As I’ve stated previously, it’s not ND’s job, nor is it in their contract to increase the ACC’s total revenue by joining the grid league. I am not advocating this, but it is a byproduct of brainstorming expansion with Stanford.


However, if Stanford, Cal, (both already candidates) and Navy (fb-only) were invited, the ACC could get to seven ND games many seasons if the Irish continue to schedule Stanford/Navy outside the ACC slate. This would benefit the network by gaining another high quality home game.

My understanding is ND’s contract is to rotate the ACC teams, so there would be some years where they too actually benefit by opening up even more spots on their non-ACC slate.

This is a low risk opportunity to perhaps create a rotation that is interesting enough to at least get the Irish to consider joining. I’d propose a yearly rotation of:

FSU/Miami

GT/Clemson

UNC/Duke/State/Wake

UVA/VT/UL

Pitt/Cal

BC/SU

Stanford

Navy


OOC: USC, 10, 11, 12


Regarding future expansion, esayem’s top candidates are, in no order: Houston, SMU, Kansas, Arizona, Arizona St. and Colorado.

I still believe UW and UO are Big 10 bound.

(08-10-2022 07:27 AM)esayem Wrote:  As I’ve stated previously, it’s not ND’s job, nor is it in their contract to increase the ACC’s total revenue by joining the grid league. I am not advocating this, but it is a byproduct of brainstorming expansion with Stanford.


However, if Stanford, Cal, (both already candidates) and Navy (fb-only) were invited, the ACC could get to seven ND games many seasons if the Irish continue to schedule Stanford/Navy outside the ACC slate. This would benefit the network by gaining another high quality home game.

My understanding is ND’s contract is to rotate the ACC teams, so there would be some years where they too actually benefit by opening up even more spots on their non-ACC slate.

This is a low risk opportunity to perhaps create a rotation that is interesting enough to at least get the Irish to consider joining. I’d propose a yearly rotation of:

FSU/Miami

GT/Clemson

UNC/Duke/State/Wake

UVA/VT/UL

Pitt/Cal

BC/SU

Stanford

Navy


OOC: USC, 10, 11, 12


Regarding future expansion, esayem’s top candidates are, in no order: Houston, SMU, Kansas, Arizona, Arizona St. and Colorado.

I still believe UW and UO are Big 10 bound.

I see the main principals of your post as:
1) create a better schedule of ACC opponents for ND to play, and
2) invite teams they play annually anyway so that the ACC TV contract can grow.

Your proposal - even with principal #1 only - would result in more ND/FSU, ND/Miami, and ND/Clemson, and less ND/Duke, etc. This is a good business decision, IMO. I creates 2 benefits:
a) better tv ratings & ticket sales for both the ACC and Notre Dame
b) fewer losses absorbed by the North Carolina foursome

If the ACC wants to bring in Stanford and Cal...you add Oregon, Washington, SDSU and either Cincy, WVU or UCF

Go to 20...4 pods of 5

9 game league schedule

(08-10-2022 09:40 AM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  I see the main principals of your post as:
1) create a better schedule of ACC opponents for ND to play, and
2) invite teams they play annually anyway so that the ACC TV contract can grow.

Your proposal - even with principal #1 only - would result in more ND/FSU, ND/Miami, and ND/Clemson, and less ND/Duke, etc. This is a good business decision, IMO. I creates 2 benefits:
a) better tv ratings & ticket sales for both the ACC and Notre Dame
b) fewer losses absorbed by the North Carolina foursome

Yes, exactly. Although the UNC-ND game did sell out immediately!

Anyone would have been laughed off the board a few months ago for suggesting Cal and Stanford as legitimate ACC expansion targets, but alas, here we are. Realistically, this is as good of an ACC slate as possible that we can offer Notre Dame at this point. It would also be a more geographically diverse schedule than the Big Ten, regardless of whether ND joins full-time or remains part-time.

I also like the idea of a couple Texas outposts; Houston because it's a mega market and the school (far from its ceiling) has proven they invest in athletics, and SMU because it's a mega market and the donors are proving they'll keep pace with NIL.

(08-10-2022 09:57 AM)esayem Wrote:  

(08-10-2022 09:40 AM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  I see the main principals of your post as:
1) create a better schedule of ACC opponents for ND to play, and
2) invite teams they play annually anyway so that the ACC TV contract can grow.

Your proposal - even with principal #1 only - would result in more ND/FSU, ND/Miami, and ND/Clemson, and less ND/Duke, etc. This is a good business decision, IMO. I creates 2 benefits:
a) better tv ratings & ticket sales for both the ACC and Notre Dame
b) fewer losses absorbed by the North Carolina foursome

Yes, exactly. Although the UNC-ND game did sell out immediately!

Anyone would have been laughed off the board a few months ago for suggesting Cal and Stanford as legitimate ACC expansion targets, but alas, here we are. Realistically, this is as good of an ACC slate as possible that we can offer Notre Dame at this point. It would also be a more geographically diverse schedule than the Big Ten, regardless of whether ND joins full-time or remains part-time.

I also like the idea of a couple Texas outposts; Houston because it's a mega market and the school (far from its ceiling) has proven they invest in athletics, and SMU because it's a mega market and the donors are proving they'll keep pace with NIL.

I can just imagine the post from XLance in 2029 - "It's Time to Un-Invite Houston and SMU"

But seriously, I am on board with going big and getting creative. More schools equal more leverage. And if the ACC is going to blow up in 2036, better to have solid programs with some recent history onboard now versus looking at lesser league members later.

(08-10-2022 07:27 AM)esayem Wrote:  As I’ve stated previously, it’s not ND’s job, nor is it in their contract to increase the ACC’s total revenue by joining the grid league. I am not advocating this, but it is a byproduct of brainstorming expansion with Stanford.


However, if Stanford, Cal, (both already candidates) and Navy (fb-only) were invited, the ACC could get to seven ND games many seasons if the Irish continue to schedule Stanford/Navy outside the ACC slate. This would benefit the network by gaining another high quality home game.

My understanding is ND’s contract is to rotate the ACC teams, so there would be some years where they too actually benefit by opening up even more spots on their non-ACC slate.

This is a low risk opportunity to perhaps create a rotation that is interesting enough to at least get the Irish to consider joining. I’d propose a yearly rotation of:

FSU/Miami

GT/Clemson

UNC/Duke/State/Wake

UVA/VT/UL

Pitt/Cal

BC/SU

Stanford

Navy


OOC: USC, 10, 11, 12


Regarding future expansion, esayem’s top candidates are, in no order: Houston, SMU, Kansas, Arizona, Arizona St. and Colorado.

I still believe UW and UO are Big 10 bound.

The problem with that scenario is compare that to the rotation the B1G can give now with USC & UCLA. Compare the added fans watching every game in a Big Ten conference due to their fan bases compared to ACC fan bases.

I don't like where CFB is heading but the scenario of putting all the name schools in two leagues and having 1 or 2 lesser leagues has been decided. Maybe its possible after 10-20 years CFB realizes it made a mistake but if that's possible it won't be for a long time.

ND will make that switch to the B1G sometime between now and the end of the current ACC contract. As I understand the ACC GOR's only applies to sports other than football and hockey and thats a pittance compared to football revenues. Your solution is a band aid and small short term gains at best to what they get in the eventual B1G conference.

Jack Swarbick just arrived from laughing at ACC AD's talking about closing the revenue gap with piecemeal changes to read this thread.

He's now laughing harder.

Hypothetical expansion: ND, Navy (FB only), Stanford, Cal, Oregon, Washington.

20 member conference schedule:
With 9 conference games: 4 permanent opponents, with 5 other games rotating against remaining schools home and home on a six year cycle.

With 8 conference games: 2 permanent opponents, with 6 other games rotating against remaining schools home and home on a six year cycle.

ND permanent opponents:
2 permanent: Navy and Stanford
4 permanent: Navy, Stanford, Pittsburgh, and GT or Miami

In the B1G, of course, ND's 4 permanent opponents could be USC, Stanford, Michigan State and Purdue.

... AND WE'LL EVEN CHANGE THE CONFERENCE NAME TO NOTRE DAME WORLD!!! WILL YA JOIN NOW ???? WHADDA YA THINK ???

(08-10-2022 12:29 PM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:  Jack Swarbick just arrived from laughing at ACC AD's talking about closing the revenue gap with piecemeal changes to read this thread.

He's now laughing harder.

Damn. I knew I should be charging subscription fees.

(08-10-2022 12:58 PM)Bear Catlett Wrote:  ... AND WE'LL EVEN CHANGE THE CONFERENCE NAME TO ARMY/AIR FORCE WORLD!!! WILL YA JOIN NOW ???? WHADDA YA THINK ???

NCAABBS orderlies?! Can you lock this man back up in his padded AAC cell please??

(08-10-2022 07:27 AM)esayem Wrote:  As I’ve stated previously, it’s not ND’s job, nor is it in their contract to increase the ACC’s total revenue by joining the grid league. I am not advocating this, but it is a byproduct of brainstorming expansion with Stanford.


However, if Stanford, Cal, (both already candidates) and Navy (fb-only) were invited, the ACC could get to seven ND games many seasons if the Irish continue to schedule Stanford/Navy outside the ACC slate. This would benefit the network by gaining another high quality home game.

My understanding is ND’s contract is to rotate the ACC teams, so there would be some years where they too actually benefit by opening up even more spots on their non-ACC slate.

This is a low risk opportunity to perhaps create a rotation that is interesting enough to at least get the Irish to consider joining. I’d propose a yearly rotation of:

FSU/Miami

GT/Clemson

UNC/Duke/State/Wake

UVA/VT/UL

Pitt/Cal

BC/SU

Stanford

Navy


OOC: USC, 10, 11, 12


Regarding future expansion, esayem’s top candidates are, in no order: Houston, SMU, Kansas, Arizona, Arizona St. and Colorado.

I still believe UW and UO are Big 10 bound.

Stanford would have enough value for the ACC if they are willing to join.

With respect to Navy, unless ND joins the ESPN/ACCN and shares the media money with the ACC, I am afraid that the gain from one more ND game would be smaller than the loss from having one more mouth (Navy).

ND probably wants to get out as soon as possible. It might be better for the ACC to settle if the money is reasonably good (more than $300 million or so), although Greensboro may want to keep ND till the end. I think XLance’s UN-inivte post is a tacit admission that ND thing didn’t work out as planned.

Houston seems like a possible choice. I like TCU more than SMU.

ND seems to enjoy football independence because it makes them unique. They want flexibility to schedule whomever they want…even if it means less payouts. The ACC won’t try to force ND to change; ND has to first express a desire for conference membership before the ACC risks adding Navy football.

Regardless of ND’s interests, working with the PAC or select PAC programs makes sense for the ACC and ESPN. This is an opportunity for Phillips to make a difference. IMHO, adding Stanford and Cal is a good expansion (it also makes more $en$e if Washington and Oregon join).

(08-10-2022 02:06 PM)Wahoowa84 Wrote:  ND seems to enjoy football independence because it makes them unique. They want flexibility to schedule whomever they want…even if it means less payouts. The ACC won’t try to force ND to change; ND has to first express a desire for conference membership before the ACC risks adding Navy football.

Regardless of ND’s interests, working with the PAC or select PAC programs makes sense for the ACC and ESPN. This is an opportunity for Phillips to make a difference. IMHO, adding Stanford and Cal is a good expansion (it also makes more $en$e if Washington and Oregon join).

Correct, and that’s what I was trying to convey with my opening statement. This was not meant to be another Notre Dame thread, but it sort of became one because I think the ACC is in the position to become a national conference.

The TV network is in place, the entire east coast is covered and no other P5 can say that. IMO, moving into California and Texas at least solidifies the conference as #3 going forward regardless of what ND, the SEC, and Big Ten end up doing.

With ND’s AD complaining about travel, wait until USC/UCLA try out their new digs. The Big Ten is assuredly going west, and UW and UO are most likely the targets.

ESPN is going to put pieces in place where they will make them the most money. I see WVU and Cincy going to the ACC along with two other teams...probably some combo of Houston, Baylor, TCU and SMU.

(08-10-2022 02:30 PM)GoWulfPak Wrote:  ESPN is going to put pieces in place where they will make them the most money. I see WVU and Cincy going to the ACC along with two other teams...probably some combo of Houston, Baylor, TCU and SMU.

People have been predicting this sort of thing for years but it never happens. Why? Probably, because it wouldn't increase net revenues per ACC school not to mention that it would be a geographic mess and not to mention that it would violate numerous contracts some of these schools have with the B12 and not to mention that those B12 schools can probably make about as much in the B12 as in the ACC giving them no motivation to switch conferences. But keep on dreaming, although it seems like a pathetic dream to me. We're not talking about U.S.C. or Texas here.

(08-10-2022 02:29 PM)esayem Wrote:  

(08-10-2022 02:06 PM)Wahoowa84 Wrote:  ND seems to enjoy football independence because it makes them unique. They want flexibility to schedule whomever they want…even if it means less payouts. The ACC won’t try to force ND to change; ND has to first express a desire for conference membership before the ACC risks adding Navy football.

Regardless of ND’s interests, working with the PAC or select PAC programs makes sense for the ACC and ESPN. This is an opportunity for Phillips to make a difference. IMHO, adding Stanford and Cal is a good expansion (it also makes more $en$e if Washington and Oregon join).

Correct, and that’s what I was trying to convey with my opening statement. This was not meant to be another Notre Dame thread, but it sort of became one because I think the ACC is in the position to become a national conference.

The TV network is in place, the entire east coast is covered and no other P5 can say that. IMO, moving into California and Texas at least solidifies the conference as #3 going forward regardless of what ND, the SEC, and Big Ten end up doing.

With ND’s AD complaining about travel, wait until USC/UCLA try out their new digs. The Big Ten is assuredly going west, and UW and UO are most likely the targets.

Agree on the bolded. At this point, the ACC could significantly increase revenue by transforming into a national conference. But becoming a national conference is not meant as a lure towards Notre Dame…it’s the means to generate value.

Transforming into a national entity can be done two ways:

1) Expansion - there are only a handful of individual programs that invest in college athletics at a level that helps the ACC…Washington, Stanford, Arizona State, Cal-Berkeley and Oregon. All the other schools are dilutive. The only reason to consider any other programs (e.g., Kansas, Oklahoma State, TCU, Baylor or WVU) is if ESPN is making a lucrative offer. The schools that help the ACC are in the PAC.

2) Partnership - the PAC has a complementary footprint and institutional profiles. They have the foundation that enables building brand equity.

The B1G opened a door by expanding with USC and UCLA. The ACC can also gain revenue by following this path to a national conference.

(08-10-2022 02:54 PM)Hallcity Wrote:  

(08-10-2022 02:30 PM)GoWulfPak Wrote:  ESPN is going to put pieces in place where they will make them the most money. I see WVU and Cincy going to the ACC along with two other teams...probably some combo of Houston, Baylor, TCU and SMU.

People have been predicting this sort of thing for years but it never happens. Why? Probably, because it wouldn't increase net revenues per ACC school not to mention that it would be a geographic mess and not to mention that it would violate numerous contracts some of these schools have with the B12 and not to mention that those B12 schools can probably make about as much in the B12 as in the ACC giving them no motivation to switch conferences. But keep on dreaming, although it seems like a pathetic dream to me. We're not talking about U.S.C. or Texas here.

This is how I know you don't follow expansion very closely.

Times have changed. ESPN has a vested interest in the ACC network. That is new since the last round of expansion. Because of this, ESPN has every reason in the world to build more quality inventory and put the ACCN at full rate in new states. Texas has a few people that would translate into more money for the ACC and ESPN.

Baylor is a good brand in Texas and a Baptist U like WF. They move the needle in terms of football and basketball. So does Cincy which puts the ACCN in Ohio. WVU has historic rivals in the ACC and owns a HUGE fan base that will fill up every stadium in which they play.

Jim Phillips is on record as saying everything about the ACC going forward must be football driven. Of those the ACC will be able to add..... Cincy, Baylor (and/or other Texas schools) and WVU helps football. I like Okie State as well but who knows about them. They pull pretty good TV numbers just like WVU relative to the rest of the schools in the XII.

Additionally, ESPN cares very little about the PAC and even less about the XII. They would rather move the quality pieces around instead of paying competitive money for crappy viewership in both. Take out OU and Tex from the XII and it's worth about 50% of what it once was .... take out USC and the PAC is worth a lot less.

But...you put Texas Tech and Okie State into the PAC then you have two/three time zones worth of inventory and the PACN (that I predict ESPN will take over) in Texas. Result? ESPN gets the SECN, ACCN (Baylor, TCU et al) and the newfound PACN courtesy of the Red Raiders. Hell throw Kansas out west too just so ESPN can say they own all the blue blood basketball programs.

Will these new configurations pull SEC/B1G money? No....but it gets them a lot closer than what we see today and that is the point.

The PAC has an exposure problem because they play so late. Put some games in the CTZ and you get more exposure. The XII has a population problem but decent size fan bases (Okie State, Kansas, Iowa State, Tex Tech) which will be of interest to streaming partners. Merger complements both.

ESPN is not going to let the ACC die on the vine. There will be monetary corrections to keep the ACC happy. The last thing ESPN wants is half the ACC squirming and talking to FOX about moving to the B1G one day.

This is ESPN vs everyone else and ESPN is gonna win. They always do.

I can't get over the comments seen nationally on this topic. It's like nothing I've ever seen.

Not to single anyone out because these are typical comments:

Quote:...Your solution is a band aid and small short term gains at best...

Quote:...laughing at ACC AD's talking about closing the revenue gap with piecemeal changes...

I get how frustrating it is to see the SEC and Big Ten so far in front of the ACC in terms of revenue - I do - but why all the complaining about what the ACC can do? I mean, "make it do what it do", you know?

Maybe our teams won't be in the same conference down the road. Maybe they will. Either way, I expect the league to do everything it can to help Virginia Tech succeed as long as we are in the ACC - whether that's another $20 million/year or another $2 million.

Maybe we need a special "whiner" thread? I just don't think we need to fill every single thread with whining...