No they are essentially directional schools that have no appeal to anyone. No brands. A&M and Texas already get the Texas viewers.
COLUMN: What happens to Iowa State if the Big 12 implodes?
- Thread starter ChrisMWilliams
- Start date
But 'big markets' matter you said. Houston and DFW are 'big markets'.
1. They already have those markets
2. None of those schools are brand name enough to be in either one of those leagues.
A big brand in a small market would be attractive. I mean if you have a chance to add a Clemson you probably don't care the S. Carolina is already in the league. I mean there is a reason why Tech would be attractive to the Pac-12 and it isn't because of loyal fans or academics. It's adding eyes and Texas and helping schools in that conference recruit Texas.
Must suck to be stuck in 2010 and not realize things have changed, but that is where you are.
Given that logic, and using Tech as an example. Why wouldn't the Pac-12 want Houston over Tech? Houston as a city is a bigger market than Lubbock. Either one gets the Pac-12 in Texas so Houston should be a logical choice ahead of Tech right? Or TCU, SMU, or even North Texas all in DFW area would be too right?
Thanks for explaining what everybody already fully understands- the rationale for adding Rutgers in 2014.
But were you paying attention at all at that time? Everybody understood that Rutgers was onlyvaluable in a cable and satellite dominated media, where subscribers had those channels as part of their package, whether they watch them or not. Even at that time cable and satellite trends were heading south fast, so pretty much everybody understood their value would drop accordingly and eventually be a drag once on demand and a la carte become dominant in college sports UNLESS the money and prestige of being in the Big 10 elevate Rutgers into a team that people watch. It hasn’t. They will be good with Schiano, so they might be banking on that.
But in the end teams that have value either draw well even in years that aren’t great, OR their programs are such that bad years are unlikely. Rutgers is neither.
Again, I’m not saying ISU is highly valuable. But Rutgers is absolutely worthless. Baylor and TCU are not valuable at all either.
Tech is a better brand than Houston. Ask yourself this, where is it more expensive to run an ad=New York or Des Moines? If the conference is the beneficiary of the money New York is always going to make you more cash. The ad revenue in those markets is crazy good.
ISU did pretty last year in ratings
www.sportsmediawatch.com
Being relevant in football is going to make our "floor" the Pac-12
College Football TV Ratings
College football TV ratings for the 2023 season. Will be updated as the season progresses, typically on Tuesdays (Wednesdays in holiday weeks). College football
Being relevant in football is going to make our "floor" the Pac-12
You guys act like nothing can change with these schools. Who's to say ISU will remain the national football power we've become the last 9 months. Rutgers may end up turning things around and be a massive add to the Big 10. I think decisions are made with long term potential in mind and not just how it makes the conference look for a 2-3 year period.
Houston has a bigger enrollment than Tech, in a bigger city than Tech. So bigger city = more ad revenue according to you, so Houston would make more sense than Tech using your parameters.
I just hope JP and Big Daddy Barry are talking behind the scenes. That is one relationship (if they have one) that could really make a difference.
Pollard's best friend in the industry is the Oregon AD. Not enough people are talking about that.
If the remaining 8 Big 12 schools can add Oregon, Oregon St, Arizona, Arizona St, Colorado and Utah.. That's pretty good.
If the remaining 8 Big 12 schools can add Oregon, Oregon St, Arizona, Arizona St, Colorado and Utah.. That's pretty good.
It's like a giant community College. UCF has like 60k enrollment also. They aren't big brands. TV markets and your brand are what it's about. You clearly get a pass with having lousy football if you can bring a big market with you.
or it could make is 3rd highest paid in a decentralized conference, JP needs to be a visionary here to save this and gain leverageISU did pretty last year in ratings
College Football TV Ratings
College football TV ratings for the 2023 season. Will be updated as the season progresses, typically on Tuesdays (Wednesdays in holiday weeks). College football
Being relevant in football is going to make our "floor" the Pac-12
Last edited:
And right now, ISU is a hot brand with a rabid fan base that support the team (viewers).
I would think this could be part of the pitch for ISU. The intensity and passion around those games would drive some more viewers to watch as well.
I'm not sure of that. I'd like to believe you're right, but there was a ton of pissing and moaning on this board when ISU had games moved to ESPNPlus last year and it appears Cyclones.TV never really got the numbers they wanted. Seems like a whole bunch of people wouldn't sign up - and that's of a subset of population of our fans who go to "CycloneFanatic". What do the non-"fanatics" do? We like to believe we have a large and growing fan base, but where are the actual numbers? There's a whole bunch of cheap skates on this board who won't even sign up to support the site.
Prove me wrong everyone, prove me wrong! When the time comes to sign-up for those streaming services everyone needs to do so in the new world to show the interest ISU truly generates.
The complaining about ESPN+ is because they took those games from regular tv where everyone got them. They did this even though they said they wouldn’t. If you think there’s a lot of Iowa State people who wouldn’t sign up then how many for the big schools do you think are signing up. Fair weather fans regardless of fanbase aren’t going to convert. Our fanbases is intensely loyal. That will lead to a higher conversion rate.
The typical Minnesota fan would like to add ISU and drop Iowa if the money is close to the same.
