(08-18-2020 12:19 PM)usffan Wrote:  

(08-18-2020 11:11 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(08-18-2020 10:58 AM)arkstfan Wrote:  ESPN and FOX ain't pay those dollars for non-conference games. They don't even know the bulk of the non-conference when they bid.

The easiest way to get more money is offer more intra-league games.

The non-conference games essentially exist to increase gate revenue, and get enough wins to keep people happy enough to donate and buy tickets.

Remember, as big as the TV money is, at big P5 schools, stuff like gate revenue and other dollars associated with home games is still the biggest source of revenue. E.g., even with no money from TV at all, Alabama would still have had $120 million in athletic revenue last year.

So I do not see schools like Alabama and Ohio State giving up home games to make ESPN or FOX happier.

Plus, not every conference game is a ratings winner. I'm not sure Alabama vs Vandy is a bigger draw than Alabama vs Texas Tech.

There's also a math problem here. The conference controls all of the home games, and almost every P5 team games the system by playing 7-8 home games/year. That gives the SEC and the B1G essentially 14 x 7.5 or 105 games of inventory that they can sell to the various networks and/or keep on their conference network every year. If they go to a 10 game conference-only schedule plus 2 other P5 games (which presumably is a zero sum game such that they're only able to average 6 home games/year), that only yields 84 total games of inventory that they'll have the ability to sell. Even if the various broadcast networks are willing to up their average pay/game to offset that loss of 21 games/year in inventory, will it be enough to compete with the additional loss of revenue from ticket sales, parking and concessions? Not to mention the ill will it will cause in their various towns when they each lose an average of 1.5 home game weekends/year (meaning hotels don't get as many guests, restaurants and bars don't have as many customers, etc.)? Throw in the change in dynamics when teams will have to convince their fans that a 5-7 season is essentially the same as a 7-5 or 8-4 season was 'back in the good ole days?'

There's an old saying - be careful what you wish for...

USFFan

Your presumption that the P5 would play no G5 or FCS games if they went to a 10 game league schedule is unlikely. Much more likely is that they would go to either 2 G5 games or 1 G5 and 1 FCS. Most of those would be home games for the P5 team, meaning they would average close to 7 home games per school, which is right about what they average now. In 2019 only the SEC and B1G averaged 7 home games. The others were right around 6.5.

I'm not sure that every P5 media contract gives control of all home games to the media partner. In the Big XII, third tier rights remain with the school, not the conference, so they may have the right to sell those games above and beyond the conference media contract.

If the P5 average the same number of home games as they currently do, but more of those are P5 vs P5, then they would be presumably more valuable on the whole. Fact is, nobody is going to make any change that lowers the value of their media deal.

(08-18-2020 10:37 AM)domer1978 Wrote:  

(08-18-2020 10:30 AM)TerryD Wrote:  

(08-18-2020 10:12 AM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  I see ND settling into an 8 game ACC schedule and playing USC, Navy, a G5, and an elite Big 10/SEC/Big 12 school annually.

That would give them 6-7 home games per year.

I don't.

My only concern is the amount of hate that will gin up when ND exits the ACC to return to indy status as soon as it can.

The ire that will result when ND does (again) exactly what it says it will do ahead of time will be monumental.

Yep, that is why I am having fun with it for now. This is a unique experience for ND and why not embrace the change in the short term. I know when the pull out (no pun intended) of the ACC people will be pissed. But we will be doing what we said would happen from the very beginning.

Oh, I am having fun with it. Why not? There is no alternative.

It won't happen, but I would really enjoy ND football waltzing in, winning the ACC title and waltzing out.

That would be a lot of fun. I would truly embrace that.

You and I both know it won't just be ACC fans angry, it will be every sportswriter and fans of just about every other program.

(08-18-2020 01:21 PM)TerryD Wrote:  

(08-18-2020 10:37 AM)domer1978 Wrote:  

(08-18-2020 10:30 AM)TerryD Wrote:  

(08-18-2020 10:12 AM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  I see ND settling into an 8 game ACC schedule and playing USC, Navy, a G5, and an elite Big 10/SEC/Big 12 school annually.

That would give them 6-7 home games per year.

I don't.

My only concern is the amount of hate that will gin up when ND exits the ACC to return to indy status as soon as it can.

The ire that will result when ND does (again) exactly what it says it will do ahead of time will be monumental.

Yep, that is why I am having fun with it for now. This is a unique experience for ND and why not embrace the change in the short term. I know when the pull out (no pun intended) of the ACC people will be pissed. But we will be doing what we said would happen from the very beginning.

Oh, I am having fun with it. Why not? There is no alternative.

It won't happen, but I would really enjoy ND football waltzing in, winning the ACC title and waltzing out.

That would be a lot of fun. I would truly embrace that.

You and I both know it won't just be ACC fans angry, it will be every sportswriter and fans of just about every other program.

Yeah, imagine if we lose a bunch (3 or more) of games the outcry will be enormous. "Only indy so they can water down their schedule etc" will be the mantra.

(08-18-2020 11:11 AM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  I have no problem with 10 conference games - provided the other 2 games are split one home, on away. No need to dictate quality of opponent - that will take care of itself - but what you can't have is some teams with 7 home games and some with only 5. Make everyone play exactly 6 (or do as JR suggested, play 13 games with 6 FBS and one FCS or low G5 home game - still with 6 road games, though).

At some point you might add guidelines for who you can schedule, but I think you have to nail down the how many home vs away first.

If 13 there is a move to 13 games with a longer season. Would that change the bowls? 7-6 becomes the threshold wouldn’t it. It would be hard to fathom a bunch of 6-7 teams playing in a Bowl.

(08-17-2020 08:12 PM)schmolik Wrote:  I'll believe the ACC/SEC will go to 10 conference games permanently when I see it. I'd be surprised if either went to 9 by the 2030's. If Florida is playing 5 road SEC games every year and at Tallahassee every other year, they'll only play six home games every other year. You think that's going to fly in Gainesville? ESPN better come up with a ton of cash to make up for the missed home game. Maybe the Big Ten could go to 10 home games (Iowa would object but I can't think of any others with a permanent non conference rival). Like it or not, the big schools like home games.

You nailed it. Look at the top 20/30 P5 programs and how many home games they averaged over the last 10 years and know that this is a long shot if not impossible.

(08-18-2020 01:21 PM)ken d Wrote:  

(08-18-2020 12:19 PM)usffan Wrote:  

(08-18-2020 11:11 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(08-18-2020 10:58 AM)arkstfan Wrote:  ESPN and FOX ain't pay those dollars for non-conference games. They don't even know the bulk of the non-conference when they bid.

The easiest way to get more money is offer more intra-league games.

The non-conference games essentially exist to increase gate revenue, and get enough wins to keep people happy enough to donate and buy tickets.

Remember, as big as the TV money is, at big P5 schools, stuff like gate revenue and other dollars associated with home games is still the biggest source of revenue. E.g., even with no money from TV at all, Alabama would still have had $120 million in athletic revenue last year.

So I do not see schools like Alabama and Ohio State giving up home games to make ESPN or FOX happier.

Plus, not every conference game is a ratings winner. I'm not sure Alabama vs Vandy is a bigger draw than Alabama vs Texas Tech.

There's also a math problem here. The conference controls all of the home games, and almost every P5 team games the system by playing 7-8 home games/year. That gives the SEC and the B1G essentially 14 x 7.5 or 105 games of inventory that they can sell to the various networks and/or keep on their conference network every year. If they go to a 10 game conference-only schedule plus 2 other P5 games (which presumably is a zero sum game such that they're only able to average 6 home games/year), that only yields 84 total games of inventory that they'll have the ability to sell. Even if the various broadcast networks are willing to up their average pay/game to offset that loss of 21 games/year in inventory, will it be enough to compete with the additional loss of revenue from ticket sales, parking and concessions? Not to mention the ill will it will cause in their various towns when they each lose an average of 1.5 home game weekends/year (meaning hotels don't get as many guests, restaurants and bars don't have as many customers, etc.)? Throw in the change in dynamics when teams will have to convince their fans that a 5-7 season is essentially the same as a 7-5 or 8-4 season was 'back in the good ole days?'

There's an old saying - be careful what you wish for...

USFFan

Your presumption that the P5 would play no G5 or FCS games if they went to a 10 game league schedule is unlikely. Much more likely is that they would go to either 2 G5 games or 1 G5 and 1 FCS. Most of those would be home games for the P5 team, meaning they would average close to 7 home games per school, which is right about what they average now. In 2019 only the SEC and B1G averaged 7 home games. The others were right around 6.5.

I'm not sure that every P5 media contract gives control of all home games to the media partner. In the Big XII, third tier rights remain with the school, not the conference, so they may have the right to sell those games above and beyond the conference media contract.

If the P5 average the same number of home games as they currently do, but more of those are P5 vs P5, then they would be presumably more valuable on the whole. Fact is, nobody is going to make any change that lowers the value of their media deal.

Unless I missed something within the last year, the Big 12 (sans Texas and Oklahoma) signed over tier 3 to ESPN until something like 2024. IIRC, an AD said this was in preparation to package all rights in the next contract. Things may have changed since then though and I just didn’t notice. Found some mentions from last spring.

Quote: “Our fan base can now go to one place and find all of our games,” K-State athletic director Gene Taylor said. “They don’t have to try and figure out if they are on the Kansas State website or Fox Sports. That was the big local reason for this. Also, as we start to renegotiate our broadcast deal in 2024, I think it strengthens the league. Our next provider will have all the rights.”

Read more here: https://www.kansascity.com/sports/colleg...rylink=cpy

https://www.cbssports.com/college-footba...s-on-espn/

(08-18-2020 01:21 PM)ken d Wrote:  

(08-18-2020 12:19 PM)usffan Wrote:  

(08-18-2020 11:11 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(08-18-2020 10:58 AM)arkstfan Wrote:  ESPN and FOX ain't pay those dollars for non-conference games. They don't even know the bulk of the non-conference when they bid.

The easiest way to get more money is offer more intra-league games.

The non-conference games essentially exist to increase gate revenue, and get enough wins to keep people happy enough to donate and buy tickets.

Remember, as big as the TV money is, at big P5 schools, stuff like gate revenue and other dollars associated with home games is still the biggest source of revenue. E.g., even with no money from TV at all, Alabama would still have had $120 million in athletic revenue last year.

So I do not see schools like Alabama and Ohio State giving up home games to make ESPN or FOX happier.

Plus, not every conference game is a ratings winner. I'm not sure Alabama vs Vandy is a bigger draw than Alabama vs Texas Tech.

There's also a math problem here. The conference controls all of the home games, and almost every P5 team games the system by playing 7-8 home games/year. That gives the SEC and the B1G essentially 14 x 7.5 or 105 games of inventory that they can sell to the various networks and/or keep on their conference network every year. If they go to a 10 game conference-only schedule plus 2 other P5 games (which presumably is a zero sum game such that they're only able to average 6 home games/year), that only yields 84 total games of inventory that they'll have the ability to sell. Even if the various broadcast networks are willing to up their average pay/game to offset that loss of 21 games/year in inventory, will it be enough to compete with the additional loss of revenue from ticket sales, parking and concessions? Not to mention the ill will it will cause in their various towns when they each lose an average of 1.5 home game weekends/year (meaning hotels don't get as many guests, restaurants and bars don't have as many customers, etc.)? Throw in the change in dynamics when teams will have to convince their fans that a 5-7 season is essentially the same as a 7-5 or 8-4 season was 'back in the good ole days?'

There's an old saying - be careful what you wish for...

USFFan

Your presumption that the P5 would play no G5 or FCS games if they went to a 10 game league schedule is unlikely. Much more likely is that they would go to either 2 G5 games or 1 G5 and 1 FCS. Most of those would be home games for the P5 team, meaning they would average close to 7 home games per school, which is right about what they average now. In 2019 only the SEC and B1G averaged 7 home games. The others were right around 6.5.

I'm not sure that every P5 media contract gives control of all home games to the media partner. In the Big XII, third tier rights remain with the school, not the conference, so they may have the right to sell those games above and beyond the conference media contract.

If the P5 average the same number of home games as they currently do, but more of those are P5 vs P5, then they would be presumably more valuable on the whole. Fact is, nobody is going to make any change that lowers the value of their media deal.

Point 1 - the all P5 speculation was from upthread, which was why I went there.

Point 2 - third tier rights are realistically only there when the 1st tier and 2nd tier rightsholders pass on accepting (i.e. paying for) them. Limiting the inventory of those games leads to the scenario where there will be less third tier games at all.

USFFan

(08-18-2020 10:06 AM)ken d Wrote:  

(08-18-2020 09:35 AM)JRsec Wrote:  

(08-18-2020 09:31 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(08-18-2020 09:28 AM)JRsec Wrote:  Another home game pays a lot more than going to a run of the mill bowl.

But going to a bowl, even a rink-dink one, is more fun, and adds about 3 weeks to an already short season.

I like the bowls.

Quo, these days they are extra risks for the Seniors who think they have a chance to be drafted and the schools aren't turning out for them like they once did. They were inventions of the chambers of commerce to begin with and now the AD's are more interested in whether or not they pay. Coaches might still see them as a reward or vacation, but mostly they see them as a way to earn a bonus, even though most contracts are now specifying playoffs as bonus material, not the Poulan Weed Easter Bowl.

I do appreciate your sentiment as a fan, but nobody has been making decisions based on fans want for the last 20 years.

I think coaches also like it for the extra two weeks of practice time it gives them - much of which can be spent developing less experienced players who didn't see much playing time during the regular season. It's a nice jump on Spring practice.

Ken I think you will find that there is wisdom in moving the Spring Game to mid to late August and actually having a game against a G5 or smaller FBS program or even an FCS team if it helps the state. By skipping Spring training two and three sport athletes have options otherwise impinged by the Spring Practice and in the couple of Summer months away by the players anything they learned in the Spring is at least out of practice and at worst forgotten by the time Fall camp starts. By moving Fall camp up to mid July and skipping Spring you not only give coaches and families a needed break but you can actually use that time more productively preparing for the actual season complete with a work the kinks out preseason game which if you have a 12 game Home and Home P5 schedule gives everyone their 7th home game to sell with the season book, which by the way goes up with P only games by about 25% and pleases the fans more.

Expanded playoffs then make the playing those games more worthwhile and if we have have an 8 team playoff that's 7 major bowls involved. Have another 8 bowls set up for solid post season matches and everyone wins. Those can be dedicated to P5 only and a new criteria for bowl eligible teams is 7-6.

(08-18-2020 03:23 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(08-18-2020 10:06 AM)ken d Wrote:  

(08-18-2020 09:35 AM)JRsec Wrote:  

(08-18-2020 09:31 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(08-18-2020 09:28 AM)JRsec Wrote:  Another home game pays a lot more than going to a run of the mill bowl.

But going to a bowl, even a rink-dink one, is more fun, and adds about 3 weeks to an already short season.

I like the bowls.

Quo, these days they are extra risks for the Seniors who think they have a chance to be drafted and the schools aren't turning out for them like they once did. They were inventions of the chambers of commerce to begin with and now the AD's are more interested in whether or not they pay. Coaches might still see them as a reward or vacation, but mostly they see them as a way to earn a bonus, even though most contracts are now specifying playoffs as bonus material, not the Poulan Weed Easter Bowl.

I do appreciate your sentiment as a fan, but nobody has been making decisions based on fans want for the last 20 years.

I think coaches also like it for the extra two weeks of practice time it gives them - much of which can be spent developing less experienced players who didn't see much playing time during the regular season. It's a nice jump on Spring practice.

Ken I think you will find that there is wisdom in moving the Spring Game to mid to late August and actually having a game against a G5 or smaller FBS program or even an FCS team if it helps the state. By skipping Spring training two and three sport athletes have options otherwise impinged by the Spring Practice and in the couple of Summer months away by the players anything they learned in the Spring is at least out of practice and at worst forgotten by the time Fall camp starts. By moving Fall camp up to mid July and skipping Spring you not only give coaches and families a needed break but you can actually use that time more productively preparing for the actual season complete with a work the kinks out preseason game which if you have a 12 game Home and Home P5 schedule gives everyone their 7th home game to sell with the season book, which by the way goes up with P only games by about 25% and pleases the fans more.

Expanded playoffs then make the playing those games more worthwhile and if we have have an 8 team playoff that's 7 major bowls involved. Have another 8 bowls set up for solid post season matches and everyone wins. Those can be dedicated to P5 only and a new criteria for bowl eligible teams is 7-6.

You don't have to convince me. I've been arguing for that for years.

And I'd add a corollary to that. Allow all schools the extra two weeks of practice in the Fall whether they qualify for a bowl or not. The ones that didn't become bowl eligible need it more than those that did, with the exception of the bowls that really count for something, financially or otherwise. If that means some 7-6 teams stay home, that's no big deal to me.

Make football a one semester sport for the 99% of D-I programs that aren't playing for a national championship for that extra week.

I like the idea of the “Spring” game moving to August and being played against an FCS foe but I think a 12 game all-P5 schedule would kill recruiting and fan support at the weaker schools. Winning 0-3 games/yr for years on end will not bode well for Indiana, Kansas, Oregon St, etc. I’d like the P5 minimum to be be 10 games.

(08-18-2020 01:27 PM)domer1978 Wrote:  

(08-18-2020 01:21 PM)TerryD Wrote:  

(08-18-2020 10:37 AM)domer1978 Wrote:  

(08-18-2020 10:30 AM)TerryD Wrote:  

(08-18-2020 10:12 AM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  I see ND settling into an 8 game ACC schedule and playing USC, Navy, a G5, and an elite Big 10/SEC/Big 12 school annually.

That would give them 6-7 home games per year.

I don't.

My only concern is the amount of hate that will gin up when ND exits the ACC to return to indy status as soon as it can.

The ire that will result when ND does (again) exactly what it says it will do ahead of time will be monumental.

Yep, that is why I am having fun with it for now. This is a unique experience for ND and why not embrace the change in the short term. I know when the pull out (no pun intended) of the ACC people will be pissed. But we will be doing what we said would happen from the very beginning.

Oh, I am having fun with it. Why not? There is no alternative.

It won't happen, but I would really enjoy ND football waltzing in, winning the ACC title and waltzing out.

That would be a lot of fun. I would truly embrace that.

You and I both know it won't just be ACC fans angry, it will be every sportswriter and fans of just about every other program.

Yeah, imagine if we lose a bunch (3 or more) of games the outcry will be enormous. "Only indy so they can water down their schedule etc" will be the mantra.

Well, those who exclaim "ND has an easy schedule as an independent, it needs to join a conference" picked a bad year for ND to join a conference.

It is almost universally agreed that the original schedule that had Wisconsin, Southern Cal and Stanford on it was harder than the ACC conference only schedule it has now.

If ND loses three games against the ACC, it will be solely because this year's ND team is not as good as those of the past three years.

How do I know? Because ND went 14-1 against the ACC during the last three regular seasons.

(08-17-2020 07:54 PM)EigenEagle Wrote:  Not surprising ESPN is advocating what would be good for ESPN. If this was the most profitable business model for P5 schools it would've happened years ago, though.

Good for ESPN and great for fans.

(08-18-2020 05:52 PM)TerryD Wrote:  

(08-18-2020 01:27 PM)domer1978 Wrote:  

(08-18-2020 01:21 PM)TerryD Wrote:  

(08-18-2020 10:37 AM)domer1978 Wrote:  

(08-18-2020 10:30 AM)TerryD Wrote:  I don't.

My only concern is the amount of hate that will gin up when ND exits the ACC to return to indy status as soon as it can.

The ire that will result when ND does (again) exactly what it says it will do ahead of time will be monumental.

Yep, that is why I am having fun with it for now. This is a unique experience for ND and why not embrace the change in the short term. I know when the pull out (no pun intended) of the ACC people will be pissed. But we will be doing what we said would happen from the very beginning.

Oh, I am having fun with it. Why not? There is no alternative.

It won't happen, but I would really enjoy ND football waltzing in, winning the ACC title and waltzing out.

That would be a lot of fun. I would truly embrace that.

You and I both know it won't just be ACC fans angry, it will be every sportswriter and fans of just about every other program.

Yeah, imagine if we lose a bunch (3 or more) of games the outcry will be enormous. "Only indy so they can water down their schedule etc" will be the mantra.

Well, those who exclaim "ND has an easy schedule as an independent, it needs to join a conference" picked a bad year for ND to join a conference.

It is almost universally agreed that the original schedule that had Wisconsin, Southern Cal and Stanford on it was harder than the ACC conference only schedule it has now.

If ND loses three games against the ACC, it will be solely because this year's ND team is not as good as those of the past three years.

How do I know? Because ND went 14-1 against the ACC during the last three regular seasons.

They should only join a conference because everyone else that matters is in a conference. If they played 12 cupcakes and went undefeated, their brand would propel them into the CFO regardless of their SOS.

The idea of moving to 13 games for everyone is totally DOA until these compensation lawsuits get resolved.

(08-18-2020 03:59 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  I like the idea of the “Spring” game moving to August and being played against an FCS foe but I think a 12 game all-P5 schedule would kill recruiting and fan support at the weaker schools. Winning 0-3 games/yr for years on end will not bode well for Indiana, Kansas, Oregon St, etc. I’d like the P5 minimum to be be 10 games.

I think this is the simplest and most elegant solution - just get the SEC and ACC to start requiring 2 P5 opponents yearly and get the Big Ten/Big 12/PAC 12 to start enforcing their 9+1 rules

(08-18-2020 01:21 PM)TerryD Wrote:  

(08-18-2020 10:37 AM)domer1978 Wrote:  

(08-18-2020 10:30 AM)TerryD Wrote:  

(08-18-2020 10:12 AM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  I see ND settling into an 8 game ACC schedule and playing USC, Navy, a G5, and an elite Big 10/SEC/Big 12 school annually.

That would give them 6-7 home games per year.

I don't.

My only concern is the amount of hate that will gin up when ND exits the ACC to return to indy status as soon as it can.

The ire that will result when ND does (again) exactly what it says it will do ahead of time will be monumental.

Yep, that is why I am having fun with it for now. This is a unique experience for ND and why not embrace the change in the short term. I know when the pull out (no pun intended) of the ACC people will be pissed. But we will be doing what we said would happen from the very beginning.

Oh, I am having fun with it. Why not? There is no alternative.

It won't happen, but I would really enjoy ND football waltzing in, winning the ACC title and waltzing out.

That would be a lot of fun. I would truly embrace that.

You and I both know it won't just be ACC fans angry, it will be every sportswriter and fans of just about every other program.

The caterwauling from the Big10 fanbases would be louder imo. Lots of G5 people would complain as well. But USC, Stanford, the University of the Navy, MSU, Purdue, Texas, Oklahoma, Bama, UGA, Miami, GT and enough other schools to round out a schedule will always be there for ND. Cheer cheer.

(08-18-2020 09:07 PM)bullet Wrote:  The idea of moving to 13 games for everyone is totally DOA until these compensation lawsuits get resolved.

It could also help resolve them by giving the schools a bargaining chip to get concessions from the players and/or a way to generate additional revenue to offset increased benefit costs. Look at how the NFL pushed for 17 games and eventually got it as part of a CBA.