Well, this isn't great.
https://www.espn.com/college-footba...ces-fsu-clemson-expected-reach-settlement-acc
https://www.espn.com/college-footba...ces-fsu-clemson-expected-reach-settlement-acc
ACC Distribution Settlement
- Thread starter CJsE
- Start date
so 4 schools will get 15m more annually (unc, miami, FSU and clemson) while the other schools can expect a 7m cut in revenue.
Gee, i wonder which side pitt will be on lol. mostly based on TV ratings too? Damn, bad time to end that pitt/psu OOC games, those actually got good ratings. no time like a good OOC schedule
Gee, i wonder which side pitt will be on lol. mostly based on TV ratings too? Damn, bad time to end that pitt/psu OOC games, those actually got good ratings. no time like a good OOC schedule
Is that the average over the last 5 years? That’s the timeline they are using.UNC isn't getting anything.
so this is weighted for football obviously. man, some of these big time early OOC matchups are going to really be pay outs for some of these teams.
Lets face it, your typical ACC matchups, even against good teams, arent going to get anything special. So to get these tv ratings, you need to either get on ABC or a favorable espn time slot or have some OOC matchups against SEC powerhouses...
That's where a school like Ga tech playing georgia every year will be huge. Obviously Notre dame matchups will help. Miami playing florida will be big.
FSU plays bama next two years early, that will be monster ratings, then they play a home and home with georgia after the bama series ends. again, cementing them to receive bigger payouts.
Clemson has LSU home and home, again, huge ratings..
Then you have schools like virginia scheduling not one but two fcs teams in the OOC, 100% guaranteeing them to be taking a big pay cut...
Might be a certain irony here. They're doing this to pacify the schools at the top, but if you tick off enough of those "next tier" schools, maybe they'll ultimately be the ones leading the charge to gain majority and dissolve the GOR. The Big 12 was only paying about $10M less per school last year. They'll probably just shut up and take their medicine until 2036, though.
That said, those Pitt viewership numbers are absolutely awful. My goodness does it suck to be a sports fan in this town. There is just no metric where we have an advantage.
That said, those Pitt viewership numbers are absolutely awful. My goodness does it suck to be a sports fan in this town. There is just no metric where we have an advantage.
I don’t think so. Too many of them have nowhere to go outside of the ACC.
That’s why they would agree to this deal.
Worst case scenario for a lot of teams in the ACC is they form some version of the Old Big East.
So maybe you get some of the teams that would have a home in the Big 12 on board with dissolving the league. But BC, Cuse, Wake, Cal, Stanford, etc. don’t have anything to gain. So they will always be a No vote.
Being forced to take a steep cut in tv payout is still better than the tv payout outside of the ACC for them.
yeah, lets just take the sh*t sandwich the acc is giving us and eat it and say thank you. beats the alternative for schools like us.
I don't like using TV ratings because ratings can vary greatly depending on what other games are on and what channel you get put on. But this needed to be done. Give FSU, Clem, and UNC more. They are the big brands.
yeah agreed but Duke Basketball is the biggest brand out there. i know hoops doesnt pay the bills as much as football does but it still makes money and there is no bigger name out there than duke hoops..
BC football is probably worth more than Duke basketball. College basketball TV ratings are tiny
No, that was just 2024 regular season and doesn't include ACCN games, but it gives a good idea of where everyone stands.
The ACC schools are idiots if they agree to a deal involving ratings, which are heavily dependant on factors outside of how good the team is playing. Especially for Pitt, since their game times have to take a bak seat to the Succos schedule.
Yea. TV ratings are a pretty poor indication of team value. If W&J played every Wednesday night on ESPN, their ratings would be outstanding since there are no other games on. I said this before and I'll say it again, they should use a 3rd party to LOOK at the ratings and other factors and determine how much of the ESPN contract is derived from each team. Is it like FSU 15%, Clem 15%, BC 3%, Wake 3%? This wouldn't be a very difficult exercise for a consulting firm.
Pitt would probably have a home in the Big 12.
But yes, some teams absolutely should take the shit sandwich. It’s in their best interest.
my post sounded like sarcasm but i was being serious, i think that's our best interest too.
If you break it down by tier:
Miami/FSU/Clemson will be getting a little more, but it's still less than they'd be getting in the big two. And I think they're all pretty confident they would have a landing spot in one of those conferences (certainly Clemson and FSU, at least).
Schools like UNC and Virginia, who very well might have a landing spot in the big two, should be even more ticked off now. Virginia Tech and NC State, perhaps delusionally, may also fit this category.
And then schools like Pitt, Louisville, Syracuse, Duke, etc. you would think might harbor a certain amount of resentment if they're now getting what basically amounts to a Big 12 payout. Maybe they'd like to wash their hands of the ACC and simply ensure a place in what they perceive to be a more stable league. I certainly think Stanford and Cal would have landing spots in the Big 12 as well, but we've already seen them turn that down. However, if some more respectable institutions (so, not talking about Louisville) made the move then maybe that would be enough to galvanize them to do so, since they're already getting paid basically nothing to be in the ACC (I don't recall exactly when their cut kicks in or what the reduction terms are).
It's all unlikely, though, of course. That's a lot of pieces that would have to move, and I'm more or less just stirring the pot in message board cliche fashion. Might not be impossible, though. Only takes over 50%, even if different motives lead to strange bedfellows.
Last edited:
Georgia Tech certainly isn't a big brand, yet they're showing up high on these lists. I know they're in a big market, but I'm willing to be some of this is also related to the ridiculous non-conference schedules they play. This past season, they "only" had two of those games - Georgia and Notre Dame, but two is enough to really jack up average viewership. On top of that, didn't they play a week zero (i.e. only game on) game against FSU in Ireland?
Pitt can claim that the Pirates and Steelers make scheduling a challenge and ask for 4 weeknight games each year. They would get higher ratings and a higher payout.
Networks don't care if the viewers are coming from OOC schedules or in conference. Viewers are viewers.
GT not only played the big OOC games, but they also played two of the big ACC teams this past season. Their biggest ratings were against Georgia, FSU, Miami, Notre Dame. Then you have a game like UNC vs GT with fewer than 550k viewers. This season they play Georgia, Clemson, and Colorado, so their numbers will be down but they'll still get a nice 8million+ viewer boost from the Georgia game.
That's one reason the distribution is based on 5 years, because of the unbalanced ACC schedule. But that's the whole thing, that 11 teams gets 80% of their television ratings when playing the other three plus Notre Dame. The only real winners will be Clemson, FSU, and Miami.
good post and answers my question of why in the hell georgia tech has good ratings. because of the opposing fanbase. makes sense now considering Ga tech is far down the list of popularity all thru Georgia and even in atlanta..
Well that's my point: Georgia Tech, in and of themselves, did not bring those ratings. If you want to make the argument that they should be rewarded for going out and scheduling like they do, it's a fair one to be had. But some of this is pretty self-fulling... for instance, Florida State has protected rivalries against Miami and Clemson, in addition to playing Floriday every year.
Those of you who love Saturday Noon kickoffs, they just kill Pitt's overall numbers.
they kill attendance, i dont think they play a part in tv ratings. compare them to a 3:30pm kickoff, more people arent watching on tv than the noon ones.
Apples to apples, i'd bet more people watch pitt at noon than later. it's just the walk up numbers that are lower at noon..
GT's ratings are because they played FSU in Week 0 vs no competition. They also played Notre Dame and Georgia. And the UGa game was on Black Friday vs no competition. Those are 3 of the best TV spots you can get. And some will say, "well, GT was picked for those spots because of their Atlanta market." No, no they weren't. W&J would have brought very similar ratings if substituted for GT there. Which is why TV ratings shouldn't be used.
The Heather Lyke Dublin Classic where we sold our Wisconsin home game will bring massive TV ratings since it's Week 0. Why should we be rewarded for that?
I'd agree that noon TV numbers are better than 3:30 if we are comparing apples to apples. People tend to be busier and out of the home mid-day. And the West Coast watches the 9AM local time games before they leave to go surfing or roller blading around noon local.
If they want to incentivize scheduling more marquee games, I guess I'm fine with that. But that's about the extent in which I would like to see anybody rewarded for opponent-driven TV ratings.
They should look at the attendance/TV averages against FCS teams in games that were on the ACCN only if they really want an accurate depiction of fan engagement.
Last edited:
it's a tad weird using TV Ratings as your barometer here. like others have said, tv ratings can be influenced by many things. Ga tech is about as average as it gets as far as brands in the ACC and their ratings are very high..
Hell, if pitt still had psu 4 game schedule going, with ND on the rotation, our numbers would be very high.
How you cant just use objective metrics like playoff appearances, ncaa tournament games (on the hoops side) and actual success ON THE FIELD to dictate pay bumps is beyond me..
lock me in a room for 24 hours with 2 bottles of jameson, a 30 pack of Miller lite, a fioris large peperoni pizza and two asian chicks, preferably of age, an 8 ball of cocaine and i'd have this all figured out for you..
Pitt would be crazy stupid to not play in Week 0 every year and try to maximize weeknight games if they are going to be paid based on TV ratings. Great idea to pay based on brand value but terrible idea to use TV ratings to measure that. I mean let's say Pitt is having a great year and plays Clemson in a primetime game but it just so happens It occurs at the same exact time as some national tragedy or some OJ Simpson car chase type event. Why should Pitt be penalized for Americans turning their game off to follow some national event?
Doesn’t all of that take care of itself when using a 5 year rolling window?
Yeah, I can Google about 8,000 rankings of brand value. It must not be impossible to attempt to quantify. Didn't they literally just apply these formulas to conference expansion models like a year ago?
disagree. You got the Big Fox noon game, PSU played so many times head to head against us that is going to draw people away. Noon games get lost in the forest of games. People with youth sports are likely busy at least until early afternoon. Especially if you aren't on ABC or Big ESPN.
No. Because ACCN games aren't rated so in 5 years, a school like Pitt may only have 30 rated games. It's not enough.
I do think these schools should try to manipulate the numbers....and maybe that's the point. Want paid more, stop scheduling all Saturday games.
Our schedule should be:
Game 1: Week 0
Game 2: Labor Day Eve (Sunday)
Game 3: Road
Bye
Game 4: Wednesday night or Friday night
Andy Staples published an article saying one school is willing to pay $200 million to leave on Tuesday. I'd link but... it's from a competing platform. Easily located on Twitter.
What does ESPN know? They just picked up the option on the ACC network a little over a month ago. Were they fine with the litigating schools departing because it's all the same to them and aren't actually "losing them" if they fold into the SEC, just switching networks?
I always knew Phillips was a hack, but 100 million for 6 years of media rights? Incompetence beyond parallel.
What does ESPN know? They just picked up the option on the ACC network a little over a month ago. Were they fine with the litigating schools departing because it's all the same to them and aren't actually "losing them" if they fold into the SEC, just switching networks?
I always knew Phillips was a hack, but 100 million for 6 years of media rights? Incompetence beyond parallel.
I’d be surprised if teams like FSU or Clemson left before 2030. They will make double what the Big 10 gave Oregon and Washington and have a much easier path to the CFP.
I will admit it does seem weird to to push these changes through to then immediately leave.
Do they have a promise though? Guess we'll find out tomorrow.
Latest posts
-
-
-
-
My guess as to why this site is STILL in 'no mans land' at the moment
- Latest: ChiefJusticeMarshall
-
