04-07-2020, 03:34 AM
Given that so many games are on TV, especially cable, do conferences REALLY need to extend their footprints into EVERY state, making travel difficult?
(04-07-2020 03:34 AM)Erictelevision Wrote: [ -> ]Given that so many games are on TV, especially cable, do conferences REALLY need to extend their footprints into EVERY state, making travel difficult?
(04-07-2020 03:58 AM)Erictelevision Wrote: [ -> ]I find it hard to believe that someone in CA can't turn on their TV and watch the SEC or B1G network. I live near Boston and I have the PAC-12 network on my cable system.
(04-07-2020 03:58 AM)Erictelevision Wrote: [ -> ]I find it hard to believe that someone in CA can't turn on their TV and watch the SEC or B1G network. I live near Boston and I have the PAC-12 network on my cable system.
(04-07-2020 03:58 AM)Erictelevision Wrote: [ -> ]I find it hard to believe that someone in CA can't turn on their TV and watch the SEC or B1G network. I live near Boston and I have the PAC-12 network on my cable system.
(04-07-2020 03:34 AM)Erictelevision Wrote: [ -> ]Given that so many games are on TV, especially cable, do conferences REALLY need to extend their footprints into EVERY state, making travel difficult?
(04-07-2020 03:34 AM)Erictelevision Wrote: [ -> ]Given that so many games are on TV, especially cable, do conferences REALLY need to extend their footprints into EVERY state, making travel difficult?
(04-07-2020 11:41 AM)Fighting Muskie Wrote: [ -> ]The footprint model is dead for the most part. The focus now is who can be the biggest draw, regardless of of where the schools are. Brand power is everything.
It confirms the fears I had almost a decade ago when the Big Ten added Rutgers and Maryland for their markets rather than going for better athletic brands.
10 years ago adding new states and markets was all the rage. Adding a school like Florida St to the SEC was seen as a duplication of markets. Now it’s about adding actual eyeballs rather than new cable subscribers.
(04-07-2020 03:34 AM)Erictelevision Wrote: [ -> ]Given that so many games are on TV, especially cable, do conferences REALLY need to extend their footprints into EVERY state, making travel difficult?
(04-07-2020 05:21 PM)quo vadis Wrote: [ -> ](04-07-2020 11:41 AM)Fighting Muskie Wrote: [ -> ]The footprint model is dead for the most part. The focus now is who can be the biggest draw, regardless of of where the schools are. Brand power is everything.
It confirms the fears I had almost a decade ago when the Big Ten added Rutgers and Maryland for their markets rather than going for better athletic brands.
10 years ago adding new states and markets was all the rage. Adding a school like Florida St to the SEC was seen as a duplication of markets. Now it’s about adding actual eyeballs rather than new cable subscribers.
Well ..... the reason the B1G and the SEC are making so much more than the other P5 are those conference networks, which rely on cable subscriptions.
It's probably not a coincidence that B1G revenues boomed after Rutgers and Maryland joined.
Cable subscribers and "eyeballs" are the same thing. The difference now compared to 2011 is the emergence of streaming, but streaming still means paying for content, like cable.
(04-08-2020 12:31 PM)EigenEagle Wrote: [ -> ]How much of a compact footprint can you really have as a G5 league?
Is there really any meaningful savings in travel savings if the Sun Belt East teams to replace trips to Louisiana and Arkansas with trips to Boca Raton, Miami, Kentucky, and West Virginia? Nope.
G5 contracts are going up, CFP payouts are going to go up when the CFP is expanded, going for expansion based on geography in the G5 is a really, really dumb idea.
(04-08-2020 12:56 PM)quo vadis Wrote: [ -> ](04-08-2020 12:31 PM)EigenEagle Wrote: [ -> ]How much of a compact footprint can you really have as a G5 league?
Is there really any meaningful savings in travel savings if the Sun Belt East teams to replace trips to Louisiana and Arkansas with trips to Boca Raton, Miami, Kentucky, and West Virginia? Nope.
G5 contracts are going up, CFP payouts are going to go up when the CFP is expanded, going for expansion based on geography in the G5 is a really, really dumb idea.
Thing is, though, college football still has a heavily regional aspect to it. It's no surprise that three most powerful P5 conferences also are the most geographically cohesive. That builds rivalries and fan interest, and ultimately brand value.
People *everywhere* like to see a *local* rivalry because they know the bitterness that comes from that. That's why fans across the country tune in for USC - UCLA, FSU - Miami (and Florida), Army - Navy, Oklahoma - Texas, Georgia - Florida, Michigan - Ohio State, etc. Notre Dame vs USC is really the only exception, and that works because ND is a "national" school.
Geographic dispersion creates "who cares" attitudes among fans. Like it or not, if someone is closer to you, there is more likely to be a rivalry attitude. FAU vs UNT has zero rivalry content. FAU vs FIU, absolutely, ditto with UNT vs Texas State.
(04-08-2020 12:56 PM)quo vadis Wrote: [ -> ](04-08-2020 12:31 PM)EigenEagle Wrote: [ -> ]How much of a compact footprint can you really have as a G5 league?
Is there really any meaningful savings in travel savings if the Sun Belt East teams to replace trips to Louisiana and Arkansas with trips to Boca Raton, Miami, Kentucky, and West Virginia? Nope.
G5 contracts are going up, CFP payouts are going to go up when the CFP is expanded, going for expansion based on geography in the G5 is a really, really dumb idea.
Thing is, though, college football still has a heavily regional aspect to it. It's no surprise that three most powerful P5 conferences also are the most geographically cohesive. That builds rivalries and fan interest, and ultimately brand value.
People *everywhere* like to see a *local* rivalry because they know the bitterness that comes from that. That's why fans across the country tune in for USC - UCLA, FSU - Miami (and Florida), Army - Navy, Oklahoma - Texas, Georgia - Florida, Michigan - Ohio State, etc. Notre Dame vs USC is really the only exception, and that works because ND is a "national" school.
Geographic dispersion creates "who cares" attitudes among fans. Like it or not, if someone is closer to you, there is more likely to be a rivalry attitude. FAU vs UNT has zero rivalry content. FAU vs FIU, absolutely, ditto with UNT vs Texas State.
(04-07-2020 03:34 AM)Erictelevision Wrote: [ -> ]Given that so many games are on TV, especially cable, do conferences REALLY need to extend their footprints into EVERY state, making travel difficult?