Here are the highlights.
- "ESPN has the right to televise three Friday ACC football contests annually which will include a standing commitment from Boston College and Syracuse to each host one game as well as an afternoon or evening game on Thanksgiving Friday."
- The Labor Day spectacular remains, and so do the Thursday night games.
- 15 years is a long time to be partnered with anyone for anything.
- The ACC has gone all-in with ESPN (won't be able to sell third-tier media rights).
"We do everything we can to protect high school football," Swofford said of the Friday games. "We could have done a lot more but didn't want to. ... The northeast corridor doesn't have the same sensitivity (to Friday high school football) as the southeast."
The financial terms weren't revealed, but the deal is reported to be worth $3.6 billion ($17 million/school).
Sources: ESPN's new ACC deal comes out to 15 years for $3.6 billion. That comes out to a whopping $17M per school.— John Ourand (@Ourand_SBJ) May 9, 2012
The ACC was able to renegotiate its existing 12-year contract ($1.86 billion, $12.9 million/school) signed in 2010 because it expanded to 14 teams (thanks 'Cuse and Pitt). The original 12-team ACC deal was worth $3.08M per school, now, not even ten years later each ACC school is banking more than five times more.
$17 million a year is a lot of money, especially for a conference that's failed to consistently show up on the biggest stage and has a lot of small/disinterested fanbases. However, the Big Ten, Pac-12, Big 12 and SEC will all receive more TV dollars.
|Conference||Annual School $||Through|
The only way ACC schools will see north of $20M a year is if the conference can land Notre Dame.
What do you guys think about the deal? Does it make sense for the ACC to be monogamous with ESPN? Is 15 years too long? Are you happy with the rivalries, closeness (spatially), and moderate level of competition in the league? Or would you bolt for more money, longer rides, and elite competition in, say, the SEC?