Saw a good article on tomahawk nation that showed some numbers on a valuation of the ACC teams in terms of football and basketball viewership for last season. FSU came in first with VT coming 5th: http://www.tomahawknation.com/2012/5/15/3021181/is-fsu-really-the-most-v...
I think the article brings up some good points and the metrics are fair but as JLMHokie pointed out on twitter a 5 year evaluation would be nice on this. VT had some very high ranked OOC games in previous years and also had better bball seasons which make me believe VT valuation would come in higher for a 5 year average. I think the valuation would be also be a good bit higher this year with Labor Day game,Thursday night games being against bigger name opponents in FSU and Miami, and OOC games being vs. teams w/ bigger fan bases than last year with Pittsburgh/Cincy versus likes of ECU/Marshall. I don't have hard numbers to support but seems like common sense on that.
Think article brings up some good points and that FSU is probably the most valuable team in ACC as in terms of TV viewership but for a 5 year average the disparity would lower a bit.
Comments
Well
I will try to check that math sometime this week, but it seems like it is roughly accurate. The two big shortcomings are that it only considers 2011 data and it excludes post-season play (think sugar bowl).
Very interesting, though. The guy did a good job with the data that he did use.
poor ol bc
they sure did deliver that northeastern market huh?
Past vs Future
Can you continue to rely on past performance to predict the future? If so what explains Notre Dame? When was the last time they were really relevant in football (beside TV ratings)?
I have a problem with putting valuation on amatuer sports. I know it factors into TV deals, bowl games, and the BCS but there needs to be some balance with all this. Money should not be the primary concern..
Exactly
The ratings he shows is exactly what they mean to be: tv ratings. This means that it isn't a valuation of performance, which, as you suggest, fluctuates often, but of the consumer base for the school's sports. That is why we had decent basketball ratings last year even though we weren't great, and that is why Miami had good football ratings last year even though they weren't great. In my opinion, short term performance probably only makes a +-10% difference on consumer base. Ex. Notre Dame, Miami. That is why valuation is best determined in this way.
Also consider, however, that a school's value to a conference isn't just tv ratings (just mostly tv ratings, since tv ratings = $)
The ACC should make FSU the following offer
They can go to the Big 12 without a buyout but they have to take BC with them.
It all sucks
Money, bowls, at-large bids, tv coverage, are all determined by brand-name popularity and not a "fair" contest of performance on the field. Kind of like money in politics. This is why I like the tournaments for all the other divisions of NCAA football.
More to chew on
Article from Bill Roth with some factoids.
http://www.hokiesports.com/rothreport/recaps/20120614aaa.html
Nice to see we are on solid financial footing desptie the lack of state support. If the state contributed anything towards athletic facilities think how much farther ahead we would be. But at the same time we would be subject to political pressures.
Our situation should be factored into any financial discussion about the health of the ACC. It should give us more weight to throw around because it makes us attractive to any conference.
Did you really tweet this yesterday??
Tweeted Virginia Tech blog The Key Play: “Robert Nkemdiche, the top recruit in the country, committed to Clemson. Dabo promising players they get to call plays is really working out.”
Apparently, kicking VaTech's turkeyrumpus TWICE last season isn't enough to garner some careful verbage consideration pre-tweet.
Hey, after getting embarrassed
by the Tigers in Lane and on a neutral field, maybe Beamer ought to consider letting HIS PLAYERS CALL THE PLAYS!!! Certainly didn't work out otherwise, did it??
You know
What worked out really well? Clemson "[k]icking VaTech's turkeyrumpus TWICE last season" to end up in the Orange Bowl.
Oh I'm sorry, perhaps I should clarify since you don't seem to understand sarcasm: 70-33.
Sarcasm is all you folks have to fall back on
after two humiliating defeats at the hand of the team that lost in the OB 70-33. Just imagine what the score would've been had the turkeypoops managed to make it to Miami??? Remember, the hokeys scored ONE FREAKIN' TOUCHDOWN IN 8 QUARTERS AGAINST CLEMSON!!
There's no sarcasm in my post, so I won't have to waste any more time here explaining things to folks with extremely short memories. None of this conversation would've taken place had that stupid tweet not been made.
Chill brah
You gotta relax. Sarcasm's the norm here. Although, I must admit that your passion reminds me of someone...
http://youtu.be/CwxxaFvYTXY (Fast forward to 1:50, that's when it gets good.)
Good luck with Auburn in ATL. You'll need it.
"Print that. Tweet that." - Dabo.
Even though I'd like to see what variation/combination of turkey and butt he's going to use next, I banned the troll's account.
tigjrm76,
1. I hope you find something more worthwile to do during retirement than troll the Internet for anti-Clemson comments.
2. It was a joke. One that wasn't intended to be anything but in good fun.
3. Congrats on getting a verbal from the #1 prospect in the country.
4. Congrats on beating us twice last year. It helped Clemson improve their recent record against Tech from 0-5 to 2-7.
5. Good luck next season, and around the Internet.
a thousand pardons sir!
Guys, everybody knows the rules of college football fandom: if a team beats you for the first time(s) in like 14 years than we're not allowed to make fun of them in any way. Just like I'm sure tigerjim has nothing but admiration and respect for the Cocks, we too should have nothing but reverence for our new purple clad overlords.
Also the notion that the transitive property in algebra totally works in college football is completely accurate and logical! It makes sense since Clemson beat us by 28 and then lost their next game by 37 then we would of course lost to the couchburners by 65! Imagine the shame!
Hell, I dont even know why Beams and Co are even making the trip to Death Valley because we surely have about as much chance to beat the mighty Tigers as Wake does. Oh wait. . .
couldn't find an ACC one for last year
But the Big 12 illustrates this nicely in 2011:
welp
#goodeffortgoodjob