Here comes the doomsday thread, sorry

[HFCS]

But that's what it boils down to. It's a product with consumers, at the end of the day. And people have shown no indication, so far, that they're ready to stop consuming. Not in anything but anecdotal capacity.

Looking at ratings in Washington and Oregon in a year or two could be the first real test study. Sure they are the smaller more rural fan base, but if there’s any measurable drop for a few years or if Seahawks ratings increase you could learn something.

If that was me I might still watch MWC but no way in hell I’d watch a nano second of any big ten programming and if I hadn’t been a Seahawks fan (or the two local mls) I might become one.

They are the first long term high level conference teams to get squeezed out (at least since SWC collapse 30 years ago) who have some passionate fans. Long term I think cfb has still added fans when you realize Utah, BYU and TCU are all bigger additions than those subtractions, along with Cincy, Houston, SMU and ucf that are tbd.

 

[HoopsTournament]

I'm just over this whole thing. Go be a super conference, I can't bring myself to care anymore, go Cyclones.

Yep. I love High School and NFL more than College Football anyway. I will still always root for ISU in football no matter what level they are playing at. Elitists can be elite and act superior all they want.

 

[HouClone]

I agree with others that the college fans are more emotional invested. If the Big 10 and SEC break away, the leftover fans like me aren't going to watch as much as the networks think they will. Frickin' powerful Bill Hancock, former CFP executive director, answered a question about just this same scenario over a year ago and he disagreed. He basically said the leftover fan will watch. Geez.

 

[HFCS]

I agree with others that the college fans are more emotional invested. If the Big 10 and SEC break away, the leftover fans like me aren't going to watch as much as the networks think they will. Frickin' powerful Bill Hancock, former CFP executive director, answered a question about just this same scenario 9 months ago and he disagreed. He basically said the leftover fan will watch. Geez.

Somebody like that surely had “free college” via mommy and daddy. After the money I spent to put myself through ISU the idea that I’m now just going to cheer for my local USC or UCLA (or even more far fetched Iowa) is totally absurd.

 

[HoopsTournament]

I’ve been going back and forth on this. Not saying super league is going to happen but they would be basically betting that football fans will watch…football.

If ISU/TT gets 800k on ESPN 2 they are betting that those 800k aren’t all ISU and TT fans. They are thinking there are football fans and that if that game isn’t available on ESPN 2 they will just go to the ESPN game between Alabama and Tennesee and not to ESPN+ to watch ISU.

All of this is hypothetical obviously but all those fans on the east coast with no school ties will watch whatever is on ESPN/Fox/CBS/NBC and if you are a diehard Baylor and TCU fan you will pay for the subscription to watch your team.

I doubt if LSU and Georgia were playing the ratings would crater if Big 12 fans boycott. We already watch our own games while those games play and they still get massive ratings.

The problem is you are thinking in terms of today’s generation. As time goes on, each generation (or half generations) will feel less connected to the Elite league and ratings will go down. It is why AAA or G League or XFL don’t get the ratings. This will be no different.

 

[HFCS]

The problem is you are thinking in terms of today’s generation. As time goes on, each generation (or half generations) will feel less connected to the Elite league and ratings will go down. It is why AAA or G League or XFL don’t get the ratings. This will be no different.

At some point you can reduce it down to asking why reducing the # of alumni fans by 50% could possibly increase total nationwide interest.

 

[HoopsTournament]

Yes but this is where the counterpoint to your last response to my post about revenue sharing begins. Which was a great post by the way. Parity is crucial in maintaining a good product.

The blue bloods will alway be the blue bloods and you speak of Vanderbilts, Rutgers, Indiana’s. Garbage programs.

What do they become if they can pay the players more and recruits that typically go to Utah, Ok st, TCU, ISU, NCST, ect. start going to those schools? Well they become TCU, Ok st, NCST.

The garbage programs rise because the non blue blood recruits just consolidate to the current lower P2?

If they break off, the lower tier teams don’t rise. There still has to be a winner and loser in every game. And a break would mean they are not playing anyone but themselves.

 

[Al_4_State]

Maybe you don't, and maybe there are quite a few people who feel the same as you. But 43 of the top 50 most viewed games, through the regular season and championship weekend featured at least one team that is or will be in the Big10/SEC. It's not a stretch to say that big brands draw people.

Yes, there are passionate fanbases outside of those two conferences, and yes part of their "superiority" is the result of years of propaganda, but at some point, the scoreboard doesn't lie, and if you're consistently dwarfing the competition, it will have an effect. And it already is. Look at Florida State doing everything it can to join them. If a school in the lower tier gets popular enough to be a threat to their ratings, they'll just add them. What school would say no? SEC/Big10 gets stronger. Competition gets weaker.

And your last point, I'll again fall back on what I've said previously. The powers that be, in the Big 10 and SEC, are not stupid. If they make this move, it won't be without taking your point into strong consideration and and analysis. You have to give them at least a little credit for being at least a little business savvy, considering where they currently sit. These conferences didn't just luck their way into being in the position they are.

They have great ratings largely due to their large fanbases as a result of being located in populous states. They absolutely lucked into their position. Demographics are the biggest reason the Big 12 is behind them.

People in charge of college athletics have routinely demonstrated extreme incompetence. The Pac 12 is a great example. Administrators are routinely blinded by prestige, perception, and things that don’t pay the bills. There’s no guarantee that these people will make smart and financially sound decision.

Now I think they are smart, and will see the value in letting the rest of these schools exist. I’m just saying there’s no guarantee that the adults in the room are, well, the adults in the room.

 

[Jer]

Someone should tell the people watching games. TV ratings are up, both year over year, and as a trend over time.

Thank you for posting that. I’ve been saying ratings are going up with both CFB and NFL and people keep saying it’s falling like a rock due to NIL, realignment, etc.

The fact is that good football is fun to watch for all of us that enjoy the sport, regardless of how we may feel about the changes going on.

The turbulence may lose some casual fans or reduce their consumption, but that is nowhere evident in any stats to be moving the needle downward yet.

Some potential changes would possibly have a bigger impact, but people overestimate how much is ever going to change overnight. This has been a 20 year iterative process of change and will continue to be iterative.

 

[HoopsTournament]

They do "share" the money, in a manner of speaking - right now College Football is worth $x billion to TV nets (most of those from ESPN & FOX) - when Super League (or whatever, call it what you want) happens (& it will almost certainly happen), most of $x billions will be spread across two leagues instead of ten (er, nine... RIP P12) - as I said before, the value of B1G & SEC will skyrocket over night, while the value of the rest will plummet - our "share" will decrease dramatically - & you know? most Cyclones fan will still be watching College Football on ESPN & FOX b/c most people that watch football, like to watch football - you can remain on your high horse & swear off watching Super League in principle, but most people just want to watch football, regardless of who is playing

It’s not a high horse. I just have better things to do with my time.

 

[ClubCy]

The problem is you are thinking in terms of today’s generation. As time goes on, each generation (or half generations) will feel less connected to the Elite league and ratings will go down. It is why AAA or G League or XFL don’t get the ratings. This will be no different.

Counterpoint: the next generation will have less emotional attachment to a school like Iowa State and have a secondary team like Auburn or whoever.

I’ll use UNI as example. UNI students watch and cheer for the panthers but a lot of them also watch Iowa and Iowa State and cheer for them. Im not predicting this to happen but could something like that happen? Sure.

I am still of the opinion that a super league won’t happen for what it’s worth.

 

[Jer]

The problem is you are thinking in terms of today’s generation. As time goes on, each generation (or half generations) will feel less connected to the Elite league and ratings will go down. It is why AAA or G League or XFL don’t get the ratings. This will be no different.

I think that is a hypothetical, but one that I think people vastly overestimate how much of an impact losing some viewers is going to change the course while others come in to offset them.

As long as the product is entertaining, the vast majority of high volume viewers will continue to watch.

 

[HoopsTournament]

I’m already down to watching the big 12 only now. I understand I am in the minority, but I have very little interest if Iowa state or another big 12 team isn’t playing. I haven’t seen an Iowa game ex when they play Iowa state in years.

But you may not be in the minority for long.

 

[FriendlySpartan]

There are 2 dynamics going on in college sport right now.

One, the student-athletes have the courts giving them more power day-by-day with NIL and immediate transfer eligibility. NIL has quickly evolved into pay-for-play and the richest 30 schools don't care because it benefits them in the short-term. It may not in the long-term if courts keep giving student-athletes more leverage regarding movement and money.

Two, college football playoffs are expanding. The current 4 team model generated around $500M that is distributed to the ten P5 & G5 Conferences. Starting with 2026 season the 12 team playoff is expected to generate between $1.5-$2.0B annually. The incremental money is BIGGER than the recently signed Big10 or SEC TV deals for an entire season. That is what the Big10 and SEC are trying to corner. They want to make sure their teams make up the vast majority of CFP teams. They could increase conference payouts as teams advance in the playoffs. Or maybe Big10/SEC want a payout methodology similar to March Madness where conferences are awarded units based on the # of teams their conference gets into the CFP. So if the Big12 only gets 1 team, it gets 1/12th of the media rights fees. Whereas if the Big10 gets 5 teams, it gets 5/12th of the media rights fees.

So stacking the deck against Big12 and ACC teams, does generate them more money. The key is how do they give fanbases not in the Big10/SEC enough to keep them engaged to watch the CFP?

I agree with all of this except for the idea that the top 30 programs don’t care about the current set up becuase thats the onus of this committee. The top schools are being unable to stock talent with the portal and many have had top recruits poaches by other schools willing to drop a larger bag. Now that they are getting effected they care.

 

[ClubCy]

If they break off, the lower tier teams don’t rise. There still has to be a winner and loser in every game. And a break would mean they are not playing anyone but themselves.

Obviously there has to be a winner and a loser and no Indiana will never win a CFP. I was talking about roster talent rising for the lower teams compared to the Big 12.

The players that typically go to Utah, Ok St, K state could get paid more by going to Purdue, Indiana, ect. Then the talent drops off for Ok st, Utah, ect. The marketing and propaganda was bad before but it’s about to get 1000x worse. ESPN is already running ads for the SEC next year IN FEBRUARY.

 

[ClubCy]

They have great ratings largely due to their large fanbases as a result of being located in populous states. They absolutely lucked into their position. Demographics are the biggest reason the Big 12 is behind them.

People in charge of college athletics have routinely demonstrated extreme incompetence. The Pac 12 is a great example. Administrators are routinely blinded by prestige, perception, and things that don’t pay the bills. There’s no guarantee that these people will make smart and financially sound decision.

Now I think they are smart, and will see the value in letting the rest of these schools exist. I’m just saying there’s no guarantee that the adults in the room are, well, the adults in the room.

Do you honestly think big 12/mwc/acc fans boycotting a new league would put a dent in those great ratings?

 

[HoopsTournament]

I think that is a hypothetical, but one that I think people vastly overestimate how much of an impact losing some viewers is going to change the course while others come in to offset them.

As long as the product is entertaining, the vast majority of high volume viewers will continue to watch.

But people die and more people are born. Over time those new people will have less of an attachment.

Also just because ratings are high now means nothing 20 years from now. Baseball was the most popular sport until it wasn’t. America Idol was the most popular show on TV until it wasn’t. And the reason is because they changed. And because the demographics of the people watching changed. And thinking that won’t happen here is naive.

 

[HoopsTournament]

Obviously there has to be a winner and a loser and no Indiana will never win a CFP. I was talking about roster talent rising for the lower teams compared to the Big 12.

The players that typically go to Utah, Ok St, K state could get paid more by going to Purdue, Indiana, ect. Then the talent drops off for Ok st, Utah, ect. The marketing and propaganda was bad before but it’s about to get 1000x worse. ESPN is already running ads for the SEC next year IN FEBRUARY.

Top talent doesn’t matter if you win 2 games every year.

 

[Icky_Mettle]

One thing with the higher sports tv ratings is now they count out of home viewing, something they didn’t used to track.

Sports TV Ratings Are About to Get Even Bigger. Here’s Why.

Barflies and gym rats are boosting sports ratings, but an upcoming expansion of Nielsen's out-of-home sample should help scare up even higher numbers.

www.sportico.com

 

[ClubCy]

Top talent doesn’t matter if you win 2 games every year.

Dude you are missing my entire point. I’m not talking about wins and losses. I’m talking about the talent gap between the perceived P2 and the rest of the leagues when they can offer more money if revenue sharing becomes a thing (which it will).