I also think he's a little more biased and has reason to fabricate nonsense.
Realignment Megathread (All The Moves)
- Thread starter ISUcyclones11
- Start date
Right. Also, OUUT are bigger draws/TV slots than USC and UCLA, so it hurts us more. These numbers have literally been manipulated to favor the pac.
That's what I meant when I said "context matters."
Is that really what all this comes down to, the context? In terms of purely objective ratings numbers, the Pac wins, but when you adjust for (hugely important) context - the types of things actual humans make business decision on - the Big 12 wins?
The outside people lobbying for the Pac-12 will find ways to manipulate data to show that the Pac-12 is better. The outside people lobbying for the Big 12 will find ways to manipulate data to show that the Big 12 is better. That's the way this is going to play out.
I think context does matter, and the networks know exactly what they're looking for when they look at the data.
I wish I had the extra free time to dive in to the last 5-6 years of TV numbers, and do some slicing/dicing.
One would have to believe the valuation models used by the networks have these factors built in. It is why nearly any article on weekly ratings at least has the previous non-Covid year as a comparison.
The ratings outside a very few select group of schools is as much based on the context than the schools, although that context improves when including more timezones.
The issue is the networks have basically already picked the winners in that regard, with best context long ago going to certain schools and conferences, and now it is just moving all the winners to two conferences, but also moving the "spots" with them. There just won't be much context open for deserving non-P2 matchups.
But in terms of leftover PAC vs new Big 12, imo the networks know that adding the top remaining PAC schools to Big 12 is the biggest value add move. The first year in a long time that saw the non-OUT schools get some good context without OUT, and it largely was better than ACC or PAC.
A conference like the ACC in which the conference title game gets surpassed by American when its P2 hopefuls are not in it, is not something to build around imo. ESPN SHOULD want to move those long positons on Pitt and Wake to Big 12.
The PAC at least had the Friday night excuse, but those paltry ratings for Utah-Oregon, were not good and indicative of the weakness and issue in exporting PAC only to the rest of the country. Those schools in BIG would see a big jump, but even added to Big 12 and eventually ACC schools as 3rd conference, a large jump in interest would occur.
Last edited:
It comes down to ease of access. Via a cable package or YTTV or Hulu or whatever, I probably have 5-10 football games available at any given time on a Saturday. And given the fact it includes the networks, the ESPN family, the Fox family, and several of the conference networks, it covers all the top tier matchups. As a fan looking around for a game to watch, this is one stop shopping for me. I will find something worth watching here almost every time and won't look any further. Even though I have Prime and Apple and Peacock, there is no reason to leave my primary football source to even look at what is over there.
That may change one day when some top tier games move to those services. But right now the top B1G, SEC and ACC games are going to be on my Cable, YTTV, Hulu Live, and those deals are going to likely cover the next 5 to 10 years.
Do we need to keep starting new realignment related threads? Much easier to see everything from everyone when it is in one thread.
This is my hunch too...the TV people know the difference between raw numbers and the context surrounding them.
Of course, for most games, neither league is some ratings juggernaut that will attract eyeballs on its own. Time slots, matchups, the network promoting the game...all those things matter a lot. The networks can engineer whatever outcome they want. Which is why I won't be comfortable until the deal is signed.
I grew up in Iowa and Nebraska, went to ISU, lived near downtown Chicago for 15 years and saw all those passionate B10 fan bases (NW and Illinois not among them at all), then lived in LA near UCLA campus then lived in valley not far from Rosebowl. I've also road tripped a ton around west coast and mountain regions since moving to CA.
Just from what I see with my own eyes tells me the real fan interest and real eyeballs of "new" big 12 dwarfs the Pac 10.
I'm sure these #s mean something to somebody, but in terms of the real bones of what is really there...I love the west coast and the Sierras in particular but it just isn't out here, it's not out here for pro sports and it REALLY isn't out here for college sports.
-Base data does not count streaming, so while the worst Big 12 games are on FS2 count, the worst PAC games on PACN do not
-ignored 2021 data in which new Big 12 destroys remaining PAC
-PAC games that would typically get relegated to ESPN2 or FS1 get on ESPN or OTA due to the West coast time slot without power conference competition. Now they will be competing with USC and UCLA as well as more expansion of other conferences getting into 9 pm Eastern kicks
This really isn’t both sides skewing data. It’s one side having dumb guys with a mouthpiece that apparently can’t use some simple logic.
You never needed sources or connections. By using available and easy to find data and some basic reasoning, some of us clowns on CF pointed out how Wilner and Mandel were wrong when they said the best of Big 12 had no value, and that they are wrong about the values of the two leagues.
If the reports of dollars for the PAC and Big 12 are Remotely close, then we were right. Wilner and Mandel were and are wrong. There is no disconnect between viewership and media value. They simply don’t understand this simple data and the basic logic being applied.
Yes, but you go to those places because you are used to going there…and because the networks have trained you to do so. We have to acknowledge that Apple and Amazon have the money and resources to retrain us if they want to.
SicEm365's ratings analysis guy has another one out. Responds to Wilner after showing some general data on tv windows.
sicem365.com
The Value of TV Windows & Responding to Another Big 12, Pac 12 Comparison
When realignment comes around, fans run to TV ratings as television value are the motor behind much of the saga that has been on-going for seemingly forever. These comparisons usually end up very flawed for a number of reasons.
Don't take this wrong because I embrace your enthusiasm, but you are an outlier. Therefore, your demographics isn't what the networks are looking to grab. They're looking to grab every Saturday two game viewer out there. You're the icing on the cake. And everyone knows icing always already comes with cake.
The two game a Saturday fan is the one far less likely to make an effort to watch though.
That is what he is saying imo. Streaming is a long ways off in getting even the passionate fan, let alone casual fan
Notre Dame AD sure sounding like a guy who’s gonna stay independent.
ND all on board with being network-aligned with both FOX League and ESPN League (right now via ACC). Retain independence, while being shoulder games for both at some level. Why join a conference when you can just be on the same network?
Good spot to be in, if NBC (or ESPN) is willing to pay for the independence.
They'll stay independent until they no longer have a seat at the table.
But I’m not sure that will ever happen since the SEC has just as much sway in creating the rules as the B1G does, and the SEC is incentivized to keep Notre Dame out of the B1G.
We’re barreling toward a 16-team, entirely at-large bid playoff structure.
That's the question. ND's in a very good spot if NBC decides to pay up for them as an independent. If they're throwing $350 mill/year to the B1G, we'll see if they'll step up to the $75 mill/year that ND wants.
