(03-21-2024 07:02 AM)esayem Wrote:  For those of you who aren’t aware, the BOT is not making any decisions. The decision runs through the board of governors, which isn’t just representing Carolina, but the entire UNC system.
....

The trustees chair intends his remarks for an audience, and we may be sure the NC Board of Governors sits in its front row.

The ACC officially became a second-class conference last week. Meanwhile the BoG has presumably acquired its own copies of the relevant contracts.

(03-21-2024 08:30 AM)b2b Wrote:  So that leaves Clemson, FSU, UNC, NCSU and Notre Dame.

And it's HILARIOUS to see how certain UNC fans are have slowly changed their tune over time. UNC leadership is finally starting to show their true selves. What's playing out in real-time is the classic "good cop / bad cop" technique.

The Tar Heels are following the leader.

(03-21-2024 06:31 AM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  I’ve been telling y’all: the quickest way to see this all get wrapped up is for the SEC to agree to take Clemson, FSU, UNC, and NC St.

With both state schools standing to immensely benefit from an easy exit from the ACC, there’s no reason for NC courts to be favorable to the ACC in these proceedings.

Based from this, it’s finally looking like UNC has gotten to the point where they are ready to pull the plug.

If ESPN is going to refuse their option to extend the ACC's contract in 2025 they want to keep more of the ACC than just Clemson, Florida State, North Carolina and N.C. State.

If they want to scoop the value out of the ACC they will need to take Louisville and Virginia Tech as well. If it is revenue leaders they will need to take Duke, Miami, and Virginia along with Louisville in addition to Clemson, FSU and North Carolina and N.C. State.

ESPN will want to hold onto super majorities of viewership in North Carolina and Florida, hold onto their national draws and strongest regional draws, and they don't have that yet.

UNC and NC State will carry North Carolina. FSU gives them the super majority in Florida when added to the Gators. Clemson is that regional brand that adds value to any of its games in the SEC. The biggest brand still on the table is Duke. The best revenue generator in Virginia is UVa. The best viewership in Virginia is Tech.

ESPN is waiting until they have hammered out who will stay with them in the SEC before they do anything and refusing to extend the contract gives cover to these moves as it reduces the GOR to a 1 year exit if these schools leave in 2026.

(03-21-2024 10:13 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(03-21-2024 05:58 AM)PeteTheChop Wrote:  "I think this shows that what is supposed to be a member-based organization is not being led in a way that represents the best interests of all the members, but instead, it's really representing the bottom tier of the membership at the expense of the top tier, which is why Clemson and Florida State are doing what they're doing."

(snip image)

That quote really popped out for me too.

These statements by a very powerful NC personage are IMO bad news for the ACC.

These remarks raise new questions about what exactly 'homerism' means now in the state of North Carolina.

(03-21-2024 11:28 AM)Gitanole Wrote:  

(03-21-2024 10:13 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(03-21-2024 05:58 AM)PeteTheChop Wrote:  "I think this shows that what is supposed to be a member-based organization is not being led in a way that represents the best interests of all the members, but instead, it's really representing the bottom tier of the membership at the expense of the top tier, which is why Clemson and Florida State are doing what they're doing."

(snip image)

That quote really popped out for me too.

These statements by a very powerful NC personage are IMO bad news for the ACC.

These remarks raise new questions about what exactly 'homerism' means now in the state of North Carolina.

What struck me is that Pete's remarks about "representing the bottom tier" is the NCAA's issue in microcosm. Truly it may be said that as goes the ACC so goes the NCAA. It's true in governance and in revenue production (basketball).

https://www.espn.com/college-football/st...-explained
Some schools aren't being transparent based on this article on the Clemson lawsuit:


"...There's a genuine question about why Clemson would do this at all if Florida State was willing to be the canary in the coal mine. While numerous other ADs -- both inside the ACC and out -- have said they're keenly watching FSU's efforts to exit the grant of rights, they've all sounded more than happy to let the Seminoles take the heat and, ideally, provide the blueprint for an exit strategy.

Clemson's lawsuit suggests that the school sees value in helping set that blueprint and, in turn, potentially being among the first out the door. If both FSU and Clemson depart the league, others would surely follow -- including, perhaps, North Carolina, Virginia, Miami and NC State...."

This is what I figured was happening. Here is my post from August when FSU first started making noise:

My opinion, FSU is just being the spokesman for the other 6 schools looking to leave. Now those other schools will be "good cop", preaching in public against FSU making noise about leaving and in private working to figure out how to break GoR.

(03-20-2024 10:46 PM)Gitanole Wrote:  Inside Carolina: UNC Board of Trustees chair responds to Clemson lawsuit against ACC, calls for conference transparency

"I think that what Clemson is doing is 100 percent proof positive that a significant portion of the membership of the conference is unhappy,” UNC Board of Trustees chair John Preyer told Inside Carolina on Wednesday. “I don't see how it is in anyone's interest for the ACC leadership to try and browbeat its member schools from getting access to information and being transparent. And that's kind of the case Clemson is making.

"I think this shows that what is supposed to be a member-based organization is not being led in a way that represents the best interests of all the members, but instead, it's really representing the bottom tier of the membership at the expense of the top tier, which is why Clemson and Florida State are doing what they're doing. I think that's just obvious."

Clemson noted in its lawsuit that the ACC office did not hold a vote requesting that its members approve of its lawsuit against Florida State nor had Clemson ever authorized the league’s lawsuit against FSU.

With two prominent ACC schools electing to sue the ACC pertaining to the grant of rights over the past three months, speculation has turned to UNC’s next steps and if Clemson’s filing on Tuesday has expedited the university’s actions in pursuing all potential options.

"I think it's too soon to tell,” Preyer said, “but it certainly creates added pressure on the conference to address the concerns of its member schools.”

In January, Preyer told Inside Carolina that it was incumbent upon UNC’s leadership to do what was in the university’s best interests when it came to the dramatic changes taking place across the collegiate landscape and that those leaders had an obligation to assess the financial realities of growing revenue gaps between conferences and make the best decision for UNC based on that available data.

UNC athletic director Bubba Cunningham was more cautious in his interview with Inside Carolina last month, highlighting UNC’s obligation in being a great partner in supporting the ACC while the school takes a measured approach amid the current unknowns that exist within the NCAA framework and conference realignment nationally.

There was a clear difference in opinion in the interviews in how to guide UNC through this pivotal moment in collegiate athletics, which suggests a point of contention between the university’s Board of Trustees and its athletic director.

“It is a potential conflict,” Preyer said, “and it's something that is disturbing based on some of the comments he’s made recently which seem to support the ACC at the expense of Carolina—that’s a bad look. I think we all recognize that change is hard, but sometimes change is exactly what is needed. We all have to fight the comfort of complacency. And I think that now is the time to be very open to pursuing all options, including those beyond remaining in the Atlantic Coast Conference."

The Board of Trustees will hold their regular meeting this month next Wednesday and Thursday in Chapel Hill, where UNC’s future options will continue to be a topic of discussion following Clemson’s lawsuit filed in Pickens County, S.C. on Tuesday.

via 24/7 and Reddit

https://247sports.com/college/north-caro...229014980/

https://www.reddit.com/r/CFB/comments/1b...ees_chair/

Thanks for this.

It’s obvious that UNC wants to leave and has a landing spot.

That doesn’t mean that UNC is going to challenge the GoR like FSU and Clemson.

My guess: UNC BoT will keep talking but they will take no action. UNC will wait and see how the legal case is developing.

(03-21-2024 06:53 AM)Glenn360 Wrote:  

(03-21-2024 06:31 AM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  I’ve been telling y’all: the quickest way to see this all get wrapped up is for the SEC to agree to take Clemson, FSU, UNC, and NC St.

With both state schools standing to immensely benefit from an easy exit from the ACC, there’s no reason for NC courts to be favorable to the ACC in these proceedings.

Based from this, it’s finally looking like UNC has gotten to the point where they are ready to pull the plug.

That means the 14 other ACC schools would lose their deal.

I don't think ESPN wants to pay more for the SEC while at the same time paying for the ACC with it's biggest brands gone.

Yes.

I don't think this is the end of the ACC - I expect that ND (et al) will rebuild it into a new version of the old BigEast/AAC.

However (I suggested this awhile back in a different thread), I do think that this is the end of espn wanting the current ACC contract.

I think it's in espn's best interests to be able to scoop up several ACC schools into the SEC, and then either drop the ACC, or renegotiate a new (lower) contract.

I think it's probably "cleaner" if they drop them. Otherwise, I think it creates a too-easy-to-view lawsuit of the left-behinds claiming that espn shafted them by allowing (providing the opportunities for) the big schools to leave.

Besides, if (as I guess) Fox and NBC pick up the new ACC/ND deal, then, from espn's pov, that's less money that Fox may have to spend to oppose espn in other sports negotiations. (Not just at the college level.)

Plus, if Fox/NBC pick up the ACC, I think there will be less of a "push" for the Big10 to expand out east.

(03-21-2024 11:28 AM)JRsec Wrote:  

(03-21-2024 06:31 AM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  I’ve been telling y’all: the quickest way to see this all get wrapped up is for the SEC to agree to take Clemson, FSU, UNC, and NC St.

With both state schools standing to immensely benefit from an easy exit from the ACC, there’s no reason for NC courts to be favorable to the ACC in these proceedings.

Based from this, it’s finally looking like UNC has gotten to the point where they are ready to pull the plug.

If ESPN is going to refuse their option to extend the ACC's contract in 2025 they want to keep more of the ACC than just Clemson, Florida State, North Carolina and N.C. State.

If they want to scoop the value out of the ACC they will need to take Louisville and Virginia Tech as well. If it is revenue leaders they will need to take Duke, Miami, and Virginia along with Louisville in addition to Clemson, FSU and North Carolina and N.C. State.

ESPN will want to hold onto super majorities of viewership in North Carolina and Florida, hold onto their national draws and strongest regional draws, and they don't have that yet.

UNC and NC State will carry North Carolina. FSU gives them the super majority in Florida when added to the Gators. Clemson is that regional brand that adds value to any of its games in the SEC. The biggest brand still on the table is Duke. The best revenue generator in Virginia is UVa. The best viewership in Virginia is Tech.

ESPN is waiting until they have hammered out who will stay with them in the SEC before they do anything and refusing to extend the contract gives cover to these moves as it reduces the GOR to a 1 year exit if these schools leave in 2026.

excellent post.

Of those choices, it is likely "cheaper", of the SEC/espn "allows" Fox to take a few of those - either through Big10 expansion, or Fox picking up the ACC deal.

If, as many believe, the first 4 into the SEC are FSU, Clemson, NC, and NC State, then the biggest question really is Miami. They are a relatively small private school sitting in a big market. Do they "need" to go to the P2, or would they be happy in a remade ACC, even if the media deal stayed where it is right now and didn't drop? I don't know. But I would be surprised if anyone allowed that to be a risk on the table.

The easy answer is just to have the Big10 add 2 for 20, and the SEC stand at 20, and everyone moves on. With a priority given to keeping the rest of the ND regular opponents in the ACC. I think Virginia is the likely one out - to give Maryland and PSU another rival.

SEC: FSU, Clemson, NC, and NC State
Big10: Miami and Virginia

ACC only needs to backfill to 15 (if they keep the current contract). 18-6=12.

Add: USF, Tulane, UConn.

And we're done.

(03-21-2024 11:36 AM)bullet Wrote:  https://www.espn.com/college-football/st...-explained
Some schools aren't being transparent based on this article on the Clemson lawsuit:


"...There's a genuine question about why Clemson would do this at all if Florida State was willing to be the canary in the coal mine. While numerous other ADs -- both inside the ACC and out -- have said they're keenly watching FSU's efforts to exit the grant of rights, they've all sounded more than happy to let the Seminoles take the heat and, ideally, provide the blueprint for an exit strategy.

Clemson's lawsuit suggests that the school sees value in helping set that blueprint and, in turn, potentially being among the first out the door. If both FSU and Clemson depart the league, others would surely follow -- including, perhaps, North Carolina, Virginia, Miami and NC State...."

Winning a war often requires attacking on multiple fronts.

Sent from my Pixel 7 using Tapatalk

(03-21-2024 11:32 AM)JRsec Wrote:  

(03-21-2024 11:28 AM)Gitanole Wrote:  

(03-21-2024 10:13 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(03-21-2024 05:58 AM)PeteTheChop Wrote:  "I think this shows that what is supposed to be a member-based organization is not being led in a way that represents the best interests of all the members, but instead, it's really representing the bottom tier of the membership at the expense of the top tier, which is why Clemson and Florida State are doing what they're doing."

(snip image)

That quote really popped out for me too.

These statements by a very powerful NC personage are IMO bad news for the ACC.

These remarks raise new questions about what exactly 'homerism' means now in the state of North Carolina.

What struck me is that Pete's remarks about "representing the bottom tier" is the NCAA's issue in microcosm. Truly it may be said that as goes the ACC so goes the NCAA. It's true in governance and in revenue production (basketball).

As the question of an extension of the ACC’s contract has an effective date of 2027 if ESPN concurs, the ACC demanding media rights of departed schools through 2036 is absurd. Those games would largely have nothing to do with any ACC delivery. If there is a Clemson vs Auburn fb game at Auburn in 2028, and Clemson had left the ACC in 2025, the ACC leveraging Clemson’s earnings is problematic in concept and practicality. The revenue generated for that game would far exceed what would be generated if Clemson was playing Boston College, for example, on that day. Further, the ACC, nor ESPN, can project any school’s earnings through 2036. The GoR entitlement arguments certainly can be challenged in court for excessiveness, ingrained punitiveness, and ambiguous revenue projections. The GoR’s concept of financially obligating a school for many years after having become members elsewhere, is more about organizational greed and deterrence, rather than actual revenue loss that cannot be realistically quantified years in advance.
Exit fees need to be focused on the conference’s administrative costs to find replacements or adjust accordingly, inclusive of rescheduling expenses for each remaining member. Anything beyond projected real costs, is intended for deterrence and punishment.

I’m for flexibility in the affiliation system. Conditions change. Schools evolve, some digress. No conference structure needs to be intended as the status quo lasting forever.

(03-21-2024 09:54 AM)Sparty Baby 84 Wrote:  The ACC is officially on life support. Crystal ball says...

First Wave:

(events happening in the year 2024)

1.) Florida State and Clemson pay exits fees to the ACC for their absence during 2025-2026 and 2026-2027 athletic seasons because both schools will join the SEC starting with the 2025-2026 season.

2.) ESPN has to allow both schools to join the SEC (otherwise they would join the Big Ten) and as a result, ESPN does not renew the ACC contract and lets it expire on July 1, 2027.

Second Wave:

(events happening in the years 2025-2026)

3.) There is a fight for the states/markets of Virginia and North Carolina. The Big Ten and SEC will agree to a private compromise rather than even more publicly lord over the landscape of college sports. The SEC will take UNC and NC State. The Big Ten will take Virginia and the fate of Virginia Tech will be undecided (but not fought over) at this point.

4.) The ACC is now a smoldering crater with Louisville and Miami headlining. But seen as a "headliner" the SEC accepts Louisville and the Big Ten accepts Miami. For those keeping score, the Big Ten and SEC now have 20 schools each.

SEC 20
Tennessee / Vanderbilt
Kentucky / Louisville
North Carolina / North Carolina State
South Carolina / Clemson
Florida / Florida State
Georgia / Missouri
Alabama / Auburn
Mississippi / Mississippi State
Texas A&M / Arkansas
Texas / Oklahoma

LSU is going indy?

(03-21-2024 11:28 AM)JRsec Wrote:  

(03-21-2024 06:31 AM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  I’ve been telling y’all: the quickest way to see this all get wrapped up is for the SEC to agree to take Clemson, FSU, UNC, and NC St.

With both state schools standing to immensely benefit from an easy exit from the ACC, there’s no reason for NC courts to be favorable to the ACC in these proceedings.

Based from this, it’s finally looking like UNC has gotten to the point where they are ready to pull the plug.

If ESPN is going to refuse their option to extend the ACC's contract in 2025 they want to keep more of the ACC than just Clemson, Florida State, North Carolina and N.C. State.

If they want to scoop the value out of the ACC they will need to take Louisville and Virginia Tech as well. If it is revenue leaders they will need to take Duke, Miami, and Virginia along with Louisville in addition to Clemson, FSU and North Carolina and N.C. State.

ESPN will want to hold onto super majorities of viewership in North Carolina and Florida, hold onto their national draws and strongest regional draws, and they don't have that yet.

UNC and NC State will carry North Carolina. FSU gives them the super majority in Florida when added to the Gators. Clemson is that regional brand that adds value to any of its games in the SEC. The biggest brand still on the table is Duke. The best revenue generator in Virginia is UVa. The best viewership in Virginia is Tech.

ESPN is waiting until they have hammered out who will stay with them in the SEC before they do anything and refusing to extend the contract gives cover to these moves as it reduces the GOR to a 1 year exit if these schools leave in 2026.

JR, could you enlighten me on the bolded phrase please? You got my attention!!

(03-21-2024 12:14 PM)Skyhawk Wrote:  If, as many believe, the first 4 into the SEC are FSU, Clemson, NC, and NC State, then the biggest question really is Miami. They are a relatively small private school sitting in a big market. Do they "need" to go to the P2, or would they be happy in a remade ACC, even if the media deal stayed where it is right now and didn't drop? I don't know.

One word:

Here's the dirty little secret: if as few as four schools break the grant of rights, ESPN can dissolve its entire deal with the conference. It's the Big East circa 2011 all over again.

(03-21-2024 12:58 PM)DFW HOYA Wrote:  Here's the dirty little secret: if as few as four schools break the grant of rights, ESPN can dissolve its entire deal with the conference. It's the Big East circa 2011 all over again.

Pretty sure that's why they picked up Stanford, Cal, and SMU. I think now it would take 7.

(03-20-2024 11:50 PM)JRsec Wrote:  Drip, ....drip, .....drip, .... etc.

The process of erosion on an ironclad GOR.

Water and rapid oxidation work wonders.

My future grandchild in 2036: "Granddad, how did the ironclad GoR get busted?"
My future self: "At first, very very slowly, then, very very quickly"

If UNC is already this far along, that's really bad news for the ACC.

(03-21-2024 12:49 PM)PeteTheChop Wrote:  

(03-21-2024 12:14 PM)Skyhawk Wrote:  If, as many believe, the first 4 into the SEC are FSU, Clemson, NC, and NC State, then the biggest question really is Miami. They are a relatively small private school sitting in a big market. Do they "need" to go to the P2, or would they be happy in a remade ACC, even if the media deal stayed where it is right now and didn't drop? I don't know.

One word:

rofl

I think it's really a question about the ND rivalry, and how interested the P2 are in them - and mostly, what kinds of costs are we looking at.

I don't think they pay 300M (or more) to leave ND. Not when they can just wait things out in a few years, for what is likely a guaranteed spot in the Big10.

But if it comes down to a reduced exit fee (less than the 120M) plus maybe a cost for leaving a year early (2026, instead of 2027), then, I think they're gone like Bugs Bunny : )

(03-21-2024 06:03 AM)OdinFrigg Wrote:  Sunshine on undisclosed agreements? The UNC BoT Chair is distressing “Mother-May-I” Notre Dame and the ACC’s tier 2 members.

The ACC has to pay their lawyers and related court costs, but did not have a membership vote to go down this road? Being savvy in this matter was not apparent in Phillips’ missteps.

FSU, Clemson, and UNC now speaking up, showed the warning signs on the expansion vote. Those three, at least, will be gone from the ACC more sooner than much later.

ND, as always, will do whatever they want. They might decide to stay in the ACC and rebuild it. They might decide to merge the ACC with the Big 12, and dare the Big 12 to turn down NOTRE DAME. They might move their olympic sports to the BE and go fully independent in football. They might take their current loose ACC arrangement and move it to any of the other Conferences. Or maybe they get the B1G to exercise that clause in their media rights agreement, but demand ALL the additional money for themselves.