OT: SMU Stanford Cal to the ACC

Dec 17, 2008
45,215
16,775
0
Last night the UNC BoT came out with strong statements against expansion. Some took that to mean someone changed their vote out of UNC/Clemson/FSU/NC State. The rumor was that NC State changed its vote and so the ACC got the 12 of 15 needed to add SMU, Stanford, Cal
 
Nov 9, 2016
164
285
0
Maybe someone can explain further but this doesn’t sound good: “SMU will not receive any media rights revenue for 1st 7 years.”
 

RUfromNJ

All-Conference
Oct 23, 2007
4,449
3,141
0
Maybe someone can explain further but this doesn’t sound good: “SMU will not receive any media rights revenue for 1st 7 years.”
Frustrated World Cup GIF
 
Dec 17, 2008
45,215
16,775
0
Maybe someone can explain further but this doesn’t sound good: “SMU will not receive any media rights revenue for 1st 7 years.”
Yea they won't get any tv revenue from the conference for the first 7 years. It's the price they're willing to pay to get into the P4/5. They're known for their boosters. I mean how much money must they be making now in the AAC? I think they might get about 8-9M from the AAC. So if you look at it in those terms it's not too bad. So sort of 63M less than what they're making now over the 7 years and the boosters might pick up that tab.
 
  • Like
Reactions: RedTeam8s
Dec 17, 2008
45,215
16,775
0
time for the PAC-2 to expand lol
Well that's the next shoe to drop. The AAC and MWC are both trying to get them to join.

I still wonder if they can't figure out something where the MWC schools all jump on board the PAC so they can all share whatever grandfathered benefits/money the PAC might have left.
 

NickRU714

Heisman
Aug 18, 2009
13,604
12,367
0
Ahhh just like the "college athletics we grew up with". Right everyone?
Cal and Stanford in the ATLANTIC COASTAL CONFERENCE.

Too bad it's "NIL" ruining how pure college athletics is.....

The Office Reaction GIF
 
Last edited:
Dec 17, 2008
45,215
16,775
0
From the article:

The expectation entering Friday’s meeting was that at least one member — NC State — planned to support the expansion proposal, giving the league the necessary 12 votes for expansion.

Under the ACC’s most recent proposal, Stanford and Cal would take a reduced TV share (~30% or roughly $8 million) and SMU was expected to take no TV share for as many as nine years. The concessions free up about $55 million to be distributed to ACC teams both evenly and through an incentive pool primarily rewarding football success.

The additional money is coming from ESPN, which is contractually obligated to pay the league a Tier 1 TV share (roughly $24 million) for each additional expansion member - a total of $72 million. The schools would see an escalation in their shares through the Grant of Rights and they’d receive non-TV ACC shares from NCAA tournament, CFP and the incentive pool.

The incentive pool from the additional expansion revenue is heavily weighted on football success. In one proposal circulated among officials, the cash would be distributed based only on football success. It’s unclear if that proposal has been formalized. A school that reaches all football incentives (national title) stands to get as much as $10 million in additional cash




Their boosters probably will.

 

wheezer

Heisman
Jun 3, 2001
169,165
24,778
113
Maybe someone can explain further but this doesn’t sound good: “SMU will not receive any media rights revenue for 1st 7 years.”
I believe SMU offered this as a way to get in
And it worked

Best guess is that NC state was the flipped vote, maybe a long term play to keep NC in conference later on

Question becomes, will Fla state and Clemson be satisfied with this, or still actively look for the exit
 

rureadyforsomefootball

All-Conference
Aug 20, 2005
5,246
2,065
113
Wow, the old Pac 12, college sports and TV, a marriage made in heaven, lol. Thank the Lord for Rutgers location is all I got to say.
 

NickRU714

Heisman
Aug 18, 2009
13,604
12,367
0
How are Stanford and Cal going to run their Atheltic Departments on approx $8m/year in media revenue?

How much are they currently receiving from the PAC-12 annually?
 

Ridge 22

All-American
Jun 30, 2007
7,348
9,428
98
What happens once the 3 new schools start receiving a full share over the next 3-7 years? I don't see how this is accretive longer term for the existing ACC schools
 
  • Like
Reactions: ScarletDave

AntiG

All-Conference
Jan 27, 2012
4,512
3,561
113
Tells me they expect to lose teams to the SEC or BIG. More likely to both.
UNC, FSU, Clemson all voted against them... NC State changed their vote in the end.

FSU and Clemson have been talking about leaving the ACC for over a decade and almost did several times. Its coming and it will be ugly lol
 

Scarlet4ever

All-American
Feb 14, 2004
8,593
6,500
98
How is this better for Cal and Stanford at 30% revenue than trying to go to the Big 12? I realize the ACC schools on average have better academic profiles and may be more alike, but taking pennies on the dollar to travel coast to coast seems like a poor decision.

I wonder if adding more slices to the pie helps FSU and Clemson legally challenge the GOR.
 
Dec 17, 2008
45,215
16,775
0
How is this better for Cal and Stanford at 30% revenue than trying to go to the Big 12? I realize the ACC schools on average have better academic profiles and may be more alike, but taking pennies on the dollar to travel coast to coast seems like a poor decision.

I wonder if adding more slices to the pie helps FSU and Clemson legally challenge the GOR.
There have been rumors that changing conference configuration provides some sort of out from the GOR but I think that's just internet bunk. It will still be as hard and costly to get out of the GOR as it was before this expansion. Maybe that PE deal works but it won't be cheap.
 

Knight Shift

Heisman
May 19, 2011
85,790
83,340
113
From the article:

The expectation entering Friday’s meeting was that at least one member — NC State — planned to support the expansion proposal, giving the league the necessary 12 votes for expansion.

Under the ACC’s most recent proposal, Stanford and Cal would take a reduced TV share (~30% or roughly $8 million) and SMU was expected to take no TV share for as many as nine years. The concessions free up about $55 million to be distributed to ACC teams both evenly and through an incentive pool primarily rewarding football success.

The additional money is coming from ESPN, which is contractually obligated to pay the league a Tier 1 TV share (roughly $24 million) for each additional expansion member - a total of $72 million. The schools would see an escalation in their shares through the Grant of Rights and they’d receive non-TV ACC shares from NCAA tournament, CFP and the incentive pool.

The incentive pool from the additional expansion revenue is heavily weighted on football success. In one proposal circulated among officials, the cash would be distributed based only on football success. It’s unclear if that proposal has been formalized. A school that reaches all football incentives (national title) stands to get as much as $10 million in additional cash




Their boosters probably will.


Did they have to sign that onerous grant of rights? That would be stupid if they did.

And I hope Oregon State wins the PAC 2 this year and show all those yellow-bellied losers who is boss of the PAC!!!!
 
Dec 17, 2008
45,215
16,775
0
Did they have to sign that onerous grant of rights? That would be stupid if they did.

And I hope Oregon State wins the PAC 2 this year and show all those yellow-bellied losers who is boss of the PAC!!!!
Yea for sure the 3 new additions have to sign the GOR to join.

Oregon State is the sentimental favorite people are rooting for this year. We'll see if they can build on last year. I think it'll be tough road to that, depends on how consistent DJU can be for them.
 
  • Like
Reactions: cicero grimes

JerseyNoles

All-Conference
Jul 28, 2021
2,844
2,425
3
Love the move for SMU, their boosters are stepping up big time
I'd love to see them competitive and a thorn in the side of UT, A&M, OU, LSU, etc.
 

knight82

All-American
Nov 4, 2002
8,245
8,652
113
I guess the Mountain West and AAC will fight over Oregon State and Washington State
 

krup

Heisman
Feb 5, 2003
70,133
10,066
0
What happens once the 3 new schools start receiving a full share over the next 3-7 years? I don't see how this is accretive longer term for the existing ACC schools
They don’t, according to the stories.

No share for SMU and about 30% shares for Stanford and Cal for the next 7 years.

By then, FSU and Clemson are out or close to getting out and the deal will need to be redone anyway,
 

Brisket and Bourbon

All-Conference
Jun 22, 2023
1,138
1,112
0
ATLANTIC COAST conference…makes sense!

Conference realignment 🤦🏻‍♂️

2 west coast teams will have to fly all over the east…and once place in Texas.

14 east coast teams will have to fly west and to Texas for all the sports few to no one cares about.

More money and way more travel expenses…like way more.

So stupid.
 
Last edited:

Greene Rice FIG

Heisman
Dec 30, 2005
40,437
23,613
0
Next let’s just drop the going to class requirement. What does a Stanford baseball player do having to spend 5 weekends on the east coast. Schedule is MW1 MW2 MW3 MW4 MW5