Commentary Thread for Premium Top-Shelf Tweets

[Chin Diesel]

I apologize if my attempt at light humor could be considered trolling. I just couldn't believe that a Wake Forest booster, of all people, would be a source for an article concerning Big-12 Expansion. Then there was the car wash thread that I am fond of reading and well, I thought the joke might be found funny to the regular readers of this blog site. But if I offended anyone, please accept this apology and know that it was out of ignorance and not malice.

You've got it backwards.

The trolling was done by the person who referenced a WF Booster while asking the newspaper reporter.

There are other unverified references to a WF Booster on the interwebs where the booster shares his scoop on realignment.

 

[upstater]

I get that women's basketball doesn't move the needle nationally, but if a network is trying to establish value, does the fact that WBB is a huge TV draw in Connecticut not matter?

A B12 network that shows MBB and WBB from November through March will draw a ton of eyeballs in Connecticut.

The women's team draws eyeballs nationally. It's like having a top 25 men's team.

 

[FfldCntyFan]

If the alleged source actually exists he shouldn't be too hard to track down. How many boosters could Wake Forest possibly have?

 

[brasssbonanzaa]

If the alleged source actually exists he shouldn't be too hard to track down. How many boosters could Wake Forest possibly have?

And Wake Forrest probably has even fewer!

 

[Jae-VT]

You've got it backwards.

The trolling was done by the person who referenced a WF Booster while asking the newspaper reporter.

There are other unverified references to a WF Booster on the interwebs where the booster shares his scoop on realignment.

Understood and thank you for clarifying your post for me. It is certainly appreciated.

 

[Jae-VT]

And Wake Forrest probably has even fewer!

Yes, it certainly is sad to see a professional reporter make that kind of mistake.

 

[MountainMan]

The women's team draws eyeballs nationally. It's like having a top 25 men's team.

Is there documentation of this? I"ve seen some individual women's BB TV ratings for NCAA finals and such but never a list of TV ratings for regular season WBB games. I believe there was supposedly a really big TV number from one of the regular season games last season if I remember correctly.

 

[WestCoastHusky]

Is there documentation of this? I"ve seen some individual women's BB TV ratings for NCAA finals and such but never a list of TV ratings for regular season WBB games. I believe there was supposedly a really big TV number from one of the regular season games last season if I remember correctly.

Here is one: Syracuse-Connecticut Women’s NCAA Hoops Final leads cable sports TV ratings for Tuesday April 5, 2016

Here is another one: Notre Dame-Connecticut, Spurs-Thunder, SportsCenter lead cable sports nets for Tuesday April 7, 2015

 

[Adios]

There's also that time when some UConn WBB game had a higher rating than a Syracuse MBB game on at the same time.

@upstater has the details memorized.

 

[upstater]

Here is one: Syracuse-Connecticut Women’s NCAA Hoops Final leads cable sports TV ratings for Tuesday April 5, 2016

Here is another one: Notre Dame-Connecticut, Spurs-Thunder, SportsCenter lead cable sports nets for Tuesday April 7, 2015

The UConn-South Carolina regular season game last year did a .7, and another did a .8. You have to look at the games that were on ESPN or ESPN2to make a comparison. While those aren't Duke-Kentucky numbers, they are really really good. For the state of Connecticut, they say half the population (1.7m) watched the championship game.

UConn men do a .8 to 1.3 on ESPN regularly.

 

[upstater]

There's also that time when some UConn WBB game had a higher rating than a Syracuse MBB game on at the same time.

@upstater has the details memorized.

Haha. It was actually the fact that SNY tape delayed the Cuse men's game in New York state so that it could show the UConn women's game.

 

[whaler11]

Is there any documentation of the 1.7 million for Connecticut for the women's championship game. There is absolutely no way that is true.

Since they only got 2.9 million viewers it would mean pretty much no one outside of the state watched either.

 

[uconnell]

Is there any documentation of the 1.7 million for Connecticut for the women's championship game. There is absolutely no way that is true.

Since they only got 2.9 million viewers it would mean pretty much no one outside of the state watched either.

Yay, UConn's favorite cheerleader, not.

 

[whaler11]

Yay, UConn's favorite cheerleader, not.

Oh sorry for not believing that half the population of the state watched a basketball game. I must not like UConn.

The women's final is bigger than the Super Bowl!!!!!!!!! Wheeeeeeeeee

 

[upstater]

Is there any documentation of the 1.7 million for Connecticut for the women's championship game. There is absolutely no way that is true.

Since they only got 2.9 million viewers it would mean pretty much no one outside of the state watched either.

I might have read this wrong but I have no idea what 1.7 refers to here:
2014-15 ESPN Women's Basketball Ratings Notes (Infographic)

It can't be rating because we know the rating for the game was in the 30s for the market.

Also, I think you are confusing people for households. For instance, the 2014-2015 championship was seen in 3.2m households. But over 4.4m viewers watched it.

UConn's historic NCAA title win draws impressive television ratings

As for Connecticut, I think the state has 1.3m households and 3.6m residents.

 

[whaler11]

I might have read this wrong but I have no idea what 1.7 refers to here:
2014-15 ESPN Women's Basketball Ratings Notes (Infographic)

It can't be rating because we know the rating for the game was in the 30s for the market.

Also, I think you are confusing people for households. For instance, the 2014-2015 championship was seen in 3.2m households. But over 4.4m viewers watched it.

UConn's historic NCAA title win draws impressive television ratings

As for Connecticut, I think the state has 1.3m households and 3.6m residents.

I'm not confusing anything. You said half the residents watched.

That infographic is saying Hartford had a 1.7 rating for the season on those three networks.

LOL - close though.

 

[upstater]

I'm not confusing anything. You said half the residents watched.

That infographic is saying Hartford had a 1.7 rating for the season on those three networks.

LOL - close though.

I got it wrong.

Also, you got the previous quote of 2.7m viewers wrong. That is totally false.

The difference between you and me is that I can admit when I'm wrong. You can't.

 

[CL82]

Oh sorry for not believing that half the population of the state watched a basketball game. I must not like UConn.

The women's final is bigger than the Super Bowl!!!!!!!!! Wheeeeeeeeee

 

[whaler11]

I got it wrong.

Also, you got the previous quote of 2.7m viewers wrong. That is totally false.

The difference between you and me is that I can admit when I'm wrong. You can't.

Um it's your link says 2.95 million total viewers.

 

[sportsart]

The UConn-South Carolina regular season game last year did a .7, and another did a .8. You have to look at the games that were on ESPN or ESPN2to make a comparison. While those aren't Duke-Kentucky numbers, they are really really good. For the state of Connecticut, they say half the population (1.7m) watched the championship game.

UConn men do a .8 to 1.3 on ESPN regularly.

Here's how a normal person would respond to your post.

Can you clarify your numbers? Something doesn't look right.

 

[NYUConn]

Let's fast forward this 3 hours.

Upstater will post more numbers, Whaler will continue to antagonize him in the process.

Everyone is unhappy.

 

[upstater]

Um it's your link says 2.95 million total viewers.

No, it does not. It says 3m households and 4.3-4.4m viewers.

Again, you can't seem to comprehend the difference between households and viewers.

 

[whaler11]

Let's fast forward this 3 hours.

Upstater will post more numbers, Whaler will continue to antagonize him in the process.

Everyone is unhappy.

It's sort of fun when someone is so clueless they actually tell me that my number is wrong when they are the one that posted it.

There are just some people who should give up on numbers - it's not their thing.

 

[upstater]

It's sort of fun when someone is so clueless they actually tell me that my number is wrong when they are the one that posted it.

There are just some people who should give up on numbers - it's not their thing.

I never posted any link about 2.9m viewers. You are delusional. Now you are making things completely up.

 

[jostar1]

I gave a LOL when I read that.

Perfect troll networking. This is how you get a source to become legit. Out the same info in multiple blogs/websites and count on readers not connecting the dots.

I just thought it was a Boneyarder goofing around.