(01-17-2024 09:47 PM)SouthernConfBoy Wrote:  

(01-17-2024 09:40 PM)PAW79 Wrote:  

(01-17-2024 06:56 PM)SouthernConfBoy Wrote:  

(01-17-2024 06:55 PM)PAW79 Wrote:  

(01-17-2024 06:42 PM)SouthernConfBoy Wrote:  https://www.aol.com/acc-accuses-florida-...13850.html


"The league formally amended its complaint Wednesday, alleging FSU violated the signed agreement when it chose to challenge the exclusive grant of rights. The conference also accused the school of releasing confidential information — “trade secrets” between the league and television partner ESPN — in its legal filing in the Sunshine State.

The ACC, in its 55-page filing, is seeking a trial and damages it “reasonably believes will be substantial.” The league also asked the court for a permanent injunction barring FSU from participating in the management of league affairs while it “has a direct and material conflict of interest” with the ACC's purposes and objective. It also asked for a permanent injunction barring the Seminoles from disclosing confidential information about the TV agreement.

Both sides have agreed to respond to the complaints by mid-February. It could result in more motions filed.

No one expects a merger of the two complaints because they involve two separate state courts. One court could defer to the other or both could proceed independently. Both sides have requested a trial."

I have stated this before and will state it again ...... it's too damn bad that the ACC was not (and probably never will be) this aggressive and proactive in support of it's members and certainly in regards to it's TV contracts. If they were only half as interested and proactive in promoting football as they are in fighting the FSU lawsuit, we probably would not be in this mess!

Not proactive enough for you?

ACC TV contract revenue by year - something FSU claims is static - from IRS FORMS 990

24 - 580 M Pro Rata 3 Additional Schools Estimate
23 - 461 M estimate from UNC and NCSU athletic departments
22 - 443 M
21 - 397 M
20 - 332 M
19 - 288 M
18 - 277 M
17 - 236 M
16 - 226 M
15 - 217 M
14 - 197 M
13 - 146 M
12 - 130 M
11 - 78 M
10 - 77 M
9 - 76 M

Yep, nice numbers. Now compare this to what we have seen from the SEC and BIG. The ACC has for the past decade or longer been three steps behind the SEC/BIG when it comes to realignment and TV contracts. If everyone in the ACC is happy with these numbers, then all is good.

Seen or claimed to be coming? It's been 15 years of the B10 and SEC announcing a projected income in the next fiscal year, while the ACC reports an audited result from the last fiscal year.

You think tiny little Clemson deserves the same amount of money as Ohio State, Michigan, and Penn State with three times your living alumni? That's what you and FSU apologists are saying despite the fact that Clemson is very small in size and FSU is very young compared to who wants to emulate.

The average B10 schools has twice the alumni of an ACC school. They have 85% more students. In a world where you get paid by eyeballs, they have more eyeballs - twice as many as the average ACC school. Clemson is only slightly bigger than Nebraska or Northwestern.

I've been trying to explain this to people. Private school USC has more grad students than Miami's entire student body. You're going to come up way short trying to find similar universities in the Big Ten and SEC. We don't have the alumni, and we fall short on the Go-State-U fans as well.

How many high school dropouts in Georgia root for Tech instead of UGa?

(01-18-2024 02:39 PM)SouthernConfBoy Wrote:  

(01-18-2024 02:13 PM)ken d Wrote:  

(01-18-2024 01:53 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(01-18-2024 01:10 PM)PAW79 Wrote:  

(01-18-2024 10:33 AM)SouthernConfBoy Wrote:  Is the inability to read catching? So, are you really saying that the ACC is in fact earning as much as the BIG/SEC because the ACC numbers are audited and the SEC/BIG numbers are not?? OK, sure. Guess all of the reports from multiple sources indicating a $30-$40 million dollar a year shortfall in conference distributions between the ACC and the SEC/BIG is merely an accounting error.


That's not at all what I said.

It's a shame that some folks are so easily fooled. When the SEC or B10 or B12 toss out a number that includes future distribution of expanded football playoff money and compare against the ACC as if the ACC gets none of that you just swallowed an $8-10 annual lie. When the media reports it like that you swallow it to the large intestines.

Here is the TV contract money on a per school based for the ACC, B10 and SEC over the last 5 years. This is TV, not bowls, not playoff, not NCAA, and not interest income on investments. Understand that audited statements and 990's are published for the fiscal year that ends on June 30th of the year prior to the May filing.

Fiscal Year ACC B10 SEC Average Annual Per School Deficit to P-2

22 31 M 41 M 39M -9M
21 29 M 29 M 42 M -6.5M
20 25 M 38 M 35 M -11.5M
19 22 M 38 M 34 M -14M
18 19M 31 M 26 M - 9.5 M

But, but what about the 30-40 million you say?

That's future revenue for future years, plus about $10 million for the expanded playoff.

But, the ACC contracts do not increase, they are still just $12 M a year.

That's stupid that people swallow that, since in the last 5 years the ACC has seen a TV contract increase of 63%.


But the reality is that SOME people can't trust their actual senses, they BELEIVE something and actual tangible evidence means nothing to them. Sad.

Well, this illiterate fool stands corrected. Now that I have been shown the error of my ways, I can clearly see that there is absolutely no substantial difference in payouts between the ACC and other conferences. Everything is just fine for now and into the future. ACC football and more importantly, ACC basketball have nothing to fear from the other conferences that will not be spending the additional $$$ that they are not making year over year. Nothing to do but sit back and a enjoy a leisurely sail with the Pilot into the sunset!

Corrected, but still not understanding.
I guess comprehension is too much to ask for.

You got that right.

Sad isn't it? It explains so many problems in the United States.

What I comprehend is that the ACC "can do no harm and is perfectly fine" crowd will never admit that things could or should be better. It's OK. You guys just keep your heads buried in the sand and all will be fine. Clemson is a charter member of the ACC and the ACC has been very good for Clemson. The fact is though that Clemson's focus and desire is all about football. The SEC and BIG are focused on football and have been very proactive and aggressive in building their conferences/brands. The ACC meanwhile has fallen way behind in this area (football). I agree that the ACC has some built in disadvantages compared to the SEC/BIG such as large alumni bases and large stadiums.

My contention remains that it is a shame that the ACC was not/is not as aggressive and proactive when it comes to building its football brand as it has been in litigation to protect the basketball/olympic sports crowd.

We can argue all day. ACC proponents think everything is smelling rosy while ACC detractors think the sky is falling. The truth is things are not as good as some seem to think nor are they as bad as some seem to think. It will be interesting to see how this all shakes out over the next several years. I hope everyone has a great day.