O.T. Conference Shuffle ( OU and Texas inquire about joining SEC)

[Bay Area Billiken]

21 minutes ago, HoosierPal said:

Florida State wants out of the ACC.   If the ACC brought in a brainiac school like Stanford to bolster the mathletics of the conference rather than the athletics, the Seminoles would pay a ransom to get out.

https://www.sportskeeda.com/college-football/how-much-will-florida-state-pay-leave-acc-exploring-different-alternatives-seminoles-ahead-2023-season

There is a possibility the ACC takes Stanford and Cal as a preemptive to losing Florida State and Clemson.  Pete Thamel reported the ACC Presidents were previously cool to taking Stanford and Cal.  The Pac-12 and ACC had a much publicized alliance that fell way short in reality, never really got off the ground.  But the Bay Area pair and the ACC are not strangers. 

At one time, SLU was playing (and losing) to Florida State in hoops twice a season in the rugged Metro Conference.  I was mere feet away on the baseline as SLU struggled against the FSU Press, right in front of us, and blew a 7 point lead with approx. 30 seconds left.  

[TheA_Bomb]

If it's true, I'm not sure how Stanford could deny a student-athlete NIL.  They may have done so but I'm unclear how it's enforceable. Also seems like Sports suicide. 

This FSU rumbling could lead to changes that actually effect SLU.  If they left for the SEC the ACC may get UCONN (which would make sense) then BE adds multiple teams. 

Also no way SEC and B10 agree to conference championship Autobids for the CFP.  Right now the agreement was the 6 top ranked conference champions get an auto bid. It wasn't conference specific.  So Pac12 doesn't have a bid.  Also everything can change because everything has changed. 

[Compton]

16 minutes ago, TheA_Bomb said:

If it's true, I'm not sure how Stanford could deny a student-athlete NIL.  They may have done so but I'm unclear how it's enforceable. Also seems like Sports suicide.

I don't think Stanford prohibits student athletes from getting NIL deals, they are just choosing not to participate in any way. So, a star recruit sits down with Arizona staff and they say "Talk to our designated NIL organization that we just got off the phone with 5 seconds ago, and here is a list of marketing groups, companies, and boosters that have already expressed interest in working with you should you become a Wildcat." The same recruit goes to Stanford and the staff says "we think you're great!"

Interesting point about an ACC, UConn, Big East waterfall.

[billiken_roy]

22 minutes ago, TheA_Bomb said:

If it's true, I'm not sure how Stanford could deny a student-athlete NIL.  They may have done so but I'm unclear how it's enforceable. Also seems like Sports suicide. 

This FSU rumbling could lead to changes that actually effect SLU.  If they left for the SEC the ACC may get UCONN (which would make sense) then BE adds multiple teams. 

Also no way SEC and B10 agree to conference championship Autobids for the CFP.  Right now the agreement was the 6 top ranked conference champions get an auto bid. It wasn't conference specific.  So Pac12 doesn't have a bid.  Also everything can change because everything has changed. 

ive never seen anywhere that a school is required to give NiL money.   i think you meant the school cant get in the middle of an athlete getting paid NiL money from a third party which i agree with.   

[Compton]

The ACC seems like the next domino to fall in all of this. There are a few exceptional football programs (Clemson, FSU) and numerous great basketball schools that increasingly aren't competitive in football (BC, Wake, Pitt, UNC, Duke, Syracuse). It's already imbalanced with teams interested in leaving (FSU, Clemson). Throwing in two not particularly popular or competitive schools on the West Coast will only exacerbate the existing instability in the ACC. Stanford and Cal might be able to cash slightly bigger checks for a few years, but for how long until the ACC's most successful football programs get pulled away and it has to back-fill with AAC teams (and maybe UConn)?

From the other side, if you're the ACC you'd be burdening all of your members and student athletes to play programs that are in financial turmoil (Cal) and have opted out of NIL (Stanford), making them uncompetitive for the foreseeable future and therefore unlikely to add CFP or March Madness dollars to the Conference coffers.

As much as Stanford and Cal might identify with Duke and UNC, the PAC4 just needs to get over the fact that they'll be playing San Jose St. and Fresno St. and join the MWC.

[Lord Elrond]

30 minutes ago, Compton said:

The ACC seems like the next domino to fall in all of this. There are a few exceptional football programs (Clemson, FSU) and numerous great basketball schools that increasingly aren't competitive in football (BC, Wake, Pitt, UNC, Duke, Syracuse). It's already imbalanced with teams interested in leaving (FSU, Clemson). Throwing in two not particularly popular or competitive schools on the West Coast will only exacerbate the existing instability in the ACC. Stanford and Cal might be able to cash slightly bigger checks for a few years, but for how long until the ACC's most successful football programs get pulled away and it has to back-fill with AAC teams (and maybe UConn)?

From the other side, if you're the ACC you'd be burdening all of your members and student athletes to play programs that are in financial turmoil (Cal) and have opted out of NIL (Stanford), making them uncompetitive for the foreseeable future and therefore unlikely to add CFP or March Madness dollars to the Conference coffers.

As much as Stanford and Cal might identify with Duke and UNC, the PAC4 just needs to get over the fact that they'll be playing San Jose St. and Fresno St. and join the MWC.

Exactly. Stanford and Cal add access to one major TV market for the ACC. The rest of the ACC now has to split the revenue 2 more ways, and increase travel costs in all sports. Is it worth adding them to the existing ACC schools? I kind of doubt it.

[willie]

1 hour ago, billiken_roy said:

ive never seen anywhere that a school is required to give NiL money.   i think you meant the school cant get in the middle of an athlete getting paid NiL money from a third party which i agree with.   

I don't believe this is true in the state of Missouri. The state recently passed legislation saying schools can be envolved. I believe California also has the same type legislation. 

[Bay Area Billiken]

https://twitter.com/mhver3/status/1688961836450779149?s=46&t=jikm5nKg-NlIUjy2c9C9zw

 

[Compton]

56 minutes ago, Lord Elrond said:

Exactly. Stanford and Cal add access to one major TV market for the ACC. The rest of the ACC now has to split the revenue 2 more ways, and increase travel costs in all sports. Is it worth adding them to the existing ACC schools? I kind of doubt it.

Agreed. Stanford and Cal are at best the 9th and 10th most attractive teams to scoop from what was the PAC12. What can the ACC expect to achieve from the dregs of the Pac12? The SF media market and preemptively addressing the departure of FSU and Clemson. But it's not clear by how much, if at all, adding Stanford and Cal outweighs adding UConn, Memphis, and/or SMU.

[TheA_Bomb]

2 hours ago, billiken_roy said:

ive never seen anywhere that a school is required to give NiL money.   i think you meant the school cant get in the middle of an athlete getting paid NiL money from a third party which i agree with.   

I was referring to BayArea's mention that Stanford (allegedly) does not allow NIL for their athletes. Not that it is compulsory a school be involved. 

I think FSU is done in the ACC based on statements released.  Does that mean Clemson is also done?  Maybe if, SEC can get more $ from ESPN for 9 team schedule and 2 more marquee FB schools they might do it. ESPN also has ACC rights could this mean that a drop in FB competitiveness for the conference effects their TV deal? For example ESPN is willing to pay SEC more,  then uses the change in conference membership to renegotiate or eliminate the ACC comtract?  ESPN is hurting right now if they could pay the SEC more and not pay the ACC at all that might save them a few tens of millions. 

I could see ACC grabbing UCONN. Then the BE scrambling to add content (ie members).

The flurry of activity is too many changes too fast it's all about money all about TV deals and not about student athletes, rivalries or traditions.  NIL, transfer portal, major conference shifts,  new CFP system and expansion it's all so much at once. 

[Cowboy II]

-come on, I'm a Billiken fan, to believe this confernce shakeup will get us to the BEast seems like one of the many dreams that haven't come true

-also, I'm not familiar with a school giving NIL money

[brianstl]

2 hours ago, TheA_Bomb said:

I was referring to BayArea's mention that Stanford (allegedly) does not allow NIL for their athletes. Not that it is compulsory a school be involved. 

I think FSU is done in the ACC based on statements released.  Does that mean Clemson is also done?  Maybe if, SEC can get more $ from ESPN for 9 team schedule and 2 more marquee FB schools they might do it. ESPN also has ACC rights could this mean that a drop in FB competitiveness for the conference effects their TV deal? For example ESPN is willing to pay SEC more,  then uses the change in conference membership to renegotiate or eliminate the ACC comtract?  ESPN is hurting right now if they could pay the SEC more and not pay the ACC at all that might save them a few tens of millions. 

I could see ACC grabbing UCONN. Then the BE scrambling to add content (ie members).

The flurry of activity is too many changes too fast it's all about money all about TV deals and not about student athletes, rivalries or traditions.  NIL, transfer portal, major conference shifts,  new CFP system and expansion it's all so much at once. 

I don't think FSU and Clemson are at the top of the SEC's wish list of ACC programs.

[Pistol]

Per ESPN, the ACC has a $120 million exit fee. Even in this era, that's a lot of money for FSU or Clemson or anyone else to spend on an exit.

The Big East exit fee is reportedly $30 million.

[JMM28]

3 minutes ago, Pistol said:

Per ESPN, the ACC has a $120 million exit fee. Even in this era, that's a lot of money for FSU or Clemson or anyone else to spend on an exit.

The Big East exit fee is reportedly $30 million.

There’s also this regarding FSU. 
https://www.sportico.com/business/finance/2023/florida-state-athletics-jpmorgan-private-equity-funding-acc-1234733152/

 

that’s a scary proposition to bring into college athletics. 

 

[TheA_Bomb]

2 hours ago, brianstl said:

I don't think FSU and Clemson are at the top of the SEC's wish list of ACC programs.

You don't think or you're hearing/reading others are at the top?

 

FSU was in the SEC in the past.  Clemson's biggest rival is USC. They make the most sense on fit.

Maybe VT, UNC, Miami would also be good fits.  

For football on TV, Clemson and FSU and Miami are the best options. In my opinion. 

 

Let me scare everyone even more what's to stop a company say Nike from essentially buying a conference?  The New Pac 12 brought to you by Nike and they bank roll the match ups to create TV content that they then parcel out?  They then contract every player to NIL get the best players and compete.  It could happen murmurs of this are out there. 

[WVBilliken]

Seems a bunch of these teams will find out what it's like NOT being the top dog.  

Is Oklahoma going to own the SEC?

Is USC now an also ran?

Will Texas ever be a dominate force again?

I guess they will get more money ..... but winning has just become a hell of a lot tougher for most of these teams.  

"Be careful what you wish for".

[Compton]

56 minutes ago, TheA_Bomb said:

what's to stop a company say Nike from essentially buying a conference?

There's more money for schools in the current model than going the for-profit route. See NCAA v. XFL.

[TheA_Bomb]

35 minutes ago, WVBilliken said:

Seems a bunch of these teams will find out what it's like NOT being the top dog.  

Is Oklahoma going to own the SEC?

No

Is USC now an also ran?

No

Will Texas ever be a dominate force again?

Yes

I guess they will get more money ..... but winning has just become a hell of a lot tougher for most of these teams.  

"Be careful what you wish for".

 

[brianstl]

2 hours ago, TheA_Bomb said:

You don't think or you're hearing/reading others are at the top?

 

FSU was in the SEC in the past.  Clemson's biggest rival is USC. They make the most sense on fit.

Maybe VT, UNC, Miami would also be good fits.  

For football on TV, Clemson and FSU and Miami are the best options. In my opinion. 

 

Let me scare everyone even more what's to stop a company say Nike from essentially buying a conference?  The New Pac 12 brought to you by Nike and they bank roll the match ups to create TV content that they then parcel out?  They then contract every player to NIL get the best players and compete.  It could happen murmurs of this are out there. 

If the ACC implodes the top targets will most likely be Virginia and UNC. The top two programs in states that have a combined population of 19 million plus the greater DC market.  The SEC wants those states for recruiting both athletes and students.  ESPN doesn’t want to lose those schools to the Big 10 and their media rights ending up with Fox.

[Bay Area Billiken]

https://twitter.com/LarryWilliamsTI/status/1689376957228527616?s=20

The Irish are reportedly going to bat for Stanford and Cal with the ACC.  

[TheA_Bomb]

20 hours ago, brianstl said:

If the ACC implodes the top targets will most likely be Virginia and UNC. The top two programs in states that have a combined population of 19 million plus the greater DC market.  The SEC wants those states for recruiting both athletes and students.  ESPN doesn’t want to lose those schools to the Big 10 and their media rights ending up with Fox.

Makes sense, but I have paid close attention and not heard/read that sentiment. Crazy things are happening and no one is happy.  

  I think UNC can move the needle in that state but I don't know how many sports fans UVA brings in. ESPN has the data on how many viewers they pull in.  FSU and Clemson are more rabid fan bases in my opinion with more objective football success.  Potential also probably matters and they could be better.

If ND becomes a full ACC member and Stanford & Cal are added that is a viable and interesting conference.  Maybe it makes the above moot.  

[Bay Area Billiken]

https://twitter.com/redditcfb/status/1688760491500601345?s=46&t=jikm5nKg-NlIUjy2c9C9zw

This is the Stanford I know. Map issue? Just rewrite the map️

[Bay Area Billiken]

https://twitter.com/themontyshow/status/1689353322971668480?s=46&t=jikm5nKg-NlIUjy2c9C9zw

 

[OkieBilliken]

What really confuses me is how universities run by an individual state can screw each other over.  When I lived in Oklahoma several years ago, OU was ready to jump to the PAC 10 because of the possible inequities resulting from the Longhorn Network.  They were prevented from doing so by the state government because the PAC 10 had no interest in taking Okla State as well.    Now UCLA is ok to screw Cal, UW is ending WSU’s relevancy,  Oregon probably doing the same to OSU.    I love college football but hate what it’s done to college sports

[thetorch]

17 hours ago, OkieBilliken said:

What really confuses me is how universities run by an individual state can screw each other over.  When I lived in Oklahoma several years ago, OU was ready to jump to the PAC 10 because of the possible inequities resulting from the Longhorn Network.  They were prevented from doing so by the state government because the PAC 10 had no interest in taking Okla State as well.    Now UCLA is ok to screw Cal, UW is ending WSU’s relevancy,  Oregon probably doing the same to OSU.    I love college football but hate what it’s done to college sports

I think UCLA is with Cal, they are in the same university system so yes why would they screw each other, but your other examples actually compete with each other.

Like Mizzou and Mo St. They are not in the same university system and compete with each other. Mizzou holds down Mo St any way they can. Washington and Wash St are the same.