I'm still a little bummed we didn't get Ole Miss this year. Marshall Henderson vs. Cyclone Alley would have been way more fun than running Auburn out of the gym.
Big 12 / SEC Game at Hilton in 2014
- Thread starter CyFan61
- Start date
I'm still a little bummed we didn't get Ole Miss this year. Marshall Henderson vs. Cyclone Alley would have been way more fun than running Auburn out of the gym.
You're not picking up what I'm throwing down, coach. ESPN will be airing to the same number of TV sets regardless of whether it's Iowa State/Kentucky, Texas/Kentucky, or synchronized cross-stitching. They're already in everyone's cable subscription coast-to-coast, so there's no need for ESPN to air a Texas game thinking that it will get them more access to TV sets.
Access to viewers is what matters, and since ESPN already has the access to the household via the cable subscription they've purchased, the way they drive up viewership is to air games that they believe will draw a lot of interest. Having a large fanbase helps, but not so much if they're apathetic and unlikely to tune in (hence why ESPN had no qualms about paring Texas up with Vanderbilt last year).
I'm not disagreeing with the conclusion--Texas/Kentucky deserves to happen more than Iowa State/Kentucky--but the calculus to arrive at it is not what you think it is.
Why do Super Bowl ads cost a zillion times more money that a regular ad during a regular broadcast? Because MORE PEOPLE WILL BE WATCHING THEM. Jesus, I didn't think this was so complicated. Somebody help this guy out.
Nobody is debating that. You are the one who is not understanding what everyone else is trying to say.
And why do you think the Super Bowl gets so many viewers? It's because it's the single most important game of the season and gets an insane amount of publicity...it has nothing to do with the size of the teams' fanbases or how many TV sets they have in their markets. Denver and Seattle are two middle-of-the-pack franchises in terms of market size, and yet this Super Bowl was the highest-rated in history. The same principle applies this Texas/Kentucky game.
Your point is a couple miles over his head.... Cut him some slack.
What's funny is his post actually backed up your point lol
I understand what he is saying; it's just not relevant. He is saying that ESPN shouldn't care what matchups they put on tv because they will get the same amount of revenue off their per household fee whether the tvs are on or off. While I agree that ESPN gets a set amount per household, that is NOT the factor used in determining what match ups the network wants. They will be able to ask more money for advertising if the game is between two top ten teams than if it wasn't. And when one of those top ten teams has as huge number of households in them as the Texas market then they can predict that their ratings for that game would be higher. A game between Kentucky and Texas will have higher tv ratings than a game between Kentucky and Iowa State. If every sports bar in the Texas market turns on the game and every sports bar in the ISU market turns on the game, Texas draws a MUCH higher number.
Dear god, I hope you dopes never take a marketing class. Your GPA will never survive it.
ESPN should care about the match-up and clearly they do. But will care more about how much a national audience cares about the game than how big the home media market of the school is. If the decision making worked the way you make it out, KU wouldn't get near the national coverage they do.
Texas is ultimately getting that second headline game spot because people will likely see an elite Top 10 ranked team and recognize a potentially great game with Kentucky. If Texas were coming into this season with same expectations they had last year (i.e. low expectations) they would not have gotten the Kentucky game just because there's more sports bars in Texas. The game would have gone to ISU or OU, a team that looked likely to be ranked and easily marketed NATIONALLY as a top team.
Wait... you were the guy who used imaginary standings to prove his "points" and you call someone else a dope?
Exactly.
twocoach, you've got several of us making the exact same points, repeatedly and in very clear terms. I'm still hopeful that you'll have an "a-ha" moment and understand what we're telling you, but if you don't get it by now, I don't think it's worth my time trying to explain it further.
And the reason they gave the game to Texas instead of Iowa State, also a Top 15 team, is because Texas puts more eyeballs on sets. The fan base size isn't the only reason it got the game but it plays as a tie breaker when other things (national ranking) are equal. Obviously last year when Texas was expected to suck they were not consider for an elite matchup. 1) ranking next year 2) finsih last year 3) national draw based on name recognition/fan base size. Not complicated.
