UNC Football Catch-all | Bill Belichick Era underway

[Calheel]

ACC Kickoff: Commissioner’s Tone Masks UNC’s Clearer Exit Path

As currently constructed, the league’s days appear numbered. And sources confirm the Tar Heels are highly interested in making a move.

247sports.com

I am assuming this is the paragraph being referred to:

“But make no mistake, now, multiple sources told IC, the SEC is where the Tar Heels are aiming under the leadership of Roberts and Newmark, should UNC move to leave the ACC for another league, perhaps in the near future. Sources said the 2030-31 school year, when the ACC's decreasing exit fees dip from $93 million to the flat $75 million threshold, would figure to become an important final line of demarcation, if the Tar Heels haven't made their departure sooner. Seven decades ago, UNC was one of the original member schools in the 1953 founding of the ACC.”

Yes. I assume that is where Mpaer came up with that. I would not want him on my team in a game of competitive telephone.

 

[mpaer]

Yes. I assume that is where Mpaer came up with that. I would not want him on my team in a game of competitive telephone.

Literally a cut and paste
But make no mistake, now, multiple sources told IC, the SEC is where the Tar Heels are aiming under the leadership of Roberts and Newmark, should UNC move to leave the ACC for another league, perhaps in the near future. Sources said the 2030-31 school year, when the ACC's decreasing exit fees dip from $93 million to the flat $75 million threshold

 

[Calheel]

Literally a cut and paste
But make no mistake, now, multiple sources told IC, the SEC is where the Tar Heels are aiming under the leadership of Roberts and Newmark, should UNC move to leave the ACC for another league, perhaps in the near future. Sources said the 2030-31 school year, when the ACC's decreasing exit fees dip from $93 million to the flat $75 million threshold

1. We will likely move before 2030-31. Not sure how you got 2030-31 is a "final line of demarcation" = we will wait until 2030-31.

2. We are targeting the SEC. But that does not mean we are moving to the SEC. It takes two to tango, and if the SEC does not offer us full membership right away, the Big10 is in play.

 

[05C40]

I would really like to read/something that I know does not, never has, and never will exist. That is, a well thought-out, well researched, well written, and most importantly with a succient and accurate summary, report that evalutes the impact of intercollegiate sports on the academic core missions of a university. I understand that in today's era of Trumpium demands for aligned thinking and teaching at universities, revenue generating sports may be a necessity. But are intercollegiate sports (mens, womens, revenue-positive, & revenue negative) a net positive for universities in terms of attracting students, keeping alumni interested and giving, and attracting big donor support to the university as a whole. If intercollegiate sports are a necessity in today's political environment, then so be it.

 

[stankeylegjones]

Literally a cut and paste
But make no mistake, now, multiple sources told IC, the SEC is where the Tar Heels are aiming under the leadership of Roberts and Newmark, should UNC move to leave the ACC for another league, perhaps in the near future. Sources said the 2030-31 school year, when the ACC's decreasing exit fees dip from $93 million to the flat $75 million threshold

I don't read that as what you wrote before.

 

[CFordUNC]

I may be wrong (often am!) but I don't think that snippet really says anything we haven't already known, which is that 1. UNC wants out of the ACC, 2. the desired destination for the current PTBs is the SEC, and 3. that it becomes a lot more financially tenable to leave the ACC in about 5-6 years.

But in order to go to the SEC, we have to have an invite, which I don't think is a sure thing. I agree that IF the SEC were to expand, schools like UNC and UVA are top choices for the league, but I don't think there is any guarantee that the SEC membership would vote to expand even if/when UNC/UVA/FSU/Clemson/etc. are "available."

 

[stankeylegjones]

What is the pay-out difference (expected) between being in the SEC (or BIG10) and the ACC? I'm pretty sure it's more than 18 million per year, no? If so, UNC would actually make money leaving sooner rather than later, if they are going to eventually move.

 

[SnoopRob]

I may be wrong (often am!) but I don't think that snippet really says anything we haven't already known, which is that 1. UNC wants out of the ACC, 2. the desired destination for the current PTBs is the SEC, and 3. that it becomes a lot more financially tenable to leave the ACC in about 5-6 years.

But in order to go to the SEC, we have to have an invite, which I don't think is a sure thing. I agree that IF the SEC were to expand, schools like UNC and UVA are top choices for the league, but I don't think there is any guarantee that the SEC membership would vote to expand even if/when UNC/UVA/FSU/Clemson/etc. are "available."

It's interesting that you are cautious about our ability to move out of the ACC, especially to the SEC.

Maybe it's an unwarranted display of hubris, but my take is that UNC is the most attractive potential school in the ACC for acquisition by another conference, will have its choice between the SEC & B10, and that such leverage will ensure that it not only gets into whichever conference it prefers but will do so on the best deal available. (I think we'll ultimately end up in the SEC unless the NCGA/BOG gets involved and screws it up for us.)

 

[Calheel]

3. that it becomes a lot more financially tenable to leave the ACC in about 5-6 years.

Don't think point 3 is correct at all. The SEC payouts are projected (and there is a lot of guesswork in these numbers) to be roughly $30 million more per year by 2027. If the buyout drops $18 million, but we lose $30 million per year by staying pat, then we cost ourselves $12 million every year we don't leave.

 

[OGtruthhurts]

whats the conf revenue diff b/t what unc is receiving now vs what current sec schools are receiving

if it is great i dont see the need to even wait to make the jump if the sec wants unc. whats a few tens of millions of dollars to a university if it will be recouped soon.

 

[Calheel]

What is the pay-out difference (expected) between being in the SEC (or BIG10) and the ACC? I'm pretty sure it's more than 18 million per year, no? If so, UNC would actually make money leaving sooner rather than later, if they are going to eventually move.

We are on the exact same page today.

 

[SnoopRob]

Don't think point 3 is correct at all. The SEC payouts are projected (and there is a lot of guesswork in these numbers) to be roughly $30 million more per year by 2027. If the buyout drops $18 million, but we lose $30 million per year by staying pat, then we cost ourselves $12 million every year we don't leave.

I think we're going to have to see the real world effects of the ACC's incentive payments before the delta between the ACC & SEC/B10 will be known for each school. If the new system is effective, I think you may see the schools most likely to leave (UNC, Clemson, FSU) make enough "extra" money to lower the gap where leaving isn't as attractive, even if there is still a gap.

 

[nycfan]

 

[Calheel]

I think we're going to have to see the real world effects of the ACC's incentive payments before the delta between the ACC & SEC/B10 will be known for each school. If the new system is effective, I think you may see the schools most likely to leave (UNC, Clemson, FSU) make enough "extra" money to lower the gap where leaving isn't as attractive, even if there is still a gap.

Posting a chart that was widely circulated a couple of years ago. If these numbers are anywhere close to accurate, it will be a financial no brainer to leave in 2027 -- success fee or not.

 

[mpaer]

If someone wants to give me odds-like I win if we finish higher-I'll lay down $1,000

 

[Ramrouser]

It's interesting that you are cautious about our ability to move out of the ACC, especially to the SEC.

Maybe it's an unwarranted display of hubris, but my take is that UNC is the most attractive potential school in the ACC for acquisition by another conference, will have its choice between the SEC & B10, and that such leverage will ensure that it not only gets into whichever conference it prefers but will do so on the best deal available. (I think we'll ultimately end up in the SEC unless the NCGA/BOG gets involved and screws it up for us.)

This.

UNC can join either league and we're maybe the only team to be in this position other than ND. UVA is fading as an expansion target with its recent relative de emphasis on the two revenue sports. In contrast, every action on the part of UNC since last November (Belichick/Turner/Newmark) is designed to get UNC ready to move to the SEC.

It will happen in the next three years.

 

[CFordUNC]

This.

UNC can join either league and we're maybe the only team to be in this position other than ND. UVA is fading as an expansion target with its recent relative de emphasis on the two revenue sports. In contrast, every action on the part of UNC since last November (Belichick/Turner/Newmark) is designed to get UNC ready to move to the SEC.

It will happen in the next three years.

I can absolutely tell you unequivocally and without hesitation that’s not true about UVA fading as an expansion target, and even more wrong about them “deemphasizing” the primary to revenue sports. They spent $12M on their new men’s basketball roster and even more than that on their football roster. Their AD was the senior Football administrator who helped hire Kirby Smart at UGA and remains close with many SEC athletics directors. Virginia is every bit a desirable expansion target, essentially the 1B to North Carolina’s 1A.

It doesn’t matter, though, because neither UNC nor UVA are going anywhere until or unless the SEC (or Big 10, for that matter) membership majority decides that they want to add new schools, which is certainly not definite. UNC can want to go to the SEC all we want (and heaven knows that’s where I want us to be), and the powers that be at UNC can say that the SEC is our intended destination, but until or unless the majority of the SEC members want to add additional schools, this is all for naught. I don’t claim to be an expert on any of this stuff by any means, but I would have to imagine that the SEC schools would need to see that adding North Carolina and Virginia would be a significant revenue boost for them to offset further dividing the overall revenue pie.

 

[SnoopRob]

I can absolutely tell you unequivocally and without hesitation that’s not true about UVA fading as an expansion target, and even more wrong about them “deemphasizing” the primary to revenue sports. They spent $12M on their new men’s basketball roster and even more than that on their football roster. Their AD was the senior Football administrator who helped hire Kirby Smart at UGA and remains close with many SEC athletics directors. Virginia is every bit a desirable expansion target, essentially the 1B to North Carolina’s 1A.

It doesn’t matter, though, because neither UNC nor UVA are going anywhere until or unless the SEC (or Big 10, for that matter) membership majority decides that they want to add new schools, which is certainly not definite. UNC can want to go to the SEC all we want (and heaven knows that’s where I want us to be), and the powers that be at UNC can say that the SEC is our intended destination, but until or unless the majority of the SEC members want to add additional schools, this is all for naught. I don’t claim to be an expert on any of this stuff by any means, but I would have to imagine that the SEC schools would need to see that adding North Carolina and Virginia would be a significant revenue boost for them to offset further dividing the overall revenue pie.

The next step in conference realignment is going to be the destruction of the ACC and the SEC/B1G fully taking over as the P2 (unless they decide to merge into 1 superconference). The main deadline for this is the next CFP renegotiation; the current contract ends after the 2031-2032 season.

Given that major changes to the CFP will take some time to negotiate and that schools have to give a year notice to leave the ACC, the 2029/2030 period will be crucial for the SEC/B1G to nail down their new members. I expect that to be the next major realignment period, as it will only take one of the B1G/SEC choosing to move to push both into action.

 

[SnoopRob]

Posting a chart that was widely circulated a couple of years ago. If these numbers are anywhere close to accurate, it will be a financial no brainer to leave in 2027 -- success fee or not.

I remember that chart possibly having significant issues, but I don't remember why.

If the gap is anywhere near that large, I would expect the ACC schools with options to leave as soon as possible. Of course, as has been noted in other posts, the SEC/B1G has to open to new members and I'm not sure that happens until closer to 2030.

 

[SnoopRob]

I have no idea what to expect out of this upcoming season, given a new coaching staff and largely new players.
My hunch is that we'll be a bit better than 12th, but you could slot us anywhere between 3rd and 15th and my reaction would probably be, "Ok."