Realignment talk not going away

[ButtFumble 5291]

9 minutes ago, The Hot Dog Buffet said:

 

Colorado, ASU, and Cincinnati are also AAU schools.

Cincinnati is not

the Big 12 has Kansas, CU, AU, ASU, Utah.....ISU was, but their administration and their state fucked up and let them down

[The Hot Dog Buffet 1314]

2 minutes ago, Saint Austin said:

How is the 2024 AAC more attractive to WSU/OSU than the Mountain West?

The AAC has a better contract and is more likely to sneak a team into the playoffs than the Mountain West.

[gatormarc 938]

 

[BurntOrange&White 42012]

Just now, gatormarc said:

 

So what are the per year payout?

[JBJ 3830]

7 minutes ago, 'stache said:

By 2030 I would hope the networks and schools would get together and ask "what are we even doing anymore?" The whole system needs to be realigned geographically with the ability for the bluebloods to make money based on tv appearances with a high baseline for everyone else involved. This whole thing has just gotten ridiculous.

Yeah.  Equal revenue sharing has actually made things worse for the majority of mid teams.  They've gone from getting a decent baseline with the option for more money that was somewhat controllable by being good and scheduling good matchups, to being separated from the largest money pools altogether.

Edited September 1, 2023 by JBJ

['stache 22147]

I don't think I've ever seen a school publicly discuss or acknowledge a no vote in conference realignment. I can't imagine UNC is that pissed about travel costs, gotta be something else they dislike about the conference. I always thought they'd be the anchor that keeps the ACC together, but seems they will probably leave when FSU and Clemson do as well, and NCST president realized that they'll be left behind and want the best possible ACC after the departures. 

[LTbear 4219]

Just now, 'stache said:

I don't think I've ever seen a school publicly discuss or acknowledge a no vote in conference realignment. I can't imagine UNC is that pissed about travel costs, gotta be something else they dislike about the conference. I always thought they'd be the anchor that keeps the ACC together, but seems they will probably leave when FSU and Clemson do as well, and NCST president realized that they'll be left behind and want the best possible ACC after the departures. 

Perhaps that it will now be even harder to get enough "dissolve the conference" votes for them to ever get out for free. 

[Al_4_ISU 12665]

Cincinnati is not
the Big 12 has Kansas, CU, AU, ASU, Utah.....ISU was, but their administration and their state fucked up and let them down

It was a combo of our state government and not having a medical school. Administration couldn’t do much

[ButtFumble 5291]

4 minutes ago, BurntOrange&White said:

So what are the per year payout?

well the ACC in May was about $40 million so it looks like about $12 million and growing about $300,000 to $500,000 per year depending on ACC revenue growth

16 minutes ago, LTbear said:

Again, that is not how that works. Nor can Stanford and Cal just "wink wink" some research dollars NCSU's way. 

yea when one looks at research funding for Nebraska and other teams that have moved conferences and compares it to teams that did not and even to teams outside the P5 there is really no correlation at all to conference affiliation and the growth or increase in research funding

 

VVVV........OU and Georgia would like to talk to you about an anti-trust lawsuit

7 minutes ago, 'stache said:

By 2030 I would hope the networks and schools would get together and ask "what are we even doing anymore?" The whole system needs to be realigned geographically with the ability for the bluebloods to make money based on tv appearances with a high baseline for everyone else involved. This whole thing has just gotten ridiculous.

[BurntOrange&White 42012]

Just now, ButtFumble said:

well the ACC in May was about $40 million so it looks like about $12 million and growing about $300,000 to $500,000 per year depending on ACC revenue growth

yea when one looks at research funding for Nebraska and other teams that have moved conferences and compares it to teams that did not and even to teams outside the P5 there is really no correlation at all to conference affiliation and the growth or increase in research funding

 

VVVV........OU and Georgia would like to talk to you about an anti-trust lawsuit

So less than half of what the PAC deal would have been if they weren't so stupid to turn it down? hahaha

[ButtFumble 5291]

Just now, BurntOrange&White said:

So less than half of what the PAC deal would have been if they weren't so stupid to turn it down? hahaha

well to be fair the PAC 12 deal was 100% streaming with Apple and Oregon and Washington said "no fucking way" and bolted once the Big 10 agreed to paying them each $31 million to start with a $1 million per year escalator for the life of the current deal

after that the 4 corners had a Big 12 offer and CU had already taken it, but the Apple deal was still there and the 9 were going to take it until Oregon and UW got the call

in addition there was a 4 partner deal with ESPN, Fox, CBS for a little bit of basketball, and Amazon for about $23 million, but Amazon backed out after CU left

once Oregon and UW were gone and the remaining 3 of the 4 corners saw they were fucked there was a call to the Big 12 and then Fox agreed to give a pro rata share of TV money for all 4 of the 4 corners and they were gone leaving the PAC 4

only ESPN was on the hook for their $20 million of the Big 12 TV deal for up to 4 "P5" schools Fox had not agreed to anyone being added for their $11.6 million share even just CU......but Fox agreed to cover that for all 4 of the 4 corners

so the PAC 12 $25 million from Apple fell apart because the Big 10 agreed to give Oregon and UW $31 million each with an annual bump

there was never really a chance to turn the Apple deal down.....though I would think that if the PAC 12 did not fuck around so long to find out if they could get a little more money from anywhere else they could have wrapped that Apple deal up a couple of weeks before Colorado left.....but I also imagine that Oregon and UW were slow rolling things, the ASU president was in love with his own voice, CU was getting old feet and working the Big 12 to not get a deal that made them look like a chump and Stanford and Cal were thinking they were worth a fuck to anyone and they would have a soft landing somewhere.....so they just pushed off Apple until the Big 10 made enough of a deal that Oregon and UW could accept being second class citizens in the Big 10 and jumped and CU had already seen what was up and jumped

[LTbear 4219]

1 minute ago, ButtFumble said:

well to be fair the PAC 12 deal was 100% streaming with Apple and Oregon and Washington said "no fucking way" and bolted once the Big 10 agreed to paying them each $31 million to start with a $1 million per year escalator for the life of the current deal

after that the 4 corners had a Big 12 offer and CU had already taken it, but the Apple deal was still there and the 9 were going to take it until Oregon and UW got the call

in addition there was a 4 partner deal with ESPN, Fox, CBS for a little bit of basketball, and Amazon for about $23 million, but Amazon backed out after CU left

once Oregon and UW were gone and the remaining 3 of the 4 corners saw they were fucked there was a call to the Big 12 and then Fox agreed to give a pro rata share of TV money for all 4 of the 4 corners and they were gone leaving the PAC 4

only ESPN was on the hook for their $20 million of the Big 12 TV deal for up to 4 "P5" schools Fox had not agreed to anyone being added for their $11.6 million share even just CU......but Fox agreed to cover that for all 4 of the 4 corners

so the PAC 12 $25 million from Apple fell apart because the Big 10 agreed to give Oregon and UW $31 million each with an annual bump

there was never really a chance to turn the Apple deal down.....though I would think that if the PAC 12 did not fuck around so long to find out if they could get a little more money from anywhere else they could have wrapped that Apple deal up a couple of weeks before Colorado left.....but I also imagine that Oregon and UW were slow rolling things, the ASU president was in love with his own voice, CU was getting old feet and working the Big 12 to not get a deal that made them look like a chump and Stanford and Cal were thinking they were worth a fuck to anyone and they would have a soft landing somewhere.....so they just pushed off Apple until the Big 10 made enough of a deal that Oregon and UW could accept being second class citizens in the Big 10 and jumped and CU had already seen what was up and jumped

Last fall the PAC had an offer from ESPN for $30 million each.

[GreenspointTexas 9992]

Jesus guys, this is all temporary anyway

[BurntOrange&White 42012]

3 minutes ago, ButtFumble said:

well to be fair the PAC 12 deal was 100% streaming with Apple and Oregon and Washington said "no fucking way" and bolted once the Big 10 agreed to paying them each $31 million to start with a $1 million per year escalator for the life of the current deal

after that the 4 corners had a Big 12 offer and CU had already taken it, but the Apple deal was still there and the 9 were going to take it until Oregon and UW got the call

in addition there was a 4 partner deal with ESPN, Fox, CBS for a little bit of basketball, and Amazon for about $23 million, but Amazon backed out after CU left

once Oregon and UW were gone and the remaining 3 of the 4 corners saw they were fucked there was a call to the Big 12 and then Fox agreed to give a pro rata share of TV money for all 4 of the 4 corners and they were gone leaving the PAC 4

only ESPN was on the hook for their $20 million of the Big 12 TV deal for up to 4 "P5" schools Fox had not agreed to anyone being added for their $11.6 million share even just CU......but Fox agreed to cover that for all 4 of the 4 corners

so the PAC 12 $25 million from Apple fell apart because the Big 10 agreed to give Oregon and UW $31 million each with an annual bump

there was never really a chance to turn the Apple deal down.....though I would think that if the PAC 12 did not fuck around so long to find out if they could get a little more money from anywhere else they could have wrapped that Apple deal up a couple of weeks before Colorado left.....but I also imagine that Oregon and UW were slow rolling things, the ASU president was in love with his own voice, CU was getting old feet and working the Big 12 to not get a deal that made them look like a chump and Stanford and Cal were thinking they were worth a fuck to anyone and they would have a soft landing somewhere.....so they just pushed off Apple until the Big 10 made enough of a deal that Oregon and UW could accept being second class citizens in the Big 10 and jumped and CU had already seen what was up and jumped

 

1 minute ago, LTbear said:

Last fall the PAC had an offer from ESPN for $30 million each.

This. 

[SimonBolivar 11068]

Here's SMU's schedule difference between AAC and ACC and you can see why, if the donors had the money, it was an easy choice to move even with the future of the conference being uncertain and your closest opponent being pretty far away.

2023:
LaTech
@ Oklahoma
Prairie View A&M
@ TCU
Charlotte
@ East Carolina
@ Temple
Tulsa
@ Rice
North Texas
@ Memphis
Navy

2024 Schedule (ACC portion is hypothetical):

Houston Christian
@ Vanderbilt
TCU
Stanford
@ Cal
FSU
@ Georgia Tech
Louisville
@ NCST
Syracuse
@ Virginia Tech
Wake Forest

[The Original Greaser Bob 2901]

1 hour ago, mdmost said:

Man, you know this city doesn't care about SMU. I doubt this changes much in that regard unless SMU just starts tearing up the ACC. 

I'm happy for all the alumni of other schools who now get to play SMU in Dallas.  I'm assuming Stanford and SMU will be in the same western division, so those football and basketball games will be fun.

Plus, SMU easy to hate.  Not as easy to hate as USC, but it will do.

[redswingline 1124]

SMU - no TV money for 9 years.

They will get a few years of TV money before the ACC media deal expires and the ACC  implodes.

Seems like a high risk low reward gamble.

[SimonBolivar 11068]

1 minute ago, redswingline said:

SMU - no TV money for 9 years.

They will get a few years of TV money before the ACC media deal expires and the ACC  implodes.

Seems like a high risk low reward gamble.

If your donors are telling you they'll foot the bill, then why not?

[0xdeadbeef 1704]

37 minutes ago, LTbear said:

Last fall the PAC had an offer from ESPN for $30 million each.

When that $30 million ESPN deal was leaked, there was part of the story where an un-named University President killed the deal because he had worked with a professor at his university and came up with a $50 million per-team value.   

Did it ever come out which university that was?

 

[ztejas 44286]

5 minutes ago, redswingline said:

SMU - no TV money for 9 years.

They will get a few years of TV money before the ACC media deal expires and the ACC  implodes.

Seems like a high risk low reward gamble.

Yeah you're right we should have stayed in the fucking American with UNT and Charlotte. 

[LTbear 4219]

3 minutes ago, 0xdeadbeef said:

When that $30 million ESPN deal was leaked, there was part of the story where an un-named University President killed the deal because he had worked with a professor at his university and came up with a $50 million per-team value.   

Did it ever come out which university that was?

 

No, but there's been a lot of speculation it was ASU. Doubt we'll ever know. 

[nnm 38004]

This smells a lot like TCU agreeing to join the Big East as its only lifeline to a BCS conference, only to drop them as soon as aggy left and created an opening in the B12. The Big East as a viable BCS football conference cratered soon after. 
As others with far more knowledge about this whole realignment issue have pointed out, this sure seems to be a stopgap that will crater when Clemson and FSU bolt. 

[billfromlaketravis 11869]

31 minutes ago, SimonBolivar said:

Here's SMU's schedule difference between AAC and ACC and you can see why, if the donors had the money, it was an easy choice to move even with the future of the conference being uncertain and your closest opponent being pretty far away.

2023:
LaTech
@ Oklahoma
Prairie View A&M
@ TCU
Charlotte
@ East Carolina
@ Temple
Tulsa
@ Rice
North Texas
@ Memphis
Navy

2024 Schedule (ACC portion is hypothetical):

Houston Christian
@ Vanderbilt
TCU
Stanford
@ Cal
FSU
@ Georgia Tech
Louisville
@ NCST
Syracuse
@ Virginia Tech
Wake Forest

Yep. Schedule is better if SMU just plays Cal and Stanford. 

[ztejas 44286]

4 minutes ago, nnm said:

As others with far more knowledge about this whole realignment issue have pointed out, this sure seems to be a stopgap that will crater when Clemson and FSU bolt. 

Part of the idea is to try and keep the conference alive even if Clemson/FSU/UNC leave (I mean I think it's the main reason everyone else voted yes). It would still be by far the 4th best conference. Would the CFP move to not giving even 4 conference champs autobids? I'm not sure - I guess we'll see. 

Edited September 1, 2023 by ztejas

[LTbear 4219]

 

 

[The Hot Dog Buffet 1314]

Hopefully these schools at least get a full share of the buyout money when FSU, Clempson, and UNC leave.

[4th&Five 42026]

 

[bullet 1631]

1 hour ago, Saint Austin said:

How is the 2024 AAC more attractive to WSU/OSU than the Mountain West?

Well AAC announced they aren't looking west.  So unless WSU/OSU can peel off some AAC schools for a non-existent TV contract, their choices are:

1) Join MWC; or

2) Invite MWC to join you.

[bullet 1631]

1 hour ago, 'stache said:

I don't think I've ever seen a school publicly discuss or acknowledge a no vote in conference realignment. I can't imagine UNC is that pissed about travel costs, gotta be something else they dislike about the conference. I always thought they'd be the anchor that keeps the ACC together, but seems they will probably leave when FSU and Clemson do as well, and NCST president realized that they'll be left behind and want the best possible ACC after the departures. 

UNC has never met an expansion they liked.  Duke hadn't previously.

[bullet 1631]

36 minutes ago, LTbear said:

No, but there's been a lot of speculation it was ASU. Doubt we'll ever know. 

Someone said there was a Stanford professor who proclaimed himself a media expert, so that is a possibility (president said a professor told him they should be worth $50 million was the story).

[LTbear 4219]

1 minute ago, bullet said:

Someone said there was a Stanford professor who proclaimed himself a media expert, so that is a possibility (president said a professor told him they should be worth $50 million was the story).

Could be. Whoever it is I bet that professor has uh, lost a few friends. 

[Dutch 4580]

54 minutes ago, redswingline said:

SMU - no TV money for 9 years.

They will get a few years of TV money before the ACC media deal expires and the ACC  implodes.

Seems like a high risk low reward gamble.

One worth taking, though.  They get to play P5 football for around a decade and, if they stop 30+ years of being dogshit and actually start winning, can use it to try and get a seat at the "Best of The Rest" conference behind the SEC and B1G. SMU did paying players with the best of them, and, with NIL removing any stigma about doing so, they'll ramp up the payroll quickly. Any school in their position would take the gamble.

I may be one of the few who looks back on the SWC with fondness*, so a former SWC mate getting better landing spot isn't a bad thing.  Not to mention, a someone else said up thread (too lazy to go back and check), Texas HS players will benefit from one more school playing CFB at the Power 5 or 4 or Whatever level.

*Totally understand why it went away but childhood memories are often sepia-hued.

Edited September 1, 2023 by Dutch

[SimonBolivar 11068]

6 minutes ago, bullet said:

Well AAC announced they aren't looking west.  So unless WSU/OSU can peel off some AAC schools for a non-existent TV contract, their choices are:

1) Join MWC; or

2) Invite MWC to join you.

MWC has a pretty big GoR and/or buyout. I bet you see Wazzu and OSU joining them not the other way around. Also, I'm assuming that the AAC announcing that they aren't looking west means that the PNW 2 didn't pick them and not the other way around. It would be incredibly stupid of the 2024 AAC to allow their biggest competitor to add two former P5 schools.

[Huckleberry 34749]

8 minutes ago, bullet said:

Well AAC announced they aren't looking west.  So unless WSU/OSU can peel off some AAC schools for a non-existent TV contract, their choices are:

1) Join MWC; or

2) Invite MWC to join you.

This has all gotten way too stupid for me to pay attention to anymore. But I think they have to go with option 2. Invite enough MWC members to dissolve that conference, eliminate exit fees, and keep the PAC branding. Yes it's worth less now but no reason not to. 

[BurntOrange&White 42012]

[The Hot Dog Buffet 1314]

4 minutes ago, Dutch said:

One worth taking, though.  They get to play P5 football for around a decade and, if they stop 30+ years of being dogshit and actually start winning, can use it to try and get a seat at the "Best of The Rest" conference behind the SEC and B1G. SMU did paying players with the best of them, and, with NIL removing any stigma about doing so, they'll ramp up the payroll quickly. Any school in their position would take the gamble.

How well are their donors going to be able to cover both their media rights and their players?

[BurntOrange&White 42012]

 

 

[Ghost of LL 15705]

2 hours ago, statsman said:

Two schools that really benefited from NIL- UT and SMU. UT, because, finally, the school could get behind paying players. SNY, because, although they have always been fine with paying players, they had been shamed into not doing so. 
 
Now, SMU is in the ACC, their games are on a major network, and they have more NIL budgeted than any B12 teams (after 2023). I wonder how the TCU-UH games will do, ratings wise, vs SMU-Clemson. Oh, and now ACC schools have a recruiting inroad to Texas (Miami and Clemson are already recruiting Texas). 
 
(and even though it’s BS, SMU claims NCs from ‘81 and ‘82)
 
I see now why TCU dropped their series with them. 

As an SMU Law alumnus and someone who is generally sympathetic to the Ponies' cause, I am pretty fucking gruntled this morning.

You could conceive of a scenario in which SMU, with all its NIL money, recruits Dallas the way Miami recruits South Florida and builds a similar program.  Not a program that is going to contend for national championships.  And not really a program that anybody in its home city gives a shit about.  But something that is still very competitive and fun to watch.

And yeah--SMU's situation is now far better than TCU's.  

2 hours ago, mdmost said:

Man, you know this city doesn't care about SMU. I doubt this changes much in that regard unless SMU just starts tearing up the ACC. 

I think the point is that it's great for Dallas even if nobody in the city cares much about SMU.  First, it's going to have conference games that are meaningful in the national college-football picture.  And second, hosting a bunch of Olympic sports brings both money and exposure.

[Napoleon 8853]

On 8/9/2023 at 2:27 AM, Lymanward said:

Not like SMU is going anywhere. ACC can tape a dollar to them and add later if you require emergency measures. 

This aged well over 3 weeks.

 

On 8/9/2023 at 7:54 AM, Aqua Buddha said:

Why in the flying fuck would anyone take SMU?  They're not good at anything and they barely move the needle even in the DFW market.

This aged well over 3 weeks.

 

On 8/9/2023 at 7:55 AM, mdmost said:

If they're willing to whore themselves out for no pay then I guess you can take that and then get more access to the DFW recruiting market?

This still holds true.

 

 

On 8/9/2023 at 8:25 AM, gatormarc said:

I have an irrational hate for Equestrian because several SEC schools changed course and added that rather than Women's Lacrosse, sticking us in the AAC.

Equestrian team at SMU is the second largest in the entire athletic department behind football.

TITLE IX

That is why schools in the south have added equestrian teams. Plus, if you are rich enough to compete, you are probably bringing your own horse to school and you are used to paying for the horse’s upkeep yourself, so the scholarships just cover tuition, room, & board.

[ztejas 44286]

6 minutes ago, The Hot Dog Buffet said:

How well are their donors going to be able to cover both their media rights and their players?

Well. The Hunts are worth over $20B combined and the Chiefs have been printing money.

[Napoleon 8853]

3 minutes ago, ztejas said:

Well. The Hunts are worth over $20B combined and the Chiefs have been printing money.

Money is not an issue with SMU.

It never has been.

[ztejas 44286]

11 minutes ago, BurntOrange&White said:

 

 

They've lost 2 of the last 3 with both SMU wins coming in FW. I'm sure someone on Twitter will point that out to that doofus aggy. 

And last season a TCU team that made the CFP won by 8 over a totally mediocre SMU team...

Edited September 1, 2023 by ztejas

[DanTheHorn 5092]

4 hours ago, Longboard Horn said:

https://www.si.com/college/2023/09/01/stanford-cal-smu-acc-accepted-vote-conference-realignment-expansion

SMU IS FINALLY BACK IN A BIG BOY CONFERENCE!

It would not surprise me if they start spending enough NIL money to become relevant again.

[Evil Bill Obrien 3522]

 

 

 

[statsman 5698]

31 minutes ago, DanTheHorn said:

It would not surprise me if they start spending enough NIL money to become relevant again.

That is exactly their plan. 
 
Where is Sterlin Gilbert?

[DanTheHorn 5092]

2 hours ago, BurntOrange&White said:

So 2031 we should expect to see UNC, Clemson, FSU announce their intent to leave the conference? 

They are gone in 2036 for sure. ESPN allowed the smaller schools to secure money through 2036 as long as they have 15 members. So can the ACC just let UNC, Clemnson and Florida State out of the GOR with some kind of nice fat settlement. That leaves the remaining schools sitting pretty with lots of extra money in their pocket to distribute on top of the ESPN TV money they are getting today. They are going to be left out in the cold come 2031 or 2036 so why not do it next year?

[ztejas 44286]

32 minutes ago, DanTheHorn said:

It would not surprise me if they start spending enough NIL money to become relevant again.

It's already started. SMU had the 13th ranked transfer class this past window. 

[Murfdogg21 4577]

After the dust settles with whatever happens to WSU and Oregon St., can the BigTen and Big12 conferences finally correct their names or pick names not based on number of members?

[bullet 1631]

1 hour ago, Dutch said:

One worth taking, though.  They get to play P5 football for around a decade and, if they stop 30+ years of being dogshit and actually start winning, can use it to try and get a seat at the "Best of The Rest" conference behind the SEC and B1G. SMU did paying players with the best of them, and, with NIL removing any stigma about doing so, they'll ramp up the payroll quickly. Any school in their position would take the gamble.

I may be one of the few who looks back on the SWC with fondness*, so a former SWC mate getting better landing spot isn't a bad thing.  Not to mention, a someone else said up thread (too lazy to go back and check), Texas HS players will benefit from one more school playing CFB at the Power 5 or 4 or Whatever level.

*Totally understand why it went away but childhood memories are often sepia-hued.

No.  I was saddened by the end of  the SWC.  I still have the cup from the last SWC game.  After watching UT finish off A&M on TV I went over to Rice Stadium to watch the last half of the UH-Rice game in 1995.   I was happy when TCU and UH made it back to the big time.  I wish the best for Rice, although they really need to stay out of the big time.  They are in a good place now.  Don't have any sympathy for SMU.  Their death penalty hastened the end of the SWC and created a scandal plagued 80s in the conference.

[bullet 1631]

1 hour ago, BurntOrange&White said:

Like I said earlier in the thread-jumping the shark.

But hey, its good for Dallas hotels and restaurants.