Think there’ll b a Social Media Blitz against SEC/B1G w/ 8 CFP Auto Bids?
If so, why? If not, why not?
NASCAR sunk so fast, and that happened without Social Media, now with Social Media on everyone’s phone, could the CFP and SEC/B1G ratings sink faster? What do you think?
PS Of course this is if 8 Automatic Bids is passed by the Power Hungry 2 Conferences.
** Edited by Stech at 7/17/2025, 5:46:05 AM
56 Replies
In a 16-team format, they will get that many anyway without having to
mandate it before a game is played. I am against any and all schemes that give AQs to non-champions.
** Edited by Maroon Baboon at 7/18/2025, 11:44:21 PM
(In response to this post by Stech)
1y
However, it is going to happen. I say if the other conferences surrender on the eight automatic bids. Then they should restrict it to no more than eight bids for those two conferences. The other eight bids always go to other conferences
** Edited by wwhokie1 at 7/19/2025, 12:17:36 PM
(In response to this post by Maroon Baboon)
Yeah. I think there are opportunities to sue for peace here.
And capping the B1G and SEC is one way.
I like the idea of having play-in games for teams being considered (let's say, in the Top 20), but aren't in a conference championship game. However, this should be across conferences, not within the conference. And it should be played the same weekend as the conference championship games.
(In response to this post by wwhokie1)
E
EDGEMAN
1y
(In response to this post by Maroon Baboon)
And the 5-11 format basically gives 2 more bids to the P2.
Takes the current format and will basically allow the committee to name one more B1G team and one more SEC team. And the "first four out" you just know will be a bunch of ACC and BXII teams. The committee on the morning shows the next day: "Ohh, so close. But we are sorry."
These pukes already took the byes away from conference champions and just doing "straight seeding" (read: rigged CFP poll).
They aren't going to be happy until they make this think a football version of a B1G-SEC Challenge.
I dislike the 5-11 almost as much the 4-4-2-2-whatever. The 5-11 is just lazy. Has a bunch of teams sitting home resting while the top two teams in each P2 conference play a CG that won't even yield them a bye.
** Edited by Maroon Baboon at 7/19/2025, 12:06:43 PM
(In response to this post by EDGEMAN)
1y
The only games that were lower viewership were the two games on TNT. And fun fact, both of those games had ACC teams in them.
For comparison, the P5 conference championship games range from 8m up to 17m viewers. Highest regular season games are typically between 10m to 13m viewers. So the playoff games are right in line with being among the highest viewership of each season. Even the bad playoff games have better viewership numbers than the majority of regular season games.
First chart is playoff games before the national title game.
Second chart is the national title games.
Each game is shown twice, one entry for each team.
(In response to this post by Stech)
1y
now isn’t comparable to 8 automatic bids just for being in a conference.
(In response to this post by HokieAl)
1y
By people *****ing on their phones
(In response to this post by Stech)
1y
(In response to this post by Pylons)
1y
I was just saying ratings aren't going tank *because of* some "social media blitz." Ratings will tank (if they do) because of whatever causes the blitz. One cause, two correlated effects.
(In response to this post by Stech)
1y
the masses. What I am trying to say is once people stop seeing the value, is that Social Media makes it fall much faster. I think the network producers in particular are missing that because of the short term incentives they get paid on. Many a rat has lost their life over seeking the cheese. Dang, the universe is out of whack, we might just be agreeing. 🤣
(In response to this post by Pylons)
1y
blitz though. Even if it qualifies as a blitz, I am not sure it matters because the ratings will likely not take a hit. The popularity of the sport has likely gotten to a place where it is "too big to fail" even if someone intentionally dropped Fat Man, Little Boy, and Tsar Bomba on the sport at the same time. You could make a case that gambling is the factor that pushed it over the top given how much money currently flows in that industry.
(In response to this post by Stech)
1y
College Football is the 2nd most popular sport in the US. I would be surprised if Nascar was ever in the top 10 as it is a niche event in the Southeast which I dont even consider a true sport. College Football could lose millions of viewers and will still be more relevant than Nascar ever would or could be for the next 200 years.
(In response to this post by Stech)
1y
(In response to this post by Sunsetunderground)
1y
I was involved in the Marketing and Sales part. Using teams and drivers to promote products. It was insane from Daytona, to Michigan, to Northern California, to Southern California and everywhere in between. I experienced it firsthand. Then the networks just started emphasizing a handful of teams and drivers. Before if you went to a race, it was really amazing to watch the broad base support for drivers, “mainly from their area.” This is exactly what the networks are heading towards with College Football. They are headed towards doing the exact same thing. The NFL does the opposite, smaller markets can win, like Green Bay. In fact you could argue that *Green Bay Packer fans have been the role model for supporting a team whether they are elite, good or even below average. It’s astounding to see their support when it’s 0 degrees outside, and that carries over into the rest of the NFL. This “was” the same with NASCAR drivers from certain or nearby towns/states.
By the way, I do understand why if you have not experienced what I saw first hand, you would have a hard time seeing the parallel. However, I saw it firsthand, and the speed of the drop off was amazing. We used to see tickets for a race go for $500 to a $1000 (in the after market) about 20 years ago. Now you have many empty seats and TV ratings are no where near what they used to be. I hope the arrogance of the Power Hungry 2, doesn’t do the same thing, but I am very skeptical it won’t. Once things start going down the mountain instead of up, it’s almost impossible to turn things around fast!! Pun intended!! 🤣
*You could make an argument that Virginia Tech fans have been similar in College Football, I hope Whit doesn’t kill that, but again, once you start going down the mountain instead of up, it is hard to stop.
** Edited by Stech at 7/18/2025, 11:06:05 AM
(In response to this post by Sunsetunderground)
2
2hhoop3
1y
would be TRIED to go national. Just because a sport holds events in varying locations does not qualify it as a national draw as the geniuses have learned in a painful fashion in recent years. They continue to flail badly with their "in season" tourney being their latest misguided attempt. The old man, were he still around, would be appalled at what the younger generations have done to the brand/product.
(In response to this post by Stech)
1y
IE clean up the rough and tumble sport to sell in board rooms and the average household.
NASCAR couldn't become a national "sport", yet TV and the NASCAR brass tore it lose from it's rural south east roots.
(In response to this post by 2hhoop3)
1y
Country boy drivers.
Your average bubba nascar fan could deal with one Jeff Gordon (by hating him). When most of the drivers became similar to him, it became unwatchable.
Moving races out of traditional strongholds like Darlington and Wilkesboro for bigger city tracks didn’t help much either.
(In response to this post by Atlee Hokie)
V
VPI 1924
1y
(In response to this post by Stech)
1y
Networks emphasizing a subset of teams/drivers. Every sport has done that forever.
(In response to this post by Stech)
1y
experience in this area?
(In response to this post by Pylons)
1y
Nascar didn't fall because Jeremy Mayfield and Ward Burton weren't getting enough TV coverage vs. Jeff Gordon and Dale Earnhardt Jr.
(In response to this post by Stech)
1y
(In response to this post by Pylons)
1y
to only emphasizing a few teams/drivers...which led to the sport's fall. As a fan, I didn't experience that (the fall, yes...obviously...but not for that reason). A fan can see TV coverage as well as a sales/marketing person. Maybe you can explain better how your expertise lends insight to the change in TV coverage you claim.
And of course it's just my opinion...expressed in response to yours. The whole opinion thing is kinda integral to *discussion* boards.
(In response to this post by Stech)
1y
me I am wrong with your numbers and I will change my mind. Bottom line in this whole thing, for me is I think the TV producers are very short sighted. Their bonuses are based on very short term numbers. That eventually catches up with them. Whether it’s College Football, NASCAR, or Fortune 500 companies. Arrogance brought down Goliath and it might take time, but it eventually has a way of knocking things down to the ground.
(In response to this post by Pylons)
1y
Attendance, ratings, sponsorship dollars, etc, rose and fell... there's really no dispute there. You said the fall was due to the way networks covered Nascar. Your only support for that is "I worked on sales and marketing with Nascar. I went to races. I saw it up close." It's not compelling. I didn't see the coverage change despite your contention that it did. And to insist that your numberless take be refuted with numbers is dumb.
(In response to this post by Stech)
1y
Cliff's Notes:
Stech: I witnessed the fall of Nascar firsthand, working in sales/marketing with them. I went to races everywhere and saw the fan support drop off a cliff. It happened because TV coverage changed such that the emphasis became only on a handful of teams/drivers.
Pylons: I watched races as much as anyone. Most on TV, some in person. I didn't see the change in coverage, so that explanation doesn't make sense.
Stech: Prove it with facts!
You don't have facts in your argument. I don't have facts in mine. I don't think numbers exist that would give any insight into network TV coverage emphasis. It seems like your experience might lend some really interesting and compelling support for your argument...like if you saw a sponsor drop a team or ad spots because the TV coverage emphasis changed (not because ratings dropped...the drop happened, the reason is where our disagreement lies). But stories like that are absent. I can't prove you wrong any more than you can prove yourself right (which applies in the other direction as well). It's a difference of opinion.
I'd suggest the reason lies in changing demographics that Nascar couldn't keep up with, the loss of compelling driver personalities/rivalries, and the sterilization of the racing through rule changes...not in how TV covers the sport. Not sure I've ever heard anyone else suggest that TV argument. Curiously, even though you're blaming TV, you don't even mention watching on TV...just attending races.
Google AI doesn't suggest anything like you suggest. It does suggest things I just noted. Here's a link to a pretty well-written piece about the decline of Nascar from someone who was also immersed in it...the only mention of TV coverage basically just says that there were far too many commercial breaks to keep fans interested...nothing about the coverage emphasis with respect to drivers/teams.
@Stech
** Edited by Pylons at 7/19/2025, 12:14:01 PM
Link:
Another opinion
(In response to this post by Pylons)
1y
(In response to this post by Pylons)
2
2hhoop3
1y
and article you linked knows what he is talking about and people close to NASCAR with actual knowledge of the sport would find far more to agree with than they would to disagree with.
** Edited by 2hhoop3 at 7/19/2025, 11:06:01 AM
(In response to this post by Pylons)
1y
then you attack my post with nothing to prove it wrong. You have zero experience in the field, no facts to dispute what I stated, and you constantly attack my post over and over and over again. Then call my post dumb, without any substantive evidence, okay gotcha.
(In response to this post by Pylons)
1y
1. NFL
2. College Football
3. MLB
4. Premier League
5. NBA
6. College Basketball
7. NHL
8. UFC
9. BOXING
10. MLS
11. WNBA
You are living in a bubble if you think anyone in the major northern markets NYC, Boston, Philadelphia, ever cared about Nascar. It was and still is a regional niche event a step down from professional wrestling.
(In response to this post by Stech)
1y
Marketing and Sales?
** Edited by Stech at 7/18/2025, 7:26:46 PM
(In response to this post by Sunsetunderground)
1y
I’d guess the ratings were above everything on that list aside from NFL / MLB / NBA / NCAAF / NCAAB and above all but the most hyped boxing matches.
NASCAR doesn’t release attendance figures but it drew some pretty large crowds. As far as spectacles are concerned - I’ve been fortunate to go to some big time stuff and a big NASCAR race was right up there with anything I’ve seen live.
(In response to this post by Sunsetunderground)
1
1400E
1y
Rank League/Event Peak U.S. Viewership Event Year
1 NFL ~114 million Super Bowl LVII (Chiefs vs. Eagles) 2023
2 Boxing ~50 million Ali vs. Leon Spinks II (ABC - free TV) 1978
3 MLB ~55 million (est.) 1960 World Series Game 7 (Pirates vs. Yankees) 1960
~40 million 2011 World Series Game 7 (Cardinals vs. Rangers) 2011
4 College Football ~35.6 million BCS National Championship (Auburn vs. Oregon) 2011
5 NBA ~35.9 million 1998 NBA Finals Game 6 (Bulls vs. Jazz) 1998
6 College Basketball ~35 million 1979 NCAA Final (Magic Johnson vs. Larry Bird) 1979
7 NASCAR ~19.4 million 2005 Daytona 500 2005
8 UFC ~8.8 million UFC on FOX 1 (Velasquez vs. dos Santos) 2011
9 NHL ~8.2 million 1971 Stanley Cup Final Game 7 1971
10 Premier League ~5 million Man City vs. Arsenal (NBC/Peacock) 2023
11 MLS ~3.1 million 1996 MLS Cup (D.C. United vs. LA Galaxy) 1996
12 WNBA ~2.5 million Inaugural Game (Liberty vs. Sparks) 1997
(In response to this post by Sunsetunderground)
1y
is what I am talking about. However, he and Pylons don’t want to see it, so there is no chance they will ever open their eyes and see it, zero!!!
(In response to this post by 1400E)
1y
Rather than talking about TV ratings for other sports and especially talk about Nascar. Showing me TV ratings then claiming that must prove a point means nothing. This is like saying VT and Tennessee must be the most popular teams in CFB because the most fans attended that game in Bristol. If my Masters degree taught me anything it is that you can make any statistics slant any argument. "Lies, damned lies, and statistics" is a phrase often used to describe the persuasive power of statistics, especially when used to manipulate or distort information to support a weak argument. It highlights the potential for statistics to be misused or misinterpreted to mislead an audience.
The phrase suggests that statistics can be more deceptive than outright lies or even blatant falsehoods. This is because statistics, when presented without proper context or explanation, can be easily manipulated to create a false impression or support a preconceived notion.
(In response to this post by Stech)
1y
(In response to this post by Stech)
1y
Agree that it's not an apt comparison.
(In response to this post by Sunsetunderground)
1y
because we are really good at rolling over.
Sincerely,
The ACC and B12
(In response to this post by Stech)
1y
(In response to this post by hokie4ever)
1y
have already hired a combination of outside advertising and PR consultants to craft an easily digestible counter-narrative to "the P2 are inherently better and deserve more than everyone else" idea, and then initiated the progressive metastasization of that narrative into the public consciousness. Relentless repetition of that simple narrative at every opportunity on every available platform, 24/7.
They would have also refused to play nice with the SEC and Big 10, and either sandbagged or fought them at every opportunity, instead of just prostrating themselves on the floor at their feet and giving them everything they want.
The fact that the ACC and Big 12 are treating this still unfolding existential crisis to their business models like it's just friendly business as usual is indicative of how incompetent, cowardly, and lacking in long-term vision the people running things at the highest level are.
(In response to this post by Stech)
V
VTCALS72
1y
could and should have people working for them who could turn the tide from a P2 to a P4 is simply dreaming. Your position that the ACC/B12 only need enough conference or schools administrators who could and there could be a legitimate P4. I doubt that there is enough quantity of what you call "capabale" administrators, coaches or players out there to elevate the little p2 back up to full P4 status. The few that are out there would be hired away by the P2 before they could make much progress. The simple fact is there are not enough of the kind of administrators, coaches or players to staff and fund what was the P4. And I question if there is enough disposable money out there in ACC/B12 donorland to fund the 30 ish teams in the ACC/B12 to the P2 level. There just are not. and no, I do not believe private capital can make up the difference.
Whereas a P4 would most likely generate a lot more total revenue for the industry, it sure appears that the media sees more profit for themselves with fewer teams and way less games with a FSU/Clemson,/Miami lessACC/B12 teams getting spotlight games. They want more Clemson and PSU and less B12 and ACC games. It appears that is where they see more profit.
So the real quetion is whether the ACC and B12 are incompetent and missing real opportunities or whether they are just following the 2nd most famous Clint Eastwood line, "A man has just got to know his limitations" and are trying to fashion the very best of a little p2 level.
I know you think the ACC/B12 should be all in on a P4 or bust but maybe the administrators know that all in equals bust.
(In response to this post by Baltimore_Hokie)
1y
in this context. In the movie, Callahan says it twice to his lieutenant - the first time, he's insinuating that his lieutenant is a chickensh_t because he's never pulled his gun, and the second time, he's insinuating that he's an idiot, because he underestimated Callahan.
The line is used both times by Callahan to denigrate his lieutenant; he never uses it in a way that insinuates, "a wise man shouldn't undertake tasks that appear extremely difficult or impossible under the circumstances," which is 100% how you're attempting to shoehorn it, it makes zero sense, and just makes you look like you never understood the subtext of a movie line you really appear to like, which is actually kind of sad.
(In response to this post by VTCALS72)
1y
Because I sure do. And, honest question here, what's the point? I'm sure, at this point in the conversation, everyone understands your position, which is, succinctly stated, if you're not in the SEC or the Big 10, there's no chance for you, and you should just give up, roll over, and play dead. Sorry, that's never going to be my position on anything, because I wasn't raised that way. Where I come from, you're either in the game to win it, or you shouldn't be in the game at all. If I truly believed in your "the sky is falling, the sky is falling" crap, I would just say, "shutter the VT football program."
Unless you have something new to say, I'm unclear why you're wasting your time. All I can figure at this point is that you must need typing finger exercise.
(In response to this post by VTCALS72)
V
VTCALS72
1y
is happening.
My position is not "no chance for you." What your description of my position is shows you are so locking in to a very low odds position with no consideration to other alternatives. I believe that being in the little "p" could be football more like the football we loved and can get behind strongly while the P2 becomes the NFL minor league. Admittedly the little p 2 (or 3) will be a feeder system to the big P 2 but that IWII.
So I strongly disagree with your current take of all out P2 level or "roll over and play dead." There is something in between that can be very good. So it is you and not me with the "sky is falling," approach.
And the real kicker, is that none of the ACC, B12 or any school within them can really do much of anything about it, not even FSU, Clemson or Miami. Those 3 may be anointed but that will be at the decision of big media and the P2. So the ACC/B12 have to either adapt to the reality that exist or go full kamikaze.
I believe your kamikaze approach is very wrong for VT.
(In response to this post by Baltimore_Hokie)
1y
Thought I heard some ACC and some Big 12 schools got together for chats.
(In response to this post by Baltimore_Hokie)
1y
The Big 10 and, ESPECIALLY, the SEC propaganda machines are running full tilt 24 hours a day. The commissioner, the coaches, the ADs, the players, their state media, their network partners, all day, every day, all you hear is how much better these conferences are than the ACC and Big 12.
When was the last time you saw Jim Phillips say anything that demonstrated he understood the gravity of the current situation? When was the last time you heard any pro-ACC viewpoint on anything besides the ACCN that nobody watches and ESPN doesn't promote?
(In response to this post by MrFantastic!)
1y
Schools is what I heard.
(In response to this post by Baltimore_Hokie)
1y
B12 and ACC, says what happpened, while the Big 10 SEC run and flood social media,.. you look at the Big 12 and ACC websites, its just about platitudes, while all the Big 10 and SEC, are just worried aobout Championships and gettting more money.
(In response to this post by Stech)