Clock ticking on the ACC as we know it - Printable Version
+- The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board)
+-- Forum: C-House! (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-4.html)
+--- Forum: The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-5.html)
+--- Thread: Clock ticking on the ACC as we know it (/thread-25498.html)
+- The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board)
+-- Forum: C-House! (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-4.html)
+--- Forum: The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-5.html)
+--- Thread: Clock ticking on the ACC as we know it (/thread-25498.html)
Clock ticking on the ACC as we know it - needle - 03-04-2025
Settlement now official that ends lawsuits filed by FSU, Clemson against ACC
Quote: ESPN recently exercised its opt-in clause with the ACC, extending its media rights deal with the conference through 2036 while providing some relief for the ACC through turbulent times. The new revenue-distribution strategy, as proposed in the settlement, would distribute 40% of the television money evenly through the 14 longstanding ACC members -- including Florida State and Clemson -- with 60% of the revenue distributed on a ratings-based formula from the past five years.
In addition, the total cost to exit the ACC is expected to decline by $18 million each year through 2029-30. After that period, the fee drops to $75 million and any exiting program will retain its media rights with the league.
https://www.cbssports.com/college-football/news/acc-settles-florida-state-clemson-lawsuits-revised-revenue-distribution-lowered-exit-fee-among-key-details/
RE: Clock ticking on the ACC as we know it - GK3 - 03-04-2025
(03-04-2025, 12:43 PM)needle Wrote: Settlement now official that ends lawsuits filed by FSU, Clemson against ACCSo exactly how much do we get and what does it cost us to leave the ACC?
Quote: ESPN recently exercised its opt-in clause with the ACC, extending its media rights deal with the conference through 2036 while providing some relief for the ACC through turbulent times. The new revenue-distribution strategy, as proposed in the settlement, would distribute 40% of the television money evenly through the 14 longstanding ACC members -- including Florida State and Clemson -- with 60% of the revenue distributed on a ratings-based formula from the past five years.
In addition, the total cost to exit the ACC is expected to decline by $18 million each year through 2029-30. After that period, the fee drops to $75 million and any exiting program will retain its media rights with the league.
https://www.cbssports.com/college-football/news/acc-settles-florida-state-clemson-lawsuits-revised-revenue-distribution-lowered-exit-fee-among-key-details/
RE: Clock ticking on the ACC as we know it - 82lsju - 03-04-2025
(03-04-2025, 01:33 PM)GK3 Wrote:(03-04-2025, 12:43 PM)needle Wrote: Settlement now official that ends lawsuits filed by FSU, Clemson against ACCSo exactly how much do we get and what does it cost us to leave the ACC?
Quote: ESPN recently exercised its opt-in clause with the ACC, extending its media rights deal with the conference through 2036 while providing some relief for the ACC through turbulent times. The new revenue-distribution strategy, as proposed in the settlement, would distribute 40% of the television money evenly through the 14 longstanding ACC members -- including Florida State and Clemson -- with 60% of the revenue distributed on a ratings-based formula from the past five years.
In addition, the total cost to exit the ACC is expected to decline by $18 million each year through 2029-30. After that period, the fee drops to $75 million and any exiting program will retain its media rights with the league.
https://www.cbssports.com/college-football/news/acc-settles-florida-state-clemson-lawsuits-revised-revenue-distribution-lowered-exit-fee-among-key-details/
Quote:The new revenue-distribution strategy, as proposed in the settlement, would distribute 40% of the television money evenly through the 14 longstanding ACC members -- including Florida State and Clemson -- with 60% of the revenue distributed on a ratings-based formula from the past five years.
It should also be noted that the 40% of television money distributed evenly among the 14 longstanding institutions is not a slight towards the more recent members. SMU decided to forgo media rights payments for nine years to join the ACC, while Cal and Stanford agreed to a 30% rate, so the newcomers are on a different scale.
Quote:That [exit fee] figure is already down to $165 million for fiscal year 2026, which is still steep. But a continuous decline through 2030 will make it more manageable, and a flat fee of $75 million beyond 2030 is more in line with a standard exit fee.
so I'm assuming our 30% revenue share will not get much if any bump from the 60% of the revenue distributed on a ratings-based formula from the past five years. What's not clear to me is if our share is now really 12% (30% * 40%) if we don't get any of the 60% pool based on ratings.
Looking like two big super conferences coming soon....will be be invited to the party?
RE: Clock ticking on the ACC as we know it - Mick - 03-04-2025
(03-04-2025, 03:26 PM)82lsju Wrote: Looking like two big super conferences coming soon....will be be invited to the party?
Sure. Every conference needs a doormat.
I make zee small joke...
RE: Clock ticking on the ACC as we know it - 82lsju - 03-04-2025
(03-04-2025, 04:17 PM)Mick Wrote:(03-04-2025, 03:26 PM)82lsju Wrote: Looking like two big super conferences coming soon....will be be invited to the party?
Sure. Every conference needs a doormat.
I make zee small joke...
of course we've been the doormat or near doormat for most of the last seven years.....and I would not expect us to be included in either of the tqo super conferences unless one of them feels it needs a west coast presence (which the Big 10 already has but the SEC may want to have so maybe the Big 10 takes us and Cal to keep the SEC off the west coast, or maybe the SEC feigns interest in us and Cal to stick the Big 10 with two more doormats/near doormats).
RE: Clock ticking on the ACC as we know it - Spiny_Norman - 03-04-2025
(03-04-2025, 04:48 PM)82lsju Wrote:(03-04-2025, 04:17 PM)Mick Wrote:(03-04-2025, 03:26 PM)82lsju Wrote: Looking like two big super conferences coming soon....will be be invited to the party?
Sure. Every conference needs a doormat.
I make zee small joke...
of course we've been the doormat or near doormat for most of the last seven years.....and I would not expect us to be included in either of the tqo super conferences unless one of them feels it needs a west coast presence (which the Big 10 already has but the SEC may want to have so maybe the Big 10 takes us and Cal to keep the SEC off the west coast, or maybe the SEC feigns interest in us and Cal to stick the Big 10 with two more doormats/near doormats).
Stanford's one shot at a miracle save would have been joining the B10 on Notre Dame's coattails. But they didn't budge from their semi-independent status and here we are in the ACC like an orphan at a family reunion.
Fox and ESPN are running college football now and Stanford does nothing for them on our own. We will continue to wander in the wilderness, on the outside of the power players until the Big 10 and SEC abandon the ESPN/Fox hegemony or something else forces a major change in college football.
RE: Clock ticking on the ACC as we know it - chrisk - 03-04-2025
It is too soon to make sweeping predictions on the mid-term future of college football until the impact of the House settlement is felt. There is also the possibility of Federal legislation, however unlikely.
RE: Clock ticking on the ACC as we know it - BostonCard - 03-05-2025
That’s why merely being good again won’t move the needle. What the networks want are teams that will draw viewers regardless of how good they are, so we are not valuable to ESPN and Fox, and since we are not valuable to ESpN and Fox we are not valuable to the SEC and Big Ten.
BC
RE: Clock ticking on the ACC as we know it - StanUSwagU - 03-05-2025
(03-05-2025, 12:10 AM)BostonCard Wrote: That’s why merely being good again won’t move the needle. What the networks want are teams that will draw viewers regardless of how good they are, so we are not valuable to ESPN and Fox, and since we are not valuable to ESpN and Fox we are not valuable to the SEC and Big Ten.
BC
***************
Hi BostonCard,
(1). Hope all is well.
(2). Good points.
(3). I wonder how NotreDame & Duke have garnered the 'interest of Networks & Big Conferences' ?
(4). I also wonder [if in addition to winning (ie being Top20 in Football & Mens Basketball)] ....if [a] Stanford made serious structural changes to model its Athletics & Admissions & NIL to be more in the mold of NotreDame and Duke, if [b] we increased our undergraduate student body size by 2000 undergrads to include/add 'a 'more diverse BigTime sports loving, less professional nerdy undergraduate population', if [c] the Face of our AthleticsDept (eg AthDir) was ' a BigTime charismatic & nationally known figure with a storied SEC background, like a SteveSpurrier or PeytonManning ...who insisted on Stanford being Top10 in NIL Collective Dollars...if [d] Marketing of Stanford Football & Mens Basketball was more than just hanging a few banners up & down El Camino Real, & catering to Stanford-Type fans around Atherton, PaloAlto, SharonPark, etc ...but rather, reached out on a different social/cultural level to get 'Non Stanford Affiliated fans like 49ers Fans & 'regular college football & college basketball sports fans' from SanFrancisco & SanJose ..... if we might transition to being slightly more 'interesting to Networks & Big Conferences' ?
I wonder (ignoring for the moment the 'which comes 1st the chicken or the egg conundrum'), ....if that might translate to more repeats of the following:
(5). When Stanford Football was at its apogee the Networks were interested: As in 'Bringing ESPN College GameDay to Stanford for the 'Top 10 Stanford vs Oregon tilt on the Farm' where ESPN Television commentators Chris Fowler & Kirk Herbstreit were commenting that they couldn’t hear themselves because the Stadium Noise was so raucous, where the Stadium was vibrating because a lot of 'NonStanford regular CollegeFootball Fans who came to see this game were standing all-game. roaring, jumping up & down' & 'where “Exciting ‘non-traditional, DMV raised’ Dual-Threat QB Kevin Hogan, was in his bag on Zone-Read Keeps high-stepping with 'Style & Swag' into the EndZone vs the OregonDefense ! "
When Stanford Mens Basketball was at its apogee the Networks were interested: As in 'Bringing Dicky V & the
whole ESPN GameDay Mens Basketball crew to Stanford for the Famous, 'Matt Lottich with the Steal, Stanford vs Arizona Thriller with Nick Robinson hitting the walk off buzzer-beater, and ensuing Fans & TigerWoods storming the court !'
(6). Of Course, all the above would start with Stanford & its Administration, Leadership, & Alums, being willing to change the current 'status quo' & 'embrace the new landscape of BigTime Power4 Athletics (and dare I say become less nerdy & stodgy') ....are we up to that challenge ?
[a] Solve the Bland/Narrow Scope of outreach of Stanford University & Stanford Athletics to the whole Larger BayArea SportsFan community, & Get TopNotch GameDay Event Planning (including Concerts, FoodTruck Concourses, TopTier SEC level Tailgating, CarShows, DJays, etc) ...and maybe Stanford Stadium and Maples are more full on GameDays;
[b] Then with fuller Stadiums & Arenas, and Top10 NIL money, and Admissions & Transfer criteria more in line with NotreDame & Duke, ...more 'Big Time 4 & 5 star athletes commit/transfer into Stanford,
[c] Then with more 'Big Time 4 & 5 star athletes committing/transferring into Stanford, then the Media & Networks & BigConferences are more interested in covering StanfordAthletics, and its 'larger number of charismatic 4 & 5 star Football & Basketball student-athletes''
(7). So, I agree with your overall premise that 'more than merely winning' is likely needed; Long overdue 'cultural & structural changes' to Stanford University, (what I would call the 49er-izing, Always Additive, Box-Office-Interesting, super-sizing KD-ChefCurry-DraymondGreen,JimmyButler Warrior-izing & Outreaching to the larger 2Million Non-Stanford BayArea residents ...rather than the 'current, insular, little engine that never could-izing'), would need to be done at Stanford, for us to become more 'attractive to Networks and BigConferences'; ...are we up to that challenge of being less Nerdy & more NotreDame-like, & Box-Office ?
RE: Clock ticking on the ACC as we know it - 2006alum - 03-05-2025
(03-05-2025, 03:59 AM)StanUSwagU Wrote:(03-05-2025, 12:10 AM)BostonCard Wrote: That’s why merely being good again won’t move the needle. What the networks want are teams that will draw viewers regardless of how good they are, so we are not valuable to ESPN and Fox, and since we are not valuable to ESpN and Fox we are not valuable to the SEC and Big Ten.
BC
***************
Hi BostonCard,
(1). Hope all is well.
(2). Good points.
(3). I wonder how NotreDame & Duke have garnered the 'interest of Networks & Big Conferences' ?
(4). I also wonder [if in addition to winning (ie being Top20 in Football & Mens Basketball)] ....if [a] Stanford made serious structural changes to model its Athletics & Admissions & NIL to be more in the mold of NotreDame and Duke, if [b] we increased our undergraduate student body size by 2000 undergrads to include/add 'a 'more diverse BigTime sports loving, less professional nerdy undergraduate population', if [c] the Face of our AthleticsDept (eg AthDir) was ' a BigTime charismatic & nationally known figure with a storied SEC background, like a SteveSpurrier or PeytonManning ...who insisted on Stanford being Top10 in NIL Collective Dollars...if [d] Marketing of Stanford Football & Mens Basketball was more than just hanging a few banners up & down El Camino Real, & catering to Stanford-Type fans around Atherton, PaloAlto, SharonPark, etc ...but rather, reached out on a different social/cultural level to get 'Non Stanford Affiliated fans like 49ers Fans & 'regular college football & college basketball sports fans' from SanFrancisco & SanJose ..... if we might transition to being slightly more 'interesting to Networks & Big Conferences' ?
I wonder (ignoring for the moment the 'which comes 1st the chicken or the egg conundrum'), ....if that might translate to more repeats of the following:
(5). When Stanford Football was at its apogee the Networks were interested: As in 'Bringing ESPN College GameDay to Stanford for the 'Top 10 Stanford vs Oregon tilt on the Farm' where ESPN Television commentators Chris Fowler & Kirk Herbstreit were commenting that they couldn’t hear themselves because the Stadium Noise was so raucous, where the Stadium was vibrating because a lot of 'NonStanford regular CollegeFootball Fans who came to see this game were standing all-game. roaring, jumping up & down' & 'where “Exciting ‘non-traditional, DMV raised’ Dual-Threat QB Kevin Hogan, was in his bag on Zone-Read Keeps high-stepping with 'Style & Swag' into the EndZone vs the OregonDefense ! "
When Stanford Mens Basketball was at its apogee the Networks were interested: As in 'Bringing Dicky V & the
whole ESPN GameDay Mens Basketball crew to Stanford for the Famous, 'Matt Lottich with the Steal, Stanford vs Arizona Thriller with Nick Robinson hitting the walk off buzzer-beater, and ensuing Fans & TigerWoods storming the court !'
(6). Of Course, all the above would start with Stanford & its Administration, Leadership, & Alums, being willing to change the current 'status quo' & 'embrace the new landscape of BigTime Power4 Athletics (and dare I say become less nerdy & stodgy') ....are we up to that challenge ?
[a] Solve the Bland/Narrow Scope of outreach of Stanford University & Stanford Athletics to the whole Larger BayArea SportsFan community, & Get TopNotch GameDay Event Planning (including Concerts, FoodTruck Concourses, TopTier SEC level Tailgating, CarShows, DJays, etc) ...and maybe Stanford Stadium and Maples are more full on GameDays;
[b] Then with fuller Stadiums & Arenas, and Top10 NIL money, and Admissions & Transfer criteria more in line with NotreDame & Duke, ...more 'Big Time 4 & 5 star athletes commit/transfer into Stanford,
[c] Then with more 'Big Time 4 & 5 star athletes committing/transferring into Stanford, then the Media & Networks & BigConferences are more interested in covering StanfordAthletics, and its 'larger number of charismatic 4 & 5 star Football & Basketball student-athletes''
(7). So, I agree with your overall premise that 'more than merely winning' is likely needed; Long overdue 'cultural & structural changes' to Stanford University, (what I would call the 49er-izing, Always Additive, Box-Office-Interesting, super-sizing KD-ChefCurry-DraymondGreen,JimmyButler Warrior-izing & Outreaching to the larger 2Million Non-Stanford BayArea residents ...rather than the 'current, insular, little engine that never could-izing'), would need to be done at Stanford, for us to become more 'attractive to Networks and BigConferences'; ...are we up to that challenge of being less Nerdy & more NotreDame-like, & Box-Office ?
Notre Dame has a massive alumni base and is also the de facto second alma mater for millions of Catholics in America. In markets like NYC they draw more eyeballs than every university in the Northeast and I think every one in the US but tOSU and Michigan.
I'm not convinced Duke will survive the great re-sorting either, so the lawyer in me is inclined to respond, "objection - admits facts not in evidence." With few exceptions, almost every school in the B1G and SEC is a large and/or public school with a significant alumni and fan base. That is not Stanford and there's no way in our lifetimes to pivot and make it so.
RE: Clock ticking on the ACC as we know it - Mick - 03-05-2025
(03-05-2025, 03:59 AM)StanUSwagU Wrote: (4). I also wonder [if in addition to winning (ie being Top20 in Football & Mens Basketball)] ....if [a] Stanford made serious structural changes to model its Athletics & Admissions & NIL to be more in the mold of NotreDame and Duke, if [b] we increased our undergraduate student body size by 2000 undergrads
Wasn't that the idea behind acquiring the Belmont campus? The admissions rate is already ridiculously low. So what if it crept up 2%?
(03-05-2025, 07:20 AM)2006alum Wrote: I'm not convinced Duke will survive the great re-sorting either, so the lawyer in me is inclined to respond, "objection - admits facts not in evidence." With few exceptions, almost every school in the B1G and SEC is a large and/or public school with a significant alumni and fan base. That is not Stanford and there's no way in our lifetimes to pivot and make it so.
It's very difficult to reconcile "exclusive" with "broad interest." Notre Dame achieves it primarily because of their long history of success and secondarily because of their unique culturual/religious demographics. They're almost like a public school in the broad appeal. I noticed that the highway signs in Michigan have the UMich logo on them...that's some broad appeal.
Stanford is way too exclusive, as it should be. It limits broad appeal, particularly without the winning tradition. Stanford's winning tradition is in stops and starts, which is insufficient to appeal to a broad college football audience.
RE: Clock ticking on the ACC as we know it - Goose - 03-05-2025
(03-05-2025, 03:59 AM)StanUSwagU Wrote: <snip>
(4). I also wonder [if in addition to winning (ie being Top20 in Football & Mens Basketball)] ....if [a] Stanford made serious structural changes to model its Athletics & Admissions & NIL to be more in the mold of NotreDame and Duke, if [b] we increased our undergraduate student body size by <snip>
In summary, if Stanford changed its structure and goals to something completely different than they are now Stanford MIGHT become attractive to the super conferences that are probable to be created. The notional university thereby created would of course be nothing like Stanford as we know it. I for one think that would be a horrible evolution.
Up to now, Stanford was proud of in its athletic endeavors and successes because they took place without fatally compromising what Stanford wants to be. We tried to do both, with some degree of success. I totally oppose Stanford becoming "something else" to even have a shot at continuing top-tier athletics. Fortunately, I believe the "administration" and faculty agree with that proposition. If we have to become "UCLA Lite" to stay in the "top tier" of athletics (and it is unclear that UCLA can actually do that), I want no part of it. Nothing wrong with UCLA. We aren't them and vice-versa.
RE: Clock ticking on the ACC as we know it - CowboyIndian - 03-05-2025
I thought I saw some stat sheet, posted here or on another site and possibly by MSqueri, regarding Stanford's ratings appeal and we were somewhere in the middle ground, surprisingly ahead of some of the bigger state schools for viewer (and advertiser) interest. Maybe our prospects became dimmer because we tied ourselves to Kal.
RE: Clock ticking on the ACC as we know it - Mick - 03-05-2025
This Forbes article, now a dozen years old, describes the reasons behind Stanford's new prominence. Our newly hired General Managers is featured prominently.
The Secrets Behind Stanford's Emergence as a Football Powerhouse
And this two-month-old article attempts to answer "so...what happened?"
BTW and FWLIW, Stanford appreciates and honors excellence in all its forms. It tends not to venerate areas that are not excellent. So unless and until the football team returns to excellence...and I appreciate the host of reasons why it may not...it will lack fans. But given that we're committed to the ACC for the next decade or so, doesn't it make sense to get as close to excellence as possible?
RE: Clock ticking on the ACC as we know it - 82lsju - 03-05-2025
(03-05-2025, 02:55 PM)Mick Wrote: This Forbes article, now a dozen years old, describes the reasons behind Stanford's new prominence. Our newly hired General Managers is featured prominently.
The Secrets Behind Stanford's Emergence as a Football Powerhouse
And this two-month-old article attempts to answer "so...what happened?"
BTW and FWLIW, Stanford appreciates and honors excellence in all its forms. It tends not to venerate areas that are not excellent. So unless and until the football team returns to excellence...and I appreciate the host of reasons why it may not...it will lack fans. But given that we're committed to the ACC for the next decade or so, doesn't it make sense to get as close to excellence as possible?
I for one would be pretty surprised if the ACC, in its current form, is around in a decade....
RE: Clock ticking on the ACC as we know it - needle - 03-05-2025
(03-05-2025, 01:47 PM)CowboyIndian Wrote: I thought I saw some stat sheet, posted here or on another site and possibly by MSqueri, regarding Stanford's ratings appeal and we were somewhere in the middle ground, surprisingly ahead of some of the bigger state schools for viewer (and advertiser) interest. Maybe our prospects became dimmer because we tied ourselves to Kal.
I could be way off, but I don't think any current ACC team ends up in either the SEC or B1G. Only FSU brings along any kind of national following in 2025, and they are not worth the headache.
That said, I think most ACC schools would leave for the Big XII if there's one more penny to be made, and I think the Big XII would consider it an honor to overpay for the privilege of killing off the ACC. I suspect FSU, Clemson, UNC and NC State all are part of the Big XII before the end of this decade.
RE: Clock ticking on the ACC as we know it - chrisk - 03-05-2025
(03-05-2025, 09:26 PM)needle Wrote:(03-05-2025, 01:47 PM)CowboyIndian Wrote: I thought I saw some stat sheet, posted here or on another site and possibly by MSqueri, regarding Stanford's ratings appeal and we were somewhere in the middle ground, surprisingly ahead of some of the bigger state schools for viewer (and advertiser) interest. Maybe our prospects became dimmer because we tied ourselves to Kal.
I could be way off, but I don't think any current ACC team ends up in either the SEC or B1G. Only FSU brings along any kind of national following in 2025, and they are not worth the headache.
That said, I think most ACC schools would leave for the Big XII if there's one more penny to be made, and I think the Big XII would consider it an honor to overpay for the privilege of killing off the ACC. I suspect FSU, Clemson, UNC and NC State all are part of the Big XII before the end of this decade.
If Big 12 overpays for ACC teams, it would hurt the payout of the current members. Hard to see that happening. I don't see those four schools seeing the Big 12 as an upgrade.
RE: Clock ticking on the ACC as we know it - Maple Leaf - 03-06-2025
(03-04-2025, 08:12 PM)chrisk Wrote: It is too soon to make sweeping predictions on the mid-term future of college football until the impact of the House settlement is felt. There is also the possibility of Federal legislation, however unlikely.
And what happens if the players (student-athletes) protest the excessive travel they are now experiencing and request/demand new conferences based on geography? Maybe football is exempt but not the other sports.