2024 College Football TV Ratings

[ralphiewvu]

If you're asking what the sliding scale for ESPN's ad rates are, that's proprietary information.

I'm asking what viewership is needed per cfp game to get that $100 million to break even? Is it 10 million? 15 million?

You and Eric have no problem telling everyone they are losing money on this. And you seem to think $100 million in ad revenue per game is the break even point. So what's the viewership required to get that break even point?

 

[ericd7633]

No. UGA v Texas drew more

We’ll see.

So despite 25 years worth of data to suggest your take is going to be wrong, you're going to stick to it?

 

[michaeljordan_fan]

I thought he was talking conf championships this year. Who cares about numbers 10 years ago.

Again, we’ll see. Maybe you ate right and in wrong. Well going out in week.

Oregon/OSU didnt play in the b1g ccg

 

[michaeljordan_fan]

I'm asking what viewership is needed per cfp game to get that $100 million to break even? Is it 10 million? 15 million?

You and Eric have no problem telling everyone they are losing money on this. And you seem to think $100 million in ad revenue per game is the break even point. So what's the viewership required to get that break even point?

The amount paid is public knowledge. All you have to do is divide that number by the games played to find the per game cost.

I didn't include espn's production costs, since that is internal information, as is the sliding scale ad rates.

 

[ericd7633]

I thought he was talking conf championships this year. Who cares about numbers 10 years ago.

Again, we’ll see. Maybe you ate right and in wrong. Well going out in week.

OSU didn't make the B1GCG.

Historical data is super important in projecting viewership, like we're doing here. It's why your take on the Sugar Bowl getting more is going to end up looking dumb. Plus, there are a ton more resources put into the Rose Bowl, and this will be no different (GameDay etc..)

If the Sugar Bowl gets more, I'll admit I'm wrong.

 

[ericd7633]

PSU/Bama is getting much more than PSU/SMU. This year with so many major brands having 3+ it won't produce amazing ratings. But if it's put in to give more autos to the P2 (right or not) you are going to start seeing more major brands facing off or much more intriguing matchups then what we have now. More than one network will be interested in those numbers.

I'm genuinely asking, what viewer number does ESPN need to break even on each game? Does anyone know?

Don't know exactly, but 7.5 million ain't it.

 

[UbetterDUCK]

OSU didn't make the B1GCG.

Historical data is super important in projecting viewership, like we're doing here. It's why your take on the Sugar Bowl getting more is going to end up looking dumb. Plus, there are a ton more resources put into the Rose Bowl, and this will be no different (GameDay etc..)

If the Sugar Bowl gets more, I'll admit I'm wrong.

No way the Sugar Bowl viewership is higher than the Rose Bowl. International viewership for the Rose vs Sugar no matter who is playing isn’t even close.

 

[ericd7633]

No way the Sugar Bowl viewership is higher than the Rose Bowl. International viewership for the Rose vs Sugar no matter who is playing isn’t even close.

Yeah I don't really see a scenario where the Sugar Bowl can get more. Even if it was a blowout, I still can't see it.

 

[ericd7633]

FCS semis up like 175% from last year. ESPN struck gold with their NCAA championship(s) TV deal. Only paying $115 million/yr and already has seen record viewership for the women's volleyball regional finals and FF. Men's soccer final was the 2nd highest viewed final, and now this with FCS football. Great numbers already and haven't gotten to the women's tournament or MCWS and WCWS.

 

[ralphiewvu]

The amount paid is public knowledge. All you have to do is divide that number by the games played to find the per game cost.

I didn't include espn's production costs, since that is internal information, as is the sliding scale ad rates.

Don't know exactly, but 7.5 million ain't it.

So this right here is the problem. Both of you have no idea what viewership number is needed to be able to charge that $100 million ( not including production costs) for ads to break even. Do I think it's more than 7.5??? Absolutely. But for all we know it could be 12 million. A number that seems like it could be hit on average the deeper we go. So out right saying expansion won't happen because ESPN is losing money is putting the horse before the cart when NO ONE HERE knows how much ESPN is profiting or losing off of this.

 

[WhosYourDawggy]

So despite 25 years worth of data to suggest your take is going to be wrong, you're going to stick to it?

Do you really care? So yes, I’m going to go with the CFP and UGA and ND brands to beat the CFP with Ore and tOSU. If I am wrong I won’t give one shit.

 

[WhosYourDawggy]

View attachment 129858

FCS semis up like 175% from last year. ESPN struck gold with their NCAA championship(s) TV deal. Only paying $115 million/yr and already has seen record viewership for the women's volleyball regional finals and FF. Men's soccer final was the 2nd highest viewed final, and now this with FCS football. Great numbers already and haven't gotten to the women's tournament or MCWS and WCWS.

Every time people say ESPN is dying things just get better. CFB numbers were great this year.

 

[Thiefery]

ESPN is just better for CFB.. People been shitting on Gameday for years now, but they continue to dominate in the ratings.

 

[ericd7633]

Do you really care? So yes, I’m going to go with the CFP and UGA and ND brands to beat the CFP with Ore and tOSU. If I am wrong I won’t give one shit.

No, I don't really care. You're the one that came after me for making a prediction on it. If you didn't care, why even respond in the first place? Then you doubled down and said it was a "smart take" when it's the exact opposite of that.

 

[ericd7633]

So this right here is the problem. Both of you have no idea what viewership number is needed to be able to charge that $100 million ( not including production costs) for ads to break even. Do I think it's more than 7.5??? Absolutely. But for all we know it could be 12 million. A number that seems like it could be hit on average the deeper we go. So out right saying expansion won't happen because ESPN is losing money is putting the horse before the cart when NO ONE HERE knows how much ESPN is profiting or losing off of this.

But you're paying more money for worse games. The QF's, SF's and CG will all do great. That's already baked into the price they are paying. If you have to pay an additional $118 million ($336 total) for two more games, it doesn't make sense monetarily IMO. Maybe the contract is broken down as such, 1st round games are less and there are escalating costs the further the CFP goes on. I haven't seen anything like that, but it would make sense. So maybe they only have to pay $150 million or something for an additional two games. Idk. But paying the rate they are now on a per game basis, it's a sunk cost IMO.

And again, a lot of my opinion is based on the fact they sublicensed a bunch of games to TNT because they were worried about the cost overall. Depending on how much they got from TNT, that was probably the correct move.

 

[ralphiewvu]

But you're paying more money for worse games. The QF's, SF's and CG will all do great. That's already baked into the price they are paying. If you have to pay an additional $118 million ($336 total) for two more games, it doesn't make sense monetarily IMO. Maybe the contract is broken down as such, 1st round games are less and there are escalating costs the further the CFP goes on. I haven't seen anything like that, but it would make sense. So maybe they only have to pay $150 million or something for an additional two games. Idk. But paying the rate they are now on a per game basis, it's a sunk cost IMO.

Not if the network gets provisions to give the P2 more autobids. I'm not for that at all, but if the extra 2 teams are anre someone like Alabama and USC, it's not going to necessarily be worse games. And again we have no idea if it's a sunk cost. Sure the PSU viewership in round 1 likely isn't covering this. But 2 of the 4 games were in the teens. I can't imagine that's not good enough and as you said it'll likely only get better.

And again, a lot of my opinion is based on the fact they sublicensed a bunch of games to TNT because they were worried about the cost overall. Depending on how much they got from TNT, that was probably the correct move.

Did they officially state they were worried about cost? Maybe they didn't want to compete with the NFL and sub'd the only two games going against it?

 

[ericd7633]

Not if the network gets provisions to give the P2 more autobids. I'm not for that at all, but if the extra 2 teams are anre someone like Alabama and USC, it's not going to necessarily be worse games. And again we have no idea if it's a sunk cost. Sure the PSU viewership in round 1 likely isn't covering this. But 2 of the 4 games were in the teens. I can't imagine that's not good enough and as you said it'll likely only get better.

Did they officially state they were worried about cost? Maybe they didn't want to compete with the NFL and sub'd the only two games going against it?

So if we had a 14 teamer this year, and got rid of the auto byes, we would have had 4 B1G and 4 SEC teams, and the matchups wouldn't have been that great. I laid that out earlier in this thread.

They sublicensed games through the 2028 season. So it's more than just the two games this year. And starting in 2026, TNT gets two QF games as well. So that's a total of 16 games. That's a shit ton.

 

[ralphiewvu]

So if we had a 14 teamer this year, and got rid of the auto byes, we would have had 4 B1G and 4 SEC teams, and the matchups wouldn't have been that great. I laid that out earlier in this thread.

And I've stated this year isn't the norm. Alabama isn't in this. The ACC got two teams and one of them wasn't FSU. The G5 got a Bye and teams like Oklahoma, USC and Michigan hovered around .500 . I'm just saying having provisions so teams I listed have a better chance of getting in and networks get good matchups isn't going to mean 1st round games will draw terrible.

They sublicensed games through the 2028 season. So it's more than just the two games this year. And starting in 2026, TNT gets two QF games as well. So that's a total of 16 games. That's a shit ton.

A fair point. However they did this before the games even started? Yes the argument to help mitigate cost is to sub to another network is most likely the reason but they had no idea what teams and matchups were going to happen when they did this. I think it's a bit of a security blanket just in case this isn't worth it.

 

[ericd7633]

And I've stated this year isn't the norm. Alabama isn't in this. The ACC got two teams and one of them wasn't FSU. The G5 got a Bye and teams like Oklahoma, USC and Michigan hovered around .500 . I'm just saying having provisions so teams I listed have a better chance of getting in and networks get good matchups isn't going to mean 1st round games will draw terrible.

A fair point. However they did this before the games even started? Yes the argument to help mitigate cost is to sub to another network is most likely the reason but they had no idea what teams and matchups were going to happen when they did this. I think it's a bit of a security blanket just in case this isn't worth it.

Did you overlook my previous post? These would have been the matchups, in a 14 teamer, with the top 5 conference champions making it, and no auto byes:

#3 Texas vs. #14 Clemson
#4 Penn State vs. #13 Miami
#5 Notre Dame vs. #12 Arizona State
#6 Ohio State vs. #11 Alabama
#7 Tennessee vs. #10 SMU
#8 Indiana vs. #9 Boise State

This is the scenario you've been calling for. Do these 6 games avg more than 10.75 million? Idk, but there's your baseline for expansion.

Yes, so then we agree on the sublicensing part? That's what I've been saying this entire time. They're worried about cost, so have TNT pay them like $2 billion or whatever it was to recoup some of the cost.

 

[michaeljordan_fan]

They're worried about cost, so have TNT pay them like $2 billion or whatever it was to recoup some of the cost.

I don't think they've released the amount Warner Bros. is paying, but it's difficult to imagine it's more than $250 million per year. If WB was willing to pay more than that, they'd have been a competitor to just win the overall contract.