My chart is showing regular season viewership for 2015-2025

graphics for the B12 and ACC?

I’m actually wanting to put all my stats and charts onto a website so that people can reference the data as they want. I just need to get it built. ** Edited by HokieAl at 1/19/2026, 8:57:14 PM

Mountain West brand value took a huge hiit when Boise State, SD State, Co State and Fresno State left. NOt onlyh are they good brands, but they lost huge Markets like San Diego Denver and the Fresno. Mountain West picked up Grand canyon UTEP. well.... THis is not about fans or hopes and desires but that what media valuates programs. ACC has big markets, Bay Area, Dallas Boston NY, Miami Atlanta Charlotte, DMV, and Teams with overall solid market and brands. Right now they are good, it would probably not affect the rights, Also, VT NOW has a an operational 225-250 million dollar a year athletic dept. As Franklin says, the University's metric is be playoff contenders (short term 2-4 years) and they got hte money. If so VT WILL be in a player in new reconfiguration not left behind. Also with VT rights structure, Miami will get al the ACC's chunk for playoffs. that could be 30 imllion extra to ongoing rights,. That is SEC Big 10 level. So VT gets that way and media exposure they do just fine.

ACC. Clearly, there is a difference. My point was that if you lose the top 1/3 of your conference, the value changes. That includes the B12, as well as the SEC and BIG. If the top 1/2 of the BIG and SEC form their own conference, obviously, those that remain are not worth what they are currently getting.

the large amount make less. That makes Disney and Fox stock go up. That is the literal bottom line here. College Football is basically a bunch of stocks, you keep what makes money and sell what loses money. Get ready, you ain’t seen nothing yet, once PE or corporate entities own the conferences and team(s), we will talk about these days like hardly anything was going on. They will buy and sell conferences/schools teams so fast it will make your head spend. ** Edited by Stech at 1/19/2026, 1:19:45 PM

a key partner of the new PAC, I concur. No differently than the PAC not getting a "power" conference media deal, the value of the content is key. They still pay $2.5M per school, so that content is still needed apparently, so maybe that is the local market rate? The Power conferences either are in markets where people actually watch the games, and/or have games with National appeal. The conferences control that content, not the networks. The networks only rent that content for a period of time.

But its media contract runs through 2036. Obviously, the ACC and ESPN will try to poach schools to backfill from less well paid conferences in 2030. This has been my prediction from 2024.

more likely. If the P2 start cooperating again, it could be less, but IMHO their competing for dominance will probably send the number up.

Grabbing UMCP and Rutgers was for cable money increase but didn’t help the B10 dominance.

wants Southeastern located schools. I think they would love two in Florida in Miami and Florida State (an SEC candidate too). Clemson is not doing great right now, but the B1G and maybe the SEC would like them, and I think Georgia Tech is in Atlanta, yeah B1G would like that too. The SEC has a history of two schools in a state, and they want Virginia and North Carolina. Those two state schools could be split between the P2. This is all if we keep the P2, if we go to a P1, then the number shrinks substantially IMHO.

a lot more money. Or they would break out and form its own conference.

doesn't take long to change things around. Look at what UVA did in one year. So if you look forward the top 7-8 in the ACC can get there, and are getting their quickly. By the way, it could be more, Stanford's donor is giving 50M for this year's roster, keep an eye of them. If Indiana can do it, many ACC teams can do it too.

in alignment.

may be movement in the B12 as well. Utah, the Arizona schools, Colorado, TT, maybe even TCU offer markets, strong programs, and academics that would be attractive to the BIG and SEC. The ACC is not the only conference that will change. The B12 has the advantage because all of our schools have already been passed up, and hopefully, if the BIG and SEC expand, it will indeed be in your neck of the woods.

will not only be a data point in where things might be going in the future but, also a look at what might be the true story of what went down in their last deal. I doubt the Big 12 loses anybody in the next round of realignment and there, IMO, is a greater probability they could pick up schools. We will see whether your perception of the Big 12 media value is accurate come 2029-2030. I expect Yormark to be proactive the best that he can with the hand he has to play.

know, we disagree on that. I'm increasingly less inclined that the media companies pulled the puppet strings on the PAC imploding, and that contract the B12 got was bases on the media value of the B12 schools before the PAC imploded. You, of course, have a right to believe what you want, but I sure haven't found any evidence of your assertions - other than opinions. Maybe you can direct me where to look for evidence of your assertions, as I can't get the contract, or access the discussions that Yormark had with ESPN and FOX.

The reported offer that ESPN/Fox gave the Pac-12 post-USC/UCLA (but with Oregon/Washington still in the mix) was $30M per school annually. Now that was probably ESPN's starting point and they probably would've gone slightly higher (maybe 34-35M), but I'd say the Big 12 deal is pretty accurately valued as it stands now.

contract - pretty sure all of us were at the time. They then added the 4 corners after they got that contract, so IMO it's currently undervalued. Just an opinion.

And that was with Oregon and Washington still in the mix. So I'd say the Four Corners were value-neutral adds to the Big 12. I recall Fox was pushing back on upping its payments pro rata for the Big 12 when the Four Corners were added (Fox was not obligated to do so) and so the $31.6M figure may actually be lower. I guess we'll see when the 990 tax filings come out.

is the next contract. While I understand some ACC fans believing it won't be much, I think we will be surprised again to the upside. Yormark is trying to separate basketball from football, and without a network, the B12 may be in a position to have multiple deals with multiple media companies, including ESPN, FOX, CBS, and maybe some streaming companies in addition to ESPN+. While we won't know until it happens, it may be a better business model then having a conference network. At least, with the cable subscriptions changing, it's what I see happening. The uncertainty of the SEC and BIG expanding plays a big roll in the unknows as well. None of us can say what our respective conferences will look like in 2031.

I have mine. The evidence of the assertions lies directly in the logic that you have chosen to repeatedly ignore. Thinking that the four corners and a group of G5s compensate for Texas and OU and generate an additional increase is a huge stretch and most everybody aside from you and your Big 12 cronies recognize there was more going on.

and we had some discussion on this very subject, it did seem to make some common sense at the time. However, as things have progressed, it has become (based on common sense) that it is the conferences that have the content, and the networks are the ones in the weaker position as it comes to media rights money. It was the playoff structure that swayed my opinion. While ESPN has the rights until the current contract expires, the playoff committee is looking at expansion, not for fairness, but to guarantee that the bulk of the money from that expansion stays with the BIG and SEC. Content is king for the time being, and as long as conferences have the ability to negotiate their own media deals, the BIG and SEC reign supreme. They reign supreme because of their consolidation of the brands, and most watched programs. The B12's media contract is based on the regular season viewership numbers, and as a rule of thumb, one can see that the stadiums in the B12 are mostly sold out, and people are watching. (actual numbers back me up, but you can access those numbers easily). Miami's recent appearance on the national stage again, helps Miami, and does not change the ACC's position in the regular season. The B12's performance in the new playoff structure is non existent for now, the regular season is producing numbers (content) that people actually watch. (again, the numbers are out there). There is no evidence of your assertions, and you have certainly called me out on my opinions in the past. We will find out soon enough as the B12 will get another contract as the ACC moves to uneven distributions to try to keep members together.

from regaling the board with your somewhat erroneous and largely irrelevant dissertation. You previously admitted in an earlier post that you do not have access to the contract and/or discussions so how can you make the statement that the current contract is based on viewership? You follow that up by trying to make a connection between viewership and a sold out stadium. Your second paragraph on content largely ignores the reality that content without distribution capability doesn't work. The four corners and former PAC 12 schools can educate you more on that. Your theory that the conferences with content hold the power is not consistent with history or present practice. The NFL is likely the only entity close to even footing with media companies and that owes to their strategy of spreading the content to a variety of conglomerates which they can do because they control the whole pie. That structure is not, at present, a reality for college football. You are right on one thing, we will see with the next round of contracts what the actual reality might be. Also, you are entitled to your opinion and as you have been told on previous occasions the question is how intelligently you can defend your position.

of me on my lapel as a badge oh honor, and it confirms that I mast hit a nerve that you can not dispute - you know with facts, or without some sort of attempt to impugn my character.

their own judgement as to what nerves may have been hit and the merits of our respective positions.