TV revenue sharing question

[g8rh8rMD]

The day of the week and time of the game is set by the networks, not by the conference or school. As you wrote, Clemson played on a Thursday and FSU on a Friday, not what those schools wanted either.

No, the time of the game is set by the network. The day is set by the league. The ACC deal with ESPN includes a requirement that the league provide an inventory of Thursday night and Friday night games. We already know that the ACC has assigned us to play on Thursday night this year on September 27 at home vs. North Carolina. That has nothing to do with the networks setting the game time. It also means that we have only 4 days between playing FIU and playing again vs UNC. We also will be playing BC on October 26th this year, a Friday night. That seems like a terrible idea to go to BC on a Friday night in late October, doesn't it? I only have Clemson games on my calendar because that is my wife's team, they don't have any weekday games this year, so it's not like everyone in the league does it every year.

The conference assigns these games. If there is a set of rules or logic that is applied to how the games get assigned, please share it as I haven't seen it. Also, as far as I am aware, the conference's deal with ESPN only requires the conference to supply a certain amount of Thursday and Friday night games, it doesn't require certain teams to be in those games. We should be telling the league that we don't want to be assigned those games. They are bad for our student-athletes, bad for our season ticket holders (of which I am one and ****ed that one of my 6 home games this season is on a weeknight and would require me to either take two days off of work to drive to see it, or to pony up big bucks to fly), but most importantly, these weeknight games on the road are bad for Miami's and the conference's chances of putting teams in major bowls and the playoffs. It's not like I'm the only one making this claim. This article is not specifically about weeknight games, but the same logic applies: Kirk Herbstreit dismissed Chris Petersen over night games. He won’t be able to dismiss Urban Meyer.

That link came up on a quick search, there is plenty more you can find and learn about the topic should you wish to.

Look, no offense to @SpikeUM, please don't take this comment as referring to you personally, but I'm tired of trying to lead horses to water here. I feel like I'm constantly debating with people on here who simply want to take the contrarian, non-homer viewpoint, just to show how magnanimous they are, but aside from that knee-jerk reaction, they have little to no understanding or caring of what we are talking about here.

Is it the end of the world to play the ACCCG in a cold weather city every year, just two hours from Clemson's campus? No. Is it where Miami fans should want to see the game played? Absolutely not, and I don't understand why a segment of our fan base would want to stand up and defend this decision. Is it the end of the world to play on Thursday or Friday night twice a year? No, we've done that and won championships doing it since the Big East days. Does it improve the experience for our players, coaches, or fans? No. It also reduces our chances of winning a title in any given year. Is it the end of the world that ACC officials have been scientifically shown to be biased against Miami and the other most-recently-joined schools? Not really, we've always had to overcome biased officiating. It's certainly not ideal, though, is it? Raise your hand if you're happy about how many holding calls our defensive pass rush benefited from last season. I could go on...

When you put all of these things together, it all absolutely matters. At the end of the day, the University AD and even President and Board, etc, are supposed to be advocates for the University and student-athletes. I'm not saying we should leave the ACC, but we, as a fan base and our AD, etc, should be raising these concerns and fighting to improve our situation and standing within the conference.

Or, we can just continue to rationalize and take it like little *******. Either way.

 

[g8rh8rMD]

Meh, attendance for the conference championship games has more to do with who's playing in the game than where the game is being played. The two times they played the game in Tampa, the match-ups were pathetic.

2008: #18 Boston College vs #25 Virginia Tech
2009: #25 Clemson vs #12 Georgia Tech

Not total garbage but very weak for a "championship" game.

Side note: Last years' game narrowly missed the record for ACCCG attendance.

You're being kind. I mean, this was the era when people were legitimately questioning whether the ACC even deserved to be considered a P5 conference, and rightly so.

BC and GT, even VT really, but to a lesser extent, are all smaller fan bases that don't travel well. GT was ridiculously over-ranked at 12. Nobody wanted to see those games, even their own fans. To call those match ups hot garbage (for a conference championship game) is being generous. And yet we're supposed to compare and accept as justification for permanently placing the game in Charlotte, the attendance for those games against a playoff play-in game between Clemson and Miami, with Clemson as defending national champion and Miami on the doorstep of "back" and having our first ten win season in over a decade? C'mon man.

 

[Mark Little]

Meh, attendance for the conference championship games has more to do with who's playing in the game than where the game is being played. The two times they played the game in Tampa, the match-ups were pathetic.

2008: #18 Boston College vs #25 Virginia Tech
2009: #25 Clemson vs #12 Georgia Tech

Not total garbage but very weak for a "championship" game.

Side note: Last years' game narrowly missed the record for ACCCG attendance.

Are you denying that both games would've drawn more in Charlotte?

 

[Mark Little]

You still have yet to explain what advantage there is to the ACC to lock themselves in to a deal with the city of Charlotte 13 years into the future.

That's because I doubt they locked themselves into anything. They were able to move it in a nanosecond after the discrimination law passed in North Carolina. It's not as if they don't have flexibility if something unforeseen happens.

 

[Mark Little]

No, the time of the game is set by the network. The day is set by the league. The ACC deal with ESPN includes a requirement that the league provide an inventory of Thursday night and Friday night games. We already know that the ACC has assigned us to play on Thursday night this year on September 27 at home vs. North Carolina. That has nothing to do with the networks setting the game time. It also means that we have only 4 days between playing FIU and playing again vs UNC. We also will be playing BC on October 26th this year, a Friday night. That seems like a terrible idea to go to BC on a Friday night in late October, doesn't it? I only have Clemson games on my calendar because that is my wife's team, they don't have any weekday games this year, so it's not like everyone in the league does it every year.

The conference assigns these games. If there is a set of rules or logic that is applied to how the games get assigned, please share it as I haven't seen it. Also, as far as I am aware, the conference's deal with ESPN only requires the conference to supply a certain amount of Thursday and Friday night games, it doesn't require certain teams to be in those games. We should be telling the league that we don't want to be assigned those games. They are bad for our student-athletes, bad for our season ticket holders (of which I am one and ****ed that one of my 6 home games this season is on a weeknight and would require me to either take two days off of work to drive to see it, or to pony up big bucks to fly), but most importantly, these weeknight games on the road are bad for Miami's and the conference's chances of putting teams in major bowls and the playoffs. It's not like I'm the only one making this claim. This article is not specifically about weeknight games, but the same logic applies: Kirk Herbstreit dismissed Chris Petersen over night games. He won’t be able to dismiss Urban Meyer.

That link came up on a quick search, there is plenty more you can find and learn about the topic should you wish to.

Look, no offense to @SpikeUM, please don't take this comment as referring to you personally, but I'm tired of trying to lead horses to water here. I feel like I'm constantly debating with people on here who simply want to take the contrarian, non-homer viewpoint, just to show how magnanimous they are, but aside from that knee-jerk reaction, they have little to no understanding or caring of what we are talking about here.

Is it the end of the world to play the ACCCG in a cold weather city every year, just two hours from Clemson's campus? No. Is it where Miami fans should want to see the game played? Absolutely not, and I don't understand why a segment of our fan base would want to stand up and defend this decision. Is it the end of the world to play on Thursday or Friday night twice a year? No, we've done that and won championships doing it since the Big East days. Does it improve the experience for our players, coaches, or fans? No. It also reduces our chances of winning a title in any given year. Is it the end of the world that ACC officials have been scientifically shown to be biased against Miami and the other most-recently-joined schools? Not really, we've always had to overcome biased officiating. It's certainly not ideal, though, is it? Raise your hand if you're happy about how many holding calls our defensive pass rush benefited from last season. I could go on...

When you put all of these things together, it all absolutely matters. At the end of the day, the University AD and even President and Board, etc, are supposed to be advocates for the University and student-athletes. I'm not saying we should leave the ACC, but we, as a fan base and our AD, etc, should be raising these concerns and fighting to improve our situation and standing within the conference.

Or, we can just continue to rationalize and take it like little *******. Either way.

The ACC gets paid a lot of money to play exclusive Thursday and Friday night games.

Why would anybody complain about that?

You really posted all of that to make a silly point that nobody is going to heed?

 

[DTP]

Are you denying that both games would've drawn more in Charlotte?

No, because you can't prove that either way. But to say those two **** championship games drew smaller crowds ONLY because they were in Tampa and not Charlotte is absolutely ridiculous.

I'd be willing to bet if Clemson and Miami had played the ACCCG in Tampa last season, they would have sold the stadium out.

@g8rh8rMD is 100% correct. The ACC has nothing to gain by giving Charlotte the game every season. If anything, they should open up the bidding for other cities. See if someone else wants to sweeten the pot. It's no secret that these games are big money makers for the local economies.

 

[Mark Little]

No, because you can't prove that either way.

Clemson's game would've definitely drawn more. No question.

Virginia Tech's, most likely too.

The non-Charlotte sites have drawn an average of 12,500 less fans. That's just a fact.

 

[Mark Little]

No, because you can't prove that either way. But to say those two **** championship games drew smaller crowds ONLY because they were in Tampa and not Charlotte is absolutely ridiculous.

Florida State and Virginia Tech in 2010. Neither team in the top 10. Drew 72,379 in Charlotte.

Matt Ryan's Boston College vs. #6 Virginia Tech in 2007. Drew 53,212 in Jacksonville.

Playoff-bound Clemson vs. Virginia Tech in 2016. Drew 50,628 in Orlando.

 

[DTP]

Clemson's game would've definitely drawn more. No question.

Virginia Tech's, most likely too.

The non-Charlotte sites have drawn an average of 12,500 less fans. That's just a fact.

The first two points are assumptions but I agree that they'd probably get a larger Clemson and VT fan turnout at a game that's right around the corner than a game a thousand miles away. I'd bet they'd get a better turnout for an FSU/Miami ACCCG in Orlando or Tampa than they would in Charlotte though.

The third point in bold is a fact but you have to take into account that the games held in Charlotte by and far have been much higher profile match-ups between highly ranked nationally relevant opponents.

 

[g8rh8rMD]

Clemson's game would've definitely drawn more. No question.

Virginia Tech's, most likely too.

The non-Charlotte sites have drawn an average of 12,500 less fans. That's just a fact.

Your entire argument is at least naive if not disingenuous. I can give you a long list of "facts" based on correlation that have nothing to do with causation. Your argument for executing a 13 year contract to lock up the ACCCG in Charlotte is that the contract doesn't really matter and the ACC can get out of it whenever they want. Got it, thanks for clearing that up for me. Sorry for the confusion, but I can be a bit dense sometimes.

Yawn. I'm done with you, bro. You're either not a Miami Hurricane, or you just enjoy arguing against your own interests for some bizarre disordered reason. Either **** off, troll, or seek help. Here's a hug, presuming generously that your issue is the latter...

Go Canes. Maybe we can enjoy a beer together at HRS or in Charlotte later this fall. (if you're really not a gaytor or Clemp's $on tigger)

 

[Mark Little]

Your entire argument is at least naive if not disingenuous. I can give you a long list of "facts" based on correlation that have nothing to do with causation. Your argument for executing a 13 year contract to lock up the ACCCG in Charlotte is that the contract doesn't really matter and the ACC can get out of it whenever they want. Got it, thanks for clearing that up for me. Sorry for the confusion, but I can be a bit dense sometimes.

My post was far less naive and disingenuous than yours.

You've yet to articulate why signing with Charlotte was, indeed, a bad thing.

 

[Mark Little]

Yawn. I'm done with you, bro. You're either not a Miami Hurricane, or you just enjoy arguing against your own interests for some bizarre disordered reason. Either **** off, troll, or seek help. Here's a hug, presuming generously that your issue is the latter...

Go Canes. Maybe we can enjoy a beer together at HRS or in Charlotte later this fall. (if you're really not a gaytor or Clemp's $on tigger)

I love it.

The typical fanboy response.

"You must not be a real Cane fan!"

Why? Because I seem to understand this issue more than you?