Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Post Reply 
Does this season's success make UCF/USF more attractive to the P5?
Author Message
BullsFanInTX Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 7,958
Joined: May 2008
Reputation: 178
I Root For: USF
Location:
Post: #31
RE: Does this season's success make UCF/USF more attractive to the P5?
(10-08-2017 10:44 PM)JRsec Wrote:  
(10-08-2017 10:34 PM)BullsFanInTX Wrote:  
(10-08-2017 09:33 PM)MplsBison Wrote:  It's not the P5, though. PAC and Big Ten never would. And the ACC and SEC for all intents and purposes can't. So that means we're really only talking about the Big 12. Not saying they aren't P5, of course.

Will the Big 12 add USF/UCF? In my opinion, no I don't think they will.

Then the Big 12 would be very short sighted and not thinking about the long term (next 20+ years), and the benefit to adding them.

If you want to gain the interest of a P conference and the fans won't turn out for your present competition there is one option that might help to gain attention anyway. Build your Athletic Endowment to a level that sustains enough scholarships for the required minor sports that conferences like the SEC and ACC sponsor so that the endowment shows the level of fan support even if they don't show up to the current events in sufficient numbers. Attendance and endowment are both indicative of the kind of base of support the major conferences are looking for.

Not really. I mean Syracuse and Pitt's attendance were never any better than USF's in the Big East, and in most cases, worse.

I stand by my assertion that most programs conform to the opponents (with the exception of true major programs that are within the so called power conferences). If you took about 6 ACC or Big 12 teams and placed them in CUSA or the Sun Belt, they'd be hard pressed to average 20-25K per game.

And by the way, both USF and UCF's long term averages are at the very upper end of so called G5 attendance...within the top 5 for sure.
(This post was last modified: 10-08-2017 10:51 PM by BullsFanInTX.)
10-08-2017 10:49 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Fighting Muskie Offline
Special Teams
*

Posts: 722
Joined: Sep 2016
Reputation: 23
I Root For: Ohio St, MAC
Location:
Post: #32
RE: Does this season's success make UCF/USF more attractive to the P5?
One thing adding UCF and USF to the Big 12 is get them into Florida that's something that they currently don't have and that brings some immediate value. Even if they don't get their golden ticket out I feel like when the AAC's contract is up it would be wise for them to sign with FOX who will be willing to give them more than the low ball deal ESPN gave them for what they considered a duplicate market. The state of Florida is only going to grow and second and third generation Floridians are going to be more likely than their parents to support local teams. When UCF and USF start bringing big names into town the crowds will return because frankly no one is going to get really excited to see Temple or UConn or Tulsa or Tulane.
10-08-2017 10:56 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
JRsec Offline
Super Moderator
*

Posts: 14,158
Joined: Mar 2012
Reputation: 716
I Root For: SEC
Location:
Post: #33
RE: Does this season's success make UCF/USF more attractive to the P5?
(10-08-2017 10:49 PM)BullsFanInTX Wrote:  
(10-08-2017 10:44 PM)JRsec Wrote:  
(10-08-2017 10:34 PM)BullsFanInTX Wrote:  
(10-08-2017 09:33 PM)MplsBison Wrote:  It's not the P5, though. PAC and Big Ten never would. And the ACC and SEC for all intents and purposes can't. So that means we're really only talking about the Big 12. Not saying they aren't P5, of course.

Will the Big 12 add USF/UCF? In my opinion, no I don't think they will.

Then the Big 12 would be very short sighted and not thinking about the long term (next 20+ years), and the benefit to adding them.

If you want to gain the interest of a P conference and the fans won't turn out for your present competition there is one option that might help to gain attention anyway. Build your Athletic Endowment to a level that sustains enough scholarships for the required minor sports that conferences like the SEC and ACC sponsor so that the endowment shows the level of fan support even if they don't show up to the current events in sufficient numbers. Attendance and endowment are both indicative of the kind of base of support the major conferences are looking for.

Not really. I mean Syracuse and Pitt's attendance were never any better than USF's in the Big East, and in most cases, worse.

I stand by my assertion that most programs conform to the opponents (with the exception of true major programs that are within the so called power conferences). If you took about 6 ACC or Big 12 teams and placed them in CUSA or the Sun Belt, they'd be hard pressed to average 20-25K per game.

And by the way, both USF and UCF's long term averages are at the very upper end of so called G5 attendance...within the top 5 for sure.

By what metrics? Attendance? Gross Total Revenue? Market valuation? You aren't. Extend the 65 of the P Conferences down to the 72nd position and you have the G5 schools that are most likely to be able to make the jump on metrics. I've posted those lists in various places on this board and keep up with them annually because together they paint quite a different picture than just any one metric. Even within the P5 there are major gaps that mark strength and weaknesses. Below the 72nd position there aren't many schools that can make the jump.

Attendance matters in spades, endowment levels show stability. Outside of that what UCF and USF have going for them is a graduate base that will be coming of age in numbers within a decade and a half and in a growing state that can attract large viewing audiences. If you want to get to a P conference ahead of schedule you'll have to show you can deliver support (commitment) with viewers, attendees, giving, and in commercial brand value.

The SEC this past year averaged 77,500 in attendance. The ACC averaged 49,900. The SEC's average gross revenue for a member school was 131 million. The ACC averaged 88 million. The SEC had the highest viewing numbers. The ACC was tied with the PAC for last. The brand value of the SEC's member schools was 7.3 billion. That of the ACC was 2.7 billion. Every other P conference was over 3 billion with the Big 10 coming in at 5.7 billion.

If all you want to tout is your 45,000 in attendance you don't even help the ACC make more money. Your problem is in selling your school's commitment to realize its potential to a larger and more affluent conference when you lag the lowest numbers. The ACC is the only conference who has two members that rank below the 65th position in some of these metrics. Wake Forest is one, and there is another (I just can't remember which one it is right now), so Connecticut and B.Y.U. rank within the 65th position on some of those metrics of which attendance and gross total revenue are two of the categories.

If UConn and B.Y.U. can't get in on metrics how can schools that rank below 72nd position in many of those stats get a look? You have to sell the conferences on your commitment to realize your potential which being located in Central Florida already has their interest. Since your attendance, and therefore Gross Total Revenue, and therefore Market Numbers aren't up to snuff, endowment may be your best and possibly only ticket.

Many of the smaller schools who try to make the jump up can't because of the requisite number of minor sports you must offer and the required number of Title IX sports you have to offer along with them to make the move. Most conferences are now asking for minimum facilities with required amenities and seating capacity requirements. Those were the kinds of things that even after 2 applications kept W.V.U. from being able to file a viable application to the SEC.

But when the day comes that the ACC and SEC might be interested in USF or UCF then the better strength you can demonstrate the better chance you have of convincing the SEC of your potential. If you aspire to 50,000 attendance to please the ACC the SEC will pass. The difference between the two is the distance between the #1 conference in the metrics I listed and the #5 conference.

Sure your folks will turn out when the SEC comes to town. But SEC schools average 11,500 more per venue in attendance than the Big 10. If you can't meet our average then it isn't likely you can get in. The SEC makes much more than the Big 10 (16 million per school average from all revenue streams). That means we make more on merchandise sales, donations just to be able to purchase tickets, and expect travel crowds of 15,000 in our venues. A pair of season books in the end zone at an SEC venue will cost you $1400 to $1600 in donations for the right to purchase 1 pair at an average cost of $550 per book. So you will have 77,500 people the vast majority of which are paying minimally $2500 to $2700 a year on 1 pair of season books in the worst seats in the stadium. The cost goes up, and I mean way up from there.

So if you can't fund an endowment or deliver the number of fannies in the seats we are looking for, or worse yet don't have a venue even capable of getting close to those numbers then you aren't getting in.

If the ACC lands Notre Dame all in they will move to 4th ahead of the PAC in some of those metrics. But that's it. They have too many small private schools with small venues, and old schools like in Raleigh/Durham that have landlocked older facilities that can't expand. That's what holds them back. And since they already have two schools in Florida you have a bigger obstacle in selling them on a third than you would have in selling the SEC on a 2nd.

A couple of pages back I was saying that the SEC would be wise to invest in South Florida. You are in the Central area of the State where we don't have a presence from there South and are on the Gulf side which means access to and from Texas takes on interesting dimensions in planned growth for the SEC.

Making an intentional push to up attendance and build an endowment that would facilitate your move up are paramount in becoming viable. The location and future potential already have people's attention. But none of the metrics you currently have are acceptable. So a demonstration of the desire and ability to successfully make that move up would be a requirement of consideration. And that's pretty much the end of that story. If you don't believe me then do the work and look it up.

Upward mobility is about commitment to meet the standards of the more powerful conference. It isn't a gift you are given just because you have potential.
(This post was last modified: 10-08-2017 11:34 PM by JRsec.)
10-08-2017 11:25 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
_C2_ Offline
The King of Overanalysis
*

Posts: 17,270
Joined: Feb 2008
Reputation: 349
I Root For: Houston
Location: Near Seawall Town
Post: #34
RE: Does this season's success make UCF/USF more attractive to the P5?
(10-08-2017 06:58 PM)ken d Wrote:  
(10-08-2017 06:48 PM)otown Wrote:  
(10-08-2017 06:43 PM)ken d Wrote:  The question was "does this season's success make UCF/USF more attractive?". The answer to that question has to be no. Not any more than Western Michigan, Northern Illinois, Marshall and any number of other schools who found short term success. Jumping on the latest big thing isn't a recipe for long term success.

Thats just it..... UCF bottomed out, but had a quick turnaround. In fact, they have been very successful over a long period of time with multiple conference championships, multiple 10 plus win seasons, and a BCS win over the Big 12 champ. Very inaccurate to label them as having "short term success.".............. but yes, poor wording of the question indeed, and I get your point on a technicality.

But it's not a technicality. If it were, Boise State would have been invited somewhere before this. The point is it isn't about wins, whether that's over a few years or "multiple" years. The equation is a lot more complex than that.

It's not about wins but connections and timing. If you aren't already in, chances are you aren't getting in.
10-08-2017 11:47 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
TrojanCampaign Offline
All American
*

Posts: 4,155
Joined: Sep 2011
Reputation: 106
I Root For: USC, UA, AAMU,
Location: Huntsville
Post: #35
RE: Does this season's success make UCF/USF more attractive to the P5?
(10-08-2017 04:37 PM)rednblackattack Wrote:  The day they are added to the Big 12 is the day Texas and OU will bolt

And go where? The PAC-12 is not any better than the Big 12...And the SEC is not adding any more.
10-09-2017 12:12 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
JRsec Offline
Super Moderator
*

Posts: 14,158
Joined: Mar 2012
Reputation: 716
I Root For: SEC
Location:
Post: #36
RE: Does this season's success make UCF/USF more attractive to the P5?
(10-08-2017 11:25 PM)JRsec Wrote:  
(10-08-2017 10:49 PM)BullsFanInTX Wrote:  
(10-08-2017 10:44 PM)JRsec Wrote:  
(10-08-2017 10:34 PM)BullsFanInTX Wrote:  
(10-08-2017 09:33 PM)MplsBison Wrote:  It's not the P5, though. PAC and Big Ten never would. And the ACC and SEC for all intents and purposes can't. So that means we're really only talking about the Big 12. Not saying they aren't P5, of course.

Will the Big 12 add USF/UCF? In my opinion, no I don't think they will.

Then the Big 12 would be very short sighted and not thinking about the long term (next 20+ years), and the benefit to adding them.

If you want to gain the interest of a P conference and the fans won't turn out for your present competition there is one option that might help to gain attention anyway. Build your Athletic Endowment to a level that sustains enough scholarships for the required minor sports that conferences like the SEC and ACC sponsor so that the endowment shows the level of fan support even if they don't show up to the current events in sufficient numbers. Attendance and endowment are both indicative of the kind of base of support the major conferences are looking for.

Not really. I mean Syracuse and Pitt's attendance were never any better than USF's in the Big East, and in most cases, worse.

I stand by my assertion that most programs conform to the opponents (with the exception of true major programs that are within the so called power conferences). If you took about 6 ACC or Big 12 teams and placed them in CUSA or the Sun Belt, they'd be hard pressed to average 20-25K per game.

And by the way, both USF and UCF's long term averages are at the very upper end of so called G5 attendance...within the top 5 for sure.

By what metrics? Attendance? Gross Total Revenue? Market valuation? You aren't. Extend the 65 of the P Conferences down to the 72nd position and you have the G5 schools that are most likely to be able to make the jump on metrics. I've posted those lists in various places on this board and keep up with them annually because together they paint quite a different picture than just any one metric. Even within the P5 there are major gaps that mark strength and weaknesses. Below the 72nd position there aren't many schools that can make the jump.

Attendance matters in spades, endowment levels show stability. Outside of that what UCF and USF have going for them is a graduate base that will be coming of age in numbers within a decade and a half and in a growing state that can attract large viewing audiences. If you want to get to a P conference ahead of schedule you'll have to show you can deliver support (commitment) with viewers, attendees, giving, and in commercial brand value.

The SEC this past year averaged 77,500 in attendance. The ACC averaged 49,900. The SEC's average gross revenue for a member school was 131 million. The ACC averaged 88 million. The SEC had the highest viewing numbers. The ACC was tied with the PAC for last. The brand value of the SEC's member schools was 7.3 billion. That of the ACC was 2.7 billion. Every other P conference was over 3 billion with the Big 10 coming in at 5.7 billion.

If all you want to tout is your 45,000 in attendance you don't even help the ACC make more money. Your problem is in selling your school's commitment to realize its potential to a larger and more affluent conference when you lag the lowest numbers. The ACC is the only conference who has two members that rank below the 65th position in some of these metrics. Wake Forest is one, and there is another (I just can't remember which one it is right now), so Connecticut and B.Y.U. rank within the 65th position on some of those metrics of which attendance and gross total revenue are two of the categories.

If UConn and B.Y.U. can't get in on metrics how can schools that rank below 72nd position in many of those stats get a look? You have to sell the conferences on your commitment to realize your potential which being located in Central Florida already has their interest. Since your attendance, and therefore Gross Total Revenue, and therefore Market Numbers aren't up to snuff, endowment may be your best and possibly only ticket.

Many of the smaller schools who try to make the jump up can't because of the requisite number of minor sports you must offer and the required number of Title IX sports you have to offer along with them to make the move. Most conferences are now asking for minimum facilities with required amenities and seating capacity requirements. Those were the kinds of things that even after 2 applications kept W.V.U. from being able to file a viable application to the SEC.

But when the day comes that the ACC and SEC might be interested in USF or UCF then the better strength you can demonstrate the better chance you have of convincing the SEC of your potential. If you aspire to 50,000 attendance to please the ACC the SEC will pass. The difference between the two is the distance between the #1 conference in the metrics I listed and the #5 conference.

Sure your folks will turn out when the SEC comes to town. But SEC schools average 11,500 more per venue in attendance than the Big 10. If you can't meet our average then it isn't likely you can get in. The SEC makes much more than the Big 10 (16 million per school average from all revenue streams). That means we make more on merchandise sales, donations just to be able to purchase tickets, and expect travel crowds of 15,000 in our venues. A pair of season books in the end zone at an SEC venue will cost you $1400 to $1600 in donations for the right to purchase 1 pair at an average cost of $550 per book. So you will have 77,500 people the vast majority of which are paying minimally $2500 to $2700 a year on 1 pair of season books in the worst seats in the stadium. The cost goes up, and I mean way up from there.

So if you can't fund an endowment or deliver the number of fannies in the seats we are looking for, or worse yet don't have a venue even capable of getting close to those numbers then you aren't getting in.

If the ACC lands Notre Dame all in they will move to 4th ahead of the PAC in some of those metrics. But that's it. They have too many small private schools with small venues, and old schools like in Raleigh/Durham that have landlocked older facilities that can't expand. That's what holds them back. And since they already have two schools in Florida you have a bigger obstacle in selling them on a third than you would have in selling the SEC on a 2nd.

A couple of pages back I was saying that the SEC would be wise to invest in South Florida. You are in the Central area of the State where we don't have a presence from there South and are on the Gulf side which means access to and from Texas takes on interesting dimensions in planned growth for the SEC.

Making an intentional push to up attendance and build an endowment that would facilitate your move up are paramount in becoming viable. The location and future potential already have people's attention. But none of the metrics you currently have are acceptable. So a demonstration of the desire and ability to successfully make that move up would be a requirement of consideration. And that's pretty much the end of that story. If you don't believe me then do the work and look it up.

Upward mobility is about commitment to meet the standards of the more powerful conference. It isn't a gift you are given just because you have potential.
I looked up a few numbers for you. You did a little better than I remembered but still lag some others. It's at least feasible.
South Florida: 74th-Gross Total revenue $47,160,819 / Avg Attendance: 37,539 / Valuation: 67th-$70,189,000

Central Florida: 67th-$59,379,453 / Avg Attendance: 35,802 / Valuation: 61st-$82,302,000

So if you average the components I think both South Florida and Central Florida do fit within the 72nd position by average of the metrics.

So checking the conference standards of the conferences you wish to apply to should give you the goals for the requisite number of sports, venue sizes, amenities required, and the conference means and averages are there and updated annually. I still say that financial commitment to making the move needs to be demonstrated and if you don't do the upgrades now, but can bank the money necessary to accomplish them then that will help. Endowing minor sports will help as well. Usually football and basketball can pay for themselves.

But with those numbers you can start to see what has to be done. Continuing to raise the academic standard, especially in research, will help too.
10-09-2017 12:25 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
JRsec Offline
Super Moderator
*

Posts: 14,158
Joined: Mar 2012
Reputation: 716
I Root For: SEC
Location:
Post: #37
RE: Does this season's success make UCF/USF more attractive to the P5?
(10-09-2017 12:12 AM)TrojanCampaign Wrote:  
(10-08-2017 04:37 PM)rednblackattack Wrote:  The day they are added to the Big 12 is the day Texas and OU will bolt

And go where? The PAC-12 is not any better than the Big 12...And the SEC is not adding any more.

We most certainly would add either or both of those. Those two take our economic impact from over 7 billion to 10 billion.
10-09-2017 12:26 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
otown Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,569
Joined: May 2013
Reputation: 44
I Root For: Florida
Location:
Post: #38
RE: Does this season's success make UCF/USF more attractive to the P5?
(10-08-2017 09:22 PM)Wedge Wrote:  
(10-08-2017 04:19 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  If USF and UCF continue to sustain success

In the 9 seasons before receiving a Big 12 invitation, TCU won a total of 92 football games.

That is sustained success. It's way too early to talk about sustained success in year one of what a team hopes will be a long run.

That's cherry picking one team. Utah was good, but less than TCU. Louisville similar to Utah. Pitt and Syracuse, let's not even go there. You remove the winless season where UCF had a coach that quit on the team, and you are looking at Louisevill numbers. Point being?
(This post was last modified: 10-09-2017 07:50 AM by otown.)
10-09-2017 05:12 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
otown Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,569
Joined: May 2013
Reputation: 44
I Root For: Florida
Location:
Post: #39
RE: Does this season's success make UCF/USF more attractive to the P5?
(10-09-2017 12:26 AM)JRsec Wrote:  
(10-09-2017 12:12 AM)TrojanCampaign Wrote:  
(10-08-2017 04:37 PM)rednblackattack Wrote:  The day they are added to the Big 12 is the day Texas and OU will bolt

And go where? The PAC-12 is not any better than the Big 12...And the SEC is not adding any more.

We most certainly would add either or both of those. Those two take our economic impact from over 7 billion to 10 billion.

I do not hear that at all in my circles. At least not from a lot of Florida boosters. In addition, I think you underestimate the bad blood between TAM and Texas and why the breakup happened.
(This post was last modified: 10-09-2017 05:16 AM by otown.)
10-09-2017 05:15 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
DawgNBama Offline
NCR Ranger
*

Posts: 2,280
Joined: Sep 2002
Reputation: 46
I Root For: p-natal vitamin
Location: prenatal vitamins
Post: #40
RE: Does this season's success make UCF/USF more attractive to the P5?
(10-08-2017 06:58 PM)ken d Wrote:  
(10-08-2017 06:48 PM)otown Wrote:  
(10-08-2017 06:43 PM)ken d Wrote:  The question was "does this season's success make UCF/USF more attractive?". The answer to that question has to be no. Not any more than Western Michigan, Northern Illinois, Marshall and any number of other schools who found short term success. Jumping on the latest big thing isn't a recipe for long term success.

Thats just it..... UCF bottomed out, but had a quick turnaround. In fact, they have been very successful over a long period of time with multiple conference championships, multiple 10 plus win seasons, and a BCS win over the Big 12 champ. Very inaccurate to label them as having "short term success.".............. but yes, poor wording of the question indeed, and I get your point on a technicality.

But it's not a technicality. If it were, Boise State would have been invited somewhere before this. The point is it isn't about wins, whether that's over a few years or "multiple" years. The equation is a lot more complex than that.

Actually, Boise was invited to a BCS/P5 level conference in the past: the Big East. But other than that, no P5 level conference has made any sense. Why would Texas & Oklahoma want to play in Boise or have access to the Boise market? Boise can get rather cold in November, I imagine. Plus, Boise is like probably about the size of Birmingham, AL. Somewhat big, but not really big like Orlando & Tampa.
10-09-2017 05:25 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 




User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)


Copyright © 2002-2017 Collegiate Sports Nation Bulletin Board System (CSNbbs), All Rights Reserved.
CSNbbs is an independent fan site and is in no way affiliated to the NCAA or any of the schools and conferences it represents.
This site monetizes links. FTC Disclosure.
Powered By MyBB, © 2002-2017 MyBB Group.