Networks have to be tired of constant renegotiation.

How does this affect Maryland vs. ACC?

(04-22-2013 01:37 PM)Melky Cabrera Wrote:  

(04-22-2013 12:32 PM)TerryD Wrote:  If true, Notre Dame got everything it wanted out of conference realignment, then.

It gets access to the playoffs and to the Orange Bowl as an independent, seven football games a year under its control, the NBC deal and the ACC deal with the existing fourteen teams staying intact for at least ten years and its other sports televised via an ACC network.

Not bad, Jack Swarbrick and John Swofford.

So, ND is signing a modified GOR, which does not include football?

Since ND will not vote on matters concerning ACC football, then this would make sense.

(04-22-2013 01:37 PM)Melky Cabrera Wrote:  

(04-22-2013 12:32 PM)TerryD Wrote:  If true, Notre Dame got everything it wanted out of conference realignment, then.

It gets access to the playoffs and to the Orange Bowl as an independent, seven football games a year under its control, the NBC deal and the ACC deal with the existing fourteen teams staying intact for at least ten years and its other sports televised via an ACC network.

Not bad, Jack Swarbrick and John Swofford.

So, ND is signing a modified GOR, which does not include football?

Obviously. They just signed a long-term independent TV deal.

MT @Mengus22: Now that ACC is settled, getting beat out for Big 12 by West Virginia was the best thing that could've happened to Louisville.

THe folks most happy today are maybe ECU since their slim odds of an sec invite went up. Or the other thing could be trading between leagues that have schools locked down with a GOR. Wouldn't' the acc and sec both better off if the sec could pick up nc state and wake with the acc adding uconn and cincy?

(04-22-2013 12:10 PM)NJRedMan Wrote:  Someone will eventually challenge a GoR and then we'll see how ironclad they are. Until then, none of us know how well it will hold up. We all thought exit fees were enforceable until they weren't.

While true, this does work pretty differently. A grant of rights does not technically do anything to stop someone from changing conferences. They have given up rights to broadcast home games though so legally, if a school leaves conference A for conference B, conference A still has all the home rights. The only way for a school to get them back is to buy them back or wait for the GoR to expire (which they all do eventually).

Jim Young @ACCSports
RT @JFowlerCBS: Told #ACC annual media rights money, in light of GOR completion, will average $20-plus-million per school starting July 1.

Jeremy Fowler ‏ @ JFowlerCBS 2m

I'm told
# ACC annual media rights money, in light of GOR completion, will average $20-plus-million per school starting July 1.

(04-22-2013 01:52 PM)ohio1317 Wrote:  

(04-22-2013 12:10 PM)NJRedMan Wrote:  Someone will eventually challenge a GoR and then we'll see how ironclad they are. Until then, none of us know how well it will hold up. We all thought exit fees were enforceable until they weren't.

While true, this does work pretty differently. A grant of rights does not technically do anything to stop someone from changing conferences. They have given up rights to broadcast home games though so legally, if a school leaves conference A for conference B, conference A still has all the home rights. The only way for a school to get them back is to buy them back or wait for the GoR to expire (which they all do eventually).

Well if someone leaves, the ACC still owns the rights to their home games but they have sold those rights (with the possible except of Tier III) to ESPN.

It protects the ACC in that if a school leaves, ESPN has less basis for lowering the rights fee since ESPN will still hold the rights to 6 to 8 games per year for the school depending on their scheduling practices. The only loss is the four conference road games.

In reality if say UVA went to the Big 10, chances are that UVA's home schedule will be just as valuable, if not more valuable to ESPN than if they remained in the ACC. ESPN comes out ahead because none of the extra value has to be paid to the ACC.

(04-22-2013 12:44 PM)10thMountain Wrote:  Huge if true.

Doesn't mean realignment is done, just changes where targets can come from.

It's over. End of an exciting 3-4 years.

Yay. Happy happy, joy joy. But I'm still a GOR skeptic. Then again, I'm just skeptical as hell of everything. And I'll be damned if I'll trust anyone in the den of thieves that is conference realignment.

(04-22-2013 02:07 PM)arkstfan Wrote:  

(04-22-2013 01:52 PM)ohio1317 Wrote:  

(04-22-2013 12:10 PM)NJRedMan Wrote:  Someone will eventually challenge a GoR and then we'll see how ironclad they are. Until then, none of us know how well it will hold up. We all thought exit fees were enforceable until they weren't.

While true, this does work pretty differently. A grant of rights does not technically do anything to stop someone from changing conferences. They have given up rights to broadcast home games though so legally, if a school leaves conference A for conference B, conference A still has all the home rights. The only way for a school to get them back is to buy them back or wait for the GoR to expire (which they all do eventually).

Well if someone leaves, the ACC still owns the rights to their home games but they have sold those rights (with the possible except of Tier III) to ESPN.

It protects the ACC in that if a school leaves, ESPN has less basis for lowering the rights fee since ESPN will still hold the rights to 6 to 8 games per year for the school depending on their scheduling practices. The only loss is the four conference road games.

In reality if say UVA went to the Big 10, chances are that UVA's home schedule will be just as valuable, if not more valuable to ESPN than if they remained in the ACC. ESPN comes out ahead because none of the extra value has to be paid to the ACC.

This is an important point. GOR protects ESPN moreso than anyone else as they have their contracts with all 5 of the Big conferences, especially the ACC and SEC as those conferences have sold the rights covered under the GOR to ESPN. Any ACC or SEC school that leaves still has their rights owned by ESPN long term. Any Pac 12 or Big 10 school that leaves still has their rights owned by the Pac 12 Network and Big 10 Network. Any Big 12 School that leaves will have their rights owned by Fox/ESPN.

The GOR gives ESPN an incentive to keep teams from leaving the ACC and SEC due to their long term deals. In 2016 The Big 10 will likely do what the Pac 12 did and take all their content in house and sell packages of games to the networks. So an ACC school leaving the ACC to the Big 10 would drive the price up for ESPN next contract negotiation. This GOR may not be 100% fullproof, but it does a great job at protecting the conference by aligining it with ESPN. It is much better to have ESPN on your side in college sports

Now that I've had a chance to get outdoors and think on it...

This was really driven by ESPN, with the evidence being the recently tweet $$$ figures. Why ESPN? Because they couldn't afford to lose UNC to the B1G or FSU to the XII, conferences that aren't fully partnered with ESPN. FOX has a hand in both (and a substantial hand with the B1G).

The WWL understood this and I'm willing to bet sig space that they initiated the conversation with Swofford. For once, the ACC found itself in a position of ... wait for it.... wait.... LEVERAGE, and used it to get immediate money ($20M starting July 1) for the members.

I mentioned that on page 3. ESPN had to be behind this move. Great move.

(04-22-2013 02:20 PM)Fireman451 Wrote:  I mentioned that on page 3. ESPN had to be behind this move. Great move.

Yeah, you did -- great insight, sir.

(04-22-2013 02:18 PM)ecuacc4ever Wrote:  Now that I've had a chance to get outdoors and think on it...

This was really driven by ESPN, with the evidence being the recently tweet $$$ figures. Why ESPN? Because they couldn't afford to lose UNC to the B1G or FSU to the XII, conferences that aren't fully partnered with ESPN. FOX has a hand in both (and a substantial hand with the B1G).

The WWL understood this and I'm willing to bet sig space that they initiated the conversation with Swofford. For once, the ACC found itself in a position of ... wait for it.... wait.... LEVERAGE, and used it to get immediate money ($20M starting July 1) for the members.

I don't think ACC is getting 20 million for the 2013-14 season- sounds like the average per year though is now up to 20 instead of 17. So maybe 15-16 mil next year and then near the end up to 23-24 mil maybe..

Agreed, the last thing espn wants is the big 10 to get prime school's from the acc for the BTN. I thought the big 10 should have just gone for FSU and not worried about UNC and UVA, those school's already have plenty of $ and ties that bind them to the ACC.

(04-22-2013 02:18 PM)ecuacc4ever Wrote:  Now that I've had a chance to get outdoors and think on it...

This was really driven by ESPN, with the evidence being the recently tweet $$$ figures. Why ESPN? Because they couldn't afford to lose UNC to the B1G or FSU to the XII, conferences that aren't fully partnered with ESPN. FOX has a hand in both (and a substantial hand with the B1G).

The WWL understood this and I'm willing to bet sig space that they initiated the conversation with Swofford. For once, the ACC found itself in a position of ... wait for it.... wait.... LEVERAGE, and used it to get immediate money ($20M starting July 1) for the members.

IIRC, ESPN and Fox also wanted the Big 12 to have a GOR.

Maybe they've had enough of every conference that adds a new team asking for more money even though they have a lot of years left on their contract. I'd imagine that every time an exec from ESPN gets an e-mail from one of these conferences saying, "Hey, let's talk about renegotiating our contract now that we've added _______ to our league," the ESPN guy forwards it around internally with the comment, "This is bulls#!t."

(04-22-2013 12:10 PM)NJRedMan Wrote:  Someone will eventually challenge a GoR and then we'll see how ironclad they are. Until then, none of us know how well it will hold up. We all thought exit fees were enforceable until they weren't.

You're right, but 1) it indicates that no ACC schools plan on leaving (why would they have ALL voted to increase the buyout?) and 2) the fact that they ALL voted for it woul dmake it tricky for a school to try to break.

(04-22-2013 02:14 PM)westwolf Wrote:  

(04-22-2013 12:44 PM)10thMountain Wrote:  Huge if true.

Doesn't mean realignment is done, just changes where targets can come from.

It's over. End of an exciting 3-4 years.

Its just beginning for the non-football schools. But at least they have an idea that the waves are over.