(08-11-2015 11:54 AM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  Guys...lets settle this

1) CCU will be the only school in its' market area
2) Florence/Myrtle Beach TV stations will send trucks to Columbia to cover USC.
3) They will also send them to cover CCU
4) Florence is less of home town for CCU than Myrtle Beach
5) CCU is viable with even moderate support from MB
6) Sometimes the 'TV market' doesn't really match up to the 'actual market'.

7) EKU will always be squashed in its market by UK
8) CCU has fewer alumni than EKU and will have lower initial attendance
9) CCU has a puke worthy field
10) Both need new facilities
11) CCU has a greater potential for broader based support based upon primacy in a market and a lack of competition for FBS.

Prepare for a point by point rebuttal from MplsBison

(08-11-2015 12:21 PM)dbackjon Wrote:  Prepare for a point by point rebuttal from MplsBison

I was going to quibble based on the meaning of "rebuttal", and it seems that contradiction without substantial supporting evidence actually qualifies.

(08-11-2015 12:39 PM)BruceMcF Wrote:  

(08-11-2015 12:21 PM)dbackjon Wrote:  Prepare for a point by point rebuttal from MplsBison

I was going to quibble based on the meaning of "rebuttal", and it seems that contradiction without substantial supporting evidence actually qualifies.

Good point.

(08-11-2015 11:40 AM)BruceMcF Wrote:  

(08-11-2015 09:21 AM)MplsBison Wrote:  As I correctly stated before, EKU is in a TV market with 450k TV households. Thus, by definition, their *potential* for growth must be much higher than a TV market with far fewer households.

Will they ever get more viewers than the team in the small market? That's an entirely separate discussion.

I'm merely responding to him for using the term growth potential.

Its the same discussion, by the definition of growth potential: if they cannot ever get more viewers, because they are more heavily overhadowed by a closer P5 school, then their growth potential is lower.

(08-11-2015 11:29 AM)MplsBison Wrote:  The discussion was TV viewers. Those people aren't traveling to the stadium.

This is akin to why treating Florence as the main population center for the Coastal market was incorrect: TV stations don't care about municipal boundaries, they care about people watching their channel, whether they are inside or outside any given municipal boundary.

People going to the games is one of the elements in determining TV coverage.

Growth potential has only to do with the size of the TV market. You're using your own definition for potential, which is invalid.

People going to the games is the very definition of not watching the games on TV. It's irrelevant.

The #1 and #2 viewed games in the Florence/Myrtle market will always be U of SC and Clemson, if they're on basic tier cable or network TV (which they should be, in that market).

CC has a chance to be a distant #3.

(08-11-2015 11:58 AM)BruceMcF Wrote:  

(08-11-2015 11:54 AM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  Guys...lets settle this

1) CCU will be the only school in its' market area
2) Florence/Myrtle Beach TV stations will send trucks to Columbia to cover USC.
3) They will also send them to cover CCU
4) Florence is less of home town for CCU than Myrtle Beach
5) CCU is viable with even moderate support from MB
6) Sometimes the 'TV market' doesn't really match up to the 'actual market'.

7) EKU will always be squashed in its market by UK
8) CCU has fewer alumni than EKU and will have lower initial attendance
9) CCU has a puke worthy field
10) Both need new facilities
11) CCU has a greater potential for broader based support based upon primacy in a market and a lack of competition for FBS.

"2) Florence/Myrtle Beach TV stations will send trucks to Columbia to cover USC."
It sounded to me like they would be more likely to just use network affiliates in Columbia.

The other ten sound right.

I concur.

(08-11-2015 11:54 AM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  Guys...lets settle this

1) CCU will be the only school in its' market area
2) Florence/Myrtle Beach TV stations will send trucks to Columbia to cover USC.
3) They will also send them to cover CCU
4) Florence is less of home town for CCU than Myrtle Beach
5) CCU is viable with even moderate support from MB
6) Sometimes the 'TV market' doesn't really match up to the 'actual market'.

7) EKU will always be squashed in its market by UK
8) CCU has fewer alumni than EKU and will have lower initial attendance
9) CCU has a puke worthy field
10) Both need new facilities
11) CCU has a greater potential for broader based support based upon primacy in a market and a lack of competition for FBS.

2 is wrong, per previous posts.

1 and 3-6 are not incorrect, but not really relevant in this discussion.

7 might be correct, but no more than CC will be by U of SC and Clemson combined in its market. And I supposed the definition of "squashed" is subjective.

8-10 seem reasonable.


11 is in no way supported by any of the preceding points. It's entirely your opinion.

(08-11-2015 01:19 PM)MplsBison Wrote:  

(08-11-2015 11:40 AM)BruceMcF Wrote:  

(08-11-2015 09:21 AM)MplsBison Wrote:  As I correctly stated before, EKU is in a TV market with 450k TV households. Thus, by definition, their *potential* for growth must be much higher than a TV market with far fewer households.

Will they ever get more viewers than the team in the small market? That's an entirely separate discussion.

I'm merely responding to him for using the term growth potential.

Its the same discussion, by the definition of growth potential: if they cannot ever get more viewers, because they are more heavily overhadowed by a closer P5 school, then their growth potential is lower.

(08-11-2015 11:29 AM)MplsBison Wrote:  The discussion was TV viewers. Those people aren't traveling to the stadium.

This is akin to why treating Florence as the main population center for the Coastal market was incorrect: TV stations don't care about municipal boundaries, they care about people watching their channel, whether they are inside or outside any given municipal boundary.

People going to the games is one of the elements in determining TV coverage.

Growth potential has only to do with the size of the TV market. You're using your own definition for potential, which is invalid.

People going to the games is the very definition of not watching the games on TV. It's irrelevant.

The #1 and #2 viewed games in the Florence/Myrtle market will always be U of SC and Clemson, if they're on basic tier cable or network TV (which they should be, in that market).

CC has a chance to be a distant #3.

We are talking about a G5 program. Television revenue is going to be MAYBE 5% of your operating revenue. The majority of G5 programs receive as much or more from the CFP as they get from television.

You are wrong on all counts.

The capacity of a program is determined by the market of businesses willing to donate and sponsor and the human beings willing to purchase a ticket.

Sun Belt has the current worst deal in college football and if AState were whisked away to the AAC, the revenue increase from television would be roughly a 7% increase in budget. Nothing to sneeze at but we aren't going be gold plating the faucets in the dressing room either.

G5's make money by cutting expenses and repurposing the funds, selling tickets, getting donations and sponsorships, performing better in basketball and scoring better in the CFP ratings oh and the ever popular student fee.

In the current market for G5 football it doesn't much matter if the potential team is market #50 or #150.

(08-11-2015 01:19 PM)MplsBison Wrote:  Growth potential has only to do with the size of the TV market. You're using your own definition for potential, which is invalid.

I'm using the dictionary definition for potential:

Quote: latent qualities or abilities that may be developed and lead to future success or usefulness.

There is no reason to believe that EKU has the potential to attract 100% of its TV market, so its growth potential is smaller than 100% of its TV market.

Just because you decide to assume that the potential ceiling for both EKU and Coastal in each of their markets is 100% of the total market does not make it so.

Quote: People going to the games is the very definition of not watching the games on TV. It's irrelevant.

You do not seem to understand that media coverage extends beyond just the game itself.

Take a look at the struggles eastern michigan faces in the shadow of michigan. While kentucky is nowhere near the football program of michigan the struggles will be similar. Coastal is comparable to ga southern. Both are smaller schools that have the potential to carve out their own little niche in the state as they have a little breathing room

(08-11-2015 01:43 PM)arkstfan Wrote:  

(08-11-2015 01:19 PM)MplsBison Wrote:  

(08-11-2015 11:40 AM)BruceMcF Wrote:  

(08-11-2015 09:21 AM)MplsBison Wrote:  As I correctly stated before, EKU is in a TV market with 450k TV households. Thus, by definition, their *potential* for growth must be much higher than a TV market with far fewer households.

Will they ever get more viewers than the team in the small market? That's an entirely separate discussion.

I'm merely responding to him for using the term growth potential.

Its the same discussion, by the definition of growth potential: if they cannot ever get more viewers, because they are more heavily overhadowed by a closer P5 school, then their growth potential is lower.

(08-11-2015 11:29 AM)MplsBison Wrote:  The discussion was TV viewers. Those people aren't traveling to the stadium.

This is akin to why treating Florence as the main population center for the Coastal market was incorrect: TV stations don't care about municipal boundaries, they care about people watching their channel, whether they are inside or outside any given municipal boundary.

People going to the games is one of the elements in determining TV coverage.

Growth potential has only to do with the size of the TV market. You're using your own definition for potential, which is invalid.

People going to the games is the very definition of not watching the games on TV. It's irrelevant.

The #1 and #2 viewed games in the Florence/Myrtle market will always be U of SC and Clemson, if they're on basic tier cable or network TV (which they should be, in that market).

CC has a chance to be a distant #3.

We are talking about a G5 program. Television revenue is going to be MAYBE 5% of your operating revenue. The majority of G5 programs receive as much or more from the CFP as they get from television.

You are wrong on all counts.

The capacity of a program is determined by the market of businesses willing to donate and sponsor and the human beings willing to purchase a ticket.

Sun Belt has the current worst deal in college football and if AState were whisked away to the AAC, the revenue increase from television would be roughly a 7% increase in budget. Nothing to sneeze at but we aren't going be gold plating the faucets in the dressing room either.

G5's make money by cutting expenses and repurposing the funds, selling tickets, getting donations and sponsorships, performing better in basketball and scoring better in the CFP ratings oh and the ever popular student fee.

In the current market for G5 football it doesn't much matter if the potential team is market #50 or #150.

So now you're saying TV viewership doesn't matter for potential Sun Belt schools. Rather, it's ticket sales and donations by local businesses that count.

Fine. So on that basis, how are you claiming Coastal is cut-and-dried better than EKU?

(08-11-2015 01:51 PM)BruceMcF Wrote:  

(08-11-2015 01:19 PM)MplsBison Wrote:  Growth potential has only to do with the size of the TV market. You're using your own definition for potential, which is invalid.

I'm using the dictionary definition for potential:

Quote: latent qualities or abilities that may be developed and lead to future success or usefulness.

There is no reason to believe that EKU has the potential to attract 100% of its TV market, so its growth potential is smaller than 100% of its TV market.

Just because you decide to assume that the potential ceiling for both EKU and Coastal in each of their markets is 100% of the total market does not make it so.

Quote: People going to the games is the very definition of not watching the games on TV. It's irrelevant.

You do not seem to understand that media coverage extends beyond just the game itself.

The only latent quality for future success of TV viewership within a given market, is the number of viewers in the market.

That means EKU's TV market potential is higher than CC's, by definition.

Glad we cleared that up.

(08-11-2015 05:04 PM)solohawks Wrote:  Take a look at the struggles eastern michigan faces in the shadow of michigan. While kentucky is nowhere near the football program of michigan the struggles will be similar. Coastal is comparable to ga southern. Both are smaller schools that have the potential to carve out their own little niche in the state as they have a little breathing room

Given the evidence of rational posters like roka, I'm more convinced than ever that Coastal would be a fine selection for the Sun Belt overall.

But if we focus on a single attribute like TV market potential, which perhaps leads to an irrational discussion with irrational posters, the evidence is not there to rank CC far ahead of EKU.

That's really all I was getting at.

(08-11-2015 05:26 PM)MplsBison Wrote:  

(08-11-2015 05:04 PM)solohawks Wrote:  Take a look at the struggles eastern michigan faces in the shadow of michigan. While kentucky is nowhere near the football program of michigan the struggles will be similar. Coastal is comparable to ga southern. Both are smaller schools that have the potential to carve out their own little niche in the state as they have a little breathing room

Given the evidence of rational posters like roka, I'm more convinced than ever that Coastal would be a fine selection for the Sun Belt overall.

But if we focus on a single attribute like TV market potential, which perhaps leads to an irrational discussion with irrational posters, the evidence is not there to rank CC far ahead of EKU.

That's really all I was getting at.

Agree with you. Comparing solely the markets in their current state does not show the advantages coastal provides

As much as I'd like to see EKU get in, it is pretty much all UK all the time in the Lexington TV market, which is almost half the state of Kentucky. UK even dominates the Kentucky side of the Cincinnati market. That may improve somewhat when EKU goes FBS (WKU gets more coverage in Louisville now), but Coastal Carolina would be the clear #3 in the state. Coastal's "WKU", USC Upstate, doesn't even have a football program. Furman, The Citadel, SC State, and Wofford will never be FBS.

(08-11-2015 09:23 PM)chargeradio Wrote:  As much as I'd like to see EKU get in, it is pretty much all UK all the time in the Lexington TV market, which is almost half the state of Kentucky. UK even dominates the Kentucky side of the Cincinnati market. That may improve somewhat when EKU goes FBS (WKU gets more coverage in Louisville now), but Coastal Carolina would be the clear #3 in the state. Coastal's "WKU", USC Upstate, doesn't even have a football program. Furman, The Citadel, SC State, and Wofford will never be FBS.

Wouldn't Winthrop be our WKU lol? They don't have football either but have actually talked about adding it and I think are a better comparison than USC Upstate.

I guess that could work, but Upstate is essentially the opposing directional moniker to Coastal. Geographically, Winthrop is to the state of South Carolina as NKU is to the state of Kentucky.

20% more people live within 30 miles Coastal than EKU.
A person living on the edge of that radius closest to the University of South Carolina is 95 miles from Columbia
A person living on the edge of that radius toward the UK campus is four miles from the UK campus because UK is 26 miles from EKU.
Let's try another population experiment. We will go halfway between Lexington and Richmond and extend a line over to US 27 and state highway 15 and then bounded on the south by the intersection of state 15 and 30 and then due west to US 127. Roughly a 90 mile drive at the furthest point (roads aren't straight in this area!). To be fair to Coastal we extend the radius to 40 miles. The population difference grows to 25% more in the Conway area.

UK limits EKU's potential growth to the north and even if you extend deeper south there just isn't much population and remember part of that radius around Coastal is in the ocean.

SC is just growing as people are moving down from other parts of the country. MB isn't a huge city, but Horry County has a lot of people. Then when you consider close cities (about 60-90 minute drive) with decent populations like Wilmington, Florence, and Charleston, and the populations in-between, I think there is a decent potential audience that Coastal can market to. I'm not saying it is going to overtake any of the major schools - but it is a convenient option for those people who would like to see FBS football but don't want to drive as far or deal with the traffic that an 80,000+ stadium presents. I personally would be happy to have dual fans and we have been successful with having Coastal / Clemson and Coastal / SC fans. If we do go to the Sun Belt, I actually would prefer that we don't play either school in football so as to not alienate those fans.

Another point. Every living EKU alum was on campus when the Colonels played football unless they only attended in 1943-45 when football was suspended.

A traditional student at Coastal who didn't take an academic redshirt year who is older than 35 or so didn't attend Coastal when there was football on campus. Their football era alums are just now reaching the age where you expect them to start coming back and going to more games and maybe buying season tickets.

(08-11-2015 09:23 PM)chargeradio Wrote:  As much as I'd like to see EKU get in, it is pretty much all UK all the time in the Lexington TV market, which is almost half the state of Kentucky. UK even dominates the Kentucky side of the Cincinnati market. That may improve somewhat when EKU goes FBS (WKU gets more coverage in Louisville now), but Coastal Carolina would be the clear #3 in the state. Coastal's "WKU", USC Upstate, doesn't even have a football program. Furman, The Citadel, SC State, and Wofford will never be FBS.

Talking about the entire state is obviously irrelevant for schools like EKU and Coastal, which are regional.

Within their respective TV markets:

- Kentucky dominates popularity, followed probably by Louisville and then EKU has a chance to be the clear #3.
- U of SC dominates popularity, followed probably by Clemson and then Coastal has a chance to be the clear #3.

And their markets are both reasonably sized, at 485k and 285k TV households, respectively.


Looks like a wash to me.