|
TNET: ESPN analyst skeptical on ACC/Clemson-FSU settlement, sees programs in prime position to leave
|
Replies: 47
| visibility 5900
|
Webmaster [∞]
TigerPulse: 100%
∞
Posts: 46472
Joined: 2012
|
TNET: ESPN analyst skeptical on ACC/Clemson-FSU settlement, sees programs in prime position to leave
Mar 7, 2025, 10:17 AM
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
Hall of Famer [8988]
TigerPulse: 97%
43
|
Not buying that "academics" argument AT ALL.
8
8
Mar 7, 2025, 10:28 AM
|
|
Honestly, what the #### does academics have to do with anything moving forward? These players are barely students anymore anyway. How does a school being prestigious in the academic community impact media deals? How do research grants and elite world class laboratories draw eyeballs to football games? Then you have the dying media of cable tv. So markets dont matter either if that program doesnt draw eyeballs. All of that is old school thinking that just isnt the reality anymore.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Immortal [62648]
TigerPulse: 100%
60
Posts: 62715
Joined: 2007
|
Re: Not buying that "academics" argument AT ALL.
2
Mar 7, 2025, 11:37 AM
|
|
Cable TV could make a comeback mainly bc streaming prices for TV are quickly catching up to the prices of cable TV right before folks started pulling the plug...
I love streaming but I had to settle for a little less with streaming or I would be at the same price streaming as I was with cable, I was getting more with cable, but I chose to settle for a little less for the lower price!!!
|
|
|
|
|
|
1st Rounder [601]
TigerPulse: 100%
21
|
Re: Not buying that "academics" argument AT ALL.
1
Mar 7, 2025, 1:30 PM
[ in reply to Not buying that "academics" argument AT ALL. ] |
|
Because school presidents still give final decisions and they care immensely about academics.
|
|
|
|
|
|
National Champion [7928]
TigerPulse: 100%
42
|
Re: Not buying that "academics" argument AT ALL.
4
Mar 7, 2025, 1:33 PM
|
|
They don't pay the bills. The networks do. If what you said was true, Stanford would already be in the Big 10, and never would have had to beg to join the ACC.
Money talks. Bullsh!t joins the ACC.
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Medallion [20337]
TigerPulse: 100%
52
Posts: 15297
Joined: 2010
|
Cal and Stanford outrank UVA & UNC in academics
Mar 7, 2025, 6:24 PM
|
|
That said, UVA and UNC have better geography.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hall of Famer [8988]
TigerPulse: 97%
43
|
So let me get this straight
2
Mar 7, 2025, 2:27 PM
[ in reply to Re: Not buying that "academics" argument AT ALL. ] |
|
They are going to turn down millions for THEIR school because of the academic standing of A DIFFERENT school? LOL, not in this life time.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [2423]
TigerPulse: 100%
32
|
Re: TNET: ESPN analyst skeptical on ACC/Clemson-FSU settlement
3
Mar 7, 2025, 10:40 AM
|
|
Yeah that's 2012 expansion thinking. No one is clamoring for UVA except XII maybe.
|
|
|
|
|
|
1st Rounder [601]
TigerPulse: 100%
21
|
Re: TNET: ESPN analyst skeptical on ACC/Clemson-FSU settlement
Mar 7, 2025, 1:31 PM
|
|
Yeah, I read the quote and when it ended at "who would want Virginia?" I was like, I don't know. Who would?
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Medallion [18933]
TigerPulse: 100%
52
|
I'd lump McElroy in with Finebaum...both like to hear themselves talk, nothing
1
Mar 7, 2025, 10:44 AM
|
|
but ESecPN shills. Football is driving this train.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-Pro [740]
TigerPulse: 74%
22
|
Hope he's right about us though
Mar 7, 2025, 12:30 PM
|
|
He was right about us making the playoff last year & hopefully he's right this year about Clemson being one of the most competitive teams in the sport outright this season.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [5836]
TigerPulse: 100%
39
|
UVA?!?!
Mar 7, 2025, 10:46 AM
|
|
IF Greg was looking at this from a lens of how successful is the UVA athletic department then he would have a point. I think they've won a NC in most every major sport outside of football in the last 10yrs.
But football drives the revenue and they just averaged 38K fans per game last year
https://virginia.rivals.com/news/state-of-the-program-part-i-reviewing-uva-s-2024-football-season
Fan Support
Perhaps this goes along with the previous section, but the fanbase is not bought in on what the football program is doing right now. UVa broke 40,000 fans in just three home games, and never broke 45,000. 2024 was the second time in three years that they’ve failed to hit 45k for any home game. Down the stretch, attendance was very poor, and the enthusiasm of the crowds was quite tepid. UVa drew just 36,305 for ACC leader SMU on Senior Day, and we doubt that number is a real reflection of how many folks turned up. And imagine what 2025 is going to look like, barring major changes? This problem isn’t necessarily on the coaching staff, but it’s a major problem for the athletic department and a sign of deteriorating support for the program.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Tiger Titan [50424]
TigerPulse: 76%
58
Posts: 36941
Joined: 2003
|
Tony Elliott is a nice guy but he isn't the kind of coach to turn them around.
2
1
Mar 7, 2025, 11:36 AM
|
|
I don't see him having the big personality or outside the box thinking to make them more popular or a big winner.
I hope I'm wrong, as I am certainly pulling for Tony. I just don't see it. I didn't see it when he was hired and I still don't see it now.
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Medallion [20054]
TigerPulse: 100%
52
|
Re: Tony Elliott is a nice guy but he isn't the kind of coach to turn them around.
Mar 7, 2025, 5:56 PM
|
|
Curious if you see a big personality or outside the box thinking for Coach Brownell? Genuinely interested in how you view him compared to Coach Tony Elliott.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Valley Legend [12374]
TigerPulse: 98%
47
Posts: 12617
Joined: 2003
|
Re: Tony Elliott is a nice guy but he isn't the kind of coach to turn them around.
1
Mar 8, 2025, 12:07 PM
|
|
Curious if you see a big personality or outside the box thinking for Coach Brownell? Genuinely interested in how you view him compared to Coach Tony Elliott.
I was going to ask the same question. UVA (white meat) football and Clemson basketball have similar histories. UVA can continue to cycle through coaches and get the same mediocre results or they can invest in the program to change the narrative like Clemson did for basketball. The thing is, big name coaches who are change agents will not come to UVA without the investment as winning would be too difficult and their career is on the line. If they strike gold with a young coach, they will take the first good offer out as they know without investment, sustaining a winning program is not possible
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Medallion [20054]
TigerPulse: 100%
52
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [10747]
TigerPulse: 60%
45
Posts: 13809
Joined: 2006
|
Re: TNET: Analysist spamalyist
1
Mar 7, 2025, 11:08 AM
|
|
For someone to even guess at what might happen 5 years down the road is just ridiculous.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Top TigerNet [32296]
TigerPulse: 100%
55
Posts: 48299
Joined: 1999
|
Bottom line... Clemson still needs out... ASAP
4
Mar 7, 2025, 11:11 AM
|
|
and there are only two possible better options... SEC or Big 10
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Elite [5197]
TigerPulse: 100%
38
|
^ THIS***
Mar 7, 2025, 12:59 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
National Champion [7928]
TigerPulse: 100%
42
|
About that.....
2
Mar 7, 2025, 11:18 AM
|
|
The conferences aren't writing the checks, ESPN/Fox are. They will not pay pro-rata for UNC or UVa as the viewership is limited. OSU/UGA are not going to want smaller checks to support the addition of the wine and cheese academic schools. ESPN/FOX want viewers, both Clemson and FSU bring more viewers than the average school in either conference.- Hence, they will right a "full" check for either.
Greg needs to learn about the power of the purse-string.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-American [569]
TigerPulse: 98%
20
|
Re: About that.....
Mar 7, 2025, 11:47 AM
|
|
It’s crazy but GT outdrew both UNC and UVA this year in terms of eyeballs and nobody is yes GT is gonna run and bail.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-Pro [740]
TigerPulse: 74%
22
|
Actually
Mar 7, 2025, 12:29 PM
|
|
To clarify, GT actually had the highest ratings in the league outright last season.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Elite [5197]
TigerPulse: 100%
38
|
Which is why if I was the commissioner of the Big 10
Mar 7, 2025, 1:01 PM
|
|
I would be going after GTech!
|
|
|
|
|
|
National Champion [7928]
TigerPulse: 100%
42
|
Re: Which is why if I was the commissioner of the Big 10
1
Mar 7, 2025, 1:38 PM
|
|
Just stop.
GT played Notre Dame, FSU, and UGA this past year. It was a one-off. Look at a 5 year average.
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Medallion [20756]
TigerPulse: 100%
52
Posts: 14613
Joined: 2009
|
Re: TNET: ESPN analyst skeptical on ACC/Clemson-FSU settlement, sees programs in
5
5
Mar 7, 2025, 11:20 AM
|
|
He's not wrong. NC and VA are very powerful TV markets. While their football programs may not be as up to snuff as SEC and B1G, their markets sure as heck are, and bigly. And remember, any game featuring them will also have an opponent that more often than not does move the needle. Keeping UNC in the fold at the time was actually part of the GOR push, as they were ultimately one of the biggest available prizes out there for expansion.
If UVA is losing money five years from now and they have the opportunity to enter the B1G with a full share, what on earth do you think they would do? Heck, they could make the move in less time and just pay a little more. B1G Network subs increases would grease those skids big time.
Regarding a super football league - it's folly to think the SEC and B1G would simply cede the power they've accumulated.
|
|
|
|
|
|
National Champion [7928]
TigerPulse: 100%
42
|
Re: TNET: ESPN analyst skeptical on ACC/Clemson-FSU settlement, sees programs in
2
Mar 7, 2025, 11:42 AM
|
|
UVa does not "own" the eyeballs of Virgina.
UNC does not "own" the eyeballs of North Carolina.
Neither own a toll gate on any TV set in either state.
Now, look at TV ratings/viewership NATIONWIDE for ACC schools for the past 10 years. Tell me where the eyeballs are.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Immortal [62648]
TigerPulse: 100%
60
Posts: 62715
Joined: 2007
|
Re: TNET: ESPN analyst skeptical on ACC/Clemson-FSU settlement, sees programs in
Mar 7, 2025, 11:58 AM
|
|
It wasn't that long ago that Dabo with Clemson had the eyes around the entire country. With Dabo correcting his mistakes that his trial of inhouse hires created, the eyes around the country will come back bc Dabo's views of power FB worked out really well for Clemson and people are taking the wait and see if he can do it once again and I believe that Tiger nation believes he can bc his ideology didn't change, just his plan of growing his own coaching staff within knocked things off center just a bit...
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Medallion [20756]
TigerPulse: 100%
52
Posts: 14613
Joined: 2009
|
Re: TNET: ESPN analyst skeptical on ACC/Clemson-FSU settlement, sees programs in
1
Mar 7, 2025, 12:11 PM
[ in reply to Re: TNET: ESPN analyst skeptical on ACC/Clemson-FSU settlement, sees programs in ] |
|
Cable and streaming services do 'own' the eyeballs though, they are the gatekeepers and tolls. Fees jump significantly for in-state programming on a SECN or B1GN. The additions of either of those heavily populated state markets from either of those programs to either of those leagues would easily pay for any exit fee due.
|
|
|
|
|
|
National Champion [7928]
TigerPulse: 100%
42
|
Re: TNET: ESPN analyst skeptical on ACC/Clemson-FSU settlement, sees programs in
1
Mar 7, 2025, 1:40 PM
|
|
Cable is a dying platform. Streaming does not have state borders. You have a failed arguement.
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Medallion [20756]
TigerPulse: 100%
52
Posts: 14613
Joined: 2009
|
Re: TNET: ESPN analyst skeptical on ACC/Clemson-FSU settlement, sees programs in
Mar 7, 2025, 1:51 PM
|
|
The networks we're discussing do possess premiums for markets, regardless of how their signal arrives.
Would the ACCN provide the same revenue to the rest of the league if UNC and UVA were to bolt? That's an unequivocal "no".
|
|
|
|
|
|
National Champion [7928]
TigerPulse: 100%
42
|
Re: TNET: ESPN analyst skeptical on ACC/Clemson-FSU settlement, sees programs in
2
Mar 7, 2025, 1:58 PM
|
|
Yes, but subscriptions to cable networks like ACCN are dying. RIGHT NOW it has an impact. In 5 years, cable TV may be completely dead. If that happens, it is doubtful anyone would pay to stream that content, if not FORCED to pay for it as part of a cable package.
Again, to be as blunt as possible.....
Ohio State (or Michigan, or PSU, etc) will NOT take a dime less to add a team. A team is either additive to the contract or its not. If it brings more eyeballs than the average team in the league it is additive. If it brings fewer it does NOT.
Clemson and FSU are ADDITIVE to the SEC and the Big 10. No other ACC schools are additive. All of this talk/conjecture looks great on paper. When numbers are discussed between the networks and the conferences, the truth will emerge. UNC, UVa are swimming naked with the tide going out....
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Medallion [20756]
TigerPulse: 100%
52
Posts: 14613
Joined: 2009
|
Re: TNET: ESPN analyst skeptical on ACC/Clemson-FSU settlement, sees programs in
Mar 7, 2025, 2:16 PM
|
|
I agree with much of what you're saying there except your final takeaway. "Owning" the premier universities in the states of NC and VA from a sports media standpoint is extremely valuable. The GOR everyone hated so much here was devised as much to prevent those programs from getting poached and gutting our network deal and that extra revenue stream. Do they deserve it? Not to me or you or most others on here, but believe me, they're worth it from a media standpoint.
|
|
|
|
|
|
National Champion [7928]
TigerPulse: 100%
42
|
Re: TNET: ESPN analyst skeptical on ACC/Clemson-FSU settlement, sees programs in
Mar 7, 2025, 5:18 PM
|
|
Oregon and Washington had to join at a reduced share. USC (the real one) didn’t. Yet USC (the real one) isn’t the state university for California, Cal is. Cal has no TV ratings. Cal got no offer. Oregon and Washington have decent ratings. They get 1/2 share offers. USC (the real one) brings ratings. They got a full share.
This really isn’t rocket science.
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Medallion [20756]
TigerPulse: 100%
52
Posts: 14613
Joined: 2009
|
Re: TNET: ESPN analyst skeptical on ACC/Clemson-FSU settlement, sees programs in
Mar 7, 2025, 6:09 PM
|
|
Equating Cal to UNC and UVA as state schools is a real stretch.
A half share of B1G, like Oregon and Washington though, isn't, for UVA at least. That would still pay for an exit, with a future secured in a Biggie. Leagues need patsies to pad records in football.
UNC would command USC billing.
|
|
|
|
|
|
National Champion [7928]
TigerPulse: 100%
42
|
Re: TNET: ESPN analyst skeptical on ACC/Clemson-FSU settlement, sees programs in
Mar 8, 2025, 10:58 AM
|
|
UNC would command USC billing?
These two are NOT equivalent. UNC is hardly watched in football. Basketball is great, but that doesn’t bring the money that football does. Academics? UVA and Duke are a notch above. I just don’t see it. B1G is not buying the state of North Carolina.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Immortal [62648]
TigerPulse: 100%
60
Posts: 62715
Joined: 2007
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Medallion [20337]
TigerPulse: 100%
52
Posts: 15297
Joined: 2010
|
|
|
|
|
|
Tiger Titan [50424]
TigerPulse: 76%
58
Posts: 36941
Joined: 2003
|
UVA brings very little to the table.
1
Mar 7, 2025, 11:33 AM
|
|
Their bigger athletic programs have been pretty mediocre lately. Men's basketball was obviously very good in recent years, but that program seems to be mediocre again as well. They have a decent sized fan base, but nothing that will move the needle much in terms of TV ratings.
McElroy's argument about NC and VA being appealing states for SEC expansion is a very outdated idea. It's not about geography or expanding to new states. It's about eyeballs and marketability to enhance the conference's bottom line. UVA doesn't do much there. UNC is more valuable due to their Nike/Jordan affiliation and resulting brand popularity, but I am still not convinced that they are the crown jewel some think.
I also don't think that the Big 10 is dumb enough to invite new members just because they are good schools academically. Sure, that matters some to the Big 10, but at the end of the day it will be about the money those schools bring from athletics.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Immortal [62648]
TigerPulse: 100%
60
Posts: 62715
Joined: 2007
|
Re: UVA brings very little to the table.
Mar 7, 2025, 12:22 PM
|
|
It's about winning and dominating sports programs, that is what opens eyes that has been closed bc of overall mediocre sports programs around the country, and by Saban retiring it has been closing the eyes that a dominate Bama had open that DeBoer won't be able to keep open if he fails to get Bama back to the Nick Saban times as the Bama HC.
I lot of Bama nation were against or not happy with the idea of a Dabo hire, I personally think that the biggest mistake that the Bama AD has made by not going after Dabo with an open check book bc I personally believe that Dabo would have been very successful as the Bama HC if they could have pulled him away from Clemson...
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Elite [5197]
TigerPulse: 100%
38
|
I think the Bama job will be more attractive
Mar 7, 2025, 1:06 PM
|
|
IF Kalen DeBoer isn’t successful there and gets fired in a year or two. I would suspect you’ll see more coaches interested in the job. It’s very hard to “follow” Nick Saban.
I know coaches don’t look at it that way. The competitive fire is to strong in them but I still imagine it’s a factor.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gridiron Giant [15329]
TigerPulse: 100%
50
Posts: 15824
Joined: 2010
|
UVA and UNC
Mar 7, 2025, 11:45 AM
|
|
UVA and UNC have a big ball and chain tied to them - Virginia Tech and Nancy. The Virginia legislators especially will never allow the two to part ways. We saw what happened in 2005 when they would not let UVA vote for the ACC expansion with Miami, BC and Syracuse without VT so the ACC caved as they usually do and VT replaced Syracuse at the time.0
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Medallion [20756]
TigerPulse: 100%
52
Posts: 14613
Joined: 2009
|
Re: UVA and UNC
1
Mar 7, 2025, 12:16 PM
|
|
Perhaps state legislations would try to block, but good luck selling that to the public in today's mega-bucks college athletics world and dwindling public funding era. This isn't 2005 anymore. Traditions, as we have known them to be in many areas of life, are taking a major back seat to the allure of power in the here and now. Politicians in those states may not want it, but financially they can no longer justify preventing it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [11008]
TigerPulse: 73%
45
Posts: 10796
Joined: 2017
|
Let me fix the headline for you.
Mar 7, 2025, 11:49 AM
|
|
TNET: ESPN “analyst” desperately needed something to write about, so he made up some crap
You’re welcome.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-Pro [740]
TigerPulse: 74%
22
|
Gotta enjoy these next 5 years
Mar 7, 2025, 12:27 PM
|
|
The thought of having just two leagues makes my stomach twist like an anchor hitch tied by a belligerent deep-water fisherman on a 3-day Rumpleminze bender.
Gonna savor the next 5 years of stability just in case.
|
|
|
|
|
|
National Champion [7980]
TigerPulse: 100%
42
Posts: 10773
Joined: 2007
|
so this is a way to get the bottom feeders to leave then I think thats a win for
Mar 7, 2025, 1:26 PM
|
|
clemson and fsu and could potentially pave the way to raise the brand of the ACC and maybe add potential players later once the fat is trimmed. I have a feeling that yuo'll have teams in the top conference get antsy to find a way to compete nationally again by joining a conference that would be winnable. Not under the current tv payout thats not a viable prospect but who knows how this thing will look in 2030 in terms of parity among conferences. I know a team in the mid pack of the SEC or Big 10 will have a better chance competing in the ACC to get into those CFP type conversations.
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [4006]
TigerPulse: 100%
35
|
Re: TNET: ESPN analyst skeptical on ACC/Clemson-FSU settlement
1
Mar 7, 2025, 5:20 PM
|
|
Did he really say “continuous” instead of “contiguous”? Or is that a typo?
Also, while UNC and UVA are attractive schools, McElroy is using 2014 thinking where just being in a state with a large population guaranteed significant revenue from cable/satellite providers for the conference channel, not matter whether the customers actually wanted or watched that channel. This is much, much less important today.
A single cat lady living alone who doesn’t care one bit about college sports no longer needs to pay ESPN $10 a month just so she can access movies on Lifetime and Hallmark. She’s also no longer having to pay a premium to the SEC, ACC, B1G, etc. depending on which state she happens to live in.
Brands that drive viewership of the games/clips/content regardless of platform is what will determine these decisions. This will leave UVA in particular in a fairly weak position.
|
|
|
|
|
|
TigerNet GOAT [∞]
TigerPulse: 100%
∞
|
Re: TNET: ESPN analyst skeptical on ACC/Clemson-FSU settlement
Mar 7, 2025, 9:59 PM
|
|
He indeed said continuous, but he might've been going for the latter.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Starter [296]
TigerPulse: 98%
14
|
Ive heard this narrative from pundits
1
Mar 8, 2025, 9:26 AM
|
|
But it doesn’t make sense. Yes, either league would be adding real estate with North Carolina and/or Virginia, but it would do little to increase viewership. Neither North Carolina nor Virginia had a football game last year in the top 100 in viewership last year…they have a hard enough time filling their stadiums. TV money is based on viewership not real estate. Do you think the SEC or Big10 would split their TV money for two teams who would not move the viewership needle?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Replies: 47
| visibility 5900
|
|
|
|
50
