Tiger Board Logo

Donor's Den General Leaderboards TNET coins™ POTD Hall of Fame Map FAQ
GIVE AN AWARD
Use your TNET coins™ to grant this post a special award!

W
50
Big Brain
90
Love it!
100
Cheers
100
Helpful
100
Made Me Smile
100
Great Idea!
150
Mind Blown
150
Caring
200
Flammable
200
Hear ye, hear ye
200
Bravo
250
Nom Nom Nom
250
Take My Coins
500
Ooo, Shiny!
700
Treasured Post!
1000

YOUR BALANCE
check this out. Frank the tank says the ACC will have
storage This topic has been archived - replies are not allowed.
Archives - Tiger Boards Archive
add New Topic
Replies: 8
| visibility 1

check this out. Frank the tank says the ACC will have


Jul 3, 2012, 5:57 PM

a big advantage in owning the rights to the Orange. When the Orange is a semi-final, the ACC gets the broadcast money even if an ACC team is not in the game. Also the ACC does not have to split the broadcast rights with another conference like the SEC/Big12 split the champions bowl and the Pac12/Big 10 split the Rose. Here is a cut and paste:


Frank the Tank
VERY smart for both the ACC and Orange Bowl to do this. It's what the Rose Bowl already does and the Champions Bowl plans to do. Remember that these rights *include* the semifinal games when the Orange is the host, so the ACC is essentially getting direct broadcast payments for at least 4 semifinal games over the course of the 12-year deal *regardless* of whether the ACC is actually a semifinal participant. Plus, the ACC isn't going to be splitting that broadcast revenue in the same manner that the Big Ten/Pac-12 and SEC/Big 12 do with their respective bowls (although those respective bowls would likely receive higher rights fees overall compared to the Orange, so it's a give and take). Any thoughts that the ACC wouldn't be financially viable going forward ought to be erased completely.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Why wouldn't the rights fees be the same for the OB if they


Jul 3, 2012, 6:05 PM

have the Championship game or why would their semifinal be worth less than the other semi. That doesn't make sense.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

If it is a semi game it will not be less. He is pointing out


Jul 3, 2012, 6:12 PM

that the ACC is going to get all the rights for owning that game instead of sharing it with another contracted conference, Like the SEC and Big12 who jointly own what is being referred to as the Champion Bowl which is the Bowl they created. It will probably not be known as that when it is actually created.

Maybe I missed your point though.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

I haven't been following too closely, but prior to this deal


Jul 3, 2012, 6:18 PM

there were guys saying The Pac10/Big 10 and Big12/SEC had an advantage over the ACC due to the Rose Bowl and now the Champion Bowl. On the surface it seems this new deal would equalize whatever the Rose and Champion Bowl did, but what I'm not sure of is what advantage did those bowls provide to the other conferences?

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

It's the broadcast rights money. (the money paid by the TV


Jul 3, 2012, 6:53 PM

channel to air the bowl game)

The Rose bowl broadcast rights were split between the two conferences of Pac12 & Big10. The bowl would make it's money from ticket revenues, sky boxes, advertising in the stadium, concession sales and would pay out to the two teams the BCS payout.

Now that the OB has that kind of deal with the ACC, then there is only one conference that is the recipient of those revenues and it goes to the ACC regardless of who is playing in the OB.

The OB is a less revenue generator than the other bowls. It is evident by the BCS pay out per bowl. Sugar, Fiesta and Rose are all higher, I do believe. Even though it is a less revenue generator, it is all ours.


**Cover York's #### (CYA) Qualifyer** I don't know the exact splits between any conferences and bowls and do not know exact revenues and expenses of these bowls, but it is a good approximation of the generalities of the bowl pay outs. I guess I could review their exempt organization tax return and probably get all of the exact numbers, but most would probably be buried too far to get the true numbers.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: check this out. Frank the tank says the ACC will have


Jul 3, 2012, 7:24 PM

good luck with that...without a quality opponent there won't be much tv money to be "all ours".

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: check this out. Frank the tank says the ACC will have


Jul 3, 2012, 7:28 PM

#1 and #4 teams in country would not be a good matchup for tv.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

I think we will have good luck with it. Word is the


Jul 3, 2012, 7:56 PM [ in reply to Re: check this out. Frank the tank says the ACC will have ]

opponent will be the "best of the rest" open to coming from any conference or Notre Dame. Probably guaranteed to be a top-5 to 12 team that didn't get one of the other spots. I'm sure there will be years the coots, if not SEC champs wouldn't mind getting that bowl as SEC#3 especially since Coots have never, ever been to the Orange, Cotton, Sugar, while we are 3-3 in those bowls.


Congratulations on having the only off-campus stadium in the SEC! And congrats on having only 2 years and 10 months of probation to go!!!

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

I guess this is one way to split up the playoff money -


Jul 3, 2012, 8:55 PM

funnel it heavily through bowl games controlled by the conferences that are more established and committed. How the conferences split that from there is a whole new territory.

What's going to happen to the Sugar Bowl in all this? New Year's in New Orleans - a lot of tradition that's getting cast aside by the new hotness. A good destination for an extra ACC team, as is Atlanta, but surprised that the SEC has kind of left them hanging so far.

2024 purple level memberbadge-donor-05yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up


Replies: 8
| visibility 1
Archives - Tiger Boards Archive
add New Topic