All of what you said is highly subjective.

(07-23-2016 04:09 PM)jaredf29 Wrote:  All of what you said is highly subjective.

so is the idea that a larger metro area will result in the ability to dray more fans that you have failed to draw in the past

and really it is not as "subjective" as you make it out to be

the UCLA numbers especially show that a large metro area does not automatically equal a large number of fans and that is with a highly ranked university that has been a large university for a long time and that has had success in a number of sports over long periods of time

so there is really nothing "subjective" about that especially when compared to teams from small states and small metro areas that consistently draw more fans even those with smaller enrollments and lesser academic stature and some with lesser long term athletics history

and there is really nothing "subjective" about the fact that it not really impressive to most people to run around pointing out all of the things you have failed to ever take advantage of

pretty much every program out there can tell you about all the things they would take advantage of if they just actually found a way to do it

and it is hardly "subjective" to point out that when you claim you have much more to take advantage of you should at least be able to show where you have successfully taken advantage of at least SOME of it

(07-23-2016 03:10 PM)TodgeRodge Wrote:  

(07-23-2016 02:50 PM)jaredf29 Wrote:  My point is the AAC candidates plus byu with the exception of maybe uconn, are located inside their specific dma's and closer to larger airport hubs. If your argument is potential than there are several different candidates that have more potential than say csu and in larger population states.

and my reply is that "potential" is about more than metro areas

and also the argument that it really does not impress me nor should it impress anyone else that a program has a lot of unrealized "potential" in their major metro area

that just says to me they have not gotten it done as much as it says to me they will get it done

if you want to go on the basis of actually accomplishing something than ECU or USM or Fresno State can make as much or more of a claim than any AAC member or any other AAC member

at least they actually get something done on and off the field in the smaller areas they are in Vs sitting around talking a whole lot about what they could do or will do if they ever shut up and actually do it

hell even UTSA can make a claim over some of these others including one right down the road......at least UTSA has managed to draw over 40,000 fans for some of their games and actually make a claim to a metro area and they pulled off a winning season just a couple of years into starting football

USF has shown repeatedly that they can draw 65,000+ fans to their home games.

(07-23-2016 09:00 PM)Sellular1 Wrote:  

(07-23-2016 03:10 PM)TodgeRodge Wrote:  

(07-23-2016 02:50 PM)jaredf29 Wrote:  My point is the AAC candidates plus byu with the exception of maybe uconn, are located inside their specific dma's and closer to larger airport hubs. If your argument is potential than there are several different candidates that have more potential than say csu and in larger population states.

and my reply is that "potential" is about more than metro areas

and also the argument that it really does not impress me nor should it impress anyone else that a program has a lot of unrealized "potential" in their major metro area

that just says to me they have not gotten it done as much as it says to me they will get it done

if you want to go on the basis of actually accomplishing something than ECU or USM or Fresno State can make as much or more of a claim than any AAC member or any other AAC member

at least they actually get something done on and off the field in the smaller areas they are in Vs sitting around talking a whole lot about what they could do or will do if they ever shut up and actually do it

hell even UTSA can make a claim over some of these others including one right down the road......at least UTSA has managed to draw over 40,000 fans for some of their games and actually make a claim to a metro area and they pulled off a winning season just a couple of years into starting football

USF has shown repeatedly that they can draw 65,000+ fans to their home games.

When?

(07-23-2016 09:11 PM)sierrajip Wrote:  

(07-23-2016 09:00 PM)Sellular1 Wrote:  

(07-23-2016 03:10 PM)TodgeRodge Wrote:  

(07-23-2016 02:50 PM)jaredf29 Wrote:  My point is the AAC candidates plus byu with the exception of maybe uconn, are located inside their specific dma's and closer to larger airport hubs. If your argument is potential than there are several different candidates that have more potential than say csu and in larger population states.

and my reply is that "potential" is about more than metro areas

and also the argument that it really does not impress me nor should it impress anyone else that a program has a lot of unrealized "potential" in their major metro area

that just says to me they have not gotten it done as much as it says to me they will get it done

if you want to go on the basis of actually accomplishing something than ECU or USM or Fresno State can make as much or more of a claim than any AAC member or any other AAC member

at least they actually get something done on and off the field in the smaller areas they are in Vs sitting around talking a whole lot about what they could do or will do if they ever shut up and actually do it

hell even UTSA can make a claim over some of these others including one right down the road......at least UTSA has managed to draw over 40,000 fans for some of their games and actually make a claim to a metro area and they pulled off a winning season just a couple of years into starting football

USF has shown repeatedly that they can draw 65,000+ fans to their home games.

When?

Do you not have access to the innerwebs to look this crap up? Many times. WV and Miaimi had over 67k. Hell, we even had 66k for a game against you idiots. BTW, the FSU game this year is almost sold out for 70k tickets.

(07-23-2016 09:11 PM)sierrajip Wrote:  

(07-23-2016 09:00 PM)Sellular1 Wrote:  

(07-23-2016 03:10 PM)TodgeRodge Wrote:  

(07-23-2016 02:50 PM)jaredf29 Wrote:  My point is the AAC candidates plus byu with the exception of maybe uconn, are located inside their specific dma's and closer to larger airport hubs. If your argument is potential than there are several different candidates that have more potential than say csu and in larger population states.

and my reply is that "potential" is about more than metro areas

and also the argument that it really does not impress me nor should it impress anyone else that a program has a lot of unrealized "potential" in their major metro area

that just says to me they have not gotten it done as much as it says to me they will get it done

if you want to go on the basis of actually accomplishing something than ECU or USM or Fresno State can make as much or more of a claim than any AAC member or any other AAC member

at least they actually get something done on and off the field in the smaller areas they are in Vs sitting around talking a whole lot about what they could do or will do if they ever shut up and actually do it

hell even UTSA can make a claim over some of these others including one right down the road......at least UTSA has managed to draw over 40,000 fans for some of their games and actually make a claim to a metro area and they pulled off a winning season just a couple of years into starting football

USF has shown repeatedly that they can draw 65,000+ fans to their home games.

When?

Oh, come on! South Florida owned the Div 1AA attendance records for many years. Additionally, USF drew very well when part of C-USA. How can a school anticipate having a coaching scandal and trying to rebuild?

ECU, UCF, and South Florida all have the fan bases to draw 65,000. That's why we are part of the American.

(07-23-2016 02:42 PM)TodgeRodge Wrote:  

(07-23-2016 02:13 PM)jaredf29 Wrote:  

(07-23-2016 10:12 AM)esayem Wrote:  The Mormon stuff needs to stop. Nobody is saying "ugh, what is the percentage of Cincinnatians in Texas?" Nobody said that about West Virginians.

Looking from a practical standpoint, the best bets are BYU, Houston, Colorado State, and Cincinnati. If it's two, I say it will be the two Cougars. I believe CSU has a ton of potential, especially with the on-campus stadium.

Boise and ECU bring large football followings, Tulane and Rice bring elite academic clout, UConn, Memphis, UNLV, UNM, and the FLA schools bring a lot too, but at the end of the day the aforementioned are the best overall choices.

I do not understand the Colorado state love. The whole state of Colorado's population is 5.3 million while the city of Houston is 2.3 m by itself. Fort Collins is closer to Wyoming than Denver and 1.5 hours from Denver airport. It's not a travel partner for BYU cause you'd still have to fly into SLC or Provo an hour flight unless you're going to drive for 8 hours through the Rockies.

LA is what 7 million people

are all 7 million of those people UCLA and USC fans no of course not

and while UCLA and USC draw decent crowds they still draw a great deal fewer fans in very large venues than programs in Alabama, Louisiana, Columbus Ohio, Auburn and on and on

in 2009 UCLA in LA drew 64,500 fans while USC had 85,000

2010 UCLA was 60,300 and USC was 80,000

2011 UCLA 56,600 USC 75,000......that put USC #19 in D1-A attendance that year UCLA was not in the top 30

2012 UCLA 65,000 USC 88,000 good for #9 while UCLA #22

it goes on and on

so while those are not "terrible" attendance numbers overall that is two very very large well funded long established academic and athletic universities that are either highly successful or thought to be highly successful in the media capital of the world and the second largest city in the USA and the largest state in the USA and they do not do nearly as well as programs in states with a smaller population than their city

I am not saying that CSU will immediately start attracting 40,000 or 50,000 fans or need to expand their new stajium in 2 or 3 years of they were in the Big 12, but it is equally laughable to pretend that people in a large metro area especially new residents will just suddenly rush out and start supporting the "home town university" if they get in the Big 12 especially when pretty much all of those that care about college athletics already have a team they strongly support even if they move to a large metro area and or they do not care about college athletics and it matters not what conference any university in the city is a member of

major fan support is not built over night and any fan support you can gain "over night" will be fleeting at best and as soon as the losses show up or some other program close by starts willing those fair weather fans will be gone the next day

I agree with Todge on this one. Also, big cities are usually more into the NFL too. My passion is college football and when I tell that to someone at a meeting in New York, Miami or LA they respond by telling me their favorite NFL team or simply stare at me with a puzzled look on their face. I remember asking an associate from Atlanta about the Michael Vick deal when he played for Atlanta and his response was, "Oh the NFL? I hate the NFL. I'm a Georgia fan."
Cheers!

- True and fair enough, Colorado isn't exactly a plains state. But there's a huge difference between the front range and being right in the middle of the mountains like BYU.

- People love talking about populations. I don't get it. Living in Colorado doesn't make you automatically tune in to a CSU game, nor does living in Houston make you automatically tune in to a UH game.

People need to start talking about fan/alumni base sizes. Those are the most accurate potential markets for advertisers looking to put ads on football games.

(07-23-2016 10:22 PM)Sellular1 Wrote:  

(07-23-2016 09:11 PM)sierrajip Wrote:  

(07-23-2016 09:00 PM)Sellular1 Wrote:  

(07-23-2016 03:10 PM)TodgeRodge Wrote:  

(07-23-2016 02:50 PM)jaredf29 Wrote:  My point is the AAC candidates plus byu with the exception of maybe uconn, are located inside their specific dma's and closer to larger airport hubs. If your argument is potential than there are several different candidates that have more potential than say csu and in larger population states.

and my reply is that "potential" is about more than metro areas

and also the argument that it really does not impress me nor should it impress anyone else that a program has a lot of unrealized "potential" in their major metro area

that just says to me they have not gotten it done as much as it says to me they will get it done

if you want to go on the basis of actually accomplishing something than ECU or USM or Fresno State can make as much or more of a claim than any AAC member or any other AAC member

at least they actually get something done on and off the field in the smaller areas they are in Vs sitting around talking a whole lot about what they could do or will do if they ever shut up and actually do it

hell even UTSA can make a claim over some of these others including one right down the road......at least UTSA has managed to draw over 40,000 fans for some of their games and actually make a claim to a metro area and they pulled off a winning season just a couple of years into starting football

USF has shown repeatedly that they can draw 65,000+ fans to their home games.

When?

Do you not have access to the innerwebs to look this crap up? Many times. WV and Miaimi had over 67k. Hell, we even had 66k for a game against you idiots. BTW, the FSU game this year is almost sold out for 70k tickets.

I may have stated it wrong, but over 60,000 seems like a lot over the last few years. Selling out against FSU does not necessarily mean that 70,000 USF fans bought those tickets. I do agree that it shows if a team with a large market like ours can fill the seats if the right schedule is there.

Attendance doesn't matter as long as the school has a reasonable base around 50k. USC and UCLA are 2 of the most attractive sports properties in America, it doesn't matter how many people attend the games. Getting 50k at ECU is nice and all, but those folks properly average $40k or $50k in family income and represent a huge amount of the fans that care about the team. The 50k in attendance at USC and UCLA probably average $150k in income and represent a tiny amount of the fans that care about the team. Completely different world.

(07-23-2016 09:00 PM)Sellular1 Wrote:  

(07-23-2016 03:10 PM)TodgeRodge Wrote:  

(07-23-2016 02:50 PM)jaredf29 Wrote:  My point is the AAC candidates plus byu with the exception of maybe uconn, are located inside their specific dma's and closer to larger airport hubs. If your argument is potential than there are several different candidates that have more potential than say csu and in larger population states.

and my reply is that "potential" is about more than metro areas

and also the argument that it really does not impress me nor should it impress anyone else that a program has a lot of unrealized "potential" in their major metro area

that just says to me they have not gotten it done as much as it says to me they will get it done

if you want to go on the basis of actually accomplishing something than ECU or USM or Fresno State can make as much or more of a claim than any AAC member or any other AAC member

at least they actually get something done on and off the field in the smaller areas they are in Vs sitting around talking a whole lot about what they could do or will do if they ever shut up and actually do it

hell even UTSA can make a claim over some of these others including one right down the road......at least UTSA has managed to draw over 40,000 fans for some of their games and actually make a claim to a metro area and they pulled off a winning season just a couple of years into starting football

USF has shown repeatedly that they can draw 65,000+ fans to their home games.

Repeatedly meaning.... 3 times? It's not "repeatedly" when you have to rely on other Florida schools to get to that mark.

This is without including UConn's other revenue sport WBB.

http://www.hookem.com/2016/07/25/big-12-...er-report/

According to a report by the Wall Street Journal, if the Big 12 officials want to use “worth” when it comes to selecting new members, Houston wouldn’t be close to making the cut.

By combining two reports released by the Journal over the past year, Connecticut and South Florida are the clear cut leaders in “worth” when fans combine the Journal’s report on values of men’s basketball programs and football programs. UConn’s hoops team is assigned a value of $137.9 million, and its football program is given a $88.12 million tag. Combined, that $226 million is tops of 11 schools that have been bandied about for Big 12 expansion. That appraisal is higher than three current members – TCU, Baylor and West Virginia.

Rounding out the other top four candidates on the Journal’s list are USF at $159 million, BYU at $128 million and Central Florida at $117 million. The University of Houston ranks 10th of the 11 candidates with a total value of $50 million. East Carolina is last with a tag of $36 million.

(07-23-2016 10:26 PM)chess Wrote:  

(07-23-2016 09:11 PM)sierrajip Wrote:  

(07-23-2016 09:00 PM)Sellular1 Wrote:  

(07-23-2016 03:10 PM)TodgeRodge Wrote:  

(07-23-2016 02:50 PM)jaredf29 Wrote:  My point is the AAC candidates plus byu with the exception of maybe uconn, are located inside their specific dma's and closer to larger airport hubs. If your argument is potential than there are several different candidates that have more potential than say csu and in larger population states.

and my reply is that "potential" is about more than metro areas

and also the argument that it really does not impress me nor should it impress anyone else that a program has a lot of unrealized "potential" in their major metro area

that just says to me they have not gotten it done as much as it says to me they will get it done

if you want to go on the basis of actually accomplishing something than ECU or USM or Fresno State can make as much or more of a claim than any AAC member or any other AAC member

at least they actually get something done on and off the field in the smaller areas they are in Vs sitting around talking a whole lot about what they could do or will do if they ever shut up and actually do it

hell even UTSA can make a claim over some of these others including one right down the road......at least UTSA has managed to draw over 40,000 fans for some of their games and actually make a claim to a metro area and they pulled off a winning season just a couple of years into starting football

USF has shown repeatedly that they can draw 65,000+ fans to their home games.

When?

Oh, come on! South Florida owned the Div 1AA attendance records for many years. Additionally, USF drew very well when part of C-USA. How can a school anticipate having a coaching scandal and trying to rebuild?

IMO the jury is still out on USF. They drew well during their meteoric rise through the football ranks and never really had to deal with adversity. The recent down turn and climb back up will show you (us) exactly what fan base they truly have.

(07-22-2016 12:22 PM)Realignment Wrote:  

(07-22-2016 09:25 AM)EvilVodka Wrote:  the problem with this set up is that Oklahoma is not playing ANY schools in Texas. If you add Houston, you MUST stick them with Oklahoma.

You would have one-permanent rival in the other division.

Cincinnati/Houston
Iowa State/Tulane
Kansas/Baylor
Kansas State/Memphis
Oklahoma/Texas
Oklahoma State/Texas Tech
West Virginia/TCU

FWIW, if such a set up became reality, no need to pigeon hole "rivalries" UT and Oklahoma would need to play every year, but the rest should continue a regular rotation. Similar to how the Big Ten and Pac 12 are set up.

(07-22-2016 02:19 PM)MissouriStateBears Wrote:  Texas has the 5th largest population of Mormons and the Mormons holy site in located in the Kansas City metro.

Texas is the second most populous state. The fact that it is "only" fifth shows a relatively small Mormon population in terms of percentage.

(07-25-2016 06:28 AM)TopperCard Wrote:  

(07-23-2016 09:00 PM)Sellular1 Wrote:  

(07-23-2016 03:10 PM)TodgeRodge Wrote:  

(07-23-2016 02:50 PM)jaredf29 Wrote:  My point is the AAC candidates plus byu with the exception of maybe uconn, are located inside their specific dma's and closer to larger airport hubs. If your argument is potential than there are several different candidates that have more potential than say csu and in larger population states.

and my reply is that "potential" is about more than metro areas

and also the argument that it really does not impress me nor should it impress anyone else that a program has a lot of unrealized "potential" in their major metro area

that just says to me they have not gotten it done as much as it says to me they will get it done

if you want to go on the basis of actually accomplishing something than ECU or USM or Fresno State can make as much or more of a claim than any AAC member or any other AAC member

at least they actually get something done on and off the field in the smaller areas they are in Vs sitting around talking a whole lot about what they could do or will do if they ever shut up and actually do it

hell even UTSA can make a claim over some of these others including one right down the road......at least UTSA has managed to draw over 40,000 fans for some of their games and actually make a claim to a metro area and they pulled off a winning season just a couple of years into starting football

USF has shown repeatedly that they can draw 65,000+ fans to their home games.

Repeatedly meaning.... 3 times? It's not "repeatedly" when you have to rely on other Florida schools to get to that mark.

More than that. Also not all schools were from Florida. WV game had over 67,000. We've even had close to 60k in Tampa when you chumps played us

(07-25-2016 10:15 AM)Sellular1 Wrote:  

(07-25-2016 06:28 AM)TopperCard Wrote:  

(07-23-2016 09:00 PM)Sellular1 Wrote:  USF has shown repeatedly that they can draw 65,000+ fans to their home games.

Repeatedly meaning.... 3 times? It's not "repeatedly" when you have to rely on other Florida schools to get to that mark.

More than that. Also not all schools were from Florida. WV game had over 67,000. We've even had close to 60k in Tampa when you chumps played us

FWIW, USF has had some very good years attendance wise. They were in the 40-50k range for several seasons.

2015 26,578
2014 30,694
2013 34,702
2012 44,130
2011 40,550
2010 40,849
2009 52,553
2008 49,690
2007 53,170
2006 30,222
2005 38,865

So in this thread we are at UConn, UC/BYU, and the Floridas being locks?

(07-25-2016 10:42 AM)adcorbett Wrote:  

(07-25-2016 10:15 AM)Sellular1 Wrote:  

(07-25-2016 06:28 AM)TopperCard Wrote:  

(07-23-2016 09:00 PM)Sellular1 Wrote:  USF has shown repeatedly that they can draw 65,000+ fans to their home games.

Repeatedly meaning.... 3 times? It's not "repeatedly" when you have to rely on other Florida schools to get to that mark.

More than that. Also not all schools were from Florida. WV game had over 67,000. We've even had close to 60k in Tampa when you chumps played us

FWIW, USF has had some very good years attendance wise. They were in the 40-50k range for several seasons.

2015 26,578
2014 30,694
2013 34,702
2012 44,130
2011 40,550
2010 40,849
2009 52,553
2008 49,690
2007 53,170
2006 30,222
2005 38,865

They also lead the nation in no shows. Their actual attendance bears zero resemblance to their announced attendance. I'm talking 10,000+ no shows per game every game for years.