What was ISU v. Colorado on? I was traveling, didn't get to watch.Hard to have an apples to apples comparison, when there were no B12 games on over the air networks.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
What was ISU v. Colorado on? I was traveling, didn't get to watch.Hard to have an apples to apples comparison, when there were no B12 games on over the air networks.
I think you’re trying a gotcha, but if you look B12 games are likely more profitable compared to CBS/NBC.What were the viewership numbers for 2:30pm Big 12 games on Saturday?

Kinda shows you that Campbell is dead on. Tv networks and conferences aren't being very efficient and conferences aren’t getting hosed.I think you’re trying a gotcha, but if you look B12 games are likely more profitable compared to CBS/NBC.
CBS and NBC are paying $350M per year each for around 13 games (1 per week). That’s nets out to about $27M per game. ESPN/Fox are paying B12 $190M each per year for around $7.3M per game (rough estimate, I don’t know the exacts). Here are the viewers in millions for the top B12 game on ESPN/Fox compared to CBS/NBC. The cost per viewer for B12 games is less than half the B10 games
View attachment 158849
I'm not arguing that the networks could've paid way less for Big 12 games and possibly seen better margins. Just that they'd also have millions less total viewers for those games which I can't imagine would make advertisers happy.I think you’re trying a gotcha, but if you look B12 games are likely more profitable compared to CBS/NBC.
CBS and NBC are paying $350M per year each for around 13 games (1 per week). That’s nets out to about $27M per game. ESPN/Fox are paying B12 $190M each per year for around $7.3M per game (rough estimate, I don’t know the exacts). Here are the viewers in millions for the top B12 game on ESPN/Fox compared to CBS/NBC. The cost per viewer for B12 games is less than half the B10 games
View attachment 158849
Well advertisers would likely pay less for the inventory since there’s fewer impressions. But it’s not millions difference, it’s, on average, around 1 to 1.2M per game (as it stands now). So these B12 games see a 28% drop in viewers, but the networks are spending 61% less per viewer. They could charge half as much for the inventory of B12 games and still see around a 25% better ROI than what CBS and NBC are seeingI'm not arguing that the networks could've paid way less for Big 12 game and possibly seen better margins. Just that they'd also have millions less total viewers for those games which I can't imagine would make advertisers happy.
If CBS would have got primary OTA rights in the last B12 TV deal, they would have had flexibility with timing of those games as opposed to being locked in to the 2:30 window.I'm not arguing that the networks could've paid way less for Big 12 game and possibly seen better margins. Just that they'd also have millions less total viewers for those games which I can't imagine would make advertisers happy.
advertisers are probably a lot happier with Matt Campbell than Kirk Ferentz. I seen stats which show that Iowa State is almost double the audience year over year.I'm not arguing that the networks could've paid way less for Big 12 games and possibly seen better margins. Just that they'd also have millions less total viewers for those games which I can't imagine would make advertisers happy.
The CFB bubble definitely won't pop if CFB properly executes the Campbell plan with media rights pooling, rational geographic 7x10 realignment and bidding out regular season and CFP rights NFL-style.I’ll just leave your Cody Campbell deal to the side. And I agree, CBS and NBC are not seeing the ROI in their B10 investment. Going to be a factor when the bubble pops next TV round
Will be interesting to see if that holds. Much of that current average seems to be affected more by those first 2-3 weeks of games when most of the OOC games were crap. Now that we're in the guts of conference play with a lot of impactful conference games happening, I'd be surprised if there isn't a good bit more separation.Well advertisers would likely pay less for the inventory since there’s fewer impressions. But it’s not millions difference, it’s, on average, around 1 to 1.2M per game (as it stands now). So these B12 games see a 28% drop in viewers, but the networks are spending 61% less per viewer. They could charge half as much for the inventory of B12 games and still see around a 25% better ROI than what CBS and NBC are seeing
Yeah we’ll see. I’ll try to keep this updated if I remember.Will be interesting to see if that holds. Much of that current average seems to be affected more by those first 2-3 weeks of games when most of the OOC games were crap. Now that we're in the guts of conference play with a lot of impactful conference games happening, I'd be surprised if there isn't a good bit more separation.
Problem is ESPN will never match on air networks, on a regular basis, even though it is in most households, it still is not in as many as the on air networks.Yeah we’ll see. I’ll try to keep this updated if I remember.
Those CBS and NBC numbers are going to have to go up big time (or B12 go down big time) in order to match profitability.
That is a really good point too. NBC and CBS are both OTA, while ESPN is on cable. All 3 have streaming options.Problem is ESPN will never match on air networks, on a regular basis, even though it is in most households, it still is not in as many as the on air networks.
And honestly I am not sure Fox will match the other 3 either.
Hell I know areas of Iowa that Fox is difficult to pull in without a good outdoor Antenna, and I am sure that is probably the case in other areas around the country too.
Hell my mom has an outdoor Antenna, and still cant get Fox, She didnt even know what Fox was a few years ago, when we were there for the holidays trying to watch Football. And at the same time my uncle had no idea it was an actual channel when we discussed it that day, and he had cable/satellite with the actual channel.
There is a good part of the older generation that are used to only select games being aired on TV like it was for many years in the past. So if they cant find a game on their main channels they either dont think its actually on TV or that it is on a channel they dont get, and are not able or willing to invest in what is needed to get that channel for a game. Many of that generation are just used to the way it was years ago, and dont notice that things have changed or dont care. (I know I single out the older generation, there are others that are in the same boat for various reasons, but I think it is a higher percentage of the older generation, simply because they were used to the old 3 channels with a few games and thats it, and my example is from my parents generation.)
So are you only counting viewership numbers for Big 12 games that are broadcast as part of the Big 12's TV contract?That is a really good point too. NBC and CBS are both OTA, while ESPN is on cable. All 3 have streaming options.
I (and the networks too) would expect NBC/CBS to outdraw ESPN if for no other reason than it is accessible in more households. And yet, the top ESPN B12 game has actually outdrawn the NBC B10 game 3 out of 6 weeks this season. The top B12 ESPN game has outdrawn CBS twice.
I’ll keep updating, but I’d be shocked if, at the end of the year, CBS or NBC’s investment is more profitable than ESPN/Fox’s in the B12.
Also, I’m not counting the Notre Dame/USC game this week for NBC. The Peacock only has that game’s rights due to its Notre Dame contract. And both schools were actually trying to move that game to Netflix.
Yes. I deliberately didn’t count the TCU vs North Carolina game that had 6.6M viewers as the rights to that game belonged to the ACCSo are you only counting viewership numbers for Big 12 games that are broadcast as part of the Big 12's TV contract?
Good read here on CFB TV rating dynamics.
Also read elsewhere that CBS is paying Fox $350M/yr for its B10 sublicense deal while ESPN paid an incremental $300M/yr to the SEC to pick up the 2:30 CT window that CBS previously had.
So a couple of things here. CBS got fleeced by Fox and should have picked up the B12 instead and got more bang for their buck. And the B12 really needs to engage CBS on the next TV deal and their willingness to spend more on sports under their new ownership. And ESPN got a sweetheart deal with the SEC because of their control of all other SEC rights.
And this is another reason why the Cody Campbell plan needs to be legislated to bust up the ESPN/Fox duopoly and double/triple media revenues for all of FBS.
I think you’re trying a gotcha, but if you look B12 games are likely more profitable compared to CBS/NBC.
CBS and NBC are paying $350M per year each for around 13 games (1 per week). That’s nets out to about $27M per game. ESPN/Fox are paying B12 $190M each per year for around $7.3M per game (rough estimate, I don’t know the exacts). Here are the viewers in millions for the top B12 game on ESPN/Fox compared to CBS/NBC. The cost per viewer for B12 games is less than half the B10 games
View attachment 158849
I called it a Ponzi scheme, Michigan calls it a payday loan.
Seems like though the B12 doesn't have big city media darlings we have some pretty darn stout fanbases that support their teams. ASU seems sort of lack luster, Utah seems ro have dedicated fans but weren't happy about landing in the B12. Don't know if that has changed or not.By taking UCLA and USC, it appears they aren’t getting the ROI from the LA audience. I would say the Big 12 probably got the better end of the deal with the 4 corners. Plus the teams the Big 10 cost them more in the travel than the 4 corners cost the Big 12.