Going to give you an example of this. Let's say Middle Tennessee is hosting Marshall. ESPN isn't looking to go out and try to sell an ad to a mid-state company in Tennessee. They will just roll their same ads during this game as if it were Ohio State-Michigan. This is why there is virtually no value add for ESPN to carry this game (as they will do next Friday night). An ad buy for a 30 second primetime Friday night game let's assume costs $100,000. So even if a local Murfreesboro or Nashville business wanted to buy an ad during this time frame they are probably going nope no chance at that cost.
If; however, ESPN granted the right to each school (or the conference), then suddenly we can offer Middle Tennessee Medical Center a season package of ads that will be shown 8 times during each game during the six home games and let's say another five are shown during some road games. That's 53 exposures for MTMC on an ESPN platform that we probably sell for a fraction of the price ($25,000) vs. one ad on big ESPN. MT could probably generate more revenue selling its own ads than we are getting right now.
With that said, the conference could do this in a more efficient way and probably generate more revenue for all of us especially for regional ad sales (say Regions Bank for example which is business that has roughly the same footprint as C-USA). A major problem for us right now is the league is too big. Too many teams to have to revenue share with. Plus, I have absolutely no confidence in the league's leadership to be able to pull something like this off.
(10-13-2017 10:25 PM)ThreeifbyLightning Wrote: [ -> ]Going to give you an example of this. Let's say Middle Tennessee is hosting Marshall. ESPN isn't looking to go out and try to sell an ad to a mid-state company in Tennessee. They will just roll their same ads during this game as if it were Ohio State-Michigan. This is why there is virtually no value add for ESPN to carry this game (as they will do next Friday night). An ad buy for a 30 second primetime Friday night game let's assume costs $100,000. So even if a local Murfreesboro or Nashville business wanted to buy an ad during this time frame they are probably going nope no chance at that cost.
If; however, ESPN granted the right to each school (or the conference), then suddenly we can offer Middle Tennessee Medical Center a season package of ads that will be shown 8 times during each game during the six home games and let's say another five are shown during some road games. That's 53 exposures for MTMC on an ESPN platform that we probably sell for a fraction of the price ($25,000) vs. one ad on big ESPN. MT could probably generate more revenue selling its own ads than we are getting right now.
With that said, the conference could do this in a more efficient way and probably generate more revenue for all of us especially for regional ad sales (say Regions Bank for example which is business that has roughly the same footprint as C-USA). A major problem for us right now is the league is too big. Too many teams to have to revenue share with. Plus, I have absolutely no confidence in the league's leadership to be able to pull something like this off.
Can’t argue with this model. Better than current strategy. Some just prefer to belittle ESPN. Regardless, they’re still the leader in sports broadcasting. We have different opinion regarding revenue and exposure but at end of the day every university needs an increase in revenue. If this does not occur watch for regional conferences to develop
The only way to get more exposure on ESPN is to play at odd times like middle of the week games when the P5 conference refuse to play. ESPN3 really isn’t better than Stadium or any other streaming platform because the only people watching are the people intentionally seeking out the game. IMO CUSA needs to make CUSA.tv a quality reliable digital network for the hardcore fans to watch when games are not on traditional TV. I think many hardcore fans would be willing to pay for a monthly subscription like $9.99 a month for a better quality CUSA.tv. Teams should also be allowed to sell their TV rights to local TV stations. In Charlotte the local CW station has produced and aired our first three home games. Being on local TV gives you more exposure to the people in your home area than being buried on a streaming platform.
(10-14-2017 06:02 AM)jaminniner Wrote: [ -> ]The only way to get more exposure on ESPN is to play at odd times like middle of the week games when the P5 conference refuse to play. ESPN3 really isn’t better than Stadium or any other streaming platform because the only people watching are the people intentionally seeking out the game. IMO CUSA needs to make CUSA.tv a quality reliable digital network for the hardcore fans to watch when games are not on traditional TV. I think many hardcore fans would be willing to pay for a monthly subscription like $9.99 a month for a better quality CUSA.tv. Teams should also be allowed to sell their TV rights to local TV stations. In Charlotte the local CW station has produced and aired our first three home games. Being on local TV gives you more exposure to the people in your home area than being buried on a streaming platform.
Plenty of folks just want to watch college football and will watch whatever game is offered in the middle of the week.
I would rather play on Saturdays than get Tuesday night exposure. I live in Birmingham in a football crazed office and I was the only person who watched the Troy State South Alabama game on TV. If the UAB La Tech game was played in the middle of the week it would have been in front of 9,000 instead of 27,000.
The Deputy CUSA Commissioner is former UAB AD Brian Mackin, who resigned rather than tell the team football had been disbanded, leading to the epic confrontation below when UAB President (and Mussolini Impersonator) Ray Watts told Mackin if he was too cowardly, he, the great Watts, would tell them himself.
Therefore, expect the loathsome cretin Watts and his spineless toady, current UAB AD Mark "Fumbles" Ingram, to defend Judy to the last doughnut.
(10-14-2017 02:11 PM)bladhmadh Wrote: [ -> ]I would rather play on Saturdays than get Tuesday night exposure. I live in Birmingham in a football crazed office and I was the only person who watched the Troy State South Alabama game on TV. If the UAB La Tech game was played in the middle of the week it would have been in front of 9,000 instead of 27,000.
Mid week games kill attendance for everyone. At least everyone in G5 conferences. Unless a big payday is part of the deal, mid week games should never happen.
(10-14-2017 02:11 PM)bladhmadh Wrote: [ -> ]I would rather play on Saturdays than get Tuesday night exposure. I live in Birmingham in a football crazed office and I was the only person who watched the Troy State South Alabama game on TV. If the UAB La Tech game was played in the middle of the week it would have been in front of 9,000 instead of 27,000.
I'd rather be on ESPN on Tuesday than BEIN on Saturday
(10-14-2017 02:11 PM)bladhmadh Wrote: [ -> ]I would rather play on Saturdays than get Tuesday night exposure. I live in Birmingham in a football crazed office and I was the only person who watched the Troy State South Alabama game on TV. If the UAB La Tech game was played in the middle of the week it would have been in front of 9,000 instead of 27,000.
I'd rather be on ESPN on Tuesday than BEIN on Saturday
Why? I believe the negatives for a school far outweigh the positives of playing on a Tuesday or Wednesday night. Mid week games are tough on families, tough on fans, and especially tough on out-of-town travelers. The school's attendance suffers. According to the article below, Akron --a MAC school-- won't draw "anywhere close to 10K fans for one of these mid week games". And you can't convince me that financial support among alumni --specifically donations from alumni-- doesn't suffer as well. That's the biggie that nobody talks about. You gotta get these alumni donors ON CAMPUS on a weekend. Also, according to this article, mid week games are really tough on the student athletes, especially those who have to miss at least two days of school when traveling out of town for these road games.
The article does say that most coaches believe its a benefit to play these mid week games. But it's hard to believe that a top notch high school player will see an empty stadium on ESPN on a Tuesday night and say to himself, "I want THAT!"
All of this for the benefit of playing in front of an average of 140,00 ALLEGED viewers? Some things just aren't worth the trouble. And mid week games might be a great example of this.
I dunno..we always had good crowds for tues/thurs games when we were in the mac...and I am excited to find college football on Tuesday Wednesday Thursday and Friday nights
(10-14-2017 02:11 PM)bladhmadh Wrote: [ -> ]I would rather play on Saturdays than get Tuesday night exposure. I live in Birmingham in a football crazed office and I was the only person who watched the Troy State South Alabama game on TV. If the UAB La Tech game was played in the middle of the week it would have been in front of 9,000 instead of 27,000.
Mid week games kill attendance for everyone. At least everyone in G5 conferences. Unless a big payday is part of the deal, mid week games should never happen.
Attendance is already a problem for most if not all
Not willing to play on weekdays is part of the reason we are where we are. It was the first disaster of a decision this conference made getting away from ESPN.
(10-28-2017 06:41 AM)nastybunch Wrote: [ -> ]Not willing to play on weekdays is part of the reason we are where we are. It was the first disaster of a decision this conference made getting away from ESPN.
I'm glad we are not a "weekday" conference. The most important thing other than winning for schools at our level is for fans being able to attend home games. That leads to donations for more than athletics. A weeknight game means it is a game I would be attending without my kids. A weeknight game means fans who don't live near campus can not attend. I would much rather play a home game on Saturday in front of 25,000 fans that play on ESPN 2 on a Tuesday in front of 4,500. You don't grow the fan base playing midweek games
I really enjoyed watching the Marshall vs FIU game on Facebook on my I-pad while, while watching the end of the Canes game and waiting for FAU to start. It was fun to interact with everyone in chat, and watching the EMOJI's flow across the screen when a pick or TD happen was neat. Now from what I saw the live stream had at most about 5.2K people watching. Not sure where that stands in "good vs bad" number but I imagine its in the middle as this is truly a new format for most of those who are interested in college football.
I'm 47 with two teenage daughters so dont count me in the millenial group that is strong on streaming. I tried it out to see how it was and enjoyed it. My kids are going to be the first generation that probably doesnt really differentiate between a TV set and a stream. To them its all in the same. Streaming is the future. The more we can get the better it will be.
With IMG College and Learfield Sports merging they are going to be responsible for selling the advertising and sponsorships for just about everybody. I would love to see them vertically integrate and produce their own streamed content for the conferences that want to partner with them (meaning the non-P5). It would be in IMG/Learfield's best interest to have a decent looking product that is dependable and available since they make their money selling it. They could either use their national clout to negotiate a deal with a platform to deliver the content, or they could buy/build one of their own. The barriers to entry in the streaming world are nothing like getting into TV or cable.