Any updates or rumors?

h/t: Orange79

(12-29-2015 06:36 PM)TexanMark Wrote:  

Any updates or rumors?

h/t: Orange79

I think you summed it up.

Well, there is a possibility/rumor that ESPN is contractually obligated to create an ACCN or compensate the Conference for not doing so. How much? Who knows. If I had to guess, I would say about $3 million per member until an ACCN is created.

I don't think it's happening.

(12-29-2015 09:14 PM)Dasville Wrote:  Well, there is a possibility/rumor that ESPN is contractually obligated to create an ACCN or compensate the Conference for not doing so. How much? Who knows. If I had to guess, I would say about $3 million per member until an ACCN is created.

2 million per team if the network doesn't materialize.

Good....

Now if we can dump The SEC and Big Ten Network maybe I will get cable again. As long as I am forced to pay excessive fees for substandard collegiate athletics that I don't watch, I won't have cable.

I urge others to join me. I am surprised the number of Big Ten (Indiana) and SEC fans (Kentucky) in the Metro Louisville area that are unplugging for the same reason.

If their own fans don't want to play for B Side / Throwaway games why should the rest of us pay for it?
CJ

I am losing hope by the day as well. IF we don't get a cable network, the league absolutely has to come up with other revenue sources to take advantage of the changing landscape. Something has to be done.

I think long term, the ACC is in a better position without the network now, IF the league stays stable.

The ACC is in a bad TV deal, and if they extend it by 20 years as part of an ACC Network deal, it is just compounding the position and they'll always be playing catch up.

The ACC will get their best TV deal under the threat of free agency, and with the continued ascension of football.

Now, if the conference can't come up with enough revenue to keep the league from breaking apart before then, then it's all for naught. I'd rather see almost any other possible source of increased revenue than hitching up with ESPN for 20 more years right now.

(12-30-2015 09:52 AM)Lou_C Wrote:  I think long term, the ACC is in a better position without the network now, IF the league stays stable.

The ACC is in a bad TV deal, and if they extend it by 20 years as part of an ACC Network deal, it is just compounding the position and they'll always be playing catch up.

The ACC will get their best TV deal under the threat of free agency, and with the continued ascension of football.

Now, if the conference can't come up with enough revenue to keep the league from breaking apart before then, then it's all for naught. I'd rather see almost any other possible source of increased revenue than hitching up with ESPN for 20 more years right now.

ACC had a chance for free agency and passed so it could save Raycom (why does the ACCC give a crap?) and Swofford's son.

The big issue is stability. The next 5-10 years, the SEC and B1G will be sniffing around and offering programs like Va Tech (SEC), NC State (SEC), NC (both), VA (both), Ga Tech (B1G) HUGE sums of money and better exposure. The coming revenue gap is going to be a problem.

I agree though, the ACC needs to get away from ESPN. The ACC is simply a conference that is the red headed step child of another conferences TV network. It is bad for business IF you are competing in college football (so many ACC schools don't notice).

(12-30-2015 10:05 AM)nole Wrote:  

(12-30-2015 09:52 AM)Lou_C Wrote:  I think long term, the ACC is in a better position without the network now, IF the league stays stable.

The ACC is in a bad TV deal, and if they extend it by 20 years as part of an ACC Network deal, it is just compounding the position and they'll always be playing catch up.

The ACC will get their best TV deal under the threat of free agency, and with the continued ascension of football.

Now, if the conference can't come up with enough revenue to keep the league from breaking apart before then, then it's all for naught. I'd rather see almost any other possible source of increased revenue than hitching up with ESPN for 20 more years right now.

ACC had a chance for free agency and passed so it could save Raycom (why does the ACCC give a crap?) and Swofford's son.

The big issue is stability. The next 5-10 years, the SEC and B1G will be sniffing around and offering programs like Va Tech (SEC), NC State (SEC), NC (both), VA (both), Ga Tech (B1G) HUGE sums of money and better exposure. The coming revenue gap is going to be a problem.

I agree though, the ACC needs to get away from ESPN. The ACC is simply a conference that is the red headed step child of another conferences TV network. It is bad for business IF you are competing in college football (so many ACC schools don't notice).

No doubt it was misplayed. Can't go back in time though.

But where it stands now, the ACC can't have both a conference network in the near future AND avoid basically a lifetime marriage to ESPN.

Can't have it both ways.

I personally don't think that the ACC is in a great position to be extending a terrible TV deal into the late 2030s.

It's up to the ACC to figure out how to keep some kind of pace with the options on the table, which are few.

I also don't believe, but I don't know, that the ACC Network today would generate enough money to guarantee stability in the face of the B1G and SEC anyway, so my personal view all along is that I'd rather have them roll the dice that they'll be in a better position in 7-10 years if they keep their options open, and forego an extra $2-4m a year in a bad ACC network deal.

(12-30-2015 11:55 AM)Lou_C Wrote:  

(12-30-2015 10:05 AM)nole Wrote:  

(12-30-2015 09:52 AM)Lou_C Wrote:  I think long term, the ACC is in a better position without the network now, IF the league stays stable.

The ACC is in a bad TV deal, and if they extend it by 20 years as part of an ACC Network deal, it is just compounding the position and they'll always be playing catch up.

The ACC will get their best TV deal under the threat of free agency, and with the continued ascension of football.

Now, if the conference can't come up with enough revenue to keep the league from breaking apart before then, then it's all for naught. I'd rather see almost any other possible source of increased revenue than hitching up with ESPN for 20 more years right now.

ACC had a chance for free agency and passed so it could save Raycom (why does the ACCC give a crap?) and Swofford's son.

The big issue is stability. The next 5-10 years, the SEC and B1G will be sniffing around and offering programs like Va Tech (SEC), NC State (SEC), NC (both), VA (both), Ga Tech (B1G) HUGE sums of money and better exposure. The coming revenue gap is going to be a problem.

I agree though, the ACC needs to get away from ESPN. The ACC is simply a conference that is the red headed step child of another conferences TV network. It is bad for business IF you are competing in college football (so many ACC schools don't notice).

No doubt it was misplayed. Can't go back in time though.

But where it stands now, the ACC can't have both a conference network in the near future AND avoid basically a lifetime marriage to ESPN.

Can't have it both ways.

I personally don't think that the ACC is in a great position to be extending a terrible TV deal into the late 2030s.

It's up to the ACC to figure out how to keep some kind of pace with the options on the table, which are few.

I also don't believe, but I don't know, that the ACC Network today would generate enough money to guarantee stability in the face of the B1G and SEC anyway, so my personal view all along is that I'd rather have them roll the dice that they'll be in a better position in 7-10 years if they keep their options open, and forego an extra $2-4m a year in a bad ACC network deal.

I am starting to lean that way as well.

But does the ACC believe it is in a "terrible TV deal"? I don't think it does. I rarely find an ACC fan outside of FSU fan base that sees an issue with revenue or the weak/negative converage from ESPN. Whether the ACC gets a network or not, it will likely be a shadow of the SEC network (both in coverage and revenue).

It seems that the same folks who have always run the ACC would likely make the same mistake and lock us into another LONG term contract at the bottom of the P5......because it doesn't seem the ACC is unhappy with anything.

I imagine ESPN will try and lock the ACC into another long term weak deal just to lock in the properties they like (Duke BBall) but that keep the conference in the weakest position.

I think the only thing that schools that don't care for the TV situation can do is not renew the GOR. I highly doubt FSU resigns a GOR unless REAL changes occur with ESPN and the TV contract.

"We're doing this for a couple of reasons, and we would never do a stupid economic deal," said Lenny Daniels, executive vice president and chief operating officer of Turner Sports. "The long-term television world is going to change, and we think everything is, eventually, going to be interconnected."


Link:


NCAA Digital Rights


It may be time to embrace Raycom Sports!

(12-30-2015 12:15 PM)nole Wrote:  

(12-30-2015 11:55 AM)Lou_C Wrote:  

(12-30-2015 10:05 AM)nole Wrote:  

(12-30-2015 09:52 AM)Lou_C Wrote:  I think long term, the ACC is in a better position without the network now, IF the league stays stable.

The ACC is in a bad TV deal, and if they extend it by 20 years as part of an ACC Network deal, it is just compounding the position and they'll always be playing catch up.

The ACC will get their best TV deal under the threat of free agency, and with the continued ascension of football.

Now, if the conference can't come up with enough revenue to keep the league from breaking apart before then, then it's all for naught. I'd rather see almost any other possible source of increased revenue than hitching up with ESPN for 20 more years right now.

ACC had a chance for free agency and passed so it could save Raycom (why does the ACCC give a crap?) and Swofford's son.

The big issue is stability. The next 5-10 years, the SEC and B1G will be sniffing around and offering programs like Va Tech (SEC), NC State (SEC), NC (both), VA (both), Ga Tech (B1G) HUGE sums of money and better exposure. The coming revenue gap is going to be a problem.

I agree though, the ACC needs to get away from ESPN. The ACC is simply a conference that is the red headed step child of another conferences TV network. It is bad for business IF you are competing in college football (so many ACC schools don't notice).

No doubt it was misplayed. Can't go back in time though.

But where it stands now, the ACC can't have both a conference network in the near future AND avoid basically a lifetime marriage to ESPN.

Can't have it both ways.

I personally don't think that the ACC is in a great position to be extending a terrible TV deal into the late 2030s.

It's up to the ACC to figure out how to keep some kind of pace with the options on the table, which are few.

I also don't believe, but I don't know, that the ACC Network today would generate enough money to guarantee stability in the face of the B1G and SEC anyway, so my personal view all along is that I'd rather have them roll the dice that they'll be in a better position in 7-10 years if they keep their options open, and forego an extra $2-4m a year in a bad ACC network deal.

I am starting to lean that way as well.

But does the ACC believe it is in a "terrible TV deal"? I don't think it does. I rarely find an ACC fan outside of FSU fan base that sees an issue with revenue or the weak/negative converage from ESPN. Whether the ACC gets a network or not, it will likely be a shadow of the SEC network (both in coverage and revenue).

It seems that the same folks who have always run the ACC would likely make the same mistake and lock us into another LONG term contract at the bottom of the P5......because it doesn't seem the ACC is unhappy with anything.

I imagine ESPN will try and lock the ACC into another long term weak deal just to lock in the properties they like (Duke BBall) but that keep the conference in the weakest position.

I think the only thing that schools that don't care for the TV situation can do is not renew the GOR. I highly doubt FSU resigns a GOR unless REAL changes occur with ESPN and the TV contract.

Obviously, there's no telling what happens next and a good or bad deal is made. Hopefully in 5-7 years we'll be in a post-Swofford environment.

I think there are elements of most fan bases that are less than thrilled with the current economics, or else there wouldn't be so much ACC Network speculation and agita on every board, which there is. But you've also got an element of there being little you can do. People are only going to spend so much hand wringing on a subject where there's little that can be done, and obviously there are different degrees to which it affects different schools.

I don't THINK that the fan bases and school administrations and boosters will be so blind next time around to just be happy with anything. Most schools are investing in coaches and facilities and and will have an eye on financials, and administrators at virtually every institution have given the issue lip service.

Who knows. There's not even much that FSU or Clemson can do other than make themselves as attractive as possible to the SEC and B1G, because barring interest there, FSU doesn't have many options to work with. Either that or politic 3-5 other schools into Big 12 interest, and that's not going to happen.

(12-30-2015 12:37 PM)Dasville Wrote:  
"We're doing this for a couple of reasons, and we would never do a stupid economic deal," said Lenny Daniels, executive vice president and chief operating officer of Turner Sports. "The long-term television world is going to change, and we think everything is, eventually, going to be interconnected."


Link:


NCAA Digital Rights


It may be time to embrace Raycom Sports!

You got something a little more up to date than a 5+ year old article?

(12-30-2015 11:55 AM)Lou_C Wrote:  

(12-30-2015 10:05 AM)nole Wrote:  

(12-30-2015 09:52 AM)Lou_C Wrote:  I think long term, the ACC is in a better position without the network now, IF the league stays stable.

The ACC is in a bad TV deal, and if they extend it by 20 years as part of an ACC Network deal, it is just compounding the position and they'll always be playing catch up.

The ACC will get their best TV deal under the threat of free agency, and with the continued ascension of football.

Now, if the conference can't come up with enough revenue to keep the league from breaking apart before then, then it's all for naught. I'd rather see almost any other possible source of increased revenue than hitching up with ESPN for 20 more years right now.

ACC had a chance for free agency and passed so it could save Raycom (why does the ACCC give a crap?) and Swofford's son.

The big issue is stability. The next 5-10 years, the SEC and B1G will be sniffing around and offering programs like Va Tech (SEC), NC State (SEC), NC (both), VA (both), Ga Tech (B1G) HUGE sums of money and better exposure. The coming revenue gap is going to be a problem.

I agree though, the ACC needs to get away from ESPN. The ACC is simply a conference that is the red headed step child of another conferences TV network. It is bad for business IF you are competing in college football (so many ACC schools don't notice).

No doubt it was misplayed. Can't go back in time though.

But where it stands now, the ACC can't have both a conference network in the near future AND avoid basically a lifetime marriage to ESPN.

Can't have it both ways.

I personally don't think that the ACC is in a great position to be extending a terrible TV deal into the late 2030s.

It's up to the ACC to figure out how to keep some kind of pace with the options on the table, which are few.

I also don't believe, but I don't know, that the ACC Network today would generate enough money to guarantee stability in the face of the B1G and SEC anyway, so my personal view all along is that I'd rather have them roll the dice that they'll be in a better position in 7-10 years if they keep their options open, and forego an extra $2-4m a year in a bad ACC network deal.

Since streaming is becoming a bigger part of future distribution, don't rule out the value of brands when it comes to realignment. Where Clemson and Florida State were not the favored expansion brands for the SEC under the market model, the content value that they have to bring would only multiply the value of any conference with more than a couple of brands. I think they are very viable again for any conference, including the SEC. For the Big 10 it will be the same, AAU, brands (whether football or basketball) and markets. There are a couple of content multipliers out there for them in football and a few in basketball.

So all I'm saying here is that pressure will now come not only upon those whose markets seem valuable to the SEC or Big 10, but also those whose brands would multiply the number of compelling match ups each week. The former extends carriage fees (while they last) but the latter is valuable all day long every day.

IMO the ACC should have been willing to do back-flips to create room for Texas, Oklahoma, and a buddy to go along with pressure to bring N.D. on board full time with that kind of play. Then you would have had the content to have made a market model worthwhile, but certainly the branding to always maximize streaming. The reticence in some quarters of the ACC to pursue those kinds of proposals when they were offered by ESPN is why you are in limbo today.

(12-30-2015 04:19 AM)CardinalJim Wrote:  Good....

Now if we can dump The SEC and Big Ten Network maybe I will get cable again. As long as I am forced to pay excessive fees for substandard collegiate athletics that I don't watch, I won't have cable.

I urge others to join me. I am surprised the number of Big Ten (Indiana) and SEC fans (Kentucky) in the Metro Louisville area that are unplugging for the same reason.

If their own fans don't want to play for B Side / Throwaway games why should the rest of us pay for it?
CJ

LOL, That seems to be the only one that carries UK games around her. Guess Kat fans can always go back to listen to Them on 840WHAS Radio !

(12-30-2015 01:04 PM)Lou_C Wrote:  

(12-30-2015 12:15 PM)nole Wrote:  

(12-30-2015 11:55 AM)Lou_C Wrote:  

(12-30-2015 10:05 AM)nole Wrote:  

(12-30-2015 09:52 AM)Lou_C Wrote:  I think long term, the ACC is in a better position without the network now, IF the league stays stable.

The ACC is in a bad TV deal, and if they extend it by 20 years as part of an ACC Network deal, it is just compounding the position and they'll always be playing catch up.

The ACC will get their best TV deal under the threat of free agency, and with the continued ascension of football.

Now, if the conference can't come up with enough revenue to keep the league from breaking apart before then, then it's all for naught. I'd rather see almost any other possible source of increased revenue than hitching up with ESPN for 20 more years right now.

ACC had a chance for free agency and passed so it could save Raycom (why does the ACCC give a crap?) and Swofford's son.

The big issue is stability. The next 5-10 years, the SEC and B1G will be sniffing around and offering programs like Va Tech (SEC), NC State (SEC), NC (both), VA (both), Ga Tech (B1G) HUGE sums of money and better exposure. The coming revenue gap is going to be a problem.

I agree though, the ACC needs to get away from ESPN. The ACC is simply a conference that is the red headed step child of another conferences TV network. It is bad for business IF you are competing in college football (so many ACC schools don't notice).

No doubt it was misplayed. Can't go back in time though.

But where it stands now, the ACC can't have both a conference network in the near future AND avoid basically a lifetime marriage to ESPN.

Can't have it both ways.

I personally don't think that the ACC is in a great position to be extending a terrible TV deal into the late 2030s.

It's up to the ACC to figure out how to keep some kind of pace with the options on the table, which are few.

I also don't believe, but I don't know, that the ACC Network today would generate enough money to guarantee stability in the face of the B1G and SEC anyway, so my personal view all along is that I'd rather have them roll the dice that they'll be in a better position in 7-10 years if they keep their options open, and forego an extra $2-4m a year in a bad ACC network deal.

I am starting to lean that way as well.

But does the ACC believe it is in a "terrible TV deal"? I don't think it does. I rarely find an ACC fan outside of FSU fan base that sees an issue with revenue or the weak/negative converage from ESPN. Whether the ACC gets a network or not, it will likely be a shadow of the SEC network (both in coverage and revenue).

It seems that the same folks who have always run the ACC would likely make the same mistake and lock us into another LONG term contract at the bottom of the P5......because it doesn't seem the ACC is unhappy with anything.

I imagine ESPN will try and lock the ACC into another long term weak deal just to lock in the properties they like (Duke BBall) but that keep the conference in the weakest position.

I think the only thing that schools that don't care for the TV situation can do is not renew the GOR. I highly doubt FSU resigns a GOR unless REAL changes occur with ESPN and the TV contract.

Obviously, there's no telling what happens next and a good or bad deal is made. Hopefully in 5-7 years we'll be in a post-Swofford environment.

I think there are elements of most fan bases that are less than thrilled with the current economics, or else there wouldn't be so much ACC Network speculation and agita on every board, which there is. But you've also got an element of there being little you can do. People are only going to spend so much hand wringing on a subject where there's little that can be done, and obviously there are different degrees to which it affects different schools.

I don't THINK that the fan bases and school administrations and boosters will be so blind next time around to just be happy with anything. Most schools are investing in coaches and facilities and and will have an eye on financials, and administrators at virtually every institution have given the issue lip service.

Who knows. There's not even much that FSU or Clemson can do other than make themselves as attractive as possible to the SEC and B1G, because barring interest there, FSU doesn't have many options to work with. Either that or politic 3-5 other schools into Big 12 interest, and that's not going to happen.

The main thing that erks Me is that hardly any of Louisvilles December Basketball games are aired locally anymore . Some not even on ESPN 3. I'm sure it's an issue throughout the ACC Conference too. An ACC Channel would most likely carry those games for each school as well as ones not broadcast nationally while another ACC school is being shown.

(12-30-2015 12:15 PM)nole Wrote:  But does the ACC believe it is in a "terrible TV deal"? I don't think it does. I rarely find an ACC fan outside of FSU fan base that sees an issue with revenue or the weak/negative converage from ESPN.

Primarily because most of the fans you run into are in one of two groups:

A. Fans of the schools rescued from the Big East

or

B. Fans of the basketball first old-time ACC schools who foolishly think that the revenue gap isn't going to have any effect on hoops.

As evidenced by the majority of the posts on this board the ACC could box up a steaming pile of elephant dung and both groups would fall all over themselves to heap praise on it. Witness the Swofford love with the "Ninja" meme. Sadly, what they saw as this:



has actually turned out to be this:


But you'll never get one of the lickspittles to admit it.

(12-30-2015 01:04 PM)Lou_C Wrote:  

(12-30-2015 12:15 PM)nole Wrote:  ...does the ACC believe it is in a "terrible TV deal"? I don't think it does. I rarely find an ACC fan outside of FSU fan base that sees an issue with revenue or the weak/negative converage from ESPN.

...I think there are elements of most fan bases that are less than thrilled with the current economics, or else there wouldn't be so much ACC Network speculation and agita on every board, which there is. But you've also got an element of there being little you can do. People are only going to spend so much hand wringing on a subject where there's little that can be done...

BINGO. That is how I feel. The ACC TV contract stinks. The Orange Bowl contract stinks. The coverage by ESPN stinks. However, these things are all water under the bridge, and there's so little that can be done in the short term that I'm just tired to discussing them.

More than that, I'm tired of reading / hearing complaints which offer absolutely no solutions whatsoever. I can see the problem - now tell me how to fix it or leave it alone!

JMO though.

(12-30-2015 02:48 PM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  

(12-30-2015 01:04 PM)Lou_C Wrote:  

(12-30-2015 12:15 PM)nole Wrote:  ...does the ACC believe it is in a "terrible TV deal"? I don't think it does. I rarely find an ACC fan outside of FSU fan base that sees an issue with revenue or the weak/negative converage from ESPN.

...I think there are elements of most fan bases that are less than thrilled with the current economics, or else there wouldn't be so much ACC Network speculation and agita on every board, which there is. But you've also got an element of there being little you can do. People are only going to spend so much hand wringing on a subject where there's little that can be done...

BINGO. That is how I feel. The ACC TV contract stinks. The Orange Bowl contract stinks. The coverage by ESPN stinks. However, these things are all water under the bridge, and there's so little that can be done in the short term that I'm just tired to discussing them.

More than that, I'm tired of reading / hearing complaints which offer absolutely no solutions whatsoever. I can see the problem - now tell me how to fix it or leave it alone!

JMO though.

These points cant be stressed any better. I don't see any fans who are happy with the status quo, not even former BE fans. But nothing that anyone can do about it now. At least not on this board. So why keep sounding like a broken record and crying the same old tired song at every opportunity? Just because other don't share in the whining doesn't mean that we don't realize that the ACC has some real issues to conquer.