Tiger Board Logo

Donor's Den General Leaderboards TNET coins™ POTD Hall of Fame Map FAQ
GIVE AN AWARD
Use your TNET coins™ to grant this post a special award!

W
50
Big Brain
90
Love it!
100
Cheers
100
Helpful
100
Made Me Smile
100
Great Idea!
150
Mind Blown
150
Caring
200
Flammable
200
Hear ye, hear ye
200
Bravo
250
Nom Nom Nom
250
Take My Coins
500
Ooo, Shiny!
700
Treasured Post!
1000

YOUR BALANCE
All you need to know about a potential ACC Network
storage This topic has been archived - replies are not allowed.
Archives - Tiger Boards Archive
add New Topic
Replies: 21
| visibility 1

All you need to know about a potential ACC Network


Jan 14, 2013, 1:00 PM

You either make it happen or your fall off the map. You either make it happen or you continue to fall behind your competition. I don't care if people do not want to watch it or not. You think people are jacked up about Maryland vs. Indiana, Rutgers vs. Purdue, Minnesota vs. Maryland, Northwestern vs. Rutgers and on and on and on (current B1G programming)

It was never about offering up programming that people wanted to see. Sporting events are the only live events people watch anymore. They are worth their weight in gold. People are still going to watch FSU play WF on the ACC network. People are still going to watch CU play Duke. People are still going to watch NC State play Syracuse.

No matter what people say the market is there (the Godaddy bowl between two **** teams produced decent ratings.

Do it and stop falling behind....or don't do it and kiss your conference behind. Either way I am not worried about it because Clemson football is a strong brand and will be wanted by a conference who takes itself seriously.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up


Don't forget


Jan 14, 2013, 1:02 PM

If 2-3 of these ND games are made neutral site games every year, it cuts both NBC and ESPN out of it.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: Don't forget


Jan 14, 2013, 1:04 PM

NBC and ESPN can kick rocks for all I care. Reading that article made me furious. It literally said something to the effect of "your right next to the SEC so we don't think we want to help you out"

If I am Swofford you tell them to shove it up their ### and get started on your channel the next day.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up


If you do it you do NOT tie yourself to the SEC network so


Jan 14, 2013, 1:06 PM

that you will always play second fiddle to them.

I look for someone besides ESPN to sponsor me. What about the new Fox sports network?

We need to put Clemson on primetime just like all those SEC teams get it. JMHO.


Message was edited by: AThomas®


2024 orange level memberbadge-donor-10yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: If you do it you do NOT tie yourself to the SEC network so


Jan 14, 2013, 1:15 PM

Exactly. You have to move away from ESPN and get into talks with the new 24/7 Fox Sports Channel (supposed to get started this upcoming Fall). Right now, ESPN is telling your business that you are not good enough for them. Which may actually be the case for them, but not for everyone else.

Live sports coverage is worth its weight in gold. You have to at least leverage ESPN. Tell them "hey, if you do not want to get on board with the ACC network that is fine. We will explore our other options" News Corp (Owner of Fox and the new channel) would literally kill for a relationship with the new ACC

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up


ESPN owns all ACC content. A Network with someone else


Jan 14, 2013, 1:29 PM

is not even possible right now.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: ESPN owns all ACC content. A Network with someone else


Jan 14, 2013, 1:42 PM

Its very easy. You essentially purchase your rights back from the provider. As the B1G did when they opened up their network. You do not write a check. The money just does not come in.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up


And why would ESPN want to do that? What leverage does


Jan 14, 2013, 2:29 PM

the ACC have to force ESPN to sell content?

"Hey ESPN, we're going to buy back some rights from you so we can start a Network with your competitor" Yeah, that would go over well.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: And why would ESPN want to do that? What leverage does


Jan 14, 2013, 2:34 PM

It doesn't matter what they want to do. The standard was set when they let other conferences do this exact same thing.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up


You might want to review the ACC TV contract.


Jan 14, 2013, 2:38 PM

The ACC is the ONLY conference all in with ESPN. They own the rights to ALL ACC football and most basketball games. Those right include tiers 1, 2, and 3. No other conference has an exclusive contract with ESPN. Not the BIG, not the SEC, not the PAC, and not the Big12.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: You might want to review the ACC TV contract.


Jan 14, 2013, 2:39 PM

Bashful,

Your reading comprehension sucks. It has nothing to do with current tv contracts, and everything to do with the standard that was set when other conferences decided to do the same.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up


Re: You might want to review the ACC TV contract.


Jan 14, 2013, 2:53 PM

Nothing wrong with my reading comprehension. You're just wrong.

What other conferences did is irrelevent because they DID NOT HAVE AN EXCLUSIVE CONTRACT with one supplier.

The only hope the ACC has of working a Network with someone other than ESPN is IF something can be worked out with NBC AND ESPN due to the partial addition of ND.

I'm not going to argue with you any more. Believe what you want to believe. But you are wrong about this one.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: You might want to review the ACC TV contract.


Jan 14, 2013, 2:56 PM

WRONG WRONG WRONG WRONG WRONG WRONG WRONG

B1G was afforded to the opportunity to buy back those third tier rights and some second. They did and then the created the B1G network. You cannot hold the ACC to a different standard. The standard was set. No way it is held up in court if ESPN tries to fight it.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up


Re: You might want to review the ACC TV contract.


Jan 14, 2013, 3:04 PM

Once again you are wrong. Not how it happened.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: You might want to review the ACC TV contract.


Jan 14, 2013, 3:08 PM

Once again. Exactly how it happened. Once again....with the additions of UL, SU, and Pitt contract will be renegotiated. Once again.....I knew you would be back. See ya in a little

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up


Re: You might want to review the ACC TV contract.


Jan 14, 2013, 3:20 PM

This article discusses how the BIG Network came to be. The BIG 10 DID NOT buy back content from ESPN. The BIG 10 tried to re-sign with ESPN in 2004, with three years remaining on the current contract. ESPN low balled and The BIG 10 walked. The BIG 10 Network started in 2007, when the ESPN contract ended.

Read it. You might learn something.

ESPN's 'lowball' offer triggered Big Ten expansion
Failed negotiation also led to Big Ten Network
July 01, 2011|By Teddy Greenstein, Chicago Tribune reporter


The conventional Big Ten expansion timeline begins Dec. 15, 2009, when the conference released a statement calling for a "thorough evaluation of options."

But uncovering the true origin of Nebraska joining the Big Ten — which becomes official Friday — requires a trip in the way-back machine and involves champagne and bruised egos.

The date: April 30, 2004. That's when a posse of ESPN executives, led by Mark Shapiro, John Wildhack, Loren Matthews and Chuck Gerber, met with conference honchos at Big Ten headquarters in Park Ridge.

The Big Ten's long-term deal with the network had three years remaining, but Commissioner Jim Delany wanted to dip his toe in the pool. Turns out the water was ice cold. And shark-infested.

In his early 30s, Shapiro had risen to executive vice president of programming and production after spearheading the "SportsCentury" series and boosting ratings with shows such as "Pardon the Interruption," "Around the Horn," "Dream Job," "Playmakers" and the World Series of Poker.

Shapiro also was a cutthroat negotiator, as chronicled in the book "Those Guys Have All the Fun: Inside the World of ESPN," and his style rankled the likes of NHL Commissioner Gary Bettman and the NBA's David Stern.

An amiable session in which the Big Ten and ESPN cleaned up "housekeeping matters" — schedules and announcers — took a nasty turn at the one-hour mark. That's when talk turned to a contract extension, a negotiating session that went nowhere. Fast.

"The shortest one I ever had," Delany told the Tribune. "He lowballed us and said: 'Take it or leave it. If you don't take our offer, you are rolling the dice.' I said: 'Consider them rolled.' "

Delany had warned ESPN officials that without a significant rights-fee increase, he would try to launch a new channel that would pose competition both for TV viewers and the Big Ten's inventory of games: the Big Ten Network.

"He threw his weight around," Shapiro said in a telephone interview, "and said, 'I'm going to get my big (rights-fee) increase and start my own network.' Had ESPN stepped up and paid BCS-type dollars, I think we could have prevented the network. In retrospect, that might have been the right thing to do. Jim is making a nice penny on that."

Said Delany: "If Mark had presented a fair offer, we would have signed it. And there would not be a Big Ten Network."

The BTN, profitable in its second year, doled out about $7 million to each Big Ten school in 2009-10. Without that chunk of a $22 million per school TV revenue distribution pie, the conference might not have had schools such as Nebraska thirsting for an invitation.

The network's formation also encouraged new thinking from the universities' typically conservative presidents and chancellors. A 12th team would lead to two divisions and a conference championship game in football and another giant payday. Fox purchased the rights to the first six title games for between $20 million and $25 million per season.

Said Delany: "The Big Ten Network was a factor, but I think we still would have expanded. You can take a different tack."

Shapiro, an Iowa and Glenbrook South alumnus, called adding Nebraska a "genius" move: "You're taking one of the most storied institutions in the history of college football and plunking it into one of the best conferences. Iowa-Nebraska will become a rivalry overnight, and Michigan and Ohio State will play every year. It's a dream showcase."

Shapiro left ESPN in October 2005 for a $10 million signing bonus from Redskins owner Dan Snyder to run the Six Flags amusement parks. He's now the CEO of #### Clark Productions and consults for the NFL Network and sits on the board of the Tribune Company.

In 2006, Delany went back to the negotiating table with Wildhack and executives George Bodenheimer and John Skipper. They hammered out a 10-year, $1 billion deal for roughly 40 football and 60 men's basketball games. Another 35 to 36 football games and more than 100 men's basketball games went to the BTN, which launched Aug. 30, 2007.

Feeling emboldened, Delany sent a package to Shapiro that included champagne and a note. Shapiro said the note read: "See, I did it."

"My reaction was: Who does that?" Shapiro said. "It was so juvenile. I sent the note to Bodenheimer and poured the champagne down the drain."

Delany said Shapiro's recollection of the note isn't accurate: "That's not how I would express myself. What I wrote was tongue-in-cheek. I believe it was: 'Enjoy the champagne while enjoying the network.'

"It wasn't juvenile at all. We did toast to Mark, and I was thanking him. If it hadn't been for him, we never would have pushed ourselves to do (the Big Ten Network). It was a continuation of the conversation. He left (ESPN), so I didn't get to tell him that in person."

Said Shapiro: "In every negotiation with Jim, there is a potential for fireworks. He's incapable of ordering a la carte. And in terms of this deal with ESPN and bringing Nebraska in and launching the network, he got the buffet. To his credit, he got it all."

He didn't even have to spring for the champagne.

"It was a pre-existing bottle in a cooler," Delany said. "It was a re-gift."

tgreenstein@tribune.com

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: You are right. You play the cards that you are dealt


Jan 14, 2013, 1:48 PM [ in reply to ESPN owns all ACC content. A Network with someone else ]

and don't worry about the other crap. It is okay to dream but but you survive and try to improve on that as time goes alone. Promises of grandeur aren't worth a penny if the man making those promised does not have the where all to back them. Some people will pay you !0% interest where as the more reliable will only pay a fraction of that because they are strong enough not to have to do it. You better make sure of who you are dealing with. That said, Swofford, in my opinion has the expertise to deal with the right ones. We don't need to get involved with another Hootie radio network.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Because of the current contract, it's ESPN or no one.


Jan 14, 2013, 1:27 PM [ in reply to If you do it you do NOT tie yourself to the SEC network so ]

Unless we want to wait 15 years to start an ACC Network with Fox. And by then I'm not sure the ACC will still be around as we know it today.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: Because of the current contract, it's ESPN or no one.


Jan 14, 2013, 1:43 PM

Wrong.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up


Re: Because of the current contract, it's ESPN or no one.


Jan 14, 2013, 7:52 PM

He is right. We are locked in to ESPN.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

We need a Clemson network...call it CAT...Clemson


Jan 14, 2013, 1:22 PM

Athletics Television...sponsored by none other than TigerNet. We could rotate announcers among the TNet faithful with such colorful commentary like, "That ref's full of sh!t!" or "Look at those morons, jerkwads, DB's, idiots." or "Here comes those c---loving coots with that POS Spurrier on the field...." Halftime commentary could include more TNet faithful...like Bryanttiger arguing with Low Country or DSP dissing GWP. All the while in the background is our defense dancing and rapping to "We too deep!" Works for me! LOL

2024 orange level memberbadge-donor-10yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

I vote for that !***


Jan 14, 2013, 8:10 PM



flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Replies: 21
| visibility 1
Archives - Tiger Boards Archive
add New Topic