Conference realignment "Rumors" "tweets" "etc"

[Cubanbull]

6 minutes ago, I like GOOOOLD (and green) said:

I understand, OU/T are better.  No one is saying they aren’t.  It’s bigger than that though.  They are trying to take the Longhorn network and turn it into Big12 network.  The four markets added surpass viewers of those two departing teams, even if those teams have better individual followings. 

Look at the link I provided. The ratings speak for themselves 

[UCF_rustbucket]

11 minutes ago, bulloni said:

This dude's a UCF fan right? I see his downvoted reputation and his posts always sound like a UCF fan. This is a take so delusional only someone from those fanbases would make it

 

The bolded sentence in his post isn't wrong on its own. They lost 1 Texas team but replaced it with another in a bigger media market, and lost an Oklahoma team replaced it with Cincinnati, Orlando, and Provo. But he's incorrectly assuming that media partners will automatically pay more for larger media markets vs larger viewership. 

[Cubanbull]

10 minutes ago, UCF_rustbucket said:

The bolded sentence in his post isn't wrong on its own. They lost 1 Texas team but replaced it with another in a bigger media market, and lost an Oklahoma team replaced it with Cincinnati, Orlando, and Provo. But he's incorrectly assuming that media partners will automatically pay more for larger media markets vs larger viewership. 

Here is a quick rundown for you. In past two years.

Games with over 2.0 million viewers

Leftover Eight w/o OUand UT= 6

Games with OU and UT= 27

Games with new Four additions = 4

Games with over 3.0 million viewers

Leftover Eight= 1

OU and UT= 13

New Four = 2

Games with over 4 million viewers

Leftover Eight= 0

Texas and Oklahoma = 7

New Four= 0

Games with over 5 million viewers

LeftOver Eight = 0

Texas and Oklahoma = 2

New Four=0

Games with over 6 million viewers

Left Over Eight=0

Texas and Oklahoma = 1

New Four=0

[John Lewis]

The Houston market probably had better viewership for Texas games than for the University of Houston games, so that could be a net loss for the Big 12 right there.

Adding the Cincinnati and Orlando markets certainly helps, even if the programs in those respective cities are in heavy competition for ratings.

BYU's national brand may help the most. 

[Triple B]

1 hour ago, bulloni said:

This dude's a UCF fan right? I see his downvoted reputation and his posts always sound like a UCF fan. This is a take so delusional only someone from those fanbases would make it

Nope. Dual citizenship, starting out here as a ECU fan and I think attended USF after that. 

[I like GOOOOLD (and green)]

1 hour ago, bulloni said:

This dude's a UCF fan right? I see his downvoted reputation and his posts always sound like a UCF fan. This is a take so delusional only someone from those fanbases would make it

 

Wtf. You are ignoring basic math to rather insult me? You are arguing against common sense.  

[I like GOOOOLD (and green)]

37 minutes ago, Triple B said:

Nope. Dual citizenship, starting out here as a ECU fan and I think attended USF after that. 

 

Edited July 19, 2022 by I like GOOOOLD (and green)

[I like GOOOOLD (and green)]

1 hour ago, UCF_rustbucket said:

The bolded sentence in his post isn't wrong on its own. They lost 1 Texas team but replaced it with another in a bigger media market, and lost an Oklahoma team replaced it with Cincinnati, Orlando, and Provo. But he's incorrectly assuming that media partners will automatically pay more for larger media markets vs larger viewership. 

I didn’t say anyone would pay more for those markets than ou/t individually.  They just add more viewers overall in new areas than what’s leaving, which helps everyone involved, and ultimately involves more money.  Inflation also matters.  And demand, which there happens to be right now with FOX, ESPN, and now NBC interested in big 12 content.  

[Brad]

No need to go personal.  It doesn't change facts or fiction.

[St.PeteSlim89]

15 hours ago, Triple B said:

:unshun: Take it for what it's worth, and I don't know why I'm even ****** bothering, but someone in Athletics told me that the Big 12 has indicated that the controlling of our revenues by having our own stadium would be advantageous. :reshun:

Also only worth two cents, but I heard the same thing from someone in Athletics.  My understanding is that the Big 12 didn’t like our current revenue stream that we get (or don’t get) from being at Ray Jay.