Another example - FBS needs to restructure

[Meangreen Fight]

17 hours ago, SMU2006 said:

SMU is absolutely in the same peer group as the majority of the ACC (FSU, NC State, Clemson, VA Tech, GA Tech, WF, Miami, Syracuse, PITT, etc.)

Wow, the delusion is worse than I thought.  Unfortunately this isn’t about students or academics at all.  It is about how much a media distribution outlet win pay to air your games.  For SMU since the death penalty that has been G5 level.  Otherwise SMU wouldn’t been the last G5 team to find P4 lifeboat they had to pay an entrance fee to get into.  ESPN isn’t happy they are getting SMU games as a part of their package.  And if and when any of those teams you listed leave the ACC they will NOT consider SMU an on par replacement.

Edited February 20 by Meangreen Fight

[rcade]

On 1/24/2024 at 4:41 PM, SMU2006 said:

So explain to me again how SMU isn't in a P4 conference?

SMU is in a Power conference FOR NOW. When FSU and the other bigs leave, the ACC is the next Pac-12.

SMU got in the Power 5 right when the ESPN/Fox/SEC/Big 10 fatberg was trying to create two superconferences to form an NFL-sized competition that screws over everybody else.

[rcade]

On 2/6/2024 at 11:29 AM, SMU2006 said:

The additions of CAL/Stanford/SMU was about grabbing the best available programs that fit the ACC's academic and athletic profile.

The additions of Cal, Stanford and SMU was about preventing ESPN from triggering a clause to renegotiate its TV deal if the ACC fell below 15 schools.

FSU's lawsuit against the ACC is hammering the conference for adding these schools, calling it another self-serving decision that helps the conference at the expense of its existing members. SMU, Cal and Stanford are bringing down the average TV viewership of ACC games, which isn't helping anyone in the ACC get closer to financial parity with the SEC and Big 10.

Edited February 19 by rcade

[rcade]

I give our SMU pal here a hard time, but I am starting to enjoy the idea of the Mustang faithful swimming in the cold Atlantic, trying desperately to convince Rose there's room on the floating door after the sinking of the TitanACC.

We, like the rest of the G5, are the poor bastards in steerage.

[NT93]

https://www.on3.com/news/florida-state-acc-negotiation-to-set-up-next-round-of-realignment/

[rcade]

I was expecting the ACC-Florida State dueling lawsuits to become haggling over price. Didn't think it would be so soon.

The original grant of rights that was supposed to be an ironclad lock against schools leaving the ACC is only four pages long:

https://cdn.theathletic.com/app/uploads/2022/07/01185531/ACC-Grant-of-Rights-1.pdf

I've signed longer contracts to write a book.

[NT80]

10 hours ago, NT93 said:

https://www.on3.com/news/florida-state-acc-negotiation-to-set-up-next-round-of-realignment/

"The number likely will land somewhere near the middle of that $150 million floor and that $572 ceiling. Then Florida State will pay. And while neither the Big Ten nor the SEC have expressed any public interest in the Seminoles, it seems highly likely one or both leagues would then try to scoop up Florida State as well as the other desirable properties that choose to buy their way out once Florida State breaks the seal. 

Given the seeming inevitability of a negotiation, it almost doesn’t matter if the Big Ten or SEC are interested now. If several potentially additive programs buy their way into free agency at once, the competitiveness of the true Power 2 could take over. The Big Ten would see an opportunity to plant its flag in the South. The SEC might feel a need to defend its borders or expand its footprint."

 

[SMU2006]

2 hours ago, NT80 said:

"The number likely will land somewhere near the middle of that $150 million floor and that $572 ceiling. Then Florida State will pay. And while neither the Big Ten nor the SEC have expressed any public interest in the Seminoles, it seems highly likely one or both leagues would then try to scoop up Florida State as well as the other desirable properties that choose to buy their way out once Florida State breaks the seal. 

Given the seeming inevitability of a negotiation, it almost doesn’t matter if the Big Ten or SEC are interested now. If several potentially additive programs buy their way into free agency at once, the competitiveness of the true Power 2 could take over. The Big Ten would see an opportunity to plant its flag in the South. The SEC might feel a need to defend its borders or expand its footprint."

 

LOL.  That's just the monetary piece to exit the conference.  The ACC would still own the rights to FSU's home games for the next 13 years.  There's nothing they can do about that.

This won't be resolved until the early 2030's (at the earliest).  Signed contracts have consequences.  Sorry FSU.

[greenminer]

The P5/G5 talk should start to fizzle as more and more people realize this is B10/SEC...then everyone else.

There will be a split.  SMU put there best foot forward and got a step closer than us, but in the end it won't matter.

What is interesting to me is how the CFB world will treat them knowing what they sacrificed to be in this new position.

[SMU2006]

7 minutes ago, greenminer said:

The P5/G5 talk should start to fizzle as more and more people realize this is B10/SEC...then everyone else.

There will be a split.  SMU put there best foot forward and got a step closer than us, but in the end it won't matter.

What is interesting to me is how the CFB world will treat them knowing what they sacrificed to be in this new position.

There will absolutely be a Power 2.  There is no question on that.  The Big 12/ACC will be a rung below but will still have access to the playoff and the ability to schedule Big 10/SEC schools in non-conference.

The entirety of the G5 is going to be playing in a separate league in the next 5-10 years.

Edited February 20 by SMU2006

[greenminer]

8 minutes ago, SMU2006 said:

There will absolutely be a Power 2.  There is no question on that.  The Big 12/ACC will be a rung below but will still have access to the playoff and the ability to schedule Big 10/SEC schools in non-conference.

The entirety of the G5 is going to be playing in a separate league in the next 5-10 years.

What have you read that makes you believe this?

I'm talking about a complete split.  The B10/SEC will no longer share a playoff/system with the rest of us.

Even with some truth, I think that will be short term.  A complete split, with zero playoff involvement for the rest of us, is on the horizon.

[NT80]

32 minutes ago, SMU2006 said:

LOL.  That's just the monetary piece to exit the conference.  The ACC would still own the rights to FSU's home games for the next 13 years.  There's nothing they can do about that.

This won't be resolved until the early 2030's (at the earliest).  Signed contracts have consequences.  Sorry FSU.

No, it's an all-inclusive exit fee.   They could just leave now without media rights, but the lawsuit is about all of it.

Sorry, your best teams in your new conference will soon be leaving, lol!

Welcome to the AAC 2.0

[TIgreen01]

6 minutes ago, NT80 said:

No, it's an all-inclusive exit fee.   They could just leave now without media rights, but the lawsuit is about all of it.

Sorry, your best teams in your new conference will soon be leaving, lol!

Welcome to the AAC 2.0

So...should the ACC lose FSU, Clemson, Miami, UNC and VaTech....do Stanford and Cal stick around?  I get that they may still want to be associated academically with Duke, GT, WF....but is it worth it to be in such a far flung ATHLETIC conference where the TV money can't possibly make up for the travel?  If they decide it's not, does that mean they tuck tail and join the MWC or WCC?  What of the ACC remnants?  Do they play with the likes of the Sun Belt and AAC?

History says that they would raid the nearest schools from the conference one rung down in the pecking order.  If the CFP continues to allow access beyond just the SEC/Big10, then history just continues to repeat itself, impo.

[SMU2006]

33 minutes ago, NT80 said:

No, it's an all-inclusive exit fee.   They could just leave now without media rights, but the lawsuit is about all of it.

Sorry, your best teams in your new conference will soon be leaving, lol!

Welcome to the AAC 2.0

Your lack of understanding of the GoR and the ACC's motivations for enforcing it are staggering.

There is ZERO incentive for the ACC to cooperate with FSU and allow them to exit for simply a monetary fee.  They have every legal and fiscal reason to fight them tooth and nail (which they will do and are doing) b/c once the precedent is set you could see Clemson and UNC follow suit.

FSU will still be an ACC member in a decade.  Book it.

[SMU2006]

37 minutes ago, NT80 said:

No, it's an all-inclusive exit fee.   They could just leave now without media rights, but the lawsuit is about all of it.

Sorry, your best teams in your new conference will soon be leaving, lol!

Welcome to the AAC 2.0

and irrespective of if/when FSU can get out the obvious moves are to add SDSU, USF, and Tulane.  Is it the SEC or the Big 10?  Nope.  Is it the AAC?  Not even close.

Being in a conference with Stanford/CAL/Louisville/GA Tech/Miami/Duke/WF/NC State/PITT/BC/Syracuse is light years better than the AAC even if there are a couple defections along the way.

Edited February 20 by SMU2006

[SMU2006]

49 minutes ago, greenminer said:

What have you read that makes you believe this?

I'm talking about a complete split.  The B10/SEC will no longer share a playoff/system with the rest of us.

Even with some truth, I think that will be short term.  A complete split, with zero playoff involvement for the rest of us, is on the horizon.

Your scenario will be too exclusionary and would result in the mother of all antitrust lawsuits.  Big 10 and SEC will throw the Big 12/ACC a bone and keep them in the loop to avoid Congress getting involved.

[greenminer]

27 minutes ago, SMU2006 said:

Big 10 and SEC will throw the Big 12/ACC a bone and keep them in the loop to avoid Congress getting involved.

Interest/desire is too strong to care about Congress.  Lots of "let's get it done and we will figure this out later" movement going on.

We'll find out, one way or the other.

[SMU2006]

8 minutes ago, greenminer said:

Interest/desire is too strong to care about Congress.  Lots of "let's get it done and we will figure this out later" movement going on.

We'll find out, one way or the other.

Wrong again.  Congress is absolutely going to get involved here.  Grandstanding and poking their noses where it doesn't belong is what Congress does best.  

[greenminer]

36 minutes ago, SMU2006 said:

Wrong again.  Congress is absolutely going to get involved here.  Grandstanding and poking their noses where it doesn't belong is what Congress does best.  

I think people were saying the same about NIL, too.

weird to see you speak like you have this all figured out, when you’ve been wrong before.

 

EDIT: not actually weird. Perfectly in line with a resident troll.

Edited February 20 by greenminer

[Jonnyeagle]

27 minutes ago, SMU2006 said:

Wrong again.  Congress is absolutely going to get involved here.  Grandstanding and poking their noses where it doesn't belong is what Congress does best.  

Look we all get that you and your University are benefiting from all this.  You rub it in our faces on a daily basis.

And let me be clear, I do get your anger over receiving the death penalty.  I thought that was extremely unfair and still do to this day.

But surely you do not believe that it is for the good of the game to have success based on solely financial metrics.  There is no oversight, and just by virtue of being a private school alone gives you a huge advantage as things stand today because you are not required to open up your books like the rest of us.  We have close to 50K students and yet we can't leverage that in the current scenario but you have a couple billionaires and that alone gives you the right to field a better squad?  It's a travesty, it is obscene and you know it is.  The game as we know it will soon become a shadow of what it was unless the governments gets involved with legislation quickly.

[rcade]

7 hours ago, SMU2006 said:

There is ZERO incentive for the ACC to cooperate with FSU and allow them to exit for simply a monetary fee.

The incentive for the ACC to work out a deal is to avoid the risk of losing in court and having the grant of rights ruled unenforceable, letting any school leave with no compensation to the conference.

The links above explained how both sides take a huge risk letting these cases reach a court judgment.

 

Edited February 21 by rcade

[NT80]

7 hours ago, SMU2006 said:

Your lack of understanding of the GoR and the ACC's motivations for enforcing it are staggering.

There is ZERO incentive for the ACC to cooperate with FSU and allow them to exit for simply a monetary fee.  They have every legal and fiscal reason to fight them tooth and nail (which they will do and are doing) b/c once the precedent is set you could see Clemson and UNC follow suit.

FSU will still be an ACC member in a decade.  Book it.

You really are clueless.  

[Meangreen Fight]

15 hours ago, SMU2006 said:

LOL.  That's just the monetary piece to exit the conference.  The ACC would still own the rights to FSU's home games for the next 13 years.  There's nothing they can do about that.

This won't be resolved until the early 2030's (at the earliest).  Signed contracts have consequences.  Sorry FSU.

You should know money talks and BS walks.  What happens if ESPN call the lower value ACC team’s bluff and tell you that letting FSU go will make them happy?  You don’t want to piss off the ultimate sugar daddy.  
 

ESPN- Tell you what ACC irrelevants and your cabin boy SMU; you can either divide up your portion of the remainder of the promised revenue now and go away or the next contract we offer your school will be cents on the dollar.  Mind you in the meantime until your contract run out we are going to put as many of your games on at bad time slots and behind a paywall and show your real independent value without us.  
 

Rememberthe money is coming from the distributors and advertising on the games.  Hurting and restricting FSU, Clemson, Virginia Tech, Miami, and North Carolina is bad for viewership numbers.  
 

[SMU2006]

7 hours ago, Meangreen Fight said:

You should know money talks and BS walks.  What happens if ESPN call the lower value ACC team’s bluff and tell you that letting FSU go will make them happy?  You don’t want to piss off the ultimate sugar daddy.  
 

ESPN- Tell you what ACC irrelevants and your cabin boy SMU; you can either divide up your portion of the remainder of the promised revenue now and go away or the next contract we offer your school will be cents on the dollar.  Mind you in the meantime until your contract run out we are going to put as many of your games on at bad time slots and behind a paywall and show your real independent value without us.  
 

Rememberthe money is coming from the distributors and advertising on the games.  Hurting and restricting FSU, Clemson, Virginia Tech, Miami, and North Carolina is bad for viewership numbers.  
 

Ah yes nothing like ESPN trying to actively de-value its own property (ACC) so that they can let FSU walk over to FOX/Big 10, a  direct competitor.  ESPN is locked into a sweetheart deal with the ACC through 2036.  They have absolutely zero incentive to de-stabilize the league and risk losing valuable properties to their competition.

Brilliant stuff champ!

[SMU2006]

13 hours ago, rcade said:

The incentive for the ACC to work out a deal is to avoid the risk of losing in court and having the grant of rights ruled unenforceable, letting any school leave with no compensation to the conference.

The links above explained how both sides take a huge risk letting these cases reach a court judgment.

 

Good luck with the legal argument that the GoR, willingly and lawfully agreed to by every ACC member institution, is unenforceable. The legal precedent/argument is clearly on the side of the ACC.  They know it.  FSU knows.  Every other ACC institution knows it as well.

Edited February 21 by SMU2006