(12-31-2023 12:46 AM)Ragu Wrote:  

(12-31-2023 12:41 AM)random asian guy Wrote:  Some more:

1. Pete Thamel doesn’t believe FSU would get a full share from the B10 or the SEC.

“But wherever they go, one thing that’s fairly certain right now with the media market the way it is: they’re not going to get full freight,” claims Thamel.

“Much like Washington, Oregon, Cal, Stanford, SMU all went to their new leagues at discounted rates, Florida State will not enter a league at full throttle.”

2. Thamel doesn’t think the SEC is that interested in FSU but may need to protect the South.

Well, there’s only two places to go, the SEC and Big Ten. The SEC doesn’t have a tremendous appetite for them as of right now, but if the Big Ten does have an appetite for them, it becomes a bit of a game of chicken, right. Does the SEC want the Big Ten planting a flag in the south? We’re going to these mega conferences and Florida State becomes this crucial chess piece.”

3. Clemson may make a similar move but UNC is the most wanted.

“So Clemson has not been as outspoken, but has done just as much due diligence. They would be expected to make a similar move next, perhaps in the upcoming months.

“North Carolina, I can’t overstate, is really the most coveted property in the ACC right now.

https://www.on3.com/college/florida-stat...s-the-acc/

Thamel is an ESPN shill who isn't plugged in on this. He's still rating Virginia higher than FSU for expansion candidates for God sakes .. doesn't know the topic or have real info on it

Sent from my Pixel 3 using Tapatalk

What are you talking about? Thamel is very well-connected regarding ESPN/ACC matters. Didn’t he break the news about Cal/Stan/SMU joining the ACC?

Based on what he said, here's my educated guess:

1. ESPN seems more inclined to move UNC/UVa to the SEC rather than FSU/Clemson.

2. ESPN/SEC is hesitant to allow FSU to join the Big Ten.

3. However, ESPN/SEC is probably unwilling to grant FSU the full share.

Therefore, it appears to me that FSU is headed for the Big Ten.

(12-31-2023 09:08 PM)random asian guy Wrote:  

(12-31-2023 12:46 AM)Ragu Wrote:  

(12-31-2023 12:41 AM)random asian guy Wrote:  Some more:

1. Pete Thamel doesn’t believe FSU would get a full share from the B10 or the SEC.

“But wherever they go, one thing that’s fairly certain right now with the media market the way it is: they’re not going to get full freight,” claims Thamel.

“Much like Washington, Oregon, Cal, Stanford, SMU all went to their new leagues at discounted rates, Florida State will not enter a league at full throttle.”

2. Thamel doesn’t think the SEC is that interested in FSU but may need to protect the South.

Well, there’s only two places to go, the SEC and Big Ten. The SEC doesn’t have a tremendous appetite for them as of right now, but if the Big Ten does have an appetite for them, it becomes a bit of a game of chicken, right. Does the SEC want the Big Ten planting a flag in the south? We’re going to these mega conferences and Florida State becomes this crucial chess piece.”

3. Clemson may make a similar move but UNC is the most wanted.

“So Clemson has not been as outspoken, but has done just as much due diligence. They would be expected to make a similar move next, perhaps in the upcoming months.

“North Carolina, I can’t overstate, is really the most coveted property in the ACC right now.

https://www.on3.com/college/florida-stat...s-the-acc/

Thamel is an ESPN shill who isn't plugged in on this. He's still rating Virginia higher than FSU for expansion candidates for God sakes .. doesn't know the topic or have real info on it

Sent from my Pixel 3 using Tapatalk

What are you talking about? Thamel is very well-connected regarding ESPN/ACC matters. Didn’t he break the news about Cal/Stan/SMU joining the ACC?

Based on what he said, here's my educated guess:

1. ESPN seems more inclined to move UNC/UVa to the SEC rather than FSU/Clemson.

2. ESPN/SEC is hesitant to allow FSU to join the Big Ten.

3. However, ESPN/SEC is probably unwilling to grant FSU the full share.

Therefore, it appears to me that FSU is headed for the Big Ten.

Like JR said, new SEC adds get full shares. B1G sources have said FSU would get a full share there too

I don't think Thamel is connected on the network side in terms of negotiations And since he works for espn, it behooves them to try to devalue FSU right now

Sent from my Pixel 3 using Tapatalk

The ACC had 4 additions available at pro rata. They chose to offer only partials to Stanford, Cal and SMU.
The B1G didn't give Oregon and Washington full shares.

There is no reason to believe that the SEC will offer full shares to their next additions.

(12-31-2023 02:55 PM)Ragu Wrote:  ESPN said the conference is not elite by leaving out a 13-0 conference champ and jumping two one loss teams over them.

To put it bluntly, I think what ESPN was really saying is Alabama draws better TV numbers than Florida State. To what extent that's true or not is an exercise for the reader, but I don't think it was an indictment of the ACC so much as a money grab by ESPN.

(12-31-2023 04:48 PM)esayem Wrote:  So you believe if Travis didn’t get hurt and they blew out UF and Louisville, they still get left out? Despite the committee saying it was due to Travis being out?

IMO, the committee lied there. ESPN was definitely pushing for Alabama to be included, and if that meant FSU being left out, they didn't seem to have a problem with that.

(01-01-2024 12:47 PM)XLance Wrote:  The ACC had 4 additions available at pro rata. They chose to offer only partials to Stanford, Cal and SMU.
The B1G didn't give Oregon and Washington full shares.

There is no reason to believe that the SEC will offer full shares to their next additions.

The ACC had a clear reason for offering partial shares to Cal/Stan/SMU; it IS getting full pro rata from ESPN, however. Prior to this, the ACC always gave full shares from day 1.

The Big Ten reportedly may not be getting full pro rata for Wash/Oregon.

If the SEC gets pro rata, no reason to doubt that they would pass on the full shares to the newcomers. Nothing in any of this makes me question that they would.

(01-01-2024 04:53 PM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  

(01-01-2024 12:47 PM)XLance Wrote:  The ACC had 4 additions available at pro rata. They chose to offer only partials to Stanford, Cal and SMU.
The B1G didn't give Oregon and Washington full shares.

There is no reason to believe that the SEC will offer full shares to their next additions.

The ACC had a clear reason for offering partial shares to Cal/Stan/SMU; it IS getting full pro rata from ESPN, however. Prior to this, the ACC always gave full shares from day 1.

The Big Ten reportedly may not be getting full pro rata for Wash/Oregon.

If the SEC gets pro rata, no reason to doubt that they would pass on the full shares to the newcomers. Nothing in any of this makes me question that they would.

I posted the following in an adjacent thread but it matters here:

The ACC office operates on the basis of about a half share of revenue, In 2012 the office operation was 10.6 Million against income of $231 million. In 2022 that number was $21 million versus income of $616 Million. The league office gets about what ND games, plus or minus a million or two.

Total income for the ACC was

$134 M in FY 10
$214 M in FY 13
$405 M in FY 17
$616 M in FY 22

The per school payout last year was $39.4 million per full time school. It's on page 2 of schedule A of last year's report.
The per school payout in fy 2011 was $12.5 million per full time school. It's on page 1 of schedule A of that year's report.

The expenses of the office have gone up 98% in 12 years. Per school revenue per school has gone up 350% in 12 years.

As I understand it, the ACCN is a contract within a contract but it also represent a sunk cost investment on the part of the ACC schools. Part of the investment was not receiving some distribution from ESPN during the build up to the launch of this network. That mean anyone joining needs to pay the equivalent of a "dues payment" and that's easily paid via a withholding of other monies.

Always remember the ACC is like a Cotillon or Country Club. New members have to pay "initiation" fees so that their stake in the club become equal to the other members. One of the things the B12 does that the ACC does not is bill for the league services after the fact. The ACC takes the money up front and it causes you to show less revenue on your books, but you dispense with the illusion created by a cash payment that is going to partially paid back in a few weeks.

The ACC can always reward SMU, Cal, and Stanford for their efforts if the League chooses. Without such a mechanism these schools could be tempted to do what Duke with their football program for much of the 80's and 90's - just ride on the other schools.