Just as I expected. This guy runs down Cal, Stanford, and SMU. Essentially says they are toast. This guy runs off at the mouth, but seems to know a helluva lot.
no, the definition of depressing wuz u posting that chris street should "follow his dreams" in throwing away a berkeley degree & future potential generational wealth after almost 3 years of studies in order to now be a back up running back at utah techsouthseasbear said:
This is depressing.
I am not a troll because I new nothing about this whol e issue, andI I said so. Just reported whaWT I HEAR AND READ. Cal's athletic director thanks me when I passed along the same message to him you read.Shocky1 said:
gobears49, ur either really clueless or a really funny troll, the big 12 lobbying machine led by berkeley grad karen "acc prisoner" brodkin of la's enpower marketing firm is just making up **** on behalf of their client, the big 12 commish
reality is that there are contracts & a contractually ironclad gor in place, the acc isn't going anywhere just because florida state is tryna negotiate a a buyout that's not gonna happen
maybe u should just root for the big 12's truck stop schools that got no academic admission requirements or something, got it?
As was pointed out on the Bear Insider board, Drake Toll is a senior at Baylor University and does high school football play by play. He's also a vice president in Baylor's student government. I think we should give his opinion all the weight he's earned during the entire course of his sports journalism career.golden sloth said:
I watched the full video, and Drake C Toll's logic does not make sense to me.
I don't understand how he can say both the Big Twelve is strong and the ACC is weak, or why ESPN is going to kill the ACC to move the biggest schools into other conferences.
First, regarding the Big Twelve's strength, the Big Twelve has a relative small population following, and no big name brands. Who is the biggest brand in the Big Twelve? Utah? BYU? Maybe Colorda with Coach Prime (which is a temporary bump)? He claims Boston College doesn't deliver the Boston market for the ACC and he might be right. Yet, at the same time, we can't say that Texas Tech, TCU, Houston and Baylor deliver the Texas market, Cincinatti delivers the Ohio market or UCF delivers the Florida market. The schools the Big Twelve has are either the Big Dog in a small or medium market or an afterthought in a big market, therefore they have a small population following in spite of having large population footprint. Without a big name brand or a large population following, the Big Twelve will be at a financial disadvantage with the B1G and the SEC, and will see their best coaches and players move to those conferences due to that disadvantage.
Second, he talks of ESPN not opting into the ACC in 2027, claiming instead that they want to move those schools into other conferences. This also does not make sense. All the discussion is about how the ACC's media deal is incredibly beneficial to ESPN at the expense of the schools. Why would ESPN kill the deal when they are the biggest beneficiaries? Further, the speaker references ESPN not making money on ACC games, yet the payout between the ACC and Big Twelve is comprable, and if Wake Forest vrs Duke is not making ESPN money, then Iowa St - Kansas is not making ESPN any money. Further, if ESPN did want to poach the top 4 or 5 schools, they would need to move the schools into either the SEC or the Big Twelve and the not the B1G as they do not have a media deal with the B1G. FSU and Clemson might like the SEC, but North Carolina, Virgnia, and Miami have to be eyeing the B1G, so ESPN would be taking a huge risk in breaking up a good deal without the guarantee of being able to secure all the top schools they want.
The only thing I do agree with is that the conference does not make geographic sense, but I'd counter that Cincinnati, West Virginia, and UCF do not make sense in the Big Twelve.
In conclusion, there is plenty of concern about the long-term future of the ACC, but I am not worried about ESPN not opting into the contract and killing the conference. Further,,I still see three tiers of conferences inevitably forming in 5 - 6 years:
- Tier 1 - B1G & SEC - after they grab Florida State, Clemson, Miami, & North Carolina
- Tier 2 - Big Twelve & leftovers of the ACC (in separate conferences)
- Tier 3 - Everyone else
You're misquoting me. I said he should pursue his dreams, not yours. Apparently you are so egocentric you can't imagine people having priorities for their lives that don't align with yours.Shocky1 said:no, the definition of depressing wuz u posting that chris street should "follow his dreams" in throwing away a berkeley degree & future potential generational wealth after almost 3 years of studies in order to now be a back up running back at utah techsouthseasbear said:
This is depressing.
If we tread water these next 2 seasons and don't change coaches we are going to be left to drown in the next realignment shuffle.bencgilmore said:
we gotta win. if we keep winning 6 or 7 a year, he's right, we're a money loser for anyone
Strykur said:If we tread water these next 2 seasons and don't change coaches we are going to be left to drown in the next realignment shuffle.bencgilmore said:
we gotta win. if we keep winning 6 or 7 a year, he's right, we're a money loser for anyone
Wilcox has not won 7 or more games since 2019.bencgilmore said:
we gotta win. if we keep winning 6 or 7 a year, he's right, we're a money loser for anyone
southseasbear said:Wilcox has not won 7 or more games since 2019.bencgilmore said:
we gotta win. if we keep winning 6 or 7 a year, he's right, we're a money loser for anyone
southseasbear said:Wilcox has not won 7 or more games since 2019.bencgilmore said:
we gotta win. if we keep winning 6 or 7 a year, he's right, we're a money loser for anyone
the point is that none of what we've done in a long time will prove our Baylor streamer friend wrongsouthseasbear said:Wilcox has not won 7 or more games since 2019.bencgilmore said:
we gotta win. if we keep winning 6 or 7 a year, he's right, we're a money loser for anyone
Shocky1 said:no, the definition of depressing wuz u posting that chris street should "follow his dreams" in throwing away a berkeley degree & future potential generational wealth after almost 3 years of studies in order to now be a back up running back at utah techsouthseasbear said:
This is depressing.
accprisoner said:
Because the acc's deal is only good because FSU is a mammoth tv draw. If FSU leaves, the acc goes from being a golden goose to an albatross overnight
accprisoner said:
Because the acc's deal is only good because FSU is a mammoth tv draw. If FSU leaves, the acc goes from being a golden goose to an albatross overnight
Put it this way goldensloth - FSU ranks first in viewership per game for the ACC. In 2023, they ranked 9th in total viewership across all conferences. And in games most watched in 2023, they had the 9th most watched game - excluding CFP games.golden sloth said:accprisoner said:
Because the acc's deal is only good because FSU is a mammoth tv draw. If FSU leaves, the acc goes from being a golden goose to an albatross overnight
Clemson, Miami and North Carolina all just coughed.
Also, FSU cant leave without paying a huge price. They willfully signed on to this contract, there was no duress or deviance.
philly1121 said:Put it this way goldensloth - FSU ranks first in viewership per game for the ACC. In 2023, they ranked 9th in total viewership across all conferences. And in games most watched in 2023, they had the 9th most watched game - excluding CFP games.golden sloth said:accprisoner said:
Because the acc's deal is only good because FSU is a mammoth tv draw. If FSU leaves, the acc goes from being a golden goose to an albatross overnight
Clemson, Miami and North Carolina all just coughed.
Also, FSU cant leave without paying a huge price. They willfully signed on to this contract, there was no duress or deviance.
In either of those metrics above - there is no other ACC team. Now, you're correct - Clemson, UNC and Miami bring value. But none of their games even cracked the top 10 in per team viewership or matchups.
You're right. the contract seems ironclad. But the sheer weight of realignment and the movement of money to the SEC and B1G will certainly bring change sooner than 2036.
Technically the ACC got their lawsuit in first (anticipating what FSU was going to do).DiabloWags said:
Hence, FSU filing a lawsuit against the ACC in December challenging the league's "Grant of Rights" agreement and withdrawal fee; to which the ACC sued back.
The current withdrawal penalty would be at least $572 million.
Takeaways from FSU suing ACC over grant of rights deal (tallahassee.com)
Well, again, I'm not saying FSU is the only one bringing value. Of the teams that are in the top 10 in terms of value - 6 of those are either in the SEC or B1G; 1 is going to the SEC; 1 is the Deion factor early in the season; 1 is going to the B1G and the last is Notre Dame. FSU is a top 15 team in terms of media value over past 3 years. And Clemson, Miami, UNC - even Virginia are tv draws. I'm sure these guys want to leave too.golden sloth said:philly1121 said:Put it this way goldensloth - FSU ranks first in viewership per game for the ACC. In 2023, they ranked 9th in total viewership across all conferences. And in games most watched in 2023, they had the 9th most watched game - excluding CFP games.golden sloth said:accprisoner said:
Because the acc's deal is only good because FSU is a mammoth tv draw. If FSU leaves, the acc goes from being a golden goose to an albatross overnight
Clemson, Miami and North Carolina all just coughed.
Also, FSU cant leave without paying a huge price. They willfully signed on to this contract, there was no duress or deviance.
In either of those metrics above - there is no other ACC team. Now, you're correct - Clemson, UNC and Miami bring value. But none of their games even cracked the top 10 in per team viewership or matchups.
You're right. the contract seems ironclad. But the sheer weight of realignment and the movement of money to the SEC and B1G will certainly bring change sooner than 2036.
Using a one year sample size to determine TV value is not a good idea. Florida State was better than they typically are, went undefeated and their ratings benefitted because of that, but I would consider this last season an outlier, not the rule.
Yes, Florida State is a good draw, but to say they alone carry the conference, is wrong. Clemson had higher ratings than them for a good 4 or 5 year run within the last decade.
There is a delayed and exponential relationship to how good the team is to the ratings they provide.