This is an automated archive made by the Lemmit Bot.

The original was posted on /r/cfb by /u/InVodkaVeritas on 2024-03-16 01:19:23.

This thought came out from a conversation with /u/rbtgoodson a couple of days ago in this thread. Specifically in regards to UNC AD Cunningham’s comments that the ACC could seek to go to 21 schools in order to form regional divisions.

I also think it is notable that UNC’s AD Cunningham, Tennessee AD White, and Syracuse Chancellor Syverud are currently serving in a joint Think Tank with several others in which they are strategizing how to bring back regionalism while also maintaining a tier structure to the economics of the FBS.

Here are my thoughts on how realignment may unfold if FSU loses their lawsuit against the ACC.

There’s been a lot of conversation about the ACC’s instability in the context of the FSU lawsuit to remove or reduce the costs of them leaving. I’ve been a part of that. Both as a self-interested Stanford alumna and logistics/realignment junkie that constantly works out scheduling formats and realignment scenarios.

However, the realization that came out in my conversation with rbtgoodson was that one aspect of this realignment drama has been over-discussed while another aspect has been under-discussed.

The over-discussed aspect is the prospect of the ACC being torn apart when FSU wins its case. The Big Ten and SEC raiding what they want from the ACC and the remainder either going to the Big 12 or abandoned to blend with the AAC.

The under-discussed aspect is the prospect that FSU loses their case, or mostly loses, and ends up with a huge payment due in order to leave. FSU intends to leave regardless, even if they have to take private equity to do it, or at least that’s the assumption. Clemson seems poised to consider it at the very least, discussing it with their lawyers, but they don’t have the same public-facing will to get out by any means necessary.

And the motivation to leave is pretty clear based on all the numbers that are coming out. Approximately 45 million dollars in difference between the Big Ten and the Big 12 per year with the new CFP deal and media contracts from 2026-3030 and an assumption of an even bigger difference between 2031-2036 when the Big Ten gets their next contract. Which is why Florida State officials are talking about missing out on “half a billion” in revenue over the course of the ACC contract. That’s what it will be, or more, over that time span. And even if it costs FSU the full “$572 Million” to get out of the ACC, as their Board of Regents claim it would without a court ordered reduction, they likely still will… because after this contract there will be another contract and another. So long term, being in the Big Ten will make up the difference in costs of getting out of the ACC.

So I wanted to make a discussion post from the under-discussed aspect of the FSU vs NCAA case:

That FSU does not win their case to get out for a severely reduced cost, but leaves despite having to pay hundreds of millions to do it.

Assumption 1: FSU will not get out of the ACC for cheap, but will get out.

If this occurs, the only way it makes sense for an ACC school to leave is if they get a full share. Financially you don’t make up ground if you end up in a partial share situation like Oregon and Washington if you have to also to pay hundreds of millions to leave. If you only get a partial share from the Big Ten or SEC then it makes sense to wait until the 2030s to leave instead of leave right now.

So, if you need to pay hundreds of millions to leave the ACC, it only makes financial sense to leave if FOX or ESPN are going to give you a full share in the Big Ten or SEC.

For ESPN it makes no sense to pay extra for a team to go to the SEC, and I severely doubt the Big Ten wants to pay Clemson, so it only makes sense for 1 team to leave: Florida State

Assumption 2: The only school that FOX/B1G would consider giving a full share to in the ACC is Florida State

Conclusion 1: Only Florida State is leaving the ACC.

Now that brings me to the comments of UNC Athletic Director Cunningham who expressed interest to “expand so big that you could create regionality within a bigger league.” He specifically mentioned creating 3 7-team divisions within the ACC as his chosen option.

Cunningham stressed that the reason he was against adding Stanford and Cal was because it disrupted regionalism and travel schedules. Expanding to 21 schools with 3 regional 7-team divisions is his solution to this problem, bringing back regionalism to the ACC within a divisional context.

Assumption 3: The ACC will seek to create 3 7-team divisions within a 21-member conference.

If only Florida State leaves, that puts the ACC at 16 members, plus Notre Dame as a non-football member with special status (and in this scenario they may join the Big Ten with FSU, but won’t join the ACC). Which means they need to add 5 football members to reach 21.

As Stanford and Cal are the only two schools out west in the ACC, it would only make sense to add 5 Western teams in order to give the conference a 7-team regional division.

However, there’s a real dearth of West Coast teams not already in a major conferences. San Diego State is really the best you can do… and San Diego State isn’t bad, but they’re not a headliner and they are also only one team.

There is only one realistic place to get valuable additions from the West Coast.

Conclusion 2: The ACC will target some Western teams from the Big 12.

Here are the top 10 options out west if you include Big 12 schools:

Air Force, Arizona, Arizona State, BYU, Colorado, Colorado State, Oregon State, San Diego State, Utah, Wazzu

If you had to rank those in terms of general quality:

Tier 1: Arizona, Arizona State, Utah, and Colorado

Tier 2: BYU, Oregon State, and Wazzu

Tier 3: Air Force and San Diego State

Tier 4: Colorado State

However, there are a couple of other factors here:

  1. Do they fit the ACC profile?
  2. Do they want to go to the ACC?
  3. Do they fit what ESPN would want to pay for?

Speaking to point three for a minute: ESPN is required to pay a full share to any school that the ACC adds. In fact, Stanford, Cal, and SMU are all technically getting full shares; they are just required to immediately turn around and pay back the majority of it to the ACC as a membership fee. So theoretically the ACC could add Central Michigan and ESPN would be required to pay full rate for them.

However, as ESPN still needs to opt into the ACC contract for 2027 and beyond the ACC isn’t going to want to load up on schools that’ll convince them to opt out and renegotiate the deal. They’ll want valuable members.

So:

Assumption 4: Who ESPN wants does matter

I believe that ESPN does not want to pay full rate for Colorado State. They might accept Air Force, but it would be low on their list too. SDSU might be acceptable because they have a quality market, but that feels like a backup option. I feel like Tier 1 and Tier 2 options from above are the ones worth considering first.

ESPN used to have a lot of access to the west coast. They had access to the Pac-12. Now they only have split-access to the 5 mountain Big 12 schools plus Stanford and Cal from the ACC. So the teams they would want would be the furthest West that were still of high quality.

Conclusion 3: Arizona, Arizona State, BYU, Colorado, Oregon State, Utah, and Wazzu are the only 7 western schools in serious contention for the 5 spots, with SDSU as a backup option

This causes us to circle back to factor 1 and factor 2: do they fit the ACC profile, and do they want to go to the ACC?

Starting with last things first: Do they want to go?

Oregon State and Wazzu would certainly be yeses. Despite the travel, being in a power conference would more than make up for it. SDSU is in the same boat.

In severe contrast: Colorado and Arizona pushed the hardest to get out of the Pac-12 and join the Big 12. Colorado took a 2.5 million dollar bonus to do it while their head football coach and administration talked up strongly how much they wanted to be connected to the state of Texas. Arizona’s President Robbins talked about how much he wanted to be the Big 12 and connected to those basketball schools.

BYU I am somewhat unsure on. They spent years begging for a spot in a major conference and finally have one. I have no clue how they would feel about the ACC, but have a feeling about how the ACC would feel about them.

Arizona State and Utah have talked a lot about their academic progress. Utah in particular was in love with being in the same conference as Stanford and Cal and would most likely love to be again. Arizona State, too, talks a lot about how much their academics have progressed and were reluctant to leave the Pac-12 before they had too. I think both would be happy to join the ACC if it made sense.

And, First things last, do they fit the profile?

Mostly, I think that the ACC could live with any of them. BYU fits the profile the least, but I think they could live with BYU. After all, they live with the academics of Louisville a…

Content cut off. Read original on old.reddit.com/…/oc_taking_unc_ad_cunninghams_com…