NCAA reorg imminent

[Essexfenwick]

Super happy with UMD administration monetizing it’s location advantage instead of sharing its money with the old ACC members that made our “Rival” to be Pitt. The institution really has foresight and intelligence regarding the big picture over emotion.

maryland brought in a paltry $107 million last year and i'm assuming still has a s***load of debt. they weren't sharing "their money" with anyone.

Will be making 100 million just from tv after 2024. The B1G doubled tv revenue after UMD and Rutgers joined. UMD had to pay back the B1G loan for escape from ACC fee. That’s done this year. The only school left that keeps revenue per school from dropping is Notre Dame.

[Essexfenwick]

Also a ton of giving to the AD has been rerouted to NIL programs by design.

[ggait]

Exactly two years ago, P12/ACC/B10 announced their "alliance" as the counter to the SEC's grab of UT and OU.

In hindsight, it was the exactly correct concept. It bundled the three most aligned conferences (large Olympic sports, AAU/high academics). Also, the nation-wide scheduling alliance would only apply to the mobile money sports -- football, mbb, wbb.

Problem was it was just a handshake deal that wasn't firmed up with real commitments, contracts and dollars. So once USC decided to bolt to the $$$ greener pastures of the B10, Katy bar the door.

As I tell my clients, handshake deals are worth the paper they are written on.

[Essexfenwick]

Exactly two years ago, P12/ACC/B10 announced their "alliance" as the counter to the SEC's grab of UT and OU.

In hindsight, it was the exactly correct concept. It bundled the three most aligned conferences (large Olympic sports, AAU/high academics). Also, the nation-wide scheduling alliance would only apply to the mobile money sports -- football, mbb, wbb.

Problem was it was just a handshake deal that wasn't firmed up with real commitments, contracts and dollars. So once USC decided to bolt to the $$$ greener pastures of the B10, Katy bar the door.

As I tell my clients, handshake deals are worth the paper they are written on.

The PAC 4 should go to the big 12. That will make 4 solid conferences and should end the drama.

[Njlaxx11]

Exactly two years ago, P12/ACC/B10 announced their "alliance" as the counter to the SEC's grab of UT and OU.

In hindsight, it was the exactly correct concept. It bundled the three most aligned conferences (large Olympic sports, AAU/high academics). Also, the nation-wide scheduling alliance would only apply to the mobile money sports -- football, mbb, wbb.

Problem was it was just a handshake deal that wasn't firmed up with real commitments, contracts and dollars. So once USC decided to bolt to the $$$ greener pastures of the B10, Katy bar the door.

As I tell my clients, handshake deals are worth the paper they are written on.

The PAC 4 should go to the big 12. That will make 4 solid conferences and should end the drama.

i think they should just get rid of conferences - it has no bearing on the the national championship tournaments. I'm sure people would be upset that "classic rivalries" would be taken away but they can always just be scheduled.

[Essexfenwick]

Exactly two years ago, P12/ACC/B10 announced their "alliance" as the counter to the SEC's grab of UT and OU.

In hindsight, it was the exactly correct concept. It bundled the three most aligned conferences (large Olympic sports, AAU/high academics). Also, the nation-wide scheduling alliance would only apply to the mobile money sports -- football, mbb, wbb.

Problem was it was just a handshake deal that wasn't firmed up with real commitments, contracts and dollars. So once USC decided to bolt to the $$$ greener pastures of the B10, Katy bar the door.

As I tell my clients, handshake deals are worth the paper they are written on.

The PAC 4 should go to the big 12. That will make 4 solid conferences and should end the drama.

i think they should just get rid of conferences - it has no bearing on the the national championship tournaments. I'm sure people would be upset that "classic rivalries" would be taken away but they can always just be scheduled.

Other than Northwestern and Vanderbilt the Big Ten and SEC are very coherent alliances. Why would they give up strategic advantage for their institutions? Every conference from the SEC to the Ivy League has its own image and identity.

[wgdsr]

Super happy with UMD administration monetizing it’s location advantage instead of sharing its money with the old ACC members that made our “Rival” to be Pitt. The institution really has foresight and intelligence regarding the big picture over emotion.

maryland brought in a paltry $107 million last year and i'm assuming still has a s***load of debt. they weren't sharing "their money" with anyone.

Will be making 100 million just from tv after 2024.
The B1G doubled tv revenue after UMD and Rutgers joined. UMD had to pay back the B1G loan for escape from ACC fee. That’s done this year. The only school left that keeps revenue per school from dropping is Notre Dame.

no, they won't. it's possible you have a real difficult time following this stuff because it's moving fast, or just source everything on twitter.
the b1g, sec even the acc have been doubling + revenue on new contracts for quite some time now. it's in the papers. maryland and rutgers are only in one of them.
the exit fee was i believe only $31 million. we're working on a decade ago now. i thought the b1g was making b1g money? that's not even the annual income of a lot of folks on here's cul de sac. fact is, they've been running sizable deficits and that's maybe turned into a sizable debt. but i can be corrected (source?).
you may not have heard, but revenues are increasing and the acc is locked into a 20 year contract. notre dame hardly figures in, given they are a partial member in the one sport that really matters.

as long as we're bringing up donors, uva with a v good donation year had $160 in revenue last year. the b1g entire conference payout was $20 million > than acc, largest gap ever. so if and when that stretches to $40 million (some years into the future), umd will have cut into uva's "lead" by just 38% (minus what they have to pay out in interest and principal and for buying out coaches' contracts)

here's where i am... i'm firmly convinced my alma mater can run a halfway decent athletic program with ~$150+ mill + nil $$. so i'm non-plussed on the rest. hopefully, this latest round of cash can put the terps in good stead, have no ill will there. they had some real gains on the football field last year. hopefully, they don't smoke my 'hoos on sep 15.

[Njlaxx11]

Exactly two years ago, P12/ACC/B10 announced their "alliance" as the counter to the SEC's grab of UT and OU.

In hindsight, it was the exactly correct concept. It bundled the three most aligned conferences (large Olympic sports, AAU/high academics). Also, the nation-wide scheduling alliance would only apply to the mobile money sports -- football, mbb, wbb.

Problem was it was just a handshake deal that wasn't firmed up with real commitments, contracts and dollars. So once USC decided to bolt to the $$$ greener pastures of the B10, Katy bar the door.

As I tell my clients, handshake deals are worth the paper they are written on.

The PAC 4 should go to the big 12. That will make 4 solid conferences and should end the drama.

i think they should just get rid of conferences - it has no bearing on the the national championship tournaments. I'm sure people would be upset that "classic rivalries" would be taken away but they can always just be scheduled.

Other than Northwestern and Vanderbilt the Big Ten and SEC are very coherent alliances. Why would they give up strategic advantage for their institutions? Every conference from the SEC to the Ivy League has its own image and identity.

with all the movement, conferences have lost their purpose. why have ucla in the same conference as rutgers? winning your conference has no bearing on you making the championship tournaments - in any ncaa sport to my knowledge. what strategic advantage does it serve?

[wgdsr]

Exactly two years ago, P12/ACC/B10 announced their "alliance" as the counter to the SEC's grab of UT and OU.

In hindsight, it was the exactly correct concept. It bundled the three most aligned conferences (large Olympic sports, AAU/high academics). Also, the nation-wide scheduling alliance would only apply to the mobile money sports -- football, mbb, wbb.

Problem was it was just a handshake deal that wasn't firmed up with real commitments, contracts and dollars. So once USC decided to bolt to the $$$ greener pastures of the B10, Katy bar the door.

As I tell my clients, handshake deals are worth the paper they are written on.

The PAC 4 should go to the big 12. That will make 4 solid conferences and should end the drama.

i think they should just get rid of conferences - it has no bearing on the the national championship tournaments. I'm sure people would be upset that "classic rivalries" would be taken away but they can always just be scheduled.

Other than Northwestern and Vanderbilt the Big Ten and SEC are very coherent alliances. Why would they give up strategic advantage for their institutions? Every conference from the SEC to the Ivy League has its own image and identity.

with all the movement, conferences have lost their purpose. why have ucla in the same conference as rutgers? winning your conference has no bearing on you making the championship tournaments - in any ncaa sport to my knowledge. what strategic advantage does it serve?

it actually does in most every sport. including lacrosse. and top d1 football is about to join those ranks next year.

[Essexfenwick]

Exactly two years ago, P12/ACC/B10 announced their "alliance" as the counter to the SEC's grab of UT and OU.

In hindsight, it was the exactly correct concept. It bundled the three most aligned conferences (large Olympic sports, AAU/high academics). Also, the nation-wide scheduling alliance would only apply to the mobile money sports -- football, mbb, wbb.

Problem was it was just a handshake deal that wasn't firmed up with real commitments, contracts and dollars. So once USC decided to bolt to the $$$ greener pastures of the B10, Katy bar the door.

As I tell my clients, handshake deals are worth the paper they are written on.

The PAC 4 should go to the big 12. That will make 4 solid conferences and should end the drama.

i think they should just get rid of conferences - it has no bearing on the the national championship tournaments. I'm sure people would be upset that "classic rivalries" would be taken away but they can always just be scheduled.

Other than Northwestern and Vanderbilt the Big Ten and SEC are very coherent alliances. Why would they give up strategic advantage for their institutions? Every conference from the SEC to the Ivy League has its own image and identity.

with all the movement, conferences have lost their purpose. why have ucla in the same conference as rutgers? winning your conference has no bearing on you making the championship tournaments - in any ncaa sport to my knowledge. what strategic advantage does it serve?

One thing is true.. it’s really going to mean something if you win a B1G championship . It’s not much easier than a national championship in most sports.

Non revenue sports are going to have travel coast to coast limited to once a year and a central neutral facility is being proposed.

The BiG windfall is estimated at 100 million per member after 2024. The stable and growing revenue injection had already enabled former athletic dept fundraising to be diverted into NIL nonprofits.

[ggait]

Reports are that Clemson is going to be the flip vote adding the three new teams.

Kinda makes sense.

If the new pool of money is going to be allocated based on football success, Clemson (and not fsu) is the program most likely to get some of that dough.

[wgdsr]

Reports are that Clemson is going to be the flip vote adding the three new teams.

Kinda makes sense.

If the new pool of money is going to be allocated based on football success, Clemson (and not fsu) is the program most likely to get some of that dough.

maximum leverage, you almost have to.

i do wonder if there's been any shifting with the mehs, unc and ncst, et.al..

[bearlaxfan]

9/1 8:04am espn:
The ACC presidents and chancellors met Friday morning and voted to add three schools -- Stanford, Cal and SMU, sources told ESPN. It will bring the league to 18 members -- 17 will play football full time in the league. The additions are in all sports and will begin in the 2024-25 school year.

Hope this isn't old news, I really don't follow this, I just know I don't like it. Grew up with the old Bigs: 8, 10. PAC 10 etc. SWC even.

[wgdsr]

9/1 8:04am espn:
The ACC presidents and chancellors met Friday morning and voted to add three schools -- Stanford, Cal and SMU, sources told ESPN. It will bring the league to 18 members -- 17 will play football full time in the league. The additions are in all sports and will begin in the 2024-25 school year.

Hope this isn't old news, I really don't follow this, I just know I don't like it. Grew up with the old Bigs: 8, 10. PAC 10 etc. SWC even.

it's actually brand new news. i had heard the acc imploded last year. go figure.

[Typical Lax Dad]

9/1 8:04am espn:
The ACC presidents and chancellors met Friday morning and voted to add three schools -- Stanford, Cal and SMU, sources told ESPN. It will bring the league to 18 members -- 17 will play football full time in the league. The additions are in all sports and will begin in the 2024-25 school year.

Hope this isn't old news, I really don't follow this, I just know I don't like it. Grew up with the old Bigs: 8, 10. PAC 10 etc. SWC even.

it's actually brand new news. i had heard the acc imploded last year. go figure.

No different than the Ivy League dropping sports!

[wgdsr]

9/1 8:04am espn:
The ACC presidents and chancellors met Friday morning and voted to add three schools -- Stanford, Cal and SMU, sources told ESPN. It will bring the league to 18 members -- 17 will play football full time in the league. The additions are in all sports and will begin in the 2024-25 school year.

Hope this isn't old news, I really don't follow this, I just know I don't like it. Grew up with the old Bigs: 8, 10. PAC 10 etc. SWC even.

it's actually brand new news. i had heard the acc imploded last year. go figure.

No different than the Ivy League dropping sports!

ivy model looking better every year if they can keep their programs alive thru admissions growth creep.

[ggait]

Move makes no sense, except it does make sense.

More proof (sorry DocB) that the current ACC members really are locked in/up for many years/dollars still.

While the lock up is still there, go shopping for the best P5 teams that are available. If you wait to shop, there will only be fewer/worser teams available. More likely Group5 schools than Power5s. Although that distinction is becoming fuzzier by the day. And the add of every new school dilutes the voting power and influence of the aspiring leavers.

With enough time passage and/or money, eventually some teams will have the chance to leave for greener pastures. Basically impossible to know today who will have a realistic opportunity years from now -- Clemson? UNC? FSU? UVA? Miami? Duke? Many hope to be called up to the Big 2. But very few will actually be chosen. And there definitely will be some surprises.

And when the TBD lucky leavers leave, the ACC will still have enough teams to continue in existence. Because, end of day, everyone can't be in the B10 and SEC.

[pcowlax]

Agree with a lot of that ggait. It might have been FFG who said that it will end up with 4 conferences (my belief) or 1, with the major football schools in essence splintering their football at least from the NCAA (less likely) but there won’t be 2. Totally agree with this, if there were just SEC and BIG it would cause the schools to LOSE money, and that is obviously not their North Star. Look at the push to expand the playoff and even expand the hoops tourney. You can’t have conferences with 30 teams and 2 20 team conferences constituting all of top level football would lead to lower TV deals, not higher. As for the ACC, heh. Looks like, as was blindingly obvious, that all of the posturing and shouting from FSU was from a position of weakness, not strength. When lawyers are blustering and threatening it is because they do NOT have a case, not when they do. FSU was obviously (except to a very few) trying to bully or intimidate their way out of a contract they have no legal hope of getting out from. To paraphrase Dr. Johnson, I refute him thus. If FSU had any way out, they would be out. They have no way out of the GOR and cannot afford the hundreds of millions it would take to get out. They will of course not stay beyond 2036. Sometime closer to that, they will offer a lesser sum to the other schools than the full buyout and the other schools, knowing they will get nothing if they wait until 2036 and knowing they cannot keep them behind that, will take it. Until then, FSU and Clemson are stuck and it doesn’t matter in the slightest that they hate this or think it’s unfair or that it holds them back or that it means some of the conference doesn’t want to be in the conference. Looks like what actual matters is the legal, binding contract. How anachronistic.

[wgdsr]

lot of possibilities.
b1g's contracts run to 2031. sec's up to 2034, although some i think are up a year or 2 earlier.

i can see them doing a yuge cfp contract for 2026+ (and i believe espn controls the length of the contract). contract length falls in that window. by then, there's a good feel for market shares on streaming and the degradation of cable.

@ that point, alabama, texas, tosu, mich and uga look around and say... "we still wanna split everything with big 12, acc, g5's, vandy and rutgers"?

and a new league is born. by then, we may already be @ employee/collective bargaining stage. or that may be the kindling if we're not. then it's chaos, dogs and cats living together before a new world order emerges for everyone.

[bearlaxfan]

If the money sport athletes eventually get the same rights as labor in the US economy as a whole (and then we're talking right-to-work vs right-to-organize states of course) could we see some ambitious money men just try enticing them into developmental leagues for the pros, splitting off from the school-based system to a more euro model?
And if so, how long before some alums are indicted for (attempted?) murder of the pro leagues' organizers?