Florida State Board of Trustees Chairman blasted ACC.

[chuckd4vt]

I would, and so would the ACC. FSU is one of only a very few ACC football programs that can be considered "big time". If they leave, it would cripple the league. In that event, I would be 100% in favor of VT moving to the SEC.

Agreed.

[chuckd4vt]

no network worth their salt would sign a short term deal worth anything to the league. even at the "$17MM/year" rate, i hope most people realize we'll only see ~$13MM in year 1 but will see ~$23MM in year 15. it's not actually $17MM year from year 1. and that's not just our deal, that's ALL TV rights deals signed to long term contracts.

But 15 is a VERY LONG deal. And we signed it in a collectively historic slump.

[BUGGZY]

But 15 is a VERY LONG deal. And we signed it in a collectively historic slump.

let's look at the facts. we signed a 12 year deal in the midst of a historic slump which also happened to be during a major recession in the US economy and the year before ANYONE else was renewing long term rights deals.

THAT was the bad deal.

unfortunately, we were stuck with it. the 15 year deal you keep mentioning is actually a renegotiation of another deal only ONE YEAR into said deal. even an arbitrator might be slightly annoyed if a party forced a renegotiation to his table only ONE YEAR into a 12 year deal.

we just took a $155MM/year deal we were legally committed to for 12 years and turned it into a $240MM/year deal afte ONE YEAR of the 12 year deal.

i'm not trying to make Swofford into a hero or anything like that, but let's not act like he simply extended the same $155MM deal or only got us up to $180MM/year or something like that. he took his own really bad 12 year deal (which most in the industry thought was a coup when he signed it considering the market he had to work with) and turned it into a pretty decent 15 year deal.

you have to give ESPN something in return for a $85MM/year increase in rights fees ONE YEAR into a 12 year deal, and what we gave them was 4 more years.

[chuckd4vt]

let's look at the facts. we signed a 12 year deal in the midst of a historic slump which also happened to be during a major recession in the US economy and the year before ANYONE else was renewing long term rights deals.

THAT was the bad deal.

unfortunately, we were stuck with it. the 15 year deal you keep mentioning is actually a renegotiation of another deal only ONE YEAR into said deal. even an arbitrator might be slightly annoyed if a party forced a renegotiation to his table only ONE YEAR into a 12 year deal.

we just took a $155MM/year deal we were legally committed to for 12 years and turned it into a $240MM/year deal afte ONE YEAR of the 12 year deal.

i'm not trying to make Swofford into a hero or anything like that, but let's not act like he simply extended the same $155MM deal or only got us up to $180MM/year or something like that. he took his own really bad 12 year deal (which most in the industry thought was a coup when he signed it considering the market he had to work with) and turned it into a pretty decent 15 year deal.

you have to give ESPN something in return for a $85MM/year increase in rights fees ONE YEAR into a 12 year deal, and what we gave them was 4 more years.

I agree, it goes w/out saying that the initial deal was ridiculous. The Pac10 folks showed that not long after it was signed. Swofford got owned there. And why not a 6-8 year deal then? I actually fel pretty good about where most the ACC programs will be then. But 15 years of being outgunned in this arms race will be hard to stomach.

[HokieJay]

I agree, it goes w/out saying that the initial deal was ridiculous. The Pac10 folks showed that not long after it was signed. Swofford got owned there. And why not a 6-8 year deal then? I actually fel pretty good about where most the ACC programs will be then. But 15 years of being outgunned in this arms race will be hard to stomach.

Everyone talks about Swofford making the deal. Was it his call alone? I assume that he ran it by each member AD for a vote, isn't that SOP? I would wager there is much, MUCH more to this story than we know. Another thing that hasn't been discussed is the timing of the deal. Could the ACC have waited a year or two to renegotiate? It seems to me the conference bargaining power is pretty low now and could be better in 1 or 2 years. I'd love to lay eyes on the previous (to the new announcement) contract with ESPN to see the terms of renegotiation.

[neworleanshoo]

pretty embarrassing for FSU.. but happy to hear the prez's statement.

[VPI63]

I mean the ACC's decision with regard to the Tier III programming rights doesn't sound very smart to me.

Well, it shows that this conference is run by BB 1st folks.

Of course, we all should know and understand that by now. This is with why, with 20/20 hind sight, I now question the wisdom of joining the ACC.

I'm guessing that UCONN will be the next target, if we expand. Why, because of BB.

Folks seem to feel that the Domers will join the ACC. Maybe they will, but it would seem that a conference that puts BB ahead of FB would not be a good fit for them and, IMHO, for VT either.

[gern]

still laugh at aTm giving them the bird. One of biggest rivalries in the country and they said "Yeah, no we're done with your shirt."

[gern]

I'd be ok with pooling *ALL* NCAA media rights though that will never happen

[gern]

Anyone know what has come of VT's membership? Have we forged any meaningful arrangements partnering with adjacent schools? Only thing comes to my mind was biomedical eng(?) with WF but I think that was pre-2004.

"Of the few who still support FSU staying in the ACC, most cite the number of well-regarded academic institutions within the conference. However, Haggard scoffed at the idea that the ACC somehow helps FSU's academic reputation.

"No FSU graduate puts on his resume or interviews for a job saying they are in the same conference as Duke and Virginia," he said. "Conference affiliation really has no impact on academics.""

Thank you....maybe we can finally put that stupid myth to bed once and for all.