Conference Realignment

Vespidae

Helluva Engineer
Messages
5,339
Location
Auburn, AL

ESPN selling their name for a sports book for 150M a year + other stuff to try to supplement their revenue
Welcome to the ESPN Cheetah Pizza Hut. Where it’s always naked Happy Hour. Remember to tip your server.
 

UgaBlows

Helluva Engineer
Messages
7,000
SMU’s viewership is measured in fractions. I’m not sure what this gets the ACC.

Does the ACC network get to increase it’s subscriber rate like The BIG does with a team in market? Because if so it has nothing to do with how many SMU fans watch them on tv, it’s how many tv’s in Dallas tv market have the ACC network in their cable/satellite/streaming package
 

UgaBlows

Helluva Engineer
Messages
7,000
It’s not like the college presidents said “we need SMU to put an academic halo on our addition of Stanford and Cal”. This seems like a coached move. I don’t see why the ACC commissioner and ADs would do this unless someone (ESPN) suggested it
They should get Tulane as well, thats 3 major tv markets added
 

Vespidae

Helluva Engineer
Messages
5,339
Location
Auburn, AL
Does the ACC network get to increase it’s subscriber rate like The BIG does with a team in market? Because if so it has nothing to do with how many SMU fans watch them on tv, it’s how many tv’s in Dallas tv market have the ACC network in their cable/satellite/streaming package
You’re right. I don’t have an answer for that.

But any eyes on SMU are taking away eyes from ESPN/Longhorn Network. Net net … I don’t see any reason for ESPN to encourage this at the expense of a loss of viewers to Longhorn.
 

stech81

Helluva Engineer
Messages
8,957
Location
Woodstock Georgia
You’re right. I don’t have an answer for that.

But any eyes on SMU are taking away eyes from ESPN/Longhorn Network. Net net … I don’t see any reason for ESPN to encourage this at the expense of a loss of viewers to Longhorn.
Question is the SEC going to let Texas keep the longhorn network
 

stech81

Helluva Engineer
Messages
8,957
Location
Woodstock Georgia
You’re right. I don’t have an answer for that.

But any eyes on SMU are taking away eyes from ESPN/Longhorn Network. Net net … I don’t see any reason for ESPN to encourage this at the expense of a loss of viewers to Longhorn.
Not sure what is true anymore.

Any type of expansion that would reduce the estimated $39.4 million average annual distribution to existing members was considered a "non-starter" among ACC leadership, but the university is willing to forgo conference distribution pay for their first several years in the ACC should they receive an invitation to join the conference, Yahoo Sports reports.
 

iceeater1969

Helluva Engineer
Messages
9,764

ESPN selling their name for a sports book for 150M a year + other stuff to try to supplement their revenue
Just kidding:
A few years back 2016 Gt Researcher 1 and 2 did some fine computer banking work.
Let's get our quantum computer guys into gambling since its legit. A few pennies here and there add up.

Here is the deal: Last year at ACC meeting the bigs got to hear what accn wanted WHO HAD HEARD WHAT THE TV GUYS WANTED - make programs way better tv product, get eyes watching accn - dont sit around and expect tv cash cow to keep going.

Since Gt has done many very good things. However in advace of the meeting the studs of conference resent the lack of effort by the scrubs. Now our bigs are hearing from TV guys - dont expect the full payment - repeat we ant got the cash. So make deals to keep"" Some % of current TV money.

Getting SMU would be a plus for me due to family.
By way people in Texas dislike the uppity UT grads.
They are always acting like they are elite.

We must sacrafice some $$ now to widen our appeal.
 

UgaBlows

Helluva Engineer
Messages
7,000
You’re right. I don’t have an answer for that.

But any eyes on SMU are taking away eyes from ESPN/Longhorn Network. Net net … I don’t see any reason for ESPN to encourage this at the expense of a loss of viewers to Longhorn.
It doesn’t even matter about people watching SMU or not, there are likely (maybe?) millions of homes in that Dallas/Fort Worth tv market that already have the ACC network as part of their subscription (whether they want it or not) potentially if SMU became a ACC team then the cost for that channel would automatically ncrease substantially for every single one of them.
 

Vespidae

Helluva Engineer
Messages
5,339
Location
Auburn, AL
It doesn’t even matter about people watching SMU or not, there are likely (maybe?) millions of homes in that Dallas/Fort Worth tv market that already have the ACC network as part of their subscription (whether they want it or not) potentially if SMU became a ACC team then the cost for that channel would automatically ncrease substantially for every single one of them.
Outki values an in state team at $1/mo. If it’s on cable. But also noted that ESPN is losing 3.5M subs a year.

Nothing is certain.
 

Northeast Stinger

Helluva Engineer
Messages
11,129
Yes, let's look at things objectively:

1. You have members of a conference (the ACC) that have openly said their conference media contract is untenable to compete with their national "peers":



2. You have what is arguably the ACC's biggest brand openly saying they want out because they can't compete with the money the ACC can afford to pay out. They won't get out any time soon, but the tea leaves are telling everyone as soon as they find a way out they're gone. This is from FSU's school president, NOT some AD tossing media bombs. At this point it's saber rattling from FSU, but as the GOR end date gets closer, it's pretty much a promise...especially for the ACC schools that are targets for other conferences.




3. You have the two biggest conferences (SEC and B1G) in open expansion to secure their position as the kings of college sports. One conference (the B1G) has well known national aspirations. What's the only region they're not in at the moment? The Southeast. Which conference has multiple "like minded" schools in a region the B1G has made it known they want to be in? The ACC. Which conference has teams (UVE, UNC) that are well known to have been past targets of the SEC? The ACC. Which conference has members openly complaining about distributions because they can't compete with teams from the B1G and SEC? The ACC. Which conference has no chance to increase member distributions to compete with the two largest conferences? The ACC.


This isn't emotional "whining and moaning"...it's reading the tea leaves and understanding the reality on the horizon once the GOR ends for the ACC.

I would go further to say that anyone who doesn't see the end of the ACC coming is irrationally burying their head in the sand and ignoring all the signs that the ACC is not going survive in its current state once the GOR ends (or a member finds a legal way out). Will the ACC live on after the GOR ends? Yes, but in name only...certainly not as the ACC we know today.

I think what lends merit to your tea leaf prognostication is the fact that nobody on this site has any confidence at all that the leadership of the ACC will act proactively to strengthen the conference. The stand pat and do nothing approach insures that, in light of the magnificent 7 bellyaching, the conference will lose prestige, support and money. The hemorrhaging of good will between conference members should be stopped asap by showing that the leadership has a plan. But, to repeat, nobody on this thread or this site has any confidence that things are going to get better.

The sad thing is that it doesn’t have to be this way. It doesn’t have to turn out this way. But this slow motion car crash continues.
 

MusicalBuzz

Jolly Good Fellow
Messages
226
Fourth, college football's audience demo will start to impact it by the mid 2030's if not sooner. According to one Nielson study, college football has an older viewership (44% of viewers over 55) than some other major US sports and also lacks diversity (82% white, only NASCAR and PGA had higher percentages). In a country that is likely to be majority-minority in the next 15 years that is not great. A second Nielson study showed that while on 34% of 35-45 yr olds did not consider themselves college football fans, 43% of 18-34 yr olds do not consider themselves college football fans

With apologies after your many great articles and perspectives here, but there’s a lot of broad stroke extrapolations, or missing context, here.

Race: The US is majority white, especially depending how the demographic is sliced — 82% isn’t necessarily so unreasonable.

And even by percentages — if we assume, say, Hispanic population — and assuming this group is not an expected CFB fan and is not the “white” group — is growing disproportionately.. it doesn’t really matter as long as the core group of expected viewers holds fast

Age: what’s missing is application of the percent of the country the respective age groups; baby boomers and the generation are current bigly so I would expect a higher percentage of viewers heee

Groups: I don’t care so much what 34-45 care as a metric today; but with how varies to 10 / 20 years ago. I wouldn’t have necessarily called myself a CFB fan at 35, either.

Possibly a factor in future of CFB viewership is the impact of expected viewers over next 30yrs, eg those currently 40-60 yrs old, who become disillusioned by the corporatization, money-grabbing — even the cost of viewing — and breakdown of traditional alignment of CFB.
 

Vespidae

Helluva Engineer
Messages
5,339
Location
Auburn, AL
I think what lends merit to your tea leaf prognostication is the fact that nobody on this site has any confidence at all that the leadership of the ACC will act proactively to strengthen the conference. The stand pat and do nothing approach insures that, in light of the magnificent 7 bellyaching, the conference will lose prestige, support and money. The hemorrhaging of good will between conference members should be stopped asap by showing that the leadership has a plan. But, to repeat, nobody on this thread or this site has any confidence that things are going to get better.

The sad thing is that it doesn’t have to be this way. It doesn’t have to turn out this way. But this slow motion car crash continues.
It probably does. The ACC is a collection of schools with average to below average attendance. South Carolina exited and joined the SEC. The fact is, the ACC has limited appeal beyond a few schools. Should they be more aggressive? Yes. But athletics is not a priority for most of the ACC schools.
 

Techster

Helluva Engineer
Messages
18,388
I think what lends merit to your tea leaf prognostication is the fact that nobody on this site has any confidence at all that the leadership of the ACC will act proactively to strengthen the conference. The stand pat and do nothing approach insures that, in light of the magnificent 7 bellyaching, the conference will lose prestige, support and money. The hemorrhaging of good will between conference members should be stopped asap by showing that the leadership has a plan. But, to repeat, nobody on this thread or this site has any confidence that things are going to get better.

The sad thing is that it doesn’t have to be this way. It doesn’t have to turn out this way. But this slow motion car crash continues.

If you look at the viewership chart, the top 4 ACC teams are (in order of most average viewers):

1. FSU
2. Clemson
3. Miami
4. Louisville

Let's look at the pattern of what's happened to this point that's changed the landscape.

1. Texas and OU going to the SEC
2. USC and UCLA going to the B1G

It's well known that the B1G covets FSU and/or Miami for the exploding Florida market. Clemson is also an expansion target. Anyone here have any faith that the ACC will keep the top 3 members of the ACC in terms of viewership? What happened when the PAC12 and BIG12 lost their respective "biggest brands"? The PAC12 is all but dead with all 4 members remaining, and two are openly talking to other conferences. The Big12 had to take a reduced media payout, but they were smart enough to add some nice pieces in terms of markets and programs with upside. Their bigger paydays will come on the next contract.

So what happens to the ACC when (there's no "ifs" here) FSU, Clemson, and Miami all bolt? There are ZERO programs left on the national landscape that can back fill the viewership that the ACC will lose when those programs bolt. If anyone doesn't think they'll bolt when the Death Star B1G or SEC comes knocking with their $100 million+ annual payout, well those programs are much smarter than GT leadership back in 2012/2013. It's likely UNC is gone as well as they've been holding off the B1G and SEC for decades...but when the media distribution shrinks in 2036 because our most watched members will want to join the club of the "haves", UNC won't be able to hold out any longer if they want to sustain their "blueblood" status. ACC won't be able to command the dollars that the Big12/SEC/B1G command, and the ACC most likely loses Louisville/VT/NC State/Syracuse/possibly GT to the Big12 because the ACC media value will crater without the "brand" ACC programs.

IMO, the ACC's last chance at viability would have been working something out with the remaining PAC12 members years ago. Trying to fill in the geographical gap with a Texas school like UHouston or Baylor would have been a good move. The PAC 12 schools remaining after USC and UCLA bolted REALLY REALLY tried to stick together, and that was the ACC's chance to capitalize. Unfortunately, ACC shuffled about until most of the remaining PAC12 schools found other homes.

I grew up watching GT in the ACC. I was born well after GT left the SEC so I have no recollection of any of the SEC battles GT had. The ACC is all I've known in terms of GT fandom. You're right, it is VERY sad what's going on. However, that's the nature of business. You either adjust, or die. GT stayed in the ACC for sentimental reasons in 2012/2013, and we may have sealed our fate at that time.

**Something else I touched on earlier in this thread that's interesting to ponder. Would the ACC have survived had GT moved to the B1G in 2012? Atlanta's media market carriage fees probably formed a big part of the ACC's valuation at the time. Had GT moved to the B1G, would that have precipitated other schools to move as well given the ACC no longer could have capitalized on carriage fees of Atlanta and GT? Interesting how GT is central to the ACC's future in one shape or another.
 
Last edited:

Roswellgoldmember

Georgia Tech Fan
Messages
98
If you look at the viewership chart, the top 4 ACC teams are (in order of most average viewers):

1. FSU
2. Clemson
3. Miami
4. Louisville

Let's look at the pattern of what's happened to this point that's changed the landscape.

1. Texas and OU going to the SEC
2. USC and UCLA going to the B1G

It's well known that the B1G covets FSU and/or Miami for the exploding Florida market. Clemson is also an expansion target. Anyone here have any faith that the ACC will keep the top 3 members of the ACC in terms of viewership? What happened when the PAC12 and BIG12 lost their respective "biggest brands"? The PAC12 is all but dead with all 4 members remaining, and two are openly talking to other conferences. The Big12 had to take a reduced media payout, but they were smart enough to add some nice pieces in terms of markets and programs with upside. Their bigger paydays will come on the next contract.

So what happens to the ACC when (there's no "ifs" here) FSU, Clemson, and Miami all bolt? There are ZERO programs left on the national landscape that can back fill the viewership that the ACC will lose when those programs bolt. If anyone doesn't think they'll bolt when the Death Star B1G or SEC comes knocking with their $100 million+ annual payout, well those programs are much smarter than GT leadership back in 2012/2013. It's likely UNC is gone as well as they've been holding off the B1G and SEC for decades...but when the media distribution shrinks in 2036 because our most watched members will want to join the club of the "haves", UNC won't be able to hold out any longer if they want to sustain their "blueblood" status. ACC won't be able to command the dollars that the Big12/SEC/B1G command, and the ACC most likely loses Louisville/VT/NC State/Syracuse/possibly GT to the Big12 because the ACC media value will crater without the "brand" ACC programs.

IMO, the ACC's last chance at viability would have been working something out with the remaining PAC12 members years ago. Trying to fill in the geographical gap with a Texas school like UHouston or Baylor would have been a good move. The PAC 12 schools remaining after USC and UCLA bolted REALLY REALLY tried to stick together, and that was the ACC's chance to capitalize. Unfortunately, ACC shuffled about until most of the remaining PAC12 schools found other homes.

I grew up watching GT in the ACC. I was born well after GT left the SEC so I have no recollection of any of the SEC battles GT had. The ACC is all I've known in terms of GT fandom. You're right, it is VERY sad what's going on. However, that's the nature of business. You either adjust, or die. GT stayed in the ACC for sentimental reasons in 2012/2013, and we may have sealed our fate at that time.

**Something else I touched on earlier in this thread that's interesting to ponder. Would the ACC have survived had GT moved to the B1G in 2012? Atlanta's media market carriage fees probably formed a big part of the ACC's valuation at the time. Had GT moved to the B1G, would that have precipitated other schools to move as well given the ACC no longer could have capitalized on carriage fees of Atlanta and GT? Interesting how GT is central to the ACC's future in one shape or another.
It’s not well know that the BIG covets FSU or the SEC for that matter. Maybe/Probably they do but FSU doesn’t fully fit either conferences traditional expansion criteria.
 

Techster

Helluva Engineer
Messages
18,388
It’s not well know that the BIG covets FSU or the SEC for that matter. Maybe/Probably they do but FSU doesn’t fully fit either conferences traditional expansion criteria.

Yes, it's quite well known the B1G covets FSU. Probably one of the worst secrets in college sports at the moment. The B1G isn't getting involved because of the GOR so it's up to FSU to figure it out. Do you think FSU is making this stink because they're praying the SEC or B1G takes them? Anyone making a stink as big as FSU most likely knows they missing out but can't legally get out of their current situation.
 
Top