Story Poster
Photo by USA TODAY Sports
Oklahoma State Football

Here We Go, NCAA May Create Chaos in Cracking Down on NIL Boosters in Recruiting

May 3, 2022
18,575

STILLWATER – We wrote in our story on Monday (May 2) that we would love to be a fly on the wall at the Big 12 Spring Meetings in Scottsdale, Ariz. The conference athletic directors are there along with the head coaches in football, men’s basketball, and women’s basketball; and that includes the three new schools (Cincinnati, Central Florida, and Houston) that are hoping to negotiate their way to an early exit from the American Athletic Conference and with independent BYU join the Big 12 early. We knew the topics would include NIL, transfer portal, and all the recent changes that are rocking major college athletics. Today’s news may be trending college football and all of it’s major schools toward that new entity of a Power Five league that would include the top schools and could be not just football, but all sports. Taking those major schools out of the NCAA.

This afternoon here came a report from Sports Illustrated and Ross Dellinger on how the NCAA, which has a task force of member administrators looking into many of these same topics. For those that thought the NCAA had been neutered and was incapable of policing it’s landscape anymore. There is news for you as the latest tampering case in the NCAA Transfer Portal with Pittsburgh wide receiver and Biletnikoff Award winner Jordan Addison going in the portal with alleged promises of a multimillion-dollar NIL deal from USC connections may have helped prompt some of this. We know it prompted Pitt head coach Pat Narduzzi to contact USC head coach Lincoln Riley and make threats.

USA TODAY Sports
NCAA

That might be fun to be a fly on the wall for. The news is that the NCAA taskforce is saying they are close to having new guidelines and rules with regard to NIL. Those new guidelines will clarify that boosters and booster-led collectives are to steer completely clear of recruiting. The SI report also states that schools with boosters that overstepped into using NIL and NIL collectives to put money in the hands of recruits, both high school and transfer portal entries, could be punished for their actions. The guidelines are still in draft form, but they clearly outline outline that booster-backed collectives should be prohibited from associating with high school prospects and college transfers. The NCAA wants boosters and their money to stay out of the recruiting process.

That is the way it has always supposed to have been, but we know over the years booster have been up to their elbows in cheating, some were caught (SMU, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Miami (Fla.), Mississippi, Texas A&M, and more) and some were never caught.

The wild, wild west that has been going on since NIL was instituted last summer could make the process easier as boosters and their collectives have openly bragged about their involvement.

This new pursuit of recent rule breakers could really cause a lot of work for lawyers, both those for schools and boosters, and for the NCAA representatives to try to improve their batting average in the legal system.

Mark J. Rebilas-USA TODAY Sports
Dr. Shrum, Gundy, and Weiberg on the same page with NIL. Slow and careful.

Oklahoma State should be completely clear on this one. Athletic director Chad Weiberg has been cautious and diligent in moving the Cowboys and Cowgirls forward in NIL.

“We are moving very deliberately on this,” Weiberg told me this spring. “We have two collectives that we will debut, one will be for profit (Unbridled) and the other will be for charity (Pokes with a Purpose). We want to give our athletes every opportunity, but we are going to do it within the rules.”

“I think Chad Weiberg, our athletic director, has done a very good job of being guarded about this initially, because different people like Texas and Florida have done some interesting things and it has been like the wild, wild west,” Darren Schrum, husband of OSU President Dr. Kayse Shrum recently told Pokes Rpeort. “Who knows when the NCAA may come out and put more rules and regulations in regarding NIL.”

Exactly, it looks like that time may be very soon. Oklahoma State head football coach Mike Gundy has been supportive of NIL with his players, but under the guideline of Oklahoma State University and within the spirit of the “Cowboy Culture” in the football program.

“What direction it's going to go from now moving forward, who's going to police it, what the mandates will be, I'm not sure,” Gundy added while confirming that OSU is close to having a finalized collective that will pay each of the student-athletes money. “We're just living day to day with this. So, myself, Chad Weiberg, and Dr. Shrum and some others are coming together to come up with what we're creating and calling a model of consistency here. We're close here to finalizing our model of what our athletic department and our administration and myself feel like as best. We could be within a month, and the companies that we have and working with them to try to weed through all this. NIL that would allow us to do the things that we feel like are important to enhance the student-athletes opportunities when they're in school competing and get an education. But they're not going to be tied contractually to anything we're doing to keep them from doing a separate NIL deal.”

Things are heating up with this and in Scottsdale there will be talk. Oklahoma State and others like Kansas State, Iowa State, even Oklahoma have done things right so far by NIL, but others have not. Rather than face NCAA scrutiny and possible punishment could this tremor move the power schools to that eventual major college sports league that would include Notre Dame and the Power Five schools with possibly a few others. They would leave the NCAA and create their own organization and police and govern themselves. It would be a “best case” development financially for Oklahoma State and the Big 12 members. The Pac-12 and ACC would also come out on the high side financially.

Discussion from...

Here We Go, NCAA May Create Chaos in Cracking Down on NIL Boosters in Recruiting

18,080 Views | 78 Replies | Last: 2 yr ago by CaliforniaCowboy
CaliforniaCowboy
How long do you want to ignore this user?
I'll bet you a pizza on that...

GumbyFromPokeyLand
How long do you want to ignore this user?
CaliforniaCowboy said:

I'll bet you a pizza on that...




On what, specifically?
CaliforniaCowboy
How long do you want to ignore this user?
GumbyFromPokeyLand said:

CaliforniaCowboy said:

I'll bet you a pizza on that...




On what, specifically?
well, after re-reading your post, that is an excellent question, because you added in a whole bunch of stuff that was not being discussed.

I hadn't realized when I posted that bet, that you had once again re-written the entire discussion so that you could make a separate and barely tangentially related inane point so that you would have something further to argue about.

Nevermind.
GumbyFromPokeyLand
How long do you want to ignore this user?
CaliforniaCowboy said:

GumbyFromPokeyLand said:

CaliforniaCowboy said:

I'll bet you a pizza on that...




On what, specifically?
well, after re-reading your post, that is an excellent question, because you added in a whole bunch of stuff that was not being discussed.

I hadn't realized when I posted that bet, that you had once again re-written the entire discussion so that you could make a separate and barely tangentially related inane point so that you would have something further to argue about.

Nevermind.
Well, to be fair, when I posted the following…..

If the NCAA folds, or the playoff picture changes, the ACC will not get out of their TV contract and will not lose any teams, and no settlement to that end WILL be pursued. The ACC WONT HAVE TO FORCE any team to remain in a situation that they do not wish to remain, simply because the penalties to leave will be financially impossible to overcome.

I have to admit I was somewhat plagiarizing the words of another poster. So I can't take full credit for my thoughts after reading the words previously posted in this thread…..

. ..if the NCAA folds, or the playoff picture changes, the ACC will NOT be able to hold those teams, and a settlement WILL be reached. The ACC CANNOT FORCE any team to remain in a situation that they do not wish to remain.

If they want to leave (obviously the whole freaking league will be folding LIKE I SAID in my analysis) there is no force on Earth that can make them or anybody stay.

So, in the end, I guess I'm not fully responsible for the post you're referring to.
So maybe a bet on the subject isn't quite appropriate.
CaliforniaCowboy
How long do you want to ignore this user?
no.... the "if the playoff picture changes" was originally intended to be included in mass reconfiguration, which would exclude the ACC.... but the way it is written there does not imply that context. The original intent, IMO, was if the playoff changes such that it excludes the ACC.

so that would need to be clarified.... obviously the discussion was around changes in the existing landscape that would severely adversely affect the ACC, triggering such changes.... not, say, expanding the playoff to 12 which would not trigger such events, and is a moot discussion because it likely would not trigger the 12PAC making severe changes either.

Also, (second), how can you possible assume to know what the alumni of a school would be willing to pay to get out of a 20 year adverse situation? I'm not going to be around 20 years to collect on that bet.

GumbyFromPokeyLand
How long do you want to ignore this user?
CaliforniaCowboy said:

no.... the "if the playoff picture changes" was originally intended to be included in mass reconfiguration, which would exclude the ACC.... but the way it is written there does not imply that context. The original intent, IMO, was if the playoff changes such that it excludes the ACC.

so that would need to be clarified.... obviously the discussion was around changes in the existing landscape that would severely adversely affect the ACC, triggering such changes.... not, say, expanding the playoff to 12 which would not trigger such events, and is a moot discussion because it likely would not trigger the 12PAC making severe changes either.

Also, (second), how can you possible assume to know what the alumni of a school would be willing to pay to get out of a 20 year adverse situation? I'm not going to be around 20 years to collect on that bet.


Maybe YOU should be more careful about the statements you make. It was your post afterall.

Hmmmm...how can I assume a school or a school's alumni can't afford to forego up to 14 years of media revenue? Gee, I don't know? Common sense maybe? Seems almost as safe as assuming the sun will rise tomorrow.
CaliforniaCowboy
How long do you want to ignore this user?
naw... maybe you should just stop cherry picking statements, out of context of the discussion, and quit trying to pick fights.

we had a decent discussion going until you butted in and started making stuff up.

I wish we could get back to that discussion.

We'll see in just a couple of years what's going to happen, when these contracts start coming up.... the ACC is NOT going to sit idle while everybody else gets rich. ESPN will make sure that they don't have too.

all of this will likely be renegotiated in the next few years... if the NCAA can maintain support for that long.

lots and lots and lots of discussions starting up about creating a new governing organization, which may or may not include non-P5 leagues.
NJAggie
How long do you want to ignore this user?
CaliforniaCowboy said:

naw... maybe you should just stop cherry picking statements, out of context of the discussion, and quit trying to pick fights.

we had a decent discussion going until you butted in and started making stuff up.

I wish we could get back to that discussion.

We'll see in just a couple of years what's going to happen, when these contracts start coming up.... the ACC is NOT going to sit idle while everybody else gets rich. ESPN will make sure that they don't have too.

all of this will likely be renegotiated in the next few years... if the NCAA can maintain support for that long.

lots and lots and lots of discussions starting up about creating a new governing organization, which may or may not include non-P5 leagues.
And just why would ESPN gift the ACC with more money?

The ACC leadership were so worried about losing people to other conferences they chose the low bid, and gave them all their media rights, and agreed to much of it being streaming so they could get everyone signed and under a 20 year GoR.

The ACC provides so little to ESPN's overall TV picture, and are such a boon to their bottom line there is no way they will give them money.

Disney is notorious for underpaying and never even beginning to compensate their performers. The ACC is just the latest underpaid performer out there. They have a contract with a very small yearly increase in it that runs until 2036. They'll get to negotiate a new deal then.

There really aren't very many talks about new organizations, and their not serious works with all the players at the table. They're a few voices. And a new organization won't supersede the conferences, it will be working with the existing conferences.

The fact the B1G and SEC are getting the money they want without having to create anything new means there is little support or reason for a new organization. The only thing that would do that is if the NCAA impedes those two conferences then they might break away.

The one favorable thing right now is so many people were trying to get in on the B1G contract it shows that the desire for college football is still huge, and so some of that is going to be running downhill for the PAC and Big XII. How close that gets us to the Big 2 is unknown, but I think we could see more money than we make now, but not the gain the Big 2 got. The PAC has really bad numbers and when they come in that will be the point USC accepts being 2nd tier or makes the move to the B1G.
GumbyFromPokeyLand
How long do you want to ignore this user?
The ACC has one chance. And that one chance is il the NCAA implodes AND the SEC and B1G in an effort to save college football from itself, agree to some sort of 65, 75 or 85 school super league under a new set of rules and a singular consolidated media contract (with multiple content providers) that facilitate the early termination of all existing P5 media contracts. But the chances of that are next to nil.

In short, the ACC is screwed.
CaliforniaCowboy
How long do you want to ignore this user?
contracts are renegotiated all the time.

ESPN could have plenty of incentive to boost the ACC contract, to 1) ensure that those teams remain competitive and enhance the viewer product (as they have done previously), and 2) to make a pre-emptive move to possibly keep tech giants from moving into the streaming space.

many, many, many things are possible, and IMO, likely.


NJAggie
How long do you want to ignore this user?
CaliforniaCowboy said:

contracts are renegotiated all the time.

ESPN could have plenty of incentive to boost the ACC contract, to 1) ensure that those teams remain competitive and enhance the viewer product (as they have done previously), and 2) to make a pre-emptive move to possibly keep tech giants from moving into the streaming space.

many, many, many things are possible, and IMO, likely.



When has ESPN/Disney ever negotiated a higher paying contract when they have one in place?
GumbyFromPokeyLand
How long do you want to ignore this user?
NJAggie said:

CaliforniaCowboy said:

contracts are renegotiated all the time.

ESPN could have plenty of incentive to boost the ACC contract, to 1) ensure that those teams remain competitive and enhance the viewer product (as they have done previously), and 2) to make a pre-emptive move to possibly keep tech giants from moving into the streaming space.

many, many, many things are possible, and IMO, likely.



When has ESPN/Disney ever negotiated a higher paying contract when they have one in place?


Never. And the tech giants can't stream an ACC game for, oh, about a million different reasons.
CaliforniaCowboy
How long do you want to ignore this user?
GumbyFromPokeyLand said:

NJAggie said:


When has ESPN/Disney ever negotiated a higher paying contract when they have one in place?


Never. And the tech giants can't stream an ACC game for, oh, about a million different reasons.
these are NOT my opinions... but you can continue to act the fool all you'd like... you're wrong, you're always wrong.

"A bigger price tag could mean it's easier for ESPN to either get outbid for the Big Ten rights or the Pac-12's. We've noted where competition comes from on the Big Ten front. For the Pac-12, a tech player like Amazon or Apple is more likely to offer more cash..."

there are many articles about the topic if you would care to educate yourself
CaliforniaCowboy
How long do you want to ignore this user?
NJAggie said:

CaliforniaCowboy said:

contracts are renegotiated all the time.

ESPN could have plenty of incentive to boost the ACC contract, to 1) ensure that those teams remain competitive and enhance the viewer product (as they have done previously), and 2) to make a pre-emptive move to possibly keep tech giants from moving into the streaming space.

many, many, many things are possible, and IMO, likely.



When has ESPN/Disney ever negotiated a higher paying contract when they have one in place?
one must look to the future for answers, not the past..... we're talking about a rapidly changing landscape, not the stoic history of broadcast TV and college football...

how about you name me the boosters and TV companies that would like to see their products decrease in value annually for a decade, to the point of annual obsolescence, just because of some supposedly non-negotiable contract.
GumbyFromPokeyLand
How long do you want to ignore this user?
CaliforniaCowboy said:

GumbyFromPokeyLand said:

NJAggie said:


When has ESPN/Disney ever negotiated a higher paying contract when they have one in place?


Never. And the tech giants can't stream an ACC game for, oh, about a million different reasons.
these are NOT my opinions... but you can continue to act the fool all you'd like... you're wrong, you're always wrong.

"A bigger price tag could mean it's easier for ESPN to either get outbid for the Big Ten rights or the Pac-12's. We've noted where competition comes from on the Big Ten front. For the Pac-12, a tech player like Amazon or Apple is more likely to offer more cash..."

there are many articles about the topic if you would care to educate yourself


Nobody was talking about the B1G or PAC. But since it's not your opinion that you're touting, maybe you could link us to the galacticly idiotic opinion that does show a believable path to a new increased value ACC/ ESPN TV deal in the next 10-14 years.
CaliforniaCowboy
How long do you want to ignore this user?
GumbyFromPokeyLand said:

CaliforniaCowboy said:

GumbyFromPokeyLand said:

NJAggie said:


When has ESPN/Disney ever negotiated a higher paying contract when they have one in place?


Never. And the tech giants can't stream an ACC game for, oh, about a million different reasons.
these are NOT my opinions... but you can continue to act the fool all you'd like... you're wrong, you're always wrong.

"A bigger price tag could mean it's easier for ESPN to either get outbid for the Big Ten rights or the Pac-12's. We've noted where competition comes from on the Big Ten front. For the Pac-12, a tech player like Amazon or Apple is more likely to offer more cash..."

there are many articles about the topic if you would care to educate yourself


Nobody was talking about the B1G or PAC. But since it's not your opinion that you're touting, maybe you could link us to the galacticly idiotic opinion that does show a believable path to a new increased value ACC/ ESPN TV deal in the next 10-14 years.
do your own homework... I found it, it's not that hard to know what you're actually talking about... you should try it once.

you're once again changing the words around... nobody said anything like what you just posted.

Dude, you already told us that you just post here to start fights with others. that's all you do, just like you said you were going to do.

you simply what to shut down all discussion and all points of view that aren't yours, or that don't align with what you choose to believe.

and yes, the B1G and the Pac were in play, since the discussion was about the changing landscape of TV contracts, those, upcoming and those being left behind. Why can't you follow a discussion? The PAC was clearly mentioned in the thread several times... that was the original point of this tangent, about PAC teams joining the B1G.

you're just wrong once again... as usual. Stop trying to pick fights
NJAggie
How long do you want to ignore this user?
CaliforniaCowboy said:

NJAggie said:

CaliforniaCowboy said:

contracts are renegotiated all the time.

ESPN could have plenty of incentive to boost the ACC contract, to 1) ensure that those teams remain competitive and enhance the viewer product (as they have done previously), and 2) to make a pre-emptive move to possibly keep tech giants from moving into the streaming space.

many, many, many things are possible, and IMO, likely.



When has ESPN/Disney ever negotiated a higher paying contract when they have one in place?
one must look to the future for answers, not the past..... we're talking about a rapidly changing landscape, not the stoic history of broadcast TV and college football...

how about you name me the boosters and TV companies that would like to see their products decrease in value annually for a decade, to the point of annual obsolescence, just because of some supposedly non-negotiable contract.
Have I or anyone else said the ACC is happy with it? No they aren't but none of the teams can leave, and ESPN/Disney isn't going to change the deal. Both parties have to want to renegotiate not just the one that has the bad deal.
GumbyFromPokeyLand
How long do you want to ignore this user?
NJAggie said:

CaliforniaCowboy said:

NJAggie said:

CaliforniaCowboy said:

contracts are renegotiated all the time.

ESPN could have plenty of incentive to boost the ACC contract, to 1) ensure that those teams remain competitive and enhance the viewer product (as they have done previously), and 2) to make a pre-emptive move to possibly keep tech giants from moving into the streaming space.

many, many, many things are possible, and IMO, likely.



When has ESPN/Disney ever negotiated a higher paying contract when they have one in place?
one must look to the future for answers, not the past..... we're talking about a rapidly changing landscape, not the stoic history of broadcast TV and college football...

how about you name me the boosters and TV companies that would like to see their products decrease in value annually for a decade, to the point of annual obsolescence, just because of some supposedly non-negotiable contract.
Have I or anyone else said the ACC is happy with it? No they aren't but none of the teams can leave, and ESPN/Disney isn't going to change the deal. Both parties have to want to renegotiate not just the one that has the bad deal.


Of course, everyone knows that. Even the guy that pretends there are published opinions to the contrary. But what else is there to do in the off-season but throw some bait out there for him and wait for the silliness to surface.
CaliforniaCowboy
How long do you want to ignore this user?
NJAggie said:

CaliforniaCowboy said:

NJAggie said:


When has ESPN/Disney ever negotiated a higher paying contract when they have one in place?
one must look to the future for answers, not the past..... we're talking about a rapidly changing landscape, not the stoic history of broadcast TV and college football...

how about you name me the boosters and TV companies that would like to see their products decrease in value annually for a decade, to the point of annual obsolescence, just because of some supposedly non-negotiable contract.
Have I or anyone else said the ACC is happy with it? No they aren't but none of the teams can leave, and ESPN/Disney isn't going to change the deal. Both parties have to want to renegotiate not just the one that has the bad deal.
we shall see what we shall see. First off, nothing much will change until the other conferences settle on deals (like the B12), and that will be a few years yet, which also means a few more years shaved off the ACC GOR.

We shall see.... I would bet that the ACC will not stick to a GOR that holds all of their members back by tens of millions of dollars annually. The GOR was designed to keep a conference together, not keep it as the worst paid league.
GumbyFromPokeyLand
How long do you want to ignore this user?
How does the ACC GOR hold back millions $$$ annually from every school?
CaliforniaCowboy
How long do you want to ignore this user?
GumbyFromPokeyLand said:

How does the ACC GOR hold back millions $$$ annually from every school?
go bait somebody else....

I'm not going to argue with your cherry picking and semantics.
GumbyFromPokeyLand
How long do you want to ignore this user?
CaliforniaCowboy said:

GumbyFromPokeyLand said:

How does the ACC GOR hold back millions $$$ annually from every school?
go bait somebody else....

I'm not going to argue with your cherry picking and semantics.


The ACC GOR does not prevent every, or any, ACC school from making more money as a member of the ACC. And the ACC will not relinquish or release any or every school's GOR unless and/or until the conference dissolves.
CaliforniaCowboy
How long do you want to ignore this user?
GumbyFromPokeyLand said:

CaliforniaCowboy said:

GumbyFromPokeyLand said:

How does the ACC GOR hold back millions $$$ annually from every school?
go bait somebody else....

I'm not going to argue with your cherry picking and semantics.


The ACC GOR does not prevent every, or any, ACC school from making more money as a member of the ACC. And the ACC will not relinquish or release any or every school's GOR unless and/or until the conference dissolves.
that's what I said. go fight with a fence post, you'll have more success.

GumbyFromPokeyLand
How long do you want to ignore this user?
CaliforniaCowboy said:

GumbyFromPokeyLand said:

CaliforniaCowboy said:

GumbyFromPokeyLand said:

How does the ACC GOR hold back millions $$$ annually from every school?
go bait somebody else....

I'm not going to argue with your cherry picking and semantics.


The ACC GOR does not prevent every, or any, ACC school from making more money as a member of the ACC. And the ACC will not relinquish or release any or every school's GOR unless and/or until the conference dissolves.
that's what I said. go fight with a fence post, you'll have more success.




Yeah, that's what you said. LOL

" I would bet that the ACC will not stick to a GOR that holds all of their members back by tens of millions of dollars annually. The GOR was designed to keep a conference together, not keep it as the worst paid league."
NJAggie
How long do you want to ignore this user?
You're correct the concept is to protect the conference. The problem was that the ACC was so scared of losing teams that they sold all their media rights (tv, radio, tournaments, signage, etc...) over to ESPN for a price that was the #4 contract when signed.

So concepts are fine, but if you have fools doing the negotiating and signing you wind up locked into a situation you can't get out of.

Yes the ACC could release the GoR, and let the teams go find other homes. However ESPN could sue them all into oblivion for not delivering the content they promised.

The thing to watch right now is the PAC as they go to the table. They have terrible ratings and nothing to say pay us more. If they get more money then the Big XII should get more. But, depending on how bad the PAC deal is it could send some schools looking for a home in the B1G. I know you don't want to believe this could happen, but the money is too much for them not to consider it. If they hold pat, no one is picking anyone out of the Big XII so then we'd be set until the SEC comes back up.
CaliforniaCowboy
How long do you want to ignore this user?
GumbyFromPokeyLand said:

CaliforniaCowboy said:

GumbyFromPokeyLand said:

CaliforniaCowboy said:

GumbyFromPokeyLand said:

How does the ACC GOR hold back millions $$$ annually from every school?
go bait somebody else....

I'm not going to argue with your cherry picking and semantics.


The ACC GOR does not prevent every, or any, ACC school from making more money as a member of the ACC. And the ACC will not relinquish or release any or every school's GOR unless and/or until the conference dissolves.
that's what I said. go fight with a fence post, you'll have more success.




Yeah, that's what you said. LOL

" I would bet that the ACC will not stick to a GOR that holds all of their members back by tens of millions of dollars annually. The GOR was designed to keep a conference together, not keep it as the worst paid league."
yes, I said that too.... you simply have no idea what the conversation is about.... to you, the conversation is about all the fictitious statements that you put in others mouths so you could disagree with yourself.

just move to another topic already, you're wrong, you're always wrong
CaliforniaCowboy
How long do you want to ignore this user?
NJAggie said:



So concepts are fine, but if you have fools doing the negotiating and signing you wind up locked into a situation you can't get out of.

Yes the ACC could release the GoR, and let the teams go find other homes. However ESPN could sue them all into oblivion for not delivering the content they promised.

I don't believe that is true. They can get out of it, you just mentioned one way, and 2) ESPN could only sue the ACC because that is who they have the contract with, and that league could disband and reform.

it's simply way too soon to be using world like "can't" and "never".

NJAggie
How long do you want to ignore this user?
CaliforniaCowboy said:

NJAggie said:



So concepts are fine, but if you have fools doing the negotiating and signing you wind up locked into a situation you can't get out of.

Yes the ACC could release the GoR, and let the teams go find other homes. However ESPN could sue them all into oblivion for not delivering the content they promised.

I don't believe that is true. They can get out of it, you just mentioned one way, and 2) ESPN could only sue the ACC because that is who they have the contract with, and that league could disband and reform.

it's simply way too soon to be using world like "can't" and "never".


Well maybe you need to contact the people at the ACC, because they just finished their annual meeting and from the commissioner to all school officials they basically are saying they are in a mess because they have no way out of a bad contract and the CFB world is passing them by as they're locked into it.

They also say there is no move to leave the NCAA for some new alignment of schools going on. There could be a shift to it all being under the auspices of the CFP, but that wouldn't change conference structures or TV contracts. So no 60 team league in the offing. We've got the conferences and their contracts no matter what organization they are under.

Swarbrick says the whole thing is moving towards dual suns (SEC/B1G) with the rest of us revolving around them.

https://theathletic.com/3307110/2022/05/11/jim-phillips-acc-meetings-ncaa-schedule-model/
CaliforniaCowboy
How long do you want to ignore this user?
NJAggie said:



Well maybe you need to contact the people at the ACC, because they just finished their annual meeting and from the commissioner to all school officials they basically are saying they are in a mess because they have no way out of a bad contract and the CFB world is passing them by as they're locked into it.

They also say there is no move to leave the NCAA for some new alignment of schools going on. There could be a shift to it all being under the auspices of the CFP, but that wouldn't change conference structures or TV contracts. So no 60 team league in the offing. We've got the conferences and their contracts no matter what organization they are under.

Swarbrick says the whole thing is moving towards dual suns (SEC/B1G) with the rest of us revolving around them.

https://theathletic.com/3307110/2022/05/11/jim-phillips-acc-meetings-ncaa-schedule-model/

yeah, like I said it will take until the other conferences sign their new deals, a couple more years, so yeah, the ACC is playing it close to the vest for now.... nobody would expect them to make a premature announcement. and although it is a long term mess, it's not that bad for them until at least after the last deal is struck (B12)... then we shall see.

besides, you can't have it both ways, what the ACC says and what Swarbrick says, because those two are not compatible.

one thing is certain, the future will definitely not remain as it is now (as of when the ACC spoke)
CaliforniaCowboy
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Actually I hadn't read anything about the ACC meeting, so I just went and read 3 articles, and they didn't sound as gloomy as you portrayed.

I read this...

Phillips said conference officials "talked with ESPN at length" on Wednesday "about some really, I think, high-level opportunities from a sponsorship standpoint to help generate" more revenue. "And they're as motivated as we are," he said, "because we're 50-50 partners."

and also this about changing their division alignment...

Phillips and the athletic directors met Wednesday with ESPN, and the possible change was front and center. "I think they'll be supportive," Phillips said of ESPN. "I'd be surprised if they weren't, especially if you can get some matchups you haven't had in a while." Interdivision pairings such as Clemson-Virginia Tech and N.C. State-Virginia happen once every six seasons. Sans divisions, and with each team assigned three annual opponents, teams would play one another at least twice every four years. If approved, the new format would start in 2023. The unknown is whether revamping the football schedule would enhance ACC revenue.

it sounds like they believe they can get more revenue from their existing deal with offering better match-ups.
NJAggie
How long do you want to ignore this user?
CaliforniaCowboy said:

Actually I hadn't read anything about the ACC meeting, so I just went and read 3 articles, and they didn't sound as gloomy as you portrayed.

I read this...

Phillips said conference officials "talked with ESPN at length" on Wednesday "about some really, I think, high-level opportunities from a sponsorship standpoint to help generate" more revenue. "And they're as motivated as we are," he said, "because we're 50-50 partners."

and also this about changing their division alignment...

Phillips and the athletic directors met Wednesday with ESPN, and the possible change was front and center. "I think they'll be supportive," Phillips said of ESPN. "I'd be surprised if they weren't, especially if you can get some matchups you haven't had in a while." Interdivision pairings such as Clemson-Virginia Tech and N.C. State-Virginia happen once every six seasons. Sans divisions, and with each team assigned three annual opponents, teams would play one another at least twice every four years. If approved, the new format would start in 2023. The unknown is whether revamping the football schedule would enhance ACC revenue.

it sounds like they believe they can get more revenue from their existing deal with offering better match-ups.
Really?

OK so you're position has been that ESPN renegotiating their contract was very possible. Your quotes show them trying to find sponsors willing to support the league, and that ESPN is fine with that. This is necessary because as part of their deal to get from $25M to $32M they sold all signage in their sports venues to ESPN. So now they need to find people willing to pay more than ESPN is offering to increase revenue through this venue. Why wouldn't ESPN be fine if they found outside sponsors to donate to them? That's not a renegotiation.

The contract caps what is shown on ESPN because initially a huge amount of games and all tier 3 were going to RayCom who then sold the games to local TV stations and regional cable networks. To get the money from $25M to $32M the ACC sold all of that to ESPN, who designated for the ESPN3 platform. So most ESPN fans can get those games if they have ESPN on their home cable package. So basically the ACC is hoping that ESPN will decide on its own to broadcast more of their games and that they'd then get paid for additional inventory not required to be broadcast by the contract will help raise their revenue. Again ESPN is not renegotiating and not offering any more money.

The ACC is begging and pleading with ESPN and ESPN is saying that's nice. They are not in a happy space. And multiple ACC AD's are saying they're stuck with no place to go.
GumbyFromPokeyLand
How long do you want to ignore this user?
- ESPN is not going to renegotiate the ACC tv contract
- nobody is leaving the ACC
- nobody is joining the ACC
- no ACC school is getting out of their GOR
- ACC is not going to do away with the GOR
- ACCs GOR will remain in place until 2036
- the ACC is not going to dissolve
- an implosion by the NCAA will not result in the dissolution of the ACC
- an implosion by the NCAA will not result in the cancellation of the ESPN/ACC deal

Bottom line, the ACC and every school in the ACC is stuck with their bad tv deal with ESPN that expires in 2036
CaliforniaCowboy
How long do you want to ignore this user?
now that I'll bet a pizza on.

unsupported speculation
CaliforniaCowboy
How long do you want to ignore this user?
come on NJ, you're more capable than that.

you're picking at their interim solutions (while everyone waits on the other deals to be struck), and trying to make them out to be nothing. ESPN and the ACC are NOT going to change their contract until AFTER the other deals have been struck, in the MEANTIME, they are ALREADY working with the ACC to keep them competitive with the other leagues existing contracts.

The ACC has not yet even realized a complete season with their new ACC Network, so the value of that is still in the works. (from one article that I read).

I'll let you have the last word on the subject, but there is not much to say except everything, and I mean everything is currently in play, and only time will sort it all out... likely at least 2 possibly 3 more years.
GumbyFromPokeyLand
How long do you want to ignore this user?
GumbyFromPokeyLand said:

- ESPN is not going to renegotiate the ACC tv contract
- nobody is leaving the ACC
- nobody is joining the ACC
- no ACC school is getting out of their GOR
- ACC is not going to do away with the GOR
- ACCs GOR will remain in place until 2036
- the ACC is not going to dissolve
- an implosion by the NCAA will not result in the dissolution of the ACC
- an implosion by the NCAA will not result in the cancellation of the ESPN/ACC deal

Bottom line, the ACC and every school in the ACC is stuck with their bad tv deal with ESPN that expires in 2036



Yeah, it's only supported by the economic and contractual reality that everyone but you can recognize. But hey, ignorance is bliss.
Page 2 of 3
 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.