This is an article from Syracusefan.com. The ACC actually closes the gap significantly on another P5 Conference and it wasn't just the PAC 12.

From the article:

While the ACC ranked last in the power-five in average payout, it did close the gap financially on most of its peers in 2017-18, even without the addition of the ACC Network. The financial numbers come from each conference’s IRS Form 990, a document that non-profit organizations are required to make available.
The ACC’s payout was essentially equal with the Pac-12, whose average payout actually dropped. The ACC also closed the gap substantially with the Big XII ($34.6 million average payout) and modestly with the SEC ($43.1 million average payout).

[i][b]The ACC payout numbers do not include multimedia rights agreements, which the schools make independently.

[/i][/b]
Article

(06-01-2019 12:34 PM)cuseroc Wrote:  This is an article from Syracusefan.com. The ACC actually closes the gap significantly on another P5 Conference and it wasn't just the PAC 12.

From the article:

While the ACC ranked last in the power-five in average payout, it did close the gap financially on most of its peers in 2017-18, even without the addition of the ACC Network. The financial numbers come from each conference’s IRS Form 990, a document that non-profit organizations are required to make available.
The ACC’s payout was essentially equal with the Pac-12, whose average payout actually dropped. The ACC also closed the gap substantially with the Big XII ($34.6 million average payout) and modestly with the SEC ($43.1 million average payout).

[i][b]The ACC payout numbers do not include multimedia rights agreements, which the schools make independently.

[/i][/b]
Article

The ACC had an average payout of 29.5m. These tv contracts are backloaded so it should not come as a surprise that a new record is made every year. I do like that the ACC has closed the gap with the Pac12 and Big12 and will likely over take both with the ACCN.

When 20+ schools spent a bunch of (wasted?) money trying to woo the Big 12-2 to accept them into their country club, the Big 12-2 was smart to settle on staying as-is. If they will be patient and smart, they'll stay just where they are today.

I don't see any current G5 program being added to their conference which would make up for a 5 to 8 million dollar reduction per school due to gross conference revenues being split 2 more ways. And, I know they don't distribute their money equally necessarily. The Big 12-2 actually has the best model in size (round robin FB and MBB). They have proven access to the FB playoffs. Now they have their FB championship game back. They are getting 70% of their MBB programs into March Madness (read: $$$) and their baseball programs are doing just fine as well. They'd be foolish to expand and Texas & Oklahoma would be equally foolish to depart, which I don't think they will.

Big 12-2 fans can be a little goofy on the message boards. I was going to say especially the butthurt WVU fans, but even they have mostly now started to settle in the Big 12-2 and are getting over the fact the ACC and SEC never wanted them and was never going to invite them into their country club. Having said all that, they have sort of defaulted into the best set up (IMO). The only issue to deal with is Texas' ego. The other members of the Big 12-2 have learned how to deal with and stroke that ego when needed. Texas and Oklahoma aren't going anywhere. They know they've got it good right where they are. (same for FSU, Clemson, UNC, and others in the ACC)

"it did close the gap financially on most of its peers in 2017-18,"

The gap with the Big 10 is $24 Million. Tjat gap did not close.

The gap with the SEC is is $14 Million. That gap did not close.

The Big 12 teams keep their own tier 3 rights. For the OK & UT of the world that is $7-$15 million a year. So again, that gap did not close.


Catching the PAC 12 is great. But that isn't the goal and it skews the real story here. The cost of keeping up in football has gone up...WAY up, and it isn't slowing down. And the PAC 12 isn't really playing that game. Much like the Big East before P5.

When the SEC renegotiates it's TV contract (2024 I believe), the game is gonna change again in a MAJOR way.

The ACCN will have to clear north of $15 Million (so a net of $12 million) in 5 years to put a dent in the revenue gap that is still growing.

(06-02-2019 05:46 AM)nole Wrote:  "it did close the gap financially on most of its peers in 2017-18,"

The gap with the Big 10 is $24 Million. Tjat gap did not close.

The gap with the SEC is is $14 Million. That gap did not close.

The Big 12 teams keep their own tier 3 rights. For the OK & UT of the world that is $7-$15 million a year. So again, that gap did not close.


Catching the PAC 12 is great. But that isn't the goal and it skews the real story here. The cost of keeping up in football has gone up...WAY up, and it isn't slowing down. And the PAC 12 isn't really playing that game. Much like the Big East before P5.

When the SEC renegotiates it's TV contract (2024 I believe), the game is gonna change again in a MAJOR way.

The ACCN will have to clear north of $15 Million (so a net of $12 million) in 5 years to put a dent in the revenue gap that is still growing.

Nole is correct on a couple of points. The gap vs. the SEC is $1M more this year than last year, and the gap vs. the Big Ten grew by leaps and bounds. However, Big XII revenue did not increase, so the ACC did make up some ground there (not that they are primary competitors, though).

Yes, the ACCN needs to generate about $15M/team (which, I believe, it is projected to do; keep in mind that, while the SEC doesn't reveal the exact SECN revenue numbers, my analysis shows that the SECN accounts for about $20M/team of their revenue - so I don't think 3/4 of that is a stretch).

When the SEC gets their new T1 deal, the ACC may be forced to sit down with ESPN to discuss some major changes (think division realignment, etc.) in order to keep up financially. JMO.

Let's face it, the best way for the ACC to "close the gap" is to get rid of NC State and WF. Their reduncancy in the league is apparent and sadly both are worth more to the SEC and the B10 respectively. A solid entry into North Carolina is valuable to the the SEC and Big 10. WF can compete in all B10 and SEC sports except football. NC State can compete in all sports, but will never make it over the top unless they can use their southern location as a relative advantage.

As WF builds it's new medical campus in Charlotte with Carolina's/Atrium Health, their move is on - they have moved before. Four schools in one state is a mess. Just ask California and Texas.

(06-03-2019 09:06 AM)Statefan Wrote:  Let's face it, the best way for the ACC to "close the gap" is to get rid of NC State and WF. Their reduncancy in the league is apparent and sadly both are worth more to the SEC and the B10 respectively. A solid entry into North Carolina is valuable to the the SEC and Big 10. WF can compete in all B10 and SEC sports except football. NC State can compete in all sports, but will never make it over the top unless they can use their southern location as a relative advantage.

As WF builds it's new medical campus in Charlotte with Carolina's/Atrium Health, their move is on - they have moved before. Four schools in one state is a mess. Just ask California and Texas.

Reducing the divisor by 2 would surely help:

ACC Revenue for 2017-18: $465M total
divided by 15.2 shares = $30.6M
assuming the same total with only 2 teams in NC,
divided by 13.2 shares = $35.2M
an instant bump of $4.6M per school remaining.

TRADING 2 teams would help even more (if that's even an option) because it could increase revenue (if it's the right 2 teams).

(06-03-2019 09:06 AM)Statefan Wrote:  Let's face it, the best way for the ACC to "close the gap" is to get rid of NC State and WF. Their reduncancy in the league is apparent and sadly both are worth more to the SEC and the B10 respectively. A solid entry into North Carolina is valuable to the the SEC and Big 10. WF can compete in all B10 and SEC sports except football. NC State can compete in all sports, but will never make it over the top unless they can use their southern location as a relative advantage.

As WF builds it's new medical campus in Charlotte with Carolina's/Atrium Health, their move is on - they have moved before. Four schools in one state is a mess. Just ask California and Texas.

You made a good (and uncomfortable) point. NC is much smaller than TX or CA.

But would WF and NC State leave? No offense, but I don't think BIG or SEC will take WF at this point. NC State may have a chance but would it leave all the historical ties and relationship with UNC/Duke? More importantly, would leaving the ACC negatively affect the academic side, particularly with respct to the research triangle projects?

1. The ACC isn't kicking anybody out
2. NC State and Wake Forest aren't looking to leave - neither is anybody else
3. Other conferences aren't looking to raid the ACC
4. The ACC Network hasn't even launched yet
5. Any "gaps" may never be completely closed and not sure they have to be
6. Premature to project what the financial landscape will look like 10 years from now and certainly any projections extrapolated out to membership

I think if someone said the University of Beijing was looking to join a conference on a message board, somebody would run with the dumbest of all fantasies and try to make it real...and yes, there would be some gullible people who would believe it. LOL.

(06-03-2019 09:31 AM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  

(06-03-2019 09:06 AM)Statefan Wrote:  Let's face it, the best way for the ACC to "close the gap" is to get rid of NC State and WF. Their reduncancy in the league is apparent and sadly both are worth more to the SEC and the B10 respectively. A solid entry into North Carolina is valuable to the the SEC and Big 10. WF can compete in all B10 and SEC sports except football. NC State can compete in all sports, but will never make it over the top unless they can use their southern location as a relative advantage.

As WF builds it's new medical campus in Charlotte with Carolina's/Atrium Health, their move is on - they have moved before. Four schools in one state is a mess. Just ask California and Texas.

Reducing the divisor by 2 would surely help:

ACC Revenue for 2017-18: $465M total
divided by 15.2 shares = $30.6M
assuming the same total with only 2 teams in NC,
divided by 13.2 shares = $35.2M
an instant bump of $4.6M per school remaining.

TRADING 2 teams would help even more (if that's even an option) because it could increase revenue (if it's the right 2 teams).

This is logical.

(06-01-2019 06:34 PM)Wear Purple Wrote:  Big 12-2 fans can be a little goofy on the message boards. I was going to say especially the butthurt WVU fans, but even they have mostly now started to settle in the Big 12-2 and are getting over the fact the ACC and SEC never wanted them and was never going to invite them into their country club.

I don't agree with that. If WVU cracked down on fan behavior and had an academic overhaul so that they weren't a glorified JuCo an invite would happen. The only thing keeping WVU from the ACC is WVU.

(06-03-2019 12:41 PM)Wear Purple Wrote:  1. The ACC isn't kicking anybody out
2. NC State and Wake Forest aren't looking to leave - neither is anybody else
3. Other conferences aren't looking to raid the ACC
4. The ACC Network hasn't even launched yet
5. Any "gaps" may never be completely closed and not sure they have to be
6. Premature to project what the financial landscape will look like 10 years from now and certainly any projections extrapolated out to membership

I think if someone said the University of Beijing was looking to join a conference on a message board, somebody would run with the dumbest of all fantasies and try to make it real...and yes, there would be some gullible people who would believe it. LOL.

If I tell you NC State would leave if it could you can take that straight to Jesus Christ at the Pearly Gates. Looking and being able to leave to are two separate things. We don't control our destiny. The word "raid" is a word used by Morons. The intelligent phrase is "looking for best fit" - raid is a word used by by dip ***** under the age of 35 who are B10 and SEC wannabees and know nothings.

NC State, Purdue, Illinois, WF, Vandy, Iowa State, Ole Miss, as well as a few others are in the wrong conferences for their own long term good. However like a bad marriage, sometimes you have to just ride it until you die.

(06-03-2019 02:17 PM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:  

(06-01-2019 06:34 PM)Wear Purple Wrote:  Big 12-2 fans can be a little goofy on the message boards. I was going to say especially the butthurt WVU fans, but even they have mostly now started to settle in the Big 12-2 and are getting over the fact the ACC and SEC never wanted them and was never going to invite them into their country club.

I don't agree with that. If WVU cracked down on fan behavior and had an academic overhaul so that they weren't a glorified JuCo an invite would happen. The only thing keeping WVU from the ACC is WVU.

Yeah, well ... that's a pretty large hurdle.

Rule No 1: WVU is goin to WVU...
Rule No 2: When thinking that adding WVU might be okay, reread Rule No 1.

Back to the O.P.

Another thing about the revenue...it will be interesting to see if the $3M ESPN bump (for not having the Network) goes away in the first year or will it be phased out?

(06-05-2019 10:12 AM)TexanMark Wrote:  Rule No 1: WVU is goin to WVU...
Rule No 2: When thinking that adding WVU might be okay, reread Rule No 1.

Back to the O.P.

Another thing about the revenue...it will be interesting to see if the $3M ESPN bump (for not having the Network) goes away in the first year or will it be phased out?

My pet theory (based on rumor and innuendo, so take it for what it's worth) is that the $3M bump was made permanent in exchange for the GoR/tier 1 contract extension... however, since I'm not aware of any way to actually see the contents of the updated TV contract, I guess there's no way of knowing for now (UNLESS one of you has some high-level contacts who be willing to make an anonymous leak?)

Media at FSU has stated the $3 Million penalty bump goes away.

I believe it does as well.

We will see.

(06-05-2019 12:28 PM)nole Wrote:  Media at FSU has stated the $3 Million penalty bump goes away.

I believe it does as well.

We will see.

OK, maybe it does (I'd like to check that out too if you have a link, btw).

It does beg the question: what did the ACC get for extending the contract to 2036?

(06-05-2019 12:50 PM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  

(06-05-2019 12:28 PM)nole Wrote:  Media at FSU has stated the $3 Million penalty bump goes away.

I believe it does as well.

We will see.

OK, maybe it does (I'd like to check that out too if you have a link, btw).

It does beg the question: what did the ACC get for extending the contract to 2036?

I won't answer that on this board....I'll get killed for it.

I'll try to find that info.

HokieMark. These is from "Dot" at warchant. He has been on the FSU beat longer than anyone (20 plus years). Also a note from Ira S as well:


https://floridastate.forums.rivals.com/t...st-4374744

Either way, it's pretty much a guessing game at this stage. And again, no matter what the initial distribution is you have to subtract $3 million and the investment by each school to build it out.

https://floridastate.forums.rivals.com/t...st-4399651



Follow-up:

Don't mean to come off as the Grim Reaper with this story. But wanted to point out some of the harsh details surrounding FSU’s current financial state and the challenges ahead.

The ACC Network will undoubtedly provide a much-needed infusion of new revenue to FSU and other ACC member schools. However, some have overstated how much and how quickly that infusion will happen. A few things to consider:

* ESPN is already paying the ACC a penalty of approximately $3 million per school for failing to launch the linear network earlier. So the $29.5 million reported distribution per school will immediately drop to $26.5 million the minute the network is launched.



https://floridastate.forums.rivals.com/t...154/page-7



I speak to a lot of people "in the know" at FSU and they all tell me they are concerned about the current state of FSU's athletic finances.



https://floridastate.forums.rivals.com/t...54/page-10



Actually what Coburn said this week to the board was the opposite of "good news" re. ACC and revenues. He confirmed what I've been saying for a while that Wilcox's $8-10 million estimate for the first couple years of the ACC network is exaggerated. Looking like the revenue will be less than was told to them by the ACC.

Hopefully you aren't referring to the Boosters having to liquidate real estate to get athletics out of the red as good news.









https://floridastate.forums.rivals.com/t...re.256163/



I read it a couple days ago. If the premise was that, "Everything's fine. Nothing to see here," then I would say I 100 percent don't agree with that. I'd have to go back and listen, but I believe Jeff was saying that he doesn't think the gap between conference payouts is going to keep FSU from being competitive with elite programs.

I agree with that to a degree -- I believe FSU is going to figure out ways to keep funding football at a high level because it's so important to the athletics department and the university. But if the revenue doesn't come up from the conference and season ticket sales don't rebound, then they're going to have to take away big sums of moneys from other areas. Would they kill some of the Olympic sports programs? I don't know. That would probably be a last resort.

But the money has to come from somewhere. And right now it's not coming quick enough from the ACC.

19 iraschoffel, Friday at 10:04 AM