I saw it posted that Cleveland-Akron-Canton television market ranks 17th and it got me to thinking: Toledo's Northern suburbs are included in Detroit's market and without them, Toledo ranks 76th. One of the factors considered by a conference when extending an invitation to join is tv market share. What do my fellow fans think of the idea that Toledo be combined with Detroit, thus making us the 6th market in the nation? I'm not even sure how these things are decided, but I thought this would make an interesting topic for discussion during this off-season.
(05-27-2013 12:32 PM)Aries_Rocket Wrote: [ -> ]I saw it posted that Cleveland-Akron-Canton television market ranks 17th and it got me to thinking: Toledo's Northern suburbs are included in Detroit's market and without them, Toledo ranks 76th. One of the factors considered by a conference when extending an invitation to join is tv market share. What do my fellow fans think of the idea that Toledo be combined with Detroit, thus making us the 6th market in the nation? I'm not even sure how these things are decided, but I thought this would make an interesting topic for discussion during this off-season.
Obviously Toledo is better situated TV wise than say Ohio, for example; however, it goes beyond just market size---it is also a matter of how well a team is supported within that market (and beyond). For example, if the UT/BG game went head to head against OSU/UM what do you think the TV ratings in a Detroit market that includes Toledo would look like? For that matter, what do you think the ratings would look like just within Lucas and Wood Counties?
(05-27-2013 02:25 PM)T-Town Wrote: [ -> ] (05-27-2013 12:32 PM)Aries_Rocket Wrote: [ -> ]I saw it posted that Cleveland-Akron-Canton television market ranks 17th and it got me to thinking: Toledo's Northern suburbs are included in Detroit's market and without them, Toledo ranks 76th. One of the factors considered by a conference when extending an invitation to join is tv market share. What do my fellow fans think of the idea that Toledo be combined with Detroit, thus making us the 6th market in the nation? I'm not even sure how these things are decided, but I thought this would make an interesting topic for discussion during this off-season.
Obviously Toledo is better situated TV wise than say Ohio, for example; however, it goes beyond just market size---it is also a matter of how well a team is supported within that market (and beyond). For example, if the UT/BG game went head to head against OSU/UM what do you think the TV ratings in a Detroit market that includes Toledo would look like? For that matter, what do you think the ratings would look like just within Lucas and Wood Counties?
It all depends. If both OSU and UM were on NCAA probation, had bowl bans, and were 0-11 going into that game while both UT and BG were undefeated and ranked 1 and 2 in the nation, I imagine we could deliver a sizable tv share. How many people in Philadelphia care about Temple f-ball? Yet that helped get them invited to the Big East.
I think people in Detroit would still be watching UM games.
(05-27-2013 05:23 PM)Aries_Rocket Wrote: [ -> ] (05-27-2013 02:25 PM)T-Town Wrote: [ -> ] (05-27-2013 12:32 PM)Aries_Rocket Wrote: [ -> ]I saw it posted that Cleveland-Akron-Canton television market ranks 17th and it got me to thinking: Toledo's Northern suburbs are included in Detroit's market and without them, Toledo ranks 76th. One of the factors considered by a conference when extending an invitation to join is tv market share. What do my fellow fans think of the idea that Toledo be combined with Detroit, thus making us the 6th market in the nation? I'm not even sure how these things are decided, but I thought this would make an interesting topic for discussion during this off-season.
Obviously Toledo is better situated TV wise than say Ohio, for example; however, it goes beyond just market size---it is also a matter of how well a team is supported within that market (and beyond). For example, if the UT/BG game went head to head against OSU/UM what do you think the TV ratings in a Detroit market that includes Toledo would look like? For that matter, what do you think the ratings would look like just within Lucas and Wood Counties?
It all depends. If both OSU and UM were on NCAA probation, had bowl bans, and were 0-11 going into that game while both UT and BG were undefeated and ranked 1 and 2 in the nation, I imagine we could deliver a sizable tv share. How many people in Philadelphia care about Temple f-ball? Yet that helped get them invited to the Big East.
Nobody in Philly (or most of Pennsylvania for that matter) cares about college football outside of Penn State. TV channels and advertisers like potential viewers though, which is where the whole market size comes into play and means more than the 27 people who will actually watch a Temple game on TV. The Big Ten Network cares more about grabbing as many NYC area viewers for an Ohio State v. Nebraska game than they do about the 39 people who may watch Rutgers play any sport on the network.
(05-28-2013 07:41 AM)Rocket Pirate Wrote: [ -> ] (05-27-2013 05:23 PM)Aries_Rocket Wrote: [ -> ] (05-27-2013 02:25 PM)T-Town Wrote: [ -> ] (05-27-2013 12:32 PM)Aries_Rocket Wrote: [ -> ]I saw it posted that Cleveland-Akron-Canton television market ranks 17th and it got me to thinking: Toledo's Northern suburbs are included in Detroit's market and without them, Toledo ranks 76th. One of the factors considered by a conference when extending an invitation to join is tv market share. What do my fellow fans think of the idea that Toledo be combined with Detroit, thus making us the 6th market in the nation? I'm not even sure how these things are decided, but I thought this would make an interesting topic for discussion during this off-season.
Obviously Toledo is better situated TV wise than say Ohio, for example; however, it goes beyond just market size---it is also a matter of how well a team is supported within that market (and beyond). For example, if the UT/BG game went head to head against OSU/UM what do you think the TV ratings in a Detroit market that includes Toledo would look like? For that matter, what do you think the ratings would look like just within Lucas and Wood Counties?
It all depends. If both OSU and UM were on NCAA probation, had bowl bans, and were 0-11 going into that game while both UT and BG were undefeated and ranked 1 and 2 in the nation, I imagine we could deliver a sizable tv share. How many people in Philadelphia care about Temple f-ball? Yet that helped get them invited to the Big East.
Nobody in Philly (or most of Pennsylvania for that matter) cares about college football outside of Penn State. TV channels and advertisers like potential viewers though, which is where the whole market size comes into play and means more than the 27 people who will actually watch a Temple game on TV. The Big Ten Network cares more about grabbing as many NYC area viewers for an Ohio State v. Nebraska game than they do about the 39 people who may watch Rutgers play any sport on the network.
Pretty much agree with your post, especially the part about the Big Ten using Rutgers just to get their foot in the door in the NYC market in order to try to sell their "marquee" games like OSU/UM. However, I don't think that same strategy would work too well for a non-AQ conference. For example, how much did Rutgers help the former Big East FB ratings in NYC?
The only other clarification I would make is that while the number of POTENTIAL viewers determines market size, unless or until those potential viewers become an actual audience= ratings = advertising $$$$, they are pretty much useless----and don't think that TV executives are not totally focused on ratings = $$$$.
As I said before, it is obviously more advantageous to be in a large market than a small market; however, the ability to deliver that market is also usually a factor. The point I was trying to make regarding Toledo becoming part of the Detroit market as suggested in the original post is that I don't think that artificially redrawing a market boundary would make much difference one way or the other as to UT's chances of being invited into another conference.
Market size are complete non-factors for non-major conference schools because networks and advertisers are already assuming (and rightfully so most of the time) that nobody is going to watch them on TV.
lets just say ohio state and michigan started just like toledo.....sacrifices need to be made.
abc needs to show toledo games locally like columbus shows osu games every week.
lord knows why they stopped showing them
(05-28-2013 06:09 PM)crusher38 Wrote: [ -> ]lets just say ohio state and michigan started just like toledo.....sacrifices need to be made.
abc needs to show toledo games locally like columbus shows osu games every week.
lord knows why they stopped showing them
I don't understand your first line. The popularity of Toledo is incomparable to the popularity of Michigan and Ohio State.
Are you saying Ch. 13 should break their contractual obligations with ABC, not show the national games, pay a fee for that, lose advertisement dollars from that game, and show Toledo play Western Michigan while nobody watches? UT is very accessible with live games on BCSN, at least three games on the ESPN networks, and just about every other game live online.
Why local channels stopped showing local games is simple (and unfortunate): it's all about maximizing dollars, whether local viewers like it or not. ESPN/ABC, Fox, and CBS flimsily proved that the local stations could make more money showing the national games the big networks have contracts with. It even goes beyond just the local channels and their network affiliate; the owners of the local networks and the cable/satellite companies play a huge role. The owners want to maximize advertising dollars and the cable/satellite companies want to maximize subscription dollars. All of this has basically neutered local TV and the only difference between an ABC affiliate in Toledo compared to an ABC affiliate in New York is the local news (which is likely horrible in both places).
Boise State@Toledo had something like a 2.2 for a Friday night game on ESPN. MAC games are usually a .4-.6. So it's not like people won't watch UT. It's a matter of who the opponent is.
(05-28-2013 06:09 PM)crusher38 Wrote: [ -> ]lets just say ohio state and michigan started just like toledo.....sacrifices need to be made.
I'm willing to give my first born if it means a Top Ten finish and a BCS bowl for the Rockets. I'd settle for Top Twenty Five if we get better concessions and they fix up the East side of the GB.
13ABC used to broadcast a home game once in a while, especially a big game, but I don't recall when the last time was that they aired one. Actually, it's probably good that home games are not aired locally, at least not live. Now, if we had gone undefeated last year, were moving up in the rankings, and the last few games looked like sell-outs maybe they would have picked up one of those, who knows.
I understand that it's all about money, ratings, and drawing viewers. However, one thing I can tell is that I never watch the out-of-market events we are force fed locally, NEVER--not UCLA, USC, Iowa, Alabama, the FL teams, or any of the rest of the crap the networks push in my face. I don't give 2 poops about those teams. I don't even watch tOSU or UM, although I can understand why a lot of people do--their wanna-be couch potato "fans" don't go to their games anyway. So, the networks might be getting revenues by airing those games, but they are not serving our local community very well. I guess it isn't about that anymore.
I cannot make all of our away games; I hope internet streaming continues to expand so video is available for every single game.
(05-29-2013 06:51 AM)Rocket Pirate Wrote: [ -> ] (05-28-2013 06:09 PM)crusher38 Wrote: [ -> ]lets just say ohio state and michigan started just like toledo.....sacrifices need to be made.
abc needs to show toledo games locally like columbus shows osu games every week.
lord knows why they stopped showing them
I don't understand your first line. The popularity of Toledo is incomparable to the popularity of Michigan and Ohio State.
Are you saying Ch. 13 should break their contractual obligations with ABC, not show the national games, pay a fee for that, lose advertisement dollars from that game, and show Toledo play Western Michigan while nobody watches? UT is very accessible with live games on BCSN, at least three games on the ESPN networks, and just about every other game live online.
Why local channels stopped showing local games is simple (and unfortunate): it's all about maximizing dollars, whether local viewers like it or not. ESPN/ABC, Fox, and CBS flimsily proved that the local stations could make more money showing the national games the big networks have contracts with. It even goes beyond just the local channels and their network affiliate; the owners of the local networks and the cable/satellite companies play a huge role. The owners want to maximize advertising dollars and the cable/satellite companies want to maximize subscription dollars. All of this has basically neutered local TV and the only difference between an ABC affiliate in Toledo compared to an ABC affiliate in New York is the local news (which is likely horrible in both places).
dont understand? read it slower.......
osu didnt start out a powerhouse,dude
(05-29-2013 08:04 AM)H2Oville Rocket Wrote: [ -> ] (05-28-2013 06:09 PM)crusher38 Wrote: [ -> ]lets just say ohio state and michigan started just like toledo.....sacrifices need to be made.
I'm willing to give my first born if it means a Top Ten finish and a BCS bowl for the Rockets. I'd settle for Top Twenty Five if we get better concessions and they fix up the East side of the GB.
it could be done!!!
espn airs college games...so that means abc needs to air local games period. either that or the mac gets their own channel
Of course Ohio State and Michigan didn't start out as powerhouses, but Ohio State has been a powerhouse since the 1930s and Michigan since the early 1900s. Guess what? They are still powerhouses. Just by the chronological measurement, Toledo is very far behind. If Toledo had 20 straight undefeated seasons and Ohio State and Michigan had 20 straight losing seasons at the same time as Toledo's streak, Toledo would still not be as popular as Ohio State and Michigan.
(05-31-2013 07:26 AM)Rocket Pirate Wrote: [ -> ]Of course Ohio State and Michigan didn't start out as powerhouses, but Ohio State has been a powerhouse since the 1930s and Michigan since the early 1900s. Guess what? They are still powerhouses. Just by the chronological measurement, Toledo is very far behind. If Toledo had 20 straight undefeated seasons and Ohio State and Michigan had 20 straight losing seasons at the same time as Toledo's streak, Toledo would still not be as popular as Ohio State and Michigan.
they didnt really have competition in the 30's man.....
its like saying bill russell has all those titles with the celtics...but there were only like 6 teams around.
and powerhouses dont get beat at home by a rookie qb from usc
(06-02-2013 07:25 PM)crusher38 Wrote: [ -> ] (05-31-2013 07:26 AM)Rocket Pirate Wrote: [ -> ]Of course Ohio State and Michigan didn't start out as powerhouses, but Ohio State has been a powerhouse since the 1930s and Michigan since the early 1900s. Guess what? They are still powerhouses. Just by the chronological measurement, Toledo is very far behind. If Toledo had 20 straight undefeated seasons and Ohio State and Michigan had 20 straight losing seasons at the same time as Toledo's streak, Toledo would still not be as popular as Ohio State and Michigan.
they didnt really have competition in the 30's man.....
its like saying bill russell has all those titles with the celtics...but there were only like 6 teams around.
and powerhouses dont get beat at home by a rookie qb from usc
And good teams don't lose at home to Ball State or get squeezed by Eastern Michigan, Buffalo, and Akron.
As much as I can't stand those two programs (especially Ohio State), you can't deny that they are powerhouses, have been for a long time, and will be in the future. Who cares if there weren't very many programs around in the 1930s? There were over 120 teams in Div. 1A last season and exactly one went undefeated.
(06-02-2013 10:54 PM)Rocket Pirate Wrote: [ -> ] (06-02-2013 07:25 PM)crusher38 Wrote: [ -> ] (05-31-2013 07:26 AM)Rocket Pirate Wrote: [ -> ]Of course Ohio State and Michigan didn't start out as powerhouses, but Ohio State has been a powerhouse since the 1930s and Michigan since the early 1900s. Guess what? They are still powerhouses. Just by the chronological measurement, Toledo is very far behind. If Toledo had 20 straight undefeated seasons and Ohio State and Michigan had 20 straight losing seasons at the same time as Toledo's streak, Toledo would still not be as popular as Ohio State and Michigan.
they didnt really have competition in the 30's man.....
its like saying bill russell has all those titles with the celtics...but there were only like 6 teams around.
and powerhouses dont get beat at home by a rookie qb from usc
And good teams don't lose at home to Ball State or get squeezed by Eastern Michigan, Buffalo, and Akron.
As much as I can't stand those two programs (especially Ohio State), you can't deny that they are powerhouses, have been for a long time, and will be in the future. Who cares if there weren't very many programs around in the 1930s? There were over 120 teams in Div. 1A last season and exactly one went undefeated.
it all comes down to money,man....
im sure about 70 years ago all colleges were sat down in a room somewhere and asked to buy into a certain syste to which toledo said no..........