Swofford is a no BS in charge Commish

Discussion in 'Syracuse Football Board' started by kcsu, May 23, 2012.

  1. kcsu

    kcsu All Conference

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2011
    Messages:
    3,387
    Likes Received:
    1,883
    Before anyone on this board post another comment about the demise of the ACC you should listen to the interview with JS today. The guys is one cool leader. He comes across as informed and in charge. Im not saying that FSU or others are not telling him the truth but regardless of what change may happen in the short term my opinion is that we have a very solid leader in JS and in the end he is going to ensure that the ACC remains a major player.
  2. JimBoston

    JimBoston Walk On

    Joined:
    Sep 28, 2011
    Messages:
    52
    Likes Received:
    3
    You are kidding?

    Just as the BE hated the Providence leadership, most of the ACC hates NC's leadership. For the ACC to survive with the football schools, Swofford will probably have to be canned.
  3. bevosu

    bevosu All Conference

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2011
    Messages:
    2,306
    Likes Received:
    1,938
    Been a lot of pro Swofford comments on this board (and the previous one), and I'm sure the guy isn't a dummy, but the renegotiated ESPN TV contract wasn't a grand slam homer.

    I'm disappointed that that was the best he could do. Apparently there are a few ACC members that feel the same?
  4. javadoc

    javadoc All Conference

    Joined:
    Aug 26, 2011
    Messages:
    2,929
    Likes Received:
    1,998
    Are you sure that you understand all the details of the contract to justify your disappointment? And I hate to say it, but ACC football is not a hot commodity right now.
  5. PeteCalvin

    PeteCalvin Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Aug 26, 2011
    Messages:
    6,119
    Likes Received:
    5,743
    Swofford is good for SU. If it's between losing Swofford and losing FSU, I'll put a bow on the Seminoles. Sayonara.

    Swofford is about balance between the sports and is one of the few commissioners out there who sees the value of an unrivaled hoops component. As much as I hated the BBall centric Providence Mafia, I don't want a deep south football centric ignoramus running the show either, which is what we would have if the FSU BOT president had his way. I want a big picture guy.

    Ties to UNC or not, Swofford has been on top at every turn of the expansion wheel. I think he sees the ACC as becoming a better version of the PAC12 rather than an SEC or Big 12. Beyond the hardwood and gridiron, the PAC has strengths in academics and Olympic sports. The SEC and Big 12 are all about the pigskin. I don't want to be in a conference that's all about the pigskin.

    The ACC's roots, much like the old BE, are in hoops. That is their identity. I don't see them selling that down the river for the sake of football. If that was the case, SU and Pitt would still be rubbing Marinatto's bunions. Right now the ACC has strength in both, which is more than the SEC, Big 12 and PAC can say. The ACC football product isn't spectacular right now, but they have some solid programs that can catch fire, and sooner or later one or two will.

    When all is said and done, the ACC will be able to make millions on both football AND basketball, which should put them in a very strong financial position regardless of what idiot bloggers think.
  6. bnoro

    bnoro Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2011
    Messages:
    6,078
    Likes Received:
    5,320
    What leverage was he supposed to use to make it better? He was lucky they got what they got, there was no open market that would have helped there. ESPN could have easily told the ACC to f*ck off and gave them the same deal.
  7. texasorange

    texasorange Scout Team

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2011
    Messages:
    493
    Likes Received:
    262
    Amen Brother Pete! You have articulated my own thoughts exactly. I think there is a lot of smoke, but it coming from all the cigarette smoking in West Virginia.
  8. bevosu

    bevosu All Conference

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2011
    Messages:
    2,306
    Likes Received:
    1,938
    I'm far from knowing all the details. Only going by some of the numbers that have been tossed around. I haven't read any real detailed rundown on what that contract involves.

    Just basing my thoughts on how optimistic people seemed to be (to me) after the news concerning the money other conferences were getting.

    Initially I didn't read a lot about the ACC being a potential orphan conference. People seemed to think the ACC was in a decent bargaining position.

    I heard things like..Live TV sports is in high demand (Adv). Speculation that other networks might kick the numbers up due to competition.

    I guess things changed? Or the initial optimism might have been a little over the top? Or my optimism might have been irrational and I just discounted more balanced opinions?

    The disappointment for me is based more on a gut feeling than anything objective.
  9. OburgCuse

    OburgCuse 2nd String

    Joined:
    Aug 29, 2011
    Messages:
    606
    Likes Received:
    316
    There was no competition because ACC was under contract with ESPN still. The negotiations were exclusively with ESPN because of the SU/Pitt expansion which allowed the ACC to reopen up the contract and renegoiate what was already in place, but no outside networks were involved for the most part.
    bnoro likes this.
  10. bnoro

    bnoro Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2011
    Messages:
    6,078
    Likes Received:
    5,320
    This point is being ignored in this thread. The ACC had ZERO leverage.
  11. kcsu

    kcsu All Conference

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2011
    Messages:
    3,387
    Likes Received:
    1,883
    The leverage that the ACC has at this point is ESPN. If other leagues who are free to cut a deal with fox or NBC try to destroy the value of the ACC something tells me that ESPN will protect its franchise
  12. bevosu

    bevosu All Conference

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2011
    Messages:
    2,306
    Likes Received:
    1,938
    That's why I used the word 'speculation'. There was speculation...apparently based on faulty information. I'm not talking about the mainstream media. Speculation, not unlike some of the things we're hearing now about possible B12 expansion. Web talk.
  13. kingottoiii

    kingottoiii Guest

    He publicly stated he wanted $21 million per team and got $16 per team. He threatened arbitration and instead settled for a figure $5 million less than he wanted. Adding SU and Pitt increases the ACC FB inconference inventory by 15 games. That is quite a bit. That is an inventory increase of over 30%, yet the value per team went up less than 25%. Not only that he ADDED years to a contract that was BELOW market value. Why?

    In addition there were rumors that the B12 was sniffing around the ACC. ESPN controls the ACC for TV. You would think that ESPN would want to protect its investment and give at least the $19 million per team that the B12 TV contract was rumored to be.
  14. JimBoston

    JimBoston Walk On

    Joined:
    Sep 28, 2011
    Messages:
    52
    Likes Received:
    3
    ACC is not totally tied into ESPN as there is the Raycom deal. Raycom used to have a deal with both the SEC and ACC, but the SEC dropped them to go for more $s with ESPN. The deal doesn't make everyone happy in the ACC. By the way, guess who hired Swofford's son before the latest deal was signed? Raycom.

    Here is a link to an article on Raycom and the ACC deal.

    http://www.sportsbusinessdaily.com/...story-With-ACC-Secures-Future-For-Raycom.aspx

Web Hosting Service by Host Duplex