(08-28-2021 08:09 AM)ren.hoek Wrote:  

(08-27-2021 02:41 PM)nole Wrote:  

(08-27-2021 09:32 AM)ren.hoek Wrote:  

(08-27-2021 08:25 AM)XLance Wrote:  

(08-27-2021 07:59 AM)cuseroc Wrote:  Yeah, that would really stink if the ACC lost FSU and Clemson.

Well, we would miss Clemson.

I'm very encouraged by what we're seeing from Phillips so far. I like the alliance to keep ESPN from creating a power 1 structure. I love the alliance to upgrade OOC schedules, something some teams really needed to be forced to do. I love the idea of abandoning Greensboro, which should help purge the Swofford clown show. And bringing Delaney in as a consultant on revenue generation and branding is a great idea and will pay dividends. Is this all too little, too late? Time will tell, but I like what I see.

You don't think there is a "power 1 structure" already?

If ESPN gives the SEC all the best time slots (which the new contract does), best PR push (which it does), double the revenue (which it will), etc. Isn't there a power 1 already?

Correct. That is why the alliance is significant. It distances is from ESPN and positions us to take our rights to market down the road. In the mean time, ESPN cannot stop paying us for opposing their power 1 vision. We have a contract and they have a fiduciary duty to make the tv rights as profitable as possible for all parties. ESPN already marginalizes the ACC in a myriad of ways (as you rightly noted), so we have nothing to lose on that front.

The more I think about the Alliance, the more it appears to be a means of reigning-in ESPN’s influence on college athletics. Everyone wants ESPN money, but conferences are getting worried how media revenue is now driving (rather than following) the changes..