Conference Realignment

[Vespidae]

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. So, maybe Tech "diluted" the viewership number, but more likely Penn St/Michigan diluted the viewership number. The UGa game was a 7:30 start, 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 that game either.

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.

Rather than look at one game, look at the number of Nielsen appearances and the average viewership. That‘s how value is determined.

It is historically low. I hate to break it you, but Tech does not drive ratings. And they have not appeared on a lot of Nielsen networks. Low appearances and low ratings per appearance. Not great.

The way media rights work, Tech’s numbers dilute the total reported conference numbers. That’s simply a fact. I know you don’t like it, so take it up with ESPN/Fox/NBC etc.

A benefit to Tech is that they are not on Nielsen rated networks very often and that’s good, because those numbers are excluded from the calculation. So Tech vs Duke on the ACCN really doesn’t matter. Tech v Georgia on ABC does.

Ask yourself each week, “What is the best matchup, that will appeal to the greatest number of Nielsen viewers?”

I’m not judging one way or another, but simply trying to explain things In a way that might be useful. One thing I find with this forum is a tendency to be an echo chamber and I encourage you to think for yourself. Not everything presented here is factually correct.

A final note. Yes, I teach college. I find that a number of posters here have personally insulted me as a hack for teaching and thats fine. I think it says more about them than me. But I am semi retired. Prior to teaching, I ran a half billion dollar company with operations in 180 countries. I’m not bragging, but I think I have the contacts (including the former chairman of Nielsen) and experience to bring a perspective you might value. If you don’t, just read it and discard it and do your own thing.

 

[cpf2001]

“Tech isn’t on top networks much” and “Tech and other ACC programs have been bad” seem like the same thing.

I don’t think a 3-9-forever GT is appealing to anyone, but we’ve gotta hope for a return to at least recent-decades average-to-top-25 performance there.

The problem is that if the rest of the ACC stays ****ty even a good-but-not-great GT team’s games aren’t draws if they’re against meh to bad UVA/Wake/Duke/etc.

But which of those programs are the big problems and which are being dragged down? Who had potential to draw future eyeballs? That’s what the Big 10 has to figure out by looking for the hidden variables in the numbers. Could a good GT team be more relevant and interesting than a good UNC or UVA one? Historically it’s obviously yes; whether or not too much of that history has been squandered is tbd.

I’m also curious if basketball matters at all for these calculations. Does the Big 10 like UNC more because of their basketball or is football being second fiddle a negative factor?

 

[UgaBlows]

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.

UVA and UNC would be towards the bottom of the SEC in enrollment numbers

 

[Techster]

UVA and UNC would be towards the bottom of the SEC in enrollment numbers

GT also beats both in eyeballs (in terms of football) AND is in a MUCH bigger TV market.

 

[gtbeak]

Rather than look at one game, look at the number of Nielsen appearances and the average viewership. That‘s how value is determined.

It is historically low. I hate to break it you, but Tech does not drive ratings. And they have not appeared on a lot of Nielsen networks. Low appearances and low ratings per appearance. Not great.

The way media rights work, Tech’s numbers dilute the total reported conference numbers. That’s simply a fact. I know you don’t like it, so take it up with ESPN/Fox/NBC etc.

A benefit to Tech is that they are not on Nielsen rated networks very often and that’s good, because those numbers are excluded from the calculation. So Tech vs Duke on the ACCN really doesn’t matter. Tech v Georgia on ABC does.

Ask yourself each week, “What is the best matchup, that will appeal to the greatest number of Nielsen viewers?”

I’m not judging one way or another, but simply trying to explain things In a way that might be useful. One thing I find with this forum is a tendency to be an echo chamber and I encourage you to think for yourself. Not everything presented here is factually correct.

A final note. Yes, I teach college. I find that a number of posters here have personally insulted me as a hack for teaching and thats fine. I think it says more about them than me. But I am semi retired. Prior to teaching, I ran a half billion dollar company with operations in 180 countries. I’m not bragging, but I think I have the contacts (including the former chairman of Nielsen) and experience to bring a perspective you might value. If you don’t, just read it and discard it and do your own thing.

Taking your post step by step....

Rather than look at one game, look at the number of Nielsen appearances and the average viewership. That‘s how value is determined. - True to some degree, but the main driver to value in the context of our discussion is if a school brings a new and distinct state to the table for a conference network, as well as how many cable subscribers are in that state. The difference in ratings is primarily driven by time slot, not school, IOW, other than a handful of schools already spoken for, the various schools are essentially equal. But the difference in subscription fees is quite large if a school brings a new state into the fold to the conference network. That is why Tech, UNC, UVa, etc (Rutgers and Maryland as recent examples) would be/were valuable to the Big 10. BTW, I expect this to change in coming years as streaming becomes more and more a factor, but for now that is the business model.

I hate to break it you, but Tech does not drive ratings. And they have not appeared on a lot of Nielsen networks. Low appearances and low ratings per appearance. Not great. That's why I said "I'm not saying we are an incredible television draw, we were, after all, only on OTA networks or the ESPN mothership two times".

So Tech vs Duke on the ACCN really doesn’t matter. Tech v Georgia on ABC does. - And yet you don't seem to acknowledge the fact that our game v UGa was the most viewed game of the entire season for ABC Saturday Night football (or whatever they call it). Admittedly Alabama/Texas would have beaten it had that game been on ABC instead of ESPN, but still the point that it was a highly viewed game stands.

I encourage you to think for yourself. Not everything presented here is factually correct. - That's what I'm doing in this case. Thinking for myself and pointing out that speculating that a middle of the road Texas A&M/LSU game would be a better draw than an 8-0 Tech team is not likely correct, especially given that this year's A&M/LSU game was lightly viewed. And, to be clear, I'm just using that as an example because you focused on that one. In general, any school that is 8-0 will be a good draw, better than other schools sitting at 5-3/4-4 except in a small number of extreme cases.

I find that a number of posters here have personally insulted me as a hack for teaching and thats fine. I have/had no intention of insulting you, and I probably could have written that sentence better. My apologies.

 

[Techster]

I don't see Key as one who would request a ton of special admits either, but should he go that route, at least his administration appears to have his back for a change. He's made it very clear that he wants to do whatever it takes to beat the team to the east.

When Paul Johnson was our coach, there's an interview where he said (paraphrasing here) that he was allowed to bring whoever he wanted, there was no number of "special admits" he was limited to....BUT, he was also cognizant that it didn't do him/the team any good or the SA he brought in any good if he flunked out after the season. CPJ actually cared about the SA's academic future and he wasn't going to burn good will on the Hill to bring in an SA for the season.

I thought about this recently. Given NIL, and the nature of the portal, how high is academics anymore when we recruit kids?

 

[WreckinGT]

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?

FSU can't even hold a candle to how awful of a partner Texas was to the Big 12 and the SEC just welcomed them with open arms. It's all about money. Always has been.

 

[RonJohn]

FSU can't even hold a candle to how awful of a partner Texas was to the Big 12 and the SEC just welcomed them with open arms. It's all about money. Always has been.

Texas griped a lot and demanded special treatment. However, Texas waited until the GOR was going to run out to leave the conference. (They paid to leave one year early after they had already announced they were leaving at the end of the contract, but they did wait.) FSU sued the ACC. FSU has demanded that confidential agreements with the television partner be made public. The FSU lawsuit reads a lot more like trailer trash arguments on Judge Judy than an actual lawsuit. NO, Texas has not acted worse than FSU is currently acting. If Texas were the candle wick in your analogy, then FSU would be a nuclear explosion.

 

[roadkill]

Texas griped a lot and demanded special treatment. However, Texas waited until the GOR was going to run out to leave the conference. (They paid to leave one year early after they had already announced they were leaving at the end of the contract, but they did wait.) FSU sued the ACC. FSU has demanded that confidential agreements with the television partner be made public. The FSU lawsuit reads a lot more like trailer trash arguments on Judge Judy than an actual lawsuit. NO, Texas has not acted worse than FSU is currently acting. If Texas were the candle wick in your analogy, then FSU would be a nuclear explosion.

I was just about to post similar thoughts, but you beat me to it.

 

[WreckinGT]

Texas griped a lot and demanded special treatment. However, Texas waited until the GOR was going to run out to leave the conference. (They paid to leave one year early after they had already announced they were leaving at the end of the contract, but they did wait.) FSU sued the ACC. FSU has demanded that confidential agreements with the television partner be made public. The FSU lawsuit reads a lot more like trailer trash arguments on Judge Judy than an actual lawsuit. NO, Texas has not acted worse than FSU is currently acting. If Texas were the candle wick in your analogy, then FSU would be a nuclear explosion.

Four teams left the Big 12 mostly because of the actions of Texas. On top of demanding unequal revenue sharing, they tried to move to the Pac 10 with 5 other teams only to screw those teams at the last second and stay because they reached a deal with ESPN for the Longhorn Network. One of those teams was Colorado. Texas decided themselves (along with some political influence) that they would rather take Baylor instead of Colorado causing Colorado to jump immediately. Texas tried to air high school football games on its own network to gain recruiting advantages over it's conference mates. The rest of the conference had to go ape**** to prevent that. No, FSU's lawsuit doesn't really come close to this.

 

[RonJohn]

FSU's lawsuit doesn't really come close to this.

With regard to leaving a conference, McMurphy said in a podcast that many teams have changed conferences, and that FSU is the ONLY one to do things with this much damage. He said "There is a right way to do it, and the way that FSU is doing it" I don't know who McMurphy, nor who Josh Pate talked to, but you are totally ignoring that tenor of what they are saying. According to Pate, a Big10 president told him that FSU is not joining the Big10. Not that we aren't entertaining the idea. Not that the are content with the number they have now. Not that we are not looking to expand. Not anything that implies that nothing will happen, yet leaves the door open. He told Pate that FSU will not be a member of the Big10. According to McMurphy, he talked to at least three Big10 presidents who said basically the same thing, and also to some ADs who said basically the same thing, and also some Big10 administrators who said basically the same thing.

Didn't you post early in this thread that FSU would not have filed the lawsuit if they didn't already have a Big10 invitation guaranteed to them, so it was obvious that they already had that guarantee from the Big10?

 

[WreckinGT]

With regard to leaving a conference, McMurphy said in a podcast that many teams have changed conferences, and that FSU is the ONLY one to do things with this much damage. He said "There is a right way to do it, and the way that FSU is doing it" I don't know who McMurphy, nor who Josh Pate talked to, but you are totally ignoring that tenor of what they are saying. According to Pate, a Big10 president told him that FSU is not joining the Big10. Not that we aren't entertaining the idea. Not that the are content with the number they have now. Not that we are not looking to expand. Not anything that implies that nothing will happen, yet leaves the door open. He told Pate that FSU will not be a member of the Big10. According to McMurphy, he talked to at least three Big10 presidents who said basically the same thing, and also to some ADs who said basically the same thing, and also some Big10 administrators who said basically the same thing.

Didn't you post early in this thread that FSU would not have filed the lawsuit if they didn't already have a Big10 invitation guaranteed to them, so it was obvious that they already had that guarantee from the Big10?

Not really a guarantee but yes, I believe that FSU and Clemson did not do this without some confidence that they could get into one of the P2 conferences if they managed to get out of the conference. I still stand by that. Doesn't mean they won't both end up in the Big 12 in a couple of years but yes, I think conversations were had which led to both of them making the moves they did.

As for the "right way" to do things. Most people don't do things the "right way" if it involves possibly crippling your program for years to come. They do the desperate thing.

 

[Techster]

With regard to leaving a conference, McMurphy said in a podcast that many teams have changed conferences, and that FSU is the ONLY one to do things with this much damage. He said "There is a right way to do it, and the way that FSU is doing it" I don't know who McMurphy, nor who Josh Pate talked to, but you are totally ignoring that tenor of what they are saying. According to Pate, a Big10 president told him that FSU is not joining the Big10. Not that we aren't entertaining the idea. Not that the are content with the number they have now. Not that we are not looking to expand. Not anything that implies that nothing will happen, yet leaves the door open. He told Pate that FSU will not be a member of the Big10. According to McMurphy, he talked to at least three Big10 presidents who said basically the same thing, and also to some ADs who said basically the same thing, and also some Big10 administrators who said basically the same thing.

Didn't you post early in this thread that FSU would not have filed the lawsuit if they didn't already have a Big10 invitation guaranteed to them, so it was obvious that they already had that guarantee from the Big10?

Since when did you take anonymous sources as gospel? I'm a big fan of McMurphy, and he's definitely one of my trusted sources on social media, but how many times have "anonymous sources" been wrong? SEC and B1G had "anonymous" sources saying they were not expanding, and there were B1G and SEC representatives that went on record that said "they were not expanding at the moment"...only to expand months later (See: USC/UCLA, Texas/Oklahoma).

There was an article I posted last year that literally quoted a conference president that the B1G's intent was to be a national conference and you literally tried to argue that it wasn't trustworthy because the writer's execution wasn't to your liking. It was an attack on the messenger without regard to the actual message. Funny enough, months later the B1G added Oregon and Washington. As a reminder:

Conference Realignment

Then give it to us. Show me the law that says GT can’t support their athletic association. You guys will do anything to keep your 60 years worth of excuses going. There are no more excuses. You either do what it takes to win or get relegated. GT hid behind “calculus” for decades and our...

gtswarm.com

Sorry, but you trying to refute someone based off an "anonymous source" proves one thing about this whole realignment issue: People will believe what they want to help their beliefs and narratives.

When it comes to FSU, they draw the most eyeballs in the ACC in a region one of the P2 conference desperately wants to be in. The B1G's biggest media partners are FOX, CBS, and NBC. Do you honestly think the B1G and their media partners care that FSU is trying to get out in any manner they can (BTW, also against a media competitor) if it helps their bottom line? You and some others are putting way too much emphasis on being a good business partner when that business partner is unrelated to their current relationships.

BTW, I'm one of the ones that strongly believes FSU isn't doing this on a wing and a prayer. FSU is doing this because they have financial incentive waiting on them as soon as they can break the GOR. Read into that what you will.

 

[ThatGuy]

I'm a newer flan, class of 2020.. That guy was dumb af..

Hey now, hold up.

 

[RonJohn]

Since when did you take anonymous sources as gospel? I'm a big fan of McMurphy, and he's definitely one of my trusted sources on social media, but how many times have "anonymous sources" been wrong? SEC and B1G had "anonymous" sources saying they were not expanding, and there were B1G and SEC representatives that went on record that said "they were not expanding at the moment"...only to expand months later (See: USC/UCLA, Texas/Oklahoma).

There was an article I posted last year that literally quoted a conference president that the B1G's intent was to be a national conference and you literally tried to argue that it wasn't trustworthy because the writer's execution wasn't to your liking. It was an attack on the messenger without regard to the actual message. Funny enough, months later the B1G added Oregon and Washington. As a reminder:

Conference Realignment

Then give it to us. Show me the law that says GT can’t support their athletic association. You guys will do anything to keep your 60 years worth of excuses going. There are no more excuses. You either do what it takes to win or get relegated. GT hid behind “calculus” for decades and our...

gtswarm.com

Sorry, but you trying to refute someone based off an "anonymous source" proves one thing about this whole realignment issue: People will believe what they want to help their beliefs and narratives.

When it comes to FSU, they draw the most eyeballs in the ACC in a region one of the P2 conference desperately wants to be in. The B1G's biggest media partners are FOX, CBS, and NBC. Do you honestly think the B1G and their media partners care that FSU is trying to get out in any manner they can (BTW, also against a media competitor) if it helps their bottom line? You and some others are putting way too much emphasis on being a good business partner when that business partner is unrelated to their current relationships.

BTW, I'm one of the ones that strongly believes FSU isn't doing this on a wing and a prayer. FSU is doing this because they have financial incentive waiting on them as soon as they can break the GOR. Read into that what you will.

I did say earlier in the thread that McMurphy's quotes are from anonymous sources, so I take them with a grain of salt:

McMurphy has anonymous quotes from multiple sources. They are all anonymous so I take them with a grain of salt. However, the quotes include things that I have said in this thread about FSU not being an attractive partner based on the way they are handling themselves:



I haven't seen many people, if any at all, pointing this out. I think it is obvious. People in this thread have said that it is all about football and money, and that FSU can act any way they want to and the Big10 and SEC will still froth over having them. There isn't enough money from either to provide a full share, at least until the current media contracts run out. Anyone who thinks that going into business with a shady and obstinate business partner makes sense is wrong. Even if there was money to be made, the risks of an out of control business partner can't be made up for by profit.

The current post you are referring to was just a repudiation of the notion that Texas is a much worse partner than FSU.

Even though I don't trust anonymous sources, McMurphy has at least claimed that Big10 "university presidents" are some of his sources. That doesn't gain credibility in my view because we don't know who they actually are and the sources are not willing to put their face to the quotes. However, it is somewhat better than something like "some people in the Big10".

The thing I found interesting about the Pate podcast is his apparent change of opinion, more than his anonymous quotes. He is a blowhard and I don't pay much attention to him. I am not certain of what he has been saying before. In this podcast, he says that until a few weeks ago, he was certain that FSU would have a landing spot in the Big10 or SEC. He repeated the quote from a "Big10 university president". Then he went on a diatribe about how the only thing he considers when discussing realignment is matchups, and that is based on his perspective as a fan. But that he now realizes that the people who will actually make such decisions are not looking from a fan perspective. They have different views and priorities and are looking at things that fans don't place any value on. He is just now realizing that the blowhard fan viewpoint is not the only viewpoint in the world, and that fans ranting on the internet will not be what makes decisions on realignment.

 

[stinger78]

Here are the P4 over the last 5 years, 9+ wins/ 7-8wins (ACC-AC, Big Integer-BI, Big 12-BT, SEC-SC):

23: AC 4/6, BI 4/4, BT 6/2, SC 6/2
22: AC 5/4, BI 4/5, BT 2/3, SC 5/4
21: AC 4/1, BI 7/2, BT 3/3, SC 5/4
19: AC 2/5, BI 6/2, BT 2/4, SC 5/3
18: AC 2/6, BI 5/3, BT 2/5, SC 6/4

What I take from this is that the ACC, the last two seasons, is not far at all from the so-called P2. In 2021 the ACC was light in the middle, and prior to that was light at the top. IOW, the ACC seems to be correcting itself the last two seasons. We’ll see what the upcoming seasons hold.

 

[Techster]

 

[apatriot1776]

That was my thinking as well. Thus the Atlanta connection, not the entire state. I think there are a lot of non-Atlantan Georgians who are not only default uga fans, but view GT as elitist. That's very difficult to overcome.

As others have said I think our best bet is to become a "second team" for non-UGA sidewalk fans. Even during my time at Tech, many in my fraternity would tailgate all morning for a noon game, then after the game and a quick dinner we'd change into our shirts and root for whatever SEC team our dad went to (or by default, whoever played UGA).

There's plenty of Auburn, Alabama, Tennessee, etc fans in Georgia that are just as sick of UGA as we are. Dormant rivalries notwithstanding, we can maybe appeal to those fans who don't want to travel all the way to Knoxville or Gainesville and drop $1000 on a hotel and tickets to see a college football game.

 

[roadkill]

Sankey has to deny any sort of "recruitment" of ACC schools in his public statements, otherwise, he is inviting tortious interference lawsuits from the ACC. What we don't know is if certain schools have reached out to him.

This guy made a similar comment in the context of Greff Swaim's tweets.

 

[Techster]

Sankey has to deny any sort of "recruitment" of ACC schools in his public statements, otherwise, he is inviting tortious interference lawsuits from the ACC. What we don't know is if certain schools have reached out to him.

This guy made a similar comment in the context of Greff Swaim's tweets.

Tortious interference was a point I made years ago about this. ZERO representatives from any conference will publicly admit "recruiting" another school from another conference, or even mentioning other schools are being looked at for fear of litigation. This is why when Texas/OU and USC/UCLA left their respective conferences there was a big show of how those schools were the first to contact the SEC/B1G (*wink* *wink*) because those schools still had agreements with their conferences. You can find my postings on this earlier in this thread. It's also why NDAs are signed before real discussions are started about realignment.

One of the more interesting aspects of what Sankey said, and what he's openly telling the public, is that school Presidents ultimately make the expansion decisions and who gets invited...NOT ADs or Conference Commissioners. What criteria conference Presidents have is totally different than what fans and media think. It's been rumored for over a decade that GT has always been high on B1G's Presidents' expansion list because of our combination of academics + athletics + market. It's also why I don't fear the ACC collapsing because, IMO, GT won't be left out in the wilderness like Wake Forest/maybe Duke/NC State/Louisville/Syracuse and other ACC schools may be should the ACC collapse.