Jump to content

Hurtlocker

Legacy Members
  • Posts

    2,155
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Hurtlocker

  1. Yeah this is the next end game. It won't be the top 18 brands on their own, or relegation, but the top 60 some schools will break out to become the next version of the NCAA, for football at least, under the CFP money umbrella. My guess is the first step is sharing the same set of rules for the sport, players, NIL, etc, but the holy grail will be moving to a full NFL model of media contracts, where all of the schools involved pool broadcast inventory together for the regular season and playoffs. If you think the jump the B1G did in how they structured their last deal was large, leveraging them all together would create a juggernaut that would likely increase media valuations 5-10x over todays. But before you get there, you need to show you can operate together as a cohesive unit.
  2. Eh, no. Leaving early, contractually with the media partners, actually had to be settled out by giving Fox more. The Big 12 teams did not get a premium for six years to allow a one-year early exit, that's crazy talk. If there was movement the Big12 would have been looking at a $60m average over 6-8 years, due to how their T1 contract was severely undervalued from being so old, now they're looking at a $40m over 6, that's a sizable decrease with the big brand exits. Additionally, they likely got 10-15% less for signing fast. However, after watching what happened to the Pac, resigning at stable rates was the exact right decision. I don't think anyone in whatever the new 16 is going to be called, is going to be complaining about media revenues. The only increase that occurred here that isn't market dependent is the boosts they gave to the schools coming in, but that was completely paid for by Texas and OU's buy out fees. They basically invested it to lure in more schools, like Colorado and Arizona.
  3. Not sure on 2011, I thought it was closer to 2016. That's when there was a lot of Clemson/FSU to the Big12 talk and they got all hoity saying the ACC schools were a better academic fit or something. What they wanted was the ACC Network because the SEC was getting a network and making more money. However, building that network cost them 20 years. I think they thought the ACC Network was the golden goose and it would pay out $20+ million a team or something, but, spoiler, it didn't.
  4. On the FSU front, from the Tampa Bay Times: We ran an FSU football playoff conspiracy theory by a sports businessman You don’t have to look hard to find conspiracy theories about why 13-0 Florida State was left out of the College Football Playoff in favor of 12-1 Alabama. The playoff selection committee’s stated reason, of course, was that the Seminoles were a different team without star quarterback Jordan Travis. FSU’s weaker schedule didn’t help. Message boards and social media have other ideas — namely that ESPN was pulling the strings on the selection committee. The playoff’s broadcaster either wanted to protect another partner (the SEC) by picking the Crimson Tide or wanted Alabama to boost TV ratings. There’s no evidence to support the arguments, unless you think the order of helmets behind analyst Kirk Herbstreit was a sign. ESPN partners with the ACC, too, and committee chairperson Boo Corrigan is the athletic director at an ACC school (North Carolina State) that would have made more money with FSU, not Alabama, in the field. Regardless, we ran the root of the theory by Ray Katz. He’s the chief operating officer of the media rights and business firm Collegiate Sports Management Group and teaches at Columbia University’s sports management program. Would Alabama be a larger draw for casual fans in a way that FSU wouldn’t be? “I’m not going to say Florida State would not be,” Katz said. “I think it’s an incredibly compelling story.” FSU would have added a different name-brand program to the field. Alabama has only missed the playoff twice in 10 years; FSU has qualified for the semifinals once (2014). The Seminoles overcame Travis’ injury to win the ACC as Mike Norvell’s four-year rebuilding process culminated with a perfect season. It’s easy to envision that story attracting viewers. But the data on Alabama’s dominance is overwhelming. The Crimson Tide averaged 7.3 million viewers over the 11 games tracked by Sports Media Watch. The dozen FSU games with available data averaged 4.2 million viewers. “Every week that Alabama is on any kind of reasonable TV platform, they kick butt,” Katz said. “That’s just the reality of the situation… “I think it’s a Nick Saban effect to some extent. He stirs up the pot. You either tune in to watch him win, or you tune in to watch him lose. That’s just a fact.” That fact has attracted the interest of politicians. State Sen. Corey Simon, the former FSU star defensive lineman, wrote on social media after last week’s decision that ESPN has a “vested interest in the SEC participating in the CFP.” U.S. Sen. Rick Scott has asked to see any correspondence between committee members and ESPN and/or the SEC. Gov. Ron DeSantis has set aside $1 million in his proposed budget for possible litigation. Katz said he has a “real problem with all these popularity contests and prognostications.” How big of an underdog FSU would be in the playoff shouldn’t be a factor. But if Katz had to buy into an alternative explanation, his wouldn’t involve TV ratings. “My conspiracy theory is — if there was a conspiracy theory — it’s about them defending why they are going to 12 teams,” Katz said. When the field expands from four teams to 12 next year, teams that play in the first round and keep winning will play two more games than they would now. The longer season adds more wear and tear on players’ bodies and will cut into students’ class or free time, depending on the schedules. Katz said an exclusion like undefeated FSU provides a reason to justify expansion; the Seminoles would have made a 12-team field. “It defends that,” Katz said.
  5. Late to the party on this NIL change of stance by the NCAA, but it is a major game changer. Not so much in that kids can get paid, but it is the line in the sand of our next division in college sports. They're trying to say it won't be, but there is no way you can have one set of schools openly paying players and another not yet consider them competitive. As soon as this gets voted on, it will be the FCS, the FBS, and the CFP. This CFP then can start implementing its own rules and regulations, require things that the NCAA cannot to everyone, including mandating participation to investigation and enforcement. (Currently the NCAA receives none of the money from football, but has to handle all of the investigation, with no one being required to participate. Expect that to change.) Some schools can make this change without batting a financial eye, some will do it to stay in the limelight. Many will say "fuck that". It is the beginning of the end for the current FBS structure. I've seen it estimated that for a school to comfortably adopt the new measures, they'd need to have an athletic department that has revenues of over $100m. As of the last reporting cycle, that includes 49 public programs, with Ohio State at the top and KState at 49 (likely more with privates like ND, USC, Miami, TCU, Baylor, NW and Vandy. All of the schools in that 49 are Power 5: $200M+: Ohio State, Texas, Bama, Michigan, Georgia $150m - $199M: LSU, A&M, Florida, Penn State, Oklahoma, Auburn, Michigan State, Indiana, Virginia (usually around $110m, had a huge donation), FSU, Kentucky, Clemson, Tennessee, Oregon, Arkansas, Iowa, Wisconsin $125m - $149M: Louisville, Illinois, Washington, Nebraska, South Carolina, Missouri, Minnesota, Ole Miss $100m - $124m: Arizona, UNC, ASU, Cal, Kansas, Utah, Purdue, VTech, ISU, MSU, TTech, Rutgers, Maryland, GTech, WVU, OkSt, UCLA, NCState, KState P5 Close, but not quite: Colorado ($94), UCF($89), WSU ($85), Oregon State ($83), Cinci ($83), Houston ($78) WSU/Beavers will see a reduction in revenue in 2-3 years, hard to see where they can keep up the drive. Colorado hasn't shown the Prime bump in these numbers, would expect them to be well over $100m by next report. UCF/Cinci/Houston/BYU are all getting $10m bumps even before they reach full payment in the Big12. With the privates, that puts about 70 teams in the NIL/CFB universe, most of whom already push NIL. But now they'll be able to set their own rules away from everyone else and that's huge.
  6. This is great man, I'd love to see it again in a year. My suspicion what we see now is a bit of overvaluation on the conferences we see acquiring teams and we'll see a decrease in valuation somewhere to even it out. For instance, Texas leading the SEC is off a rank derived from being Bama, yes, but also Big 12 schools. If we assume the same projected power, and why wouldn't we, that decrease will not be felt in the B12 anymore, but instead against A&M, Arkansas, Mississippi State, Florida, and Kentucky, who will now own those losses. Same holds true for Oregon. They're going to get their wins, but now they have to beat Michigan, Ohio State and Washington next year to replicate those results. If they win out, either Michigan or Ohio State will have two losses at the end of the year, diminishing their score. If the SEC/B1G were pushing only for the post season, they'd make sure their big brands only play one big brand a year, increasing the amount of 1 loss powers, but TV execs won't allow that to happen. Fox will easily screw ESPN on the post season to increase the value of their in-season schedule. The same was shown in the B12 this year. Cinci, Houston, BYU, and UCF likely had much higher scores last year, especially Cinci, but then met the meat grinder of P5 scheduling. You simply cannot have someone go up, without something else going down. Next year for the B12 they'll have someone make the next jump, because there will be 16 less losses in conference play with Texas/BlowU moving out. I agree fully with you that I expect Arizona and Utah to immediately step into top quad contenders, but the list of who could make it there with them includes KState, ISU, OkSt, WVU, Kansas, TCU, Colorado. They'll either suffer from the Pac 12 issue of no one ever getting through unscathed, or a couple are going to end up looking like power houses. To your point, no historical champs, but I think their ceiling looks higher than the ACC's with historic champs. I've been saying it for a year, and @bullet sort of just proved it. In the new 12 post season, I expect to see 3.5 teams a year each between the B1G/SEC (absorbing the Pac's old spot), 2/each for the B12/ACC, and one school from the PacMWC/SunBelt/AAC (likely in that order) each year with ND stealing one of the ACC's spots when good, since they can't ever receive a bye. I also expect to see the B12/ACC get more wins than most expect in that first round, which will give a huge bonus to whatever school can do it consistently. Semi's in, I expect historic power to dominate.
  7. I want to see Georgia win and FSU get bounced to open up #4, but part of me wants the upset just to watch the world burn. Come on committee, explain to me how head to head works. Fucktards. Also, while the point is true, that dudes numbers were so off it is stunning - same point though. SEC - $330 B12 - $90 (actual seat, not SRO) B1G - $37 ACC - $30 PAC - $17 Also, story time because there is whiskey in me. Went with some guys on a weekend to the cocktail party. Played Sawgrass on Friday, woke up blind drunk on Saturday and proceeded to make our way to the game to scalp tickets. The Florida side had me wondering, even in my obliterated state, if I had all my shots. On the Georgia side it was a freakish orchestra of black leather pants and mini skirts with skin tight red sweaters, like it was a school uniform. At some point a guy in our group had his moment where he bought a nerf football from an 8 year old for like $100. As we looked at him as perplexed as monkeys punching a monolith as he proceeded to just chuck it randomly into the Georgia tailgating crowd. As we innocently followed that crazy misplaced football around for hours we ran into an ungodly high number of hot girls who had no right being at this game, dressed in that uniform. I recommend.
  8. https://x.com/RedditCFB/status/1730810645514244432?s=20
  9. Been knee deep in it for like a year with realignment, but after watching this game its hard to fathom how they fucked up so colossally, but great last game.
  10. Yeah its why they went from 8 to 9 when they dropped to ten. They had to keep the total inventory count up. They likely kept that in the pro rata payment, OOC games aren't worth shit.
  11. When rivalries sell, it is kind of dumb that the Big 12 didn't lean into marketing what they have more. All have been overshadowed by the River and Bedlam, but with those gone, start shining a light. The BigTen whores out the dumbest trophy games imaginable and it works. It seems the B12 wants parity more than anything else.
  12. Yes, Oklahoma was moving to the south and would play Texas every year and it wasn't fair to be the only team to have to play Texas and Nebraska every year, since, at the time Nebraska was actually good and everyone thought Colorado would stay national champ level too. Not solving that was sort of the first crack in the foundation. Also kind of dumb from a TV standpoint.
  13. True, but what part of the contract isn't being performed? Or do you mean that the contract is only for today and tomorrow doesn't count? That's not really true. Especially if something was provided for that future, in this case the development of a cable channel. That's like saying you're not bound to pay off a debt you signed up for, because tomorrow isn't enforceable. It is, otherwise they'd never get anything done, they'd have horrible credit, and capital projects couldn't be financed.
  14. It's basically how Learfield exists, colleges sign them all the time and have for ages for merchandising, broadcasts, or really any avenue to monetize their IP. Logoed T-Shirts don't end up all over Walmart unless someone went through this process.
  15. Not sure what the relief is for, currently they're being paid quite a bit of money on the contract and are not harmed in anyway, outside the wish they had more. Also, the ACC has been through this before, though with a buyout, which is likely the easier to claim foul on:
  16. What locked them into the deal was that FSU/Clemson and others wanted an ACC Network because they thought the SEC made more than them because of the T3 content. Did they make more than the ACC on T3 content, yes, but we're talking $5-7ms here. The big money is the T1 content and the SEC took theirs to market and made a lot more (then the B1G blew that out of the water). So the ACC extended their deal so ESPN could absorb the cost of building a network for T3 content that they could have just let go to ESPN+ for free, and went to market in a few years from now instead of 13.
  17. Getting cameras into the stadium is like the lowest concern here. Could FSU stream their sports to bypass the agreement? Sure, they could try, though, at a minimum they'd take on all the production and marketing costs too. And, just like how things get pulled off YouTube all the time, the rights holder can go after internet distribution. ISPs cannot knowingly allow pirated content to go through their pipeline any more than CBS can over the air. Rights need to be secured to be broadcast either way. And if you think broadcasts go to die on T3 channels or ESPN+, just wait until the only way you see it is a university website that likely isn't designed to handle mass media. Even if they were allowed to broadcast on their website without concern, it would also have an effect on if they could even put together an independent schedule worth watching if none of their games are T1. Why would ND swap that home and home when one year it's in a void. They'd get a bigger audience traveling to Ball State. What not allowing the cameras into the stadium does do, however, is put them into breach of contract, for another level of expense, regardless of if one believes sovereign immunity or government immunity would protect them against the liability of breaking said contract they entered into in good faith. Just find a big pile of money laying around that already isn't laying around just so you can go to court about not making money over the internet. Which brings us to the crux of this, FSU wants to leave to make more money, not less. That's what all their whining is about. Adding more expenses and getting less exposure on an outlet that pays out pennies on the dollar in value isn't the way to do that. They want to take them back to sell to BTN or the SEC. Well ESPN clearly cannot broadcast them if the ACC holds the rights and BTN isn't going to get into a legal battle over it. They'll just sit back and let it play out, on FSU's dime. No major provider who can offer to hand FSU money is going to do that. This is why Texas/OU cut a deal just to get out a year early and USC/UCLA set it up to go when their contract was over. They either need to do what hasn't been done and prove that the contract isn't binding, or they need to settle out of it, or they just need to STFU and wait.
×
×
  • Create New...