Realignment Megathread (All The Moves)

FriendlySpartan

Well-Known Member
Jul 26, 2021
9,663
10,137
113
38
You can find exceptions. But teams that don't draw well, aren't going to have high viewership.

USC & UCLA were taken because their media market and the ability of BTN to charge more.

Michigan, tOSU, Bama, OU have great viewership because 80k+ have attended their games for the last 50+ years!

Those prior season ticket holders watch on TV. Those fans that share season tickets, watch on TV.

It also doesn't hurt that teams with great viewership have a long history of bowl level teams. And fan memories are long- look no further than Nebraska FB fans and Indiana hoops fans
BTW bama and michigan have had plenty of games with half filled stadiums when they were bad. I was around at Michigan for the end of rich rod era and half the stands would be empty and people would boo when it was announced it was another sold out crowd.
 

Gorm

With any luck we will be there by Tuesday.
Jul 6, 2010
5,846
2,723
113
Cedar Rapids, IA

FriendlySpartan

Well-Known Member
Jul 26, 2021
9,663
10,137
113
38
But do you really think the fans not showing up in person are watching on TV? Doubt it.

IMO attendance is a good indicator of overall fans interest and value to the networks. I can't think of many high media value FB schools that average less than 60k fans to their games.

The Big10's recent adds are the exception and they are located in the 2nd largest DMA.
The fans not showing up in person are 100% watching on TV. One thing you have to realize is that not every school has an amazing in game experience and many die hard fans have never been to games since they graduated. Going to a game is a full all day experience for a lot of people who don't find that to be time well spent when they can watch with their friends at home on an 80inch 4k tv. I have rarely missed a single spary or michigan football game in years but I have only been to 6 since graduating. Almost everyone I know is the same way which is anecdotal evidence but its what I see. Especially the schools with huge alumni bases many never go back to games but still watch.
 
  • Informative
Reactions: jcyclonee

SEIOWA CLONE

Well-Known Member
Dec 19, 2018
6,793
6,989
113
63
But do you really think the fans not showing up in person are watching on TV? Doubt it.

IMO attendance is a good indicator of overall fans interest and value to the networks. I can't think of many high media value FB schools that average less than 60k fans to their games.

The Big10's recent adds are the exception and they are located in the 2nd largest DMA.
Those schools do for the Big 10, look at how BTN works, if you do not have a team from the state you live in you only pay 10 cents to get all the games on basic cable, but if they have a team that number goes up to $1.56 I believe. That is the genius of the system, even thou I am not a fan, everyone still has to pay because its on basic cable. Adding Rutgers and Maryland was not for the schools or their programs it was to add the NY, DC and Baltimore to the instate price, that is where the money is being made. Adding UCLA and USC adds the LA market and the surrounding areas, that is why it makes sense to add those team, even if their record is below average.

The B12 does not have this advantage, because we do not have a TV network, so we are playing under a different set of rules. Houston makes money for the B10, we will have to wait and see if it does for the B12.
 
Last edited:
  • Agree
Reactions: 2speedy1

Pope

Well-Known Member
SuperFanatic
SuperFanatic T2
Feb 7, 2015
10,562
23,984
113
Can we please not get this thread caved? Who effing cares about AAU status? We weren't going to the B10 with it or not.
My intent was not to get this caved, so I have deleted my earlier post. I was just trying to respond to someone who was criticizing ISU's president for the decision to withdraw from AAU.
 

JUKEBOX

Well-Known Member
Oct 27, 2008
7,961
1,479
113
Not really. At this point media market size still matters. Especially for the BTN, SECN and ACCN and how they make money off cable & streaming subscriptions

Unfortunately, ISU isn't in a large media market and we don't have 10-20 years of being a top 25 team!
Yes I understand that Ames, IA doesn't provide a huge media market for scamming cable subscribers but neither do a lot of other Big 12 schools, yet our school is the one that gets the comparison.
 
Last edited:

AlaCyclone

Well-Known Member
Jun 14, 2007
5,585
6,785
113
BTW bama and michigan have had plenty of games with half filled stadiums when they were bad. I was around at Michigan for the end of rich rod era and half the stands would be empty and people would boo when it was announced it was another sold out crowd.
I experienced the Michigan phenomenon in 2008 (vs. Northwestern), but in all fairness, it was a cold, wet day and the first day of hunting season. It was more than half full, but I had plenty of leg room. Definitely not 100K like they claimed.

 
Last edited:

isucy86

Well-Known Member
Apr 13, 2006
9,143
7,738
113
Dubuque
The fans not showing up in person are 100% watching on TV. One thing you have to realize is that not every school has an amazing in game experience and many die hard fans have never been to games since they graduated. Going to a game is a full all day experience for a lot of people who don't find that to be time well spent when they can watch with their friends at home on an 80inch 4k tv. I have rarely missed a single spary or michigan football game in years but I have only been to 6 since graduating. Almost everyone I know is the same way which is anecdotal evidence but its what I see. Especially the schools with huge alumni bases many never go back to games but still watch.

Not the point. Pretty obvious fans watch on TV. Otherwise, the Big10 wouldn't be making $1B a year from the TV folks. We're talking about if there is a correlation between attendance and TV viewership.

Michigan has been drawing around 100k to its games for decades. Michigan is one of the winningest teams in CFB history! A Michigan grad not watching games in person or on TV would be sacrilegious. But look around the Big10- Minnesota, Northwestern, Illinois, Indiana, Purdue, Maryland & Rutgers. Why does their viewership pale Michigan, Ohio State, Penn State? # of living alumni is part of the equation, winning football is part of the answer. But having on/off attendance issues is a bigger reason.

If attendance wasn't a critical inroad to future attendance & TV watching colleges wouldn't spend so much time & real estate (good seats) in having students attend FB & MBB games during their college years. Michigan makes 20,000 tickets available to students because they know attendance develops a habit that carries over after school is done.
 

isucy86

Well-Known Member
Apr 13, 2006
9,143
7,738
113
Dubuque
BTW bama and michigan have had plenty of games with half filled stadiums when they were bad. I was around at Michigan for the end of rich rod era and half the stands would be empty and people would boo when it was announced it was another sold out crowd.

Again there are exceptions to everything. Did those empty seats still pay for season tickets? Did many of those empty seats still watch on TV.

Name me a handful of teams (heck even a couple) with average attendance < 50K that have a HISTORY of great TV viewership.
 

ISUTex

Well-Known Member
May 25, 2012
9,886
9,632
113
Rural U.S.A.
The B1G cares. Every institution in it is a member of the AAU except UNL who was a member when they joined. Very soon the "top notch" college football on TV will include exactly two conferences. One of them being the B1G.


Who gives a **** if the Big 10 cares? Iowa State wasn't getting in the Big 10 either way. There will be more than two conferences Relax.
 

Clones123

Active Member
May 5, 2016
141
175
43
Des Moines, IA
Not the point. Pretty obvious fans watch on TV. Otherwise, the Big10 wouldn't be making $1B a year from the TV folks. We're talking about if there is a correlation between attendance and TV viewership.

Michigan has been drawing around 100k to its games for decades. Michigan is one of the winningest teams in CFB history! A Michigan grad not watching games in person or on TV would be sacrilegious. But look around the Big10- Minnesota, Northwestern, Illinois, Indiana, Purdue, Maryland & Rutgers. Why does their viewership pale Michigan, Ohio State, Penn State? # of living alumni is part of the equation, winning football is part of the answer. But having on/off attendance issues is a bigger reason.

If attendance wasn't a critical inroad to future attendance & TV watching colleges wouldn't spend so much time & real estate (good seats) in having students attend FB & MBB games during their college years. Michigan makes 20,000 tickets available to students because they know attendance develops a habit that carries over after school is done.
Texas A&M has roughly 36,000 tickets in their student section. Insanity, but also I'm kind of jealous
 
  • Like
Reactions: agentbear