Started By
Message
re: ESPN would facilitate the SEC poaching VT/NCST from the ACC.
Posted on 7/2/15 at 10:44 am to Jamie Lannister
Posted on 7/2/15 at 10:44 am to Jamie Lannister
quote:
Rivalries is what makes college football what it is.
Realignment kills rivalries because $$ mean more. See A&M/UTx, Arky/UTx, NU/OU, KU/Mizzou.
quote:
The ACC contract means any program that violates can't get tv revenue until 2027. That makes it a stable conference. Teams will lose money to bolt for SEC and would take a long time to even break even.
I agree that the ACC is stable for most, if not all, of their agreement.
quote:
If you win the ACC, you are basically a lock for the playoff.
If FSU loses a game last year, they don't make the playoff. No conference is a lock, not even the SEC, but with the addition of Notre Dame, I put the ACC probably on the same competitive level as the PAC or B1G, or maybe slightly lower. Definitely above the B12, though.
1
Posted on 7/2/15 at 10:45 am to Mirthomatic
quote:
What if the B1G and SEC are outearning the ACC by $15M a year? What if, by sending UNC to the B1G and NCST to the SEC, the state of North Carolina could realize a $30M annual increase to the budgets of their top two institutions? That kind of windfall can't just be dismissed.
why would the payout gap get any larger than it currently is? If sec and big renegotiate tv contracts then the acc will too
Posted on 7/2/15 at 10:49 am to Jamie Lannister
quote:
If you look at distance of schools from VA tech, most of their close rivals are in the ACC, The ones furthur away including their old rivals from the big east, BC and Miami.
They've also rarely played SEC programs.
If ACC would tweak the conference so that all the teams played each other more, I don't think there would be any difference b/t ACC and SEC ticket revenue. Right now Clemson and VA Tech still only play like every 8 years and that should be a matchup ACC tries to have every year.
ACC is supposedly looking at going to 3 divisions
I can't speak for VT, but do they have any real rivals other than Virginia?
I think the ACC could do a better job scheduling, as you suggest, but that still wouldn't help ACC reach SEC ticket revenue levels. You're just always going to have more sellouts w/ an SEC schedule than you would for ACC.
How would the ACC divide into 3 divisions? Are they considering taking on UConn or something? Are they going to put Notre Dame in a division?
Posted on 7/2/15 at 10:49 am to tylerdurden24
quote:
People are bored and the Big 12 mentioned considering picking up 2 more teams if the championship game rule doesn't deregulate to allow them to do one with 10 teams.
The Big 12 didn't even mention expansion. The President of OU did, and quite frankly when it comes to Big 12 expansion so far he hasn't gotten what he has wanted up to this point. It is kinda a non-story.
The big shock factor in all of it for me is how many people are living and breathing lagging indicators. I remember being frustrated back in 2010 and 2011 when it came to talking about realignment as many college football fans didn't have a basic understanding for the situation nor the enthusiasm to learn. I often felt like a college professor trying to talk to kindergarteners, and there was a pretty big backlash about the topic in general for forcing changes to "their" sport.
Yet now years later when the SLIGHTEST bit of realignment news hits all of these people jump out of the woodwork to give their two cents. Often they don't know the whole story, but the overall realignment IQ and enthusiasm is much higher than in 2011. It is a too little too late situation, as GORs have ended the shifting for a decade, yet there is a fairly large group of people who now embrace this sort of change via realignment.
What this makes me realize is that college football fans are conservative by nature and are slow to adapt to an always changing landscape. I have always wondering why the same programs (some of them lacking obvious advantages needed to stay on top) keep dominating the sport but now the obvious answer is that is how the FANS want it. There is a mental moat around the helmet programs.
In regards to realignment, I think that is part of the reason for the enthusiasm. There are all these comments about "as a fan of the game, I prefer a super conference of top 10 programs" which shows a real lack of understanding of what is driving realignment. To me it is clear that all the newfound enthusiasm for the subject either comes from fan bases who programs were taken down a peg by realignment or by traditional fans of college football who have convinced themselves the point of realignment is to put more big programs in the same conference just for their enjoyment (its not).
Either way I am glad that realignment is over for now, as this decade might be the best situation my program ever finds itself in.
Posted on 7/2/15 at 10:52 am to THWG247
quote:
why would the payout gap get any larger than it currently is? If sec and big renegotiate tv contracts then the acc will too
Because the $$ from the BTN and SECN is still growing. And in the case of the B1G, their primary TV deal is ending in 2017. The ACC can't just decide to renegotiate their contract if they see the B1G getting a better deal.
Posted on 7/2/15 at 10:53 am to Mirthomatic
quote:
If FSU loses a game last year, they don't make the playoff. No conference is a lock, not even the SEC, but with the addition of Notre Dame, I put the ACC probably on the same competitive level as the PAC or B1G, or maybe slightly lower. Definitely above the B12, though.
Nah, ACC doesn't even need ND. People have short memories, VA Tech has really owned the conference since joining. Some of the traditional powers in ACC have had some issues, similar to issues that Florida, Texas, USC, Michigan, Nebraska have had. It isn't a statement on the conference. The game has changed a lot, teams are playing faster and there are more competitive programs than there used to be back in the day.
Most years, a 1 loss ACC program will have a good chance of making playoff. Keep in mind most ACC programs also play a SEC game out of conference, especially FSU and Clemson.
This post was edited on 7/2/15 at 10:55 am
Posted on 7/2/15 at 10:57 am to Mirthomatic
quote:
can't speak for VT, but do they have any real rivals other than Virginia? I think the ACC could do a better job scheduling, as you suggest, but that still wouldn't help ACC reach SEC ticket revenue levels. You're just always going to have more sellouts w/ an SEC schedule than you would for ACC. How would the ACC divide into 3 divisions? Are they considering taking on UConn or something? Are they going to put Notre Dame in a division?
All of the universities close to VA Tech that they have played with some regulatiry are in the ACC except for West Virginia. Plus Miami and BC from their big east days. Those were their big games in the Big east. They have rarely played any SEC programs.
The new ACC is a young conference, it is hard to say it can't make money similar to SEC.
It is more likely ACC will expand to take UConn and another program, then will lose any programs
This post was edited on 7/2/15 at 10:59 am
Posted on 7/2/15 at 10:57 am to Jamie Lannister
quote:
Nah, ACC doesn't even need ND
If the ACC didn't need ND, they wouldn't have accepted them as a partial football member. The B1G wouldn't do that. Neither would the SEC.
quote:
Most years, a 1 loss ACC program will have a good chance of making playoff.
I agree with this. I just also think the same is true if the ACC loses UVA/VT/UNC/NCST.
Posted on 7/2/15 at 10:59 am to THWG247
quote:
why would the payout gap get any larger than it currently is? If sec and big renegotiate tv contracts then the acc will too
They can't. The ACC signed away EVERYTHING until 2026-27. All three tiers of content. They have no leverage to force a renegotiation.
The B1G is going to make more money soon because their Tier 1 deal is up for sale in 2016. That plus their network is going to have each Big 10 team making more than $10 extra per year than the average ACC team before we hit 2020.
The SEC doesn't have anything up for bid soon, but it has a revenue source the ACC doesn't in the SEC Network. The SEC DIDN'T sell its Tier 3 content to ESPN in the last contract, which means (unlike the ACC) it gets paid when that content is monetized via the SEC Network. Once that distribution is maximized I could see each SEC team making $10 million+ more than any ACC team by 2020 as well.
What will keep the ACC stable is that their 20/25-ish million per year is in the ballpark of the other Power 5 conferences (the Big 12 and PAC). The reality is that within five years the SEC, the B1G and Texas will be on another planet when it comes to revenue than the rest of the sport. Even if ESPN starts an ACC Network there is no guarantee that will close the gap for the ACC, as the conference already sold those Tier 3 rights away:
quote:
ESPN's right fees are expected to rise from the league's 12 schools each getting about $13 million per year to the 14 schools in the expanding league getting about $17 million. ESPN will get new rights, including an additional 30 men's basketball games annually and 14 more conference-controlled football games.
LINK
Basically the ACC already sold away any future upside to survive last round. We will see if that works out going forward.
Posted on 7/2/15 at 11:00 am to Mirthomatic
why would the NC schools leave a NC centric conference? They would be basically Vandy/ Kentucky in SEC.
very few of their alumni/students/fans will support a move to SEC
very few of their alumni/students/fans will support a move to SEC
Posted on 7/2/15 at 11:01 am to Jamie Lannister
quote:
All of the universities close to VA Tech that they have played with some regulatiry are in the ACC except for West Virginia. Plus Miami and BC from their big east days. Those were their big games in the Big east. They have rarely played any SEC programs.
"Playing with regularity" doesn't equal "rival". UTx and OU are playing the rest of the B12 with regularity, and they're hating it.
Conversely, A&M hardly ever played Alabama or Auburn, but those are tremendously exciting games for the fans.
Do you really think VT fans would stay home when given the chance to see Florida/Georgia/Tennessee/South Carolina on a yearly basis?
Posted on 7/2/15 at 11:02 am to Mirthomatic
quote:
quote: why would the payout gap get any larger than it currently is? If sec and big renegotiate tv contracts then the acc will too Because the $$ from the BTN and SECN is still growing. And in the case of the B1G, their primary TV deal is ending in 2017. The ACC can't just decide to renegotiate their contract if they see the B1G getting a better deal.
Why isn't there an ACC network? Yeah i know the football aspect of it would be a bit less desirable than sec/big but it seems like basketball would be huge.
Posted on 7/2/15 at 11:05 am to Jamie Lannister
quote:
The new ACC is a young conference, it is hard to say it can't make money similar to SEC.
I can say with certainty it won't for ten years. In fact the SEC and the B1G will be making $10 million more per team in ten years.
Is that enough to destabilize the ACC? Depends on what ESPN does in the 2025 timeframe. Also depends on what happens to the sport in lawsuits between now and then.
Posted on 7/2/15 at 11:05 am to Mirthomatic
I don't think texas and OU hate playing in BIg 12. that is a SEC talking point, navel gazing.
what is wrong with a conference with Oklahoma State, Kansas State, Baylor, TCU. Both TCU and Baylor almost made the playoffs last year
what is wrong with a conference with Oklahoma State, Kansas State, Baylor, TCU. Both TCU and Baylor almost made the playoffs last year
Posted on 7/2/15 at 11:06 am to cardboardboxer
I believe Duke and UNC basketball makes more than most SEC football programs
Posted on 7/2/15 at 11:06 am to Jamie Lannister
quote:
why would the NC schools leave a NC centric conference? They would be basically Vandy/ Kentucky in SEC.
Why would they be Kentucky? Why not South Carolina?
Posted on 7/2/15 at 11:07 am to THWG247
quote:
Why isn't there an ACC network?
There is. It is called ESPN3. The ACC already signed away all its Tier 3 content (aka the stuff the B1G and the SEC put on their network) to get a little bit extra money of out ESPN last round. There was a lot of discussion when that happened that the ACC basically traded money (in the form of a future conference network) for exposure (in the form of every game being on ESPN1/2/3).
Posted on 7/2/15 at 11:08 am to Mirthomatic
good point. lol only thought of Kentucky b/c SC has been better the past 6 years,
Speaking of Kentucky, during the realignment a few years ago, there was a consistent rumor about Kentucky bolting to ACC. I think that would be a good move for them.
if the point is to win football championships, not sure why any team would want to go to SEC. Just making it more difficult
Speaking of Kentucky, during the realignment a few years ago, there was a consistent rumor about Kentucky bolting to ACC. I think that would be a good move for them.
if the point is to win football championships, not sure why any team would want to go to SEC. Just making it more difficult
This post was edited on 7/2/15 at 11:11 am
Posted on 7/2/15 at 11:09 am to Jamie Lannister
quote:
I believe Duke and UNC basketball makes more than most SEC football programs
Maybe when you are looking at total revenues like donations sure. I am just talking about tv money, where every ACC team is going to make less than every SEC team going forward.
You do make a good point: even a $10 million a year gap isn't even 10% of the revenue of the top programs nationally. But still that is a lot of money and money drove the bus the last round of realignment.
Posted on 7/2/15 at 11:11 am to cardboardboxer
quote:
The Big 12 didn't even mention expansion. The President of OU did
Whoever mentioned it, it has nothing to do with the SEC right now. Hell, if the Big 12 does end up expanding, it still won't affect the SEC as they'd likely just pick up Houston or UCF or some other midmajor.
quote:
Yet now years later when the SLIGHTEST bit of realignment news hits all of these people jump out of the woodwork to give their two cents.
Like I said, it's boredom. If SEC media days or fall camp were happening right now, this wouldn't even be a discussion. Hell, they were still debating the effect of Harbaugh's interview on three different sports radio stations this morning.
quote:
It is a too little too late situation, as GORs have ended the shifting for a decade, yet there is a fairly large group of people who now embrace this sort of change via realignment.
That level of expansion was a pandora's box that altered the reality of college athletics. Of course there had been expansion before, but nothing like the rampant speculation leading up to those decisions and the change of the landscape with the Big 12 barely remaining alive and the Big 10, Pac 10, ACC, and SEC adding new teams to their schedules. Of course everyone was resistant to the changes whent hey were first posed, but now that we went through it once, it seems like a blast in hindsight. That was one of the most entertaining offseasons in memory and the changes it led to were akin to the post-lockout NHL season a few years back; a lot of teams got to hit the reset button by joining new conferences and even more teams are still reaping the benefits via fatass tv checks.
quote:
I have always wondering why the same programs (some of them lacking obvious advantages needed to stay on top) keep dominating the sport but now the obvious answer is that is how the FANS want it. There is a mental moat around the helmet programs.
But think about what you're dealing with: these aren't corporate-owned NFL fanbase. These are centuries old campuses and teams and fanbases with a deep abiding love for their respective landscapes and towns and home states. Anything that threatens to alter what is essentially this way of life (especially in the SEC) has to be considered a negative by default. Even with the new TV money leading to stadium expansions and huge coaching contracts leading to a better product on a nicer field, you still hear a lot of grumbling about the way things used to be. College football is now and always will be (god willing) about nostalgia. It's where old men go to feel young again, to reminisce about better, younger days. It's where old women gather to entertain and talk like they were still putting on rush parties and mixers. And all of a sudden you want to bump our longtime friends from Auburn off the schedule to bring in some yankee asses from the midwest to town instead? Like fricking hell!
quote:
To me it is clear that all the newfound enthusiasm for the subject either comes from fan bases who programs were taken down a peg by realignment or by traditional fans of college football who have convinced themselves the point of realignment is to put more big programs in the same conference just for their enjoyment (its not).
I'm opposed to it purely out of an allegiance to the South and the South. I completely hate the idea of allowing non-Southern states and schools to be a part of what we have. I'm not opposed to adding other teams from the right states, but I am opposed to doing it simply out of a need to drive revenue. I realize that revenue-driving is the new name of the game, but it doesn't mean I have to like it. Leave that kind of corporate shite to the NFL. At the very least let me pretend college football still has something sacred about it.
Page 5 of 10
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News