CSNbbs

A case study game with similar time slots / networks:

Cincy vs Memphis, Thursday, September 24, 7pm ESPN

1.25 million viewers

Louisville vs Clemson, Thursday, September 17, 7pm ESPN

1.9 million viewers

So ESPN is paying the ACC 20 million more per team for ~700k more viewers

http://www.sportsmediawatch.com/college-...v-ratings/

That Memphis - Cincinnati game was also the better game and featured two QBs that are getting serious NFL attention.

(09-28-2015 03:04 PM)NBPirate Wrote: [ -> ]A case study game with similar time slots / networks:

Cincy vs Memphis, Thursday, September 24, 7pm ESPN

1.25 million viewers

Louisville vs Clemson, Thursday, September 17, 7pm ESPN

1.9 million viewers

So ESPN is paying the ACC 20 million more per team for ~700k more viewers

http://www.sportsmediawatch.com/college-...v-ratings/

On paper that huge divergence makes no sense. They can claim having the top conferences help with ad revenue. ...I guess

The league has to be happy with that number. For comparison, 2014 AAC Thursday night ESPN games featuring UCF vs. ECU reached 1.04M viewers and UCF vs. UH had 744K viewers. The AAC has two more ESPN Thursday night conference games this year with ECU vs. UCF and USF vs. UCF late in the season.

(09-28-2015 03:32 PM)gulfcoastgal Wrote: [ -> ]The league has to be happy with that number. For comparison, 2014 AAC Thursday night ESPN games featuring UCF vs. ECU reached 1.04M viewers and UCF vs. UH had 744K viewers. The AAC has two more ESPN Thursday night conference games this year with ECU vs. UCF and USF vs. UCF late in the season.

Let's hope we make a game of it.

College Football: Week 4

Saturday
2.53 rating ABC 12:00 pm #22-BYU at Michigan
n/a rating ESPN 12:00 pm #8-LSU at Syracuse
n/a rating ESPN2 12:00 pm #20-Georgia Tech at Duke
2.76 rating ABC 3:30 pm Western Michigan at #1-Ohio State or Virginia Tech at East Carolina
3.16 rating CBS 3:30 pm Tennessee at Florida
1.45 rating NBC 3:30 pm Massachusetts at #6-Notre Dame
1.76 rating ESPN 3:30 pm #24-Oklahoma State at Texas
1.87 rating FOX 4:45 pm #3-TCU at Texas Tech
1.85 rating ESPN 7:00 pm #14-Texas A&M at Arkansas
2.18 rating ABC 8:00 pm #9-UCLA at #16-Arizona
2.07 rating FOX 8:30 pm #18-Utah at #13-Oregon
1.74 rating ESPN 10:30 pm #19-USC at Arizona State


These are from last weekend, so how does the "or" work in the rating for ECU and Va Tech?

Here's a summary of AAC games based on this (sat 9/26 not included yet)....

http://www.sportsmediawatch.com/college-...v-ratings/

2.22M W2 USF/Florida St ESPN , Sat 9/12 1130a
2.00M W1 SMU/Baylor , ESPN, Fri 9/4, 7p
1.92M W1 Penn St /Temple , ESPN , Sat 9/5, 330p
1.90M W3 UConn/ Missouri, ESPN, Sat 9/19, 12Noon
1.24M W4 Cincinnati/Memphis , ESPN, Thurs 9/24, 730p
1.05M W2 ECU/Florida , ESPN2, Sat 9/12, 7p
668K W3 Tulsa /Oklahoma , FS1, Sat 9/19, 12Noon
293K W3 USF/ Maryland , ESPNU, Sat 9/19 , 12noon
166K W2 Temple/Cincinnati , ESPNNews , Sat 9/12, 8p
151k W2 UCF/Stanford , FS1 , Sat 9/12, 1030p

That Louisville Clemson game was a snooze fest. Probably kept some viewers away from our game.

UC plays on Thursday night again this week. We have the U coming into town so ratings should be strong once again.

(09-28-2015 03:32 PM)gulfcoastgal Wrote: [ -> ]The league has to be happy with that number. For comparison, 2014 AAC Thursday night ESPN games featuring UCF vs. ECU reached 1.04M viewers and UCF vs. UH had 744K viewers. The AAC has two more ESPN Thursday night conference games this year with ECU vs. UCF and USF vs. UCF late in the season.

Cincy vs ECU on ESPN2 Thurs night game drew well also with 821K. I know not apple to apples but good considering Cal vs USC on espn started about 1/2 way thought the game. Cal/USC drew 1.27 that night.

These are the only numbers that matter to realignment or power status. If your conference draws eyeballs then its relevant, if it doesn't then it's not.

(09-28-2015 03:04 PM)NBPirate Wrote: [ -> ]So ESPN is paying the ACC 20 million more per team for ~700k more viewers

1) Conference TV contracts are based on aggregate TV ratings, not single game ratings. Aggregate ratings gives you a much better picture of how many eyeballs a conference can be expected across all games. To illustrate this point, let's compare the average TV viewer numbers for conference games in the ACC and AAC last year (link). I've included the ACC championship in the total given below (it's part of the conference TV package), but left out games against out-of-conference opponents, Notre Dame, and Navy (since they weren't in the AAC last year).

Average ACC conference game: 2.62M (35 rated games)
Average AAC conference game: 371K (30 rated games)

ACC games that drew over 1.0M viewers: 20 out of 35
AAC games that drew over 1.0M viewers: 3 out of 30

Now there are some obvious problems with this analysis for sure (e.g. no adjustment for which network the game was on, when it was played, etc.). It also only uses data from last year. With that said, I think it is still useful in illustrating why the ACC is valued more than the American and why only looking at single game comparisons can be deceiving.

2) Why do people pay $120+ bucks for a Nike shoe when they could buy a sneaker that is every bit as good for $40-60 bucks? Brand value. The ACC is a Power 5 conference with an access bowl slot. The American is not. The ACC has several schools with brand recognition in football (FSU, Clemson, Miami, VT) and basketball (UNC, Duke, UofL, Cuse). The American has some solid basketball brands (UConn, UC, Memphis, Temple), but no one has a national level brand for football. Those facts help drive up the price for the ACC TV contract.

3) Competition drives prices. When ESPN bid for the ACC's TV rights, it had to compete with Fox Sports. When ESPN bid for the American's TV rights, its only competition was NBC Sports. There was nothing forcing ESPN to raise the value of the American contract because it didn't have any serious competition competing against it.

(09-28-2015 06:10 PM)UofLgrad07 Wrote: [ -> ]

(09-28-2015 03:04 PM)NBPirate Wrote: [ -> ]So ESPN is paying the ACC 20 million more per team for ~700k more viewers

1) Conference TV contracts are based on aggregate TV ratings, not single game ratings. Aggregate ratings gives you a much better picture of how many eyeballs a conference can be expected across all games. To illustrate this point, let's compare the average TV viewer numbers for conference games in the ACC and AAC last year (link). I've included the ACC championship in the total given below (it's part of the conference TV package), but left out games against out-of-conference opponents, Notre Dame, and Navy (since they weren't in the AAC last year).

Average ACC conference game: 2.62M (35 rated games)
Average AAC conference game: 371K (30 rated games)

ACC games that drew over 1.0M viewers: 20 out of 35
AAC games that drew over 1.0M viewers: 3 out of 30

Now there are some obvious problems with this analysis for sure (e.g. no adjustment for which network the game was on, when it was played, etc.). It also only uses data from last year. With that said, I think it is still useful in illustrating why the ACC is valued more than the American and why only looking at single game comparisons can be deceiving.

2) Why do people pay $120+ bucks for a Nike shoe when they could buy a sneaker that is every bit as good for $40-60 bucks? Brand value. The ACC is a Power 5 conference with an access bowl slot. The American is not. The ACC has several schools with brand recognition in football (FSU, Clemson, Miami, VT) and basketball (UNC, Duke, UofL, Cuse). The American has some solid basketball brands (UConn, UC, Memphis, Temple), but no one has a national level brand for football. Those facts help drive up the price for the ACC TV contracts.

3) Competition drives prices. When ESPN bid for the ACC's TV rights, it had to compete with Fox Sports. When ESPN bid for the American's TV rights, its only competition was NBC Sports. There was nothing forcing ESPN to raise the value of the American contract because it didn't have any serious competition competing against it.

The point he was making is that given similar channel and time slot the AAC team didn't drastically under perform versus the ACC team. The main difference between that 3 and 20 number being over 1m is the time slot/channel.

Nobody is arguing that the ACC isn't drawing more eyeballs even in the most favorable comparison for the AAC but the difference is not as great as the 2m vs 20m or whatever the payout for the ACC is now.

(09-28-2015 06:10 PM)UofLgrad07 Wrote: [ -> ]

(09-28-2015 03:04 PM)NBPirate Wrote: [ -> ]So ESPN is paying the ACC 20 million more per team for ~700k more viewers

1) Conference TV contracts are based on aggregate TV ratings, not single game ratings. Aggregate ratings gives you a much better picture of how many eyeballs a conference can be expected across all games. To illustrate this point, let's compare the average TV viewer numbers for conference games in the ACC and AAC last year (link). I've included the ACC championship in the total given below (it's part of the conference TV package), but left out games against out-of-conference opponents, Notre Dame, and Navy (since they weren't in the AAC last year).

Average ACC conference game: 2.62M (35 rated games)
Average AAC conference game: 371K (30 rated games)

ACC games that drew over 1.0M viewers: 20 out of 35
AAC games that drew over 1.0M viewers: 3 out of 30

Now there are some obvious problems with this analysis for sure (e.g. no adjustment for which network the game was on, when it was played, etc.). It also only uses data from last year. With that said, I think it is still useful in illustrating why the ACC is valued more than the American and why only looking at single game comparisons can be deceiving.

2) Why do people pay $120+ bucks for a Nike shoe when they could buy a sneaker that is every bit as good for $40-60 bucks? Brand value. The ACC is a Power 5 conference with an access bowl slot. The American is not. The ACC has several schools with brand recognition in football (FSU, Clemson, Miami, VT) and basketball (UNC, Duke, UofL, Cuse). The American has some solid basketball brands (UConn, UC, Memphis, Temple), but no one has a national level brand for football. Those facts help drive up the price for the ACC TV contract.

3) Competition drives prices. When ESPN bid for the ACC's TV rights, it had to compete with Fox Sports. When ESPN bid for the American's TV rights, its only competition was NBC Sports. There was nothing forcing ESPN to raise the value of the American contract because it didn't have any serious competition competing against it.

We don't get the same time / channel slots as the ACC. Can't be compared like that.

(09-28-2015 06:14 PM)ECBrad Wrote: [ -> ]The point he was making is that given similar channel and time slot the AAC team didn't drastically under perform versus the ACC team.

The point I'm making is that it is really hard to draw any sort of conclusions from a single data point. Conference contracts aren't based on the results of one game so the idea that "ESPN is paying the ACC 20 million more per team based on a 700k more viewers" seems like a silly argument.

(09-28-2015 06:14 PM)ECBrad Wrote: [ -> ]Nobody is arguing that the ACC isn't drawing more eyeballs even in the most favorable comparison for the AAC but the difference is not as great as the 2m vs 20m or whatever the payout for the ACC is now.

Whether we agree or disagree on the value difference is irrelevant. Conferences are worth as much as the market is willing to pay and market decided the ACC's TV package was worth a lot more.

(09-28-2015 06:34 PM)NBPirate Wrote: [ -> ]We don't get the same time / channel slots as the ACC. Can't be compared like that.

That begs the question of why. Why doesn't the American get more slots on ESPN or ESPN 2? Why doesn't ESPN value the majority of the American's content as highly as the ACC, SEC, etc? If the only difference is due the time / channel slot, then why isn't there more balance between the leagues?

IMO, the difference in time / channel slots between the league is a function of the leagues themselves. ESPN see the ACC has having a better collection of ratings drivers compared to the American (FSU, VT, Clemson vs. Houston, UC, UCF). That is why the ACC gets more slots on the main ESPN channels and why it gets paid more.

(09-28-2015 06:36 PM)UofLgrad07 Wrote: [ -> ]

(09-28-2015 06:14 PM)ECBrad Wrote: [ -> ]The point he was making is that given similar channel and time slot the AAC team didn't drastically under perform versus the ACC team.

The point I'm making is that it is really hard to draw any sort of conclusions from a single data point. Conference contracts aren't based on the results of one game so the idea that "ESPN is paying the ACC 20 million more per team based on a 700k more viewers" seems like a silly argument.

So you drew a bad conclusion from a lot of data points? That's not a valid comparison.

Right way to do this is find the most equal comparisons, same time slots, same channels. Everything else - including your effort - is a waste of time.

(09-28-2015 07:01 PM)mascotswinchampionships Wrote: [ -> ]

(09-28-2015 06:36 PM)UofLgrad07 Wrote: [ -> ]

(09-28-2015 06:14 PM)ECBrad Wrote: [ -> ]The point he was making is that given similar channel and time slot the AAC team didn't drastically under perform versus the ACC team.

The point I'm making is that it is really hard to draw any sort of conclusions from a single data point. Conference contracts aren't based on the results of one game so the idea that "ESPN is paying the ACC 20 million more per team based on a 700k more viewers" seems like a silly argument.

So you drew a bad conclusion from a lot of data points? That's not a valid comparison.

Right way to do this is find the most equal comparisons, same time slots, same channels. Everything else - including your effort - is a waste of time.

This

(09-28-2015 06:48 PM)UofLgrad07 Wrote: [ -> ]

(09-28-2015 06:34 PM)NBPirate Wrote: [ -> ]We don't get the same time / channel slots as the ACC. Can't be compared like that.

That begs the question of why. Why doesn't the American get more slots on ESPN or ESPN 2? Why doesn't ESPN value the majority of the American's content as highly as the ACC, SEC, etc? If the only difference is due the time / channel slot, then why isn't there more balance between the leagues?

You really don't want to know the REAL answer to that question. If you've been a Lousyville fan for more than 5 years, you already know the REAL answer.

And, if I might make the observation, the "Power" in Power5 has very little to do with POWERful football, and everything to do with POWERball. Meaning, the teams that attract the best recruits are the teams ESPN WANTS to be able to attract the best recruits. Therefore ESPN pays them more, The recruit sees them in an advantageous light because of it, and ESPN slaps a P5 label on them.

Furthermore, I will postulate that the reason ESPN does this is two-fold: A) They don't want to pay out more money than they already do, and 2) They don't want to burden their punch-drunk ex-football player commentators with having to remember 129 D-1a coaches' names, or 129 schools' mascots for that matter...

#selffulfillingprophesy

(09-28-2015 06:48 PM)UofLgrad07 Wrote: [ -> ]

(09-28-2015 06:34 PM)NBPirate Wrote: [ -> ]We don't get the same time / channel slots as the ACC. Can't be compared like that.

That begs the question of why. Why doesn't the American get more slots on ESPN or ESPN 2? Why doesn't ESPN value the majority of the American's content as highly as the ACC, SEC, etc? If the only difference is due the time / channel slot, then why isn't there more balance between the leagues?

IMO, the difference in time / channel slots between the league is a function of the leagues themselves. ESPN see the ACC has having a better collection of ratings drivers compared to the American (FSU, VT, Clemson vs. Houston, UC, UCF). That is why the ACC gets more slots on the main ESPN channels and why it gets paid more.

Sadly, you are correct about all of this.

Networks don't arbitrarily give out good channels and slots, they do it based on track record.