Lifted from VT CR board | Page 2 | The Boneyard

Lifted from VT CR board

Status
Not open for further replies.

caw

Joined
Aug 26, 2011
Messages
6,978
Reaction Score
12,247
How is FSU stuck? According to Frank the Tank: "Florida State hits virtually every metric that the Big Ten is looking for long-term; football power, growing population and massive TV markets."

Probably the geography?
 
Joined
Aug 26, 2011
Messages
4,070
Reaction Score
11,661
I don't think that's too far-fetched a scenario given that there are currently people making millions a year playing video games on YouTube.

Maybe not in five or ten years, but I can definitely see a day where even a school like UConn says f--- it and puts their home content on their own platform.

You think 100,000 people would spend $9.95 a month if that's what it took to see UConn home games in every sport?

Probably.
Back in the '70s the Rasmussen family had this idea of starting a cable network to broadcast Whalers games & all UCONN sports. That little start up in Bristol morphed into one of Disney's most profitable arms.
 
Joined
Aug 13, 2013
Messages
8,406
Reaction Score
7,935
The WVU butt hurt braying donkeys of twitterdom have been predicting the demise of the ACC for some time.

All of this nittering based on having or not having a network. The kooks, as we know them on our boards, are the equivalent of the true believers who nail signs to trees about the end being near and stand on street corners bellowing "repent".

With the large population footprint of the conference, with a solid presence in ESPN's top metered markets, as long as there is an ESPN, the ACC will be there. There are current changing circumstances and technology and the ACC/ESPN will have to adjust to those circumstances.

As the GOR nears, the question is.."will anyone want the content of the conference?". ESPN has proven that they do...the original ACC contract was the largest at the time, set the bar, and ESPN has bumped it up since. The exposure of the conference is very good. I think that the next contract will be fine. ESPN and the ACC are, inexorably, tied hand to hand as business partners.

It's just a matter of time...IMHO..when the business climate allows.

According to Georgia Tech president G.P. “Bud” Peterson (via the Atlanta Journal-Constitution), ESPN — which has been in talks with the ACC to partner up on a conference network — asked to delay plans so that further preparations could be made.

“(ESPN) had come back and said that in some of the other instances where (conference) networks have started, they lost considerable amounts of money in the first couple of years,” Peterson said at a quarterly board meeting for the Georgia Tech Athletic Association. “What they’d like to do is delay the start for a couple years and do the necessary preparation.”
 
Joined
Aug 27, 2011
Messages
694
Reaction Score
1,573
I still think VT and UConn are the ideal next move for the B1G. I think VT would have to pull a Maryland and breach some contracts for this to happen. This combination loses its appeal if the B1G is content to wait until the ACC contracts expire by their terms. UVA is the better school but VT is no slouch, especially in science/engineering.
 
Joined
Aug 13, 2013
Messages
8,406
Reaction Score
7,935
If Delaney wants UConn....it would seem to be tied into the new B1G contract negotiations this spring if it is going to happen in the near future.

The Big Ten contract will set a new bar, it will be the latest...And although a sports financial analyst says that the market is not as "frothy" as before, he expects a major increase. Everything that Delaney has been doing for the last number of years has been building up to this negotiation (expansion, divisions, CCG).

If Delaney is shopping further expansion as a contract enhancement, we should be hearing about it in the next year or so.
 
Joined
Nov 10, 2014
Messages
416
Reaction Score
2,933
The ACC is not going away. It will always exist in some form. Basic maths shows there are more P5 teams than their are spots in the BIG/SEC.

The better questions is whether ACC teams who have opportunities in the BIG/SEC will eventually depart. If a Big12 network was formed would that provide another opportunity to make more money for ACC teams? Those are reasonable questions

Questioning the long term stability of the ACC does not make one a kook. In fact, the only kooks are the people who do not want to recognize the world is changing and instead pretend to say "all is well." The ACC is not at the same financial level as the BIG or SEC. People who are emotional attached to the ACC may not want to hear it but that does not change the reality

ESPN does want ACC content and it is valuable. But ESPN does not want to pay BIG/SEC money for it by forming an ACCN ...ESPN does not need more time to examine an ACCN...they already know they are not building one
 

pj

Joined
Mar 30, 2012
Messages
8,597
Reaction Score
24,930
I can definitely see a day where even a school like UConn says f--- it and puts their home content on their own platform.

You think 100,000 people would spend $9.95 a month if that's what it took to see UConn home games in every sport?

Probably.

Unfortunately it has to attract a lot more revenue than that to be worthwhile. That's $12 million per year. TV production costs for "every sport" would be more, so it wouldn't be profitable. (I saw a report that Missouri's travel costs in the SEC were $7-8 mn per year. It costs more to produce TV than to move a team to and from a game.)
 

pj

Joined
Mar 30, 2012
Messages
8,597
Reaction Score
24,930
I could see the B1G and SEC getting into North Carolina and Virginia (say, splitting UNC/NC State and UVa/Va Tech), Texas and Oklahoma going Pac with TTech and Ok State, and the remaining ACC and B12 merging to create the runt of the P4.
 

whaler11

Head Happy Hour Coach
Joined
Aug 27, 2011
Messages
44,376
Reaction Score
68,269
Unfortunately it has to attract a lot more revenue than that to be worthwhile. That's $12 million per year. TV production costs for "every sport" would be more, so it wouldn't be profitable. (I saw a report that Missouri's travel costs in the SEC were $7-8 mn per year. It costs more to produce TV than to move a team to and from a game.)

Some sort of partner would have to exist to produce the games and deliver the content. Like how IMG has individual contracts with schools - I would imagine a few partners would be available.

You are right 100,000 subscribers wouldn't be anywhere near enough, and it won't be viable for more than maybe 25-30 programs. But at some point I'd guess those 25-30 programs will need to stay whole if the cable money shrinks and this might be their only option.
 
Joined
Dec 25, 2011
Messages
7,188
Reaction Score
8,765
How is FSU stuck? According to Frank the Tank: "Florida State hits virtually every metric that the Big Ten is looking for long-term; football power, growing population and massive TV markets."

I agree that FSU could be of interest to the B1G; but, they are not AAU (and further back for that 'standard' than UConn - as a sample US News has UConn at #57, V Tech at #70 and FSU at #96). In addition, while not a deal breaker, the fact that Florida is not remotely close contiguous to the B1G is an issue. Lastly, while their football team makes serious money, the school only offers 19 varsity sports where as the B1G on average offers 23 per college (Northwestern is the lowest at 18 while, and as a FYI, UConn offers offers 20). So, FSU would face some challenges in joining the B1G. That said, if the ACC does collapse, allowing the B1G to grab UVA, UNC, G Tech and maybe Duke, Florida St will likely join the B1G. If instead the XII collapses, the B1G will expand southwest instead of southeast and FSU will stay with the ACC.
 
Joined
Aug 2, 2013
Messages
1,975
Reaction Score
1,549
The ACC's problem is it's all print and no foot.

Also a large portion of the ACC footprint overlaps the footprints of the SEC and B1G. The ACC isn't the top conference for much of its footprint.
 
Joined
Sep 14, 2011
Messages
2,676
Reaction Score
6,257
Also a large portion of the ACC footprint overlaps the footprints of the SEC and B1G. The ACC isn't the top conference for much of its footprint.
Precisely. The ACC's target population, which our friend calls a "footprint," consists of a foot (either the SEC or B1G) and a print which is the ACC. And soon enough, the only substantial portion (North Carolina and Virginia) will enter the cross hairs of those big boy conferences.
 
Joined
Aug 13, 2013
Messages
8,406
Reaction Score
7,935
I'd say as many folks in Florida watch the combo of FSU and Miami as they do Florida...and South Carolina is split pretty near 50-50 on Clemson/South Carolina. Georgia owns their state. There are no ACC teams in Alabama, Mississippi, Louisiana, Arkansas, Mizzouri.

The ACC owns North Carolina and Virginia. Louisville and Kentucky will be pulling closer in splitting Kentucky football fans but Kentucky probably has the lead now.
 
Joined
Dec 14, 2012
Messages
1,064
Reaction Score
4,266
Unfortunately it has to attract a lot more revenue than that to be worthwhile. That's $12 million per year. TV production costs for "every sport" would be more, so it wouldn't be profitable. (I saw a report that Missouri's travel costs in the SEC were $7-8 mn per year. It costs more to produce TV than to move a team to and from a game.)

200,000 would be 24 million and make it more than viable.
We are a state of 3.5 million with avid alumni out of state, would that be a stretch? I don't know..
 
Joined
Sep 14, 2011
Messages
2,676
Reaction Score
6,257
I'd say as many folks in Florida watch the combo of FSU and Miami as they do Florida...and South Carolina is split pretty near 50-50 on Clemson/South Carolina. Georgia owns their state. There are no ACC teams in Alabama, Mississippi, Louisiana, Arkansas, Mizzouri.

The ACC owns North Carolina and Virginia. Louisville and Kentucky will be pulling closer in splitting Kentucky football fans but Kentucky probably has the lead now.
And when FSU/Miami aren't playing where do Floridians go for college football? The SEC or the ACC? Ditto for South Carolina. Ditto again for Kentucky. And we're one more realignment move away from saying ditto for North Carolina and Virginia.
 
Joined
Jan 15, 2014
Messages
1,154
Reaction Score
258
There is no data available that says Ohio, Michigan, Indiana, Iowa, Pennsylvania ie " the rust belt ", will be growing in population, influence, etc over the next 50 years. Quite the opposite as a matter of fact. All the data points to a loss of population, loss of influence, etc. Where is the population expected to grow in the country over the next 50 years ? Well, its not in the midwest. Its in the South, Southwest. The notion that the ACC league thus is going " to collapse ", or swallowed up by the " rust belt " midwest league is really going against all the data that is readily available to us as to where the population shifts, influence, leverage, etc will be happening over the next 50 years. ND is anything but stupid. They had a chance to join the Rust Belt Conference , but they see the same population data for the next 50 years as the rest of us.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Aug 2, 2013
Messages
1,975
Reaction Score
1,549
I'd say as many folks in Florida watch the combo of FSU and Miami as they do Florida...and South Carolina is split pretty near 50-50 on Clemson/South Carolina. Georgia owns their state. There are no ACC teams in Alabama, Mississippi, Louisiana, Arkansas, Mizzouri.

The ACC owns North Carolina and Virginia. Louisville and Kentucky will be pulling closer in splitting Kentucky football fans but Kentucky probably has the lead now.

So, by your own admission, the ACC only owns two states in its own footprint. That's not good, every other P5 owns more.

I also don't think the ACC will pull even in Kentucky, but even so, you're setting the bar pretty low there.
 
Joined
Aug 2, 2013
Messages
1,975
Reaction Score
1,549
There is no data available that says Ohio, Michigan, Indiana, Iowa, Pennsylvania ie " the rust belt ", will be growing in population, influence, etc over the next 50 years. Quite the opposite as a matter of fact. All the data points to a loss of population, loss of influence, etc. Where is the population expected to grow in the country over the next 50 years ? Well, its not in the midwest. Its in the South, Southwest. The notion that the ACC league is going " to collapse ", or swallowed up by the " rust belt " midwest league is really going against all the data that is readily available to us as to where the population shifts will be happening in the next 50 years.

Which might explain why the "rust belt" midwest league is expanding east. The ACC should be worried that the "rust belt" midwest league doesn't to it, what it did to the Big East.
 

MattMang23

Adding Nothing to the Conversation
Joined
Sep 21, 2011
Messages
5,150
Reaction Score
14,742
The state of Kentucky is an ACC state like we are a NEC state or a MAAC state- and we have two schools in either league.
 
Joined
Jan 15, 2014
Messages
1,154
Reaction Score
258
Which might explain why the "rust belt" midwest league is expanding east. The ACC should be worried that the "rust belt" midwest league doesn't to it, what it did to the Big East.
Even moving " east " ( to N.E., NJ, etc ) won't be all that great for the Big. Besides, the ACC proactively expanded both " east " and " south ", by adding Miami, BC, VT, Syracuse, Pitt, Louisville ( and ND from right in the center of the midwest ) under Swofford's tenure. Under Swofford, the ACC expanded north, south, east all along the Atlantic Coast all the way from Maine to the southern tip of Florida. The Big took Maryland & Rutgers by comparison. Not exactly a good comparison to what the ACC has done by contrast, imo. I'd say an unbiased view would say the ACC has done pretty well for itself in the musical chairs we call realignment. Plus, the league is stable now too. Look at the B12. Its a mess, with instabilty, infighting, acrimony galore. Its the B12 that might " collapse " imo... not the ACC.
 
Joined
Jun 11, 2013
Messages
1,448
Reaction Score
2,769
Even moving " east " ( to N.E., NJ, etc ) won't be all that great for the Big. Besides, the ACC proactively expanded both " east " and " south ", by adding Miami, BC, VT, Syracuse, Pitt, Louisville ( and ND from right in the center of the midwest ) under Swofford's tenure. Under Swofford, the ACC expanded north, south, east all along the Atlantic Coast all the way from Maine to the southern tip of Florida. The Big took Maryland & Rutgers by comparison. Not exactly a good comparison to what the ACC has done by contrast, imo. I'd say an unbiased view would say the ACC has done pretty well for itself in the musical chairs we call realignment. Plus, the league is stable now too. Look at the B12. Its a mess, with instabilty, infighting, acrimony galore. Its the B12 that might " collapse " imo... not the ACC.

I would welcome any collapse right now to reshuffle to who should be in a p5 and who should not. I doubt you feel the same. Cling on.
 
Joined
Aug 26, 2011
Messages
5,286
Reaction Score
9,284
Even moving " east " ( to N.E., NJ, etc ) won't be all that great for the Big. Besides, the ACC proactively expanded both " east " and " south ", by adding Miami, BC, VT, Syracuse, Pitt, Louisville ( and ND from right in the center of the midwest ) under Swofford's tenure. Under Swofford, the ACC expanded north, south, east all along the Atlantic Coast all the way from Maine to the southern tip of Florida. The Big took Maryland & Rutgers by comparison. Not exactly a good comparison to what the ACC has done by contrast, imo. I'd say an unbiased view would say the ACC has done pretty well for itself in the musical chairs we call realignment. Plus, the league is stable now too. Look at the B12. Its a mess, with instabilty, infighting, acrimony galore. Its the B12 that might " collapse " imo... not the ACC.
Ya, ACC is sitting pretty compared to the B1G. Swofford out-maneuvered Delaney every step of the way. :confused:
 
Joined
Sep 14, 2011
Messages
2,676
Reaction Score
6,257
There is no data available that says Ohio, Michigan, Indiana, Iowa, Pennsylvania ie " the rust belt ", will be growing in population, influence, etc over the next 50 years. Quite the opposite as a matter of fact. All the data points to a loss of population, loss of influence, etc. Where is the population expected to grow in the country over the next 50 years ? Well, its not in the midwest. Its in the South, Southwest. The notion that the ACC league thus is going " to collapse ", or swallowed up by the " rust belt " midwest league is really going against all the data that is readily available to us as to where the population shifts, influence, leverage, etc will be happening over the next 50 years. ND is anything but stupid. They had a chance to join the Rust Belt Conference , but they see the same population data for the next 50 years as the rest of us.
Your analysis conveniently ignores the elephant in the ACC's living room. The Northeast, which is where the B1G is moving has something north of 60 million souls. How long will it take for the South to increase it's population by, say, 360 million which, after the SEC peels off its 300 million leaves the necessary 60 million for the ACC? That's a really long time horizon. BCU might even win some conference games before that bet pays off.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Online statistics

Members online
71
Guests online
2,694
Total visitors
2,765

Forum statistics

Threads
155,799
Messages
4,032,043
Members
9,865
Latest member
Sad Tiger


Top Bottom