(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.