Something amazing has happened in the last week. Whether it is part of a fundamental change in college athletics, or a response driven by self-interest I am stunned and thrilled. No, I’m not talking about the playoff plans for college football. I’m talking about the discussion of the revised ACC contract.
Since the new contract has been announced last week, it has been subject to debate, argument and especially the frustrations of Florida State fans with the ACC. There was the typical denial from the FSU athletic department that really didn’t say anything. What followed was where it got interesting. FSU fan anger exploded, and the chairman of the FSU Board of Trustees spouted off without really knowing the facts to further fan the flames..
The usual way these things are done are through anonymous sources explaining details of the contract to provide more context. You would have the backtracking and damage control by and for the name person spouting off. And at first that happened — see the part about explaining that all the conference media contracts are backloaded.
Yet that did little to quell things. In fact, it seemed that nothing was making a difference. Cue the change in tactics to direct dealings.
The President of Florida State directly responded to much of the debate regarding changing conferences. Lining up behind staying with the ACC. He didn’t deflect or just brush it off as just the internet and message boards. He’s not getting on twitter and debating fans. He’s paying attention and showing that he is hearing the issues.
Then, yesterday, ESPN did something they never do. They set out to try and explain the contract beyond simply a press release with the happy spin.
First, a rights fee payment schedule that escalates in amount over the term is a commonplace provision in major college conference deals. This arrangement is not unique to the ACC. The pre-existing agreement between ESPN and the ACC (that carried through 2023) had an escalating rights fee schedule and the deal we announced last week contains a similar schedule. There is nothing unusual about how ESPN is paying the ACC over the life of this deal. It’s the industry standard.
It may be “industry standard,” but how many outside the industry knew that fact before this week?
Secondly, the additions of Pittsburgh and Syracuse as ACC members triggered a composition clause in the existing agreement. This clause is designed to allow for both partners to address the value of the conference taking into account the change in membership. There was no specific valuation formula based on total number of schools or on a per school basis. It is not an “out clause” nor does it trigger a complete renegotiation of the entire agreement. Again, conference composition clauses are standard in our industry and are part of every ESPN college rights agreement.
[Emphasis added.]
This is vital, and significant. A lot of the ranting about the new deal seemed to be based on the belief that the ACC could renegotiate the entire deal as if it was back on the open market. To some degree, I would say the valuation given for the addition of Pitt and Cuse plus the increased inventory was pegged closer to present market value, but this was never a renegotiation.
The other big reason for the anger is the fact that the ACC got their initial deal done before the Pac-12 and Big 12 really got the giant jump in money. Here’s a look at FSU fans mostly expressing relief and pleasant surprise at how good a deal the conference got when the deal was announced in 2010. It looked like a pretty good deal at the time.
Lastly, the term “third-tier rights” means different things in different conference agreements. In the new ACC extension (as was the case in the original 2011-2023 agreement), ESPN retains exclusive rights to all football and men’s basketball games. Additionally, ESPN retains the first selection rights to women’s basketball and all other ACC sports such as baseball, softball, soccer, lacrosse, etc. Whatever is not selected for coverage and distribution by ESPN from these sports is retained by the member institutions.
Here’s the double-edged sword to that. Nothing upsets out-of-state (or market) fans more than not even being able to watch even the crappiest game on ESPN3.com. To have that, ESPN has to have all the rights
The view of 3d tier rights has become so skewed all because of the Longhorn Network. ESPN isn’t paying Texas $15 million a year for one football games and a few bad basketball games. They are paying that in no small part to keep the Big 12 intact, and because the Texas brand is strong enough to try this experiment.
This was a big shift by ESPN. To come out and directly talk about the deal itself. They don’t do that.
I know that it could simply be that ESPN felt it was in their overall best interest. More expansiopocolypse is not what ESPN wants. They definitely want FSU in the ACC, and don’t want to have to do yet another “composition clause” discussion with the Big 12 because the membership changed.
It is still a welcome change of tactics. One where they actually provide information and some effort at context.
clause” (love these legal terms, another fav of mine Quantitative Easing) anyway with the Big 12, as they only have 10 teams and somebody will be added to get to 11 and then 12.
Whether that is Louisville & Cincy (which I doubt since neither have much of a football brand) or FSU & Miami (which I doubt since the extra revenue would just be shifted to additional travel expenses). If I was the Boise State AD I would be trying to do what TCU did, shift to the Big 12 before EVEN playing a game in the BigEast.
So then this combo might work, Boise & Louisville(the Big 12 would rather BYU, but don’t see that happening).
Boise has a national football brand, better than TCU’s. And L’Ville provides a bridge from Iowa State to Hooterville (wvu) plus brings good hoops.
Academically both are duds, but they took the biggest academic dud in FBS, the hoopies. 🙂
Or how added ‘exposure’ in this ESPN deal equates to additional revenues?
Full disclosure…I am not, however, aware of any structured academic cooperative between ACC schools like the B1G’s CIC.
You mean like this:
The mission of the ACCIAC is to leverage the athletic associations and identities among the 12 ACC universities in order to enrich the educational missions, especially the undergraduate student experiences, of member universities. The intent is to impact all students, not only student athletes. The strategy is to sponsor activities and programs that cannot be accomplished by any one university, and are best supported by universities?acting?in?concert. By directly supporting academic initiatives, the ACC reinforces its conviction that strong academics and strong athletics go together, and it projects this message to its many stakeholders.
Please enlighten me to the windfall opportunity Nordenberg chose to ignore in favor of this horrendous deal Pitt is now saddled with from which the athletic department is now poised to reap unprecedented revenues?
How do you quantify what a “good” deal is from a “bad” deal?
What better deal was available for Swofford to negotiate on behalf of the ACC?
Please explain to me and the other uneducated masses what should have happened.
and the ACC not pitt
the big 12 gets 20 million the SEC will most likely get 22 or 23 million when there new deal is done the big 10 is over 20 million so how is 17 million a good deal when we wont even see that for 5 years or more if you had read outher posts not just pitt blather you would see were outhers have said the acc got screwed or even TX panther on this post who said the acc was raped
do you really think being the lowest tv deal of all the major conferences is a good deal if so
i dont the acc reachs more tv sets than most of the outhers saw that posted on here bye some one in last few days why settle for last and call it a good deal sure pitt will make more money then ever but that is not the point a bad deal is a bad dealfor the ACC. ask FSU.
And if one of the big countries in Europe tumbles like Spain or Italy. Watch out. Say hello to Quantitative Easing, 3, 4 and 5, etc. 🙂
did you see ECH makeing fun of my typeing i dont care any more with frends like you and dan and bossdraws the heck with them but a bad deal is a bad deal when you are geting less money than everyone else you cant call it a good deal
becides i think i am doeing better on geting my ideas across dont you take care of your self bud i thinks its goin to be a long year in football agein its tino time.
1. Punctuation is your friend. Embrace it.
2. You are ASSUMING the “new” Big XII Media contract will generate $20M on AVERAGE per school. Nothing has been confirmed.
3. Where did you get your SEC estimate? The SEC is locked into a media contract, signed in 2009 that runs through 2024, designed similarly to the new ACC deal that restricts the conference from developing their own network yet does incorporate the same ‘Look-In” clauses that Swafford, that rube, negotiated. These “look-ins” do not allow for the entire contract to be renegotiated on the open market where by inciting a bidding war between new potential parties, but rather allows for the contract to be adjusted by the existing parties in light of the ever changing league compositions as well as technological advancements. If you are going to talk shit Frankcan, you better have actual details and facts on your side, not pixie dust you pick up from “outher posts.”
4. Much of the immediate wailing and dire reactions to the announcement of the new ACC media deal (in particular by a boneheaded BOT Chair at FSU, who has since retracted his initial comments) were based on a lack of understanding of the covenants of the contract itself as well as a general lack of knowledge of the structure of nearly ALL media contracts. In light of a better understanding of THE FACTS of the ACC deal, the $17M/YR AVERAGE per institution is well in line with the market value of the conference contracts especially considering the now STRONGER association with the largest producer and distributor of sports programming in the world. Believe it or not Frankcan, there is a VALUE to being the number one supplier of programming to ESPN. ESPN has a more vested interest in the success of the ACC than any other entity on Earth. Think about that for a second and let it sink in. Will Pitt or NC State get an extra check for $1.5M a year based on that fact? No, but if you can’t understand the implicit value of that relationship, I can’t help you.
5. Ask FSU what exactly? Do you think these institutions are going to make drastic, institution altering decisions based on a spread of $2-$3M of athletic revenue? What would be the extra COST to FSU to make a move? Do you have any idea? Start adding it up Enistein…Exit Fees and additional travel costs alone eat into that $2-$3M. Now, even that $20M bullshit number you pulled out of your rear-end doesn’t seem so “good” now does it?
6. Furthermore, if you think Swafford is an idiot and was “raped” in the contract negotiation, I am sure you have evidence of a better deal that could have been/should have been made. Spill it, show me where this better deal was. Give me some FACTS, not some dopey rumor you picked up off of a different blog or your own inane concoction.
7. Lastly, I beg YOU to wake up and pay attention and seek some context to your opinions. Take off your tinfoil hat, stop hoarding water, duck tape, and plastic sheeting in your basement, and try to see more than just what you want to see that supports your distorted view of impending doom.
Yes, the ACC schools are in places like Boston, DC, Miami, and Atlanta, where there are lots of TVs, but by and large the football teams for those schools, outside of some percentage of dedicated alumni, elicit shrugs.
No matter, IMHO. So it goes. I’d rather be part of a conference of excellent universities, located in interesting and vibrant cities and towns, who happen to play football – rather than be associated with rabid backwater hick idiots in the middle of nowhere.
You can keep the extra $2M.
may be you need help we have a DR TOM on here may be he can help you chill brother before you stroke out i dont think you have been on here before
are you new . I think it is a bad deal so do outhers at least i did not say pitt made the deal as you did . talk abought geting things stright read your own frist post and this is a free blog we do not all have to think as you do
and i dont mean to be rude but you dont seam to have a problem with it is your name hitler
sence you dont like outher thoughts but your own
get a grip on your self we dont like to insult each outher and you being new it is not a good idea we dont do it except in fun so take a chill pill dude and try not to be boring
do you belive the personal attack bye ECH on me tin foil hats the hats are plastic how are you tonight TEX PANTHER good to hear from you bud.
Notre Dame is still paying Charley Weis more money than Pitt is paying coach Chryst. And Charley is Kansas’ head football coach. What the h.ll is going on here?
Most of the complaining is coming from FSU people who seem to think FSU is on the level of Texas. T Also, FSU people assume that the rumored 20 million per team Big 12 deal will go up significantly to at least 23 million per school if Clemson and FSU are added to the conference. I’m not exactly sure how adding those two schools will increase a TV deal by 36 million per year. I mean what kind of TV markets due Clemson and FSU bring in?
And really Pitt is getting a huge increase from going to the Big East to ACC. So the leaving a little money on the table isn’t going to affect Pitt because Pitt is used to operating with low Big East money.
Also @txpanther I know you don’t like Swofford and the NC focus of the ACC, but you have to remember that those are two of the reasons why Pitt probably got into the ACC to begin with.
My only complaint is that if the ACC would have gotten something on the higher end of the range and if the contract was better communicated by the commish, we most likely would not have had the thoughts of the FSU BOT or AD made public. The perception now is that the ACC is ripe for pickings and is not stable primarily because the school most recognized nationally for football is upset. Perception is reality.
Very good deal for Pitt however…I won’t deny that. Just wish Swofford was better at negotiations and a more effective communicator.
With the addition of Pitt and Cuse who both have strong historical football, the image of the ACC should gradually shift away from basketball and with that the NC schools will have less influence. Now, the ACC needs to start winning on the football field when it matters. Pitt included. That would solve the attendance problem.
This wasn’t a brand new deal where they could “go shopping”. Actually a pretty good deal and I think probably a little extra fair from ESPN when you look at it all.
Then a look in, if a couple teams in the conference get in the top 5 or play for a NC, or even way out there, if ND has to choose a conference and they choose ACC, they would hit a huge jackpot.
The more I’ve read up on this stuff, Florida States problems are a lot more to do about, Florida State.
As some have said, maybe if they would have maintained their program in the top 10, the ACC would have had a bigger contract a few years ago.
Same with Miami. I don’t think the ACC has a problem, but, if those two want to bitch about the conferences football, they ought to look at themselves. They are supposed to be the ACC’s football powers.
Riiiight. Swafford can’t negotiate. I mean, just look what has happened over the last decade. He was only able to pry Miami, Virginia Tech, Boston College, Syracuse and Pitt away from the league next door (without anyone catching wind of the thievery until the deals were done), effectively crippling the Big East all the while increasing the ACC’s revenue stream by extraordinary multiples and developed an unprecedented relationship with the largest sports distribution platform on the planet.
Man is he a backwater dope.
Really?
Pitt benefits greatly by being an outstanding academic research university. Being affiliated with other outstanding schools like those in the ACC rather than WVU can only benefit Pitt as a university. A recent PG article on research dollars said:
“In its highest ranking ever, the University of Pittsburgh now receives the third-largest amount of federal research money among public universities, and the fifth-largest amount among all schools.
In fiscal 2010, which ended in October, Pitt attracted $594.7 million in federal research money and totaled $822.5 million in total research expenditures, according to the National Science Foundation.”
It looks like TV money for football is peanuts compared to dollars for research which is really one of the main missions of major universities like Pitt.
However, as the dust settles, it more and more looks like Florida State is going absolutely nowhere. Nor is Va Tech or NC. St.
Texas helped WVU financially, because they needed to get to 10 teams.
Texas nor the Big 12 do not need anyone at this point. Oh, they could wish or think about, but not a necessity.
Hence, Texas is not helping the next team or teams to move to the Big 12.
FSU is 2 or 3 million in the hole, won’t be able to pay 20M to the ACC to get out.
Va Tech will not be let go. Politics will prevail.
Last night saw the NC ST ath. dir. interviewed, and we all know, words are just words, that’s a given, but….
she was all pumped up talking about the ACC and NCST. Have had a tournament team in mens hoops lately, only lost by three to Kansas, have 3 McDonalds all-americans back.
There football has 18 of 20 letterman coming back.
Womens hoop and softball was talking about the rivalry’s they have with ACC etc. etc..
I think the ACC will look the same in 5 years as it does now.
Unless Notre Dame ever gets their hand forced and they would pick ACC. (known longshot, however the new playoff system could trigger that, still a longshot.)
I think the ACC is very stable, more stable than some blogosphere people would like, and we will be enjoying it for many more years to come.
@Frankcan, this may be a “sports blog”, but it’s a COLLEGE sports blog, so some proficiency in the English language is appreciated;
@TX Panther and the rest: the ACC was mid-contract with ESPN when the re-negotiation took place, and yet the ACC just got a big bump in money in spite of the fact that the two teams they are adding haven’t won anything in more than a decade, are in relatively small markets, and can’t come close to filling their stadiums (that being Syracuse and Pitt).
The ACC was NOT in a position to go on the open market and see what NBC or some other mythical TV network was offering. Was their initial payout level less than the SEC back in the day? Sure. Why? Because the SEC wins everything, and their schools dominate not only in their home states (very few pro teams in the bible belt, and those that are there are outdrawn by the SEC schools), but everywhere else where casual fans want to watch good football.
The ACC may have some big cities in their fanshed, but those cities prefer pro sports (Boston, NY, DC) or they prefer the SEC (Atlanta, the entire state of Florida, South Carolina). The BigXII has fewer schools, and fewer good football teams, but they have Texas and Oklahoma, and each state where they compete they DOMINATE (even the Dallas Cowboys are 2nd banana to the Longhorns), with the possible exception being Iowa. The ACC’s anchor football teams are FSU and Miami, neither of which compete with Texas and OU in terms of football success or fan support. We are lucky to be getting this contract – not just the existing ACC schools, but especially Pitt and Syracuse. This is like winning the lottery.
Winning football games has ZERO to do with a media contract.
If great football is purportedly a pathway to national prominence, more money, and enhanced reputations, then the members should take it upon themselves to have better FB programs, rather than sitting around fretting about some of the “football schools” leaving.
Pitt’s administration isn’t committed to becoming elite in football because it would require them to spend money it doesn’t have on the football program. I don’t disagree with this philosophy.
Nonetheless, Pitt is trying to get over the hump and stability in coaching staff and conferences will help along with the more money the ACC brings, but it needs to generate revenues like the elite schools to compete and at the same time manage it’s expenses well. Pitt doesn’t have an 80k seat stadium and enough companies interested in suites/boxes to generate that kind of dough.
However, Pitt is fiscally responsible and it won’t sacrifice their academic mission and moral compass to get to the elite level. Kudos for Pitt.
Unfortunately, many schools in the SEC and Big 12 do value athletics above academics and do find ways to outright cheat their way to the top or push the envelope and operate in shades of gray.
So what is Pitt to do? I don’t think it can do anything more than what Pitt has already done. Commit to what you hope turns out to be a stable conference (TBD), commit to a coach for the long term (fingers crossed), commit to facilities (done). Now fans need to commit and show up on game day and travel to bowl games. These things happen and Pitt becomes relevant on the national stage again. Maybe not elite, but I’ll take being respected again.
I haven’t always done my part and I largely lost interest in Pitt athletics beginning in the 90’s (still have my ticket stub from the ’77 Sugar Bowl, though, so I go back aways)
I live and work within spitting distance of Byrd Stadium at UMD, but I’ve committed to get back to the Burgh for at least four of the Pitt home games this year, and I’m super excited for the ACC given my proximity to so many of the venues.
I sincerely hope the ACC does remain stable.
I also very much like Paul Chryst; seems like a nice, decent, guy and a fit with the school and the town, and I hope people give him a real chance.
Personally, I’m going to ignore this conference-instability nonsense and enjoy some football and basketball. Que sera, sera.
I love my alma mater. My Pitt degree(s) have opened many doors for me in life. I hope things are finally looking up in their football program.
Hail to Pitt!
