(08-07-2015 02:15 PM)CougarRed Wrote:  Geography will keep BYU out too. That and the other things.

If the Big 12 decides to expand, Houston is a dead cinch lock. The other school will be Cincy or UCF.

End of story.

That's crazy talk. There is NOONE that is a dead cincy lock to be invited to the Big 12 if they were to expand. BYU would be, but even they have some logistical issues to be worked.

No other candidate is close to a lock. Certainly not Houston, Cincy, Memphis, UCF, Boise, or any others. The truth is, we don't know what the Big 12 would do because they haven't even reached that point yet.

Especially in 2 of the last 5 years- the MWC and AAC have been almost equal- if not the MWC being stronger. And Boise was in the MWC in 4 of the 5 years, so the WAC thing is getting to be a thing of the past.....

Location may be a push quite frankly. There's some positives for being out west- to include the ability to have later games. And Boise in football for TV is a much bigger brand than Cincy is. Basketball like it or not is pretty meaningless. Football is what drives the bus, and right now, Boise is very attractive. Maybe even more so now with the coaching change having gone so well.

(08-07-2015 02:15 PM)CougarRed Wrote:  Geography will keep BYU out too. That and the other things.

If the Big 12 decides to expand, Houston is a dead cinch lock. The other school will be Cincy or UCF.

End of story.

BYU is most likely in spite of geography and everything else.

Boise is probably as unlikely as UConn. Just too much of a stretch.

The other one could be Cincinnati, Houston, UCF, USF, Tulane or Memphis. Its really just BYU and those 6 that have any measurable chance.

(08-07-2015 02:30 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(08-07-2015 02:15 PM)CougarRed Wrote:  Geography will keep BYU out too. That and the other things.

If the Big 12 decides to expand, Houston is a dead cinch lock. The other school will be Cincy or UCF.

End of story.

BYU is most likely in spite of geography and everything else.

Boise is probably as unlikely as UConn. Just too much of a stretch.

The other one could be Cincinnati, Houston, UCF, USF, Tulane or Memphis. Its really just BYU and those 6 that have any measurable chance.

Boise way more likely vs UConn. They're closer, and more importantly they have great football. If BYU goes, Boise becomes an instant very real possibility.

(08-07-2015 02:01 PM)CougarRed Wrote:  Baseball, bullet?

Baseball will have nothing to do with it.

Geography and academics will keep Boise out.

Overall sports will have some impact. That hurts Boise. In any event, you didn't read the discussion. The other poster made the comment that UCF didn't have anything but football and that hurt them relative to Boise.

(08-07-2015 02:18 PM)stxrunner Wrote:  

(08-07-2015 02:03 PM)stever20 Wrote:  

(08-07-2015 01:57 PM)Otacon Wrote:  What benefits does Boise have over Cincinnati? Slightly better football?

Slightly better football?

last 10 years- Boise is 113-19. Cincy is 87-41. Over 2x the number of losses..
last 5 years- Boise is 55-11. Cincy is 44-22. Double the losses

so better football by a good size margin.

Also Boise willing to do Thursday/Friday games, which helps the TV contract.

Better football, no doubt, but it's not like we are comparing a losing program to a winning one. Let's also keep in mind UC was playing in the Big East for a fair amount of those years, which while far from a gauntlet, was much better than the WAC that Boise was playing in.

Not to mention, once you get past football, it's really not an argument. Boise's basketball and academics aren't even in the same stratosphere as UC's. Location and TV market also favor UC. And since when does UC not play Thurs/Friday? We have been doing so for years including the upcoming one.

Obviously I'm biased, and I typically try to stay out of my cheerleader outfit, but overall, this isn't really a comparison. I think most would agree.

Its not. Cincinnati football doesn't compare to Boise football. But then Boise football isn't enough to offset their other disadvantages.

(08-07-2015 02:32 PM)stever20 Wrote:  

(08-07-2015 02:30 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(08-07-2015 02:15 PM)CougarRed Wrote:  Geography will keep BYU out too. That and the other things.

If the Big 12 decides to expand, Houston is a dead cinch lock. The other school will be Cincy or UCF.

End of story.

BYU is most likely in spite of geography and everything else.

Boise is probably as unlikely as UConn. Just too much of a stretch.

The other one could be Cincinnati, Houston, UCF, USF, Tulane or Memphis. Its really just BYU and those 6 that have any measurable chance.

Boise way more likely vs UConn. They're closer, and more importantly they have great football. If BYU goes, Boise becomes an instant very real possibility.

That's like saying China is closer than India. They're both too far away. BYU doesn't help. Boise would be a 3rd school far from everyone else currently in the conference.

(08-07-2015 02:25 PM)YNot Wrote:  

(08-07-2015 01:57 PM)Otacon Wrote:  What benefits does Boise have over Cincinnati? Slightly better football?

Boise St. consistently beats Cincinnati in football TV ratings and selection for better time slots and channels.

BOISE ST. 2014 TV RATINGS (top-5)
v. UConn (ABC) = 1.9 rating, 2.96M viewers
v. Ole Miss (ESPN-Thursday) = 1.5 rating, 2.42M viewers
v. Fresno St. (ESPN-Friday) = 1.0 rating, 1.62M viewers
MWC Championship (CBS)= 1.0 rating, 1.53M viewers
v. BYU (ESPN-Friday)= 0.6 rating, 1.02M viewers

CINCINNATI 2014 TV RATINGS (top-5)
v. Houston (ESPN) - 0.9 rating, 1.31M viewers
v. ECU (ESPN2-Thursday) = 0.5 rating, 821K viewers
v. Tulane (ESPN2-Friday) = 0.4 rating, 648K viewers
v. USF (ESPN2-Friday) = 0.4 rating, 576K viewers
v. Toledo (ESPNU-Friday) = 0.3 rating, 394K viewers

v. Ohio St. ?? - Big Ten Network
v. Miami ?? - GamePlan
v. Memphis ?? - CBSSN
v. Miami(OH) ?? - CBSSN

So, Boise St. has five games with more than one million viewers and four with 1.0 rating or better. Cincinnati has one such game.

Ohio St. v. Cincinnati gets placed on the BTN and Miami v. Cincinnati relegated to GamePlan. Meanwhile, Boise St. v. UConn makes ABC and Boise St. v. Ole Miss is picked for the first ESPN broadcast of the season.

BOISE ST. 2013 TV RATINGS (top-5)
v. Fresno St. (ESPN-Friday) = 1.4 rating, 2.12M viewers
v. Air Force (ESPN-Friday) = 1.3 rating, 2M viewers
v. BYU (ESPN-Friday) = 1.2 rating, 1.97M viewers
v. Washington (FS1) = 0.4 rating, 710K viewers
v. Wyoming (ESPN2) = 0.4 rating, 603K viewers

CINCINNATI 2013 TV RATINGS (top-5)
v. Louisville (ESPN-Thursday) = 1.1 rating, 1.57M viewers
v. Temple (ESPN-Friday) = 0.6 rating, 872K viewers
v. Illinois (ESPN2) = 0.4 rating, 553K viewers
v. Memphis (ESPN2-Wednesday) = 0.3 rating, 437K viewers
v. Purdue (ESPNU) = 0.2 rating, 412K viewers

Boise St. lands three games with around TWO million viewers, Cincinnati has one game at 1.5 million.

First of all, it's already been well proven that ratings and viewers have a lot more to do with network and timeslot than any team that plays in the game. So comparing ESPN2/U games to ABC, ESPN main, and CBS is a worthless exercise. Let's also not pretend Boise didn't get VERY fortunate with their ABC slotting last year as Week 3 was one of the weakest slate of games in recent memory. The ONLY matchup between ranked teams that week was USCe - Georgia, and it was scooped up by CBS as their feature.

That said, Boise gets better network exposure because they have more of a national brand than UC as a result of their success on the big stage and consistency. That's why they get chosen for those timeslots. So there is definite value there, and there is not much question their football at this moment is out in front.

I think the thing with Boise is would they be willing to go Big 12 football only. If they did, I could see it happening pretty easily, along with BYU football only. Boise parks their other sports either in the Big West again or more likely the WAC. BYU remains in the WCC. Keep basketball 10 teams which the Big 12 seems to love.

(08-07-2015 02:41 PM)stever20 Wrote:  I think the thing with Boise is would they be willing to go Big 12 football only. If they did, I could see it happening pretty easily, along with BYU football only. Boise parks their other sports either in the Big West again or more likely the WAC. BYU remains in the WCC. Keep basketball 10 teams which the Big 12 seems to love.

I don't see the Big 12 taking a partial unless it was Notre Dame.

(08-07-2015 02:34 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(08-07-2015 02:18 PM)stxrunner Wrote:  

(08-07-2015 02:03 PM)stever20 Wrote:  

(08-07-2015 01:57 PM)Otacon Wrote:  What benefits does Boise have over Cincinnati? Slightly better football?

Slightly better football?

last 10 years- Boise is 113-19. Cincy is 87-41. Over 2x the number of losses..
last 5 years- Boise is 55-11. Cincy is 44-22. Double the losses

so better football by a good size margin.

Also Boise willing to do Thursday/Friday games, which helps the TV contract.

Better football, no doubt, but it's not like we are comparing a losing program to a winning one. Let's also keep in mind UC was playing in the Big East for a fair amount of those years, which while far from a gauntlet, was much better than the WAC that Boise was playing in.

Not to mention, once you get past football, it's really not an argument. Boise's basketball and academics aren't even in the same stratosphere as UC's. Location and TV market also favor UC. And since when does UC not play Thurs/Friday? We have been doing so for years including the upcoming one.

Obviously I'm biased, and I typically try to stay out of my cheerleader outfit, but overall, this isn't really a comparison. I think most would agree.

Its not. Cincinnati football doesn't compare to Boise football. But then Boise football isn't enough to offset their other disadvantages.

I agree, hence the first line of my post. My main point was that UC isn't exactly struggling, not to try and say the program is better than Boise's right now.

(08-07-2015 02:42 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(08-07-2015 02:41 PM)stever20 Wrote:  I think the thing with Boise is would they be willing to go Big 12 football only. If they did, I could see it happening pretty easily, along with BYU football only. Boise parks their other sports either in the Big West again or more likely the WAC. BYU remains in the WCC. Keep basketball 10 teams which the Big 12 seems to love.

I don't see the Big 12 taking a partial unless it was Notre Dame.

I could pretty easily. I think they really love the 10 team format in everything. Absolutely love it. But they need 12 for football to get the title game. Doing this gives the Big 12 in a lot of ways the best of both worlds.

(08-07-2015 02:07 PM)ren.hoek Wrote:  

(08-07-2015 01:56 PM)stever20 Wrote:  My point is that it's not automatically going to be Cincy there just to provide WVU with a travel partner. Boise right now really far ahead of Cincy and has some other benefits as well.

the geographically correct answer is ND and WVU join the ACC as 15 and 16. big12 then adds BYU, Boise State and Colorado State. but there's a better chance of Chris Christie leading a jazzercise class than WVU going to the ACC.

But didn't your know, that is just message board fodder, and no university presidents actually think that way?[/align]

(08-07-2015 02:45 PM)stever20 Wrote:  

(08-07-2015 02:42 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(08-07-2015 02:41 PM)stever20 Wrote:  I think the thing with Boise is would they be willing to go Big 12 football only. If they did, I could see it happening pretty easily, along with BYU football only. Boise parks their other sports either in the Big West again or more likely the WAC. BYU remains in the WCC. Keep basketball 10 teams which the Big 12 seems to love.

I don't see the Big 12 taking a partial unless it was Notre Dame.

I could pretty easily. I think they really love the 10 team format in everything. Absolutely love it. But they need 12 for football to get the title game. Doing this gives the Big 12 in a lot of ways the best of both worlds.

It gives them 12, but creates a perception of weakness and involves them bringing in someone who they wouldn't consider an academic peer to the least of the Big 12 schools. I don't think anyone wants to be a hybrid like the Big East. Notre Dame adds enough value to consider it. Anyone else? No. Look at those ratings the Boise fan is posting. They're pretty low. Its not enough of an advantage to make up for the negative perception of being a hybrid.

(08-07-2015 02:45 PM)stever20 Wrote:  

(08-07-2015 02:42 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(08-07-2015 02:41 PM)stever20 Wrote:  I think the thing with Boise is would they be willing to go Big 12 football only. If they did, I could see it happening pretty easily, along with BYU football only. Boise parks their other sports either in the Big West again or more likely the WAC. BYU remains in the WCC. Keep basketball 10 teams which the Big 12 seems to love.

I don't see the Big 12 taking a partial unless it was Notre Dame.

I could pretty easily. I think they really love the 10 team format in everything. Absolutely love it. But they need 12 for football to get the title game. Doing this gives the Big 12 in a lot of ways the best of both worlds.

Football-only is the only Boise gets added. No way the B12 is going to try to sell adding a school as a full member whose peers in the USNWR rankings are the University of the Incarnate Word and Walla Walla University.

(08-07-2015 03:09 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(08-07-2015 02:45 PM)stever20 Wrote:  

(08-07-2015 02:42 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(08-07-2015 02:41 PM)stever20 Wrote:  I think the thing with Boise is would they be willing to go Big 12 football only. If they did, I could see it happening pretty easily, along with BYU football only. Boise parks their other sports either in the Big West again or more likely the WAC. BYU remains in the WCC. Keep basketball 10 teams which the Big 12 seems to love.

I don't see the Big 12 taking a partial unless it was Notre Dame.

I could pretty easily. I think they really love the 10 team format in everything. Absolutely love it. But they need 12 for football to get the title game. Doing this gives the Big 12 in a lot of ways the best of both worlds.

It gives them 12, but creates a perception of weakness and involves them bringing in someone who they wouldn't consider an academic peer to the least of the Big 12 schools. I don't think anyone wants to be a hybrid like the Big East. Notre Dame adds enough value to consider it. Anyone else? No. Look at those ratings the Boise fan is posting. They're pretty low. Its not enough of an advantage to make up for the negative perception of being a hybrid.

look at the opponents...
UConn
Ole Miss(on 1st Thursday night of the season)
Fresno
MWC title game
BYU
Fresno again
Air Force
BYU again
Washington
Wyoming

Not exactly stellar opponents there by any stretch.

I don't know guys, one thing that I have said from the start is they will explore the option to expand and likely to expand as their plan A from the start, but as time passes by gut feeling is starting to change and my doubt of the Big 12 expanding is growing.

If there are no expansion offers out by late spring of 2016, I'm taking money off the table they expand at all.

I can't let the information from Frankthetanks article about Oklahoma wanting out to subside. It is real, IMO.

(08-07-2015 02:45 PM)stever20 Wrote:  But they need 12 for football to get the title game.

Only if it takes CCG deregulation longer to happen than it would take to add two teams.

(08-07-2015 02:40 PM)stxrunner Wrote:  First of all, it's already been well proven that ratings and viewers have a lot more to do with network and timeslot than any team that plays in the game. So comparing ESPN2/U games to ABC, ESPN main, and CBS is a worthless exercise. Let's also not pretend Boise didn't get VERY fortunate with their ABC slotting last year as Week 3 was one of the weakest slate of games in recent memory. The ONLY matchup between ranked teams that week was USCe - Georgia, and it was scooped up by CBS as their feature.

That said, Boise gets better network exposure because they have more of a national brand than UC as a result of their success on the big stage and consistency. That's why they get chosen for those timeslots. So there is definite value there, and there is not much question their football at this moment is out in front.

The original question "was what benefits does Boise St. have over Cincinnati?" besides its better football. The facts point that Boise St. absolutely has a better national brand and that the TV networks pick Boise St. ahead of Cincinnati for better channels and timeslots.

Regarding the Boise St.-UConn game - ESPN/ABC could have chosen Toledo v. Cincinnati (an AAC frontrunner) or NC St. v. South Florida (P5 opponent).

ESPN/ABC also could have chosen another AAC matchup later in the season - perhaps even an all-AAC matchup. In Week 3, they had UCF @ (20) Missouri or ECU @ (17) Virginia Tech or (21) Louisville @ Virginia or Wyoming @ (2) Oregon or Southern Miss @ (3) Alabama or Iowa @ Iowa St. or Army @ (15) Stanford or (16) Arizona St. @ Colorado or Nebraska @ Fresno St. or Nevada @ Arizona.

They chose Boise St. v. UConn.

(08-07-2015 03:10 PM)krup Wrote:  Football-only is the only Boise gets added. No way the B12 is going to try to sell adding a school as a full member whose peers in the USNWR rankings are the University of the Incarnate Word and Walla Walla University.

Excellent point. Especially with Kansas, Texas, and Iowa St. as part of the AAU and Oklahoma and Texas Tech apparently striving to get there.