The last two weeks, the word from the ACC was that they didn’t want to expand. The word was that they’d looked at expansion and found no one worth adding. As evidence of this: The ACC did not expand despite there being full shelves in the Pac-12 aisle at the college football realignment market.
Now, though, Cal and Stanford are reportedly on the radar, with Pete Thamel reporting for ESPN that the ACC’s athletic directors are talking today and its university presidents are talking tomorrow.
Thamel shares what we expected regarding the finances: Stanford and Cal would change little if anything about the ACC’s current TV deal, with ACC schools making much less than the SEC and Big Ten and something similar to what the Big 12 is pulling in all while also having the longest such contract on the books, one set to carry the league to 2036 rather than the 2030, 2031, and 2034-ending deals the Big Ten, Big 12, and SEC respectively enjoy. Add Stanford and Cal or not, and the ACC will still be on a tier with the Big 12 financially, with any upside further in the future than it is for West Virginia and its friends.
The question for the ACC, then, is whether Stanford and Cal could help it culturally and/or competitively. Notably for this, the ACC is a strong academic conference among the power conferences, with two schools in the U.S. News & World Report top 25 and two just outside it, and that’s without counting partial member Notre Dame. With the Big Ten up to four in the top 25 with the additions of UCLA and USC, adding Stanford and Cal could allow the ACC to pass the Big Ten back by one measure of best academic conference among the Power Four. It’s a bit silly, but there’s value for universities in being able to say that they’re peers with Stanford, and to a lesser degree with Vanderbilt and Northwestern and the rest.
On the competitive side, it’s looking unlikely right now that Stanford or Cal will make even a 12-team playoff before 2036, but it’s far from impossible. Not only is the playoff expanding, but we aren’t that far removed from Stanford producing some of the best football teams of the early 2010s. The real advantage probably wouldn’t be in Cal and Stanford’s accomplishments, but in getting an annual trip to the West Coast, something Notre Dame has particularly leveraged well these last 25 years in its California recruiting.
There’s nothing all that convincing in any of this for the ACC, but neither does anything scream that this is a bad idea. With partial revenue shares now a proven practice thanks to the Big Ten and Washington and Oregon, the ACC could try to get the Bay Area pair at a discount, but any discount would be minimal when filtered out in its indirect fashion to the 14 other member schools. It’s an arbitrary decision, and one that seems likely to come back to the whims of the league. Perhaps they’ll feel pressured to do something, anything, with Florida State causing a stir and the rest of the country’s conferences either moving forward or being left behind. Perhaps they’ll wish to steer against the current, choosing stability and what passes for tradition.
On the Stanford and Cal side, the decision is probably simpler, if the invitation is extended. In favor of joining the ACC is 1) the reality that they wouldn’t be stepping down academically from the Pac-12, making a lateral move instead; 2) the likelihood they’ll be bringing in more revenue than they would in the Mountain West, unless the ACC is offering them only a 40% revenue share or worse; 3) tougher and more respected competition in sports other than football, sports of particular importance to non-football juggernaut Stanford; and 4) the fact that they’d still be in what’s informally a power conference (the Power Five not only is figuratively no more with the Pac-12 fading, but is literally no more with the new College Football Playoff and New Year’s Six format leaving the label on the historical ash heap). In favor of continuing to partner with schools west of the Mississippi, whether through 1) a merger with the Mountain West or through 2) joining the Mountain West or through 3) football independence and non-football membership in something like the WCC or through 4) adding SMU and Rice to get back to the Pac-6 until the Mountain West’s buyouts drop, is the travel piece. If Stanford and Cal were to join the ACC, their closest conference foes would be Notre Dame and Louisville, each nearly two thousand miles away. (Washington reportedly feared the cost of Big Ten membership could be $10M in travel expenses, which is what I used to get the 40% revenue share estimate, given the MWC’s deal pays its members something like $4M a year and the ACC’s pays a reported $37M a year or so.)
I don’t know in which direction these variables balance out for Stanford and Cal, and I don’t know if it differs depending on the schools. Stanford isn’t at particular risk of losing any of its academic reputation because it’s playing UNLV in basketball. Stanford is on par with Harvard and Yale. It’s just a whole different beast. Cal is more in the thick of things, one of the best state schools in the country but one of a few scrapping for that distinction. Academic prestige might matter more for Cal? Stanford seems more culturally invested in sports, or at least is doing its investment more successfully. The quality of competition might matter more for Stanford? Whatever the case, my guess is that the equation balances out clearly on one side or the other. I would guess Stanford and Cal are interested in the ACC, though, primarily for the reason that I would guess the ACC already knows their hypothetical answer and is only discussing this because the answer is yes. It’s easier for a school to answer about its interest in a conference than it is for a conference to answer about its interest in a school. There are fewer stakeholders to align.
What Is Florida State Up To?
Sportico reported on Friday that Florida State is working with JPMorgan Chase to figure out how to raise more money, possibly through a private equity deal in which an investor handles the commercial rights of the athletic brand, receiving its return on investment through media and sponsorship payments. My understanding is that this would mean a hypothetical investor, let’s call it the Saudi Arabian sovereign wealth fund, would buy Florida State’s commercial rights and then receive the ESPN money from the ACC TV deal as well as the Winn-Dixie money from the jumbotron ads. I might be getting something wrong, but this is all hypothetical, so I don’t think I’m *that* wrong.
Anyway, this could probably work in four directions: In one direction, Florida State could get enough money to make ACC membership more comfortable for the short term but still leave them dreaming of the SEC. In the second, Florida State could get enough money quickly to pay its ACC buyout (a reported $120M) and then join the SEC. In a third, Florida State could get enough money to make it not care about the ACC/SEC revenue disparity anymore, then further decide it’s happy enough in the ACC to stay there in perpetuity. In the fourth, Florida State could think this is a loophole which will get them out of the ACC deal, something they could be right or wrong about, I have no idea.
The bigger question here is whether this could fundamentally change finances in college athletics. I’m curious! One thing I will say, though, is: I’m not sure how much each school’s money matters. I mean, I know it matters, especially for academics and research and all that. But for athletics, I’m not sure. It matters a lot for recruiting, and I suppose it could finance facilities upgrades, freeing up more booster money for recruiting, but I’d think you’d hit diminishing returns quickly on facilities upgrades.
Either way, I kind of hope it happens, partially so we can learn about it and partially so some Saudi Arabian royal starts getting sponsorship checks from a local credit union in Tallahassee.
Who’s Next to Bow Out?
21 MLB teams remain in some form of playoff contention, but only twelve of those will make the field. Who’s next to be dropped?
At the moment, the Angels sit in the worst position, with only a 2.1% playoff probability on FanGraphs and a record one game below .500 in the midst of what’s currently a six-game losing streak. The Guardians are another possibility, sitting a game and a half behind Anaheim but enjoying an 8.0% playoff probability thanks to the AL Central title being so much more accessible than the AL West. That Guardians probability doesn’t include José Ramírez’s impending three-game suspension, though, and while it shouldn’t make up what’s nearly a fourfold advantage, it isn’t meaningless.
Beyond the Guardians, the Red Sox sit at 10.5% and the Yankees sit at 15.2%. Each of those teams is at least three games above .500, but their division chances are similar to those of the Angels (effectively zero) and they have easier games this week, which is actually a bad thing as far as downside goes. FanGraphs’s model isn’t expecting the Angels and Guardians to dominate their series against the Giants and Blue Jays. The Red Sox and Yankees, though, respectively host the Royals and visit the White Sox to open this week. If those go badly, that could be it.
Regardless of who it is, the present situation indicates our next effective elimination will come in the American League. When 20 teams soon remain in the race, we can expect each league to have exactly ten of them.
The series leading off this week:
Contender vs. Factor
After today’s game in San Diego, the Dodgers go to Phoenix to face the reeling Diamondbacks, losers of six straight and suddenly needing to pass three teams to get back in playoff position.
The Astros are in Baltimore to play the Orioles. The Orioles could theoretically take the best record in baseball soon, but they continue to overperform statistical expectations. The Astros, meanwhile, trail the Rangers by two and a half but are about a tossup in division probabilities.
The Blue Jays are back above 5.0% in the FanGraphs World Series column, giving us six contenders once more. As said, they’re in Cleveland to start the week off.
Factor vs. Factor
The Giants, as said, are in Anaheim. San Francisco’s been streaky lately, but they did briefly pull within three games of Los Angeles this weekend. They sat four back entering today.
The Padres go to Seattle after today, facing a Mariners team making a credible threat to, for the third straight year, jump from nowhere into the thick of the playoff race. They’ve won five straight, they’re just 2.5 games back of a Wild Card spot, and they’re only six back of the Rangers. That’s a lot, but it isn’t insurmountable.
The Marlins visit the Reds in a showdown between the first two NL teams out of the playoff spots right now. Miami’s lost four straight. Cincinnati’s lost six.
Other Contenders, Other Factors
Atlanta goes to Pittsburgh, looking to keep its 104-win pace going and erase the taste of a series loss at Wrigley Field.
The Rays host the Cardinals this week. The sun is shining, and three games back of Baltimore, Tampa Bay needs to make some hay.
The Rangers are in Oakland, and that’s another series like Boston’s and New York’s in that Texas needs to take care of business. They’ve been worse on the road this year, but the A’s have been bad everywhere.
Minnesota goes to Detroit to visit the Tigers, looking to build on what’s become a 4.5-game division lead after they swept Arizona and the Guardians dropped two of three to the White Sox.
The Phillies host the Nationals, looking to move ahead of the Giants in the race for the NL’s 4-seed and the accompanying first round home-field advantage.
The Brewers host the Rockies, and it’s another one where one team is expected to take care of business. The Brew Crew has retaken the NL Central lead, but they only lead the Cubs and Reds by 1.5 games each.
Those Cubs are in Queens to play the Mets, and this is one where the FanGraphs model might be underestimating Chicago’s playoff probability. The Mets are playing worse than their roster right now. Take that for what it’s worth as the North Siders try to pull ahead of the Reds by more than just percentage points.
As said, Boston and New York (AL) are hosting Kansas City and traveling to Chicago (AL).
How About Those Cubs?
More sensational stuff from the Cubs this weekend, as they took a series where the reasonable goal was to not get swept and found a way to win it. This trip to Queens isn’t going to be easy, and this weekend’s trip to Toronto is going to be hard, but after that the opportunities come in earnest for two straight weeks, with the White Sox, Royals, Tigers, and Pirates on the docket in succession. It’s not that simple, it’s never that simple, but 3–3 this week would be a solid result.
The matchups in Queens are:
- Monday: Smyly vs. Senga
- Tuesday: Taillon vs. Carrasco
- Wednesday: Hendricks vs. Peterson
The latter two are much better than tonight’s—Carrasco and Peterson have both struggled, especially Carrasco, while Senga’s been around his high expectations. So, win tonight and the road trip’s off to a great start. Looks like the A lineup is out there, so that seems to be the thought for David Ross as well.
One last note about this series before I publish these and pop the game on: Wednesday’s a night game, which may mean some later travel to Toronto before Thursday’s off day but also means no early wakeup calls this week until Saturday (and even that’s a mid-afternoon game). After three straight day games this weekend and those 16 games in 16 days Boog Sciambi’s been talking about, that should be helpful.
