Conference Realignment

[RonJohn]

I've seen uva mentioned more than once as some sort of desirable linchpin.
What am I missing about uva that makes them so attractive in re: to sports?

The SEC touches North Carolina. If they add North Carolina, they would touch Virginia. North Carolina and Virginia are both large main state schools. They add Virginia and North Carolina media markets in contiguous states. The SEC has seemed to prefer large state schools and has stated that they prefer contiguous states. Compare that to FSU and Clemson. The SEC is already in Florida with the main state school. The SEC is already in SC with the main state school. Neither of those schools is a main state school, and neither provides a new market.

The same can be said of the Big10 with respect to UNV and UVA. The Big10 is not contiguous any more, but both schools are contiguous to the Big10 (if both are added). Both are large main state schools. And in the case of the Big10, both are AAU schools.

I am not saying that these are the only factors in consideration. Just answering your question by pointing out the highlights of why both of those schools as a pair are attractive to both of the P2 conferences.

 

[RonJohn]

Did he elaborate on their criteria?

Not really. He said something along the lines of the fans not caring about media markets nor AAU status. He said that most fans don't even have a clue what the AAU is.

However it was later in his video that he talked about the "suits" not caring about what fans care about and having different cristeras. He basically said that the "suits" don't care about the fans or players when they make their decisions.

He is a blowhard, and not someone that I watch or pay much attention to. But I did just happen across this video today.

 

[Vespidae]

The SEC touches North Carolina. If they add North Carolina, they would touch Virginia. North Carolina and Virginia are both large main state schools. They add Virginia and North Carolina media markets in contiguous states. The SEC has seemed to prefer large state schools and has stated that they prefer contiguous states. Compare that to FSU and Clemson. The SEC is already in Florida with the main state school. The SEC is already in SC with the main state school. Neither of those schools is a main state school, and neither provides a new market.

The same can be said of the Big10 with respect to UNV and UVA. The Big10 is not contiguous any more, but both schools are contiguous to the Big10 (if both are added). Both are large main state schools. And in the case of the Big10, both are AAU schools.

I am not saying that these are the only factors in consideration. Just answering your question by pointing out the highlights of why both of those schools as a pair are attractive to both of the P2 conferences.

Good summary. The only problem for both is that their average viewership is lower than that of Arkansas, who is dead last in the SEC. I don’t understand the value either one brings.

 

[RonJohn]

Good summary. The only problem for both is that their average viewership is lower than that of Arkansas, who is dead last in the SEC. I don’t understand the value either one brings.

Which I think kind of plays into Josh Pate's statement that things that are important to fans are not necessarily important to college presidents and athletic directors who actually make the decisions. And that things that are important to the decisions makers are not necessarily important to the fans.

 

[roadkill]

Good summary. The only problem for both is that their average viewership is lower than that of Arkansas, who is dead last in the SEC. I don’t understand the value either one brings.

You could ask the same question as to why the SEC added Arkansas.

 

[Vespidae]

You could ask the same question as to why the SEC added Arkansas.

Different era. Media rights had not yet begun to make their presence and power known.

 

[roadkill]

Isn't there still a carriage fee argument in there somewhere? I get that streaming/eyeballs are the future, but a recently linked article indicated that carriage fees still generate 10x the revenue of streaming for ESPN. If the BIG got into Virginia and NC, wouldn't that be additive for Fox? Asking the experts.

 

[forensicbuzz]

Which I think kind of plays into Josh Pate's statement that things that are important to fans are not necessarily important to college presidents and athletic directors who actually make the decisions. And that things that are important to the decisions makers are not necessarily important to the fans.

I don't know what their criteria are either, but I guarantee it has to do with money, probably big money.

 

[WreckinGT]

There is a difference in those kinds of discussions and the discussions about FSU. McMurphy says that 100% of people he has talked to (University presidents, athletic directors, Big10 officials), do not want to add FSU. That isn't a -- we are not planning further expansion at this point -- kind of statement. It is a -- FSU is extremely non-attractive kind of statement. I saw a Josh Pate video in which he said that he talked to a Big10 president who told him flat out that FSU will not be joining the Big10. Another interesting thing that Pate said is that fans see viewership and matchups as the ONLY thing to drive conference expansion. An example he gave was FSU to the SEC so people can see matchups like FSU-Oklahoma. He said that the "suits" in the offices don't care about that like the fans do. They have an entirely different set of criteria that fans have no interest in.

Maybe. Maybe not. McMurphy has stated in other interviews that the SEC and B1G 100% do not want Clemson either. It may be true that they don't want either of them. It may also be true that they want leaks to say they are not interested in them for a variety of reasons. We will never know.

 

[Vespidae]

Isn't there still a carriage fee argument in there somewhere? I get that streaming/eyeballs are the future, but a recently linked article indicated that carriage fees still generate 10x the revenue of streaming for ESPN. If the BIG got into Virginia and NC, wouldn't that be additive for Fox? Asking the experts.

I just checked. The BTN is already available in VA.

 

[RonJohn]

Isn't there still a carriage fee argument in there somewhere? I get that streaming/eyeballs are the future, but a recently linked article indicated that carriage fees still generate 10x the revenue of streaming for ESPN. If the BIG got into Virginia and NC, wouldn't that be additive for Fox? Asking the experts.

It would for the Big10 Network. It wouldn't add more for Fox affiliates or FS1 because those are not specific to the Big10. I don't have good TV household numbers in front of me, but it would add about $1 per TV household to the revenue of the Big10 Network per month.

 

[RonJohn]

I just checked. The BTN is already available in VA.

The BTN, SECN, and ACCN have a difference of $1 or more depending on whether the media market is in region for the conference. The TV providers pay roughly $1 more per subscriber in Kentucky than they do in Indiana for the SECN because Kentucky has an SEC team while Indiana does not. If the SEC expands to NC and VA, then every TV subscriber in NC and VA will pay an additional dollar per month for access to the SECN.

 

[gtbeak]

I'm not questioning your conclusion, but I would appreciate a link to the data. Apologies if you've posted it previously.

There can't be exact data since there has not been an 8-0 Vandy or an 8-0 Georgia Tech in recent years, so this is all speculative. That said, looking at last season's Texas A&M v LSU game one can see that the viewership for that game (ESPN Noon game, but on Thanksgiving weekend) was only 2.00M viewers, which was lower than the average and median ESPN Noon games. So, the point is not only speculative, but it also could be wrong.

That said, I don't want to pound on Vespidae too hard. I don't see any data that says Georgia Tech helps with TV ratings, but I also don't see any data that says we suppress ratings. I'd be interested in "checking the work", so to speak.

 

[Vespidae]

The BTN, SECN, and ACCN have a difference of $1 or more depending on whether the media market is in region for the conference. The TV providers pay roughly $1 more per subscriber in Kentucky than they do in Indiana for the SECN because Kentucky has an SEC team while Indiana does not. If the SEC expands to NC and VA, then every TV subscriber in NC and VA will pay an additional dollar per month for access to the SECN.

Ok. But VA brings virtually zero Nielsen viewers, so it’s dilutive to future rights. That means it has value to BTN, but not SEC.

I’m skeptical.

 

[Vespidae]

There can't be exact data since there has not been an 8-0 Vandy or an 8-0 Georgia Tech in recent years, so this is all speculative. That said, looking at last season's Texas A&M v LSU game one can see that the viewership for that game (ESPN Noon game, but on Thanksgiving weekend) was only 2.00M viewers, which was lower than the average and median ESPN Noon games. So, the point is not only speculative, but it also could also be wrong.

That said, I don't want to pound on Vispedae too hard. I don't see any data that says Georgia Tech helps with TV ratings, but I also don't see any data that says we suppress ratings. I'd be interested in "checking the work", so to speak.

Tech’s average is 1.83. I’m not in my office but as I recall, Tech had only one Nielsen broadcast last year. FSU by contrast, had an average of 4.16 but was on a Nielsen broadcast 10 times. Thats why they are screaming to leave.

1.83 is less than any SEC team. It would be mid pack for BTN, which IS Nielsen, so that makes sense.

Re the “record”, a fun fact is that the way media rights are determined in addition to advertising dollars/viewership is “reversion to the mean”. There’s an expectation that when they pay, some teams will improve leading to higher demand. Sadly, ACC has been stuck although you can make a claim that some teams are doing better than historically.

Had FSU and Miami simply maintained their programs, this mess wouldn’t exist.

 

[LT 1967]

I believe this article is just about the Florida Attorney General being sure she gets some credit for a previous court protective order, but I suppose FSU wins this part of the battle. They will receive the ESPN contract. I hope there is some leakage!

MSN

 

[LT 1967]

Noles may not like this article. Sankey slams them concerning their reaction to the CFP omission.

MSN

 

[Vespidae]

Noles may not like this article. Sankey slams them concerning their reaction to the CFP omission.

MSN

A friend of mine lives in Florida and was a D-1 athlete at an SEC school. She says it’s pretty well established that in addition to religion and politics, don’t talk about FSU. It has become caustic in the state.

Teams leave conferences all the time. FSU seems to want to burn the house down as they leave. Not a good reputation.

 

[gtbeak]

Tech’s average is 1.83. I’m not in my office but as I recall, Tech had only one Nielsen broadcast last year. FSU by contrast, had an average of 4.16 but was on a Nielsen broadcast 10 times. Thats why they are screaming to leave.

1.83 is less than any SEC team. It would be mid pack for BTN, which IS Nielsen, so that makes sense.

Re the “record”, a fun fact is that the way media rights are determined in addition to advertising dollars/viewership is “reversion to the mean”. There’s an expectation that when they pay, some teams will improve leading to higher demand. Sadly, ACC has been stuck although you can make a claim that some teams are doing better than historically.

Had FSU and Miami simply maintained their programs, this mess wouldn’t exist.

You're a college professor, I believe. Given that, you know that numbers need to be put into proper context.

Last season Tech had two games on OTA networks or the ESPN mothership...Clemson and UGa. The Clemson game drew 1.62M for a noon start on ABC, which is not good compared to the normal ABC noon game, which drew a median of 2.46M. However, it was up against the Michigan/Penn St game on Fox, which drew 9.16M viewers. Three times Fox got a huge audience for their noon starts, the three game round-robin between Michigan/Ohio St/Penn St. Each of those weeks the ABC noon game took a deep dive in viewership numbers. Maybe Tech "diluted" the viewership number for the Clemson game, but more likely Penn St/Michigan did the diluting. The UGa game was a 7:30 start, also on ABC, and it drew 5.33M viewers. That was the highest viewership that ABC had for any Saturday night game all season. I think we all would acknowledge that most were tuned in to see UGa, but I don't think you can say that Tech "diluted" the viewership of the game.

I'm not saying we are an incredible television draw, we were, after all, only on OTA networks or the ESPN mothership two times, but I don't see anything in the numbers that say we "dilute" viewership.

 

[RonJohn]

Teams leave conferences all the time. FSU seems to want to burn the house down as they leave. Not a good reputation.

It seems to me that throughout the discussion about the FSU lawsuit, many people are ignoring the character aspect of it. If a person of high character makes a mistake in a business partnership and owns up to it, people will likely forgive it. If a person of low character burns the business to the ground to get what he wants out of it, future business partners will remember that. People seem to think that FSU will be a good conference member if they are just making more mone than the ACC is currently providing. Have they never interacted with FSU fans? If FSU joins the SEC and is making a full share of revenue, how long will it be before FSU fans are complaining about scheduling, or referee decisions, or TV time slots, or something. If they join the SEC and the SEC doesn't bow down to them and declare them the best football program in the history of the world, there will be many in the fanbase who will be screaming just as loud as they are screaming now about the ACC. Why would the leadership of the SEC want to put up with that? Why would the leadership of the Big10? Why even would the Big12 want to put up with that?