I was a bit surprised to see Clemson and Florida State Settle to keep the ACC intact for the next 5-6 yrs. Interesting revenue share with nothing fixed! Revenue distribution will be as follows as per ESPN:
"The new revenue distribution model, or "brand initiative," will be based on a five-year rolling average. Sixty percent of total ACC television revenue will go toward this initiative. More weight will be given to more recent viewership. A team's total viewership will then be divided by the total ACC viewership to equal its percentage of the money available in this pool. The other 40 percent of the television revenue will be distributed evenly among all league schools.
If BSU, WSU and OSU and SDSU feel like they carry the rest of us laggards then this model gives them the lions share of the revenue. I have always thought Wyoming punches above weight class in terms of TV eyeballs. Yes WY is the smallest TV market in the country but I bet we actually outdraw many of the MWC schools.
As per Grok: "Wyoming football’s television ratings in 2024 were solid for a mid-tier MWC team, with standout moments like the Arizona State (1.1M) placing them above the conference’s bottom tier. However, they lagged significantly behind Boise State, UNLV, Colorado State, and Air Force, whose marquee games or larger markets drove higher averages. Wyoming’s viewership aligns with Fresno State and San Jose State, reflecting a competitive but not elite draw in the MWC television landscape. For exact 2024 averages, full Nielsen data post-season would be needed, but Wyoming’s middle-of-the-pack status is clear."
So we are at the bottom in terms of instate eyeballs, but end up in the middle of the pack. Which means we would be treated more than fair under such a model. With the relative strong state support (compared to CSU) I think economically we would be more than competitive. I suspect our numbers would be even stronger if we could actually compete for conference titles.
I hope this model catches on as a way to keep smaller teams/markets viable and reward those programs with significantly greater "interest" levels. Thoughts?
"The new revenue distribution model, or "brand initiative," will be based on a five-year rolling average. Sixty percent of total ACC television revenue will go toward this initiative. More weight will be given to more recent viewership. A team's total viewership will then be divided by the total ACC viewership to equal its percentage of the money available in this pool. The other 40 percent of the television revenue will be distributed evenly among all league schools.
If BSU, WSU and OSU and SDSU feel like they carry the rest of us laggards then this model gives them the lions share of the revenue. I have always thought Wyoming punches above weight class in terms of TV eyeballs. Yes WY is the smallest TV market in the country but I bet we actually outdraw many of the MWC schools.
As per Grok: "Wyoming football’s television ratings in 2024 were solid for a mid-tier MWC team, with standout moments like the Arizona State (1.1M) placing them above the conference’s bottom tier. However, they lagged significantly behind Boise State, UNLV, Colorado State, and Air Force, whose marquee games or larger markets drove higher averages. Wyoming’s viewership aligns with Fresno State and San Jose State, reflecting a competitive but not elite draw in the MWC television landscape. For exact 2024 averages, full Nielsen data post-season would be needed, but Wyoming’s middle-of-the-pack status is clear."
So we are at the bottom in terms of instate eyeballs, but end up in the middle of the pack. Which means we would be treated more than fair under such a model. With the relative strong state support (compared to CSU) I think economically we would be more than competitive. I suspect our numbers would be even stronger if we could actually compete for conference titles.
I hope this model catches on as a way to keep smaller teams/markets viable and reward those programs with significantly greater "interest" levels. Thoughts?
