Well, here we go again. Another article from John Swofford's mouthpiece....David Teel. Thoughts:
*This is simply go against football schools....AGAIN...and claiming it's for the ACC schools.
*FSU, which now supplements a weak ACC payout with revenue generating non conference games (Ole Miss, Bama, etc), will now lose that revenue.
*Claims this is to help ACC playoff chances. Anyone REALLY believe Clemson and FSU (who are against this) don't understand how to make the playoffs but Tobacco Roads does? This is more pissing down our back and saying it is raining.
*Assures Notre Dame will never join the ACC. More than likely, Swofford now knows Notre Dame will never join the ACC and this is one of few revenue avenues the ACC has left other than Wednesday games at noon.
*Like with Thursday night and Friday night games....this is hurting footballs schools and putting money into basketball schools (cause they don't care).
*This will hurt season ticket sales for football schools. AGAIN, take money away from football schools....increase the ESPN payout.....and the PR sell is "we got you more money"
*I think this move increases the odds FSU never signs a GOR extension again.
http://www.dailypress.com/sports/teel-blog/dp-teel-time-acc-nine-revisit-post.html
"The ACC needs more revenue from its media rightsholder, and in exchange, ESPN surely is requesting more inventory.
Specifically, games. More specifically, football games. Conference football games.
This would be a teeth-gnashing moment for those who believe nine league games would curtail marquee non-conference matchups."
1. I'm very much against this. If SOME ACC TEAMS want to play a 9th game, I say let them schedule it as an OOC game (like UNC / Wake Forest). No reason to force it on the rest of the league!
ReplyDelete2. If ESPN really does demand this as a condition of launching an ACC Network, two things should go with it: (a) a raise in tier 1 rights fees PLUS 50% of the ACCN profits, and (b) implement the 9th game as a 2nd annual rival - and make FSU's rivals Miami and Ga Tech.
At the end of the day, I can be bought. But I have no doubt that ESPN would pay the ACC say 5M to make the ACC do this and then turn around and give the SEC 12 M and NOT make them do it.
ReplyDeleteThe ACC simply can't trust ESPN to not grow this revenue gap. We can't give everything away and HOPE EPSN makes us hole. They have shown the are cool with shorting us.
FSU likely will lose money if you factor everything in on this, even IF a network brings in $3 Million (and aren't we promised this NOW for doing nothing?).
On top of ALL this....how would the ACC react to basketball decisions made that went against what UNC and Duke want? We ALL know the answer to this. They treat the football schools like shit in this conference even when we are the ones bringing in the revenue. I just struggle to understand the ACC.
FWIW, if ESPN says it has to be 9 games, I'd like to see the $3M/year bump AND a network with 50% of the profits.
ReplyDeleteSo FSU and Clemson lose $3 million from the extra game but make it back up for a net gain of $0.
DeleteWhile schools like duke, wake, unc, duke, bc, dude, etc have a net gain of $3 million.
Still a terrible deal for FSU and Clemson. The football schools shouldn't have to subsidize the conference even more than they already do.
Maybe demand the coastal schools give up their cushy divisional arrangement and move to pods. That increases the frequency of marquee games without having to expand to 9 games and without stealing from the football schools to finance the rest of the conference.