jdgaucho Posted September 2, 2022 Share Posted September 2, 2022 This isn't happening? https://247sports.com/college/hawaii/board/102452/Contents/if-the-sec-invited-hawaii-would-hawaii-be-able-to-compete-189665733/?page=1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
East Coast Aztec Posted September 2, 2022 Share Posted September 2, 2022 On 9/1/2022 at 8:43 AM, Cougar King said: BYU is going to The Big 12. That's why the guy says realistically. Tulsa is not realistic. And UTSA having one good year isn't enough to rate MWC. In other words, it isn't realistic. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
utenation Posted September 2, 2022 Share Posted September 2, 2022 On 9/2/2022 at 12:06 PM, HawaiiMongoose said: It’s very unlikely BYU would give up its guaranteed Big 12 ticket to join a diminished Pac-12 that’s at significant risk of being further cherry-picked into oblivion. But the B12 is stable right? LOL. If the SEC and B10 want more teams from any conference, they will get them despite B12 exit fees. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reverend Posted September 2, 2022 Share Posted September 2, 2022 On 9/2/2022 at 1:01 PM, East Coast Aztec said: Tulsa is not realistic. And UTSA having one good year isn't enough to rate MWC. In other words, it isn't realistic. One good year? They are in the best recruiting area on the country and would be top 4 in attendence. They are also building a 10,000 seat basketball arena. The MWC also needs to invite Gonzaga and tell them they will take Saint Mary's as well if they get their gym up to 5000 seats or close to it. With the new playoff news the MWC needs to be aggressive. Lose the money now to gain more later. 1 Quote I am Halfmanhalfbronco's bitch. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
East Coast Aztec Posted September 2, 2022 Share Posted September 2, 2022 On 9/2/2022 at 1:28 PM, Reverend said: One good year? They are in the best recruiting area on the country and would be top 4 in attendence. They are also building a 10,000 seat basketball arena. The MWC also needs to invite Gonzaga and tell them they will take Saint Mary's as well if they get their gym up to 5000 seats or close to it. With the new playoff news the MWC needs to be aggressive. Lose the money now to gain more later. Show me another good year? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reverend Posted September 2, 2022 Share Posted September 2, 2022 On 9/2/2022 at 2:48 PM, East Coast Aztec said: Show me another good year? I'm not your search engine. They have only had a team for 11 Years. Not that hard to research. Quote I am Halfmanhalfbronco's bitch. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reverend Posted September 2, 2022 Share Posted September 2, 2022 Not sure I'm a fan of the first round games being played at the higher rated teams stadium. That's gonna be a lot of games on The Blue. Quote I am Halfmanhalfbronco's bitch. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RSF Posted September 2, 2022 Share Posted September 2, 2022 On 9/2/2022 at 3:28 PM, Reverend said: One good year? They are in the best recruiting area on the country and would be top 4 in attendence. They are also building a 10,000 seat basketball arena. The basketball arena is long range and conceptual. No funding. Quote In the beginning the Universe was created. This has made a lot of people very angry and been widely regarded as a bad move. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RSF Posted September 2, 2022 Share Posted September 2, 2022 On 9/2/2022 at 3:48 PM, East Coast Aztec said: Show me another good year? 2021 was their 1st season of more than 8 wins, and that season included wins over 2 D2 schools. Quote In the beginning the Universe was created. This has made a lot of people very angry and been widely regarded as a bad move. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reverend Posted September 2, 2022 Share Posted September 2, 2022 On 9/2/2022 at 3:01 PM, RSF said: The basketball arena is long range and conceptual. No funding. They were halfway there last December. Quote I am Halfmanhalfbronco's bitch. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RSF Posted September 2, 2022 Share Posted September 2, 2022 On 9/2/2022 at 4:05 PM, Reverend said: They were halfway there last December. https://www.utsa.edu/today/2021/12/story/utsa-athletics-launches-bold-champions.html Thats not for the arena. Quote In the beginning the Universe was created. This has made a lot of people very angry and been widely regarded as a bad move. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reverend Posted September 2, 2022 Share Posted September 2, 2022 On 9/2/2022 at 3:06 PM, RSF said: Thats not for the arena. Yep, you're correct. I thought I had posted the wrong article but I was wrong. I thought it was in this one. https://thejbreplay.com/eighmy-says-utsa-is-planning-a-new-basketball-arena?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=eighmy-says-utsa-is-planning-a-new-basketball-arena Still convinced they would be a good add. Quote I am Halfmanhalfbronco's bitch. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack Bauer Posted September 2, 2022 Share Posted September 2, 2022 Alright gang, lets close it up in here. New playoff format means no new expansion. Everyone have a good life, see you on the other side. 1 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pelado Posted September 2, 2022 Share Posted September 2, 2022 On 9/2/2022 at 9:36 AM, utenation said: So you are vouching for this part time biased blogger? Your boy also had data from 2012–2021. Why is that? Usually when you are comparing against someone else’s work, you use the same comparison window to be accurate with the comparison. Did the B12 numbers look better in 2012? Maybe that’s why? Did the extra years bring up the averages for the B12? Wilner used the most recent 5 years taking out 2020. I think this gives us the most recent data with enough to not cherry pick 1 or 2 years. I hit a paywall for Mandel’s article, so not sure here. I’m certainly not going to take the time to look through all his crap since 2012 with the very basic link you provided. I haven't verified his data (and don't plan to) because that would be a shit-ton of work with little to no benefit. So I'm not vouching for his data, but he's not exactly making huge claims. He doesn't claim much if any disagreement with the data that Wilner is using, he just doesn't think it includes all the appropriate context: Quote Wilner has a long track record of reputable reporting and his numbers were in the ballpark of what I saw in my data with slight variances, but lacked the context that I believe ultimately makes his comparison pretty irrelevant. My goal here isn’t to attack him, his reporting, or anything of the sort. I intend to add more data and context to the conversation. Insights get better with more data and context, not less. As far as why he went back to 2012 instead of just the last five years, I think that's just how far he's gone back with the database he's compiled of ratings by network and broadcast window. This graphic from his response to Wilner shows the average rating for games in each broadcast window, how many games were played, and how many games were on competing networks simultaneously: These numbers make sense. The network and broadcast window play a big part in what the ratings will be. Generally speaking, games on ABC, CBS, FOX, and NBC garner better ratings than games on ESPN. Games on ESPN tend to perform better than games on ESPN2 and FS1. Games on ESPN2 and FS1 tend to perform better than games on ESPNU. Games on ESPNU perform better than games on CBS Sports, Pac-12 Networks, etc. As such, the more games a team or conference has on broadcast networks and ESPN, the more likely they are to get ratings over 1.0 or 2.0. Bradshaw suggests in his response to Wilner that the new Big 12 contract will still have broadcast windows on higher rated networks (though likely fewer than if they still had Oklahoma/Texas in conference). Let's say they make another deal with ESPN and FOX. All of those ABC, FOX, and ESPN spots will go to new Big 12 teams (unlike the last decade in which Oklahoma and Texas played in the majority of those games). As such, the average rating for the remaining Big 12 teams is likely to increase over what they have been in the past for those teams. In a different post/article, he shows the ratings for regular season conference games for each conference from 2014-2021 (sans 2020). He said he picked that time frame because there weren't many conference membership changes during that time (just Navy joining the AAC and UConn leaving the AAC). These numbers include USC/UCLA for the Pac 12 and also include Oklahoma/Texas for the Big 12. And here's for Thursday and Friday games: He also includes a chart that excludes USC/UCLA from the PAC and Oklahoma/Texas from the Big 12. It also, curiously, excludes Florida State and Clemson from the ACC. He says that's because there's been talk of the ACC being raided, but it's probably just to make the Big 12 look better compared to the ACC. The AAC numbers have not been adjusted to reflect the loss of Cincinnati, Houston, and UCF. And here's for Thursday and Friday games: In broadcast windows they have in common, the remaining PAC and remaining Big 12 teams get very comparable ratings. The PAC has advantages in the late games (as one might expect) that haven't typically faced much competition, but will likely face more competition going forward with B1G games and BYU conference games against the Big 12. I still expect the PAC to continue to have the ratings advantage in the late games, just not as pronounced. Like the PAC's late night advantage when the Big 12 hasn't typically been playing, the Big 12 has a big ratings advantage in the noon ET window when the PAC isn't playing any conference games (and probably still won't). So, to reiterate, his beef with Wilner is: Quote Overall, Wilner’s article doesn’t really look at television window, network, or the likelihood of either to be unchanged as the after dark spot is likely to compete with USC and UCLA going forward either with them on FS1 splitting viewership or taking the ESPN windows that produce 1.0 ratings from them. In the end, he comes down to this as the differentiation between the Big 12 and PAC ratings: Quote we end up with any difference at this point amounting to splitting hairs. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
utenation Posted September 2, 2022 Share Posted September 2, 2022 On 9/2/2022 at 3:48 PM, Pelado said: I haven't verified his data (and don't plan to) because that would be a shit-ton of work with little to no benefit. So I'm not vouching for his data, but he's not exactly making huge claims. He doesn't claim much if any disagreement with the data that Wilner is using, he just doesn't think it includes all the appropriate context: As far as why he went back to 2012 instead of just the last five years, I think that's just how far he's gone back with the database he's compiled of ratings by network and broadcast window. This graphic from his response to Wilner shows the average rating for games in each broadcast window, how many games were played, and how many games were on competing networks simultaneously: These numbers make sense. The network and broadcast window play a big part in what the ratings will be. Generally speaking, games on ABC, CBS, FOX, and NBC garner better ratings than games on ESPN. Games on ESPN tend to perform better than games on ESPN2 and FS1. Games on ESPN2 and FS1 tend to perform better than games on ESPNU. Games on ESPNU perform better than games on CBS Sports, Pac-12 Networks, etc. As such, the more games a team or conference has on broadcast networks and ESPN, the more likely they are to get ratings over 1.0 or 2.0. Bradshaw suggests in his response to Wilner that the new Big 12 contract will still have broadcast windows on higher rated networks (though likely fewer than if they still had Oklahoma/Texas in conference). Let's say they make another deal with ESPN and FOX. All of those ABC, FOX, and ESPN spots will go to new Big 12 teams (unlike the last decade in which Oklahoma and Texas played in the majority of those games). As such, the average rating for the remaining Big 12 teams is likely to increase over what they have been in the past for those teams. In a different post/article, he shows the ratings for regular season conference games for each conference from 2014-2021 (sans 2020). He said he picked that time frame because there weren't many conference membership changes during that time (just Navy joining the AAC and UConn leaving the AAC). These numbers include USC/UCLA for the Pac 12 and also include Oklahoma/Texas for the Big 12. And here's for Thursday and Friday games: He also includes a chart that excludes USC/UCLA from the PAC and Oklahoma/Texas from the Big 12. It also, curiously, excludes Florida State and Clemson from the ACC. He says that's because there's been talk of the ACC being raided, but it's probably just to make the Big 12 look better compared to the ACC. The AAC numbers have not been adjusted to reflect the loss of Cincinnati, Houston, and UCF. And here's for Thursday and Friday games: In broadcast windows they have in common, the remaining PAC and remaining Big 12 teams get very comparable ratings. The PAC has advantages in the late games (as one might expect) that haven't typically faced much competition, but will likely face more competition going forward with B1G games and BYU conference games against the Big 12. I still expect the PAC to continue to have the ratings advantage in the late games, just not as pronounced. Like the PAC's late night advantage when the Big 12 hasn't typically been playing, the Big 12 has a big ratings advantage in the noon ET window when the PAC isn't playing any conference games (and probably still won't). So, to reiterate, his beef with Wilner is: In the end, he comes down to this as the differentiation between the Big 12 and PAC ratings: I”m done looking at Bradshaw’s numbers and opinions. I’ve made many arguments on why. The point is dead. Moving on. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pelado Posted September 2, 2022 Share Posted September 2, 2022 On 9/2/2022 at 2:12 PM, utenation said: But the B12 is stable right? LOL. If the SEC and B10 want more teams from any conference, they will get them despite B12 exit fees. You're right that the B1G or SEC could take anyone they want from the B12 (or PAC). The B12's stability is somewhat counterintuitive. It's stable because it's unlikely that the B1G or SEC are going to try to take anyone else. The threat of the B1G taking the most attractive PAC teams is why that league is threatened right now. On 9/2/2022 at 3:30 PM, Jack Bauer said: Alright gang, lets close it up in here. New playoff format means no new expansion. Everyone have a good life, see you on the other side. Of course you post that we need to close it up here just before I post a long response to @utenation 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pelado Posted September 2, 2022 Share Posted September 2, 2022 On 9/2/2022 at 3:53 PM, utenation said: I”m done looking at Bradshaw’s numbers and opinions. I’ve made many arguments on why. The point is dead. Moving on. Ignorance is bliss. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
utenation Posted September 2, 2022 Share Posted September 2, 2022 On 9/2/2022 at 3:55 PM, Pelado said: Ignorance is bliss. You can call it what you want. Maybe you like to swallow the info from a part time blogger with zero support of his claims other than his opinion and a small snippet saying where he got data but I just can’t do it. Nor do I have the patience to read posts that read like a 300 page book. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
utenation Posted September 2, 2022 Share Posted September 2, 2022 On 9/2/2022 at 3:54 PM, Pelado said: You're right that the B1G or SEC could take anyone they want from the B12 (or PAC). The B12's stability is somewhat counterintuitive. It's stable because it's unlikely that the B1G or SEC are going to try to take anyone else. The threat of the B1G taking the most attractive PAC teams is why that league is threatened right now. So to summarize, the conferences I mentioned can and will do whatever they want. I don't think anything in realignment is stable right now. And you have no clue what conference leadership is saying in back rooms or in board meetings not for the public's eyes or ears. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mano Posted September 2, 2022 Share Posted September 2, 2022 It does seem that the 12 team playoff would reduce the chances of any current P5 conference expanding with G5 teams as they are all almost guaranteed a slice of the playoff pie that they won't want to share. 1 Quote I'm a desperate man Send lawyers, guns, and money The shit has hit the fan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...