(10-29-2019 02:50 PM)JRsec Wrote: [ -> ] (10-23-2019 11:04 AM)bullet Wrote: [ -> ] (10-22-2019 04:37 PM)Wedge Wrote: [ -> ]
The Gators already have announced 2 non-con P5 opponents (including FSU every year) from 2020-2025, and from 2028-2031. Assuming there are no unannounced cancellations among those and no unannounced future P5 games, they're looking for 2026 and 2027, and 2032 and beyond.
Several "name" teams appear to have availability for 2026-2027, so the Gators shouldn't have trouble finding games for those years.
Also, the fact that Florida wants to make sure they have at least 2 P5 non-con games every year fits in with an observation made awhile back in an article that we talked about here: Teams are scheduling for the future on the assumption that there will be an 8-team playoff. Teams that hope to be contenders are going to want 10 or 11 P5 games, to have a schedule that looks good if they're under consideration for an at-large spot or for higher seeding in the playoff.
I think internal revenues are more a factor. #1 fan interest. Even the SEC schools are starting to feel a lessening of enthusiasm. #2 is TV ratings, although that is a bigger factor for the Pac 12, Big 12 and Big 10 who have their whole contracts coming up sooner than the SEC and ACC.
CBS is coming up in 2023-4 for the SEC. CBS has indicated a desire for more games. How do you get that with ESPN buying up T2 rights to the SEC? Expansion. Expansion also means more P Games. And since CBS is T1 only swapping 1 T3 game for another P game gives both CBS and ESPN more T1 and T2 games to broadcast. Expansion helps to cover the inventory lost for the SECN as that's 4 more T3 games to cover the loss of 14. And not all T2 games get picked up and adding two schools increases that inventory by 8 games if you consider each new addition will be limited to 3 T1 appearances which is the ceiling per school in appearances on CBS annually. So if two new additions add 24 games and 6 could be T1 and 4 will likely be T3 that leaves 14 more games that are likely to be broadcasted by ABC, ESPN, ESPN2, or ESPNU. Let's say they pick up 6 of those, with the 8 remaining the NET inventory for SECN after two additions is 12 games or a NET loss of 2 games for the season. T1 pays more. T2 pays more. And 2 added fan bases to the T3 more than covers the loss of 2 events.
Therein lies the motivation for expansion whether you are the SEC, Big 10, or ACC. With the PAC the motivation would be expanding into a new time slot which increases the value of their existing inventory and the increased inventory from additions.
If nothing happens in the way of realignment the SEC needs to play an additional P Game to increase its inventory of T1 and T2 and that money has to cover the loss of inventory to the SECN. More basketball could help in this regard, but it wouldn't make up the difference.
Folks on this board like to pine for the days of 10 and 12 member conferences. The reason those days will not happen again is the residual market model for T3 rights, and the need to increase the inventory of T1 and T2 games for payout increases for the content driven games which attract more ad money.
Since these models aren't changing the drive toward expansion remains. In short we are going to get larger and not smaller.
Adding to the complexity is this afternoon's announcement from the NCAA that players are entitled to the rights from their images. This is going to open an interesting period where some schools will have to ponder their futures in P conferences.
Inventory is not an issue. CBS doesn't even want to televise #12 and #14 from the SEC-South Carolina and Missouri. Their president came out and said it 2 or 3 years ago. You don't need the inventory for the future of T3 which is online. The SEC and B1G needed it for their networks, but they don't need more than 14.
The last expansion was not about quality. Rutgers and Maryland???? Missouri???? For that matter, A&M, which was about market and recruiting and a program with great fan support, not about quality.
(11-07-2019 02:53 PM)bullet Wrote: [ -> ] (10-29-2019 02:50 PM)JRsec Wrote: [ -> ] (10-23-2019 11:04 AM)bullet Wrote: [ -> ] (10-22-2019 04:37 PM)Wedge Wrote: [ -> ]
The Gators already have announced 2 non-con P5 opponents (including FSU every year) from 2020-2025, and from 2028-2031. Assuming there are no unannounced cancellations among those and no unannounced future P5 games, they're looking for 2026 and 2027, and 2032 and beyond.
Several "name" teams appear to have availability for 2026-2027, so the Gators shouldn't have trouble finding games for those years.
Also, the fact that Florida wants to make sure they have at least 2 P5 non-con games every year fits in with an observation made awhile back in an article that we talked about here: Teams are scheduling for the future on the assumption that there will be an 8-team playoff. Teams that hope to be contenders are going to want 10 or 11 P5 games, to have a schedule that looks good if they're under consideration for an at-large spot or for higher seeding in the playoff.
I think internal revenues are more a factor. #1 fan interest. Even the SEC schools are starting to feel a lessening of enthusiasm. #2 is TV ratings, although that is a bigger factor for the Pac 12, Big 12 and Big 10 who have their whole contracts coming up sooner than the SEC and ACC.
CBS is coming up in 2023-4 for the SEC. CBS has indicated a desire for more games. How do you get that with ESPN buying up T2 rights to the SEC? Expansion. Expansion also means more P Games. And since CBS is T1 only swapping 1 T3 game for another P game gives both CBS and ESPN more T1 and T2 games to broadcast. Expansion helps to cover the inventory lost for the SECN as that's 4 more T3 games to cover the loss of 14. And not all T2 games get picked up and adding two schools increases that inventory by 8 games if you consider each new addition will be limited to 3 T1 appearances which is the ceiling per school in appearances on CBS annually. So if two new additions add 24 games and 6 could be T1 and 4 will likely be T3 that leaves 14 more games that are likely to be broadcasted by ABC, ESPN, ESPN2, or ESPNU. Let's say they pick up 6 of those, with the 8 remaining the NET inventory for SECN after two additions is 12 games or a NET loss of 2 games for the season. T1 pays more. T2 pays more. And 2 added fan bases to the T3 more than covers the loss of 2 events.
Therein lies the motivation for expansion whether you are the SEC, Big 10, or ACC. With the PAC the motivation would be expanding into a new time slot which increases the value of their existing inventory and the increased inventory from additions.
If nothing happens in the way of realignment the SEC needs to play an additional P Game to increase its inventory of T1 and T2 and that money has to cover the loss of inventory to the SECN. More basketball could help in this regard, but it wouldn't make up the difference.
Folks on this board like to pine for the days of 10 and 12 member conferences. The reason those days will not happen again is the residual market model for T3 rights, and the need to increase the inventory of T1 and T2 games for payout increases for the content driven games which attract more ad money.
Since these models aren't changing the drive toward expansion remains. In short we are going to get larger and not smaller.
Adding to the complexity is this afternoon's announcement from the NCAA that players are entitled to the rights from their images. This is going to open an interesting period where some schools will have to ponder their futures in P conferences.
Inventory is not an issue. CBS doesn't even want to televise #12 and #14 from the SEC-South Carolina and Missouri. Their president came out and said it 2 or 3 years ago. You don't need the inventory for the future of T3 which is online. The SEC and B1G needed it for their networks, but they don't need more than 14.
The last expansion was not about quality. Rutgers and Maryland???? Missouri???? For that matter, A&M, which was about market and recruiting and a program with great fan support, not about quality.
All things CEO's say are subject to change without notice. They have been experimenting with the occasional off normal time telecast. T1 revenue will be the only true income increaser moving forward. So content multipliers will be the selections next time around. More national draw games will equal more revenue.
(11-07-2019 03:01 PM)JRsec Wrote: [ -> ] (11-07-2019 02:53 PM)bullet Wrote: [ -> ] (10-29-2019 02:50 PM)JRsec Wrote: [ -> ] (10-23-2019 11:04 AM)bullet Wrote: [ -> ] (10-22-2019 04:37 PM)Wedge Wrote: [ -> ]
The Gators already have announced 2 non-con P5 opponents (including FSU every year) from 2020-2025, and from 2028-2031. Assuming there are no unannounced cancellations among those and no unannounced future P5 games, they're looking for 2026 and 2027, and 2032 and beyond.
Several "name" teams appear to have availability for 2026-2027, so the Gators shouldn't have trouble finding games for those years.
Also, the fact that Florida wants to make sure they have at least 2 P5 non-con games every year fits in with an observation made awhile back in an article that we talked about here: Teams are scheduling for the future on the assumption that there will be an 8-team playoff. Teams that hope to be contenders are going to want 10 or 11 P5 games, to have a schedule that looks good if they're under consideration for an at-large spot or for higher seeding in the playoff.
I think internal revenues are more a factor. #1 fan interest. Even the SEC schools are starting to feel a lessening of enthusiasm. #2 is TV ratings, although that is a bigger factor for the Pac 12, Big 12 and Big 10 who have their whole contracts coming up sooner than the SEC and ACC.
CBS is coming up in 2023-4 for the SEC. CBS has indicated a desire for more games. How do you get that with ESPN buying up T2 rights to the SEC? Expansion. Expansion also means more P Games. And since CBS is T1 only swapping 1 T3 game for another P game gives both CBS and ESPN more T1 and T2 games to broadcast. Expansion helps to cover the inventory lost for the SECN as that's 4 more T3 games to cover the loss of 14. And not all T2 games get picked up and adding two schools increases that inventory by 8 games if you consider each new addition will be limited to 3 T1 appearances which is the ceiling per school in appearances on CBS annually. So if two new additions add 24 games and 6 could be T1 and 4 will likely be T3 that leaves 14 more games that are likely to be broadcasted by ABC, ESPN, ESPN2, or ESPNU. Let's say they pick up 6 of those, with the 8 remaining the NET inventory for SECN after two additions is 12 games or a NET loss of 2 games for the season. T1 pays more. T2 pays more. And 2 added fan bases to the T3 more than covers the loss of 2 events.
Therein lies the motivation for expansion whether you are the SEC, Big 10, or ACC. With the PAC the motivation would be expanding into a new time slot which increases the value of their existing inventory and the increased inventory from additions.
If nothing happens in the way of realignment the SEC needs to play an additional P Game to increase its inventory of T1 and T2 and that money has to cover the loss of inventory to the SECN. More basketball could help in this regard, but it wouldn't make up the difference.
Folks on this board like to pine for the days of 10 and 12 member conferences. The reason those days will not happen again is the residual market model for T3 rights, and the need to increase the inventory of T1 and T2 games for payout increases for the content driven games which attract more ad money.
Since these models aren't changing the drive toward expansion remains. In short we are going to get larger and not smaller.
Adding to the complexity is this afternoon's announcement from the NCAA that players are entitled to the rights from their images. This is going to open an interesting period where some schools will have to ponder their futures in P conferences.
Inventory is not an issue. CBS doesn't even want to televise #12 and #14 from the SEC-South Carolina and Missouri. Their president came out and said it 2 or 3 years ago. You don't need the inventory for the future of T3 which is online. The SEC and B1G needed it for their networks, but they don't need more than 14.
The last expansion was not about quality. Rutgers and Maryland???? Missouri???? For that matter, A&M, which was about market and recruiting and a program with great fan support, not about quality.
All things CEO's say are subject to change without notice. They have been experimenting with the occasional off normal time telecast. T1 revenue will be the only true income increaser moving forward. So content multipliers will be the selections next time around. More national draw games will equal more revenue.
Hence why I do think "mega" or "super" conferences will start to form and divisions will dissipate. It allows for larger geographical conferences and somewhat of an open concept scheduling where a school has a set number of rivals then plays whoever from the rest of the conference.
(11-01-2019 11:45 AM)Wedge Wrote: [ -> ] (11-01-2019 01:04 AM)ChrisLords Wrote: [ -> ]Virginia Tech just signed a home and home with Alabama, Ole Miss and an as yet unnamed SEC school. I wonder if it's Florida. It would be for 2024 and 2025.
https://virginiatech.sportswar.com/artic...re-series/
Florida has already scheduled Miami (as well as Florida State, of course) for '24 and '25. The '24 game is on August 31, the same date as VT's '24 game against the unnamed SEC team.
South Carolina and Tennessee both have vacancies in '24 and '25, and neither has announced games for the two dates VT announced (8/31/24 and 8/30/25).
Turns out that Virginia Tech's mystery SEC opponent is Vanderbilt.
(11-19-2019 10:15 AM)Wedge Wrote: [ -> ]Turns out that Virginia Tech's mystery SEC opponent is Vanderbilt.
Which makes me wonder if they were trying to get someone else and this was the fall-back position in case they couldn't (hence the secrecy)?
(11-19-2019 04:41 PM)Hokie Mark Wrote: [ -> ] (11-19-2019 10:15 AM)Wedge Wrote: [ -> ]Turns out that Virginia Tech's mystery SEC opponent is Vanderbilt.
Which makes me wonder if they were trying to get someone else and this was the fall-back position in case they couldn't (hence the secrecy)?
Could be. Or maybe there was a disagreement about playing the Vandy home game at the NFL stadium, or maybe they had agreed to play that day in Nashville but hadn't finalized the contract for playing at the NFL stadium.