PAC soon on the Prowl again for more Football members...

[DentonStang]

14 hours ago, NT80 said:

PAC has 7 now for football, need 8 by 2026 season.  But really prefer 9-10 by 2027 for better scheduling.   

The American Athletic Conference (AAC) buyout fee is $10 million plus a 27-month notice period.

The PAC has a war chest of funds to help with buyouts if needed.   

I think Texas State buyout from the SBC is only $5 mil.

So.eone up above posted PAC is aiming at $10M/school media value.  You think Texas State is worth $10M?  I can't see it.

[wardly]

On 3/1/2025 at 12:17 AM, NT80 said:

Info courtesy of @MCMLXXX on the Conference ReAlignment forum...

St. Marys appears very close to being added for basketball.

Texas St. listed as "all but done" and UNT now listed as "possible" along with UTSA in this updated PAC expansion video.

 

The BIG Mountain podcast says St. Mary's in for basketball and Texas State for all sports. Texas State has a cheap buyout [$5 million] while the AAC program buyouts are cost prohibitive [$15 million]. The PAC then takes a pause and see how their arbitration with the MWC plays out.

[NT80]

19 minutes ago, DentonStang said:

So.eone up above posted PAC is aiming at $10M/school media value.  You think Texas State is worth $10M?  I can't see it.

No, not in today's $.   

The figures I saw mentioned was that media was bidding on the western time slots, and it didn't matter which G5 programs were added, that they were all valued the same. 

But then I saw there was belief that some Central Time zone schools would add appeal with some of the media platforms, getting into Texas markets.   Maybe they are selling it as these 7 base schools plus 3 additions = $10/mil each/yr?

Media deal supposed to be finalized by end of this month.   Then the MWC poaching court case settled or mediated, then the $$ remaining in the PAC bank will be know along with future revenue expectations to see potential invitees.

We'll see if any of it is close to factual, lol....

[NT80]

14 minutes ago, wardly said:

The BIG Mountain podcast says St. Mary's in for basketball and Texas State for all sports. Texas State has a cheap buyout [$5 million] while the AAC program buyouts are cost prohibitive [$15 million]. The PAC then takes a pause and see how their arbitration with the MWC plays out.

$10 mil exit fees with 27 months notice = notice to leave AAC by June of 2025 to play in PAC in Sept 2027 season?

[wardly]

2 hours ago, NT80 said:

$10 mil exit fees with 27 months notice = notice to leave AAC by June of 2025 to play in PAC in Sept 2027 season?

Thanks for correcting me. I was close enough for government work.

[GMG_Dallas]

3 hours ago, NT80 said:

No, not in today's $.   

The figures I saw mentioned was that media was bidding on the western time slots, and it didn't matter which G5 programs were added, that they were all valued the same. 

But then I saw there was belief that some Central Time zone schools would add appeal with some of the media platforms, getting into Texas markets.   Maybe they are selling it as these 7 base schools plus 3 additions = $10/mil each/yr?

This would make a lot of sense and is how I figured things would play out. Media partners have probably told them $10 mil per school is what they're worth regardless of which G5 schools they add. The Texas market is great but I don't think the G5 Texas schools available currently bring enough value to boost the media deal (including us, sadly). Now, if I'm the PAC, I do see the Texas market as a huge area of opportunity and who knows what some of the G5 Texas schools can accomplish with more money.

I've read on Redit threads that the new PAC really values basketball and considering some of the additions (Gonzaga, St Mary's), that seems pretty obvious. No clue how plugged-in those reddit members are so it could just be basic fan observations. If you're looking at the two main revenue sports, we have a clear edge in basketball over the other Texas G5s available. If they want to be a basketball conference for the sake of earning a bunch of tournament credits to boost their earnings, there's not many better schools available than us.

Here's to hoping we get an invite and take a chance.

[NT80]

52 minutes ago, wardly said:

Thanks for correcting me. I was close enough for government work.

I think it is around $15 mil for less than 27 months notice. 

But some schools that left the AAC before we got in negotiated a lessor early-out fee.

[NT80]

39 minutes ago, GMG_Dallas said:

I've read on Redit threads that the new PAC really values basketball and considering some of the additions (Gonzaga, St Mary's), that seems pretty obvious. No clue how plugged-in those reddit members are so it could just be basic fan observations. If you're looking at the two main revenue sports, we have a clear edge in basketball over the other Texas G5s available. If they want to be a basketball conference for the sake of earning a bunch of tournament credits to boost their earnings, there's not many better schools available than us.

Here's to hoping we get an invite and take a chance.

Yes, NCAA bids bring in a lot of revenue for a Conference.   The PAC hopes to be a multi-bid league.   

Texas is also valued for recruiting by PAC coaches.   Plus, getting their teams seen to the middle and eastern time zones is important to an AD. 

It would be a risk/reward opportunity for North Texas.   We bring good men's and women's basketball, and beat Oregon St this season, to maybe open some eyes up there?  Hopefully football plays well hosting Washington St in football this fall.  Playing in DFW would be a good recruiting trip for the PAC.

I'm just not sure Jared is a salesman for such an endeavor.   He seems more like a sit-back-and-wait for someone to call, rather than initiating contact and being a builder/promoter of the program.  

[NM Green]

I agree about Jared. He seems to go with flow of the other Texas schools and our AAC brethren. Notice this department really only hops into marketing action after we biatch about poor marketing efforts then he puts some nice things together. But initiating is not what I think of when I see Jared. I see methodical, safe, absolute proof of results first before acting.

A move to the PAC would require a Maverick. If we took the chance and moved with Texas State we would leapfrog UNLV UTSA the rest of the Mountain West, and others who would secretly desire to move to a higher profile league.

GMG
 

 

[DeepGreen]

12 hours ago, NT80 said:

I'm just not sure Jared is a salesman for such an endeavor.   He seems more like a sit-back-and-wait for someone to call, rather than initiating contact and being a builder/promoter of the program.  

Are you saying Jared is lazy?

[wardly]

49 minutes ago, DeepGreen said:

Are you saying Jared is lazy?

Just my guess and by golly, but UTSA and TSU are basically in the same market. UNT with either TSU or UTSA makes more sense . UNT covers the DFW market and TSU  Austin/ San Antonia. This may be a slam dunk for TSU because of the low SBC buyout as well as their small media revenue . However I just don't see UNT as a risk taker. The PAC will know its media rights income this month which I doubt will be more than the AAC. In addition I have NEVER been right on conference realignment as I continue to wrongfully believe that geography matters.

[MrAlien]

The administration has to be proactive, the AAC as we know it will not last much longer.  As soon as the ACC looses their big brand schools they will raid the AAC, and UNT is not going to be on their list. 

[MCMLXXX]

1 hour ago, MrAlien said:

The administration has to be proactive, the AAC as we know it will not last much longer.  As soon as the ACC looses their big brand schools they will raid the AAC, and UNT is not going to be on their list. 

Who is on their list?

[NT80]

1 hour ago, MCMLXXX said:

Who is on their list?

Memphis, Tulane, USF.

[NT80]

3 hours ago, DeepGreen said:

Are you saying Jared is lazy?

No, not lazy.  He does the basics.  But not forward thinking.   A move to the PAC requires someone willing to cheerlead the fanbase and Admin, to go above the basics.   I don't seem him doing that.  Out of his comfort zone.   

Like one fan told me "He won't make eye contact or approach you; you have to approach him."

[DeepGreen]

23 minutes ago, NT80 said:

No, not lazy.  He does the basics.  But not forward thinking.   A move to the PAC requires someone willing to cheerlead the fanbase and Admin, to go above the basics.   I don't seem him doing that.  Out of his comfort zone.   

Like one fan told me "He won't make eye contact or approach you; you have to approach him."

Who hired Jared?  I'm not a hiring expert, but I hired many employees during my career.  One would pick up on things like eye contact, etc.  Again, maybe Jared did the right things during the interview.  I hired many great people who could interview lights out.  Then they turned to duds.

[GMG_Dallas]

21 minutes ago, DeepGreen said:

Who hired Jared?  

Wren Baker hired him. Smastrek promoted him. Seems Mosley was the comfortable pick. I believe that in order to be great, you have to first be uncomfortable. We keep missing the mark on that.

"he kept coming back to Mosley as someone who was already familiar with UNT"

https://www.untsystem.edu/news/unt-introduces-new-athletic-director-mosley-and-new-football-coach-morris.php

[SMU2006]

On 3/2/2025 at 3:04 PM, DentonStang said:

So.eone up above posted PAC is aiming at $10M/school media value.  You think Texas State is worth $10M?  I can't see it.

Absolutely not.

Tier payout systems are going to become the norm, however.  Its only a matter of time before the networks look at the Big 10 and SEC and tell them that in no world does Mississippi State/Vandy deserve as much revenue as Texas/Georgia or Northwestern/Purdue getting equal share to Ohio State/Michigan.

When the existing TV contracts are up for renewal you're going to see a massive shift towards brand and incentive-laden revenue distributions that will further enrich the established schools and the ones who have been sliding by with a free meal ticket left fighting for scraps.

[NT80]

1 hour ago, SMU2006 said:

Tier payout systems are going to become the norm, however.  Its only a matter of time before the networks look at the Big 10 and SEC and tell them that in no world does Mississippi State/Vandy deserve as much revenue as Texas/Georgia or Northwestern/Purdue getting equal share to Ohio State/Michigan.

When the existing TV contracts are up for renewal you're going to see a massive shift towards brand and incentive-laden revenue distributions that will further enrich the established schools and the ones who have been sliding by with a free meal ticket left fighting for scraps.

Conferences will be the ones to start tier payouts.  The MWC already has, and the ACC soon will.  Boise was given more revenue when the MWC was whole. 

Recently, the downsized MWC gave UNLV and Air Force a higher revenue percentage to remain committed to the conference.  

Now the ACC is going to tiers based on viewership and success.   Also, an escape from the ACC will be allowed starting in 2030 with reduced penalties...

Sources: FSU, Clemson expected to reach settlement with ACC

"According to sources, the settlement includes two key objectives: establishing a new revenue-distribution model based on viewership and a change in the financial penalties for exiting the league's grant of rights before its conclusion in June 2036."

 

"Although the settlement will not make substantive changes to the grant of rights, it is expected that there will be declining financial penalties for schools that exit before 2036, with the steepest decreases coming after 2030 -- something that would apply to any ACC school, not just Clemson and Florida State.

The specific financial figures for schools to get released from the grant of rights were not readily available. But the total cost to exit the league after the 2029-30 season is expected to drop below $100 million, sources said."

https://www.espn.com/college-football/story/_/id/44093338/sources-fsu-clemson-expected-reach-settlement-acc

 

[SMU2006]

2 hours ago, NT80 said:

Conferences will be the ones to start tier payouts.  The MWC already has, and the ACC soon will.  Boise was given more revenue when the MWC was whole. 

Recently, the downsized MWC gave UNLV and Air Force a higher revenue percentage to remain committed to the conference.  

Now the ACC is going to tiers based on viewership and success.   Also, an escape from the ACC will be allowed starting in 2030 with reduced penalties...

Sources: FSU, Clemson expected to reach settlement with ACC

"According to sources, the settlement includes two key objectives: establishing a new revenue-distribution model based on viewership and a change in the financial penalties for exiting the league's grant of rights before its conclusion in June 2036."

 

"Although the settlement will not make substantive changes to the grant of rights, it is expected that there will be declining financial penalties for schools that exit before 2036, with the steepest decreases coming after 2030 -- something that would apply to any ACC school, not just Clemson and Florida State.

The specific financial figures for schools to get released from the grant of rights were not readily available. But the total cost to exit the league after the 2029-30 season is expected to drop below $100 million, sources said."

https://www.espn.com/college-football/story/_/id/44093338/sources-fsu-clemson-expected-reach-settlement-acc

 

The exit fees have always been a red herring.  The real crux of the issue for FSU and Clemson is the GOR which runs through 2036.  That and the fact the Big 10 and SEC have expressed no desire to expand beyond their current makeup.  It could change certainly, but the Big 10 and SEC are next in line for a tiered media distribution.  If the Big 12 is truly getting in bed with private equity you can absolutely be assured schools that are underperforming will be given virtually nothing with the threat of relegation looming over their heads.

[NT80]

2 minutes ago, SMU2006 said:

The exit fees have always been a red herring.  The real crux of the issue for FSU and Clemson is the GOR which runs through 2036.  That and the fact the Big 10 and SEC have expressed no desire to expand beyond their current makeup.  It could change certainly, but the Big 10 and SEC are next in line for a tiered media distribution.  If the Big 12 is truly getting in bed with private equity you can absolutely be assured schools that are underperforming will be given virtually nothing with the threat of relegation looming over their heads.

GOR in the new settlement would travel with the leaving school.  Expect changes in 2030!

[SMU2006]

2 minutes ago, NT80 said:

GOR in the new settlement would travel with the leaving school.  Expect changes in 2030!

[NT80]

6 minutes ago, SMU2006 said:

You:  “The real crux of the issue for FSU and Clemson is the GOR which runs through 2036.”

It no longer runs thru 2036.  It will now leave when a team leaves.  Teams will be leaving before 2036….like in 2030.  

[SMU2006]

6 minutes ago, NT80 said:

You:  “The real crux of the issue for FSU and Clemson is the GOR which runs through 2036.”

It no longer runs thru 2036.  It will now leave when a team leaves.  Teams will be leaving before 2036….like in 2030.  

The Exit Fee Was Never the Real Barrier—It's the GOR The idea that the ACC’s so-called “exit fee” dropping below $100 million suddenly makes it easier for FSU and Clemson to leave is a red herring. The real obstacle has never been the exit fee—it’s the Grant of Rights (GOR). Paying the exit fee only gets a school out of the conference; it does nothing to reclaim the media rights they signed away. As long as the GOR remains enforceable, the ACC—not FSU or Clemson—controls their media revenue through 2036. That’s why their legal arguments have focused on sovereign immunity rather than traditional contract defenses. They aren’t fighting the exit fee—they’re fighting to break the GOR and take their media rights with them. The GOR is a Copyright License—And Long-Term Licenses Are Enforceable At its core, the ACC’s GOR isn’t just a contract—it’s an IP license. FSU and Clemson voluntarily licensed their media rights to the ACC for a defined term, much like a content creator licenses their work to a distributor. Long-term IP licensing is standard practice—media companies, sports leagues, and content owners routinely sign deals spanning decades, and courts consistently uphold them. In fact, under 17 U.S.C. § 203, federal copyright law permits authors to terminate an assignment only after 35 years. If Congress considers 35 years a reasonable licensing period for original creative works, a 20-year GOR for college media rights is hardly excessive. What makes the GOR particularly strong—and problematic for Clemson and FSU— is that it covers not just existing works but prospective works (future games). Courts have consistently upheld such sophisticated commercial arrangements, and the standard for unconscionability is extraordinarily high in this context—virtually insurmountable for universities that willingly entered these agreements with full legal representation.

[NT80]

7 minutes ago, SMU2006 said:

The Exit Fee Was Never the Real Barrier—It's the GOR The idea that the ACC’s so-called “exit fee” dropping below $100 million suddenly makes it easier for FSU and Clemson to leave is a red herring. The real obstacle has never been the exit fee—it’s the Grant of Rights (GOR). 

Sources told ESPN that there'd just be one number to exit the league, not the combination of a traditional exit fee and the loss of media from the grant of rights.