The Sports Business Exchange
©
A Trade Journal for Young Sports Business Professionals Fall 2010– The College Sports Issue -Volume 2, Issue 2
The College Sports Issue www.TheSportsBusinessExchange.com www.twitter.com/TSBX info@thesportsbusinessexchange.com © 2009, 2010 The Sports Business Exchange
Twitter logo is property of www.twitter.com and the Facebook logo is property of www.facebook.com.
Table of Contents The Other Northeast Football Conference By Joshua Duboff, Founder of TSBX Duboff looks at the CAA Football conference and examines whether or not it is sustainable as a conference amidst realignment.
An Evolving Multimedia Rights Landscape By Chris Stearns Stearns looks at the evolving landscape of multimedia rights in college athletics. He takes a look at both the big news from the summer along with the evolving inventory and how clients are leveraging their partnerships.
Brand Relevance at the NCAA Division I Level From A Mid-Major’s Perspective By Dan Heck Heck discusses brand relevance at the NCAA Division I level from the perspective of a mid-major school, Central Michigan University.
Collegiate Sports Information: More Than Just Building Buzz By Chevonne Mansfield Mansfield provides a summary of the sports information field, the role of a Sports Information Director, and how it varies across the NCAA.
The Influence of the Bowl Championship Series on Competitive Balance in College Football Dr. Stephen W. Dittmore and Craig M. Crow A Special from The Journal of Sport Administration & Supervision The purpose of this study was to assess whether competitive balance within the six founding Bowl Championship Series (BCS) conferences has improved since the implementation of the BCS.
twitter.com/TSBX Fall 2010
facebook.com/TSBXjournal
www.TheSportsBusinessExchange.com
3
The Other Northeast Football Conference Joshua Duboff
Fall sports are back in action and the second week of college football is behind us. Obviously, Football isn’t the only fall sport on campus. Therefore, we should also welcome back soccer, field hockey, and all the other fall sports just kicking off their seasons on campuses across the country. For many athletes the teams they play against and the conference championship they play for will not be the same this year as it will in years to come. Colorado, BYU, Utah, Nebraska, Boise State, and several other schools will make the jump to new conferences (or become an independent) in the next few years. The summer of 2010 could go down in history as a summer that reshaped premiere college sports in America.
Joshua Duboff is the Founder and Editor-in-Chief of The Sports Business Exchange. Outside of The Sports Business Exchange, Duboff works in collegiate sports media, sponsorship activation, and campus marketing. He has previously held positions with a broad spectrum of companies and has worked with many major clients. He can be reached at duboff@thesportsbusiness exchange.com.
In the long run, the Colonial Athletic Association’s (CAA) Football Conference will be one of the conferences affected the most by the 2010 offseason. While often overshadowed by the Football Bowl Subdivision (FBS) conference, CAA Football is perennially one of the strong Football Championship Subdivision (FCS) conferences. CAA Football has been around since 2005 but started playing games in 2007. The FCS conference is a hodgepodge of universities that compete in other conferences for all other sports. The University of Delaware, James Madison, Towson, and William & Mary are full time CAA member institutions. The University of Maine and the University of New Hampshire are part of the America East Conference. The University of Massachusetts, University of Rhode Island, and Richmond University are Atlantic 10 member institutions. Villanova is a member of the Big East Conference. Additionally, Old Dominion and Georgia State will be joining the conference in 2011 and 2012, respectively.
At first glance, CAA Football appears to be a stable conference. By 2012, it will be a 12 team conference with institutions located up and down the eastern shoreline. Among FCS conferences, CAA Football might be the strongest conference out there. Four FCS teams made it to the NCAA Playoffs in 2009. Since the CAA Football conference was created, one team from the conference has played for the national championship each year. Delaware played for the championship in 2007, and Richmond and Villanova won 4
www.TheSportsBusinessExchange.com
Fall 2010
the championship in 2008 and 2009, respectively (Massachusetts also played for the national championship in 2006 during their last season in the A10 Football conference). In 2009, the same four teams that made the NCAA Playoffs also defeated a FBS foe during the regular season included two teams from the ACC. Earlier this season, James Madison knocked off the 13th ranked Virginia Tech Hokies. However, upon closer examination, the conference is not as stable as it appears. Amid financial difficulties to field a competitive team, Hofstra University and Northeastern University ended their football program and left the CAA conference. Rhode Island may move to the less expensive NEC. Villanova might move too, albeit to the Big East Conference. If Rhode Island and Villanova leave, CAA Football will be left with ten institutions and only three of which are in the northeast. Big East commissioner John Marinatto contacted Villanova and expressed interested in Villanova joining the Big East in Football. Villanova is already a Big East member institution in all other sports. Mariantto’s invitation is thought to be in response to the conference realignments that took place this past summer. Neither the Big East nor its member institutions were involved in realignment this summer however speculation remains about the strength of the conference and its capacity to compete at the Bowl Championship Series (BCS) level in the years to come. Aside from the need to upgrade their stadium, or move to an off-campus location to meet NCAA requirements, a move to the Big East seems like a good idea for Villanova. A move to the Big East means better exposure, tougher competition, and easier avenues to generate revenue. CAA Football is in a tough situation. The conference is almost too competitive for its own good. As of the polls released on September 13, 2010, seven of the ten teams in the conference are ranked in the top sixteen nationwide – Villanova (1), James Madison (3), New Hampshire (8), Richmond (9), Delaware (10), William & Mary (12), Massachusetts (16). When teams are consistently this good, other conferences are going to try to pick off the cream of the crop. It looks like it might work for Villanova. Could it happen to any of the other schools as well? However, simply moving to a new conference for football is extremely difficult for many of the other institutions in the CAA Football conference. Many of these schools are affiliated with at least three, if not more, conferences to meet the needs of the sports they offer. For Villanova, a move to the Big East simply aligns football with all of their other sports. However other institutions don’t have that luxury. For example, suppose the University or New Hampshire had an offer to change conferences. A change in conferences would not only affect the CAA and whatever conference is acquiring UNH, but it Fall 2010
www.TheSportsBusinessExchange.com
5
may also have an effect on the America East Conference and Hockey East. The question at hand is whether FCS football is sustainable. Without a true source of revenue from TV contracts most universities lose money every year. Some institutions are taking a proactive approach and showing fans that the product on the field is worth caring about and that FCS football is sustainable. This season Gillette Stadium in Foxboro, MA, home of the New England Patriots, will host its first ever college football game. Most people would expect either Boston College or the University of Connecticut to be playing in this game, if not both teams. However, this is not the case. The University of Massachusetts will face off against the University of New Hampshire in a game being touted as the ―Colonial Clash.‖ This will be the first of two matchups between the CAA foes at Gillette Stadium. Nothing is bigger for University of Montana Grizzly fans than beating their cross state rival Bobcats from Montana State University. Both schools are FCS institutions competing in the Big Sky Conference. It may not be Michigan vs. Ohio State, but the rivalry is statewide phenomenon. Winning a national championship would be great, but Grizzly fans make or break their season during their annual game with Montana State. Complications with other conference affiliations will not prevent institutions from leaving the CAA Football conference nor will specialty games at NFL stadiums. Therefore, the CAA needs to develop a plan that systematically guarantees growth and long-term sustainability for their conference and member institutions. While unlikely, a collaborative push by 6-8 institutions to FCS level might be the best medicine. Adding a Mid American Conference institution or two and Temple University (currently independent) could create a very viable and competitive conference. A conference the Big East would prefer to live without. Works Cited: 1) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colonial_Athletic_Association#Football 2) http://www.hofstra.edu/home/News/PressReleases/120309_football.html 3) http://www.boston.com/sports/colleges/football/articles/2009/11/23/northeastern_calls_an_end_to_football/ 4) http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/news/story?id=5553575 5) http://www.sportsnetwork.com/merge/tsnform.aspx?c=sportsnetwork&page=cfoot2/misc/tsn-div-1aa-poll.htm 6) http://www.boston.com/sports/colleges/extras/colleges_blog/2010/08/umass_vs_unh_co.html
6
www.TheSportsBusinessExchange.com
Fall 2010
An Evolving Multimedia Rights Landscape Chris Stearns
Outside of conference realignment, which includes a full rebranding effort by the Pac-10, the biggest college sports business news came on July 28th with the news of IMG College acquiring competitor ISP Sports for an undisclosed monetary sum. Prominent schools include Texas, Ohio State, Oregon and Florida from IMG and Alabama, Georgia, UCLA and Virginia Tech from ISP. Both companies, along with Learfield Sports, are leaders in collegiate multimedia rights. These companies partner with universities and conferences throughout the nation to manage the sponsorship revenue of each property through radio and television networks, signage, game sponsors and more.
Chris currently works at a university’s property for a multimedia rights holder. He coordinates the property’s inventory and supervises game day operations. As a student worker in his alma mater’s athletic department, he managed marketing, promotions and game day operations. He can be reached at stearnscd@gmail.com or on Twitter at @PuraVideChris.
IMG, a multinational and multifaceted company with dealings in entertainment, media and professional sports, had invested heavily into the collegiate sports industry three years ago when they acquired Host Communications. In addition to now holding the multimedia rights for 80 schools, with over $400 million in annual sales, IMG also has operates the Collegiate Licensing Company (CLC) which manages the licensing for more than 200 college properties including schools, conferences and bowl games.1 With some schools officially switching conferences starting in 2011, it will be interesting to see how these changes impact both school and conference multimedia rights deals.
The business itself is evolving too. Yes, sales are the still the lifeblood of the industry, but it is what they’re selling that is evolving. No longer does selling solely static signage, radio spots or program ads cut it for many universities. Yes they are still an important part of sponsorships inventory for college athletics, especially for smaller schools, but they are no longer the be-all and end-all when it comes to inventory. Technology is driving the next wave of collegiate (and professional) sports sponsorships with increased focus on mobile technology and social media. Mobile technology may be the most important up-and-coming segment of the industry as it easily gives fans a chance to interact with their favorite team instead of just sitting in a seat and wearing the gear. According to Nielsen ratings released on August 2 nd, Fall 2010
www.TheSportsBusinessExchange.com
7
smartphones comprise 25% of the mobile market and are predicted to overtake feature phones by the end of 2011. With constant access to email, web browsing and thousands of Apps, people are always able to stay connected through their iPhones, Blackberrys or Android-powered devices.2 Companies like FanDrive Media and CrowdCameo are starting to take advantage of the increase in smartphone usage by partnering with universities and their multimedia rights holders for new promotions. The University of Iowa is leveraging its partnership with FanDrive in multiple ways. Multiple sponsored texting polls, one radio specific and one in-venue allow the University to engage different fans both at home, on the road and in-venue. During football games in Kinnick Stadium, fans have the ability to vote on the first-half player of the game and can see the results of the poll in real time on HawkVision. One person who votes will also receive a bounce back message later in the game in which they obtain a small branded prize and are entered into a drawing for a grand prize bowl trip. They also use texting promotions throughout basketball and wrestling season in Carver-Hawkeye Arena by asking fans to text the answer to a trivia question, with one winner being selected at random to receive a premium branded prize. LSU is taking the fan pictures experience to another level with its partnership with CrowdCameo.3 Fans have the ability to take pictures from any cell phone and email them to a custom email address, where they then go through an approval process before appearing on in-stadium video boards, a branded website gallery, as well as being automatically broadcast socially through Facebook and Twitter feeds. Fans can visit the gallery and are allowed to claim their photos and vote for their favorites, adding yet another level of interactivity to an already engaging promotion. Sponsorship is no longer a one-way street with clients providing all the information to the fans. Sponsors are now turning to the fans to engage back and provide them information as well. University athletic departments are turning to social media to engage fans with Twitter, Facebook, YouTube and Foursquare leading the way. Many promotions now involve a social media component or are run fully via a University’s Twitter and/or Facebook account. Fans can communicate directly with their school’s favorite players, coaches, or individual teams and if they get a response back, it builds the relationship between fan and school even more. Gameday Rivals is a Bud Light sponsored promotion that is using Twitter, Facebook, YouTube, branded website and television to find the Ultimate Tailgater.4 It allows fans to send photos and stories about why they’re the best tailgater in college football. They’re currently in Season 3 and are focusing on the Big XII with a concept called 8
www.TheSportsBusinessExchange.com
Fall 2010
―American Idol for Tailgaters.‖ Currently there have been over 3.6 million Internet hits and over 106 video clips that have been sent all over the world. With technology constantly evolving, look for university athletic departments and their multimedia rights holders to continue the progression of fan engagement through corporate sponsorship. Sponsors and sellers need to be creative to keep thinking of new ideas or twists when it comes to promotions in order to keep fans’ interest. And for the fans and sponsors of college athletics, it’s an optimistic future. Works Cited: 1) http://www.imgworld.com/press_room/fullstory.sps?iType=13708&iNewsid=6650986&iCategoryID= 2) http://blog.nielsen.com/nielsenwire/online_mobile/android-soars-but-iphone-still-most-desired-as-smartphones-grab-25-of-u-smobile-market/ 3) http://crowdcameo.com/ 4) http://www.facebook.com/GamedayRivals
Fall 2010
www.TheSportsBusinessExchange.com
9
Brand Relevance at the NCAA Division I Level From A Mid-Major’s Perspective Daniel Heck
―The thing that I always fear the most, but now more than ever, is becoming irrelevant..‖ - Senior Associate A.D. Derek van der Merwe, Central Michigan University (CMU) This statement was made not in the middle of a losing fall, winter, or spring sports campaign, not even following a tough loss. But instead it was on the Tuesday following CMU’s MidAmerican Conference (MAC) football championship game, when Central Michigan University defeated the Ohio Bobcats 20-10 on Friday, December 4, 2010—the Chippewas’ third MAC Championship in four years. A time of jubilation and celebration in many athletic departments throughout the country was viewed at CMU as one of the most critical and urgent times ever faced by the University and the leadership within CMU Athletics. Such is the life at a non-BCS school—never settling for sharing the spotlight, never settling for second-best to the power conferences, always doing the little (and big) things to brand themselves and stay relevant in every single aspect of intercollegiate athletics at the Division I level. On January 28, 2009, the Mid-American Conference and ESPN announced the most extensive rights agreement in the 63-year history of the conference when their conference television package was extended until 2016-17 season, covering football, and men’s and women’s basketball (Mid-American Conference, 2009).
Dan Heck is the Coordinator of Marketing and Community Relations in the Department of Intercollegiate Athletics at Central Michigan University. A graduate student pursuing a Master of Arts in Sport Administration, Dan oversees the social media efforts of CMU Athletics, all marketing and promotions related to basketball within CMU’s new events center, and also coordination of CMU’s community relations and student rewards programs. He can be reached at heck1df@cmich.edu or follow @danielfheck on Twitter.
―Through demonstrated audience growth and success, both on the field and on the court, the MAC has proven to be a very popular and competitive conference. The MAC and its member institutions have always had a shared vision of the benefits of creative scheduling. We are excited to continue to provide national exposure of their football and men’s and women’s basketball action across our multiple platforms including significant coverage on ESPNU,‖ said Burke Magnus, ESPN senior vice president, college sports programming (Mid-American Conference, 2009). 10
www.TheSportsBusinessExchange.com
Fall 2010
Game days at CMU when ESPN rolls into Mt. Pleasant for a mid-week broadcast are days that create irreplaceable national exposure—especially for an institution that doesn’t have the national broadcast rights for all twelve games on their schedule like those in BCS conferences. For CMU, a mid-week game being broadcast on ESPN means not having to compete for viewership with other in-state and national football games that would normally be happening simultaneously on a Saturday afternoon. This creative scheduling on a local level makes attendance difficult for a solid majority of CMU’s season ticketholders, many of whom reside 2-3 hours away in the metro-Detroit area. Despite the difficulty of attendance for those alums and donors living outside of Mt. Pleasant, CMU as a whole (students, faculty, and staff), as well as the community as a whole, have really embraced mid-week games as a necessary showcase for the university on a national level. The embrace of mid-week games at CMU has allowed the university to really brand themselves by showing to the entire country that CMU has a very exciting game day experience. It is also a platform for the university’s ―This is Central‖ ad campaign during ESPN’s broadcast, which on Wednesday, November 19, 2008 vs. Ball State was broadcasted to the largest college football viewing audience ever for a Tuesday or Wednesday night game (CMU Athletics, 2008). With these messages, institutions (like CMU) can address the rising need for reassurance among funders and consumers about the return on their investment in higher education. Brands also encourage connections with external constituents that institutions can draw on, particularly as they continue to seek monetary support through annual state appropriations and rely on revenue from tuition. Branding efforts are also related to the national stature of a university or college, because the peers and others that determine rankings are not immune to the effects of advertising. The perception in higher education is that with more prestige comes more resources (Harris, 2009). Again, at an institution without the resources of a BCS institution, no price tag can be placed on the value of the national exposure generated by an ESPN broadcast for the institution, the athletic department, and the brand identity. When it comes to brand identity and relevance at a national level, CMU has been able to enhance their national image during those mid-week ESPN broadcasts, as well as other national broadcasts including the MAC Championship game and GMAC Bowl, 3.52 million viewers (Payne, 2010), and through an exclusive Adidas apparel and shoe agreement which began in Fall 2009. The Adidas contract from a marketing and branding standpoint has done a few very important things for CMU—number one, brand association with the Adidas brand, specifically within Adidas’ collegiate licensing program. ―When you have the Adidas brand attached to your school, most fans will almost automatically associate your school with other BCS schools within the Adidas family Fall 2010
www.TheSportsBusinessExchange.com
11
like Michigan, Notre Dame, Tennessee, etc,‖ says CMU’s Director of Marketing, Mike Dabbs. Before the Adidas agreement, CMU’s brand identity, specifically in relation to CMU’s apparel identity, was customized to fit the needs of each of CMU’s 16 varsity sports. The results were a brand identity crisis with inconsistent image branding, particularly in regards to CMU’s uniform and apparel colors and design elements (Adidas, 2009). The uniform color and design elements initially re-branded through CMU’s Adidas package has allowed the university to add the same color and design elements to every single facet of the athletics department, branding all of CMU’s print, video, digital, online, and in-stadium graphics to fit one common standard—a very powerful initiative from a marketing standpoint. As CMU looks to the future to continue their brand-strengthening initiatives as a ―midmajor‖ school, there is only one other thing that CMU Athletics can keep doing to stay relevant at a national level—keep winning. Keep qualifying for NCAA tournaments in women’s soccer, keep winning MAC football championships, keep placing at the NCAA wrestling national championships, and also keeping winning in their new events center, set to open in December 2010—a brand strengthening initiative of its own. Bottom line, when given the opportunity to perform during an ESPN broadcast, when the lights are on and there is nowhere to hide, the bottom line is that a ―mid-major‖ will do wonders for their brand relevancy by winning on that national stage. Since winning is out of Derek van der Merwe’s control as Senior Associate A.D. at CMU, it’s no wonder why he would ―fear irrelevancy.‖
Works Cited : Adidas. (2009). CMU enters into agreement with adidas. Retrieved August 9, 2010, from http://adidas-team.com/? page_id=24 CMU Athletics. (2008, November 24). CMU-Ball State Draws Record ESPN Ratings. Retrieved August 4, 2010, from http://www.cmuchippewas.com/ViewArticle.dbml?DB_OEM_ID=10500&ATCLID=3622612 Harris, M. S. (2009, Winter). Institutional Brand Personality. New Directions for Higher Education , pp. 23-33. Mid-American Conference. (2009, January 28). MAC and ESPN Announce Rights Agreement Through 2016-17. Retrieved August 5, 2010, from http://mac-sports.com/ViewArticle.dbml? &DB_OEM_ID=9400&ATCLID=3655999&SPID=3806&SPSID=42994 Payne, A. (2010, January 13). CMU's GMAC Bowl win draws 3.52M viewers, tops cable sports ratings. Retrieved August 9, 2010, from http://www.mlive.com/chippewas/index.ssf/2010/01/cmus_gmac_bowl_win_draws_352m.html
12
www.TheSportsBusinessExchange.com
Fall 2010
Collegiate Sports Information: More Than Just Building Buzz Chevonne Mansfield
The sports information department at a University is often seen as the publicity arm for the athletics department, its studentathletes and coaches. Coordinating publicity is one of the duties of a Sports Information Director (SID), but SIDs are also called upon to serve as journalists, statisticians, webmasters, graphic designers and social media experts, depending on your school’s affiliation (NCAA Division I-III, NAIA, Community College). NCAA Division I schools with large athletic budgets, nationally ranked programs and many sports have large SID staffs. In the sports information hierarchy, the head of the department is usually given the task of handling the day-to-day publicity of the top athletic program at that school. The main objective for the head SID at University of Florida and Notre Dame, for example, is to serve as the primary contact for one sport; usually a revenue generating sport like football or men’s basketball. Serving as the primary contact means you are the media liaison and publicist for that designated sport. You are the point person the media contacts when they want to interview a player or coach. You also promote the sport in various ways including writing press releases and game recaps. The SID also writes game previews, produces game notes and designs media guides for that specific sport. Sometimes, the SID must also update the school’s athletics site.
Chevonne Mansfield is in her first year as Assistant Director of Communications at the Southwestern Athletic Conference (SWAC). She serves as the primary media contact for selected sports and travels to SWAC championships to provide on-site media support. She joined the SWAC after serving three years as the Assistant Sports Information Director at Howard University. Mansfield recently completed the NCAA Leadership Institute for Ethnic Minority Males and Females. The yearlong institute was held at the NCAA National Headquarters in Indianapolis and included four 2 ½ day sessions throughout 2008-09, and a weeklong session in June 2009.
Schools like Notre Dame have anywhere from 7 to 10 full-time Sports Information staff and numerous student-workers, work study students and volunteers. The sports are divided up and the head of the department, usually the one with the most experience, is given the tougher sport(s) to manage. Sometimes, the head person is only given one sport to work with. The other sports are divided up amongst the rest of the staff. Ideally, a sports information department should have two or three sports per staff member. But sometimes, and more often than not, SIDs are asked to cover more than that. Fall 2010
www.TheSportsBusinessExchange.com
13
Many Division II and III schools, and even some Division I schools, only have two or three full-time SIDs. St. John’s University (NY), a Division I, Big East school in the nation’s media capital, only has three full-time SIDs for 17 sports. Howard University, a Division I school in Washington, D.C., has two SIDs for 19 sports. St. John’s has extra support in the form of two graduate assistants and a full-time publications coordinator, and their duties vary from the staff at Howard University, a mid-major school that competes in the Mid-Eastern Athletic Conference (MEAC). Division II Shippensburg has one SID for 18 sports while Division III Salisbury (Md.) has one SID for 19 sports. Division I Navy, members of the Patriot League, sponsors 29 sports with six full-time SIDs. Navy SIDs carry an average of four to six sports each. Moreover, some schools in the Ivy League sponsor up to 40 sports. So if you’re not an SID at a large D-I school with ample staff, what are your duties? For Bill Morgal, the SID at Shippensburg, it is a juggling act. At a soccer match, Morgal might be asked to be the announcer, operate the clock, keep statistics and double as a DJ before the game. During a baseball or softball game, he might have to play each player's introduction music, keep the boxscore, operate the scoreboard and announce the next batter up to bat. He might also have to pick up food for the media before a home football game, or try to figure out why the radio crew's phone cable isn't working at a basketball game. That's all before Morgal will write game reports, check on away scores, update the school's athletics website and oversee the rest of his staff, which includes a graduate assistant and two and seven student assistants. The sports information director job is not for the faint of heart. Morgal said during the fall sports season, for example, he will work seven days a week and can log up to 80 hours per week (Reneer 2010). For SIDs on the college level, as well as those working at a conference office, great communication and organizational skills are needed. For those at smaller schools, it helps to know statistics and graphic design programs like Statcrew, The Automated Scorebook and Adobe InDesign. All schools and conferences, from Division I Atlantic Coast Conference (ACC) to NAIA use stat programs for their games, but the difference is that the lar14
www.TheSportsBusinessExchange.com
Fall 2010
ger programs sometimes contract out their statistician crews while smaller schools have to input stats on their own. With new age technology, more SIDs are managing their teams’ publicity in various outlets outside of traditional media. It won't be long before you'll have a coach or two that wants to use social media to brand their programs, no matter how small they are. Twitter, Facebook and YouTube have all become media outlets in their own rights (Syme 2010). That poses another question that SIDs must answer: Is there much of a need for a small sports information office to have multiple Twitter accounts? If you and another person manage 23 athletic programs, do you have a feed for, say, football and everything else? Chris Syme, Assistant SID at Montana State, does not think so. She is an SID at a D-I school with 17 programs. ―There are three of us and we are swamped. We do our own media guides, run the website and do all the events. I can't imagine what the workload of two people running 23 programs must be like,‖ Syme said. ―Sometimes I think we feel pressure from other schools, even those our size, to develop a culture we can't really keep up with. I know we are not Duke.‖ ―Our idea of creating a buzz about our team or our events just consists of talking. What happens is that we haven't changed our approach to how we do business, just our methods,― Syme elaborated. ―Now instead of buying newspaper space or TV ads to announce our events, or sending out emails of our new stories, we are also posting all the same information on the internet via Facebook, Twitter or YouTube. We are still "telling"… just using different avenues.‖ Howard Smith, Assistant SID at American University in Washington, D.C., has spearheaded an explosion of Eagles content across online mediums. The athletic department now has 580 Twitter followers, 886 Facebook fans, and has posted 193 videos of everything ranging from game highlights to student-athlete profiles on YouTube (Unger 2010). ―It’s a new culture,‖ Smith said. ―We’ve created a pretty solid [online] presence. It’s a great way for parents, fans, and alumni to stay connected to college athletics.‖
Fall 2010
www.TheSportsBusinessExchange.com
15
The job of an SID has changed greatly over the years. They wear many hats and keep up with ever-changing new technology. SIDs are asked to be on the cutting edge — and the cycle is very quick. With sports being the way it is today, there’s not much downtime. Traditionally, SIDs deal with statistics, media guides and running the press box, but it’s evolved into much more. It’s constant, continuous and competitive. If it’s not games on the field, it’s publicity off the field. Sports Information is a 365 days a year job.
Works Cited : Higgens, Ron. ―Chicken Hawk: Ole Miss Athletic Media Relations Chief Has Been True to his School for 29 Years.‖ The Commercial Appeal URL: http://m.commercialappeal.com/news/2010/apr/28/chicken-hawk/ (28 April 2010). Reneer, Joel. " Shippensburg U.'s SID Bill Morgal keeps chaotic schedule." Public Opinion Online URL: http:// www.publicopiniononline.com/ci_15572536 (5 May 2010). Syme, Chris. ―Twitter for the Smaller Guys.‖ URL: http://newadventuresofanoldsid.blogspot.com/search/label/sports% 20information (10 June 2010). Unger, Mike. ―Smith Helping Lead AU Athletics into Online Arena.‖ American Today URL: http://www.american.edu/ americantoday/campus-news/20100518-howard-smith-athletics.cfm (18 May 2010). "Good Sport" interview: Charles Bloom, Play-by-Play" Public Relations Society of America (PRSA) Tactics. March 2010.
Interested in writing for The Sports Business Exchange? TSBX is always interested in new articles from young sports business professionals. Articles can be on any topic related to sports business but must be academic in nature. For more information, visit www.TheSportsBusinessExchange.com.
16
www.TheSportsBusinessExchange.com
Fall 2010
The Influence of the Bowl Championship Series on Competitive Balance in College Football Dr. Stephen W. Dittmore, University of Arkansas Craig M. Crow, West Liberty University
Research Problem The purpose of this study was to assess whether competitive balance within the six founding Bowl Championship Series (BCS) conferences has improved since the implementation of the BCS. Competitive balance in sport has been identified as a predictor of demand for sporting events and leagues. The present study confirms, through empirical results, that within-season competitive balance within all six founding BCS conferences has improved since its creation. However, only three of the six conferences exhibited improved between-season competitive balance, meaning frequent turnover of championship teams was not observed in all conferences. This article would likely be useful to intercollegiate athletic managers in any of the six BCS conference offices as well as their member institutions.
As part of an exciting partnership between The Sports Business Exchange and the Journal of Sport Administration & Supervision, TSBX will feature selected articles from the Journal’s publication. For more information on the Journal of Sport Administration & Supervision, visit jsasonline.org.
Issue Scholars in sport marketing and sport economics regularly cite This article was originally the importance of the uncertainty of outcome as a unique factor published in the Volume 2/ in sport, and one which helps dictate demand for the sport prodApril 2010 issue of JSAS. uct. Spectators would be less inclined to purchase tickets to an event whose outcome was predetermined. As a result, sport leagues and governing bodies often take measures to ensure a level of competitive balance exists within their leagues or bodies.
Humphreys (2002, p. 133) stated competitive balance was ―thought to be an important determination of demand for sporting events‖ because it reflects uncertainty about the outcome. The less certain the outcome of a particular event, the greater the interest or demand for that event. Sports Illustrated writer Stewart Mandel indicated in his 2008 book Bowls, Polls & Tattered Souls that demand for NCAA Division I college football has exploded recently for a variety of reasons. One factor creating increased attention for college football is the Bowl Championship Series (BCS), a coalition of Division I-FBS conferences, the UniverFall 2010
www.TheSportsBusinessExchange.com
17
sity of Notre Dame, and select bowl game organizations. The BCS emerged from the Bowl Alliance in 1998, with six founding conferences (Atlantic Coast, Big East, Big Ten, Big 12, Pacific-10, and Southeastern) guaranteed an automatic bid to a BCS bowl game for their respective conference champion. Former Southeastern Conference Commissioner Roy Kramer, the creator of the BCS, told New York Times writer Pete Thamel in 2008 that he had three objectives for the BCS at the time of its founding: expand interest in the sport, work within the bowl structure, and create a title game. At the end of the 2007, USA Today writer Jon Sacareno observed that while not a stated objective, the BCS system seems to have also increased competitive balance within college football. Regardless of the objectives of the BCS, the reality is that a fair amount of criticism is leveled against the BCS each year by universities outside the BCS, certain members of the media, and, more recently, publically elected members of Congress. This controversy is not, however, altogether bad for the BCS. Economics professors Randy Grant, John Leadley, and Zenon Zygmont wrote in their 2008 book, The Economics of Intercollegiate Sports, broadcast networks may actually favor the BCS because the controversial nature drives ratings upward. Further, the possibility of a playoff system similar to what is contested in basketball would weaken the importance of the regular season and drive ratings downward. Although not a focus of this study, current controversy surrounding the BCS and its process for determining a national champion is worth noting. Individual universities, Congressmen, and even the President of the United States have suggested college football would be better served with a playoff system. An analysis of those opinions is beyond the scope of the current study. The purpose of this study, therefore, was to assess whether Saraceno’s observation of increased competitive balance within the six founding BCS conferences was true and how those findings might affect the landscape of college football. Summary This study followed the recommendations of Leeds and von Allmen (2005) by examining both within-season and between-season variation in competitive balance during three five-year periods. The first period studied was the five seasons prior to the formation of the BCS (1993-1997). The second period studied was the five seasons immediately after the creation of the BCS (1998-2002), while the third period included the subsequent five seasons from 2003-2007. Fall 2010
www.TheSportsBusinessExchange.com
18
Within-Season Balance Within-season variance measures how teams in a given conference or league vary in competition in a given year. If all teams were of equal playing strength, it would be assumed that all teams would win half their games and lose the other half, i.e., each team would have a .500 winning percentage. Within-season balance was evaluated by considering the ratio of actual average standard deviation of team winning percentages for each year studied to the idealized standard deviation. Overall within-season results revealed improved competitive balance in all six conferences following the implementation of the BCS. From 1993-2007, all conferences had decreased ratios of actual standard deviations to idealized standard deviations ranging from highly increased competitive balance in the ACC to slight increased competitive balance in the Big Ten and Pac-10. While overall competitive balance improved from 1993-2007, only four conferences improved competitive balance from 1998-2002, the immediate five-year period following the BCS's creation. Both the Big East and Pac-10 showed decreased competitive balance during this period. Only the Big Ten exhibited decreased competitive balance from 2003 -2007. Between-Season Balance While within-season variance measures dispersion from top to bottom within a given conference or league, it does not measure whether the same team wins the conference championship from year to year. To accomplish this, between-season variance was evaluated by calculating the Herfindahl-Hirschman Index (HHI), a measure of the concentration of firms in an industry. The HHI was useful in that it reflects the concentration of championships in a sports league over time by measuring the distribution of championship shares. Championships were defined based on conference standings or outcome of conference championship games, depending on each respective conference’s method for determining a champion. Co-champions were awarded a half point based on the recommendation of Eckard (1998). Unlike the within-season results, overall between-season results showed competitive balance improvement in only three of the six conferences following the implementation of the BCS, meaning frequent turnover of championship teams was not observed in all conferences. The Pac-10 showed the greatest decrease in competitive balance from 19932007, while the ACC and the SEC demonstrated the greatest improvement in competitive balance between 1993-2007. The Big East essentially stayed the same, regardless of 19
www.TheSportsBusinessExchange.com
Fall 2010
whether the University of Miami’s 1995 season, during which the institution was ineligible for the conference title, was included or not. Analysis Within-Season Balance The ACC showed the greatest overall increase of within-season competitive balance during the study period. This is largely attributable to the introduction of three new schools—Boston College, Miami (Fla.), and Virginia Tech—during the study period. The presence of these football programs effectively balanced out the dominance of schools such as Florida State and Georgia Tech and created more overall uncertainty of outcome in conference games. Results from the Big East were mixed with a strong overall increase in competitive balance from 1993-2007, despite a decrease in competitive balance from 1998-2002. Of note is that, during the end of that period, Boston College, Miami (Fla.) and Virginia Tech were still in the Big East. The 2003-2007 period included conference newcomers Cincinnati, Connecticut, Louisville, and South Florida. This realignment appears to have created an overall more competitive conference. While the ACC and Big East were improving within-season competitive balance, the Big Ten was moving in the opposite direction, showing greatly reduced competitive balance from 2003-2007. This decrease moved the Big Ten from the conference with the most balance between 1998-2002 to the conference with the least balance from 2003-2007, which suggests that teams in the Big Ten experienced very little outcome uncertainty in their conference games. Given that all six conferences showed improved within-season competitive balance between 1993-2007, arguing that the Bowl Championship Series has hurt competitive balance in college football becomes difficult. Between-Season Balance The ACC was the only conference that became increasingly competitive in terms of between-season balance with the passing of each period of measurement. Several factors likely led to the ACC’s display of increased between-season competitive balance during the periods under consideration. First, Florida State dominated the ACC upon joining the conference in 1992, winning at least a share of the conference title every season between 1992-2000. The ACC’s increase in between-season competitive balance from 20032007 is likely attributable to the addition of new members Boston College, Miami, and Virginia Tech during 2004, which gave the conference 12 members, permitting it to hold a championship game per NCAA mandates. Accordingly, the conference’s championship point could no longer be split because an outright conference champion could be Fall 2010
www.TheSportsBusinessExchange.com
20
crowned via the championship game. Finally, the ACC had much room for improvement, as the conference sported the worst between-season competitive balance of any of the founding BCS conferences from 1993-2002. Conversely, the Pac-10 was the only conference to exhibit a decrease in between-season competitive balance with each passing period. The continual decline of between-season competitive balance in the Pac-10 can likely be attributed to two related factors: first, USC reemerged as a dominant program from 2003-2007; and second, the Pac-10 permits for the possibility of co-champions, which allowed USC to share a claim to the conference championship without winning the conference outright in 2006 and 2007. Consequently, USC was able to earn at least a share of a championship point during every season from 2003-2007. Finally, another interesting note is that for each of the three periods under consideration, the respective founding BCS conferences with the best and worst HHI figures were conferences whose champions were not determined by championship games. Thus, for the periods under consideration, those conferences without championship games were at neither an advantage nor a disadvantage for between-season competitive balance due to their lower number of conference members. Discussions/Implications The study supports the notion that overall competitive balance in the founding BCS conferences has improved since the beginning of the BCS in 1998. All six founding BCS member conferences scored higher on the within-season measure of competitive balance, and three of the six member conferences showed improved competitive balance using the between-season measure. Several conclusions and implications emerge from these findings. First, given that demand for sport product is attributable in part to the closeness of the competition (or the level of uncertainty of game outcomes), according to results of this study, intercollegiate conferences may be in a position to leverage this increased competitive balance for greater revenues in various contract negotiations. In late 2008, the SEC, a conference which showed steady within-season improvement in competitive balance and overall improvement in between-season competitive balance, signed a 15-year, $2.25 billion multimedia contract with ESPN. Conferences seeking to increase revenues through enhanced rights agreements similar to the SEC could point to competitive balance and uncertainty of outcome as a selling tool. 21
www.TheSportsBusinessExchange.com
Fall 2010
Second, despite the finding that all six conferences showed improved within-season competitive balance between 1993 and 2007, four of the six conferences witnessed decreased between-season competitive balance between 2003 and 2007. This trend should alarm those associated with the conferences as it suggests that, while overall competitive balance is improving, the top teams remain strong from season to season. Nowhere was this more pronounced than the Pac-10, where within-season competitive balance improved from 2003 to 2007 while between-season balance simultaneously decreased significantly in the same period as USC captured three conference championships outright and shared two others (2006 with California and 2007 with Arizona State). Failure to achieve between-season competitive balance, such as within the Pac-10, may have the opposite effect of increasing demand for the product. While demand may increase for games in which the outcome may not be known (e.g., Oregon State vs. Stanford), the repeated championships for USC may actually decrease demand for its games within the Pac-10 as consumers become less motivated to attend/consume games in which the outcome may not be as uncertain. Finally, recent conference realignment seems to have positively impacted competitive balance in the ACC and Big East, the only founding BCS conferences to expand during the study period. Given NCAA rules regarding conference championship games, it seems unlikely that conferences with 12 members (SEC, ACC, and Big 12) would add members. However, for the remaining three BCS conferences (Big East, Big Ten, and Pac-10), both room and motivation to grow exist, according to results of this study. Previous research has suggested that conference realignment will have the effect of grouping members with similar drawing power. This grouping could create uncertainty in conferences outside of the BCS. As sports economist James Quirk noted in 2004, ―There is evidence of considerable amount 'churning' in conference memberships, for those major conferences below the top level, and there might be a link between this churning and competitive balance problems within the conference.‖ Essentially, according to results of this study, the Big East, Big Ten, and Pac-10 would benefit from adding additional schools from non-founding BCS conferences such as the Mountain West, Conference USA, and Mid-American. While this would improve the fortunes of the BCS conferences, it would likely further hurt the non-BCS conferences.
Fall 2010
www.TheSportsBusinessExchange.com
22
23
www.TheSportsBusinessExchange.com
Fall 2010
The views and opinions expressed in this publication are not necessarily the same as The Sports Business Exchange, its staff, or partners. The articles and opinions within are strictly the views of each author and do not reflect the views of the Sports Business Exchange, The Sports Business Exchange’s staff, or the company of employment for each author. All articles printed by The Sports Business Exchange were published with the expressed consent of the author. Any factual errors are solely the responsibility of the author. Articles that were submitted for publication and chosen for print may have been edited for grammatical and spelling errors, but only when absolutely necessary. Articles remain unchanged 99% of the time. The author’s original text was used as often as possible. Reproduction for commercial purposes of The Sports Business Exchange, any article, logo, photo, or content within, is strictly prohibited without the express written consent of The Sports Business Exchange’s Editor-in-Chief and the author of the article when applicable. For more information, visit www.TheSportsBusinessExchange.com. © 2009, 2010 The Sports Business Exchange