I always looked at the Big East possibly enticing Big 12 schools if that conference crumbled then getting Maryland or Boston College. Kansas, Kansas State, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Iowa State, etc. Those schools could be available if the Big Ten raids the Big 12 and Texas bolts the conference. First, assuming we only lose Rutgers, we expand to 10 or 12, get the Big East Network underway and negotiate a strong deal with Fox.

(05-17-2010 11:06 AM)Inigo Wrote:  

(05-17-2010 06:18 AM)mattsarz Wrote:  1) 12 years, $1.86 billion. Average annual rights are $155 million

In seemingly unrelated news... Comcast just raised my cable bill $2 per month.

Now THAT'S funny.

(05-17-2010 05:20 PM)CatsClaw Wrote:  I always looked at the Big East possibly enticing Big 12 schools if that conference crumbled then getting Maryland or Boston College. Kansas, Kansas State, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Iowa State, etc. Those schools could be available if the Big Ten raids the Big 12 and Texas bolts the conference. First, assuming we only lose Rutgers, we expand to 10 or 12, get the Big East Network underway and negotiate a strong deal with Fox.

Maryland or BC aren't going anywhere. Their new TV deal proves it.

(05-17-2010 06:29 AM)Airport KC Wrote:  The money announced is only 12-13 million per school, clearly more than what the ACC was getting but not impressive when compared with SEC/Big Ten.

Yes, it's a big jump up from the $67m they were getting annually, more than double that, but far from SEC/Big 10 money.

It does, however, show how "bulletproof" the ACC brand is to actual performance on the football field.

(05-17-2010 09:49 AM)CollegeCard Wrote:  This makes me repeat the question I ask when I see the expansion threads. Why would BC and Maryland leave the ACC?

Maryland will be in the ACC as long as there *is* an ACC. Might as well talk about North Carolina or Duke leaving the ACC.

Again if The SEC comes calling no TV contract is going to keep Georgia Tech, Clemson, Florida State, Virginia Tech or Miami from jumping from The ACC. Conference membership is a long term decision, this contract won't change that. The fans here that should be very excited about this TV contract are WVU, Syracuse, Pitt and UConn. It is likely those programs will be gone to The ACC in the near future. Look at it this way. Does anyone really believe The SEC will allow a new ACC TV to keep it from expanding? Not likely.....
CJ

...STUNNING...

(05-18-2010 04:43 AM)CardinalJim Wrote:  Does anyone really believe The SEC will allow a new ACC TV to keep it from expanding? Not likely.....
CJ

It is not the ACC's contract that stops SEC expansion, it is the SEC's. There is no way ESPN and CBS reopen their deal with the SEC for an ACC school, period. Possibly for Texas, but then only if ESPN does not believe it can maintain its current access to B12 games.

The ACC's new contract now keeps the ACC from expanding. A B10 move to 14 schools would set a precedent for the 14 school model. If the ACC got hosed on its TV deal, it might suddenly have seen the need to expand into the northeast (Syracuse/Pitt?) to enhance the value of its TV package. With a solid contract in hand, such expansion is now off the table (for twelve years anyway).

(05-18-2010 07:41 AM)orangefan Wrote:  

(05-18-2010 04:43 AM)CardinalJim Wrote:  Does anyone really believe The SEC will allow a new ACC TV to keep it from expanding? Not likely.....
CJ

It is not the ACC's contract that stops SEC expansion, it is the SEC's. There is no way ESPN and CBS reopen their deal with the SEC for an ACC school, period. Possibly for Texas, but then only if ESPN does not believe it can maintain its current access to B12 games.

The ACC's new contract now keeps the ACC from expanding. A B10 move to 14 schools would set a precedent for the 14 school model. If the ACC got hosed on its TV deal, it might suddenly have seen the need to expand into the northeast (Syracuse/Pitt?) to enhance the value of its TV package. With a solid contract in hand, such expansion is now off the table (for twelve years anyway).

Only thing that is guaranteed in the future is "more change"...as College Athletics never stands still...as they continue to add more bowl games, more March Madness slots, huge increase in TV $$$$, new conf championship games, new conferences, expanded conferences, etc...

Every school will always keep an eye out for their INTEREST FIRST...and their conf second...as in this "arms race" in regards to having the biggest/best programs...colleges have shown they will do anything and everything to get there.

Hate to admit it, but this deal is a big feather in the cap of those who say the ACC made the right move by raiding the Big East 6 years ago.

(05-18-2010 10:12 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  Hate to admit it, but this deal is a big feather in the cap of those who say the ACC made the right move by raiding the Big East 6 years ago.

Possibly, though I still have deep skepticism of what BC delivers for them. It seems they could have come up w/ a better 3rd, Cuse or WVU would have added more tangible value...

It's all market driven. All people understand is numbers, whether the numbers make sense or not. They understand that Boston's market is one of the largest, and that BC is in that market. Nobody in Boston cares whether BC wins or loses, or whether they even play the game at all. But the people that know care about markets, and the numbers therein. The numbers said BC was the better choice, because Boston's market was larger than the other markets available. Of course if BC captures 2% of their market it's a f#ckin' miracle...

ESPN killing Raycom...what a shock

(05-18-2010 06:38 PM)PurpleReigns2012 Wrote:  ESPN killing Raycom...what a shock

I'd be surprised if ESPN does not sublicense a pretty good package of games to Raycom. This will allow ESPN to recover some of their costs.

Raycom should be willing to pay a reasonable price to maintain their survival. In theory, buying the games directly from the ACC or on a sublicense from ESPN should not make a big difference to Raycom.

I suspect the biggest difference we'll see is that some hoops games previously simulcast on Raycom and ESPN that are blacked out in ACC territory, will now be broadcast exclusively on ESPN. Raycom will likely handle Saturday noon cfb games, plus a solid package of ACC hoops, all of which will be included on ESPN Game Plan and Center Court.

This isn't that surprising. The ACC may not have 100K stadiums like the SEC, but it does draw a substantial crowd on TV. FSU-Miami on Labor Day set an ESPN primetime college football rating record. The Thursday football games draw well and several ACC schools like to play them. The ESPN Sat games also drew very well... far better than the Pac-10 and better than the more ho-hum non-feature Big 10 games ESPN had. There's a number of big rivalries in conference and out. The ACC tends to play a good OOC schedule in football on the whole... as it turns out Georgia vs Southwestern Central A&M Methodist Community won't get nearly the TV ratings Georgia Tech vs Notre Dame will, etc. And basketball speaks for itself.

What will be more interesting to see is:
1) Whether every conference in D-I gravitates towards a minimum of 12 teams and a championship game
2) Whether Big 10 Network revenues hold at such high levels.
2) Assuming YES to #2, whether every conference that achieves #1 eventually offers their own network

The Big East needs to spin off a basketball only conference, and get serious about going to 12 teams. Hell, I'll even give you Boston College. Too damn far north for this southerner. I suppose the best ACC option to go back to 12 is ECU. Then you can pick up Memphis, Houston, Marshall. C-USA will then raid the Sun Belt. I imagine the Pac-10 wouldn't like everybody else cashing in without it, so it would raid the MWC. The MWC would then raid the WAC. And you'd have some bizarre marriage of the leftovers in the WAC and Sun Belt forming a final uber-sprawled out conference.

(05-20-2010 06:24 PM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:  This isn't that surprising. The ACC may not have 100K stadiums like the SEC, but it does draw a substantial crowd on TV. FSU-Miami on Labor Day set an ESPN primetime college football rating record. The Thursday football games draw well and several ACC schools like to play them. The ESPN Sat games also drew very well... far better than the Pac-10 and better than the more ho-hum non-feature Big 10 games ESPN had. There's a number of big rivalries in conference and out. The ACC tends to play a good OOC schedule in football on the whole... as it turns out Georgia vs Southwestern Central A&M Methodist Community won't get nearly the TV ratings Georgia Tech vs Notre Dame will, etc. And basketball speaks for itself.

What will be more interesting to see is:
1) Whether every conference in D-I gravitates towards a minimum of 12 teams and a championship game
2) Whether Big 10 Network revenues hold at such high levels.
2) Assuming YES to #2, whether every conference that achieves #1 eventually offers their own network

The Big East needs to spin off a basketball only conference, and get serious about going to 12 teams. Hell, I'll even give you Boston College. Too damn far north for this southerner. I suppose the best ACC option to go back to 12 is ECU. Then you can pick up Memphis, Houston, Marshall. C-USA will then raid the Sun Belt. I imagine the Pac-10 wouldn't like everybody else cashing in without it, so it would raid the MWC. The MWC would then raid the WAC. And you'd have some bizarre marriage of the leftovers in the WAC and Sun Belt forming a final uber-sprawled out conference.

I don't know if 12 is going to be necessary. If the PAC-10 can get the revenue they desire at 10 teams, they won't expand.

Since terms haven't been released, I'd like to see how many games the ACC gets on ESPN/ESPN2 on Saturdays. The number dropped nearly in half last season as the SEC's new contract started. Only seven ACC contracted games appeared on ESPN/ESPN2.

The other issue is that a large number of games appeared on ESPN360.com. Time Warner doesn't yet carry the service and 16 ACC games vs. FBS teams were on the service last year. That's a lot.

There was an article from FanHouse that ESPN may have received at least $50 million/season from Raycom to win the rights. There was some concern that the Sunday Night Hoops package could go away, but the ACC seems happy with it and wants it to continue.

http://ncaabasketball.fanhouse.com/2010/...espn-deal/

(05-18-2010 05:38 PM)Crimsonelf Wrote:  

(05-18-2010 10:12 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  Hate to admit it, but this deal is a big feather in the cap of those who say the ACC made the right move by raiding the Big East 6 years ago.

Possibly, though I still have deep skepticism of what BC delivers for them. It seems they could have come up w/ a better 3rd, Cuse or WVU would have added more tangible value...

Boston? Sure, beantown is a pro town, but still, BC gives the ACC a nice bit of exposure in what SHOULD be pure Big East territory.

BC in the ACC is a cancer gnawing at the innards of the Big East. A 5th column.

(05-20-2010 07:08 PM)mattsarz Wrote:  

(05-20-2010 06:24 PM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:  This isn't that surprising. The ACC may not have 100K stadiums like the SEC, but it does draw a substantial crowd on TV. FSU-Miami on Labor Day set an ESPN primetime college football rating record. The Thursday football games draw well and several ACC schools like to play them. The ESPN Sat games also drew very well... far better than the Pac-10 and better than the more ho-hum non-feature Big 10 games ESPN had. There's a number of big rivalries in conference and out. The ACC tends to play a good OOC schedule in football on the whole... as it turns out Georgia vs Southwestern Central A&M Methodist Community won't get nearly the TV ratings Georgia Tech vs Notre Dame will, etc. And basketball speaks for itself.

What will be more interesting to see is:
1) Whether every conference in D-I gravitates towards a minimum of 12 teams and a championship game
2) Whether Big 10 Network revenues hold at such high levels.
2) Assuming YES to #2, whether every conference that achieves #1 eventually offers their own network

The Big East needs to spin off a basketball only conference, and get serious about going to 12 teams. Hell, I'll even give you Boston College. Too damn far north for this southerner. I suppose the best ACC option to go back to 12 is ECU. Then you can pick up Memphis, Houston, Marshall. C-USA will then raid the Sun Belt. I imagine the Pac-10 wouldn't like everybody else cashing in without it, so it would raid the MWC. The MWC would then raid the WAC. And you'd have some bizarre marriage of the leftovers in the WAC and Sun Belt forming a final uber-sprawled out conference.

I don't know if 12 is going to be necessary. If the PAC-10 can get the revenue they desire at 10 teams, they won't expand.

Well...Pac-10 had the worst/lowest BCS TV Package besides the Big East so I think that is what's pushing them TO expand...

No doubt their #1 realistic choice (everyone would want Univ of Texas) would be Univ of Colorado and Denver's #18 largest TV Market...as Boulder has a lot more in common with Westwood, Berkeley, Eugene, etc...than they do with Austin, College Station, Lubbock, etc...

If Colorado says yes...then I do think Pac-10 would go after Univ of Utah (Salt Lake, #33 largest TV Market)...which is a perfect stop over going to or coming from Denver).

Not sure the Pac-10 can get a larger/better TV deal without expansion...as with all of their current teams on Pacific Coast Time (late kickoffs/tip-offs), having 2 members in the Mountain time zone might help just a bit.

Obviously, Texas is the key to virtually all the conferences...but if Texas stays put and the Big 12 (or whatever it will be called) continues to give out uneven shares of $$$$ so that UT can continue to get the most $$$, Colorado and then Utah (i.e. in Salt Lake, much easier to get to then BYU...less controversial too) for expansion.

(05-20-2010 08:17 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(05-18-2010 05:38 PM)Crimsonelf Wrote:  

(05-18-2010 10:12 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  Hate to admit it, but this deal is a big feather in the cap of those who say the ACC made the right move by raiding the Big East 6 years ago.

Possibly, though I still have deep skepticism of what BC delivers for them. It seems they could have come up w/ a better 3rd, Cuse or WVU would have added more tangible value...

Boston? Sure, beantown is a pro town, but still, BC gives the ACC a nice bit of exposure in what SHOULD be pure Big East territory.

BC in the ACC is a cancer gnawing at the innards of the Big East. A 5th column.

Exactly.

ESPN knows EXACTLY how much Boston College and the Boston TV Market are worth...but its funny to see some Big East fans like bitcruncher that come up with their own numbers (i.e. BC/ACC gets just 2% of the Boston TV Market), yet ESPN is now going to pay the ACC close to $2 Billion.

Also, Bitcruncher didn't mention the demographics of the Boston Metro area (i.e. one of the highest in regards to income/college education, etc...) which is a KEY demographic for marketers.

ACC made the right move to invite BC, VT and Miami, which improved their conf worth (maybe not to the extant some wanted or thought)...just like the Big East made similar good moves in inviting Cinci, Louisville and USF. (Big East gets a mulligan for DePaul debacle).