Monday, May 23, 2011

TV musical chairs and other links

When the Pac 10 announced their mega TV contract, many ACC and BC fans were left wondering why our deal looked so small. As with many things surrounding college football the answer is complicated. Today's announcement that the Big East will wait until next year to sign their respective deal confirmed the basic issue that game times and timing is all that matters. The ACC signed our deal before NBC/Comcast was in play. We only had Fox to leverage. Now the Big East has no one to leverage as Fox and ESPN have filled most of their time slots. One thing the ACC can learn from the Pac 10 is the value of off hour games and a longer regular season. If the ACC wants more money, they need to expand to nine regular season football games and 18 regular season basketball games like the Pac 10. The ACC should also explore the Friday night games that the Pac 10 will play. Because of time zone issues, the ACC can't play the late night games like the Pac 10, but I would be willing to have 11 AM kickoffs in the ACC if it meant more money.



If you haven't been following the Q&As with the incoming basketball recruits, now is a perfect time to catchup. Here is Dennis Clifford's.


A few people have asked why Reggie Jackson pulled out of the NBA's combine in Chicago. Supposedly he has some nagging injuries. My guess is that he has assurances he will be selected by certain teams and is now trying to protect that. By skipping the combine he avoids injury, looking bad or getting a less desirable team interested.

3 comments:

William said...

ATL, our attendance is atrocious for 1 PM games, let alone noon games, could you imagine 11 AM? With Gameday going on?

Erik said...

11 AM kickoffs says the guy who lives in Georgia!
#TailgatingIsFun
#IDontSeeAnyOfTheTVMoney
#ATLEntitledToOpinionIGuess

chicagofire1871 said...

Could the ACC go to a 9 game conference schedule and 18 in basketball and force a renegotiation? Or are we sitting on our hands for the next 12 years, getting comparatively poorer?