Home
Articles
Photos
Interviews
Forums
New posts
Search forums
Georgia Tech Recruiting
Dashboard
What's new
New posts
New profile posts
Latest activity
Chat
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Home
Forums
Georgia Tech Athletics
Georgia Tech Football
Conference Realignment
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="RonJohn" data-source="post: 1007242" data-attributes="member: 2426"><p>Except, what he is saying is that ESPN will extend the ACC deal and continue to pay the ACC, but pay the SEC more for Clemson and FSU than they are paying now, except that some of that money will be paid to the ACC, so that the ACC won't lose money, the SEC will make more money, and ESPN won't have to pay out any more money. How that works mathematically I don't understand.</p><p></p><p>IF there is a total opt-out option in 2027, and ESPN wants to not pay the majority of the ACC, then they will just opt-out. This shuffling things around and making money magically appear doesn't make any sense, except to frothing-fan type people on Twitter.</p><p></p><p>I won't say that it is impossible for something to happen, but since the GOR requires the signature of every single member of the ACC to change it, FSU is not going to realistically get out of the GOR. The ACC could potentially still own FSU's rights and license them to the SEC to sell to ESPN. They might be able to do that without changing the GOR. But why would ESPN want that? Why would the SEC want that? Why would FSU want that if they are in the SEC, but only making similar, or maybe less money than in the ACC? The ACC paid out about $40 million per team last year. The SEC paid out about $50 million per team. The SEC is projected to have a significant jump next year because of the new deal. If the SEC revenue goes to $75 million next year, and the ACC gets FSU's current revenue for licensing the rights, then the SEC would only get around $30 million extra for having FSU. Is ESPN going to be happy about paying $30 million more for FSU to be in a different conference? Is the ACC going to be happy about licensing the content for less than market value? Is the SEC going to be happy about having a team that brings in much less revenue than any other team? Maybe it sounds good as an idea, but the puzzle pieces just don't line up.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="RonJohn, post: 1007242, member: 2426"] Except, what he is saying is that ESPN will extend the ACC deal and continue to pay the ACC, but pay the SEC more for Clemson and FSU than they are paying now, except that some of that money will be paid to the ACC, so that the ACC won't lose money, the SEC will make more money, and ESPN won't have to pay out any more money. How that works mathematically I don't understand. IF there is a total opt-out option in 2027, and ESPN wants to not pay the majority of the ACC, then they will just opt-out. This shuffling things around and making money magically appear doesn't make any sense, except to frothing-fan type people on Twitter. I won't say that it is impossible for something to happen, but since the GOR requires the signature of every single member of the ACC to change it, FSU is not going to realistically get out of the GOR. The ACC could potentially still own FSU's rights and license them to the SEC to sell to ESPN. They might be able to do that without changing the GOR. But why would ESPN want that? Why would the SEC want that? Why would FSU want that if they are in the SEC, but only making similar, or maybe less money than in the ACC? The ACC paid out about $40 million per team last year. The SEC paid out about $50 million per team. The SEC is projected to have a significant jump next year because of the new deal. If the SEC revenue goes to $75 million next year, and the ACC gets FSU's current revenue for licensing the rights, then the SEC would only get around $30 million extra for having FSU. Is ESPN going to be happy about paying $30 million more for FSU to be in a different conference? Is the ACC going to be happy about licensing the content for less than market value? Is the SEC going to be happy about having a team that brings in much less revenue than any other team? Maybe it sounds good as an idea, but the puzzle pieces just don't line up. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
The 2014 ACC Football Championship was played in what city?
Post reply
Home
Forums
Georgia Tech Athletics
Georgia Tech Football
Conference Realignment
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
Accept
Learn more…
Top