ACC Network?

Here ya go, GrassyNoleHitman.

The ACC has formed a committee of athletic directors and hired Wasserman Media Group to explore the financial benefits of launching its own conference network.

While its media rights are tied up with ESPN for the next 15 years, that hasn’t stopped the conference from beginning the process of deciding whether such a channel is feasible. It hasn’t had formal talks with ESPN, which would have to play a big role in any ACC channel since the network controls the league’s rights.

Continue reading: http://www.sportsbusinessdaily.com/J...leges/ACC.aspx

i hope it happens. it is the only way that FSU can get even close to SEC type money. the ACC generally gets good TV ratings, and it has every market along the entire eastern seaboard. so we have a valuable product to put out there for a network. the current ACC contract hands out nearly 17 mil/year to each team. I think the current Big 12 hands out just under 19/year + whatever you can get for 3rd tier rights on your own. the $2 mil/ year difference from the basic contract is not enough to jump. throw in another $5 mil/ year and it starts to become tempting.

however, an ACC network can get more money than FSU would get alone on its 3rd tier rights, so i think any upcoming ACCN means no more defections from the ACC, no more raiding of the Big East, and a bit of stability from the ACC front.

Coach K isn't happy about the ACC breaking up.

http://network.yardbarker.com/colleg..._head_12667681

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GrassyNoleHitman

i hope it happens. it is the only way that FSU can get even close to SEC type money. the ACC generally gets good TV ratings, and it has every market along the entire eastern seaboard. so we have a valuable product to put out there for a network. the current ACC contract hands out nearly 17 mil/year to each team. I think the current Big 12 hands out just under 19/year + whatever you can get for 3rd tier rights on your own. the $2 mil/ year difference from the basic contract is not enough to jump. throw in another $5 mil/ year and it starts to become tempting.

however, an ACC network can get more money than FSU would get alone on its 3rd tier rights, so i think any upcoming ACCN means no more defections from the ACC, no more raiding of the Big East, and a bit of stability from the ACC front.

---

GrassyNoleHitman,

It will still be difficult to keep schools from turning down the Big 10 or the SEC. Both conferences still need members and live game inventory to fill out their respective networks. From planning to launch to expansion, the Big 10 Network is 10 years ahead of the ACCN, while the SEC's Network is 5 years ahead. Any school who turns down either one of those leagues will be costing itself at least $100 million over the next 10 years.

But what the new ACCN might do is fight off the Big 12, and that's almost certainly Swafford's goal long-term. To keep schools from bolting for the Big 12 in the short term, ESPN is going to have to give up third-tier ACC football rights or make up the financial difference to the schools where it really makes a difference - FSU, Miami, and Clemson. I believe they're prepared to do that. They won't risk the possibility of the conference completely falling apart.

But it appears ESPN is lukewarm to the idea of an ACCN. That's understandable. With the obscene profit ESPN must be making off of the ACC, its largest source of programming, no ESPN executive is going to want to give a penny of that up. But ESPN might not have a choice. The conference won't be stable until they can generate much more revenue to the entire league.

That's going to mean buying all of the third-tier basketball rights in the next few years and working on agreements with cable companies to carry the network from Maine down to Florida. But it's still ESPN. They can get it done.

For Florida State, it would mean the type of revenue you would be looking for in the long-term. Even if you can't get quite the amount of money you could be making in the Big 12 in the short term, if you go to the Big 12, you would be going to the only one of the major five leagues with no league-wide TV network. Suddenly, each schools in the other 4 leagues is making millions if not tens of millions of dollars more per year off of network money. You think there is bitterness towards the Longhorn Network now within the Big 12, wait until the day the ACCN launches.

One more thing to keep in mind. If the ACCN launches, that league will be no different than the Big 10 or SEC. They will need additional schools to fill out TV inventory. Not only will they have to replace schools leaving for the SEC and Big 10, but they will have to expand beyond that.

Not only will UConn and Cincy be in the league, but others as well. They could double up on certain markets to ensure they're on basic cable in those locations or expand to new markets. Think Temple, USF, UMass, Memphis. But I also think some of the Catholic 7 would be in play - St. Johns, Georgetown, and Nova for everything but FBS football.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Historian

But I also think some of the Catholic 7 would be in play - St. Johns, Georgetown, and Nova for everything but FBS football.

---

Interesting thought, but I think after the BE fiasco of this year, they will stay together. The money would be nice, but their shared history, culture, and heritage keep them together.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by hookdown

Interesting thought, but I think after the BE fiasco of this year, they will stay together. The money would be nice, but their shared history, culture, and heritage keep them together.

---

That's what Maryland was saying publicly a couple of years ago - "We'll never be Brutas, we'll never leave the ACC" - and then the Big 10 went and threw a knife into the equation.

Half of the ACC are former Big East. How many of them do you think are anxious to repeat the hybrid conference experience?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by parialex

Half of the ACC are former Big East. How many of them do you think are anxious to repeat the hybrid conference experience?

---

Not saying they would do it, but if they needed the inventory for an ACCN, they would consider it. Especially if it only meant those three plus Notre Dame.

I think you underestimate the cohesion of the Catholic school mentality (or perhaps I overestimate it...). Their goals are somewhat different from a public university.

We shall see.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by hookdown

I think you underestimate the cohesion of the Catholic school mentality (or perhaps I overestimate it...). Their goals are somewhat different from a public university.

We shall see.

---

Let's see if they invite VCU to the Big Priest.

The other thing I find interesting about the ACC Network is the fact its success would almost ensure that the 5 major conferences would all survive long-term.

Years ago, there was a strong belief we might have 4 major conferences with 16 schools in each league - 64 total schools. It is quite plausible we might end up with 5 leagues, each with 16 schools - 80 total schools.

And you can only imagine how that would impact leagues like the Big East, CUSA, the Mountain West, and the SBC.

Bumping this thread. Current Clemson AD Dan Radakovich, who spent the past few years at Georgia Tech as AD, was on College Sports Today with Mark Packer (SiriusXM) last Friday.

A large portion of the interview focused on conference realignment and the ACC Network. It was clear from Radakovich's comments that an ACC Network is going to happen, even if the league sustains some losses to other leagues in the coming months. He indicated the ACC was moving forward, but they were behind the curve when compared to the Big 10.

We said the Big East was the WAC of the AQ conferences last year. When will it stop?

...This is what I posted on another board regarding the money discrepancy between the ACC and other major conferences...

Maryland is supposedly going to make $43 mil in the Big Ten by 2017
http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/201...ney/index.html

let's assume that is the baseline of what the major conferences will make. the SEC may blow that out of the water tomorrow, but i have a feeling it will be in the same ballpark.

here are the financials from last year per forbes:
http://www.kansascity.com/2013/01/16...enue-list.html

Projected 2012-13 revenue by conference Conference...Big Ten...Pac-12.....ACC........SEC.......Big 12 Total........$310 mil..$303 mil...$293 mil...$270 mil..$262 million Bowl games...$40 mil...$39 mil....$35 mil....$50 mil...$42 million NCAA tourny..$20 mil...$14 mil....$17 mil....$15 mil...$20 million TV revenue...$250 mil..$250 mil...$240 mil...$205 mil..$200 million Per school...$25.8 mil.$25.3 mil..$24.4 mil..$19.3 mil.$26.2 million Source: Forbes

as i stated earlier, the B1G and SEC will jump from 25.8 and 19.3 to $43 by 2017. that leaves FSU with $18.6 mil to make up...a pretty big gap.

first...the additions of Pitt and Cuse apparently won't lower the per team payout. i think it was even going to give an extra 1 mil per team but i can't verify that. swapping Maryland for Louisville won't lower the payout either (and may have a slight bump). the games against ND are supposed to add 1-2 mil per team to the TV contract (use 1.5 for this exercise).

so all the team shuffling will give FSU a net of at least 1.5 mil more from the TV contracts (down to 17.1 mil to make up).

now look at NCAA basketball tournament units. i know that these things fluctuate each year, but assuming teams have similar success we should enjoy similar returns. the new ACC lineup (without Md, but with Pitt, Cuse, and Louisville) will give us a big increase in payouts based on the 2014 values
http://winthropintelligence.com/2013...payouts-after/

this gives the ACC $27.3 mil instead of the $17 mil given in the Forbes figures above. the extra money gives FSU an extra 700K (down to 16.4 mil to make up).

third tier rights...currently FSU sells its third tier rights for 6.6 million (down to 9.8 mil to make up). don't forget...the conference networks means the SEC and B1G teams have already sold their third tier rights. so they are trading this revenue stream with the conference network revenue stream. UF, UGA, and the other top earning teams better hope that the SEC network brings in a lot more than the 10-13 mil they are currently getting...
http://www.sportsbusinessdaily.com/J...hts-Deals.aspx

Bowl payouts
The Forbes data above shows the ACC bad bowl revenue of $35 mil. with the new Orange Bowl contract and other bowls contracts that will jump to $49.5 mil. this increase of $14 mil adds an extra $1 mil per team.
(down to 8.8 mil to make up)

Big 12 scheduling...

The Big 12 wants to improve its strength of schedule, without adding a championship game. the plan for doing that is a scheduling alliance with the ACC. basically it would guarantee a bunch of games like the OSU game we have planned in 2014. basically how it would work is in years we don't play ND we would have a Big 12 opponent. and FSU would keep the TV money from that game, roughly $4 million/game (down to 4.8 mil to make up).


keep in mind, 2017 when the Big Ten is supposed to be paying out $43 mil to Maryland is when the ACC's contract with ESPiN has a "look in" period. if we show good ratings the ACC TV contract will be worth more. we may not make up the full $4.8 million gap, but we should be able to come close. and no matter what...$4.8 mil gap sure sounds a lot more manageable than a $20 million gap. and by replacing maryland with Louisville and Savannah State with ND or a Big 12 team...we will probably be able to make up that $4.8 mil gap with ticket sales. and if you look at last year's numbers...the SEC had a larger gap than that they they had to close with the Big 12.




"but when UNC, UVA, and GT leave for the Big 10 the ACC will be nothing as a conference and we may as well drop down to NAIA"

why would UNC ditch the ACC (a conference which it owns) to be second fiddle to Michigan when the difference in payout is at most $3.8 mil/year? (UNC has a better third tier rights deal than us). realistically after the look in period the gap for UNC will be closer to 1-1.5 mil per year. if it takes nearly 20 years to pay off the exit fee, it doesn't make sense to move.

also the ACC could survive losing dead weight teams like UVA and GT. it may see a situation like the Big 12 where they payout per team is greater because there are fewer mouths to feed. certainly losing football powers like GT and UVA won't get the ACC kicked out of the big boys table.

every year our schedule will include games against UF, UM, CU, UL, and ND or a Big 12 team. that is awesome. even with Swofford's incompetence we are still only going to be a few million behind the conferences that have their own networks.

GrassyNoleHitman,

I understand your points, but when doing the direct comparison between television deals and overall revenue, Maryland made the jump. It will be difficult to keep schools from leaving for the SEC or Big 10.

But, if given the choice of the ACC or Big 12, the ACC immediately comes out ahead with Florida State when the ACC Network launches. Florida State will have revenue that will far exceed the $6.6 million it now receives in third tier rights or even increased third tier rights it would be able to gather by being in the Big 12. It would also not have to pay the ACC exit fee, which is expected to be anywhere from $15 to $30 million and would be able to share in the exit fee money coming from the four schools who are expected to leave the league.

In five to seven years, as ESPN adds cable systems for the ACC Network along the Eastern Seaboard (basic cable) and nationwide, the stand-alone channel will help the ACC schools far outpace the revenue the Big 12 schools not named Texas receive in TV money.

At the same time, the problem with keeping schools from leaving for the Big 10 is that the Big 10 is likely to receive a blockbuster first-tier rights deal in 2017. I think the numbers they gave Maryland were actually very conservative. The same holds true for the SEC. Their next deal with CBS could be just as jaw dropping.

About Maryland and the Big 10:

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/201...ney/index.html

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Historian

At the same time, the problem with keeping schools from leaving for the Big 10 is that the Big 10 is likely to receive a blockbuster first-tier rights deal in 2017. I think the numbers they gave Maryland were actually very conservative.

---

the real problem with keeping schools from jumping to the Big Ten has nothing to do with sports. The Big Ten has an academic arm that helps bring in $8 BILLION to its schools through NIH and other federal grants.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Committ...al_Cooperation

If FSU were to jump to the B1G it could probably see an increase in federal grant funding of well over $50 million/year. maybe up to $100 mil.


if the ACC could duplicate that model nobody would ever leave to get an extra $10 mil in TV money...

ACC just announced a grant of rights today.

nobody (else) is leaving the ACC prior to 2027. i am thinking my numbers are more accurate than the ones Maryland was looking at. otherwise there is no way FSU, UL, CU sign the TV rights away.

Wow. And with that, unless it turns out the GORs are unenforceable, the end of realignment is in sight.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GrassyNoleHitman

nobody (else) is leaving the ACC prior to 2027.

---

Where there are lawyers and $$$$, there is a way..... :icon_wink:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Historian

Bumping this thread. Current Clemson AD Dan Radakovich, who spent the past few years at Georgia Tech as AD, was on College Sports Today with Mark Packer (SiriusXM) last Friday.

A large portion of the interview focused on conference realignment and the ACC Network. It was clear from Radakovich's comments that an ACC Network is going to happen, even if the league sustains some losses to other leagues in the coming months. He indicated the ACC was moving forward, but they were behind the curve when compared to the Big 10.

---

Radakovich sounded really upbeat in this interview when discussing a possible ACC Network a few weeks ago. I guess I would be, as well. To get all 15 ACC presidents to sign a GOR, ESPN must be quietly promising an over-the-top amount of cash. Maybe as much as the SEC will make from its network partnership with ESPN or the Big 10 will make from its network partnership with Fox.

In the end, for a stand-alone network, it's not as much about what you do on the field as it is about what markets you bring to the table and how many basic cable households you can acquire.

I knew that ESPN would do whatever it took to ensure the fact the ACC would not dissolve, but they went even further and did what it took to keep the league completely intact. Let the war between ESPN and Fox continue.

It will also be interesting over the next few years to see how the Big 12 schools not named Texas react. They are about to really be left behind.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Historian

Radakovich sounded really upbeat in this interview when discussing a possible ACC Network a few weeks ago. I guess I would be, as well. To get all 15 ACC presidents to sign a GOR, ESPN must be quietly promising an over-the-top amount of cash. Maybe as much as the SEC will make from its network partnership with ESPN or the Big 10 will make from its network partnership with Fox.

In the end, for a stand-alone network, it's not as much about what you do on the field as it is about what markets you bring to the table and how many basic cable households you can acquire.

I knew that ESPN would do whatever it took to ensure the fact the ACC would not dissolve, but they went even further and did what it took to keep the league completely intact. Let the war between ESPN and Fox continue.

It will also be interesting over the next few years to see how the Big 12 schools not named Texas react. They are about to really be left behind.

---

This action lends credence to your --and Dawg'06's-- numerous recent comments about ESPN not letting the ACC dissolve. Having said that, if ESPN (and Fox Sports) are so starved for entertainment content, how can this "need" for content (and the big bucks that go with it) NOT filter down to the other conferences, including CUSA??

If indeed there is a "war" for content going on between ESPN and Fox, it seems to me that other conferences besides the ACC would benefit as well. Including the Big XII schools you referenced above.

Sports Business Daily: ACC gains stability with grant of media rights; ACC Network the next step?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HogDawg

This action lends credence to your --and Dawg'06's-- numerous recent comments about ESPN not letting the ACC dissolve. Having said that, if ESPN (and Fox Sports) are so starved for entertainment content, how can this "need" for content (and the big bucks that go with it) NOT filter down to the other conferences, including CUSA??

If indeed there is a "war" for content going on between ESPN and Fox, it seems to me that other conferences besides the ACC would benefit as well. Including the Big XII schools you referenced above.

---

The Big XII is set. Their TV contract is fixed into a long-term contract, and it doesn't appear they will have any membership changes that would trigger a renegotiation. UT has the LHN, and they are happy. The other nine Big XII schools don't have the benefit of a conference network padding their bank accounts like everybody else eventually will. UT isn't interested in a conference network because they have their own, and the Big XII doesn't have any attractive expansion options. With the few, small, and overlapping markets in the Big XII footprint, a Big XII Network wouldn't be able to produce much revenue without UT and conference expansion.

We'll find out how it filters down to C-USA in a couple years when Banowsky has to renegotiate.

Also, I think NBC/Comcast will eventually become a player. They've just gotten off to a very late and really bad start.

ACC, ESPN still bullish on conference network
http://www.sportsbusinessdaily.com/J...C-Network.aspx