forums

MEGA Conference Realignment and lawsuits Megathread: Stories, Tales, Lies, and Exaggerations

Rellyrell said:
Hence y Disney+, Hulu are such perfect option B’s. Disney been ahead of the game on this. They lost a significant subscription base, but that was globally stemming from their lost of India’s IPL (cricket), but here in the U.S, Disney+, Hulu, & ESPN+ grew significantly last fiscal yr.

A lot of my partners have cut cable; they use Disney+ premium package, Netflix, Max, and DoFu Sports for all their needs. ****, w/ the high speed internet cost, they are paying on avg. about $100/month less than I’m paying for Direct TVs bundle package.
Click to expand...
****. DirectTv is still around?
 
Advertisement
Rickd said:
Yeah ... looks like things cooled on the "realignment front" so now we are discussing degrees and honor societies.

There was some scuttlebutt re Louisville having received a Big 12 invite earlier in the week. I would think that Pitt, Louisville and NC State would be huge additions to the Big 12. Those 3 to the Big 12 along with UM, UNC, ND and maybe UVA to the Big 10, Clemson and FSU to the SEC ... game over for the ACC conference. Blowing up the ACC is the only viable route for everyone. BC and Wake end up in smaller regional conferences where they belong.
Click to expand...

Yoyo82 said:
Pitt, Lou, and NCState would be better additions to the Big12 than half the schools already in the conference and would only grow the pie for everybody. The Big12 would absolutely take them.
Click to expand...
I doubt the Virginia legislature would allow UVA to bolt if VT doesn’t have a landing spot.
 
Advertisement
Rellyrell said:
Indeed. AT&T bought them & repurposed them as their own entity.
Click to expand...

And sold off 30% of it to private equity last year at a significant discount to what they paid.

Its rare that the entire world knows a deal is dumb beforehand, during due diligence and at the close and it still goes through but god bless ATT's little corporate hearts.
 
ACC needs to play hardball with ESPN. We are going to implode if you don’t renegotiate our deal. If you really just want two super leagues, we can speed that up. If not, let us get some real numbers together.
 
Advertisement
Cryptical Envelopment said:
Describe "hardball" please.

You need to have leverage to play hardball.
Click to expand...
Hardball means worse things will happen. Implode. Is a hardball word. ESPN from wussy Connecticut does not want 4 teams bolting and suing to get out. That is uber bad business. The ACC should be “you gonna help fix this or not?” Bad contracts get renegotiated all the time.
 
JTKoval said:
Hardball means worse things will happen. Implode. Is a hardball word. ESPN from wussy Connecticut does not want 4 teams bolting and suing to get out. That is uber bad business. The ACC should be “you gonna help fix this or not?” Bad contracts get renegotiated all the time.
Click to expand...

Wussy Connecticut? Besides being a completely weird thing to say, ESPN is a subsidiary of the Walt Disney Company which is a multi-national conglomerate headquartered in Burbank, CA. Furthermore I'd guess that somewhere between 0% and 0% of the decision makers at ESPN are from Connecticut.

So anyway, where is the leverage to play hardball with? What makes you think that ESPN has any interest in paying more for ACC football under any circumstances? Especially when they will end up with half the cream of the crop in the SEC if the ACC falls apart anyway. And even if they did, the ACC is an incredibly inferior product when compared to the B1G and SEC, so if ESPN paid us closer to fair market value in the next few years, it would be incrementally higher (think $5M per school) which would still leave us at a massive competitive disadvantage to the B1G/SEC and we'd be in the exact same spot, with the schools with a landing spot itching to get out. The only difference is ESPN, which is not in a strong financial position right now, would have less money in their coffers. Does that sound like something ESPN would agree to?

Us: hardball!

ESPN: eat a ****!

"You gonna help fix this or not?" is not a strong negotiating point.
 
Last edited:
JTKoval said:
ACC needs to play hardball with ESPN. We are going to implode if you don’t renegotiate our deal. If you really just want two super leagues, we can speed that up. If not, let us get some real numbers together.
Click to expand...
HARDBALL? ACCN makes only $120-140 million a year profit ... there is NO MONEY. Blow it up.
 
Advertisement
calinative umstudent said:
Click to expand...

I disagree with his conclusions that ACC schools going to the big12 would be laughable. Not saying it will happen, but describing it as "near zero chance" seems over the top. The core argument he's really making is that the big12 is not a better option for any acc school, so there's no path to enough votes for conference dissolution. Without knowing the BIG12 contract, that still sounds overly confident
 
Cryptical Envelopment said:
Wussy Connecticut? Besides being a completely weird thing to say, ESPN is a subsidiary of the Walt Disney Company which is a multi-national conglomerate headquartered in Burbank, CA. Furthermore I'd guess that somewhere between 0% and 0% of the decision makers at ESPN are from Connecticut.

So anyway, where is the leverage to play hardball with? What makes you think that ESPN has any interest in paying more for ACC football under any circumstances? Especially when they will end up with half the cream of the crop in the SEC if the ACC falls apart anyway. And even if they did, the ACC is an incredibly inferior product when compared to the B1G and SEC, so if ESPN paid us closer to fair market value in the next few years, it would be incrementally higher (think $5M per school) which would still leave us at a massive competitive disadvantage to the B1G/SEC and we'd be in the exact same spot, with the schools with a landing spot itching to get out. The only difference is ESPN, which is not in a strong financial position right now, would have less money in their coffers. Does that sound like something ESPN would agree to?

Us: hardball!

ESPN: eat a ****!

"You gonna help fix this or not?" is not a strong negotiating point.
Click to expand...
The little leverage the ACC had is the threat of some programs leaving to the competition, aka B1G. Also there may be a business case for ESPN that supporting the ACC network is less attractive than consolidating top teams in another conference (SEC) and killing the ACC deal. Not a lot, but there are arguments to be made.
 
JTKoval said:
ACC needs to play hardball with ESPN. We are going to implode if you don’t renegotiate our deal. If you really just want two super leagues, we can speed that up. If not, let us get some real numbers together.
Click to expand...
That should do it. I’ll call jimmy pittaro
 
Advertisement
DamnLiesAndStatistics said:
I disagree with his conclusions that ACC schools going to the big12 would be laughable. Not saying it will happen, but describing it as "near zero chance" seems over the top. The core argument he's really making is that the big12 is not a better option for any acc school, so there's no path to enough votes for conference dissolution. Without knowing the BIG12 contract, that still sounds overly confident
Click to expand...
No Acc school is going to go to the big 12. Zero chance.

Accept being third. The espn contract has fmv resets every years. It is what it is.
 
IMG_5668.gif
 
NorthernVirginiaCane said:
No Acc school is going to go to the big 12. Zero chance.

Accept being third. The espn contract has fmv resets every years. It is what it is.
Click to expand...
We'll see. Maybe not in the short term, but eventually. It's just a game theory question.



It only takes two or three non SEC/B1G bound schools to realize the ACC will be dead. If Clemson, UM, FSU, UNC, UVA, etc... all leave, you don't think the ACC value craters and ESPN has a right to renegotiate? The ACC becomes worthless, and these schools either have to place their future in a legal battle (exits fees + GOR), or they join the mutineers to dissolve the ACC while they have the votes so they can secure their individual futures in the BIG 12.



You're essentially assuming that, given the prisoner's dilemma, all the other schools stick together. Maybe they do. But it's not a zero percent chance.
 
Advertisement
Back
Top