ESPN not happy with LHN? | Page 2 | The Boneyard

ESPN not happy with LHN?

Status
Not open for further replies.
pj said:
Yes. If a B12 remnant / AAC merger takes place, it will be the top AAC teams moving to the B12 and leaving the weak AAC teams behind, not the B12 teams joining the AAC, which would create a too-large conference with too many weak teams.
Expand ...

If it were to happen, I wonder what the re-negotiated tv rights would look like. They would certainly look better than the current AAC deal (even if it was noticeably less than the current B12), and it might be with FOX. That would be very interesting...
 
upstater said:
ESPN needs to get out of this LHN deal quick before it brings down the entire network.
Expand ...

lolololol
 
LHN bringing Disney down? OK, I know you don't like your current situation but c'mon...

Baylor would give another chance for teams to play in Texas when not playing UTA. It puts the ACC in another new state, plus UConn shuts out the B1G from New England. :)

The B1G is desperate for another big-time football and they might even suspend the AAU rule for OU. This is the same exact reason they were jonesing for ND all those years. This is what happens when they have to carry the likes of Illinois, Indiana, Minnesota and now two East schools that the folks in the heartland think don't belong. The SEC and Pac12 has them scared. Even the ACC is catching up.

The SEC don't need more football power. So they can be fine with decent all-around athletic programs like WVU. Keeps them in the geographic footprint.
 
CoastAtlantic said:
LHN bringing Disney down? OK, I know you don't like your current situation but c'mon...

Baylor would give another chance for teams to play in Texas when not playing UTA. It puts the ACC in another new state, plus UConn shuts out the B1G from New England. :)

The B1G is desperate for another big-time football and they might even suspend the AAU rule for OU. This is the same exact reason they were jonesing for ND all those years. This is what happens when they have to carry the likes of Illinois, Indiana, Minnesota and now two East schools that the folks in the heartland think don't belong. The SEC and Pac12 has them scared. Even the ACC is catching up.

The SEC don't need more football power. So they can be fine with decent all-around athletic programs like WVU. Keeps them in the geographic footprint.
Expand ...

The hyperbole coming from ACC folk is getting a little overboard. You have FSU and Clemson and that it, at least for football.
 
CoastAtlantic said:
LHN bringing Disney down? OK, I know you don't like your current situation but c'mon...

Baylor would give another chance for teams to play in Texas when not playing UTA. It puts the ACC in another new state, plus UConn shuts out the B1G from New England. :)

The B1G is desperate for another big-time football and they might even suspend the AAU rule for OU. This is the same exact reason they were jonesing for ND all those years. This is what happens when they have to carry the likes of Illinois, Indiana, Minnesota and now two East schools that the folks in the heartland think don't belong. The SEC and Pac12 has them scared. Even the ACC is catching up.

The SEC don't need more football power. So they can be fine with decent all-around athletic programs like WVU. Keeps them in the geographic footprint.
Expand ...
Which two events have a higher probability of occurring:
1) A Big Ten school leaving the B1G to go to the ACC.
2) An ACC school leaving the ACC to go to the B1G.

The answer to this question will tell if the ACC is catching up. BTW, There are no possible scenarios where the SEC or Pac 12 try to poach from the B1G.
 
CoastAtlantic said:
LHN bringing Disney down? OK, I know you don't like your current situation but c'mon...

Baylor would give another chance for teams to play in Texas when not playing UTA. It puts the ACC in another new state, plus UConn shuts out the B1G from New England. :)

The B1G is desperate for another big-time football and they might even suspend the AAU rule for OU. This is the same exact reason they were jonesing for ND all those years. This is what happens when they have to carry the likes of Illinois, Indiana, Minnesota and now two East schools that the folks in the heartland think don't belong. The SEC and Pac12 has them scared. Even the ACC is catching up.

The SEC don't need more football power. So they can be fine with decent all-around athletic programs like WVU. Keeps them in the geographic footprint.
Expand ...
You've gone nuts....coming from the guy whose conference(ACC) is in the shadows between 2 Mega-conferences(B1G/SEC). Sounds like someone's scared just not the B1G !! BTW didnt Minnesota and ACC power Cuse clash last fall?
 
.-.
B1GHuskyInTX said:
Which two events have a higher probability of occurring:
1) A Big Ten school leaving the B1G to go to the ACC.
2) An ACC school leaving the ACC to go to the B1G.

The answer to this question will tell if the ACC is catching up. BTW, There are no possible scenarios where the SEC or Pac 12 try to poach from the B1G.
Expand ...
I don't think the SEC or the Pac12 would need to poach a school from the B1G. So, yes, I would agree. The key, here, is that Disney is betting long on a Sun Belt (no, not the SBC) strategy. They have pulled everything possible to get the pay TV operators to sign up the SECN at the rates they wanted. UConn in the ACC would benefit both sides tremendously. Recruitment in new territories. Better geography. The B1G has history and legacy but future is in the growing states. I think Disney will agree to start the ACC Net soon after realizing the profits from the SECN. They'll let the B1G go completely to other networks since they will make so much money that they won't become necessary to their bottom line. Nothing against everyone else but that is how I see things. :)
 
Last edited:
The SEC Network and the Big Ten Network, predictably, have sold well. The SEC is selling lights' out and the Big Ten Network is doing very well.

I don't think that bodes well for the mythical ACC Network. The SEC and Big 10 are dominant in every market they're in and that's what moves carriers.

I don't see where the ACC cracks in - they're subservient to the SEC and Big 10 wherever they overlap and their northeastern wing is either in the middle of nowhere (SU) or buried in their own market (BC). I don't know why ESPN would throw more money into a property they already own outright just to be able to sell a network to carriers in North Carolina and Virginia.

Being the house band for ESPN has had huge advantages for the ACC in terms of money and promotion, but this is the downside. I think that's why you've seen the ACC Net talk fade despite last year's talking points suggesting that a decision was imminent.
 
Fishy said:
The SEC Network and the Big Ten Network, predictably, have sold well. The SEC is selling lights' out and the Big Ten Network is doing very well.

I don't think that bodes well for the mythical ACC Network. The SEC and Big 10 are dominant in every market they're in and that's what moves carriers.

I don't see where the ACC cracks in - they're subservient to the SEC and Big 10 wherever they overlap and their northeastern wing is either in the middle of nowhere (SU) or buried in their own market (BC). I don't know why ESPN would throw more money into a property they already own outright just to be able to sell a network to carriers in North Carolina and Virginia.

Being the house band for ESPN has had huge advantages for the ACC in terms of money and promotion, but this is the downside. I think that's why you've seen the ACC Net talk fade despite last year's talking points suggesting that a decision was imminent.
Expand ...

Unless you peruse the SU board, in which case, the ACCN is full steam ahead! Which is hilarious on several levels.
 
.-.
I heard ESPN's original plan was to give The ACCN away free to every carrier who signed up for The SECN. The problem was it made everyone not want to sign up for The SECN. They scrapped that plan and things are now going great.
 
I don't think it's necessary to create another channel when you can just convert ESPNU to an ACCN.
 
CoastAtlantic said:
I don't think it's necessary to create another channel when you can just convert ESPNU to an ACCN.
Expand ...

So they are going to take a channel that they charge everyone that pays for a subscription so they could charge roughly the same amount to a third their subscribers? ESPN is smarter than that.
 
CoastAtlantic said:
I don't think it's necessary to create another channel when you can just convert ESPNU to an ACCN.
Expand ...

It's true, once the other power conferences have created their own networks, ESPNU is going to be ACC+AAC. At least you'll be getting paid for it.
 
.-.
My dad's initials were LHN. He's spinning in his grave watching his initials being plastered all over the internet as a reference to anything having to do with T-Sip U.

As for the aforementioned T-Sips, the notion that they would ever voluntarily join a conference they're not allowed to absolutely dominate in all ways is ludicrous. It will never happen.

Next to the definitions of the words 'insufferable', 'arrogant' and 'obnoxious' in the dictionary, there should be photos of almost any UT fans.
 
coachcap said:
Isn't that where most ACC games are already buried?
Expand ...

Once Disney finishes it's contract with the Big Ten, they'd be able to clear space on the 2 main ESPNs for the ACC, SEC and some of the B12. That would then allow them to move up games now on ESPN3 to ESPN U. The AAC also would get more face time. Imagine if UConn were in the ACC:

Noon ABC:

Virginia-Virginia Tech
UNC-Duke
UConn-Syracuse
UConn-BC

Noon ESPNU/ACCN

UConn-Virgnia
UConn-Pitt

3:30 ESPN 2:

UNC-Virginia
UConn-Clemson
Louisville-Virginia Tech
Miami-UConn

3:30 ESPNU/ACCN

UNC-UConn
Virginia-UConn

8:00 ESPN

FSU-ND
Clemson-FSU
FSU-Miami
UConn-ND

Of course, this all depends on how good the football team would be in the future should the conference get enough sense to invite you in.
 
ESPN would be a fool to lose the B1G contract. There will be a massive bidding war. I'm sure Delany already knows what Fox will offer, which is where the $40/$45 million per school figure is coming from. ESPN can always match or exceed the offer Fox makes.

Personally, I think the B1G contract will be split up among several entities. Much like how Fox owns the B1G Championship Game now in its own separate deal. I think we might see something like that.

At any rate, having 11 state flagship universities means big bucks for the B1G. Only having 1 private school is a huge advantage, and even that 1 private school is located in the Chicago market, which is advantageous.

Whoever lands the B1G contract will have the B1G rating$$$$$.
 
dayooper said:
The hyperbole coming from ACC folk is getting a little overboard. You have FSU and Clemson and that it, at least for football.
Expand ...
Please explain to me what Clemson has done since 1988 to be considered a "national power"? You have Florida State and that's it.
 
freescooter said:
Please explain to me what Clemson has done since 1988 to be considered a "national power"? You have Florida State and that's it.
Expand ...

Yeah, I don't get it either. Clemson is a good football school, but they have had 3 decades of not winning big games.
 
freescooter said:
Please explain to me what Clemson has done since 1988 to be considered a "national power"? You have Florida State and that's it.
Expand ...
upstater said:
Yeah, I don't get it either. Clemson is a good football school, but they have had 3 decades of not winning big games.
Expand ...

Never said they were a national power, just a football school. There are three schools in the ACC that are known for football: FSU, Clemson, and VT. That's all. Louisville? If they keep it up may be, but they are traditionally a basketball school.
 
.-.
dayooper said:
Never said they were a national power, just a football school. There are three schools in the ACC that are known for football: FSU, Clemson, and VT. That's all. Louisville? If they keep it up may be, but they are traditionally a basketball school.
Expand ...

Depends on what you mean by known for football. Clemson should be much better but they've been scuffling on the national stage for 3 decades. VT benefited greatly from a down period in the BE (prior to WV coming on like gangbusters) but their history is an abysmally poor record against ranked teams. Louisville was a 55% win team in the BE. I don't think these teams have a rep. that's any different than, say, an Oklahoma St. or an Arkansas or an Iowa. Good football schools but more toward the middling side than the top.
 
Actually, I agree with upstater on this. Though I will say that Clemson is a media darling most years for reasons that continually escape me. If you look at some of their blowout losses in recent years, it should make it pretty clear they are a closer to a mid-level program than a power one. Florida State beat them 51-14 last year in a game that wasn't as close as the score indicated.
 
B1GOSU said:
At any rate, having 11 state flagship universities means big bucks for the B1G. Only having 1 private school is a huge advantage, and even that 1 private school is located in the Chicago market, which is advantageous.
Expand ...

*cough* 13 State Flagship Us *cough*


C'Mon, Bucknut ;)
 
upstater said:
Depends on what you mean by known for football. Clemson should be much better but they've been scuffling on the national stage for 3 decades. VT benefited greatly from a down period in the BE (prior to WV coming on like gangbusters) but their history is an abysmally poor record against ranked teams. Louisville was a 55% win team in the BE. I don't think these teams have a rep. that's any different than, say, an Oklahoma St. or an Arkansas or an Iowa. Good football schools but more toward the middling side than the top.
Expand ...

Absolutely. When I think of FSU, Clemson, and VT, I think of their football teams. That was my point.
 
Cleanface said:
*cough* 13 State Flagship Us *cough*


C'Mon, Bucknut ;)
Expand ...
Nope, 11. MSU and Purdue aren't the flagship schools. They could be if their respective states didn't already have one, but, technically they are not.
 
dayooper said:
Absolutely. When I think of FSU, Clemson, and VT, I think of their football teams. That was my point.
Expand ...

A little OT, but is that all it takes for someone to be considered a "football school"? Is Rutgers a "football school" because their basketball is even more pathetic?

If that's true, then we'll pretty much always carry the stigma of being a "basketball school", what with the championships and all.
 
.-.
Status
Not open for further replies.

Forum statistics

Threads
168,336
Messages
4,565,400
Members
10,465
Latest member
agiglax


Top Bottom