Interesting info from New York Times

[Sawyer]

Seems relevant with the Big 12 potentially looking to add teams.

http://thequad.blogs.nytimes.com/20...NYT+>+Sports)&seid=auto&smid=tw-nytimessports

Lots of info here on what teams really add in terms of TV sets.

I'll admit I didn't read this thoroughly (I only looked at the graphics), but I found the Big 12 numbers particularly interesting.

 

[AdaSooner]

One thing I noticed is that SMU and Houston, despite their location, have a very small following of only 200,000 fans each. That seems to support what I said earlier about those two schools bringing very little to the Big 12 Conference. TCU has a bigger, although still not all that impressive, following of an estimated 400,000. While those numbers would likely increase with a membership in the Big 12, I'm not sure it will be enough to justify opening the door to let them in?

On another note, I'll admit that I was surprised to learn that OU is not ranked higher nationally. Makes me wonder if the stats compiled here were the results of an actual survey, or a television viewership poll like the Nielsen Ratings? My point is that I watch teams play for entirely different reasons. OU because I'm a fan. I will also sit and watch every minute of a UT, LSU, Notre Dame game, and two or three more schools I could name, because I want to see them get beat. The opponent doesn't matter. I cheer for a handful of schools to lose, regardless of who they're playing. I doubt if I'm alone in my "devotion" to the teams I despise. .

 

[dubyac]

getting to 10 should be easy enough... BYU makes the most sense... and looking at those numbers you can see why... but beyond 10, West Virginia would bring a good amount of fans... the only thing with them is you might have to add someone close to them geographically as well... like Louisville... those would be my top 3 choices based on football, overall athletics and fans combined...

 

[j2d2]

I gathered that the numbers quoted were based on Google Search hits. I doubt that that is very accurate.

 

[bocabull]

The biggest mistake a conference can make right now is focusing on market size/tv sets, potential etc. That is a recipe for failure. Just ask Motorola, RIM, Samsung, etc who see the market for iPads and launch crappy copy cat versions that have face planted.

This is why when push came to shove the Big 10 blew off Missouri in favor of Nebraska. They focused on the product. A good product will sell better in the long run.

Since the formation of the Big XII the best product has been the OU-Texas rivalry in football and the other 10 teams desire to get into the mix. In basketball it's been Kansas leading the way with OU, Oklahoma State and Texas taking turns at the top. Any decision made should be based solely, 100%, on enhancing that product.

At this point there appears to be one way to do it and we need to move fast.

Add Louisville and stay at 10 teams. Louisville is about the same distance from the Big XII teams as Boulder Co was. It's only 300 miles from Columbia. They are the only product available that will enhance the product.

 

[OKURanger]

The biggest mistake a conference can make right now is focusing on market size/tv sets, potential etc.... A good product will sell better in the long run.

bocabull, thank you for this argument as I think it makes the most sense, long term. While reading it, I thought of the SEC in football. Most of their schools don't have a "big" market, yet they make a ton of money from TV contracts.

Why? Good product.

 

[WTSooner]

bocabull, thank you for this argument as I think it makes the most sense, long term. While reading it, I thought of the SEC in football. Most of their schools don't have a "big" market, yet they make a ton of money from TV contracts.

Why? Good product.

Don't get confused on market size. It isn't just how many people are in your state or city. Southerns love football WAY more than they do in the North, esepcially the NE. So it doesn't matter if you are based out of Boston, b/c Boston folks don't care for college football, those they won't watch the games. On the flip side, when Bama plays, I bet darn near every tv set in the state is tuned to the game.

 

[sperry]

Don't get confused on market size. It isn't just how many people are in your state or city. Southerns love football WAY more than they do in the North, esepcially the NE. So it doesn't matter if you are based out of Boston, b/c Boston folks don't care for college football, those they won't watch the games. On the flip side, when Bama plays, I bet darn near every tv set in the state is tuned to the game.

This is exactly correct. People talk about adding Colorado State or Air Force to get the Denver Market, Cincinnati to get Ohio, UCF and USF to get Florida, and it's all nonsense. People don't care about any of those teams. OU is a big draw because not only are all the alums fans, but a huge percentage of people whose only connection to the university is that they live in Oklahoma are fans. Same goes for all the popular programs: Texas, Wisconsin, Alabama, Michigan, LSU, etc. You can basically look to stadium size and attendance numbers to see what tv ratings are going to be like as well.

 

[Sawyer]

This is exactly correct. People talk about adding Colorado State or Air Force to get the Denver Market, Cincinnati to get Ohio, UCF and USF to get Florida, and it's all nonsense. People don't care about any of those teams. OU is a big draw because not only are all the alums fans, but a huge percentage of people whose only connection to the university is that they live in Oklahoma are fans. Same goes for all the popular programs: Texas, Wisconsin, Alabama, Michigan, LSU, etc. You can basically look to stadium size and attendance numbers to see what tv ratings are going to be like as well.

Partially true.

When you're talking about TV deals like the Big 12 or SEC deals, actual viewers are all that really matter. The Big 10 Network, however, is reliant on total population. They sell subscriptions through cable/dish subscriptions and get a set rate per subscriber. It's not the sort of thing where only fans of the team are getting the channel; it's part of a package, and the more people a state has the more packages they will sell. And they also get more per subscription in states that are part of the Big 10 footprint (in the past it was $0.10/month for non-Big 10 states vs. $0.70/month for Big 10 states).

Of course, they went with Nebraska over Missouri, Rutgers, Syracuse, etc. for their 12th team, so state population wasn't their sole consideration. It does matter, though.

 

[sperry]

Partially true.

When you're talking about TV deals like the Big 12 or SEC deals, actual viewers are all that really matter. The Big 10 Network, however, is reliant on total population. They sell subscriptions through cable/dish subscriptions and get a set rate per subscriber. It's not the sort of thing where only fans of the team are getting the channel; it's part of a package, and the more people a state has the more packages they will sell. And they also get more per subscription in states that are part of the Big 10 footprint (in the past it was $0.10/month for non-Big 10 states vs. $0.70/month for Big 10 states).

Of course, they went with Nebraska over Missouri, Rutgers, Syracuse, etc. for their 12th team, so state population wasn't their sole consideration. It does matter, though.

The rate they can charge per subscription is a direct function of how the state's fan base. The cable providers aren't going to pawn something off on their customers that the customers don't want. The cable providers will base their pricing and packaging on the interest in their consumer base, and they aren't going to be able to or try to tack on $1 a month to every person in the state of Colorado because CSU joined the Big 9.

 

[Sawyer]

cable providers aren't going to pawn something off on their customers that the customers don't want.

You serious?

 

[sperry]

You serious?

they would certainly like to, it's just not going to work when the thing they're trying to sell is access to a football team that no one in the state cares about.

 

[Sawyer]

Multiple flaws in your thinking here.

First, cable companies do that all the time. That's how they make money.

Second, which states are you talking about that don't care about football? It doesn't seem to apply to anywhere that's ever been brought up as an expansion possibility. This is America. A loveof football is pretty much universal.

Finally, I'm not making those numbers up. They're documented figures for what the BTN actually gets from cable providers (or did in the past; it may be higher now). Those are their rates. I'm not just speculating on how their network is sold.

 

[sperry]

Multiple flaws in your thinking here.

First, cable companies do that all the time. That's how they make money.

Second, which states are you talking about that don't care about football? It doesn't seem to apply to anywhere that's ever been brought up as an expansion possibility. This is America. A loveof football is pretty much universal.

Finally, I'm not making those numbers up. They're documented figures for what the BTN actually gets from cable providers (or did in the past; it may be higher now). Those are their rates. I'm not just speculating on how their network is sold.

I'm saying no one in the state of Colorado cares about CSU football, except for a few alums. Same goes for USF, UCF, Houston, Rice, SMU, TCU, etc. There's a reason good conferences aren't jumping to get these teams, and its the reason the Big XII isn't going to go to 12 teams.

I never said you were speculating about the rates the BTN charges. I'm saying people in the Big 10 footprint will pay to have it, because there's large numbers of people in the region that care about the various big 10 programs. That's not the case for Big 12 football in Florida or Colorado, adding CSU or UCF isn't going to change it either.

Basically, we can wait for this to play out, and I'll be proven right when the Big XII doesn't go to 12 teams.

 

[Northbase]

I went to the Official sites of many of the candidate schools to see what their enrollments are at this time. Some of them were much smaller than I thought, and others much larger than what you would think. There are quite a few variables that have to be taken into consideration with expansion. One of those variables would be growth potential with the affiliation with the Big 12. If new schools were to receive a huge increase in TV payouts because of their affiliation with the Big 12, I would want them to put that money to use in a way that would increase that schools reputation and marketability.

Some Considerations

Regional TV Market
School Enrollment
Alumni population
Long Term outlook for the regions economy
Is there any National affiliation with the institution that adds TVs
Dedication of the School to build facilities or upgrades
and I am sure quite a bit more that we have not considered.

 

[Sawyer]

I'm saying no one in the state of Colorado cares about CSU football, except for a few alums. Same goes for USF, UCF, Houston, Rice, SMU, TCU, etc. There's a reason good conferences aren't jumping to get these teams, and its the reason the Big XII isn't going to go to 12 teams.

I never said you were speculating about the rates the BTN charges. I'm saying people in the Big 10 footprint will pay to have it, because there's large numbers of people in the region that care about the various big 10 programs. That's not the case for Big 12 football in Florida or Colorado, adding CSU or UCF isn't going to change it either.

Basically, we can wait for this to play out, and I'll be proven right when the Big XII doesn't go to 12 teams.

If the Big 12 were to add CSU and USF and create a conference network similar to the Big Ten Network, whether or not fans in those states cared about those schools wouldn't matter, either. That's the beauty of a conference-owned network.

For what it's worth, though, I just read Boise State, BYU, West Virginia and Louisville to the Big 12, Mizzou to the SEC might happen.

 

[sperry]

If the Big 12 were to add CSU and USF and create a conference network similar to the Big Ten Network, whether or not fans in those states cared about those schools wouldn't matter, either. That's the beauty of a conference-owned network.

For what it's worth, though, I just read Boise State, BYU, West Virginia and Louisville to the Big 12, Mizzou to the SEC might happen.

What on earth are you talking about it? If the people in those states dont' care about Big XII football, the Big XII network isn't going to get added, regardless of whether those teams are in the conference or not.


As for that expansion plan, that would be awesome if it happened, but it won't. No schools that the Big XII can get add any money, except for perhaps BYU. They'll go to the minimum number that they can and still keep their existing television contracts. I'll also believe Mizzou has an SEC offer when it becomes official, and not a moment sooner. Same goes for Oklahoma.

 

[Sawyer]

What I'm talking about is how these conference networks actually work. You go ahead and stick with what you want to believe, though.

Signs increasingly are pointing to Mizzou to the SEC. The Big 12 adding just one team would definitely not help. Adding one team to get to 10 doesn't do anything for long-term stability. Again, believe whatever you want. We'll all know a lot more in less than a week.

 

[sperry]

What I'm talking about is how these conference networks actually work. You go ahead and stick with what you want to believe, though.

Signs increasingly are pointing to Mizzou to the SEC. The Big 12 adding just one team would definitely not help. Adding one team to get to 10 doesn't do anything for long-term stability. Again, believe whatever you want. We'll all know a lot more in less than a week.

What don't you understand about cable companies not picking up the network in areas where people don't care about it? It's like how you can't get the longhorn network except for a few areas in Texas. People in the rest of the country don't want it.


As for Mizzou leaving, like I said, I don't believe they have an offer to go anywhere. I think they would be gone for sure if they could, but they can't, so they're stuck like the rest of us.

 

[garyeb2]

What don't you understand about cable companies not picking up the network in areas where people don't care about it? It's like how you can't get the longhorn network except for a few areas in Texas. People in the rest of the country don't want it.


As for Mizzou leaving, like I said, I don't believe they have an offer to go anywhere. I think they would be gone for sure if they could, but they can't, so they're stuck like the rest of us.

Of course you could be right. But, I was flipping thru channels the other day and I saw that I had the BYU network. I certainly didn't ask for it. I'm on Cox Cable in Norman.