forums

MEGA Conference Realignment and lawsuits Megathread(Its still personal)

Shogungts said:
This is a lot, but as far as I can tell you are only taking payouts into consideration, not how much revenue ESPN (or anyone else is making). As a very simple example, you can't just say if the ACC went away tomorrow that ESPN would 'save $560M' ($40M x 14 schools) b/c presumably ESPN is making a net profit on televising ACC games.

Is there a path where ESPN could pay Clemson, Miami, FSU, etc more money and still make additional profits b/c they no longer need to pay schools like Duke $40M a year? Maybe, but w/o knowing their take (or projected take) it is hard to do those calculations. They would also need to be able to get out of paying the schools not going to greener pastures.
Click to expand...
Oh yeah I agree I'm not looking at ESPNs revenue, but unless we try to quantify the "value" that each of these programs actually brings we don't and won't know the profit ESPN is making off each program to do a better analysis.

The point though is whatever that profit is, will still be there if the ACC goes down, because its NOT REALLY ESPN losing valuable programs UNLESS they choose not to get involved in the Big10 at all if they get 4 members, And they also won't be spending more money period. Schools that move to the SEC you could say their Profit would reduce, HOWEVER they'd be in a lot more major games and in new markets, which could increase their profits off those programs... And if they chose to contribute the $40M and follow the ACC schools to the Big10, they'd actually likely profit even more for having bigger games on average.

If the mostly mid level ACC programs move to the Big12, ESPN will more than likely increase their profits on those programs too too, because their expenses are literally getting cut in half, yet are mostly playing the same level of competition except for a handful of games. But it is more national which will have an even broader audience. And obviously the programs they choose not to move into the Big12 - like a Wake or something, they're gaining by just straight up not having to pay at all, or significantly less...
 
Advertisement
Dacrowcane said:
Have I had too much wine? That chart looks like Miami is S tier and above FL St?
Click to expand...
Miami is the ONLY ONE that they have evaluated, along with ND, as warranting a full share from the outset. FSU would get a partial just like Oregon and Washington. Clemson ... partial share permanently. EDIT ... my error in reading the @Genetics tweet ... the chart is NOT the media eval but one guys eval and Gentics is correcting him stating that the media evaluation has FSU Clemson above Miami.
 
Last edited:
JgDaCane said:
yep
Click to expand...
NO WAY ... do you understand that chart? The B10 has evaluated Miami and ND as schools that would get a full share upon joining while FSU would get a partial share for several years then have a chance to move up to full share. EDIT ... the chart was prepared by ONE GUY ... and is NOT the actual media evaluation. @Genetics corrected the guy in his comments above the chart .. he said the media eval actually had FSU / Clemson ABOVE Miami.
 
Last edited:
Rickd said:
Miami is the ONLY ONE that they have evaluated, along with ND, as warranting a full share from the outset. FSU would get a partial just like Oregon and Washington. Clemson ... partial share permanently.
Click to expand...

Interesting …

Source(s)? Had not seen these official evaluations before
 
Advertisement
RVACane said:
Nice work, Cali!

When they said Cali only understands defending hilltops and west coast football, I told them no no no… you don’t know Cali. Cali understands exotic mushrooms, sprouts & shoots, tasty waves, cool buzz and Conference Mathz.
Click to expand...
Raiders left. A's are leaving. Cal and Stanford may be ****ed... hasn't been a great time for Bay area sports except for the Warrior or if you're a ****** 49ers fan...
 
RVACane said:
Is there a risk of breach of contract simply by announcing that??? Anyone???
Click to expand...
Doubt it. Free speech. Only thing would be formality of exit fee aspect of leaving acc and when, in theory, that payment would be triggered- if it comes to pass. Different than grant of rights
 
Rickd said:
It is NOT UNSETTLING REGARDING THE ASSESSMENT OF UM. If you read the index the S classification is for schools evaluated at a FULL MEDIA SHARE FOR THE B10. THAT IS MIAMI.

FSU is a take at a partial share, same as Oregon / Washington then a chance to move up to full share.

B - Partial Share permanently (Clemson, Stanford, Cal, UNC)
C = unlikely (UVA, Va Tech, Ga Tech

So ... it looks like Clemson / FSU better head to the SEC and Miami bails to the B10 with ND.
Click to expand...
There’s no way that’s accurate for fsu or Clemson for big10. Just saying. They would be full share wherever
 
Tony4Miami said:
Click to expand...

I think he's correcting the person who had us ahead of FSU/Clemson here (from Fox/NBC/CBS perspective)...Not agreeing with that list saying FSU wouldn't get full share...

That's really not all that surprising though - in the last decade they have been far more successful than us and had better ratings. Will that continue into the future, if we get back to being a quality program? who knows. I think we can easily surpass them. And even if we are below FSU/Clemson to Fox right now, doesn't change that we would still absolutely have a spot in the Big10 - and get a full rev share.

And as much as the hype right now is on FSU going Big10 and same with Clemson.... I still can't see the SEC just kicking back and ONLY targeting UNC and UVA. I just don't see that as being the likely ending. I think it's still more likely than not that Clemson ends up in the SEC. I also think FSU probably want to be SEC, with really academics being the only thing seriously working in Big10s favor for FSU (over the SEC that is).

Regardless I see Notre Dame, Miami, FSU, Clemson, and UNC being full revenue shares in EITHER Big10 or SEC.
 
Advertisement
calinative umstudent said:
Oh yeah I agree I'm not looking at ESPNs revenue, but unless we try to quantify the "value" that each of these programs actually brings we don't and won't know the profit ESPN is making off each program to do a better analysis.

The point though is whatever that profit is, will still be there if the ACC goes down, because its NOT REALLY ESPN losing valuable programs UNLESS they choose not to get involved in the Big10 at all if they get 4 members, And they also won't be spending more money period. Schools that move to the SEC you could say their Profit would reduce, HOWEVER they'd be in a lot more major games and in new markets, which could increase their profits off those programs... And if they chose to contribute the $40M and follow the ACC schools to the Big10, they'd actually likely profit even more for having bigger games on average.

If the mostly mid level ACC programs move to the Big12, ESPN will more than likely increase their profits on those programs too too, because their expenses are literally getting cut in half, yet are mostly playing the same level of competition except for a handful of games. But it is more national which will have an even broader audience. And obviously the programs they choose not to move into the Big12 - like a Wake or something, they're gaining by just straight up not having to pay at all, or significantly less...
Click to expand...
I am not sure that bolded part is true as Fox owns the Big10 rights; they can and are sub-licensing, but I am sure they are charging enough to make a profit themselves. As for making more money with marque match ups, at some point the market becomes saturated and when you reach saturation the money becomes incremental. Even with adding Oregon and Washington (I realize you can make the case that FSU/Miami/Clemson are higher brands), supposedly the additional TV money given to the Big10 was only enough to cover the reduced revenue share for those teams and some money to cover travel.

I am not saying that ESPN can't and won't find a way to make money if the ACC was to go away, but I am skeptical that they would want to assist it in going away given the cushy agreement they currently have. But all of us are just guessing w/o knowing how much the networks are making.
 
@Baba Yaga how was PanterA?

1691277536766.png
 
Advertisement
I haven't seen much talk about VT either, at one time I would have considered them a "get" for another conference, are they being overlooked?
I've heard for years that it's a really tough place to recruit to due to location and having gone there is also kinda a ***** to travel to.
 
Shogungts said:
I am not sure that bolded part is true as Fox owns the Big10 rights; they can and are sub-licensing, but I am sure they are charging enough to make a profit themselves. As for making more money with marque match ups, at some point the market becomes saturated and when you reach saturation the money becomes incremental. Even with adding Oregon and Washington (I realize you can make the case that FSU/Miami/Clemson are higher brands), supposedly the additional TV money given to the Big10 was only enough to cover the reduced revenue share for those teams and some money to cover travel.

I am not saying that ESPN can't and won't find a way to make money if the ACC was to go away, but I am skeptical that they would want to assist it in going away given the cushy agreement they currently have. But all of us are just guessing w/o knowing how much the networks are making.
Click to expand...
I think we all have to probably accept that the GOR is most likely to have a settlement as our way out. That settlement for ACC to Big10 schools will likely have ESPN retaining some rights - essentially entering into the Big10 media deal, at the same cost they are currently paying, but getting better games out of the deal. Like ESPN has the rights to what like 6 home games for us. Well WHAT IF they just get to choose ANY 6 Big10 conference games we're in. That would be their benefit for allowing us out. Would that be better for ESPN? 6 home games for Miami in ACC OR ANY 6 Big 10 Miami conference games...or **** just our 6 Big10 conference games (and OOC)...

Also this isn't like ESPN is getting to choose between an ACC for the next 13 years or killing the ACC next year. ESPN won't be able to keep the ACC alive for 13 years period. That much is a foregone conclusion. The Top ACC schools want out yesterday. This is a situation ESPN has to make it work out best for them. And trying to keep 4 ACC schools hostage from moving to the BIG10 isn't likely to work well or long. And I'm pointing out it's not like it's all negatives for the ACC to die from ESPNs perspective anyways. Financially everything would be better for ESPN with the exception of how the ACC to Big10 programs are handled. I think its possible for US, ESPN, and the BIG10 to all walk away from that for the better....
 
Advertisement
Shogungts said:
Assuming it is the tweet with the chart in it that he is referring to, that is b/c it is not official evaluations. That is what someone posted (I assume) as a guess. The Genetics guy is replying to him and correcting him.
Click to expand...
Correct ... I just scanned it initially and read it as @Genetics56 passing on the CONFERENCE EVAL ... but it was an individuals and he corrected them stating that the Media eval had Clemson / FSU ahead of Miami.
 
Ispyin said:
Doubt it. Free speech. Only thing would be formality of exit fee aspect of leaving acc and when, in theory, that payment would be triggered- if it comes to pass. Different than grant of rights
Click to expand...
But if they’re announcing that they are breaking a contract, I wonder what legal impact that has??? It’s not simply a free speech opinion. There’s a contract. One party says they aren’t honoring it. That party needs to be sure about their stance as does the other. It gets into anticipatory breach and all kinds of contract law stuff potentially.
 
Advertisement
Back
Top