(08-14-2015 10:36 AM)rokamortis Wrote:  

(08-14-2015 10:33 AM)MplsBison Wrote:  

(08-13-2015 05:55 PM)shere khan Wrote:  All one need do is visit eku and coastal in person

All the blah blah in this thread is goofy.

Coastal wins by a country mile

These are a country mile apart?






Not sure which country you live in, but sounds like the guys tasked with measuring out a mile called it in early.

You should at least try to post current pictures of both stadiums (neither image you posted is of the current stadium) or EKU's renderings along with Coastal's when released. Just to be consistent.

Plus, I think they may be discussing more than just football.

What is cheaper tearing down the Begley building that has 16,000 seats on its roof or expanding Brooks stadium?
EKU has released their plans 18-20k all new they tore the visiting side down already.
Coastal built their stadium with future expansion in mind to twenty thousand.
There is a good chance Coastal will have the bigger stadium and it will cost less to get there.

(08-14-2015 02:40 PM)MplsBison Wrote:  Ah ... now you changed it. "Real attendance", which is driven by "demand".

See, you're just agreeing with me. "Demand", as you call it, is the same rough idea that's harder to measure and quantify -- which I called "popularity".

Attendance and TV viewership are both dependent on this more general concept.

Yes, and this is why it would be idiotic to define market potential as simply the total number of television sets in some arbitrarily selected media market.

So, instead, we define market potential as the potential size of the market demand. Clearly EKU has a lower ceiling on the potential popularity of their FB, given their close proximity to Kentucky. They are in a situation similar to EMU.

"

(08-13-2015 06:37 PM)David Krumudgen Wrote:  i have visited both and its coastal by a mile.
There are less people going to college these days.

Colleges are trying to recruit out of state students
and international students to fill the lower enrollments

Now which area is going to be easier to recruit students
Myrtle Beach or Richmond.

Not even close

richmond is in the middle of nowhere with nothing. its hard to believe it is still operating. its like a little weak version of marshall.

Coastal is growing in a great part of the country and will dwarf eku "college of last resort" in 5 years.

you people who are commenting should visit them both.

the whole argument is a no brainer.

Is Coastal still in SC?

(08-15-2015 09:48 AM)bullet Wrote:  SIAP-article from 8/10

http://www.lcsun-news.com/las_cruces-spo...pportunity

It's now or never for New Mexico State.

Since his hire, Athletics Director Mario Moccia's main charge has been to find a stable home for Aggies football. The current four-year agreement with the Sun Belt Conference is nice, but a temporary membership leaves NMSU in the same college athletics limbo that resulted in the Aggies playing an independent football schedule in 2013.

As conference movement across the country has slowed down in recent years, there is an apparent window open to NMSU. A contingent of Sun Belt officials will be on campus for two days later this week, following visits to current Football Championship Subdivision schools Eastern Kentucky and Coastal Carolina in recent weeks.
....

I just don't see it, because of the geography difference.

SB would be better off going after CC, EKU and MO St, in my opinion.

(08-15-2015 10:11 AM)BruceMcF Wrote:  

(08-14-2015 02:40 PM)MplsBison Wrote:  Ah ... now you changed it. "Real attendance", which is driven by "demand".

See, you're just agreeing with me. "Demand", as you call it, is the same rough idea that's harder to measure and quantify -- which I called "popularity".

Attendance and TV viewership are both dependent on this more general concept.

Yes, and this is why it would be idiotic to define market potential as simply the total number of television sets in some arbitrarily selected media market.

So, instead, we define market potential as the potential size of the market demand. Clearly EKU has a lower ceiling on the potential popularity of their FB, given their close proximity to Kentucky. They are in a situation similar to EMU.

Sorry, that is the definition. The potential number of TV viewers in a given market for any program is the number of TV households in the market.

Anything else is a derivative from that.

I'm not saying that straight market potential is the best statistic to use. And if you want to weight it by "popularity within the market" somehow, that would be valid. That's just not what the definition is for market potential.

Call it something else.

(08-15-2015 12:06 PM)shere khan Wrote:  

(08-13-2015 06:37 PM)David Krumudgen Wrote:  i have visited both and its coastal by a mile.
There are less people going to college these days.

Colleges are trying to recruit out of state students
and international students to fill the lower enrollments

Now which area is going to be easier to recruit students
Myrtle Beach or Richmond.

Not even close

richmond is in the middle of nowhere with nothing. its hard to believe it is still operating. its like a little weak version of marshall.

Coastal is growing in a great part of the country and will dwarf eku "college of last resort" in 5 years.

you people who are commenting should visit them both.

the whole argument is a no brainer.

Gee, ya think SK has an investment in Conway??

(08-15-2015 01:28 PM)MplsBison Wrote:  Sorry, that is the definition. The potential number of TV viewers in a given market for any program is the number of TV households in the market.

Anything else is a derivative from that.

Yes, but calling it market potential is saying that there is a potential to get all of those television sets tuned into a game by that school ... which in the case of EKU is false. Their market potential is not even 50% of the total market size.

Quote: I'm not saying that straight market potential is the best statistic to use. And if you want to weight it by "popularity within the market" somehow, that would be valid. That's just not what the definition is for market potential.

But the only reason you've advanced to believe that "market potential" = "total number of television sets" is because you claim it does. And given the amount of unsubstantiated BS I've seen you spout, I see no reason why I should believe you rather than professionals in the fields involved.

Quote: Call it something else.

Since market potential already meant something different when you decided to redefine it, I'd say the same thing back at you ... except there is no need to come up with a name for the total market size ... there's already a phrase that means that.

(08-15-2015 01:28 PM)MplsBison Wrote:  

(08-15-2015 12:06 PM)shere khan Wrote:  richmond is in the middle of nowhere with nothing. its hard to believe it is still operating. its like a little weak version of marshall.

Coastal is growing in a great part of the country and will dwarf eku "college of last resort" in 5 years.

you people who are commenting should visit them both.

the whole argument is a no brainer.

Gee, ya think SK has an investment in Conway??

More likely he has actual experience to back up his arguments.

(08-15-2015 03:45 PM)BruceMcF Wrote:  

(08-15-2015 01:28 PM)MplsBison Wrote:  Sorry, that is the definition. The potential number of TV viewers in a given market for any program is the number of TV households in the market.

Anything else is a derivative from that.

Yes, but calling it market potential is saying that there is a potential to get all of those television sets tuned into a game by that school ... which in the case of EKU is false. Their market potential is not even 50% of the total market size.

Quote: I'm not saying that straight market potential is the best statistic to use. And if you want to weight it by "popularity within the market" somehow, that would be valid. That's just not what the definition is for market potential.

But the only reason you've advanced to believe that "market potential" = "total number of television sets" is because you claim it does. And given the amount of unsubstantiated BS I've seen you spout, I see no reason why I should believe you rather than professionals in the fields involved.

Quote: Call it something else.

Since market potential already meant something different when you decided to redefine it, I'd say the same thing back at you ... except there is no need to come up with a name for the total market size ... there's already a phrase that means that.

(08-15-2015 01:28 PM)MplsBison Wrote:  

(08-15-2015 12:06 PM)shere khan Wrote:  richmond is in the middle of nowhere with nothing. its hard to believe it is still operating. its like a little weak version of marshall.

Coastal is growing in a great part of the country and will dwarf eku "college of last resort" in 5 years.

you people who are commenting should visit them both.

the whole argument is a no brainer.

Gee, ya think SK has an investment in Conway??

More likely he has actual experience to back up his arguments.

I've told you multiple times now what the correct definition of potential is. You believe whatever you want to believe.

And it's funny, SK posts zero proof, poorly worded, slanderous ... almost resentful posts about EKU, yet you take him at his word because? Who knows, I guess you like the idea that he claims to have visited both places.


But if I were to proclaim that I've visited both places and that EKU is a "country mile" ahead of CC, you'd call me a liar.


It has nothing to with me. That's about all I can tell you.

The definition of potential is:
adjective: having or showing the capacity to become or develop into something in the future.
OR
noun: latent qualities or abilities that may be developed and lead to future success or usefulness.

No mention of television in the definition so any definition requiring the analysis of TV markets is a non-standard self-created definition.

When one program has played football for 100 years and another barely over a decade and have nearly identical attendance... logical people conclude the newer program has greater potential.

(08-15-2015 05:48 PM)MplsBison Wrote:  I've told you multiple times now what the correct definition of potential is. You believe whatever you want to believe.

You've claimed multiple times that your definition is the correct definition.

But you are the only source for that definition. Your support for your claim is simply repeating the claim. But proof by repetition is not actually proof.

"Market potential" from study.com:

Quote:Market potential is the entire size of the market for a product at a specific time. It represents the upper limits of the market for a product. Market potential is usually measured either by sales value or sales volume.

Businessdictionary.com:

Quote: The estimated maximum total sales revenue of all suppliers of a product in a market during a certain period.

(Or we could ask an academic economist, but that would be cheating.)

(08-15-2015 06:59 PM)arkstfan Wrote:  The definition of potential is:
adjective: having or showing the capacity to become or develop into something in the future.
OR
noun: latent qualities or abilities that may be developed and lead to future success or usefulness.

No mention of television in the definition so any definition requiring the analysis of TV markets is a non-standard self-created definition.

If we are talking about media market potential, number of TV sets that might get turned on to watch a game is a useful proxy for a relative comparison. Obviously the number of TV sets that exist within a certain radius of a school is not a proxy for potential media value.

(08-15-2015 06:59 PM)arkstfan Wrote:  When one program has played football for 100 years and another barely over a decade and have nearly identical attendance... logical people conclude the newer program has greater potential.

"Past performance is no guarantee of future results", especially when talking about growth rates, but, yeah, Coastal has demonstrated more ability to grow its attendance over the past ten years, it is in a growth market, and it has a higher ceiling on its market potential than EKU, due to EKU's proximity to Kentucky.

If JMU wanted to join the Sunbelt, they'd be a better invite than either, but they don't seem to want to move unless its to the American, CUSA or the MAC.

(08-15-2015 06:59 PM)arkstfan Wrote:  The definition of potential is:
adjective: having or showing the capacity to become or develop into something in the future.
OR
noun: latent qualities or abilities that may be developed and lead to future success or usefulness.

No mention of television in the definition so any definition requiring the analysis of TV markets is a non-standard self-created definition.

When one program has played football for 100 years and another barely over a decade and have nearly identical attendance... logical people conclude the newer program has greater potential.

Obviously I wasn't talking about the definition of potential as a stand alone word.

Your last sentence is completely unfounded and entirely your opinion.

This must be your M.O. Say stuff that either makes sense or sort've makes sense for most of the post ... then right at the end make a huge leap. I guess, hoping no one notices?

(08-15-2015 08:09 PM)BruceMcF Wrote:  

(08-15-2015 05:48 PM)MplsBison Wrote:  I've told you multiple times now what the correct definition of potential is. You believe whatever you want to believe.

You've claimed multiple times that your definition is the correct definition.

But you are the only source for that definition. Your support for your claim is simply repeating the claim. But proof by repetition is not actually proof.

"Market potential" from study.com:

Quote:Market potential is the entire size of the market for a product at a specific time. It represents the upper limits of the market for a product. Market potential is usually measured either by sales value or sales volume.

Businessdictionary.com:

Quote: The estimated maximum total sales revenue of all suppliers of a product in a market during a certain period.

(Or we could ask an academic economist, but that would be cheating.)

(08-15-2015 06:59 PM)arkstfan Wrote:  The definition of potential is:
adjective: having or showing the capacity to become or develop into something in the future.
OR
noun: latent qualities or abilities that may be developed and lead to future success or usefulness.

No mention of television in the definition so any definition requiring the analysis of TV markets is a non-standard self-created definition.

If we are talking about media market potential, number of TV sets that might get turned on to watch a game is a useful proxy for a relative comparison. Obviously the number of TV sets that exist within a certain radius of a school is not a proxy for potential media value.

(08-15-2015 06:59 PM)arkstfan Wrote:  When one program has played football for 100 years and another barely over a decade and have nearly identical attendance... logical people conclude the newer program has greater potential.

"Past performance is no guarantee of future results", especially when talking about growth rates, but, yeah, Coastal has demonstrated more ability to grow its attendance over the past ten years, it is in a growth market, and it has a higher ceiling on its market potential than EKU, due to EKU's proximity to Kentucky.

If JMU wanted to join the Sunbelt, they'd be a better invite than either, but they don't seem to want to move unless its to the American, CUSA or the MAC.

You just confirmed that everything I've been saying is correct.

The upper limit for TV viewership in a given market is the number of TV households in the market. You can't say it any other way. End of story.

Thus, EKU's market potential is higher than CC's, because their market has more TV households than CC's. That's just the by the books definition.

(08-16-2015 07:05 AM)MplsBison Wrote:  

(08-15-2015 08:09 PM)BruceMcF Wrote:  [quote='MplsBison' pid='12275137' dateline='1439678934'] I've told you multiple times now what the correct definition of potential is. You believe whatever you want to believe.

You've claimed multiple times that your definition is the correct definition.

But you are the only source for that definition. Your support for your claim is simply repeating the claim. But proof by repetition is not actually proof.

"Market potential" from study.com:

Quote:Market potential is the entire size of the market for a product at a specific time. It represents the upper limits of the market for a product. Market potential is usually measured either by sales value or sales volume. [/quot
Businessdictionary.com:

Quote: The estimated maximum total sales revenue of all suppliers of a product in a market during a certain period.

(Or we could ask an academic economist, but that would be cheating.)

(08-15-2015 06:59 PM)arkstfan Wrote:  The definition of potential is:
adjective: having or showing the capacity to become or develop into something in the future.
OR
noun: latent qualities or abilities that may be developed and lead to future success or usefulness.

No mention of television in the definition so any definition requiring the analysis of TV markets is a non-standard self-created definition.

If we are talking about media market potential, number of TV sets that might get turned on to watch a game is a useful proxy for a relative comparison. Obviously the number of TV sets that exist within a certain radius of a school is not a proxy for potential media value.

(08-15-2015 06:59 PM)arkstfan Wrote:  When one program has played football for 100 years and another barely over a decade and have nearly identical attendance... logical people conclude the newer program has greater potential.

"Past performance is no guarantee of future results", especially when talking about growth rates, but, yeah, Coastal has demonstrated more ability to grow its attendance over the past ten years, it is in a growth market, and it has a higher ceiling on its market potential than EKU, due to EKU's proximity to Kentucky.

If JMU wanted to join the Sunbelt, they'd be a better invite than either, but they don't seem to want to move unless its to the American, CUSA or the MAC.

You just confirmed that everything I've been saying is correct.

The upper limit for TV viewership in a given market is the number of TV households in the market. You can't say it any other way. End of story.

Thus, EKU's market potential is higher than CC's, because their market has more TV households than CC's. That's just the by the books definition.

Trying the blast the most logical and credible poster who runs circles around you just makes you look like a fool. NDSU is in no man's land...you can make fast friends with David St.

(08-16-2015 03:51 PM)ARSTATEFAN1986 Wrote:  

(08-16-2015 07:05 AM)MplsBison Wrote:  

(08-15-2015 08:09 PM)BruceMcF Wrote:  [quote='MplsBison' pid='12275137' dateline='1439678934'] I've told you multiple times now what the correct definition of potential is. You believe whatever you want to believe.

You've claimed multiple times that your definition is the correct definition.

But you are the only source for that definition. Your support for your claim is simply repeating the claim. But proof by repetition is not actually proof.

"Market potential" from study.com:

Quote:Market potential is the entire size of the market for a product at a specific time. It represents the upper limits of the market for a product. Market potential is usually measured either by sales value or sales volume. [/quot
Businessdictionary.com:

Quote: The estimated maximum total sales revenue of all suppliers of a product in a market during a certain period.

(Or we could ask an academic economist, but that would be cheating.)

(08-15-2015 06:59 PM)arkstfan Wrote:  The definition of potential is:
adjective: having or showing the capacity to become or develop into something in the future.
OR
noun: latent qualities or abilities that may be developed and lead to future success or usefulness.

No mention of television in the definition so any definition requiring the analysis of TV markets is a non-standard self-created definition.

If we are talking about media market potential, number of TV sets that might get turned on to watch a game is a useful proxy for a relative comparison. Obviously the number of TV sets that exist within a certain radius of a school is not a proxy for potential media value.

(08-15-2015 06:59 PM)arkstfan Wrote:  When one program has played football for 100 years and another barely over a decade and have nearly identical attendance... logical people conclude the newer program has greater potential.

"Past performance is no guarantee of future results", especially when talking about growth rates, but, yeah, Coastal has demonstrated more ability to grow its attendance over the past ten years, it is in a growth market, and it has a higher ceiling on its market potential than EKU, due to EKU's proximity to Kentucky.

If JMU wanted to join the Sunbelt, they'd be a better invite than either, but they don't seem to want to move unless its to the American, CUSA or the MAC.

You just confirmed that everything I've been saying is correct.

The upper limit for TV viewership in a given market is the number of TV households in the market. You can't say it any other way. End of story.

Thus, EKU's market potential is higher than CC's, because their market has more TV households than CC's. That's just the by the books definition.

Trying the blast the most logical and credible poster who runs circles around you just makes you look like a fool. NDSU is in no man's land...you can make fast friends with David St.

He's not running circles, zig-zags, or any other patterns in my vicinity.

So is coastal in the sun belt yet?

"Reports are indicating that Coastal Carolina will receive invite into Sun Belt tomorrow; Chanticleers only w/football since 2003, moving up." - @DomIzzoWDAY

Nothing so far on the Coastal Carolina website.

http://www.goccusports.com/

Enough smoke to say its probable though. McMurphy is the guy you normally want to hear a tweet from to confirm its a done deal.

I think the Sunbelt must still be deciding on if they should have 12 football schools to hold a CCG. There is a majority of not having one because the revenues isn't there yet to make it worthwhile. Karl Benson has always been in favor of going to 12 to get a CCG like the other conferences, but has yet to convince the presidents that is it worthwhile.

Which is the reason they visited NMSU. If a CCG isn't worthwhile, then NMSU will be added to split into divisions. The still FCS minded schools like App St, will only have to travel to NMSU every other year.

(08-31-2015 01:10 PM)MWC Tex Wrote:  I think the Sunbelt must still be deciding on if they should have 12 football schools to hold a CCG. There is a majority of not having one because the revenues isn't there yet to make it worthwhile. Karl Benson has always been in favor of going to 12 to get a CCG like the other conferences, but has yet to convince the presidents that is it worthwhile.

Which is the reason they visited NMSU. If a CCG isn't worthwhile, then NMSU will be added to split into divisions. The still FCS minded schools like App St, will only have to travel to NMSU every other year.

Actually it's only every four years, surprised my FCS minded brain could do that math...