Christopher Lambert
‏ @theDudeofWV

If I were to post TV ratings for ACC conf games without naming the participants along with similarly formatted data from the AAC you wouldn’t be able to tell the difference from the AAC & ACC except for FSU & Clemson.
11:06 AM - 27 Jun 2019 from West Virginia, USA

The AAC has more upside due to

DMAs,
Locations in areas interested in football, and
Trajectories.

(06-28-2019 02:01 PM)HoustonRocks Wrote:  Christopher Lambert
‏ @theDudeofWV

If I were to post TV ratings for ACC conf games without naming the participants along with similarly formatted data from the AAC you wouldn’t be able to tell the difference from the AAC & ACC except for FSU & Clemson.
11:06 AM - 27 Jun 2019 from West Virginia, USA

The AAC has more upside due to

DMAs,
Locations in areas interested in football, and
Trajectories.

My guess is that he'd prefer to cherry pick from our games, or pretend like the games on ESPN3 that "aren't rated" don't count.

Just like his preposterous realignment scoops of years ago, he makes an assertion but the sources are "confidential". In this case, he says if he posted it and then doesn't.

Was it ever found out that theDudeofWV and Tuxedo Yoda were the same guy?

@TheDudeofWV and @flugempire are the same.

(06-28-2019 08:18 PM)Shannon Panther Wrote:  Just like his preposterous realignment scoops of years ago, he makes an assertion but the sources are "confidential". In this case, he says if he posted it and then doesn't.

TV ratings are not confidential, public information.

I'd have to see the actual rating up against one another before I believed this guys claim.

On the surface his claim is legit.
https://www.sportsmediawatch.com/college...v-ratings/

Game: Viewers (Network)
Cincinnati-UCF: 3.098 million (ABC)
UCF-USF: 1.741 million (ESPN)
Miami-BC: 1.36 million (ESPN)
Pitt-UVA: 1.359 million (ESPN2)
FSU-NC St: 1.347 million (ABC)
USF-Tulsa: 1.17 million
Temple-UCF: 1.191 million (ESPN)
Louisville-Syracuse: 1.062 million (ESPN2)
GT-Louisville: 996K (ESPN)
GT-VT: 968K (ESPN)
Pitt-Miami: 919K (ESPN)
Miami-UVA: 870K (ESPN2)
BC-Wake Forest: 863K (ESPN)
Syracuse-BC: 765K (ESPN)
WF-NC St: 744K (ESPN)
VT-Duke: 728K (ESPN2)
Memphis-Tulane: 738K (ESPN2)
Miami-VT: 733K (ESPN)
Tulsa-Temple: 728K (ESPN)
BC-FSU:716K (ESPN2)
NC St-Syracuse: 680K (ESPN2)
Memphis-SMU: 623K (ESPN2)
Duke-Miami: 620K (ESPN2)
Wake Forest-FSU: 576K (ESPN2)
Miami-GT: 551K (ESPN2)
Tulsa-Houston: 538K (ESPN)
UCF-ECU: 486K (ESPN2)
UCF-UCONN: 444K (ESPNU)
VT-N Carolina: 389K (ESPNU)
Navy-UCF: 385K (ESPN2)
Tulane-Houston: 378K (ESPN)
Pitt-VT: 344K (ESPNU)

Even though he exempted Clemson and FSU, even some of Clemson's games were not that impressive for a Top 4 team...
Clemson-Wake Forest: 966K (ESPN)
Clemson-Louisville: 1.55 million (ABC)

The area where the AAC falls short is consistency. We had several games that had n.a. listed instead of a number of viewers. I assumed that meant a number so low it was not worth computing/reporting...but one of those games was on ABC, which doesn't make sense. Those games were...

Tulane-Cincinnati (ESPNU)
SMU-UCF (ESPNU)
ECU-Temple (ESPNews)
SMU-Tulane (ESPNU)
Cincinnati-Tulsa (ESPNU)
Tulane-Tulsa (ESPNU)
Memphis-ECU (ESPNU)
Navy-Cincinnati (ESPNU)
Houston-SMU (ESPNU)
Tulsa-Memphis (ESPNU)
USF-Cincinnati (ESPNU)
ECU-Tulane (ESPNews)
Houston-Memphis (ABC) ???
Temple-UCONN (ESPNU)
Navy-Tulane (ESPNU)

(06-28-2019 08:56 PM)Garrettabc Wrote:  Was it ever found out that theDudeofWV and Tuxedo Yoda were the same guy?

Nah, they're both freaking idiots.

He could be right about this, but he's a WVU guy. He would never point it out, if not. He has a grudge against the ACC.

And he was absolutely the worst and most inaccurate troll during all the conference realignment stuff.

(06-29-2019 04:23 PM)Square Knight Wrote:  On the surface his claim is legit.
https://www.sportsmediawatch.com/college...v-ratings/
.
.
.


The area where the AAC falls short is consistency. We had several games that had n.a. listed instead of a number of viewers. I assumed that meant a number so low it was not worth computing/reporting...but one of those games was on ABC, which doesn't make sense. Those games were...

Tulane-Cincinnati (ESPNU)
SMU-UCF (ESPNU)
ECU-Temple (ESPNews)
SMU-Tulane (ESPNU)
Cincinnati-Tulsa (ESPNU)
Tulane-Tulsa (ESPNU)
Memphis-ECU (ESPNU)
Navy-Cincinnati (ESPNU)
Houston-SMU (ESPNU)
Tulsa-Memphis (ESPNU)
USF-Cincinnati (ESPNU)
ECU-Tulane (ESPNews)
Houston-Memphis (ABC) ???
Temple-UCONN (ESPNU)
Navy-Tulane (ESPNU)

First off, thanks for doing the legwork on this. I kept looking at this and saying "not today."
Second, those n.a. COULD mean no measurable viewing...for some, especially News and U games...but as you note, doesn't fly for an ABC Black Friday game. Basically, the Mouse just reported less out this year compared to previous. Thats ultimately SMW's source, so Paulsen is dependent on what they put out.
Third, a reason I didnt get started was how do you TRULY compare - timeslot, network, etc?
Fourth, if we take away their top performers and still compare our top...thats not a discussion I want to jump into. Anyone else remember the G4 trying to make some case about the AAC East WITHOUT UCF being below the MVC in Sagarin (all the while the G4 division he was honking actually WAS below the MVC at full strength)?

(06-29-2019 05:02 PM)slhNavy91 Wrote:  

(06-29-2019 04:23 PM)Square Knight Wrote:  On the surface his claim is legit.
https://www.sportsmediawatch.com/college...v-ratings/
.
.
.


The area where the AAC falls short is consistency. We had several games that had n.a. listed instead of a number of viewers. I assumed that meant a number so low it was not worth computing/reporting...but one of those games was on ABC, which doesn't make sense. Those games were...

Tulane-Cincinnati (ESPNU)
SMU-UCF (ESPNU)
ECU-Temple (ESPNews)
SMU-Tulane (ESPNU)
Cincinnati-Tulsa (ESPNU)
Tulane-Tulsa (ESPNU)
Memphis-ECU (ESPNU)
Navy-Cincinnati (ESPNU)
Houston-SMU (ESPNU)
Tulsa-Memphis (ESPNU)
USF-Cincinnati (ESPNU)
ECU-Tulane (ESPNews)
Houston-Memphis (ABC) ???
Temple-UCONN (ESPNU)
Navy-Tulane (ESPNU)

First off, thanks for doing the legwork on this. I kept looking at this and saying "not today."
Second, those n.a. COULD mean no measurable viewing...for some, especially News and U games...but as you note, doesn't fly for an ABC Black Friday game. Basically, the Mouse just reported less out this year compared to previous. Thats ultimately SMW's source, so Paulsen is dependent on what they put out.
Third, a reason I didnt get started was how do you TRULY compare - timeslot, network, etc?
Fourth, if we take away their top performers and still compare our top...thats not a discussion I want to jump into. Anyone else remember the G4 trying to make some case about the AAC East WITHOUT UCF being below the MVC in Sagarin (all the while the G4 division he was honking actually WAS below the MVC at full strength)?

Thanks. Agree with your sentiments.

In addition to the one weak area I brought up (14 or 15 games with viewership low enough to be listed as n.a.), you brought up the other major AAC weakness. At the top end, the AAC had four regular season conference games over 1 million, with a high of 3.098 million.

Meanwhile, the ACC had 14 conference games over one million, with five of them ranging between 3.55 million and 5.5 million).

Overall, the 2018 season analysis give us strong positives to build from.
- Memphis vs Tulane on ESPN 2 drew more viewers than Miami vs VT on ESPN.
- UCF vs USF drew 700K more viewers than Pitt vs Miami on the same network (ESPN)
- UCF vs Cincinnati drew significantly more viewers than at least two Clemson conference games on the same network.

This and many other examples show the relevance of the AAC is increasing and drawing more interest.

(06-29-2019 06:50 PM)Square Knight Wrote:  

(06-29-2019 05:02 PM)slhNavy91 Wrote:  

(06-29-2019 04:23 PM)Square Knight Wrote:  On the surface his claim is legit.
https://www.sportsmediawatch.com/college...v-ratings/
.
.
.


The area where the AAC falls short is consistency. We had several games that had n.a. listed instead of a number of viewers. I assumed that meant a number so low it was not worth computing/reporting...but one of those games was on ABC, which doesn't make sense. Those games were...

Tulane-Cincinnati (ESPNU)
SMU-UCF (ESPNU)
ECU-Temple (ESPNews)
SMU-Tulane (ESPNU)
Cincinnati-Tulsa (ESPNU)
Tulane-Tulsa (ESPNU)
Memphis-ECU (ESPNU)
Navy-Cincinnati (ESPNU)
Houston-SMU (ESPNU)
Tulsa-Memphis (ESPNU)
USF-Cincinnati (ESPNU)
ECU-Tulane (ESPNews)
Houston-Memphis (ABC) ???
Temple-UCONN (ESPNU)
Navy-Tulane (ESPNU)

First off, thanks for doing the legwork on this. I kept looking at this and saying "not today."
Second, those n.a. COULD mean no measurable viewing...for some, especially News and U games...but as you note, doesn't fly for an ABC Black Friday game. Basically, the Mouse just reported less out this year compared to previous. Thats ultimately SMW's source, so Paulsen is dependent on what they put out.
Third, a reason I didnt get started was how do you TRULY compare - timeslot, network, etc?
Fourth, if we take away their top performers and still compare our top...thats not a discussion I want to jump into. Anyone else remember the G4 trying to make some case about the AAC East WITHOUT UCF being below the MVC in Sagarin (all the while the G4 division he was honking actually WAS below the MVC at full strength)?

Thanks. Agree with your sentiments.

In addition to the one weak area I brought up (14 or 15 games with viewership low enough to be listed as n.a.), you brought up the other major AAC weakness. At the top end, the AAC had four regular season conference games over 1 million, with a high of 3.098 million.

Meanwhile, the ACC had 14 conference games over one million, with five of them ranging between 3.55 million and 5.5 million).

Overall, the 2018 season analysis give us strong positives to build from.
- Memphis vs Tulane on ESPN 2 drew more viewers than Miami vs VT on ESPN.
- UCF vs USF drew 700K more viewers than Pitt vs Miami on the same network (ESPN)
- UCF vs Cincinnati drew significantly more viewers than at least two Clemson conference games on the same network.

This and many other examples show the relevance of the AAC is increasing and drawing more interest.

That's the thing. Everybody only looks at top end. Networks pay for the whole conference, and half of our games don't seem to be worth tracking in the ratings dept.

(06-30-2019 10:41 AM)CoastalJuan Wrote:  

(06-29-2019 06:50 PM)Square Knight Wrote:  

(06-29-2019 05:02 PM)slhNavy91 Wrote:  

(06-29-2019 04:23 PM)Square Knight Wrote:  On the surface his claim is legit.
https://www.sportsmediawatch.com/college...v-ratings/
.
.
.


The area where the AAC falls short is consistency. We had several games that had n.a. listed instead of a number of viewers. I assumed that meant a number so low it was not worth computing/reporting...but one of those games was on ABC, which doesn't make sense. Those games were...

Tulane-Cincinnati (ESPNU)
SMU-UCF (ESPNU)
ECU-Temple (ESPNews)
SMU-Tulane (ESPNU)
Cincinnati-Tulsa (ESPNU)
Tulane-Tulsa (ESPNU)
Memphis-ECU (ESPNU)
Navy-Cincinnati (ESPNU)
Houston-SMU (ESPNU)
Tulsa-Memphis (ESPNU)
USF-Cincinnati (ESPNU)
ECU-Tulane (ESPNews)
Houston-Memphis (ABC) ???
Temple-UCONN (ESPNU)
Navy-Tulane (ESPNU)

First off, thanks for doing the legwork on this. I kept looking at this and saying "not today."
Second, those n.a. COULD mean no measurable viewing...for some, especially News and U games...but as you note, doesn't fly for an ABC Black Friday game. Basically, the Mouse just reported less out this year compared to previous. Thats ultimately SMW's source, so Paulsen is dependent on what they put out.
Third, a reason I didnt get started was how do you TRULY compare - timeslot, network, etc?
Fourth, if we take away their top performers and still compare our top...thats not a discussion I want to jump into. Anyone else remember the G4 trying to make some case about the AAC East WITHOUT UCF being below the MVC in Sagarin (all the while the G4 division he was honking actually WAS below the MVC at full strength)?

Thanks. Agree with your sentiments.

In addition to the one weak area I brought up (14 or 15 games with viewership low enough to be listed as n.a.), you brought up the other major AAC weakness. At the top end, the AAC had four regular season conference games over 1 million, with a high of 3.098 million.

Meanwhile, the ACC had 14 conference games over one million, with five of them ranging between 3.55 million and 5.5 million).

Overall, the 2018 season analysis give us strong positives to build from.
- Memphis vs Tulane on ESPN 2 drew more viewers than Miami vs VT on ESPN.
- UCF vs USF drew 700K more viewers than Pitt vs Miami on the same network (ESPN)
- UCF vs Cincinnati drew significantly more viewers than at least two Clemson conference games on the same network.

This and many other examples show the relevance of the AAC is increasing and drawing more interest.

That's the thing. Everybody only looks at top end. Networks pay for the whole conference, and half of our games don't seem to be worth tracking in the ratings dept.

That's not necessarily the case, I'm not sure they have reported ESPNnews for.pretry much its whole existence, and ESPNU has always been spotty.

Thankfully a lot of those type game are eliminated (news) or reduced (ESPNU) with the new contract so it should become easier to track.

I’ve been saying for the longest time on the realignment board that the ACC Network won’t be as successful as the ACC fans claim it will be. They lack the passionate fans of the B1G and SEC and their networks reflect that. If ACC games on ESPN2 and ESPNU have mediocre viewership, I can’t imagine what those numbers will be on the ACCN. Wake Forest vs Boston College on the ACCN? Yikes.

If I was a Louisville, Boston College, Wake Forest, Syracuse and Pitt fan, I’d be praying the ACCN starts delivering fast otherwise schools with options will start getting antsy and one or two will challenge the GOR. It’s one thing to accept you’re behind Alabama and Ohio State financially if you’re Clemson and Florida State. Another thing is to be behind Missouri and Minnesota.

the UC/UCF game ratings were impressive.

UCF - USF should have beaten Pitt - Miami. UCF was on a fantastic run. People were tuned in to see if they could continue the run. Pitt had clinched the Coastal Division the week before so there was nothing at stake in their game. People watch games for two reasons, a rooting interest in one of the teams, and a game with a compelling storyline or match up. If it hadn't been my alma mater playing, I probably would have watched the UCF-USF game.

Reverse mirror games make it difficult to suss out ratings per game. The UCF/Memphis game paired with Washington and Oregon drew 2.99M on ABC and 341k on ESPN2. USF and Houston similarly drew 2.35M on ABC and 315k on ESPN2 paired with ASU/USC.

(07-01-2019 10:48 AM)gulfcoastgal Wrote:  Reverse mirror games make it difficult to suss out ratings per game. The UCF/Memphis game paired with Washington and Oregon drew 2.99M on ABC and 341k on ESPN2. USF and Houston similarly drew 2.35M on ABC and 315k on ESPN2 paired with ASU/USC.

Very true. ESPN knows for sure how much of that was UCF/Memphis and how much of it was Washington/Oregon - but we can only guess. Sometimes you can get the TV map which shows what parts of the country got which game - I suppose you could try to ratio the 2.99M to the ABC parts and the 341K to the ESPN2 parts... LOTS of work for sure!

Even then, it’s not a straight split as some states watch college football in greater numbers than others. Whoever gets the coveted southeast has a leg up in potential viewers. So, while you can’t say for certain they were 1m+ viewers, you can’t say they weren’t either...goes for UM/UH on ABC too. It reminds me of how folks use the USAToday ncaa revenue numbers. Over 1/3 of the AAC isn’t included, but that doesn’t stop many from making comparisons in absolute terms. Playing probabilities, it’s unlikely all three were under 1m. Assuming they were for arguments sake, they’d still be on the list somewhere.