Interesting speculation about ACC dissolution by Greg Flugaur last night
On his YouTube show "Peak Around The Corner" Greg speculated that if the B1G and SEC establish a scheduling agreement that UNC could lead the rest of the Magnificent 7 (VT, UVa, NC St, Clemson, FSU and Miami) plus three other schools to dissolve the ACC. No timeline given but most likely sometime in 2025. It comes from his Big Ten source and a UNC "money perch". Duke was mentioned as one of the three schools that would join M7. He does not know the other two schools but did mention something about Syracuse however didn't elaborate much about it. There would be private equity involvement and the new conference would take their media rights to market. Streaming would most likely be heavily involved and I assume ESPN would be as well. If this happens it will be led by UNC AD Bubba Cunningham. There is much speculation that if a scheduling agreement between the P2 happens it may force ND into joining the B1G. Greg has speculated for a long time that UNC wants to join the P2 (most likely SEC) but there are too many obstacles that prevent that from occurring. No idea if this will actually happen but it does provide for interesting speculation.
** Edited by Millpoint at 11/12/2024, 10:18:54 AM
** Edited by Millpoint at 11/12/2024, 10:52:30 AM
** Edited by Millpoint at 11/12/2024, 10:54:16 AM
** Edited by Millpoint at 11/12/2024, 10:55:19 AM
** Edited by Millpoint at 11/13/2024, 4:03:09 AM
** Edited by Millpoint at 11/13/2024, 4:05:32 AM
70 Replies
1y
Remember, FSU to B1G was chalk earlier this year, or was it to the SEC?
(In response to this post by Millpoint)
T
Truthahn
1y
Those must be dropping like a rock. No one is even hate watching them anymore.
(In response to this post by mrcaniac)
1y
They aren't even on the ACCNetwork. Even the Clemson/Citadel game is on the CW so it isn't because FSU is playing an FCS school.
(In response to this post by Truthahn)
I think an adult from the Big Ten called him and told him
that FSU to the B1G ain't happenin' and he best STFU.
Went from "chalk" to "off the board" instantly.
(In response to this post by mrcaniac)
F
Flanker
1y
The ACC needs a contract bump to make everyone happy. This could be a way of putting pressure on ESPN to increase the ACC contract.
I suspect the top schools of the ACC would quickly get invites to the P2 once the ACC has been dissolved but I doubt there are ten open spots in the P2 for former ACC schools. The Big 12 has a few schools that would fit in the footprint of both the SEC and the B1G.
(In response to this post by Millpoint)
1y
Of the ACC. His radio shack setup is a step down from the Finbaums and Dan Patricks of the world.
(In response to this post by Millpoint)
Why listen to the Wayne's World of college football?
(In response to this post by Millpoint)
Conferences are totally FUBAR right now. The powers that be didn't think
think this through. The value taken from a previous conference is not necessarily added to a new conference.
Need to see the playoff play out for a few years before making any decisions IMO.
(In response to this post by Millpoint)
O
ombandit
1y
(In response to this post by Millpoint)
T
Truthahn
1y
But Miami and Duke would apparently bump two of those, but none of the MAG7? And I assume it is not GT (why is GT not in the MAG7?).
So two of Cal, Pitt or Louisville gets the ax in this scenario?
(In response to this post by Millpoint)
Make Conferences Round Robin Again #MCRRA 🧢
Get the hats made up.
In all seriousness. I'd like to see a 12-team conference with 11 conference games, 1 OOC game. And no lame neutral site conference championship game. Either have an outright champion (no CG game at all), or give the first place team a home game in the CG game.
I doubt that this is what Flugaur is getting at, but it should be. Build rivalries and competition. Get rid of cupcakes.
This should be the case for all conferences, not just the ACC. In fact, if every "conference" would do this, you could do less teams and more OOC games if you'd like. But the key is, expand the CFP and get rid of conference title games. Instead of byes, give champions a home game. 16 teams would be a good number.
** Edited by Maroon Baboon at 11/15/2024, 11:54:53 PM
(In response to this post by Millpoint)
1y
(In response to this post by Millpoint)
O
ombandit
1y
(In response to this post by marcbvtgm)
D
daveinop
1y
or whatever it was from the nice guy whose name I can never remember?
(In response to this post by Millpoint)
S
Stech
1y
(In response to this post by daveinop)
D
daveinop
1y
(In response to this post by Stech)
1y
This reminds me of a project I had in business school many years ago. Basically it's a game of where to position your company and products. You have to find the right balance of:
- quantity
- price
- quality
We are not going to beat the P2 on quality. And price is flexible depending on the strategy. So that leaves quantity. To me the best path forward is not by shedding teams. The maximum value is to consolidate the ACC, B12 and PAC (currently 39 total teams) and take advantage of the different states and timezones and types of schools. Not everything has to be luxury. Lots of companies do well by selling large volumes of cheap crap (like ACC football haha).
You could go promotion/relegation, you could do NFL model with lots of variability, you could go hyper regional, you could go public vs private. Lots of options if they were willing to be creative. And that would give the media partners options as well, especially if we make streaming a key component.
(In response to this post by Millpoint)
1y
They could have the same schedule agreement that they have with the ACC right now. Plenty of teams to choose from to have 3-6 games every year.
(In response to this post by HokieAl)
T
TerryD
1y
I wonder what number eleven will be ?
(In response to this post by Millpoint)
1y
I know it's every Big Ten fantasy to add the Irish but ultimately ND will do what's best for ND. He seems to have toned that down a bit from the past.
(In response to this post by TerryD)
1y
Any ND alumnus or big money donor that cuts the big checks to the ND athletic department will tell you the exact same thing. They would rather not have ND football at all than stoop to such a low.
(In response to this post by Millpoint)
Their other sports will play in the Patriot League before joining FB conf
(In response to this post by Baltimore_Hokie)
1y
for then the penny finally drops on the ACC. They'd have never left to fleece the ACC in the first place if they'd have known the 7 Catholic schools were going to split from the AAC football schools and keep all the Big East records and trademarks.
(In response to this post by VaTechHokiesACC)
1y
He was just leveraging it for an ACC partial. His quote was that it would be good for catholism but little else.
(In response to this post by Baltimore_Hokie)
1y
and, therefore, has zero significance today. Also, you've clearly got your quote wrong. It's very clear from the linked ESPN/McMurphy article from the time that non-football ND would have stayed in a Big East that included the Catholic 7 schools:
"Notre Dame intended to stay in the Big East through the 2013-14 season as long as the league's seven Catholic basketball schools remained. But those schools -- DePaul, Georgetown, Marquette, Providence, St. John's, Seton Hall and Villanova -- are expected to announce in the coming days they are leaving the Big East to begin their own league on July 1."
What ND did NOT know when this article was written was that the "new league" those schools were leaving to form was just "the Big East," and would retain all the trademarks and record books from the original league. The remaining football-minded Big East schools (Cincinnati, South Florida, UConn, etc.) ended up selling off their interest in the Big East's trademarks, etc. and formed the AAC, and ND's entire problem was the inclusion of those schools in the Big East to begin with.
While they could grit their teeth and deal with "low brow" schools like WVU and Rutgers when they joined in 1995, ND never made any secret about not wanting to be in a conference with South Florida, Cincinnati, UCF, Louisville, Houston, and that group. But, since ND didn't realize at the time that they would have ultimately ended up with what they wanted anyway, they moved to the ACC.
I've been following all this stuff very closely for almost 40 years now, and not just in the context of where VT was situated at the time. History doesn't repeat itself, but it certainly echoes, which is why it's so important to understand what's come before.
(In response to this post by Sunsetunderground)
1y
(In response to this post by Baltimore_Hokie)
1y
I'd be interested to read the actual quote and about the context, if you could provide a source.
** Edited by Baltimore_Hokie at 11/14/2024, 9:58:14 AM
(In response to this post by Sunsetunderground)
T
Truthahn
1y
(In response to this post by Baltimore_Hokie)
1y
(In response to this post by Truthahn)
T
Truthahn
1y
That way, they could have played whatever FB schedule they wanted. 10 home games, whatever.
(In response to this post by Baltimore_Hokie)
1y
They thought, at the time they entered the ACC, that the Big East was going to be what the AAC is now, and that the private, Catholic basketball schools were going to leave the Big East and start a new conference. So they left, and joined the ACC instead. There's no doubt in my mind that if they had known the Catholic schools were going to retain all the Big East trademarks, records, etc., while also getting rid of the misfit schools like Louisville, South Florida and Cincinnati, they would never have left.
(In response to this post by Truthahn)
S
Stech
1y
So have I got this right? He’s saying the ACC is losing the M7 plus 3, and ESPN is renewing the ACC contract in February? Splain that one Lucy. How do you do both? 🤷♂️
(In response to this post by Millpoint)
2
2hhoop3
1y
the trolls may get lucky and get something right. So far a broken clock is more accurate. The peace and quiet was nice but, now the doors appear open again and the flies flock once again to the latest pile.
(In response to this post by Stech)
S
Stech
1y
for the ACC, and the now Mag 7 plus 3 leaving the ACC. The primary key to a magic trick is diversion, when one of his predictions comes right, he is just going to divert your attention to the one that is right. Hey maybe he pulls a rabbit of his hat and both come true in Feb/2025, and I have to eat the hat, but for now I will stick with eggs and bacon, and maybe a turkey leg too. 😁
(In response to this post by 2hhoop3)
2
2hhoop3
1y
be eating solid food. He is nothing more than a mouthpiece for the B1G spewing what they feed him for their varying propaganda objectives.
(In response to this post by Stech)
1y
But if The ACC gets a majority voting bloc among themselves they will simply disappear the conference.
(In response to this post by Stech)
S
Stech
1y
(In response to this post by 33laszlo99)
1y
scrap the contract and try to skim the best of the lot for The SEC. Now I think they will renew the contract and try to keep it away from the streamers. Also, if there is a dissolution and the big money comes calling, maybe ESPN can spend enough to grab, say, UNC and UVA while the streamers fight over the others. The streamers will fight over the new conference, but the schools will need to unify if they want to take advantage of it. These new media companies are likely in-the-dark about how much revenue they will earn and how much they can comfortably pay the conference.
(In response to this post by Stech)
T
Truthahn
1y
If the remaining teams get to keep their ACC contract money, is there harm to sue over? The idea then would be to give some bonus to the MAG7 side eventually? I assume the MAG7 would require more assurances that another split could not happen, with say Clemson and FSU leaving.
I dunno, this one makes my head hurt.
(In response to this post by 33laszlo99)
S
Stech
1y
will talk about the one he got right, and tell you things changed on the one I got wrong, but I did tell you….
So come here to see the future, because I have the pipeline to those that know. 🔮🤣
(In response to this post by 33laszlo99)
1y
There are different ways to get from point A to B. This seems like the fastest and most efficient path. I believe a "financially competitive" ACC looks as follows:
Definitely In:
VT / UVA (joined at the hip)
UNC/NSCT (joined at the hip)
FSU
Clemson
Miami
GT
SMU
Duke
Definitely Out:
BC
WF
Stanford
Marginal:
Pitt
Syracuse
Cal
Louisville
(In response to this post by Millpoint)
1y
And, yes, I am well aware what their current conference record is. Wake Forest and Boston College have had good conference records before too; it doesn't mean they bring anything to the table.
The California teams have no business being mentioned here either. SMU is a financial cancer that the average person couldn't pinpoint on a map, and Cal and Stanford are both completely worthless football programs. And, the major kicker is that all three are completely isolated across the country from everyone else. It has never made any sense. The three new additions remain a colossal mistake made during a panic.
** Edited by Baltimore_Hokie at 11/12/2024, 4:16:38 PM
(In response to this post by VT ChemE 1986)
While I like your 10 very much, I wonder if that is enough time zones for
the national streamers.
The streamers, who are usually just committing to one conference package, want coast to coast coverage/interest since their customer base is national.
(In response to this post by VT ChemE 1986)
1y
you have to dissolve the ACC?
I think you guys are nuts. Do you honestly think you can conjure up a conference to compete with the SEC or the BIG TV ratings and media deals?
Do you hear yourselves?
** Edited by Big12 guy at 11/12/2024, 3:22:13 PM
(In response to this post by VT ChemE 1986)
1y
intelligent person would - as trimming the useless chaff that nobody cares about from the conference so that the programs that people do care about can be more financially viable. You could get rid of 8-9 ACC members right now, and the conference likely wouldn't lose a dime in valuation. All that Wake Forest and the rest are, are mouths to feed.
And, before you start turning on the water works and talking about loyalty to conference brethren - it's only a matter of time before the SEC and B1G figure out a way to cut off their worthless eaters too.
(In response to this post by Big12 guy)
1y
It's just not in alignment with reality. Virginia Tech is not on the same plane as Boston College (located in a pro sports city with zero fanbase and zero marketability) and Wake Forest (tiny, private religious school that's the 4th draw out of 4 other schools in the same state and conference, that also has a tiny stadium and very few living alumni.)
(In response to this post by VPI 1924)
1y
decides to go .500% in the conference), at what point does a program go from having "value" to becoming a "useless chaff?"
(In response to this post by Baltimore_Hokie)
1y
that W-L record on a given year is not synonymous with a football program's brand value. Given your post, it certainly doesn't appear to be taking, despite all evidence to the contrary.
It's not hard to understand and accept the notion that FSU can go 0-12 in football any given season and that brand would still be worth exponentially more than a 11-1 Wake Forest or SMU.
(In response to this post by VTHokie2000)
1y
years. At least its value now is not at the same level it was in 1980s.
(In response to this post by Baltimore_Hokie)
1y
versus what VT gets. It will open your eyes to the disparity in perceived value, even when they have been hovering around .500 and haven't accomplished anything of note since the 1990s.
Once the media outlets decide you're important, you're important, and when they decide you're not, then you're not. Any viability VT has remaining is coasting on the fumes of this principle.
(In response to this post by VTHokie2000)
1y
are the other blue bloods in the Blue Blood Super League. After all you did propose that eventually the conferences will look to trim the less desirable schools from the conference/league. Once that happens then every year blue blood programs will finish dead last in the conference/league because those will be the only teams competing in the conference/league. If the same 1-3 blue bloods occupy the cellar year after year, then at some point people will start to call those blue blood programs the new version of Vandy, Wake, BC, Northwestern, or Kansas. The reason people will be making those comparisons is because the only "value" they add to the conference/league is finishing dead last or near the bottom of the conference/league every year.
(In response to this post by Baltimore_Hokie)
1y
My point was that Nebraska can go 0-12 for a decade straight, and still command more eyeballs, and therefore be worth more money from a brand standpoint, than Virginia Tech. The B1G would never get rid of Nebraska, because they put significant cash on the barrelhead year after year, whether they're 0-12 or 12-0.
When the culling starts, and it will, the teams that will go will be the teams that could go 10-2 or 11-1 for 7 or 8 years running and, even then, nobody would really care to watch them play unless they were playing Ohio State (i.e., Northwestern, Maryland, etc.)
(In response to this post by VTHokie2000)
1y
desirable programs. However, if a conference or league opens the door for this decision, then what is there to prevent the conference/league from doing it again at a later date? Hence why my reply asked the question "When does a (blue blood) program go from having value to not having value?"
If FSU, Nebraska, and Auburn spend a decade (or two) jockeying with each other on the order of the bottom 3 places in the conference/league, then their "value" could drop significantly. At least I wouldn't assume it is equal to what it is now or whatever point of time you want to use for the comparison. If a blue blood becomes a program that is "just another mouth to feed," then are they really that much different than how people view Wake, BC, Vandy, Purdue, Northwestern, etc. in this era of college football? One reason a conference/league may decide to not cull any teams is because they need someone to play the role of the Tampa Bay Buccaneers or LA Clippers and they don't want a blue blood program in that role.
(In response to this post by Baltimore_Hokie)
1y
They will get a large increase in media money, which will provide the revenue needed to pay players. This must get underway soon because there will be a new playoff format created for the 2026 season. In the new playoff, The "reborn" conference would be richer, leaner, and stronger, with no BC, Wake, or Calford.
While Yormark wants a wide footprint for The XII, Bubba C. wants a regional conference. (MSU might be out; add in Louisville or Syracuse). The media partner will almost certainly be a streamer. The new media partner, like ESPN, will be unhappy with three schools in NC and with five in NC & VA combined.
(In response to this post by Big12 guy)
1y
with the Big12. But before that can happen the deadweight of the ACC has to be cast off.
(In response to this post by Big12 guy)
T
Truthahn
1y
Assuming the "Yes" votes all have a separate ironclad agreement to form a new conference, with a hardened GOR, etc., then I could see that happening. However, you could probably only jettison 3 schools by dissolution, leaving 14 (I assume ND is gone in this scenario). Not much of a makeover, IMO, but maybe worth doing for the Yeses.
** Edited by Truthahn at 11/12/2024, 12:14:22 PM
(In response to this post by Millpoint)
1y
conference. It would need to be covert. (very difficult with more than two parties, but not impossible).
And once the conference is gone, there are NO members to worry about. All schools are free to make whatever agreements they wish to make, including the involvement of schools who were not members of the original ACC i.e. USF.
(In response to this post by Truthahn)
S
Stech
1y
reporting that ESPN is renewing the ACC contract in February. I guess both are possible, but how probable is it that both are happening?
** Edited by Stech at 11/12/2024, 1:10:27 PM
(In response to this post by Truthahn)
1y
50% plus one under NC law.
(In response to this post by Truthahn)
1y
(In response to this post by Millpoint)
1y
(In response to this post by VT ChemE 1986)
1y
(In response to this post by Millpoint)