ACC opener idea

[Sean Miller Fan]

I was jealous I didn't come up with the idea of starting the season with ACC games spread apart multiple days. Swofford usually copies my other stuff (ACCN, NYC, 20 games, etc) so I'm going to throw this out there:

Start the season with all games played in Greensboro and eliminate Greensboro from ACCT rotation. Friday night doubleheader, Saturday night doubleheader, 3 games on Sunday. Would be like a mini-ACC Tournament. Teams wouldn't like giving a home game but that would be minimized with 10 ACC home games. Also, the 4 NC schools would have to count it as a home game

 

[Las Panteras]

I was jealous I didn't come up with the idea of starting the season with ACC games spread apart multiple days. Swofford usually copies my other stuff (ACCN, NYC, 20 games, etc) so I'm going to throw this out there:

Start the season with all games played in Greensboro and eliminate Greensboro from ACCT rotation. Friday night doubleheader, Saturday night doubleheader, 3 games on Sunday. Would be like a mini-ACC Tournament. Teams wouldn't like giving a home game but that would be minimized with 10 ACC home games. Also, the 4 NC schools would have to count it as a home game

You were jealous......

Of yourself????

SMH.......

 

[levance2]

I actually agree that some extra neutral games would be an interesting kickoff. I'd recommend some kind of more regional idea with the NC schools maybe having something along the lines you suggested. Have the more Northeast-centric schools kickoff with a double-header in Boston/NYC/Philly and maybe have the Virginia schools kickoff in DC, etc.

You could do something pretty basic like have one neutral game per team per year, alternating that replacing a home game every other season. You could actually attempt to balance that with the ACC/B1G challenge, although that event isn't 100% reliable.

 

[73CAV]

Most ACC schools will never give up home games due to financial considerations, and neutral site games would require that from one of the participants. 50 years ago, Virginia would sometimes play a home game at a neutral site, but that was only shortly after the basketball program became fully funded with a complete allotment of scholarships. The athletic department could actually make more money playing elsewhere. (At the start of the 60s, one of the obstacles facing UVa's coaches was convincing over half of the recruits to pay their own way.). It wasn't until 70/71 that U Hall was consistently full. Today, a missed home game would cost the school way too much money. The same is true at most of the rest of the conference.

 

[Sean Miller Fan]

Most ACC schools will never give up home games due to financial considerations, and neutral site games would require that from one of the participants. 50 years ago, Virginia would sometimes play a home game at a neutral site, but that was only shortly after the basketball program became fully funded with a complete allotment of scholarships. The athletic department could actually make more money playing elsewhere. (At the start of the 60s, one of the obstacles facing UVa's coaches was convincing over half of the recruits to pay their own way.). It wasn't until 70/71 that U Hall was consistently full. Today, a missed home game would cost the school way too much money. The same is true at most of the rest of the conference.

They would get 1/15 of the ticket sale/sponsorship money for the Bojangles ACC Tip-Off Weekend which would pretty close to what giving up 1 of 10 ACC home games would equal. Obviously, you wouldn't be giving up home games vs Duke, UNC, or a rival

 

[73CAV]

They would get 1/15 of the ticket sale/sponsorship money for the Bojangles ACC Tip-Off Weekend which would pretty close to what giving up 1 of 10 ACC home games would equal. Obviously, you wouldn't be giving up home games vs Duke, UNC, or a rival

Uh, maybe those numbers would work for Pitt. It wouldn't come close for UVa and most other ACC programs. It's bad enough that conference expansion has done away with round robin scheduling, losing the revenue generated by a home ACC game will insure the failure of such a proposal.

 

[Sean Miller Fan]

They would get 1/15 of the ticket sale/sponsorship money for the Bojangles ACC Tip-Off Weekend which would pretty close to what giving up 1 of 10 ACC home games would equal. Obviously, you wouldn't be giving up home games vs Duke, UNC, or a rival

Uh, maybe those numbers would work for Pitt. It wouldn't come close for UVa and most other ACC programs. It's bad enough that conference expansion has done away with round robin scheduling, losing the revenue generated by a home ACC game will insure the failure of such a proposal.

You lose 1 home game every other year while getting 1/15 of the revenue generated by 7 games EVERY year. Its a net positive for every school but maybe Lou, Syr, and UNC

 

[73CAV]

You lose 1 home game every other year while getting 1/15 of the revenue generated by 7 games EVERY year. Its a net positive for every school but maybe Lou, Syr, and UNC

It wouldn't be close to a net positive for Virginia. While the JPJ only has about 2/3 the seats of the Greensboro Coliseum (about 14,500 to 22,000), UVa home game seating enjoys premium pricing, and there are no individual tickets to sell. An early season event such as you propose would be unlikely to fill the Coliseum to capacity, and the pricing would not be as dear (at least, not for all seven games). Sponsorship money split 15 ways is unlikely to equal the sponsorship money a Virginia home game generates. Luxury box sales, split 15 ways, are unlikely to come close to what Virginia gets for a single game. Lastly, UVa owns the JPJ. Rent for the Coliseum isn't insignificant.

As you note, UNC, Louisville, & Syracuse would definitely lose in such an arrangement. Virginia would, too. In all likelihood N C State and Notre Dame, also. In fact, I am not sure who would benefit besides Boston College.

 

[Joe the Panther Fan]

You lose 1 home game every other year while getting 1/15 of the revenue generated by 7 games EVERY year. Its a net positive for every school but maybe Lou, Syr, and UNC

If you understood math and things like expenses you'd realize that in the scenario you are pimping here the off site games would have to draw far, far more revenue than a team's home games do for them to come out ahead.

I mean you get that if each team gets 1/15 of 7 games every year instead of one full home game every other year that if the games generated the same net revenue (which would be how you would have to sell the neutral site games) that literally everyone would come out behind, right? Not only would the neutral site games have to bring in more money than the combined games on campus would to come out even but you'd also have to account for the extra expenses of teams having to make one more road trip every other year. That isn't as costly as if you were doing something like this for football, but on the other hand these games aren't drawing nearly as many people as a football game would either.

The only schools that would come out ahead in a deal like this are the ones that don't draw at home. Like us, right now. Us a couple of years ago on the other hand? No way. Not even close.

 

[Sean Miller Fan]

You lose 1 home game every other year while getting 1/15 of the revenue generated by 7 games EVERY year. Its a net positive for every school but maybe Lou, Syr, and UNC

If you understood math and things like expenses you'd realize that in the scenario you are pimping here the off site games would have to draw far, far more revenue than a team's home games do for them to come out ahead.

I mean you get that if each team gets 1/15 of 7 games every year instead of one full home game every other year that if the games generated the same net revenue (which would be how you would have to sell the neutral site games) that literally everyone would come out behind, right? Not only would the neutral site games have to bring in more money than the combined games on campus would to come out even but you'd also have to account for the extra expenses of teams having to make one more road trip every other year. That isn't as costly as if you were doing something like this for football, but on the other hand these games aren't drawing nearly as many people as a football game would either.

The only schools that would come out ahead in a deal like this are the ones that don't draw at home. Like us, right now. Us a couple of years ago on the other hand? No way. Not even close.

The additional value of an extra home game is not what you think it is. Lets take UVa as an example, a team that sells out of season tickets. The arena holds 14,500. If they lose a non-descript home game vs Pitt, that game as 1 game in a season ticket package is worth maybe $30. So instead of selling out of season tickets at $500, maybe they need to drop season tickets to $470 to sell out. However, in all likelihood, they probably sell out at the same price even without the Pitt home game.

But lets say they do have to lower ticket prices by $30 to account for the loss of the Pitt home game. When you factor out student seats, thats a $400K revenue loss every other year. I believe 4 sessions in Greensboro would sell out at $20/ticket. That's $1.76 million in ticket revenue. Divided 15 ways, that's $117,333 but doesn’t include naming rights which is another $100K per school. And remember, its every other year that you give up a home game so a team like UVa would be breaking even and maybe even make a small profit depending.

 

[PittAU]

They would get 1/15 of the ticket sale/sponsorship money for the Bojangles ACC Tip-Off Weekend which would pretty close to what giving up 1 of 10 ACC home games would equal. Obviously, you wouldn't be giving up home games vs Duke, UNC, or a rival

If biscuits are involved I am IN!

 

[Joe the Panther Fan]

The additional value of an extra home game is not what you think it is. Lets take UVa as an example, a team that sells out of season tickets. The arena holds 14,500. If they lose a non-descript home game vs Pitt, that game as 1 game in a season ticket package is worth maybe $30. So instead of selling out of season tickets at $500, maybe they need to drop season tickets to $470 to sell out. However, in all likelihood, they probably sell out at the same price even without the Pitt home game.

But lets say they do have to lower ticket prices by $30 to account for the loss of the Pitt home game. When you factor out student seats, thats a $400K revenue loss every other year. I believe 4 sessions in Greensboro would sell out at $20/ticket. That's $1.76 million in ticket revenue. Divided 15 ways, that's $117,333 but doesn’t include naming rights which is another $100K per school. And remember, its every other year that you give up a home game so a team like UVa would be breaking even and maybe even make a small profit depending.

It's been obvious for years that the value of a home game is not what YOU think it is, because if it was teams would be likely to schedule completely differently.

 

[Sean Miller Fan]

The additional value of an extra home game is not what you think it is. Lets take UVa as an example, a team that sells out of season tickets. The arena holds 14,500. If they lose a non-descript home game vs Pitt, that game as 1 game in a season ticket package is worth maybe $30. So instead of selling out of season tickets at $500, maybe they need to drop season tickets to $470 to sell out. However, in all likelihood, they probably sell out at the same price even without the Pitt home game.

But lets say they do have to lower ticket prices by $30 to account for the loss of the Pitt home game. When you factor out student seats, thats a $400K revenue loss every other year. I believe 4 sessions in Greensboro would sell out at $20/ticket. That's $1.76 million in ticket revenue. Divided 15 ways, that's $117,333 but doesn’t include naming rights which is another $100K per school. And remember, its every other year that you give up a home game so a team like UVa would be breaking even and maybe even make a small profit depending.

It's been obvious for years that the value of a home game is not what YOU think it is, because if it was teams would be likely to schedule completely differently.

Joe, come on. You know some of these low value home games arent worth the amount they print on the ticket.

 

[73CAV]

The additional value of an extra home game is not what you think it is. Lets take UVa as an example, a team that sells out of season tickets. The arena holds 14,500. If they lose a non-descript home game vs Pitt, that game as 1 game in a season ticket package is worth maybe $30. So instead of selling out of season tickets at $500, maybe they need to drop season tickets to $470 to sell out. However, in all likelihood, they probably sell out at the same price even without the Pitt home game.

But lets say they do have to lower ticket prices by $30 to account for the loss of the Pitt home game. When you factor out student seats, thats a $400K revenue loss every other year. I believe 4 sessions in Greensboro would sell out at $20/ticket. That's $1.76 million in ticket revenue. Divided 15 ways, that's $117,333 but doesn’t include naming rights which is another $100K per school. And remember, its every other year that you give up a home game so a team like UVa would be breaking even and maybe even make a small profit depending.

The notion that all four sessions would be 'sell-outs' is more than a bit speculative, if not wildly optimistic. Even if you put one of the four Carolina schools into each session, I very much doubt that all four would be sell-outs, and the ADs of other schools are going to be less than enthusiastic about playing before crowds dominated by those schools. Essentially, it is selling a 'home' date to another school. I am a bit more than skeptical that fans from Boston College, Syracuse, Pitt, Notre Dame, Miami, and FSU would attend in meaningful numbers, if at all. Also, not everyone would be sacrificing a "non-descript" home game. Someone would have to be giving up a home date against an elite team. At some schools, this would create major issues among the ticket holders. Lastly, you neglected to address the issues around 'luxury suites'. The heavy donors and corporate sponsors that pay the premiums for those amenities are not going to take nicely to losing a prime opportunity to schmooze their clients/friends, and it is not as though individual schools don't have paid advertising for home games. LED banners along scorers' tables are seen not just by fans in attendance, but also by television audiences. Then, there are the paid concessions. Once you consider the travel expenses associated with such an event, it makes little, if any, economic sense for any school not named UNC, Duke, Wake, or N C State, and I doubt it makes much sense to the folks at UNC and State.

 

[Joe the Panther Fan]

Joe, come on. You know some of these low value home games arent worth the amount they print on the ticket.

I also know that if this was as cut and dried as you seem to think it is that teams would schedule completely differently than they do. The fact that no one even considers doing something like what you are talking about in an environment where the dollar rules all ought to tell you that there aren't more dollars in you idea.

It's a stupid idea. It isn't ever going to happen. There are reasons for that, even if you want to pretend otherwise.

 

[Sean Miller Fan]

Joe, come on. You know some of these low value home games arent worth the amount they print on the ticket.

I also know that if this was as cut and dried as you seem to think it is that teams would schedule completely differently than they do. The fact that no one even considers doing something like what you are talking about in an environment where the dollar rules all ought to tell you that there aren't more dollars in you idea.

It's a stupid idea. It isn't ever going to happen. There are reasons for that, even if you want to pretend otherwise.

Why do you think so many cupcakes are scheduled? Hint: its not to sell tickets. Those games are "worth" next to nothing at all but a few places

 

[SoufOaklin4Life]

Joe, come on. You know some of these low value home games arent worth the amount they print on the ticket.

Double down on inanity