forums

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

Hold My Beer said:
Was it viewed as massively lopsided in 2016? The common belief seemed to be "wow, a 20-year-deal. That's some real security."

The media's and public's understanding were less sophisticated 10 years ago. Same goes for the university presidents who took Swofford at his word



It was bad because because the ACC member schools did give up something -- including their freedom to leave the conference without a massive penalty -- to help Swofford make sure Raycom (and thus his son) were taken care of via the deal with ESPN.

In the case, schools aren't relinquishing anything close to as significant. The uniforms, fields and courts have had and likely always will have a Big XII logo (inventory the schools wouldn't have the authority to sell on their own) and for which they were paid nothing. Now they'll have a combined Big XII/Monster logo likely taking up a similar amount of space for which they'll reportedly receive $1.5M annually
Click to expand...

It was viewed as massively lopsided. From Forbes:

www.forbes.com

Did ACC Teams Get Ripped Off With New ESPN TV Contract?

The ACC has signed a new multi-billion dollar TV deal with ESPN, but could it have gotten more? Maybe.
www.forbes.com www.forbes.com

"Whatever the case may be, the ACC is certainly hoping that its new deal is enough. If not, the conference may go the way of the Big East as it helplessly watches its teams go running for the hills."

Johnny Carson Nbc 90Th Special GIF by NBC



I'm sure there were some people who felt the positives outweighed the negative, just like there are people who see the positives in the Big12 deal. There might be more to the Big12 deal, but from the outside looking in, getting the naming rights for an entire conference should be valued at a lot more than a couple million per team (and i think it's actually less than that).
 
Handsome Squidbum said:
It was viewed as massively lopsided. From Forbes:

www.forbes.com

Did ACC Teams Get Ripped Off With New ESPN TV Contract?

The ACC has signed a new multi-billion dollar TV deal with ESPN, but could it have gotten more? Maybe.
www.forbes.com www.forbes.com

"Whatever the case may be, the ACC is certainly hoping that its new deal is enough. If not, the conference may go the way of the Big East as it helplessly watches its teams go running for the hills."

Johnny Carson Nbc 90Th Special GIF by NBC



I'm sure there were some people who felt the positives outweighed the negative, just like there are people who see the positives in the Big12 deal. There might be more to the Big12 deal, but from the outside looking in, getting the naming rights for an entire conference should be valued at a lot more than a couple million per team (and i think it's actually less than that).
Click to expand...
Arkansas is getting 3 times that for stadium naming rights from a regional credit union. A major, nationwide brand getting airtime on all games, not just home games for a third of the price? I just don't see how it isn't viewed as an absolute dumb deal by the Big XII, but we are told we should see the whole contract. 🤷‍♂️
 
Hold My Beer said:
I'm not gonna call it the Monster Big XII. You're not gonna call it the Monster Big XII. Most people that write or talk about College Football ain't gonna call it that.

ESPN and FOX probably won't do so on any kind of regular basis, either... unless Monster and its parent company pay them a ****load of additional money specifically to do so (which is unlikely).

It's like driving behind a vehicle with an FSU or UF bumper sticker; a minor annoyance but in the big picture, it's inconsequential
Click to expand...
they call it hard rock stadium all the time and hard rock doesnt pay them
 
Hold My Beer said:
I'm not gonna call it the Monster Big XII. You're not gonna call it the Monster Big XII. Most people that write or talk about College Football ain't gonna call it that.

ESPN and FOX probably won't do so on any kind of regular basis, either... unless Monster and its parent company pay them a ****load of additional money specifically to do so (which is unlikely).

It's like driving behind a vehicle with an FSU or UF bumper sticker; a minor annoyance but in the big picture, it's inconsequential
Click to expand...
They'll call it the "Monster 12" if they start winning.
 
CaneinBroward said:
Arkansas is getting 3 times that for stadium naming rights from a regional credit union. A major, nationwide brand getting airtime on all games, not just home games for a third of the price? I just don't see how it isn't viewed as an absolute dumb deal by the Big XII, but we are told we should see the whole contract. 🤷‍♂️
Click to expand...

Happy Beer GIF by German Kraft


Monster energy drinks is paying the Big XII to be tied to the conference via the Big XII logo and naming rights at championship events. That includes the logo that member schools display on their playing surfaces and their uniforms. This sponsorship was sold by the Big XII conference and approved by its schools, who essentially don't have to to any extra work to close or execute the deal that pay them $1M or thereabouts that they didn't get last year for using the Big XII logo.

In comparison, that sponsorship in Fayetteville was a partnership between CommunityAmerica Credit Union and the University Arkansas and has nothing to do with the SEC office. That the annual payout is more than three times larger makes perfect sense because the Hogs are in the much more high-profile SEC, the credit union will have naming rights at the stadium and likely its own branding on the uniforms and playing surfaces (as opposed to a co-branded Big XII logo) and no doubt a number of other advertising elements and perks that Monster would be unable to secure in making a deal with the conference office as opposed the individual schools.

Here's an excerpt from Front Office Sports fwiw:

"One industry source, however, called it “objectively a terrible deal,” saying Big 12 schools were worth much more than the $1 million (or potentially less) the schools would be getting from the annual payout. Another said the value of school-specific jersey patch deals made with schools of the caliber of the Big 12 was worth multiple millions of dollars per year.

The jersey patch and field/court logo component isn’t a one-to-one comparison to school-specific deals, however. School-specific jersey patch deals offer brands the opportunity to paste their logo independently on a team’s jersey. The Big 12 deal offers only a co-branded patch that will also include the Big 12 branding. In addition, the compensation for the league goes beyond the $20 million in annual fees, one source told FOS: The deal requires that Monster pay for conversion fees, and Monster has committed to putting “dollar for dollar” toward its domestic and international advertisements touting the conference."
 
Hold My Beer said:
Happy Beer GIF by German Kraft


Monster energy drinks is paying the Big XII to be tied to the conference via the Big XII logo and naming rights at championship events. That includes the logo that member schools display on their playing surfaces and their uniforms. This sponsorship was sold by the Big XII conference and approved by its schools, who essentially don't have to to any extra work to close or execute the deal that pay them $1M or thereabouts that they didn't get last year for using the Big XII logo.

In comparison, that sponsorship in Fayetteville was a partnership between CommunityAmerica Credit Union and the University Arkansas and has nothing to do with the SEC office. That the annual payout is more than three times larger makes perfect sense because the Hogs are in the much more high-profile SEC, the credit union will have naming rights at the stadium and likely its own branding on the uniforms and playing surfaces (as opposed to a co-branded Big XII logo) and no doubt a number of other advertising elements and perks that Monster would be unable to secure in making a deal with the conference office as opposed the individual schools.

Here's an excerpt from Front Office Sports fwiw:

"One industry source, however, called it “objectively a terrible deal,” saying Big 12 schools were worth much more than the $1 million (or potentially less) the schools would be getting from the annual payout. Another said the value of school-specific jersey patch deals made with schools of the caliber of the Big 12 was worth multiple millions of dollars per year.

The jersey patch and field/court logo component isn’t a one-to-one comparison to school-specific deals, however. School-specific jersey patch deals offer brands the opportunity to paste their logo independently on a team’s jersey. The Big 12 deal offers only a co-branded patch that will also include the Big 12 branding. In addition, the compensation for the league goes beyond the $20 million in annual fees, one source told FOS: The deal requires that Monster pay for conversion fees, and Monster has committed to putting “dollar for dollar” toward its domestic and international advertisements touting the conference."
Click to expand...
You are missing the point with all due respect. It has nothing to do with the difficulty of placing their name on the field or on their uniforms. Of course Monster will pay conversion fees....so what? Every sponsor deal has that worked into it. It has to do with the value of the entire brand of the conference.

I know the $EC had nothing to do with the acquisition of the naming rights deal for Arkansas. It's part of my point.....Arkansas negotiated a deal on its own worth 3 times as much as the Big XII deal and it will only get air time during Arkansas home games. They won't wear a Credit Union patch on their unis, so it won't be seen at away games. And how many Arkansas games has anyone seen outside of Arkansas during the past few years anyway? I'm the biggest couch potato during football season going from game to game. I can think of maybe 2 or 3 Arkansas home games that were broadcast in my area last season.

Good for Monster Energy though. They got a **** of a deal.
 
U got This said:
@HighPerformance shut ur ***** *** up. You been starting **** with other posters like jamesquall now you crying like a hoe. I'd take ya wife from you if you closer and knock your jaw loose
Click to expand...
No- no you wouldn’t. She doesn’t like betas- and I will be at plenty of Miami games -as I live in Florida. I hate to break it to you beta “boy” but I’m not buying what you’re trying to sell on here. But I’m sure there are plenty of other people out there who you can impress with your fake tough guy routine.
 
RVACane said:
I don’t ordinarily like to get into this thread and I would prefer the Big 12 personally for athletics which isn’t happening but it’s the research cooperation and funding grants the school will bring in by being in the B1G. Assuming we are on a full share with the new tv deal, when it starts, the money into the school being in the B1G is much greater than the money coming into the school in the SEC because of the research grant funding. This isn’t a pure athletics decision as I know you know as you referenced it.
Click to expand...
I can’t complain too much- being out of the ACC will be good enough.
 
HighPerformance said:
No- no you wouldn’t. She doesn’t like betas- and I will be at plenty of Miami games -as I live in Florida. I hate to break it to you beta “boy” but I’m not buying what you’re trying to sell on here. But I’m sure there are plenty of other people out there who you can impress with your fake tough guy routine.
Click to expand...

Lets agree to disagree buddy. I know what i can do
 
If we’ve learned anything in the acc…. You never let them negotiate a conference wide deal for your school. If we keep rolling in fb and bball how i expect us to, we should be able to sign a “monster” sponsor deal independently. Pun intended.
 
Back
Top