More trouble in ACC paradise?

[jostar1]

Seems like a more intelligent in targeted attack than having piña coladas.

Which gives me a chance to blow the dust off of this:

The Pina Colada Song (UConn version)*

I am tired of our conference, I mean it does kind of suck.
But I don't see a way out, without a whole lotta luck.
How did we get here, when were really hot?
I thought back on how Louisville got the last P5 spot:

Warde had Pina Coladas, while watching girl's basketball.
He did not do any lobbying which is what caused us to fall.
If you like being in a real conference, with teams that you've known for years,
Don't trust the fan of the donuts or you'll end up in tears.

Now I don't blame Suzy, I know it sounds kind of mean,
But I expect that a "rock star" would have known the routine.
Nothing is given, to those who sit back and wait.
And when you think where the blame lies, it's not up for debate...

Warde had Pina Coladas, while watching girl's basketball.
He should have been working, but he was dropping the ball.
So now we're stuck playing Tulsa and likely will be for years.
We trusted the fan of the donuts and it ended in tears.

* Written during the dark days of our membership in the AAC.

Exactly. Hope is not a plan.

 

[Exit 4]

Warde's ability to be proactive and see around the corner is unmatched. Michigan knows.

 

[SU1968]

ESPN might (and likely would) be willing to pay a school a premium if it meant that it would, as a consequence of their departure, pay the remaining (nonproductive) schools in the conference a substantial reduction such that it's overall cost for product was reduced. This same approach was the underpinning of its financing the Big East raids.

Faced with a potential PAC-12-ing of the ACC, the strongest of the weak sisters left in the conference might (and likely would) find the big 12 more attractive.

Yes, the system is "tapping out", but the consolidation of the existing conference system is a part of that process. What you see as an extension of the existing system, I see as its death throes.

You do realize that when the ACC Network was created, each school had to establish their own production facilities, not ESPN.

 

[CL82]

You do realize that when the ACC Network was created, each school had to establish their own production facilities, not ESPN.

I do, but ESPN still has to pay the conference for the rights to the games. Currently, they're paying one blended rate for both the valuable schools and non-productive schools. If the high value schools leave the ACC, the rate ESPN is willing to pay for the nonproductive schools is very likely to be reduced. Probably significantly.

 

[Fishy]

If by "generous" you mean the lowest offer of all the "BCS" Conferences, then you are correct. Although it certainly reasonable for the big east to think, it wasn't particularly generous when it was going to make it the weakest of all its peers. Those are the facts and I could not agree more that we "need to stop making up stories about what happened."

ESPN gave a low ball offer which the big east turned down and then ESPN funded the disembowelment of the big east. Essentially, it was like the protection rackets. "you got yourself a nice conference here. It would be a shame if something was to happen to it."


Absolutely agree! Well, except of course that it's a tried and true model that's been successful for them in the past. I mean, why would they go back to a strategy that worked? Nobody does that.

Here's the thing, the content isn't going anywhere. If moving the productive pieces to a different conference and paying them what they're worth means that they can still keep the rest of their inventory at a lower total cost, it makes perfect sense to do it.


Lol, the big east was "out of contract" because ESPN lowballed them. Which is exactly what they would be in a position to do to an ACC leftover conference. Fully agree with you that the big east was the "5th or sixth best option" since there were only six BCS automatic qualifier conferences. The other "5th or sixth best option" was the ACC. By cutting the big east and moving schools to the ACC ESPN consolidated the 6 BCS AQ conferences into the five power conferences. The Pac 12 has been eliminated to make it 4 power conferences. By 2036, and probably before, it will only be three power conferences

Again, try reality.

ESPN’s offer to the Big East was something that nearly every football school in the conference including UConn, Syracuse and Louisville wanted to accept. It was shot down by Georgetown, PC, and, remarkably, Notre Dame. It would have come to $17M each for football playing members.

That was the summer of 2011.

 

[jostar1]

I thought it was the Pitt President who recommended that the ESPN offer not be accepted.

 

[buddy]

I thought it was the Pitt President who recommended that the ESPN offer not be accepted.

I believe you are correct!

 

[CL82]

Again, try reality.

ESPN’s offer to the Big East was something that nearly every football school in the conference including UConn, Syracuse and Louisville wanted to accept. It was shot down by Georgetown, PC, and, remarkably, Notre Dame. It would have come to $17M each for football playing members.

That was the summer of 2011.

The fact that you didn't disagree that the ESPN offer to the big east was substantially lower than what every other BCS automatic qualifying conference was making is duly noted.

That is reality, but you know that because you avoided disputing it in your response.

 

[freescooter]

I do, but ESPN still has to pay the conference for the rights to the games. Currently, they're paying one blended rate for both the valuable schools and non-productive schools. If the high value schools leave the ACC, the rate ESPN is willing to pay for the nonproductive schools is very likely to be reduced. Probably significantly.

That’s sort of what they said about the Big 12. The remainder took a haircut no doubt but not that bad. In many ways the ACC is in transition right now. I mean is Florida State a productive member? Is Clemson? Down cycle or the new normal? Is Miami back for real or is this just a case of everything breaking their way in the playoffs? Even on the hoop side they lost 4 hall of fame coaches and a very good one in 3 years. It is usually a challenge to recover from that for any school. Some take longer than others and some never do. But it also provides an opportunity for some other program to step into the upper echelon . So ESPN could bet on the wrong horse much like they did with BC.

 

[Fishy]

The fact that you didn't disagree that the ESPN offer to the big east was substantially lower than what every other BCS automatic qualifying conference was making is duly noted.

That is reality, but you know that because you avoided disputing it in your response.

....the Big East was worth less.

My god.

 

[nelsonmuntz]

Again, try reality.

ESPN’s offer to the Big East was something that nearly every football school in the conference including UConn, Syracuse and Louisville wanted to accept. It was shot down by Georgetown, PC, and, remarkably, Notre Dame. It would have come to $17M each for football playing members.

That was the summer of 2011.

That is not what happened. ESPN launched a raid on the Big East which blew up in its face by like $100 million/year more for significantly less content. It is one of the worst deal punching-self-in-face that I have ever seen or heard of, and I know of a lot of deals done by a lot of idiots. From 2013:

FS1

Of the 17 schools in the NBE, 14 absolutely knocked it out of the park in realignment, Cincinnati was in the penalty box for almost a decade, and USF and UConn got hosed, although UConn glove saved with the Big East for hoops.

ESPN's offer was a lowball, and the other Big East schools shoved it right up ESPN's backdoor.

 

[Fishy]

That is not what happened. ESPN launched a raid on the Big East which blew up in its face by like $100 million/year more for significantly less content. It is one of the worst deal punching-self-in-face that I have ever seen or heard of, and I know of a lot of deals done by a lot of idiots. From 2013:

FS1

Of the 17 schools in the NBE, 14 absolutely knocked it out of the park in realignment, Cincinnati was in the penalty box for almost a decade, and USF and UConn got hosed, although UConn glove saved with the Big East for hoops.

ESPN's offer was a lowball, and the other Big East schools shoved it right up ESPN's backdoor.

lol....ESPN's offer was reasonable which is why UConn, Louisville, Syracuse, West Virgina, etc., voted to accept it. Notre Dame, Pitt and the basketballs killed it.

Fifteen years later, UConn, USF and the basketballs haven't even sniffed that kind of money.

You guys are wild.

 

[nelsonmuntz]

lol....ESPN's offer was reasonable which is why UConn, Louisville, Syracuse, West Virgina, etc., voted to accept it. Notre Dame, Pitt and the basketballs killed it.

Fifteen years later, UConn, USF and the basketballs haven't even sniffed that kind of money.

You guys are wild.

The basketballs doubled their take immediately. UConn and USF got hosed, and Cincinnati got mostly hosed. 14 out of 17 crushed it.

 

[CL82]

Fifteen years later, UConn, USF and the basketballs haven't even sniffed that kind of money.

Lol, you can't compare the current big east with the football conference big east. It's an apple's to oranges comparison. C'mon fishy you know that.

....the Big East was worth less.

So it was fair that ESPN offered the big east less, because the big east was worth less, because ESPN offered it less?

Um... have you ever heard of circular reasoning? Just wondering.

 

[ScottVib]

$17M in 2012 $$ = $23.8M today

That’s a lot more than the $7-8 both UConn & USF still enjoy… and without any of the renegotiation other leagues have had. It doesn’t matter though, eventually it all would’ve been ripped apart and the deal thrown away.

 

[CL82]

$17M in 2012 $$ = $23.8M today

That’s a lot more than the $7-8 both UConn & USF still enjoy… and without any of the renegotiation other leagues have had. It doesn’t matter though, eventually it all would’ve been ripped apart and the deal thrown away.

So being in a basketball only conference is worth less than being in a BCS football conference? Who knew? 😆

 

[ScottVib]

So being in a basketball only conference is worth less than being in a BCS football conference? Who knew? 😆

I think the bigger point he was trying to make was that turning down the deal... even if the valuation was much lower than the other BCS conferences, unquestionably cost the Big East schools money in the short-term. Objectively, the Big East had significantly fewer name brands than any of the other BCS conferences, and with a third fewer teams, had significantly less football inventory to offer... expecting the same money with a conference anchored by West Virginia, Louisville & Pitt as core brands as say a conference that had Florida State, Miami & Clemson was never going to happen.. in the end, the league gambled that they could create a bidding war, they failed as Pitt & Syracuse bolted almost immediately.

 

[whalerfan]

What hasn't been mentioned is that NBC Sports Network was new at the time and buying up the rights to many leagues. This gave direct competition to Bristol. Someone was in the commissioner's ear saying that there was more money to be had than ESPN was offering. This wasn't the case. Eerily similar to the PAC 12 with basically the same result.

 

[CL82]

I think the bigger point he was trying to make was that turning down the deal... even if the valuation was much lower than the other BCS conferences, unquestionably cost the Big East schools money in the short-term. Objectively, the Big East had significantly fewer name brands than any of the other BCS conferences, and with a third fewer teams, had significantly less football inventory to offer... expecting the same money with a conference anchored by West Virginia, Louisville & Pitt as core brands as say a conference that had Florida State, Miami & Clemson was never going to happen.. in the end, the league gambled that they could create a bidding war, they failed as Pitt & Syracuse bolted almost immediately.

I think you're suffering a little bit from revisionism. Remember that when ESPN first funded the raids on the big east conference in 2003 Miami was a big east team, not an ACC team. Florida State went 5-7, while Rich Rodriguez led West Virginia on the other hand was 8-5. There was a lot of debate between which was the better conference the big east or the ACC. It was only after ESPN systematically gutted, the big east that it became the lesser football conference.

So again, that becomes circular reasoning, ESPN gutted the big east because it was the lesser conference but the big east was the lesser conference because ESPN gutted it. It's a logical inconsistency to use the consequences of the raid as a justification for the raid.

 

[ScottVib]

We're not talking about what ESPN did after the fact (or before the fact in 2003) however... we (well at least I thought we were) were talking about the logic in turning down the contract offer that was in hand at that point in time, in 2011. You noted the offer was significantly lower than the other BCS conferences received (which is true); I simply stated why objectively a lower offer should've been expected and not rejected simply for being lower. The Big East the time offered less in the way of football brands and volume of football content. It's inarguable that the Big East post 2003 was weaker in terms of football branding, but it's also irrelevant to a discussion of the particulars of a decision made by Big East members in 2011.

The Big East rejected the deal and ESPN followed up by grabbing the brands it wanted, further destroying the value to those schools left behind. As I noted, I think that raid probably happens regardless, if not in 2011 in the not too distant future.

 

[Hamms30]

So again, that becomes circular reasoning, ESPN gutted the big east because it was the lesser conference but the big east was the lesser conference because ESPN gutted it. It's a logical inconsistency to use the consequences of the raid as a justification for the raid.

 

[CL82]

We're not talking about what ESPN did after the fact (or before the fact in 2003) however... we (well at least I thought we were) were talking about the logic in turning down the contract offer that was in hand at that point in time, in 2011. You noted the offer was significantly lower than the other BCS conferences received (which is true); I simply stated why objectively a lower offer should've been expected and not rejected simply for being lower. The Big East the time offered less in the way of football brands and volume of football content. It's inarguable that the Big East post 2003 was weaker in terms of football branding, but it's also irrelevant to a discussion of the particulars of a decision made by Big East members in 2011.

The Big East rejected the deal and ESPN followed up by grabbing the brands it wanted, further destroying the value to those schools left behind. As I noted, I think that raid probably happens regardless, if not in 2011 in the not too distant future.

Kind of silly to take one item out of a chain of events, and say "well let's just look at this separately." By that will logic a poacher who illegally shoots a deer can say "well, I just found it dead in the woods."

The facts aren't in dispute here. ESPN funded the raid of the big east to lower its overall cost to acquire games at a lower cost to the network. It then offered a lowball offer to the conference. When the conference refused that offer it financed further raids to destroy the big east.

With the benefit of hindsight, the conference should have taken the offer, in much the same way that, the victim, whose store is burned down by thugs should have with the benefit of hindsight, paid them protection money. That doesn't justify ESPN's actions anymore than it justifies the anrsonists actions. Criminal is criminal. Wrong is wrong.

Now, if I'm the ACC, I would be very nervous right now. Having gotten away with this in the past, ESPN is very likely to go back to this playbook again.

(Oh, and here's a pro tip, if you are replying to my post, you might want to use the reply function. That way, I'll see your response. Unless, of course, you didn't want me to. 😏)

 

[nelsonmuntz]

Kind of silly to take one item out of a chain of events, and say "well let's just look at this separately." By that will logic a poacher who illegally shoots a deer can say "well, I just found it dead in the woods."

The facts aren't in dispute here. ESPN funded the raid of the big east to lower its overall cost to acquire games at a lower cost to the network. It then offered a lowball offer to the conference. When the conference refused that offer it financed further raids to destroy the big east.

With the benefit of hindsight, the conference should have taken the offer, in much the same way that, the victim, whose store is burned down by thugs should have with the benefit of hindsight, paid them protection money. That doesn't justify ESPN's actions anymore than it justifies the anrsonists actions. Criminal is criminal. Wrong is wrong.

Now, if I'm the ACC, I would be very nervous right now. Having gotten away with this in the past, ESPN is very likely to go back to this playbook again.

(Oh, and here's a pro tip, if you are replying to my post, you might want to use the reply function. That way, I'll see your response. Unless, of course, you didn't want me to. 😏)

In hindsight, ESPN's actions appear to be much more vindictive than economic. The Big East wanted a fair offer, ESPN declined, and then, picking apart the carcass, ended up paying more money for less content for the same schools in different leagues. The ESPN then followed that up by paying the American a step down to the contract they offered the Big East, but for a significantly inferior product, that then morphed into UCF, Houston and Cincinnati going to the Big 12 at full pay.

It was a catastrophically stupid contract negotiation that ESPN engineered, all to teach the Big East a lesson. 12 years later, they did the same thing, with the same stupid outcome, to the Pac 12.

 

[Drew]

What needs to happen is for the state to open the check book and buy its ACC seat like SMU

What would be most beneficial for the state to do is to actually be proactive for once and do that now instead of waiting and reacting in a panic in 2030 when everything starts falling apart to try to get us in as the tomb door seals shut.

Have zero faith in that happening until it absolutely has to though and even then there are enough people with their head in the sand that they’d rather go down with the ship

Lamont thankfully is a huge supporter of UConn and UConn football specifically and seems to at least be aligned with the administration. I don’t live in CT but from the outside, seems likely he will be reelected this year given his approval ratings. That would at least mean we will have a Governor, President, and AD that all are aligned and understand the importance of getting into the P4 club, hopefully that’s enough to drag the naysayers over the line with them to get it done when they need to take the vote

 

[Ha Who]

Miami's Carson Beck turns heads with stunning admission about attending classes as college athlete

Miami Hurricanes quarterback Carson Beck went viral after saying he had not taken classes for two years ahead of the national championship game.

www.foxnews.com