Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 30
  1. #11
    You seem to be stuck in the present tense. What I see here is an ND admission that their independent world is crumbling and they need a landing to stay relevant. Moving forward NBC will become less likely to reup the TV deal for ND alone when other networks are carrying blockbuster match-ups week in week out. ND won't be locked out, but their ability to schedule big name opps will be severly crippled, because conferences will be busy playing with themselves and will not be willing to schedule around to meet ND's needs. This move means ND has realized that the NBC contract is losing value and the difficultly to schedule a game with desired opps. The ACC offers them the relevancy that is fading away for ND; and this is why they will eventually be a full member. This may be heresy to say, but the NBC has probably already starting considering dropping ND contract in 2015; it is only a few games and there are bigger meals out there. Loyalty in the last decade means nothing anymore; it is all about more money. I wouldn't be surprised if NBC told ND this and that they are planning to pursue the ACC for a bigger package deal.


    QUOTE=Benhokio;445506]I sincerely hope you are right but I doubt it. What incentive does Notre Dame have for joining the ACC in football with this deal in place? You get to participate in the ACC's olympic sports, keep the NBC contract, gain access to the ACC's bowls AND schedule 7 traditional rivalry games a year. This deal actually makes it less likely that Notre Dame joins as a full member. The only way I see full membership is if independents are somehow locked out of the playoff.[/QUOTE]

  2. #12
    Read TSL's Fact Sheet Will & Co. put together.

    Quote Originally Posted by Benhokio View Post
    Where are you getting these numbers? There is no way this deal nets $2 million more per team per year. Why the hell would ESPN pay $28 million more per year (14 teams * $2 million) for the right to broadcast an average of 2.5 football games and 30 basketball games? ESPN is currently commited to paying only ~$238 million (14 teams * $17 million) for 100+ ACC football games and ~420 ACC basketball games. The addition of a few ND games is completely insignificant financially.

  3. #13
    If the NBC is willing to pay good money for ND home games; why wouldn't ESPN pay a LOT more for VT vs. ND in Lane, or Clem vs ND in the Valley, or ND vs FSU in Tallahassee or UNC vs ND in Chapel Hill, or ND vs Miami. THAT is worth quite a bit IMO....at least $1-$2 million per ACC team for sure.

    Quote Originally Posted by Benhokio View Post
    Where are you getting these numbers? There is no way this deal nets $2 million more per team per year. Why the hell would ESPN pay $28 million more per year (14 teams * $2 million) for the right to broadcast an average of 2.5 football games and 30 basketball games? ESPN is currently commited to paying only ~$238 million (14 teams * $17 million) for 100+ ACC football games and ~420 ACC basketball games. The addition of a few ND games is completely insignificant financially.

  4. #14

    Join Date
    January 03, 2003
    Posts
    10,660
    Quote Originally Posted by Hokie Flyer View Post
    Read TSL's Fact Sheet Will & Co. put together.
    Unfortunately that is not a "FACT". That fact sheet is quoting a tweet. And the tweet was one of those "sources say possibly up to" deals.

    There is no way 2.5 ND football games are worth $28M. It's just not possible. And no offense, but ND basketball is enough of a draw to make up the difference.

  5. #15

    Join Date
    February 03, 2005
    Posts
    2,098
    Quote Originally Posted by Hokie Flyer View Post
    If the NBC is willing to pay good money for ND home games; why wouldn't ESPN pay a LOT more for VT vs. ND in Lane, or Clem vs ND in the Valley, or ND vs FSU in Tallahassee or UNC vs ND in Chapel Hill, or ND vs Miami. THAT is worth quite a bit IMO....at least $1-$2 million per ACC team for sure.
    Do you realize that NBC is paying a grand total of $15 million per year right now for their home games (and those games include USC, Michigan, Michigan St., etc.)? Why the hell would ESPN pay $28 million for an average of 2.5 football games a year when NBC only pays $15 million for all of them?
    Last edited by Benhokio; Fri Sep 14 2012 at 10:32 AM.

  6. #16

    Join Date
    December 24, 1999
    Posts
    1,155
    Quote Originally Posted by Benhokio View Post
    Do you realize that NBC is paying a grand total of $15 million per year right now for their home games (and those games include USC, Michigan, Michigan St., etc.)? Why the hell would ESPN pay $28 million for an average of 2.5 football games a year when NBC only pays $15 million for all of them?
    You are forgetting about basketball both men and women, Olympic sports on ESPNU ad ESPN3, and just the brand awareness that ND brings to the Network and their ability to cross advertise (although this is not a very large component) You are also forgetting that NBC's contract is coming up and the new numbers will be higher. But let's say it's only one million more per team, isn't it still a win-win?

    I too think ND needs to be in for football, but this is not a Big East deal. This is a good first step.

  7. #17

    Join Date
    October 07, 1999
    Posts
    2,754
    This was the most palatable way to initiate ND into the conference and it was very smart to lock them in. It's the best deal for ND also because the conference peers most closely match the academic and culture of ND.

    I think it's great for both the ACC and ND and can't wait to see them in Lane!

  8. #18
    Will Stewart's Avatar
    Join Date
    September 18, 1999
    Location
    Radford, VA
    Posts
    42,910
    Quote Originally Posted by Benhokio View Post
    Where are you getting these numbers? There is no way this deal nets $2 million more per team per year. Why the hell would ESPN pay $28 million more per year (14 teams * $2 million) for the right to broadcast an average of 2.5 football games and 30 basketball games? ESPN is currently commited to paying only ~$238 million (14 teams * $17 million) for 100+ ACC football games and ~420 ACC basketball games. The addition of a few ND games is completely insignificant financially.
    Here are the details of the deal:

    http://www.techsideline.com/2012/09/...-a-good-thing/
    Always use "Reply With Quote", so everyone knows to whom you're responding.

  9. #19
    BUGGZY's Avatar
    Join Date
    August 15, 2002
    Location
    Annandale, VA
    Posts
    13,709
    Quote Originally Posted by Benhokio View Post
    Do you realize that NBC is paying a grand total of $15 million per year right now for their home games (and those games include USC, Michigan, Michigan St., etc.)? Why the hell would ESPN pay $28 million for an average of 2.5 football games a year when NBC only pays $15 million for all of them?
    that NBC deal is also 8 years old. look at what TV deals have done over the past 3 years alone...they are skyrocketing. that NBC deal also gives NBC no cable broadcasts (ESPN has already realized that they make more money on ESPN than they do on ABC which is why they moved MNF to cable) and no content from Jan-March when there is no football.

    If/when ND re-ups with NBC, look for NBC to be paying them ~$25-30MM/year for 7 games, and that will likely run through to 2024 season to align with the playoff contract(s).

    ESPN knows they are underpaying the ACC for the markets we blanket, but at the same time, we're the unlucky ones who signed a bad deal in a depressed market before anyone else's TV deals came up. i think we easily get $1MM more per team, possibly more, and we may even pull some rights back to launch an ACC network, or simply demand ESPN launch one with the rights they already have.

    the ultimate win in all of this would be to demand the ACC get 1 home game per team back to either support the launch of a network or to give back to each school to bundle themselves, but i'm not holding my breath.
    "This no more resembles that than something unlike something else resembles that." - Loosely quoting PHNC

  10. #20

    Join Date
    February 03, 2005
    Posts
    2,098
    Quote Originally Posted by Will Stewart View Post
    Thanks, Will. I see the tweet you reference but I don't accept that as verified fact. Again, I hope I'm way off here and this is a huge windfall for the conference.

Posting Permissions

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