--------
Examining college football realignment and the future of the ACC
By: Ira Schoffel - Floridastate.rivals.com
As uncertainty reigns supreme in college athletics right now, we'll try to sort through some of the madness and speculation with a new edition of the Warchant 3-2-1
We'll offer up three observations, two questions and one prediction about college sports realignment, the future for Florida State athletics, and possible outcomes for the Atlantic Coast Conference.
1 -- FSU has been preparing for this inevitability
While the aftershocks from USC and UCLA bolting from the Pac-12 to the Big Ten are still rumbling across the college football landscape, the only surprises to anyone who has been following this saga closely were the timing and the specifics.
Few could have predicted it would be the two Los Angeles schools joining the mostly Midwest conference, but I think most everyone involved -- from college administrators to media to observant fans -- knew at some point there would be more major reshuffling of schools. Especially once Oklahoma and Texas announced they were heading to the Southeastern Conference last summer.
Whether it was going to be one massive college sports league or two or three super-conferences, the transformation that had been whispered about for years was clearly about to become a reality. The only questions were when and how.
Florida State's administration was obviously of that mindset when the university changed the leadership of its athletics department late last year and started pouring much greater resources into the football program.
The first sign was speeding up the retirement of former A.D. David Coburn, who originally was expected to stay on through the end of the academic year. Coburn, of course, was put in place to help get the department's finances in order, which he did, but he was not necessarily the person you'd want in charge of a school looking to start investing heavily into athletics.
Enter Michael Alford, an administrator with a strong fundraising background and a desire to make big things happen. Since Alford took over in December, he has received the blessing and guidance of FSU's new top-level administration -- President Richard McCullough and Board of Trustees Chairman Peter Collins -- to increase staffing and spending almost across the board.
Some of the Seminoles' recent changes are obvious -- from the renovations of the weight room and locker room to the planned remaking of Doak Campbell Stadium -- while others are below the surface, including the hiring of many new additional support staff members and bumping up certain salaries to keep assistant coaches in place.
None of that happened by accident.
While some fans might still be in wait-and-see mode with Mike Norvell and his staff, understandably so, I believe FSU's new administration made a conscious decision to provide Norvell with every resource he needed. Not just to help him be successful in the short-term, but to make sure the program was in as strong a position as possible when the college landscape eventually shifted again.
Whether that happened in 2022, 2025 or beyond.
There is no denying Florida State's rich tradition of success in football and other sports. But the messy divorce between Jimbo Fisher and the Seminoles -- thanks in large part to a dysfunctional relationship between the athletics department, Fisher and Seminole Boosters -- left the school looking amateurish to some, and uncommitted to others.
I still think FSU would have been a very attractive property for other conferences even if the Seminoles didn't get their house in order. But now that they have -- with a university president, BOT chair, athletics director and new head of Seminole Boosters (Stephen Ponder) -- all working in unison, the Seminoles are much better-positioned for whatever the future holds.
2 -- Being proactive is good; panic is bad
As you can tell from all the wild media reports from around the country this week, college administrators are scrambling to figure out their next steps following the latest Big Ten act of aggression.
The Pac-12 is looking for new schools to poach. The Big 12 is doing the same. Those two leagues could end up merging. The ACC -- and the rest of the free world -- are courting Notre Dame. And several ACC schools are meeting with their attorneys to figure out if there's an economically viable path out of the long-term Grant of Rights.
The reality is that no one knows exactly how it's all going to play out. As we have heard from multiple people in recent days, "everything is on the table."
With so many variables at play, the challenge for administrators at FSU and others schools will be acting swiftly and being proactive while also avoiding the panic that helped put them in the difficult situations they face today.
If we travel back in time to 2013, when every school in the ACC signed off on the original Grant of Rights, that was clearly a situation where university presidents were extremely worried the conference was about to crumble. FSU and Clemson appeared to be flirting with the Big 12, while the Big Ten appeared to be eyeing North Carolina, Virginia and others. In the end, the presidents decided stability was more important than opportunity.
While some schools were intrigued by the possibility of making more money from a different league, the thought of other schools bailing first -- and potentially leaving them in a depleted conference -- felt too risky. FSU didn't want to be stuck in an ACC that had been raided by the Big Ten any more than UNC, Virginia and others liked the idea of the Seminoles and Clemson taking off.
That's when former Commissioner John Swofford, by using the promise of a potentially lucrative ACC television network as bait, convinced the presidents to sign away their media rights for 15 years. Swofford amazingly pulled off the same move about three years later to push through the final negotiations with ESPN to launch the network.
To get that deal done, he got the presidents to extend the Grant of Rights an additional nine years through 2036.
As we stand here today, just five years later, I’m sure most of the schools involved now have major regrets. Certainly all of the strongest brands do.
That is the challenge in these times. There's often a desire to act quickly, but being hasty can lead to pitfalls.
Could FSU and other schools have pushed back on the length of the Grant of Rights the first time or the second time? Could they have exerted some power instead of letting ESPN define the terms? It's impossible to know for sure whether it would have worked, but I can guarantee they all wish they had tried.
Instead, they're saddled with the longest contract in college sports with potentially the smallest annual payouts (of the Power Five conferences).
At some point -- whether it's this month or next year or the years after that -- FSU will almost assuredly have another huge decision to make. It could mean reaching major financial settlements to get out of the
Grant of Rights and it could mean uncertainty surrounding a future with new conference partners.
It likely will result in another conflict between opportunity and stability.
Here's hoping the school's new leadership can handle that moment better.
3 -- The Grant of Rights is a real issue
There has been a lot of speculation about which ACC schools might be heading where in the next round of realignment, and there is definitely a sense that some university leaders are willing to move by any means necessary.
But it's important to remember that it won't be easy.
When Texas and Oklahoma made their decision to bolt for the SEC, the Big 12's television contract was nearing completion. The same went for USC and UCLA, who waited until the tail end of their Pac-12 TV deal before looking around.
The ACC schools obviously are in a much different situation, with a Grant of Rights that reaches out another 14 years.
Would FSU, Clemson, North Carolina, Miami and others be able to buy their way out of that deal early through a financial settlement if they had offers from the SEC or Big Ten? Probably, but it would cost a fortune.
Would ESPN intervene at some point and try to grab some of these upper-tier teams to fortify the SEC super-conference it has helped build? Maybe. But it would mean dismantling a conference it already has invested heavily in (the ACC) and potentially helping competitor FOX Sports, which is partnered with the Big Ten.
There is a growing feeling throughout college athletics that the ACC, at least as we know it, will cease to exist long before its long-term TV deal is completed. But the unwinding could be very arduous and costly.
It has been widely reported in recent days that one way ACC Commissioner Jim Phillips could try to keep the ACC intact is by restructuring the way the conference divides its revenue.
Instead of each school receiving an equal share, the schools that generate the most revenue would receive larger payouts each year, while the others would divide the rest. This reportedly would be the ACC's strategy to entice Notre Dame to finally become a full-time member, and it also could appease some of the concerns from schools like Clemson and Florida State.
While I get that desperate times call for desperate measures, this seems extremely ill-fated.
For starters, this type of setup was the exact reason the old Big 12 crumbled; Nebraska, Texas A&M and others resented that Texas received preferential treatment and more revenue than everybody else. So I'm not sure how those rocky waters would be avoided here -- especially if Notre Dame waltzed in and immediately started getting more cash than everybody else.
Then there is the question of how you quantify which of the existing schools deserve the largest shares. Does Florida State receive less than Clemson because its football product has been sub-par in recent years? Or do the Seminoles' always-strong TV ratings make up for that? And what about a school like Wake Forest, which made last year's conference title game but doesn't move the needle at all when it comes to bringing in money.
I'm sure ESPN would come up with a formula for justifying all of this, but would it be one that everyone deems fair? No chance.
If the ACC does move forward with this approach, perhaps it could be a way to keep the conference together for a little while longer. And maybe it would even bring along the Irish, which would force ESPN to start paying the league substantially more each year.
But it's very difficult to see that as a long-term solution.
2 -- Do fans really want NFL 2.0 -- College Football Edition?
On Tuesday's Seminole Headlines, Jeff Cameron, Corey Clark and I talked about this topic of conference realignment for most of the two-hour show. And one of the things we did was look out into the future, to where all of this might be headed.
To a time when the SEC and Big Ten become college football's version of the AFC and NFC. When there could be 20 or 24 teams on each side, and perhaps the top 12 or 16 teams would be selected for the playoffs en route to determining a national champion.
The sport would look completely different. Many (more) traditional rivalries would fall by the wayside. Student-athletes would likely turn into professionals, with real salaries to go along with their NIL contracts. Individual games would become less significant because teams with 8-4 or 9-3 records would likely have a shot at the playoffs.
It would essentially be pro football on Saturdays.
Given all of the uncertainty facing schools like Florida State right now, I think many supporters would sign up for that model in a heartbeat if it meant securing an invitation to the party. It sure would beat the alternative of being left out.
But is an NFL model of college football really what fans want? Would it really be best for the long-term success of the sport?
We all know college football has changed dramatically since the 1980s, '90s and even 2000s. We understand that it's big business and that TV essentially gets to call all the shots. At the same time, we've already seen some lifelong fans lose interest in recruiting because of massive NIL deals and the idea that any school could lure a committed prospect away at the last minute with a substantial offer.
When you add that together with transient rosters due to the transfer portal -- plus these other elements that would come with a pro-style league -- are we really sure fans won't start checking out? That it won't diminish the entire experience and eventually start hurting revenue?
I don't know the answer to that. But I'm not sure the TV execs do, either.
One prediction -- ESPN will try to save ACC in the short-term
There are a lot of theories about what will happen next in this real-life game of Monopoly, and as I said, I'm not sure anyone knows exactly how it will all play out. But I feel pretty confident that the bigwigs at ESPN are going to pull as many levers as they can to keep the ACC afloat. At least for the time being.
If that means sweetening the pot for Notre Dame to join full-time, they'll do that. If it means helping the ACC put together deals to lure schools from other conferences, they'll do that.
I just don't see ESPN letting the ACC, which it has poured a lot of money into and for which it owns all the media rights for more than a decade, simply fall apart. At least right now. (If it looks like the Big Ten is going to land Notre Dame or some other big fish, then that might be a different story.)
That doesn't mean I think ESPN will definitely be successful with that approach. But I do think it will be their initial strategy.
And if that's what happens, it will be up to the individual schools to decide if they are going to go along with it, or keep searching for the nearest escape hatch.
Examining college football realignment and the future of the ACC
By: Ira Schoffel - Floridastate.rivals.com
As uncertainty reigns supreme in college athletics right now, we'll try to sort through some of the madness and speculation with a new edition of the Warchant 3-2-1
We'll offer up three observations, two questions and one prediction about college sports realignment, the future for Florida State athletics, and possible outcomes for the Atlantic Coast Conference.
Three Observations
1 -- FSU has been preparing for this inevitability
While the aftershocks from USC and UCLA bolting from the Pac-12 to the Big Ten are still rumbling across the college football landscape, the only surprises to anyone who has been following this saga closely were the timing and the specifics.
Few could have predicted it would be the two Los Angeles schools joining the mostly Midwest conference, but I think most everyone involved -- from college administrators to media to observant fans -- knew at some point there would be more major reshuffling of schools. Especially once Oklahoma and Texas announced they were heading to the Southeastern Conference last summer.
Whether it was going to be one massive college sports league or two or three super-conferences, the transformation that had been whispered about for years was clearly about to become a reality. The only questions were when and how.
Florida State's administration was obviously of that mindset when the university changed the leadership of its athletics department late last year and started pouring much greater resources into the football program.
The first sign was speeding up the retirement of former A.D. David Coburn, who originally was expected to stay on through the end of the academic year. Coburn, of course, was put in place to help get the department's finances in order, which he did, but he was not necessarily the person you'd want in charge of a school looking to start investing heavily into athletics.
Enter Michael Alford, an administrator with a strong fundraising background and a desire to make big things happen. Since Alford took over in December, he has received the blessing and guidance of FSU's new top-level administration -- President Richard McCullough and Board of Trustees Chairman Peter Collins -- to increase staffing and spending almost across the board.
Some of the Seminoles' recent changes are obvious -- from the renovations of the weight room and locker room to the planned remaking of Doak Campbell Stadium -- while others are below the surface, including the hiring of many new additional support staff members and bumping up certain salaries to keep assistant coaches in place.
None of that happened by accident.
While some fans might still be in wait-and-see mode with Mike Norvell and his staff, understandably so, I believe FSU's new administration made a conscious decision to provide Norvell with every resource he needed. Not just to help him be successful in the short-term, but to make sure the program was in as strong a position as possible when the college landscape eventually shifted again.
Whether that happened in 2022, 2025 or beyond.
There is no denying Florida State's rich tradition of success in football and other sports. But the messy divorce between Jimbo Fisher and the Seminoles -- thanks in large part to a dysfunctional relationship between the athletics department, Fisher and Seminole Boosters -- left the school looking amateurish to some, and uncommitted to others.
I still think FSU would have been a very attractive property for other conferences even if the Seminoles didn't get their house in order. But now that they have -- with a university president, BOT chair, athletics director and new head of Seminole Boosters (Stephen Ponder) -- all working in unison, the Seminoles are much better-positioned for whatever the future holds.
2 -- Being proactive is good; panic is bad
As you can tell from all the wild media reports from around the country this week, college administrators are scrambling to figure out their next steps following the latest Big Ten act of aggression.
The Pac-12 is looking for new schools to poach. The Big 12 is doing the same. Those two leagues could end up merging. The ACC -- and the rest of the free world -- are courting Notre Dame. And several ACC schools are meeting with their attorneys to figure out if there's an economically viable path out of the long-term Grant of Rights.
The reality is that no one knows exactly how it's all going to play out. As we have heard from multiple people in recent days, "everything is on the table."
With so many variables at play, the challenge for administrators at FSU and others schools will be acting swiftly and being proactive while also avoiding the panic that helped put them in the difficult situations they face today.
If we travel back in time to 2013, when every school in the ACC signed off on the original Grant of Rights, that was clearly a situation where university presidents were extremely worried the conference was about to crumble. FSU and Clemson appeared to be flirting with the Big 12, while the Big Ten appeared to be eyeing North Carolina, Virginia and others. In the end, the presidents decided stability was more important than opportunity.
While some schools were intrigued by the possibility of making more money from a different league, the thought of other schools bailing first -- and potentially leaving them in a depleted conference -- felt too risky. FSU didn't want to be stuck in an ACC that had been raided by the Big Ten any more than UNC, Virginia and others liked the idea of the Seminoles and Clemson taking off.
That's when former Commissioner John Swofford, by using the promise of a potentially lucrative ACC television network as bait, convinced the presidents to sign away their media rights for 15 years. Swofford amazingly pulled off the same move about three years later to push through the final negotiations with ESPN to launch the network.
To get that deal done, he got the presidents to extend the Grant of Rights an additional nine years through 2036.
As we stand here today, just five years later, I’m sure most of the schools involved now have major regrets. Certainly all of the strongest brands do.
That is the challenge in these times. There's often a desire to act quickly, but being hasty can lead to pitfalls.
Could FSU and other schools have pushed back on the length of the Grant of Rights the first time or the second time? Could they have exerted some power instead of letting ESPN define the terms? It's impossible to know for sure whether it would have worked, but I can guarantee they all wish they had tried.
Instead, they're saddled with the longest contract in college sports with potentially the smallest annual payouts (of the Power Five conferences).
At some point -- whether it's this month or next year or the years after that -- FSU will almost assuredly have another huge decision to make. It could mean reaching major financial settlements to get out of the
Grant of Rights and it could mean uncertainty surrounding a future with new conference partners.
It likely will result in another conflict between opportunity and stability.
Here's hoping the school's new leadership can handle that moment better.
3 -- The Grant of Rights is a real issue
There has been a lot of speculation about which ACC schools might be heading where in the next round of realignment, and there is definitely a sense that some university leaders are willing to move by any means necessary.
But it's important to remember that it won't be easy.
When Texas and Oklahoma made their decision to bolt for the SEC, the Big 12's television contract was nearing completion. The same went for USC and UCLA, who waited until the tail end of their Pac-12 TV deal before looking around.
The ACC schools obviously are in a much different situation, with a Grant of Rights that reaches out another 14 years.
Would FSU, Clemson, North Carolina, Miami and others be able to buy their way out of that deal early through a financial settlement if they had offers from the SEC or Big Ten? Probably, but it would cost a fortune.
Would ESPN intervene at some point and try to grab some of these upper-tier teams to fortify the SEC super-conference it has helped build? Maybe. But it would mean dismantling a conference it already has invested heavily in (the ACC) and potentially helping competitor FOX Sports, which is partnered with the Big Ten.
There is a growing feeling throughout college athletics that the ACC, at least as we know it, will cease to exist long before its long-term TV deal is completed. But the unwinding could be very arduous and costly.
Two Questions
1 -- Could changing the payout structure save the ACC?It has been widely reported in recent days that one way ACC Commissioner Jim Phillips could try to keep the ACC intact is by restructuring the way the conference divides its revenue.
Instead of each school receiving an equal share, the schools that generate the most revenue would receive larger payouts each year, while the others would divide the rest. This reportedly would be the ACC's strategy to entice Notre Dame to finally become a full-time member, and it also could appease some of the concerns from schools like Clemson and Florida State.
While I get that desperate times call for desperate measures, this seems extremely ill-fated.
For starters, this type of setup was the exact reason the old Big 12 crumbled; Nebraska, Texas A&M and others resented that Texas received preferential treatment and more revenue than everybody else. So I'm not sure how those rocky waters would be avoided here -- especially if Notre Dame waltzed in and immediately started getting more cash than everybody else.
Then there is the question of how you quantify which of the existing schools deserve the largest shares. Does Florida State receive less than Clemson because its football product has been sub-par in recent years? Or do the Seminoles' always-strong TV ratings make up for that? And what about a school like Wake Forest, which made last year's conference title game but doesn't move the needle at all when it comes to bringing in money.
I'm sure ESPN would come up with a formula for justifying all of this, but would it be one that everyone deems fair? No chance.
If the ACC does move forward with this approach, perhaps it could be a way to keep the conference together for a little while longer. And maybe it would even bring along the Irish, which would force ESPN to start paying the league substantially more each year.
But it's very difficult to see that as a long-term solution.
2 -- Do fans really want NFL 2.0 -- College Football Edition?
On Tuesday's Seminole Headlines, Jeff Cameron, Corey Clark and I talked about this topic of conference realignment for most of the two-hour show. And one of the things we did was look out into the future, to where all of this might be headed.
To a time when the SEC and Big Ten become college football's version of the AFC and NFC. When there could be 20 or 24 teams on each side, and perhaps the top 12 or 16 teams would be selected for the playoffs en route to determining a national champion.
The sport would look completely different. Many (more) traditional rivalries would fall by the wayside. Student-athletes would likely turn into professionals, with real salaries to go along with their NIL contracts. Individual games would become less significant because teams with 8-4 or 9-3 records would likely have a shot at the playoffs.
It would essentially be pro football on Saturdays.
Given all of the uncertainty facing schools like Florida State right now, I think many supporters would sign up for that model in a heartbeat if it meant securing an invitation to the party. It sure would beat the alternative of being left out.
But is an NFL model of college football really what fans want? Would it really be best for the long-term success of the sport?
We all know college football has changed dramatically since the 1980s, '90s and even 2000s. We understand that it's big business and that TV essentially gets to call all the shots. At the same time, we've already seen some lifelong fans lose interest in recruiting because of massive NIL deals and the idea that any school could lure a committed prospect away at the last minute with a substantial offer.
When you add that together with transient rosters due to the transfer portal -- plus these other elements that would come with a pro-style league -- are we really sure fans won't start checking out? That it won't diminish the entire experience and eventually start hurting revenue?
I don't know the answer to that. But I'm not sure the TV execs do, either.
One prediction -- ESPN will try to save ACC in the short-term
There are a lot of theories about what will happen next in this real-life game of Monopoly, and as I said, I'm not sure anyone knows exactly how it will all play out. But I feel pretty confident that the bigwigs at ESPN are going to pull as many levers as they can to keep the ACC afloat. At least for the time being.
If that means sweetening the pot for Notre Dame to join full-time, they'll do that. If it means helping the ACC put together deals to lure schools from other conferences, they'll do that.
I just don't see ESPN letting the ACC, which it has poured a lot of money into and for which it owns all the media rights for more than a decade, simply fall apart. At least right now. (If it looks like the Big Ten is going to land Notre Dame or some other big fish, then that might be a different story.)
That doesn't mean I think ESPN will definitely be successful with that approach. But I do think it will be their initial strategy.
And if that's what happens, it will be up to the individual schools to decide if they are going to go along with it, or keep searching for the nearest escape hatch.
