(11-24-2012 11:26 AM)BJUnklFkr Wrote:  

(11-24-2012 10:34 AM)He1nousOne Wrote:  IF UL, UC and UConn are actually happening and then ESPN actually gives the ACC a revalued contract that is equivalent to that of the Big 12 then we may just have our minds blown.

Whatever moves the B1G and SEC make seem to be much more worrisome than the B-XII though. Especially when they are throwing figures like $40 million around.

if espn gives the average they gave for pitt & syr. plus the value of the n. dame contract should put them in the 22-24 million range. that's less than the sec& B1G but more than the Big 12 . now their's potential wildcard in nbc/comcast. in their desire to get more N. dame content might be in play to purchase a package from espn that might push the per average up even more

Back to the OP topic of BC possibly next WOULD the ACC be upset to see the them leave??? I honestly think they were the worse mistake for addition to the ACC when they originally expanded in 03, and till this day IMHO they just look out of place amongst the conference. So really would the ACC family be up in arms if BC left or would they help them pack and pay their travel expense out of the conference???

(11-24-2012 11:35 AM)mj4life Wrote:  

(11-24-2012 11:26 AM)BJUnklFkr Wrote:  

(11-24-2012 10:34 AM)He1nousOne Wrote:  IF UL, UC and UConn are actually happening and then ESPN actually gives the ACC a revalued contract that is equivalent to that of the Big 12 then we may just have our minds blown.

Whatever moves the B1G and SEC make seem to be much more worrisome than the B-XII though. Especially when they are throwing figures like $40 million around.

if espn gives the average they gave for pitt & syr. plus the value of the n. dame contract should put them in the 22-24 million range. that's less than the sec& B1G but more than the Big 12 . now their's potential wildcard in nbc/comcast. in their desire to get more N. dame content might be in play to purchase a package from espn that might push the per average up even more

Add Notre Dame but drop from 9 conference games to 8. Probably won't see much of an increase. Media was reporting an additional ~$1M/team for Notre Dame at the time. I doubt very much ESPN changes the contract for Louisville.

Pretty sure ESPN would keep the proceeds from whatever package they'd sell to a different network. The ACC sold all of their rights. ESPN owns those rights. Why should the ACC get paid for something they don't own?

(11-24-2012 02:18 PM)JustAnotherName Wrote:  

(11-24-2012 11:35 AM)mj4life Wrote:  

(11-24-2012 11:26 AM)BJUnklFkr Wrote:  

(11-24-2012 10:34 AM)He1nousOne Wrote:  IF UL, UC and UConn are actually happening and then ESPN actually gives the ACC a revalued contract that is equivalent to that of the Big 12 then we may just have our minds blown.

Whatever moves the B1G and SEC make seem to be much more worrisome than the B-XII though. Especially when they are throwing figures like $40 million around.

if espn gives the average they gave for pitt & syr. plus the value of the n. dame contract should put them in the 22-24 million range. that's less than the sec& B1G but more than the Big 12 . now their's potential wildcard in nbc/comcast. in their desire to get more N. dame content might be in play to purchase a package from espn that might push the per average up even more

Add Notre Dame but drop from 9 conference games to 8. Probably won't see much of an increase. Media was reporting an additional ~$1M/team for Notre Dame at the time. I doubt very much ESPN changes the contract for Louisville.

Pretty sure ESPN would keep the proceeds from whatever package they'd sell to a different network. The ACC sold all of their rights. ESPN owns those rights. Why should the ACC get paid for something they don't own?

By changing two schools, there has been enough of an alteration to the circumstances of the contract for a good faith requirement to re-evaluate the terms of the contract (as per the language of teh contract from what I gather), and if ESPN and the ACC cannot come to an agreement, then a neutral 3rd party will decide for them. That arbitrator will take the increased value of ND's games into account when he/she/they make(s) his/her/their decision. If ND games are a hot commodity, then thei value will be high, and the ACC will be compensated accordingly.

(11-24-2012 02:18 PM)JustAnotherName Wrote:  

(11-24-2012 11:35 AM)mj4life Wrote:  

(11-24-2012 11:26 AM)BJUnklFkr Wrote:  

(11-24-2012 10:34 AM)He1nousOne Wrote:  IF UL, UC and UConn are actually happening and then ESPN actually gives the ACC a revalued contract that is equivalent to that of the Big 12 then we may just have our minds blown.

Whatever moves the B1G and SEC make seem to be much more worrisome than the B-XII though. Especially when they are throwing figures like $40 million around.

if espn gives the average they gave for pitt & syr. plus the value of the n. dame contract should put them in the 22-24 million range. that's less than the sec& B1G but more than the Big 12 . now their's potential wildcard in nbc/comcast. in their desire to get more N. dame content might be in play to purchase a package from espn that might push the per average up even more

Add Notre Dame but drop from 9 conference games to 8. Probably won't see much of an increase. Media was reporting an additional ~$1M/team for Notre Dame at the time. I doubt very much ESPN changes the contract for Louisville.

Pretty sure ESPN would keep the proceeds from whatever package they'd sell to a different network. The ACC sold all of their rights. ESPN owns those rights. Why should the ACC get paid for something they don't own?

because espn owns the rights they can choose to up the amount if they so choose & turn around & sell some of it to a 3rd party to recoup some of its cost. so let's say the contract is for 30 million but nbc might cover 10 to 12 milion of it for whatever package they agree to. another possible scenario is raycom partnering with another party since they own national syndication rights to the inventory espn doesn't want. espn/raycom contract allows them to sell to other national cable companies by the way

(11-24-2012 11:59 AM)BigOwensboroCard Wrote:  Back to the OP topic of BC possibly next WOULD the ACC be upset to see the them leave??? I honestly think they were the worse mistake for addition to the ACC when they originally expanded in 03, and till this day IMHO they just look out of place amongst the conference. So really would the ACC family be up in arms if BC left or would they help them pack and pay their travel expense out of the conference???

If only BC left, then I think the ACC would stay at 12.

(11-25-2012 01:01 AM)ChrisLords Wrote:  

(11-24-2012 11:59 AM)BigOwensboroCard Wrote:  Back to the OP topic of BC possibly next WOULD the ACC be upset to see the them leave??? I honestly think they were the worse mistake for addition to the ACC when they originally expanded in 03, and till this day IMHO they just look out of place amongst the conference. So really would the ACC family be up in arms if BC left or would they help them pack and pay their travel expense out of the conference???

If only BC left, then I think the ACC would stay at 12.

Well I am not talking about expanding or not I am just curious to know would the ACC family actually care if BC decided to up and leave the conference??? I think 12 makes alot more sense than going to these bigger leagues we are seeing today of 14 and possibly more. Unfortunately who does these leagues bring in is anybodies guess, but to stretch your league out to satisfy a member like the ACC did with BC to accompany Miami back 03 was just weird IMO. They are the true definition of the red headed step child of a conference more so than any other team in the country IMO.

(11-25-2012 04:01 PM)BigOwensboroCard Wrote:  

(11-25-2012 01:01 AM)ChrisLords Wrote:  

(11-24-2012 11:59 AM)BigOwensboroCard Wrote:  Back to the OP topic of BC possibly next WOULD the ACC be upset to see the them leave??? I honestly think they were the worse mistake for addition to the ACC when they originally expanded in 03, and till this day IMHO they just look out of place amongst the conference. So really would the ACC family be up in arms if BC left or would they help them pack and pay their travel expense out of the conference???

If only BC left, then I think the ACC would stay at 12.

Well I am not talking about expanding or not I am just curious to know would the ACC family actually care if BC decided to up and leave the conference??? I think 12 makes alot more sense than going to these bigger leagues we are seeing today of 14 and possibly more. Unfortunately who does these leagues bring in is anybodies guess, but to stretch your league out to satisfy a member like the ACC did with BC to accompany Miami back 03 was just weird IMO. They are the true definition of the red headed step child of a conference more so than any other team in the country IMO.

Be nice. Don't you need their vote?

(11-25-2012 01:01 AM)ChrisLords Wrote:  

(11-24-2012 11:59 AM)BigOwensboroCard Wrote:  Back to the OP topic of BC possibly next WOULD the ACC be upset to see the them leave??? I honestly think they were the worse mistake for addition to the ACC when they originally expanded in 03, and till this day IMHO they just look out of place amongst the conference. So really would the ACC family be up in arms if BC left or would they help them pack and pay their travel expense out of the conference???

If only BC left, then I think the ACC would stay at 12.

BC is so bad on both football and basketball. Can we pay them to leave then add both UConn and Louisville?

(11-24-2012 02:26 PM)nzmorange Wrote:  

(11-24-2012 02:18 PM)JustAnotherName Wrote:  

(11-24-2012 11:35 AM)mj4life Wrote:  

(11-24-2012 11:26 AM)BJUnklFkr Wrote:  

(11-24-2012 10:34 AM)He1nousOne Wrote:  IF UL, UC and UConn are actually happening and then ESPN actually gives the ACC a revalued contract that is equivalent to that of the Big 12 then we may just have our minds blown.

Whatever moves the B1G and SEC make seem to be much more worrisome than the B-XII though. Especially when they are throwing figures like $40 million around.

if espn gives the average they gave for pitt & syr. plus the value of the n. dame contract should put them in the 22-24 million range. that's less than the sec& B1G but more than the Big 12 . now their's potential wildcard in nbc/comcast. in their desire to get more N. dame content might be in play to purchase a package from espn that might push the per average up even more

Add Notre Dame but drop from 9 conference games to 8. Probably won't see much of an increase. Media was reporting an additional ~$1M/team for Notre Dame at the time. I doubt very much ESPN changes the contract for Louisville.

Pretty sure ESPN would keep the proceeds from whatever package they'd sell to a different network. The ACC sold all of their rights. ESPN owns those rights. Why should the ACC get paid for something they don't own?

By changing two schools, there has been enough of an alteration to the circumstances of the contract for a good faith requirement to re-evaluate the terms of the contract (as per the language of teh contract from what I gather), and if ESPN and the ACC cannot come to an agreement, then a neutral 3rd party will decide for them. That arbitrator will take the increased value of ND's games into account when he/she/they make(s) his/her/their decision. If ND games are a hot commodity, then thei value will be high, and the ACC will be compensated accordingly.

You must not have read anything I said.

(11-24-2012 02:34 PM)mj4life Wrote:  

(11-24-2012 02:18 PM)JustAnotherName Wrote:  

(11-24-2012 11:35 AM)mj4life Wrote:  

(11-24-2012 11:26 AM)BJUnklFkr Wrote:  

(11-24-2012 10:34 AM)He1nousOne Wrote:  IF UL, UC and UConn are actually happening and then ESPN actually gives the ACC a revalued contract that is equivalent to that of the Big 12 then we may just have our minds blown.

Whatever moves the B1G and SEC make seem to be much more worrisome than the B-XII though. Especially when they are throwing figures like $40 million around.

if espn gives the average they gave for pitt & syr. plus the value of the n. dame contract should put them in the 22-24 million range. that's less than the sec& B1G but more than the Big 12 . now their's potential wildcard in nbc/comcast. in their desire to get more N. dame content might be in play to purchase a package from espn that might push the per average up even more

Add Notre Dame but drop from 9 conference games to 8. Probably won't see much of an increase. Media was reporting an additional ~$1M/team for Notre Dame at the time. I doubt very much ESPN changes the contract for Louisville.

Pretty sure ESPN would keep the proceeds from whatever package they'd sell to a different network. The ACC sold all of their rights. ESPN owns those rights. Why should the ACC get paid for something they don't own?

because espn owns the rights they can choose to up the amount if they so choose & turn around & sell some of it to a 3rd party to recoup some of its cost. so let's say the contract is for 30 million but nbc might cover 10 to 12 milion of it for whatever package they agree to. another possible scenario is raycom partnering with another party since they own national syndication rights to the inventory espn doesn't want. espn/raycom contract allows them to sell to other national cable companies by the way

My god, are you actually trying to tell me that if ESPN sells a package of games to a separate network that you expect ESPN to then give the ACC some of that money? The ACC gave ESPN the rights to those games. That property is ESPN's and ESPN's alone.

But hey, some of you actually thought the Orange Bowl would bring in greater than $60M and that the ACC would get at least $40M of that.

(11-24-2012 02:26 PM)nzmorange Wrote:  By changing two schools, there has been enough of an alteration to the circumstances of the contract for a good faith requirement to re-evaluate the terms of the contract (as per the language of teh contract from what I gather), and if ESPN and the ACC cannot come to an agreement, then a neutral 3rd party will decide for them. That arbitrator will take the increased value of ND's games into account when he/she/they make(s) his/her/their decision. If ND games are a hot commodity, then thei value will be high, and the ACC will be compensated accordingly.

Note that "any" alteration does not mean you can reopen a contract. There has to be a good reason. When Syracuse and Pitt were added, ESPN agreed to add a bit mor emoney because they were goign to have extra games to sell in syndication. They also required years be added to the deal to make it happen. If the ACC did it again, they could be stuck in the same contract until 2035.

Note that adding ND games to the pot is a murky gray area. Even though an agreement is in place, they are still OOC games. Most conferences do not get a credit for the value of their OOC games, because they change so often. I understadn ND'd is different, but they had an agreementr with the BE too. I'd bet the ACC has a better chance of enforcing it than the BE did, but the point remains.

(11-26-2012 01:12 AM)JustAnotherName Wrote:  My god, are you actually trying to tell me that if ESPN sells a package of games to a separate network that you expect ESPN to then give the ACC some of that money? The ACC gave ESPN the rights to those games. That property is ESPN's and ESPN's alone.

They were not "given" away. They were sold for a pretty decent premium. It just so happens it doesn;t look that way due to how the rights market for college sports exploded right after that (due in large part to the ACC: they just did not get to reap the benefits of it).

(11-26-2012 12:03 PM)adcorbett Wrote:  

(11-26-2012 01:12 AM)JustAnotherName Wrote:  My god, are you actually trying to tell me that if ESPN sells a package of games to a separate network that you expect ESPN to then give the ACC some of that money? The ACC gave ESPN the rights to those games. That property is ESPN's and ESPN's alone.

They were not "given" away. They were sold for a pretty decent premium. It just so happens it doesn;t look that way due to how the rights market for college sports exploded right after that (due in large part to the ACC: they just did not get to reap the benefits of it).

Don't get too caught up in the wording that you fail to see the message.

(11-26-2012 01:12 AM)JustAnotherName Wrote:  

(11-24-2012 02:34 PM)mj4life Wrote:  

(11-24-2012 02:18 PM)JustAnotherName Wrote:  

(11-24-2012 11:35 AM)mj4life Wrote:  

(11-24-2012 11:26 AM)BJUnklFkr Wrote:  Whatever moves the B1G and SEC make seem to be much more worrisome than the B-XII though. Especially when they are throwing figures like $40 million around.

if espn gives the average they gave for pitt & syr. plus the value of the n. dame contract should put them in the 22-24 million range. that's less than the sec& B1G but more than the Big 12 . now their's potential wildcard in nbc/comcast. in their desire to get more N. dame content might be in play to purchase a package from espn that might push the per average up even more

Add Notre Dame but drop from 9 conference games to 8. Probably won't see much of an increase. Media was reporting an additional ~$1M/team for Notre Dame at the time. I doubt very much ESPN changes the contract for Louisville.

Pretty sure ESPN would keep the proceeds from whatever package they'd sell to a different network. The ACC sold all of their rights. ESPN owns those rights. Why should the ACC get paid for something they don't own?

because espn owns the rights they can choose to up the amount if they so choose & turn around & sell some of it to a 3rd party to recoup some of its cost. so let's say the contract is for 30 million but nbc might cover 10 to 12 milion of it for whatever package they agree to. another possible scenario is raycom partnering with another party since they own national syndication rights to the inventory espn doesn't want. espn/raycom contract allows them to sell to other national cable companies by the way

My god, are you actually trying to tell me that if ESPN sells a package of games to a separate network that you expect ESPN to then give the ACC some of that money? The ACC gave ESPN the rights to those games. That property is ESPN's and ESPN's alone.

But hey, some of you actually thought the Orange Bowl would bring in greater than $60M and that the ACC would get at least $40M of that.

no what i'm telling you espn could partner with another network to help cover the cost of paying the acc. raycom already covers a certain percentage of the cost of the contract already for national syndication rights. espn would still own first choice of the inventory it wants either way. so espn is not giving any money back to acc it's already included in the value of the contract

So my point is who gives a F if ESPN does that? If the ACC isn't going to see anymore money it doesn't even matter. It's irrelevant.