The click bait over here in flyover is pushing an ACC
B12 merger again. Any of you guys here anything credible?
64 Replies
7mo
Eastern 10 with PSU, MD and RU. JMO
(In response to this post by Big12 guy)
7mo
are now in the territory of "every man for himself."
The SEC has a serious desire for UNC and UVa. But UVa is not a sure thing for SEC; and I suspect that UNC no longer has any bargaining power for tag-alongs. We're past that.
(In response to this post by MrFantastic!)
7mo
The other 6 to the SEC to form an ACC-esque division, possibly with Duke too.
I could also see the B1G and SEC going to 20, 24, 28, or 30 schools each and breaking away from the NCAA eventually.
(In response to this post by MrFantastic!)
7mo
Those two were added under the old rules where markets and cable boxes mattered. both do still have school size in their favor (RU 50k, MD 40k). But both are definitely not adding to the brand value and bringing lots of tv viewers. They are basically filler content for the Big Ten Network.
If the BIG votes to add some new brand name schools, then I would not be shocked if they also vote to expel the dead weight and do a straight swap.
(In response to this post by MrFantastic!)
7mo
provoke a response. But this one of yours was quite surprising. I'm curious about your thinking.
Do you think The B1G regrets the addition of MD/RU? Would the conference be improved by the absence of these two? If The ACC added MD/RU, would you disapprove?
By unofficial sources they are both moneymakers because of the massive and prosperous ad markets they represent.
(In response to this post by HokieAl)
7mo
My personal view is that the BIG is probably happy as they are (top in money, good national exposure to both coasts, large schools that generate a lot of eyes and butts in seats). So they probably don't regret MD and RU at all. Plus, MD and RU provide basically guaranteed wins every year for the top brands. Those schools are getting paid nicely to lose, which benefits both sides. So I don't think they want to shed teams.
BUT, the BIG is also part of the P2 and caught up in all discussion, and planning, and speculation about the P2 breaking off or having their own tier or getting additional PE money. They can't avoid being part of that higher level topic. And unfortunately, the P2 concept relies on big brands constantly having big important matchups (NFL model). So teams like MD, RU, NW are at risk of getting flagged on a spreadsheet as not worth keeping in potential future P2 models. Again, this is pure speculation, but carrying known information forward to anticipate potential outcomes.
The BIG doesn't have to make any hard choices yet. But there might come a time that they have to reassess and adjust if the P2 concept becomes something more concrete.
EDIT: I didn't answer your ACC question. Honestly I don't know what I would think of the ACC adding them. The ACC has so many issues right now that there is no easy answer. Plus I'm biased because I want VT to be within a structure that is good at football. And the current ACC is not good at managing football.
** Edited by HokieAl at 12/18/2025, 5:12:46 PM
(In response to this post by 33laszlo99)
M
Marooned
7mo
Where the rich get richer and the Rutgers of the world will be even less competitive. It may become so costly to stay in the arms race that schools will cull themselves from the herd out of necessity. What would that look like? It will probably be organizing a lower tier group for football - this is where those folks who advocate for a Premiere League style promotion/ relegation system may get their wish, at the conference level.
(In response to this post by HokieAl)
7mo
FB program and similarly on "Brand."
BTW, I anticipate that media players will soon have much more influence in realignment than ever. And that is why realignment may be far from over.
I'm watching what happens with the Paramount vs Netflix duel for WBD. If Paramount wins, they will start raining hell in college sports content.
** Edited by 33laszlo99 at 12/18/2025, 5:47:42 PM
(In response to this post by HokieAl)
7mo
i.e. Condition to get UNC get NC state, so condition for UVA VT.
The key is all th MAG 7 or nothing.
(In response to this post by Sunsetunderground)
7mo
otherwise, why would they bother?
(In response to this post by MrFantastic!)
7mo
I can see a day when about 48 left and all get same. Why? Because Bluebloods will figure they still get the easy way.
(In response to this post by Big12 guy)
7mo
Some will likely get P2 tickets, the rest will accept Big 12 invites, and the ACC will morph into a G5 football conference with a few prominent basketball programs.
(In response to this post by Big12 guy)
7mo
(In response to this post by Baltimore_Hokie)
7mo
(In response to this post by MrFantastic!)
7mo
still have the same problem as the P2's.
I'm not sure how you include a Houston, UCF, and a couple of others if it is the B12. I'm not seeing the money from some of the B12 schools, and as you have found out first hand in the ACC, if programs are not investing, it brings down the entire conference.
(In response to this post by Baltimore_Hokie)
7mo
programs in this footprint forever. ESPN cannot entirely stop them, so they will need to minimize the damage by relocating their most valued schools in The SEC. It indicates The ACC will lose a substantial chunk of their top membership. The SEC is not eager to expand (only 2?), but it will be necessary.
Currently The Big XII is shared by ESPN (primary partner) and Fox (26 FB & 63 MBB) so that seems to satisfy both P2's. The expansion focus remains on ACC schools.
The next consideration: will the residual ACC schools wish to continue as a group, or will some Louisville, Pitt, etc. and the three Western members choose to hook-up with Big XII?
The Big XII may, or may not seek ACC properties, who knows? But Big XII schools might be safe from poaching unless The SEC sees a need to enlarge their footprint in the West or Fox feels a need to get access to more Texas-based content. SEC targets could be Az, Az St, Colo, Kansas. Utah makes no secret of their hopes of B1G membership.
Watch-out if WBD ends up in Paramount hands, CBS has been itching to grab college content (maybe buying-up Fox inventory). It will almost certainly accelerate realignment.
(In response to this post by Big12 guy)
7mo
Rights to their respective conferences for a period of time. There is no "defensive " move of one media company against the other.
If FOX wants SEC games, the will get a shot in 2034. If ESPN wants to air Big 10 games, they can bid on them in 2030.
As you state, there WILL be other players in this sector. The conferences will add if they can get the media dollars - full stop. If it doesn't bring in more than they are making now, they will not expand.
ESPN doesn't want to pay more, so why in the world would they want the SEC to get more valuable? Same for FOX. The idea that this is one network against another is fleeting, and defies common sense.
(In response to this post by 33laszlo99)
7mo
Week", things changed. CBS bought-in to The B1G media deal hoping to make up for what they lost. They have made it known that they are disappointed with their place in the pecking order for top games. I believe Paramount intends to correct the situation by acquiring WBD.
With the fast-approaching era of outside investment in conferences and internation streaming by media companies, look for long-term GoR's and performance-based media payouts. Realignment will occur for the next few years. After these new arrangements are in place realignment will become prohibitively expensive.
As for ESPN and The BigXII, ESPN allowed Fox to take 26 FB games because ESPN did not have enough broadcast windows required to keep all of the content for themselves. Streaming will solve that problem. Disney will need help (possibly Netflix, who is bidding against Paramount for WBD).
(In response to this post by Big12 guy)
6mo
Friday: Primetime & Late Night
Saturday: Noon, Afternoon, Primetime & Late Night
A hundred media companies can put-out their content in these windows simultaneously but they are sharing the audience. We always check for the count of viewers after a weekend of games, which is fine. But looking at the "share %" of the greater (total) audience matters as well, and so do Nielsen MSA's.
I think that, right now, TV execs are throwing their weight around like never before for sports content. They are more viciously competitive than ever. The battle of the P2 conferences and talk of a P1 will be replaced by the struggle among the "P" networks.
The possibility of a P1 conference will come up again when the current bulk audience "ages-out" (boomers), and sports content loses value.
(In response to this post by Big12 guy)
7mo
own weight for the long term? If not, then they could eventually break up into smaller conferences because the money may no longer be there for them as a super conference.
(In response to this post by Big12 guy)
7mo
the realignment moves to date have not been to balance competition, doing what's right for the student athlete, tradition, or to be fair. It all comes down to money, and if being in the B12 or ACC gives you the best chance to compete, then so be it.
It's no different for the P2 teams. While a Mississippi State (example) does get more media money than all not in the P2, their budget shortfalls are higher than many in the ACC or B12.
Currently the conferences are the ones negotiating the media deals, so consolidation will continue until that dynamic changes.
(In response to this post by VTHokie2000)
7mo
do with whether you thought the Big XII, ACC, and whatever other conference (currently existing or new) that ends up in the group just right below the P2 group will see their future media contracts grow at the current rate vs. slow down or even stop growing because the networks have decided to reallocate that money into the P2 contracts. A lot of people see DI college athletics continue its shift to a P2 World. Now whether that is just in football, the 2 revenue sports, or for all sports is TBD. What does that mean for conferences like the ACC and Big XII going forward if they don't end up becoming 1 of the P2s? Particularly if they push in the next few years to 20-24 members before the "P2 World" Era truly begins. Did the conference just find itself in the same position as Wiley E. Coyote has been in numerous times hovering in the air above a canyon (right before gravity takes effect) because he zigged when the Roadrunner zagged?
(In response to this post by Big12 guy)
7mo
for there not to be a competitive media deal if they were to consolidate into a "3rd" conference.
Will the P2 get more? As of now, they are indeed getting the ratings, and THAT is what the media companies are paying for.
Do the top 1/2 of the ACC and B12 get decent ratings? They do, and the top 3 brands of the ACC with ND certainly seem to be doing better in eyeballs than the K-States of the world. That does not mean that K-State does not get the numbers. The VT faithful know full well that when you are competitive, and playing for something (title, national championship, playoff bid), then ratings come along with that success.
We are imbalanced currently because the BIG and SEC got big time blue bloods to go to their conferences, and the media contracts that go with those numbers. The ACC is stuck with their current contract, and it has yet to be seen whether the addition of the 4 corners will help the B12 in the next round of negotiations.
What I do know, is that if there were deflections from the top 1/2 of the ACC to the B12, there would be a much better chance of getting a contract that is closer to the P2. Would that be a distant 3rd, or would it be close enough to actually compete on the revenue side? We may find out, but that is pure speculation.
(In response to this post by VTHokie2000)
7mo
Also, I'm not sure the networks are just paying for TV ratings. I do think the networks, at least ESPN, may be basing the "value" on how much gambling activity a conference or school generates for them. So in terms of gambling, how much gambling dollars does a K-State game generate on any given day? If it is peanuts compared to Miss State, then it could be a reason ESPN (or Fox) may want raise (to borrow a poker term) how much it invests in the P2s compared to that next tier. It may not be the right move to make for the long-term because it rubs too many people the wrong way. However, it may still be the right business decision to make at the time which should be the driving factor here.
(In response to this post by Big12 guy)
7mo
a Texas bring in more gamblers than Miss State? I would assume so as there are more Texas fans.
I think the gambling money however, comes down more to the casual fan than the true blooded VT fan (as an example). Vegas is looking to add a NBA franchise - so gambling is a part of things, like it or not. How much that drives eyeballs is beyond my paygrade, but let's assume for the moment that it's a large number.
The B12 and ACC are in some pretty large markets, and don't think for one second that the passion of the fans, and the money of the gamblers are not paying attention. They will get solid ratings no matter what the P2 does.
(In response to this post by VTHokie2000)
7mo
by conference. I suspect it does exist somewhere though and someone is using it to make decisions with. If the various sports talk shows on TV and the radio spend majority of their time focused on certain conferences during their "gambling segments," then it could suggest the data shows those conferences are seeing the most significant action. Then again, I am assuming the network doesn't have any other potential biases that could influence their business decisions.
(In response to this post by Big12 guy)
7mo
very easy for someone to place a parlay bet involving other games and that person doesn't have to watch those other games. Hence why I suggested in an earlier post that gambling activity may not always be tied to TV ratings.
(In response to this post by Big12 guy)
7mo
go back to the street, where it avoids the pesky taxes and "glamour" appeal of corporate operations. The Mob can still capture players, but it would not be necessary by the top levels of the system. Small-time actors will always try to run local operations. But they can be "disenfranchised" by the enforcement hierarchy.
Too much sports programming is contaminated by betting advise. Let's forbid discussion on the air of point spreads, odds, and anything to do with gambling. Forbid publishing this info as part of schedules.
Most activities that help corporations make profit; I'm in favor of. But this one capitalist endeavor I believe belongs on a landline phone or a stroll to the corner bar. It worked very well for a very long time.
(In response to this post by VTHokie2000)
7mo
in any sports betting of any kind.
(In response to this post by 33laszlo99)
H
HOO86
7mo
Much preferred to ACC-Big East merger. There was push back, but since we are both national it works for me.
(In response to this post by Big12 guy)
S
Stech
7mo
makes sense. I would like to hold on to a P4 and expand the playoff. However, if we end up with a Super League, (I don’t think all the SEC and B1G schools make it in the Super League)but, some ACC and B12 make it.
PS The interesting subtle things that just happened, is Notre Dame playing the victim card, the bashing of the G6 by Saban and Finebaum, and talk of more expansion seems to have lit a fire under the ACC, B1G, B12 and G6. All of a sudden they don’t want to roll over and play dead to the SEC and ND.
(In response to this post by HOO86)
7mo
is currently understood. As long as the conferences can negotiate their own media deals, it will never make sense to trade that away for this mythical league.
I do think however, that it is very possible that withing the playoff format, it is entirely possible that they separate football, and put in a minimum $ figure for football budgets. That would allow some to voluntarily step aside (the entire MAC?), and force those that can not raise the money (for whatever reason) to not be included in the playoffs.
A new "super league" is too erroneous and expensive to form, and I don't see how they negotiate the basketball tournament and all other non rev sports. Even the P2 doesn't want that IMO.
It took a while, but VT, TT, BYU, Utah, UNC, IU, and others are finding ways to get the money to compete at the highest levels. Those that can't, are hanging on be a thread (ISU comes to mind).
One can look around, and see who are making the big investments, and who are not.
(In response to this post by Stech)
M
Marooned
7mo
I’m not so sure, particularly now in the era of uneven payouts and preferential treatment in scheduling games with ND.
(In response to this post by Big12 guy)
7mo
could very well make the "ACC Blue Bloods" happy enough to stay until 2036. I don't think it's automatic that the ACC implodes, but it certainly "feels" like it.
With all of the recent drama concerning ND - because mostly, they are treated differently than the rest of the conference, does not bode well for uneven distributions. If the ACC can make it work, and live with "All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others", then they will be laying the groundwork for other conferences or "super leagues" to do the same.
My time on this board has shown me that the vast majority of VT fans will not like the unequal revenue sharing - especially on the metrics they will be using to determine the amounts. It's my guess, that VT fans will not be the only ones. Imagine Louisville being treated as the red headed stepchild so that whining FSU can get more money so that "they" can compete with the P2.
IMO, the ACC needs to have another sit down with ESPN, and open up at least the secondary ACC content to other media companies. The ACCN is not turning out to be the answer as it currently sits, so maybe thinking outside the box to generate more revenue is needed.
For example - make it the ACC/Big East network. Or, the ACC/B12 network. Anything to bring more revenue to the ACC schools.
** Edited by Big12 guy at 12/20/2025, 11:01:33 AM
(In response to this post by Marooned)
M
Marooned
7mo
ESPN wants more marketable content. So going to nine conference games per school plus one non-conference P4 game should help. Perhaps some kind of skills competition programming should also be added.
I also think the ACC should look at cultivating ongoing marketing and broadcasting opportunities in Canada. This might include exhibitions in MBB, WBB and various other sports against Canadian university teams. It might also include pursuing week zero neutral site games in the Toronto and Montreal CFL stadiums (reconfigured to NCAA requirements of course).
(In response to this post by Big12 guy)
S
Stech
7mo
It will dwarf what the traditional football powers of the SEC and B1G can get for them.
(In response to this post by Big12 guy)
7mo
give the Super League antitrust exemption. Particularly if schools leave the Big Ten and SEC to form the new league and the schools not selected to participated in the league remain in their current conferences. I guess whatever schools are left in the P2 conferences will come crashing back to Earth like Icarus.
(In response to this post by Stech)
7mo
preventing schools from competing at the highest level of collegiate athletics? Plus, if you look at the current requirements for schools to compete at the DI level or DI-FBS subdivision if we want to just talk DI football, then the bar is pretty low.
(In response to this post by Big12 guy)
7mo
a private entity, and it seems to me, that they are already setting the rules and limiting inclusion.
For the sake of argument, we are talking FBS level football only, as they are the only ones with access to the playoffs currently. (there is no anti trust suite that I know of currently).
** Edited by Big12 guy at 12/18/2025, 10:05:55 AM
(In response to this post by VTHokie2000)
7mo
same time. Here's what I mean by that statement. Currently the 5 highest ranked conference champions receive an automatic bid. Most people assume that to mean most years it will be the 4 P4 champions and 1 G6 champion (including the Pac-12 in this group for discussion sake). This year 2 G6 champions got into the field which supports the idea that the Gs aren't "excluded" from participating in the tournament. If this ever went before a judge, then they could argue there is nothing to say in a given year that all 5 automatic bids could go to a G conference. Likewise, an argument could be made that there is nothing legally preventing the G conferences from receiving any or all of the at-large bids. Hence why the rules were written in such a way to never explicitly define which conferences would receive the automatic bid because there are less automatic bids currently available than FBS conferences. It may be semantics, but legally that may be the only thing that matters here.
(In response to this post by Big12 guy)
7mo
Why merge leagues and bring along non-contributors like Boston College or schools with a problematic history like Baylor or schools that just don’t have the profile?
It would be so much smarter to form a league of a certain size (18? 20? 24? 32?) that is composed of the best of the ACC and Big 12 and perhaps some P2 castoffs (Maryland? Mississippi State?) to have a best of the rest league.
The priority should be collecting schools that actually put fans in the seats. Because attendance is the best indicator of a program that is apt to draw television viewers.
(In response to this post by Big12 guy)
V
Vippie1
7mo
and the moneymen telling you what the contract payoffs would look like, for example, say 24 selected teams , divided into 12 in the East and 12 in the West (with maybe 6 team divisions) and some NFLish type set-up for football scheduling, playoffs etc. And then figure out how you want to work hoops and other sports.
Once you know the end result (the $$$) - the 24 "members" work about getting rid of the legal and political hurdles (i.e. jettison the BCs/ WFs etc.) . Some straight ahead merger as is pointless IMO.
(In response to this post by Tailgate Guru)
7mo
members in any conference. With the new realities of the PAC implosion, there are certainly some weak links in the B12. The weak links in the ACC are evident as well.
24 is a decent number, but I don't think we go back to large "divisions". Go to small "divisions" or pods. 4-6 teams. That increases the flexibility to schedule the top teams against each other for ratings purposes, retains traditional rivals, keeps travel to a minimum with non revs, and could be an extremely competitive "conference". A win, win, win for those included, and those that are not? They still have their basketball and/or academics to fall back on.
(In response to this post by Vippie1)
V
Vippie1
7mo
and turn it into a AFL or ABA -like renegade league with its own TV contracts and championships, essentially locking the NCAA /P2 out of certain geographies. Ending the current NCAA monopoly would reduce the P2s ability to negotiate lion shares of TV agreements.
And you can have your own rules on and off the field. It would create a high level of chaos and instability for the P2. Actually it would be great fun if it ever happened! IMO just a realistic threat of something like that ever happening would make the P2 support a much more equitable sharing of the sugar with the ACC and B12.
(In response to this post by Big12 guy)
7mo
Otherwise the risk is ending up like the PAC and causing your own demise. It would be a huge risk for a big reward.
(In response to this post by Vippie1)
7mo
I have no clue if anyone would be willing to have a football only alliance. But if they did then all the academic alignment and geography alignment doesn’t matter. It’s becomes much easier to manage a big entity if it is just football.
(In response to this post by Tailgate Guru)
E
EDGEMAN
7mo
Include every school that puts 60K+ fans in the stands for football, and shows significant fan support on the road.
Any school's fan base doesn't care about sports can join together with like minded fan bases in their own conference.
(In response to this post by HokieAl)
7mo
(In response to this post by EDGEMAN)
E
EDGEMAN
7mo
(In response to this post by ancient alien 2018)
7mo
who gets left out.
Let the P2 keep their Purdue's and Mississippi States.
(In response to this post by Tailgate Guru)
7mo
And likely get more playoff money. I also see no world where Stanford associates with West Virginia. If you thought the ACC was academically elitist. If there is any merger I think the academic schools form an Ivy league at the D1 level. Stanford, Duke, Cal, Wake, BC, Tulane, Rice, Georgetown, Villanova etc
(In response to this post by Big12 guy)
7mo
Stanford associate with WVU of all schools? We see what that got the PAC for sure.
(In response to this post by Sunsetunderground)
7mo
Highly reduced distributions. Even associating with BYU which is an excellent school was always a non starter with Stanford. If that doesn't tell you how they view most of the Big 12 teams I dont know what would.
(In response to this post by Big12 guy)
7mo
made it crystal clear how they feel. We are the truck stop conference after all, and frankly, as a fan, I'd like to keep it that way. We are just fine with beer in a can out here.
** Edited by Big12 guy at 12/18/2025, 8:21:32 AM
(In response to this post by Sunsetunderground)
7mo
(In response to this post by Big12 guy)