If any of us were in charge of athletics at Florida State or Clemson, even though we happened to be holding a poker hand that roughly is the equivalent of a “jack high”, of course the obvious course at this point in the history of the Atlantic Coast Conference would be to bluff. The stakes may be high, in a sense, but there is nothing to lose.
The Seminoles and Tigers and the others agitating for changes to how the ACC operates have data to support the position that they are the ones generating the most football money for the league. That gives them a good argument, but only a smidge of leverage. Why not put that onto the table and see if it can lead to a greater share of the revenue pot?
Just don’t buy the fiction that any of this means the ACC will be breaking up anytime soon.
They're staging their annual spring meetings this week in Florida. They'll be staging them again next May.
The members of the ACC all signed grant-of-rights agreements in 2016, at the formation of the ACC Network. Those contracts have a term of 20 years, meaning they expire in 2036, well past the league’s 80th birthday. They were signed willingly, with each member well aware of what the potential drawbacks could be, because there were advantages in having their own national TV platform and the security it would be in operation for years.
MORE: Ranking the ACC QB situations after spring practice
Now they want out? Because someone in the next neighborhood got richer? To go where? And do what?
To join another conference where they’ll make the kind of money Vanderbilt and Northwestern soon will?
As long as everyone’s engaging in fantasy, how about we all sit around and chat about what each of us would buy first after winning the MegaMillions?
The ACC is not going anywhere, except maybe to another Final Four if things keep moving as they are for Duke men’s basketball.
Here’s why:
1. Nowhere to go. If Clemson or Florida State or all seven programs reporter Brett McMurphy indicated were looking into whether they could escape the grant-of-rights deal were to succeed, there is no conference better situated to house them.
Clemson, FSU, Miami, UNC, NC State, Virginia & Virginia Tech are “The Magnificent 7” ACC schools, sources told @ActionNetworkHQ. These schools, @RossDellenger reported, have met in past several months, w/lawyers examining grant-of-rights to determine just how unbreakable it is.…
— Brett McMurphy (@Brett_McMurphy) May 15, 2023
The SEC? What would the Tigers or Seminoles do for the SEC, which already has one program in South Carolina and one in Florida?
For all the SEC members to agree to more expansion, there would have to be reason to expect it would mean significantly greater revenues than the new deal will produce. And it would likely have to be a monstrous leap, given the Gamecocks and Gators would be sacrificing the SEC-exclusive hold they now have on their states.
North Carolina is the one program that would have significant value to another league. They are in one of the fastest-growing markets and have a significant fan base, although less penetration in football than men’s basketball. It can’t be fun to see the money for the SEC and Big Ten escalating so far beyond the ACC’s reach. The Tar Heels knew the ACC was behind, however, and elected to stay there when they signed the grant-of-rights.
2. No one to pay them. Clemson and Florida State are worth, say, $17 million annually under this ESPN contract. There’s no good reason the network – currently in another round of cost-cutting – would be willing to pay them nearly three times that merely for changing leagues. Each program has a significant following, but neither is in a massive media market. A 2022 study by consultant TJ Altimore didn't place either among 16 largest college football fan bases.
ESPN is getting a nice deal now, and it’s made a significant investment in the ACC Network. It would be dreadful business to be the catalyst for destruction of its own venture.
MORE: Why CFP dates for 2024 season are doomed to fail
If the seven schools were able to go so far as destroying the ACC and attempting to form a new conference with the opportunity to go onto the open market, they certainly would be entering an environment offering greater rights fees than generally were available in 2016.
The market for live sports has continued to escalate as streaming services have become willing to bid for rights, with Apple TV+ now the primary home of Major League Soccer telecasts, Amazon Prime holding a significant deal with the NFL and Peacock about to begin showing some Big Ten football and basketball games.
The “post-apocalyptic ACC” likely wouldn’t encounter any interest from ESPN, though, not after the schools involved escaped their long-term arrangement and wrecked the ACC Network. There are other networks out there, but the Pac-12’s experience in this market has shown it’s not as easy as saying, “Call me” and expecting big-dollar network offers.
3. No way to get out, anyway. If a grant-of-rights agreement were so easy to escape, you think Texas and Oklahoma still would be competing in the Big 12? Their exfiltration to the SEC was announced in the summer of 2021. They won’t be playing SEC football games until the fall of 2024. That’s three years of visiting Lubbock instead of Tuscaloosa. Why didn’t the Sooners and Longhorns bolt sooner? Because they wanted to get paid.
The grant-of-rights agreements don’t prevent a conference member from competing in another league or as an independent; if that happens, though, all broadcast rights revenue earned is the property of the conference. So the Horns could have played in the SEC in 2022, ’23 and ’24, but whatever TV money they earned would have belonged to the Big 12.
MORE: SN"s post-spring Top 25
Now, a three-year wait is much shorter than an ACC member would face if, indeed, one could find another home. So the only option at that point would be legal action. And no doubt any league school that wants to challenge the grant-of-rights could find a law firm to take the case.
That school most likely would lose, though.
And then they’d also be out millions in legal fees.