Thought these numbers were interesting from the following Big-12 article. These numbers are very encouraging. It should be noted, that the AAC numbers are based on far fewer appearances, so that's probably a bit misleading. Still, it is an indication that the AAC's ability to attract an audience is already substantial and should continue to build. Its also further proof that our current deal seriously undervalues the conference. Overall, its an interesting article. (the chart with the info below is on page two).

2015-2016 Tier One Media Numbers:

In-Conference Games Average Audience

SEC-5,244,000
B1G-5,013,094
AAC-4,516,000
B12-3,480,615
ACC-3,287,444
Pac-2,711,750

http://big12fanatics.com/media-matters-t...-analysis/

thanks for posting.

All of the games they're using for those metrics are National broadcast for the AAC vs. every game on conference networks or regional broadcasts for every other conference based on what I gleaned from that article.

(03-03-2016 11:51 AM)BearcatMan Wrote:  All of the games they're using for those metrics are National broadcast for the AAC vs. every game on conference networks or regional broadcasts for every other conference based on what I gleaned from that article.

Nope. Tier one would eliminate regional broadcasts. Doesn't look like it includes all national games either. Looks like maybe these are just ABC, NBC, CBS, and Fox OTA games.

Really it says nothing. Article is comparing 2 AAC games to an average of 12.6 for the P5. Obviously the AAC will look "better" with such a drastic discrepancy.

Just two games though... I guess that's Temple-Houston and Navy-Houston?

(03-03-2016 11:55 AM)Chappy Wrote:  Just two games though... I guess that's Temple-Houston and Navy-Houston?

One would assume...maybe Memphis-Cincinnati? I know that one had some good numbers as well.

(03-03-2016 11:55 AM)Chappy Wrote:  Just two games though... I guess that's Temple-Houston and Navy-Houston?

I think its just ABC, CBS, NBC. or Fox OTA games. So, yes. Those would be the only two conference games that were on ABC. The other American ABC games were OOC. So those two games would have been among the most attractive AAC games of the year. That said, its not like ABC picks Kansas-Kansas St for its OTA ABC broadcast each week. Those ABC games are usually going to be the BEST game of the week available from any given P5 conference.

(03-03-2016 11:55 AM)TheBasketBallOpinion Wrote:  Really it says nothing. Article is comparing 2 AAC games to an average of 12.6 for the P5. Obviously the AAC will look "better" with such a drastic discrepancy.

Actually, it says a lot. Remember that the AAC receives a small fraction in broadcast rights of what the P5 receives. The value of these two games alone indicates that the AAC is dramatically underpaid. Moreover, were more AAC games broadcast, even with results just half as good, it would be even more evidence that that AAC is underpaid.

This is quite a big issue for Cinci and UConn now. ESPN currently owns those two schools at bottom basement prices. Why would it want to pay more in any move to the Big12?

Yes its just two games, but his point still stands to reason. Its a good look for the AAC and will generate more opportunities at that level. It is on us to continue to average those numbers through those additional games.

(03-03-2016 12:04 PM)Enriquillo Wrote:  

(03-03-2016 11:55 AM)TheBasketBallOpinion Wrote:  Really it says nothing. Article is comparing 2 AAC games to an average of 12.6 for the P5. Obviously the AAC will look "better" with such a drastic discrepancy.

Actually, it says a lot. Remember that the AAC receives a small fraction in broadcast rights of what the P5 receives. The value of these two games alone indicates that the AAC is dramatically underpaid. Moreover, were more AAC games broadcast, even with results just half as good, it would be even more evidence that that AAC is underpaid.

This is quite a big issue for Cinci and UConn now. ESPN currently owns those two schools at bottom basement prices. Why would it want to pay more in any move to the Big12?

If certain rumors are to believed, which they probably shouldn't be, ESPN may be interested in converting the LHN to a B12N because it is not performing well. So the equation becomes what combination of schools would maximize the value of a hypothetical B12N as far as carriage is concerned. ESPN could possibly make more money from a new B12N with demand for carriage in strong markets than it stands to lose by no longer underpaying for certain schools content.

(03-03-2016 12:04 PM)Enriquillo Wrote:  

(03-03-2016 11:55 AM)TheBasketBallOpinion Wrote:  Really it says nothing. Article is comparing 2 AAC games to an average of 12.6 for the P5. Obviously the AAC will look "better" with such a drastic discrepancy.

Actually, it says a lot. Remember that the AAC receives a small fraction in broadcast rights of what the P5 receives. The value of these two games alone indicates that the AAC is dramatically underpaid. Moreover, were more AAC games broadcast, even with results just half as good, it would be even more evidence that that AAC is underpaid.

This is quite a big issue for Cinci and UConn now. ESPN currently owns those two schools at bottom basement prices. Why would it want to pay more in any move to the Big12?

That's the point. The math isn't that difficult. If the AAC had 12 in conference games broadcast, they would have to average just 2.3m for the other games to equal the PAC12s average. If it was 9 games, they'd have to average 2.9m viewers in those games to equal the ACCs numbers.

Those are not outlandish viewership numbers and that's to EQUAL the PAC12 and ACC, whose TV contracts pay multitudes more than the AAC's.

(03-03-2016 12:28 PM)SublimeKnight Wrote:  

(03-03-2016 12:04 PM)Enriquillo Wrote:  

(03-03-2016 11:55 AM)TheBasketBallOpinion Wrote:  Really it says nothing. Article is comparing 2 AAC games to an average of 12.6 for the P5. Obviously the AAC will look "better" with such a drastic discrepancy.

Actually, it says a lot. Remember that the AAC receives a small fraction in broadcast rights of what the P5 receives. The value of these two games alone indicates that the AAC is dramatically underpaid. Moreover, were more AAC games broadcast, even with results just half as good, it would be even more evidence that that AAC is underpaid.

This is quite a big issue for Cinci and UConn now. ESPN currently owns those two schools at bottom basement prices. Why would it want to pay more in any move to the Big12?

That's the point. The math isn't that difficult. If the AAC had 12 in conference games broadcast, they would have to average just 2.3m for the other games to equal the PAC12s average. If it was 9 games, they'd have to average 2.9m viewers in those games to equal the ACCs numbers.

Those are not outlandish viewership numbers and that's to EQUAL the PAC12 and ACC, whose TV contracts pay multitudes more than the AAC's.

Bottom line, we probably wouldn't rate as high as the Pac-12 if ABC televised the top 12 AAC games this year--but I bet we would get somewhere around 75% of their numbers. That said, we certainly wouldn't get just 10% of the Pac12 ratings either (which is how we are currently paid---earning just 10% of what the pac12 teams get).

Pretty clear what it's saying...

Navy, Houston, and Temple to the Big 12.

UC and UC to form new league with New Mexico State, Idaho, and UMass.

(03-03-2016 05:00 PM)CornellCoog Wrote:  Pretty clear what it's saying...

Navy, Houston, and Temple to the Big 12.

UC and UC to form new league with New Mexico State, Idaho, and UMass.

was thinking the same thing except add Wyoming and Delaware to the new league UC and UCONN are forming.

(03-03-2016 12:36 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(03-03-2016 12:28 PM)SublimeKnight Wrote:  

(03-03-2016 12:04 PM)Enriquillo Wrote:  

(03-03-2016 11:55 AM)TheBasketBallOpinion Wrote:  Really it says nothing. Article is comparing 2 AAC games to an average of 12.6 for the P5. Obviously the AAC will look "better" with such a drastic discrepancy.

Actually, it says a lot. Remember that the AAC receives a small fraction in broadcast rights of what the P5 receives. The value of these two games alone indicates that the AAC is dramatically underpaid. Moreover, were more AAC games broadcast, even with results just half as good, it would be even more evidence that that AAC is underpaid.

This is quite a big issue for Cinci and UConn now. ESPN currently owns those two schools at bottom basement prices. Why would it want to pay more in any move to the Big12?

That's the point. The math isn't that difficult. If the AAC had 12 in conference games broadcast, they would have to average just 2.3m for the other games to equal the PAC12s average. If it was 9 games, they'd have to average 2.9m viewers in those games to equal the ACCs numbers.

Those are not outlandish viewership numbers and that's to EQUAL the PAC12 and ACC, whose TV contracts pay multitudes more than the AAC's.

Bottom line, we probably wouldn't rate as high as the Pac-12 if ABC televised the top 12 AAC games this year--but I bet we would get somewhere around 75% of their numbers. That said, we certainly wouldn't get just 10% of the Pac12 ratings either (which is how we are currently paid---earning just 10% of what the pac12 teams get).

Thats a very good point. Even if we come in maybe 20% less than the lowest P5, then we deserve far closer than 1/10 of the tv money, which is where we currently sit.
Id be fine with us moving up to 1/2 of the lowest P5. Our TV numbers and success on the field and court support that.

If we could get $10 million a year, plus playoff money and NCAA credits, we would have income close to $14 million, which would be a game changer for all of us.

I expect much closer to $4-6 million in our next contract though.

Of course The AAC is grossly insulted underpaid... This league should be making 8mil- 12mil per member neighborhood $$$ numbers yesterday.

That the AAC is even mentioned and evaluated with the other Power 5 conferences is a huge plus for the league. I know this is a Big 12 blog, but you have to think Aresco and the network bean counters are aware of these numbers. The best news is that if the BIG moves some of their inventory over to FOX (our better yet, all of it) in 2017, there may be more $$ available for the AAC come that contract renegotiation. Having a good track record in those tier 1 games only helps our case.

It is all a game of numbers.

.

(03-03-2016 12:11 PM)HartfordHusky Wrote:  

(03-03-2016 12:04 PM)Enriquillo Wrote:  

(03-03-2016 11:55 AM)TheBasketBallOpinion Wrote:  Really it says nothing. Article is comparing 2 AAC games to an average of 12.6 for the P5. Obviously the AAC will look "better" with such a drastic discrepancy.

Actually, it says a lot. Remember that the AAC receives a small fraction in broadcast rights of what the P5 receives. The value of these two games alone indicates that the AAC is dramatically underpaid. Moreover, were more AAC games broadcast, even with results just half as good, it would be even more evidence that that AAC is underpaid.

This is quite a big issue for Cinci and UConn now. ESPN currently owns those two schools at bottom basement prices. Why would it want to pay more in any move to the Big12?

If certain rumors are to believed, which they probably shouldn't be, ESPN may be interested in converting the LHN to a B12N because it is not performing well. So the equation becomes what combination of schools would maximize the value of a hypothetical B12N as far as carriage is concerned. ESPN could possibly make more money from a new B12N with demand for carriage in strong markets than it stands to lose by no longer underpaying for certain schools content.

I am sure ESPN is very interested in doing this. I mean the infrastructure is already built. Right out of the gate they would add inventory for the other 9 teams. I honestly think that alone would help the channel get picked up in some markets it isn't currently and also expand the carriage price they also get in and out of markets which will only add more revenue. I mean selling a channel that has Oklahoma and Texas along with Kansas B-ball has to be easier that just selling Texas alone.

(03-04-2016 12:05 PM)PT_american Wrote:  

(03-03-2016 12:11 PM)HartfordHusky Wrote:  

(03-03-2016 12:04 PM)Enriquillo Wrote:  

(03-03-2016 11:55 AM)TheBasketBallOpinion Wrote:  Really it says nothing. Article is comparing 2 AAC games to an average of 12.6 for the P5. Obviously the AAC will look "better" with such a drastic discrepancy.

Actually, it says a lot. Remember that the AAC receives a small fraction in broadcast rights of what the P5 receives. The value of these two games alone indicates that the AAC is dramatically underpaid. Moreover, were more AAC games broadcast, even with results just half as good, it would be even more evidence that that AAC is underpaid.

This is quite a big issue for Cinci and UConn now. ESPN currently owns those two schools at bottom basement prices. Why would it want to pay more in any move to the Big12?

If certain rumors are to believed, which they probably shouldn't be, ESPN may be interested in converting the LHN to a B12N because it is not performing well. So the equation becomes what combination of schools would maximize the value of a hypothetical B12N as far as carriage is concerned. ESPN could possibly make more money from a new B12N with demand for carriage in strong markets than it stands to lose by no longer underpaying for certain schools content.

I am sure ESPN is very interested in doing this. I mean the infrastructure is already built. Right out of the gate they would add inventory for the other 9 teams. I honestly think that alone would help the channel get picked up in some markets it isn't currently and also expand the carriage price they also get in and out of markets which will only add more revenue. I mean selling a channel that has Oklahoma and Texas along with Kansas B-ball has to be easier that just selling Texas alone.

Yup. Turns an existing money loser into a solid profit center.