Can someone remind me; are we rooting for FSU & Clemson to blow up the ACC?
Because every article I read & video I watch makes it sounds like a diminished ACC will not end well for VT. Most scenarios have it ending well for FSU, Clemson, & UNC in one of the P2s. Then there is some talk about UVA and Miami landing in a P2. Most scenarios have VT either stuck in a very G5-esque ACC remnants, or best case scenario going to the B12. But I don't believe any of these result in more $$$ for VT.
So why do we want FSU and Clemson to succeed again?
46 Replies
T
TDVick
2y
My guess is that the leaks will largely turn out to be true and that ESPN can and will cancel the deal.
If I have the right to buy something from you for the next 21 years, but I have the option to terminate early, then you have sold me an implied put. Whatever the stated deal amount that was reported, the index amount of the reported figure is actually worth far less. So either the leaders of the great academic juggernaut known as the ACC couldn't figure this out (highly unlikely), or they went along with this structure precisely so that they could trumpet that the the gap versus the SEC wasn't as big as it was if the implied put wasn't included. In which case, there was possibly a bit of deception.
My other suspicion is that this would have been suppressed if not for the litigation in the state of FL.
** Edited by TDVick at 4/8/2024, 3:40:08 PM
(In response to this post by UpstateSCHokie)
V
VTCALS72
2y
than just the ACC? It would seem to me that both sides are buying the put.
(In response to this post by TDVick)
T
TDVick
2y
have known about the cancellation feature? How on earth could something like that been slipped in? "Hey guys, we have a deal with a top line number of $X annually, but you can't read this, you just have to trust us?"
This is what seems even more slippery.
1. ESPN makes threats about non-disclosure of trade secrets.
2. If this scenario is correct, then wouldn't a LOT of ACC school people have to have known about this?
However, it seems that FSU and Clemson were legitimately surprised about some of the details. How could this be?
Either something was hidden or some people were COMPLETELY asleep at the wheel and derelict at their duty. How could a contract with such bad terms have been signed?
I want to find this out and see if someone did something wrong. Hopefully several states will start focusing in on ESPN/Disney. I'm still quite cranky about us not going to the SEC in 2012. It seems like a lot of people would have an interest in keeping these details from being revealed.
The more success FSU has, the closer we get to having accountability, so I am rooting for FSU to win.
Am I missing something? This situation looks like it was very bad from the start. Some schools might have made some bad decisions to stay in the ACC, that was based on bad information.
The VT to SEC window probably closed prior to these events, but I still want to find out.
** Edited by TDVick at 4/8/2024, 3:33:59 PM
(In response to this post by TDVick)
V
VTCALS72
2y
And, I believe that FSU and Clemson, with the ulterior motive of getting out are feigning surprise at something that may well be an industry standard (look in). didn't we here that the Big contract is similarly locked in a safe at the Big headquarters?
Way too many are discounting how much ESPN spent getting the ACCN up and going. I believe the delay in the look in is directly corelated with the delay in getting the ACCN up to speed.
But to be fair, most of my assumptions are based on the ACC, (or VT in other matters) do a competent job. that is another reason your continued angst at the VT2SEC is overstated IMHO.
(In response to this post by TDVick)
2y
The Clemson suit gets to the heart of what matters the most to me. Define exactly what the costs are for exit related to the exit fee of $120 million (maybe get it reduced) and the media rights.
All the talk about the B12 doesn't matter if the $120 million exit fee remains. Because VT is never going to pay that. VT is literally stuck in the ACC until the conference is either disbanded by vote or has the rules changed so that the exit fee is lower.
Right now everyone is talking about the media rights (which would potentially go down in value/cost if ESPN reduces the contract). But to me that doesn't matter because VT and others will not pay that $120 million. Even very rich Texas didn't want to pay that much and they can easily afford it.
The ACC corporate office cares about survival. And they will survive as long as that $120 million poison pill exists (with or without FSU and Clemson). The ACC must fully die in order for schools like VT to move.
** Edited by HokieAl at 4/7/2024, 10:42:54 PM
(In response to this post by UpstateSCHokie)
2y
(In response to this post by UpstateSCHokie)
Don't be hasty
I think a blown up ACC is really bad.
* I think the Big12 will kills sports at VT. Who wants to fly that far for swim meets and volleyball games?
A living ACC might have more strength when the eventual "pro lite" league leaves the NCAA. That's really want we to be part of, a football only minor league NFL and leave WBB and MBB in the ACC sans football.
maybe i am drunk
but i don't drink so that is unlikely
(In response to this post by Air-Ic)
2y
As most everyone knows there is currently a big difference between the money payout to the P2 and everyone else. The difference is already being felt by VT with the Kenny Brooks situation and it will only get worse from here.
If the ACC finds stability as it is, it will be fool's gold because the money differential will remain and the ACC will suffer a slow financial drain upon which it may never recover. In my opinion, it would be better to accelerate the process with a "big bang" ending knowing full well that VT does not have a guaranteed spot. If it doesn't happen for VT I hope we can find relief through the courts but I am not a lawyer.
Therefore, I am pulling for the FSU/Clemson lawsuits to be successful because that will accelerate the process. I admit that this is a scary way to approach the problem but I think meeting it head on sooner rather than later is the best way.
(In response to this post by UpstateSCHokie)
I
INSIDE99
2y
The ACC (or any other conference) cannot sustain itself against the P2 likes when the money discrepancy is that severe over the course of time. Slow or quick - but it's already happening.
(In response to this post by 133921Hokie)
T
TDVick
2y
the ACC unraveling and us landing in the B12 would be that much worse off. Plus, I want to see the curtain pulled back on this whole ACC deal and some heads roll.
(In response to this post by INSIDE99)
2y
The revenue disparity is manageable. Keep selling tickets. Raise the student fee a few hundred.
(In response to this post by 133921Hokie)
2y
What exactly have they done for VT? You guys do not play FSU or Clemson every year, and ND only once in a blue moon.
Then they tried to take the Miami game away from you guys.
I'm not a B12 cheerleader, but it seems we have stability, and actually make more money in the new contact AFTER Texas and OU left. Before that, the conference was strong armed by Texas, and I will not miss the old B12.
This process with FSU and Clemson is killing the conference, and it's not just FSU's fault.
Hobnobbing with the academics is something for sure, but everything is being driven by athletics.
VT was good as an independent, they were good in the Big East, they are good in the ACC, and they will be good no matter what happens with the ACC.
VT is defined by VT - not the ACC.
(In response to this post by SpeakToDamien)
M
Marooned
2y
Only the lawyers get rich from that. They should’ve negotiated an early exit from an agreement THEY SIGNED instead of venting in public about inadequate revenues etc. and draining resources.
(In response to this post by 133921Hokie)
I'm not sure what leverage they had to negotiate an early exit.
Especially one over a decade before the purported end of the contract.
With UT and OU, they just announced that they were leaving early (one year early, mind you), and the Big XII said, "Fine. Pay in full for your exit."
So they said, "Um. Ok. We'll come back for the last year."
And the Big XII said, "Well, we don't really want you back for the last year."
So they said, "OK. Let's negotiate a settlement."
The Big XII, "Ok."
I just don't see FSU and the ACC doing this with a dozen years left to go.
However, ESPN is stuck between a rock and a hard place. They could help the ACC's case here by officially extending to 2036 rather than opting out in 2027. Bit if they do, and somehow the ACC loses in court, they have to pay the current rate for an FSU-less ACC. But if they say no to the extension, then FSU and perhaps several other schools that they have under contract and decent rate might be headed to the B1G and FOX.
Perhaps ESPN might strike a bargain to allow Clemson and FSU to go to the SEC in exchange for extending the contract with the ACC to 2036, in addition to paying the ACC exit fees for FSU and Clemson. I am not sure UNC would go for this, but most of the other schools in the conference might go for it since there is currently so much uncertainty, and they might just want the problem off their hands for a decade of (somewhat) stability. I don't know, just spitballin' here.
(In response to this post by Marooned)
S
Stech
2y
🤷♂️🤣
** Edited by Stech at 4/6/2024, 5:34:59 PM
(In response to this post by UpstateSCHokie)
V
VTCALS72
2y
They are all over every podcast on the net, spreading "poor little ole FSU screwed over by the mean old ACC" garbage. Then they are backed by just about every BXII podcast out there. XII is still hoping to be the 3rd "big" league and whereas they have no shot of doing so no matter what, getting VT, Pitt, Louisville and NCSU keep the dream alive so they are all anti ACC, beating their chest about what their savior, Yourmark is going to do. Meanwhile, the ACC is playing their cards like Whit B in hiring coaches.
I don't want FSU and Clemson to succeed because unless one of the P2 conferences reaches down and takes us, we are way better off in the "new" ACC than having to play in a midwestern conference who does not and will not carry much influence on either coast.
(In response to this post by UpstateSCHokie)
2y
That means that fsu and Clemson lose their lawsuits and espn extends. That gets us 5-6 years of stability. I can live with that.
Then hopefully the situation is better in the early 2030s. That could be anything. More competitive contract with some unequal distributions? P2 model is expanding considerably? Who knows. Worry about that later.
(In response to this post by UpstateSCHokie)
V
Vippie1
2y
any additional time period where the pols and maybe courts , and yes public opinion, can hopefully force some structural changes to the non-system we have at this moment , is likely to VTs advantage. As of today there are practically zero constraints on the P2 and networks doing exactly as they please- and I dont trust that that will end well for VT. As hard as it is, biding our time hoping that some higher authority forces some obviously needed changes is IMO our best play.
(In response to this post by SpeakToDamien)
O
obguthr
2y
and those leagues may break apart like the WAC and Big East did. In the near term, it's going to be a painful few years as we watch Kentucky and other P2 pilfer the talent that we develop. There's little we can do about it. Biding our time and strengthening relationships is what we should be doing.
(In response to this post by Vippie1)
Dunno. I just think the whole thing is a lose-lose for college sports fans.
And while I want the Hokies to land on our feet of course, I've been a college sports fan long before I was a Hokie.
My hope is that VT admin is considering all scenarios and working all contacts. At this point, I hope we end up in the Big Ten unless some sort of real reform occurs like the 70/80 team Super League that would restore regionalism and old rivalries hopefully (but I realize that no one in real power is supporting this). OR, something truly revolutionary like a PL relegation and promotion system. Either of these two options I would support.
(In response to this post by UpstateSCHokie)
A lot of questions about the 70/80 team Super League...
1. Is it only for football?
2. How is the TV money distributed?
3. How regional do they get? That is do they mix P-4 schools or try to keep all the schools in their original conferences? For example, does the P-4 all go to 20 members and have two 10-team divisons for each conference? This seems most logical but the ACC and Big 12 would still be far behind in media revenue.
4. If this is only for football, do the ACC, Big 10, Big 12 and SEC play all their other sports as they do now? That is the Big 10 still has 18, SEC 14, ACC 17.5, Big 12 16 members. The other schools will simply be associate members for football and will take a much smaller cut from each P-4 conference TV revenue deal.
(In response to this post by Maroon Baboon)
2y
(In response to this post by UpstateSCHokie)
2y
(In response to this post by VT ChemE 1986)
V
VPI 1924
2y
Clemson and FSU will never ever never make the final 4 playoffs again. They are both poverty schools compared to the ELITES
(In response to this post by UpstateSCHokie)
2y
Of the conference stays in place and ESPN solidifies its commitment to the remainder. The defectors need to pay a heavy price.
** Edited by VT ChemE 1986 at 4/6/2024, 1:09:35 PM
(In response to this post by UpstateSCHokie)
2y
renegotiation time?
(In response to this post by VT ChemE 1986)
2y
There are too many possibilities and not enough information.
(In response to this post by LonghornHokie)
2y
into a P2? I guess in that scenario, we're hoping for a B12 invite?
(In response to this post by VT ChemE 1986)
V
VTCALS72
2y
I am thinking that big media is so close to the P2 being just about where they want them that now they are about having a level between the P2 and G5 almost like a triple A league in the Majors. I don't think the pay to this level will be any more than halfway between the G5 and the P2 but the P2 does need a minor league that can produce both players and coaches ready to play in the big show.
My guess at this time a new level of 3 regional conferences, all paid about halfway between G5 and P2, the new ACC, XII and new PACs. Regionalism will be big because there won't be enough $$$ to handle the non revs in far flung conferences.
(In response to this post by UpstateSCHokie)
2y
A contract give or take with the B12? We have a power 4. The ACC or B12 with a significant difference from the other? We have a P3.
No matter if VT lands in the P2 or not, she will be playing competitive football as far as the eye can see.
This P2 experiment will backfire. No matter how much money the make, they will play each other, and there will be a lot of blue blood programs with 4 losses and coach buyouts.
(In response to this post by UpstateSCHokie)
V
VTCALS72
2y
A favorite story of Chris Coleman is how back in his growing up days, his school would roll TVs in the classrooms to watch the ACC tourney but when VT was playing in the BE and he asked to watch, they said no. You see VT was not in the state's "home" conference. The XII while you are correct about being competitive, it will never be the "home" conference for any east or west coast team. And that is a long term weight to carry.
(In response to this post by Big12 guy)
2y
But I would defer to my WVU friends. They are the perfect case study for teams and fans that were hung out to dry. The shame of that was it wasn't because they didn't add athletically, didn't have value, or because no one cared.
WVU didn't end up in the AAC or a conference like that, because they play football and have passionate fans.
I hope you are not saying the VT faithful would stop caring.
(In response to this post by VTCALS72)
V
VTCALS72
2y
WVU is the only game in the state. Yes as much disdain as I have for their fans, they are passionate. But WVU is the only real major university and the only game in town for most, of the state. So most, but not all of those fans would have still been game crazy even if WVU was in the MAC.
As I stated, VT has already been in that situation when we went through the wilderness of the Metro, the A10, half in the BE then all in the BE until finally in the ACC. I have seen it before. We were not the only game in town, we were in what our home area considered an inferior no body cares about conference. It hurt us and it took Mike Vick to made much of a difference.
We were facing something like 6 teams in close proximity (relatively) all in the "favored" conference. That matters. We were at a disadvantage. There was a whole other layer of people who became VT fans once we were in the favored conference. Heck we could drive to UVA and all 4 North Carolina schools and back in a day and at least 2 of those schools (Wake and Duke) implemented higher prices for tickets and concession because they knew they were going to be besieged by VT fans.
Lose that and going back to being in a conference that our home area (DMV, VA and NC) does not care one bit about except WVU and yes there will be slippage. But that is not just a VT thing. Same for NCSU if they end up in the XII. In fact I am going to go so far as to say that if FSU and Clemson go Big 10 then they also will be in what their home area sees an a inferior conference. Their area's heart belongs to the SEC.
(In response to this post by Big12 guy)
2y
And talk about competition for fans. The point is, the context of my recent posts is what it would take to be a national brand that the P2 finds desirable.
I get a sense that many have been comfortable and complacent in the ACC, and are entitled. I'm sure that comment will be taken the wrong way, but it just sounds like the PAC story all over again.
Except for Utah and ASU, the other 6 additions are schools that are pumped and excited to be in the B12. The ACC can have them as far as I'm concerned. There is genuine excitement in the B12 these days - more than i have seen in over 30 years.
I'd much rather you guys stay together, then have a bunch of fans thinking they are slumming it in our conference.
(In response to this post by VTCALS72)
V
VTCALS72
2y
The only 2 things that can be taken negatively is that their influence does not and will not extend to either coast. That and the idea they can change the P2 into the P3. I don't doubt that it is a competitive conference in it's region. There are really no P2 teams in the center of your region so, kind of like WVU you are the only game in town. But I don't take that as negative. In fact I hope that the XII will be one of 3 regional conferences (did I say regional?) on a level between the G5 and P2 along with the ACC and new PAC. And don't think this isn't a 2 way street. My guess is most don't really like WVU being in their conference. And there really isn't any of the "realistic teams from the ACC (VT, UVA, NCSU, Pitt, Lville, GT) that would excite anybody in the Big XII, except maybe WVU and Cincy. But that is because they are more in the ACC region than they are in the Big12 region.
(In response to this post by Big12 guy)
2y
When they added UCF and BYU. Add Cincy, and they most definitely have an Eastern presence.
Frankly, I think the only advantage the B12 has/had over the PAC and ACC is that they were the only non P2 that could expand East or West. The "coast" conferences could only expand by taking B12 leftovers.
There is a bit of irony that the PAC passed 9n the flyover schools this is not to imply that I think the B12 is better than the ACC. It's that the geography centric conferences (PAC ACC) may break apart because of geography.
And yes, the PAC and ACC looked down on the B12 leftovers and the 4 G5 additions. You guys could have had ANY of them.
I contend that VT and Pitt would thrive in the B12. Add Louisville and NCSU? You would have your regional conference.
(In response to this post by VTCALS72)
2y
Then with WVU, Cincy, and UCF there would be a stronger football eastern block in the B12 than the remnants of the ACC without FSU and Clemson (especially because Miami is likely gone as well).
(In response to this post by Big12 guy)
V
VTCALS72
2y
Especially if the ACC only loses 3 teams which was your example.
(In response to this post by GALOISGROUP)
2y
If ND counts... probably. Otherwise, out of curiosity, which three teams in the remnant ACC do you believe add better "football" value than WVU, Cincy and UCF?
EDIT: For logical coherency, it cannot be Louisville, Pitt, VT, or NC State - since the presumption would be they carry the same value as themselves.
** Edited by GALOISGROUP at 4/7/2024, 2:20:02 PM
(In response to this post by VTCALS72)
V
VTCALS72
2y
and do note I am talking about what is best for the schools current footprint year in and year out. In your example only WVU is equal to or greater than any of one of Miami or UNC, VT, Pitt, Lville, NCSU and GT for football only.
(In response to this post by GALOISGROUP)
2y
VT, Pitt, Lville, and NCSU are not relevant since the are the block being discussed (and as mentioned they are presumed to equal themselves in either group) and Miami is also not relevant they had left in the original premise.
That leaves only UNC and GT from your list and in FOOTBALL ONLY:
WVU > UNC [anyone who says otherwise has not been to a football game at both places...]
I would take Cincy or UCF over GT in football these days, but I do not think any add a ton of value at this time.
Obviously, if non-football factors are considered UNC and GT are better academic institutions and UNC clearly brings more in terms of Basketball and Olympic sports... but football only this is my take.
(In response to this post by VTCALS72)
V
VTCALS72
2y
I am not trying to predict the 2024 season with a ranking of the XII against the ACC minus 7 ACC members, which is what I see you just did.
To me the question is what is best for VT and starting off with assumptions that the ACC in the discussion is minus 7 teams before any comparisons is pretty useless. But, yes, VT, NCSU, Lville and Pitt are way better than Cincy or UCF as league mates in the area VT is in. As I said, WVU is different. Heck, you can even add Wake, Duke and UVA as being better conference mates too that simply because all can go to away games in easy driving distance. Neither Cincy or UCF is that. And for all other XII teams, well they just as well be from another planet. But the other planet thing is probably as true for any of the 4 teams the XII assumes are "in the discussion" for pretty much any of the above assumed ACC league member trying to go play in, create rivalries and interest in Utah, Colorado, AZ, Iowa, Kansas, Oklahoma Texas or any other XII states I missed.
So for the area VT is in, a league that has one of UNC or Miami along with every other ACC team minus FSU and Clemson is a much better option today or in the immediate future than anything a midwest regional conference trying to establish what the local/regional conference already has.
And even at the end of say the 2024 season with no real surprises, don't be surprised that the ACC isn't better than the XII just like they were in the NCAA tourney.
(In response to this post by GALOISGROUP)
V
VTCALS72
2y
Were not proactive moves by the XII or ACC but were "enticed" to add them by ESPN so they could pull them back into the new PAC.
(In response to this post by Big12 guy)
V
VTCALS72
2y
When the ACC raided the BE one of the initial targets was Boston College. You see the idea was the ACC could bring in national football names like FSU and Miami and UNC/Duke for MBB and Boston would swoon. Thing is Boston is a Celtics/Pats/Sox city and didn't care that much about either BC or college football. But the point, they didn't care about claiming a conference out of their region and culture as their own either. Same thing is at play here and as I said it is a 2 way street.
But you did kind of hit on something I agree with, my prognostication of 3 regional conferences could be one conference with 3 divisions with one "commissioner" who would probably be Yourmark. But one of 3 divisions or conferences, I do not believe there will be enough money from big media to run non rev sports with as far flung travel as a BXII with 4 additions from the the ACC.
(In response to this post by Big12 guy)