ShopMobileRadio RSSRivals.com Yahoo! Sports


Tomahawks
Register User Options
Site: Forum:


Post New topic Post New Poll Post Reply   Page 1 2 3 4

Previous Topic | Next Topic | Back to Topics


Grizzlynole posted on ...

Sorry if we've been around this barn already, but could someone explain why UF doesn't want us in the SEC? Thanks---Griz

_______________________________________________________________________________________________________

You're joking right?  The turds dispise competition from any other state university and do everything they can legal or otherwise, to keep everyone else down.  That's been true at least going back to the passage of the Buckman Act, a 1905 law that reorganized higher education into three institutions segregated by race and gender.

FYI, Florida State College played UF 4 times in 1902, 03 and 04 (twice in 02) beating UF 3-1.  So our REAL all-time record vs UF is 35?24?2 not 34?21?2.
12/4 7:04 PM | IP: Logged



Originally posted by = Iceman =:




Originally posted by fsujd:

You forgot to mention the 5 year look ins the ACC will get.  If we got more money for more inventory then we got a bump from Syracuse and Pitt because they created more inventory. 




The ACC lost some of that inventory and "bump" when they decided to switch from a 9 game conference schedule to an 8 game conference schedule.  For full disclosure though, FSU will more than make up for the lost revenue through the added annual home game a 4 game OOC schedule affords. 




That is true but when Louisville was added Swofford said the ACC/ESPN deal was not effected and never saw any word of it changing after announcement of 8 conference games. 
12/4 11:48 PM | IP: Logged



Originally posted by BigHieb:
FSUJD,

Do you not recall what the last ESPN "lookin" got the league? A backloaded contract that required the ACC to give up essentially all of its inventory for minimal increase in revenue for an extended period of time. ESPN has zero incentive to significantly increase its payout to a conference it already possesses. It's not like FOX can swoop in during the lookin period and drive the ACC contract price higher. It's a closed negotiation.... One that ESPN holds all the power. The lookin is simply a method that the ACC can save face by saying "our new two homes games against ND annually can get us more money" and then sign a contract through 2030.

The lookin is a fraud. As long as FSU is in the ACC during the period of 2012 til probably at least 2022, we will be getting approximately $8mill less than the Big12 andPAC 12 and $10 to 15 million less annually than SEC and B1G. (including third tier rights) and no lookin clause is going to help that.


As noted by another poster when Syracuse and Pitt were added that was not a "look in".  That provision came in as part of the re-negotiation when Cuse and Pitt were added.  The ACC got an average of $4 million per team increase when those two were added.  No one right now can say what the look in will bring.  Part of that depends on the ACC's performance of course, including FSU's.  We do know a bump is coming with the ND add.

One reason I don't buy a lot of these projections that are thrown around is they don't all pan out.  Pac 12 is an example.  I read in a Bay area paper that the Pac payout on TV right now is about 15 million (theirs is backloaded too like everybody else) and their future projections may be a little rosey because it includes the Pac 12 Network that has yet to be picked up by Direct TV and some other major carriers.

Big 10 says Maryland will get 12 million more in 2014 than it would in the ACC.  This year the Big 10 paid 24 million per school (and that is with Nebraska not getting full share), ACC 17 million for 7 mil difference.  So in less than two years that is going to almost double with two (really three with Nebraska full share) more schools to pay?  We'll see.

SEC paid 20 million this year.  So they are 3 million ahead.  CBS isn't indicating they will give big bump, if any.  It remains to be seen what SEC actually gets so I don't take 10-15 million gap at face value.  Its 3 right now.  That is what we know.
12/5 12:01 AM | IP: Logged



Originally posted by Nole4757:






Originally posted by fsujd:









Originally posted by AllNoles:
BORASCH,

The deal with ESPN is not going to allow us to negotiate with anyone other than ESPN. There's no point to them locking us into a contract if we could just go negotiate with others during the life of the deal. This is why I always thought such a long deal, at such a bad price, was such a horrible idea.

Have you seen the ESPN-ACC contract? I will admit I have not, but it's been reported for a while that ESPN has the option to renegotiate the deal if certain things happen to the ACC (life FSU leaving), and that if the ACC changes or adds certain teams which increase value, then ESPN will redo the deal based on some formula. It's not an open re-negotiation, and it's not something that gives the ACC some great new deal.

A few other things. Pitt/Syracuse is already calculated into the current value, but they did not give us real value. The deal increased only becasue we aded inventory to the deal in terms of more games per team. I recall the breakdown of that deal showing we really got nothing by adding those teams.

Maryland and Louisville swapping won't change the deal.

I am not sure about this, but I think it's been reported that the ND 2.5 games/season adds less than a million per team per year. That's a nice bump, but we are still way outside the range of other teams.

Finally, I don't understand your points about ND. ND's contract was worth 15M a year back when other leagues/teams were making less than $7-8M a year. You can't pretend ND extending their deal past '15 will be for anything like ACC money. They'll get $25M or more. And if they join the ACC, they will give up a lont of money, which makes no sense for them to do.






You forgot to mention the 5 year look ins the ACC will get.  If we got more money for more inventory then we got a bump from Syracuse and Pitt because they created more inventory.  By the way those two were unmercifully skewered on here and both end up making bowl games, unlike one of the SEC additions.

The new ACC with Pitt, Syracuse, Louisville and non-sanctioned UM and UNC would have 11 teams in bowls out of 14. 

Gene, has whipped up the Big 12 hopes again.  If it doesn't happen you guys might be busting his door down.




This post was edited on 12/4 12:20 AM by fsujd







fsujd:

Spin away.

But, and I know these are minor points that undermine your ACC spin:




  • didn't Pitt and Syracuse play in the Big East and the two SEC additions play in the SEC this year,
  • didn't Louisville and Pitt both lose to UCONN this year
  • UNC is sanctioned
  • Miami is not officially sanctioned yet
  • Only 7, not 8, ACC teams actually qualified this year for bowls games, the seventh qualifying ACC team self banned while the ACC replacement team begged after going 6-7







To your points:

1.  Yes they did but still bowl eligible.  Syracuse beat Missouri.
2.  Yes but they are still bowl eligible.
3.   True.
4.    I am aware of that but who wants to type that explaination every time.  The point is they aren't playing in a bowl.
5.    If UM and UNC were bowl eligible GT would not have played in the championship game and finished the season 6-6, bowl eligible. 

Basically nothing you said changed my original post.

12/5 12:08 AM | IP: Logged Distance-wise there isn't much of a difference between the long distance schools of the ACC and Big 12. But other than Va Tech and UVA there are some very remote places in the Big 12: Iowa St, Kansas, K-St, Texas Tech come to mind.

Posted from wireless.rivals.com



Posted on 12/5 4:59 AM | IP: Logged


Originally posted by fsujd:



Originally posted by = Iceman =:




Originally posted by fsujd:

You forgot to mention the 5 year look ins the ACC will get.  If we got more money for more inventory then we got a bump from Syracuse and Pitt because they created more inventory. 



The ACC lost some of that inventory and "bump" when they decided to switch from a 9 game conference schedule to an 8 game conference schedule.  For full disclosure though, FSU will more than make up for the lost revenue through the added annual home game a 4 game OOC schedule affords. 



That is true but when Louisville was added Swofford said the ACC/ESPN deal was not effected and never saw any word of it changing after announcement of 8 conference games. 

It's a 7% reduction of total inventory for ESPN, including losing 1 game a year from FSU, VA Tech, Miami, Clemson, etc.  So, the contract goes down by the percentage loss of inventory.  It's not a huge deal though, b/c FSU will more than make it up by the extra home game every year. 

12/5 9:35 AM | IP: Logged


Originally posted by = Iceman =:

Originally posted by fsujd:



Originally posted by = Iceman =:




Originally posted by fsujd:

You forgot to mention the 5 year look ins the ACC will get.  If we got more money for more inventory then we got a bump from Syracuse and Pitt because they created more inventory. 



The ACC lost some of that inventory and "bump" when they decided to switch from a 9 game conference schedule to an 8 game conference schedule.  For full disclosure though, FSU will more than make up for the lost revenue through the added annual home game a 4 game OOC schedule affords. 



That is true but when Louisville was added Swofford said the ACC/ESPN deal was not effected and never saw any word of it changing after announcement of 8 conference games. 

It's a 7% reduction of total inventory for ESPN, including losing 1 game a year from FSU, VA Tech, Miami, Clemson, etc.  So, the contract goes down by the percentage loss of inventory.  It's not a huge deal though, b/c FSU will more than make it up by the extra home game every year. 


Not all games would have been televised, so I dont see how the contract goes down by 7%.
12/5 10:29 AM | IP: Logged


Originally posted by Calif_Nole:


Re: NEW: War Room - ACC scuttlebutt, DC search update, assistant coachesGrizzlynole posted on ...

Sorry if we've been around this barn already, but could someone explain why UF doesn't want us in the SEC? Thanks---Griz

_______________________________________________________________________________________________________

You're joking right?  The turds dispise competition from any other state university and do everything they can legal or otherwise, to keep everyone else down.  That's been true at least going back to the passage of the Buckman Act, a 1905 law that reorganized higher education into three institutions segregated by race and gender.

FYI, Florida State College played UF 4 times in 1902, 03 and 04 (twice in 02) beating UF 3-1.  So our REAL all-time record vs UF is 35?24?2 not 34?21?2.
UF will no longer black ball FSU.  They wont advocate for us but they wont block either.
12/5 12:03 PM | IP: Logged
Previous Topic | Next Topic | Back to Topics

Post New topic Post New Poll Post Reply Page 1 2 3 4

LATEST NEWS




Rivals.com is your source for: College Football | Football Recruiting | College Basketball | Basketball Recruiting | College Baseball | High School | College Merchandise
Site-specific editorial/photos Warchant.com. All rights reserved. This website is an officially and independently operated source of news and information not affiliated with any school or team.
About | Advertise with Us | Contact | Privacy Policy | About our Ads | Terms of Service | Copyright/IP policy | Yahoo! Sports - NBC Sports Network

Statistical information 2007 STATS LLC All Rights Reserved.