|
Post by 01aztecgrad on Jul 10, 2015 10:27:46 GMT -8
By the time the Big-12 is ready to go to 14 the revenue bonanza from conference networks will have stalled. The cable bundling model is beginning to break, with the number of cable subscribers dropping slightly over the last two years, and the number of streaming options just now starting to pick up steam (SlingTV, CBS, HBO, and Showtime). The conference networks will soon no longer be able to demand a premium for every standard cable subscriber in their territory. They'll only get revenue from those willing to pay a premium for the channel, either in a sports only package from the cable company, or through a streaming channel.
Since most of the conferences have guaranteed minimums for their rights over the next decade, I don't expect much to change in the immediate future, but they'll know very soon that they aren't hitting their subscriber and viewership goals, and that their next deal will be for less money. At that point I don't think you'll see talk of expansion, I think you'll see talk of the really popular schools within a conference demanding a larger share of a shrinking pie. Just like the Mountain West was ahead of it's time by creating their own network, they are ahead of their time with a dramatically unequal revenue sharing plan.
|
|
|
Post by 94sdsu on Jul 10, 2015 11:23:49 GMT -8
Hoobs....I like it!
|
|
|
Post by pbaztec17 on Jul 10, 2015 11:33:23 GMT -8
SDSU-Alum2003, great homework here and, I think, compelling. The one ingredient that you left out---and is somewhat intangible--is confidence. They've had 5 years to see if our football program could gain relevance nationally, and it has not. Rocky and our AD apparently force them to conclude that our program has not, and will not, produce on the field, as the other teams listed. They do not want a program lacking inspiration, enthusiasm, potential, and no fans, led by hapless and hopeless people.
Folks wonder why the media ignores us? Hello!!! Not even one victory over a good P5 school. Not even during the regular season much less in a bowl game. UCF? They beat #6 Baylor in the Fiesta Bowl in 2013. See my moniker. THAT'S what matters. If we get that done, which we are fully capable of, yet we're still ignored, THEN it will be time to give up. im with you on that one. That fiesta bowl win was huge for them. If i remember correctly, they were huge dogs in that game too
|
|
|
Post by hoobs on Jul 10, 2015 11:45:28 GMT -8
By the time the Big-12 is ready to go to 14 the revenue bonanza from conference networks will have stalled. The cable bundling model is beginning to break, with the number of cable subscribers dropping slightly over the last two years, and the number of streaming options just now starting to pick up steam (SlingTV, CBS, HBO, and Showtime). The conference networks will soon no longer be able to demand a premium for every standard cable subscriber in their territory. They'll only get revenue from those willing to pay a premium for the channel, either in a sports only package from the cable company, or through a streaming channel. Since most of the conferences have guaranteed minimums for their rights over the next decade, I don't expect much to change in the immediate future, but they'll know very soon that they aren't hitting their subscriber and viewership goals, and that their next deal will be for less money. At that point I don't think you'll see talk of expansion, I think you'll see talk of the really popular schools within a conference demanding a larger share of a shrinking pie. Just like the Mountain West was ahead of it's time by creating their own network, they are ahead of their time with a dramatically unequal revenue sharing plan. Excellent points in the first paragraph, but I am led to a different conclusion. I think the diminishing, instead of increasing, revenue from networks bidding on the conference TV rights I think there may be sufficient motivation to PUSH the conferences, especially the Big12, to improve their media market footprint in order to compensate a bit. But I agree that there could also be an impetus to go with the imbalanced payout model. Granted, making "only" half of what U of Texas makes if invited to the Big12 is fine* with me. (*EDIT: Okay, not really "fine" but you get what I mean...)
|
|
|
Post by pokesmot on Jul 10, 2015 12:12:37 GMT -8
Our problem is that nobody cares about us....even in San Diego. We can't fill the lower bowl of Qualcom and all know the only reason we have decent attendance at all is because of the firework show. What is worse than being in a small market with bad attendance, is being in a large market with bad attendance. Face it, we aren't a desirable choice.
|
|
|
Post by AccessBowlTime on Jul 10, 2015 12:45:32 GMT -8
Folks wonder why the media ignores us? Hello!!! Not even one victory over a good P5 school. Not even during the regular season much less in a bowl game. UCF? They beat #6 Baylor in the Fiesta Bowl in 2013. See my moniker. THAT'S what matters. If we get that done, which we are fully capable of, yet we're still ignored, THEN it will be time to give up. im with you on that one. That fiesta bowl win was huge for them. If i remember correctly, they were huge dogs in that game too Yes. Per Phil Steele, Baylor was favored by 16 going in.
|
|
|
Post by aztecalum on Jul 10, 2015 12:55:00 GMT -8
Good points about our lack of wins against P5 teams, inability to fill the Q, and lack of fan enthusiasm. On the flip side, how do you explain Rutgers to B10? Why is Memphis considered? Who does Cincy beat in P5? They were embarrassed in Orange bowl a couple of years ago!
|
|
|
Post by AccessBowlTime on Jul 10, 2015 13:06:50 GMT -8
Rutgers didn't just benefit from being in the NY metro media area. It benefited from a paucity of competitors who were members of the AAU. By way of analogy, if SDSU could break free of the CSU system and get into a hybrid conference with Cal Poly SLO and maybe CP Pomona, given our location, we might have an opportunity to become the Pac's version of Rutgers. Of course, the totally defeatist attitude about that of a majority of this board makes me skeptical.
Cincinnati not only has the advantage of being pushed for hard by WVU, frankly they have both a better football history and a better basketball history than SDSU. Hell, in hoops the historical chasm is as big as the Grand Canyon.
Memphis really has little going for it besides a quality basketball program and geographical fortuity.
|
|
|
Post by fowl on Jul 10, 2015 13:44:02 GMT -8
By the time the Big-12 is ready to go to 14 the revenue bonanza from conference networks will have stalled. The cable bundling model is beginning to break, with the number of cable subscribers dropping slightly over the last two years, and the number of streaming options just now starting to pick up steam (SlingTV, CBS, HBO, and Showtime). The conference networks will soon no longer be able to demand a premium for every standard cable subscriber in their territory. They'll only get revenue from those willing to pay a premium for the channel, either in a sports only package from the cable company, or through a streaming channel. Since most of the conferences have guaranteed minimums for their rights over the next decade, I don't expect much to change in the immediate future, but they'll know very soon that they aren't hitting their subscriber and viewership goals, and that their next deal will be for less money. At that point I don't think you'll see talk of expansion, I think you'll see talk of the really popular schools within a conference demanding a larger share of a shrinking pie. Just like the Mountain West was ahead of it's time by creating their own network, they are ahead of their time with a dramatically unequal revenue sharing plan. Spot on. ESPN has lost over 7% of its subscribers over the past five years and is having to cut costs per the WSJ today: www.wsj.com/articles/espn-tightens-its-belt-as-pressure-on-it-mounts-1436485852
|
|
|
Post by Area51 Aztec on Jul 10, 2015 14:38:44 GMT -8
I don't get why SDSU gets zero consideration. The only reason I can think of is that we'd be another far flung outlier school, much like UWV is now. The media doesn't seem to give SDSU much consideration. We don't really know what kind of consideration SDSU is receiving behind closed doors from BIG XII University Presidents/Athletic Directors and TV executives; the people who will ultimately make the decisions. The media mentions UCF fairly frequently. SDSU and UCF have very similar profiles. School - DMA Rank - Recruiting Rank - US News Rank UCF - DMA #18 - RR #1 - USNR #173 SDSU - DMA #28 - RR #3 - USNR #149 Air Distance / Flight Time from San Diego to Austin: 1162 miles / 2 hrs 42 min Air Distance / Flight Time from Orlando to Austin: 993 miles / 2 hrs 23 minutes Both are large public Universities with sizeable alumni bases (SDSU's alumni is larger) located in destination cities with pleasant year round climate. UCF has a better DMA and a slightly better recruiting rank. However, UCF has to primarily compete with both the ACC (primarily Florida State but also Miami) and the SEC (Florida) for TV ratings and recruits. SDSU only has to primarily compete with the PAC 12 (primarily USC/UCLA but also Stanford/Cal) for TV ratings and recruits. SDSU has significantly better academics as measured by U.S. World News. UCF is located closer to the University of Texas than SDSU. However, SDSU only requires an additional 19 minutes of flight time to fly to Austin. SDSU has a better overall athletic program than UCF (both baseball programs are comparable) and a significantly better basketball program. However, UCF has had some recent success in football Both SDSU and UCF have comparable quality athletic facilities. However, UCF does possess a significant advantage with its 45,000 seat on campus football stadium. Based on this data SDSU should be in the conversation as an expansion candidate (and likely are with the powers that be). If the BIG XII expands by 4 teams and starts a BIG XII network they would be wise to add these 4 teams: 1. BYU - Quality overall program with a national following 2. UCF - Large public university that gives the BIG XII a foothold in the large Florida TV & recruiting markets 3. Cincinnati - Gives West Virginia a natural rival and travel partner while also allowing the BIG XII to gain a foothold in the Ohio TV & recruiting markets; also a solid basketball program 4. SDSU - Large public university wiith a solid basketball program and overall athletics; gives BYU a natural rival and travel partner while also allowing the BIG XII to gain a foothold in the large Southern California TV & recruiting markets These teams would more than double the current TV viewership of the BIG XII while also gaining a foothold in the fertile recruiting states of Florida, California and Ohio. Furthermore, this would allow for the first National P5 conference. TV networks would have a wide variety of programming to showcase in all 4 time zones from coast to coast. This kind of conference set-up would be very lucrative and solidify the BIG XII conference. I would love to see somebody take the time to post some of these stats verse current Big12 members, i.e. Kansas, Kansas St, Iowa St. including Population, Media market shares, education number etc. to show that SDSU's numbers probably outperform lot of those schools already in. Would be interesting to see.
|
|
|
Post by 94sdsu on Jul 10, 2015 14:54:21 GMT -8
I'm sure the B12 would love to cull some existing members and get better members, but I think the only real one would be ISU. Iowa has a population about the same as SD County, with the majority of them being Iowa not Iowa State fans. ISU absolutely drags that conference down. There are other schools like TTU, KSU, KU but at least they've performed on the field on occasion (actually KU does it on the court).
|
|
|
Post by alamobruin on Jul 10, 2015 15:16:41 GMT -8
I'm sure the B12 would love to cull some existing members and get better members, but I think the only real one would be ISU. Iowa has a population about the same as SD County, with the majority of them being Iowa not Iowa State fans. ISU absolutely drags that conference down. There are other schools like TTU, KSU, KU but at least they've performed on the field on occasion (actually KU does it on the court). Hold the phone. Iowa State may not be winning in football, but of course, somebody has to be last, or next-to-last. Nevertheless, the Cyclones pull their weight in the B12.
2014-15
Football Attendance: Iowa State - 52,197 San Diego State - 32,406
Men's Basketball Attendance: Iowa State - 14,295 (19th in nation) San Diego State - 12,414 (27th)
Women's Basketball Attendance: Iowa State - 9,289 (4th in nation) San Diego State - 604
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 10, 2015 15:28:03 GMT -8
I'm sure the B12 would love to cull some existing members and get better members, but I think the only real one would be ISU. Iowa has a population about the same as SD County, with the majority of them being Iowa not Iowa State fans. ISU absolutely drags that conference down. There are other schools like TTU, KSU, KU but at least they've performed on the field on occasion (actually KU does it on the court). Hold the phone. Iowa State may not be winning in football, but of course, somebody has to be last, or next-to-last. Nevertheless, the Cyclones pull their weight in the B12.
2014-15
Football Attendance: Iowa State - 52,197 San Diego State - 32,406
Men's Basketball Attendance: Iowa State - 14,295 (19th in nation) San Diego State - 12,414 (27th)
Women's Basketball Attendance: Iowa State - 9,289 (4th in nation) San Diego State - 604
Give us a B12 schedule and a larger BB arena and we would meet or exceed those numbers...well except for women's BB.
|
|
|
Post by sdcoug on Jul 10, 2015 15:43:02 GMT -8
I'm sure the B12 would love to cull some existing members and get better members, but I think the only real one would be ISU. Iowa has a population about the same as SD County, with the majority of them being Iowa not Iowa State fans. ISU absolutely drags that conference down. There are other schools like TTU, KSU, KU but at least they've performed on the field on occasion (actually KU does it on the court). Hold the phone. Iowa State may not be winning in football, but of course, somebody has to be last, or next-to-last. Nevertheless, the Cyclones pull their weight in the B12.
2014-15
Football Attendance: Iowa State - 52,197 San Diego State - 32,406
Men's Basketball Attendance: Iowa State - 14,295 (19th in nation) San Diego State - 12,414 (27th)
Women's Basketball Attendance: Iowa State - 9,289 (4th in nation) San Diego State - 604
Don't disagree with you - not everyone will win, and there are always a bottom feeder in the various conference (e.g. WSU/OSU in P12, etc.) who'll have the occasional successes. And from a attendance perspective, ISU is definitely holding their own.
However, apples to apples. If SDSU were playing Baylor in SD, both as members of the B12, do you think the attendance gap would be 20k? I don't. Basketball is about capacity - we're sold out, and I don't know price points so hard to compare, but ultimately both ISU & SDSU would sell out a Baylor game. Women's b-ball is less relevant, but playing in the B12 would help SDSU's women's program be relevant and crowds wouldn't be in the 100's.
That said, which would draw a bigger TV rating - a game in the SDSU market vs. Baylor or a game in Iowa?
Which of all these stats is more important to Fox & ESPN?
ISU is playing on a different playing field than SDSU today. There's no denying we make a fraction of what they do off TV contracts, and that impacts the entire athletic program & how they operate. What's important though, is upside 10 years from now, based on all the teams operating on the same financial platform, or at least closer to it.
Iowa St is who they are because they're already in the B12. The question is, which program would be in better shape & more valuable to Fox/ESPN when operating in the same higher income bracket? That's the debate. That said, location & legacy membership is key, and Iowa St is in the right place at the right time.
|
|
|
Post by AccessBowlTime on Jul 10, 2015 15:59:36 GMT -8
Women's Basketball Attendance:
Iowa State - 9,289 (4th in nation)
Can anybody say Nothing else to do in Ames?
|
|
|
Post by phantom on Jul 10, 2015 16:38:48 GMT -8
There's only 2 ways we'll ever get into the BIG12.
1. We give millions of dollars to the necessary powers that be in the BiG12. Power player ADs, commissioner, school presidents, whoever necessary. I'm talking Jerry Jones kind of lobbying.
2. Go on a Bosie St type of run: I'm talking an undefeated season this year with DJ running for close to 2000 yards culminating in a big bowl win over a traditional type like a Michigan. National news with star players creating a national dialogue. And then next season, do it again. 13-0 or 12-1 at worst punctuated with outstanding individual play (dj 20+ td's, Munson 150+ tackles) and another big bowl win over a traditional power like say a Georgia and DJ becoming a household name. Everyone loves star players, everyone loves an underdog.
That's the kind of things that will make us a TV ratings darling and a viable option for a power conference. Anything less, forget it.
|
|
|
Post by alamobruin on Jul 10, 2015 16:45:47 GMT -8
Hold the phone. Iowa State may not be winning in football, but of course, somebody has to be last, or next-to-last. Nevertheless, the Cyclones pull their weight in the B12.
2014-15
Football Attendance: Iowa State - 52,197 San Diego State - 32,406
Men's Basketball Attendance: Iowa State - 14,295 (19th in nation) San Diego State - 12,414 (27th)
Women's Basketball Attendance: Iowa State - 9,289 (4th in nation) San Diego State - 604
Give us a B12 schedule and a larger BB arena and we would meet or exceed those numbers...well except for women's BB. Would you? If you were a 2-10 or 3-9 team, would you draw those numbers? If you were 0-9 in the conference? Would the San Diego TV market be tuned in?
Don't get me wrong. I am a solid SDSU proponent in B12 expansion (one of the few), but you cannot disparage a university that supports its teams no matter where they are in the standings. Those are real fans, and not someone to "cull" from the membership.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 10, 2015 17:43:38 GMT -8
Give us a B12 schedule and a larger BB arena and we would meet or exceed those numbers...well except for women's BB. Would you? If you were a 2-10 or 3-9 team, would you draw those numbers? If you were 0-9 in the conference? Would the San Diego TV market be tuned in?
Don't get me wrong. I am a solid SDSU proponent in B12 expansion (one of the few), but you cannot disparage a university that supports its teams no matter where they are in the standings. Those are real fans, and not someone to "cull" from the membership.
I never said they should be culled, only pointing out what conference affiliation can do for attendance.
|
|
|
Post by alamobruin on Jul 10, 2015 18:29:23 GMT -8
Would you? If you were a 2-10 or 3-9 team, would you draw those numbers? If you were 0-9 in the conference? Would the San Diego TV market be tuned in?
Don't get me wrong. I am a solid SDSU proponent in B12 expansion (one of the few), but you cannot disparage a university that supports its teams no matter where they are in the standings. Those are real fans, and not someone to "cull" from the membership.
I never said they should be culled, only pointing out what conference affiliation can do for attendance. Sorry, didn't mean to imply that you did. My original response was to 94sdsu, who used that suggestion. So when you replied to me, I was referring to his point, which was somewhat contentious.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 10, 2015 18:42:48 GMT -8
No worries, no offense taken, and I definitely do not think anyone should be cut from the B12 currently. I get your point about consistency of support, however its hard to know what this fan base would be like if it ever reached the top tier of CFB. We've never had the chance and the nature of a place like SoCal means that without that premium, top level competition/affiliation, the greater region will stay fairly lethargic toward us unless we do something legendary. That is probably our greatest weakness, even more so than the underwhelming history.
|
|