- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- 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
0
Posted on 8/29/11 at 6:23 pm to SlowFlowPro
The basic math is:
[A:# fans watching their SEC team tomorrow + B:# fans watching other SEC games tomorrow] -
[C:# fans watching their non SEC team today (ex SEC opponents) - D:# fans watching SEC games today (incl SEC opponents)]
Note: Last 10 yrs Clemson played 17 SEC opponents and MO played 5.
While I agree that more Clemson fans than MO fans watch their team play, I doubt that it is an overwhelming # considering the limited # of games, the limited audiences, and the 20% or so population advantage of MO over SC.
I think the difference between B and D is much greater for MO than Clemson. Even though they are in the ACC, Clemson fans are watching a lot of SEC games today because of where they are located, who they play (over 10 yrs they played a full season of SEC games more than MO), that many fans have ties to more than one school, and the media probably floods them with SEC stuff. The advantage for MO is that I'm sure they don't watch a lot of SEC games today, they don't play a lot of SEC teams today, and their interest in all SEC games will increase by an order of magnitude.
I think the switch in focus from the Big 12 to the SEC for MO would overwhelm any advantage Clemson would have in direct team support because the switch from the ACC to SEC is not that dramatic for them. I also think the competition and passion of the SEC is contagious. When they experience it in it's full glory interest will increase. None of this means I think MO is a slam dunk winner for the SEC, however, they are a better choice than Clemson in terms of value, not culture or other such things.
[A:# fans watching their SEC team tomorrow + B:# fans watching other SEC games tomorrow] -
[C:# fans watching their non SEC team today (ex SEC opponents) - D:# fans watching SEC games today (incl SEC opponents)]
Note: Last 10 yrs Clemson played 17 SEC opponents and MO played 5.
While I agree that more Clemson fans than MO fans watch their team play, I doubt that it is an overwhelming # considering the limited # of games, the limited audiences, and the 20% or so population advantage of MO over SC.
I think the difference between B and D is much greater for MO than Clemson. Even though they are in the ACC, Clemson fans are watching a lot of SEC games today because of where they are located, who they play (over 10 yrs they played a full season of SEC games more than MO), that many fans have ties to more than one school, and the media probably floods them with SEC stuff. The advantage for MO is that I'm sure they don't watch a lot of SEC games today, they don't play a lot of SEC teams today, and their interest in all SEC games will increase by an order of magnitude.
I think the switch in focus from the Big 12 to the SEC for MO would overwhelm any advantage Clemson would have in direct team support because the switch from the ACC to SEC is not that dramatic for them. I also think the competition and passion of the SEC is contagious. When they experience it in it's full glory interest will increase. None of this means I think MO is a slam dunk winner for the SEC, however, they are a better choice than Clemson in terms of value, not culture or other such things.
Posted on 8/29/11 at 6:31 pm to Indiana Tiger
quote:
While I agree that more Clemson fans than MO fans watch their team play, I doubt that it is an overwhelming # considering the limited # of games, the limited audiences, and the 20% or so population advantage of MO over SC.
in terms of general support, i'd be shocked if clemson didn't get 3x the donations per year compared to mizzou
quote:
The advantage for MO is that I'm sure they don't watch a lot of SEC games today, they don't play a lot of SEC teams today, and their interest in all SEC games will increase by an order of magnitude.
but their underlying interest is so minuscule that you can increase it by 2 magnitudes and it won't mean much
quote:
I also think the competition and passion of the SEC is contagious.
mizzou won't join a conference and then have a rabid fanbase
quote:
When they experience it in it's full glory interest will increase
when they become a 3rd or 4th tier SEC team, their interest will likely lesson
missouri just has a shitty, near nonexistent fanbase. they don't give a frick about CFB on the level of an SEC team. they wouldn't even be UK
Posted on 8/29/11 at 6:46 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
in terms of general support, i'd be shocked if clemson didn't get 3x the donations per year compared to mizzou
I guess as a proxy this is relevant. If you're talking athletics, while I have no clue, I would accept that as a premise. If you're talking about to the school as a whole, you would have to show me the numbers.
As I said, I'm not making a case for MO to the SEC, but a case that MO has more value to the SEC than Clemson. You don't agree. I've explained my reasoning. Saying they suck in 20 different ways won't convince me otherwise.
This post was edited on 8/29/11 at 6:58 pm
Posted on 8/30/11 at 8:13 am to Indiana Tiger
quote:your case is based around the premise that lots of people in STL and KC actually follow Missouri football
MO has more value to the SEC than Clemson
i contend that it's not as much as you think
Posted on 8/30/11 at 8:30 am to Indiana Tiger
quote:
I guess as a proxy this is relevant. If you're talking athletics,
i am, b/c we're talking about athletic support (for ratings)
unless the SEC creates a cable network, the only way to create new viewers is to add a fanbase that supports its school
that level of support will increase the viewership on ESPN/CBS
so, then the comparison of schools should come down to which school will show its school more support
Posted on 8/30/11 at 8:42 am to Rouge
quote:
i contend that it's not as much as you think
I freely admit I may be wrong because I don't know the real numbers, but:
quote:
your case is based around the premise that lots of people in STL and KC actually follow Missouri football
My case depends on that enough viewers watch. The hyperbole regarding how they don't care about football makes one think that the broadcasting of college football games in the state of MO is a money losing public service to SEC ex-pats. Overall they are not as passionate or probably as knowledgeable, but many watch.
Because of where they are located and who they play, they have a low SEC viewer base. I think you underate how high the Clemson SEC viewer base is to start. They have much less room to grow and MO doesn't need a giant viewing audience to overcome.
Posted on 8/30/11 at 8:46 am to Rouge
quote:
your case is based around the premise that lots of people in STL and KC actually follow Missouri football
People up there follow it the week of KU-UM and occasionally if they have a strong team. Other than that, wake them up when basketball comes around. I don't feel that they have the same amount of fans that eat and live college football like the majority of the SEC.
Posted on 8/30/11 at 8:51 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
increase the viewership on ESPN/CBS
It's increase viewership of the SEC. CBS is tied only to the SEC, but ESPN is not.
quote:
so, then the comparison of schools should come down to which school will show its school more support
The only valid comparison is the impact on the SEC as a whole and not a single school. Look at my equation. If you disagree with it, then we have something to discuss, otherwise this is a waste of time.
Page 2 of 2
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News