SMU2006

Poverty program problems. We don't need the money.

Difference here is we actually have billionaires who can do it (and already have their names on buildings around campus).

Nothing could be further from the truth re: donor fatigue. Just speaking anecdotally here but the Mustang Club and other fundraising arms have been inundated with donations and pledges in the last few weeks. Also, prominent donors have already earmarked over $100m for the next several years contingent upon ACC invitation. This will be a catalyst for historic fundraising at SMU across the board.

Between NCAAT credits and other non-TV related revenue SMU will make more than the $7m due via The American's TV rights package annually. Also, donors have earmarked roughly $150m immediately to be deployed upon official acceptance into the ACC.

You're right. With a Top 10 NIL how could we ever compete with the likes of Boston College, Syracuse, GA Tech, and PITT....

Tell me what is illegal about what SMU is doing. I'll wait.

Not at all. SMU is more financially committed than any G5 and half the P5's in the country. Leveraging that financial commitment to improve conference affiliation is just good business. Plain and simple.

SMU is in for all sports.

I'm not sure its validation but its certainly proof positive that the SMU brass has leveraged its assets and positioned the university to make a significant move up. Time will tell if we can validate that investment. I'm hopeful.

The school isn't forking over a dime. Its a handful of alumni who are doing this. Also, there is an additional $50-100m earmarked to be greenlit the moment the ACC deal goes down from the Hunt/Miller/Brookshire/Fords that is engineered to keep the NIL and operational budgets in line with other ACC schools. Having billionaires is a super cool cheat code.

When/if that occurs (again the ACC grant of rights runs through 2036) it'll be about the exact same thing that realignment is about now. Money. As long as that is the central component I like SMU's chances to navigate those waters and land in a situation that FAR exceeds the AAC.

B/c the networks need the content. I think there is a very good chance FSU/Clemson head off to the SEC or Big 10 eventually but there are still 8-10 ACC schools that will not have a landing spot. The networks will want to keep the ACC alive. Same for the Big 12.

If UNT had a chance to be associated with the following institutions (US News Ranking:) Stanford (#3) Duke (#10) CAL-Berkeley (#20) Notre Dame (#18) UVA (#25) UNC (#29) WF (#29) BC (#36) GA Tech (#44) FSU (#55) Miami (#55) VA Tech (#62) Syracuse (#62) and NC State (#72) you wouldn't do it? That is just intellectually dishonest. UNT would do unspeakable things to join those ranks if it had the financial means to do so.

There is already a Power 2 but the Big 12 and ACC will continue to exist within the context of what will essentially be D1A. Everything else will be D1AA including scheduling/bowls/etc.

Yet SMU has better attendance despite UNT having 5x the undergrads......

It has nothing to do with being associated with UNT in isolation and everything to do with being associated with an objectively better group of peer institutions both academically and athletically. Yes give me a conference with a dozen schools in the USNWR Top 100 (including SMU) as opposed to the AAC with just Rice and Tulane. This isn't even factoring in the vastly superior on-field and on-court improvement. Its nothing more than that. UNT would do the same if they could.

Not at all. Do whatever you can to move up. The reality is that there is going to be a break from the NCAA by the Power 4 in the next decade. For SMU this was all about doing anything and everything it can to secure a place at the table before the break occurs. You can hate it all you want but if UNT had the cash to do it they would.

So let me get this straight. If UNT had the financial resources to do something like this to be associated with elite institutions such as Stanford, CAL, Duke, Wake, UVA, UNC, BC, et al...... you wouldn't support it? SMU is doing the exact same thing that others have done in realignment. Use your advantages to leverage your way up the ladder.

lol. Its going to be fun revisiting this thread from time to time.

Predicting what will happen in 5-7 years with respect to realignment is a fool's errand. No one had UT/OU to the SEC nor USC/UCLA to the B1G in 2017. If you're playing the odds the B1G is not going to expand until it can get a 100% no from Notre Dame. As long as NBC is willing to give Notre Dame their sweetheart deal along with getting to play a unique, national schedule I don't think ND can be swayed (regardless of the monetary disadvantage). If the B1G can get ND they will then turn their sights to UNC and UVA. In all likelihood FSU and Clemson go to the SEC. It is certainly possible the B1G raids the PAC for UW/Oregon but the Michigan and Ohio State AD's are both on record as saying they do not want anymore westward expansion. Nothing about UW/Oregon has changed since last summer when they were there to be had along with USC/UCLA. This is why I believe there will be either a formal merger or alliance between the PAC and ACC. Both are vulnerable to eventual expansion by the B1G and SEC so why not try to get out ahead of it now and secure landing spots for the likely programs that do not get selected for what will eventually be the Power 2? After the PAC secures their media rights deal (again....its going to be announced to coincide with the PAC basketball tourney) I fully expect an announcement with the ACC to come shortly thereafter. The endgame here is that in the next decade there is going to be a complete breakaway from the NCAA. There will be a Power 2 of the SEC and B1G while the PAC/ACC and Big 12 will be on the second tier. They will schedule each other exclusively all but eliminating a matchup with schools from the MWC, AAC, MAC, Sun Belt, CUSA. I could see a consolidation of a few remaining G5's that have the funding/NIL to keep up the fight to form a "best of the rest" conference while most of the other conferences/programs will be relegated to what will essentially be Division 2.

Army, LA Tech, and Texas State are the ones that make the most sense IMO.

UT and OU negotiated out of a deal a whole one year early. FSU is locked into the GoR for another 13 years. Its not happening.

PAC media rights will be announced the week of the PAC 12 basketball tourney.

This is all conjecture and bloviating from FSU. That GoR is ironclad. They have zero leverage.

Announcement likely to coincide with the start of the PAC-12 basketball tourney (March 8). In all likelihood both SMU and SDSU come in at around half of the TV revenue projected for the legacy PAC schools. The estimates are all over the place from 26m on the low end to 35m on the high end. I think you can realistically expect the PAC to get the equivalent of the Big 12's deal so lets say 31-32m with a 5 year GoR.