Since regionalism is dead and we’re just chasing money, the best move is to go after 4 PAC schools with the best brands and TV markets. Washington, Oregon, Stanford and Cal are all accretive to the ACC contract…it forces ESPN to open negotiations on T1/T2 rates, and the ACCN gets into huge markets. Travel would be hell, but it appears that everyone is just preparing financially for a big earthquake in college athletics.

This is all just about money and power. The ACC would be adding brands and markets to maximize media payouts…and have leverage in CFP discussions.

(07-28-2022 06:58 AM)Wahoowa84 Wrote:  Since regionalism is dead and we’re just chasing money, the best move is to go after 4 PAC schools with the best brands and TV markets. Washington, Oregon, Stanford and Cal are all accretive to the ACC contract…it forces ESPN to open negotiations on T1/T2 rates, and the ACCN gets into huge markets. Travel would be hell, but it appears that everyone is just preparing financially for a big earthquake in college athletics.

This is all just about money and power. The ACC would be adding brands and markets to maximize media payouts…and have leverage in CFP discussions.

Travel would suck for the Pac schools. It would just be a minor inconvenience for the existing ACC schools.

(07-28-2022 09:21 AM)Schema Wrote:  

(07-28-2022 06:58 AM)Wahoowa84 Wrote:  Since regionalism is dead and we’re just chasing money, the best move is to go after 4 PAC schools with the best brands and TV markets. Washington, Oregon, Stanford and Cal are all accretive to the ACC contract…it forces ESPN to open negotiations on T1/T2 rates, and the ACCN gets into huge markets. Travel would be hell, but it appears that everyone is just preparing financially for a big earthquake in college athletics.

This is all just about money and power. The ACC would be adding brands and markets to maximize media payouts…and have leverage in CFP discussions.

Travel would suck for the Pac schools. It would just be a minor inconvenience for the existing ACC schools.

Yep. The only thing that makes sense (at this insane point) is for the B1G to effectively build a Pacific division. USC/UCLA standing alone thousands of miles away from the core of the B1G is absurd.

(07-28-2022 05:11 AM)XLance Wrote:  

(07-27-2022 06:43 PM)OrangeDude Wrote:  

(07-27-2022 06:00 PM)ndlutz Wrote:  I said 0, but I could just have easily said a couple scraps from the Pac-12 or Big 12 if the ACC is raided.

I think we're toast.

That's probably how most of us are feeling inside even if we haven't fully accepted it or will admit it. But there still is a part of me that thinks the Super 2's new upcoming contracts will only be for 5 years at the most and they may stay pat at 16 until the end of that period to see how things develop.

In 5 years, perhaps the ACC's fortunes in football can change?

Cheers,
Neil

We've all lived through it. It's a difficult transition to absorb or be absorbed. The B1G and SEC are getting ready to go through transitions unlike any they have done before. Both conferences are going to need time to transition, which should give the ACC time. We'll see what Phillips is made of.

I think the ACC should expect Notre Dame to honor their contracts with the league until 2036. If they choose to do otherwise the Conference should demand generous compensation.
Assuming a consistent role from Notre Dame, I would invite only one to semi-pair with the existing Irish presence, and that would be Cincinnati.

In a landscape of no divisions, I suppose 15 for football makes sense. But not as sold on Cincy. Prefer WVU myself. But I suspect the PAC crew would prefer Cincy also.

IF the B1G and SEC stand pat at 16 until the next TV contracts come up, I'd still feel better if Phillips at least tries to add Oregon, Washington, Stanford, and two of Arizona State, Utah, and Cal.

The PAC teams would have 4 permanent rivals relatively close by so the other two road games from the current ACC members shouldn't put much of a travel strain at least for football.

ESPN's low-ball of $245M annually means around $200M of that is for football.

I've analyzed the stats and Oregon and Washington combined are $70M total while Stanford is $30M. Arizona State and Utah combined is $50M so that is $150M of the $200M for those 5 programs. WSU's value is mostly dependent upon Washington, Cal's value has been mostly dependent on USC, UCLA, and Stanford (the latter the smallest amount of Cal's value). Arizona's value to the PAC is mostly in basketball while I was very surprised to see how small the value was for Colorado. But as bad as the Buffs are value wise they are still way better than the Beavers which has basically very little real value at all.

Is it any wonder the rumors of Arizona and Colorado applying to the B12 are out there? Not saying those rumors are true but if they aren't, they probably will be no matter if the B1G or the SEC or even the ACC come calling for any of the PAC schools with some value.

Anyway, if the value of those 5 PAC schools are indeed worth $150M in football monies imagine how significantly that can justify an increase in the ACC Tier1 and Tier 2 payouts - Oregon vs Miami, Washington vs Clemson, Stanford vs Florida State, Utah vs VT, Arizona State vs Louisville.

Also adding the states of Oregon, Washington, and Utah (not much I know but it is a state) as well as the Phoenix Arizona area and Northern California to the ACCN will also increase.

Obviously all of the above assumes B1G and SEC remain at 16 until the next TV contracts come into play and for the PAC to no longer be a viable conference on its own.

Unlikely, most definitely. BUT I assume even Phillips knows he has to try something.

Cheers,
Neil

(07-28-2022 06:58 AM)Wahoowa84 Wrote:  Since regionalism is dead and we’re just chasing money, the best move is to go after 4 PAC schools with the best brands and TV markets. Washington, Oregon, Stanford and Cal are all accretive to the ACC contract…it forces ESPN to open negotiations on T1/T2 rates, and the ACCN gets into huge markets. Travel would be hell, but it appears that everyone is just preparing financially for a big earthquake in college athletics.

This is all just about money and power. The ACC would be adding brands and markets to maximize media payouts…and have leverage in CFP discussions.

If you want best brands and TV markets, you don't take BOTH Stanford and Cal. One will suffice. Stanford is by far better than Cal.

The 4th school should be one of ... Arizona State (Phoenix), Utah (Salt Lake City but the best football program of these 3), or Colorado (Denver) are far superior to Cal, IMO.

(07-28-2022 11:13 AM)OrangeDude Wrote:  

(07-28-2022 05:11 AM)XLance Wrote:  

(07-27-2022 06:43 PM)OrangeDude Wrote:  

(07-27-2022 06:00 PM)ndlutz Wrote:  I said 0, but I could just have easily said a couple scraps from the Pac-12 or Big 12 if the ACC is raided.

I think we're toast.

That's probably how most of us are feeling inside even if we haven't fully accepted it or will admit it. But there still is a part of me that thinks the Super 2's new upcoming contracts will only be for 5 years at the most and they may stay pat at 16 until the end of that period to see how things develop.

In 5 years, perhaps the ACC's fortunes in football can change?

Cheers,
Neil

We've all lived through it. It's a difficult transition to absorb or be absorbed. The B1G and SEC are getting ready to go through transitions unlike any they have done before. Both conferences are going to need time to transition, which should give the ACC time. We'll see what Phillips is made of.

I think the ACC should expect Notre Dame to honor their contracts with the league until 2036. If they choose to do otherwise the Conference should demand generous compensation.
Assuming a consistent role from Notre Dame, I would invite only one to semi-pair with the existing Irish presence, and that would be Cincinnati.

In a landscape of no divisions, I suppose 15 for football makes sense. But not as sold on Cincy. Prefer WVU myself. But I suspect the PAC crew would prefer Cincy also.

IF the B1G and SEC stand pat at 16 until the next TV contracts come up, I'd still feel better if Phillips at least tries to add Oregon, Washington, Stanford, and two of Arizona State, Utah, and Cal.

The PAC teams would have 4 permanent rivals relatively close by so the other two road games from the current ACC members shouldn't put much of a travel strain at least for football.

ESPN's low-ball of $245M annually means around $200M of that is for football.

I've analyzed the stats and Oregon and Washington combined are $70M total while Stanford is $30M. Arizona State and Utah combined is $50M so that is $150M of the $200M for those 5 programs. WSU's value is mostly dependent upon Washington, Cal's value has been mostly dependent on USC, UCLA, and Stanford (the latter the smallest amount of Cal's value). Arizona's value to the PAC is mostly in basketball while I was very surprised to see how small the value was for Colorado. But as bad as the Buffs are value wise they are still way better than the Beavers which has basically very little real value at all.

Is it any wonder the rumors of Arizona and Colorado applying to the B12 are out there? Not saying those rumors are true but if they aren't, they probably will be no matter if the B1G or the SEC or even the ACC come calling for any of the PAC schools with some value.

Anyway, if the value of those 5 PAC schools are indeed worth $150M in football monies imagine how significantly that can justify an increase in the ACC Tier1 and Tier 2 payouts - Oregon vs Miami, Washington vs Clemson, Stanford vs Florida State, Utah vs VT, Arizona State vs Louisville.

Also adding the states of Oregon, Washington, and Utah (not much I know but it is a state) as well as the Phoenix Arizona area and Northern California to the ACCN will also increase.

Obviously all of the above assumes B1G and SEC remain at 16 until the next TV contracts come into play and for the PAC to no longer be a viable conference on its own.

Unlikely, most definitely. BUT I assume even Phillips knows he has to try something.

Cheers,
Neil

Neil we have discussed West Virginia many times. I still have the schedule you made for a 15 team ACC with West Virginia as #15 and still trying to squeeze Notre Dame's 5 games per year too. I'm OK with the Mountaineers instead of Cincinnati, but it's a risky add for all of the original ACC schools as there is no history or common ground, and West Virginia is starting to die in the Big 12.
Perhaps the best move would be to get as much from the Irish as possible and let them go. With the cultural differences, Notre Dame would never truly fit as a full time member in the ACC. Syracuse is still a project after all these years.

Going west is a temporary band-aid and without a Los Angeles school..........plus the further north you go the greater the political divide. I understand the numbers....I just hope it does not happen, it wouldn't end well.

(07-28-2022 02:56 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(07-28-2022 11:13 AM)OrangeDude Wrote:  

(07-28-2022 05:11 AM)XLance Wrote:  

(07-27-2022 06:43 PM)OrangeDude Wrote:  

(07-27-2022 06:00 PM)ndlutz Wrote:  I said 0, but I could just have easily said a couple scraps from the Pac-12 or Big 12 if the ACC is raided.

I think we're toast.

That's probably how most of us are feeling inside even if we haven't fully accepted it or will admit it. But there still is a part of me that thinks the Super 2's new upcoming contracts will only be for 5 years at the most and they may stay pat at 16 until the end of that period to see how things develop.

In 5 years, perhaps the ACC's fortunes in football can change?

Cheers,
Neil

We've all lived through it. It's a difficult transition to absorb or be absorbed. The B1G and SEC are getting ready to go through transitions unlike any they have done before. Both conferences are going to need time to transition, which should give the ACC time. We'll see what Phillips is made of.

I think the ACC should expect Notre Dame to honor their contracts with the league until 2036. If they choose to do otherwise the Conference should demand generous compensation.
Assuming a consistent role from Notre Dame, I would invite only one to semi-pair with the existing Irish presence, and that would be Cincinnati.

In a landscape of no divisions, I suppose 15 for football makes sense. But not as sold on Cincy. Prefer WVU myself. But I suspect the PAC crew would prefer Cincy also.

IF the B1G and SEC stand pat at 16 until the next TV contracts come up, I'd still feel better if Phillips at least tries to add Oregon, Washington, Stanford, and two of Arizona State, Utah, and Cal.

The PAC teams would have 4 permanent rivals relatively close by so the other two road games from the current ACC members shouldn't put much of a travel strain at least for football.

ESPN's low-ball of $245M annually means around $200M of that is for football.

I've analyzed the stats and Oregon and Washington combined are $70M total while Stanford is $30M. Arizona State and Utah combined is $50M so that is $150M of the $200M for those 5 programs. WSU's value is mostly dependent upon Washington, Cal's value has been mostly dependent on USC, UCLA, and Stanford (the latter the smallest amount of Cal's value). Arizona's value to the PAC is mostly in basketball while I was very surprised to see how small the value was for Colorado. But as bad as the Buffs are value wise they are still way better than the Beavers which has basically very little real value at all.

Is it any wonder the rumors of Arizona and Colorado applying to the B12 are out there? Not saying those rumors are true but if they aren't, they probably will be no matter if the B1G or the SEC or even the ACC come calling for any of the PAC schools with some value.

Anyway, if the value of those 5 PAC schools are indeed worth $150M in football monies imagine how significantly that can justify an increase in the ACC Tier1 and Tier 2 payouts - Oregon vs Miami, Washington vs Clemson, Stanford vs Florida State, Utah vs VT, Arizona State vs Louisville.

Also adding the states of Oregon, Washington, and Utah (not much I know but it is a state) as well as the Phoenix Arizona area and Northern California to the ACCN will also increase.

Obviously all of the above assumes B1G and SEC remain at 16 until the next TV contracts come into play and for the PAC to no longer be a viable conference on its own.

Unlikely, most definitely. BUT I assume even Phillips knows he has to try something.

Cheers,
Neil

Neil we have discussed West Virginia many times. I still have the schedule you made for a 15 team ACC with West Virginia as #15 and still trying to squeeze Notre Dame's 5 games per year too. I'm OK with the Mountaineers instead of Cincinnati, but it's a risky add for all of the original ACC schools as there is no history or common ground, and West Virginia is starting to die in the Big 12.
Perhaps the best move would be to get as much from the Irish as possible and let them go. With the cultural differences, Notre Dame would never truly fit as a full time member in the ACC. Syracuse is still a project after all these years.

Going west is a temporary band-aid and without a Los Angeles school..........plus the further north you go the greater the political divide. I understand the numbers....I just hope it does not happen, it wouldn't end well.

Understand re WVU. It's a personal preference to me. The business/logical choice is indeed Cincy.

The rest of your arguments seems like let's just give up and end the ACC altogether. And that is a legitimate stance to take. But IF it is to survive than it needs to adapt. I am trying to show it can survive and not only survive but potentially perhaps thrive.

But ultimately that is up to the presidents of the member universities to decide. Not us fans.

Again, as I have said in the past, North Carolina has no worries as an institution. As a long time fan you may not like where this is heading and perhaps you will give up following Tar Heels sports altogether. I don't know.

As a Syracuse fan, for me it's most likely whatever the leftover conference will call itself (if it even exists by 2030) or the New New New New Big East.

Cheers,
Neil

(07-28-2022 03:47 PM)OrangeDude Wrote:  

(07-28-2022 02:56 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(07-28-2022 11:13 AM)OrangeDude Wrote:  

(07-28-2022 05:11 AM)XLance Wrote:  

(07-27-2022 06:43 PM)OrangeDude Wrote:  That's probably how most of us are feeling inside even if we haven't fully accepted it or will admit it. But there still is a part of me that thinks the Super 2's new upcoming contracts will only be for 5 years at the most and they may stay pat at 16 until the end of that period to see how things develop.

In 5 years, perhaps the ACC's fortunes in football can change?

Cheers,
Neil

We've all lived through it. It's a difficult transition to absorb or be absorbed. The B1G and SEC are getting ready to go through transitions unlike any they have done before. Both conferences are going to need time to transition, which should give the ACC time. We'll see what Phillips is made of.

I think the ACC should expect Notre Dame to honor their contracts with the league until 2036. If they choose to do otherwise the Conference should demand generous compensation.
Assuming a consistent role from Notre Dame, I would invite only one to semi-pair with the existing Irish presence, and that would be Cincinnati.

In a landscape of no divisions, I suppose 15 for football makes sense. But not as sold on Cincy. Prefer WVU myself. But I suspect the PAC crew would prefer Cincy also.

IF the B1G and SEC stand pat at 16 until the next TV contracts come up, I'd still feel better if Phillips at least tries to add Oregon, Washington, Stanford, and two of Arizona State, Utah, and Cal.

The PAC teams would have 4 permanent rivals relatively close by so the other two road games from the current ACC members shouldn't put much of a travel strain at least for football.

ESPN's low-ball of $245M annually means around $200M of that is for football.

I've analyzed the stats and Oregon and Washington combined are $70M total while Stanford is $30M. Arizona State and Utah combined is $50M so that is $150M of the $200M for those 5 programs. WSU's value is mostly dependent upon Washington, Cal's value has been mostly dependent on USC, UCLA, and Stanford (the latter the smallest amount of Cal's value). Arizona's value to the PAC is mostly in basketball while I was very surprised to see how small the value was for Colorado. But as bad as the Buffs are value wise they are still way better than the Beavers which has basically very little real value at all.

Is it any wonder the rumors of Arizona and Colorado applying to the B12 are out there? Not saying those rumors are true but if they aren't, they probably will be no matter if the B1G or the SEC or even the ACC come calling for any of the PAC schools with some value.

Anyway, if the value of those 5 PAC schools are indeed worth $150M in football monies imagine how significantly that can justify an increase in the ACC Tier1 and Tier 2 payouts - Oregon vs Miami, Washington vs Clemson, Stanford vs Florida State, Utah vs VT, Arizona State vs Louisville.

Also adding the states of Oregon, Washington, and Utah (not much I know but it is a state) as well as the Phoenix Arizona area and Northern California to the ACCN will also increase.

Obviously all of the above assumes B1G and SEC remain at 16 until the next TV contracts come into play and for the PAC to no longer be a viable conference on its own.

Unlikely, most definitely. BUT I assume even Phillips knows he has to try something.

Cheers,
Neil

Neil we have discussed West Virginia many times. I still have the schedule you made for a 15 team ACC with West Virginia as #15 and still trying to squeeze Notre Dame's 5 games per year too. I'm OK with the Mountaineers instead of Cincinnati, but it's a risky add for all of the original ACC schools as there is no history or common ground, and West Virginia is starting to die in the Big 12.
Perhaps the best move would be to get as much from the Irish as possible and let them go. With the cultural differences, Notre Dame would never truly fit as a full time member in the ACC. Syracuse is still a project after all these years.

Going west is a temporary band-aid and without a Los Angeles school..........plus the further north you go the greater the political divide. I understand the numbers....I just hope it does not happen, it wouldn't end well.

Understand re WVU. It's a personal preference to me. The business/logical choice is indeed Cincy.

The rest of your arguments seems like let's just give up and end the ACC altogether. And that is a legitimate stance to take. But IF it is to survive than it needs to adapt. I am trying to show it can survive and not only survive but potentially perhaps thrive.

But ultimately that is up to the presidents of the member universities to decide. Not us fans.

Again, as I have said in the past, North Carolina has no worries as an institution. As a long time fan you may not like where this is heading and perhaps you will give up following Tar Heels sports altogether. I don't know.

As a Syracuse fan, for me it's most likely whatever the leftover conference will call itself (if it even exists by 2030) or the New New New New Big East.

Cheers,
Neil

Last year when it look gloomy for the BigXII that would have been the time to pull the trigger to have brought in Cincinnati and WVU to go to 16 plus ND. Could have invited Houston or Baylor for 18. Had that happened The Big XII would likely have been the one left trying to find lifelines likely in the PAC had they not snubbed them. Who knows if USC, UCLA leaving after that would still be as shaky with 4 conferences instead of 5 with 3 wondering when the next hammer would strike.

(07-28-2022 11:30 AM)Pervis_Griffith Wrote:  

(07-28-2022 06:58 AM)Wahoowa84 Wrote:  Since regionalism is dead and we’re just chasing money, the best move is to go after 4 PAC schools with the best brands and TV markets. Washington, Oregon, Stanford and Cal are all accretive to the ACC contract…it forces ESPN to open negotiations on T1/T2 rates, and the ACCN gets into huge markets. Travel would be hell, but it appears that everyone is just preparing financially for a big earthquake in college athletics.

This is all just about money and power. The ACC would be adding brands and markets to maximize media payouts…and have leverage in CFP discussions.

If you want best brands and TV markets, you don't take BOTH Stanford and Cal. One will suffice. Stanford is by far better than Cal.

The 4th school should be one of ... Arizona State (Phoenix), Utah (Salt Lake City but the best football program of these 3), or Colorado (Denver) are far superior to Cal, IMO.

IMO - Cal is oddly underrated in these discussions. Their football performance is mercurial and they are in a down cycle. Being the California flagship means they get elite talent (they have a bunch of NFL Pro Bowl selections). More importantly, they open the state of California for other football brands. Oregon, Utah, Arizona State, nor Colorado have the homegrown talent to maintain their football pedigrees…continued access to California recruits is essential for their football survival. ESPN would likely prefer to double dip in the Bay Area/California, rather than add an relatively smaller mountain state.

Expansion with PAC schools should be viewed as a short-term proposition. To help the ACC fix the horrendous media payouts through 2036.

You guys that would take WV over UC crack me up.

(07-29-2022 07:32 AM)Wahoowa84 Wrote:  

(07-28-2022 11:30 AM)Pervis_Griffith Wrote:  

(07-28-2022 06:58 AM)Wahoowa84 Wrote:  Since regionalism is dead and we’re just chasing money, the best move is to go after 4 PAC schools with the best brands and TV markets. Washington, Oregon, Stanford and Cal are all accretive to the ACC contract…it forces ESPN to open negotiations on T1/T2 rates, and the ACCN gets into huge markets. Travel would be hell, but it appears that everyone is just preparing financially for a big earthquake in college athletics.

This is all just about money and power. The ACC would be adding brands and markets to maximize media payouts…and have leverage in CFP discussions.

If you want best brands and TV markets, you don't take BOTH Stanford and Cal. One will suffice. Stanford is by far better than Cal.

The 4th school should be one of ... Arizona State (Phoenix), Utah (Salt Lake City but the best football program of these 3), or Colorado (Denver) are far superior to Cal, IMO.

IMO - Cal is oddly underrated in these discussions. Their football performance is mercurial and they are in a down cycle. Being the California flagship means they get elite talent (they have a bunch of NFL Pro Bowl selections). More importantly, they open the state of California for other football brands. Oregon, Utah, Arizona State, nor Colorado have the homegrown talent to maintain their football pedigrees…continued access to California recruits is essential for their football survival. ESPN would likely prefer to double dip in the Bay Area/California, rather than add an relatively smaller mountain state.

Expansion with PAC schools should be viewed as a short-term proposition. To help the ACC fix the horrendous media payouts through 2036.

quote]

Stanford would be nice, but I just don’t see them coming. Their AD was at podium today with the Pac commissioner during difficult Q&A session. My guess is that Stanford will take an invitation from BIG but not from us.

That’s why the focus has to be on UO and UW. If we want four, maybe Cal and ASU? How about SDSU? Getting into Southern Cal is not a bad idea in my opinion.

(07-28-2022 03:47 PM)OrangeDude Wrote:  

(07-28-2022 02:56 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(07-28-2022 11:13 AM)OrangeDude Wrote:  

(07-28-2022 05:11 AM)XLance Wrote:  

(07-27-2022 06:43 PM)OrangeDude Wrote:  That's probably how most of us are feeling inside even if we haven't fully accepted it or will admit it. But there still is a part of me that thinks the Super 2's new upcoming contracts will only be for 5 years at the most and they may stay pat at 16 until the end of that period to see how things develop.

In 5 years, perhaps the ACC's fortunes in football can change?

Cheers,
Neil

We've all lived through it. It's a difficult transition to absorb or be absorbed. The B1G and SEC are getting ready to go through transitions unlike any they have done before. Both conferences are going to need time to transition, which should give the ACC time. We'll see what Phillips is made of.

I think the ACC should expect Notre Dame to honor their contracts with the league until 2036. If they choose to do otherwise the Conference should demand generous compensation.
Assuming a consistent role from Notre Dame, I would invite only one to semi-pair with the existing Irish presence, and that would be Cincinnati.

In a landscape of no divisions, I suppose 15 for football makes sense. But not as sold on Cincy. Prefer WVU myself. But I suspect the PAC crew would prefer Cincy also.

IF the B1G and SEC stand pat at 16 until the next TV contracts come up, I'd still feel better if Phillips at least tries to add Oregon, Washington, Stanford, and two of Arizona State, Utah, and Cal.

The PAC teams would have 4 permanent rivals relatively close by so the other two road games from the current ACC members shouldn't put much of a travel strain at least for football.

ESPN's low-ball of $245M annually means around $200M of that is for football.

I've analyzed the stats and Oregon and Washington combined are $70M total while Stanford is $30M. Arizona State and Utah combined is $50M so that is $150M of the $200M for those 5 programs. WSU's value is mostly dependent upon Washington, Cal's value has been mostly dependent on USC, UCLA, and Stanford (the latter the smallest amount of Cal's value). Arizona's value to the PAC is mostly in basketball while I was very surprised to see how small the value was for Colorado. But as bad as the Buffs are value wise they are still way better than the Beavers which has basically very little real value at all.

Is it any wonder the rumors of Arizona and Colorado applying to the B12 are out there? Not saying those rumors are true but if they aren't, they probably will be no matter if the B1G or the SEC or even the ACC come calling for any of the PAC schools with some value.

Anyway, if the value of those 5 PAC schools are indeed worth $150M in football monies imagine how significantly that can justify an increase in the ACC Tier1 and Tier 2 payouts - Oregon vs Miami, Washington vs Clemson, Stanford vs Florida State, Utah vs VT, Arizona State vs Louisville.

Also adding the states of Oregon, Washington, and Utah (not much I know but it is a state) as well as the Phoenix Arizona area and Northern California to the ACCN will also increase.

Obviously all of the above assumes B1G and SEC remain at 16 until the next TV contracts come into play and for the PAC to no longer be a viable conference on its own.

Unlikely, most definitely. BUT I assume even Phillips knows he has to try something.

Cheers,
Neil

Neil we have discussed West Virginia many times. I still have the schedule you made for a 15 team ACC with West Virginia as #15 and still trying to squeeze Notre Dame's 5 games per year too. I'm OK with the Mountaineers instead of Cincinnati, but it's a risky add for all of the original ACC schools as there is no history or common ground, and West Virginia is starting to die in the Big 12.
Perhaps the best move would be to get as much from the Irish as possible and let them go. With the cultural differences, Notre Dame would never truly fit as a full time member in the ACC. Syracuse is still a project after all these years.

Going west is a temporary band-aid and without a Los Angeles school..........plus the further north you go the greater the political divide. I understand the numbers....I just hope it does not happen, it wouldn't end well.

Understand re WVU. It's a personal preference to me. The business/logical choice is indeed Cincy.

The rest of your arguments seems like let's just give up and end the ACC altogether. And that is a legitimate stance to take. But IF it is to survive than it needs to adapt. I am trying to show it can survive and not only survive but potentially perhaps thrive.

But ultimately that is up to the presidents of the member universities to decide. Not us fans.

Again, as I have said in the past, North Carolina has no worries as an institution. As a long time fan you may not like where this is heading and perhaps you will give up following Tar Heels sports altogether. I don't know.

As a Syracuse fan, for me it's most likely whatever the leftover conference will call itself (if it even exists by 2030) or the New New New New Big East.

Cheers,
Neil

You probably don’t know me but I had read many of OmniOrange’s postings. They were very helpful for me to understand the ACC’s earlier expansions as well as the Big East dynamics.

The demographic change is slow but real. Unfortunately, WVU’s value has been on the slow decline.

Cincy has more upside, or more accurately, Cincy has less downside risk than WVU.

Still, I think UO and UW are the best realistic candidates out there.

(07-29-2022 12:59 PM)random asian guy Wrote:  

(07-28-2022 03:47 PM)OrangeDude Wrote:  

(07-28-2022 02:56 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(07-28-2022 11:13 AM)OrangeDude Wrote:  

(07-28-2022 05:11 AM)XLance Wrote:  We've all lived through it. It's a difficult transition to absorb or be absorbed. The B1G and SEC are getting ready to go through transitions unlike any they have done before. Both conferences are going to need time to transition, which should give the ACC time. We'll see what Phillips is made of.

I think the ACC should expect Notre Dame to honor their contracts with the league until 2036. If they choose to do otherwise the Conference should demand generous compensation.
Assuming a consistent role from Notre Dame, I would invite only one to semi-pair with the existing Irish presence, and that would be Cincinnati.

In a landscape of no divisions, I suppose 15 for football makes sense. But not as sold on Cincy. Prefer WVU myself. But I suspect the PAC crew would prefer Cincy also.

IF the B1G and SEC stand pat at 16 until the next TV contracts come up, I'd still feel better if Phillips at least tries to add Oregon, Washington, Stanford, and two of Arizona State, Utah, and Cal.

The PAC teams would have 4 permanent rivals relatively close by so the other two road games from the current ACC members shouldn't put much of a travel strain at least for football.

ESPN's low-ball of $245M annually means around $200M of that is for football.

I've analyzed the stats and Oregon and Washington combined are $70M total while Stanford is $30M. Arizona State and Utah combined is $50M so that is $150M of the $200M for those 5 programs. WSU's value is mostly dependent upon Washington, Cal's value has been mostly dependent on USC, UCLA, and Stanford (the latter the smallest amount of Cal's value). Arizona's value to the PAC is mostly in basketball while I was very surprised to see how small the value was for Colorado. But as bad as the Buffs are value wise they are still way better than the Beavers which has basically very little real value at all.

Is it any wonder the rumors of Arizona and Colorado applying to the B12 are out there? Not saying those rumors are true but if they aren't, they probably will be no matter if the B1G or the SEC or even the ACC come calling for any of the PAC schools with some value.

Anyway, if the value of those 5 PAC schools are indeed worth $150M in football monies imagine how significantly that can justify an increase in the ACC Tier1 and Tier 2 payouts - Oregon vs Miami, Washington vs Clemson, Stanford vs Florida State, Utah vs VT, Arizona State vs Louisville.

Also adding the states of Oregon, Washington, and Utah (not much I know but it is a state) as well as the Phoenix Arizona area and Northern California to the ACCN will also increase.

Obviously all of the above assumes B1G and SEC remain at 16 until the next TV contracts come into play and for the PAC to no longer be a viable conference on its own.

Unlikely, most definitely. BUT I assume even Phillips knows he has to try something.

Cheers,
Neil

Neil we have discussed West Virginia many times. I still have the schedule you made for a 15 team ACC with West Virginia as #15 and still trying to squeeze Notre Dame's 5 games per year too. I'm OK with the Mountaineers instead of Cincinnati, but it's a risky add for all of the original ACC schools as there is no history or common ground, and West Virginia is starting to die in the Big 12.
Perhaps the best move would be to get as much from the Irish as possible and let them go. With the cultural differences, Notre Dame would never truly fit as a full time member in the ACC. Syracuse is still a project after all these years.

Going west is a temporary band-aid and without a Los Angeles school..........plus the further north you go the greater the political divide. I understand the numbers....I just hope it does not happen, it wouldn't end well.

Understand re WVU. It's a personal preference to me. The business/logical choice is indeed Cincy.

The rest of your arguments seems like let's just give up and end the ACC altogether. And that is a legitimate stance to take. But IF it is to survive than it needs to adapt. I am trying to show it can survive and not only survive but potentially perhaps thrive.

But ultimately that is up to the presidents of the member universities to decide. Not us fans.

Again, as I have said in the past, North Carolina has no worries as an institution. As a long time fan you may not like where this is heading and perhaps you will give up following Tar Heels sports altogether. I don't know.

As a Syracuse fan, for me it's most likely whatever the leftover conference will call itself (if it even exists by 2030) or the New New New New Big East.

Cheers,
Neil

You probably don’t know me but I had read many of OmniOrange’s postings. They were very helpful for me to understand the ACC’s earlier expansions as well as the Big East dynamics.

The demographic change is slow but real. Unfortunately, WVU’s value has been on the slow decline.

Cincy has more upside, or more accurately, Cincy has less downside risk than WVU.

Still, I think UO and UW are the best realistic candidates out there.

Warren's "maybe not done" comments will cause Washington, Oregon, and others to bide their time in the PAC12 in hopes of a B1G invitation. Cincinnati would accept an ACC invitation, though. They're arguably better than any ACC football program not named Clemson, which would fill a glaring need of the ACC. If FSU, Miami, and VT get well, then the contract value might also increase. I keep coming back to market value - FSU, Miami, Clemson, UNC, and UVa would all be invited to one of the super 2 if not for the GOR. Why ESPN isn't paying them fair market value in the ACC is beyond me, but if I were Phillips, I'd bludgeon ESPN with the reports of B1G/Fox being interested in FSU/Miami: "guys, they and others will walk if you don't pay fair market value and your investment in the ACC network will go down the toilet with the ACC."

(07-28-2022 03:47 PM)OrangeDude Wrote:  

(07-28-2022 02:56 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(07-28-2022 11:13 AM)OrangeDude Wrote:  

(07-28-2022 05:11 AM)XLance Wrote:  

(07-27-2022 06:43 PM)OrangeDude Wrote:  That's probably how most of us are feeling inside even if we haven't fully accepted it or will admit it. But there still is a part of me that thinks the Super 2's new upcoming contracts will only be for 5 years at the most and they may stay pat at 16 until the end of that period to see how things develop.

In 5 years, perhaps the ACC's fortunes in football can change?

Cheers,
Neil

We've all lived through it. It's a difficult transition to absorb or be absorbed. The B1G and SEC are getting ready to go through transitions unlike any they have done before. Both conferences are going to need time to transition, which should give the ACC time. We'll see what Phillips is made of.

I think the ACC should expect Notre Dame to honor their contracts with the league until 2036. If they choose to do otherwise the Conference should demand generous compensation.
Assuming a consistent role from Notre Dame, I would invite only one to semi-pair with the existing Irish presence, and that would be Cincinnati.

In a landscape of no divisions, I suppose 15 for football makes sense. But not as sold on Cincy. Prefer WVU myself. But I suspect the PAC crew would prefer Cincy also.

IF the B1G and SEC stand pat at 16 until the next TV contracts come up, I'd still feel better if Phillips at least tries to add Oregon, Washington, Stanford, and two of Arizona State, Utah, and Cal.

The PAC teams would have 4 permanent rivals relatively close by so the other two road games from the current ACC members shouldn't put much of a travel strain at least for football.

ESPN's low-ball of $245M annually means around $200M of that is for football.

I've analyzed the stats and Oregon and Washington combined are $70M total while Stanford is $30M. Arizona State and Utah combined is $50M so that is $150M of the $200M for those 5 programs. WSU's value is mostly dependent upon Washington, Cal's value has been mostly dependent on USC, UCLA, and Stanford (the latter the smallest amount of Cal's value). Arizona's value to the PAC is mostly in basketball while I was very surprised to see how small the value was for Colorado. But as bad as the Buffs are value wise they are still way better than the Beavers which has basically very little real value at all.

Is it any wonder the rumors of Arizona and Colorado applying to the B12 are out there? Not saying those rumors are true but if they aren't, they probably will be no matter if the B1G or the SEC or even the ACC come calling for any of the PAC schools with some value.

Anyway, if the value of those 5 PAC schools are indeed worth $150M in football monies imagine how significantly that can justify an increase in the ACC Tier1 and Tier 2 payouts - Oregon vs Miami, Washington vs Clemson, Stanford vs Florida State, Utah vs VT, Arizona State vs Louisville.

Also adding the states of Oregon, Washington, and Utah (not much I know but it is a state) as well as the Phoenix Arizona area and Northern California to the ACCN will also increase.

Obviously all of the above assumes B1G and SEC remain at 16 until the next TV contracts come into play and for the PAC to no longer be a viable conference on its own.

Unlikely, most definitely. BUT I assume even Phillips knows he has to try something.

Cheers,
Neil

Neil we have discussed West Virginia many times. I still have the schedule you made for a 15 team ACC with West Virginia as #15 and still trying to squeeze Notre Dame's 5 games per year too. I'm OK with the Mountaineers instead of Cincinnati, but it's a risky add for all of the original ACC schools as there is no history or common ground, and West Virginia is starting to die in the Big 12.
Perhaps the best move would be to get as much from the Irish as possible and let them go. With the cultural differences, Notre Dame would never truly fit as a full time member in the ACC. Syracuse is still a project after all these years.

Going west is a temporary band-aid and without a Los Angeles school..........plus the further north you go the greater the political divide. I understand the numbers....I just hope it does not happen, it wouldn't end well.

Understand re WVU. It's a personal preference to me. The business/logical choice is indeed Cincy.

b]The rest of your arguments seems like let's just give up and end the ACC altogether.[/b] And that is a legitimate stance to take. But IF it is to survive than it needs to adapt. I am trying to show it can survive and not only survive but potentially perhaps thrive.

But ultimately that is up to the presidents of the member universities to decide. Not us fans.

Again, as I have said in the past, North Carolina has no worries as an institution. As a long time fan you may not like where this is heading and perhaps you will give up following Tar Heels sports altogether. I don't know.

As a Syracuse fan, for me it's most likely whatever the leftover conference will call itself (if it even exists by 2030) or the New New New New Big East.

Cheers,
Neil

Neil,
I have no desire to end the ACC, it's hard for me to see Carolina in either the SEC or the B1G. Personally I would rather take a lesser amount of money and stay exactly where we are.
We have a good mix of schools with a good footprint, our schools just need a better product. The 14 we have plus Cincy should give us all we need and all in the ETZ (a real plus for broadcast scheduling).

I would choose others. Merge with ALL remaining PAC schools. That is the only way they will agree with a merge. These are big state schools. Top 2 are good enough. NC has four schools in the conference.

Easiest fits, geographically:* Cincinnati and UCF
Other good fits from Big XII: Iowa State and TCU, maybe Baylor
Any Pac-12 team not names Oregon/Washington State would be ok

(07-29-2022 03:45 PM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  Easiest fits, geographically:* Cincinnati and UCF
Other good fits from Big XII: Iowa State and TCU, maybe Baylor
Any Pac-12 team not names Oregon/Washington State would be ok

Our best bet would be to work from the inside out.

(07-29-2022 03:45 PM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  Easiest fits, geographically:* Cincinnati and UCF
Other good fits from Big XII: Iowa State and TCU, maybe Baylor
Any Pac-12 team not names Oregon/Washington State would be ok

If the money increase from the network partnership with Pac plus adding Cincy and other B12 school(s) is comparable to the money increase from UO and UW, then yeah I would rather take Cincy and B12 schools.

We will see.

(07-30-2022 06:27 PM)random asian guy Wrote:  

(07-29-2022 03:45 PM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  Easiest fits, geographically:* Cincinnati and UCF
Other good fits from Big XII: Iowa State and TCU, maybe Baylor
Any Pac-12 team not names Oregon/Washington State would be ok

If the money increase from the network partnership with Pac plus adding Cincy and other B12 school(s) is comparable to the money increase from UO and UW, then yeah I would rather take Cincy and B12 schools.

We will see.

I am torn on this. From a regional aspect that is definitely true. But in terms of a "brand" or "near brand" perspective - the PAC definitely has two brands both well above any left in the B12. And I would say Stanford is as good as the two best remaining football schools - Oklahoma State and Baylor.

Ultimately football increases in the future will most likely be tied to "brand" and near-brand match-ups.

The ACC has three brands or near-brands while the PAC has two with Oregon and Washington.

Hokie Mark wrote:

RE: adding brands - conference TV ratings don't grow linearly with more brands, they grow exponentially.
- If you have 2 big brands, you have ONE big game per year (A/B).
- If you have 3 big brands, you have, not two, but THREE big games (A/B, A/C, B/C)
- With 4 big brands you have SIX big games (A/B, A/C, A/D, B/C, B/D, C/D)
- 5 brands gives you 10 big games
- 6 brands gives you 15 big games
It's just combinations of N brands taken 2 at a time = n!/(2*(n-2)!).

The B12's two best football programs left are Oklahoma State and Baylor imho. But in reality are they that much better than Virginia Tech and Louisville? With those latter two programs already in the ACC the conference is having difficulty showcasing even 4 big games a year.

Now having said all of that, the likelihood of the ACC with any PAC teams of value is very slight. But shouldn't that be the goal of Phillips first and foremost and then settle for the best B12 teams?

Just my thoughts.

Cheers,
Neil