📡 Realignment News '23: After a weekend of conversations, there’s continued momentum toward the ACC adding Stanford, Cal and SMU

[OldPlayer]

The new PAC broadcasting deal they were trying to strike would have paid PAC schools 20 million per year plus incentives. The buyout for SDSU to leave their conference, 34 million. (It's 17 million, but subject to being doubled without the proper notice.)

Their effort to form a new conference, in part, was to avoid that buyout. IE: "Let's just disband the whole thing."

At one point SDSU was on a list of potential schools to expand the Pac12 or be a replacement school. I’m sure they would have negotiated the departure fee and timing if it came to fruition.

 

[TerryP]

At one point SDSU was on a list of potential schools to expand the Pac12 or be a replacement school. I’m sure they would have negotiated the departure fee and timing if it came to fruition.

Hell, more than that. Their AD said, "It wasn't if, it was when." I think the interview was with CBS. I know he was talking about both the Big 12 and the PAC in that interview.

I'm pretty sure I've got the timeline right. He said that at the beginning of May and their deadline to request withdrawal from the conference was June 30th.

If they gave notice to leave on June 1st, it would have been a 17 million buyout. After July 1st, to leave and join another conference before '25, doubles that amount.

You suggest it could be negotiated. The terms? Sure. The amount? I don't know. I can't think of a reason the MWC would have to give SDSU any breaks there.

 

[RTB X Bot]

 

[It Takes Eleven]

SMU must be the required flyover school.

 

[BamaFan334]

SMU must be the required flyover school.

or connector flight opportunity.

 

[24and7]

Breaking on Jox..

ACC to add SMU, Cal and Stanford..

One more needed..

 

[It Takes Eleven]

Breaking on Jox..

ACC to add SMU, Cal and Stanford..

One more needed..

Perhaps they're losing a few teams and it will net.

 

[TerryP]

Perhaps they're losing a few teams and it will net.

It sure seems that way to me.

What's sad is "power conference" is defined by the number of teams versus the actual power of the conference.

...and in a "told you so" moment, it has led to what I suspected: schools thinking they bring the same thing to the table when they are only bringing down the talent level of those conferences.

 

[It Takes Eleven]

It sure seems that way to me.

What's sad is "power conference" is defined by the number of teams versus the actual power of the conference.

...and in a "told you so" moment, it has led to what I suspected: schools thinking they bring the same thing to the table when they are only bringing down the talent level of those conferences.

The Fresno State guy wants equal TV revenue...

 

[Brandon Van de Graaff]

They didn’t ask my opinion, but I think this was a desperation play by the ACC that will not serve them well over the long haul.

 

[TerryP]

They didn’t ask my opinion, but I think this was a desperation play by the ACC that will not serve them well over the long haul.

You want to talk about desperation? SMU isn't taking any revenue for the next seven years is what's being reported. The conference is getting an additional 70 million or so per year.

This brings a question to mind. How long has it been since SMU was in a "major conference?" The old Southwest?

 

[TerryP]

 

[It Takes Eleven]

I wonder if FSU and Clemson bargained to delay their departure to allow the ACC to maintain its minimum number to keep the TV contract intact. They could've used an imminent departure to bargain down their exit fee. Now, they can't.

 

[50+yeartidefan]

Absolutely correct....
Would it not be better. As the big 12 did to just grab some quality G5 teams.....than try to fly teams across US....for ACC ....

This realignment is going to look like it was built by drunken engineers before its over... ( maybe already does)

 

[TerryP]

I wonder if FSU and Clemson bargained to delay their departure to allow the ACC to maintain its minimum number to keep the TV contract intact

I've seen it suggested that the additional revenue made them pause. I don't believe it to be true. I think the number is 73 million—divided how many ways sans SMU? 17? An additional 4 million or so doesn't seem like a lot.

 

[PurlJam]

They didn’t ask my opinion, but I think this was a desperation play by the ACC that will not serve them well over the long haul.

Agreed, but the ACC did get 3 Vandy's out of the deal. Sometimes SMU with get up to the Kentucky level though.

 

[TerryP]

 

[BamaFan334]

With North Carolina being a very Liberal school politically, does any of this have to do with California politics? Didn't California threaten to not play athletics in states that don't allow gay marriage or have coronavirus restrictions or something like that? I can't recall the situation from a couple years ago, but do we think any of this is political from a national prospective?

 

[TerryP]

With North Carolina

At this point I'm unqualified to answer. Everything changes with those three words.

I fell into a rabbit hole an hour or so ago...look at the bio's for the guys who run ACC schools. How many are linked to Stanford, or Cal? There's a good part of why this is happening.

And, if I may add, if you don't believe Notre Dame is exercising their weight? Schools of a "like mind."

 

[TerryP]

What's the saying about a blind squirrel catching a nut?