JRsec
Super Moderator
Posts: 38,403
Joined: Mar 2012
Reputation: 8071
I Root For: SEC
Location:
|
RE: Realignment's Sobering Numbers For Those Who Like To Create Move Scenarios
(01-25-2018 10:04 AM)ken d Wrote: (01-25-2018 02:24 AM)JRsec Wrote: (01-25-2018 01:21 AM)DawgNBama Wrote: (01-22-2018 06:09 PM)JRsec Wrote: Conference/Attendance Average / Gross Total Revenue Average / WSJ Estimated Values For Product Average
1. SEC / 77,565 / $121,240,504 / $523,416,428
2. B1G / 66,162 / $108,269,417 / $415,748,643
3. B12 / 57,238 / $102,170,537 / $376,433,300
4. PAC / 50,112 / $ 89,239,736 / $253,766,417
5. ACC / 49,827 / $ 87,034,205 / $182,383,929
When Discussing Realignment Fans Ignore Statistics That Can Indicate the Value of a Team to a Conference.
The first number is the average football attendance of the conference. This number tends to indicate the impact that those schools can have when visiting your campus. That is why they are important. They aren't a deal maker, but they can be a deal breaker.
The second number is the average gross total revenue earned by a conference school. If a candidate's gross total revenue is at or above the average gross revenue for a conference it generally indicates whether or not the school being added brings enough value for consideration. But in fairness you have to handicap this number by subtracting the total TV revenue of the conference of the candidate from the total of the conference which is looking to add them.
For comparison's sake last year the SEC earned 40.1 million in TV revenue and the Big 10 earned about 43 million for all tiers, the Big 12 35 million plus their T3, the PAC roughly 29 million for all tiers, and the ACC roughly 28 million for all tiers.
The third number is the dollar amount of impact that a school brings to its surrounding markets. This might be the best factor to consider when looking at whether or not a school will pay its own way into another conference. It's also the best way to see whether or not a pair of schools add value.
To make that determination add the total impact value of the pair of schools and divide by 2. If that average is higher than the conference average for the conference they wish to join the answer is yes. If it is lower than that average then the answer is no.
When you've done this you will find that the number of schools which could add value to a particular conference is much smaller than you might think.
Candidates that add to the averages of the SEC:
SEC avgs: 77,565 / $121,240,504 / $ 525,416,428
1. Texas: 97,881 / $182,104,126 / $1,243,124,000
2. Oklahoma: 86,857 / $150,371,878 / $1,001,967,000
3. Notre Dame: 80,795 / $134,211,095 / $ 856,938,000
4. Florida St.: 76,800 / $123,344,314 / $ 385,938,000
5. Clemson: 80,970 / $ 95,800,326 / $328,411,000
No other schools add to any metric for the SEC.
The following schools might be considered for market Additions and Academics:
1. Virginia 39,929 / $100,632,895 / $ 168,534,000
2. Kansas 25,828 / $ 94,697,418 / $ 183,031,000
3. T.C.U. 45,168 / $ 93,259,382 / $ 153,631,000
4. Duke 29,895 / $ 91,971,836 / $ 64,195,000
5. West Va. 57,583 / $ 91,412,352 / $ 72,649,000
6. North Car. 50,250 / $ 90,969,518 / $ 147,179,000
7. Ok. State 53,814 / $ 90,049,297 / $ 285,293,000
8. Miami 58,572 / $ 85,615,972 / $ 254,502,000
9. Va. Tech 63,043 / $ 84,064,779 / $ 269,883,000
10. N.C.St. 57,497 / $ 80,255,029 / $ 191,813,000
You will note the relatively low impact values for Duke and West Virginia. This is a big issue where these two are concerned. It is why both Duke and West Virginia would likely have to be paired with a better addition to gain membership in the SEC, or in Duke's case either the SEC or Big 10. In fact Miami, Oklahoma State, Virginia Tech, and N.C. State show their strength in being someone's #2 by virtue of the economic impact they have within their states.
For the Big 10 there are only 3 schools that add to all of their metrics:
1. Texas
2. Oklahoma
3. Notre Dame
For the markets and academics compare the following to the Big 10's averages:
1. Virginia
2. North Carolina
3. Virginia Tech
4. Duke
5. N.C. State
6. Syracuse
So if you are going to propose that certain schools should be placed in any conference my suggestion is to run the numbers and see if it is doable first. In the vast majority of cases it will not be.
If we decide to ditch the “eliminate the Big 12” stuff and use these same metrics/methods, at least two of these methods shows why the Big 12 decided not to expand (I used the first two methods, FYI. Have not tried method #3 but have a morning appointment to attend. I will attempt #3 later.). Using the first two methods, only UCONN looks like an expansion candidate and that’s only by substituting the Big 12 Conference’s median for its mean.
That's the whole reason I decided to go ahead and post it. It's tough at the top. The Big 10 and SEC really only have 3 viable candidates if they are looking to improve the metrics. The question that is developing is "how real is the threat that the Big 12 might be able to expand out of the PAC?
But remember the market model/subscription fee approach hasn't been totally abandoned as a pay model. It might still be possible if the SEC or Big 10 added a school from a large enough state to add a profit under the old model. But even those targets are limited. Consider that alternate method #4.
In your OP, you basically identified UT, OU and Notre Dame as the only three who really move the needle for the bigs. And, considering that ND can't move anywhere until about 2035 by contract, that leaves two.
Unless the B1G were to go beyond 16, which I doubt, the addition of Texhoma would put those schools in a position where they have few real rivals their own fans (and potential recruits) want to see them play. And based on the average Sagarin strength ratings over the past 8 seasons, Texas would rank #13 in that 16 team league. I don't think Texas wants to be in a league where they can't even pretend to be (one of) the 800 pound gorillas.
The P5 (and the Mouse) all have it pretty good exactly the way things stand today. I still believe that there are more reasons to keep the status quo than to reorganize further.
Texa-homa to the SEC is quite a different matter. A division of 6 would give Texas these schools on the annual schedule: Arkansas, Missouri, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, & Texas Tech. A&M could be a permanent crossover. If we have two divisions of 9 it would add Ole Miss, A&M and L.S.U. Still a very satisfying schedule all the way around. Alabama, Auburn and Miss State would shift East.
The big issues for Texas and Oklahoma are fans who are extremely dissatisfied with home schedules.
Still, the inertia of Texas is quite strong which is why many at Oklahoma feel they have to be the first to make a move and offering OSU with them might be enough to get that ball started.
The eruption of dissatisfaction in the PAC is the blip on the radar screen that bears watching. Their contract is up in 2024-5 as well and apparently their PACN contractual characteristics are constraining with regard to selling a network a % of the interest.
And while I said that there are only three who move the needle for the SEC or Big 10, it must also be noted that the total value of OU and UT as a pair could indeed cover the little brothers and still add to the bottom line, just not nearly as much. So that is an angle to play with. An SEC with the added leverage of those two brands would be a formidable force in negotiations and that more than anything else would probably be why Disney would prefer stasis. And if the PAC suffers defection they will get it if the beneficiary is the Big 12. Such an event, however unlikely, could expand the Big 10 as well, but less from metrics than from markets and academic goals.
|
|