Why don't networks

[CJHawkeyes]

pay for better OOC matchups? I realize some conferences are on competing networks, but why doesn't ABC for example pay for more games like Texas-Ohio State. Do they really not gain enough to do so? And how much more would fans be willing to pay for such games? Would you rather pay $75-$100 for a ticket to game similar to the one mentioned or $50 to see your team destroy a I-A/I-AA cupcake? Personally, I think it would be smart for a network to setup an in-season four team tournament similar to what college basketball has. I'm sure there are an infinite number excuses for why this can't be done, but think of the possibilities.

[ZOOMBAG]

Imagine four top five rated teams playing a four team tourney in the first two weeks of the season. Assuming you played both the "championship" and the "consolation" games one of the top five teams in the nation is guaranteed to be 0-2 after two weeks into the season. Not likely to happen.

[CJHawkeyes]

Imagine four top five rated teams playing a four team tourney in the first two weeks of the season. Assuming you played both the "championship" and the "consolation" games one of the top five teams in the nation is guaranteed to be 0-2 after two weeks into the season. Not likely to happen.


I certainly agree that is an excuse that would prevent the four team tournament idea from happening, but since this sport is more about money than competition, you would think everyone has their price. Of course, I don't know how financially lucrative such an idea would be for a network. Of course, you would think ABC might pay two schools on its network to play that are playing worthless I-AA games instead.

[HellYeahHokie]

pay for better OOC matchups? I realize some conferences are on competing networks, but why doesn't ABC for example pay for more games like Texas-Ohio State. Do they really not gain enough to do so? And how much more would fans be willing to pay for such games? Would you rather pay $75-$100 for a ticket to game similar to the one mentioned or $50 to see your team destroy a I-A/I-AA cupcake? Personally, I think it would be smart for a network to setup an in-season four team tournament similar to what college basketball has. I'm sure there are an infinite number excuses for why this can't be done, but think of the possibilities.

With the preseason games, like the Coach's Classic, Kickoff Classic, etc. Those were nice cash-cows for teams. But many of these schools can still do better financially with an extra home game, even if it is a cream puff. Ticket sales are just one element of the vast amount of money earned by Enormous State University vs. Directional State University.

The networks would really have to make it worth it for more schools to jump on board with a big named OOC game.

[ZOOMBAG]

TV money, even in a conference like the SEC, pales in comparison to ticket revenue. Tennessee makes more from two home games than the TV revenue share from the SEC TV contract and BCS bowl payouts combined.

[HellYeahHokie]

Television is far more about national exposure than it is about money. The money is icing on the cake, and believe me, the ADs want as much icing as possible. But the money comes from ticket sales, $8 smoked turkey legs, $3 cokes, $4 Nachos, etc. You can't have that without butts in your seats.

I lived through the 90s with everyone complaining about VT scheduling cupcakes on their way to national prominance. Our AD, however, said over and over again, they VT would play any team, but only for a home and away series. There would be no 1-way series, or even 2-for-1 series. VT didn't rise to national prominance because of a creamepuff schedule (although easy wins certainly provided successful seasons). VT rose to prominance because the raked in the money with 7 or 8 home game seasons, so they had to the money to improve facilities, to keep Frank and his assistants well-paid, etc.

Once VT made the MNC game against FSU, they finally had the reputation to negotiate home-and-home series with good programs. And that is why aTm, LSU, Auburn, Wisconsin, Penn State, Ohio State, etc were willing to sign these contracts (some backed out, but that's besides the point).

It's all about the home game. You did the math for just ticket sales alone. Think about all the other money. Even BCS bowl money ($12M divided by 12 teams), doesn't compare to a single home game.

And if we ever get a 16-team playoff, then the rich will continue to get richer, because the top seeded teams will get home-field advantage through the first 2 rounds at least. (I don't see them using bowl stadiums until at least the 3rd game). The gate might be split more evenly between the teams, but not all the other things. So McSneeze State might get a playoff spot against Florida in the 1st round of a 16-team playoff, but who do you think will be getting the real payoff?

[aufan59]

Couldn't it end up hurting ratings? Lets say TV deals were behind Oregon/Oklahoma and Texas/OSU in 06.

If Oregon didn't play Oklahoma, and Texas didn't play Ohio State, Texas vs Oklahoma could have been much more hyped and the ratings probably would have gone up if both came in undefeated.

[CJHawkeyes]

Couldn't it end up hurting ratings? Lets say TV deals were behind Oregon/Oklahoma and Texas/OSU in 06.

If Oregon didn't play Oklahoma, and Texas didn't play Ohio State, Texas vs Oklahoma could have been much more hyped and the ratings probably would have gone up if both came in undefeated.

Perhaps, but if true, that is just one more nail in the coffin of the "every game counts" argument. How sad is it if Texas-Oklahoma is a better tv draw if both teams are unchallenged unbeatens?