No one in my circle of ISU fans gives a **** about not playing Texas. Not playing OU sucks from a historical perspective, but that's really it.
We packed the house for such traditional rivals as BYU, Arizona, and Arizona State.
Realignment Megathread (All The Moves)
- Thread starter ISUcyclones11
- Start date
We packed the house for such traditional rivals as BYU, Arizona, and Arizona State.
I do think the conferences will just keep getting bigger. They've been growing for 100 years and I don't see it stopping. If there ends up 1 division it will be the Big 10 & SEC. At some point a conference champion is just stupid because the conference is too big. Maybe have a West & East Champ. It would actually be so much better for everyone if the conferences would shrink to a max of 12.
Live sports are the only thing that generate ad sales. TV wants more live sports, not less.
I'm not sure where you're coming from at all here.
Disagree, but it depends on critical mass.
If Top 40 are Premier, then there's ~30-40 2nd tier. That's a LOT of the main viewership in the Premier and I would agree 2nd tier would be G5 in this scenario. Money/eyeballs might be 80/20 even if the team count is 50/50.
But if only Top 24 are Premier, then there's 50-60 2nd tier, including a lot of larger programs. In this case, you'd keep a lot of veiwers and interest. Team count would be 30/70 but viewership might be 60/40 or even 50/50 and the 2nd tier is viable. Now, much less money per team, but as long as it is equal, I think it would work.
Correct. But it’s the big games that make the money from the ad sales. Having “content” on espn+ getting 150k viewers is costing them money. They make up for it by the huge ratings hey get for big games. Thats why they don’t just need content.
No one would watch a second tier league the same way no one watches triple A baseball, hockey juniors, G league etc. You will get some die hards that just watch on instinct but you aren’t getting many more real fans in your scenario.
You wouldn’t because it’s a second tier league. It’s why so many people that went to MAC schools as an example cheer for a root for a power program. Making a second tier league like that just turns all those teams into the new G5
They obviously have a great program, but some of their fans are delusional. Actually saw some who think they'll be in the CFP within 4-5 years.
I like your posts generally friendlyspartan but I think you’re pushing a bad take here. You are claiming that games between and with teams in the “2nd tier” of programs (say, programs ranked 25 to say 60) draw only 150k viewers currently and are unprofitable for distributors. Your ratings take is flat out wrong — average ratings of games involving the 2nd tier are obviously higher than your 150k figure including because the average game is not currently distributed via espn+ as you say. There is no reason that will change going forward — there are and will continue to be many available slots for 2nd tier games on premier, high visibility distribution channels for as long as linear television exists and it is NOT going away anytime soon. And you’re wrong about the profitability of 2nd tier games, considering both ad and subscription revenue that ties back to that inventory. I invite you to provide evidence, not conjecture, showing that I am wrong.
If you can show me how a game bringing in 150k-250k on espn+ is profitable for that game vs the money spent on that game I will gladly concede the point. It’s very well established that the networks are paying for those very high ratings games where they are making the real money from.
Also a key point that I’m making towards this is not about the current landscape but about cfb splitting into 2 divisions. The ratings and fan support for those lower division teams would crater if they were moving from a P4 landscape. ISU would just be UNI after 5ish years and MSU would be western Michaign if it happens to them. Michigan obv would be safe
They don't realize that they're going to have be bought twice a year to make the financials work simply because they've already maxed out revenue in the Dome. They've already squeezed and squeezed and squeezed their season ticket holders and that's going to be less fun when you realize the new MWC isn't much of a step up from the MVFC and 8-4/9-3 is going to feel like an abject failure to them.
The New PAC and the American are going to get the G6 slot 90% of the time.
The New PAC and the American are going to get the G6 slot 90% of the time.
Games involving teams 70-25 get much better ratings than that.
ESPN and Fox aren't paying the other leagues because they lose money on it.
They aren’t paying most G5 teams much at all which is kinda the point. If ISU can survive and put out a product that you would be happy to watch do you think you can do that on a G5 media budget?
Streaming or not, the channels still exist.
NBC, ABC, CBS, FOX, ESPN, ESPN2, FS1, etc etc all still exist. Streaming is just the extra content, that doesnt fit on the regular channels or content to push subscriptions.
But there is still a lot of Channels that need to fill their time slots.
No.
But no one in the current Big 12 is making a Top 20 cut. The product would not change in such a scenario.
The problem is you are saying if there was a split of around the top 24 teams would take all the money and time slots and viewership etc. And then comparing those that would be in the 25-75 to the G5 saying they will automatically lose all their fans and viewership.
Sorry we basically have that now, the B1G and SEC get all the promotion and good slots, yet the B12 and ACC still have many games that bring in millions of viewers, and far more than the G5.
If the top 24 teams broke away, the rest will not automatically be reduced to G5, they will end up being in some form of a middle tier, which the only thing that would be different is they would call it as such rather than what they are doing now where they are promoting 2 conferences as being superior in every way, and promoting it far more than the other 2, instead they will do the same only calling it something like P2, SP2, and the G6, etc.
You also seem to not understand that a 24 team league, would not provide enough content to fill up all the sports slots on the major networks, therefore, the so called second tier teams would have to fill those spots, just like the B12 and ACC do now.
So the 2nd tier of P4 games will only get 150k-250k and only be on ESPN+?
Interesting take. It's wrong, but interesting nevertheless. I can see why you think that, though. Your school has been subsidized by the very high ratings games in your conference for years.
Comparing Iowa State or Michigan State to a directional school in either state is ridiculous. The institutions (prestige, enrollment, alumni base, etc.) matter and saying either university would become UNI or WMU is absurd. It didn't even happen to Oregon State or Washington State and they were the only 2 to lose their seat in the last game of musical chairs. If Iowa State or Michigan State were to drop outside the "Premier League", there would be 40+ other schools going with them.
Exactly this.
There's already a de facto insistence by the media that the Big 10 and SEC are out ahead (and their best teams are), but the Big 12 and ACC both produce a ton of inventory that draws much better than the G5, and is competitive with large chunks of the SEC and Big 10. Those fans aren't just going to walk away in the even of a small elite tier break off.
There is way too much demand for more than 12 CFB games a week.
Ok too many to respond to all at once, I’m gonna agree to disagree on here because if a second division as the one that is being talked about would happen, where teams like ISU and MSU wouldn’t be allowed to be ranked among the top tier teams or have the ability to compete for a real championship those programs would crater.
People can say we already exist in such a scheme but we don’t as those current P4 schools all still have a shot to make it. You don’t get an Indiana experience in such a league it just doesn’t matter.
If you can point out a tier to league anywhere where there isn’t relegation (which won’t happen) I’m more than happy to hear how good they are doing.
People can say we already exist in such a scheme but we don’t as those current P4 schools all still have a shot to make it. You don’t get an Indiana experience in such a league it just doesn’t matter.
If you can point out a tier to league anywhere where there isn’t relegation (which won’t happen) I’m more than happy to hear how good they are doing.
We're saying that a more formal separation isn't going to change the demand for game from a large chunk of schools.
Depending of course on where that line is drawn. If that line is drawn around the current P4/G6, nothing really changes in terms of current revenue structure or game demand.
If that line is the absolute elite tier doing their own thing, there will be strong demand for the 2nd tier, which would roughly equate to current P4 schools that are not blue bloods.
If that line is the current Big 10 and SEC saying they play their own title and the Big 12, ACC, and G6 can't participate, it gets the murkiest on long term effects.
