- Joined
- Aug 26, 2011
- Messages
- 30,660
- Reaction Score
- 53,382
UConn never had a chance for the ACC....
- Thread starter mauconnfan
- Start date
- Status
ctchamps
We are UConn!! 6 >>>1!
- Joined
- Aug 24, 2011
- Messages
- 17,784
- Reaction Score
- 45,781
Did you fact check the president?
- Joined
- Sep 2, 2011
- Messages
- 1,684
- Reaction Score
- 2,888
The acc did.
http://m.espn.go.com/general/blogs/blogpost?blogname=big12&id=49702
Haggard was disappointed the conference controlled third-tier TV rights for football, but universities held them for basketball. It's more evidence, Haggard said, of the conference favoring the North Carolina-based basketball schools like North Carolina and Duke. However, an ACC spokesman said ESPN controlled the rights for both football and basketball, and that Haggard was mistaken.
http://m.espn.go.com/general/blogs/blogpost?blogname=big12&id=49702
Haggard was disappointed the conference controlled third-tier TV rights for football, but universities held them for basketball. It's more evidence, Haggard said, of the conference favoring the North Carolina-based basketball schools like North Carolina and Duke. However, an ACC spokesman said ESPN controlled the rights for both football and basketball, and that Haggard was mistaken.
Did you fact check the president?
- Joined
- Aug 26, 2011
- Messages
- 30,660
- Reaction Score
- 53,382
Well, I was wrong. Mind boggling that FSU bigwigs would say that--and be wrong. WTF? What makes it even weirder is the chairman openly talked of the Tobacco Road bias in using that incorrect information. So, he was wrong about the facts, and he then blasts the Carolinas for manipulating the conference to their own ends? The facts don't support the case I'm making, but no one can deny that the bias and the bad blood between FSU and Tobacco Road is definitely there. The UNC president's comment reinforces that bad blood.
- Joined
- Sep 2, 2011
- Messages
- 1,684
- Reaction Score
- 2,888
in a macro sense, the acc ceding all of its rights to the acc is even worse. the nepotism and sweetheart deal shown by the acc to raycom has to make those at fsu livid.
while the big 10 is growing its network and the sec is about to begin theirs, the acc is mired in a contract that takes them to 2030. there's no getting around that the acc will see less than half the revenue of the big 10 and sec in just a few years time. and the amounts aren't trivial, $40m for big 10 versus $15-16m for acc in 2016.
it's the hole the acc dug because of swofford's insistence in protecting raycom at the expense of its members.
while the big 10 is growing its network and the sec is about to begin theirs, the acc is mired in a contract that takes them to 2030. there's no getting around that the acc will see less than half the revenue of the big 10 and sec in just a few years time. and the amounts aren't trivial, $40m for big 10 versus $15-16m for acc in 2016.
it's the hole the acc dug because of swofford's insistence in protecting raycom at the expense of its members.
ctchamps
We are UConn!! 6 >>>1!
- Joined
- Aug 24, 2011
- Messages
- 17,784
- Reaction Score
- 45,781
An ESPN article quoting an anonymous ACC spokesman isn't a ringing endorsement when it comes to fact checking. Now certainly the FSU president may have gone off after making a mistake in what he read or what he was told by advisors but I'm going to need something more conclusive before coming to a decision.
.-.
- Joined
- Sep 2, 2011
- Messages
- 1,684
- Reaction Score
- 2,888
since the contracts are purposefully withheld from public schools bc of foia requests, unless the espn k comes out someplace else, we can only go by what's reported.
however, swofford went to kiss the rings of clemson's bot, and supposedly said the same thing.
http://www.orangeandwhite.com/news/2012/jul/20/accs-john-swofford-clemson-board-trustees-engage-f/
however, swofford went to kiss the rings of clemson's bot, and supposedly said the same thing.
http://www.orangeandwhite.com/news/2012/jul/20/accs-john-swofford-clemson-board-trustees-engage-f/
ctchamps
We are UConn!! 6 >>>1!
- Joined
- Aug 24, 2011
- Messages
- 17,784
- Reaction Score
- 45,781
Raycom is a much bigger player in all of this UConn vs. Ville talk then Jurich or WM. I still get the impression FSU wants the ACC to stay intact, but the university decision makers are reacting very emotionally right now about a whole slew of things. Even if the ACC spokesperson is correct and FSU President Haggard is incorrect, Haggard's statement demonstrates a tension and frustration within the ACC. And this was before Md. left. Of course I don't know anything about Haggard and he could have a loose cannon temperament.
ctchamps
We are UConn!! 6 >>>1!
- Joined
- Aug 24, 2011
- Messages
- 17,784
- Reaction Score
- 45,781
Obviously UConn doesn't want to join a conference in which two of the universities are unable to read a contract accurately or intelligently. Nothing in this article about third tier. I do appreciate trying to get to the heart of the matter. If the ACC is correct I would have expected a public retraction by Haggard was in order. That certainly would clarify things.
- Joined
- Aug 26, 2011
- Messages
- 30,660
- Reaction Score
- 53,382
The FSU president referenced his apology for public comments based on misinformation, so 'll assume he was referring to the comments made by the chairman of his board.
Rumrunner is right about the macro argument, that the relationship between Swofford and Raycom may still be poisoning the well between UNC and FSU. no doubt they don't like each other.
- Joined
- Aug 24, 2011
- Messages
- 4,629
- Reaction Score
- 12,965
Going back to the original post on this thread. This article has Herbst / Manuel PR written all over it. We had a fine chance for the invite and Jurich played a much better hand. Susan and Ward were working on their sun tans while Jurich saved his athletic department. Yeah, I know, that's hyperbole, but when you are in those positions you need to be aware of perceptions and the perception here absolutely sucks.
RS9999X
There's no Dark Side .....it's all Dark.
- Joined
- Aug 26, 2011
- Messages
- 5,626
- Reaction Score
- 562
The problem is that the ACC gets very good Tier 3 rights through Raycom. Raycom runs the ACC network, the digital rights, FSU has a very good IMG contract for radio, coaches shows, etc.
The confusion is the way the ESPN contract is structured. The real problem is that ACC Tier I and Tier II rights are of a paltry value (around $12.5 Million of the contract). Take away the basketball and that's around $8.5 million for football which of course FSU could do better by moving when you consider the new bowl and playoff distribution formulas.
It's the case of the team with the best fan draw in a conference beeing squeezed. Like UConn FSU sits at the top of their Conference as a revenue earner and as a likely poaching target
In the oriignal deal RayCom was granted (13 years) for $50M a year to all football and basketball games that are not picked up by ESPN plus all Digital content for the ACC Website and Corporate ACC conference branding deals. Raycom branded this the "ACC Digital Network".
That $4.2 million a year per team is higher today in the $5.2 million range over the life of the longer contract with SU, PItt and LU.
Remember also RayCom picks up production costs, etc. If FSU could sell their one game a year available to Tier 3 and 4 December basketball games for better than $6 million it might be that FSU is losing money here. Then there's the put up and shut up and FSU has yet to ever market that stuff or attempt to market it or broker a deal with RayCom to split additonal revenue 50/50 by marketing it.
The confusion is the way the ESPN contract is structured. The real problem is that ACC Tier I and Tier II rights are of a paltry value (around $12.5 Million of the contract). Take away the basketball and that's around $8.5 million for football which of course FSU could do better by moving when you consider the new bowl and playoff distribution formulas.
It's the case of the team with the best fan draw in a conference beeing squeezed. Like UConn FSU sits at the top of their Conference as a revenue earner and as a likely poaching target
In the oriignal deal RayCom was granted (13 years) for $50M a year to all football and basketball games that are not picked up by ESPN plus all Digital content for the ACC Website and Corporate ACC conference branding deals. Raycom branded this the "ACC Digital Network".
That $4.2 million a year per team is higher today in the $5.2 million range over the life of the longer contract with SU, PItt and LU.
Remember also RayCom picks up production costs, etc. If FSU could sell their one game a year available to Tier 3 and 4 December basketball games for better than $6 million it might be that FSU is losing money here. Then there's the put up and shut up and FSU has yet to ever market that stuff or attempt to market it or broker a deal with RayCom to split additonal revenue 50/50 by marketing it.
.-.
RS9999X
There's no Dark Side .....it's all Dark.
- Joined
- Aug 26, 2011
- Messages
- 5,626
- Reaction Score
- 562
Haggard was a hero for a day. He is a foot in mouth fool .and no longer a trustee.
The whole thing is spin. Raycom pays 32.25% for Tier 3 and Digital Rights and the Corporate Web presence and Corporate Marketing for the ACC. That's nearly $5.8 mil of the new $18 mil average (if that indeed is the correct tweaked figure). That's decent for Tier III. What no one wants to admit is how badly Tier I and Tier II ACC Football is valued if you subtract out another $3.5 mil for basketball. Less than 1/2 the contract is Tier I and II Football despite what Clemson and others claim. The math is simple.
Obviously Notre Dame and the ACC Orange Bowl help with the Football Dsitributions as does the new playoff format revenue distribution.
Make no mistake--no one is paying a premium to broadcast Waste Forest football or Duke.
The whole thing is spin. Raycom pays 32.25% for Tier 3 and Digital Rights and the Corporate Web presence and Corporate Marketing for the ACC. That's nearly $5.8 mil of the new $18 mil average (if that indeed is the correct tweaked figure). That's decent for Tier III. What no one wants to admit is how badly Tier I and Tier II ACC Football is valued if you subtract out another $3.5 mil for basketball. Less than 1/2 the contract is Tier I and II Football despite what Clemson and others claim. The math is simple.
Obviously Notre Dame and the ACC Orange Bowl help with the Football Dsitributions as does the new playoff format revenue distribution.
Make no mistake--no one is paying a premium to broadcast Waste Forest football
or Duke.
Waquoit
Mr. Positive
- Joined
- Aug 24, 2011
- Messages
- 36,421
- Reaction Score
- 101,830
Exactly, and that's sad. We shouldn't be the target audience for their PR campaign.
- Joined
- Aug 26, 2011
- Messages
- 30,660
- Reaction Score
- 53,382
First off, it was 2 football games for FSU this year. So, why would only football have to grab more than $5.2m? It would be the basketball, the 2 football, not to mention the baseball, that would have to beat that $5m figure. and I'm not catching you on production costs. SNY picks up production costs for UConn, so... why is that relevant?
RS9999X
There's no Dark Side .....it's all Dark.
- Joined
- Aug 26, 2011
- Messages
- 5,626
- Reaction Score
- 562
That extra game was the WVU game which was canceled in February due to the realignment and 9-game Big 12 Schedule. WVU paid $500,000 to exit the schedule and was replaced in 2013.
The ongoing problem with the FSU Tier III rights is that no one at FSU put a value on them before the contract and no one came up with a quote after the fact that they could be marketed for more and no one came up with a competing bid or any real numbers.
It's merely disgruntled fans saying that RayCom should not be able to put up 32.25% for Tier III Rights and they have a better plan without addressing the real problem: Tier I and Tier II football Rights..
The breakdown of the estimated $18.4 million per team (after Notre Dame or $1.3 mil accretive per team) is Tier I and II basketball (20%) or $3.68 million per team. RayCom 32.25% for Tier III ($5.93 mil) and Tier I and II Football the remainder or $8.78 mil per team.
Sure some think an ACC Network is the same value as the BiG and RayCom arent the ones to do that. They chose not to leverage the NYC market with SU and UConn. It's out of territory for them whereas Cincy and Louisville are RayCom territory.
Allow me to play a minor Junior Chamber of Commerce hype on Louisville football. You knew I'd show up some time, but I have mention right up front I haven't bought into the football rivalry, fair catch and all. I have enjoyed seeing UConn become very good at football but I have also seen your recent mini swoon - which did not affect the choice of Louisville to the ACC, IMO.
Since 2004, Louisville has finished the season in the Top Ten in the country twice - at #6 both times - and the Top 20 another time. For a 4 year stretch no college in America outside of USC sent more players to the NFL. Yeah, we got Kragthorped bad for 3 years - not 4. Most conferences and aware colleges see a return under String to this level of performance as imminent - we do too. We are heavily freshmen and sophomore-laden as Charlie's recruiting has taken off. We'll bring a Heisman candidate and a ranked team to whatever conference we go to.
This is a far better history than you depict. In fact, it's arguably better than any ACC program over that same time frame. Bear in mind the 23 other sports Louisville has won conference titles in, including 10 conference titles last year.
Since 2004, Louisville has finished the season in the Top Ten in the country twice - at #6 both times - and the Top 20 another time. For a 4 year stretch no college in America outside of USC sent more players to the NFL. Yeah, we got Kragthorped bad for 3 years - not 4. Most conferences and aware colleges see a return under String to this level of performance as imminent - we do too. We are heavily freshmen and sophomore-laden as Charlie's recruiting has taken off. We'll bring a Heisman candidate and a ranked team to whatever conference we go to.
This is a far better history than you depict. In fact, it's arguably better than any ACC program over that same time frame. Bear in mind the 23 other sports Louisville has won conference titles in, including 10 conference titles last year.
.-.
- Joined
- Aug 26, 2011
- Messages
- 30,660
- Reaction Score
- 53,382
I don't buy it. Sorry.
Better than UConn? Yes. Everyone here has agreed (even though UConn held its own against Louisville head-to-head over the years).
2 top 10 rankings? That's good. I think that's what puts you over the top. But... Coming from the BE? Not so sure. Even the sched. this year is highly questionable, as are your losses. I mean, Boston College and Kansas also finished in the top 10.
Better than UConn? Yes. Everyone here has agreed (even though UConn held its own against Louisville head-to-head over the years).
2 top 10 rankings? That's good. I think that's what puts you over the top. But... Coming from the BE? Not so sure. Even the sched. this year is highly questionable, as are your losses. I mean, Boston College and Kansas also finished in the top 10.
Did they put all those pros into the league? We finished 6th in the country out of Conference USA, actually, in 2004. Then out of the Big East when Rutgers, WVU and we were all top 25 teams.
The schedule this year is scandalously crappy. Worst ever. But it's bad because WVU jumped the shark and Georgia bought out the game we had scheduled. This year is found money for Louisville - we figured next year and then the next ones would be our Charlie Strong Biggun's.
- Joined
- Aug 26, 2011
- Messages
- 30,660
- Reaction Score
- 53,382
BC has lots of pros too. Heck, I think UConn has put 20 in the pros in the same time period. Currently has 15. Some whom went by the wayside in the interim, like Deon Anderson, were actually starters. As I said, UL is better than UConn, but I don't think it's a formidable football school.
- Joined
- Aug 28, 2011
- Messages
- 2,271
- Reaction Score
- 2,929
This cracks me up that a Johnny Come Lately member of the ACC is running things. How do they let that happen ? FSU is dictating things ?! Frankly, UNC, Duke, Wake, etc. should have admitted all the new schools but gave themselves 2 votes to everyone else's 1 vote.
The idea that Louisville is in any way superior to UConn is laughable. The only possible advantage they have is that there isn't a single other goddam thing worth doing in the state of Kentucky besides watching college sports. Sadly, that advantage doesn't go very far in the real world.
What should have made the difference is not the current status of Louisville vs. UConn football (nevermind that UConn keeps beating the "superior program" head to head), it should always be the POTENTIAL for UConn football. How the hell do you look at the success mens and women's basketball have had - coming from effectively nothing to national powerhouses - and not realize the immense potential there ?
I wonder if we should still be as hot to join a conference dumb enough to think adding Louisville was the smarter move, or that is steeped in basketball history and yet allows a non-charter member added for football to dictate things.
I like the idea of seeing UConn matched up with SU and Pitt again, and also UNC and Duke in hoops every year, but maybe another major conference would be a better fit in the long run.
The idea that Louisville is in any way superior to UConn is laughable. The only possible advantage they have is that there isn't a single other goddam thing worth doing in the state of Kentucky besides watching college sports. Sadly, that advantage doesn't go very far in the real world.
What should have made the difference is not the current status of Louisville vs. UConn football (nevermind that UConn keeps beating the "superior program" head to head), it should always be the POTENTIAL for UConn football. How the hell do you look at the success mens and women's basketball have had - coming from effectively nothing to national powerhouses - and not realize the immense potential there ?
I wonder if we should still be as hot to join a conference dumb enough to think adding Louisville was the smarter move, or that is steeped in basketball history and yet allows a non-charter member added for football to dictate things.
I like the idea of seeing UConn matched up with SU and Pitt again, and also UNC and Duke in hoops every year, but maybe another major conference would be a better fit in the long run.
HuskyHawk
The triumphant return of the Blues Brothers.
- Joined
- Sep 12, 2011
- Messages
- 35,554
- Reaction Score
- 94,756
So essentially, UL got lucky and avoided two losses they would have had without the schedule change.
ESPN lists all the NFL players by school. UConn has 13. Louisville has 18. Not anywhere near the top of the list (just look at LSU right next to it) http://espn.go.com/nfl/college/_/letter/l I'd argue that given our disadvantage in not even playing FBS football for the entire period, our 13 might be more impressive.
.-.
- Joined
- Aug 26, 2011
- Messages
- 30,660
- Reaction Score
- 53,382
We have 15 now that Greg Lloyd and .......... (sorry, forgot his name, just signed a couple weeks ago) made rosters.
With Ort looking strong, UConn also has a major leaguer who may very well do good things, too. I frankly expect Springer to also do great things, but then, I'm a baseball-first guy, so I would, lol.
I'm not dissing UConn football - I hope you realize this. My statement about NFL players dealt with a time period, 2004-2008, when only one school sent more pros to the league. Someone had alluded that we had "no history". That was a reply to that bizarre conclusion.
I'm not dissing UConn football - I hope you realize this. My statement about NFL players dealt with a time period, 2004-2008, when only one school sent more pros to the league. Someone had alluded that we had "no history". That was a reply to that bizarre conclusion.
- Status