ACC expansion ...

[WhosYourDawggy]

I did qualify my statement with the note that the GT attraction was not the typical attraction (meaning it wouldnt bring the money any other team would). The B1G has always and still does desire a southern presence. They wanted GT 10 years ago for the Atlanta exposure. There is a very large B1G team following in Atlanta and it isn't just about GT fanboy headcount, it is TVs. Just because almost all of GA is red doesn't mean there aren't alot of people that still tune in to their games. And the B1G badly wants to have games in Atlanta not only because it is a major market, but also because it is ground zero for the most talent rich state in the country. These teams want to play there in front of the recruits and they'll sell alot of tickets to B1G fans who otherwise never get up north to see their teams play.

GT offers nothing itself per se. It is about TVs, location, and the amount of B1G fans in the area. B1G has already done the study on it and invited once, but like morons our school turned it down. So B1G got Rutgers instead. Those reasons haven't changed.

None of what you say comes close to them spending $100 million per year to bring in GaTech.

- TV markets meant something 10 years ago. It means far less today. The LA market will bring the B1G $17 million, and that is a shrinking share of CFB revenue. In 10 years it will likely be half that.

- Being in a market means the BTN channel is in play. That's it. It doesn't increase eyeballs watching games. All the B1G games except some crappy ones that only show on the BTN channel are available on Fox. If they want the BTN they can go with YouTueb TV or Fubu or Hulu without the B1G paying tens of millions per year by taking GaTech.

- You may have a point on the recruiting, but the price is too high.

- The caclulous that was in place for Rutgers v. GaTech has absolutely changed. In 2014 there were 90 million basic cable viewers. In 2027 the number will be 40 million. Also, Rutgers delivered NJ and the entire state of New York. Rutgers was happening no matter what Ga Tech said or didn't say.

 

[Thiefery]

*soccer>baseball>basketball

Soccer dad too?

 

[rfjeff9]

None of what you say comes close to them spending $100 million per year to bring in GaTech.

- TV markets meant something 10 years ago. It means far less today. The LA market will bring the B1G $17 million, and that is a shrinking share of CFB revenue. In 10 years it will likely be half that.

- Being in a market means the BTN channel is in play. That's it. It doesn't increase eyeballs watching games. All the B1G games except some crappy ones that only show on the BTN channel are available on Fox. If they want the BTN they can go with YouTueb TV or Fubu or Hulu without the B1G paying tens of millions per year by taking GaTech.

- You may have a point on the recruiting, but the price is too high.

- The caclulous that was in place for Rutgers v. GaTech has absolutely changed. In 2014 there were 90 million basic cable viewers. In 2027 the number will be 40 million. Also, Rutgers delivered NJ and the entire state of New York. Rutgers was happening no matter what Ga Tech said or didn't say.

I disagree to an extent. We really don't know how it will be in 10 years with the media. Cable has shrunk, but by no means is it a non entity and many decisions about the media piece of the pie can still be tied directly to cable. As far as streaming goes, we arent there yet to a point where everyone has all access. That is among way off for just purely physical and logistical purposes. Cable and TV count is still going to be a factor in the future, especially in more rural areas.

Regardless of that, there still seems to be a difference in the strategy of SEC vs B1G expansion, and their philosophies have always been different. One is more about the $$ a team can being to the SEC table, but the B1G seems to be more about footprint and national exposure, while ensuring that the $$ is either reasonable, or there are other considerations like academocs, AAU status, or planting a flag in media market. That's why I think the price is NOT too high to add Tech. But even then we're 4th down the list at best. I won't hold my breath on it. And it's still so far down the road for any ACC team that it's an argument for a later date, really.

 

[Wild Turkey]

I haven't put a lot of thought into it, but

(1) part of the problem is that March Madness involves about 365 schools, not just the big conferences. And while the tournament is a huge success, it is so because of the smaller schools and because there are a lot of schools. Hell, some of the better teams are in the B12, ACC, and PAC, the conferences getting their lunch money stolen every day. It's not like the B1G and the SEC could take over March Madness and make something of it that people would want to watch, and

(2) believe it or not, there isn't as much money in it as football. Not even close. The B1G and the SEC combined are about to be at $3 billion every year. March Madness is about $1 billion. I think they are fine concentrating on football and letting the NCAA handle hoops.

(3) because hoops only requires 15 schollies the big schools can't dominate by just throwing money at it. The advantages they have in CFB don't necessarily translate to basketball.

I disagree with you. If Kansas, UNC and Duke make it into one of the 2 conferences then they have all the star power they need to form a basketball championship. In fact they could include the Big East (paying them a small cut) and you would only be leaving out a few teams like Gonzaga that move the needle.

People like the underdogs but they won’t stop watching if you have all the big names in the tournament. It easily could be 500mm to each conference.

It will definitely happen at some point. If the ACC stays intact then they will include them split about 330mm a piece and have some at large spots for fun.

 

[Top Cat]

So
Some Basketball Schools do hold value in the re-alignment talks.

Basically the only real "basketball" schools who have any basketball value in realignment that are free agents would be UNC and Kansas. The NCAAT getting pulled out would probably help those schools' case, but after that there's still some extra obstacles economically.

The economics has to change for either school to truly make sense unless ND insists on UNC tagging with them.

 

[WhosYourDawggy]

I disagree with you. If Kansas, UNC and Duke make it into one of the 2 conferences then they have all the star power they need to form a basketball championship. In fact they could include the Big East (paying them a small cut) and you would only be leaving out a few teams like Gonzaga that move the needle.

People like the underdogs but they won’t stop watching if you have all the big names in the tournament. It easily could be 500mm to each conference.

It will definitely happen at some point. If the ACC stays intact then they will include them split about 330mm a piece and have some at large spots for fun.

You are just making shit up now because it sounds cool to you. You are totally ignoring economic reality.

 

[WhosYourDawggy]

I disagree to an extent. We really don't know how it will be in 10 years with the media. Cable has shrunk, but by no means is it a non entity and many decisions about the media piece of the pie can still be tied directly to cable. As far as streaming goes, we arent there yet to a point where everyone has all access. That is among way off for just purely physical and logistical purposes. Cable and TV count is still going to be a factor in the future, especially in more rural areas.

Regardless of that, there still seems to be a difference in the strategy of SEC vs B1G expansion, and their philosophies have always been different. One is more about the $$ a team can being to the SEC table, but the B1G seems to be more about footprint and national exposure, while ensuring that the $$ is either reasonable, or there are other considerations like academocs, AAU status, or planting a flag in media market. That's why I think the price is NOT too high to add Tech. But even then we're 4th down the list at best. I won't hold my breath on it. And it's still so far down the road for any ACC team that it's an argument for a later date, really.

Agree we don't know what we will have in 10 years.

We do know exactly what cable means. For the B1G, the LA market they just got by bringing in USC and UCLA is worth $17.5 million a year, and shrinking. That's going to be about 1.2% of their entire new contract. That's the no. 2 cable market in the US. I'd ballpark the BTN component of their contract at about 20%. The other 80% is viewership generated by the team including games with over 4 million viewers, and their ability to get into the new expanded CFP. GaTech gets a zero on both of those. Academics and AAU won't get past that.

 

[Wild Turkey]

You are just making shit up now because it sounds cool to you. You are totally ignoring economic reality.

No, it's basic math.

The NCAA makes a little over a billion dollars a year in revenue from the basketball tournament.
The NCAA is very close to just going away.

If the SEC and B1G took over the tournament and split the revenue it would be 500 million a piece and if they split it 3 ways it would be 330 million a piece. Now what I don't know is how it cost to put on the tournament and that would come out of the revenue but say it's 100 million that's still 450 million the conferences split.

If both conferences see 300 to 500 million in revenue sitting on the table for them to take then they are going to do it and that is "economic reality".

There is nothing "cool" about it because I hate the idea of MM going away as it is today but I also realize it's very much in danger.

 

[rfjeff9]

Agree we don't know what we will have in 10 years.

We do know exactly what cable means. For the B1G, the LA market they just got by bringing in USC and UCLA is worth $17.5 million a year, and shrinking. That's going to be about 1.2% of their entire new contract. That's the no. 2 cable market in the US. I'd ballpark the BTN component of their contract at about 20%. The other 80% is viewership generated by the team including games with over 4 million viewers, and their ability to get into the new expanded CFP. GaTech gets a zero on both of those. Academics and AAU won't get past that.

I disagree. I think location and live B1G games in front of recruits in the market are a bigger deal to the B1G than you give credit.

I am first to admit that other than location, GT has nothing to offer, and they are still somewhere down the list. But to think they have almost no shot is perhaps not understanding the objective, there is more to this than money. Maybe for SEC, it's about the dollars, but for B1G, it has at least as much to do with expanding footprint and playing live in the talent rich south. Like I said, the B1G interest to expand into the south has never gone away. And yes, I think it is pretty clear at this point that academics and AAU really matter a great deal to B1G. Not enough to merit an invite on its own, but coupled with the location and the desire to have a presence there, there is at least an average chance for a B1G future for GT.

Time will tell which direction B1G goes. They may stop with ND, they may grab more PAC teams, or maybe extend south. I think if they go for more than 2 schools in the south then GT is the 3rd or 4th team.

 

[WhosYourDawggy]

I disagree. I think location and live B1G games in front of recruits in the market are a bigger deal to the B1G than you give credit.

I am first to admit that other than location, GT has nothing to offer, and they are still somewhere down the list. But to think they have almost no shot is perhaps not understanding the objective, there is more to this than money. Maybe for SEC, it's about the dollars, but for B1G, it has at least as much to do with expanding footprint and playing live in the talent rich south. Like I said, the B1G interest to expand into the south has never gone away. And yes, I think it is pretty clear at this point that academics and AAU really matter a great deal to B1G. Not enough to merit an invite on its own, but coupled with the location and the desire to have a presence there, there is at least an average chance for a B1G future for GT.

Time will tell which direction B1G goes. They may stop with ND, they may grab more PAC teams, or maybe extend south. I think if they go for more than 2 schools in the south then GT is the 3rd or 4th team.

Here is what I think you are missing ... the largeness of the money. You have to bring in $100 million for a team to be worth it. You can't say we generate $20 million. $50 million. You have to be able to generate a billion dollars over a decade in order for you to justify your cut. With all due respect, Ga Tech has nothing that can approach that in direct or indirect value. If we were talking $20 million a year, or maybe even $30 million a year, maybe we can get there. But even teams like Clemson, OkSU, FSU, Miami, UNC are going to have a hard time justifying their share.

 

[Wild Turkey]

I disagree. I think location and live B1G games in front of recruits in the market are a bigger deal to the B1G than you give credit.

I am first to admit that other than location, GT has nothing to offer, and they are still somewhere down the list. But to think they have almost no shot is perhaps not understanding the objective, there is more to this than money. Maybe for SEC, it's about the dollars, but for B1G, it has at least as much to do with expanding footprint and playing live in the talent rich south. Like I said, the B1G interest to expand into the south has never gone away. And yes, I think it is pretty clear at this point that academics and AAU really matter a great deal to B1G. Not enough to merit an invite on its own, but coupled with the location and the desire to have a presence there, there is at least an average chance for a B1G future for GT.

Time will tell which direction B1G goes. They may stop with ND, they may grab more PAC teams, or maybe extend south. I think if they go for more than 2 schools in the south then GT is the 3rd or 4th team.

GT is probably worth about 30 to 40 million.
They have the rights to the GT vs UGA game every other year.
They have an AAU membership that generates 100s of millions in research dollars.
They have more brand recognition than Illinois, Purdue, Northwestern, Rutgers, Maryland, Minnesota, Indiana (in football not Bball) and I would put them on par with Michigan State.

They are not a slam dunk but at least a bubble team.

 

[WhosYourDawggy]

No, it's basic math.

The NCAA makes a little over a billion dollars a year in revenue from the basketball tournament.
The NCAA is very close to just going away.

If the SEC and B1G took over the tournament and split the revenue it would be 500 million a piece and if they split it 3 ways it would be 330 million a piece. Now what I don't know is how it cost to put on the tournament and that would come out of the revenue but say it's 100 million that's still 450 million the conferences split.

If both conferences see 300 to 500 million in revenue sitting on the table for them to take then they are going to do it and that is "economic reality".

There is nothing "cool" about it because I hate the idea of MM going away as it is today but I also realize it's very much in danger.

Again, you are just making shit up. It's the opposite of basic math ... it's hard math and you are just saying, hell yeah let's do away with NCAA and grab a billion dollars. I don't really have the time to do a deep dive, but

The NCAA may be going away in football, but whatever is left after that is a billion dollar entity that, "according to the NCAA, there are 350 Division 1 schools, 310 Division 2 schools, and 438 Division 3 schools. To give you a better idea of size and how these divisions compare, about 176,000 student athletes compete at the Division 1 level. A little more than 118,000 student-athletes compete in Division 2 and Division 3 has just under 188,000 student athletes on its various rosters."

You have an entity in charge of 1100 universities, and about 500,000 college athletes. But, no, the NCAA will just go away because about 60 schools is going to take over and grab the $1 billion dollars that funds all these universities and their athletes?

Do you realize how crazy you sound? Like the other 1040 universities are going to say, cool, we are out of the sports business but have it? Dude, this ain't happening.

 

[WhosYourDawggy]

GT is probably worth about 30 to 40 million.
They have the rights to the GT vs UGA game every other year.
They have an AAU membership that generates 100s of millions in research dollars.
They have more brand recognition than Illinois, Purdue, Northwestern, Rutgers, Maryland, Minnesota, Indiana (in football not Bball) and I would put them on par with Michigan State.

They are not a slam dunk but at least a bubble team.

Stop ... WTH ... Ga Tech on par with Michigan State? $30 - $40 million. Break that down for us. Athletics only.

Atlanta is the 8th largest market, and with LA being 2nd, that may be worth $10 million per year. Their viewership is under 500K per game, and that is with games against Clemson, UGA, and others where the eyeballs belong to the other team. Even when we pay Ga Tech we get a noon slot on the SECC or the ACCN. They generate zero, none, nada, for the CFP money. You'd be stretching it to say they are worth $20 million ... they aren't even earning their share in the ACC, let alone a $100 million share of the B1G.

 

[Deep Creek]

Here is what I think you are missing ... the largeness of the money. You have to bring in $100 million for a team to be worth it. You can't say we generate $20 million. $50 million. You have to be able to generate a billion dollars over a decade in order for you to justify your cut. With all due respect, Ga Tech has nothing that can approach that in direct or indirect value. If we were talking $20 million a year, or maybe even $30 million a year, maybe we can get there. But even teams like Clemson, OkSU, FSU, Miami, UNC are going to have a hard time justifying their share.

There are damn few teams that bring that much worth to the party...at least all by themselves.

 

[rfjeff9]

GT is probably worth about 30 to 40 million.
They have the rights to the GT vs UGA game every other year.
They have an AAU membership that generates 100s of millions in research dollars.
They have more brand recognition than Illinois, Purdue, Northwestern, Rutgers, Maryland, Minnesota, Indiana (in football not Bball) and I would put them on par with Michigan State.

They are not a slam dunk but at least a bubble team.

"Bubble", yes that's the damn word I have been noodling over but couldn't find.

 

[rfjeff9]

Here is what I think you are missing ... the largeness of the money. You have to bring in $100 million for a team to be worth it. You can't say we generate $20 million. $50 million. You have to be able to generate a billion dollars over a decade in order for you to justify your cut. With all due respect, Ga Tech has nothing that can approach that in direct or indirect value. If we were talking $20 million a year, or maybe even $30 million a year, maybe we can get there. But even teams like Clemson, OkSU, FSU, Miami, UNC are going to have a hard time justifying their share.

No, I get it. And as far as the SEC goes, you are spot on. But B1G thinks a little differently on it for their objectives and I think we fit in to a certain extent. I give us an average chance overall.

 

[7samurai13]

baseball>basketball

You are on some strong drugs if you think baseball brings anywhere near the same amount of cash.

 

[CorpRebel]

In light of all that has gone on in the past couple years in CFB, will GOR (in it's present forms) actually still be utilized in 10 years or so?

 

[outofyourmind]

In light of all that has gone on in the past couple years in CFB, will GOR (in it's present forms) actually still be utilized in 10 years or so?

 

[rfjeff9]

In light of all that has gone on in the past couple years in CFB, will GOR (in it's present forms) actually still be utilized in 10 years or so?

I think 10 years is when teams are clamoring to leave, and B1G and SEC take another look if they are inclined to do so at all. Certainly B1G will call ND at least.

Afterwards, it's hard to believe that anyone else would do a GOR for that many years again like this, it's brutal and is going to ultimately hurt programs that need to act in their own self interest, but cannot afford to do so.

But you have to admit, it's working as designed.