OT: UConn women post nice nice rating

[Palatine]

According to ESPN, the ratings for the South Carolina-UConn game were outstanding.

Nationally, it had an 0.8 overnight rating for highest regular season women's basketball game on ESPN2 since UConn played Stanford in 2010.

It's not the Super Bowl. But it's a number that rivals a few bowl games on ESPN main channel and probably means over a million sets were tuned in. It is also a meaningful stat when portraying the strength, depth and drawing power of the UConn athletic department.

 

[imno1]

I know many on this board think ESPN has a thing against UConn but last night was like a 3 hour ad for the university. First the game and then the GA Project. It was impressive

 

[Cheeky]

I feel like there's been some leakage in the membrane barrier between the men's board and the women's board recently. Somebody should look into that.

 

[Jerry1714]

According to ESPN, the ratings for the South Carolina-UConn game were outstanding.

Nationally, it had an 0.8 overnight rating for highest regular season women's basketball game on ESPN2 since UConn played Stanford in 2010.

It's not the Super Bowl. But it's a number that rivals a few bowl games on ESPN main channel and probably means over a million sets were tuned in. It is also a meaningful stat when portraying the strength, depth and drawing power of the UConn athletic department.

So you are telling me almost 2x as many people watched a February regular season women's basketball game than the 2014 BE Tournament Championship?

But, but, but............

 

[CAHUSKY]

I feel like there's been some leakage in the membrane barrier between the men's board and the women's board recently. Somebody should look into that.

You don't see the women posting big ratings as being a positive for conference realignment and, therefore, important to mens basketball?

 

[Stainmaster]

You don't see the women posting big ratings as being a positive for conference realignment and, therefore, important to mens basketball?

CR = football. That's the story going forward.

 

[Cheeky]

You don't see the women posting big ratings as being a positive for conference realignment and, therefore, important to mens basketball?

I think CAHUSKY has been infected. Please let's get somebody on this.

 

[CAHUSKY]

CR = football. That's the story going forward.

Everything helps when you're grasping at straws.

 

[CAHUSKY]

I think CAHUSKY has been infected. Please let's get somebody on this.

I'm a uconn fan through and through. All sports. Love for everything uconn, Thats what I'm infected with.

 

[Gurleyman]

I hunted down the field hockey feeds to watch us beat Duke last year and Cuse this year for national titles. Personally, my way of thinking is that if they're handing out a trophy, I want it (I've personally watched UConn win 16 titles - listened on the radio to Jim D'Orsaneo's header in '81 for 17, and just read about field hockey '81 and '85 in the paper).

I believe we are 17-1 in national title games I've watched/listened to live. I did watch Women's Soccer get lit up by North Carolina once in the early 00's - my only blemish.

 

[UConn990411]

CR = football. That's the story going forward.

There are plenty of other factors - notably the school's market/cable boxes and AAU status (for B1G).

 

[jleves]

CR = football. That's the story going forward.

Not entirely correct - it's about how many TV sets will tune into football and how many tickets to football you can sell. Adding TV sets and seats for other sports certainly does not hurt and any P5 conference will figure in the total amount of extra revenue that can be produced by adding a team so both the womens and mens bball teams helps - they just aren't as significant as the football numbers where most of the money is.

A while back I raised the question in my mind about mens hoops being a revenue generator based on the number of games they play and did a little math. UConn plays 16 home games this year so they can sell 7x10,000 at Gampel (70,000) + 8x16,000 at XL (128,000) + 1 at Webster Bank Arena (9,000) for a total of 207,000 seats @ about $27/ticket which is $5,589,000 per season give or take a little rounding and not taking into account super expensive seats. Michigan football had 7 home games this year for a total of 763,000 seats @ an average of $65/ticket for a total of $49,595,000. That doesn't take into account the number of TVs tuned in which is way higher for Michigan football even with 9 less games.

While Michigan may be the extreme example because of the size of the stadium, it tells you why Football drives the bus. $44,000,000 extra for football is massive.

 

[UConnNick]

I'm a uconn fan through and through. All sports. Love for everything uconn, Thats what I'm infected with.

That's great, and I'm with you, but the women's BB program isn't going to get us into a P5 conference. If that had any influence on anybody's decision to invite UCONN, it would have already happened.

Only football drives the conference realignment bus.

 

[CAHUSKY]

That's great, and I'm with you, but the women's BB program isn't going to get us into a P5 conference. If that had any influence on anybody's decision to invite UCONN, it would have already happened.

Only football drives the conference realignment bus.

So the women having the top rated games in womens basketball hurt us? Of course not. So, i like it.

 

[sammydabiz]

 

[ctchamps]

Not entirely correct - it's about how many TV sets will tune into football and how many tickets to football you can sell. Adding TV sets and seats for other sports certainly does not hurt and any P5 conference will figure in the total amount of extra revenue that can be produced by adding a team so both the womens and mens bball teams helps - they just aren't as significant as the football numbers where most of the money is.

A while back I raised the question in my mind about mens hoops being a revenue generator based on the number of games they play and did a little math. UConn plays 16 home games this year so they can sell 7x10,000 at Gampel (70,000) + 8x16,000 at XL (128,000) + 1 at Webster Bank Arena (9,000) for a total of 207,000 seats @ about $27/ticket which is $5,589,000 per season give or take a little rounding and not taking into account super expensive seats. Michigan football had 7 home games this year for a total of 763,000 seats @ an average of $65/ticket for a total of $49,595,000. That doesn't take into account the number of TVs tuned in which is way higher for Michigan football even with 9 less games.

While Michigan may be the extreme example because of the size of the stadium, it tells you why Football drives the bus. $44,000,000 extra for football is massive.

This is the "big" picture. Fortunately the current administration understands this and doesn't take a myopic approach to the problem. All facets of revenue are important albeit some have greater importance than others.

Of course you haven't included costs in this paragraph. Nor have you included excitement generated by sports success that leads to alumni contributions. Nor have you included the excitement generated by sports that influences contributions to the academic side where, as @upstater has pointed out many times, the real money is made for universities. But I really like your presentation much more than the poster who can only see the picture of sports from how his entertainment could be interrupted.

 

[upstater]

That's great, and I'm with you, but the women's BB program isn't going to get us into a P5 conference. If that had any influence on anybody's decision to invite UCONN, it would have already happened.

Only football drives the conference realignment bus.

Football drives it because football makes money. It could be fusball or tiddly winks. If people watch it, conferences want it.

 

[CL82]

I know many on this board think ESPN has a thing against UConn but last night was like a 3 hour ad for the university. First the game and then the GA Project. It was impressive

You mean because the funded the evisceration of the best basketball conference ever to support their 'house band' and left us to wither and die on the vine threaten our entire athletics program, while costing Connecticut taxpayers millions? I mean why would anyone hold a grudge about that?

ESPN doesn't hate us, they just don't give a crap whether we live or die. After taking so much Connecticut taxpayer money that's kind of a bitter pill to swallow.

Connecticut subsidizes ESPN -> ESPN then subsidizes ACC-> the ACC uses that subisidy to pick off our conference mates leaving us in the festering stink hole of a conference...but hey they'll put us on TV when it makes them money, so we're even right? Not by a long shot.

 

[David 76]

It's all about money. Football is big money. Women's basketball is little money. But it is still money. It won't erase a big deficit in football by any means. But I think the B1G would see a nice side benefit to instant credibility in women's basketball.

 

[rwdinsalem]

sammydabiz

That is such a juvenile attempt at humor. And offensive.

 

[Dooley]

You don't see the women posting big ratings as being a positive for conference realignment and, therefore, important to mens basketball?

No and no. Sorry.

 

[CAHUSKY]

No and no. Sorry.

Youre right. It would be better if they posted low ratings and offered absolutely no value as additional winter programing for the B10 network. Why in the world would we ever want another arrow in our quiver when we could just rely on football?

PS. Im not saying womens basketball gets us anywhere. I am saying an overall successful athletic department that can draw additional eyeballs to the BTN isn't a bad thing. We need all the help we can get.

 

[Dooley]

Youre right. It would be better if they posted low ratings and offered absolutely no value as additional winter programing for the B10 network. Why in the world would we ever want another arrow in our quiver when we could just rely on football?

PS. Im not saying womens basketball gets us anywhere. I am saying an overall successful athletic department that can draw additional eyeballs to the BTN isn't a bad thing. We need all the help we can get.

I understand the point you're making. I really do. But WBB should be viewed as no more than an add-on accessory at checkout...AFTER you have made your purchase. Research/academics, football success and support, DMA presence and ratings in the top 2 revenue sports, and men's hoops will be the top criteria used to evaluate UCONN's value to a P5 conference. WBB has been and will continue to be viewed as nothing more than accessory to the previously mentioned, and more heavily weighted, criteria.

Want proof? UCONN's WBB has been the most dominant collegiate program in the past 20 years of, perhaps, ANY collegiate program has been in the history of the NCAA (only competitor: UCLA hoops in the Wooden era) and yet we are still sitting on the sidelines. The sport just doesn't generate the same kind of national interest and, more importantly, money that football does. We need to devote as much resources as possible into improving football.

 

[CAHUSKY]

I understand the point you're making. I really do. But WBB should be viewed as no more than an add-on accessory at checkout...AFTER you have made your purchase. Research/academics, football success and support, DMA presence and ratings in the top 2 revenue sports, and men's hoops will be the top criteria used to evaluate UCONN's value to a P5 conference. WBB has been and will continue to be viewed as nothing more than accessory to the previously mentioned, and more heavily weighted, criteria.

Want proof? UCONN's WBB has been the most dominant collegiate program in the past 20 years of, perhaps, ANY collegiate program has been in the history of the NCAA (only competitor: UCLA hoops in the Wooden era) and yet we are still sitting on the sidelines. The sport just doesn't generate the same kind of national interest and, more importantly, money that football does. We need to devote as much resources as possible into improving football.

Which is basically what i said in my post.

 

[Dooley]

Which is basically what i said in my post.

Huh? I responded to this...

You don't see the women posting big ratings as being a positive for conference realignment and, therefore, important to mens basketball?

...which I don't agree with at all. I don't see WBB ratings as having anything to do with conference realignment or men's basketball. UConn will be judged/valued/invited based on: research/academics, football, DMA and ratings in football and men's hoops, and men's hoops. Those 4 things right there are your money makers and what is driving realignment. If WBB had anything to do CR, don't you think we'd already be in a P5 conference by now? I'd rather put ALL of our arrows in those 4 quivers than anywhere else, right now. Then after we get our invite, we can redistribute where needed.