So you say you want to join a P2 conference. Schools must be able to
raise a billion dollars to cover exit fees, pro rated conference pay outs, and NIL to get and retain players and coaches. Without knowing what the true cost will be to leave, a lot schools will have to decide if they can financially afford to make the move or even if they want to. FSU will determine the exit fee and they better hope they have a landing spot that guarantees full shares of conference money and only have to pay exit fees. Once the price is set, the other schools will be able to determine if they can raise the money or if they even want to based on their landing spot and what they will receive in conference pay outs. There will be a real cost to jumping to P2.
46 Replies
No problem with VT dropping down
(In response to this post by manassashoo)
2y
At one time, our game "report" in the Sunday paper was only a line in the list of scores; usually on the losing side. That's part of the iconic disparaging remarks by Bill Brill etal. UVA was in the ACC so they got kind of a bye though Frank Howard (Clemson's legendary HC) called them "white meat."
(In response to this post by CrystalCoveHokie)
2y
Is too expensive, and remember that we're a University. I would not throw away a billion dollars just to be included, not counting the annual cost. If it cost that much to get out of the ACC and into a P2 conference, then I think I'm fine in a tier two. Over a half a billion dollars just to switch conferences is insane. Hopefully the numbers would come in substantially less than that, or we would be able to make a move in 10 years without that financial cost.
(In response to this post by manassashoo)
2y
If Penn State is spending $700 million to renovate their stadium, I have no desire to be a part of that.
I just hope VT can be in a league with more interesting games. It doesn't have to be top level but you can get good games at the second tier.
** Edited by Gator Hokie at 6/24/2024, 7:48:27 AM
(In response to this post by wwhokie1)
V
VTCALS72
2y
Are JMU, Liberty and maybe even ECU more interesting games than Arizona, Arizona St, Oklahoma St, KU, KSU, ISU or any other Big 12 teams other than the easternmost 3 of WVU, Cincy and UCF?
I am not saying they are but that it is a real question especially if our market is saturated with P2 teams all around us.
** Edited by VTCALS72 at 6/24/2024, 8:10:51 AM
(In response to this post by Gator Hokie)
2y
I’m not sure of the proper schools to keep it interesting.
All I know is that Stanford, Cal, and SMU aren’t it.
(In response to this post by VTCALS72)
the VTAD should have made a meme coin, followed by a pump and dump
could have been set forever
(In response to this post by Gator Hokie)
2y
The right approach for everyone is to be more like ND and have the football team completely separate from all the other sports when it comes to conference alignment.
I’m fine with VT being an ACC basketball school. And wrestling and softball and track, etc.
But football is the one thing where it would be nice to be part of a different group.
(In response to this post by manassashoo)
No other program can do what they do
(In response to this post by HokieAl)
I'd be all for it if we could also get the TV contract the ND has.
(In response to this post by HokieAl)
E
EDGEMAN
2y
...sports.
(In response to this post by Maroon Baboon)
2y
That is a very unique and special contract only for ND.
But I do think it is possible for VT and others to find a middle ground that lets their football teams break away while staying ACC members for everything else. All that would be needed is some compromise, some creativity, and a lot of egos to be set aside (I know, not happening). But there has to be other ways to satisfy the minimum required obligations to fulfill the ESPN contract as noted in the GOR.
I know it has a very low probability, but I like to try and think creatively.
(In response to this post by EDGEMAN)
Heck, the big blue bloods will never get the ND contract
(In response to this post by HokieAl)
V
VPI 1924
2y
Oranges and oil don’t mix.
(In response to this post by manassashoo)
2y
(In response to this post by VPI 1924)
S
Stech
2y
So a consolidation of P2 plus a couple of others that want to spend money on football. The Illinois AD implied that some Power 2’s including Illinois might not want to be in it because they don’t want to spend that much on football. The NCAA President Charlie Barker implied there would be a minimum spend on football to get in, and some schools alumni donors are not going to want to spend that much. However, expect a tier 2 playoff to happen for the ones not in tier 1.
(In response to this post by manassashoo)
P
pine52x
2y
They put too much emphasis on engineering and computer science. They need to put more of that money into athletics where the real stature of a university is realized. (ha ha)
(In response to this post by Stech)
W
WarHog38
2y
Athletes? A conference like that will be dead on arrival. I listened to that pod cast by Josh Pate that was linked within the Topic Header for a very long thread just below. Pate said a lot in the 28 minutes before he got to his glass of water gif. Pate said he was never donating to a school so they could afford to pay the athletes. I know Pate is not the messiah of college football. However what fan will donate his hard earned money so an 18 year old can drive a new sports car and flash bling? You think those inherently tight fisted billionaires are going to do that? The only idiots I could see doing that are in the US Government. The same ******s pushing this.
(In response to this post by Stech)
V
VPI 1924
2y
As I stated below, there will be no more than 16 teams in tier 1. No one with a financially sound mind would give a quarter to pay illiterate athletes.
(In response to this post by Stech)
2y
OSU
Michigan
Texas
OU
LSU
Alabama
Auburn
Florida
PSU
FSU
Clemson
Tennessee
USC-W
Oregon
Washington
Notre Dame
(In response to this post by VPI 1924)
2y
Georgia takes their place.
And even Florida no longer belongs based on recent results. FSU brings that state if you go with only 16 teams.
You would need more geographic coverage. Maybe a Wisconsin. Or maybe A&M since Texas does love football and is a big enough state to make it worthwhile.
But realistically there are easily 20-30 teams stupid enough to want the tier 1 glory that they will spend any amount of money.
(In response to this post by LonghornHokie)
2y
(In response to this post by LonghornHokie)
2y
Every one of these schedules would be beyond brutal with no cupcakes to provide some R&R.
(In response to this post by OrlandoHokie)
2y
Nebraska, UCLA, TAMU, and maybe Wisconsin are the first ones to come to mind. If the group caps at 20 teams, then they could split into 2 conferences of 10 or even split the 2 conferences into 4 divisions of 5. If the conferences split into divisions, then the schedule can truly take on a NFL-like vibe because teams could play every other team in the division home and away in the same season for 8 games. Then the remaining 4 games could rotate among the other divison and/or conference. It would allow the playoff to be restructed to mirror the NFL's so the conference champions play each other in the Collegiate Super Bowl.
I guess they could increase to 24 to ensure no team runs the risk of ending up with a bye week in the later half of season because a division with 5 members will have 1 odd team out each week. Although I am not sure there are 7 schools who are truly deserving of having a Tier 1 status.
(In response to this post by LonghornHokie)
2y
(In response to this post by LonghornHokie)
T
Truthahn
2y
Four pods, with 3 game conference schedules, and 8 or 9 out of conference games against CUSA (but not Liberty) and MAC teams, then they all get into the 16 team CFP.
Problem solved.
(In response to this post by OrlandoHokie)
V
VPI 1924
2y
Then 4 more- USC-W, ND, Oregon and TexasA&M. I’ll revise my 16 above to only 10 Tier 1 teams.
(In response to this post by LonghornHokie)
2y
Be nice if the bottom 2-3 spots were up for relegation anyway.
(In response to this post by VPI 1924)
V
VPI 1924
2y
Normal football. No paying athletes
(In response to this post by VPI 1924)
2y
that option going forward. It may depend on whether there is a distinction between DI-FBS, DI-FCS, DII, and DIII football or they are all lumped together. There may not even be a distinction between NCAA sponsored sports and NAIA sponsored sports (aka the other 4-year collegiate athletic association).
** Edited by VTHokie2000 at 6/24/2024, 8:13:18 AM
(In response to this post by VPI 1924)
2y
the early 1980s for violating antitrust laws on how it controlled the broadcast of college athletic events. We could be looking at the student-athlete's version of that event.
(In response to this post by VPI 1924)
V
VTCALS72
2y
for any ACC team.
So my current take is the new ACC will hold with only a max of 4 leaving and probably just 2.
(In response to this post by manassashoo)
2y
(In response to this post by VTCALS72)
H
hokieZ71
2y
The nightmare is the P2 stop at 20. FSU/Clemson/UNC/UVA go to the SEC and Miami goes to the B1G along with one extra west coast team (Arizona State, Stanford or Utah) to the B1G to give them a 5-team west coast division.
At that point, the ACC is worthless and the remaining teams have 2 options.
1) they could stick around and add Tulane and UConn and USF and they could make about $15-$20M a year (or maybe less…)
2) Or the valuable ones could go to the Big XII together; VT, NCST, Louisville and Pitt - form an eastern bloc with WVU and Cincinnati. And then they could earn $50M+ every year to do it. That’s 6 schools stretching from Pittsburgh to Cincinnati to Raleigh. It’s a no brainer.
That said, I don’t think the P2 takes exactly 6 ACC schools. Certainly no time soon.
** Edited by hokieZ71 at 6/23/2024, 10:47:23 PM
(In response to this post by Big12 guy)
V
VTCALS72
2y
the money of the ACC even without those 6 is just off. I believe that both the ACC and Big 12 TV revenue in it's current form will shrink to nearly nothing. And again, my opinion is that getting money out of leagues like the ACC, PAC and Big 12 was job 1 in all this re organization.
I really don't believe that big media will produce any TV below the P2 level. Instead they will buy produced games of their choice to stream through their broadcast channels. No more paying for BC vs Wake or any game between teams with losing records. And no matter circumstances, if big media continues to contract with the Big 12 and ACC in any similar manner, they will have to take some bad matchups. I think they are through taking those and investing as much in games like that as they are doing now.
(In response to this post by hokieZ71)
W
WBGV
2y
dollar increase that runs through 2031 hasn’t even begun yet. The major concern on this board by many is whether ESPN is going to extend the ACC contract or not especially if schools leave the conference. As of to today there hasn’t been any indication that they will and the deadline to make that decision is fast approaching (only months away).
ESPN’s silence on this issue has been deafening.
(In response to this post by VTCALS72)
V
VTCALS72
2y
Why should ESPN be doing anything public at this time. I do believe they are calling a lot of shots to come up with a settlement and that the new deal may well depend on the ACCs willingness to settle if Clemson and FSU go SEC.
(In response to this post by WBGV)
2y
What do you expect them to say?
Major college sports is currently undergoing upheaval. ESPN just needs to sit and see what happens, before committing to anything or talking publicly. They have until February (correct?). A lot might happen between now and then.
** Edited by Will Stewart at 6/24/2024, 11:27:44 AM
(In response to this post by WBGV)
W
WBGV
2y
contracts with the ACC that would go a long way in alleviating concerns about the conference’s future that FSU created in their legal filings back in December. By not saying anything, those concerns have only been amplified by the media.
ESPN could make a definitive statement that the ACC media rights contract runs through 2036 and that they are committed to being a strong partner for the duration of the contract. That would kill the current narrative across the country that the contract is ending in 2027 which is causing a lot of consternation among ACC fan bases.
Maybe the wise move during this time of upheaval is to say nothing as you suggested, but by saying nothing ESPN is actually saying something about the future of the ACC and in the minds of a lot of people that is concerning.
** Edited by WBGV at 6/24/2024, 4:57:57 PM
(In response to this post by Will Stewart)
D
daveinop
2y
why undermine that stance?
(In response to this post by WBGV)
True, I would happily take the Big 12 over that
(In response to this post by Big12 guy)
S
Stech
2y
invasion.
(In response to this post by VTCALS72)