Sports Media Watch Viewership data for the last 4 seasons.

First column is a stack ranking of P5 schools' media value (based on 4 criteria: # TV viewers; # TV games; # conf media rights viewers; # conf media rights games). It is an analysis.

Total games/viewers include home, away & neutral site games. Total games/viewers also include bowls.

Conference games/viewers are only for the home team. There are no neutral site games in the conference data (with the exception of UGA-UF, OU-UT & Ark-TAMU which SMW appears to rotate every year to the alternate school; and CCGs).

Rank Team Total Games Total Avg Vwrs (M) Conf # Games Conf Avg Vwrs (M) Conf Value %
9 Clem 47 5.7 18 2.6 16%
18 Mia 38 2.7 15 2.2 11%
19 FSU 31 2.5 15 2.1 10%
29 VT 26 2.2 11 2.0 7%
30 Lou 23 2.1 11 2.1 8%
38 UNC 25 1.9 9 2.2 7%
40 Pitt 21 2.1 9 1.9 5%
41 GT 19 2.1 11 1.7 6%
42 BC 18 1.9 9 2.1 6%
46 Syr 18 1.9 6 1.9 4%
54 UVA 17 2.1 7 1.2 3%
55 Wake 18 1.7 8 1.7 4%
56 NCSt 23 1.6 9 1.4 4%
62 Duke 17 1.4 7 0.7 2%
CCG 4 5.9 8%
TOTAL 341 2.6 149 2.0 100%

7 ND 50 4.4 27 3.0

8 Okla 49 4.7 22 2.9 19%
12 Tex 42 3.4 18 3.3 18%
25 OkSt 46 2.0 21 1.9 11%
34 WVU 42 1.8 19 1.5 8%
39 ISU 43 1.8 21 1.3 8%
43 TCU 44 1.5 21 1.1 7%
45 TTU 38 1.4 19 1.2 7%
48 Bylr 38 1.5 18 1.0 5%
51 KSt 39 1.2 17 1.2 6%
64 KU 26 0.7 14 0.7 3%
CCG 4 7.0 8%
TOTAL 407 2.1 194 1.7 100%

2 OSU 43 7.4 18 4.9 15%
3 Mich 38 5.2 20 5.1 18%
11 PSU 39 3.8 19 3.1 10%
13 Wisc 37 4.0 15 2.6 7%
15 MSU 37 2.7 20 2.5 9%
22 Iowa 37 2.0 19 2.1 7%
23 Ind 26 2.4 12 2.2 5%
27 NW 34 2.2 15 1.8 5%
28 Neb 29 2.2 13 2.0 5%
36 Minn 27 1.8 13 2.0 4%
47 MD 22 1.6 9 1.7 3%
49 Pur 25 1.5 12 1.6 3%
61 Ill 18 1.1 9 1.1 2%
65 Rutg 11 1.0 5 0.9 1%
CCG 4 10.8 7%
TOTAL 423 3.2 203 2.8 100%

16 USC 40 2.5 18 2.5 17%
24 Wash 36 2.5 16 1.7 10%
26 Ore 33 2.9 13 1.7 9%
31 Stan 32 1.8 15 1.9 11%
35 WSU 27 1.9 13 1.9 9%
44 UCLA 33 1.5 15 1.3 8%
50 ASU 22 1.6 9 1.6 6%
57 Uta 32 1.5 15 0.8 5%
58 Col 23 1.4 10 1.4 5%
59 Cal 26 1.2 10 1.4 5%
60 Ariz 27 1.1 16 0.9 5%
63 OrSt 16 1.0 11 0.8 3%
CCG 4 4.4 7%
TOTAL 347 1.8 165 1.6 100%

1 Ala 50 7.8 21 4.7 16%
4 UGA 43 6.3 18 3.4 10%
5 LSU 39 5.6 19 3.6 11%
6 Aub 38 4.5 16 4.2 11%
10 UFla 40 3.8 19 3.3 10%
14 TAM 35 3.0 15 2.6 6%
17 Tenn 23 3.2 13 2.6 6%
20 SCar 21 2.6 9 2.7 4%
21 MsSt 31 2.4 14 2.2 5%
32 Miss 22 2.2 10 2.2 4%
33 Ark 16 2.4 8 2.4 3%
37 UK 13 3.0 4 2.3 1%
52 Miz 17 2.0 10 1.3 2%
53 VU 11 1.9 7 1.7 2%
CCG 4 13.4 9%
TOTAL 399 4.2 187 3.3 100%

Notes:
Sports Media Watch publishes viewership data from ABC/ESPN/ESPN2/ESPNU/ENWS, Fox/FS1/FS2, CBS, NBC/USA and BTN (starting in 2020). Data from SECN, ACCN and regional networks are not currently available. The columns with conference (‘Conf’) data are designed to simulate T1 & T2 media rights...therefore, BTN games are not included in these columns.
Data and rankings within conferences are more meaningful as all schools share common media and bowl contracts.

(04-15-2021 03:11 PM)Wahoowa84 Wrote:  Sports Media Watch Viewership data for the last 4 seasons.

First column is a stack ranking of P5 schools' media value (based on 4 criteria: # TV viewers; # TV games; # conf media rights viewers; # conf media rights games). It is an analysis.

Total games/viewers include home, away & neutral site games. Total games/viewers also include bowls.

Conference games/viewers are only for the home team. There are no neutral site games in the conference data (with the exception of UGA-UF, OU-UT & Ark-TAMU which SMW appears to rotate every year to the alternate school; and CCGs).

Rank Team Total Games Total Avg Vwrs (M) Conf # Games Conf Avg Vwrs (M) Conf Value %
9 Clem 47 5.7 18 2.6 16%
18 Mia 38 2.7 15 2.2 11%
19 FSU 31 2.5 15 2.1 10%
29 VT 26 2.2 11 2.0 7%
30 Lou 23 2.1 11 2.1 8%
38 UNC 25 1.9 9 2.2 7%
40 Pitt 21 2.1 9 1.9 5%
41 GT 19 2.1 11 1.7 6%
42 BC 18 1.9 9 2.1 6%
46 Syr 18 1.9 6 1.9 4%
54 UVA 17 2.1 7 1.2 3%
55 Wake 18 1.7 8 1.7 4%
56 NCSt 23 1.6 9 1.4 4%
62 Duke 17 1.4 7 0.7 2%
CCG 4 5.9 8%
TOTAL 341 2.6 149 2.0 100%

7 ND 50 4.4 27 3.0

8 Okla 49 4.7 22 2.9 19%
12 Tex 42 3.4 18 3.3 18%
25 OkSt 46 2.0 21 1.9 11%
34 WVU 42 1.8 19 1.5 8%
39 ISU 43 1.8 21 1.3 8%
43 TCU 44 1.5 21 1.1 7%
45 TTU 38 1.4 19 1.2 7%
48 Bylr 38 1.5 18 1.0 5%
51 KSt 39 1.2 17 1.2 6%
64 KU 26 0.7 14 0.7 3%
CCG 4 7.0 8%
TOTAL 407 2.1 194 1.7 100%

2 OSU 43 7.4 18 4.9 15%
3 Mich 38 5.2 20 5.1 18%
11 PSU 39 3.8 19 3.1 10%
13 Wisc 37 4.0 15 2.6 7%
15 MSU 37 2.7 20 2.5 9%
22 Iowa 37 2.0 19 2.1 7%
23 Ind 26 2.4 12 2.2 5%
27 NW 34 2.2 15 1.8 5%
28 Neb 29 2.2 13 2.0 5%
36 Minn 27 1.8 13 2.0 4%
47 MD 22 1.6 9 1.7 3%
49 Pur 25 1.5 12 1.6 3%
61 Ill 18 1.1 9 1.1 2%
65 Rutg 11 1.0 5 0.9 1%
CCG 4 10.8 7%
TOTAL 423 3.2 203 2.8 100%

16 USC 40 2.5 18 2.5 17%
24 Wash 36 2.5 16 1.7 10%
26 Ore 33 2.9 13 1.7 9%
31 Stan 32 1.8 15 1.9 11%
35 WSU 27 1.9 13 1.9 9%
44 UCLA 33 1.5 15 1.3 8%
50 ASU 22 1.6 9 1.6 6%
57 Uta 32 1.5 15 0.8 5%
58 Col 23 1.4 10 1.4 5%
59 Cal 26 1.2 10 1.4 5%
60 Ariz 27 1.1 16 0.9 5%
63 OrSt 16 1.0 11 0.8 3%
CCG 4 4.4 7%
TOTAL 347 1.8 165 1.6 100%

1 Ala 50 7.8 21 4.7 16%
4 UGA 43 6.3 18 3.4 10%
5 LSU 39 5.6 19 3.6 11%
6 Aub 38 4.5 16 4.2 11%
10 UFla 40 3.8 19 3.3 10%
14 TAM 35 3.0 15 2.6 6%
17 Tenn 23 3.2 13 2.6 6%
20 SCar 21 2.6 9 2.7 4%
21 MsSt 31 2.4 14 2.2 5%
32 Miss 22 2.2 10 2.2 4%
33 Ark 16 2.4 8 2.4 3%
37 UK 13 3.0 4 2.3 1%
52 Miz 17 2.0 10 1.3 2%
53 VU 11 1.9 7 1.7 2%
CCG 4 13.4 9%
TOTAL 399 4.2 187 3.3 100%

Pleasantly surprised- Louisville, BC, Indiana, Northwestern, Washington State

Underwhelmed- UVA, NC State, Nebraska, Illinois and the entire PAC12.

2020 was a disaster for the PAC. They did not handle the pandemic as well as other conferences. It will take a while to recover from this past season's debacle.

With regards to Washington State, Mike Leach seems to always have competitive and entertaining teams. His departure may be difficult on WSU football.

I know this is a P5 board but do you have an AAC numbers? Just want to see how they stack up to the P5.

(05-31-2021 08:32 PM)random asian guy Wrote:  I know this is a P5 board but do you have an AAC numbers? Just want to see how they stack up to the P5.

No, I only have P5 schools. Also, not sure that it would be fair to compare AAC viewership to P5 schools. The media deals are done by the conferences and the AAC does not have the clout to get prime exposure for their games.

(06-01-2021 10:23 AM)Wahoowa84 Wrote:  

(05-31-2021 08:32 PM)random asian guy Wrote:  I know this is a P5 board but do you have an AAC numbers? Just want to see how they stack up to the P5.

No, I only have P5 schools. Also, not sure that it would be fair to compare AAC viewership to P5 schools. The media deals are done by the conferences and the AAC does not have the clout to get prime exposure for their games.

Yes, it’s not fair to comapre the AAC viewership to P5 schools. But I am interested in which AAC schools get the most viewership. Maybe one or two AAC schools get better numbers than some of the bottom P5 schools.

(06-01-2021 11:10 AM)random asian guy Wrote:  

(06-01-2021 10:23 AM)Wahoowa84 Wrote:  

(05-31-2021 08:32 PM)random asian guy Wrote:  I know this is a P5 board but do you have an AAC numbers? Just want to see how they stack up to the P5.

No, I only have P5 schools. Also, not sure that it would be fair to compare AAC viewership to P5 schools. The media deals are done by the conferences and the AAC does not have the clout to get prime exposure for their games.

Yes, it’s not fair to comapre the AAC viewership to P5 schools. But I am interested in which AAC schools get the most viewership. Maybe one or two AAC schools get better numbers than some of the bottom P5 schools.

SlhNavy has been tracking this for the past 4-5 years, the strongest tv ratings come from (in no particular order) UC, UCF, Houston and Memphis. This is not that surprising given they have been the strongest programs during that time and in larger markets. He would know better than I but my recollection is their are capturing stronger ratings than several P5 schools— likely performing about middle of the pack.

(06-01-2021 11:46 AM)CliftonAve Wrote:  

(06-01-2021 11:10 AM)random asian guy Wrote:  

(06-01-2021 10:23 AM)Wahoowa84 Wrote:  

(05-31-2021 08:32 PM)random asian guy Wrote:  I know this is a P5 board but do you have an AAC numbers? Just want to see how they stack up to the P5.

No, I only have P5 schools. Also, not sure that it would be fair to compare AAC viewership to P5 schools. The media deals are done by the conferences and the AAC does not have the clout to get prime exposure for their games.

Yes, it’s not fair to comapre the AAC viewership to P5 schools. But I am interested in which AAC schools get the most viewership. Maybe one or two AAC schools get better numbers than some of the bottom P5 schools.

SlhNavy has been tracking this for the past 4-5 years, the strongest tv ratings come from (in no particular order) UC, UCF, Houston and Memphis. This is not that surprising given they have been the strongest programs during that time and in larger markets. He would know better than I but my recollection is their are capturing stronger ratings than several P5 schools— likely performing about middle of the pack.

Hmmmm... I have it at conference level for at least the last three seasons, all games, conference-controlled, and intra-conference -- I would have to look at 2017, because I might have some file management/version control issues. Team by team would be a little bit of an effort.
To match the OP's data presentation, I'll ask Wahoowa84 -- what is conference value %age? % of total conference-inventory viewers attributable to Team X's viewers for their conference controlled home games? One issue with that, maybe not in past data -- the one Navy home game pulled to ABC/ESPN/ESPN2 for 2021 will be Cincinnati 23 October...if Cincinnati is undefeated at that point, it could be huge, and Navy would get the credit rather than Cincinnati. I don't know that I have a better answer.
Also, I see CCG broken out separately, which kind of takes away "credit" for the teams in the CCG being a draw...I mean, I get it, the CCG has its own drawing power...but Clemson-ND CCG was hugely above any other ACC CCG for example, so you are ranking teams, but create a blind spot for a team's addition to (or subtraction from) a "conference-norm" CCG...I don't know that I have a better answer.
Finally, if I did this and then tried to squeeze the AAC teams into your 1-65, what is that overall ranking based on? Total viewers all games, average viewership per rated game all games, total viewers conference-controlled games, or average viewership per rated game conference-controlled games?

(06-01-2021 07:59 PM)slhNavy91 Wrote:  

(06-01-2021 11:46 AM)CliftonAve Wrote:  

(06-01-2021 11:10 AM)random asian guy Wrote:  

(06-01-2021 10:23 AM)Wahoowa84 Wrote:  

(05-31-2021 08:32 PM)random asian guy Wrote:  I know this is a P5 board but do you have an AAC numbers? Just want to see how they stack up to the P5.

No, I only have P5 schools. Also, not sure that it would be fair to compare AAC viewership to P5 schools. The media deals are done by the conferences and the AAC does not have the clout to get prime exposure for their games.

Yes, it’s not fair to comapre the AAC viewership to P5 schools. But I am interested in which AAC schools get the most viewership. Maybe one or two AAC schools get better numbers than some of the bottom P5 schools.

SlhNavy has been tracking this for the past 4-5 years, the strongest tv ratings come from (in no particular order) UC, UCF, Houston and Memphis. This is not that surprising given they have been the strongest programs during that time and in larger markets. He would know better than I but my recollection is their are capturing stronger ratings than several P5 schools— likely performing about middle of the pack.

Hmmmm... I have it at conference level for at least the last three seasons, all games, conference-controlled, and intra-conference -- I would have to look at 2017, because I might have some file management/version control issues. Team by team would be a little bit of an effort.
To match the OP's data presentation, I'll ask Wahoowa84 -- what is conference value %age? % of total conference-inventory viewers attributable to Team X's viewers for their conference controlled home games? One issue with that, maybe not in past data -- the one Navy home game pulled to ABC/ESPN/ESPN2 for 2021 will be Cincinnati 23 October...if Cincinnati is undefeated at that point, it could be huge, and Navy would get the credit rather than Cincinnati. I don't know that I have a better answer.
Also, I see CCG broken out separately, which kind of takes away "credit" for the teams in the CCG being a draw...I mean, I get it, the CCG has its own drawing power...but Clemson-ND CCG was hugely above any other ACC CCG for example, so you are ranking teams, but create a blind spot for a team's addition to (or subtraction from) a "conference-norm" CCG...I don't know that I have a better answer.
Finally, if I did this and then tried to squeeze the AAC teams into your 1-65, what is that overall ranking based on? Total viewers all games, average viewership per rated game all games, total viewers conference-controlled games, or average viewership per rated game conference-controlled games?

If you are interested in expanding the stack-ranking beyond the P5 schools' TV viewership...

What is conference value %age?
A team’s home game viewership divided by the conference’s home game viewership. Mathematically, using Clemson-ACC as the example: (18 games at Clemson * 2.6M viewers per game) / (149 games at ACC stadiums * 2.0M viewers per game) = 16%.

Why are CCG broken out separately?
The CCG are not broken out of the first two variables (Total Games = all TV rated games, regardless of setting [home+away+neutral-site, regular-season+CCG+bowl]; Total Avg Vwrs (M) = average viewership on all rated games, regardless of setting).
The CCG are broken out of the last two variables (Conference # Games and Conference Average Viewers (M)). I was curious to understand the relative impact of CCG on conference media rights.

What is the overall ranking based on?
First, stack-ranked each P5 team by four criteria…
a) Total viewers, all games (1-Alabama, 2-Ohio State…64-Oregon State, 65-Rutgers)
b) Total average viewers per game in millions, all games (1-Alabama, 2-Ohio State…64-Rutgers, 65-Kansas)
c) Number of rated conference game viewers, home games only (1-Michigan, 2-Alabama…64-Duke, 65-Rutgers)
d) Conference average viewers per game in millions, home games only (1-Michigan, 2-Ohio State…64-Kansas, 65-Duke)
Then took the simple average of the four stack-ranked criteria. Finally, stack-ranked the simple average for the 65 schools.

(06-02-2021 01:35 PM)Wahoowa84 Wrote:  

(06-01-2021 07:59 PM)slhNavy91 Wrote:  

(06-01-2021 11:46 AM)CliftonAve Wrote:  

(06-01-2021 11:10 AM)random asian guy Wrote:  

(06-01-2021 10:23 AM)Wahoowa84 Wrote:  No, I only have P5 schools. Also, not sure that it would be fair to compare AAC viewership to P5 schools. The media deals are done by the conferences and the AAC does not have the clout to get prime exposure for their games.

Yes, it’s not fair to comapre the AAC viewership to P5 schools. But I am interested in which AAC schools get the most viewership. Maybe one or two AAC schools get better numbers than some of the bottom P5 schools.

SlhNavy has been tracking this for the past 4-5 years, the strongest tv ratings come from (in no particular order) UC, UCF, Houston and Memphis. This is not that surprising given they have been the strongest programs during that time and in larger markets. He would know better than I but my recollection is their are capturing stronger ratings than several P5 schools— likely performing about middle of the pack.

Hmmmm... I have it at conference level for at least the last three seasons, all games, conference-controlled, and intra-conference -- I would have to look at 2017, because I might have some file management/version control issues. Team by team would be a little bit of an effort.
To match the OP's data presentation, I'll ask Wahoowa84 -- what is conference value %age? % of total conference-inventory viewers attributable to Team X's viewers for their conference controlled home games? One issue with that, maybe not in past data -- the one Navy home game pulled to ABC/ESPN/ESPN2 for 2021 will be Cincinnati 23 October...if Cincinnati is undefeated at that point, it could be huge, and Navy would get the credit rather than Cincinnati. I don't know that I have a better answer.
Also, I see CCG broken out separately, which kind of takes away "credit" for the teams in the CCG being a draw...I mean, I get it, the CCG has its own drawing power...but Clemson-ND CCG was hugely above any other ACC CCG for example, so you are ranking teams, but create a blind spot for a team's addition to (or subtraction from) a "conference-norm" CCG...I don't know that I have a better answer.
Finally, if I did this and then tried to squeeze the AAC teams into your 1-65, what is that overall ranking based on? Total viewers all games, average viewership per rated game all games, total viewers conference-controlled games, or average viewership per rated game conference-controlled games?

If you are interested in expanding the stack-ranking beyond the P5 schools' TV viewership...

What is conference value %age?
A team’s home game viewership divided by the conference’s home game viewership. Mathematically, using Clemson-ACC as the example: (18 games at Clemson * 2.6M viewers per game) / (149 games at ACC stadiums * 2.0M viewers per game) = 16%.

Why are CCG broken out separately?
The CCG are not broken out of the first two variables (Total Games = all TV rated games, regardless of setting [home+away+neutral-site, regular-season+CCG+bowl]; Total Avg Vwrs (M) = average viewership on all rated games, regardless of setting).
The CCG are broken out of the last two variables (Conference # Games and Conference Average Viewers (M)). I was curious to understand the relative impact of CCG on conference media rights.

What is the overall ranking based on?
First, stack-ranked each P5 team by four criteria…
a) Total viewers, all games (1-Alabama, 2-Ohio State…64-Oregon State, 65-Rutgers)
b) Total average viewers per game in millions, all games (1-Alabama, 2-Ohio State…64-Rutgers, 65-Kansas)
c) Number of rated conference game viewers, home games only (1-Michigan, 2-Alabama…64-Duke, 65-Rutgers)
d) Conference average viewers per game in millions, home games only (1-Michigan, 2-Ohio State…64-Kansas, 65-Duke)
Then took the simple average of the four stack-ranked criteria. Finally, stack-ranked the simple average for the 65 schools.

Thanks for the methodology.
I now have another project for my "off-season conditioning."

I can pull what I have for the AAC schools - as I compile their total viewers, avg per rated game (all games), conference viewers, and avg per rated conference game, I'll find "comps" in your 1-65 listing.
It will be a whole second phase fitting them back into your 1-76 listings to get four separate stack rankings and then redoing a four-factor 1-76 stack ranking.

One more methodology question: How do you handle reverse mirror games?
sportsmediawatch lists one viewership number for four teams/two games on ABC and one viewership number for four teams/two games on ESPN2...if you have a way to avoid double-counting, I would be grateful for the insight.

(06-01-2021 11:10 AM)random asian guy Wrote:  

(06-01-2021 10:23 AM)Wahoowa84 Wrote:  

(05-31-2021 08:32 PM)random asian guy Wrote:  I know this is a P5 board but do you have an AAC numbers? Just want to see how they stack up to the P5.

No, I only have P5 schools. Also, not sure that it would be fair to compare AAC viewership to P5 schools. The media deals are done by the conferences and the AAC does not have the clout to get prime exposure for their games.

Yes, it’s not fair to comapre the AAC viewership to P5 schools. But I am interested in which AAC schools get the most viewership. Maybe one or two AAC schools get better numbers than some of the bottom P5 schools.

Before I start crunching numbers, my bold prediction:
The top 1-3 AAC teams will be around the middle of the contract-bowl team rankings.
The next 2-3 AAC teams will be better than #65.
The bottom half of the AAC teams will probably not be better than the bottom contract-bowl teams.

(06-06-2021 10:35 PM)slhNavy91 Wrote:  

(06-02-2021 01:35 PM)Wahoowa84 Wrote:  

(06-01-2021 07:59 PM)slhNavy91 Wrote:  

(06-01-2021 11:46 AM)CliftonAve Wrote:  

(06-01-2021 11:10 AM)random asian guy Wrote:  Yes, it’s not fair to comapre the AAC viewership to P5 schools. But I am interested in which AAC schools get the most viewership. Maybe one or two AAC schools get better numbers than some of the bottom P5 schools.

SlhNavy has been tracking this for the past 4-5 years, the strongest tv ratings come from (in no particular order) UC, UCF, Houston and Memphis. This is not that surprising given they have been the strongest programs during that time and in larger markets. He would know better than I but my recollection is their are capturing stronger ratings than several P5 schools— likely performing about middle of the pack.

Hmmmm... I have it at conference level for at least the last three seasons, all games, conference-controlled, and intra-conference -- I would have to look at 2017, because I might have some file management/version control issues. Team by team would be a little bit of an effort.
To match the OP's data presentation, I'll ask Wahoowa84 -- what is conference value %age? % of total conference-inventory viewers attributable to Team X's viewers for their conference controlled home games? One issue with that, maybe not in past data -- the one Navy home game pulled to ABC/ESPN/ESPN2 for 2021 will be Cincinnati 23 October...if Cincinnati is undefeated at that point, it could be huge, and Navy would get the credit rather than Cincinnati. I don't know that I have a better answer.
Also, I see CCG broken out separately, which kind of takes away "credit" for the teams in the CCG being a draw...I mean, I get it, the CCG has its own drawing power...but Clemson-ND CCG was hugely above any other ACC CCG for example, so you are ranking teams, but create a blind spot for a team's addition to (or subtraction from) a "conference-norm" CCG...I don't know that I have a better answer.
Finally, if I did this and then tried to squeeze the AAC teams into your 1-65, what is that overall ranking based on? Total viewers all games, average viewership per rated game all games, total viewers conference-controlled games, or average viewership per rated game conference-controlled games?

If you are interested in expanding the stack-ranking beyond the P5 schools' TV viewership...

What is conference value %age?
A team’s home game viewership divided by the conference’s home game viewership. Mathematically, using Clemson-ACC as the example: (18 games at Clemson * 2.6M viewers per game) / (149 games at ACC stadiums * 2.0M viewers per game) = 16%.

Why are CCG broken out separately?
The CCG are not broken out of the first two variables (Total Games = all TV rated games, regardless of setting [home+away+neutral-site, regular-season+CCG+bowl]; Total Avg Vwrs (M) = average viewership on all rated games, regardless of setting).
The CCG are broken out of the last two variables (Conference # Games and Conference Average Viewers (M)). I was curious to understand the relative impact of CCG on conference media rights.

What is the overall ranking based on?
First, stack-ranked each P5 team by four criteria…
a) Total viewers, all games (1-Alabama, 2-Ohio State…64-Oregon State, 65-Rutgers)
b) Total average viewers per game in millions, all games (1-Alabama, 2-Ohio State…64-Rutgers, 65-Kansas)
c) Number of rated conference game viewers, home games only (1-Michigan, 2-Alabama…64-Duke, 65-Rutgers)
d) Conference average viewers per game in millions, home games only (1-Michigan, 2-Ohio State…64-Kansas, 65-Duke)
Then took the simple average of the four stack-ranked criteria. Finally, stack-ranked the simple average for the 65 schools.

Thanks for the methodology.
I now have another project for my "off-season conditioning."

I can pull what I have for the AAC schools - as I compile their total viewers, avg per rated game (all games), conference viewers, and avg per rated conference game, I'll find "comps" in your 1-65 listing.
It will be a whole second phase fitting them back into your 1-76 listings to get four separate stack rankings and then redoing a four-factor 1-76 stack ranking.

One more methodology question: How do you handle reverse mirror games?
sportsmediawatch lists one viewership number for four teams/two games on ABC and one viewership number for four teams/two games on ESPN2...if you have a way to avoid double-counting, I would be grateful for the insight.

With regards to reverse mirror games...I counted the highest rated game’s viewership data to all teams (and disregarded viewership data from a second channel on the same game). To be mathematically precise towards the broader college football industry, I thought about taking the average of both channels’ viewership. There are pros/cons to each approach...I just chose a standard and stuck with it. Some imperfection (“double-counting”) occurs with my simplification of how SMW presents the data.

My prediction for the AAC
a) No team will be higher than #45 Texas Tech (i.e., the best AAC teams will be in the lowest quartile of P5 viewership)
b) Five AAC teams should have better “viewership” data than the current P5 floor, #65 Rutgers. In partial defense of Rutgers, it does appear that the BIG has relegated the Scarlet Knights to BTN branding duty. UCF, Cincy and Navy should have relative strong viewership. It’s really about matchups and timing.

In regards to the mirror games, if 6 million watched it on ABC and another 2 million watched it on ESPN2 then should the viewership be the sum of the two? IMHO 8 million people watched the game. Some people got to watch it OTA based on their market, while others had to watch it on cable because a regional broadcast took precedence on the flagship.

(06-07-2021 10:45 AM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  In regards to the mirror games, if 6 million watched it on ABC and another 2 million watched it on ESPN2 then should the viewership be the sum of the two? IMHO 8 million people watched the game. Some people got to watch it OTA based on their market, while others had to watch it on cable because a regional broadcast took precedence on the flagship.

My understanding of reverse mirror games using Disney networks as an example - they’ll show UVa versus Georgia Tech on ABC in the states east of the Mississippi River; while showing the game on ESPN2 in the states west of the Mississippi River. Simultaneously, they’ll show Okie State versus Texas Tech on ABC west of the Mississippi River; while showing them on ESPN2 in states east of the Mississippi River. The challenge is that Disney can be selective in choosing the exact locations and channels for airing a game. Sports Media Watch reports viewership for the channel and time slot...even though two games are mirrored on the same channel, but at different locations. My methodology gives a slight boost (bias) to teams that have mirrored games.

With the proposed departure of OU and UT, as well as potential inclusion of UCF + Cincy + BYU + Houston, I was curious to understand what would happen to the B12 media rights.

Stack ranking the new proposed additions into the current P5 media data...

Rank Team All Games Avg Vwrs (M) Home # Games Home Avg Vwrs
8 OU 49 4,737 22 2,863
12 Tex 42 3,394 18 3,336
25 OkSt 46 1,983 21 1,853
34 TCU 22 3,093 21 1,073
35 WVU 42 1,767 19 1,460
39 ISU 43 1,753 21 1,304
44 UCF 36 1,651 14 1,243
46 TTU 38 1,362 19 1,200
48 Bylr 38 1,489 18 974
50 KSt 39 1,230 17 1,245
61 Cin 25 1,671 10 772
62 BYU 35 1,082 18 821
64 Hou 26 1,124 14 866
68 KU 26 748 14 733

My observations...

1) Over the past 4 years, UCF has been the darling media ratings program in the G5. If UCF remains competitive, there is no reason why they can't be in the top third of the new B12 (in terms of media ratings).

2) BYU's media ranking "suffers" relative to the proposed AAC additions due to over-exposure. Most of its rated games have been against much weaker opponents than the B12 or AAC media package. BYU should get the most bump up in media rankings from joining the B12.

3) Media value rankings of OU (#8) and UT (#12) should increase significantly as their schedules are moving from the B12 to the SEC. Obviously, that also means that the ratings for the remaining Big 8 schools will be going down once OU and UT leave the conference.

4) The new B12 will really struggle to schedule games that have Tier 1 ratings (payouts) potential. They will have many Tier 2 games, but losing the brand programs makes them dependent on an exciting conference championship game or OOC games for a marquee events. Over the past 4 years, B12 conference media rights games with > 4M viewers:
Season Week Viewers (M) Team A (away) Team B (home)
2020 W12 4.100 OkSt OU
2020 W9 4.040 Tex OkSt
2020 W6 4.810 Tex OU
2019 CCG 8.700 OU Bylr
2019 W14 5.820 OU OkSt
2019 W12 6.790 OU Bylr
2019 W9 4.210 OU KSt
2019 W7 7.250 OU Tex
2019 W2 8.630 LSU Tex
2019 W1 5.440 Hou OU
2018 CCG 10.300 OU Tex
2018 W13 5.630 OU WVU
2018 W11 3.917 OkSt OU
2018 W10 4.431 WVU Tex
2018 W6 5.608 Tex OU
2017 CCG 5.896 OU TCU
2017 W13 4.644 USF UCF
OOC rivalry games (e.g., such as Bedlam and USF-UCF) may be their best opportunity at tier 1 ratings.

*** If Wahoowa's existing data includes Bowl Games, this data will require one more tweak to be incorporated into that present 1-65 list *** (edit 23 Sep)

I finally put in the work on all 11 AAC teams. Edited to more clearly break out Wahoowa's four categories, and I checked my work on the in conference combined factors rankings

2017-2020 Total viewership,regular season and CCGs, no bowls included in order of total viewers
Team....Total Vwrs......Games....Avg Vwrs per rated game
1 Navy ....44418000....21........2115143
2 UCF .....42128000....34........1239059
3 MEM.....34090000....27........1262593
4 CIN......28973000....22........1316955
5 HOU.....23395000....24........974792
6 USF......22472000....20........1123600
7 TULS....13141000....21........625762
8 SMU.....10659000....17........627000
9 TULA......7547000....13........580538
10 TEM......7057000....14........504071
11 ECU......3680000....10........368000

Average Viewers per rated game regular season and CCGs, no bowls included
1 Navy 2115143
2 Cincinnati 1316955
3 Memphis 1262593
4 UCF 1239059
5 USF 1123600
6 Houston 974792
7 SMU 627000
8 Tulsa 625762
9 Tulane 580538
10 Temple 504071
11 ECU 368000

2017-2020 Conference viewership, home games only, and %age
Team....Total Vwrs..........%age of conf viewers
1 MEM.....19166000......21.43%
2 UCF......16395000......18.33%
3 HOU.....12853000......14.37%
4 USF......11236000...,..12.56%
5 CIN........7719000.......8.63%
6 TULS......4642000.......5.19%
7 TULA......4452000.......4.98%
8 SMU.......3486000.......3.90%
9 ECU........3184000......3.56%
10 TEM......2563000.......2.87%
11 Navy......1574000.......1.76%

2017-2020 Conference inv avg per rated game viewership, home games only
1 Memphis 1369000
2 UCF 1171071
3 USF 936333
4 Houston 856867
5 Navy 787000
6 Cincinnati 771900
7 Tulane 742000
8 Tulsa 580250
9 ECU 454857
10 SMU 435750
11 Temple 366142


And here are the ordinal rankings in conference, averaging the rankings in each of the four categories.

Team - AVERAGE of 4
Memphis 2
UCF 2.5
Cincinnati 4.25
Houston 4.5
USF 4.5
Navy 4.5
Tulsa 7.25
Tulane 8
SMU 8.25
ECU 10
Temple 10.25

(09-21-2021 07:27 PM)slhNavy91 Wrote:  I finally put in the work on all 11 AAC teams. Edited to more clearly break out Wahoowa's four categories, and I checked my work on the in conference combined factors rankings

2017-2020 Total viewership,regular season and CCGs, no bowls included in order of total viewers
Team....Total Vwrs......Games....Avg Vwrs per rated game
1 Navy ....44418000....21........2115143
2 UCF .....42128000....34........1239059
3 MEM.....34090000....27........1262593
4 CIN......28973000....22........1316955
5 HOU.....23395000....24........974792
6 USF......22472000....20........1123600
7 TULS....13141000....21........625762
8 SMU.....10659000....17........627000
9 TULA......7547000....13........580538
10 TEM......7057000....14........504071
11 ECU......3680000....10........368000

Average Viewers per rated game regular season and CCGs, no bowls included
1 Navy 2115143
2 Cincinnati 1316955
3 Memphis 1262593
4 UCF 1239059
5 USF 1123600
6 Houston 974792
7 SMU 627000
8 Tulsa 625762
9 Tulane 580538
10 Temple 504071
11 ECU 368000

2017-2020 Conference viewership, home games only, and %age
Team....Total Vwrs..........%age of conf viewers
1 MEM.....19166000......21.43%
2 UCF......16395000......18.33%
3 HOU.....12853000......14.37%
4 USF......11236000...,..12.56%
5 CIN........7719000.......8.63%
6 TULS......4642000.......5.19%
7 TULA......4452000.......4.98%
8 SMU.......3486000.......3.90%
9 ECU........3184000......3.56%
10 TEM......2563000.......2.87%
11 Navy......1574000.......1.76%

2017-2020 Conference inv avg per rated game viewership, home games only
1 Memphis 1369000
2 UCF 1171071
3 USF 936333
4 Houston 856867
5 Navy 787000
6 Cincinnati 771900
7 Tulane 742000
8 Tulsa 580250
9 ECU 454857
10 SMU 435750
11 Temple 366142


And here are the ordinal rankings in conference, averaging the rankings in each of the four categories.

Team - AVERAGE of 4
Memphis 2
UCF 2.5
Cincinnati 4.25
Houston 4.5
USF 4.5
Navy 4.5
Tulsa 7.25
Tulane 8
SMU 8.25
ECU 10
Temple 10.25

As I worked through the data, I was wondering about using home games for the conference viewership. Say Cincinnati stays undefeated this year and the 23 October game at Navy gets ABC at noon, and does a good number -- Navy would get the credit for that in this setup, rather than Cincinnati which is obviously the draw. CCGs could get credited to both participants instead of to no one.
I did an excursion using all conference games in which a team is involved. The denominator changes, but here is the ranking giving both teams credit for intraconference games:
2017-2020 conference viewers, all games involved
Team......Total conference viewers Viewers...age
1 UCF.....35678000.................20.48
2 MEM....34090000.................19.56
3 USF......21518000.................12.35
4 CIN......21332000.................12.24
5 HOU.....16634000...................9.54
6 TULS.....10472000..................6.01
7 SMU........8647000..................4.96
8 NAVY.......7733000..................4.43
9 TULA.......6268000..................3.59
10 TEM.......5477000..................3.14
11 ECU.......3680000..................2.11

CCGs come back in UCF and USF move up for benefitting from all the War and I4 games instead of just half (and a few other big games for UCF).
Navy moves up, not because their away conference games in those four years were blockbusters, but just getting more than only the two 2020 games counted.

Then I did another excursion -- the 2018 Notre Dame at Navy game wasn't conference inventory, but the 2022, 2024, 2026, 2028, and 2030 ND at Navy games will be.
With that datapoint, Navy moves up to 4.4% of the conference viewership, from 11th to 8th for either home games only or all conference games in which a team is involved

(09-21-2021 07:27 PM)slhNavy91 Wrote:  *** If Wahoowa's existing data includes Bowl Games, this data will require one more tweak to be incorporated into that present 1-65 list *** (edit 23 Sep)

I finally put in the work on all 11 AAC teams. Edited to more clearly break out Wahoowa's four categories, and I checked my work on the in conference combined factors rankings

2017-2020 Total viewership,regular season and CCGs, no bowls included in order of total viewers
Team....Total Vwrs......Games....Avg Vwrs per rated game
1 Navy ....44418000....21........2115143
2 UCF .....42128000....34........1239059
3 MEM.....34090000....27........1262593
4 CIN......28973000....22........1316955
5 HOU.....23395000....24........974792
6 USF......22472000....20........1123600
7 TULS....13141000....21........625762
8 SMU.....10659000....17........627000
9 TULA......7547000....13........580538
10 TEM......7057000....14........504071
11 ECU......3680000....10........368000

Average Viewers per rated game regular season and CCGs, no bowls included
1 Navy 2115143
2 Cincinnati 1316955
3 Memphis 1262593
4 UCF 1239059
5 USF 1123600
6 Houston 974792
7 SMU 627000
8 Tulsa 625762
9 Tulane 580538
10 Temple 504071
11 ECU 368000

2017-2020 Conference viewership, home games only, and %age
Team....Total Vwrs..........%age of conf viewers
1 MEM.....19166000......21.43%
2 UCF......16395000......18.33%
3 HOU.....12853000......14.37%
4 USF......11236000...,..12.56%
5 CIN........7719000.......8.63%
6 TULS......4642000.......5.19%
7 TULA......4452000.......4.98%
8 SMU.......3486000.......3.90%
9 ECU........3184000......3.56%
10 TEM......2563000.......2.87%
11 Navy......1574000.......1.76%

2017-2020 Conference inv avg per rated game viewership, home games only
1 Memphis 1369000
2 UCF 1171071
3 USF 936333
4 Houston 856867
5 Navy 787000
6 Cincinnati 771900
7 Tulane 742000
8 Tulsa 580250
9 ECU 454857
10 SMU 435750
11 Temple 366142


And here are the ordinal rankings in conference, averaging the rankings in each of the four categories.

Team - AVERAGE of 4
Memphis 2
UCF 2.5
Cincinnati 4.25
Houston 4.5
USF 4.5
Navy 4.5
Tulsa 7.25
Tulane 8
SMU 8.25
ECU 10
Temple 10.25

Thank you.

So it looks like the media exposure is not that great for the G5 teams in general. Still, the viewership for Navy, UCF, Cincy, Houston, Memphis, and USF are decent and no wonder three of these six will join the Big 12 while the two are probably next in line.

Does anyone know why Navy was not even considered by the Big 12?

(09-26-2021 12:29 PM)random asian guy Wrote:  

(09-21-2021 07:27 PM)slhNavy91 Wrote:  *** If Wahoowa's existing data includes Bowl Games, this data will require one more tweak to be incorporated into that present 1-65 list *** (edit 23 Sep)

I finally put in the work on all 11 AAC teams. Edited to more clearly break out Wahoowa's four categories, and I checked my work on the in conference combined factors rankings

2017-2020 Total viewership,regular season and CCGs, no bowls included in order of total viewers
Team....Total Vwrs......Games....Avg Vwrs per rated game
1 Navy ....44418000....21........2115143
2 UCF .....42128000....34........1239059
3 MEM.....34090000....27........1262593
4 CIN......28973000....22........1316955
5 HOU.....23395000....24........974792
6 USF......22472000....20........1123600
7 TULS....13141000....21........625762
8 SMU.....10659000....17........627000
9 TULA......7547000....13........580538
10 TEM......7057000....14........504071
11 ECU......3680000....10........368000

Average Viewers per rated game regular season and CCGs, no bowls included
1 Navy 2115143
2 Cincinnati 1316955
3 Memphis 1262593
4 UCF 1239059
5 USF 1123600
6 Houston 974792
7 SMU 627000
8 Tulsa 625762
9 Tulane 580538
10 Temple 504071
11 ECU 368000

2017-2020 Conference viewership, home games only, and %age
Team....Total Vwrs..........%age of conf viewers
1 MEM.....19166000......21.43%
2 UCF......16395000......18.33%
3 HOU.....12853000......14.37%
4 USF......11236000...,..12.56%
5 CIN........7719000.......8.63%
6 TULS......4642000.......5.19%
7 TULA......4452000.......4.98%
8 SMU.......3486000.......3.90%
9 ECU........3184000......3.56%
10 TEM......2563000.......2.87%
11 Navy......1574000.......1.76%

2017-2020 Conference inv avg per rated game viewership, home games only
1 Memphis 1369000
2 UCF 1171071
3 USF 936333
4 Houston 856867
5 Navy 787000
6 Cincinnati 771900
7 Tulane 742000
8 Tulsa 580250
9 ECU 454857
10 SMU 435750
11 Temple 366142


And here are the ordinal rankings in conference, averaging the rankings in each of the four categories.

Team - AVERAGE of 4
Memphis 2
UCF 2.5
Cincinnati 4.25
Houston 4.5
USF 4.5
Navy 4.5
Tulsa 7.25
Tulane 8
SMU 8.25
ECU 10
Temple 10.25

Thank you.

So it looks like the media exposure is not that great for the G5 teams in general. Still, the viewership for Navy, UCF, Cincy, Houston, Memphis, and USF are decent and no wonder three of these six will join the Big 12 while the two are probably next in line.

Does anyone know why Navy was not even considered by the Big 12?

You have to look at Navy's overall viewers being largely Army-Navy, which won't be part of conference inventory, and ND games every other year which is only two to three million viewers. We show poorly in the conference inventory viewers. Now of course, that's in part with NMCMS home games being on non-Nielsen-rated CBSSN, but you can't show that we give any bump to viewership of intra-conference games on ESPN's networks -- one big number in 2015, when we went to Houston Black Friday as a de facto play-in game for a shot at the conference championship and NY6 slot and had 3 million viewers. Even Tulane-Navy being on ABC due to COVID last year, and Air Force-Navy being on CBS this year., other examples like Thursday or Friday night games..one can't say they were great numbers.

Navy didn't participate in the 2016 dog and pony show, even though the Big Twelve at that time said they would take football-only -- which led to Air Force throwing their panties up on the stage.

That was probably equal parts knowing the 2016 show was a traveshamockery, and pushing all our chips in on the AAC.

We're not a good candidate for all-sports. Army and Navy have a good thing in the Patriot League for non-football sports. In addition to travel killing all those non-revenue sports, honestly there are few in which we'd hold our own -- way out of our depth in MBB and WBB - in those we can hold our own in the one-bid Patriot. Baseball maybe less of a disadvantage but still a steep hill. Lacrosse both men's and women's are important to Navy -- does Big Twelve even play lax? Maybe swimming/diving with Texas gone, but still a big maybe.

Holy Moly......The Big 12 is losing 37% of their value and the PAC is losing 25%.