Yes, the ACC can add more schools, but ESPN doesn't have to pay the conference a single cent more than what they're contractually obligated to. Sure adding might help the conference survive the inevitable poaching of FSU, Clemson, and others, but they dilute the payouts for their current members unless they can get ESPN to renegotiate. I just don't see that happening unless it's Notre Dame.
ESPN has invested in many things besides the ACC network. The network is trying to cut costs, not add to them. ESPN owns the media rights to each of the 14 ACC schools until 2036, regardless of whether the school is in the ACC or not, and ESPN got them for cheap. Right now, I think it's around 35M each, but that's more than what ESPN is paying Big 12 schools. The Big 12 would be a better return on their investment considering the amount they're spending per team. ESPN is trying to cut the fat. They're already going to cut 8 Pac 12 schools from their budget minimum. They're not looking to add more to their ACC budget.
@paulmkz agreed but there's no clause in the ACC contract that says ESPN has to pay. Look at it from the network side. Is it better for ESPN to pay 20M for the majority of all of West Virginia's media rights as a Big12 member or the 35-40M if they were an ACC member? Push comes to shove, ESPN would rather that school to be in the Big12 to save on costs.
West Virginia and Cincinnati are the only schools outside of UCONN that make sense for me. Although I’m not sure those schools would leave for less money.
@@tiredofthem not true. Many of us would love to get out of the Big 12. When possible; WVU fans travel great driving mostly and some flying. We just are not willing to pay for absurd air-fair for every away game. We have no true rivalries in the Big 12; but we do in the ACC Miami, Pitt, Va Tech just to name 3. UVA, Duke, UNC are clearly geographical rivalry potentials. We are just not and never have been a good fit for the Big 12. I was excited when we joined it to get to play Oklahoma and Texas every year. That’s gone. So absolutely we would welcome a move to the ACC. Its just a completely better fit….
Also think about Marshal? Their football program is strong (went into Notre Dame and won last year), their men’s basketball is solid, and just 2-3 years ago their men’s soccer team won the National Championship. Plus, Marshall fans travel and spend money. Then add that now you have another instant Rivalry with WVU. A win-win!!
At some point this all will be put to bed. I would say in the next decade or so CFB will basically be the NFL, but bigger of course. 32 teams in the B1G and 32 in the SEC. Sweet 16 essentially on each side for the playoffs until two conference Champs play for the big shiny trophy and lots of money. Then in the 2040s or 50s, teams like Texas, Oklahoma, Nebraska, Missouri, Arkansas, Florida, South Carolina, Auburn, Notre Dame (conference or not), FSU, Miami, etc...will all be mad and say, "this whole thing sucks, we can't win. Let's try to do this smaller conference's thing cause I bet that will work!" Then the process goes around again. It's insane lol
@@tarheel7406 it's certainly possible. But I personally think 32 each due to a lot of larger universities left out. Plus having a sweet 16 feel will be great TV and that's what drives the bus now.
@@CodyH88 This realignment is about contraction vis consolidation. Only the schools needed and wanted due to some special aspect will be included. Those and SEC/B1G members. The outside fans will be deemed disposable.
Once the ACC falls apart, Notre Dame will have no choice but to finally join the B1G. 🍀 to the B1G is inevitable. Could be a few years away, but inevitable just the same.
@@FEARTHEEER1 You’re right, it doesn’t have to be until the ACC falls apart. They could make the smart choice and join the B1G before that even happens.
I wonder if getting to 14 teams is a ploy because we all know multiple acc teams are leaving so it gives the big 12 a chance to grab a ncstate or a Virginia
Unlikely that the new BIG12 can pay enough to overcome inertia and poach from a rebuilding ACC. Exit fees as well. The ACC is not in the same situation as the PAC. There's no purpose for a national Tier 2 conference.
@@tarheel7406 well in 12yearsish, we should know, knowing that the big 12s payout is higher than the acc right now, and how I'm ESPN eliminating expenses why would I renegotiate and give the acc more money? Basically the big 12 is aligning itself as the #3 conference in the future, then after that who knows but I can easily see in what 17 years the big 12 will be pushing closer to the big 20
@@sparkythesecretsquirrel4013 There is no part of "Atlantic Coast" I don't understand. I'm suggesting a new conference, one with an Atlantic Division and a Pacific Division.
Well, they could dissolve both conferences forming a new one, but there is no TV deal, yet. With the layoffs at ESPN, it might not be the best timing. Maybe ESPN has a good Line of credit to bet on the future enough to bank roll that, not sure...?
The ACC has waited far too long to attempt to fix this. The moves they're looking at now should have been made years ago. Now there are no moves left to make.
What expansion options did the ACC have to increase value? If anything, it expanded too much with CUSE and BC. The ACC faced the same challenge as the BIG12. After each raided the old BIGEAST and SWC respectively, there was nowhere else to go. The ACC could have maybe possibly poached PSU, but no ither SEC or B1G school of high value was feasible, and the BIG12 wasn't pulling from its surrounding P5s. The difference was that the ACC didn't have TEXAS poison causing a rot from the middle.
The ACC Commissioner Jim Phillip should have been ready Oowhen Oklahoma & Texas decided to join the SEC . When USC & UCLA. decided to jump to the B1G. The ACC should have made news. Buying time until ?
@@timothyblack3322 Ready to do what? The ACC had already talked with TX/OK, and the pair was not going to pick the ACC over the SEC. TEXAS may have due to academics, but OK wouldn't. As for USC/UCLA, the ACC had already internally considered and rejected. So wait to announce the 3-5-5? A new logo? Headquarters move?
If the ESPN did not want to pay a lot for the PAC on its own they won't pay the ACC more to add them either. I don't see much movement on the ACC side until the GOR is up again in 6ish years for the SEC/Big10/Big12
This is how the ACC stays alive. If they don’t make this move first the SEC and BIG Ten will divide the conference. The ACC will finally talk Penn State into joining. If this happens Maryland and Rutgers will join in on the move. I think this will be attractive enough to get Notre Dame to commit to a conference;). This will land an awesome tv contract.
IT IS NOT. Read my Long Post that says "I HAVE BEEN TRYING" in the 1st paragraph. There is a TON that you do not know that is 100% TRUE about the ACC and proves you WRONG.
I had to click in here just to say. “ACC is OPEN” where have I heard that? It took a year for that commissioner to kinda repeat what Bret Yormark said.
Again.... Inside the stunning USC-UCLA move to the Big Ten -- and the chaos that followed (Jul 11, 2022) "The ACC has had strategy conversations like these ever since, including whether it was financially beneficial to expand with schools like West Virginia or, yes, USC. 'We looked at everybody,' one source said. 'What do you do? I don't think coast to coast was an appetite that the presidents wanted. I think that perspective would have changed if they had known.'" ... "Multiple sources in the league kept coming back to the same central question: 'Where is the financial value?'" --- ACC realignment: League considered at least four schools in expansion talks, per report (May 19, 2023) In an effort to stabilize the conference and keep pace with the SEC and Big Ten, which continue to grow both in membership and financial prosperity, the ACC explored options for expansion, ESPN's David Hale reported. "ACC has looked at a few (expansion options)," Hale wrote..., "including Oregon, Washington, SMU and West Virginia. From what I've been told, the [dollars] just aren't there."
ACC realignment: League considered at least four schools in expansion talks, per report (May 19, 2023) In an effort to stabilize the conference and keep pace with the SEC and Big Ten, which continue to grow both in membership and financial prosperity, the ACC explored options for expansion, ESPN's David Hale reported. "ACC has looked at a few (expansion options)," Hale wrote..., "including Oregon, Washington, SMU and West Virginia. From what I've been told, the [dollars] just aren't there."
I’m not sure who if anyone would want to join a conference with (;a) A binding Grant of Rights and (B) 7 of its members , possibly more that have intentions of breaking that and leaving for another conference. Aka instability. The previous conference commissioner, Swofford made a terrible deal with ESPN that was binding for over a decade without any option after say a contract renegotiation every 10 years and a hundred million dollar exit fee.
One caveat, the exit fee only gets the school out of their conference. It does not buy back their media rights from whomever they sold it to, in this case ESPN. Since ESPN holds those rights until 2036 and ESPN pays each ACC school around 35 million a year, I'd imagine buying back those rights would cost each school upwards of 400 million and possibly more.
@@benjaminhawkes6693 I didn't say ESPN would pay that much more for those team, but those are really the only realistic options. It wouldn't make sense for any power 5 teams to join the ACC unless it's a desperate PAC-12 team. Hence why the ACC hasn't expanded yet. The only upside with these teams is that it would get the ACC into new markets
@@ItsHashtagBoy I just don't think ESPN has anything left in the tank for rights deals and they want to continue to have the NBA. There is already talk of them trading equity for rights in upcoming deals.
@@benjaminhawkes6693 Off topic, but been thinking (hence the smell). I keep reading about ESPN becoming 100% streaming, but can it move content under existing contracts to streaming or have to wait until a renegotiation? Could the SEC, etc. be moved to streaming while the ACC remains linear until 2036?
@tarheel7406 afaik that won't happen so soon as any existing rights deals. They haven't really done the proper experimenting with streaming, they still do pay per view level stuff that 70k-300k people watch. I'm sure they are watching apple and Amazon with their more valuable streaming content although Amazon isn't really dependent on the income and wants prime subscribers for other income streams (and people have and stick with prime for other reasons anyways). I imagine Amazon will one day rule streaming though (being the gateway streamer for all the smaller services) and turn what sports they have into actual ppv add-ons. I think espn will go the way of Eastman Kodak. They are panicked and disorganized and led by a man fighting culture wars with a state, trying to figure out the future of the theme park industry, a huge merchandise arm, royalties business, numerous movie studios, three different streaming services and a massive legacy linear cable business alongside broadcast television. And he seems to think his finger should actually be in each of those pies at once. The stock price is awful vs. Index, and the parent company is hemorrhaging money quarter after quarter. I think he should sell all the tv including espn to Apple or Amazon and keep an equity stake while losing control. This can leave the various studios with a content outlet.
@@garlandalmarode6396 the rest of the ACC was pretty much irrelevant 10 years ago as well and they still are everybody thinks Florida state's going to make it to the playoffs that's not going to happen they barely beat Oklahoma in the bowl game in Oklahoma was garbage last year
@@jdwilmoth Football Playoff Appearances, 1st Rd Wins, Nattys (per Wiki 2015-2023) ACC: 9-4-2 (includes ND) B12: 4-1-0 (Includes OK but not CINCY, w/o OK but with CINCY 2-1-0) B1G: 8-2-1 PAC: 2-1-0 Final Four Appearances, 1st Rd Wins, Nattys (per Wiki 2015-2023. 2020 N/A) ACC: 8-5-3 B12: 5-4-2 (includes OK but not HOUSTON, w/o OK but with HOUSTON 5-4-2) BIGEAST: 5-3-3 Final Four Appearances, 1st Rd Wins, Nattys (per Wiki 1985-2023, 2020 N/A) ACC: 38-22-12 (includes L'VILLE & CUSE, not MD) B12: 21-09-04 (includes OK, CINCY & HOUSTON) 2023 Final D-Cup Standings: ACC: 2 Top 10, 6 Top 20 (includes ND) B12: 0 Top 10, 0 Top 20 (excludes Texas) B1G: 2 Top 10, 5 Top 20 (includes USC and UCLA) PAC: 1 Top 10, 1 Top 20 (excludes USC and UCLA SEC: 5 Top 10, 8 Top 20 (includes Texas)
From What I’ve Seen Clemson will Stay if the ACC Expands if not they will join the BIG TEN or They Will Become Independent like Notre Dame but from what I’ve heard if they do expand it probably won’t Involve Syracuse, Virginia, Virginia Tech and Florida State but the top 10 schools the ACC will most like target to try to get them to join the ACC if they do chose re alignment they would be(this is in Alphabetical Order) 1. Appalachian State Mountaineers 2. East Carolina Pirates 3. Kentucky Wildcats 4. Maryland Terrapins 5. Memphis Tigers 6. Oklahoma State Cowboys 7. Purdue Boilermakers 8. Rutgers Scarlet Knights 9. Troy Trojans 10. West Virginia Mountaineers
UConn is a good fit and they're definitely interested - if the Big 12 doesn't take them before that can happen. Tulane and SMU are on the table if the ACC wants to expand geographically. The Carolina schools would never allow it, but Coastal is also a pretty good option talent-wise. That's just off the top of my head. The east coast has way more programs to pick from when compared to the west coast
Again, the BIG12 had lost its top 6 upon the TX/OK news. Top 6! The 8 remainders had no trouble getting boo coos of replacement candidates. Just no self-awareness.
@@joeykelly5642 I agree that UConn would be perfect, if rejected by the Big 12. A number of old UConn rivals are in the ACC already. Of course, UConn has a $30 million payout to the Big East if they split.
@@bella42291 That's like chopping off your right arm to save some work trimming your fingernails. I hope you didn't waste a lot of time coming up with that idea.
Clemson, Floroda State, Miami, UNC, UVa, and NC State may All be ki leaving the ACC soon, they just cant afford to keep the biggest programs. SEC and BIG10 r just gonna keep getting bigger
ACC needs more rivalry’s and why they’ve waiting this long to invite UConn is Reason passing any understanding! If ND didn’t want to join than invite Temple or UMass.. These 3 schools have tremendous potential and already maintain rivalries within ACC. They have sat on their assets and now are right behind the PAC 12. I don’t think UConn would consider joining ACC. Stay independent living off that fat endowment fund until the B10 calls! After MBB and WBB both win the 2024 title again and the FB team goes 9-3 this year; they’ll be able to make their own TV contract without a conference! Can you imagine the clout ACC would have claiming 18 more BB titles? Their commissioner is lazy or out to lunch!
a) The current ACC isn't adding any value dilutive schools or "no" votes on dissolution. b) UCONN would accept an ACC invite even if that means ending up as a replacement c) UCONN is not landing in the B1G UCONN is either a non-factor, a +1 with ND, or backfill.
@@benjaminhawkes6693 No one here in Mass really cares about them. They've sucked forever and they don't put money into their athletic departments. All they care about is collecting that ACC check.
Rutgers has not had the resources. They will be getting a full share by 2027. RU got $30 million from the B1G two years ago and $49 million this past year. RU borrowed tens of millions from the B1G when they joined and those numbers will jump dramatically in the next few years. As of now RU has gotten almost certainly less than FSU since it has been in the B1G - which is about to change by a huge amount. RU stinks at football, but it brings in the NYC TV market, so between the NYC market and South Jersey, which is the Philly market, that is somewhere around 9 million TV sets and more than 25 million people. So RU is being paid big bucks for three reasons. Location, location, and location. Being the only college football team within 150 miles of Manhattan has its virtues. By the way, RU is 20 miles from Manhattan. New B1G contracts - NY to Chicago to LA. No one else can ever say that.
@@tiredofthem I take it for granted that in that statement you know that you are totally discounting the NY Times. The Times did a survey about 10 years ago of favorite college teams among football fans in the NYC market. Rutgers was first by a mile, which should not be surprising since RU has hundreds of thousands of alums and at least 40,000 current students in the NY market. ND was second, followed by Penn State and then UConn and Michigan. At that time, UConn was still playing P5 football, so interest in UConn football must have dropped significantly. The TV execs paying billions of dollars seemed to pay attention to RU. As they say in real estate, Rutgers has three things, location , location, location. It would be much better if RU won, but even being a doormat, it is a doormat in a very high rent district.
They won’t if they are smart Big 12 has a bright future ACC will be picked apart by SEC And Big 10 later that’s the only reason Big 10 haven’t jumped on Oregon and Washington
I am concerned about that too. That is why I think the Big 12 should accept only two schools out west and then wait. See what happens with the ACC and if we can get a couple of east schools to go with WV and UCF.
@@manipulatedworld5355 The BIG12 has already been picked apart. It lost its top 6! All non original members are backfill. The question is which is better for any given Tier 2 school, the rebuilt ACC or the rebuilt BIG12. There are reasons why WVU and UCF would prefer either one.
Let's say ESPN earns $500mil on the ACC, and they earn $400mil on the Big 12. We would say the ACC is the better deal, right? Well, let's find out. ESPN pays the ACC an average of $35mil per school x 14 schools = $490mil in cost. Subtract that from the $500mil leaves ESPN with $10mil in profit. Now, let's say the Big 12 is at 16 schools. ESPN is paying the Big 12 around $20mil per school. (Fox is paying the other 11 mil per school). So, ESPN pays $20mil x 16 schools = $320mil cost. Subtract that from the $400mil income off the Big 12 would give ESPN $80mil in profit. Under those conditions, ESPN earns a lot more profit off the Big 12 than the ACC. The Big 12 would really need to tank in order for the ACC to be a better earner for ESPN. So, ESPN will probably say no to ACC expansion while it's easier to earn a profit off the Big 12.
We don't know what the ESPN earns on each conference. We know that the ACC's deal is considered terrible and the BIG12's not, even though the media deals are similar in amount. This means we know that the return on the ACC is far more than the BIG12. Far more than the $100M difference you assumed. Garbage in, garbage out. Regardless, the ACC has already internally considered and rejected all PAC schools, so ESPN doesn't have that option. PAC schools are value or contract dilutive to the ACC while they are roughly neutral in the BIG12.
@tarheel7406 the ACC deal is only terrible for FSU and Clemson. All 14 ACC schools are earning more than the Big 12, but ESPN is fitting the bill for only part of the Big 12 earnings. They're paying everything for the ACC. Each school in the ACC gets about $35 million each from ESPN, which means it costs ESPN $490 million each year for the ACC. ESPN only pays $20 million per school for the Big 12. Even if the Big 12 were to expand to 16 schools, that cost would only be $320 million annually. If the Big 12 brings in 400 million, that is an $80 million profit for ESPN. By contrast, the ACC at 35 per school (at the current 14 schools) would need to bring in $570 million to earn ESPN an $80 million profit. It's simple math. The Big 12 is more cost-effective than the ACC.
@@timmeyer9191 Honestly, you come back with more garbage? I good faith estimate that the current ACC is valued at twice the new BIG12 or ~$60M per annually, and only CLEMSON & FSU are above average? The BIG12 had depleted out from the middle so only TX/OK were above average, but the ACC hasn't so depleted. Of course the BIG12 is more cost effective. It's low quality, cheaper goods to inventory. Adding PAC to the new BIG12 is just adding more low-quality goods at the same cheap price. The profit margin would be standard since the BIG12's new deal is current market. The ACC demands more per team, and PAC schools aren't worth the price that the ACC would sell under current market. PAC schools wouldn't cover the overhead. Nevertheless, the profit margin is higher in the ACC because ESPN is selling premium ads but only paying as if mid-level content. That's why the ACC's deal is considered terrible. Frankly, I'm missing the point here. ESPN would prefer putting lower value schools in with other lower value schools in order to sell ads to the same basic market. Adding lower value PAC schools in with the ACC would just lower what ESPN can sell ACC ads. One merges a Honda and Chevy dealership but not a Honda and Mercedes. The ACC won't add PAC schools, so what is the question? ESPN wouldn't put PAC school in the SEC either.
@tarheel7406 I'm just saying what the accountants at ESPN are looking at. I'm just saying what has been reported that ESPN is paying each conference and extrapolating that the ACC will need to earn a minimum of 170 million more than the Big 12 to match the Big 12 profit line for ESPN. That's not garbage. It's simple math. Go ahead and exaggerate the value of each ACC school outside FSU and Clemson like the Pac 12 did after LA left if you want, but numbers never lie. Those numbers show that it will be easier for ESPN to turn a profit with the Big 12 than it will be with the ACC.
@@timmeyer9191 You're saying nonsense and assuming clearly false profit margins. Again, why is the ACC's deal "terrible" and the BIG12's not "terrible" when the pay roughly te same? Numbers don't lie but liars can create numbers. Economists can't really just assume a can opener.
The current ACC isn't interested in UCF, but a rebuilding ACC likely will be. If UCF won't move to a rebuilding ACC, then I suspect USF will get that slot. Maybe doesn't matter, but that would mean UCF in a low prestige conference playing a hodgepodge national schedule competing for attention with USF in a more prestigious conference playing a regional round robin schedule.
Plus even if it made sense for the ACC, and we were after the 5 year grant of rights UCF just signed runs out, the case for jumping from the Big 12 to the ACC is not exactly that strong.
So the ACC members were crying because they don’t get enough money! But now they wanna add another team or two so they can split the pie even more? Doesn’t make any sense
Doesn’t make sense but it’s the unfortunate reality they’re in. Expand for long term sustainability and give up short term money. But the sustainability is vulnerable bc there’s not enough money.. they’re stuck. Catch 22
@@Knightowl1980 The PAC is a different situation. The new PAC was at a viable 10 and was offered the same deal as the BIG12 without expansion. The PAC was in denial, thought it was still worth Tier 1 money, rejected the deal, and the rest is history. In short, the PAC didn't die due to not expanding. It could have poached the top 4 from the BIG12 and put itself in a better negotiating position because the BIG12 would have been weakened as a fallback for the broadcasters. The current ACC remains a Tier 1 and is likely worth close enough. Expanding only harms any chances of getting a new Tier 1 media deal. This means that the ACC only expands to replace as needed. If the ACC will deplete out eventually, the remainders would be wise to secure the replacements now and settle with and release the others. Since that wiser path doesn't seem to be happening, then things stay the same.
The ACC is expected to pay more than the new BIG12, so barely 3rd. The PAC has no future media deal. The current ACC is not expanding with any school not named ND.
The ACC has been hit with a. "Poacher Nuclear Bomb" ,. ........... .......and it's still standing. That tell you anything? I can't believe how threatened the sec is by the ACC. It's comical. We meet you on the grass in about 5 weeks. Then we'll see who's pounding their chest.
That is NOT TRUE Read my Long Post that says "I HAVE BEEN TRYING" in the 1st paragraph. There is a TON that you do not know that is 100% TRUE about the ACC and proves you WRONG.
@@TheRainman614 True. But SO WHAT? SEC can't get them because ESPN will not PAY the SEC to take them because it would HURT ESPN. BIG cannot get them because ACC was too SMART to sign a TINY 10-year TV Deal and GOR to leave itself VULNERABLE to poaching like the XII and PAC did. They REASON the ACC Deal is SO LONG and not "terrible" like clowns say, is because it is doing EXACTLY what it was designed to do. Keep the ACC free from poaching and watch the XII and PAC fight it out for SCRAPS in the CHAOS. PAC and XII fought it out. ACC and their PARTNER ESPN determined the XII was the winner and ESPN gave the XII a "Great TV Deal" and offered the PAC the Pennies they were worth. And gave XII the Pro Rata Claus they needed to help ESPN and ACC to KILL the PAC, and that is doing exactly what it was designed to do. This Fall ACC will announce a SIX TEAM EXPANSION of Stanford, Oregon, Washington, Utah, Arizona St and SMU (unless 2 or 3 other Big Fish are Wise enough to Bite before then}. ESPN will pay for it and increase the ACC's TV Deal... which is already going to pay $16 Million more EACH next year anyway.
That is NOT TRUE Read my Long Post that says "I HAVE BEEN TRYING" in the 1st paragraph. There is a TON that you do not know that is 100% TRUE about the ACC and proves you WRONG.
@@davidkreitzer4401 Probably. Because they have NO VISION and do not even see their PRESENT. They would cut off their arms because they are STUPID and have NO IDEA how BAD it would be for them in the SEC or BIG. But in a year's time, they will NEVER want to leave the ACC. ACC is going to be earning MORE than the BIG in 3 years' time. ACC is going to CONTINUE to win more Championships than the BIG does ACC is SMARTER than the BIG and is USING the BIG's OBSESSION with Notre Dame to STEAL the PAC schools the BIG thinks they can wait on until later right out from under their nose AFTER they USED the big to destabilize the PAC and PaID the XII to destabilize it further. ACC is more RUTHLESS than the BIG because this is TWICE NOW that they ACC has KILLED another Conference, something the BIG does not have the BALLS to do The ACC with NONE of the advantages the SEC and BIG has figured out how to STYMIE their PLANS to EAT the ACC and pull themselves ABOVE them BOTH EIGHT YEARS AGO and the PAY OFF is NOW. Watch and See.
At the end of the day, by the 26 playoffs, the P2 will get either a guarantee 12 of 16 slots or split away. The fans, the networks and those conferences want it. Thecrest can play James Madison for a participation trophy 🏆
@osupokie nearly 18 million people watched Ohio St and Michigan last year. That 1 games drew more eyeballs than nearly half the games from the leftovers for the full season minus games with Texas and Oklahoma. Some people may not watch but the networks won't miss those viewers
@@buckeyeintexas4709you think that might be because they both were pretty good? If either team was 5 and 5 I would not have watched. People want to watch good football games, not the same teams when they are good or bad.
Everyone outside the Big Ten and SEC are doomed. If you don't get to one of those conferences now you're essentially a future group of 5 team. Big 12 folks are celebrating Colorado coming back but think about this Big 12 fans. Your schools are only making $30 million per year in the Big 12. Big Ten teams are making $80 million. That's a difference in $500 million over the next 10 years, which is massive. Every great coach and great player will be in one of the new 2 power conferences.
@@ddaboss1937 I gave the base numbers for the contracts. You're listing future projections. The Big Ten believes they'll be close to $100 million when it's all said and done.
That is NOT TRUE Read my Long Post that says "I HAVE BEEN TRYING" in the 1st paragraph. There is a TON that you do not know that is 100% TRUE about the ACC and proves you WRONG.
that really isnt true at all...most of the schools in the SEC and BIG wouldnt even be coveted if they were on the outside looking in..neither conference is literally full of FB royalty...
The ACC should be going a little westward LOUISIANA, LOUISIANA TECH, MEMPHIS, NEW MEXICO, SMU, SOUTHERN MISS as well as expand with MARSHALL & UCONN! If Clemson, Florida State, North Carolina, Notre Dame & Virginia LEAVES, I would consider TROY as a threat to the SEC in LOCAL Recruitment(s) and VILLANOVA(as a replacement for NOTRE DAME)!
If the ACC "only" lost the certain 4 (ignoring ND), it would retain 10, which is viable if nor preferred for a Tier 2 conference. No need to expand, but if so UCONN +1.
We'll see in about 13 years! Truly, WV is a better fit in the ACC right now. Also, Cincy and UCF don't feel right in the B12. Just like Nebraska doesn't feel right in the BIG. Now, can you imagine how powerful the B12 would have been IF the PAC merged with them several years ago? That combo would have rivaled the Power 2.
