FSU to B1G
- Thread starter PURPLE Book Cat
- Start date
Uh, no their not.
AZ Central has mentioned several Pac-12 Schools will not sign on to a new Grant of Rights. Implying they don't like the rumored AppleTV proposal. They continue to speculate the Four-Corner Schools will bolt to Big XII and Washington, Oregon, California and Stanford will bolt to B1G. We will see..........stay tuned
Health care system requirements? Do tell. They don’t have a medical school or any type of healthcare system that I know of. Are you thinking UF and their prestigious Shands system??
Mr. Warren came in holding every card he could hope for. Hard to play that hand badly when you have all the leverage in TV negotiations and great schools begging to join your conference.
Mr. Phillips made a big mistake taking the no win - bad hand ACC job where schools would love to find a way to leave the conference.
Had he stayed at NU for a while, would Phillips likely be driving the BIG Ten pole position in the college football arms/$$$ race?
GOUNUII
The articles I've read indicate that FSU is pressuring the ACC to move to a model of unequal revenue sharing in order to better compensate certain schools. I hope that never happens in the Big Ten. In fact, I hope it is never even suggested for the Big Ten. I think that policy ultimately destroys a conference.
Won't happen, but I would take him back in a New York minute....
Who’s to say?
Part of winning is understanding the playing field. Warren picked a winner and Phillips picked a loser.
Between Fitz’ ten-year albatross, the botched Polisky succession, and the ACC’s looming position as the littlest brother, Dr. Jim has had a rough few years.
He’s wiping his tears with $100 bills tho, and I most assuredly am not.
Addendum: in reading the article Coral linked above, it really is pretty ridiculous that a major focus of a university president is football media rights deals. Super good chemist tho.
Richard D. McCullough - Wikipedia
Last edited:
Think what will happen is that B1G teams that make the expanded playoff (and possibly even the conference championship) get to keep a greater part of the proceeds for themselves).
Based on the current trajectory, I don't see us playing in the same sandbox as Michigan and Ohio State 20-25 years from now. But also...I don't necessarily consider that a bad thing. My wallet and eyeballs don't mean enough to make a difference so we'll just have to sit back and see how it all plays out.
I can imagine one of two major scenarios:
1. Big Ten and SEC work out their own 16-program conferences with a conference vs. conference season endgame, and leave everyone else and the bowl system behind. They can still play regular season/exhibition games against the ACC and other attractive opponents...but we're already at a point in time where the Rose Bowl/Big Ten/Pac-12 alliance is fading, and "traditional rivalries" have given way to business deals. If 32 of the biggest programs (or more like 24 of the biggest programs and eight hangers-on including NU) just agree to their own terms, then that's the way it will go. The NUs and Vandys of this universe might benefit by getting in as founding members, but as membership grows...the USCs and UCLAs of the world have no reason to vote with/for us.
2. A promotion/relegation system actually makes very good sense for college athletics. I suspect there is enough research to show that even when a school like Boise State rises, they don't stay up for very long and "traditional powers" almost always make a comeback (so the power brokers might not mind it since the house always wins) - basically a meritocracy with build-in advantages.
I can imagine one of two major scenarios:
1. Big Ten and SEC work out their own 16-program conferences with a conference vs. conference season endgame, and leave everyone else and the bowl system behind. They can still play regular season/exhibition games against the ACC and other attractive opponents...but we're already at a point in time where the Rose Bowl/Big Ten/Pac-12 alliance is fading, and "traditional rivalries" have given way to business deals. If 32 of the biggest programs (or more like 24 of the biggest programs and eight hangers-on including NU) just agree to their own terms, then that's the way it will go. The NUs and Vandys of this universe might benefit by getting in as founding members, but as membership grows...the USCs and UCLAs of the world have no reason to vote with/for us.
2. A promotion/relegation system actually makes very good sense for college athletics. I suspect there is enough research to show that even when a school like Boise State rises, they don't stay up for very long and "traditional powers" almost always make a comeback (so the power brokers might not mind it since the house always wins) - basically a meritocracy with build-in advantages.
Last edited:
Would be a little weird to have FSU on a geographic island, but at least we have plenty of eastern time zone teams.
Had previously heard that Washington, Oregon, and Stanford were all ready to go, essentially waiting on ND to make a decision. If ND were to jump on board, the question would then be which PAC-12 school took the fifth spot — would Cal join Stanford and UCLA? Oregon State join Oregon (B1G coaches/directors not thrilled about it because it’s kind of a pain to get to Corvallis)? To a much lesser extent, would Washington State join Washington (B1G coaches/directors even less thrilled about that because it’s even more of a pain in the ass to get to Pullman)?
It got to the point where the state legislatures of California and Oregon were considering proposals that would effectively tie in-state P5 football programs to one another, but haven’t tracked closely since then.
All of this, of course, depends upon Notre Dame. But now it isn't just the B1G applying the pressure
No disagreement from me or what I’ve heard. Some consternation that Cal might not be a great cultural fit for the B1G (basically a bunch of hippie weirdos), but that that might just be the cost of doing business if it got Washington/Oregon/Stanford/Notre Dame on board.
Weird, yes. But the footprint would span almost all of the US: from NJ to FLA through the midwest to LA. All they need is Washington to encircle the entire continental US.
Next stop, Hawaii.
Also correct. Notre Dame is basically the lynchpin in all this, them coming on board would basically send all the dominoes falling. And, given the very public griping by FSU, Clemson, etc. about their ACC shares, you can’t really see Notre Dame signing up to join there anytime soon.
Sticking point is mostly how Notre Dame’s NBC deal interacts with the B1G’s TV deal(s). They’ll want some kind of special treatment (because that’s what Notre Dame does), but their leverage keeps going down as 1) the ACC looks more and more like a sinking ship, reducing their bargaining leverage and 2) Notre Dame itself struggles a bit on the field, even just a bit under Freeman in his first year.
People should listen to the Andy Staples podcast where he got a copy of the Big 12 GOR agreement. It’s not a lengthy document (I think 3 pages) which means it’s not terribly complicated. I’ll summarize the discussion. No one is getting out of a GOR agreement without writing a sizable check (hundreds of millions). FSU (and Clemson, UNC) are screwed.
There are questions as to the enforceability of the ACC’s provisions, which would likely result in a settlement far less than the potential exposure discussed. The term of the ACC contract is a major issue
Clemson’s discussions with the SEC, for example, impact the validity of the contract with others. There also is an issue associated with the changed circumstances associated with NCAA governance
So you didn’t listen to the podcast. There is a reason a GOR has never been challenged. Because it can’t be broken
Relevant issues at play:
1. Notre Dame would not join the B1G without Stanford joining. Stanford will not join without Cal. But Notre Dame would likely join a conference with both Stanford and USC (and Michigan/MSU - interesting that Northwestern has been also discussed as a school with significant history with Notre Dame)
2. The B1G has a strong incentive to resolve potential issues with the California regents by combining Cal/UCLA. Particularly with similar issues looming with Washington/Oregon and their intrastate counterparts, which was the most significant reason that the B1G did not absorb those schools earlier.
3. Look for the B1G to lobby/support the Big XII - potentially with media rights collaboration - to soften the blow for the remaining PAC schools (particularly OSU and WSU). This has Antitrust implications as well.
4. The significance of cultural fit is infinitesimal, if not zero. (See: corn-bred Huskers walking the Jersey shore boardwalk, Terrapins in Hollywood, or for that matter Cal hippies in Pullman or Scottsdale).
Cal might have a bunch of hippie weirdos, but they also have one of the most elite engineering schools anywhere (ranked higher than any Big Ten engineering school in the US News rankings). They are a major research institution and the flagship of the most populous state in the USA. It seems they tick all the B1G checkboxes.
But 17 is such an odd number (but at least it's prime).
Too bad we can't kick out Buttgers.
Good grief dude. It’s not happening. And I do t see a scenario where BC, Syracuse etc agree to unequal revenue sharing. FSU agreed to the GOR and now have to live with it. All to get a conference network.
So leaving what I may or may not know aside for the moment, let’s look at this logically from media sources that are widely reporting on FSU’s imminent desire to explore all other options.
For example:
https://www.cbssports.com/college-f...ce-conference-powers-potentially-leaving/amp/
https://www.on3.com/college/florida...athletic-director-michael-alford-sec-big-ten/
https://www.tampabay.com/sports/sem...all-florida-state-acc-conference-realignment/
The B1G is set to pay out its schools north of $90MM per year. The ACC will pay its schools $36.1MM per year. Let’s call it a ballpark $50MM difference.
Assume (very incorrectly, I might add) that FSU somehow ends up on the hook for a full $120MM buyout (in reality, the expected buyout is in the $60-$70MM range), that is literally three years worth of merely the delta in revenues added from joining the B1G for FSU’s athletic programs to function at STATUS QUO… while still making what it makes in the ACC on top of that.
If Northwestern can leverage this cash flow to finance a ridiculously awesome new basketball arena and potentially a new stadium while making peanuts from apparel & ticket sales, FSU will make out just fine even with the buyout.
FSU will finance the difference over 5 years and come out cash flow positive over status quo from second one, paying a $65MM settlement to the ACC after $5MM in legal fees (generously). This will be spread out over a much longer period than the time it would take to break even if they wanted to pay the payout back with just the difference above and beyond their current payout. There is zero question of whether the payout makes economic sense - even if FSU were subject to the full buyout fee (and it won’t be).
There has never been a genius in the business of college sports more profound than Jim Delaney.
Last edited:
You are way off. The $120mm is just the exit fee (what Maryland had to pay to leave ACC). That does not include media rights. What are 12 years worth of media rights? Ball park is $350mm. Add I. $120mm exit fee and you are approaching half a billion dollars.
And even if by some miracle FSU could pay it, the ACC could still say no thanks.
Ok - so presuming that the ACC would want to spend the millions to defend at best an uncertain/losing case on the grant of rights…
(For something to be a contract, it must have three components: an offer, an acceptance and consideration. If I walk into a store and buy a pack of gum, my receipt is a valid contract. The store has offered me gum at a specific price. I have accepted those terms. I have given the store that amount of money, and the store has given me the pack of gum.
In the grant of rights, the school has given the conference something of value — its media rights. But what has the conference given the school? It’s not the money for those media rights. That comes from one or several networks based on the terms of the conference’s deal with the network(s). The school’s attorneys could argue that an entirely separate contract covers that consideration.
Meanwhile, the attorneys for the conference and the remaining schools could argue that the consideration the school received was stability in an unstable time. via the Athletic)
…FSU would have immense value to the B1G (and vice versa) even in the impossible scenario of the ACC owning FSU’s media rights while FSU competes in the B1G.
While the ACC would have a limited right to FSU home games for a limited period of time, this would still open the Florida market to the B1G network for FSU’s away games. (Keep in mind the snowbirds that would want BTN access to their teams back home anyway). The difference in value to the B1G in the limited term would be mitigated. The value is in the Florida market, not necessarily the media rights 7-8 FSU home games that the ACC would weirdly have rights to.
In any case, this scenario isn’t happening. The enforceability of the grant of rights in such scenario (particularly given the brevity of the contract) is - in the very best light from the perspective of the ACC - questionable. The Florida legislature would also get involved, fueling the uncertainty.
FSU’s departure gets settled with the ACC for $60-$70MM.
Haven’t we gone through this
what-I-may-or-may-not-know routine
with you before?
I would be willing to bet a lot of money that if (and I don’t think it’s even a remote possibility) Fsu paid to get out of the GOR, it would be multiples higher. Once again, you are making stuff up.
