David Teel
I don't believe ADs knew how insignificant. I think Swoff wanted nine, but when he saw impass he caved to Clemson.
tricknole
tricknole
tricknole
David Teel
tricknole
tricknole
tricknole
tricknole
tricknole
http://www.dailypress.com/sports/teel-blog/
The ADs spent much of the last three-plus months in fierce debate over two alternatives offered by ESPN, both designed to create more quality programming for the ACC Network, set to launch in 2019. In exchange for financial incentives, ESPN asked for eight league games and two Power Five non-conference dates (8+2), or nine league games and one outside Power Five contest (9+1).
But during a conference call Tuesday morning to prepare for their face-to-face meetings, the athletic directors learned from ACC commissioner John Swofford that while ESPN prefers one of those formats, it will settle for 8+1. This according to sources throughout the league.
How much that will cost the conference in incentives is unknown.
By an 8-6 vote in May 2014 – Virginia Tech’s Whit Babcock was in the majority, Virginia’s Craig Littlepage in the minority -- ACC athletic directors approved the 8+1 model, and since the July unveiling of the ACC Network, when partner ESPN asked for the scheduling concessions, they have been similarly divided on 8+2 vs. 9+1.
(At ESPN’s request, the ADs already have agreed to expand the league men’s basketball schedule from 18 to 20 games, effective 2019-20, to coincide with the ACC Network’s launch.)
As they did two years ago, football powers Clemson and Florida State most adamantly oppose nine league games. They have annual non-conference rivals in South Carolina and Florida, respectively, and a fifth league road game every other season, plus the occasional contest with Notre Dame – the Fighting Irish are contracted to play, on average, five ACC teams annually on a rotation -- would affect the Tigers’ and Seminoles’ ability to schedule seven home games each year.
The other ACC schools that face an in-state rival from the Southeastern Conference each season, Georgia Tech and Louisville, also prefer eight league games, and in 2014 that foursome convinced enough of their colleagues to approve 8+1 rather than 9+1.
But when the choice was presented in July as 8+2 or 9+1, some athletic directors, including Babcock, reconsidered. With the Big Ten, Big 12 and Pacific 12 playing nine league games, scheduling two Power Fives annually was going to be a constant migraine.
As recently as Monday, momentum for 9+1 -- the best choice IMHO -- was building. The chance to dodge 8+2’s scheduling headaches, plus the opportunity to play league rivals in the opposite division once every three years instead of once every six, was appealing.
Then Swofford provided an escape hatch Tuesday, rendering 9+1 a longshot and putting 8+2 on life support.
The upshot: Those who like the ACC football schedule just the way it is are likely to be very happy.
http://csnbbs.com/thread-792579-page-12.html
Lou
"I think putting six teams in the top 25, being featured on college game day three times in the first five weeks, and popping big ratings numbers probably should have everyone thinking long and hard about making any rash changes right now.
The idea of "more inventory" is kind of absurd on the face of it. Only the Big 10 has played more P5 games than the ACC over the last several years. Most schools try to play two P5 schools every year, and most of the ones that don't aren't that relevant to TV. No offense to NCSU or Wake, but is ESPN really pounding on tables because they have one and not two P5 OOC games?
And even the non-P5 schools we're playing are fairly prominent, BYU, Houston, ECU, Cincinnati, Army, Navy. It's hardly like we're scheduling directional Louisiana teams every Saturday.
We don't have a Baylor in this league, specifically trying to avoid P5 competition. This ultimatum is an answer to a problem that doesn't exist.
And the answer to not seeing everyone enough in conference is to eliminate the divisions. If ESPN and Swofford want to do something, they should go back to work on that. "
Brett McMurphy reported the cost of not going to one of the 10 P5 schedule models was $500,000 per year. That's peanuts.
ReplyDeleteI don't get this.
DeleteThe reasoning against 9+1 is sound, logical and irrefutable. It was an horrible idea and should never have gotten the run that it did.
But 8+2 would've accomplished something very similar, and the crap schools that supposedly wanted to face each other more often could've done that as OOC games.
So did the crap schools NOT care about playing other ACC schools more often after all? Because I think FSU and Clemson would've gladly voted in favor of 8+2 if the only alternative was 9+1, since both schools do 8+2 frequently already.
The question/point I'm trying to make is: How did these crap schools that are so hell bent on playing more ACC games more frequently (because they're so awful nobody wants to play them ooc) wind up agreeing to the option that offers them the LEAST of what they claimed they wanted? Was that just a lie? What happened? Did FSU and Clemson pull a power move and say f you, even though we'd agree to 8+2, we're going to put you in your place and force the status quo upon everyone? Something's whacky.
And f David Teel. "F her right in the p."
For the love of god can we kick Wake out of the conference? They serve no purpose whatsoever. They're tiny. They're not competitive. They have no fans. They're, at best, the 5th most popular program in their own state. Cincinnati, Temple and UConn would all be YUGE, immediate upgrades over them. It'll also mean one less "crap" old guard school voting to hold this conference back.
500K that FSU would have to give up MILLIONS to get. And some NC media is portraying the decision as illogical. Insanity on Tobacco Road.
DeleteWhat are you talking about? FSU wouldn't have to give up anything for 8+2. We already do that frequently.
ReplyDeleteThe question was why were the crap schools so gungho about 10 p5 games and yet they settled on the status quo 9 p5 games when FSU and Clemson would've likely agreed to 8+2?
Because there's no way am acc ooc game between wake/unc should count as the "1" in 8+1. So they'd still have to schedule 8+2 anyways. These crap schools are a joke.
While we're at it kicking wake out, I suggest we kick NC state out as well. They're also fairly valueless. Now bring on 2 of Cincy, UConn or Temple. Big time upgrades and/or better for the network.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDelete