Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 31
  1. #21

    Join Date
    December 22, 2002
    Posts
    4,351
    Quote Originally Posted by BUGGZY View Post
    that's why having ESPN as our ACC Network partner would be key. In order to make money on the ACC Network, Disney will need to get carriage at favorable rates. because of that, they WILL be willing to move premier matchups to the ACC Network (at least initially). imagine a noon Clemson - NCSU game on ABC where they do nothing but hype the 3:30 ND@FSU game on ACC Network (maybe it's on ABC everywhere outside our footprint, but ACC Network inside the footprint).

    of course, once carriage is gained, and the money is flowing, they will fill the network with Wake vs 'Cuse games, but initially, Disney will push the issue, i think.
    Just saying that an FSU-ND game will NEVER be on such a network. I'm sorry. Maybe in 30 years.
    r

  2. #22
    PadrosWindup's Avatar
    Join Date
    June 16, 2003
    Posts
    5,013
    As I understand the 3 tier system, premier games like FSU-VT or ND@anyone would be chosen for Tier 1 (ABC over the air) or Tier 2 (ESPN/2/U), and not be available for what is currently Tier 3. That is why the current Tier 3 Raycom broadcast is pretty much This Week in Wake Forest Football. Maybe an ACCN/ESPN deal would put give the ACCN some first choices - anything can be negotiated into a contract.

    Correct me if I'm wrong - trust me, I don't like having to agree with Chuck on this.


    Quote Originally Posted by BUGGZY View Post
    you used a premier bball game to compare to a mediocre football game. how would this hold up if we used FSU-VT or all 2.5 ND games played in ACC stadiums as the games being placed on the ACC Network? still think the UNC-L'ville MBB game would generate more angry callers to the various cable providers? UNC will play L'ville in MBB every year (in addition to 17 other ACC games). FSU will play VT once every 6 years, and also only plays 7 other conference games, not 17. the same could be said about ND for most AC schools...we'll only play them once every 6 years.

    putting those high demand football games on the Network will be what drives carriage and favorable carriage rates for the league mosreso than MBB or any other sport.

    10% of the content will drive 90% of the demand for the channel when it's all said and done.
    BCS level college football is a resource war, not a morality play.

  3. #23

    Join Date
    May 18, 2006
    Posts
    4,112

    Time delay it would.

    Quote Originally Posted by chuckd4vt View Post
    Just saying that an FSU-ND game will NEVER be on such a network. I'm sorry. Maybe in 30 years.
    r

    Plus many replay's. Especially if it is great game.

  4. #24
    Edgeman's Avatar
    Join Date
    January 05, 2001
    Location
    Virginia Beach
    Posts
    49,228
    Quote Originally Posted by MrFantastic! View Post
    Plus many replay's. Especially if it is great game.
    Would be nice if every regional game would be rebroadcast on the ACCN.
    "You start a conversation you can't even finish it
    You're talkin' a lot, but you're not sayin' anything
    When I have nothing to say, my lips are sealed
    Say something once, why say it again?"
    - David Byrne

  5. #25
    BUGGZY's Avatar
    Join Date
    August 15, 2002
    Location
    Annandale, VA
    Posts
    13,709
    Quote Originally Posted by PadrosWindup View Post
    As I understand the 3 tier system, premier games like FSU-VT or ND@anyone would be chosen for Tier 1 (ABC over the air) or Tier 2 (ESPN/2/U), and not be available for what is currently Tier 3. That is why the current Tier 3 Raycom broadcast is pretty much This Week in Wake Forest Football. Maybe an ACCN/ESPN deal would put give the ACCN some first choices - anything can be negotiated into a contract.

    Correct me if I'm wrong - trust me, I don't like having to agree with Chuck on this.

    ESPN is going to broadcast some premier SEC games on the SEC Network for exactly this reason. If ESPN is the ACC Network (as they are with the SEC Network), they will put whatever content they have rights to on that channel in order to help gain carriage.

    and for the person who said never, i agree on a national level, but in content/carriage fights, anything is possible. i could EASILY see ESPN putting ND @ FSU on ABC nationally but putting it on ACCN in Florida if they needed to push the issue with Florida cable companies.
    "This no more resembles that than something unlike something else resembles that." - Loosely quoting PHNC

  6. #26
    BUGGZY's Avatar
    Join Date
    August 15, 2002
    Location
    Annandale, VA
    Posts
    13,709
    is this a 1 year deal? if not, it's another example of how our rights are going to get more and more difficult to buy back the longer we let this all drag out.

    http://www.msg.com/msg-news/-msg-net...-schedule.html

    we sold all of our rights to ESPN

    ESPN sold a chunk to Raycom

    Raycom sold a chunk to Fox Sports

    Fox Sports has sold chunks to YES and MSG

    That is now 4 rights holders below ESPN that ESPN and the ACC would need to buy back (at a significant loss, i'm sure) in order to secure enough content to justify an ACC Cable Network. i sure hope the decision makers know what the hell they are doing...
    "This no more resembles that than something unlike something else resembles that." - Loosely quoting PHNC

  7. #27
    PadrosWindup's Avatar
    Join Date
    June 16, 2003
    Posts
    5,013
    Add in the fact that YES and MSG are NYC centered regional networks - will they be showing the same games?
    Will different games be shown in the same timeslots?

    Quote Originally Posted by BUGGZY View Post
    is this a 1 year deal? if not, it's another example of how our rights are going to get more and more difficult to buy back the longer we let this all drag out.

    http://www.msg.com/msg-news/-msg-net...-schedule.html

    we sold all of our rights to ESPN

    ESPN sold a chunk to Raycom

    Raycom sold a chunk to Fox Sports

    Fox Sports has sold chunks to YES and MSG

    That is now 4 rights holders below ESPN that ESPN and the ACC would need to buy back (at a significant loss, i'm sure) in order to secure enough content to justify an ACC Cable Network. i sure hope the decision makers know what the hell they are doing...
    BCS level college football is a resource war, not a morality play.

  8. #28

    Join Date
    October 07, 1999
    Posts
    1,913
    Quote Originally Posted by chuckd4vt View Post
    Most of TSL noticed when the Tier 3 stuff was included in this RECENT contract renegotiation. And that was conducted in 2011 AFTER the B1GNetwork was already making major coin. We discussed the "issues" with that here quite a bit and I would imagine 3/4 of this board's posters would have not "thrown in" the rights into that contract. Anyhow, the exposure the ACC is getting compared to the Pac12 is a joke. They have a reality program following around a couple of Pac12 programs throughout the season. I would LOVE watching that, especially if it were VT. And they do replay games and historic matchups. I LOVE watching old Hokie games every once in a while. If one were on once a week, I would check it out. Anyhow, you are wrong about the hindsight being 20/20. This is just another instance of those in charge of the ACC making a mistake, a mistake that most fairly informed fans wouldn't have made. Same thing with inviting BC and playing that ACCCG in Florida instead of Charlotte for so many years.
    A couple of rebuttals are in order.

    Number one it is total false assumption that the ACC-ESPN contract was renegotiated. The contract in place took probably a year to hammer out in 2009-10. It was a multi-year contract say 10 years, ESPN has that in their pocket. The addition of Syracuse and Pitt then Notre Dame gave the ACC the opportunity to stick out their hand and ask for more money but wasn't grounds for a total redo of the contract. I believe the serial additions resulted in going from 14.4 mil to 17 mil to the current 20 mil average per year per team pay hike. I think that was a pretty fair adjustment and happened each time relatively quickly. I doubt ESPN would want to tear up the still valid 2010 contract and doubt the ACC could reasonably demand it just going from 12 to 14 1/2 teams. So the notion that getting back those rights were ever in play is just false.

    Like it or not, we i.e., the ACC want to partner with ESPN. They are the undisputed leader in sports broadcasting. The Fox productions I have seen are just amateur hour in comparison, IMHO.

    more rebuttal later.

  9. #29
    BUGGZY's Avatar
    Join Date
    August 15, 2002
    Location
    Annandale, VA
    Posts
    13,709
    Quote Originally Posted by PadrosWindup View Post
    Add in the fact that YES and MSG are NYC centered regional networks - will they be showing the same games?
    Will different games be shown in the same timeslots?
    they theoretically could, but i doubt they do. each network gets "up to" 10 games from Fox Sports. Fox Sports only has rights to 17 games. i think you will see each Network get 7-8 games depending on time slot availability and a possible bidding process. now, if you do the math, 17 games is more than the 14 week season, so there will be at least 3 weeks with more than 1 game, and in those cases, i could see both networks simultaneously airing 2 different games.
    "This no more resembles that than something unlike something else resembles that." - Loosely quoting PHNC

  10. #30

    Join Date
    October 07, 1999
    Posts
    1,913
    Quote Originally Posted by chuckd4vt View Post
    Most of TSL noticed when the Tier 3 stuff was included in this RECENT contract renegotiation. And that was conducted in 2011 AFTER the B1GNetwork was already making major coin. We discussed the "issues" with that here quite a bit and I would imagine 3/4 of this board's posters would have not "thrown in" the rights into that contract. Anyhow, the exposure the ACC is getting compared to the Pac12 is a joke. They have a reality program following around a couple of Pac12 programs throughout the season. I would LOVE watching that, especially if it were VT. And they do replay games and historic matchups. I LOVE watching old Hokie games every once in a while. If one were on once a week, I would check it out. Anyhow, you are wrong about the hindsight being 20/20. This is just another instance of those in charge of the ACC making a mistake, a mistake that most fairly informed fans wouldn't have made. Same thing with inviting BC and playing that ACCCG in Florida instead of Charlotte for so many years.
    More rebuttal.

    ESPN is the undisputed leader in sports broadcasting. They started and are perpetuating the 24/7, 365 day programming they provide on multiple dedicated channels. They already owned both SEC and ACC programming rights untill the SEC repurchased them. If an SEC or ACC dedicated channel was such a slam dunk, why didn't they roll it out several years ago when they owned 100% of the rights ?

    As stated elsewhere it is hard to provide interesting content continually 365 days a year. The college game by definition has 1/3 of the year dead with no competition of any kind. Yeah , I'm game for some Hokie reruns if we won but not that bored or in need of reruns of any other teams be it ACC, SEC or whomever. I suspect I'm not alone and without interesting live competition and I don't count poker, chainsaw/lumber jack or strongman filler in that category, no one is watching the channel. Like any other show if it isn't being viewed it won't survive.

    I suspect the Big 10, fat revenue now will get seriously pared down. The current Time-Warner cable vs CBS feud out in California is the tip of the iceberg to totally go ala cart viewing and thus paying. Once that happens a lot of that automatic money will disappear.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •