Jump to content

Zhorn96

Burnt Ends
  • Posts

    1131
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Zhorn96

  1. Lulz, this got posted on a Cal board

    "ACC insider here: the NC schools flipped. You're in with stanford. Just be aware what an awful mistake you've made. The acc has a contract with ESPN with a composition clause that allows ESPN to renegotiate payouts with schools, but not the acc to negotiate for more money. FSU and Clemson are going to slice the throat of the ACC sometime in the next year. ESPN will slash the payout to the bone after Clemson and FSU leave and the ACC will crumble if 8 schools find landing spots.


    Also, prepare to get absolutely hosed on every single call in every single sport whenever you play a school from tobacco road. Pac 12 refs are like little children compared to the game rigging masters at work in the ACC.


    That being said,
    welcome aboard."

    • Haha 2
  2. 1 hour ago, bullet said:

    Cal has 14 men's and 15 women's sports, well over the 16 minimum for FBS.
    cross country
    track indoor
    track outdoor
    basketball
    baseball/softball
    golf
    tennis
    swimming & diving
    soccer
    rowing
    water polo
    gymnastics
    men's football
    men's rugby
    women's lacrosse
    women's field hockey
    women's volleyball

    Rugby would clearly be on the chopping block.  Maybe women's lacrosse.  Not sure what else.  They have had some success in one or the other sex in water polo, gymnastics and rowing.

    Rugby is self funded and actually makes a small profit.  But its a big Title IX issue.  Would think track, baseball, gymnastics (M&W), lacrosse and field hockey are the most likely candidates 

  3. 1 hour ago, MadisonJumpAround said:

    Can't reveal too much, but my job hears intel from a company directly tied to one of the Pac 4 left behind schools. I am just passing along what I hear and doing it here because this is basically the realignment church and seemingly a long way from my own B1G forums. 

    I have been told that someone at the Pac12 (likely Luck) is pitching something pretty radical in an effort to save the Pac-12 conference outright. The proposal is a merger of sorts with the ACC, but only in Football. The basic gist I was told was that the Pac 4 would effectively "add" San Diego State and become 5. SMU would join the ACC under the auspices that it would forego any TV revenue for 7 years.  That creates a 20 team football conference. However, it would act like a conference in a conference, which it would be. The 5 west coast teams would form a Western Division. The 15 other teams would divide into 3 divisions of 5 each. This is specifically for scheduling purposes, not necessarily a prelude to conference semi-finals (but you could do that if the NCAA signed off). 

    Why would the ACC agree to take on these schools? Money is what I am told. Apparently Apple is pretty hard up to get into the college FB game and Luck or someone still has them interested. The Western 5 would strike their own deal with Apple at something around $15-18 million per team. Apple would control all content in stadiums for those 5 teams. ESPN apparently kinda likes this idea, because they would likely only pay $5 million per for for the additional 6 teams or $30 million total. For such a small investment on ESPN's part they would add a ton of content - all of SMU's games home and away - and all of the Western 5's games in Eastern stadiums. Stanford @ Florida State for example.

    But the primary benefit would be that the Western Teams "self finance" their accession to the ACC and that the conference would generate $30 million more that could fund the unequal revenue sharing model that Clemson and FSU seek to restore stability, which ESPN wants above all else and keeps the B1G at bay. 

    As far as the other sports, the Pac 12 would add 7 teams from the West Coast Conference, including Gonzaga and Saint Mary's, to create a regional league that cuts down travel expenses and has similar sports interests. Thus, the pac-12 would exist and be a west coast league. The 5 football playing members could create an identity of sorts inside the ACC. The ACC gets to expand without blowing up their own cost model for non-revenue sports (SMU is an easy travel site in Dallas) and preserves their basketball brand. FSU and Clemson get money likely than any B12 school, but still less than B1G and SEC (but enough to compete with them). ESPN gets to settle this whole thing down for a decade or so only paying an additional $30million total (less than half one SEC school's distribution). 

    I was told this is a hail mary. For all I know it is full of crap. But seems like a pretty detailed proposal and while on its face, seems crazy, kind of makes some sense. I could see why people might go for it. Again, not a prediction. I am not the Dude of West Virginia. I hear stuff all the time from these guys, sometimes right, sometimes not. This was compelling enough I wanted to share. Take that for what its worth. 

    dunno if this is the deal structure (could be?) but the Cal side is feeling pretty optimistic that a move to the ACC is happening with 'Furd and while they wont get a full share, its more than 50% and would eventually scale to full partnership.  Would be for most sports but Cal would also be looking to axe a number of programs, mostly men's in all likelihood.  30 sports currently so 6-ish getting chopped would be logical.  We'll see, negotiations are ongoing but UNC/NCState sound like they are close to flipping their vote.

    • Hook 'Em 1
  4. 17 minutes ago, John80 said:

    I don't see how Cal can take 0 dollars because they have large stadium payments to make.

    a couple different sources suggest that donors have stepped up and committed the money if needed.  The alarm bells have (apparently) finally been recognized and the impact of the AD failing would be catastrophic far beyond just "no more football." 

    I'm also in the skeptical camp re: that level of engagement but there is definitely money available if they can tap into it.  That was always the issue.

  5. sounds like Cal, Furd and SMU would take $0 TV for a certain number of years and it might be for football only, not other sports (if bball is included seems murky).  That's $90Mish that can be redistributed to the other 15 teams.  I suspect it would be uneven distro to keep Clemson, FSU and possibly UNC happy.  Buys them time til the next realignment Armageddon in 2030 I suppose

  6. 11 minutes ago, Texas Wahoo said:

    Interesting article on the ACC.  I particularly noted the reason for NC State's no-vote on expansion - not that they have anywhere to go, but they want to be tied to UNC (and thus presumably in the ACC forever).

     

    https://www.espn.com/college-football/story/_/id/38198507/acc-florida-state-college-football-2023-conference-realignment

     

     

    yeah, its not dead yet apparently.  ND, Cal, Furd all focused on swaying UNC is the backchannel rumor I'm hearing from the West Coast.  Since FSU and Clemson didn't bolt, status quo opens the door again.  We'll see.  The rest of this week will be interesting.

  7. I think a lot of people on here are thinking logically from a competitive perspective but not from a TV/ad money perspective.  If the goal is an NFL lite feeder league which generates massive revenues through ads (which I think it is), they don't care about the interest among fans outside of the ones in the final "league" which is why they want the big brands.  They're going to want to invest heavily in those final 24/40/48 teams whatever it is and make it an NFL like spectacle.  All the best HS players will attend these schools and they can market it all and generate massive profits from televising the circus.  Some "good teams" will fail in this model...that's just encouragement to reinvest their money back into the program to make it better so they can earn the prizes that the "winners" will no doubt receive.  And on and on.  The schools not "in" will be forced to de-escalate the arms race and will settle back into the G5/FCS shadows which will ripple effect their ADs and less revenue will be generated.  I believe this is approximately what the networks want to drive towards, NFL Lite.

    The logic of 8 geographically based conferences of 8 teams each (or 4 of 16 with 2 divisions) is makes sense from a competitive standpoint.  It feeds into a perfect playoff systems and maintains interest nationally.  Not as much money though...

    • Hook 'Em 1
  8. 52 minutes ago, billfromlaketravis said:

    If I’m ESPN, I’d get Cal and Stanford into the ACC. Growing the ACCN is the only revenue escalator available to the malcontents like Florida State. Add Bay Area TVs, top flight Tier 3 programming, 930 window, and pick up their shares of the PAC Network. Win-win. 
     

    Yes, I fully acknowledge the travel would be horrific. 

    Cal/Furd are still talking to the Big18 also.  Cheaper rate than UO/UW.  Next week will be interesting...

  9. Long term play… pffft.  I think this Fox deal for 6 years is the deal before the deal.  40-48 split away in 2030 to play big boy football.  The rest fall away to G5 irrelevance.  Got to be in one of the remaining 4 conferences and prove you belong over the next 6 years.  The Vandys, Northwesterns, Indianas, etc will drop out in 2030 IMO

    • Like 1
  10. 4 hours ago, USC Traveler said:

    From a mod on the Clemson 247 board:

     

    This is what I got:

    - We are gone. The decision has been made. We are leaving the ACC.

    - The GOR will not keep us in the ACC.

    - We have not been offered a spot by the B1G or the SEC as of yet.

    - The B1G has not decided to expand South...yet.

    - The SEC has not decided to expand further...yet.

    - We appear to prefer a move to the B1G (as of now). At least the majority within Clemson do.

    - If The B1G does extend a formal offer, the SEC would have to move very fast on an offer or we will move to the B1G.

    - We are looking at this as there is greater upside to a move to the B1G; and greater downside to a move to the SEC.

    - We also feel that our move to the SEC would have less positive impact on the SEC than the negative impact if they lose us to the B1G.

    That's it for now. I can tell you this is from very high places.

    So to sum up: We are definitely moving; the GOR will not stop us; the B1G holds the cards: we prefer the B1G (as of now); but the SEC is not out of the equation; no offers have been extended.

     

    https://247sports.com/college/clemson/board/22/Contents/calstanford-213945457/?page=1

    If true, they must think the GOR isn’t enforceable cause the exit fee is $120m and buying your media rights back is ? With estimates anywhere from $150m to $350m.  Nobody is paying $500m to hop conferences

  11. 26 minutes ago, bullet said:

    I was there around 2000.  Went in and watched a  practice.  Place was scary.  Broken benches everywhere.  Unreal.

    It was horrific.  Splintered old benches, dripping water underneath, it was like a dungeon.  Weight room could only handle 1/3rd or so if the team at a time… the stadium fucking sucked except for the view and the historic cool factor.  They had to spend the coin on it…

    • Hook 'Em 1
  12. 10 minutes ago, redswingline said:

    CFB isn't that important out there. Not sure how that means their head is up their ass, they would just rather place their money elsewhere.

    I was referring to the schools ADs, not the alums.  And Furd's AD is in infinitely better shape than Cal's from a donor perspective.  Cal has potential though, they can pull 60k into games if there is a decent product that is marketed properly (see early Tedford years).  With the Raiders, Warriors and soon to be A's all gone, the East Bay is going to be only Cal for (potentially) major sports. And their NIL is a lot better than most people realize.  They bought a whole new men's bball roster which will win 20+ games this season (up from ...3).  And they brought in 13 transfers to build out their depth in football.  They spent ~$5M between the 2 sports allegedly and there is more money available for the next cycle.  But their Chancellor doesn't care because she is dreaming about retirement and the AD is a bumbling fuckwit who is about to get fired for covering up massive athlete abuse in the women's swim team.  Cal just needs a year or two and with the right hires, they could actually turn this shit around.  Which is why I think they'd jump at ACC for survival, even knowing that thing implodes in the next couple years, because by then, it might be "fixed" and they'll be more attractive to the Big18 or whatever #3 conference emerges from the ashes.  Wouldn't surprise me if they beg their way in to the Big18 for $10-15M a year and fundraise the gap to cover the 6 years til the next TV contract

    Meh, anyway, we'll see.

  13. 6 minutes ago, ABSR said:

    But here's the kicker.  What pays for all of those Olympic and other sports?   Well, that is the Pac-12 driven by Football revenues.  So Stanford and Cal can try to self fund through donations or University funds all of the other sports...but even Stanford will struggle with this and Cal will just not care.  

    So losing a real P-5 conference affiliation for football, along with the financial support it provides, will severely affect every sport in the athletic department.

    a lot of folks think Stanford is fine because they have $$$ everywhere.  They have $36B in endowments...but all of that is tied up in specific things, they cant just move the money around.  There was a reason they tried cutting 13 sports during Covid (or whatever it was).  Furd athletics are broke too... that said, both Furd and Cal have the alums to fix all of this if they get their heads out of their asses.  Thats the challenging part

    • Hook 'Em 3
  14. Just now, Horn of Gabriel said:

    Unsurprising about CoB.  Also was $500MM the cost of the retrofit?  That might buy one-third of a new stadium construction in Cali...

    it was $450M or something.  The stadium was in wretched shape, basically all they kept was the outer shell for the architecture and history of it.  Everything else was completely gutted and they massively upgraded the athletic facilities in general.  Locker rooms, weight rooms, meeting rooms, etc.  Partnered with the Biz school so some classrooms there and that spread the cost a little. Its pretty nice now... 

    • Hook 'Em 1
  15. 55 minutes ago, camel at sea said:

    So if the CalFord to ACC stuff is done, the next move for the PAC4 is either 1) merging with the MWC, or 2) an AAC raid and an Apple+ media del.  They could park on 8 members for a year and then fill out the roster with MWC teams when the buyout number drops.  I'd guess that the Bay Area schools prefer the second option.  There's some value in the "Pac" brand and they'd want to keep its history, NCAA credits, etc.  

    If Apple can promise better money than the AAC, then I think they could get SMU, Rice, and Tulane relatively easily.  The tug-of-war between the academic people in the Bay Area, and Apple, over which other MWC/AAC schools get invited later would be really fascinating.  SDSU and Colorado State seem like safe bets, but would Apple twist their arm enough to make them invite Boise or Fresno St?    

    I am not sure the ACC thing is over... They need 3 or fewer "no's" for an invite to Cal/Furd.  There are 4 currently from what I heard.  FSU, Clemson, Miami and VT.  Apparently UNC and NC St are leaning towards "yes" now.  All the others are strong "yes" votes.  So really it hinges on VT and if they change their mind... 8/15 is when FSU has to notify if they are opting out if they are doing so...

    • Hook 'Em 1
×
×
  • Create New...