|
Replies: 20
| visibility 1
|
Editor [∞]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 6795
Joined: 8/7/17
|
Breakdown of financials on potential ACC expansion
1
Aug 12, 2023, 8:20 AM
|
|
Longtime NC sports radio host David Glenn goes over some of the financials and why an ACC expansion might make sense to schools willing to vote for it, and he covers why it doesn't make as much sense at the end of the video:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IQq6M8U3Kfo
|
|
|
|
 |
Hall of Famer [22886]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 7317
Joined: 8/31/03
|
Here is my question.
15
15
Aug 12, 2023, 8:32 AM
|
|
I really don't care whether ACC invites Cal or Stanford or anyone else. Clemson and FSU are leaving either way.
The only question I have is, "How can FSU and Clemson use the expansion situation to hasten their way out of the conference?"
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1060]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 650
Joined: 1/9/16
|
This ^^^^^
2
Aug 12, 2023, 8:58 AM
|
|
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [49306]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 15163
Joined: 11/7/20
|
Re: Here is my question.
1
Aug 12, 2023, 9:12 AM
[ in reply to Here is my question. ] |
|
While I agree with you Bret. Hope you're right, seems to me we had a window and leverage. ND wants cal and Stanford. It just looks like in my uneducated guess, we could have told ND become a full member, we'll bring them on but espn has to scrap the gor and redo a new contract. As I said, I don't have enough information to know if that's possible or feasible.
What happens if the SEC really pulls one over on the acc and invites cal and Stanford in at reduced rates?
It's a travesty if cal and Stanford were left out because they provide so much to the "other " Olympic sports in college. Seems that would carry a lot of value too.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hall of Famer [22886]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 7317
Joined: 8/31/03
|
My negotiation would be...
2
Aug 12, 2023, 9:17 AM
|
|
..."Look, you know we're leaving ASAP. Let us go without paying the exit fee and convince espn to waive our GOR (they can just replace us with Stanford) and we'll vote yes."
I'm sure that is not feasible, but from my outsider perspective, that would be my thought.
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [5458]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 5200
Joined: 12/3/07
|
Addendum:
3
Aug 12, 2023, 9:24 AM
|
|
So the ACC would have to agree to let Clemson/FSU out of the ACC while also agreeing to sell/give the media rights back to the schools AND ESPN would have to agree to some renegotiated production/broadcast rights (which they have no incentive to do). So there’s a lot of entities involved that all have to agree to change.
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [5324]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 5478
Joined: 9/11/04
|
Re: Here is my question.
3
Aug 12, 2023, 9:23 AM
[ in reply to Re: Here is my question. ] |
|
I’d be shocked if the $EC and all those umm extremely conservative fanbases would invite liberal California schools. There would be rioting at the $EC headquarters.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rock Defender [60]
TigerPulse: 86%
Posts: 97
Joined: 9/7/21
|
Re: Here is my question.
3
Aug 12, 2023, 9:41 AM
|
|
For Greg Sankey it is not about politics. He has the best, most successful conference and it is built on a contiguous geography, natural rivalries and a rabid fanbase - all that equals money.
He see southern region expansion as a chance to increase rivalries and fan involvement, thus he might jump at Clemson, FSU and UNC but west coast schools are too separated and fan base not passionate enough.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Trainer [36]
TigerPulse: 30%
Posts: 83
Joined: 7/7/22
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [4473]
TigerPulse: 91%
Posts: 4254
Joined: 1/1/19
|
Re: Here is my question.
1
Aug 12, 2023, 10:03 AM
[ in reply to Re: Here is my question. ] |
|
Carries very little in todays world
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [5628]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 4085
Joined: 10/3/03
|
Re: Here is my question.
Aug 13, 2023, 10:44 AM
[ in reply to Re: Here is my question. ] |
|
I agree with Brett.
Sooner, or later the ACC is going to implode, no matter what. The only thing I care about or am focused on is how Clemson can use every opportunity presented to get out quicker. FSU and Clemson are a package deal; so wherever one goes so does the other. Neither will remain in the ACC.
Clemson and FSU have had enough of the ACC. Its over.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [13681]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 9013
Joined: 8/30/18
|
Re: Here is my question.
Aug 13, 2023, 10:59 AM
[ in reply to Re: Here is my question. ] |
|
I don't think ND wants them in badly enough to join the ACC in football. They have their own plan for that and are sticking to it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [10815]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 9367
Joined: 12/29/06
|
Re: Here is my question.
Aug 13, 2023, 11:52 AM
[ in reply to Re: Here is my question. ] |
|
To me, the ultimate would be to take Stanford if Notre Dame would come in and spend our energy on strengthening the conference, especially the teams that I feel are not holding up their end of the bargain ...... Miami, VT, and to a lesser extent Syracuse and Boston College. I expect the North Carolina schools, minus Duke and Wake, to be competitive, although Duke and Wake are right in the mix as of now. WE have great universities and there is no reason we could not rival the SEC and BIG Ten athletically.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [4473]
TigerPulse: 91%
Posts: 4254
Joined: 1/1/19
|
Re: Here is my question.
Aug 12, 2023, 10:02 AM
[ in reply to Here is my question. ] |
|
At this time the SEC is only interested in Clemson not FSU. FSU is going to have to prove that with over 20 transfers over the past two years they can sustain the good team they have bought for this season
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [7222]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 6987
Joined: 11/30/98
|
Re: Here is my question.
Aug 13, 2023, 10:48 AM
|
|
Based on what? How do you know what the SEC is thinking?
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [13681]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 9013
Joined: 8/30/18
|
Re: Here is my question.
Aug 13, 2023, 11:03 AM
[ in reply to Re: Here is my question. ] |
|
I'm pretty sure they are interested in both. They don't want the B1G to be able to extend into SC and FL.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [13681]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 9013
Joined: 8/30/18
|
Re: Here is my question.
Aug 13, 2023, 10:58 AM
[ in reply to Here is my question. ] |
|
I have to believe some of these "internal negotiations" with FSU/Clemson are taking place and why they have not closed the book on this yet. However, I am equally convinced they probably won't reach an agreement and this will all be over by tomorrow.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Associate AD [827]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 575
Joined: 4/20/15
|
Re: Breakdown of financials on potential ACC expansion
1
Aug 12, 2023, 11:39 AM
|
|
As absurd as it would be geographically, the idea is growing on me. I have gone from hard "no" to "it isn't entirely crazy" the more I read and hear. He makes a case for $200 million more in revenue immediately, with Cal and Stanford taking a 60% share and SMU none for 5 - 7 years. There would be some reduction for expenses but he isn't clear how much. He also does not include additional travel expenses, which would impact Olympic sports for more than football since football simply swaps out a game at, say, Syracuse, for one in Palo Alto. So, it sounds like Clemson would net $6 million to $11 million more per year for 5 - 7 years, without having to commit to anything else. That gets us half way through the remaining GOR period with an additional $50 - $70 million, which isn't exactly chump change. If the GOR can be broken in the meantime, all the better. Or worst case scenario is it is a lot cheaper (by half) to breach the contract and walk away in 2030. Best case scenario is that it works out well for everyone involved.
Of course the ACC could choose to set aside a chunk of the money in a performance bonus pool, consistent with what has already been agreed to but now with more money in it, with that money going to high performers in football and basketball. And that could significantly narrow the gap between individual schools that perform at a high level and the SEC and B1G schools.
I am sure Clemson and FSU have looked at this and decided it is not worth it for the ROI, so these numbers probably aren't right. If so, I sure would like to see what their analysis shows. And I hope they aren't rejecting just because they are unhappy with the ACC and want to stick a finger in its eye.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-Conference [411]
TigerPulse: 66%
Posts: 358
Joined: 7/3/22
|
Re: Breakdown of financials on potential ACC expansion
Aug 13, 2023, 10:55 AM
|
|
If they expand you're stuck for sure. You'll never get out until the GOR is expiring. You don't see that??
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [13681]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 9013
Joined: 8/30/18
|
Re: Breakdown of financials on potential ACC expansion
Aug 13, 2023, 11:05 AM
[ in reply to Re: Breakdown of financials on potential ACC expansion ] |
|
I think it is the right move for the ACC if the conference wants to try and survive long-term but it is the wrong move for those who are trying to get out ASAP.
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [7221]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 6905
Joined: 1/25/17
|
If the current contract is modified: "doesn't that
Aug 13, 2023, 11:44 AM
|
|
If the current contract is modified: "doesn't that open the door then to additional opportunities to further modify the contract"?
I.E. wouldn't adding Stanford and Cal open the door to get out for Clemson?
I believe you have to have: "CAUSE".
In this case the cause would be the gross underpayment based on what you have done to bring money to the league. A couple "real football National titles" and a "international" football National championship. But BC and UVA get the same payout and have done nothing.
These are points of view of someone that does not no. So, take it easy on me and explain it to me like I am 10 y.o. why it's not possible. I'm trying to get an understanding, so I can speak on it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Replies: 20
| visibility 1
|
|
|
50
