Yeah, that map was ridiculous.

Baylor may have no fanbase but that's not true of the big Texas public schools

(12-29-2013 10:48 PM)10thMountain Wrote:  Yeah, that map was ridiculous.

Baylor may have no fanbase but that's not true of the big Texas public schools

Holy smokes, we agree on something again. Texas, Texas A&M and Texas Tech are the 3 most supported brands in the state of Texas. Everyone else fights for 4th.

(12-29-2013 10:38 PM)jml2010 Wrote:  

(12-29-2013 10:19 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(12-29-2013 10:03 PM)jml2010 Wrote:  

(12-29-2013 09:58 PM)JRsec Wrote:  JML, I've got nothing against you or Tech. I wish you well. I think the PAC would be a good home for you guys, but, it may very well not be your only option. Depending on how things go down, which conference might have teams bow out of the obligation of moving to an upper tier with stipends, minimum endowment requirements, minimum numbers of required sports, etc, there might very well be other options available to the Red Raiders before this is over with in either a few years or a decade.

Really all Tech has to do is stay competitive and I think your present coach will handle that, improve your academics and I understand their is a plan in progress to that end, and you will be fine. You don't have to beat out anyone to make the upper tier, just stay ahead of those behind you. I'm confident that will happen.

Thanks for the kind words. I'm not sure what you are getting at in terms of the PAC not being our only option. Aggy will never vote to add Tech or Texas and the ACC is bad fit for Tech. I realize I make your job as a mod tough but I know Tech will end up in a good spot and I will stand up for Tech when others bash us.

1. You only make my job as a Mod tough when you post taunts while inebriated following a celebration. Not over any of this stuff.

2. The next decade may very well see this whole process pared down to a P3 consisting of at least 60 schools. In that kind of world the networks will determine placement and those they are willing to pay will have a home somewhere. And that's if Texas doesn't insist on you guys as a partner in a move.

3. Even in the SEC profit trumps the individual wishes of single schools and in a 20 team conference all of these teams will want their in state rivals in the mix because scheduling them otherwise might not be possible.

4. There was no "gentlemen's agreement" in the SEC beyond the last two additions. Two new markets were the requirement for renegotiating our ESPN contract. No such provision is in the new one. Slive asked for the agreement not to nominate other in state schools until the renegotiation clause was activated. The rest is chat room B.S. In 1992 Florida nominated F.S.U. for membership. Two years ago South Carolina officials (including Spurrier) stated that they had no opposition to the consideration of Clemson. Nobody cares what Kentucky thinks about a football add and Louisville wasn't on the menu. Georgia would prefer not to add Tech or Clemson, or F.S.U. but they are alone in that. The SEC will vote to do what earns each of them the most.

So yeah, anything is possible up to a Texahoma to the SEC. But until other targets are eliminated either by addition or refusal it is down the list on priorities.

1. Guilty as charged. I do love to drink beer and tend to get a bit more mouthy once I have consumed 15 or so beers.

2. I have no clue how this turns out but I think it will be 64 schools. No one from the Big 10, SEC or PAC 12 will be left behind. Texas Tech will be fine regardless of what Texas does because I think the PAC wants a Texas school and outside of Texas, who brings more to the table than Tech?( Fans, TV Sets, facilities, growing academics).

3. I understand what you are saying but honestly, Tech is bad fit for the SEC. I would love to play LSU, Arkansas, Bama and Auburn but would they enjoy playing us in conference?

4. Adding the Texoma4 to the SEC would piss aggy off but the SEC would cement itself as the #1 conference in Texas with those 4 additions. Aggy has done well but just think how much more money the SEC network would make adding the 4 of the 5 largest fan bases in Texas & Oklahoma.

As to points 3 & 4, yes Tech is a bad fit "geographically" in that it is a bit far West for what the SEC would desire. And I think a Texahoma deal to the SEC only makes sense if the ACC stays whole and we look at rounding out an upper tier at 18 per P4 conference and capping the new tier at 72 (which would easily make lawsuits unlikely in that investment cutoff drops significantly around postion 71 and it would essentially eliminate the pool of those who could meet the set requirements for inclusion).

At 18 with no prospect for ACC schools being added the SEC would be hard pressed to find a better solution geographically and economically. We would essentially move to a conference comprised of 3 six team divisions. Texahoma plus Arkansas and Missouri would comprise the West. Alabama, Auburn, the Mississippi's, L.S.U. & A&M the central, and Florida, Georgia, South Carolina, Kentucky, Tennessee, and Vanderbilt the East. The 3 division champs and the team with the best record among the others would comprise the CCSeries playoff. The six team Western division would essentially be the best of the old Big 12 (minus Nebraska). A&M would still be distinct in the Central division.

(12-29-2013 10:54 PM)JRsec Wrote:  At 18 with no prospect for ACC schools being added the SEC would be hard pressed to find a better solution geographically and economically. We would essentially move to a conference comprised of 3 six team divisions. Texahoma plus Arkansas and Missouri would comprise the West. Alabama, Auburn, the Mississippi's, L.S.U. & A&M the central, and Florida, Georgia, South Carolina, Kentucky, Tennessee, and Vanderbilt the East. The 3 division champs and the team with the best record among the others would comprise the CCSeries playoff. The six team Western division would essentially be the best of the old Big 12 (minus Nebraska). A&M would still be distinct in the Central division.

That would add to an already fine damn conference. Tech would be definitely be an outlier in that conference but College Station is only 6-7 hours from Lubbock. In state of Texas terms, that isn't a big thing. I routinely made the drive from Houston and College Station while I was at Tech. I live in Oklahoma now and OSU, OU, Arkansas & Mizzou would be easy games to attend.

The Geography of College Football Fans

The above link tells the true story. UT and A&M fan bases are >2x larger then Texas Tech's fan base, and no other Texas-based school comes close to Tech. Of course, the NYT poll/study tracks actual fans who take the time to state their allegiances. 90% of your average unaffiliated Texans will identify as Longhorn fans. A&M is still very popular among the same rural folk who have always supported A&M but the Ags aren't winning over new fans from typical Texans.

Hell, I contributed to Aggie ratings. I loved watching JFF play this season and last but, like most Texans, I have little interest in watching your typical Aggie team play against teams that don't resonate with Texans. So next season will be telling with regard to A&M's alleged popularity. Aggies are an insular group so they may believe that the SEC is as relevant to all Texans as it is to Ags, but I haven't heard any increased chatter about the SEC this season. In DFW, sports radio will talk about A&M individually but the majority of CFB talk is all Big 12. The SEC gets no coverage beyond A&M because the SEC is not relevant outside the Aggie fan base.

EDIT: MNC title contenders are discussed on DFW sports radio. So Bama and Auburn are not unknown to Texans. Just wanted to clarify. Lol.

My how the tune has changed.

First it was "The people of Texas will never embrace the SEC because they love the Big 12 so much"

Now it's "Well...the people don't watch EVERY SEC game!"

(12-29-2013 11:22 PM)10thMountain Wrote:  My how the tune has changed.

First it was "The people of Texas will never embrace the SEC because they love the Big 12 so much"

Now it's "Well...the people don't watch EVERY SEC game!"

Not sure what that means but, either way, Texans don't care about the SEC beyond the occasional interesting matchup, just like any other conference not B12. At least in DFW, it's all Big 12 + A&M. I remember before the 2013 CFB season started, Corby on The Ticket said, "Aggie fans. Let's get this out of the way. Texas is still a Big 12 state so that's what we will be talking about most of the time when it comes to CFB. So, if you Aggies want to complain or ***** to our management that we don't cover the SEC adequately, please do so today and get it over with." He didn't even mean it to be taken rudely. Just matter of fact.

(12-29-2013 10:51 PM)jml2010 Wrote:  

(12-29-2013 10:48 PM)10thMountain Wrote:  Yeah, that map was ridiculous.

Baylor may have no fanbase but that's not true of the big Texas public schools

Holy smokes, we agree on something again. Texas, Texas A&M and Texas Tech are the 3 most supported brands in the state of Texas. Everyone else fights for 4th.

Thank you.

(12-29-2013 11:31 PM)FreshPrinceOfDarkness Wrote:  

(12-29-2013 11:22 PM)10thMountain Wrote:  My how the tune has changed.

First it was "The people of Texas will never embrace the SEC because they love the Big 12 so much"

Now it's "Well...the people don't watch EVERY SEC game!"

Not sure what that means but, either way, Texans don't care about the SEC beyond the occasional interesting matchup, just like any other conference not B12. At least in DFW, it's all Big 12 + A&M. I remember before the 2013 CFB season started, Corby on The Ticket said, "Aggie fans. Let's get this out of the way. Texas is still a Big 12 state so that's what we will be talking about most of the time when it comes to CFB. So, if you Aggies want to complain or ***** to our management that we don't cover the SEC adequately, please do so today and get it over with." He didn't even mean it to be taken rudely. Just matter of fact.

Well if one radio station said that then it's clearly settled! Well just ignore how the SEC had all the top rated games in TX this year because one B12 homer with a radio show said Texans care more about the Big 12!

(12-29-2013 11:31 PM)FreshPrinceOfDarkness Wrote:  

(12-29-2013 11:22 PM)10thMountain Wrote:  My how the tune has changed.

First it was "The people of Texas will never embrace the SEC because they love the Big 12 so much"

Now it's "Well...the people don't watch EVERY SEC game!"

Not sure what that means but, either way, Texans don't care about the SEC beyond the occasional interesting matchup, just like any other conference not B12. At least in DFW, it's all Big 12 + A&M. I remember before the 2013 CFB season started, Corby on The Ticket said, "Aggie fans. Let's get this out of the way. Texas is still a Big 12 state so that's what we will be talking about most of the time when it comes to CFB. So, if you Aggies want to complain or ***** to our management that we don't cover the SEC adequately, please do so today and get it over with." He didn't even mean it to be taken rudely. Just matter of fact.

In DFW, you are correct. In Houston, if the Big 12 survives and I hope it doesn't, we need Tech and Texas to get back to 08 & 09 levels. Our 2 schools winning will beat anything that aggy has to offer in Houston. That being said, aggy caught lightning in a bottle and has done well with UT and Tech being down and that has been proven in the most recent Houston TV ratings. JR thinks it is possible for the SEC to add the Texoma 4 which I sincerely doubt, but adding those 4 schools would definitely make Texas a true SEC state in all regions

This entire thread is dumb. Rice runs Texas and everyone knows it.

(12-29-2013 11:47 PM)nzmorange Wrote:  This entire thread is dumb. Rice runs Texas and everyone knows it.

Congrats to Cuse. That come back on minnysota was epic only rivaled by us in the Insight Bowl and last years Texas Bowl.

Minnysota thought they were to good for Tech and we beat them both times in epic come from behind fashion
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7ad83jBB08c
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MIDD5gXrGcs

(12-29-2013 11:45 PM)jml2010 Wrote:  

(12-29-2013 11:31 PM)FreshPrinceOfDarkness Wrote:  

(12-29-2013 11:22 PM)10thMountain Wrote:  My how the tune has changed.

First it was "The people of Texas will never embrace the SEC because they love the Big 12 so much"

Now it's "Well...the people don't watch EVERY SEC game!"

Not sure what that means but, either way, Texans don't care about the SEC beyond the occasional interesting matchup, just like any other conference not B12. At least in DFW, it's all Big 12 + A&M. I remember before the 2013 CFB season started, Corby on The Ticket said, "Aggie fans. Let's get this out of the way. Texas is still a Big 12 state so that's what we will be talking about most of the time when it comes to CFB. So, if you Aggies want to complain or ***** to our management that we don't cover the SEC adequately, please do so today and get it over with." He didn't even mean it to be taken rudely. Just matter of fact.

In DFW, you are correct. In Houston, if the Big 12 survives and I hope it doesn't, we need Tech and Texas to get back to 08 & 09 levels. Our 2 schools winning will beat anything that aggy has to offer in Houston. That being said, aggy caught lightning in a bottle and has done well with UT and Tech being down and that has been proven in the most recent Houston TV ratings. JR thinks it is possible for the SEC to add the Texoma 4 which I sincerely doubt, but adding those 4 schools would definitely make Texas a true SEC state in all regions

The SEC seemed quite willing to consider adding 4 (even 5 discussed) schools to gain Virginia and North Carolina. Those two states give us 60% of what Texahoma delivers and they don't have two teams in the top 10 in profitability and only 2 of those schools could be considered football first schools. All 4 of Texahoma are football first schools.

Should the SEC decide to go after Texas and Oklahoma of course they will try to land just the two of them first. But considering the remaining markets consider this. Oklahoma and Texas together deliver 30 million viewers. A&M has given us a considerable piece of Texas but nowhere near what the top 3 publics give the SEC in terms of product, financial and political advantage within the State.

Texas and Oklahoma are #1 & #7 in profitability. The SEC has 4 others already in the top 10. Texas, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, and Texas Tech, outdraw North Carolina, N.C. State and Virginia in average crowd and it's not really close. Only Virginia Tech meets that benchmark. Texahoma travels well to games. The Virginia and Carolina schools less so. The kind of division that would be formed out of Texas, Texas Tech, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Arkansas, and Missouri would essentially be the grafting of the best of the Old Big 12 (minus Nebraska) into the top football conference in the nation, which possesses the best viewership in the nation, and which could with the inclusion of those 4 quite easily out earn every conference in the nation.

Texas is a research giant. They don't need the CIC anymore than Virginia or the Research Triangle schools do. Everyone they truly care about playing would be right there in their division, plus the Aggies in the same conference.

Logistically, economically, culturally, and familiarly, I don't see why anyone would think the notion foreign. Would it be more or less of a stretch to see that than to see Texahoma in the PAC? or to see Texas and Oklahoma split from their long standing little brothers for a foray into the Big 10? I think those are questions to ponder.

(12-30-2013 12:05 AM)jml2010 Wrote:  

(12-29-2013 11:47 PM)nzmorange Wrote:  This entire thread is dumb. Rice runs Texas and everyone knows it.

Congrats to Cuse. That come back on minnysota was epic only rivaled by us in the Insight Bowl and last years Texas Bowl.

Minnysota thought they were to good for Tech and we beat them both times in epic come from behind fashion
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7ad83jBB08c
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MIDD5gXrGcs

Thanks!

(12-29-2013 09:14 PM)jml2010 Wrote:  Like I said, Tech and UT need to get back to 08 & 09 levels and aggy will once again be 2nd or 3rd fiddle in the state of Texas. The TV ratings show that and once autograph leaves, the hype of the SEC will wear off. Texans still want to see local big Texas teams play each other. After a few years, the newness of a&m in the SEC will mean nothing to Texans.

True story. My son saw someone in Atlanta in an A&M jersey. Asked him if he was an A&M fan. He said, "No. I'm not even sure where the school is. I like Johnny Football."

What was the ratings for that big time Thanksgiving showdown between UT and Tech again?

Surely it had the best ratings in the state because "Texans want to see local big Texas teams play each other!"

...right?

(12-29-2013 10:07 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(12-29-2013 10:01 PM)S11 Wrote:  

(12-29-2013 09:31 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(12-29-2013 09:07 PM)10thMountain Wrote:  This year's ratings

Quote:
UT-BYU ............. 0.8 ..... 1,290,000
UT-Ole Miss ........ 0.1 ..... 130,000 (LHN)
UT-ISU ............. 1.5 ..... 2,400,000
UT-OU .............. 3.0, .... 4,710,000
UT-TCU ... ……..0.4, .... 676,000
UT-KU .............. 0.1 ..... 130,000 (LHN)
UT-WVU ............. 1.5 ..... 2,650,000
UT-OSU ............. 1.4 ..... 2,190,000
UT-Tech ............ 0.7 ..... 1,050,000

A&M-Rice ........... 2.7 ..... 4,200,000
A&M-'Bama .......... 8.5 ... 13,590,000
A&M-SMU ............ 0.5 ..... 809,000
A&M-Arky ........... 1.7 ..... 2,760,000
A&M-Ole Miss ....... 3.2 ..... 5,110,000
A&M-Auburn ......... 4.2 ..... 6,730,000
A&M-UTEP ........... 0.7 ..... 1,120,000
A&M-MSU ............ 2.9 ..... 4,530,000
A&M-LSU ............ 4.8 ..... 8,140,000
A&M-Mizzou ......... 3.6 ..... 5,730,000

Average share:

A&M ...... 3.28
UT ...... 1.06

Total viewers:

A&M ...... 52,719,000
UT ...... 15,181,000

Excellent post 10th! If nothing else it proves that the Big 12 spin doctors have a long way to go to put a Texas load of kittie litter on the data gathered by the pollsters and by your data listed above. If I could give you any more rep points I would.

1- The Texas data is pretty skewed by 3 things on tv ratings:
a- Texas in a down year vs A&M's most anticipated year in decades
b- LHN dropping numbers down for 3 UT games including the best noncon home game
c- FSN, FS1, FOX vs ESPN. Newer and lesser networks don't do as well as ESPN even when simply comparing the Big 12 and Pac12 against itself on each network.
d- A HUGE matchup before A&M's season slipped off against Bama that was hyped all offseason due to Bama's 3 national titles in 4 years.

A&M had a better year and more eyeballs this year, but the reality of it is much much less than these numbers imply despite how much the aggy and anti-b12 crowd wish it were different.

Let me get this straight S11. We are not to believe the actual raw data, but we are to believe what the Big 12 apologists tell us to believe? "Pay no attention to the man (Bear) behind the curtain." "I am the great and powerful Wizard of Oz (apologist for a failing Texas)! It is what it is, and at the time that is most current. Nothing more, nothing less.

Until the Big 10 ccg, there wasn't a single Fox game in the top 25. And that included some pretty good matchups with the Pac 12 this year. FS1 gets miniscule ratings, in the vicinity of ESPNU.

Less fanatic fans just haven't started associating Fox with college football yet.

Compare ESPN games to ESPN games if you want more relevant data. Also this data excludes some of the Big 12 ESPN regional games. So it excludes some of the better rated games. This data was compiled by some random Aggie on a spreadsheet. Its not complete and is simple data without critical analysis. It is what it is and nothing more. An accumulation of certain selected numbers without comparing apples to apples or oranges to oranges.

(12-29-2013 10:39 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(12-29-2013 10:33 PM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  

(12-29-2013 07:52 PM)S11 Wrote:  

(12-29-2013 07:35 PM)Lurker Above Wrote:  Aggies edge past Longhorns in Texas popularity contest.

A recent survey by Public Policy Polling found 22 percent of Texas voters identified themselves as Aggies sports fans, compared with 20 percent who declared their loyalty for the Longhorns.

http://dallas.culturemap.com/news/sports...ge-sports/

For pete's sake people, its a survey of 500 voters. Not exactly the best methodology.

Better one to compare UT vs A&M- Facebook pre-season top 25 county leaders:
http://mashable.com/2013/08/30/college-f...ebook-map/



That tells a much more statistically sound story than 500 random schmucks.

This map is worthless, too. By making each county "winner take all", it is extremely misleading - for example, does anyone really think that there are NO Michigan State fans in Michigan? or no FSU fans in Florida outside of Tallahassee itself?

"There are 3 kinds of lies..." - Mark Twain (aka Samuel Clemens - liar!)

Thank you! You are exactly right about the data on the map. There are more living Auburn alumni than Alabama alumni in the State of Alabama yet the entire map is crimson. I have no doubt that counting the fair weather fans that most years Alabama has more fans in the state, but the map couldn't even be right county by county. There are regions of the state where there are more Auburn alumni and fans than those of Alabama, yet all 67 counties including Lee county (home to Auburn U) are colored crimson. Ridiculous!

I think the words "Facebook" and "Preseason" tell you all you need to know.

And yet one year's selected data means A&M owns Texas? Alabama won two straight MNCs and their data was skewed higher than usual.

(12-29-2013 10:51 PM)jml2010 Wrote:  

(12-29-2013 10:48 PM)10thMountain Wrote:  Yeah, that map was ridiculous.

Baylor may have no fanbase but that's not true of the big Texas public schools

Holy smokes, we agree on something again. Texas, Texas A&M and Texas Tech are the 3 most supported brands in the state of Texas. Everyone else fights for 4th.

UH was bigger than A&M for a good portion of its history. I think its been bigger than Tech for the last half century at least. They were also more successful for a good chunk of that time in the SWC than either school. Their fans aren't as intense as UT, A&M or Tech, but there are a lot of them out there.

Wow, just can't handle that not that many people cared to watch the cows this years. It can't possibly be there's something wrong with UT, it has to be faulty numbers or incorrect data. There's no way anyone is allowed to be more popular than the nut less cows.

But that's the entitlement mentality that's led you to this situation