Reply to thread

Message: [QUOTE="HtownOrange, post: 4611628, member: 622"] Don't believe any rumor about the networks not having money. They have more money than you think. ESPN has more money for the ACC than they let on. They will keep giving the ACC more money, probably just enough to placate the majority and keep the peace, but they have more than enough money to pay everyone SEC money. If you don't believe it, take a look at the annual payouts, the ACC is getting larger payouts than the base agreements. No, the ACC is not making SEC money, nor B1G money, but the B1G isn't making the B1G money yet and they still obfuscate the revenues by pooling gate revenues with the payouts. (Which may be one reason they refuse to assist Rutgers in any favorable manner as Rutgers' gate revenue is abysmal and they are benefitting immensely from the arrangement and contributing nothing more than easy victories to the remaining B1G foes). For all the big mouths on the interwebs that think ESPN is going to cut out the east coast markets for the SEC alone and give the east coast from VA north to Fox free of charge while splitting the Carolinas, Georgia and Florida, they are allowing yourself to be deceived. ESPN is in the game to make money, not lose money or to give up money streams to Fox of any other network/streamer. You don't make money by giving up revenue streams. If nothing else, the northeast brings in huge hoops revenue. I still believe they bring in more football revenue than most will admit as NY and PA are large population states, but that would take advanced research analytics from a marketing specialist/advertising specialist or TV type (Matt Sarz(?) are you there? anyone else?) of which I am not. Regardless, that is not how business works. ESPN is a business, as is the Mickey Mouse network, neither ESPN nor the Mickey Mouse Network has a history of losing money. ESPN owns the SEC and the ACC networks. That means ESPN already hold 30 properties. Fox holds less than 20 properties. The problem for Fox is that they don't have big names to go after right now. Sure, ND is "available" but they are committed to the ACC at least through 2036 and really have no interest in the B1G as it is formatted now. Regarding the Big 12 and Pac-Leftovers, ESPN does not need to make a move and pay big money, they will be able to cobble a conference together and offer a reasonable deal for cannon fodder for the SEC and ACC. Sure, the SEC is ESPN's premier conference, but ESPN cannot alienate the ACC so much so that they turn to Fox in 2036. ESPN must keep the deal close enough to keep the ACC in the fold. Nor can ESPN allow the ACC to break up because they lose the ACC as a whole and they lose too many properties, further, they cannot risk losing the northeast to the B1G nor sharing the southeast with the B1G. Again, to do so, they will have to keep the ACC placated and close enough to the other two (SEC and B1G) to keep the ACC together. For the B1G to win over ND, they would need additional east coast teams to cover ND's "national" schedule. I am not mocking ND, they like to play Navy and 5 other east coast teams (3 home, 3 away) annually. Two west coast (1 home, 1 away), two midwest (1 home and 1 away) and two whatever (1 home, 1 away). Disclaimer: If an ND fan corrects me, go with their correction. Anyway, ND will need a conference that allows such a schedule. We can assume that the B1G wanted USC for that purpose, and another west coast team. Also, it is likely the B1G picks up another 2-6 west coast teams over the next few years, per chatter. The B1G easily meets the midwest requirement. The problem is the east coast requirement. As it stands, the B1G has PSU, Rutgers and UMD. While ND could conceivable play PSU regularly and possibly UMD, it is hard to fathom UND agreeing to play Rutgers - let alone at Rutgers - annually. Thus, the B1G needs a minimum of two teams (this assumes Navy is a non-conference game) from the ACC. Rumor has it that UVA, UNC and GATech are the targets. They are legitimate targets for the B1G based on academics. But once again, that does not fully match the ideals of the national schedule which tends to rotate between major populations centers on the east coast and hits several in the northeast because of the heavy catholic populations (you know, they target student population recruit for ND). That would require the B1G to take more likely at least 6-8 ACC schools to get the coverage to draw ND's attention. This raises two major points: 1) does the B1G want that kind of expansion and at once? 2) Will ESPN allow the ACC to break up and lose so many properties at once to Fox? In my view, it is hard to view ESPN giving up a money making conference, losing several individual properties to Fox for no return benefit. This shift would mean the B1G/Fox would now have 30+ properties and the SEC/ESPN would have 20ish properties (this assumes the SEC takes 4 ACC teams tbd). Sure, they may enhance the SEC revenues in a small way, but closing off the northeast markets is not good business for ESPN; nor is blindly conceding these same properties to a competitor without any returned benefit as Fox would get ND and the north east en toto and a share of the the southeast. Unless the plan is for the SEC to expand to the northeast, ESPN is not allowing the ACC to fall apart, even then, the ACC - including the northern teams - are rolled largely into the SEC. Nor can you have a simple 30-40 team league with the "factory" schools. The "factories" must have fodder to keep looking good. That is why the playoffs went to 12 teams and six conference champs. [URL unfurl="true"]https://en.as.com/ncaa/when-will-the-college-football-playoff-format-expand-to-12-teams-n-2/[/URL] With six conference champs, the deal ensures that there will be six conferences or more. At least for a while. We may see the number shrink as the conferences grow. However, the numbers are basically an admission that there needs to be a large number of teams to ensure enough teams to keep some illusion of elite teams. Bottom feeders must exist. SEC teams, other than Vandy, refuse to be viewed as bottom feeders and lose revenue though they lack impressive conference records and are likely to have less impressive conference records with the addition of UT and OU. SEC bottom feeders need someone else to beat up on. Based on the fact that there are now going to be 12 teams in the playoffs, the minimum number appears to be about 90 or more, presently there are 120-130. And there may not be a real intent to force FBS bottom feeders to drop down to FCS or Div.2, it may be that they simply want to secure the haves and have nots while they can see the only real long game option is ... The real long game is when the universities and conferences get smart and start negotiating as one league, like the professionals do. Only then we will get a real idea of how much money is in the system. Until then, the networks hold enough cards to keep the conferences at bay and guessing what is really available. Just a reminder, at each deal for the last 20 or 30 years, each conference has been told there was no more money. Each deal after that was increased significantly. We are also told that football drives the bus, but revenues show that hoops and football are roughly equal for TV. [/QUOTE]

Verification: What is a Syracuse fan's favorite color?