Realignment Update

[mtrout]

Kliavkoff needs to go. They should poach Aresco.

Surely you jest. Aresco is the clown who lost our best schools, was unable to sell new quality institutions on joining us and then added the garbage schools that we now have.
NO Thanks! If you want to poach somebody poach the commissioner of B12.

The best thing SMU can do is get into a P5 conference. If some of these mentioned teams go to the B1G- Fl. St. , Clemson then just maybe there is a chance go move to the ACC. One can always hope.

Aresco lost teams to a P5 conference that will pay them 4-5x what they got in the AAC.

Kliavkoff is piloting the total destruction of what could have been a ~50M/yr per school conference (when USC & UCLA were still there).

[Topper]

Florida State's President has told its board that absent a "radical change" in its media payout structure the school will seriously consider leaving the ACC. I think we are going to see the networks step in and puppeteer the move of at least Oregon and Washington to the Big 10, and Clemson and Fla State to the SEC. I bet that they control the cards re the ACC media deal. It will then be a circus as the ACC falls apart. We should probably be looking toward the ACC leftovers to form some sort of a new league that might have more media appeal than the AAC. The PAC will have nothing left but Washington and Oregon State unless Cal and Stanford can't get invited to the Big 10.

[EastStang]

Seriously, we need to be looking at options and be proactive in this instead of sitting there wishing. Clemson and FSU will be in for a shock in the SEC if they get an invite and the ACC let's them go.

[FroggieFever]

Seriously, we need to be looking at options and be proactive in this instead of sitting there wishing. Clemson and FSU will be in for a shock in the SEC if they get an invite and the ACC let's them go.

ACC & PAC are done for. AAC and MWC need to merge and go after the remaining goodies (Oregon State, Wash. State, etc.).

[max the wonder dog]

Beginning to look like PAC won't have WA or OR either, and if the B1G gets Stanford and Cal that will give them the #10 TV market. Here's the pre-obituary:

https://www.deseret.com/sports/2023/8/2/23817619/pac-12-next-school-to-leave-turn-out-the-lights-big-12-big-ten-conference-realignment

Time to line up for a replacement slot in the ACC. The less-in-demand schools in that conference include NC State, Syracuse, Wake, BC, Pitt and VA Tech. Much better that hooking up with a PAC of OR ST, WA ST, some Mountain West teams and Boise State. And, we'll save a fortune on travel.

[PonyEnergy]

Cal
Oregon State
Stanford
Washington State
Air Force
Colorado State
San Diego State
Memphis
Navy
SMU
Tulane
Boston College
Duke
Georgia Tech
Pittsburgh
Syracuse

[EastStang]

I think NC State, GT, Miami, Louisville and VT may be homeless as well. Welcome back to the BE.

[MustangStealth]

I think NC State, GT, Miami, Louisville and VT may be homeless as well. Welcome back to the BE.

I'd rather align ourselves with them than Oregon State and Washington State.

[rodrod5]

Florida State's President has told its board that absent a "radical change" in its media payout structure the school will seriously consider leaving the ACC. I think we are going to see the networks step in and puppeteer the move of at least Oregon and Washington to the Big 10, and Clemson and Fla State to the SEC. I bet that they control the cards re the ACC media deal. It will then be a circus as the ACC falls apart. We should probably be looking toward the ACC leftovers to form some sort of a new league that might have more media appeal than the AAC. The PAC will have nothing left but Washington and Oregon State unless Cal and Stanford can't get invited to the Big 10.

this will be extremely difficult to pull off

1. ESPN owns 100% of the content of the ACC and the SEC and are a party to contracts with those conferences. ESPN is 100% aware of the existence of the GOR for the ACC. Thus ESPN "enticing" ant member of the ACC to break a contract with the ACC to move to the SEC for the financial gain of that program or ESPN or both is "enticement" and "torturous interference" which if proven in court gets 3X actual damages. That is a MASSIVE risk to ESPN for not a great deal and in fact the "opportunity" to pay a lot more money for content they already own 100% of. But of course leaving other members of the ACC hanging is an issue. Even if ESPN does not leave the other members of the ACC "hanging" on their TV deal there is still the fact that ESPN would be "colluding" to cause the top draw teams in the ACC to leave the ACC and play in the SEC which will have a major hit to ticket sales, prices, and attendance for remaining members of the ACC.

2. As we saw with Texas and OU they had to negotiate with FOX to pay FOX for the lost content that FOX owned that would have included Texas and OU games. That was in addition to Texas and OU paying exit fees and money to break the GOR a single year early. Texas and OU were leaving the Big 12 that is about half owned by ESPN and half owned by FOX. In the case of movement from the ACC to the Big 10 potentially (instead of to the SEC) well now ESPN is in the exact same position that FOX is in except that ESPN owns 100% of the content of the ACC while FOX only had about half of the Big 12. In addition there are 9 years left on the ACC contract not a single year like Texas and OU paid FOX for so that will be much more expensive. There is also the factor of the ACCn and what losing their top Florida team and their only team in SC will do with that.

3. As of now there has only been a single realignment situation that dealt with a GOR and that was Texas and OU and the Big 12. The others all had a simple contract that had a clear ability to give notice to leave the conference and pay the fee and leave with the media rights. A number of the realignments happened when the media rights were ending for the particular conference that was losing members and in the case of the PAC 12 right now there is no exit fee and the GOR ends at the same time as the media rights deal. So with the exception of Texas and OU and the Big 12 there has never been a situation where media partners were clearly enticing a program to break a contract, the GOR, for the financial gain of that member of the media partners or both. And in the Big 12 case clearly Texas and OU were prepared to stay the entire time and they paid a lot to leave and paid FOX.

Along with that I feel it is pretty clear that the Big 12 had that leverage of known enticement and interference against ESPN. It is clear that Texas and OU made a major violation of the Big 12 contract for conference membership and in addition to that continued to vote on conference business including business related to media rights negotiations. But because arresco is such an idiot and does not know how to forward emails the Big 12 had evidence of ESPN colluding with the AAC very clearly. I am of the opinion that information and that reality is part of why ESPN made the pretty good, but not great, contract offer to the Big 12 and continues to show favor to the Big 12 over the PAC 12.

In the case of the ACC though there is so much length left on their contract, there are so many teams that will be harmed, and it will be ESPN taking all of the legal risk or ESPN possibly losing the best teams they have under the ACC contract, if those teams go to the Big 10 I cannot see a way that FSU and Clemson and others trying to leave does not end up in several massive court cases with a number of parties in each case and filed in a number of jurisdictions and with huge money on the line. In addition there are a lot of new waters to be tested with the GOR. You could be looking at teams being without a conference, without their media rights, and liable for a lot of money. You could be looking at major media companies fighting it out even if conferences and teams are working it out. You could be looking at media companies paying a lot of money in interference claims while they still owe conferences a lot of money and no teams end up and move. Or teams move, but their old conference keeps their media rights.

The PAC 12 is the last of the stupid ones with no exit fee, a media contract that is ending at the same time as the GOR, and their two top teams and others being able to simply walk away. Of course a GOR should always end with the ending of a media contract, but since the fall of the Big East no other conference had allowed themselves to not have an exit fee that went on much longer than the media deal to at least collect something and to make a jump to a new conference have to really make financial sense. With the GORs in place for the long term in the ACC and the exit fees, there only being ESPN dealing with the ACC and SEC, and with FOX looking like they are conservative on their athletics sending and FOX having set the precedent for collecting money if a GOR is allowed to be exited from well I do not see a way that ESPN basically drags themselves in to court to pay more for content they already own by having teams go from the ACC to the SEC and I just do not see FOX too excited to face the same type of massive litigation for Clemson and FSU or any other ACC teams especially when Oregon and UW are probably out there at half price of what they pay other Big 10 teams now.

We are in a world of REAL money now and REAL damages and litigation that has not been attempted and that there is no real precedent for and no real surety to the outcome of and with only two players one of whom would be doing it to themselves, ESPN, well it just does not make a lot of sense to do it for pretty much no gain for ESPN. Or for FOX to have to turn around and pay a hell of a lot more for a precedent they just set for a couple of teams that are not a great fit in the Big 10 that is already pretty full.

[fan]

I think NC State, GT, Miami, Louisville and VT may be homeless as well. Welcome back to the BE.

I'd rather align ourselves with them than Oregon State and Washington State.

Since it now looks like the PAC is falling apart how about the AAC going after Washington St., Oregon St., San Diego St. and Boise (or Fresno or UNLV)?

Edit: Well.... looks like Froggie Fever actually proposed this above.

[redpony]

fan: Since it now looks like the PAC is falling apart how about the AAC going after Washington St., Oregon St., San Diego St. and Boise (or Fresno or UNLV)?

Good idea, we could get rid of a couple of garbage schools (denton school etc) and then have an east and west division.

[Topper]

Florida State's President has told its board that absent a "radical change" in its media payout structure the school will seriously consider leaving the ACC. I think we are going to see the networks step in and puppeteer the move of at least Oregon and Washington to the Big 10, and Clemson and Fla State to the SEC. I bet that they control the cards re the ACC media deal. It will then be a circus as the ACC falls apart. We should probably be looking toward the ACC leftovers to form some sort of a new league that might have more media appeal than the AAC. The PAC will have nothing left but Washington and Oregon State unless Cal and Stanford can't get invited to the Big 10.

this will be extremely difficult to pull off

1. ESPN owns 100% of the content of the ACC and the SEC and are a party to contracts with those conferences. ESPN is 100% aware of the existence of the GOR for the ACC. Thus ESPN "enticing" ant member of the ACC to break a contract with the ACC to move to the SEC for the financial gain of that program or ESPN or both is "enticement" and "torturous interference" which if proven in court gets 3X actual damages. That is a MASSIVE risk to ESPN for not a great deal and in fact the "opportunity" to pay a lot more money for content they already own 100% of. But of course leaving other members of the ACC hanging is an issue. Even if ESPN does not leave the other members of the ACC "hanging" on their TV deal there is still the fact that ESPN would be "colluding" to cause the top draw teams in the ACC to leave the ACC and play in the SEC which will have a major hit to ticket sales, prices, and attendance for remaining members of the ACC.

2. As we saw with Texas and OU they had to negotiate with FOX to pay FOX for the lost content that FOX owned that would have included Texas and OU games. That was in addition to Texas and OU paying exit fees and money to break the GOR a single year early. Texas and OU were leaving the Big 12 that is about half owned by ESPN and half owned by FOX. In the case of movement from the ACC to the Big 10 potentially (instead of to the SEC) well now ESPN is in the exact same position that FOX is in except that ESPN owns 100% of the content of the ACC while FOX only had about half of the Big 12. In addition there are 9 years left on the ACC contract not a single year like Texas and OU paid FOX for so that will be much more expensive. There is also the factor of the ACCn and what losing their top Florida team and their only team in SC will do with that.

3. As of now there has only been a single realignment situation that dealt with a GOR and that was Texas and OU and the Big 12. The others all had a simple contract that had a clear ability to give notice to leave the conference and pay the fee and leave with the media rights. A number of the realignments happened when the media rights were ending for the particular conference that was losing members and in the case of the PAC 12 right now there is no exit fee and the GOR ends at the same time as the media rights deal. So with the exception of Texas and OU and the Big 12 there has never been a situation where media partners were clearly enticing a program to break a contract, the GOR, for the financial gain of that member of the media partners or both. And in the Big 12 case clearly Texas and OU were prepared to stay the entire time and they paid a lot to leave and paid FOX.

Along with that I feel it is pretty clear that the Big 12 had that leverage of known enticement and interference against ESPN. It is clear that Texas and OU made a major violation of the Big 12 contract for conference membership and in addition to that continued to vote on conference business including business related to media rights negotiations. But because arresco is such an idiot and does not know how to forward emails the Big 12 had evidence of ESPN colluding with the AAC very clearly. I am of the opinion that information and that reality is part of why ESPN made the pretty good, but not great, contract offer to the Big 12 and continues to show favor to the Big 12 over the PAC 12.

In the case of the ACC though there is so much length left on their contract, there are so many teams that will be harmed, and it will be ESPN taking all of the legal risk or ESPN possibly losing the best teams they have under the ACC contract, if those teams go to the Big 10 I cannot see a way that FSU and Clemson and others trying to leave does not end up in several massive court cases with a number of parties in each case and filed in a number of jurisdictions and with huge money on the line. In addition there are a lot of new waters to be tested with the GOR. You could be looking at teams being without a conference, without their media rights, and liable for a lot of money. You could be looking at major media companies fighting it out even if conferences and teams are working it out. You could be looking at media companies paying a lot of money in interference claims while they still owe conferences a lot of money and no teams end up and move. Or teams move, but their old conference keeps their media rights.

The PAC 12 is the last of the stupid ones with no exit fee, a media contract that is ending at the same time as the GOR, and their two top teams and others being able to simply walk away. Of course a GOR should always end with the ending of a media contract, but since the fall of the Big East no other conference had allowed themselves to not have an exit fee that went on much longer than the media deal to at least collect something and to make a jump to a new conference have to really make financial sense. With the GORs in place for the long term in the ACC and the exit fees, there only being ESPN dealing with the ACC and SEC, and with FOX looking like they are conservative on their athletics sending and FOX having set the precedent for collecting money if a GOR is allowed to be exited from well I do not see a way that ESPN basically drags themselves in to court to pay more for content they already own by having teams go from the ACC to the SEC and I just do not see FOX too excited to face the same type of massive litigation for Clemson and FSU or any other ACC teams especially when Oregon and UW are probably out there at half price of what they pay other Big 10 teams now.

We are in a world of REAL money now and REAL damages and litigation that has not been attempted and that there is no real precedent for and no real surety to the outcome of and with only two players one of whom would be doing it to themselves, ESPN, well it just does not make a lot of sense to do it for pretty much no gain for ESPN. Or for FOX to have to turn around and pay a hell of a lot more for a precedent they just set for a couple of teams that are not a great fit in the Big 10 that is already pretty full.

"Tortious." And that is my point. ESPN can manipulate Clemson and Fla St over to the SEC, continue the payout to the remaining ACC teams or re-negotiate based on ESPN's financial situation, and be rid of them in a few years. Maybe they do interfere with the league but there would be little in the way of monetary damages if they continue the payout.

[35straight II]

I think the “have nots” need to get in front of this train wreck and salvage whatever they can. Take teams from the ACC, AAC, Pac12 and MWC. From a coast to coast super conference. PAC 20. Keeps a lot of traditional/geographical rivalries in place and would allow the conference to target all time zones. It would take someone with a lot of balls and knowledge to get the ball rolling on something like this, just not sure who that would be.

PAC 20 (Pacific/Atlantic)

EAST
Boston College
Duke
Louisville
Miami
NC State
North Carolina
Pitt
Syracuse
Virginia Tech
Navy

WEST
Memphis
SMU
Tulane
UTSA
Cal
Oregon State
Washington State
Stanford
Air Force
San Diego St

[EastStang]

I'd probably do Boise instead of UTSA, but San Antonio is a larger market. Also, maybe Army might consider joining such a conference. It would be nice to have all three service academies in one conference. They might opt to be football only since they play in another conference for other sports. I am not totally convinced that UVA will be asked to move by the B1G. UVA's football attendance is pretty low, (I've been to games there). I went to a game against Boston College and the stadium looked more empty than ours. VT sells out games routinely. So, who knows. We're in the crazy zone now.

[rodrod5]

"Tortious." And that is my point. ESPN can manipulate Clemson and Fla St over to the SEC, continue the payout to the remaining ACC teams or re-negotiate based on ESPN's financial situation, and be rid of them in a few years. Maybe they do interfere with the league but there would be little in the way of monetary damages if they continue the payout.

I would disagree

1. What financial incentive is there for ESPN to pay more for Clemson and FSU vs. what they pay for them now. They own 100% of the rights to them what do they want to pay more for?

2. In addition to the above there are only so many premium spots to go around on ABC, ESPN, and ESPN II so trying to argue "better match ups" for a conference that already has more quality match ups than ESPN can currently handle is not really a great argument relative to the cost. This is even more true with Texas and OU joining.

3. There is the issue of the ACCn. I have argued other places that the purpose of the ACCn for ESPN was to remove the OBLIGATION for ESPN to show a particular number of ACC games on ABC, ESPN, and ESPN II and instead shift them over to the ACCn. Yes the ACC shares in the profits, but in reality they also now share in the COST of producing those games as well. It just so happens that as of now the money generated from the ACCn covers those cost, delivers some profit to ESPN and to the ACC. But as a just our report said for the first time ever FS1 has more subscribers than ESPN and cord cutting is still happening and is a reason for that chance in subscriber numbers for ESPN in particular. So at some point when the ACCn is only break even well ESPN is still money ahead because they are still covering the cost of producing ACCn content instead of paying that cost AND having to place that content on ABC, ESPN, or ESPN II instead of something that would be more preferable to show on those channels at any particular time.

ESPN had to start doing that because they are out of air time for showing football when anyone will watch. Which is the same issue the PAC 12 is facing. ESPN being out of places to put PAC 12 content and in addition the less desirable times that some PAC 12 content is shown.

4. With #3 in mind above there is the issue of "in market" and "out of market" rates for subscribers. I am not as big of a believer as some are that ESPN with the ACCn or even the SECn can just add a team to a conference and BAM! cable companies now have to start paying in market rates for 100% of the subscribers in that state. But many ACC fans argue this is in fact the case. So with Clemson in particular taking them from the ACC now means that cable companies, if it is true, can now start paying out of market rates for all the ACCn subs in SC. That hurts the ACC. In addition I think there would be a push from cable companies to reduce rates in Florida if FSU was gone. Even if there was not immediately then the next time that cable/content negotiations happen between ESPN and the cable and sat companies, which will surely be before the end of the ACC TV contract, there will be a push to reduce ACCn subscriber rates in Florida and probably across the entire spectrum of cable companies and subscribers because of the loss of two top teams. And that hurts the ACC.

5. I do not think it is a stretch for ACC members to go back several years or even a decade or more and look at ticket sales and ticket prices for individual home games that have FSU or Clemson as the visiting program for that game vs. those that do not and to be able to show that Clemson and FSU as conference members makes them money on ticket sales and concessions. In fact I think that would be quite easy to show or at least to convince a court.

6. There is still the issue that FSU and Clemson are also breaking the contract, GOR, with the ACC and they are definitely going to be doing so to enrich themselves. That will be pretty much impossible to argue against and thus that is something that would most likely be able to be collected on by the ACC and the members.

In addition I think it would be hard to argue that ESPN is not enticing FSU and Clemson to go to the SEC and to make more money and be paid more money by ESPN because ESPN is not going to profit from that. What other reason would ESPN have to spend that money when they already control 100% of the content of FSU and Clemson and the ACC. I think one can go right back to #4. Will ESPN be getting some additional "in market" revenue for the SECn? If so that is going to be a major issue.

7. I think there are a number of other "stability", "brand damage", and on and on claims that may or may not be really true in a real dollars ans cents way, but that the ACC will be able to trot out dozens of "experts" to testify about. and sure ESPN will have their that will say that is not true or laughably probably try and argue that somehow the ACC is being helped or enhanced, but again that will drag on forever and ever. What reason does ESPN have to drag themselves into that mess when the end result is paying more for content they already own 100% of for the next 9 years. Along with that if things go really sideways for ESPN or the SEC or both in court who knows what other conference or what other entities might head to court to start dragging ESPN through the coals. Worse yet "congress". It is not like ESPN is running around with clean hands or that they have not been exerting a lot of influence on college sports. sports in general, and cable TV rates and subscriber fees. And when there is talk again about ESPN possibly being spun off from Disney or there being some equity partnerships and with cable subs still dropping like a rock I don't think ESPN is in the mood for a long court fight that will be a drag on Disney stock, make any partners weary, and invite some "oversight". Especially simply to pay a lot more to move Clemson and FSU from the ACC to the SEC for really no good reason.