Non-Key Tweets | Page 847 | The Boneyard

Non-Key Tweets

blue93 said:
Here’s what I don’t understand about this anticpated break off of two super conferences: these teams won’t all be appointment television if there’s a break off of the P2.

For example, I’m absolutely watching a late season game between 9-0 FSU and 8-1 Clemson. I’m probably not watching them if they’re middling teams in a beefed up P2. I don’t have a dog in that fight, I watch when the stakes are high. Swap FSU/Clemson with whoever you want.

I don’t know how they maintain those ratings when the biggest brands are cannibalizing each other all year.
Expand ...
Yep! ‘The world needs ditch diggers Danny’.
 
CL82 said:
He is definitionally non-key. He and the dude are the reason this thread exists.
Expand ...
The two throw a hundred darts a day and so with that, some land and most do not.
 
.-.
Exit 4 said:
I was told by someone in the sports media rights pricing biz that espn still values the ACC content in a meaningful way. Proof will be in the pudding when that extension comes out.
Expand ...
Content costs going up at the same time revenues are flattish is not a recipe for success. Something needs to give and the ACC media rights extension is next up for negotiation. There was not one top 25 rated TV game that involved an ACC vs ACC matchup and the lowest 3 TV rated bowl games involving P5 schools had current ACC members BC, SMU, Syracuse, and Cal. Take out Clemson and FSU and the ACC media rights value drops considerably.
 
UConnJim said:
Content costs going up at the same time revenues are flattish is not a recipe for success. Something needs to give and the ACC media rights extension is next up for negotiation. There was not one top 25 rated TV game that involved an ACC vs ACC matchup and the lowest 3 TV rated bowl games involving P5 schools had current ACC members BC, SMU, Syracuse, and Cal. Take out Clemson and FSU and the ACC media rights value drops considerably.
Expand ...
Some are estimating that FSU/Clemson equate to 25-30% of the entire ACC tv value.
 
billybud said:
Maybe...or maybe just wishcasting....

TV viewing right now...50% is captured by only 18 teams...when you move that up to 40 or so, it's nearly the universe.

Only 10% of viewers from bottom 71 schools...

Expand ...


I think college athletics needs to be very careful with the assumption that the viewer market is locked into the top programs. First of all, 10% of the market is an enormous piece of the market. The goal is to grow markets. Second, a lot of college fans watch the big programs compete becuase they identify with college athletics through their own affiliation. That model is all being upended and probably will be factured. I think that when the day comes that the average college football fan views Alabama, Michigan, USC, etc. like the view the New England Patriots, as professional sports franchises, college football is in a lot of trouble.

I'm only one fan, but I was an avid college athletics fan. My viewership is way down and continues to decline. Am I alone?
 
uconndogs said:
I think college athletics needs to be very careful with the assumption that the viewer market is locked into the top programs. First of all, 10% of the market is an enormous piece of the market. The goal is to grow markets. Second, a lot of college fans watch the big programs compete becuase they identify with college athletics through their own affiliation. That model is all being upended and probably will be factured. I think that when the day comes that the average college football fan views Alabama, Michigan, USC, etc. like the view the New England Patriots, as professional sports franchises, college football is in a lot of trouble.

I'm only one fan, but I was an avid college athletics fan. My viewership is way down and continues to decline. Am I alone?
Expand ...
I think college football has the ability, perhaps even the likelihood, to get away with it and follow an NFL Lite model. The other sports not so much.
 
.-.
UConnJim said:
Content costs going up at the same time revenues are flattish is not a recipe for success. Something needs to give and the ACC media rights extension is next up for negotiation. There was not one top 25 rated TV game that involved an ACC vs ACC matchup and the lowest 3 TV rated bowl games involving P5 schools had current ACC members BC, SMU, Syracuse, and Cal. Take out Clemson and FSU and the ACC media rights value drops considerably.
Expand ...

We shall see. All will be clear when ESPN and the ACC settle on their extension. We all thought the B12 had modest value and yet they pulled off a nice contract.

Barring a twist in the ACC lawsuits that allows for a low cost exit (then yes schools will leave and the ACC contract will lose value), I think the ACC gets a decent contract which will defer the ultimate P2/P3 alignment to the mid 2030s.
 
Last edited:
Exit 4 said:
We shall see. All will be clear when ESPN and the ACC settle on their extension. We all thought the B12 had modest value and yet they pulled off a nice contract.

Barring a twist in the ACC lawsuits that allows for a low cost exit (then yes schools will leave and the ACC contract will lose value), I think the ACC gets a decent contract which will defer the ultimate P2/P3 alignment to the mid 2030s.
Expand ...
You disagree without Clemson and FSU that the media rights at probably 30% less? This was like when B12 lost Texas and OU.
 
MHver3@MHver3
·
23h
My contact is saying a straw poll is currently being conducted to see how much support there is for adding Pac2. WVU is a no.


MHver3@MHver3
·
23h
WVU, Cincy, UCF, OkSU, and Kansas are currently “no” votes on the first straw poll. None of those 5 are a hard no though. More information needed. Board meeting informally to discuss with consultants.


MHver3@MHver3
·
22h
So espn actually has to pay less to add Pac2 to B12 vs adding to ACC. ACC currently shopping for more additions anticipating multiple defections and needing to stay at 14 to keep ESPN deal from getting restructured.



MHver3@MHver3
WVU and a few other B12 schools offering the following counter-proposal to BY today :

MHver3@MHver3
·
9h
B12 enters a scheduling alliance with Pac2 in 2025. If ratings are satisfactory then an invitation to join would be extended with entrance fee requirements and a graduated buy in. Wouldn’t be a full share member until next tv contract.


MHver3@MHver3
·
9h
Pac2 halts all legal disputes with networks during this “evaluation period”

MHver3@MHver3
·
9h
The “entrance fee” would be used to offset travel costs for the expanded geographical footprint.

MHver3@MHver3
·
9h
Pac2 relinquishes ownership of PAC assets to B12 as a condition of joining the conference. This includes all monies, media infrastructure, and intellectual property


MHver3@MHver3
·
9h
B12 CEOs would need to approve a provision that if the conference expands again there will be at least 2 additions east of the Mississippi River

MHver3@MHver3
·
54m
ESPN looking to once again block Apple and Amazon from power4 content. Pac2 absorption by B12 would create extra inventory. ESPN now offering to partner with B12 to create a conference network and secure carriage.

MHver3@MHver3
·
47m
K-State and Iowa St changed their stance on the additions to a soft “no”. BY is telling the network there is a path to unanimous support but it’s going to take time and negotiation with all 3 parties.


MHver3
@MHver3
·
48m
Full steam ahead though on starting talks with Pac2 for a 2025 scheduling agreement.


MHver3@MHver3
45m
BY and B12 not looking to make a hair trigger decision. There is majority support for the pac2 additions but 2 extra mouths to feed in the west when the focus is on the east means this is not going to be rushed.


MHver3@MHver3
·
40m
B12 partnering with espn on a network for the extra inventory has risks. Start up costs would be low due to PACN existing infrastructure but up front revenue would be lower than just selling off the content. Long term potential revenue could outweigh risks.
 
billybud said:
Maybe...or maybe just wishcasting....

TV viewing right now...50% is captured by only 18 teams...when you move that up to 40 or so, it's nearly the universe.

Only 10% of viewers from bottom 71 schools...

Expand ...

I think it’s worth knowing what the total number of viewers actually is. Potentially losing 10% of viewers by dropping those bottom schools could still be a rather significant number of viewers.
 
Greedo said:
I think it’s worth knowing what the total number of viewers actually is. Potentially losing 10% of viewers by dropping those bottom schools could still be a rather significant number of viewers.
Expand ...

Believe me...a business will plan on focusing on where 90% of the business revenue comes from...

And..I'll bet the ad revenue is not 90%-10%....the ad revenue may not be proportionate to viewing but be weighted to
heavy viewing,

When you have 97,000 watching Memphis-UAB and and 5.3 million watching Penn State-Ohio State the same Saturday...Memphis-UAB is not worth worrying with,
 
.-.
billybud said:
Believe me...a business will plan on focusing on where 90% of the business revenue comes from...

And..I'll bet the ad revenue is not 90%-10%....the ad revenue may not be proportionate to viewing but be weighted to
heavy viewing,

When you have 97,000 watching Memphis-UAB and and 5.3 million watching Penn State-Ohio State the same Saturday...Memphis-UAB is not worth worrying with,
Expand ...

First, a 10% loss of market share would be very significant and greatly impact media contracts. I’m not saying there is going to be a 10% loss, but for the purpose of this discussion the impact of something of that magnitude needs to be recognized.

Also, the issue is not the draw of Memphis-UAB, the issue is the impact on the viewership of PSU-Ohio State. Does all the change in college football including an eventually segregated P2 of the Big and SEC disenfranchise a significant portion of college football viewership? The underlying assumption around much of conference realignment is that viewership holds and even increases. I question whether that critical assumption is correct.
 
A
uconndogs said:
First, a 10% loss of market share would be very significant and greatly impact media contracts. I’m not saying there is going to be a 10% loss, but for the purpose of this discussion the impact of something of that magnitude needs to be recognized.

Also, the issue is not the draw of Memphis-UAB, the issue is the impact on the viewership of PSU-Ohio State. Does all the change in college football including an eventually segregated P2 of the Big and SEC disenfranchise a significant portion of college football viewership? The underlying assumption around much of conference realignment is that viewership holds and even increases. I question whether that critical assumption is correct.
Expand ...
Anybody who believes there be a drop off watching the biggest college games is delusional. No one in the past was watching G5 games and in the future no one will be still watching those games. I did not attend Alabama nor Georgia but will still watch that game on a Saturday afternoon. Watch UMass vs UConn - No.
 
uconndogs said:
First, a 10% loss of market share would be very significant and greatly impact media contracts. I’m not saying there is going to be a 10% loss, but for the purpose of this discussion the impact of something of that magnitude needs to be recognized.

Also, the issue is not the draw of Memphis-UAB, the issue is the impact on the viewership of PSU-Ohio State. Does all the change in college football including an eventually segregated P2 of the Big and SEC disenfranchise a significant portion of college football viewership? The underlying assumption around much of conference realignment is that viewership holds and even increases. I question whether that critical assumption is correct.
Expand ...
Who is being disenfranchised? What major areas would not be covered by the P2 + the Big12? Assuming UNC, UVA, VT, and Miami find a home somewhere in the P2+Big12 (along with FSU and Clemson), where are the holes? The North East. Thats it. All other regions are covered. Hopefully UConn finds a home and that would cover just about everywhere.
 
One has to wonder why 18 teams have captured, over a ten year period, 50 percent of viewers. Obviously, folks from “disenfranchised” programs are tuning in.

ESPN has been honest in admitting that they have put their eggs solidly in the SEC basket. The market is consolidating. No accident that the P12 is gone, that the ACC contract was not extended.
 
dayooper said:
Who is being disenfranchised? What major areas would not be covered by the P2 + the Big12? Assuming UNC, UVA, VT, and Miami find a home somewhere in the P2+Big12 (along with FSU and Clemson), where are the holes? The North East. Thats it. All other regions are covered. Hopefully UConn finds a home and that would cover just about everywhere.
Expand ...
Even the Northeast region is covered because it includes NJ and PA. New England may not be covered unless UConn or BCU get invited to the show. I don't think the powers that be care too much about New England though.
 
.-.
Kolumbo said:
Even the Northeast region is covered because it includes NJ and PA. New England may not be covered unless UConn or BCU get invited to the show. I don't think the powers that be care too much about New England though.
Expand ...
Yeah, Boston is a pretty big market, but it’s a pro sports town there ever was. Between the Red Socks, Celtics and Pats, I’m not sure college football even registers with them.
 
dayooper said:
Yeah, Boston is a pretty big market, but it’s a pro sports town there ever was. Between the Red Socks, Celtics and Pats, I’m not sure college football even registers with them.
Expand ...
Well, the Celtics, Patsies and Bruins at least. :cool:
 
Kolumbo said:
Well, the Celtics, Patsies and Bruins at least. :cool:
Expand ...
Not sure if you sarc was on, but you have to include the Sox as they annually average 2.5m fans a year and are always getting their fair share of talk radio.
 
dayooper said:
Who is being disenfranchised?
Expand ...

Me for one. But, addressing the topic more broadly - college football is likely going to be two super conferences of probably 40 programs which will dominate money and talent. This will be a professional sports franchise model.

Of the roughly 135 programs that participate in the current BCS format, how much of the total college football fan base continues to identify with college football? Does a BC, Syracuse, Baylor fan continue to be a broad based college football fan knowing they have no practical way of competing with two power conferences. Or worse, those two conferences break off from the NCAA altogether.

My point is simply this. Conference realignment may turn out to be a huge economic success for a much smaller group of programs. But, given all the change, I think there is a big assumption that current viewership will all be restrained, let alone grow.

I used to watch all my football in Saturdays, now it’s mostly Sundays. I can watch the best players in the world in the NFL. I used to watch college football for something much different.
 
.-.
You must log in or register to reply here.

Forum statistics

Threads
168,505
Messages
4,579,253
Members
10,489
Latest member
Djw06001


Top Bottom