(02-28-2015 01:25 PM)HuskyU Wrote:  

(02-28-2015 01:08 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(02-28-2015 12:32 PM)HuskyU Wrote:  

(02-28-2015 12:10 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(02-28-2015 11:08 AM)HuskyU Wrote:  Uhhh...Just like any other single flagship state university, UCONN athletics own the state of Connecticut, which is a bigger market than any G5 city school. Even if we completely ignore the NYC DMA (which 1 million Connecticut residents are a part of), UCONN still dominates the #30 Hartford/New Haven market.

"Just like any other flagship"?

You mean like say Ohio State averaging 105k fans a game?

UConn averaged 27K home attendance last year. I'm sure that "dominated" the Connecticut market for college football, but that only means UConn was the tallest midget in a midget college football market. Their football doesn't own anything worth owning.

Ohio is a state of 11.6 million people. Connecticut has less than third the population (at 3.6 million people). 105,000/3=35,000. How about that?

How about what? There is no way to spin 35K attendance as owning anything worth owning.

You brought up who is the dominating team within G5 markets. No one outside of UCONN has any stake in Connecticut. Whether UCONN fills a 100,000 stadium or not, it doesn't change the fact that UCONN is the only college game in town, thus dominating the "market."

I'm sorry, but 27K in the stands doesn't qualify as 'dominating' a market in any meaningful sense. And from a TV perspective, far better to draw a 40-share but finish in second place than a 2-share and in first. Nobody is going to pay more than peanuts for a 2-share, whether it is best or not.

(02-28-2015 11:12 AM)tnzazz Wrote:  

(02-28-2015 11:01 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(02-28-2015 10:52 AM)Side Show Joe Wrote:  

(02-28-2015 10:07 AM)tnzazz Wrote:  

(02-28-2015 09:04 AM)SApuro Wrote:  CUSA will be fine. Same numbers or a 10-20% bump.

TV right values have gone up. CUSA added major markets.

Your kidding. You lost Memphis, New Orleans, Orlando, Houston, Tulsa. That contract was done with AAC schools who have more brand recognition and actually own their markets for the most part.

You guys should go for visibility on a actual station. It pays off long term.

Lets be honest. We all play in G5 conferences. Any team in a major market that truly own their market, would have been grabbed by a P5.

Wow, good catch, as I missed his claim that AAC schools "own" their markets. Let's see:

Memphis? In football that's SEC country not Memphis country.

New Orleans? LSU is far bigger than Tulane.

Tampa? Sadly, there are more Florida and FSU fans in the bay area than USF fans.

Orlando? More Gators fans than UCF fans.

Houston? TAMU and UT control that market.

Philly? Temple football barely registers a blip.

UConn? They own Storrs, but if we're talking the greater NYC area, barely a blip.

Cincy? They own a few blocks around their campus. The rest is Buckeyes territory.

Verdict: AAC schools tend to be in big markets, but don't come close to owning them, at least not in football.

Then you missed "for the most part" and Memphis absolutely owns most of West TN and Northern Miss. That's for all sports.

I am sorry. I love Memphis as a program. But when I fly into Memphis' airport although there may be more of their gear and memorabilia than most G5 programs have at their big city airport, the place is covered in Tennessee, Ole Miss and Arkansas stuff. Memphis MBB is amazing but the South is about college football overwhelmingly and Wal Mart fans loyalties lie with SEC and ACC and B12.

(03-01-2015 08:54 AM)panama Wrote:  

(02-28-2015 11:12 AM)tnzazz Wrote:  

(02-28-2015 11:01 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(02-28-2015 10:52 AM)Side Show Joe Wrote:  

(02-28-2015 10:07 AM)tnzazz Wrote:  Your kidding. You lost Memphis, New Orleans, Orlando, Houston, Tulsa. That contract was done with AAC schools who have more brand recognition and actually own their markets for the most part.

You guys should go for visibility on a actual station. It pays off long term.

Lets be honest. We all play in G5 conferences. Any team in a major market that truly own their market, would have been grabbed by a P5.

Wow, good catch, as I missed his claim that AAC schools "own" their markets. Let's see:

Memphis? In football that's SEC country not Memphis country.

New Orleans? LSU is far bigger than Tulane.

Tampa? Sadly, there are more Florida and FSU fans in the bay area than USF fans.

Orlando? More Gators fans than UCF fans.

Houston? TAMU and UT control that market.

Philly? Temple football barely registers a blip.

UConn? They own Storrs, but if we're talking the greater NYC area, barely a blip.

Cincy? They own a few blocks around their campus. The rest is Buckeyes territory.

Verdict: AAC schools tend to be in big markets, but don't come close to owning them, at least not in football.

Then you missed "for the most part" and Memphis absolutely owns most of West TN and Northern Miss. That's for all sports.

I am sorry. I love Memphis as a program. But when I fly into Memphis' airport although there may be more of their gear and memorabilia than most G5 programs have at their big city airport, the place is covered in Tennessee, Ole Miss and Arkansas stuff. Memphis MBB is amazing but the South is about college football overwhelmingly and Wal Mart fans loyalties lie with SEC and ACC and B12.

Yes, I am familiar with Memphis too, and Memphis football owns no territory at all. The city is saturated in SEC territory.

(02-27-2015 07:30 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(02-27-2015 06:46 PM)PirateTreasureNC Wrote:  

(02-27-2015 06:08 PM)Savacool Wrote:  CUSA has lost a lot of members to the AAC and picked up many new members from the Sunbelt. How will this influence the value of its current negotiations for a new TV contract and what will the final dollar amount be? What network will they sign with and how much exposure will they get in football and basketball in their new contract?

Considering who they added I doubt they get better than 80% of the pre-AAC raid contract value. That said, media rights have increased so who really knows. I doubt it passes the MAC or AAC current deals.

When the Big East had a huge negative membership turnover in 2011-2012 and became the AAC, that was right smack in the middle of a media rights value boom, and yet the boom-factor was no match for the membership-loss factor, as our rights bid went from approximately $13 million per school/year (ESPN offer in April 2011) to $2 million per year in January 2013, what the AAC ended up signing for.

So I'd expect that if C-USA has taken a big negative change in membership, their new rights fees will be a lot less than their old contract.

The fact the numnuts that ran the Big East turned this down still pisses me off beyond belief. To those who got a life raft and are making double that now, it worked out great. For those of us left behind, it's been almost too much to stomach.

(02-28-2015 11:01 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(02-28-2015 10:52 AM)Side Show Joe Wrote:  

(02-28-2015 10:07 AM)tnzazz Wrote:  

(02-28-2015 09:04 AM)SApuro Wrote:  CUSA will be fine. Same numbers or a 10-20% bump.

TV right values have gone up. CUSA added major markets.

Your kidding. You lost Memphis, New Orleans, Orlando, Houston, Tulsa. That contract was done with AAC schools who have more brand recognition and actually own their markets for the most part.

You guys should go for visibility on a actual station. It pays off long term.

Lets be honest. We all play in G5 conferences. Any team in a major market that truly own their market, would have been grabbed by a P5.

Wow, good catch, as I missed his claim that AAC schools "own" their markets. Let's see:

Memphis? In football that's SEC country not Memphis country.

New Orleans? LSU is far bigger than Tulane.

Tampa? Sadly, there are more Florida and FSU fans in the bay area than USF fans.

Orlando? More Gators fans than UCF fans.

Houston? TAMU and UT control that market.

Philly? Temple football barely registers a blip.

UConn? They own Storrs, but if we're talking the greater NYC area, barely a blip.

Cincy? They own a few blocks around their campus. The rest is Buckeyes territory.

Verdict: AAC schools tend to be in big markets, but don't come close to owning them, at least not in football.

False, OSU does not own Cincinnati.

OSU owns the state....poll after poll shows that although they do have fans in Cincy, they do not own Cincy. UC owns the city. As a matter of fact a sports columnist in Cincy recently put an article out and the sole point of the article was to publicly ponder why Ohio State gets no love in the city of Cincinnati. I am aware just because a columnist writes such an article doesn't prove beyond the shadow of doubt what I'm saying is true, but it does show that there is indeed some legitimacy to what I said.

So when you make statements like this you only show you are clueless on certain things and it lessons your arguments (which I tend to agree with on the whole). You should do more research on these things before you use your preconceived notions as "fact".

(03-01-2015 09:52 AM)Bearcats#1 Wrote:  

(02-27-2015 07:30 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(02-27-2015 06:46 PM)PirateTreasureNC Wrote:  

(02-27-2015 06:08 PM)Savacool Wrote:  CUSA has lost a lot of members to the AAC and picked up many new members from the Sunbelt. How will this influence the value of its current negotiations for a new TV contract and what will the final dollar amount be? What network will they sign with and how much exposure will they get in football and basketball in their new contract?

Considering who they added I doubt they get better than 80% of the pre-AAC raid contract value. That said, media rights have increased so who really knows. I doubt it passes the MAC or AAC current deals.

When the Big East had a huge negative membership turnover in 2011-2012 and became the AAC, that was right smack in the middle of a media rights value boom, and yet the boom-factor was no match for the membership-loss factor, as our rights bid went from approximately $13 million per school/year (ESPN offer in April 2011) to $2 million per year in January 2013, what the AAC ended up signing for.

So I'd expect that if C-USA has taken a big negative change in membership, their new rights fees will be a lot less than their old contract.

The fact the numnuts that ran the Big East turned this down still pisses me off beyond belief. To those who got a life raft and are making double that now, it worked out great. For those of us left behind, it's been almost too much to stomach.

Yes, it was a colossal blunder. We turned down ACC money, crazy.

And, while it can never be proven, but we even might have been able to cripple the ACC by luring a couple ACC teams away. Maybe a Maryland and/or BC could have been lured with the promise of even more money from ESPN than the ACC, which had just signed their bad deal in 2010, could offer.

In any event, for Cincy and USF, it was a disaster for sure.

(03-01-2015 09:55 AM)Bearcats#1 Wrote:  

(02-28-2015 11:01 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(02-28-2015 10:52 AM)Side Show Joe Wrote:  

(02-28-2015 10:07 AM)tnzazz Wrote:  

(02-28-2015 09:04 AM)SApuro Wrote:  CUSA will be fine. Same numbers or a 10-20% bump.

TV right values have gone up. CUSA added major markets.

Your kidding. You lost Memphis, New Orleans, Orlando, Houston, Tulsa. That contract was done with AAC schools who have more brand recognition and actually own their markets for the most part.

You guys should go for visibility on a actual station. It pays off long term.

Lets be honest. We all play in G5 conferences. Any team in a major market that truly own their market, would have been grabbed by a P5.

Wow, good catch, as I missed his claim that AAC schools "own" their markets. Let's see:

Memphis? In football that's SEC country not Memphis country.

New Orleans? LSU is far bigger than Tulane.

Tampa? Sadly, there are more Florida and FSU fans in the bay area than USF fans.

Orlando? More Gators fans than UCF fans.

Houston? TAMU and UT control that market.

Philly? Temple football barely registers a blip.

UConn? They own Storrs, but if we're talking the greater NYC area, barely a blip.

Cincy? They own a few blocks around their campus. The rest is Buckeyes territory.

Verdict: AAC schools tend to be in big markets, but don't come close to owning them, at least not in football.

False, OSU does not own Cincinnati.

OSU owns the state....poll after poll shows that although they do have fans in Cincy, they do not own Cincy. UC owns the city. As a matter of fact a sports columnist in Cincy recently put an article out and the sole point of the article was to publicly ponder why Ohio State gets no love in the city of Cincinnati. I am aware just because a columnist writes such an article doesn't prove beyond the shadow of doubt what I'm saying is true, but it does show that there is indeed some legitimacy to what I said.

So when you make statements like this you only show you are clueless on certain things and it lessons your arguments (which I tend to agree with on the whole). You should do more research on these things before you use your preconceived notions as "fact".

Ratings for the Oregon-OSU national title game:

"Columbus and Dayton got a 43.8 followed by Cleveland (41.3), Portland, Birmingham (36.1), Cincinnati (26.5), Jacksonville (25.7) and Knoxville (25.5)."

So while tOSU doesn't seem to own Cincinnati as much as it owns other big cities around the state, it still seemingly has a powerful presence there. I wonder what Bearcats TV ratings in Cincy are compared to OSU?

Your pro-Bearcats view may cause you to underestimate OSU strength in Cincy.

(03-01-2015 10:04 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(03-01-2015 09:55 AM)Bearcats#1 Wrote:  

(02-28-2015 11:01 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(02-28-2015 10:52 AM)Side Show Joe Wrote:  

(02-28-2015 10:07 AM)tnzazz Wrote:  Your kidding. You lost Memphis, New Orleans, Orlando, Houston, Tulsa. That contract was done with AAC schools who have more brand recognition and actually own their markets for the most part.

You guys should go for visibility on a actual station. It pays off long term.

Lets be honest. We all play in G5 conferences. Any team in a major market that truly own their market, would have been grabbed by a P5.

Wow, good catch, as I missed his claim that AAC schools "own" their markets. Let's see:

Memphis? In football that's SEC country not Memphis country.

New Orleans? LSU is far bigger than Tulane.

Tampa? Sadly, there are more Florida and FSU fans in the bay area than USF fans.

Orlando? More Gators fans than UCF fans.

Houston? TAMU and UT control that market.

Philly? Temple football barely registers a blip.

UConn? They own Storrs, but if we're talking the greater NYC area, barely a blip.

Cincy? They own a few blocks around their campus. The rest is Buckeyes territory.

Verdict: AAC schools tend to be in big markets, but don't come close to owning them, at least not in football.

False, OSU does not own Cincinnati.

OSU owns the state....poll after poll shows that although they do have fans in Cincy, they do not own Cincy. UC owns the city. As a matter of fact a sports columnist in Cincy recently put an article out and the sole point of the article was to publicly ponder why Ohio State gets no love in the city of Cincinnati. I am aware just because a columnist writes such an article doesn't prove beyond the shadow of doubt what I'm saying is true, but it does show that there is indeed some legitimacy to what I said.

So when you make statements like this you only show you are clueless on certain things and it lessons your arguments (which I tend to agree with on the whole). You should do more research on these things before you use your preconceived notions as "fact".

Ratings for the Oregon-OSU national title game:

"Columbus and Dayton got a 43.8 followed by Cleveland (41.3), Portland, Birmingham (36.1), Cincinnati (26.5), Jacksonville (25.7) and Knoxville (25.5)."

So while tOSU doesn't seem to own Cincinnati as much as it owns other big cities around the state, it still seemingly has a powerful presence there. I wonder what Bearcats TV ratings in Cincy are compared to OSU?

Your pro-Bearcats view may cause you to underestimate OSU strength in Cincy.

Comparing a regular season UC football rating vs say UH (or insert any other AAC team) and Ohio State playing in a national title game is insane and would prove nothing.

The very ratings you use above only go toward proving my point. Again, it's not a pro UC view of mine or not. The fact is people in Cincy know this, it has been discussed over and over. People outside Ohio assume one thing when in reality, you peel back the covers it's not true. They run a poll every year asking Cincy folk to rate their fav sports teams in order. Reds and Bengals are always #1 and #2 by a LONG shot. UC fb and bb is #3 and #4. Xu hoops is #5. OSU fb is usually #7 or #8 and OSU bball is like #14. I know it's just a poll and people can vote more than once etc. But the point is, at no time does OSU ever go above UC in this poll. And as I have already stated, it's so much so that a sports columnist, who usually RIPS UC did an article this past football season asking Why OSU Gets No Love in Cincinnati. That article would have made him a laughing stock if it was not even the slightest bit true. You wouldn't see a Columbus sports writer write the same article for example.

So this really isn't about my pro UC stance. It's based more on polls, articles, atc. Comparing Cincy viewers national title game viewer numbers to those in the rest of the state only support what I'm saying. Yes it was still a 26, but a school in the state was playing for the national title. You would expect the numbers to be higher in Cincy vs many other cities in the USA. But compare Cincy to Cleveland or Columbus and OSU clearly doesn't have the presence in Cincy they do in the rest of the state.

(03-01-2015 10:11 AM)Bearcats#1 Wrote:  

(03-01-2015 10:04 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(03-01-2015 09:55 AM)Bearcats#1 Wrote:  

(02-28-2015 11:01 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(02-28-2015 10:52 AM)Side Show Joe Wrote:  Lets be honest. We all play in G5 conferences. Any team in a major market that truly own their market, would have been grabbed by a P5.

Wow, good catch, as I missed his claim that AAC schools "own" their markets. Let's see:

Memphis? In football that's SEC country not Memphis country.

New Orleans? LSU is far bigger than Tulane.

Tampa? Sadly, there are more Florida and FSU fans in the bay area than USF fans.

Orlando? More Gators fans than UCF fans.

Houston? TAMU and UT control that market.

Philly? Temple football barely registers a blip.

UConn? They own Storrs, but if we're talking the greater NYC area, barely a blip.

Cincy? They own a few blocks around their campus. The rest is Buckeyes territory.

Verdict: AAC schools tend to be in big markets, but don't come close to owning them, at least not in football.

False, OSU does not own Cincinnati.

OSU owns the state....poll after poll shows that although they do have fans in Cincy, they do not own Cincy. UC owns the city. As a matter of fact a sports columnist in Cincy recently put an article out and the sole point of the article was to publicly ponder why Ohio State gets no love in the city of Cincinnati. I am aware just because a columnist writes such an article doesn't prove beyond the shadow of doubt what I'm saying is true, but it does show that there is indeed some legitimacy to what I said.

So when you make statements like this you only show you are clueless on certain things and it lessons your arguments (which I tend to agree with on the whole). You should do more research on these things before you use your preconceived notions as "fact".

Ratings for the Oregon-OSU national title game:

"Columbus and Dayton got a 43.8 followed by Cleveland (41.3), Portland, Birmingham (36.1), Cincinnati (26.5), Jacksonville (25.7) and Knoxville (25.5)."

So while tOSU doesn't seem to own Cincinnati as much as it owns other big cities around the state, it still seemingly has a powerful presence there. I wonder what Bearcats TV ratings in Cincy are compared to OSU?

Your pro-Bearcats view may cause you to underestimate OSU strength in Cincy.

Comparing a regular season UC football rating vs say UH (or insert any other AAC team) and Ohio State playing in a national title game is insane and would prove nothing.

I never said to compare OSU national title game ratings vs UC regular season ratings. I posted the national title game numbers to show OSU strength in Cincy, irrespective of Bearcats strength. Since Cincy was the #6 highest-rated city for that game in the entire country, that tells us that OSU does have strength in Cincy way above what we would expect of a typical city, albeit clearly not as much as they have in other Ohio cities. But any writer who says OSU gets "no love" in Cincy is obviously crazy. A much fairer thing to ask would be "why does OSU have less strength in Cincy than in Cleveland and other big Ohio cities"?

Polls done by local newspapers and the like mean little, as typically they are subscribed to by fans of the local teams. What we need is just regular-season ratings for OSU and Bearcats in Cincinatti.

I bet those ratings would be close, way too close to claim Cincy "owns" the city moreso than OSU.

(03-01-2015 10:20 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(03-01-2015 10:11 AM)Bearcats#1 Wrote:  

(03-01-2015 10:04 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(03-01-2015 09:55 AM)Bearcats#1 Wrote:  

(02-28-2015 11:01 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  Wow, good catch, as I missed his claim that AAC schools "own" their markets. Let's see:

Memphis? In football that's SEC country not Memphis country.

New Orleans? LSU is far bigger than Tulane.

Tampa? Sadly, there are more Florida and FSU fans in the bay area than USF fans.

Orlando? More Gators fans than UCF fans.

Houston? TAMU and UT control that market.

Philly? Temple football barely registers a blip.

UConn? They own Storrs, but if we're talking the greater NYC area, barely a blip.

Cincy? They own a few blocks around their campus. The rest is Buckeyes territory.

Verdict: AAC schools tend to be in big markets, but don't come close to owning them, at least not in football.

False, OSU does not own Cincinnati.

OSU owns the state....poll after poll shows that although they do have fans in Cincy, they do not own Cincy. UC owns the city. As a matter of fact a sports columnist in Cincy recently put an article out and the sole point of the article was to publicly ponder why Ohio State gets no love in the city of Cincinnati. I am aware just because a columnist writes such an article doesn't prove beyond the shadow of doubt what I'm saying is true, but it does show that there is indeed some legitimacy to what I said.

So when you make statements like this you only show you are clueless on certain things and it lessons your arguments (which I tend to agree with on the whole). You should do more research on these things before you use your preconceived notions as "fact".

Ratings for the Oregon-OSU national title game:

"Columbus and Dayton got a 43.8 followed by Cleveland (41.3), Portland, Birmingham (36.1), Cincinnati (26.5), Jacksonville (25.7) and Knoxville (25.5)."

So while tOSU doesn't seem to own Cincinnati as much as it owns other big cities around the state, it still seemingly has a powerful presence there. I wonder what Bearcats TV ratings in Cincy are compared to OSU?

Your pro-Bearcats view may cause you to underestimate OSU strength in Cincy.

Comparing a regular season UC football rating vs say UH (or insert any other AAC team) and Ohio State playing in a national title game is insane and would prove nothing.

I never said to compare OSU national title game ratings vs UC regular season ratings. I posted the national title game numbers to show OSU strength in Cincy, irrespective of Bearcats strength. Since Cincy was the #6 highest-rated city for that game in the entire country, that tells us that OSU does have strength in Cincy way above what we would expect of a typical city, albeit clearly not as much as they have in other Ohio cities. But any writer who says OSU gets "no love" in Cincy is obviously crazy.

Polls done by local newspapers and the like mean little, as typically they are subscribed to by fans of the local teams. What we need is just regular-season ratings for OSU and Bearcats in Cincinatti.

I bet those ratings would be close, way too close to claim Cincy "owns" the city moreso than OSU.

Again, a school in the state was playing in the national title game. One would expect the ratings in Cincy, a city in the state to be higher than in say, Austin or Miami etc.

The real fact finding happens when you compare the ratings for OSU/Oregon within the state -which you did.

Columbus, Cleveland, etc. had ratings in the 40's.
Cincinnati's rating was 26

almost less than half.

point made....and hence the article was written.

(03-01-2015 10:22 AM)Bearcats#1 Wrote:  

(03-01-2015 10:20 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(03-01-2015 10:11 AM)Bearcats#1 Wrote:  

(03-01-2015 10:04 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(03-01-2015 09:55 AM)Bearcats#1 Wrote:  False, OSU does not own Cincinnati.

OSU owns the state....poll after poll shows that although they do have fans in Cincy, they do not own Cincy. UC owns the city. As a matter of fact a sports columnist in Cincy recently put an article out and the sole point of the article was to publicly ponder why Ohio State gets no love in the city of Cincinnati. I am aware just because a columnist writes such an article doesn't prove beyond the shadow of doubt what I'm saying is true, but it does show that there is indeed some legitimacy to what I said.

So when you make statements like this you only show you are clueless on certain things and it lessons your arguments (which I tend to agree with on the whole). You should do more research on these things before you use your preconceived notions as "fact".

Ratings for the Oregon-OSU national title game:

"Columbus and Dayton got a 43.8 followed by Cleveland (41.3), Portland, Birmingham (36.1), Cincinnati (26.5), Jacksonville (25.7) and Knoxville (25.5)."

So while tOSU doesn't seem to own Cincinnati as much as it owns other big cities around the state, it still seemingly has a powerful presence there. I wonder what Bearcats TV ratings in Cincy are compared to OSU?

Your pro-Bearcats view may cause you to underestimate OSU strength in Cincy.

Comparing a regular season UC football rating vs say UH (or insert any other AAC team) and Ohio State playing in a national title game is insane and would prove nothing.

I never said to compare OSU national title game ratings vs UC regular season ratings. I posted the national title game numbers to show OSU strength in Cincy, irrespective of Bearcats strength. Since Cincy was the #6 highest-rated city for that game in the entire country, that tells us that OSU does have strength in Cincy way above what we would expect of a typical city, albeit clearly not as much as they have in other Ohio cities. But any writer who says OSU gets "no love" in Cincy is obviously crazy.

Polls done by local newspapers and the like mean little, as typically they are subscribed to by fans of the local teams. What we need is just regular-season ratings for OSU and Bearcats in Cincinatti.

I bet those ratings would be close, way too close to claim Cincy "owns" the city moreso than OSU.

Again, a school in the state was playing in the national title game. One would expect the ratings in Cincy, a city in the state to be higher than in say, Austin or Miami etc.

The real fact finding happens when you compare the ratings for OSU/Oregon within the state -which you did.

Columbus, Cleveland, etc. had ratings in the 40's.
Cincinnati's rating was 26

almost less than half.

point made....and hence the article was written.

You miss the point: If OSU has much higher ratings for a title game in Cincy than in just about all other US cities, that tells us OSU has a lot of strength in Cincy. It just doesn't have the same strength it has in other Ohio cities (and a good question is "why not"?), but it does NOT mean OSU has "no love" there. A 26 rating is not "no love". It's a lot of love.

And, all of this does nothing to prove your claim that Cincy owns the city. We just need the regular season TV ratings for OSU and Cincy to examine that.

(03-01-2015 10:33 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(03-01-2015 10:22 AM)Bearcats#1 Wrote:  

(03-01-2015 10:20 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(03-01-2015 10:11 AM)Bearcats#1 Wrote:  

(03-01-2015 10:04 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  Ratings for the Oregon-OSU national title game:

"Columbus and Dayton got a 43.8 followed by Cleveland (41.3), Portland, Birmingham (36.1), Cincinnati (26.5), Jacksonville (25.7) and Knoxville (25.5)."

So while tOSU doesn't seem to own Cincinnati as much as it owns other big cities around the state, it still seemingly has a powerful presence there. I wonder what Bearcats TV ratings in Cincy are compared to OSU?

Your pro-Bearcats view may cause you to underestimate OSU strength in Cincy.

Comparing a regular season UC football rating vs say UH (or insert any other AAC team) and Ohio State playing in a national title game is insane and would prove nothing.

I never said to compare OSU national title game ratings vs UC regular season ratings. I posted the national title game numbers to show OSU strength in Cincy, irrespective of Bearcats strength. Since Cincy was the #6 highest-rated city for that game in the entire country, that tells us that OSU does have strength in Cincy way above what we would expect of a typical city, albeit clearly not as much as they have in other Ohio cities. But any writer who says OSU gets "no love" in Cincy is obviously crazy.

Polls done by local newspapers and the like mean little, as typically they are subscribed to by fans of the local teams. What we need is just regular-season ratings for OSU and Bearcats in Cincinatti.

I bet those ratings would be close, way too close to claim Cincy "owns" the city moreso than OSU.

Again, a school in the state was playing in the national title game. One would expect the ratings in Cincy, a city in the state to be higher than in say, Austin or Miami etc.

The real fact finding happens when you compare the ratings for OSU/Oregon within the state -which you did.

Columbus, Cleveland, etc. had ratings in the 40's.
Cincinnati's rating was 26

almost less than half.

point made....and hence the article was written.

You miss the point: If OSU has much higher ratings for a title game in Cincy than in just about all other US cities, that tells us OSU has a lot of strength in Cincy. It just doesn't have the same strength it has in other Ohio cities (and a good question is "why not"?), but it does NOT mean OSU has "no love" there. A 26 rating is not "no love". It's a lot of love.

And, all of this does nothing to prove your claim that Cincy owns the city. We just need the regular season TV ratings for OSU and Cincy to examine that.

I disagree...I think it shows they don't have the love that they get elsewhere in the state which was the point of the article and the point of what I'm saying and back to the original point, UC has more cache in cincy than "a few blocks around campus". The onus is on you to prove that, it's YOUR statement. I want you to prove that Cincy doesn't carry the city but only owns a "few blocks around campus".

Also, you are assuming everybody in Cincy was watching the game rooting for OSU. I wasn't. I watched the game, but only because I was hoping to see OSU lose. If you told me before the game you saw the future and OSU wins that game, I wouldn't have bothered.

(03-01-2015 10:35 AM)Bearcats#1 Wrote:  

(03-01-2015 10:33 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(03-01-2015 10:22 AM)Bearcats#1 Wrote:  

(03-01-2015 10:20 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(03-01-2015 10:11 AM)Bearcats#1 Wrote:  Comparing a regular season UC football rating vs say UH (or insert any other AAC team) and Ohio State playing in a national title game is insane and would prove nothing.

I never said to compare OSU national title game ratings vs UC regular season ratings. I posted the national title game numbers to show OSU strength in Cincy, irrespective of Bearcats strength. Since Cincy was the #6 highest-rated city for that game in the entire country, that tells us that OSU does have strength in Cincy way above what we would expect of a typical city, albeit clearly not as much as they have in other Ohio cities. But any writer who says OSU gets "no love" in Cincy is obviously crazy.

Polls done by local newspapers and the like mean little, as typically they are subscribed to by fans of the local teams. What we need is just regular-season ratings for OSU and Bearcats in Cincinatti.

I bet those ratings would be close, way too close to claim Cincy "owns" the city moreso than OSU.

Again, a school in the state was playing in the national title game. One would expect the ratings in Cincy, a city in the state to be higher than in say, Austin or Miami etc.

The real fact finding happens when you compare the ratings for OSU/Oregon within the state -which you did.

Columbus, Cleveland, etc. had ratings in the 40's.
Cincinnati's rating was 26

almost less than half.

point made....and hence the article was written.

You miss the point: If OSU has much higher ratings for a title game in Cincy than in just about all other US cities, that tells us OSU has a lot of strength in Cincy. It just doesn't have the same strength it has in other Ohio cities (and a good question is "why not"?), but it does NOT mean OSU has "no love" there. A 26 rating is not "no love". It's a lot of love.

And, all of this does nothing to prove your claim that Cincy owns the city. We just need the regular season TV ratings for OSU and Cincy to examine that.

I disagree...I think it shows they don't have the love that they get elsewhere in the state which was the point of the article and the point of what I'm saying and back to the original point, UC has more cache in cincy than "a few blocks around campus". The onus is on you to prove that, it's YOUR statement. I want you to prove that Cincy doesn't carry the city but only owns a "few blocks around campus".

Also, you are assuming everybody in Cincy was watching the game rooting for OSU. I wasn't. I watched the game, but only because I was hoping to see OSU lose. If you told me before the game you saw the future and OSU wins that game, I wouldn't have bothered.

We have both made claims so the burden is on both of us. You claim Cincy owns the city, I claim Cincy owns only a few blocks around campus.

We need the regular season TV ratings for the city to suss this out. Nothing else will do it.

(03-01-2015 10:45 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(03-01-2015 10:35 AM)Bearcats#1 Wrote:  

(03-01-2015 10:33 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(03-01-2015 10:22 AM)Bearcats#1 Wrote:  

(03-01-2015 10:20 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  I never said to compare OSU national title game ratings vs UC regular season ratings. I posted the national title game numbers to show OSU strength in Cincy, irrespective of Bearcats strength. Since Cincy was the #6 highest-rated city for that game in the entire country, that tells us that OSU does have strength in Cincy way above what we would expect of a typical city, albeit clearly not as much as they have in other Ohio cities. But any writer who says OSU gets "no love" in Cincy is obviously crazy.

Polls done by local newspapers and the like mean little, as typically they are subscribed to by fans of the local teams. What we need is just regular-season ratings for OSU and Bearcats in Cincinatti.

I bet those ratings would be close, way too close to claim Cincy "owns" the city moreso than OSU.

Again, a school in the state was playing in the national title game. One would expect the ratings in Cincy, a city in the state to be higher than in say, Austin or Miami etc.

The real fact finding happens when you compare the ratings for OSU/Oregon within the state -which you did.

Columbus, Cleveland, etc. had ratings in the 40's.
Cincinnati's rating was 26

almost less than half.

point made....and hence the article was written.

You miss the point: If OSU has much higher ratings for a title game in Cincy than in just about all other US cities, that tells us OSU has a lot of strength in Cincy. It just doesn't have the same strength it has in other Ohio cities (and a good question is "why not"?), but it does NOT mean OSU has "no love" there. A 26 rating is not "no love". It's a lot of love.

And, all of this does nothing to prove your claim that Cincy owns the city. We just need the regular season TV ratings for OSU and Cincy to examine that.

I disagree...I think it shows they don't have the love that they get elsewhere in the state which was the point of the article and the point of what I'm saying and back to the original point, UC has more cache in cincy than "a few blocks around campus". The onus is on you to prove that, it's YOUR statement. I want you to prove that Cincy doesn't carry the city but only owns a "few blocks around campus".

Also, you are assuming everybody in Cincy was watching the game rooting for OSU. I wasn't. I watched the game, but only because I was hoping to see OSU lose. If you told me before the game you saw the future and OSU wins that game, I wouldn't have bothered.

We have both made claims so the burden is on both of us. You claim Cincy owns the city, I claim Cincy owns only a few blocks around campus.

We need the regular season TV ratings for the city to suss this out. Nothing else will do it.

.....Tv rating are so subjective.

They are influenced by what a media giant wants people to see. If there were a Ohio State and UC game on the same day but the Ohio State game had a prime time slot against a top 10 team that has been hyped by ESPN all week of course more people will watch it.

Especially if the UC game is really early in the morning or really late at night.

I could argue with you that Alabama A&M University a small school in Huntsville, AL has more fans in this city than the University of Alabama does. But the TV ratings will always favor Alabama due to the availability of games and the media influence.

(03-01-2015 11:21 AM)TrojanCampaign Wrote:  I could argue with you that Alabama A&M University a small school in Huntsville, AL has more fans in this city than the University of Alabama does. But the TV ratings will always favor Alabama due to the availability of games and the media influence.

In that case, the greater media influence and availability of games would explain why Alabama owns Huntsville more than Alabama A&M, but it wouldn't change the fact that Alabama does own that city more than Alabama A&M.

Thus, IMO, TV ratings are a valuable source of information about market ownership.

(03-01-2015 11:21 AM)TrojanCampaign Wrote:  

(03-01-2015 10:45 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(03-01-2015 10:35 AM)Bearcats#1 Wrote:  

(03-01-2015 10:33 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(03-01-2015 10:22 AM)Bearcats#1 Wrote:  Again, a school in the state was playing in the national title game. One would expect the ratings in Cincy, a city in the state to be higher than in say, Austin or Miami etc.

The real fact finding happens when you compare the ratings for OSU/Oregon within the state -which you did.

Columbus, Cleveland, etc. had ratings in the 40's.
Cincinnati's rating was 26

almost less than half.

point made....and hence the article was written.

You miss the point: If OSU has much higher ratings for a title game in Cincy than in just about all other US cities, that tells us OSU has a lot of strength in Cincy. It just doesn't have the same strength it has in other Ohio cities (and a good question is "why not"?), but it does NOT mean OSU has "no love" there. A 26 rating is not "no love". It's a lot of love.

And, all of this does nothing to prove your claim that Cincy owns the city. We just need the regular season TV ratings for OSU and Cincy to examine that.

I disagree...I think it shows they don't have the love that they get elsewhere in the state which was the point of the article and the point of what I'm saying and back to the original point, UC has more cache in cincy than "a few blocks around campus". The onus is on you to prove that, it's YOUR statement. I want you to prove that Cincy doesn't carry the city but only owns a "few blocks around campus".

Also, you are assuming everybody in Cincy was watching the game rooting for OSU. I wasn't. I watched the game, but only because I was hoping to see OSU lose. If you told me before the game you saw the future and OSU wins that game, I wouldn't have bothered.

We have both made claims so the burden is on both of us. You claim Cincy owns the city, I claim Cincy owns only a few blocks around campus.

We need the regular season TV ratings for the city to suss this out. Nothing else will do it.

.....Tv rating are so subjective.

They are influenced by what a media giant wants people to see. If there were a Ohio State and UC game on the same day but the Ohio State game had a prime time slot against a top 10 team that has been hyped by ESPN all week of course more people will watch it.

Especially if the UC game is really early in the morning or really late at night.

I could argue with you that Alabama A&M University a small school in Huntsville, AL has more fans in this city than the University of Alabama does. But the TV ratings will always favor Alabama due to the availability of games and the media influence.

You would need to look at similar channels and more than 1 year. ABC>ESPN2>CBSSports. And a great year or bad year merely tells you about that one year.

(03-01-2015 10:20 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(03-01-2015 10:11 AM)Bearcats#1 Wrote:  

(03-01-2015 10:04 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(03-01-2015 09:55 AM)Bearcats#1 Wrote:  

(02-28-2015 11:01 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  Wow, good catch, as I missed his claim that AAC schools "own" their markets. Let's see:

Memphis? In football that's SEC country not Memphis country.

New Orleans? LSU is far bigger than Tulane.

Tampa? Sadly, there are more Florida and FSU fans in the bay area than USF fans.

Orlando? More Gators fans than UCF fans.

Houston? TAMU and UT control that market.

Philly? Temple football barely registers a blip.

UConn? They own Storrs, but if we're talking the greater NYC area, barely a blip.

Cincy? They own a few blocks around their campus. The rest is Buckeyes territory.

Verdict: AAC schools tend to be in big markets, but don't come close to owning them, at least not in football.

False, OSU does not own Cincinnati.

OSU owns the state....poll after poll shows that although they do have fans in Cincy, they do not own Cincy. UC owns the city. As a matter of fact a sports columnist in Cincy recently put an article out and the sole point of the article was to publicly ponder why Ohio State gets no love in the city of Cincinnati. I am aware just because a columnist writes such an article doesn't prove beyond the shadow of doubt what I'm saying is true, but it does show that there is indeed some legitimacy to what I said.

So when you make statements like this you only show you are clueless on certain things and it lessons your arguments (which I tend to agree with on the whole). You should do more research on these things before you use your preconceived notions as "fact".

Ratings for the Oregon-OSU national title game:

"Columbus and Dayton got a 43.8 followed by Cleveland (41.3), Portland, Birmingham (36.1), Cincinnati (26.5), Jacksonville (25.7) and Knoxville (25.5)."

So while tOSU doesn't seem to own Cincinnati as much as it owns other big cities around the state, it still seemingly has a powerful presence there. I wonder what Bearcats TV ratings in Cincy are compared to OSU?

Your pro-Bearcats view may cause you to underestimate OSU strength in Cincy.

Comparing a regular season UC football rating vs say UH (or insert any other AAC team) and Ohio State playing in a national title game is insane and would prove nothing.

I never said to compare OSU national title game ratings vs UC regular season ratings. I posted the national title game numbers to show OSU strength in Cincy, irrespective of Bearcats strength. Since Cincy was the #6 highest-rated city for that game in the entire country, that tells us that OSU does have strength in Cincy way above what we would expect of a typical city, albeit clearly not as much as they have in other Ohio cities. But any writer who says OSU gets "no love" in Cincy is obviously crazy. A much fairer thing to ask would be "why does OSU have less strength in Cincy than in Cleveland and other big Ohio cities"?

Polls done by local newspapers and the like mean little, as typically they are subscribed to by fans of the local teams. What we need is just regular-season ratings for OSU and Bearcats in Cincinatti.

I bet those ratings would be close, way too close to claim Cincy "owns" the city moreso than OSU.

This is one of the stupidest arguments and it happens over and over. NO college team "OWNS" any major city. They simply cannot. A city of 2 million or 10 million is simply so large and diverse that it's impossible for one school to "own" the city. The sheer diversity of the city makes it impossible. In the fast growing sunbelt region, where many of the inhabitants are transplants from elsewhere, it's even more unlikely for any school to own the city. The key in these big cities is that even a small percentage of the population is a large number relative to most other parts of the county.

The second issue with the "owning" the city argument is it acts as if every tv in the city shuts off once the Ohio St game is over. The reality is the channel just changes to catch the Cinci game---or maybe a MAC game that's of interest to a fan of that area. Hell, a fan might change the channel DURING a Ohio St blowout to watch a close game between Cinci and Memphis (and vice versa). Big city people are capable of being fans of multiple teams when it requires no more than the click of a remote to follow ones favorite teams. In fact, they can ATTEND the local game and be home in time to catch another game on tv that same day/evening.

In Quo's example---I fully expect that Cinci's ratings would have been in the 40's as well if they were playing in the first CCG of the playoff era.

(03-01-2015 12:13 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  The second issue with the "owning" the city argument is it acts as if every tv in the city shuts off once the Ohio St game is over. The reality is the channel just changes to catch the Cinci game---or maybe a MAC game that's of interest to a fan of that area.

Or maybe they change channels to watch LSU vs Ole Miss, or USC vs Arizona State, instead of the Cincy game. That's what TV ratings are for, eh, to sort that kind of thing out?

Beyond that, though, I do agree the word "own" can be problematic. That's why i really prefer "deliver". E.g., imagine a sports network is thinking about the value of Houston football in East Texas. If Houston delivers a 30 rating in that area when they play, they are valuable to that network, because 30 is a high rating. They are valuable even if TAMU gets a 40 rating. It just means TAMU is even more valuable.

The problem a Houston has isn't that TAMU and Texas are more valuable in the Houston area than Houston is. It is that Houston just doesn't deliver much of the Houston market, irrespective of who else does. Hence they are not valuable.

Of course at a deeper level there is the issue of "is my school not valuable because we haven't mobilized our fan base, or because we don't have a large enough fan base"? If Houston draws bad TV ratings in East Texas because even though they have a huge alumni base that could constitute a big viewership, and that base likes Houston football more than anyone else, but just doesn't care enough about it to watch, then they need to mobilize and energize that base. On the other hand, if the reason is that Houston's big alumni base actually prefer TAMU or Texas football, then they need to convert TAMU and Texas fans to being Houston fans.

The latter is the problem that USF has: We have a huge USF alumni base in the Central-West Central Florida area, but because we have a short and not distinctive football history, and because UF, FSU, and Miami historically dominated the local sports media, many of those USF alums grew up liking the Gators, Noles, or Canes. They formed a bond with those programs as kids, before they went to college, and that allegiance has endured. They support USF in every other way, but on Saturdays they are Gators and Noles fans, not Bulls fans. A big problem for us.

I am part of that problem re basketball: I grew up in the DC area and became a Georgetown fan as a child in the 1970s. Eleven years at USF didn't change that, in hoops I am still a Hoyas fan first, USF fan second.

(03-01-2015 12:48 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(03-01-2015 12:13 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  The second issue with the "owning" the city argument is it acts as if every tv in the city shuts off once the Ohio St game is over. The reality is the channel just changes to catch the Cinci game---or maybe a MAC game that's of interest to a fan of that area.

Or maybe they change channels to watch LSU vs Ole Miss, or USC vs Arizona State, instead of the Cincy game. That's what TV ratings are for, eh, to sort that kind of thing out?

Beyond that, though, I do agree the word "own" can be problematic. That's why i really prefer "deliver". E.g., imagine a sports network is thinking about the value of Houston football in East Texas. If Houston delivers a 30 rating in that area when they play, they are valuable to that network, because 30 is a high rating. They are valuable even if TAMU gets a 40 rating. It just means TAMU is even more valuable.

The problem a Houston has isn't that TAMU and Texas are more valuable in the Houston area than Houston is. It is that Houston just doesn't deliver much of the Houston market, irrespective of who else does. Hence they are not valuable.

Of course at a deeper level there is the issue of "is my school not valuable because we haven't mobilized our fan base, or because we don't have a large enough fan base"? If Houston draws bad TV ratings in East Texas because even though they have a huge alumni base that could constitute a big viewership, and that base likes Houston football more than anyone else, but just doesn't care enough about it to watch, then they need to mobilize and energize that base. On the other hand, if the reason is that Houston's big alumni base actually prefer TAMU or Texas football, then they need to convert TAMU and Texas fans to being Houston fans.

The latter is the problem that USF has: We have a huge USF alumni base in the Central-West Central Florida area, but because we have a short and not distinctive football history, and because UF, FSU, and Miami historically dominated the local sports media, many of those USF alums grew up liking the Gators, Noles, or Canes. They formed a bond with those programs as kids, before they went to college, and that allegiance has endured. They support USF in every other way, but on Saturdays they are Gators and Noles fans, not Bulls fans. A big problem for us.

I am part of that problem re basketball: I grew up in the DC area and became a Georgetown fan as a child in the 1970s. Eleven years at USF didn't change that, in hoops I am still a Hoyas fan first, USF fan second.

I think the biggest error people make is the assumption that any one team "owns" or "delivers" a market automatically excludes another from team doing the same thing. In other words, in TV, its not a zero sum game. In Houston, some of the highest ever recorded local ratings for college football are for UH games. The key---we need to be winning. Ditto Texas. Their ratings in Houston continue to slide---but they were quite high here when Vince Young was leading them to a national championship. Strangely, there are few times when BOTH the Cougars and the Longhorns were good at the same time. However, my guess is if both were doing very well at the same time, you would find both getting great ratings in the city (lol....and neither would approach the Texans NFL ratings).

I agree with your comments about mobilizing your alumni base. For the first time I can really remember, the University of Houston has begun to do that in a tangible way that might show real long term attendance benefits (largely due to president Renu Kahtor). They have built (or are planning to build in the case of basketball) first class stadium venues for the major revenue sports. The campus is now home to around 10K students (includes two private student housing developments on the edge of campus). These on campus students develop much closer ties to the school than commuter students. A TV contract that televises most all football/basketball games on highly recognizable ESPN platforms. Exposure and visibility is important, for example--I became a fan of UH long before I ever stepped foot on campus by following them on TV and radio back in the day. Finally, the administration has finally committed enough money to the athletics programs to pay their coaches near the top of their peers (in some cases more than some P5 schools pay). Over time, I think we will see these moves pay dividends at the turnstiles---but it is a process.

(03-01-2015 11:27 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(03-01-2015 11:21 AM)TrojanCampaign Wrote:  I could argue with you that Alabama A&M University a small school in Huntsville, AL has more fans in this city than the University of Alabama does. But the TV ratings will always favor Alabama due to the availability of games and the media influence.

In that case, the greater media influence and availability of games would explain why Alabama owns Huntsville more than Alabama A&M, but it wouldn't change the fact that Alabama does own that city more than Alabama A&M.

Thus, IMO, TV ratings are a valuable source of information about market ownership.

Oh, wow I'm sorry you seem to know more about the city that I live in, work in, went to school in, and do community service in.

The SWAC has no TV contract per say so there are no games on TV. I can see if we were comparing two schools who had the same level of TV access but that does not apply to Alabama A&M or UC.

FYI I was in Cincinnati for work two weeks ago and I would agree that UC is more popular than Ohio State in the city.

The only way that you could prove one team is more popular than another team in the city would be to poll people living in the city and ask who they root for not what the most accessible team for the to watch on TV is.