(02-18-2012 02:44 PM)SuperFlyBCat Wrote:  Houston and Texas in general is highly populated.

Houston-USM outdrew Texas-Baylor (with a Heisman candidate) on the same day in the Houston DMA 10.6 to 8.2. There are UT and BU alums in Houston; there may be 27 USM alums here. A week earlier, amazingly, the Texas-Texas A&M got a 7.9 rating in Houston.

What I think younger people don't realize is that, for the most part, Houston and Texas were #1 and #2 in the state from the mid-60s through the early 90s. Houston has had five Final Four teams, about five times as many as any old SWC school. If UH gets it going again like in the 70s when the school had almost annual Top 20 finishes from 66-79 and five Top 10 rankings from '73-'90 (along with a Lombardi Award and a Heisman Trophy), and if Boise could keep it up along with good Big East programs like Rutgers, USF, etc., the league should be head and shoulders above the "Alliance" or any conferences outside the big six.

(02-18-2012 03:12 PM)Shasta77 Wrote:  

(02-18-2012 02:44 PM)SuperFlyBCat Wrote:  Houston and Texas in general is highly populated.

Houston-USM outdrew Texas-Baylor (with a Heisman candidate) on the same day in the Houston DMA 10.6 to 8.2. There are UT and BU alums in Houston; there may be 27 USM alums here. A week earlier, amazingly, the Texas-Texas A&M got a 7.9 rating in Houston.

What I think younger people don't realize is that, for the most part, Houston and Texas were #1 and #2 in the state from the mid-60s through the early 90s. Houston has had five Final Four teams, about five times as many as any old SWC school. If UH gets it going again like in the 70s when the school had almost annual Top 20 finishes from 66-79 and five Top 10 rankings from '73-'90 (along with a Lombardi Award and a Heisman Trophy), and if Boise could keep it up along with good Big East programs like Rutgers, USF, etc., the league should be head and shoulders above the "Alliance" or any conferences outside the big six.

As soon as Ticket City was announced I put that on my viewing calendar because I was very interested in seeing the matchup. Houston dominated.
Especially wanted to watch Houston.

You have to wonder if Big East plans on taking the Big East Network nationally. Right now ESPN produces the events and then has it on syndication for various local networks. Having their own network is where money will increase the most. The only way ACC and SEC can increase their TV contracts is through expansion. Big 10 and Pac 12 by all reports will be out earning both of them and it will only increase. Big East has always been touting media markets and Comcast does have the most cable customers. In no way does Big East have big football draws yet but the basketball content makes it lucrative enough.

(02-18-2012 03:08 PM)GeminiShamrock Wrote:  I don't think we're going anywhere for a good while after we join, quo.

Sounds good.

(02-18-2012 03:12 PM)Shasta77 Wrote:  

(02-18-2012 02:44 PM)SuperFlyBCat Wrote:  Houston and Texas in general is highly populated.

Houston-USM outdrew Texas-Baylor (with a Heisman candidate) on the same day in the Houston DMA 10.6 to 8.2. There are UT and BU alums in Houston; there may be 27 USM alums here. A week earlier, amazingly, the Texas-Texas A&M got a 7.9 rating in Houston.

What I think younger people don't realize is that, for the most part, Houston and Texas were #1 and #2 in the state from the mid-60s through the early 90s. Houston has had five Final Four teams, about five times as many as any old SWC school. If UH gets it going again like in the 70s when the school had almost annual Top 20 finishes from 66-79 and five Top 10 rankings from '73-'90 (along with a Lombardi Award and a Heisman Trophy), and if Boise could keep it up along with good Big East programs like Rutgers, USF, etc., the league should be head and shoulders above the "Alliance" or any conferences outside the big six.

To be fair, UT has been down the last few years and Baylor is a small private school. I wonder what the ratings would have been had UH not been ranked #6 in the BCS with a Heisman hyped QB? I would also add that that UH-USM game was on ABC while the A&M-UT game was on ESPN.

I think a better barometer is the 2009 season when UH played ECU in the C-USA championship game on ESPN2 without an undefeated UH team and no Heisman QB.
http://blog.chron.com/sportsmedia/2010/0...to-ponder/
Houston TV rating for Texas schools in 2009.
UT-Neb 15.7 ABC
UT-A&M 13.5 ESPN
UT-Tx Tech 10.9 ABC
UT-OU 10.8 ABC
Kan-UT 9.0 ABC
UT-Okla St 8.9 ABC
Tx Tech-UH 7.9 ESPN2
UT-Mizzou 7.7 ABC
Tx Tech-Neb 6.7 ABC
UH-ECU 4.7 ESPN2
http://blog.chron.com/sportsmedia/2009/1...h-schools/

Quote:Saturday’s most-watched game, big surprise, was the Big 12 cuticle-biter between Texas and Nebraska, which did an estimated 15.8/26 on Channel 13. Florida-Alabama on Channel 11 did an estimated 12.4/25 on Channel 11. The C-USA game between Houston and East Carolina did a 4.7 rating on ESPN2

As to your 2nd point, after the 3 out 4 SWC crowns in the late 70's, another school in the state started dominating. They reside 90 miles up the road from Houston and they might argue that UH was not dominant in the 80's or 90's

(02-18-2012 07:21 PM)jml2010 Wrote:  

(02-18-2012 03:12 PM)Shasta77 Wrote:  

(02-18-2012 02:44 PM)SuperFlyBCat Wrote:  Houston and Texas in general is highly populated.

Houston-USM outdrew Texas-Baylor (with a Heisman candidate) on the same day in the Houston DMA 10.6 to 8.2. There are UT and BU alums in Houston; there may be 27 USM alums here. A week earlier, amazingly, the Texas-Texas A&M got a 7.9 rating in Houston.

What I think younger people don't realize is that, for the most part, Houston and Texas were #1 and #2 in the state from the mid-60s through the early 90s. Houston has had five Final Four teams, about five times as many as any old SWC school. If UH gets it going again like in the 70s when the school had almost annual Top 20 finishes from 66-79 and five Top 10 rankings from '73-'90 (along with a Lombardi Award and a Heisman Trophy), and if Boise could keep it up along with good Big East programs like Rutgers, USF, etc., the league should be head and shoulders above the "Alliance" or any conferences outside the big six.

To be fair, UT has been down the last few years and Baylor is a small private school. I wonder what the ratings would have been had UH not been ranked #6 in the BCS with a Heisman hyped QB? I would also add that that UH-USM game was on ABC while the A&M-UT game was on ESPN.

I think a better barometer is the 2009 season when UH played ECU in the C-USA championship game on ESPN2 without an undefeated UH team and no Heisman QB.
http://blog.chron.com/sportsmedia/2010/0...to-ponder/
Houston TV rating for Texas schools in 2009.
UT-Neb 15.7 ABC
UT-A&M 13.5 ESPN
UT-Tx Tech 10.9 ABC
UT-OU 10.8 ABC
Kan-UT 9.0 ABC
UT-Okla St 8.9 ABC
Tx Tech-UH 7.9 ESPN2
UT-Mizzou 7.7 ABC
Tx Tech-Neb 6.7 ABC
UH-ECU 4.7 ESPN2
http://blog.chron.com/sportsmedia/2009/1...h-schools/

Quote:Saturday’s most-watched game, big surprise, was the Big 12 cuticle-biter between Texas and Nebraska, which did an estimated 15.8/26 on Channel 13. Florida-Alabama on Channel 11 did an estimated 12.4/25 on Channel 11. The C-USA game between Houston and East Carolina did a 4.7 rating on ESPN2

As to your 2nd point, after the 3 out 4 SWC crowns in the late 70's, another school in the state started dominating. They reside 90 miles up the road from Houston and they might argue that UH was not dominant in the 80's or 90's

This is kind of slanted the other way. Texas was 12-0 in the Big 12 championship game in 2009 and went on to play in the national championship game. So Im guessing they got a bit of boost in the ratings from that. What I see is a Houston team that was somewhat dormant throught the late 90s rebuilding thier football program and thier brand during the 2000's. The 2009 team followed several bowl worthy seasons and the team was beginning to rebuild its audience. Thats also part of the reason the 2011 ratings were better, the 2009 team had set the stage for the Cougars to have a higher profile. In 2011, the public had a better awareness of the squad and it was easier for them to attract more casual fans---thus they had higher ratings. Alot the rebound had to do with getting the athletic department and school administration back on the same page. There for a while we had an administration that looked at athletics like it was a useless expense item. President Khantor sees athletics as the public face of the university and a driver of student enrollment. Its a whole different mind set these days.

(02-18-2012 09:45 PM)attackfrog Wrote:  This is kind of slanted the other way. Texas was 12-0 in the Big 12 championship game in 2009 and went on to play in the national championship game. So Im guessing they got a bit of boost in the ratings from that. What I see is a Houston team that was somewhat dormant throught the late 90s rebuilding thier football program and thier brand during the 2000's. The 2009 team followed several bowl worthy seasons and the team was beginning to rebuild its audience. Thats also part of the reason the 2011 ratings were better, the 2009 team had set the stage for the Cougars to have a higher profile. In 2011, the public had a better awareness of the squad and it was easier for them to attract more casual fans---thus they had higher ratings. Alot the rebound had to do with getting the athletic department and school administration back on the same page. There for a while we had an administration that looked at athletics like it was a useless expense item. President Khantor sees athletics as the public face of the university and a driver of student enrollment. Its a whole different mind set these days.

I agree with you but I have seen a few UH poster point out this years TV ratings acting like that is the norm. I agree with you that Khator is doing good things but I wonder how this season will be without CK and a decent portion of your offense. If UH somehow makes the C-USA championship game this season with a similar 10-2 record they had in 09, will they generate the same interest the 11 team received? I think a bunch of casual football fans in Houston watched to see if UH could be a BCS buster.

Fact is when UT is good, they dominate the Houston TV market as evidenced from one of the links I posted.

(02-18-2012 09:45 PM)attackfrog Wrote:  

(02-18-2012 07:21 PM)jml2010 Wrote:  

(02-18-2012 03:12 PM)Shasta77 Wrote:  

(02-18-2012 02:44 PM)SuperFlyBCat Wrote:  Houston and Texas in general is highly populated.

Houston-USM outdrew Texas-Baylor (with a Heisman candidate) on the same day in the Houston DMA 10.6 to 8.2. There are UT and BU alums in Houston; there may be 27 USM alums here. A week earlier, amazingly, the Texas-Texas A&M got a 7.9 rating in Houston.

What I think younger people don't realize is that, for the most part, Houston and Texas were #1 and #2 in the state from the mid-60s through the early 90s. Houston has had five Final Four teams, about five times as many as any old SWC school. If UH gets it going again like in the 70s when the school had almost annual Top 20 finishes from 66-79 and five Top 10 rankings from '73-'90 (along with a Lombardi Award and a Heisman Trophy), and if Boise could keep it up along with good Big East programs like Rutgers, USF, etc., the league should be head and shoulders above the "Alliance" or any conferences outside the big six.

To be fair, UT has been down the last few years and Baylor is a small private school. I wonder what the ratings would have been had UH not been ranked #6 in the BCS with a Heisman hyped QB? I would also add that that UH-USM game was on ABC while the A&M-UT game was on ESPN.

I think a better barometer is the 2009 season when UH played ECU in the C-USA championship game on ESPN2 without an undefeated UH team and no Heisman QB.
http://blog.chron.com/sportsmedia/2010/0...to-ponder/
Houston TV rating for Texas schools in 2009.
UT-Neb 15.7 ABC
UT-A&M 13.5 ESPN
UT-Tx Tech 10.9 ABC
UT-OU 10.8 ABC
Kan-UT 9.0 ABC
UT-Okla St 8.9 ABC
Tx Tech-UH 7.9 ESPN2
UT-Mizzou 7.7 ABC
Tx Tech-Neb 6.7 ABC
UH-ECU 4.7 ESPN2
http://blog.chron.com/sportsmedia/2009/1...h-schools/

Quote:Saturday’s most-watched game, big surprise, was the Big 12 cuticle-biter between Texas and Nebraska, which did an estimated 15.8/26 on Channel 13. Florida-Alabama on Channel 11 did an estimated 12.4/25 on Channel 11. The C-USA game between Houston and East Carolina did a 4.7 rating on ESPN2

As to your 2nd point, after the 3 out 4 SWC crowns in the late 70's, another school in the state started dominating. They reside 90 miles up the road from Houston and they might argue that UH was not dominant in the 80's or 90's

This is kind of slanted the other way. Texas was 12-0 in the Big 12 championship game in 2009 and went on to play in the national championship game. So Im guessing they got a bit of boost in the ratings from that. What I see is a Houston team that was somewhat dormant throught the late 90s rebuilding thier football program and thier brand during the 2000's. The 2009 team followed several bowl worthy seasons and the team was beginning to rebuild its audience. Thats also part of the reason the 2011 ratings were better, the 2009 team had set the stage for the Cougars to have a higher profile. In 2011, the public had a better awareness of the squad and it was easier for them to attract more casual fans---thus they had higher ratings. Alot the rebound had to do with getting the athletic department and school administration back on the same page. There for a while we had an administration that looked at athletics like it was a useless expense item. President Khantor sees athletics as the public face of the university and a driver of student enrollment. Its a whole different mind set these days.

Very well said. It wouldn't suprise at all to see an even bigger eye ball/ratings increase too.

(02-18-2012 03:08 PM)GeminiShamrock Wrote:  

(02-18-2012 01:32 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(02-18-2012 10:49 AM)Cubanbull Wrote:  

(02-18-2012 10:43 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(02-18-2012 09:57 AM)UHCougar Wrote:  Okay, step up . . . if it's more than $10 million per football school, you'll agree to not post anything negative about the new Big East schools for a year.

Ok, but only if you agree that if it is less than $10m per football school you agree to not post anything positive about the new Big East schools for a year.

Ok and can we all agree to stop the incessant end of the world for Big East posts until that happens?

FWIW, i do not consider my posts to be "end of the world" because i do not believe that if what i think will happen happens - namely a $10m per football school TV deal, the end of AQ, and the loss of an automatic major-bowl tie-in for the Big East - it will be the end of the world for the Big East. We will go on as a good football conference, though i think that there is a reasonable chance that the schools that joined strictly for the AQ-status and whom are far away from our natural "East" footprint, like Boise, SDSU, Houston, and SMU, will choose to leave for their old conferences.

Houston's former conferences:

Missouri Valley - I-AA (FCS). No chance in hell we're going back to it now!
SWC - Dead. Therefore, no chance in hell.
Conference USA - Will be dead in 2013 (when we join this league, by the way) due to the merger with the MWC. So...nope.

Perhaps a future destination: Big 12 - No way in hell unless if one or two things happens: Texas leaves or the other nine schools man up and tell Texas to go f*ck itself. Even then, we may not join.

I don't think we're going anywhere for a good while after we join, quo.

I'm with you GeminiShamrock. I've said it before and I'll say it again. No way in HELL do I ever want Houston in a same conference with THE UT ever. The only one time I want Houston associated with the UT is when we (UH) are throbbing the f***k out of them on the football field period. Wow, I feel so much better now.

(02-17-2012 05:53 PM)Wilkie01 Wrote:  

(02-17-2012 01:52 PM)SF Husky Wrote:  According to this article:

http://www.cbssports.com/mcc/blogs/entry...2/34756677

Quote:In a matter of a whirlwind few months, the Big East’s hopes for a lucrative TV contract now rest with Boise State, Connecticut, Houston and Rutgers.

Those are the four most attractive Big East schools to TV, according to the analyst.

Which means Louisville will be gone in 2013.

Wilkie,

Speaking as an alum of one of the 4 biggest TV draws in the nBe, I'll see your , and raise you a .