Started By
Message
Lots of realignment rumors spiking back up
Posted on 4/28/23 at 9:54 am
Posted on 4/28/23 at 9:54 am
Yes, most of it is message board chatter, Clemson and FSU reporters, not particularly credible guys like Swain, and anonymous "sources", but where there is this much smoke, there is usually a fire.
On the west coast, it's more chatter about the B1G inviting four more PAC schools: Washington, Oregon, Cal and Stanford. I'm not sure I believe that, especially with regard to Cal and Stanford. Though the fact that the PAC media deal negotiations continue to comically stall and rumors are now that Apple is the only big player lend credence to the fact that the conference is ripe for further plundering.
On the east coast, the talking heads at TigerNet claim that six ACC schools are in cahoots to find a way out of that conference's daunting grant of rights: FSU, Miami, Clemson, UNC, NCST, and VT. I don't think that is surprising news to anyone, FSU and Clemson have been publicly screaming that they want out to anyone who will listen for at least the past two years. They know that if they stay in the ACC, they are fricked. The SEC will be pulling down $50-60mm more per school than them within a few years. How are you going to compete for championships when Vanderbilt has a spare $60mm per year to throw at coaches, players, staff, and facilities over you?
But if true, and that's an assumption in and of itself, it tells me that at least several of those ACC schools are pretty damn confident that they have a seat at the table in the B1G or SEC. I think sooner than later, and for better or worse, we're going to see some more realignment fireworks.
On the west coast, it's more chatter about the B1G inviting four more PAC schools: Washington, Oregon, Cal and Stanford. I'm not sure I believe that, especially with regard to Cal and Stanford. Though the fact that the PAC media deal negotiations continue to comically stall and rumors are now that Apple is the only big player lend credence to the fact that the conference is ripe for further plundering.
On the east coast, the talking heads at TigerNet claim that six ACC schools are in cahoots to find a way out of that conference's daunting grant of rights: FSU, Miami, Clemson, UNC, NCST, and VT. I don't think that is surprising news to anyone, FSU and Clemson have been publicly screaming that they want out to anyone who will listen for at least the past two years. They know that if they stay in the ACC, they are fricked. The SEC will be pulling down $50-60mm more per school than them within a few years. How are you going to compete for championships when Vanderbilt has a spare $60mm per year to throw at coaches, players, staff, and facilities over you?
But if true, and that's an assumption in and of itself, it tells me that at least several of those ACC schools are pretty damn confident that they have a seat at the table in the B1G or SEC. I think sooner than later, and for better or worse, we're going to see some more realignment fireworks.
This post was edited on 4/28/23 at 9:55 am
12
Posted on 4/28/23 at 9:57 am to BreakawayZou83
CFB is already pro-lite. Steps toward mega-conferences just cement it. Shoot, Disney effectively owns the SEC now.
Posted on 4/28/23 at 10:03 am to BreakawayZou83
I'm not sure the SEC is looking to get bigger anymore. While I'm sure they'll "explore options", I don't think they're trying to lure anyone else into the SEC at this point.
I think UNC is the only one that would make them really think about it, but from all I've heard, UNC is interested in the Big 10, not the SEC. While FSU and Clemson have a good football pedigree, they don't bring enough viewers in states the SEC already has a presence in. I honestly think if the SEC were to expand more, they'd be behind NC and VA schools. Maybe even behind WVU.
I think UNC is the only one that would make them really think about it, but from all I've heard, UNC is interested in the Big 10, not the SEC. While FSU and Clemson have a good football pedigree, they don't bring enough viewers in states the SEC already has a presence in. I honestly think if the SEC were to expand more, they'd be behind NC and VA schools. Maybe even behind WVU.
Posted on 4/28/23 at 10:06 am to BreakawayZou83
I'm skeptical that the unhappy schools in the ACC will find a way out of the grant of rights, other than buying their way out. And, when it comes time to do that, OU and Texas were only able to buy out one year early from the Big XII -- hard to see those schools doing any better with the ACC, especially considering how dire their departure would be for the remaining schools.
Posted on 4/28/23 at 10:10 am to DawginSC
quote:
I'm not sure the SEC is looking to get bigger anymore. While I'm sure they'll "explore options", I don't think they're trying to lure anyone else into the SEC at this point.
I think UNC is the only one that would make them really think about it, but from all I've heard, UNC is interested in the Big 10, not the SEC. While FSU and Clemson have a good football pedigree, they don't bring enough viewers in states the SEC already has a presence in. I honestly think if the SEC were to expand more, they'd be behind NC and VA schools. Maybe even behind WVU.
I'm not suggesting that I want the SEC to get bigger, and I know a significant number of fanbases would in fact prefer that the conference shedded a few recent additions. However, I don't think the SEC has the luxury of choosing to stand pat at 16.
The reason I believe the B1G hasn't already added Oregon and Washington is because they want to add some combination of UNC, Miami, FSU, and Clemson. Striking the SEC right in the heart of its territory and effectively precluding the SEC from expanding further without totally sacrificing geography and settling for scraps.
I also don't believe the B1G (or any conference) want to expand beyond 20. The scheduling doesn't make sense - there simply aren't enough games in a year to do it. So if the B1G can take, say FSU and UNC, they could still add Washington and Oregon later. The SEC meanwhile would have lost its two best expansion targets. That means less money for the SEC over the years compared to the B1G, potentially a lot less. The SEC has gotten this far because it does aggressively expand while conferences like the PAC snubbed their noses at it. Picking apart the ACC is the last round of expand or die.
Posted on 4/28/23 at 10:11 am to DawginSC
quote:When Jim Delaney was Big Ten commissioner, his ultimate plan was to grab UNC (his alma mater, coincidentally), UVA, Georgia Tech, and maybe FSU in order to get the Big Ten into the southeast, where the population was growing (unlike the Rust Belt). Even the weak arse move of adding Rutgers and Maryland made some sense in this context (Delaney was worried that Penn State might look elsewhere if they remained an isolated eastern outpost). But, with Delaney gone, it seems like they may have jettisoned this strategy. Adding "brands" from the West Coast is a big departure, and might limit what they can do in the East when the ACC falls apart a decade from now.
I'm not sure the SEC is looking to get bigger anymore. While I'm sure they'll "explore options", I don't think they're trying to lure anyone else into the SEC at this point.
I think UNC is the only one that would make them really think about it, but from all I've heard, UNC is interested in the Big 10, not the SEC. While FSU and Clemson have a good football pedigree, they don't bring enough viewers in states the SEC already has a presence in. I honestly think if the SEC were to expand more, they'd be behind NC and VA schools. Maybe even behind WVU.
Posted on 4/28/23 at 10:13 am to twk
quote:
I'm skeptical that the unhappy schools in the ACC will find a way out of the grant of rights, other than buying their way out. And, when it comes time to do that, OU and Texas were only able to buy out one year early from the Big XII -- hard to see those schools doing any better with the ACC, especially considering how dire their departure would be for the remaining schools.
I agree, but desperation is a stinky cologne. FSU can't afford to throw their hands up and wait until 2036. The damage will be well past done by then . A $60mm+ annual deficit to the SEC and B1G schools over the course of more than a decade will leave them permanently behind.
Posted on 4/28/23 at 10:16 am to DawginSC
quote:
I'm not sure the SEC is looking to get bigger anymore. While I'm sure they'll "explore options", I don't think they're trying to lure anyone else into the SEC at this point.
The next addition for the SEC is when there is a wholesale change to the CFB system. If and when the SEC and Big 10 breakaway from everyone else and together create an NFL-style league of college football heavyweights, then I think we’ll see some more additions
Posted on 4/28/23 at 10:19 am to BreakawayZou83
The inherent problem with any ACC to SEC move is what’s the incentive for ESPN?
ESPN is going to pay more money to teams they already have under contract, for what? So those teams can lose more games in a better conference?
It makes no sense for a company (Disney) that is already cutting costs to do that.
Clemson, Florida State, etc. are arguably worth more to Disney as double digit win, playoff contenders in the ACC than they would be in the SEC. I definitely don’t see them being worth $60M more.
Unless the conferences start paying players, most recruits are still going to choose the program that wins. Conference TV money does not currently affect NIL money players receive.
If the conferences start paying players, I don’t think any of the conferences as we know them will stick around. Ohio State isn’t going to keep around Northwestern at that point.
ESPN is going to pay more money to teams they already have under contract, for what? So those teams can lose more games in a better conference?
It makes no sense for a company (Disney) that is already cutting costs to do that.
Clemson, Florida State, etc. are arguably worth more to Disney as double digit win, playoff contenders in the ACC than they would be in the SEC. I definitely don’t see them being worth $60M more.
quote:
How are you going to compete for championships when Vanderbilt has a spare $60mm per year to throw at coaches, players, staff, and facilities over you?
Unless the conferences start paying players, most recruits are still going to choose the program that wins. Conference TV money does not currently affect NIL money players receive.
If the conferences start paying players, I don’t think any of the conferences as we know them will stick around. Ohio State isn’t going to keep around Northwestern at that point.
Posted on 4/28/23 at 10:20 am to BreakawayZou83
If they were smart, schools like Arizona and Colorado would get out of the PAC 12 immediately and head to the Big 12. They won’t though as they’re all run by academics who’d rather hobnob with Stanford and Cal than fraternize with the help even if it means further lack of exposure and erosion of athletic brands.
Posted on 4/28/23 at 10:23 am to DawginSC
quote:
While FSU and Clemson have a good football pedigree, they don't bring enough viewers in states the SEC already has a presence in.
Does this even matter any more? Viewers are viewers. It’s not like we are fighting over “TV Markets” any more.
I don’t even have cable, I have YouTube TV, and I know a lot of people my age (31) and younger have the same. I feel like streaming is the future and where the viewers come from won’t matter. Try to get the teams with the biggest fanbases watching your games. More viewers = bigger tv deals = more money for our schools.
Posted on 4/28/23 at 10:28 am to TomRollTideRitter
quote:
The inherent problem with any ACC to SEC move is what’s the incentive for ESPN?
ESPN is going to pay more money to teams they already have under contract, for what? So those teams can lose more games in a better conference?
It makes no sense for a company (Disney) that is already cutting costs to do that.
Clemson, Florida State, etc. are arguably worth more to Disney as double digit win, playoff contenders in the ACC than they would be in the SEC. I definitely don’t see them being worth $60M more.
The inherent value to ESPN is that if those programs somehow manage to wrangle their way out of the ACC grant of rights, they could end up in the B1G with Fox. Then ESPN is left holding the bag. So if I'm an executive at ESPN, I'm sitting quietly in the background to avoid any anti trust complaints while quietly muttering "SEC, SEC, SEC".
And from the SEC's and Big 12's perspective, this all makes too much sense. It doesn't get discussed enough, but BOTH conferences have pro rata clauses. Meaning if they add P5 schools, the media deals get proportionally increased. It's why the SEC was able to add OU/Texas without a hiccup. But that also means that the Big 12 could add ACC members and increase those ACC members media payout by $10mm/annually.
So ESPN is in a funny spot, it could end up paying a lot more money to a group of ACC schools than it anticipated. But the alternatives are losing at least some of those schools to Fox and the B1G, or potentially, anti-trust litigation.
Posted on 4/28/23 at 10:28 am to Captain Insano
quote:
Try to get the teams with the biggest fanbases watching your games. More viewers = bigger tv deals = more money for our schools.
Easy to see.
FSU, Clemson, UNC, Miami, Virginia Tech, and West Virginia are all good targets.
Posted on 4/28/23 at 10:31 am to Captain Insano
That's the point these schools are pitching, I'm sure. FSU/Auburn will get a lot more streaming eyeballs than FSU/Syracuse. Clemson/LSU is far more watchable than LSU/Vandy. The big games are driving the new expansion, not markets.
Posted on 4/28/23 at 10:33 am to onthebay
quote:
That's the point these schools are pitching, I'm sure. FSU/Auburn will get a lot more streaming eyeballs than FSU/Syracuse. Clemson/LSU is far more watchable than LSU/Vandy. The big games are driving the new expansion, not markets.
100%. It's also why the SEC MUST take the top ACC schools if they have the opportunity. It cements the conference as the strongest, most cohesive collection of brands. The B1G leadership knows this and, y'all watch, they will aggressively pursue the likes of UNC and FSU when the opportunity arises.
Posted on 4/28/23 at 10:42 am to BreakawayZou83
quote:
Clemson
You do not want these weirdos in the SEC. I spent some time on their message board when we played them for the natty. They are a strange breed.
Posted on 4/28/23 at 10:42 am to BreakawayZou83
The SEC and Big Ten will become 24 team mega conferences soon.
The regular season will become all conference games.
Clemson, FSU, Miami, North Carolina and Virginia Tech will be in the SEC soon with two teams from the western US.
The regular season will become all conference games.
Clemson, FSU, Miami, North Carolina and Virginia Tech will be in the SEC soon with two teams from the western US.
Posted on 4/28/23 at 10:47 am to remaster916
Eventually there will be "Many hands in the little pie"
There is a saying Addition By Subtraction. Sometimes the only way to improve your team or conference is to take something away from it, and I think we are approaching that point.
There is a saying Addition By Subtraction. Sometimes the only way to improve your team or conference is to take something away from it, and I think we are approaching that point.
Posted on 4/28/23 at 10:51 am to TideFaninFl
Kick Vandy out. They belong with Duke and Wake Forest.
Posted on 4/28/23 at 10:55 am to remaster916
quote:
The SEC and Big Ten will become 24 team mega conferences soon.
This was always the plan.
They will have their 2 conference champions play for the national title. They will control all of the meaningful post-season revenue.
Page 1 of 4
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News