A disagreement about whether adding Cal, Stanford, and SMU to the ACC is a good idea

Mike Taccorsi of the Sporting News wrote brilliantly, as he always does, about how meaningless this would be to add these three schools. There's no interest in these three schools.

Well, I don't know. There's interest in SMU. But in terms of students, in terms of fans, in terms of wins, the two schools that are trying to find a soft landing place from the Pac-12 do not provide the ACC with much, if anything. My only question is, or my only statement to that is, it does add California.

And until that crumbles into the sea, that's not bad. How are you, Mike? I am well, Adam, but I am vexed by your position. I understand. Look, if you want to add California, you could add San Diego State, or you could add Pomona Pacific. I wouldn't add Pomona Pacific.

I don't think they have a big following. But I agree with you about San Diego State. My opinion on this is that I think the ACC, I mean, I think this whole thing is dumb.

But I also thought all of the other things, all of the other stuff that we have seen in conference expansion, Southern Cal and UCLA, financially, sure. But that's not dumb. Oh, no. That's not dumb. It's dumb in a college way.

In a business way. But it's not dumb from an economic way. Right. No, I understand that. And I think the ACC is, you can't have it both ways. You can't be a great college conference now and not be thinking about the business of it. I don't think it's a lot of money, but it is clearly more money that will come to the ACC based on the three schools that they are adding. First of all, let me point out a couple things. Okay. First of all, if you're so desperate to expand, why expand 3,000 miles to get two programs nobody cares about without first taking a shot at, say, Memphis and Yukon, where they have real followings and you don't distort your geographic footprint at all and therefore inflate your travel costs wildly.

You can add those two programs without that. And you can still make the same money that you're talking about. It's not much.

I don't believe, like, okay, so I have had my job at the Sporting News for now, my full time job at the Sporting News for now 23 years. If somebody tells me, okay, here's what we're going to do. We're going to pay you $1,000 more a year to do a job that you don't want or like. I'm not doing it. It's only $1,000.

I mean, I don't mean to offend anybody. But I get your point, but it's only $1,000. And that's really in real terms what you're talking about with these programs. Let me ask you this question that Florida State is not happy. Does not create an existential crisis for an organization that has a ironclad 13 year contract. It just doesn't.

I agree. If there is a smart move out there to be made, and I don't know that there is because, you know, like if West Virginia felt that they were really unhappy in the big 12 because it's such a pain to go to Lubbock and now to have to go to Tempe and Salt Lake City, Salt Lake City, etc. If they felt like that was not worth it, OK, then maybe that would be worthwhile or the two schools that I mentioned.

But like people don't go to Stanford games. I know that there's no reason from a from a competitive standpoint, there's no reason. But this week, why should the ACC be the one be the conference that is thinking about this in terms of of it being a college thing?

Because it's not anymore. I'm talking about what's good business. Yeah, but I think this is better business to do nothing. Is it better business to do nothing?

Sometimes it is. I don't think it's better business to do nothing here. I think it's better business to try.

I look at this. First of all, the ACC is not doing this if it's not out of desperation. I think there is a real fear that this is going to the next five years in college football, because it's what it's about, is going to look so drastically different that if you are not at least of the same size. And this may do nothing but delay the inevitable anyway, that ultimately you're going to left get left back. And I think the ACC is trying to not be in that position. Here's the truth. You, as the ACC, are never getting the money that the SEC and the Big Ten get, because you don't have that level of passion slash interest, and you don't have that that exists in the SEC, and you don't have the level of volume and interest in terms of the huge alumni bases that you have at Michigan, Ohio State, Penn State, et cetera, and that are passionately invested as well.

You don't have that, and you're not getting it. I agree. So as the league exists, it's not getting to that level. If the Big Ten is at 60 or 70, and it's going to escalate from about 60 to about 70, and you're at 30 and change, and maybe you'll go up a little over time, you're always going to be behind. And that's true of the ACC and the Big Twelve. The Big Twelve didn't change its circumstance by adding those four schools.

Agreed. It didn't assure security, future security. Let's remember, right now, with the addition of those four schools, the Big Twelve now has 16 members.

Well, the ACC has 15, so they're not numerically imperiled in any way. And so the question is, if you're going to expand, it first has to make economic sense. I argue that it probably doesn't. But if you're going to, then there are schools that make much better economic sense than Stanford and Cal. Yeah, but it also doesn't. Again, in principle, you and I are on the same side of this.

But I look at the future I think maybe differently than you do. And I think the ACC is making a move out of desperation. It would have made a ton more sense if last summer, when the Big Ten decided, you know what, we don't want Oregon and Washington, if the ACC had recognized the handwriting and said, well, that league is going to fall apart.

So why not make a move then? Okay, so let me tell you what would have happened. Can I tell you what would have happened if they'd done that? Here's what would have happened, okay? They would have said, Oregon and Washington would have said, okay, we'll think about it. And then they would have come down to the last day, as they did in this circumstance, and they would have been just about ready to sign on the dotted line to get the Apple money. Or they'd have thought about, okay, maybe the ACC. And then the Big Ten would have swooped in and offered membership in a conference where eventually they can make much more. And they would have turned around and said, oh, we're not coming after all. You don't have the financial wherewithal to change your circumstance. You can't. So it doesn't help you to water down what you have now.

If you're a restaurant franchisor, like a fast food place, you don't go and open outposts in places that aren't going to sell any burgers just so you can say you have more restaurants. Hey, Carolina Panthers fans, Chris Lee and Dennis Cox here. We're excited to offer you all the inside information on your team with the newest member of the Capitol Broadcasting Podcast Network, Panthers Playbook. Twice a week, we'll keep you updated on your Carolina Panthers. We're talking about locker room insight, exclusive interviews, and of course, in-depth looks at all of the Panthers wins. Touchdown, Carolina!

Panthers Playbook, download and subscribe today at wrelsportsfan.com or wherever you discover your favorite podcasts. I don't know. It worked for Chick-fil-A in New York. It did.

It worked for Krispy Kreme in New York, too. Never mind. Look, again, in principle, you and I are on the same page, and I know that it's not even going to come close, and I think the numbers are way underinflated. I couldn't come up with a better word than that.

That's embarrassing. I think the numbers, the gap is much wider than it's been portrayed. I think the SEC and the Big Ten are going to be distributing nearly $100 million per school in shared media revenue within five years. The ACC, maybe if they're lucky, they'll get to 50. I don't think it's a $30 million gap. I think it's closer to a $50 million gap, and this is never going to come close to bridging the gap. Even adding Notre Dame wouldn't get the ACC all the way there.

That would be good. Thank you, Jack Swarbrick, for completely forgetting the fact that you have this contract that says you have to join the ACC if you join a league over the life of this contract when he was on with Dan Patrick. But I think the ACC needs to do something because I think nothing is a losing move, and I recognize that this is a Hail Mary, but it should mean something to the ACC network, which is something that is not figured into the numbers that Ross Dellinger put out on Sports Illustrated because it should mean something to the ACC network. That's not going to change it that much. And again, if you're going to expand for expansion's sake, expand to places that give a darn about the teams that you're expanding to bring in.

That's my point. I would add, you mentioned San Diego State, I would, and I would add Oregon State and Washington State, and now at least you've got six schools out west in your league that can play each other a lot, and maybe the field hockey team doesn't have to go cross country in either case. I would be all on board with that, but I wish they would think about doing something like that, but who the heck knows? I really believe that we are headed for, I'll just use the term, a reckoning when it comes to college football. We're always going to love the games. That's never going to change. I'm not saying it's going away, but I think the structure of the sport is going to look so drastically different within ten years, it might be even sooner than that, that we're not even going to recognize what it is. It's just going to be its own. It's going to be the NFL, which is fine. The NFL is great.

But it's going to be a college version of the NFL with more teams. That all comes down to this simple fact, whether or not the athletes become paid employees of the universities. Or just to get employee status, whether they're paid or not, whether they get employee status. You don't have to be paid to get employee status. If you get employee status, they have to pay you something. There's a minimum wage in every state. Health insurance would be, in many cases, enough. I don't think that the athletes are going to settle to not be paid if they get employee status. They won't put up with that.

There's no way. And that's where that money difference you talk about really comes in. Because there's only so much you can do with it on a football field. You can hire so many different nutritionists or strength coaches or quality control coaches or whatever you want to call them. And it only impacts the on-field product so much. At the end of the day, there are 100 roster spots or 85 roster spots on every school.

And it's somewhat of an unpredictable employee force in terms of their efficacy. You don't know whether every five-star kid is going to play like a five-star and every four-star kid is going to play like a four-star. And how many two-stars are going to turn into superstars?

You don't know for sure. You talked about that huge gap economically. The gap, competitively, is not that huge. It's just not. It hasn't been. I agree. It hasn't been for the life of college football. And the only way I could see it making a dramatic shift is if we go to where the SEC school can outbid the ACC school for the best players. I kind of think we're headed in that direction. Maybe.

But anyway, real quick. Did you turn it off when Virgil Van Dyke was handed a red card in the 28th minute? I was a little behind, so my wife wanted to have lunch on the patio. So I'm like, I'm not fighting her at 1-0 down to 10 men with Liverpool fighting it. So I didn't.

I just went out and had a nice lunch with my wife. And then I came back in and I ran it fast forward until the first call. And I thought, wow, great. We tied.

Okay. And then the second goal was literally a jaw-dropping moment. I mean, when the second one went inside the post, I was just like this. It was ridiculous. I got mowed the lawn when Van Dyke was sent off. I went and mowed the lawn, but I had it on my headphones. Mike and I are both.

He's the reason I'm a Liverpool fan. Mike, of course, you have the sporting news. I appreciate your time, man.

I'll talk to you soon. My pleasure, Adam. You got it. Mike, of course, you have the sporting news. Look, we're trying to find some disagreement, healthy disagreement on the program.

That was fun. Are you struggling to lose weight and keep it off? Tired of wasting time and money on starvation diets that lead to more frustration and stress? If there was a weight loss solution that could actually work for you, would you try it? Then head to Golo.com. I'm Steve. I lost 138 pounds in nine months on Golo.

I'm Amber. I've lost 128 pounds with Golo taking release. If you're ready to take back control of your life, head to Golo.com now and see how Golo can work for you.

That's G-O-L-O dot com. My sleep is way better. My inflammation has gone way down. Golo saved my life. I was way overweight. That's what sent me down the path.

I wanted to make sure and live for my kid. I have literally tried everything. I was on the verge of getting gastric bypass surgery, and I saw the Golo commercial, and it was the last thing I tried because it worked. Join over two million people who have found a better way to lose weight with Golo. Your healthier and happier life begins at Golo.com. That's G-O-L-O dot com. Again, G-O-L-O dot com.