Re: TNET: ACC commish reacts to ESPN on FSU AD addressing conference revenue issues

Clemson Conqueror [11425]

TigerPulse: 98%

Posts: 13871

Joined: 2021

Mar 2, 2023, 6:58 PM [ in reply to Re: TNET: ACC commish reacts to ESPN on FSU AD addressing conference revenue issues ]

Your’s looks like smart analysis to me. As others have often written, the conference expansions are all about capturing the biggest revenue growth aspect of CFB … large new revenues from the expanded playoffs.

(*). My curiosity about mega conferences of SEC and B1G is whether the value of in-season games will deteriorate. The conferences will not bear any short term risk; all of that will be borne by the networks.

SEC: For the SEC to retain its value (when compared to other conferences’ value) to ESPN, it did so by expanding by adding two more power teams which, in their own right, bring a good audience from their fan base. Simply from the non-playoff ‘value-added’ aspects, neither TX nor OK have anything other than an additive impact. In other words, since SEC is only digging deeper into regular season revenues by adding TX & OK, there isn’t any special ‘new geography’ or ‘fill a deficiency in game day content’ by bringing in TX &/or OK.

(*). But with their prime in-season programming slots already full up with games, how will relegating Mizzou vs Kentucky or U.of S.Carolina vs Vandy to the soon-to-come expanded Thursday or the ‘new’ Wednesday night slot help to maintain the weighted average value of in-season games?

(*). I believe that the overall weighted average revenue value (I.e.,the weighted average TV ratings value) of SEC in-season games will actually decline somewhat.

Xxxxxxxxx

B1G: Their geographical expansion model has potential to improve overall viewership more for the entirety of their in-season games. However, if B1G’s expansion goes beyond USC and UCLA (I.e., OR and WA), then they too will face the dilution effect of having too many ‘shows’ than there are good slots to broadcast those games. Think of IN vs Iowa or MD vs Northwestern. Worse for the new Left Coast B1G is that the impact from disenfranchised fans from schools like Cal, Stanford, OR State, Utah, AZ, AZ State as far as overall viewer interest. Overall Ratings for B1G / PAC 12 super conference games will be eroded by those fans watching games from other conferences, or (worse) in losing some fundamental interest in CFB in general.a

In other words, B1G expansion also risks diluting the weighted average viewer ratings for the entirety of the conference’s in-season slate.

Xxxxxxxx

The playoffs gamble - yes for the networks. Not so much (short term) for the new Super Conferences.

The networks are already gambling that the growth from playoffs ratings revenues will greatly exceed the decline for overall average in-season game ratings. As long as these new cable contracts remain in place (after negotiations had been concluded) every school that’s in the new Super Conference wins.

The networks darn well better be right.

Xxxxxxxx

(***). After this first iteration of Super Conference cable contracts expires, I’m betting that subsequent contracts will be LESS lucrative for the Super Conferences.

ESPN and Fox / NBC / CBS will be disappointed in the profits that they get from their first contracts with the new Super Conferences.

Xxxxxxxx

Unfortunately for Clemson and FSU, the overspending that Fox / CBS / NBC had done with B1G, along overspending that ESPN has done with SEC, won’t help us.

The sports networks are locked into a new battle of attrition via their respective Super Conference partners. The conferences are the arms dealers that are selling the weapons that the networks are buying for conducting this war. The arms dealers are the only sure winners.

flag link

military_tech

thumb_down

thumb_up

When FSU basically owned the ACC I never heard any complaints from FSU about financial problems. Since Clemson has dominated the ACC and FSU has been irrelevant how many HC’s have the fired. ?? How many of those HC’s are they still paying ??. FSU use to fill their stadium when they were winning, they sold a lot of merchandise and made more money because they played in big BG’s with more of their fans going to those games. They were winning which brought in more revenue.

As FSU tries to get back to where they were for so many years in the 80’s, 90’s and most of the first 10 to 12 years of the 2000’s they are facing the same problem many other programs are facing lack of money. They need to increase revenue.

In 2016 when Clemson won its 2nd NC I believe the athletic department still lost $1 million dollars because of the cost to play a game to get into the NC game and having to share equally earned revenue with other conference teams. The other ACC teams did not pay Clemson’s expenses to play in the CFP’s. But they made money from our success.

I honestly do not know what the solutions are to the ACC’s financial crisis. Anyway you try to restructure the ACC most teams will suffer financially more than Clemson and maybe FSU and schools that are becoming more competitive again. A lot of these problems IMO you have to put on Swofford and the lame NCAA and ESPN.

If you restructure the ACC schools must meet certain criteria to be a part of the conference. We need to get rid of some schools and go after quality programs. I would like to see the ACC ###### away a couple of SEC schools like Auburn and Ole Miss or teams who are sick of Alabama and / or a couple of Big 10 teams who are sick of OSU. I know this is wishful thanking.

With the current contract Clemson is part, is there anyway out. ?? Which conference would best suite Clemson ???

Swofford retired just before the ???? Hit the fan. I think he knew he had mismanaged the future of the ACC.

TNET: ACC commish reacts to ESPN on FSU AD addressing conference revenue issues