ADVERTISEMENT

Should the ACC add Pac 12 or Big 12 teams

Sean Miller Fan

All P I T T !
Oct 30, 2001
70,614
23,086
113
Who would you add? Maybe this gets us more revenue and FSU stops whining

1. Oregon
2. Washington
3. Arizona
4. Colorado
5. Cal
6. OK St
7. TT
8. Kansas
9. Utah
10. Arizona State
11. Stanford

That would be my rank.
 
No team is leaving the big 12 to join the acc.

I’d love ok state and wvu though.

I know I know, they don’t bring enough to add revenue blah blah.
 
I guess I understand your reasoning for placing Stanford this low, but they aren’t in reality. No way they are less valuable to a conference than Texas Tech for example. They are an interesting one to accurately evaluate. Awesome prestige. Huge population. Not a huge upside in athletics. I get that.
 
  • Like
Reactions: HailToPitt725
It's not as easy as just saying they don't add enough on their own. The only reason you add any of these teams is so you can renegotiate the TV deal. The renegotiation part is where you expect to pick up the increase.

They're going to be forced to add someone, otherwise you're stuck for the next 13 years.
 
It's not as easy as just saying they don't add enough on their own. The only reason you add any of these teams is so you can renegotiate the TV deal. The renegotiation part is where you expect to pick up the increase.

They're going to be forced to add someone, otherwise you're stuck for the next 13 years.



Right, but the ACC would absolutely know ahead of time if they were going to add enough money in a renegotiated television deal to know if any of them were worth it. And none of those schools are worth it.

Put it this way. If those schools were worth that much more money then why weren't they worth more money to the Big 12? And why can't they get anything approaching a good offer for the PAC???
 
  • Like
Reactions: cashisking884
You don’t jump off a good boat onto a sinking ship.


On what planet is the Big 12 a "good boat"?

The Big 12 is in "good" shape right now for one reason, and one reason only. There is literally no one left in the conference that anyone else wants to poach. They are essentially bad enough to be left alone.

And I'm not sure why anyone would think that's a good thing.
 
Right, but the ACC would absolutely know ahead of time if they were going to add enough money in a renegotiated television deal to know if any of them were worth it. And none of those schools are worth it.

Put it this way. If those schools were worth that much more money then why weren't they worth more money to the Big 12? And why can't they get anything approaching a good offer for the PAC???
No school in the acc or big 12 or the pac 10 are going to instantly add value to a re negotiated tv deal.

Outside of notre dame, no school or combo of teams are going to immediately be worth it. You have to think long term, down the road, if they will add value.
 
On what planet is the Big 12 a "good boat"?

The Big 12 is in "good" shape right now for one reason, and one reason only. There is literally no one left in the conference that anyone else wants to poach. They are essentially bad enough to be left alone.

And I'm not sure why anyone would think that's a good thing.
I don’t disagree. More stable is a better way to say it. It’s weird but the fact that they don’t have any desirable programs is what gives you hem stability.

It’s weird.
 
No school in the acc or big 12 or the pac 10 are going to instantly add value to a re negotiated tv deal.

Outside of notre dame, no school or combo of teams are going to immediately be worth it. You have to think long term, down the road, if they will add value.


What value do you think that, say, Texas Tech is ever going to add? Or Oklahoma State? Or any of the rest of them?
 
Who would you add? Maybe this gets us more revenue and FSU stops whining

1. Oregon
2. Washington
3. Arizona
4. Colorado
5. Cal
6. OK St
7. TT
8. Kansas
9. Utah
10. Arizona State
11. Stanford

That would be my rank.
If the ACC wanted to expand into Big 12 or Pac-12 territory, I would look at the following schools, in alphabetical order:

1. Arizona State
2. California
3. Colorado
4. Kansas
5. Oregon
6. Stanford
7. TCU
8. Utah
9. Washington

This is because they’re the closest institutional fits to the ACC (e.g., academics and/or AAU affiliation) and are mostly in large metropolitan markets.
 
Who would you add? Maybe this gets us more revenue and FSU stops whining

1. Oregon
2. Washington
3. Arizona
4. Colorado
5. Cal
6. OK St
7. TT
8. Kansas
9. Utah
10. Arizona State
11. Stanford

That would be my rank.
I would go with Oregon, UW, Stanford and Cal.
So would/will the B10. The ACC has no juice to play in this game. It will be hard enough for them to hang on to the best they have let alone adding high profile members from the west coast.

https://www.si.com/fannation/colleg...ll-expansion-big-ten-targeting-pac-12-schools
 
So would/will the B10. The ACC has no juice to play in this game. It will be hard enough for them to hang on to the best they have let alone adding high profile members from the west coast.

https://www.si.com/fannation/colleg...ll-expansion-big-ten-targeting-pac-12-schools
The more teams your conference adds and the more money they make, the better odds of them finally winning some championships, right? If you can’t win them on your own, try to steal other teams from the outside that can win them for you?
 
The more teams your conference adds and the more money they make, the better odds of them finally winning some championships, right? If you can’t win them on your own, try to steal other teams from the outside that can win them for you?
This is about money, not championships.

The ACC is poor and getting poorer. The B10 is rich and getting richer.

And that’s just the way it is.
 
Right, but the ACC would absolutely know ahead of time if they were going to add enough money in a renegotiated television deal to know if any of them were worth it. And none of those schools are worth it.

Put it this way. If those schools were worth that much more money then why weren't they worth more money to the Big 12? And why can't they get anything approaching a good offer for the PAC???
Yeah, but it's still not about what a school adds. The market has changed and numbers are ridiculous. A much worse B12 conference is going to be on par with the ACC in TV revenue.

The ACC contract as it sits is way under value. The ACC isn't worth the B1G or SEC money, but they're worth a good bit more than the B12.

It's why I asked a question about the GOR in the other thread and if it opens that can of worms during expansion.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TheSpecialSauce
Who would you add? Maybe this gets us more revenue and FSU stops whining

1. Oregon
2. Washington
3. Arizona
4. Colorado
5. Cal
6. OK St
7. TT
8. Kansas
9. Utah
10. Arizona State
11. Stanford

That would be my rank.

Merge w/ Pac-12 and have an east coast & west coast division w/ a conference championship between the two
 
  • Like
Reactions: Jeffburgh
On what planet is the Big 12 a "good boat"?

The Big 12 is in "good" shape right now for one reason, and one reason only. There is literally no one left in the conference that anyone else wants to poach. They are essentially bad enough to be left alone.

And I'm not sure why anyone would think that's a good thing.

This is right.

But if you think the whole thing is going to blow up and you aren’t going to be in a Super Conference if it does, the stability of the Big 12 might be appealing.

In the land of the blind, the one eyed man is king.

Well, in the land of eye sight, the one eyed man is at least not a peasant. That’s the blind. The Big 12 is the one eyed man, so at least you don’t end up being thrown away with the blind.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ThePanthers
It's not as easy as just saying they don't add enough on their own. The only reason you add any of these teams is so you can renegotiate the TV deal. The renegotiation part is where you expect to pick up the increase.

They're going to be forced to add someone, otherwise you're stuck for the next 13 years.

But how many schools that would even kind of move the needle, would want to sign onto that GOR deal?

Maybe schools like SMU or Washington State, but others are not going to want to get locked into it.
 
Merge w/ Pac-12 and have an east coast & west coast division w/ a conference championship between the two

So you’d have a conference where half the league doesn’t play the other half, except one team from each league, in a single game a year?
 
For football, I'd want to see WVU (rivalry with not only Pitt, but other northern ACC schools), Oklahoma State, Oregon, and Washington.

When you factor in basketball, it changes. Arizona and Kansas now would be under consideration.
 
No school in the acc or big 12 or the pac 10 are going to instantly add value to a re negotiated tv deal.

Outside of notre dame, no school or combo of teams are going to immediately be worth it. You have to think long term, down the road, if they will add value.

Which probably goes against adding PAC schools.

You have a bunch of schools that don’t prioritize sports.

Fanbases that don’t prioritize sports.

And population centers that aren’t growing for the most part.

There’s no long term upside to them.
 
But how many schools that would even kind of move the needle, would want to sign onto that GOR deal?

Maybe schools like SMU or Washington State, but others are not going to want to get locked into it.
That's a different argument.

My contention was their value wasn't solely what they brought on their own. The ability to renegotiate the numbers is a bigger deal when you have other new agreements to compare yourself with.

I would guess ESPN is working on something with the ACC. If not adding teams, maybe going to 9 conf games. An uncompetitive ACC is not good for ESPN, but they aren't going to give money away for nothing.
 
Maybe every team plays 1-2 crossover. The Championship game alternates east coast and west coast

But then you aren’t really creating a rivalry. What ratings does Pitt-Washington State draw when they play once ever 9 years.

One of the ACC’s problems, at least as it relates to television audience, is a lack of meaningful games, which is somewhat related to a lack of meaningful rivalries.

Cal-Syracuse in their once a decade showdown doesn’t really help that.
 
That's a different argument.

My contention was their value wasn't solely what they brought on their own. The ability to renegotiate the numbers is a bigger deal when you have other new agreements to compare yourself with.

I would guess ESPN is working on something with the ACC. If not adding teams, maybe going to 9 conf games. An uncompetitive ACC is not good for ESPN, but they aren't going to give money away for nothing.

I don’t think it’s a different argument. It’s a question that stems from your point.

If the ACC is forced to add schools, whom could they even add that even causes someone to look up from their desk?

I think the GOR almost hurts their ability to add that kind of team, assuming what you’re saying is correct, because what teams would even want to be shackled with it?
 
Who would you add? Maybe this gets us more revenue and FSU stops whining

1. Oregon
2. Washington
3. Arizona
4. Colorado
5. Cal
6. OK St
7. TT
8. Kansas
9. Utah
10. Arizona State
11. Stanford

That would be my rank.
I'd add none of them because it is called the ATLANTIC COAST CONFERENCE and none of those schools are geographically a fit AND may I add that I feel the same way about Notre Dame as well.
 
I don’t think it’s a different argument. It’s a question that stems from your point.

If the ACC is forced to add schools, whom could they even add that even causes someone to look up from their desk?

I think the GOR almost hurts their ability to add that kind of team, assuming what you’re saying is correct, because what teams would even want to be shackled with it?
It is a different argument. I'm saying the additional of Duquesne would get them more money by simply renegotiating the TV deal. Now that's an extreme (and deliberately ridiculous) example and I understand you just don't add teams to renegotiate the deal.

My original point was you can't just look at what a team brings on it's own in the ACC's case. The ACC shouldn't be on par with the new B12 in TV revenue. They should be somewhere between the B12 and the SEC/B1G.
 
It is a different argument. I'm saying the additional of Duquesne would get them more money by simply renegotiating the TV deal. Now that's an extreme (and deliberately ridiculous) example and I understand you just don't add teams to renegotiate the deal.

My original point was you can't just look at what a team brings on it's own in the ACC's case. The ACC shouldn't be on par with the new B12 in TV revenue. They should be somewhere between the B12 and the SEC/B1G.
The other thing that is forgotten is that it doesn't do the ACC much good to head back to the table until the Big12 and Pac12 sort out their nonsense. There isn't much point trying to negotiate without knowing where the market is set. Also somewhat telling that ESPN has been pretty quiet about the Pac12.
 
The other thing that is forgotten is that it doesn't do the ACC much good to head back to the table until the Big12 and Pac12 sort out their nonsense. There isn't much point trying to negotiate without knowing where the market is set. Also somewhat telling that ESPN has been pretty quiet about the Pac12.
It’s true. The ACC might start efforts to bring in something like Wash or Oregon (or whichever of them is the more appealing) to try to thwart the B1G. That sounds positive as far as showing proactive and aggressive tendency. But say, word of it inevitably gets out. The B1G catches wind, accelerates their own intentions (that already sounded inevitable, but they were dragging their feet). It makes it’s own formal offer to them (likely publicly). That offer would likely overwhelm whatever the ACC is offering, or possibly an ugly public bidding war initiates, that the ACC is doomed to lose. Those schools eagerly accept the B1G. The ACC is publicly humiliated and neutered.

Not likely, but nothing is surprising anymore.
 
Probably doesnt move the revenue needle but WVU is the obvious one. Backyard Brawl would be the premiere rivalry in the ACC. WVU-VT and Cuse-WVU are top rivalries. Weakens Big 12s entrance into the “Northeast”.
That's exactly who i would want, It makes geographic sense and gives Pitt a real rival again. I honestly don't care about moving needles or gaining footprints.
 
It’s true. The ACC might start efforts to bring in something like Wash or Oregon (or whichever of them is the more appealing) to try to thwart the B1G. That sounds positive as far as showing proactive and aggressive tendency. But say, word of it inevitably gets out. The B1G catches wind, accelerates their own intentions (that already sounded inevitable, but they were dragging their feet). It makes it’s own formal offer to them (likely publicly). That offer would likely overwhelm whatever the ACC is offering, or possibly an ugly public bidding war initiates, that the ACC is doomed to lose. Those schools eagerly accept the B1G. The ACC is publicly humiliated and neutered.

Not likely, but nothing is surprising anymore.
I have no idea how the ACC feels about the PAC12 schools. Really doubt the conference would go that way. There just isn't much to chase that fits well and adds value. But the ACC has a decent product and ESPN has invested into the conference so right now, I think the TV people want to strengthen it. Not let it falter. We'll see.
 
  • Like
Reactions: cashisking884
I have no idea how the ACC feels about the PAC12 schools. Really doubt the conference would go that way. There just isn't much to chase that fits well and adds value. But the ACC has a decent product and ESPN has invested into the conference so right now, I think the TV people want to strengthen it. Not let it falter. We'll see.

It probably depends on what the Big Ten does. But I don’t think the Big Ten makes their next move until 2028ish, going into the 2030 new tv deal.

If you’re ESPN, you’re probably not worried about the SEC taking ACC teams, because you essentially own the SEC.

Yeah, it means you have to pay Clemson or whomever more.

But it gets you out of the ACC network, which isn’t exactly setting the world on fire.
And it lets you lower the price you’re paying for Wake or Syracuse or someone like that.
So maybe that cost increase is offset but those cost savings?

It’s when the Big Ten comes raiding that you probably want to do something if you’re ESPN. Because then it’s only a net loss to you.
 
  • Like
Reactions: HailToPitt725
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT