Blog Entry

ACC gets a windfall

Posted on: July 8, 2010 11:48 am
Edited on: July 8, 2010 12:03 pm
  •  
 
The ACC has signed a 12-year television rights deal with ESPN worth approximately $1.86 billion.

ACC commissioner John Swofford basically confirmed the worth of the deal during a Thursday morning teleconference.

Asked specifically about the $1.86 billion price tag Swofford said: "I have read some things that have been written that are quite accurate."

Swofford added that each school's take has doubled. Breaking that down evenly means that the conference will receive $155 million a year from the deal, more than doubling the current take of $75 million. That's $13 million per school which, for now, puts the ACC ahead of the Big 12 in the No. 3 spot in TV revenue behind the Big Ten and SEC.

"One of the reasons we settled on 12 years is that seemed to be a balancing point where we could maximize the dollars," Swofford said.

What this means for the Big 12 and Pac-10, two current ESPN partners, can only be good. The Pac-10 will negotiate a new deal next year. The Big 12 must wait five more years for its ESPN deal to expire. But the network has shown good faith by not cutting its payout despite the league's loss of Nebraska and Colorado.

Swofford added that the ACC did its "due diligence" in exploring a conference network but that that numbers didn't add up. In a telling statement Swofford also said, "The Big Ten Network may turn out to be an anomaly."
  •  
Category: NCAAF
Tags: ACC
 
Comments

Since: Jan 19, 2008
Posted on: July 12, 2010 2:46 pm
 

ACC gets a windfall

I dont understand each league having a network, I would watch a ACC network because I have lived in the ACC area all my life. I will not watch the Big 10 network at all, not unless they had PSU/ OSU in football or such top teams in basketball, these games will always be on ESPN or networks. Its just too regional for it too matter.




Since: Aug 16, 2006
Posted on: July 10, 2010 1:14 pm
 

ACC gets a windfall

Outstanding posty. Thanks.



Since: Jul 9, 2010
Posted on: July 9, 2010 8:54 pm
 

ACC gets a windfall

I don't want to say you are crazy, but WVU would not be a good fit in the ACC for a
number of reasons.  First of all, the ACC does not have a desire to expand and this
notion has been documented all through this last conference re-alignment. All of the
current members of the ACC are very happy, and they split all of their Conference
revenue equally. The ACC's new deal makes it even stronger with the current 12 members,
and why would you want to divide your conference revenue between 14 or 16 team?
All the ACC needs to do is continue to keep making the conference better as a group of
12 Fine Universities.
Secondly, if the ACC did expand in the Northeast the teams that would better fit the current ACC
footprint are Syracuse, UConn, Rutgers, and PITT.  Now the argument that the Big TEN could go
after these teams.  But the BIG TEN has several teams that are not located in the BIG EAST Northest
area that they could go after.  
Thirdly, and you won't probably like this, but WVU is a football venue that a lot of visiting teams fans
don't like to attend.  The reputation is there at WVU, and well documented, that visiting team fans
are treated terrible.  WVU needs to get rid of this negative reputation, and it probably can do so
with strong leadership from it's Administration, student Government, Athletic Director's Office, and the
non-student fans. You are definitely right about one thing, WVU does travel very well.
So, that's why one does not hear much about WVU in any conference expansion talk.



Since: Oct 13, 2006
Posted on: July 9, 2010 5:12 pm
 

ACC gets a windfall

I don't think that quote was intended to mean that he thought the success Big Ten Network was a fluke in any way.

I believe the 'anomaly' is that he's talking about is that the Big Ten's fan base is so large that other conference might not be able to duplicate the BTN's success.





Since: Nov 2, 2008
Posted on: July 9, 2010 4:56 pm
 

ACC gets a windfall

I think were saying the other conferences could not support a network of it's own by it's viewers...



Since: Nov 3, 2008
Posted on: July 9, 2010 2:51 pm
 

ACC gets a windfall

that's the thing I've never understood -- they always threw out $0.70 per household in their coverage area, but I know I get really angry when they jack up my rates because they've added throwaway channels.  I can't help but think it's coming.

My wife is an Ohio State alum, as are several of her family and friends.  They love their OSU, but none has any interest in anything beyond football & basketball, and even then, it's only the games against marquee opponents that draw big interest.  I'm the same way.  As much as I love college football (I read about it year-round), I really have no interest in seeing my team play Western Kentucky.  Any game worth watching is going to be on a major network/ESPN.  I think the long-term smart money is continuing to forge deals with the big boys.



Since: Sep 12, 2006
Posted on: July 9, 2010 2:05 pm
 

ACC gets a windfall

I never said I got anything??  You don't write posts where anyone can get it.



Since: Aug 17, 2006
Posted on: July 9, 2010 1:58 pm
 

ACC gets a windfall

First I enjoy seeing Penn State Womens volleyball the threepeat they put on what used to a West Coast dominated Sport, but I know I am in the minority.   

The rate of paying Universities for TV deals keeps going up,  PAC 10 and Big East had better get a better deal. 



Since: Nov 3, 2006
Posted on: July 9, 2010 12:39 pm
 

ACC gets a windfall

your right, you don't get it



Since: Sep 12, 2006
Posted on: July 9, 2010 8:58 am
 

ACC gets a windfall

People may think I am crazy but I think the ACC could use WV.  Right now the ACC is filled with TV teams and not enough going to the game teams.  Not many teams travel to bowls in the ACC.  VT, Clemson, and FSU are about it.  They have TV markets now it is time to put some teams in where their fans travel to games.


The views expressed in this blog are solely those of the author and do not reflect the views of CBS Sports or CBSSports.com