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
Front Page Story: TigerNet Face-off: Should Clemson jump to the Big 12?
storage This topic has been archived - replies are not allowed.
Archives - Tiger Boards Archive
add New Topic
Replies: 54
| visibility 1

Front Page Story: TigerNet Face-off: Should Clemson jump to the Big 12?


May 11, 2012, 3:20 PM

 
TigerNet Face-off: Should Clemson jump to the Big 12?

TigerNet takes a look at both sides of the argument on whether Clemson should jump to the Big 12. Full Story »


flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: Front Page Story: TigerNet Face-off: Should Clemson jump to the Big 12?


May 11, 2012, 3:34 PM

You missed the 'Pro' for making the move of: you'd never have to publish that much anticipated Swofford-killing story

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: Front Page Story: TigerNet Face-off: Should Clemson jump to the Big 12?


May 11, 2012, 3:37 PM

HAHAHA....Nikki and I wondered how long it would take to get a Swoffie comment. Priceless

badge-seniorwriter.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up


Re: Front Page Story: TigerNet Face-off: Should Clemson jump to the Big 12?


May 11, 2012, 3:38 PM

:) Anything I can do to help out! Enjoy the weekend

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

A fellow Simpsonvillian.***


May 11, 2012, 4:03 PM [ in reply to Re: Front Page Story: TigerNet Face-off: Should Clemson jump to the Big 12? ]



2024 purple level memberbadge-donor-15yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

'I Cannot Sanction Your Buffoonery'


Re: Front Page Story: TigerNet Face-off: Should Clemson jump to the Big 12?


May 11, 2012, 3:39 PM

stay in ACC imo.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Good job writing this piece. I enjoyed both sides of it.***


May 11, 2012, 3:53 PM



2024 orange level memberbadge-donor-10yr.jpgringofhonor-clemsontiger1988-110.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Very good job on both sides, but geography makes me stay.


May 11, 2012, 9:33 PM

If we win everything will be okay in ACC.

badge-donor-05yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: Very good job on both sides, but geography makes me stay.


May 14, 2012, 9:44 AM

Here's my problem with all of the re-alignment. Regional/Geographic conferences are becoming a thing of the past. Atleast for all conference but the SEC (even Missouri touches another SEC state).

In the ACC we now have BC, Pitt, and Syracuse. Additionally, any additional expansion is likely to include additional Big East schools.

Texas and Oklahoma aren't right down the road but at least culturally I'd like to think we have more in common with the populations of Texas, Oklahoma, and Kansas than the populations of New York and Mass.

Just my 2 cents

2024 white level memberbadge-donor-05yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: Front Page Story: TigerNet Face-off: Should Clemson jump to the Big 12?


May 11, 2012, 3:55 PM

Its time to go.

To hell with the ACC.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: Front Page Story: TigerNet Face-off: Should Clemson jump to the Big 12?


May 11, 2012, 3:57 PM

I hope that both of you know how stupid your talk sounded.When the world changes, you change with it. Or you will be insignificant and behind the times. The only thing that I see you done was create an argument fans on either side. Well guess what, we already have that. But let me add this. After the FB schools defect from the ACC except Clemson. You can bring in a Bull Dozer and level DV. Because it would be much to big to accommodate a watered down conference FB game. You have to lower not raise the ticket prices to get 30k fans to watch WAC like teams to play. And when FB is dead at Clemson, where in the H&LL are you going to get the money that helps support the other sports at Clemson. You either change with the changing. Or you will Die with the dying.

2024 orange level memberbadge-donor-15yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up


Gibbin em da bidnes. Fifteen yds.***


May 11, 2012, 4:01 PM



2024 orange level memberbadge-donor-10yr.jpgringofhonor-clemsontiger1988-110.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

people seem to miss the fact that added revenue


May 11, 2012, 4:02 PM [ in reply to Re: Front Page Story: TigerNet Face-off: Should Clemson jump to the Big 12? ]

enhances all sports and the athletic budget as a whole.... it also makes the travel easier...

You're not traveling with what you make now... you have much more revenue.

WVU estimated only $1 million per year more in travel for ALL SPORTS to join the Big XII.

An eastern division including WVU, Clemson, FSU, Miami, and Louisville would make it even easier.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

"I've been working since I was 15 continually until now. I worked 40 hours a week at 15, when it wasn't even legal for 15 year olds to work that many hours."


Re: Front Page Story: TigerNet Face-off: Should Clemson jump to the Big 12?


May 11, 2012, 6:56 PM [ in reply to Re: Front Page Story: TigerNet Face-off: Should Clemson jump to the Big 12? ]

I predicted that on the money, didn't I :)

2024 orange level memberbadge-donor-15yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up


Re: Front Page Story: TigerNet Face-off: Should Clemson jump to the Big 12?


May 12, 2012, 1:21 PM [ in reply to Re: Front Page Story: TigerNet Face-off: Should Clemson jump to the Big 12? ]

geez dude chill. It was a good quality article and david deserves props for setting it up.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: Front Page Story: TigerNet Face-off: Should Clemson jump to the Big 12?


May 12, 2012, 11:09 PM

David deserves nothing for creating that BS!!!

2024 orange level memberbadge-donor-15yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up


Sounded like the second half was just emotional conjecture***


May 11, 2012, 4:26 PM



flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

The Real Motive of Clemson/FSU: TOP SECRET


May 11, 2012, 5:08 PM

I have been sitting on this for too long. It is time to begin letting fellow Tiger followers the truth. So here it is. Clemson and FSU want in the SEC. It is where they belong as football passionate schools being located where they are. But the problem is of course two folded. 1. The SEC wants to expand its footprint. 2. Both schools' instate rivals want no part of CU/FSU getting in. Problem #1 is the main obstacle without question. The athletic department at FSU has devised a plan to pressure the SEC into an invite for CU/FSU. What is it? A possible CU/FSU entry into the Big 12 would potentially impact the SEC greatly. The SEC doesn't want the Big 12 or anyone else of stature gainging a foothold in their backyard. TV ratings could be swung tremendously. Right now the lack of marquee matchups in the ACC's conference schedule allow the SEC to DOMINATE primetime TV ratings. Imagine how that could change if Clemson were playing Texas opposite of the SEC matchup instead of Clemson playing at Noon versus Wake, BC, etc. And FSU facing off against Oklahoma in primetime as well? The bigtime matchups would threaten the SEC's dominance in TV ownership within its own current geographic footprint. Now the SEC would still get its viewers of course, but the idea is are they willing to risk losing a good chunk of their audience to an expanded Big 12? In addition with WVU, Clemson, and FSU powerhouses like Texas and OU will gain immediate benefits with recruiting right in the SEC's backyard. Yeah the Bama's will get theirs, but what about the middlings of the SEC? You think those guys want the Horns and Sooners playing games in their backyard on National TV at Doak and Death Valley? Whether this gambit will work or not remains to be seen. But make no mistake, the true motive to the Big 12 talks is to get to the SEC. Stay tuned.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

So do you have real insider info or this is a speculative


May 11, 2012, 5:37 PM

post? Thanks.

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

Perfectly logical speculation and entertaining too.***


May 11, 2012, 5:42 PM



2024 orange level memberbadge-donor-10yr.jpgringofhonor-clemsontiger1988-110.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: Perfectly logical speculation and entertaining too.***


May 11, 2012, 7:11 PM

Entertaining yes, logical not-so-much.

The SEC doesn't care if the Big 12 gets a member or two in the southeast. The poster seems to think the SEC will lose TV sets if there is an FSU / Oklahoma game on at the same time. Everything I have read about the future of conference expansion is that conferences want to go where they are not so they can get the monthly fees from the cable companies for their conference networks. Once the SEC creates a network, it knows it will get the same subscribers whether or not the Big 12 is in the area or not. Therefore, the SEC has much more to gain by adding teams in states where they are not than by trying to protect areas they are already in.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: The Real Motive of Clemson/FSU: TOP SECRET


May 11, 2012, 5:48 PM [ in reply to The Real Motive of Clemson/FSU: TOP SECRET ]

Do you have sources to back up your claim? Not saying this couldn't happen but we have been hearing rumor of all types covering this. My opinion, is yes if Clemson and FSU joined the Big 12 then it will open up the doors to recruiting in the SEC territory. The fact is that both Texas and OU is doing this now and regardless if they do they still have to compete with other top schools in the area. Truthfully, OU and Texas doesn't need to recruit the southeast to survive and that shows with their history. As long as the Big 10, PaC 12, and Big 12 all have contracts with ESPN, the SEC will never truely dominate the primetime tv ratings. I doubt ESPN will ever have a SEC game on all of their channels during the primetime slots when their are big time matchups from other conferences going on (ex. Southern Cal vs. Oregon, etc.). Would the SEC panic if Clemson and FSU joined the Big 12? They might or might not. Could the Big 12 then compete with the SEC if they got CU/FSU? Its possible but the SEC is built pretty strong with the exception of 2 or 3 teams. Remember, FSU can lobby and pull whatever stunt to get into the SEC, but its up to the memebers of the conference to vote them in.

military_donation.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: The Real Motive of Clemson/FSU: TOP SECRET


May 11, 2012, 6:41 PM [ in reply to The Real Motive of Clemson/FSU: TOP SECRET ]

I feel the exact same. If the SEC won't let us in, we help the BIG X12 built a twin.

2024 orange level memberbadge-donor-15yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up


you're all over it big o. the...


May 11, 2012, 9:30 PM [ in reply to The Real Motive of Clemson/FSU: TOP SECRET ]

Thought had occurred to me as well. The argument against us due to multiple schools from one state is put down easily with bama/aub. People put that game on their schedules. Imagine cu/coots for eastern title. I think the sec would love to have that tv money not to mention the real rivalry of cu/uga. How about fl? We yank kids out of their backyard like we have an assembly line in place. Tv, are you kidding? The addition of us and fsu means huge dollars. Not to mention the easy bowl affiliations. It is a no-brainer. Scu and fl just need to see the money for what it could be and get on board.

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

Let us not be deceived by phrases about ‘Man taking charge of his own destiny.’ All that can really happen is that some men will take charge of the destiny of others. . . . The more completely we are planned the more powerful they will be. - C.S. Lewis


oh and as far as bb...


May 11, 2012, 9:33 PM

The sec knows that adding us and fsu only helps to get the sec bb rep where it should be. All but ky, of course!

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

Let us not be deceived by phrases about ‘Man taking charge of his own destiny.’ All that can really happen is that some men will take charge of the destiny of others. . . . The more completely we are planned the more powerful they will be. - C.S. Lewis


the flipside of your speculation could be that...


May 12, 2012, 10:57 AM [ in reply to The Real Motive of Clemson/FSU: TOP SECRET ]

... the SEC wants to see FSU & Clemson jump to the Big 12 to cause uncertainity for the rest of the ACC football schools, which brings NCSU and VPI into play. I competely agree w/ you accessment that footprint/markets is the driver and not as much UF or SC's objections.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Another bad article written by Mr Hood


May 11, 2012, 5:11 PM

Grant of Rights stabilized the Big 12 and you can Now fly Southwest to airports in Big 12 country. For the same cost of flying to Logan,Or BWI. If southwest doesn't work...Air tran also provides cheap air fare.

Research first then write

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: Another bad article written by Mr Hood


May 11, 2012, 5:22 PM

You gotta be kidding me. You seriously want to deal with flying that far for road games on a regular basis? Be serious now

badge-donor-05yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up


Re: Another bad article written by Mr Hood


May 11, 2012, 6:53 PM

You be serious! Do you want to sit in a half empty DV watching BB conference FB teems playing BB conference Clemson. The only coaches we could get would be 4/8 type like Tommy West coached teems... The No people should really know what they are saying No to. People, the world we live in now is all about how much money you have. If you are broke, the big boys will starve you. You sure as H&ll ain't going to get nothing they want. Left overs only!!!

2024 orange level memberbadge-donor-15yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up


Re: Another bad article written by Mr Hood


May 11, 2012, 10:46 PM [ in reply to Another bad article written by Mr Hood ]

Are you kidding me? We play 4-5 conference away games a year.
Ever flown to Dallas? It's one of the easiest 2 hr flights you'll ever take. Texas,Okla, etc are quicker to get to via plane than Duke, Wake, and even FSU are to drive to. Big freaking deal.

badge-donor-05yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Any Clemson fan who is in favor of the Big 12


May 11, 2012, 5:21 PM

Is OUT OF THEIR MIND! Are you guys crazy? This guy is right: the thing that makes Clemson so successful and unique to recruits is the fan support! You leave the region, you lose the fan support! Duh! Who can possibly afford to make it out west for 4 road games a year? Definitely not the students. We bring an intimidating presence on the road because our fans can easily travel to Atlanta, Florida, NC, VA/MD

badge-donor-05yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up


Only problem is...


May 11, 2012, 5:38 PM

many people can't afford to even go to the home games.






#21

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: Any Clemson fan who is in favor of the Big 12


May 11, 2012, 6:54 PM [ in reply to Any Clemson fan who is in favor of the Big 12 ]

Record your self and play it back. You will see how STUPID it sounds.

2024 orange level memberbadge-donor-15yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up


Re: Any Clemson fan who is in favor of the Big 12


May 12, 2012, 6:18 AM

I've had the same stance all along! I don't think its stupid at all. Listen to all of you approving of this move just because of money. Its preposterous! Conferences have their ups and downs. The ACC isn't what it once was, but it will surely rebound at some point. IF we change conferences, it will be to the SEC. If that's not the case, IT SHOULDN'T HAPPEN! Do you really want us to have to go play teams like Iowa State, Kansas, Baylor, and Texas Tech? I think not. Yeah, flying may be easy. But its expensive, and not the ideal way to travel to a game as a fan. You lose all the fun of the "road trip" mentality and can't even bring much stuff to tailgate or anything like that.

You want to try flying into Austin and attempting to catch a cab back to the airport AFTER a game there? good luck with that. I WILL NOT have my school make a ##### of itself by changing conferences for money

badge-donor-05yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up


Re: Any Clemson fan who is in favor of the Big 12


May 12, 2012, 11:14 PM

It sounds like its all about what is good or bad for you. And not what would be good for Clemson her self. Clemson is one of the finest Institutions in the country. And she deserves much better than what the acc offers. Which isn't much!!!

2024 orange level memberbadge-donor-15yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up


Come on dood


May 12, 2012, 12:05 AM [ in reply to Any Clemson fan who is in favor of the Big 12 ]

"Intimidating presence on the road"? Really? Want us to intimidate on the road? We have to stop "pulling a Clemson" and win on the road consistently.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

We were all getting along just fine before this article.


May 11, 2012, 5:43 PM

Now look what you've done! Bwahahahahaha

2024 orange level memberbadge-donor-10yr.jpgringofhonor-clemsontiger1988-110.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

good read...


May 11, 2012, 6:06 PM

Swofford still sucks

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

She nailed Hood on her last point. Players and recruits


May 11, 2012, 7:17 PM

want their family and Friends to be able to see them play. Most won't be able to in the faraway Big 12 !!

badge-donor-10yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up


Re: She nailed Hood on her last point. Players and recruits


May 11, 2012, 10:26 PM

You wouldn't want to pay 15 bucks for a ticket against what we will playing against. But in a couple of years after the dust settles ( the dust that we will be left in) we will be just like all the scrubs that are left in the acc. OOC games, we certainly won't want to part of the A$$ kicking usuc will be putting on us yearly. I can't Believe folks can't see how insignificant Clemson will be in FB. And after its all said and done, it will be way to late to say I WISH we would have left when we had the chance. But the ones that are saying don't go any where. They are probably the one that don't give Rats A$$ about FB anyway.

2024 orange level memberbadge-donor-15yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up


Re: She nailed Hood on her last point. Players and recruits


May 11, 2012, 10:49 PM [ in reply to She nailed Hood on her last point. Players and recruits ]

Ummmm. Players families don't generally go to away games unless they are in a city that the kid is from. So Bellamys family in south fla may get to see us play in 1 game during their career if Miami is in our rotation that 4 yr period. When recruits mention proximity they are speaking of home games. That's why it's tough to get kids from Texas to Clemson.

badge-donor-05yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

David....


May 11, 2012, 7:48 PM

Any update on a possible interview with ole Johny boy?

2024 white level member flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: Front Page Story: TigerNet Face-off: Should Clemson jump to the Big 12?


May 11, 2012, 9:15 PM

USCe will make about 10 million (or more) than us, if we stay in the ACC. Thats more than half what we make at 17. The SEC has yet to launch its own network, and it will likely add two teams, possibly ACC teams not named Clemson, to get to 16. The possibility of a weakened ACC with us still in it, is very real. What will the payout be then?

That's a huge advantage to give to your rival every day, it has already started telling. The new playoff system could also give USC/eveyone not ACC/Big East more money if making it the playoff is split among conference who get in.

Point being even if the best happens for the ACC, ie no members leave, we'll still be at a significant disadvantage, and there's every reason to believe it will widen. This isn't about preferences, going to away games etc., its about basic competitiveness(facility upgrades, paying coaches so they won't take higher pay jobs)>>This is already happening. We lose coaches to Alabama now, but how would you like to start losing coaches to Ole Miss, Arkansas, or West Virginia(Big 12)because they can outspend us?

Would I like to be in the SEC? Yes. Would I like to play UGA every year? Yes. But being invited now is very remote, as the Mizzou. and Texas A&M adds show the SEC's priorities, and USCe and others will continue to veto instate rivals.

So how do we keep from falling behind USCe in a huge way? There are only 3 conferences that can keep up with the SEC. One of them is apparently looking to add new members, the Big 12. The deal they just signed is worth 20 million, but it is now only a 10 team conference that doesn't play a championship game. Nor does it include 3rd Tier rights; the ACC deal does, 17 mil is what we get.

Add a Championship game, two or more schools like Clemson and possibly FSU, plus Tier 3 TV rights... you're looking at upper 20s. Plus money from the playoff we'd get much more frequently than in the ACC. That would make us financially competitive with USCe.

Once these conferences fill out to 14 to 16 teams we will have no options, and will be bound to the fate of the ACC. They are looking for quality teams, not mid-majors. The BigTen, SEC, Big12 schools aren't leaving their leagues, that means ACC/BigEAst teams are targets. The ACC will lose quality teams whether we go or not.

Staying in the ACC ensures we take home much less than USCe. The New playoff system and/or ACC defections would be catastrophic, and we will be the poor kid in the state for decades to come.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

OK, several point on this posting


May 11, 2012, 10:29 PM

Nikki's arguments were more persuasive because most of them were based on facts.

Hood's points were based on "what-ifs" and conjecture.

When does football season start so we can quit talking about this crap.

badge-donor-05yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

null


Re: OK, several point on this posting


May 12, 2012, 8:36 AM

Agree! Anyway, the men and women that set in those huge over size chairs, with those over sized mahogany desk. They will be the ones making all the decisions in wether we swim or drown....


Message was edited by: allorangeallthetime52®


2024 orange level memberbadge-donor-15yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up


Tigernet Face-off Coming Monday:


May 12, 2012, 9:31 AM

Should we drop USC and pick up Tulsa as our ooc rival?

2024 orange level memberbadge-donor-15yr.jpgringofhonor-jospehg.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up


Re: Front Page Story: TigerNet Face-off: Should Clemson jump to the Big 12?


May 12, 2012, 10:47 AM

I'm not opposed to Clemson moving to another conference, but the Big 12 is owned by the University of Texas. That's the big reason why all the good schools left the conference. Swofford is an abominable leader and has never been any help to schools outside of NC, but you'd better look closely before you jump.

badge-donor-15yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

CUTBA-MD


A Texas friend of mine emailed me his opinion....


May 12, 2012, 11:50 AM

Since it seems that there are tons of internet / message board
rumors going on about realignment, I figured that I would start a thread
where we could all post everything together instead of having a lot of
threads about the same topic. There are huge threads on
FSU/Clemson/Texas sites across all the competitors (Rivals/Scout/247),
to go along with everyone and their brother that has a blog with those
associated schools.

I hope everyone joins in bringing info to this, as this should keep us
busy during the offseason. It feels really good to be on the other side
of the fence this year, as compared to last year. Since I'm starting
this I guess I should be the first one to put some info into it. I got
this from a Baylor fan on one of the other sites, there is a ton of info
(if all true) but I think we all know that everything needs to be taken
with a grain of salt. Anyways enjoy/discuss:

There are a lot of moving pieces to conference realignment, and even the
most knowledgeable posters don't know all of them. I've been lucky
enough to have had a number of clients that are directly or indirectly
involved with conference realignment on the side of Texas, Oklahoma,
ESPN, and others, share a little insight. I'm by no means an expert, but
I have a pretty strong understanding of some of the dynamics that you
won't see in print.

First, at this point, everything is a guessing game as to whether the
ACC is or isn't raidable. It's going to come down to their final TV
payout.

Tier 3 Programming & Payouts

Where the ACC is severely limited is that their ESPN contract is for
Tier 1, 2, and 3 programming, which leaves no sports programming for
teams like FSU, Clemson, and VA Tech to sell to regional and national
carriers. Shared Tier 3 payouts isn't a bad thing if you're getting a
strong payout on Tier 1 & 2. But, when you're a team like FSU or
Clemson, which has a strong following, your "value" is being used to
subsidize teams with lesser value. So, your take home is much lower than
if you controlled your own Tier 3 rights.

Unfortunately when it comes to Tier 3 payouts, most don't understand
exactly what Tier 3 refers to, how the contracts differ from school to
school (and conference to conference), or the various levels even w/in
Tier 3 contracts. The numbers most like to throw around aren't even Tier
3 payouts. Tier 3 refers to ONLY those sporting events which the
conference's network partners have opted not to televise in any
capacity. Yet, most of the numbers tossed about included everything BUT
actual Tier 3. Most of the ISP, IMG, Learfield Sports, etc contract
numbers tossed around are nothing more than payouts for coaches shows,
radio broadcasts, stadium advertising rights, website operation rights,
and various other marketing & advertising related enterprises.

First things first, think of ISP, IMG (ISP's parent corp.), and
Learfield, etc as pimps. They don't actually provide a service. Rather,
they connect universities to various services, and act as the go-between
in exchange for a fee (generally a percentage of the take home). Let's
use ISP and Florida as an example. ISP negotiated and handled the 10
year/$82M Sun Sports contract for Florida. They also negotiated all of
Florida's radio contracts. They sell the advertising in their stadium,
produce their game day programs, establish endorsements for the coaches,
manage the Gator's website, and advertising for it, etc. So, Florida
gets $8.2M/yr from a hybrid-Tier 3 package from Sun Sports + another
$2M+/- from ISP for advertising and management related services, for a
total annual payout in the $10M range. But, not all of that is Tier 3,
only a small piece.

One of the other issues is most don't understand that the true Tier 3
figures teams have gotten in the past are going the way of the dinosaur.
Texas reset the bar on true Tier 3 payouts (not to be confused w/
contracts that include "other" services). Most quote Texas as receiving
$15M/yr for Tier 3. And, that's true. But, what made Texas' deal such a
landmark is that is ON TOP of their IMG contract, which pays an
additional $9.4M/yr for radio, stadium advertising, game day programs,
website rights, etc. Texas is actually getting $24.4M/yr for their
all-in package, not $15M. Now, compare that to Florida's $10M and
Florida State's $6.6M. The reason this is important to note is b/c the
numbers discussed for Florida (which are most often mentioned in these
discussions) are from 4 years ago. It's a whole new world from a
financial perspective, and when their contract expires in a couple of
years, they'll resign for $15M - $20M for their all-in package (my
opinion).

FSU currently gets $6.6M/yr from their ISP package, which includes
coaches shows, stadium advertising, radio, etc. The issue with the ACC's
ESPN deal isn't that it costs a team like FSU the measly $3M-ish
difference between what they get and what Florida gets from true Tier 3
production currently, but that it costs FSU a much larger sum that is
now available on the market. The SEC doesn't allow standalone networks
like the LHN. That's what makes the Big XII such a strong entity from
the standpoint of true Tier 3 earnings. Oklahoma, for instance, is about
to sign the 2nd largest true Tier 3 deal here shortly. A school like FSU
should have no problem getting an additional $5M - $8M in today's market
on top of their radio, coaches shows, advertising, etc package they're
getting from ISP (potentially more).......especially if they can put out
a really strong season before signing. And, in the right conference,
that amount could increase even more.

Also, the SEC's TV deal allows for "up to" 1 football game a year for
Tier 3 broadcast, but it doesn't guarantee it. Last year, CBS televised
15 SEC games, and the ESPN network televised the other 75 games. So, no
SEC football games made it to Tier 3 distribution. Thus, the Florida
deal is not only undervalued from a time/inflation standpoint, but also
from an inventory standpoint. There is a big difference between network
contracts that leave NO football inventory and the Big XII's which
guarantees at least 1 per team, and allows you to purchase your OOC home
games for Tier 3 distribution (the same as how Versus purchases Big XII
games from ESPN/FSN for Tier 3 broadcast). Plus, the Big XII's contracts
allow for more basketball games for Tier 3 as well. Texas, for instance,
had 12 Tier 3 basketball games last year. The Big XII's current
contracts are only for 59 of the 75 Big XII home football games, which
leaves more inventory for sale by every team.

Tier 3 is a much bigger monster than everyone realizes, b/c everyone's
going off of the meager contracts that were signed 2, 3, 4, 5 years ago.
And, in the past, ISP, IMG, Learfield, etc largely reached out to
regional players for broadcast arrangements. Now, there is an
established market (and vision) for larger scale Tier 3
deals.........deals that will make the old PPV ways of the past look
downright laughable.

Big XII's Tier 1 & 2 Payouts

It's been leaked that the Big XII is at the cusp of signing an extension
with ABC/ESPN that will pay the conference just shy of $20M/yr for Tier
1 & 2 programming, beginning in 2016. However, that number was leaked
with the purpose of driving the price higher, the same as what the Big
XII did to drive their FSN contract 50% higher when it was signed in
April 2011. With Fox now working to share a split contract with ABC, the
number is expected to push closer to $21M for Tier 1 & 2, possibly a
smidgeon higher.

Beyond the Big XII's payout for Tier 1 & 2, I can tell you they were
wise enough to build into the preliminary ABC contract an escalator that
will increase their payout a fixed amount if at least 2 teams are added
to produce a championship game. The exact "per team" increase is
dependent upon the total teams added, but will be in the $1.5 - $2.5M
range.

In addition, there are out clauses in both contracts that will open them
up for renegotiation at market value should the Big XII expand further.
Much of what's said about the Big XII's contracts as far as certain
teams being on the "list", etc are message board fiction. But, there is,
from what I've been told, an understanding as to potential ranges with
certain teams added to the Big XII. So, while it isn't in print, it is
understood.

ACC's Payout

Much has been made about the article that estimated the ACC's payout
would be in the $15M/yr range once it's reworked. I think most at ESPN
are expecting that number to be higher, but not nearly high enough to
stave off any expansion threats from neighboring conferences. Many have
asked why ESPN wouldn't simply pay them enough to prevent poaching. The
answer is, it'll likely cost them more to prevent it than otherwise.
Think about it. In order for the ACC's 2 y/o ESPN contract to go from
$13M/yr to the $25M/yr they'd need to prevent being raided, ESPN would
have to increase their annual payout $168,000,000. On the flip side, if
the best teams are picked off the ACC and added to the SEC or Big XII,
it will not cost them $168M in escalations. And, they still get a huge
inventory to broadcast, while cutting out a lot of the weaker teams that
don't draw on TV: ala BC, Syracuse, Wake, Duke (football), Maryland,
etc.

Also, ESPN's contract w/ the ACC is for a fixed amount of inventory. For
their contract to increase at a high rate, ESPN has to buy more
inventory than they're getting. And, as it stands, the ACC's available
inventory to sell is only increasing 16.7%. Plus, if football drives the
boat (and it does), then to presume that 2 lackluster football teams + 2
years of inflation could drive up a contract $100M+ (which is what would
be needed to hit $20M/team), then you would have to kiss the thought of
Notre Dame joining a conference goodbye. Because.......if you can get a
$100M bump from 2 middling teams & 2 years of inflation, then what is
Notre Dame football worth on the open market? And yes, I realize ESPN is
getting football, basketball, and baseball, as well as Olympic sports
from the ACC, while NBC is getting just football from Notre Dame. But, I
think it's safe to say football at the very least, accounts for 50% of
the ACC's contract (if not 75%). So, even if football is only half of
the $100M bump, you're essentially saying Pitt football is worth
$25M/yr. So, what's Notre Dame football worth then?

That's why in many respects, the numbers through around for pay
increases are absurd, b/c people are saying Pitt & Syracuse are each
worth $50M/yr each out of one side of their mouth, but NBC may not want
to pay Notre Dame $15M out of the other. SMH.

An Add'l Big XII Angle

Another wrinkle the Big XII has that isn't set in stone, but has been
discussed is the possibility of opting for an 8-team conference slate in
a 12-team or 14-team conference. Why would this be beneficial in their
pursuit of any high-value ACC teams? B/c when the ACC switched from an
8-game to a 9-game conference schedule, it cost each school 1 home game
every other year. At FSU or Clemson, based on attendance, a home game is
worth around $8M in terms of gate receipts, concessions, etc. Switching
from a 9-game slate to an 8-game slate would afford each school an
additional $8M+/- every other year in additional revenue ON TOP of the
additional revenue they'd pick up in TV payout.

Plus, it would mean that those teams wouldn't have to cancel their
higher caliber OOC games, like Clemson had to do with Georgia, and is at
risk of having to do with Oklahoma State & Ole Miss in coming seasons.

Now, in fairness, the ACC's schedule hasn't definitively cost each team
1 home game every other year. But, in order to continue having the 7-8
home games a year most teams prefer, it means high quality OOC games
like Clemson/Georgia have to be axed in favor of scheduling a "buy" game
against a cup cake. Just looking at the numbers, it would appear there
is about a $3M swing in revenue in switching from a traditional home &
home series against a quality OOC opponent to paying a lesser team to
come to your house to get whipped.

Adding it All Up

Obviously, we're talking hypothetical's here, but there is a very real
possibility that by switching to the Big XII, a team like FSU, VA Tech,
or Clemson would be able to make:

$20M - $25M/yr on Tier 1 & 2
$3M - $10M/yr on true Tier 3 (not including radio, etc)
$1.5M - $2.5M on a CCG
$3M - $8M every other year from an additional home game

When the dust settles on the Big XII's contracts, most of the teams will
be making $25M - $35M annually on true Tier 1 ? 3 payouts. And, that
doesn't include escalations from a CCG or the bump in payout that would
result from procuring 2 or 3 high-level teams through expansion.

For the ACC to keep up, they're going to have to double their current
contract, b/c otherwise, it will be very easy to offer FSU, VA Tech, or
Clemson a $10M+ increase in annual TV take home.

I've heard many say that's not that big a deal. But in reality, it's
actually a bigger deal than most realize. FSU & Clemson specifically,
compete annually against Florida, Georgia, Alabama, Auburn, Tennessee,
and South Carolina for recruits. Each of those teams (aside from USC)
has a significant edge in attendance at games. Why is that important?
Because TV money aside, if you assume every fan in attendance is worth
$100 to the athletic department's coffers, the difference in per home
game take home between an FSU and an Alabama, is about $2.4M. Add that
up over the course of a season and you're talking about an $18M
shortfall in revenue vs a regional competitor. Now, add an additional
$10M - $15M in TV revenue shortfall, and you can see that it won't be
hard to fall behind significantly.

Sadly, IMO, college athletics is looking more and more like professional
baseball, where money drives success. But, if that doesn't change, a
program like FSU, Clemson, and VA Tech cannot operate and compete at an
annual $30M revenue shortfall to their competitors. At some point,
something has to give, b/c coaching salaries are going to push beyond
many teams' ability to compete and pay......as sad as that may be. So,
while geography or travel may not make sense, their hand may be forced
if (and that's a big if) the ACC contract does not come back at a
competitive rate. And IMO, that will have to be around $25M.

And, before anyone says travel will eat up a lot of the extra $.....the
Big XII has an option to offer an adjusted payout based on annual travel
miles. So, there are opportunities to make FSU, Clemson and others
wholes in that respect."

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Someone, please tell me this is wrong!


May 12, 2012, 12:28 PM

Elsewise, I'm changing sides on this issue and we are bound for the Big XII.

"For the ACC to keep up, they're going to have to double their current contract, b/c otherwise, it will be very easy to offer FSU, VA Tech, or Clemson a $10M+ increase in annual TV take home."



"And, before anyone says travel will eat up a lot of the extra $.....the Big XII has an option to offer an adjusted payout based on annual travel miles. So, there are opportunities to make FSU, Clemson and others
wholes in that respect."

2024 orange level memberbadge-donor-10yr.jpgringofhonor-clemsontiger1988-110.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: Someone, please tell me this is wrong!


May 12, 2012, 12:46 PM

U can bet if it is BAD for Clemson athletics then barker is all for it!just look at what he has done.have U seen all the football parking he has eliminated??

No way he lets Clemson go to the BIG 12 if it helps us!!

badge-donor-15yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up


Re: Someone, please tell me this is wrong!


May 12, 2012, 1:48 PM

i agree
but
with the money we're spending
maybe we've turned that corner.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: Someone, please tell me this is wrong!


May 12, 2012, 3:36 PM

How about clicking on that little "T" icon on the top right of your screen and read your mail?

I don't want this to end hidden somewhere in a boring thread. Thanks.

2024 orange level memberbadge-donor-10yr.jpgringofhonor-clemsontiger1988-110.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: Someone, please tell me this is wrong!


May 12, 2012, 2:22 PM [ in reply to Re: Someone, please tell me this is wrong! ]

That's the dumbest thing I've ever heard.

You're arguing that since Barker eliminated some parking, he doesn't have the school's best interest in mind? Come on!

badge-donor-05yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up


Overall, it seems a bad move, but a Big-16....


May 16, 2012, 11:05 AM

on the other hand could be very interesting.

Something like this?

South - Clemson, FSU, Miami, Georgia Tech
North - WVU, Louisville, Cincinnati, Iowa State
Midwest - Kansas, K-State, OU, OSU
Southwest - Texas, TCU, Texas Tech, Baylor

Let the SEC nab VT and Notre Dame (or NCSU) for 16, and the ACC and Big East remainders could merge.

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

Big 12 Tough? Yeah Right


May 17, 2012, 2:09 PM

The Big 12 is in shambles. Sure the ACC has had some tough years and has Duke, NC State & UNC. Every conference has bad teams. Texas hasn't been extremely good in years nor has any existing B12 teams with an exception or two. Oklahoma and OSU have good years but the ACC has just as many top tier teams as the new Big 12. Clemson would win 9 games every year in the Big 12 until the conference fell apart like it probably will do. The ACC should have never invited Rutgers and Syracuse.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Replies: 54
| visibility 1
Archives - Tiger Boards Archive
add New Topic