(11-06-2013 04:36 PM)vandiver49 Wrote:  Viewed from a network perspective, I think both FOX/ESPN have as winnable hands as one could get with events that are within their control. Neither can influence the economy nor can either do anything about dwindling attendance. But I think both have maximized viewership as best as the can within the CFB sphere. FOX has the PAC and the B1G and B12 partially while ESPN has the ACC, SEC and the other half of the B12. Each has a rabid fan base (SEC, B1G) along with major population centers(ACC, PAC).

JR, I know you mentioned in another thread that while the ACC geographically has the largest population base that hasn't been monetized, but ESPN doesn't need fans at games to get paid. They just need to be able to justify the WWL stations on basic cable packages. You don't need rabid fans to make that happen, just enough who give a damn to threaten to cancel their cable if it's picked up. Its the same strategy FOX will use on the West Coast with the PAC and their various RSN's.

The problem Vandiver is their number of viewers. They averaged 2.65 million per game out of that colossal footprint while the SEC drew close to 4.5 million out of theirs. The ACC can claim being third in viewership, but the truth is they are .5 from 5th place and 1.2 million away from 2nd. The PAC was last with 2.1 million viewers per game average. I believe the Big 12 had just over 2.3 for an average, but considering their footprint that shows strength actually. So the top brands in the ACC are more valuable in either the Big 10 or SEC.