Mailbag: The impact of an ACC collapse, flexibility for WSU and OSU, the issues with football breaking away and more
The Hotline mailbag publishes each Friday. Send questions to pac12hotline@bayareanewsgroup.com and include ‘mailbag’ in the subject line. Or hit me on X: @WilnerHotline.
Please note: Some questions have been edited for clarity and brevity.
If the ACC breaks up, what happens to Cal, Stanford and SMU? – @JonBernal19
The ACC’s tumultuous situation potentially impacts a slew of schools beyond the three entering the conference next summer, but let’s focus on the Bay Area tandem.
Desperate as they were following the collapse of the Pac-12, Stanford and Cal took a significant risk by signing the ACC’s grant-of-rights contract and locking themselves into a 12-year deal during a time of massive upheaval across college athletics.
At the time, the ACC was viewed by many as the next conference to rupture.
On Dec. 3: Florida State’s exclusion from the College Football Playoff carried immediate and clear implications for the future of the ACC, reinforcing the notion among FSU stakeholders that the Seminoles aren’t on the same tier as the SEC.
And sure enough, the university’s board of trustees voted unanimously on Friday to challenge the ACC’s grant-of-rights agreement.
To be clear: The Seminoles aren’t going anywhere anytime soon. They will compete in the ACC in the 2024-25 college sports season and, most likely, in 2025-26, as well.
FSU has merely taken the first step in what could be a long and costly process.
Nor is it clear that the SEC or Big Ten would want the Seminoles.
They don’t add a new market for the SEC’s media partner, ESPN, which already has access to the football-crazed Sunshine State through an SEC member (Florida).
And although the Big Ten’s media partner, Fox, would surely be interested in planting a flag in Florida – the network doesn’t have media rights deals with the SEC or ACC – the Big Ten presidents might be more interested in North Carolina and Virginia.
Expansion discussions would play out in the SEC and Big Ten only if the Seminoles become available.
But we know this: If Florida State successfully challenges the grant of rights, then Clemson and North Carolina will, as well – and perhaps Miami and Virginia, too.
At that point, the ACC would become a shell of its current self.
What of the Bay Area schools?
Either Stanford and Cal would be locked into a greatly depleted ACC until 2036, schlepping their teams across the country for limited revenue and second-rate competition, or the collapse of the ACC would allow the duo (and SMU) to extricate themselves from the grant-of-rights contract.
The former scenario would be nothing short of ghastly for the Cardinal and Bears, reflecting the immense gamble made by the leadership on each campus a few months ago.
The latter scenario could lead to a reformation of the Pac-12 – a development predicted by the Hotline just prior to the CFP snubbing Florida State.
We figured the process would not unfold until the 2030s, but the speed of change appears to be accelerating.
Which current Pac-12 teams have the best odds of making the expanded College Football Playoff in the next five years? – @tpenn1997
A few weeks ago, we examined the teams best positioned for success in the Big Ten and Big 12 next season, and I’m not sure the longer-term outlook differs:
•Utah is set up to win immediately and annually in the Big 12, with Arizona on solid footing in the near term. Colorado figures to be reasonably competitive in 2024 with continued improvement – as long as Deion Sanders sticks around – while Arizona State is facing a longer rebuild.
•Oregon appears slightly better set for life in the Big Ten than USC and Washington, although all three schools are built to finish in the top third of the 18-team conference on a regular basis.
•UCLA’s prospects for success are bleak, in our opinion, unless the university administration discovers a passion for football that compares favorably to the ethos elsewhere.
The Hotline will dive into the states of Big Ten and Big 12 football in 2024 as soon as the NFL draft deadline passes in the middle of January. Until then – and with all the transfer portal mayhem – it’s impossible to project rosters.
Does the deal between Washington State, Oregon State and the West Coast Conference (for Olympics sports and basketball) hinder the next steps for rebuilding the Pac-12 and, specifically, the idea that they would merge with the Mountain West? – @pfnnewmedia
I saw a few reports suggesting the Mountain West wanted a long-term commitment that the ‘Pac-2’ schools wouldn’t agree to, hence the temporary move with the WCC. Any insight on that? – @c_rog6
We don’t see a hindrance on any front.
With their two major agreements – the football scheduling partnership with the Mountain West and the deal to become affiliate members of the WCC in basketball and other sports – the Cougars and Beavers have shrewdly avoided making any commitments beyond the 2025-26 sports season.
For both, the deck is clear starting in the spring of 2026, and that’s by design: It coincides with the expiration of the Mountain West’s contract with Fox and CBS.
Strategically, WSU and OSU have played everything just right.
And yes, there has been much speculation about the Mountain West pressuring the ‘Pac-2’ schools into lengthy partnerships.
The Hotline will take a hard pass on that topic until we confirm the details in a manner that meets our standards for publication.
But as mentioned above, WSU and OSU wisely valued flexibility above all else, including revenue.
How is Chip Kelly’s thought experiment different from the proposal by NCAA president Charlie Baker to create a subdivision? – @RockDawg3
The conceptual framework is essentially the same: It’s time to separate the heavyweight football schools from the other 300-something Division I members.
First, kudos to Kelly and Baker for thinking outside the box. (Kelly offered some key details a few months ago on the ‘Canzano and Wilner’ podcast.)
We could produce a series of articles on the merits of each plan, but here are two nuggets to consider:
•Baker’s plan called for schools in the new subdivision to allocate at least $30,000 for each countable athlete’s enhanced educational trust fund. That’s a nice starting point, but it will take Ohio State exactly 30 seconds to offer $60,000 per player and Texas A&M another minute to up the ante to $75,000. The ultimate cost of competing for blue-chip recruits and elite transfers will be exorbitant.
•Kelly’s plan calls for the 60-something schools in the independent football league to share the media revenue equally, but we see no chance of that happening. Michigan and Georgia would demand a larger share than Purdue and South Carolina, for example, and they would have full support from the TV partners.
Why? Because the current media contracts funnel cash from the networks to the conferences and then to the schools, meaning Fox is effectively paying the Big Ten the same price for the Michigan-Ohio State showdown as for the Minnesota-Illinois game.
That’s an inefficient market.
Eventually, one of two models will emerge: Either Fox and ESPN will insist on paying the schools directly, or the conferences will allow for unequal revenue distribution.
Can you offer a ballpark (or better) estimate for the release of the dates for the WSU and OSU games against the Mountain West? I’m looking to buy a few trips. – @TonyOnly_
My best guess is the dates will be finalized early next year – meaning January or the first half of February.
But as with so much about Washington State and Oregon State athletics, the situation is highly fluid.
And don’t forget, those specific schedules are merely part of the master grids pieced together by TV partners that have contracts with multiple conferences.
What impact has the breakup of the Pac-12 had on the football transfer portal? Have numbers increased, or is it hard to tell given the mayhem of transfers in general? – @MrEd315
It’s too early to confirm the impact of realignment on the outflow of players, largely because we are only halfway through the monthlong window for athletes to enter the portal.
And even then, the portal will open again in the spring.
The Hotline would argue that coaching changes have as much, if not more, influence on transfer decisions than changes in conference affiliation.
If USC misses the NCAA Tournament, how much internal pressure do you sense Andy Enfield would face? – @MattZemek
Should ASU coach Bobby Hurley be on the hot seat? I’ve been a Hurley defender, but things look bad right now. – @Harris_Mark7
Did Oregon State coach Wayne Tinkle get removed from the hot seat with the changes to the Pac-12 and the financial challenges facing the Beavers? – @bdgiddens6
The Hotline is planning a deep dive into the Hot Seat situation across Pac-12 basketball in the coming days.
Generally, we believe there could be a slew of coaching changes this spring, although Enfield’s job seems fairly secure – he has led the Trojans to three consecutive NCAA Tournament bids.
Hurley’s status could depend on the preferences of ASU’s yet-to-be-appointed athletic director.
And yes, clarity on the Pac-12’s financial and legal situations could impact OSU’s decision on Tinkle’s future.
Also, we suspect coaching changes could come this spring at Oregon, Washington and Stanford, albeit for various reasons.
How would you feel if you had donated millions of dollars toward the NIL payments to former USC quarterback Malachi Nelson or ex-UCLA quarterback Dante Moore? Do you think the transfer decisions of high NIL earners will dampen the will to spend? – Hans Ghaffari
First, I’d feel grateful to have $1 million available to donate to a college football quarterback’s bank account.
Second, I’d feel deep regret at having previously decided to donate $1 million to a college football quarterback’s bank account.
Third, I would vow to never again donate $1 million to a college football quarterback’s bank account.
Yes, the transfer decisions will impact NIL war chests, which are funded by donors. But that impact could vary greatly across the country based on passion levels.
In other words, USC and UCLA donors might take a more skeptical view of future NIL investment than, for example, desperate, deep-pocketed Texas A&M donors.
We’ll see how it plays out over the next 12-18 months.