Key tweets, and it's all gone to Hell.

[Sea Goat]

Another guy with a Syracuse/ESPN connection...

 

[HuskyinWRNY]

Didn't the Virginia state legistlature force the ACC to take VA Tech due to UVA being in the conference already?

Yes

 

[Drew]

https://x.com/mikesilver/status/1694472746636566921?s=46&t=hjArpDIx-1zBUxx7deYS8Q

 

[LetsGoUC]

what a joke...i mean SMU?!?! im gonna puke.

 

[CoastAtlantic]

 

[yuckformak]

what a joke...i mean SMU?!?! im gonna puke.

If the acc takes these 3 than be thankful we are not in that pathetically awful conference. Sorry but big east basketball and independent is way better. Who cares about the money. Clearly we navigate a with deficits pretty well.

 

[aburks41]

Our state officials continue to allow ESPN to profit off the backs of CT taxpayers at the expense of our taxpayer funded university. It’s a double whammy and needs to be dealt with, now.

 

[hoopsfan22]

Our state officials continue to allow ESPN to profit off the backs of CT taxpayers at the expense of our taxpayer funded university. It’s a double whammy and needs to be dealt with, now.

What would you like done? If the ACC doesn't want us, then they don't want us.

 

[JeepCSC]

I wonder where the $72m number is coming from. ACC’s television rights were at nearly $31 million last year. Maybe $24m is the base contract, and the other $7m came from the ACCN? So would the withholding only be for the ESPN contract, and the increased ACCN fees from California and Texas get evenly distributed? Lots of questions, little to no answers at this time.

 

[aburks41]

What would you like done? If the ACC doesn't want us, then they don't want us.

The ACC doesn’t want SMU. ESPN want SMU because of their delusions of the Dallas market for the ACCNetwork

 

[giddyup]

To engage whom? You? Because you have no friggin idea what contact they've had with the other conferences.

Res ipsa counselor. Generally hiding under rocks isn’t a formula for success. Battles are won and lost on perception and any business lawyer worth their salt ought to know you need a sophisticated messaging strategy to drive your objectives.

 

[huskymedic]

I wonder where the $72m number is coming from. ACC’s television rights were at nearly $31 million last year. Maybe $24m is the base contract, and the other $7m came from the ACCN? So would the withholding only be for the ESPN contract, and the increased ACCN fees from California and Texas get evenly distributed? Lots of questions, little to no answers at this time.

From the Dellenger article above: Sources: ACC expansion talks still alive as leaders consider new financial proposal

-> The ACC’s television contract with ESPN includes a pro-rata clause requiring the network to increase the value of the deal by one Tier 1 share for every new member — believed to be about $24 million a share, or about 70% of a full ACC share, which includes Tiers 1-3.

The ACC would stand to earn about $72 million in new money with the three expansion shares. Cal and Stanford have agreed to each take about 30% of the $24 million share, or roughly $7-10 million. After Cal and Stanford’s share and travel costs are off-set (roughly $1-2 million per school), the ACC stands to earn at least $30 million in revenue to re-distribute, likely through an incentive pool based on athletic success.

The incentives are expected to be heavily weighted toward football success, including such things as winning championships, final top-25 rankings and bowl assignments. <-

 

[CL82]

What would you like done? If the ACC doesn't want us, then they don't want us.

Lol, the ACC wants who whom ever ESPN says that they will give them additional income for. As the Boston College AD said "ESPN told us what to do."

@aburks41 got this exactly right.

 

[CTFAN4LIFE]

Great thoughts after the fact.

Typical hypocrisy by Notre Dame and in the same paragraph no less: blames schools/conferences for forcing student athletes to travel so much and yet wants Calford to land in a conference where every member is 3,000 miles away.

 

[The Viking]

I’d love a local reporter or a national reporter to ask ACC, espn or UConn sources if UConn approached them about taking a Cal/Stanford type cut.
Yes the ACC may be a non-starter but I’d like to hear that from some anonymous sources as a curious mind.
I’m assuming we have because it would be stunningly foolish if we haven’t at least approached them about the idea

 

[Hoophound]

Unfortunately, this could set the bar for future expansion. “You want in, forego any money”.

That’s not very appealing.

 

[Muddler]

Our state officials continue to allow ESPN to profit off the backs of CT taxpayers at the expense of our taxpayer funded university. It’s a double whammy and needs to be dealt with, now.

I’ve never heard a media member ask any state official about their relationship with ESPN either, and the financial damage done to our flagship state university. If there is nothing they can do, I’d like to hear them say it. If we just added up how much Syracuse and Pitt have made from ESPN since joining the ACC, it has to be a few hundred million.

 

[hoopsfan22]

Unfortunately, this could set the bar for future expansion. “You want in, forego any money”.

That’s not very appealing.

Race to the bottom. Is there anything more American than that?

 

[CTFAN4LIFE]

Race to the bottom. Is there anything more American than that?

The haves and the have-nots.

 

[The Viking]

Unfortunately, this could set the bar for future expansion. “You want in, forego any money”.

That’s not very appealing.

Cal and Stanford will be getting full shares before the Contract ends per that article. It would be a gradual increase.

 

[BigTenFan]

I find it amazing that ESPN reports on this.
They are paying the league they are 'reporting on'
Sounds to me like they are the Wizard of OZ behind the curtain pulling the strings.....not much behind the curtain

 

[JeepCSC]

-> The ACC’s television contract with ESPN includes a pro-rata clause requiring the network to increase the value of the deal by one Tier 1 share for every new member — believed to be about $24 million a share, or about 70% of a full ACC share, which includes Tiers 1-3.

The ACC would stand to earn about $72 million in new money with the three expansion shares. Cal and Stanford have agreed to each take about 30% of the $24 million share, or roughly $7-10 million. After Cal and Stanford’s share and travel costs are off-set (roughly $1-2 million per school), the ACC stands to earn at least $30 million in revenue to re-distribute, likely through an incentive pool based on athletic success.

The incentives are expected to be heavily weighted toward football success, including such things as winning championships, final top-25 rankings and bowl assignments. <-

But using that math, a full share of the ACC tv contract would be $34m. It wasn’t that high last year. And I don’t know how the ACCN fits in, since a sizable chunk of that $440m total tv rights payment is from that (and therefore separate cash flow from the contracted ESPN payouts).

 

[Patrick79]

I’d love a local reporter or a national reporter to ask ACC, espn or UConn sources if UConn approached them about taking a Cal/Stanford type cut.
Yes the ACC may be a non-starter but I’d like to hear that from some anonymous sources as a curious mind.
I’m assuming we have because it would be stunningly foolish if we haven’t at least approached them about the idea

That’s a terrible deal for UConn. We pay $30 million in exit fees to then make $10 million for several years while we get in a GOR to s league that is likely going to be picked apart in a few years.

 

[DarthGrumpy]

Explain to me how a school that gets maybe 25k per game is relevant in the Dallas market? Going forward, brands matter more than markets.

After Texas and A&M, SMU is likely the 3rd or 4th biggest football brand (with Houston) in the State. It's bigger with a stronger history in football than TCU, which mattes to many. It is also less controversial in terms of it's sports history and religious affiliation than Baylor while Rice is seen nowadays as the Ivy League wannabe in Texas while everyone ignores Texas tech. With how big Texas is and how big football is in Texas, that have to bring value.

 

[CTFAN4LIFE]

After Texas and A&M, SMU is likely the 3rd or 4th biggest football brand (with Houston) in the State. It's bigger with a stronger history in football than TCU, which mattes to many. It is also less controversial in terms of it's sports history and religious affiliation than Baylor while Rice is seen nowadays as the Ivy League wannabe in Texas while everyone ignores Texas tech. With how big Texas is and how big football is in Texas, that have to bring value.

Pretty sure there is data that shows in Texas the brands above SMU are TX, TX A&M, TX Tech, TCU, Baylor, and Houston.