Something was bound to give. For 12 years I have been banging the drum that Wake should take a relegated role for the good of the conference. They do not fit the mold of big time cfb and quite frankly, half of the ACC does not either. The ACC was only going to be able to get so far expanding before they run out of candidates that improve the bottom line.

It's probably too late to do anything about it now, but here is the emergency surgery that the ACC needs to perform if its going to stay above the Big12 and play catch up to the SEC and B1G:

Wake and one of Duke or UVA needs to be non-football members. I'd go with UVA because they are currently the worst football program in the ACC, don't bring enough brand power in basketball and VT already covers their state. My guess is they get about $14-$15m each from the ACCN and maybe another $5-7m as a football Indy. If those 2 can make around $20m each starting out, that's still pretty good and they will still be reconned as being above the G5 line. They can use this opportunity to enhance their brand by barnstorming or perhaps Wake just needs to double down on basketball and drop to FCS, I'm sure whatever is the case the ACC will try to accommodate a long time member with a willingness to make a sacrifice for the good of the others. As a thank you the ACC allows them to keep their $14m each from the current playoff distributions until the 2028 look-in.

That leaves a surplus of about $24m each ($48m total). I think ESPN should see the value of ridding the 2 worst ratings draw and allows the ACC to keep the difference. Distribute $12m each to FSU, Clem, UNC and Miami. All of a sudden ACC membership is looking more "tenable".

Let's take this a few more steps further to insure the big brands are happy enough to stick around and stabilize the conference:

1 Home team keeps all gate revenue (except what is sold through the visiting team). This will work out especially well for FSU and Clemson, I don't think anyone loses from this arrangement except the 3 newcomers as well as Duke, BC and SU.

2 ACC playoff teams get a performance bonus that is at least equal to the B1G (the current biggest %).

3 If we got to this point, I believe we stabilized the situation enough to hold together. But if we are still grumpy, we could probably add Tulane and give them the SMU deal and divide up the spoils. However, I hope we have bigger ambitions than a short term money grab.

Just to recap in case you feel like your school is getting screwed, unless you are Wake and UVA, your media deal remains the same. Unless you are one of the 3 newcomers or Duke, BC, SU, your gate revenue stays approximately the same with a big (deservedly so) boost for FSU and Clemson. Playoff money, everybody has an equal chance to get a larger piece, but realistically only a handful of schools will get it consistently.


Now that the conference is stabilized and we accepted our new roles, let's work toward a bigger, better media deal in 2036 and beyond, which means we have to prove starting now that our games are worth more than the current thing. What networks want to see is annual good matchups, some teams have a better synergy than with others, so let's make sure those are annual.

1 ND is the wildcard in all of this, the ACC is given 2-3 ND games a year, make them count. My suggestion would be to go annual with 3, rotate the other 2: Pitt, Stanford and Miami would be my annuals, rotate the other 2 with SU, BC, UL, Cal, VT and maybe Duke. I think it's a waste on Clemson and FSU since they are non-traditional rivals and they have no problems scheduling good OOC opponents. UNC and NCSU has proven to be on the low end of the scale in ND ratings, UNC could not even fill their own stadium the last time ND visited. Unless ND insist they play SMU, nothing about this jumps out to me as good for the ratings.

2 With 15 football members, the ACC could go to a 2-6-6 schedule, but I think it would be better off as a 5-3-3-3. Let's see what that might look like for FSU, Clem, UNC, UM and Duke:

FSU - Clem, UM, GT, UL, Cal
Clem - FSU, GT, VT, NCSU, BC
UM - FSU, VT, Pitt, SU, BC
UNC - Duke, NCSU, VT, GT, Stan
Duke - SU, Stan, GT, UNC, NCSU


Agenda 2030

Right around this time everybody is satisfied, the rating have come back positive, the ACC's next round of negotiations is starting to come in sight. There is this realization that the travel burden for Stan, Cal and SMU needs to be remedied and pretty soon they will be getting full shares. The ACC see's a chance to expand, ESPN see's the benefit of getting a bigger piece of the late night games, so the ACC invites TCU, Az and ASU all at pro-rata. Now we got 18 football members or 3 divisions of 6 or we continue on the 5-3-3-3-3 model with some adjustments, but obviously the now 6 western teams play each other round robin. Lot's of solid tier 1 and tier 2 combinations can be made from it.

D-day 2036

FSU, Clem, UNC and UM are pretty content at this point, they were able to win a few national championships between them, ND also has 1 and the quality of the games has gotten the attention of NBC where they want to be the ACC's exclusive carrier and get them in the competitive range of the SEC and B1G. FSU and the other members decide this is working out and continue on.

Wake and UVA also benefitted as the pendulum has swung back toward basketball and they have now established themselves as the new Gonzaga and UConn. Wake vs Duke is still a healthy regional rivalry, VT still dominates UVA in football, but UVA is a uppity basketball power so they don't care that much. The ACC has figured out how to create the best possible basketball matchups, the CW is showing ACC men's and women's basketball 3 days a week each.


And then I woke up...

(03-20-2024 06:56 AM)Garrettabc Wrote:  Something was bound to give. For 12 years I have been banging the drum that Wake should take a relegated role for the good of the conference. They do not fit the mold of big time cfb and quite frankly, half of the ACC does not either. The ACC was only going to be able to get so far expanding before they run out of candidates that improve the bottom line.

It's probably too late to do anything about it now, but here is the emergency surgery that the ACC needs to perform if its going to stay above the Big12 and play catch up to the SEC and B1G:

Wake and one of Duke or UVA needs to be non-football members. I'd go with UVA because they are currently the worst football program in the ACC, don't bring enough brand power in basketball and VT already covers their state. My guess is they get about $14-$15m each from the ACCN and maybe another $5-7m as a football Indy.

Gotta go to work, to be continued...

Historically-speaking, the worst football teams in the ACC have been Duke and Wake (but UVa isn't far behind).

The problem for the ACC involves its small public schools and obviously so many private schools. These two things do NOT produce football ratings those writing the big checks desire.

The tide turned for the ACC when football overtook basketball in terms of TV worth.

(03-20-2024 08:23 AM)GoWulfPak Wrote:  The problem for the ACC involves its small public schools and obviously so many private schools. These two things do NOT produce football ratings those writing the big checks desire.

The tide turned for the ACC when football overtook basketball in terms of TV worth.

That IS the biggest change, no doubt.

Having revenue based on in-state subs, where there are 4 schools in the same, medium-sized state, is also a big problem.

I fleshed out all of my thoughts with a specific end goal.

Personally I don't like the defeatist attitude of "nobody will agree to this", "this still won't be enough". Hey, what we have has gotten us this far, make the necessary adjustments and there is a chance, the game quality will certainly be better than what it currently is and I do believe deep down that nobody really wants to deal with the uncertainty of new conference membership and I'm sure Clemson would hate to see the conference they help founded just blow up.

I think the FSU and Clemson people in charge would see the value in this vision, the fanboys could too if they they were not blinded by rage. It was dumb for the ACC to think FSU and Clemson (and there will be more) to sit back and let their football programs fall behind and allow their brands diminish. That's not good long term thinking, we'd have another situation in 2036 like in 2011 where we had a bunch of good, but not great football teams, that did not get us a competitive contract with the SEC and B1G.

Let's learn from the past, make the painful adjustments, build toward the future.

Meh.. there is a bigger gap in brands between Ohio State/Michigan/Penn State and the bottom feeders of the B10 than there is the teams in the ACC. Same can be said for Alabama/LSU/Georgia and Mississippi State and Vandy.

(03-20-2024 09:57 AM)CliftonAve Wrote:  Meh.. there is a bigger gap in brands between Ohio State/Michigan/Penn State and the bottom feeders of the B10 than there is the teams in the ACC. Same can be said for Alabama/LSU/Georgia and Mississippi State and Vandy.

Even more reason to chop off the bottom, FSU/Clem/Miami does not/cannot carry the extra weight like OSU, Mich, PSU can. Duke and BC were also on my radar, but I was aiming for the bare minimum.

The goal is to keep the conference together to 2036 and past that. The ACC can close the gap some and be more of a peer to the SEC and B1G than it is to the Big12. That is a realistic goal, but egos will keep it from becoming a reality.

(03-20-2024 09:43 AM)Garrettabc Wrote:  I fleshed out all of my thoughts with a specific end goal.

Personally I don't like the defeatist attitude of "nobody will agree to this", "this still won't be enough". Hey, what we have has gotten us this far, make the necessary adjustments and there is a chance, the game quality will certainly be better than what it currently is and I do believe deep down that nobody really wants to deal with the uncertainty of new conference membership and I'm sure Clemson would hate to see the conference they help founded just blow up.

I think the FSU and Clemson people in charge would see the value in this vision, the fanboys could too if they they were not blinded by rage. It was dumb for the ACC to think FSU and Clemson (and there will be more) to sit back and let their football programs fall behind and allow their brands diminish. That's not good long term thinking, we'd have another situation in 2036 like in 2011 where we had a bunch of good, but not great football teams, that did not get us a competitive contract with the SEC and B1G.

Let's learn from the past, make the painful adjustments, build toward the future.

Do not think that is enough pain, as does that even make up for the deficit that the ACC just agreed to in the new playoff revenue split?

I am really surprised by the way the ACC is acting. FSU has been grumbling for years about focusing on football and has been largely ignored to (our fans would say) maybe punished for it (officiating and scheduling).

What is the end game here? If the ACC "wins" then Clemson and FSU football brand is diminished and when the contract is renewed in the top brands leave, probably with out many options other than to form a competing league? Or lets say that is not even an option and you have them trapped, then that new contract you get from ESPN or whomever is going to be a shell of what you had.

We are already seeing the effect of not investing in football in the basketball prestige of the conference. How long before the SEC and B1G are the top dogs there too?

When you get to the point where your own key schools like UNC start questioning what is going on you have to consider this is over, at least in its current form. Even the B12 is making an argument that it is a much better basketball conference than the ACC. So if the ACC is not king in basketball and second fiddle in football (can't even get an undefeated conference champ, with 2 wins over SEC teams OOC, into the playoffs damaged brand.

I could maybe understand this if the ACC was trying to do something to fix this every time they had an opportunity to do something they always seem to do the minimal with minimal results. The above proposal seems to be more of the same... don't schedule your biggest draw FSU vs ND at all but USE ND to bring up lower draw teams? Ditto for Clemson? This is the 2011 mistake all over again... breaking the FSU GT rivalry because coastal teams wanted that game. Having FSU play teams like BC and Wake and barely ever seeing VT and UNC. VT and FSU had history (Metro conference as well as a National Title game).

Jim Phillips, PhD had a job he was hired to do and after making the tour of the conference he felt job 1 was to move the conference headquarters and lock the everything in the conference to North Carolina? Sound like he was really listening to the football schools there.

I have no idea what is going to happen in court, I have been surprised by the way they handled NIL and recently the NCAA enforcement policy. I would hope this is viewed similarly to a labor dispute and current exit fees viewed as excessive/punitive -- what they are. Especially if the GOR was not a requirement to get the ACCN as been suggested. The ACC and ESPN trying to hide the agreement hints at that answer.

Personally I hate all of this. The old model is dead, just not buried yet. Mistakes include allowing conferences to strike media deals for football while not allowing the same for basketball. Allowing NIL to roll out basically unregulated. No real control on coaching salaries while not figuring out some kind of compensation for the players. Now that the NCAA has no real power anymore I expect even more of a mess moving forward.

I do not believe that over half of the schools in the current ACC are even interested in the new model.

And.... this, and much more, is why most FSU fans just want out. Contracts are suppose to regulate a fair exchange services and are meant to be broken when not equitable. I do not understand the thought of you signed it... so live with it mentality. When the relationship with the ACC began it was actually favorable. When the exit fee was established the relationship was souring.

Obviously FSU feels this is no longer equitable and is looking to break from the contract. Again if you look at this a labor dispute, is $500m or more fair if you feel your interests were not being cared for, or harmed? Remember that there are 6 other schools that feel similarly.

Many feel that lawsuit is just to get the ACC to the negotiating table, but given the recent court decisions maybe they should go to trial.

(03-20-2024 09:43 AM)Garrettabc Wrote:  I fleshed out all of my thoughts with a specific end goal.

Personally I don't like the defeatist attitude of "nobody will agree to this", "this still won't be enough". Hey, what we have has gotten us this far, make the necessary adjustments and there is a chance, the game quality will certainly be better than what it currently is and I do believe deep down that nobody really wants to deal with the uncertainty of new conference membership and I'm sure Clemson would hate to see the conference they help founded just blow up.

I think the FSU and Clemson people in charge would see the value in this vision, the fanboys could too if they they were not blinded by rage. It was dumb for the ACC to think FSU and Clemson (and there will be more) to sit back and let their football programs fall behind and allow their brands diminish. That's not good long term thinking, we'd have another situation in 2036 like in 2011 where we had a bunch of good, but not great football teams, that did not get us a competitive contract with the SEC and B1G.

Let's learn from the past, make the painful adjustments, build toward the future.

But the rage is real. Clemson is a bit different as a long term and founding member of the ACC, but my contingent of the FSU fanbase has the upper hand now and we're not letting it go. I think the powers that be in Tallahassee know that there is no scenario where they can settle for remaining in the ACC at this point, without losing a significant portion of the fanbase which they cannot afford to lose.

(03-20-2024 01:22 PM)meyersnole Wrote:  

(03-20-2024 09:43 AM)Garrettabc Wrote:  I fleshed out all of my thoughts with a specific end goal.

Personally I don't like the defeatist attitude of "nobody will agree to this", "this still won't be enough". Hey, what we have has gotten us this far, make the necessary adjustments and there is a chance, the game quality will certainly be better than what it currently is and I do believe deep down that nobody really wants to deal with the uncertainty of new conference membership and I'm sure Clemson would hate to see the conference they help founded just blow up.

I think the FSU and Clemson people in charge would see the value in this vision, the fanboys could too if they they were not blinded by rage. It was dumb for the ACC to think FSU and Clemson (and there will be more) to sit back and let their football programs fall behind and allow their brands diminish. That's not good long term thinking, we'd have another situation in 2036 like in 2011 where we had a bunch of good, but not great football teams, that did not get us a competitive contract with the SEC and B1G.

Let's learn from the past, make the painful adjustments, build toward the future.

Do not think that is enough pain, as does that even make up for the deficit that the ACC just agreed to in the new playoff revenue split?

I am really surprised by the way the ACC is acting. FSU has been grumbling for years about focusing on football and has been largely ignored to (our fans would say) maybe punished for it (officiating and scheduling).

What is the end game here? If the ACC "wins" then Clemson and FSU football brand is diminished and when the contract is renewed in the top brands leave, probably with out many options other than to form a competing league? Or lets say that is not even an option and you have them trapped, then that new contract you get from ESPN or whomever is going to be a shell of what you had.

We are already seeing the effect of not investing in football in the basketball prestige of the conference. How long before the SEC and B1G are the top dogs there too?

When you get to the point where your own key schools like UNC start questioning what is going on you have to consider this is over, at least in its current form. Even the B12 is making an argument that it is a much better basketball conference than the ACC. So if the ACC is not king in basketball and second fiddle in football (can't even get an undefeated conference champ, with 2 wins over SEC teams OOC, into the playoffs damaged brand.

I could maybe understand this if the ACC was trying to do something to fix this every time they had an opportunity to do something they always seem to do the minimal with minimal results. The above proposal seems to be more of the same... don't schedule your biggest draw FSU vs ND at all but USE ND to bring up lower draw teams? Ditto for Clemson? This is the 2011 mistake all over again... breaking the FSU GT rivalry because coastal teams wanted that game. Having FSU play teams like BC and Wake and barely ever seeing VT and UNC. VT and FSU had history (Metro conference as well as a National Title game).

Jim Phillips, PhD had a job he was hired to do and after making the tour of the conference he felt job 1 was to move the conference headquarters and lock the everything in the conference to North Carolina? Sound like he was really listening to the football schools there.

I have no idea what is going to happen in court, I have been surprised by the way they handled NIL and recently the NCAA enforcement policy. I would hope this is viewed similarly to a labor dispute and current exit fees viewed as excessive/punitive -- what they are. Especially if the GOR was not a requirement to get the ACCN as been suggested. The ACC and ESPN trying to hide the agreement hints at that answer.

Personally I hate all of this. The old model is dead, just not buried yet. Mistakes include allowing conferences to strike media deals for football while not allowing the same for basketball. Allowing NIL to roll out basically unregulated. No real control on coaching salaries while not figuring out some kind of compensation for the players. Now that the NCAA has no real power anymore I expect even more of a mess moving forward.

I do not believe that over half of the schools in the current ACC are even interested in the new model.

And.... this, and much more, is why most FSU fans just want out. Contracts are suppose to regulate a fair exchange services and are meant to be broken when not equitable. I do not understand the thought of you signed it... so live with it mentality. When the relationship with the ACC began it was actually favorable. When the exit fee was established the relationship was souring.

Obviously FSU feels this is no longer equitable and is looking to break from the contract. Again if you look at this a labor dispute, is $500m or more fair if you feel your interests were not being cared for, or harmed? Remember that there are 6 other schools that feel similarly.

Many feel that lawsuit is just to get the ACC to the negotiating table, but given the recent court decisions maybe they should go to trial.

I'm wondering if you read my OP thoroughly, the suggestions I've made remedy a lot of those ailments. We can quibble over details about what the long game should be and how to get there, I'm just saying there is a path forward...if the ACC choses to take it.

The ACC as far as I can remember was always lightly regarded as a football conference, the ACC by process of elimination is now 3rd (moving up in the world). The problem is the revenue gap between 3 and the P2, those with a place to go is making noise. Satisfy the revenue gap for the most valuable members just enough to keep it together and each member tolerates the arrangement until 2036. The question becomes, how do we keep it together past 2036? I addressed the path I would take that would involve the least amount of pain that I could think of.

I will say this again for emphasis: FSU and Clemson do not need the ND game. FSU and Clemson have a much easier time scheduling big time OOC opponents. FSU had LSU 2x and will have Alabama 2x and Georgia 2x coming up. Clemson is in the same boat, Miami is also except ND vs Miami is more marketable (Catholics vs Convicts). If Pitt was regularly playing WVU and/or PSU, then I'd say they don't need the ND game either, but historically it is significant and was important to both parties. I suggested that it was a waste for ND to play UNC, NCSU, SMU and Duke (I already relegated Wake and UVA).

I'm making chicken salad out of you know what over here.

(03-20-2024 02:08 PM)Gamenole Wrote:  

(03-20-2024 09:43 AM)Garrettabc Wrote:  I fleshed out all of my thoughts with a specific end goal.

Personally I don't like the defeatist attitude of "nobody will agree to this", "this still won't be enough". Hey, what we have has gotten us this far, make the necessary adjustments and there is a chance, the game quality will certainly be better than what it currently is and I do believe deep down that nobody really wants to deal with the uncertainty of new conference membership and I'm sure Clemson would hate to see the conference they help founded just blow up.

I think the FSU and Clemson people in charge would see the value in this vision, the fanboys could too if they they were not blinded by rage. It was dumb for the ACC to think FSU and Clemson (and there will be more) to sit back and let their football programs fall behind and allow their brands diminish. That's not good long term thinking, we'd have another situation in 2036 like in 2011 where we had a bunch of good, but not great football teams, that did not get us a competitive contract with the SEC and B1G.

Let's learn from the past, make the painful adjustments, build toward the future.

But the rage is real. Clemson is a bit different as a long term and founding member of the ACC, but my contingent of the FSU fanbase has the upper hand now and we're not letting it go. I think the powers that be in Tallahassee know that there is no scenario where they can settle for remaining in the ACC at this point, without losing a significant portion of the fanbase which they cannot afford to lose.

The fanbase would get over it if the ACC fired Jim Phillips and said "here's more money, please don't leave". We might complain a little, but we would have gotten what we have wanted. Of course that strategy would have been more effective before the lawsuit.

Quote:.. Many feel that lawsuit is just to get the ACC to the negotiating table ....

It's the FSU fans who just want a negotiated settlement with the ACC.

You need to understand two things. First, the ACC has a strong hand legally. You're not likely to have success in court. Second, negotiating something FSU can live with means that other conference members will make their own demands and very soon the ACC will dissolve into chaos. Since most ACC member institutions don't want the ACC to dissolve into chaos, they're not going to settle.

FSU fans seem only concerned with what they want. Try to consider other points of view but mostly consider the fact that FSU has gone way out on a legal limb that's about to get sawed off behind them. Clemson, at least, hasn't given notice that they're leaving the ACC. In giving notice that they're leaving the ACC, FSU has put itself in a very precarious position. If FSU doesn't win in court, it's at the ACC's mercy.

(03-20-2024 02:32 PM)Hallcity Wrote:  

Quote:.. Many feel that lawsuit is just to get the ACC to the negotiating table ....

It's the FSU fans who just want a negotiated settlement with the ACC.

You need to understand two things. First, the ACC has a strong hand legally. You're not likely to have success in court. Second, negotiating something FSU can live with means that other conference members will make their own demands and very soon the ACC will dissolve into chaos. Since most ACC member institutions don't want the ACC to dissolve into chaos, they're not going to settle.

FSU fans seem only concerned with what they want. Try to consider other points of view but mostly consider the fact that FSU has gone way out on a legal limb that's about to get sawed off behind them. Clemson, at least, hasn't given notice that they're leaving the ACC. In giving notice that they're leaving the ACC, FSU has put itself in a very precarious position. If FSU doesn't win in court, it's at the ACC's mercy.

The ACC does have a strong hand, legally, but it doesn't have a strong hand with tv-wise. Therefore, the ACC must take care not to overplay it's hand. Beating FSU is not really the goal (at least, it shouldn't be). Securing the future of the ACC should be the goal - and you do that by negotiating a deal with ESPN (whether it involves FSU leaving is less important).

(03-20-2024 02:14 PM)Garrettabc Wrote:  

(03-20-2024 02:08 PM)Gamenole Wrote:  

(03-20-2024 09:43 AM)Garrettabc Wrote:  I fleshed out all of my thoughts with a specific end goal.

Personally I don't like the defeatist attitude of "nobody will agree to this", "this still won't be enough". Hey, what we have has gotten us this far, make the necessary adjustments and there is a chance, the game quality will certainly be better than what it currently is and I do believe deep down that nobody really wants to deal with the uncertainty of new conference membership and I'm sure Clemson would hate to see the conference they help founded just blow up.

I think the FSU and Clemson people in charge would see the value in this vision, the fanboys could too if they they were not blinded by rage. It was dumb for the ACC to think FSU and Clemson (and there will be more) to sit back and let their football programs fall behind and allow their brands diminish. That's not good long term thinking, we'd have another situation in 2036 like in 2011 where we had a bunch of good, but not great football teams, that did not get us a competitive contract with the SEC and B1G.

Let's learn from the past, make the painful adjustments, build toward the future.

But the rage is real. Clemson is a bit different as a long term and founding member of the ACC, but my contingent of the FSU fanbase has the upper hand now and we're not letting it go. I think the powers that be in Tallahassee know that there is no scenario where they can settle for remaining in the ACC at this point, without losing a significant portion of the fanbase which they cannot afford to lose.

The fanbase would get over it if the ACC fired Jim Phillips and said "here's more money, please don't leave". We might complain a little, but we would have gotten what we have wanted. Of course that strategy would have been more effective before the lawsuit.

I disagree, and think you may be underestimating the number of fans who want OUT of the ACC and will settle for nothing less.

(03-20-2024 02:32 PM)Hallcity Wrote:  

Quote:.. Many feel that lawsuit is just to get the ACC to the negotiating table ....

It's the FSU fans who just want a negotiated settlement with the ACC.

You need to understand two things. First, the ACC has a strong hand legally. You're not likely to have success in court. Second, negotiating something FSU can live with means that other conference members will make their own demands and very soon the ACC will dissolve into chaos. Since most ACC member institutions don't want the ACC to dissolve into chaos, they're not going to settle.

FSU fans seem only concerned with what they want. Try to consider other points of view but mostly consider the fact that FSU has gone way out on a legal limb that's about to get sawed off behind them. Clemson, at least, hasn't given notice that they're leaving the ACC. In giving notice that they're leaving the ACC, FSU has put itself in a very precarious position. If FSU doesn't win in court, it's at the ACC's mercy.

At least get your facts straight, FSU has at no point given notice that we are leaving the ACC. Everyone knows we are, but the formalities of notice and the ramifications of that have not been set in motion.

(03-20-2024 02:32 PM)Hallcity Wrote:  

Quote:.. Many feel that lawsuit is just to get the ACC to the negotiating table ....

It's the FSU fans who just want a negotiated settlement with the ACC.

You need to understand two things. First, the ACC has a strong hand legally. You're not likely to have success in court. Second, negotiating something FSU can live with means that other conference members will make their own demands and very soon the ACC will dissolve into chaos. Since most ACC member institutions don't want the ACC to dissolve into chaos, they're not going to settle.

FSU fans seem only concerned with what they want. Try to consider other points of view but mostly consider the fact that FSU has gone way out on a legal limb that's about to get sawed off behind them. Clemson, at least, hasn't given notice that they're leaving the ACC. In giving notice that they're leaving the ACC, FSU has put itself in a very precarious position. If FSU doesn't win in court, it's at the ACC's mercy.

If the ACC does not win in court, the ACC will have a hard time keeping half of it's members, then they'd wish they would have just kept FSU and Clemson happy. An ACC "win" in court is just a temporary revenue boost, the long term future is a small media deal and smaller piece of the playoff pie, but I guess that suits a basketball conference just fine.

(03-20-2024 03:20 PM)Gamenole Wrote:  

(03-20-2024 02:14 PM)Garrettabc Wrote:  

(03-20-2024 02:08 PM)Gamenole Wrote:  [quote='Garrettabc' pid='19528295' dateline='1710945814']
I fleshed out all of my thoughts with a specific end goal.

Personally I don't like the defeatist attitude of "nobody will agree to this", "this still won't be enough". Hey, what we have has gotten us this far, make the necessary adjustments and there is a chance, the game quality will certainly be better than what it currently is and I do believe deep down that nobody really wants to deal with the uncertainty of new conference membership and I'm sure Clemson would hate to see the conference they help founded just blow up.

I think the FSU and Clemson people in charge would see the value in this vision, the fanboys could too if they they were not blinded by rage. It was dumb for the ACC to think FSU and Clemson (and there will be more) to sit back and let their football programs fall behind and allow their brands diminish. That's not good long term thinking, we'd have another situation in 2036 like in 2011 where we had a bunch of good, but not great football teams, that did not get us a competitive contract with the SEC and B1G.

Let's learn from the past, make the painful adjustments, build toward the future.

But the rage is real. Clemson is a bit different as a long term and founding member of the ACC, but my contingent of the FSU fanbase has the upper hand now and we're not letting it go. I think the powers that be in Tallahassee know that there is no scenario where they can settle for remaining in the ACC at this point, without losing a significant portion of the fanbase which they cannot afford to lose.

The fanbase would get over it if the ACC fired Jim Phillips and said "here's more money, please don't leave". We might complain a little, but we would have gotten what we have wanted. Of course that strategy would have been more effective before the lawsuit.

I disagree, and think you may be underestimating the number of fans who want OUT of the ACC and will settle for nothing less.

(03-20-2024 02:32 PM)Hallcity Wrote:  

Quote:.. Many feel that lawsuit is just to get the ACC to the negotiating table ....

It's the FSU fans who just want a negotiated settlement with the ACC.

You need to understand two things. First, the ACC has a strong hand legally. You're not likely to have success in court. Second, negotiating something FSU can live with means that other conference members will make their own demands and very soon the ACC will dissolve into chaos. Since most ACC member institutions don't want the ACC to dissolve into chaos, they're not going to settle.

FSU fans seem only concerned with what they want. Try to consider other points of view but mostly consider the fact that FSU has gone way out on a legal limb that's about to get sawed off behind them. Clemson, at least, hasn't given notice that they're leaving the ACC. In giving notice that they're leaving the ACC, FSU has put itself in a very precarious position. If FSU doesn't win in court, it's at the ACC's mercy.

At least get your facts straight, FSU has at no point given notice that we are leaving the ACC. Everyone knows we are, but the formalities of notice and the ramifications of that have not been set in motion.
[/https://www.sportsbusinessjournal.com/Articles/2023/12/26/florida-state-acc-lawsuit

From Sports Business Journal:

Quote: [The lawsuit ] also asks the court to “deem that Florida State issued its formal notice of withdrawal from the ACC effective Aug. 14, 2023,” though it “doesn’t say where it might be going instead.”

(03-20-2024 01:22 PM)meyersnole Wrote:  Even the B12 is making an argument that it is a much better basketball conference than the ACC. So if the ACC is not king in basketball and second fiddle in football (can't even get an undefeated conference champ, with 2 wins over SEC teams OOC, into the playoffs damaged brand.

HOF'ers Roy Williams, Coach K, Jim Boeheim, and Pitino are all gone. Larranaga (two FFs) and Len Hamilton have a couple years left. That is like a 150 years of consistency gone! I think we can get a few years to regroup, no?

(03-20-2024 01:22 PM)meyersnole Wrote:  I could maybe understand this if the ACC was trying to do something to fix this every time they had an opportunity to do something they always seem to do the minimal with minimal results. The above proposal seems to be more of the same... don't schedule your biggest draw FSU vs ND at all but USE ND to bring up lower draw teams? Ditto for Clemson? This is the 2011 mistake all over again... breaking the FSU GT rivalry because coastal teams wanted that game. Having FSU play teams like BC and Wake and barely ever seeing VT and UNC. VT and FSU had history (Metro conference as well as a National Title game).

The SWC actually thought about a scheduling model like this back before they folded. The problem is declaring a champ if you have a "strong" pod and a "weak" pod:

Pitt, Louisville, Virginia Tech, Carolina, State, Clemson, FSU, Miami (Notre Dame)

BC, Syracuse, UVa, Wake, Duke, Georgia Tech, SMU, Stanford, Cal

What a meat-grinder that first division is. Great for TV, but how do we determine a champ? The CCG might be a blowout every year.

(03-20-2024 01:22 PM)meyersnole Wrote:  ....
Personally I hate all of this. The old model is dead, just not buried yet. Mistakes include allowing conferences to strike media deals for football while not allowing the same for basketball. Allowing NIL to roll out basically unregulated. No real control on coaching salaries while not figuring out some kind of compensation for the players. Now that the NCAA has no real power anymore I expect even more of a mess moving forward.

I do not believe that over half of the schools in the current ACC are even interested in the new model.

And.... this, and much more, is why most FSU fans just want out.
....

It's fair to say cans have been kicked down the road, yes.
And we're nearing the end of the road.

(03-20-2024 02:32 PM)Hallcity Wrote:  

Quote:.. Many feel that lawsuit is just to get the ACC to the negotiating table ....

It's the FSU fans who just want a negotiated settlement with the ACC.
....

No, it's just how these things work. They're typically settled out of court.

Review past cases: Texas, Oklahoma, Maryland, et al. Or ask any attorney.

Florida has unusually transparent 'sunshine' laws. We're seeing ESPN and the ACC sending up a mighty wail about surrendering documents for discovery. It's fair to say these entities have their own incentives to settle.

Hearings are scheduled in the next two weeks or so. We'll see how those go.

In practical terms: Florida State and Clemson are gone. What's at stake in these cases is determination of the price.

Grants of rights have not been tested before. Their effectiveness as a deterrent has rested primarily on the number of unknowns involved. The revenue gap changed the calculus. These two schools are no longer deterred, and are now seeking precise numbers so they can make plans.

(03-20-2024 01:22 PM)meyersnole Wrote:  

(03-20-2024 09:43 AM)Garrettabc Wrote:  I fleshed out all of my thoughts with a specific end goal.

Personally I don't like the defeatist attitude of "nobody will agree to this", "this still won't be enough". Hey, what we have has gotten us this far, make the necessary adjustments and there is a chance, the game quality will certainly be better than what it currently is and I do believe deep down that nobody really wants to deal with the uncertainty of new conference membership and I'm sure Clemson would hate to see the conference they help founded just blow up.

I think the FSU and Clemson people in charge would see the value in this vision, the fanboys could too if they they were not blinded by rage. It was dumb for the ACC to think FSU and Clemson (and there will be more) to sit back and let their football programs fall behind and allow their brands diminish. That's not good long term thinking, we'd have another situation in 2036 like in 2011 where we had a bunch of good, but not great football teams, that did not get us a competitive contract with the SEC and B1G.

Let's learn from the past, make the painful adjustments, build toward the future.

Do not think that is enough pain, as does that even make up for the deficit that the ACC just agreed to in the new playoff revenue split?

I am really surprised by the way the ACC is acting. FSU has been grumbling for years about focusing on football and has been largely ignored to (our fans would say) maybe punished for it (officiating and scheduling).

What is the end game here? If the ACC "wins" then Clemson and FSU football brand is diminished and when the contract is renewed in the top brands leave, probably with out many options other than to form a competing league? Or lets say that is not even an option and you have them trapped, then that new contract you get from ESPN or whomever is going to be a shell of what you had.

We are already seeing the effect of not investing in football in the basketball prestige of the conference. How long before the SEC and B1G are the top dogs there too?

When you get to the point where your own key schools like UNC start questioning what is going on you have to consider this is over, at least in its current form. Even the B12 is making an argument that it is a much better basketball conference than the ACC. So if the ACC is not king in basketball and second fiddle in football (can't even get an undefeated conference champ, with 2 wins over SEC teams OOC, into the playoffs damaged brand.

I could maybe understand this if the ACC was trying to do something to fix this every time they had an opportunity to do something they always seem to do the minimal with minimal results. The above proposal seems to be more of the same... don't schedule your biggest draw FSU vs ND at all but USE ND to bring up lower draw teams? Ditto for Clemson? This is the 2011 mistake all over again... breaking the FSU GT rivalry because coastal teams wanted that game. Having FSU play teams like BC and Wake and barely ever seeing VT and UNC. VT and FSU had history (Metro conference as well as a National Title game).

Jim Phillips, PhD had a job he was hired to do and after making the tour of the conference he felt job 1 was to move the conference headquarters and lock the everything in the conference to North Carolina? Sound like he was really listening to the football schools there.

I have no idea what is going to happen in court, I have been surprised by the way they handled NIL and recently the NCAA enforcement policy. I would hope this is viewed similarly to a labor dispute and current exit fees viewed as excessive/punitive -- what they are. Especially if the GOR was not a requirement to get the ACCN as been suggested. The ACC and ESPN trying to hide the agreement hints at that answer.

Personally I hate all of this. The old model is dead, just not buried yet. Mistakes include allowing conferences to strike media deals for football while not allowing the same for basketball. Allowing NIL to roll out basically unregulated. No real control on coaching salaries while not figuring out some kind of compensation for the players. Now that the NCAA has no real power anymore I expect even more of a mess moving forward.

I do not believe that over half of the schools in the current ACC are even interested in the new model.

And.... this, and much more, is why most FSU fans just want out. Contracts are suppose to regulate a fair exchange services and are meant to be broken when not equitable. I do not understand the thought of you signed it... so live with it mentality. When the relationship with the ACC began it was actually favorable. When the exit fee was established the relationship was souring.

Obviously FSU feels this is no longer equitable and is looking to break from the contract. Again if you look at this a labor dispute, is $500m or more fair if you feel your interests were not being cared for, or harmed? Remember that there are 6 other schools that feel similarly.

Many feel that lawsuit is just to get the ACC to the negotiating table, but given the recent court decisions maybe they should go to trial.

This is not a labor dispute.

This is a contractual dispute between sophisticated parties.

The legal analysis is far different between the two.