JRsec
Super Moderator
Posts: 37,913
Joined: Mar 2012
Reputation: 7737
I Root For: SEC
Location:
|
RE: Network proxy wars
(08-12-2022 02:07 PM)GarnetAndBlue Wrote: (08-12-2022 01:51 PM)JRsec Wrote: (08-12-2022 12:51 PM)GarnetAndBlue Wrote: (08-12-2022 12:31 PM)Skyhawk Wrote: (08-12-2022 12:20 PM)JRsec Wrote: I'll return to a strategy I first mentioned a year ago. And will tweak it just a little.
How does ESPN grow the SEC's value without destroying completely a competitive balanced needed to make the whole of college football interesting to the general public?
How does ESPN grow the value of the ACC without angering Tobacco Road?
How does ESPN keep a monopoly on advertising in Texas, which is quite different from simply having the State's best "competitive" rate?
I believe the answer is simple in theory.
Remove Tobacco Road from the ACC.
Place Duke, North Carolina and Virginia in the SEC.
Wake Forest and Vanderbilt become the SEC's first all but football members.
Add Kansas to the SEC West.
This builds basketball branding to match football branding. It adds 4 AAU schools helping the conference academic profile. It balances a top-heavy football conference, and adds 3 new States to the footprint establishing a centralized conference map.
The ACC loses 4 schools, one on the weak end but historically important to Duke and UNC, and 3 basketball first schools.
ESPN does not want to lose a toehold in New England and helping Pitt and Cuse re-emerge as football playing hoops brands is important.
Keep ND independent but obliged to the ESPN family of rights and not just a conference.
Add to the now 10 member ACC the following:
Central Florida, Cincinnati, West Virginia, Baylor, Houston, Texas Christian, Oklahoma State, Kansas State, Texas Tech and Iowa State.
Iowa State, Kansas State, Oklahoma State, Texas Christian, Texas Tech
Baylor, Central Florida, Florida State, Houston, Miami
Clemson, Georgia Tech, Louisville, N.C. State, Virginia Tech
Boston College, Cincinnati, Pittsburgh, Syracuse, West Virginia
Out West ESPN could help the PAC remnants of Oregon State, Washington State, Arizona, Arizona State, Colorado, and Utah to build a new conference.
With something like this ESPN essentially fronts the 4 headed to the SEC at pro rata for T1 and T2 revenue and makes a profit on T3 by adding 3 states and 23 million to the SECN footprint. Essentially $30 million more each for the 4 schools (counting the additional T3 against the cost of the T1& 2 pro rata) makes the added cost 120 million a year.
In the ACC the football cachet blossoms. FSU and Clemson are the new bell cows. ACC schools are now looking at 50-60 million.
Rivalries are preserved and restored and all of it is in house, save for the PAC schools which could at least be partially assimilated if need be. Monopolies over the region are maintained.
Since you had 2 schools drop football, why not let FSU and Clemson make the move too? Just replace them with USF and Memphis.
Correct. The previous scenario (by JR, though I appreciate his creativity) would be an absolute hard pass from me as a FSU fan. I'd be done with the game. The only way I'd even consider it would be if FSU got a major sweetheart deal that put them on par with SEC $. Not a nickel less and I'd still be on the bubble . I wouldn't waste my time on a mish-mosh league that wasn't a true P2 where FSU was trying to fight it out against 3 other FL schools while UF was sitting rich and pretty in the SEC.
That's okay. I doing a little contrarian selling of why the 24-school model is necessary. I get a lot of pushbacks from those who cannot grasp the value of a closed upper tier, or the fact that the whole can have more value, indeed much more value, than the mere sum of the parts, and that 24 represents an inventory objective, possibly a minimum, of the networks which will cobble market reaches and brands into a group which accomplishes each conferences regional objectives. I also believe regions will be upheld for the sake of the natural national rivalry between North and South and to keep local rivalries to strengthen each conference.
It does illustrate 2 things, however.
1. All key brands have to move to one of the super 2 which will likely be 24 schools.
2. The composite conference has to be football centric to hold and merit a competitive payout.
I hear all the time from commissioners that the additions must ad value. So far this is merely a hollow excuse not to pick too quickly. I believe in the end all PAC AAU schools will likely wind up in the B1G or perhaps 1 or 2 in the SEC. And I believe the SEC will wind up with 6 or 7 ACC schools, and it could even be 8. What some existing members opt to do in the future could play a hand.
If we stop at 20 there won't be enough inventory. And key schools left behind would sue, IMO. At 24 each you cover most. At 28 each you just about cover all. But at 28 you run the risk of killing value in the composite conference which is necessary to the transition. It's Goldilocks situation in that they have to find the mix that is just right for it to work well.
You're always one step ahead, aren't you?!
Here is what must happen to get the new upper division, the expanded CFP, and the breakaway from the NCAA for hoops as well. And you could say it has to happen for any major shift in any industry.
1. You have to sell the decision makers on a substantial revenue potential. Expanded playoffs does that.
2. You have to educate them about risks and strategies to overcome them. This has been accomplished or the mantra would not be "Super 2", "the pull of two powerful spheres" etc. All ADs on the same page about what will happen. They just aren't on board yet with who, and how many.
3. The process needs to be slow enough to let the consumer get his/her head around it. We are doing that now. I don't really think we need to limit moves to 2 at a time as much as we can't overwhelm the public, which has been in the midst of massive change covering an array of issues, and then slam them with massive change in one of their escapes. To this end NIL and Pay for Play already resonates with enough fans that they realize moving for large revenue gains is essential and reasonable. And finally, most fans understand why heavily subsidized programs can't and shouldn't make this jump.
4. No matter how careful ESPN and FOX are inclusion for large self-funded State programs will be the issue they will err on intentionally because they need political approval, not necessarily backing to make this work smoothly.
Therefore, I don't think the composite conference goes away.
5. This ESPN demur with regard to Big 10 rights actually signals to me that FOX and ESPN have likely agreed on much of the division and that each of their 2 proxies will have input as well. I think N.D. is a Kabuki dance designed to distract from the final moves and will in the end will be used as a justification for the outcome which will actually be employed for reasons not yet obvious to us. The Big Ten's 3 network arrangement circumvents collusion claims.
Therefore, we will just watch the drama unfold on schedule to allow for emotional blow and then acceptance when bylines explaining things after the fact sanitize and rationalize the events. I wouldn't be surprised if in the end N.D. claims independence but has a scheduling arrangement with all 3 conferences.
People will be tutored on why they need to buy in. Controversy will make the curious spike initial ratings. The planners will point to those numbers and say, "See, we were right!" And the hype will give way to the games.
|
|