Breaking: ACC Presidents and Chancellors have voted to extend invitations to SMU, Cal and Stanford to push the league to 18 teams, sources told @PeteThamel. pic.twitter.com/nmS9yJBhFX

— ESPN (@espn) September 1, 2023

What a bunch of losers

If this actually does happen, the Pac 4 will be reduced to the Pac 2. One has to feel for Wazzou & OSU. They aren't very relevant & nobody wants them.

It has happened. It is official. Congrats to all 3 especially our former SWC mate for getting back into a power conference after almost 30 years. I sense it will be a short lived experience though for SMU and maybe a short reprieve from demotion for Cal and Stanford.

This round of realignment, which I count as the same round that began 2 years ago with Texas and OU leaving the XII, has actually seen a net gain of 3 power conference schools actually and not a whittling down which is counterintuitive to what people think realignment does. BYU, UC, UCF, UH and SMU get promotions and WSU and OrSU are casualties.

You have to jump into a lifeboat if the ship is sinking. SMU is paying dearly, but giving itself a chance at relevance for the next round of realignment. I wonder who flipped in the ACC vote?

BearFan33 said:

---

You have to jump into a lifeboat if the ship is sinking. SMU is paying dearly, but giving itself a chance at relevance for the next round of realignment. I wonder who flipped in the ACC vote?

---

NC State flipped.

This is devastating news on the long-term recruiting front. Despite what some may believe, giving access to Texas recruits to Arizona, Arizona State, Utah, and Colorado along with elevating SMU and Houston to power conference status does not magically create more recruits in the state of Texas for those programs to add to their recruiting classes. These changes will come at a cost.

Aberzombie1892 said:

---

This is devastating news on the long-term recruiting front. Despite what some may believe, giving access to Texas recruits to Arizona, Arizona State, Utah, and Colorado along with elevating SMU and Houston to power conference status does not magically create more recruits in the state of Texas for those programs to add to their recruiting classes. These changes will come at a cost.

---

First thing I thought also

They did what they had to do and their deep-pocketed boosters will help offset the temporary financial hamstringing.

The opposite of losing.

historian said:

---

If this actually does happen, the Pac 4 will be reduced to the Pac 2. One has to feel for Wazzou & OSU. They aren't very relevant & nobody wants them.

---

I'd rather have wazzu and osu rather than cal or Stanford

SMU will not receive any media rights revenue for 1st 7 years, while Stanford & Cal will receive reduced shares, sources said

They might be a better cultural fit but they are not competitive athletically and they do not do anything for the conference financially. I agree with the sentiment but I don't think it's a good idea from the big picture perspective.

What that really meant is I would have zero use for Stanford or cal.

Also I suspect the big daddies in the ACC are now just one foot closer to the door.

gobears20 said:

---

SMU will not receive any media rights revenue for 1st 7 years, while Stanford & Cal will receive reduced shares, sources said

---

I believe it's actually 9 years in the final agreement (but that's just from sources).

Excellent news. This will hasten the demise of the ACC. This does nothing to appease to Clemson, FSU and to a lesser extent UNC. There is simply no way that this conference makes sense in any meaningful sense of the term beyond academics and Clemson and FSU aren't there for the academics.

If anything, I suspect Clemson and FSU are furious at Notre Dame for pushing this. This is a clear play by ND to remain football independent.

Yes, opening up the recruiting grounds sucks, but this will be temporary until the next conference shakeout and the B12 just got a strogner shot at remaining in the game at the next major shift.

Aberzombie1892 said:

---

This is devastating news on the long-term recruiting front. Despite what some may believe, giving access to Texas recruits to Arizona, Arizona State, Utah, and Colorado along with elevating SMU and Houston to power conference status does not magically create more recruits in the state of Texas for those programs to add to their recruiting classes. These changes will come at a cost.

---

It's not "devastating". Quite a hyperbole.

Probably so

ACC won't last long like this.

Happy for SMU, though. However, what happens to them in 7 years when the ACC is trying to negotiate a new deal? Given they don't take any money now because their brand doesn't demand it, doesn't that mean they'll drag down the ACC in the future as well?

Bear8084 said:

---

Aberzombie1892 said:

---

This is devastating news on the long-term recruiting front. Despite what some may believe, giving access to Texas recruits to Arizona, Arizona State, Utah, and Colorado along with elevating SMU and Houston to power conference status does not magically create more recruits in the state of Texas for those programs to add to their recruiting classes. These changes will come at a cost.

---

It's not "devastating". Quite a hyperbole.

---

Hyperbole is the perfect word to describe that.
Competition was always going to increase. Things are never going to stay the same.

Good for SMU, but I'm not worried about them at all.
SMU's problem is that they've consistently been 10-15 years behind doing what they should be doing to get ahead.
What I mean by that is whatever they were doing in 2018......... they should have been doing from 2005-10. Their marketing in the city of Dallas has always been garbage.

SMU is in the ACC today....but will the ACC be the "ACC" in 5 years when Clemson, FSU, and Miami all leave?

historian said:

---

If this actually does happen, the Pac 4 will be reduced to the Pac 2. One has to feel for Wazzou & OSU. They aren't very relevant & nobody wants them.

---

You are absolutely right.

But I hope they end up in the Mountain West and help make that conference better.

I know that I will personally tune in for a late night west coast game between Wash St. and Boise St.

Redbrickbear said:

---

historian said:

---

If this actually does happen, the Pac 4 will be reduced to the Pac 2. One has to feel for Wazzou & OSU. They aren't very relevant & nobody wants them.

---

You are absolutely right.

But I hope they end up in the Mountain West and help make that conference better.

I know that I will personally tune in for a late night west coast game between Wash St. and Boise St.

---

Don't sleep on Oregon State.

I've read that this move was to preserve the ACC without having to renegotiate the TV deal should FSU, Clem and others leave. They have to remain with a certain number of members or they have to renegotiate. With that said, I expect at least 2 of their biggest brands to leave early and PAC like chaos to ensue. Will some members take a B12 life boat (stability, equality), or will the ACC stay together? I think it stays together and we have the big 2 and little 2 conferences.

BearFan33 said:

---

I've read that this move was to preserve the ACC without having to renegotiate the TV deal should FSU, Clem and others leave. They have to remain with a certain number of members or they have to renegotiate. With that said, I expect at least 2 of their biggest brands to leave early and PAC like chaos to ensue. Will some members take a B12 life boat (stability, equality), or will the ACC stay together? I think it stays together and we have the big 2 and little 2 conferences.

---

I totally agree with you on the Big 2 / Little 2 point. BY has already done an amazing job. However, he'll need to work hard to make sure that doesn't happen.

That's primarily why I'm hoping FSU and Clemson can stay happy for a while.

However, if FSU and Clemson bolt, then I could see Calford also bolting. It just doesn't make sense to fly all the way across the country for virtually every road game to play Duke in football.

I keep reading the language in the GOR uses the terms ' on campus games'. Meaning maybe there's some wiggle room to get out if a school left and played it's games at neutral sites they wouldn't owe?

I'm no where a legal expert so who knows. My prediction is the Irate 3 become unbearable to live with and there is a negotiated exit.

Method Man said:

---

Bear8084 said:

---

Aberzombie1892 said:

---

This is devastating news on the long-term recruiting front. Despite what some may believe, giving access to Texas recruits to Arizona, Arizona State, Utah, and Colorado along with elevating SMU and Houston to power conference status does not magically create more recruits in the state of Texas for those programs to add to their recruiting classes. These changes will come at a cost.

---

It's not "devastating". Quite a hyperbole.

---

Hyperbole is the perfect word to describe that.
Competition was always going to increase. Things are never going to stay the same.

Good for SMU, but I'm not worried about them at all.
SMU's problem is that they've consistently been 10-15 years behind doing what they should be doing to get ahead.
What I mean by that is whatever they were doing in 2018......... they should have been doing from 2005-10. Their marketing in the city of Dallas has always been garbage.

SMU is in the ACC today....but will the ACC be the "ACC" in 5 years when Clemson, FSU, and Miami all leave?

---

People can be free to disagree, but the following items are true:

1. Quantity of power conference teams - Texas will have 7 power conference teams from 2024-on, and no other state has more than 4 (FL/NC/CA).

2. Brands - The top brands in the region will no longer even semi-regularly play legacy Big 12 teams from 2024-on (UT/OU/A&M).

3. Big 12 Expansion - Big 12 expansion will give access to Texas recruiting to 4 already existing power conference teams that have not recently had access to Texas recruiting, and those programs will be looking to replace their California recruiting efforts with Texas recruiting efforts as they will no longer play California power teams.

4. Houston and Dallas - Between ACC and Big 12 expansion, the two largest cities in the state of Texas will have now have power conference teams located in those cities when they previously did not have power conference teams located there (Fort Worth is near Dallas, but it's not in Dallas).

5. ACC expansion - ACC teams will now play in Dallas. While they probably won't mine Texas, all it takes is a couple of commitments here and there to make a difference to the recruiting efforts of the legacy Big 12 teams.

It's not a big deal at all.

Aberzombie1892 said:

---

Method Man said:

---

Bear8084 said:

---

Aberzombie1892 said:

---

This is devastating news on the long-term recruiting front. Despite what some may believe, giving access to Texas recruits to Arizona, Arizona State, Utah, and Colorado along with elevating SMU and Houston to power conference status does not magically create more recruits in the state of Texas for those programs to add to their recruiting classes. These changes will come at a cost.

---

It's not "devastating". Quite a hyperbole.

---

Hyperbole is the perfect word to describe that.
Competition was always going to increase. Things are never going to stay the same.

Good for SMU, but I'm not worried about them at all.
SMU's problem is that they've consistently been 10-15 years behind doing what they should be doing to get ahead.
What I mean by that is whatever they were doing in 2018......... they should have been doing from 2005-10. Their marketing in the city of Dallas has always been garbage.

SMU is in the ACC today....but will the ACC be the "ACC" in 5 years when Clemson, FSU, and Miami all leave?

---

People can be free to disagree, but the following items are true:

1. Quantity of power conference teams - Texas will have 7 power conference teams from 2024-on, and no other state has more than 4 (FL/NC/CA).

2. Brands - The top brands in the region will no longer even semi-regularly play legacy Big 12 teams from 2024-on (UT/OU/A&M).

3. Big 12 Expansion - Big 12 expansion will give access to Texas recruiting to 4 already existing power conference teams that have not recently had access to Texas recruiting, and those programs will be looking to replace their California recruiting efforts with Texas recruiting efforts as they will no longer play California power teams.

4. Houston and Dallas - Between ACC and Big 12 expansion, the two largest cities in the state of Texas will have now have power conference teams located in those cities when they previously did not have power conference teams located there (Fort Worth is near Dallas, but it's not in Dallas).

5. ACC expansion - ACC teams will now play in Dallas. While they probably won't mine Texas, all it takes is a couple of commitments here and there to make a difference to the recruiting efforts of the legacy Big 12 teams.

It's not a big deal at all.

---

We're dooooooooomed....

Not saying it isn't big, it is, but it's not devastating.

Abercrombie. You have been a doomsdayer for the XII and or Baylor all along. Up until the past few months you were talking how the new XII would collapse in the face of the strong and lucrative Pac for example. Now that the opposite has occurred the sky is still falling for Baylor because the XII is now large, strong, diverse, healthy and SMU is now in the ACC for free.

The even newer version of the XII is not bad at all for Baylor or any other Texas member or any member for that matter, it is extremely good in fact. No Texas school should should be scared or intimidated by SMU being in the ACC. You need to knock off your every thing is terrible for Baylor schtick.

Cal announces it will not receive full ACC revenue shares until its 10th year in league: 2033. Stanford & SMU in same situation

— Brett McMurphy (@Brett_McMurphy) September 1, 2023

gobears20 said:

---

Cal announces it will not receive full ACC revenue shares until its 10th year in league: 2033. Stanford & SMU in same situation

— Brett McMurphy (@Brett_McMurphy) September 1, 2023

---

Talk about pay to play!

Bear8084 said:

---

Aberzombie1892 said:

---

Method Man said:

---

Bear8084 said:

---

Aberzombie1892 said:

---

This is devastating news on the long-term recruiting front. Despite what some may believe, giving access to Texas recruits to Arizona, Arizona State, Utah, and Colorado along with elevating SMU and Houston to power conference status does not magically create more recruits in the state of Texas for those programs to add to their recruiting classes. These changes will come at a cost.

---

It's not "devastating". Quite a hyperbole.

---

Hyperbole is the perfect word to describe that.
Competition was always going to increase. Things are never going to stay the same.

Good for SMU, but I'm not worried about them at all.
SMU's problem is that they've consistently been 10-15 years behind doing what they should be doing to get ahead.
What I mean by that is whatever they were doing in 2018......... they should have been doing from 2005-10. Their marketing in the city of Dallas has always been garbage.

SMU is in the ACC today....but will the ACC be the "ACC" in 5 years when Clemson, FSU, and Miami all leave?

---

People can be free to disagree, but the following items are true:

1. Quantity of power conference teams - Texas will have 7 power conference teams from 2024-on, and no other state has more than 4 (FL/NC/CA).

2. Brands - The top brands in the region will no longer even semi-regularly play legacy Big 12 teams from 2024-on (UT/OU/A&M).

3. Big 12 Expansion - Big 12 expansion will give access to Texas recruiting to 4 already existing power conference teams that have not recently had access to Texas recruiting, and those programs will be looking to replace their California recruiting efforts with Texas recruiting efforts as they will no longer play California power teams.

4. Houston and Dallas - Between ACC and Big 12 expansion, the two largest cities in the state of Texas will have now have power conference teams located in those cities when they previously did not have power conference teams located there (Fort Worth is near Dallas, but it's not in Dallas).

5. ACC expansion - ACC teams will now play in Dallas. While they probably won't mine Texas, all it takes is a couple of commitments here and there to make a difference to the recruiting efforts of the legacy Big 12 teams.

It's not a big deal at all.

---

We're dooooooooomed....

---

I look forward to the expansion of all of the "WhY cAn'T wE rEcRuIt BeTtEr?" posts considering how many of those we get now.

Oh wow, even by crazy college re-alignment standards this seems extra crazy.

There's no way FSU and Clemson are happy about this. I guess this stops the ACC bleeding for a while, but when those two inevitably bolt...you think the NC States and Louisvilles and Dukes of the world are gonna want to stick it out in a league with Georgia Tech, SMU, and Cal?! Not happening.

BY will pick that league to pieces when the time comes!

If what I read is true, I admire ACC leadership for doing what is in the interest of the conference as a whole (short term as it may be). The B12 catered to UT for too long and it nearly drove the conference off a cliff. The ACC sensing that FSU, clemson and perhaps others are going to bolt as soon as possible is solidifying itself now as best it can. They don't need to cater to those that are leaving.

So is Cal going to come to Texas to play in anything? I don't know what the other states are that their legislature has banned paying travel expenses. Or has this been rescinded? SMU 's donors really have to step up. That travel for them is a nightmare. They have nothing close.

canoso said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

historian said:

---

If this actually does happen, the Pac 4 will be reduced to the Pac 2. One has to feel for Wazzou & OSU. They aren't very relevant & nobody wants them.

---

You are absolutely right.

But I hope they end up in the Mountain West and help make that conference better.

I know that I will personally tune in for a late night west coast game between Wash St. and Boise St.

---

Don't sleep on Oregon State.

---

Interesting side note: Baylor MBB plays Oregon State in November. It's not football but MBB is big nationally.

BearFan33 said:

---

If what I read is true, I admire ACC leadership for doing what is in the interest of the conference as a whole (short term as it may be). The B12 catered to UT for too long and it nearly drove the conference off a cliff. The ACC sensing that FSU, clemson and perhaps others are going to bolt as soon as possible is solidifying itself now as best it can. They don't need to cater to those that are leaving.

---

I think you are misreading the situation.

This move is primarily in the interest of Notre Dame. Notre Dame needs as many Power conferences as possible to remain independent in football. If Stanford falls from the ranks of P4, that is the loss of an annual game on the schedule. ND can't afford to play more ACC games, with USC IN b10, ND is close to being B10 adjacent. That leaves SEC and B12 opponents which ND typically doesn't chase. This is a defensive move by ND to keep Stanford as a power 4 school. The lesser ACC schools went along with it because of the academic affiliation and a misguided hope to keep the ACC together. Note that The three newcomers don't get full media shares until 2033 when they'll be on the cusp of renegotiating a contract.

This does nothing for Clemson, FSU and UNC. FSU in particular needs Sec/B10 type cash and I don't think this will plcate them. My predication is that by next summer the ACC implodes. We'll be down to a P3 for the balance of this round of TV contracts.

They might not have catered to FSU and Clemson on this move, but they just catered to ND.