How many think 75M + *20M VT gift & Franklin/Recruiting gives VT a P2 seat
or at least a great chance now? If so, why? If not, why not?
*A few months ago, and hearing another ~20M coming.
50 Replies
1mo
(In response to this post by Stech)
1mo
(In response to this post by Stech)
2
2hhoop3
1mo
question/point? Seems to me the question is whether the money is generating results. How did TT's year stack up against their Big 12 brothers and other P4 peers? Winning and being highly competitive builds demand for a brand.
(In response to this post by UTPr0sim)
1mo
That is why the B1G expanded, because Fox told them to do it. If Disney tells Sankey that the SEC needs to sure up their northern front, they will likely expand into North Carolina and Virginia.
I think the more likely domino will be the implosion of the conferences, especially for football. That makes making Tech competitive on the national scale so imperative, especially in football. That is a train that we cannot afford to miss at the station or we will never recover.
(In response to this post by Stech)
1mo
Once that's a regular occurrence, we can start worrying about begging to regularly play teams with way more expensive rosters.
(In response to this post by Stech)
1mo
If P2 is the goal, then the main question is why? What do we want to get out of the P2? Is it the money? The tv exposure? The conference brand? Or the matchups and schools we would get to play against?
I think the media and public (and I'm guilty of this as well) focus too much on the differences in media money between conferences. If we really dig down into the specifics of comparing schools and their revenue streams, we can really isolate the challenge for VT and others.
VT can't control the ACC actions or image. So we can set that aside.
VT can control their OOC schedules. And we can control our ability to win games. Those things can get us tv exposure, matchups with good football opponents, and access to the playoffs where those two things are the main focus.
The money helps us get there (coaches, facilities, etc.). But right now too much of our money is controlled by others (ACC distributions, NCAA distributions, ACC media money). The best part of these massive donations is that they are completely within the VT ecosystem and known values over time. This is one of the areas that we need to focus our growth in order to improve to P2 levels.
As a comparison, look at VT 2023 revenue compared to Tennessee. It's contributions, ticket sales, and licensing/sponsorships where we get crushed in comparison vs the top programs.
** Edited by HokieAl at 6/8/2026, 12:16:36 PM
(In response to this post by Stech)
M
Marooned
1mo
Buzz about the program leading to increased viewership and better bowl pairings/CFP appearances will bring in more conference revenue to VT, and pull funds from other possible P2 targets. Both will help VT’s chances of being invited (assuming of course that there is such a thing when that time comes).
(In response to this post by Stech)
1mo
of a hurry to get out of the ACC than I was a year ago. We might be trending toward a situation where it might not be much difference for a top tier ACC or BigXII program than it is for a bottom feeder in the P2.
Sure, if a courier arrived today with a B1G invite, I would take it in a heartbeat. But I'm more confident of VT prospects without a P2 invite than I was recently.
(In response to this post by Marooned)
M
Marooned
1mo
that can be controlled. Even the AAU membership seems like an arbitrary milestone. While achieving their metrics is beneficial, an invitation may not immediately follow.
(In response to this post by Maroon Baboon)
1mo
they will not go to uneven conference distributions. They don't need too. However, if there is a quality school like a Utah that will accept a permanently smaller % of the media distribution, that, IMO, may happen.
** Edited by Big12 guy at 6/8/2026, 6:47:21 PM
(In response to this post by Maroon Baboon)
E
EDGEMAN
1mo
The bigger, more successful schools want more money, and the easiest way to get that is to take it from the less successful schools in their conferences.
(In response to this post by Maroon Baboon)
1mo
most here are expecting (P-2 expansion, football only conferences/leagues,...). From what I've been noticing the past 6-12 months, most of the ACC schools are investing more into football. Miami appears to be finally back. Tech football is on the rise. Georgia Tech, Louisville, SMU are all improving. FSU still has great potential despite their recent shortcomings. Clemson is doing well in recruiting and it seems like they are getting their groove back. NIL money seems to be increasing throughout the ACC. UNC, Duke and UVA have the potential to outspend even the SEC schools in NIL money. Even Cal and Stanford are investing. Maybe everyone in the ACC is doing so to get a P-2 bid, but what happens if the ACC suddenly has 5, 6 or 7 football teams in the weekly Top 25? Winning seems to solve a multitude of problems in college athletics. Is it still possible that the ACC improves so much in football in the next 4-5 years that they become a Power 3 conference? Maybe I've been listening to Josh Pate more than I should be. ;)
(In response to this post by Stech)
1mo
If VT starts actually winning big and gets back on the national scene, and during this time, if the school can get AAU status, I think these things will be more important.
WRT to 75m, whoever gave that gift is the Real MVP.
Side note: I don'y think much realignment will happen soon because so many other things are in flux. Until all of that is settled, processed and implemented for a while, then maybe after that.
(In response to this post by Stech)
1mo
SEC.
I think our best chance is if it goes to a new P1 with huge financial backing. Maybe 36 schools involved? That way, the SEC and B1G won’t need to jettison their weak links. Their weak links will simply not receive invites to the new P1 league.
(In response to this post by Stech)
1mo
That alone should give everyone pause to permanent realignment winners and losers being picked in a boardroom.
So I think we all owe IU and Cignetti our gratitude.
And this is why I favor a fluid relegation and promotion system.
(In response to this post by Femoyer Hokie)
M
Marooned
1mo
Just ask the Ducks and Huskies.
(In response to this post by Maroon Baboon)
V
Vippie1
1mo
Congressional action seems inevitable and the purpose of any SEC threats is really about leverage- negotiating the most advantageous deal .
End result will slow conference realignment to a crawl and but leave the SEC and B1G with some built in degree of economic advantages that will be grudgingly acceptable to the ACC/B12 and the rest.
I think that is where all this ends if I'm reading tea leaves correctly.
(In response to this post by Stech)
1mo
Superconference.
I don't see things your way. This looks like an "ideal" course for VT and The ACC. There may be more action that you are hoping for, sooner and mor explosive.
(In response to this post by Vippie1)
1mo
place before Texas went to the SEC. Or, if you want to go back further, before Maryland left for the B1G and A&M and Mizzou left for the SEC.
(In response to this post by Vippie1)
2
2hhoop3
1mo
have been riding the coattails and visions of their predecessors(Slive and Delaney) but, they are now in a market where their options are dwindling and they have their schools screaming for more money and the networks demanding more inventory and scheduling flexibility. It appears the BIG has more options with more partners while the SEC is limited with ESPN/ABC.
(In response to this post by Vippie1)
1mo
need to grow the footprint more than he is comfortable with.
As for these B1G and SEC Commissioners, they are media-money-crackheads. They will be told what to do. And they will be well paid to do it.
(In response to this post by 2hhoop3)
1mo
While I hate the current configuration of the B1G, I must admit, It is on both coasts, and in the top 3 media markets. The SEC is in none of those media markets. The B1G can own late night on Saturdays.
SEC is counting on Southern passion to carry the day, and perhaps it will. But the deck is stacked against them.
If I am the SEC, I am looking to get into NC and VA, but also the west. I'd start in AZ.
(In response to this post by 33laszlo99)
1mo
(In response to this post by Maroon Baboon)
V
Vippie1
1mo
with a world where all div 1 collectively negotiates media rights , like the NFL, because that is how you maximize revs.
The thorny issue of course is how do you devide those massive revenues. I think they will still do so via conference based on complex formulas which will somewhat reward based on ratings . Obviously the B1G and SEC will still payout more but may kick back enough to the rest for the benefit from 1) a bigger pie and 2) better stability and industry peace.
(In response to this post by 2hhoop3)
1mo
the membership. Entry into their market is no cakewalk. Envision the NFL with 140 teams. Better?
Here's an issue I haven't seen discussed: Revenue is revenue. Money is money. If Congress sees fit to pool media money and control the distribution, why not do the same with ticket sales, concessions, parking, merch, and hey, why not NIL cash? Afterall, a dollar is just a dollar.
Does keeping score produce unfair outcomes? Let's find a "fair" way to reallocate points.
(In response to this post by Vippie1)
1mo
share a single red cent with G6 peasants. Too steep and slippery a slope.
(In response to this post by Vippie1)
1mo
sports? I ask because a majority of the non-revenue sports sponsored at the NCAA level are depended, some cases heavily depended, upon the G6s, DIIs, and DIIIs to have enough sponsored teams to qualify as a NCAA sport.
(In response to this post by 33laszlo99)
V
Vippie1
1mo
Congress, like it or not, will drive the end game- to me that is increasingly clear.
I just did a quick cursory look at the schools in the P4- the ACC/B12 combo is 20 states, 40 senators, the SEC/B1G is I think 26 states, 52 senators. However remember several states overlap between the two camps. And then there are the states that in theory have no dog in the fight (except the G6).
The bottom line is for any consensus on legislation to be enacted it will have to satisfy both camps (and possibly the G6 states too) . So it will push them towards long term cooperation. Again, it isn't "sharing" per se, it is the pooling media rights. The devil will be in the details on how you split the revs up but ultimately it will end up with the Ohio States and Alabamas having some revenue advantage, just not the predatory monopoly that they may want.
(In response to this post by 33laszlo99)
1mo
among P4 conferences and "maybe" G6. The argument for lopsided revenue for P2 vs P4 can be made by G6, FCS, Div 2, and Div 3. The current system is not "fair" to those schools either. But Cody C. is not advocating for them. Doing so does not benefit his school, so why bother; screw 'em.
The P2 two will withdraw from the NCAA. They have been studying and planning for this for a long time. They probably aren't ready, but the time has come. There will soon be a P1 and another P1. As we discuss this be assured that they are trying to draw P4, G6, and even FCS schools to join their respective spheres of influence, primarily through their common media relationships. Congress and Cody will be joined by another "C" word, "courts" as we try to untangle the bonds among NCAA, CFP, Conferences, and TV.
Buckle up.
(In response to this post by Vippie1)
1mo
Result, I just don't see that ever happening. I don't think the P2 gives any time or thought to most of the G6. And I cannot imagine they would think that negotiating a deal jointly with the G6 would be to their benefit at all. Before that happened, I think the P2 would break off and form their own league. Then perhaps negotiate a collective deal with all of those in new league.
** Edited by wwhokie1 at 6/7/2026, 2:15:56 PM
(In response to this post by Vippie1)
2
2hhoop3
1mo
to maximize revenues for all as opposed to a select group that will have to eventually happen. However, the devil will be in the details. Some will need to cede some power and influence, others may be to place their revenue demands in a more cooperative place and ALL will have to compromise to get a revenue sharing formula that works collectively. Your #2 is the lynch pin, industry wide stability and peace. The P2 eventually have to realize they need the broad spectrum fan base otherwise demand for the product will plateau. I do not see the leaders on either side(media or university) capable of building and selling that vision as their credibility is suspect given all that has gone before in realignment and playoff negotiations.
(In response to this post by Vippie1)
1mo
It is fair question to ask because when a team is relegated to the tier below, then most Americans will likely view that as a "minor league" compared to the top tier. The reason promotion/relegation works in Europe is because the people have bought into it. If you look at the TV ratings and gambling activity between the EPL and the Championship, then you will see the drop isn't as steep as in the US when comparing any of the major pro leagues vs. their top tier minor league. Heck there is a reason very few minor leagues are broadcasted here in the US.
(In response to this post by manassashoo)
1mo
the very next year. If that would happen in college football, I think there would be great interest--plus the chance to play for a second tier national championship rather than a meaningless bowl game.
But I am not sure if @manassashoo is using the EFL definition of relegation, or just the idea that some programs should not be included moving forward.
(In response to this post by VTHokie2000)
1mo
the end of the season. They have an equal shot at remaining in their current tier or being relegated to League One too. In terms of TV ratings and gambling activity, I don't think you will find there as much of a drop between the EPL and the Championship as you see in the US between a pro league and its highest minor league. How much of that is engrained in the "American sports culture?"
(In response to this post by Maroon Baboon)
1mo
the AHL or G-League because the Major League, NHL and NBA teams own those lower tier teams. Everyone kinda knows its place. For example, the Hershey Bears, perhaps the most successful minor league franchise in America are not in any way trying to get into the NHL.
However, if you had teams that have been in big time college football for their whole history of their school, and that team was relegated for a season, their fans would still follow, and (sadly IMO) people would still gamble on their games. If a relegation system is fluid, there would be great interest in the overall sport? If it is a mandated permanent "relegation," then major college football would take a big hit.
I promise you, if VT is left out of a "super league" and are "relegated" to an FCS- or G6-type league, I promise you, I will not watch a single second of the top league. If VT has a total crap year, and gets relegated the EFL way, I would still stay interested in everything and hope for promotion the following year. And I think most college football fans feel the same way.
(In response to this post by VTHokie2000)
1mo
Plus, over in Europe the fan bases are a lot more "community based" than how the college fan bases are structured in the US. I'm not sure the average American behavior would be like yours. It would definitely be interesting see play out. I do know over in the UK the networks will televise EPL, Championship, League One, and League Two games each week. I haven't found anything to confirm what happens to all the tiers below League Two because there might be 1 or 2 more tiers that will still get some broadcasting coverage during the season. It may not be every game like you see with the EPL, but it could be 1 or 2 games. Now the gambling may include a few more tiers, particularly in places like London, Manchester, or Liverpool because of how community oriented the fan bases are structured.
For the record, I have never been against the idea. I am just not sure enough of the American public would buy into the idea. Particularly if the networks are not interested in broadcasting all the tiers. At least in order for the promotion/relegation to work, then there will probably need to be more than 2 tiers to ensure teams get to play everyone in the league home and away in the same season or over 2 seasons if they only play once per season. I suspect enough ADs will want that as a requirement before they will buy into the plan.
(In response to this post by Maroon Baboon)
1mo
At the top of the EFL is
1. The Premier League (PL)
2. The Championship League (Tier 2)
3. League One (Tier 3)
4. League Two (Tier 4)
5. A bunch of semi-pro league tiers below that.
And each tier has relegation and promotion annually. For example, in the 20-team Premier League, the bottom three teams are related to Tier 2 for the next season, and the top 3 teams from the Championship League are promoted to the PL. And it's basically the same concept right down the system, including the semi-pro leagues, who can get promoted to the Tier 4 and work their way up.
(In response to this post by manassashoo)
1mo
The P2 may be espn/abc Vs rest.
I can see Acc magnificentl 7 surviving. Probably as a new league . Which in reality makes most sense.
The super league model has to be looking as simple to many mouths to feed.
(In response to this post by Stech)
1mo
Most schools in the hunt have big donors that can pony up. Many though do not have a great coach. VT picked up a gem after PSU stupidly fired Franklin. So short sided.
I hope this is the turning point for you guys. The ACC needs more balance and more top teams.
(In response to this post by Stech)
1mo
It seems to me that the schools would be voting for a decrease in payouts. There would have to be a bigger picture than just adding to the conference. These items certainly make us more appealing, but I just don't think there is enough financial incentive.
** Edited by wwhokie1 at 6/6/2026, 8:16:26 PM
(In response to this post by Stech)
1mo
too many competing interests. They're not going to just keep adding more programs.
(In response to this post by wwhokie1)
1mo
Between the NETWORKS and P2, they will do the math after the next round of rights. SEC already told ESPN, lets start discussing a new rights agreement considering SEC increased value. You can bet that the for the networks, they would be told the new rights will include expansion to x teams and the new expanded leadgue will also get per school at least 10-15 percent increase. Same for the Big 10. If they dont there are other takers.
during nFL negotiations you never saw any networks balk and say we are not covering NFL. and if they pulled back Amazon NETFLIX have already said they will step up,.
Key for programs, it is essential to increase your BRAND to be a national brand. between wins, stars, national coaches and unique environments.
(In response to this post by wwhokie1)
1mo
CFP National Championship game. That's the reason the NFL is a different animal, and why 1-1 comparisons between the NFL and College Football media rights concepts are basically useless.
(In response to this post by 1947Sunbowl)
1mo
from, ahem, streamers.
I don't claim to have any real knowledge of this, but I expect Paramount+CBS to irritate the other carriers by bidding-up content prices. They want in badly.
National Brand will be no more, or less a factor than it has been. But look for a new element of value to show up in the calculus: International Brand. One reason UNC is so highly coveted by P2 conferences is because they have residual global cache from the Michael Jordan era. MJ put an indelible stamp on the planet. Carolina Blue jerseys can still be seen in urban neighborhoods all across the U.S.
ESPN cannot possibly be satisfied with The SEC geographical footprint. The SEC wants a pay increase before 2034. This spells aggressive realignment, and likely before 2030.
(In response to this post by 1947Sunbowl)
2
2hhoop3
1mo
in its current state is not the NFL and you are fantasizing if you believe (1) they will dictate terms and percentage increases to networks or (2) that there are really the depth of other outlets to step in if the current networks balk. Your assessment of the market, both in terms of demand and availability, is flawed.
(In response to this post by 1947Sunbowl)