https://twitter.com/BryanDFischer/status...8580657153

DAY OF (W)RECKONING

(08-09-2022 04:02 PM)nole Wrote:  

(08-09-2022 03:43 PM)Hallcity Wrote:  With ESPN no longer broadcasting B10 games, doesn't that mean that more ACC games will be scheduled more prominently? ESPN instead of ESPN2 or game start at 3:30 instead of noon. Shouldn't ESPN have to pay the ACC more to broadcast its games in more valuable slots?

Or it gives the SEC more slots.

The assumption ESPN gets ACTUALLY vested in the ACC is a hope...not sure there is anything there judging by the last 10 years.

Maybe I just don't get it, but does a 3:30 game between Mississippi and Auburn or Kentucky and Texas A&M excite football fans not in one of those states more than a NC State and VT or Clemson and Miami? It seems to me that once you get beyond the top two or three SEC schools there's not much pizzazz there. Wouldn't featuring more appealing ACC games be more appealing to the casual viewer?

(08-10-2022 02:37 PM)dawgitall Wrote:  

(08-09-2022 04:02 PM)nole Wrote:  

(08-09-2022 03:43 PM)Hallcity Wrote:  With ESPN no longer broadcasting B10 games, doesn't that mean that more ACC games will be scheduled more prominently? ESPN instead of ESPN2 or game start at 3:30 instead of noon. Shouldn't ESPN have to pay the ACC more to broadcast its games in more valuable slots?

Or it gives the SEC more slots.

The assumption ESPN gets ACTUALLY vested in the ACC is a hope...not sure there is anything there judging by the last 10 years.

Maybe I just don't get it, but does a 3:30 game between Mississippi and Auburn or Kentucky and Texas A&M excite football fans not in one of those states more than a NC State and VT or Clemson and Miami? It seems to me that once you get beyond the top two or three SEC schools there's not much pizzazz there. Wouldn't featuring more appealing ACC games be more appealing to the casual viewer?

That's something ESPN had to offer in order to get the SEC contract - but I totally agree with you, I'd rather watch paint dry than watch most SEC football games.

This is actually a troublesome problem for ESPN, the SEC, and ACC.

The BIG/FOX appears to have set themselves up for the perceived future broadcast market.

A) Acquiring USC and UCLA for a. national conference
B) Deals to broadcast BIG sports content on 3 OTA national networks.
C) Deal with Amazon to provide BIG sports streaming along with independent BIG network.
D) BIG is also available via cable networks.

This configuration is set up to serve cable subscribers, while also enticing BIG and casual fans who may be inclined to cut cable. This is a problem for ESPN, SEC, and ACC who are dependent on cable subscribers at this time.

ESPN is vulnerable as it only controls 1 OTA network in ABC. They are trying to raise cable rates for their sports product enticing chord cutters. The BIG can now also entice their fans and population centers to cut cable by providing alternative distribution of sports content. ESPN thus takes a revenue hit which also hits the SEC and ACC.

The BIGs alternative approach also better promotes that conference. Cheaper service to all audiences. The ACC and SEC are stuck on ESPN and regional broadcasts. More expensive to view requiring more cable fees.

The ACC will likely get a short term boost, to long term pain.

"And you know the surest way to go broke? Keep getting an increasing share of a shrinking market." - Larry the Liquidator

And make no mistake, The cable subscribers market is shrinking.

Unfortunately, the ACC has put all it's rights in the ESPN basket along with the SEC. The SEC is banking on it being the prime ESPN money maker and prime regional viewing to keep it on par with the BIG.

The ACC needs to get creative now, but is probably too conservative to be creative.

The ACC needs to create a national presence. That may be taking a TV money decrease now to bring in central and west coast teams to build a stronger more diversified sports viewing Market.

Buy up every possible regional channel slot for our teams.

Make our presence a fixture on every national TV set.

(08-10-2022 02:37 PM)dawgitall Wrote:  

(08-09-2022 04:02 PM)nole Wrote:  

(08-09-2022 03:43 PM)Hallcity Wrote:  With ESPN no longer broadcasting B10 games, doesn't that mean that more ACC games will be scheduled more prominently? ESPN instead of ESPN2 or game start at 3:30 instead of noon. Shouldn't ESPN have to pay the ACC more to broadcast its games in more valuable slots?

Or it gives the SEC more slots.

The assumption ESPN gets ACTUALLY vested in the ACC is a hope...not sure there is anything there judging by the last 10 years.

Maybe I just don't get it, but does a 3:30 game between Mississippi and Auburn or Kentucky and Texas A&M excite football fans not in one of those states more than a NC State and VT or Clemson and Miami? It seems to me that once you get beyond the top two or three SEC schools there's not much pizzazz there. Wouldn't featuring more appealing ACC games be more appealing to the casual viewer?

What more appealing ACC games? The point is that the SEC as a whole has WAY MORE college football fans in general so of course they're going to drive viewership more. Just look at the size of their stadiums compared to the ACC. They're going to watch the games in their conference whether they're fans of the individual program or not.

The BIG tens new economic model brings up an interesting thought that could be a radical idea.

Are their enough rich ACC alumni who could buy up existing regional networks for an OTA ACC network?

Not just a nepotistic content provider like raycom/Bally's. But physically buy enough OTA channel space starting in the ACC's major media markets, and buy back ACC games to promote ACC teams. Have that channel play a big ACC game of the week, but then also a second regional game.

I know your saying isn't that the deal we have now with the ACCN and ESPN. But those games are dictated by ESPN, and may be stuck on ESPN channels or in the dreaded ACCNX or ESPN+ which has extra fees that exclude non cable subscribers. Either way, the idea is to take back more games and put them OTA to reach larger audiences and make back the cost with more advertising and better league promotion.

Especially, if ESPN decides to just feature more SEC games instead of investing more in promoting the ACC.

There are more thoughts and discussion could better hone this idea. I have also been considering if Disney would be willing to spend the money to do something similar if it absorbs the PAC.

(08-11-2022 02:21 PM)AeroWolf Wrote:  The BIG tens new economic model brings up an interesting thought that could be a radical idea.

Are their enough rich ACC alumni who could buy up existing regional networks for an OTA ACC network?

Not just a nepotistic content provider like raycom/Bally's. But physically buy enough OTA channel space starting in the ACC's major media markets, and buy back ACC games to promote ACC teams. Have that channel play a big ACC game of the week, but then also a second regional game.

I know your saying isn't that the deal we have now with the ACCN and ESPN. But those games are dictated by ESPN, and may be stuck on ESPN channels or in the dreaded ACCNX or ESPN+ which has extra fees that exclude non cable subscribers. Either way, the idea is to take back more games and put them OTA to reach larger audiences and make back the cost with more advertising and better league promotion.

Especially, if ESPN decides to just feature more SEC games instead of investing more in promoting the ACC.

There are more thoughts and discussion could better hone this idea. I have also been considering if Disney would be willing to spend the money to do something similar if it absorbs the PAC.

Even if they were for sale, I suspect the price would be astronomically high.

Is Bally Sports still a Fox affiliate network after it used to be called Fox Sports South, Fox Sports North. Used to be a lot of ACC games on those

(08-11-2022 03:26 PM)CardFan1 Wrote:  Is Bally Sports still a Fox affiliate network after it used to be called Fox Sports South, Fox Sports North. Used to be a lot of ACC games on those

Bally sports appears to be an independent local regional sports broadcast distributor. Used to be the old Fox Sports South family of networks that gont spun offFox when Disney acquired 20th century Fox. Appears to be primarily interested in just providing local sports distribution on cable channels and network affiliated.

Again I think the ACC needs to think bigger in terms of adjusting to the new TV sports economic model to target both cable and non cable subscribers.

That means convince ESPN to allow it's family of channels to be offered standalone via streaming. ESPN still forces a cable subscription, and then additional fees for sports packages. ESPN needs to change this approach, because it's price increases has been a major driver cable cord cutting. When they drive consumers away due to price increases it hurts the ACCs bottom line.

Become a better OTA TV partner. ACC should be pasting it games on OTA channels to avoid crap like the Comcasts ACCN blackout or Bally sports blackouts. Making sure an ACC game is available on every ACC media zone should be a priority. This attracts a larger advertising base, than people who are buying the ACCN network and streaming packages. It also provides a better promotional approach by reaching more than just cable subscribers.

(08-11-2022 04:40 PM)AeroWolf Wrote:  Bally sports appears to be an independent local regional sports broadcast distributor. Used to be the old Fox Sports South family of networks that gont spun offFox when Disney acquired 20th century Fox. Appears to be primarily interested in just providing local sports distribution on cable channels and network affiliated.

Again I think the ACC needs to think bigger in terms of adjusting to the new TV sports economic model to target both cable and non cable subscribers.

That means convince ESPN to allow it's family of channels to be offered standalone via streaming. ESPN still forces a cable subscription, and then additional fees for sports packages. ESPN needs to change this approach, because it's price increases has been a major driver cable cord cutting. When they drive consumers away due to price increases it hurts the ACCs bottom line.

Become a better OTA TV partner. ACC should be pasting it games on OTA channels to avoid crap like the Comcasts ACCN blackout or Bally sports blackouts. Making sure an ACC game is available on every ACC media zone should be a priority. This attracts a larger advertising base, than people who are buying the ACCN network and streaming packages. It also provides a better promotional approach by reaching more than just cable subscribers.

Are you hoping for a deal with someone like MeTV, Antenna TV, Cozi TV, Dabl, etc.?

Probably have to start with those channels. I think the goal should be the 3 ACC games OTA broadcast, every week. One game via ABC, 1 national audience worthy game, and 1 local region game.

Need to make sure we are available and promoted without forcing cable fees.

Thinking about inventory only the ACC provides between 7 and 14 games every week. Assuming a short week of football

Assuming some cooperation from ESPN
1 game on OTA ABC, Biggest game of week. Only national broadcast if ESPN cooperates.
1 game on ESPN, 2nd big game of the Week. 2nd biggest game of the week, but it requires a cable subscription.
3 Games on ACCN, which requires cable subscription, possible extra sports package fees.
1 game on raycom/Bally's, This may be the local regional game

This leaves
Maybe 1 game on ABC with ND.
And everything else on ACCNX which requires streaming

How can we setup the games so that less of the games are on the ACCNX?

The ACC has maybe only 2 OTA promotional games if we are lucky. I think we need 3 preferably national maintain perception of power status and help promote the conference to viewers. (More advertising, more showcasing to larger pools of recruits)

This leaves 1-8 games available

ESPN has always been a major part of College sports and it is going to be weird to not see B1G games opening up the Sat. slate on ESPN. I am not sure cutting ESPN out will benefit the B1G. No College Gameday visits or exposure in football nor basketball. B1G/ACC challenge is done. No more B1G Mondays for B1G basketball. Really going to be interesting to see if NBC or CBS can build something to replace that exposure.

(08-16-2022 08:15 AM)Indytarheel Wrote:  ESPN has always been a major part of College sports and it is going to be weird to not see B1G games opening up the Sat. slate on ESPN. I am not sure cutting ESPN out will benefit the B1G. No College Gameday visits or exposure in football nor basketball. B1G/ACC challenge is done. No more B1G Mondays for B1G basketball. Really going to be interesting to see if NBC or CBS can build something to replace that exposure.

On the flip side, it becomes even more important for ESPN to expand outside of the Southeast, IMO. Although as long as they have the NFL, NBA, etc., it's not like those in other regions are going to drop ESPN because they don't have the Big Ten (I could talk myself out of it either way).

(08-16-2022 08:36 AM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  

(08-16-2022 08:15 AM)Indytarheel Wrote:  ESPN has always been a major part of College sports and it is going to be weird to not see B1G games opening up the Sat. slate on ESPN. I am not sure cutting ESPN out will benefit the B1G. No College Gameday visits or exposure in football nor basketball. B1G/ACC challenge is done. No more B1G Mondays for B1G basketball. Really going to be interesting to see if NBC or CBS can build something to replace that exposure.

On the flip side, it becomes even more important for ESPN to expand outside of the Southeast, IMO. Although as long as they have the NFL, NBA, etc., it's not like those in other regions are going to drop ESPN because they don't have the Big Ten (I could talk myself out of it either way).

MACtion alone will keep ESPN in homes across the Midwest!

I have to say, ESPN getting Notre Dame would be absolutely brilliant for them (and honestly would help the ACCN). Although, it's looking like they'll stick with NBC per reports.

(08-16-2022 08:36 AM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  

(08-16-2022 08:15 AM)Indytarheel Wrote:  ESPN has always been a major part of College sports and it is going to be weird to not see B1G games opening up the Sat. slate on ESPN. I am not sure cutting ESPN out will benefit the B1G. No College Gameday visits or exposure in football nor basketball. B1G/ACC challenge is done. No more B1G Mondays for B1G basketball. Really going to be interesting to see if NBC or CBS can build something to replace that exposure.

On the flip side, it becomes even more important for ESPN to expand outside of the Southeast, IMO. Although as long as they have the NFL, NBA, etc., it's not like those in other regions are going to drop ESPN because they don't have the Big Ten (I could talk myself out of it either way).

Is it? Aside from tOSU/Michigan game, what other match ups under the Fox banner attract as much attention as those under the ESPN banner. Whether you like the SEC or not, you have to respect the fact that the regional content was interesting enough to command a network that out paced everyone. That was just with football. Throw in bball and the content is unmatched. As it stands, ESPN has Carolina/Duke and Louisville/UK; two of the biggest matchups in bball. Nevermind the possibilities from a pool of ACC, Big East, AAC, SEC, Big 12 and Pac10 entities. I get what you are saying but the content and possible content under ESPN seems to have the network well ahead of Fox.

(08-16-2022 12:18 PM)Indytarheel Wrote:  

(08-16-2022 08:36 AM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  

(08-16-2022 08:15 AM)Indytarheel Wrote:  ESPN has always been a major part of College sports and it is going to be weird to not see B1G games opening up the Sat. slate on ESPN. I am not sure cutting ESPN out will benefit the B1G. No College Gameday visits or exposure in football nor basketball. B1G/ACC challenge is done. No more B1G Mondays for B1G basketball. Really going to be interesting to see if NBC or CBS can build something to replace that exposure.

On the flip side, it becomes even more important for ESPN to expand outside of the Southeast, IMO. Although as long as they have the NFL, NBA, etc., it's not like those in other regions are going to drop ESPN because they don't have the Big Ten (I could talk myself out of it either way).

Is it? Aside from tOSU/Michigan game, what other match ups under the Fox banner attract as much attention as those under the ESPN banner. Whether you like the SEC or not, you have to respect the fact that the regional content was interesting enough to command a network that out paced everyone. That was just with football. Throw in bball and the content is unmatched. As it stands, ESPN has Carolina/Duke and Louisville/UK; two of the biggest matchups in bball. Nevermind the possibilities from a pool of ACC, Big East, AAC, SEC, Big 12 and Pac10 entities. I get what you are saying but the content and possible content under ESPN seems to have the network well ahead of Fox.

basketball and baseball ...

DIAMOND DOLLS

(08-16-2022 12:18 PM)Indytarheel Wrote:  

(08-16-2022 08:36 AM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  

(08-16-2022 08:15 AM)Indytarheel Wrote:  ESPN has always been a major part of College sports and it is going to be weird to not see B1G games opening up the Sat. slate on ESPN. I am not sure cutting ESPN out will benefit the B1G. No College Gameday visits or exposure in football nor basketball. B1G/ACC challenge is done. No more B1G Mondays for B1G basketball. Really going to be interesting to see if NBC or CBS can build something to replace that exposure.

On the flip side, it becomes even more important for ESPN to expand outside of the Southeast, IMO. Although as long as they have the NFL, NBA, etc., it's not like those in other regions are going to drop ESPN because they don't have the Big Ten (I could talk myself out of it either way).

Is it? Aside from tOSU/Michigan game, what other match ups under the Fox banner attract as much attention as those under the ESPN banner. Whether you like the SEC or not, you have to respect the fact that the regional content was interesting enough to command a network that out paced everyone. That was just with football. Throw in bball and the content is unmatched. As it stands, ESPN has Carolina/Duke and Louisville/UK; two of the biggest matchups in bball. Nevermind the possibilities from a pool of ACC, Big East, AAC, SEC, Big 12 and Pac10 entities. I get what you are saying but the content and possible content under ESPN seems to have the network well ahead of Fox.

That wasn't even my point (which was ESPN's college football "footprint" is just one corner of the country - can't afford to cede the rest of the nation to Fox!).

That said, it sounds like you might need to back off drinking so much SEC cool-aid. The SEC plays great football, but that doesn't mean that they beat the Big Ten in the TV ratings. For instance, here are the top 5 games for the last 4 weeks of last year (B1G in blue, SEC in red):

Rivalry Week
1. Ohio St/Michigan, Fox, 15.893M
2. Alabama/Auburn, CBS, 10.369M
3. OU/Okla. State, ABC, 6.486M
4. Wisc/Minnesota, Fox, 5.049M
5. Penn St/Mich St, ABC, 3.893M

Week 12
1. Ark/Ala, CBS, 5.464M
2. MSU/OSU, ABC, 5.287M
3. Ore/Utah, ABC, 4.818M
4. Neb/Wisc, ABC, 3.534M
5. IA St/OU, Fox, 3.103M

Week 11
1. Mich/PSU, ABC, 5.942M
2. UGA/Tenn, CBS, 5.781M
3. Pur/OSU, ABC, 4.739M
4. OU/Bayl, Fox, 3.719M
5. TAMU/MS, ESPN, 3.531M

Week 10
1. OSU/Neb, Fox, 5.328M
2. LSU/Ala, ESPN, 5.000M
3. MSU/Pur, ABC, 4.400M
4. Aub/TAMU, CBS, 3.759M
5. Ore/Wash, ABC, 2.726M

I'd say the Big Ten holds up quite well, not just Ohio State/Michigan.

Dude, chill. You demonstrated that the B1G have interest. That "footprint" or corner of the country has a population of 97 million and it's still growing. Additionally, ESPN just added Texas and Oklahoma to that footprint. The midwest, B1G territory has a population of 68.99 million and is shrinking. Throw in the 3.9 million in LA, although we know that would not be the case; not everyone in any area is watching, the footprint is still less than that of ESPN. If you take into account that not everyone is a football fan and there are transplants living in each area and the matchup presented for that weekend and what other variable that will effect viewship, ESPN's banner can draw from a larger population even though it is just a corner. Adding a Oregon, Washington, Arizona, Kansas, Baylor, WV, Cincy would just be gravy and not a necessity. Like it or not the SEC parlayed regional interest into one helluva media product and one helluva asset to ESPN.

(08-16-2022 02:28 PM)Indytarheel Wrote:  Dude, chill. You demonstrated that the B1G have interest. That "footprint" or corner of the country has a population of 97 million and it's still growing. Additionally, ESPN just added Texas and Oklahoma to that footprint. The midwest, B1G territory has a population of 68.99 million and is shrinking. Throw in the 3.9 million in LA, although we know that would not be the case; not everyone in any area is watching, the footprint is still less than that of ESPN. If you take into account that not everyone is a football fan and there are transplants living in each area and the matchup presented for that weekend and what other variable that will effect viewship, ESPN's banner can draw from a larger population even though it is just a corner. Adding a Oregon, Washington, Arizona, Kansas, Baylor, WV, Cincy would just be gravy and not a necessity. Like it or not the SEC parlayed regional interest into one helluva media product and one helluva asset to ESPN.

No one questions what an asset the SEC is, but you're still spouting inaccurate data.

The SEC footprint - even with Texas and Oklahoma added - is 98.9 million according to the 2021 census data. By contrast, the Big Ten + California is now 125.8 million.

My original point was that if Fox is allowed to get most of the rest of the country under its control, it could have 70% of the population (since the SEC footprint only holds 29.6%).

If you include the ACC's footprint, it's gets ESPN up to 49%. To control the majority, ESPN would need to add Ohio at least (52.5%). California would bump it up to 60.9%, even without Ohio. All that assumes no ACC defections to the Big Ten.