or not?
I think Fox getting first half already opens some time for ACC via Espn?
I the they don't get B102, does that push ACCN forward?

(04-23-2016 02:23 PM)TIGER-PAUL Wrote:  or not?
I think Fox getting first half already opens some time for ACC via Espn?
I the they don't get B102, does that push ACCN forward?

No, ideally we wish Fox gets the complete B1G package. ABC/Disney is a bigger and more powerful ally than Fox. We will begin to see ABC/ESPN push SEC/ACC New Year bowls sooner once B1G becomes Fox property.

(04-23-2016 03:26 PM)ArQ Wrote:  

(04-23-2016 02:23 PM)TIGER-PAUL Wrote:  or not?
I think Fox getting first half already opens some time for ACC via Espn?
I the they don't get B102, does that push ACCN forward?

No, ideally we wish Fox gets the complete B1G package. ABC/Disney is a bigger and more powerful ally than Fox. We will begin to see ABC/ESPN push SEC/ACC New Year bowls sooner once B1G becomes Fox property.

I would be happy to see ESPN to decline to even bid on the second half of the B1G package. It would be making a statement that the industry leader thinks a lot more about the properties (including the ACC) it already has than it does about the Big Ten.

It certainly would be interesting if ESPN didn't even bid on B1G SECONDARY package. Even more interesting would be the B1G coaches pushback played out in public.

There will no doubt be plenty of B1G on ESPN at the end of the day.

The money conferences seem to have set a formula of splitting their interests in different networks.

Most likely you see ESPN get the 2nd half of the B1G. The B1G has already hit the jackpot, so I don't think $$$ is gonna be an issue for them. And I don't' think you see ESPN walk away from 1 of the 2 power conferences.

I would like to see ESPN continue to bid on Big Ten rights - but stay low. Despite the size of their fan bases, their football is simply not worth that much more than ACC football.

I don't see ESPN walking away. Fox needed the tier 1 as the corner stone, Espn didn't. Only question is does Espn go after all that is left, or try to break out part of the inventory. It may well make sense for them to try n get the top 1/2 of what is left, and let the rest go elsewhere.

(04-24-2016 08:21 AM)goodknightfl Wrote:  I don't see ESPN walking away. Fox needed the tier 1 as the corner stone, Espn didn't. Only question is does Espn go after all that is left, or try to break out part of the inventory. It may well make sense for them to try n get the top 1/2 of what is left, and let the rest go elsewhere.

I don't think it matters if ESPN gets the 2nd half as long as they don't pay a ton for it.

If for some reason they pay for more than the 1st half, then I'd be concerned.

I have a feeling the ACC will be relegated to the noon slots on ESPnu, ESPN news, ESPN3. Most games in the evening going ESPN, espn2 will go to sec and sec reruns.

If the ACC still wants its own television network, it is definitely rooting for ESPN to land the other half of the Big Ten's television package.

(04-25-2016 07:12 AM)Dr. Isaly von Yinzer Wrote:  If the ACC still wants its own television network, it is definitely rooting for ESPN to land the other half of the Big Ten's television package.

^^^ THIS (Probably) ^^^

On the one hand, lack of content for ABC, ESPN, ESPN2, ESPNU, ESPNews, and even ESPN3 makes it less likely that ESPN would want to launch an ACC Network because they might feel that they "need" that content for their own networks.

On the other hand, if the situation gets bad enough, ESPN might go back to an idea they already considered (reportedly) a couple of years ago: to convert ESPNU into the ACC Network - presumably in the hopes of getting it on basic cable throughout the ACC footprint. IMO, cord-cutting makes this more likely that before.

(04-23-2016 03:26 PM)ArQ Wrote:  No, ideally we wish Fox gets the complete B1G package. ESPN/Disney is a bigger and more powerful ally than Fox.

The Big Ten's reported new deal with Fox would go through the 2022-23 season. It includes more of the conference's basketball and football games on Fox and Fox Sports 1.

Several industry experts said Big Ten basketball coaches were closely watching the negotiations. Anything that meant fewer games on longtime partners ESPN and CBS would be viewed negatively by the coaches.
-- Dennis Dodd

HAVE AT IT, BOYS

From what I have read, Fox' deal is a guarantee if they broadcast a B1G game. I may be misunderstanding the arrangement, but if I am correct and Fox decides to not broadcast the full allotment of games, the B1G gets paid proportionately. If Fox does not see the numbers to support the payout, Fox simply does not broadcast games, which fall into the next group to select games, theoretically pushing more games to the BTN (where Fox owns 51%).

If I am wrong and Fox is guaranteeing a total payout, then Fox will not let a top game go to another broadcaster. Wat is the incentive for any other broadcaster than for volume? The middle f the pack games don't garner significant ratings any more than the middle of the pack of any other P5 conference. The bottom games will still be relegated to the BTN

Regardless, why anyone would pay the same amount as the reported Fox figure for the games Fox is rejecting is beyond reason. Fox will select the top games for the best numbers. No one will match that payout per game for lesser games.

I would not be surprised to see that Fox withdraws the deal and makes a lesser offer or that the deal is not quite as lucrative as has been presented. The value simply isn't there for B1G football and B1G hoops has some good teams but lets not id ourselves, they aren't staked top to bottom. If Fox truly overpays for the B1G, ESPN should let them have the B1G, concentrate on their properties and possibly give a little more exposure to the MAC and Big Mess/AAC.

(04-24-2016 07:14 AM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  I would like to see ESPN continue to bid on Big Ten rights - but stay low. Despite the size of their fan bases, their football is simply not worth that much more than ACC football.

How many quality teams does the B1G have? That's an argument for message board posters, fans, and TV talking heads. The ESPN bean counters who will make an offer to the B1G look at something else. If I can distribute Illinois vs Rutgers at a certain time, will advertisers buy it? Will it get positive ratings? Will we make money on it? How much? It's not the quality of the FB team, it's the breadth and depth of the viewing audience. Lots of people watch B1G FB.

The B1G should've helped the ACC pass divisional deregulation. There are a lot of B1G content match ups that aren't being played regularly. More brand v brand match ups = more $.

(04-30-2016 08:59 AM)Lenvillecards Wrote:  The B1G should've helped the ACC pass divisional deregulation. There are a lot of B1G content match ups that aren't being played regularly. More brand v brand match ups = more $.

Obviously they thought they didn't need the boost.

(04-30-2016 10:24 AM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  

(04-30-2016 08:59 AM)Lenvillecards Wrote:  The B1G should've helped the ACC pass divisional deregulation. There are a lot of B1G content match ups that aren't being played regularly. More brand v brand match ups = more $.

Obviously they thought they didn't need the boost.

It could've helped them with the second half of their TV package possibly.