That is the rumor circulating on the Cal board. It is reported that there was a phone conference call between PAC presidents/chancellors and ACC senior staff (notice: not the ACC presidents/chancellors) and the the PAC/presidents/chancellors held a meeting behind closed doors after that. Take that for what it's worth.
OT: PAC/ACC merger?
- Thread starter Retired711
- Start date
Disclaimer: I’m not a lawyer
That said, any institution that joins the ACC has to agree to the GOR based on what I have read to date. So there is no way any school with P2 aspirations or even Big XII will sigh a GOR with the ACC until 2036.
Another option is the ACC school join the PAC in which case any schools with P2 aspirations can now leave.
Third scenario would be they form a new entity and then it’s a free for all. Anyone who wants to go anywhere is free to move.
Just my thoughts.
That said, any institution that joins the ACC has to agree to the GOR based on what I have read to date. So there is no way any school with P2 aspirations or even Big XII will sigh a GOR with the ACC until 2036.
Another option is the ACC school join the PAC in which case any schools with P2 aspirations can now leave.
Third scenario would be they form a new entity and then it’s a free for all. Anyone who wants to go anywhere is free to move.
Just my thoughts.
Both conferences can form an alliance 
. It should work as well as the most recent last 3 conference alliance.
In all seriousness, it would make sense of the remnants of both conferences ( after the valuable brands depart) to merge to remain viable
. It should work as well as the most recent last 3 conference alliance. In all seriousness, it would make sense of the remnants of both conferences ( after the valuable brands depart) to merge to remain viable
Wasn't there talk about a B1G-PAC alliance ( not just bowl games) that hadBoth conferences can form an alliance
In all seriousness, it would make sense of the remnants of both conferences ( after the valuable brands depart) to merge to remain viable
both conferences having each their members schedule a couple games against a year against the other conference's teams
That never happened and a few years later the B1G took 2 of the best of the PAC.
But an allience would give the ACC better access to the West Coast while the PAC teams ( left) could become better known in the southern part of the east coast .
For me, conference expansion in 2023 is very different than it was 10-15 years ago. People still keep taking about cable boxes but why? Isn’t eyeballs more important in 2023 because of streaming. So many of the schools that barely get mentioned seem like they have way more value than given credit for. I don’t see how UVA is more valuable than Duke. Or how Oregon is more valuable than BYU. Please enlighten me
And with a list like that you could see why PAC would want to merge with ACC. I think a merger between those two keeps them as third best conference. Even after the B1G takes a few more
The UC Board of Regents was reluctant to let UCLA join the B1G, which has seven schools in the Eastern time zone. But every ACC school is in the Eastern time zone. I doubt the Board of Regents would like Cal joining the ACC, particularly because the ACC schools are in the Southeast and so it's a *long* air trip. But, as some of you have said, beggars can't be choosers.
The PAC could just have each of it's remaining programs schedule
one ACC school from their Atlantic and one from the Coastal division
on a home and home yearly series.
Throw in an occasional Notre Dame game and an alliance might work
helping both conferences survive and help the PAC keep what members are left.
But the PAC's TV rights deal might not be good enough to keep some of the programs from jumping and the ACC might not like what's left.
one ACC school from their Atlantic and one from the Coastal division
on a home and home yearly series.
Throw in an occasional Notre Dame game and an alliance might work
helping both conferences survive and help the PAC keep what members are left.
But the PAC's TV rights deal might not be good enough to keep some of the programs from jumping and the ACC might not like what's left.
Has there ever been a merger? No merger is going to happen cause that would mean a lot of ppl will have to give up their 6& 7 figure do little jobs
Cable is still king by a vast majority. The cord cutters are not as many as some here like to believe. Sure, it's happening, but not at the rate where Cable Market value has diminished significantly, it's basically a pimple on a cow's ***.
You might want to look at the link. https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/202...bers-since-1992-youtube-tv-is-the-only-riser/
Pay TV 75.5 million customers still after a loss of 2.3 million. You Tube at 6.3 mil. customers is the only one of the cord cutting streams which gained customers. Satellite TV also lost customers. So, you see a huge rush to You Tube TV in the near future? Off these numbers Conference media rights are still going to be hooked to cable markets in the future.
That's 2.3 million in just three months. Cable is losing 10% a year. Satellite is 13% per year. Notice that Youtube, the pay-TV service that is going up, is distinctive in being available by phone and computer as well as TV. (Notice also that Direct TV has lost NFL's Sunday Ticket to Youtube.) Maybe that's the wave of the future.
I'd like to see the PAC 12 go away so I don't have to hear Bill Walton say "The PAC 12. The conference of champions" 7,000 times whenever he works a game.
The big 8 merged with 4 teams from the SWC…a kluged marriage that screwed over many!Didn’t the Big 8 merge with the SWC?
Or am I misremembering.
I don't know the answer to that specific question, but what's important is that it's clear that there's a long-term trend of cable losing customers to the point where cable is down to where it was thirty years ago. That's why networks like ESPN are watching their spending a lot more.
Until streaming services like YouTubeTV, Fubo, etc. go to a-la-carte services, is there a difference between them and cable? As much as streaming is considered the future, it hasn't translated like everyone thought. Streaming is moving closer to what people ran from with cable. Neilsen has been tracking streaming services, which mimic cable in that large markets still dictate advertising, and that's where most viewers are.
Cable forced NY and nj pay for B1G. Nobody can force Hulu or Roku on you. I have Hulu and it’s pretty a-la-carte.
I can only use like 2-3 devices at a time but come college football I upgrade to unlimited devices. I cancel espn plus until college soccer starts. Etc
I made the switch from Cable to YouTubeTV and was happy with it at first. Now my bill (originally $49.99) is just as expensive (currently $72.99) as Cable, and my selection of channels continues to change. YouTubeTV has dropped MLB Network and SNY (Mets/Jets) because they couldn't agree on fees, but I've picked up several cooking channels. I have no use for more cooking channels. YouTubeTV, Sling, and Fubo operate just like cable companies, where you have channels you don't watch, but you pay for them. I don't think there will ever be pure streaming services with a-la-carte services for sports.
Obviously there is a lot of strength in the ACC grant of rights the schools signed, because none have legally challenged it yet.
I’m no lawyer, but it sure seems to me that an ACC merger with west coast schools would give FSU and Clemson a very good argument that the GOR should no longer be binding because the conference changed so substantively.
??? My cable bill is over $ 225 a month . $72 , I'm doing something wrong or have too many tvs or channels. No wonder my wife has me calling every 6 months to get lower fees.
I was over 300 with cablevision. Switched to Hulu and now it’s barely over 100
I assume your “cable bill” means internet includes. So that internet figure would have to be tacked on to the 72 bucks for YouTube Tv to get an apples to apples comparison. It would still likely be cheaper than 225 though.
I think the PAC/ACC merger is pie in the sky dreaming. A scheduling partnership is possible. Even the ACC taking a group of PAC schools is sort of possible but still unlikely imo. A whole merger between two conferences is dreaming imo because of too many current entanglements with GORs and network deals and then how to split revenue too.
I would be embarrassed to tell you my total cable bill, but internet is only about 10% of it. That's probably true of many other cable customers as well.
Wow..if it’s 200 plus just for tv, that’s a lot. I used to have the triple play from FIOS that put me around that.
I saved money on not not needing cable boxes (3) anymore and not having to pay extra for dvr service (and it wasn’t unlimited either). I also moved the home phone to a cell phone. I increased the speed of my internet too and still pay less than I was.
My FIOS bill started at $155 through a three-year contract. It covered TV, phone, and internet. Once that contract ran out, my bill went north of $400. Next, I shopped around and used free Hulu, Fubo, Sling, and YouTubeTV trials for four months. I signed up under my name, my wife's name, and my son's name until I couldn't do it anymore. I settled on YouTubeTV because of the combination of the price ($49.99) and the sports channels offered. Since then, I've lost several sports channels as the price increases every few months. Let's not forget Optimum is my internet provider. That started at $55 monthly before ballooning to $75 for 300 Mbps. I didn't see the small print saying the deal would last one year, even though I was told it wouldn't change as long as I was a customer. No video or audio means no proof of that lie. I tried to get Optimum's one gig deal ($50) but couldn't because I was an existing customer. Both treat me like sh*t now that got me as a customer. The cost is creeping back to levels I ran from a few years ago.
75 for 300mbps seems quite a bit. On FIOS, I pay that much for a gig but it’s discounted a little because I also have Verizon cell service.
Rumor has it Oregon, Washington. Utah, Stanford. Arizona st, SMU is the teams ESPN and the ACC is in talks with to form a 2 coastal conference.
ESPN needs content for the ACC network that just came to terms with Comcast.
There have been folks steadfast in saying the GOR will not be in jeopardy if the ACC and ESPN invite these certain teams.
ESPN needs content for the ACC network that just came to terms with Comcast.
There have been folks steadfast in saying the GOR will not be in jeopardy if the ACC and ESPN invite these certain teams.
More like left. Arkansas left years earlier to join the SEC. Texas, Baylor, A&M, and Texas Tech left the SWC and joined the Big 8, Rice, SMU, TCU, and I believe Houston were left out in the cold.Didn’t the Big 8 merge with the SWC?
Or am I misremembering.
actually the Big 8 took the best of the SWC after the conference decided to disband because only a few of it's members could afford to run a quality football program with the type of revenue the SWC could give in its revenue sharing and how scandals hurt the conference's image.Didn’t the Big 8 merge with the SWC?
Or am I misremembering.
The Big 8 only took Texas, Texas A&M , Texas Tech and Baylor leaving the rest to fend for itself.
Arkansas left the year before the SWC went poof and joined the SEC .
That 225 direct TV doesn't include internet. I get a separate fios bill.
Most people didn't know the Big 12 got off to a rocky start. Colorado was one of those schools that complained about the Southwest Conference schools joining the Big 8 schools. Colorado's AD felt Texas ( and Texas A&M, to a lesser extent) would demand special treatment because of their name, and who didn't see that coming? Other ADs/presidents from Oklahoma and Nebraska eased fears and convinced the other Big 8 schools to vote in favor of the merger. Over time, Nebraska started to see what Colorado had been saying about Texas. The Big 12 was close to never forming as a conference.