Pacific American Conference 18

Cincy did and it hasn't been that long ago that TCU and Utah were G5 schools. The question to me is would schools like Cal and Purdue have been just as good had they been in a G5 conference?

Cincy, TCU, Utah, UCF, etc. Plenty of schools have built themselves up from the G5 ranks. Boise would have competed in a 12 team playoff many times under Petersen. I think giving G5 access to the expanded CFP is good for the long term growth of the sport.
 
TLDR - fuck you, read it, it's good stuff.

I am working on an article for Rivals about this, but Clemson and FSU should be working within the ACC to determine how CFP shares will be divided within the ACC beginning in 2026. That should be their endgame. Rough outline:

- In 2026, the 11-game CFP will go from earning around $800 million per year, to $2 billion per year. The 4-team CFP made between $500 and $600 million per year. The 11-game CFP in 2024 and 2025 will make around $800 million.

- Currently, $90 million is given to the G5 to split. Small amounts, about $4-$6 million are given to the conferences of the 4 teams that get in for expenses. The rest is evenly divided between the P5 conferences. The key here is that each conference can then decide how to distribute it, and most do it evenly. FSU and Clemson will want to change that and here is why:

A couple of major things are going to happen:

- The money is going to more than triple from the 4-team, 3-game CFP. Huge bucks.
- The G6 will get a cut like they did before.
- The P4 distribution will be based on "shares" as they do for March Madness. As an example, let's say it's $2 billion, and they cut out $200 million for expenses and the G6 cut. That leaves $1.8 billion for the P4. The shares will work something like this:

* 12 shares for everyone that gets in.
* 8 shares for the teams that get byes or win round 1
* 4 shares for the teams that win round 2
* 2 shares for the teams that win the semis
* 1 share for the NC

That's a total of 27 shares - that means a share is worth about $67 million. The conference of a team that gets in and loses gets $67 million for the 1 share everyone gets. For the winners of round 1 and the byes, they will earn their conference $134 million. The NC will get 5 shares, or $335 million. If the SEC had two teams get to the finals, they would get $603 million (9 shares). Let's say they had another team lose in first round (1 share), another in the second round (2 shares), that's 3 more shares for the SEC that would now get $804 million for 12 shares. That's $50 million per team. Now you can see where the numbers come from when I have posted that the SEC will be in the $115 million range per team ... $60-$70 million in TV, $45-55 million in CFP money.

This is based off what March Madness does. There is more complexity to it, but there is more money in the CFP - $2 billion v. $1.2 billion for March Madness. And, in March Madness, there are way more teams and games, and therefore far more shares - something like 120 shares v. 27 shares. So, shares are worth a lot more in the CFP.

So, FSU and Clemson, the teams in the ACC that are most likely to get into the CFP should be negotiating for the ACC distribution to be given mostly to those who earn it. Let's say they each win a game and then lose. That's 2 shares each, or $134 million each, or $268 million for the ACC. If you distributed that across 16 teams, that would be $16.75 million which puts the ACC schools at about $45-$55 million, the numbers I have posted in the past. But, if I were Clemson and FSU I would say, fuck that. Let's give all the teams 60% of the total share revenue, or about $10 million each. Then the teams that got in the CFP get the other 40%. So, $160 million would go to all teams, including Clemson and FSU, leaving $108 million or $54 million for FSU and Clemson. They also got $10 million each team got, meaning they would get $64 million for getting into the CFP and winning a game. Now, they are in the $90 million range and can compete. This will incentivize other schools in the ACC to invest in their programs, and in recruiting. Basically, if you want SEC money in the ACC, you better start getting into the CFP. Schools that could do that are Miami, FSU, Clemson, Wake, UNC, NCSU, VaTech, Lousiville, and the Nerds. This would also have the benefit of making the ACC more competitive, and they could be ready to sign a bigger contract in 2036.

These amounts in the ACC are all hypotheticals, of course, Maybe they give more to all schools because that is the agreement now. But if they want to try to really get SEC money and get 2-3 teams in per year, they need to give schools a reason to invest.
I get it and as far as post season that's fine, FWIW I thought ACC already voted for post season redistribution shares that would reward the schools that excel more than the schools that don't make it. I'm against (as well as all the other ACC schools not named FSU or Clemson) uneven shares from overall ACC money pool that is NOT tied to post season. If I misunderstood the previous post I responded to, that's my bad.

My issue is with Clemson and FSU just demanding more money regardless of and notwithstanding the regular season. FSU has had no problem for a 6 year stretch taking equal distribution with a garbage record. But now they advocate for performance shares only when they benefit. I get the money gap is an issue to them. Any team that wants more needs to fix their team and become competitive.
 
I get it and as far as post season that's fine, FWIW I thought ACC already voted for post season redistribution shares that would reward the schools that excel more than the schools that don't make it. I'm against (as well as all the other ACC schools not named FSU or Clemson) uneven shares from overall ACC money pool that is NOT tied to post season. If I misunderstood the previous post I responded to, that's my bad.

My issue is with Clemson and FSU just demanding more money regardless of and notwithstanding the regular season. FSU has had no problem for a 6 year stretch taking equal distribution with a garbage record. But now they advocate for performance shares only when they benefit. I get the money gap is an issue to them. Any team that wants more needs to fix their team and become competitive.
We are in total agreement. Fuck that poverty program in Tallahassee. You hit the nail on the head. They sucked for a while and now think they are relevant again. I hope they lose 4 games this year. I think having an incentive based system for post-season makes sense for the ACC as it will incentivize some of the middling schools to make investments.
 
We are in total agreement. Fuck that poverty program in Tallahassee. You hit the nail on the head. They sucked for a while and now think they are relevant again. I hope they lose 4 games this year. I think having an incentive based system for post-season makes sense for the ACC as it will incentivize some of the middling schools to make investments.
you can shit on their play on the field but it's still worth more than the others despite them being shit
 
IF they cull they'll have to add some other to get up to 35-40.
ND, Florida State, Miami, Clemson, North Carolina are just a few teams that could be added. There are plenty out there to consider.
 
ND, Florida State, Miami, Clemson, North Carolina are just a few teams that could be added. There are plenty out there to consider.
That would probably be the list if they are looking for brand names that would bring more eyeballs than some of their current members. I don't think they'd be interested in teams that don't attract eyeballs but have been good football teams. I think they'll only want teams that bring more value than their proportionate share would be.
 


Feels like an intentional leak by Stanford (or Cal) to put pressure on the ACC to get it done. Stanford would have to be dragged into the Big12. Even then, I'm not sure they just wouldn't go Ivy before joining what they would consider a bunch of filthy plebs in a truck stop conference.
 
Feels like an intentional leak by Stanford (or Cal) to put pressure on the ACC to get it done. Stanford would have to be dragged into the Big12. Even then, I'm not sure they just wouldn't go Ivy before joining what they would consider a bunch of filthy plebs in a truck stop conference.
Regardless of politics it makes a ton more sense to go B12 then ACC. Your closest conference mate after Cal and SMU is something like 2300 miles away. That’s beyond nuts. But again, it’s Stanford/Cal so politics matter.
 
Regardless of politics it makes a ton more sense to go B12 then ACC. Your closest conference mate after Cal and SMU is something like 2300 miles away. That’s beyond nuts. But again, it’s Stanford/Cal so politics matter.

Geography doesn't matter anymore. It stopped mattering in realignment years ago. And it's not so much politics as it is country club status. They can pal around with the UVAs and Dukes of the world and feel they are peers. They ain't paling around with Iowa St, WVU, and Texas Tech. They look down on those folk. Maybe enough money will get them to swallow their pride for awhile until they find something better down the road, but I'd venture to guess most Calford types view the Big12 as a last resort.
 
Geography doesn't matter anymore. It stopped mattering in realignment years ago. And it's not so much politics as it is country club status. They can pal around with the UVAs and Dukes of the world and feel they are peers. They ain't paling around with Iowa St, WVU, and Texas Tech. They look down on those folk. Maybe enough money will get them to swallow their pride for awhile until they find something better down the road, but I'd venture to guess most Calford types view the Big12 as a last resort.
Keep thinking having to travel 2300+ miles for every conference road game but one doesn’t matter. If they (Stanford) wish to pal around in the country club status just join the Ivy League. There is no doubt the B12 is the last resort but ultimately it comes down to what the networks are willing to do. Personally I hope they just rebuild the PAC to try and get that back up to snuff. Yes, I know that won’t happen over night and some schools they should add (Boise) they won’t because of the elitist mentality. Still the travel for ACC membership is nuts.
 
i guess. i dont think anyone expected a bowl from them anyway
That was their goal for 2023, just “right the ship” and make any bowl but…The university self imposed….. AFTER the portal closed :pound: So slimy
 
Cincy, TCU, Utah, UCF, etc. Plenty of schools have built themselves up from the G5 ranks. Boise would have competed in a 12 team playoff many times under Petersen. I think giving G5 access to the expanded CFP is good for the long term growth of the sport.
Sun-belt and AAC championship games are bout to be 🔥

:couch2: :pop2:
 
so I was thinking about 2024 schedules for the PacX schools. if they cant put together a conference, if the 4 stay together or if Oregon State and WSU are left alone what do the do?
with 4 they have 6 games booked
with 2 teams they have 4.
looking at the independent teams
Army still needs games. ND and Uconn each need 1.
try and get games with teams like Kansas State who had Arizona on the schedule but thats gonna be a conference game now.
Utah had Baylor and BYU so both of them will be looking.
in theory Arizona and Utah as well. tho bad blood might prevent that.

do you think they could convince teams to break schedule and then try and book both teams?
like Missouri and Umass
 
Back
Top