Key tweets, and it's all gone to Hell. | Page 809 | The Boneyard

Key tweets, and it's all gone to Hell.

NowInStorrs said:
Connecticut senators and Big East nostalgia fans may have also played a role
Expand ...

There are plenty of political boards on the internet. This would be welcome on many of them, but it isn’t remotely true.

Yormark was not cloak and dagger about his interest in UConn, and I think the decision for UConn to walk away from the basketball-only offer that as on the table was mutual.

People need to stop the idiotic fantasy that UConn is getting anything resembling a full share offer to the Big 12 or ACC as a lone addition without something seismic happening first. Since that is the reality, people can stop using this situation as a back door for making political posts.
 
Fishy said:
Where are they going?

We know where UNC and UVa are going - the P2. But where are Clemson and FSU going?
Expand ...
Both school administrations absolutely believe they will eventually be in either the SEC or Big Ten.

You obviously believe the opposite.

We will know for sure in a few years.
 
Fishy said:
There’s a ton of Coach Prime inflation in there, but still, who cares? You wasted your time.

The ACC makes more money than the B12. The ACC will continue to make more money than the B12. Your lil homework project does not change any of that.
Expand ...
Conference championship viewers:

Big 12: Arizona St. vs. Iowa St. 6.9 million

ACC: SMU vs Clemson. 5.98 million
 
Ldandy said:
I’m not sure I agree with FSU and Clemson getting almost nothing. This was a negotiation where both sides needed to look like they got something. The ACC bought itself a few years of relative quiet, and FSU/Clemson got a workable number that makes leaving the ACC entirely possible. If performance based payments are based on ratings, then they made out there as well. FSU and Clemson will almost always be cashing the biggest checks without making it look like The Boston Colleges and Wakes are being completely extorted.
Expand ...
Maybe it should look like the dregs of A&PCC (BC, WF, SU etc.) are being extorted...
 
Fishy said:
There’s a ton of Coach Prime inflation in there, but still, who cares? You wasted your time.

The ACC makes more money than the B12. The ACC will continue to make more money than the B12. Your lil homework project does not change any of that.
Expand ...
The ACC saw Coach Prime, and raised a Coach Belichick. Your move Midwest.
 
UConnJim said:
But, this past season's TV ratings don't support your statements as Big 12 football had more eyeballs then the ACC. This was from a previous post and this includes FSU and Clemson so if Clemson and FSU left, the Big 12 would have far and away better TV ratings than the ACC.

Week 0/1: ACC: 11.002 million, Big 12: 9.443 million
Week 2: ACC: 4.642 million, Big 12: 6.138 million
Week 3: ACC: 4.137 million, Big 12: 4.166 million
Week 4: ACC: 5.311 million, Big 12: 9.035 million
Week 5: ACC: 4.781 million, Big 12: 8.174 million
Week 6: ACC: 5.831 million, Big 12: 4.821 million
Week 7: ACC: 2.580 million, Big 12: 4.642 million

Total viewers: Big 12: 48.857 million viewers, ACC: 38.284 million viewers.

This is a small sample size, but it clearly shows the Big 12 is holding it's own or doing better versus the ACC and the trends continued throughout the season.
Expand ...

That’s irrelevant if they can’t convert that into more money than the ACC. It simply doesn’t matter.
 
.-.
Fishy said:
The ACC makes more money than the B12. The ACC will continue to make more money than the B12.
Expand ...
What are the relative numbers? I thought they were both roughly the same somewhere around $44 million per school.
 
UConnJim said:
Conference championship viewers:

Big 12: Arizona St. vs. Iowa St. 6.9 million

ACC: SMU vs Clemson. 5.98 million
Expand ...
The only game competing directly with the Big 12 Championship was the MAC Championship Game.

Meanwhile, the ACC title game shared the same time slot as the Big Ten Championship Game, featuring Penn State vs. Oregon.
 
CL82 said:
What are the relative numbers? I thought they were both roughly the same somewhere around $44 million per school.
Expand ...

In the past, the B12 was bringing in a lot less revenue, but distributing it among far fewer members. (And there’s exit fee money figured in somewhere.) The newest members to the B12 were actually dilutive whereas the ACC’s new members, as crazy as they are, will be additive.

I think this chart overstates the difference a bit, but it’s instructive. I think he’s trying to guess the ACC Network payout with the new carriage fees. There actually will be decent revenue from the additions.

IMG-1089.jpg
 
JMick said:
And they wouldn't have had a chance to chime in if it wasn't leaked
Expand ...

There were like 17 schools plus a conference office involved in this discussion. There were likely several hundred people aware of the discussion. Do you think anyone involved thought it was going to remain a secret? Because that is the premise of this whole silly victimization fantasy.
 
.-.
UConnJim said:
But, this past season's TV ratings don't support your statements as Big 12 football had more eyeballs then the ACC. This was from a previous post and this includes FSU and Clemson so if Clemson and FSU left, the Big 12 would have far and away better TV ratings than the ACC.

Week 0/1: ACC: 11.002 million, Big 12: 9.443 million
Week 2: ACC: 4.642 million, Big 12: 6.138 million
Week 3: ACC: 4.137 million, Big 12: 4.166 million
Week 4: ACC: 5.311 million, Big 12: 9.035 million
Week 5: ACC: 4.781 million, Big 12: 8.174 million
Week 6: ACC: 5.831 million, Big 12: 4.821 million
Week 7: ACC: 2.580 million, Big 12: 4.642 million

Total viewers: Big 12: 48.857 million viewers, ACC: 38.284 million viewers.

This is a small sample size, but it clearly shows the Big 12 is holding it's own or doing better versus the ACC and the trends continued throughout the season.
Expand ...
It is not only how many. Who enters the equation too. One reason golf is even on tv is that 74% of its viewers earn 75,000 plus (2023 number). I’d bet ACC viewers have higher average incomes than B12 viewers.
 
freescooter said:
It is not only how many. Who enters the equation too. One reason golf is even on tv is that 74% of its viewers earn 75,000 plus (2023 number). I’d bet ACC viewers have higher average incomes than B12 viewers.
Expand ...

Are you taking into account the Cattle Ranchers and Energy Industry?
 
freescooter said:
It is not only how many. Who enters the equation too. One reason golf is even on tv is that 74% of its viewers earn 75,000 plus (2023 number). I’d bet ACC viewers have higher average incomes than B12 viewers.
Expand ...
And you wonder why the big 12 presidents didn’t want us
 
Eavesdrop said:
The only game competing directly with the Big 12 Championship was the MAC Championship Game.

Meanwhile, the ACC title game shared the same time slot as the Big Ten Championship Game, featuring Penn State vs. Oregon.
Expand ...
The Big 12 game was at noon which is not a good time slot for viewers and the ACC game was at 8 PM.
 
I don’t know what the demographics are for the average Big 12 football viewer - the ratings are fine, but there’s a massive bump in there reserved only for Colorado. Prime is underpaid relative to the eyeballs he brings in.

But pump the brakes.

Half of the Big 12 is made up of schools so unappealing that they either made nothing in their former lives (Houston, Cincy, BYU and UCF) or no network even wanted to extend them an offer (Arizona, Utah, Colorado, Arizona State). Additionally, the schools that were already there were considered DOA when OU and Texas left.

They have a really bright commissioner and he’s done great work for them, but there’s a reason they’re possibly on the cuff of bring in PE partners…they are maxed out and desperate.
 
Fishy said:
I don’t know what the demographics are for the average Big 12 football viewer - the ratings are fine, but there’s a massive bump in there reserved only for Colorado. Prime is underpaid relative to the eyeballs he brings in.

But pump the brakes.

Half of the Big 12 is made up of schools so unappealing that they either made nothing in their former lives (Houston, Cincy, BYU and UCF) or no network even wanted to extend them an offer (Arizona, Utah, Colorado, Arizona State). Additionally, the schools that were already there were considered DOA when OU and Texas left.

They have a really bright commissioner and he’s done great work for them, but there’s a reason they’re possibly on the cuff of bring in PE partners…they are maxed out and desperate.
Expand ...

You forgot WVU and the value they bring, just sayin
 
.-.
UConnJim said:
The Big 12 game was at noon which is not a good time slot for viewers and the ACC game was at 8 PM.
Expand ...
Games broadcast at noon (EST) in the past routinely featured lower-ranked and/or less competitive/appealing matchups. But Fox's Big Noon Kickoff has proven that big television ratings are possible in this timeslot.

However, your post highlights the issue I was trying to point out. Comparing raw ratings without context can be misleading. Many factors impact TV ratings, such as the rankings and perceived quality of the teams, the brands involved, the timeslot, and the competition in that slot. These contextual details are essential when evaluating viewership numbers.

The ACC title game featured a former Group of Five team with little brand recognition against a 17th-ranked Clemson squad. It was up against #3 Penn State vs. #1 Oregon. I am surprised the game drew as well as it did.
 
Fishy said:
I don’t know what the demographics are for the average Big 12 football viewer - the ratings are fine, but there’s a massive bump in there reserved only for Colorado. Prime is underpaid relative to the eyeballs he brings in.

But pump the brakes.

Half of the Big 12 is made up of schools so unappealing that they either made nothing in their former lives (Houston, Cincy, BYU and UCF) or no network even wanted to extend them an offer (Arizona, Utah, Colorado, Arizona State). Additionally, the schools that were already there were considered DOA when OU and Texas left.

They have a really bright commissioner and he’s done great work for them, but there’s a reason they’re possibly on the cuff of bring in PE partners…they are maxed out and desperate.
Expand ...

I know you are negative on our prospects, but Yormark knows, we get all those podunk schools into the megalopolis of the Northeast. Hopefully, that helps us.
 
Hoophound said:
I know you are negative on our prospects, but Yormark knows, we get all those podunk schools into the megalopolis of the Northeast. Hopefully, that helps us.
Expand ...

Yormark is not the one who worries me….it’s the podunk schools.

I have no faith that some hayseed school president with a corn field out her window is gonna understand that expanding their doofus conference footprint into the northeast is a good thing.
 
.-.
freescooter said:
It is not only how many. Who enters the equation too. One reason golf is even on tv is that 74% of its viewers earn 75,000 plus (2023 number). I’d bet ACC viewers have higher average incomes than B12 viewers.
Expand ...
What in the ever flying fluck does this have to do with anything? Viewers ain't paying these contracts directly.
 
Fishy said:
Yormark is not the one who worries me….it’s the podunk schools.

I have no faith that some hayseed school president with a corn field out her window is gonna understand that expanding their doofus conference footprint into the northeast is a good thing.
Expand ...
For as much (deserved) grief we give Susan and Ward for their failures, the vast majority of presidents and ADs are every bit as clueless as those two were and if it weren't for pure luck would be bottom feeding, too.
 
Fishy said:
no network even wanted to extend them an offer (Arizona, Utah, Colorado, Arizona State).
Expand ...
Didn't they get a full share from Fox and ESPN when they joined the big 12?
 
.-.
You must log in or register to reply here.

Forum statistics

Threads
168,154
Messages
4,554,985
Members
10,438
Latest member
UConnheart


Top Bottom