Schools in the ACC that have rich football tradition and bring more value to the conference than they get out of it (such as FSU and Clemson) are presumably looking for an escape hatch. And us loyal fans are desperate for our teams to not get relegated to some sort of tier 2 irrelevance. Maybe ESPN will throw us a lifeline and maybe the SEC (or B1G) will invite us to be part of their big boys club. But man, it sure does suck to be in this position, doesn’t it? Feels like we’re on hand and knee begging both the 4 letter network (that seemingly has taken every opportunity to diminish our accomplishments over the years), and the most arrogant hillbilly conference (that’s rejected us many times in the past), to be part of their exclusive “it just means more” good ole boy club. But sad as it may be, due to poor prior leadership and bad decision making, this is where we are.
That said, I can’t help but wonder if there might just be an opportunity out there that doesn’t require us to simply hope things shake out in our favor. And I’ve concocted one that may seem like a gigantic stretch, but maybe it’s not so absurd when more closely examined. Before explaining, let me propose several premises that probably must true in order for this idea to have any merrit:
1. As we know, unless something happens that allows top revenue generating schools in the ACC (such as FSU) to escape to the SEC and B1G, those schools are going to continue to be stuck in what’s becoming an increasingly financially disadvantaged situation, making it increasingly more difficult to compete. Essentially, FSU is trapped in the ACC and while there seems to be viable scenarios that could allow FSU to find a way out, none of them are within FSU’s control (other than finding the hundreds of millions of dollars it would take to buy its way out). And those who have the power to let FSU out, won’t be exercising that power as a favor to FSU. If it happens, it’ll simply be the byproduct of decisions that are made because the powers that be see a benefit in it for themselves and their respective organizations. In other words, FSU is it’s only advocate here and is essentially powerless in its pursuit to leave the ACC for greener pastures. FSU’s opportunity to escape hinges on the hope that what’s in its best interest happens to be aligned with the outcome resulting from decisions made by others.
2. the overwhelming value a conference offers its member institutions is monetary. There are other things like traditional matchups, path to the championship, prestige, etc.., but the real value a program derives from its conference is its revenue share. That’s becoming even more true in today’s CFB climate, where the revenue disparity between conferences is increasing significantly and rapidly. Its for this reason that teams like FSU are dissatisfied with their current situation (they contribute more than they get back). And it’s for the same reason that teams like Vandy are thrilled with their current situation (they get more than they put in).
3. With number 2 in mind, it’s reasonable to deduce that approximately half of the teams in revenue sharing conferences contribute more than the value they get in return. For reasons mentioned below, some schools are likely more accepting of this reality than others based on their individual circumstances, but the fact remains that these schools are being under-compensated in comparison to the value they add.
Alabama is an interesting test case. Clearly Bama is one of the schools that’s being under-compensated relative to the value it adds. It would be difficult to compare FSU’s situation to Bama’s due to the fact that Bama currently gets as much as (or more than) it would in any other conference, while FSU gets far less than it would if it were in the SEC or B1G. What the two schools have in common however, is that they both are one of the top revenue generating schools in their respective conference, and they both get less than their “fair share” of the revenue in return. Perhaps it’s safe to assume that Bama is satisfied with its current conference affiliation. After all, they get as much money as any school, and that amount is more than enough for them to compete at the highest level and win championships. But even so, they are similar to FSU in that they both are funding less valuable programs at their own expense. It’s just the consequence of being a top revenue generator in an equal revenue share model. In the end, just as the ACC needs FSU more than FSU needs the ACC, the SEC needs Bama more than Bama needs the SEC.
And that leads me to the opportunity that may sound absurd, but just maybe unveils the one very powerful hidden lever the ACC could pull allowing for its survival. A lever that could allow the ACC to compete for Tier 1 status and become the third super conference that some (including Herbstreit) predict will be the future CFB model. The lever obviously being to eliminate the equal revenue share model. But equally as important to the ACC pulling that lever, it’s what the ACC could (would need to) do after pulling that lever that would allow it to capitalize on the opportunity. And that’s to aggressively pursue expansion of the most coveted brands, starting with Alabama. Its been suggested that adding members would trigger a renegotiation of the ESPN contract. What kind of contract could the ACC negotiate if it now had Bama and one or two other high profile schools? Between a new robust media contract and no (or minimal) revenue sharing restrictions, what could the ACC offer a school like Alabama? While Bama may be perfectly satisfied with its current situation, would they not be intrigued by the idea of making even more money, getting their “fair share” and no longer allowing the bottom feeders of the SEC to ride their coat tails, give itself a financial advantage over every other program, an opportunity to invite Auburn or other schools of their choice to join them, all while transforming the College Football landscape for the better?
Obviously there would be many challenges to pull off something of this magnitude. I won’t go down that rabbit hole as there are many and my post is already way too long. But if the ACC wants to survive, it needs to think bigger, stop being timid, and go out and make things happen. And if this is the most aggressive and most absurdly concocted strategy available, what better place to start?
That said, I can’t help but wonder if there might just be an opportunity out there that doesn’t require us to simply hope things shake out in our favor. And I’ve concocted one that may seem like a gigantic stretch, but maybe it’s not so absurd when more closely examined. Before explaining, let me propose several premises that probably must true in order for this idea to have any merrit:
1. As we know, unless something happens that allows top revenue generating schools in the ACC (such as FSU) to escape to the SEC and B1G, those schools are going to continue to be stuck in what’s becoming an increasingly financially disadvantaged situation, making it increasingly more difficult to compete. Essentially, FSU is trapped in the ACC and while there seems to be viable scenarios that could allow FSU to find a way out, none of them are within FSU’s control (other than finding the hundreds of millions of dollars it would take to buy its way out). And those who have the power to let FSU out, won’t be exercising that power as a favor to FSU. If it happens, it’ll simply be the byproduct of decisions that are made because the powers that be see a benefit in it for themselves and their respective organizations. In other words, FSU is it’s only advocate here and is essentially powerless in its pursuit to leave the ACC for greener pastures. FSU’s opportunity to escape hinges on the hope that what’s in its best interest happens to be aligned with the outcome resulting from decisions made by others.
2. the overwhelming value a conference offers its member institutions is monetary. There are other things like traditional matchups, path to the championship, prestige, etc.., but the real value a program derives from its conference is its revenue share. That’s becoming even more true in today’s CFB climate, where the revenue disparity between conferences is increasing significantly and rapidly. Its for this reason that teams like FSU are dissatisfied with their current situation (they contribute more than they get back). And it’s for the same reason that teams like Vandy are thrilled with their current situation (they get more than they put in).
3. With number 2 in mind, it’s reasonable to deduce that approximately half of the teams in revenue sharing conferences contribute more than the value they get in return. For reasons mentioned below, some schools are likely more accepting of this reality than others based on their individual circumstances, but the fact remains that these schools are being under-compensated in comparison to the value they add.
Alabama is an interesting test case. Clearly Bama is one of the schools that’s being under-compensated relative to the value it adds. It would be difficult to compare FSU’s situation to Bama’s due to the fact that Bama currently gets as much as (or more than) it would in any other conference, while FSU gets far less than it would if it were in the SEC or B1G. What the two schools have in common however, is that they both are one of the top revenue generating schools in their respective conference, and they both get less than their “fair share” of the revenue in return. Perhaps it’s safe to assume that Bama is satisfied with its current conference affiliation. After all, they get as much money as any school, and that amount is more than enough for them to compete at the highest level and win championships. But even so, they are similar to FSU in that they both are funding less valuable programs at their own expense. It’s just the consequence of being a top revenue generator in an equal revenue share model. In the end, just as the ACC needs FSU more than FSU needs the ACC, the SEC needs Bama more than Bama needs the SEC.
And that leads me to the opportunity that may sound absurd, but just maybe unveils the one very powerful hidden lever the ACC could pull allowing for its survival. A lever that could allow the ACC to compete for Tier 1 status and become the third super conference that some (including Herbstreit) predict will be the future CFB model. The lever obviously being to eliminate the equal revenue share model. But equally as important to the ACC pulling that lever, it’s what the ACC could (would need to) do after pulling that lever that would allow it to capitalize on the opportunity. And that’s to aggressively pursue expansion of the most coveted brands, starting with Alabama. Its been suggested that adding members would trigger a renegotiation of the ESPN contract. What kind of contract could the ACC negotiate if it now had Bama and one or two other high profile schools? Between a new robust media contract and no (or minimal) revenue sharing restrictions, what could the ACC offer a school like Alabama? While Bama may be perfectly satisfied with its current situation, would they not be intrigued by the idea of making even more money, getting their “fair share” and no longer allowing the bottom feeders of the SEC to ride their coat tails, give itself a financial advantage over every other program, an opportunity to invite Auburn or other schools of their choice to join them, all while transforming the College Football landscape for the better?
Obviously there would be many challenges to pull off something of this magnitude. I won’t go down that rabbit hole as there are many and my post is already way too long. But if the ACC wants to survive, it needs to think bigger, stop being timid, and go out and make things happen. And if this is the most aggressive and most absurdly concocted strategy available, what better place to start?
