(11-11-2013 04:14 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(11-11-2013 03:57 PM)jaminandjachin Wrote:  

(11-11-2013 03:29 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(11-11-2013 03:20 PM)jaminandjachin Wrote:  

(11-11-2013 03:14 PM)JRsec Wrote:  Fair enough, an observation error on my part, but to look at the percentage of actual viewers out of the total potential viewers is important. Then to compare that to long term trends is revealing. One of the reasons the SEC and Big 10 are likely to be more aggressive in future expansion is because both already optimize their potential market fairly well. Therefore for them the issue is new product. While the ACC has certainly been aggressive in realignment their greatest upside is within their existing footprint. Their issue is how to energize those who aren't watching. What I don't know about the ACC is whether their long term data indicates a static percentage of viewers, a declining one, an ascending one, or one that has peaks and valleys. The PAC statistics long term don't indicate much upside potential in spite of their population. Their issues do seem to be more cultural. I'm not sure that is true for the ACC and the answer to that would seem to me to be indicative of their ability to attain parity with the SEC / Big 10, or not.

Previous reports has shown the ACC being third...as you stated earlier. That is with mediocre football. You have to assume if the quality of play improves the viewership will also improve. Miami and FSU are returning to their glory. Louisville will be a nice improvement over Maryland. The deal with Notre Dame will increase viewership as well.

While I tend to agree with you in principal I would still like to see the long range trend. It is also going to be somewhat difficult to measure the N.D. impact because of the arrangement reached. Do you only count the ACC games they play? If so that discounts ambient viewers from the Irish that will take an interest in ACC games not involving the Irish. Right now a resurgent F.S.U. is the cure to a limited extent. I'm not sold on Miami for a number of reasons.

I see ACC interest being increased by Virginia Tech's ability to return to form, by B.C. just finding a way to become enough of a factor to draw a higher percentage from their fickle market, and by the Tar Heels and Wolfpack actually putting a product that worth something on the field. To have the most successful school in the State of North Carolina be a small private (Duke) is not optimizing the market even though the Blue Devils make for a good story.

Recovering respectability at Florida State helps, but delivering Virginia and North Carolina viewers something to watch would help a lot more.

True....UNC will be there soon enough....

Why no confidence in Miami?

On a football level they are improving thanks to a good coach, but for the product they've put on the field they have serious attendance issues which I attribute to a dramatic shift in culture that has taken place in their region since the early 80's and the heyday of the Canes. I also attribute this decline to the rise in popularity of the football at South Florida and UCF. As Broward and Dade become more Hispanic culturally I think the locus for football in South Florida is shifting slightly North. This won't affect Miami basketball or baseball, but it will continue to affect their football. Add to that, the issue over a small private university not having a large local alumni base upon which to build the kinds of crowds that they need and I think long term this issue will only grow worse.

I have nothing against Miami and they are strong academically, but demographics are a limiting factor in my opinion. We'll see.

I don't understand why Miami attendance issues are a problem. Miami has always had attendance issues even when they were winning championships. Miami is a small school. They aren't made for filling a 75k stadium for each home game. However, Miami is made for TV when they are good.

(11-11-2013 04:51 PM)jaminandjachin Wrote:  

(11-11-2013 04:14 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(11-11-2013 03:57 PM)jaminandjachin Wrote:  

(11-11-2013 03:29 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(11-11-2013 03:20 PM)jaminandjachin Wrote:  Previous reports has shown the ACC being third...as you stated earlier. That is with mediocre football. You have to assume if the quality of play improves the viewership will also improve. Miami and FSU are returning to their glory. Louisville will be a nice improvement over Maryland. The deal with Notre Dame will increase viewership as well.

While I tend to agree with you in principal I would still like to see the long range trend. It is also going to be somewhat difficult to measure the N.D. impact because of the arrangement reached. Do you only count the ACC games they play? If so that discounts ambient viewers from the Irish that will take an interest in ACC games not involving the Irish. Right now a resurgent F.S.U. is the cure to a limited extent. I'm not sold on Miami for a number of reasons.

I see ACC interest being increased by Virginia Tech's ability to return to form, by B.C. just finding a way to become enough of a factor to draw a higher percentage from their fickle market, and by the Tar Heels and Wolfpack actually putting a product that worth something on the field. To have the most successful school in the State of North Carolina be a small private (Duke) is not optimizing the market even though the Blue Devils make for a good story.

Recovering respectability at Florida State helps, but delivering Virginia and North Carolina viewers something to watch would help a lot more.

True....UNC will be there soon enough....

Why no confidence in Miami?

On a football level they are improving thanks to a good coach, but for the product they've put on the field they have serious attendance issues which I attribute to a dramatic shift in culture that has taken place in their region since the early 80's and the heyday of the Canes. I also attribute this decline to the rise in popularity of the football at South Florida and UCF. As Broward and Dade become more Hispanic culturally I think the locus for football in South Florida is shifting slightly North. This won't affect Miami basketball or baseball, but it will continue to affect their football. Add to that, the issue over a small private university not having a large local alumni base upon which to build the kinds of crowds that they need and I think long term this issue will only grow worse.

I have nothing against Miami and they are strong academically, but demographics are a limiting factor in my opinion. We'll see.

I don't understand why Miami attendance issues are a problem. Miami has always had attendance issues even when they were winning championships. Miami is a small school. They aren't made for filling a 75k stadium for each home game. However, Miami is made for TV when they are good.

I agree with you. But that's where changing demographics are hurting them and viable South Florida and Central Florida football alternatives are dipping into the talent pool in the "South Florida" region. Throw in FIU and FAU and the area now has many alternatives to the U that weren't really a factor in the 80's. F.S.U. and Florida will still get their share of the kids too. As the culture shifts in Miami high school talent pools reflect some of that change as well. So more competitors and a somewhat diminishing talent pool is taking a toll (but I'm not saying there isn't sufficient talent in the region just more competition for less overall talent).

I will agree once I see Miami no longer recruiting at an elite level. The fact they've had really good recruiting classes even with the specter of NCAA sanctions hanging over them speaks volumes.

(11-11-2013 04:59 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(11-11-2013 04:51 PM)jaminandjachin Wrote:  

(11-11-2013 04:14 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(11-11-2013 03:57 PM)jaminandjachin Wrote:  

(11-11-2013 03:29 PM)JRsec Wrote:  While I tend to agree with you in principal I would still like to see the long range trend. It is also going to be somewhat difficult to measure the N.D. impact because of the arrangement reached. Do you only count the ACC games they play? If so that discounts ambient viewers from the Irish that will take an interest in ACC games not involving the Irish. Right now a resurgent F.S.U. is the cure to a limited extent. I'm not sold on Miami for a number of reasons.

I see ACC interest being increased by Virginia Tech's ability to return to form, by B.C. just finding a way to become enough of a factor to draw a higher percentage from their fickle market, and by the Tar Heels and Wolfpack actually putting a product that worth something on the field. To have the most successful school in the State of North Carolina be a small private (Duke) is not optimizing the market even though the Blue Devils make for a good story.

Recovering respectability at Florida State helps, but delivering Virginia and North Carolina viewers something to watch would help a lot more.

True....UNC will be there soon enough....

Why no confidence in Miami?

On a football level they are improving thanks to a good coach, but for the product they've put on the field they have serious attendance issues which I attribute to a dramatic shift in culture that has taken place in their region since the early 80's and the heyday of the Canes. I also attribute this decline to the rise in popularity of the football at South Florida and UCF. As Broward and Dade become more Hispanic culturally I think the locus for football in South Florida is shifting slightly North. This won't affect Miami basketball or baseball, but it will continue to affect their football. Add to that, the issue over a small private university not having a large local alumni base upon which to build the kinds of crowds that they need and I think long term this issue will only grow worse.

I have nothing against Miami and they are strong academically, but demographics are a limiting factor in my opinion. We'll see.

I don't understand why Miami attendance issues are a problem. Miami has always had attendance issues even when they were winning championships. Miami is a small school. They aren't made for filling a 75k stadium for each home game. However, Miami is made for TV when they are good.

I agree with you. But that's where changing demographics are hurting them and viable South Florida and Central Florida football alternatives are dipping into the talent pool in the "South Florida" region. Throw in FIU and FAU and the area now has many alternatives to the U that weren't really a factor in the 80's. F.S.U. and Florida will still get their share of the kids too. As the culture shifts in Miami high school talent pools reflect some of that change as well. So more competitors and a somewhat diminishing talent pool is taking a toll (but I'm not saying there isn't sufficient talent in the region just more competition for less overall talent).

FIU and FAU? Are you serious? Changing demographics of Miami? The % of Florida's Hispanic population that lives in South Florida has actually decreased by 8% over the last decade. The largest growth in Hispanic population has been in the I4 corridor.

(11-11-2013 06:08 PM)CrazyPaco Wrote:  

(11-11-2013 04:59 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(11-11-2013 04:51 PM)jaminandjachin Wrote:  

(11-11-2013 04:14 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(11-11-2013 03:57 PM)jaminandjachin Wrote:  True....UNC will be there soon enough....

Why no confidence in Miami?

On a football level they are improving thanks to a good coach, but for the product they've put on the field they have serious attendance issues which I attribute to a dramatic shift in culture that has taken place in their region since the early 80's and the heyday of the Canes. I also attribute this decline to the rise in popularity of the football at South Florida and UCF. As Broward and Dade become more Hispanic culturally I think the locus for football in South Florida is shifting slightly North. This won't affect Miami basketball or baseball, but it will continue to affect their football. Add to that, the issue over a small private university not having a large local alumni base upon which to build the kinds of crowds that they need and I think long term this issue will only grow worse.

I have nothing against Miami and they are strong academically, but demographics are a limiting factor in my opinion. We'll see.

I don't understand why Miami attendance issues are a problem. Miami has always had attendance issues even when they were winning championships. Miami is a small school. They aren't made for filling a 75k stadium for each home game. However, Miami is made for TV when they are good.

I agree with you. But that's where changing demographics are hurting them and viable South Florida and Central Florida football alternatives are dipping into the talent pool in the "South Florida" region. Throw in FIU and FAU and the area now has many alternatives to the U that weren't really a factor in the 80's. F.S.U. and Florida will still get their share of the kids too. As the culture shifts in Miami high school talent pools reflect some of that change as well. So more competitors and a somewhat diminishing talent pool is taking a toll (but I'm not saying there isn't sufficient talent in the region just more competition for less overall talent).

FIU and FAU? Are you serious? Changing demographics of Miami? The % of Florida's Hispanic population that lives in South Florida has actually decreased by 8% over the last decade.

The time span quoted was the past 3 decades. I separated FIU and FAU from UCF and USF as well. The point remains there are more FBS teams recruiting the area in state than 30 years ago and the demographics versus the 1980's has changed.

(11-11-2013 06:15 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(11-11-2013 06:08 PM)CrazyPaco Wrote:  

(11-11-2013 04:59 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(11-11-2013 04:51 PM)jaminandjachin Wrote:  

(11-11-2013 04:14 PM)JRsec Wrote:  On a football level they are improving thanks to a good coach, but for the product they've put on the field they have serious attendance issues which I attribute to a dramatic shift in culture that has taken place in their region since the early 80's and the heyday of the Canes. I also attribute this decline to the rise in popularity of the football at South Florida and UCF. As Broward and Dade become more Hispanic culturally I think the locus for football in South Florida is shifting slightly North. This won't affect Miami basketball or baseball, but it will continue to affect their football. Add to that, the issue over a small private university not having a large local alumni base upon which to build the kinds of crowds that they need and I think long term this issue will only grow worse.

I have nothing against Miami and they are strong academically, but demographics are a limiting factor in my opinion. We'll see.

I don't understand why Miami attendance issues are a problem. Miami has always had attendance issues even when they were winning championships. Miami is a small school. They aren't made for filling a 75k stadium for each home game. However, Miami is made for TV when they are good.

I agree with you. But that's where changing demographics are hurting them and viable South Florida and Central Florida football alternatives are dipping into the talent pool in the "South Florida" region. Throw in FIU and FAU and the area now has many alternatives to the U that weren't really a factor in the 80's. F.S.U. and Florida will still get their share of the kids too. As the culture shifts in Miami high school talent pools reflect some of that change as well. So more competitors and a somewhat diminishing talent pool is taking a toll (but I'm not saying there isn't sufficient talent in the region just more competition for less overall talent).

FIU and FAU? Are you serious? Changing demographics of Miami? The % of Florida's Hispanic population that lives in South Florida has actually decreased by 8% over the last decade.

The time span quoted was the past 3 decades. I separated FIU and FAU from UCF and USF as well. The point remains there are more FBS teams recruiting the area in state than 30 years ago and the demographics versus the 1980's has changed.

Have you actually spent any time in South Florida? Miami has never had anything but a terrible fan base with a bunch of bandwagon jumpers when they win. FIU and FAU are complete non-factors. Your assumed demographic shift is happening more so in UCF and USF's territory than in Miami's. Increasing hispanic population hasn't impacted football in Texas or Arizona or Southern California one bit, nor anywhere else in the South.

(11-11-2013 06:24 PM)CrazyPaco Wrote:  

(11-11-2013 06:15 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(11-11-2013 06:08 PM)CrazyPaco Wrote:  

(11-11-2013 04:59 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(11-11-2013 04:51 PM)jaminandjachin Wrote:  I don't understand why Miami attendance issues are a problem. Miami has always had attendance issues even when they were winning championships. Miami is a small school. They aren't made for filling a 75k stadium for each home game. However, Miami is made for TV when they are good.

I agree with you. But that's where changing demographics are hurting them and viable South Florida and Central Florida football alternatives are dipping into the talent pool in the "South Florida" region. Throw in FIU and FAU and the area now has many alternatives to the U that weren't really a factor in the 80's. F.S.U. and Florida will still get their share of the kids too. As the culture shifts in Miami high school talent pools reflect some of that change as well. So more competitors and a somewhat diminishing talent pool is taking a toll (but I'm not saying there isn't sufficient talent in the region just more competition for less overall talent).

FIU and FAU? Are you serious? Changing demographics of Miami? The % of Florida's Hispanic population that lives in South Florida has actually decreased by 8% over the last decade.

The time span quoted was the past 3 decades. I separated FIU and FAU from UCF and USF as well. The point remains there are more FBS teams recruiting the area in state than 30 years ago and the demographics versus the 1980's has changed.

Have you actually spent any time in South Florida? Miami has never had anything but a terrible fan base with a bunch of bandwagon jumpers when they win. FIU and FAU are complete non-factors. Your assumed demographic shift is happening more so in UCF and USF's territory than in Miami's. Increasing hispanic population hasn't impacted football in Texas or Arizona or Southern California one bit, nor anywhere else in the South.

70's & 80's, yes. As to the fan base I agree. As to UCF & USF I haven't been down there but twice in the last 20 years and then just briefly. As to Texas, Arizona, and Southern California their hispanic migration is mostly from Mexico with other Central American influences which is quite different from Cuban and Haitian culture. Puerto Rican culture blends pretty well wherever in the U.S. they go and like the Mexicans and Mexican-Americans adapt quickly blending their cultures with those of the U.S. states they call home. Miami has always been different in that regard. And I don't see that as a bad thing, I just see it for what it is, different. But Miami is a mix of a low percentage of native Floridians, retired people from the Northeast, Cubans, Haitians and others. In Texas, Arizona, and Southern California the Hispanic/Mexican influence is more native than the Anglo presence and it is the Anlgos who over two hundred years have blended their cultures with those native Hispanics who are now their neighbors. I lived in Texas a while too and the influence both ways was evident. I have no reason to doubt the same is true in Arizona and Southern California.

But as far as Miami returning to prominence, I just don't foresee a sustained run for them like they had through the 80's, for part of the 90's and then again early this century. So as far as the Canes returning to who they were in their glory years I don't think the recipe is there as strongly as it once was for them to draw upon as they once did. And that is my opinion.

(11-11-2013 07:57 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(11-11-2013 06:24 PM)CrazyPaco Wrote:  

(11-11-2013 06:15 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(11-11-2013 06:08 PM)CrazyPaco Wrote:  

(11-11-2013 04:59 PM)JRsec Wrote:  I agree with you. But that's where changing demographics are hurting them and viable South Florida and Central Florida football alternatives are dipping into the talent pool in the "South Florida" region. Throw in FIU and FAU and the area now has many alternatives to the U that weren't really a factor in the 80's. F.S.U. and Florida will still get their share of the kids too. As the culture shifts in Miami high school talent pools reflect some of that change as well. So more competitors and a somewhat diminishing talent pool is taking a toll (but I'm not saying there isn't sufficient talent in the region just more competition for less overall talent).

FIU and FAU? Are you serious? Changing demographics of Miami? The % of Florida's Hispanic population that lives in South Florida has actually decreased by 8% over the last decade.

The time span quoted was the past 3 decades. I separated FIU and FAU from UCF and USF as well. The point remains there are more FBS teams recruiting the area in state than 30 years ago and the demographics versus the 1980's has changed.

Have you actually spent any time in South Florida? Miami has never had anything but a terrible fan base with a bunch of bandwagon jumpers when they win. FIU and FAU are complete non-factors. Your assumed demographic shift is happening more so in UCF and USF's territory than in Miami's. Increasing hispanic population hasn't impacted football in Texas or Arizona or Southern California one bit, nor anywhere else in the South.

70's & 80's, yes. As to the fan base I agree. As to UCF & USF I haven't been down there but twice in the last 20 years and then just briefly. As to Texas, Arizona, and Southern California their hispanic migration is mostly from Mexico with other Central American influences which is quite different from Cuban and Haitian culture. Puerto Rican culture blends pretty well wherever in the U.S. they go and like the Mexicans and Mexican-Americans adapt quickly blending their cultures with those of the U.S. states they call home. Miami has always been different in that regard. And I don't see that as a bad thing, I just see it for what it is, different. But Miami is a mix of a low percentage of native Floridians, retired people from the Northeast, Cubans, Haitians and others. In Texas, Arizona, and Southern California the Hispanic/Mexican influence is more native than the Anglo presence and it is the Anlgos who over two hundred years have blended their cultures with those native Hispanics who are now their neighbors. I lived in Texas a while too and the influence both ways was evident. I have no reason to doubt the same is true in Arizona and Southern California.

But as far as Miami returning to prominence, I just don't foresee a sustained run for them like they had through the 80's, for part of the 90's and then again early this century. So as far as the Canes returning to who they were in their glory years I don't think the recipe is there as strongly as it once was for them to draw upon as they once did. And that is my opinion.

Wow, I don't even know where to start to respond, not that it is probably worth it.

Whether Miami returning to prominence again will have nothing to do with your demographical assumptions.

Well, here is a link of the TV ratings for games so far... someone else can parse it. I just glanced at it, but didn't get the feeling the Big 12 was doing all that great. Maybe a harder look would show otherwise.

http://www.sportsmediawatch.com/college-...v-ratings/

Most of the time the Big 12's biggest game is Texas/Oklahoma tv wise. Well FSU/Clem and FSU/Miami both outdrew that game.

(11-11-2013 02:13 PM)jaminandjachin Wrote:  

(11-11-2013 10:33 AM)john01992 Wrote:  i know that the b12 has an impressive per game average thats 3rd behind only the SEC & b10. but how legit are those numbers? since 2 of the 10 teams are OU/TX that means 40% of all b12 games have one of those teams playing and im just curious if its just a case of ou/ut driving up the numbers

I'm curious to see where this data is. How is the Big 12 third?

They picked up West Virginia...

(11-11-2013 09:26 PM)Otacon Wrote:  

(11-11-2013 02:13 PM)jaminandjachin Wrote:  

(11-11-2013 10:33 AM)john01992 Wrote:  i know that the b12 has an impressive per game average thats 3rd behind only the SEC & b10. but how legit are those numbers? since 2 of the 10 teams are OU/TX that means 40% of all b12 games have one of those teams playing and im just curious if its just a case of ou/ut driving up the numbers

I'm curious to see where this data is. How is the Big 12 third?

They picked up West Virginia...

I don't think the B12 ratings for this year are going to be very impressive. Oklahoma and Baylor suffered the FS1 treatment that has been screwing the PAC this year. Biggest B12 conference game of the year and the ratings were so low they didn't even mention them in this article:

http://www.sportsmediawatch.com/2013/11/...rd-strong/

I thought I saw that the OU/Baylor rating was 1.5, but I can't seem to find a site to confirm that now.

(11-11-2013 05:13 PM)jaminandjachin Wrote:  I will agree once I see Miami no longer recruiting at an elite level. The fact they've had really good recruiting classes even with the specter of NCAA sanctions hanging over them speaks volumes.

Yes, this is critical.

We talk about the "upside" of various programs constantly here, yet there seems to be a lot of people down on the long-term prospects of Miami, which I don't quite understand. As you've noted, even with mediocre coaches and sanctions, the Canes are *still* pulling in elite recruiting classes.

Forget about the upside. The *floor* for Miami is that they have the best location for recruiting of any school in the country. Period. Better than Texas. Better than USC. Better than in-state competitor Florida. They are not merely located in South Florida in the way that FIU and FAU are (which is a grave mistake that people make in thinking that those schools' locations are any way comparable to Miami's location just because they're in the same metro area). Miami (the school) is what a 17 or 18-year old top recruit's idealized and romanticized version of what living in Miami (the metro area) is - a gorgeous campus in an upscale neighborhood with beautiful people walking around and a short drive from the beach. Even USC is plopped down in the middle of South Central LA, so just imagine what USC would be like if it was in UCLA's neighborhood - that's essentially what Miami has.

Both the abundance of football talent that already lives in the southern half of Florida along with nationally-recognized recruits have continuously bought into that vision even in the down times for the Canes. Miami can *always* sell that vision well and that's something that isn't ever going to change. That vision is already incredibly intoxicating for a lot of "normal" young people, so just put yourselves in the shoes of a 17-year old hotshot recruit that hears tales of how Canes in the past were very literally the kings of South Beach during their times at the school, which trumps any other possible "Big Man on Campus" scenario. Plus, it doesn't hurt that even in a down period, Miami still excels at what most recruits' ultimate dream is: getting drafted in the NFL.

As a result, I think a lot of people very mistakenly underrate Miami. While their core fan base is fairweather and doesn't show up for games (just as the city of Miami overall is fairweather and doesn't show up for games for all of its sports teams), their national TV value is as high as anyone not named Notre Dame. Look at the list of the highest-rated ESPN telecasts of all-time and you see that Miami dominates the list. Casual sports fans still gravitate toward games that Miami is playing in and, in this world, that TV value means more than attendance. Sure, it's great to have both a lot of TV value and high attendance like many SEC and Big Ten schools do, but when push comes to shove, the TV value that Miami nationally has is a LOT harder to develop than selling tickets locally. When Miami is rolling, they can scoop up talent like no other school in the country is able to do. I have a heck of a lot more faith in the "upside" of Miami than any of the schools that are continuously touted as sleeping giants around here.

(11-12-2013 10:49 AM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  

(11-11-2013 05:13 PM)jaminandjachin Wrote:  I will agree once I see Miami no longer recruiting at an elite level. The fact they've had really good recruiting classes even with the specter of NCAA sanctions hanging over them speaks volumes.

Yes, this is critical.

We talk about the "upside" of various programs constantly here, yet there seems to be a lot of people down on the long-term prospects of Miami, which I don't quite understand. As you've noted, even with mediocre coaches and sanctions, the Canes are *still* pulling in elite recruiting classes.

Forget about the upside. The *floor* for Miami is that they have the best location for recruiting of any school in the country. Period. Better than Texas. Better than USC. Better than in-state competitor Florida. They are not merely located in South Florida in the way that FIU and FAU are (which is a grave mistake that people make in thinking that those schools' locations are any way comparable to Miami's location just because they're in the same metro area). Miami (the school) is what a 17 or 18-year old top recruit's idealized and romanticized version of what living in Miami (the metro area) is - a gorgeous campus in an upscale neighborhood with beautiful people walking around and a short drive from the beach. Even USC is plopped down in the middle of South Central LA, so just imagine what USC would be like if it was in UCLA's neighborhood - that's essentially what Miami has.

Both the abundance of football talent that already lives in the southern half of Florida along with nationally-recognized recruits have continuously bought into that vision even in the down times for the Canes. Miami can *always* sell that vision well and that's something that isn't ever going to change. That vision is already incredibly intoxicating for a lot of "normal" young people, so just put yourselves in the shoes of a 17-year old hotshot recruit that hears tales of how Canes in the past were very literally the kings of South Beach during their times at the school, which trumps any other possible "Big Man on Campus" scenario. Plus, it doesn't hurt that even in a down period, Miami still excels at what most recruits' ultimate dream is: getting drafted in the NFL.

As a result, I think a lot of people very mistakenly underrate Miami. While their core fan base is fairweather and doesn't show up for games (just as the city of Miami overall is fairweather and doesn't show up for games for all of its sports teams), their national TV value is as high as anyone not named Notre Dame. Look at the list of the highest-rated ESPN telecasts of all-time and you see that Miami dominates the list. Casual sports fans still gravitate toward games that Miami is playing in and, in this world, that TV value means more than attendance. Sure, it's great to have both a lot of TV value and high attendance like many SEC and Big Ten schools do, but when push comes to shove, the TV value that Miami nationally has is a LOT harder to develop than selling tickets locally. When Miami is rolling, they can scoop up talent like no other school in the country is able to do. I have a heck of a lot more faith in the "upside" of Miami than any of the schools that are continuously touted as sleeping giants around here.

Frank your optimism is not born out with the data. Miami which first played football in 1936 had intermittent and sporadic success from 1936 until the 1980's, a decade they would dominate in many ways winning 3 of their AP #1 finishes in that decade alone followed closely by another in 91. It would be a decade before they would attain that level of success again. 3 of those top finishes came as independents, 2 as members of the Big East, but the highest finish they have been able to manage in the ACC came in their first year (2004) when they finished 11th. They've finished ranked in the top 20 (or 25) twice since then with 17th being the next highest finish. They might attain that this year but I doubt it. The dominance of the Hurricane football program is a brief anomaly in their 77 year history as the bulk of the domination spanned one 10 year period under two great coaches.

The last dozen years have been a return to the 45 years prior to 1981 with a few brief and random high finishes dotting those 4 and a half decades. While I'm not disparaging the Hurricanes which have been better than average for most of their 77 years they are still, outside of that brilliant decade of teams, simply an average football program and while Golden is a really good young coach only a horrific Florida team's opening loss elevated the expectations of this program this year. Virginia Tech rang home the reality of those inflated expectations quite emphatically last weekend. Maybe Golden gets it done, but the history of the program since joining the ACC seems to indicate otherwise. And, outside of that golden decade, the rest of their history indicates otherwise as well.

As to demographics we'll see what the future brings. There are many changes in demographics outside of Miami that will impact them along with many other U.S. cities.

If Alabama, Oklahoma, U.S.C., Texas, or Ohio State had only been great for 1 ten year span in their storied histories, they wouldn't be storied.

Television may drive the value these days, but networks don't like empty seats either. Miami is a great school but relatively small as a private school and alumni participation is a factor. I just don't see the tremendous upside that some of you see. What I do see is a return to pre 1981 numbers which for 45 years prior and, with the exception of 2001, the 22 years following have supported.

(11-11-2013 10:49 AM)bullet Wrote:  Take out Alabama's and Johnny autograph's games last year and the SEC ratings were back with everyone else. Take out FSU and Miami and the ACC ratings are not much better than the AAC. Take out Ohio St, Michigan and Nebraska and the Big 10 is pretty bad too. What do you think happens to the Pac 12 ratings w/o USC and Oregon? These types of arguments are just stupid.

I don't think it's stupid so much as it's just making a point not usually intended by the people who bring the subject up. The reality is that TV ratings are driving by a handful of schools. It's not the conference that matters; it's the school. USC, Bama, Ohio State, Michigan, Florida, Texas, Oklahoma, Florida State, etc.

There are probably 20 or so schools that really move the needle no matter how well they are playing. After that, it's just a question of who is good and who isn't.

(11-12-2013 03:49 PM)JRsec Wrote:  The last dozen years have been a return to the 45 years prior to 1981 with a few brief and random high finishes dotting those 4 and a half decades. While I'm not disparaging the Hurricanes which have been better than average for most of their 77 years they are still, outside of that brilliant decade of teams, simply an average football program and while Golden is a really good young coach only a horrific Florida team's opening loss elevated the expectations of this program this year. Virginia Tech rang home the reality of those inflated expectations quite emphatically last weekend. Maybe Golden gets it done, but the history of the program since joining the ACC seems to indicate otherwise. And, outside of that golden decade, the rest of their history indicates otherwise as well.

I tend to agree with you on the Miami situation. Miami had a freakish ten-year run that will echo forever. But that doesn't mean they can repeat it. If it were all about the campus, then Pepperdine would have awesome teams. The elite talent wants to get to the pros and get laid. Miami doesn't have a monopoly on any of that. And the school president only tolerates the football program AT BEST. I think that is their biggest problem now.

As someone who grew up in SoCal watching college football during Miami's glory years, I never really associated them with the glitzy Miami lifestyle. I always connect them to Vanilla Ice wearing a Miami sweatshirt in the Ice, Ice, Baby music video. A school for thugs and wannabe poseur tough guys. I disliked Notre Dame when I was young much more than I do now and even then I had to root for them against Miami.

I was a little shocked when I found out that the school itself was actually very good academically. Hard to reconcile that with the thug image of Miami that I'll probably never get over.

(11-12-2013 04:36 PM)TomThumb Wrote:  As someone who grew up in SoCal watching college football during Miami's glory years, I never really associated them with the glitzy Miami lifestyle. I always connect them to Vanilla Ice wearing a Miami sweatshirt in the Ice, Ice, Baby music video. A school for thugs and wannabe poseur tough guys. I disliked Notre Damn when I was young much more than I do now and even then I had to root for them against Miami.

I was a little shocked when I found out that the school itself was actually very good academically. Hard to reconcile that with the thug image of Miami that I'll probably never get over.

That's why Donna Shalala can barely tolerate the football program.

(11-12-2013 02:32 AM)TomThumb Wrote:  I don't think the B12 ratings for this year are going to be very impressive. Oklahoma and Baylor suffered the FS1 treatment that has been screwing the PAC this year. Biggest B12 conference game of the year and the ratings were so low they didn't even mention them in this article:

http://www.sportsmediawatch.com/2013/11/...rd-strong/

I thought I saw that the OU/Baylor rating was 1.5, but I can't seem to find a site to confirm that now.

Thursday game opposite the pros. 1.5 is pretty good for that situation. The colleges probably got a decent amount for TH games and the NFL has undermined ESPN and Fox on that. Oregon/Stanford did fabulous for TH night.