Oklahoma & Texas to SEC?
- Thread starter bumpstock
- Start date
Sorry bro, in this situation, thats how its viewed. It's as important as the other non football sports. You can accept it or not.
Here is an interesting view from someone who covers Oklahoma State. Kinda long, but if you click you can read his thread.
I dont know who he is, he isnt a writer for the Georgia rivals site, or 247, not sure about the new one. But if word is out that the SEC is shopping for a few more teams I am sure there would be some letting it know they are willing. I am just guessing and haven't heard any names, but Cinncy, UCF or Memphsis would be 3 that wouldnt surprise me if they reached out. I dont think OSU or Mich are interested, but a week ago I would have called BS on Texas and OU to the SEC.
Conference expansion is getting as cutthroat as recruiting,I am going to be cautious, not believe everything I read, but not disregarding it either.
I root for all things UK.
Absolutely. I was very happy watching our volleyball team win the title, a few months ago. I want UK to be the very best in all sports.
I don't know where you're seeing $240 million. TV broadcast revenue is closer to $372 million (it totaled $332 million in the 10 months after the ACC network rollout). Then you would have to add in home game revenue. Clemson football has ticket sales of ~$25 million. So, a conservative estimate would be in the $33 -$37 million range, which is about the same as the average conference distribution. That's for the ACC, and again assuming no increase over the next 15 years.
What I meant was that you would have to buy out their GOR from the ACC in addition to paying them as a new conference member. I think you only figured one half of the equation or at least that's how I read it. Otherwise, the ACC would still own their media rights, and home game revenue, regardless of their affiliation with the SEC. Meaning they would be pretty much worthless to your conference as a new member.
The GOR makes it financially untenable for anyone to leave unless the conference collectively disbands and isn't up until 2036.
TV Revenue
Last edited:
you can say the same of SOME FB fans or any other sport
SOMEONE THAT LOVES UK DOES NOT TRY TO DIVIDE THE FANBASE
you try to divide and start arguments among UK fans almost on a daily basis
you need a timeout or warning from the mods
hopefully they will deal with you soon
you are either like the little kid in the sandbox that has a toy and is jealous at other kids that also have a toy, or you are just one of those people that is jealous of the world and packs tells or whatever it takes to keep division going
ESPN was actually behind a lot of it. They wanted assurance the conference was stable. If you remember, Maryland left just a few years before the ACC network partnership was finalized.
I don’t think the grant of rights covers ticket sales. It covers media rights for home games of conference members.
“The conference's grant of rights makes it financially untenable for a school to leave, guaranteeing in the 20 years of the deal that a school's media rights, including revenue, for all home games would remain with the ACC regardless of the school's affiliation.”
ESPN-backed ACC Network launches in 2019
The ACC, in partnership with ESPN, is launching its own conference network by August 2019.
www.espn.com
So, what I’m saying is if the SEC just replaced that media revenue for an exiting ACC school, they could put them in a position at least as good as they have in the ACC. And I think that would be doable.
I don’t think the grant of rights covers ticket sales. It covers media rights for home games of conference members.
“The conference's grant of rights makes it financially untenable for a school to leave, guaranteeing in the 20 years of the deal that a school's media rights, including revenue, for all home games would remain with the ACC regardless of the school's affiliation.”
ESPN-backed ACC Network launches in 2019
The ACC, in partnership with ESPN, is launching its own conference network by August 2019.
So, what I’m saying is if the SEC just replaced that media revenue for an exiting ACC school, they could put them in a position at least as good as they have in the ACC. And I think that would be doable.
No. That's not how the GOR works. They would relinquish their media rights and home game revenue (I used football ticket sales to give you an idea how much that would be) to the ACC upon leaving the conference. You would have to pay them as a new conference member AND buy out their GOR from the ACC. It's not as simple as just replacing their lost TV revenue to keep their athletic department afloat. Just TV money alone, you'd be looking at a minimum $330 million buyout, and that doesn't factor in an increase over the next 15 years. If it were doable, the B1G would be looking at ACC schools instead of Kansas and Iowa St. We're in the most demographically favorable part of the country.
I'm with you. It seems like the season will open a week earlier to allow for a four team championship.
I can’t find anything in support of your characterization of GoR. Everything I see says it’s about media rights.
“A Grant of Rights, in basic form, is written permission from league members to relinquish control of television rights to the league for the duration of the deal. If a school leaves, it forfeits those earnings to be spread among the rest of the conference.”
ACC approves Grant of Rights deal
The ACC is eschewing its $50 million exit fee model in favor of a Grant of Rights, which could solidify the league from the Big Ten or other conference realignment poachers. The league also wants an ACC channel.
www.cbssports.com
I can’t find anything in support of your characterization of GoR. Everything I see says it’s about media rights.
“A Grant of Rights, in basic form, is written permission from league members to relinquish control of television rights to the league for the duration of the deal. If a school leaves, it forfeits those earnings to be spread among the rest of the conference.”
ACC approves Grant of Rights deal
The ACC is eschewing its $50 million exit fee model in favor of a Grant of Rights, which could solidify the league from the Big Ten or other conference realignment poachers. The league also wants an ACC channel.
Yeah, it seems like you don't understand how a GOR works. This is from just before it was extended:
ACC GOR
"...For example, if an ACC school now attempted to leave for the Big Ten, SEC or Big 12, the ACC would still own that school’s media rights until 2026-27. That effectively makes ACC schools worthless from a raiding conference’s standpoint since they either can’t get access to those media rights or would have to pay a large buyout to the ACC to obtain them."
ACC GOR
"The agreement states that if a school leaves for another conference during the length of the contract, that school's media rights and revenue for all home games remain with the ACC."
Last edited:
We must be have a bizarre miscommunication because the quoted text is only about media rights. That’s the point I am making.
I see. Yeah, we must.
ACC GOR
"The agreement states that if a school leaves for another conference during the length of the contract, that school's media rights AND REVENUE FOR ALL HOME GAMES REMAIN WITH THE ACC."
Lol. Is that better? Not sure which part you don't get.
The operative portion of the ACC’s Grant of Rights states:
Each of the Member Institutions hereby (a) irrevocably and exclusively grants to the conference during the Term (as defined below) all rights (the “Rights”) necessary for the Conference to perform the contractual obliga- tions of the Conference expressly set forth in the ESPN Agreement, re- gardless of whether such Member Institution remains a member of the Conference during the entirety of the Term and (b) agrees to satisfy and perform all contractual obligations of a Member Institution during the Term that are expressly set forth in the ESPN Agreement.”
That’s from a Harvard Journal of Sports and Entertainment Law article. It has actual language from the grant of rights agreement. I cannot find the full agreement anywhere.
The language you excerpted is ambiguous. It could mean “media rights and all revenue” or “media rights and media revenue”. The ESPN article I quoted earlier says “a school’s media rights, including revenue”, which clearly means media revenue.
Looks like its at Georgia reporter from SB Nation, yah I dont know how reputable it is either.
lol You can believe whatever you'd like. You were pretty obviously wrong about even the media revenue. Again, one would assume that if it's doable then the B1G would target ACC schools instead of Kansas and/or Iowa St. I'd be glad to revisit this post if and when realignment occurs.
The only source you provided was something ambiguous from Syracuse.com. Meanwhile I cite ESPN, CBS, and a Harvard publication. Find one single thing that says ticket revenue is part of the grant of rights. That’s all you have to do.
This is what I said:
They would relinquish their media rights and home game revenue (I used football ticket sales to give you an idea how much that would be) to the ACC upon leaving the conference.
You can literally quote it above.
I've also quoted numerous sources stating it would be financially untenable for anyone to leave the ACC due to the GOR.
BUT, it sounds like you know better. I guess we'll just take your word for it.
My personal preference for the next step is devour the ACC by taking four teams. 😇
But your contention that an exiting team would relinquish all home game revenue, not just media revenue for home games, is basically unsupported by anything you cite. So basically I’m supposed to take YOUR word for it.
Yes, everyone says poaching from the ACC is financially untenable. But that may be outdated thinking because a lot has changed since that grant of rights went into effect. The new SEC ESPN deal replacing just the SEC CBS package is worth more per year than the entire ACC exclusive deal with ESPN. The financial gap will be astronomical when that goes into effect, and that isn’t even considering the money that will come pouring in for premiere games with Texas and Oklahoma.
Don’t get the wrong idea. I’m not here to be argumentative. I’m genuinely curious as to whether the ACC is now poachable. It may not be. But I’d like to read definitive analysis if there is any available.
I would love to see U6 back in Conf. USA. 🤣
It's not unsupported. You just don't accept it. And that's fine. That's not the way I understand it (there's no reason to differentiate home game revenue if it's the same as media rights), but you might actually be right. It is somewhat ambiguous. Like I said, just the media rights would constitute at least a $330 million buyout at the current rate. It would likely be a lot more given that doesn't factor in an increase over the next 15 years after a 15% increase in year one of the ACC Network. Then you would still have to pay them a distribution. I don't think it's doable. A lot of other people don't think it's doable. I guess we'll see.
Last edited:
We really would have to see the text of the grant of rights to resolve this. I don’t envision a buyout, though. The conference would keep the rights (and money) and ESPN would broadcast whatever game they want. I don’t think they’d have a hard time choosing between Clemson vs. Alabama and Wake Forest vs. Louisville.
Then the question is what value does the transferring team bring with them if they leave behind home game media rights. I’d say the main thing they bring is their value as a premiere opponent and their likelihood of owning a playoff spot for the conference. Probably a little more. Whatever that adds up to.
Cool. You wouldn't get any TV revenue from Clemson over the next 15 years. It would all go to the ACC. So, why add them in the first place?
How does that work with the other conference members? Clemson brings in $0 revenue, but gets added to everyone's schedule, and still gets the same distribution as everyone else. lol I'm sure South Carolina would be on board.
So here is the scenario. The SEC decides to jump to 20 teams by raiding the ACC. Take your pick, but they add the four most valuable teams which the ACC is currently paying around $40 Million. In that scenario, a new TV contract would have to be negotiated. Let’s say that takes the SEC payout to $60 Million per team. A deal could be struck where the ACC gets paid their $40 Million until 2036, the new teams still pocket $20 million and earn a lot of security for the future, and all of the member schools are pocketing more money because they just added a lot of value to the conference.
I doubt it plays out like this, but there are ways for a really valuable ACC property to say screw-it I am securing my future while I can.
I doubt it plays out like this, but there are ways for a really valuable ACC property to say screw-it I am securing my future while I can.
There are a lot of problems with this scenario, but the most obvious one is that the four best teams from the ACC aren't leaving the conference to take ~33% haircut in distributions, while also having a much more difficult route to the playoffs. That and the ACC isn't the one being poached - it's the BIG12.
Presumably the ACC would not get tv revenue from road games against non ACC schools. Not sure those rights can be granted.
If it’s actually $0, you’re right, it’s impossible. But I don’t think it’s zero, and I don’t think new members would necessarily get the same deal as other SEC schools until they could contribute all of their media rights. Until then, as the saying goes, we don’t have to outrun the bear, we just have to outrun you.
THIS LEAGUE. Coming here is a big mouthful of humble pie for them. While not liking it, at the same time I bet A&M are laughing their a$$es off at the Sippers.
Tell ya what, with 9/T conference games, financially I don't see how there's room for a home & home with them.
