Breaking Oregon and Washington to the B1G

[Baron Winnebago]

Going to a 10 game conference schedule might make the conference more TV money, but I feel like it would take decades for that to matter within the actual sport. Big 10 teams would theoretically make more money than SEC teams, but the tradeoff would be more "good" teams finishing seasons at 7-5 or 8-4, while the same caliber SEC teams continue to finish at 9-3 or 10-2.

The public perception (which includes recruits) would be that, yeah you can watch more Big 10 matchups on tv, and maybe some Big 10 teams have nicer weight rooms or richer coaches, but the SEC teams win more games and send more teams to the playoff. Personally, that's what I want. I don't care at all about how many MORE zillion dollars we can add to our coffers, I want to win games.

One thing to note was the Sec stayed at 8 because tv partners didn't want to shell out more for 9, so any movement for the Big ten would be linked directly to the TV deal. I suspect that the sec will go to 9 when their next tv deal is up

 

[LoudHogRider]

That was also in an age before everyone Cut the Cord fwiw

There IS one element to "market geography" (or boundary as @Jim14510 refers to it) that really hasn't been discussed ITT: the notion of advertising revenue. All of my comments heretofore have been targeted towards 1/2 of the equation: subscriber revenue. The other element that comes into play is the ad revenue, and that is very much geography (or market) based. That's why Buttgers still matters, and WHY Stanford and Cal could STILL matter (beyond the metric shyte ton of academic research dollars they would bring with them) to the B1G Conference.

 

[Carm]

There IS one element to "market geography" (or boundary as @Jim14510 refers to it) that really hasn't been discussed ITT: the notion of advertising revenue. All of my comments heretofore have been targeted towards 1/2 of the equation: subscriber revenue. The other element that comes into play is the ad revenue, and that is very much geography (or market) based. That's why Buttgers still matters, and WHY Stanford and Cal could STILL matter (beyond the metric shyte ton of academic research dollars they would bring with them) to the B1G Conference.

 

[Jim14510]

There IS one element to "market geography" (or boundary as @Jim14510 refers to it) that really hasn't been discussed ITT: the notion of advertising revenue. All of my comments heretofore have been targeted towards 1/2 of the equation: subscriber revenue. The other element that comes into play is the ad revenue, and that is very much geography (or market) based. That's why Buttgers still matters, and WHY Stanford and Cal could STILL matter (beyond the metric shyte ton of academic research dollars they would bring with them) to the B1G Conference.

Would think tv ratings would have a bigger impact on ad revenue than geography.

 

[LoudHogRider]

Would think tv ratings would have a bigger impact on ad revenue than geography.

Good point, and I'm not sure. My sense is that if the "markets" were the same size, that would be absolutely the case.

BUT ... let's say you draw a large viewing audience rating in a smaller market (e.g. Eugene, OR). What kind of revenue is generated by local advertisers who see a larger share of a smaller potential number of customers vs. a smaller viewing audience rating in a MUCH larger market (e.g. San Francisco) that Stanford or Cal would provide access to?

I'm truly not sure which advertising model would bring in more revenue to the B1G. I worked on the periphery of this in my dot com days, but I have no direct knowledge or insight as to how it plays out in broadcast media.

Anyone, anyone? Buehler ... Buehler?

 

[SoCal_Corn]

Would think tv ratings would have a bigger impact on ad revenue than geography.

^THIS^

More viewers = More ads = More TV network revenue = More CF payouts to CONFs

More, More, More and More.



That's why I was hoping for ASU and the PHX market - #6 in the USA - but I dont think ASU has as big a folllowing locally as does Wash and Ore.
I see more NEB stuff than I do ASU stuff.

 

[SoCal_Corn]

Good point, and I'm not sure. My sense is that if the "markets" were the same size, that would be absolutely the case.

BUT ... let's say you draw a large viewing audience rating in a smaller market (e.g. Eugene, OR). What kind of revenue is generated by local advertisers who see a larger share of a smaller potential number of customers vs. a smaller viewing audience rating in a MUCH larger market (e.g. San Francisco) that Stanford or Cal would provide access to?

I'm truly not sure which advertising model would bring in more revenue to the B1G. I worked on the periphery of this in my dot com days, but I have no direct knowledge or insight as to how it plays out in broadcast media.

Anyone, anyone? Buehler ... Buehler?

 

[Carm]

It sounds to me like Fox is more interested in adding national brands than teams with lots of local viewers. CFB fans everywhere may tune in for a game with Oregon even if they don't follow Oregon.

Viewership ratings are a better measure of value than market size

 

[BorWhiskey]

they didn't have to - the Pac 12 was falling apart and they were available on the cheap. Based on the numbers it is completely possible they paid their entire half-share - the statement that members "would likely view this as a 2M reduction in the share" suggests it is travel cost and not an explicit share reduction.

They would not be in if Fox didn't cover a significant part of the cost, and Fox/CBS/NBC wouldn't pay 70-80M a year for them - they'd lose money.

We have different definitions. The last paragraph is what I was getting at. They didn’t pay what was the going rate for a Big Ten team and that’s what I was looking for to “pony up”. Not just that they gave some money.

 

[Carm]

 

[Carm]

 

[Carm]

 

[Carm]

Here are the 16 college football teams with the biggest estimated fan bases, per Altimore:

1. Ohio State: 11.26 million

2. Notre Dame: 8.21 million

3. Texas: 7.82 million

4. Penn State: 6.36 million

5. Michigan: 6.26 million

6. Florida: 5.89 million

7. Oregon: 5.54 million

8. Alabama: 5.34 million

9. Wisconsin: 4.57 million

10. USC: 4.46 million

11. LSU: 4.02 million

12. Georgia: 3.99 million

13. Texas A&M: 3.87 million

14. Syracuse: 3.45 million

T-15 Auburn: 3.27 million

T-15. Tennessee: 3.27 million

 

[Carm]

Here is the table showing the College Football viewership by team in the 2022 season. The data is based on views per week:

Team	Viewers (in million)
Ohio State	5.80
Alabama	5.11
Michigan	4.37
Tennessee	4.13
Georgia	3.50
Notre Dame	3.30
LSU	3.22
Texas	3.06
Penn State	3.05
Clemson	2.59
Florida	2.57
Oregon	2.21
TCU	2.20
Southern California	2.07
Florida State	2.03
Nebraska	1.98
Michigan State	1.91
Texas A&M	1.87
Maryland	1.864
Auburn	1.863

 

[Carm]

all this info I just posted shows why Fox wanted Oregon and why Nebraska still has value.

It also suggests that the only true needle movers on the viewership side which may still become available in the future are FSU, Clemson and perhaps Miami.

 

[Kaladin]

Big Ten should try and steal Texas A&M

 

[alt f4]

This is the kind of shit that happens when you outlaw bullying. Taking away a prey's natural predator, the species keeps growing.

View attachment 25748

Damn. Wisconsin with 8.00M. 🙂

 

[alt f4]

Here is the table showing the College Football viewership by team in the 2022 season. The data is based on views per week:

Team	Viewers (in million)
Ohio State	5.80
Alabama	5.11
Michigan	4.37
Tennessee	4.13
Georgia	3.50
Notre Dame	3.30
LSU	3.22
Texas	3.06
Penn State	3.05
Clemson	2.59
Florida	2.57
Oregon	2.21
TCU	2.20
Southern California	2.07
Florida State	2.03
Nebraska	1.98
Michigan State	1.91
Texas A&M	1.87
Maryland	1.864
Auburn	1.863

What's amazing about, everyone on this list had a winning record last year, except for 2 teams (from what I remember).

 

[Jim14510]

Here is the table showing the College Football viewership by team in the 2022 season. The data is based on views per week:

Team	Viewers (in million)
Ohio State	5.80
Alabama	5.11
Michigan	4.37
Tennessee	4.13
Georgia	3.50
Notre Dame	3.30
LSU	3.22
Texas	3.06
Penn State	3.05
Clemson	2.59
Florida	2.57
Oregon	2.21
TCU	2.20
Southern California	2.07
Florida State	2.03
Nebraska	1.98
Michigan State	1.91
Texas A&M	1.87
Maryland	1.864
Auburn	1.863

I assume that's abnormally high for TCU?

 

[Carm]

Big Ten should try and steal Texas A&M

they are in the AAU