Report: OU & Texas reach out to join SEC

[AuH2O]

Tech has respectable numbers, but didn't have a great season. Two things that kept it down were its max potential. When Iowa State and Oklahoma played during the regular season they drew 3.8m people. The highest Tech had this year was 2.8m against Texas. Additionally, they had more games on T2.

If they had 10 wins and were playing for a championship I'd expect their numbers to be the same as OkSt/ISU. To the winners go the spoils.

As for Prime, they could have them on whenever you wanted. Streaming services don't have the issue the channels due, which is they can only broadcast one national game at a time (though ABC likes to do splits where they put two or three games on at the same time across the country, NFL style, to maximize total audience).

Tech’s problem is being mediocre for a long time. TCU and Baylor at least have had some good years lately. If Tech could get it together they have potential to have value, but I think they’ve got some apathy problems.

Good point on Prime, but while it may make sense to overlap actual game times to max local viewership, if it is a package deal with a conference or group of teams it might still make sense to have a traditional schedule to get carryover viewership.

 

[AuH2O]

Yep. You have your Tier 2 channels (FS1, FS2, ESPN2, ESPNU, or ESPN+) and then your Tier 1 channels (ABC, Fox, ESPN) for the Big 12 games. Here's how many last year's games went on the Tier 2 channels: Baylor - 5 games, KSU - 4, ISU - 3, Tech - 6, Kansas - 6, WVU - 3, TCU - 6, OSU - 1. Texas and OU - 0 games.

And that’s why you have to compare viewership on those channels. Even if you take out the UT and OU games ISU was not far behind USC and Oregon and well ahead of the rest of the PAC. Well ahead of Iowa for that matter.

 

[AuH2O]

This one did not, it was just a rough average to ballpark quick numbers. On your points:

Time Slots - They really don't matter too much, as long as the East Coast has people tuning it. That's where the vast majority of the population resides, so its not to much of a surprise. Last year the average noon eastern, afternoon (2-5pm est), and Primetime, slots were within 10% of each other. The late night games, however, drew a quarter of the other slots.

Channels - Tier 1 channels, e.g ABC/NBC/CBS/FOX, all draw the highest amount. This shouldn't be too shocking as even people without cable get these stations, so they're in more households, and they get marketed better so people know what to watch. Even people who aren't fans will watch these to see what happens.

View attachment 88196

Tier 2 channels (ESPNU/2, FS1, etc) draw next to nothing. ESPN is the only cable channel that will pull down respectable numbers, that USA blip was one game. Conference channels draw around the same as FS2, the BTN number there is the average of 4 games total that have been rated because they drew enough of an audience. Seriously, 4, its like 10% of the total amount of games shown ... some watched only by the people filming it.

This one matters far more. For instance Iowa State had 3 games on T2 channels, where none of the teams above it in the total audiences had any. Iowa State's average audience for T1 games (which includes ESPN here) was 2.16m and their average audience on T2 channels was 487k. That's a big deal. Put those on ESPN and you're drawing about 3-4m more people in total.

Fox has grown over the past few years, especially as they started getting the Big Noon Kickoff going. Its in its infancy, but is producing results. It will be interesting to see what CBS does once the SEC leaves in a few years. They don't want to pay the big numbers, but they basically built the SEC with their single game marketing. Whoever takes a haircut to grab those 15 time slots at 3:30 eastern will get a sizable boost of exposure.

Related to this, anyone catch the Dave something or other guy from College Football Matrix CW interviewed on KXNO yesterday? I'll try to stick with the arguments and not be an *******, but I'll just say for a guy trying to come on and plug a college football Patreon site, he did not represent himself well. Here are basically his points:

- Other than Notre Dame, no expansion candidates bring ANY value to any of the conferences. Anyone that says this really needs to be completely disregarded and ignored in the discussion of realignment and TV, because it's a really dumb statement. ESPN will show MAC games. So basically all and any college football content has SOME value. And it's been demonstrated over and over again on here in terms of viewership vs. the PAC that it is clear that ISU would not only bring content value, but would be a major boost to average PAC viewership. So yes, when an Iowa State- Oklahoma State game on Fox beats a Notre Dame- Pitt game on ABC head-to-head by 400,000 viewers, those teams absolutely have value, particularly for a league like the PAC that struggles to get viewers outside of network games that include USC or Oregon.

- He said "people keep talking about eyeballs, but that doesn't really matter any more. That model is dying (referring to cable and satellite), so people have to look at streaming numbers." WTF does this even mean? Does he have some stash of streaming data out there? Number of viewers (and to a lesser extent attendance) are the only metrics we have to compare most teams' value in a streaming world. Maybe he just mispoke and meant market size didn't matter anymore, but I'm not sure. It really sounded like someone that had no idea about the situation, read a few message boards, then mashed up a bunch of legitimate concepts into a completely nonsensical point.

- He picked TCU as a surprise team this year, then said he had no idea who their QB is.

So I caution people from taking much from national sports media. The idea that they understand the inner workings of media contracts and team valuations in a streaming world is laughable. It's like asking the kid stocking shelves in Hy-Vee about the opportunities and challenges of the produce supply chain over the next few years because he's holding a can of green beans.

 

[spierceisu]

Saw this online somewhere and thought it would be interesting. Says SEC looking to go to 20 teams with some other Big 12 teams joining to lock down Texas. Would include TCU, Baylor, Texas Tech, and Oklahoma State going to the SEC.
https://www.frogsowar.com/2021/8/17/22628940/rumor-tcu-to-the-sec

 

[CycloneDaddy]

Related to this, anyone catch the Dave something or other guy from College Football Matrix CW interviewed on KXNO yesterday? I'll try to stick with the arguments and not be an *******, but I'll just say for a guy trying to come on and plug a college football Patreon site, he did not represent himself well. Here are basically his points:

- Other than Notre Dame, no expansion candidates bring ANY value to any of the conferences. Anyone that says this really needs to be completely disregarded and ignored in the discussion of realignment and TV, because it's a really dumb statement. ESPN will show MAC games. So basically all and any college football content has value. And it's been demonstrated over and over again on here in terms of viewership vs. the PAC that it is clear that ISU would not only bring content value, but would be a major boost to average PAC viewership. So yes, when an Iowa State- Oklahoma State game on Fox beats a Notre Dame- Pitt game on ABC head-to-head by 400,000 viewers, those teams absolutely have value, particularly for a league like the PAC that struggles to get viewers outside of network games that include USC or Oregon.

- He said "people keep talking about eyeballs, but that doesn't really matter any more. That model is dying (referring to cable and satellite), so people have to look at streaming numbers." WTF does this even mean? Does he have some stash of streaming data out there? Number of viewers (and to a lesser extent attendance) are the only metrics we have to compare most teams' value in a streaming world. Maybe he just mispoke and meant market size didn't matter anymore, but I'm not sure. It really sounded like someone that had no idea about the situation, read a few message boards, then mashed up a bunch of legitimate concepts into a completely nonsensical point.

- He picked TCU as a surprise team this year, then said he had no idea who their QB is.

So I caution people from taking much from national sports media. The idea that they understand the inner workings of media contracts and team valuations in a streaming world is laughable. It's like asking the kid stocking shelves in Hy-Vee about the opportunities and challenges of the produce supply chain over the next few years because he's holding a can of green beans.

Probably was Dave Bartoo from College Football Matrix. He doesnt watch college football games but is a analytics stud and sells his services to football programs. He also sells and grows weed so a pretty interesting fellow.

 

[AuH2O]

Probably was Dave Bartoo from College Football Matrix. He doesnt watch college football games but is a analytics stud and sells his services to football programs. He also sells and grows weed so a pretty interesting fellow.

Yes, that's the guy. Maybe best to keep his interviews to gambling and analytics.

 

[BCClone]

This one did not, it was just a rough average to ballpark quick numbers. On your points:

Time Slots - They really don't matter too much, as long as the East Coast has people tuning it. That's where the vast majority of the population resides, so its not to much of a surprise. Last year the average noon eastern, afternoon (2-5pm est), and Primetime, slots were within 10% of each other. The late night games, however, drew a quarter of the other slots.

Channels - Tier 1 channels, e.g ABC/NBC/CBS/FOX, all draw the highest amount. This shouldn't be too shocking as even people without cable get these stations, so they're in more households, and they get marketed better so people know what to watch. Even people who aren't fans will watch these to see what happens.

View attachment 88196

Tier 2 channels (ESPNU/2, FS1, etc) draw next to nothing. ESPN is the only cable channel that will pull down respectable numbers, that USA blip was one game. Conference channels draw around the same as FS2, the BTN number there is the average of 4 games total that have been rated because they drew enough of an audience. Seriously, 4, its like 10% of the total amount of games shown ... some watched only by the people filming it.

This one matters far more. For instance Iowa State had 3 games on T2 channels, where none of the teams above it in the total audiences had any. Iowa State's average audience for T1 games (which includes ESPN here) was 2.16m and their average audience on T2 channels was 487k. That's a big deal. Put those on ESPN and you're drawing about 3-4m more people in total.

Fox has grown over the past few years, especially as they started getting the Big Noon Kickoff going. Its in its infancy, but is producing results. It will be interesting to see what CBS does once the SEC leaves in a few years. They don't want to pay the big numbers, but they basically built the SEC with their single game marketing. Whoever takes a haircut to grab those 15 time slots at 3:30 eastern will get a sizable boost of exposure.

This one will tell is if the SEC is all that. With ESPN/ABC getting the SEC, they should have their numbers vault CBS who currently has them. Or at least what CBS was since they may not have any.

 

[jctisu]

Don’t see this happening but IF the SEC is really looking to just disband the Big 12 and throw four more life rafts out there I don’t understand the thinking of adding the three Texas schools when you already own Texas with UT and A&M as many have pointed out.

Go all in and add OKST, ISU, WVU and either of the Kansas schools to pick up three more states and areas. Would help out Missouri, OU, and Arkansas with some proximity now and the conference would now have a school in 15 different states. That’s almost a third of the entire mainland US.

I know that the above likely doesn’t matter at all but the SEC cares more about that SEC brand more than any other conference aside from maybe the Big Ten. Get SEC into as many states as you can if in fact you are looking to add four just to finish off the Big 12 so you can move on. Get as much value from the four you do choose as you can, and that isn’t TCU or Baylor.

 

[helechopper]

What if a streaming service picked up the BIG12 and proceeded to give everyone a 2:30 kick time?

Haha!

 

[cyIclSoneU]

Don’t see this happening but IF the SEC is really looking to just disband the Big 12 and throw four more life rafts out there I don’t understand the thinking of adding the three Texas schools when you already own Texas with UT and A&M as many have pointed out.

Go all in and add OKST, ISU, WVU and either of the Kansas schools to pick up three more states and areas. Would help out Missouri, OU, and Arkansas with some proximity now and the conference would now have a school in 15 different states. That’s almost a third of the entire mainland US.

I know that the above likely doesn’t matter at all but the SEC cares more about that SEC brand more than any other conference aside from maybe the Big Ten. Get SEC into as many states as you can if in fact you are looking to add four just to finish off the Big 12 so you can move on. Get as much value from the four you do choose as you can, and that isn’t TCU or Baylor.

I agree that this isn't happening, but if the SEC decided their best move was grabbing four more Big 12 schools to kill the league, then they would be OSU, WVU, and ISU, and the last pick would be interesting to see; I'd guess Tech and Kansas would both have an argument. Hard to imagine a world where both Baylor and TCU get that life raft, absent some pretty serious Texas-style interference and under-the-table promises.

 

[scyclonekid]

Scott frost and AD department under NCAA violations, being investigated. Big ten should kick em out and add us. We bring more in athletics and are AAU.

 

[CascadeClone]

How is this bad for ISU??

If the SEC sees value in TT, Baylor and TCU, then obviously ISU has value in the creation of mega conferences. Whether it be a #'s game in the battle between SEC & Alliance. Or SEC knowing that a conference needs depth, otherwise really good teams are just going to beat up on each other.

If anything, rumor indicates to me there is a systematic plan happening behind the scene.

Yeah, it isn't that the SEC wants those 3 teams, it's that ESPN is floating this rumor (or prompting some discussion) to sow discord in the Irate8, to increase the panic level and chances they implode themselves so ESPN/OuT doesn't have to pay the media rights. Subtle as a rubber crutch.

 

[CascadeClone]

They sure could, and they would have instant, 100% accurate viewership figures as well. It would depend on what the conference negotiated and preferred.

Or you could structure it as a minimum guaranteed and some kind of performance bonus based on actuals. So if the viewership is great then the conference could get more, sort of a bonus/incentive plan.

 

[cykadelic2]

Yeah, it isn't that the SEC wants those 3 teams, it's that ESPN is floating this rumor (or prompting some discussion) to sow discord in the Irate8, to increase the panic level and chances they implode themselves so ESPN/OuT doesn't have to pay the media rights. Subtle as a rubber crutch.

ESPN isn't floating this rumor. Greg Swaim started it for some reason and he is an advocate for OK State. Swaim has a history of floating bad realignment rumors. There is no flippin way ESPN will fund the addition of those four schools to the SEC.

 

[CascadeClone]

This one did not, it was just a rough average to ballpark quick numbers. On your points:

Time Slots - They really don't matter too much, as long as the East Coast has people tuning it. That's where the vast majority of the population resides, so its not to much of a surprise. Last year the average noon eastern, afternoon (2-5pm est), and Primetime, slots were within 10% of each other. The late night games, however, drew a quarter of the other slots.

Channels - Tier 1 channels, e.g ABC/NBC/CBS/FOX, all draw the highest amount. This shouldn't be too shocking as even people without cable get these stations, so they're in more households, and they get marketed better so people know what to watch. Even people who aren't fans will watch these to see what happens.

View attachment 88196

The bolded is where the Irate8 (or at least some of them) could add value to the Pac12, increasing inventory in favorable time slots. And more interest in those games could increase interest in the league overall and thus evening games (a bit of a stretch, but possible).

Here's a question - where does (will) Amazon Prime fit in these tiers? Are they T2? Or are they down in T3 land? It would make a big difference in what they can affordably pay for content.

 

[SCNCY]

The bolded is where the Irate8 (or at least some of them) could add value to the Pac12, increasing inventory in favorable time slots. And more interest in those games could increase interest in the league overall and thus evening games (a bit of a stretch, but possible).

Here's a question - where does (will) Amazon Prime fit in these tiers? Are they T2? Or are they down in T3 land? It would make a big difference in what they can affordably pay for content.

If I had to venture, I would think Amazon would want to pay for Tier 1 rights. They probably want first pick on the best games they can get.

 

[CYEATHAWK]

Yeah, it isn't that the SEC wants those 3 teams, it's that ESPN is floating this rumor (or prompting some discussion) to sow discord in the Irate8, to increase the panic level and chances they implode themselves so ESPN/OuT doesn't have to pay the media rights. Subtle as a rubber crutch.

Maybe, however I think people should take it more serious because not only would it save a ton of money for ESPN/OuT.....it would promise those other three money they could only imagine and would lock down the state of Texas with all that NIL sponsor money for players. This is big.

 

[cykadelic2]

If I had to venture, I would think Amazon would want to pay for Tier 1 rights. They probably want first pick on the best games they can get.

I doubt it ends up that way. If the B12 leftovers would go in all in with Amazon, the B12 would want Amazon to sublicense the top GOTW to an over the air network like CBS or NBC and the rest of the games would be delivered via Prime. Amazon would likely produce the games carried on CBS or NBC and there would obviously be a huge advertising/banner presence for Amazon during those games but the Big 12 would need a weekly over the air presence in some fashion IMO.

 

[cyIclSoneU]

I doubt it ends up that way. If the B12 leftovers would go in all in with Amazon, the B12 would want Amazon to sublicense the top GOTW to an over the air network like CBS or NBC and the rest of the games would be delivered via Prime. Amazon would likely produce the games carried on CBS or NBC and there would obviously be a huge advertising/banner presence for Amazon during those games but the Big 12 would need a weekly over the air presence in some fashion IMO.

It's not clear to me that an OTA like CBS, NBC, FOX would agree to broadcast one Big 12 game a week in a post-OU and UT world though. Those networks don't do that as it is without the headliner brands.

But I think it would be great for the league if we could get it to happen. Something like CBS or FOX gets the top Big 12 game each week; Amazon gets all but 1 or 2 of the rest; and those bottom ones go on CBSSN or FS1.

 

[sj4]

One thing I can say is that even though it's not readily apparent today as to specifically why....the fact that we might not be associated with Texas anymore is a big plus. They screwed over the Big 12 twice now. And there is no reason to believe they won't do the same to the SEC in some way, shape or form in the future.

By the way...In the 10 seasons prior to the forming of the fabled Longhorn Network Texas won 83% of their football games. In the 10 seasons since forming it they have won 58%. Nice.

And I would bet better than even money that ESPN has lost money on the deal.