Conference Realignment

[Root4GT]

The ACC for decades was the premier basketball conference. No one complained about conference dominance, media bias, or conspiracy then. Well, a little.

Clemson, a few years ago, was a dominating football program. But Dabo made the call to abstain from NIL and the portal. That’s a self inflicted wound. FSU and Miami in the 1990s, likewise. Self-inflicted.

Birmingham AL is the number one television market in the country for college football. Chapel Hill, Charlottesville, and Syracuse are rounding errors.

Check out Pareto. Yes, the data is skewed. But it’s predictably skewed. Hardwringing isn’t going to change that. Alabama is what, a $150 million program. In five years, it will be $250 million. It’s the same thing that happened to the NFL. Everyone today loves KC … and few remember Pottsville.

I grew up in Alabama. My old gf was a member of the Bryant tribe. It is inconceivable that Bama will yield to anything other than being Number One. Or die trying. The money machine is massive. Massive.

If the ACC wants to be relevant, it has to manage itself to relevance. But, when they had it … in basketball … they successfully managed themselves into irrelevance. Not a great strategy.

The ACC prioritized football over basketball in expansion as that is where the dollars are. The result was basketball became watered down, Then the legendary coaches, Pitno, Boeheim, Coach K and Williams all retired/left. Hard to replace 4 all time great coaches in a 4 year span.

 

[Vespidae]

I don't completely disagree with you, but when Clemson was winning two out of three national championships it did basically nothing for the ACC or it's perception. In fact we had to listen to idiots like Finebaum talk about how Clemson is built like an SEC team.

Finebaum works for the SEC Network. He‘s not objective and has said so.

Clemson IS built like an SEC team. Large following, effective fundraising, strong administrative support. The key point is, Clemson made a decision that athletics were important and funded it. I commend them.

 

[Vespidae]

The ACC prioritized football over basketball in expansion as that is where the dollars are. The result was basketball became watered down, Then the legendary coaches, Pitno, Boeheim, Coach K and Williams all retired/left. Hard to replace 4 all time great coaches in a 4 year span.

I don’t disagree but that’s a big bet. The world is littered with companies that try to expand outside of what they are good at. McDonalds’s Pizza?

I recall being back stage at a Tech basketball game about 6 years ago. Coaches were talking about the cost of the bus trip, eating to go meals, and minimizing expenses … it wasn’t just being good spending money, it was painful frugality. Hard to get good at anything when you are spread so thin.

 

[orientalnc]

I think most agree with you that the SEC has been the most successful conference in the past. What bugs many is the assumption, before rosters are assembled, that they will continue to be so dominant that everyone else is an afterthought.

 

[Root4GT]

I think most agree with you that the SEC has been the most successful conference in the past. What bugs many is the assumption, before rosters are assembled, that they will continue to be so dominant that everyone else is an afterthought.

The issue is how much do average college football fans know about other conferences? Most it's not much. GT fans are obsessed with the SEC due to our history with them and Georgia being so good.

Most GT fans have very limited knowledge of the Pac 12, the Big 12 or the B1G past Ohio State and Michigan.

Media and sports talk has 24/7 to fill. The NFL takes up the majority of the National Coverage. College football becomes big in the fall and the top teams are the conversation. It's easy to see the SEC has won 15 of the BCS or CFP championships. It is also easy to see the top SEC teams put the most players in the NFL, Ohio State is on par. Those are easy talking points and they resonate Nationally.

When Clemson won 2 NCs and was in 4 straight CFPs they were a National topic. They dropped off the Nation scene as they quit winning big time. The were the ACC in football. If FSU goes 11-1 they will be big news this year.

 

[Vespidae]

I think most agree with you that the SEC has been the most successful conference in the past. What bugs many is the assumption, before rosters are assembled, that they will continue to be so dominant that everyone else is an afterthought.

If I recall, Dodd was super successful at Tech but he went in waves … 3-8, 7-4, 10-1, 11-0. Lots of development. Many of the SEC teams recruit deep and have a lot of returning production. It’s not good or bad, just a different model. They have the money and resources to do it.

I suppose you can do it a number of different ways, but you can’t deny the consistency of any program, SEC or not, if they can maintain it. Vandy is SEC and sucks.

 

[WreckinGT]

Finebaum works for the SEC Network. He‘s not objective and has said so.

Clemson IS built like an SEC team. Large following, effective fundraising, strong administrative support. The key point is, Clemson made a decision that athletics were important and funded it. I commend them.

Clemson is not built like an SEC team. They are built like a great team. Or at least were a great team. Those aren't the same thing and the majority of teams in the SEC are not great teams. Most aren't even good teams.

 

[Vespidae]

Clemson is not built like an SEC team. They are built like a great team. Or at least were a great team. Those aren't the same thing and the majority of teams in the SEC are not great teams. Most aren't even good teams.

Splitting hairs. The SEC has a long history of big, dominating lines, a strong running game and depth. That, until the last few years, was an expected line of play. Vandy, MS State, and other bottom feeders are not illustrative of typical SEC play because they can’t recruit to that model.

So to your point, Clemson could compete to the top of the SEC with its approach to the game. Makes sense. Dabo graduated and coached in the SEC.

 

[leatherneckjacket]

Birmingham exceeds Houston for CFB. In the car, but will get the most recent figures.

https://footballscoop.com/archive-news/eight-of-the-country-s-top-11-college-football-tv-markets-are-in-the-south

Huh? Birmingham has 200K residents. An 8.9 rating implies 10 million households. It is impossible that these numbers are correct .

 

[Vespidae]

Huh? Birmingham has 200K residents. An 8.9 rating implies 10 million households. It is impossible that these numbers are correct .

The BHAM metro area “was 1,180,631, making it the 50th largest metropolitan statistical area in the United States as of that date.”

BHAM subscribers extend to the northern part of the state. A large percentage of that follow CFB. 538 breaks it down by school and by county.

 

[orientalnc]

BIRMINGHAM (ANNISTON AND TUSCALOOSA) DMA is number 45 Designated Market Area in United States, as ranked by Nielsen as of 2024, TV Household population of 696,380 and an average income $40,818 and a median income $40,041.

 

[orientalnc]

BIRMINGHAM (ANNISTON AND TUSCALOOSA) DMA is number 45 Designated Market Area in United States, as ranked by Nielsen as of 2024, TV Household population of 696,380 and an average income $40,818 and a median income $40,041.

It could be the poorest TV market in the top 50, especially if you pull Mountain Brook and Vestavia Hills.

 

[RonJohn]

Birmingham exceeds Houston for CFB. In the car, but will get the most recent figures.

https://footballscoop.com/archive-news/eight-of-the-country-s-top-11-college-football-tv-markets-are-in-the-south

I don't think this means what you seem to be insinuating that it means. It says that Birmingham had to top viewership rating of all markets. It does not say that anybody made more profit in Birmingham than anywhere else. Birmingham had an 8.9 rating, but is a small market of around 650-700k TV households. That means that somewhere around 60,000 people in Birmingham watched college football. Houston has almost 2.5 million TV households. In actual numbers, instead of rating, Houston could have rating of 2.5 and still have the same number of viewers. (Atlanta is very similar)

It also doesn't include Fox, CBS, or NBC. Fox would have probably driven up numbers in Big10 areas. CBS would have driven up numbers even higher in SEC areas. NBC might not have has much of an impact. While they carry ND, the audience would be spread around and not concentrated.

In short, this does not even remotely mean that Birmingham is more profitable for college football than other cities. In fact, going by this list without the rating numbers for each city, it would appear that Atlanta is the most profitable for ESPN college football. It is 7th on your list of ratings in market, and 9th as far as size of the market. The Atlanta market is almost four times as big as Birmingham which, as I posted for Houston, could have a rating as low as 2.5 and still have as many viewers as Birmingham. Rating without market size is a meaningless number.

EDIT: One other thing to note. The story states that "SEC-centric markets littered the top five...". People have been complaining that ESPN heavily over-markets the SEC, and panders to them. That causes the market for the product to be heavily regionalized. That isn't necessarily a positive for ESPN. I am sure ESPN wants a national audience, not one of only Southern viewers. I think it is highly likely that the next round of SEC expansion will be concentrated outside the South, which could be bad news for FSU. I think ESPN will be pushing for them to cater to a national audience, and not concentrate more in an area that they already get good ratings.

 

[RonJohn]

Huh? Birmingham has 200K residents. An 8.9 rating implies 10 million households. It is impossible that these numbers are correct .

8.9 rating is percentage of households in the market that watch, not millions of viewers.

 

[orientalnc]

Huh? Birmingham has 200K residents. An 8.9 rating implies 10 million households. It is impossible that these numbers are correct .

The Birmingham DMA covers most of north Alabama. A lot bigger than the city.

 

[Vespidae]

BIRMINGHAM (ANNISTON AND TUSCALOOSA) DMA is number 45 Designated Market Area in United States, as ranked by Nielsen as of 2024, TV Household population of 696,380 and an average income $40,818 and a median income $40,041.

BHAM yes. But the TV market is larger than Jefferson. I don’t live in Columbus, but I’m part of that MSA. Doesnt matter. Check the ESPN ratings. I’m pretty sure BHAM is the number one CFB market and Columbus OH is two. I haven’t checked in a while so I won’t debate updated numbers.

I lived out west and tbh, nobody cared about CFB. Zero. By comparison.

 

[orientalnc]

BHAM yes. But the TV market is larger than Jefferson.

I agree the DMA is most of N Alabama, but Jefferson County is where the bulk of that population lives.

I have my MBA from UAB and spent almost ten years there, so it's almost a second hometown.

 

[slugboy]

100%. It’s Fox v ESPN now. Conferences are increasingly irrelevant. It’s matchups now. That’s the game.

Would be nice to see CBS or even NBC enter the fray. Wishful thinking

 

[stinger 1957]

Looks to me like SEC needs new money mkts which means expanding into places like NC and VA, maybe KC and PA. The more I look at Clemson and FSU the more it looks like Big 12 for them, I just do not think they bring what SEC/ESPN desperately need. They made a good move with the state of TX, not sure how much over long run OK brings, time will tell.

 

[Northeast Stinger]

Interesting read as to how the SEC rose to prominence. The article suggests it was a combination of luck and timing. Several good points are made to back that up.

A couple of things are left out, in my opinion. First, even though the B1G has won more championships than the SEC, the gap closed fast after the SEC and ESPN made a TV deal. I don’t think that is entirely coincidental.

Second, after the SEC got its *** kicked in several nationally televised intersectional games in the 70s, the SEC began their campaign of “we are the best.” The campaign would go through several iterations such as “SEC speed” and, 8 years ago, “It just means more,” but the campaign was relentless and never lost sight of the goal. Part of that goal was to suggest that every team in the SEC was stronger because of conference competition. “If we lose, it is because we beat each other up.” When the SEC began this campaign they were probably the 3rd strongest conference. But, 30 years later, it finally paid off. The beauty of the campaign is that it seems to influence both humans and computers into believing the conference is strong top to bottom. A Clemson or an FSU generally has more to prove because humans and computers believe they are anomalies within a weak conference. They are always considered a one off event and any loss for them is devastating for national rankings whereas not so much for a top rated SEC team.

Having waged a successful campaign for decades, and then finally turning the corner, the SEC now has the very real advantage of attracting the best recruits, the best coaches, and the best TV contracts. But this was not always the case, and never inevitable. Money, resources and an outstanding PR campaign made the difference. A lesson the ACC has yet to learn.