Can a bicoastal ACC/Pac-12 arrangement really work?
There's been a thesaurus leafed through on conference calls to find the best non-alliance wording to describe a potential long-distance arranged marriage between the ACC and Pac-12. Partnership? Loose scheduling consortium? Bicoastal arrangement?
They likely won't have to pick one that works, as sources indicated on Thursday that there's little chance of this happening in the form it is being discussed.
In what's being discussed, the leagues would keep their form. And they would be bonded together through the power of large quantities of television inventory and the occasional sexy cross-country football matchup between, say, Miami and Oregon. (Sorry, Mario Cristobal.)
How creative can the leagues get? One idea being discussed, per sources, is a four-day in-season basketball tournament between the leagues as a way to drive up value. Perhaps there's some football scheduling creativity? It sounds fun, but not all that lucrative.
The real play here is geography and quantity, as ESPN already owns all of the ACC rights through 2036 and would benefit from a presence on the West Coast, in particular for Saturday night football inventory.
But no one should hail this potential partnership as some sort of financial haymaker, especially for the high-end ACC schools worried about falling way behind the SEC and Big Ten. It's novel, but unlikely to be a game-changer.
One of the appeals to the Big Ten going into Southern California was turning millions of television homes into "inner market," which should command a significantly higher fee for the Big Ten Network. But that isn't expected to be the case for the ACC Network in this arrangement, as the Pac-12 schools aren't going to be recognized as actual ACC schools. Therefore, no significant financial bump.
"It's really hard unless they're going out and getting those schools to flat-out join the conference," said an industry source. "Absent institutions coming in individually to the ACC or a flat-out merger, the value created would be marginal."
So how much value could be created? How much would the Pac-12, whose TV deal is coming to market after the 2023 football season, command on its own? And would schools in the ACC already worried about cash flow compared to the SEC and Big Ten find enough value in the arrangement? It's hard to find where the significant money would be.
That's where there's some bottom-line skepticism. The numbers are supposed to be floated by the schools next week. And the notion, at the least, gave everyone in conference offices a breath from the dizzying game of Realignment Risk.
"It's early, and schools are curious to what the finances would indicate," said a source familiar with the talks. "Is the lift significant enough for ACC schools to close some of the gap with the SEC and Big Ten?"
Skepticism would be the obvious position on this potential arrangement, without more exploration of fiscal upside.
If the number crunching on the ACC arrangement with the Pac-12 come back underwhelming financially -- and that's the expectation -- things could potentially go from collegial to predatory in a number of directions.
Would the ACC just be better off selectively poaching a few schools in major markets new to the ACC? That list could include Cincinnati, TCU, Houston, Washington, Oregon, Cal, Stanford, Arizona State, Colorado and Oklahoma State? (Only Oklahoma State has a limited market, but it has a strong program.)
This would seemingly drive more revenue via more inventory, which could open up the current ACC deal and give a decent boost to the ACC schools crying poor compared to the Big Ten and SEC. The bonus here would seemingly be an ACC Network with juiced-up inner-market rates thanks to the addition of a flurry of high-population areas. Cable plays are always tricky, just ask former Pac-12 commissioner Larry Scott. But the combination of better inventory and more ACC Network money would seemingly go a longer way pacify the high-end ACC members who are clamoring for unequal revenue share.
Ultimately, the ACC's binding grant of rights running congruent to the television deal that expires in 2036 is seemingly going to take ugly and aggressive legal action for schools to escape from. No one appears likely to be the first to run to the courthouse.
Could that cause eventually lead to a recalibrated ACC that helps appease the concerns of the league bell cows?
There's been a thesaurus leafed through on conference calls to find the best non-alliance wording to describe a potential long-distance arranged marriage between the ACC and Pac-12. Partnership? Loose scheduling consortium? Bicoastal arrangement?
They likely won't have to pick one that works, as sources indicated on Thursday that there's little chance of this happening in the form it is being discussed.
In what's being discussed, the leagues would keep their form. And they would be bonded together through the power of large quantities of television inventory and the occasional sexy cross-country football matchup between, say, Miami and Oregon. (Sorry, Mario Cristobal.)
How creative can the leagues get? One idea being discussed, per sources, is a four-day in-season basketball tournament between the leagues as a way to drive up value. Perhaps there's some football scheduling creativity? It sounds fun, but not all that lucrative.
The real play here is geography and quantity, as ESPN already owns all of the ACC rights through 2036 and would benefit from a presence on the West Coast, in particular for Saturday night football inventory.
But no one should hail this potential partnership as some sort of financial haymaker, especially for the high-end ACC schools worried about falling way behind the SEC and Big Ten. It's novel, but unlikely to be a game-changer.
One of the appeals to the Big Ten going into Southern California was turning millions of television homes into "inner market," which should command a significantly higher fee for the Big Ten Network. But that isn't expected to be the case for the ACC Network in this arrangement, as the Pac-12 schools aren't going to be recognized as actual ACC schools. Therefore, no significant financial bump.
"It's really hard unless they're going out and getting those schools to flat-out join the conference," said an industry source. "Absent institutions coming in individually to the ACC or a flat-out merger, the value created would be marginal."
So how much value could be created? How much would the Pac-12, whose TV deal is coming to market after the 2023 football season, command on its own? And would schools in the ACC already worried about cash flow compared to the SEC and Big Ten find enough value in the arrangement? It's hard to find where the significant money would be.
That's where there's some bottom-line skepticism. The numbers are supposed to be floated by the schools next week. And the notion, at the least, gave everyone in conference offices a breath from the dizzying game of Realignment Risk.
"It's early, and schools are curious to what the finances would indicate," said a source familiar with the talks. "Is the lift significant enough for ACC schools to close some of the gap with the SEC and Big Ten?"
Skepticism would be the obvious position on this potential arrangement, without more exploration of fiscal upside.
What else could the ACC do?
The word merger has trended out of any conversations. That would involve a league giving up auto bids, a seat at the College Football Playoff table and some commissioner making millions giving up his job and endangering the dozens of employees in the conference office. Those appear to be untenable roadblocks.If the number crunching on the ACC arrangement with the Pac-12 come back underwhelming financially -- and that's the expectation -- things could potentially go from collegial to predatory in a number of directions.
Boston College and Duke. Why take on the Pac-12's have-nots, too?
Would the ACC just be better off selectively poaching a few schools in major markets new to the ACC? That list could include Cincinnati, TCU, Houston, Washington, Oregon, Cal, Stanford, Arizona State, Colorado and Oklahoma State? (Only Oklahoma State has a limited market, but it has a strong program.)
This would seemingly drive more revenue via more inventory, which could open up the current ACC deal and give a decent boost to the ACC schools crying poor compared to the Big Ten and SEC. The bonus here would seemingly be an ACC Network with juiced-up inner-market rates thanks to the addition of a flurry of high-population areas. Cable plays are always tricky, just ask former Pac-12 commissioner Larry Scott. But the combination of better inventory and more ACC Network money would seemingly go a longer way pacify the high-end ACC members who are clamoring for unequal revenue share.
Ultimately, the ACC's binding grant of rights running congruent to the television deal that expires in 2036 is seemingly going to take ugly and aggressive legal action for schools to escape from. No one appears likely to be the first to run to the courthouse.
Could that cause eventually lead to a recalibrated ACC that helps appease the concerns of the league bell cows?
