Football ...
Basketball ...
Baseball ...
Other Sports ...
Futbol ...
🤫995🤫 ...
Gambling ...
Movies & TV ...
Music ...
Hobbies ...
Lulz ...
Food & Travel
...
Daily Texan ...
Business & Markets ...
Cloak Room ...
Help ...
For Sale ...
Board Discussion ...
Advertise...
Tailgate Donations
-
Posts
2294 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Store
Downloads
Recruiting - 2020
2019-2020 Football Season
Football
Entertainment
Sports
News and Business
Cloak Room
Transfer Portal
Recruiting
Events
Everything posted by Hurtlocker
-
This is true. The upside is the brands high is higher, but their low is higher too. When good, Texas/Bama or Texas/Georgia will be a behemoth of a game, but with each loss that high becomes a bit less high. Tennesee is a good example, when they were strugglebus, they drew about 3m less than when they were running Bama out of the game. To get a huge game on TV: It has to be on a major channel. CBS/ABC/FOX/NBC and slightly behind is ESPN. (then any cable channel > Any conference Network > Any streaming service) It has to be marketed well. CBS is the king of this, ABC and Fox are slightly behind, and NBC better figure it out quick now that they wrote a big check. It has to be close. No matter who is playing if the game is a blow out in the second, people tune out. To get the massive numbers it has to go down to the last 5 minutes. It has to be FOR something. Title Race? Championship? The only reason outside those that draw are like Made for TV events to start the season because we want football back. That's it really. Brands factor in, but they're multipliers. They'll add audience, but the audience they add depends on the above. Case in point, last years CFP: Afternoon game: TCU/Michigan. Checks all the boxes above and drew 21.7m viewers at 4pm, with a 10 rating (meaning it had 10% of all viewers watching TV) Prime game: Georgia/Ohio State. Again, checks everything above, close game, etc. It drew 22.45m with a 9.8 rating. Championship game, TCU/Georgia. Did not check the boxes as the game was over in the first quarter - 17.2m with an 8.7 rating. So, having two brands in a game didn't provide as huge of a multiplier as you'd imagine with having one. TCU pulled its weight considering Michigan/Ohio State to get into the Big Ten Title drew 17m. Both games hovered around 22m, because they were close and good games. To your other point, its a bit of give and take. Having all the brands together allows them to increase the one thing they do sell, the regular season, with the knowledge of at least two of their brands will be in it at the end of the season. That does mean that many brands will be sitting it out more then they're used to. For instance I'd be shocked if OU duplicated the conference championship run in the SEC it had in the B12. There will be more 8 win seasons and less 12. But, you're also in the biggest marketing machine all year round. The upside for those not in the top two, is that your negative is a lower regular season number/lower publicity, but your opportunity to build your brand is increased, due to a higher chance to play for a Natty. Look at TCU this year. It doesn't matter that they got their ass stomped in the champ game. What matters is that 40m people watched TCU's logo flash up repeatedly and have talking heads market them for weeks. Its probably a half bill in free publicity. Do that enough and your regular season games start getting watched by more people, meaning the next contract is bigger.
-
Because they got it done 11 months before the season started. They're trying to paint the Pac more runway.
-
Yeah I don't see the motivation either. They have the ACC locked down for 13 more years. Let's say the SEC pays out $60m on their current deal for current members, those four schools you are discussing are not equal ads. Every conference has a unequalness, there is no way around that. The difference in the ACC isn't that the low is freakishly lower than the SEC's low, its that the high isn't anywhere near the SEC's high. I haven't pulled the numbers this year to run a straight comparison, but some key numbers from last year: Last year's ACC championship game drew 3.5 million in prime time. Three times as many turned into Michigan/Purdue at the same time. Purdue. The Pac drew twice as many on Friday and both the SEC and Big 12's championships were seen by three times the audience. Miami v Clemson last year drew 1.4m on ESPN in the coveted 3:30 eastern window. Three times as many turned into Ohio State/Maryland. Maryland. FSU v Miami last year drew 1.5m on ABC in prime time. Texas Tech/TCU drew a million more than day, at noon. FSU v Clemson did the best in the regular season last year of the bunch, pulling 3.4m in prime time on ABC. Of course Penn State/Michigan doubled that at noon while Alabama/Tennessee quadrupled that at 3:30. On quick look, unless an ACC team is playing Notre Dame, the numbers are not impressive. They're not $60m numbers. If those schools were generating 8-12m when playing each other OR competing with the SEC/B1G team that played opposite them, then maybe. But neither of those is happening. EDIT: also factor into ESPN's non-motivation, ND is currently locked into the ACC in all other sports with a clause that if they join any league before 2036, it will be the ACC. Why would ESPN want to accelerate the move of ND to Fox/NBC? ND on the road is one of the consistently best games for ESPN in the ACC. Last year: ND/USC - 6.7m ND/Clemson - 3.3m ND/UNC - 3.5m ND/Cal - 2.9m ND is likely the only property hanging a flag in the ACC's offices who could command the money in the current SEC/B10 deals.
-
Yeah, that would have had some impact, because the original Big 12 just was never harmonious, it was never a team. If you look at the SEC and Big Ten, they've got decades together, there is rarely external disagreements. The Big 12 was pissing in each other's drinks from the start. Yes, the decision to not protect OU/Nebraska was a wound that never healed. Not seeing that it would be was a strategic blunder. They should have found a way to balance that better than North/South. Then Nebraska got butthurt more by not being able to bring in entire teams of non-qualifiers and the entire conference shit the bed by turning down the Big 12 Network, which was then pitched to the Big Ten to turn them into a financial juggernaut. So, I guess, while OU/Nebraska was one issue, the main issue was everyone thought they were smart, but were all basically complete idiots and shit it down their leg when it did have power. They didn't see the forest through the trees and got out maneuvered on literally every front. Imagine it did unify, stayed together and had the power of the Big Ten Network. Would the Pac have got to 12? Would the Big 12 been able to defend recruiting in Texas better without all the self-inflicted wounds? Would the SoCals and Arizonas have moved over to the Big 12, since they basically had a firewall up the Mississippi once it was clear the Pac had no expansion options? Texas/OU/A&M (mostly due to shear size)/Nebraska/USC in football, and UCLA/Arizona/Kansas in basketball, with a network in their back pocket, would be a rival to either of the Big 2 today.
-
This is the one from the Baylor channel, not the Gonzaga one, that matters. Its 45 minutes long but Sam knows his stuff on inventory. This is the problem the Pac has and there isn't a solution for it, unless CBS wants another game. There simply are not enough windows remaining to make the math work.
-
Yeah this picking apart the ACC thing doesn't have a lot of legs with me for a few reasons: UNC/UVA look down on the Big Ten. They still actively mock Maryland that they are now stuck with Midwest schools. Any time "they'll make more money" is brought up, eyes roll. The distain is real. UNC/UVA run the ACC as old school partners. Their athletics are paid for out of trusts and UVA's endowment is north of $10b for a single school, not a system. There is more talk on the east coast about consolidating to what was, than expanding to what could be. Why would ESPN move any ACC school to the SEC? They already get SC/Georgia/Clemson, they get Florida/Miami/FSU. Those are already valued and paid for today. So, ESPN is going to pay $60ish mill more a year...just because it has a different conference logo? Its sort of like the River. It moved, but its not worth more now. What is worth more is Texas against Bama and Georgia. Giving more value to Arkansas/A&M games. What you have is what you have. You'd have to make more money with Miami/Arkansas or FSU/Kentucky, and I don't think that kind of star power is there. What does the SEC get? They already have 8 pretty solid football brands out of 16. The downside to that is you can't have all 8 good in a single year. So if you add you're adding some generals to your globetrotters. That helps end of season, but at the expense of in season. Your tv contract is only for the season. Additionally, they are already struggling to find broadcast windows for their current inventory. Four Saturday games a weekend are on the SECN. The rest are already in top tier spots. There aren't more T1 spots available, you've filled them, most of the ACC's are more T2 slots, so where is the money coming from? You'd be taking from your own plate.
-
If things stay how they are, e.g. Pac10, I'd imagine you'd see this: Big = 2.75 bids/year SEC = 2.75 Big 12/ACC = 1.75 Pac/G5 = 1.25 ND = 0.5
-
Part two of this discussion is that all of the "champion" bowls set up today, like the Rose, Sugar, Orange, are now part of the CFP expansion, so they won't pay out the way they did. When the SEC and Big 12 combined, that paid the Big 12 $8m a year. Now that $240m in change is pulled out of the conference ledger and incorporated into the 12 team playoff.
-
Only problem with this is the reason the Big 12 stayed the same is they moved from 8 to 9 conference games 4 * 12 = 48 games to sell 4.5 * 10 = 45 games to sell. That's how the Big 12 kept it even after dropping to ten, no one paid them to stay together. They just were able to keep supplying enough games with less to split. The Pac 12, however, already has 9 conference games to feed the Pac Net. They'll drop from 54 games to 45. The only way they can do that is kill the PacNet. Which, will mean less money and a ton of lost investment.
-
Late to the party, but the Rose Bowl, from a historic perspective, is already dead. CFB expansion and USC moving to the Big Ten have nuked any chance of it being stand-alone bowl with any significance or relevance.
-
Damn brotha, great seeing you around. Hope life's been well!
-
Clearly sooner is better than later, but my guess is before July31st, since August first is the start of their new year. Most conferences have at least a one-year notice clause and you can't move on a dime and get on other schedules. If schools want to get on the Big Ten or Big 12's 2024 schedule, they need to have it worked out that they're moving before the end of July. Also on mouthpieces: Dodds has been a Big 12 mouthpiece through all this. He's a Mizzou grad and KC dude. It seems every time the Pac team of Mandel and Canzano drop news, someone floats Dodds a counter. And with CBS being the bigger media player and national, he's getting the most buzz. The difference here is this is an AZ hit piece on the Pac, so they're clearly not getting their message out via the Pac channels. The dude says they can drive to Lubbock and have options, then says they have time and the deal is mostly linear and no one would go for mostly streaming. He's painting them in a corner and feels very similar to your woman saying: It's not.
-
yes, if Texas/OU asked but they went to the B1G AFTER Texas/OU went to the SEC
-
Funny thing is though, the old big 12 needed inventory, but if Texas and OU stayed would have been making about $65m on the new contract, a 13% dif and not even noticed in the total revenue. Quite likely they could have lured in LA to make more. At the end of the day though, this was about a recruiting war that the SEC was winning. Doesn't matter if adding USC would have added the same money, its a rounding error. Its about negating
-
Liberty barely has cafeterias on their campus, this is one to let do its thing for a while. If you're looking for the next power broker in Virginia, it is not Liberty, its JMU.
-
my favorite part of SLC is I asked for a double, so they gave me a shot on the side.
-
Seems about right, outside ND no one is worth the $75 and ND would likely pay for a partner at that rate. Clemson, FSU, Oregon, Washington, and UNC are all around $40-50m in total worth. Arizona/ASU/Colorado are all in line with the top of the Big 12, Utah is probably even with BYU.
-
Probably a gift to the Rose Bowl
-
Just saw that too, most of the noise seems to be Arizona and Utah fans, but it will only take one.
-
First time I heard someone besides Arizona leading the charge. Also how did "Hail Mary" and "Colorado State" end up in the same sentence?
-
UW Reporter for Seattle Times:
Football ... Basketball ... Baseball ... Other Sports ... Futbol ... 🤫995🤫 ... Gambling ... Movies & TV ... Music ... Hobbies ... Lulz ... Food & Travel ... Daily Texan ... Business and Markets ... Cloak Room ... Help ... For Sale ... Board Discussion ... Subscribe!... Donate!... Advertise... COOKIE MONSTER!