As reported today in Orangeyes Articles: Gross says unequal revenue not a bad idea

[arbitragegls]

In the following article today, Dr. Gross indicated his belief that unequal revenue split based on teams going to bowls/NCAA March Madness etc should receive an extra kick insofar as revenue is concerned. It is interesting to go back in time and NOTE what our source had indicated and how much of it From December 6th, 2012 seems to be on target:

http://www.syracuse.com/orangefootb...h_projected_revenue_increas.html#incart_river

"ACC Commissioner John Swofford said last month at the conference spring meetings that he formed a subcommittee to determine a fair structure for football bowl revenue distribution. The current system is an equal share, regardless if a school even qualified for a bowl. But many ACC school officials, including Gross, favor a model that rewards schools for competing in the postseason.
Swofford hopes the subcommittee will make progress on how it will decide future bowl revenue distribution by late fall.
"We're in the competition business. That's what we all signed up for," Gross said. "If a team is in last place all the time, they're still getting a bulk of the money, but they don't certainly get the part where the team has to go compete, have to go travel, the extra expenses and all those types of things. The winning team shouldn't be penalized. There should be an incentive to want to win and be there."
Gross added: "There's an algorithm in there that can make everybody happy, where the lion's share goes to the conferences and the schools, that there's a portion left out for those that compete and advance and go further. You want to take out the million dollar free throws because none of us believe in that, but at the same time you want to reward those schools that do well."

As some of you probably remember (haha) back on December 6, 2012 the following was posted:

So we now have the Presidents of all 15 institutions, including 'Cuse, FSU, Pitt, Clemson, GTech and Notre Dame, signing a love fest note saying all is okay...well its a start. A thread was started and I will tell you it is worth MORE THAN the paper it is written on...so here goes: (source--hopefully I got this right):​

ACC and ESPN are in discussions that if come to fruition...it will be happy days are here again--damn we lost another election--look for the following as might have beens that actually can happen:​

1. ESPN not to let ACC media contract stay where it is ...reasons are plentiful including but not limited to:​

--Notre Dame home games with ACC teams​

--The third most viewed conference by TV sets and gaining on #2 (Big 12 way behind)​

2. ACC working on possibility of changing revenue distribution but not for the overall TV contract (split overall TV contract equally)​

--example:​

a) FSU in Orange Bowl pays $17,000,000+ pay out​

b) take out travel/incidentals etc prior to splitting equally with conference (way done now)​

--did conference play the game or did FSU?​

c) perhaps give FSU an additional $4 million or whatever out of game​

d) split the remainder equally among non participants of that game​

e) Repeat for each and every football ball Bowl game each team plays in​

​

Now a really cool move:​

f) do the same for each bball team that gets to the NCAA's/NIT​

--for each round team gets travel money plus a larger share of the dollars earned for each round before being equally distributed to other teams...​

--now teams like Wake Forest if not making extra dollars on football field, can make extra dollars being a heck of a good bball team​

G) Result is all teams share Overall TV contract...all teams receive equal distribution of football bowl games and NCAA and NIT bball games...except teams playing in BOWL or BBall Tournament receive a $$ sum off the top before distribution​

Expectations are that 1 will happen soon and that 2 is under advisement and being discussed/well received...​

3. Maryland fee to leave conference is important...but if #1 and potentially #2 happen, it really will not make a key difference for teams leaving...why leave if you play in a BOWL and/or bball tournament each team can bring in significant added dollars...this could be even more a significant $$$$ hit for 'Cuse...​

​

Discuss/questions/fingers crossed!​

arbitragegls, Dec 6, 2012​

​

The point of this is that we are in a stable, forward looking Conference. The ACC is committed to continue its movement forward: academically, athletically, and revenue wise...sure it may take time for "good things" to happen...but those "good things" have been set in motion! In the coming weeks we will have more to discuss based on above revenue share and also the ACC Network moving forward!​

​

It's Is Good to be 'Cuse!!!!!​

 

[44PRIDE]

1. ESPN not to let ACC media contract stay where it is ...reasons are plentiful including but not limited to:

--Notre Dame home games with ACC teams​

--The third most viewed conference by TV sets and gaining on #2 (Big 12 way behind)​

​

Could you elaborate on this? It sounds like you are saying ESPN is going to increase the ACC contract on their own accord. That doesn't sound very...realistic.

 

[shantydaze]

If I recall correctly, unequal distributions was one of the reasons cited by Miami when leaving the Big East and Nebraska when leaving the Big 12. While I am in favor of schools receiving extra money to cover the costs of competing in a bowl game or the NCAA tournament, providing these schools additional revenue over and above the costs creates "haves" and "have nots" which can create discord among the conference members. Further, does this push schools down the SEC path (allegedly) - spreading around a couple of hundred thousand dollars to players to get over the hump and make a BCS Bowl/Playoffs where the real money can be made?

Another issue arises when a school allegedly breaks NCAA rules to make a bowl game or the tournament. Does the school have to refund the additional money to the conference? What if a key player on the team scored the winning touchdown against SU, making them ineligible to play in a bowl and it was later determined the player should have been academically ineligible? Does SU get more money?

Competition for revenue should be at the conference level, not the school level. To have otherwise can create acrimony between the member schools and a reason to bend the rules.

 

[sendithome]

I agree with Gross. The schools that bring in revenue to the conference should get a little more than others. The amount should be enough to award but not to entice cheating. I'm sure the amounts/calculations and ramifications for breaking conference and/or NCAA rules are being ironed by that committee.

Thanks Arb for the update!