ACC generated record revenue-Paid ND full share in 2021

[Atom Atlas]

Worldwide Pandemic, Record profits.. Imagine that...

 

[TheOriginalCane]

ACC generates record revenue in 2020-21 fiscal year

The conference, which had its schools schedule 11 football games during the COVID-19-impacted 2020 season, did not suffer the same kind of pandemic-induced financial hits that other conferences experienced during that time period.

theathletic.com

The ACC generated more than $578 million in revenue for the 2020-21 fiscal year, a conference record and an increase of more than $80 million from the previous year, federal tax documents show. The conference, which had its schools schedule 11 football games during the COVID-19-impacted 2020 season, did not suffer the same kind of pandemic-induced financial hits that other conferences experienced during that time period, according to the league’s Form 990, which was obtained by The Athletic.

Schools received an average distribution of $36.1 million per institution, according to the conference, which is a 16 percent increase from the previous year.

Notre Dame, which was a full member of the ACC in football in 2020 and shared its home game rights on NBC with the rest of the conference, was paid an equal share of $34,889,808 from the conference. This was an increase from the $10.8 million that the Fighting Irish received in 2019-20, when they were not a full member in football.

24 million reasons for ND to join a conference...

 

[Rellyrell]

I just wanna put this out there:

I pretty much have every single channel whether cable or streaming. I’ve seen games on the Big Ten Network, SEC Network, Longhorn Network, & ACC Network.

The coverage, clarity (meaning TV angles) is night & day different on those aforementioned networks & ACC. ACC, especially the streaming, feels 2nd class.

Our contract is not up until 2036.

Here’s the breakdown of conferences (on avg./yr):
ACC - $17m/team

B1G - $31.4m/team **currently in negotiations; word is they may be getting close to $1b/yr or $70m distribution/team***

B12 - $20m/team **will soon be w/o a TV contract, and no main suitors seem to be interested. Hence, this led OU & UT to jump ship**

PAC12 - $21m/team **new TV contract coming next season**

SEC - $40m/team **new TV contract w/ ESPN is about to flood the SEC w/ $$ come 2024**

UT & ND also have side TV deals making $15m/yr

So here’s the thing, out of all the P5 conferences, we’re getting the least. Also, our deal is running out in 2036!! The market has already changed. These other conferences have negotiated big bank $$ this yr alone. Only the B12 is in dire straights, but just like I didn’t like our Adidas signage b/c of the market change, I didn’t like this ACC contract.

Sign a 10 yr deal, & then renegotiate. The B1G signed a 6 yr deal for $2b+ & now r in a position to sign a bigger contract. Smh. I feel like we’re always catching the shorter end of the stick. The ACC has been a never ending nightmare.

 

[CaneLife93]

I just wanna put this out there:

I pretty much have every single channel whether cable or streaming. I’ve seen games on the Big Ten Network, SEC Network, Longhorn Network, & ACC Network.

The coverage, clarity (meaning TV angles) is night & day different on those aforementioned networks & ACC. ACC, especially the streaming, feels 2nd class.

Our contract is not up until 2036.

Here’s the breakdown of conferences (on avg./yr):
ACC - $17m/team

B1G - $31.4m/team **currently in negotiations; word is they may be getting close to $1b/yr or $70m distribution/team***

B12 - $20m/team **will soon be w/o a TV contract, and no main suitors seem to be interested. Hence, this led OU & UT to jump ship**

PAC12 - $21m/team **new TV contract coming next season**

SEC - $40m/team **new TV contract w/ ESPN is about to flood the SEC w/ $$ come 2024**

UT & ND also have side TV deals making $15m/yr

So here’s the thing, out of all the P5 conferences, we’re getting the least. Also, our deal is running out in 2036!! The market has already changed. These other conferences have negotiated big bank $$ this yr alone. Only the B12 is in dire straights, but just like I didn’t like our Adidas signage b/c of the market change, I didn’t like this ACC contract.

Sign a 10 yr deal, & then renegotiate. The B1G signed a 6 yr deal for $2b+ & now r in a position to sign a bigger contract now. Smh. I feel like we’re always catching the shorter end of the stick. The ACC has been a never ending nightmare.

See, I hear/read this on this board and other places.

I’m thinking, if it’s this obvious that the ACC signed this bad of a deal, how in THEE **** did the folks who work for the ACC sign this ****** of a deal? Does no one have any foresight?

I’m guessing there are very little businessmen who work in their corporate office, and if there are, that *** needs to be fired for negligence because we’re at a severe disadvantage with respect to the other conferences.

 

[Hold My Beer]

I feel like we’re always catching the shorter end of the stick. The ACC has been a never ending nightmare.

The hodge-podge nature of the ACC was always gonna make it vulnerable if/when more prestigious and marketable conferences went down the expansion path.

The schools with options aren't gonna sit around and accept a $40M-plus shortfall every year until 2036 because of John Swofford's 20-year GoR agreement.

The lawyers and accountants will get together and hash out a settlement.

1) Some ACC schools will have options to "align" with the SEC and/or the B1G

2) Some ACC schools won't have option to join the SEC or B1G and will have to make do with other ACC "left-behinds" and call-ups from conferences lower in the pecking order

3) And then there will be those ACC schools falling somewhere in-between for which either of the two aforementioned options is a possibility.

Feel like the Canes are most likely in that third group

 

[Shogungts]

One of those 2 was as a member of the ACC and in the other they had to go undefeated. Being able to play in a 13th game may have helped their cause last year.

They already pretty much have to go undefeated to make the playoff without being in a conference, but with conferences getting rid of divisions to get their 2 best teams playing for the conference championship, it will be even harder for ND. I know the ACC, SEC, and Big 10 have not made the move to no divisions yet, but the writing is on the wall.

Oomph, I completely forgot they were part of the ACC while responding (duh) and yes, I understand one of the reasons for the conferences moving away from divisions is to try to have a better chance of getting 2 of their teams in, but outside of an SEC team (and maybe not all of the time) I still think that ND gets in over the 2nd place team in any conference if it has the same record. ND probably gets in over the PAC12 and BIG12 champions if they have the same record and probably the ACC too unless Clemson returns to form or (hopefully) Miami steps up.

Obviously all of these can be titled one way or the other based on how strong teams look in a given year, but I still don't see the need for them to join. But let's say they do decide they want to join a conference, pretty much any conference will take them, but once they do that there will be no going back to independence which I am sure they are well aware of.

 

[mirvin88]

Bring in ND and make FSU and ND our two set games and then do the open conference

 

[Hold My Beer]

if it’s this obvious that the ACC signed this bad of a deal, how in THEE **** did the folks who work for the ACC sign this ****** of a deal? Does no one have any foresight?

I’m guessing there are very little businessmen who work in their corporate office, and if there are, that *** needs to be fired for negligence because we’re at a severe disadvantage with respect to the other conferences.

1. The sports media right marketplace has changed immensely since Swofford convinced the ACC presidents (and their AD's) he was getting them a heck of a deal.

2. The true "super-conference" concept — 16 to 20 to 24 teams — wasn't really in play six years ago.

3. Along with protecting his family's "connections" with Raycom, Swofford cared most about keeping his league intact for the core members: the four North Carolina schools and UVA (plus Virginia Tech as a tagalong). The traditionally mediocre or lower-profile football programs outside those six (BC, Cuse, GT, Pitt and U of L) were happy to go along.

4) The three schools that should have never agreed to this 20-year pennies on-the-dollar contract (and ultimately are to blame for going along instead of kicking up a fuss) are Miami, FSU and Clemson.

Yet another example of Miami's weak administration with its lack of guts and foresight ******** over the athletic program

 

[Rellyrell]

See, I hear/read this on this board and other places.

I’m thinking, if it’s this obvious that the ACC signed this bad of a deal, how in THEE **** did the folks who work for the ACC sign this ****** of a deal? Does no one have any foresight?

I’m guessing there are very little businessmen who work in their corporate office, and if there are, that *** needs to be fired for negligence because we’re at a severe disadvantage with respect to the other conferences.

It’s a lot of ppl not very good at their jobs, especially at the corporate level; look no further than Emmert & his financial blunders.

 

[Shogungts]

See, I hear/read this on this board and other places.

I’m thinking, if it’s this obvious that the ACC signed this bad of a deal, how in THEE **** did the folks who work for the ACC sign this ****** of a deal? Does no one have any foresight?

I’m guessing there are very little businessmen who work in their corporate office, and if there are, that *** needs to be fired for negligence because we’re at a severe disadvantage with respect to the other conferences.

They did it to try to stop the league from getting poached.

The last go around of conference realignments (not OU and UT joining the SEC) the BIG10 had just stolen Maryland and there was concern that they might come after UNC and other schools. There was also fear that the SEC would try to poach FSU and Clemson (interestingly there was also talks of UT and OU joining the ACC).

In order to try to stop the conference from being picked apart, all of the schools agreed that any school that left the conference would give up their TV rights until the current deal (at the time of switching) ended - in this case 2036. This meant the school would sacrifice their share of the TV contract and the new conference would not be able to televise their games. By putting the end date out so far, it effectively meant that no school would leave as even though a lot of these schools have a lot of money, they dont have the eating ~$20M a year money until 2036 type of money. Obviously that may change as we get closer to 2036 as the forfeited money would be less, the other leagues continue to make more to the point where maybe they can make up for the loss and it is unlikely that the ACC deal will not be renegotiated before then anyway.

There has been debate about whether this deal would be enforceable, but no one knows for sure until someone tries it and goes to court over the rights at which point they will have to live with the outcome of that verdict.

So the initial purpose of the deal was actually a good one that likely held the ACC together at a time of tumult, but it was short sighted in the long run (or even medium run since we aren't even half way through the deal) as although the ACC is still together as it was then, the league overall has fallen behind on TV revenue which is going to get much worse soon.

 

[Hold My Beer]

So the initial purpose of the deal was actually a good one that likely held the ACC together at a time of tumult, but it was short sighted in the long run (or even medium run since we aren't even half way through the deal) as although the ACC is still together as it was then, the league overall has fallen behind on TV revenue which is going to get much worse soon.

The fly in the ointment — which revealed itself over time as the money and costs in football and men's basketball exploded —was that the ACC was made up of pieces that don't fit together.

FSU and Clemson have nothing in common with Boston College, Syracuse and Wake Forest.

North Carolina, Virginia, Georgia Tech and Duke have nothing in common with Louisville.

What similarities do Miami and Pitt share with NC State and Virginia Tech?

And the whole Notre Dame pipedream "let's cut 'em a sweet deal and maybe just maybe they'll join for football" was as desperate as it gets. The B1G or the $EC never would've agreed to such a thing, yet here's the ACC hiking its skirt like a two-bit hooker.

 

[Atom Atlas]

They did it to try to stop the league from getting poached.

The last go around of conference realignments (not OU and UT joining the SEC) the BIG10 had just stolen Maryland and there was concern that they might come after UNC and other schools. There was also fear that the SEC would try to poach FSU and Clemson (interestingly there was also talks of UT and OU joining the ACC).

In order to try to stop the conference from being picked apart, all of the schools agreed that any school that left the conference would give up their TV rights until the current deal (at the time of switching) ended - in this case 2036. This meant the school would sacrifice their share of the TV contract and the new conference would not be able to televise their games. By putting the end date out so far, it effectively meant that no school would leave as even though a lot of these schools have a lot of money, they dont have the eating ~$20M a year money until 2036 type of money. Obviously that may change as we get closer to 2036 as the forfeited money would be less, the other leagues continue to make more to the point where maybe they can make up for the loss and it is unlikely that the ACC deal will not be renegotiated before then anyway.

There has been debate about whether this deal would be enforceable, but no one knows for sure until someone tries it and goes to court over the rights at which point they will have to live with the outcome of that verdict.

So the initial purpose of the deal was actually a good one that likely held the ACC together at a time of tumult, but it was short sighted in the long run (or even medium run since we aren't even half way through the deal) as although the ACC is still together as it was then, the league overall has fallen behind on TV revenue which is going to get much worse soon.

When you say " teams agreed" , do you mean teams within the conference or all teams from all conferences??... Either way I'm kinda surprised anyone would agree to that .... But overall I agree it's a bad deal any way you slice it...

 

[Tad Footeball]

This Notre Dame issue will probably only ever actually be broached for a final time once Playoff expansion takes place. If we get a system with auto bids for conference winners then their hand might finally be forced even if it's my ideal system of 8 teams with 3 at-large bids.

Let the overinflated self-worth of that fanbase feel like they were "screwed" out of a playoff spot one year because the mighty SEC got 2-3 teams in and/or an undefeated G5 team got in and see how quickly they contemplate joining the ACC- a conference those arrogant hypocrites delusionally believe they'd win every year.

 

[Billy D Williams]

The ACC needs to find its nuts and tell ND to **** or get off the pot. Clemson is starting to slip (and Dabo has been complaining like Saban that NIL is ruining their bag monopoly). FSU is a dumpster fire. UM is honestly the only program in the ACC that looks like it is headed in the right direction. ACC would make a lot of money putting ND on UMs permanent opponent list, assuming the acc goes to a divisionless conference. Frankly, most of the country doesn't care about UM vs FSU anymore, but they will always tune in for "Catholics vs Convicts"

I Phucking hate ND almost as much as Baga! Why they get Royal treatment like they something special in sports is simply stupid.

 

[Hold My Beer]

Why Notre Dame get Royal treatment like they something special in sports is simply stupid.

ACC is like the corny dude in the club spending all his money trying to ease up on some chick who really doesn't want anything to do with him.

She gonna smile and drink them free drinks alright.

But then she leave out with someone else and ol' boy going home alone wondering WTF went wrong.

 

[DTP]

It’s all a moot point when the big kids all leave and take their ball with them. College football has been on a collision course with a have/have not split for a while. The money is bigger than ever and the haves are going to have more than ever. Especially with NIL making the gap even wider. College football will become two leagues. One group will be made up of the top 50 or so programs who spend the most and also make the most money. That league will operate as a de facto NFL minor league where players are compensated and the concept of amateurism is finally tossed out. The rest of the teams will form a sort of 1-AA league that’s more in line with traditional college football. Let’s be real, most universities can’t compete with the handful of $$$ teams so it’s probably for the better that they just become separate leagues. No more cupcakes for the big boys and an even playing field for everyone else. Players can transfer to and from leagues just like they do now.

 

[Shogungts]

When you say " teams agreed" , do you mean teams within the conference or all teams from all conferences??... Either way I'm kinda surprised anyone would agree to that .... But overall I agree it's a bad deal any way you slice it...

All of the teams in the ACC agreed. It was essentially a poison pill deal to keep everyone in the conference as everyone was scared of being left out if other teams made a move first.

I don't think it was a bad idea to have all of the teams tie it to the TV contract as it has done what it intended. The issue was the TV deal itself and specifically agreeing to a deal out to 2036 with the terms that they did. If they had better terms like forcing an evaluation every 5 years where they tied it to other leagues or an independent arbitrator set the new payouts, it would have made a lot more sense.

Now the question is will ESPN let the ACC fade further into mediocrity due to less tv revenue or will they decide at some point it is in their best interest to redo the deal so ACC teams can be more competitive and get better ratings...

 

[Rellyrell]

One of those 2 was as a member of the ACC and in the other they had to go undefeated. Being able to play in a 13th game may have helped their cause last year.

They already pretty much have to go undefeated to make the playoff without being in a conference, but with conferences getting rid of divisions to get their 2 best teams playing for the conference championship, it will be even harder for ND. I know the ACC, SEC, and Big 10 have not made the move to no divisions yet, but the writing is on the wall.

I suspect the B1G to forego divisions fairly soon; they didn’t go to divisions until 2011.

The ACC went to divisions once they expanded to include Big East teams.

The PAC-12 didn’t include divisions until 2011 when they expanded.

However, they all followed the SEC Model. The SEC have been using divisions since 1992. I know w/ the expansion to 16 in the next coming yrs, the talks have included to scrap that tradition. The B12 is now considering divisions once they expand to 14 teams before UT & OU leave, & talks r they’ll keep divisions when UT & OU leave.

In the PAC-12 & ACC especially, it makes sense for to scrap divisions b/c frequently we’ll see the best teams play in the same division, but only the division winner move on. How often have we seen The Coastal send up a sacrificial lamb for the Atlantic since 2004? Since SC has been down most of this time since 2011, how often have The South been a sacrificial lamb for The North?

 

[Shogungts]

However, they all followed the SEC Model. The SEC have been using divisions since 1992. I know w/ the expansion to 16 in the next coming yrs, the talks have included to scrap that tradition.

They followed the SEC b/c they had to; a rule was passed at the ncaa level requiring that a team win its division to play in its conference championship game. They just removed that rule which is why all of the conferences are now looking at if it makes sense for them to change to no divisions.

 

[Rellyrell]

They followed the SEC bc they had to; a rule was passed at the ncaa level requiring that a team win its division to play in its conference championship game. They just removed that rule which is why all of the conferences are now looking at if it makes sense for them to change to no divisions.

Oh, I’m well aware. I believe it started in 1987, but it was literally an obscure rule started by two, D-2 schools as a suggestion to the NCAA. The rule stated that conferences that had 12+ teams could split into 2 divisions. This rule was akin to the NFL’s Tuck Rule.

It wasn’t until The Presidents of the SEC got wind of this rule that they started plotting in 1990 to become a super conference to garnish more revenue. They also tried to poach us from the independent circuit during this time. They tried to poach us, FSU, UT, A&M, and other teams from the old SWC. By 1992, they succeeded in granting membership to Arkansas & USCe & voila, the new era of Conference Title Games.

They were playing chess, & they technically grandfathered while bringing this rule to light. Seeing the revenue & success of the SEC, teams years later started expanding by poaching from struggling conferences. (Btw, the SWC or new B12 have always found a way to be in some turmoil & financial bull chit.)

It wasn’t until 2016 that the NCAA eased its restrictions on Conference Championship Games by allowing Conferences w/ less than 12 teams to host a championship game, & now they’ve relaxed that rule further.