by TexCane
With this week’s court settlement, all eyes are on the survival chances for the ACC, specifically after 2030. Many are saying this latest development is the beginning of the end for the ACC.
Really? Let’s pump the brakes here!
This proud conference is not going down without a fight. Commissioner Jim Phillips and his 18 athletic directors have 5 years to flip the narrative for the conference. This group is not oblivious to the challenges ahead. There are smart people around the table.
The first challenge is to balance out the revenue gap with the SEC and B1G. It’s been reported there will be as much as a $30M gap. The current media rights deal with ESPN is not going get bigger over the next five years unless the conference increases the value of their product.
So, how can the ACC increase the value of full membership?
The conference has already agreed to a tiered revenue model and a performance incentive package that could increase the annual distribution by as much as $15M for the top schools. That’s a major win for the top tier of schools. But is it enough to keep schools like FSU, Clemson, Miami and North Carolina from leaving when the exit fee drops to $75M in 2031?
What additional strategies could the conference take over the next five years to close the gap even further?
EXPANSION…?
We must assume FSU and Clemson will leave after five years. Perhaps even more schools will try to find a “safe harbor.”
“Go West, young man!”
One scenario would be to expand the conference from 17 football-playing schools to 20 schools. Who? The conference last strategy was a western expansion. The jury is still out on how that worked.
For the western expansion strategy to ultimately be successful, the ACC must expand again in the west. However, the selected schools must bring more eyeballs to the table to satisfy ESPN. That means large markets. There are three schools that have excellent upside but carry some risk. The ACC should consider offering membership to UNLV, San Diego State and UTSA. The conference needs a major presence in the souther California market. SDSU and Las Vegas are growing markets with growing football programs. UTSA also offers another presence in the key Texas market. San Antonio is one of the fastest grow makers in the country. Of course, each of these programs must continue its recent upward trend.
An expanded ACC could look something like…
EAST: FSU, Clemson, Georgia Tech, UNC, NC State, Duke, Virginia Tech, Virginia, Syracuse, Boston College
WEST: Miami, Pittsburgh, Louisville, Wake Forest, SMU, UTSA, Stanford, Cal, San Diego State, UNLV
The downside of western expansion is the pie slices get smaller in the short term, thus the risk. These new schools must be willing to take a smaller revenue distribution over the next five years.
CONTRACTION…?
Recently, there has been some buzz about the SEC and B1G getting rid of their weakest members. Could the ACC also consider this strategy?
It’s doubtful the ACC would go this route unless the conference dissolves and reforms into a new 12-member conference. That could result in bigger slices of pie for the remaining schools. Assuming FSU and Clemson remain, the new conference could also include Miami, North Carolina, Duke, NC State, Georgia Tech, Virginia Tech, Virginia, Pittsburgh, SMU and Louisville. The new conference could also include Notre Dame as an olympic sports only member with an expanded six-game out-of-conference football scheduling agreement.
The downside of this strategy is brand and inventory for a 12-school model. Can the FSU, Clemson and Miami football brands be attractive enough when the next media contract comes up? Can the UNC and Duke basketball brands be attractive enough?
All good questions.
BOTTOM LINE:
The ACC has five years to make themselves beautiful again for suitors. Bold moves and leadership are the only options for survival.
Expansion or contraction?
It should be an interesting road for the ACC to travel.
GO CANES!
Comments