Interesting Viewship Info for BCS conferences

[Jericho]

This comes from Frank the Tank, who is actually pulling it from slideshare.net. But the takeaway from the information gets into Nielsen viewership totals for the Big six conferences for the last year. Stats are broken down by sport (football and basketball)

Here are the average football viewership totals by conference according to Nielsen:
1. SEC – 4,447,000
2. Big Ten – 3,267,000
3. ACC – 2,650,000
4. Big 12 – 2,347,000
5. Pac-12 – 2,108,000
6. Big East – 1,884,000

Here are the average basketball viewership totals by conference according to Nielsen:
1. Big Ten – 1,496,000
2. ACC – 1,247,000
3. SEC – 1,222,000
4. Big 12 – 1,069,000
5. Big East – 1,049,000
6. Pac-12 – 783,000

Two biggest surprises for me were how high the ACC was in football and how low the Big East was in basketball. Obviously these figures play into what people want to see happen with UCONN. Most notably, it probably makes the ACC more appealing and the Big East less appealing.

Of course, many don't need to be convinced of the benefits of making a move. Many would like a move. It's just that it takes two to tango and no conference is calling just yet. But this info makes the ACC look that little bit better.

 

[SubbaBub]

I'd be curious, how much the dead weight BB programs hurt the average.

 

[Adios]

Maybe we can use the Pac-12 contract as a benchmark?

 

[uconnfan68]

This comes from Frank the Tank, who is actually pulling it from slideshare.net. But the takeaway from the information gets into Nielsen viewership totals for the Big six conferences for the last year. Stats are broken down by sport (football and basketball)

Here are the average football viewership totals by conference according to Nielsen:
1. SEC – 4,447,000
2. Big Ten – 3,267,000
3. ACC – 2,650,000
4. Big 12 – 2,347,000
5. Pac-12 – 2,108,000
6. Big East – 1,884,000

Here are the average basketball viewership totals by conference according to Nielsen:
1. Big Ten – 1,496,000
2. ACC – 1,247,000
3. SEC – 1,222,000
4. Big 12 – 1,069,000
5. Big East – 1,049,000
6. Pac-12 – 783,000

Two biggest surprises for me were how high the ACC was in football and how low the Big East was in basketball. Obviously these figures play into what people want to see happen with UCONN. Most notably, it probably makes the ACC more appealing and the Big East less appealing.

Of course, many don't need to be convinced of the benefits of making a move. Many would like a move. It's just that it takes two to tango and no conference is calling just yet. But this info makes the ACC look that little bit better.

ACC football is skewed by Clemson, FSU, VT. I just don't believe the numbers for basketball... BE below B12?? Really?

 

[Dann]

all this point to one thing. how did the pac12 get that tv deal compared to what the acc got? if there is some type of average per school figure here that sways numbers at all, then i'm also curious as to what the BE would have been # wise in basketball if you drop the dead weight or even better do just the fball playing members in basketball.

 

[ZooCougar]

ACC football is skewed by Clemson, FSU, VT. I just don't believe the numbers for basketball... BE below B12?? Really?

I believe it. Winter is dreary down there, and it's not like there is anything else going on ... and they love college sports much more than the northeast does.

 

[nelsonmuntz]

Frank the Tank is a Big 10 homer and Big East basher and I am skeptical of this information. First off, the SEC numbers are only for CBS, which broadcasts the SEC without any competition in the 3:30 time slot on Saturdays. There is no way the SEC numbers are that big when you include the regional games at night, or nights when ESPN runs 2 SEC games against each other on ESPN and ESPN2. Are you telling me 9 million people are watching ESPN on saturday nights to catch South Carolina/Mississippi State and Kentucky/Tennessee?

Since the data is provided without any context, there is no point in trying to interpret it.

The Basketball numbers must just be for the National games, but even then I am not clear what they represent. They look too small for the featured game of the week numbers.

Putting a bunch of numbers on a website is not indicative of anything.

 

[HuskyHawk]

all this point to one thing. how did the pac12 get that tv deal compared to what the acc got? if there is some type of average per school figure here that sways numbers at all, then i'm also curious as to what the BE would have been # wise in basketball if you drop the dead weight or even better do just the fball playing members in basketball.

It was a huge mistake. Which is why I don't think the other conferences can expect a similar mistake in their favor. Anyone who has lived in CA can tell you that college sports are worse than an afterthought, most of the population isn't even aware of them. There is also no general, statewide pride in the flagship U, since there isn't one, there are several. Cal Berkeley is certainly not considered the flagship in SoCal. I suspect that the Pac 10 does better in Oregon, Washington and Arizona than in its biggest market.

The Big East hoops numbers do look low. But the same phenomena applies. Nebraska may not be very good at basketball or have many people, but when they play (even hoops) it is a statewide event. The same is not true in Wisconsin for Marquette. I'm sure U Wisconsin is a much bigger draw, regardless of record or ranking. Maryland probbaly trumps Georgetown. Sadly, Penn State probably beats Pitt or Nova, even in basketball. What this shows me is that flagship state universities rule when it comes to ratings.

 

[RS9999X]

Frank the Tank is a Big 10 homer and Big East basher and I am skeptical of this information. First off, the SEC numbers are only for CBS, which broadcasts the SEC without any competition in the 3:30 time slot on Saturdays. There is no way the SEC numbers are that big when you include the regional games at night, or nights when ESPN runs 2 SEC games against each other on ESPN and ESPN2. Are you telling me 9 million people are watching ESPN on saturday nights to catch South Carolina/Mississippi State and Kentucky/Tennessee?

Since the data is provided without any context, there is no point in trying to interpret it.

The Basketball numbers must just be for the National games, but even then I am not clear what they represent. They look too small for the featured game of the week numbers.

Putting a bunch of numbers on a website is not indicative of anything.

Some of this is self-fulfilling. If a conference is broadcast on a major (like the SEC) some of that is attiributable to being on CBS instead of ESPN2.

ESPN and ESPN2 publish their yearly numbers: ESPN averages 1.3 million viewers a game in basketball and ESPN2 averages 500,000 a game. In 2010 ESPNs best watched telecast was UNC v Texas 2.9 million viewers then the 4th most watched game ever on ESPN.

The interesting figure is ad dollars for regular seasonNCAA basketball versus the tourney. March Madness is just so freaking huge. UConn/Butler pulled 20 mllion viewers making it one of 3 college sports broadcast to top 20 million (the BCS title game pulled down 24 million viewers to top all).

Also a stark reminder that the marquee NFL and NBA games just kill College Ball on the majors and the Comcast approach to create more of these marquee made for TV matchups in new time slots to compete against College Ball on ABC/Disney.

 

[SubbaBub]

What this shows me is that flagship state universities rule when it comes to ratings.

This is the reason why in the long run, when considering all revenue sports, the B1G >>ACC>>>>>>>>NNBE.

Sent from my MB860 using Tapatalk

 

[RS9999X]

This goes back to the inbreeding 9-game BCS conference schedules and alignments like the BiG and PAC-12 to create as much marquee inventorya s possible.

The goal is to own two time slots a week and just kill it over the course of the season. No mid-majors allowed. No conference cellar dwellers either.

 

[RS9999X]

all this point to one thing. how did the pac12 get that tv deal compared to what the acc got? if there is some type of average per school figure here that sways numbers at all, then i'm also curious as to what the BE would have been # wise in basketball if you drop the dead weight or even better do just the fball playing members in basketball.

The Big East gets the noon games and the PAC-12 gets the 10:00 PM games. The PAC owns their time zone, the Big East doesn't. I'm sure there are numbers on that somewhere.

 

[metsfan2323]

5. Pac-12 – 2,108,000
6. Big East – 1,884,000

.

I'm amazed how close we are to the PAC 12. The new Big East will pass them and be worth more money.

 

[RS9999X]

Last years/ Top 15 Games (not including Bowls)\\

http://www.sportsbusinessdaily.com/Daily/Issues/2011/12/15/Media/CFB-ratings.aspx

 

[Jericho]

ACC football is skewed by Clemson, FSU, VT. I just don't believe the numbers for basketball... BE below B12?? Really?

I don't disagree, butI doubt it means that much either. Aren't the Big 12 numbers skewed by Texas and Oklahoma? And the Pac-10 skewed by USC and....not sure anyone else really rates in football. But even the SEC, as dominant as it is, has to be carried by the bigger name schools (Bama, LSU, Florida, UT, Georgia) at the expense of its "lesser" schools (the Mississippis, Vandy, etc...)

 

[Jericho]

Frank the Tank is a Big 10 homer and Big East basher and I am skeptical of this information. First off, the SEC numbers are only for CBS, which broadcasts the SEC without any competition in the 3:30 time slot on Saturdays. There is no way the SEC numbers are that big when you include the regional games at night, or nights when ESPN runs 2 SEC games against each other on ESPN and ESPN2. Are you telling me 9 million people are watching ESPN on saturday nights to catch South Carolina/Mississippi State and Kentucky/Tennessee?

Since the data is provided without any context, there is no point in trying to interpret it.

The Basketball numbers must just be for the National games, but even then I am not clear what they represent. They look too small for the featured game of the week numbers.

Putting a bunch of numbers on a website is not indicative of anything.

Frank the Tank may or may not be a "homer" (he's from Big 10 county no doubt, but tends to put a pretty objective bend on things), but those are not his numbers. He's pulling them from other sources. And sure context is important, but these numbers alone are pretty interesting...