... and what can be done about it.
The Athletic
“It’s top of mind,” Jim Phillips said. “I think we have to do a better job with revenue within the conference office, and I think you’ll see a Chief Revenue Officer at some point be part of our our new structure after we find our new location, whether (the league office remains) in Greensboro and another facility in Greensboro or we go to two of the other finalists. So the overall organization needs to have somebody each and every day thinking about revenue. We talked with ESPN at length today about some really, I think, high-level opportunities from a sponsorship standpoint to help generate, and they’re as motivated as we are because we’re 50-50 partners. So we’re going to have to continue to find every way that we can resource the conference, championships and locations of championships and the rest of it."
TL/DR version: Hope, pray and throw some stuff against the wall with the hope it sticks.
Apparently Phillips talked with ESPN today — but he certainly doesn't suggest to his schools or their fan bases that the four-letter network will be coming to the rescue with increased payments to help ACC members catch up financially with their peers in the B1G and SEC.
"I’d also say at the same time, just because you have the most money doesn’t mean you win all the time, either, depending on whatever sport you look at," Phillips said. "And that’s not an excuse not to try to close the revenue gap, but I also know that we’ve done a really good job in our schools of taking the resources that they’ve had and using them to have success.”
Sounds like the message is to keep making do with less.
Be interesting to see if UNC, UVA, Duke, FSU and Clemson will be OK with that challenge for the next 13 years.
Quote: “It’s top of mind,” Jim Phillips said. “I think we have to do a better job with revenue within the conference office, and I think you’ll see a Chief Revenue Officer at some point be part of our our new structure after we find our new location, whether (the league office remains) in Greensboro and another facility in Greensboro or we go to two of the other finalists. So the overall organization needs to have somebody each and every day thinking about revenue.
Translation: We’re moving to Charlotte.
Quote:We talked with ESPN at length today about some really, I think, high-level opportunities from a sponsorship standpoint to help generate, and they’re as motivated as we are because we’re 50-50 partners. So we’re going to have to continue to find every way that we can resource the conference, championships and locations of championships and the rest of it."
Translation: We’re adding a 9th conference game and will continue to try to orchestrate some statistically improbable scenario where we can force Notre Dame to join in football and save our bacon.
Houston we have a bureaucrat! The solution to a revenue problem is to grow administrative expense by hiring a "Revenue Specialist" so for more money he can say, "You aren't making enough money. You need to improve your football profile!"
Rednecks astutely call this management move "When a Buzzard calls a buddy to feast." Phillips realizes he's standing over a body which is soon to be a carcass so instead of wasting time trying to improve it he simply invites another buddy to make a meal of it!" Revenue Specialist = Buzzard #2. The Revenue Specialist will require a staff = more buzzards.
When you see 'em circling.....it's time to leave!
(05-11-2022 09:48 PM)JRsec Wrote: [ -> ]Houston we have a bureaucrat! The solution to a revenue problem is to grow administrative expense by hiring a "Revenue Specialist" so for more money he can say, "You aren't making enough money. You need to improve your football profile!"
Rednecks astutely call this management move "When a Buzzard calls a buddy to feast." Phillips realizes he's standing over a body which is soon to be a carcass so instead of wasting time trying to improve it he simply invites another buddy to make a meal of it!" Revenue Specialist = Buzzard #2. The Revenue Specialist will require a staff = more buzzards.
When you see 'em circling.....it's time to leave!
I’m re-reading Ayn Rand’s “Atlas Shrugged” and the competent are somehow obligated to support the incompetent because of some nebulous idea of ‘social responsibility ‘. College football isn’t operating under this myth anymore but college basketball is. The NCAA Men’s Basketball tournament is the greatest event where we can see a Cinderella make a run like St. Peter’s this year and the Butler’s, Loyola’s and George Mason’s have done so in the past. But there are entire BB conferences that are D-1 in name only because of the guaranteed sweet, sweet NCAA cash.
(05-11-2022 11:05 PM)RutgersMike Wrote: [ -> ] (05-11-2022 09:48 PM)JRsec Wrote: [ -> ]Houston we have a bureaucrat! The solution to a revenue problem is to grow administrative expense by hiring a "Revenue Specialist" so for more money he can say, "You aren't making enough money. You need to improve your football profile!"
Rednecks astutely call this management move "When a Buzzard calls a buddy to feast." Phillips realizes he's standing over a body which is soon to be a carcass so instead of wasting time trying to improve it he simply invites another buddy to make a meal of it!" Revenue Specialist = Buzzard #2. The Revenue Specialist will require a staff = more buzzards.
When you see 'em circling.....it's time to leave!
I’m re-reading Ayn Rand’s “Atlas Shrugged” and the competent are somehow obligated to support the incompetent because of some nebulous idea of ‘social responsibility ‘. College football isn’t operating under this myth anymore but college basketball is. The NCAA Men’s Basketball tournament is the greatest event where we can see a Cinderella make a run like St. Peter’s this year and the Butler’s, Loyola’s and George Mason’s have done so in the past. But there are entire BB conferences that are D-1 in name only because of the guaranteed sweet, sweet NCAA cash.
No society ever achieved greatness by traveling at the speed of their slowest. No child left behind has naturally matured into no citizen left behind. The lunar landing was planned and executed before the price of the Great Society was realized.
Atlas is past shrugging. He's drawing disability. Mars is a pipe dream. And basketball, like all pursuits of excellence, deserves better than the NCAA.
I hope some part of humanity explores the stars, because as brief as we live the clock is still ticking on our Sun's life expectancy. I mean we now have a debt figure which is larger than our star's life expectancy. Isn't that a sobering thought. Oh well, Ellsworth Toohey is alive and well and living as a lobbyist in D.C.
(05-11-2022 09:48 PM)JRsec Wrote: [ -> ]Houston we have a bureaucrat! The solution to a revenue problem is to grow administrative expense by hiring a "Revenue Specialist" so for more money he can say, "You aren't making enough money. You need to improve your football profile!"
Rednecks astutely call this management move "When a Buzzard calls a buddy to feast." Phillips realizes he's standing over a body which is soon to be a carcass so instead of wasting time trying to improve it he simply invites another buddy to make a meal of it!" Revenue Specialist = Buzzard #2. The Revenue Specialist will require a staff = more buzzards.
When you see 'em circling.....it's time to leave!
Agree about the Chief Revenue Officer idea. We have the same bureaucracy issue on the "academic side" - if Academic Affairs is losing money or struggling with an issue, we often end up hiring a Vice Provost (at around $400,000 per year) to study the problem. Well, the first move is to create a Task Force, which then recommends hiring the Vice-Provost. The problem doesn't get solved, or even better from an administrative POV, by its nature has no permanent solution, but the Vice-Provost usually ends up with a newly-hired staff around him or her studying the problem, and it becomes another administrative appendage on the university.
Beyond that, though, I sympathize with Philip's rhetoric. He didn't sign that 2010 deal that has the ACC locked in at a low rate of pay for the next 15 years, and there's really nothing he can do about it. So try to make rhetorical lemonade out of real lemons.
The real problem the ACC has is solvable by its membership. The ACC could just vote to dissolve the GOR. That would free up the valuable schools to possibly find greener pastures. Of course that won't happen, because those schools that lack value and don't think there are greener pastures won't vote for that.
In the end, the schools keeping the FSUs, UNCs, Dukes and Clemsons down are .... their fellow low-value conference mates.
(05-11-2022 09:48 PM)JRsec Wrote: [ -> ]Houston we have a bureaucrat! The solution to a revenue problem is to grow administrative expense by hiring a "Revenue Specialist" so for more money he can say, "You aren't making enough money. You need to improve your football profile!"
Rednecks astutely call this management move "When a Buzzard calls a buddy to feast." Phillips realizes he's standing over a body which is soon to be a carcass so instead of wasting time trying to improve it he simply invites another buddy to make a meal of it!" Revenue Specialist = Buzzard #2. The Revenue Specialist will require a staff = more buzzards.
When you see 'em circling.....it's time to leave!
Yes! That struck me as a really odd comment.
(05-11-2022 09:21 PM)CarlSmithCenter Wrote: [ -> ]Quote: “It’s top of mind,” Jim Phillips said. “I think we have to do a better job with revenue within the conference office, and I think you’ll see a Chief Revenue Officer at some point be part of our our new structure after we find our new location, whether (the league office remains) in Greensboro and another facility in Greensboro or we go to two of the other finalists. So the overall organization needs to have somebody each and every day thinking about revenue.
Translation: We’re moving to Charlotte.
Quote:We talked with ESPN at length today about some really, I think, high-level opportunities from a sponsorship standpoint to help generate, and they’re as motivated as we are because we’re 50-50 partners. So we’re going to have to continue to find every way that we can resource the conference, championships and locations of championships and the rest of it."
Translation: We’re adding a 9th conference game and will continue to try to orchestrate some statistically improbable scenario where we can force Notre Dame to join in football and save our bacon.
That is the only move that is guaranteed to add revenue. But even adding us will not make up the difference of the (incoming) tsunami of the big 2. Everything else is rearranging chairs on the Titanic.
The contract the ACC signed was/is a disaster that will continue to reverberate for the next 15 years.
(05-12-2022 07:34 AM)quo vadis Wrote: [ -> ]The real problem the ACC has is solvable by its membership. The ACC could just vote to dissolve the GOR. That would free up the valuable schools to possibly find greener pastures. Of course that won't happen, because those schools that lack value and don't think there are greener pastures won't vote for that.
In the end, the schools keeping the FSUs, UNCs, Dukes and Clemsons down are .... their fellow low-value conference mates.
It's really not that complicated, is it?
You've got six schools clearly on the "Big Two" level in terms of what each brings to the table: Clemson, Duke, Florida State, North Carolina, *Notre Dame and Virginia.
You've got six more somewhere between a half-notch or full-notch below: Georgia Tech, Louisville, Miami, NC State, Pitt and Virginia Tech
Then there are the remaining three with basically no hope of getting into either the B1G or SEC: Boston College, Syracuse and Wake Forest.
IMO, the key would be for at least half of the six schools in the second tier to be secure with a Big Two landing spot.
Then it's just a matter of time for the ACC as we know it dissolving with haves going one way and the have-nots left to figure out.
(05-12-2022 07:34 AM)quo vadis Wrote: [ -> ] (05-11-2022 09:48 PM)JRsec Wrote: [ -> ]Houston we have a bureaucrat! The solution to a revenue problem is to grow administrative expense by hiring a "Revenue Specialist" so for more money he can say, "You aren't making enough money. You need to improve your football profile!"
Rednecks astutely call this management move "When a Buzzard calls a buddy to feast." Phillips realizes he's standing over a body which is soon to be a carcass so instead of wasting time trying to improve it he simply invites another buddy to make a meal of it!" Revenue Specialist = Buzzard #2. The Revenue Specialist will require a staff = more buzzards.
When you see 'em circling.....it's time to leave!
Agree about the Chief Revenue Officer idea. We have the same bureaucracy issue on the "academic side" - if Academic Affairs is losing money or struggling with an issue, we often end up hiring a Vice Provost (at around $400,000 per year) to study the problem. Well, the first move is to create a Task Force, which then recommends hiring the Vice-Provost. The problem doesn't get solved, or even better from an administrative POV, by its nature has no permanent solution, but the Vice-Provost usually ends up with a newly-hired staff around him or her studying the problem, and it becomes another administrative appendage on the university.
Beyond that, though, I sympathize with Philip's rhetoric. He didn't sign that 2010 deal that has the ACC locked in at a low rate of pay for the next 15 years, and there's really nothing he can do about it. So try to make rhetorical lemonade out of real lemons.
The real problem the ACC has is solvable by its membership. The ACC could just vote to dissolve the GOR. That would free up the valuable schools to possibly find greener pastures. Of course that won't happen, because those schools that lack value and don't think there are greener pastures won't vote for that.
In the end, the schools keeping the FSUs, UNCs, Dukes and Clemsons down are .... their fellow low-value conference mates.
Yes sir, we hired three 100 grand a year consultants to figure out why such and such (enrollment down, admission pathways not working) is not working. Then the bureaucrat makes recommendations and everyone pick's a part the suggestion (in a committee) and what we are left with is a giant turd. Aww the benefits of working for a government agency, they will always find a way to waste taxpayer dollars.
Ride the wave, there will be a lot of changes coming soon due to the uncertainty of everything people keep mentioning.
I think we’ll see FBS breakaway into an actual separate division and voting entity first. Frankly, this should have happened 50 years ago when it was first proposed.
(05-12-2022 09:32 AM)PeteTheChop Wrote: [ -> ] (05-12-2022 07:34 AM)quo vadis Wrote: [ -> ]The real problem the ACC has is solvable by its membership. The ACC could just vote to dissolve the GOR. That would free up the valuable schools to possibly find greener pastures. Of course that won't happen, because those schools that lack value and don't think there are greener pastures won't vote for that.
In the end, the schools keeping the FSUs, UNCs, Dukes and Clemsons down are .... their fellow low-value conference mates.
It's really not that complicated, is it?
You've got six schools clearly on the "Big Two" level in terms of what each brings to the table: Clemson, Duke, Florida State, North Carolina, *Notre Dame and Virginia.
You've got six more somewhere between a half-notch or full-notch below: Georgia Tech, Louisville, Miami, NC State, Pitt and Virginia Tech
Then there are the remaining three with basically no hope of getting into either the B1G or SEC: Boston College, Syracuse and Wake Forest.
IMO, the key would be for at least half of the six schools in the second tier to be secure with a Big Two landing spot.
Then it's just a matter of time for the ACC as we know it dissolving with haves going one way and the have-nots left to figure out.
The last tier will try to sell their votes to ESPN without hesitation. Their dissolution vote is a significant part of their value right now. Better to get value from it than reach the end of GOR. That may yield them an offer to Big 12 East.
And that threat is a big risk to the middle class. They could collude to try and get a couple more P2 spots, but all getting an invite is not happening. It wouldn’t take long for the least likely to take the security of an ESPN offer that keeps them whole (or better) to the ACC revenue. Riding out the ACC GOR is risky. Once one or two make that known, the middle class races for whatever security they can get before the American is the only option
(05-12-2022 09:32 AM)PeteTheChop Wrote: [ -> ] (05-12-2022 07:34 AM)quo vadis Wrote: [ -> ]The real problem the ACC has is solvable by its membership. The ACC could just vote to dissolve the GOR. That would free up the valuable schools to possibly find greener pastures. Of course that won't happen, because those schools that lack value and don't think there are greener pastures won't vote for that.
In the end, the schools keeping the FSUs, UNCs, Dukes and Clemsons down are .... their fellow low-value conference mates.
It's really not that complicated, is it?
You've got six schools clearly on the "Big Two" level in terms of what each brings to the table: Clemson, Duke, Florida State, North Carolina, *Notre Dame and Virginia.
You've got six more somewhere between a half-notch or full-notch below: Georgia Tech, Louisville, Miami, NC State, Pitt and Virginia Tech
Then there are the remaining three with basically no hope of getting into either the B1G or SEC: Boston College, Syracuse and Wake Forest.
IMO, the key would be for at least half of the six schools in the second tier to be secure with a Big Two landing spot.
Then it's just a matter of time for the ACC as we know it dissolving with haves going one way and the have-nots left to figure out.
Exactly. What makes the most sense is to go to the bylaws and figure out how many votes it takes to nullify the GOR and/or disband the conference.
If it’s a 2/3rds vote that’s easy—sort out a plan where 10 schools end up in either the Big 10 or SEC, pass the vote, and move on.
If it takes a 3/4ths vote that’s where things get trickier because that likely means one or both of the Big 10/SEC going beyond 20 members to likely 24 (although 21 would work if you did 3 divisions of 7).
(05-12-2022 11:17 AM)Fighting Muskie Wrote: [ -> ] (05-12-2022 09:32 AM)PeteTheChop Wrote: [ -> ] (05-12-2022 07:34 AM)quo vadis Wrote: [ -> ]The real problem the ACC has is solvable by its membership. The ACC could just vote to dissolve the GOR. That would free up the valuable schools to possibly find greener pastures. Of course that won't happen, because those schools that lack value and don't think there are greener pastures won't vote for that.
In the end, the schools keeping the FSUs, UNCs, Dukes and Clemsons down are .... their fellow low-value conference mates.
It's really not that complicated, is it?
You've got six schools clearly on the "Big Two" level in terms of what each brings to the table: Clemson, Duke, Florida State, North Carolina, *Notre Dame and Virginia.
You've got six more somewhere between a half-notch or full-notch below: Georgia Tech, Louisville, Miami, NC State, Pitt and Virginia Tech
Then there are the remaining three with basically no hope of getting into either the B1G or SEC: Boston College, Syracuse and Wake Forest.
IMO, the key would be for at least half of the six schools in the second tier to be secure with a Big Two landing spot.
Then it's just a matter of time for the ACC as we know it dissolving with haves going one way and the have-nots left to figure out.
Exactly. What makes the most sense is to go to the bylaws and figure out how many votes it takes to nullify the GOR and/or disband the conference.
If it’s a 2/3rds vote that’s easy—sort out a plan where 10 schools end up in either the Big 10 or SEC, pass the vote, and move on.
If it takes a 3/4ths vote that’s where things get trickier because that likely means one or both of the Big 10/SEC going beyond 20 members to likely 24 (although 21 would work if you did 3 divisions of 7).
It takes a 3/4ths vote.
There are 2 avenues to pursue.
1. The SCOTUS rules in favor of Pay for Play and the inequitable impact upon existing contracts leads to a court order that all must be voided and redone.
2. The SEC takes 7 to 8 to keep ESPN in control of rights and the rest roll over into an ESPN (full rights acquired) B12 where pay is slightly augmented.
I don't see ESPN giving up any rights, just reshuffling 2 decks and eliminating one. And I'm not sure it will matter what the remnant conference is called (B12 or ACC).
Notre Dame is the only brand which could be free to leave Disney's universe.
I just wanted to add: Has anyone stopped to ask why division-less is being approved now, after years of resistance? The NCAA knows where this is headed and is lifting all formerly imposed restrictions in a last ditch effort to retain the schools caught up in the need for consolidation. I expect them to fail to hold onto them but any attempt to resist would absolutely ensure rapid departure. The NCAA is trying to buy time. But for those who believe expansion is over, going division-less is precisely the concession needed to grow larger.
Wonder what happened in the recent look in clause between ESPN and the ACC. Seems like nothing.
(05-11-2022 09:06 PM)PeteTheChop Wrote: [ -> ]... and what can be done about it.
The Athletic
“It’s top of mind,” Jim Phillips said. “I think we have to do a better job with revenue within the conference office, and I think you’ll see a Chief Revenue Officer at some point be part of our our new structure after we find our new location, whether (the league office remains) in Greensboro and another facility in Greensboro or we go to two of the other finalists. So the overall organization needs to have somebody each and every day thinking about revenue. We talked with ESPN at length today about some really, I think, high-level opportunities from a sponsorship standpoint to help generate, and they’re as motivated as we are because we’re 50-50 partners. So we’re going to have to continue to find every way that we can resource the conference, championships and locations of championships and the rest of it."
TL/DR version: Hope, pray and throw some stuff against the wall with the hope it sticks.
Apparently Phillips talked with ESPN today — but he certainly doesn't suggest to his schools or their fan bases that the four-letter network will be coming to the rescue with increased payments to help ACC members catch up financially with their peers in the B1G and SEC.
"I’d also say at the same time, just because you have the most money doesn’t mean you win all the time, either, depending on whatever sport you look at," Phillips said. "And that’s not an excuse not to try to close the revenue gap, but I also know that we’ve done a really good job in our schools of taking the resources that they’ve had and using them to have success.”
Sounds like the message is to keep making do with less.
Be interesting to see if UNC, UVA, Duke, FSU and Clemson will be OK with that challenge for the next 13 years.
That right there is the massive issue. It's one thing if it's just a few years, or even 5 to 7 years out but 13 years? That's when extreme actions could take place if the revenue differential grows.
(05-12-2022 11:41 AM)Bluedevil16 Wrote: [ -> ]Wonder what happened in the recent look in clause between ESPN and the ACC. Seems like nothing.
Yes, it's very much like "Notre Dame may be joining the ACC for football"
Or as we'll soon find out: "Ironclad GoR agreements"
(05-12-2022 11:01 AM)Big 12 fan too Wrote: [ -> ]The last tier will try to sell their votes to ESPN without hesitation. Their dissolution vote is a significant part of their value right now. Better to get value from it than reach the end of GOR. That may yield them an offer to Big 12 East.
So, counting the ballots, we've got:
Yes (moving to a wealthier neighborhood): Clemson, Duke, Florida State, North Carolina, Virginia
Yes (give me my damn alimony check): Boston College, Syracuse, Wake Forest
Undecided (evaluating all options): Georgia Tech, Louisville, Miami, NC State, Pitt, Virginia Tech
Not talking ("Get Kevin Warren on the phone:"): Notre Dame
Agree that the comment about a Chief Revenue Officer is not a good omen. The most important task for the ACC commissioner is to generate revenue (through media, bowls, basketball, etc.). Every conference likely has a deputy commissioner who focuses on revenue issues, but you don’t want to publicly delegate an essential responsibility.
The other awkward comment is conflating the revenue gap with ESPN’s 50/50 partnership on the ACCN. Maybe he was trying to focus on the positive outlook on ACCN payouts during the next year or two.
??️♈️?
@ADavidHaleJoint
56m
This week's ACC spring meetings covered some hot topics -- from NIL and tampering enforcement to the new scheduling plans, but with a B1G TV deal valued at more than $1.1B coming soon, it all felt a bit like arranging deck chairs on the Titanic. A quick ?.
??️♈️?
@ADavidHaleJoint
55m
@ByPatForde
talked w/Jack Swarbrick a few weeks back in which the ND AD speculated on seismic changes coming: "We're going to have these 2 conf that have distanced themselves from anyone else financially, that's where I see it starting to break down."
si.com
Notre Dame AD Swarbrick Sees Division I Breakup as ‘Inevitable’
Wholesale change is unavoidable in college athletics. The Fighting Irish athletic director thinks a total realignment of Division I is coming with it.
??️♈️?
@ADavidHaleJoint
54m
Swarbrick spoke today and reiterated that concern: "We're getting to a two solar system model here. You have two suns with all the gravitational pull -- the Big Ten and the SEC. People are going to have to figure out how to align with one or the other.”
??️♈️?
@ADavidHaleJoint
53m
Swarbrick didn't make guarantees -- "possible but not inevitable" — but said there are "fissures" that creating the lines of demarcation: Football/men's basketball investment & success; philosophy/culture; finances. You can see those on display just in the ACC.
??️♈️?
@ADavidHaleJoint
53m
Miami AD Dan Radakovich basically endorsed Swarbrick's prediction, too: "The idea of having like-minded schools pull together and do something different, I know Jack talked about it as being inevitable, I don't know that I disagree with that. It's just what the timeline is."
??️♈️?
@ADavidHaleJoint
52m
What is the timeline? Several folks I talked to think a break from the NCAA is coming soon - maybe within the next 6-12 months. Gene Smith's suggestion about allowing the CFP to govern is a big part of that discussion. But what about something more seismic like super conferences?
??️♈️?
@ADavidHaleJoint
50m
Jim Phillips said the time was now to investigate new arrangements for football but tried to tamp down concerns about super conference-type change: "I don't see that happening right now or over the next 5-10 years. I just don’t."
??️♈️?
@ADavidHaleJoint
49m
The trump card for Phillips is the ACC’s grant of rights, which runs through 2036 and would prevent any departing schools from keeping their media rights in a new league. It’s been a shield for the league in the wake of last summer’s Okla/Texas moves but it won’t always be.
??️♈️?
@ADavidHaleJoint
Each year that passes, the relative cost of the GoR goes down, while the relative revenue losses compared w/SEC & B1G goes up. Given state of NIL & pay-for-play, for football-focused schools like Miami, Clemson & FSU, that’s a potentially existential concern in the long term.
9:11 AM · May 12, 2022·TweetDeck