|
Replies: 7
| visibility 1
|
CU Guru [1189]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 431
Joined: 9/18/06
|
Are there not 8-10 schools that would immediately benefit
Jul 11, 2022, 5:12 PM
|
|
from taking their media rights to the market? I understand that dissolving the GOR would open up the possibility of the super conferences raiding the ACC, but everyone outside of Wake Forest and maybe BC would benefit from renegotiating their media rights.
Clemson, FSU are in a league of their own in terms of moving the needle from a football perspective, but Miami, GT (and even BC) are in major markets. Louisville and VT are larger brands with decent followings. UNC, Duke, NCST, UVA, Syracuse are in states with top-ten populations.
If the Big XII is set to get a similar payout with their future makeup and much smaller markets and brands, surely the ACC could at least improve upon their current contact, however minimal since the landscape has changed drastically from when the contract was signed.
https://www.heartlandcollegesports.com/2021/09/09/new-look-big-12-revenue-reportedly-just-shy-of-current-revenue/ New-Look Big 12 Revenue Reportedly Just Shy of Current Revenue The story of Oklahoma and Texas’ departure from the Big 12 has had a woeful theme for the remaining eight teams – in the approximate words of Bob Bowlsby, the conference would lose half of its TV value without OU and UT. However, the last two weeks have seen this sad Big 12 swan song […]
The GOR itself is absurd, but it’s equally absurd to think some of the smaller ACC brands would leave money on the table just to prevent others from defecting. And if the ACC is raided and the leftovers can make the same amount of money in a third mega conference, why wouldn’t they? Not to mention it would free up valuable time slots on ESPN. Perhaps I’m missing something.
|
|
|
|
 |
CU Medallion [64519]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 88961
Joined: 3/27/01
|
I don't care who the ACC adds...
Jul 11, 2022, 5:46 PM
|
|
even if its Notre Dame, any new TV deal that results will still pale in comparison to the SEC and Big10.
The answer is to get out, and get out NOW. The sooner the better. If Clemson remains in the ACC, it will die a slow painful death along with a lot of other schools.
Just my .02 cents.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [3621]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 3472
Joined: 12/1/19
|
Re: I don't care who the ACC adds...
Jul 11, 2022, 5:59 PM
|
|
And you Sir .. are spot on!
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [48147]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 14875
Joined: 11/7/20
|
Re: I don't care who the ACC adds...
Jul 11, 2022, 6:12 PM
|
|
While I agree, I just tried posting the breaking news article from Saturday Down South that reports SEC presidents met and said no more expansion.
I tend to agree with that report. Why would B1G and SEC want more teams. They got the money and prestige now. Jmho but the more I think about, the more it makes sense. Each conference poached the big money teams.
I really think we need to break from the ACC and form a new conference with 16 new teams.
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1189]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 431
Joined: 9/18/06
|
Unfortunately, this may be our best option in the immediate
Jul 11, 2022, 7:07 PM
|
|
If the SEC and B1G are done expanding, we lead the charge and cherry pick the 16-20 best brands available and renegotiate. Obviously not ideal, but anything is better than standing pat.
Then again, B1G said they were standing pat one year ago. Maybe things are still possible, but won’t happen in the timeline we fans are wanting.
I still think the SEC counters the B1G’s move. With prep football participation on the decline across the country, I don’t think those conferences can afford to lose top recruits to teams from other conferences for much longer (especially B1G). The B1G also can’t afford to house only one team that is capable of competing with the SEC or Clemson.
I also think the fact that we have not heard any denials from any of the schools mentioned in expansion rumors, that the decision makers are exhausting all options.
With media days coming up, perhaps announcements (good or bad) will come then. And it also makes sense that the SEC has to say they are done for now since any ACC is still bound by the GOR and the notion that a Clemson was on their radar would send everything into a tizzy. Dot your i’s and cross your t’s before leaking anything damning.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Associate AD [833]
TigerPulse: 92%
Posts: 1060
Joined: 11/30/98
|
Re: I don't care who the ACC adds...
Jul 11, 2022, 7:11 PM
[ in reply to I don't care who the ACC adds... ] |
|
Yes we need to get out but from what I understand the only way to dissolve the GOR is of 8 teams decide to leave. So There has to be more money for teams like NCState to play somewhere else to allow teams like Clemson a way out.
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Medallion [64519]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 88961
Joined: 3/27/01
|
I firmly believe...
Jul 11, 2022, 7:18 PM
|
|
the GOR includes a "competitive revenue clause". Right now, 80% of conference revenue is generated by football and, over the last several years, Clemson has accounted for the lions share of that in the ACC, yet their return is peanuts compared to the competition in other leagues. This, in and of itself, is an out for Clemson. The league can't hold Clemson hostage if Clemson can make twice the revenue elsewhere. That's overly punitive and inequitable. A good contract attorney would have a field day with this in court.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commissioner [940]
TigerPulse: 96%
Posts: 1067
Joined: 8/10/01
|
Re: I firmly believe...
Jul 12, 2022, 8:57 AM
|
|
Any chance you've been able to find or have seen the 2016 GOR?
All I have seen is the 2013 GOR and it does not contain the competitive revenue clause.
Might be possible to make the case such a concept is inferred from the recitals but that's a lot tougher argument.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Replies: 7
| visibility 1
|
|
|
50
