RE: When the divisionless model passes, who do you want your 3 permanent partners to be?
(05-17-2022 08:26 AM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:
(05-17-2022 07:26 AM)GTFletch Wrote: 2. The Big12 media contract with Fox and ESPN runs through the 2024-25 season. They are about to divide their current TV Dollars 14 ways and then they will reup starting in 25-26. This chart doesn't address this.
The Big 12 will make less or barely more money given the loss of Texas and Oklahoma. This will be softened for most of a decade since the exit fees of Texas and OU will go to the remaining Big 12 non-expansion members, which should close their gap in revenue between the SEC and B1G considerably albeit briefly.
(05-17-2022 07:26 AM)GTFletch Wrote: 3.The Pac-12 is stuck with media rights contracts till after 2024 season. Doesn't take into account their new TV dollars starting in 2025.
The Pac-12's bump is in there. They're also at the end of their existing contract with ESPN where the pay raises actually start happening in a meaningful way.
(05-17-2022 07:26 AM)GTFletch Wrote: 4. This chart does not take into account the new TV Dollars that the ACC will see from the ACCN having Full distribution.
This is a difference of < $5m/team/year. It helps, it doesn't move the needle.
(05-17-2022 07:26 AM)GTFletch Wrote: 5. This chart does not consider the ACC adding a 9th conf game for 2023 season that the ACC will use in ESPN negotiations to increase TV dollars or take with them to the new Alliance TV contarct negotiations that will follow the ACC/BIG/PAC OOC scheduling agreement!
Same as above. This helps, it won't move the needle. There is no OOC scheduling agreement in The Alliance. The Alliance can't even agree on how many non-conference games should even exist. The B1G appears to want to eliminate non-conference games beyond big kickoff games and a cupcake or two. Even if there were a two game a year OOC agreement in The Alliance ... it would be a small cash bump of a few million per team per year. And that enriches the B1G equally, thus not helping the ACC catch up at all there.
How in the heck can the Pac12 bump be in there??? They cant resign their new TV deal until 2024 starting new payouts in 2025? Did they resign early??? Oh wait we are playing make believe...GOT IT! someone just made up a number...ok!
Why do you think the ACCN will be a difference of < $5m/team/year?? I have seen ACC AD Projections at 8-10M or more up to 15M, nothing below 8M? You do understand that ESPN & ACC split revenue 50/50 right? So all advertisement on top of the distrubutions will also be split. Since they are fully distro to 90M homes, ESPN has briefed there will be a bump in advertisement revenue. Who is giving you this projection?? your SEC cousin?
Look I am not saying there is not the so-called revenue gap between every Conf and how it can be detrimental. What I am saying is that the sky is not falling at the rate that the SEC homers tried to state with this graphic. For example: Reports earlier this month had indicated that the Big Ten could finalize its new TV deal by Memorial Day weekend and that the deal could net nearly double the current annual distribution of $54 million per school. But Iowa athletic director Gary Barta said that figure was wishful thinking. “There’s talk of that doubling. I mean, I wish that were true,” Barta told The Athletic. “There’s nowhere even near that possibility. But there could be some potential upside, (though) nothing near that kind of money.”
(This post was last modified: 05-17-2022 04:53 PM by GTFletch.)
RE: When the divisionless model passes, who do you want your 3 permanent partners to be?
Will the Big12 or Pac-12’s new media deal have a chance at getting close to the Big Ten’s new deal?
Currently, the Big Ten distributes about $55 million annually to each school while the Pac-12 hands out approximately $35 million (in non-pandemic years). Those figures flow from three primary revenue streams: media deals for football and basketball regular-season broadcasts; the NCAA Tournament; and the College Football Playoff.
The media deals vary by the league and account for an outsize portion of the overall distribution, while the NCAA and CFP revenues are essentially the same across the Power Five.
In other words, the Big Ten’s $20 million (or 57 percent) advantage over the BIG12/Pac-12 is rooted in bigger and better media deals for its Tier I rights and the Big Ten Network.
That won’t change when the Big Ten begins its new contract cycle in 2023 , the Pac-12 follows in 2024, and the BIG12 in 2025. If anything, we expect the Big Ten’s advantage to increase. Why? Because media consumption has changed.
It’s no longer about the number of cable homes in your footprint; it’s about the number of marquee football matchups you can offer — matchups that draw more than four or five million viewers. In part because of the ratings machine known as Ohio State, the Big Ten has a massive advantage in that regard. Hence that is why once all alliance conf are at 9 conf games(ACC should be there by 2023) we may see a package of alliance OOC games sold as a "Game of the Week" package.
Will the ACC be able to increase their Tier I rights & ACC Network $$ by going to 9 Conf games since it is about the number of marquee football matchups you can offer l?
Yes, however what that brings to 15 schools is debatable.
(This post was last modified: 05-17-2022 04:51 PM by GTFletch.)
RE: When the divisionless model passes, who do you want your 3 permanent partners to be?
(05-17-2022 03:16 PM)TexanMark Wrote: Cuse AD hinted that there will only be two permanent rivals (BC and Pitt for Cuse). It sounds like we'll be playing 5 others on a regular 2 out of 4 yrs rotation. The extra game (8th league game) will be manipulated for max TV ratings.
Cuse AD is an expert on ESPN affairs since he worked on the other end for over 25 yrs. Too bad he wasn't around for Swofford.
This is an interesting idea. Basically the third rival is not permanent but the ESPN can change for the better rating. Maybe this is why the original reporting said two or three permanent rivals. I am fine with this idea as long as we get paid gainfully.
RE: When the divisionless model passes, who do you want your 3 permanent partners to be?
(05-17-2022 04:50 PM)random asian guy Wrote:
(05-17-2022 03:16 PM)TexanMark Wrote: Cuse AD hinted that there will only be two permanent rivals (BC and Pitt for Cuse). It sounds like we'll be playing 5 others on a regular 2 out of 4 yrs rotation. The extra game (8th league game) will be manipulated for max TV ratings.
Cuse AD is an expert on ESPN affairs since he worked on the other end for over 25 yrs. Too bad he wasn't around for Swofford.
This is an interesting idea. Basically the third rival is not permanent but the ESPN can change for the better rating. Maybe this is why the original reporting said two or three permanent rivals. I am fine with this idea as long as we get paid gainfully.
Agreed...however...at best maybe everyone gets a $1-2M bump...still helps
RE: When the divisionless model passes, who do you want your 3 permanent partners to be?
(05-16-2022 09:15 PM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:
(05-16-2022 05:31 PM)random asian guy Wrote:
The ACC is never third in that chart.
It is because some SEC homer made the chart. The ACC Media payout to the 14 schools from 2018-2021 was:
ACC MEDIAN
2018: $31.1M
2019: $33.3M
2020: $32.4M
2021: $37.2M
However the chart doesn't have the ACC paying out $37M until 2024. This is simply not true. Just like the narrative that the ACC Network at full distrubtion will only increase every schools media payout by 5M per year. Just simply not true!
If you would like to research facts instead of listening to false narrative please use the links below.
RE: When the divisionless model passes, who do you want your 3 permanent partners to be?
FWIW: Here's how that P5s media payouts compare to the other fiscal 2021:
SEC.... ..$80.5M
(* Secured the supplemental revenue by borrowing from its future media rights earnings, link below)
BIG.......$46.6M
BIG12... $39M
ACC...... $37.2M
PAC12... $21.6M
The SEC has distributed $23 million in supplemental revenue to each of its 14 members in an effort to help offset the financial impact of COVID-19, commissioner Greg Sankey confirmed to Sports Illustrated in an interview this week. The league is financing the distribution of $322 million by accessing future earnings from its multimillion-dollar media rights deal with ESPN that begins in 2024.
RE: When the divisionless model passes, who do you want your 3 permanent partners to be?
(05-17-2022 03:16 PM)TexanMark Wrote: Cuse AD hinted that there will only be two permanent rivals (BC and Pitt for Cuse). It sounds like we'll be playing 5 others on a regular 2 out of 4 yrs rotation. The extra game (8th league game) will be manipulated for max TV ratings.
Cuse AD is an expert on ESPN affairs since he worked on the other end for over 25 yrs. Too bad he wasn't around for Swofford.
Based on this article, I read it differently. To me, it sounds like he is saying there would be three permanent rivals. He says Pitt and BC make the most sense for two of them. Then, for the third, there is some flexibility on the choice. That doesn't sound like he is saying there will only be two permanent rivals, at least not to me.
RE: When the divisionless model passes, who do you want your 3 permanent partners to be?
(05-16-2022 09:15 PM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:
(05-16-2022 05:31 PM)random asian guy Wrote: According to Navigate, the ACC teams will get $36M next year. The extra $5 million will not close the Gap but it would definitely help the ACC to take/stay in #3 spot.
The ACC is never third in that chart.
I expect that the ACC will take the #3 spot AND stay there.
RE: When the divisionless model passes, who do you want your 3 permanent partners to be?
(05-18-2022 08:17 AM)Schema Wrote:
(05-17-2022 03:16 PM)TexanMark Wrote: Cuse AD hinted that there will only be two permanent rivals (BC and Pitt for Cuse). It sounds like we'll be playing 5 others on a regular 2 out of 4 yrs rotation. The extra game (8th league game) will be manipulated for max TV ratings.
Cuse AD is an expert on ESPN affairs since he worked on the other end for over 25 yrs. Too bad he wasn't around for Swofford.
Based on this article, I read it differently. To me, it sounds like he is saying there would be three permanent rivals. He says Pitt and BC make the most sense for two of them. Then, for the third, there is some flexibility on the choice. That doesn't sound like he is saying there will only be two permanent rivals, at least not to me.
Correct; you two are both saying mostly the same thing. There is no “2 rival” rotation that works. It’ll be 3 rivals BUT, the ACC may cede ($) to ESPN the rights to occasionally change that 3rd rival.
(This post was last modified: 05-18-2022 09:22 AM by Crayton.)
RE: When the divisionless model passes, who do you want your 3 permanent partners to be?
(05-18-2022 09:20 AM)Crayton Wrote:
(05-18-2022 08:17 AM)Schema Wrote:
(05-17-2022 03:16 PM)TexanMark Wrote: Cuse AD hinted that there will only be two permanent rivals (BC and Pitt for Cuse). It sounds like we'll be playing 5 others on a regular 2 out of 4 yrs rotation. The extra game (8th league game) will be manipulated for max TV ratings.
Cuse AD is an expert on ESPN affairs since he worked on the other end for over 25 yrs. Too bad he wasn't around for Swofford.
Based on this article, I read it differently. To me, it sounds like he is saying there would be three permanent rivals. He says Pitt and BC make the most sense for two of them. Then, for the third, there is some flexibility on the choice. That doesn't sound like he is saying there will only be two permanent rivals, at least not to me.
Correct; you two are both saying mostly the same thing. There is no “2 rival” rotation that works. It’ll be 3 rivals BUT, the ACC may cede ($) to ESPN the rights to occasionally change that 3rd rival.
I'm in total agreement with this plan. For an extra $70M/year ($5M per school) the ACC should agree to let ESPN alter that 3rd annual matchup every other year if they wish. That gives them 7 games per year of their choosing for a mere $10M per game - what a bargain! But if ESPN thinks the price is too steep, offer to do the same thing in basketball - a bundle price - they should understand that!
As for the CCG, you can offer to take the top 2 teams AND agree to vote in favor of CFP expansion BEFORE the contract expires - in exchange for at least an extra $28M/year ($2M more per school).
Starting from the latest $37M ACC payout, these two changes would get the payouts up to $37M + $5M + $2M = $44M/school. That's not including whatever bump comes from the next CFP contract (est. $5M/school) and the next "Contract Bowl" deal (est. $1M/school). My guess is $50M/year per school by 2025 at the latest - if the ACC and ESPN can agree to all this.
When the divisionless model passes, who do you want your 3 permanent partners to be?
(05-18-2022 10:56 AM)Hokie Mark Wrote: As for the CCG, you can offer to take the top 2 teams AND agree to vote in favor of CFP expansion BEFORE the contract expires - in exchange for at least an extra $28M/year ($2M more per school).
if notre dame & sec are for it ...
I’m against it ...
RE: When the divisionless model passes, who do you want your 3 permanent partners to be?
(05-18-2022 11:21 AM)green Wrote:
(05-18-2022 10:56 AM)Hokie Mark Wrote: As for the CCG, you can offer to take the top 2 teams AND agree to vote in favor of CFP expansion BEFORE the contract expires - in exchange for at least an extra $28M/year ($2M more per school).
if notre dame & sec are for it ...
I’m against it ...
NONSTARTER
OK, what if they pay $70M/year for it?
#EveryContractIsNegotiable
(This post was last modified: 05-18-2022 01:49 PM by Hokie Mark.)
When the divisionless model passes, who do you want your 3 permanent partners to be?
(05-18-2022 01:49 PM)Hokie Mark Wrote:
(05-18-2022 11:21 AM)green Wrote:
(05-18-2022 10:56 AM)Hokie Mark Wrote: As for the CCG, you can offer to take the top 2 teams AND agree to vote in favor of CFP expansion BEFORE the contract expires - in exchange for at least an extra $28M/year ($2M more per school).
if notre dame & sec are for it ...
I’m against it ...
RE: When the divisionless model passes, who do you want your 3 permanent partners to be?
(05-18-2022 10:56 AM)Hokie Mark Wrote:
(05-18-2022 09:20 AM)Crayton Wrote: It’ll be 3 rivals BUT, the ACC may cede ($) to ESPN the rights to occasionally change that 3rd rival.
I'm in total agreement with this plan. For an extra $70M/year ($5M per school) the ACC should agree to let ESPN alter that 3rd annual matchup every other year if they wish. That gives them 7 games per year of their choosing for a mere $10M per game - what a bargain! But if ESPN thinks the price is too steep, offer to do the same thing in basketball - a bundle price - they should understand that!
As for the CCG, you can offer to take the top 2 teams AND agree to vote in favor of CFP expansion BEFORE the contract expires - in exchange for at least an extra $28M/year ($2M more per school).
Starting from the latest $37M ACC payout, these two changes would get the payouts up to $37M + $5M + $2M = $44M/school. That's not including whatever bump comes from the next CFP contract (est. $5M/school) and the next "Contract Bowl" deal (est. $1M/school). My guess is $50M/year per school by 2025 at the latest - if the ACC and ESPN can agree to all this.
Are you saying the ACC can leverage their CFP vote for more money? I’m not sure they can. Unanimity was only required for altering the current deal. If they withhold a vote for an expanded playoff beginning in 2026, the majority of the other conferences will still likely implement a playoff for which ACC teams will be eligible. I’m also not sure ESPN will offer any money for the Top Two CCG; that seems to be something the ACC will do even without financial help.
(This post was last modified: 05-18-2022 02:14 PM by Crayton.)
When the divisionless model passes, who do you want your 3 permanent partners to be?
(05-18-2022 02:12 PM)Crayton Wrote:
(05-18-2022 10:56 AM)Hokie Mark Wrote:
(05-18-2022 09:20 AM)Crayton Wrote: It’ll be 3 rivals BUT, the ACC may cede ($) to ESPN the rights to occasionally change that 3rd rival.
I'm in total agreement with this plan. For an extra $70M/year ($5M per school) the ACC should agree to let ESPN alter that 3rd annual matchup every other year if they wish. That gives them 7 games per year of their choosing for a mere $10M per game - what a bargain! But if ESPN thinks the price is too steep, offer to do the same thing in basketball - a bundle price - they should understand that!
As for the CCG, you can offer to take the top 2 teams AND agree to vote in favor of CFP expansion BEFORE the contract expires - in exchange for at least an extra $28M/year ($2M more per school).
Starting from the latest $37M ACC payout, these two changes would get the payouts up to $37M + $5M + $2M = $44M/school. That's not including whatever bump comes from the next CFP contract (est. $5M/school) and the next "Contract Bowl" deal (est. $1M/school). My guess is $50M/year per school by 2025 at the latest - if the ACC and ESPN can agree to all this.
Are you saying the ACC can leverage their CFP vote for more money? I’m not sure they can. Unanimity was only required for altering the current deal. If they withhold a vote for an expanded playoff beginning in 2026, the majority of the other conferences will still likely implement a playoff for which ACC teams will be eligible. I’m also not sure ESPN will offer any money for the Top Two CCG; that seems to be something the ACC will do even without financial help.
When the divisionless model passes, who do you want your 3 permanent partners to be?
(05-03-2022 07:48 PM)ChrisLords Wrote: With 14 teams, you have 3 permanent partners and 5 games to rotate around the remaining 10 teams.
For Florida State I'd like to see Georgia Tech and Miami on the schedule every year. Many will want Clemson as the third opponent, but in an annual spot I prefer we touch base with mid-Atlantic alumni (and media). Virginia Tech, Virginia, or Pitt.
RE: When the divisionless model passes, who do you want your 3 permanent partners to be?
(06-23-2022 08:05 AM)Gitanole Wrote:
(05-03-2022 07:48 PM)ChrisLords Wrote: With 14 teams, you have 3 permanent partners and 5 games to rotate around the remaining 10 teams.
For Florida State I'd like to see Georgia Tech and Miami on the schedule every year. Many will want Clemson as the third opponent, but in an annual spot I prefer we touch base with mid-Atlantic alumni (and media). Virginia Tech, Virginia, or Pitt.
Keep in mind: with 14 teams and a 3-5-5 scheduling format, every team that's not annual is bi-annual. You'd still play every team twice every four years anyway. That's one of the beauties of going divisionless!
RE: When the divisionless model passes, who do you want your 3 permanent partners to be?
(05-03-2022 07:48 PM)ChrisLords Wrote: With 14 teams, you have 3 permanent partners and 5 games to rotate around the remaining 10 teams.
(06-23-2022 08:05 AM)Gitanole Wrote: For Florida State I'd like to see Georgia Tech and Miami on the schedule every year. Many will want Clemson as the third opponent, but in an annual spot I prefer we touch base with mid-Atlantic alumni (and media). Virginia Tech, Virginia, or Pitt.
(06-23-2022 09:20 AM)Hokie Mark Wrote: Keep in mind: with 14 teams and a 3-5-5 scheduling format, every team that's not annual is bi-annual. You'd still play every team twice every four years anyway. That's one of the beauties of going divisionless!
Yes, indeed! And I love it. A conference feels much more like a conference this way. (Good riddance to Jim Delany for blocking progress in the past.)
I had this very much in mind when expressing my preference for VT, Virginia, or Pitt. I'd add Syracuse, too--the Finger Lakes region is a great out-of-town trip. Every Florida State athlete would meet Clemson every other year anyway--not to mention in conference championship match-ups when both teams are hot. And the Seminoles, like others in our conference, still regularly face an SEC rival. So there's that.
Of course, fans can as easily argue it the other way. Clemson's a money game that TV likes? OK, let's play it every year. We can still take care of our other priorities.
However the cake gets sliced, all of us can have and eat much more of it this way.
/
When the divisionless model passes, who do you want your 3 permanent partners to be?
![[Image: V2-Chart-1536x1139.png]](https://nvgt.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/03/V2-Chart-1536x1139.png)
