Non-Key Tweets

[MattMang23]

Who does the Dude think he is by protecting his tweets and why does he do it in the first place? I'd think he would want as many people as possible consuming his garbage. Plus, it's not half as fun following only one side of @Dooley's evisceration of him in my timeline.

The tweet protection is nonsense anyways, I requested a follow with a dummy egg-picture account that has zero tweets and follows like three people and he accepted nonetheless. So if he's doing it to screen his followers then he's doing an awful job.

I think it was done a long time ago when he decided to make a Facebook group about conference realignment and he was "only" going to share his "updates" on that page. He locked everyone out of Twitter so that they would join his Facebook group.

 

[MattMang23]

Tee hee hee

 

[shizzle787]

Tee hee hee

Which means an official expansion announcement will come tomorrow.

 

[CougarRed]

6% of people watching in Houston's home market is weak.

You're kidding, right?

For the entire 2015 regular season, only 2 games did better than 6.3 on ESPN in the Houston market.

Plus, it was a blowout, and we were playing a school no one in Houston cares about.

We freaking knocked it out of the park. There's a reason ESPN is pumping UH every chance they get.

 

[kyleslamb]

You're kidding, right?

For the entire 2015 regular season, only 2 games did better than 6.3 on ESPN in the Houston market.

Plus, it was a blowout, and we were playing a school no one in Houston cares about.

We freaking knocked it out of the park. There's a reason ESPN is pumping UH every chance they get.

Slow down there, Coug. You're getting way ahead of yourself.

Yes, 6.3 isn't terrible and given it was a blowout, the rating suffered but don't act like this was a big win. It wasn't. It most definitely wasn't knocking it out of the park relative to the rest of college football.

Last year alone, SEVEN (not two) regular season, NON-Houston games fared better than this 6.3 rating you say "knocked it out of the park." And this game was a primetime, Thursday night window where only one NFL game and no other major college football games were competing against it. A 6.3 home market rating is not good. In fact, nearly two dozen metered markets AVERAGE 4-5 rating for games that don't even include their own home market teams. If the city of Houston was only able to muster a 6.3 rating for a top-10 team in a prime time game with little or no competition, this should not be seen as knocking it out of the park. It's a bloop single.

ESPN's hyping Houston because of the team, not because of the perceived fan support or lack thereof. You are excited because you haven't personally seen these numbers for your team, but relative to college football, these aren't good ratings. There are bluebloods routinely doing ratings of anywhere from 20 to 75 in their home markets. A 6.3 is barely a blip on the radar especially when it occurred with a window where there was very little going on against it.

 

[MattMang23]

Slow down there, Coug. You're getting way ahead of yourself.

Yes, 6.3 isn't terrible and given it was a blowout, the rating suffered but don't act like this was a big win. It wasn't. It most definitely wasn't knocking it out of the park relative to the rest of college football.

Last year alone, SEVEN (not two) regular season, NON-Houston games fared better than this 6.3 rating you say "knocked it out of the park." And this game was a primetime, Thursday night window where only one NFL game and no other major college football games were competing against it. A 6.3 home market rating is not good. In fact, nearly two dozen metered markets AVERAGE 4-5 rating for games that don't even include their own home market teams. If the city of Houston was only able to muster a 6.3 rating for a top-10 team in a prime time game with little or no competition, this should not be seen as knocking it out of the park. It's a bloop single.

ESPN's hyping Houston because of the team, not because of the perceived fan support or lack thereof. You are excited because you haven't personally seen these numbers for your team, but relative to college football, these aren't good ratings. There are bluebloods routinely doing ratings of anywhere from 20 to 75 in their home markets. A 6.3 is barely a blip on the radar especially when it occurred with a window where there was very little going on against it.

And boom goes the dynamite.

 

[ct06111]

Seen the viewers posted anywhere yet? For reference:

Last Thurs: Ga Tech vs. Clemson = 1.813M viewers
Two Thurs: Cincinnati vs Houston = 2.159M viewers

College Football TV Ratings — Sports Media Watch

0.9 rating. 1.421 million homes - UConn vs Houston - ESPN

0.3 rating. 513,000 homes
Kansas vs Texas Tech - FS1

 

[ct06111]

Thursday Final Nationals: 'Thursday Night Football' Still Tops Prime Time Sans CBS National Simulcast - Programming Insider

0.91 household rating 1.421 million
Women 18-34: 0.23
Men 18-34: 0.55
Women 18-49: 0.26
Men 18-49: 0.66

 

[ct06111]

18th most watched programming in terms of viewers during prime time

10th most watched programming in terms of 18-49 aged viewers during prime time.

For reference: the Kansas/TT game ranked 80th / 84th

 

[auror]

Seen the viewers posted anywhere yet? For reference:
Two Thurs: Cincinnati vs Houston = 2.159M viewers

College Football TV Ratings — Sports Media Watch
0.9 rating. 1.421 million homes - UConn vs Houston - ESPN

This part isn't a great look for us comparing to Cincy.

 

[dayooper]

This part isn't a great look for us comparing to Cincy.

You aren't going to any conference because of football and you won't for several years. If you get in, it's because of men's basketball, the NYC market, and the fact you se the largest, best known flagship university in the NE. Football would help a little, but it isn't a major reason why.

 

[CougarRed]

Last year alone, SEVEN (not two) regular season, NON-Houston games fared better than this 6.3 rating you say "knocked it out of the park."

A 6.3 is barely a blip on the radar especially when it occurred with a window where there was very little going on against it.

Um, you are including network games on CBS, ABC, FOX and NBC. Cable games get worse ratings.

As I originally (and correctly) said, only 2 games did better all last year in the Houston market "on ESPN."

As for blips on the radar, only 19K TV households tuned into the game in the Hartford/New Haven market. Got a 2.2 rating in that market. Ouch.

 

[dayooper]

Um, you are including network games on CBS, ABC, FOX and NBC. Cable games get worse ratings.

As I originally (and correctly) said, only 2 games did better all last year in the Houston market "on ESPN."

As for blips on the radar, only 19K TV households tuned into the game in the Hartford/New Haven market. Got a 2.2 rating in that market. Ouch.

You tout this like it's going to help you, but it actually hurts you. While you may be strong in Houston (duh), how good were you nationwide. National ratings is what the Big12 needs, not more Texas exposure.

Why would ESPN want to take Houston, who presently is making them a butt load of money in the AAC and put them in a conference where the coverage is redundant? As far as ESPN pushing Houston, of course they would, everybody loves a Cinderella story and that's what you are right now.

I actually thing you would be a decent fit in the PAC, but you would have to keep up this run after Herman leaves.

 

[CL82]

Um, you are including network games on CBS, ABC, FOX and NBC. Cable games get worse ratings.

As I originally (and correctly) said, only 2 games did better all last year in the Houston market "on ESPN."

As for blips on the radar, only 19K TV households tuned into the game in the Hartford/New Haven market. Got a 2.2 rating in that market. Ouch.

Lol, it's been a rough few years and I think many knew what the outcome was going to be. Before you take a ratings lap on this one, you might want to consider that our woman's basketball team gets better ratings, or at least get a commitment from Herman that he's not leaving at the end of the season.

 

[Ldandy]

Lol, it's been a rough few years and I think many knew what the outcome was going to be. Before you take a ratings lap on this one, you might want to consider that our woman's basketball team gets better ratings, or at least get a commitment from Herman that he's not leaving at the end of the season.

LOL good luck getting that commitment from Herman. The only thing he's going to be committing to is a plan to play USC, LSU, and UT against one another to become the highest paid coach in the game.

 

[MattMang23]

LOL good luck getting that commitment from Herman. The only thing he's going to be committing to is a plan to play USC, LSU, and UT against one another to become the highest paid coach in the game.

If he's paid more than Nick Saban, something is wrong.

 

[kyleslamb]

Um, you are including network games on CBS, ABC, FOX and NBC. Cable games get worse ratings.

As I originally (and correctly) said, only 2 games did better all last year in the Houston market "on ESPN."

As for blips on the radar, only 19K TV households tuned into the game in the Hartford/New Haven market. Got a 2.2 rating in that market. Ouch.

So you're touting how impressive people are supposed to be that only two out-of-market games, on ESPN only, scored higher last year than a prime time game on Thursday night involving the top-10 home market team in a window with no competition? Clearly you aren't self-aware that what you're saying is not impressive at all. So the city of Houston tuned in slightly more for this game than they did two SEC teams they have no attachment to? Wow. Color me impressed (sarcasm, there).

That's not impressive. Again, a 6.3 rating for a top-10 home market team in a window with no competition is not a good rating. Seriously, look at what the big boys do. Do some research. You'll find a 6.3 in that circumstance is actually not something to brag about.

Coug, I'm pulling for Houston. I'm a big Tom Herman fan and I love what the program is doing. But being objective here, the 6.3 market rating is not a good college football rating for that kind of window for a home-market team. It's really not.

 

[Ldandy]

If he's paid more than Nick Saban, something is wrong.

Oh I agree, but there feels like a perfect storm building where the deepest of pockets all vie to prove who is the most desperate. Herman could be the beneficiary of this insanity.

 

[MattMang23]

Oh I agree, but there feels like a perfect storm building where the deepest of pockets all vie to prove who is the most desperate. Herman could be the beneficiary of this insanity.

Totally. It's going to be a seller's market.

 

[Dooley]

Guys, a 6.2 local number is very good. A 2.2 local number is horrendous. I really hope there are some streaming ratings that have yet to be released that show UConn fans had a pulse on Thursday night.

 

[JSM1970]

Thurs night NFL, Yanks-Sox Papi's last game @ Yankee Stadium and a football team that is awful to watch and everyone knows has < 0% chance to win or even stay within 3 TDs

No excuses, but the rankings reflect the product

Guys, a 6.2 local number is very good. A 2.2 local number is horrendous. I really hope there are some streaming ratings that have yet to be released that show UConn fans had a pulse on Thursday night.

 

[Dooley]

Thurs night NFL, Yanks-Sox Papi's last game @ Yankee Stadium and a football team that is awful to watch and everyone knows has < 0% chance to win or even stay within 3 TDs

No excuses, but the rankings reflect the product

I know the excuses. Just putting things in perspective. We have no business getting after a Coogs fan for Houston's local number is my point...especially when their local is actually very good and ours is atrocious.

 

[kyleslamb]

I know the excuses. Just putting things in perspective. We have no business getting after a Coogs fan for Houston's local number is my point...especially when their local is actually very good and ours is atrocious.

But in fairness, UConn fans aren't claiming these ratings "knocked it out of the park." The numbers for Houston aren't atrocious, but they're nothing to be bragging about. Contrary to the Coug fan's suggestions, no networks and conferences are going to beat down Houston's door to lock them up with a 6.3 in-market, primetime game with no college football competition during the window.

 

[Dooley]

But in fairness, UConn fans aren't claiming these ratings "knocked it out of the park." The numbers for Houston aren't atrocious, but they're nothing to be bragging about. Contrary to the Coug fan's suggestions, no networks and conferences are going to beat down Houston's door to lock them up with a 6.3 in-market, primetime game with no college football competition during the window.

It's also a bit hypocritical if we are allowed to use a Sox/Yanks baseball game and a NFL game if Houston fans aren't allowed to use Texas Tech vs Kansas conference game and the same NFL game that we can apparently use to explain our local number. And if our fans didn't watch because of the pre-game expectations of a blowout, UH fans are supposed to remain glued to their TVs once it was evident that we had no business being on the same field as them?

I do agree that a 6.3 is not "knocking it out of the park", per se. The OU/UH number knocked it out of the park. 6.3 is still VERY good but not park blasting. 2.2 is awful no matter how many excuses UConn fans can come up with for not tuning in.

 

[dayooper]

It's also a bit hypocritical if we are allowed to use a Sox/Yanks baseball game and a NFL game if Houston fans aren't allowed to use Texas Tech vs Kansas conference game and the same NFL game that we can apparently use to explain our local number. And if our fans didn't watch because of the pre-game expectations of a blowout, UH fans are supposed to remain glued to their TVs once it was evident that we had no business being on the same field as them?

I do agree that a 6.3 is not "knocking it out of the park", per se. The OU/UH number knocked it out of the park. 6.3 is still VERY good but not park blasting. 2.2 is awful no matter how many excuses UConn fans can come up with for not tuning in.

Dooley, you are generally a pretty straightforward, smart guy, but your comparison of the TTU/Kansas game with the Sox/Yanks and Patriots games is a little absurd. TTU may be in Texas, but they are worlds apart from the greater Houston area. Were people watching the other games in Conneticutt? Probably.

You are correct that Houston football draws better in their respective local areas. They should as they are on year two of a remarkable run with a great coach while looking to join a conference dominated by more Texas schools. That being said, conferences wouldn't be looking to add UConn for football, and you would be crazy to think they were. There is a laundry list of reasons why a conference would want UConn, football ain't one of them.