(12-20-2023 06:13 AM)hk25 Wrote: Would be interesting to see the #’s with all P5 opponents games removed. A straight G5 vs G5 comparison.
(12-20-2023 08:40 AM)aTxTIGER Wrote: (12-19-2023 11:44 PM)rollgreenwave Wrote: (12-19-2023 03:06 PM)slhNavy91 Wrote: (12-19-2023 11:56 AM)aTxTIGER Wrote: Here are those teams' averages without their highest rated games:
Navy---1.174 million
USF----144k
Tulane---541.8k
Boise St---417.5k
Memphis---385.3k
Rice---96k
You should take away Navy's ND number too. Then we're down to like 750,000 per Nielsen rated game for three games.
Honest question, what's the point of this? An average but not the whole dataset?
Not saying the way they did it is appropriate, but sometimes a single outlier in a dataset influences the whole thing so much that it's a good idea to remove that one value to get a more useful conclusion. So it's not an outlandish idea.
Yup. The point is that huge ratings playing cannon fodder for Alabama and Texas doesn't mean very much because 95% of the viewers aren't watching for USF or Rice.
If you are trying to show who is the bigger draw for TV in the G5 taking out those outliers is the best way to look at it. Navy is a special case due to the Notre Dame and Army games they have every year. They are obviously and impressively the best program in the conference in terms of viewership due to the event games they have.
Okay - y'all seem to want to ascertain some esoteric "non-contract-bowl-conference team with the bestest inherent TV attractiveness."
Good luck to you.
In my opinion that is meaningless.
USF's numbers are greater because of Alabama visiting. Navy's numbers are buoyed by Army-Navy (in total viewer #s but not benefitting the conference) and by Notre Dame (which IS a conference game every other year).
Guess what? When the AAC got a billion dollar deal from Disney, it was in part because we were selling Alabama at USF and Notre Dame at Navy and even Boise at Memphis. That's the advantage the AAC and the mwc continue to have over the other three.
Intra-conference games are only 53% of the viewers that the AAC is selling to Disney. And that's okay. Disney is buying the eyeballs, not the t-shirts.
If you are saying "network" or "contract" or "deal", then dismissing home games against contract-bowl-conference teams is wrong.
For the conference and for any discussion of media money, conference controlled inventory viewers is what to look at.
Total viewers -- including the away games -- doesn't mean much for the conference or the contract. But there is some merit in looking at it for the schools. Rice visited Texas. The AD can tell the university President that they got into millions more living rooms AND got paid. Maybe they actually do get some applications, or a donation, they wouldn't because of that temporary association with a non-nerd school. Total viewers are fair to discuss for a school, but it isn't really "brand" it's more like "reach" or like impressions/clicks but not monetized.
You seem to be looking for brand, so why exclude one game or another when talking about it?
Does non-autonomous vs non-autonomous somehow capture something better? I say vehemently no. The Notre Dame game IS part of Navy's Brand. If you have a rivalry or even a couple repeated matchups, say requirements from state legislature for flagships to play in-state schools, that can be part of your brand. Various schools have used "Anyone, anywhere, any time" from Bobby Bowden at Florida State to Pat Hill at Fresno State, so EVEN the away games can be part of the brand. "Giant-killer" can be part a program's brand, and make it more likely that home or away games get the plus up to the better network/timeslot.
And that's the other reason looking at some of the TV numbers but not others for some esoteric inherent attractiveness is off. Way more than school, it's timeslot, timeslot, timeslot.
Year after year, the AAC's top viewership teams are the top performing teams. Be in the NY6 talk or the CFP talk, and you get those ABC and ESPN and Black Friday slots. Cincinnati, Houston, UCF were never a Big Three for viewership because when they were down, they got crap timeslots (or none) and got crap viewer numbers. I could compare Memphis' share of AAC viewers in a year like 2019 to a down year and get two very different answers of how big a draw they are for TV. The value of the AAC has been proven by over half the conference demonstrating they can deliver when called upon - Houston, Temple, Navy, UCF, Memphis, Cincinnati, Tulane, throw in UTSA.
And the network isn't looking at a single game's draw or even a single team. The contract is about 40 games on the family of networks, across Thursday/Friday/Saturday and then numbers on ESPN+. Do these teams and their opponents give us a total inventory worth 20 timeslots on ESPN2 or better?
And having said all that, we CAN look at the AAC as head and shoulders over the other non-contract-bowl conferences if you narrow down the aperture.
Four AAC vs AAC games over a million. Only one mwc vs mwc, the CCG. And only one MAC vs MAC, the CCG. For the Sun Belt and CUSA, nothing in what the conference is selling their media partners got over a million, just one paycheck away game each.
/
The most-watched Group of Five teams (minimum five Nielsen-rated games)
