In partnership with CBSSports.com
Online Now 845
Online now 209 Record: 11761 (2/27/2012)
The Web's No. 1 forum for coverage and discussion of Terps sports
Visitor discussion of University of Maryland and college sports
A place for lively discussion for all other sports unrelated to Maryland athletics
Feedback for IMS and 247Sports
You have no favorite boards.
The most viewed topics.
The most replied to topics.
The most up-voted topics.
The most down-voted topics.
The most up-voted posters.
The most down-voted posters.
The most followed posters.
I was hoping for a lot more for all the changes...sigh...
ACC expansion will mean at least $1 million to $2 million a year in additional revenue for each of the conferences existing schools, according to sources privy to discussions between the league and ESPN. The addition of Pittsburgh and Syracuse, which will increase the number of teams in the A
Jackie Robinson isn't dirty. This isn't Pack Pride.
Oh yeah, my favorite part:
The ACC is not using a media consultant for these talks. In the past, the conference has used IMG’s Barry Frank.
"Maryland football: Where everybody gets hurt and the starting left tackle has an existential crisis."
ESPN to Swofford: You can have 10 of these shiny nickels, or five lousy quarters.
Swofford: THE NICKELS! THE NICKELS!
This post was edited by hgoodman 2 years ago
That almost gets us where we need to be for the "buy out Edsall" fund.
Swofford then makes a mad dash for Bojangles.
This was my immediate thought.
[Athletic Director Hogie]You guys spell your last name with 2 Rs, correct?[/Athletic Director Hogie]
Andrew and Aaron: "Yeah, why...?"
"And I try to har-mo-nize with songs the lonesome sparrow sings...
There are no kings inside the Gates of Eden."
While the Big 12 got no bump adding WVU, there was no downgrade in money when the Big 12 lost Nebraska, Aggies, Mizzou and colo, since they replaced them with TCU and WVU. Obviously someone with a fat purse knows value when they see it.
ACC missed a lot of Bojangles by not adding WVU and Texas.
Many of Pitt's 58 "rushing attempts" were the result qb Tino Sunseri fleeing the pocket like a man whose clothes were on fire.
Can someone on here explain a couple issues to me?
1. Why wouldn't the acc now be thinking about starting their own network? Seems as though it would be very popular in the highly populated east coast.
2.how are revenues so much higher in the Midwest? East coast is extraordinarily populated and you think the cable companies would want to get a piece of this money all the easy from Miami to Boston. What gives?
In answer to #2...it has to be about rating. While the East Coast has bigger markets (and more of them)...the Big10 is almost all huge state schools w/ hige followings. ACC has way too many private schools that draw crappy market share. Networks arent going to pay for market unless you get get market share in those markets.
I bet Big10 crushes the rating in those midwest markets. ACC....probably pretty meh.
I'm going to gander that the Big 10 has more alumni in Philly, NYC and Boston than the ACC. Michigan, Ohio St, Penn St. Wisconsin, Michigan St are all huge schools. BC, U of MD, UVA, UNC and Duke are probably the only schools sending alumni to those cities. Now that we have 'Cuse that may change a bit but the size of the B10 schools are still enormous.
The thing that doesn't quite square about that is that I think it's much more than just about the ratings.
For example, MASN has gotten horrible ratings for the past couple years, but the fact that there is a network is a huge cash cow for the Orioles. If you start your own network, in particular, you control the programming 24 hours a day. You can't tell me that wouldn't be a popular network for all these East Coast cities. The ACC has established a real identity with serious brand recognition on the East Coast. At least as much as the Pac-12 out west. Right???
But the ACC has real footholds in those markets. BC football is a big deal in Boston. Syracuse is the most popular college basketball team in NYC. Does that mean that cable networks wouldn't see the value in adding an ACC network full time to be able to get access to those games full time? That doesn't quite make sense to me.
Again, I'm not trying to be argumentative here. Just honestly wondering what's going on.
Also, our current deal with ESPN is horrible. This ESPN3/ESPNU nonsense is terrible. ESPN is treating ACC basketball in a way that's not befitting of the best college basketball conference in the country.
In fact, they've basically done that to all college basketball. Makes sense since basketball is not the revenue driver that football is (outside of sleazeball program-runners like Calipari), but for true college basketball fans it's a damn shame.
Big Ten has an incredible line up. Almost the entire conference are huge state schools with huge alumni bases that dominate their markets. Who is competition to Minnesota in Minnesota? UW in Wisconsin? Ohio State in Ohio? etc. And when there is some competition (Michigan-Michigan St), both are in the Big Ten.
but the tv markets are better than you expect. In the top 50 markets, I count 11 that would be right in the middle (and dominated by) the Big Ten footprint.
The ACC has 14 of the top 50 tv markets, but so many of them are areas that are really SEC country in my opinion (Atlanta, Orlando, etc.) or are really pro markets with little interest in college sports (Miami, Boston, DC)
1. Swoffford is an idiot steeped in the past. He can not get himself out of Carolina oriented thinking. he probably likes Western cue over Eastern...!
2. What is there to do in the Mid West but watch TV. Possible the density of veiwers per play is higher. Just guessing
This post was edited by tagterp 2 years ago
Since when is BC football a big deal in Boston?? Boston is a pro sports ton. Red Sox, Patriots, Celtics and Bruins are what rule that city......BC is probably not even 5th. BC's rating in Boston have always been poor. Small Catholic school that doesnt draw that much from Mass as a %. Not like a large state school. I didnt look it up...but I bet less than 1/3 come from MAss.
This is where everyone stopped reading your posts.
classlessthug: I have too much on my plate to worry about the fact that my junk intimidates some needle D undergrad.
Geeze. Way to jump down my throat! Just asking legit questions! I lived in Boston btw. BC football it's not huge at all but when they win the city does get behind them. Either way my questions still stand. Not trying to argue details here. And was hoping for more than the obligatory"because swofford is an idiot" stuff...
No, they just don't.
Dude fine.not the point at all.
What is your point, then?
You claim it doesn't make sense that the ACC doesn't have it's own network, citing the fact that BC delivers Boston and Syracuse delivers NYC. Neither are true.
Boston is a pro town, plain and simple. And I've long tried to explain that NO sport short of the NFL delivers NYC. It's too big and diverse of a city to be delivered. Is Syracuse the biggest college brand in town? Yeah, probably. But to say they deliver NYC is not accurate. Good luck selling that line to an ad exec.
So if you understand those two facts, it's pretty easy to figure out why the ACC doesn't have it's own network.
What point am I missing?
Michigan and Ohio St football are both way bigger in NYC than Syracuse football. It's Syracuse football folks.
Fair enough. Would you agree with my statement that no college team, in any sport, can make the claim that they deliver NYC?
247Sports In partnership with CBS Sports