Conference Realignment

[stinger78]

Duke?? DUKE???? Oh the Horror!!! Who would ever want to see Tech play a team we've never played
played once a long time ago
played a few times
played 90 times, 3rd most only to ugag and auburn

I consider most of these arguments to be without substance since the vast majority of our history has been playing these opponents.

 

[stinger78]

I'm coming to wonder if your not right on this. I don't watch pro for a reason. And I think there could be an overreach by the big2 for money amd exclusivity that puts them on that level where they're competing with the pros for viewership. IDK I just think they will become little brother while the rest of the country might still support their own non big2 teams amd conferences and tune out for those others like I already did.

Used to be a time I would be delighted to see UGA and Alabama play a good game. Now I couldn't care less because the talent gap is so wide. I'm betting I'm not alone in this.

Think about the remaining teams left out. Will they care any more than, say NDSU fans care about the Iron Bowl?

if GT doesn't get in, that's OK. It will be an elite league I care nothing about At that point. And we could be the kings of the remaining division. Better to rule in hell than serve in heaven. I want wins, not losses.

But if we DO get in, welcome to the occasional winning season less often than not - which will kill our program just as effectively. After all, half of the teams in those big2 conferences will be sub .500. Who here thinks we wouldn't be in that group?

My thinking exactly.

Be careful what you wish for. How’s Vandy football these days? They used to be a powerhouse too.

 

[stinger78]

No. Winning AND being watched matter. Did you not read it? Apparently not.

Oh, I read it… when is the last time we’ve won against the top echelon regularly? The 1950’s. Did you not read it?

 

[WreckinGT]

So? There are millions who will. And are.

There is a pretty good argument to be made though for essentially relegating most of college football and what that will do to viewership and interest in the sport in general. College Football in general isn't a very good product. Even among the top tier teams. It is driven by mostly by fans and and their love for their own teams. If you do things to diminish their interest in watching their team play, it is going to diminish their interest in watching other games as well. If GT becomes a G5 team with little chance to ever compete at the upper levels then the likelihood that I watch the playoffs are close to zero.

 

[Vespidae]

Oh, I read it… when is the last time we’ve won against the top echelon regularly? The 1950’s. Did you not read it?

You read it and clearly didn’t understand it. The economics of college football today, regardless of “winning” is media based.

Most fans are trapped in the mentality of CFB as it was. Not as it is. And today, it’s programming content. Vandy makes more money losing than Tech does winning. That’s the New Reality.

 

[Vespidae]

There is a pretty good argument to be made though for essentially relegating most of college football and what that will do to viewership and interest in the sport in general. College Football in general isn't a very good product. Even among the top tier teams. It is driven by mostly by fans and and their love for their own teams. If you do things to diminish their interest in watching their team play, it is going to diminish their interest in watching other games as well. If GT becomes a G5 team with little chance to ever compete at the upper levels then the likelihood that I watch the playoffs are close to zero.

Media data says you’re wrong.

 

[WreckinGT]

Media data says you’re wrong.

Media data exists for what college football is now. Not what it will be when they succeed in making college football a two conference sport.

 

[Vespidae]

Media data exists for what college football is now. Not what it will be when they succeed in making college football a two conference sport.

Nobody is making multi billion dollar decisions on a whim. Trust me … they know exactly where CFB is going.

 

[WreckinGT]

Nobody is making multi billion dollar decisions on a whim. Trust me … they know exactly where CFB is going.

No, they aren't. But im not sure the people really making the decisions really care all that much about the health of the sport or growing the sport in general.

 

[Vespidae]

No, they aren't. But im not sure the people really making the decisions really care all that much about the health of the sport or growing the sport in general.

Financially, it’s never been healthier. Viewership is increasing, not decreasing. It’s media now, not “attendance”.

 

[cpf2001]

I have a hard time finding total viewership numbers or seasonal average across all p5 or such, but I’m skeptical of the “never been better” story - the title game this year, for instance, was still down, with fewer viewers than any but one championship game from the 2010s. https://www.statista.com/statistics/244245/average-conference-tv-viewership-ncaa-football/

https://espnpressroom.com/us/press-...llege-football-playoff-and-new-years-six/amp/ - “record” but if you look at the specific claims, lots of “best in six years” type of hedging.

Sounds like things have ticked a bit back up again the last couple of years, but since the early 2010s you realign, you add a playoff, and you do 25M for your title game - which has shrank, if anything, compared to stuff going back to 1993, and you’re better than ever?

“They know what they’re doing” is what people have said about the leadership of countless companies or industries stagnating and declining through the years.

 

[stinger78]

You read it and clearly didn’t understand it. The economics of college football today, regardless of “winning” is media based.

Most fans are trapped in the mentality of CFB as it was. Not as it is. And today, it’s programming content. Vandy makes more money losing than Tech does winning. That’s the New Reality.

But how is that helping their football program? They stink worse than ever.

 

[Vespidae]

I have a hard time finding total viewership numbers or seasonal average across all p5 or such, but I’m skeptical of the “never been better” story - the title game this year, for instance, was still down, with fewer viewers than any but one championship game from the 2010s. https://www.statista.com/statistics/244245/average-conference-tv-viewership-ncaa-football/

https://espnpressroom.com/us/press-...llege-football-playoff-and-new-years-six/amp/ - “record” but if you look at the specific claims, lots of “best in six years” type of hedging.

Sounds like things have ticked a bit back up again the last couple of years, but since the early 2010s you realign, you add a playoff, and you do 25M for your title game - which has shrank, if anything, compared to stuff going back to 1993, and you’re better than ever?

“They know what they’re doing” is what people have said about the leadership of countless companies or industries stagnating and declining through the years.

Look at dollars. There is no question they are better than ever.

As to “idiots” running the conferences, I think not. The SEC has been clear for the last decade on what they are trying to do and … they are doing it. Payouts are up, not down. But sure … they are declining if that’s what you want to believe.

 

[Vespidae]

But how is that helping their football program? They stink worse than ever.

Vandy? Vandy could care less about football.

 

[iceeater1969]

We are here.
1. The chaos will continue for a few years.
2. Then a crisis will occur. Order will be established
3. Those that are relevant ($) AND POTENTIAL ($) at that time will get a tenative seat at table. Get more eyes on tv - move up.

Get to 3 is GT goal.

4.Things will gradually shift based on inherent physical advantages.


If we get to 4, we can gradually out do small market teams .
Gt has reversed.
A. terrible support from Hill, B. marketing by gtaa at zero, C. poor quality assistant coaches, D. Recruiting by flashy by adding ga hs coaching legends to sell gt as QUALY FIELD AND CLASSROOM brand. E. Supporting a solid head coach and replacing a clown.

By 3, Gt will look like a solid team located in giant tv market. The many business in Atl will find Gt as a bargain for client entertainment.

IN 4 the P2 Team will bring many viewers to our games . With the crazy nil , portal rules restrained Gt will gradually over take the smaller teams.

 

[stinger78]

Vandy? Vandy could care less about football.

So? Miss State still has more mediocre and bad years than good ones. Arky hasn’t been above mediocre in my memory. USCe is trapped in mediocrity. Look at TAMU, UF, Auburn, etc. None are knocking it out of the park.

Money does not solve all problems.

 

[cpf2001]

CFB leadership wouldn’t be the first to confuse “our audience has gotten more valuable” with “our audience and/or popularity is growing”. Think they can take credit for advertiser behavior post-dvr and streaming?

Here’s the alternate explanation for what the SEC is doing:

They know the game isn’t growing - the biggest games of the year aren’t doing bigger numbers (>30M viewers) than in the 90s despite overall population growth.

They know their fanbase is largely aging.

They’re grabbing as big a share of the pie as they can to bring in as much as possible in the short term and choke out the competition for a smaller and smaller future audience share.

All very shrewd, all doesn’t require any genius on the part of the rest of NCAA/CFB (ACC/PAC/G5/etc) leadership, all consistent with a decline phase instead of a growth one.

“Population has gotten larger, audience has not” is what the NY6/title game charts tell me. Thats not growth. The Super Bowl, meanwhile, has gone from 80-90M viewers to 100-120, since the 90s.

 

[iceeater1969]

CFB leadership wouldn’t be the first to confuse “our audience has gotten more valuable” with “our audience and/or popularity is growing”. Think they can take credit for advertiser behavior post-dvr and streaming?

Here’s the alternate explanation for what the SEC is doing:

They know the game isn’t growing - the biggest games of the year aren’t doing bigger numbers (>30M viewers) than in the 90s despite overall population growth.

They know their fanbase is largely aging.

They’re grabbing as big a share of the pie as they can to bring in as much as possible in the short term and choke out the competition for a smaller and smaller future audience share.

All very shrewd, all doesn’t require any genius on the part of the rest of NCAA/CFB (ACC/PAC/G5/etc) leadership, all consistent with a decline phase instead of a growth one.

“Population has gotten larger, audience has not” is what the NY6/title game charts tell me. Thats not growth. The Super Bowl, meanwhile, has gone from 80-90M viewers to 100-120, since the 90s.

nfl = has gone thru chaos
They are back to recruiting fans.
We are in chaos - with 2 good leagues - not logical

In future CFB will get past the chaos and have "new college presidents " that act like college football is a very good thing for their college.



Angel is our first president that acts like an owner.

 

[Vespidae]

CFB leadership wouldn’t be the first to confuse “our audience has gotten more valuable” with “our audience and/or popularity is growing”. Think they can take credit for advertiser behavior post-dvr and streaming?

Here’s the alternate explanation for what the SEC is doing:

They know the game isn’t growing - the biggest games of the year aren’t doing bigger numbers (>30M viewers) than in the 90s despite overall population growth.

They know their fanbase is largely aging.

They’re grabbing as big a share of the pie as they can to bring in as much as possible in the short term and choke out the competition for a smaller and smaller future audience share.

All very shrewd, all doesn’t require any genius on the part of the rest of NCAA/CFB (ACC/PAC/G5/etc) leadership, all consistent with a decline phase instead of a growth one.

“Population has gotten larger, audience has not” is what the NY6/title game charts tell me. Thats not growth. The Super Bowl, meanwhile, has gone from 80-90M viewers to 100-120, since the 90s.

The SEC has never stated, ever … your characterizations. They HAVE stated repeatedly that their strategy is to create weekly matchups that are able to be distributed as programming content and achieve a lower than average share of viewers than a typical NFL program.

That allows them to negotiate comparable media rights deals. You may not agree with their strategy for the reasons you cited, but they don’t. They believe it, manage to it, and distribute piles of cash to their members.

 

[cpf2001]

The SEC has never stated, ever … your characterizations. They HAVE stated repeatedly that their strategy is to create weekly matchups that are able to be distributed as programming content and achieve a lower than average share of viewers than a typical NFL program.

That allows them to negotiate comparable media rights deals. You may not agree with their strategy for the reasons you cited, but they don’t. They believe it, manage to it, and distribute piles of cash to their members.

Obvious they aren’t going to come out and say “we’re going to win the decline phase” but it’s perfectly compatible with all of their actions.

I can’t claim to know if they think the overall game is in a decline phase or not or if they think they’re driving national growth of the game outside the SEC programs too. Frankly, who cares?

But the part that I keep coming back to is that the viewership seems stuck for a good 30 years now.

Do you have the numbers to counter the ones that the playoff/title game ones I linked paint of stagnation followed by slow decline, in the face of growing population and growing absolute viewers for the NFL? If so, happy to see them. But without them… it just seems like cheerleading. “Pay no attention to diminished attendance and stagnant peak viewership, things are better than ever!” Why? Do you have evidence the fanbase is getting younger and larger?

Using a non-sports industry metaphor, it looks like at best a consolidation phase, not a growth phase.