ACC Network Done Deal?

[NYUConn]

The ACC played the CR gane well when it raided and killed the Big East. It's had played it poorly since, and both times we got hurt.

Letting BC blackball us was short sighted and dumb.
Picking Louisville over us (thanks FSU and Clemson) was shorter sighted and dumber. The B1G showed that the correct way to play the CR game was to expand territory, even if that meant adding less than stellar football programs. The ACC didn't learn from that and instead took what it thought was the best football program available. Nevermind that Louisville isn't the number team in it's own state.

I'm not saying that the ACC would have a network right now if they had added us a few years ago, but I am also not convinced that Swofford is as astute at David Teel thinks he is.

I completely agree with this. I'll even go farther and say that the ACC's biggest blunders are what they didn't anticipate and didn't prevent that hurt it the most.

Allowing the B1G to take Rutgers and get a footprint in the NYC DMA was a huge blow. The ACC grabbed Cuse and thought that was good enough, which nobody in their right mind would think that the Orange alone would deliver NYC. If Swofford really could play the game, he would have premptively taken RU or even UConn to claim the NYC DMA (at least with UConn the ACC could claim by virtue of Fairfield County to have a presence in the NYC DMA).

But I truly believe the most egregious thing Swofford allowed to happen was letting Maryland - with decades of history in the ACC and the conference's footprint in our nation's capital - leave to go to the B1G. Yes, I understand the economics behind the Maryland move but I cannot understand how Swofford could have let this happen.

Then to replace Maryland with a Louisville athletic department that has proven to be criminally corrupt and in a worthless DMA that they don't even own, that was just terrible.

 

[Sky ball]

I think people need to stop thinking that ESPN is going to repurpose/rebrand ESPNU and ESPN News. These are successful channels that each bring in almost $200 million of revenues per year and are in ~74 million households each. LHN is now about breakeven so it's not a big loss maker for ESPN. Perhaps ESPN Classic, which is only available in ~25 million homes and has been in decline for years, could become an ACC Network.

In my opinion, an "ACC Network" can only come about as a new channel (highly doubtful), repositioning ESPN Classic, or as some sort of streaming network like ESPN3 (probable). It does make sense for ESPN to experiment with a streaming network with ACC content and see if it could generate sizable revenues as it wouldn't be too costly to start up.

I think they will start a new ESPN channel...ESPN The Ocho!

 

[CL82]

The ACC wasn't the brains of the Big East raids, that was ESPN. The ACC was a convenient tool for ESPN to use to consolidate the number of conference deals it had to buy.

 

[Dooley]

Louisville has a very good and loyal fanbase and they heavily invest in the two sports that matter most in CR: football and MBB. That's good for them and will help them maintain a power conference profile (Big 12) if/when the ACC ever disbands because of lack of conference network.

But what's more valuable to a network: 50% market share of Louisville or 100% marketshare of Hartford/New Haven PLUS (at least) 5% marketshare of NYC and Boston? And the ratings were in at a time when Louisville is in the ACC and winning and UConn its stuck in the AAC and struggling. Put a P5 schedule and winning programs in front of those DMAs and the interest only goes up. Nothing but good news for any conference aspiring to create or add to a conference network.

 

[billybud]

In football competition, nobody wants to again carry the labeling tag that hurt the BE.... the Big Least.

So adding a program or two that will be the bottom of a conference and water down content seems to be a sticking point...thus some Big 12 angst....

The Big Ten could afford to water down their schedule some....still...this year based on early ESPN FPI...

The easiest schedules of 2016 are...

1. Minnesota
2. Michigan
3. Purdue
4. Maryland
5. Nebraska

The Top Five all Big Ten...and Indiana and Iowa make the Top Ten.

http://247sports.com/Bolt/College-footballs-toughest-and-easiest-2016-schedules-44687841

 

[Kgun7]

In football competition, nobody wants to again carry the labeling tag that hurt the BE.... the Big Least.

So adding a program or two that will be the bottom of a conference and water down content seems to be a sticking point...thus some Big 12 angst....

The Big Ten could afford to water down their schedule some....still...this year based on early ESPN FPI...

The easiest schedules of 2016 are...

1. Minnesota
2. Michigan
3. Purdue
4. Maryland
5. Nebraska

The Top Five all Big Ten...and Indiana and Iowa make the Top Ten.

http:// /Bolt/College-footballs-toughest-and-easiest-2016-schedules-44687841

Great point ... I wonder if Fox had SOS data for the B1G prior to offering the annual GDP of Costa Rica for 50% of the TV deal ...

 

[upstater]

Fishy...I never could even figure out why they give a CEO a million dollar raise when the stock has tanked and the company's performance is down.

I don't think anyone has seen the media contract since it is between two non public entities and not subject to FOIA. We know that there are "look ins", we just don't know what the contract says about them.

Sometimes, in a long term contract, the market may move and one or both of the parties writes in a built in look in as a protection. The market is reset upward...or maybe downward, but the contract may contain an adjustment clause.

The question is..."If there are look ins, why?"

I can figure that out easily.

The CEO uses the cash position for a stock buyback which is why he/she gets a compensation increase.

 

[upstater]

In football competition, nobody wants to again carry the labeling tag that hurt the BE.... the Big Least.

So adding a program or two that will be the bottom of a conference and water down content seems to be a sticking point...thus some Big 12 angst....

The Big Ten could afford to water down their schedule some....still...this year based on early ESPN FPI...

The easiest schedules of 2016 are...

1. Minnesota
2. Michigan
3. Purdue
4. Maryland
5. Nebraska

The Top Five all Big Ten...and Indiana and Iowa make the Top Ten.

http:// /Bolt/College-footballs-toughest-and-easiest-2016-schedules-44687841

The ACC watered it down with BC, Syracuse, Pitt, Louisville too. Heck, everything in the conference outside of FSU and Clemson is now watery.

 

[NYUConn]

The ACC watered it down with BC, Syracuse, Pitt, Louisville too. Heck, everything in the conference outside of FSU and Clemson is now watery.

Gonna let you all in on a major bombshell revelation:

With the exception of FSU and Clemson more recently, the ACC has been the most overrated football conference year in and year out for the last decade plus.

Miami has done jack since joining the ACC and V-Tech has a win over Cincy in the Orange Bowl to hang their hats on.

The conference was 5-13 in BCS games, 1-4 pre-expansion and 4-9 after expansion.

The truth is the ACC has always been Florida State and the __ dwarfs.

 

[dwalks93]

In football competition, nobody wants to again carry the labeling tag that hurt the BE.... the Big Least.

So adding a program or two that will be the bottom of a conference and water down content seems to be a sticking point...thus some Big 12 angst....

The Big Ten could afford to water down their schedule some....still...this year based on early ESPN FPI...


http:// /Bolt/College-footballs-toughest-and-easiest-2016-schedules-44687841

This makes absolutely no sense. The Big12 and the ACC are perceived to be the weaker, most vulnerable P5 conferences for one reason...they are earning less money than the SEC/BIG.

The ACC and Big12 compete in most sports as well as any P5 conference. IMO the label that really hurt the BE was not "the Big Least" but was "the Big Unstable." A perception of instability is what causes teams to leave for another conference when they have an opportunity. The current income disparity is what is causing that "unstable" label to be applied now to the Big12 and to a lesser extend, the ACC.

Any expansion by the Big12 or ACC that is not purely grounded in closing the financial gap is just plain silly. It was never about football...it was always about money. The ACC and Big12 need to figure that out...

 

[jostar1]

This was posted on TechSideline:

Brett McMurphy, ESPN FB analyst, on radio this weekend

He said the reported $45 million payout from ESPN to ACC if there is no network is an annual payout, not a one time deal. So, it sounded like ESPN is really on the hook for getting this done one way or another.

McMurphy said this on Andy Staples Sunday show in SiriusXM.

 

[nelsonmuntz]

This was posted on TechSideline:

Brett McMurphy, ESPN FB analyst, on radio this weekend

He said the reported $45 million payout from ESPN to ACC if there is no network is an annual payout, not a one time deal. So, it sounded like ESPN is really on the hook for getting this done one way or another.

McMurphy said this on Andy Staples Sunday show in SiriusXM.

If true, the state should be pulling any string we have with ESPN to get them to add UConn to the ACC. If ESPN is on the hook for the network anyway, why not add UConn? It will make the network more valuable to ESPN, and if they are going to pay one nickel more than the annual minimum, they should be able to get the conference they want.

 

[mavblues]

If true, the state should be pulling any string we have with ESPN to get them to add UConn to the ACC. If ESPN is on the hook for the network anyway, why not add UConn? It will make the network more valuable to ESPN, and if they are going to pay one nickel more than the annual minimum, they should be able to get the conference they want.

And that's why I liked the timing of JJ's article.

 

[billybud]

This makes absolutely no sense. The Big12 and the ACC are perceived to be the weaker, most vulnerable P5 conferences for one reason...they are earning less money than the SEC/BIG.

The ACC and Big12 compete in most sports as well as any P5 conference. IMO the label that really hurt the BE was not "the Big Least" but was "the Big Unstable." A perception of instability is what causes teams to leave for another conference when they have an opportunity. The current income disparity is what is causing that "unstable" label to be applied now to the Big12 and to a lesser extend, the ACC.

Any expansion by the Big12 or ACC that is not purely grounded in closing the financial gap is just plain silly. It was never about football...it was always about money. The ACC and Big12 need to figure that out...

Well...that's the rub...I don't think it really is all about the money and getting cable box U.

At some date in the future, having games that people want to watch will be important. Rutgers and Maryland might be good for carriage fees...but in actual viewing, not so much. Paying for streaming will happen....and the way TV is watched will ever move towards streaming.

I do believe that the marquee match ups will drive...just like they do in the SEC. Have an interesting spectacle and folks will watch. As far as watching Wake play GT or Northwestern play Purdue, I'd rather watch a monkey screw a football.

 

[billybud]

We are almost in the same stage of competing technologies of times gone by - when there was both beta and vhs, then vhs and two types of CD technology, and then CD and downloading content. Live TV via cable is the final frontier ( at least for awhile) Apple TV had planned to replace cable companies by now, but they failed to get agreements with the broadcasters.

ESPN is trying to create a model where they can continue to make a lot of money by broadcasting sports on whatever technology the market screams for.

If the technology advances to where you can stream seamlessly to any TV (connected to a wifi) or PDA - and where the broadcaster can protect against illegal sharing or pirating - then its off to the races.

Anything is possible...

 

[WestHartHusk]

We are almost in the same stage of competing technologies of times gone by - when there was both beta and vhs, then vhs and two types of CD technology, and then CD and downloading content. Live TV via cable is the final frontier ( at least for awhile) Apple TV had planned to replace cable companies by now, but they failed to get agreements with the broadcasters.

ESPN is trying to create a model where they can continue to make a lot of money by broadcasting sports on whatever technology the market screams for.

If the technology advances to where you can stream seamlessly to any TV (connected to a wifi) or PDA - and where the broadcaster can protect against illegal sharing or pirating - then its off to the races.

Anything is possible...

Aren't we there now? What is your life like?

 

[UConnNick]

One of two things is happening in the ACC:

1. they are fervishly scrambling to convince Notre Dame to join full-time and bring in UConn as member 16 so that they can launch their ACC Network;

2. they are asking Tom Jurich if he can cook any more books and increase Louisville's census population by 10M people overnight.

My money is on #2.

No. 2 may require another huge influx of hookers, something the Cards can probably ill afford right now.

 

[Fishy]

There are four networks - BigTen, SEC, Pac12 and Longhorn. The first two work, the third one doesn't and the fourth should be taught in business school as something to never, ever do.

There won't be a fifth any time soon.

If you don't have a network, you're left to opine that new technologies will somehow float your boat. They won't, in large part because you don't actually have a boat. What you have is a life preserver and about ten years to tread water hoping one of the conferences with a boat decides you're worth of plucking out of the drink.

 

[RegisteredUconn]

I think (B) is what carries the day. Who does the B1G desire? If you can answer that, only then do you know who (A) is. I think it's Virginia and UNC.

I really don't think UNC is as hot a commodity as it's made out to be. They won't necessarily secure the state for the B1G because the SEC can simply cherry pick NC State. Who will draw better in the (semi) deep south? SEC or B1G?

I also am not sure that Va Tech isn't a better B1G fit than UVA. For some reason, UVA strikes me as secretly wanting to be a more populous version of William & Mary with better badminton and croquet.

 

[billybud]

Aren't we there now? What is your life like?

I have two lives....I stream like crazy at my Florida home on Comcast XFinity....

....at my mountain cabin where I am at the moment, I use a Verizon hot spot to access the internet. Streaming eats up the gigs really fast.

Also the MBPS on the hotspot is slow enough to often buffer and stutter (especially HD content). Many, many folks in the rural areas do not have cable...use a dish....

 

[RegisteredUconn]

Annnnnnddddd.THUD.

“We think we’re in a really good position for the long-term,” Swofford told Fischel. “We’ve just got to make the right decisions and time things appropriately.”

“I don’t know that there will be public clarity,” Swofford said of this week. “I think we will move further down the trail of where we’re headed, without question. … We’re really just not going to have a whole lot more to say until we reach a point of saying something definitive. It takes some patience with that, but we’ll get to a good place, I’m confident.”

Translation: "ESPN said no and I am running out of ways to avoid saying that."

Anybody know what Jeff Fischel's buddies call him? It isn't "Fishy" is it?

 

[upstater]

I really don't think UNC is as hot a commodity as it's made out to be. They won't necessarily secure the state for the B1G because the SEC can simply cherry pick NC State. Who will draw better in the (semi) deep south? SEC or B1G?

I also am not sure that Va Tech isn't a better B1G fit than UVA. For some reason, UVA strikes me as secretly wanting to be a more populous version of William & Mary with better badminton and croquet.

I'd love for people to chime in on this one, but UNC is the dominant program by far in that state. NC State is a little brother. All kids want to get into UNC, but many settle for NC State.

UNC and Virginia are the two big ones there, definitely not NCSU and VT.

 

[billybud]

Like they say in North Carolina...only 26 miles from Culture to Agriculture...

 

[dwalks93]

Well...that's the rub...I don't think it really is all about the money and getting cable box U.

At some date in the future, having games that people want to watch will be important. Rutgers and Maryland might be good for carriage fees...but in actual viewing, not so much. Paying for streaming will happen....and the way TV is watched will ever move towards streaming.

I do believe that the marquee match ups will drive...just like they do in the SEC. Have an interesting spectacle and folks will watch. As far as watching Wake play GT or Northwestern play Purdue, I'd rather watch a monkey screw a football.

Billy, you approach expansion like a fan. You want to select expansions team based on who you want to watch FSU play. But guess what...whether it is Rutgers or Louisville the FSU fans are paying to watch FSU. The more important component is the revenue stream.

You implied that the big football programs make the money..."I do believe that the marquee match ups will drive...just like they do in the SEC". . It makes sense...look at the SEC they have good football and lots of money.

In reality the inverse is actually true... the money made the good football programs. To prove my point take the following examples. It wasn't too long ago that Alabama was struggling. Sure they were a blue blood football program in a talent rich area but they were not consistently winning. So what did they do? They went out and broke the bank to hire Nick Saban. Basically Bama rewrote the college landscape by saying we will pay whatever is required to recruit arguably the best coach in America and win. This is the same model that occurred with OSU and Urban Meyer and Michigan and Jim Harbaugh. Bottom line you show me a program spending money on football and, more often than not, I'll show you a program that is winning.

Perhaps a better example is University of Miami. Miami is a traditional powerhouse in arguably the most talent rich football region in America. Yet around the early 2000s Miami's President quit spending money on football. The Miami football team was in the midst of the embarrassing Shapiro scandal and University of Miami was instead investing its money on academics not football. Despite location, history and talent, Miami's program tanked when the football spending tanked. Interestingly, for the first time since the early 2000s, Miami has started spending money on football again. Coach Mark Richt was a $4 million plus investment (almost double what former HC Golden was getting), Miami significantly increased its salaries for assistant coaches and is upgrading all its facilities. Do you want to bet Miami football makes a huge come back within the next 5 years?

Why do you think FSU is screaming about the financial gap between the BIG/SEC and ACC? Because they know when it comes to coaches it is a seller's market. My guess is this year LSU Coach Les Miles gets fired. When that happens FSU Coach Fisher will be on a very short list for the LSU job. LSU will likely try and throw the bank at Fisher. I would expect FSU will match whatever LSU offers using FSU booster money and extra football budget to pay for it. But what if the gap between LSU and FSU was $30 million a year? Could FSU keep up? That is why it is the money, not the "interesting spectacle", that drives expansion.

Arguing "at some future date, having games people want to watch will be important" is a exercise in alternative reality. The current reality is the ACC is falling behind in revenue and needs to take steps to close the gap. Expansion is based on money, not exciting games for the fans.

 

[billybud]

I say expand all you want with Rutgers, Boston College, Indiana, Iowa State, Vanderbilt, FAU, FIU, etc.....But football fans won't watch low tier match ups at the rate that they watch better games. And eventually demand will have a meaning. Right now you can strng arm folks into paying for a cable channel that they don't watch. That may not be quite as true some time in the future.

The SEC just three years ago, distributed less conference revenue than the ACC....but the SEC was on a tear, winning 7 straight national championships. Now adding an eighth.

And SEC fans watch their teams play...watch big match ups...Alabama-LSU, Alabama-Auburn, Georgia-Florida, etc. It was that watching that made the SEC money in their contract revision and network, not vice versa.

Alabama had money before any contract increase....last year, if you subtracted $30 million from Bama's athletic budget...they still had more athletic department revenue than Georgia, South Carolina, Michigan State, Nebraska, Iowa, Illinois, Purdue, UCLA, Clemson and the like.

Of the Ten Most Watched Football Games of 2014...

#1 Alabama-Auburn
#3 Alabama-Missouri
#4 Miss State-Alabama
#6 Bama-LSU
#9 Florida-Alabama
#10 Texas A&M-Auburn

That's the power of the SEC....games that people watch.