header pic

Perhaps the BEST B1G Forum anywhere, here at College Football Fan Site, CFB51!!!

The 'Old' CFN/Scout Crowd- Enjoy Civil discussion, game analytics, in depth player and coaching 'takes' and discussing topics surrounding the game. You can even have your own free board, all you have to do is ask!!!

Anyone is welcomed and encouraged to join our FREE site and to take part in our community- a community with you- the user, the fan, -and the person- will be protected from intrusive actions and with a clean place to interact.


« previous next »
Pages: 1 ... 5 6 [7] 8 9 ... 69   Go Down
Author

Topic: UCLA and USC

 (Read 49344 times)

Cincydawg

  • Oracle of Piedmont Park
  • Global Moderator
  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Default Avatar
  • Posts: 72161
  • Oracle of Piedmont Park
  • Liked:
Re: UCLA and USC
« Reply #84 on: July 01, 2022, 09:36:39 AM »
If we end up with two 20 team conferences, we basically will have four ten team conferences.

Around and around we go ...
Logged

ELA

  • Global Moderator
  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 20364
  • Liked:
Re: UCLA and USC
« Reply #85 on: July 01, 2022, 09:49:01 AM »
Logged

utee94

  • Global Moderator
  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 17796
  • Liked:
Re: UCLA and USC
« Reply #86 on: July 01, 2022, 09:57:51 AM »
Quote from: Cincydawg on July 01, 2022, 08:45:07 AM
Which schools out there are the major money makers left hanging?

UNC UVA  FSU  Miami?  Oregon  Washington  Colorado  Oklahoma State?  ND  Clemson 

NCSU  BC  Kansas?  KState? 

Think beyond just football.
Aside from Notre Dame-- Texas and OU to the SEC, and USC and UCLA to the B1G, are really the last big media rights captures that move the needle all that much.

Any other additions to a conference would only provide minimal incremental revenue.

Which makes me think the next moves from any conference, will be vanity/prestige adds, or strategic ones to capture Notre Dame.  Getting Stanford into the B1G works toward BOTH of those goals.

I don't really see any advantage to adding Oregon to the B1G.  They're a dangerously competitive athletics school that doesn't really bring any television markets or recruiting areas to the table.  They pose great risk to the existing powers in the B1G, but provide little return.  I'd be surprised if Oregon is actually under serious consideration.
Logged

FearlessF

  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 37796
  • Liked:
Re: UCLA and USC
« Reply #87 on: July 01, 2022, 10:00:20 AM »
Quote from: TamrielsKeeper on July 01, 2022, 08:52:29 AM
I don't really feel like Iowa is "rivals" with anyone in the B1G outside of Minnesota/Wisconsin/Nebraska.  I'd include NW too, but it's not a trophy game.

Everyone outside of those three I consider "like minded associates" who I root for outside of them playing Iowa.  I don't think you need more than 3/4 "rivals", otherwise the term gets a bit watered down, wouldn't you agree?
I agree, but playing the same teams each season builds something that is favorable, especially for the fans.
and the fans are responsible for TV ratings
Logged
"Courage; Generosity; Fairness; Honor; In these are the true awards of manly sport."

FearlessF

  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 37796
  • Liked:
Re: UCLA and USC
« Reply #88 on: July 01, 2022, 10:03:07 AM »
Quote from: utee94 on July 01, 2022, 09:57:51 AM
Aside from Notre Dame-- Texas and OU to the SEC, and USC and UCLA to the B1G, are really the last big media rights captures that move the needle all that much.

Any other additions to a conference would only provide minimal incremental revenue.

Which makes me think the next moves from any conference, will be vanity/prestige adds, or strategic ones to capture Notre Dame.  Getting Stanford into the B1G works toward BOTH of those goals.

I don't really see any advantage to adding Oregon to the B1G.  They're a dangerously competitive athletics school that doesn't really bring any television markets or recruiting areas to the table.  They pose great risk to the existing powers in the B1G, but provide little return.  I'd be surprised if Oregon is actually under serious consideration.
Ed Zachery


I'd guess Arizona is the bigger TV market than the other PAC programs
Perhaps the Big could add a program from Texas to force the BTN into that TV market?
Logged
"Courage; Generosity; Fairness; Honor; In these are the true awards of manly sport."

847badgerfan

  • Administrator
  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 25484
  • Liked:
Re: UCLA and USC
« Reply #89 on: July 01, 2022, 10:03:47 AM »
Quote from: utee94 on July 01, 2022, 09:57:51 AM
Aside from Notre Dame-- Texas and OU to the SEC, and USC and UCLA to the B1G, are really the last big media rights captures that move the needle all that much.

Any other additions to a conference would only provide minimal incremental revenue.

Which makes me think the next moves from any conference, will be vanity/prestige adds, or strategic ones to capture Notre Dame.  Getting Stanford into the B1G works toward BOTH of those goals.

I don't really see any advantage to adding Oregon to the B1G.  They're a dangerously competitive school that doesn't really bring any television markets or recruiting areas to the table.  They pose great risk to the existing powers in the B1G, but provide little return.  I'd be surprised if Oregon is actually under serious consideration.
You are a smart man.

And the whole AAU thing went out the window when UNL was allowed in.

Take Stanford and ND and Washington, and grab one more of either Colorado, Arizona, or ASU.

You now have the ND market, the bay area market, the Seattle market, and the Denver market or the PHX market.

This is all about TV.
Logged
U RAH RAH! WIS CON SIN!

847badgerfan

  • Administrator
  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 25484
  • Liked:
Re: UCLA and USC
« Reply #90 on: July 01, 2022, 10:04:55 AM »
Quote from: FearlessF on July 01, 2022, 10:03:07 AM
Ed Zachery


I'd guess Arizona is the bigger TV market than the other PAC programs
Perhaps the Big could add a program from Texas to force the BTN into that TV market?
The only two suitable schools from Texas are in the SEC. Nothing else moves any needle. We don't need another Rutgers.
Logged
U RAH RAH! WIS CON SIN!

FearlessF

  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 37796
  • Liked:
Re: UCLA and USC
« Reply #91 on: July 01, 2022, 10:07:51 AM »
agreed, but the same reason we have Rutgers applies to a Texas program

forced carry of the BTN for the entire state
Logged
"Courage; Generosity; Fairness; Honor; In these are the true awards of manly sport."

utee94

  • Global Moderator
  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 17796
  • Liked:
Re: UCLA and USC
« Reply #92 on: July 01, 2022, 10:09:42 AM »
Quote from: 847badgerfan on July 01, 2022, 10:04:55 AM
The only two suitable schools from Texas are in the SEC. Nothing else moves any needle. We don't need another Rutgers.

Yes, exactly.  And actually, there are 4 schools that really tap into the Texas market-- Texas, Texas A&M, OU, and LSU to a lesser extent (they're popular in Houston and East Texas).  All of them will be in the SEC.

Heck, Oklahoma State probably pulls better numbers inside the state of Texas, than do TCU, Baylor, Houston, Rice, SMU, North Texas, or anyone else not named Texas Tech.  Who is probably about even with Oklahoma State and WAY below the top 4 draws in the state.

Logged

utee94

  • Global Moderator
  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 17796
  • Liked:
Re: UCLA and USC
« Reply #93 on: July 01, 2022, 10:11:23 AM »
Quote from: FearlessF on July 01, 2022, 10:07:51 AM
agreed, but the same reason we have Rutgers applies to a Texas program

forced carry of the BTN for the entire state
That's no longer occurring in all markets in NY/NJ, some carriers are flat out refusing, and I'd expect the same refusal in the state of Texas unless the B1G had nabbed UT or TAMU.  The cable subscriber model is dying anyway.  Rutgers was a really bad take, in hindsight.
Logged

TamrielsKeeper

  • Recruit
  • **
  • Default Avatar
  • Posts: 60
  • Liked:
Re: UCLA and USC
« Reply #94 on: July 01, 2022, 10:40:04 AM »
Yeah, they love talking about the B1G being in NY, which is physically kind of true, but Rutgers certainly doesn't deliver NY.  They'd like a do-over on Rutgers, I'm nearly sure.

If you could swap out Rutgers for North Carolina, that would be a great trade.
Logged

TamrielsKeeper

  • Recruit
  • **
  • Default Avatar
  • Posts: 60
  • Liked:
Re: UCLA and USC
« Reply #95 on: July 01, 2022, 10:43:54 AM »
Quote from: 847badgerfan on July 01, 2022, 10:03:47 AM
You are a smart man.

And the whole AAU thing went out the window when UNL was allowed in.

Take Stanford and ND and Washington, and grab one more of either Colorado, Arizona, or ASU.

You now have the ND market, the bay area market, the Seattle market, and the Denver market or the PHX market.

This is all about TV.

I think Oregon delivers more eyeballs than any of Colorado/Arizona/ASU though, and I don't think it's even close.

The argument could certainly be made that's a byproduct of Phil Knight/Nike money and if that ever goes away, they might be a dumpster fire, but in terms of TV ratings (not market), Oregon is a better bet than Denver/Phoenix, because I don't think Colorado/ASU/Arizona actually deliver those markets.
Logged

Cincydawg

  • Oracle of Piedmont Park
  • Global Moderator
  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Default Avatar
  • Posts: 72161
  • Oracle of Piedmont Park
  • Liked:
Re: UCLA and USC
« Reply #96 on: July 01, 2022, 10:47:57 AM »
Washington probably gets eyeballs, and this is more than just football.

I don't know about Colorado, that program could get eyeballs at some point, it's a decently sized market.

Logged

TamrielsKeeper

  • Recruit
  • **
  • Default Avatar
  • Posts: 60
  • Liked:
Re: UCLA and USC
« Reply #97 on: July 01, 2022, 10:50:42 AM »
I'd be fine with any of AZ/ASU/CU, I'm just guessing the networks would push for Oregon.
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 5 6 [7] 8 9 ... 69   Go Up
« previous next »
 
Support the Site!
Purchase of every item listed here DIRECTLY supports the site.
Smokeys Record Year Hoodie

Smokey Record Hoodie