So this is what conference expansion nets you.

Jerry Hinnen notes that in return for a fairly modest bump ($1-2 million/year per school) in its TV deal, the ACC had to pay a steep price on its end even for that:

… In exchange for the boost to the contract, ESPN is also expected to exact a not-insignificant price: a three-year extension of what was already a 12-year deal, meaning the ACC won’t be able to enter a full contract negotiation until 2026. (If the Big Ten and Pac-12 networks continue at their expected rates of growth, how wide will the gap be between those conferences and the ACC 14 years from now?)

Such a deal.  Of course, nothing’s stopping them from going to 16 and renegotiating again, right?

Mike Slive had better hope that’s not an indication of where the national broadcast market is right now.

About these ads

14 Comments

Filed under ACC Football, It's Just Bidness

14 responses to “So this is what conference expansion nets you.

  1. wnc dawg

    The fact that this # comes AFTER they agreed to a 9 game schedule makes it even worse. They literally have nothing else to offer the tv partners except 16 teams. You’d think they could get similar $ as this just for going to 9 and giving another full weekend of games. As an ACC alum, it has saddened me to no end how they have just destroyed all that was good about the league. Swofford didn’t have many angles with the hand he was dealt, but man, has he just been pwned at every turn by the tv guys.

    • Robby

      The mistake was not taking Syracuse instead of BC years ago and not staying at 12 this year. Now they have too many middling programs to ever be attractive.

      • Mayor of Dawgtown

        Why can’t that exact same comment be said about where the SEC is now?

        • Biggus Rickus

          The SEC hasn’t expanded with anyone like Boston College, and while I can’t find any stats to back it up, I’m guessing on average SEC games draw better ratings on ESPN than ACC games.

        • Even if Texas A&M never ascends to the rank of powerhouse (or even demi-powerhouse) in the SEC, they’ve still got a rabid fanbase and plenty of pull in terms of TV viewership. BC couldn’t even sell bowl tickets when they were going to decent games.

          I still think SEC expansion was a mistake, as it was a response to a non-existent threat (i.e. the Pac-12 taking over the world). But the ACC’s expansion was a compounded mistake, as it was a response to that misguided response. I mean, they went to 12 teams because they wanted to be known as more than just a basketball conference, and now they go to 14 with a pair of football programs the rest of the country could hardly give less of a crap about? This is what’s known as “diluting your brand,” and in terms of football, the ACC’s brand wasn’t that stout to begin with.

  2. Go Dawgs!

    Man, imagine the SEC wrecking the league by bringing in two schools that don’t even belong just to get more money in the TV deal, and then getting stonewalled like that. Wouldn’t that just be fitting?

    • Joe

      I say A&M fits anyway, but your point is valid.

      • Mayor of Dawgtown

        I think Mizzou fits better than A&M–not that either actually “fit.”

        • Macallanlover

          And I like both of them, (A&M the best). What I don’t like is the ADs and conference “leadership” not recognizing the need for a 9th conference game. Season ticket holders deserve better than the 1-2 good home games a year, and all fans should have a good, quality match-up every weekend on TV.

  3. Chadwick

    in less than ten years college football, at least the rich traditional football most of us grew up with, will be destroyed. i have no doubt in that given the avarice and idiocy of the people driving all the “improvements”.

    • Frank Bunn

      When me and the War Department retire abroad somewhere I have figured that about the only thing I’m really going to miss is going to Sanford Stadium a couple of times a year, and watching the Dawgs on TV whenever I want to. However, if things turn out like you say (and these days I’m predisposed to agree with you), then I guess I won’t be missing a damn thing, and I can just live in the moment in paradise, wherever that is.

      • Macallanlover

        Amen brother! Don’t really understand why games shouldn’t be available through satellite. We have to watch soccer games from all over the globe, why not offer CFB? There is a market expansion for TV execs to factor in.

  4. stoopnagle

    It’ll all be OK. We still have good bourbon.