|
|
Post by aztecm on Jul 17, 2024 9:58:40 GMT -8
But yet, still worthless to P5 programs. Wazzu and OSU were left behind for a reason. And we are still in the G5 for a reason. We aren't as desirable as aztecmesa thinks. If we were, we would already be in the P5. It might help our “value” if we can beat them both this year. Winning would be great. Selling out Snapdragon and strong tv viewership would do a lot more. |
|
|
|
Post by hoobs on Jul 17, 2024 11:05:23 GMT -8
In the circus of conference membership... TV viewership is *much* more important than stadium attendance.
|
|
|
|
Post by heuschele on Jul 17, 2024 11:39:37 GMT -8
The only reason for us to join withthe PAC2 is if they bring only 6 or so MWC schools. Put them on a MWC budget for 5 years and they are middle of the pac, if best, as a MWC member. I still think we end up getting a B12 invite. We are too big a prize not to go to them or an ACC western expansion. Who other than us thinks that we are a big prize? Not many but the question is why? Academically we are near the top of MWC and compare fine with the average P5 school. Sports wise we compare fine especially the money sports. Mbb has been better than the average p5 school over the last 15 years. That is a long time. For the last 2 years, top 5 in nation. FB recently had perhaps best stretch ever (I do realize coryell had better record but competition was a little lower which could account for the record discrepancy). The secondary sports are competitive with p5 schools. Like all programs, there is variation between the quality of each sport team but overall they would not be at the bottom of the p5. So why do so few consider us a p5 school? It is the fans and alumni. We do not support the teams as expected for P5 teams. Whether it is NIL, streaming costs, travel to bowl games and tournaments. I admit we do ok with mbb but probably still not to p5 expectations. Fbfan support is terrible. I went to bowl game that Aztecs were in that was in San Diego (BYU) had more fans present than we had and the game did not sell out. In quite a few recent years our team record was better than indicative of our bowl invite. Why? Because the fans do not travel or spend like other schools. The year we lost to Utah state in MWC championship game with much of the team having COVID, we were one of the better non p5 teams in the country. The loss in MWC championship game did not help but that was a greatly depleted team. If we win a game at that level down that number of players, it would be near miracle. Yet the better bowls did not want us. A good bowl team that wanted us could have easily rationalized our whooping in the MWC championship game. They did not because they did not desire the Aztecs. Our loss to Stan state gave them the excuse not to give us an invite. I do recognize the fans on Aztec mesa are some of our best fans. Many travel to watch the Aztecs. Many donate and/or purchase merchandise. Overall there are not enough to have p5 consider us a prize. Go Aztecs |
|
|
|
Post by longtimesdsufan on Jul 17, 2024 12:01:20 GMT -8
I think the will be many more league changes. The schools with the most viewers will want even more of the pie. Below is average views for each game from a talking head online. Who you play helps, and so does winning. It does give an idea of what the network see and how they spend for games.
1 Ohio State — 5.55M
2 Alabama — 5.08M
3 Michigan — 4.78M
4 Colorado — 4.50M
5 Georgia — 3.95M
6 Florida State — 3.58M
7 Notre Dame — 3.46M
8 Penn State — 3.31M
9 LSU — 2.85M
10 Southern Cal — 2.83M
11 Washington — 2.68M
12 Tennessee — 2.67M
13 Oklahoma — 2.40M
14 Nebraska — 2.39M
15 Florida — 2.12M
16 Auburn — 2.074M
17 Oregon — 2.067M
18 Texas A&M — 2.062M
19 Oregon State — 1.74M
20 Mississippi — 1.71M
21 Clemson — 1.70M
22 Missouri — 1.63M
23 Iowa — 1.60M
24 Utah — 1.53M
25 Michigan State — 1.48M
26 Wisconsin — 1.45M
27 TCU — 1.42M
28 Maryland — 1.41M
29 Minnesota — 1.37M
30 Louisville — 1.36M
31 Miami FL — 1.33M
32 Duke — 1.32M
33 UCLA — 1.25M
34 Kansas — 1.24M
35 BYU — 1.21M
36 Indiana — 1.18M
37 Iowa State — 1.15M
38 Oklahoma State — 1.14M
39 Arkansas — 1.13M
40 West Virginia — 1.095M
41 Navy — 1.090M
42 Washington State — 1.08M
43 Kentucky — 1.04M
44 Rutgers — 977K
45 North Carolina — 966K
46 Texas Tech — 950K
47 South Carolina — 900K
48 Illinois — 862K
49 Mississippi State — 839K
50 Colorado State — 814K
51 Kansas State — 810K
52 Georgia Tech — 766K
53 Syracuse — 703K
54 Purdue — 694K
55 Pittsburgh — 690K
56 Army — 683
57 Virginia — 663K
58 NC State — 661K
59 UCF — 621K
60 Boston College — 617K
61 Arizona State — 603K
62 Houston — 587K
63 Stanford — 549K
64 Cincinnati — 481K
65 Tulane — 480K
66 Wake Forest — 464.8K
67 Northwestern — 464.7K
68 South Florida — 463.7K
69 Baylor — 454K
70 California — 450K
71 Arizona — 434K
72 Virginia Tech — 398K
73 Boise State — 338K
74 Memphis — 336K
75 Rice — 316K
76 San Jose State — 312K
77 Western Kentucky — 305K
78 UTSA — 288K
79 UNLV — 287K
80 Wyoming — 213K
81 Vanderbilt — 205K
82 SMU — 201K
83 Fresno State — 196K
84 Massachusetts — 193K
85 San Diego State — 192K
86 Buffalo — 187K
87 Coastal Carolina — 186K
88 Bowling Green — 182K
89 Air Force — 178K
90 Temple — 173K
91 Marshall — 146K
92 Tulsa — 132K
93 UAB — 129K
94 Central Michigan — 124K
95 James Madison — 123K
96 Toledo — 119K
97 Georgia State — 112K
98 New Mexico — 101
|
|
|
|
Post by AzTex on Jul 17, 2024 12:34:14 GMT -8
Who other than us thinks that we are a big prize? Not many but the question is why? Academically we are near the top of MWC and compare fine with the average P5 school. Sports wise we compare fine especially the money sports. Mbb has been better than the average p5 school over the last 15 years. That is a long time. For the last 2 years, top 5 in nation. FB recently had perhaps best stretch ever (I do realize coryell had better record but competition was a little lower which could account for the record discrepancy). The secondary sports are competitive with p5 schools. Like all programs, there is variation between the quality of each sport team but overall they would not be at the bottom of the p5. So why do so few consider us a p5 school? It is the fans and alumni. We do not support the teams as expected for P5 teams. Whether it is NIL, streaming costs, travel to bowl games and tournaments. I admit we do ok with mbb but probably still not to p5 expectations. Fbfan support is terrible. I went to bowl game that Aztecs were in that was in San Diego (BYU) had more fans present than we had and the game did not sell out. In quite a few recent years our team record was better than indicative of our bowl invite. Why? Because the fans do not travel or spend like other schools. The year we lost to Utah state in MWC championship game with much of the team having COVID, we were one of the better non p5 teams in the country. The loss in MWC championship game did not help but that was a greatly depleted team. If we win a game at that level down that number of players, it would be near miracle. Yet the better bowls did not want us. A good bowl team that wanted us could have easily rationalized our whooping in the MWC championship game. They did not because they did not desire the Aztecs. Our loss to Stan state gave them the excuse not to give us an invite. I do recognize the fans on Aztec mesa are some of our best fans. Many travel to watch the Aztecs. Many donate and/or purchase merchandise. Overall there are not enough to have p5 consider us a prize. Go Aztecs I never like that take on our record during Coryell's time. Yes, we were playing against weaker teams than we are now, but then, as now, we were playing against teams with similar resources. Unlike now however, we were getting Junior College transfers who weren't good enough coming out of high school to get a scholarship offer from a 4 year college. There weren't the ranking services then as there are now, but those would have been zero star recruits coming out of high school.
Considering what Coryell did with the resources he had then imagine what he could have done with the Aztecs today.
EDIT: Please see dadhammett's reply to the above post below.
|
|
|
|
Post by aztech on Jul 17, 2024 12:42:43 GMT -8
Who other than us thinks that we are a big prize? Not many but the question is why? Academically we are near the top of MWC and compare fine with the average P5 school. Sports wise we compare fine especially the money sports. Mbb has been better than the average p5 school over the last 15 years. That is a long time. For the last 2 years, top 5 in nation. FB recently had perhaps best stretch ever (I do realize coryell had better record but competition was a little lower which could account for the record discrepancy). The secondary sports are competitive with p5 schools. Like all programs, there is variation between the quality of each sport team but overall they would not be at the bottom of the p5. So why do so few consider us a p5 school? It is the fans and alumni. We do not support the teams as expected for P5 teams. Whether it is NIL, streaming costs, travel to bowl games and tournaments. I admit we do ok with mbb but probably still not to p5 expectations.
Fbfan support is terrible. I went to bowl game that Aztecs were in that was in San Diego (BYU) had more fans present than we had and the game did not sell out. In quite a few recent years our team record was better than indicative of our bowl invite. Why? Because the fans do not travel or spend like other schools. The year we lost to Utah state in MWC championship game with much of the team having COVID, we were one of the better non p5 teams in the country. The loss in MWC championship game did not help but that was a greatly depleted team. If we win a game at that level down that number of players, it would be near miracle. Yet the better bowls did not want us. A good bowl team that wanted us could have easily rationalized our whooping in the MWC championship game. They did not because they did not desire the Aztecs. Our loss to Stan state gave them the excuse not to give us an invite. I do recognize the fans on Aztec mesa are some of our best fans. Many travel to watch the Aztecs. Many donate and/or purchase merchandise. Overall there are not enough to have p5 consider us a prize. Go Aztecs We shall see if Lewis' entertaining offense makes a difference with attendance this year. The wins and his defense in year two should get the full attention we deserve. It was nice that we won a lot with Rocky but man, for the most part they were boring. Most guys dug the tough Chuck Knox style, but not the chicks. They probably told their dates at halftime, "Hey let's go home and party." LOL |
|
|
|
Post by Boise Aztec on Jul 17, 2024 14:11:20 GMT -8
******* Really? What value are you alluding to? I see them both as mediocre and certainly not more valuable from any standpoint than sdsu. SDSU’s more valuable than both of those schools. SDSU is the only school in the MWC that is as valuable as those schools… There is a significant drop to BSU, AFA and UNLV… |
|
|
|
Post by standiego on Jul 17, 2024 14:24:34 GMT -8
makes little sense to knock OSU and WSU as they are the 2 determining schools for a PAC revival
The TV networks are the key for determining what level a school is at for Football as that is their key sport and they determine things by TV Viewers as they in turn have to sell those buying Ads
Correct SDSU has primarily been known in recent years for football that is not that entertaining to watch - will the new HC and the team change some people - that is what SDSU has to bank on - Winning and making it exciting
Also quite important is for the AD to make sure fans know the date - network and time games are on - unfortunately the networks and times change quite often -
|
|
|
|
Post by chris92065 on Jul 17, 2024 14:55:16 GMT -8
Difference is that osu and wsu are sitting on a pile of cash and could payoff 6 schools to leave the mwc which would end the conference.
Osu and wsu are holding all the cards.
I believe they are waiting for the acc to fall apart before they make their move.
I hope jd is in the phone daily with the acc because their days are numbered as currently constructed and will definitely need to add western schools soon.
|
|
|
|
Post by missiontrails on Jul 17, 2024 15:25:12 GMT -8
In the circus of conference membership... TV viewership is *much* more important than stadium attendance. I pretty much agree, but the thing is, filling seats with butts helps to land top-notch recruits, which eventually helps drive up TV viewership. Tack on increased revenue from game tickets, parking, concessions, and souvenirs and you build yourself a winning program in all facets. |
|
|
|
Post by RiffelBooks on Jul 17, 2024 16:53:39 GMT -8
Not many but the question is why? Academically we are near the top of MWC and compare fine with the average P5 school. Sports wise we compare fine especially the money sports. Mbb has been better than the average p5 school over the last 15 years. That is a long time. For the last 2 years, top 5 in nation. FB recently had perhaps best stretch ever (I do realize coryell had better record but competition was a little lower which could account for the record discrepancy). The secondary sports are competitive with p5 schools. Like all programs, there is variation between the quality of each sport team but overall they would not be at the bottom of the p5. So why do so few consider us a p5 school? It is the fans and alumni. We do not support the teams as expected for P5 teams. Whether it is NIL, streaming costs, travel to bowl games and tournaments. I admit we do ok with mbb but probably still not to p5 expectations. Fbfan support is terrible. I went to bowl game that Aztecs were in that was in San Diego (BYU) had more fans present than we had and the game did not sell out. In quite a few recent years our team record was better than indicative of our bowl invite. Why? Because the fans do not travel or spend like other schools. The year we lost to Utah state in MWC championship game with much of the team having COVID, we were one of the better non p5 teams in the country. The loss in MWC championship game did not help but that was a greatly depleted team. If we win a game at that level down that number of players, it would be near miracle. Yet the better bowls did not want us. A good bowl team that wanted us could have easily rationalized our whooping in the MWC championship game. They did not because they did not desire the Aztecs. Our loss to Stan state gave them the excuse not to give us an invite. I do recognize the fans on Aztec mesa are some of our best fans. Many travel to watch the Aztecs. Many donate and/or purchase merchandise. Overall there are not enough to have p5 consider us a prize. Go Aztecs I never like that take on our record during Coryell's time. Yes, we were playing against weaker teams than we are now, but then, as now, we were playing against teams with similar resources. Unlike now however, we were getting Junior College transfers who weren't good enough coming out of high school to get a scholarship offer from a 4 year college. There weren't the ranking services then as there are now, but those would have been zero star recruits coming out of high school. Considering what Coryell did with the resources he had then imagine what he could have done with the Aztecs today.
You could throw Claude Gilbert in there, too, who won with similarly poor resources and against better competition -- not to Sir Don's extent but his record was far more than respectable. |
|
|
|
Post by RiffelBooks on Jul 17, 2024 16:55:20 GMT -8
I think the will be many more league changes. The schools with the most viewers will want even more of the pie. Below is average views for each game from a talking head online. Who you play helps, and so does winning. It does give an idea of what the network see and how they spend for games. 1 Ohio State — 5.55M 2 Alabama — 5.08M 3 Michigan — 4.78M 4 Colorado — 4.50M 5 Georgia — 3.95M 6 Florida State — 3.58M 7 Notre Dame — 3.46M 8 Penn State — 3.31M 9 LSU — 2.85M 10 Southern Cal — 2.83M 11 Washington — 2.68M 12 Tennessee — 2.67M 13 Oklahoma — 2.40M 14 Nebraska — 2.39M 15 Florida — 2.12M 16 Auburn — 2.074M 17 Oregon — 2.067M 18 Texas A&M — 2.062M 19 Oregon State — 1.74M 20 Mississippi — 1.71M 21 Clemson — 1.70M 22 Missouri — 1.63M 23 Iowa — 1.60M 24 Utah — 1.53M 25 Michigan State — 1.48M 26 Wisconsin — 1.45M 27 TCU — 1.42M 28 Maryland — 1.41M 29 Minnesota — 1.37M 30 Louisville — 1.36M 31 Miami FL — 1.33M 32 Duke — 1.32M 33 UCLA — 1.25M 34 Kansas — 1.24M 35 BYU — 1.21M 36 Indiana — 1.18M 37 Iowa State — 1.15M 38 Oklahoma State — 1.14M 39 Arkansas — 1.13M 40 West Virginia — 1.095M 41 Navy — 1.090M 42 Washington State — 1.08M 43 Kentucky — 1.04M 44 Rutgers — 977K 45 North Carolina — 966K 46 Texas Tech — 950K 47 South Carolina — 900K 48 Illinois — 862K 49 Mississippi State — 839K 50 Colorado State — 814K 51 Kansas State — 810K 52 Georgia Tech — 766K 53 Syracuse — 703K 54 Purdue — 694K 55 Pittsburgh — 690K 56 Army — 683 57 Virginia — 663K 58 NC State — 661K 59 UCF — 621K 60 Boston College — 617K 61 Arizona State — 603K 62 Houston — 587K 63 Stanford — 549K 64 Cincinnati — 481K 65 Tulane — 480K 66 Wake Forest — 464.8K 67 Northwestern — 464.7K 68 South Florida — 463.7K 69 Baylor — 454K 70 California — 450K 71 Arizona — 434K 72 Virginia Tech — 398K 73 Boise State — 338K 74 Memphis — 336K 75 Rice — 316K 76 San Jose State — 312K 77 Western Kentucky — 305K 78 UTSA — 288K 79 UNLV — 287K 80 Wyoming — 213K 81 Vanderbilt — 205K 82 SMU — 201K 83 Fresno State — 196K 84 Massachusetts — 193K 85 San Diego State — 192K 86 Buffalo — 187K 87 Coastal Carolina — 186K 88 Bowling Green — 182K 89 Air Force — 178K 90 Temple — 173K 91 Marshall — 146K 92 Tulsa — 132K 93 UAB — 129K 94 Central Michigan — 124K 95 James Madison — 123K 96 Toledo — 119K 97 Georgia State — 112K 98 New Mexico — 101 Again, keep in mind that most of our games end up on CBS Sports Network, which most people don't have. That always skews our numbers. Our viewership isn't good, but it s not that bad, either. |
|
|
|
Post by AzTex on Jul 17, 2024 18:23:47 GMT -8
I never like that take on our record during Coryell's time. Yes, we were playing against weaker teams than we are now, but then, as now, we were playing against teams with similar resources. Unlike now however, we were getting Junior College transfers who weren't good enough coming out of high school to get a scholarship offer from a 4 year college. There weren't the ranking services then as there are now, but those would have been zero star recruits coming out of high school. Considering what Coryell did with the resources he had then imagine what he could have done with the Aztecs today.
You could throw Claude Gilbert in there, too, who won with similarly poor resources and against better competition -- not to Sir Don's extent but his record was far more than respectable. You can pretty much take it for granted that anything I say about Don goes for Claude also. Claude wasn't as great a coach as Don was, but then who was?
Claude fought the same obstacles that Don did and still holds the 2nd best winning percentage in Aztec Football history.
|
|
dadhammett
Starter
The Warrior Brotherhood
Posts: 175
|
Post by dadhammett on Jul 17, 2024 20:34:45 GMT -8
I never like that take on our record during Coryell's time. Yes, we were playing against weaker teams than we are now, but then, as now, we were playing against teams with similar resources. Unlike now however, we were getting Junior College transfers who weren't good enough coming out of high school to get a scholarship offer from a 4 year college. There weren't the ranking services then as there are now, but those would have been zero star recruits coming out of high school.
I'm sorry, but I really need to correct you on this: "we were getting Junior College transfers who weren't good enough coming out of high school to get a scholarship offer from a 4 year college." This is patently untrue. When I went to JC (Chabot College), nine high school all-stars turned down D-1 offers to play California JC ball at Chabot; why? First, we were not eligible to play as freshmen; secondly, CA JC ball was superior to small college football. I myself turned down a full ride to Cal.
Playing a full 10 game schedule plus playoffs as Freshman just sounded like a better plan than playing 4 Freshman games and being cannon fodder for upper classmen at a D-1 school. Every one of us still got a full ride, along with several who did not have offers out of high school. Most of my teammates at State were offered out of high school, so the myth of the lesser athlete is simply that, a myth. As a side note, we played several major college programs and beat every one of them, so you are incorrect on all fronts.
|
|
|
|
Post by jp92grad on Jul 17, 2024 20:55:06 GMT -8
I never like that take on our record during Coryell's time. Yes, we were playing against weaker teams than we are now, but then, as now, we were playing against teams with similar resources. Unlike now however, we were getting Junior College transfers who weren't good enough coming out of high school to get a scholarship offer from a 4 year college. There weren't the ranking services then as there are now, but those would have been zero star recruits coming out of high school.I'm sorry, but I really need to correct you on this: " we were getting Junior College transfers who weren't good enough coming out of high school to get a scholarship offer from a 4 year college." This is patently untrue. When I went to JC (Chabot College), nine high school all-stars turned down D-1 offers to play California JC ball at Chabot; why? First, we were not eligible to play as freshmen; secondly, CA JC ball was superior to small college football. I myself turned down a full ride to Cal. Playing a full 10 game schedule plus playoffs as Freshman just sounded like a better plan than playing 4 Freshman games and being cannon fodder for upper classmen at a D-1 school. Every one of us still got a full ride, along with several who did not have offers out of high school. Most of my teammates at State were offered out of high school, so the myth of the lesser athlete is simply that, a myth. As a side note, we played several major college programs and beat every one of them, so you are incorrect on all fronts. Thank you for the post, this is the interesting information that needs to be passed down about this program from the people that were in it. AFL |
|
|
|
Post by AzTex on Jul 17, 2024 21:20:20 GMT -8
I never like that take on our record during Coryell's time. Yes, we were playing against weaker teams than we are now, but then, as now, we were playing against teams with similar resources. Unlike now however, we were getting Junior College transfers who weren't good enough coming out of high school to get a scholarship offer from a 4 year college. There weren't the ranking services then as there are now, but those would have been zero star recruits coming out of high school.I'm sorry, but I really need to correct you on this: " we were getting Junior College transfers who weren't good enough coming out of high school to get a scholarship offer from a 4 year college." This is patently untrue. When I went to JC (Chabot College), nine high school all-stars turned down D-1 offers to play California JC ball at Chabot; why? First, we were not eligible to play as freshmen; secondly, CA JC ball was superior to small college football. I myself turned down a full ride to Cal. Playing a full 10 game schedule plus playoffs as Freshman just sounded like a better plan than playing 4 Freshman games and being cannon fodder for upper classmen at a D-1 school. Every one of us still got a full ride, along with several who did not have offers out of high school. Most of my teammates at State were offered out of high school, so the myth of the lesser athlete is simply that, a myth. As a side note, we played several major college programs and beat every one of them, so you are incorrect on all fronts. No reason to apologize. I'm happy that your corrected my misinformation. I wasn't aware of the facts you presented. I fully retract the final two sentences of mine that you quoted and extend my apology to you and all the players from those days.
I was, and remain, proud of the players we had in those days. You're about 5 years younger than I am, and I do remember when you were on the team.
EDIT: I do still maintain that our great win/loss record back then was NOT due to the level of competition. We did it because of great coaching and great players.
|
|
|
|
Post by longtimesdsufan on Jul 18, 2024 6:14:05 GMT -8
I think the will be many more league changes. The schools with the most viewers will want even more of the pie. Below is average views for each game from a talking head online. Who you play helps, and so does winning. It does give an idea of what the network see and how they spend for games. 1 Ohio State — 5.55M 2 Alabama — 5.08M 3 Michigan — 4.78M 4 Colorado — 4.50M 5 Georgia — 3.95M 6 Florida State — 3.58M 7 Notre Dame — 3.46M 8 Penn State — 3.31M 9 LSU — 2.85M 10 Southern Cal — 2.83M 11 Washington — 2.68M 12 Tennessee — 2.67M 13 Oklahoma — 2.40M 14 Nebraska — 2.39M 15 Florida — 2.12M 16 Auburn — 2.074M 17 Oregon — 2.067M 18 Texas A&M — 2.062M 19 Oregon State — 1.74M 20 Mississippi — 1.71M 21 Clemson — 1.70M 22 Missouri — 1.63M 23 Iowa — 1.60M 24 Utah — 1.53M 25 Michigan State — 1.48M 26 Wisconsin — 1.45M 27 TCU — 1.42M 28 Maryland — 1.41M 29 Minnesota — 1.37M 30 Louisville — 1.36M 31 Miami FL — 1.33M 32 Duke — 1.32M 33 UCLA — 1.25M 34 Kansas — 1.24M 35 BYU — 1.21M 36 Indiana — 1.18M 37 Iowa State — 1.15M 38 Oklahoma State — 1.14M 39 Arkansas — 1.13M 40 West Virginia — 1.095M 41 Navy — 1.090M 42 Washington State — 1.08M 43 Kentucky — 1.04M 44 Rutgers — 977K 45 North Carolina — 966K 46 Texas Tech — 950K 47 South Carolina — 900K 48 Illinois — 862K 49 Mississippi State — 839K 50 Colorado State — 814K 51 Kansas State — 810K 52 Georgia Tech — 766K 53 Syracuse — 703K 54 Purdue — 694K 55 Pittsburgh — 690K 56 Army — 683 57 Virginia — 663K 58 NC State — 661K 59 UCF — 621K 60 Boston College — 617K 61 Arizona State — 603K 62 Houston — 587K 63 Stanford — 549K 64 Cincinnati — 481K 65 Tulane — 480K 66 Wake Forest — 464.8K 67 Northwestern — 464.7K 68 South Florida — 463.7K 69 Baylor — 454K 70 California — 450K 71 Arizona — 434K 72 Virginia Tech — 398K 73 Boise State — 338K 74 Memphis — 336K 75 Rice — 316K 76 San Jose State — 312K 77 Western Kentucky — 305K 78 UTSA — 288K 79 UNLV — 287K 80 Wyoming — 213K 81 Vanderbilt — 205K 82 SMU — 201K 83 Fresno State — 196K 84 Massachusetts — 193K 85 San Diego State — 192K 86 Buffalo — 187K 87 Coastal Carolina — 186K 88 Bowling Green — 182K 89 Air Force — 178K 90 Temple — 173K 91 Marshall — 146K 92 Tulsa — 132K 93 UAB — 129K 94 Central Michigan — 124K 95 James Madison — 123K 96 Toledo — 119K 97 Georgia State — 112K 98 New Mexico — 101 Again, keep in mind that most of our games end up on CBS Sports Network, which most people don't have. That always skews our numbers. Our viewership isn't good, but it s not that bad, either. I agree. My point is that the top 40 teams with an average of 1 million plus will end up forming their own league. |
|
|
|
Post by gentlesaztec on Jul 18, 2024 7:59:49 GMT -8
Just curious, but what do you think our viewership is south of the border with almost a 4,000,000 population between Tijuana, Ensenada and Mexicali.
|
|
|
|
Post by panammaniac on Jul 18, 2024 8:59:26 GMT -8
Difference is that osu and wsu are sitting on a pile of cash and could payoff 6 schools to leave the mwc which would end the conference. Osu and wsu are holding all the cards. I believe they are waiting for the acc to fall apart before they make their move. I hope jd is in the phone daily with the acc because their days are numbered as currently constructed and will definitely need to add western schools soon. If the MWC loses 6 schools, then what happens next? You have 6 MWC schools floating around without a home and really nowhere to go. I don't think the MWC will die. IT would only need to scrape up 2 schools to remain viable. I know SDSU wouldn't care about the MWC at that point but nobody really wants to see conferences die and schools left homeless because that just isn't good for college sports in general. We've had some discussion about that on the NMSU board, and I've run the question by NMSU's AD who was a classmate of mine back in the day. Things could get very interesting. What if the MWC invited NMSU, UTEP, Sam Houston, and maybe UTA to offset Hawaii's FB only membership? Would those schools go? It seems like a slam dunk, but I'm not so sure the answer is yes. CUSA's media deal is paying somewhere between $800k - $900k per school. It isn't much even compared to the current MWC deal. But it has the benefit of long term stability, lots of national TV exposure (albeit on Tuesday and Wednesday nights), lots of bowl tie-ins, and outside of Liberty, all of the schools have similar athletics budgets. Would a MWC consisting of NMSU, UNM, UTEP, Wyoming, Utah State, Nevada, Sam Houston and their 25 fans, UTA and whoever else pay significantly more than $800k? Additionally, all of those MWC schools outspend all of the CUSA schools by at least $10 million. Would they reduce their athletics budgets in response to getting a smaller TV deal, and would the CUSA schools increase theirs a little? Maybe they meet in the middle at $25 million budget? There's way more questions than answers on that subject right now. But if the MWC were to lose 6 schools and NMSU and UTEP get the phone call, I think the powers that be have to at least take that call. One way or another, things are going to get very interesting. |
|
|
|
Post by omnipotentaztec on Jul 18, 2024 9:26:47 GMT -8
Again, keep in mind that most of our games end up on CBS Sports Network, which most people don't have. That always skews our numbers. Our viewership isn't good, but it s not that bad, either. I agree. My point is that the top 40 teams with an average of 1 million plus will end up forming their own league. This is totally misleading. It's comparing apples with oranges. What if SDSU played Oregon, UCLA, USC, etc., on CBS on Saturday afternoons. SDSU would be top 20. Oregon State is #19, not because of who "they" are as much as who they are playing against. Let's see how Oregon State looks playing Fresno St, Wyoming, San Jose St., New Mexico, on the CW for a few years. It will be ugly. |
|
