According to SportsMediaWatch.com,

Between 10-16 million people have tuned into Baylor, TCU, Tech and Texas games this year. TCU is low at 10 million. Texas is high at 16 million. The 4-school average is 14M.

Compare

UCF 6.8M
UConn 6.8M
Navy 4.9M
SMU 3.4M
Temple 3.3M
USF 2.6M
Houston 2.6M
Cincy 2.6M

The Big 12 schools average about 3.5x the viewers that we do.

Yet they get paid 10x the money.

I think we'll have a good case to make for more $$$ whenever ESPN "looks in" or 5 years from now when we start to renegotiate.

Yikes, not good numbers by UC. Hopefully Thursday night's game will significantly jump UC's ratings average.

I'm pretty surprised by the UConn number due to the season we are having. That is a nice number for a 2 win team. I wonder how much our ABC matchup against Michigan brings that number up. Regardless I'll take any favorable data at this point.

The Cinci number just seems wrong to me.

(12-03-2013 12:55 PM)mlb Wrote:  Yikes, not good numbers by UC. Hopefully Thursday night's game will significantly jump UC's ratings average.

Our national games have been televised by ESPNU and ESPNNews. If you scower the weekly results everybody has bombed on those networks (including P5 schools).

Contract should be in the 5 to 8 million per school range if this conference stays together. I might be the only Bearcat fan that wouldn't mind a GOR with this league if the conference could get that type of money. I like building something, its more fun to be the underdog than be part of the establishment.

Correct on both counts.

The Michigan game skewed the UConn number.

And ESPNews has been a drag on our numbers relative to other conferences.

And most of UC's games were at noon and against some teams with awful records. It's still not good, but those things didn't help.

I think the case will be made for better TV revenue by a number of reasons.

If (and it’s a big if) conference realignment slows down, which it seems like it may be, and the AAC can get a couple seasons of stability under its belt that will add to the value of the TV deal.

The football product will have a chance next season to get it’s legs under itself a little more and in the short term if 2 of the teams from the group of UC, UCF, Houston, and ECU can crack the top 25 , along with a few OOC P5 wins that will also up the value.

In 2015 Navy will be in and add to the national exposure of the AAC.

Basketball is off to a good start and while the AAC is losing Louisville which is significant Temple will be back stronger next season after what is a rebuilding year this year and SMU will continue to make strides and with the recruiting class coming in is poised to surprise a lot of people next season. These 2 won’t be a replacement, but it will definitely help ease the sting.

All of the above combined with the size of the TV markets I believe will bring all the schools a nice uptick in revenue from the next TV deal. With all the instability of realignment and the C7 split the timing couldn’t have been worse when negotiating the last TV deal.

Let's see what the final numbers are after the Cinci/Ville game.

By the way where do you find the numbers on this site? I want to see what Louisville is at as they are not included in the OP and seem to have been the most nationally televised of the conference this year (I'm guessing)

(12-03-2013 01:03 PM)NYCTUFan Wrote:  I think the case will be made for better TV revenue by a number of reasons.

If (and it’s a big if) conference realignment slows down, which it seems like it may be, and the AAC can get a couple seasons of stability under its belt that will add to the value of the TV deal.

The football product will have a chance next season to get it’s legs under itself a little more and in the short term if 2 of the teams from the group of UC, UCF, Houston, and ECU can crack the top 25 , along with a few OOC P5 wins that will also up the value.

In 2015 Navy will be in and add to the national exposure of the AAC.

Basketball is off to a good start and while the AAC is losing Louisville which is significant Temple will be back stronger next season after what is a rebuilding year this year and SMU will continue to make strides and with the recruiting class coming in is poised to surprise a lot of people next season. These 2 won’t be a replacement, but it will definitely help ease the sting.

All of the above combined with the size of the TV markets I believe will bring all the schools a nice uptick in revenue from the next TV deal. With all the instability of realignment and the C7 split the timing couldn’t have been worse when negotiating the last TV deal.

agree with you specially in point #1 if the AAC doesnt lose anyoneelse in next 3-4 years that stability will lead to higher pay out. But all we need is more realignment talks and we become very unstable.

(12-03-2013 01:04 PM)Hank Schrader Wrote:  By the way where do you find the numbers on this site?

Here's the list of games tracked by Nielsen. Games on Longhorn Network, Big 10 Network, Pac 12 Network, Fox Sports Net and CBS Sports are not tracked.

Only ESPN, ESPN2, ESPNU, ESPNews, ABC, CBS, NBC, Fox, Fox Sports 1.

You'll have to add the Louisville games up by yourself.

(12-03-2013 12:58 PM)CliftonAve Wrote:  

(12-03-2013 12:55 PM)mlb Wrote:  Yikes, not good numbers by UC. Hopefully Thursday night's game will significantly jump UC's ratings average.

Our national games have been televised by ESPNU and ESPNNews. If you scower the weekly results everybody has bombed on those networks (including P5 schools).

Being on Wednesday night, opposite of World Series Game 6, killed that one.

So did getting of to a mediocre, at best, start to the season.

Takeaway Texas, what tv rating results you get from those ZERO market ghost towns (Baylor & TT) then!?!

My point is simple, Texas leaves and the b12 goes under.

(12-03-2013 12:57 PM)Hank Schrader Wrote:  I'm pretty surprised by the UConn number due to the season we are having.

85% of that came from the UConn/Mich game

(12-03-2013 01:04 PM)Hank Schrader Wrote:  Let's see what the final numbers are after the Cinci/Ville game.

By the way where do you find the numbers on this site? I want to see what Louisville is at as they are not included in the OP and seem to have been the most nationally televised of the conference this year (I'm guessing)

Louisville drew 9.91 million in seven national TV games. This is down from 14.7 million last year on six national TV games (regular season only).

(12-03-2013 01:32 PM)BigHouston Wrote:  Takeaway Texas, what tv rating results you get from those ZERO market ghost towns (Baylor & TT) then!?!

My point is simple, Texas leaves and the b12 goes under.

True except that they dont' play Texas every week. Obviously they are still drawing good ratings.

(12-03-2013 01:32 PM)BigHouston Wrote:  Takeaway Texas, what tv rating results you get from those ZERO market ghost towns (Baylor & TT) then!?!
.

Baylor hasn't played Texas yet, so the 14 million they drew did not include Texas. Baylor's game vs. Texas Tech was not on national TV, who also drew 12 million.

(12-03-2013 12:49 PM)CougarRed Wrote:  According to SportsMediaWatch.com,

Between 10-16 million people have tuned into Baylor, TCU, Tech and Texas games this year. TCU is low at 10 million. Texas is high at 16 million. The 4-school average is 14M.

Compare

UCF 6.8M
UConn 6.8M
Navy 4.9M
SMU 3.4M
Temple 3.3M
USF 2.6M
Houston 2.6M
Cincy 2.6M

The Big 12 schools average about 3.5x the viewers that we do.

Yet they get paid 10x the money.

I think we'll have a good case to make for more $$$ whenever ESPN "looks in" or 5 years from now when we start to renegotiate.

Where is OSU at?

I ask because I want to see these numbers after the bowl games as well. UCF in a BCS bowl compared to OSU in a BCS bowl would be interesting to note ESPECIALLY if the Fiesta gets matched with NIU (i.e. poor viewership)

(12-03-2013 01:53 PM)adcorbett Wrote:  

(12-03-2013 01:32 PM)BigHouston Wrote:  Takeaway Texas, what tv rating results you get from those ZERO market ghost towns (Baylor & TT) then!?!
.

Baylor hasn't played Texas yet, so the 14 million they drew did not include Texas. Baylor's game vs. Texas Tech was not on national TV, who also drew 12 million.

I think he was implying that Texas fans watch(in large) their in-state B12 opponents on TV. I believe it too. That state is crazy over football. Just like every UNC/State fan was watching us play Duke(hoping for the upset) in basketball. -- They just love the sport and keep close tabs on rivals.

If Texas was moved to the SEC/B1G the casual Texas fan would probably be eyeballing those games instead of the TT/Baylor game, etc.... unless the game had high stakes.

(12-03-2013 01:00 PM)bearcatlawjd Wrote:  Contract should be in the 5 to 8 million per school range if this conference stays together. I might be the only Bearcat fan that wouldn't mind a GOR with this league if the conference could get that type of money. I like building something, its more fun to be the underdog than be part of the establishment.

A GoR isn't without some sort of tradeoff. For the XII, it was a boatload of money in a renewed TV deal with ESPN. For the B1G, PAC, and ACC, (and likely SEC) it's a conference network. What would the GoR be traded for in the American? A couple of million dollars per year? Maybe, but when the disparity between the American and the P5 is so great, which American team is going to forgo the possiblity of hitting the big time for that?

Networks don't care that much about a GOR. They have built in protections so that if anything went down, they could cut their losses. Now if you build a network, there is a lot of infrastructure that must be protected; much different argument.

The AAC would gain little from outside sources for a GOR, and it would only be beneficial to each other as showing their commitment. But I can't see any team in the AAC, and I mean any team, wanting to sign one, when each one, save for maybe Tulsa, thinks they may have a chance one day to move up if the conference as a whole cannot move itself up.