I get the large market concept but:

FIU does not deliver Miami, The U does.

UNT does not deliver Dallas/ Ft worth SMU and TCU does

MTSU does not deliver Nashville Vandy does.

La Tech ? What Market ?

If I were CUSA I would not merge with MWC

I would add not because of markets but because of good programs, potential, and fits the footprint those schools would be.

MTSU, WKU, ASU, FIU, UNT

(04-16-2012 11:12 PM)David Krumudgen Wrote:  I get the large market concept but:

FIU does not deliver Miami, The U does.

UNT does not deliver Dallas/ Ft worth SMU and TCU does

MTSU does not deliver Nashville Vandy does.

La Tech ? What Market ?

If I were CUSA I would not merge with MWC

I would add not because of markets but because of good programs, potential, and fits the footprint those schools would be.

MTSU, WKU, ASU, FIU, UNT

You don't have to deliver a market, if you're in the market you can command higher ad dollars and the cable company can bill everyone and pass a portion on to the conference.

UH doesn't carry Houston (UT and A&M), SMU doesn't carry DFW (UT and A&M), UCF doesn't carry Orlando (UF and FSU). Yet the Big Least added all of them.

(04-16-2012 11:12 PM)David Krumudgen Wrote:  I get the large market concept but:

FIU does not deliver Miami, The U does.

Actually the U only delivers a portion of Miami

UNT does not deliver Dallas/ Ft worth SMU and TCU does

No, they just deliver a portion as well. Texas and about 4 other schools have supporters there too.

MTSU does not deliver Nashville Vandy does.

No, Vandy doesn't even carry Nashville, I'd say it's at least 2/3 Vols

La Tech ? What Market ?

This is true

If I were CUSA I would not merge with MWC

I also agree

I would add not because of markets but because of good programs, potential, and fits the footprint those schools would be.

MTSU, WKU, ASU, FIU, UNT

Well, you just named 3 of the schools you just railed on but ok. Honestly, it's not about if these schools deliver the entire market as it is that they are IN the market. Even if UNT actually has 5% of the fans in DFW area, that's still 333,000 people. And that's not even the major reason; it's the other 6.3 million that could potentially watch them on TV that advertisers care about. They "represent" the number of households in the market.

Drat, you beat me.

Comparing UH, SMU and UCF is not proper here. Although they may not "deliver" their markets, they do have enough market penetration to warrant a value increase. The same is not the case for the schools the "Alliance" is attempting to acquire. It will take most of those schools at least 5 years to even come close to penetrating their respective markets. This is why I continually argue that the figure heads over this Alliance are way off base and are overstating their value to the networks. I will be surprised if CUSA is able to maintain its current value to the networks. They and the MWC must sell off strategically aligned and matched games in order to maintain their independent values, let alone increase it. However, those games will come with added travel cost, so now you are right back at square one.

Does anyone outside of the Big 6 conferences actually deliever there market? Look at the SEC more than half of those schools aren't exactly located in big markets

(04-16-2012 11:41 PM)techdawg88 Wrote:  Look at the SEC more than half of those schools aren't exactly located in big markets

They don't need to be.

(04-16-2012 11:41 PM)techdawg88 Wrote:  Does anyone outside of the Big 6 conferences actually deliever there market? Look at the SEC more than half of those schools aren't exactly located in big markets

I guess it depends upon how the term "deliver" is defined. For some networks, 30% market share of a 1M viewership area may be deemed "delivering" the market.

(04-16-2012 11:43 PM)LFTCajun Wrote:  

(04-16-2012 11:41 PM)techdawg88 Wrote:  Look at the SEC more than half of those schools aren't exactly located in big markets

They don't need to be.

Exactly! Although they may not be in big markets, they have the proven ability to deliver either big markets or multiple markets.

Just think, Tulane could still be in the SEC if they hadn't dropped out long time ago

(04-16-2012 11:12 PM)David Krumudgen Wrote:  I get the large market concept but:

FIU does not deliver Miami, The U does.

UNT does not deliver Dallas/ Ft worth SMU and TCU does

MTSU does not deliver Nashville Vandy does.

La Tech ? What Market ?

If I were CUSA I would not merge with MWC

I would add not because of markets but because of good programs, potential, and fits the footprint those schools would be.

MTSU, WKU, ASU, FIU, UNT

And of course the same old question---Why not the Louisiana Ragin' Cajuns???????

As long as they can convince some idiot ad-buyers to pay for unwatched televisions......it matters.

Very valid point.

UNT doesn't have Dallas market. They share it with UT,TCU,SmU, Arkansas, Baylor, Tamu....bad at football below average at basketball

Latech has 0 market with below average athletics..yeah CUSA is inviting a winner here!!!
The sleeper is in ark st and FIU. These 2 schools are class of sunbelt! Ark st hired Gus Malzahn as HC and is On the rise. Ark st also keeps CUSA in Memphis market..also picks up arkansas as a new state in the conference..FIu big, giant market. Decent football.horrible basketball..bigg school

(04-17-2012 12:40 AM)exflash Wrote:  

(04-16-2012 11:12 PM)David Krumudgen Wrote:  I get the large market concept but:

FIU does not deliver Miami, The U does.

UNT does not deliver Dallas/ Ft worth SMU and TCU does

MTSU does not deliver Nashville Vandy does.

La Tech ? What Market ?

If I were CUSA I would not merge with MWC

I would add not because of markets but because of good programs, potential, and fits the footprint those schools would be.

MTSU, WKU, ASU, FIU, UNT

And of course the same old question---Why not the Louisiana Ragin' Cajuns???????

People outside of Louisiana consider all of South Louisiana to be the property of LSU. Tech faces the same problem with that same perception of North Louisiana, just not as bad. The fact that LSU has been on such an incredible roll doesn't help either of us in that regard.

(04-16-2012 11:12 PM)David Krumudgen Wrote:  I get the large market concept but:

FIU does not deliver Miami, The U does.

UNT does not deliver Dallas/ Ft worth SMU and TCU does

MTSU does not deliver Nashville Vandy does.

La Tech ? What Market ?

If I were CUSA I would not merge with MWC

I would add not because of markets but because of good programs, potential, and fits the footprint those schools would be.

MTSU, WKU, ASU, FIU, UNT

Really? We're on THIS a year after this has been explained 1 million times? We still have to explain the Alliance and markets?

I HATE THE OFFSEASON!!!!

(04-16-2012 11:12 PM)David Krumudgen Wrote:  I get the large market concept but:

FIU does not deliver Miami, The U does.

UNT does not deliver Dallas/ Ft worth SMU and TCU does

MTSU does not deliver Nashville Vandy does.

La Tech ? What Market ?

If I were CUSA I would not merge with MWC

I would add not because of markets but because of good programs, potential, and fits the footprint those schools would be.

MTSU, WKU, ASU, FIU, UNT

Vandy does not carry the Nashville market because UT does. Just like UT and Ole Miss carry the Memphis market.

(04-17-2012 06:42 AM)panama Wrote:  Really? We're on THIS a year after this has been explained 1 million times? We still have to explain the Alliance and markets?

I HATE THE OFFSEASON!!!!

Your problem is that nobody really buys the explanation.

(04-17-2012 12:58 AM)RustonCAT Wrote:  Very valid point.

UNT doesn't have Dallas market. They share it with UT,TCU,SmU, Arkansas, Baylor, Tamu....bad at football below average at basketball

Latech has 0 market with below average athletics..yeah CUSA is inviting a winner here!!!
The sleeper is in ark st and FIU. These 2 schools are class of sunbelt! Ark st hired Gus Malzahn as HC and is On the rise. Ark st also keeps CUSA in Memphis market..also picks up arkansas as a new state in the conference..FIu big, giant market. Decent football.horrible basketball..bigg school

You are not very bright. You should bounce your ideas off other people before you post.

(04-17-2012 07:23 AM)ark30inf Wrote:  

(04-17-2012 06:42 AM)panama Wrote:  Really? We're on THIS a year after this has been explained 1 million times? We still have to explain the Alliance and markets?

I HATE THE OFFSEASON!!!!

Your problem is that nobody really buys the explanation.

Because they didnt do well in math. Atlanta Metro has 6 million people. 1% of that is 60k people. If only 1 to 3 percent of a large market are watching its more than the total population of a small market if 100% are watching. There is a method to the madness. Its just that small market schools dislike the implication that lies therein.

(04-17-2012 06:19 AM)BRtransplant Wrote:  

(04-17-2012 12:40 AM)exflash Wrote:  

(04-16-2012 11:12 PM)David Krumudgen Wrote:  I get the large market concept but:

FIU does not deliver Miami, The U does.

UNT does not deliver Dallas/ Ft worth SMU and TCU does

MTSU does not deliver Nashville Vandy does.

La Tech ? What Market ?

If I were CUSA I would not merge with MWC

I would add not because of markets but because of good programs, potential, and fits the footprint those schools would be.

MTSU, WKU, ASU, FIU, UNT

And of course the same old question---Why not the Louisiana Ragin' Cajuns???????

People outside of Louisiana consider all of South Louisiana to be the property of LSU. Tech faces the same problem with that same perception of North Louisiana, just not as bad. The fact that LSU has been on such an incredible roll doesn't help either of us in that regard.

Drive through Shreveport, Ruston, and Monroe...you will see just as much if not more Purple and Nacho Cheese as in Lafayette. It's not because LSU is on a roll...it's because Louisiana contains the most disloyal sports fans on the face of the earth. If you aren't winning, they aren't watching.