http://www.espn.com/college-football/sto...-saturdays
Quote:The Big Ten plans to scale back its plans for Friday night football games moving forward after hearing from a long list of parties affected by the change.
The league announced last fall that its television partners would start to broadcast games on Friday nights, including six contests after the opening Labor Day weekend of the 2017 season. The decision drew criticism from coaches, fans and high school athletic associations.
In an updated schedule released last week, two of those six games -- Northwestern at Maryland on Oct. 13 and Michigan State at Northwestern on Oct. 28 -- were moved back to Saturday kickoff dates. A conference official told ESPN on Monday that moving forward, the league is likely to scale back even further to two or three Friday night games after the opening week per year.
Quote:The Big Ten has plans to bring its television partners together with many of its members and the high school athletic association directors from the 11 states within its footprint in the near future to discuss ways to mitigate the negative effects that playing on Fridays might have.
Highly doubtful. We are talking about the conference that for the second year in a row has it's two biggest football draws playing of Friday night instead of using the supposed exposure that these abominations receive to get exposure for programs that wouldn't normally get it.
I'd like to hear how much money this will cost the Big Ten when they renegotiate their TV contract to remove those Friday night games. While I agree that playing on Friday is a bad idea in many states, I think we also need to know the financial impact (maybe it's not that much?).
ACC can't totally rid of them. But agree, the larger fb schools in ACC should not play any.
I definitely don't agree with that.
If the league wants to totally get rid of them then totally get rid of them. Personally, I don't think we get as much out of these Friday night games as others insist we do.
However, the ACC can't be picking and choosing who plays on Friday nights and who doesn't? If we're going to play on non-traditional nights, then everyone goes in the pool.
Now, I'm not suggesting that we should schedule our marquee matchups on Friday night. However, nobody should be exempt from them because once you start down the road you create a caste system between "Friday schools" and "Saturday schools" and nobody wants to be in that former group.
I ave to disagree on putting everyone in the pool. If you don't want to play on Friday, then get the program pointed in the right direction. And yes, that include the Tar Heels. No way should the ACC top programs play on Friday.
(04-03-2017 06:35 PM)Kaplony Wrote: [ -> ] (04-03-2017 06:08 PM)Dr. Isaly von Yinzer Wrote: [ -> ]I definitely don't agree with that.
If the league wants to totally get rid of them then totally get rid of them. Personally, I don't think we get as much out of these Friday night games as others insist we do.
However, the ACC can't be picking and choosing who plays on Friday nights and who doesn't? If we're going to play on non-traditional nights, then everyone goes in the pool.
Now, I'm not suggesting that we should schedule our marquee matchups on Friday night. However, nobody should be exempt from them because once you start down the road you create a caste system between "Friday schools" and "Saturday schools" and nobody wants to be in that former group.
Easy enough for the fan of a school that thus far hasn't had to play a non-Black Friday Friday night game and little chance of it in the future. We are stuck with the two wasteland schools who enjoy them because they aren't drawing home crowds anyway so it doesn't hurt attendance.
And it just goes to show the arguments made by the people who claimed that Friday night games would result in greater exposure was just the typical ACC fanboy lie. If that were the case they wouldn't consistently force the top drawing schools to do it and instead be serving up the teams that can't get any exposure otherwise. The past three seasons every single one of Clemson's games has been on either broadcast TV or one of the ESPN networks except the FCS and G5 OOC games. I imagine if I cared to look FSU would be the same. Perhaps use these abominations for the games that otherwise would be relegated to Raycom, ESPNNEWS, or Foxsports.
I have to agree with Kap here... non-traditional time slots are best used to get exposure for teams who couldn't muscle their way into a good Saturday slot. Clemson and FSU can get the Saturday slots, so I say let them. I don't mind when VT plays on Thursday, though I'm not a fan of Fridays at all, and I don't want to kill the Saturday schedule because the best games have been moved to a week night.
The B1G is scaling back as you say but it isn't really that much. What happened was that two of the original six games that were scheduled to be on a Friday were moved to Saturdays. The two moved to Saturday were Maryland hosting Northwestern and and the other was Northwestern hosting Michigan State (i.e. conference games in October). There are still four games that are planned to be Friday games which all happen in September. Of those four remaining, only one is a conference game (Sept. 29 Nebraska at Illinois). The other three are: Sept. 1 Washington at Rutgers and also Utah State at Wisconsin. Then on Sept. 8 Ohio at Purdue.
What it really boils down to is that the Maryland vs Northwestern (Oct. 13) and the Northwestern vs Michigan State (Oct. 27) have moved from some sort of ESPN/ESPN2/ESPNews broadcast to probably being on the Big Ten Network. There is likely to be some monetary loss due to this but I can't see it being an absolute ton. I think the league would like to capitalize on the revenue Friday night games bring but the teams are pushing back against it. I suspect the Big Ten will try it out to see how this works and likely set it up as they have it now. Mostly non-conference games and have them all in September.
If the ACC is making horrible concessions like Friday games, it can NOT be $16 Million in revenue behind the SEC/B1G.
How does Swofford get called a Ninja for horrible negotiation skills?
I think a big wildcard in this discussion is what happens once the ACC Network is up and running?
Right now, Friday night games are a way for the ACC's television partner (ESPN) to showcase more ACC games during a given weekend. Does that change once you add three games every Saturday to the ACC Network? You're still going to get some of the higher-profile ACC games on ESPN, ESPN2 and ESPNU on Saturdays, so I'd guess we'll see less Friday games when the ACCN is operational.
If I'm ESPN, I'd be much more inclined to parlay existing contracts with the AAC, Boise State and BYU into Friday night games while selling them on the advantage of the exposure for their programs (much like the Thursday night games used to be for teams like VT).
(04-04-2017 09:45 AM)H.U.S.T.L.E. Wrote: [ -> ]I think a big wildcard in this discussion is what happens once the ACC Network is up and running?
Right now, Friday night games are a way for the ACC's television partner (ESPN) to showcase more ACC games during a given weekend. Does that change once you add three games every Saturday to the ACC Network? You're still going to get some of the higher-profile ACC games on ESPN, ESPN2 and ESPNU on Saturdays, so I'd guess we'll see less Friday games when the ACCN is operational.
If I'm ESPN, I'd be much more inclined to parlay existing contracts with the AAC, Boise State and BYU into Friday night games while selling them on the advantage of the exposure for their programs (much like the Thursday night games used to be for teams like VT).
^^^ THIS ^^^
HUSTLE, you are obviously an intelligent, well-educated fan.
We gave up more Friday games when we went back for more money. We didn't have so many when we first started playing Fridays.
It's not that hard. Opening week isn't a big deal, and neither is Black Friday.
The ACC should be able to find 4-5 other games to play on Friday that don't involved FSU or Clemson. Certainly FSU and Clemson shouldn't be playing Fridays every year. It's just stupid to have your biggest draws totally off the board on a full slate of Saturday football discussion.
It's a good slot for Pitt-BC or NC State-Appalachian State. Those games easily can get 3X the viewers and attention than if they get lost in the shuffle on Saturday. You can have a better game, like say Miami - VT on Black Friday.
What is so hard about that? I'm pretty sure that was closer to the original Friday games arrangement the ACC got involved with.
The ACC needs to definitely go about buying back to it's original Friday arrangement. I certainly hope they do in concert with the launch of the ACC Network. As mentioned, those FSU and Clemson games would have more value anchoring the ACC Network than they probably do on a Friday Night.
I can understand Friday night games being a problem in the more rural / college town areas of The ACC. For us and I am speaking of Louisville, we have always enjoyed the Friday night games, it's a party here. Fans usually leave work early or take the day off to get to the stadium before Noon to tailgate for 8 - 10 hours.
We don't have the same tradition of a Clemson, Pittsburgh or Boston College so not playing on Saturday isn't a big deal.
Personally I would rather have an 8PM Friday night game than a Noon Saturday tilt.
CJ
So why can't the ACC just tell ESPN "These teams are willing to play on Thursday, those teams are willing to play on Friday, and the others are Saturday only"? It sounds like that is essentially what the Big Ten is doing...
Louisville's been doing it for so long that we kind of expect 1-2 weeknight games per year. Some of the best atmospheres at PJCS have happened on a weeknight, so I personally don't mind it. Take a half day and tailgate all afternoon.
What I DO mind is having the Saturday noon game every week. If we have to do weeknight games, then the trade off should be more weekend prime time night games, or at least the late afternoon 4:00 games.
(04-05-2017 05:49 AM)Hokie Mark Wrote: [ -> ]So why can't the ACC just tell ESPN "These teams are willing to play on Thursday, those teams are willing to play on Friday, and the others are Saturday only"? It sounds like that is essentially what the Big Ten is doing...
That seems to be the common sense solution, right?
Who knows what the negotiations actually end up looking like, but it sure seems that ESPN is dictating who they want to see in some of those Friday night matchups.
One group's opinions we don't hear much from on this topic are the coaches - I'm curious how they feel about Friday night games, but my guess is that they like them much better than Thursday games.
It's also interesting to see which fanbases do and don't mind playing games on days other than Saturday - based on the small sample size here & taking from what I know of the Hokie fanbase, it appears that former Big East teams used to playing on Thursday or Friday nights don't really mind it that much while longtime ACC fans have a strong aversion to it.
I thought the Louisville/Syracuse Friday night matchup this past season was great for the league, as it was a coming out party for Lamar Jackson on national TV without much competition for eyeballs. The ACC needs to be strategic with those Friday night slots and I thought that was an outstanding showcase for the conference (even if it was at the expense of Syracuse... sorry guys).
As I mentioned previously in the thread, I think the ACC Network coming may actually help solve some of these issues. In order to boost the subscriber numbers, it wouldn't shock me to see games like Clemson/BC or FSU/BC on the network. No offense to BC, but it makes sense to use those first-tier brands to anchor the ACCN when they aren't playing in a marquee matchup. Use the Friday night slots for the likes of your second-tier brands like Louisville, VT & Miami. Those fanbases seem to like the exposure of night games on non-traditional gamedays more than some of the other conference members.
(04-05-2017 05:49 AM)Hokie Mark Wrote: [ -> ]So why can't the ACC just tell ESPN "These teams are willing to play on Thursday, those teams are willing to play on Friday, and the others are Saturday only"? It sounds like that is essentially what the Big Ten is doing...
This seems to be what they have done as far as hosting games goes. Syracuse, BC and Louisville are all willing to host Friday games, and all did last year. One Friday game is on Black Friday, which is a different situation. The only other Friday game last year was hosted by Florida State on Veterans Day. I'm guessing the fact that it was on Veterans Day affected their willingness to host, since many fans would have had the day off to travel.
This year, Syracuse, BC and Duke are hosting Friday games, with two more on Black Friday.
(04-04-2017 10:37 AM)Kaplony Wrote: [ -> ]You know how to tell when you win an argument? When your opponent goes personal.
I accept you concession.
Congrats on a meaningless regular season win against Clemson being the brightest highlight in Pitt football since the Marino era.
So calling Dr. Islay a cuck wasn't personal?
(04-05-2017 05:21 AM)CardinalJim Wrote: [ -> ]I can understand Friday night games being a problem in the more rural / college town areas of The ACC. For us and I am speaking of Louisville, we have always enjoyed the Friday night games, it's a party here. Fans usually leave work early or take the day off to get to the stadium before Noon to tailgate for 8 - 10 hours.
We don't have the same tradition of a Clemson, Pittsburgh or Boston College so not playing on Saturday isn't a big deal.
Personally I would rather have an 8PM Friday night game than a Noon Saturday tilt.
CJ
I understand that I am an interloper here, but I agree with you 100%. Thursday/Friday night games always feel like a big time event. IIRC the last 9 games Rutgers and Louisville played against each other were on Thursday or Friday.
(04-05-2017 07:25 AM)H.U.S.T.L.E. Wrote: [ -> ] (04-05-2017 05:49 AM)Hokie Mark Wrote: [ -> ]So why can't the ACC just tell ESPN "These teams are willing to play on Thursday, those teams are willing to play on Friday, and the others are Saturday only"? It sounds like that is essentially what the Big Ten is doing...
That seems to be the common sense solution, right?
Who knows what the negotiations actually end up looking like, but it sure seems that ESPN is dictating who they want to see in some of those Friday night matchups.
One group's opinions we don't hear much from on this topic are the coaches - I'm curious how they feel about Friday night games, but my guess is that they like them much better than Thursday games.
It's also interesting to see which fanbases do and don't mind playing games on days other than Saturday - based on the small sample size here & taking from what I know of the Hokie fanbase, it appears that former Big East teams used to playing on Thursday or Friday nights don't really mind it that much while longtime ACC fans have a strong aversion to it.
I thought the Louisville/Syracuse Friday night matchup this past season was great for the league, as it was a coming out party for Lamar Jackson on national TV without much competition for eyeballs. The ACC needs to be strategic with those Friday night slots and I thought that was an outstanding showcase for the conference (even if it was at the expense of Syracuse... sorry guys).
As I mentioned previously in the thread, I think the ACC Network coming may actually help solve some of these issues. In order to boost the subscriber numbers, it wouldn't shock me to see games like Clemson/BC or FSU/BC on the network. No offense to BC, but it makes sense to use those first-tier brands to anchor the ACCN when they aren't playing in a marquee matchup. Use the Friday night slots for the likes of your second-tier brands like Louisville, VT & Miami. Those fanbases seem to like the exposure of night games on non-traditional gamedays more than some of the other conference members.
It's less of an issue for Syracuse because our recruiting isn't based on attracting local talent. As such, playing during HS games isn't a big deal. The only players in the Dome on gameday are kids who either have scheduled (and therefore more flexible) visit or kids who really, really want to play for us.
Additionally, our football fans (who go to games) are mostly local, so week day games aren't an issue for them. They don't have to worry about travel.
So the downside is comparatively small.
However, the upside is comparatively big. We get a prime time slot that we wouldn't normally get, which is great for general exposure, recruiting, and growing our fan support.
As such, I have no issue w/ SU taking one or two for the team (conference) every year. The conference will do best if every school gives what it can and takes what it needs.
My issue is if SU is going to have that mindset, I strongly wish the rest of the conference would go along (or continue to go along in many cases). SU has extremely limited flexibility in basketball because we have 4 legitimate OOC rivalries in basketball and at least 3 of them are against big name schools (St. John's, UConn, Villanova, and Georgetown). Scheduling 20 ACC games + multiple OOC rivals + anybody else interesting OOC is an issue - especially when the tourney committee doesn't accurately take circumstances of a win/loss into account.
IMHO, if the conference is going to 20 BB games and we're biting the bullet on Friday night games, I'd like to get love w/ conference tournaments - especially in basketball and lacrosse. Now I'll be the first to admit that the ACCT in NYC was designed to benefit SU the most, so don't take this post as a complaint. It's more a statement of my beliefs/opinions/perspective.
(04-05-2017 01:21 PM)UpStreamRedTeam Wrote: [ -> ] (04-04-2017 10:37 AM)Kaplony Wrote: [ -> ]You know how to tell when you win an argument? When your opponent goes personal.
I accept you concession.
Congrats on a meaningless regular season win against Clemson being the brightest highlight in Pitt football since the Marino era.
So calling Dr. Islay a cuck wasn't personal?
South Carolina logic dictates "no", #amirite?