Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Post Reply 
Stop the Slander: AAC TV viewership doesn't equal to the Big 12 remains
Author Message
JSchmack Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,686
Joined: Jan 2021
Reputation: 252
I Root For: chaos
Location:
Post: #41
RE: Stop the Slander: AAC TV viewership doesn't equal to the Big 12 remains
(08-18-2021 03:44 PM)Jared7 Wrote:  Well, the point of the article, rather obviously, was to refute the Stewart Mandel hit piece that came out on July 27 that was designed to support the then-current (alleged) ESPN/Aresco attempt to lowball the Big 12 schools into thinking that they were regarded as no better than average AAC schools so that they might be tempted to precipitously change conferences if ESPN merely dangled a few million more per school to the AAC. And it does a very good job at that - so much so that Mandel himself tweeted favorably about it today in order to appear less of a shill than his original article exemplified. It is especially good at comparing Big 12 v. Big 12 ratings against AAC v. AAC ratings across all applicable networks rather than omitting the Fox ratings as Mandel did. And the conclusions - that Big 12 teams have at least 60% higher ratings (and maybe as much as 75% higher ratings) - seem logical. But will that change ESPN's minds about Big 12 schools? Doubtful... And because it only compares Big 12 schools v. AAC schools, it has a kid's table aspect to it which seems less helpful than a comparison against, say, Pac 12 schools.

And there are still flaws. Just like Mandel, it discounts TCU's 2018 game against Ohio State, which drew high ratings, because, well, everyone just "knows" that all viewers merely tuned in to watch the Buckeyes. And it mentions the TCU-ISU 2014 game and highlights the Clones' 2-10 record yet fails to mention that TCU was then ranked #3 in the nation and, CFP Committee shenanigans aside, seemed poised to make the first ever playoff. Those factors are more indicative of a Baylor study (who is, of course, TCU's main rival). And it's very convenient that because the Frog-Buckeye game magically just can't be included that Baylor ends up just slightly rated higher than TCU. So instead of being 24th best in TV ratings (as the thread down below concludes), the Frogs are right behind Baylor. Whatever. Typical Baylor slights notwithstanding, it's a decent article.


The fact that three days after the first Texas/Okla to SEC rumor hit the wire, you had articles about the TV value of AAC being higher than remaining B12 teams, combined with the Aresco "aggressively pursuing" comments and the "We already have ESPN at the table" comment, I'm like 98% certain that ESPN was actively trying to get the either remaining B12 schools to abandon ship in the panic so they could save a half billion dollars.

At the end of the day, it really doesn't matter WHOM is worth more as a conference. The Big 12 isn't going to stick at 8, and the AAC schools invited will jump at the chance to join a conference who's worse member is better than teams 8-11 of the AAC -- and one who has better basketball to boot.

The whole purpose of the TV value leak and projection was to scare the Big 8 members into leaving all that ESPN money on the table.
(This post was last modified: 08-18-2021 08:07 PM by JSchmack.)
08-18-2021 08:05 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Stugray2 Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 7,175
Joined: Jan 2017
Reputation: 679
I Root For: tOSU SJSU Stan'
Location: South Bay Area CA
Post: #42
RE: Stop the Slander: AAC TV viewership doesn't equal to the Big 12 remains
These numbers match the attendance difference between the two conferences. Non of the AAC matches any remaining eight except KU on attendance for football. And only Wichita State, Memphis and Cincinnati match basketball attendance.

It's not that close. In the end the remaining eight will get a larger TV deal in 2025-33 than the AAC has and probably take an AAC school or two, but not the other way around.
08-18-2021 08:32 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
BruceMcF Online
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 13,103
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 760
I Root For: Reds/Buckeyes/.
Location:
Post: #43
RE: Stop the Slander: AAC TV viewership doesn't equal to the Big 12 remains
(08-18-2021 01:14 PM)Wedge Wrote:  To the extent that is a criticism of Mandel's article -- it's correct that Mandel goes too far in speculating the remaining Big 12 average team value might be equal to the average AAC team value. ...

Mandel's article is seriously flawed analysis ... he focuses on the OTA games, but looks at average ratings rather than average viewers per school.

His analysis is that the average ratings are quite close. And over the period excluding 2020 (which is an outlier because the Big12 had so many slots open to it which in normal conditions would not have been), the two groups of "only Remaining Eight" and "AAC" got approximately the same number of games selected for OTA.

But that is from an inventory from the R8 of up to 6 games per season from eight schools on the one hand ... assuming a P5 OOC game levels them out to 5 home games out of 10, plus two buy games, minus the home Oklahoma or Texas game ... so an inventory of 48 or fewer games per year ...

... while if the typical AAC school has 6 homes games a year, the AAC had an inventory of 72 games (since we are excluding 2020 as an outlier).

So his own numbers showed that the R8 are more valuable on a per school basis than the AAC ... he just stopped analyzing the numbers when it reached the conclusion he was aiming for, rather than the conclusion that the numbers themselves point to.

Also, the filtering out of R8 games with OK/TX means that Mandel's analysis is comparing a central estimate of the AAC value to a deliberately conservative estimate of the R8 value, since the average R8 only selections for OTA were on top of already showing some of those same schools when they played OK/TX, and while the R8 viewers were not a majority of the viewing audience for those games, they were some of it and were part of the calculation of scheduling those games OTA.

The information to untangle how conservative the estimate that comes from Mandel's number is ... which is "roughly 50% more FB value per school" ... that is not likely publicly available. The higher the value the potential telecast partners would place on the R8, the harder it is for four schools from the AAC to match that value, and so the more likely it is that they expand to 10 rather than 12.

But if FB is 80% of the media value of the typical conference and MBB 20%, then at $7m/school in the AAC, that is $5.6m/school for FB and $1.4m/school for basketball, and if the R8 FB is, conservatively, 50% more valuable per school, that is $8.4m/school for FB.

The R8 aren't a "normal" conference if they are a "tweener" for FB and a power conference for basketball, and on the basketball side, I'd say twice the AAC value for basketball is also conservative, so that's $2.8m/school for basketball, for a floor value of $11.2m/school.

On that, $15m/school is not at all implausible ... it just requires more information that we likely wouldn't have available to us ... $25m/school might be optimistic.

Now, the top individual schools in the AAC are worth more than the average school, so if the R8 are worth in the neighborhood of 60%-80% more per school, adding four schools that are also worth 60% more per school than the average of the AAC ought to be straightforward ... that would seem likely to be UC, Houston, Memphis and UCF. Subtract one from that set if BYU wants to join and the Big12 wants to invite them.
(This post was last modified: 08-18-2021 09:16 PM by BruceMcF.)
08-18-2021 08:45 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
DavidSt Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 23,011
Joined: Dec 2013
Reputation: 729
I Root For: ATU, P7
Location:
Post: #44
RE: Stop the Slander: AAC TV viewership doesn't equal to the Big 12 remains
The G5 usually get better tv ratings and attendance better than some P5 schools. Boise State got mor viewers on ESPN than they do with CBS Sports Network. Boise State got paid more for having games on ESPN which makes them more valuable than any of the other MWC. It was a bad idea for MWC to go away from ESPN because you get valued less going to another channel that are not in many households.
08-18-2021 09:10 PM
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
1845 Bear Offline
Moderator
*

Posts: 5,161
Joined: Aug 2010
Reputation: 187
I Root For: Baylor
Location:
Post: #45
RE: Stop the Slander: AAC TV viewership doesn't equal to the Big 12 remains
(08-18-2021 09:10 PM)DavidSt Wrote:  The G5 usually get better tv ratings and attendance better than some P5 schools. Boise State got mor viewers on ESPN than they do with CBS Sports Network. Boise State got paid more for having games on ESPN which makes them more valuable than any of the other MWC. It was a bad idea for MWC to go away from ESPN because you get valued less going to another channel that are not in many households.

Boise is clearly the biggest draw in the MWC. After that maybe SDSU since they were Boise’s partner in the almost joining the Big East episode or maybe AFA due to service academy brand.
08-19-2021 08:06 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
quo vadis Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 50,012
Joined: Aug 2008
Reputation: 2372
I Root For: USF/Georgetown
Location: New Orleans
Post: #46
RE: Stop the Slander: AAC TV viewership doesn't equal to the Big 12 remains
(08-18-2021 08:02 PM)whittx Wrote:  
(08-18-2021 12:01 PM)1845 Bear Wrote:  https://sicem365.com/s/10313/stop-the-sl...12-remains

Article breaks through the numbers and shows that the Big 12's remaining schools have been doing better than the AAC in TV numbers.

[Image: 0044334-jtoa.jpg]

Keep in mind, you're comparing flagship land grants + Baylor/TCU to largely 3-4th public schools in their states. You're talking about schools that
(with the exceptions of TCU and WV) have the built in advantages of playing top level competition for decades before several of the American schools existed. You're talking about a conference that in one form or another has been around for over 100 years before the American was founded. Yet the Remaining 8 are barely ahead of the American. If you put schools like Texas, Oklahoma, and Nebraska with the power American schools and left Baylor, both Kansas schools and Texas Tech with East Carolina, Tulane, and Tulsa, the situation would be quite different.

That's kind of my thinking: Even if you screen out L8 games vs TX and OU, I think there's a good chance there's a halo effect that the L8 have gotten merely because their games were "P5" games, which carries more status, and have ramifications for things CFB fans regard as important, like a guaranteed berth in the Sugar Bowl and possibly a place in the CFP playoffs. The presence of TX and OU, which to me is what that power status was based on, casts an aura of "big time" over a TT - TCU game that is just absent when it is UCF vs ECU. Make UCF vs ECU an ACC game, or make TT vs Kansas State a Mountain West game, and I think ratings would be higher than they currently are for the former, and lower than they currently are for the latter, just on that basis alone.

I think this effect could impact attendance as well. I'd bet there are fans who would be more likely to attend a USF vs ECU game if it was a P5/ACC game, just because there's a better feeling about your team being in a big-time league and the game has possible big-time ramifications. The attendance boost wouldn't just be for USF vs FSU. Conversely, if the L8 drop from power status in 2025, I could see Kansas State vs Baylor games declining in attendance for the opposite reason.

So while I don't quarrel with the basic point - I do think that currently, L8 games draw higher ratings than AAC games - it's not really relevant, not a fair comparison.
(This post was last modified: 08-19-2021 08:22 AM by quo vadis.)
08-19-2021 08:18 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
CliftonAve Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 21,880
Joined: May 2012
Reputation: 1171
I Root For: Jimmy Nippert
Location:
Post: #47
RE: Stop the Slander: AAC TV viewership doesn't equal to the Big 12 remains
(08-19-2021 08:18 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  
(08-18-2021 08:02 PM)whittx Wrote:  
(08-18-2021 12:01 PM)1845 Bear Wrote:  https://sicem365.com/s/10313/stop-the-sl...12-remains

Article breaks through the numbers and shows that the Big 12's remaining schools have been doing better than the AAC in TV numbers.

[Image: 0044334-jtoa.jpg]

Keep in mind, you're comparing flagship land grants + Baylor/TCU to largely 3-4th public schools in their states. You're talking about schools that
(with the exceptions of TCU and WV) have the built in advantages of playing top level competition for decades before several of the American schools existed. You're talking about a conference that in one form or another has been around for over 100 years before the American was founded. Yet the Remaining 8 are barely ahead of the American. If you put schools like Texas, Oklahoma, and Nebraska with the power American schools and left Baylor, both Kansas schools and Texas Tech with East Carolina, Tulane, and Tulsa, the situation would be quite different.

That's kind of my thinking: Even if you screen out L8 games vs TX and OU, I think there's a good chance there's a halo effect that the L8 have gotten merely because their games were "P5" games, which carries more status, and have ramifications for things CFB fans regard as important, like a guaranteed berth in the Sugar Bowl and possibly a place in the CFP playoffs. The presence of TX and OU, which to me is what that power status was based on, casts an aura of "big time" over a TT - TCU game that is just absent when it is UCF vs ECU. Make UCF vs ECU an ACC game, or make TT vs Kansas State a Mountain West game, and I think ratings would be higher than they currently are for the former, and lower than they currently are for the latter, just on that basis alone.

So while I don't quarrel with the basic point - I do think that currently, L8 games draw higher ratings than AAC games - it's not really relevant, not a fair comparison.

I wonder how many people watching a random TCU v Kansas State game are Texas or OU fans consuming everything BXII? Will they still watch after they move to the SEC? This will be something that will have to be considered going forward.
08-19-2021 08:24 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
quo vadis Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 50,012
Joined: Aug 2008
Reputation: 2372
I Root For: USF/Georgetown
Location: New Orleans
Post: #48
RE: Stop the Slander: AAC TV viewership doesn't equal to the Big 12 remains
(08-19-2021 08:24 AM)CliftonAve Wrote:  
(08-19-2021 08:18 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  
(08-18-2021 08:02 PM)whittx Wrote:  
(08-18-2021 12:01 PM)1845 Bear Wrote:  https://sicem365.com/s/10313/stop-the-sl...12-remains

Article breaks through the numbers and shows that the Big 12's remaining schools have been doing better than the AAC in TV numbers.

[Image: 0044334-jtoa.jpg]

Keep in mind, you're comparing flagship land grants + Baylor/TCU to largely 3-4th public schools in their states. You're talking about schools that
(with the exceptions of TCU and WV) have the built in advantages of playing top level competition for decades before several of the American schools existed. You're talking about a conference that in one form or another has been around for over 100 years before the American was founded. Yet the Remaining 8 are barely ahead of the American. If you put schools like Texas, Oklahoma, and Nebraska with the power American schools and left Baylor, both Kansas schools and Texas Tech with East Carolina, Tulane, and Tulsa, the situation would be quite different.

That's kind of my thinking: Even if you screen out L8 games vs TX and OU, I think there's a good chance there's a halo effect that the L8 have gotten merely because their games were "P5" games, which carries more status, and have ramifications for things CFB fans regard as important, like a guaranteed berth in the Sugar Bowl and possibly a place in the CFP playoffs. The presence of TX and OU, which to me is what that power status was based on, casts an aura of "big time" over a TT - TCU game that is just absent when it is UCF vs ECU. Make UCF vs ECU an ACC game, or make TT vs Kansas State a Mountain West game, and I think ratings would be higher than they currently are for the former, and lower than they currently are for the latter, just on that basis alone.

So while I don't quarrel with the basic point - I do think that currently, L8 games draw higher ratings than AAC games - it's not really relevant, not a fair comparison.

I wonder how many people watching a random TCU v Kansas State game are Texas or OU fans consuming everything BXII? Will they still watch after they move to the SEC? This will be something that will have to be considered going forward.

Yeah, that could happen. It's still "your league". In my experience if you go to a Baton Rouge sports bar in the Fall, yes, the bulk of screens will have the LSU game on, of course, but after that, the pecking order is (a) any huge-brand OOC games, like say if Ohio State vs Penn State is on, and (b) other SEC games, even Kentucky vs South Carolina.
(This post was last modified: 08-19-2021 08:35 AM by quo vadis.)
08-19-2021 08:33 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
10thMountain Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 7,358
Joined: Jan 2008
Reputation: 357
I Root For: A&M, TCU
Location:
Post: #49
RE: Stop the Slander: AAC TV viewership doesn't equal to the Big 12 remains
The fact that this IS debatable tells you all you need to know.
08-19-2021 08:58 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
DavidSt Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 23,011
Joined: Dec 2013
Reputation: 729
I Root For: ATU, P7
Location:
Post: #50
RE: Stop the Slander: AAC TV viewership doesn't equal to the Big 12 remains
I know my friends who are Oklahoma and Oklahoma State fans that they wanted Boise State in the conference. Look at it this way? Boise State, San Diego State and TCU were ready to join the Big East when the Big East got raided.
08-19-2021 09:04 AM
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
quo vadis Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 50,012
Joined: Aug 2008
Reputation: 2372
I Root For: USF/Georgetown
Location: New Orleans
Post: #51
RE: Stop the Slander: AAC TV viewership doesn't equal to the Big 12 remains
(08-19-2021 08:58 AM)10thMountain Wrote:  The fact that this IS debatable tells you all you need to know.

Yes, in 2016 the Iowa State AD famously said that without TX and OU, the Big 12 is the Mountain West. That is probably an exaggeration, but not much of one. The conference is likely headed to "non-Power" status once this happens. So they should draw it out and make as much money off TX and OU as they can, while they can.
08-19-2021 09:08 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Eichorst Offline
Special Teams
*

Posts: 501
Joined: Jan 2014
Reputation: 43
I Root For: Nebraska
Location:
Post: #52
RE: Stop the Slander: AAC TV viewership doesn't equal to the Big 12 remains
(08-18-2021 02:17 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  Even taking all of the article's data for granted, one thing that comes to my mind is that the ratings for a Kansas State vs Texas Tech game may gain a "ratings halo effect" because people know this is a game involving teams that are in a Power conference. CFB fans know this game will bear on the Big 12 standings, which is important because the Big 12 is a P5 conference, such that its champ will at least go to the Sugar Bowl, and may go to the CFP playoffs.

The status of a WVU vs Kansas game as a Big 12 game, a P5 game that may have implications for the powers like OU and TX, gives a gravitas to those non-OU/TX Big 12 matchups that may boost ratings compared to ratings for a G5 league.

And it is that gravitas that will likely be missing once Texas and OU are gone, as they are basically IMO the source of it.

Strongly agree with this. Even fans of the remaining schools will lose some interest, at least in the short term. I expect the remaining 8's ratings to crater for a couple of years if they decide to stick it out together.
08-19-2021 09:17 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Jared7 Offline
2nd String
*

Posts: 436
Joined: Apr 2019
Reputation: 69
I Root For: TCU
Location:
Post: #53
RE: Stop the Slander: AAC TV viewership doesn't equal to the Big 12 remains
(08-19-2021 09:17 AM)Eichorst Wrote:  Strongly agree with this. Even fans of the remaining schools will lose some interest, at least in the short term. I expect the remaining 8's ratings to crater for a couple of years if they decide to stick it out together.
No, in the short term, there will be heightened interest; especially with the UT and OU games in the next 2-4 years. There will be strong motivation to beat them in all sports in their final games in the conference. After that, we'll see - you may well be right. But dropping OU from the schedule means 1 fewer L for virtually all teams and improving records tend to heighten fan interest as well. Actual performance will drive this and that is unknowable at this time. Dropping UT - a middle-of-the-pack team for over a decade - will have less of an impact on the records of remaining teams.
08-20-2021 11:27 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
1845 Bear Offline
Moderator
*

Posts: 5,161
Joined: Aug 2010
Reputation: 187
I Root For: Baylor
Location:
Post: #54
RE: Stop the Slander: AAC TV viewership doesn't equal to the Big 12 remains
(08-19-2021 09:08 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  
(08-19-2021 08:58 AM)10thMountain Wrote:  The fact that this IS debatable tells you all you need to know.

Yes, in 2016 the Iowa State AD famously said that without TX and OU, the Big 12 is the Mountain West. That is probably an exaggeration, but not much of one. The conference is likely headed to "non-Power" status once this happens. So they should draw it out and make as much money off TX and OU as they can, while they can.

Pollard quoting the MWC payout as an exaggeration vs Bowlsby projecting numbers based on tv valuations.

I’ll take Bowlsby’s number which corresponds to other reports we’ve seen since the move was leaked.
08-20-2021 11:30 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Jared7 Offline
2nd String
*

Posts: 436
Joined: Apr 2019
Reputation: 69
I Root For: TCU
Location:
Post: #55
RE: Stop the Slander: AAC TV viewership doesn't equal to the Big 12 remains
(08-18-2021 08:05 PM)JSchmack Wrote:  The fact that three days after the first Texas/Okla to SEC rumor hit the wire, you had articles about the TV value of AAC being higher than remaining B12 teams, combined with the Aresco "aggressively pursuing" comments and the "We already have ESPN at the table" comment, I'm like 98% certain that ESPN was actively trying to get the either remaining B12 schools to abandon ship in the panic so they could save a half billion dollars.

At the end of the day, it really doesn't matter WHOM is worth more as a conference. The Big 12 isn't going to stick at 8, and the AAC schools invited will jump at the chance to join a conference who's worse member is better than teams 8-11 of the AAC -- and one who has better basketball to boot.

The whole purpose of the TV value leak and projection was to scare the Big 8 members into leaving all that ESPN money on the table.

You're probably right. But the cease and desist letter has apparently worked and everyone has backed off, at least as of now. So, in the absence of depositions under oath, we might never definitively know what truly happened, beyond speculation and conjecture.
08-20-2021 11:32 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Jared7 Offline
2nd String
*

Posts: 436
Joined: Apr 2019
Reputation: 69
I Root For: TCU
Location:
Post: #56
RE: Stop the Slander: AAC TV viewership doesn't equal to the Big 12 remains
(08-20-2021 11:30 AM)1845 Bear Wrote:  
(08-19-2021 09:08 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  
(08-19-2021 08:58 AM)10thMountain Wrote:  The fact that this IS debatable tells you all you need to know.

Yes, in 2016 the Iowa State AD famously said that without TX and OU, the Big 12 is the Mountain West. That is probably an exaggeration, but not much of one. The conference is likely headed to "non-Power" status once this happens. So they should draw it out and make as much money off TX and OU as they can, while they can.

Pollard quoting the MWC payout as an exaggeration vs Bowlsby projecting numbers based on tv valuations.

I’ll take Bowlsby’s number which corresponds to other reports we’ve seen since the move was leaked.

quo is trolling. It's not a "famous" statement and, as you say, Pollard was exaggerating. TCU was actually in the MWC and the conference revenue distribution in our final year (2011-12) was $3.1 million. Bowlsby's projections of a $14 million haircut and a payout of $25 million are about 8 times that. And about 3+ times the AAC's current payout, where L-USF resides. The actual figures contradict quo although he'll probably never admit it.
08-20-2021 11:38 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Attackcoog Online
Moderator
*

Posts: 44,735
Joined: Oct 2011
Reputation: 2860
I Root For: Houston
Location:
Post: #57
RE: Stop the Slander: AAC TV viewership doesn't equal to the Big 12 remains
(08-18-2021 08:45 PM)BruceMcF Wrote:  
(08-18-2021 01:14 PM)Wedge Wrote:  To the extent that is a criticism of Mandel's article -- it's correct that Mandel goes too far in speculating the remaining Big 12 average team value might be equal to the average AAC team value. ...

Mandel's article is seriously flawed analysis ... he focuses on the OTA games, but looks at average ratings rather than average viewers per school.

His analysis is that the average ratings are quite close. And over the period excluding 2020 (which is an outlier because the Big12 had so many slots open to it which in normal conditions would not have been), the two groups of "only Remaining Eight" and "AAC" got approximately the same number of games selected for OTA.

But that is from an inventory from the R8 of up to 6 games per season from eight schools on the one hand ... assuming a P5 OOC game levels them out to 5 home games out of 10, plus two buy games, minus the home Oklahoma or Texas game ... so an inventory of 48 or fewer games per year ...

... while if the typical AAC school has 6 homes games a year, the AAC had an inventory of 72 games (since we are excluding 2020 as an outlier).

So his own numbers showed that the R8 are more valuable on a per school basis than the AAC ... he just stopped analyzing the numbers when it reached the conclusion he was aiming for, rather than the conclusion that the numbers themselves point to.

Also, the filtering out of R8 games with OK/TX means that Mandel's analysis is comparing a central estimate of the AAC value to a deliberately conservative estimate of the R8 value, since the average R8 only selections for OTA were on top of already showing some of those same schools when they played OK/TX, and while the R8 viewers were not a majority of the viewing audience for those games, they were some of it and were part of the calculation of scheduling those games OTA.

The information to untangle how conservative the estimate that comes from Mandel's number is ... which is "roughly 50% more FB value per school" ... that is not likely publicly available. The higher the value the potential telecast partners would place on the R8, the harder it is for four schools from the AAC to match that value, and so the more likely it is that they expand to 10 rather than 12.

But if FB is 80% of the media value of the typical conference and MBB 20%, then at $7m/school in the AAC, that is $5.6m/school for FB and $1.4m/school for basketball, and if the R8 FB is, conservatively, 50% more valuable per school, that is $8.4m/school for FB.

The R8 aren't a "normal" conference if they are a "tweener" for FB and a power conference for basketball, and on the basketball side, I'd say twice the AAC value for basketball is also conservative, so that's $2.8m/school for basketball, for a floor value of $11.2m/school.

On that, $15m/school is not at all implausible ... it just requires more information that we likely wouldn't have available to us ... $25m/school might be optimistic.

Now, the top individual schools in the AAC are worth more than the average school, so if the R8 are worth in the neighborhood of 60%-80% more per school, adding four schools that are also worth 60% more per school than the average of the AAC ought to be straightforward ... that would seem likely to be UC, Houston, Memphis and UCF. Subtract one from that set if BYU wants to join and the Big12 wants to invite them.

I never got that from his article. To me, the Mandel piece was about value. He never said the AAC was more valuable, he said the leftover Big12 teams without UT/OU games had a viewership that wasnt a lot better than the AAC and that would likely give an indication of future TV contract value. I think he was also looking at those numbers in terms of how attractive the leftovers might be to other P5 conferences. Like I said---I never got the idea that Mandel was saying the AAC had better ratings.
08-20-2021 12:07 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
quo vadis Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 50,012
Joined: Aug 2008
Reputation: 2372
I Root For: USF/Georgetown
Location: New Orleans
Post: #58
RE: Stop the Slander: AAC TV viewership doesn't equal to the Big 12 remains
(08-20-2021 11:30 AM)1845 Bear Wrote:  
(08-19-2021 09:08 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  
(08-19-2021 08:58 AM)10thMountain Wrote:  The fact that this IS debatable tells you all you need to know.

Yes, in 2016 the Iowa State AD famously said that without TX and OU, the Big 12 is the Mountain West. That is probably an exaggeration, but not much of one. The conference is likely headed to "non-Power" status once this happens. So they should draw it out and make as much money off TX and OU as they can, while they can.

Pollard quoting the MWC payout as an exaggeration vs Bowlsby projecting numbers based on tv valuations.

I’ll take Bowlsby’s number which corresponds to other reports we’ve seen since the move was leaked.

Eh, maybe I am wrong, but the way I interpreted what the ISU AD said was more holistically. Yes, if Bowlsby is correct the L8 will earn about $14m per year, which is way more than the $4m or so a year the MW teams earn (it's also way, way less than what the P4 teams will be earning).

But the main point IMO was that without TX and OU, the L8 will fall from the ranks of the power leagues. Regardless of whether the payout is $17m or $7m, the L8 will no longer be regarded as in the same "power club" with the other four leagues. I predict it will lose the trappings of power, such as the Sugar Bowl bid (if contract bowls still exist after 2025) and in any new playoff scheme, it will get "G5 money" not the big cut that the P-conferences get. And the media and public will not view the L8 as a P-league either.

It's the hit in status, as much as the hit in money, that will be in effect.

I think the current formation of the "Alliance" among the ACC, PAC and B1G - with the L8 conspicuously absent - is another indicator of what is in store.

But hey, I've been wrong before.
08-20-2021 12:15 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
ArmoredUpKnight Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 9,834
Joined: Dec 2009
Reputation: 681
I Root For: UCF Knights
Location: Fort Lauderdale, FL
Post: #59
RE: Stop the Slander: AAC TV viewership doesn't equal to the Big 12 remains
Some Youtuber has better information than ESPN?

Why didn't Fox or CBS refute the story? It had to come from Sic'em
(This post was last modified: 08-20-2021 12:28 PM by ArmoredUpKnight.)
08-20-2021 12:24 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Jared7 Offline
2nd String
*

Posts: 436
Joined: Apr 2019
Reputation: 69
I Root For: TCU
Location:
Post: #60
RE: Stop the Slander: AAC TV viewership doesn't equal to the Big 12 remains
(08-20-2021 12:15 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  Eh, maybe I am wrong, but the way I interpreted what the ISU AD said was more holistically. Yes, if Bowlsby is correct the L8 will earn about $14m per year, which is way more than the $4m or so a year the MW teams earn (it's also way, way less than what the P4 teams will be earning).

But the main point IMO was that without TX and OU, the L8 will fall from the ranks of the power leagues. Regardless of whether the payout is $17m or $7m, the L8 will no longer be regarded as in the same "power club" with the other four leagues. I predict it will lose the trappings of power, such as the Sugar Bowl bid (if contract bowls still exist after 2025) and in any new playoff scheme, it will get "G5 money" not the big cut that the P-conferences get. And the media and public will not view the L8 as a P-league either.

It's the hit in status, as much as the hit in money, that will be in effect.

I think the current formation of the "Alliance" among the ACC, PAC and B1G - with the L8 conspicuously absent - is another indicator of what is in store.

But hey, I've been wrong before.

And you're wrong again. The projected payout is $25 million, which includes the $14 million from media, plus hoops credits (currently 59) and other stuff. Which is only about $5-7 million less than the conference revenue distributions the ACC and Pac 12 currently earn. And way way more than L-USF's conference currently earns (which will also drop if raided).

So your main point is also wrong. The Big 12 will drop from the 3rd most financially viable conference to the 5th, but it will still be in the range of #'s 3 and 4 and way way above whoever is #6 (probably the MWC). And if it loses the Sugar Bowl, it will probably get the Cotton (or Fiesta) Bowl, if contract bowls remain. And, it will not negotiate it's CFP payouts with the G conferences and, hence, will not be at their level.

The Alliance is a PR move designed to form a voting bloc for the upcoming NCAA convention and to delay the CFP until it can be opened up for competitive bidding. It followed a similar meeting between the PAC and Big 12. L-USF wasn't included.

Wrong before, wrong again.
(This post was last modified: 08-20-2021 12:46 PM by Jared7.)
08-20-2021 12:46 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 




User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)


Copyright © 2002-2024 Collegiate Sports Nation Bulletin Board System (CSNbbs), All Rights Reserved.
CSNbbs is an independent fan site and is in no way affiliated to the NCAA or any of the schools and conferences it represents.
This site monetizes links. FTC Disclosure.
We allow third-party companies to serve ads and/or collect certain anonymous information when you visit our web site. These companies may use non-personally identifiable information (e.g., click stream information, browser type, time and date, subject of advertisements clicked or scrolled over) during your visits to this and other Web sites in order to provide advertisements about goods and services likely to be of greater interest to you. These companies typically use a cookie or third party web beacon to collect this information. To learn more about this behavioral advertising practice or to opt-out of this type of advertising, you can visit http://www.networkadvertising.org.
Powered By MyBB, © 2002-2024 MyBB Group.