Cal and Stanford agreed to join the ACC in the summer of 2023, signing their lives away for 12 years and partial shares of the conference’s revenue.

This week, the schools received confirmation their new home will remain intact for the duration of the agreement.

ESPN exercised the option to extend its media rights contract with the ACC until the summer of 2036. The outcome was widely expected but well received nonetheless across the bicoastal conference.

“We appreciate the ongoing partnership with ESPN and their enduring commitment that further solidifies the ACC as a premier league in all facets,” ACC commissioner Jim Phillips said Thursday in a joint statement from the conference and its network partner.

ESPN’s decision to extend the deal, which was first reported by ESPN (naturally), likely means the end of realignment at the highest levels of college sports, at least for the remainder of the decade.

Had the network declined the option, there would have been panic in the streets and ivory towers alike. The media rights agreement with the ACC would have expired in two years, potentially leaving the longstanding members and the newcomers to scramble for a new deal or membership in other leagues.

Cal and Stanford might have been rendered homeless just as they were getting comfortable.

Instead, the realignment wave that propelled the Bears and Cardinal into the ACC in the first place — after the collapse of the Pac-12 in the summer of 2023 — should come to an end for the power conferences (ACC, Big 12, Big Ten and SEC).

In our view, the next rupture point is 2028-29, when the Big Ten likely will assess its membership situation in advance of media rights negotiations for the contract cycle that begins in the summer of 2030.

ESPN’s report on the ACC partnership contained an additional piece of news — one deeply connected to the contract extension — that could impact on the Bears and Cardinal as they attempt to field consistently competitive football teams.

The conference is restructuring its revenue model in an attempt to satisfy Florida State and Clemson and prompt the duo to end their lawsuits against the conference. If approved, the change likely will exacerbate the disparity in annual revenue sent to the Bay Area campuses. (More on that momentarily.)

Per ESPN: “Under the proposed plan, a percentage of the ACC’s television revenue would be included in a ‘brand’ fund, and that money would then be distributed to schools that annually generate the most revenue for the conference in football and men’s and women’s basketball — with Clemson, Florida State, Miami and North Carolina likely at the top of the pyramid, sources told ESPN.”

This is not 2005, when Cal had Marshawn Lynch, or 2015, when Christian McCaffrey played for Stanford. Football has lost relevance on both campuses at precisely the time it has become more critical than ever within the college sports ecosystem.

(The same goes for the men’s basketball programs, and the extent to which the brand value of the Stanford women’s team will make a difference in the ACC’s model is highly questionable.)

If this were the only financial challenge facing the schools, they might be able to adjust and thrive. But the biggest obstacle remains intact: Their partial revenue shares.

Because the schools were desperate for a home following the collapse of the Pac-12, they agreed to join the ACC at steep discounts.

Officially, the Bears and Cardinal are full-share members for 12 years. But according to Cal’s approval letter, which was obtained by the Hotline through a public records request, the Bears must “contribute” money back to the conference for nine years.

That contribution is more than a few million dollars here and there; it’s tens of millions, year after year.

According to Cal’s membership letter — Stanford is believed to have agreed to the same terms — the contributions are as follows:

— “67% of distributions of Media Revenue to Cal during each of the first 7 years following the Effective Date;

— “30% of distributions of Media Revenue to Cal during the 8th year following the Effective Date; and

— “25% of distributions of Media Revenue to Cal during the 9th year following the Effective Date.”

Related Articles

Big Ten 2025 football forecast: Penn State favored over Ohio State, Oregon

Big 12 MBB power rankings: Houston beats Kansas, Iowa State splits

WBB West power rankings: Unbeaten UCLA on top, 1-loss USC next

Big 12 football 2025 forecast: BYU, Texas Tech & Arizona State on top

College Football Playoff, realignment & March Madness: Our 2025 predictions

Our rough estimates, which are based on ACC media revenue projections, suggest each school will take home $195 million less in distributions than the legacy ACC schools over the nine-year period.

And that’s before the “brand” distribution model takes effect.

Both athletic departments will receive financial assistance from central campus, and they must double down on fundraising efforts, as well. (Cal also has the benefit of a $10 million payment from UCLA over each of three years, courtesy of the UC Regents.)

Admittedly, the extent to which the revenue disparity impacts each football team in a given year will be difficult to measure. Our hunch is the Bears and Cardinal muster respectable seasons from time to time. Pluck the right quarterback out of the transfer portal, or employ the right coordinator, and nine wins could follow.

But consistent success will be challenging. And high-level winning — competing with the likes of Clemson, Miami and Florida State for playoff bids over the sweep of the next 11 seasons — seems daunting.

Beyond daunting, actually.

It’s a tangled web, for sure. The steps required to pacify Clemson and Florida State and maintain peace in the ACC will make it more difficult for the Bears and Cardinal to compete.

But at least their new home should remain intact for the rest of the decade.

*** Send suggestions, comments and tips (confidentiality guaranteed) to [email protected] or call 408-920-5716

*** Follow me on the social media platform X: @WilnerHotline