ACC Network is about more than money; it means stability

CHARLOTTE — After they’d shown the requisite highlight video that accompanies these annual events, John Swofford retook the stage with something akin to an apology.

“Some of you,” the ACC commissioner said, “may be disappointed that I’m not going to be able to do the dance that I’ve done the last couple of years, dancing around some questions about television.”

Everyone laughed. And although no one danced (“People would’ve seen how bad I am,” Swofford said), what followed as the ACC’s media days kicked off was essentially a big party. After years of waiting — and in Swofford’s case, dodging those pesky questions — the vibe in a ballroom at the Westin Charlotte for the official announcement of a conference network was something just shy of giddy.

But amid all the backslapping revelry, don’t miss what the ACC Network really means for the conference: Stability.

Or that for another significant chunk of the college landscape, it means exactly the opposite.

The contrast in Charlotte was stark with the fearful scrambling and anxious frenzy currently underway in the Big 12. In an abrupt reversal, that league announced Tuesday that instead of tabling consideration of expansion — as was nearly universally expected — it was kicking the process into overdrive.

“I’m not sure how you connect those things, necessarily,” Swofford said, because he had to say that. But for several reasons, the conferences’ two announcements are inextricably linked.

There are the obvious financial ramifications of adding a conference network. Though no one would discuss specifics, once launched in August 2019, the ACC’s network will likely add between $5 million and $8 million to each school’s budget (and for the next two years, in the run-up to launch, the ACC’s rights deal will increase). It will lift the ACC into third place in revenue among Power Five leagues, behind the Big Ten and SEC but ahead of the Big 12 and Pac-12. It’s not necessarily a bonanza, but it’s not insignificant.

It’s not a coincidence that the Big 12’s expansion plan is transparently a short-term cash grab. The league essentially asked wanna-be members to submit their best proposal – meaning in part, “How little would it take for you to join us?” The Big 12’s TV deals stipulate a pro rata rights fee increase with each new member. It’s why there’s a push to add not just two but four schools (and hey, why stop there?). New members would get only partial shares for several years, while the 10 current members would divide some percentage of that extra money.

But the ACC Network means more than money. Duke athletics director Kevin White, chair of the ACC’s TV committee put it like this:

“We can’t be a real Power Five player without a network.”

Asked to expound, he touted enhanced visibility and financial stability, and said recruiting — especially in non-revenue sports — would be helped by the increased exposure. Put it all together:

“Your brand gets enhanced,” White said. “And I think it’s important.”

Pop quiz: Which Power Five conference does not have — and has no option for — a conference network? (Answer below.)

It’s no secret the TV climate has changed; the future for cable networks doesn’t look bright. Which is why the Big 12, which has only 11 million cable/satellite homes in its footprint (the fewest of any Power Five conference, and more than half of those homes are in Texas) had its hopes for a conference network quashed by executives from ESPN and Fox earlier this summer. (It’s a little more complicated; the Longhorn Network throws a wrench into the Big 12’s plans, too. But there’s no appetite among TV partners for a Big 12 network.)

The end result is this: Three of the Power Five leagues have a network. The ACC is about to get one. The Big 12 is not.

Talk about being psychologically disadvantaged.

And here’s something else that is very tangible, and very important. Pay attention to what came along with the ACC’s new deal: an extension of its schools’ grant of media rights to the league, essentially locking them together through the 2035-36 school year.

“The landscape has been, at least in the Eastern seaboard, literally frozen. That’s the impact,” White said. And later, he added: “The dartboard is no longer jumping.”

But over in the Big 12, they’re frantically tossing darts all over the map. There was a hope among Big 12 types that, when the current TV deals (and the current grants of rights expired), they might pluck away schools from another Power Five league. From the ACC, they talked most about Florida State and Clemson.

It was probably never realistic, for a lot of reasons (including: why would anyone want to join a league that put the “fun” in “dysfunctional”?). But now, with the ACC members locked up for 20 years, it’s not a possibility.

And so the Big 12’s presidents, who had appeared set to end all the expansion talk, did a complete 180, apparently in the space of a few hours in a conference room. Only two days in, and the process has descended, at least publicly, into chaos. Presidents and athletic directors from hopeful Group of Five schools everywhere are making private and very public pitches. A gaggle of Texas politicians are weighing in (endorsing Houston). And no one is going to be surprised if it keeps getting crazier and crazier.

Or if the Big 12’s decision to get bigger, if not better, doesn’t provide any real stability at all.

The Big 12 will get more money from its TV partners with expansion (though it won’t make them happy in doing so). And when the Big 12’s TV contracts expire in 2024, well, what happens then? Pay attention, when the Big 12 expands to whether its current grant of rights is extended.

If not, it’s not hard to imagine big names Texas and Oklahoma being plucked by other Power Five leagues (hey, how about Texas to the ACC?). At which point the Big 12 as we know it would essentially expire along with its TV deals.

It’s worth noting that several times in the past when realignment shook the landscape, there was a perception among many that the ACC was the conference most likely to fall or be picked apart.

“I never really was concerned any of that was going to happen,” Swofford said. “But just knowing that it could brought you some — brought me some sense of uneasiness.”

In retrospect, the idea seems shortsighted; the Big 12’s forced marriage and geographical limitations made it much more likely to lose in realignment. It might have been inevitable. The Big 12 lost four members (eventually adding two). The ACC wasn’t immune. But after Maryland bolted for the Big Ten, it made all the right moves, adding Louisville and convincing Notre Dame to sign on, at least partially. Not insignificantly, the league’s members signed that initial grant of rights.

With this new network, they’ve extended it for what, in the current climate, feels like an eternity. And they like how forever feels.

“We’re in a great place right now, we really are,” Swofford said. “We’ve got everything in front of us in terms of opportunity, stability, resources, a really good, effective footprint with a large population. We just need to take advantage of the assets that we have.”