Tuesday, January 18, 2022

Legend

 












Friday, January 14, 2022

Commissioner Jim Phillips explains ACC's opposition to early College Football Playoff expansion

 

Commissioner Jim Phillips explains ACC's opposition to early College Football Playoff expansion

Any faint chance of expanding the College Football Playoff before the 2026 season vanished Friday morning as ACC commissioner Jim Phillips affirmed the league’s opposition to altering the four-team model in the near-term.

Changes to the CFP prior to the expiration of the original 12-year contract, which runs through the 2025 season, requirs unanimity from the 10 Bowl Subdivision commissioners and Notre Dame athletic director Jack Swarbrick. In unveiling a 12-team proposal in June, a CFP subcommittee hoped to forge that consensus in time for the 2024 season.

But subsequent vetting by the larger group, especially the ACC, hit roadblocks. Indeed, no other conference has publicly stated resistance to any expansion prior to 2026.

“The membership of the ACC is very much aligned in its position that now is not the right time to expand the College Football Playoff,” Phillips said during a call with about a dozen reporters. “... Our CEOs, [athletic directors] and head coaches overwhelmingly support our position. We have significant concerns surrounding a proposed expansion model, though we’d be supportive of future expansion once and if these concerns are addressed.”

Phillips outlined three primary ACC concerns:

-The instability elsewhere in college athletics regarding governance, name, image and likeness (NIL) compensation for athletes, the transfer portal and the potential unionization of athletes.

-How would additional games, even for a small number of teams, impact athletes’ physical health and academic pursuits?

-A “desperate need” to review the entire college football calendar, not only the season itself, but also recruiting.


“Collectively,” Phillips said, “we have much larger issues facing us than to expand the CFP early by two years.”

Phillips worked on the committee that recently overhauled the NCAA constitution and serves on the Transformation Committee charged with restructuring the NCAA. So more than most, he lives the chaos that is college sports today, and he said the enterprise “is begging” Congress for federal legislation that would override varying state laws regarding NIL compensation.

But the CFP, blessedly, operates outside of NCAA control, and multi-tasking playoff expansion with overall governance doesn’t seem like an unreasonable ask.

Phillips, though, is beholden to his membership.

The four-man CFP subcommittee that crafted June’s 12-team proposal — automatic bids to the six highest-rated conference champions, plus six at-large bids —included Notre Dame’s Swarbrick. And absent an eight-team model with six automatic qualifiers, playoff expansion would remove any incentive for the Fighting Irish to bring their independent football program to the ACC, the league in which their other teams compete.

But Phillips called any notion that the ACC’s position is designed to leverage Notre Dame “absolutely, positively not true.”

Phillips said ACC opposition originally centered specifically on the 12-team playoff, with a league preference for eight. But as NCAA matters further swirled in late fall, the conference shifted its objections to any present expansion.

Other leagues have raised issues — the Big Ten and Pac-12 want accommodations for their longtime partner, the Rose Bowl, and the Big Ten prefers guaranteed access for every Power Five champion — but the ACC is alone in publicly opposing to pre-2026 expansion.

Two commissioners who worked with Swarbrick on the subcommittee, the Big 12's Bob Bowlsby and SEC's Greg Sankey, have not hidden their frustration at the stalemate.

But changes to the CFP after the original contract require a more nebulous consensus rather than unanimity, and Phillips said he is “sure” the playoff will expand then.

“You’re talking about two years,” he said of the delay. “... There’s been major debate, and there’s been moments when it may feel like we’ve stalled. But we continue to come back and try to work collectively for the future of college football.”

CFP title game viewership by year (excluding 2020) UPDATE

Great research by ACC Football RX 

Trend: NCG TV Viewers

Many have pointed out that the TV numbers for this year's national championship game between Alabama and Georgia was the second lowest since the CFP began (only last year was lower), and is 4th from the bottom when you toss in the BCS years...

YEARWINDOWGAMERTGVwrs(M)NET
1998-99Fiesta (NC)TENN-FSU17.226.112ABC
1999-00Sugar (NC)FSU-VT17.526.962ABC
2000-01Orange (NC)OKLA-FSU17.827.24ABC
2001-02Rose (NC)Miami-NEB13.821.559ABC
2002-03Fiesta (NC)OSU-Miami17.229.104ABC
2003-04Sugar (NC)LSU-OKLA14.823.937ABC
2004-05Orange (NC)USC-OKLA13.721.419ABC
2005-06Rose (NC)TEX-USC21.735.63ABC
YEARWINDOWGAMERTGVwrs(M)NET
2006-07BCSNCUF-OSU17.428.795FOX
2007-08BCSNCLSU-OSU14.423.069FOX
2008-09BCSNCUF-OKLA15.826.767FOX
2009-10BCSNCALA-TEX17.230.776ABC
2010-11BCSNCAUB-ORE15.327.316ESPN
2011-12BCSNCALA-LSU1424.214ESPN
2012-13BCSNCALA-ND15.126.38ESPN
2013-14BCSNCFSU-AUB14.826.205ESPN
YEARWINDOWGAMERTGVwrs(M)NET
2014-15CFPNCOSU-ORE18.634.148ESPN
2015-16CFPNCALA-CLEM1526.182ESPN
2016-17CFPNCCLEM-ALA14.225.266ESPN
2017-18CFPNCALA-UGA15.628.443ESPN
2018-19CFPNCCLEM-ALA13.825.28ESPN
2019-20CFPNCLSU-CLEM14.325.588ESPN
2020-21CFPNCALA-OSU10.318.653ESPN
2021-22CFPNCUGA-ALA22.6ESPN

Most teams pull in a big number the first time they are in the championship, only to drop off in return trips. For instance, Georgia vs. Alabama part I drew 28.443 million viewers in 2017 - which was also the Bulldogs first trip to either a BCS or CFP championship game. The rematch this year? only 22.6 million viewers - a drop of nearly 6 million!

I said not all teams suffer this drop off with repeated trips to the big game. Which teams? Clemson for one. The Tigers have played in four title games and stayed between 25.2 and 26.2 million viewers in all of them. More proof? Alabama has remained in the NCG, but viewership has tanked without Clemson.

The LSU Tigers have also been steady in their four appearances, ranging from 23.1 to 25.6 million.

Finally, do you want a team which consistently draws big numbers? Look no further than the Florida State Seminoles! In four trips to the BCS and CFP championship games, the Noles have never drawn less than 26.1 million viewers - and they maxed out at 27.2 million in 2000.






College football’s biggest threat is the continued regionalization of success and interest in the sport


Is the south's dominance of college football becoming problematic for the sport?


A little over a year ago, I published my second installment of The Electoral Map Of Football, an attempt by me to figure out the national electoral preference of football between the NFL and college football. By flipping North Carolina and Virginia to college football states, the result was closer than you’d imagine and you’d think indicate that college football is perhaps narrowing the gap with the NFL in terms of interest.

But of late, the ratings have presented a bit of different picture and particularly the ratings for the College Football Playoff, which has largely been dominated by the SEC and to a much greatest extent to the SEC’s footprint (states with SEC teams in them). Looking at how things have gone in the playoff era you begin to see a concerning trend.



The Pac 12 hasn’t appeared in the four-team playoff the last five years.

The Big 12 has only had one school make the playoff (Oklahoma, who is leaving for the SEC) and has never won a game in the playoffs’ eight-year existence.

The Big Ten and ACC have had some success making the playoff regularly, but in eight years both conferences have only had one school actually win a game in the playoff.

Focusing a bit more on the SEC footprint, 21 of the last 24 championships come from an area of the country that represents just 160 of 538 votes on the electoral map. Ohio State’s two national championships and USC’s one represent 71 electoral votes although I think most would agree that the fandom for any California college football team is culturally a bit more muted than other parts of the country even in an upswing.

Looking at the part of the country outside of the SEC footprint that has not won a championship, you’re looking at a 303 electoral compared to the 160 who have won a championship in the SEC’s footprint and then 71 (Ohio and California) who have won a championship outside of the SEC’s footprint.



Now if you’re thinking all of this is a bunch of smoke and mirrors to make a point, let’s look at the same map for the 24 years prior to the BCS era. Most glaring is the gold states signifying states who had won a title in that 24-year span outside of the South. That’s a MUCH different map than the one above.



In this map, you have eight non-SEC footprint states now having won a championship instead of two over the last 24 years. The same summary we did for the last 24 years is done below for the 24 years before the BCS below (with the more recent analysis below to see side by side) Note: – There are 3 extra national championships in those 24 years based on split championships so there are 27 championships recognized.
24 years before the BCS: Three of the twelve pre-expansion SEC teams (25% of the league) had won the championship (Alabama, Georgia, and Florida). Those three teams have combined for 5 of the 27 championships (18.5%).
Post BCS: six of 12 SEC teams (50%) accounting for 14 of 24 championships (58.333%).
24 years before the BCS: Including recent and future SEC additions, the numbers go up to four teams winning national championships (Oklahoma 3x). The soon-to-be SEC would have four teams (25% of the league) accounting for 8 of the 27 championships (29%).
Post BCS: 8 of 16 teams (50%) winning 16 of 24 championships (66.66%).
24 years before the BCS: Broadening to SEC footprint and adding in seven championships added via Clemson, Florida State, Miami, and Georgia Tech, the total goes climbs to 15 of the 27 championships (55%).
Post BCS: While impressive it’s still not the 21 of 24 championships (87.5%) the SEC footprint has done the last 24 years.


I think the last stat is probably the most important. The number of championships outside of the south was at a healthy 45% in the 24 years leading up to the BCS. It was nearly a coin flip if the college football national champion would come out of the South.

Since the start of the BCS, that number is far from a coinflip as it has fallen to 12.5% in the 24 years since. It’s easy to see why with that level of recent success in the south the sport is thriving there in terms of interest, ratings, and general fandom. Unfortunately, the lesser amount of success and excitement outside the region assuredly plays a role in deflating ratings, attendance, and general participation and interest in the sport outside of the south.in the 16 years prior to the BCS, current SEC schools only won two championships

Looking at that 24 year period before the BCS, you had fans of schools like Penn State, Pitt, Notre Dame, Washington, Colorado, BYU, Nebraska, and Michigan that probably prioritized following their team and the sport a lot more than today simply because, in their lifetime, their team had won a championship. Going back a bit further and you can add Michigan State, Iowa, Minnesota, Syracuse, and Maryland to that list. But when you go a quarter of a century without that higher watermark of relevancy, some of that regional interest begins to fade away.

Of all of those pre BCS champions I just mentioned, how many of those schools do you think will win a championship in the next 24 years? How many of these schools’ ceilings have been recalibrated where the idea of winning a national championship is just no longer realistic?

If you were to pick two teams outside of the SEC footprint to win a championship in the next 24 years, you’d probably pick the same two that did it the last 24 years in Ohio State and USC. You could argue Oregon as a team poised for similar relevance going but it’s harder to make that case given their last two coaches bolted for jobs at Miami and Florida State.

While it was encouraging to see Cincinnati and Michigan make the playoff, the lack of competitiveness of those games (joining the likes of Washington, Michigan State, and Notre Dame when matched up against an SEC team in the playoff) plus the possibility that both head coaches may be on borrowed time at those schools, doesn’t exactly point to any type of regional football market correction coming anytime soon.

You can actually feel and see college football slipping in terms of national relevance. Daytime ESPN has pushed college football further away from the constantly discussed NFL and the NBA and more towards the afterthoughts of MLB and the NHL. ESPN has largely grown comfortable ceding the majority of news-breaking of the sport to other outlets. They’ve crunched the numbers and know that for large parts of the country, college football is much more of an afterthought than what it used to be and the NBA and the NFL are surer bets more worthy of airtime. Simply put, ESPN would rather talk NBA and NFL all day because that’s the preference of viewers in New York, Chicago, Los Angeles, Philadelphia, DC, Phoenix, Denver, the Bay Area, and Boston. If college football fans don’t want the NFL and NBA jammed down their throat, most of them can just flip over to the conference network of their choosing with ESPN well-positioned by owning the networks servicing fans in the south with the SEC Network and ACC Network.

Meanwhile, the three power conferences with TV deals coming up and unsure of their future prospects are the Big Ten, Big 12, and the Pac 12, soon to be representing those remaining 3 of the last 24 championships. While the Big Ten is in a good position for a new deal, the Big 12 and Pac 12 are seemingly precarious positions between not much recent championship or playoff success and at a severe rating disadvantage. It’s very plausible one or both of the conferences may soon find themselves playing a majority of their games on a streaming service like Amazon Prime, Apple TV+, or ESPN+, something that will certainly not do any favors with fans or recruits.

Does playoff expansion help or hurt this trend? The BCS seemingly did away with whatever balance college football had settled into. Realignment and the playoff only accelerated the trend of southern regionalization of the sport. Seeing more teams from around the country in the playoff certainly seems like a good thing but it also opens up the door for more final fours with all southern teams, something we already saw in 2018 with Georgia, Alabama, Oklahoma, and Clemson making the playoff (Oklahoma, then in the Big 12).

Between another round of realignment, the transfer portal, NIL, and playoff expansion, we’re entering a new very different chapter of college football. These added variables have the ability to further tilt success towards the near southern monopoly over the sport. Perhaps we’ll see the opposite play out and these change agents will revert back some of the parity the sport enjoyed before the BCS.

Ultimately, college football’s growing regional imbalance of interest and success doesn’t register that much to stakeholders within the sport because it has yet to affect the bottom line. Playoff expansion actually will probably push back any real concern over this for another decade given the amount of money it will inject into the sport. That said, it’s not hard to envision a world in the not so distant future where there are no more games to add to the playoff, conferences are too fat to expand any further, there are no more conference networks to launch, and nobody tunes in to find the stream of a lowly regular-season matchup played in a half-empty stadium between two teams that haven’t finished in the top five in 50 years. For many pockets of the country, this is already a reality and one that’s coming to many states and schools in the not-so-distant future.

Wednesday, January 12, 2022

Household distribution for sports networks continues decline, but erosion ‘orderly’

 

Household distribution for sports networks continues decline, but erosion ‘orderly’


ord-cutting is accelerating at such a clip that the number of multichannel video homes in the United States dropped more than 10% over the past two years, according to Nielsen’s monthly household universe estimates.

 

But national sports networks — typically the priciest channels on cable systems — have seen a much slower rate of erosion over that two-year time span from January 2020 to January 2022.

Household distribution for ESPN and ESPN2 dropped by 4%, while subscriber numbers for FS1 and NBCSN, the sports channel that went dark for good on Jan. 1, both dropped by only around 2% in the past 24 months.

Overall, the Nielsen report shows that the number of homes that subscribe to multichannel video — cable, satellite or a virtual multichannel video provider such as Sling TV or YouTube TV — fell to 82.8 million. That’s the lowest figure in at least 16 years, which is as far back as SBJ’s records go. In January 2006, before cable’s meteoric rise in subscriber numbers, Nielsen estimated more than 93 million multichannel subscribers.

Almost all cable networks have seen their distribution fall below the 80 million-home mark. Only six of the 135 channels included in Nielsen’s research are in more than 80 million homes, and five of those are owned by Discovery: Food Network (81.49 million), HGTV (81.45 million), Discovery Channel (80.45 million), Investigation Discovery (80.43 million) and TLC (80.11 million), according to Nielsen’s January report.

TBS (80.01 million) is the only other network above 80 million, and it, along with other Turner channels, is about to be acquired by Discovery as part of a deal expected to close early this year.

Nielsen puts out these subscriber counts each month estimating how many subscribers each network has. The list only includes Nielsen-rated homes, so channels that aren’t rated by the company, like ACC Network, CBS Sports Network and SEC Network, aren’t included.

While the research provides a good general snapshot of the distribution business, many networks have complained that some of the household counts are off. 

Take ESPNU, for example, which lost nearly 16 million homes over the two-year period to wind up with just 44.85 million homes, according to the report. An ESPN source said ESPNU’s distribution is closer to 54 million currently. The problem: Nielsen’s estimates include homes that receive linear TV ads. ESPNU doesn’t use linear ads for its digital MVPD subscribers. ESPN Deportes, which shows a 31% drop in the report, has the same issue.

Still, sources say the overall downward trend from January 2020 to January 2022 is accurate and shows that cord-cutting, so far, is happening more slowly for sports networks.

Entertainment networks that have sports on their schedule, like USA (down 9%), TBS (down 8%) and TNT (down 8%) saw even bigger drops over that two-year span.

Two league-owned networks saw particularly steep declines over the last two years, with distribution for MLB Network and NBA TV both dropping 12%.

NFL Network was one of just three sports networks to register an increase over the two-year period. Its distribution rose 5% to 57.45 million homes — the biggest distribution among all league-owned sports channels.

FS2 (up 5% to 60.57 million) and beIN Sports (up 7% to 13.54 million) are the only other channels to show an increase.

In a report released last week, financial research company MoffettNathanson pegged the rate of subscriber decline at 5.2%, “among the worst on record and is undoubtedly worse than we and others had once over-optimistically projected.”

There is good news, according to the report. The rate of decline is “orderly,” which means a gradual decline that will give media companies time to figure out how to transition from linear to digital.

“But there is clearly a risk that the declines become disorderly,” the report said. “All it would take is one major player — ESPN is the obvious candidate — to decide that the future demands a bolder shift in their best programming to [direct-to-consumer], or, alternatively, that their entire suite of programming should be simultaneously available DTC … and the Jenga tower would collapse.”

Tuesday, January 11, 2022

ACC Officiating oddities

 

FSU Law Rankings