ACC Basketball a Dud

[SouthronCross]

Well let's consider that the "BUG10" did not sign a GoR under duress. So, peck away if you like but it's a huge stretch to suggest "it's necessary".

Who in the ACC signed its GOR under duress?

If a school really wanted out we certainly would not see the hissy fit being put up by the ACC.

If PSU were to go to the B1G today, and, tell them that they wanted out of their GOR in order to join the ACC, that Delany and Co would simply just let them go? I respectfully disagree.

And if a Mizzou or Vandy should leave the SEC, get out the GoR countdown clock. It would follow.

I don't for a minute believe that a GOR is unbreakable. Although, it'd be really interesting to see how a challenge would play out.

 

[dayooper]

I don't for a minute believe that a GOR is unbreakable. Although, it'd be really interesting to see how a challenge would play out.

I completely agree. The thing is, someone would want to break it enough to challenge and fins a conference that would take th leap. The Big12 is the first that comes to mind (the love their contract, but hate the conference). Just not enough exposure for the schools.

The ACC? Seems like you all are happy except I don't know how the lack of a dedicated conference network is sitting with some. That would be the only reason I can come up. Otherwise, the schools that could go (UNC, UVA, FSU, Clemson, GTU) all seem pretty happy.

 

[dayooper]

Unless you can point to a clause in the GOR and say "here is what they do differently" then your post just reads like BUG talking points. PSU is bound in the same way as UVA to their respective conferences.

Unless you show where the clauses all are the same, than you are sounding like another ACC apologist.

My guess (I'm about as far from an "insider" as you can get) is that they have similar verbiage, but suit the needs of each conference. The needs of The Big12 are not the same as The ACC and The Big10 or even The Pac12. If I remember correctly, The ACC GoR was patterned after The Big12. The Big12's GoR was different from The Big10's and The Pac12's because they have no conference network to buy into. The Big12 GoR was structured to keep the conference together as ESPN wanted to keep Texas. Again, I'm not an expert nor an insider. It's just the way it was explained to me.

As far as UVA and PSU being bound the same to their respective conferences, they are not. PSU owns a share in the BTN (1/14 of 49% plus what ever the buy in for UNL, RU, and UMD is at the time). They would have to be bought out with the settlement negotiated. Since there is no ACC Network (aside from a streaming one) nor any on the horizon, the connection starts and ends with the exit fee/GoR.

 

[nelsonmuntz]

Unless you show where the clauses all are the same, than you are sounding like another ACC apologist.

My guess (I'm about as far from an "insider" as you can get) is that they have similar verbiage, but suit the needs of each conference. The needs of The Big12 are not the same as The ACC and The Big10 or even The Pac12. If I remember correctly, The ACC GoR was patterned after The Big12. The Big12's GoR was different from The Big10's and The Pac12's because they have no conference network to buy into. The Big12 GoR was structured to keep the conference together as ESPN wanted to keep Texas. Again, I'm not an expert nor an insider. It's just the way it was explained to me.

As far as UVA and PSU being bound the same to their respective conferences, they are not. PSU owns a share in the BTN (1/14 of 49% plus what ever the buy in for UNL, RU, and UMD is at the time). They would have to be bought out with the settlement negotiated. Since there is no ACC Network (aside from a streaming one) nor any on the horizon, the connection starts and ends with the exit fee/GoR.

GOR's are sales of broadcast rights. Those contracts are locked down and there is a lot of case law to enforce them. No one is getting out of a GOR unless there was a trapdoor built in that we don't know about.

 

[NotreDameJoe]

The conference tv networks are all structured differently based in part on when they were created. I doubt their intent was to do anything other than maximize the $$$. The network is not a divisible asset so it wouldn't prevent movement. The exception is UT, I don't see any practical way they can take the LHN into a conference that has a network.

 

[dayooper]

The conference tv networks are all structured differently based in part on when they were created. I doubt their intent was to do anything other than maximize the $. The network is not a divisible asset so it wouldn't prevent movement. The exception is UT, I don't see any practical way they can take the LHN into a conference that has a network.

How are the Big10 schools not tied to the network? The Big10 schools own 49% of the network with the ability to own 100% in the future. They paid into the network with their tier2 and tier3 and have a vested interest as they lost money the first year or so. The Pac12 fully owns and put up starting costs to launch the network. The schools pay 100% of the operating costs. The schools are tied to the conferences is that hey don't want to lose the money they have in their asset.

 

[dayooper]

GOR's are sales of broadcast rights. Those contracts are locked down and there is a lot of case law to enforce them. No one is getting out of a GOR unless there was a trapdoor built in that we don't know about.

Sure, that's why Prince was known as that symbol for several years. That's how he got around His GoR with his previous publishing company. Again, schools have "sold" their rights to the conferences and the conferences have sold them to the media companies. The media companies want GoR's as they don't want to lose their rights. As long as the conferences hold the rights, they are obligated to pay for them, no matter what conference they reside.

 

[SouthronCross]

I completely agree. The thing is, someone would want to break it enough to challenge and fins a conference that would take th leap. The Big12 is the first that comes to mind (the love their contract, but hate the conference). Just not enough exposure for the schools.

That is where Swofford got his biggest criticism...that he traded more exposure on ABC-ESPN for a little less money. It looked bad, until it came out that that both the Big 12 and Pac-12 were pretty unhappy with how little exposure they were getting from the ESPN Networks. How could ESPN show some of their games, when they had control their own Tier 2 (P12) and Tier 3 (both) content? ESPN has all of the ACC's, which meant they could air nearly any game they wanted, at any available time.

If I can find that article, I will link it for you.

The ACC? Seems like you all are happy except I don't know how the lack of a dedicated conference network is sitting with some. That would be the only reason I can come up. Otherwise, the schools that could go (UNC, UVA, FSU, Clemson, GTU) all seem pretty happy.

Remaining in the ACC was always UNC's and UVA's first choice. Yeah, the opportunity to go to either the SEC or B1G was/is VERY enticing. But, this is a league they'd shared with NCSU, Duke, Wake, Maryland, and, Clemson for 60+ years. They did not want to just throw that history away. Tech has been here for 36 years, FSU for 23. They and CU all want football to be better. Last season was a step in the right direction,, but, thats all it was. A step.

If memory serves, Swofford made it known that signing the GOR was no guarantee of a possible ACCN ever coming to fruition. But, he and some of the league's original ADs seem to think its more than a possibility within the next 3-5 years. I am not 100 percent sold on it, but, you just never know.

 

[dayooper]

Remaining in the ACC was always UNC's and UVA's first choice. Yeah, the opportunity to go to either the SEC or B1G was/is VERY enticing. But, this is a league they'd shared with NCSU, Duke, Wake, Maryland, and, Clemson for 60+ years. They did not want to just throw that history away. Tech has been here for 36 years, FSU for 23. They and CU all want football to be better. Last season was a step in the right direction,, but, thats all it was. A step.

If memory serves, Swofford made it known that signing the GOR was no guarantee of a possible ACCN ever coming to fruition. But, he and some of the league's original ADs seem to think its more than a possibility within the next 3-5 years. I am not 100 percent sold on it, but, you just never know.

That's my thought as well. I do know that the exposure from the BTN has been great for the Big10 schools and with The SECN starting up, they will increase their exposure as well. UNC, Duke, FSU will always get good coverage from ESPN because they are national brands. Schools like UVA/Clemson/GTU/NCST that don't have the national exposure were the ones I was thinking of. I never thought they were unhappy and looking to move, but that would be my guess at who could be getting restless. Was there some sort of clause that added a little extra from ESPN if there wasn't a dedicated network within XX number of years? I thought I heard that.

 

[btstimpy]

That's my thought as well. I do know that the exposure from the BTN has been great for the Big10 schools and with The SECN starting up, they will increase their exposure as well. UNC, Duke, FSU will always get good coverage from ESPN because they are national brands. Schools like UVA/Clemson/GTU/NCST that don't have the national exposure were the ones I was thinking of. I never thought they were unhappy and looking to move, but that would be my guess at who could be getting restless. Was there some sort of clause that added a little extra from ESPN if there wasn't a dedicated network within XX number of years? I thought I heard that.

I've heard that too. It is somewhere in the neighborhood of $2.5 million per school per year not to have a network. That's why the payout now is in the $22.5 million range for the schools with this tacked on. If a network is created and launched, this part goes away and is used to start the network which would then need to generate its own revenue to replace this. This of course sent the Dude into orbit as though the ACC is being told they would have to get less from ESPN to have a network. But of course it was only a eureka revelation to the Dude. The ACC schools already know this.

With three of the other P5 Conferences having their own networks, ESPNU might not have much else to show other than the ACC. I've wondered if it might not morph into the ACC Network. Regarding the exposure on the BTN, I've never seen the first minute of coverage on the BTN. I haven't either on the PAC 12 network or the Longhorn Network. None of these come with my cable package. I may have seen some at a sports bar during football, but I didn't know which network it was, and there was no sound.

 

[NotreDameJoe]

Some people don't appreciate that it takes time and money to start up a television station. I'd guess at least two years from the time the conference demands it to when it actually appears on your dial.

 

[dayooper]

Some people don't appreciate that it takes time and money to start up a television station. I'd guess at least two years from the time the conference demands it to when it actually appears on your dial.

Yup, and the Big10 expected to start seeing profit in year 4 or 5. They were even in year 2 and made money in year 3. They did have the backing of Fox to help the process along. The Pac12 network is experiencing a little slower growth, but they don't have the backing of a major network (100% owned by the conference) nor the fan base that the Big10 and SEC have. The LHN? Who knows as ESPN owns it and pays Texas for the content. I doubt they will ever say they are losing money on the deal.