forums

MEGA Conference Realignment and lawsuits Megathread: Stories, Tales, Lies, and Exaggerations

I've missed the preceding 104 pages of discussion, but someone counsel me as to why adding teams to the ACC is not a good idea? Of course, if we could leave for the SEC/BIG 10, that'd be preferable, but let's assume we can't like some are currently reporting (either because the SEC/Big 10 don't wanna expand anymore or because of the current ACC tv deal).

- Seems to me that if the ACC added teams, it may give the ACC grounds to renegotiate the current TV deal?

- there's viable teams out there that can make the ACC a competitive conference with the SEC/Big 10, not necessarily from a financial perspective, but from a football performance perspective (e.g. Notre Dame, Oregon, Washington, Utah, Stanford, Oklahoma State, TCU).

Why isn't this being discussed (maybe it was on this board so siap, but I'm talking about the national discussion)? Do we have the appeal to pull in an Oregon/Washington or Notre Dame/Oregon, etc.?

I feel like there's an opening for ONE of the the pac-12/big 12/ACC to become a third big time conference on par with (or close) with the SEC/Big 10, and the ACC has the most firepower of those conferences right now.
 
Last edited:
Advertisement
JD08 said:
If you thought the league was against us in the ACC, just imagine in the SEC.
Click to expand...
i cant imagine any current SEC school wants Miami to be in the SEC. Because then Big Boy football is in Miami where Mario will clean up. Let's hope it's the $$$$$$$$$ in the 305.....it's always the money.
 
m-vac said:
maybe there is another path. I do think it will be three league super conference's. As is now, there's 2-4 schools in each conference (SEC, Big10, ACC) that carry the conference.

If ACC is to remain they need to re-negotiate TV deal with new terms & add teams. ND is the obvious, and even though geographically not in line, the big schools like Oregon in the pac, maybe a cincy or MD.
Click to expand...
That's what I just posted about. If ACC teams, like us, are forced to stay put, we should definitely add teams (Seems like there's multiple teams out there that are a value-add both financially and competitively). Doesn't seem like any pundits are entertaining this a serious option though.
 
Advertisement
Even at $500M buyout, it probably still makes sense to leave the ACC. Our annual payout in the SEC or Big Ten could be $100M higher than what the ACC will payout, and we’d make that buyout money back in ~5 years. Feels like a lot of these “reports” are just leverage plays. Last week reports surfaced that ND was staying independent, but they clearly haven’t made a decision yet.
 
CanesNation26 said:
I've missed the preceding 104 pages of discussion, but someone counsel me as to why adding teams to the ACC is not a good idea? Of course, if we could leave for the SEC/BIG 10, that'd be preferable, but let's assume we can't like some are currently reporting (either because the SEC/Big 10 don't wanna expand anymore or because of the current ACC tv deal).

- Seems to me that if the ACC added teams, it may give the ACC grounds to renegotiate the current TV deal?

- there's viable teams out there that can make the ACC a competitive conference with the SEC/Big 10, not necessarily from a financial perspective, but from a football performance perspective (e.g. Notre Dame, Oregon, Washington, Utah, Stanford, Oklahoma State, TCU).

Why isn't this being discussed (maybe it was on this board so siap, but I'm talking about the national discussion)? Do we have the appeal to pull in an Oregon/Washington or Notre Dame/Oregon, etc.?

I feel like there's an opening for ONE of the the pac-12/big 12/ACC to become a third big time conference on par with (or close) with the SEC/Big 10, and the ACC has the most firepower of those conferences right now.
Click to expand...

The only way this happens is the quality of teams brought in. Right now, I see it like this as far as danger zone of being completely folded:

1. Pac-12
2. ACC
3. Big 12

The PAC-12 is in danger; they’ve had poor leadership for a while. If u thought the ACCN was an unmitigated disaster, the PAC-12 Network was even worst. Two of the three most attractive teams to that conference is gone, and their biggest media market is gone, so they r a dead conference walking.

The B12 is actually in a really good spot b/c even though they lost OU & UT, they replaced them w/ high quality G5 teams w/ good fan bases, & are in line for a new TV deal + in a position to poach from the PAC-12. The B12 was already shelling out $43m/school, if they can get that in the $50-$55m range, that’ll be a win & stabilizer.

In regards to the ACC, if everyone can stay put & they add a ND & be able to renegotiate their TV deal to put them in the $50-60m range, OK. However, I’m just not sure they have the cache to do that. I mean, I was looking at the terms of this deal & my goodness Swofford was an absolute buffoon to sign this deal. Again, this was a Beta James type of a move. Of course ESPN signed off on this; they probably had a fresh fountain pen to sign on the dotted line! Just not sure they would go away from such a sweet heart deal for their benefit.
 
Last edited:
Advertisement
CanesNation26 said:
I've missed the preceding 104 pages of discussion, but someone counsel me as to why adding teams to the ACC is not a good idea? Of course, if we could leave for the SEC/BIG 10, that'd be preferable, but let's assume we can't like some are currently reporting (either because the SEC/Big 10 don't wanna expand anymore or because of the current ACC tv deal).

- Seems to me that if the ACC added teams, it may give the ACC grounds to renegotiate the current TV deal?

- there's viable teams out there that can make the ACC a competitive conference with the SEC/Big 10, not necessarily from a financial perspective, but from a football performance perspective (e.g. Notre Dame, Oregon, Washington, Utah, Stanford, Oklahoma State, TCU).

Why isn't this being discussed (maybe it was on this board so siap, but I'm talking about the national discussion)? Do we have the appeal to pull in an Oregon/Washington or Notre Dame/Oregon, etc.?

I feel like there's an opening for ONE of the the pac-12/big 12/ACC to become a third big time conference on par with (or close) with the SEC/Big 10, and the ACC has the most firepower of those conferences right now.
Click to expand...
My 2 cents was after the Big 10 deal is announced for the Pac 12/Big 12/ACC to negotiate a new deal as one entity since it appears no one can get out of the ACC for another 8 years or so. Each conference maintains its own regular season conference games and conference championship games. However, each team plays 1 team from one partner and one from the other each year. This would be a tremendous inventory of games. Reduces the OOC opportunites for the Big 10 and SEC. Plus, you keep ND on contract so if and when they do leave for the Big 10, the ACC gets paid.

Like you said, there are some pretty big teams in these 3 conferences. Hopefully they could negotiate something that is in shouting distance of the Big 10 and SEC teams. At least to last long enough until Miami can move.
 
Rellyrell said:
In fairness, Clemson has competed & won Nat’l titles & there was a huge discrepancy in pay out then, as well.
Click to expand...
Plus, to your point about Nike, if you want to be an elite program you have to position yourself with elite resources. Being outside the 2 super conferences isn’t good for the Miami brand. We need to be in the best conference, as well. The P5 conferences are a thing of the past. Now, it’ll be SEC/Big 10 then everyone else. We do not want to be with everyone else.

We won’t be.
 
Advertisement
Advertisement
Rellyrell said:
The only way this happens is the quality of teams brought in. Right now, I see it like this as far as danger zone of being completed folded:

1. Pac-12
2. ACC
3. Big 12

The PAC-12 is in danger; they’ve had poor leadership for a while. If u thought the ACCN was an unmitigated disaster, the PAC-12 Network was even worst. Two of the three most attractive teams to that conference is gone, and their biggest media market is gone, so they r a dead conference walking.

The B12 is actually in a really good spot b/c even though they lost OU & UT, they replaced them w/ high quality G5 teams w/ good fan bases, & are in line for a new TV deal + in a position to poach from the PAC-12. The B12 was already shelling out $43m/school, if they can get that in the $50-$55m range, that’ll be a win & stabilizer.

In regards to the ACC, if everyone can stay put & they add a ND & be able to renegotiate their TV deal to put them in the $50-60m range, OK. However, I’m just not sure they have the cache to do that. I mean, I was looking at the terms of this deal & my goodness Swofford was an absolute buffoon to sign this deal. Again, this was a Beta James type of a move. Of course ESPN signed off on this; they probably had a fresh fountain pen to sign on the dotted line! Just not sure they would go away from such a sweet heart deal for their benefit.
Click to expand...
Why do people continue to float this idea ND would ever join the ACC? There is zero chance.
****, we let them walk in for the covid year and gave them an easy path to the CFB Playoff. Five minutes after the season ended they were like, thanks but no thanks.

People hoping to add lower tier schools and G5 schools to form a conference to compete against the SEC/BIG? That's crazy. When the dust settles there will be two conferences that matter and everybody else on the outside looking in.

Of course this is bad for the sport but it is the reality.
 
Agree that anyone not inside the big 2 wouldn’t be taken seriously but Jacob Hester and some other dweeb on XM 84 floated the idea of acc/big 12/pac form a conference and sell rights to Apple who has 60 billion in cash to break into cfb. I personally would hate it. We will ultimately be in another conference imo
 
Advertisement
Back
Top