Sports Business Daily: Fox- Big Ten close to 6 yr 1.5 billion deal for 1/2 Big Ten rights

[Arizona Knight]

This is the key. The Big Ten is likely going to get 500 million per year. If 250 for half is the overpay part. I don't think the Big ten will average 44.5m per year.

Recent reports indicate that Big Ten schools are projecting $44.5 million in annual revenue by the first year of the new TV contract (2017-18) for 12 of its 14 schools. Maryland and Rutgers aren’t fully vested until they’ve been in the conference six years. The majority of that revenue will come from the league’s media contracts. The Big Ten Network pays $8 million per school annually. If the new deal eventually reaches $500 million per year, as Commissioner Jim Delany has sought, that would average $35.7 million per school once all of the schools are able to take a full share. Combined with the BTN revenue, the Big Ten’s annual revenue would reach a whopping $44 million per school.

Even if the other half goes for $200mm we are still looking at $32mm/year. Also, the $8mm/year for the BTN was the 2014 payout. 2015 has not been announced yet but it will be another jump as revenue increases and profits withheld due to on boarding of Maryland and Rutgers expire. By 2017 the BTN payout will be something tangibly greater than $8mm. If you go conservatively with 10 that's $42mm before NCAA, CCG (although that may be rolled into T1 deal), CFP, Bowls, etc. Full members will be north of $50mm in 2017.

 

[WickedOrange]

Even if the other half goes for $200mm we are still looking at $32mm/year. Also, the $8mm/year for the BTN was the 2014 payout. 2015 has not been announced yet but it will be another jump as revenue increases and profits withheld due to on boarding of Maryland and Rutgers expire. By 2017 the BTN payout will be something tangibly greater than $8mm. If you go conservatively with 10 that's $42mm before NCAA, CCG (although that may be rolled into T1 deal), CFP, Bowls, etc. Full members will be north of $50mm in 2017.

Don't forget about all those Rutgers tournament credits!

 

[TexanMark]

Tirico going to NBC...could they (NBC) be prepping in case they grab more CFB? Mike is living in Detroit...a perfect spot to travel out of to the boring B1G games.

ESPN lowballing tells me they aren't willing to overpay...cuz it would have a negative outcome of causing instability.

 

[nzm136]

Tirico going to NBC...could they (NBC) be prepping in case they grab more CFB? Mike is living in Detroit...a perfect spot to travel out of to the boring B1G games.

ESPN lowballing tells me they aren't willing to overpay...cuz it would have a negative outcome of causing instability.

I can only imagine the commentary on ESPN if they don't end up with any non-sublicensed B1G content. OSU and Michigan will be the only teams with substantial coverage, and even then, the back-handed complements will ROLL in.

 

[sutomcat]

This is the key. The Big Ten is likely going to get 500 million per year. If 250 for half is the overpay part. I don't think the Big ten will average 44.5m per year.

Recent reports indicate that Big Ten schools are projecting $44.5 million in annual revenue by the first year of the new TV contract (2017-18) for 12 of its 14 schools. Maryland and Rutgers aren’t fully vested until they’ve been in the conference six years. The majority of that revenue will come from the league’s media contracts. The Big Ten Network pays $8 million per school annually. If the new deal eventually reaches $500 million per year, as Commissioner Jim Delany has sought, that would average $35.7 million per school once all of the schools are able to take a full share. Combined with the BTN revenue, the Big Ten’s annual revenue would reach a whopping $44 million per school.

Again, the Fox bid is for a maximum of $250 million. That would be for the majority of the games available in the package, it would include the conference championship game, give them first choice of games to air, etc.

The only way the B1G is going to get someone to match that $250 million for a package well less than half of what Fox gets is if they someone makes bids the same amount for a vastly weaker package. It isn't going to happen.

The B1G surely wanted ESPN to match or outbid the extremely aggressive Fox bid. They surely wanted to keep as much of their package on ESPN as possible. Moving most of it to Fox scares the hell out of them and the coaches and ADs in the league are justifiably worried this could affect recruiting. That is why the proposed length of the deal is so remarkably short. The B1G promised its schools huge money with this contract and the only way they are going to be able to deliver on it is to move the league to the crappy Fox networks.

It goes worse for the B1G. They brought in UMd and Rutgers only to bring in more money from their B1G network. As cord cutting continues to accelerate dramatically, that decision is going to haunt them.

Here is an extract from an article on that topic:

3. We may look back on the Big Ten's addition of Maryland and Rutgers as very poor business decisions.

Maryland Rutgers were the last major realignment dominoes to fall.

But these weren't decisions made predicated on launching a new network. (The SEC Network wouldn't have launched without Texas A&M and Missouri, meaning the SEC was leaving hundreds of millions of dollars on the table.) Maryland and Rutgers were added to the Big Ten based on the value they could bring to the Big Ten Network. Both are in large markets where the cable rates could theoretically increase substantially.

But in a debundled universe are there enough Maryland and Rutgers fans to pay for their addition in an over-the-top market?

No way.

So if the Big Ten Network -- which is half owned by Fox -- starts to see money declining from debundling, you have to rely on huge fan bases to make up the deficit.

A good early test for how nervous cable companies are about debundling will come with the Big Ten's rights packages which will be sold this year. How much can ESPN and Fox afford to bid?

Linkage

 

[Alsacs]

Again, the Fox bid is for a maximum of $250 million. That would be for the majority of the games available in the package, it would include the conference championship game, give them first choice of games to air, etc.

The only way the B1G is going to get someone to match that $250 million for a package well less than half of what Fox gets is if they someone makes bids the same amount for a vastly weaker package. It isn't going to happen.

The B1G surely wanted ESPN to match or outbid the extremely aggressive Fox bid. They surely wanted to keep as much of their package on ESPN as possible. Moving most of it to Fox scares the hell out of them and the coaches and ADs in the league are justifiably worried this could affect recruiting. That is why the proposed length of the deal is so remarkably short. The B1G promised its schools huge money with this contract and the only way they are going to be able to deliver on it is to move the league to the crappy Fox networks.

It goes worse for the B1G. They brought in UMd and Rutgers only to bring in more money from their B1G network. As cord cutting continues to accelerate dramatically, that decision is going to haunt them.

Here is an extract from an article on that topic:

3. We may look back on the Big Ten's addition of Maryland and Rutgers as very poor business decisions.

Maryland Rutgers were the last major realignment dominoes to fall.

But these weren't decisions made predicated on launching a new network. (The SEC Network wouldn't have launched without Texas A&M and Missouri, meaning the SEC was leaving hundreds of millions of dollars on the table.) Maryland and Rutgers were added to the Big Ten based on the value they could bring to the Big Ten Network. Both are in large markets where the cable rates could theoretically increase substantially.

But in a debundled universe are there enough Maryland and Rutgers fans to pay for their addition in an over-the-top market?

No way.

So if the Big Ten Network -- which is half owned by Fox -- starts to see money declining from debundling, you have to rely on huge fan bases to make up the deficit.

A good early test for how nervous cable companies are about debundling will come with the Big Ten's rights packages which will be sold this year. How much can ESPN and Fox afford to bid?

Linkage

I made a typo in my post I meant the Big Ten s likely NOT going to get 500 million per year after reading that article.


My point was supposed to be the FOX half is going to be the higher paid half of the contract. I doubt they will get more than 200 for the other half.

The Big Ten will make a good amount of money but as much as they thought they would get. They are going to have to take less from ESPN to keep the ESPN exposure. They are taking a shorter deal to become the first conference on the market next time instead of the last. Being last backfired and ESPN cutting back on spending from Disney orders.

 

[sutomcat]

Okay, understood.

I think the biggest reason the length of the deal is so short because it is evident to the B1G that at least half of their games, maybe more, are going to be on the Fox networks and they are concerned that is going to hurt the B1G athletic programs in terms of exposure and recruiting.

A short contract gives Delaney close to the money he was promising the B1G schools when they agreed to bring the leeches on board, at least until the B1G network money starts evaporating. When the B1G network has to switch to an ala carte model, it will be interesting to see if the haves are willing to give the have nots the same cut of money.

It is going to be interesting to watch things develop over the next 10 or 15 years, for the B1G and all the other conferences.

 

[jr4750]

If you're not a P5 conference member, I'm not sure how you compete anymore. If the B10 is at a point in the near future where they are paying 40+ mil to each league member, they are light years ahead of everyone, with the exception of SEC and PAC 12. For any non-p5 member, might as well just accept never winning an olympic sport title ever again, and with the resources that these super conferences have, you won't beat them in pretty much anything.

It baffles me that b10, in the rust belt of America, where people can't wait to get out of, are able to get that much money. There are maybe 5 teams in the b10 that interest me. OSU, Mich, MSU, Wisky, and maybe Nebraska football. Otherwise, I'm bored. Not saying that those teams aren't a better group than most conferences have, but how they are 20+million more valuable a year than the ACC, given the idea that the league should take into account, all sports (obviously football by far is the most important) is crazy.

In 10 years given the wide range already between the haves and have nots, will a Villanova be able to win the NCAA basketball championship? Just read that Mich is finalizing a $174 million with Nike, on top of conference earnings, merchandise, tickets, etc., they almost have to pay their coaches $8 million a year. They have money to burn. Insanity.

 

[sutomcat]

The B1G has fundamental problems with declining population, an aging fan base, poor economies, etc. They know it and are trying hard to expand into the rapidly growing South to help address this. It primarily affects their recruiting now.

The big thing they have going for them is their fanbase. The schools are generally huge, have enormous alumni bases and for many of their states, the residents root for the state team even if they are not alums. That translates into great numbers for TV ratings.

As their states continue to get smaller, poorer and the home grown talent continues to decline, this advantage will continue to erode. But it is undeniable; they get great numbers for games involving most of their schools.

 

[jr4750]

The B1G has fundamental problems with declining population, an aging fan base, poor economies, etc. They know it and are trying hard to expand into the rapidly growing South to help address this. It primarily affects their recruiting now.

The big thing they have going for them is their fanbase. The schools are generally huge, have enormous alumni bases and for many of their states, the residents root for the state team even if they are not alums. That translates into great numbers for TV ratings.

As their states continue to get smaller, poorer and the home grown talent continues to decline, this advantage will continue to erode. But it is undeniable; they get great numbers for games involving most of their schools.

Good point about the state school angle. No doubt that is a huge advantage. Having been raised in Ohio, people literally live and die by OSU, whether they went there or not. Probably helps in a weird way that there isn't much to do in those states besides go to college games. You'd think given the size of this deal, there would be no catching these schools, especially in football. I truly hope that doesn't happen. While the playing grounds will never be truly equal, they have to be within earshot, or else whats the point of playing. No matter how many Michigan and OSU fans there are, there are more cumulative fans and perspective fans of teams across the country that need the chance of victory to be engaged. Can't ruin the game by empowering the few.

 

[oldpinepoint]

What I find interesting about this whole thing is that fox is trying to emulate ESPN. They have done that by trying to copy its business model. They have been buying a ton of media rights, as well as on air talent. Now you have ESPN who has been bleeding cash trying make this business model work. ESPN realizes that they need to cut costs and the long term view is that the model is changing to more of a digital platform.

So a few things, Fox will become a crappier version of ESPN because they are buying up boring sports right and awful on air talent. Skip Bayless, Colin cowturd, etc.

I think the deal is short for many reasons mentioned above, including recruiting, $$$$, etc. I also think fox doesn't want a long term deal, they know things are changing but they are stuck because they are trying to build the brand.

My general sense is that I think the landscape is changing and I think it's picking up steam. The BTN model has peaked or close to it. They might get one more good contract this go around but I would expect after the six years is up it might not be as valuable.

All I know is cord cutting is getting here faster than a lot of people thought. I'm half way there right now. I very rarely watch ESPN, i don't watch BTN and I don't even know what channel FS1 is. I have scaled down cable and a higher broadband for Netflix, HBO, etc. the current model is not sustainable, it has to change

 

[Orijinal]

So a few things, Fox will become a crappier version of ESPN because they are buying up boring sports right and awful on air talent. Skip Bayless, Colin cowturd, etc.

I have to disagree here. Cowherd was a huge coup by Fox. He is almost a must daily listen, even if you don't agree with many of the things that he says (which I do not). He had more talent than anyone at ESPN and now more talent than anyone at Fox (even if he has been a d___bag when it comes to talking down the SU campus and the Syracuse area in general--which he certainly has)

 

[sutomcat]

Okay, understood.

I think the biggest reason the length of the deal is so short because it is evident to the B1G that at least half of their games, maybe more, are going to be on the Fox networks and they are concerned that is going to hurt the B1G athletic programs in terms of exposure and recruiting.

A short contract gives Delaney close to the money he was promising the B1G schools when they agreed to bring the leeches on board, at least until the B1G network money starts evaporating. When the B1G network has to switch to an ala carte model, it will be interesting to see if the haves are willing to give the have nots the same cut of money.

It is going to be interesting to watch things develop over the next 10 or 15 years, for the B1G and all the other conferences.

More analysis about how much the B1G contract will really bring B1G schools.

How much will the schools get? This is where the math and logic start to get really wonky!

Recent reports indicate that Big Ten schools are projecting $44.5 million in annual revenue by the first year of the new TV contract (2017-18) for 12 of its 14 schools. Maryland and Rutgers aren’t fully vested until they’ve been in the conference six years. The majority of that revenue will come from the league’s media contracts. The Big Ten Network pays $8 million per school annually. If the new deal eventually reaches $500 million per year, as Commissioner Jim Delany has sought, that would average $35.7 million per school once all of the schools are able to take a full share. Combined with the BTN revenue, the Big Ten’s annual revenue would reach a whopping $44 million per school.OK, where to start? How about in the middle with "if the new deal eventually reaches $500 million per year". Based on what was stated above, how likely does that seem? If the Fox bid of "up to $250 million" includes the first picks every week AND the championship game, what are the chances that ESPN (or any other network) is willing to match that amount for what's left? Yeah, that would be zero. I'm estimating a total media deal more like $350 to $400 million per year - a big difference.

Also, to get their $35.7 million per school number, they had to divide $500 million by 14... but it's already been well established that conferences also get a cut. The ACC gets a cut; so does the SEC, Big XII, and Pac-12. Jim Delaney doesn't work from free, I'm guessing. So the divisor should've been 15, not 14.

That means so far a more reasonable average TV payout is $400M / 15 = $26.7 million per school per year - still a very good number, but also $9 million per year less than the outrageous number tossed out in the article. By the way, the ACC currently gets an average of around $21 million per school; if the reports of a $3 million/year bump is true (for not getting a cable network), that number grows to $24 million, or just $2.7 million behind the Big Ten - until you add in the BTN revenue, that is.
...

Linkage

 

[nzm136]

More analysis about how much the B1G contract will really bring B1G schools.

How much will the schools get? This is where the math and logic start to get really wonky!

Recent reports indicate that Big Ten schools are projecting $44.5 million in annual revenue by the first year of the new TV contract (2017-18) for 12 of its 14 schools. Maryland and Rutgers aren’t fully vested until they’ve been in the conference six years. The majority of that revenue will come from the league’s media contracts. The Big Ten Network pays $8 million per school annually. If the new deal eventually reaches $500 million per year, as Commissioner Jim Delany has sought, that would average $35.7 million per school once all of the schools are able to take a full share. Combined with the BTN revenue, the Big Ten’s annual revenue would reach a whopping $44 million per school.OK, where to start? How about in the middle with "if the new deal eventually reaches $500 million per year". Based on what was stated above, how likely does that seem? If the Fox bid of "up to $250 million" includes the first picks every week AND the championship game, what are the chances that ESPN (or any other network) is willing to match that amount for what's left? Yeah, that would be zero. I'm estimating a total media deal more like $350 to $400 million per year - a big difference.

Also, to get their $35.7 million per school number, they had to divide $500 million by 14... but it's already been well established that conferences also get a cut. The ACC gets a cut; so does the SEC, Big XII, and Pac-12. Jim Delaney doesn't work from free, I'm guessing. So the divisor should've been 15, not 14.

That means so far a more reasonable average TV payout is $400M / 15 = $26.7 million per school per year - still a very good number, but also $9 million per year less than the outrageous number tossed out in the article. By the way, the ACC currently gets an average of around $21 million per school; if the reports of a $3 million/year bump is true (for not getting a cable network), that number grows to $24 million, or just $2.7 million behind the Big Ten - until you add in the BTN revenue, that is.
...

Linkage

I think that the ACC is getting 18 and change. The 21 and change number includes the 3 bump. The difference would be 5.7 plus the BTN revenue. SU will probably make something close to 90 this year (the results will be released next year) and 100 next year (because of higher starting expectations from football, basketball, and olympic sports). The TV gap is real, but in the scheme of 100 million dollar budgets, it's not the end of the world.

 

[Hokie Mark]

I think that the ACC is getting 18 and change. The 21 and change number includes the 3 bump. The difference would be 5.7 plus the BTN revenue. SU will probably make something close to 90 this year (the results will be released next year) and 100 next year (because of higher starting expectations from football, basketball, and olympic sports). The TV gap is real, but in the scheme of 100 million dollar budgets, it's not the end of the world.

We have to be consistent. The $18M ACC revenue is current, not average; the B1G revenue discussed here is average over the life of the contract (by convention, it would start low and increase). The correct number for comparison would be the ACC average, which was last reported to be around $21M IIRC.

 

[Whitey23]

B10/SEC/Pac12 network talk in this podcast around the 43min and on.

(I didn't know the Pac12 network hired Lazard.)

http://www.si.com/more-sports/2016/04/27/si-media-podcast-john-ourand-tirico-bayless-bill-simmons

 

[Alsacs]

B10/SEC/Pac12 network talk in this podcast around the 43min and on.

(I didn't know the Pac12 network hired Lazard.)

http://www.si.com/more-sports/2016/04/27/si-media-podcast-john-ourand-tirico-bayless-bill-simmons

I listened yesterday Deitsch thinks the Big Ten schools will force Delany to make some sorta deal with ESPN to keep some games on ESPN.
While Ourand thinks unlike the ACC in 2010 when Coach K and Gary Williams talked the ACC into saying with ESPN over FOX that Delany will do whatever he wants regardless of the Big Ten coaches opinions.

I do agree with Deitsch the Longhorn Network has been an undoubted failure for ESPN. Pac-12 network should have partnered with Fox or ESPN no a bank.
SEC network is profitable because of ESPN jamming it on SEC country and they used all their muscle they could.

 

[nzm136]

We have to be consistent. The $18M ACC revenue is current, not average; the B1G revenue discussed here is average over the life of the contract (by convention, it would start low and increase). The correct number for comparison would be the ACC average, which was last reported to be around $21M IIRC.

My understanding is that the 21 already has the 3 baked in. You're telling me that it should be 24? If so, that's great. Do you have a source?

Also, is the 21/24 for the contract as a whole, or just the remainder of the contract?

 

[Alsacs]

The ACC contract calls for a higher payout each year, It isn't 18 million per year it rises each year. That is why the ACC had to give ESPN an extra 2 years on the contract in exchange for a higher payout.

 

[Hokie Mark]

My understanding is that the 21 already has the 3 baked in. You're telling me that it should be 24? If so, that's great. Do you have a source?

Also, is the 21/24 for the contract as a whole, or just the remainder of the contract?

The TV portion of ACC revenue for the 2013-14 season was reported as $197.2 million for the entire conference, or about $13 million per team. That's still near the minimum of the contract - for graph of TV payments over time, see http://accfootballrx.blogspot.com/2015/06/is-acc-hopelessly-behind-moneywise.html

As reported in 2012, the AVERAGE of the TV contract was $17 million/year. By Dec 2012 - March 2013 the average had grown to $19.2 million per team per year - see http://accfootballrx.blogspot.com/2014/04/inside-info-acc-tv-contract.html

The addition of 2.5 games/year with Notre Dame, along with the Grant of Rights, resulted in another bump (reportedly at least $1M/year) to the average - now at $20M+/year over the life of the contract - see http://accfootballrx.blogspot.com/2013/04/on-2nd-thought-acc-gor.html (the exact amount was not made public).

Average TOTAL payment to each team for fiscal year 2013-14 (including TV, bowls, NCAA units, etc.) was $19.3 million/team- see http://accfootballrx.blogspot.com/2015/07/teel-on-revenue-growth.html for a summary of the various components of that.

BOTTOM LINE: The ACC TV contract average sits at $20 to $21 million per team per year BEFORE any bump from a conference network (or lack of one).

 

[Hokie Mark]

My understanding is that the 21 already has the 3 baked in. You're telling me that it should be 24? If so, that's great. Do you have a source?

Also, is the 21/24 for the contract as a whole, or just the remainder of the contract?

The TV portion of ACC revenue for the 2013-14 season was reported as $197.2 million for the entire conference, or about $13 million per team. That's still near the minimum of the contract - for graph of TV payments over time, see http://accfootballrx.blogspot.com/2015/06/is-acc-hopelessly-behind-moneywise.html

As reported in 2012, the AVERAGE of the TV contract was $17 million/year. By Dec 2012 - March 2013 the average had grown to $19.2 million per team per year - see http://accfootballrx.blogspot.com/2014/04/inside-info-acc-tv-contract.html

The addition of 2.5 games/year with Notre Dame, along with the Grant of Rights, resulted in another bump (reportedly at least $1M/year) to the average - now at $20M+/year over the life of the contract - see http://accfootballrx.blogspot.com/2013/04/on-2nd-thought-acc-gor.html (the exact amount was not made public).

Average TOTAL payment to each team for fiscal year 2013-14 (including TV, bowls, NCAA units, etc.) was $19.3 million/team- see http://accfootballrx.blogspot.com/2015/07/teel-on-revenue-growth.html for a summary of the various components of that.

BOTTOM LINE: The ACC TV contract average sits at $20 to $21 million per team per year BEFORE any bump from a conference network (or lack of one).

 

[nzm136]

The TV portion of ACC revenue for the 2013-14 season was reported as $197.2 million for the entire conference, or about $13 million per team. That's still near the minimum of the contract - for graph of TV payments over time, see http://accfootballrx.blogspot.com/2015/06/is-acc-hopelessly-behind-moneywise.html

As reported in 2012, the AVERAGE of the TV contract was $17 million/year. By Dec 2012 - March 2013 the average had grown to $19.2 million per team per year - see http://accfootballrx.blogspot.com/2014/04/inside-info-acc-tv-contract.html

The addition of 2.5 games/year with Notre Dame, along with the Grant of Rights, resulted in another bump (reportedly at least $1M/year) to the average - now at $20M+/year over the life of the contract - see http://accfootballrx.blogspot.com/2013/04/on-2nd-thought-acc-gor.html (the exact amount was not made public).

Average TOTAL payment to each team for fiscal year 2013-14 (including TV, bowls, NCAA units, etc.) was $19.3 million/team- see http://accfootballrx.blogspot.com/2015/07/teel-on-revenue-growth.html for a summary of the various components of that.

BOTTOM LINE: The ACC TV contract average sits at $20 to $21 million per team per year BEFORE any bump from a conference network (or lack of one).

Awesome. That would mean that our media payouts are on par with the Pac-12 (and will soon surpass them), and are on par with the Big XII. If that's true (and I don't doubt you), then the ACC *has* to have one of the worst PR/marketing department of any organization on the planet.

 

[sutomcat]

Awesome. That would mean that our media payouts are on par with the Pac-12 (and will soon surpass them), and are on par with the Big XII. If that's true (and I don't doubt you), then the ACC *has* to have one of the worst PR/marketing department of any organization on the planet.

The contract Swofford signed was not a good one for the ACC. He could have gotten a lot more money had he gotten Fox involved. He didn't, in large part because the ACC coaches didn't want to lose the exposure ESPN offered the ACC programs.

The B1G had the same decision to make and decided, apparently, to take the money and take their chances with the Fox channels. I hope Fox or Fox and TBS end up taking the whole B1G contract.

I think ESPN has given the SEC and the B1G preferential treatment over the past few years, especially for football and Olympic sports, and I hope if the B1g leaves ESPN completely, a lot of the bandwidth ESPN reserved for them will go to the ACC.

 

[nzm136]

The contract Swofford signed was not a good one for the ACC. He could have gotten a lot more money had he gotten Fox involved. He didn't, in large part because the ACC coaches didn't want to lose the exposure ESPN offered the ACC programs.

The B1G had the same decision to make and decided, apparently, to take the money and take their chances with the Fox channels. I hope Fox or Fox and TBS end up taking the whole B1G contract.

I think ESPN has given the SEC and the B1G preferential treatment over the past few years, especially for football and Olympic sports, and I hope if the B1g leaves ESPN completely, a lot of the bandwidth ESPN reserved for them will go to the ACC.

I agree. Actually, you could throw the BIG EAST in the B1G camp of trading a higher payout for a weaker degree of exposure.

 

[HtownOrange]

Awesome. That would mean that our media payouts are on par with the Pac-12 (and will soon surpass them), and are on par with the Big XII. If that's true (and I don't doubt you), then the ACC *has* to have one of the worst PR/marketing department of any organization on the planet.

Along with what Tom said, the timing was horrible; Miami was under performing, FSU and Clemson were still on the upward climb, etc. The ACC probably would have gotten more money had they at least negotiated somewhat with Fox for part of the rights. Such is life. By the time the deal comes up again, much of the delivery we knew 5-10 years ago will have changed.

What no one is talking about right now is that the SEC is in their deal for about two decades more. Imagine how far they could be behind by then.

 

[HtownOrange]

The contract Swofford signed was not a good one for the ACC. He could have gotten a lot more money had he gotten Fox involved. He didn't, in large part because the ACC coaches didn't want to lose the exposure ESPN offered the ACC programs.

The B1G had the same decision to make and decided, apparently, to take the money and take their chances with the Fox channels. I hope Fox or Fox and TBS end up taking the whole B1G contract.

I think ESPN has given the SEC and the B1G preferential treatment over the past few years, especially for football and Olympic sports, and I hope if the B1g leaves ESPN completely, a lot of the bandwidth ESPN reserved for them will go to the ACC.

The B1G may be banking on their huge alumni base and their massive in-state following to weather the "Non-ESPN coverage" storm. They will likely be surprised by the lack of interest in their two new partners' states, if so.