ACC Kickoff week is done, so what did we learn from it??

I just saw Luke at Operation Football in Charlotte and you're back. You have a big smile on your face, Luke Tkach.

You can follow him on X at Luke Tkach. And that's kind of weird. You're on X, Luke. I don't care. You threw me off.

I was like, no, that's not right, Adam. I just said that. Yeah.

Everybody's on X these days. Strange that we're going to get away with that. Will your big picture take away from what we talked about or everything that happened over the last three days in Charlotte is what? That the ACC, for the first time in a couple of years, isn't in a perpetual moment of immediate crisis and existential crisis. And part of that's because there's no TV money out there, which is what prompted the Oklahoma Texas move that kind of overshadowed kickoff two years ago. And it's what prompted the USC UCLA move that sort of overshadowed kickoff last year. And, you know, like this media operation in three days this year, two days previously, there's a sort of convention feel to it. It's kind of everybody in the ACC getting together. It's the closest thing to the basketball tournament that we have for football. And because of that, when you have these sort of big picture issues that overshadow things, I think there's more of a sense of panic than there would be if it just happened in June. And I think we definitely saw that last year where it's USC and UCLA happens. Everyone comes to kickoff like, oh, what do we need to do? It's crazy. ACC is in big trouble.

Granite. Well, we spent the last year talking about that. Nobody's been able to figure out a way around the granites and all the squeaky wheels that cough Florida State and elsewhere got slapped around at Amelia Island when they got called on their bluff.

And so now everybody's quiet and they're just there's no reason for anybody to move because there's no TV money. The PAC 12 is finding that out the extremely hard way as we speak. The PAC 12 is more likely to end up on the ACC network. The ACC is a rights holder of another conference, which is a wild thing. Can you imagine Jim Phillips and Jimmy Pataro at ESPN sitting down to do the PAC 12 football television schedule?

But that was my takeaway. You got a couple of national potential national title contenders. You got a couple of sleeper teams that could make a run at the ACC title.

And that's what people were talking about. The quarterbacks is Florida State for real as Clemson, you know, can they keep it up? How about State? How about Carolina? No one was worried about, you know, Virginia jumping to the PAC 12 or whatever.

So that was my takeaway as if this is a moment of relative calm. Of course, I wrote that tempting fate and then, you know, 12 hours later, Colorado jumps to the big 12 and we're right back where we started. Colorado jumps and then Jim Phillips tells David Hale and Andrea Adelson that we would be open to expansion again. And we know right now that expansion is likely not going to involve Notre Dame unless their TV money is also dried up, which I guess may be the case. But everything I've read is that NBC would still be able to provide Notre Dame with enough financial backing where it would not have to be a financial move for them. If that's incorrect, then maybe Notre Dame is part of it.

But then I'm hearing that Oregon and Washington would be open to having an arrangement with the ACC. And I just don't know where this is ever going to end. I know none of it is good.

No, none of it is good. And I don't think I think the USC UCLA thing is one of the worst thing anyone has done for college athletes in a long, long time. It's going to be terrible for athletes in the Big Ten, not just at USC and UCLA, but across the Big Ten. I don't think it makes any sense to have a conference with NC State and UNC and Oregon and Washington in it. You know, football ruins everything.

That's the one thing we've learned in this last decade of college. Everything football touches, it ruins. I think there is more of a window for Notre Dame to enter the ACC now than there was last year, than there was two years ago when Jack Sorbrick and Greg Sankey were trying to push through their little college football playoff expansion plan that filled all their needs and got called on that. Mike, you raised the point about finances with NBC, and I think you're right about that. I think the flip side is if Notre Dame finds out that they are the biggest property on Peacock, then suddenly the ESPN option with the ACC might look a little better. Because in the end, Notre Dame's insistence on football independence is about arrogance.

It's about ego. It's about saying we're bigger than everyone else. We have our own TV deal. We're on NBC. We play games in Ireland. We play the schedule that we insist is some sort of purity. If we play Stanford, that's not like anyone else playing a cross-country game. It's Notre Dame Stanford.

Of course, it's blessed by St. Stanford. You start playing on Peacock and you lead in his Real Housewives or whatever. Your ego and your perception of your program is this thing that's above everyone else might change.

Or the money. Hey, NBC tells Notre Dame that, hey, look, man, times are tight for everybody. And we're giving you the Pac-12 treatment. We want you back, but we're not going to blah, blah, blah. All of a sudden, maybe ACC and the ESPN do look, or ASP and the ACC do start to look good.

But no, I don't think we're done with it, Adam. But I think it's a lot harder for parts to move now than it did than it was a summer ago than it was two summers ago. There is no television money out there. And the reason Phillips can say, hey, we would expand is because he knows even Notre Dame at this point in this market in the summer of 2023 wouldn't move the needle on television rights fees.

There just isn't the money out there. ESPN is looking at or Disney is looking at doing some sort of strategic partnership in ESPN, which may mean pulling it off of ABC and putting it into NBCUniversal. It may mean co-opting the NBA or the NBA.

The market is terrible. And the last thing you want to do is be that casino host in the Pac-12 trying to sell your league to somebody. And all anyone's telling you is, well, maybe Paramount Plus would be interested in the Pac-12 After Dark.

Something like that. Luke Tkach of the NNO. Let me, before we only have a few more minutes left, let me fold this into the Carolina Hurricanes. Vladimir Tarasenko opted for a one-year, five-year deal, a one-year, $5 million deal with the Ottawa Senators. I never really could close my eyes and process Tarasenko with Carolina because I couldn't figure out, was he really going to forecheck like that? Was he really going to play Carolina style since the Hurricanes play one way? Every line plays the same type of way.

So I never really bought into that. And Tony D'Angelo is here now. Sebastian Aho's got a new contract. I actually think the Hurricanes have done pretty good business so far in the off season.

Where are they? Yeah, no, I think they're a good chip. The one area that I would look at was I don't think they will because I think they're okay with the Asparico, Kiami and Jack Jure is looking to upgrade down the middle.

Yeah, they seem okay with that. I wouldn't have gone out and gotten Tony D'Angelo, but you know, every time Tom Dunham thinks he's getting a $5 million player for $1.6 million, it just always happens to be Tony D'Angelo. And that's also a small enough deal where if things don't go well or whatever, they can bury him in the minors. They can even buy him out. My guess is he ends up playing about 30 games when someone's hurt or in the second half of back to back on road trips when the second power play unit's struggling. So it's not like a huge deal. This isn't like two years ago when they had everything riding on Tony D'Angelo.

He's basically an extra spare tire in the trunk at this point. And look, he's proven he can come here and keep his nose clean and not cause problems except in the playoffs when they play the Bruins or the Rangers, which certainly could happen again. But no, I've said this all along. I said this after July 1st and that week I was on vacation, so I didn't really write it then, but I've written it since. I think they did really good business. I think you would up and down the changes they made this summer. They brought the goalies back, which you could say, hey, maybe they wanted to upgrade a little, but they did it at a price that allows them to do so many other things on the roster.

The oil law deal was a great weaponization of short term cap space. It's one of the things they do really well. You know, people were like, oh, they're out there. They're in the free agent market. It's like, well, no, they're just doing what they always do. They spotted something that works for them and they're willing to overpay for two years rather than do a five year deal.

Bunting fills a need. And that's when you get back to Tarasenko on the question you asked about him. I really thought he was the guy that could have helped them at the deadline last year at the right price. Obviously, the Rangers got their first and he didn't do a ton for them, just given the lack of scoring on the wings with the injured players. I wasn't as excited about bringing him in as a free agent this summer, not just for the reasons that that used to be. But you just look at the course of his career over the last few years, you're really taking on a reclamation project.

To me, he's the guy, the guy who signs a one year, five million dollar deal with Ottawa and hopes he plays well and gets to a team that's any good. So I don't think there's any luck. Nothing's lost there for the hurricanes. There's no missed opportunity there. If there was a missed opportunity, it was last March, Tarasenko.

And even then, maybe there wasn't. I agree. Real quick about this, because you seem to think that they go into the season with the roster that they have, which means seven NHL defenseman, no offense, Dylan Coughlin.

If we add him, it's eight. I think that if there's going to be a deal made with a defenseman, meaning Brett Pesci, just like Justin Falk five years ago, it doesn't happen until training camp. But, I mean, I'd be more than happy to go into the season with the roster that they've got. Yeah.

Well, the thing is, OK, yes. Is there some semi immediate pressure to deal with the contract situations, whether it's Pesci or Shea or even a table, a turbine and these guys who are up after the season? Yeah, of course there is. And especially when you're dealing with an asset like Brett Pesci, someone who's going to be very desirable to other teams, you want to make sure you do that right. But, yeah, I don't I don't think there's any rush.

I don't think there's any rush in November. You know, especially now that you have Orlov, you have this huge sort of cushion in your defensive depth. But but no, I if that deal didn't happen at the draft, which obviously it didn't and there is no new contract out there, then no, I don't think there's any hurry with that. That could be a trade deadline deal.

You know, as crazy as that sounds, they will at some point and they may get to this point with Tara Vainen as well. They will at some point have to make sure that doesn't become an asset they lose for nothing. It's not a big enough cap number where you say, OK, like the Leafs are trying to talk themselves into with Nylander where you say, OK, if he rocks, that's not great. But then we have ten million dollars to spend. We didn't otherwise. That's not the case here. You got to get something if you're going to make that change.

Oh, you know what? I don't think you do. I think the the asset that you want is to raise a cup. And I think Brett Pesci gets you closer to winning a Stanley Cup than not having Brett Pesci because they're not replacing Brett Pesci. Right. I just think that they're I just I don't think they I don't think they're closer to winning a cup unless you're bringing in a stud that can play in your top six, preferably in the middle. I just don't think you're getting better. And I think that everything this year should be about winning a Stanley Cup. This is the group that's got to go really push for it.

But that's just that's just what I think. Welcome back from Charlotte. Luke, I missed you on the train last night. I drove this time. No train for me. What a traffic. And that's that's the that was a lucky break. All right, A.G., I mean, I'll talk to you later. Luke, the cock of the news and observer here on the Adam Gold Show.