A lot of detail in the article.

Really talks a lot about how the Big Ten contract might limit additional bidders.

This was a top rate article with a classic comic in the FSU/B1G section.

I found the ACC/ESPN section most interesting:

Quote:Speaking of the ACC... Why Wouldn’t ESPN Work To Move The Top Brands To The SEC?
Some very good reasons.

Their Current Deal is GREAT For ESPN in Price: The ACC extended their deal multiple times since they signed it initally over a decade ago. They did it when they started their network and when they expanded. This has led to a deal that hasn’t caught up with market rates. To put it in perspective- the Big Ten sold 15-16 games to each of CBS and NBC that would compare pretty similarly to the ACC’s top 15 or so games for around 350 million per year. The entire television revenue for the ACC in the year before their network started was 288 million. ESPN would be crazy to pay more for the same product elsewhere.

Their Current Deal Is GREAT For ESPN In Inventory & Minimums: They have a national contract with them where they really only have to put on some combo of Clemson, FSU, Miami, whoever hosts Notre Dame in a scheduling agreement and a handful of other games. They have around 34% of the ACC’s best games and can monetize the lesser ones without obligation to put them on ABC, ESPN, ESPN2, or ESPNU allowing them to maximize viewership overall.

They Spent A Lot On An ACC Network That Is Making Them Money: The ACC Network is a partnership with ESPN and the ACC where ESPN had to spend a lot up front which is why they got such a long grant of rights. The ACC is making over 360M in carriage revenue currently and likely throwing off solid profits that could grow over time. ESPN isn’t going to damage a money maker to increase their cost when they are cost cutting.

(08-03-2023 03:20 PM)1845 Bear Wrote:  

A lot of detail in the article.

Really talks a lot about how the Big Ten contract might limit additional bidders.

Excellent, well researched article by Sam Bradshaw.

(08-03-2023 04:02 PM)IWokeUpLikeThis Wrote:  This was a top rate article with a classic comic in the FSU/B1G section.

I found the ACC/ESPN section most interesting:

Quote:Speaking of the ACC... Why Wouldn’t ESPN Work To Move The Top Brands To The SEC?
Some very good reasons.

Their Current Deal is GREAT For ESPN in Price: The ACC extended their deal multiple times since they signed it initally over a decade ago. They did it when they started their network and when they expanded. This has led to a deal that hasn’t caught up with market rates. To put it in perspective- the Big Ten sold 15-16 games to each of CBS and NBC that would compare pretty similarly to the ACC’s top 15 or so games for around 350 million per year. The entire television revenue for the ACC in the year before their network started was 288 million. ESPN would be crazy to pay more for the same product elsewhere.

Their Current Deal Is GREAT For ESPN In Inventory & Minimums: They have a national contract with them where they really only have to put on some combo of Clemson, FSU, Miami, whoever hosts Notre Dame in a scheduling agreement and a handful of other games. They have around 34% of the ACC’s best games and can monetize the lesser ones without obligation to put them on ABC, ESPN, ESPN2, or ESPNU allowing them to maximize viewership overall.

They Spent A Lot On An ACC Network That Is Making Them Money: The ACC Network is a partnership with ESPN and the ACC where ESPN had to spend a lot up front which is why they got such a long grant of rights. The ACC is making over 360M in carriage revenue currently and likely throwing off solid profits that could grow over time. ESPN isn’t going to damage a money maker to increase their cost when they are cost cutting.

Would have been funny to play this on a loop at the FSU BoR meeting yesterday. Well, funny to most of us anyway.

(08-03-2023 04:45 PM)bryanw1995 Wrote:  

(08-03-2023 04:02 PM)IWokeUpLikeThis Wrote:  This was a top rate article with a classic comic in the FSU/B1G section.

I found the ACC/ESPN section most interesting:

Quote:Speaking of the ACC... Why Wouldn’t ESPN Work To Move The Top Brands To The SEC?
Some very good reasons.

Their Current Deal is GREAT For ESPN in Price: The ACC extended their deal multiple times since they signed it initally over a decade ago. They did it when they started their network and when they expanded. This has led to a deal that hasn’t caught up with market rates. To put it in perspective- the Big Ten sold 15-16 games to each of CBS and NBC that would compare pretty similarly to the ACC’s top 15 or so games for around 350 million per year. The entire television revenue for the ACC in the year before their network started was 288 million. ESPN would be crazy to pay more for the same product elsewhere.

Their Current Deal Is GREAT For ESPN In Inventory & Minimums: They have a national contract with them where they really only have to put on some combo of Clemson, FSU, Miami, whoever hosts Notre Dame in a scheduling agreement and a handful of other games. They have around 34% of the ACC’s best games and can monetize the lesser ones without obligation to put them on ABC, ESPN, ESPN2, or ESPNU allowing them to maximize viewership overall.

They Spent A Lot On An ACC Network That Is Making Them Money: The ACC Network is a partnership with ESPN and the ACC where ESPN had to spend a lot up front which is why they got such a long grant of rights. The ACC is making over 360M in carriage revenue currently and likely throwing off solid profits that could grow over time. ESPN isn’t going to damage a money maker to increase their cost when they are cost cutting.

Would have been funny to play this on a loop at the FSU BoR meeting yesterday. Well, funny to most of us anyway.

Especially that comic:

(08-03-2023 04:02 PM)IWokeUpLikeThis Wrote:  This was a top rate article with a classic comic in the FSU/B1G section.

I found the ACC/ESPN section most interesting:

Quote:Speaking of the ACC... Why Wouldn’t ESPN Work To Move The Top Brands To The SEC?
Some very good reasons.

Their Current Deal is GREAT For ESPN in Price: The ACC extended their deal multiple times since they signed it initally over a decade ago. They did it when they started their network and when they expanded. This has led to a deal that hasn’t caught up with market rates. To put it in perspective- the Big Ten sold 15-16 games to each of CBS and NBC that would compare pretty similarly to the ACC’s top 15 or so games for around 350 million per year. The entire television revenue for the ACC in the year before their network started was 288 million. ESPN would be crazy to pay more for the same product elsewhere.

Their Current Deal Is GREAT For ESPN In Inventory & Minimums: They have a national contract with them where they really only have to put on some combo of Clemson, FSU, Miami, whoever hosts Notre Dame in a scheduling agreement and a handful of other games. They have around 34% of the ACC’s best games and can monetize the lesser ones without obligation to put them on ABC, ESPN, ESPN2, or ESPNU allowing them to maximize viewership overall.

They Spent A Lot On An ACC Network That Is Making Them Money: The ACC Network is a partnership with ESPN and the ACC where ESPN had to spend a lot up front which is why they got such a long grant of rights. The ACC is making over 360M in carriage revenue currently and likely throwing off solid profits that could grow over time. ESPN isn’t going to damage a money maker to increase their cost when they are cost cutting.

I wish I had a dollar for every time this has been written here the last 10 years. I’d be a wealthy man

(08-03-2023 04:46 PM)IWokeUpLikeThis Wrote:  

(08-03-2023 04:45 PM)bryanw1995 Wrote:  

(08-03-2023 04:02 PM)IWokeUpLikeThis Wrote:  This was a top rate article with a classic comic in the FSU/B1G section.

I found the ACC/ESPN section most interesting:

Quote:Speaking of the ACC... Why Wouldn’t ESPN Work To Move The Top Brands To The SEC?
Some very good reasons.

Their Current Deal is GREAT For ESPN in Price: The ACC extended their deal multiple times since they signed it initally over a decade ago. They did it when they started their network and when they expanded. This has led to a deal that hasn’t caught up with market rates. To put it in perspective- the Big Ten sold 15-16 games to each of CBS and NBC that would compare pretty similarly to the ACC’s top 15 or so games for around 350 million per year. The entire television revenue for the ACC in the year before their network started was 288 million. ESPN would be crazy to pay more for the same product elsewhere.

Their Current Deal Is GREAT For ESPN In Inventory & Minimums: They have a national contract with them where they really only have to put on some combo of Clemson, FSU, Miami, whoever hosts Notre Dame in a scheduling agreement and a handful of other games. They have around 34% of the ACC’s best games and can monetize the lesser ones without obligation to put them on ABC, ESPN, ESPN2, or ESPNU allowing them to maximize viewership overall.

They Spent A Lot On An ACC Network That Is Making Them Money: The ACC Network is a partnership with ESPN and the ACC where ESPN had to spend a lot up front which is why they got such a long grant of rights. The ACC is making over 360M in carriage revenue currently and likely throwing off solid profits that could grow over time. ESPN isn’t going to damage a money maker to increase their cost when they are cost cutting.

Would have been funny to play this on a loop at the FSU BoR meeting yesterday. Well, funny to most of us anyway.

Especially that comic:

The Far Side is great.

This caught my attention.

Quote:Will The Pac-12 Rebuild If Teams Leave?
As far as keeping the conference entity alive, it comes down to how many teams remain, can they leverage postseason revenue left with the league, and can they manage the exit fees that would prevent MWC and AAC schools from jumping over on a one year notice. Teams would presumably leave their NCAA tournament credits and the league has a relationship with the Rose Bowl and playoff that pays them tens of millions more than any G5 annually. Those can be utilized to potentially build a better league than the existing G5’s. With the fear of departures realized and over with the potential to take less revenue in order to get better exposure from a media partner is also there. A rebuilt PAC should dwarf any G5 in revenue even if it would be way behind any P5 league.

A big issue is exit penalties for teams leaving in just one year. Mountain West teams are on the hook for 34 million if they leave now to join in time for the 2024 season. Schools like SMU from the American have an exit fee of 10 million if they give 27 month notice but if they leave before that it increases to a negotiated amount.

If it’s just two or three schools it probably can’t build back. However if a nucleus of six schools remain it’s easy to see them take 3-4 G5’s and try to build back. It depends on who and how many.

If there are 4 PAC teams left, can the PAC build back to 10-12 luring teams with CFP money and NCAA tourney credits for the first few seasons? Of course, a media deal needs to come first.

(08-04-2023 06:23 AM)GoBuckeyes1047 Wrote:  This caught my attention.

Quote:Will The Pac-12 Rebuild If Teams Leave?
As far as keeping the conference entity alive, it comes down to how many teams remain, can they leverage postseason revenue left with the league, and can they manage the exit fees that would prevent MWC and AAC schools from jumping over on a one year notice. Teams would presumably leave their NCAA tournament credits and the league has a relationship with the Rose Bowl and playoff that pays them tens of millions more than any G5 annually. Those can be utilized to potentially build a better league than the existing G5’s. With the fear of departures realized and over with the potential to take less revenue in order to get better exposure from a media partner is also there. A rebuilt PAC should dwarf any G5 in revenue even if it would be way behind any P5 league.

A big issue is exit penalties for teams leaving in just one year. Mountain West teams are on the hook for 34 million if they leave now to join in time for the 2024 season. Schools like SMU from the American have an exit fee of 10 million if they give 27 month notice but if they leave before that it increases to a negotiated amount.

If it’s just two or three schools it probably can’t build back. However if a nucleus of six schools remain it’s easy to see them take 3-4 G5’s and try to build back. It depends on who and how many.

If there are 4 PAC teams left, can the PAC build back to 10-12 luring teams with CFP money and NCAA tourney credits for the first few seasons? Of course, a media deal needs to come first.

I would think they could... IF the exit fees for additions could be worked out.