome is dependent on whether the current model manages not to completely implode in the interim.
(In response to this post by Big12 guy)
2y
they earn it. If you did that, no team from the ACC would look elsewhere, and the competition and rivalries would become even more intense.
And ya, if the B12 actually did that, there isn't top team in the ACC that wouldn't look at that kind of deal. You guys in the ACC are pretty sensitive when the B12 is brought up, but is was meant to be an example as there is no way the ACC or B12 would vote for something like that.
(In response to this post by 2hhoop3)
2
2hhoop3
2y
the point just discounted the validity of it. You guys in the Big 12 have already proven that bastardizing a conference to kow tow to one or two schools just prolongs the inevitable.
** Edited by 2hhoop3 at 1/23/2024, 2:54:06 PM
(In response to this post by Big12 guy)
2y
to play a game against KU, or KSU, I got ya a pair o 5f0 yard line tickets for either or. Come to think of it, when you play a road conference game at Iowa State, I've got connections there too. it will be a blast as you can find out first hand what it is to be a B12 guy.
(In response to this post by 2hhoop3)
2
2hhoop3
2y
already seen first hand what it is to be a Big 12 guy as well as the previous iterations as SW guy, Big 8 guy and the soon to a channel near you new Big 16 guy. I will pass.
(In response to this post by Big12 guy)
2y
(In response to this post by 2hhoop3)
2y
(In response to this post by Big12 guy)
2y
B12 changed how revenue is shared with postseason money, either or would be a more attractive conference for good programs moving forward - in football or basketball.
Or, I could just post "the ACC is better than the B12", but that would be kinda boring, as that is already covered on this board.
(In response to this post by NokieHokie)
2y
(In response to this post by Big12 guy)
2y
"it is my contention that the remnants of the B12, PAC, and the ACC will compete, and win national championships at every level of college athletics."
Any competitive playoff game is going to bring ratings - because it is the playoffs. I don't follow the NFL at all. I do watch some games this time of year - mostly because they are usually competitive. Many fans might skip a first round Toledo UM game because it will be competitive one in a million - and then it is a youtube rerun of the ending that people watch - not the entire game.
How often in the last 30 years has one of these remnants even beaten a highly ranked (all teams have down years occasionally) blue blood? Why will that change now? and with changes in $$$$ it only gets harder.
(In response to this post by Big12 guy)
2y
The B12 has zero power to influence what happens to the ACC - they have no attractive teams within the wanted
geographic area. They'll be around to pick up leftovers.
The remnants of the B12 and ACC, in whatever form shakes out, will be the equivalent of today's G5. They'll get the possibility of a spot at the CFP table for a little while (and with 12 one or two will initially actually make it) but it will be just for appearances. There may even be a couple of first round underdog upsets - but I'd bet a whole lot of money they won't make it to the final.
IMHO, in the not too distant future, the CFB playoff will change again, and it won't be to welcome lessor conferences/teams to further split the money, the P2 will expand so that the number of CFP to sell remains the same (think division and conference championships) and they will break away from the rest.
(In response to this post by Big12 guy)
2y
regulated to a G5 status. it is my contention that the remnants of the B12, PAC, and the ACC will compete, and win national championships at every level of college athletics.
The blue bloods in football already got the best time slots in football, and that they were already the richest programs. The difference is that now they are consolidated - or will be consolidated in two conferences. So what?
Next year, there are 4 schools favored to win the B12, and it's likely that there will be one not favored vying for a conference championship - and two of them will get invited to the expanded playoffs.
Get lucky, and they can win the thing. It just got harder to have a 2 loss season in the SEC (BIG continues to be overrated). The sky is not falling - that is unadulterated fear. The landscape is changing, but as a fan, I'm comfortable with the B12's future.
(In response to this post by RTFC)
2y
and you think the lessor teams will compete better than they do today?
The remnants of the ACC and B12 will get FSUed - I think it was wrong, but have no heartburn over who it happened too. For a while you'll get the conference champions for ACC and B12, and maybe even some second teams.
If you start to have more than the occasional App State over UM in the first round of the CFP, then changes will be made - the powers that be (ESPN, blue bloods, etc.) won't stand for that.
I'm also comfortable with VT's future (not so much the ACC because of the opportunities that some ACC teams will have - and IMHO VT is on that 50/50 bubble) I'll be a fan and go to games regardless of what level they play - but I'm not under any delusion that the ACC remnants after any expansion will compete with the P2 at the highest level of football - they barely can do it now - a la FSU.
(In response to this post by Big12 guy)
2y
Peek Around the Corner. Streamed live on Jan 20, 2024
Video: Start at the 22 minute mark
Length: 30+ minutes
(In response to this post by WBGV)
2y
athletic conference realignment. by KORIE DEAN / The News&Observer
“A UNC System Board of Governors committee next week will consider giving the system president and the board the power to prevent universities from changing athletic conferences, according to a meeting agenda. The move comes as conference realignment dominates discussions around college athletics. The ACC voted last year to expand its membership despite objections by UNC-Chapel Hill and two other league schools. N.C. State initially stood with UNC in its objection to expansion, but flipped its vote, allowing the league to add three schools — Stanford, the University of California and Southern Methodist University.”
(In response to this post by WBGV)
2y
the proposal as being reported only requires that any school wanting to change conference must submit a financial plan to the Board of Governors (BOG) of the NC System which can approve or reject it. The speculation being that the BOG would never approve a financial plan unless both UNC and NCST were being offered membership together in the same conference.
I don’t believe that to be the case. If UNC is offered B1G membership and NCST isn’t and UNC submits a financial plan showing that they can makes hundreds of millions of dollars more in a new conference over say a 6 or 7 year period then how could the BOG with fiduciary responsibility and duties reject their financial plan preventing UNC from joining the B1G? In this scenario, NCST doesn’t have the same opportunity as UNC. Keeping both schools together would hurt UNC immensely and thus the entire system as a whole.
(In response to this post by WBGV)
2y
bind the two schools together. To me it looks as though they are just protecting themselves from letting UNC secretly sneak-off to The SEC without any consideration for State. As long as they reserve authority to veto a move, they can insert themselves into the negotiation and assure that State gets proper consideration. If a deal for both teams is not attainable, at least they tried. If these regulators truly have the best interests of the NC System in mind, they would be very reluctant to deny UNC a rare opportunity for a big athletic payday.
(In response to this post by WBGV)
V
VTCALS72
2y
UNC above all!! What if NCSU provides financial statements showing huge losses if UNC goes to the Big alone. Because of the states unique set up with one board running both schools what you are suggesting is like promoting one child and driving down the other.
(In response to this post by WBGV)
2y
just one campus of many. You add the enrollment, academics and research of the other campuses and chapel hill is just another campus of the system. No matter what UNC thinks, they are part of a UNC system and they have to find away to collaboratively work with the others and if not the system will ensure they will.
And if some academic/athletic leaders want to leave .. see ya
(In response to this post by WBGV)
S
Stech
2y
count on either.
(In response to this post by WBGV)
2y
As long as the four stick together, they will ensure all will be ok. I also feel both state government, have seen other states and ensuring they are involved and the 'state's interests are collectively being respected.
All these 'experts who say the big 12 is our future, they miss a critical point. none of us want to be in the Big 12 and would rather stick with the ACC. We know any departure there will be enough revenue from schools leaving to hold the institutions alive for 10 years
(In response to this post by Stech)
2y
will be because it's the best option moving forward.
As a fan, I want VT in the B12, but also Clemson, NCSU, Miami, Pitt, and a few others, but that is different from thinking that the B12 is better than the ACC. The ACC is a really good conference that seems to be being squeezed by ESPN, and maybe the ACC was too good of a conference, as they passed on WVU and other B12 teams when all of them would have taken an invite in a New York second when OU and Texas announced.
Y'all didn't want WVU, UCF, or any other school that is currently in the B12. It seems to me, that like the PAC, you were king of the hill until the BIG and SEC media packages were announced. Now we have a strong B12.
(In response to this post by DMV Gobbler)
2y
control their expansion decisions. ESPN controls whether the ACC media rights contract will be extended or not for another 9 years even if all members remain (from the compliant filed by FSU). I haven’t heard any expert talk about NC State or VT going to the Big 12. It was only referenced in the above post.
Declining an invitation to a party that you haven’t been invited too reeks of self-despair.
(In response to this post by DMV Gobbler)
V
VTCALS72
2y
I think the idea of a Power 3 is laughable. I think the idea that there will continue to be a 12 team playoff with the idea of a stop reserved for the Big 12 champ is laughable. That is unless they have something like a 4 team play in for everybody but the P2/ND kind of like the "accommodation" to all those minor colleges in the NCAA. So I fully expect the TV money for the ACC AND the Big 12 and everybody else except the P2/ND to reduce by at least half, maybe more. What will be left is new media outlets, streaming and a football major league and aa minor league(s).
(In response to this post by DMV Gobbler)
2y
the ACC's demise if that thinking permeates, as it presumes that the ACC is a premiere conference without their top 4 teams.
(In response to this post by VTCALS72)
V
VTCALS72
2y
You seem to assume the Big12 is or can be a premier conference with all it's top teams gone.
Mine is exactly the opposite, neither can remain as a premier conference with the national brands gone. And further, that is how the media and advertisers want it.
(In response to this post by Big12 guy)
2y
the ACC lost FSU, Miami, Clemson, and UNC - I would still consider them a premiere conference. No differently that the B12 teams after texas and Oklahoma announced they were leaving.
The only reason we did not have UCF, BYU, Cincy and houston in the B12 before their departure, was because those teams felt like you do - that they thought it would dilute their brand. Then they left anyway. Sounds a lot like the ACC today, as they passed on those schools, UConn, and if those top teams had been given their way, you wouldn't have Cal, Stanford, and SMU in the ranks. Those last 3 additions may very well keep the ACC together when the top brands leave - and the argument legal or otherwise, is not if they will leave the ACC, it's when, and how many.
The PAC - and the leftover B12 teams learned the hard way that bubble teams do not get the invite, yet there they are, with 16 teams, and a very competitive standing.
Do not be surprised when the B12 gets 2 invites to the 12 team playoff year after year - with a single invite, and a 3 team invite being the exceptions.
The ACC may be a better conference "now", but looking out a decade?
(In response to this post by VTCALS72)
V
VTCALS72
2y
conference format and be pretty much exactly the same and that will be something "premier" is not associated with.
In fact the only advantage I see for VT wrt the Big 12 would be very short term. Right now it is a holding pattern waiting for the ACC national brands and ND to be available and willing to go to the P2. Once those are in, the media will move to pretty much exclude everyone else based on a perceived lack of "national market desirability." That is why they are clustering all the "national market desirable" teams together. There will be only TV crumbs left for the rest of what was college football.
(In response to this post by Big12 guy)
2y
when it comes to conference realignment, but might also be behind Duke. Unfortunately, they may end up in a reconfigured conference that includes Oregon State and Washington State.
(In response to this post by Stech)
S
Stech
2y
“The proposed policy change, which is on the agenda for the board’s University Governance committee meeting Wednesday, would require chancellors across the 16-university system to give the UNC System President, currently Peter Hans, “advance notice prior to executing any agreement which would result in the constituent institution’s transfer, removal, or joining of an athletic conference association.”
Such notice would need to include a “financial plan” associated with the proposed conference move, which the president could either approve or disapprove, the policy states. If the president approves the financial plan, he would then submit the notice and plan to the Board of Governors.
“The Board of Governors could then choose — but would not be required — to hold a vote on the financial plan. If the board were to “vote down,” or vote against, the plan, chancellors would not be able to move forward with a conference move unless they present and receive approval for a a new financial plan by the president and the board.”
(In response to this post by WBGV)
S
Stech
2y
could be the exception. Duke, Syracuse, Boston College, Pittsburgh, Wake Forest , Georgia Tech (if they don’t go P2) stay.
They already grabbed Stanford, Cal, SMU. If the Mag 7 plus 1 leave, look for Tulane, Rice, UConn and USF to join them and double down on Basketball IMHO.
(In response to this post by EDGEMAN)
S
Stech
2y
That’s a nice advantage they will have over the new Big East.
(In response to this post by EDGEMAN)
2y
in one of his shows. Duke is a private school and not in the NC system. I was referring only that NC State may be behind Duke as far as conference desirability especially with the Big 12 which you referenced as wanting them. Their commissioner wants to separate basketball from football in their next media rights negotiation because he believes it is undervalued. It has been reported that he was courting Gonzaga and UConn before the PAC-12 implosion. If there is another conference implosion and schools became available, then Yormark and the Big 12 media partners might prefer Duke over other schools for their basketball brand.
** Edited by WBGV at 1/23/2024, 10:04:24 AM
(In response to this post by Stech)
2y
Duke is not part of the UNC system, but being in NC they are very much part of how politicians consider decisions (votes)
Very few NC politicians can afford to alienate all NCST, WF and Duke supporters (voters)
(In response to this post by WBGV)
S
Stech
2y
non-mag 7 ACC teams? Let’s list the the non-mag 7 ACC schools
Duke
Syracuse
Boston College
Pittsburgh
Wake Forest
Georgia Tech (if they don’t go to a P2)
SMU
Stanford
Cal
Notre Dame all Olympic Sports plus 5 football games
I’ll give you Louisville (but I’m not sure on that)
However that’s an Academic Conference of Champions, so look for Tulane, Rice, UConn and USF to take the Mag 7 plus 1’s places. These Universities Presidents have a priority of being with like minded Universities over sports. They won’t just all of sudden change on that, that’s why they just grabbed Stanford, Cal and even SMU who is top 100 ranked USNW ranked school. Yep all the past and recent behavior with that group says most if not all will stick together.
** Edited by Stech at 1/23/2024, 10:47:21 AM
(In response to this post by WBGV)
2y
seem to matter to schools when it comes to athletic conference affiliation is the TV money and visibility. I don’t think that these schools will stay together if they can’t secure an acceptable media rights contract that enables them to remain competitive and if they have other options.
I guess they could always go the Ivy League route, but even that model is under attack in the courts.
(In response to this post by Stech)
D
duro
2y
compromised position. State either goes with them when they leave or they have an equivalent offer/landing spot in another conference. This has very high visibility and the politicians want them together. They are tied together and the Virginia schools are in a similar position. Further more UNC and UVA don’t want to separate either. So like it or not chances are VT, UVA, UNC and NC State are all going together.
(In response to this post by WBGV)
2y
Any scenario that cripples them would also be suspect. NCST doesn't have to also get the same invite - but the financial budget/plan would also include the impact on them.
There are lots of "financial analyses" that could be done to show keeping your land grant institution in a viable sports position is the "better" overall solution, almost regardless of the numbers to UNCCH. One only has to put a value on something that NCST sports helps create that, while maybe inflated, can be argued successfully. Also arguing the value of viable ACC (which maintaining UNC would help do) to any NC constituency, that may also indirectly include WF and Duke components, would be pretty easy - not suggesting it is completely legitimate, I too think the ACCs days are numbered - just Govt's are great at creating that type of thing.
(In response to this post by WBGV)
D
daveinop
2y
associated with alienating and undermining their land grant u's...that also happen to have their largest in state enrollments...by quite a bit.
(In response to this post by WBGV)
2
2hhoop3
2y
at counting votes yet when adding numbers in a budget request 2+2 always equals 5 or more. The question is whether realignment will fall in the vote or the budget category. ;-)
(In response to this post by daveinop)
D
daveinop
2y
and that math is quite simple
(In response to this post by WBGV)