Virginia Newspaper column: B1G talking with UVA and UNC | Page 2 | The Platinum Board

Virginia Newspaper column: B1G talking with UVA and UNC

Install the app
How to install the app on iOS

Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.

Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.

Welcome to tPB!

Welcome to The Platinum Board. We are a Nebraska Husker news source and fan community.

Sign Up Now!
  • Welcome to The Platinum Board! We are a Nebraska Cornhuskers news source and community. Please click "Log In" or "Register" above to gain access to the forums.

Virginia Newspaper column: B1G talking with UVA and UNC

I think that's pretty close on what the divisions in a 24 team conference would look like, but I don't think UM, tOSU and PSU would all agree to be in the same division. you'd also be setting FSU up to dominate their division

I know it's personal preference, but the midwest division sounds boring as shit
Midwest is boring as shit

That’s why I’ve always hoped we would end up in some kind of West Coast division
 
I still don't understand how the ACC GOR issue gets fixed......

The schools in your Northeast consider themselves the original midwest. Maybe your midwest gets to be called Plains or Central or something. Based on the AAU thing, I'd think Miami might have an edge over FSU.
I just assume that if the Big Ten, Fox, and the ACC teams want to do this, they’ll figure out a way
 

Cunningham wants everybody to know UNC isn’t leaving the ACC: Really?​

11ea36b0865ce042d7c650577b016227


The Big Ten’s interest in UVA and North Carolina is more real than anybody is letting on publicly, which makes a News & Observer column telling us that UNC AD Bubba Cunningham told his staff that his school isn’t leaving the ACC all the more interesting.
“When the news cycle starts spinning like this, I have the obligation to let our staff know what I know and reassure them we’re going to be OK, that I value what they do, that the university values what they do. That’s my role, to reassure them that things are going to be fine,” Cunningham was quoted as saying in the column.
Hmmm.
The backstory here is the published reports from Thursday that had Big Ten chancellors authorizing Tony Petitti to talk with four schools to gauge interest in joining the league, naming two – Washington and Oregon – that have since accepted invites.
The other two schools were not named in the published reports, but there was speculation about interest in UVA and UNC, which have been linked to possible Big Ten expansion efforts in the past year.
I’m hearing more than speculation. Folks that I know who would know are saying that the ball is essentially in the court of Virginia and Carolina, and that the leverage being used is, if UVA and UNC don’t want in, the conference will move on to add Stanford and Cal, who are in obvious need of a new home with the implosion of the Pac-12.
Assuming that what the people that I know who would know aren’t being misled, we would seem to be at a loggerheads here.
With what I’ve been led to believe is going on, it’s hard to reconcile that with how over the top Cunningham has been in distancing Carolina from any interest in bolting from the ACC, including going on a Raleigh radio station on Thursday to blast higher-ups at Florida State for going public with their desire to leave the ACC.
And then, there’s this column, which feels, like the radio interview, like a plant.
Maybe I’m just reading things into what Cunningham has been saying, but it seems to me that if he is playing the PR game, it’s about trying to gain some leverage on his side with the Big Ten, which low-balled Washington and Oregon with their invites this week.
Those two schools will only get partial media-rights shares, basically a little more than what they’d been getting from the Pac-12, through the end of the decade.
If I’m UNC, or UVA, whose leaders have been, quite noticeably, silent the past few days, I’m not leaving the ACC for anything less than a full Big Ten share.
Which might put into context this other Bubba Cunningham quote from the News & Observer column.
“We have a $137 million budget. We have 285 employees. Eight hundred student-athletes. We’re going to host 200 events this year. Over a million people are going to come to our games. We’re in good shape,” Cunningham said.
You can read that two ways – to support the notion that, we’re not leaving, or to buttress the point, if you want us, show me the money.
Would there be any chance at getting Miami with UNC?
 
357th in college football
yes - kind of like Maryland and Rutgers

I think Fox and the B1G have an arrangement to let Fox have brands as long as the B1G can balance with academics
 
Would there be any chance at getting Miami with UNC?
the real issue is, does the ACC blow up?

I don't think it will., at least not for a few years. Too much money and risk. It also could create an immediate windfall for ESPN, which Fox probably doesn't want.

But we'll know in a week, because the deadline to pull out for the 2024 season is 8/15. If it doesn't happen this ACC conjecture could be an annual event for several years. But people will keep stirring the pot for the coming week to see if something happens.

I think the most probable outcome is that the B1G invites Cal and Stanford sometime soon after 8/15. Current Pac-12 deal is $250M a year. My guess is that they get offered about $25M a year with full membership starting in the next deal. Could get up to Oregon Washington level' through the 2024-30 deal depending how much Stanford thinks it can get as an independent (i.e., if it is more than $25M) But of course, this is all a gut feeling.
 
What if instead of Stanford and Cal, the Big 10 adds: KU and Miami

A: USC, UCLA, Washington, KU, Oregon, Nebraska

B: Wisconsin, Cockeye, Minnesota, NW, Ohio St, Michigan

C: PSU, Illinois, Indiana, Purdue, Michigan St, Clemson

D: Miami, UNC, FSU, Maryland, Rutgers, Virginia

This would give you 4 divisions with modern and historic blue bloods in each division.
 
I'd think Miami might have an edge over FSU.
The only REAL knock I can think of against Miami is they really are a rather small university with a small(ish) alumni base. So far, the B1G "profile" is that of large, state or land grant institutions with YUGE alumni bases. I get the Miami market, but the entire viewership experience is trending towards streaming and while - when good - Miami is an interesting brand and does draw viewership, it cannot be from their alumni base alone.

They risk falling back to Vanderbilt or Northwestern status in a conference of behemoths if they hit an extended rough patch on the gridiron, ala Nebraska.

I'm still very much in wait and see, or as @MtnHusker's neighbors might say, "I'm from Missourah. You're gonna have to show me" as it relates to the early termination of the ACC's GOR.
 
What if instead of Stanford and Cal, the Big 10 adds: KU and Miami

A: USC, UCLA, Washington, KU, Oregon, Nebraska

B: Wisconsin, Cockeye, Minnesota, NW, Ohio St, Michigan

C: PSU, Illinois, Indiana, Purdue, Michigan St, Clemson

D: Miami, UNC, FSU, Maryland, Rutgers

This would give you 4 divisions with modern and historic blue bloods in each division.
Probably don’t need both Miami and FSU, better off adding one of those schools and Georgia Tech, which gives you the Atlanta market
 
Fox and Big Ten are at odds on this element. Fox wants big games. B1G wants the best conference across sports and academics. They want UVa, UNC, Stanford and Cal. They also recognize that those schools soften the schedule a little. A benefit only for the existing universities. Not for the network.
 
A good reminder of where the media companies are financially right now

Because while all this is going on, the TV companies that have funded every previous round of realignment are undergoing their own existential crisis.

When the Big Ten announced its record-setting $1 billion-per-year deals with Fox, NBC and CBS last summer, it seemed like yet another milestone in the never-ending bubble that is sports TV rights. That number marked a nearly 250 percent increase for the Big Ten in just six years, and only partially because of USC and UCLA.

Kliavkoff, perhaps naively, figured his league could expect much the same bump when the Pac-12 opened negotiations shortly thereafter. During the past year, however, he has learned those rules no longer apply. ESPN’s parent company, Disney, is going through massive cost-cutting. CEO Bob Iger sent a shudder through the industry when he declared in February that the company would be “more selective” with sports properties. The NFL? No-brainer. NBA? No-brainer.

Pac-12 football? Not so much.

But it’s not just Kliavkoff’s conference feeling the squeeze. Even the mighty SEC got a humbling taste of the new recipe when ESPN declined its request for more money in exchange for moving from eight to nine conference games. The network is under no obligation to pay a dollar more than it already does for the league’s entire inventory, but the conference’s leaders mistakenly believed it would do so anyway for the opportunity to show more LSU-Auburn, less LSU-McNeese State. Thus the SEC is staying at eight for now.

Meanwhile, the long-held hope among sports leagues that streamers like Amazon and Apple would soon start throwing money at them mostly has not come to pass. Amazon went all in on Thursday Night Football because the NFL is the NFL. Beyond that, however, the streamers mostly have focused on smaller, cheaper properties like MLS and, apparently, the Pac-12.

The Big Ten may well want to throw Oregon and Washington a lifeline and create its own little After Dark package, but it would still need someone to pay for it. Don’t assume Fox/CBS/NBC will just keep throwing money at the league every time it gets a yearning. It certainly becomes more realistic if those schools come in at a reduced share, but the increased travel expenses that go with it also would have to be taken into account

That brings us to Florida State. Were one to listen to that meeting Wednesday, one would think the school can just snap its finger at any moment and truckloads of cash suddenly will descend upon Tallahassee. Who wouldn’t want a piece of (according to FSU’s president) the 12th-most watched program in the country during the past decade?

The most logical suitor would be the SEC, but as mentioned previously, ESPN holds the rights to the SEC through 2034. ESPN currently pays $30 million-ish per year for the rights to Florida State’s home games via its ACC deal. How’s it going to feel about paying roughly double that for the same school, just in a different league?
 
Probably don’t need both Miami and FSU, better off adding one of those schools and Georgia Tech, which gives you the Atlanta market
Miami & FSU give you control over the state when paired with the Big Ten brands. One of them, where the other goes to the SEC likely means the one we got diminishes in value.
 
Fox and Big Ten are at odds on this element. Fox wants big games. B1G wants the best conference across sports and academics. They want UVa, UNC, Stanford and Cal. They also recognize that those schools soften the schedule a little. A benefit only for the existing universities. Not for the network.
From the rumors I saw on the Michigan board, they may have compromised. Fox picks a couple, B1G picks a couple, within certain parameters
 
A Don’t assume Fox/CBS/NBC will just keep throwing money at the league every time it gets a yearning. It certainly becomes more realistic if those schools come in at a reduced share, but the increased travel expenses that go with it also would have to be taken into account
Yes, and now is the time that fox May see the money is worth it. If they can devalue Disneys properties by having the far and away best games then it further hurts Disney, making them more selective in their own investments and helping fox achieve what it has wanted for the past 15 years… to become the world leader in sports. They feel they are in many other live programming categories.
 
Back
Top