(11-27-2018 03:51 PM)TrojanCampaign Wrote:  Jeez.

You guys think Californians are anti-Christian.

Who said that? The Policies of the PAC 12 however are hardly friendly to faith based organizations.

(11-27-2018 03:57 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(11-27-2018 03:51 PM)TrojanCampaign Wrote:  Jeez.

You guys think Californians are anti-Christian.

Who said that? The Policies of the PAC 12 however are hardly friendly to faith based organizations.

Incorrect. They are not friendly to intolerant, pseudo-faith based policies like bigotry.

(11-26-2018 05:03 PM)OdinFrigg Wrote:  Utah is not AAU.

My mistake I thought they were....

(11-26-2018 06:53 PM)Jjoey52 Wrote:  

(11-26-2018 05:03 PM)OdinFrigg Wrote:  Utah is not AAU.

Nobody gives a real crap about academics, though it can be used as an excuse to deny membership. The driver on all this is MONEY, I guarantee the poorest academic school in the country could get in any conference if they bring in a bunch of money.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

True and what drives money is TV contracts, what drives TV is ratings and what drives ratings is conference population footprint. Both the PAC-12 and Big-12 lag significantly behind the ACC, SEC and Big 10. That forces poorer TV contracts and less revenue and visibility to compete. If USC and Stanford remain in a conference with 2nd tier revenue and visibility over time they will also become second tier. The same applies to UCLA in basketball.

Only by reducing duplicate small population states and forming a Texas-California based conference can the PAC-12 and Big-12 overcome the population problem.

(11-27-2018 11:29 PM)Sactowndog Wrote:  

(11-26-2018 06:53 PM)Jjoey52 Wrote:  

(11-26-2018 05:03 PM)OdinFrigg Wrote:  Utah is not AAU.

Nobody gives a real crap about academics, though it can be used as an excuse to deny membership. The driver on all this is MONEY, I guarantee the poorest academic school in the country could get in any conference if they bring in a bunch of money.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

True and what drives money is TV contracts, what drives TV is ratings and what drives ratings is conference population footprint. Both the PAC-12 and Big-12 lag significantly behind the ACC, SEC and Big 10. That forces poorer TV contracts and less revenue and visibility to compete. If USC and Stanford remain in a conference with 2nd tier revenue and visibility over time they will also become second tier. The same applies to UCLA in basketball.

Only by reducing duplicate small population states and forming a Texas-California based conference can the PAC-12 and Big-12 overcome the population problem.

Wrong. What drives ratings is having the highest % of that population actually watching the games. It's easier to track now and that is why the footprint model for payoffs is dying for everything but T3 events on conference networks. You have to be able to draw a national audience to score the best ad rates and that drives revenue. Content games where brands square off drive actual viewers and that is why the SEC and Big 10 dwarf the rest. The ACC actually has the largest potential population, but they are 5th out of the P5 in revenue because of the low % of actual viewers that tune in. They are hoping that the ACCN will close that gap, and it might.

But while the leader in TV revenue will be the Big 10 this year, the Big 10 will still trail the SEC in average total revenue per school by about 10 million per school when the figures are in next year. Butts in the seats x ticket prices x donations to buy those tickets is the real difference. That and the SEC's TV revenue will get a big boost when its 20 year old contract with CBS is renewed in 2023.

(11-27-2018 11:47 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(11-27-2018 11:29 PM)Sactowndog Wrote:  

(11-26-2018 06:53 PM)Jjoey52 Wrote:  

(11-26-2018 05:03 PM)OdinFrigg Wrote:  Utah is not AAU.

Nobody gives a real crap about academics, though it can be used as an excuse to deny membership. The driver on all this is MONEY, I guarantee the poorest academic school in the country could get in any conference if they bring in a bunch of money.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

True and what drives money is TV contracts, what drives TV is ratings and what drives ratings is conference population footprint. Both the PAC-12 and Big-12 lag significantly behind the ACC, SEC and Big 10. That forces poorer TV contracts and less revenue and visibility to compete. If USC and Stanford remain in a conference with 2nd tier revenue and visibility over time they will also become second tier. The same applies to UCLA in basketball.

Only by reducing duplicate small population states and forming a Texas-California based conference can the PAC-12 and Big-12 overcome the population problem.

Wrong. What drives ratings is having the highest % of that population actually watching the games. It's easier to track now and that is why the footprint model for payoffs is dying for everything but T3 events on conference networks. You have to be able to draw a national audience to score the best ad rates and that drives revenue. Content games where brands square off drive actual viewers and that is why the SEC and Big 10 dwarf the rest. The ACC actually has the largest potential population, but they are 5th out of the P5 in revenue because of the low % of actual viewers that tune in. They are hoping that the ACCN will close that gap, and it might.

But while the leader in TV revenue will be the Big 10 this year, the Big 10 will still trail the SEC in average total revenue per school by about 10 million per school when the figures are in next year. Butts in the seats x ticket prices x donations to buy those tickets is the real difference. That and the SEC's TV revenue will get a big boost when its 20 year old contract with CBS is renewed in 2023.

I don’t think it’s an either or. Yes % viewers matters but % of what matters also. The PAC-12 has an issue with percent of viewers in CA because they have 4 schools clustered in 2 closeby areas. The Fresno area is owned by Fresno, SDSU owns San Diego. All schools are super selective reducing affinity. The PAC would be better off with at least one CA State school in the conference but it’s not happening. So they better improve overall population base.