The Confidential is on record as disagreeing with the notion that the Big XII’s grant of rights is impenetrable. That being said, the Confidential also disagrees with the notion that a grant of rights is merely an exit fee with lipstick. Depending on the legalese, a grant of rights should be a property transfer, made voluntarily and for consideration, by a school. It should be much much stronger than an exit fee. As such, the ACC needs to address its current perceived weakness relative to the Big XII by pursuing, successfully, a grant of rights of some length.
The response is always that a grant of rights is not wanted by the membership. Who does not want it? If UNC, Duke, and Virginia do not want the grant of rights, then that tells you everything you need to know about the viability of the ACC. Maryland did not like the exit fee and now it is in litigation with the ACC. If these three schools are not bound to each other, and willing to reduce that to paper, then the ACC is doomed.
If those three agreed, one would have to think that Syracuse, Wake Forest, BC, and North Carolina State would be on board immediately. For the most part, these schools are at risk for being left out when the chairs reshuffle. Pitt could dabble with the Big XII, but the Big 10 is not an option, so Pitt should also be in favor. While Virginia Tech–like North Carolina State–is rumored to be attractive to the SEC, it is unclear that the SEC is actually interested in these schools are their first choice. If UNC and UVa went the Big 10 route, then perhaps a marriage would make sense. But as long as UVa and UNC are solidly ACC, it is difficult to believe that a separation would be desired by Va Tech and NC State.
So that leaves Georgia Tech, Miami, Clemson, and FSU. All four duplicate SEC markets (Georgia, South Carolina, Florida). The Big 10 is not at all likely for Clemson alone. Georgia Tech, FSU and Miami are possible, but have many reasons that they do not fit the Big 10. At least not in the same way that North Carolina and Virginia do–proximity and academics. Plus, Georgia Tech is a clear also-ran in its market.
The Big XII complicates things. All four schools could make more money in the Big XII. Probably. It is unclear why Clemson and Georgia Tech would make $26+M per year for the Big XII. Again, both are secondary schools in their markets. And it is not like South Carolina is a big market. Miami and Florida State are a different story. Together, they would give the Big XII a strong Eastern flank and presence throughout Florida. It would likely be worth it for the Big XII to take these two (or perhaps all four). So these are the four truly “problem” schools. At the same time, if the ACC had a legitimate plan to increase overall revenue, it is unclear that the monetary difference would be worth the move. Certainly not in the same sense as Maryland’s move to the Big 10 (a relative no-brainer for a mismanaged athletic department that needs money badly and had the one thing the Big 10 needs–a new market). But joining the Big XII would mean a grant of rights. So, while it is unlikely that the SEC would come calling for Florida State or Clemson, a grant of rights with the Big XII would take them out of consideration. Of course, a grant of rights with the ACC does the same thing. So, yeah, the hesitance is there.
So this is the point where the ACC and ESPN need to sit down and talk seriously. Without a grant of rights, the ACC is at a real risk of dissolving or turning into something unrecognizable. If that happens, the good ACC markets will be divided between the Big 10, Big XII, and SEC. If 10 teams leave the ACC, but only two go to the SEC (i.e. 6 to the Big XII and 2 to the Big 10), that means that 80% of those schools will shift over to conferences with a significant Fox relationship. If Fox throws more money at these conferences, ESPN will be marginalized further with the lucrative college sports market (and ad revenue generated). If ESPN is cool with that, so be it. But if ESPN is not, then they need to step up to the plate and agree to something to make the ACC stronger. And, by stronger, the ACC needs something tangible to convince everyone in the ACC to be willing to sign a grant of rights.
The length does not matter. A five-year grant of rights would be enough to at least quiet the realignment talk a little. It is shorter than the Big XII’s current grant of rights, meaning that schools with an eye on other conferences will still have an edge. But it would allow for a bit of a “cease fire” and chance for the ACC to rebrand itself with its new additions.
If anyone does not want a grant of rights for even a relative short period, then it is clear that the ACC is not long for this world. It is what it is.
The Confidential 