Welp, ACC stays together with a new agreement (LINK) | Page 8 | The Boneyard

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

Very detailed multi-post thread on VaTech:



One slide:

IMG_2253.jpeg
 
CL82 said:
That allocation between men's basketball and football ratings for revenue, sharingl makes the ACC less attractive to us
Expand ...

I think that’s about standard isn’t it?
 
Hoophound said:
I think that’s about standard isn’t it?
Expand ...
Unequal revenue distribution isn't standard. FSU and Clemson bullied the ACC into it. If that is the basis for weighing ratings in determining revenue, distributions it discounts our inherent advantage in viewership for men's and women's basketball.
 
CL82 said:
That allocation between men's basketball and football ratings for revenue, sharingl makes the ACC less attractive to us
Expand ...
I get where you're coming from but I'm not so sure about that. For the unequal revenue share distribution, UConn has one of the top basketball brands in the conference so UConn would benefit there. Football, UConn wouldn't really benefit at all in the beginning. So even though basketball would only account for 25%, UConn has a large financial interest there. Football is going to be split mostly by the big football brands. Programs like bcu, wake, virginia, pitt, smu, cal, syracuse would likely be in a worse situation than UConn. Sure 50/50 would be ideal but football has to be given a larger share. UConn gets a decent share of a smaller pie but some other programs are eating scraps regardless.
 
.-.
Kolumbo said:
I get where you're coming from but I'm not so sure about that. For the unequal revenue share distribution, UConn has one of the top basketball brands in the conference so UConn would benefit there. Football, UConn wouldn't really benefit at all in the beginning. So even though basketball would only account for 25%, UConn has a large financial interest there. Football is going to be split mostly by the big football brands. Programs like bcu, wake, virginia, pitt, smu, cal, syracuse would likely be in a worse situation than UConn. Sure 50/50 would be ideal but football has to be given a larger share. UConn gets a decent share of a smaller pie but some other programs are eating scraps regardless.
Expand ...
Yeah, you're right other teams might be in an even worse position, but if you allocate revenue, so that basketball ratings only count for 25% of the total allocation, you've created a situation whereby it becomes very difficult for Connecticut to get what would have been a "full share" prior to unequal distribution.

Of course, that assumes that we even get an invitation. It's been elusive, to say the least, so far.
 
40% of ACC Revenue is equal distribution...it is the other 60% that is unequally split...based on viewership ...25% of that 60% will be BB, 75% FB....

UConn would get the 40% equal distribution part same as any ACC school (unless negotiated differently for entry) and UConn's basketball would do well in the distribution of the 25% basketball.
 
CL82 said:
Yeah, you're right other teams might be in an even worse position, but if you allocate revenue, so that basketball ratings only count for 25% of the total allocation, you've created a situation whereby it becomes very difficult for Connecticut to get what would have been a "full share" prior to unequal distribution.

Of course, that assumes that we even get an invitation. It's been elusive, to say the least, so far.
Expand ...
Yeah, that's pretty much the idea though. It's baked in so that FSU & Clemson on average make much more than a full share. I'd bet maybe 5 or 6 programs would make above average payout, the other 12 or 13 below average. Not sure if unequal shares would be sustainable long term. The big dogs would eventually go P2 I would think.

FSU, Clemson, Miami, Ga Tech? Louisville would get above average football revenue. The rest below average.
 
Kolumbo said:
Yeah, that's pretty much the idea though. It's baked in so that FSU & Clemson on average make much more than a full share. I'd bet maybe 5 or 6 programs would make above average payout, the other 12 or 13 below average. Not sure if unequal shares would be sustainable long term. The big dogs would eventually go P2 I would think.

FSU, Clemson, Miami, Ga Tech? Louisville would get above average football revenue. The rest below average.
Expand ...
The ratings are going to be driven by network, time slot, other schools on at same time, the opponent, and how successful the season has been. And, the ratings are going to be determined over a five year period. So, if your school is decent and you have a good group of opponents, you will have decent TV ratings. One caveat is the games have to be on an ESPN network, so if you play @Notre Dame on NBC, the ratings don't count.

For example, BC should have decent TV ratings in 2025 as they are playing Notre Dame, Clemson, Louisville, GT, Syracuse, Cal, SMU, Stanford, Pitt, UConn,... driven by the opponent.
 
.-.
jostar1 said:
Expand ...

Those ten years projections are meaningless. I agree with the general theme of what he is saying, but there is no way to accurately project what each conference will make in their next media deals ---- realignment will happen between now and then, for example. Even if conference affiliations remain the same (highly unlikely), there is no way to know that the Big 12 will catch the ACC or that the SEC will surpass the B1G in revenue ten years from now.
 
huskymedic said:


Expand ...

Who here thinks UNC men's basketball will get their $7m moneysworth on the court via Hubert Davis at the helm? I don't. I'm doubtful about Belichick on the FB side, too. Surprised that women's BB at UNC isn't making more than their baseball.... UConn gets so much "return" on its spending/budget relative to on-court/on-field performance in the sports that matter most. Certainly more than UNC lately.
 
.-.
CTFAN4LIFE said:
Who here thinks UNC men's basketball will get their $7m moneysworth on the court via Hubert Davis at the helm? I don't. I'm doubtful about Belichick on the FB side, too. Surprised that women's BB at UNC isn't making more than their baseball.... UConn gets so much "return" on its spending/budget relative to on-court/on-field performance in the sports that matter most. Certainly more than UNC lately.
Expand ...
Davis is on a year to year contract basically, he wins or he's gone. Belichick will be fine. UNC finally hired a coach that emphasizes evaluation & development who also happens to be a big name. Mack Brown got all the key factions on the same page & UNC has clear vision of what it wants from the football program. Belichick is putting a system in place that will likely be around long after he is gone
 
ZooCougar said:
The Belechick cult people are unreal.
Expand ...
Not a fan of Belichick nor would I have hired him but he is the type of coach UNC needs long term. We need proven evaluators & developer's of talent. We need the Dave Clawson type instead of a Lincoln Riley type
 
ramses 2.0 said:
Davis is on a year to year contract basically, he wins or he's gone. Belichick will be fine. UNC finally hired a coach that emphasizes evaluation & development who also happens to be a big name. Mack Brown got all the key factions on the same page & UNC has clear vision of what it wants from the football program. Belichick is putting a system in place that will likely be around long after he is gone
Expand ...
Agree on Davis, but the jury is out on Belichick and I say that as a lifelong Pats fan. Belichick's NFL winning percentage without Tom Brady is a lackluster .443. So, there's that and he has to prove his "militant/command and control" ways will work with 20 year olds. It'll be interesting.
 
CTFAN4LIFE said:
Agree on Davis, but the jury is out on Belichick and I say that as a lifelong Pats fan. Belichick's NFL winning percentage without Tom Brady is a lackluster .443. So, there's that and he has to prove his "militant/command and control" ways will work with 20 year olds. It'll be interesting.
Expand ...
Don't need Brady in college football, Saban won several titles with average QB's at best. Not that UNC expects to win titles
 
.-.
CTFAN4LIFE said:
Didn't say anything about needing Brady - point being that BB needed a HOF QB to become a top tier HC.
Expand ...
Name a top tier coach in the NFL that wins on regular basis without a franchise type QB. I can't think of any at least in the modern era of salary cap & free agency.
 
ramses 2.0 said:
Name a top tier coach in the NFL that wins on regular basis without a franchise type QB. I can't think of any at least in the modern era of salary cap & free agency.
Expand ...
Sean McVay. Doug Pederson. Kyle Shanahan. You could argue 5 year spans of John Harbaugh and Ron Rivera.
 
CTFAN4LIFE said:
Sean McVay. Doug Pederson. Kyle Shanahan. You could argue 5 year spans of John Harbaugh and Ron Rivera.
Expand ...
Pederson has been fired twice & only had 1 great season but he still had Wentz & Lawrence. McVay has Stafford & had Goth before that. Shanahan had Jimmy G & now has Purdie. Harbaugh had Flacco & now has Jackson. Rivera had Newton. So each one had a QB they felt were franchise type players, doesn't have to be a all time great like Brady
 
ramses 2.0 said:
Pederson has been fired twice & only had 1 great season but he still had Wentz & Lawrence. McVay has Stafford & had Goth before that. Shanahan had Jimmy G & now has Purdie. Harbaugh had Flacco & now has Jackson. Rivera had Newton. So each one had a QB they felt were franchise type players, doesn't have to be a all time great like Brady
Expand ...
You said franchise QB. Not sure how you define it, but in my mind it equates to someone in the top 10 QB's of their 7-10 year span. Of the guys you listed, I'll give ya Cam. The others, not so much. That's why I think the coaches I listed can line up against almost anybody in a 7-10 year span. Belichick had the incredible gift of having the single most impactful player in the history of the NFL for TWO DECADES.
 
ramses 2.0 said:
Name a top tier coach in the NFL that wins on regular basis without a franchise type QB. I can't think of any at least in the modern era of salary cap & free agency.
Expand ...
Mike Tomlin had Big Ben his entire career and then had Pickett and Wilson for the past 3 years. Believe it or not Tomlin has been at the helm for 18 years and the team didn't sheet the bed once Ben left. Steelers aren't winning championships right now but they've always had a good system in place and didn't drop off like the patsies have. I'm not saying Tomlin is Belichick but Ben isn't Brady either.
 
ramses 2.0 said:
Not a fan of Belichick nor would I have hired him but he is the type of coach UNC needs long term. We need proven evaluators & developer's of talent. We need the Dave Clawson type instead of a Lincoln Riley type
Expand ...

The reforms Belichick has emplaced at UNC will
last decades. No. Centuries.

Mark them down 12–0 for the next 50 years.
 
.-.
You must log in or register to reply here.

Forum statistics

Threads
168,351
Messages
4,566,614
Members
10,469
Latest member
xxBlueChips


Top Bottom