FSU not happy about ACC ESPN deal

[B1GEast]

http://floridastate.rivals.com/content.asp?CID=1364755

"It's mind-boggling and shocking," said Haggard. "How can the ACC give up third tier rights for football but keep them for basketball?"

Haggard is referring to the fact that the ACC surrendered all third tier television rights for football to ESPN/ABC but kept them for men's basketball. That arrangement will likely result in substantial revenue for schools with a strong basketball following like North Carolina and Duke.On the other hand, it will do very little for schools with a more traditional football following like FSU, Clemson, Virginia Tech and Miami.

 

[huskymedic]

Love this quote..

Of the few who still support FSU staying in the ACC, most cite the number of well-regarded academic institutions within the conference. However, Haggard scoffed at the idea that the ACC somehow helps FSU's academic reputation.

"No FSU graduate puts on his resume or interviews for a job saying they are in the same conference as Duke and Virginia," he said. "Conference affiliation really has no impact on academics."

 

[upstater]

Love this quote..

Of the few who still support FSU staying in the ACC, most cite the number of well-regarded academic institutions within the conference. However, Haggard scoffed at the idea that the ACC somehow helps FSU's academic reputation.

"No FSU graduate puts on his resume or interviews for a job saying they are in the same conference as Duke and Virginia," he said. "Conference affiliation really has no impact on academics."

No S, Sherlock!

 

[epark88]

Pitt is so going to sue the ACC over this...

 

[UConnDan97]

Pitt is so going to sue the ACC over this...

Yesss!!! Quality post. I would give you two "likes" if I could...

 

[Durks07]

He was very candid in his willingness to see if there was a better option for FSU, and very unhappy with the seeming bias towards UNC and Duke in the new deal. There may be action on this sooner rather than later.

 

[B1GEast]

He was very candid in his willingness to see if there was a better option for FSU, and very unhappy with the seeming bias towards UNC and Duke in the new deal. There may be action on this sooner rather than later.

He's right about the ACC's bias to Duke and UNC, but wait till they get to the Big 12 and have to deal with their bias to Texas.

 

[UConnDan97]

He's right about the ACC's bias to Duke and UNC, but wait till they get to the Big 12 and have to deal with their bias to Texas.

I was thinking about this, because it has been mentioned before by some other posts. With the Big12 swelling their ranks (TCU, WVU, Fla St, Clemson, etc.), I'm not so sure that Texas has the hold on the conference that it used to. In fact, I know that many of the schools are p.o.'ed by the way Texas treated them in the "almost-PAC" deal (schools like Baylor, Kansas, etc.). With all the new, high quality schools around, I don't think that the have-nots will feel the need to suck up to Texas anymore. I'm not sure, but we'll see...

 

[upstater]

He's right about the ACC's bias to Duke and UNC, but wait till they get to the Big 12 and have to deal with their bias to Texas.

More $$$ + TV rights

 

[pj]

This game of musical chairs is almost absurd. It's becoming a game of jumping to whoever has the best TV contract at the moment. The Big East was unstable because it had an old TV contract and other leagues were getting $17-20 mn per year deals. Now the ACC is unstable because they're only $17 mn vs $20 mn + 3rd tier rights for conferences currently negotiating deals. Depending on how this works out, there could be ACC teams looking to jump to the Big East in a few years if the Big East gets a good deal and top ACC teams have gone to the B12 or SEC.

You can be sure the attorneys and executives writing these media contracts are paying close attention to termination clauses.

 

[whaler11]

http://floridastate.rivals.com/content.asp?CID=1364755

"It's mind-boggling and shocking," said Haggard. "How can the ACC give up third tier rights for football but keep them for basketball?"

Haggard is referring to the fact that the ACC surrendered all third tier television rights for football to ESPN/ABC but kept them for men's basketball. That arrangement will likely result in substantial revenue for schools with a strong basketball following like North Carolina and Duke.On the other hand, it will do very little for schools with a more traditional football following like FSU, Clemson, Virginia Tech and Miami.

Turns out according to 15 sources he's wrong anyway. No schools retained men's basketball third tier rights.

 

[FAIRTIDES]

http://floridastate.rivals.com/content.asp?CID=1364755

"It's mind-boggling and shocking," said Haggard. "How can the ACC give up third tier rights for football but keep them for basketball?"

Haggard is referring to the fact that the ACC surrendered all third tier television rights for football to ESPN/ABC but kept them for men's basketball. That arrangement will likely result in substantial revenue for schools with a strong basketball following like North Carolina and Duke.On the other hand, it will do very little for schools with a more traditional football following like FSU, Clemson, Virginia Tech and Miami.

Is there a link that has a definition of the "tier" arrangement? Or, a short description entered here-in?

Thank you.

 

[mcs333]

Update on FSU

http://blogs.orlandosentinel.com/sp...e-fsu-the-big-12-and-acc-currently-stand.html

 

[MilliniumPrince]

If they increase does not kick in until 2021....and runs only the final 6 years...some people are going to be, upset.

 

[Chin Diesel]

Here's why FSU is looking around. It really is as simple as this paragraph in the Sentinel article.

"But, consider this. When trying to maintain the arms race with in-state rival Florida and its extraordinarily lucrative deal with the SEC, the cash-strapped Seminoles, comparatively speaking, could be in a severe economic hole in the coming years. As Bianchi points out in his column, assuming the ACC’s $17 million kicks in instantly, FSU still would earn $128 million less than the Gators over the length of the ACC’s extended 15-year contract."

 

[Srqhusky]

Has anyone given thought to where all this money is going to come from for these football conference tv deals? I mean espn isn't printing their own money . Does anyone think ultimately we r going to be paying for all the college football greed as the. Costs are passed on to the consumers

 

[HuskyFan16]

Has anyone given thought to where all this money is going to come from for these football conference tv deals? I mean espn isn't printing their own money . Does anyone think ultimately we r going to be paying for all the college football greed as the. Costs are passed on to the consumers

fair enough. solution: buy a ticket.

 

[PolisHusky]

It's called presenting a desirable product (key conference matchups that attract a great viewership) to serve a large audience and the network cuts a check for a percentage of the advertising dollars (projected) that come in. Viewers tuning in means a higher premium for advertising. If you are concerned about doing your part, watch the commercials (don't DVR or TiVo) during UConn games. That is where an overwhelming amount of the money comes from, exponentially more than what we contribute as cable subscribers.

 

[UConnDan97]

It's called presenting a desirable product (key conference matchups that attract a great viewership) to serve a large audience and the network cuts a check for a percentage of the advertising dollars (projected) that come in. Viewers tuning in means a higher premium for advertising. If you are concerned about doing your part, watch the commercials (don't DVR or TiVo) during UConn games. That is where an overwhelming amount of the money comes from, exponentially more than what we contribute as cable subscribers.

Please explain to me how DVRing is costing a tv station in advertising dollars?? The short answer is, "It doesn't." That's the real reason why these conference tv contracts have become so lucrative; unlike other forms of tv shows, where 'real-time viewing' is unimportant, they assume that you will watch the sporting event in real-time. They know that many fans are afraid of finding out the score before they've seen the game. That's the angle that is repaying the tv outfits for these ridiculous numbers.

In summary, if you can't be at your tv set to watch the UConn game in real-time, then DVR the thing. You aren't costing your university a single cent...

 

[Jarhead_1775]

Isn't there an advertising guy around? I'm pretty sure they aren't even averse to dvr. If I recall that even when you fast forward through the commercials, you're still seeing the products advertised. Chances are you've already seen the commercial and you recall it and associate it, even though you've only seen a few frames. Our brains are MUCH smarter than we are... It's crazy.

 

[whaler11]

If you aren't a Neilsen home, what you watch isn't effecting ratings anyway.

 

[Chin Diesel]

If you aren't a Neilsen home, what you watch isn't effecting ratings anyway.

Going off on a bit of a tangent, but what is the purpose of Nielsen's anymore?

With such a huge number of homes on cable and satellite it should be a simple reporting of how many people were tuned in to every station, what shows were DVR'ed etc.

To heck with sampling, when you have over 90% of the population on cable and satellite, you are more than covered. If I'm an advertiser or network executive I'd rather have the full rate report in basic form for 90% of the population than some sampling of home.

 

[whaler11]

Going off on a bit of a tangent, but what is the purpose of Nielsen's anymore?

With such a huge number of homes on cable and satellite it should be a simple reporting of how many people were tuned in to every station, what shows were DVR'ed etc.

To heck with sampling, when you have over 90% of the population on cable and satellite, you are more than covered. If I'm an advertiser or network executive I'd rather have the full rate report in basic form for 90% of the population than some sampling of home.

You'd have to ask the people who buy and use the info. There are groups that sell the numbers you are talking about, but advertising cost is still based on Neilsen ratings.

Neilsen does a much better job on demos - that is the info they need not the total number of people watching.

 

[sdhusky]

Going off on a bit of a tangent, but what is the purpose of Nielsen's anymore?

With such a huge number of homes on cable and satellite it should be a simple reporting of how many people were tuned in to every station, what shows were DVR'ed etc.

To heck with sampling, when you have over 90% of the population on cable and satellite, you are more than covered. If I'm an advertiser or network executive I'd rather have the full rate report in basic form for 90% of the population than some sampling of home.

People who DVR actually watch a lot more ads than you might think. Studies have shown that advertising effectiveness isn't hurt a ton by DVRs

 

[whaler11]

People who DVR actually watch a lot more ads than you might think. Studies have shown that advertising effectiveness isn't hurt a ton by DVRs

They measure both anyway so they know.