ACC / ESPN Deal

[cuseguy]

interesting.

so BC and Cuse said ok to friday, but they wanted the plum home game on the mothership thanks friday afternoon as a concession.

id say that means Cuse v BC will never be on thanks fri.

hows that strike ya cuseguy??

Actually, I'm still a little confused on all this. I'm waiting for someone who knows what they're talking about to make it perfectly clear.

 

[zls44]

Good for them.

"We'd like more Saturday slots"
"No. We have the Big Ten and Big 12. You can have all the Friday night you want."

 

[arbitragegls]

Just making sure all of us are on same page. It was initially thought that the revenue increase brought by 'Cuse and Pitt would be an additional $1-$2 million per school. It is actually closer to $4 million more...which is darn good. This new deal replaces the old one that was scheduled to run through 2023 as indicated below. So starting now with the new contract each ACC team will increase its TV revenue by $4 million from now through '26-'27. And depending when and if 'Cuse and Pitt get full share immediately, the ACC schools can pick up even more dollars. If you think about it, from '13-'23 when old contract would have ended, each school is picking up an additional $40 million bucks...so lets not say this is not a good deal..it is a terrific one!
Importantly, as indicated by ESPN:
"ESPN's original deal with the ACC was through 2023. The new deal added four years, plus more games. ESPN also gained title sponsorship rights to all conference tournament events, including the ACC men's tournament, which has never been sponsored"

 

[orange79]

"We'd like more Saturday slots"
"No. We have the Big Ten and Big 12. You can have all the Friday night you want."

Bitter doesn't suit you

 

[omniorange]

So, we got $1-2M more than we thought, we are getting more teams on TV (women's bball should really benefit), we are guaranteed a NATIONAL game each year on Friday evening, and we're still complaining?

About sums it up. :rolling:

Cheers,
Neil

 

[Chip]

Actually, I'm still a little confused on all this. I'm waiting for someone who knows what they're talking about to make it perfectly clear.

I agree with you that I'd rather have the Chestnut Hill trips be in October. Weather is usually perfect for a fall college football game, as I recall in the 90's when we played BC away every other mid October.

But I also like the idea of playing on the Friday after Thanksgiving. That isn't a typical Friday. That day has become a college football staple, it's like having two Saturdays that weekend. Playing on that day would be great exposure.

We'll see what happens when that statement is finally clarified.

 

[rrlbees]

About sums it up. :rolling:

Cheers,
Neil

Some of you paint with broad brushes. A couple out of town fans lament the additional Friday games based upon possible misinterpreted writing and everyone is complaining? I haven't seen one post complaining about the deal itself and the $17M/yr SU will get.

 

[HtownOrange]

Thoughts on the deal:

1) $17 mil may be accurate or not. No official word on $$$.
2) 15 years is TOO LONG!
3) ACC loses as ESPN owns rights to every sport and all tiers.
4) 5 year interval to review the contract is good for ACC
5) FSU probably using the Big 12 for building influence against the Carolina four. Hard to see them playing Iowa State and presenting that as a good game to their fans. FSU fans not likely to travel there. Academics and Texas influence should be enough to scare of any sane person (read University president/board)
6) FSU could jump to SEC for the right money. Academics are weak, but with TAMU, Mizzou, Vandy and UF, there are some academically inclined schools.
7) Clemson does not have enough influence to join either the Big 12 or the SEC by themselves and certainly not enough to take anyone with them. They would be 2nd to FSU.
8) Swofford indicated that the ACC would open discussions next year, post Big East negotiations and would get more. The retained experts agreed. This deal happened too quick and is likely another Swofford mess up.
9) Expect the SEC to become the highest paid conference again.
10) Being joined at the hip with ESPN is good now, but two years before re-negotiating rights, ESPN will downplay ACC as they did the Big East. Future deals should include at least two broadcast partners.
11) Still better than the Big East deal and probably more than what they will garner now. Not sure it is better than what the Big East would have gotten had nobody (Syracuse, Pitt, WVU, TCU) left.

 

[OrangeXtreme]

Thoughts on the deal:

1) $17 mil may be accurate or not. No official word on $$$.
2) 15 years is TOO LONG!
3) ACC loses as ESPN owns rights to every sport and all tiers.
4) 5 year interval to review the contract is good for ACC
5) FSU probably using the Big 12 for building influence against the Carolina four. Hard to see them playing Iowa State and presenting that as a good game to their fans. FSU fans not likely to travel there. Academics and Texas influence should be enough to scare of any sane person (read University president/board)
6) FSU could jump to SEC for the right money. Academics are weak, but with TAMU, Mizzou, Vandy and UF, there are some academically inclined schools.
7) Clemson does not have enough influence to join either the Big 12 or the SEC by themselves and certainly not enough to take anyone with them. They would be 2nd to FSU.
8) Swofford indicated that the ACC would open discussions next year, post Big East negotiations and would get more. The retained experts agreed. This deal happened too quick and is likely another Swofford mess up.
9) Expect the SEC to become the highest paid conference again.
10) Being joined at the hip with ESPN is good now, but two years before re-negotiating rights, ESPN will downplay ACC as they did the Big East. Future deals should include at least two broadcast partners.
11) Still better than the Big East deal and probably more than what they will garner now. Not sure it is better than what the Big East would have gotten had nobody (Syracuse, Pitt, WVU, TCU) left.

The ACC's original deal with ESPN (which began last year) was for 12 years, ending in 2023. It's been extended 4 years (now running to 2027). There were not going to be open discussions with other networks, but ESPN was allowed to modify the existing deal to account for Pitt & SU.

 

[HtownOrange]

The ACC's original deal with ESPN (which began last year) was for 12 years, ending in 2023. It's been extended 4 years (now running to 2027). There were not going to be open discussions with other networks, but ESPN was allowed to modify the existing deal to account for Pitt & SU.

right. But Swofford did not have to extend the deal nor did he have to give away the rights to every sport. The ACC would have been better off with a lower payout and no extension. ESPN and the ACC had to agree to the new terms otherwise it would have gone to mediation or arbitration. A mediator would have gotten nearly the same payout (probably more) without losing rights to everything else. This is my opinion, nothing more.

For the record, I'm still glad to be in the ACC.

 

[kingottoiii]

Thoughts on the deal:

1) $17 mil may be accurate or not. No official word on $$$.

You can make a pretty good argument that FSU would make $10 million more pr year in the B12. The TV $ for B12 is said to be $19 million. With increased inventory and bigger matchups you would think that number would go up. Then there is the CCG increase to the contract. Plus FSU having the ability to sell at least 2 cupcake games to regional TV. On top of that would be the playoff money.

IMO the BCS going away really hurts the ACC. Before the were getting $20 million a year. Now how much will they get? Lets say the conference champ makes the playoffs if you are in the Top 6 system is put into place. And lets say that for every playoff team a conf gets $25 million (which likely will be much higher). Well if FSU is in the B12 then they likely get $2 million a year from playoff money. While if they stay in the ACC that number would be likely be $500k a year.

Adding that all up IMO it would be close to $10 million more per year for FIFTEEN years. That is a lot to give up on. If Swofford had gotten the $21 million he wanted then that number would only be $5 million and not enough for FSU to move. I am really surprised that ESPN low balled the ACC and didn't protect their investment.

 

[OrangeXtreme]

Then again, maybe the ACC got more by bundling all the Tier 3 rights into a single package than each school could have gotten individually.

 

[HtownOrange]

You can make a pretty good argument that FSU would make $10 million more pr year in the B12. The TV $ for B12 is said to be $19 million. With increased inventory and bigger matchups you would think that number would go up. Then there is the CCG increase to the contract. Plus FSU having the ability to sell at least 2 cupcake games to regional TV. On top of that would be the playoff money.

IMO the BCS going away really hurts the ACC. Before the were getting $20 million a year. Now how much will they get? Lets say the conference champ makes the playoffs if you are in the Top 6 system is put into place. And lets say that for every playoff team a conf gets $25 million (which likely will be much higher). Well if FSU is in the B12 then they likely get $2 million a year from playoff money. While if they stay in the ACC that number would be likely be $500k a year.

Adding that all up IMO it would be close to $10 million more per year for FIFTEEN years. That is a lot to give up on. If Swofford had gotten the $21 million he wanted then that number would only be $5 million and not enough for FSU to move. I am really surprised that ESPN low balled the ACC and didn't protect their investment.

My opinion is that FSU would make more money in the Big 12, but it would have to be significantly higher - at least $10MM to make the move. School administrators and boards are very aware of how each conference is run. Also, if FSU hates the Carolina Four, they will hate Texas even more; and if FSU hates ACC officiating, it's just as bad if not worse in the Big 12.

FSU is more likely to jump to the SEC for $5MM or more, though. This is my concern. The SEC is run very well and you don't have a UT running everything. FSU would fit nicely in the SEC, except t hat they would rarely challenge for a national championship in the SEC. Plus teh SEC will renegotiate their TV deals now that they have added TAMU and Mizzou.

 

[HtownOrange]

Then again, maybe the ACC got more by bundling all the Tier 3 rights into a single package than each school could have gotten individually.

That is a possibility, especially when talking the non-revenue sports.

However, giving up the right to sell off a game or two can be costly. Texas gets $10mm for their third tier (1 football game, a few hoops and the non-revenue sports). LSU makes $8MM (if I recall), Florida $5MM. I'm not saying Syracuse would have a $5MM deal, just that Swofford undervalued the ACC, again. The B1G has all of their rights tied into one deal, but they get paid well, and on 51% of their network.

UConn sold the rights to a few women's games for more than $1MM/year.

 

[OrangeXtreme]

That is a possibility, especially when talking the non-revenue sports.

However, giving up the right to sell off a game or two can be costly. Texas gets $10mm for their third tier (1 football game, a few hoops and the non-revenue sports). LSU makes $8MM (if I recall), Florida $5MM. I'm not saying Syracuse would have a $5MM deal, just that Swofford undervalued the ACC, again. The B1G has all of their rights tied into one deal, but they get paid well, and on 51% of their network.

UConn sold the rights to a few women's games for more than $1MM/year.

Well, there's UConn Women's Hoops, then there's SU Women's Hoops.

 

[kingottoiii]

My opinion is that FSU would make more money in the Big 12, but it would have to be significantly higher - at least $10MM to make the move. School administrators and boards are very aware of how each conference is run. Also, if FSU hates the Carolina Four, they will hate Texas even more; and if FSU hates ACC officiating, it's just as bad if not worse in the Big 12.

FSU is more likely to jump to the SEC for $5MM or more, though. This is my concern. The SEC is run very well and you don't have a UT running everything. FSU would fit nicely in the SEC, except t hat they would rarely challenge for a national championship in the SEC. Plus teh SEC will renegotiate their TV deals now that they have added TAMU and Mizzou.

If FSU were happy they wouldn't have gone against the higher exit fee and would have gone for GOR with this contract. Either would make the ACC stable for the next 15 years. Financially SU will be fine the next 15 years whether FSU leaves or not. But should FSU leave then we are no longer in a big boy conference. Still much better than the BE, but not what we thought we were getting when we joined.

 

[HtownOrange]

If FSU were happy they wouldn't have gone against the higher exit fee and would have gone for GOR with this contract. Either would make the ACC stable for the next 15 years. Financially SU will be fine the next 15 years whether FSU leaves or not. But should FSU leave then we are no longer in a big boy conference. Still much better than the BE, but not what we thought we were getting when we joined.

Agreed. I also think that FSU does value academics more than most fans give them credit for. That is addressed in another thread and covered very well.

SU is going to be happy for years to come: We (fan only, I cannot even claim Syracuse as my alma mater) double our TV rights, play better competition and have improved our academic association.

 

[normaliswear]

If FSU were happy they wouldn't have gone against the higher exit fee and would have gone for GOR with this contract. Either would make the ACC stable for the next 15 years. Financially SU will be fine the next 15 years whether FSU leaves or not. But should FSU leave then we are no longer in a big boy conference. Still much better than the BE, but not what we thought we were getting when we joined.

Yeah I agree. If I had to bet money I'd say FSU and CU stay put... but its by no means a sure thing. And to be honest if we had to leave our true BE home I'm going to be kinda pissed if its for a slightly better kids table league. Question... maybe I'm in NY and not grasping just how big a juggernaut Texas football is, but why did the Big 12 get that much better a contract than the ACC? The Big 12 has Texas, OU... and then a bunch of garbage in football, Kansas and garbage in basketball and the rest of their sports, on average, is far inferior to the ACC. ACC doesn't have Texas or OU, but it does have FSU, Miami, VTech, not too bad, and the crappy football schools, us included sadly for now, are at least in better TV markets. BBall is far better in the ACC. I know football is King but it seems like its Texas and OU football vs every other possible thing a conference could offer a TV network... and they still get way more money.

 

[HtownOrange]

Yeah I agree. If I had to bet money I'd say FSU and CU stay put... but its by no means a sure thing. And to be honest if we had to leave our true BE home I'm going to be kinda pissed if its for a slightly better kids table league. Question... maybe I'm in NY and not grasping just how big a juggernaut Texas football is, but why did the Big 12 get that much better a contract than the ACC? The Big 12 has Texas, OU... and then a bunch of garbage in football, Kansas and garbage in basketball and the rest of their sports, on average, is far inferior to the ACC. ACC doesn't have Texas or OU, but it does have FSU, Miami, VTech, not too bad, and the crappy football schools, us included sadly for now, are at least in better TV markets. BBall is far better in the ACC. I know football is King but it seems like its Texas and OU football vs every other possible thing a conference could offer a TV network... and they still get way more money.

The ACC has Swofford who has no vision for the future, a UNC-centric outlook (his alma mater), an "holier than thou" attitude (He attempted to crush Clemson football but has conveniently been as light as possible on UNC for violations), poor advice and advisors, and a hoops only outlook.

The Big 12 at least recognizes that big time college sports is a business. They attempt to act that way (under the thumb of UT). They have one large population (Texas) and two kings in football. The ACC has two kings and a few Barons. Also, VATech is overrated. The soft scheduling for all those years leaves a bad taste in everyone's mouth, though it has improved, they cannot shed the reputation. Also, VATech cannot win big games. Rack up wins v. cupcakes and no wins against Big Boys = nothing. Outside of the ACC, nobody really respects VATech. Pitt and Syracuse are more respected because of good scheduling and winning big games in their histories.

Finally, the ACC has sucked the last few years, plain and simple. The Big East has performed much better, especially OOC and in bowl games. At some point, FSU and Clemson (and Miami) must accept that they, too, have been weak and will not be compensated for poor performance.

 

[Guinness]

FWIW the rumor mill has FSU reaching out to the SEC last year and being rebuffed.

 

[SmilinBob]

I'm sure it's been said before but could someone explain the tier 2/3 system for me? Does this effect/affect (pick one) Time Warner and the SNY deals?

 

[KaiserUEO]

The ACC has Swofford who has no vision for the future, a UNC-centric outlook (his alma mater), an "holier than thou" attitude (He attempted to crush Clemson football but has conveniently been as light as possible on UNC for violations), poor advice and advisors, and a hoops only outlook.

The Big 12 at least recognizes that big time college sports is a business. They attempt to act that way (under the thumb of UT). They have one large population (Texas) and two kings in football. The ACC has two kings and a few Barons. Also, VATech is overrated. The soft scheduling for all those years leaves a bad taste in everyone's mouth, though it has improved, they cannot shed the reputation. Also, VATech cannot win big games. Rack up wins v. cupcakes and no wins against Big Boys = nothing. Outside of the ACC, nobody really respects VATech. Pitt and Syracuse are more respected because of good scheduling and winning big games in their histories.

Finally, the ACC has sucked the last few years, plain and simple. The Big East has performed much better, especially OOC and in bowl games. At some point, FSU and Clemson (and Miami) must accept that they, too, have been weak and will not be compensated for poor performance.

hey sparky, can you tell me why you hate swofford??

the man who picked off 5 BigEast teams into the ACC, forced a 6th to bend over in texas and saved his conference name forever??

im a little confused on this.

if your arguement is 'but the sec got more $$!!'...then dont respond.

if you think the bevo got more $$ youre foolish. the real #s arent out there yet.

 

[kingottoiii]

but why did the Big 12 get that much better a contract than the ACC? The Big 12 has Texas, OU...

The ACC got locked into a long term deal during a buyer's market. We are currently in a seller's market and the B12 can shop their TV rights. If the ACC TV rights were a free agent, they would get a lot more money. IMO at least $5 million more per year.

 

[MikeSU02]

hey sparky, can you tell me why you hate swofford??

the man who picked off 5 BigEast teams into the ACC, forced a 6th to bend over in texas and saved his conference name forever??

im a little confused on this.

if your arguement is 'but the sec got more $$!!'...then dont respond.
"

if you think the bevo got more $$ youre foolish. the real #s arent out there yet.

Not sure if you follow Dennis Dodd, but his tweets support a lot of the stuff you have been saying:

twitter.com/dennisdodd:

"I'm seeing a lot of FSU-to-Big 12 stuff that makes me scratch my head"

"If SEC does a network that's going to dominate the market. How then does an FSU network work in a state where UF is clearly No. 1?"

"Two things: I'm still of the opinion that the ONLY collegiate networks that will work are BTN (done) and SEC if it starts one ..."

"No. 2: Why does Texas want another team in the league that can beat it?"

"As I've always said you're either a market or a brand in terms of conference hopping. Clemson is neither. FSU is maybe one."

"Clemson and FSU went from $10 a year to $17 a year in about a year. That's pretty stout."

 

[kingottoiii]

Not sure if you follow Dennis Dodd, but his tweets support a lot of the stuff you have been saying:

twitter.com/dennisdodd:

"I'm seeing a lot of FSU-to-Big 12 stuff that makes me scratch my head"

"If SEC does a network that's going to dominate the market. How then does an FSU network work in a state where UF is clearly No. 1?"

FSU wouldn't be starting a network but selling 2-3 FB games plus a handful of BBall games to a existing network. SU gets money from TW and SNY to broadcast BE games. Those monies both go away in the ACC.

"Two things: I'm still of the opinion that the ONLY collegiate networks that will work are BTN (done) and SEC if it starts one ..."

"No. 2: Why does Texas want another team in the league that can beat it?"

They wouldn't face FSU every year. Also by going to 12 teams, you can go back to an 8 team schedule. That means more OOC FB games and more content for LHN.

"As I've always said you're either a market or a brand in terms of conference hopping. Clemson is neither. FSU is maybe one."

"Clemson and FSU went from $10 a year to $17 a year in about a year. That's pretty stout."


Wouldn't going from $17 million a year to $25 million a year be stout?