of course we know nothing. but I take it as black and white and UNC signed away their 10 million 3rd tier deal. This is for ALL sports.
Things have changed alot and ACC is not known for transparency.
QUOTE=BUGGZY;739527]why do they have to cancel? we have a deal in place with IMG worth several $$Million per year. UNC has a 3rd tier deal worth north of $10M. they may need to adjust some things with regards to football and MBB, but as it stands today, nothing prevents any ACC school from having their own media deal for what's left after the ESPN deal.[/QUOTE]
[/QUOTE]
There is ZERO chance UNC, FSU, etc signed away their remaining media rights. This was just an extension of the rights ESPN already owned. it does include first dibs on all Olympic sports, but the schools retain anything not picked up by ESPN or Raycom.
do you really think UNC would happily shred a $10M/year deal in order to get $2M/year back from the ACC?
FSU Pres has also been quoted today that the GOR was needed for ESPN to have confidence in the stability of the league. without it, they would not invest in the network, which they are now apparently beginning work on. i don't think the $20M # includes the ACC Network, that is likely what they got for the ND addition and MD/L'ville swap. ACC Network will probably end up being some form of rev share/partnership between the league and ESPN.
"This no more resembles that than something unlike something else resembles that." - Loosely quoting PHNC
Lol...C'mon Lawhokie, you know if people read it on the internet, it must be true!!!
i don't have stats immediately available to back it up, but if digital rights are the future (as many suggest), the ACC Network run by Raycom is the single largest digital network of its kind in college sports. The ACC rareley discloses more than they have to publicly regarding media rights, but when the ESPN/Raycom partnerships were first announced, SBJ reported the deal included a clause that could trigger future rev sharing with Raycom in exchange for the digital rights and ACCN name.
basically, the ACC gave it to them at cost to allow them to build up the brand and the platform, but once it's making money, the ACC could hold their hand out and demand rev share back from Raycom.
while we don't see the money now, if people want to talk about forward thinking, i believe that may qualify. then, again, i could be wrong and ESPN3, ACC Network, etc will all turn out to be failures in 10 years.
"This no more resembles that than something unlike something else resembles that." - Loosely quoting PHNC