I just don't see FSU as the prime Fla expansion candidate. The law suits are unbecoming. The BIG does not like to see its dirty laundry aired in open court. Plus there is little upside to taking FSU beyond its sports revenue being above the BIG average. I also don't think the sEC doubles up in its states. SO FSU and Clemson are BIG or bust. My bet is bust. Both end up in the B12.

(01-02-2024 11:06 AM)JRsec Wrote:  

(01-02-2024 11:00 AM)DavidSt Wrote:  Virginia, UNC and Kansas fits the Big 10 better than SEC. They are academics snobs.

I hardly see Kansas as snobbish. Snobbishness is not your normal Plains' State characteristic. Practicality and independent mindedness would be more likely.

KU sees themselves very much the way Frank sees BIG country. Johnson County and Lawrence are very snobbish. In fact, KU now puts a great emphasis on recruiting Franks in the Chicago suburbs in particular

In true BIG fashion, they don’t represent the general population of their constituency. I mean, is the rust belt snobbish? Is Indiana?

(01-02-2024 11:16 AM)Big 12 fan too Wrote:  

(01-02-2024 11:06 AM)JRsec Wrote:  

(01-02-2024 11:00 AM)DavidSt Wrote:  Virginia, UNC and Kansas fits the Big 10 better than SEC. They are academics snobs.

I hardly see Kansas as snobbish. Snobbishness is not your normal Plains' State characteristic. Practicality and independent mindedness would be more likely.

KU sees themselves very much the way Frank sees BIG country. Johnson County and Lawrence are very snobbish. In fact, KU now puts a great emphasis on recruiting Franks in the Chicago suburbs in particular

In true BIG fashion, they don’t represent the general population of their constituency. I mean, is the rust belt snobbish? Is Indiana?

That's an interesting perspective when breaking it down by counties. In the South I wouldn't call Atlanta snobbish, but they act entitled, which is a different nuance than snobbish.

To Mike in the SEC, the issue with Florida State and Clemson are the ties to Florida and South Carolina, some old promises made by Slive, and the impact of their travel crowds. The are the last 2 schools in the Southeast which fit the SEC profile and the conference, which likes its composition, sees them that way. Florida State carries about 37% of the college sports viewers in Florida. UF carries 42%. The SEC ad rates in Florida (via ESPN) go up with their inclusion. They really are additive. The concern moving forward is the depth of interest in the SEC flags a bit the closer to Central and South Florida that you go. Snowbirds and retirees not weaned on SEC football are part of that. The concerning part is that UCF has 70,000 students and USF 55,000. Those are future customers and they do not completely share a footprint with FSU and UF which essentially share the same footprint. It is the main reason I raise USF in my discussions. They are AAU, have a great location, and are not booked solid year-round due to Disney and MGM. And they are a destination for drivers which is accessible. Clemson is the one which doesn't have other compelling reasons other than size of the venue and the overwhelming enthusiasm of its support.

(01-02-2024 11:13 AM)mikeinsec127 Wrote:  I just don't see FSU as the prime Fla expansion candidate. The law suits are unbecoming. The BIG does not like to see its dirty laundry aired in open court. Plus there is little upside to taking FSU beyond its sports revenue being above the BIG average. I also don't think the sEC doubles up in its states. SO FSU and Clemson are BIG or bust. My bet is bust. Both end up in the B12.

No one is paying hundreds of millions of dollars to go to the B12. The force that would drive FSU to the B1G is ESPN's refusal to pay a premium to a school they feel they already have under contract that killed the golden goose of the GoR.

(01-02-2024 12:21 PM)UpStreamRedTeam Wrote:  

(01-02-2024 11:13 AM)mikeinsec127 Wrote:  I just don't see FSU as the prime Fla expansion candidate. The law suits are unbecoming. The BIG does not like to see its dirty laundry aired in open court. Plus there is little upside to taking FSU beyond its sports revenue being above the BIG average. I also don't think the sEC doubles up in its states. SO FSU and Clemson are BIG or bust. My bet is bust. Both end up in the B12.

No one is paying hundreds of millions of dollars to go to the B12. The force that would drive FSU to the B1G is ESPN's refusal to pay a premium to a school they feel they already have under contract that killed the golden goose of the GoR.

Yes, I get all that. Also the reason why I don't think we see major movement until the ACC GOR has to be extended or expire.

What I think what does come out of these ACC vs FSU lawsuits is some sort of tiered revenue distribution, where FSU/Clemson/UNC demand more $$ based on revenue generated than BC/GT//WF gets.

(12-31-2023 08:39 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(12-31-2023 08:34 PM)Blust3 Wrote:  I think all FSU actions are under instructions of B1G. B1G told to sue ACC. There is a good chance the exit fee will be lowered so B1G will pay less. There should be already a deal under the table between FSU and B1G.

Doubt it. That's collusion. The Big 10 will play it the same way as the SEC, no contact until they are free. If anything came out that there was any hint of a deal offered prior to their exit your biscuits would be in the fire. And they aren't light and fluffy like southern biscuits. They would create a lot of smoke and smell.

I agree that it is extremely unlikely that the B1G in any way encourage this. On the other hand, it would surprise me if FSU had not put out feelers and gotten positive feedback from representatives of members of either the B1G or the SEC that their application would be greeted favorably. To go the nuclear route with the ACC without some assurance of strong interest from either the SEC or B1G would be foolhardy.

(01-02-2024 01:33 PM)orangefan Wrote:  

(12-31-2023 08:39 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(12-31-2023 08:34 PM)Blust3 Wrote:  I think all FSU actions are under instructions of B1G. B1G told to sue ACC. There is a good chance the exit fee will be lowered so B1G will pay less. There should be already a deal under the table between FSU and B1G.

Doubt it. That's collusion. The Big 10 will play it the same way as the SEC, no contact until they are free. If anything came out that there was any hint of a deal offered prior to their exit your biscuits would be in the fire. And they aren't light and fluffy like southern biscuits. They would create a lot of smoke and smell.

I agree that it is extremely unlikely that the B1G in any way encourage this. On the other hand, it would surprise me if FSU had not put out feelers and gotten positive feedback from representatives of members of either the B1G or the SEC that their application would be greeted favorably. To go the nuclear route with the ACC without some assurance of strong interest from either the SEC or B1G would be foolhardy.

How the events unfold will strongly indicate, but not prove, in which direction the "encouragement" existed. I would not be surprised if the encouragement is a "Phantom Menace" arrangement, as strange as this may sound, between FSU and ESPN, in which case the SEC could be a silent partner. FOX would be taking a huge risk as they can't control discovery or the narrative. The Big 10 would be pursuing brand that would add value, but one outside of their norms and that too would have FOX written all over it as their presidents are much more consistent. Much has been made of Oregon being taken over Stanford, but Oregon makes money and is currently AAU. FSU is not. Is not located in a region of Florida which has a goodly number of Big 10 alums, and is not easy to get to. Miami checks all of those boxes and is AAU.

If FOX and ESPN are trying to create larger Super Conferences (and this is not proven but recent moves seem to indicate that they are) then a spat between ESPN and FSU over the direction of the ACC serves both ESPN's possible motives as well as FSU's and acting openly hostile is nice kabuki theater. FOX picks up Miami, the SEC (ESPN) FSU, possibly Clemson and suddenly the ACC has lost 1/3rd of its commercial value. The PAC 12 part II transpires.

The Big 12 is used to cover everyone financially so that no actual damages might be claimed, and the 2 Super Conferences emerge (FOX/ESPN proxies).

Conferences don't think this way. 14 presidents voting with a vision for who they are don't think like a black ops team. Corporations do, and they do it all the time. I seriously doubt that the Big 10 and SEC do anything but offer guidelines for what their presidents will and won't approve. I'm also suspect that FOX told the Big 10 to take Oregon and Washington before ESPN realized that taking those 2 and Cal and Stanford were better west coast leverage than snatching two schools from L.A. The prize out west was who would be the first to attach 2 California schools to Oregon and Washington. You see what happened to the rest of the PAC 12. Big 12 and Mountain West bound.

The SEC had no West coast aspirations. It had to be the ACC which ESPN would use, but they were late on Oregon and Washington. Now they have Cal and Stanford on the cheap and the ACCN picks up California and Texas thanks to SMU. Washington and Oregon paired with USC and UCLA represent 4 of the top 5 brands value wise in the PAC 12. USC and UCLA are delivering a great market but as product weren't as valuable as Oregon and UW. Stanford with Oregon and Washington would have been a coup for the ACC. And yes, I know it's weird to even think that way, but penetration of the West Coast market in an efficient manner would have been attained.

(01-02-2024 02:29 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(01-02-2024 01:33 PM)orangefan Wrote:  

(12-31-2023 08:39 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(12-31-2023 08:34 PM)Blust3 Wrote:  I think all FSU actions are under instructions of B1G. B1G told to sue ACC. There is a good chance the exit fee will be lowered so B1G will pay less. There should be already a deal under the table between FSU and B1G.

Doubt it. That's collusion. The Big 10 will play it the same way as the SEC, no contact until they are free. If anything came out that there was any hint of a deal offered prior to their exit your biscuits would be in the fire. And they aren't light and fluffy like southern biscuits. They would create a lot of smoke and smell.

I agree that it is extremely unlikely that the B1G in any way encourage this. On the other hand, it would surprise me if FSU had not put out feelers and gotten positive feedback from representatives of members of either the B1G or the SEC that their application would be greeted favorably. To go the nuclear route with the ACC without some assurance of strong interest from either the SEC or B1G would be foolhardy.

How the events unfold will strongly indicate, but not prove, in which direction the "encouragement" existed. I would not be surprised if the encouragement is a "Phantom Menace" arrangement, as strange as this may sound, between FSU and ESPN, in which case the SEC could be a silent partner. FOX would be taking a huge risk as they can't control discovery or the narrative. The Big 10 would be pursuing brand that would add value, but one outside of their norms and that too would have FOX written all over it as their presidents are much more consistent. Much has been made of Oregon being taken over Stanford, but Oregon makes money and is currently AAU. FSU is not. Is not located in a region of Florida which has a goodly number of Big 10 alums, and is not easy to get to. Miami checks all of those boxes and is AAU.

If FOX and ESPN are trying to create larger Super Conferences (and this is not proven but recent moves seem to indicate that they are) then a spat between ESPN and FSU over the direction of the ACC serves both ESPN's possible motives as well as FSU's and acting openly hostile is nice kabuki theater. FOX picks up Miami, the SEC (ESPN) FSU, possibly Clemson and suddenly the ACC has lost 1/3rd of its commercial value. The PAC 12 part II transpires.

The Big 12 is used to cover everyone financially so that no actual damages might be claimed, and the 2 Super Conferences emerge (FOX/ESPN proxies).

Conferences don't think this way. 14 presidents voting with a vision for who they are don't think like a black ops team. Corporations do, and they do it all the time. I seriously doubt that the Big 10 and SEC do anything but offer guidelines for what their presidents will and won't approve. I'm also suspect that FOX told the Big 10 to take Oregon and Washington before ESPN realized that taking those 2 and Cal and Stanford were better west coast leverage than snatching two schools from L.A. The prize out west was who would be the first to attach 2 California schools to Oregon and Washington. You see what happened to the rest of the PAC 12. Big 12 and Mountain West bound.

The SEC had no West coast aspirations. It had to be the ACC which ESPN would use, but they were late on Oregon and Washington. Now they have Cal and Stanford on the cheap and the ACCN picks up California and Texas thanks to SMU. Washington and Oregon paired with USC and UCLA represent 4 of the top 5 brands value wise in the PAC 12. USC and UCLA are delivering a great market but as product weren't as valuable as Oregon and UW. Stanford with Oregon and Washington would have been a coup for the ACC. And yes, I know it's weird to even think that way, but penetration of the West Coast market in an efficient manner would have been attained.

Imo that’s similar to what I’m betting is occurring.

There is little incentive for ESPN or SEC to take on the liability of driving this (enticing the weakest link, FSU) given the primary reason for action is blocking Fox/BIG. This is mostly defensive for ESPN/SEC imo.

ESPN, ACC, Fox etc all don’t want discovery. They don’t want the future depending on favorable ruling

But free agency of ACC is also to be avoided if ESPN, whether that’s from expiration of GoR, litigation, or from ESPN declining its option.

That all leads to settlement imo. FSU allowed to leave, in which its settlement goes to those left behind, then ESPN either canceling the contract if it gets a sufficient arrangement on other schools, or exercising the option if more departures are unfavorable.

I do think there’s a risk that if BIG grabs two of the top ACC brands, it leads to more, and potentially at low cost of FSU it victorious in court. And if multiple of top ACC brands leave, is espn making money when exercising its option?

(01-02-2024 11:13 AM)mikeinsec127 Wrote:  I just don't see FSU as the prime Fla expansion candidate. The law suits are unbecoming. The BIG does not like to see its dirty laundry aired in open court. Plus there is little upside to taking FSU beyond its sports revenue being above the BIG average. I also don't think the sEC doubles up in its states. SO FSU and Clemson are BIG or bust. My bet is bust. Both end up in the B12.

We will happily double up with FSU and Clemson, and UNC/Miami would nicely tie a bow on entire region, but those are the only schools that are worth any consideration at all today from the P2. The only Big 12 schools that might get consideration in the future, for different reasons, are KU, CU, and ASU, but none of them make the cut using the current "Missouri" or "UCLA" line.

(01-02-2024 03:02 PM)Big 12 fan too Wrote:  

(01-02-2024 02:29 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(01-02-2024 01:33 PM)orangefan Wrote:  

(12-31-2023 08:39 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(12-31-2023 08:34 PM)Blust3 Wrote:  I think all FSU actions are under instructions of B1G. B1G told to sue ACC. There is a good chance the exit fee will be lowered so B1G will pay less. There should be already a deal under the table between FSU and B1G.

Doubt it. That's collusion. The Big 10 will play it the same way as the SEC, no contact until they are free. If anything came out that there was any hint of a deal offered prior to their exit your biscuits would be in the fire. And they aren't light and fluffy like southern biscuits. They would create a lot of smoke and smell.

I agree that it is extremely unlikely that the B1G in any way encourage this. On the other hand, it would surprise me if FSU had not put out feelers and gotten positive feedback from representatives of members of either the B1G or the SEC that their application would be greeted favorably. To go the nuclear route with the ACC without some assurance of strong interest from either the SEC or B1G would be foolhardy.

How the events unfold will strongly indicate, but not prove, in which direction the "encouragement" existed. I would not be surprised if the encouragement is a "Phantom Menace" arrangement, as strange as this may sound, between FSU and ESPN, in which case the SEC could be a silent partner. FOX would be taking a huge risk as they can't control discovery or the narrative. The Big 10 would be pursuing brand that would add value, but one outside of their norms and that too would have FOX written all over it as their presidents are much more consistent. Much has been made of Oregon being taken over Stanford, but Oregon makes money and is currently AAU. FSU is not. Is not located in a region of Florida which has a goodly number of Big 10 alums, and is not easy to get to. Miami checks all of those boxes and is AAU.

If FOX and ESPN are trying to create larger Super Conferences (and this is not proven but recent moves seem to indicate that they are) then a spat between ESPN and FSU over the direction of the ACC serves both ESPN's possible motives as well as FSU's and acting openly hostile is nice kabuki theater. FOX picks up Miami, the SEC (ESPN) FSU, possibly Clemson and suddenly the ACC has lost 1/3rd of its commercial value. The PAC 12 part II transpires.

The Big 12 is used to cover everyone financially so that no actual damages might be claimed, and the 2 Super Conferences emerge (FOX/ESPN proxies).

Conferences don't think this way. 14 presidents voting with a vision for who they are don't think like a black ops team. Corporations do, and they do it all the time. I seriously doubt that the Big 10 and SEC do anything but offer guidelines for what their presidents will and won't approve. I'm also suspect that FOX told the Big 10 to take Oregon and Washington before ESPN realized that taking those 2 and Cal and Stanford were better west coast leverage than snatching two schools from L.A. The prize out west was who would be the first to attach 2 California schools to Oregon and Washington. You see what happened to the rest of the PAC 12. Big 12 and Mountain West bound.

The SEC had no West coast aspirations. It had to be the ACC which ESPN would use, but they were late on Oregon and Washington. Now they have Cal and Stanford on the cheap and the ACCN picks up California and Texas thanks to SMU. Washington and Oregon paired with USC and UCLA represent 4 of the top 5 brands value wise in the PAC 12. USC and UCLA are delivering a great market but as product weren't as valuable as Oregon and UW. Stanford with Oregon and Washington would have been a coup for the ACC. And yes, I know it's weird to even think that way, but penetration of the West Coast market in an efficient manner would have been attained.

Imo that’s similar to what I’m betting is occurring.

There is little incentive for ESPN or SEC to take on the liability of driving this (enticing the weakest link, FSU) given the primary reason for action is blocking Fox/BIG. This is mostly defensive for ESPN/SEC imo.

ESPN, ACC, Fox etc all don’t want discovery. They don’t want the future depending on favorable ruling

But free agency of ACC is also to be avoided if ESPN, whether that’s from expiration of GoR, litigation, or from ESPN declining its option.

That all leads to settlement imo. FSU allowed to leave, in which its settlement goes to those left behind, then ESPN either canceling the contract if it gets a sufficient arrangement on other schools, or exercising the option if more departures are unfavorable.

I do think there’s a risk that if BIG grabs two of the top ACC brands, it leads to more, and potentially at low cost of FSU it victorious in court. And if multiple of top ACC brands leave, is espn making money when exercising its option?

Settle out FSU and Clemson and the SEC is not in jeopardy of losing control in Florida or Georgia or South Carolina, and Kentucky, Tennessee, Alabama, Mississippi, Arkansas, Louisiana, and Missouri are firmly in their hands with Texas and Oklahoma about to be. What's the worst that could happen to the SEC and ESPN at that point? They lose Duke, Miami, North Carolina and Virginia, and possibly Georgia Tech to the Big 10. That's the worst that can happen. If it did is the SEC locked out of North Carolina and Virginia? No. Virginia is split by taking Virginia Tech and N.C. State becomes "the" football brand in the state after joining the SEC. Kansas is still available to the West and by taking them the SEC would have the 1st and 2nd winningest programs of all time in college hoops. Again, this is the worst that can happen.

North Carolina has twice felt imperiled, and both times reached out to the SEC. I should think that ESPN's top priority is in securing its super majority among Florida's college sports viewership. That means FSU. It is their most efficient pathway to that end. North Carolina comes to the SEC with a partner if that partner is Duke the SEC is landing Virginia as well. If that partner is N.C. State and Duke heads north then likely UVa does as well and Virginia Tech heads to the SEC.

Once you've covered the top 2 football brands for the SEC and the top Basketball brand, possibly both, and landed a Virginia school, what's left to get?

This is the impetus behind FSU's boldness. They can be that bold if they secretly believe the rights holder is with them. ESPN can't just say "We support FSU's departure from the ACC." But their legal team can point FSU's legal team in the right direction. FSU can turn it into such a public stink that the ACC wants to negotiate it away and when they do 3 schools leave. Do they all go to the SEC or do two leave for the SEC (those that FOX can't really aske because they don't fit Big 10 standards) and Miami to head North (if everyone profits none dare call it treason). If it is Miami that heads north and North Carolina waits, then the rest happens with relatively little dissension. If North Carolina heads to the SEC with N.C. State and Duke is the Big 10's entry to North Carolina then there's no rancor, especially if Virginia tosses in with Duke and the SEC lands Virginia Tech. What happens after that doesn't really matter. FOX and ESPN cover the remainder in the Big 12. Only those added to the Big 10 and SEC cost them more.

And all it takes is one settlement to establish a precedent. Think 250 to 280 million including exit fees and it will take off from there. The moves would cost FOX and allies 240 million for 6 schools. They would cost ESPN 280 million for 8. The shutdown of the ACCN would save ESPN about 100 million a year. Keeping most of the same states in the SECN would earn them another portion of the expense back. ESPN would save 10 million per ACC school moved to the B12 and the damages and exit fees totaling 280 million for each school departing for the SEC and Big 10 would save them 10 million for each headed to the Big 12 and nearly 40 million for each headed to the Big 10. It's a revenue neutral or better move for ESPN and one in which only the schools headed to the Big 10 would they lose rights to. Those in the Big 12 they can still access.

The consolidation and playoff profits, coupled with neutral or better costs for the consolidation are the network's motive. If FOX and the Big 10 gets some of what they want and the SEC gets what it desires, and if every school keeps access and nobody loses money in the venture for the remainder of the contracted ACC period, where is the opposition to be found? And that is why I have to consider why ESPN and FSU could actually be working together.

It be stupid if the Big Ten didn't add Florida State?

(01-02-2024 12:21 PM)UpStreamRedTeam Wrote:  

(01-02-2024 11:13 AM)mikeinsec127 Wrote:  I just don't see FSU as the prime Fla expansion candidate. The law suits are unbecoming. The BIG does not like to see its dirty laundry aired in open court. Plus there is little upside to taking FSU beyond its sports revenue being above the BIG average. I also don't think the sEC doubles up in its states. SO FSU and Clemson are BIG or bust. My bet is bust. Both end up in the B12.

No one is paying hundreds of millions of dollars to go to the B12. The force that would drive FSU to the B1G is ESPN's refusal to pay a premium to a school they feel they already have under contract that killed the golden goose of the GoR.

I am not sure the B1G is ready for them right now, maybe not anyone. Again, despite the belief of some that FSU gets a full share, I do not find it as simple as that. With Oregon and Washington at @ roughly 1/2 shares, bringing in FSU at a full would be bad optics both internally and externally. For FSU to get a full share, Oregon and Washington would need to be made whole... Is FSU over the next 6 years worth 2x B1G payouts, somewhere between $500K to $1 billion from the FOX/NBC/CBS coalition. Now of course this is moot if FSU just takes a B1G 1/2 share (similar to the amount they would get from the Big 12).

Unless the existing B1G teams are willing to take less to make the numbers work.

(12-31-2023 03:37 PM)DavidSt Wrote:  This is a good question to ask with FSU's crybaby reaction to get out of the ACC, and the way they lost to Georgia in their bowl game? Would the Big 10 and SEC rethinking on adding them after their hissy fit and sue happy attitude trying to get out of the ACC? Would the P2 worried that FSU would sue them in the future if they invited them? I would not invite them at all.

Not going to happen. FSU has had back door talks with Big/SEC which led to their actions. Big will be calling them if they can get clear, SEC maybe, probably not.

Now I do think it is quite possible FSU gets a 1/2 to 2/3 share out of the box.

(01-02-2024 05:23 PM)Dull Impact Wrote:  

(01-02-2024 12:21 PM)UpStreamRedTeam Wrote:  

(01-02-2024 11:13 AM)mikeinsec127 Wrote:  I just don't see FSU as the prime Fla expansion candidate. The law suits are unbecoming. The BIG does not like to see its dirty laundry aired in open court. Plus there is little upside to taking FSU beyond its sports revenue being above the BIG average. I also don't think the sEC doubles up in its states. SO FSU and Clemson are BIG or bust. My bet is bust. Both end up in the B12.

No one is paying hundreds of millions of dollars to go to the B12. The force that would drive FSU to the B1G is ESPN's refusal to pay a premium to a school they feel they already have under contract that killed the golden goose of the GoR.

I am not sure the B1G is ready for them right now, maybe not anyone. Again, despite the belief of some that FSU gets a full share, I do not find it as simple as that. With Oregon and Washington at @ roughly 1/2 shares, bringing in FSU at a full would be bad optics both internally and externally. For FSU to get a full share, Oregon and Washington would need to be made whole... Is FSU over the next 6 years worth 2x B1G payouts, somewhere between $500K to $1 billion from the FOX/NBC/CBS coalition. Now of course this is moot if FSU just takes a B1G 1/2 share (similar to the amount they would get from the Big 12).

Unless the existing B1G teams are willing to take less to make the numbers work.

The WSJ values Washington's economic impact at slightly over a half billion. FSU is around 390 million. Much of the speculation is just plain screwy if you delve into the numbers like attendance & total revenue (which reflect depth of donor support and depth of the pockets of their top fans and the support level of the whole fan base in terms of attendance, especially in weak years) and the WSJ (which measures the impact of this upon their sphere of influence in terms of hard business).

Numbers matter. The nearer the program to the core of the conference the more synergy they create in travel and economic impact. The Big 10 likely needs one or two more West Coast schools to attain that synergy and contain the travel overhead. There has to be some contiguity for any region added to reduce overhead and travel because otherwise the fans of that school will simply quit traveling to away games requiring airflight, and I'm talking in terms of the numbers of visiting fans. Certainly, there will be some and some parents for these games, but 15 or 20 thousand visitors? You need a core of closer games to perk that up.

The Big 10 has outearned the SEC by as much as 10 million in media revenue and still the SEC outpaced them in total revenue by 5 million. How? Ticket sales, concessions, and donations for away tickets and generally larger venues, even though the Big 10 has 3 of the top 6 including the top 2. The SEC average attendance will be around 77,000 with Oklahoma and Texas and was 75,500 prior to the expansion. The Big 10 is around 66,000 per home game for an average. Why? The SEC is more compact, and travel is easier and late season weather better.

Virginia and North Carolina can be incorporated with Maryland and Penn State and Rutgers and remain compact enough. Florida State? The bulk of their travel fans would pack it in after a few years. You would get ad revenue from Florida, but not enough to cover Big 10 travel and media pro rata.

FWIW, this is what Pete Thamel said regarding FSU to the P2:

“But wherever they go, one thing that’s fairly certain right now with the media market the way it is: they’re not going to get full freight,” claims Thamel.

“Much like Washington, Oregon, Cal, Stanford, SMU all went to their new leagues at discounted rates, Florida State will not enter a league at full throttle.”

https://www.on3.com/college/florida-stat...s-the-acc/

(01-02-2024 06:02 PM)random asian guy Wrote:  FWIW, this is what Pete Thamel said regarding FSU to the P2:

“But wherever they go, one thing that’s fairly certain right now with the media market the way it is: they’re not going to get full freight,” claims Thamel.

“Much like Washington, Oregon, Cal, Stanford, SMU all went to their new leagues at discounted rates, Florida State will not enter a league at full throttle.”

https://www.on3.com/college/florida-stat...s-the-acc/

Which raises the question, what's the point of doing this now? If all FSU can attract is a 50% share at the SEC or B1G, their TV money would be pretty close to equal to what they're getting as a member of the ACC not factoring in what they have to pay to get out of the ACC. Wouldn't it be better to wait until they can leave without penalty and for a full share?

(01-03-2024 08:43 AM)orangefan Wrote:  

(01-02-2024 06:02 PM)random asian guy Wrote:  FWIW, this is what Pete Thamel said regarding FSU to the P2:

“But wherever they go, one thing that’s fairly certain right now with the media market the way it is: they’re not going to get full freight,” claims Thamel.

“Much like Washington, Oregon, Cal, Stanford, SMU all went to their new leagues at discounted rates, Florida State will not enter a league at full throttle.”

https://www.on3.com/college/florida-stat...s-the-acc/

Which raises the question, what's the point of doing this now? If all FSU can attract is a 50% share at the SEC or B1G, their TV money would be pretty close to equal to what they're getting as a member of the ACC not factoring in what they have to pay to get out of the ACC. Wouldn't it be better to wait until they can leave without penalty and for a full share?

I have told Random Asian Guy about this Thamel quote already. It can only refer to the Big 10. The SEC is, and prides itself upon being, a conference where all members earn equal shares. Florida State if considered by the SEC would be a full share member, or they wouldn't be a member at all. This is another idiotic statement by Thamel. But that is what I have come to expect from a sports reporter from Yahoo.

And note: If Florida State became a member of the SEC their media revenue share would be equal to that of Alabama and Texas and every other member. If they received less, it would be because ESPN withheld a portion to pay their damages and exit fees to the ACC and when those were paid nothing would be withheld.

I state that only to be able to remind those who might claim that it wasn't an equal share that it was an equal share allotted though a portion of it may be garnished to pay their debts elsewhere.

With the SEC there is no buy in and there is no exit fee. The sum of what is owed to the SEC if a school departs is only equal to the unpaid amount of the COVID loan that each conference member received during the restricted attendance due to the virus.

(01-03-2024 08:43 AM)orangefan Wrote:  

(01-02-2024 06:02 PM)random asian guy Wrote:  FWIW, this is what Pete Thamel said regarding FSU to the P2:

“But wherever they go, one thing that’s fairly certain right now with the media market the way it is: they’re not going to get full freight,” claims Thamel.

“Much like Washington, Oregon, Cal, Stanford, SMU all went to their new leagues at discounted rates, Florida State will not enter a league at full throttle.”

https://www.on3.com/college/florida-stat...s-the-acc/

Which raises the question, what's the point of doing this now? If all FSU can attract is a 50% share at the SEC or B1G, their TV money would be pretty close to equal to what they're getting as a member of the ACC not factoring in what they have to pay to get out of the ACC. Wouldn't it be better to wait until they can leave without penalty and for a full share?

That could tell you how confident they are they won’t be paying much more than the exit- get capitulation

Perhaps this is what’s needed to get ESPN to decline the option, which makes it a much cheaper exit for everyone, and gets espn to secure FSU

Let’s me real. If FSU has to pay a price not worth leaving, the ACC will take them back. Little risk for FSU

FOX will decide if the Big Ten adds Florida State (or anyone else, really).

(12-31-2023 07:57 PM)bryanw1995 Wrote:  

(12-31-2023 07:50 PM)TeamRamRod1 Wrote:  The SEC already has a texas problem. They don't need another malcontent.

Texas and OU without A&M, CU, Nebraska and Missouri, were always a weird fit for the new Big 12. They left, they didn't raise the huge amount of stink that FSU raised, and they inadvertently did the Big 12 a favor by leaving before the Pac and ACC schools. They'll be a much better fit in the SEC, and I'm sure things will work out just fine with them. If you guys continue building your football program, I wouldn't be all that surprised to see Texas voting in favor of KU to the SEC down the road, too.

I think they'd be able to handle Mizzou going to the Big Ten for cultural fit and bucks. Losing Colorado hurt. A&M was gone. If you lose Mizzou and A&M. Then backfill with BYU and TCU while keeping the open tier-3 rights for each school it would've worked. BYU, Nebraska, Oklahoma and Texas could've still got their cushy deals and kept rivalries in tact.