Will the Big East be able to keep up with the P5 long-term?

[NJRedman]

I think most of you are missing the point. I don't think lacking football would be our downfall but rather the fact that we are a conference of private schools. I think we got lucky with FS1 launching exactly when we formed and they payed a premium for content. Currently we all operate with basketball budgets on par with P5 programs. We will see if that continues after next TV contract.

If we keep winning national titles they will.

Only if the national titles lead to better conference game ratings, right? That's my biggest concern. Smaller alumni bases and a lack of state following, in some cases, can lead to less eyeballs on the TV.

Exciting games between good teams brings eyeballs. The OG Big East didn't have huge alumni bases and state followings but the games were must see Tv because they were highly competitive games between really good teams. I think we're moving in that direction. We have a slew of good coaches in the conference. We are adjusting well to life after FB schools who over shadowed us. On our own and with the help of the B1G brining more people to FS1 we will still end up being the 6th highest paid conference in the NCAA.

[Savannah Jay]

I think you folks are insane if you think football 20 years from now won't be the most popular sport.

I mean in high schools- there are over a million kids that play HS football. It's over 500k more than any other HS sport for boys. I'm sorry- but that just isn't changing in 20 years. It would take frankly generations for it to change to not be the most popular sport(looking at the last 2 years data- 2013-14- had 1.093 million boys playing football- 2014-15 had 1.083 million boys playing- so only 10k fewer boys playing football). Oh, and another interesting factoid. The # of boys HS athletes in 2014-15 dropped by about 8,682 kids.
http://www.nfhs.org/ParticipationStatis ... esults.pdf

Yeah! It's not like a high school with 800 boys has more than 13 kids tryout for basketball and needs to make cuts, unlike football that can basically keep as many as they want. Nope, that has nothing to do with those statistics. Time for some of you to take your blinders off and start dealing in facts!

What he said ^^^

Participation of 1,083,617 divided by 14,154 schools means 76.55 players per school. Because most schools don't cut for football (they need human tackling dummies too) it's not really fair to compare that to baseball, basketball, soccer, etc., that have tryouts and cuts.

Football, while still wildly popular, is at a bit of a crossroads, IMO, because:
1. Pro football players are retiring early, sometimes after just one or two years in the league; some college kids, who don't see a pro future, hanging up the helmet as well because of injury risk
2. More players will die young, sometimes because of suicide, as a result of CTE (although concussions apparently don't affect hockey players' brains like football players, according to Gary Bettman, but I digress)
3. Earlier this year, Pop Warner settled a lawsuit brought by a family of a 25 year old man who committed suicide. Autopsy showed CTE and he, apparently, endured concussions in Pop Warner starting at age 11. This settlement sent some waves through the insurance industry, particularly those that insure youth sports leagues. This is a big deal. If more lawsuits ensue (pardon the pun), youth football may be put out of business, if only because the insurance is too expensive.
4. Very prominent individuals, particularly professional athletes, prohibiting their kids from playing football.
5. Rising popularity of other sports, like lacrosse and soccer

This isn't an obit for football but how the CTE thing plays out (are we just scratching the surface, or will it just affect a small number of players) will go a long way toward dictating what football looks like in 20 years.

[stever20]

but here's the thing. football isn't hurting for numbers, and those kids that are playing football are going to remain fans most likely for good.

It's going to take a MASSIVE change for football to get even remotely close to #2. MUCH longer than 20 years. Folks here don't want to acknowledge how far football is ahead of any other sport in America. It's NFL, then College Football, then everything else. Top rated 15 sports events so far this year- only Cle/GS game 7 is not a football game. Considering that there have only been like 10 college football games and 15 NFL slots, that's pretty tough. And a HUGE part of that frankly- gambling and fantasy. That's not going away any time soon.

[Xudash]

Getting back to the central question at hand: yes, the Big East will be able to keep up with the P5 long-term.

I'm going to blow past the old adage of "never say never" and just go with an overriding and emphatic position - - the P5 has been and will continue to solve for football, period, end of story. This has been and will continue to be all about football for them. Once "they" believe they have football right, all this will settle down.

I seriously doubt there is one AD among the top 10 revenue producing schools in the United States (Texas, Ohio State, Alabama, Michigan, et al) that believes the NCAA Basketball Tournament would survive and remain valuable were the P5 to rip away and crank up their own club deal. That tournament would be destroyed were they to break away, because:

1. It would be less inclusive - viewers fall out as the little school participation falls away.
2. The drama of the first weekend, in particular, would be destroyed.
3. Good luck achieving ratings with Washington State v. Boston College in round one, etc.

None of this addresses the reality of politicians entering the circus were they wanting to break away. Each state will have its own unique characteristics, but anyone who thinks this would play out well in Ohio is nuts. Ohio State is the 900 pound guerrilla in the room, but it sits there with 6 MAC schools, UC, a couple Horizon schools and two catholic schools which would be less than pleased were the P5 to break away. Ohio State isn't THAT big.

It all gets back to the simple reality that these land grant battleships are solving for football. AT THE MARGIN, they cannot solve for basketball by breaking away, because the marketplace (i.e. CBS and viewership, et al) and the politicians won't allow it. They know that.

Beyond all that, we can keep up with stipends through our Fox deal. As has been pointed out here, there are only so many existing P5 schools that are "cash flow positive" in their athletic departments. The top schools will continue to lock in the top one-and-done talent and everything else should balance out via supply and demand (i.e. of talent).

WE do need to keep building the brand so that we're good to go with whatever TV media rights deals look like within the next 10 years. Yes, we're all small, private schools, but I have to believe that hoops sports fans are fairly familiar with most of our teams across the country at this point. We're trending brilliantly. Keep that up and we position ourselves well for the long-term.

[Savannah Jay]

but here's the thing. football isn't hurting for numbers, and those kids that are playing football are going to remain fans most likely for good.

It's going to take a MASSIVE change for football to get even remotely close to #2. MUCH longer than 20 years. Folks here don't want to acknowledge how far football is ahead of any other sport in America. It's NFL, then College Football, then everything else. Top rated 15 sports events so far this year- only Cle/GS game 7 is not a football game. Considering that there have only been like 10 college football games and 15 NFL slots, that's pretty tough. And a HUGE part of that frankly- gambling and fantasy. That's not going away any time soon.

See, here's the thing. No one is arguing the popularity of football among fans, unless I missed a post. Did I miss it?

What I am saying is that economics can change football and that has nothing to do with popularity of the sport. If pee wee football leagues cannot operate for fear of being sued and a lack of insurance, then the leagues won't exist. If the NFL, with all of its massive resources, continue to get sued because lingering issues from players, that could impact its future. If some of those schools who barely make money (or do not make any money) fielding college football teams get sued by former players, they could decide to drop football. If parents stop letting their kids play football because of CTE, that's going to hurt numbers. None of that has anything to do with the sport's popularity. It will be very interesting to see the participation statistics 5 and 10 years from now. To me, those numbers will be driven by what I stated initially...if we are just seeing the tip of the iceberg on CTE, those numbers will be impacted greatly. If this is as "bad" as it gets with CTE claims/lawsuits...football's future path won't be altered negatively.

And, while this may be anecdotal, we have a high school here that is not fielding a football team this year because they don't have enough players (and I live in the south!).

And I agree with Xudash's take, particularly the value of the NCAA tourney with only football schools. Even if the football schools wanted to have their own tourney (which I don't think they do, because they understand the "product" of the NCAA tourney), there are way to many "agendas" that would have to align to make that happen (so it won't).

[stever20]

The thing is, CTE has been going on for a while now. It's been a whopping 5+ years since Duerson died. Junior Seau died 4+ years ago now.

The number in 2011-12 when things started to come out was 1.095 million boys playing HS football. So with everything that's come out, in 3 years it's dropped by 12k boys. That's pretty negligible. (last years data not out yet).

I seriously doubt ANY FBS program will drop football. see what happened at UAB a few years ago.

And yes, Jet said that in 20 years, football won't be the most popular sport. I'm sorry- but that is pretty moronic. Football would need to have it's participation cut in half. I'm sorry- but that just isn't going to happen. And folks even if they don't let their kids play football will still be football fans.

Regarding the question- we really haven't seen the impact of the new money for the SEC or Big Ten yet at all. Lets see the years where those 2 conferences are getting 50+ million dollars per school per year- and then lets see the impact at that point. And the ACC isn't going anywhere either and will be up over 40 million dollars per school per year. Plus all 3 have or will have dedicated networks.

[DeltaV]

All I know about the future of football is that if I have a son, there is no way that he would play. And I know that a LOT of people like me (early 30's, well educated, professional) feel the same way.

The Copa America got more watercooler discussion this year than the super bowl did around our water cooler.

[stever20]

2 things...
1- there's still a lot of folks that do let their kids play.
2- a lot of those kids even if they don't play football are still football fans.

to think that football is just going to collapse in 20 years is really a joke. That's just not realistic- at all.

Part of what helps football-
1- it's the best by far for gambling and fantasy
2- it's only 16 games(for NFL) or 12 games(for college). 1 game a week.

[DudeAnon]

The thing is, CTE has been going on for a while now. It's been a whopping 5+ years since Duerson died. Junior Seau died 4+ years ago now.

The number in 2011-12 when things started to come out was 1.095 million boys playing HS football. So with everything that's come out, in 3 years it's dropped by 12k boys. That's pretty negligible. (last years data not out yet).

I seriously doubt ANY FBS program will drop football. see what happened at UAB a few years ago.

And yes, Jet said that in 20 years, football won't be the most popular sport. I'm sorry- but that is pretty moronic. Football would need to have it's participation cut in half. I'm sorry- but that just isn't going to happen. And folks even if they don't let their kids play football will still be football fans.

Regarding the question- we really haven't seen the impact of the new money for the SEC or Big Ten yet at all. Lets see the years where those 2 conferences are getting 50+ million dollars per school per year- and then lets see the impact at that point. And the ACC isn't going anywhere either and will be up over 40 million dollars per school per year. Plus all 3 have or will have dedicated networks.

Two things stever,

1) Stop saying "I'm sorry", you aren't sorry. You are never sorry.

2) Your last paragraph does address my question a bit more directly. Right now every BE school gets 4.16 million dollars a year plus another mil or some from their own media rights with Learfield etc. I have read that football revenue accounts for 85% to basketball 15%. If we stick with that ratio then we would be getting the equivalent of around $30 million a year which is in general what the P5 is getting right now. The problem with that is it still puts us on the lower end of the P5 and many of us believe we won't get as much next time.

[marquette]

The Big East has always had less lucrative tv contracts than the other power conferences, with the exception of our current pro-rated contract which puts us in the range for basketball money. The old Big East only got $3.5 million per FOOTBALL school from their tv deal. Now, back then power conferences weren't getting the same money they are now but it was still far behind everyone else. We overcame this by selling kids on a basketball first league, in large cities, with high visibility. We still offer that. We have the same basketball facilities as the F5, we have exciting cities full of things to do, and we have rich basketball history.

Another reason I think we will remain competitive, there is room for a 6th power conference (and possibly a 7th and 8th fringe power conferences like the A10/AAC now). As long as the NCAA tournament stays at 68 teams we will be a league capable of sending half our members. Even if the SEC started taking things more seriously and sent 7 teams to the dance every year it would likely come at the expense of the MVC, A10, AAC, MWC, and WCC long before it would impact us. The UNIs, St. Mary's(s?), St. Joe's(s?), Temples, Tulsas, SMUs, etc are the ones with a lot to worry about.