Jump to content
Did I hear a WOOSH?

Conference Realignment thread

Recommended Posts

On 9/1/2022 at 6:20 PM, utenation said:

They should have built an indoor shuttle train

Definitely.  And the walkways as slow as hell too.  First time flying in here and getting off the plane in B gates I kept walking and walking and wondering where the hell this journey would end.  It took forever to get to the rental car section. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 9/1/2022 at 7:11 PM, Did I hear a WOOSH? said:

Is that like when people say wait til they come to Florida and see what actual 90% humidity at 95 degrees feels like?

It feels like Houston.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 9/1/2022 at 7:40 PM, Did I hear a WOOSH? said:

You’re going to have to up your game when you come over, both on the field and in your trash talk.  It’s bad.

Thats a funny one, that is...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 9/1/2022 at 7:42 PM, utenation said:

Mark my words, I won’t ever come to your stadium. 

If you do, make sure your tetanus shot is up to date.

 

All the rust, you see...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 9/1/2022 at 5:48 PM, utenation said:

So somehow this makes Wilson’s embarrassing stats better?  Utah has never been known as a QB School. Maybe we should compare number of players sent to the NFL for the last 15 years?

Btw, Tyler Huntley is a better QB as a back up free agent. I wonder if the Jets would like their money back?

Surprising that the Jets haven't traded Wilson for Huntley yet.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 9/1/2022 at 1:16 PM, Spaztecs said:

That's a geographically tight Conference. And well balanced. Would you play 9 games ? Top two in the CCG.

My dream scenario for a conference would be 9 teams. Play everybody each season and still have four out of conference games. Won't happen, though.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 9/1/2022 at 3:09 PM, AZdogFan said:

My understanding is they don't have conference-specific exit fees but they have a Grant of Media Rights agreement in place so anybody who jumps ship before that expires loses the money they'd have gotten paid out for their media buyout. 

USC/UCLA are in the clear because they're not leaving until the current one expires and definitely aren't going to be signing the new one, but anyone else who leaves after signing is going to leave a chunk of money on the table.

At this point I'm wondering if someone (or a group of someones) from the university level are sandbagging negotiations to see if an opportunity comes along.

Ding Wells GIF by YFTpodcast

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 9/1/2022 at 7:35 PM, AztecSU said:

Wilner raises some good points, but his analysis is, at best, incomplete. 

I don't expect any more movement from the PAC except for possibly adding SDSU and maybe one other team.  That leads to them getting a contract renewal that is at least comparable to what the New Big12 gets on a per-team basis.

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 9/1/2022 at 6:48 PM, Pelado said:

Wilner raises some good points, but his analysis is, at best, incomplete. 

I don't expect any more movement from the PAC except for possibly adding SDSU and maybe one other team.  That leads to them getting a contract renewal that is at least comparable to what the New Big12 gets on a per-team basis.

BYU belongs in a western conference with teams on the west coast. The best possible scenario is SDSU & BYU. And the only issues are snobbery and supposed big10 poaching in the future. That version of the PAC makes the most sense if the LA schools are gone. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 9/1/2022 at 7:48 PM, Pelado said:

Wilner raises some good points, but his analysis is, at best, incomplete. 

I don't expect any more movement from the PAC except for possibly adding SDSU and maybe one other team.  That leads to them getting a contract renewal that is at least comparable to what the New Big12 gets on a per-team basis.

So of the 5 facts he listed in the article, how are they incomplete?

or what would make this complete for the point he was making?

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 9/1/2022 at 7:54 PM, utenation said:

So of the 5 facts he listed in the article, how are they incomplete?

or what would make this complete for the point he was making?

There are several ways, but I'll only address a few.  The PAC ratings advantage comes largely from their games being unopposed on better-rated networks during the late broadcast window.  Going forward, though, the PAC will not have exclusive access to the late broadcast window.  The Big 10 will be able to put matchups there when USC and/or UCLA host home games.  The Big 12 can also place games in the 10 or 10:30 ET window with BYU home games which are likely to be of greater interest than the games BYU was hosting during independence.  So their exclusivity on that broadcast window will likely be lessened.

Wilner makes a good point that Oklahoma and Texas have been bigger for ratings than USC and UCLA have been.  Oklahoma has been in the mix for conference championships every year for...a really long time.  Texas hasn't but still draws eyeballs.  They're a big loss for the Big 12.  USC has been a quiet giant for the last several years.  They are a big ratings draw when they're great, but they haven't been that great for a while.  UCLA is not that big of a deal in football.

Since neither UCLA nor USC have been fixtures in the conference title race (nor the national conversation), their ratings haven't been that great the last few years relative to Oklahoma/Texas.  But one of the things that drives ratings (not necessarily the most important) is how well a team is doing in the current season.  An undefeated Utah is likely to garner more viewership than a .500 Utah.  A Utah that is in play for a conference title will get better viewership than one that has been statistically eliminated from the conference title conversation.  That has been the reality in the PAC the last several years since USC/UCLA have been mediocre.  Meanwhile, in the Big 12, Oklahoma has been conference champs 6 of the last 7 seasons.  Once they're gone, somebody else will be in the mix for the conference championship, which will provide a boost to their ratings (though certainly not to Oklahoma-rating levels).

It's funny to me that Wilner fixates on the time zones as an advantage to the PAC:

Quote

 

Also, the Big 12 has a competition problem. Based in the Central Time Zone, its games often are head-to-head against the SEC and Big Ten.

But that’s precisely why the Pac-12 has value to the likes of Fox and ESPN. It can fill the competition-free broadcast windows with matchups that appeal to the 75 million people in the Mountain and Pacific time zones.

 

In recent years, the PAC has been considering early morning kickoffs (9 am?) so that they can compete in those broadcast windows that Wilner claims are a problem for the Big 12. The Big 12 has been achieving ratings similar to the PAC while competing head-to-head with the SEC and the Big Ten

The problem with the PAC being the only game on TV in the late-night broadcast window (which they won't anymore) for those 75 million people in the Mountain and Pacific time zones is that those 75 million don't care about football nearly as much as the 250+ million people in the country who live to the east.  The PAC has schools in DMAs that are much bigger than the Big 12 schools, but the percentage of people who care about college football in those DMAs is much smaller than the percentage of people who care about college football in most Big 12 markets.

I'm sure I'm forgetting other ways in which Wilner's analysis is incomplete, but that's probably good enough for now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 9/1/2022 at 9:01 PM, Pelado said:

There are several ways, but I'll only address a few.  The PAC ratings advantage comes largely from their games being unopposed on better-rated networks during the late broadcast window.  Going forward, though, the PAC will not have exclusive access to the late broadcast window.  The Big 10 will be able to put matchups there when USC and/or UCLA host home games.  The Big 12 can also place games in the 10 or 10:30 ET window with BYU home games which are likely to be of greater interest than the games BYU was hosting during independence.  So their exclusivity on that broadcast window will likely be lessened.

Wilner makes a good point that Oklahoma and Texas have been bigger for ratings than USC and UCLA have been.  Oklahoma has been in the mix for conference championships every year for...a really long time.  Texas hasn't but still draws eyeballs.  They're a big loss for the Big 12.  USC has been a quiet giant for the last several years.  They are a big ratings draw when they're great, but they haven't been that great for a while.  UCLA is not that big of a deal in football.

Since neither UCLA nor USC have been fixtures in the conference title race (nor the national conversation), their ratings haven't been that great the last few years relative to Oklahoma/Texas.  But one of the things that drives ratings (not necessarily the most important) is how well a team is doing in the current season.  An undefeated Utah is likely to garner more viewership than a .500 Utah.  A Utah that is in play for a conference title will get better viewership than one that has been statistically eliminated from the conference title conversation.  That has been the reality in the PAC the last several years since USC/UCLA have been mediocre.  Meanwhile, in the Big 12, Oklahoma has been conference champs 6 of the last 7 seasons.  Once they're gone, somebody else will be in the mix for the conference championship, which will provide a boost to their ratings (though certainly not to Oklahoma-rating levels).

It's funny to me that Wilner fixates on the time zones as an advantage to the PAC:

In recent years, the PAC has been considering early morning kickoffs (9 am?) so that they can compete in those broadcast windows that Wilner claims are a problem for the Big 12. The Big 12 has been achieving ratings similar to the PAC while competing head-to-head with the SEC and the Big Ten

The problem with the PAC being the only game on TV in the late-night broadcast window (which they won't anymore) for those 75 million people in the Mountain and Pacific time zones is that those 75 million don't care about football nearly as much as the 250+ million people in the country who live to the east.  The PAC has schools in DMAs that are much bigger than the Big 12 schools, but the percentage of people who care about college football in those DMAs is much smaller than the percentage of people who care about college football in most Big 12 markets.

I'm sure I'm forgetting other ways in which Wilner's analysis is incomplete, but that's probably good enough for now.

Wow. This is a huge book. I agree with you on the point that the late night window won’t be competition free based on movement. 
 

But unless you can look at data in the same time window for both conferences, I don’t find his facts incomplete. I’m not sure there’s enough good comparison data here. 

And I think you already agreed that TX/OU loss was a bigger impact(Wilner’s  point) on ratings than the PAC despite your many speculation hypotheticals. 
 

Overall I think Wilner was accurate with proving his point.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.



×
×
  • Create New...