I think which market at particular team does matter, but less than it ever has before. Previously, most conferences had their own "channel" and by getting a team located in a particular market that would expand the brand because that channel would be available by default and more games may be watched than before.
But that means little now. Most college games are available everywhere. Fewer people actually watch traditional cable and satellite than ever, so when they search "college football" on their boxes, adding a team to a market doesn't move the needle much at all.
What matters is how many fans watch these games on TV. Market does help in terms of potential to a certain extent, but there is enough historical data to show that SJSU does very little for that market. UNLV is the other side, with good (not great) crowds showing up for football. There is potential there. But is has come around slowly.
Which is why we have been left out. People think it was a stupid move or we were blocked by other jealous teams in the conference, but I don't believe it. Why snuff out a team that will increase your bottom line, when all of expansion has been 99% been about that.
Our historical data hasn't been good enough. Now if they would have waited and done it now, would we be there? More likely. For sure they would have rather had us than Utah State.
A very good point here, but first…
You say you think we were left out because basically we had sucked previously, but then say “why snuff out a team that will increase your bottom line when all of expansion has been 99% about that?”
So which is it? Did we suck and not meet their metrics or were we a team that would have increased their bottom line?
Personally, I think there were absolute feelings of superiority or fear of UNLV/Las Vegas that caused them to decide to not include UNLV in the first round of expansion. Trying to hide behind “metrics” was a stupid cover.
I’m positive their egos told them that this “bold” move was going to destroy the MW and they’d get UNLV and AFA anyway. Then they would be in the cool kids club as some sort of founding members and everyone else would be second class, including UNLV.
They’re also afraid of Las Vegas, because it would be the dominating city within the conference. Vegas makes too much sense as the hub for everything the conference does and it would eventually swallow up all your operations.
Total side note… in many posts, when talking about poaching penalties and exit fees, you make the argument that they’ll get settled for far less or thrown out completely. You’re a smart person, I’m sure there are smart people in the new PAC as well…
If they thought litigation was going to save them, then why not go for the whole kit and kaboodle right out of the gate? If it’s not going to cost anywhere near what it’s supposed to cost then why put yourself in the spot you’re now in?
What I do agree with you about is actual TV markets mattering less than they have, due to how games are consumed. Yes markets matter, but probably only more for awareness of a specific team within that market.
Sports betting proliferation probably has the biggest impact nowadays. So it’s very reliant on “branding”, which creates awareness and gets people to tune in.
The new PAC no doubt has the better teams and brands right now. The MW will never pass them in that regard. But they are too small and too regional. They’ll have too few opportunities on a weekly basis to convince the rest of the country to care. You think anyone outside the Pacific time zone is gonna care about SDSU vs CSU that much more than SJSU vs AFA, assuming none of them are ranked?
A merged MW/PAC would, as a brand, be far superior and would no doubt help the profiles of its best teams. It would be clear and away the best G5 in my opinion and would force the rest of the country to pay attention. I mean you’d basically own the west.