Would they sign a grant of rights that GIVES those away for nothing?

Could the ACC nevertheless collect extra money and pass it along to other members? Or perhaps only give the $$ to Clemson and FSU so they will stop whining?.

A report from Ralph Russo at the Associated Press, Stanford is trying hard to receive an invite from the ACC and might be willing to do so at a reduced revenue-sharing cost:
"Leaders from Stanford, California, Oregon State and Washington State spoke Thursday, and Stanford told its colleagues it had informed the ACC that it would be open to joining the conference at greatly reduced or even no media rights payout for several years, a person familiar with the discussions told The Associated Press."
"Whether getting Stanford and Northern California rival Cal at a cut rate will be enough to convince the necessary 12 of 15 ACC schools to vote to expand remains unknown."

THAT is what a $38-billion endowment can do.

If they can talk Notre Dame into coming along, we may find room for them both in the XII.

&ct=g

SMU is reportedly trying to do the same thing. Be a member of ACC for 3-4 years with no payout. Their endowment however is about like Baylor's. However if SMU has so few eyes that TCU would end the 110 year rivalry, it would seem a P4 would still not take them.

My guess is that it is going to happen, at least for SMU and Stanford. I've read that in the ACC agreement the media providers have to pay the ACC an equal share for the new members. So I see at least Stanford and SMU joining. SMU/Stanford will accept reduced payouts for some time with the extra media money going to existing ACC members.

Eventually SMU and Stanford (maybe more) will receive a full share. Maybe this keeps FSU and Clem happy for the time being.

Cal is in trouble financially and has much less flexibility than SMU and Stanford. I don't know about WSU and OSU.

Ultimately, I don't think this helps the ACC and the same problems remain. It is a lifeline for Stanford and gives SMU a chance at being in a P4 conf.

Was it just a rumor that the ACC was going to take up expansion again today?

If Stanford and ND knocked on the XII's door, they wouldn't even have two words out of their collective mouths and the XII would be jumping all over them. They would be a hell of a feather in the XII's cap.
Stanford, IMO, would still be a fish out of water in the XII, starting with the fact they don't place nearly the emphasis on football that the XII would expect. They would bring something academic to the conference though that the XII would not pass on. Baylor and Co. in the conference would look the other way on its left coast leanings just to get them in the conference.
ND would be less of a fish out of water as they are pretty much about football like the XII. Academically, they like to think they're the Stanford of the midwest, but they aren't. Yes, they have good grad rates for football players. Like Stanford does. Hell, for a long time ND even beat ucla and Cal in grad rates as well. And ucla and Berkeley are two schools that far outrank ND overall.
Ranking-wise, as a school, ND really isn't that much better than USC.
They are a football school that just happens to be a good school too. Like USC.
Stanford though, they ain't.

Trojan I'm not sure how your post just above is a response to anything I said or asked about. I am certain I have said nothing about thinking that ND and the XII would end up together. I have never thought that. So I'm pretty sure I never posted anything indicating I thought that. Also hypothetically I actually do not think the XII in the current climate with the current leadership would even entertain entering into a similar agreement with ND that the ACC has where they have the clout that Texas had here but as a part time member.


BTW I did see this morning that it appears the ACC rejected Cal and Stanford again. So that appears to still be going no where.

Sources: The potential additions of Cal, Stanford and SMU to the ACC are again under serious consideration by the ACC. A small group of ACC presidents met Wednesday morning to discuss financial models that would come with the additions.

— Pete Thamel (@PeteThamel) August 23, 2023

More meetings are expected this week. Just one vote is needed among the block of UNC, N.C. State, Clemson and FSU to get the three new schools in, assuming all the yes votes are in agreement with the financial arrangements. A realistic timeline for a decision is about one week.

— Pete Thamel (@PeteThamel) August 23, 2023

The concessions expected from SMU include a willingness to take no broadcast media revenue for the first seven years they are in the league. Stanford and Cal would both receive the same share, which will both be reduced but different in form than SMU's concessions.

— Pete Thamel (@PeteThamel) August 23, 2023

No income for 7 years? The ACC May fall apart before they would ever start getting a penny.

gobears20 said:

---

Sources: The potential additions of Cal, Stanford and SMU to the ACC are again under serious consideration by the ACC. A small group of ACC presidents met Wednesday morning to discuss financial models that would come with the additions.

— Pete Thamel (@PeteThamel) August 23, 2023

More meetings are expected this week. Just one vote is needed among the block of UNC, N.C. State, Clemson and FSU to get the three new schools in, assuming all the yes votes are in agreement with the financial arrangements. A realistic timeline for a decision is about one week.

— Pete Thamel (@PeteThamel) August 23, 2023

The concessions expected from SMU include a willingness to take no broadcast media revenue for the first seven years they are in the league. Stanford and Cal would both receive the same share, which will both be reduced but different in form than SMU's concessions.

— Pete Thamel (@PeteThamel) August 23, 2023

---

Gosh they are desperate. If they haven't reached out to the B12 and got a hard no, then they are not doing their due diligence. Potentially the B12 could offer Stanford and Cal a better deal. SMU would be out of luck with B12 I presume.

If the ACC takes Cal/Stan/SMU it may keep them together longer, but the big problem remains with FSU/Clemson and others with wandering eyes. At any point SEC or B10 could blow the ACC up, expanded or not.

ABC BEAR said:

---

If they can talk Notre Dame into coming along, we may find room for them both in the XII.

---

Everyone wants ND, except maybe the SEC, but the love is unrequited. They will remain independent.

PartyBear said:

---

Was it just a rumor that the ACC was going to take up expansion again today?

---

I thought there was some deadline on August 15 and obviously that has passed. But who knows?

PartyBear said:

---

No income for 7 years? The ACC May fall apart before they would ever start getting a penny.

---

7 years is a long time to go without $. Now, the ACC contracts go through 2036. That's 13 years from now. Would the ACC get additional $ in years 8 to 13 for the new teams?

If the new model is "Pay-to-Play" with conferences first charging admission fees, and next charging annual dues, then how long until CURRENT members of conferences (I won't mention Vandy!) are told that they will be pushed out by a school that is willing to pay to join!?

This could make NIL look like a kid's game.

PartyBear said:

---

SMU is reportedly trying to do the same thing. Be a member of ACC for 3-4 years with no payout. Their endowment however is about like Baylor's. However if SMU has so few eyes that TCU would end the 110 year rivalry, it would seem a P4 would still not take them.

---

The American's payout is about $7m per year. Not chump change, but SMU could probably find that or something close to that. SMU is already running an athletic department without big tv money.

P12's payout is about $21m per year. That's a lot harder to backfill for the P12 leftovers.

What's hilarious is given stanfords (and the PaC12 at large) strong socialist values, shouldn't they be willing to play for less since they have more?

PartyBear said:

---

Trojan I'm not sure how your post just above is a response to anything I said or asked about. I am certain I have said nothing about thinking that ND and the XII would end up together. I have never thought that. So I'm pretty sure I never posted anything indicating I thought that. Also hypothetically I actually do not think the XII in the current climate with the current leadership would even entertain entering into a similar agreement with ND that the ACC has where they have the clout that Texas had here but as a part time member.


BTW I did see this morning that it appears the ACC rejected Cal and Stanford again. So that appears to still be going no where.

---

That's because I wasn't speaking to you or your posts.
I was addressing the poster who was entertaining the thought that if Stanford could talk ND into coming along with, then that might be something to look at.

Hmm…in the corner of that post it says in response to PartyBear. Oh well.

What Twitter is saying is that Stanford, Cal and SMU will be announced tomorrow as new ACC members for what it's worth. SMU entering essentially in a state of agreed death penalty with no income for 7 years and Cal and Stanford for 7-10 million a year. Again for what all of that is worth. If true about SMU they may never see a penny as P4 member if the ACC collapses before then, they are likely right back in the conference they are in as of now.

On the other hand, interestingly enough, if true, at least for a while every former SWC member except Rice has found their way into a power conference post SWC.

GoodOleBaylorLine said:

---

PartyBear said:

---

SMU is reportedly trying to do the same thing. Be a member of ACC for 3-4 years with no payout. Their endowment however is about like Baylor's. However if SMU has so few eyes that TCU would end the 110 year rivalry, it would seem a P4 would still not take them.

---

The American's payout is about $7m per year. Not chump change, but SMU could probably find that or something close to that. SMU is already running an athletic department without big tv money.

P12's payout is about $21m per year. That's a lot harder to backfill for the P12 leftovers.

---

This is what is being lost in the headlines. Assuming that the PAC12 will collapse and thus would force CAL, Stanford, etc. elsewhere, those teams would only be giving up to maybe $10M a year if they joined the ACC for free vs what they would make in the AAC/MWC. While it's true that that amount is not nothing, it's not enough to be a game changer in the grand scheme of things.

PartyBear said:

---

Hmm…in the corner of that post it says in response to PartyBear. Oh well.

What Twitter is saying is that Stanford, Cal and SMU will be announced tomorrow as new ACC members for what it's worth. SMU entering essentially in a state of agreed death penalty with no income for 7 years and Cal and Stanford for 7-10 million a year. Again for what all of that is worth. If true about SMU they may never see a penny as P4 member if the ACC collapses before then, they are likely right back in the conference they are in as of now.

On the other hand, interestingly enough, if true, at least for a while every former SWC member except Rice has found their way into a power conference post SWC.

---

Did it get announced?

Looks like it still is not happening.

This is like paying someone to be your prom date.

But you still have to get them home by 9.

BY may be jumping the shark. According to an SI report and a SF Chronicle report today, the XII may just take the remaining 4 PAC schools if the ACC still isn't getting it together to invite Cal and Stanford. I can understand the Cal and Stanford part (big metro area and high academics etc) but going to 20 right now with the rest of the PAC makes no sense. For one thing if true, the old PAC schools will have as many votes about conference matters as the legacy 8 and the travel for most of the conference to get to OrState and WSU will be hell and expensive.

PartyBear said:

---

BY may be jumping the shark. According to an SI report and a SF Chronicle report today, the XII may just take the remaining 4 PAC schools if the ACC still isn't getting it together to invite Cal and Stanford. I can understand the Cal and Stanford part (big metro area and high academics etc) but going to 20 right now with the rest of the PAC makes no sense. For one thing if true, the old PAC schools will have as many votes about conference matters as the legacy 8 and the travel for most of the conference to get to OrState and WSU will be hell and expensive.

---

It would be insane if the PAC 12 collapses and every single member ends up in a P4. Who would have thought?

Aberzombie1892 said:

---

PartyBear said:

---

BY may be jumping the shark. According to an SI report and a SF Chronicle report today, the XII may just take the remaining 4 PAC schools if the ACC still isn't getting it together to invite Cal and Stanford. I can understand the Cal and Stanford part (big metro area and high academics etc) but going to 20 right now with the rest of the PAC makes no sense. For one thing if true, the old PAC schools will have as many votes about conference matters as the legacy 8 and the travel for most of the conference to get to OrState and WSU will be hell and expensive.

---

It would be insane if the PAC 12 collapses and every single member ends up in a P4. Who would have thought?

---

Yeah I was thinking the same. The funny thing is, they'd essentially be getting the same amount of money they turned down in the original ESPN offer. I know we have a Fox component, but from a media perspective, it's a wash.

One reason ACC considering Stanford, Cal & SMU is ESPN's media rights deal w/ACC allows ESPN to renegotiate (i.e. reduce revenue) if league drops below 15 members, sources told @ActionNetworkHQ. With potential future departures of FSU, Clemson & possibly others, ACC considering…

— Brett McMurphy (@Brett_McMurphy) August 28, 2023

boognish_bear said:

---

One reason ACC considering Stanford, Cal & SMU is ESPN's media rights deal w/ACC allows ESPN to renegotiate (i.e. reduce revenue) if league drops below 15 members, sources told @ActionNetworkHQ. With potential future departures of FSU, Clemson & possibly others, ACC considering…

— Brett McMurphy (@Brett_McMurphy) August 28, 2023

---

This was the missing piece. At this point, I would be surprised if the ACC doesn't add them.

SOURCES: I’m hearing SMU will also give opposing teams a 7-point lead to start every conference game for the first 5 years and then after year five, it will reduce to a 3-point lead for the following 10 years https://t.co/13L3otATxU

— Trey Smith (@imtreysmith) August 28, 2023

Why would they add SMU instead of Memphis or USF, I would think one of those two are the strongest G5 programs currently with largest fanbases, Tulane is on the upswing lately to but small private school like SMU.

Why not UTSA? Of course what makes SMU a candidate is the offer to do it for free for 7 seasons. That is a long time.

Sources: The ACC presidents meeting scheduled for tonight has been postponed. The decision to postpone came because the University of North Carolina had an active shooter on campus today. The movement of the meeting is out of respect for everyone at UNC.

— Pete Thamel (@PeteThamel) August 28, 2023

Allegedly only FSU and Clemson are no votes on expansion at this point. So again allegedly I say, the expansion will pass when voted on next.

Fyi ..if this SMU deal happens. Technically they wouldn't be foregoing all revenue. They still get the ACC bowl payout...CFB payouts..and NCAA tournament units.

PartyBear said:

---

Allegedly only FSU and Clemson are no votes on expansion at this point. So again allegedly I say, the expansion will pass when voted on next.

---

So UNC and NC State switched to yes?! My guess is those that stay no votes will have a legal out of the grant of rights. Maybe UNC stays no and NC state changes to yes but has an agreement UNC will take they with them when they get the Power 2 invite.