Interesting TV facts

[Crusty]

As we all know conference realignment is all about cable subscribers and the demand for a conference’s product in various Designated Market Areas (DMAs). Obviously, different DMA’s have different demand for a conference’s products based on sports entertainment competition and fan base in each DMA. The general assumption is that if a conference has a team in a given DMA it will enjoy a significant level of demand, an assumption that seems reasonable if imprecise.

So, the battlefield is comprised of various DMA’s that are controlled or influenced by conference members that may be enticed to jump to a new conference. In an attempt to determine the relative strength (contracts aside) of the conferences, I have taken the top 200 Nielsen DMAs and assigned a conference to each. If the DMA had a member form one of the 5 major conferences in or near the DMA it was assigned to that conference.

I made certain arbitrary assumptions along the way: 1- I assigned the Florida Panhandle to FSU (ACC); 2- Tampa - St Pete to USF (BE); 3- Miami to Miami (ACC); 4- the rest of Florida to the University of Florida (SEC).

I also created a BE category for USF, Cincinnati, UConn and Louisville. All others were placed in a “None” category including New York (6.48%) and Philly (2.59%), which together comprise 9.7% of the universe.

Lastly, I placed ND is a separate category. You can determine for yourself ND’s value.
These data confirms that the B1G, Pac 12 and the SEC are the clear leaders. However, the ACC is clearly ahead of the Big 12 even counting zero for ND and zero for NYC. While certainly having a rabid fan base with higher subscriber rates, Big 12 has 6 teams in either Texas and Oklahoma and do not have the geographic/population coverage other conferences enjoy.

Conference/ TV Households/ % of Total

Big Ten 22.2% / 25,249,360​

PAC 12 19.0% / 21,676,660​

SEC 18.0% / 20,477,310​

ACC 13.3% / 15,205,080​

None 12.9% / 14,735,620​

Big 12 10.4% / 11,872,880​

BE 3.8% / 4,371,880​

ND 0.3% / 319,860​

Total 100.0% / 113,908,650​

Certainly, these numbers can change quickly with a few major defections. The big TV household prizes are Georgia Tech in Atlanta with 2.3 million, Boston College with 2.4 million, Miami with 1.6 million, Pitt with 1.1 million, NC State in Raleigh with 1.1 million, and UNC with a broad section of NC probably over 2 million. It is very hard to judge the impact of Virginia Tech or for that matter UVA.

The Big 12 needs to entice schools that can bring in a couple of very big TV audiences in order to significantly outpace the ACC. Unless Texas can be dealt with that may prove to be a very tough task. Moreover, every conference will only be interested in bringing in programs that will add to the pie and that will be increasingly more difficult from here on out as evidence by the Big Ten’s stretch for MD and Rutgers.

While there seems to be little doubt that the top 3 conferences will grow and become stronger financially, those are the only conclusions that appear safe to make. There are factors limiting everyone.
1.

1. The law of diminishing returns. Every roster is limited by rule. While recruiting quality can be enhanced by better facilities, the increase in quality diminishes with every successive level of facility enhancement. In other words once a certain threshold is reached, additional money is less and less a determinate of success.
2. Number 1 above explains why the correlation between revenues and on-field performance is not all that clear. Virtually every major revenue program has had periods of poor performance - so much so that it appears that other factors such as coaching talent is more important than money. ND has had more money than anyone for the last 50 years and the results on the field have been mediocre to poor. The Brian Kellys and Nick Sabans of the world seem to be more important factors for success than total revenue. Oregon is 37th in football revenue and a top ten program on the field.
3. When a conference expands it remains to be seen if the greater impact will be the old members poaching in the new member’s territory or vice versa.
4. Not all of the new TV money will go into football. After all, many of these schools already have state-of-the-art facilities and expensive coaching staffs. Much of the impact will be in other sports and much of the windfall will be soaked up by academics.

5.It could be argued that the overall increase in TV money available will help the smaller schools to catch up with the large ones. An extra $5 million goes a long way in most programs but how is an extra $5 million going to affect Alabama, Texas or ND?​

At the end of the day, there will be TV market saturation and the TV wealth will be spread among a larger number of programs guaranteeing a dilution of the product.

It is not at all clear to me what the future of the Big 12 or the ACC is going tom be. One thing I do know is that the Big East is going the way of the dodo bird and our position is much stronger in the ACC.

 

[Moontan]

I'm curious know how you handled split DMAs. For example, while Georgia Tech is in Atlanta, there are more UGA fans there than GT fans. To be fair, you'd have to give both the ACC and SEC "credit" for the Atlanta DMA. Is that what you did?

There are other examples, namely NYC, DC, etc.

 

[chakka3421]

Crusty - it doesnt matter the number of household, what matters is how to turn it into $$$. that means you need your own network. But I agree money doesnt translate into on field success. Both Rutgers and Maryland are about to find out.

 

[Crusty]

I didn't try to micro analyze to that extent because there are too many of those situations. I gave Atlanta to GT. What I really wanted to see was the relative strength ACC vs Big 12. SEC as we expected was a given. NYC was allocated to None.

 

[Crusty]

IMO the way to trump the Big Ten in NYC is to add UConn and ND.