we don't care about nd/nbc.

(12-11-2012 03:31 PM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  

(12-11-2012 03:28 PM)Cardsfan1974 Wrote:  

(12-11-2012 03:21 PM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  ACC will be neck & neck w/ Pac-12 and Big-12, but behind SEC & B1G.
Keep in mind, too, that the Contract Bowls only pay 2 out of 3 years - the other 1 year when it is a semi-final those teams will be getting Access bowl money (which I assume is the same for everyone?). So the ACC doesn't need to make up $40-$27.5 = $12.5M, but only 2/3 of that = $8.3, which it can certainly do through basketball money alone.

Will this be enough to keep Florida ST Clemson & GT happy ?

No.
As long as U of Florida and U of S Carolina makes $0.25 more than FSU & Clemson, they will NOT be happy. They may stay in the ACC, but they won't be happy.

Well as long as they stay, that's what matters. The problem with the ACC is that the FB school's have underachieved( Louisville also ) when they start winning again. The Money will come as well, when this happens it should make for A much happier ACC.

PART A
If it is $19 million/yr, here are my thoughts:

1. How long is the contyract? These contracts are back-loaded, so a 10 year $19 million dollar/yr contract > a 12 year $19 million/yr contract, because the average payout for the first 10 years of the 12 year contract will be less than $19 million/yr.

2. When does it start? This is important, because a team in the 2nd year of a back-loaded contract makes more than a team in the 1st year, and a team in the 3rd year makes more than a team in the 2nd year, and so on. This is important, because all the other conferences (except the SEC and possibly the Big XII) have already started their contracts. So, even if we are the same on paper, we would still be getting less.

3. What rights have we given away, and what rights do we still have? This is important for obvious reasons.

4. What kind of exposure will we have? This is important for obvious reasons.

5. If we are close to being on par with everyone else, then this was clutch. It gives us a second chance to improve our football product. There is no reason why we can't go into the next round of BCS negotiations (in 12 years) on equal footing with at least the Pac. The ACC has some great names, but we have had an off decade, and we need to turn the ship around. However, I do think that the conference has gotten the message, and I see a lot of positive moves. Hopefully this new TV deal will continue that, and we will see some results on the field.

PART B
And my thoughts on the ACC in general:

1. I hear (on the BIG EAST board) that MSG might end its contract to host the BIG EAST tourney. If that happens, I bet it's because the ACC wants to include it in its rotation. I can't think of any other reason why they would stop hosting the BET.

2. The ACC needs to implement cross-school education programs (like the B1G). We need to find a way to fill the academic void created by UMD's departure.

3. we really need to focus on maximizing bowl revenue. I do not want to fall too far behind the Pac and the Big XII in non-bcs bowl revenue.

(12-11-2012 03:46 PM)nzmorange Wrote:  PART A
If it is $19 million/yr, here are my thoughts:

1. How long is the contyract? These contracts are back-loaded, so a 10 year $19 million dollar/yr contract > a 12 year $19 million/yr contract, because the average payout for the first 10 years of the 12 year contract will be less than $19 million/yr.

2. When does it start? This is important, because a team in the 2nd year of a back-loaded contract makes more than a team in the 1st year, and a team in the 3rd year makes more than a team in the 2nd year, and so on. This is important, because all the other conferences (except the SEC and possibly the Big XII) have already started their contracts. So, even if we are the same on paper, we would still be getting less.

3. What rights have we given away, and what rights do we still have? This is important for obvious reasons.

4. What kind of exposure will we have? This is important for obvious reasons.

5. If we are close to being on par with everyone else, then this was clutch. It gives us a second chance to improve our football product. There is no reason why we can't go into the next round of BCS negotiations (in 12 years) on equal footing with at least the Pac. The ACC has some great names, but we have had an off decade, and we need to turn the ship around. However, I do think that the conference has gotten the message, and I see a lot of positive moves. Hopefully this new TV deal will continue that, and we will see some results on the field.

PART B
And my thoughts on the ACC in general:

1. I hear (on the BIG EAST board) that MSG might end its contract to host the BIG EAST tourney. If that happens, I bet it's because the ACC wants to include it in its rotation. I can't think of any other reason why they would stop hosting the BET.

2. The ACC needs to implement cross-school education programs (like the B1G). We need to find a way to fill the academic void created by UMD's departure.

3. we really need to focus on maximizing bowl revenue. I do not want to fall too far behind the Pac and the Big XII in non-bcs bowl revenue.

Great post, but I thought the Acc was ahead of the Pac 10 in bowl revenue, when it comes to second tier bowls. I know they have the Rose, but most of their other bowls were minimum payouts or near minimum payouts, at least I thought.

(12-11-2012 03:55 PM)cuseroc Wrote:  

(12-11-2012 03:46 PM)nzmorange Wrote:  PART A
If it is $19 million/yr, here are my thoughts:

1. How long is the contyract? These contracts are back-loaded, so a 10 year $19 million dollar/yr contract > a 12 year $19 million/yr contract, because the average payout for the first 10 years of the 12 year contract will be less than $19 million/yr.

2. When does it start? This is important, because a team in the 2nd year of a back-loaded contract makes more than a team in the 1st year, and a team in the 3rd year makes more than a team in the 2nd year, and so on. This is important, because all the other conferences (except the SEC and possibly the Big XII) have already started their contracts. So, even if we are the same on paper, we would still be getting less.

3. What rights have we given away, and what rights do we still have? This is important for obvious reasons.

4. What kind of exposure will we have? This is important for obvious reasons.

5. If we are close to being on par with everyone else, then this was clutch. It gives us a second chance to improve our football product. There is no reason why we can't go into the next round of BCS negotiations (in 12 years) on equal footing with at least the Pac. The ACC has some great names, but we have had an off decade, and we need to turn the ship around. However, I do think that the conference has gotten the message, and I see a lot of positive moves. Hopefully this new TV deal will continue that, and we will see some results on the field.

PART B
And my thoughts on the ACC in general:

1. I hear (on the BIG EAST board) that MSG might end its contract to host the BIG EAST tourney. If that happens, I bet it's because the ACC wants to include it in its rotation. I can't think of any other reason why they would stop hosting the BET.

2. The ACC needs to implement cross-school education programs (like the B1G). We need to find a way to fill the academic void created by UMD's departure.

3. we really need to focus on maximizing bowl revenue. I do not want to fall too far behind the Pac and the Big XII in non-bcs bowl revenue.

Great post, but I thought the Acc was ahead of the Pac 10 in bowl revenue, when it comes to second tier bowls. I know they have the Rose, but most of their other bowls were minimum payouts or near minimum payouts, at least I thought.

I actually don't know. If we are, then I want to keep it that way.

(12-11-2012 03:46 PM)nzmorange Wrote:  PART A
If it is $19 million/yr, here are my thoughts:

1. How long is the contyract? These contracts are back-loaded, so a 10 year $19 million dollar/yr contract > a 12 year $19 million/yr contract, because the average payout for the first 10 years of the 12 year contract will be less than $19 million/yr.

2. When does it start? This is important, because a team in the 2nd year of a back-loaded contract makes more than a team in the 1st year, and a team in the 3rd year makes more than a team in the 2nd year, and so on. This is important, because all the other conferences (except the SEC and possibly the Big XII) have already started their contracts. So, even if we are the same on paper, we would still be getting less.

3. What rights have we given away, and what rights do we still have? This is important for obvious reasons.

4. What kind of exposure will we have? This is important for obvious reasons.

5. If we are close to being on par with everyone else, then this was clutch. It gives us a second chance to improve our football product. There is no reason why we can't go into the next round of BCS negotiations (in 12 years) on equal footing with at least the Pac. The ACC has some great names, but we have had an off decade, and we need to turn the ship around. However, I do think that the conference has gotten the message, and I see a lot of positive moves. Hopefully this new TV deal will continue that, and we will see some results on the field.

PART B
And my thoughts on the ACC in general:

1. I hear (on the BIG EAST board) that MSG might end its contract to host the BIG EAST tourney. If that happens, I bet it's because the ACC wants to include it in its rotation. I can't think of any other reason why they would stop hosting the BET.

2. The ACC needs to implement cross-school education programs (like the B1G). We need to find a way to fill the academic void created by UMD's departure.

3. we really need to focus on maximizing bowl revenue. I do not want to fall too far behind the Pac and the Big XII in non-bcs bowl revenue.

Think your A5 point is very important. I was out with a ND friend on Saturday. He has a son in the 9th grade. He's just excited because this is the 1st time that his son has seen ND be really good. Brought up the recruiting and how now kids his son's age will see ND a lot different than they have before. The same can be said about the ACC in a lot of ways. Success must come on the field. Thinking not only a school like Florida St and Clemson, but schools like Pitt and Cuse even. As y'all brought up, Pitt and Cuse have a ton of tradition. Time for them to start playing like it. ACC has gotten in a lot of ways a get out of jail free card sort of speak. They have to take advantage of it.... If they have another decade like this last one, I think it's safe to say the results won't be the same the next time.

(12-11-2012 03:56 PM)nzmorange Wrote:  

(12-11-2012 03:55 PM)cuseroc Wrote:  

(12-11-2012 03:46 PM)nzmorange Wrote:  PART A
If it is $19 million/yr, here are my thoughts:

1. How long is the contyract? These contracts are back-loaded, so a 10 year $19 million dollar/yr contract > a 12 year $19 million/yr contract, because the average payout for the first 10 years of the 12 year contract will be less than $19 million/yr.

2. When does it start? This is important, because a team in the 2nd year of a back-loaded contract makes more than a team in the 1st year, and a team in the 3rd year makes more than a team in the 2nd year, and so on. This is important, because all the other conferences (except the SEC and possibly the Big XII) have already started their contracts. So, even if we are the same on paper, we would still be getting less.

3. What rights have we given away, and what rights do we still have? This is important for obvious reasons.

4. What kind of exposure will we have? This is important for obvious reasons.

5. If we are close to being on par with everyone else, then this was clutch. It gives us a second chance to improve our football product. There is no reason why we can't go into the next round of BCS negotiations (in 12 years) on equal footing with at least the Pac. The ACC has some great names, but we have had an off decade, and we need to turn the ship around. However, I do think that the conference has gotten the message, and I see a lot of positive moves. Hopefully this new TV deal will continue that, and we will see some results on the field.

PART B
And my thoughts on the ACC in general:

1. I hear (on the BIG EAST board) that MSG might end its contract to host the BIG EAST tourney. If that happens, I bet it's because the ACC wants to include it in its rotation. I can't think of any other reason why they would stop hosting the BET.

2. The ACC needs to implement cross-school education programs (like the B1G). We need to find a way to fill the academic void created by UMD's departure.

3. we really need to focus on maximizing bowl revenue. I do not want to fall too far behind the Pac and the Big XII in non-bcs bowl revenue.

Great post, but I thought the Acc was ahead of the Pac 10 in bowl revenue, when it comes to second tier bowls. I know they have the Rose, but most of their other bowls were minimum payouts or near minimum payouts, at least I thought.

I actually don't know. If we are, then I want to keep it that way.

I think ACC would be ahead, and frankly not sure if it's even all that close. P12 has a poor set of bowl games.

(12-11-2012 03:37 PM)TIGER-PAUL Wrote:  we don't care about nd/nbc.

why not ? ND being in & playing ACC team's is the reason for the 19 Million A year. ND has to be happy also.

(12-11-2012 03:27 PM)stever20 Wrote:  

(12-11-2012 03:21 PM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  ACC will be neck & neck w/ Pac-12 and Big-12, but behind SEC & B1G.
Keep in mind, too, that the Contract Bowls only pay 2 out of 3 years - the other 1 year when it is a semi-final those teams will be getting Access bowl money (which I assume is the same for everyone?). So the ACC doesn't need to make up $40-$27.5 = $12.5M, but only 2/3 of that = $8.3, which it can certainly do through basketball money alone.

I thought that was the case, but the article today made it seem as if the money is guaranteed each year. That could be great for the ACC- they might in the years the OB is hosting a sf get 40 million dollars- if you know what I mean.....

What would keep the ACC from getting the full 55 million per year when the OB is hosting a semi?

Isn't the only time they are obligated to pay another conference when that conference is providing a team? That's the way I understood it.

as far a bowls go, the league needs to do away with the within one game rule & allow bowls to take the most attractive team available, in fact the within one should only apply to N.Dame

(12-11-2012 04:06 PM)4x4hokies Wrote:  

(12-11-2012 03:27 PM)stever20 Wrote:  

(12-11-2012 03:21 PM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  ACC will be neck & neck w/ Pac-12 and Big-12, but behind SEC & B1G.
Keep in mind, too, that the Contract Bowls only pay 2 out of 3 years - the other 1 year when it is a semi-final those teams will be getting Access bowl money (which I assume is the same for everyone?). So the ACC doesn't need to make up $40-$27.5 = $12.5M, but only 2/3 of that = $8.3, which it can certainly do through basketball money alone.

I thought that was the case, but the article today made it seem as if the money is guaranteed each year. That could be great for the ACC- they might in the years the OB is hosting a sf get 40 million dollars- if you know what I mean.....

What would keep the ACC from getting the full 55 million per year when the OB is hosting a semi?

Isn't the only time they are obligated to pay another conference when that conference is providing a team? That's the way I understood it.

true, though I could see a clause where the kicked out conference get paid their contract fee no matter what.... which would be 40 million for all 5 conferences in that case.....

We don't get a penny from their nbc deal, so I don't see how its relevant.

(12-11-2012 04:11 PM)TIGER-PAUL Wrote:  We don't get a penny from their nbc deal, so I don't see how its relevant.

This is true the ACC doesn't get nothing from their NBC deal , but if they don't get that NBC deal. They won't be happy and they may end up in another conference, if this happen's no 19 Million A year. Then team's like Florida ST an Clemson would be looking for new homes. The Big12-2 would take them in A heartbeat. The football school's have to be happy if we all want this thing to work.

(12-11-2012 04:24 PM)Cardsfan1974 Wrote:  

(12-11-2012 04:11 PM)TIGER-PAUL Wrote:  We don't get a penny from their nbc deal, so I don't see how its relevant.

This is true the ACC doesn't get nothing from their NBC deal , but if they don't get that NBC deal. They won't be happy and they may end up in another conference, if this happen's no 19 Million A year. Then team's like Florida ST an Clemson would be looking for new homes. The Big12-2 would take them in A heartbeat. The football school's have to be happy if we all want this thing to work.

if NBC somehow decided to give up Notre Dame(unlikely) ESPN , CBS, or Fox would all be ready to take over for them. their ratings on ABC this year was in the 9 million per game average.

Cincinnati is just waiting to get a shot at it. Now that Lyle Jones is gone and has settled on his coaching search, we can move on. We have plans for a new 70 million dollar upgrade to our football stadium due out soon (before first of year) and plans on the way to upgrade basketball arena that seats 13,176.


http://news.cincinnati.com/article/20121...ws|text|UC

(12-11-2012 04:00 PM)stever20 Wrote:  

(12-11-2012 03:46 PM)nzmorange Wrote:  PART A
If it is $19 million/yr, here are my thoughts:

1. How long is the contyract? These contracts are back-loaded, so a 10 year $19 million dollar/yr contract > a 12 year $19 million/yr contract, because the average payout for the first 10 years of the 12 year contract will be less than $19 million/yr.

2. When does it start? This is important, because a team in the 2nd year of a back-loaded contract makes more than a team in the 1st year, and a team in the 3rd year makes more than a team in the 2nd year, and so on. This is important, because all the other conferences (except the SEC and possibly the Big XII) have already started their contracts. So, even if we are the same on paper, we would still be getting less.

3. What rights have we given away, and what rights do we still have? This is important for obvious reasons.

4. What kind of exposure will we have? This is important for obvious reasons.

5. If we are close to being on par with everyone else, then this was clutch. It gives us a second chance to improve our football product. There is no reason why we can't go into the next round of BCS negotiations (in 12 years) on equal footing with at least the Pac. The ACC has some great names, but we have had an off decade, and we need to turn the ship around. However, I do think that the conference has gotten the message, and I see a lot of positive moves. Hopefully this new TV deal will continue that, and we will see some results on the field.

PART B
And my thoughts on the ACC in general:

1. I hear (on the BIG EAST board) that MSG might end its contract to host the BIG EAST tourney. If that happens, I bet it's because the ACC wants to include it in its rotation. I can't think of any other reason why they would stop hosting the BET.

2. The ACC needs to implement cross-school education programs (like the B1G). We need to find a way to fill the academic void created by UMD's departure.

3. we really need to focus on maximizing bowl revenue. I do not want to fall too far behind the Pac and the Big XII in non-bcs bowl revenue.

Think your A5 point is very important. I was out with a ND friend on Saturday. He has a son in the 9th grade. He's just excited because this is the 1st time that his son has seen ND be really good. Brought up the recruiting and how now kids his son's age will see ND a lot different than they have before. The same can be said about the ACC in a lot of ways. Success must come on the field. Thinking not only a school like Florida St and Clemson, but schools like Pitt and Cuse even. As y'all brought up, Pitt and Cuse have a ton of tradition. Time for them to start playing like it. ACC has gotten in a lot of ways a get out of jail free card sort of speak. They have to take advantage of it.... If they have another decade like this last one, I think it's safe to say the results won't be the same the next time.

agree, acc lucked out getting an equal share.

(12-11-2012 04:58 PM)TIGER-PAUL Wrote:  

(12-11-2012 04:00 PM)stever20 Wrote:  

(12-11-2012 03:46 PM)nzmorange Wrote:  PART A
If it is $19 million/yr, here are my thoughts:

1. How long is the contyract? These contracts are back-loaded, so a 10 year $19 million dollar/yr contract > a 12 year $19 million/yr contract, because the average payout for the first 10 years of the 12 year contract will be less than $19 million/yr.

2. When does it start? This is important, because a team in the 2nd year of a back-loaded contract makes more than a team in the 1st year, and a team in the 3rd year makes more than a team in the 2nd year, and so on. This is important, because all the other conferences (except the SEC and possibly the Big XII) have already started their contracts. So, even if we are the same on paper, we would still be getting less.

3. What rights have we given away, and what rights do we still have? This is important for obvious reasons.

4. What kind of exposure will we have? This is important for obvious reasons.

5. If we are close to being on par with everyone else, then this was clutch. It gives us a second chance to improve our football product. There is no reason why we can't go into the next round of BCS negotiations (in 12 years) on equal footing with at least the Pac. The ACC has some great names, but we have had an off decade, and we need to turn the ship around. However, I do think that the conference has gotten the message, and I see a lot of positive moves. Hopefully this new TV deal will continue that, and we will see some results on the field.

PART B
And my thoughts on the ACC in general:

1. I hear (on the BIG EAST board) that MSG might end its contract to host the BIG EAST tourney. If that happens, I bet it's because the ACC wants to include it in its rotation. I can't think of any other reason why they would stop hosting the BET.

2. The ACC needs to implement cross-school education programs (like the B1G). We need to find a way to fill the academic void created by UMD's departure.

3. we really need to focus on maximizing bowl revenue. I do not want to fall too far behind the Pac and the Big XII in non-bcs bowl revenue.

Think your A5 point is very important. I was out with a ND friend on Saturday. He has a son in the 9th grade. He's just excited because this is the 1st time that his son has seen ND be really good. Brought up the recruiting and how now kids his son's age will see ND a lot different than they have before. The same can be said about the ACC in a lot of ways. Success must come on the field. Thinking not only a school like Florida St and Clemson, but schools like Pitt and Cuse even. As y'all brought up, Pitt and Cuse have a ton of tradition. Time for them to start playing like it. ACC has gotten in a lot of ways a get out of jail free card sort of speak. They have to take advantage of it.... If they have another decade like this last one, I think it's safe to say the results won't be the same the next time.

agree, acc lucked out getting an equal share.

VT, Miami, and FSU are mostly responsible for that. Having more historic BCS points than the PAC is what did it.

(12-11-2012 05:01 PM)4x4hokies Wrote:  VT, Miami, and FSU are mostly responsible for that. Having more historic BCS points than the PAC is what did it.

The key is, somebody has to earn those points over the next 12 years, or we'll all be in a world of hurt in the next BCS cycle.

The ACC has a ton going for it:

- Its schools are located in much stronger recruiting areas than the B1G, for instance. Georgia and Florida are 2 of the 4 biggest exporters of FBS talent (along with TX and CA). Virginia, NC, and western PA are also solid recruiting grounds. We've all gotta work to get our share.
- Replacing UMD with UL should create more "SEC style" matchups within the ACC. For instance, Clemson will now play FSU, UL, GT, and S.Car. annually - all big crowd "SEC feel" games -- good for recruiting and TV ratings.
- 5 games per year vs. ND will provide excellent exposure, especially with ND's reemergence.
- As the "house conference" of ESPN, should get better promotion
- Should get better TV windows from ESPN and ABC with many SEC games moving to the SEC network.
- Basketball will have a combination ACC and Old Big East feel.

One thing that has made both Big East basketball and SEC football great the last 6-7 years has been the number of quality teams. That creates great matchups every week. The addition of UL and alliance with ND in football, and the addition of all of the BE teams in basketball makes the ACC an interesting potential blend of BE style hoops and SEC style football.

The last realignment raised BE hoops to a level I never thought possible. The ingredients are there for this ACC realignment to do the same in hoops and football, but schools have to commit to making it happen.

(12-11-2012 05:21 PM)orangefan Wrote:  

(12-11-2012 05:01 PM)4x4hokies Wrote:  VT, Miami, and FSU are mostly responsible for that. Having more historic BCS points than the PAC is what did it.

The key is, somebody has to earn those points over the next 12 years, or we'll all be in a world of hurt in the next BCS cycle.

The ACC has a ton going for it:

- Its schools are located in much stronger recruiting areas than the B1G, for instance. Georgia and Florida are 2 of the 4 biggest exporters of FBS talent (along with TX and CA). Virginia, NC, and western PA are also solid recruiting grounds. We've all gotta work to get our share.
- Replacing UMD with UL should create more "SEC style" matchups within the ACC. For instance, Clemson will now play FSU, UL, GT, and S.Car. annually - all big crowd "SEC feel" games -- good for recruiting and TV ratings.
- 5 games per year vs. ND will provide excellent exposure, especially with ND's reemergence.
- As the "house conference" of ESPN, should get better promotion
- Should get better TV windows from ESPN and ABC with many SEC games moving to the SEC network.
- Basketball will have a combination ACC and Old Big East feel.

One thing that has made both Big East basketball and SEC football great the last 6-7 years has been the number of quality teams. That creates great matchups every week. The addition of UL and alliance with ND in football, and the addition of all of the BE teams in basketball makes the ACC an interesting potential blend of BE style hoops and SEC style football.

The last realignment raised BE hoops to a level I never thought possible. The ingredients are there for this ACC realignment to do the same in hoops and football, but schools have to commit to making it happen.

I'm not so sure about the games moving to the SEC network. I think it'd be more like the FCS games, and lower level SEC games. I'd expect ESPN and or ESPN 2 to have prime time SEC games every weekend. The SEC has nothing to do with ABC- the competition for the ACC there is Big Ten/Pac 12/Big 12.

(12-11-2012 05:33 PM)stever20 Wrote:  I'm not so sure about the games moving to the SEC network. I think it'd be more like the FCS games, and lower level SEC games. I'd expect ESPN and or ESPN 2 to have prime time SEC games every weekend. The SEC has nothing to do with ABC- the competition for the ACC there is Big Ten/Pac 12/Big 12.

It is true that ESPN is acquiring the SEC Tier 3 rights, but that is only 14 games. I think that they will also move some of their Tier 2 inventory to the SECN. It's possible that some of these games may come from a clawback of games sold by ESPN to RSNs. However, the SECN will two games a week beyond the Tier 3 games, to demand carriage fees in the range of the B1G ($1/mo/subscriber +/-). The P12 Network has rights to 36+ fb games, about 3 per week, and the B1G has similar inventory prior to the latest B1G expansion.