(05-25-2013 01:46 PM)Maize Wrote:  

(05-25-2013 12:42 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(05-25-2013 11:43 AM)Maize Wrote:  According to the article the breakdown per league during that time period is the following:

2011-12
Payout per school
Big Ten:$23.8 million (Nebraska received reduced share)
SEC:$20.4 million
ACC:$16.9 million
Big 12:$12.0 million (Missouri, Texas A&M received reduced share)
Pac-12:$11.1 million (Colorado, Utah received reduced share)
Payout per school that received full allotment

Big Ten:$24.7 million
SEC:$20.4 million
ACC:$16.9 million
Big 12:$14.9 million
Pac-12:$13.3 million

% change in total payout to schools from 2010-11
Pac-12:42.1
ACC:37.8
Big Ten:13.6
SEC:4.4
Big 12:-8.1

Yes, and as I explained, 2011-2012 is a year after the ACC's "big" (but really rather paltry) 2010 contract with ESPN kicked in, but before the bigger contracts signed by the PAC and Big 12 in 2012 kicked in.

And b4 the rework/GoR with ND...:key words...time period...

Exactly. This time period is even before the increase for Pitt/Syracuse/ND/GOR, etc.

(05-25-2013 04:10 PM)jaminandjachin Wrote:  

(05-25-2013 01:46 PM)Maize Wrote:  

(05-25-2013 12:42 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(05-25-2013 11:43 AM)Maize Wrote:  According to the article the breakdown per league during that time period is the following:

2011-12
Payout per school
Big Ten:$23.8 million (Nebraska received reduced share)
SEC:$20.4 million
ACC:$16.9 million
Big 12:$12.0 million (Missouri, Texas A&M received reduced share)
Pac-12:$11.1 million (Colorado, Utah received reduced share)
Payout per school that received full allotment

Big Ten:$24.7 million
SEC:$20.4 million
ACC:$16.9 million
Big 12:$14.9 million
Pac-12:$13.3 million

% change in total payout to schools from 2010-11
Pac-12:42.1
ACC:37.8
Big Ten:13.6
SEC:4.4
Big 12:-8.1

Yes, and as I explained, 2011-2012 is a year after the ACC's "big" (but really rather paltry) 2010 contract with ESPN kicked in, but before the bigger contracts signed by the PAC and Big 12 in 2012 kicked in.

And b4 the rework/GoR with ND...:key words...time period...

Exactly. This time period is even before the increase for Pitt/Syracuse/ND/GOR, etc.

Strange obsession with the ACC...we all will agree that the ACC in term of earnings is not @ the level of the SEC/B1G or right now probably when their network takes off the PAC-12.

But going forward and with the renewed commitment from all 14 Members-(and they backed it up with the Grant of Rights) the ACC is on currently very solid footing and in the overall scope including the Bowl Deals they are putting together they are going to be very strong...as will all the P5 Leagues.

My guess he wants to make the ACC the "BIG EAST"...kind of hard to do...unlike the BIG EAST, everyone including Notre Dame is on the same page and moving in the same direction. Look @ the Projected Future Bowl Lineup provided by Sports Illustrated, ACC Men's & Women Basketball, Baseball, LaCrosse and even Football-(only the SEC had more NFL Draft Picks in the 2013 Draft) and of course the ReWork with the new additions of Syracuse, Pittsburgh, Notre Dame & Louisville.

John Swofford turned the Maryland issue that was a lemon into lemonade for the league and got a much better deal for all current & future members.

(05-25-2013 01:46 PM)Maize Wrote:  

(05-25-2013 12:42 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(05-25-2013 11:43 AM)Maize Wrote:  According to the article the breakdown per league during that time period is the following:

2011-12
Payout per school
Big Ten:$23.8 million (Nebraska received reduced share)
SEC:$20.4 million
ACC:$16.9 million
Big 12:$12.0 million (Missouri, Texas A&M received reduced share)
Pac-12:$11.1 million (Colorado, Utah received reduced share)
Payout per school that received full allotment

Big Ten:$24.7 million
SEC:$20.4 million
ACC:$16.9 million
Big 12:$14.9 million
Pac-12:$13.3 million

% change in total payout to schools from 2010-11
Pac-12:42.1
ACC:37.8
Big Ten:13.6
SEC:4.4
Big 12:-8.1

Yes, and as I explained, 2011-2012 is a year after the ACC's "big" (but really rather paltry) 2010 contract with ESPN kicked in, but before the bigger contracts signed by the PAC and Big 12 in 2012 kicked in.

And b4 the rework/GoR with ND...:key words...time period...

.... and we just last week got word on what that rework added up to: $18 million, rising to $20 million if an ACCN isn't implemented. Still below what the PAC and B12 are getting.

(05-26-2013 12:41 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(05-25-2013 01:46 PM)Maize Wrote:  

(05-25-2013 12:42 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(05-25-2013 11:43 AM)Maize Wrote:  According to the article the breakdown per league during that time period is the following:

2011-12
Payout per school
Big Ten:$23.8 million (Nebraska received reduced share)
SEC:$20.4 million
ACC:$16.9 million
Big 12:$12.0 million (Missouri, Texas A&M received reduced share)
Pac-12:$11.1 million (Colorado, Utah received reduced share)
Payout per school that received full allotment

Big Ten:$24.7 million
SEC:$20.4 million
ACC:$16.9 million
Big 12:$14.9 million
Pac-12:$13.3 million

% change in total payout to schools from 2010-11
Pac-12:42.1
ACC:37.8
Big Ten:13.6
SEC:4.4
Big 12:-8.1

Yes, and as I explained, 2011-2012 is a year after the ACC's "big" (but really rather paltry) 2010 contract with ESPN kicked in, but before the bigger contracts signed by the PAC and Big 12 in 2012 kicked in.

And b4 the rework/GoR with ND...:key words...time period...

.... and we just last week got word on what that rework added up to: $18 million, rising to $20 million if an ACCN isn't implemented. Still below what the PAC and B12 are getting.

Big 12 is only getting that much because they have 4 less teams. More power to them. Let's see the chest thumping if they have to pick up two more teams.

Not afraid of the Pac 12 either. Their network isn't doing jack.

ACC network will get done eventually. Once they get the Raycom/Fox sports mess out of the way it's clear sailings.

(05-26-2013 07:01 AM)jaminandjachin Wrote:  

(05-26-2013 12:41 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(05-25-2013 01:46 PM)Maize Wrote:  

(05-25-2013 12:42 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(05-25-2013 11:43 AM)Maize Wrote:  According to the article the breakdown per league during that time period is the following:

2011-12
Payout per school
Big Ten:$23.8 million (Nebraska received reduced share)
SEC:$20.4 million
ACC:$16.9 million
Big 12:$12.0 million (Missouri, Texas A&M received reduced share)
Pac-12:$11.1 million (Colorado, Utah received reduced share)
Payout per school that received full allotment

Big Ten:$24.7 million
SEC:$20.4 million
ACC:$16.9 million
Big 12:$14.9 million
Pac-12:$13.3 million

% change in total payout to schools from 2010-11
Pac-12:42.1
ACC:37.8
Big Ten:13.6
SEC:4.4
Big 12:-8.1

Yes, and as I explained, 2011-2012 is a year after the ACC's "big" (but really rather paltry) 2010 contract with ESPN kicked in, but before the bigger contracts signed by the PAC and Big 12 in 2012 kicked in.

And b4 the rework/GoR with ND...:key words...time period...

.... and we just last week got word on what that rework added up to: $18 million, rising to $20 million if an ACCN isn't implemented. Still below what the PAC and B12 are getting.

Big 12 is only getting that much because they have 4 less teams. More power to them. Let's see the chest thumping if they have to pick up two more teams.

I see absolutely no reason why the Big 12 would ever have to pick up two more teams.

(05-26-2013 07:35 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(05-26-2013 07:01 AM)jaminandjachin Wrote:  

(05-26-2013 12:41 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(05-25-2013 01:46 PM)Maize Wrote:  

(05-25-2013 12:42 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  Yes, and as I explained, 2011-2012 is a year after the ACC's "big" (but really rather paltry) 2010 contract with ESPN kicked in, but before the bigger contracts signed by the PAC and Big 12 in 2012 kicked in.

And b4 the rework/GoR with ND...:key words...time period...

.... and we just last week got word on what that rework added up to: $18 million, rising to $20 million if an ACCN isn't implemented. Still below what the PAC and B12 are getting.

Big 12 is only getting that much because they have 4 less teams. More power to them. Let's see the chest thumping if they have to pick up two more teams.

I see absolutely no reason why the Big 12 would ever have to pick up two more teams.

Right now there isn't, but the landscape of college football changes every year. A year ago you would have said you couldn't see Notre Dame playing 5 games a year against the ACC...well they are. You would have said Missouri in the SEC?? Nah...well they are. Rutgers/ Maryland in the BIG? No way. Big 12 will be the only major conference without a CG. If part of the playoff selection is SOS then playing a higher profile opponent in a CG may hold more weight than playing a 9th conference game. The BIG is going to 9 conf games. Pac 12 is already at 9 and both play a CG. ACC wants to stay at 8 but they make up for it by having high profile non-conference games.

(05-26-2013 12:41 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(05-25-2013 01:46 PM)Maize Wrote:  

(05-25-2013 12:42 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(05-25-2013 11:43 AM)Maize Wrote:  According to the article the breakdown per league during that time period is the following:

2011-12
Payout per school
Big Ten:$23.8 million (Nebraska received reduced share)
SEC:$20.4 million
ACC:$16.9 million
Big 12:$12.0 million (Missouri, Texas A&M received reduced share)
Pac-12:$11.1 million (Colorado, Utah received reduced share)
Payout per school that received full allotment

Big Ten:$24.7 million
SEC:$20.4 million
ACC:$16.9 million
Big 12:$14.9 million
Pac-12:$13.3 million

% change in total payout to schools from 2010-11
Pac-12:42.1
ACC:37.8
Big Ten:13.6
SEC:4.4
Big 12:-8.1

Yes, and as I explained, 2011-2012 is a year after the ACC's "big" (but really rather paltry) 2010 contract with ESPN kicked in, but before the bigger contracts signed by the PAC and Big 12 in 2012 kicked in.

And b4 the rework/GoR with ND...:key words...time period...

.... and we just last week got word on what that rework added up to: $18 million, rising to $20 million if an ACCN isn't implemented. Still below what the PAC and B12are getting.

Actually, on par with the Big XII...but don't let the facts get in the way

(05-26-2013 07:43 AM)jaminandjachin Wrote:  

(05-26-2013 07:35 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(05-26-2013 07:01 AM)jaminandjachin Wrote:  

(05-26-2013 12:41 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(05-25-2013 01:46 PM)Maize Wrote:  And b4 the rework/GoR with ND...:key words...time period...

.... and we just last week got word on what that rework added up to: $18 million, rising to $20 million if an ACCN isn't implemented. Still below what the PAC and B12 are getting.

Big 12 is only getting that much because they have 4 less teams. More power to them. Let's see the chest thumping if they have to pick up two more teams.

I see absolutely no reason why the Big 12 would ever have to pick up two more teams.

Right now there isn't, but the landscape of college football changes every year. A year ago you would have said you couldn't see Notre Dame playing 5 games a year against the ACC...well they are. You would have said Missouri in the SEC?Nah...well they are. Rutgers/ Maryland in the BIG? No way. Big 12 will be the only major conference without a CG. If part of the playoff selection is SOS then playing a higher profile opponent in a CG may hold more weight than playing a 9th conference game. The BIG is going to 9 conf games. Pac 12 is already at 9 and both play a CG. ACC wants to stay at 8 but they make up for it by having high profile non-conference games.

Actually he did...screamed to the high hills that no way the SEC would take Missouri back in 2011...

Swofford said the role of Raycom in a world with an ACC channel is yet to be determined.

He likened the necessary rights readjustment to conferences buying back third-tier TV rights from their schools before contracts with major cable providers could get done.

“There would be some adjustment to content and how it is distributed,” Swofford said. “I don’t know that it complicates things any more so than anybody else that’s started a channel. Those are part of the discussions that ESPN would have, both with us and their sub-licensees.

“There are issues there that we would need to address, just as other conferences have addressed them.”

http://www.news-record.com/sports/colleg...f6878.html

People got to remember, it took the SEC-(Project X....the SEC Network) 3 years to get it as a go in 2014... My guess we might be looking @ 2015-2016 to get it off the ground.

ACC needs to start charging for the digital content. It has the most expansive digital coverage of all conferences.

(05-26-2013 12:04 PM)jaminandjachin Wrote:  ACC needs to start charging for the digital content. It has the most expansive digital coverage of all conferences.

It already has the most subscribers of any league...a slight fee could pocket the league a nice piece of $$$

(05-26-2013 11:04 AM)Maize Wrote:  

(05-26-2013 12:41 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(05-25-2013 01:46 PM)Maize Wrote:  

(05-25-2013 12:42 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(05-25-2013 11:43 AM)Maize Wrote:  According to the article the breakdown per league during that time period is the following:

2011-12
Payout per school
Big Ten:$23.8 million (Nebraska received reduced share)
SEC:$20.4 million
ACC:$16.9 million
Big 12:$12.0 million (Missouri, Texas A&M received reduced share)
Pac-12:$11.1 million (Colorado, Utah received reduced share)
Payout per school that received full allotment

Big Ten:$24.7 million
SEC:$20.4 million
ACC:$16.9 million
Big 12:$14.9 million
Pac-12:$13.3 million

% change in total payout to schools from 2010-11
Pac-12:42.1
ACC:37.8
Big Ten:13.6
SEC:4.4
Big 12:-8.1

Yes, and as I explained, 2011-2012 is a year after the ACC's "big" (but really rather paltry) 2010 contract with ESPN kicked in, but before the bigger contracts signed by the PAC and Big 12 in 2012 kicked in.

And b4 the rework/GoR with ND...:key words...time period...

.... and we just last week got word on what that rework added up to: $18 million, rising to $20 million if an ACCN isn't implemented. Still below what the PAC and B12are getting.

Actually, on par with the Big XII...but don't let the facts get in the way

Actually, it is currently less than what the Big 12 gets, and it will only rise to close, not equal to, but close, to what the Big 12 gets if an ACCN isn't put in to operation. But don't let facts get in the way. Plus, the ACC deal extends out to 2027, which is worse than the Big 12's deal, which expires in 2025.

And both have 5 year look ins...also, that means the Big XII GoR runs out 2 years before the ACC...

How do Nebraska fans feel abut this?

Quote:The Big Ten passed more than $286 million to its teams through TV contracts, postseason football and basketball and NCAA payouts during the 2011-2012 year, according to tax forms submitted to the IRS and obtained by the News & Record. Its 11 established members got an average cut of $24.7 million, with new member Nebraska receiving a reduced share.

How much reduced is Nebraska's share? If you do the math you'll find that in order for the other 11 to get $24.7M, Nebraska has to get only $14.3M... $10.4M less WITHIN their own conference! And from what I've read elsewhere, the Huskers are still many years away from getting a full share...

(05-26-2013 12:45 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(05-26-2013 11:04 AM)Maize Wrote:  

(05-26-2013 12:41 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(05-25-2013 01:46 PM)Maize Wrote:  

(05-25-2013 12:42 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  Yes, and as I explained, 2011-2012 is a year after the ACC's "big" (but really rather paltry) 2010 contract with ESPN kicked in, but before the bigger contracts signed by the PAC and Big 12 in 2012 kicked in.

And b4 the rework/GoR with ND...:key words...time period...

.... and we just last week got word on what that rework added up to: $18 million, rising to $20 million if an ACCN isn't implemented. Still below what the PAC and B12are getting.

Actually, on par with the Big XII...but don't let the facts get in the way

Actually, it is currently less than what the Big 12 gets, and it will only rise to close, not equal to, but close, to what the Big 12 gets if an ACCN isn't put in to operation. But don't let facts get in the way. Plus, the ACC deal extends out to 2027, which is worse than the Big 12's deal, which expires in 2025.

A couple of points:

1) The Big 12 isn't getting a big increase after 2025. Networks are already overpaying for the content. ACC on the other hand....

2) If it takes the ACC 3 years to get a network up and running, then the Big 12 has 3 years to make more than the ACC (per team). After that it's all over.

(05-26-2013 01:04 PM)jaminandjachin Wrote:  

(05-26-2013 12:45 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(05-26-2013 11:04 AM)Maize Wrote:  

(05-26-2013 12:41 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(05-25-2013 01:46 PM)Maize Wrote:  And b4 the rework/GoR with ND...:key words...time period...

.... and we just last week got word on what that rework added up to: $18 million, rising to $20 million if an ACCN isn't implemented. Still below what the PAC and B12are getting.

Actually, on par with the Big XII...but don't let the facts get in the way

Actually, it is currently less than what the Big 12 gets, and it will only rise to close, not equal to, but close, to what the Big 12 gets if an ACCN isn't put in to operation. But don't let facts get in the way. Plus, the ACC deal extends out to 2027, which is worse than the Big 12's deal, which expires in 2025.

A couple of points:

1) The Big 12 isn't getting a big increase after 2025. Networks are already overpaying for the content. ACC on the other hand....

2) If it takes the ACC 3 years to get a network up and running, then the Big 12 has 3 years to make more than the ACC (per team). After that it's all over.

Exactly....all 5 Leagues are get'n paid....all 5 have Direct Tie-Ins to CFP Bowls...All 5 are laughing all the way to the bank...

(05-26-2013 12:50 PM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  How much reduced is Nebraska's share? If you do the math you'll find that in order for the other 11 to get $24.7M, Nebraska has to get only $14.3M... $10.4M less WITHIN their own conference! And from what I've read elsewhere, the Huskers are still many years away from getting a full share...

Which is curiously right at the Big 12 figure for 2011-12.

It is possible that the contract allows for Nebraska to complete its BTN buy-in faster by "contributing" the offset between what they received and the true average. In any case, much of that money would have been contributed to the BTN startup had they been a member from the get-go.

(05-26-2013 01:09 PM)Maize Wrote:  

(05-26-2013 01:04 PM)jaminandjachin Wrote:  

(05-26-2013 12:45 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(05-26-2013 11:04 AM)Maize Wrote:  

(05-26-2013 12:41 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  .... and we just last week got word on what that rework added up to: $18 million, rising to $20 million if an ACCN isn't implemented. Still below what the PAC and B12are getting.

Actually, on par with the Big XII...but don't let the facts get in the way

Actually, it is currently less than what the Big 12 gets, and it will only rise to close, not equal to, but close, to what the Big 12 gets if an ACCN isn't put in to operation. But don't let facts get in the way. Plus, the ACC deal extends out to 2027, which is worse than the Big 12's deal, which expires in 2025.

A couple of points:

1) The Big 12 isn't getting a big increase after 2025. Networks are already overpaying for the content. ACC on the other hand....

2) If it takes the ACC 3 years to get a network up and running, then the Big 12 has 3 years to make more than the ACC (per team). After that it's all over.

Exactly....all 5 Leagues are get'n paid....all 5 have Direct Tie-Ins to CFP Bowls...All 5 are laughing all the way to the bank...

Nobody has ever said that the P5, including the ACC, aren't getting paid out the wazzoo. They are. The issue has been who is getting paid the least.

(05-26-2013 03:16 PM)SeaBlue Wrote:  

(05-26-2013 12:50 PM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  How much reduced is Nebraska's share? If you do the math you'll find that in order for the other 11 to get $24.7M, Nebraska has to get only $14.3M... $10.4M less WITHIN their own conference! And from what I've read elsewhere, the Huskers are still many years away from getting a full share...

Which is curiously right at the Big 12 figure for 2011-12.

It is possible that the contract allows for Nebraska to complete its BTN buy-in faster by "contributing" the offset between what they received and the true average. In any case, much of that money would have been contributed to the BTN startup had they been a member from the get-go.

That's an excellent point. It will be interesting to track Nebraska's take in the future. But I do remember Alvarez saying that whoever was added it would take time before they would get equity in the BTN.

Wonder if this will apply to Maryland as well.

Cheers,
Neil