(12-03-2012 12:54 PM)JustAnotherName Wrote:  Some people are predicting the Big Ten may double up the ACC's tv contract come 2016 when their contract expires. I've seen a respected Atlanta columnist mention $25-30M for the SEC once their current negotiations are done.

The thing about that is, folks say "double the ACC's" money, but really it's "double the ACC's, Big XII's, Pac-12's AND SEC's" money. Having said that, I'm very skeptical about those estimates. They are always "up to $30 million/year". They'll cite the fact that the Big Ten distributed $24 million this year, but they fail to mention that Nebraska only got $11 million and Penn State basically got nothing. So the true average was $20.9M.

Quote:That's significant money. The fact that a conference that nearly disolved recently is making more tv revenue AND has better bowl revenue than the ACC is pitiful.

You're changing gears on me here; I assume you are now talking Big XII. Yes, it appears they are still ahead of the ACC just barely, though the ACC's contract has now been bumped up to around $18 million/year, so the gap is smaller.

I think ultimately if FSU, Clemson and Va Tech pressed for unequal distribution of some of the money (say, keep ALL of your bowl money, for example) that might be the thing to keep the football powers in the fold. (To be fair, they'd probably have to let teams keep all of their NCAA basketball tournament money, too). Simply divide the TV money and the base playoff money equally, and make everything else "eat what you kill". I think that idea might gain some traction...

(12-03-2012 01:38 PM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  

(12-03-2012 12:54 PM)JustAnotherName Wrote:  Some people are predicting the Big Ten may double up the ACC's tv contract come 2016 when their contract expires. I've seen a respected Atlanta columnist mention $25-30M for the SEC once their current negotiations are done.

The thing about that is, folks say "double the ACC's" money, but really it's "double the ACC's, Big XII's, Pac-12's AND SEC's" money. Having said that, I'm very skeptical about those estimates. They are always "up to $30 million/year". They'll cite the fact that the Big Ten distributed $24 million this year, but they fail to mention that Nebraska only got $11 million and Penn State basically got nothing. So the true average was $20.9M.

Quote:That's significant money. The fact that a conference that nearly disolved recently is making more tv revenue AND has better bowl revenue than the ACC is pitiful.

You're changing gears on me here; I assume you are now talking Big XII. Yes, it appears they are still ahead of the ACC just barely, though the ACC's contract has now been bumped up to around $18 million/year, so the gap is smaller.

I think ultimately if FSU, Clemson and Va Tech pressed for unequal distribution of some of the money (say, keep ALL of your bowl money, for example) that might be the thing to keep the football powers in the fold. (To be fair, they'd probably have to let teams keep all of their NCAA basketball tournament money, too). Simply divide the TV money and the base playoff money equally, and make everything else "eat what you kill". I think that idea might gain some traction...

The thing about the Big Ten is their timing. They are going to be the only sports property up for bidding in a few years... (well, maybe NBA as well). It's easy to see a 300-350 million per year deal. 350 mil per year would be 25 million per school just there, not including anything from Big Ten network(which right now is about 7 mil per year). So, to say they'd be looking at 28-32 million to me seems very reasonable. Also interesting will be to see for Big Ten how long they do their deal. I could see them pushing for like a 11-12 year deal, to get done in like 2028, just after all the deals for the other conferences are done....

Confirmation that the ACC's contract is now worth $18M/year/school can be found where?

(12-03-2012 01:53 PM)stever20 Wrote:  The thing about the Big Ten is their timing. They are going to be the only sports property up for bidding in a few years... (well, maybe NBA as well). It's easy to see a 300-350 million per year deal. 350 mil per year would be 25 million per school just there, not including anything from Big Ten network(which right now is about 7 mil per year). So, to say they'd be looking at 28-32 million to me seems very reasonable. Also interesting will be to see for Big Ten how long they do their deal. I could see them pushing for like a 11-12 year deal, to get done in like 2028, just after all the deals for the other conferences are done....

You can say "it's easy to see $300 to $350 million per year" and then gravitate to the max. The fact is, the largest contract EVER was the combined ESPN+Fox deal with the Pac-12 for $250 million per year - and that was to head off competition from NBC. I could just as well say 'it's easy to see $280 million per year". No one can say what 2016 holds...

First of all, you have to ask if NBC can even afford to compete for a contract that large; if not, there is no reason to go any higher.
Second, you have to wonder if the BTN will decrease the value of the non-BTN games.
Third, you are assuming infinite growth for media rights; at some point the networks will say "this much and no more".

(12-03-2012 01:56 PM)JustAnotherName Wrote:  Confirmation that the ACC's contract is now worth $18M/year/school can be found where?

Quote:The addition of Louisville will not affect the ACC's new media-rights deal. When the ACC added Notre Dame in all sports except football in September, sources told ESPN the conference's media-rights deal was expected to increase to about $18 million annually per school.

ESPN article, about 1/2 to 2/3 down - LINK.

(12-03-2012 02:17 PM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  

(12-03-2012 01:53 PM)stever20 Wrote:  The thing about the Big Ten is their timing. They are going to be the only sports property up for bidding in a few years... (well, maybe NBA as well). It's easy to see a 300-350 million per year deal. 350 mil per year would be 25 million per school just there, not including anything from Big Ten network(which right now is about 7 mil per year). So, to say they'd be looking at 28-32 million to me seems very reasonable. Also interesting will be to see for Big Ten how long they do their deal. I could see them pushing for like a 11-12 year deal, to get done in like 2028, just after all the deals for the other conferences are done....

You can say "it's easy to see $300 to $350 million per year" and then gravitate to the max. The fact is, the largest contract EVER was the combined ESPN+Fox deal with the Pac-12 for $250 million per year - and that was to head off competition from NBC. I could just as well say 'it's easy to see $280 million per year". No one can say what 2016 holds...

First of all, you have to ask if NBC can even afford to compete for a contract that large; if not, there is no reason to go any higher.
Second, you have to wonder if the BTN will decrease the value of the non-BTN games.
Third, you are assuming infinite growth for media rights; at some point the networks will say "this much and no more".

NBC might not be able to compete, but Fox sure can.

The only thing that could make the Big Ten not get the big bucks frankly is if a la carte is in by then. The odds are pretty long on that.

even if Big Ten got 280 million- that's 20 million, plus the 7 million for the BTN that's 27 million per school......

Being one of only 2 properties up for grabs in 2016 will have it's plusses for sure.... The sports rights business shows no signs of slowing down at all....

(12-03-2012 02:24 PM)stever20 Wrote:  

(12-03-2012 02:17 PM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  

(12-03-2012 01:53 PM)stever20 Wrote:  The thing about the Big Ten is their timing. They are going to be the only sports property up for bidding in a few years... (well, maybe NBA as well). It's easy to see a 300-350 million per year deal. 350 mil per year would be 25 million per school just there, not including anything from Big Ten network(which right now is about 7 mil per year). So, to say they'd be looking at 28-32 million to me seems very reasonable. Also interesting will be to see for Big Ten how long they do their deal. I could see them pushing for like a 11-12 year deal, to get done in like 2028, just after all the deals for the other conferences are done....

You can say "it's easy to see $300 to $350 million per year" and then gravitate to the max. The fact is, the largest contract EVER was the combined ESPN+Fox deal with the Pac-12 for $250 million per year - and that was to head off competition from NBC. I could just as well say 'it's easy to see $280 million per year". No one can say what 2016 holds...

First of all, you have to ask if NBC can even afford to compete for a contract that large; if not, there is no reason to go any higher.
Second, you have to wonder if the BTN will decrease the value of the non-BTN games.
Third, you are assuming infinite growth for media rights; at some point the networks will say "this much and no more".

NBC might not be able to compete, but Fox sure can.

The only thing that could make the Big Ten not get the big bucks frankly is if a la carte is in by then. The odds are pretty long on that.

even if Big Ten got 280 million- that's 20 million, plus the 7 million for the BTN that's 27 million per school......

Being one of only 2 properties up for grabs in 2016 will have it's plusses for sure.... The sports rights business shows no signs of slowing down at all....

But that's the thing, Steve... neither NBC, ESPN, nor Fox offered the Pac-12 that much money individually. It was only the partnership between Fox and ESPN - formed to beat out the 3rd, NBC - which came up with that money. Now you are assuming that Fox will offer up $280M/year by itself for a property it already partially owns by virtue of a 49% share in BTN?

(12-02-2012 11:27 PM)krux Wrote:  Does anyone think we all stay together with our current membership? I get a very "Big 12" feel to the ACC right now. By that I mean, everyone predicting its demise then, BOOM nothing happens.

yes
unless b10 or sec come calling.

(12-03-2012 02:31 PM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  

(12-03-2012 02:24 PM)stever20 Wrote:  

(12-03-2012 02:17 PM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  

(12-03-2012 01:53 PM)stever20 Wrote:  The thing about the Big Ten is their timing. They are going to be the only sports property up for bidding in a few years... (well, maybe NBA as well). It's easy to see a 300-350 million per year deal. 350 mil per year would be 25 million per school just there, not including anything from Big Ten network(which right now is about 7 mil per year). So, to say they'd be looking at 28-32 million to me seems very reasonable. Also interesting will be to see for Big Ten how long they do their deal. I could see them pushing for like a 11-12 year deal, to get done in like 2028, just after all the deals for the other conferences are done....

You can say "it's easy to see $300 to $350 million per year" and then gravitate to the max. The fact is, the largest contract EVER was the combined ESPN+Fox deal with the Pac-12 for $250 million per year - and that was to head off competition from NBC. I could just as well say 'it's easy to see $280 million per year". No one can say what 2016 holds...

First of all, you have to ask if NBC can even afford to compete for a contract that large; if not, there is no reason to go any higher.
Second, you have to wonder if the BTN will decrease the value of the non-BTN games.
Third, you are assuming infinite growth for media rights; at some point the networks will say "this much and no more".

NBC might not be able to compete, but Fox sure can.

The only thing that could make the Big Ten not get the big bucks frankly is if a la carte is in by then. The odds are pretty long on that.

even if Big Ten got 280 million- that's 20 million, plus the 7 million for the BTN that's 27 million per school......

Being one of only 2 properties up for grabs in 2016 will have it's plusses for sure.... The sports rights business shows no signs of slowing down at all....

But that's the thing, Steve... neither NBC, ESPN, nor Fox offered the Pac-12 that much money individually. It was only the partnership between Fox and ESPN - formed to beat out the 3rd, NBC - which came up with that money. Now you are assuming that Fox will offer up $280M/year by itself for a property it already partially owns by virtue of a 49% share in BTN?

IN a word yes. They're trying to build up a competitor to ESPN and the Big Ten games would be huge for that. A LOT of volume there.

And, in everything that's gone to open market, it's never been the low end that's gotten the contract....

(12-03-2012 02:36 PM)stever20 Wrote:  

(12-03-2012 02:31 PM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  you are assuming that Fox will offer up $280M/year by itself for a property it already partially owns by virtue of a 49% share in BTN?

IN a word yes. They're trying to build up a competitor to ESPN and the Big Ten games would be huge for that. A LOT of volume there.

And, in everything that's gone to open market, it's never been the low end that's gotten the contract....

Not sure what that last part was supposed to do for us, but... as for the idea that "there's no limit to how high these contracts can go"... didn't CBS decline to purchase any more games from the SEC? Which conference provides better content than that? If you really believe that the Bull Market will never end, I have some real estate I'd like to sell you...

(12-03-2012 02:43 PM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  

(12-03-2012 02:36 PM)stever20 Wrote:  

(12-03-2012 02:31 PM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  you are assuming that Fox will offer up $280M/year by itself for a property it already partially owns by virtue of a 49% share in BTN?

IN a word yes. They're trying to build up a competitor to ESPN and the Big Ten games would be huge for that. A LOT of volume there.

And, in everything that's gone to open market, it's never been the low end that's gotten the contract....

Not sure what that last part was supposed to do for us, but... as for the idea that "there's no limit to how high these contracts can go"... didn't CBS decline to purchase any more games from the SEC? Which conference provides better content than that? If you really believe that the Bull Market will never end, I have some real estate I'd like to sell you...

The thing was SEC wasn't on the open market at that point. CBS wasn't going to get more games..... So, not a lot more value for CBS than before.... Now ESPN on the other hand, that's where you'll see the increase/them creating a SEC network....

I just don't think you're being realistic to think that the Big Ten won't get at least $300 million in their new deal... $50 million more in 5 years is not a huge leap quite frankly. Live sports are the only thing in TV that are seeing their rights fees increase right now. I think this especially given the fact that the Big Ten is generally speaking considerably ahead of the Pac 12 in tv ratings.....

(12-03-2012 02:20 PM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  

(12-03-2012 01:56 PM)JustAnotherName Wrote:  Confirmation that the ACC's contract is now worth $18M/year/school can be found where?

Quote:The addition of Louisville will not affect the ACC's new media-rights deal. When the ACC added Notre Dame in all sports except football in September, sources told ESPN the conference's media-rights deal was expected to increase to about $18 million annually per school.

ESPN article, about 1/2 to 2/3 down - LINK.

So... no confirmation.

When people were discussing the Notre Dame add it's no surprise the conference leaked to the media that the contract would increase ~$1M/school. However, after Notre Dame was added the ACC also decided to decrease conference games from 9 back to 8 (at ND's behest and not FSU or Clemson's, mind you).

I'm not sure that $1M figure is still accurate given the other lost games. Wasn't the ACC going to own ~2 games a year against Notre Dame anyways, even before they joined the ACC due to all of their ACC series? Now the ACC will get 2-3 games per year but without those extra 7 conference games.

(12-03-2012 01:38 PM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  The thing about that is, folks say "double the ACC's" money, but really it's "double the ACC's, Big XII's, Pac-12's AND SEC's" money. Having said that, I'm very skeptical about those estimates. They are always "up to $30 million/year". They'll cite the fact that the Big Ten distributed $24 million this year, but they fail to mention that Nebraska only got $11 million and Penn State basically got nothing. So the true average was $20.9M.

That is the thing that those cheering for the ACC's demise (WVU fans in particular) are leaving out when they talk about the money difference. the B10 in particular is going to smoke every other conference's payouts. It is not simply an ACC problem. The SEC will eventually catch up but there is no way in hell the PAC or B12 will. They will find themselves in the same boat as the ACC.

Of the Big 4(5) it is really the big 2.

(12-03-2012 03:12 PM)WNCOrange Wrote:  

(12-03-2012 01:38 PM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  The thing about that is, folks say "double the ACC's" money, but really it's "double the ACC's, Big XII's, Pac-12's AND SEC's" money. Having said that, I'm very skeptical about those estimates. They are always "up to $30 million/year". They'll cite the fact that the Big Ten distributed $24 million this year, but they fail to mention that Nebraska only got $11 million and Penn State basically got nothing. So the true average was $20.9M.

That is the thing that those cheering for the ACC's demise (WVU fans in particular) are leaving out when they talk about the money difference. the B10 in particular is going to smoke every other conference's payouts. It is not simply an ACC problem. The SEC will eventually catch up but there is no way in hell the PAC or B12 will. They will find themselves in the same boat as the ACC.

Of the Big 4(5) it is really the big 2.

Totally agree. Pac 12 is able to compete right now due to sheer luck in the timing of their tv deal..... They also are lucky because of sheer geography- kind of hard for Big Ten to take USC for example.

It's really between ACC and Big 12.

The ACC should pick up UCONN, Cincinnati, and Memphis.

(12-03-2012 05:32 PM)GrandmasterTiger Wrote:  The ACC should pick up UCONN, Cincinnati, and Memphis.

OK, not trying to be a jerk or anything, but this is like the second or third time I have seen this suggestion. I can understand why you would suggest Uconn and Cincy, but why Memphis?

(12-03-2012 05:32 PM)GrandmasterTiger Wrote:  The ACC should pick up UCONN, Cincinnati, and Memphis.

I'd post this suggestion here

(12-03-2012 05:32 PM)GrandmasterTiger Wrote:  The ACC should pick up UCONN, Cincinnati, and Memphis.

Hell no, maybe, hell no.

(12-03-2012 05:32 PM)GrandmasterTiger Wrote:  The ACC should pick up UCONN, Cincinnati, and Memphis.

The idea is to improve football, not bury it.

Whatever we gain by adding Cincy would be lost time two by adding awful programs like UConn and Memphis.