From the article:

UNC joined Florida State and Clemson in voting against conference expansion in September. They were outvoted, 12-3, in a decision that extended invites to Stanford, California and SMU. Those teams will officially join the league in 2024.

"I didn't think it was in the best interests of our student-athletes,” Cunningham said. “I still believe that. If you want to schedule a nonconference game occasionally on the West Coast, I think that's wonderful. But to be required to go out there on an annual basis, I don't think that's in our best interests for our student athletes."

... and that supposed tug-of-war for UNC between the SEC and B1G

Another politically expedient paragraph good for a chuckle:

"Cunningham acknowledged various opinions on campus and throughout the Chapel Hill community in how UNC should adapt in this ever-changing collegiate sports world. Fans would likely prefer to play games against SEC competition. Those fixated on the financials would prefer to chase the money, while head coaches would likely base their opinions based on the quality of competition they play. Faculty would have their opinion as well. Those myriad beliefs only add to the complex issues facing the university and its athletic department."

Voices in the room wrt to future conference affiliation from loudest to inconsequential:

Tier 1. Big $$$ Tar Heel Athletic Boosters

Tier 2. Chancellor Roberts, UNC Board of Governors and Gov. Cooper (would he weigh in?)

Tier 3: UNC fan base and North Carolina politicians

Tier 127: UNC faculty

(03-14-2024 10:50 AM)bryanw1995 Wrote:  

(03-14-2024 06:53 AM)XLance Wrote:  

(03-14-2024 06:41 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  Sometimes ADs do not necessarily reflect the view of the university. But in this case his view seems very consonant with what I would think would be the stance of the university.

NC doesn't want to leave the nACC, it is their natural home and their dominion, where they are the big cheese, the conference revolves around them.

But financial necessity has set in, and IMO if FSU gets out of the GOR, NC will be right there behind them going through the Exit door.

I think that Carolina will hang around in the ACC for a while if for no other reason that to be able to spend their share of Florida State's exit monies.

“What we have to do short term is maximize our revenue. We need to continue to sell football tickets and basketball tickets and do what we can from a digital standpoint with the ACC. There's always going to be revenue gaps. It's getting bigger, and it can be more challenging, but I've also said that we have a lot of things that other folks don't have. We're a great location. We're in a great league. We have great competition. We have great coaches. You don't have to have the most money to win. And I think we've demonstrated that in every sport that we have."


"If Florida State thinks that they have greater value than our league and want to leave, wouldn't we ask to share in the upside of that greater value?” Cunningham said. “So I'm not sure that $500 [million] is going to be enough. So maybe it's $600 or $700 million to get out of the league. I don't know."

That depends. How is that $600-700m going to be paid? Certainly not as one lump sum. At the least, it's likely that any buyout would be spread out over the entire term of the GoR, so through 2036. If they worked out something today, that would mean:

$650m
12 years
$650m/12 = $54m per year for 12 years

$54m/17 = $3.2m per school per year for 12 years

$3.2m isn't going to move the needle at all for UNC if they're seriously considering leaving. If you triple that to $9.6m b/c Clemson and Miami both also chose to leave...that's some decent money, but all that does is make up for the CFP shortfall.

Would UNC risk getting left out of the new power structure in order to ensure more short-term revenues? There's no way they'd make so much more in the P2 that they'd be able to recoup that $54m per year plus the extra $9.6m that they'd be giving up (assuming all of Clemson, FSU and Miami left)? I think they'd probably stay for the better financials until 2036 and then leave, but it's possible that they'd depart early if they were worried that the P2 would run out of spots and wouldn't make room for them in 2036. It's also possible, perhaps even probably, that ND leaves the ACC if all 3 of the big football brands depart, and that could have an effect on UNC's ultimate decision.

I think the ACC would demand payment in one lump sum. It would be up to FSU to devise their own source of financing.

(03-14-2024 10:35 AM)JRsec Wrote:  PS: I will enjoy the mental gymnastics which will ignore the implications of Cunningham's remarks while focusing on the usual platitudes to the ACC and North Carolina's position in it, which while sincere are the ingredients common ingredients used to temper the flavor of any school's remarks when they are having to consider options. Staying is always an option. Talking Fan, Donor, and Coach preferences for leaving is what you might call a Sicilian message, as well as the statement of an alternate consideration.

I mean nobody is naive and we're not speaking in platitudes. Carolina looks at the ACC quite like Notre Dame looks at Independence. If it is no longer viable, we are very aware of the options before us.

And yes, many fans would prefer the SEC to the B18 if we only have two choices.

(03-14-2024 02:07 PM)esayem Wrote:  

(03-14-2024 10:35 AM)JRsec Wrote:  PS: I will enjoy the mental gymnastics which will ignore the implications of Cunningham's remarks while focusing on the usual platitudes to the ACC and North Carolina's position in it, which while sincere are the ingredients common ingredients used to temper the flavor of any school's remarks when they are having to consider options. Staying is always an option. Talking Fan, Donor, and Coach preferences for leaving is what you might call a Sicilian message, as well as the statement of an alternate consideration.

I mean nobody is naive and we're not speaking in platitudes. Carolina looks at the ACC quite like Notre Dame looks at Independence. If it is no longer viable, we are very aware of the options before us.

And yes, many fans would prefer the SEC to the B18 if we only have two choices.

And in spite of the goat being an apt representation of Tar Heel stubbornness the SEC would prefer Carolina if Carolina could not maintain the ACC. And I'm reasonably certain that the presidents feel the same way, and not just about the Heels.

(03-14-2024 02:07 PM)esayem Wrote:  

(03-14-2024 10:35 AM)JRsec Wrote:  PS: I will enjoy the mental gymnastics which will ignore the implications of Cunningham's remarks while focusing on the usual platitudes to the ACC and North Carolina's position in it, which while sincere are the ingredients common ingredients used to temper the flavor of any school's remarks when they are having to consider options. Staying is always an option. Talking Fan, Donor, and Coach preferences for leaving is what you might call a Sicilian message, as well as the statement of an alternate consideration.

I mean nobody is naive and we're not speaking in platitudes. Carolina looks at the ACC quite like Notre Dame looks at Independence. If it is no longer viable, we are very aware of the options before us.

And yes, many fans would prefer the SEC to the B18 if we only have two choices.

I believe that about the SEC.

Not only is the SEC obviously more geographically compadre, but in expanding the past 10 or so years, the SEC has IMO kind of sneakily got better academically. Nowadays, schools like Florida, Georgia, Vanderbilt, Texas and Texas AM make at least 5 schools UNC probably wouldn't mind rubbing elbows with from an academic/institutional POV. Texas alone helps the SEC greatly in that regard.

(03-13-2024 08:57 PM)JRsec Wrote:  https://247sports.com/college/north-caro...228513295/

Take good look at what Cunningham lists as priorities in making a decision as to conference and check out the quoted Navigate estimate on the projected SEC and Big 10 payouts.

From the article:

Quote:Cunningham said. “Now, if North Carolina wasn't in the ACC, would there still be an ACC? I think so. But I thought there would be a Pac-12 as well.

ouch.

(03-15-2024 09:42 AM)Skyhawk Wrote:  

(03-13-2024 08:57 PM)JRsec Wrote:  https://247sports.com/college/north-caro...228513295/

Take good look at what Cunningham lists as priorities in making a decision as to conference and check out the quoted Navigate estimate on the projected SEC and Big 10 payouts.

From the article:

Quote:Cunningham said. “Now, if North Carolina wasn't in the ACC, would there still be an ACC? I think so. But I thought there would be a Pac-12 as well.

ouch.

Bubba and Boo better be prepping their pivot.

(03-13-2024 10:29 PM)IWantToTalkToRalphSampson Wrote:  

(03-13-2024 08:57 PM)JRsec Wrote:  https://247sports.com/college/north-caro...228513295/

Take good look at what Cunningham lists as priorities in making a decision as to conference and check out the quoted Navigate estimate on the projected SEC and Big 10 payouts.

Quote: Cunningham, who is in his 13th year as UNC’s athletic director, offered his opinion on alternative options. The first being for the ACC to stay at 15 teams. The second being even more expansion to 21 teams, which would allow for three seven-team regional divisions that would reduce travel requirements during the regular season before bringing the entire conference together for postseason play.

“That's what I was hopeful of,” Cunningham said. “Either stay where we were, stay regional, or expand so big that you could create regionality within a bigger league."

So is this a reference to the ACC’s back channel efforts to add UW, Oregon, and two of the Four Corners schools to go along with Calford?

Could still happen, I suppose, after the next wave of carnage.

Washington State
Oregon State
Cal
Stanford(?)
San Diego State
Colorado State
somebody

Louisville(?)
Southern Meth
Memphis
Tulane
USF
somebody
somebody

Boston College
Syracuse(?)
Pittsburgh(?)
Wake Forest
Duke(?)
Georgia Tech(?)
UCF(?)

(03-14-2024 07:05 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(03-14-2024 06:53 AM)XLance Wrote:  

(03-14-2024 06:41 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  Sometimes ADs do not necessarily reflect the view of the university. But in this case his view seems very consonant with what I would think would be the stance of the university.

NC doesn't want to leave the nACC, it is their natural home and their dominion, where they are the big cheese, the conference revolves around them.

But financial necessity has set in, and IMO if FSU gets out of the GOR, NC will be right there behind them going through the Exit door.

I think that Carolina will hang around in the ACC for a while if for no other reason that to be able to spend their share of Florida State's exit monies.

“What we have to do short term is maximize our revenue. We need to continue to sell football tickets and basketball tickets and do what we can from a digital standpoint with the ACC. There's always going to be revenue gaps. It's getting bigger, and it can be more challenging, but I've also said that we have a lot of things that other folks don't have. We're a great location. We're in a great league. We have great competition. We have great coaches. You don't have to have the most money to win. And I think we've demonstrated that in every sport that we have."


"If Florida State thinks that they have greater value than our league and want to leave, wouldn't we ask to share in the upside of that greater value?” Cunningham said. “So I'm not sure that $500 [million] is going to be enough. So maybe it's $600 or $700 million to get out of the league. I don't know."

Good point about exit money.

Though if I was one of the gonna-be-left-behind schools, I would be alert to NC, Clemson, and/or Miami doing that, and would want a deal that says to collect a share of the FSU exit fees you have to commit to staying for X-number of additional years, no grab and go.

Which might change the stakes and cause those schools to decide better to leave sooner rather than waiting for the exit shares.

Maybe we'll see.

This conversation comes up often...."SEC or B1G, we've got to get out of the ACC, we're falling behind".
Then when faced with the prospect of leaving the ACC and having to schedule teams that the school has little of no history with (that is true in both the B1G and the SEC), the prospect becomes less exciting. When you realize that money is the only benefit, and your actions would harm your peers, it's not a decision to be taken lightly.

(03-14-2024 07:05 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  Good point about exit money.

Though if I was one of the gonna-be-left-behind schools, I would be alert to NC, Clemson, and/or Miami doing that, and would want a deal that says to collect a share of the FSU exit fees you have to commit to staying for X-number of additional years, no grab and go.

Which might change the stakes and cause those schools to decide better to leave sooner rather than waiting for the exit shares.

Maybe we'll see.

The grab-and-go would be a crass move. Especially with Cal and others coming in under the financial circumstances they agreed to.

What precedents exist for this?

(03-16-2024 08:37 AM)Gitanole Wrote:  

(03-14-2024 07:05 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  Good point about exit money.

Though if I was one of the gonna-be-left-behind schools, I would be alert to NC, Clemson, and/or Miami doing that, and would want a deal that says to collect a share of the FSU exit fees you have to commit to staying for X-number of additional years, no grab and go.

Which might change the stakes and cause those schools to decide better to leave sooner rather than waiting for the exit shares.

Maybe we'll see.

The grab-and-go would be a crass move. Especially with Cal and others coming in under the financial circumstances they agreed to.

What precedents exist for this?

For crassness?
Open your eyes and look at the world around you, plus one could say that Florida State's conduct in their attempt to leave the ACC was the epitome of crass behavior,