Welp, ACC stays together with a new agreement (LINK) | Page 4 | The Boneyard

Welp, ACC stays together with a new agreement (LINK)

With the Big 12 media rights being up for renewal prior to the ACC, the ACC may get aggressive and try to poach a few Big-12 teams?
 
Looks to me that the strong football schools in the ACC decided that there isn't enough money flowing to keep them competitive with their perceived peers in the the BIG and the SEC. Thus, a special payout scheme had to be concocted. This institutionalized inequality will eventually be the end of the ACC. It may work short term, but the BIG and the SEC are going to keep financially separating themselves from the others in the so-called "P conferences", including the ACC,

Regarding UConn, our ticket out of the BE doldrums will be the "monetization" of March Madness by the marquee BB brands. Then we become attractive to any of the "P conferences". Expect a fight from the NCAA because MM is the only way that organization stays afloat. BB doesn't move the needle very much now because the NCAA gloms the lion's share of MM revenue. I'd bet the SEC and the BIG already are salivating about taking over MM. The other lesser "P conferences" should take notice of this and add UConn to help get seats at the table. Otherwise, the P-2 will end up in the financial "catbird seat" and the rest of the "P conferences" and any other marquee BB brands will enter a nuclear winter.
 
Seems odd that ND would want to be locked into Clemson when it is already obligated to play ACC teams every year.

 
Kolumbo said:
Seems odd that ND would want to be locked into Clemson when it is already obligated to play ACC teams every year.

Expand ...

Probably more like Clemson wanted it but who knows
 
Kolumbo said:
Seems odd that ND would want to be locked into Clemson when it is already obligated to play ACC teams every year.

Expand ...


"Brands and non-brands" ?????
wtf is that? how on earth would that work?
 

What Clemson-ACC settlement documents reveal about Tigers’ future in league​


Here are recently released details of the agreement.

Interesting point --- the 60% revenue distribution (75% football and 25% men's basketball) is NOT based on team success for the ACC members. It's based on viewership. If FSU goes 1-11 again, but has more viewers than every other team, FSU will be paid more than every other team.

Even if a school like Wake Forest has a strong season, if no one is watching, they won't be paid more (unless the make the CFB playoffs) and will be paid less than teams with worse records that have more viewers.
 
Rufus said:
Interesting point --- the 60% revenue distribution (75% football and 25% men's basketball) is NOT based on team success for the ACC members. It's based on viewership. If FSU goes 1-11 again, but has more viewers than every other team, FSU will be paid more than every other team.

Even if a school like Wake Forest has a strong season, if no one is watching, they won't be paid more (unless the make the CFB playoffs) and will be paid less than teams with worse records that have more viewers.
Expand ...
FSU banks that viewership just by having their games aired on networks with better distribution than the other teams more frequently (it's arguably fair though, since the revenue is coming via TV, at least its the teams drawing those TV dollars getting the extra (if the Big East had a similar clause it would favor UConn)). It puts the onus on the less popular schools to get off to big starts to ensure they are picked for the premium slots later in the season when ESPN may flex their games into the money time slots.
 
This clause is so unusual...FSU/Clemson must have had the ACC in a legal bind and ESPN backed away....to allow such of a permanent constitutional change...The Carolina Crew would not let this happen unless there were a loaded gun in the background.

 
billybud said:
This clause is so unusual...FSU/Clemson must have had the ACC in a legal bind and ESPN backed away....to allow such of a permanent constitutional change...The Carolina Crew would not let this happen unless there were a loaded gun in the background.

Expand ...

That is the craziest clause I've ever seen. It's only a clip of a subsection, but that appears to give each full veto power for anything that comes up for vote. That's almost malpractice by the other schools that agreed to that. At least allow for some type of supermajority where Clemson/FSU vote no. That does all but officially mean that UConn won't be invited unless both Clemson and FSU leave.
 
billybud said:
This clause is so unusual...FSU/Clemson must have had the ACC in a legal bind and ESPN backed away....to allow such of a permanent constitutional change...The Carolina Crew would not let this happen unless there were a loaded gun in the background.

Expand ...

Too bad that veto clause didn’t exist when Calford and SMU got in. Also makes me think UNC and UVa are all but gone if/when a P2 calls. FSU and Clemson too but I don’t believe they are as coveted.
 
UConnTrumbull said:
Too bad that veto clause didn’t exist when Calford and SMU got in. Also makes me think UNC and UVa are all but gone if/when a P2 calls. FSU and Clemson too but I don’t believe they are as coveted.
Expand ...
In many ways that sounds like our best case scenario. It's a huge loss for the ACC, but it still leaves behind a solid group of schools. The loss of FSU and Clemson eliminates two people who have been reported as being opposed to our admission to the conference. UNC is reported as being a "pro UConn" school, so that's a loss, but one would think that Duke would want to replace UNC with another premier basketball program? Similarly, Virginia has been counted as a "pro UConn" vote having a lot of connections with the university. So their loss is the loss of another potential Yes vote but I think Connecticut is one of the few available universities that have a similar profile to Virginia.

The real question to me is whether the former big east schools vote against us to keep us from getting a competitive advantage or whether they vote for us to improve rivalries and have another school from above the Mason-Dixon line.
 
UConnTrumbull said:
Too bad that veto clause didn’t exist when Calford and SMU got in. Also makes me think UNC and UVa are all but gone if/when a P2 calls. FSU and Clemson too but I don’t believe they are as coveted.
Expand ...
I think any school is gone if the P2 calls, from any non-P2 league.
 
billybud said:
This clause is so unusual...FSU/Clemson must have had the ACC in a legal bind and ESPN backed away....to allow such of a permanent constitutional change...The Carolina Crew would not let this happen unless there were a loaded gun in the background.

Expand ...

Where is there a business lawyer to interpret this? Can it really give that much veto power to just 2 schools?
 
ScottVib said:
I think any school is gone if the P2 calls, from any non-P2 league.
Expand ...
Yes but UNC and Virginia are most likely, IMO. Could go either SEC or B1G. New markets, large populations and good academics (matters for B1G). It’s funny to me that FSU and Clemson are given veto power when the real power holders are UNC and Virginia.
 
UConnTrumbull said:
Yes but UNC and Virginia are most likely, IMO. Could go either SEC or B1G. New markets, large populations and good academics (matters for B1G). It’s funny to me that FSU and Clemson are given veto power when the real power holders are UNC and Virginia.
Expand ...
Yep, the question isn't who would accept an invite from the P2, the question is who does the P2 want?
 
Virginia is in the lower third of the ACC in TV viewing. Good academics, not a whole lot better than BC, but very good.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Online statistics

Members online
257
Guests online
6,626
Total visitors
6,883
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Share This Page

Forum statistics

Threads
163,685
Messages
4,367,824
Members
10,157
Latest member
FightOnCT


.
..
Top Bottom