ACC Gets New TV Deal With ESPN
The long wait appears to finally be over. According to the Triangle Business Journal, ESPN out-bid Fox in close fashion. Fox stepped up its game because it wanted to increase its internet-broadcasting efforts. This move allowed the ACC to milk more money out of ESPN.
$155 million between 13 teams (the league office gets an equal share for projects and operations) is about $12 million per year. That's almost 3X what the teams were making under the old deal. SEC schools get roughly $17 million each from their TV deals. That's $ 5 Million more per SEC school per year, but the ACC closed the gap in somewhat major fashion.
201 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Wow great news
This is far better than what I expected the ACC to get with the economy the way it is and the crappy product we’ve had the last few years as a conference.
Bring back Peter Tom Willis— a true Nole! -FiestaNole
all things considered, 5 million gap is not bad.
Need the big daddy boosters to come through on the stuff Jimbo needs.
Could this have any affect on realignment? Maybe now the ACC looks better.
Bring back Peter Tom Willis— a true Nole! -FiestaNole
I would say so
I think it makes anyone looking at leaving the ACC think twice unless ESPN is willing to up their payment to the SEC. It also kills ACC expansion because it would dilute the per school pay out. I honestly feel bad for the Big East schools that the B10 doesn’t pick up. This does bode well for the B12 and P10 though. ESPN needed someone bidding against them, and I’m actually pulling for Fox to get one of the other two conferences. I actually wouldn’t be surprised to see ESPN go big for the P10 and let the B12 go.
by osceolafan850 on May 17, 2010 10:35 AM EDT up reply actions
Not a huge suprise
A few years back the ACC was the most lucrative conference per team. The SEC made their deal at the best possible time. Sans recession this ACC deal would have been just as big. A lot of ACC teams play SEC teams, and really is the ole miss v. arkansas game any better than NC v. Clemson? These guys are smart enough to know that college football is cyclical over that many years. They wanted to block Fox out, but at this point, we all benefit if Fox gets another conference= more games on TV and better product. Rest assured, as long as Herbstreit, Robert Smith, and Chris Spielman are sitting there OSU will still be ESPN’s fave.
I have no doubt whatsoever that this is attributable to the astute reporting of Bud Elliot and the crack TN staff on this very subject.....
: )o
Oderint Dum Metuant
by DRusso97 on May 17, 2010 10:11 AM EDT via mobile reply actions
That's an impressive piece of negotiating given our how our product compares to the SEC.
Also Tricknole you obviously had a better idea of how much we could close the gap than I did.
I bow to your wisdom oh ancient one : )
Giddy-up!
Awesome
I had to look at the author (not MattD) and then click on the link to make sure this wasn’t a bizarro, May Fool’s column. This is great news.
Further to Miaminole’s point, can there be any speculation drawn from this deal that is a precursor – or even a dealbreaker – in terms of league expansion?
"I got a PBS mind in an MTV world"...Jimmy Buffett
by The Ryno and I Know on May 17, 2010 10:19 AM EDT reply actions
Good news overall....BUT keep in mind...
UF has a $9 MIllion a year deal with sunsports in ADDITION to that.
So UF is at $25 Million a year in TV deals to FSU’s $12 Million.
FSU might have a deal like UF’s with sunshine….I don’t know. But if they don’t….still a MASSIVE gap there.
I figure as the article mentioned
we might be dealing with Raycom again. Who knows, we may be able to get something similar.
Bring back Peter Tom Willis— a true Nole! -FiestaNole
FSU has a deal with Sunshine
They replay FSU games in addition to the UF games they do. But I doubt it is for the same amount as FSU football isn’t worth as much as UF football right now.
by osceolafan850 on May 17, 2010 10:36 AM EDT up reply actions
We're always going to be chasing them to some extent
But conference TV money is one thing we can’t really control. It’s like “free money” in a way, and it’s devastating to start so far behind in the money you don’t have to work for.
It also means that when you add in what FSU can do on it’s own, it doesn’t have to be behind Ole Miss, Kentucky, etc. That was very dangerous territory to be stuck in.
by LouC on May 17, 2010 10:51 AM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
Much more than i expected.
Very pleased by this news. The main reason I supported a possible move to the SEC in my head was because I didn’t have faith in Swofford & Co. to broker a solid deal. While $5 million is still a large gap, I remain hopeful that winning games will help bring in enough booster money to keep us at an elite level for years to come.
Strange things are afoot at the Circle-K.
by mmmCheese on May 17, 2010 10:25 AM EDT via mobile reply actions
Wow, last numbers I had heard was that the ACC was shopping for $120 million
and wasn’t getting any takers. This is borderline shocking, and HUGE news for the ACC to stay in the ball game.
What I like about this also is if I’m figuring the years right, this should end a year before the SEC contract right? So the ACC will get first shot in a new landscape, including a conference network if that’s the way they go.
Not to toot my own horn, but I made a post a week or so ago about how if the ACC couldn’t get the deal they wanted, they should retain and monetize the rights to broadcast their games digitally as a game-changer. A lot of people couldn’t see the value that could be realized in that, but according to the article, the internet rights to the games was what drove the bidding up by tens of millions. Obviously, they aren’t worth that now, but ESPN and FOX are taking the long term view of that delivery system also.
Great job by Swofford and team on that.
12 Year Deal
The story says it’s a 12 year deal. The SEC’s deal was 15 years if I remember correctly. Both are pretty long term comitments.
by SeminoleMike on May 17, 2010 11:27 AM EDT up reply actions
I love that our deal expires before the SEC's
in 12 years – $12-$13M/year per team may not look that lucrative – getting the chance to negotiate BEFORE the SEC is advantageous to us.
by GraniteStateNoles on May 17, 2010 12:16 PM EDT up reply actions
Doesn't it only end one year sooner?
MiNDSET? SWAG-ER-ISM!!!
---------------------------------------------------------
"Trick is right."
"Wherever you are, Trick, you are wise, indeed."
I'm sure that wasn't a coincidence.
Until/unless our on the field product is better – we need to get our deal nailed down prior to the SEC sucking all the oxygen out of the room.
If this deal is confirmed, IMO, we lucked out.
by GraniteStateNoles on May 17, 2010 4:47 PM EDT up reply actions
Ok.
Just wasn’t sure if you were using the ACC’s 12 year deal vs. the SEC’s 15 year deal and thinking ours ended much sooner.
MiNDSET? SWAG-ER-ISM!!!
---------------------------------------------------------
"Trick is right."
"Wherever you are, Trick, you are wise, indeed."
$120M/year during the 60 day exclusive negotiation period that ESPN had
is what I had heard too. If true, ESPN screwed up by not nailing us down during their exclusivity window. Thank you Fox for driving our price up.
I still want to see this confirmed by the ACC or ESPN – but if true – then I want to publicly take back everything bad I said about John Swofford. This is an excellent outcome for the ACC and FSU.
Now, if the SEC comes calling FSU has leverage to make a great deal or the ability to turn it down altogether.
I think the Big East teams that may get left behind by Big 10 expansion are probably not feeling too good right now. This deal probably closes a 3rd door to the Big East – whatever’s left was passed over by the Big Ten; the SEC is not likely to expand to include any of them because it means reopening their deal with ESPN or splitting money more ways; and the ACC is now in the same boat as the SEC – reopen the deal or dilute the package amongst more schools.
And geographically the Big East left overs are boxed in.
I think the Big East will now look at add more teams to replace the ones its losing and hope for the best.
I agree with those that say that perhaps ESPN swoops in for rights to the Pac10 and lets Fox have the Big 12.
At that point, ESPN could approach the SEC or Pac 10 about trying to poach Texas, OU, Ok St, A&M.
by GraniteStateNoles on May 17, 2010 12:15 PM EDT up reply actions
I wonder if seeing how much money ESPN actually had left to spend
gives the SEC second thoughts about not aggressively going after FSU, Miami, Clemson, GT, etc. Obviously ESPN had more cash to lay out, and the SEC could have gotten a lot of what the ACC just got if they had added those four teams and re-opened negotiations.
Good point.
I think a few things worked in our favor here.
1) Fox deciding to get aggressive.
2) TBS from the Sport Business Journal article is said to be looking to expand its regular season basketball coverage and taking down the ACC blocks them from IMO the best b-ball conference around.
3) ESPN losing the NCAA b-ball tourney left them with a lot of money to spend.
Amazingly I think this deal may have been as much about basketball as football. No doubt if it was football only – ESPN could have proactively gone to the SEC and said – hey – add FSU, GT, Clemson and Miami and we’ll sweeten the pot to not only pay them off – but to give the rest of the SEC teams some walking around money. That would have saved ESPN a boat load of money IMO. Which means it wasn’t about football only.
by GraniteStateNoles on May 17, 2010 12:40 PM EDT up reply actions
4) The networks felt better about the ACC's long-term viability.
Looming threats to the Big 12 and Big East made it a good idea to secure a deal now with the ACC.
Abiaka Windclan
>>>----------------------->
by Abiaka Windclan on May 17, 2010 2:09 PM EDT up reply actions
Basketball was a big factor.
No doubt about it. Interestingly, the basketball product remains attractive to networks even if Florida State, Georgia Tech, Clemson and Miami go elsewhere.
Abiaka Windclan
>>>----------------------->
by Abiaka Windclan on May 17, 2010 2:12 PM EDT up reply actions
I apologize to Swofford too.
I was wondering how he could go from a good AD at UNC to a mediocre commish.
Obviosuly, he didn’t.
Kudos to him and his staff
However, with miami in decline, I wonder what our marketability will look lie 5 years from now.
Apparently, Ann was wrong. :)
by PeachTreeNole on May 17, 2010 1:08 PM EDT up reply actions
After much deliberation with idiots.
The whole “Miami in decline” argument is universally rejected. Fans outside of FL, and casual FSU/Miami fans are unaware, and will argue tooth and nail with the evidence, mostly by cutting and pasting recruiting rankings from rivals and scout.
"I'm just a big, hairy, American winning machine"
by Randall W. Spetman on May 17, 2010 1:28 PM EDT up reply actions
The decline of UM
is only in comparison to where the Big 3 have been. If Miami is a 8-11 win team that is ranked anywhere from 15-25 that is a win for the ACC in comparison to where they have been. With smart scheduling even if they are the 3rd choice for kids in the state the Canes could be a lot like Leach’s Texas Tech teams were in the B12.
by osceolafan850 on May 17, 2010 2:00 PM EDT up reply actions
Bingo. All about perception.
However, if they keep scheduling BCS opponents on neutral sites, their record will suffer, and the rankings will be hurt. However, it would drive their exposure up as it did in 2009
"I'm just a big, hairy, American winning machine"
by Randall W. Spetman on May 17, 2010 2:03 PM EDT up reply actions
Seems like the bidding war
between Fox and ESPN worked out in our favor. I’m glad ESPN won because they provide better coverage and analysts in my opinion. We also should still have some games on Raycom. This is huge news for FSU and the ACC and I bet John Swofford is a very happy man today.
"We didn't lose the game; we just ran out of time." - Vince Lombardi
on top of better analysts
They control a great deal of the public perception. Its nice to know ESPN has a vested interest in seeing the conference succeed.
by Mr. Tito Carlos on May 17, 2010 10:58 AM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
Agreed
I just read that Fox was denied a chance to match ESPN’s offer. Smart move there. An extra $10 million on the contract or whatever definitely isn’t worth having the presence on ESPN, and as you said, the vested interest.
Hockey never recovered from being dropped by ESPN (look how little coverage they get) and boxing suffered in a huge way when they got out of big-time boxing.
The vested interest thing is huge.
Ah, what's the matter?
You don’t like your games broadcast via webcam?
Is it a webcam?
I always thought it was someone’s blackberry, hooked to a satellite.
"I'm just a big, hairy, American winning machine"
by Randall W. Spetman on May 17, 2010 1:30 PM EDT up reply actions
Not quite ...
It’s someone with a blackberry who texts the video to someone who then plays the video on their iPhone. The iPhone video is taped directly off the screen for upload to the satellite.
I agree with all of this, but...
For some reason I was pulling for Fox. I really liked the idea of us and the PAC 10 being on Fox and the wall-to-wall coverage that would provide on Saturdays as well as possible east coast/west coast matchups. Obviously, at the end of the day, the deal with more money is better for FSU and that’s most important. I just like the NFL and NASCAR on Fox and thought college football could/will be good there too.
by SteelerNole21 on May 17, 2010 11:03 AM EDT up reply actions
I don't blame you
But at the end of the day, the Sportcenter factor is a huge deal, as is the cross-promotion between ESPN’s 3-4 channels.
I liked the idea of having a flagship place on a network like Fox. But at the end of the day, ESPN is just too much of a difference maker.
It’s pretty interesting to see how much ESPN values the ACC after all, after how bad our football has been and hearing how much basketball doesn’t matter. Really impressive.
Production values and popular opinion are winners for ESPN over Fox
ESPN IMO does a much better job with college football than Fox. Better broadcasters – better editorial viewpoint during the broadcast (Fox seems to always get side tracked by stupid stuff like mascots, etc).
And ESPN is much more of a shaper of public opinion nationally which I think gets reflected in the media polls, etc.
by GraniteStateNoles on May 17, 2010 12:43 PM EDT up reply actions
Perception matters in modern college football?
Who knows? We may even see some FSU highlights on sportscenter…
Not to mention a little luuuuv for CP7’s Heisman chances. Another little added bonus.
"I'm just a big, hairy, American winning machine"
by Randall W. Spetman on May 17, 2010 1:32 PM EDT up reply actions
In a couple of years
I think Fox’s broadcasts would be fine. They were horrible when they started out with the NFL and NASCAR as well. The problem is that they can’t assault you with coverage the way ESPN can with Sportscenter and CFB live.
by osceolafan850 on May 17, 2010 2:02 PM EDT up reply actions
Regular season ACC Football was being watched
more on ESPN than most of those SEC games even with the product being as bad as it has been. ESPN realized that if they gave up on ACC football and it finally started living up to what we all though it would be after expansion, it would be unbelievable mistake. I think 3 of the top 5 most watched regular season games are from the ACC (number two being MIAMI vr FSU last yr) so imagine what those rating will look like when we are both top 10 teams again. The bidding war may have been because fox wanted basketball but ESPN paid up cause they didn’t want to lose football.
I don't think this is out of the question.
ESPN has first rights to games, but its only going to air so much content. I mean, has anyone heard of any SEC-style requirments for the “ACC game of the week” type matchup? I haven’t. So perhaps ESPN can take first dibs on matchups, and we can link with the Pac-10 for nationwide coverage of non-ESPN Pac-10 and ACC games via the PacACC network. Or whatever you’d want to call it.
I bleed Garnet and piss Gold.
I don't think it works that way
I think ESPN now owns all the games. Anyone that wants a game has to “lease” it from ESPN. So Raycom will be working with the ACC, but will be buying the games from ESPN.
Fox Sports Net could still end up showing ACC hoops, if they buy them from ESPN, which could happen. But it isn’t any additional money for the ACC.
The only possible increase in what I read about is with the Raycom deal. They’ll lease the games from ESPN to show on their broadcast networks. One of the articles said something about Raycom profit sharing with the ACC if the their games get into enough markets.
I have no idea how that would work, and it’s only under discussion right now.
Good thing ESPN didn't get the NCAA tourney
Something tells me this deal wouldn’t have happened if they did.
"I think therefore I am not a Gator"
Great point
Their wallet certainly wouldn’t be burning if they had picked up the tourney
by westcoastnolefan on May 17, 2010 11:06 AM EDT up reply actions
Which is bad for the B12 and P10
Things are about to get dicey for them. ESPN has to run out of dough to bid with sooner or later, so one or both of them might end up on Fox. This would be good from a money perspective but ESPN does not give the same coverage to teams they do not cover. That will hurt the national profile of the dominant teams and make it harder for other teams to rise. If only one of them goes they are screwed because ESPN could almost ignore them completely.
by osceolafan850 on May 17, 2010 11:21 AM EDT up reply actions
And who bids against Fox to up the contract?
Without ESPN in the bidding war, the B12 and P10 may get what Fox wants them to have because the network is in the driver’s seat.
"I think therefore I am not a Gator"
by Jamil Dawson on May 17, 2010 11:23 AM EDT up reply actions
ESPN will put in a bid
and I am sure the bid will be for more than the conferences get now. The question is how big a raise they get. Without a bidding war I doubt they double their money and then sum like the other conferences.
by osceolafan850 on May 17, 2010 12:38 PM EDT up reply actions
I think ESPN will next go after the Pac 10
It fits their model of running games from right after College GameDay until late in the evening on Saturdays.
Depending on how much cash is left – Fox may pull the Big 12 and Big East (or what’s left of it). Also wouldn’t be surprised to see Fox take the Mountain West at some point.
by GraniteStateNoles on May 17, 2010 12:45 PM EDT up reply actions
It'll be interesting to see how this affects the B12/PAC10 in regard to them creating their own network.
Fox may be SOL all the way around if they decided to team up (which may not be a bad idea, IMO….that’s a lot of geography for one sports network)
"I'm just a big, hairy, American winning machine"
by Randall W. Spetman on May 17, 2010 1:34 PM EDT up reply actions
Perhaps we can edge in with them and create a Pac-10/B12/ACC network?
Wishful thinking, but I think such a network “could” out-earn the SEC and Big 10. Maybe not COMBINED, but you get my point.
I bleed Garnet and piss Gold.
Pretty sure that a condition of ESPN's deal
will be NO ACC network – just as it was a condition of the SEC’s deal.
by GraniteStateNoles on May 18, 2010 12:42 AM EDT up reply actions
There is some ACC Network via Raycom talks according to the article.
Thought I read that somewhere at least.
MiNDSET? SWAG-ER-ISM!!!
---------------------------------------------------------
"Trick is right."
"Wherever you are, Trick, you are wise, indeed."
It's not really a network
It’s just that the games will be branded “ACC Network” like the SEC’s 12:00 games were this year. They will still originate with ESPN and be leased by Raycom.
I don’t think it is any actual step in the process toward a real network (which should be prohibited by this deal), other than possibly putting the name “ACC Network” into the public consciousness. It’s nothing more than a branding change.
To put it another way, the SEC already has this exact same thing, and nobody thinks of them as having a network or moving toward one. Most people have probably not even noticed that it exists.
Amazing news.
I hope apart of the deal was ESPN telling the ACC to stop screwing us over with BS calls.
Seriously.
by Legal_Seminole on May 17, 2010 11:15 AM EDT reply actions
Will someone please breakdown for me how this affects expansion!?!!?
/MattDNole
by coonhound on May 17, 2010 11:24 AM EDT reply actions 2 recs
Dude, Kevin Nash and Scott Hall are going to be PISSED when we retract our expansion invitation!
The real Spetman may get Razors Edged, if he ain’t careful.
"I'm just a big, hairy, American winning machine"
by Randall W. Spetman on May 17, 2010 1:36 PM EDT up reply actions
Don't worry, NC State will join them regardless
They are Wolfpack for life after all!
Team Gold - Winner of the 1st TN FSU Spring Football Fantasy Draft
Expansion is dead
Expansion is dead for everyone except for the Big 10 and Pac 10.
Not at all.
First you forgot the Big East. But that aside, once these deals are up (SEC and ACC finishing roughly the same time), expansion will likely be looked at again. Mega conference expansion is on the back burner but definitely not dead, imo.
MiNDSET? SWAG-ER-ISM!!!
---------------------------------------------------------
"Trick is right."
"Wherever you are, Trick, you are wise, indeed."
I think
ESPN picked up the ACC because of how sorry SEC basketball is. Instead of watching Ole MISS at MISS ST and ARKANSAS @ UGA. They can get great ACC games with top programs such as UNC, Duke, Maryland, FSU, GA TECH, CLEMSON, and VA TECH. ESPN is always the best choice for coverage since thats all they do. FOX can’t give 24/7 exposure like ESPN does. And everyone and their mother watches SPORTSCENTER and other ESPN programming. GREAT NEWS!
by DeanerNoleProphet on May 17, 2010 11:25 AM EDT reply actions
Fox has to be scrambling.
They want to stay active in college sports. They just lost out of the ACC football and basketball rights and they no longer have the BCS. Yes, they have NASCAR, NFL, and MLB but I think they really wanted into the college game to gain viewers both on the tube and, as Bud pointed out, online.
"Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable."
"But How will I know limits from lies, if I never try."
by geoffissiffoeg on May 17, 2010 11:45 AM EDT reply actions
You have to wonder how this impacts their market strategy.
I mean, seriously. A single conference deal with the PAC10? Compared to what they already cover (listed above), is it worth the money/effort just to stay viable in college athletics?
"I'm just a big, hairy, American winning machine"
by Randall W. Spetman on May 17, 2010 1:39 PM EDT up reply actions
Pac 10 and Big 12 may cooperate on a TV deal.
The rumour is all over the Net. It must be true.
; )
Abiaka Windclan
>>>----------------------->
by Abiaka Windclan on May 17, 2010 2:15 PM EDT up reply actions
Good point
"Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable."
"But How will I know limits from lies, if I never try."
by geoffissiffoeg on May 18, 2010 6:05 PM EDT up reply actions
Not Raycom
We’ll still be on Raycom, but Raycom will “buy” the games from ESPN. So no additional money in the pot from Raycom.
Don’t know anything about Sunshine.
Will this effect
other areas of revenue over time for the ACC as a whole, and the schools individualy? Ticket sales, merchendice etc.
Unconquered 2010 GO NOLES !
by Renegade_NOL3 on May 17, 2010 12:00 PM EDT via mobile reply actions
maybe
it could in the sense that increased conference exposure gets fans more excited, and these fans spend more money on their favorite programs in the for of tickets, jerseys, etc.
But ultimately, not really, no.
by Mr. Tito Carlos on May 17, 2010 12:14 PM EDT up reply actions
Wow, awesome
Way more than I was expecting. This certainly sweetens the pot for staying in the ACC. Definitely makes things more interesting.
Thank you ACC B-Ball
for being the #1 reason that this awsome deal was made!!!
Jacksonville Seminole Club @ jaxnoles.com
1st Coast Gridiron @ 1stcoastgridiron.com
I think the basketball piece was the main driver for ESPN
in this deal.
by GraniteStateNoles on May 17, 2010 12:46 PM EDT up reply actions
Agreed
Swofford leveraged basketball very well in this contract. Thanks coach K and Roy Williams!
Accountabilty is back in Tallahassee....
Don't forget Seth Greenberg!
"I'm just a big, hairy, American winning machine"
by Randall W. Spetman on May 17, 2010 1:40 PM EDT up reply actions
This deal would not have happened without Leonard Hamilton driving the FSU BBall bus.

>-----:----:------>Spearing 'em and Scalping 'em like it's 1999
"I want you guys to line up alphabetically by height," and,
"I want you guys to pair up in groups of three and then line up in a circle."
Coach Bill Peterson
I was going to go with a Ham joke, but I wanted to leave the door open for a seasoned veteran to post funny Ham pic
"I'm just a big, hairy, American winning machine"
by Randall W. Spetman on May 17, 2010 1:53 PM EDT up reply actions
I thought it was a train, per Cameron.
MiNDSET? SWAG-ER-ISM!!!
---------------------------------------------------------
"Trick is right."
"Wherever you are, Trick, you are wise, indeed."
Thanks, Duke
We’re sorry for all the things we said about you during football season.
Abiaka Windclan
>>>----------------------->
by Abiaka Windclan on May 17, 2010 2:18 PM EDT up reply actions
Do we have a count of ACC games televised on ESPN
compared, e.g., with the SEC?
Accountabilty is back in Tallahassee....
way too early. Doesn't even start till 2011-2012 year.
Ponder lacks arm strength? Think again.
Tomahawk Nation: Nole-Holds-Barred Analysis of FSU Sports!
Follow Tomahawk Nation's Twitter feed!
by Bud Elliott on May 17, 2010 12:38 PM EDT up reply actions
I hope there's a >= % of FB games shown than Basketball
It’s obvious that our basketball programs carried a lot of weight in this contract.
Accountabilty is back in Tallahassee....
Basketball
Kind of funny that many, including myself, didnt think basketball really had a lot of pull but now it seems that it was an important factor to them signing for this amount of $
I think that basketball might be a bigger deal
now that these digital broadband broadcasts are in play. You go from having three channels to fill to basically a limitless amount.
Say, Wednesday night at 9 pm, the rating for a basketball game between Maryland vs. Georgia Tech may only be marginally better than Tennessee vs. Vanderbilt. Probably not worth paying a great deal more. You can cherry pick the few games every week you broadcast.
However, if you look at having broadband rights, there won’t be just that one game, you’ve got the entire night’s slate of conference action every night. In that case, the entire ACC basketball slate is worth way, way more than covering the entire SEC basketball slate.
ESPN 3 is worth way more with all ACC basketball basketball games covered than all SEC basketball.
Not only ACC basketball, but what about the impact on FSU basketball?
A 2011 team consisting of Snaer, Milller, White, Shannon, Gibson, and maybe-but-probably-not Singleton getting some exposure on ESPN?
One of the biggest hindrances to FSU basketball (outside of offense, of course) is exposure. Nobody gets to see us unless we’re playing Duke or UNC.
With a successful squad, this could be a significant contract for FSU basketball as well.
"I'm just a big, hairy, American winning machine"
by Randall W. Spetman on May 17, 2010 1:52 PM EDT up reply actions
Kreft and James, also?
MiNDSET? SWAG-ER-ISM!!!
---------------------------------------------------------
"Trick is right."
"Wherever you are, Trick, you are wise, indeed."
Oooh, forgot about Kreft.
"I'm just a big, hairy, American winning machine"
by Randall W. Spetman on May 17, 2010 4:51 PM EDT up reply actions
Seriously, how short sighted of you.
Crack addicts and 29 year olds totally move the needle on ESPN programming.
sigh….
The world is getting flatter.
Basketball is a huge draw internationally in a way that American football is not.
ESPN knows this well. Millions of people in Asia watch sports on ESPN every day. They know the Timberwolves and Mavericks and Rockets. They follow the players and they buy the merch.
The same people don’t know a New England Patriot from a New Jersey Turnpike, and don’t consider their lives any poorer for that. A network promoting a Florida State-Virginia Tech gridiron game goes nowhere. The same network can get a huge audience for a hoops game between North Carolina and Duke without even trying. The audience is already in it. This is their game.
Abiaka Windclan
>>>----------------------->
by Abiaka Windclan on May 17, 2010 2:00 PM EDT up reply actions
I heard that JJ Redick had the top selling jersey in all of China when he was a senior.
"I'm just a big, hairy, American winning machine"
by Randall W. Spetman on May 17, 2010 2:05 PM EDT up reply actions
American basketball in China is a big deal
Especially the NBA (Kobe is a God over there), and I’m pretty sure that NCAA basketball is increasing in popularity, too.
"I'm just a big, hairy, American winning machine"
by Randall W. Spetman on May 17, 2010 4:54 PM EDT up reply actions
ACC basketball does...
I would think that if this were any other conference not named the Big East, it wouldn’t have had the same amount of leverage.
"I'm just a big, hairy, American winning machine"
by Randall W. Spetman on May 17, 2010 1:42 PM EDT up reply actions
Speaking of the Big East...
As we have seen, networks are paying money for a good basketball product. As we have also seen, Fox has some money to spend. With the ACC now under contract, the Big East can still make a go of it.
Abiaka Windclan
>>>----------------------->
by Abiaka Windclan on May 17, 2010 2:05 PM EDT up reply actions
Not for the same amount
Even though the programs are down, FSU and Miami are still big time draws. The Big East doesn’t have anyone to match up. You also get FSU-UF and UGA-Ga Tech when the ACC teams are at home. ACC and Big East bball are near equal in worth but ACC football is worth much more than BE football.
by osceolafan850 on May 17, 2010 2:10 PM EDT up reply actions
Onward
Looks like the ACC is in it for the long haul. It’s more than a survivor; it’s a major player. There are worse things than being the third-richest conference in college sports.
The conference still has much to gain by connecting the big TV-market dots that lie between Boston College and its other member schools. Adding some combination of Syracuse, Rutgers, Pittsburgh and Connecticut, if it can, gives the league even more appeal. That appeal and muscle is immediate in basketball. As we have just seen, basketball still counts.
Expansion of this sort has been in the league’s interest for seven years now. It may have just moved up the priority list for those schools as well, and for ESPN.
Abiaka Windclan
>>>----------------------->
by Abiaka Windclan on May 17, 2010 1:47 PM EDT reply actions
The ACC has the next decade now to position itself
They can’t get caught with their pants down this time – they’re going to get the next crack with this contract running out before the SEC. Whether it be with another TV contract, another network, their own network, expansion, whatever.
This deal keeps them in the fight. Getting a deal for $80 million a year, a number that had been thrown around, would have put them so far behind it wouldn’t have mattered. But now they’ve got 12 years to figure out how to close that value gap between the SEC and ACC.
In 2011, I'll be interested in
seeing how the ACC competes with the SEC for the Saturday night games on ESPN. SEC games have dominated the ESPN night games.
That said, I’m looking forward to never having to ask this question: what channel is the FSU game on???
Accountabilty is back in Tallahassee....
You still will have to ask that question
ABC, ESPN, ESPN2, ESPNU and ESPN3 are always options.
by osceolafan850 on May 17, 2010 3:08 PM EDT up reply actions
I agree...
but what do they do to get ACC schools serious about football?
Expansion is dead for the ACC
unless they are prepared to create a network or one of the Big East teams becomes a power around the time this contract ends. Bringing in another team would mean less money per school which would put us deeper in the hole compared to the SEC and B10. All Big East teams that don’t go to the B10 are now stuck in that conference.
by osceolafan850 on May 17, 2010 2:13 PM EDT up reply actions
Not sure if it's dead yet
But I suspect that this puts up a pretty solid defense against being raided.
Not sure it’s totally dead. This puts the ACC in the position to be an aggressor potentially.
If you interpret this (and I’m not too sure you correctly can) to say “basketball doesn’t generate value in TV contracts, but PREMIER, TOP SHELF basketball does”, well then, you have a pretty interesting proposition there.
Try this on for size. Add Pitt, WVA, UCONN and Syracuse for football. Also add Georgetown, Villanova, Notre Dame and St. Johns (or whatever non-football playing schools would be most valuable) for a 20-team conference (just make sure you don’t include Cincinatti under any circumstances), with 16 of them playing football. You think that could support an independent ACC network?
I’m not saying the ACC should do this, I’m just saying it makes an interesting proposition.
If the ACC is able to shore up it’s members, as the TV contract would indicate it has, and the SEC is unable to lure Texas and/or Oklahoma because of the proposed Pac 10/Big 12 TV situation, you might actually see the ACC with the strongest hand if the super-conferences start to materialize.
Nobody is moving
unless ESPN is willing to pony up and give them more money. But if it is taking Billion dollar+ contracts for them to keep conferences I can’t see them willing to redo contracts. Without that neither the SEC or ACC are about to expand just to cut down on the amount of money each school gets. If the SEC did it then suddenly they aren’t making more than the ACC. If the ACC did it then they would be way behind the SEC.
And nobody wants partial members. That, more than anything else, is what is slowly killing the Big East. Not only would a 20 team conference be hard to control and schedule, but the basketball only schools would feel like 2nd class citizens and they would be. The difference in payouts they received would be gigantic because of their lack of football. But most importantly both the ACC and SEC conference commissioners have said they don’t want to expand.
by osceolafan850 on May 17, 2010 10:35 PM EDT up reply actions
I think expansion involving the ACC is dead for now
If ESPN wants to grab the Big East for basketball – they’ll just make an offer. They don’t need it to be part of the ACC.
I’m sure part of our deal with ESPN is that we will not form or explore an ACC network. Or maybe that point is moot because ESPN owns our TV rights for football and basketball – so we can form a network – but its going to have to be baseball and tennis and golf that we air on it.
I also think if the deal as reported is accurate that NO team will defect to the SEC now. There’s not enough motivation.
by GraniteStateNoles on May 18, 2010 12:49 AM EDT up reply actions
Rutgers
The Big 10 will fight us tooth and nail for Rutgers, but we may still have a shot at Louisville.
by SeminoleMike on May 17, 2010 3:55 PM EDT up reply actions
But what concerns me most is how this is going to affect the possibility of a 8, 12, or 16-team college football playoff.
Someone should post a fanpost with their thoughts about this subject now that the likelihood of SEC raping the ACC in their quest to expand has somewhat diminished.
>-----:----:------>Spearing 'em and Scalping 'em like it's 1999
"I want you guys to line up alphabetically by height," and,
"I want you guys to pair up in groups of three and then line up in a circle."
Coach Bill Peterson
Frank... clearly the football playoff will be a 17 team deal...
Seeds 1-12: The SEC
Seeds 13-16: The Big Ten, Big 12, Pac-10, ACC Champions
Seed 17: Notre Dame
The Big East can send their champion only when the SEC has a team that is 0-12. In that case, it still requires a 2/3 vote in the US Senate and 3/4 state ratification.
It’s the only fair and logical method.
Warmest Regards,
SEC Blowhard
by coonhound on May 17, 2010 3:34 PM EDT up reply actions 6 recs
Well, we could start writing fan posts inquiring about the status of CJ Mizell and Willie Downs...
BTW- does Callahan Bright have any eligibility remaining?
He's been working out with Dishon Platt
"I'm just a big, hairy, American winning machine"
by Randall W. Spetman on May 17, 2010 5:09 PM EDT up reply actions
True story, I’ve known Dishon Platt since I was approx 11 years old and my brother lived with one of his family members of the same last name at FSU
365 days, until I change my ways.
Right... and next you'll tell us that Jared Jones stole your hotdogs, you went shrooming with Wyatt Sexton,
and frequented the JCKC dog track with Adrian McPherson
Insulting? Come on! I guess I should have included my favorite disclaimer, "With All Due Respect" or "No Disrespect Intended" for those who might find my comment insulting instead of just good natured ribbing.
>-----:----:------>Spearing 'em and Scalping 'em like it's 1999
"I want you guys to line up alphabetically by height," and,
"I want you guys to pair up in groups of three and then line up in a circle."
Coach Bill Peterson
And now that the deal's done, we want our dad gum 30 on 30!
And it better be full of Saint Bobby is Great and Jimbo is his anointed God-son, so here come the noles crap.
Giddy-up!
I wish it included baseball but can't get everything.
I’m still very happy about the deal. :)
GO NOLES!!! SCALP EM!
Well, looks like Hoops was worth more than people thought (including me)...
I thought Hoops mattered very little because nobody really watches regular season college basketball.
Just to add...
If Hoops made a big difference (as I think it did), I wonder how much it helped that Duke/UNC won the last two titles?
And the conference winning 5 of the last 10.
"I think therefore I am not a Gator"
by Jamil Dawson on May 17, 2010 4:40 PM EDT up reply actions
I think this is more about competition than it is about basketball
I am sure hoops was a part of it but not enough to get this bump. A big factor is ESPN has a lot of air time they have to fill. That inflated how much they needed ACC basketball. But the biggest reason for the bump is just pure competition. The SEC got the deal they did in part because ESPN didn’t want them to form their own network like the B10, thus introducing a form of competition for the rights. With us Fox wanting in on college sports, and having very deep pockets, forced ESPN to go much higher than they originally felt the ACC was worth.
by osceolafan850 on May 17, 2010 3:57 PM EDT up reply actions
Another relevant article about the "Raycom" aspect of the deal...
It will be branded the ACC Network like the SEC does with their regional distribution.
Here’s the most interesting part…
There have been some discussions about the possibility of revenue-sharing between the ACC and Raycom should the distribution of the ACC Network increase during the life of the 12-year deal, but no decisions have been made on that front. Right now, the ACC Network would have about 27 million possible viewers.
by LouC on May 17, 2010 3:55 PM EDT reply actions 1 recs
27 Million viewers...
how does that compare to the Big 10?
Currently?
I’m not sure where they get the 27 million. There are a lot more than that in VA, NC, GA and FL alone. Unless they think only 1/2 of those would watch.
MiNDSET? SWAG-ER-ISM!!!
---------------------------------------------------------
"Trick is right."
"Wherever you are, Trick, you are wise, indeed."
Maybe he meant households?
But even 27 million households seems small for the ACC states.
Maybe.
I don’t know if that’s low or not though. The BT shares their territory with no one really. The ACC shares FL, GA and SC with the SEC.
MiNDSET? SWAG-ER-ISM!!!
---------------------------------------------------------
"Trick is right."
"Wherever you are, Trick, you are wise, indeed."
Methinks
it might have something to do with not having a Raycom affiliate in all areas?
"Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable."
"But How will I know limits from lies, if I never try."
by geoffissiffoeg on May 17, 2010 10:26 PM EDT up reply actions
I haven't the faintest.
MiNDSET? SWAG-ER-ISM!!!
---------------------------------------------------------
"Trick is right."
"Wherever you are, Trick, you are wise, indeed."
I'm pretty sure that's the case
They own stations, and I don’t know if they own any in Boston, or Baltimore or whatever.
BTN is in 45 million households
Not all are basic tier viewers though.
That's one reason I'm interested in an ACC Network
The BTN gets 70 cents per subscription in its home states. If for those 27 million viewers the ACC got 50 cents, that’s 13.5 million a month. I think there would be more subscribers in the ACC area, though.
I would be interested in reading more about a potential ACC Network (now some years away, it seems): the problems with starting and operating one and negotiating deals with cable providers; the potential profits and other sources of income (advertising, web-access to events, etc.), potential number of subscribers (with considerations for possible expansion scenarios), and such.
Is there ANY chance a network gets up and going even before the new deal expires? Could a network survive on the left over games, reruns, and special programs (spring games, season reviews/previews, etc.) it would be able to run in the meantime? Doubtful, if the SEC hasn’t done it yet… but I do like the idea of an ACC network. Hmm.
I was hoping FOX would win
Just because I thought FSU could turn the “ACC on FOX” into their own de facto national TV deal like how UF has turned the “SEC on CBS” into their own de facto national TV deal.
It would’ve been nice to know that FSU wouldn’t have to deal with the ABC 3:30 regional crunch anymore.
Big Cat Country, The #1 Jaguars blog on the net
by Jonathan Loesche on May 17, 2010 4:00 PM EDT reply actions
Fox can't brainwash people like ESPN can.
"I'm just a big, hairy, American winning machine"
by Randall W. Spetman on May 17, 2010 4:52 PM EDT up reply actions
Fox is not in the business of brainwashing. Fox is "Fair and Balanced" and the voice of reason.
>-----:----:------>Spearing 'em and Scalping 'em like it's 1999
"I want you guys to line up alphabetically by height," and,
"I want you guys to pair up in groups of three and then line up in a circle."
Coach Bill Peterson
That's Fox News
Fox is in the business of mind numbing with comedy
"Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable."
"But How will I know limits from lies, if I never try."
by geoffissiffoeg on May 17, 2010 10:31 PM EDT up reply actions
Only with their "news entertainment" channel....
Oderint Dum Metuant
by DRusso97 on May 17, 2010 11:00 PM EDT via mobile up reply actions
Yeah but
The whole “SEC is NFL-lite” mantra started well before ESPN basically joined them at the hip. It wasn’t like CBS having their main game each week hurt them.
Big Cat Country, The #1 Jaguars blog on the net
by Jonathan Loesche on May 18, 2010 12:43 PM EDT up reply actions
Can someone tell me if the SEC Deal with ESPN was for all sports (baseball too) or if baseball came later?
Is it possible that I may see ACC Baseball on ESPN in the near future? I’m tired of seeing only SEC Baseball on ESPN.
The initial report I read said football and basketball only.
"I'm just a big, hairy, American winning machine"
by Randall W. Spetman on May 17, 2010 4:55 PM EDT up reply actions
I think it's all sports.
Since women’s softball and baseball are all over ESPN now.
MiNDSET? SWAG-ER-ISM!!!
---------------------------------------------------------
"Trick is right."
"Wherever you are, Trick, you are wise, indeed."
It's all sports.
Ponder lacks arm strength? Think again.
Tomahawk Nation: Nole-Holds-Barred Analysis of FSU Sports!
Follow Tomahawk Nation's Twitter feed!
I'm getting 11.92M/year/school in the ACC and 12.5M/year/school in the SEC via their deals with ESPN.
2.25B/15 years/12 schools = 12.5M/year/school SEC
1.86B/12 years/13 parties = 11.92M/year/school ACC
No?
MiNDSET? SWAG-ER-ISM!!!
---------------------------------------------------------
"Trick is right."
"Wherever you are, Trick, you are wise, indeed."
Why can't the ACC get a deal with Raycom like the SEC has with CBS?
Obviously not for the same amount of money, but something is better than nothing? Why let Raycom purchase games from ESPN and not buy our rights outright?
MiNDSET? SWAG-ER-ISM!!!
---------------------------------------------------------
"Trick is right."
"Wherever you are, Trick, you are wise, indeed."
Because we got more from espn than we'd get separately from Raycom
Ponder lacks arm strength? Think again.
Tomahawk Nation: Nole-Holds-Barred Analysis of FSU Sports!
Follow Tomahawk Nation's Twitter feed!
Not following.
The SEC gets more from ESPN than they do CBS, also. Why can’t we sell the rest of our games to Fox (or anyone) instead of letting Raycom purchase them from ESPN? What money does the ACC get from Raycom?
MiNDSET? SWAG-ER-ISM!!!
---------------------------------------------------------
"Trick is right."
"Wherever you are, Trick, you are wise, indeed."
ESPN paid for the games to sell them
If we withled them we’d get less money.
Ponder lacks arm strength? Think again.
Tomahawk Nation: Nole-Holds-Barred Analysis of FSU Sports!
Follow Tomahawk Nation's Twitter feed!
SEC gets over 200 mil per
so their number is much higher.
Ponder lacks arm strength? Think again.
Tomahawk Nation: Nole-Holds-Barred Analysis of FSU Sports!
Follow Tomahawk Nation's Twitter feed!
Those are per teams numbers through each conferences' ESPN contract.
MiNDSET? SWAG-ER-ISM!!!
---------------------------------------------------------
"Trick is right."
"Wherever you are, Trick, you are wise, indeed."
That's not accurate.
The difference is 5 Mil per year.
Ponder lacks arm strength? Think again.
Tomahawk Nation: Nole-Holds-Barred Analysis of FSU Sports!
Follow Tomahawk Nation's Twitter feed!
$12 million per year. That’s almost 3X what the teams were making under the old deal. SEC schools get roughly $17 million each from their TV deals. That’s $ 5 Million more per SEC school per year, but the ACC closed the gap in somewhat major fashion.
Ponder lacks arm strength? Think again.
Tomahawk Nation: Nole-Holds-Barred Analysis of FSU Sports!
Follow Tomahawk Nation's Twitter feed!
What's confusing everyone is that the ESPN contracts for the SEC and ACC are
similar. But the difference is in the money CBS gives the SEC for the major game of choice.
So you can say that ESPN paid almost the same for ACC football as SEC football, but they bought the SEC package without the most attractive SEC games. So ESPN still values SEC football more. But the difference is certainly less than anticipated, especially when you factor in the recession.
Now, if we kick butt (as a conference) in football for the next 12 years, we might just be able to sell off one game a week to Fox or something else like the SEC does to CBS. But we’re not strong enough now (yet).
Right. ESPN got the ENTIRE ACC for less than it paid for some of the SEC.
Ponder lacks arm strength? Think again.
Tomahawk Nation: Nole-Holds-Barred Analysis of FSU Sports!
Follow Tomahawk Nation's Twitter feed!
Including multiple TV contracts though
Using just the ESPN numbers we got a really competitive rate.
Team Gold!
But that is not relevant because we sold all our rights, so
we must compare our deal to what the SEC got for all its rights.
Which is 12 mil v. 17 mil
Ponder lacks arm strength? Think again.
Tomahawk Nation: Nole-Holds-Barred Analysis of FSU Sports!
Follow Tomahawk Nation's Twitter feed!
No, I already addressed this in the original post
$12 million per year. That’s almost 3X what the teams were making under the old deal. SEC schools get roughly $17 million each from their TV deals. That’s $ 5 Million more per SEC school per year, but the ACC closed the gap in somewhat major fashion.
Ponder lacks arm strength? Think again.
Tomahawk Nation: Nole-Holds-Barred Analysis of FSU Sports!
Follow Tomahawk Nation's Twitter feed!
is that $17M per SEC school currently,
or did you calculate the diluted number per school if they were to share the pie after adding FSU and miami?
Apparently, Ann was wrong. :)
by PeachTreeNole on May 17, 2010 5:50 PM EDT up reply actions
lol #Expansion
Ponder lacks arm strength? Think again.
Tomahawk Nation: Nole-Holds-Barred Analysis of FSU Sports!
Follow Tomahawk Nation's Twitter feed!
I'm assuming its calculating the status quo.
Diluting the SEC share with FSU and miami taking part would show there is little reason for FSU to jump to the SEC now, with all the extra baggage and loss of ACC academic synergies which would go along with that.
Apparently, Ann was wrong. :)
by PeachTreeNole on May 17, 2010 5:53 PM EDT up reply actions
Perhaps I missed it somewhere, but will someone please explain it to me again???
Why does the ACC divide their share by 13 and the SEC only 12?
What benefits does the share allocated to “the conference” purchase for the member teams of the ACC?
ACC conference office gets a share.
Ponder lacks arm strength? Think again.
Tomahawk Nation: Nole-Holds-Barred Analysis of FSU Sports!
Follow Tomahawk Nation's Twitter feed!
by Bud Elliott on May 19, 2010 12:00 PM EDT up reply actions
What all do they do with that share?
What are the operating expenses? Is there some way to come up with the needed revenue another way? How do other confs pay for these things? Anything that would put more money in the universities’ pockets would be good for us, I’d think.
Here's what I was trying to ask, perhaps I phrased it poorly
Why does the ACC conference office need a share when the SEC conference office does not need one?
Here's hoping this "ACC Network" is successful with Raycom and we can expand that somehow.
Maybe the precursor to a stand alone ACC Network in 12 years…
MiNDSET? SWAG-ER-ISM!!!
---------------------------------------------------------
"Trick is right."
"Wherever you are, Trick, you are wise, indeed."
ACC Network
is more of a branding thing. I don’t think it is something that could be spun off into its own network. Just means when Raycom shows our games they have to say they are on the ACC network.
by osceolafan850 on May 17, 2010 10:43 PM EDT up reply actions
Don't know but it should still be looked at starting in 12 years.
MiNDSET? SWAG-ER-ISM!!!
---------------------------------------------------------
"Trick is right."
"Wherever you are, Trick, you are wise, indeed."
Non Conference...
You guys think we will see more Non Conference basketball games on ESPN?
by NolesHeatBraves on May 17, 2010 6:59 PM EDT reply actions
yes
Ponder lacks arm strength? Think again.
Tomahawk Nation: Nole-Holds-Barred Analysis of FSU Sports!
Follow Tomahawk Nation's Twitter feed!
I was hoping there'd be some good news to read while i'm on break.
Poof! Here it is. I’m thrilled to only be 5 million/team behind the SEC.
......and let the paramedics sort 'em out!
ESPN has just increased their level of SWAGGER.
>-----:----:------>Spearing 'em and Scalping 'em like it's 1999
"I want you guys to line up alphabetically by height," and,
"I want you guys to pair up in groups of three and then line up in a circle."
Coach Bill Peterson
So I haven't seen it thusfar... How does this break down versus other non-SEC conferences?
Do we currently stand at third following BTN and SEC? Or does the Big 12 edge us out still? Whats the status?
I bleed Garnet and piss Gold.
Big Twelve schools make about 6.7 million per year in the old agreement. They will be renegotiating soon, though- if they aren’t already.
Art Modell gives me a hard one
Solid third right now among conferences
At least until the TV contracts come up for the PAC 10 and Big 12 in the next couple years.
I heard one thing the NCAA might do to try to prevent more expansion/chaos than is necessary is go ahead and approve championship games for 10-team conferences. Thinking that may keep the Pac 10 happy without pulling Colorado, keep the Big 12 together minus Nebraska and Missouri, and possibly give the Big East a fighting chance to get to a championship game.
Big East will have trouble getting up to 10 football members
Right now they are split with 8 teams that play football and 8 that don’t, stopping either side from running the conference when it comes to voting issues. But if they were to add more football members then they would have the majority to tilt every vote in favor of the football playing members. Georgetown and company will never vote to expand like that reason. Some of the basketball only members feel they would be completely fine if all the football playing members left anyway.
As for where the per team payout sits, we are third now and I think we end up there when all is said and done. The P10 might have a chance to challenge, because they are needed for all day football, but their time slot also hurts them because most of their late games are too late for half of the country. The B12, even with Texas and OU, is full of small markets and even if ESPN lost them the time slots they fill could be replaced with teams from the B10, ACC and SEC.
by osceolafan850 on May 17, 2010 10:58 PM EDT up reply actions
PAC 10 basketball is worth nearly nothing
I was reading a PAC 10 blog. Their TV package now is undervalued mainly due to the households in the market, and they expect a big jump because of that. As a percentage wise maybe as much as the ACC got. But they don’t think it will approach the ACC numbers because their basketball just has no value to the networks. I think they were hoping for around $100 mil a year.
You need the Pac 10
to have all day football. After he 3:30 est game most conferences are almost completely done with their slate of games. The Pac10 allows games to go well into the evening EST. If ESPN were to lose the P10 then whoever gets them becomes the spot for football in the evening. Loss of the P10 also means the loss of the LA market, which would hurt. For those reasons I think ESPN ponies up for the P10, although not to the extent of what they have done for the SEC and ACC.
by osceolafan850 on May 18, 2010 2:54 PM EDT up reply actions
Agree with osceloafan on the Big 12
Assuming its only Nebraska and Mizzou that leaves there is only 1 most have game from the networks perspective the Red River Shootout. There is not another game from that conference that would be a guaranteed or likely national game. That is not to say there will be other games that will be national games but they will mostly be that because of a surprise team versus Texas or there is no other game worth a damn on and Texas is playing a ranked opponent. The ACC benefits because there will always be 1 national game (FSU/UM) and every other year 2 (FSU/uf) and a strong likelihood of additional games that have nation wide appeal as well as some strong teams with regional appeal. The Big12 just does not have the TV sets outside of texas for games with strong regional appeal.
And of course UM will supply some big games for the ACC
I hear they’re playing teams like Ohio State, Notre Dame, and all that…
Not surprised
The ACC’s basketball reputation is at a peak right now with the last two national champions being from our conference and I think ESPN understood that the football side has great potential, if FSU and Miami can get back to winning consistently again. VT has at least been a place holder for the conference in early season national championship discussions, even though they never seem to have the offense to be a serious threat.
I got roundly dissed a week or so ago on a TN blog when I defended the ACC while many posters were wringing their hands and praying for the mighty SEC to offer FSU a spot lest we and the ACC be relegated to the backwaters (near 1-AA status) of college football. The SEC love was palatable. Many of the posts I’m seeing today now have some of the same points I was making then. Is watching Miss State play Arkansas any better than watching Virginia play North Carolina? Watch out for NC this year BTW.
I love saying I told you so . . . .
here is something that not many might mention, but
if inflation gets to double digits, 12 years later,, that 12 million a year is not going to buy much.
I think ESPN is pretty smart to have these long term contracts..

by 





























