the money doesn't follow them to the SEC. 1) Cheaper for ESPN if they stay in the ACC 2) ESPN already dominates Florida and South Carolina in ratings with the current SEC 3) The ACC sold their contract to ESPN, you don't sue the company paying you unless you want another company to pay you 4) UNC has not sued because of the very reason above, they want to be in the SEC eventually 5) UF, USC-e, UK and probably even Tenn & Auburn compete with them for recruits and have the SEC over their head, it makes no sense to give that up, so FSU & Clemson can't get the votes 6) Referring to the above, yes Texas got in even though A&M didn't want them, but there is power in numbers and they just don't have the numbers (You still need University Presidents votes to get in a Conference) 7) There are only two ways to create a profit/surplus, one is raise more revenue (new states do that), but existing states don't and two cut expenses. If ESPN doesn't have to pay FSU and Clemson for states they already dominate because they go to the B1G, then they are cutting large expenses without losing much if any income. Think like a business, not like a fan. ** Edited by Stech at 5/3/2024, 12:08:31 PM

Man, this is certainly one gigantic mess. Good post.

take me too seriously here. Currently the B12 gets about $25M from ESPN, and about $12M from Fox. FSU go to the B12 (for now), at full price, and ESPN offers the ACC a lower contract. ESPN still gets FSU's and Clemson's home games because they bought the rights from the ACC, for less than they are paying now. FOX gets a share of the games as well, and FSU has a home until the court cases are settled, as they in all likely hood, would get a pass on the GOR from the B12. ESPN makes out like a bandit in that scenario by retaining the rights and paying less for those games. FSU potentially double dips, as the ACC retains the home game rights, but litigation would determine that they still have a monetary value, and would have to "share" their revenue for those games. FSU and Clemson could possibly be paid by both conferences until 2036, and that would put them in a position to compete with the P2 with an easier schedule. A ton of domino's in that hair brained point of view, but they are already in court, and The GOR (and payments for the GOR), is being negotiated as we speak.

ends up in the B12 is if they boxed themselves into a corner, and had to wait for the litigation process to be over with. Could they end up in the B12? Quite a few dominos would have to fall, but it's about the same chance as them staying in the ACC.

The best savings for ESPN is if they don't have to pay those two at all, they could negotiate the deal with the B1G and the ACC to let them go at an agreed upon price. The ACC does the B12 thing and possibly gets two networks, one for football and one for basketball. I could see CBS taking the football contract and ESPN keeping the basketball contract because the Academic Elites have shown they can compete in basketball way more than football. That and Fox already has the Big East, B1G and B12 in basketball, they have plenty of inventory for college basketball. You will probably still have the ACC SEC challenge, like Duke and UNC every year, plus one OOC game between the two of them, to make it two game annual series. PS I like that you are looking at it like a business would look at it, this is all just big business trying to grow their profit/surplus over time.

charged. The problem the P2 have with those two teams, is that they already have their contracts set, and ESPN would have to float the money in the SEC, and the BIG10 would make them take a haircut much like Oregon and Washington. FOX is not one to just come off of and extra $80M- $100M a year when they already have a contract inked. It would also be difficult for either of the P2 to get the schools to take less money because of ANY school for the duration of their contracts. keep in mind, there was no separation of FOX and ESPN on the football or basketball content - only the order in which they pick the gamers they want to broadcast, with ESPN having close to a 2-1 edge. FOX did not just bid on the basketball content, but Yormark has stated he would like to separate the two sports in the next media contract negotiations - we will see. The idea here, which "fans" sometimes miss, is how ESPN and FOX can improve their bottom line. Paying more for teams they already have under contract doesn't pencil out - unless the different matchups in a different conference would bring the revenue. It's a tough row to hoe to get two networks to bid on the ACC contract until 2036, and with the ACCN. I do however, agree with you that if the ACC only loses the two, they are in a solid enough position to continue as a P4. The B12 will not "poach" any school from the ACC if the media contracts are + or - from each other.

Kentucky and probably Tennessee and Auburn don't want either of them in the SEC. They don't want to give the recruiting advantage they have of those two being outside of the SEC. It's going to be much harder for those two than it was for Texas, with only one school not wanting them. ** Edited by Stech at 5/3/2024, 12:32:17 PM

UF has been a member longer, but I don't know if the SEC will say that F$U's name recognition is worth adding them to the conference. I'm thinking B1X for both F$U and CU. That gets the B1X into the south.

ACC schools, including VT if they are looking at a P2 break away. That being said, based on ESPN and FOX partnering with their streaming service, and recently, partnering with the UFL, there is a chance that FSU and Clemson get a full share from both ESPN and FOX to go to the purgatory B12 until all this stuff is litigated. ESPN and FOX collaborating brings a different twist to this conference realignment stuff in my opinion, and with the B12 being the only P conference that both have rights too, it compels me to think there is something up with the P3 argument. Just a fans knee jerk though, and I have no link, nor have I read anything like this.

You would have to think the SEC would never let the Big Ten into their territory.

I can see the SEC adding them to prevent the Big Ten getting in their core market area. But South Carolina, Florida and Georgia are all going to object.

It sure seems like they are intent at ticking off the ACC and ESPN, which is in bed with the $EC. To me, they could be involved in one of the better slight of hand tactics of all time to take focus off of potential $EC move if that were the case. However, in my opinion they are laying their cards on the table and saying it's BIG or bust. Both FSU and Clemson would take their recruiting to an even more national level with the BIG as they go coast to coast, and unlike the new ACC get paid a heck of a lot more money to expand that recruiting footprint. The $EC would just be one more feeder in the region. Also, from the $EC point a view they would take FSU and Clemson from purely a strategic move to keep the BIG out. And if that were the case, the BIG could look to UNC, UVA, or Miami to get into southern markets.

desire FSU and Clemson. Florida, Auburn, Georgia, South Carolina may protest but that would just add to the rivalry juices. FSU's "Project Osceola" that was leaked showed a revenue payout that matched the SEC's future payout per school, so that lends another nugget to SEC guess. All that said, the B1G would probably love to get FSU, Clemson, GT, Miami for built-in rivalries. Then a contiguous state path to UNC and UVa. That parks them at 24 schools. ND is already in B1G hockey, so they'll likely hitch their olympic cart to this horse. In an ideal world, the SEC would answer in kind and grab VT, NCSU, WVU, Pitt, Kansas, K-State, Texas Tech, Oklahoma State to match the B1G 24. Networks may have more $ to throw at conferences if 2 or 3 conferences cease to exist (ACC, Big12, MW), and one or two new conferences are born from the fallout. There are probably 10 years worth of lawsuits to filed over this, and I don't see how some of the Big12 would get left out of big-boy football. We're probably looking at more court cases of schools vs conferences, conferences vs networks, schools vs schools.