ACC Distribution Settlement

[TheSpecialSauce]

Does it make sense to schedule bigger name schools, even if it means more losses? Would we generate more money by playing 2 big name schools on the road in the non-conference and 2 at home?

 

[Sean Miller Fan]

It's our lane, but it's so geographically and inter-conferencely insane that I can't imagine a scenario where it would ever happen. Like, if the Big 12 and ACC leftovers did mesh, they're not going to separate Pitt and WVU because one is in a bigger city. Or Cal/Stanford, Duke/Wake/NC State, etc.

Right. It's going to be 1 league but feel like 3 because we'll be with WVU and the old Big East schools plus some ACC leftovers. Then there will be an old Big 8/Big 12/Southwest Conference Division. And an old Pac 12 Division. And really, this is fine. Maybe even add in some bball schools like Gonzaga, Gtown, SJU, Nova. I'm here for it.

 

[Houclone4]

Big 10 Bound: NC, VA

SEC Bound: FSU, Miami, Clemson, NC St

Big 12 Bound: Louisville, Pitt, VT, Duke
Big 12 Alternates (in case a team above says no), in order: Syracuse, UConn, GT, USF

New ACC
North:
Boston College
Syracuse
UConn
Temple

South:
GT
Wake Forest
USF
Tulane

West:
SMU
Memphis
Stanford
Cal

 

[TIGER-PAUL]

Unless this was forced by ESPN, which would give the conference no choice, this settlement just frankly inexcusable at every level.

On the surface, it doesn't really speak much to Pitt's leadership if they voted for this either. But all the have-not schools did, so there is probably more to the surface than it appears. But on the surface, it makes no sense to fund FSU and Clemson's eventual departure though. No sense whatsoever. And this is what it looks like on the surface.

View embedded media

Unless this was forced by ESPN
I think that’s obvious now.

 

[Slick Manager of Champs]

Does it make sense to schedule bigger name schools, even if it means more losses? Would we generate more money by playing 2 big name schools on the road in the non-conference and 2 at home?

the only "Big name" schools that move the needle with attendance here are PSU, WVU, ND. Scheduling OSU would be a disaster, a total sea of red. Tennessee was fine a few years ago, but that was coming off the ACC championship year and having WVU on schedule for first time so that really boosted season ticket sales.

The ideal is three jobbers, plus a home & home with PSU & WVU (alternate cycles)

 

[Zeldas Open Roof]

Does it make sense to schedule bigger name schools, even if it means more losses? Would we generate more money by playing 2 big name schools on the road in the non-conference and 2 at home?

2 late for that. the conference will be dead in 5 years and the next 5 years OOC is already made up.

 

[TheWerewolfFromTwilight]

the only "Big name" schools that move the needle with attendance here are PSU, WVU, ND.

Scheduling for TV ratings should be a little easier to manipulate than attendance. It's probably not going to happen, though.

 

[Sean Miller Fan]

Big 10 Bound: NC, VA

SEC Bound: FSU, Miami, Clemson, NC St

Big 12 Bound: Louisville, Pitt, VT, Duke
Big 12 Alternates (in case a team above says no), in order: Syracuse, UConn, GT, USF

New ACC
North:
Boston College
Syracuse
UConn
Temple

South:
GT
Wake Forest
USF
Tulane

West:
SMU
Memphis
Stanford
Cal

SEC Bound: UNC, UVa

The question becomes does the SEC take duplicate markets with FSU, Miami, Clem. If they dont take them, the B10 will.

 

[TheWerewolfFromTwilight]

SEC Bound: UNC, UVa

The question becomes does the SEC take duplicate markets with FSU, Miami, Clem. If they dont take them, the B10 will.

I would think UNC and UVA fit the Big Ten profile much more than they fit the SEC. Both AAU, etc. Although once private equity gets involved, I'm not sure that being AAU or anything else academic-related will matter.

Obviously Florida and South Carolina will fight to keep FSU and Clemson out of the SEC, but I don't know how much that matters (see: Texas A&M and Texas). That said, I think the Big Ten recognizes that it needs to expand southward, as that's where all the high school football action is migrating so you better have a presence down there.

 

[Sean Miller Fan]

I would think UNC and UVA fit the Big Ten profile much more than they fit the SEC. Both AAU, etc. Although once private equity gets involved, I'm not sure that being AAU or anything else academic-related will matter.

Obviously Florida and South Carolina will fight to keep FSU and Clemson out of the SEC, but I don't know how much that matters (see: Texas A&M and Texas). That said, I think the Big Ten recognizes that it needs to expand southward, as that's where all the high school football action is migrating so you better have a presence down there.

UNC and UVa see themselves as southern schools and will 100% choose the SEC if given both options, ESPECIALLY UNC.

This presents a problem because the SEC wants UNC and UVa more than the others but do they take FSU, Clem, and Miami too. And if so, does the Big Ten take VT and NC St? Maybe GT?

Also, Colorado will be in the B10 or SEC even without Deion. The market is too good.

 

[TheWerewolfFromTwilight]

UNC and UVa see themselves as southern schools and will 100% choose the SEC if given both options, ESPECIALLY UNC.

This presents a problem because the SEC wants UNC and UVa more than the others but do they take FSU, Clem, and Miami too. And if so, does the Big Ten take VT and NC St? Maybe GT?

Also, Colorado will be in the B10 or SEC even without Deion. The market is too good.

And Colorado brings Denver about as much as Rutgers brings NYC.

I don't know what the calculations are anymore. Obviously the appeal used to be that you could force all the cable subscribers to pay an extra dollar for the conference channel if you added a team there. Not sure it's still looked at the same way, though, particularly as this heads toward monthly subscription apps.

 

[HailtoPitt]

Let's be real. Pitt and most of the other ACC schools aren't serious about football. They have no nuts and just allow the bully to take. Essentially, Pitt is a little bitch.

 

[CrazyPaco]

Unless this was forced by ESPN
I think that’s obvious now.

Well, it could be something else too. Perhaps behind the scenes things are seriously progressing with private equity, and obviously any firm wanting to go into business with the ACC would want the membership nailed down.