Free Trial Ad
Why Subscribe?
  • Player/Prospect News
  • Exclusive Insider Info
  • Members-Only Forums
  • Exclusive Videos
  • Subscribe Now!
InboxChat RoomChat Room (0 fans in chatroom)

The MW TV ratings...

Avatar

Posted: 06/28/2014 11:29 AM

The MW TV ratings... 


Under'DOGS 4 Life
Reply | Quote

Posted: 06/28/2014 11:53 AM

Re: The MW TV ratings... 


The MWC should be getting over $10 million yr/team based on those numbers......
"Frequently wrong but never in doubt!"
Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 06/28/2014 1:16 PM

Re: The MW TV ratings... 


If we could win a few games against the teams from power conferences, I would think that would help our ratings ;-)

Ask Vic

Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 06/28/2014 6:13 PM

Re: The MW TV ratings... 



modestobulldog wrote: If we could win a few games against the teams from power conferences, I would think that would help our ratings ;-)
I get your point but Rutgers was an AAC now a B10.  Also, if we went back to scheduling teams other than the elite ones we'd have more "power conference" wins.

Also, it should be noted that Scott sold the networks a "bill of goods" with the Pac-12 TV contract.  They just don't deliver anywhere near the number of eyeballs to justify their contract.  The SEC and the B10 own TV.  Boise State is still harvesting ESPN TV eyeballs from their prior glory days.  With Peterson gone another 4 plus loss season and their national brand is in trouble.

 

Last edited 06/28/2014 6:24 PM by LuDog70

Reply | Quote

Posted: 06/29/2014 11:10 AM

Re: The MW TV ratings... 


This is such a important topic when it comes to the worst case scenario of schools like Fresno getting left behind by the Big5. Honestly, these numbers are better than what I expected and we really did not play anyone last year whose school has a national following besides the bowl game. I am surprised that SDSU was that far ahead of us considering how average they have been in recent years. I guess that just shows the powers of a large population. The 2014 schedule has 3 teams that will draw huge numbers. Throw in Boise and we should be at the top of the conference list next year assuming we win at least two of our non conference games. We also need schools like USU, SDSU, UNLV and Nevada to all have winning seasons to increase viewership. When the season starts it would be great if someone could update our conferences TV ratings. Definitely something I would like to remain updated on. Of course we also need Boise to get back to the 10-11 win team they were for much of the last ten years. I still thing Boise, SDSU and Fresno have a small chance of receiving invitations to power conferences but all three must continue solid football play. Lastly, if Terry can get the basketball program in the top three of the MWC that would certainly be of help to greener pastures. In the meantime it looks like Fresno is in the best non Big5 in the country.

Last edited 06/29/2014 11:12 AM by 559notown

Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 06/29/2014 11:59 AM

Re: The MW TV ratings... 



559notown wrote: This is such a important topic when it comes to the worst case scenario of schools like Fresno getting left behind by the Big5. Honestly, these numbers are better than what I expected and we really did not play anyone last year whose school has a national following besides the bowl game. I am surprised that SDSU was that far ahead of us considering how average they have been in recent years. I guess that just shows the powers of a large population. The 2014 schedule has 3 teams that will draw huge numbers. Throw in Boise and we should be at the top of the conference list next year assuming we win at least two of our non conference games. We also need schools like USU, SDSU, UNLV and Nevada to all have winning seasons to increase viewership. When the season starts it would be great if someone could update our conferences TV ratings. Definitely something I would like to remain updated on. Of course we also need Boise to get back to the 10-11 win team they were for much of the last ten years. I still thing Boise, SDSU and Fresno have a small chance of receiving invitations to power conferences but all three must continue solid football play. Lastly, if Terry can get the basketball program in the top three of the MWC that would certainly be of help to greener pastures. In the meantime it looks like Fresno is in the best non Big5 in the country.
Look at the Big-12 number my friend.  They play top level football and outside of Texas they have low level TV markets.  They need bigger TV markets badly.  The good news for them is they have upside with who they could invite unlike the Pac-12 which is essentially tapped out for upside.  SDSU and FSU do nothing for the Pac-12 TV market/contract.  But the story is exactly the opposite for the Big-12.

 

Reply | Quote

Posted: 06/29/2014 12:32 PM

Re: The MW TV ratings... 




I think you have to look at how the loss of Texas A&M and Nebraska has effected the BIG12. Those schools have a huge following and has probably single handily lowered the conferences TV stock. Will tapping into the California market help their ratings? In theory yes, but will SDSU have any success if moved to the BIG12? Look at what it has done to TCU, who was playing at a much higher level while in the MWC then SDSU is. Same can be said about Fresno. Do you really think that we could compete in that conference?

The main difference in TCU and SDSU and Fresno was the athletic budgets. TCU has had a budget that was on par with over half of the BIG12 before making the switch. I guess one of the main questions will be if Fresno can up their play if the athletic budget is significantly increased by this move. We could retain coaches, continue to upgrade facilities and perhaps begin to land recruits that currently commit to our school only to back out when a PAC 12 power comes calling. Once again, 2014 is huge for Fresno. If we can win without Carr, it will prove that CTD is the real deal and if we can win a third conference title then it will begin to start feeling like the Boise run of the the last decade. The only difference being our market dwarfs any team from Idaho. On a related note, we couldn't be playing USC, Nebraska and Utah at a better time. Sark's first game, Polini should have been fired last year and Utah is currently a bottom feeder of the PAC 12.
---------------------------------------------
--- LuDog70 wrote:


559notown wrote: This is such a important topic when it comes to the worst case scenario of schools like Fresno getting left behind by the Big5. Honestly, these numbers are better than what I expected and we really did not play anyone last year whose school has a national following besides the bowl game. I am surprised that SDSU was that far ahead of us considering how average they have been in recent years. I guess that just shows the powers of a large population. The 2014 schedule has 3 teams that will draw huge numbers. Throw in Boise and we should be at the top of the conference list next year assuming we win at least two of our non conference games. We also need schools like USU, SDSU, UNLV and Nevada to all have winning seasons to increase viewership. When the season starts it would be great if someone could update our conferences TV ratings. Definitely something I would like to remain updated on. Of course we also need Boise to get back to the 10-11 win team they were for much of the last ten years. I still thing Boise, SDSU and Fresno have a small chance of receiving invitations to power conferences but all three must continue solid football play. Lastly, if Terry can get the basketball program in the top three of the MWC that would certainly be of help to greener pastures. In the meantime it looks like Fresno is in the best non Big5 in the country.
Look at the Big-12 number my friend.  They play top level football and outside of Texas they have low level TV markets.  They need bigger TV markets badly.  The good news for them is they have upside with who they could invite unlike the Pac-12 which is essentially tapped out for upside.  SDSU and FSU do nothing for the Pac-12 TV market/contract.  But the story is exactly the opposite for the Big-12.

---------------------------------------------
Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 06/30/2014 10:08 AM

Re: The MW TV ratings... 


It is very obvious that in an age where TV drives revenue, the BIGXII is a hurtin'.  If they want to step it up a notch they will have to do something radical and go to the East or West (or both) coasts.  They have to get into markets where Football TV eyeballs matter.  Unfortunately, I think they look east again as they did with WVU but you have to like our chances down the line if we keep winning games and our TV #'s remain high.
Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 06/30/2014 12:02 PM

Re: The MW TV ratings... 


Actually, these are decent numbers.

I had no idea that many people cared about Air Force football.



noidea

http://img716.imageshack.us/img716/3167/zk686c.jpg


Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 06/30/2014 3:38 PM

Re: The MW TV ratings... 



AZWildcat24 wrote: It is very obvious that in an age where TV drives revenue, the BIGXII is a hurtin'.  If they want to step it up a notch they will have to do something radical and go to the East or West (or both) coasts.  They have to get into markets where Football TV eyeballs matter.  Unfortunately, I think they look east again as they did with WVU but you have to like our chances down the line if we keep winning games and our TV #'s remain high.
WVU was a seriously stupid move for the Big-12.  They'd have been better off going for FSU/SDSU or UCF/USF.

 

Reply | Quote