The SEC will add only ACC schools in its region. The Big Ten is only going to add AAU schools or Notre Dame or FSU/ Miami.
The BIG 12 has new contracts and is the only stable conference for the next decade outside the Big Ten or Sec.
Trouble in ACC land?
- Thread starter Buckaineer
- Start date
The BIG 12 has new contracts and is the only stable conference for the next decade outside the Big Ten or Sec.
Lol you think alumni of schools like TT, TCU, Houston, etc that care about football are just gonna stop watching UT & A&M games? As if people dont have family who might have attended, or just are simply interested in what a local school is doing? How about OK State, you think they're going to just stop caring about their rival?
Once the B1G/SEC establish themselves as their own higher quality entity they will be present in every major market, people will watch whether their school is on the outside or inside.
The BIG will not grab Kansas and here is why. They bring zero $$$$ to the BIG. Small state with zero TV's and recruits. Oregon , Washington Maybe but I think that UNC, UVA, GT, FSU are more attractive with more TV's and recruits than Oregon and Washington. Stanford is a wild card but still not as attractive as some of the other schools mentioned. I think the SEC and BIG blow up the ACC and poach those teams leaving whats left to the Big 12 and the MTN West to be poached by the PAC.
The Big XII is stable for however long the B1G and SEC allow it to remain stable. If the Big XII remains untouched for a sustained period of time its only because the schools are undesirable to the B1G/SEC and the networks pulling the strings.
The BIG 12 media deal only from current reporting will be at least $5- $6 million more per year ( before playoff, bowl, NCAa, etc monies) more than what PAC schools can get. For 6 years that would be a minimum of $30-$36 million more dollars- likely far more once you add in the additional monies not part of the base tv deals.
A lot of money to leave on the table and we don’t know, the PAC deal offered may be only $20,000,000 per school.
The networks control everything and they want three major conferences, possibly four. That’s what will determine things. Consolidating to just a few states and schools and eliminating everyone else will end major college football as must see tv. Only Big and Sec fans will be watching those games. That’s not the entire country- expect those conferences ratings to reduce as casual fans from other conferences seek out their own schools to watch wherever that may be and ignore the rest. Personally can’t remember the last time I watched an SEC game. In the Big Ten I’ve watched maybe two games a season, OSU-Michigan and OSU- PSU. Not the slightest interest in any other games. Most college fans are the same- it’s not the NFL.
Like I said, chump change if it doesnt come with an assurance that the SEC/B1G never expand again.
It’s going to be the Big Ten, the SEC and the BIG 12 will absorb the remaining PAC and ACC schools the big networks want in the mix. But that won’t all come down before the 2030s.
There has not been any indication the networks favor 3 major conferences. The networks routinely pull strings to tarnish the brand of all but 2 conferences and have enabled a feeder system that has 1-2 conferences at the top of it. They are not consolidating to "just a few states", I expect when this is done the B1G and SEC will have more markets covered than the NFL.
Casual fans watch CFB because thats whats on TV on Saturdays in the Fall. Your personal experience and preference does not reflect the national TV watching trends. The viewing audience wont be as rabid/engaged as the NFL, but it will be large in size.
Yeah, ok. $36,000,000 minimum is “chump change.” No PAC schools administrators who hope to keep their jobs will likely see things that way I don’t expect.
The SEC recently said they aren’t interested in leftover PAC schools. The Big Ten isn’t interested in the four corners or WSU or Oregon State, maybe not even Cal or Stanford. I don’t think the BIG 12 will waste time on Oregon or Washington so they are a nonstarter and inconsequential.
Both conferences absorbed what they could from the BIG 12 so there is no concern with further poaching through the current contracts and after that you’ll be in the 2030s where no one knows yet what the landscape will be.
You might be right about that. I see three maybe four major conferences in college football. I still think that you have to have something out west , that's why I think the PAC may be done being poached and the ACC might be next. I see the BIG, SEC, Big 12 and the PAC+MTN West. Then AAC, Sun Belt, MAC. SO 7 in total
Yes in fact there has. Why? They’ve signed three conferences to new, lucrative deals and locked them into their available time slots. The ACC meanwhile exists until the GOR situation is worked out. Their current deal is less than the BIG 12 deal and the BIg 12 is still in position to expand and improve the new deal even more, then renew (again). Before the ACC can get to the table - nearly a decade and a half from now.
You may be right on KU, Idk, lots of variables, but end of the day the B1G is going to expand west.
You don’t have to have something out west beyond WINDOWS. The Big Ten already has a fourth time slot with USC and UCLA.
The BIG 12 has BYU but that’s Mountain time, if they add some PAC schools they can gain more fourth time zone windows, increase exposure and revenue for doing that and provide network partners with substantial content for those later windows.
My thing is the lynchpin is Notre Dame. IF the BIG wants ND so much what is a better way to get them. Adding Oregon, Washington and Stanford or adding UNC, UVA, FSU or GT???? But again here we all are speculating on what may happen>
$36,000,000 over 6 years is chump change especially given the very high likelihood before the 6 years is up the conference will shed members. We just saw UT and OU piss away $25m to simply leave a conference 1 year early.
I already told you people that the B1G is going out West when it's time to expand further, leaving the four corners schools to be absorbed by the Big XII. If the ACC loses teams, the bigger brand names will head to the SEC.
I am not 100% sold on that. Too many $$$$$, BIG alumni and TV sets in Florida, North Carolina and Virginia for the BIG to just stay west.
It’s substantial money when you have debts to pay and want to remain competitive. The schools the BIG 12 may bring on board are not getting poached by anyone but the BIG 12. The SEC and B10 have made that clear. So, once they know what their commish can offer , the four corners have a decision to make. Exposure on the top college networks in good time slots with a conference that’s national and has far more fans where you’ll gain substantially more revenues, or wait around, see who else leaves you behind and maybe get a look by the MWC.
Last edited:
The ACC is the only place the SEC can go for more revenues, but undoubtedly the more powerful and wealthy B10 will be looking there too.
Right so the ACC is the 3rd conference because they are poor negotiators and locked themselves into a bad deal for way too long, but they are still counterintuitive to the whole movement with its geographic footprint heavily overlapping the primary interest of the networks (SEC).
$6m per year is coach buyout money nowadays. No one is moving mountains for that.
Agree because once the ACC temporary safety wall is gone, where does ND go? Always a slim possibility they would align with the new BIG 12 with the remaining ACC and PAC schools in it as well. Play similar number of games as they do with the ACC, but the BIG will likely snatch them up.
The B1G already has a nice East coast market in DC, Baltimore, Philadelphia, and NY City area. They want more than just southern California. San Francisco, Portland, and Seattle would all be huge market gains.
The ACC is not third and recent developments illustrate that. #1 their revenues are lower, but most importantly schools are desiring to exit. The primary schools. No stability there and they cannot adjust their contracts to gain new exposure or revenues or FSU, Clemson walk out.
Cool, and the primary schools of the PAC and XII have already left, not sure how that makes us better than them other than we have better negotiators.
We shall see. It’s a known USC and UCLA are gone. It’s a known that Washington and Oregon are gone asap, maybe Cal and Stanford and that no one wants any long term grant of rights.
So there’s no long term stability except moving to the BIG 12 for some. And you won’t have the superior revenues or exposure to help you remain relevant either. Important decision, but clearly at this juncture the BIG 12 option is a positive gain for PAC schools on every front.
The networks made it so by signing the conference and providing promotion and windows and revenues into the future, with another new deal ( maybe even two) to take place prior to the ACC ever getting back to the table. The BIG 12 existing schools have already been a superior football and basketball conference every year. The ACC is FSU and Clemson and they are leaving.
I guess we will all see should be interesting. But does San Fran, Portland and Seattle bring you more than UNC, UVA and FSU viewership. Is Oregon , Stanford and Washington better than those three schools in the ACC. And do they attract ND
Texas makes more money than anyone and both wanted out now. It took two years of intense negotiations for them to get out still.
PAC schools aren’t in the same financial picture that Texas and OU were.
I think the tv ratings do show Washington and Oregon bring higher viewership- not more than FSU.
The Big Ten can’t leave USC and UCLA with difficult travel so they will add more western schools like Washington and Oregon. But, that doesn’t mean once ACC schools become available they won’t go get some of those schools either.
I do see the PAC going after some MTN West and AAC schools to expand and make more $$$$. Rumors of SMU and San Diego St come to mind but also UNLV UTSA Tulsa Fresno st, Airforce Rice and Tulane
Yes, they will stop watching teams that don’t play the school they support anymore. Foolish to think otherwise. They switch to watching primarily their school and conference and go where they need to to see those games. UT or A& M and OU are irrelevant to those fans now.
Last edited:
I'm not sure about viewership, but getting the B1G Network on the cable packages is more significant, whether Aunt Hilda chooses to watch or not. Notre Dame is very connected with Stanford, even more so than they are with Southern Cal. It's a catholic thing.
As for UNC and UVA, they obviously would be B1G possibilities, but not so sure about FSU. It's almost as though there's an unwritten rule in where the SEC and B1G will go to in order to grab more schools.
Us having a TV deal means what exactly to you? That the networks have a vested interest in seeing us succeed? The Big XII just saw its two most valuable properties leave likely with strategic input from “the networks”. Because they have agreed to televise the remaining inventory doesn’t mean anything about the long term outlook for this conference.
We never should have caved IMO. This will quickly escalate the demise of the ACC, and cementing of the SEC/B1G’s power position. Atleast if we saw out our contract, and the ACC did the same, we have a decade or so to hope for a different paradigm to emerge.
The BIG 12 was negatively impacted by those two since before 2012. They had to go for the good of the conference. BIG 12 schools got a substantial pay increase and will continue on as a major conference playing major college football and basketball.
Next decade no one knows what will happen, we only know what they want to be. The media partners will determine how things shake out. For now they see the value in 3 or possibly 4 conferences, so that’s what it will be. Keeping the traitors wouldn’t change anything but making it harder for the BIG 12 schools old and new to move on for themselves instead of what Texas and OU tried to dictate to them. Now they’ll languish in the SEC and BIg 12 schools have the chance to thrive.
Take away 50% of OUs and UTs viewing from BIG 12 games and there is your evidence. Or USCs and UCLAs viewership out west. Those viewers by and large aren’t watching those schools games anymore. And since those two will push existing SEC teams down the exposure windows, expect to see some SEC schools ratings to be lower as a result too. Meanwhile the Houston, etc fans switching to watch BIg 12 games will boost BIG 12 viewership.
Last edited:
Similar threads
