Before the new Big 12 contract becomes definite the ACC should add TCU, Baylor, WV and Cincinnati. Opens up the contract and I think could push the ACC close to 70-75 million per school.

(10-31-2022 02:44 AM)7thHeaven Wrote:  Before the new Big 12 contract becomes definite the ACC should add TCU, Baylor, WV and Cincinnati. Opens up the contract and I think could push the ACC close to 70-75 million per school.

ESPN is the main player in the Big 12's new deal including having all of the conference championships, why would they move that to the ACC?

I can't understand why this is XII deal is unfolding this way. There are a couple things that could be in play....maybe?

1) The ACC has been promised a raise of some kind in the near future.

2) ESPN doesn't value certain XII schools enough to move them into the ACC? Personally, I can't believe putting a Texas school in the ACCN isn't appealing to ESPN given their 50% ownership of the ACCN. Instead of monetizing someone like TCU and or Baylor and their brands/ratings, they instead split them with FOX? Makes no sense to me, but again, perhaps ESPN doesn't really like those schools' ratings? Hard to believe this is true.

3) Notre Dame is closer to joining than everyone thinks? This makes zero sense to me as well and almost seems silly to even suggest.

4) Maybe FOX/ESPN is using the XII deal to lure away some PAC schools in order dissolve the PAC? Doing so would mean they would later need to divest the XII and then move some CTZ/ETZ schools to the ACC? I guess this is possible? The timing of the XII deal being expedited while the PAC sits idly by is curious to me.

Jim Phillips inherited a mess of a contract and I don't envy his position.

(10-31-2022 06:14 AM)GoWulfPak Wrote:  I can't understand why this is XII deal is unfolding this way. There are a couple things that could be in play....maybe?

1) The ACC has been promised a raise of some kind in the near future.

2) ESPN doesn't value certain XII schools enough to move them into the ACC? Personally, I can't believe putting a Texas school in the ACCN isn't appealing to ESPN given their 50% ownership of the ACCN. Instead of monetizing someone like TCU and or Baylor and their brands/ratings, they instead split them with FOX? Makes no sense to me, but again, perhaps ESPN doesn't really like those schools' ratings? Hard to believe this is true.

3) Notre Dame is closer to joining than everyone thinks? This makes zero sense to me as well and almost seems silly to even suggest.

4) Maybe FOX/ESPN is using the XII deal to lure away some PAC schools in order dissolve the PAC? Doing so would mean they would later need to divest the XII and then move some CTZ/ETZ schools to the ACC? I guess this is possible? The timing of the XII deal being expedited while the PAC sits idly by is curious to me.

Jim Phillips inherited a mess of a contract and I don't envy his position.

(10-31-2022 08:41 AM)domer1978 Wrote:  

(10-31-2022 06:14 AM)GoWulfPak Wrote:  I can't understand why this is XII deal is unfolding this way. There are a couple things that could be in play....maybe?

1) The ACC has been promised a raise of some kind in the near future.

2) ESPN doesn't value certain XII schools enough to move them into the ACC? Personally, I can't believe putting a Texas school in the ACCN isn't appealing to ESPN given their 50% ownership of the ACCN. Instead of monetizing someone like TCU and or Baylor and their brands/ratings, they instead split them with FOX? Makes no sense to me, but again, perhaps ESPN doesn't really like those schools' ratings? Hard to believe this is true.

3) Notre Dame is closer to joining than everyone thinks? This makes zero sense to me as well and almost seems silly to even suggest.

4) Maybe FOX/ESPN is using the XII deal to lure away some PAC schools in order dissolve the PAC? Doing so would mean they would later need to divest the XII and then move some CTZ/ETZ schools to the ACC? I guess this is possible? The timing of the XII deal being expedited while the PAC sits idly by is curious to me.

Jim Phillips inherited a mess of a contract and I don't envy his position.

Get in before UConn takes your place.

Lol FYI our football team has small ember of light glowing. Keep fanning it and we might have something again.

(10-31-2022 06:14 AM)GoWulfPak Wrote:  I can't understand why this is XII deal is unfolding this way. There are a couple things that could be in play....maybe?

1) The ACC has been promised a raise of some kind in the near future.

2) ESPN doesn't value certain XII schools enough to move them into the ACC? Personally, I can't believe putting a Texas school in the ACCN isn't appealing to ESPN given their 50% ownership of the ACCN. Instead of monetizing someone like TCU and or Baylor and their brands/ratings, they instead split them with FOX? Makes no sense to me, but again, perhaps ESPN doesn't really like those schools' ratings? Hard to believe this is true.

3) Notre Dame is closer to joining than everyone thinks? This makes zero sense to me as well and almost seems silly to even suggest.

4) Maybe FOX/ESPN is using the XII deal to lure away some PAC schools in order dissolve the PAC? Doing so would mean they would later need to divest the XII and then move some CTZ/ETZ schools to the ACC? I guess this is possible? The timing of the XII deal being expedited while the PAC sits idly by is curious to me.

Jim Phillips inherited a mess of a contract and I don't envy his position.

If #2 was important to ESPN they could have divided the B12 between the PAC/ACC after the UT/OU announcement. I'm sure at that point the remaining 8 would have taken conference membership in those two leagues and dissolved the league even allowing OU & UT to go to the SEC right away and avoid all of the exit/GOR fees. I really thought there was a chance of that happening. USC/UCLA burned the remaining PAC 12 schools by opposing B12 additions when they knew they were probably leaving. 2 Texas schools in each league and ESPN has a shot at taking over the PACN and maintaining both of them.

No messy lawsuits from schools leagues or anything. Even if they would have elevated one school to the then P4 to make an even number of teams because UH probably needed adding for Texas.

My guess is now its going to be a P3. FSU, Clemson, NC & Va. at the very least are not going to stay forever in the ACC. Probably another 2-4 schools also make the P2.
I'm assuming the 3rd league is developed with the B12 and in some sense makes sense with the central location in the country with some leftover PAC & ACC schools and convert the ACC network to the 3rd league to get in conference rates almost nationally. They also could put the best T3 content on a national network and direct the lowest desired games on ESPN Plus to double dip.

(10-31-2022 01:35 PM)Win5002 Wrote:  

(10-31-2022 06:14 AM)GoWulfPak Wrote:  I can't understand why this is XII deal is unfolding this way. There are a couple things that could be in play....maybe?

1) The ACC has been promised a raise of some kind in the near future.

2) ESPN doesn't value certain XII schools enough to move them into the ACC? Personally, I can't believe putting a Texas school in the ACCN isn't appealing to ESPN given their 50% ownership of the ACCN. Instead of monetizing someone like TCU and or Baylor and their brands/ratings, they instead split them with FOX? Makes no sense to me, but again, perhaps ESPN doesn't really like those schools' ratings? Hard to believe this is true.

3) Notre Dame is closer to joining than everyone thinks? This makes zero sense to me as well and almost seems silly to even suggest.

4) Maybe FOX/ESPN is using the XII deal to lure away some PAC schools in order dissolve the PAC? Doing so would mean they would later need to divest the XII and then move some CTZ/ETZ schools to the ACC? I guess this is possible? The timing of the XII deal being expedited while the PAC sits idly by is curious to me.

Jim Phillips inherited a mess of a contract and I don't envy his position.

If #2 was important to ESPN they could have divided the B12 between the PAC/ACC after the UT/OU announcement...

I think the Big Ten's fake alliance with the ACC and Pac-12 is what killed this, not ESPN.

(10-31-2022 06:14 AM)GoWulfPak Wrote:  I can't understand why this is XII deal is unfolding this way. There are a couple things that could be in play....maybe?

1) The ACC has been promised a raise of some kind in the near future.

2) ESPN doesn't value certain XII schools enough to move them into the ACC? Personally, I can't believe putting a Texas school in the ACCN isn't appealing to ESPN given their 50% ownership of the ACCN. Instead of monetizing someone like TCU and or Baylor and their brands/ratings, they instead split them with FOX? Makes no sense to me, but again, perhaps ESPN doesn't really like those schools' ratings? Hard to believe this is true.

3) Notre Dame is closer to joining than everyone thinks? This makes zero sense to me as well and almost seems silly to even suggest.

4) Maybe FOX/ESPN is using the XII deal to lure away some PAC schools in order dissolve the PAC? Doing so would mean they would later need to divest the XII and then move some CTZ/ETZ schools to the ACC? I guess this is possible? The timing of the XII deal being expedited while the PAC sits idly by is curious to me.

Jim Phillips inherited a mess of a contract and I don't envy his position.

Why would they pay the ACC more? They're already paying the ACC more than what they're paying the Big XII.


You're right about Phillips. To use a poker analogy, Jim Phillips has 2-7 off suit, and is short stacked at the table. But he should have known this was likely when he took the gig.

This deal is done. ESPN put a hit on the Big East because they weren't willing to make some concession and accept the deal, the Big 12 did. The Big 12 and ACC are family for at least the next 9 years.

Maybe that SMU to ACC talk was somewhat credible given the XII development.

(10-31-2022 03:57 PM)CatsClaw1 Wrote:  This deal is done. ESPN put a hit on the Big East because they weren't willing to make some concession and accept the deal, the Big 12 did. The Big 12 and ACC are family for at least the next 9 years.

Welcome to the P5 family, I guess?

(10-31-2022 02:44 AM)7thHeaven Wrote:  Before the new Big 12 contract becomes definite the ACC should add TCU, Baylor, WV and Cincinnati. Opens up the contract and I think could push the ACC close to 70-75 million per school.

This is truly delusional thinking.

(11-01-2022 08:19 AM)ken d Wrote:  

(10-31-2022 02:44 AM)7thHeaven Wrote:  Before the new Big 12 contract becomes definite the ACC should add TCU, Baylor, WV and Cincinnati. Opens up the contract and I think could push the ACC close to 70-75 million per school.

This is truly delusional thinking.

Yep. As long as the ACC is getting $1 dollar more than the B12 ESPN don't give a crap.

Cheers,
Neil

(11-01-2022 09:35 AM)OrangeDude Wrote:  

(11-01-2022 08:19 AM)ken d Wrote:  

(10-31-2022 02:44 AM)7thHeaven Wrote:  Before the new Big 12 contract becomes definite the ACC should add TCU, Baylor, WV and Cincinnati. Opens up the contract and I think could push the ACC close to 70-75 million per school.

This is truly delusional thinking.

Yep. As long as the ACC is getting $1 dollar more than the B12 ESPN don't give a crap.

Cheers,
Neil

So the $800 million more per year that the OP suggests is out of the question?

(11-01-2022 07:52 AM)GoWulfPak Wrote:  Maybe that SMU to ACC talk was somewhat credible given the XII development.

SMU, being the most desirable school left in the G5 because of location and facilities and athletic budgets and is more akin to the ACC than any other conference because of the other privates in the ACC, and academic prestige.

(11-01-2022 11:16 AM)SMUstang Wrote:  

(11-01-2022 07:52 AM)GoWulfPak Wrote:  Maybe that SMU to ACC talk was somewhat credible given the XII development.

SMU, being the most desirable school left in the G5 because of location and facilities and athletic budgets and is more akin to the ACC than any other conference because of the other privates in the ACC, and academic prestige.

SMU and Tulane were part of Harive Branscomb's original proposed Magnolia League.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Southern_Ivy

(11-01-2022 11:41 AM)XLance Wrote:  

(11-01-2022 11:16 AM)SMUstang Wrote:  

(11-01-2022 07:52 AM)GoWulfPak Wrote:  Maybe that SMU to ACC talk was somewhat credible given the XII development.

SMU, being the most desirable school left in the G5 because of location and facilities and athletic budgets and is more akin to the ACC than any other conference because of the other privates in the ACC, and academic prestige.

SMU and Tulane were part of Harive Branscomb's original proposed Magnolia League.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Southern_Ivy


I wonder what was supposedly going to prevent Duke from playing UNC. You would think something like that would have found it's way out of Durham sometime in the last 70 years if true.

I've tried to chase this citation back to a real source before and always come up empty using Carolina's, Duke's, and even the ZSR at WF. When Vandy floated this Duke was still a football power but wanted to de-emphaize football in wake of looming desegregation and due in part to being on the wrong end of Jim Tatum for nearly a decade. Casting about to blame UNC or Duke is horse **** when the real problem is that the move was a decade too late in happening. It could have been done prior to WWII in the South, but not after.

If the ACC wants to get into Texas, they should have done it last year. Instead Phillips was foolishly pursuing ND.

SMU is not a bad option but I really doubt the ACC would add only SMU.

(11-01-2022 02:43 PM)random asian guy Wrote:  If the ACC wants to get into Texas, they should have done it last year. Instead Phillips was foolishly pursuing ND.

SMU is not a bad option but I really doubt the ACC would add only SMU.

As a lifelong Methodist, are you aware of how small SMU is? The fundamental problem in the ACC is that WF, BC, and Duke are tiny, tiny schools.

The notion of a Magnolia League is actually a re varnished Methodist Church league, give that Vandy, Trinity, SMU, and Emory are all old Methodist built institutions before the big endowments.