|
Viz is right on the solution of using viewership
storage
This topic has been archived - replies are not allowed.
|
Replies: 13
| visibility 1
|
CU Guru [1698]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 929
Joined: 7/1/03
|
Viz is right on the solution of using viewership
3
Aug 11, 2023, 1:52 PM
|
|
Using Medium.com website figures for 2022 and a total of $560m GOR total, payouts as follows:
Clemson: $129m
FSU: $101m
NCSt: $44m
UNC: $42m
GT $42m
Cuse: $42m
Pitt: $32m
Miami: $30m
Wake: $26m
Louisville: $25m
BC: $16m
VT $13m
UVA: $12m
Duke: $6m
Top 6 better than today, bottom 8 get what they get. Clem and FSU competitive with Big2 and contract is attractive to outside schools (I see you ND, currently $22m and expected $60m new deal) and everyone is invented to schedule more appealing games.
Interesting hypothetical, if ND joins and brings their $60m, it actually diluted Clem to $110m and increase ND to $140m, so would seem that we don’t need them if we go to a meritocracy vs communism…
|
|
|
|
 |
110%er [5298]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 5458
Joined: 9/11/04
|
Re: Viz is right on the solution of using viewership
1
Aug 11, 2023, 2:03 PM
|
|
VT should be embarrassed for a school that supposedly cares about football
|
|
|
|
|
|
Legend [16945]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 10796
Joined: 1/25/07
|
Re: Viz is right on the solution of using viewership
1
Aug 11, 2023, 2:06 PM
|
|
But they obviously don't. We bought into the idea because they used to fill the place up and it looked good on tv but they obviously don't have any real underlying fanbase. There just isn't anything else to do in Blacksburg on a Saturday.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Legend [16945]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 10796
Joined: 1/25/07
|
Re: Viz is right on the solution of using viewership
2
Aug 11, 2023, 2:04 PM
|
|
And that's competitive at today's numbers. Now you've incentivized everyone to play the most competitive schedule possible. Schools might actual invest in booster and alumni programs to support their programs. Some small amount needs to be peeled off for non-football revenue and also split accordingly. I also think carriage fees should be shared equally. But the formula is there and if anyone in the bottom half of that list thinks their getting offers from the Big 10 because of the academic reputations they really need to think again. If Duke thinks they have a landing spot they need to take a hard look at Stanford. More prestigious school, bigger alumni base, much larger tv viewership, and the most all time NCAA championships. Duke's run at basketball is nothing by comparison and they have demonstrably failed to parlay that success into any kind of fanbase.
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [8682]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 5382
Joined: 9/7/09
|
The math that counts 8 > 6
3
Aug 11, 2023, 2:09 PM
|
|
The majority is not gonna agree to allow the minority to benefit far more than them. Also do you really think that the bottom 12 teams are gonna allow the top 2 teams to make at least 2 or 3 times the revenue; I hope they televise those negotiations.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Legend [16945]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 10796
Joined: 1/25/07
|
Re: The math that counts 8 > 6
1
Aug 11, 2023, 2:44 PM
|
|
no, I don't think that nor implied that. First, I have not idea whether it requires a majority, 2/3rds, or unanimous votes to changes the revenue distribution. But the bottom half of the conference needs to know that when the GOR expires there is no home for programs with the numbers that Virginia, Va Tech, Duke, and BC are producing. None. Cal and Stanford are two of the top 10 programs in total championships and have much bigger audiences. They can make money for the next 12 years then relegate their programs to the bottom of Group of 5 status or they can try and create a lifeline. That lifeline is to actually try and increase the value of the conference and take their fair share. They also need to seriously wrap their heads around that fact that a lot of the schools shifting conferences are doing so for no initial, reduced, and phased in revenue shares. So even if they're thrown a lifeline they won't make the money they are used to. They can invest in where they are and try and be proactive or everyone can just blame ESPN and watch it all turn to dust.
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1698]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 929
Joined: 7/1/03
|
Re: The math that counts 8 > 6
Aug 11, 2023, 2:50 PM
[ in reply to The math that counts 8 > 6 ] |
|
In this argument, you/bottom 8 schools are conceding that they are always going to have crap viewership and thus low revenue. The reality is, many of the below $40m teams could easily move up by simply scheduling better opponents (much less actually getting better on the field) and take money from the top and bottom.
The risk to those bottom 8 and certainly middle teams is if Clem/FSU/others figure out GOR and bolt, their revenue goes down more and without an opportunity to do better in any given year. Somewhere getting FSU and Clem close to $100m is what it’s going to take for that exit not to happen.
Maybe it’s as simple as 1&2 get $100m and everyone else gets $32.7m. That’s effectively where the entire acc is compared to big2 today.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Oculus Spirit [96991]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 29226
Joined: 9/14/05
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [13044]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 22364
Joined: 4/24/04
|
Nobody in the bottom is going to agree to that
Aug 11, 2023, 2:56 PM
|
|
Duke could probably make more money in the AAC. UCF apparently made about 9mil last year.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Asst Coach [721]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 685
Joined: 11/10/04
|
|
|
|
|
|
Scout Team [193]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 149
Joined: 8/8/16
|
Re: Viz is right on the solution of using viewership
Aug 11, 2023, 3:20 PM
|
|
You can't distribute 100% of the money based solely on the viewership of 1 sport.
You should probably start with a base that everyone gets, say 75% of the money gets distributed evenly. So everyone starts with $30M.
Then 12.5% could be distributed based on success in key sports... bonuses for ACCCG participants and winner, NCAAT games played, final 4 participant, or any national championships.
Then 12.5% could be divided based on TV viewership.
In a situation like that, FSU and Clem would both be well compensated, and would rival or even surpass SEC teams in some years. Other teams, whose budgets don't compare with the likes of Clemson of FSU would obviously get less. But they would have every opportunity to earn a higher payout.
The numbers would obviously need to be worked out to make sense... but some model like this, while simultaneously seeking new sources of revenue via other platforms may bridge the gap for a few years until the conference can either revised the GOR or fulfill it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1698]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 929
Joined: 7/1/03
|
Re: Viz is right on the solution of using viewership
Aug 11, 2023, 3:27 PM
|
|
Agree on the one sport model but that is what’s driving the tv dollars and at minimum is a starting point and wouldn’t materially change if you brought in basketball regular season. Maybe Duke gets back to $10m…
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [6861]
TigerPulse: 95%
Posts: 6503
Joined: 10/7/07
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [13044]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 22364
Joined: 4/24/04
|
Duke basketball is probably worth more than that Duke payout
Aug 13, 2023, 8:14 PM
|
|
alone.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Replies: 13
| visibility 1
|
|
|
|
50
