ADVERTISEMENT

More on Mtn West, TV

You’re mostly right. I ignore most of your messages because they’re so full of incomprehensible drivel, and on the rare occasion they’re understandable, they’re somewhere between ridiculous and stupid. Or both.

As for your notion that teams got picked because of their history and tradition…you’re wrong again. Those things only matter to the degree that they mean people watch those teams on TV. That’s the only thing the networks care about.

Again you missed, did not understand the example I used where I said IF TV NUMBERS WERE THE ONLY THING THAT MATTER, WSU WOULD BE IN A P4 CONFERENCE, FOR HAVING THE 4,5TH BEST TV NUMBERS IN PAC 12 CONFERENCE.

Yes they use TV numbers, THAT IS NOT THE ONLY THING THEY USE.

They use ALL THE FACTORS COMBINED TOGETHER


And they don't just go by history, tradition. And that's not the only thing I said.

I said:

In no exact order

HISTORY, TRADITION, BRAND NAME, WIN LOSS RECORD, REPUTATION, CLOUT, INFLUENCE, PERCEIVED PERCEPTION OF(NEBRASKA EXAMPLE), BOWLS, NY6 JANUARY BOWLS, CFP, FAN ATTENDENCE, TV NUMBERS, ALL COMBINED TOGETHER ALL COMBINED TOGETHER ALL COMBINED TOGETHER ALL COMBINED TOGETHER.
 
Again you missed, did not understand the example I used where I said IF TV NUMBERS WERE THE ONLY THING THAT MATTER, WSU WOULD BE IN A P4 CONFERENCE, FOR HAVING THE 4,5TH BEST TV NUMBERS IN PAC 12 CONFERENCE.

Yes they use TV numbers, THAT IS NOT THE ONLY THING THEY USE.

They use ALL THE FACTORS COMBINED TOGETHER


And they don't just go by history, tradition. And that's not the only thing I said.

I said:

In no exact order

HISTORY, TRADITION, BRAND NAME, WIN LOSS RECORD, REPUTATION, CLOUT, INFLUENCE, PERCEIVED PERCEPTION OF(NEBRASKA EXAMPLE), BOWLS, NY6 JANUARY BOWLS, CFP, FAN ATTENDENCE, TV NUMBERS, ALL COMBINED TOGETHER ALL COMBINED TOGETHER ALL COMBINED TOGETHER ALL COMBINED TOGETHER.
Saying the exact same thing 5(?) times doesn't change much. And I would argue that your BFF's Tulane and Memphis hit damn near none of those barometers. So......what exactly is your point for the 5th time? At least Memphis and Tulane got high seeds in the tourney (that's tourney with an "e"). Oh wait - neither one made it. Good thing 6 MW teams did.
 
Again you missed, did not understand the example I used where I said IF TV NUMBERS WERE THE ONLY THING THAT MATTER, WSU WOULD BE IN A P4 CONFERENCE, FOR HAVING THE 4,5TH BEST TV NUMBERS IN PAC 12 CONFERENCE.

Yes they use TV numbers, THAT IS NOT THE ONLY THING THEY USE.

They use ALL THE FACTORS COMBINED TOGETHER


And they don't just go by history, tradition. And that's not the only thing I said.

I said:

In no exact order

HISTORY, TRADITION, BRAND NAME, WIN LOSS RECORD, REPUTATION, CLOUT, INFLUENCE, PERCEIVED PERCEPTION OF(NEBRASKA EXAMPLE), BOWLS, NY6 JANUARY BOWLS, CFP, FAN ATTENDENCE, TV NUMBERS, ALL COMBINED TOGETHER ALL COMBINED TOGETHER ALL COMBINED TOGETHER ALL COMBINED TOGETHER.
I already said that market and market potential are the things they use, and said that they don’t see how WSU, OSU, and others can grow their markets, so they don’t include us. They don’t give a damn about who went to what bowl when.

Writing your repeated points in all caps doesn’t make them any more right. But it does get you back on ignore.
 
I already said that market and market potential are the things they use, and said that they don’t see how WSU, OSU, and others can grow their markets, so they don’t include us. They don’t give a damn about who went to what bowl when.

Writing your repeated points in all caps doesn’t make them any more right. But it does get you back on ignore.

I get that he has passion, but I blocked him a long time ago and I am better off for it. The guy is a walking "young homeowner turning into his parents" poster who needs an etiquette coach to say, "No...don't do that".
 
I get that he has passion, but I blocked him a long time ago and I am better off for it. The guy is a walking "young homeowner turning into his parents" poster who needs an etiquette coach to say, "No...don't do that".
Oh you guys are no fun. I never block anyone. If I tire of someone's drivel, I just keep scrolling. There's this thing on my mouse that looks like a wheel. I turn it and bye bye post! :)

I need to quit poking the hive. But I'm just like a moth to a flame.......
 
I get that he has passion, but I blocked him a long time ago and I am better off for it. The guy is a walking "young homeowner turning into his parents" poster who needs an etiquette coach to say, "No...don't do that".
Lunacy and idiocy are too often mistake for, or excuses by, passion.
 
Lunacy and idiocy are too often mistake for, or excuses by, passion.
How would you know? YOU CAN'T READ OR UNDERSTAND!

Which means, YOU CAN'T READ OR UNDERSTAND! :)

And you can't spell either. it's "mistaken" and "excused". Or "excuses for".
 
How would you know? YOU CAN'T READ OR UNDERSTAND!

Which means, YOU CAN'T READ OR UNDERSTAND! :)

And you can't spell either. it's "mistaken" and "excused". Or "excuses for".

All caps alone is not a proper encapsulation of the discussion...it is relevant 75, 85, 90, or 95% of the time though.
 
GJXBfaHXsAA_Cq_


I don't know how good the above image is, i.e. how well the ratings were calculated. But it is interesting, particularly if the goal is to rebuild a conference by poaching schools from another conference.

Some reading to go with the above picture...

Some more reading to go with the above picture...
 
GJXBfaHXsAA_Cq_


I don't know how good the above image is, i.e. how well the ratings were calculated. But it is interesting, particularly if the goal is to rebuild a conference by poaching schools from another conference.

Some reading to go with the above picture...

Some more reading to go with the above picture...
Thanks Dave - all info is good info. That said, I'm a bit meh on this Ivy league guy, and I think some of his metrics are a bit irrelevant. But it gives some points to ponder.
 
Based on that attractiveness score it looks like the Pac2 is better off without UNLV. Ouch. Just when we were starting to turn things around in football.
 
Loyal Coug1 - I really didn't know much about the "Realignment Attractiveness Score" thing, but I thought it looked interesting, so I went ahead and posted it. Look at how highly rated Stanford and Cal are in the A.C.C.... what the heck??? Stanford and Cal are rated higher than the North Carolina schools?

Also, note how highly the PAC-12 schools are rated in the B1G and Big 12 conferences. If this "Realignment Attractiveness Score" thing is to be believed, then why again did the PAC-12 disintegrate?

Meister_Rebel - UNLV was listed in the CANAZANO RUMOR. I spent a few minutes looking at student populations of various MWC schools along with state populations, and it looked like to me that UNLV should be ranked somewhere in the middle of the MWC. UNLV also has a strong history in basketball - we remember Jerry Tarkanian!

&&&&

By the way, about the CANZANO RUMOR - I have now listed to about 5 hours of Canazo's "The Bald Faced Truth" radio show that were broadcast around March 11th & 12th and can not find where Canzano himself stated that the PAC-12 might start issuing invitations to select MWC schools in late June. I'm still 'looking' (listening).
 
Just to be clear on two things that many of these posts miss.

1.) The value of a program to a specific league's viewership relates heavily to whether or not there is already a team in their general area that can draw fans. Tulsa, just as an example, has almost zero value to the B12 because Oklahoma State is already sharing eyeballs in that area. Tulsa's value to a different conference, that lacked viewers in the general area, would be higher. You could say the same general thing about many other programs.

2.) The specific viewership numbers for any team's game depend upon more than the number of diehard fans they have. It also depends upon the number and fanaticism of the opponent's fans, as well as whether the game itself is likely to be interesting. Sure, viewership numbers for a given team for last season have some value. But as they say in the investing world, past returns are no guarantee of future results. Any of the teams you've been mentioning would get better viewership in a PACWEST game than for playing San Angelo State.
 
  • Like
Reactions: KRUSTYtheCOUG
Just to be clear on two things that many of these posts miss.

1.) The value of a program to a specific league's viewership relates heavily to whether or not there is already a team in their general area that can draw fans. Tulsa, just as an example, has almost zero value to the B12 because Oklahoma State is already sharing eyeballs in that area. Tulsa's value to a different conference, that lacked viewers in the general area, would be higher. You could say the same general thing about many other programs.

2.) The specific viewership numbers for any team's game depend upon more than the number of diehard fans they have. It also depends upon the number and fanaticism of the opponent's fans, as well as whether the game itself is likely to be interesting. Sure, viewership numbers for a given team for last season have some value. But as they say in the investing world, past returns are no guarantee of future results. Any of the teams you've been mentioning would get better viewership in a PACWEST game than for playing San Angelo State.

I live in the Midwest about 2 1/2 hours from Tulsa. Nobody gives a crap about Tulsa and that includes most of the people that live in Tulsa. We are obviously in desperate times and will need to look at solutions that we might otherwise ignore....but it's hard for me to imagine Tulsa having value worthy of inclusion in a conference unless we are completely giving up on the notion that we want to be part of a Power 5 conference.

We bitch about attendance at WSU games and Tulsa averages barely over 17,000 per game...in a metro area of just over 1 million people.
 
I live in the Midwest about 2 1/2 hours from Tulsa. Nobody gives a crap about Tulsa and that includes most of the people that live in Tulsa. We are obviously in desperate times and will need to look at solutions that we might otherwise ignore....but it's hard for me to imagine Tulsa having value worthy of inclusion in a conference unless we are completely giving up on the notion that we want to be part of a Power 5 conference.

We bitch about attendance at WSU games and Tulsa averages barely over 17,000 per game...in a metro area of just over 1 million people.
I used Tulsa as an example. But since you want to use them as an example also, when I lived in Tulsa for most of the '80's they (judging by the games I attended) were probably averaging more like 25K than 17K. Playing better teams at the time, and having success, does that for you. They are maybe the smallest school that has been mentioned; they are about the same size as Rice, but probably 1/3 the size of (as an example) Tulane. Like all the oil belt private schools, they have money. And again like Rice, they have little media value to a league with other schools in the area. Most of their alum footprint is OK & TX. Most of Rice's is TX & LA. Are they a good pick for someone? Or for us? Not in an ideal world. But in an ideal world, the PAC would not have been betrayed by the witches of USC & UW, and uncontrolled NIL would not be ruining college sports. If we need schools in the middle of the country to fill out some sort of ACC pod (which is the only way I see us needing schools in the middle of the country), then the pickings are limited. It is what it is.
 
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest posts

ADVERTISEMENT