Clemson Joins FSU in Suing the ACC To Get Out of Media Rights

[WhosYourDawggy]

This is based off of what exactly?

If Clem/FSU is not worth handing out $60 mil / $75 mil then neither is OU/Tex, USC/UCLA or Ore/Wash ....

OU/TX and USC/UCLA slid in under the new TV contracts. So they were included pro rata. Ore/UW took partial shares. You guys going to get out of the ACC to take partial shares?

Also, your problem is that you have no CFP value for those conferences. The way they split the money for CFP killed you guys. You only bring TV Viewership value, so maybe you can get to $60 million, but you have no additive CFP value. Although markets don't matter, you are both redundant to the SEC for market value.

 

[WhosYourDawggy]

No exception needed... Notre Dame is an AAU member.


I wish we would get things over and just kill the ACC already...

The SEC could get the ball rolling by increasing to 20 members by adding: Clemson, Florida State, North Carolina, and Virginia.

Then the Big XII increases to 22 members by adding: North Carolina State, Virginia Tech, Louisville, Miami, Georgia Tech, and Pitt.

Once those above 10 schools leave the ACC, Notre Dame realizes it's finally time to kiss independence goodbye... So the B1G increases to 20 members by adding Notre Dame and whomever the Irish desire as a partner, probably Stanford.

Then the 6 remaining ACC schools: Syracuse, Boston College, Duke, Wake Forest, Cal, SMU increase to 18 members by adding a bunch of programs such as: USF, Tulane, Memphis, UConn, Oregon State, Washington State, Boise State, San Diego State, Fresno State, Colorado State, UNLV, UTSA... and perhaps increase to 20 members by getting into Houston & Atlanta with the additions of Rice and Georgia State... heck, get into Virgina & Philly too by also adding Liberty and Temple. They could call this newly refurbished 22 member conference the PACC.

Then with a 14 team playoff, the SEC, B1G, Big XXII, and PACC each receive an auto bid for its conference champ, with 10 at large playoff spots.

The Group of 5 conferences have their own playoff.

Do all the above and then perhaps we would finally see an end to all the realignment madness.

Why would SEC schools be willing to take less money per school to bring in those 4 teams? Same with the B1G?

 

[TaikoTiger]

OU/TX and USC/UCLA slid in under the new TV contracts. So they were included pro rata. Ore/UW took partial shares. You guys going to get out of the ACC to take partial shares?

Partial Shares until the new TV contract (2030) that is equal to or more than what the ACC is given?
Sure

Also, your problem is that you have no CFP value for those conferences. The way they split the money for CFP killed you guys. You only bring TV Viewership value, so maybe you can get to $60 million, but you have no additive CFP value. Although markets don't matter, you are both redundant to the SEC for market value.

No CFP value? False, BIG increases their chances on getting 5 teams in with Clem/FSU. Even without them making it in themselves, adding two teams who recruits in the top 10/15 will immediately increase the resumes of everyone in the conference

Add that to value they bring TV Viewership wise to a conference who lived off OSU/Mish feeding the BIG TV viewership.
By 2030, having OSU, UM, USC, Ore, Clem, FSU is going to be nice leverage when TV negotiations comes back around

 

[OlyDuck]

Partial Shares until the new TV contract (2030) that is equal to or more than what the ACC is given?
Sure


No CFP value? False, BIG increases their chances on getting 5 teams in with Clem/FSU. Even without them making it in themselves, adding two teams who recruits in the top 10/15 will immediately increase the resumes of everyone in the conference

Add that to value they bring TV Viewership wise to a conference who lived off OSU/Mish feeding the BIG TV viewership.
By 2030, having OSU, UM, USC, Ore, Clem, FSU is going to be nice leverage when TV negotiations comes back around

no body is getting 5 teams on any kind of regular basis.
adding good teams just means good teams take more losses.
example if the changes had alreasdy happened and Oregon Washington Michigan and Ohio State had to play the rankings would have been quite different.
same with Texas and Oklahoma and Ole Miss and Missouri and UGA and Alabama.

 

[WhosYourDawggy]

Partial Shares until the new TV contract (2030) that is equal to or more than what the ACC is given?
Sure


No CFP value? False, BIG increases their chances on getting 5 teams in with Clem/FSU. Even without them making it in themselves, adding two teams who recruits in the top 10/15 will immediately increase the resumes of everyone in the conference

Add that to value they bring TV Viewership wise to a conference who lived off OSU/Mish feeding the BIG TV viewership.
By 2030, having OSU, UM, USC, Ore, Clem, FSU is going to be nice leverage when TV negotiations comes back around

LOL ... it doesn't matter how many teams the SEC gets in. They get 29%. They could put 12 teams in the CFP and they get 29%. So, yeah, the way the CFP payouts are distributed killed your chance to get in the SEC and the B1G. There is no incremental value for CFP money. Both conferences get 29% whether you are in their leagues or not.

I would also point out that we are going to put 4-5 teams in most seasons anyway. We already have Bama, UGA, OU, TX, ATM, Auburn, LSU, UF, UTjr.

Finally, tell me why any mid to low level team in the SEC would want you in the SEC. It means another loss for most of them, and they would have to take a pay cut per year.

Man, you guys got screwed by the CFP money distribution. I actually think it might have been done that way on purpose ... to keep the ACC together.

Glad to hear how you are going to bring $90 million in value to the SEC and B1G. Seriously, explain it.

 

[WhosYourDawggy]

Partial Shares until the new TV contract (2030) that is equal to or more than what the ACC is given?
Sure


No CFP value? False, BIG increases their chances on getting 5 teams in with Clem/FSU. Even without them making it in themselves, adding two teams who recruits in the top 10/15 will immediately increase the resumes of everyone in the conference

Add that to value they bring TV Viewership wise to a conference who lived off OSU/Mish feeding the BIG TV viewership.
By 2030, having OSU, UM, USC, Ore, Clem, FSU is going to be nice leverage when TV negotiations comes back around

I just put this up ... I wrote this on the Rivals site:

Thread 'Was the CFP money split designed to keep the ACC together?'

Mar 27, 2024

This is something I wrote over on Rivals:

As many of you may know, I follow the conference and CFP expansion subject closely. For some reason, it intrigues me. This is a way too long post about why FSU's and Clemson's chances of getting into the P2 took a big blow with the way the CFP money is distributed.

;TLDR - because CFP money is distributed by percentage and not based on participation, FSU and Clemson can't come close to driving enough revenue to earn a full share from either conference.

I've written several detailed articles here about what drives money in CFB. While it used to...

• WhosYourDawggy
• Replies: 49
• Forum: College Football Board

 

[TaikoTiger]

LOL ... it doesn't matter how many teams the SEC gets in. They get 29%. They could put 12 teams in the CFP and they get 29%. So, yeah, the way the CFP payouts are distributed killed your chance to get in the SEC and the B1G. There is no incremental value for CFP money. Both conferences get 29% whether you are in their leagues or not.

I would also point out that we are going to put 4-5 teams in most seasons anyway. We already have Bama, UGA, OU, TX, ATM, Auburn, LSU, UF, UTjr.

Finally, tell me why any mid to low level team in the SEC would want you in the SEC. It means another loss for most of them, and they would have to take a pay cut per year.

Man, you guys got screwed by the CFP money distribution. I actually think it might have been done that way on purpose ... to keep the ACC together.

Glad to hear how you are going to bring $90 million in value to the SEC and B1G. Seriously, explain it.

Except there's still the "check in" in 2028 and when the contract ends after 6 years.
So when a conference over/under performs in getting teams into the playoffs, then that % is liking to change in the "check in" evaluation. Getting teams into the playoffs still matters and having a strong SOS will be important in getting more teams into the playoffs ... hence the value of adding two teams who recruits at a top 10/15 level and who bring in tier 1 TV ratings without the need of having to play a team like OSU or UM

 

[WhosYourDawggy]

Except there's still the "check in" in 2028 and when the contract ends after 6 years.
So when a conference over/under performs in getting teams into the playoffs, then that % is liking to change in the "check in" evaluation. Getting teams into the playoffs still matters and having a strong SOS will be important in getting more teams into the playoffs ... hence the value of adding two teams who recruits at a top 10/15 level and who bring in tier 1 TV ratings without the need of having to play a team like OSU or UM

Dude, the check is to make sure the ACC is still a conference. There isn't a chance in hell that the SEC will not get 3-5 teams in every year. They've done that for the entirety of the CFP. That is what got them the 29%.

As I said, adding Clemson and FSU now makes even less sense. Out of UGA, Bama, AU, UF, UTjr, OU, TX, LSU, ATM, and even OM, the SEC will always get the same number of teams they got in before. Adding FSU and Clemson won't help with the CFP.

Face it, not basing CFP shares on participation killed any value for you to move to the SEC or the B1G. You have to show you can generate pro rate TV money, which is hard enough. And then you have to explain how you get a full share of CFP money when you getting into the CFP doesn't matter.

Why would you guys want to be in the SEC? The best run in your history had much to do with the fact that you dominated a weak ACC. I am not taking shots at you ... I respect the Clemson-UGA rivalry ... it was huge when I was in college. But part of what made that run possible was that you didn't have to play a bunch of high end teams until the CFP. That gained you access, and then you did what you needed to do to win twice. If you played in the SEC right now, what makes you think you aren't losing 3-4 games per year? You've been losing that many in the ACC for the past couple of years. You want the SEC money, but why get money if your CFP access is reduced significantly?

Get in the CFP from the ACC ... you should be able to do that every year. Find other ways to make up the money.

 

[WhosYourDawggy]

Except there's still the "check in" in 2028 and when the contract ends after 6 years.
So when a conference over/under performs in getting teams into the playoffs, then that % is liking to change in the "check in" evaluation. Getting teams into the playoffs still matters and having a strong SOS will be important in getting more teams into the playoffs ... hence the value of adding two teams who recruits at a top 10/15 level and who bring in tier 1 TV ratings without the need of having to play a team like OSU or UM

FWIW and FYI ...

Year	B1G	SEC
2014	3	3
2015	3	2
2016	6	2
2017	5	4
2018	4	5
2019	4	3
2020	2	5
2021	3	3
2022	4	3
2023	5	5
	39	35

 

[TaikoTiger]

Dude, the check is to make sure the ACC is still a conference. There isn't a chance in hell that the SEC will not get 3-5 teams in every year. They've done that for the entirety of the CFP. That is what got them the 29%.

There's a difference between getting 3 teams (21%), 4 teams (29%), and 5 teams (36%) in the playoffs and the 29% is only set til 2028

As I said, adding Clemson and FSU now makes even less sense. Out of UGA, Bama, AU, UF, UTjr, OU, TX, LSU, ATM, and even OM, the SEC will always get the same number of teams they got in before. Adding FSU and Clemson won't help with the CFP.

How wouldn't FSU/Clem help the BIG?

Face it, not basing CFP shares on participation killed any value for you to move to the SEC or the B1G. You have to show you can generate pro rate TV money, which is hard enough. And then you have to explain how you get a full share of CFP money when you getting into the CFP doesn't matter.

Why would you guys want to be in the SEC? The best run in your history had much to do with the fact that you dominated a weak ACC. I am not taking shots at you ... I respect the Clemson-UGA rivalry ... it was huge when I was in college. But part of what made that run possible was that you didn't have to play a bunch of high end teams until the CFP. That gained you access, and then you did what you needed to do to win twice. If you played in the SEC right now, what makes you think you aren't losing 3-4 games per year? You've been losing that many in the ACC for the past couple of years. You want the SEC money, but why get money if your CFP access is reduced significantly?

Get in the CFP from the ACC ... you should be able to do that every year. Find other ways to make up the money.

Reasons:
School: More money like any other school (OU, Tex, USC, UCLA, Ore, UW and all the teams who voted to add competition)
Fans: Better games throughout the season

Making the playoffs is irrelevant if you're not winning it all

 

[WhosYourDawggy]

There's a difference between getting 3 teams (21%), 4 teams (29%), and 5 teams (36%) in the playoffs and the 29% is only set til 2028


How wouldn't FSU/Clem help the BIG?


Reasons:
School: More money like any other school (OU, Tex, USC, UCLA, Ore, UW and all the teams who voted to add competition)
Fans: Better games throughout the season

Making the playoffs is irrelevant if you're not winning it all

You just don't want to admit you got screwed by the lack of participation in the distribution. Trust me, I wanted that ... it would have meant more money for the SEC. But the differences you point out were considered when they decided on the 29%. See my other post, where I list what a CFP-12 would have been. Both leagues will be fine with the teams they have, and if the ACC collapses they will get bigger shares anyway.

The B1G is getting the largest TV money, and the largest CFP amount already without you. Why would they want or need you? They have PSU, tOSU, UM, UW, UI, USC, UO, and UW. They will always have the 3-5 they need to keep their 29%. Adding you will do the same with SEC - give mid to low teams losses, and take away per team money. Why would they do that?

As for the 2028 re-evaluate, that doesn't help you right now. The SEC and the B1G would want nothing more than to not have to deal with FSU and Clemson right now. They are both totally fine, and both teams bring more trouble than they are worth. Once the ACC breaks up in 2036, or a little before, then they can evaluate that in light of the revenue realities at that time.

All those teams got added before the TV contracts were signed. You might get added the next TV contract, but you guys are trying to get out now. Unless TV would add pro rata shares it won't happen in the SEC. In the B1G it won't happen for full shares because UO and UW aren't going to allow that. And, as I said, adding you won't add more teams to the CFP ... just switch up the mix of teams that will get in. They don't care if it's Wisconsin or FSU, or Oregon or Clemson. They'll easily justify their 29%.

The teams did vote for the new schools to come in. But in the B1G they did for USC and UCLA only because of pro rateashares provided by TV, and then partial shares for UO and UW. OU and TX were no brainers for the SEC - two bluebloods, and to keep them from going to the B1G. But, now you have no to limited CFP value, and the mid to lower teams in both leagues are tired of adding teams that make it less likely they will ever win a CC, or get to the CFP. You have to see that, right? Ole Miss isn't going to vote you guys in. USjr and UF aren't. Vandy, Mizzou, Arky, MSU, Auburn have no desire to have you in the ACC and make their path more difficult.

I agree that it would add more great games. But the SEC is already chock full of them once we go to a 9 game IC schedule.

You have to make the CFP before you can win it all. Yo would think that you would get that. The years you beat Bama, you likely wouldn't have been in at all if you had been in the SEC.

 

[TaikoTiger]

You just don't want to admit you got screwed by the lack of participation in the distribution. Trust me, I wanted that ... it would have meant more money for the SEC. But the differences you point out were considered when they decided on the 29%. See my other post, where I list what a CFP-12 would have been. Both leagues will be fine with the teams they have, and if the ACC collapses they will get bigger shares anyway.

The B1G is getting the largest TV money, and the largest CFP amount already without you. Why would they want or need you? They have PSU, tOSU, UM, UW, UI, USC, UO, and UW. They will always have the 3-5 they need to keep their 29%. Adding you will do the same with SEC - give mid to low teams losses, and take away per team money. Why would they do that?

As for the 2028 re-evaluate, that doesn't help you right now. The SEC and the B1G would want nothing more than to not have to deal with FSU and Clemson right now. They are both totally fine, and both teams bring more trouble than they are worth. Once the ACC breaks up in 2036, or a little before, then they can evaluate that in light of the revenue realities at that time.

All those teams got added before the TV contracts were signed. You might get added the next TV contract, but you guys are trying to get out now. Unless TV would add pro rata shares it won't happen in the SEC. In the B1G it won't happen for full shares because UO and UW aren't going to allow that. And, as I said, adding you won't add more teams to the CFP ... just switch up the mix of teams that will get in. They don't care if it's Wisconsin or FSU, or Oregon or Clemson. They'll easily justify their 29%.

The teams did vote for the new schools to come in. But in the B1G they did for USC and UCLA only because of pro rateashares provided by TV, and then partial shares for UO and UW. OU and TX were no brainers for the SEC - two bluebloods, and to keep them from going to the B1G. But, now you have no to limited CFP value, and the mid to lower teams in both leagues are tired of adding teams that make it less likely they will ever win a CC, or get to the CFP. You have to see that, right? Ole Miss isn't going to vote you guys in. USjr and UF aren't. Vandy, Mizzou, Arky, MSU, Auburn have no desire to have you in the ACC and make their path more difficult.

I agree that it would add more great games. But the SEC is already chock full of them once we go to a 9 game IC schedule.

You have to make the CFP before you can win it all. Yo would think that you would get that. The years you beat Bama, you likely wouldn't have been in at all if you had been in the SEC.

You say all of that and yet the BIG and SEC added teams who will added more loses for more money
At the end of the day, It's a business

 

[Deep Creek]

Why would SEC schools be willing to take less money per school to bring in those 4 teams? Same with the B1G?

The middle/bottom wouldn’t. But the top has been willing to share quite a bit of the money they generate with the ones that don’t for quite a while now.

 

[Wild Turkey]

You just don't want to admit you got screwed by the lack of participation in the distribution. Trust me, I wanted that ... it would have meant more money for the SEC. But the differences you point out were considered when they decided on the 29%. See my other post, where I list what a CFP-12 would have been. Both leagues will be fine with the teams they have, and if the ACC collapses they will get bigger shares anyway.

The B1G is getting the largest TV money, and the largest CFP amount already without you. Why would they want or need you? They have PSU, tOSU, UM, UW, UI, USC, UO, and UW. They will always have the 3-5 they need to keep their 29%. Adding you will do the same with SEC - give mid to low teams losses, and take away per team money. Why would they do that?

As for the 2028 re-evaluate, that doesn't help you right now. The SEC and the B1G would want nothing more than to not have to deal with FSU and Clemson right now. They are both totally fine, and both teams bring more trouble than they are worth. Once the ACC breaks up in 2036, or a little before, then they can evaluate that in light of the revenue realities at that time.

All those teams got added before the TV contracts were signed. You might get added the next TV contract, but you guys are trying to get out now. Unless TV would add pro rata shares it won't happen in the SEC. In the B1G it won't happen for full shares because UO and UW aren't going to allow that. And, as I said, adding you won't add more teams to the CFP ... just switch up the mix of teams that will get in. They don't care if it's Wisconsin or FSU, or Oregon or Clemson. They'll easily justify their 29%.

The teams did vote for the new schools to come in. But in the B1G they did for USC and UCLA only because of pro rateashares provided by TV, and then partial shares for UO and UW. OU and TX were no brainers for the SEC - two bluebloods, and to keep them from going to the B1G. But, now you have no to limited CFP value, and the mid to lower teams in both leagues are tired of adding teams that make it less likely they will ever win a CC, or get to the CFP. You have to see that, right? Ole Miss isn't going to vote you guys in. USjr and UF aren't. Vandy, Mizzou, Arky, MSU, Auburn have no desire to have you in the ACC and make their path more difficult.

I agree that it would add more great games. But the SEC is already chock full of them once we go to a 9 game IC schedule.

You have to make the CFP before you can win it all. Yo would think that you would get that. The years you beat Bama, you likely wouldn't have been in at all if you had been in the SEC.

You can’t predict what the B1G will do they added UCLA and Oregon.

I still can’t believe they did that.

 

[WhosYourDawggy]

You say all of that and yet the BIG and SEC added teams who will added more loses for more money
At the end of the day, It's a business

It is a business, and OU and TX made sense. Adding two more good teams doesn't. You don't add enough TV money, ESPN won't pay more until we renegotiate the contract in 2034, and you add losses to more than a majority of teams in the conference. And UF and USCjr don't want you. You don't add market as we already have SC and UF market. And you don't contribute anything for CFP money that we don't already have.

There is no business case you can make under current economic conditions that would make sense for the SEC to want you or FSU. They aren't going to take more losses for less money, and neither you nor FSU bring enough to the table.

 

[WhosYourDawggy]

The middle/bottom wouldn’t. But the top has been willing to share quite a bit of the money they generate with the ones that don’t for quite a while now.

But that is the difference between sharing with people already in the club, and sharing with people not in the club. And, even the top at some point isn't going to want to have more great teams.

 

[WhosYourDawggy]

You can’t predict what the B1G will do they added UCLA and Oregon.

I still can’t believe they did that.

Sure, I am speaking more from an SEC perspective. Maybe the B1G wants to get huge and go coast to coast even more. I'd laugh at them if they did that. They would be sharing less money with more teams. Neither FSU nor Clemson are AAU, so that cuts against them.

Seriously, I really don't think the B1G nor the SEC wants to deal with this at all. They have their fucking hands full with anti-trust, NIL, transfer portal, mixing in new schools, scheduling, etc. I am serious when I say one reason they agreed to a split of CFP mone ythat doesn't rely on participation is that precludes them from bringing in more teams until at least 2032.

 

[WhosYourDawggy]

You say all of that and yet the BIG and SEC added teams who will added more loses for more money
At the end of the day, It's a business

You say it's a business. Make the business case for why Clemson would be good for the SEC or the B1G. Use numbers. You have to use TV Viewership, CFP contribution, and TV markets (small and disappearing). Use B1G at $70 million per team for TV and $20 million per team for CFP. For the SEC, use $65 million per team for TV and $23 million per team for CFP. You can't use the TV market for SEC - they are already getting premium rates for SC and FL.

I'm serious; you say it's a business - lay out the business case. Otherwise, you are just hoping it's going to happen.

 

[OlyDuck]

FWIW and FYI ...

Year	B1G	SEC
2014	3	3
2015	3	2
2016	6	2
2017	5	4
2018	4	5
2019	4	3
2020	2	5
2021	3	3
2022	4	3
2023	5	5
	39	35

Meh using the rankings as they were and assuming the additions would hold is false facts. A fringe team (12, 13) that would have "got in" prob misses if they played another team that was there. Ie does both 12 ok and 13 lsu make it in last season had they played in same conference?

 

[ralphiewvu]

No exception needed... Notre Dame is an AAU member.


I wish we would get things over and just kill the ACC already...

The SEC could get the ball rolling by increasing to 20 members by adding: Clemson, Florida State, North Carolina, and Virginia.

Then the Big XII increases to 22 members by adding: North Carolina State, Virginia Tech, Louisville, Miami, Georgia Tech, and Pitt.

Once those above 10 schools leave the ACC, Notre Dame realizes it's finally time to kiss independence goodbye... So the B1G increases to 20 members by adding Notre Dame and whomever the Irish desire as a partner, probably Stanford.

Then the 6 remaining ACC schools: Syracuse, Boston College, Duke, Wake Forest, Cal, SMU increase to 18 members by adding a bunch of programs such as: USF, Tulane, Memphis, UConn, Oregon State, Washington State, Boise State, San Diego State, Fresno State, Colorado State, UNLV, UTSA... and perhaps increase to 20 members by getting into Houston & Atlanta with the additions of Rice and Georgia State... heck, get into Virgina & Philly too by also adding Liberty and Temple. They could call this newly refurbished 22 member conference the PACC.

Then with a 14 team playoff, the SEC, B1G, Big XXII, and PACC each receive an auto bid for its conference champ, with 10 at large playoff spots.

The Group of 5 conferences have their own playoff.

Do all the above and then perhaps we would finally see an end to all the realignment madness.

The B12 isn’t going to 22 unless the networks pay, which is highly doubtful.

The SEC/B1G isn’t going to give up more money in the playoff. They want their large cut which they’ll get for the time being until they break away. It’ll be a sad day once that happens.