Do ACC fans think at least verbal promises were given to the ACC schools to sign the GOR's and schools signed on based on those verbal promises? Or do ACC fans think it was just communicated the league would pursue a conference network?
I don't care what fans think.
(01-14-2016 02:10 PM)Dasville Wrote: [ -> ]I don't care what fans think.
ditto.
bottom line is that 15 very intelligent people were firmly convinced that signing the GOR to stay in the ACC was in their best interests (yes, that includes money). ESPN has the best football content (SEC) and the best basketball content (ACC). Either ESPN finds a way to keep the ACC financially competitive or there will be defections one day. personally, I think ESPN will keep us within reasonable distance of the B1G and SEC. could be wrong, but I don't think they want to see the conference break up.
(01-14-2016 02:02 PM)Win5002 Wrote: [ -> ]Do ACC fans think at least verbal promises were given to the ACC schools to sign the GOR's and schools signed on based on those verbal promises? Or do ACC fans think it was just communicated the league would pursue a conference network?
No, I don't think it was promised.
Honestly, I think each school signed it because they all feared
other teams would leave (after Maryland) and they would either (a) be left without a P5 conference seat, or (b) be forced to join a conference far away where travel would be a big negative. Yes, I think even FSU was afraid - of being snubbed by the SEC and being stuck on an island.
They were possibly told that without the GoR there was NO chance for a network, but I don't think they were ever 100% promised one if they did sign.
JMO though.
(01-14-2016 02:10 PM)Dasville Wrote: [ -> ]I don't care what fans think.
Ok, would all ACC athletic directors or BOR's for the particular schools please come on here and post whether it was.
good grief! its a fans message board its not made up of anything other than fans opinions.
(01-14-2016 02:19 PM)ren.hoek Wrote: [ -> ] (01-14-2016 02:10 PM)Dasville Wrote: [ -> ]I don't care what fans think.
ditto.
bottom line is that 15 very intelligent people were firmly convinced that signing the GOR to stay in the ACC was in their best interests (yes, that includes money). ESPN has the best football content (SEC) and the best basketball content (ACC). Either ESPN finds a way to keep the ACC financially competitive or there will be defections one day. personally, I think ESPN will keep us within reasonable distance of the B1G and SEC. could be wrong, but I don't think they want to see the conference break up.
I'd amend that to ESPN keeping the ACC within reasonable equity with the B12. Of course, ESPN cannot make up the difference with the Orange Bowl deal.
Cheers,
Neil
(01-14-2016 02:44 PM)Win5002 Wrote: [ -> ] (01-14-2016 02:10 PM)Dasville Wrote: [ -> ]I don't care what fans think.
Ok, would all ACC athletic directors or BOR's for the particular schools please come on here and post whether it was.
good grief! its a fans message board its not made up of anything other than fans opinions.
So what point are you driving at?
FSU, Clemson, UNC, etc...will all be bolting from the ACC now?
FSU BOT openly questioned why there wasn't a ACC Network yet and how it was a concern in their summer BOT meeting.
They were promised..........that's the truth, nobody here will like that and nobody here will believe it unless its on the front page of the NYT, but FSU was promised it. Among many other things (ND is joining the ACC).
Or maybe everyone here REALLY thinks Swofford flew to Tally, individually meet with each person of FSU's BOT and told them "sign the GOR, there are no promises".
And why does it upset folks here so much that it was promised? Why do you care? Why would it make you angry that it was? Don't get why folks get angry at the truth. Things were promised and they didn't happen. Why are you upset unless you were promised something that didn't transpire?
(01-14-2016 02:48 PM)TexanMark Wrote: [ -> ] (01-14-2016 02:44 PM)Win5002 Wrote: [ -> ] (01-14-2016 02:10 PM)Dasville Wrote: [ -> ]I don't care what fans think.
Ok, would all ACC athletic directors or BOR's for the particular schools please come on here and post whether it was.
good grief! its a fans message board its not made up of anything other than fans opinions.
So what point are you driving at?
FSU, Clemson, UNC, etc...will all be bolting from the ACC now?
I am just asking the question my OP was all in this thread. Do people think promises were made about a conference network or the Swofford/ACC officials said lets try for an ACC Network and see what happens.
It wouldn't surprise me if promises were made. Up until about a month ago, most of the rhetoric was "not if but when". Now ESPN is having financial issues, that's thrown a monkeywrench into everything. In the meantime, FSU has figured out how to make money in lieu of a conference network. For them, a conference network would just be gravy at this point.
(01-14-2016 02:59 PM)jaminandjachin Wrote: [ -> ]It wouldn't surprise me if promises were made. Up until about a month ago, most of the rhetoric was "not if but when". Now ESPN is having financial issues, that's thrown a monkeywrench into everything. In the meantime, FSU has figured out how to make money in lieu of a conference network. For them, a conference network would just be gravy at this point.
Bingo. It's just reality. It was promised.
Honestly, I bet we see some ACC Network happen.....and Swofford will technically be able to claim he delivered on the promise...it will just be a shadow of what the SEC Network is and people envisioned.
I don't believe FSU can afford to consider any revenue 'gravy'. They have SEC schools in annually looking to poach coaches and increasing our salaries to the point it is becoming a real issue (and will really be as the revenue gap gets bigger). It is critical for FSU. Again, FSU's BOT discussed this at length this summer.
(01-14-2016 03:04 PM)nole Wrote: [ -> ] (01-14-2016 02:59 PM)jaminandjachin Wrote: [ -> ]It wouldn't surprise me if promises were made. Up until about a month ago, most of the rhetoric was "not if but when". Now ESPN is having financial issues, that's thrown a monkeywrench into everything. In the meantime, FSU has figured out how to make money in lieu of a conference network. For them, a conference network would just be gravy at this point.
Bingo. It's just reality. It was promised.
Honestly, I bet we see some ACC Network happen.....and Swofford will technically be able to claim he delivered on the promise...it will just be a shadow of what the SEC Network is and people envisioned.
I don't believe FSU can afford to consider any revenue 'gravy'. They have SEC schools in annually looking to poach coaches and increasing our salaries to the point it is becoming a real issue (and will really be as the revenue gap gets bigger). It is critical for FSU. Again, FSU's BOT discussed this at length this summer.
This is where I disagree with you. If LSU wants to pay Jimbo Fisher 6 or 7 million then just let him go. You guys are a good enough program where you'll find a suitable replacement. The SEC believes that they can throw money around and take whomever they want. The problem now is enough schools can fairly compensate coaches without the headaches. Look at this past go around. South Carolina and Georgia took coordinators who were already in the SEC to be head coaches. We all know SC's first choice wasn't Muschamp. Fuente most likely could have ended up there. Tom Herman could have had either job. Fuente wanted VT and Herman stayed in Houston.
(01-14-2016 03:10 PM)jaminandjachin Wrote: [ -> ] (01-14-2016 03:04 PM)nole Wrote: [ -> ] (01-14-2016 02:59 PM)jaminandjachin Wrote: [ -> ]It wouldn't surprise me if promises were made. Up until about a month ago, most of the rhetoric was "not if but when". Now ESPN is having financial issues, that's thrown a monkeywrench into everything. In the meantime, FSU has figured out how to make money in lieu of a conference network. For them, a conference network would just be gravy at this point.
Bingo. It's just reality. It was promised.
Honestly, I bet we see some ACC Network happen.....and Swofford will technically be able to claim he delivered on the promise...it will just be a shadow of what the SEC Network is and people envisioned.
I don't believe FSU can afford to consider any revenue 'gravy'. They have SEC schools in annually looking to poach coaches and increasing our salaries to the point it is becoming a real issue (and will really be as the revenue gap gets bigger). It is critical for FSU. Again, FSU's BOT discussed this at length this summer.
This is where I disagree with you. If LSU wants to pay Jimbo Fisher 6 or 7 million then just let him go. You guys are a good enough program where you'll find a suitable replacement. The SEC believes that they can throw money around and take whomever they want. The problem now is enough schools can fairly compensate coaches without the headaches. Look at this past go around. South Carolina and Georgia took coordinators who were already in the SEC to be head coaches. We all know SC's first choice wasn't Muschamp. Fuente most likely could have ended up there. Tom Herman could have had either job. Fuente wanted VT and Herman stayed in Houston.
I get your position.....I'm 50/50 on this, but that is a tough situation for FSU and I'll explain why.
If you are right, no problem all is well.
If you are wrong, FSU has $150-$200million invested in football in just the last 10 years.....and it has hundreds of millions more it needs to make in the stadium.
At the end of the day, like we CLEARLY learned with Bowden, if you aren't competing, the money goes away. You can't have the debt levels and investments in something and fail.
FSU's leadership is VERY aware of this after what it went through from the end of Bobby's career. I promise, they don't take this lightly and they don't brush it off. They are risk averse, as they should be, with rolling the dice everytime the SEC poaches us.
This all doesn't even touch the issues with support staff, assistants, etc.
What would FSU prefer in a P4 situation?
1) An ACC with ND all in with Texas & possibly a couple of buddies & a network.
2) Join the Big 12 with 5 ACC friends & a network.
3) Create a new conference with Clemson, ND, Texas, Oklahoma & the best of the rest of those 2 conferences & a network.
Obviously the SEC would be the top choice but I think that only happens in a P3 model. Why? With the top brands going to the SEC, B1G & PAC then the best of the rest conference wouldn't be strong enough to be another power conference.
If Jimbo leaves for LSU or whomever, that would mean it's more than the money. In the current landscape of college football, FSU is one of the best jobs out there.
(01-14-2016 02:02 PM)Win5002 Wrote: [ -> ]Do ACC fans think at least verbal promises were given to the ACC schools to sign the GOR's and schools signed on based on those verbal promises? Or do ACC fans think it was just communicated the league would pursue a conference network?
Question #1: NO
Question #2: YES
(01-14-2016 03:20 PM)Lenvillecards Wrote: [ -> ]What would FSU prefer in a P4 situation?
1) An ACC with ND all in with Texas & possibly a couple of buddies & a network.
2) Join the Big 12 with 5 ACC friends & a network.
3) Create a new conference with Clemson, ND, Texas, Oklahoma & the best of the rest of those 2 conferences & a network.
Obviously the SEC would be the top choice but I think that only happens in a P3 model. Why? With the top brands going to the SEC, B1G & PAC then the best of the rest conference wouldn't be strong enough to be another power conference.
I would think #1.
FSU WANTS the ACC to succeed.....badly. I am certain folks don't see that or don't get it, but FSU badly wants to be in the ACC in the long game. It just needs revenue in football to allow it to compete in football (and a TV partner that doesn't view us as competition to their primary product).
#1. 'Promises' -no
#2. 'Pursue'- yes, with increased rights fees in lieu of one.
No.
I'm still not convinced that conference networks are a huge advantage. If they were, why didn't ESPN make an ACC network? They owned all our rights for ~15 years. That's probs the lions share of ACC media rights, period
(01-14-2016 03:42 PM)nzmorange Wrote: [ -> ]No.
I'm still not convinced that conference networks are a huge advantage. If they were, why didn't ESPN make an ACC network? They owned all our rights for ~15 years. That's probs the lions share of ACC media rights, period
Conference networks can be expensive initially and can take a few years to become profitable. With ESPN's financial woes, they are reluctant to do that at the moment.