https://newsok.com/big-12-lags-behind-se...um=twitter

Conference Average Attendance:

SEC: 78,720
Big 10: 65,998
Big 12: 56,831
PAC: 51,795
ACC: 48,577

Maybe not so coincidentally those figures also line up for revenue placement.

For those following the proposed Big 12 Realignment the data strongly favors B.Y.U..

Note:* The link works you just have to scroll down once it opens.

(02-24-2016 09:13 PM)JRsec Wrote:  https://newsok.com/big-12-lags-behind-se...um=twitter

Conference Average Attendance:

SEC: 78,720
Big 10: 65,998
Big 12: 56,831
PAC: 51,795
ACC: 48,577

Maybe not so coincidentally those figures also line up for revenue placement.

For those following the proposed Big 12 Realignment the data strongly favors B.Y.U..

Note:* The link works you just have to scroll down once it opens.

Top Ten Average Attendance/Stadium Capacity
1. BYU Indy 58,532/64,045

2. Temple AAC 44,159/68,532(NFL Stadium)

3. Memphis AAC 43,802/59,308

4. East Carolina AAC 43,274/50,000

5. Cincinnati AAC 37,096/40,000

6. Houston AAC 33,980/40,000

7. Boise St. MWC 33,612/36,387

8. Navy AAC 31,669/34,000

9. Army Indy 30,991/38,000

10.UCF AAC 30,065/44,206

Expansion decisions are about whether existing members will make more money with (or without) expansion. For the Big 12, that means bringing (or not bringing) so much new TV revenue to the table that it offsets having to divide conference revenue 12 ways instead of 10.

And, there is no direct correlation between reported attendance and TV revenue. Just as one example, Miami football is more valuable to ESPN than many schools that report greater home football attendance.

(02-25-2016 12:44 AM)Wedge Wrote:  Expansion decisions are about whether existing members will make more money with (or without) expansion. For the Big 12, that means bringing (or not bringing) so much new TV revenue to the table that it offsets having to divide conference revenue 12 ways instead of 10.

And, there is no direct correlation between reported attendance and TV revenue. Just as one example, Miami football is more valuable to ESPN than many schools that report greater home football attendance.

And how many times has Miami scratched the top 10 most viewed in recent memory?

You go micro, I was speaking macro. The averages were for conferences, not for teams.
SEC top paid this year.
Big10 second best pay out.
Big 12 third best pay out.
PAC fourth best pay out
ACC last place among the P5.

Even the % of difference roughly corresponds between the attendance and the revenue. Is this a statistical anomaly? Perhaps, perhaps not, but the correlation is interesting. If you wanted to do an analysis of TV numbers there is more variance but not anything significant to the overall evaluations.

How this relates to who the Big 12 selects or if they even choose to expand is relevant, but it will remain only a single factor among many to be considered.

(02-25-2016 12:57 AM)JRsec Wrote:  And how many times has Miami scratched the top 10 most viewed in recent memory?

Not many, but the Big 12 has no chance of acquiring any of the top 10 or 20 or 30 most-viewed football teams right now. Among non-P5 programs, Boise State is the best example of one whose TV appeal relative to other non-P5s far exceeds the TV draw of teams that report higher attendance.

(02-24-2016 09:13 PM)JRsec Wrote:  https://newsok.com/big-12-lags-behind-se...um=twitter

Conference Average Attendance:

SEC: 78,720
Big 10: 65,998
Big 12: 56,831
PAC: 51,795
ACC: 48,577

From this data you can see where the attraction would be on the PAC's side to add Oklahoma and Texas. Little brothers Oklahoma State and Texas Tech would boost numbers too.

(02-25-2016 12:57 AM)JRsec Wrote:  

(02-25-2016 12:44 AM)Wedge Wrote:  Expansion decisions are about whether existing members will make more money with (or without) expansion. For the Big 12, that means bringing (or not bringing) so much new TV revenue to the table that it offsets having to divide conference revenue 12 ways instead of 10.

And, there is no direct correlation between reported attendance and TV revenue. Just as one example, Miami football is more valuable to ESPN than many schools that report greater home football attendance.

And how many times has Miami scratched the top 10 most viewed in recent memory?

You go micro, I was speaking macro. The averages were for conferences, not for teams.
SEC top paid this year.
Big10 second best pay out.
Big 12 third best pay out.
PAC fourth best pay out
ACC last place among the P5.

Even the % of difference roughly corresponds between the attendance and the revenue. Is this a statistical anomaly? Perhaps, perhaps not, but the correlation is interesting. If you wanted to do an analysis of TV numbers there is more variance but not anything significant to the overall evaluations.

How this relates to who the Big 12 selects or if they even choose to expand is relevant, but it will remain only a single factor among many to be considered.

I was thinking of that very point. The Acc is last in attendance but 3rd in tv ratings after the BIG and SEC.

(02-25-2016 07:58 AM)Kittonhead Wrote:  

(02-24-2016 09:13 PM)JRsec Wrote:  https://newsok.com/big-12-lags-behind-se...um=twitter

Conference Average Attendance:

SEC: 78,720
Big 10: 65,998
Big 12: 56,831
PAC: 51,795
ACC: 48,577

From this data you can see where the attraction would be on the PAC's side to add Oklahoma and Texas. Little brothers Oklahoma State and Texas Tech would boost numbers too.

I still believe that Oklahoma/Oklahoma State/Kansas/Kansas State to the PAC would be a good move.
The PAC needs a "star" in football (Oklahoma) and basketball (Kansas) to energize that conference. They also need to sell ESPN a hefty portion of their network so that they would get proper distribution and improve profitability.

(02-25-2016 09:01 AM)XLance Wrote:  

(02-25-2016 07:58 AM)Kittonhead Wrote:  

(02-24-2016 09:13 PM)JRsec Wrote:  https://newsok.com/big-12-lags-behind-se...um=twitter

Conference Average Attendance:

SEC: 78,720
Big 10: 65,998
Big 12: 56,831
PAC: 51,795
ACC: 48,577

From this data you can see where the attraction would be on the PAC's side to add Oklahoma and Texas. Little brothers Oklahoma State and Texas Tech would boost numbers too.

I still believe that Oklahoma/Oklahoma State/Kansas/Kansas State to the PAC would be a good move.
The PAC needs a "star" in football (Oklahoma) and basketball (Kansas) to energize that conference. They also need to sell ESPN a hefty portion of their network so that they would get proper distribution and improve profitability.

Adding Oklahoma and Kansas might be a good move for the PAC. But it only happens if it is a good move for those schools. I don't see how it is. And, I don't see how diluting the value of those two adds by including their second bananas helps either side.

I suppose they could add two other B12 teams, including Texas, and get a small boost financially. At the same time, they would piss off the four mountain time zone teams who clearly prefer a California-centric league. I think it would be hard to get the Arizona schools, Utah and Colorado to vote for such expansion.

(02-25-2016 09:20 AM)ken d Wrote:  

(02-25-2016 09:01 AM)XLance Wrote:  

(02-25-2016 07:58 AM)Kittonhead Wrote:  

(02-24-2016 09:13 PM)JRsec Wrote:  https://newsok.com/big-12-lags-behind-se...um=twitter

Conference Average Attendance:

SEC: 78,720
Big 10: 65,998
Big 12: 56,831
PAC: 51,795
ACC: 48,577

From this data you can see where the attraction would be on the PAC's side to add Oklahoma and Texas. Little brothers Oklahoma State and Texas Tech would boost numbers too.

I still believe that Oklahoma/Oklahoma State/Kansas/Kansas State to the PAC would be a good move.
The PAC needs a "star" in football (Oklahoma) and basketball (Kansas) to energize that conference. They also need to sell ESPN a hefty portion of their network so that they would get proper distribution and improve profitability.

Adding Oklahoma and Kansas might be a good move for the PAC. But it only happens if it is a good move for those schools. I don't see how it is. And, I don't see how diluting the value of those two adds by including their second bananas helps either side.

I suppose they could add two other B12 teams, including Texas, and get a small boost financially. At the same time, they would piss off the four mountain time zone teams who clearly prefer a California-centric league. I think it would be hard to get the Arizona schools, Utah and Colorado to vote for such expansion.

Right.

California - Stanford
Oregon - Oregon State
Washington - Washington State
UCLA - USC

Arizona - Arizona State
Colorado - Utah
Kansas - Kansas State
Oklahoma - Oklahoma State

While great for rivalry week, that would be a really tough sell for the Arizona schools in particular.

(02-25-2016 12:10 AM)Titans3775 Wrote:  

(02-24-2016 09:13 PM)JRsec Wrote:  https://newsok.com/big-12-lags-behind-se...um=twitter

Conference Average Attendance:

SEC: 78,720
Big 10: 65,998
Big 12: 56,831
PAC: 51,795
ACC: 48,577

Maybe not so coincidentally those figures also line up for revenue placement.

For those following the proposed Big 12 Realignment the data strongly favors B.Y.U..

Note:* The link works you just have to scroll down once it opens.

Top Ten Average Attendance/Stadium Capacity
1. BYU Indy 58,532/64,045

2. Temple AAC 44,159/68,532(NFL Stadium)

3. Memphis AAC 43,802/59,308

4. East Carolina AAC 43,274/50,000

5. Cincinnati AAC 37,096/40,000

6. Houston AAC 33,980/40,000

7. Boise St. MWC 33,612/36,387

8. Navy AAC 31,669/34,000

9. Army Indy 30,991/38,000

10.UCF AAC 30,065/44,206

How many Big 12 schools could average 56,831 if they were in a "G5" conference?

(02-25-2016 09:28 AM)Chappy Wrote:  

(02-25-2016 09:20 AM)ken d Wrote:  

(02-25-2016 09:01 AM)XLance Wrote:  

(02-25-2016 07:58 AM)Kittonhead Wrote:  

(02-24-2016 09:13 PM)JRsec Wrote:  https://newsok.com/big-12-lags-behind-se...um=twitter

Conference Average Attendance:

SEC: 78,720
Big 10: 65,998
Big 12: 56,831
PAC: 51,795
ACC: 48,577

From this data you can see where the attraction would be on the PAC's side to add Oklahoma and Texas. Little brothers Oklahoma State and Texas Tech would boost numbers too.

I still believe that Oklahoma/Oklahoma State/Kansas/Kansas State to the PAC would be a good move.
The PAC needs a "star" in football (Oklahoma) and basketball (Kansas) to energize that conference. They also need to sell ESPN a hefty portion of their network so that they would get proper distribution and improve profitability.

Adding Oklahoma and Kansas might be a good move for the PAC. But it only happens if it is a good move for those schools. I don't see how it is. And, I don't see how diluting the value of those two adds by including their second bananas helps either side.

I suppose they could add two other B12 teams, including Texas, and get a small boost financially. At the same time, they would piss off the four mountain time zone teams who clearly prefer a California-centric league. I think it would be hard to get the Arizona schools, Utah and Colorado to vote for such expansion.

Right.

California - Stanford
Oregon - Oregon State
Washington - Washington State
UCLA - USC

Arizona - Arizona State
Colorado - Utah
Kansas - Kansas State
Oklahoma - Oklahoma State

While great for rivalry week, that would be a really tough sell for the Arizona schools in particular.

With a nine game league schedule, that kind of divisional alignment would mean each Arizona school would get to play in the state of California just once every other year. That's not going to cut it. And Colorado already left that conference once to join the PAC. I don't think they want to go back.

(02-25-2016 12:10 AM)Titans3775 Wrote:  

(02-24-2016 09:13 PM)JRsec Wrote:  https://newsok.com/big-12-lags-behind-se...um=twitter

Conference Average Attendance:

SEC: 78,720
Big 10: 65,998
Big 12: 56,831
PAC: 51,795
ACC: 48,577

Maybe not so coincidentally those figures also line up for revenue placement.

For those following the proposed Big 12 Realignment the data strongly favors B.Y.U..

Note:* The link works you just have to scroll down once it opens.

Top Ten Average Attendance/Stadium Capacity
1. BYU Indy 58,532/64,045

2. Temple AAC 44,159/68,532(NFL Stadium)

3. Memphis AAC 43,802/59,308

4. East Carolina AAC 43,274/50,000

5. Cincinnati AAC 37,096/40,000

6. Houston AAC 33,980/40,000

7. Boise St. MWC 33,612/36,387

8. Navy AAC 31,669/34,000

9. Army Indy 30,991/38,000

10.UCF AAC 30,065/44,206

What those numbers scream to me is that these schools are very much dependent on their on field performance. When they have a great year, their attendance is respectable. When they don't, they can't pay people to come. Put them in the B12 where they would usually struggle near the bottom of the league and those short term spurts in attendance will become "the good old days".

(02-25-2016 12:44 AM)Wedge Wrote:  And, there is no direct correlation between reported attendance and TV revenue. Just as one example, Miami football is more valuable to ESPN than many schools that report greater home football attendance.

Can you give another example? Miami seems to be the extreme outlier here.

Toss them out, and there does seem to be a very strong correlation between attendance and media value. Just look at the top 25 in attendance - they are essentially the schools that everyone agrees are the blue-chip media properties, save for Miami.

(02-25-2016 08:23 AM)cuseroc Wrote:  I was thinking of that very point. The Acc is last in attendance but 3rd in tv ratings after the BIG and SEC.

That's because of one school - FSU. FSU is disproportionately on TV, and FSU is one of the top-10 TV draws in the country, arguably even top-5, even when they are down on the field, and the last few years they have been way up.

Toss FSU out, and ACC ratings would surely plunge. The ACC is as dependent on FSU for TV football as the PAC is on USC.

(02-25-2016 12:10 AM)Titans3775 Wrote:  

(02-24-2016 09:13 PM)JRsec Wrote:  https://newsok.com/big-12-lags-behind-se...um=twitter

Conference Average Attendance:

SEC: 78,720
Big 10: 65,998
Big 12: 56,831
PAC: 51,795
ACC: 48,577

Maybe not so coincidentally those figures also line up for revenue placement.

For those following the proposed Big 12 Realignment the data strongly favors B.Y.U..

Note:* The link works you just have to scroll down once it opens.

Top Ten Average Attendance/Stadium Capacity
1. BYU Indy 58,532/64,045

2. Temple AAC 44,159/68,532(NFL Stadium)

3. Memphis AAC 43,802/59,308

4. East Carolina AAC 43,274/50,000

5. Cincinnati AAC 37,096/40,000

6. Houston AAC 33,980/40,000

7. Boise St. MWC 33,612/36,387

8. Navy AAC 31,669/34,000

9. Army Indy 30,991/38,000

10.UCF AAC 30,065/44,206

And Cincy people got pissy because I asked who would fill their stadium expansion...lol.

(02-25-2016 09:20 AM)ken d Wrote:  

(02-25-2016 09:01 AM)XLance Wrote:  

(02-25-2016 07:58 AM)Kittonhead Wrote:  

(02-24-2016 09:13 PM)JRsec Wrote:  https://newsok.com/big-12-lags-behind-se...um=twitter

Conference Average Attendance:

SEC: 78,720
Big 10: 65,998
Big 12: 56,831
PAC: 51,795
ACC: 48,577

From this data you can see where the attraction would be on the PAC's side to add Oklahoma and Texas. Little brothers Oklahoma State and Texas Tech would boost numbers too.

I still believe that Oklahoma/Oklahoma State/Kansas/Kansas State to the PAC would be a good move.
The PAC needs a "star" in football (Oklahoma) and basketball (Kansas) to energize that conference. They also need to sell ESPN a hefty portion of their network so that they would get proper distribution and improve profitability.

Adding Oklahoma and Kansas might be a good move for the PAC. But it only happens if it is a good move for those schools. I don't see how it is. And, I don't see how diluting the value of those two adds by including their second bananas helps either side.

I suppose they could add two other B12 teams, including Texas, and get a small boost financially. At the same time, they would piss off the four mountain time zone teams who clearly prefer a California-centric league. I think it would be hard to get the Arizona schools, Utah and Colorado to vote for such expansion.

Expanding the Pac into the central time zone only makes money for the existing Pac schools if UT is one of the new additions. And, the 4 mountain time zone schools will all vote no on any application that doesn't include UT. (There were at least 6 no votes when OU and Ok St wanted in.) And, you're right that OU and KU are valuable but not valuable enough to bring tag-alongs with them - to make the addition profitable, the Horns have to be part of it.

(02-25-2016 10:07 AM)Nebraskafan Wrote:  

(02-25-2016 12:10 AM)Titans3775 Wrote:  

(02-24-2016 09:13 PM)JRsec Wrote:  https://newsok.com/big-12-lags-behind-se...um=twitter

Conference Average Attendance:

SEC: 78,720
Big 10: 65,998
Big 12: 56,831
PAC: 51,795
ACC: 48,577

Maybe not so coincidentally those figures also line up for revenue placement.

For those following the proposed Big 12 Realignment the data strongly favors B.Y.U..

Note:* The link works you just have to scroll down once it opens.

Top Ten Average Attendance/Stadium Capacity
1. BYU Indy 58,532/64,045

2. Temple AAC 44,159/68,532(NFL Stadium)

3. Memphis AAC 43,802/59,308

4. East Carolina AAC 43,274/50,000

5. Cincinnati AAC 37,096/40,000

6. Houston AAC 33,980/40,000

7. Boise St. MWC 33,612/36,387

8. Navy AAC 31,669/34,000

9. Army Indy 30,991/38,000

10.UCF AAC 30,065/44,206

And Cincy people got pissy because I asked who would fill their stadium expansion...lol.

Your sentence structure is so poor-- I do not understand what you are trying to say. Can you elaborate please?

Basketball is every bit as lucrative as football (all the NCAA Tournament money is tied to the arcane distribution system currently in place).

If it's about the money (and it is), it's only a matter of time before the P5 start taking back the basketball tourney TV revenue similar to what they did in football.

Think long term and you can leverage the coming basketball redistribution.

I think you folks calling for their dismissal owe Kentucky FB an apology.

They averaged better attendance than 80% of the Big 12.