- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
One reason the SEC doesn't need expansion
Posted on 10/2/11 at 8:51 pm
Posted on 10/2/11 at 8:51 pm
Florida/Alabama game outdrew the Nebraska/Wisconsin game in TV ratings last night. College fans are interested in the best college football, no matter where it might be. Doesn't need to come from TV households in Texas or wherever. That's one of the differences in college football that doesn't get factored into this expansion. Kramer from the SEC had the right idea when it came to expansion. Slive does not.
Scoreboard CBS ABC FOX NBC
Adults 18-49: Rating/Share 2.7/9 1.8/5 0.9/3 0.5/2
Total Viewers (million) 7.65 5.61 2.87 4.60
Due to the nature of live sports programming the ratings for ABC & CBS (College Football) are approximate and subject to more than the typical adjustments in the final numbers. See below for more information on these Fast Affiliate Ratings.
Even with the caveats about these fast affiliate ratings and their potential adjustments, in the battle of college football games Saturday night, it's certain that CBS's Alabama v. Florida game will easily top ABC's Nebraska v. Wisconsin game once the final ratings are available.
There was no other original programming on broadcast Saturday night. You can peruse the repeat ratings at your leisure.
Broadcast primetime ratings for Saturday, October 1, 2011:
Time Net Show 18-49 Rating 18-49 Share Viewers Live+SD (million)
8:00PM CBS College Football 8-11p (Ala v. Fla.) 2.7 9 7.65
ABC College Football 8-11p (Neb v. Wisc) 1.8 5 5.61
FOX Terra Nova (8-10p) 0.9 3 2.87
NBC Harry's Law -R 0.5 2 4.10
9:00PM NBC Prime Suspect -R 0.6 2 4.56
10:00PM NBC Law & Order: SVU -R 1.0 3 5.15
-
Nielsen TV Ratings: ©2011 The Nielsen Company. All Rights Reserved. LINK
Scoreboard CBS ABC FOX NBC
Adults 18-49: Rating/Share 2.7/9 1.8/5 0.9/3 0.5/2
Total Viewers (million) 7.65 5.61 2.87 4.60
Due to the nature of live sports programming the ratings for ABC & CBS (College Football) are approximate and subject to more than the typical adjustments in the final numbers. See below for more information on these Fast Affiliate Ratings.
Even with the caveats about these fast affiliate ratings and their potential adjustments, in the battle of college football games Saturday night, it's certain that CBS's Alabama v. Florida game will easily top ABC's Nebraska v. Wisconsin game once the final ratings are available.
There was no other original programming on broadcast Saturday night. You can peruse the repeat ratings at your leisure.
Broadcast primetime ratings for Saturday, October 1, 2011:
Time Net Show 18-49 Rating 18-49 Share Viewers Live+SD (million)
8:00PM CBS College Football 8-11p (Ala v. Fla.) 2.7 9 7.65
ABC College Football 8-11p (Neb v. Wisc) 1.8 5 5.61
FOX Terra Nova (8-10p) 0.9 3 2.87
NBC Harry's Law -R 0.5 2 4.10
9:00PM NBC Prime Suspect -R 0.6 2 4.56
10:00PM NBC Law & Order: SVU -R 1.0 3 5.15
-
Nielsen TV Ratings: ©2011 The Nielsen Company. All Rights Reserved. LINK
This post was edited on 10/2/11 at 8:52 pm
2
Posted on 10/2/11 at 9:06 pm to LSU NO Tigah
You have to expand to remain relevant and competitive in the future. If we just sit back, allow the other conferences to grow to 16, we will be left clamoring for scraps. Better to cherry pick from a large pool, than have to settle with the leftovers in a small one. It's more imperative now that we get the best of the best, and put ourselves in the best position, so that 10 years down the road we remain the kings of college football.
Posted on 10/2/11 at 9:15 pm to darkstarr_drgga
quote:
You have to expand to remain relevant and competitive in the future. If we just sit back, allow the other conferences to grow to 16, we will be left clamoring for scraps. Better to cherry pick from a large pool, than have to settle with the leftovers in a small one. It's more imperative now that we get the best of the best, and put ourselves in the best position, so that 10 years down the road we remain the kings of college football.
WHY, WHY, WHY are there some people who do not or cannot understand this?
Posted on 10/2/11 at 9:18 pm to RhodeIslandRed
quote:
WHY, WHY, WHY are there some people who do not or cannot understand this?
Most people aren't really progressive thinkers. The whole "if it ain't broke don't fix it" mentality applies. Only problem, it might not be broke right now, but at some point it will become obsolete and good luck finding parts for it then.
This post was edited on 10/2/11 at 9:19 pm
Posted on 10/2/11 at 9:24 pm to darkstarr_drgga
The key to ratings is winning. Adding A&M and Missouri will do nothing to help that.
Posted on 10/2/11 at 9:31 pm to LSU NO Tigah
How do you know though? A&M could become a power if it can start taking recruits from Texas. That can now happen with A&M in the SEC. I'm not sold on Missouri quite yet, they seem to do well with what they have. The question is can they parlay the SEC into a recruiting advantage in the MidWest. It's highly possible, especially if the Big 12 or whatever it ends up, keeps taking hits. Stability will breed wins and ratings.
You also have to think long term, some of the SEC powers that are winning now may dip off. Look at the East. Who would have thought 5 years ago, that USCe would be a front runner to win their division over FLA, TENN, or GA? We need to make sure that when there's a fluctuation, we have teams that can step up and take their place.
You also have to think long term, some of the SEC powers that are winning now may dip off. Look at the East. Who would have thought 5 years ago, that USCe would be a front runner to win their division over FLA, TENN, or GA? We need to make sure that when there's a fluctuation, we have teams that can step up and take their place.
Posted on 10/2/11 at 9:40 pm to LSU NO Tigah
quote:
One reason the SEC doesn't need expansion
Annnd another...
Posted on 10/2/11 at 9:53 pm to LSU NO Tigah
quote:
The key to ratings is winning. Adding A&M and Missouri will do nothing to help that.
What do you propose? That we add the Green Bay Packers?
A&M will and Mizzou would add markets. The key is MONEY. Nothing more and nothing less.
I don't know your age, but I can remember when LSU was getting prison raped on the football field. Things change. They always have and always will. Prepare for it. And while you're at it enjoy the golden age of LSU football, because it will not last forever.
This post was edited on 10/2/11 at 9:56 pm
Posted on 10/2/11 at 9:59 pm to Sao
I apologize Sao. I didn't know that you've been banging Miss America.
Posted on 10/2/11 at 10:13 pm to RhodeIslandRed
quote:
I apologize Sao. I didn't know that you've been banging Miss America.
Sao is actually JJ Barea and he got Miss Universe knocked up.
Posted on 10/3/11 at 6:11 am to darkstarr_drgga
quote:Beyond the increased television market potential, if the real reason for the SEC is to present exciting, quality, dominant football and rabid fans, I'm not so sure they add anything to the SEC at all, except another mouth to feed in dividing up bowl and tv revenues (thanks to other teams).
I'm not sold on Missouri quite yet
Posted on 10/3/11 at 9:01 am to LSU NO Tigah
quote:
The key to ratings is winning. Adding A&M and Missouri will do nothing to help that.
And the key to winning is investing money to make your facilities competitive and your coaching staff superior. Texas A&M will have increased resources from being in the SEC (pledges from alumni have spiked since the announcement to join the SEC) that they will dedicate to improving their facilities. The only thing that will prevent them from becoming competitive in football will be mistakes in hiring coaches. They will already be competitive in most other men's and women's sports.
Missouri will likely struggle to ever reach the level of being a constant competitor for football championships in the SEC. Their commitment to athletics does not appear to approach the level of other SEC member institutions. They would likely end up being like the Mississippi schools.
Posted on 10/3/11 at 8:03 pm to RhodeIslandRed
Another thing to consider outside of potential monetary benefits to be reaped by all of the involved schools is the chaos factor.
Face it, we're humans and we love a good drama. If Mizzou pulls the trigger tomorrow, at the very least it would potentially jeopardize this hilarious attempt at keeping the Big 12 intact. At the most, it would throw it into a tailspin and the dominoes would begin to fall.
One prognostication I heard (before Mizzou's name started bouncing around so wildly) is that, after A&M, the next to go SEC would be Mizzou, after which would follow Oklahoma and Okie State to bring it to sixteen.
I'm just interested to see what happens.
Face it, we're humans and we love a good drama. If Mizzou pulls the trigger tomorrow, at the very least it would potentially jeopardize this hilarious attempt at keeping the Big 12 intact. At the most, it would throw it into a tailspin and the dominoes would begin to fall.
One prognostication I heard (before Mizzou's name started bouncing around so wildly) is that, after A&M, the next to go SEC would be Mizzou, after which would follow Oklahoma and Okie State to bring it to sixteen.
I'm just interested to see what happens.
Posted on 10/3/11 at 8:06 pm to LSU NO Tigah
quote:
The key to ratings is winning. Adding A&M and Missouri will do nothing to help that.
Perhaps not, but they would also not diminish it. Other teams which might follow them could very well help it, though.
You have to think big picture.
Posted on 10/3/11 at 9:53 pm to LSU NO Tigah
quote:
The key to ratings is winning
The key to long term success is looking at the big picture. The ratings for 1 particular Saturday is not looking at the big picture. TV contracts are not paid based on the ratings for 1 game.
Its staggering how many people think the current condition will remain the same forever. 10 years ago this week, LSU got mauled 44-15 by Florida, later that month we got beat down by Ole Miss 35-24 and stood 4-3. We had not won the SEC in 13 years, a NC in 43. Who would have believed what we would win the SEC that year and an NC 2 years later? Let alone another NC and be legit contenders for a 3rd. Things change, got to stay ahead of the curve. Adding A&M does that.
Posted on 10/3/11 at 10:54 pm to H-Town Tiger
quote:If that's what you believe then we should go out and get a winner like Oklahoma, not A&M. Winning is what brings national ratings; a winning team with a national following would have added to the SEC's negotiating ability to get bigger money in TV contracts. The SEC by continuing to win BCS championships and having those championships spread among its conference members is what I believe has driven the higher tv revenues. I wonder which team gets better average national ratings, Oklahoma in a state of 3.6 million or A&M from a state with nearly 25 million. I think it's likely Oklahoma.
Things change, got to stay ahead of the curve. Adding A&M does that.
Posted on 10/3/11 at 11:01 pm to LSU NO Tigah
You fail to understand how you can make money in football.
One way is to do as you suggest and put out great games that get ratings for big networks who pay for your games.
A second way is to make a Big 10 type SEC network. Here you aren't making as much money off ratings as you are off subscription sales. In addition you get higher percentage off subscription sales in markets where you have teams located.
All this expansion talk, from the SEC's perspective, is based less off "How to get more money from ESPN/CBS" and more on "How can we create a cash cow SEC network."
One way is to do as you suggest and put out great games that get ratings for big networks who pay for your games.
A second way is to make a Big 10 type SEC network. Here you aren't making as much money off ratings as you are off subscription sales. In addition you get higher percentage off subscription sales in markets where you have teams located.
All this expansion talk, from the SEC's perspective, is based less off "How to get more money from ESPN/CBS" and more on "How can we create a cash cow SEC network."
Posted on 10/3/11 at 11:10 pm to LSU NO Tigah
quote:
LSU ATL TIGAH
A&M has a LEGION of loyal fans, and help bring several major media markets to the SEC.
Anyone complaining about the addition of the aggies simply doesnt get 'it' at all. Want to bitch about mizzou or wvu, thats fine. But not the aggies.
Posted on 10/3/11 at 11:18 pm to darkstarr_drgga
quote:
You have to expand to remain relevant and competitive in the future. If we just sit back, allow the other conferences to grow to 16, we will be left clamoring for scraps. Better to cherry pick from a large pool, than have to settle with the leftovers in a small one. It's more imperative now that we get the best of the best, and put ourselves in the best position, so that 10 years down the road we remain the kings of college football.
If West Virginia is our best option then we're already reduced to settling for scraps.
Posted on 10/3/11 at 11:19 pm to LSU NO Tigah
quote:
Winning is what brings national ratings
Let me try thi again. I know it sounds counter intuitive, but Ratings and TV revenue are not necessaily a meritocracy. TV deals are long term and they are not based on winning or a one weekend sample. The Pac 12 got a bigger TV deal than the SEC last year. They do not look at the raings for a certain team over a short period of time. Its about reaching a wider audience. OU is one of the most successful teams of all time, they have a large following, but Texas A&M brings you a much larger state and larger alumni base. Its a move for the. Long term, you are focused on the short term. It doesn't matter if OU has higher ratings than A&M, its not a zero sum game. The SEC overall needs to grow to stay on top.
Page 1 of 2
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News