The AAC should pull a "Big 10" and add Alabama, Georgia, Kentucky and Arkansas.

(08-26-2015 09:56 AM)Okielite Wrote:  

(08-25-2015 11:37 PM)Lenvillecards Wrote:  

(08-25-2015 07:34 PM)Okielite Wrote:  

(08-25-2015 06:41 PM)Rabbit_in_Red Wrote:  So anyhow, the BigXII's going to collapse and be divvied up amongst the other four conferences. Yeah, there may be a few schools slid here and there amongst the other P4 conferences to balance the sheets, but the BigXII's going to collapse.

Certainly a possibility just like the ACC getting picked apart. Problem is that the ACC has the schools the SEC, B1G, and Big 12 want.

But don't worry. I"m sure Louisville would get in the Big 12 this time around. It's the other schools like Cuse, BC, Wake, etc.. that would be left behind.

Big 12 gets paid better than the ACC by TV partners
Big 12 has much better attendance and TV ratings than the ACC
Big 12 has much higher average AD budgets than the ACC
Big 12 has a better bowl deal with the SEC than the ACC does
Big 12 is #1 in every market in the footprint, ACC is #2 for the most part

Big 12 has many advantages over the ACC. But neither are in a good position.

Your first paragraph just proves that the ACC is far more valuable than the Big 12. The Big 12 has only 2-3 teams that anyone wants.

If Louisville goes to the Big 12 then we better be going with FSU, Clemson & GT or no thanks. While that is a possibility it is very slim. I doubt that Syracuse & BC would be left behind, they offer a lot of value to the B1G.

The Big 12 had to be overpaid just to keep it together. Yeah the Big 12 has more attendance & such & yet they are still less valuable than the ACC.

You can say that a one loss ACC champ will be left out of the playoffs but until it happens we wont know. Meanwhile 1 loss Big 12 champs have been left out recently (Oklahoma St & TCU/Baylor). When was the last time the Big 12 played for a national title or won one?

The only advantage the Big 12 has over the ACC is Texas & Oklahoma. The Big 12 realistically is far more vulnerable than the ACC.

The ACC is paid less than the Big 12, clearly the ACC is less valuable. That's the problem with being #2 in most markets.

Syracuse and BC do not bring any TV ratings for football. Thus their value to a TV partner is limited. Did you look at the TV ratings? They are FCS bad for those schools unless they play FSU, V-TEch, Clemson, or Louisville. When they pay each other nobody even watches. The days of adding schools to force everyone in the state to pay for a conference network are nearing an end. Schools with actual fans who watch the games will be worth more than those in big TV markets with limited interest.

Not sure where you are getting the less valuable comment. ISU makes more than anybody in the ACC. You are only worth what someone will pay and quite frankly the ACC is the least valuable power conference. The numbers confirm this.

Claiming otherwise is just stupid. The conferences worth the most get paid the most. End of story.

The Big 12 only has 2 valuable football teams, Oklahoma & Texas. If it weren't for them than Iowa St would be in the MWC or AAC. Fox only overpaid for the B12 to keep Oklahoma & Texas out of the PAC. There isn't a network out there drooling over Lawrence, Wacco, Stillwater & such and I bet teams like FSU aren't either. Louisville surely isn't. Unless something changed last season, the last time I checked, the B12 was getting poor ratings on Fox.

You can claim that Syracuse isn't valuable all you want but the fact that ESPN paid the ACC millions more per team to put them there proves otherwise. How many AQ BCS caliber schools have went to the B12? Only WV & that's because they were desperate & didn't have any other options.

What metrics are you using to determine media rankings? You seem to change them to fit your arguments. Is it city or state? It's easy for the B12 to claim the #1 spot in a state where they are the only P5 conference or where there is only 1 or 2 P5 teams there. Again you are giving the B12 undue benefits for being in small states/markets. I don't think anyone is arguing that the northeast isn't dominated by pro sports.

(08-26-2015 10:49 AM)Lenvillecards Wrote:  

(08-26-2015 09:56 AM)Okielite Wrote:  

(08-25-2015 11:37 PM)Lenvillecards Wrote:  

(08-25-2015 07:34 PM)Okielite Wrote:  

(08-25-2015 06:41 PM)Rabbit_in_Red Wrote:  So anyhow, the BigXII's going to collapse and be divvied up amongst the other four conferences. Yeah, there may be a few schools slid here and there amongst the other P4 conferences to balance the sheets, but the BigXII's going to collapse.

Certainly a possibility just like the ACC getting picked apart. Problem is that the ACC has the schools the SEC, B1G, and Big 12 want.

But don't worry. I"m sure Louisville would get in the Big 12 this time around. It's the other schools like Cuse, BC, Wake, etc.. that would be left behind.

Big 12 gets paid better than the ACC by TV partners
Big 12 has much better attendance and TV ratings than the ACC
Big 12 has much higher average AD budgets than the ACC
Big 12 has a better bowl deal with the SEC than the ACC does
Big 12 is #1 in every market in the footprint, ACC is #2 for the most part

Big 12 has many advantages over the ACC. But neither are in a good position.

Your first paragraph just proves that the ACC is far more valuable than the Big 12. The Big 12 has only 2-3 teams that anyone wants.

If Louisville goes to the Big 12 then we better be going with FSU, Clemson & GT or no thanks. While that is a possibility it is very slim. I doubt that Syracuse & BC would be left behind, they offer a lot of value to the B1G.

The Big 12 had to be overpaid just to keep it together. Yeah the Big 12 has more attendance & such & yet they are still less valuable than the ACC.

You can say that a one loss ACC champ will be left out of the playoffs but until it happens we wont know. Meanwhile 1 loss Big 12 champs have been left out recently (Oklahoma St & TCU/Baylor). When was the last time the Big 12 played for a national title or won one?

The only advantage the Big 12 has over the ACC is Texas & Oklahoma. The Big 12 realistically is far more vulnerable than the ACC.

The ACC is paid less than the Big 12, clearly the ACC is less valuable. That's the problem with being #2 in most markets.

Syracuse and BC do not bring any TV ratings for football. Thus their value to a TV partner is limited. Did you look at the TV ratings? They are FCS bad for those schools unless they play FSU, V-TEch, Clemson, or Louisville. When they pay each other nobody even watches. The days of adding schools to force everyone in the state to pay for a conference network are nearing an end. Schools with actual fans who watch the games will be worth more than those in big TV markets with limited interest.

Not sure where you are getting the less valuable comment. ISU makes more than anybody in the ACC. You are only worth what someone will pay and quite frankly the ACC is the least valuable power conference. The numbers confirm this.

Claiming otherwise is just stupid. The conferences worth the most get paid the most. End of story.

The Big 12 only has 2 valuable football teams, Oklahoma & Texas. If it weren't for them than Iowa St would be in the MWC or AAC. Fox only overpaid for the B12 to keep Oklahoma & Texas out of the PAC. There isn't a network out there drooling over Lawrence, Wacco, Stillwater & such and I bet teams like FSU aren't either. Louisville surely isn't. Unless something changed last season, the last time I checked, the B12 was getting poor ratings on Fox.

You can claim that Syracuse isn't valuable all you want but the fact that ESPN paid the ACC millions more per team to put them there proves otherwise. How many AQ BCS caliber schools have went to the B12? Only WV & that's because they were desperate & didn't have any other options.

What metrics are you using to determine media rankings? You seem to change them to fit your arguments. Is it city or state? It's easy for the B12 to claim the #1 spot in a state where they are the only P5 conference or where there is only 1 or 2 P5 teams there. Again you are giving the B12 undue benefits for being in small states/markets. I don't think anyone is arguing that the northeast isn't dominated by pro sports.

Iowa State is a huge land grant school with AAu status and a rabid fanbase that supports its teams across the board. Nearly 10k at WBB games, 14k+ at mens games. And expanding the football stadium over 60k to keep up with demand during a bad run.

Even ISU has value. Value to TV partners is a direct correlation to TV ratings. Schools with bad TV ratings are not worth much. Hello Cuse, BC, wake, etc.. Did you look at the TV ratings I posted for Cuse? Terrible is an understatement.

Oklahoma state has a top 12 AD budget in the country, attendance just below 60k, good TV ratings, and top shelf facilities. You think that is worthless?

Worthless is having olny 4 games make TV ratings, and only 2 above a .2. That essentially means nobody is watching. When nobody watches the games have little value. You don't need a business degree to understand how this works.

ESPN/FOX pays Cuse less for its' content than they pay ISU. Heck ISU makes more than FSU for TV money.

Your inability to acknowledge the ACC weaknesses is amusing but reeks of insecurity. I on the other hand have no problem admitting the Big 12 could collapse at some point. I"m not butthurt, sensitive, fragile, etc like you are. The Louisville fans have a certain way of embarrassing themselves in these forums. It's like you have a chip on your shoulder now that you played in a Big boy conference for a year.

The TV ratings and attendance don't' lie. The ACC has the weakest lineup in the p-5 and are typically the #2 brand in the footprint. TV Payouts don't' lie as they are confirmed by TV ratings as well. You can make up what you want but at the end of the day those numbers determine value of schools and conferences.

I have noticed that nobody is confirming Cuse having the #2 AD budget in the ACC. Would love to know if that was true. I highly doubt it.

(08-26-2015 10:10 AM)Wilkie01 Wrote:  

I'Ve never seen someone just post picture after picture because they are so scared to actually talk numbers. I'll let the facts do the talking while you copy and paste pics. It's like you don't know what to do at this point because you are getting owned by actual facts such as attendance, TV payouts, TV ratings, being #2 in most markets, etc...

Is this about getting snubbed by the Big 12? Seems like a bad case of the but hurtt.

(08-26-2015 11:08 AM)Okielite Wrote:  

(08-26-2015 10:10 AM)Wilkie01 Wrote:  

I'Ve never seen someone just post picture after picture because they are so scared to actually talk numbers. I'll let the facts do the talking while you copy and paste pics. It's like you don't know what to do at this point because you are getting owned by actual facts such as attendance, TV payouts, TV ratings, being #2 in most markets, etc...

Is this about getting snubbed by the Big 12? Seems like a bad case of the but hurtt.

Louisville always wanted to be in the Big East or the ACC, We played where we wanted to be. It all work out for us to our advantage. We really did not want to be Texas's Ho!

(08-25-2015 02:22 PM)Wilkie01 Wrote:  

(08-25-2015 02:06 PM)Pervis_Griffith Wrote:  

(08-19-2015 02:10 PM)Okielite Wrote:  I did not follow WVU until they were added to the BIg 12 so I will trust your memory. At that time Louisville was in C-USA if I remember correctly.

Uhhh .. you remembered incorrectly ... Louisville had won several Big East championships in both football and basketball before WVU was invited to the Big XII and before being invited to the ACC.

Are wasting out time on teenager or uninformed Freshman?

As soon as I posted, I got mad at myself, for rising to the bait and responding at all. Oh well.

(08-26-2015 10:19 AM)Gray Avenger Wrote:  The AAC should pull a "Big 10" and add Alabama, Georgia, Kentucky and Arkansas.

Freakin' hilarious -- thanks -- totally made me laugh out loud. Well done.

(08-25-2015 11:00 PM)Okielite Wrote:  

(08-25-2015 10:28 PM)cuseroc Wrote:  

(08-25-2015 10:01 PM)Okielite Wrote:  

(08-25-2015 08:57 PM)cuseroc Wrote:  

(08-25-2015 05:36 PM)Okielite Wrote:  According to the data Cuse is #6 in NY. #2 in Oklahoma > #6 in NY. I"m glad to have Boone along with many generous donors to the program.

I understand the hoops argument. See KU. But this is about football, not BB. Quite frankly I don't see the value in Cuse football. The TV ratings are horrid, like FCS horrid. About 100k per game unless you play a big name. That is serious lack of fan support. Schools like ISU had a bad season last year as well. Except they still can't keep up with demand for tickets and just expanded over 60k. They blow you away in TV ratings. Funny how people in big cities like NY pretend that it's a valuable spot. Then you find out Des Moines Iowa is worth more to TV partners than Cuse or BC.

So last year do you think FSU was more excited to play OSU or Cuse? Seriously? Funny how 3x more people watched the OSU/FSU game than the Cuse/FSU game. LOL. I guarantee that when FSU fans see a game against teams like Cuse it is pure disappointment for fans, coaches, and players.

Cuse was #6 in NYC, but #1 in the whole state. Those numbers that you shared was for NYC.

A person has to be either really stupid to not understand the difference between NYC and New York State or just a bad troll who wont admit he was wrong. You don't seem to be really stupid, so you are obviously a really bad troll who wont admit when he is wrong. Have a good day.

Nowhere does any data indicate that Cuse is #1 in NY for college football. If those TV ratings we looked at are from the #1 team in NY there is something terribly wrong.

If 5 schools are ahead of Cuse in NYC, and several with a considerable lead, it is likely that those schools have a presence in other parts of the state.

My guess would be as an overall state Rutgers, PSU, and Notre Dame are ahead of Cuse who is very close to others like UConn, BC, etc...

No way Cuse could overcome the advantage that some of those schools have just in NYC. Unless there is a wall built around Syracuse that does not allow fans of other teams to move there. Rutgers for example with 20% of NYC will be ahead of Cuse no matter what happens in the rest of the state.

Im making this one last attempt to explain away your ignorance concerning NYS.

First, Rutgers is in Northern New Jersey. Northern New Jersey, is part of the NYC television market. That's why Rutgers shows so strongly in NYC ratings. Very few New Yorkers care at all about Rutgers or anything in New Jersey. New Yorkers get offended to even be associated with New Jersey. That's not a slap at NJ, but just the way it is. Those 600,000 Rutgers fans that you see in NYC are for the most part, all folks in New Jersey. You, not being from NY or the northeast, wouldn't understand this. But this is the truth.

Connecticut has a strong showing for the same reason as Rutgers. Fairfield County Connecticut is part of the NYC tv market too.

Penn State has a strong showing in NYC because its Penn State. Same for ND. But in Upstate NY, both schools have some fans, but not really anymore than Michigan or Miami or Ohio State. Penn State MAY have slightly more fans than the rest, but its still negligible. Syracuse gear and bumper stickers are all over the place. I have seen Syracuse gear sold in corner stores right along with Yankees gear all over Upstate NY. Upstate NY and NYC are like two completely different states.

That's why the following statement from you is just totally nonsensical
My guess would be as an overall state Rutgers, PSU, and Notre Dame are ahead of Cuse

You just don't know the intricacies of the area so I will just let it go, but Penn State and Rutgers fans can vouch for what I said. And I'm pretty sure that None of them believe that they have more fans in the State of NY than Syracuse


Also, Syracuse does have the third largest AD in the Acc, after FSU, Louisville, there's Syracuse.

You can spin it any way you want but at the end of the day these people you keep talking about don't watch Cuse play football on TV or in person. TV ratings and attendance confirm this.

I'd love to see some actual proof that Cuse has the #3 AD budget in the ACC. Hard to believe quite frankly..

ACC revenues

(08-26-2015 11:05 AM)Okielite Wrote:  

(08-26-2015 10:49 AM)Lenvillecards Wrote:  

(08-26-2015 09:56 AM)Okielite Wrote:  

(08-25-2015 11:37 PM)Lenvillecards Wrote:  

(08-25-2015 07:34 PM)Okielite Wrote:  Certainly a possibility just like the ACC getting picked apart. Problem is that the ACC has the schools the SEC, B1G, and Big 12 want.

But don't worry. I"m sure Louisville would get in the Big 12 this time around. It's the other schools like Cuse, BC, Wake, etc.. that would be left behind.

Big 12 gets paid better than the ACC by TV partners
Big 12 has much better attendance and TV ratings than the ACC
Big 12 has much higher average AD budgets than the ACC
Big 12 has a better bowl deal with the SEC than the ACC does
Big 12 is #1 in every market in the footprint, ACC is #2 for the most part

Big 12 has many advantages over the ACC. But neither are in a good position.

Your first paragraph just proves that the ACC is far more valuable than the Big 12. The Big 12 has only 2-3 teams that anyone wants.

If Louisville goes to the Big 12 then we better be going with FSU, Clemson & GT or no thanks. While that is a possibility it is very slim. I doubt that Syracuse & BC would be left behind, they offer a lot of value to the B1G.

The Big 12 had to be overpaid just to keep it together. Yeah the Big 12 has more attendance & such & yet they are still less valuable than the ACC.

You can say that a one loss ACC champ will be left out of the playoffs but until it happens we wont know. Meanwhile 1 loss Big 12 champs have been left out recently (Oklahoma St & TCU/Baylor). When was the last time the Big 12 played for a national title or won one?

The only advantage the Big 12 has over the ACC is Texas & Oklahoma. The Big 12 realistically is far more vulnerable than the ACC.

The ACC is paid less than the Big 12, clearly the ACC is less valuable. That's the problem with being #2 in most markets.

Syracuse and BC do not bring any TV ratings for football. Thus their value to a TV partner is limited. Did you look at the TV ratings? They are FCS bad for those schools unless they play FSU, V-TEch, Clemson, or Louisville. When they pay each other nobody even watches. The days of adding schools to force everyone in the state to pay for a conference network are nearing an end. Schools with actual fans who watch the games will be worth more than those in big TV markets with limited interest.

Not sure where you are getting the less valuable comment. ISU makes more than anybody in the ACC. You are only worth what someone will pay and quite frankly the ACC is the least valuable power conference. The numbers confirm this.

Claiming otherwise is just stupid. The conferences worth the most get paid the most. End of story.

The Big 12 only has 2 valuable football teams, Oklahoma & Texas. If it weren't for them than Iowa St would be in the MWC or AAC. Fox only overpaid for the B12 to keep Oklahoma & Texas out of the PAC. There isn't a network out there drooling over Lawrence, Wacco, Stillwater & such and I bet teams like FSU aren't either. Louisville surely isn't. Unless something changed last season, the last time I checked, the B12 was getting poor ratings on Fox.

You can claim that Syracuse isn't valuable all you want but the fact that ESPN paid the ACC millions more per team to put them there proves otherwise. How many AQ BCS caliber schools have went to the B12? Only WV & that's because they were desperate & didn't have any other options.

What metrics are you using to determine media rankings? You seem to change them to fit your arguments. Is it city or state? It's easy for the B12 to claim the #1 spot in a state where they are the only P5 conference or where there is only 1 or 2 P5 teams there. Again you are giving the B12 undue benefits for being in small states/markets. I don't think anyone is arguing that the northeast isn't dominated by pro sports.

Iowa State is a huge land grant school with AAu status and a rabid fanbase that supports its teams across the board. Nearly 10k at WBB games, 14k+ at mens games. And expanding the football stadium over 60k to keep up with demand during a bad run.

Even ISU has value. Value to TV partners is a direct correlation to TV ratings. Schools with bad TV ratings are not worth much. Hello Cuse, BC, wake, etc.. Did you look at the TV ratings I posted for Cuse? Terrible is an understatement.

Oklahoma state has a top 12 AD budget in the country, attendance just below 60k, good TV ratings, and top shelf facilities. You think that is worthless?

Worthless is having olny 4 games make TV ratings, and only 2 above a .2. That essentially means nobody is watching. When nobody watches the games have little value. You don't need a business degree to understand how this works.

ESPN/FOX pays Cuse less for its' content than they pay ISU. Heck ISU makes more than FSU for TV money.

Your inability to acknowledge the ACC weaknesses is amusing but reeks of insecurity. I on the other hand have no problem admitting the Big 12 could collapse at some point. I"m not butthurt, sensitive, fragile, etc like you are. The Louisville fans have a certain way of embarrassing themselves in these forums. It's like you have a chip on your shoulder now that you played in a Big boy conference for a year.

The TV ratings and attendance don't' lie. The ACC has the weakest lineup in the p-5 and are typically the #2 brand in the footprint. TV Payouts don't' lie as they are confirmed by TV ratings as well. You can make up what you want but at the end of the day those numbers determine value of schools and conferences.

I have noticed that nobody is confirming Cuse having the #2 AD budget in the ACC. Would love to know if that was true. I highly doubt it.

If you want to use TV ratings to judge value fine, the ACC was the 3rd most watched conference last year.

http://www.teamspeedkills.com/2012/2/28/...onal-title

"Believe it or not, the third-highest conference was the ACC with 2.65 million viewers per telecast. The Big 12 was fourth with 2.3 million per telecast, the Pac-12 was fifth with 2.1 million per telecast, and the Big East was sixth with 1.9 million per telecast"

So by your metrics then the ACC should be getting paid more than the Big 12. The Big 12 didn't even have a game in the top 25 most watched last season. More viewers equal greater value right? TV ratings don't lie, right? You don't base a conference value based off of 1 team who had an off year. You don't need a business degree to understand that.

I'm glad that Iowa St has a large & passionate fan base, its a great university, but if the Big 12 fell apart tomorrow where would they go? The B1G already has Iowa & the PAC doesn't seem interested.

I'm butthurt? That's funny. If you knew me or have read my posts throughout this board then you would know that I have said that ACC teams going to the Big 12 is a plausible scenario. I know exactly what the ACC weaknesses are & I think they are more easily fixed than the ones that the Big 12 has.

The BigXII lost four schools, replaced them with two, and has at least ONE of it's key players with it's foot publicly out the door.

The ACC lost ONE school, replaced it with one considered a better athletics program AND with Notre Dame, and everyone signed a GOR because they all know a TV deal is coming. (the only people that don't believe an ACCN is happening is OkieLite and various UConn and WVU fans)

Now, even if Okielite was correct in his assessment that the ACC was #2 in all of their markets...he fails to mention one key fact: They still draw well enough to justify a hefty sum for network carriage per house in those markets, and the ACC has the best collection of markets in it's footprint of all conferences. While I think we can all likely agree that it may not to match the SEC (and I don't think anyone has suggested we'd match the SEC), it'd certainly go a long long looooooooooooong way to close the gap. Enough to where schools would be even more contented.

I get it. I mean, if my school was in a conference on the brink of collapse and it wasn't certain we'd have a landing spot in the majors...I'd probably fling a lot of poo too. I mean, who'd want #2 in a cow pasture state with minimal markets?

Do you understand that you can't have a network without content?

If someone else owns the content why would they give it back?

The Big 12 has the same problem. FOX and ESPN own the Big content already and from my understanding Raycom owns the ACC content. Why would they suddenly turn around and form a network to pay the ACC or Big 12 millions if they already own the content in the first place. That makes no sense. They are not in this to make the school's rich.

Both conferences have a mistake by not planning for a network. Now they pay the price.

(08-26-2015 01:54 PM)cuseroc Wrote:  

(08-25-2015 11:00 PM)Okielite Wrote:  

(08-25-2015 10:28 PM)cuseroc Wrote:  

(08-25-2015 10:01 PM)Okielite Wrote:  

(08-25-2015 08:57 PM)cuseroc Wrote:  Cuse was #6 in NYC, but #1 in the whole state. Those numbers that you shared was for NYC.

A person has to be either really stupid to not understand the difference between NYC and New York State or just a bad troll who wont admit he was wrong. You don't seem to be really stupid, so you are obviously a really bad troll who wont admit when he is wrong. Have a good day.

Nowhere does any data indicate that Cuse is #1 in NY for college football. If those TV ratings we looked at are from the #1 team in NY there is something terribly wrong.

If 5 schools are ahead of Cuse in NYC, and several with a considerable lead, it is likely that those schools have a presence in other parts of the state.

My guess would be as an overall state Rutgers, PSU, and Notre Dame are ahead of Cuse who is very close to others like UConn, BC, etc...

No way Cuse could overcome the advantage that some of those schools have just in NYC. Unless there is a wall built around Syracuse that does not allow fans of other teams to move there. Rutgers for example with 20% of NYC will be ahead of Cuse no matter what happens in the rest of the state.

Im making this one last attempt to explain away your ignorance concerning NYS.

First, Rutgers is in Northern New Jersey. Northern New Jersey, is part of the NYC television market. That's why Rutgers shows so strongly in NYC ratings. Very few New Yorkers care at all about Rutgers or anything in New Jersey. New Yorkers get offended to even be associated with New Jersey. That's not a slap at NJ, but just the way it is. Those 600,000 Rutgers fans that you see in NYC are for the most part, all folks in New Jersey. You, not being from NY or the northeast, wouldn't understand this. But this is the truth.

Connecticut has a strong showing for the same reason as Rutgers. Fairfield County Connecticut is part of the NYC tv market too.

Penn State has a strong showing in NYC because its Penn State. Same for ND. But in Upstate NY, both schools have some fans, but not really anymore than Michigan or Miami or Ohio State. Penn State MAY have slightly more fans than the rest, but its still negligible. Syracuse gear and bumper stickers are all over the place. I have seen Syracuse gear sold in corner stores right along with Yankees gear all over Upstate NY. Upstate NY and NYC are like two completely different states.

That's why the following statement from you is just totally nonsensical
My guess would be as an overall state Rutgers, PSU, and Notre Dame are ahead of Cuse

You just don't know the intricacies of the area so I will just let it go, but Penn State and Rutgers fans can vouch for what I said. And I'm pretty sure that None of them believe that they have more fans in the State of NY than Syracuse


Also, Syracuse does have the third largest AD in the Acc, after FSU, Louisville, there's Syracuse.

You can spin it any way you want but at the end of the day these people you keep talking about don't watch Cuse play football on TV or in person. TV ratings and attendance confirm this.

I'd love to see some actual proof that Cuse has the #3 AD budget in the ACC. Hard to believe quite frankly..

ACC revenues

Impressive. I was wrong on that. I will own it. Most online people won't but I will. That must be due to BB Ticket sales as it's' sure as heck isn't from pulling football TV ratings. Those home games likely have almost no value to TV partners since so few people watch. The BC/Cuse TV ratings are a good explanation of big markets where nobody cares about football.

On a funny note OSU would have the most AD revenue in the entire ACC with 117 million. Even richer than Notre Dame. Laffin.

Think about that.

We'd be the king of the conference. So listening to Louisville fans tell me how worthless OSU is is is quite laughable. We'd be the king of the broke arse ACC. But only #3 in the Big 12.

I guess the SEC didn't have to buy back content, oh wait, they did. Why wouldn't you buy back content to make more off of it?

(08-26-2015 08:28 PM)Lenvillecards Wrote:  

(08-26-2015 11:05 AM)Okielite Wrote:  

(08-26-2015 10:49 AM)Lenvillecards Wrote:  

(08-26-2015 09:56 AM)Okielite Wrote:  

(08-25-2015 11:37 PM)Lenvillecards Wrote:  Your first paragraph just proves that the ACC is far more valuable than the Big 12. The Big 12 has only 2-3 teams that anyone wants.

If Louisville goes to the Big 12 then we better be going with FSU, Clemson & GT or no thanks. While that is a possibility it is very slim. I doubt that Syracuse & BC would be left behind, they offer a lot of value to the B1G.

The Big 12 had to be overpaid just to keep it together. Yeah the Big 12 has more attendance & such & yet they are still less valuable than the ACC.

You can say that a one loss ACC champ will be left out of the playoffs but until it happens we wont know. Meanwhile 1 loss Big 12 champs have been left out recently (Oklahoma St & TCU/Baylor). When was the last time the Big 12 played for a national title or won one?

The only advantage the Big 12 has over the ACC is Texas & Oklahoma. The Big 12 realistically is far more vulnerable than the ACC.

The ACC is paid less than the Big 12, clearly the ACC is less valuable. That's the problem with being #2 in most markets.

Syracuse and BC do not bring any TV ratings for football. Thus their value to a TV partner is limited. Did you look at the TV ratings? They are FCS bad for those schools unless they play FSU, V-TEch, Clemson, or Louisville. When they pay each other nobody even watches. The days of adding schools to force everyone in the state to pay for a conference network are nearing an end. Schools with actual fans who watch the games will be worth more than those in big TV markets with limited interest.

Not sure where you are getting the less valuable comment. ISU makes more than anybody in the ACC. You are only worth what someone will pay and quite frankly the ACC is the least valuable power conference. The numbers confirm this.

Claiming otherwise is just stupid. The conferences worth the most get paid the most. End of story.

The Big 12 only has 2 valuable football teams, Oklahoma & Texas. If it weren't for them than Iowa St would be in the MWC or AAC. Fox only overpaid for the B12 to keep Oklahoma & Texas out of the PAC. There isn't a network out there drooling over Lawrence, Wacco, Stillwater & such and I bet teams like FSU aren't either. Louisville surely isn't. Unless something changed last season, the last time I checked, the B12 was getting poor ratings on Fox.

You can claim that Syracuse isn't valuable all you want but the fact that ESPN paid the ACC millions more per team to put them there proves otherwise. How many AQ BCS caliber schools have went to the B12? Only WV & that's because they were desperate & didn't have any other options.

What metrics are you using to determine media rankings? You seem to change them to fit your arguments. Is it city or state? It's easy for the B12 to claim the #1 spot in a state where they are the only P5 conference or where there is only 1 or 2 P5 teams there. Again you are giving the B12 undue benefits for being in small states/markets. I don't think anyone is arguing that the northeast isn't dominated by pro sports.

Iowa State is a huge land grant school with AAu status and a rabid fanbase that supports its teams across the board. Nearly 10k at WBB games, 14k+ at mens games. And expanding the football stadium over 60k to keep up with demand during a bad run.

Even ISU has value. Value to TV partners is a direct correlation to TV ratings. Schools with bad TV ratings are not worth much. Hello Cuse, BC, wake, etc.. Did you look at the TV ratings I posted for Cuse? Terrible is an understatement.

Oklahoma state has a top 12 AD budget in the country, attendance just below 60k, good TV ratings, and top shelf facilities. You think that is worthless?

Worthless is having olny 4 games make TV ratings, and only 2 above a .2. That essentially means nobody is watching. When nobody watches the games have little value. You don't need a business degree to understand how this works.

ESPN/FOX pays Cuse less for its' content than they pay ISU. Heck ISU makes more than FSU for TV money.

Your inability to acknowledge the ACC weaknesses is amusing but reeks of insecurity. I on the other hand have no problem admitting the Big 12 could collapse at some point. I"m not butthurt, sensitive, fragile, etc like you are. The Louisville fans have a certain way of embarrassing themselves in these forums. It's like you have a chip on your shoulder now that you played in a Big boy conference for a year.

The TV ratings and attendance don't' lie. The ACC has the weakest lineup in the p-5 and are typically the #2 brand in the footprint. TV Payouts don't' lie as they are confirmed by TV ratings as well. You can make up what you want but at the end of the day those numbers determine value of schools and conferences.

I have noticed that nobody is confirming Cuse having the #2 AD budget in the ACC. Would love to know if that was true. I highly doubt it.

If you want to use TV ratings to judge value fine, the ACC was the 3rd most watched conference last year.

http://www.teamspeedkills.com/2012/2/28/...onal-title

"Believe it or not, the third-highest conference was the ACC with 2.65 million viewers per telecast. The Big 12 was fourth with 2.3 million per telecast, the Pac-12 was fifth with 2.1 million per telecast, and the Big East was sixth with 1.9 million per telecast"

So by your metrics then the ACC should be getting paid more than the Big 12. The Big 12 didn't even have a game in the top 25 most watched last season. More viewers equal greater value right? TV ratings don't lie, right? You don't base a conference value based off of 1 team who had an off year. You don't need a business degree to understand that.

I'm glad that Iowa St has a large & passionate fan base, its a great university, but if the Big 12 fell apart tomorrow where would they go? The B1G already has Iowa & the PAC doesn't seem interested.

I'm butthurt? That's funny. If you knew me or have read my posts throughout this board then you would know that I have said that ACC teams going to the Big 12 is a plausible scenario. I know exactly what the ACC weaknesses are & I think they are more easily fixed than the ones that the Big 12 has.

The TV numbers for the BIg 12 were terrible last year. No doubt.

The same thing would happen to the ACC if FSU and Clemson were down and OU and TX were up. That is what happens when your best brands are not in the national spotlight. The ACC is still riding FSU/Winston fame but that is about over.

The Big 12 did not have any big games last year. Even OU/TX was a down year.



Good on you for not being in denial like the other Louisville folks here. Pretending either conference is in a great position is a misrepresentation. Both are second rate in terms of conference pecking order. Either conference could be picked apart if the SEC/B1G/ESPN/FOX decide to.

ISU has options. They were looked at by the B1G during the last round. Academics are not a turnoff. They arguably have the best fans in the country who support through good and bad. They have way too much value to be stuck in the AAC or MW.

(08-26-2015 10:13 PM)Lenvillecards Wrote:  I guess the SEC didn't have to buy back content, oh wait, they did. Why wouldn't you buy back content to make more off of it?

LOL. Not even remotely close to how it works.

So the ACC plan is to pay pennies on the dollar to buy back content from Raycom and then magically take that same content and put it on ACCN and make millions for each school.

LOL.

(08-26-2015 10:29 PM)Okielite Wrote:  

(08-26-2015 10:13 PM)Lenvillecards Wrote:  I guess the SEC didn't have to buy back content, oh wait, they did. Why wouldn't you buy back content to make more off of it?

LOL. Not even remotely close to how it works.

So the ACC plan is to pay pennies on the dollar to buy back content from Raycom and then magically take that same content and put it on ACCN and make millions for each school.

LOL.

There are several ways that it could be done, but obviously not for pennies on the dollar. One way would be to buy out Raycom & then you would own the content. Like with the SEC, I'm sure it would take a few years to payoff all of the expenses but in the long run it would be worth it.

(08-26-2015 10:44 PM)Lenvillecards Wrote:  

(08-26-2015 10:29 PM)Okielite Wrote:  

(08-26-2015 10:13 PM)Lenvillecards Wrote:  I guess the SEC didn't have to buy back content, oh wait, they did. Why wouldn't you buy back content to make more off of it?

LOL. Not even remotely close to how it works.

So the ACC plan is to pay pennies on the dollar to buy back content from Raycom and then magically take that same content and put it on ACCN and make millions for each school.

LOL.

There are several ways that it could be done, but obviously not for pennies on the dollar. One way would be to buy out Raycom & then you would own the content. Like with the SEC, I'm sure it would take a few years to payoff all of the expenses but in the long run it would be worth it.

Where does all this value magically appear from?

You are sitting here explaining how Raycom sell this to you for what is likely fair market value or higher and suddenly the ACC can turn that into millions of extra income for the schools?

I just don't see that being any more of an option than the Big 12 buying content back from Fox to start a network. There is no magic. The content is not any more valuable. TV partners are not dumb.

"Here take this old t-3 content from us so you can make millions" is not what Raycom is going to say. But that is what you care claiming.

(08-26-2015 10:13 PM)Okielite Wrote:  

(08-26-2015 01:54 PM)cuseroc Wrote:  

(08-25-2015 11:00 PM)Okielite Wrote:  

(08-25-2015 10:28 PM)cuseroc Wrote:  

(08-25-2015 10:01 PM)Okielite Wrote:  Nowhere does any data indicate that Cuse is #1 in NY for college football. If those TV ratings we looked at are from the #1 team in NY there is something terribly wrong.

If 5 schools are ahead of Cuse in NYC, and several with a considerable lead, it is likely that those schools have a presence in other parts of the state.

My guess would be as an overall state Rutgers, PSU, and Notre Dame are ahead of Cuse who is very close to others like UConn, BC, etc...

No way Cuse could overcome the advantage that some of those schools have just in NYC. Unless there is a wall built around Syracuse that does not allow fans of other teams to move there. Rutgers for example with 20% of NYC will be ahead of Cuse no matter what happens in the rest of the state.

Im making this one last attempt to explain away your ignorance concerning NYS.

First, Rutgers is in Northern New Jersey. Northern New Jersey, is part of the NYC television market. That's why Rutgers shows so strongly in NYC ratings. Very few New Yorkers care at all about Rutgers or anything in New Jersey. New Yorkers get offended to even be associated with New Jersey. That's not a slap at NJ, but just the way it is. Those 600,000 Rutgers fans that you see in NYC are for the most part, all folks in New Jersey. You, not being from NY or the northeast, wouldn't understand this. But this is the truth.

Connecticut has a strong showing for the same reason as Rutgers. Fairfield County Connecticut is part of the NYC tv market too.

Penn State has a strong showing in NYC because its Penn State. Same for ND. But in Upstate NY, both schools have some fans, but not really anymore than Michigan or Miami or Ohio State. Penn State MAY have slightly more fans than the rest, but its still negligible. Syracuse gear and bumper stickers are all over the place. I have seen Syracuse gear sold in corner stores right along with Yankees gear all over Upstate NY. Upstate NY and NYC are like two completely different states.

That's why the following statement from you is just totally nonsensical
My guess would be as an overall state Rutgers, PSU, and Notre Dame are ahead of Cuse

You just don't know the intricacies of the area so I will just let it go, but Penn State and Rutgers fans can vouch for what I said. And I'm pretty sure that None of them believe that they have more fans in the State of NY than Syracuse


Also, Syracuse does have the third largest AD in the Acc, after FSU, Louisville, there's Syracuse.

You can spin it any way you want but at the end of the day these people you keep talking about don't watch Cuse play football on TV or in person. TV ratings and attendance confirm this.

I'd love to see some actual proof that Cuse has the #3 AD budget in the ACC. Hard to believe quite frankly..

ACC revenues

Impressive. I was wrong on that. I will own it. Most online people won't but I will. That must be due to BB Ticket sales as it's' sure as heck isn't from pulling football TV ratings. Those home games likely have almost no value to TV partners since so few people watch. The BC/Cuse TV ratings are a good explanation of big markets where nobody cares about football.

On a funny note OSU would have the most AD revenue in the entire ACC with 117 million. Even richer than Notre Dame. Laffin.

Think about that.

We'd be the king of the conference. So listening to Louisville fans tell me how worthless OSU is is is quite laughable. We'd be the king of the broke arse ACC. But only #3 in the Big 12.

I looked at the those ratings that you keep harping on SU about and its funny that the Great Oklahoma St has just as many stinker games as SU did last year, for instance October 4th against Iowa St, you had a whopping 0.3 rating. Then 10/11 against Kansas, that game drew a 0.2 rating.

Weeks 14, 11, 4, 3 and 2, NO Rating. But Oky St did have some great weeks, when they played the likes of Oklahoma and Kansas St etc...

(08-26-2015 11:09 PM)cuseroc Wrote:  

(08-26-2015 10:13 PM)Okielite Wrote:  

(08-26-2015 01:54 PM)cuseroc Wrote:  

(08-25-2015 11:00 PM)Okielite Wrote:  

(08-25-2015 10:28 PM)cuseroc Wrote:  Im making this one last attempt to explain away your ignorance concerning NYS.

First, Rutgers is in Northern New Jersey. Northern New Jersey, is part of the NYC television market. That's why Rutgers shows so strongly in NYC ratings. Very few New Yorkers care at all about Rutgers or anything in New Jersey. New Yorkers get offended to even be associated with New Jersey. That's not a slap at NJ, but just the way it is. Those 600,000 Rutgers fans that you see in NYC are for the most part, all folks in New Jersey. You, not being from NY or the northeast, wouldn't understand this. But this is the truth.

Connecticut has a strong showing for the same reason as Rutgers. Fairfield County Connecticut is part of the NYC tv market too.

Penn State has a strong showing in NYC because its Penn State. Same for ND. But in Upstate NY, both schools have some fans, but not really anymore than Michigan or Miami or Ohio State. Penn State MAY have slightly more fans than the rest, but its still negligible. Syracuse gear and bumper stickers are all over the place. I have seen Syracuse gear sold in corner stores right along with Yankees gear all over Upstate NY. Upstate NY and NYC are like two completely different states.

That's why the following statement from you is just totally nonsensical
My guess would be as an overall state Rutgers, PSU, and Notre Dame are ahead of Cuse

You just don't know the intricacies of the area so I will just let it go, but Penn State and Rutgers fans can vouch for what I said. And I'm pretty sure that None of them believe that they have more fans in the State of NY than Syracuse


Also, Syracuse does have the third largest AD in the Acc, after FSU, Louisville, there's Syracuse.

You can spin it any way you want but at the end of the day these people you keep talking about don't watch Cuse play football on TV or in person. TV ratings and attendance confirm this.

I'd love to see some actual proof that Cuse has the #3 AD budget in the ACC. Hard to believe quite frankly..

ACC revenues

Impressive. I was wrong on that. I will own it. Most online people won't but I will. That must be due to BB Ticket sales as it's' sure as heck isn't from pulling football TV ratings. Those home games likely have almost no value to TV partners since so few people watch. The BC/Cuse TV ratings are a good explanation of big markets where nobody cares about football.

On a funny note OSU would have the most AD revenue in the entire ACC with 117 million. Even richer than Notre Dame. Laffin.

Think about that.

We'd be the king of the conference. So listening to Louisville fans tell me how worthless OSU is is is quite laughable. We'd be the king of the broke arse ACC. But only #3 in the Big 12.

I looked at the those ratings that you keep harping on SU about and its funny that the Great Oklahoma St has just as many stinker games as SU did last year, for instance October 4th against Iowa St, you had a whopping 0.3 rating. Then 10/11 against Kansas, that game drew a 0.2 rating.

Weeks 14, 11, 4, 3 and 2, NO Rating. But Oky St did have some great weeks, when they played the likes of Oklahoma and Kansas St etc...

Cuseroc....Don't waste your time...he is a troll who manipulates data dishonestly. He'll eventually be banned.