Non-Key Tweets

[Rufus]

Wow, Notre Dame ratings tank when they play ACC schools.

 

[Da_Aisijimo_Gou]

Maybe the sum is greater than its parts....13 ACC schools were ranked by USNWR ahead of the top ranked Big 12 school.....Baylor at #91....fourteen schools when you count Notre Dame in all but football.

Yup, after USCw, UCLA, UDub and Oregon departed the old PAC 12, Calford opting not to associate with Boise State CC and other prospective newby PAC n schools, and avoiding any association with BYU and lesser academic respected Big XII schools, Calford sucked it up shipping their athletes across country for the least bad of available alternatives.

 

[Da_Aisijimo_Gou]

Bc doesn’t fair poorly.

I don’t know how they handle differing number of games. And as others have noted, GaTech comes out high because it has a yearly game with Georgia. You could have 0 fans and put up boffo tv ratings by playing ND, OhioSt, and Alabama.

Same same with BCU faring better more due to the Fighting Chickens ‘ opponent fan bases than BCU itself. For example, BCU’s games televised last season primarily due to pre-season overrated Free Shoes (week 0 or 1), rebounding Louisville, surprising mid-teens ranked smu, and Nebraska particularly due to the Cornhuskers’ crazed fan base.

 

[CL82]

Bc doesn’t fair poorly.

I don’t know how they handle differing number of games. And as others have noted, GaTech comes out high because it has a yearly game with Georgia. You could have 0 fans and put up boffo tv ratings by playing ND, OhioSt, and Alabama.

View attachment 110464

That's an ironic result. I suspect the engine driving it may be that the only Boston College games that get broadcast are games against the high drawing teams in the ACC. So their "ratings per game broadcast" are respectable numbers but their total broadcast games are only four.

 

[Vowelguy]

That's an ironic result. I suspect the engine driving it may be that the only Boston College games that get broadcast are games against the high drawing teams in the ACC. So their "ratings per game broadcast" are respectable numbers but their total broadcast games are only four.

But their total viewers (6.9M) is still 8th.

 

[billybud]

Bc doesn’t fair poorly.

I don’t know how they handle differing number of games. And as others have noted, GaTech comes out high because it has a yearly game with Georgia. You could have 0 fans and put up boffo tv ratings by playing ND, OhioSt, and Alabama.

View attachment 110464

How in the world does a 2-10 program average over 2 million per...?

Notre Dame played #2 Georgia, #4 Penn State, #6 Ohio State and Texas A&M on their non ACC schedule...of course their non ACC schedule drew viewers....schedule like that and people will watch.

 

[Kolumbo]

Wow, Notre Dame ratings tank when they play ACC schools.

I believe this is an argument why networks would agree to pay more for FSU in the P2 rather than in the ACC. The games are much better.

How in the world does a 2-10 program average over 2 million per...?

That's part of what defines a power program, right? FSU should land in the P2 somehow.

 

[Vowelguy]

How in the world does a 2-10 program average over 2 million

Schaudenfreude

 

[CL82]

But their total viewers (6.9M) is still 8th.

Sure, but are those viewers more accurately attributed to Boston College or their opponents? My guess is that unless there is a very compelling opponent, Boston College games aren't being broadcast. I'll bet you could find similar results for Butler in the big east. Relatively few games broadcast nationally, but good numbers when they are there. Of course, those broadcast games would probably be versus Connecticut, Creighton, Marquette, and say Villanova. Under those circumstances, do you feel that they accurately reflect butlers draw in the market?

 

[ZooCougar]

Syracuse is in like eleventeenth place.

 

[Vowelguy]

Sure, but are those viewers more accurately attributed to Boston College or their opponents?

Did you even read my post?

 

[CL82]

Did you even read my post?

Yes, did you read my response?

 

[UConnDan97]

Yes, did you read my response?

Agreed.

They played Syracuse and Louisville at home, which may contribute to why their number is "higher" than Syracuse.

However, they played Virginia on the road, which may have contributed to how low the Virginia number is!

I think that the numbers on that list are certainly missing some context...

 

[billybud]

https://x.com/ByEliLederman/status/1941198358036742222?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1941198358036742222%7Ctwgr%5E%7Ctwcon%5Es1_&ref_url=

 

[Stinger92860]

Sorry, it wasn't meant to be a knock against you, and God knows I've posted many non-key tweets myself, I just think fans coming up with hypothetical conferences are just wasting their time. Maybe I'm just cranky. I'll delete it.

I believe when/if a move is coming for us, it will be a non-key tweet. At least that’s my position after a gummy.

 

[UConnJim]

But their total viewers (6.9M) is still 8th.

Here is the explanation for BC's TV ratings. Remember, TV ratings are driven by the school itself, the opponent, the time slot, time slot competition, and the broadcast network.

BC had 4 games that were rated and 8 games that were not. The ones not rated were on the ACCN, SECN, CW, and ACCNX (streaming). Here are the 4 games:

9/2 Labor Day at 7:30 PM @FSU on ESPN at 7:30 PM. This is the prime Labor Day college football time slot against a popular opponent on one of the top networks, ESPN. Viewers = 4.44 million.

10/17 Thursday night at Virginia Tech on ESPN at 7 PM. The prime college football game on Thursday night against a name opponent on ESPN. But, half of the game was up against an NFL game. Viewers = 712k.

10/25 Friday night vs Louisville on ESPN2 at 7:30 PM. Friday night marquee game against a solid opponent with limited football competition, but on ESPN2. Viewers = 879k.

11/16 Saturday @SMU on ESPN at 3:30 PM. Prime ESPN TV slot, but against stiff competition and this was the second lowest rated game in the slot by a large amount. Viewers = 957k.

So, 64% of BC viewers in 2024 came on the Labor Day prime time game against FSU.

With the new revenue share model, I would think ACC schools will be fighting for attractive opponents, good time slots, and main networks

 

[CL82]

Here is the explanation for BC's TV ratings. Remember, TV ratings are driven by the school itself, the opponent, the time slot, time slot competition, and the broadcast network.

BC had 4 games that were rated and 8 games that were not. The ones not rated were on the ACCN, SECN, CW, and ACCNX (streaming). Here are the 4 games:

9/2 Labor Day at 7:30 PM @FSU on ESPN at 7:30 PM. This is the prime Labor Day college football time slot against a popular opponent on one of the top networks, ESPN. Viewers = 4.44 million.

10/17 Thursday night at Virginia Tech on ESPN at 7 PM. The prime college football game on Thursday night against a name opponent on ESPN. But, half of the game was up against an NFL game. Viewers = 712k.

10/25 Friday night vs Louisville on ESPN2 at 7:30 PM. Friday night marquee game against a solid opponent with limited football competition, but on ESPN2. Viewers = 879k.

11/16 Saturday @SMU on ESPN at 3:30 PM. Prime ESPN TV slot, but against stiff competition and this was the second lowest rated game in the slot by a large amount. Viewers = 957k.

So, 64% of BC viewers in 2024 came on the Labor Day prime time game against FSU.

With the new revenue share model, I would think ACC schools will be fighting for attractive opponents, good time slots, and main networks

Nice analysis. I wonder how the unequal revenue distribution adjusts for ratings inflation due to opponent? If it doesn't, I would expect that teams with bad drawing power will be scheduled in the worst times slots to avoid the kind of pump up that we saw with the FSU game above.

 

[Stinger92860]

With the new revenue share model, I would think ACC schools will be fighting for attractive opponents, good time slots, and main networks

So which schools will want to play BC if viewership drives revenue? Can’t say I like that model, I would prefer more pay for success like the basketball tournament or a combo. That said I hope every old BE school, especially BC, gets screwed by the ACC.

 

[Stinger92860]

Nice analysis. I wonder how the unequal revenue distribution adjusts for ratings inflation due to opponent? If it doesn't, I would expect that teams with bad drawing power will be scheduled in the worst times slots to avoid the kind of pump up that we saw with the FSU game above.

The FSU’s and Clemson’s have to play some of lower half of the league, otherwise whats the point of being in a league. They should go independent, play top 25 schools only and go 6-6. The boosters will love that.

 

[CL82]

The FSU’s and Clemson’s have to play some of lower half of the league, otherwise whats the point of being in a league. They should go independent, play top 25 schools only and go 6-6. The boosters will love that.

Correct, but if you put those games in less desirable slots, then you minimize the ratings boost the lower end teams get from playing those games, which in turn lowers their share of discretionary conference distributions, which in turn keeps them at the bottom of the league. They are in a death spiral now, well, if not death, let's call it a coma spiral, where they are still alive, but just not relevant anymore.

That is the gift that the FSU/Clemson settlement gave to the rest of the league. They're still gone at the earliest opportunity, but now they will leave a poison pill behind that will taint the remaining members.

 

[Jimdish255]

Wow, Notre Dame ratings tank when they play ACC schools.

Every school below NC State is a massive gap down.

 

[bendm]

The B12 could’ve had Stan/Cal when the PAC broke up.
And the ACC took them precisely because of the extra revenue from exposure to new markets. Give them up and the revenue goes away.

Rule #1 of conference realignment: there is not some deity who gets to do whats best for everyone. Instead each discrete move needs to make the participants better. This 3-3 swap fails that test right off.

Cal and Stanford didn’t want to go to the big12 they preferred the ACC because it was a better fit for academics and Olympic sports (minus the travel). I believe Cal/Stanford have produced more gold medalists than any other universities. Cal/Stanford administration and alumni might have more in common with the sec schools than the big12, which is to say not much.

 

[Vowelguy]

Cal and Stanford didn’t want to go to the big12 they preferred the ACC because

Is there proof of that or was that merely a narrative floated to justify their move to the ACC?

 

[bendm]

Is there proof of that or was that merely a narrative floated to justify their move to the ACC?

That was The message conveyed by the administration to the alumni association after not getting an invite to the BIG

 

[Vowelguy]

That was The message conveyed by the administration to the alumni association after not getting an invite to the BIG

So, no proof.

 

[bendm]

So, no proof.

you’re asking me to prove a negative… As an alum I didn’t want them joining the big12 either. The travel sucks but it would suck in the BIG too. at least the ACC supports Olympic sports. The big12 doesn’t even have soccer…

 

[Vowelguy]

you’re asking me to prove a negative…

I meant, was there any contemporaneous reporting that the B12 had offered or pursued them?

 

[jostar1]

 

[CTBballfan243]

you’re asking me to prove a negative… As an alum I didn’t want them joining the big12 either. The travel sucks but it would suck in the BIG too. at least the ACC supports Olympic sports. The big12 doesn’t even have soccer…

Since soccer is a non rev sport, I would think UConn could find a near buy conference to park the soccer teams and any other non-rev sport not offered by the B12. Hockey would stay put in Hockey East.

 

[Vowelguy]