forums

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

DTP said:
I get that. What I’m saying is that ESPN negotiated a contract to pay, say the SEC “x” amount of dollars annually. That dollar amount gets split between the 14 teams. Now say, two more teams join the league. Does that same dollar amount get split between 16 teams? Or does ESPN have to pay more than they negotiated originally?
Click to expand...
More
 
Advertisement
mcnaire2004 said:
One interesting thing is we'd be the only team in either the SEC or B1G to consistently have an empty stadium. But our players would really love all the away games.
Click to expand...
UCLA, Indiana, Maryland, Rutgers, Northwestern, Vandy, Mizzou, Purdue, Mississippi State, etc. ALL say hi.

College Football Attendance Rankings: 2023 CFN Five Year Program Analysis | College Football News | College Football Predictions, Analysis and Updates

collegefootballnews-com.cdn.ampproject.org collegefootballnews-com.cdn.ampproject.org
 
Cryptical Envelopment said:
I hear you amigo, but game it out. Let's say there is realignment. I know there will be even numbers, but we don't know who is going where so let's just for the sake of equity split the six programs with the most value between the B1G and SEC:

UM, UVA and ND go to the B1G.

Clemson, FSU, UNC go to the SEC.

So ESPN gets to cherrypick Clemson, FSU and UNC (and pay the SEC for the three team addition). They now own numerous new marquee games with these programs vs the many quality teams in the SEC. Think Clemson-Bama and FSU-UGA and they also own UF-FSU outright now as a bonus.

They lose UVA and Miami. That's it in this scenario. They also get to stop paying 11 of the 14 schools in the ACC and replace BC vs. Syracuse etc. broadcast content with SEC matchups between schools that have massive budgets to recruit with and huge, passionate fanbases.

There is no leverage. Which is why in every discussion both public, private, in the media, ESPN giving the ACC a new deal with no consideration is a non-starter.
Click to expand...
What happens to the ACC network if the ACC is dissolved? Do schools receive a payout so ESPN is like buying it out or something? Or does ESPN just keep it and rebrand it as SEC2 and broadcast more SEC games?
 
Advertisement
JTKoval said:
Disagree. The ACC brand is far superior to the Big East then. ESPN’s view of value has to be a long game. We are only at a crap number because we negotiate long ago and for two long. ESPN doesn’t want the ACC to implode and go BIG10. That would be way short sighted on the future value of CFB.
Click to expand...
I think it’s pretty awesome how you stepped into the chat to one up and protect northern whoever he is from having the latest worst take on this.
 
mcnaire2004 said:
One interesting thing is we'd be the only team in either the SEC or B1G to consistently have an empty stadium. But our players would really love all the away games.
Click to expand...
mcnaire2004 said:
One interesting thing is we'd be the only team in either the SEC or B1G to consistently have an empty stadium. But our players would really love all the away games.
Click to expand...
Sounds like a troll comment. Have you actually ever BEEN to a UM football conference game? Especially when the Canes had a winning season going? Or a big OOC game? Check out the Hard Rock crowd supporting UM at the Texas A&M game crowd this season. Will be similar to the UM vs ND game in 2017 that was a sell out and 90% UM fans. Just some clown making deriding comments and definitely is either not a fan or is plain ignorant of reality.
 
Rickd said:
Sounds like a troll comment. Have you actually ever BEEN to a UM football conference game? Especially when the Canes had a winning season going? Or a big OOC game? Check out the Hard Rock crowd supporting UM at the Texas A&M game crowd this season. Will be similar to the UM vs ND game in 2017 that was a sell out and 90% UM fans. Just some clown making deriding comments and definitely is either not a fan or is plain ignorant of reality.
Click to expand...

I pay no mind to the attendance smack. It's complete bull****. Miami's attendance is underrated. Don't let them brainwash you. We do not have a naturally large student and employee base because we are a small, private school with only 11k undergrads. On an average Saturday we draw about 45k which is 4x the size of our student body. Tell me how many other schools draw 4x the size of their student body. Being a small private school, we not only have a small alumni base, but they live disproportionately far away from UM since we draw a higher percentage of students from OOS vs. a big state school.

Tiny, little, private Miami ranks 36th in attendance nationally over the last five years. Five years of ****** football, no less.

We outdrew bigger P5 schools like Oregon, KSU, L'ville, Utah, UNC, Baylor, ASU, PITT, CU, UCLA, UVA, Rutgers, CAL, Cincy, Maryland, NW, etc. and we drew just a handful less people than Missouri from the SEC and Purdue from the B1G. In fact, we outdrew six B1G, two SEC, six of the ten Big 12, and TEN Pac-12 programs! And we're 5th in the ACC. While being down.

We draw just fine. Maybe not "we have 50,000 students, 30,000 employees, three bars and no pro sports and everyone else depends on the local university for their business" fine, but just fine for who we are. Especially against our crap ACC schedule.

 
Last edited:
Advertisement
Cryptical Envelopment said:
I pay no mind to the attendance smack. It's complete bull****. Miami's attendance is underrated. Don't let them brainwash you. We do not have a naturally large student and employee base because we are a small, private school with only 11k undergrads. On an average Saturday we draw about 45k which is 4x the size of our student body. Tell me how many other schools draw 4x the size of their student body. Being a small private school, we not only have a small alumni base, but they live disproportionately far away from UM since we draw a higher percentage of students from OOS vs. a big state school.

Tiny, little, private Miami ranks 36th in attendance nationally over the last five years. Five years of ****** football, no less.

We outdrew bigger schools like Oregon, KSU, L'ville, Utah, UNC, Baylor, ASU, PITT, CU, UCLA, UVA, Rutgers, CAL, Cincy, Maryland, NW, etc. and we drew just a handful less people than Missouri from the SEC and Purdue from the B1G. In fact, we outdrew six B1G, two SEC, six of the ten Big 12, and TEN Pac-12 programs! And we're 5th in the ACC. While being down.

We draw just fine. Maybe not "we have 50,000 students, 30,000 employees, three bars and no pro sports and everyone else depends on the local university for their business" fine, but just fine for who we are.

Click to expand...
...and in the SEC or B10 we'd draw even better crowds I think.
 
Rickd said:
HARDBALL? ACCN makes only $120-140 million a year profit ... there is NO MONEY. Blow it up.
Click to expand...

1684703910049.jpeg
 
Cryptical Envelopment said:
I pay no mind to the attendance smack. It's complete bull****. Miami's attendance is underrated. Don't let them brainwash you. We do not have a naturally large student and employee base because we are a small, private school with only 11k undergrads. On an average Saturday we draw about 45k which is 4x the size of our student body. Tell me how many other schools draw 4x the size of their student body. Being a small private school, we not only have a small alumni base, but they live disproportionately far away from UM since we draw a higher percentage of students from OOS vs. a big state school.

Tiny, little, private Miami ranks 36th in attendance nationally over the last five years. Five years of ****** football, no less.

We outdrew bigger P5 schools like Oregon, KSU, L'ville, Utah, UNC, Baylor, ASU, PITT, CU, UCLA, UVA, Rutgers, CAL, Cincy, Maryland, NW, etc. and we drew just a handful less people than Missouri from the SEC and Purdue from the B1G. In fact, we outdrew six B1G, two SEC, six of the ten Big 12, and TEN Pac-12 programs! And we're 5th in the ACC. While being down.

We draw just fine. Maybe not "we have 50,000 students, 30,000 employees, three bars and no pro sports and everyone else depends on the local university for their business" fine, but just fine for who we are. Especially against our crap ACC schedule.

Click to expand...
And to this point, maybe, just maybe this is why we are valued in conference dominoes. Sure you’re getting South Florida in the negotiations, and a still strong brand, but you’re also getting a good number of sets across the country.
 
Advertisement
Cryptical Envelopment said:
I own three companies, have hundreds of people who work for me, have concerns in media and entertainment, and have negotiated hundreds if not thousands of contracts in my lifetime. Thanks for your inquiry.

I hope I passed the @JTKoval competency test. Now I'm off to facepalm your senseless post like everyone else.
Click to expand...
throwing shade on a sunny day 😎

I’m amazed by those who are so sure of their opinions when we have people on this site who actually work in this space and in some cases (cough) directly worked for someone, regardless of my or any other‘s opinion of the person, and the company at the heart of the so called renegotiation theory of timelines.

But hey what read would we know of it.
 
Last edited:
Rickd said:
New teams added ... ESPN revenue increases ... payout increases. That is even included in the horrible ESPN deal with UM. If new teams are added to the conference then the contract is renegotiated.
Click to expand...
Contract renegotiation does not mean ESPN, FOX, or whoever will continue to pay at the same rate per team just because a conference adds any team it wants. The Big 10 is getting $1B for 16 teams. That's $62,500,000 per team. Do you think UNC or UVA will each bring in over $62,500,000 each in advertising each year to the Big 10? At least they add TV sets. Maybe they can, but it just doesn't seem like it to me.

What gets me is the SEC. Would adding Clemson and FSU really add that many new TV sets to keep payouts per team the same? South Carolina and Florida are already covered there, by the flagship schools in each state no less. There has got to be a point of diminishing returns to the TV networks.

Frankly, as the 2 big boy conferences continue to get bigger and bigger, it is becoming more apparent to me anyway that college football as a whole is ******** this whole thing up. If the Power 5 agreed to negotiate as a block for TV contract rights, they would have gotten even bigger sums for more schools. Rivalries could have been saved and more quality interconference games could have been available. Instead, it looks like we're going to eventually have 2 major conferences who will likely rarely play each other due to the networks not wanting to give up programming to their rivals.
 
Cryptical Envelopment said:
I pay no mind to the attendance smack. It's complete bull****. Miami's attendance is underrated. Don't let them brainwash you. We do not have a naturally large student and employee base because we are a small, private school with only 11k undergrads. On an average Saturday we draw about 45k which is 4x the size of our student body. Tell me how many other schools draw 4x the size of their student body. Being a small private school, we not only have a small alumni base, but they live disproportionately far away from UM since we draw a higher percentage of students from OOS vs. a big state school.

Tiny, little, private Miami ranks 36th in attendance nationally over the last five years. Five years of ****** football, no less.

We outdrew bigger P5 schools like Oregon, KSU, L'ville, Utah, UNC, Baylor, ASU, PITT, CU, UCLA, UVA, Rutgers, CAL, Cincy, Maryland, NW, etc. and we drew just a handful less people than Missouri from the SEC and Purdue from the B1G. In fact, we outdrew six B1G, two SEC, six of the ten Big 12, and TEN Pac-12 programs! And we're 5th in the ACC. While being down.

We draw just fine. Maybe not "we have 50,000 students, 30,000 employees, three bars and no pro sports and everyone else depends on the local university for their business" fine, but just fine for who we are. Especially against our crap ACC schedule.

Click to expand...
⬆️⬆️⬆️⬆️⬆️⬆️
We are top three in revenue in the acc for a reason. The link is in one of the threads here but I’m not going to track it down and be google for the chronically ill informed
 
Advertisement
CaneinBroward said:
Contract renegotiation does not mean ESPN, FOX, or whoever will continue to pay at the same rate per team just because a conference adds any team it wants. The Big 10 is getting $1B for 16 teams. That's $62,500,000 per team. Do you think UNC or UVA will each bring in over $62,500,000 each in advertising each year to the Big 10? At least they add TV sets. Maybe they can, but it just doesn't seem like it to me.

What gets me is the SEC. Would adding Clemson and FSU really add that many new TV sets to keep payouts per team the same? South Carolina and Florida are already covered there, by the flagship schools in each state no less. There has got to be a point of diminishing returns to the TV networks.

Frankly, as the 2 big boy conferences continue to get bigger and bigger, it is becoming more apparent to me anyway that college football as a whole is ******** this whole thing up. If the Power 5 agreed to negotiate as a block for TV contract rights, they would have gotten even bigger sums for more schools. Rivalries could have been saved and more quality interconference games could have been available. Instead, it looks like we're going to eventually have 2 major conferences who will likely rarely play each other due to the networks not wanting to give up programming to their rivals.
Click to expand...

It's not just in-market TV sets. Actually with cord cutting its laptops, ipads, iphones and androids too, but I know what you mean.

It's content. Content is king. Quality sells. By cherry-picking these top schools they are adding some really good matchups which means better, more desirable tier 1 and 2 national broadcasts, that more people will want to watch. You get FSU vs UGA and Clemson vs. Bama and so on and so on added to the portfolio. You're going to get a lot more eyeballs (and ad revenue) with those matchups than Auburn vs. Kentucky.
 
Cryptical Envelopment said:
It's not just in-market TV sets. Actually with cord cutting its laptops, ipads, iphones and androids too, but I know what you mean.

It's content. Content is king. Quality sells. By cherry-picking these top schools they are adding some really good matchups which means better, more desirable tier 1 and 2 national broadcasts, that more people will want to watch. You get FSU vs UGA and Clemson vs. Bama and so on and so on added to the portfolio. You're going to get a lot more eyeballs (and ad revenue) with those matchups than Auburn vs. Kentucky.
Click to expand...
It’s the 80/20 rule, just college football. And both the sec and big 10 still have room to make more moves to get to where 20% control 80%of $ or some offshoot ratio.
 
Rickd said:
Sounds like a troll comment. Have you actually ever BEEN to a UM football conference game? Especially when the Canes had a winning season going? Or a big OOC game? Check out the Hard Rock crowd supporting UM at the Texas A&M game crowd this season. Will be similar to the UM vs ND game in 2017 that was a sell out and 90% UM fans. Just some clown making deriding comments and definitely is either not a fan or is plain ignorant of reality.
Click to expand...
Hmmm, I hope you're right, but I doubt it. ND was on a 9-0 run to start the season, top 10 match up, and rivalry game. Texas A&M will after 1 game against Miami of Ohio (Canes coming off of a 5-7 season the year before), against another disappointing team from last year, and not a rivalry game.

Hate to be Donny Downer, but find it EXTREMELY hard to think this TAMU game will be anywhere similar to that ND game, but again, I hope you're right.
 
mcnaire2004 said:
[BGCOLOR=initial]This deal only looks bad because of what the B1G and SEC have done. Dollar wise the ACC is doing better than it hoped when it made the deal. They wanted iron-clad solidarity against the breakup up of the league after MD left and they got it. The ACC chose stability over flexibility. This is what they wanted. Maybe a life lesson in there somewhere. [/BGCOLOR]

ESPN has no need to even entertain the idea of a negotiation. They aren't running a charity.
Click to expand...
You do realize that a huge part of why the deal looks so bad is because we removed the possibility of renegotiating for FMV for two decades? The SEC and Big10 have done what they have done because their TV contracts made them desirable landing spots for the top teams in conference reorg. But the ACC fell so far behind because in 2030 (if it still existed) it would still be stuck in 2016’s FMV.
 
Advertisement
Back
Top