Swofford speaks on B12, Notre Dame

[junglehusky]

WRAL: After eventful 2016, Swofford isn't done .

(NOTE: MISLEADING HEADLINE at least as far as CR) is concerned

Not that we want to get you into the Big 12 quagmire, but there seems to be potential for more conference disruption down the line. Is that something you think about, positioning for something else?

"I'm not sure we need to position ourselves any more than we have for something else. If it starts looking like down the road, and I don't think this is imminent at all, that more things may happen or Notre Dame decides it wants to come in for football, and I'm not suggesting or wanting to start any rumors there, that's not the case, those are things that would certainly be big on the list if they ever came into play. But I don't anticipate that coming into play any time soon."

. . . So you're saying there's a chance ?

 

[billybud]

It seems like the Big 12 wants to do something, but something else is preventing them from not, so do you have to react or just let them figure it out?



"I think that's the beauty of where we are right now as a league, I don't think we really have to react to anything. I think we're positioned well. Whatever comes up, we'll be dealing from a position of strength or at least should be. That's the place we've been trying to get ourselves since the early 2000s with the first additions that we brought into the league. A lot of people at that time didn't understand what we were trying to do, but you have to do 'A' before you can do 'B.' For us to do the extended grant of rights and the new ESPN deal, we had to strengthen our football, we had to expand our geographic footprint, the television sets in it, and the population base in it. And that gave us the opportunity then to do what we did this summer.

 

[hexlub]

I think I've become dumber after reading that quote.

 

[UConNation]

I think I've become dumber after reading that quote.

This is the part that killed me: "And that gave us the opportunity then to do what we did this summer."....... What exactly did you do this summer that you're proud of?

 

[Chin Diesel]

I think I've become dumber after reading that quote.

Then you have conference realignment comprehension issues.

Swofford clearly laid out the difference in strategy between ACC and B12.

ACC was looking long term with their additions in terms of markets and building a competitive brand. That way they have negotiating leverage with TV.

B12? Did none of that.

 

[JeepCSC]

This is the part that killed me: "And that gave us the opportunity then to do what we did this summer.".. What exactly did you do this summer that you're proud of?

I feel like I'm missing something, because extending the GOR and getting a network feel like huge gets.

 

[Dooley]

This is the part that killed me: "And that gave us the opportunity then to do what we did this summer.".. What exactly did you do this summer that you're proud of?

They won the race to a conference network/media deal versus the Big 12. As a result, the Big 12 is on life support and the ACC has secured its long-term stability.

 

[nd73]

 

[hexlub]

As I read it:

1) ACC did something
2) ACC won't do anything else unless Notre Dame wants to join for football, which we are not saying is going to happen, but it may, but it's not imminent, but it still could happen, not that they are saying it will.

So, he was kind of just dancing around everything we already knew. I wish he would have said:

'The Big 12 is screwed. We good, yo.'

 

[Marty Jackson]

This is the part that killed me: "And that gave us the opportunity then to do what we did this summer.".. What exactly did you do this summer that you're proud of?

didn't they expand the GOR until 2036 and finalize network deal with ESPN?
I think that move essentially put to rest any discussion about the Big12 raiding the ACC.

 

[billybud]

Considering the strength of the SEC football markets and the positioning of the Big 10 in the populous midwest and east, Swofford seems to have done a decent job of positioning a less advantaged ACC to survive.

He understood the future 15 years ago...moved to get in position. Some folks may not like, nor agree with his moves...

 

[CallMeBruce]

ACC was looking long term with their additions in terms of markets and building a competitive brand. That way they have negotiating leverage with TV.

Is this a joke? The ACC went after the lucrative Syracuse, Pittsburgh, and Louisville markets. The ACC has been nothing but reactionary from the start of CR.

 

[alexd]

Is this a joke? The ACC went after the lucrative Syracuse, Pittsburgh, and Louisville markets. The ACC has been nothing but reactionary from the start of CR.

Ummmm.....remember 2003????.....VA Tech...Miami...

 

[Chin Diesel]

Is this a joke? The ACC went after the lucrative Syracuse, Pittsburgh, and Louisville markets. The ACC has been nothing but reactionary from the start of CR.

You're digging yourself in to hole that's only going to get deeper. Some of what the ACC did was proactive and some was reactive.

Getting Miami, BC and VT was very proactive. It established a foothold in the northeast, solidified the mid-atlantic and took Miami off the market. It permanently weakened the Big East, added a football power, added a new market and strengthened another.

Pitt and 'Cuse wasn't great but it took those two properties off the table from the B12 and limited the B12's options.

Louisville was reactive towards losing Maryland but L'ville has done what they were supposed to do- solidify football.

While all the CR stuff was going on, some of the moves looked more suspicious than others. Now that there is a lull and everyone can look backwards, it's obvious that every move the ACC made, stabilized or increased its value. And ESPN rewarded the conference for that.

Five years ago no one would have been able to say the ACC is a stronger and more solid conference than the B12. Now it's a given. In the race to the P4, the ACC is miles ahead of the B12.

 

[Fishy]

It doesn't really matter which markets the ACC went after.

What was once perceived as a weakness - that ESPN owned the conference right down to the silverware - turned out to be its salvation.

ESPN took care of the house band and pushed the Big 12 out of the tent.

 

[JeepCSC]

Is this a joke? The ACC went after the lucrative Syracuse, Pittsburgh, and Louisville markets. The ACC has been nothing but reactionary from the start of CR.

Actually, given Miami deciding to fall off a cliff, Pitt/Syracuse might have been the bigger gets for Swofford. Not of course at the time, but it made BE football pretty much unsalvagable which of course forced Notre Dame to make a choice. In 2000, the main football targets on the Eastern Seaboard not already locked into the SEC or B10 were Miami and ND. Swofford worked overtime to get them both in the fold. It was visionary, even if the ACC decide to take a decade off from playing football.

Louisville was a purely reactionary move though. The only saving grace is the ACC didn't have a cattle call and wait 3 months to decide.

 

[billybud]

but...ESPN has rights to all of Big 12 basketball and jointly shares football with Fox...

The problem is that the Big 12 had limited marketability outside of a relatively small footprint....a group of Texas teams pared with teams from flyover country.

 

[Fishy]

"Jointly having football" is the operative phrase.

The Big 12 has a small footprint and the ACC plays second fiddle in most of its markets. Neither one is a no-brainer for a network.

Difference - ESPN ownership.

 

[upstater]

Then you have conference realignment comprehension issues.

Swofford clearly laid out the difference in strategy between ACC and B12.

ACC was looking long term with their additions in terms of markets and building a competitive brand. That way they have negotiating leverage with TV.

B12? Did none of that.

Louisville? Central New York? Cleveland Circle?

 

[upstater]

Actually, given Miami deciding to fall off a cliff, Pitt/Syracuse might have been the bigger gets for Swofford. Not of course at the time, but it made BE football pretty much unsalvagable which of course forced Notre Dame to make a choice. In 2000, the main football targets on the Eastern Seaboard not already locked into the SEC or B10 were Miami and ND. Swofford worked overtime to get them both in the fold. It was visionary, even if the ACC decide to take a decade off from playing football.

Louisville was a purely reactionary move though. The only saving grace is the ACC didn't have a cattle call and wait 3 months to decide.

Yeaaaay! Syracuse and Pitt football. So good!!!

 

[JeepCSC]

Yeaaaay! Syracuse and Pitt football. So good!!!

Not what I said. Taking them forced Notre Dame to make a choice. And Notre Dame was likely instrumental to the ACC getting a network.

 

[upstater]

Not what I said. Taking them forced Notre Dame to make a choice. And Notre Dame was likely instrumental to the ACC getting a network.

Fishy has the best explanation of what transpired. ESPN is the house brand by default. But the fact is, the conference is comprised of several teams that do not have big bases.

 

[The Funster]

ESPN has been pulling a lot of strings. Does anyone believe that the ACC destroyed the Big East without ESPN's blessing? And we all know that as a "partner" of the ACC ESPN had a lot of say in who the ACC chose from the Big East. As Fishy alludes to if the Big 12 was exclusively ESPN's property and the ACC was jointly shared it would have been the Big 12 who got the "network". But here's the thing: ESPN isn't all that. They've had cash flow issues and they've had stupid proviso's written into their contracts with the ACC and the Big 12. They were able to bribe the ACC with a quasi network and they were able to bully the Big 12 with threats about future considerations. Yes, ESPN is going to use BAMtech to try to monopolize the streaming business but my guess is that when streaming becomes more common place subscribers will be more likely want to pay to see teams, not necessarily conferences. The more popular teams will have a better ROI, irrespective of conference.

 

[upstater]

ESPN has been pulling a lot of strings. Does anyone believe that the ACC destroyed the Big East without ESPN's blessing? And we all know that as a "partner" of the ACC ESPN had a lot of say in who the ACC chose from the Big East. As Fishy alludes to if the Big 12 was exclusively ESPN's property and the ACC was jointly shared it would have been the Big 12 who got the "network". But here's the thing: ESPN isn't all that. They've had cash flow issues and they've had stupid proviso's written into their contracts with the ACC and the Big 12. They were able to bribe the ACC with a quasi network and they were able to bully the Big 12 with threats about future considerations. Yes, ESPN is going to use BAMtech to try to monopolize the streaming business but my guess is that when streaming becomes more common place subscribers will be more likely want to pay to see teams, not necessarily conferences. The more popular teams will have a better ROI, irrespective of conference.

The only problem of course is seeing your team's away games. That might necessitate conference deals for streaming.

 

[Chin Diesel]

Louisville? Central New York? Cleveland Circle?

Markets the most influential sports Network chose over the B12.

Not saying Swofford is a good; he only had to out manuever Bowlsby and he did.

CR really needs to be judged on output and results. Swofford has done very well.

It's a relative or bell curve grading not an absolute standard.