Skip to content

Report: ACC schools to make $17 million in new TV deal

Raining Money

Just as the Big 12 is on the cusp of signing at 13-year, $2.6 billion TV rights agreement, the ACC has inked its own extension that will put them in the same ballpark as the four richest conferences in college athletics.

In a release sent out today, the ACC announced an exclusive agreement with ESPN through 2026-27 that will increase exposure to the soon-to-be 14-team league. As it pertains to football, “extensive regular-season action on Saturday afternoon and nights, primetime Thursdays, three Fridays including Thanksgiving Friday, Labor Day Monday and the ACC Football Championship Game” is part of the coverage.

“We are excited to have further enhanced our partnership with ESPN through the extension of our multimedia contract,” said ACC Commissioner John Swofford. “We are proud that ESPN has invested so deeply in the ACC both from a resource and exposure standpoint. As we look to the future, this relationship will be tremendous for our schools, fans, coaches and student-athletes.”

John Ourand of the Sports Business Journal tweets that the ACC deal with ESPN will be worth $3.6 billion, according to sources.

In other words, about $17 million per school annually for tier 1, 2 and 3 rights.

That’s not quite as lucrative as deals in, say, the Big Ten or Pac-12, where schools will be banking somewhere in the $20 million range annually, but certainly not bad for a basketball conference.

But the deal demonstrates a couple of things. First, it shows that the demand for college football inventory continues to rise at a record pace. How else could a conference that has a deplorable BCS record and a handful of football schools get that kind of money? Just think if the ACC actually put out a better football product.

On that note, the Big East has to feel good about the chances of signing a respectable TV deal of its own. That’s not to say it will be in the range of $17 million – $20 million — probably not even close — but solid nonetheless.

Also, a deal like that likely puts to bed any speculation about Florida State and/or Clemson leaving the conference for the Big 12. For those wondering, yes, there was an internet rumor about that late last week and it was absurd to the point where it wasn’t even worth bringing up.

So while the TV deal, provided the numbers given by Ourand hold up, still keeps the ACC behind the “Big Four” financially, it keeps them in the same stratosphere.

Permalink 18 Comments Feed for comments Latest Stories in: Atlantic Coast Conference, Boston College Eagles, Clemson Tigers, Duke Blue Devils, Florida State Seminoles, Georgia Tech Yellow Jackets, Maryland Terrapins, Miami Hurricanes, NC State Wolfpack, North Carolina Tar Heels, Rumor Mill, Top Posts, Virginia Cavaliers, Virginia Tech Hokies, Wake Forest Demon Deacons
18 Responses to “Report: ACC schools to make $17 million in new TV deal”
  1. Tommy K says: May 9, 2012 3:18 PM

    The previous ACC deal included 3rd tier content which means for the most part, ACC programs are capped at $17 million in earning potential. Meanwhile the SEC (for now) and Big XII are free to bank off their 3rd tier content as they please, the Pac 12 Network will deliver well over the $20 million the Pac 12 schools already get and of course the Big Ten Network provides a lot of money for each school beyond what their main TV contract brings in.

    In other words, the ACC gained no money by expanding and outside of individual radio deals, really can’t bank beyond that $17 million. All of that means that unless this extension alters the 3rd tier rights so the schools can further market them (on their own or as a conference network) the ACC got a rough deal. Their locked in for well over a decade and the SEC and Big Ten are about to get new deals that will embarrass this.

  2. drummerhoff says: May 9, 2012 3:41 PM

    $17 mil * 14 members = $238 mil per year per ACC school.
    The 3 game playoff play-off is reported to be valued at $600mil per year.

    This ‘new money’ will not be divided equally. The “Big Four” will be keeping most of it. The difference in annual revenue is not $3mil ($20m-$17m)…. Its more like over $13million because most of the $600m pie will be distributed to the SEC, Big12, Pac12 & Big10.

    How is FSU going to live on $17mil when UF is getting $30m plus?

  3. mhalt99 says: May 9, 2012 3:42 PM

    amazing how lucrative slave labor is…….er student athletes…..er athletes who are enrolled in a university, that work for said university and are paid in trade with classes in art, literature, economics and maybe mathematics…..of course as long as it does not interfere with their practice schedule.

    i’m surprised apple and nike look to china to assemble sneakers and ipads…..even in china they have to pay some type of “wage” – maybe if they used the NCAA system they could offer degrees in assembly and sole gluing.

  4. thegamecocker says: May 9, 2012 3:45 PM

    And this is what happens when you have the wrong people making deals. No matter how much you push the envelope, it will still be stationary.

  5. jumbossportsblog says: May 9, 2012 3:51 PM

    Reblogged this on jumbossportsblog.

  6. morrellfsu says: May 9, 2012 4:35 PM

    This new deal includes Tier 3 rights which sucks for FSU and Clemson. The other conferences allow the schools to negotiate their own Tier 3 rights on their own which brings in more money for each school on top of the Conference TV deal.

    $17M deal only allows FSU and Clemson to start looking elsewhere to make a lot more money than the ACC is offering with the new deal.

    The ACC could care less about football and would be preferred to be viewed as a Basketball Conference anyways. To me it’s obious based on how they market, or lack there of, their football programs and football in the ACC already. The big football programs have to do it themselves.

    Yes it’s a nice little increase in a TV deal but for schools like Florida State, Clemson and Virginia Tech who are football first schools where football is the driving factor in most of these new TV deals…$17M is a slap in the face and these schools should begin looking elsewhere from the ACC.

  7. wvucolumbus says: May 9, 2012 4:56 PM

    So let me get this straight:

    WVU will earn roughly 25-30M annually once bidders respond to Mr. Luck’s RFP (request for proposal) for the T-3 rights. (20M annually from Big XII deal + 5-10M from T3 bidder)

    PITT, Syracuse, Miami, BC and Virginia Tech will be capped at roughly 17M for T1-3 rights?

    Is this correct?

  8. drummerhoff says: May 9, 2012 4:56 PM

    This is from McMurphy dated last week:

    “Another item that must be determined is dividing the revenue among the conferences. Without the AQ conference and non-AQ conference labels, I asked (Jim) Delany how would the commissioners determine how much each conference receives without those AQ/non-AQ labels.

    “It’s a secret,” he said”

    Rumor has it the secret is most of the money will be divided by the conferences playing in the 4 team playoff. Media experts say the playoff is worth $600mil annually. History says the ACC has a top 4 football team once every 10 years.

    In this light, who cares about $17mil v. $20mil?
    Am I only here?

  9. mcjon22 says: May 9, 2012 8:52 PM

    FSU and Clemson to the Big 12 in the very near future. The ACC can have fun being a basketball conference. BTW ACC, No one watches that sport until March because the regular season is absolutely meaningless. Fun Fact

  10. kcrobert10 says: May 9, 2012 9:24 PM

    Wvu is never going to see 5 to 10 mill is 3rd tear tv rights. Come on man be realist here ur in a state that has almost no tvs or big cities. U may get 20 mill from the big 12 but just let mu, neb, Texas a&m, and Colorado fans tell u not to hold ur breath ur always going to be the second tear program to Texas and Oklahoma in there eyes. Also stop trying to get fl st and clemson to try to join u in the bad idea of joining the big 12. I understand why u want them u know u can’t win with out Fla players and now ur in a conf with no ties to Fla what so ever. Face facts u guys got left out the acc and sec expansion for a reason…

  11. drummerhoff says: May 9, 2012 10:39 PM

    @kcrobert10

    Do they speak English in What?

  12. charles130 says: May 10, 2012 5:09 AM

    Ha 10 million in 3rd tier rights for a state with no internet (WV). Dream on.

    I’m sure the WVU fans will be shelling out big bucks to watch Oklahoma and Texas hang 60 on your 2 and 3 star recruits.

    Just be thankful the Big 12 was forced to add a 10th team…any team…to keep their TV deal and that you arent stuck in the new Conference USA. Congratulations on looking more attractive than Louisville.

  13. plarkin88 says: May 10, 2012 7:58 AM

    Wow, pre Big-12 resentment for incoming WVU. Say all you want about 2 and 3 star recruits, but those kids continue to show up post New Years Day and BCS the crap out of conferences supposed to roll. Or is your memory limited to games that WVU loses….Oklahoma/Georgia/Clemson remember….It’s always about money people, and with football first schools like Clemson and FSU, don’t be shocked when the look for a football first conference that pays more money.

  14. burntorangehorn says: May 10, 2012 10:28 AM

    Wait, people are now saying that letting schools sell their own 3rd-tier rights is a good thing? Where was that sentiment when people were panning the Longhorn Network, which was a high-dollar example of exactly that?

  15. mountaineer50415 says: May 10, 2012 2:28 PM

    When I go on to espn, I see that Fl. St. would have to give up playing Miami if they change conferences. No one believes they will do that, that is except a few people here that think they know everything. I will be shocked if they move conferences. They would have no chance against people like Texas, Oklahoma or Oklahoma St. Week after week. Give me a break. Just look at the last couple years, playing Ok.
    I do not understand all the crap about WV. Again no it all people know more about WV than the people in WV know. How’s that working for you? Maybe you should be more concerned with your own team. That is if you have one.

  16. thegamecocker says: May 10, 2012 4:51 PM

    @mountaineer50415

    I have noithing against the Mountaineers. As a matter of fact, I am a huge Bob Huggins fan. Great recruiter and game coach. I loved it when WV kept running it up on Clemson. I was LMAO and still am. If Clemson is mentioned as a Nat’l Champ contender this coming season, I will be shocked. You don’t fix a defense the likes of Clemsons’ in one season. You need alot of recruiting to correct that train wreck.

    And the Mountaineers score again, and again, and again,……..

  17. poison66 says: May 10, 2012 6:24 PM

    Lmao, the networks overpaid for this crummy conference.

  18. burntorangehorn says: May 10, 2012 6:26 PM

    mountaineer50415 says:
    May 10, 2012 2:28 PM
    When I go on to espn, I see that Fl. St. would have to give up playing Miami if they change conferences. No one believes they will do that, that is except a few people here that think they know everything. I will be shocked if they move conferences. They would have no chance against people like Texas, Oklahoma or Oklahoma St. Week after week. Give me a break. Just look at the last couple years, playing Ok.
    I do not understand all the crap about WV. Again no it all people know more about WV than the people in WV know. How’s that working for you? Maybe you should be more concerned with your own team. That is if you have one.
    ===============================
    Do you think WV has a better chance against UT, OU, etc. than FSU would? While it’s possible, I don’t think it’s anything close to certain.

    As for the statement that they’d have to give up playing Miami, I’m not entirely sure why. After all, they played each other almost every year from their first football matchup in 1951 to the present, and they’ve only been in the same conference since 2004. In fact, the last year they didn’t play was 1968, and the only other years they missed were ’52. ’54, ’61, ’65, and ’67. Obviously those weren’t big years of football for either team, and the rivalry hadn’t really been established yet, but it certainly has been since then.

    Look, sometimes a school leaves a conference, and the other teams in that conference harbor ill will toward them. Sometimes that means they will even refuse to schedule long-time rivals for OOC games. That’s entirely understandable in some cases, but Miami’s still a fairly recent conference-bolter as well, so you’d think they wouldn’t make an issue of it.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to leave a comment. Not a member? Register now!