Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Thread Closed 
Is the ACC really safe after the Grant of rights?
Author Message
lumberpack4 Offline
Banned

Posts: 4,336
Joined: Jun 2013
I Root For: ACC
Location:
Post: #41
RE: Is the ACC really safe after the Grant of rights?
(03-09-2014 01:59 PM)CrazyPaco Wrote:  
(03-09-2014 01:55 PM)lumberpack4 Wrote:  
(03-09-2014 01:28 PM)Kittonhead Wrote:  
(03-09-2014 11:51 AM)bullet Wrote:  
(03-09-2014 10:53 AM)westmc9th Wrote:  Yes, the GOR makes us safe, I think both the ACC and Big 12 are safe for now, its weird but ive came around to the idea of adding WVU once the Big 12 GOR comes to an end but I dont think it would happen. Im not saying DEATH TO the Big 12 I think they could add someone more in their geographical area if WVU left.

But not anyone more profitable than WVU.

With the GOR, ACC is safe for at least a decade. There will be a gap in distributions between the Big 10 and ACC, but is it enough to interest UVA or UNC even then? Big 10 isn't really interested (at least now) in anyone else in the ACC. And in getting someone to change, often they have to be dissatisfied. The ACC had a $12.9 million TV contract a year ago. They are at an average $18-$20 right now and will be making an extra $5-$6 million a year starting next year due to the playoffs and Orange Bowl deal. So that's doubling their TV/bowl revenue in a couple of years. They are pretty happy right now.

The main reason why Maryland moved to the B1G was to improve its academic reputation. Reputation isn't a problem for UVA, UNC or Georgia Tech and those are the three prime candidates for the B1G.

There aren't that many ACC schools the B1G would consider adding. Syracuse, Boston College and Pittsburgh are all out.

The move that nobody is talking about which I think is possibly is UNC and Duke to the SEC. The SEC might be willing to accommodate the Duke-UNC rivalry for the sake of getting into North Carolina. UNC I think could see the advantage in football recruiting as part of the SEC.

The traditional arguement against a move to the SEC from an ACC school has centered on academics. With TAMU and Missouri joining the SEC and Louisville, Pitt and Syracuse joining the ACC I'm not sure academics are much of an issue between the two leagues anymore.

01-wingedeagle

It truly is one of the stupidest things ever posted on the internet.

I didn't know Maryland had an academic reputation problem. I guess it's the partnership with VT on the Vet School/Equine Facility that's the cause of that. 04-cheers

I knew Maryland had a common sense and honesty reputation issue, but not an academic reputation issue.
03-09-2014 02:04 PM
Find all posts by this user
bitcruncher Offline
pepperoni roll psycho...
*

Posts: 61,859
Joined: Jan 2006
Reputation: 526
I Root For: West Virginia
Location: Knoxville, TN
Post: #42
RE: Is the ACC really safe after the Grant of rights?
Maryland moved to the B1G so they could earn more money. In the B1G they'll be able to show a profit in due time. It's that simple.
03-09-2014 02:06 PM
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Wedge Offline
Moderator
*

Posts: 19,862
Joined: May 2010
Reputation: 964
I Root For: California
Location: IV, V, VI, IX
Post: #43
RE: Is the ACC really safe after the Grant of rights?
(03-09-2014 01:06 PM)bullet Wrote:  
(03-09-2014 12:34 PM)ken d Wrote:  It wouldn't surprise me greatly if the status quo for 2015 proves to be the inflation adjusted high water mark for conference media revenues. To some extent, ESPN and Fox are gambling that the huge contracts they just signed will prove to be profitable. In any case, between them they have tied up pretty much all the properties they consider attractive. The only thing left in the future is to move those attractive pieces around.

What happens if ESPN and Fox don't realize the advertising bonanza they are hoping for? Clearly, in that case they aren't going to pay as much to the conferences next time around.

What happens if only Fox is sorely disappointed in its results, and decides to scale back unilaterally? I doubt that ESPN is going to be a white knight to the conferences and pay them what Fox used to pay them. They are only going to pay what they have to in a market they now can dictate terms to.

What happens if ESPN is the one that caves? Well, in that case, the world is coming to an end anyway, so who cares.

I could see a situation where the next round of realignment involves shedding some P5 member schools, rather than adding more. We sometimes assume that conferences would be too high-minded to act that way, but greed is a very powerful force.

Mountain West Conference is a case in point.

For that matter, the SEC and ACC and Big 12 are also examples. And the Pac 12 did shed Idaho.

There are some similarities between the PCC-to-AAWU move and the WAC-to-MWC move. In both cases, some "power members" thought other members were not as committed to athletics, and both new leagues eventually got to the point where some, but not all, of the other former members rejoined.

And yes, we may be getting close to the point where some of the P5 leagues are large enough to split in a similar way. If any of these conferences bulk up to 16 or more, that will become even more likely.

That's something that more vulnerable members of P5 leagues ought to keep in mind if voting on further expansion. If you are voting on behalf of Purdue, Wake Forest, Washington State, Mississippi State, etc., do you really want to make your league so large that it's more likely that the biggest of the big boys will someday kick you to the curb? They ought to think of their school's longterm interests and not just blindly follow a commissioner who is trying to burnish his own reputation with the next megadeal.
03-09-2014 02:17 PM
Find all posts by this user
Kittonhead Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 10,000
Joined: Jun 2013
Reputation: 122
I Root For: Beat Matisse
Location:
Post: #44
RE: Is the ACC really safe after the Grant of rights?
(03-09-2014 01:59 PM)CrazyPaco Wrote:  
(03-09-2014 01:55 PM)lumberpack4 Wrote:  
(03-09-2014 01:28 PM)Kittonhead Wrote:  
(03-09-2014 11:51 AM)bullet Wrote:  
(03-09-2014 10:53 AM)westmc9th Wrote:  Yes, the GOR makes us safe, I think both the ACC and Big 12 are safe for now, its weird but ive came around to the idea of adding WVU once the Big 12 GOR comes to an end but I dont think it would happen. Im not saying DEATH TO the Big 12 I think they could add someone more in their geographical area if WVU left.

But not anyone more profitable than WVU.

With the GOR, ACC is safe for at least a decade. There will be a gap in distributions between the Big 10 and ACC, but is it enough to interest UVA or UNC even then? Big 10 isn't really interested (at least now) in anyone else in the ACC. And in getting someone to change, often they have to be dissatisfied. The ACC had a $12.9 million TV contract a year ago. They are at an average $18-$20 right now and will be making an extra $5-$6 million a year starting next year due to the playoffs and Orange Bowl deal. So that's doubling their TV/bowl revenue in a couple of years. They are pretty happy right now.

The main reason why Maryland moved to the B1G was to improve its academic reputation. Reputation isn't a problem for UVA, UNC or Georgia Tech and those are the three prime candidates for the B1G.

There aren't that many ACC schools the B1G would consider adding. Syracuse, Boston College and Pittsburgh are all out.

The move that nobody is talking about which I think is possibly is UNC and Duke to the SEC. The SEC might be willing to accommodate the Duke-UNC rivalry for the sake of getting into North Carolina. UNC I think could see the advantage in football recruiting as part of the SEC.

The traditional arguement against a move to the SEC from an ACC school has centered on academics. With TAMU and Missouri joining the SEC and Louisville, Pitt and Syracuse joining the ACC I'm not sure academics are much of an issue between the two leagues anymore.

01-wingedeagle

It truly is one of the stupidest things ever posted on the internet.

UMD has a poor reputation when compared with UVA, UNC and even VT. A move to the B1G will help its academic reputation among High School students who are on the fence because the one thing they can point to is at least its a B1G school. You can hate the campus and College Park sucks but the bottom line is its a B1G school.

If there is any conference label outside of the Ivy League that really makes a difference to have its the B1G. UVA and UNC can stand on their own two feet with top notch campuses but for a crappy urban land grant its critical.
03-09-2014 02:18 PM
Find all posts by this user
ken d Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 17,335
Joined: Dec 2013
Reputation: 1211
I Root For: college sports
Location: Raleigh
Post: #45
RE: Is the ACC really safe after the Grant of rights?
(03-09-2014 02:17 PM)Wedge Wrote:  
(03-09-2014 01:06 PM)bullet Wrote:  
(03-09-2014 12:34 PM)ken d Wrote:  It wouldn't surprise me greatly if the status quo for 2015 proves to be the inflation adjusted high water mark for conference media revenues. To some extent, ESPN and Fox are gambling that the huge contracts they just signed will prove to be profitable. In any case, between them they have tied up pretty much all the properties they consider attractive. The only thing left in the future is to move those attractive pieces around.

What happens if ESPN and Fox don't realize the advertising bonanza they are hoping for? Clearly, in that case they aren't going to pay as much to the conferences next time around.

What happens if only Fox is sorely disappointed in its results, and decides to scale back unilaterally? I doubt that ESPN is going to be a white knight to the conferences and pay them what Fox used to pay them. They are only going to pay what they have to in a market they now can dictate terms to.

What happens if ESPN is the one that caves? Well, in that case, the world is coming to an end anyway, so who cares.

I could see a situation where the next round of realignment involves shedding some P5 member schools, rather than adding more. We sometimes assume that conferences would be too high-minded to act that way, but greed is a very powerful force.

Mountain West Conference is a case in point.

For that matter, the SEC and ACC and Big 12 are also examples. And the Pac 12 did shed Idaho.

There are some similarities between the PCC-to-AAWU move and the WAC-to-MWC move. In both cases, some "power members" thought other members were not as committed to athletics, and both new leagues eventually got to the point where some, but not all, of the other former members rejoined.

And yes, we may be getting close to the point where some of the P5 leagues are large enough to split in a similar way. If any of these conferences bulk up to 16 or more, that will become even more likely.

That's something that more vulnerable members of P5 leagues ought to keep in mind if voting on further expansion. If you are voting on behalf of Purdue, Wake Forest, Washington State, Mississippi State, etc., do you really want to make your league so large that it's more likely that the biggest of the big boys will someday kick you to the curb? They ought to think of their school's longterm interests and not just blindly follow a commissioner who is trying to burnish his own reputation with the next megadeal.

Let's fantasize that at some point in the future, ESPN says to the ACC: We have been paying you $280 million a year. When we renew the deal, we're only willing to pay you $240 million. But, if you want to drop BC and Wake Forest, we won't adjust our offer. How sure are we that the other 12 members of that league wouldn't throw those two schools under the bus? If I were BC and WFU I wouldn't be making any enemies right now.
03-09-2014 02:26 PM
Find all posts by this user
Wedge Offline
Moderator
*

Posts: 19,862
Joined: May 2010
Reputation: 964
I Root For: California
Location: IV, V, VI, IX
Post: #46
RE: Is the ACC really safe after the Grant of rights?
(03-09-2014 02:26 PM)ken d Wrote:  
(03-09-2014 02:17 PM)Wedge Wrote:  
(03-09-2014 01:06 PM)bullet Wrote:  
(03-09-2014 12:34 PM)ken d Wrote:  It wouldn't surprise me greatly if the status quo for 2015 proves to be the inflation adjusted high water mark for conference media revenues. To some extent, ESPN and Fox are gambling that the huge contracts they just signed will prove to be profitable. In any case, between them they have tied up pretty much all the properties they consider attractive. The only thing left in the future is to move those attractive pieces around.

What happens if ESPN and Fox don't realize the advertising bonanza they are hoping for? Clearly, in that case they aren't going to pay as much to the conferences next time around.

What happens if only Fox is sorely disappointed in its results, and decides to scale back unilaterally? I doubt that ESPN is going to be a white knight to the conferences and pay them what Fox used to pay them. They are only going to pay what they have to in a market they now can dictate terms to.

What happens if ESPN is the one that caves? Well, in that case, the world is coming to an end anyway, so who cares.

I could see a situation where the next round of realignment involves shedding some P5 member schools, rather than adding more. We sometimes assume that conferences would be too high-minded to act that way, but greed is a very powerful force.

Mountain West Conference is a case in point.

For that matter, the SEC and ACC and Big 12 are also examples. And the Pac 12 did shed Idaho.

There are some similarities between the PCC-to-AAWU move and the WAC-to-MWC move. In both cases, some "power members" thought other members were not as committed to athletics, and both new leagues eventually got to the point where some, but not all, of the other former members rejoined.

And yes, we may be getting close to the point where some of the P5 leagues are large enough to split in a similar way. If any of these conferences bulk up to 16 or more, that will become even more likely.

That's something that more vulnerable members of P5 leagues ought to keep in mind if voting on further expansion. If you are voting on behalf of Purdue, Wake Forest, Washington State, Mississippi State, etc., do you really want to make your league so large that it's more likely that the biggest of the big boys will someday kick you to the curb? They ought to think of their school's longterm interests and not just blindly follow a commissioner who is trying to burnish his own reputation with the next megadeal.

Let's fantasize that at some point in the future, ESPN says to the ACC: We have been paying you $280 million a year. When we renew the deal, we're only willing to pay you $240 million. But, if you want to drop BC and Wake Forest, we won't adjust our offer. How sure are we that the other 12 members of that league wouldn't throw those two schools under the bus? If I were BC and WFU I wouldn't be making any enemies right now.

One of the stories about the formation of the Big 12 goes like this: The Big 8 and SWC had been talking about merging the two leagues into one 16-team league. Someone from the Big 8 asked TV consultants to project the TV value of the combined 16-team league, and the consultants said, X dollars per year. Then they asked the consultants, what would be the TV value if we invited only UT and TAMU to join the Big 8, and the consultants said it would be the same amount.

That kind of thing might happen with a supersized league at some point. Even now, TV guys would probably say that, for example, an SEC minus Miss. State and Vandy would be worth exactly as many TV dollars as the 14-team SEC that exists today. The same amount of money, split 12 ways instead of 14.
03-09-2014 02:40 PM
Find all posts by this user
JunkYardCard Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,875
Joined: Jan 2010
Reputation: 56
I Root For: Louisville
Location: Louisville, KY
Post: #47
RE: Is the ACC really safe after the Grant of rights?
This is all such nonsense. To continue with yet another relationship analogy, an ACC or Big 12 break-up at this point would be like wanting to leave your girlfriend, but deciding to get married first and then get divorced instead of just breaking up in the first place. Some of you dreamers just make this WAY more complicated than it has to be.

Then you ask "what about when the GOR runs out?" Well, what if an asteroid crashes into New York? What if Napoleon had a B-52 at Waterloo? The answers to those questions are equally relevant. The GORs run for over a decade. ANYTHING can happen in that time.
03-09-2014 02:40 PM
Find all posts by this user
JunkYardCard Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,875
Joined: Jan 2010
Reputation: 56
I Root For: Louisville
Location: Louisville, KY
Post: #48
RE: Is the ACC really safe after the Grant of rights?
(03-09-2014 12:34 PM)ken d Wrote:  I could see a situation where the next round of realignment involves shedding some P5 member schools, rather than adding more. We sometimes assume that conferences would be too high-minded to act that way, but greed is a very powerful force.

No doubt. There are many great programs that could get squeezed out. Why does the Big Ten need Purdue, Northwestern or even Michigan State for TV purposes? Why does the ACC need four schools in North Carolina? Why does the SEC need Mississippi State or Vandy? Why does the Big 12 need anyone not named Texas or Oklahoma?

I'm not saying I think any such move would be good. In fact it would suck. But I could see it happening because of money from TV.
03-09-2014 02:46 PM
Find all posts by this user
bitcruncher Offline
pepperoni roll psycho...
*

Posts: 61,859
Joined: Jan 2006
Reputation: 526
I Root For: West Virginia
Location: Knoxville, TN
Post: #49
RE: Is the ACC really safe after the Grant of rights?
(03-09-2014 02:46 PM)JunkYardCard Wrote:  
(03-09-2014 12:34 PM)ken d Wrote:  I could see a situation where the next round of realignment involves shedding some P5 member schools, rather than adding more. We sometimes assume that conferences would be too high-minded to act that way, but greed is a very powerful force.
No doubt. There are many great programs that could get squeezed out. Why does the Big Ten need Purdue, Northwestern or even Michigan State for TV purposes? Why does the ACC need four schools in North Carolina? Why does the SEC need Mississippi State or Vandy? Why does the Big 12 need anyone not named Texas or Oklahoma?

I'm not saying I think any such move would be good. In fact it would suck. But I could see it happening because of money from TV.
Because having only 2 teams would make a lousy conference.
03-09-2014 02:51 PM
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Kittonhead Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 10,000
Joined: Jun 2013
Reputation: 122
I Root For: Beat Matisse
Location:
Post: #50
RE: Is the ACC really safe after the Grant of rights?
(03-09-2014 02:46 PM)JunkYardCard Wrote:  
(03-09-2014 12:34 PM)ken d Wrote:  I could see a situation where the next round of realignment involves shedding some P5 member schools, rather than adding more. We sometimes assume that conferences would be too high-minded to act that way, but greed is a very powerful force.

No doubt. There are many great programs that could get squeezed out. Why does the Big Ten need Purdue, Northwestern or even Michigan State for TV purposes? Why does the ACC need four schools in North Carolina? Why does the SEC need Mississippi State or Vandy? Why does the Big 12 need anyone not named Texas or Oklahoma?

I'm not saying I think any such move would be good. In fact it would suck. But I could see it happening because of money from TV.

Kicking members out over TV contract numbers is taboo.

What I think could be in store for the future is some of the mega football powers like Texas and USC deciding to go independent instead of having a large hulking conference drag them down.

Michigan might benefit from a move out of the B1G and put their sports into the ACC like Notre Dame. Play a partial ACC schedule and have plenty of room on the schedule for Ohio State and Michigan State. I bet they could stay in the CIC for academics.
03-09-2014 03:04 PM
Find all posts by this user
ClairtonPanther Offline
people need to wake up
*

Posts: 25,056
Joined: Mar 2005
Reputation: 777
I Root For: Pitt/Navy
Location: Portland, Oregon

Donators
Post: #51
RE: Is the ACC really safe after the Grant of rights?
I think everybody is forgetting about the 1000lbs gorilla in computer based networks. Conferences would be able to cut out ESPN/FOX/NBC and make profits on their own. Conferences could easily sell their network to their fans (consumer) for 10-15 a month and offer things like live games, and games from the past plus tons of other original content. Just think of how much money that could be made just from selling a network for $10 a month to 20M (if not more) consumers.

I guarantee all the conferences are paying attention to the WWE Network. That model is the model of the future.
03-09-2014 03:05 PM
Find all posts by this user
Native Georgian Online
Legend
*

Posts: 27,519
Joined: May 2008
Reputation: 1024
I Root For: TULANE+GA.STATE
Location: Decatur GA
Post: #52
RE: Is the ACC really safe after the Grant of rights?
(03-09-2014 03:04 PM)Kittonhead Wrote:  Kicking members out over TV contract numbers is taboo.
Heh. It's taboo Now. Check back in a decade. And another decade after that.
(This post was last modified: 03-09-2014 03:13 PM by Native Georgian.)
03-09-2014 03:12 PM
Find all posts by this user
quo vadis Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 50,012
Joined: Aug 2008
Reputation: 2372
I Root For: USF/Georgetown
Location: New Orleans
Post: #53
RE: Is the ACC really safe after the Grant of rights?
(03-09-2014 01:14 PM)ren.hoek Wrote:  UNC and UVA are dyed in the wool ACC. If you've ever lived in NC you would know that.

If you'd read my previous post, where I said that the NC and VA schools are core-ACC and don't want to be anywhere else, you'd know that I did know that. 07-coffee3
03-09-2014 03:28 PM
Find all posts by this user
quo vadis Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 50,012
Joined: Aug 2008
Reputation: 2372
I Root For: USF/Georgetown
Location: New Orleans
Post: #54
RE: Is the ACC really safe after the Grant of rights?
(03-09-2014 01:28 PM)Kittonhead Wrote:  
(03-09-2014 11:51 AM)bullet Wrote:  
(03-09-2014 10:53 AM)westmc9th Wrote:  Yes, the GOR makes us safe, I think both the ACC and Big 12 are safe for now, its weird but ive came around to the idea of adding WVU once the Big 12 GOR comes to an end but I dont think it would happen. Im not saying DEATH TO the Big 12 I think they could add someone more in their geographical area if WVU left.

But not anyone more profitable than WVU.

With the GOR, ACC is safe for at least a decade. There will be a gap in distributions between the Big 10 and ACC, but is it enough to interest UVA or UNC even then? Big 10 isn't really interested (at least now) in anyone else in the ACC. And in getting someone to change, often they have to be dissatisfied. The ACC had a $12.9 million TV contract a year ago. They are at an average $18-$20 right now and will be making an extra $5-$6 million a year starting next year due to the playoffs and Orange Bowl deal. So that's doubling their TV/bowl revenue in a couple of years. They are pretty happy right now.

The main reason why Maryland moved to the B1G was to improve its academic reputation.

Since when does the B1G have a better academic rep than the ACC?
03-09-2014 03:29 PM
Find all posts by this user
quo vadis Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 50,012
Joined: Aug 2008
Reputation: 2372
I Root For: USF/Georgetown
Location: New Orleans
Post: #55
RE: Is the ACC really safe after the Grant of rights?
(03-09-2014 01:53 PM)lumberpack4 Wrote:  The point is that the ACC doesn't need equal TV revenue to compete with the B10 or SEC. FSU just proved that. And while folks focus on TV revenue disparity between conferences, perhaps they need to look at overall revenue disparity within conferences.

I don't know why a school would care about within-conference revenue disparities?

Using your logic, Maryland should have joined C-USA, where their overall revenue, even with the loss of ACC money, would easily make them the highest-revenue school in that conference, instead of the B1G, where their revenue will be far less than Michigan or Ohio State?

Better yet, why not join the Sun Belt and be an even bigger fish in a tinier pond?

I think these examples should make clear why relative revenue is meaningless compared to gross revenues ... 07-coffee3
(This post was last modified: 03-09-2014 03:37 PM by quo vadis.)
03-09-2014 03:36 PM
Find all posts by this user
CoogNellie Offline
Special Teams
*

Posts: 540
Joined: Apr 2013
Reputation: 15
I Root For: Houston
Location:
Post: #56
RE: Is the ACC really safe after the Grant of rights?
(03-09-2014 03:29 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  Since when does the B1G have a better academic rep than the ACC?

Since always? Big 10 is clearly the top academic conference of the big 5.
03-09-2014 03:48 PM
Find all posts by this user
CrazyPaco Offline
All American
*

Posts: 2,946
Joined: Jul 2005
Reputation: 275
I Root For:
Location:
Post: #57
RE: Is the ACC really safe after the Grant of rights?
(03-09-2014 03:48 PM)CoogNellie Wrote:  
(03-09-2014 03:29 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  Since when does the B1G have a better academic rep than the ACC?

Since always? Big 10 is clearly the top academic conference of the big 5.

According to whom? B10 Fan Boys? gotchya.

And this is after you swap Louisville for Maryland...

2014 US News ranking

Duke 7
Notre Dame 18
Virginia 23
Wake Forest 23
North Carolina 30
Boston College 31
Georgia Tech 36
Miami 47
Clemson 62
Pitt 62
Syracuse 62
Virginia Tech 69
Florida State 91
NC State 101
Louisville 161
ACC average 54.9
ACC median 47


Big Ten
Northwestern 12
Michigan 28
Penn State 37
Illinois 41
Wisconsin 41
Ohio State 52
Maryland 62
Purdue 68
Minnesota 69
Rutgers 69
Iowa 73
Michigan St 73
Indiana 75
Nebraska 101
Big Ten average 57.2
Big Ten median 65



Fall 2013 freshman SAT scores

ACC
Duke 1455
Notre Dame 1430
Georgia Tech 1385
Boston College 1360
Virginia 1355
Wake Forest 1330
Miami 1325
North Carolina 1305
Pitt 1270
Clemson 1235
Virginia Tech 1220
Florida State 1195
NC State 1185
Syracuse 1155
Louisville 1135
ACC average 1289.3
ACC median 1305


Big Ten
Northwestern 1445
Michigan 1380
Illinois 1350
Maryland 1310
Minnesota 1300
Wisconsin 1290
Ohio State 1265
Rutgers 1210
Purdue 1200
Indiana 1175
Penn State 1175
Iowa 1170
Nebraska 1170
Michigan St 1120
Big Ten average 1254.3
Big Ten median 1237.5
(This post was last modified: 03-09-2014 04:09 PM by CrazyPaco.)
03-09-2014 04:06 PM
Find all posts by this user
lumberpack4 Offline
Banned

Posts: 4,336
Joined: Jun 2013
I Root For: ACC
Location:
Post: #58
RE: Is the ACC really safe after the Grant of rights?
(03-09-2014 03:36 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  
(03-09-2014 01:53 PM)lumberpack4 Wrote:  The point is that the ACC doesn't need equal TV revenue to compete with the B10 or SEC. FSU just proved that. And while folks focus on TV revenue disparity between conferences, perhaps they need to look at overall revenue disparity within conferences.

I don't know why a school would care about within-conference revenue disparities?

Using your logic, Maryland should have joined C-USA, where their overall revenue, even with the loss of ACC money, would easily make them the highest-revenue school in that conference, instead of the B1G, where their revenue will be far less than Michigan or Ohio State?

Better yet, why not join the Sun Belt and be an even bigger fish in a tinier pond?

I think these examples should make clear why relative revenue is meaningless compared to gross revenues ... 07-coffee3

Gosh, you really are challenged.

You have to be able to win to sell tickets and to sell advertising. I guess you think that Maryland can make it on TV alone.

Evidently you seem to think that a school's base earnings are separate from it's level of participation. I guess you think if Ohio State dropped down to the AAC that they would continue to make their current level of income. 01-wingedeagle

Your illogic is so profound that I am stunned. 01-ncaabbs
03-09-2014 04:14 PM
Find all posts by this user
CoogNellie Offline
Special Teams
*

Posts: 540
Joined: Apr 2013
Reputation: 15
I Root For: Houston
Location:
Post: #59
RE: Is the ACC really safe after the Grant of rights?
I don't have a dog in this fight so I am not going to debate you, I'm sure you can easily hand pick data that would make either conference look better.

I could cite the CIC thing or the fact that the Big 10 is composed of all AAU schools save Nebraska versus the ACC who I would guess has more than 1 school not in the AAU.
03-09-2014 04:17 PM
Find all posts by this user
CrazyPaco Offline
All American
*

Posts: 2,946
Joined: Jul 2005
Reputation: 275
I Root For:
Location:
Post: #60
RE: Is the ACC really safe after the Grant of rights?
(03-09-2014 04:17 PM)CoogNellie Wrote:  I don't have a dog in this fight so I am not going to debate you, I'm sure you can easily hand pick data that would make either conference look better.

I could cite the CIC thing or the fact that the Big 10 is composed of all AAU schools save Nebraska versus the ACC who I would guess has more than 1 school not in the AAU.

Yep, you'd cite things based on ignorance, like most B10 fanboys would when they start throwing around sheet they don't understand like the CIC. The Big Ten has more AAU school than the Ivy, therefore, it must be better. Gotchya.

Here's the point, it is stupid as all hell. These are athletic conferences, not academic conferences. People in academia don't think about academics in terms of athletic affiliations, ever.

The ACC has more members that are closer to elite academic universities, but the Big Ten has more members that are major research universities. None of that means a damn thing outside of fanboy message board arguments. And for fanboy message board arguments, there is one undisputed leader, major flaws and all, in the arbitration of college academic reputation in the US as far as the general public is concerned and the results are posted above.
(This post was last modified: 03-09-2014 04:39 PM by CrazyPaco.)
03-09-2014 04:20 PM
Find all posts by this user
Thread Closed 




User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)


Copyright © 2002-2024 Collegiate Sports Nation Bulletin Board System (CSNbbs), All Rights Reserved.
CSNbbs is an independent fan site and is in no way affiliated to the NCAA or any of the schools and conferences it represents.
This site monetizes links. FTC Disclosure.
We allow third-party companies to serve ads and/or collect certain anonymous information when you visit our web site. These companies may use non-personally identifiable information (e.g., click stream information, browser type, time and date, subject of advertisements clicked or scrolled over) during your visits to this and other Web sites in order to provide advertisements about goods and services likely to be of greater interest to you. These companies typically use a cookie or third party web beacon to collect this information. To learn more about this behavioral advertising practice or to opt-out of this type of advertising, you can visit http://www.networkadvertising.org.
Powered By MyBB, © 2002-2024 MyBB Group.