(06-01-2016 04:28 PM)lumberpack4 Wrote:  Kap you are so silly. You expect fans without any on-field results as if we all had nothing better to do, as if we lived in 96 or some other God-forsaken rural area. That's sort of odd don't you think?

NC State can sell 670K football and basketball tickets at face value despite never playing in a major bowl and not winning a conference title in football since 1979, nor a basketball title since 1989. This despite being in the same market as UNC, Duke, and the Carolina Hurricanes and competing against their 1.75 million tickets they sell into the same market.

I think you need some more econ classes. Because if Clemson fans were so generous, they would not be ranked second to last in the ACC per fan contributions according to the UVa booster website.

Just because Clemson fans are somewhat poorer than the rest of the ACC fans, doesn't make them any better.

I don't think the Clemson fans are poorer at least as far as alumni. Clemson has the 10th highest out of station tuition and a lot of rich kids and alumni from the Charleston and Hilton Head areas of the state.

Clemson is more rural than NC State and other ACC schools. It isn't as convenient to get to the games, especally for basketball on weekday nights. you bascally have to live in Greenville to do that.

(06-01-2016 02:21 PM)lumberpack4 Wrote:  Why would an NC State or UNC fan want to go to Charlotte in late December, sit in the cold rain, and watch their football team play in a meaningless bowl when they could stay home for Christmas and go to a basketball or a hockey game inside a warm, dry arena?

Some fans are so fanatical they will follow their team to bum **** because their lives are otherwise empty, but give intelligent folks some credit. A 7 or 8 win team doesn't turn either NC State or UNC fans on unless the opponent is so special that it's not a game but a happening.

One thing Clemson football has going for itself is that it does not compete in the marketplace against Clemson basketball. Frank Howard said as much 70 years ago. However at UNC, Duke, NC State, WF, UVa, Syracuse, and Louisville there is competition and it becomes a choice to make in December.


But yes, there are some fan bases that would love a trip to Charlotte so that they can buy some shoes or perhaps false teeth.

Clemson is about the exact same distance from Greenville as Chapel Hill is to Raleigh and obvoiusly alumni live all over the state and other states ncluding Charlotte. you make some weird statements

Clemson basketball just spent million dollars to reconfigure the arena. a lot of money as been spent on basketball.

(06-10-2016 09:31 PM)ren.hoek Wrote:  

(06-10-2016 05:49 PM)jtwvu87 Wrote:  http://espn.go.com/blog/big12/post/_/id/...safety-net

30.4 million For Big 12 schools..plus 3rd tier rights..wvu over $6 million..$36.4 million for WVU...

And yet WVU's administration would crawl across broken glass naked just to be considered for acc membership. That's the truest thing you'll ever read.

#brutaltruth

Now theres a gross visual that I just cant get out of my head!
Thanks a lot Ren.Hoek.

hmm..that is your opinion. however, i am not saying its not valid. we are doing the best we can do. i have no animosity against acc but just that i was inserting the lastest info available about revenues for BIG XII.. meant no disrespect.

ACC has made a lot of progress in recent years against everybody but the SEC but, of course, that just fuels Clemson and FSU paranoia that they're DOOMED because they're in the ACC.

By the way, how is it that Duke can pay Coach K about $10 million a year, which is more than the entire football and basketball staffs of either Clemson or FSU, and field more athletic teams than either Clemson or FSU even though it has only a fraction of the football attendance of either Clemson or FSU? There must be something more going on with athletic department budgets than conference TV distributions and football ticket sales.

Attendance and revenue are two different things

(06-13-2016 10:21 AM)Hallcity Wrote:  

ACC has made a lot of progress in recent years against everybody but the SEC but, of course, that just fuels Clemson and FSU paranoia that they're DOOMED because they're in the ACC.

By the way, how is it that Duke can pay Coach K about $10 million a year, which is more than the entire football and basketball staffs of either Clemson or FSU, and field more athletic teams than either Clemson or FSU even though it has only a fraction of the football attendance of either Clemson or FSU? There must be something more going on with athletic department budgets than conference TV distributions and football ticket sales.

i can assure you most Clemson fans do not feel doomed about being in the ACC and we have no problem being in it.

(06-18-2016 07:14 AM)ClemVegas Wrote:  

(06-13-2016 10:21 AM)Hallcity Wrote:  

ACC has made a lot of progress in recent years against everybody but the SEC but, of course, that just fuels Clemson and FSU paranoia that they're DOOMED because they're in the ACC. [...]

i can assure you most Clemson fans do not feel doomed about being in the ACC and we have no problem being in it.

Likewise for most Seminole fans.

ACC champs are doing fine in this new playoff era. Any disappointments have been of our own making, not the league's.

(06-19-2016 07:40 AM)Gitanole Wrote:  

(06-18-2016 07:14 AM)ClemVegas Wrote:  

(06-13-2016 10:21 AM)Hallcity Wrote:  

ACC has made a lot of progress in recent years against everybody but the SEC but, of course, that just fuels Clemson and FSU paranoia that they're DOOMED because they're in the ACC. [...]

i can assure you most Clemson fans do not feel doomed about being in the ACC and we have no problem being in it.

Likewise for most Seminole fans.

ACC champs are doing fine in this new playoff era. Any disappointments have been of our own making, not the league's.

Welcome to the board Gitanole! You will find this board to be pretty good, with mostly intelligent conversation and very little nonsense.

(06-10-2016 10:19 PM)GTFletch Wrote:  

(06-02-2016 10:35 AM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  

(06-02-2016 09:49 AM)Dasville Wrote:  Is ESPN required to sell Raycom Sports anything? Could it be that, contractually, they only have to sell them content they were going to syndicate anyway? What if espn decides to use that content in a different manner, such as a network?

My understanding is that the contract spells out so many games go to Raycom.

Some say it's about nepotism, but another explanation is that the ACC didn't want those games to fall all the way down to ESPN3. Either way, it has been good for exposure (having games OTA) but bad for revenue.

At any rate, that's the trade off... More money for no more OTA except the occasional ABC and NBC games. Great for Clemson and FSU, who are already on ABC. The other schools are the ones who must make the trade...

You both are correct, I read do not have the link (will try and find it) that ESPN and RAYCOM are in Collaboration about RAYCOM "ACC Network programming" SO I think the FOX RSN games game stay subleased, and ESPN can contract RAYCOM out for some ACC programing... The issue becomes what about the OTA games, and content for the ACC Channel.. That is why they are talking about upping the football and basketball games to 9 and 20... for more inventory!!!

LINK
http://www.cbssports.com/college-footbal...-to-clear/

Raycom has 31 ACC football & 60 basketball games (some of which are sublicensed to Fox RSN) Local stations in the South still need content, and Raycom’s ACC lineup is basically the only game left in that regard.

This makes sense, plus the OTA (over-the-air, or for free not for a fee) "ACC Network" has been greatly expanded in the last several years - at one time it was just "local stations in the South" as you said but now you can see these games in Texas, California, Oregon, Iowa, etc., and even in Hawaii as local OTA stations are still seeking sports content. This is the good news - more exposure for football and men's basketball. I heard the Conference gets a cut of advertising and maybe some fees out of it but it is not so much - maybe that is the "bad news" that the $$$ is not so much, but the OTA exposure is greater than any cable network can give you.

The copied link has a stunning list of the TV "affiliates" of this "ACC Network":

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_AC...affiliates