ACC TV Deal @ $19 million/year

[All4SU]

One potentially big thing this does is lessen the need for football tickets to generate revenue. We really really need fannies in the seats more than we need the $ now, so maybe students should get in free now without the need for an extra $99 charge on their tuition bill.

Of course, you keep the $99 on the tuition bill, and call it tuition...then give them the tickets.

 

[All4SU]

ACC Lacrosse would be great on an ACC Network.

 

[44PRIDE]

The SEC, well let's just not piss them off.

Yeah, I believe that is good advice for the ACC

 

[Alsacs]

The B1G will target Virginia, Georgia Tech, North Carolina, or Boston College. If the ACC can convince those schools to reject the B1G overtures the ACC will be fine. The SEC is fine at 14 and will only react to the B1G. I think a GOR is doable for the ACC if Ga. Tech, Virginia agree I don't think FSU will go anywhere but to the SEC so maybe they have a problem, but I think they can be convinced to agree to the GOR if they are shown the SEC won't come calling.

 

[GoSU96]

So assume the numbers are true and we are netting an extra $14 million. Had to write that down simply to see it in print.

Give Marrone an extra million $. Give each coordinator an extra $250K. Give each other assistant an extra $100K. That's $2.2 million.

So Dr. Gross, everything else being equal, here is your leftover $11.8 million per year to figure out what to do with.

It's 15.4M. The current TV contract in the BE is 3.6 for football schools.

 

[SUinNYC]

The next several weeks and month are going to be a roller coaster ride...the ACC is doing everything to remain strong and united...after all, how much dollars are needed to be secure...if all this is a $$$ race than the B1G and SEC are going to carry the day. I hope this helps...understand should have more within a week or so to pass on...keep the faith and GOOOO 'Cuse!

The tone of this last paragraph makes me nervous. Know something we don't?

 

[kingottoiii]

The B1G will target Virginia, Georgia Tech, North Carolina, or Boston College. If the ACC can convince those schools to reject the B1G overtures the ACC will be fine. The SEC is fine at 14 and will only react to the B1G. I think a GOR is doable for the ACC if Ga. Tech, Virginia agree I don't think FSU will go anywhere but to the SEC so maybe they have a problem, but I think they can be convinced to agree to the GOR if they are shown the SEC won't come calling.

They should just all agree to a GOR with an out at each look in. So in five years FSU gets a get out of jail free card should the SEC offer. A 5 year commitment really won't make or break a school. That also allows a school to see how the new playoff system and payouts actually work. Then in 5 years make a decision based on the landscape whether or not to sign a GOR for another 5 years after the look in. It really seems simple. No ACC school should want to leave until they see how things play out. So why not stabilize the ACC short term?

 

[bnoro]

How were we able to survive and still have a better balanced AD than Maryland making what little money we did in the BE? This could really catapult us to new heights if used correctly.

 

[javadoc]

How were we able to survive and still have a better balanced AD than Maryland making what little money we did in the BE? This could really catapult us to new heights if used correctly.

Amen, have said the same thing. Curious to see if we start up any new sports.

 

[DoctorBombay]

the exit fee of $50,000,000 or something close is necessary to finally shut down all the rumors and clamoring...however, the new BCS dollars should go a long way for stability...regardless the ACC is now going to survive and thrive even if a team or two leave over time...which may/ may not occur...at this moment, I would say we are in good shape.

 

[kingottoiii]

I just hope we don't waste it by adding useless sports. I take pride when the non revenue sports do well but I rather see money reinvested into FB/BBall than to start up Baseball/Hockey, which I will only care about if we make a Final Four and ignore the rest of the year. IMO a 25k BBall arena > a Top 25 Hockey team in a 5k arena. A pimped out Dome for FB > a Top 25 Baseball team and a 5k field. If a sport cannot break even AND cover the additional woman's sport that needs to be added to offset Title 9, then it is a waste of money.

 

[sutomcat]

It's 15.4M. The current TV contract in the BE is 3.6 for football schools.

One thing to keep in mind that is

a) I believe Syracuse and Pitt will not get a full share of the ACC revenue initially. Thought I read somewhere that the initial share for the new schools will be less and will be increased over a period of a few years to the full 100% share the other ACC receive.

b) Remember that the TV revenue money is the average ACC schools will receive over the length of the contract. The dollars paid start up lower than the average and ramp up sharply over time. It is a heavily back-loaded contract.

The money coming in will still be dramatically more than the SU athletic department has ever seen and it will be higher than we are discussing in the latter years of the contract. But it will take time to get to the really big numbers.

 

[Millhouse]

One thing to keep in mind that is

a) I believe Syracuse and Pitt will not get a full share of the ACC revenue initially. Thought I read somewhere that the initial share for the new schools will be less and will be increased over a period of a few years to the full 100% share the other ACC receive.

b) Remember that the TV revenue money is the average ACC schools will receive over the length of the contract. The dollars paid start up lower than the average and ramp up sharply over time. It is a heavily back-loaded contract.

The money coming in will still be dramatically more than the SU athletic department has ever seen and it will be higher than we are discussing in the latter years of the contract. But it will take time to get to the really big numbers.

Who knows what they're actually doing right now but i suspect they borrow like mad. at least now they can borrow more at less cost knowing that the money will come soon enough

 

[Czar]

I just hope we don't waste it by adding useless sports. I take pride when the non revenue sports do well but I rather see money reinvested into FB/BBall than to start up Baseball/Hockey, which I will only care about if we make a Final Four and ignore the rest of the year. IMO a 25k BBall arena > a Top 25 Hockey team in a 5k arena. A pimped out Dome for FB > a Top 25 Baseball team and a 5k field. If a sport cannot break even AND cover the additional woman's sport that needs to be added to offset Title 9, then it is a waste of money.

This. I say no to Baseball at any point, and only say yes to hockey if a booster is going to subsidize the start up of that a la Penn State.

 

[Toga]

Tom - How sure are you about (a)? I vaguely recall that scenario but thought it pertained to a different league.

One thing to keep in mind that is

a) I believe Syracuse and Pitt will not get a full share of the ACC revenue initially. Thought I read somewhere that the initial share for the new schools will be less and will be increased over a period of a few years to the full 100% share the other ACC receive.

b) Remember that the TV revenue money is the average ACC schools will receive over the length of the contract. The dollars paid start up lower than the average and ramp up sharply over time. It is a heavily back-loaded contract.

The money coming in will still be dramatically more than the SU athletic department has ever seen and it will be higher than we are discussing in the latter years of the contract. But it will take time to get to the really big numbers.

 

[Chip]

Tom - How sure are you about (a)? I vaguely recall that scenario but thought it pertained to a different league.

It definitely applies to the Big 10, Nebraska received $10M less than the other 11 schools this year.

For some reason, I thought I read there wouldn't be a phase in for the ACC. But I can barely remember what I had for breakfast, so who knows.

 

[bnoro]

This. I say no to Baseball at any point, and only say yes to hockey if a booster is going to subsidize the start up of that a la Penn State.

Why do we need a booster to subsidize hockey? Use the War Memorial. Hockey is a revenue sport in college. If they made a team I think it would be very popular, college hockey is a huge draw. Even the women's team drew upwards of 300 for some games which is pretty good for them. It would be similar to LAX attendance except probably better because hockey is much more fun to watch live.

 

[kingottoiii]

Why do we need a booster to subsidize hockey? Use the War Memorial. Hockey is a revenue sport in college. If they made a team I think it would be very popular, college hockey is a huge draw. Even the women's team drew upwards of 300 for some games which is pretty good for them. It would be similar to LAX attendance except probably better because hockey is much more fun to watch live.

You would need to cover the cost of 25 men's scholarships and 25 woman's (50 total). In addition to the cost of coaches salaries and the travel. Also you need to compete for fans vs BBall and the Crunch. To cover all of that it likely would cost north of a $50 average price per ticket. Good luck breaking even.

 

[bnoro]

You would need to cover the cost of 25 men's scholarships and 25 woman's (50 total). In addition to the cost of coaches salaries and the travel. Also you need to compete for fans vs BBall and the Crunch. To cover all of that it likely would cost north of a $50 average price per ticket. Good luck breaking even.

We already have women's scholarships. They have been playing for 3 years at Tennity on campus. Most are partial scholarships, just like men's lax. It would probably be the same for hockey. They would outdraw the Crunch because they are more identifiable than the Crunch. Schedule them on different days then Men's basketball. If a school like RPI sells out their stadium on a weekly basis, why can't SU?

 

[OrangeXtreme]

You would need to cover the cost of 25 men's scholarships and 25 woman's (50 total). In addition to the cost of coaches salaries and the travel. Also you need to compete for fans vs BBall and the Crunch. To cover all of that it likely would cost north of a $50 average price per ticket. Good luck breaking even.

There's a limit of 18 scholarships, spread over 30 players.

 

[kingottoiii]

We already have women's scholarships.

To add a men's sport it would need to be offset by a woman's sport. So if we add 18 men's hockey scholarships we need to add 18 scholarships somewhere for women. We already have women's hockey so it would need to be elsewhere. As a fan I would love to have men's hockey. But it doesn't make very good business sense to add a sport unless it pays for itself and the offsetting woman's sport. The only sports that really matter are FB and men's BBall. BBall is in good shape but FB needs all the cash it can get. I rather the money go to FB than 2 new sports.

 

[Alsacs]

No need for college hockey team the students outside a few hundred wouldn't care. Locals will go the Crunch over a startup college team. I would rather invest in sports facilities for basketball/football than wasting money on a hockey program or baseball program. The Dome is going to have to be replaced eventually the Georgia Dome which opened in 1993 is already getting replaced as Atlanta is going to build a new 1 billion dollar retractable roof stadium for 2018. The "new" Dome is where the money needs to go. SU should bank 10 million a year for 10 years from the ACC money to give them a little nest egg to have capital to lay a foundation for building a new stadium. The new stadium will cost atleast 500 million dollars if its going to be a Dome. The Dome was build in 1979 its time to look into a facelift/replacement. Hockey/Baseball aren't going to do anything to raise SU's sports profile we are a football, basketball, men's/women's lacrosse school with an excellent women's field hockey team as well.

 

[mountaincuse]

No need for college hockey team the students outside a few hundred wouldn't care. Locals will go the Crunch over a startup college team.

For years most people didn't know any better and connected them with SU anyways.

An SU hockey team would eventually cause the Crunch to become irrelevant.

I agree though about not going that route and improving what we have working now.

 

[JeremyCuse]

Why do we need a booster to subsidize hockey? Use the War Memorial. Hockey is a revenue sport in college. If they made a team I think it would be very popular, college hockey is a huge draw. Even the women's team drew upwards of 300 for some games which is pretty good for them. It would be similar to LAX attendance except probably better because hockey is much more fun to watch live.

Agree about not needing a booster but I doubt we see any new programs, we would need at least two to satisfy title 9 and from what I heard previously Gross has zero interest in adding mens Hockey or mens baseball the two most likely candidates.

 

[javadoc]

I believe Syracuse and Pitt will not get a full share of the ACC revenue initially. Thought I read somewhere that the initial share for the new schools will be less and will be increased over a period of a few years to the full 100% share the other ACC receive.

I would think twice about signing a GOR if I weren't getting pretty close to a full share immediately.