The much maligned ACC has to share it's territory with more schools than any other conference.

Drawing a perimeter line around the ACC (not including Notre Dame), the Conference shares it's territory with 9 other schools (three conferences).

From BC to Miami to FSU to Louisville to Pitt to Syracuse and back to BC; these other conference schools can be found: Rutgers, Penn State, Maryland, South Carolina, Florida, Georgia, Tennessee, Kentucky and West Virginia.
If Notre Dame is factored in the number goes up to ten with the addition of Ohio State

The SEC shares space with four other schools, while the B1G shares with only three.

The SEC shares space with Louisville, Florida State, Georgia Tech and Clemson.
The B1G shares space with West Virginia, Iowa State, and Pitt (four schools if Notre Dame is included with the ACC).

The Big 12 and the PAC share their conference territories with no schools outside of their own conference.


Shouldn't those numbers be in better balance?

The Big 12 has to share the state of Texas with the SEC (Texas A&M). That's a pretty big omission. They also have to share Iowa with the Big 10 although I don't know if they care as much about that.

The ACC doesn't share Maryland, as they lost the whole state when they departed. And the issue isn't sharing states the issue is controlling enough market share in them to command premium ad rates.

The ACC is poorly paid because the only states for which you get premium rates are North Carolina and Virginia and you use 6 schools to get that instead of 4 or 2.

You have no rival in New York or Massachusetts but you don't carry enough market share in either to get premium rates.

Pennsylvania, Kentucky, and Georgia yield a premium to the B1G and SEC. You split South Carolina giving neither the ACC or SEC the advantage, and in Florida the SEC gets its take with one school while the ACC has two to pay.

So the failure to dominate your footprint coupled with low content value is why you are where you are in the revenue pecking order.

Don't look at it as a mythical conference vs. conference contest.

Look at each athletic program individually and who they compete with, including pro teams, and including college teams in their own conference. Way back when, Nick Saban said one reason he moved from Michigan State to LSU was that he was tired of being overshadowed in his team's own state.

Why are Boston College football and basketball afterthoughts in their own market (other than poor performance)? It's the Patriots and the Celtics, not any other college team.

What's TCU's biggest local competition for football fans? It's the Dallas Cowboys, UT football, and OU football. What diverts local football fan attention from Colorado football isn't any other college team, it's the Denver Broncos.

Etc., etc.

(06-04-2021 03:56 PM)Wedge Wrote:  Don't look at it as a mythical conference vs. conference contest.

Look at each athletic program individually and who they compete with, including pro teams, and including college teams in their own conference. Way back when, Nick Saban said one reason he moved from Michigan State to LSU was that he was tired of being overshadowed in his team's own state.

Why are Boston College football and basketball afterthoughts in their own market (other than poor performance)? It's the Patriots and the Celtics, not any other college team.

What's TCU's biggest local competition for football fans? It's the Dallas Cowboys, UT football, and OU football. What diverts local football fan attention from Colorado football isn't any other college team, it's the Denver Broncos.

Etc., etc.

That's why I talked market share in New York and Massachusetts. But, Wedge the competition in Kentucky, Georgia, South Carolina, and Florida is the SEC. It's not the Panthers, Jaguars, and Bucs. In Miami it would be the Dolphins. Atlanta is still a college sports city. So your analogy only works where the demographics lean pro and that's New York/New England and out West. DFW is UT/OU and Cowboys but the issue for TCU is 11,000 enrollment. Sports cities can support both pro and college if it's a sports loving city.

(06-04-2021 04:09 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(06-04-2021 03:56 PM)Wedge Wrote:  Don't look at it as a mythical conference vs. conference contest.

Look at each athletic program individually and who they compete with, including pro teams, and including college teams in their own conference. Way back when, Nick Saban said one reason he moved from Michigan State to LSU was that he was tired of being overshadowed in his team's own state.

Why are Boston College football and basketball afterthoughts in their own market (other than poor performance)? It's the Patriots and the Celtics, not any other college team.

What's TCU's biggest local competition for football fans? It's the Dallas Cowboys, UT football, and OU football. What diverts local football fan attention from Colorado football isn't any other college team, it's the Denver Broncos.

Etc., etc.

That's why I talked market share in New York and Massachusetts. But, Wedge the competition in Kentucky, Georgia, South Carolina, and Florida is the SEC. It's not the Panthers, Jaguars, and Bucs. In Miami it would be the Dolphins. Atlanta is still a college sports city. So your analogy only works where the demographics lean pro and that's New York/New England and out West. DFW is UT/OU and Cowboys but the issue for TCU is 11,000 enrollment. Sports cities can support both pro and college if it's a sports loving city.

Yes, that's a big reason why so many of the SEC teams have as much TV value as they do. For the most part they don't have so many local fans fixated on the NFL, and even where there are NFL teams, those teams don't have the same kind of hold on local football fans as the Patriots, Giants, Eagles, Cowboys, Broncos, etc. It's just as true outside the SEC; the college teams with the strongest support locally are in markets that don't have an NFL team or where the local NFL team's support is weaker.

The same idea generally applies to college basketball, to a lesser extent. It's more difficult for a college hoops team to get traction in a market with one of the 10 or 15 most popular NBA teams.

It also helps that CFB fandom was well established before the NFL expanded that way.

(06-04-2021 04:09 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(06-04-2021 03:56 PM)Wedge Wrote:  Don't look at it as a mythical conference vs. conference contest.

Look at each athletic program individually and who they compete with, including pro teams, and including college teams in their own conference. Way back when, Nick Saban said one reason he moved from Michigan State to LSU was that he was tired of being overshadowed in his team's own state.

Why are Boston College football and basketball afterthoughts in their own market (other than poor performance)? It's the Patriots and the Celtics, not any other college team.

What's TCU's biggest local competition for football fans? It's the Dallas Cowboys, UT football, and OU football. What diverts local football fan attention from Colorado football isn't any other college team, it's the Denver Broncos.

Etc., etc.

That's why I talked market share in New York and Massachusetts. But, Wedge the competition in Kentucky, Georgia, South Carolina, and Florida is the SEC. It's not the Panthers, Jaguars, and Bucs. In Miami it would be the Dolphins. Atlanta is still a college sports city. So your analogy only works where the demographics lean pro and that's New York/New England and out West. DFW is UT/OU and Cowboys but the issue for TCU is 11,000 enrollment. Sports cities can support both pro and college if it's a sports loving city.

In state of Georgia, the ACC does have to contend with the Atlanta Falcons for fans/ market share in addition to UGa, Auburn, & Tennessee (SEC). In Kentucky, both the Cards & the 'Cats must contend with both the Bengals and the Titans for market share. UGa, Auburn and Tennessee are not nearly enough affected by this problem as Louisville and Kentucky are though.

One day when I have a lot of time on my hands, I will actually have to tell who I view as who shares what with whom.

(06-04-2021 10:53 AM)schmolik Wrote:  The Big 12 has to share the state of Texas with the SEC (Texas A&M). That's a pretty big omission. They also have to share Iowa with the Big 10 although I don't know if they care as much about that.

That is incorrect.
Look at a map and draw lines from school to school. From Texas A&M north through Arkansas and up to Missouri. There are no Big 12 schools within the SEC border.

Kansas to Iowa State to Kansas State. It's a jagged edge but there are no B1G teams within those lines.

Check your map.

(06-05-2021 06:48 AM)XLance Wrote:  

(06-04-2021 10:53 AM)schmolik Wrote:  The Big 12 has to share the state of Texas with the SEC (Texas A&M). That's a pretty big omission. They also have to share Iowa with the Big 10 although I don't know if they care as much about that.

That is incorrect.
Look at a map and draw lines from school to school. From Texas A&M north through Arkansas and up to Missouri. There are no Big 12 schools within the SEC border.

Kansas to Iowa State to Kansas State. It's a jagged edge but there are no B1G teams within those lines.

Check your map.

Oh I thought you were going by states.

XLance: "Who shares what with whom-Conference territory
The much maligned ACC has to share it's territory with more schools than any other conference.

Drawing a perimeter line around the ACC (not including Notre Dame), the Conference shares it's territory with 9 other schools (three conferences)."

Not only this ... but ACC schools are inordinately Private and Small ... with relatively smaller endowments ... and smaller fanbases ... and smaller counts of living alumni.

But isn’t sharing the territory actually better in terms of media exposure and money? NYM and NYY play in different leagues...

(06-05-2021 07:30 AM)IHAVETRIED Wrote:  XLance: "Who shares what with whom-Conference territory
The much maligned ACC has to share it's territory with more schools than any other conference.

Drawing a perimeter line around the ACC (not including Notre Dame), the Conference shares it's territory with 9 other schools (three conferences)."

Not only this ... but ACC schools are inordinately Private and Small ... with relatively smaller endowments ... and smaller fanbases ... and smaller counts of living alumni.

Ihavetried, your statement makes about much sense as me saying all people in Ohio hate peanut butter because of one woman I knew from Ohio hated peanut butter.

Sent from my moto g(7) power using Tapatalk

The ACC, Big Ten, Big 12, PAC 12, and the SEC all share territory with the NFL. The ACC shares territory with the Big Ten and the SEC. The SEC shares territory with the ACC and the Big 12. The Big 12 shares territory with the Big Ten and the SEC. The Big Ten shares territory with the ACC and the Big 12. In the P5 conferences, the PAC 12 shares with no one, except the NFL. If we include the G5 conferences, it gets more complex, but that really isn't a topic for this board.
Sent from my moto g(7) power using Tapatalk

(06-05-2021 08:40 PM)DawgNBama Wrote:  

(06-05-2021 07:30 AM)IHAVETRIED Wrote:  XLance: "Who shares what with whom-Conference territory
The much maligned ACC has to share it's territory with more schools than any other conference.

Drawing a perimeter line around the ACC (not including Notre Dame), the Conference shares it's territory with 9 other schools (three conferences)."

Not only this ... but ACC schools are inordinately Private and Small ... with relatively smaller endowments ... and smaller fanbases ... and smaller counts of living alumni.

Ihavetried, your statement makes about much sense as me saying all people in Ohio hate peanut butter because of one woman I knew from Ohio hated peanut butter.

Sent from my moto g(7) power using Tapatalk

Think about what you posted, Dawg.

XLance was making the point that the ACC is in a tough situation for having to share its territory with other conferences and also with pro teams.

I was adding to XLance's point by explaining that the ACC is also "fenced in" for other reasons. And I know you understand the point(s) I made.

Now look what happens with two realignment moves that are logical and beneficial to everyone:

1-the ACC trades Louisville to the SEC for South Carolina

2-The ACC trades Pittsburgh to the B1G for Maryland


The number of conflicting schools in the ACC "territory" drops from 9 to three (Rutgers, Georgia, and Florida)

The number of conflicting schools in the SEC territory drops from 4 to two (Florida State and Georgia Tech)

The number of conflicting schools in the B1G "territory" drops from 3 to one (Iowa State)

I would then propose a three way trade to further eliminate conflicting overlap

1-The Big 12 sends West Virginia to the SEC
2-The SEC sends Missouri to the B1G
3-The B1G sends Nebraska to the Big 12

If we remain at 5 conferences the line up would be

PAC (unchanged)
Oregon, Oregon State, Washington, Washington State, California, Stanford, UCLA, USC, Arizona, Arizona State, Utah, Colorado

Big 12
Nebraska, Kansas, Kansas State, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Texas, Texas Tech, Baylor, TCU, Iowa State

SEC
Texas A&M, Arkansas, LSU, Vanderbilt, Tennessee, Ole Miss, Mississippi State, Alabama, Auburn, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, West Virginia, Louisville

B1G
Rutgers, Penn State, Pitt, Indiana, Michigan, MDU, Ohio State, Illinois, Missouri, Iowa, Minnesota, Wisconsin, Northwestern, Purdue

ACC
Syracuse, Boston College, Maryland, UVa, Virginia Tech, Carolina, NC State, Duke, Wake Forest, Clemson, South Carolina, Georgia Tech, Florida State, Miami.

Perfectus

(06-06-2021 12:13 PM)XLance Wrote:  Now look what happens with two realignment moves that are logical and beneficial to everyone:

1-the ACC trades Louisville to the SEC for South Carolina

2-The ACC trades Pittsburgh to the B1G for Maryland


The number of conflicting schools in the ACC "territory" drops from 9 to three (Rutgers, Georgia, and Florida)

The number of conflicting schools in the SEC territory drops from 4 to two (Florida State and Georgia Tech)

The number of conflicting schools in the B1G "territory" drops from 3 to one (Iowa State)

I would then propose a three way trade to further eliminate conflicting overlap

1-The Big 12 sends West Virginia to the SEC
2-The SEC sends Missouri to the B1G
3-The B1G sends Nebraska to the Big 12

If we remain at 5 conferences the line up would be

PAC (unchanged)
Oregon, Oregon State, Washington, Washington State, California, Stanford, UCLA, USC, Arizona, Arizona State, Utah, Colorado

Big 12
Nebraska, Kansas, Kansas State, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Texas, Texas Tech, Baylor, TCU, Iowa State

SEC
Texas A&M, Arkansas, LSU, Vanderbilt, Tennessee, Ole Miss, Mississippi State, Alabama, Auburn, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, West Virginia, Louisville

B1G
Rutgers, Penn State, Pitt, Indiana, Michigan, MDU, Ohio State, Illinois, Missouri, Iowa, Minnesota, Wisconsin, Northwestern, Purdue

ACC
Syracuse, Boston College, Maryland, UVa, Virginia Tech, Carolina, NC State, Duke, Wake Forest, Clemson, South Carolina, Georgia Tech, Florida State, Miami.

Perfectus

I would love this way more than what we have now.

I would love to get Florida and Florida State and Georgia and Georgia Tech together but that would require the ACC or SEC giving up one of the schools and I don't see that happening. I'd also love Texas and Texas A&M as well but again that would require a massive trade.

(06-06-2021 12:13 PM)XLance Wrote:  Now look what happens with two realignment moves that are logical and beneficial to everyone:

1-the ACC trades Louisville to the SEC for South Carolina

2-The ACC trades Pittsburgh to the B1G for Maryland


The number of conflicting schools in the ACC "territory" drops from 9 to three (Rutgers, Georgia, and Florida)

The number of conflicting schools in the SEC territory drops from 4 to two (Florida State and Georgia Tech)

The number of conflicting schools in the B1G "territory" drops from 3 to one (Iowa State)

I would then propose a three way trade to further eliminate conflicting overlap

1-The Big 12 sends West Virginia to the SEC
2-The SEC sends Missouri to the B1G
3-The B1G sends Nebraska to the Big 12

If we remain at 5 conferences the line up would be

PAC (unchanged)
Oregon, Oregon State, Washington, Washington State, California, Stanford, UCLA, USC, Arizona, Arizona State, Utah, Colorado

Big 12
Nebraska, Kansas, Kansas State, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Texas, Texas Tech, Baylor, TCU, Iowa State

SEC
Texas A&M, Arkansas, LSU, Vanderbilt, Tennessee, Ole Miss, Mississippi State, Alabama, Auburn, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, West Virginia, Louisville

B1G
Rutgers, Penn State, Pitt, Indiana, Michigan, MDU, Ohio State, Illinois, Missouri, Iowa, Minnesota, Wisconsin, Northwestern, Purdue

ACC
Syracuse, Boston College, Maryland, UVa, Virginia Tech, Carolina, NC State, Duke, Wake Forest, Clemson, South Carolina, Georgia Tech, Florida State, Miami.

Perfectus

And everyone but the ACC loses value.

The SEC loses 50% of South Carolina in exchange for 35% of a Kentucky market we have leverage over. Then we give up an AAU school and a market of 6 million in exchange for the smallest market in the P5 and the B1G gives up Maryland for a second school in Pennsylvania when Penn State gives them leverage.

Clearly this is delusional woad blue thinking since in reality the SEC and B1G will simply do what is best for them with no regard whatsoever for the lowest revenue generating conference in the P5. Has it occurred to you that the reason the SEC and B1G are in positions of advantage is because they do the best jobs of taking care of themselves and because since 1987 they have been planning out where they wanted to be rather than merely being satisfied with status quo? They realized in the late 80's that if you didn't grow, and grow strategically you would be dying. Meanwhile UNC, Duke and UVa were happy to be left alone, as was Texas, until forced to make moves and to do so reactively and with what was available rather than proactively for a landscape that was changing. The ACC made one proactive move, FSU, and that move paid dividends. The rest have been schools that were at or slightly below the ACC mean. (Except for Louisville which you deride.) Miami is above your mean but not significantly.

So you are stuck with what you have because of lack of strategic planning. The SEC had a priority list to 20 back in 1990. Frank put together a prospective list of Big 10 targets prior to 2010 and the Big 10 knew Penn St, Notre Dame and Nebraska well in advance and they also had a list of prioritized targets afterward even if the likelihood of interest seemed low. One gets the feeling that most ACC targets were inspired by ESPN.

(06-06-2021 07:44 AM)IHAVETRIED Wrote:  

(06-05-2021 08:40 PM)DawgNBama Wrote:  

(06-05-2021 07:30 AM)IHAVETRIED Wrote:  XLance: "Who shares what with whom-Conference territory
The much maligned ACC has to share it's territory with more schools than any other conference.

Drawing a perimeter line around the ACC (not including Notre Dame), the Conference shares it's territory with 9 other schools (three conferences)."

Not only this ... but ACC schools are inordinately Private and Small ... with relatively smaller endowments ... and smaller fanbases ... and smaller counts of living alumni.

Ihavetried, your statement makes about much sense as me saying all people in Ohio hate peanut butter because of one woman I knew from Ohio hated peanut butter.

Sent from my moto g(7) power using Tapatalk

Think about what you posted, Dawg.

XLance was making the point that the ACC is in a tough situation for having to share its territory with other conferences and also with pro teams.

I was adding to XLance's point by explaining that the ACC is also "fenced in" for other reasons. And I know you understand the point(s) I made.

To be honest, I am not quite sure what point you were trying to make. But I am guessing that instead of saying all institutions in the ACC are private, maybe you meant that the ACC has more private institutions than the SEC or Big Ten. That would be true. And even some of the ACC's public institutions have smaller enrollments compared to SEC or Big Ten institutions.

(06-06-2021 12:13 PM)XLance Wrote:  Now look what happens with two realignment moves that are logical and beneficial to everyone:

1-the ACC trades Louisville to the SEC for South Carolina

2-The ACC trades Pittsburgh to the B1G for Maryland


The number of conflicting schools in the ACC "territory" drops from 9 to three (Rutgers, Georgia, and Florida)

The number of conflicting schools in the SEC territory drops from 4 to two (Florida State and Georgia Tech)

The number of conflicting schools in the B1G "territory" drops from 3 to one (Iowa State)

I would then propose a three way trade to further eliminate conflicting overlap

1-The Big 12 sends West Virginia to the SEC
2-The SEC sends Missouri to the B1G
3-The B1G sends Nebraska to the Big 12

If we remain at 5 conferences the line up would be

PAC (unchanged)
Oregon, Oregon State, Washington, Washington State, California, Stanford, UCLA, USC, Arizona, Arizona State, Utah, Colorado

Big 12
Nebraska, Kansas, Kansas State, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Texas, Texas Tech, Baylor, TCU, Iowa State

SEC
Texas A&M, Arkansas, LSU, Vanderbilt, Tennessee, Ole Miss, Mississippi State, Alabama, Auburn, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, West Virginia, Louisville

B1G
Rutgers, Penn State, Pitt, Indiana, Michigan, MDU, Ohio State, Illinois, Missouri, Iowa, Minnesota, Wisconsin, Northwestern, Purdue

ACC
Syracuse, Boston College, Maryland, UVa, Virginia Tech, Carolina, NC State, Duke, Wake Forest, Clemson, South Carolina, Georgia Tech, Florida State, Miami.

Perfectus

South Carolina has no desire to return to the ACC. Missouri has no interest in the Big Ten either.