The networks actually want a P1, and they want to be the one controlling it.

(07-31-2021 12:01 AM)random asian guy Wrote:  

(07-30-2021 11:30 PM)tj_2009 Wrote:  

(07-30-2021 10:02 PM)Shannon Panther Wrote:  The ACC needs to acknowledge that FB is driving the bus and all member schools are expected to invest accordingly. That level of investment needs to be a precondition to any expansion candidates. There is nobody coming to rescue us. This needs to happen organically.

Does anybody remember a company called Kodak? They were a company that used to dominate the photography industry when film was used for cameras. The problem for them was that they never saw digital cameras coming and they refused to acknowledge that digital cameras were going to be the future. Kodak by the way never did adequately develop digital cameras and are just hanging on.
The reason why i tell this story is because when you are in business (and the ACC is in the business of college sports), you have to be aware of the future and what was successful, may not be the recipe for success in the future.
Most people who don't follow cable companies earnings don't realize that they are losing subscribers because of cord cutting. The current model of cable contracts for college football was based on cable subscriptions but the market for that is decreasing. That model is undergoing some changes as there are less people subscribing to cable. What seems to be the trend is that people are reducing their cable packages (or cutting them off) and supplementing this with with Internet Protocol streaming (i.e. - Netflix, Disney, Amazon, Apple, Peacock (NBC), Paramount + (CBS), Youtube TV (google), Warner Brothers Discovery. These companies are raking in a worldwide audience for their streaming services and making big $$$. All of this move to IP streaming is leading to more importance for branding. The ACC either has to invest in the IP Streaming technology to sell their product worldwide or make a deal with the existing IP streaming giants. People discount basketball as a money maker because that has historically not been the most valuable commodity in the US. College football has been the king in the US. Basketball is the 2nd most popular sport in the world, and there is no market for college football outside the US. The ACC just happens to have the best college basketball league in the US. The ACC could capitalize on the popularity of basketball outside the US by using IP streaming technology and selling its product worldwide. The ACC needs to offer Kansas (Basketball blue blood and they don't become available often) and build the ACC basketball brand. The entire world is your possible customer in IP streaming and basketball is extremely popular around the world. The ACC could leverage basketball and sell it to the world so the probability of exceeding earnings over college football are extremely good. The ACC just needs to recognize this and plan for this. Sure there will be a dip in revenues in the short term while the technology is being developed, but long term the future revenues could be really high.

I haven’t thought about that. But it’s true that quite a few people in Asia (especially in China) watch the NBA games and hardly no one watches the NFL.

I would say the March Madness got some potential in overseas market. But yeah it may take decades.

The NBA is really popular around the world and if the ACC does it right they improve their basketball product as the best college basketball league in the US and are thus better able to sell their product worldwide via internet streaming. Basketball in general is so popular around the world (Number 2 sport) that streaming of basketball leagues around the world is inevitable. Hopefully the ACC can get in there and sell their product to internet streaming companies like Apple, Amazon, Netflix etc because that would make it easier than developing the streaming technology ourselves.

(07-31-2021 10:09 AM)ChrisLords Wrote:  

(07-31-2021 09:41 AM)Bear Catlett Wrote:  

(07-31-2021 09:10 AM)esayem Wrote:  

(07-31-2021 07:24 AM)Bear Catlett Wrote:  

(07-31-2021 12:54 AM)esayem Wrote:  Have you seen NIL and Miami?

HURRICANE WARNING

They've been unofficially NIL-ing for years.

Nothing will change for them.

I agree with you that Syracuse and Louisville will probably do very well in the new NIL era. Syracuse does have money and hopefully will use its connections with companies well. I think Syracuse could improve with a few good recruiting classes. Historically, Syracuse has been best when it has recruited New Jersey and supplemented it with Florida recruits. New Jersey has a lot of talent but it is tough going getting the top talent with Penn State, Ohio State and Michigan in there along with Rutgers. The Syracuse coaches get a lot of compensation from companies who pay them like Nike. I would not be surprised if Nike spreads some NIL money to some Syracuse athletes.




Wanna bet?

Surely NIL will make all the difference in assuring that they won't ever get shut out by LA Tech again.

And yeah, those SEC teams will have no idea how to use that NIL thing to their advantage. Only Miami.

Miami is best served when they can get all the best talent within 50 miles of campus. I don't think NIL helps that effort. Miami has always been notoriously underfunded for how successful they have been. With 5 National titles in the last 40 years, they should be a $150 mil a year athletics department. But as it stands they are still funded by the $190 season ticket package. Which is vastly improved because when Richt started there, their season tickets were $120.

I think the schools that have the best chance to improve are the non-elite schools that have a lot of money. In the ACC that's Louisville and Syracuse. I've always criticized Cuse for being cheap with their coaches to which fans on here say that's only part of their compensation; they have a lot of endorsements too. Well we're about to find how strong those endorsement fund channels are.

I don't think it would take too much of a talent influx for Cuse to improve dramatically and I think Babers is the guy to do it. If they can get a couple of good 3 or 4-star QBs and some depth along the offensive and defensive line they'd be much improved.

Louisville was always going to be successful eventually because not only do they have a lot of money, they have no trouble shelling it out for good coaches and doing what it takes to attract talented recruits. I think NIL accelerates their time table to being elite.

I'm not so sure about VT. Our basketball guard Tyrece Radford, who is the key to our season next year, entered the portal on the last day eligible. Word is that he wants some NIL money because his family is in bad shape. It's been 4-6 weeks now and I haven't heard of any NIL money for him to stay in Blacksburg. That does not give me hope for how well VT is going to navigate the new NIL world.

Cincy is probably in a good situation too. It's got to help to be in the middle of a big city. 10,000s of opportunities for potential endorsements.

(07-31-2021 04:46 PM)mac6115cd Wrote:  If the ACC wants to add revenue, team quality doesn't matter, TV viewers do. Do you think the B1G added Rutgers because of their football program?

According to the Nielson DMA 2020 rankings, the best new markets are:

5 Dallas-Ft. Worth (SMU)
8 Houston (Houston)
12 Tampa (USF)
18 Orlando (UCF)
37 Cincinnati (UC)
51 Memphis

If you think Florida is covered, that leaves invitations to SMU, Houston, Cincinnati and Memphis. Again, the ONLY thing that matters is TV dollars, NOT the "quality" of the football program.

I agree that television viewers count but not just in the US. The game has changed because of cord cutting of cable and internet streaming becoming the future direction. Now branding and popularity is really important in this new internet streaming era. That's why schools like Notre Dame with their brand and popularity is the number one school on every conference's list. I would say Kansas is the biggest brand out there because of their blue blood basketball program. They draw viewers regardless of the city because they are consistently one of the best basketball programs around.

(07-31-2021 11:44 PM)tj_2009 Wrote:  The NBA is really popular around the world and if the ACC does it right they improve their basketball product as the best college basketball league in the US and are thus better able to sell their product worldwide via internet streaming. Basketball in general is so popular around the world (Number 2 sport) that streaming of basketball leagues around the world is inevitable. Hopefully the ACC can get in there and sell their product to internet streaming companies like Apple, Amazon, Netflix etc because that would make it easier than developing the streaming technology ourselves.

I agree. The ACC and PAC also have an advantage with international viewers because their cities and schools are more familiar to people who live abroad.

I was looking forward to the ACCN working to build an international audience for college basketball and even baseball. But of course the network launched just in time for Covid...


Familiarity abroad would be an advantage for any bi-coastal super-league. Regular US East Coast-versus-West Coast title games can attract international viewers.

(07-31-2021 09:10 AM)esayem Wrote:  

(07-31-2021 07:24 AM)Bear Catlett Wrote:  

(07-31-2021 12:54 AM)esayem Wrote:  

(07-30-2021 10:02 PM)Shannon Panther Wrote:  The ACC needs to acknowledge that FB is driving the bus and all member schools are expected to invest accordingly. That level of investment needs to be a precondition to any expansion candidates. There is nobody coming to rescue us. This needs to happen organically.

Have you seen NIL and Miami?

HURRICANE WARNING

They've been unofficially NIL-ing for years.

Nothing will change for them.

Wanna bet?

How about when these players find out they lose other government grants cuz they make just enough to be disqualified. #unintendedconsequences

(08-02-2021 10:25 AM)TexanMark Wrote:  

(07-31-2021 09:10 AM)esayem Wrote:  

(07-31-2021 07:24 AM)Bear Catlett Wrote:  

(07-31-2021 12:54 AM)esayem Wrote:  

(07-30-2021 10:02 PM)Shannon Panther Wrote:  The ACC needs to acknowledge that FB is driving the bus and all member schools are expected to invest accordingly. That level of investment needs to be a precondition to any expansion candidates. There is nobody coming to rescue us. This needs to happen organically.

Have you seen NIL and Miami?

HURRICANE WARNING

They've been unofficially NIL-ing for years.

Nothing will change for them.

Wanna bet?

How about when these players find out they lose other government grants cuz they make just enough to be disqualified. #unintendedconsequences

As Green would say:

MO MONEY MO PROBLEMS

(08-02-2021 10:25 AM)TexanMark Wrote:  

(07-31-2021 09:10 AM)esayem Wrote:  

(07-31-2021 07:24 AM)Bear Catlett Wrote:  

(07-31-2021 12:54 AM)esayem Wrote:  

(07-30-2021 10:02 PM)Shannon Panther Wrote:  The ACC needs to acknowledge that FB is driving the bus and all member schools are expected to invest accordingly. That level of investment needs to be a precondition to any expansion candidates. There is nobody coming to rescue us. This needs to happen organically.

Have you seen NIL and Miami?

HURRICANE WARNING

They've been unofficially NIL-ing for years.

Nothing will change for them.

Wanna bet?

How about when these players find out they lose other government grants cuz they make just enough to be disqualified. #unintendedconsequences

Why would scholarship plyers need grants? Non scholarship players probably won't be getting endorsement deals.

Sent from my Pixel 3 using Tapatalk

The ACC needs more journalism schools. It needs ACC grads working in media, covering sports.

The ACC just needs to provide $1M NIL money to sponsor each 5-star QB who's willing to appear on at least 6 ACC Network football games per year.

(08-03-2021 05:28 PM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  The ACC just needs to provide $1M NIL money to sponsor each 5-star QB who's willing to appear on at least 6 ACC Network football games per year.

Love IT!

(08-03-2021 05:28 PM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  The ACC just needs to provide $1M NIL money to sponsor each 5-star QB who's willing to appear on at least 6 ACC Network football games per year.

That... could be how things work now.

____

(08-01-2021 06:46 PM)Gitanole Wrote:  

(07-31-2021 11:44 PM)tj_2009 Wrote:  The NBA is really popular around the world and if the ACC does it right they improve their basketball product as the best college basketball league in the US and are thus better able to sell their product worldwide via internet streaming. Basketball in general is so popular around the world (Number 2 sport) that streaming of basketball leagues around the world is inevitable. Hopefully the ACC can get in there and sell their product to internet streaming companies like Apple, Amazon, Netflix etc because that would make it easier than developing the streaming technology ourselves.

I agree. The ACC and PAC also have an advantage with international viewers because their cities and schools are more familiar to people who live abroad.

I was looking forward to the ACCN working to build an international audience for college basketball and even baseball. But of course the network launched just in time for Covid...


Familiarity abroad would be an advantage for any bi-coastal super-league. Regular US East Coast-versus-West Coast title games can attract international viewers.

I think the ACC would be successful if it tries to sell the college basketball league to a world audience. I suppose it would have to be with ESPN until 2036. Disney the parent of ESPN has a world wide internet streaming business so they have the technology to do it. This will mean that all the schools will get a bump up in revenue to allow streaming. What would be great if the Pac 12, ACC have some sort of scheduling alliance in basketball such that they would split up some of the internet streaming revenues for selling basketball to a world wide audience. UCLA is a brand name blue blood program, Arizona is very good too. If they could sell the basketball product to 100 million subscribers and charged them $3/month, they would generate $3.6 billion dollars. Even if they only got $1/month they would still be looking at $1.2 billion dollars in a year. Of course Disney would rake in big money but when a renewal comes up the ACC could ask for a big jump in the contract.

(08-03-2021 12:11 PM)b2b Wrote:  

(08-02-2021 10:25 AM)TexanMark Wrote:  

(07-31-2021 09:10 AM)esayem Wrote:  

(07-31-2021 07:24 AM)Bear Catlett Wrote:  

(07-31-2021 12:54 AM)esayem Wrote:  Have you seen NIL and Miami?

HURRICANE WARNING

They've been unofficially NIL-ing for years.

Nothing will change for them.

Wanna bet?

How about when these players find out they lose other government grants cuz they make just enough to be disqualified. #unintendedconsequences

Why would scholarship plyers need grants? Non scholarship players probably won't be getting endorsement deals.

Sent from my Pixel 3 using Tapatalk

Pell Grants....I bet many of them are receiving

(08-03-2021 05:22 PM)Gitanole Wrote:  The ACC needs more journalism schools. It needs ACC grads working in media, covering sports.

The league already has the best one

(08-06-2021 01:57 PM)TexanMark Wrote:  

(08-03-2021 05:22 PM)Gitanole Wrote:  The ACC needs more journalism schools. It needs ACC grads working in media, covering sports.

The league already has the best one

Doesn't help if hardly any of them work for ESPN.

Doesn't matter what journalist are out there.....ESPN pushes football on SEC network and lacrosse on ACC Network. It is the embodiment of varsity and junior varsity.

(07-22-2021 03:12 PM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  

(07-22-2021 02:46 PM)7thHeaven Wrote:  TV money and more football. I think if there are no schools that drastically change our payout we either stay put or go Big, unless ND decides to go all in but I don’t see that happening. The only way I see the ACC adding leftover Big 12 schools is if we take 4 or more unless ESPN wants to pay us big for WV and Kansas. The Texas market is booming and the ACC network would love to add the Texas Market.

There are two schools in Texas that have the gumption to compete for a national title despite being at a financial disadvantage, because they're used to it: TCU and Houston.

If the ACC decides to expand, it needs to look for schools like that, IMO. Anyone can win when they have superior resources.

Superior resources, true, but only coaching makes the difference. Texas has all the money in the world and STILL can't win...and, it won't get better in the SEC. The ACC is in the same position as the Big12 was - two top teams and the rest.

If the SEC goes after Clemson and FSU, you're in the same Big12 boat. The SEC wants to be the P1 with the rest as the G9. They've already made the first move, watch out for the next.

If you’ve been paying attention you’ll see SEC reps saying the conference is in danger of being perceived as two conferences. Adding more schools ensures that, so I’m confident they’re done.

(08-07-2021 04:21 PM)esayem Wrote:  If you’ve been paying attention you’ll see SEC reps saying the conference is in danger of being perceived as two conferences. Adding more schools ensures that, so I’m confident they’re done.

Unless Notre Dame wanted in there is no reason for the SEC to expand further.

As long as Notre Dame is content as an ACC partial and continues to say "Nyet" to the Big 10 there is no combination of remaining schools they could add to catch the SEC's value.

The Big 10 has 5 ACC schools which on paper add value. This includes Notre Dame, Florida State, Louisville, Clemson, and Miami is a wash. Of those academic standing eliminates 3 (If no Oklahoma with equivalent ranking with FSU then no FSU). Miami comes closest and has plenty of Northerners who retired there from which to draw, but no Notre Dame means no Miami.

The Big 10 could take 4 from the PAC but the most valuable, Washington, would be only 7th in the Big10 in earnings and the 4 would add to the average value minimally. And since even Washington is middle of the pack why do it? It harms relations with your Rose Bowl partner and adds prohibitively to travel.

The ACC could find marginal value in Kansas or TCU but both are outliers which might fit better with the PAC should they be inclined.

I see no compelling moves to be made outside of ND and as long as they have a CFP pathway they have no reason to move. We're all done for now. ESPN made a surgical strike which they calculated would leave no way to incite chaos.