NIU TO MWC

[dcut03]

NDSU beats half the MWC/PAC

I looked at other comparable games. Reno, UNM even SJSU do similiar numbers. MWC viewership is bad.

You have a link? I could only find the one ESPN2 game for this season.

But again if they are similar to our bottom 3, then that isn't good. It will drive down payouts.

It needs to be no worse than our mean. We are already taking it on the chin.

Any add at this point is not necessary. Just for NIU's sake, maybe one in the region, and it seems that NDSU would be the best, though I like Toledo better if they are still in the mix.

But the idea of adding the Dakotas AND the Montanas? I just don't see the logic in that.

 

[Rebel1986]

It is about eyeballs. High market penetration of tiny markets doesn't help much either.

I totally get that many of the MW numbers are bad, and that is kinda my point. We already have a bunch of teams that aren't exactly pulling their weight. Any addition at this point will drop the mean, not raise it. At this point UNLV/Vegas is raising the average well beyond the mean, and that is a bit scary in itself. Especially since until recently, we have not been a huge contributor either.

Small markets + high cost to add + questionable competitiveness= wtf is the point? (at least to me)

I mean Sac State at least has better potential with their market, new stadium and financial commitment.

In comparison, I think UC Davis (37,000 students) has very similar potential to Sacramento State (30,912 students), with both of them getting there funding from the same university system.

 

[Rebel1986]

You have a link? I could only find the one ESPN2 game for this season.

But again if they are similar to our bottom 3, then that isn't good. It will drive down payouts.

It needs to be no worse than our mean. We are already taking it on the chin.

Any add at this point is not necessary. Just for NIU's sake, maybe one in the region, and it seems that NDSU would be the best, though I like Toledo better if they are still in the mix.

But the idea of adding the Dakotas AND the Montanas? I just don't see the logic in that.

College Football TV Ratings

College football TV ratings for the 2024 regular season, bowls, College Football Playoff and National Championship.

www.sportsmediawatch.com

 

[Bullmastiff 1]

It is about eyeballs. High market penetration of tiny markets doesn't help much either.

I totally get that many of the MW numbers are bad, and that is kinda my point. We already have a bunch of teams that aren't exactly pulling their weight. Any addition at this point will drop the mean, not raise it. At this point UNLV/Vegas is raising the average well beyond the mean, and that is a bit scary in itself. Especially since until recently, we have not been a huge contributor either.

Small markets + high cost to add + questionable competitiveness= wtf is the point? (at least to me)

I mean Sac State at least has better potential with their market, new stadium and financial commitment.

I think Gloria has done her homework. She likely already met with existing media partners.

I'm guessing she's gotten feedback on who has value who doesn't.

I mean NIU and Toledo came out of left field. NDSU has been approached.

 

[Bullmastiff 1]

You have a link? I could only find the one ESPN2 game for this season.

But again if they are similar to our bottom 3, then that isn't good. It will drive down payouts.

It needs to be no worse than our mean. We are already taking it on the chin.

Any add at this point is not necessary. Just for NIU's sake, maybe one in the region, and it seems that NDSU would be the best, though I like Toledo better if they are still in the mix.

But the idea of adding the Dakotas AND the Montanas? I just don't see the logic in that.

The entire MWC conference aside from UNLV/AFA is the bottom. It's why we all got left behind initially..

If media partner sees value MWC should add them. If not, don't.

 

[dcut03]

College Football TV Ratings

College football TV ratings for the 2024 regular season, bowls, College Football Playoff and National Championship.

www.sportsmediawatch.com

This is what I was using. Didn't see more than the one game on ESPN.

 

[dcut03]

I think Gloria has done her homework. She likely already met with existing media partners.

I'm guessing she's gotten feedback on who has value who doesn't.

I mean NIU and Toledo came out of left field. NDSU has been approached.

I do not have blind faith in Gloria.

She has "promised" payouts that may not come to fruitiion. I think she got somewhat bullish with the PAC which probably soured any merger potential (both are culpable IMO).

I think she wants to look like we are "winning" by making additions, while the PAC isn't whole but I can't see how any of these schools will help our payouts. I think she is is just driving the price down.

I like the UTEP add. It made sense, and it looks like it sparked something in their athletic department

I like the GCU add. We need more basketball schools, and they could eventually add football, but they need to be FCS at least 5 years first.

UCDavis? Don't get that one.

I mean the PAC is doing everything to keep their payouts high, even to the extent that they are being very selective in their last addition.

I wish would would do the same.

Once we see both leagues' contact values our decision to stay is going to hurt a bit.

 

[Rebel1986]

I do not have blind faith in Gloria.

She has "promised" payouts that may not come to fruitiion. I think she got somewhat bullish with the PAC which probably soured any merger potential (both are culpable IMO).

I think she wants to look like we are "winning" by making additions, while the PAC isn't whole but I can't see how any of these schools will help our payouts. I think she is is just driving the price down.

I like the UTEP add. It made sense, and it looks like it sparked something in their athletic department

I like the GCU add. We need more basketball schools, and they could eventually add football, but they need to be FCS at least 5 years first.

UCDavis? Don't get that one.

I mean the PAC is doing everything to keep their payouts high, even to the extent that they are being very selective in their last addition.

I wish would would do the same.

Once we see both leagues' contact values our decision to stay is going to hurt a bit.

Utah State is not being selective.

 

[dcut03]

Utah State is not being selective.

That one was a bit of an impulse buy, lol.

 

[RebelinWA]

That one was a bit of an impulse buy, lol.

From my understanding, it was a singular big booster who was kicking and screaming for USU to move. There is a bit of a rift among the rest of the boosters on if the decision was a good one.

 

[TheMatrix31]

I do not have blind faith in Gloria.

She has "promised" payouts that may not come to fruitiion. I think she got somewhat bullish with the PAC which probably soured any merger potential (both are culpable IMO).

I think she wants to look like we are "winning" by making additions, while the PAC isn't whole but I can't see how any of these schools will help our payouts. I think she is is just driving the price down.

I like the UTEP add. It made sense, and it looks like it sparked something in their athletic department

I like the GCU add. We need more basketball schools, and they could eventually add football, but they need to be FCS at least 5 years first.

UCDavis? Don't get that one.

I mean the PAC is doing everything to keep their payouts high, even to the extent that they are being very selective in their last addition.

I wish would would do the same.

Once we see both leagues' contact values our decision to stay is going to hurt a bit.

Are they being selective or just running out of quality schools like the MW? Tulane and Memphis saying no really put the screws to them and then UNLV coming back and saying no really did

 

[dcut03]

Are they being selective or just running out of quality schools like the MW? Tulane and Memphis saying no really put the screws to them and then UNLV coming back and saying no really did

I think Both.

They are running out of options, and their last selection will likely hurt their average payouts from what they have right now.

I have seen a tweet, I didn't have time to grab it, that reported that the PAC is looking at a 14 mil./school deal since using Octogon. I don't buy that until I see it, but it is possible that they were able to add another media partner to sweeten the deal since signing with Octagon. I think they have been only working with the CW and maybe one other (CBS/Fox/Apple) up to this point.

They may try another pass at schools that have already turned them down. My guess they are willing to wait it out to see if anyone changes their mind or finding some other school that won't hurt their bottom line before adding a lower school, especially a FCS school.

 

[RebelinWA]

I think Both.

They are running out of options, and their last selection will likely hurt their average payouts from what they have right now.

I have seen a tweet, I didn't have time to grab it, that reported that the PAC is looking at a 14 mil./school deal since using Octogon. I don't buy that until I see it, but it is possible that they were able to add another media partner to sweeten the deal since signing with Octagon. I think they have been only working with the CW and maybe one other (CBS/Fox/Apple) up to this point.

They may try another pass at schools that have already turned them down. My guess they are willing to wait it out to see if anyone changes their mind or finding some other school that won't hurt their bottom line before adding a lower school, especially a FCS school.

CBS wasn't considering them; at least not a few weeks ago. Things could have change, but the concern was the lack of return of investment. CBS' offer wouldn't have been anywhere near 14m, but that's more of they don't have the capital free in Q4. The new owner may choose to prop up in Q1 Paramount's film studios than make another investment into NCAA sports; but who knows. I heard of rumors about divesting CBS sports from Paramount.

I could imagine Apple taking them on a loss, just to get more of a footprint in the NCAA.

 

[dcut03]

CBS wasn't considering them; at least not a few weeks ago. Things could have change, but the concern was the lack of return of investment. CBS' offer wouldn't have been anywhere near 14m, but that's more of they don't have the capital free in Q4. The new owner may choose to prop up in Q1 Paramount's film studios than make another investment into NCAA sports; but who knows. I heard of rumors about divesting CBS sports from Paramount.

I could imagine Apple taking them on a loss, just to get more of a footprint in the NCAA.

Since the merger, does Fox and ESPN still work like separate entities? It certainly seems so, at least with preexisting contracts

 

[RebelinWA]

Since the merger, does Fox and ESPN still work like separate entities? It certainly seems so, at least with preexisting contracts

A lot to unpack there, but from a 30,000 foot view Fox sports is separate from the rest of Disney/ ESPN. Here in the US, the a judge ruled that ESPN and Fox sports together in one entity would be too much of the market share together. In other territories, Disney owns the rights to Fox sports distribution. But I should state that media groups often "partner".