Reply to thread

Message

[QUOTE="upstater, post: 1852861, member: 153"]
We know they are paid for being part of the ACC.

The question being raised here is different.

The discussion is about whether ESPN's pool of money for spending on college football is augmented by the fact that it pays what is obviously a very low amount (well below value) for other conferences. The quote above from the Mizzou article that came out today shows that ESPN thinks of its college football holdings in sum, and not separately. It allows for loss leaders like the ACC and Texas, because it is crucial that it holds onto certain properties, and like Walmart, it makes up ground elsewhere to reach a profit. When its model is thrown off balance by potential college moves (as was the case in 2011 when the Big12 lost members) then the whole scale and balance needs to be rejiggered. Any additional AAC money will come at the expense of other conferences, either above it, or below it, possibly the B12. ESPN sees a "disturbance in the force" and tries to bring things into harmony.
[/QUOTE]

Verification

First name of men's bb coach