Bio not provided
Good summary article John,
The ND move to the ACC was about ND maintaining its status quo, while giving up 1 additional conference game (4 to 5 | BE vs ACC) and staying independent. I have read a number of articles the last few days alluding to ND's continuing hunt for teams to play deep into conference game season; the UMass game next year continues to come up as a bug for them. If you look at the ACC, ND sees a lot of old friends from the Big East - BC, Miami, Pitt, Cuse, VT and a number of frequently played opponents FSU and GT. In fact, we can all call the ACC now Big East 2.0 and while it will not have the problems of Catholic Basketball vs Football that the Big East did/still does; it is going to have a fracturing effect on the conference. With the need for inventory I see no reason for NBC to not rebid and up Notre Dame now that five ACC opponents are locked into the foreseeable future. Just as you have discussed the LHN is a thorn/splinter/wedge/jackhammer into the Big 12 so will Notre Dame's independence, exalted position, and NBC contract to the rest of the ACC. While it won't happen immediately, eventually it will turn out 2 - 4 teams. My only stipulation it will happen immediately - within the next year to avoid $50MM payout in court (very unlikely) or 2018-2020. The Big 12 isn't going to move for the 'ville and BYU, the Big 10 is done - not going to take anyone without ND, the SEC is fine at 14, and the ACC has no need to move anymore; we have in fact found Nash equilibrium...for now.
2 years ago on What Notre Dame’s Move Means For The SEC
Hey @John at MrSEC ,
Agree on the ND not being a great game changer and I'm not even sure of the $50MM being that big of a deal at this point. We saw Mizzou, TAMU, WVU, Pitt, and Cuse all negotiate down their exit fee; is $50 MM just bluster at this point when at most going off the last few deals you might pay 25% of that once the lawyers get involved? Thoughts?
2 years ago on Notre Dame To The ACC, Exit Fees Rising, “VT/NCSU To The SEC” Rumors As Dead As We Always Said
@John at MrSEC
I see where this arrangement would benefit the SEC. I see where it would benefit the ACC as an organization and add to its legitimacy. The one thing I don't see is where this arrangement would benefit FSU, Clemson, G-Tech, V-Tech in such a way as to make them want to stay. Let's say we go back to 2011 before Mizzou and TAMU joined the SEC would a similar arrangement with the Big 12 stopped Mizzou and TAMU from moving? I would say emphatically no. While the schools did not move directly for money - for Mizzou it was stability for Aggie it was more about parity with UT, the stability provided by larger contracts with ESPN and Fox certainly made it easier to keep the Big 12 together.
To use an analogy, if we're building a house we need a great roof but before we can have a roof we need a frame. The ACC needs a better roof (legitimacy that such a series would provide), but the frame (significant financial differences between individual school with their regional rivals ie FSU to UF and Clemson to USC) is in bad shape and is what needs shoring up first. The only way to shore that up is to bring the schools to parity in terms of money with their in-state rivales. In the Big 12's case, WVU and TCU along with Fox and ESPN shored up the frame first and the Champions Bowl just put a brand new roof on the house. Now it looks as strong as ever. The renegotiated contract between the ACC and ESPN did the opposite, it weakened the frame. This series as proposed does not strengthen the frame - it helps the roof. We can put a great new roof on this ACC house, but the frame is in bad shape and it doesn't matter - the house is destined to fall because the frame can't support it. Just like the Champions Bowl would not have kept Mizzou and TAMU from leaving the Big 12 this series between the ACC and SEC will not keep the ACC schools from leaving.
There is only one way this expansion and realignment is going to end and that's if everyone is at or near parity with each other. When the differences between a school jumping conferences is negligible, maybe < 3MM a year, then I believe will see this train slow. Funny enough, as an innovator in finding new ways to capitalize on its product the SEC has contributed to the increased speed and volatility in realignment. The CCG brought about all other CCGs. The SEC Network relationship with ESPN brought about the BTN, the Longhorn Network, and coming soon the Pac 12 network. I'm not saying these are bad things, as a fan I enjoy them, but all of these innovations have increased the pressure to find new revenue sources for each school in order to keep up. How many schools have indoor practice facilities versus 20 years ago? How many stadiums have been renovated and expanded in the last 10? All of these are a part of an arms race and if you don't have a ton of cash, you are not going to keep up and that's what is driving most of this realignment.
Yes, you may give the ACC some additional legitimacy with a series like you are discussing, but that doesn't put FSU on the same footing as UF and that is what's going to drive the next wave of realignment. Would love to hear what you and your sources think about this theory.
2 years, 3 months ago on Push Begins For Regular-Season Big 12-SEC Games, But SEC-ACC Games May Make More Sense