Conference Realignment

[Vespidae]

Do those teams actually have good individual viewership numbers or are they fortunate enough to play UGA and Alabama in good timeslots on major networks? How do you think Missouri or Arkansas would do ratings wise if half their games were on the ACC network or CW against other teams that don't bring in many viewers?

Large state schools typically have good numbers because they have a large fanbase. I think that's true regardless of the network. CBS would certainly bring in big numbers for the 330pm game, but very few of those were featured. I think most of them were on either the SEC Network or one of the regionals.

 

[stinger78]

Large state schools typically have good numbers because they have a large fanbase. I think that's true regardless of the network. CBS would certainly bring in big numbers for the 330pm game, but very few of those were featured. I think most of them were on either the SEC Network or one of the regionals.

If those are average per game viewers then it should smooth out some.

 

[WreckinGT]

Large state schools typically have good numbers because they have a large fanbase. I think that's true regardless of the network. CBS would certainly bring in big numbers for the 330pm game, but very few of those were featured. I think most of them were on either the SEC Network or one of the regionals.

Here is an example though. LSU vs Missouri. Two top 25 SEC teams. ESPN noon timeslot. 2.37 million viewers. Not too bad, but below Arizona vs USC, and FSU vs VT the same day. Go two weeks later and Missouri plays UGA in the 3:30 CBS timeslot. 7 million viewers. There is obviously a drastic difference in playing UGA in the 3:30 CBS timeslot vs LSU in the ESPN noon timeslot, but we compare all numbers like they are the same.

 

[Northeast Stinger]

Here is an example though. LSU vs Missouri. Two top 25 SEC teams. ESPN noon timeslot. 2.37 million viewers. Not too bad, but below Arizona vs USC, and FSU vs VT the same day. Go two weeks later and Missouri plays UGA in the 3:30 CBS timeslot. 7 million viewers. There is obviously a drastic difference in playing UGA in the 3:30 CBS timeslot vs LSU in the ESPN noon timeslot, but we compare all numbers like they are the same.

Can you imagine what Tech’s viewership numbers would look like if every game was at 3:30 and our opponents were Ohio State, Michigan, Alabama, Washington, USC, Oregon, Arizona, FSU, Texas, Notre Dame, Georgia?

Of course the betting line each week would be “How badly will Tech get beat this Saturday?” But our numbers would be amazing

 

[roadkill]

Here is an example though. LSU vs Missouri. Two top 25 SEC teams. ESPN noon timeslot. 2.37 million viewers. Not too bad, but below Arizona vs USC, and FSU vs VT the same day. Go two weeks later and Missouri plays UGA in the 3:30 CBS timeslot. 7 million viewers. There is obviously a drastic difference in playing UGA in the 3:30 CBS timeslot vs LSU in the ESPN noon timeslot, but we compare all numbers like they are the same.

To your point, it's another case of the rich getting richer. The most popular teams, or ranked teams viewed as good matchups, tend to get the most favorable time slots.

 

[Techster]

One point of contention I have with the "ACC will survive...in some form" sentiment is...well, that depends on the media. More specifically, it depends on whether the media wants to enter into a BILLION $$$ plus contract with the ACC "leftovers".

FSU leaving at some point is an all but foregone conclusion. North Carolina has signaled they need to leave the ACC to compete with their "peers" if the ACC doesn't improve its financial situation (it won't). UVA will follow UNC wherever they end up as they've been a high priority for the B1G and SEC for decades now. NC State is politically tied to UNC, which probably means NC State goes where UNC goes. Even if UNC's next conference isn't willing to take NC State, UNC has enough clout to move alone. Miami is highly valued by the B1G for the South Florida market/territory.

FSU-UNC-UVA, IMO, are all but certain to leave when the window opens. I tend to think Miami will be gone as well, but I don't feel as strongly about Miami as I do the other 3. Those schools leaving drastically reduces the value of the ACC. Now you get into a situation where the Big 12 looks awfully good to some of the remaining ACC members, and some of the ACC members look awfully good to the Big 12. Specifically, VA Tech/Pitt/NC State/Louisville/BC/Syracuse/Duke...and GT, but more on us later. Doesn't mean they all go to the Big 12, but some of those schools would be attractive to what the Big 12 is doing. New territories, equivalent fanbases, and the Big 12 is quietly building a college basketball equivalent to SEC football.

We're basically looking at the same scenario that dissolved the PAC 12. The "big brands" leave, the value of the conference gets reduced drastically, the remaining "attractive" schools leave for a better financial and administrative situation. IMO, there are 4-6 ACC schools that end up in the SEC and B1G. The rest will get picked off by the Big 12. Even with the addition of Stanford/Cal/SMU, that doesn't leave much for the ACC. It certainly gets worse for the ACC if we have to backfill with G5 teams. ACC will not be backfilling with SEC/B1G/Big 12 teams.

Back to GT. All my research, which I won't repeat but you can look up in this thread, leads me to believe GT is more likely than not going to end up in the B1G. The growth of Georgia (currently 8th most populous, and soon to be 6th or 7th within the next 5-10 years), the economic powerhouse Georgia is becoming one of the top business markets, and high concentration of B1G grads is too attractive for the B1G to pass up. You can help grow a school's fanbase, but you can not grow a market/population center the size of Georgia. Also, a good percentage of the B1G's markets are currently going through negative or flat growth, which means the B1G needs to expand into territories that are growing. Georgia (GT) and Florida (FSU/Miami) are EXPLODING. Fanbase size is important, but so is the source that grows fans of schools. Right now, the "source" of B1G fanbases is in a flat to negative growth trend. Expansion is a 50+ year decision. There's a reason why Kevin Warren's expansion plan (former B1G commissioner) was modeled after states with NFL franchises. The NFL doesn't move to cities without a big economic and population base.

Worst case scenario for GT is we end up in the Big 12 if the ACC falls apart. The SEC does not need GT with UGA in the conference. We'll see, but I think GT is in a much better situation than some GT fans think.

What media company signs up for the ACC "leftovers"? Certainly nowhere near the price of what the ACC got with today's membership. It's more likely the ACC dissolves much the same way the PAC 12 did than gets "saved". Members getting picked off to the point the conference no longer becomes attractive to anyone. You have to be blind to not see that media companies are consolidating operations...which means they will find more reasons to NOT keep the ACC alive than to pump money into the ACC to keep it going. I'll go one further and say ESPN and FOX are probably pushing behind the scenes for some of the ACC schools to move to other conferences so they can wrap up their conference tie ins and save hundreds of millions in cost. It's basically what they did with USC and UCLA (and eventually Oregon/Washington) going to the B1G, and the PAC 12 schools that went to the Big 12. Funny how all of a sudden FOX and ESPN (as well as Warner Bros) now all have an agreement to consolidate their sports channels into one mega sports streaming option. If you think the ACC is in trouble, wait until the media contracts for the G5 conferences come up for renewal.

 

[stinger78]

You guys worry too much. It’s football. We won’t stop playing football and you’ll be able to cheer on the white and gold.

Forces are at work creating a separation in CFB. We may not be in the top league. But we will play football as we have for over 125 years.

 

[Vespidae]

Here is an example though. LSU vs Missouri. Two top 25 SEC teams. ESPN noon timeslot. 2.37 million viewers. Not too bad, but below Arizona vs USC, and FSU vs VT the same day. Go two weeks later and Missouri plays UGA in the 3:30 CBS timeslot. 7 million viewers. There is obviously a drastic difference in playing UGA in the 3:30 CBS timeslot vs LSU in the ESPN noon timeslot, but we compare all numbers like they are the same.

The figures I look is weekly viewership averaged over 5 years. It's easy enough to look at every team and determine an average viewership. Better matchups produce higher ratings (and viewers) and is exactly what Greg Sankey in the SEC is trying to do ... create conditions for increasing viewership either by better scheduling, better opponents, or additional markets.

 

[Vespidae]

Can you imagine what Tech’s viewership numbers would look like if every game was at 3:30 and our opponents were Ohio State, Michigan, Alabama, Washington, USC, Oregon, Arizona, FSU, Texas, Notre Dame, Georgia?

Of course the betting line each week would be “How badly will Tech get beat this Saturday?” But our numbers would be amazing

Tech was one of the 20 most watched football games for the year a few years ago when playing UT in the Chick-fil-A bowl.

 

[Techster]

Forces are at work creating a separation in CFB. We may not be in the top league. But we will play football as we have for over 125 years.

One thing that doesn't get discussed enough is the impact of not being in the P2, or heaven forbid, not being in at least the CURRENT equivalent of the ACC/Big12 conference will have on fanbase and donor contributions. Let's also remember, GT has some of the most debt for a college sports program.

Over time, fanbase will plummet along with donor support. It won't happen overnight, but it will be long decay...and we've already seen it happen between the time GT left the SEC and becoming a member of the ACC. In many ways, we still haven't recovered. We won't be able to attract money to upgrade or even keep up our facilities. Our coaching and player pool dwindles.

As I said in the post above, I think GT is in a much better situation than some on here think, but there is a scenario where GT has to step down a level (or two). The implications of that aren't discussed enough.

 

[orientalnc]

I am going to punch holes in the TV rankings I posted yesterday.

First, Nielson does not rate games on the SEC Network, ACC network, CBS Sports Network, PAC-12 Network, ESPN+ and Peacock. Second, Vandy only had one game that was not on the SEC Network (against Alabama with 2.46 million viewers), so their raking is not actually Vandy's, but Bama's for that game.

Others have posted some very good counter points to this, but one thing is clear. You ratings for each game are impacted to large extent by the time slot and Network where your games are played. And the selection of games that were Nielson rated. Bowl games and CFP were not included.

There was discussion earlier about Missouri. They only had six of their games included in the Nielson ratings: Memphis 730 PM on ESPNU(181K), LSU Noon on ESPN (2.34M), uga 330 PM on CBS (7.00M); Tennessee 330 PM on CBS (3.62M); Florida 730 on ESPN (2.27M); Arkansas Fri 400 PM on CBS (4.09M). Their not-Nielson rated games were South Dakota, Middle Tenn, Kansas St, Vandy, Kentucky, & S Carolina. Clearly, time and network mean a ton toward your TV viewership numbers. And, who decides the network and time slot for each game? ESPN. Who benefits most from those ratings? ESPN. My question is about whether Missouri football is really a lot more popular than GT football, or is Missouri getting more favorable TV slots because they are in the SEC?

 

[Vespidae]

Clearly, time and network mean a ton toward your TV viewership numbers.

In addition to time and network, viewership is a function of game quality (Alabama v Chattanooga?), and the quality of alternative games airing at the same time.

 

[stinger78]

One thing that doesn't get discussed enough is the impact of not being in the P2, or heaven forbid, not being in at least the CURRENT equivalent of the ACC/Big12 conference will have on fanbase and donor contributions. Let's also remember, GT has some of the most debt for a college sports program.

Over time, fanbase will plummet along with donor support. It won't happen overnight, but it will be long decay...and we've already seen it happen between the time GT left the SEC and becoming a member of the ACC. In many ways, we still haven't recovered. We won't be able to attract money to upgrade or even keep up our facilities. Our coaching and player pool dwindles.

As I said in the post above, I think GT is in a much better situation than some on here think, but there is a scenario where GT has to step down a level (or two). The implications of that aren't discussed enough.

We very likely will not be in the SP2, the Semi-Pro 2 league. We will most likely remain in a college football conference - the ACC. If the ACC somehow loses 4 teams (F$U, CU, UNC, and UVA), we will still have BC, Cuse, L’ville, Pitt, VPI, NCSU, DU, WFU, GT, Miami, SMU, Cal, and Stanford. That’s a great college football conference. The world will not end.

 

[Vespidae]

We very likely will not be in the SP2, the Semi-Pro 2 league. We will most likely remain in a college football conference - the ACC. If the ACC somehow loses 4 teams (F$U, CU, UNC, and UVA), we will still have BC, Cuse, L’ville, Pitt, VPI, NCSU, DU, WFU, GT, Miami, SMU, Cal, and Stanford. That’s a great college football conference. The world will not end.

The world won’t end, but it will have serious consequences for cash flow when the media rights are renewed.

 

[CEB]

One point of contention I have with the "ACC will survive...in some form" sentiment is...well, that depends on the media. More specifically, it depends on whether the media wants to enter into a BILLION $$$ plus contract with the ACC "leftovers".

FSU leaving at some point is an all but foregone conclusion. North Carolina has signaled they need to leave the ACC to compete with their "peers" if the ACC doesn't improve its financial situation (it won't). UVA will follow UNC wherever they end up as they've been a high priority for the B1G and SEC for decades now. NC State is politically tied to UNC, which probably means NC State goes where UNC goes. Even if UNC's next conference isn't willing to take NC State, UNC has enough clout to move alone. Miami is highly valued by the B1G for the South Florida market/territory.

FSU-UNC-UVA, IMO, are all but certain to leave when the window opens. I tend to think Miami will be gone as well, but I don't feel as strongly about Miami as I do the other 3. Those schools leaving drastically reduces the value of the ACC. Now you get into a situation where the Big 12 looks awfully good to some of the remaining ACC members, and some of the ACC members look awfully good to the Big 12. Specifically, VA Tech/Pitt/NC State/Louisville/BC/Syracuse/Duke...and GT, but more on us later. Doesn't mean they all go to the Big 12, but some of those schools would be attractive to what the Big 12 is doing. New territories, equivalent fanbases, and the Big 12 is quietly building a college basketball equivalent to SEC football.

We're basically looking at the same scenario that dissolved the PAC 12. The "big brands" leave, the value of the conference gets reduced drastically, the remaining "attractive" schools leave for a better financial and administrative situation. IMO, there are 4-6 ACC schools that end up in the SEC and B1G. The rest will get picked off by the Big 12. Even with the addition of Stanford/Cal/SMU, that doesn't leave much for the ACC. It certainly gets worse for the ACC if we have to backfill with G5 teams. ACC will not be backfilling with SEC/B1G/Big 12 teams.

Back to GT. All my research, which I won't repeat but you can look up in this thread, leads me to believe GT is more likely than not going to end up in the B1G. The growth of Georgia (currently 8th most populous, and soon to be 6th or 7th within the next 5-10 years), the economic powerhouse Georgia is becoming one of the top business markets, and high concentration of B1G grads is too attractive for the B1G to pass up. You can help grow a school's fanbase, but you can not grow a market/population center the size of Georgia. Also, a good percentage of the B1G's markets are currently going through negative or flat growth, which means the B1G needs to expand into territories that are growing. Georgia (GT) and Florida (FSU/Miami) are EXPLODING. Fanbase size is important, but so is the source that grows fans of schools. Right now, the "source" of B1G fanbases is in a flat to negative growth trend. Expansion is a 50+ year decision. There's a reason why Kevin Warren's expansion plan (former B1G commissioner) was modeled after states with NFL franchises. The NFL doesn't move to cities without a big economic and population base.

Worst case scenario for GT is we end up in the Big 12 if the ACC falls apart. The SEC does not need GT with UGA in the conference. We'll see, but I think GT is in a much better situation than some GT fans think.

What media company signs up for the ACC "leftovers"? Certainly nowhere near the price of what the ACC got with today's membership. It's more likely the ACC dissolves much the same way the PAC 12 did than gets "saved". Members getting picked off to the point the conference no longer becomes attractive to anyone. You have to be blind to not see that media companies are consolidating operations...which means they will find more reasons to NOT keep the ACC alive than to pump money into the ACC to keep it going. I'll go one further and say ESPN and FOX are probably pushing behind the scenes for some of the ACC schools to move to other conferences so they can wrap up their conference tie ins and save hundreds of millions in cost. It's basically what they did with USC and UCLA (and eventually Oregon/Washington) going to the B1G, and the PAC 12 schools that went to the Big 12. Funny how all of a sudden FOX and ESPN (as well as Warner Bros) now all have an agreement to consolidate their sports channels into one mega sports streaming option. If you think the ACC is in trouble, wait until the media contracts for the G5 conferences come up for renewal.

There’s a lot here… two things I will touch on:
1. I’m generally in agreement with you about GT being more valuable than many think. Probably not a surprise to find someone equally bullish on GT on a GT message board, but I do think we have a better shot at BIG than most.
2. I’m not buying the exodus to the B12. Also, like Thornton Mellon’s final exam, my second point has 27 parts…
- Big 12 deal expires before ACC deal. (2031 vs 2036). I think there’s a real possibilty that you could see movement away from B12 at that time instead of toward it. If the ACC is smart, that’s a pitch I would be making to some select B12 members.
- the B12 negotiation taking place in 2030 +/- should be a real good indicator of how these conference media deals are going to go. If the SEC and BIG get more money while the B12 sees a flat or even a decreased deal, then we can see that the media push to a P2 is indisputable.
- I don’t imagine the B12 gets a big enough bump to make any ACC team pony up cash to buy out early, so it will be interesting to see if the B12 successfully carves out another deal that allows them to take a number of new members at full shares. That’s how the PAC schools landed there. If the B12 gets a bump and a guarantee to honor full shares for new members, the ACC negotiation is gonna get hairy.
- wonder what allegiance the remaining ACC schools would have to one another in negotiations. How many would scramble to a B12 spot after the initial offer? How many wouldn’t wait for the initial offer?
- my gut says that the B12 negotiations in 2030 look very similar to the money ACC teams get through 2036 and there isn’t any ACC to B12 movement.
- gut also says four teams, max, depart to BIG / SEC, so the ACC still has a big stable of programs.
- more likely than ACC to B12 movement, I think the ACC could play its cards right and steal some B12 teams during that negotiation time of 2029-2031… will they?

 

[stinger78]

The world won’t end, but it will have serious consequences for cash flow when the media rights are renewed.

Yes, but we won’t be keeping up with the SP2 anymore. It will all reach a new equilibrium in a relatively quick time.

 

[stinger78]

There’s a lot here… two things I will touch on:
1. I’m generally in agreement with you about GT being more valuable than many think. Probably not a surprise to find someone equally bullish on GT on a GT message board, but I do think we have a better shot at BIG than most.
2. I’m not buying the exodus to the B12. Also, like Thornton Mellon’s final exam, my second point has 27 parts…
- Big 12 deal expires before ACC deal. (2031 vs 2036). I think there’s a real possibilty that you could see movement away from B12 at that time instead of toward it. If the ACC is smart, that’s a pitch I would be making to some select B12 members.
- the B12 negotiation taking place in 2030 +/- should be a real good indicator of how these conference media deals are going to go. If the SEC and BIG get more money while the B12 sees a flat or even a decreased deal, then we can see that the media push to a P2 is indisputable.
- I don’t imagine the B12 gets a big enough bump to make any ACC team pony up cash to buy out early, so it will be interesting to see if the B12 successfully carves out another deal that allows them to take a number of new members at full shares. That’s how the PAC schools landed there. If the B12 gets a bump and a guarantee to honor full shares for new members, the ACC negotiation is gonna get hairy.
- wonder what allegiance the remaining ACC schools would have to one another in negotiations. How many would scramble to a B12 spot after the initial offer? How many wouldn’t wait for the initial offer?
- my gut says that the B12 negotiations in 2030 look very similar to the money ACC teams get through 2036 and there isn’t any ACC to B12 movement.
- gut also says four teams, max, depart to BIG / SEC, so the ACC still has a big stable of programs.
- more likely than ACC to B12 movement, I think the ACC could play its cards right and steal some B12 teams during that negotiation time of 2029-2031… will they?

I think you’d have a restructured CFB environment in which you have the ACC, the B12, the new PAC12, and maybe another like the MWest or CUSA. Thus a new P4/5 is born. CFB establishes a new equilibrium and we are done with the prima donna programs.

 

[WreckinGT]

I am going to punch holes in the TV rankings I posted yesterday.

First, Nielson does not rate games on the SEC Network, ACC network, CBS Sports Network, PAC-12 Network, ESPN+ and Peacock. Second, Vandy only had one game that was not on the SEC Network (against Alabama with 2.46 million viewers), so their raking is not actually Vandy's, but Bama's for that game.

Others have posted some very good counter points to this, but one thing is clear. You ratings for each game are impacted to large extent by the time slot and Network where your games are played. And the selection of games that were Nielson rated. Bowl games and CFP were not included.

There was discussion earlier about Missouri. They only had six of their games included in the Nielson ratings: Memphis 730 PM on ESPNU(181K), LSU Noon on ESPN (2.34M), uga 330 PM on CBS (7.00M); Tennessee 330 PM on CBS (3.62M); Florida 730 on ESPN (2.27M); Arkansas Fri 400 PM on CBS (4.09M). Their not-Nielson rated games were South Dakota, Middle Tenn, Kansas St, Vandy, Kentucky, & S Carolina. Clearly, time and network mean a ton toward your TV viewership numbers. And, who decides the network and time slot for each game? ESPN. Who benefits most from those ratings? ESPN. My question is about whether Missouri football is really a lot more popular than GT football, or is Missouri getting more favorable TV slots because they are in the SEC?

Agree with all of this. There is also the matter of what else is on to consider. Here are two separate years:

2022: GT vs UGA (noon) 2.06M viewers. LSU vs A&M (7pm) 3.92M viewers.
2023: GT vs UGA (7:30pm) 5.33M viewers. LSU vs A&M (noon) 2M viewers

What happens at noon? Ohio State vs Michigan. The most viewed regular season game in college football. I think this extends to the championship games as well. We will hear every year about the ACC having the lowest championship game numbers. Ignoring the following usual schedule:

Fri (Pac 12)
Sat noon (Big 12)
Sat 3:30 (SEC)
Sat 8pm (ACC and Big 10)

Why we got stuck playing our conference championship game at the same time as the Big 10 is beyond me. We would be better off playing it on Thursday.

 

[Vespidae]

Yes, but we won’t be keeping up with the SP2 anymore. It will all reach a new equilibrium in a relatively quick time.

Really? Try to pay off $250M in debt with lower value media rights.

 

[Root4GT]

There’s a lot here… two things I will touch on:
1. I’m generally in agreement with you about GT being more valuable than many think. Probably not a surprise to find someone equally bullish on GT on a GT message board, but I do think we have a better shot at BIG than most.
2. I’m not buying the exodus to the B12. Also, like Thornton Mellon’s final exam, my second point has 27 parts…
- Big 12 deal expires before ACC deal. (2031 vs 2036). I think there’s a real possibilty that you could see movement away from B12 at that time instead of toward it. If the ACC is smart, that’s a pitch I would be making to some select B12 members.
- the B12 negotiation taking place in 2030 +/- should be a real good indicator of how these conference media deals are going to go. If the SEC and BIG get more money while the B12 sees a flat or even a decreased deal, then we can see that the media push to a P2 is indisputable.
- I don’t imagine the B12 gets a big enough bump to make any ACC team pony up cash to buy out early, so it will be interesting to see if the B12 successfully carves out another deal that allows them to take a number of new members at full shares. That’s how the PAC schools landed there. If the B12 gets a bump and a guarantee to honor full shares for new members, the ACC negotiation is gonna get hairy.
- wonder what allegiance the remaining ACC schools would have to one another in negotiations. How many would scramble to a B12 spot after the initial offer? How many wouldn’t wait for the initial offer?
- my gut says that the B12 negotiations in 2030 look very similar to the money ACC teams get through 2036 and there isn’t any ACC to B12 movement.
- gut also says four teams, max, depart to BIG / SEC, so the ACC still has a big stable of programs.
- more likely than ACC to B12 movement, I think the ACC could play its cards right and steal some B12 teams during that negotiation time of 2029-2031… will they?

Who would you want from the Big 12?