(02-26-2012 11:08 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(02-26-2012 09:02 AM)PATiger Wrote:  Making more money makes sense. That's what it's all about.

If we were going set up conferences along strictly geographic lines, we'd have to rip apart all 11 conferences and start over. That's not going to happen.

... And yet it is the most geographically homogenous major conferences that make the most money. Go figure...

The MAC is homogeneous geographically and doesn't make much money. It has more to do with being the flagship of your state. As someone has already explained to you a school like Florida has a larger tv viewership area than just Gainesville. It has nothing to do with geography

(02-26-2012 11:17 AM)Cubanbull Wrote:  

(02-26-2012 11:13 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(02-26-2012 09:08 AM)Cubanbull Wrote:  

(02-26-2012 09:01 AM)Maize Wrote:  

(02-26-2012 08:51 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  Markets are highly overrated. SEC teams are often in small towns yet have huge followings. A market is only relevant if you have made it your own. Temple for example owns next to nothing of the Philly football market so it makes little sense to say adding them 'gives' us that market.

Imo the Alliance schools look a whole lot like new big East schools in terms of fan interest so the TV deals won't be all that different.

The fallacy in your SEC in "small markets" argument is that most of the SEC schools are the "flagship universities" in their particular state.

That means even if they are located in "small towns" their alumni base is going to be inthat particular state largest cities giving them "market penetration-(ie Florida with huge pressence in Miami, Jacksonville, Tampa, Orlando, Georgia with Atlanta & LSU with New Orleans & even aTm with Houston)

Exactly comparison to the SEC are getting old and have no basis. If you can't see that the Big East advantage in tv markets will keep them ahead of the alliance then you are just being foolish

TV markets mean little to nothing. If nobody is watching, it doesn't matter if a show is being beamed to 1000 homes or 1 million.

If the NBE stays ahead of the Alliance it will be because our programs have done a better job of attracting fan and alumni support. That's it. There are no quick fixes like choosing schools that happen to be located in large cities.

Yes how many are watching is the #1 factor but even you should see that if you have potential access to three times the viewership as someoneelse you will pay more for that. The Big East has a way higher ceiling regarding viewers than the alliance? A tv rating of 6.5 in Hattiesburg is different than a 1.5 rating in NYC

With cable TV, everyone has a potential access of 100 million. It's all a matter of what viewers are interested in. Just because Temple* is in Philly doesn't mean Philly residents are any more a "potential viewership" for them as they are for Ohio State or UCLA. You have to convince people in an area to care enough to tune in.

* and i don't mean to pick on Temple, they are just an example

(02-26-2012 03:07 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(02-26-2012 11:17 AM)Cubanbull Wrote:  

(02-26-2012 11:13 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(02-26-2012 09:08 AM)Cubanbull Wrote:  

(02-26-2012 09:01 AM)Maize Wrote:  The fallacy in your SEC in "small markets" argument is that most of the SEC schools are the "flagship universities" in their particular state.

That means even if they are located in "small towns" their alumni base is going to be inthat particular state largest cities giving them "market penetration-(ie Florida with huge pressence in Miami, Jacksonville, Tampa, Orlando, Georgia with Atlanta & LSU with New Orleans & even aTm with Houston)

Exactly comparison to the SEC are getting old and have no basis. If you can't see that the Big East advantage in tv markets will keep them ahead of the alliance then you are just being foolish

TV markets mean little to nothing. If nobody is watching, it doesn't matter if a show is being beamed to 1000 homes or 1 million.

If the NBE stays ahead of the Alliance it will be because our programs have done a better job of attracting fan and alumni support. That's it. There are no quick fixes like choosing schools that happen to be located in large cities.

Yes how many are watching is the #1 factor but even you should see that if you have potential access to three times the viewership as someoneelse you will pay more for that. The Big East has a way higher ceiling regarding viewers than the alliance? A tv rating of 6.5 in Hattiesburg is different than a 1.5 rating in NYC

With cable TV, everyone has a potential access of 100 million. It's all a matter of what viewers are interested in. Just because Temple* is in Philly doesn't mean Philly residents are any more a "potential viewership" for them as they are for Ohio State or UCLA. You have to convince people in an area to care enough to tune in.

* and i don't mean to pick on Temple, they are just an example

Correct but there a heck of more fans in Philly that temple can potentially turn into supporters and viewers if they win than Southern Miss has. Once again there are higher potential in those large markets

(02-26-2012 03:10 PM)Cubanbull Wrote:  

(02-26-2012 03:07 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(02-26-2012 11:17 AM)Cubanbull Wrote:  

(02-26-2012 11:13 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(02-26-2012 09:08 AM)Cubanbull Wrote:  Exactly comparison to the SEC are getting old and have no basis. If you can't see that the Big East advantage in tv markets will keep them ahead of the alliance then you are just being foolish

TV markets mean little to nothing. If nobody is watching, it doesn't matter if a show is being beamed to 1000 homes or 1 million.

If the NBE stays ahead of the Alliance it will be because our programs have done a better job of attracting fan and alumni support. That's it. There are no quick fixes like choosing schools that happen to be located in large cities.

Yes how many are watching is the #1 factor but even you should see that if you have potential access to three times the viewership as someoneelse you will pay more for that. The Big East has a way higher ceiling regarding viewers than the alliance? A tv rating of 6.5 in Hattiesburg is different than a 1.5 rating in NYC

With cable TV, everyone has a potential access of 100 million. It's all a matter of what viewers are interested in. Just because Temple* is in Philly doesn't mean Philly residents are any more a "potential viewership" for them as they are for Ohio State or UCLA. You have to convince people in an area to care enough to tune in.

* and i don't mean to pick on Temple, they are just an example

Correct but there a heck of more fans in Philly that temple can potentially turn into supporters and viewers if they win than Southern Miss has. Once again there are higher potential in those large markets

I think the mistake here is viewing universities as if they are like NFL teams, with claims to the loyalty of cities or geographical areas. Where i am in Baton Rouge, the vast majority of people are Saints fans, since New Orleans is just an hour down the road. NFL teams represent a city and so the city and surrounding areas is their 'potential viewership'. The Eagles are the team embraced by the vast majority of Philadelphians.

But most universities aren't like that. I live in Baton Rouge, but i root for USF because i'm an alumnus, even though it is 700 miles away from me in Tampa. I happen to live a mile from LSU's Tiger Stadium but don't give a damn about them. In contrast, another guy who lives a 1/2 mile from USF on Busch Boulevard but who went to FSU is an FSU fan and couldn't care less about USF. There simply is no natural affinity between a school and its surrounding geography. It is almost purely a function of interest among school students and alumni and to some degree casual fans who like watching good football (e.g., some burger flipper on Fowler avenue who never went to college roots for UF because they are really good and he likes college football).

(02-26-2012 03:10 PM)Cubanbull Wrote:  Correct but there a heck of more fans in Philly that temple can potentially turn into supporters and viewers if they win than Southern Miss has. Once again there are higher potential in those large markets

I think there's also a difference between a Temple and an SMU. Temple may not have much penetration in the Philadelphia market, but they also don't have competition. East Coast cities are basically virgin markets for college football. Temple has to do what UConn and Rutgers have done, and sell the idea of college football. Once that's accomplished, Philadelphia college football fans are Temple football fans, because that's the local team. (Yes, Penn State, sure.)

That's a very different situation than an SMU or an SDSU. College football isn't a new product in DFW or southern California. You're not just competing with NFL and MLB and NBA and Xbox, you're competing with the Longhorns and Sooners, the Trojans and Bruins. USF and UCF have a similar problem, but they can at least sell Tampa vs the rest of Florida, Orlando vs the rest of Florida.

(02-26-2012 03:16 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(02-26-2012 03:10 PM)Cubanbull Wrote:  

(02-26-2012 03:07 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(02-26-2012 11:17 AM)Cubanbull Wrote:  

(02-26-2012 11:13 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  TV markets mean little to nothing. If nobody is watching, it doesn't matter if a show is being beamed to 1000 homes or 1 million.

If the NBE stays ahead of the Alliance it will be because our programs have done a better job of attracting fan and alumni support. That's it. There are no quick fixes like choosing schools that happen to be located in large cities.

Yes how many are watching is the #1 factor but even you should see that if you have potential access to three times the viewership as someoneelse you will pay more for that. The Big East has a way higher ceiling regarding viewers than the alliance? A tv rating of 6.5 in Hattiesburg is different than a 1.5 rating in NYC

With cable TV, everyone has a potential access of 100 million. It's all a matter of what viewers are interested in. Just because Temple* is in Philly doesn't mean Philly residents are any more a "potential viewership" for them as they are for Ohio State or UCLA. You have to convince people in an area to care enough to tune in.

* and i don't mean to pick on Temple, they are just an example

Correct but there a heck of more fans in Philly that temple can potentially turn into supporters and viewers if they win than Southern Miss has. Once again there are higher potential in those large markets

I think the mistake here is viewing universities as if they are like NFL teams, with claims to the loyalty of cities or geographical areas. Where i am in Baton Rouge, the vast majority of people are Saints fans, since New Orleans is just an hour down the road. NFL teams represent a city and so the city and surrounding areas is their 'potential viewership'. The Eagles are the team embraced by the vast majority of Philadelphians.

But most universities aren't like that. I live in Baton Rouge, but i root for USF, even though it is 700 miles away from me in Tampa. In contrast, another guy who lives a 1/2 mile from USF on Busch Boulevard but who went to FSU is an FSU fan and couldn't care less about USF. There simply is no natural affinity between a school and its surrounding geography. It is almost purely a function of interest among school students and alumni and casual fans who like watching good football (e.g., some burger flipper on Fowler avenue who never went to college roots for UF because they are really good and he likes college football).

Not completely true. You really think that all of those fans showing to USC games have ties to the school or would be showing up if they were 3-9 for most seasons? I grew up in Miami where high schools used to outdraw the Canes. When the Canes won there were plenty of community members that became Cane fans even though they had no ties to them. Is one of the realities of big city markets.

(02-26-2012 03:16 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(02-26-2012 03:10 PM)Cubanbull Wrote:  

(02-26-2012 03:07 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(02-26-2012 11:17 AM)Cubanbull Wrote:  

(02-26-2012 11:13 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  TV markets mean little to nothing. If nobody is watching, it doesn't matter if a show is being beamed to 1000 homes or 1 million.

If the NBE stays ahead of the Alliance it will be because our programs have done a better job of attracting fan and alumni support. That's it. There are no quick fixes like choosing schools that happen to be located in large cities.

Yes how many are watching is the #1 factor but even you should see that if you have potential access to three times the viewership as someoneelse you will pay more for that. The Big East has a way higher ceiling regarding viewers than the alliance? A tv rating of 6.5 in Hattiesburg is different than a 1.5 rating in NYC

With cable TV, everyone has a potential access of 100 million. It's all a matter of what viewers are interested in. Just because Temple* is in Philly doesn't mean Philly residents are any more a "potential viewership" for them as they are for Ohio State or UCLA. You have to convince people in an area to care enough to tune in.

* and i don't mean to pick on Temple, they are just an example

Correct but there a heck of more fans in Philly that temple can potentially turn into supporters and viewers if they win than Southern Miss has. Once again there are higher potential in those large markets

I think the mistake here is viewing universities as if they are like NFL teams, with claims to the loyalty of cities or geographical areas. Where i am in Baton Rouge, the vast majority of people are Saints fans, since New Orleans is just an hour down the road. NFL teams represent a city and so the city and surrounding areas is their 'potential viewership'. The Eagles are the team embraced by the vast majority of Philadelphians.

But most universities aren't like that. I live in Baton Rouge, but i root for USF because i'm an alumnus, even though it is 700 miles away from me in Tampa. I happen to live a mile from LSU's Tiger Stadium but don't give a damn about them. In contrast, another guy who lives a 1/2 mile from USF on Busch Boulevard but who went to FSU is an FSU fan and couldn't care less about USF. There simply is no natural affinity between a school and its surrounding geography. It is almost purely a function of interest among school students and alumni and to some degree casual fans who like watching good football (e.g., some burger flipper on Fowler avenue who never went to college roots for UF because they are really good and he likes college football).

You're a Floridian, so you know damn well what you said is true of both collegiate and pro teams. However, it is indisputable that having a team in close proximity to you makes you more likely to root for said team. Not that it's a certainty at the personal level, due to loyalty issues (raised a fan of the Steelers or something/went to another college), but you can't honestly argue that it doesn't make it a better chance than if the school isn't near you. It's hard to relate to a team or support it when it's halfway across the country, and the opposite is true too.

(02-26-2012 03:20 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  

(02-26-2012 03:10 PM)Cubanbull Wrote:  Correct but there a heck of more fans in Philly that temple can potentially turn into supporters and viewers if they win than Southern Miss has. Once again there are higher potential in those large markets

I think there's also a difference between a Temple and an SMU. Temple may not have much penetration in the Philadelphia market, but they also don't have competition. East Coast cities are basically virgin markets for college football. Temple has to do what UConn and Rutgers have done, and sell the idea of college football. Once that's accomplished, Philadelphia college football fans are Temple football fans, because that's the local team. (Yes, Penn State, sure.)

Temple basketball is much more established as a brand than Temple football, and yet Temple basketball has plenty of local Philly competition, so i doubt that is a real issue here.

Bottom line is that Philly football fans are rabid but NFL oriented. They are only interested in college football if it is big time. They are interested in Penn State and Notre Dame, but not Temple. And that is unlikely to ever change.

(02-26-2012 06:43 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(02-26-2012 03:20 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  

(02-26-2012 03:10 PM)Cubanbull Wrote:  Correct but there a heck of more fans in Philly that temple can potentially turn into supporters and viewers if they win than Southern Miss has. Once again there are higher potential in those large markets

I think there's also a difference between a Temple and an SMU. Temple may not have much penetration in the Philadelphia market, but they also don't have competition. East Coast cities are basically virgin markets for college football. Temple has to do what UConn and Rutgers have done, and sell the idea of college football. Once that's accomplished, Philadelphia college football fans are Temple football fans, because that's the local team. (Yes, Penn State, sure.)

Temple basketball is much more established as a brand than Temple football, and yet Temple basketball has plenty of local Philly competition, so i doubt that is a real issue here.

Bottom line is that Philly football fans are rabid but NFL oriented. They are only interested in college football if it is big time. They are interested in Penn State and Notre Dame, but not Temple. And that is unlikely to ever change.

So what is your guess quo? How much tv revenue for each Alliance school and how much for each BE school? Break it down for us any way you think makes sense....

(02-26-2012 04:58 PM)UCF08 Wrote:  

(02-26-2012 03:16 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(02-26-2012 03:10 PM)Cubanbull Wrote:  

(02-26-2012 03:07 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(02-26-2012 11:17 AM)Cubanbull Wrote:  Yes how many are watching is the #1 factor but even you should see that if you have potential access to three times the viewership as someoneelse you will pay more for that. The Big East has a way higher ceiling regarding viewers than the alliance? A tv rating of 6.5 in Hattiesburg is different than a 1.5 rating in NYC

With cable TV, everyone has a potential access of 100 million. It's all a matter of what viewers are interested in. Just because Temple* is in Philly doesn't mean Philly residents are any more a "potential viewership" for them as they are for Ohio State or UCLA. You have to convince people in an area to care enough to tune in.

* and i don't mean to pick on Temple, they are just an example

Correct but there a heck of more fans in Philly that temple can potentially turn into supporters and viewers if they win than Southern Miss has. Once again there are higher potential in those large markets

I think the mistake here is viewing universities as if they are like NFL teams, with claims to the loyalty of cities or geographical areas. Where i am in Baton Rouge, the vast majority of people are Saints fans, since New Orleans is just an hour down the road. NFL teams represent a city and so the city and surrounding areas is their 'potential viewership'. The Eagles are the team embraced by the vast majority of Philadelphians.

But most universities aren't like that. I live in Baton Rouge, but i root for USF because i'm an alumnus, even though it is 700 miles away from me in Tampa. I happen to live a mile from LSU's Tiger Stadium but don't give a damn about them. In contrast, another guy who lives a 1/2 mile from USF on Busch Boulevard but who went to FSU is an FSU fan and couldn't care less about USF. There simply is no natural affinity between a school and its surrounding geography. It is almost purely a function of interest among school students and alumni and to some degree casual fans who like watching good football (e.g., some burger flipper on Fowler avenue who never went to college roots for UF because they are really good and he likes college football).

You're a Floridian, so you know damn well what you said is true of both collegiate and pro teams. However, it is indisputable that having a team in close proximity to you makes you more likely to root for said team. Not that it's a certainty at the personal level, due to loyalty issues (raised a fan of the Steelers or something/went to another college), but you can't honestly argue that it doesn't make it a better chance than if the school isn't near you. It's hard to relate to a team or support it when it's halfway across the country, and the opposite is true too.

I think the psychology of rooting for NFL and college teams is very different. NFL teams represent the cities and so have a kind of 'civic loyalty' tied to them. If you live in Tampa but are a Falcons fan, you will endure gentle ribbing from friends, co-workers, etc. about why you should adopt the home team, because the Bucs are regarded as the home team. In contrast, universities are much more personal. If you live in Tampa but fly a Georgia Bulldogs flag on your car, nobody will regard that as a deviation from civic norms, they will assume you are a Georgia alumnus and thus it is perfectly logical that you will support them and not any local Tampa schools. That psychological and sociological difference is what the dummies around here who harp about the need to "add more big markets" miss.

Universities aren't supported by "markets" but by alumni, students, and other past and present members of that university's community. Build that community and you will draw packed stadiums and big TV ratings even if you are located in a tiny backwoods town. Fail to do that and you will draw flies (and get paid by TV execs accordingly) even if 5 million people live within an hour's drive of your campus.

(02-26-2012 06:49 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(02-26-2012 04:58 PM)UCF08 Wrote:  

(02-26-2012 03:16 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(02-26-2012 03:10 PM)Cubanbull Wrote:  

(02-26-2012 03:07 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  With cable TV, everyone has a potential access of 100 million. It's all a matter of what viewers are interested in. Just because Temple* is in Philly doesn't mean Philly residents are any more a "potential viewership" for them as they are for Ohio State or UCLA. You have to convince people in an area to care enough to tune in.

* and i don't mean to pick on Temple, they are just an example

Correct but there a heck of more fans in Philly that temple can potentially turn into supporters and viewers if they win than Southern Miss has. Once again there are higher potential in those large markets

I think the mistake here is viewing universities as if they are like NFL teams, with claims to the loyalty of cities or geographical areas. Where i am in Baton Rouge, the vast majority of people are Saints fans, since New Orleans is just an hour down the road. NFL teams represent a city and so the city and surrounding areas is their 'potential viewership'. The Eagles are the team embraced by the vast majority of Philadelphians.

But most universities aren't like that. I live in Baton Rouge, but i root for USF because i'm an alumnus, even though it is 700 miles away from me in Tampa. I happen to live a mile from LSU's Tiger Stadium but don't give a damn about them. In contrast, another guy who lives a 1/2 mile from USF on Busch Boulevard but who went to FSU is an FSU fan and couldn't care less about USF. There simply is no natural affinity between a school and its surrounding geography. It is almost purely a function of interest among school students and alumni and to some degree casual fans who like watching good football (e.g., some burger flipper on Fowler avenue who never went to college roots for UF because they are really good and he likes college football).

You're a Floridian, so you know damn well what you said is true of both collegiate and pro teams. However, it is indisputable that having a team in close proximity to you makes you more likely to root for said team. Not that it's a certainty at the personal level, due to loyalty issues (raised a fan of the Steelers or something/went to another college), but you can't honestly argue that it doesn't make it a better chance than if the school isn't near you. It's hard to relate to a team or support it when it's halfway across the country, and the opposite is true too.

I think the psychology of rooting for NFL and college teams is very different. NFL teams represent the cities and so have a kind of 'civic loyalty' tied to them. If you live in Tampa but are a Falcons fan, you will endure gentle ribbing from friends, co-workers, etc. about why you should adopt the home team, because the Bucs are regarded as the home team. In contrast, universities are much more personal. If you live in Tampa but fly a Georgia Bulldogs flag on your car, nobody will regard that as a deviation from civic norms, they will assume you are a Georgia alumnus and thus it is perfectly logical that you will support them and not any local Tampa schools. That psychological and sociological difference is what the dummies around here who harp about the need to "add more big markets" miss.

Universities aren't supported by "markets" but by alumni, students, and other past and present members of that university's community. Build that community and you will draw packed stadiums and big TV ratings even if you are located in a tiny backwoods town. Fail to do that and you will draw flies (and get paid by TV execs accordingly) even if 5 million people live within an hour's drive of your campus.

As I have said before and given you examples of that's a wrong assumption. You really think that all of those at the LA colosseum watching USC are all alumni or students? Just like any that go to Floroda games never stepped foot in that school. Plain and simple,you win and people will follow you. Miami is a small private school and had people buying clothes with their logo and coming to games that had zero attachment to UM. But this is pointless you are set in your ideas. So I have better things to do. Over and out.

(02-26-2012 06:49 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(02-26-2012 04:58 PM)UCF08 Wrote:  

(02-26-2012 03:16 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(02-26-2012 03:10 PM)Cubanbull Wrote:  

(02-26-2012 03:07 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  With cable TV, everyone has a potential access of 100 million. It's all a matter of what viewers are interested in. Just because Temple* is in Philly doesn't mean Philly residents are any more a "potential viewership" for them as they are for Ohio State or UCLA. You have to convince people in an area to care enough to tune in.

* and i don't mean to pick on Temple, they are just an example

Correct but there a heck of more fans in Philly that temple can potentially turn into supporters and viewers if they win than Southern Miss has. Once again there are higher potential in those large markets

I think the mistake here is viewing universities as if they are like NFL teams, with claims to the loyalty of cities or geographical areas. Where i am in Baton Rouge, the vast majority of people are Saints fans, since New Orleans is just an hour down the road. NFL teams represent a city and so the city and surrounding areas is their 'potential viewership'. The Eagles are the team embraced by the vast majority of Philadelphians.

But most universities aren't like that. I live in Baton Rouge, but i root for USF because i'm an alumnus, even though it is 700 miles away from me in Tampa. I happen to live a mile from LSU's Tiger Stadium but don't give a damn about them. In contrast, another guy who lives a 1/2 mile from USF on Busch Boulevard but who went to FSU is an FSU fan and couldn't care less about USF. There simply is no natural affinity between a school and its surrounding geography. It is almost purely a function of interest among school students and alumni and to some degree casual fans who like watching good football (e.g., some burger flipper on Fowler avenue who never went to college roots for UF because they are really good and he likes college football).

You're a Floridian, so you know damn well what you said is true of both collegiate and pro teams. However, it is indisputable that having a team in close proximity to you makes you more likely to root for said team. Not that it's a certainty at the personal level, due to loyalty issues (raised a fan of the Steelers or something/went to another college), but you can't honestly argue that it doesn't make it a better chance than if the school isn't near you. It's hard to relate to a team or support it when it's halfway across the country, and the opposite is true too.

I think the psychology of rooting for NFL and college teams is very different. NFL teams represent the cities and so have a kind of 'civic loyalty' tied to them. If you live in Tampa but are a Falcons fan, you will endure gentle ribbing from friends, co-workers, etc. about why you should adopt the home team, because the Bucs are regarded as the home team. In contrast, universities are much more personal. If you live in Tampa but fly a Georgia Bulldogs flag on your car, nobody will regard that as a deviation from civic norms, they will assume you are a Georgia alumnus and thus it is perfectly logical that you will support them and not any local Tampa schools. That psychological and sociological difference is what the dummies around here who harp about the need to "add more big markets" miss.

Universities aren't supported by "markets" but by alumni, students, and other past and present members of that university's community. Build that community and you will draw packed stadiums and big TV ratings even if you are located in a tiny backwoods town. Fail to do that and you will draw flies (and get paid by TV execs accordingly) even if 5 million people live within an hour's drive of your campus.

I'll use myself as an example. I watch Rice football games on TV when they are on. I ussually go to one or two games a year just for the heck of it. I have no connection whatsover to Rice other than it is located in Houston.

I dont know how this can even be a question. If Greenville had 4 million people, do you think ECU would still be in CUSA? Of course the location of the school is germain to "market".

(02-26-2012 08:50 PM)attackfrog Wrote:  

(02-26-2012 06:49 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  Universities aren't supported by "markets" but by alumni, students, and other past and present members of that university's community. Build that community and you will draw packed stadiums and big TV ratings even if you are located in a tiny backwoods town. Fail to do that and you will draw flies (and get paid by TV execs accordingly) even if 5 million people live within an hour's drive of your campus.

I'll use myself as an example. I watch Rice football games on TV when they are on. I ussually go to one or two games a year just for the heck of it. I have no connection whatsover to Rice other than it is located in Houston.

I dont know how this can even be a question. If Greenville had 4 million people, do you think ECU would still be in CUSA? Of course the location of the school is germain to "market".

I don't usually read qv's stuff, but this is ridiculous. How many Kentucky fans have even set foot on their campus? For that matter, how many UofL fans have degrees from the University of Louisville? It's all about market.

The alumni argument may work for certain private schools, but even then, I suspect they depend on their local market (as Attackfrog just helped prove with his Rice example).

I'll be buying season tickets to SDSU football now that they're in the Big East. I never took a single class there, and the only times I've been on their campus have been to see 1 basketball game and 3 or 4 concerts.

Market is everything.

I remember 5 years ago when George Mason made the final 4. I was at a bowling alley in Northern Virginia and the bar area with the TV had the Mason game on. The place was packed with folks cheering on Mason to beat UConn. I'd guarantee you that most all of those folks were not graduates of Mason but just supporting the local school.

(02-27-2012 01:12 AM)stever20 Wrote:  I remember 5 years ago when George Mason made the final 4. I was at a bowling alley in Northern Virginia and the bar area with the TV had the Mason game on. The place was packed with folks cheering on Mason to beat UConn. I'd guarantee you that most all of those folks were not graduates of Mason but just supporting the local school.

No doubt, if a school has a good run like Mason in their final 4 year, the team can become a local phenomenon and a bandwagon will form.

But, those never last, as i bet attendance at GM games now would show. Building a program means developing the deep support of a university's community, and market size means little to nothing. People don't live a mile from the Philly Eagles stadium but not care about the Eagles. But millions live near Temple and couldn't care less about them.

You have to build the support of your community, everything else is just market fads that don't last.

(02-26-2012 08:50 PM)attackfrog Wrote:  

(02-26-2012 06:49 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(02-26-2012 04:58 PM)UCF08 Wrote:  

(02-26-2012 03:16 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(02-26-2012 03:10 PM)Cubanbull Wrote:  Correct but there a heck of more fans in Philly that temple can potentially turn into supporters and viewers if they win than Southern Miss has. Once again there are higher potential in those large markets

I think the mistake here is viewing universities as if they are like NFL teams, with claims to the loyalty of cities or geographical areas. Where i am in Baton Rouge, the vast majority of people are Saints fans, since New Orleans is just an hour down the road. NFL teams represent a city and so the city and surrounding areas is their 'potential viewership'. The Eagles are the team embraced by the vast majority of Philadelphians.

But most universities aren't like that. I live in Baton Rouge, but i root for USF because i'm an alumnus, even though it is 700 miles away from me in Tampa. I happen to live a mile from LSU's Tiger Stadium but don't give a damn about them. In contrast, another guy who lives a 1/2 mile from USF on Busch Boulevard but who went to FSU is an FSU fan and couldn't care less about USF. There simply is no natural affinity between a school and its surrounding geography. It is almost purely a function of interest among school students and alumni and to some degree casual fans who like watching good football (e.g., some burger flipper on Fowler avenue who never went to college roots for UF because they are really good and he likes college football).

You're a Floridian, so you know damn well what you said is true of both collegiate and pro teams. However, it is indisputable that having a team in close proximity to you makes you more likely to root for said team. Not that it's a certainty at the personal level, due to loyalty issues (raised a fan of the Steelers or something/went to another college), but you can't honestly argue that it doesn't make it a better chance than if the school isn't near you. It's hard to relate to a team or support it when it's halfway across the country, and the opposite is true too.

I think the psychology of rooting for NFL and college teams is very different. NFL teams represent the cities and so have a kind of 'civic loyalty' tied to them. If you live in Tampa but are a Falcons fan, you will endure gentle ribbing from friends, co-workers, etc. about why you should adopt the home team, because the Bucs are regarded as the home team. In contrast, universities are much more personal. If you live in Tampa but fly a Georgia Bulldogs flag on your car, nobody will regard that as a deviation from civic norms, they will assume you are a Georgia alumnus and thus it is perfectly logical that you will support them and not any local Tampa schools. That psychological and sociological difference is what the dummies around here who harp about the need to "add more big markets" miss.

Universities aren't supported by "markets" but by alumni, students, and other past and present members of that university's community. Build that community and you will draw packed stadiums and big TV ratings even if you are located in a tiny backwoods town. Fail to do that and you will draw flies (and get paid by TV execs accordingly) even if 5 million people live within an hour's drive of your campus.

I'll use myself as an example. I watch Rice football games on TV when they are on. I ussually go to one or two games a year just for the heck of it. I have no connection whatsover to Rice other than it is located in Houston.

I dont know how this can even be a question. If Greenville had 4 million people, do you think ECU would still be in CUSA? Of course the location of the school is germain to "market".

Frankly, you are not the kind of supporter that can take Rice to a higher level (not that they need to be on a higher level). You are a casual fan, and aualitatively (in terms of money spent) and quantitatively (in terms of numbers of attendees and viewers) they are not critical to program building.

As for ECU, i agree with you - if it had 4 million, ECU would be in the Big East, but that is only because Big East administrators are way too concerned about "market size". ECU should already be in the Big East because they have better university community support than do most Big East teams.

(02-26-2012 09:15 PM)SmallVoice Wrote:  

(02-26-2012 08:50 PM)attackfrog Wrote:  

(02-26-2012 06:49 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  Universities aren't supported by "markets" but by alumni, students, and other past and present members of that university's community. Build that community and you will draw packed stadiums and big TV ratings even if you are located in a tiny backwoods town. Fail to do that and you will draw flies (and get paid by TV execs accordingly) even if 5 million people live within an hour's drive of your campus.

I'll use myself as an example. I watch Rice football games on TV when they are on. I ussually go to one or two games a year just for the heck of it. I have no connection whatsover to Rice other than it is located in Houston.

I dont know how this can even be a question. If Greenville had 4 million people, do you think ECU would still be in CUSA? Of course the location of the school is germain to "market".

I don't usually read qv's stuff, but this is ridiculous. How many Kentucky fans have even set foot on their campus? For that matter, how many UofL fans have degrees from the University of Louisville? It's all about market.

The alumni argument may work for certain private schools, but even then, I suspect they depend on their local market (as Attackfrog just helped prove with his Rice example).

I'll be buying season tickets to SDSU football now that they're in the Big East. I never took a single class there, and the only times I've been on their campus have been to see 1 basketball game and 3 or 4 concerts.

Market is everything.

You are very wrong because it takes both a large donating alumni group plus great marketing. Louisville does that as well any school in the nation does it.

(02-26-2012 03:20 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  

(02-26-2012 03:10 PM)Cubanbull Wrote:  Correct but there a heck of more fans in Philly that temple can potentially turn into supporters and viewers if they win than Southern Miss has. Once again there are higher potential in those large markets

I think there's also a difference between a Temple and an SMU. Temple may not have much penetration in the Philadelphia market, but they also don't have competition. East Coast cities are basically virgin markets for college football. Temple has to do what UConn and Rutgers have done, and sell the idea of college football. Once that's accomplished, Philadelphia college football fans are Temple football fans, because that's the local team. (Yes, Penn State, sure.)

That's a very different situation than an SMU or an SDSU. College football isn't a new product in DFW or southern California. You're not just competing with NFL and MLB and NBA and Xbox, you're competing with the Longhorns and Sooners, the Trojans and Bruins. USF and UCF have a similar problem, but they can at least sell Tampa vs the rest of Florida, Orlando vs the rest of Florida.

SDSU is much more akin to what you claim about USF and UCF: San Diego has a built-in difference and down right dislike of LA

(02-27-2012 11:36 AM)monty Wrote:  SDSU is much more akin to what you claim about USF and UCF: San Diego has a built-in difference and down right dislike of LA

OK, I understand that as a basis for college sports fandom. I'm from New York, and a lot of people don't understand the snobbery and resistance to people in NYC embracing Rutgers football because it's a Jersey product.

But SDSU hasn't ever been good enough to build that kind of fanbase yet, turning that generalized chip-on-a-San-Diego-shoulder into 40,000 people in the stadium and a corresponding audience watching on TV.

(02-27-2012 11:41 AM)johnbragg Wrote:  

(02-27-2012 11:36 AM)monty Wrote:  SDSU is much more akin to what you claim about USF and UCF: San Diego has a built-in difference and down right dislike of LA

OK, I understand that as a basis for college sports fandom. I'm from New York, and a lot of people don't understand the snobbery and resistance to people in NYC embracing Rutgers football because it's a Jersey product.

But SDSU hasn't ever been good enough to build that kind of fanbase yet, turning that generalized chip-on-a-San-Diego-shoulder into 40,000 people in the stadium and a corresponding audience watching on TV.

They did all throughout the 60's and 70's when they would outdraw the Chargers at the Murph on occasion and it came back for a bit when Marshall was here. We're starting to see it again as after just our second winning season in a decade we're just under 40k in attendance and destroying just about eveything that's on when we're on TV in San Diego.