SMU's Hail Mary to play big-time football again

[NT80]

1 hour ago, SMU2006 said:

This is beyond stupid.  Where would SMU park its other sports?  The American certainly isn't going to let SMU walk away from football and let everything else stay in the conference.  Not to mention scheduling would be an absolute nightmare.

Independence is not and never was an option.

WE decided we're kicking you out!!

[rcade]

SMU giving up $200 million or more in media rights money to join a conference is hilarious. That has to be a record.

They're like a rich kid with no friends whose dad has to give every kid who attends his birthday party a present just to convince them to attend. And hire Lil Yachty to perform.

[Arkstfan]

1 hour ago, rcade said:

SMU giving up $200 million or more in media rights money to join a conference is hilarious. That has to be a record.

They're like a rich kid with no friends whose dad has to give every kid who attends his birthday party a present just to convince them to attend. And hire Lil Yachty to perform.

They aren't giving up $200 million. They are investing $7 million(ish) a year foregoing AAC revenue that they'd make being in the league. They were NEVER getting ACC money without a significant buy in and that buy in is foregoing an ACC TV share (some sources saying will still get basketball distribution which ain't peanuts).
 

You want to buy a $1 million dollar house, you have to plunk down $200,000 upfront that's how it works. Sure you can mortgage insurance and pay more per month. But you gotta buy equity or insure what little equity you have with mortgage insurance.

USC and UCLA are not taking full Big Ten shares nor are Oregon or Washington because they have to "buy equity" in the Big Ten. 

SMU's cost to get ACC equity is going to be high because, well they are SMU, not Florida State. Think of it as one person going to buy a million dollar house when they have $750,000 equity in their current home vs someone with only $250,000 equity in the current house. The equity the first buyer is bringing means only has to borrow $250,000 to get in the new house. Other person needs to borrow $750,000.

[rcade]

5 minutes ago, Arkstfan said:

Think of it as one person going to buy a million dollar house when they have $750,000 equity in their current home vs someone with only $250,000 equity in the current house. The equity the first buyer is bringing means only has to borrow $250,000 to get in the new house. Other person needs to borrow $750,000.

The problem with your analogy is that before SMU, joining a P5 conference wasn't like being in debt. It was like owning a bank.

Former AAC member Cincinnati will be $300 million richer from media rights revenue when SMU starts getting paid in a decade.

[Arkstfan]

29 minutes ago, rcade said:

The problem with your analogy is that before SMU, joining a P5 conference wasn't like being in debt. It was like owning a bank.

Former AAC member Cincinnati will be $300 million richer from media rights revenue when SMU starts getting paid in a decade.

There's always been a buy in. Nebraska had pay. Maryland and Rutgers had to take limited shares. They just brought more equity to the table than SMU. Honestly, I suspect Cincinnati's leadership is pondering whether they messed up jumping early. Be back with Louisville. More games that drive ticket sales. More games that drive donations. Value of program sponsorship goes up. That sideline banner is worth a lot more if SMU is playing Clemson instead of Charlotte. 

Only positive interaction I've had with SMU was when they came to Jonesboro and was told they'd never been on the road to any stadium that had better visiting team facilities. Otherwise just annoying group. But as people in Arkansas, Missouri, Colorado and elsewhere learned, the license to print money from growing cannabis doesn't go to the guy who knows how to grow it and ship it and has for years without getting caught. It goes to the dude who has a million bucks he can post as bond for the license and has cash to lobby, and that ain't the guy who was growing pot back in the woods.

It's not a meritocracy unless you consider wealth to equal merit.

[rcade]

4 minutes ago, Arkstfan said:

That sideline banner is worth a lot more if SMU is playing Clemson instead of Charlotte.

SMU-Clemson may be as short lived a conference matchup as SMU-UNT.

I've been spending a lot of time in Tallahassee and the talk about Clemson and FSU leaving is constant.

[NT80]

5 minutes ago, rcade said:

SMU-Clemson may be as short lived a conference matchup as SMU-UNT.

I've been spending a lot of time in Tallahassee and the talk about Clemson and FSU leaving is constant.

I agree with this.  They have bigger donors than Smut.  They want SEC and Big10 $$.

[Arkstfan]

Just now, rcade said:

SMU-Clemson may be as short lived a conference matchup as SMU-UNT.

I've been spending a lot of time in Tallahassee and the talk about Clemson and FSU leaving is constant.

Of course. Thing is it will likely be a decade until what they'd owe under the GOR will permit them to leave.

Means when Florida State and Clemson and maybe 2-4 others leave, SMU is at the table determining who gets invited. You think ECU or Charlotte laughs off an invite to join Wake Forest, NC State and maybe Duke in a rebuilt ACC?

South Florida isn't going to say no to joining Georgia Tech in a rebuilt ACC.

They bought a seat at the table to get a vote on who joins the next revamp.

[NorthTexasWeLove]

59 minutes ago, Arkstfan said:

They aren't giving up $200 million. They are investing $7 million(ish) a year foregoing AAC revenue that they'd make being in the league. They were NEVER getting ACC money without a significant buy in and that buy in is foregoing an ACC TV share (some sources saying will still get basketball distribution which ain't peanuts).
 

You want to buy a $1 million dollar house, you have to plunk down $200,000 upfront that's how it works. Sure you can mortgage insurance and pay more per month. But you gotta buy equity or insure what little equity you have with mortgage insurance.

USC and UCLA are not taking full Big Ten shares nor are Oregon or Washington because they have to "buy equity" in the Big Ten. 

SMU's cost to get ACC equity is going to be high because, well they are SMU, not Florida State. Think of it as one person going to buy a million dollar house when they have $750,000 equity in their current home vs someone with only $250,000 equity in the current house. The equity the first buyer is bringing means only has to borrow $250,000 to get in the new house. Other person needs to borrow $750,000.

That's great and all, but they're giving up 65M + 20M exit fee in TV money to make 0 money over 9 years all the while depleting their donor resources to keep them afloat. It's a net of over 200M in losses. That donor money could've been placed elsewhere, not on operational costs. That AAC TV money would've been their budget surplus. They're kissing opportunity costs goodbye and living off of good faith, for almost a decade. Then in 2033, who knows what the ACC will look like or what that payout will be. My guess, nothing of what it currently is. 

[Arkstfan]

Just now, NorthTexasWeLove said:

That's great and all, but they're giving up 65M + 20M exit fee in TV money to make 0 money over 9 years all the while depleting their donor resources to keep them afloat. It's a net of over 200M in losses. That donor money could've been placed elsewhere, not on operational costs. That AAC TV money would've been their budget surplus. They're kissing opportunity costs goodbye and living off of good faith, for almost a decade. Then in 2033, who knows what the ACC will look like or what that payout will be. My guess, nothing of what it currently is. 

Of course. But when NC State, Duke, Pitt, Boston College rebuild the ACC, SMU is at the table. They get to speak for and against candidates. They get to vote for or against candidates. They aren't standing there hat in hand hoping to get on the lifeboat.

[rcade]

3 minutes ago, Arkstfan said:

Of course. Thing is it will likely be a decade until what they'd owe under the GOR will permit them to leave.

I don't think programs as big as FSU and Clemson could be stuck for a decade in a conference they don't want to be in. It would leave too much of their fate to the actions of others.

[HoustonEagle]

My take away is that SMU has to win and win now.  The ACC will lose its best teams sometime in the next few years.  SMU's only opportunity is to buy players like mad and immediately contend for the conference championship and then hope they are looked at more seriously by the P3.   It truly is a hail marry but frankly if you have donors willing to fund the gamble then why the hell not.  

My disgust of SMU has to do with snobbery, unjustified elitism and the most comically stereotypical Frat scene I have witnessed on any campus.  

That said, this decision is smart if you can afford it. 

 

 

 

[DentonStang]

2 hours ago, NorthTexasWeLove said:

That's great and all, but they're giving up 65M + 20M exit fee in TV money to make 0 money over 9 years all the while depleting their donor resources to keep them afloat. It's a net of over 200M in losses. That donor money could've been placed elsewhere, not on operational costs. That AAC TV money would've been their budget surplus. They're kissing opportunity costs goodbye and living off of good faith, for almost a decade. Then in 2033, who knows what the ACC will look like or what that payout will be. My guess, nothing of what it currently is. 

First off the non-media revenue we will get from ACC is about the same as our current AAC income.  So no loss.  And that's before you calculate ticket sales etc.

Yes donor will have to fund the rest. So will Oregon and Washington donors as they are getting a massively reduced share too.  Taking reduced share has happened plenty. We are just doing it longer. But that's the cost that has to be paid.

And it isn't depleting the donor base.  I'm watching the ACC press conference at SMU right now and there are at least three billionaires sitting there.  The money is already sitting there in an account and raised from a group of people that aren't phased by their portion.  

But not that you even need billionaires.  Its a ton of money for one person but not for a group.  Most universities could come up with the money easily, if there were the interest and motivation.  Luckily the opportunity and motivation aligned right now.

Thank you Sonny Dykes for enraging our donors with spite.

Edited September 1, 2023 by DentonStang

[NorthTexasWeLove]

5 minutes ago, DentonStang said:

First off the non-media revenue we will get from ACC is about the same as our current AAC income.  So no loss.  And that's before you calculate ticket sales etc.

Yes donor will have to fund the rest. So will Oregon and Washington donors as they are getting a massively reduced share too.  Taking reduced share has happened plenty. We are just doing it longer. But that's the cost that has to be paid.

And it isn't depleting the donor base.  I'm watching the ACC press conference at SMU right now and there are at least three billionaires sitting there.  The money is already sitting there in an account and raised from a group of people that aren't phased by their portion.  

But not that you even need billionaires.  Its a ton of money for one person but not for a group.  Most universities could come up with the money easily, if there were the interest and motivation.  Luckily the opportunity and motivation aligned right now.

Thank you Sonny Dykes for enraging our donors with spite.

Yeah... millions lost and other millions spent... like I said. 

If there was a gurantee at the end of this road then I would be agreeable. But there is no guarantee of anything. The most logical scenario is sitting there with Syracuse, BC, VA, and Wake with your dick in your hand.