(01-02-2021 01:14 PM)46566 Wrote: That's actually the main reason I think they stay in the NCAA. It's not just football it other sports also. The G5, FCS games give winnable and more importantly home games. The same idea goes into basketball also. While a Kentucky Michigan State game may draw more tv ratings would each side be okay with a home and home series? A Kentucky- Western Kentucky game may draw more local interest.
There are some other ways that they benefit, as well. Playing non-P5 teams promotes viewership by millions of non-P5 (military academies, Mormons) and G5 conference fans and in states (e.g., Arkansas, Hawaii, Idaho, Nevada, New Mexico, Wyoming), cities (e.g., Cincy, Philadelphia, New Orleans, Houston, Memphis, and San Diego) and regions (e.g., western NY, sections of California, Louisiana and Ohio, western Michigan, & west Texas) where there aren't any P5 teams.
Another factor is that playing such non-P5 teams can promote regional recruitment.
In addition, if the P5s were to stop playing the non-P5s, their schedules would become more repetitive and less interesting. Americans tend to prefer innovation and variety to repetition, and it's for this reason that the number of professional franchises has expanded to the extent that it has.
Of course, they can try putting up a wall of separation to see what happens, but if they do, they might end up shooting themselves in the foot.
Why?
For one thing,
the viewership numbers have caused the major networks to rethink the notion that they can only make money from broadcasting the top 5 conferences. The proof of this is their agreement to double or triple the amount that they formerly paid to broadcast AAC and MWC games.
To illustrate the benefits to the major networks (in this case, ESPN), while the AAC viewership may only be 1/4 or 1/5 that of the average P5 conference,
ESPN only has to pay the AAC schools 1/4 ($77 million/yr) of what they have to pay the P5 conference schools ($300+ million/yr). Not only that, but
unlike their P5 deals - which only provide them with the exclusive rights to broadcast a limited selection of P5 conference games,
ESPN's deal with the AAC provides them with exclusive rights to broadcast practically any AAC game they wish to, with no competition from any proprietary conference or school network.
On top of that, the AAC schools have further sweetened the deal by shouldering many of the responsibilities and costs of broadcasting the AAC conference games.
What this means is that
the major networks have learned that they're able to get roughly the same return on their investment from broadcasting non-P5 games that they can get on broadcasting P5 games.
The name of the game is profit. If it's just as easy to double your money by broadcasting an unlimited selection of G5 conference games - - without having to set aside the $3 billion per conference/per decade that it costs to broadcast a limited selection of P5 games - - it's a no-brainer to do so, especially since the G5 conferences will bend over backwards to sweeten the deal.
.
Finally,
the P5 has reason to be concerned that, as the "senior" league, they might find themselves making the same mistake that the original did NFL when they tried to bankrupt the up-and-coming AFL into oblivion in the 1960s.
Just like the NFL learned, to their chagrin, trying to destroy the competition by doing something like that might all too easily backfire, causing popular opinion to gravitate swiftly to the up-and-coming challenger.
Much like the tale of Robin Hood, which captivated the British for centuries,
ordinary, everyday people tend quite often to cheer for the underdogs, in their battles with their wealthy and powerful oppressors.
.
At some point in the next 5-6 years, the major networks may recognize that it will be in their longer-term best interest to shift a growing share of their broadcasting time to the coverage of the C-USA, Sun Belt and MAC, as they have already begun to do for vis a vis the MWC and AAC.
A side benefit of such a strategy would be that, by building up their coverage of non-P5 events, they would able to establish a stronger and stronger bargaining position vis a vis the P5 conferences.
It might turn out that the best kind of collegiate sports broadcasting portfolio that some of the major networks can assemble might include a deal with 1 or 2 P5 conferences and 1 or 2 G5 conferences. The G5 packages would give them an unlimited selection of low-cost games to broadcast, with which they could provide a wide range of viewing options, and the P5 packages would provide them with a more limited number of high-cost, high-viewership events.
It isn't likely to be an "either-or" proposition for the major networks, going forward. To the contrary, those days seem to be coming to an end. It appears more likely to be in the best long-term interest of the major networks for the viewing options to become more like a "Chinese Menu" (1 from column A, 1 from column B, etc.)...
...and if that's the case,
it will not be in the best interests of ESPN or the other major networks for the 65 P5 teams to become artificially sequestered from the 65 non-P5 FBS teams.
.