ACC adding Stanford, Cal, SMU in 2024
www.thescore.com
ACC presidents voted to approve the additions of Stanford, Cal, and SMU, the conference announced Friday. The ACC welcomes Cal, SMU and Stanford to the league in 2024!Read more: https://t.co/9vhMMdDCq1 pic.twitter.com/N2ugGLAert— The ACC (@theACC) September 1, 2023 "We are thrilled to welcome three world-class institutions to the ACC, and we look forward to having them compete as part of our amazing league," commissioner Jim Phillips said. "Throughout the evaluation process, the ACC Board of Directors … was deliberate in prioritizing the best possible athletic and academic experience for our student-athletes and in ensuring that the three universities would strengthen the league in all possible ways."Stanford and Cal are expected to take reduced television revenue shares, while SMU will earn no television revenue from the league for approximately nine years, Yahoo Sports' Ross Dellenger adds.The schools can all reportedly earn incentives on top of their shares, based primarily on football success. Whether other sports were included as incentives hasn't been reported.Stanford's, Cal's, and SMU's football teams finished with 3-9, 4-8, and 7-6 records, respectively, in 2022.Conference realignment has impacted a large number of schools this summer. Oregon and Washington were accepted into the Big Ten in early August, joining USC and UCLA, who were voted in last year.Arizona State, Colorado, and Utah are departing from the Pac-12 for the Big 12 in 2024, and the Big 12 is losing both Texas and Oklahoma to the SEC next year.Washington State and Oregon State are the only schools scheduled to remain in the Pac-12 beyond 2023.

Stanford and Cal are expected to take reduced television revenue shares, while SMU will earn no television revenue from the league for approximately nine years.

  • TheAndrewBrown@lemm.eeEnglish
    1·
    1 year ago

    No TV revenue for 9 years?! So SMU is taking a ~$7m loss each year leaving the AAC for the ACC for 9 years? That’s wild

    • wjrii@kbin.social
      1·
      1 year ago

      There are a few EXTREMELY rich families of donors, including the Hunt family that owns the Chiefs and FC Dallas, who have just promised to float the program and fund NIL at competitive levels, but I do not envy their athletic department staff. They’re going to be begging, borrowing, and stealing for the better part of a decade to keep up appearances, and if the football team doesn’t make some noise, the culture could get pretty toxic in University Park. They also have 30+ years of alumni who picked SMU despite sports not mattering and 30+ years of locals who found something else to care about.

      TCU is constantly on a razor’s edge for general interest, even with 20 years of being an excellent G5 and respectable P5 program. It’s just such a crowded market. Winning will fix a lot of things, but winning at any sustained or impressive level been the missing part of the SMU equation so far.

  • wjrii@kbin.social
    1·
    1 year ago

    Sounds like it’s a hedge against FSU, Clemson, and UNC defecting. Makes it harder to invoke the rumored renegotiation clause in the TV deal, or to get the votes to dissolve the conference altogether (which I maintain would be WAY messier than a simple majority vote, even if such a vote is the key part of the process).

    As a fan of a B12 team, I’m still feeling pretty sanguine about being part of a “power 4”, but this does up the odds of the ACC surviving in a reduced but largely intact form. Kudos to them for being less stupid than the PAC.