Is The ACC's Next TV Deal Enough To Stave Off Defections?
Brian: The big news from yesterday was that ESPN and the ACC reached a deal on football and basketball broadcasting rights. The ACC gets an equal share, so that gives ACC members an annual payout of a little under $12 million. While the deal more than doubles the ACC’s old TV broadcasting deal, it falls short of the SEC’s blockbuster $17 million/year payout. The money also falls well short of the Big Ten payout, a figure that reportedly could increase substantially with expansion.
Conference expansion talks have been rampant. Programs such as Florida State, Miami, Clemson and Georgia Tech have been mentioned as possible SEC expansion targets, while recently Maryland and Virginia were even brought up as potential Big Ten expansion targets.
Given the ACC’s new television deal, do you think that will be enough for these programs to pledge loyalty to the ACC for the foreseeable future? Or is the gap between SEC/Big Ten money and the ACC still too great to encourage ACC programs to look elsewhere?
Jeff: I think it is safe to say that all 12 ACC programs and their fans are happy with this deal. I am somewhat surprised of the length of the deal considering the potential shakeup of all the conferences and the realistic possibility that the ACC might be negatively affected.
Brian: I’d be willing to bet that there’s language in the ESPN-ACC contract that outlines what happens if there is a huge conference realignment.
Jeff: As nice as the deal was and the importance of staying on ESPN, I don't know what Florida State would do if offered a spot in the SEC. Just because the financial gain has shrunk, there still is significant gain to be had and the SEC id king in football right now. I really don't see many schools that are all about football turning down the SEC no matter what the other circumstances. There are considerations like playing an SEC schedule is not the easiest way to the National Championship Game, but I really don't know how highly that would be weighed.
Brian: I think the easier path to a National Championship is a solid argument, and will probably keep a program like Florida State committed to the ACC. Also, what’s unclear is while programs like Florida State and Clemson might be entertaining the notion of moving to the SEC behind closed doors, it’s unclear whether the SEC would even want Florida State or Clemson. Any SEC expansion program would have to fetch an additional $17+ million so that the current SEC member schools don’t lessen their mega-TV broadcast rights annuity. Programs like Florida State and Clemson wouldn’t command nearly that $17 million number in incremental revenue. The Seminoles would come much closer than Clemson, but would still fall way short.
The only type of program that could fetch that type of money is a Texas or a Notre Dame, both of whom are on solid financial footing in terms of their current TV deals (Texas taking the lion’s share of the Big 12 revenue and Notre Dame with their NBC deal).
I absolutely agree that the ACC’s TV deal does a lot to mitigate the flight risk of any of their member programs, but I think the bigger threat is not going to come from the south but rather the north. Where the SEC’s ESPN TV payout is generally fixed at $17 million annually, the Big Ten Network offers no such ceiling. Programs like Maryland and Virginia, if called, would be stupid not to go running to the Big Ten. Testudo Times alluded to that possibility just yesterday.
So overall, I think the ACC’s TV deal shored up programs from defecting from the SEC, but the threat of the Big Ten poaching a Maryland or Virginia (however unlikely these schools being Big Ten targets is) remains a very real possibility given the revenue gap now and going forward.
Jeff: Clemson would not bolster the SECs ability to negotiate a television contract but Florida State or Miami absolutely would with their national draw and great history. The knock on the SEC right now is that their ratings outside the Southeast are not very good. Florida State might draw a few people but is not going to move the needle too far.
31 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Great Points
Very good points made with regards to the added revenue being necessary in the SEC and the SEC ratings. Its something that’s never been brought up, at least not in public fashion, but outside of the South folks don’t watch the SEC besides the big games. What that means is adding Clemson, FSU does little or nothing. They’re large regionally but nationally they’re not $17 million (or more importantly $34m) in added revenue big.
With around $13 million a year the ACC is strong, the 12 year deal is relatively short when compared to the SEC’s deal of 15 seasons.
Overall we’re good with this deal for now. I’ll sleep easier and now we can shift the focus from conference Armageddon to on the field stuff.
http://inthebleachers.net
by InTheBleachers on May 18, 2010 10:15 AM EDT via mobile reply actions
You've hit on something with national games. Also there may be a long term security issue for the SEC.
consider: Miam, FSU, Clemson, and GATECH
1. Miami and FSU game would draw national ratings if you move both in conference. Plus, you don’t have to split revenue on the FSU/UF game, which would draw nationally. Then there is the addition of revenue from a regular (in conference) Mia/UF game in the short run. It may not get you 68mil. but the sunshine state rivalries are big draws nationally and having all three completely in house could certainly take a big bite out of it.
2. Long term you can lock up the Georgia(atlanat) market by adding GaTech. Again you bring a significant rivalry completely in house. And lock up the state of South Carolina with the Clempsun Tiggers and….ding ding bring yet another significant rivalry in house.
3. Then there is the security issue in an ever changing CFB landscape. By adding these teams you have built your fence around the Southeast. i.e. you may not get the cash back the short run, but you have certainly locked up the South against long-term expansion.
Texas would obviously be a first call, but I understand that they are joined at the hip to the aggies and that wouldn’t interest the SEC. But who knows.
Giddy-up!
It's all about money
The SEC has little to no incentive to take on Georgia Tech, Clemson, Florida State or Miami to simply bring in additional southern rivalries. I realize that schools like Florida State or Miami have a national presence on the football scene, but it’s not $17 million worth.
BC Interruption, SBN's Boston College Eagles blog
I'm not saying it is, but it might be a chunk. Also, there's the money in 20yrs to consider.
If Super-conferences are a foregone conclusion in the distant future(which is where the money seems to be driving it), you might as well stake your claim now.
Giddy-up!
I’d submit to you that the conference arms race is more about $$ (TV revenue), and not being bigger than everyone else just to be bigger (super conferences).
BC Interruption, SBN's Boston College Eagles blog
And I'd agree, I'm saying additional games televised (regardless of popularity)...
and more markets (So Fla and Atlanta) could net you more cash in the long run… it CERTAINLY would not in the short.
Not to mention more bowl contributors (televised & paid out), more in-conference games (televised) per year, and the possibility of you’re own network etc.
Giddy-up!
Markets
Maybe South Florida would be nice for the SEC to have, but Atlanta is already in the fold. Make no mistake: UGA owns that state and it’s not even close. The SEC already has a strong foothold in Atlanta between UGA and the SEC title game even before you add GT into the mix.
by OrangeBritches on May 18, 2010 2:49 PM EDT up reply actions
The SEC owns both Florida and Georgia, no question. I think Miami has lost some of its stranglehold on South Florida over the years (to UF), and UGA owns Georgia.
What I don’t get though, is why does the SEC care about TV ratings? They already have a longterm deal with ESPN. ESPN simply writes each school a check for $17 mil each year, so I’m not sure if SEC schools even care about ratings.
With the Big Ten, it’s all about TV markets (and subscriber revenue). Again, not ratings.
BC Interruption, SBN's Boston College Eagles blog
But ESPN is capturing the lion’s share of that value, not the SEC. The SEC is only interested in driving the value of their football TV package up 13-14 years from now, when they want to re-up.
BC Interruption, SBN's Boston College Eagles blog
Which is why I can only surmise the ACC's new deal has a significant portion of interest in Basketball.
Our football alone couldn’t even be worth half of 12mil per school to purchase.
NO watchers = NO adds.
Giddy-up!
GaTech is another team with more games to televise and no split revenue on the game UGA game...
Not surprisingly, the big Georgia vs. Georgia Tech game last Saturday was by far the biggest program of the week during primetime in Atlanta as nearly one million people caught UGA upsetting the Yellow Jackets. – access atlanta radio
Giddy-up!
The Georgia Tech-Georgia game certainly had regional appeal (highest rated TV show in Atlanta for that week), but I doubt it made waves nationally outside of Georgia. The game meant nothing, as UGA’s season was effectively over and it was just a warm up for GT’s ACCCG appearance.
GT-UGA also had to compete against games like Stanford-ND and the first half of USC-UCLA in the same time slot.
BC Interruption, SBN's Boston College Eagles blog
Our point was that they're already watching it because of UGA.
The SEC doesn’t need Georgia Tech to deliver Atlanta. They have it already. They own it.
by OrangeBritches on May 19, 2010 10:37 AM EDT up reply actions
Correct.
SEC owns Georgia AND the conference doesn’t really care about ratings in the short term.
BC Interruption, SBN's Boston College Eagles blog
by Brian Favat on May 19, 2010 10:50 AM EDT up reply actions
I think you guys are overlooking the fact that each team you add adds 9 games (assuming a 16 team size)
footprint expansion IS better, but it’s not the only way to make money.
1. Picking up even moderately popular teams give networks more games to televise and thus gives them more adds to sell. Especially if they come with built in rivalries and such.
2. Georgia does not “own” the state by any means, there is a strong group of GaTech fans in the sate.
3. I wasn’t talking out of my but… here’s the SEC comish in an article… http://www.mrsec.com/story/report-sec-already-eyeing-six-teams-for-possible-expansion
Giddy-up!
Not buying it
The fact is ESPN massively overpaid for the SEC contract. Both ESPN and the SEC know this, which decreases the SEC’s leverage to renegotiate the media rights by adding teams. Expanding the SEC may increase revenues, but only incrementally so. Don’t think the headache of scheduling and logistics is outweighed by the potential added value by adding teams.
More or less, the ACC deal solidified the 12-team conference model as a viable format going forward.
BC Interruption, SBN's Boston College Eagles blog
I here you we'll just have to wait and see...
IMO it’s all a moot point if the Big 11 only goes to 14… it would take 16 to get the SEC to jump up and actually do something.
Giddy-up!
Regardless, BC and FSU fans are in an infinitely better position at the moment than fans of Pitt, Syracuse, Rutgers and UConn. Especially with the new ACC TV deal. Now if those teams don’t get scooped up by the Big Ten, they are seriously screwed because ACC now has decreased incentives to give them a home.
Cincinnati, Louisville and West Virginia are really, really screwed.
BC Interruption, SBN's Boston College Eagles blog
Actually, it's more like ...
1a. Big East
1b. Big 12
3. WAC
4. Pac-10
5. Everyone else not the ACC, Big Something and SEC
6. ACC
7. SEC
8. Big Ten
BC Interruption, SBN's Boston College Eagles blog
Keep telling yourself that...
along with Clem and FSU will not go to the SEC if they look to expand.
I will agree to disagree.
Giddy-up!
From the Orlando Sentinel's Andrew Carter a few days ago.
Some of the league’s athletic directors completely dismissed the notion that they’d even entertain leaving the conference. Miami’s Kirby Hocutt, for one. Maryland athletic director Debbie Yow, meanwhile, literally laughed out loud when I brought up the rumors that the Big Ten had contacted Maryland. Yow told a story about receiving a call from a Washington Post reporter several weeks back. This was just after the first Big Ten-contacting-Maryland-rumors had come about, she said. She looked at the caller ID, answered and greeted the reporter with this: "You’re wasting your time and mine!" She knew what the call was about. And knew the Big Ten rumors were bogus.
by OrangeBritches on May 18, 2010 10:38 AM EDT reply actions
as a Tech fan that hates the SEC
I worry. Dan Radakovich got his big time start at LSU. He knows how the big football factories run. He probably would relish the chance to get back into the SEC, doubling Tech’s football revenue.
With no powers, comes no responsibility.
Of course Yow is going to go on record and quickly dismiss any Maryland to the Big Ten rumors. No one is going to openly admit to trying to woo the Big Ten (except, apparently, Missouri and Nebraska).
But if Yow didn’t seriously consider moving to the Big Ten behind closed doors, IMO she’s failed as an administrator. You take Delany’s call if it means potentially doubling your revenues from TV.
BC Interruption, SBN's Boston College Eagles blog
Programs like Maryland and Virginia, if called, would be stupid not to go running to the Big Ten.
This would be true if cash for cash’s sake were what athletic departments existed for, but the point of the cash is to be more competitive. UVA athletics would be nuked beyond recognition in the Big Ten and doomed to eternal mediocrity – at best. Maryland perhaps less so, but only because they’ve got less to lose.
Besides, the difference between Big Ten TV money and ACC TV money is now only a very small portion of total AD revenues. I don’t think you’d see a doubling of TV revenues – more like a few million at best – and it doesn’t offset the major competitive disadvantages.
by MaizeAndBlueWahoo on May 18, 2010 7:49 PM EDT reply actions
The sports that matter – football and basketball – have already been nuked in Charlottesville. I don’t think they have anything to lose.
BC Interruption, SBN's Boston College Eagles blog









