Realignment talk not going away

[billfromlaketravis 11,539]

I just don't Stanford in a conference with San Diego State and Fresno. This feels like bullshit while everybody waits out Notre Dame. 

[Francisco 2.0 32,431]

27 minutes ago, billfromlaketravis said:

I just don't Stanford in a conference with San Diego State and Fresno. This feels like bullshit while everybody waits out Notre Dame. 

 

 

Yeah.  I'm guessing if that vote ever came up, Stanford would be a no, along with their letter of resignation.  

 

 

[Francisco 2.0 32,431]

It's a three day old article on The Athletic (if it has been posted previously, mea culpa) and many of us understand viewership numbers and why these decisions are being made, but someone posed a question if Texas-Auburn would really draw more viewers than Texas-Texas Tech.  Take it away, Andy Staples:

 

Quote

Loved the perspective of viewership to look through the lens of realignment. My question: How many games will truly move the dial in terms of viewership? Does Oklahoma-Mississippi State really bring in more viewers than Oklahoma-Kansas State? Does USC-Purdue outpace USC-Arizona State? Oklahoma-Texas is just a reallocation of monies. And undoubtedly Texas-Alabama will outshine nearly anything. But I really wonder if losing Texas-Texas Tech replaced by Texas-Auburn is like for like. Probably not, but is it more than made up by forcing Texas-Texas A&M? — Mark

 

Spoiler

The consolidation into the Big Ten and SEC is all about one thing: creating blockbuster matchups for the TV networks willing to pay top dollar for them. That’s why I keep writing about TV ratings and audience numbers. No matter how the product gets distributed — be it through a satellite dish, linear cable TV or a streaming service — the only sure way to make money is to have the thing that the most people want to see.

The flaw in Mark’s argument is thinking Texas Tech and Auburn are similar as television properties. No offense intended to the Red Raiders, but they just don’t bring the audience the Tigers do. They’re not even in the same galaxy.

Using our ratings data set from 2015-19 and 2021 — the 2020 pandemic year is omitted because some leagues weren’t playing some weeks, skewing the numbers — we can compare the two programs in terms of audience.

Auburn had 49 rated games during that period. Those games had a median audience of 3.5 million. Texas Tech had 53 rated games in that period. Those games had a median audience of 834,000. Because channel does matter, the Red Raiders can get a boost if we remove their 24 rated games on Fox Sports 1. That brings their median audience up to 1.7 million. Unfortunately, that’s still a little less than half of what games involving Auburn drew.

Logic fails in thinking Auburn’s numbers were big because the Tigers play Alabama. (Though the Iron Bowl does monster numbers.) Mark theorized that Auburn’s audience minus its top opponents would look similar to Texas Tech’s minus Texas and Oklahoma. A test of that hypothesis doesn’t fare well for the Red Raiders.

Without Texas and Oklahoma, Texas Tech’s median audience falls to 676,000. Taking away FS1 games, that number rises to 1.1 million.

Now let’s look at Auburn. We’ll take away Alabama and Georgia, annual opponents that are bigger draws than Texas and Oklahoma. The Tigers’ median audience drops by more than a million viewers. (Told you the Iron Bowl does massive numbers.) But that still means Auburn’s games that didn’t include those opponents drew a median audience of 2.4 million.

Not including games against Alabama or Georgia, Auburn games drew an audience of more than five million on six occasions (Penn State in 2021, LSUin 2019, Oregon in 2019, Florida in 2019, LSU in 2018, Washington in 2018). Such games drew more than two million on 28 occasions.

Not including games against Texas and Oklahoma, Texas Tech games drew an audience of more than five million zero times. They actually didn’t crack five million playing Texas or Oklahoma, either. The biggest audience for any of those games was the 2017 Texas game with 3.6 million viewers. That would have come in at No. 24 on Auburn’s list.

Absent Oklahoma or Texas, the Red Raiders played games that drew two million viewers three times (Oklahoma State in 2015, TCU in 2015, Oklahoma State in 2017). When Auburn does a thing 28 times and Texas Tech does the same thing only three times, we’re not going out on a limb when we surmise that Auburn is better at that thing than Texas Tech.

This was not done to pick on the Red Raiders. That happens to be the program Mark named, so direct all complaints to him. I chose this question because it resembles a lot of the questions I get here and on Twitter where people assume they know a team’s audience without looking at the numbers.

The leagues and networks have much more detailed numbers than these. They know who is watching and when. They break it down by gender, age and hour. These realignment decisions do not happen by accident. Leagues know what networks crave, and they strive to deliver that.

These numbers tend to make some people very mad. And that’s understandable. No one wants to be given hard data that shows the rest of the world does not think their favorite thing is as special as they think it is. They try to rationalize why their team’s numbers are lower than another team’s numbers. And some of the factors do matter. Time slot and channel affect viewership. For example, the Big 12 might be able to poach from the Pac-12 in spite of marginally better audience numbers for the top of the Pac-12 versus the top of the Big 12. But leagues and networks understand that there is a this-is-the-only-game-on bump. Because Pac-12 teams tend to play in more games that start later and finish the night as the only game on a major network, that league’s schools’ numbers are helped by that bump. And that bump can be accounted for in the calculations of leagues and networks.

But some teams are simply more popular, and that has driven these most recent moves. The Big Ten and the SEC did this so they can throw Alabama-Oklahoma, Texas-Auburn and USC-Penn State at networks, which will in turn make networks throw money at those leagues.

 

 

 

[thunderlounge 7,953]

That's an awful lot of words just to say tech sucks.

[Dirk X West 772]

4 minutes ago, thunderlounge said:

That's an awful lot of words just to say tech sucks.

I was shocked to find out that an SEC team that's played in two national championship games in the last 20 years gets better TV ratings than Texas Tech.  

[bad_teammate 13,225]

14 minutes ago, Dirk X West said:

I was shocked to find out that an SEC team that's played in two national championship games in the last 20 years gets better TV ratings than Texas Tech.  

Not only that, but they're trying to act like removing the top two SEC is like removing the top two Big 12.

Alabama
Georgia
Florida
LSU
Tenn
A&M
Arkansas

Texas
Oklahoma
Oklahoma State
West Virginia
Baylor
Iowa State
... who else is in the Big 12?

A fairer comparison would require eliminating the top 7 SEC teams.

But yeah, Tech sucks.

[oSuJeff97 3,435]

15 hours ago, Okie State said:

It wouldn't be Surly if there weren't idiotic takes.

To be fair, this is page 420.

[TKthunder2 4,998]

https://www.heartlandcollegesports.com/2022/07/23/colorado-administration-views-the-big-12-as-a-juco-league-denver-post-columnist/
 

Quote

BIG 12 NEWS

Colorado Administration Views the Big 12 as a ‘JUCO League’: Denver Post Columnist

With conference realignment back in full swing, there has been plenty of speculation as to whether or not the Pac-12 could fall apart in the near future. If it does, could teams end up in the Big 12?

One team that has come up as a possible future Big 12 team is Colorado, who of course spent decades in the Big 12 (and Big 8 before that) prior to leaving for the Pac-12 in 2011.

There are plenty of reasons for Colorado to come home to the Big 12, but the biggest hang up might be the CU administration.

Denver Post columnist Sean Keeler joined SicEm365 radio and talked about how the biggest issue in Colorado returning to the Big 12 isn’t the fan base, but rather the administration.

Keeler said, “I would say the fan base would be 60-40 Big 12, and maybe even higher. They were burned. They feel duped by the Pac-12.”

Keeler went on to add, “Here’s the kicker, I think the administration is 70-30 Pac-12. They want the money, they want the comfort, they want the politics, they want the caviar, they want the prestige, air quotes. The administration at CU views the Big 12 as a JUCO league. They don’t want to be in that. And the fans absolutely do.”

If true, then the Colorado administration is going to rue the day that they got left in the Pac-12 and left millions of dollars on the table to stay in an unstable conference due to “prestige”, or something.

Interesting, Keller goes on to note, most Colorado fans would love to go back to the Big 12, especially fans over 35-40, and continues, “But your biggest donors who are not in the greater Denver area are in California. That’s a tricky balance there and they haven’t found it.” 

I believe most Big 12 fans would love to welcome Colorado back to the league and would love to get back to making road trips to Boulder. And if CU fans want back into the Big 12 to bring back some of their old foes, then the administration needs to do what is in the best financial interest of the university and interest of their fans.

 

[Nueces River Rat 5,539]

This thread needs a vintage Raquel Welch break. 

[msucolt45 4,082]

Someone should remind the CU Admin of 70-3!!!

Just ask Klatts!

Hook’em!

[BigHornedLurker 1,968]

Colorado is determined to follow up it's initial preemptive strike move to the pac12 with a postemptive strike move to the MWC 

Edited July 24, 2022 by BigHornedLurker

[notre dame joe 197]

5 hours ago, thunderlounge said:

That's an awful lot of words just to say tech sucks.

 

4 hours ago, bad_teammate said:

Not only that, but they're trying to act like removing the top two SEC is like removing the top two Big 12.

Alabama
Georgia
Florida
LSU
Tenn
A&M
Arkansas

Texas
Oklahoma
Oklahoma State
West Virginia
Baylor
Iowa State
... who else is in the Big 12?

A fairer comparison would require eliminating the top 7 SEC teams.

But yeah, Tech sucks.

Thank you.  The article doesn't even contemplate what happens if TTech and Auburn swapped schedules. 

[LTtxfan 49,375]

26 minutes ago, msucolt45 said:

Someone should remind the CU Admin of 70-3!!!
Just ask Klatts!     
Hook’em!

 

Joel can't remember that game...

 

[Okie State 3,848]

Lol Colorado is still in denial. They'll reach acceptance soon enough.

[camel at sea 589]

9 minutes ago, Okie State said:

Lol Colorado is still in denial. They'll reach acceptance soon enough.

The faculty would rather that the football team play in games that they don't watch, against west coast schools, than in games they don't watch against Big 12 schools.  If the higher-ups there let themselves be dictated to, by that crowd, then they deserve their eventual MWC fate.

That said, it does seem like a lot of the higher-ups in Boulder understand reality.  The Denver media isn't putting out "get out while you can" articles without some encouragement.  That doesn't mean that they can get their ducks in a row, though.     

[Mitch Cumsteen 18,593]

1 hour ago, notre dame joe said:

 

Thank you.  The article doesn't even contemplate what happens if TTech and Auburn swapped schedules. 

That's definitely fair about the top of the sec being their own draw, but in addition to the conference games auburn played Penn State, Oregon, and Washington that were among their highest rated games. Did tech ever even bother to schedule anybody ooc with a pulse? This really is my biggest bitch about the irate 8; they never did anything to add value to the conference. They scheduled nobodies forever to get bowl eligible, protect their coaches and cash checks. 

And then there's this:

Quote

The biggest audience for any of those games was the 2017 Texas game with 3.6 million viewers. That would have come in at No. 24 on Auburn’s list.

Pick and choose whatever games you want. This is damning. 

[bad_teammate 13,225]

Quote

This really is my biggest bitch about the irate 8; they never did anything to add value to the conference. They scheduled nobodies forever to get bowl eligible, protect their coaches and cash checks. 

Also fair. Playing prevent defense while down 14.

[utee94 15,868]

Texas Tech hasn't been the absolute worst offender, they've had a few decent OOC opponents, but they're definitely not scheduling Penn State or Oregon...

2021: Houston, Stephen F Austin, Florida International

2020: Houston Baptist (COVID)

2019: Montana State, UTEP, Arizona

2018: Ole Miss, Lamar, Houston

2017:Eastern Washington, Arizona State, Houston

2016: SFA, Arizona State, LaTech

2015: Sam Houston State, UTEP, Arkansas

2014: Central Arkansas, Arkansas, UTEP

2013: SMU, SFA, Texas State

2012: Northwestern State, Texas State, New Mexico

[Guest]

SEC is the greatest...

but they pay 8 conference games and have a November cupcake( bye) every year.

Fuck your scheduling high horse until that changes, mofos.

[Satchel 6,949]

3 hours ago, Mitch Cumsteen said:

That's definitely fair about the top of the sec being their own draw, but in addition to the conference games auburn played Penn State, Oregon, and Washington that were among their highest rated games. Did tech ever even bother to schedule anybody ooc with a pulse? This really is my biggest bitch about the irate 8; they never did anything to add value to the conference. They scheduled nobodies forever to get bowl eligible, protect their coaches and cash checks. 

And then there's this:

Pick and choose whatever games you want. This is damning. 

Good point. Back when the Big12 was really good, the Texas-Tech game in ‘08 was the highest rated of the season. The original Big12 would have done well to follow that old African proverb: “if you want to fast, go alone. If you want to go far, go together.” Seems the landscape is littered with schools choosing to go fast.

 

[DFW Horn 6,224]

Soon, every conference will be a B1G shit salad

 

[XOVERX 5]

The CU administration reminds me of the Texas administration under DeLoss Dodds.

Dodds dissed the SEC from the beginning of the modern day realignment catalyst, which is to say, after Oklahoma v. NCAA in 1984.

First, Dodds refused to follow AR into the SEC, instead choosing the B10, over the protestations of aggy, who wanted the SEC. After getting dissed by the B10, Dodds insisted on the B12, ignoring that all but three of the major TV markets were in Texas. Then, after those three TV markets ran off, then aggy ran off to the SEC, still no SEC for Texas, Dodds gave us a dozen more years in the new B12 + LHN + WVU + TCU. Oh goodie. Then, mercifully, Dodds retired.

After Dodds left, it didn’t take too awfully long for the Texas admin to finally settle on CDC and figure out the obvious move: SEC. Thank goodness the wanderlust is over.

[BornAndRaised 12,314]

This dude called the USC/UCLA move back in April, and is now saying Big12 is waiting for t1 B10 rights to drop before B12 makes a move. Looks like they're trying to add Cal, Stanford, Arizona and Colorado.
 

read the whole thread he posted.

[DFW Horn 6,224]

7 minutes ago, BornAndRaised said:

This dude called the USC/UCLA move back in April, and is now saying Big12 is waiting for t1 B10 rights to drop before B12 makes a move. Looks like they're trying to add Cal, Stanford, Arizona and Colorado.

read the whole thread he posted.

I did.

@MHver3 is the master of postulating multiple scenarios to fit a narrative that he'll use later as proof of his "sources". Throw enough shit up against the wall and eventually something stick. It's just speculation and fun to debate, which is why we're here.

How does an anonymous hillbilly have high-level sources in the Big 12 and Pac?

[BornAndRaised 12,314]

8 minutes ago, DFW Horn said:

I did.

@MHver3 is the master of postulating multiple scenarios to fit a narrative that he'll use later as proof of his "sources". Throw enough shit up against the wall and eventually something stick. It's just speculation and fun to debate, which is why we're here.

How does an anonymous hillbilly have high-level sources in the Big 12 and Pac?

Don't know, popped up on my timeline. I've never heard of him and him calling out the USC/UCLA move in april lent him some initial credibility. Apologies if he's a known shit hound.

[statsman 5,486]

2 hours ago, slorch said:

SEC is the greatest...

but they pay 8 conference games and have a November cupcake( bye) every year.

Fuck your scheduling high horse until that changes, mofos.

They also take turns playing league games in week 1. That’s part of why the networks are willing to pay so much for their media rights. Weeks 1 thru 14, the SEC gives a good to great slate of games. 
Sorry, Slorch, but TT (like the rest of the B12) refuses to schedule a real game in week 1. As noted above, all the non-blue blood B12 schools have adopted the Snyder scheduling model, all focused on making sure they maximize the chances of getting bowl eligibility. 
It’s called free riding 

[Gidnik 3,285]

51 minutes ago, BornAndRaised said:

This dude called the USC/UCLA move back in April, and is now saying Big12 is waiting for t1 B10 rights to drop before B12 makes a move. Looks like they're trying to add Cal, Stanford, Arizona and Colorado.
 

read the whole thread he posted.

ill eat my own shit if stanford joins the big 12. 

 

[Wulaw Horn 19,153]

6 hours ago, TKthunder2 said:

https://www.heartlandcollegesports.com/2022/07/23/colorado-administration-views-the-big-12-as-a-juco-league-denver-post-columnist/
 

 

This is why I said the big 12 should slit Colorado's throat and leave them lying in a ditch. Not a good cultural fit, and like Cal Berkeley t eh don’t bring enough of anything (quality, cash, recruits) to fuck with their bitchassedness. 

[BurntOrange&White 40,045]

2 hours ago, BornAndRaised said:

This dude called the USC/UCLA move back in April, and is now saying Big12 is waiting for t1 B10 rights to drop before B12 makes a move. Looks like they're trying to add Cal, Stanford, Arizona and Colorado.
 

read the whole thread he posted.

99% of the shit he post doesn’t happen. He gets lucky 1% of the time. He’s a fool

[mdmost 43,056]

1 hour ago, BornAndRaised said:

This dude called the USC/UCLA move back in April, and is now saying Big12 is waiting for t1 B10 rights to drop before B12 makes a move. Looks like they're trying to add Cal, Stanford, Arizona and Colorado.
 

read the whole thread he posted.

You ever hear the expression that even the sun shines on a dog's ass every once in while? This guy throws shit continually against a wall. Like a monkey throwing feces. Check this bit of fan fiction. Stanford, a damn West Coast Ivy, would be a good fit for the Big 12 but Cal wouldn't? And then the Big 12 would want San Diego SMU or Fresno F'ing State instead. FRESNO! 

FRESNO!

[Satchel 6,949]

18 minutes ago, mdmost said:

You ever hear the expression that even the sun shines on a dog's ass every once in while? This guy throws shit continually against a wall. Like a monkey throwing feces. Check this bit of fan fiction. Stanford, a damn West Coast Ivy, would be a good fit for the Big 12 but Cal wouldn't? And then the Big 12 would want San Diego SMU or Fresno F'ing State instead. FRESNO! 

FRESNO!

It’s possible that Stanford’s and Cal’s academic reputations won’t be sullied by associating  with their inferiors as long as the games are at night. When all the preening and posturing is done, they’ll be like all of the other greedy schools looking to turn a buck. The only difference is it will be longer plane to Manhattan than to Corvallis. 

Edited July 25, 2022 by Satchel

[BurntOrange&White 40,045]

1 minute ago, Satchel said:

It’s possible that Stanford’s and Cal’s academic reputations won’t be sullied by associating with with their inferiors as long as the games are a night. When all the preening and posturing is done, they’ll be like all of the other greedy schools looking to turn a buck. The only difference is it will be longer plane to Manhattan than to Corvallis. 

Hope both of those schools get left in the dark. Fucking regarded admins at both that would be happy to cut football

[camel at sea 589]

From Arizona's 247 realignment insider:

 

['stache 21,892]

That CU article sounds like complete horseshit tbh.

[Azbadlands 109]

1 hour ago, Wulaw Horn said:

This is why I said the big 12 should slit Colorado's throat and leave them lying in a ditch. Not a good cultural fit, and like Cal Berkeley t eh don’t bring enough of anything (quality, cash, recruits) to fuck with their bitchassedness. 

They bring a huge metro area outside of Texas in Denver and outlying cities like Colorado Springs and Fort Collins.  But, you are right, they do suck, and don't deserve crap...

[Guest]

3 hours ago, statsman said:

They also take turns playing league games in week 1. That’s part of why the networks are willing to pay so much for their media rights. Weeks 1 thru 14, the SEC gives a good to great slate of games. 
Sorry, Slorch, but TT (like the rest of the B12) refuses to schedule a real game in week 1. As noted above, all the non-blue blood B12 schools have adopted the Snyder scheduling model, all focused on making sure they maximize the chances of getting bowl eligibility. 
It’s called free riding 

Meh.  Tech football has sucked for over a decade.  Ain't nobody reasonably claiming greatness there.  Tech's scheduling shortcomings/ workarounds don't justify the shenanigans by those claiming the high road.  That tactic isn't a surprise either.  Give me a fucking break with, " But Texas Tech does..."  It isn't remotely a similar conversation.

[Satchel 6,949]

1 hour ago, slorch said:

Meh.  Tech football has sucked for over a decade.  Ain't nobody reasonably claiming greatness there.  Tech's scheduling shortcomings/ workarounds don't justify the shenanigans by those claiming the high road.  That tactic isn't a surprise either.  Give me a fucking break with, " But Texas Tech does..."  It isn't remotely a similar conversation.

Yep, I agree. The whole “we hung for as long as we could, but Tech’s scheduling…sheesh.”

Edited July 25, 2022 by Satchel

[Guest]

Scheduling should be:

9 Conference games

1 true road non-con, P5 game

1 true home non-con P5 game

1 game wherever the fuck you want, against whomever you want.

Have every conference play a CCG or none at all.  With all of the pods/ divisions/ whatnot; I'd support having them.

16 team playoff and use other teams to fill out the lesser Bowls.

 

[Francisco 2.0 32,431]

Mandel's latest:

https://theathletic.com/3444339/2022/07/25/pac12-big12-tv-viewership/

 

Quote

Right after the Oklahoma-and-Texas-to-the-SEC bombshell broke last summer, I conducted a frantic research project examining the TV value of the eight Big 12 schools left behind. There was speculation at the time that the Pac-12 or another Power 5 conference would swoop in and invite several of those schools. I quickly realized that wasn’t going to happen, upon seeing how poorly programs like Oklahoma State and Baylor fare in the Nielsen ratings when not facing the Sooners or the Longhorns.

 

Quote

A year later, the Pac-12 finds itself in much the same predicament following USC and UCLA’s shocking departures for the Big Ten. Given the Big 12 has since stabilized itself with the additions of BYU, Cincinnati, UCF and Houston, there are now rumblings of that league trying poach a combination of the remaining Pac-12 programs.

 

Quote

With the Pac-12 knee-deep in a 30-day negotiation window with ESPN and Fox for its next deal, it was a no-brainer for me to conduct a similar study of the 10 remaining Pac-12 schools’ TV performances. Are those schools worth more, less, or roughly the same as the eight Big 12 holdovers? And does the data support the prevailing notion that Oregon and Washington are particularly valuable brands?

 

Quote

The one regret I had about that Big 12 story is that it only looked at two seasons’ (2018 and 2019) worth of data. That’s too small a sample size. Fortuitously, my colleague Andy Staples (with the help of Sports Media Watch) has since compiled a massive database of every regular-season Nielsen-rated game since 2015 (excluding the statistically worthless 2020 season). This allowed me to not only go deeper with the Pac-12, but revisit and update the Big 12 for apples-to-apples comparisons.

(I did not include BYU, Cincinnati, UCF and Houston in the Big 12’s sample, as they were not Big 12 members at the time and, in the case of the latter three, were largely facing Group of 5 and not Power 5 opponents.)

Both conferences’ home games on ABC, Fox, ESPN, ESPN2, FS1 and ESPNU were included. Unfortunately, no data is available for the Pac-12 Network, Longhorn Network or ESPN+, which began airing Big 12 games in 2019. But it’s still a relatively similar amount of inventory — after removing the departing members’ games, about 52 per year from the Big 12 and 48 from the Pac-12.

Some key takeaways…

 

Spoiler

Losing USC and UCLA is not as catastrophic as losing Oklahoma and Texas

It’s absolutely still a gut punch, but neither USC or UCLA have been as big a draw recently as Oklahoma or Texas. Over six seasons, the Sooners averaged 3.26 million viewers per game, the Longhorns 2.7 million. Over the same period, the Trojans averaged 2.17 million per game, the Bruins 1.55 million. While Oklahoma and Texas were the Big 12’s clear-cut top two, USC was not significantly higher than Oregon (2.02 million), while UCLA ranked sixth in the Pac-12.

Of course, this period coincided with Clay Helton’s underwhelming tenure at USC, in which the Trojans went 46-32 and won one Pac-12 title. The TV networks would know much better how well USC rates when it’s winning big, like it did during the Pete Carroll era.

That said, Texas was 40-36 during the same stretch and averaged a half-million more viewers than the Trojans.

There’s an obvious reason for that, though. The conferences’ two media partners generally put their best games every week on over-the-air networks ABC or Fox, where games usually draw higher ratings than on cable. Oklahoma and Texas appeared on 46 and 33 such broadcasts, respectively, compared with 28 for USC and 16 for UCLA.

In total, 73 percent of Fox and ABC’s Big 12 selections included the two departing members, versus 53 percent for the Pac-12. In fact, Oregon was chosen for the top spot 18 times, two more than UCLA.

Why, then, isn’t the Big Ten taking Oregon instead of or along with UCLA? Because the Los Angeles television market is much more valuable.

It currently comprises nearly 5.5 million households. Getting the Big Ten Network (which is majority owned by Fox) onto basic cable tiers there is expected to generate tens of millions annually in new subscriber fees — whether or not those subscribers watch a single UCLA game.

Oregon and Washington draw well — but don’t forget Stanford

Oregon, which went to the College Football Playoff the year before this period began, won a Rose Bowl in 2019 and finished in the AP Top 25 two other seasons, averaged 1.96 million viewers, even with its USC and UCLA games removed. For perspective, the top remaining Big 12 program, Oklahoma State, averaged 1.28 million.

The next-highest performer was a mild surprise: Stanford (1.83 million), which edged out Washington (1.73 million). While the Cardinal have been dreadful the past few seasons, they were notable ratings draws in the days of Christian McCaffrey and Bryce Love. In 2016, a Friday night ESPN game between No. 7 Stanford and No. 10 Washington drew 3.3 million viewers, third-highest of any Pac-12 game that season.

Stanford also gets significant mileage out of its every-other-year home games against Notre Dame. The two have played every year (save 2020) since 1997. The four installments during this period averaged 4.8 million. While there is no guarantee the series continues forever, an ESPN or Fox might pay handsomely just for the rights in the event it does.

Everyone but Arizona and Oregon State averaged at least 1.2 million viewers

Below is a chart of the remaining Pac-12 and Big 12 schools’ average TV ratings, from 2015-19 and 2021. (Games against Oklahoma/Texas and USC/UCLA are excluded.)

TEAM VIEWERS

Oregon	1.96 million
Stanford	1.83 million
Washington	1.73 million
Washington State	1.59 million
Colorado	1.49 million
Utah	1.44 million
Oklahoma State	1.28 million
California	1.27 million
TCU	1.22 million
Arizona State	1.19 million
West Virginia	1.10 million
Baylor	1.07 million
Iowa State	1.04 million
Texas Tech	866,000
Arizona	815,000
Kansas State	748,000
Oregon State	723,000
Kansas	409,000

That 1.2 million number would get laughed at in the Big Ten or SEC. As Staples recently wrote, Auburn, even with marquee games against Alabama and Georgia excluded, has a median audience that’s twice as high (2.4 million).

But it may be of relevance given the current Big 12/Pac-12 jostling taking place farther down the track.

That 1.2 million average is more than all but two of the eight Big 12 holdovers (Oklahoma State and TCU). Even Oklahoma State (1.28 million) would only rank seventh among the remaining Pac-12 schools. On the surface, that seems preposterous, given the Cowboys, who went 12-2 last season and 57-22 over those six seasons, are light years better on the field than the forlorn Buffaloes (33-42).

But I think I know the answer.

Pac-12 After Dark is a sneaky-big advantage

As much as Pac-12 coaches and fans loathe those late games, they may be the league’s saving grace in its next deal.

While the Big 12 and Pac-12 have the same two TV partners, their deals are structured differently. The Big 12’s leftover eight had far more of their games relegated to the ratings graveyard that is FS1 than the Pac-12’s, while the Pac-12 got more pickups by main ESPN. And that’s entirely because the league is able to place games at 10:30 p.m. ET, when no other Power 5 leagues are playing.

In 2021, Pac-12 teams appeared on 12 ESPN games that kicked off at 10 p.m. ET or later. Those games averaged 1.34 million viewers, and all but two broke 1 million.

Because ESPN reserves its earlier time slots almost entirely for the Big Ten, SEC and ACC, the Big 12’s best cable windows are usually daytime on ESPN2. Ratings-wise, it’s still better to be on main ESPN, regardless of kickoff time.

For example, on Nov. 20 last season, Arizona State and Oregon State — two of the Pac-12’s lowest-drawing teams — played a 10:30 p.m. ET ESPN game that garnered 1.11 million viewers. In doing so, they narrowly beat a Noon ESPN2 game that included Texas (against West Virginia). It sounds crazy, but the latter, which reached 1 million viewers, went up against both No. 4 Ohio State vs. No. 7 Michigan State on ABC (5.3 million) and Clemson vs. No. 10 Wake Forest on ESPN (1.6 million), whereas the Sun Devils and Beavers were the only Power 5 teams still in action.

The Pac-12 might be OK if…

In conclusion, the Pac-12 may be in better shape than one would have assumed three weeks ago — provided it can keep the remaining 10 schools together.

The league won’t come anywhere close to the SEC or Big Ten in its next TV deal, but a consensus has developed recently among TV experts that ESPN will likely offer something enticing enough to calm the waters. (Fox, now that it has the existing Big Ten and USC and UCLA, is likely out of the picture.) Keep in mind, that new deal will likely include the rights to 30-plus additional games a year that currently air on the soon-to-go-dark Pac-12 Network. ESPN would likely place on them on its budding ESPN+ streaming service.

Of course, if at any point the Big Ten changes its mind about Oregon and Washington, then the remains of the Pac-12 would be no better off than the remains of the Big 12. But that does not appear to be imminent. In the meantime, commissioner George Kliavkoff should urge those 10 schools to welcome a couple of new members (San Diego State would surely be one), embrace 10:30 p.m. ET kickoffs and look forward to a new era with more streaming (hello, ESPN+) and possibly no FS1 or Pac-12 Network dumps.

The money won’t be $80 million a year like the Big Ten’s 2024 projections, but should be within shouting distance of the ACC, which got $36.1 million last year.

Like the Pac-12, the rebuilt Big 12 is to be determined. But based on the ratings numbers in this story, it’s hard to see why the Pac-12 would be in a weaker position.

 

[statsman 5,486]

Thanks for the article. It looks to me like UW and Oregon should ask for unequal revenue sharing and no GOR, and settle for nothing less than equal revenue sharing/No GOR (what Texas should have done last go-round). 

[Guest]

5 minutes ago, statsman said:

Thanks for the article. It looks to me like UW and Oregon should ask for unequal revenue sharing and no GOR, and settle for nothing less than equal revenue sharing/No GOR (what Texas should have done last go-round). 

I hope they ask for that too. It will virtually guarantee the four corner schools going to the big 12

[statsman 5,486]

I don’t know. Look at the Mandel numbers- why should they leave a bunch of schools they have been joined with for decades (the Arizona schools), and join up with a bunch of schools with less viewership (Mandel’s numbers)? For more money? It sounds like they could improve PAC payouts by just dumping the PAC network. 
For stability? I’m not convinced the B12 is held together by anything more than the members having no better options (IOW, what we call a solid west Texas marriage). 

Edited July 25, 2022 by statsman

[BurntOrange&White 40,045]

20 minutes ago, slorch said:

I hope they ask for that too. It will virtually guarantee the four corner schools going to the big 12

Tend to agree here....If you're an Arizona, Utah, or hell even Stanford.....no fucking way you agree to unequal revenue sharing. That is a death sentence....

[mdleast 8,314]

That Athletic article that Francisco quotes above is really interesting and, in particular, that chart with average viewers, is not what I bet most people who think if you asked them which conference had more average viewers:

[utee94 15,868]

Does not compute.  Only mean old selfish Texas would ever want or push for unequal revenue sharing.

[BurntOrange&White 40,045]

2 minutes ago, mdleast said:

That Athletic article that Francisco quotes above is really interesting and, in particular, that chart with average viewers, is not what I bet most people who think if you asked them which conference had more average viewers:

What’s the context of that? Is it taken from all games or conference games? I’d be interested see conference games average  of both not including UCLA, USC, Texas, or Oklahoma. 

[mdleast 8,314]

What’s the context of that? Is it taken from all games or conference games? I’d be interested see conference games average  of both not including UCLA, USC, Texas, or Oklahoma. 

Per the article:

Below is a chart of the remaining Pac-12 and Big 12 schools’ average TV ratings, from 2015-19 and 2021. (Games against Oklahoma/Texas and USC/UCLA are excluded.)

[LTtxfan 49,375]

Fyi... 

 

[DFW Horn 6,224]

4 minutes ago, LTtxfan said:

Fyi... 

 

CFB players union? Fucking commies...

Better medical care? How do they get more coddling than they already receive?

[closetohumping 17,477]

26 minutes ago, mdleast said:

That Athletic article that Francisco quotes above is really interesting and, in particular, that chart with average viewers, is not what I bet most people who think if you asked them which conference had more average viewers:

1.  Say what?  I thought we he big 12 schools have been crushing the pac schools?

2. Is that mhver guy aka dude of West Virginia?

3. academics may be overrated here.   Vanderbilt is well thought of and they’re in the same conference as MSU , ole miss and aggy