Well, if ACC is getting at least 1 million more due to ND and Louisville, that means it's pretty much a million dollars.(if it was more, they would have said at least 2 million more etc.). So that takes ACC up to 18 million dollars(17 when you take out the conferences share).

(02-21-2013 08:59 AM)gocards#1 Wrote:  

(02-20-2013 11:58 PM)Villecard Wrote:  The interview with David starts at around 73:00. Highlights include:
-Says the UVa has "no interest or contact" with the B1G
-The ACC is "actively" engaging in talks with the ESPN about an ACC Network
-The ACC expects at least $1 million more a team due to the addition of ND and Louisville
-ND is not likely to play 6 ACC games as rumored
-He believes Maryland is the exception, not the rule

You can listen HERE

Where's that Baylor fan I was arguing with the other day?

Right here. I'll have to listen to the interview but my initial thoughts are the same as they were:

-UL kept the revenue roughly where it was instead of the deal getting cut down with a small amount of the bump possibly coming from UL. UL has value but so did UMD.
- ND's giant audience helping 2-3 football games get top dollar instead of ESPN3 as well as their non-fb which also drives eyeballs probably did the bulk of it.

Please do not think for a second I have any vendetta against UL. I frequently pull for you guys and if realignment ever sent either team to the other's current league I'd be happy to play the Cards annually.

**EDIT**

To support my theory I offer this math:

The SEC on CBS offers around 3.5 million per game if my math is correct on the 15 games and their average payout. ND @ ACC teams are almost assured to be an ABC, ESPN, and ESPN2 type of broadcast. So let's just assume they get 3.3 to be a little less but still top dollar.

BYU's low end of what ESPN will pay them is 800k and this is heavily rumored to be for ESPNU broadcasts with the ESPN & ESPN2 appearances paying them 1-1.2mm. I imagine the ESPNU and ESPN3 type of broadcasts for the ACC are similarly in the 800k range.

So ND bumps the ACC tv pot by 2.5 X (3,300,000-800,000) = 6.25mm for football. Divided 14 ways it's 446,000 per school.

Let's say ND hoops adds 18 home games and is 150k more valuable than the ACC average game. (UNC, UL, Duke, Cuse are high but BC, Clemson, UVA, VT, etc aren't going to get top dollar per game for hoops. I am saying 150k more than thise second group)

150k X 18 =2.7mm divided 15 ways (as ND gets a cut) is 180k.

Half that for WBB: 90k.

716k added just off these guesses. The vast majority of any increase.

I can easily be wrong but it's what seems to make sense.

(02-20-2013 05:21 PM)OldGoldnBlue Wrote:  

(02-20-2013 04:55 PM)Villecard Wrote:  FYI- David Teel, who covers the ACC for the Hampton Roads Daily Press will be on Louisville Sports Live to discuss the realignment rumors and the ACC in general at around 7:30 if you're interested.

You can stream HERE

Guarantee he pulls this move

Called it. No ACC beat writer is going to say that the ACC is in trouble while appearing on another ACC teams radio show. We all know that.

The Dude actually got McMurphy to appear on his show tonight, lets see what an unbiased reporter has to say about the situation.

(02-21-2013 09:27 AM)stever20 Wrote:  Well, if ACC is getting at least 1 million more due to ND and Louisville, that means it's pretty much a million dollars.(if it was more, they would have said at least 2 million more etc.). So that takes ACC up to 18 million dollars(17 when you take out the conferences share).

Yes...iron clad proof

I heard only the ACC has overhead too.

well, only getting 1 million more isn't the 2.5 million more that folks were claiming a month ago.

Well , since everyone in the ACC is apparently turning down B1G offers since life is so good there , B1G should start inviting Big East schools.

When the B12 was imploding, the claim made by College Presidents and ADs was that there was no "official" contacts, which proved to be true. Rather, sports advisors hired by the college and/or conference were doing the talking and the setting up of proposals.

Hard for me to believe, in this day and age, that every President, AD, and Conference Administrator hasn't talk to every other President, AD, and Conference Administrator in this stage of this Circus Realignment. One da, Rutgers was in BE. Next day, they were gone. Ditto for Pitt and Syracuse. Not a publcity piece hit the newspaper before those schools made their move.

The vultures are circling the ACC, waiting for a Maryland settlement.

We'll know that this rumor has any truth to it once someone from UVA or UNC, or even GT begins to chime in about it. Until that happens, it's just a rumor. It got a fraction more legitimate because the guy who broke the Maryland to B1G story reported it this time, but in the end, he's not really a source at any of those other schools.

(02-21-2013 09:37 AM)stever20 Wrote:  well, only getting 1 million more isn't the 2.5 million more that folks were claiming a month ago.

Dude...people only report what we hear. It could be 2.5M. It could be $1M. It could be somewhere in between. Now we need to work on that overhead thing since no one else has it.

(02-21-2013 09:45 AM)Tallgrass Wrote:  When the B12 was imploding, the claim made by College Presidents and ADs was that there was no "official" contacts, which proved to be true. Rather, sports advisors hired by the college and/or conference were doing the talking and the setting up of proposals.

Hard for me to believe, in this day and age, that every President, AD, and Conference Administrator hasn't talk to every other President, AD, and Conference Administrator in this stage of this Circus Realignment. One da, Rutgers was in BE. Next day, they were gone. Ditto for Pitt and Syracuse. Not a publcity piece hit the newspaper before those schools made their move.

Yet MFer3 and Dude all know? Oh yeah that's right they were clueless too.

(02-21-2013 10:06 AM)TexanMark Wrote:  

(02-21-2013 09:45 AM)Tallgrass Wrote:  When the B12 was imploding, the claim made by College Presidents and ADs was that there was no "official" contacts, which proved to be true. Rather, sports advisors hired by the college and/or conference were doing the talking and the setting up of proposals.

Hard for me to believe, in this day and age, that every President, AD, and Conference Administrator hasn't talk to every other President, AD, and Conference Administrator in this stage of this Circus Realignment. One da, Rutgers was in BE. Next day, they were gone. Ditto for Pitt and Syracuse. Not a publcity piece hit the newspaper before those schools made their move.

Yet MFer3 and Dude all know? Oh yeah that's right they were clueless too.

Dude and MHVer are FOS. Every single person on this board knows that, 90% of WVU fans know that and yet you ACC guys keep bringing them up as the source of all of these rumors. Get your head out of the sand.

(02-21-2013 05:49 AM)BamaWahoo Wrote:  I have absolutely no idea if UVA really is in communication with the Big 10 or has any interest in it. I am torn as to whether I want us to make such a move. But (1) I don't see why anyone at UVA having these conversations would feel obliged to inform the reporter with VT leanings in Roanoke, and (2) I think that the idea of NO communications with the B1G has to be an overstatement - and if it's not it's negligence by the administration. Even if UVA doesn't want to move to the B1G and even if Teresa Sullivan isn't chatting with Delaney, I'd be shocked if at least Sullivan wasn't casually talking about the landscape with B1G presidents. In this environment you have to know what your options are.

Yes, a reporter would only have the information that an administrator (or any other contact) would give him - and they wouldn't give him that until there was something to confirm. It's not like Maryland made public in the early stages that they were considering a move to the Big10. If you're in charge of making negotiations that could affect so many people and could mean millions of dollars of funding for your organization, you don't run and tell a reporter everything that's going on as it happens - or before it happens.

As an instituition, you don't want to look like Missouri did a few years ago publicly flirting with the Big10 - or like some Louisville politicos did trying to help Louisville leapfrog WestVirginia into the Big12, or the way UConn and Cincinnati have looked asking to get into the ACC. It's not that these institutions shouldn't court an invite - or inquire with another conference - but they should do so as descretely as possible. Telling a reporter that they are talking - or interested in talking, or willing to leave the conference they are in isn't the way to go.

In most cases, University media contacts are left out of negotiations in order to allow them to say things like "to my knowledge, there have been no discussions between x and this institution". Coaches do the same thing by having agents that negotiate with outside interests for them. That way the coach (who ends up leaving three days later) can say, "I have not spoken with anyone from that NFL team" and be completely honest.

This reporter's assurance doesn't mean anything. It neither means they are leaving nor they they wouldn't.

(02-21-2013 07:37 AM)krux Wrote:  Lets talk about the last point he made in the interview about future ACC expansion. He said they're content with 14 + ND because 16 is still the magic number (in a nutshell). He also said that unless ND joined full time they'd stay at 14.

My first thought on this point is this is why we've seen Cincy doing a heavy job of begging. At least more than what would be expected if the ACC really was looking for more members. Not that I blame Cincy, because I would hope my school did the same (and it has). If you are afraid of getting left behind for good, then you are going to pull out all stops to try and change that fate.

I think we can all agree that if any Go5 school wants to move up, it will be the ACC that has to lose teams. I guess one could argue the Big XII but the conference with the most vulnerability right now is arguably the ACC. Maybe Cincy is sensing the vulnerability is passing for the time being.

(02-21-2013 07:37 AM)krux Wrote:  Lets talk about the last point he made in the interview about future ACC expansion. He said they're content with 14 + ND because 16 is still the magic number (in a nutshell). He also said that unless ND joined full time they'd stay at 14.

So as highly improbable as it is, lets say ND joins on as #15 full time. Who then would the ACC target as #16? More importantly, what options would that create for them? Would it put PSU in play? Hell, would it make UMD think about coming back?

Anyone find that an odd statement?
"Well, since 16 is what we want, we'll stay at 14 1/2"
huh?

(02-21-2013 10:57 AM)nert Wrote:  

(02-21-2013 07:37 AM)krux Wrote:  Lets talk about the last point he made in the interview about future ACC expansion. He said they're content with 14 + ND because 16 is still the magic number (in a nutshell). He also said that unless ND joined full time they'd stay at 14.

So as highly improbable as it is, lets say ND joins on as #15 full time. Who then would the ACC target as #16? More importantly, what options would that create for them? Would it put PSU in play? Hell, would it make UMD think about coming back?

Anyone find that an odd statement?
"Well, since 16 is what we want, we'll stay at 14 1/2"
huh?

Not really...what else can they do?

(02-21-2013 07:44 AM)TerryD Wrote:  

(02-21-2013 07:37 AM)krux Wrote:  Lets talk about the last point he made in the interview about future ACC expansion. He said they're content with 14 + ND because 16 is still the magic number (in a nutshell). He also said that unless ND joined full time they'd stay at 14.

So as highly improbable as it is, lets say ND joins on as #15 full time. Who then would the ACC target as #16? More importantly, what options would that create for them? Would it put PSU in play? Hell, would it make UMD think about coming back?

I think it would be UConn or Navy (if ND really pushed for them).

Hell, take both of them and Cincy and go to eighteen, then.

(I have never thought that ND would agree to the sixth ACC game, either)

I can't see ND joining the ACC for decades (if ever) unless they lost somebody. If they were a 12 or 14 team conference, they could do a deal with ND to play only division games, so they could get by with a 5 or 6 game conference schedule. That's conceivable at some point.

(02-21-2013 11:02 AM)TexanMark Wrote:  

(02-21-2013 10:57 AM)nert Wrote:  

(02-21-2013 07:37 AM)krux Wrote:  Lets talk about the last point he made in the interview about future ACC expansion. He said they're content with 14 + ND because 16 is still the magic number (in a nutshell). He also said that unless ND joined full time they'd stay at 14.

So as highly improbable as it is, lets say ND joins on as #15 full time. Who then would the ACC target as #16? More importantly, what options would that create for them? Would it put PSU in play? Hell, would it make UMD think about coming back?

Anyone find that an odd statement?
"Well, since 16 is what we want, we'll stay at 14 1/2"
huh?

Not really...what else can they do?

The ACC can't/won't go to 16 schools unless/until Notre Dame decides to join full time.

Otherwise, it is not economically feasible for the ACC to expand.

At least, that is how I read it.

(02-21-2013 10:57 AM)nert Wrote:  

(02-21-2013 07:37 AM)krux Wrote:  Lets talk about the last point he made in the interview about future ACC expansion. He said they're content with 14 + ND because 16 is still the magic number (in a nutshell). He also said that unless ND joined full time they'd stay at 14.

So as highly improbable as it is, lets say ND joins on as #15 full time. Who then would the ACC target as #16? More importantly, what options would that create for them? Would it put PSU in play? Hell, would it make UMD think about coming back?

Anyone find that an odd statement?
"Well, since 16 is what we want, we'll stay at 14 1/2"
huh?

No because if 16 is the cap why would you permenantly squeeze ND out of the picture for Cincy/UConn. And no offense to either of those schools but I don't think it's unfair to say ND >>>> Both of them.

(02-21-2013 10:14 AM)nert Wrote:  

(02-21-2013 05:49 AM)BamaWahoo Wrote:  I have absolutely no idea if UVA really is in communication with the Big 10 or has any interest in it. I am torn as to whether I want us to make such a move. But (1) I don't see why anyone at UVA having these conversations would feel obliged to inform the reporter with VT leanings in Roanoke, and (2) I think that the idea of NO communications with the B1G has to be an overstatement - and if it's not it's negligence by the administration. Even if UVA doesn't want to move to the B1G and even if Teresa Sullivan isn't chatting with Delaney, I'd be shocked if at least Sullivan wasn't casually talking about the landscape with B1G presidents. In this environment you have to know what your options are.

Yes, a reporter would only have the information that an administrator (or any other contact) would give him - and they wouldn't give him that until there was something to confirm. It's not like Maryland made public in the early stages that they were considering a move to the Big10. If you're in charge of making negotiations that could affect so many people and could mean millions of dollars of funding for your organization, you don't run and tell a reporter everything that's going on as it happens - or before it happens.

As an instituition, you don't want to look like Missouri did a few years ago publicly flirting with the Big10 - or like some Louisville politicos did trying to help Louisville leapfrog WestVirginia into the Big12, or the way UConn and Cincinnati have looked asking to get into the ACC. It's not that these institutions shouldn't court an invite - or inquire with another conference - but they should do so as descretely as possible. Telling a reporter that they are talking - or interested in talking, or willing to leave the conference they are in isn't the way to go.

In most cases, University media contacts are left out of negotiations in order to allow them to say things like "to my knowledge, there have been no discussions between x and this institution". Coaches do the same thing by having agents that negotiate with outside interests for them. That way the coach (who ends up leaving three days later) can say, "I have not spoken with anyone from that NFL team" and be completely honest.

This reporter's assurance doesn't mean anything. It neither means they are leaving nor they they wouldn't.

In fairness, the Kentucky politicians were very discreet. It was the WV Senators who acted like clowns. And its not clear there was ever any discussion of UL "leapfrogging" WVU. There was an article with an anonymous source out of Oklahoma saying it was all misinformation related to the negotiations with Missouri and there is also speculation it was consideration of going to 11 instead of just 10.