Expansion

Cincinnati, West Virginia and TCU wouldn’t have been horrible. They have all shown they have potential. I wouldn’t turn Away Oklahoma State. Should have been on them as soon as Texas and OU announced.
 
GT flunkout said:
Things are never as good or as bad as they seem.
Click to expand...
1691678245676.png
 
stinger78 said:
There is one major assumption that folks are making: The emerging business model of 20+-team conferences is going to hold up.
However, Disney is already losing money and ESPN's contribution to profit is shrinking. The stated reason for expansion is inventory, meaning "interesting games that ESPN can make more money off of." However, here's the rub... the B1G has at least 7 teams (Rutgers, Maryland, Indiana, Purdue, Illinois, N'western, and Minnesota - and maybe even Iowa and Nebraska by now) who are relatively uninteresting on a national, or even regional, scale. Further, when is the last time you watched USC, UCLA, or Washington play? Can't wait for that Washington-Rutgers game, right? Or that, tilt for the Old Oaken Bucket? No, that's not Thoren v. Smaug, it's Indiana v. Purdue. Yawn. There's a saturation point for all this.
Click to expand...

From the article: "With its dual revenue stream — fees from cable subscribers and advertising — the sports juggernaut continues to earn billions of dollars for Disney. In the first six months of the 2023 fiscal year, Disney’s cable networks division, which is anchored by ESPN and its spinoff channels, generated $14 billion in revenue and $3 billion in profit."

ESPN is still incredibly profitable. The margins are shrinking and there are definite headwinds, but ESPN is not hemorrhaging money like so many on here keep saying (not necessarily you)
 
stinger78 said:
There is one major assumption that folks are making: The emerging business model of 20+-team conferences is going to hold up.
However, Disney is already losing money and ESPN's contribution to profit is shrinking. The stated reason for expansion is inventory, meaning "interesting games that ESPN can make more money off of." However, here's the rub... the B1G has at least 7 teams (Rutgers, Maryland, Indiana, Purdue, Illinois, N'western, and Minnesota - and maybe even Iowa and Nebraska by now) who are relatively uninteresting on a national, or even regional, scale. Further, when is the last time you watched USC, UCLA, or Washington play? Can't wait for that Washington-Rutgers game, right? Or that, tilt for the Old Oaken Bucket? No, that's not Thoren v. Smaug, it's Indiana v. Purdue. Yawn. There's a saturation point for all this.

The mercenaries will say, "Yes, but it's all about local viewership, and more discrete localities involved the better. Yeah, maybe. How many fans pack BDS to see the Jackets play Syracuse? Who besides a few Tech and Orange zealots watch that one on TV? Most I know DVR'ed it and if it turned out interesting will go back and watch later. I'm skeptical that the business model will hold up past the initial novelty of having USC-PSU as conference game. Maybe so, but I somehow doubt it.

So fast forward about 8-10 years. We've now denuded all conferences but the two anointed ones, which between them will have 8 of the 12 postseason slots. Forty-plus teams of which only about 10-12 have any real chance of getting one of those slots. And with the waning newness the TV numbers have declined. Time to reup the contract, but wait, ESPN cannot pay those huge TV $$$ for so many marginal to bad games. What will happen? Now that conference allegiances and geographical symmetry are crushed, one could see (easily or not) another breaking off of the 16 top teams into an Elite League, leaving the rest to fend for themselves. What then for Indiana-Purdue? Or USCe-Missouri? Or UCLA-Illinois? Or Vandy-Arky? Etc., etc.

Maybe I'm a nut, but it doesn't seem far-fetched to me. At some point, all those other games will be jettisoned, and we'll end up with 16-18 teams: Alabama, Auburn, Georgia, Florida, LSU, Texas, TAMU, and Oklahoma on one end and tOSU, UoM, MSU/UCLA, Oregon, USC, Washington, PSU, and Wiscy on the other. Maybe you even add F$U and Clemson to those lists. It will be a true Bush-League Pro League. They'll line up and play for the College Football Champions of the Universe trophy. Just what we need....

But that's how it already is! So, why are we destroying all college football history and traditions to do this? We could just agree with ESPN-god to play x-number of interesting inter-confernece games each year - and watch the millions roll in! How about we ride it out and watch what happens. In the meantime, let's play football with the rest of the deplorables, you know, the UNC, NCSU, Miami, VPI, UVA, and Louisville crowd. Maybe schedule a game or two a year with Oklahoma State, TCU, Stanford, Cal, BYU, K State, etc.

Works for me.
Click to expand...
I believe ESPN has miscalculated the potential revenue with the SEC/Big 10, and it will only get worse. Viewership of those conferences is going to suffer too, because college football fans are engaged with their respective favorite school, and then will watch the other ranked teams on Saturday. Overall interest is going to shrink if you completely alienate those fanbases. I don't think those fanbases are going to be converted to SEC and Big 10 fans. They'll just leave the sport and find something else. I love Georgia Tech college football, but if we continue with this type of disadvantage (conference payouts) and start (continue, thanks to Collins) getting our asses kicked by the teams like a Vanderbilt or Rutgers, I'm out completely.
 
samsgt02 said:
I believe ESPN has miscalculated the potential revenue with the SEC/Big 10, and it will only get worse. Viewership of those conferences is going to suffer too, because college football fans are engaged with their respective favorite school, and then will watch the other ranked teams on Saturday. Overall interest is going to shrink if you completely alienate those fanbases. I don't think those fanbases are going to be converted to SEC and Big 10 fans. They'll just leave the sport and find something else. I love Georgia Tech college football, but if we continue with this type of disadvantage (conference payouts) and start (continue, thanks to Collins) getting our asses kicked by the teams like a Vanderbilt or Rutgers, I'm out completely.
Click to expand...
I don't think ESPN has any affiliation with the Big 10, do they?
 
05GTCorndog said:
From the article: "With its dual revenue stream — fees from cable subscribers and advertising — the sports juggernaut continues to earn billions of dollars for Disney. In the first six months of the 2023 fiscal year, Disney’s cable networks division, which is anchored by ESPN and its spinoff channels, generated $14 billion in revenue and $3 billion in profit."

ESPN is still incredibly profitable. The margins are shrinking and there are definite headwinds, but ESPN is not hemorrhaging money like so many on here keep saying (not necessarily you)
Click to expand...
I did not imply they are hemorrhaging money, but that their contribution to profit was declining. IOW, their margins are shrinking, as you termed it. That is a bad trend when your parent company is indeed hemorrhaging red ink.
My other point is to look ahead 8-10 years and ask what might be the case. Unless something changes that trend, where might we be? There are still a lot of crappy games in those two conferences, and a lot of money going to crappy programs. I’m skeptical that the model will hold up over a decade. It will need to move to superfunding of great programs and letting all else exist in marginal TV revenues.
Just my $.02 worth.
 
05GTCorndog said:
You think we are going to add revenue by adding Georgia State and Coastal Carolina?

Doing nothing is a far better path than doing something retarded.
Click to expand...
I agree. Doing nothing is better than doing something retarded like adding Stanford and Cal. The list of candidates I threw out is just a list of candidates, not an endorsement of any of them.

Some of them have a viable path forward. Again, as an example of programs the ACC passed on, Cincinnati and Central Florida would have been excellent additions. If they were available today, they both would be INFINITELY better than Stanford and Cal. The ACC passed on them and they are now arguably in a stronger conference than the ACC with a brighter future.

The same clown clicker's that poo-poo'd Cincinnati and Central Florida in the past don't have the vision to see the other programs with potential to rise above their current perceived market value in the future.

Some of those programs I listed will be in much better position 3-5 years down the road and the ACC, if it still exists, will have made the same mistakes it's been making for many years now. No vision whatsoever. It's how we got shackled into this albatross GOR deal in the first place. No consideration for the future and how the landscape could change.

The ACC doesn't have a plan. They have never had a plan. They are just hoping Notre Dame will somehow save the day. They aren't. And now it's biting all of us in the a$$. I'll give FSU credit for seeing the writing on the wall. First legitimate chance they get, they are bolting for the door and this confederacy of dunces comes apart at the seams. I'm not rooting for it, but I wouldn't be the least bit surprised if it happens and you can blame the ACC for it if it does.
 
The ACC is fine for now. It’s not in the $70m range but the $40m range is not a bad place to be given the next tier is $7m. We’ll make enough to be a serious program for the next few years.

By 2030, we reassess as the world will be different. The B1G champ vs SEC champ may be the national championship game. The major conferences may be ready to jettison some of their weaker programs and pick up better programs. And, I pray to God, we actually have a winning team that the P2 see value in adding.

No reason for the ACC to make unnecessary moves right now.
 
Buzzilla said:
I agree. Doing nothing is better than doing something retarded like adding Stanford and Cal. The list of candidates I threw out is just a list of candidates, not an endorsement of any of them.

Some of them have a viable path forward. Again, as an example of programs the ACC passed on, Cincinnati and Central Florida would have been excellent additions. If they were available today, they both would be INFINITELY better than Stanford and Cal. The ACC passed on them and they are now arguably in a stronger conference than the ACC with a brighter future.

The same clown clicker's that poo-poo'd Cincinnati and Central Florida in the past don't have the vision to see the other programs with potential to rise above their current perceived market value in the future.

Some of those programs I listed will be in much better position 3-5 years down the road and the ACC, if it still exists, will have made the same mistakes it's been making for many years now. No vision whatsoever. It's how we got shackled into this albatross GOR deal in the first place. No consideration for the future and how the landscape could change.

The ACC doesn't have a plan. They have never had a plan. They are just hoping Notre Dame will somehow save the day. They aren't. And now it's biting all of us in the a$$. I'll give FSU credit for seeing the writing on the wall. First legitimate chance they get, they are bolting for the door and this confederacy of dunces comes apart at the seams. I'm not rooting for it, but I wouldn't be the least bit surprised if it happens and you can blame the ACC for it if it does.
Click to expand...

How do you know the ACC doesn't have a plan? The plan could be to stand pat. There are moving pieces at play. You can't just add 2-3 garbage schools and then demand a renegotiation of the contract with ESPN to increase per school payout. Maybe the ACC did try to add Oregon, Washington, Cal and Stanford (which would've been a 'big' move). Maybe ESPN wasn't onboard with throwing more money at the contract to make a move worthwhile. If ESPN is having financial struggles, why would they want to increase their ACC payout to more schools unless they were sure it would really increase the value of the contract. Perhaps the SEC and BigTen deals are way overvalued and come next re-up, the money starts to dry up if ESPN isn't writing massive checks. There could be a bubble that is about to burst.

Could the ACC have added UCF, Cincy and Houston two years ago? Probably. That move would've been laughed at when BigTen added USC and UCLA and SEC adding OU and Texas. There was no move to make for the ACC that really made sense. I'm fine not adding mediocre schools just to expand.
 
I think the next move (and the acc/big12 are already there) is unequal revenue sharing. That very well may be what FSU wants.

You could could give everyone a base amount to operate on. Then you get bonus money for every conference win (which is a known total). Then a bonus for making the championship game and a final bonus for winning the conference.

It will stratify the conference, but will give the top teams the ability to hang with the other conferences. Down side is it hampers a team’s ability to fire a bad coach.
 
gtphd said:
The ACC is fine for now. It’s not in the $70m range but the $40m range is not a bad place to be given the next tier is $7m. We’ll make enough to be a serious program for the next few years.

By 2030, we reassess as the world will be different. The B1G champ vs SEC champ may be the national championship game. The major conferences may be ready to jettison some of their weaker programs and pick up better programs. And, I pray to God, we actually have a winning team that the P2 see value in adding.

No reason for the ACC to make unnecessary moves right now.
Click to expand...
Agree. We have a long term contract. Never know what will be on the table when the rest renew.
 
midatlantech said:
Let me add, that all the ACC has to do is wake up football programs FSU, Miami, GT, VPI and hope that UL and Pitt start winning OOC games too. There was a time that on paper, the ACC had put together the best football conference but Miami quit trying, VPI and FSU fell apart post long time coaches and leadership ruined GT.
Click to expand...
How do you have Pitt lumped into this? Pitt has beaten Tennessee, UCF, WVU, etc over the past few years. One of the few programs who have held their own, while the others you mentioned have been middling or in decline.

FSU is the only program who may finally be back on an upward trajectory.
 
The evidence of the ACC not having a plan is the fact that they are in reaction mode all the time. I could buy staying put but why flirt with WV, Washington, & Oregon in that case. It would be a waste of everyone’s time. And now having serious expansion talks with Stanford, Cal, and SMU after the PAC 12 gets poached. It looks to me like the ACC got caught flat footed and didn’t read into what the SEC and B1G were up to. At least the Big 12 responded to shifting reality in time and gobbled up some second rate schools.

With FSU and Clemson out there leaking their unhappiness with the GOR you know they are turning the screws on the conference adding new teams. Further dilution is a non-starter for them, and frankly I don’t think there are really any teams left that are going to increase conference revenues.

We are in a suicide pact right now IMO. FSU and Clemson are having their parking spots held in the SEC. They have no incentive to expand. You can guarantee the B1G is talking occasionally with the teams they want. If you’re the ACC commissioner your options are to either wait until the conference finally dies or pull off some kind of miracle poaching of the Big 12. I don’t see another path forward.
 
05GTCorndog said:
How do you know the ACC doesn't have a plan? The plan could be to stand pat. There are moving pieces at play. You can't just add 2-3 garbage schools and then demand a renegotiation of the contract with ESPN to increase per school payout. Maybe the ACC did try to add Oregon, Washington, Cal and Stanford (which would've been a 'big' move). Maybe ESPN wasn't onboard with throwing more money at the contract to make a move worthwhile. If ESPN is having financial struggles, why would they want to increase their ACC payout to more schools unless they were sure it would really increase the value of the contract. Perhaps the SEC and BigTen deals are way overvalued and come next re-up, the money starts to dry up if ESPN isn't writing massive checks. There could be a bubble that is about to burst.

Could the ACC have added UCF, Cincy and Houston two years ago? Probably. That move would've been laughed at when BigTen added USC and UCLA and SEC adding OU and Texas. There was no move to make for the ACC that really made sense. I'm fine not adding mediocre schools just to expand.
Click to expand...

I have said many times and will continue to say it's all in a bubble. I definitely think the SEC and BIG10 deals are overvalued. I believe there are definitely going to be some shakeups with all of this. The $1.5 Billion deal just announced between gambling company Penn Entertainment and ESPN sheds some light on the direction all of this may go.

I personally think the BIG 10 has screwed up. I think USC, UCLA, Oregon and Washington are going to look a lot like Nebraska looks in the BIG 10; weak and woefully out of place. I'm guessing most Nebraska fans would much prefer to still be in the BIG 12.

I agree that standing pat isn't a bad decision. This is the second time I've said this. But that's not what the ACC is doing. As of right now, they are trying to shoe horn in west coast cast offs Cal and Stanford and Texas based SMU. It's a desperate move and shows how little of a clue they have in what they are doing.

If the ACC has a plan, by all means, please give us a clue as to what it is.
 
Buzzilla said:
Appalachian State, Georgia Southern, South Florida, Memphis, Tulane, East Carolina, Liberty, Coastal Carolina, Old Dominion, Louisiana, Georgia State, Louisiana Tech, Western Kentucky. All regional programs, some with excellent academics, many on the rise and suitable for consideration.

The ACC already missed on Central Florida, Cincinnati, and West Virginia which would have been great regional additions and easy adds.

TV market thinking with highly restrictive academic qualifications led to adding programs like BC and Syracuse which are football poison. The idea of adding Cal and Stanford is football suicide.
Click to expand...
That looks like a menu of options that UGA uses to schedule out of conference opponents. Pass.
 
Buzzilla said:
I have said many times and will continue to say it's all in a bubble. I definitely think the SEC and BIG10 deals are overvalued. I believe there are definitely going to be some shakeups with all of this. The $1.5 Billion deal just announced between gambling company Penn Entertainment and ESPN sheds some light on the direction all of this may go.

I personally think the BIG 10 has screwed up. I think USC, UCLA, Oregon and Washington are going to look a lot like Nebraska looks in the BIG 10; weak and woefully out of place. I'm guessing most Nebraska fans would much prefer to still be in the BIG 12.

I agree that standing pat isn't a bad decision. This is the second time I've said this. But that's not what the ACC is doing. As of right now, they are trying to shoe horn in west coast cast offs Cal and Stanford and Texas based SMU. It's a desperate move and shows how little of a clue they have in what they are doing.

If the ACC has a plan, by all means, please give us a clue as to what it is.
Click to expand...
You are forgetting the the thing that will increase the revenue which is what this expansion is all about - AN EXTENDED PLAYOFF. So, to say those teams will be like Nebraska is comparing Apples to Oranges. Sure in a 2 team or 4 team playoff with 5 power conferences you have what we’ve seen which is a lot of programs on the outside looking in after 1 or 2 losses. But this is all about the playoff money on top of the TV deals. These 2 conferences will now either demand a 20 plus team playoff or will simply create their own playoff to fill time slots in December that are now empty. The NFL playoffs start around January 13. So from December 4 (conference title games) thru January 13 the sports world is empty except for NFL regular season games, meaningless regular season NBA games, and worthless bowl games outside the small playoff we have now.

I think it is going to be awesome to have meaningful college football from rivalry week in November all the way thru the 2nd week in January. As a GT fan I love that now in those years when we put it together, ala 2014, that we’ll get our Cinderella chance. Of course, I’m sure the ACC‘s current suicide pact will screw us so I’m not holding my breath but at least I’ll have something to watch instead of the Pollyanna Bowl.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top