Conference Realignment

Belichick has NEVER coached a college game. Why is everyone so certain that he will succeed? I doubt that he will. He won't have Brady and Gronkowski to bail him out.
and it's hardly clear how long he plans to stick around since his kid is his designated coaching heir and his buyout is negligible in a few short months.
 
Belichick has NEVER coached a college game. Why is everyone so certain that he will succeed? I doubt that he will. He won't have Brady and Gronkowski to bail him out.
The UNC fans and other ACC fans I knkw are more fascinated by this move than confident that it will be a big win for the Tar Heels. I'm in that camp - I'm not voting against Belichick being successful, but it is far from a foregone conclusion. Whatever it is, it will be interesting to watch from afar.
 
The UNC fans and other ACC fans I knkw are more fascinated by this move than confident that it will be a big win for the Tar Heels. I'm in that camp - I'm not voting against Belichick being successful, but it is far from a foregone conclusion. Whatever it is, it will be interesting to watch from afar.
Agreed,and it's hardly clear how much he cares. He's probably not thrilled that contemporaries like Pete Carroll are landing NFL jobs while he's buying pizzas in Chapel Hill.
 
Why is Carolina so attractive to the Big Ten anyway. Seems pretty clear that both of their major programs would have finished in the bottom half of the Big Ten standings had they been in the league this season. I guess the women's soccer team would be a nice boost to the Big Ten but the last I looked, expansion was not really considering women's soccer very much.
 
Why is Carolina so attractive to the Big Ten anyway. Seems pretty clear that both of their major programs would have finished in the bottom half of the Big Ten standings had they been in the league this season. I guess the women's soccer team would be a nice boost to the Big Ten but the last I looked, expansion was not really considering women's soccer very much.
Women's soccer is not unimportant, but the future is in in men's fencing. https://goduke.com/news/2025/2/1/fencing-duke-takes-down-no-1-harvard
 
Why is Carolina so attractive to the Big Ten anyway. Seems pretty clear that both of their major programs would have finished in the bottom half of the Big Ten standings had they been in the league this season. I guess the women's soccer team would be a nice boost to the Big Ten but the last I looked, expansion was not really considering women's soccer very much.
New market for the conference coupled with a guaranteed win for the big boys?
 
Why is Carolina so attractive to the Big Ten anyway. Seems pretty clear that both of their major programs would have finished in the bottom half of the Big Ten standings had they been in the league this season. I guess the women's soccer team would be a nice boost to the Big Ten but the last I looked, expansion was not really considering women's soccer very much.
The bar is low considering the previous expansion included Maryland and Rutgers.
 
The bar is low considering the previous expansion included Maryland and Rutgers.
yeah, whether or not expanding into a new large state (and TV market) may or may not matter, it's hardly clear what's in it for the B1G right now. I think the ACC will stabilize, teams are making more money than they ever have (in part thanks to Stanford, Cal, and especially SMU)....
 
yeah, whether or not expanding into a new large state (and TV market) may or may not matter, it's hardly clear what's in it for the B1G right now. I think the ACC will stabilize, teams are making more money than they ever have (in part thanks to Stanford, Cal, and especially SMU)....
I do worry about what is going to happen to ACC revenues when Cal, Stanford, and SMU jump up their percentages... but that is a while down the road.

Cal and Stanford are making a 30% share this year and every year until their 7th year in the league (2032). In year 8 they jump to a 70% share, then 75% in year 9, and 100% starting in year 10 and beyond.

SMU is making zero dollars from the ACC media contract for the next 9 years and then they go to a full share in year 10. They do get a share of money earned from the CFP and NCAA tourney but not from any TV rights deals.

Between the three of them, the ACC has an extra $60 mil to distribute to the other schools. This is how we keep up -- at least a little bit -- over the next 7 years.
 
I do worry about what is going to happen to ACC revenues when Cal, Stanford, and SMU jump up their percentages... but that is a while down the road.
Wasn't in JM Keynes who said in the long run we're all dead? I don't think the current college sports landscape is sustainable and major changes are needed. That may necessitate more realignment. Maybe even the Brian Kelly plan (4 16-team, regional super leagues). Who knows?
 
I do worry about what is going to happen to ACC revenues when Cal, Stanford, and SMU jump up their percentages... but that is a while down the road.

Cal and Stanford are making a 30% share this year and every year until their 7th year in the league (2032). In year 8 they jump to a 70% share, then 75% in year 9, and 100% starting in year 10 and beyond.

SMU is making zero dollars from the ACC media contract for the next 9 years and then they go to a full share in year 10. They do get a share of money earned from the CFP and NCAA tourney but not from any TV rights deals.

Between the three of them, the ACC has an extra $60 mil to distribute to the other schools. This is how we keep up -- at least a little bit -- over the next 7 years.
$60M divided by 15 teams is $4M per program. It's not nothing, but that's what, an 8-10% bump in TV revenue?
 
Wasn't in JM Keynes who said in the long run we're all dead? I don't think the current college sports landscape is sustainable and major changes are needed. That may necessitate more realignment. Maybe even the Brian Kelly plan (4 16-team, regional super leagues). Who knows?
Could we call them conferences?
 
Conference realignment is fascinating feels like the weight teetering above Duke’s head. But the biggest near-term issue is the House settlement. Talked to someone in the athletic department this weekend and it left me feeling concerned for the future of our sports programs (except likely basketball).

But the more pressing issue is the implementation of the House settlement. Lots of moving parts and the chance it gets help up in appeals, but if implemented it lays the groundwork for some very challenging times ahead for Duke athletics.

Nina has been signaling upcoming challenges for the Olympic sports and the House settlement would be the match that starts that fire.

As you all know, would have two big elements.

First, given our revenues, Duke can (and will) provide a revenue share of $20.5m. This would replace the NIL collectives. This is significant more than our current NIL investments. This will force Duke to reallocate resources and cut expenses in other programs. Olympics sports (and large teams like lacrosse) will have to find financial support from friends of the programs at a level well beyond what they receive from those people today.

Second, scholarship limits will be removed. Just as the rev share is kicked in, there will be demand from programs to offer more scholarships. Even if the rev share didn’t happen this would be tough. Given the cost of Duke tuition and board, we will have to focus our resources because we won’t be able to compete. Basketball and football will be fine because they will get all the resources. It is very likely we won’t be able to increase the number of scholarships we offer in other sports. This will definitely impact our competitiveness.

We can say that we have plenty of money, but I can assure you that is not how the administration sees it. Tough times are coming and they will directing their finite resources towards the revenue sports. Especially if rev distribution of ACC schools changes dragging down our revenues.

Simply put, the House settlement, and our response to it, will definitely impact our teams ina big way. Fingers crossed it doesn’t happen. There is some optimism it might not, but the trends are clear. Now I understand why Nina is so worried and vocal about the impending demise of college Olympic sports.
 
Conference realignment is fascinating feels like the weight teetering above Duke’s head. But the biggest near-term issue is the House settlement. Talked to someone in the athletic department this weekend and it left me feeling concerned for the future of our sports programs (except likely basketball).

But the more pressing issue is the implementation of the House settlement. Lots of moving parts and the chance it gets help up in appeals, but if implemented it lays the groundwork for some very challenging times ahead for Duke athletics.

Nina has been signaling upcoming challenges for the Olympic sports and the House settlement would be the match that starts that fire.

As you all know, would have two big elements.

First, given our revenues, Duke can (and will) provide a revenue share of $20.5m. This would replace the NIL collectives. This is significant more than our current NIL investments. This will force Duke to reallocate resources and cut expenses in other programs. Olympics sports (and large teams like lacrosse) will have to find financial support from friends of the programs at a level well beyond what they receive from those people today.

Second, scholarship limits will be removed. Just as the rev share is kicked in, there will be demand from programs to offer more scholarships. Even if the rev share didn’t happen this would be tough. Given the cost of Duke tuition and board, we will have to focus our resources because we won’t be able to compete. Basketball and football will be fine because they will get all the resources. It is very likely we won’t be able to increase the number of scholarships we offer in other sports. This will definitely impact our competitiveness.

We can say that we have plenty of money, but I can assure you that is not how the administration sees it. Tough times are coming and they will directing their finite resources towards the revenue sports. Especially if rev distribution of ACC schools changes dragging down our revenues.

Simply put, the House settlement, and our response to it, will definitely impact our teams ina big way. Fingers crossed it doesn’t happen. There is some optimism it might not, but the trends are clear. Now I understand why Nina is so worried and vocal about the impending demise of college Olympic sports.
Can you explain more the bolded? If the 20.5M is more than we are currently getting from the collectives, why would that result in us needing to make cuts in programs ?
 
Second, scholarship limits will be removed. Just as the rev share is kicked in, there will be demand from programs to offer more scholarships. Even if the rev share didn’t happen this would be tough. Given the cost of Duke tuition and board, we will have to focus our resources because we won’t be able to compete. Basketball and football will be fine because they will get all the resources. It is very likely we won’t be able to increase the number of scholarships we offer in other sports. This will definitely impact our competitiveness.

Perhaps this is correct, but it does not match my understanding. This article, however, does:


The key change would not be the removal of scholarship limits, but rather allowing everybody on the roster to receive a scholarship. This is the obvious result of NIL (even before the House settlement), as having a roster with 15 players but only 13 allowed to be on scholarship incentivizes the other two players being on "scholarship" via NIL for those programs that can afford to do so. This is a bigger deal in a sport like football (which would now have a roster limit of 105 vs. no limit at all) or baseball (only 11.7 scholarships, so obviously there were a lot of "scholarships" at the bigger programs). Would Duke baseball immediately offer 34 scholarships rather than 11? Doubtful. Would we increase the number beyond 11.7? Probably - I could easily see 8 position players + 6 pitchers, for instance, on full scholarship.

None of this changes the thesis that big changes are coming, but this might actually help some sports at some schools due to the roster size caps.
 
Wasn't in JM Keynes who said in the long run we're all dead? I don't think the current college sports landscape is sustainable and major changes are needed. That may necessitate more realignment. Maybe even the Brian Kelly plan (4 16-team, regional super leagues). Who knows?
Yes, Keynes was focusing economics and economic policy on the short run.

You are probably right on the inevitability of future changes. After all, look at the last five years. Surely, the changes are not over.
 
Conference realignment is fascinating feels like the weight teetering above Duke’s head. But the biggest near-term issue is the House settlement. Talked to someone in the athletic department this weekend and it left me feeling concerned for the future of our sports programs (except likely basketball).

But the more pressing issue is the implementation of the House settlement. Lots of moving parts and the chance it gets help up in appeals, but if implemented it lays the groundwork for some very challenging times ahead for Duke athletics.

Nina has been signaling upcoming challenges for the Olympic sports and the House settlement would be the match that starts that fire.

As you all know, would have two big elements.

First, given our revenues, Duke can (and will) provide a revenue share of $20.5m. This would replace the NIL collectives. This is significant more than our current NIL investments. This will force Duke to reallocate resources and cut expenses in other programs. Olympics sports (and large teams like lacrosse) will have to find financial support from friends of the programs at a level well beyond what they receive from those people today.

Second, scholarship limits will be removed. Just as the rev share is kicked in, there will be demand from programs to offer more scholarships. Even if the rev share didn’t happen this would be tough. Given the cost of Duke tuition and board, we will have to focus our resources because we won’t be able to compete. Basketball and football will be fine because they will get all the resources. It is very likely we won’t be able to increase the number of scholarships we offer in other sports. This will definitely impact our competitiveness.

We can say that we have plenty of money, but I can assure you that is not how the administration sees it. Tough times are coming and they will directing their finite resources towards the revenue sports. Especially if rev distribution of ACC schools changes dragging down our revenues.

Simply put, the House settlement, and our response to it, will definitely impact our teams ina big way. Fingers crossed it doesn’t happen. There is some optimism it might not, but the trends are clear. Now I understand why Nina is so worried and vocal about the impending demise of college Olympic sports.

I don't really understand the logic here. Let's say boosters are currently giving $10M per year to the Duke collectives. Is Nina assuming that $10M will dry up overnight vs some or all of it being redirected from the collectives back to Duke Athletics?

Also, while I get that the new revenue sharing model will put more pressure on non-revenue sports, I still don't buy that Duke will be forced to axe any non-rev sports. It just sounds to me like Nina is using tough words to convince alums to support their favorite non-rev sport. Not faulting her - it's what she should be doing to keep the money flowing.

But Duke Men's Swimming existed long before the huge football TV contracts...
 
I don't really understand the logic here. Let's say boosters are currently giving $10M per year to the Duke collectives. Is Nina assuming that $10M will dry up overnight vs some or all of it being redirected from the collectives back to Duke Athletics?

Also, while I get that the new revenue sharing model will put more pressure on non-revenue sports, I still don't buy that Duke will be forced to axe any non-rev sports. It just sounds to me like Nina is using tough words to convince alums to support their favorite non-rev sport. Not faulting her - it's what she should be doing to keep the money flowing.

But Duke Men's Swimming existed long before the huge football TV contracts...
NIL collectives will be replaced by the rev share. The rev share exceeds the size of the current NIL for Duke. Dollars will be diverted from non-revenue sports. This has already been decided at Duke.

Scholarship limits change but the school needs to decide where to allocate The school has decided. No additional scholarships for Olympic sorts. Instead extra resources directed towards football.

So my point was House requires schools to spend more money. That money can be spent on all sports or some sports. At Duke, extra expenses will be directed to football and basketball and not all sports. That is the policy that has been put in place.

Probably the “right” answer. But sports like baseball, lacrosse, soccer, and tennis will likely feel the pinch.

Expect the SEC non-football sports to keep getting better and better.
 
NIL collectives will be replaced by the rev share. The rev share exceeds the size of the current NIL for Duke. Dollars will be diverted from non-revenue sports. This has already been decided at Duke.

Scholarship limits change but the school needs to decide where to allocate The school has decided. No additional scholarships for Olympic sorts. Instead extra resources directed towards football.

So my point was House requires schools to spend more money. That money can be spent on all sports or some sports. At Duke, extra expenses will be directed to football and basketball and not all sports. That is the policy that has been put in place.

Probably the “right” answer. But sports like baseball, lacrosse, soccer, and tennis will likely feel the pinch.

Expect the SEC non-football sports to keep getting better and better.
Ok, I understand all this. I would guess at all schools, not just Duke, the rev share will be directed to football and basketball. You didn't acknowledge my point that whatever booster money is flowing to collectives today can now flow back to Duke Athletics. That won't fund the $20.5M but it could fund a sizable chunk of it.
 
Back
Top